Polar Politics

Orion Anderson

Advanced Government

7 December 2012       

“Polar Politics”

Political parties have been an important element of politics in the United States since the early 1800s. While the Constitution does not address them specifically, they are accepted by most Americans as an integral component of the election process. Two major parties have come to prominence over the past one hundred and fifty years. The Democratic and Republican parties have many different positions on several issues. Issues on which their stances differ include same-sex marriage, Social Security, government-funded passenger rail service, and defense spending.

            The issue of same-sex marriage is constantly debated between the Republican and Democratic parties. Republicans are adamant that a Constitutional amendment be passed “defining marriage as a union of one man and one woman” (2012 Republican Platform 10), while the Democratic Party stated in its 2012 platform that it supports “marriage equality” and “equal treatment under law for same-sex couples” (18). Also in its 2012 platform, the Democratic Party called for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA (18). DOMA, passed in 1996, defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman (Gacek). Instead of DOMA, the Democratic Party supports the Respect for Marriage Act (2012 Democratic National Platform 18). This act will “uphold the principle that the federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections as straight couples” (Curtis). The decision to ban or acknowledge same-sex marriage should be left to the states; therefore, the Constitutional amendment proposed by the Republican Party should not be passed. The Democratic and Republican parties have very different views on the issue of same-sex marriage.

            Social Security has been relied on as a post-retirement source of income since its inception in the 1930s. The Democrats and the Republicans have polar views on the issue. Republicans support the privatization of Social Security and the option for younger citizens to create personal investment accounts (2012 Republican Platform 22), whereas Democrats prefer more government involvement. In the 2012 Democratic National Platform, the party stated that it would “block Republican efforts to subject Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market through privatization” (5). In its 2012 platform, the Democratic Party failed to address the advances in medical technology that have allowed retirees to live longer. The Republican Party stated that “comprehensive reform should address our society’s remarkable medical advances in longevity…” (2012 Republican Platform 22). This raises the question as to whether the age at which citizens can receive Social Security benefits should be raised. Social Security should be gradually privatized and funded less and less by tax dollars. The Republican idea of personal investment accounts is the solution to a declining federal system. Taking into account recent advancements in medicine, the age for Social Security benefits should be raised.

            The passenger rail system in the United States was, at one time, one of the most impressive parts of its infrastructure. Today, Amtrak is the only provider of long-distance passenger rail in the country, with the northeast corridor being its most heavily-used area. The Republican Party states in its 2012 platform that “Amtrak continues to be, for the taxpayers, an extremely expensive railroad. The public has to subsidize every ticket nearly $50” (6). Passenger rail was not addressed by the Democratic Party in its 2012 platform; however, President Obama was quoted in a 2010 USA Today article about high-speed rail as saying that “There's no reason why Europe or China should have the fastest trains when we can build them right here in America” (McGee). The article went on to outline the costs of American high-speed rail, which are in the billions of dollars for research and construction, let alone operating costs. All of this money will come from tax payers. Democrats believe some of the biggest advantages of high-speed rail are its environmental benefits. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank, refutes this claim, and was quoted later in the USA Today article, stating that “"Saving energy and reducing pollution are worthy goals, and if high-speed trains could achieve these goals, the president's plan might be a good one. But since they cannot, it isn't” (McGee). If high-speed rail is to be expanded throughout the United States, tax dollars should not be used to undertake such a massive and expensive project. The Republicans and Democrats constantly debate the issue of government-funded passenger rail.

            While tax dollars should not go towards the establishment of high-speed passenger rail in America, those funds should be used in the area of defense. A strong system of defense is essential for national security. When funds are cut, the security of American’s citizens is threatened. The opinions of Republicans and Democrats differ on the issue of defense spending. The Democratic Party stated in its 2012 platform that “in our current fiscal environment, we must also make tough budgetary decisions across the board – and that includes within the defense budget” (29). The Republican Party felt quite the opposite, stating in its 2012 platform, “Sequestration—which is severe, automatic, across-the-board cuts in defense spending over the next decade—of the nation’s military budget would be a disaster for national security, imperiling the safety of our servicemen and women, accelerating the decline of our nation’s defense industrial base, and resulting in the layoff of more than 1 million skilled workers” (40). The platform also goes on to state that the national defense system will be considered a “hollow force” if all the cuts are made as planned (41). A cut in national defense spending would be dangerous to the peace of the United States. The opposite must occur. Defense spending must increase in order to maintain national security.

            The opinions of Democrats and Republicans polarize on many issues, including same-sex marriage, Social Security, government-funded passenger rail service, and defense spending. Over the past 150 years, the Democrats and Republicans have remained two distinct parties. Each has its own ideological views and candidates to implement them on all levels of government. They have been present since the early 1800s. Today, political parties are accepted as an essential element of the election process.

Works Cited

Curtis, Colleen. “President Obama Supports the Respect for Marriage Act.” The White House Blog. The White House, 19 July 2011. Web. 6 December 2012.

Gacek, Christopher. “Basic Facts About the Defense of Marriage Act.” Family Research Council. Family Research Council, 2012. Web. 6 December 2012.

McGee, Bill. “Is High-Speed Rail On Track In The U.S.?” USA Today. USA Today, 29 September 2010. Web. 6 December 2012.

“Moving America Forward: 2012 Democratic National Platform.” Democrats.org. Democratic National Committee, 2012. Web. 6 December 2012.

“We Believe in America: Republican Platform 2012.” GOP.com. Republican National Committee, 2012. Web. 6 December 2012.