Jason over at Four Square No. 266 hits one out of the park with a thoughtful post about the Presidential race. As we all have to do, he brings some of his personal perspective to bear when deciding what’s best for his family and what’s best for the country in a President.
Governor Palin has a 5 month old son named Trig who has Downs syndrome. As a parent of a special needs kid, I feel for her and her family. Sincerely I do. My son’s special needs are different from hers, so what they are going through is a bit different than mine. All special needs kids are different and have a range of severity. So that’s a nice statement to make about being a friend and advocate.
But what exactly can you do for those parents? What proposals do you and Sen. McCain have to improve our lives? Aside from the psychological and emotional tolls that special needs can have on a family, there is also the financial toll. Hospitals, doctors, prescriptions, therapists, equipment… they cost money. Lots of money.
. . .
In the end, the two tickets are settling in to their places in the world: Obama and Biden on the left; McCain and Palin on the right. In the middle, there is a battle for the swing voters. McCain looks at the right now, proposing to drill in environmentally sensitive areas and play on everyone’s fears about terrorists and war and gas prices. Obama looks further ahead, looking for change that lasts, including alternative energy sources and being a diplomat in the world, not a gunslinger.
Essentially, the choice is more of the same or something different. And how you vote is determined if you are hoping for something better or are happy to stay the course.
Election 2008: Fear versus Hope.
Is ANWR really so “environmentally sensitive”? Seems that those who have never bothered to visit should defer to the native Alaskan folks on this issue, no?
Not really, no. They have immediate economic gain to cloud their judgment. It’s federal land, so they should get a pro rata say in the matter of course. What do they have, something like 700,000 people out of our total 300 million? Probably weight their 0.2% since it is, after all, in their back yard. Back yard being relative, given how geographically big Alaska is.
Actually, I’d just as soon go with scientists who have looked at the data and know what the hell they’re talking about.
I guess Texas and Oklahoma are environmentally insensitive, then?
But frozen mudflats that no one lives in or goes to are precious gifts, apparently.
No one, meaning, no people. The biggest herd of caribou, endangered polar bears, etc., do live there.
Traditionally, we don’t determine something’s environmental sensitivity based on how many *people* live there. It’s how much other threatened life, biodiversity, etc., lives there, and how unique the area biologically.
People do go there. Most people don’t because it is too remote and expensive to travel there. But the caribou and bears seem to like their home.
Native Alaskans get a check in the mail. If you drill everywhere, their check gets bigger.
To clarify, I think the entire world is environmentally sensitive.
I’ve previously documented the challenges that the Daniels administration has added to my family’s situation with our special needs child.
Having people hold campaign-supplied signs that read “Special needs mom for McCain/Palin” doesn’t quite sway me. Do I think having someone in the Vice Presidency who is in the same boat *could* be a benefit? Sure. But let’s hear policy. Empathy doesn’t really provide any tangible benefit.
Short term solutions vs. long term solutions – more drilling would mean more oil and that would mean being able to afford to drive Hummers and such. Long term solution? Not offered.
I’m not even sure more drilling is particularly a short term solution. It would take awhile to get online and, more importantly, my understanding is that the resources added would be a drop in the bucket.
My main concern isn’t necessarily the caribou – though preserving environmental refuges is in our long-term best interest; but: a) cost/benefit – how much will this really help us as opposed to whichever oil companies get the drilling contracts; and b) are we negotiating rationally. Recall that Enron and other interests gamed the California energy market so that there were rolling blackouts and spiking prices. During the commotion caused by their actions, they got the state of California to panic and lock into long term rates that were ultimately much higher than they needed to pay.
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/09/drill-drill-dri.html
Just posting this to add to the conversation. I don’t really have an opinion on ANWR either way.