It seems like all anyone wants to talk about these days is the election. It’s been dominating media on all levels, from the nightly news to prime time commercial slots, from billboards to web ads to the airwaves and from the front pages papers to our humble little Opinion page. Candidates are out trumpeting their agendas, their supporters are out bashing the opposition, pollsters are trying to predict the outcome, civic leaders are encouraging all to vote and news teams are telling you who said what. Something that nobody seems to be doing, however, is keeping track of the things that aren’t being said.
In the gubernatorial election, candidates are running on their economic recovery plans. In this post-recession time, the number one thing on voters’ minds is money, and candidates are capitalizing on this. Democratic candidate Tom Barrett, for example, is promising job creation and to “expand opportunity and prosperity” to all Wisconsinites. His opponent, Republican candidate Scott Walker is also promising to create jobs, as well as to lead Wisconsin’s government “back to fiscal sanity.” Even James James, the “Common Sense” candidate is getting into the rhetoric, proposing a spending freeze in government until the state budget shortfall is taken care of.
These things all sound great, for who doesn’t want a swift recovery from the recession or an economically sound state? If these candidates were running for an office that’s only purpose was to oversee economic recovery, any of them would be fit for the position. However, these men are running for Governor, a position that requires a hell of a lot more, and their platforms cannot be based solely on economics.
Since it is an election year, Congress has put off voting on hot-button issues like immigration policy, whether to extend Bush-era tax cuts, and even next year’s budget to keep their voters happy (or at least not completely irate). Unfortunately, candidates for office have adopted the same M.O., and you will be hard pressed to find candidates making a statement about those issues at all. Also missing from this election are platforms where social issues play a key role. These issues seem to be on the back burner for most candidates and while that may be fine for now, when the economic crises finally becomes a thing of the past voters may be stuck with politicians with views very different from their own.
Going back to the gubernatorial election, we can see this is a perfect example of downplaying controversial issues. Both Tom Barrett and Scott Walker make claims about social issues on their websites, but mainly skirt around them. Barrett, under the category of “Women’s Issues,” briefly brings up his support of a woman’s right to choose, and then quickly turns the subject toward his fight for equal pay for equal work. Walker, under the category of “Protecting Life” makes a one-sentence statement that he is “100% pro-life,” and then goes on to list what pro-life groups support him. Neither candidate says whether or not they will actively try to pass legislation that supports their opposing views on abortion. In fact, neither of them even use the word.
And what do they say about gay marriage, the other equally controversial topic du jour? Nothing. At least not on their websites. To make up for it, Barrett does have a statement saying he supports stem cell research, but it seems to be an afterthought in his “Health care” section. Walker doesn’t make a statement on the subject on his website, but has said he supports adult, not embryonic, research. Instead of discussing those big issues, Walker focuses on protecting the Second Amendment and Barrett focuses on protecting senior citizens. Those things are good to know about a candidate, but they certainly don’t replace the answers to other questions.
When candidates stay coy on their beliefs, voters aren’t able to make a fully informed decision. This problem seems to be especially apparent in this election, since most eyes are on the bottom line and the main issue is the economy. We cannot forget about the other issues that impact us, the social issues. There is more to the candidates than their job-creating capacity or their ability to control taxes. Voting for Scott Walker may result in lower taxes, but if he makes abortion illegal and you get knocked up, the amount of money you saved on taxes will be nowhere near enough to offset your medical bills, much less the price of raising a child. Voting for Tom Barrett may create hundreds of jobs, but if he continues to keep quiet on gay rights, your partner may never be covered under the insurance your new job provides. These are things people caught up in the fervor of recession recovery may not think about, but they are hugely important things to consider.
It is important to vote, anyone will tell you that. But it is more important to know what you’re voting for, and to demand information if none is forthcoming. Do research into what the candidates believe to see if your ideologies are in line. Write letters to the candidates if they haven’t satisfactorily articulated their views. This country and this state aren’t run on laws on social issues alone, but they do matter and they do affect us. In this election, we can’t let candidates sweep them under the table.
Allegra Dimperio ([email protected]) is a sophomore intending to major in journalism.
