Controversy Concerning Department’s Existence
The Republican Party has consistently opposed the existence of the Department of Education, arguing that there is no constitutional basis for the Department. Conservatives and libertarians believe education is a state and local responsibility instead of a federal issue.

Democrats and liberals, however, argue the existence and funding role of the Department of Education is constitutional under the Commerce Clause and the Taxing and Spending Clause, respectively.

The Need for Re-Training and Continued Education
Despite our still-high national unemployment rate,, there are industries that are in need of well-trained, qualified employees.  CareerBuilder reports that despite an abundant labor pool more than 20 percent of employers have positions for which they can’t find qualified candidates. Nearly 50 percent of human resources managers state there are areas of their organization in which they lack qualified workers.  With our aging population, the health care field, in particular, is experiencing continual shortages of qualified workers.

The days are gone in which a high school education and even a four-year college degree can be enough to get you though life in our work force.  In the modern economy, lifelong learning is essential for survival.  Furthermore, few will spend their entire work lives in just one career.

Opportunities in continued education and re-training are essential for revitalizing our economy and sustaining our nation’s economic global prominence.

The Need for the Department of Education
While education is certainly a state and local responsibility, states and cities do not exist in a vacuum.  We are the United States and what happens in one state can affect surrounding states and indeed the nation as a whole.

The Department of Education has an important function in fostering cooperation in the educational efforts of the states as well as in providing funding and resources that the states cannot individually provide to their citizens.

If there are issues concerning the effectiveness and efficiency of the Department’s efforts in these regards, the answer is not to eliminate the Department of Education nor render it totally ineffective by strangling its funding.

Put Ideology Aside and Work Together for Improvement
The Department of Education has been in operation for over 30 years.  It is established and functional, and it has an important role to play in helping to revitalize our nation’s economy.

Rather than use the threat of defunding and eliminating the Department in stump speeches to excite the extreme elements of their party, Republicans should focus on improving the Department of Education and making it more effective in providing much needed educational opportunities.

If the focus is on cooperation and strengthening the Department’s effectiveness, the economic dividends to this country will quite possibly enable the states and local entities to, in turn, become more efficient and effective in providing continued and advanced educational opportunities for their citizens.  The end result may very well be a reduced need for the Department of Education at the federal level.  Just what the Republican Party wants.  Yes?

Of course it could be that the Republican Party has always opposed the Department of Education because Republicans really do not want a well-educated American populace.  No, that couldn’t be true.  Could it?

“Our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term.”

This statement on the part of Senator McConnell is a treasonous statement, and during the past 13 plus months, his declared opposition to a successful President Obama has very much been reflected in the U.S. Senate’s inability to properly address the needs of the American public.

Why Wouldn’t President Obama Be Re-elected?
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states that the executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States. Section 8 of the same Article requires the President to take an Oath of Office in which he must affirm to the best of his ability, to preserve, protect and defend the Consitution of the United States.

If President Obama does not wield his executive powers well, if he does not work to preserve, protect and defend the United States, and if the perception of the American electorate is he has not been effective as their Chief Executive and Commander in Chief, then he is not likely to be re-elected.

Simply put, if President Obama does not do as many things as possible that are beneficial for as many Americans as possible, then he is not likely to be re-elected.

How Would a Senate Minority Leader Politically Deny a President a Second Term?
Generally speaking, by working to make certain that one, the President fails in his duties as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief, and two, the President fails to uphold his sworn oath to preserve, protect and defend the United States of America

More specifically, a Senate Minority Leader could help to prevent a President’s re-election by opposing any and every political initiative put forth by the President and his party that may be beneficial to the American public. He could oppose anything that would possibly make the President look good in the eyes of the American electorate.

The Definition of Treason
Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution states that “treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

If a Senate Minority leader is working politically to make certain that the President of the United States fails in performing actions that benefit the American public, as that Senate leader would have to do if he wanted to deny the President a second term, then that Senator is waging a political war against the United States. That Senator has not only made a treasonous statement, he is also in the process of committing treason.

How Specifically Would a Senate Minority Leader Make a President Fail?
The U.S. Senate has a peculiar little practice called the filibuster, which allows a Senator to stop progress on any bill by speaking on and on about any topic they choose. The only way to stop this endless ramble is by invoking something called cloture so that a vote on the bill can finally be taken. The invoking of cloture requires 60 Senators. In the U.S. Senate, majority vote does not rule—the number 60 does.

The filibuster has been around for a long time in the U.S. Senate, but it is only in the past 50 years that it has been used a lot, and abused far too often. Furthermore, there is no doubt that both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of filibuster abuse.

One of Senator McConnell’s Main Weapons
As Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell has a guiding hand over what Republican Senators support or do not support. If McConnell wants a bill filibustered, he can make certain it is.

The Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act of 2011, the American Jobs Act of 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, and the Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011 are just some of the measures Republican Senators have prevented passage of, through the use of the filibuster, in the past 13 plus months.

All of these bills were intended by the President and his party to address the needs of the American public. All of these bills were very much focused on the economy.

Few would deny that the state of the economy plays a key role in determining whether or not a President is re-elected.  Thus, any measure that might improve the economy in any significant way would likely improve the President’s chances of being re-elected and is thereby a threat to the Senate Minority Leader being able to accomplish his top political priority.

Now we can argue about the merits of the provisions these various bills contain, but that’s not the point here.

The American Public Needs Leaders Who Work Together and Compromise
The United States needs workable solutions to its problems, but you do not find those solutions by rambling endlessly (filibustering) in Senate sessions. Solutions are found by opposing parties sitting down and exploring various possibilities.

The Democratic and Republican parties obviously have significant differences in political philosophy, but the American public, now, as always, needs political leaders who are willing to sit down and compromise their way to solutions that benefit as many Americans as possible.

Our country cannot afford to have Congressional leaders whose top political priority is to make certain the President of the United States fails. Mitch McConnell has publicly stated that he wants the President of the United States—our country’s Chief Executive and Commander in Chief—to fail in the performance of his job duties. Mitch McConnell has been using the filibuster to try and make certain the President does indeed fail.

McConnell has made a treasonous statement.  His working to fulfill the promise of that statement is an act of treason. And the fruits of his labor have been hindering the U.S. Senate’s ability to address the needs of the American public.

The problem with the current system is that it forces candidates, in hopes of securing their party’s nomination, to focus their campaigns more on the extremes of their party instead of the center of the electorate as a whole. Then, when a candidate does secure the nomination, they slowly gravitate back towards the center in hopes of getting elected to the presidency. The resulting hypocrisy, the consequential confusion in the minds of voters about what candidates do and do not support makes identifying a candidate that you want to vote for very difficult. The more extreme stances a candidate has taken in order to get nominated resonates in a voter’s mind more than the candidate’s slow gravitation towards the center after being nominated. Thus, the end result more times than not is that voters today end up voting against a candidate they really dislike rather than for a candidate they truly support.

So, let’s have all states have open primaries.  Each state should have a single primary day in which each registered voter gets one vote to cast for one presidential candidate of whatever party the voter chooses.

This would reduce extreme candidates in each party and would force candidates to campaign more towards the center of the electorate right from the beginning of their campaign.

The center of the electorate contains the most voters. The center of the electorate is where the impetus for compromise resides. And now, more than ever before, compromise between the left and the right is needed if we are going to generate solutions that will have positive impacts on the problems facing this nation.

What do you think?

Visit the Center for Voting and Democracy for more information on the current Presidential Primary system.

George Washington

Our Founding Fathers wrestled with it, and 220 plus years later, we are still wrestling with this question—what should be the role of government, particularly the federal government, in the lives of Americans?

Two things are certain: One, the world of today is much different than the world of our Founding Fathers, and thus, it is reasonable to conclude that our best answer to the role of government is not the same as it was for them.  And two, the President can and does affect the role of the federal government in our lives much differently now than he did in 1789—the year George Washington became our first President.

What is the proper role of the federal government?  What things should the federal government do?  What things shouldn’t it do?