On the issue of civil rights, I would tend to side with the Democrats’ less cautious approach. Although the Republicans traditional outlook can be admired, in such a dynamic, fast-changing, information driven, contemporary world, I believe tradition can and should be set aside in the interests of political, moral and social progress in the U.S.
Principles and Values
Both parties again differ slightly on their approach to the nations basic principles and values:
A segment of George W. Bush’s presidential campaign in the year 2000 was his promise to nominate conservative judges only – judges who would exercise greater discipline with vicious criminals and felons; who place the right of the people and the democratic process as their priority; and those who share the Republican Party’s conservative values and adhere solely to the Constitution.(3e) The Republicans also speak of a “distinctly American inter-nationalism”(3g)(3e) leading to a prosperous and most ironically a peaceful world for America’s children. In my humble opinion, this current Republican regime has done anything but secure peace for the nation. America is under more threat than it has been since colonialism from various sources due to its infamous and insensitive “invasions” on Afghanistan and Iraq, along with the U S’s inevitable advances on its “enemies” such as Iran, North Korea and Syria.(3g) Anyone could see from 9/11 attacks that Bush’s foolhardy and naïve promises of a peaceful America are as empty as Osama Bin Laden’s prison cell. With the subsequent aforementioned reprisals on countries said to be “harbouring” such terrorists (and even more ludicrously, countries thought to be in possession of nuclear weapons!) I think it is fair to say that the future of the children of the “Land of the Free” is anything but secure. It is easy for the Opposition Party to condemn an action by the party in power from the outside looking in. Not surprisingly, the Democrats view America’s values from a different standpoint – “An American that is strong at home and respected abroad”.(3e)(3j) They call for a change in direction, less onus to be put on an unwinnable war on terror, with more emphasis being placed on the needs of the middle-class American people and the social challenges of our times.(1)(3e) A Democratic America would be “an America that offers opportunity, rewards responsibility, and rejoices diversity.”(3e)
Both parties seemingly follow different paths on this issue of principles and values, yet both claim to be carrying the torch for better and brighter America. One question I must ask myself is ‘If the Democrats were to regain power in 2009, would they actually follow up their promises and would they withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq and such like to somewhat compensate for Republican errors? (3d) Are the agendas and policies laid down by the parties sincere or are they simply empty promises for campaigning purposes only?” Both myself and the American voter have yet to be convinced.
Crime
Although crime in the U.S. has declined substantially in the past 20 years (homicide, rape and assault have all plummeted substantially since the early 1990s)(3l), substance abuse and gang crime has decreased less dramatically and is the main concern for the authorities and the American society in general today.(3l)(3k)
In this instance, both the Republican and Democratic parties hold a hard-line stance on crime. Both support the death penalty as an effective deterrent against serious crime, drugs offences and disorder in communities.(3e)(1) The two parties speak of putting the rights of victims and families first, claiming to concentrate their efforts on fighting crime with prevention as the only feasible long-term solution.(3e)
The Republican Party intend to crackdown on crime by increasing penalties for drugs offences, providing rehabilitation for appropriate drugs cases, reforming the highly controversial Exclusionary Rule(3e) which has allowed countless criminals to get off on technicalities and protecting victims’ rights by amending the Constitution.(3k)
The Democrats concentrate on proposals to fight against drugs and gangs. Community policing, in conjunction with the Democrat inspired COPS programme (leading to 100,000 more police officers on the streets)(3e) is believed to be the necessary formula to crack down on the gang violence and drug crime that devastate and destroy countless communities. While the apparent no-nonsense approach from both parties on this epidemic of gun crime and drugs in sections of the American society can be applauded, I am still left with a deep feeling of dismay at both party’s combined and yet frightening support for the death penalty. Certainly I concur that it is a matter of opinion, but for such a First World superpower to be practicing such backward eye-for-an-eye remedies in the 2lst century is beyond belief. What baffles me most about this apparent solidarity between the opposite parties on this issue is that it has never been shown as an effective method of crime prevention. Sure, it is more than effective punishment, but is punishment what we should be searching for as civil human beings? So what was all that talk of “rehabilitation” and “crime prevention” and “deterrence” about? There’s no “rehabilitation” or justice in execution, just punishment and revenge.(3d) Until the death penalty is scrapped, all of the other so-called crime policies of both parties can be rendered meaningless.
Environment
George W. Bush’s controversial rejection of the Kyoto protocol in the early months of his tenure has not done anything to improve his or his party’s shaky reputation on environmental concerns.(3i) It would not seem to be a priority for the Republicans. However, they do claim to encourage certain market-based solutions to some environmental problems, such as; advancing economic prosperity and environmental protection simultaneously; providing market-based incentives to develop machinery and technology that conform to environmental standards; ensuring localities are well-kept through a sufficient strict environmental policy.(3e)
A slightly greater emphasis is seemingly placed on this issue by the Democrats. Their environmental policy includes their commitment to honour to protect hunting and fishing heritage by opening millions of new acres of land to public hunting and fishing,(3e) whilst conserving those habitats rich in flora and fauna. They base their environmental policy around the commitment of putting the environment before the economy.(3a)(1) They believe purer water, cleaner air, well-kept national parks and forests can all contribute to a stronger economy “by promoting new technologies that create jobs and improve the world we live in.”(3e) They do not believe in the “false choice” between the economy and the environment. Overall, if I were an American voter, I would be slightly more impressed by the Democrats refreshing ideas for the environment. Developing the economy in tandem with a cleaner environment may seem like a ‘pipe dream’ but with the necessary commitment and effort the dream could be realised. At least its something to cling on to! Put it this way, a week before the 2005 Elections, students from the highly respected Brown College in Rhode Island gathered for a panel discussion on “The U.S. Presidential Elections and the future of the Environment”. The panel was simply asked which candidate from Kerry and Bush would do a better job for the environment? Seven of the eight panellists answered “John Kerry”. I believe that this response was based purely on President Bush’s failings on the environment and not John Kerry’s reassurances. In 2009, when the current President completes his second term in office, questions will be asked of his future: What will Bush do next? Retire? Probably. Comedian? Maybe. Mayor of New Orleans? Doubt it. Tied to a tree donning a ‘Save the Planet’ tee-shirt? Pigs will fly!
Abortion
The Republicans support the pro-life side of this sensitive argument, that says the unborn child has a fundamental right to life.(3e)(1) Support for women with problem pregnancies and not termination of the child should be the way forward according to the Republicans. From the Democrats side of the coin, choice is the fundamental, constitutional right, and every woman should have the right to choose.(1) The Democrats also show support for pursuing controversial embryonic stem cell research, which at present is categorically rejected by President Bush. The Democratic belief is that stem cell therapy “offers hope to more than 100 million Americans who have serious illnesses – from Alzheimer’s to heart disease to juvenile diabetes to Parkinson’s disease”.(3e)
Again it is clear for all to see that the Republicans have taken the slightly more traditional and maybe even more Christian approach to these matters. A call for advancements and a more progressive view from the Democrats would certainly not appeal to the old, typical, white, middle-class, Christian American, however, they are views, which essentially could change the way we live. I believe this is an issue in which neither party’s policies are right or wrong or stronger than the other. There will never be a right answer to the question of abortion and potential stem-cell research. Instead both parties should be commended for their efforts in sticking to their values and beliefs on an issue, which is so sensitive for all those with any opinion. This is one policy where I believe votes are irrelevant to the parties. This is about party principles.
In conclusion, I have shown the differences in policies between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party through the issues of civil rights, principles and values, crime, the environment and abortion.
However, although the two parties may appear to be polar opposites in terms of political policies, in reality, they both only manipulate the American people around such agendas, advertising and party manifestos that are highly similar to each other. Both parties in other words present and value matching policies, leaving the American public unable to exercise their vote meaningfully. In brief, less than half of Americans eligible to vote in the 2000 election did so.(1) It is the responsibility of both parties to offer something more concrete and relevant to re-ignite voter interest and improve this shocking and unacceptable statistic.
Bibliography
(1) Singh, Robert (edited by): American Government & Politics, Oxford University Press 2003
(2) Singh, Robert (edited by): Governing America (The Politics of a Divided America), Sage Publications, 2003
(3) Internet:
