The Politics of Business, Part 1

It came as a bit of a surprise, too, as I'm something of a partisan hybrid and political platypus. For many of my liberal-Democrat friends, the news was astonishing, and it sent them into an a bit of a tizzy as they engaged in a mass exodus to the nearest coffee house with their Che Guevara T-shirts to discuss the latest plight of one of their own, for this confirmed their worst fears that I had performed the dreaded post-college migration to the right. For my conservative-Republican acquaintances, which include my father, the event fell somewhere in between Bill Clinton being impeached and Oliver North running for Senate in terms of good news. Quite simply, Dad has never been more proud, because it gave him hope that not all journalists were liberals and leftists.

I came to the simple conclusion I was a Republican when I received a notice in the mail from Ed Gillespie, chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC). Along with a short letter written, I assume, by Gillespie himself, the envelope contained a GOP census with questions about President Bush's agenda and performance.

Now, I was pretty sure that I wasn't a registered member of the Republican Party (or the Democratic Party, for that matter, Dad). But then I realized where this all was coming from: not long ago, I decided to subscribe to a rather reputable business magazine owned by a troubled media giant. For the subscription, I answered a couple of questions about my background, namely my employer and my profession, writing in "CMP Media" and "journalist" on the bill and dropping it in the mailbox.

Suddenly, I was getting copious amounts of junk mail addressed to "CAMP Media." At first, it started with offers for other business magazines and lucrative gold credit card deals. Before long, the mailings progressed to a tidal force of extravagant items that accompanied only the most opulent of Americans. Yachts. Private jets. Watches that cost more than weddings. The "bling-bling" that most of us only see in rap videos and at red-carpet events. The movement reached its apex with the RNC literature.

Indeed, I called the RNC to inquire how the organization got my name and contact information. I spoke with an exceedingly pleasant woman who made her best effort to help me. She looked up my name and poll-registration number assigned to me by the RNC and confirmed that yes, indeed, the reputable business magazine owned by the troubled media giant had allowed the RNC to "rent" my name and address. She told me that the RNC frequently "rents" mailing lists from a number of sources. This reputable business magazine was chosen, she said, because the readership is predominantly affluent Americans, most of whom are Republican. Needless to say, I'm not included in that group.

So this reputable business magazine sold out my personal information faster than Martha Stewart sold her ImClone stock. Fine. Whatever. I decided to take the census, despite my position as a hardcore nonpartisan voter. Of course, taking this survey in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts was a bit risky, being that my home state is staunchest Democratic stronghold in the union. Knowing that if this information got out that I'd never be let back into Harvard Square, and wondering if that would really be such a bad thing after all, I took the plunge, bright-eyed and eager to see the inner workings of the RNC.

The Questions
Here are a few sample questions (and yes, these are word for word) and my responses:

RNC: Do you continue to support the increasing the amount of security at airports, train stations and all government buildings including monuments and museums?
Me: Duh. Of course. Airport security is run by a bunch of minimum wage half-wits. In the months after Sept. 11, I couldn't get through security at La Guardia Airport with a nail clipper. Now, the Outlaw Josey Wales could hop a flight in full gunfighter regalia. Mark me down in the "Yes" column.

RNC: Do you think that the U.S. should modernize our national defense to meet the challenges of the 21st century?
Me: Yes, that's obvious. How can this be answered any other way?

RNC: Should students, teachers, principals and administrators be held to higher standards?
Me: Again, another no-brainer. Our public schools are operating on a Jessica Simpson-like level. I marked "Yes" and moved on.

Suddenly, I found a lot more "Yes" answers than I had expected. According to the survey, I was a Republican. Sure, the questions were shamelessly transparent and more loaded than a freshman at a keg party. But the ease with which I answered them left no other explanation.

A couple of questions did give me pause, however. They concerned the economy, which as a political issue, I feel will be the deciding factor in the 2004 presidential election, instead of Iraq or national security, just as it was in 1992 with George Bush Sr. The first of these questions was "Do you support President Bush's tax plan recently passed by Congress to create more jobs and improve the economy?"

Are there more jobs now? No. But I'm not sure I can totally condemn the effort of the Republicans and the Bush administration. I didn't agree with the specifics of Bush's epic tax cut, which I like to call top-heavy, but you can't accuse Republican leadership of ignoring or neglecting the economy, an allegation which stuck to Bush's father and ultimately sealed his downfall. The problem here isn't that Bush is doing nothing or that the tax cuts are incredibly lopsided toward the wealthiest citizens, however. The issue is that government spending is increasing at a rate we've never seen before, creating deficits that are literally incomprehensible. The federal government is expected to see its deficit balloon from $374 million last year to more than $500 billion this year, and with Mars on the horizon, there is no real end in sight for that number.

Then there's another issue we will be confronted with over the next five years: How will the retiring Baby Boom generation affect the rest of us? On the one hand, it could create a significant economic opportunity in the case of the IT industry. Consider that the federal government says more than half of all IT workers will be eligible to retire in the next three years. There's no doubt that the federal government will continue to invest in IT, not only to improve its infrastructure security but to replace so many of its outdated and inefficient systems.

On the other hand, paying Social Security and health-care costs for a seemingly endless line of seniors is daunting. In fact, experts commissioned by the White House itself forecast the federal government will be $44 TRILLION over budget in the next five years, according to the reputable business magazine owned by a troubled media giant.

Recent news reports have claimed that the decline in President Bush's approval rating is connected to the Iraq-intelligence flap and subsequent lack of WMD. But attention is now shifting toward the economy. Consider that the White House recently stated that the U.S. economy will see 2.6 million new jobs created this year. Last year, the Bush Administration promised 1.7 million jobs would be created, but according to recent figures 53,000 jobs were actually lost in 2003.

Few will argue that the economy is improving, but the job market still suffers. In fact, U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, who's never been a fan of deficits, finally came out of his shell this week and warned Congress that the government's rising deficits and continued spending increases may jeopardize the current economic recovery, to say nothing of the country's finances five years down the road. Again, the economy has emerged as an almost overwhelming political issue.

Which is why I was puzzled to see the economy mentioned so infrequently on the RNC poll. Of the 15 questions on the RNC poll, only three were listed under "Economic Issues," while seven were devoted to defense and national security. I was disappointed but not surprised to see nothing in the poll about curing the ethical ills of Wall Street or repairing investor confidence in public companies following the accounting scandals at Enron and WorldCom. Sadly, there was nothing on the rising deficit, a balanced budget, or government spending, either.

What the poll did ask, however was: "Should small businesses be encouraged to grow and hire more workers?" I'm still trying to figure this one out. The RNC appears to be trying its damnedest to keep a distance between the party and big business, so it saddles small businesses with responsibility of hiring more Americans instead of mammoth enterprises and blue-chip corporations, some of which are sending work overseas in their search for cheaper labor. The third poll question regarding the economy was perhaps the most naked concerning the RNC's agenda; it involved the so-called death tax that concerns inheritance of wealth, and is clearly targeted toward the wealthiest in this country.

By the end of the poll, it was clear that the RNC was looking for validation of its own agenda instead of seeking honest, open feedback about the issues at hand (I don't imagine the Democratic National Committee is any different, and I'll get to that in another column).

Amazingly, there was nothing in the RNC's agenda that resembled the Republican platform that achieved success for the party 10 years ago: a commitment to balance the budget and return the country to fiscal responsibility. Now I'm not so sure I'm really a Republican after all.

I'm scared of the deficit. Is anyone else?

Stay tuned for part two of this series, which will focus on the Democratic National Committee's platform for the economy,oh, wait a second. They don't have one. My mistake.