When it comes to terrorism there is clearly a difference between the way those who vote Republican and those who vote Democrat feel. We have a new Gallup poll out. The poll was taken during the first week in March. Voters were asked which issue they thought was more important in the election, economics or terrorism?
Combining all voters, 65% thought the economy was the most important issue. Only 26% said that the most important issue was terrorism. The figures are different when you consider party affiliation. Republican voters put terrorism ahead by 48 to 46%. That's bad enough ... but it's far worse for Democratic voters. Only 10% of Democrats said terrorism would be the number one issue.
Then the question was phrased differently. Gallup asked: "If you had to choose, which of the following presidential candidates would you be more likely to vote for --- a candidate who would do a good job on the economy, or a candidate who would do a good job protecting the country from terrorism?"
The economy won by 51% to 42%. For Democrats, however, the split was 72% to 25%. Republicans went for the president who would protect us from terrorism by 62 to 32%.
As I read this I was thinking that, even though the war against terrorists and their supporters is very important, the economy is important as well. After all, the economy is something that affects us all on a daily basis and will never stop doing so. I was thinking that a president who had both as priorities would be best. Then I read this and the lightbulb went on:
The differences are stark and disturbing, and it all comes down to your view of the role of government. If you feel that the primary responsibility of the federal government is national defense -- keeping our country and our people safe from foreign aggression then you are more likely to vote Republican. If, on the other hand, you feel that the primary responsibility of government is to take care of you economically .. to make sure you have a job, and to inoculate you from the harsh consequences of laziness and poor decision making .. you'll vote Democratic.
Duh! You'd think I'd have figured this out by now. I've known for some time that the president doesn't have nearly the effect on the economy that a lot of people think he does. But it wasn't until just now that I understood that shepherding the economy isn't even in his job description. So what is his job? For the answer, we go to the source. From the Constitution of the United States of America:
Section. 2.
Clause 1: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
Clause 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
Clause 3: The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
Section. 3.
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Where does it say anything about the economy? That's right, nowhere. However, take a look at the first sentence of Section 3 where it says, "such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." I would say this authorizes the president to send budgets to the Congress for approval. But it's Congress that has the final say, as it should be.
Just goes to show that I still have a lot left to learn. I hope I never stop learning.
No comments:
Post a Comment