The Debt crisis in the United States exists with two main camps, the Democrats and the Republicans, in American politics today. Both of these political parties believe that their solutions to this problem are undeniably "right".

According to the Democratic National Committee's platform, the previous Bush administration put us through two wars and enabled tax cuts for the wealthy. The DNC platform contends that this lead to the nation's Great Recession, or in other words, the "worst recession since the Great Depression." However, according to a TheBlaze article by Becket Adams, the Washington Post Fact checker pointed out that there were many causes behind the Great Recession, and that the previous Bush administration is not the only one to blame. As noted by a chart on the Hamilton Project's website, The Great Recession has worsened the debt crisis since it has thrown the Federal Government deeper and deeper into the credit hole of debt. As laid out in the DNC's platform, to solve this great economic problem, the Obama Administration supports the expiration of the Bush era tax cuts, implementing the Buffet Rule, which states that "no millionaire pays a smaller share of his or her income in taxes than middle class families do", closing loopholes, deductions, and incentives for large corporations, especially the ones that out-source jobs.

This brings on discussion to the Republican side of the American debt debate. To balance the budget, the RNC contends that Congressional Republicans have "repeatedly tried to" change the budget process by voting for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution. According to an article by journalists Eric Painin and Josh Boak on The Fiscal Times website, while it may be true that Republicans have in fact done this, it would not be applicable to our financial situation, as witnessed last summer when congressional Republicans were willing to gamble with "the first default in U.S. History" in trying pass such an amendment in exchange for votes to increase the Federal debt ceiling.

So which side has the right answer?



Sources:

 http://www.democrats.org/democratic-national-platform#cutting-waste

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/washington-posts-fact-checker-debunks-obamas-latest-bush-blaming-ad

http://www.hamiltonproject.org/multimedia/charts/high_levels_of_government_debt_federal_debt_as_a_percentage_of_gdp_194/

http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_Restoring/#Item7


http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2012/08/23/Why-Serious-Talk-of-Balancing-the-Budget-Went-Bust.aspx#page1

Obama/Romney Debate

First of all, as background, I want to say that I have supported Obama since the 2008 election where he and the Democratic Party ran against the GOP and their candidate John McCain and won a quite decisive victory. Although the "change" that Obama promised so fervently during the 2008 pre-election campaign has not become the exact goal that we as Americans have witnessed for the past four years, I realize that said mission could not have possibly been completed. There are too many social, environmental, governmental, political, economical factors that have made Obama's mission of change less of the mission of change that he wanted to implement in this first place. I realize this because this motif of incomplete promises has permeated throughout American politics since our conception as a nation when the Constitution was written.

The Founding Fathers of our country, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison to name a few, promised us a country in which everyone was entitled to three ultimate goals-- "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," as stated in the Declaration of Independence, said to be authored majorly by Thomas Jefferson.

To state the obvious, not everyone in the U.S. has reached these goals, simply based on the fact that someone has to lose in order for another to win.

This brings me to focus attention on the current election race between Obama and Romney. I realized that during the debate, Obama and Romney both used and reused phrases such as, to paraphrase "I believe in the middle class," "I believe in the small businesses that drive us forward," "tax cuts for the middle class," "the American dream" and "protecting the nation". Of course, the two candidates use  did not used these exact words when debating, but I think since most Americans are not informed to the extent to actually be able to form opinions based from the facts that Obama and Romney provide to oppose each other and strengthen their reputations, the debate really doesn't matter. But also, I realized that the sad truth is that it is only up to us informed individuals, us as in we informed individuals, to make the real decisions in the direction of our country.

Five things I didn't know that I didn't know about the Democratic, Republican, and Libertarian Parties' platforms:

1. The Democrats boast on their 2012 platform that President Obama made an agreement with American car manufacturers to roughly double the MPG of cars in the coming years. They go on to say that this will save the average car owner more than $8,000 in fuel for the life of their vehicle. These are positive implications for the economic and environmental standards for our country.
2. The 2012 GOP platform says that gun rights, according to the second amendment of our constitution, will be stronger than ever before, even citing support from the National Rifle Association (NRA). That is, if they manage to win.
3. Libertarians, as asserted in their 2012 platform, condemn any interference of the government in the economy, promoting a stark laissez-faire economic framework for our country. Hmm, I wonder how that would work...
4. Education, as stated in the Libertarian Party's platform, should be controlled solely by the parent, with no governmental interference. Good luck with that one.
5. Suprisingly, the Libertarian Platform is relatively shorter than both the Democratic and GOP platforms. Short and simple should be their motto.