WASHINGTON WATCH BRET KINCAID
Choosing a President As followers of Jesus preparing to cast our vote for president, we should ask a fundamental question:Which candidate would likely be best for the nation and for the world? Many of us will be tempted to vote based on one or two policy issues we feel particularly passionate about. Abortion, climate change, poverty, what have you—each impacts our neighbors and relates to important biblical values. But voting based strictly on one or two issues ignores the fact that so many other issues have enormous effect on people’s lives. Furthermore, issues are often interrelated. For instance, a constellation of factors, such as social or economic conditions, affect abortion rates but are unrelated to abortion laws. Making abortion rare or nonexistent, then, requires we vote to influence the relevant factors in addition to abortion law. Either Sen. McCain or Sen. Obama will be given the opportunity to have a profound effect on US citizens and the world. Both are reformers, men of character, and share instincts on policies like immigration and political reform and climate change. And though choosing a president is a speculative exercise, there are at least three key general factors to keep in mind as we prayerfully decide between them. Ability to govern: We’ve heard a lot about their policy positions, but policies are no more than ink on paper if they are not enforced or executed. Whoever wins the White House will need to persuade many federal bureaucracies, employing almost 2 million civil servants pressed by interest groups, to administer policies as he wishes—a formidable task indeed. Neither McCain nor Obama has had
executive experience. And though making laws for over a decade or two surely provided them with wisdom about what it takes to marshal legislative majorities to support their policies, lawmaking isn’t governing. Obama’s three-year experience as a successful community organizer is probably more relevant than military experience because he learned about the muddled nature of implementing policy in a less-than-controlled environment. At any rate, both have led legislative offices and successful election campaigns. Questions you might consider: How well did each raise money? (Persuading people to invest in a public vision is a relevant governing skill.) What kind of people did each hire? (The winner will have to hire about 3,000 political appointees to help him govern.) How well did each respond to challenges, mistakes, and the like? (Governing leadership requires deft responses to many bumps in the road.) Foreign policy leadership: Obama and McCain have made national security their top priority, both focusing on Iraq, Afghanistan, and fighting international terrorism. The biggest difference between them is over the stay of US troops in Iraq and the mix of diplomacy and military force. McCain has consistently supported US military intervention in Iraq, but he opposed President Bush’s military strategy. Obama opposed the impending war for reasons that seem prescient today. Not surprisingly, McCain, a Vietnam veteran and POW, intends to do more than Obama to build up the US military and is willing to keep more US troops much longer in Iraq than Obama. McCain, of course, has extensive military and war experience, which may be helpful for understanding the risks of using the military. Both candidates support multilateral and diplomatic efforts in foreign policy, but McCain is averse to negotiating directly with traditional US enemies, like Iran and Cuba, and is more likely than Obama to rely on sancPRISM 2008
38
tions and other forms of coercion as a first resort. Biblical policy values: On pages 46-48 of this issue of PRISM, Ron Sider examines many policy positions of both presidential candidates. Comparative inspection of the range of domestic policy positions suggests two competing patterns of policy values. Both candidates believe government and free markets play critical roles to improve society, and both support equality, social order, and individual freedom—all policy values at the heart of biblical justice. However, Obama more often than McCain will likely pursue policies that rely on government to increase social and economic equality.For instance,Obama,not McCain, emphasizes universal healthcare coverage. McCain more than Obama will probably use government authority to achieve a more traditional social order, one that, for example, prohibits or restricts gay marriage and abortion and privileges law enforcement authority. And even though both highly value individual freedom, Obama more often than McCain will likely favor government attempts to achieve equality even when it constrains personal freedom, while McCain favors restricting freedom for the sake of preserving the conventional social order. Keep in mind that either candidate as president will choose judicial appointees who he thinks will make judgments based on similar policy value tradeoffs. One more thing: As each of us considers how to weigh each factor, let’s engage those of like mind and otherwise. Discussing these factors with family, friends, coworkers, and others will enrich our civil society and provide us and others guidance in making this important choice. ★ Bret Kincaid is associate professor of political science at Eastern University in St. David’s, Pa., and the editor of ESA’s Public Policy community (esa-online.org/publicpolicy).