DEMOCRATS: President Obama is the best choice for the 2012 Presidential Election.
By: Amy Wang, Staff Writer
With voting just around the corner, now is the time to decide who to stand by as our next president: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney.
President Obama speaks for the country as a whole.
Obama carried out many achievements during his presidency. He provided us with universal healthcare, which particularly benefits those with pre-existing conditions. He instituted equal pay for women through the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and established a White House Council on Women and Girls. He increased minority access to capital, providing support for minority-owned businesses.
He will continue to do more, if he is re-elected.
Romney opposes same-sex marriage, believing that marriage should be a union shared only between a man and a woman. Regardless of anyone’s religious beliefs, no man or woman should be refused a civil right based on his or her sexual orientation. Whether a man wants to marry a man or a woman a woman, love is love and deserves rights equal to those of any other marriages. This is the stand Obama takes, and this is the stand our country should take – we are a country of equality, aren’t we? And that means that we do not dismiss individuals based on their sexual orientation.
Abortion is a leading topic, the two sides arguing for either pro-life or pro-choice. A woman should be able to decide whether or not she wants to have a child. Although Romney’s campaign has changed its platform to allow abortions in cases of rape, incest or the mother’s health, that is still not enough. He even stated earlier in his campaign that he would support the legislation that allows all employers to refuse to cover employee’s birth control for moral reasons. This does not have to do with morals though – this has to do with rights. If a woman decides she is unable to give birth, then who can tell her otherwise? Romney wants to take away that liberty from women, but Obama stands by his belief that women should have the right to enjoy reproductive health.
Both campaigns know how important women’s votes are. Obama knows it, Romney thinks he knows it. But Obama proved himself in the fight for equality with the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (which, by the way, Romney has never publicly supported). And this wasn’t even a campaign stunt – this is something Obama believes in: equal pay for everybody, regardless of gender. Meanwhile, Romney doesn’t even seem to understand the imbalance. “We’re going to have to have employers in the new economy […] that are going to be so anxious to get good workers they’re going to be anxious to hire women,” he said when asked about pay inequality for women (which he dodged with this remark, like he does in most of the debates). It sounds like he thinks women aren’t already being hired for jobs – no, Governor Romney, women do get jobs, even in this economy. But will you do anything about their paychecks? Right, no response.
Much of Romney’s plans to boost our economy involve tax cuts for large businesses and the rich. But where does that leave everybody else? Obama stated that “Governor Romney’s policies would make things worse for middle-class families and offer no prospect for long-term opportunity for those striving to get into the middle class.” We live in a country where someone from the slums has the opportunity to create a stable life – not where the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor.
There are also many funding cuts up Romney’s sleeves. One of his first cuts is for Planned Parenthood, an organization for low-income women who do not have the insurance to cover their health needs. Other funding cuts target school funding and Pell grants for low-income college students. There are no exact cuts specified, but Associated Press reports that the Democrats believe Republicans would cut $115 billion from education funding across the board, preschool to high school and even higher over the next ten years. Paul Ryan’s plan for Pell grants has stricter guidelines that make it harder to obtain. And let’s not forget Romney’s threat towards Big Bird and PBS.
But if Romney’s willing to cut funding for organizations that help people, why doesn’t he have as strong a stance on taxes for the rich? Why does he, instead of raising taxes, want to cut them down for those who need it the least? Now he claims that he’ll cut taxes on the middle-income families too – where is he going with this? He doesn’t even explain how this can be done without exploding the deficit or raising taxes. From what we can see from the so little he’s given us, his plan’s math does not add up.
Neither do a lot of things he says. He continuously contradicts himself during the debates, with statements such as “I want to make sure we keep our Pell grant program growing,” that can easily be called out for. After all, doesn’t his education policy call for cuts on the Pell grant program? He even changed his stance on abortion to allow exceptions for rape, incest or the mother’s health, but odds are this didn’t just come from a change of heart. His positions are weak – he goes wherever he thinks the votes can be made. Who’s to say what will actually happen once he gets them? Will his pretty promises turn ugly again?
Four years are not enough to build an entire country back up from the ground. But Obama has shown progress, creating more jobs over his term and re-establishing the United States’ standing in the world. He passed the Recovery Act, which created over 682,000 jobs between January 1 and March 31 in 2010. If given time, there is chance for further improvement.
We are not a country based solely on our economic policy; we are a country based on democracy. While Romney may fix one problem, he may create ten new ones. Obama works hard to create benefits for the country as a whole, and will continue to work hard if re-elected. He doesn’t just want a better today – he wants a better tomorrow. He can get us there, but he needs us to give him the chance.