9/11, Ten Years Later

Sunday marks the 10^th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.  As Christopher Hitchens stated recently in Slate, “10 years ago in Manhattan and Washington and Shanksville, Pa., there was a direct confrontation with the totalitarian idea, expressed in its most vicious and unvarnished form.” On that day, as W.H. Auden put it in 1939, “the unmentionable odour of death/ Offend[ed] the September night.”  

It is important in this time of reflection and introspection to both honor the memories of those lost and contemplate where we’ve been and where we’re going.  Much has changed in the last ten years, both in the United States and abroad; the future success or failure of our country will be determined by the decisions made in the next few months and years. 

In September, 2001 the American economy was recovering from the bursting of the dot com bubble but still remained on a solid financial and political foundation.  The housing and construction industries were booming, corporations were enjoying substantial liquidity, and inflation and unemployment remained low.  Although the 2000 presidential election was as contentious as any in recent history, the government enjoyed a budget surplus and relative bipartisan enthusiasm.

During the Clinton years and the beginnings of the Bush Administration, the United States enjoyed stability in foreign affairs, disrupted only by small-scale conflict in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq. 

But the world has drastically changed in the last ten years.  In technological terms, the United States has almost entirely completed the transformation from an industrial power to an economic system dominated by technological innovations, financial dealings, and hyper-compartmentalized knowledge industries. 

As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman whimsically stated on Meet the Press, ten years ago “Facebook didn’t exist.  Or for most people it didn’t exist.  Twitter was a sound.  The Cloud was in the sky.  4G was a parking place.  Linkedin was a prison.  Applications were something you sent to college.  And, for most people, Skype was a typo.”

In many ways, the attacks on 9/11 have altered the military fabric of the world in a way analogous to the way technological innovations have completely altered the social fabric of our country.  They are obviously not equivalent in their ramifications, but understanding the extensive challenges we are facing is crucial, else we are deemed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

We are still mired in conflicts of astounding financial and personal cost.  The American political system is in a constant state of gridlock, our bond rating has been downgraded, and the budget deficit has skyrocketed in the past ten years.  We are at a crossroads; our leaders are, at this moment, debating if and how we can break out of this funk. 

Republican presidential candidates, such as Jon Huntsman and Mitt Romney, have proposed their own jobs plans—including capital gains cuts, tax reform, increased drilling and free trade agreements—and President Obama proposed his plan on Thursday.  They have also discussed and debated multiple perspectives on the foreign entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We can debate amongst ourselves the ideal solution to the issues we face.  Does government have the ability and the responsibility to solve this economic crisis through more stimulus spending, infrastructure projects and education investment?  Does the private sector have the main responsibility and greatest aptitude to create jobs and alter our economic system?  Should the United States completely end its involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

What is unacceptable as a country is to do nothing.  Al Qaeda sought, on September 11, to disrupt and destroy the American military, political, and financial sector while simultaneously inflicting the most significant loss of life possible.  The effects were disastrous, but the fabric of our country survived, for a time. 

Lacking decisive action, our country is on a path toward failure—and by extension victory for al Qaeda—but we still have hope.  Al Qaeda is driven by a totalitarian, anti-American ideal which Hitchens describes as “the big lie.”  Abraham Lincoln commented that “America will never be destroyed from the outside.  If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”  

Now, ten years after that tragic event, is our opportunity to once and for all declare victory.  The attacks on September 11^th “reordered and distorted the decade that followed” as David Remnick put it in The New Yorker.   The best way we can honor the memories of the fallen and defeat the “big lie” of totalitarian hate is for our politicians to set us on a path toward financial, military and political sustainability in the decade to come.  All that is required is political will.     

Winners and Losers from the GOP Presidential Debate

Wednesday night’s debate was the much anticipated debut of newly crowned Republican front runner Rick Perry.  From the beginning, two things became obvious.  First, it is not only the press but the rest of the Republican field that views Perry as the frontrunner, evident by the constant barrage of criticism from the other candidates.  Second, the main competition, for better or for worse, is and will continue to be between Perry and Mitt Romney.

From the get go, Romney and Perry engaged in a political pissing/spitting contest about their records as governors and their plans for job creation.  Perry touted his record as the 4^th ranked job creator among governors in the United States and Texas’ record as the top job creating state during the current recession.  He then criticized Romney’s record as the 47^th ranked job creator among US governors during his tenure.

Romney responded by explaining the difficulties the state of Massachusetts faced at the start of his term and the positive steps he took as governor, creating jobs at a faster rate than the national average.  He also touted his private sector experience in creating and optimizing companies around the world.  He then pointed out that a large percentage of the jobs created in Texas are the result of their surplus of natural resources, not Perry’s policies or leadership, and that Texas has the highest rate in the country of jobs at or below the minimum wage. 

Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah and perennial voice of reason, chimed in that Utah was the 1^st ranked job creating state during his tenure, but that did not detract from the Romney/Perry rivalry. 

By the end of the debate, the hierarchy of candidates became much more clarified.  Romney and Perry maintained and even solidified their position as the top tier of candidates.  Considering the setting and the crowd, they both presented strong arguments in favor of conservative positions on jobs, immigration, health care and defense.  They were both winners of the debate and will now attempt to spin the results more in their own favors using it as a springboard to future debates and appearances in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and around the country.

Michelle Bachmann and Ron Paul presented strong arguments but failed to make a statement in terms of policy positions or memorable rhetorical flourishes.  Both, in my opinion, did more harm than good.  Paul further reduced himself to the periphery by arguing that the FDA, TSA and Air Traffic Control are unnecessary government agencies.  Bachmann was simply outshined in her conservative, Tea-Party message by Perry who is now funneling her support to his own campaign.

Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich are most likely on the verge of dropping out of the race.  They simply do not have the financial and electoral support to continue the rigorous process of campaigning for elected office.  Gingrich, by making multiple attempts to claim unity among the candidates and defend against supposed efforts by the media to divide them, gave off the impression that he was above criticizing his fellow candidates and ready to get behind the eventual nominee.  This is not the attitude a real player in the Republican primary should have.

The two remaining candidates, Jon Huntsman and Hermain Cain, are both polling in the low single digits but made positive strides on Wednesday night.  Cain articulated coherent policy positions (whether or not they would be beneficial or passable is another story) and Huntsman continued to position himself as holding the rational middle ground.  Unlike some of the other candidates, however, Huntsman sounded more presidential; he did not stoop to the personal attacks and criticisms like the other candidates did and he made real, useful references to his past experiences as Ambassador and government official in four presidential administrations.  Because of the financial support both maintain, they are likely to remain in the race at least through the New Hampshire primary and have the potential to gain support in the next few months.

Very little was said in the debate that was at all novel.  It was simply part of the process of whittling down the field and creating a coherent message for the coming months.  Tonight is the Democrats’ turn, with President Obama giving his jobs speech, but it’s also opening night for the NFL…

Why College Students Should Support Jon Huntsman

Today’s jobless numbers are worrying.  According to the report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the American economy added no net jobs in the month of August and the unemployment rate remains at 9.1%.  President Obama and Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney are set to release their jobs proposals next week, but one candidate has already done so, Jon Huntsman.

As college students, there are three broad issues pertinent to our interests.  The first is jobs.  Many of us have parents who are out of work, siblings unable to find work or will be looking for jobs ourselves in the next year or so.  Huntsman, the former governor of Utah and Ambassador to China, has outlined a 4 part plan for economic recovery. 

First, he proposes comprehensive tax reform which includes simplifying tax brackets and lowering rates, eliminating capital gains taxes, reducing corporate rates and eliminating corporate and personal loopholes and deductions.  Second, he proposes expansive regulatory reform including the repeal of Obamacare and Dodd-Frank (the financial regulatory bill), reigning in the EPA and FDA, and enacting patent reform.  Lastly, he emphasizes the need for energy independence, through expanding drilling rights and natural gas capabilities, and enacting free trade agreements.

Some of these things may seem obvious, but believe it or not, they have not been outlined by any politician or presidential candidate until now.  These are all market-based solutions that will make American companies competitive with foreign corporations, reduce regulatory instability and give individuals and families more money in their pocket.  The stabilization of the economy and the stimulation of the jobs market is in our best interest as students soon to graduate. 

The second pertinent interest as college students the long-term sustainability of government, specifically in terms of spending.  We are still young but at the rate the government is spending, programs like Social Security and Medicare are on a path to destruction while the basic ability of the government to sustain its constitutionally mandated role becomes more and more hazy.  With the debt we have built up, and will continue to build up, will be able to respond to natural disasters?  Will we be able to respond to an attack on our country?  Will we be able to support law enforcement, education, infrastructure twenty years down the road?

Huntsman has been a rational voice in a sea of irrationality during these last few months of debate.  While Republicans have decried any revenue increases or defense cuts and Democrats have decried any changes to entitlements, the former governor has clearly stated that decisive action must be taken.  We must curtail entitlement spending; we must end costly foreign entanglements; we must reform the tax code. 

This is our future at stake; shouldn’t we support a candidate who has our best interests in mind rather than a candidate who caters to special interests (whether they be the anti-tax lobby or the pro-entitlement force, or the pro-military shop)?

The third pertinent issue (and this is by no means and exhaustive list but rather a general summary) that is important to college students includes social and environmental policy.  We care about equality, about clean air and clean water, about climate change.  Huntsman has been one of the most forward looking members of the Republican Party in all of these respects. 

Huntsman recently stated in an interview with ABC’s Jake Tapper that “in a center-right country, I am a center-right candidate.”  He also described himself as holding the “sensible middle ground.”  Of all the Republican candidates, he is the most reasonable in his politics, personable in his approach and experienced in both foreign and domestic affairs.  Right now, the sensible middle ground is exactly what America needs.