(On a quick side note, I’m going to start breaking up my posts into the different topics in the title, using red headings, as seen below – ‘Fiscal Cliff and American Political System’ – to make it easier for people to find what they really want to read about)
So thank God that Obama won. I’ve been watching the election campaigns closely for a while now, and was starting to get nervous as it seemed more and more people were supporting Mitt Romney. I’m transparently left-wing though, so I had no real choice but to support Obama, apparently just like most Canadians do. I stayed up until 2AM last night to watch Obama’s victory speech (and Romney’s concession as well) and wasn’t terribly surprised by anything. It is worth noting, however, that Obama took pains to focus on collaborative politics. He specifically mentioned putting aside party colours to work together on the big issues – of course one of the biggest facing them currently is the ‘fiscal cliff’ on January 1st.
Fiscal Cliff and American Political System
What is the fiscal cliff, you ask? Well many people are wondering this as well… I’ll give you the Junkie_Monkey version for those not as interested in American politics.
As Obama acknowledged in his victory speech, Republicans and Democrats have been having a very, very difficult time working together. For a short period after Obama was elected in 2008, Democrats controlled the House of Representatives – however, a by-election in 2010, and now again in 2012 has seen majority control go to the Republicans. The 435-seat House of Representatives is essentially the equivalent of our House of Commons, and the 100-seat American Senate is similar to our Senate. The major difference is that bills can be introduced into either House of Congress, wheras in Canada bills are introduced in the House of Commons and then move to the Senate for a ‘sober second thought’. The American Senate is similar in that it also has checks and balances to help keep tabs on the way power is used by other parts of government. I won’t bore you with too much detail, but just as in Canada if a bill has major changes made it will often go back to the House of Commons to be re-voted on, before it goes back to the Senate and then goes to (in Canada) the Governor General for Royal Assent and is then signed into law (as you may or may not know, the Governor General is supposed to be an apolitical position, so if the Senate and House have both voted yes on a bill, they just sign it into law, no questions asked, which is probably a good thing – in the US once both houses have approved a bill, the President signs it into law).
Anyway, the point is that they have a Democratic President, a Republican House of Representatives, and a Democratic Senate. In a perfect world this would be ideal, as both sides have input into all bills and both have opportunities to introduce and veto legislation. In reality, of course, nobody can agree on anything and the President has an extraordinarily hard time getting bills through Congress and into law. Honestly, I’m pretty amazed he managed to get Obamacare through and signed into law. Presidents in the United States have a special power called an executive order which allows them, basically, to proclaim something and immediately turn it into law. Many have argued that this power exceeds what is expected of the executive branch of government, but that’s a discussion for another day. I’m mentioning this because so far, Obama hasn’t really used these executive orders to bypass the Houses. Mostly because if he DID try that there would immediately be legal challenges and the order would probably be found unconstitutional; but back to my original point.
With this mix of Republicans and Democrats ruling, back in August 2011, they realized that they couldn’t agree on a way to reduce the deficit, reduce spending and also tax cuts; because of this, they basically agreed to disagree. They made an agreement that if they hadn’t found a way to decrease spending and organize taxes in a way that would achieve a balanced budget, automatic spending cuts and large rises in taxes will automatically happen. This was designed to put pressure on both sides to come up with a better solution – a Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads, basically. Without some sort of consensus, these spending cuts and tax increases will be HUGE – they’re designed to find $1.2 TRILLION dollars of savings over the next ten years, without increasing the government’s borrowing limit, and of course the problem is both sides agreed to it. If they can’t either repeal the agreement or instill a new agreement before that date, they will have essentially driven off of a ‘fiscal cliff’ and crash and burn in the valley below.
Analysts have repeatedly warned that not agreeing on a different plan will almost certainly put the US back into a recession – exactly what Obama doesn’t need happening in his second term as president.
Marijuana Legalized in Colorado and Washington?!?
Yes, folks, I will admit that somehow I wasn’t even aware that this proposition was even on the ballot in these states! Apparently, it was also on the ballot in Oregon, but of course it failed there. Massachusetts allowed marijuana for medical use, while Arkansas rejected a similar propsal. And yes, Colorado and Washington actually legalized marijuana for recreational use, not just decriminalized it like the de facto laws here in Canada; they also aim to create an actual framework for sales and regulation of the drug, similar to alcohol laws now. Washington’s new law will state that anyone over 21 years of age can buy up to an ounce (28 grams for all you non-pot-smokers) for personal use from a licensed retailer. Colorado took it in a slightly different direction; they allow the same amount, up to an ounce per person for recreational use, however they are also allowing people to grow as many as six plants for personal use.
“The voters have spoken and we have to respect their will. This will be a complicated process, but we intend to follow through. That said, federal law still says marijuana is an illegal drug so don’t break out the Cheetos or Goldfish too quickly.”
– Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper
I feel that this is a very, very positive step forward in the fight against the War on Drugs. The War on the War on Drugs, you might say. And the people themselves voted for it! Pretty incredible.
However, federal law in the US still states that marijuana is an illegal narcotic, which will inevitably lead to a legal showdown between these states and the feds. A good sign is that both these states have had medical marijuana for over ten years – Colorado for 12 and Washington for 14 years, and technically, marijuana isn’t even legal in Amsterdam – showing that these states are actually serious about trying to get this right the first time around. There will be a lot of work setting up the legal framework, but in the end these states will benefit immeasurably from these proposals. Increase in tax dollars, decrease in the criminalization of marijuana users, more responsible use and increased access to health care for marijuana users, etc. The benefits are both societal and individual in scope.
Anyway, I just wanted to leave you with this very interesting map, showing the distribution of votes across the US. It blows me away every time. If you looked a similar map for Canada, you’d notice a similar trend – the winning party seems to have a lot less support across the country, yet they still have more seats and therefore a majority.
