Letter to a Senator

Dear Sen. Ernst:

Dear Sen. Ernst:  You indeed have appealed to us as mother, a coronel, and now as a highly acclaimed politician. However, we noticed many inconsistencies in your presentation last night as many of the matters you included were distorted, misrepresented, or only partial representations of reality.  First, you try to sell us the idea that the economy is collapsed; then, you continue by presenting yourself as coming from an underprivileged background;  lastly, you listed affairs which supposedly you and your cohorts need to tackle, but which have already been treated by the actual administration with undisputable measures of success.

The State of The Union Address was loudly applauded by the American public yesterday, especially by the younger generations.  This is no coincidence due to the fact that the president has been enjoying lately unusually high rates of approval. His dialectic was  not only clear and logical,  his delivery was also fluent and concise. Furthermore, the president covered the state of the union exhaustively, painting pictures of recovery, success, and hope everywhere. In fact, your response covered only a tiny fraction of the comprehensive explanations presented by the president. Despite we are sure you were aware it was a “hard act to follow”— literally— we commend you on your courage, commitment and sacrifice.  We have no doubts you removed a huge load off of not-so-eager fellow Senators by accepting the challenge.

Let’s begin by discussing perhaps the most important subject matter of this address: the economy.  The dollar has been gaining strength consistently against the Euro, the Japanese yen, and the British Pound this past year. Not only can Americans buy now more imported goods, but this also frees up the national labor force for more important endeavors such as innovation, research, and development. This is exactly where the US should never relent; those nations driven by the force of ingenuity and innovation invariably achieve leadership status in this highly competitive era. China (Zhou 83), Brazil, and India, for example, have surprised everyone with new technologies and discoveries that could have sprouted here, but due to apathy, and perhaps lack of funding, were developed elsewhere.

Unemployment: We all know that the actual administration took over the reins of the economy in the largest depression the world has ever seen. Since then, however, the numbers have improved dramatically, especially in employment arena; the U.S has not seen better numbers since May, 2008. The good news is: these numbers are still on the rise.  In short, not only has the economy recovered, but it has also created millions of jobs generating trickle-down effect and redistribution of wealth for the population in general.

It is worth mentioning as well, while we discuss employment, your total support for the one you call the “Keystone jobs [sic] Bill. One of your main reasons for doing so is you believe it will create thousands of jobs.  And though the pipeline could be the genesis for up to 42,000 direct and indirect jobs during its construction, the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) reports that Keystone oil duct will provide a mere 35 permanent jobs once it is completed.

However, you reiterate that Republicans are “working hard to pass the kind of the kind of serious job-creation ideas you deserve.” With this in mind, do you actually mean that the job creation inertia now in effect has to be detained on its tracks so others can implement novel ideas such as Keystone?  Are these “good American Jobs” as you phrase it? Wouldn’t it be better to see how far this momentum takes the nation before trying other approaches?

Throughout your speech, you keep hammering the idea that the economy is as of now in disarray. You go as far as saying that you felt the “sting” of the economy on a daily basis for the past six years.” We can understand how the economy was indeed in shambles six years ago when Bush exited power, but denying its phenomenal recovery since, is completely unfair. It makes us wonder then, why you so energetically propose your party has to change the course Washington is “taking us.” Perhaps the old adage fits best as we analyze this example: “If it ain’t broke, why fix it?”

Let’s turn now to your personal anecdotes and how you seek the public's compassion by  telling them you only had one pair of good shoes, so your mother would cover them with plastic bags during rainy days. “But I was never embarrassed,” you acknowledge, "for the whole bus was filled with children with bagged shoes on the way to school. Immediately you continue with:  “Our parents did not have much, but they worked hard for what they did have.”

If you are trying to imply that your upbringing was somewhat underprivileged, and that in fact your family did not “have much,” this could mean a totally different thing under the scrutiny of relativeness. First of all, you had a two loving parents and decent public schooling. Your family owned a farm with at least some acreage—a John Deere probably—and a heated comfortable home. More importantly, not only did you have a pair of good looking shoes, but you were also able to wear them.

Just in the country of Angola, Africa, land mines have severed 8,000 children. Land mines will continue to be detrimental to children and their families for as long as they remain undetected (Arcand, Rodella-Boitreaud & Rieger 249). Furthermore thousands of children in in South East Asian countries like Vietnam, Cambodia have no lower extremities for the same reasons.

As we speak, five million children in the country of Afghanistan alone can’t go to school; there is simply no education available for them. In addition, to make matters worse, three million of these are girls, which make the situation even more reprehensible.

Now, having available space and a farm which they could “plow and help dad” sounds like a dream for the 16 million children living below the poverty line—right here—in the United States.  Many of them living in dilapidated projects, and cramped into single-parented apartments, would probably give—ironically—their left leg in order to have such opportunity.

One more thing, if you suggest we should be empathetic because you worked the biscuit line at Hardee’s or in construction as a teenager, think again. Millions of teenage and adult migrant workers do similar jobs for half the price, and no opportunity for advancement.

So one needs not to travel far to see that your upbringing was not one of sorrow. In much of the third world, and in plenty of zip codes in the United States, if your inventory of nourishment, possessions, and overall luck was finally tallied, it would be impossible to tell these children you were not advantaged.  To me, “privileged” is the first adjective that comes to mind, and the most appropriate for your status.

Lastly, you delve into matters which you make seem the actual administration has totally forgotten about, like the fight against terrorism.  According to news agencies, more than 4000 sorties had been waged by the United States in the air war against ISIS by October last year. President Obama, as Commander in Chief, is the ultimate responsible for this campaign which has decimated  ISIS extremist on the ground.  The extent of the damage, nevertheless, is hard to measure. In addition, with the initiative from the First Lady, US Special Forces were deployed to Nigeria last May, in order to train local soldiers for the prosecution and extermination of Boko Haram, and its outfit of terror.

In your appearance you also stressed the urgent need to honor America’s veterans. But, has the actual administration been disrespectful towards veterans, or has it been desecrating their memorials in any way? In May of last year, Eric Shinseki, was practically fired by the White House for not meeting the needs of veterans. Reports were doctored during his tenure which lied about veterans’ appointment waiting periods. Though Shinseki “presented” his resignation, in reality, he was dismissed for not honoring those he was supposed to.

Moreover, the President has requested a higher 2015 budget for the Veterans Administration despite the “tight fiscal environment.”  This means a 35.2% increase in discretionary budget since 2009, with a 3% increase from last year. In addition, President Obama honored disabled veterans last October by dedicating a memorial named the “American Veterans Disabled for Life Memorial,” which honor both, veterans still with us, and those deceased.

 Finally, for the highly putatively position that you hold, we believe your address needed more gravitas, less drama, and more inclusion. The economy is not in shambles; and as a matter of fact, its beamish performance speaks for itself.  Also, think of what a lucky child you were despite the mud on your shoes. Furthermore, the administration has contended terrorism firmly, and treated its veterans with utmost deference.  Right now would be a good moment for you and the GOP to spawn new ideas should you want to decry the actual state of the union.

 

Works Cited

Arcand, Rodella-Boitreaud, and Matthias Rieger (2011). The Impact of land mines
           on child health: Evidence from Angola. Economic Development and
            Cultural Change 63.2 (2015) : 249-271

                                                                                                                                         

Zhou, Peng. The Emergence of china as a leading nation in science (2006)
          Research Policy 35.1 (2006) : 83-104.