A Political Glimpse from Ireland

The political debate has intensified in recent days with both Candidates attacking each other on issues ranging from the economy to the environment. Who is right? Who is wrong? I am not sure and I don’t think anyone can make that decision unless he or she understands the ‘absolute truth’. I think I am becoming a tad bit too philosophical this early in the morning but I wanted to highlight another interesting political site I found. The site is CreateDebate.com where people can sign up and debate with the other users on the site about various issues. Each side receives a specific number of points so you can see who is winning the debate at any one point. It is a great site when comparing it to other similarly slanted sites like Helium.com which has a wider range of topics but no scoring system to see who is winning:

YouTube.com is the most popular video sharing site in the world with an estimated 53 million visitors per month in the United States.  This popularity has ensured that both Presidential candidates have dedicated YouTube pages for their various videos however users have also flooded YouTube with their various political messages dissecting every word of the candidates. I wrote earlier this week that the Internet is going to be a significant tool for the Democrats and maybe less so for the Republicans; this statement is proven by Senator McCain’s bad reputation on the site:

Step1: Go to YouTube.com

Step2: Type in John McCain

Step3: Watch the List of Anti-McCain videos appear

*Those were the first video’s that came up, according to the search term that was inputted

The Renewable Energy and Job Creation act of 2008 was recently rejected in the Senate this week with 50 yeas and 44 nays. The vote embodies the typical democrat and republican divide with republicans wanting to preserve the benefits of business while democrats want to redistribute those benefits to the people through the form of taxation. The nays were exclusively Republican while there were 3 Republican Senators who voted yes. What are the Republicans fighting for? Do companies provide tangible benefits through the tax breaks and incentives they receive? The U.S does not have the lowest tax rate in the world yet 5 of the world’s biggest 10 companies are based here.

The very word ‘incentive’ implies that it is optional; a company is not required to execute an operation upon the receipt of the incentive therefore the logical conclusion leads me to believe that the Republican segment of the Senate is out of touch with the average citizen. This is where “change” arrives; politics has always run as described in the first paragraph but how about introducing legislation that taxes positively? Why can the Republicans not realize that giving company’s free reign is not good while Democrats realize that redistributing income is just going to make companies move to the Moon.

People assume that the reason a company chooses a location is because of the lowest tax rate however that may be a large factor, there are also smaller factors like the labor pool, environment, education system, political system etc… A low tax rate does not guarantee economic success as demonstrated by Ireland whose GDP dropped by 2.9% from 2007 to 2008. There is also the problem of many American companies moving production off shore yet unsurprisingly, the Republicans are going to wait for the Democrats to create incentives for companies to keep jobs in America:

At issue is the U.S. tax code’s treatment of profits earned by foreign subsidiaries of American corporations. Profits earned in the United States are subject to the 35% corporate tax. But multinational corporations can defer paying U.S. taxes on their overseas profits until they return them to the USA - transfers that often don’t happen for years. General Electric, for example, has $62 billion in “undistributed earnings” parked offshore, according to recent Securities and Exchange Commission filings. Drug giant Pfizer boasts $60 billion. ExxonMobil has $56 billion.

The U.S currently taxes companies on profits earned in-country and overseas which provides significant income for the treasury. My suggestion (slightly different to the bill) is that we should raise the tax rates at home for companies with over $1 Billion dollars in assets located overseas encouraging companies to shift these assets to the United States to keep their tax liability low. Taxation can be a positive aspect in any economy as long as it is utilized as a gentle push rather than a shove. The Republican Senate prefers we not push at all which has only increased the number of corporate scandals in the last 8 years while big companies continue to expand their operations overseas at the expense of the American market.

I recently found this video on YouTube when I was searching for stories related to Corporate Tax Breaks, I found the presenter quite entertaining given the seriousness of this issue:

According to the press, Senator Obama has started to look for a possible Vice-President, one of the top names that has been thrown around from the beginning of the Obama campaign is the current Governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius. Kathleen Sebelius became the 44th Governor of Kansas in 2003 and was re-elected to a second term in 2006. She is fairly popular in Kansas and according to a SurveyUSA Poll released on April 24th, she has a 61% approval rating. That being said, many people criticize her overall impact for Obama campaign if she is chosen because she would not even be able to guarantee her home state in the general election. So who is the Governor and what can we expect if she is the VP? From the Office Of The Governor:

Kathleen Sebelius was born May 15, 1948 and was raised in a Catholic family in Cincinnati, Ohio. She attended the Summit Country Day School, a Roman Catholic secondary school, followed by Trinity Washington University, a Roman Catholic university in Washington, D.C., and later earned a Masters of Public Administration from the University of Kansas. She moved to Kansas in 1974 at the age of 26, where she served for eight years as a representative in the Kansas Legislature and eight years as Insurance Commissioner before being elected governor.

Governor Sebelius is married to husband, Gary, a federal magistrate judge, for 33 years, they have two sons: Ned and John. Both Sebelius boys are products of the Topeka public school system, pre-kindergarten through high school. Ned is a law student, and John is a graduate of the Rhode Island School of Design. At the heart of Governor Sebelius’ administration is a commitment to growing the Kansas economy and creating jobs; ensuring every Kansas child receives a quality education; protecting Kansas families and communities; improving access to quality, affordable health care; and taking advantage of the state’s renewable energy assets.

Governor Sebelius has not been with out her share of problems though as she recently vetoed three bills that would have allowed the construction of a coal-fired power plant in Western Kansas. Some critics cite these vetoes as detrimental to Kansas at the expense of the Governor improving herself on the national stage with the Democratic Party. I disagree with these critics because no matter how clean a Coal Power Plant professes to be, it is still damaging the environment. There are better alternative sources of energy out there which the governor fully intends to explore for the people of Kansas.

Beyond these minor issues, most Democrats see Sebelius as generally positive for Senator Obama even though according to Rasmussen Reports, she is only likely to increase Senator Obama’s chance of winning Kansas by 28% percent. Given that Kansas is a historically red state, I am willing to assume that as a VP; Sebelius would appeal to woman and older folk which is a segment of the population where Senator Obama does not have a strong base of support. This is all conjecture at this point but I think it would be reasonable to assume given that Senator Clinton could also appeal to the same segments and is more well known but given the last few months, she is not exactly on the short list.

Governor Sebelius would be a good choice beyond her being able to pull in some additional support for an Obama presidency because she agree’s with Senator Obama on most issues. The Kansas City Business Journal has a good write up on some the bills that she passed and vetoed for the states budget of 2009. Governor Sebelius and Senator Obama may see eye to eye but one of the biggest issues facing Americans as indicated by most polls is the economy which is not an area Senator Obama is short in, but maybe a potential VP would need to be strong in these areas? Do VP’s actually matter? Some people argue these points but I think it all comes down to the perception of the typical citizen. Other people argue that someone with national security experience is needed like former retired general Wesley Clarke or Senator Chuck Hagel.

These are all important factors to consider and they wll be explored in future posts of potential VP candidates for Senator Obama. Now a picture of the Governor from the State website:

I was quite surprised these past two weeks with the insistent calls for Hillary Clinton to drop out and her adamant refusal to not drop out. Since the Bosnia incident, she has come under increasing fire from the media online and offline to let the democratic party move forward since the latest Gallup poll is showing that Senator McCain can now beat both candidates in the general election. This is not good news for a Democrat like myself or any of the other Democrats in the USA and around the world but we have to take this latest revelation in context of the election so far:

1. Senator McCain has had a fairly easy ride recently with both democratic candidates attacking each other with everything but the kitchen sink.
2. Both candidates are building up information to use against Senator McCain in the general election so once the nomination process is finalized. The Democratic nominee can fully flex his or her muscles in an attempt to nullify that lead.
3. Both Democratic nominees have a lot of money behind them and at the end of the day that money can help spread their message further and faster than Senator McCain and his bus.
4. Senator McCain’s lead is within the statistical margin of error so that if the lead held up into the general election, there is a chance that the election could go either way.
5. Senator McCain has made great strides these past few weeks in distancing himself from President Bush and the GOP’s current policies. That being said he has outlined no specific plans as to how he would turn around the American economy or improve the image of the USA in the eyes of the world.

I was also shocked to hear that my own candidate (Senator Obama) did not want Senator Clinton to drop out despite the media and many people saying that the fighting is hurting the Democratic Party. Thinking about the situation logically, I now understand why Senator Obama said that… He knew that if Senator Clinton did dropout so early in the race, her supporters would most likely vote for Senator McCain. Looking below we can see some Gallup data going up to March 22nd showing the breakdown of Clinton supporters if the general election was McCain versus Obama:

 Now let us look at the hypothetical situation of Senator Clinton winning the nomination and we can see the data is far leaner as we go up to Independents:

 I have drawn a few conclusions from the current Gallup data. The first being that the Clinton supporters seem more polarized in terms of the democratic nomination. This is where my point about Senator Obama is relevant to the current situation. If he were to suddenly win the democratic nomination after PA, a lot of the Clinton supporters would feel rather angry and vote for Senator McCain in the general election. My second point relates to what both parties are saying in the media, I believe we can safely say this is more politeness than anything else but I believe the democratic party does need to wrap this up as quick as possible because their is a fine balance between alienating current democrats with the lengthy primary process and having the other nominee’s supporters switch to Senator McCain.

Alright, I will stop with the graphs and figures… with Senator Clinton’s double digit lead in PA non-existent at the moment, I believe that if she does not win by at least 10% in the Pennsylvania primary that she should seriously consider dropping out and endorsing Senator Obama. Senator Obama with his excellent oratory ability could easily win back the independents that have started to lean towards Senator McCain because if we think about the media breakdown in the USA. Fox News is the only conservative channel out there and if we can a have the majority of the major media networks broadcasting Obama’s strengths, Senator McCain will definitely lose.