TRUMPED UP

For all the money America will spend on the 2016 elections, I’m afraid it will get very little in return. 

Current estimates are that the presidential campaigns alone will spend at least $10 billion in their efforts to put their candidate in the White House. In spite of the exceptionally long list of republican candidates, after the Iowa caucuses there are only a few credible candidates left with a realistic chance to make it all the way to the White House. That is if you believe, like I do, that a self-declared socialist will not survive the democratic nomination process and that the republicans will back away from committing harakiri with either one of the current front runners, Trump or Cruz.

It is interesting that both sides in this campaign, the left and the right, call out for a revolution. Eight years ago the magic word was ‘change’. Now that is no longer good enough, we need a 'revolution'. The rhetoric has been ‘Trumped up’.

Most of the candidates will make you believe that these will be the most consequential elections of our lifetime (why else would they bother to run?), but I have argued before, and still do, that in the existing American political system, the significance and impact of who occupies the White House is highly overrated by the public and the media. It is astonishing that so many ambitious politicians, and now outsiders as well, are willing to disrupt their otherwise orderly lives by running for the presidency of the United States. Don’t they see how little the last two occupants of that office have been able to achieve in two full terms as president? Don’t they see that Barak Obama is constantly testing the boundaries of his constitutional power, because he is frustrated at every turn in his attempts to get even the most modest parts of his agenda accomplished through Congress? Only to get slapped on the wrist by the Supreme Court. Do the candidates still running for president really believe it, or expect us to believe them, when they say things like ‘when elected president, I will …….’, you fill in the rest? Ask them how they will make good on their promises, and they will all fall silent. Without exception, the stump speeches of all remaining candidates are ‘Trumped up’ in that all promises and representations will be out of the window once the election has been decided and the reality takes over.

Here is my dilemma. I, too believe, that we need a revolution. Just not the one that Bernie Sanders wants to see happen, nor the one that the extreme right GOP candidates – juiced up by the radio talk hosts – are promising us. We need a revolution in our political system before we can revolutionize the political agenda.

First, we need to get big money out of politics. No agenda will have a chance to be implemented as long as our representatives in Congress receive their signals from their campaign donors rather than their constituents.

Second, we need a constitutional amendment that mandates a national strategic plan. As a nation we need to get our priorities straight. We need to forge a consensus on what we want (need) to achieve as a nation over the next 10-15 years. And we need to uncouple the time horizon for our national strategic objectives from the presidential election cycle.

Third, we need to restore fiscal order by putting the horse back before the cart rather than behind it where it currently is. An effective fiscal discipline starts with the process of matching the long term revenue stream for the public sector with the cost of the implementation of the national strategic agenda. In simple terms, you first decide what you want to get done, then you project what it is going to cost you and finally you design a revenue generation system that will get you what you need. America needs a complete tax overhaul in the worst possible way. It is time to shift some emphasis from taxing income to taxing consumption. The time for a value add tax (VAT) like the one that exists in Europe has come. And in the income tax arena two principles need to be observed: it should be fair (proportional to disposable income) and certain (no exceptions and exemptions for the people who can afford expensive tax counsel or for companies that have political clout and can move money around). The bottom line on tax reform is that revenues should be made to match expenditures.

Fourth, a slew of changes in the election process should be considered, to include limiting the time allowed for campaigning, term limits, a one term (7-8 years) presidency, redistricting without gerrymandering and abolition of the electoral college.

Finally, the forming of a centrist third party, moving the Democrats more towards the Sanders corner and the Republicans more towards the Cruz corner would have the potential of breaking the stalemate in Congress between the left and the right and would offer the voters a much clearer choice than they currently have.

Without a revolution of sorts in the political system, none of the candidates who are still in the race can give the voters a good return on their investment in the 2016 election. They will all be powerless to convert their slogans into action and all that will remain is ‘Trumped up’ rhetoric, another public disappointment and an even stronger cry for a revolution four years from now.