Powered By Blogger

Monday, December 8, 2014

HOW TO LOSE A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

 
 
PUBLISHED BY EL NUEVO HERALD ON OCTOBER 04, 2013
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Faced with a changing economic world, where competition is increasing and resources are dwindling, a type of leadership that try to balance these two factors is necessary.  In the past, the major economic and social reforms in the U.S. have not been without controversy.  Neither is Obamacare.
 
When on June 8, 1934, Democrat President Franklin Delano Roosevelt proposed to Congress the creation of Social Security, a group of Republican senators asked the then Minister of Labor, Frances Perkins, if that was socialism.  Mrs. Perkins, who was then the first woman in a presidential cabinet, said no.  She not only sponsored the Social Security Act. So did the minimum wage laws and unemployment compensation.
 
Once the Social Security became law in 1935, its implementation meant a gigantic task;  in 1936 and 1937, 35 million registered, employers and employees.
 
To date, the Roosevelt administration had not yet overcome the great economic crisis of 1929, inherited from Republican President Herbert Hoover. Thus, registering for Social Security had to be done by mail. 
 
The economic recovery of the era also brought measures that regulated banking, as several banks were accused of fraud and largely blamed for the crisis. That's when the FDIC fund protection for bank depositors and  SEC or the commission to regulate the operations of the stock exchange, arise.
 
To 1964, Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson argues that retirees 65 years and old can not carry their medical expenses. That's when he proposed the creation of Medicare and then Medicaid for low-income or disabled.
 
Senator Barry Morris Goldwater nominated by the Republicans for the presidency in 1964, said: "If our pensioners get paid by their medical expenses, why not pay them well housing, food, holidays, liquor and cigarettes?" Of course, before such comments Goldwater lost the election to Johnson.
 
In 1965, Medicare was approved by Congress and also was a major work effort to enroll more than 20 million beneficiaries in the next three years.
 
In 1995, Republican Robert Dole, running for president in 1996, declared proudly: "I was one of the members of the House to vote against the creation of Medicare in 1965."  Of course, Dole lost the election to Bill Clinton.
 
Apparently, the fact of  opposing major social reforms consistent with the course of history only makes losing presidential elections.
 
At present, the government of President Barack Obama is engaged in implementing health care reform known as Obamacare. As usual, Republicans oppose.  They have already achieved partial government shutdown and threaten to block an increase in the debt ceiling if Obamacare is not slow and / or modify its implementation.  However, the project is legally in effect and will not stop.
 
As we saw in the past, Obamacare will not be an easy task, nor was the Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.  Coincidentally, we see that Obama inherited a crisis from Bush,  as Roosevelt inherited from Hoover.  We also see it as Obamacare have labeled as socialist project.  The truth is that Obamacare is a hard work, who will gradually adjusting mechanisms to correct their mistakes.
 
Really, the only historical error will oppose Obamacare.  There is no surer way of losing elections.
 
BENJAMIN F. DeYURRE  
Economist and Journalist 

 
 

WHO WON THE ELECTION ?


Published by El Nuevo Herald on November 26, 2014
 
 
Who writes this note was lucky of running for state representative for District 103 in Florida during the last elections on the November 4, 2014. With the ignorance that a novice can have on a political campaign, but with the objectivity that characterizes ethical journalism, these are roughly the factors that shaped the winning equation in those elections.
 
MONEY: As usual with few exceptions, increased campaign fund is directly proportional to the odds of winning; In other words, the more money you have, the more volunteers are paid and more spaces are bought in the media.
It's no secret that large corporations are supporting particular candidates hoping they defend their interests.
 
This is why the chambers of commerce of each city pass a list to members of the candidates should be supported.
 
Large businesses are really only 1% of the electorate, but manage the remaining 99% to achieve voting for their candidates, despite even, both have conflicting interests regarding wages.
 
THE LACK OF PARTY UNITY: This occurs in both parties, but in this election, this factor was dominant in the Democratic Party, particularly in South Florida.
 
Who writes this column was not recommended by his party in Broward County, due to an "error of omission", despite knowing, a priori, that if raked in that county, could win the election.
 
Although he was recommended by his party in Miami Dade, 40,000 advertisings distributed among voters in Broward County don't show the candidate of 103 district, which for the electoral purposes, had seven county precincts. This costly mistake undoubtedly influenced the outcome of the election.
 
Moreover, a massive advertising support was evidenced by Republicans elected officials, while in Democrats, this support was very limited. However, some public support as the property appraiser and the state representative for District 112 were unsuccessful, without this means weakness; rather, it reinforces the concept that prestige is not transferable.
 
Also, among the Democrats there was a "divorce" between the state party and the party in Miami Dade. While the candidates recruited by the State (including the undersigned for two months) enjoyed support, Miami Dade candidates had to seek their support on their own. In contrast, among Republicans we saw as many television and radio commercials were paid by the party directly.
 
APATHY: The midterm elections are extremely important because they determine the majority in both chambers. As indeed happened. This means that if before the opposition to President was fierce, is now virtually guaranteed results.
 
In Miami Dade came out to vote 40% of the electorate, who without being a percentage majority do manage to win elections.
 
The anticipated votes increased 25% compared to 2010 as well as absentee ballots, which incidentally, a nonprofit company whose volunteers wearing orange pullovers, toured many neighborhoods asking voters to request their absentee ballot. 
 
It would be interesting to know the political affiliation of the directors of that organization with hundreds of workers who exercised that function.
PLATFORMS: This election has been characterized by an almost total absence of well-defined campaign issues. While candidates for governor and a congressional seat were attacked each other, the other candidates, almost all (not including the undersigned) were limited to repeat the command of the party, without mentioning other issues that electorate had wanted to hear.
 
THE SECOND TERM: Historically it has been shown that the current President in exercise, lose popularity, although he improves his unemployment, investment, trust and deficit rates.
 
If we know that this happens and affects the midterm elections, why the Democratic Party didn't try to keep his popularity high spreading achievements endlessly?
 
These are the factors that, in our view, largely influenced the outcome of elections.
 
For me as candidate, it has been an enriching experience. That frenetic daily bustle, the nights of incessant work and relationships developed. were extraordinary activities that must be experienced to know them.
 
No wonder many politicians prefer to share his current income or waive them in order to be elected to public office.
 
BENJAMIN F. DeYURRE
 
Economist and Journalist, former candidate for state representative,  District 103.-D-