June 11, 2010 04:50 PM UTC

Twin sons of different mothers

• 2 Comments
• by: DavidThi808

As many of you know I dropped my support of Senator Bennet recently because his votes in the Senate pretty much guarantee that we will have another severe recession due to the banks. That however did not cause me to jump to support Andrew Romanoff – it put me squarely in the undecided column. Senator Bennet being bad for our long-term future does not mean Andrew Romanoff would be better.

So I have spent some time looking closely at both (more Romanoff as I was familiar with Bennet’s efforts to date). Romanoff’s big argument is that Bennet was imposed on us by Obama and Ritter and the people of Colorado deserve to select their own Senator. I’m sorry but while this might be an argument to consider Romanoff (and I don’t think it’s much of one), it is in no way an argument to vote for or against either candidate. This issue is not relevant to deciding who to vote for.

So where do we sit on the critical issues?  

Healthcare – I think Senator Bennet was great on this issue. He pushed hard to get HCR through and never asked for a quid-pro-quo for his vote. He was a loud voice for single payer and Medicare buy-in. He also put a lot of effort into cost containment which is the unaddressed half of our healthcare crisis. That is not addressed yet but Bennet tried and that is all we can ask. Unless Andrew Romanoff has a magic wand, I don’t see him even equaling Senator Bennet on this question. Advantage Senator Bennet.

Financial Reform – For most of the history of the U.S. we had numerous wild swings in the business cycle and it wreaked havoc on people’s lives. During the new deal FDR’s administration enacted several laws that smoothed this out – making the booms much longer, the recessions shorter, and more importantly, the recessions shallower. This system worked great for 65 years, until the Republican Congress and the Democratic Clinton administration eliminated most of the laws. (Fucking the country at the banker’s request is definitely a bi-partisan effort.) Senator Bennet has opposed reinstituting most of the laws that eliminated these financial crashes. He has also opposed most of the new suggestions that would address the new threats. On the flip side, Andrew Romanoff has been quiet on this question. So Senator Bennet bad, but Andrew Romanoff unknown. Advantage ???

Jobs – Apparently we do not have a jobs issue as neither campaign is paying much attention to it. We have an 18% unemployment/underemployment rate (including people who have given up looking) and no real job growth. This is a deadly cancer eating away at our country. And neither campaign pays it much attention other than a couple of throw-away lines. Advantage neither.

Education – This is our future. We must fix out K-12 system and rein the cost of Higher-Ed. Senator Bennet has a great record here from when he was Superintendent of the Denver Public Schools, bringing in a lot of needed improvements over great opposition. He clearly has great passion on this subject and is willing to do things that are unpopular but necessary. Andrew Romanoff has also put in major efforts for schools both in the legislature and with A-59. However he has been mostly silent on the tough questions – where the educational system must be taken on. They are both strong on this issue and Michael Bennet has not had much opportunity to do anything on education in the Senate. Advantage Senator Bennet.

Meeting the Public – I think this is very important in a representative Democracy. And both have been excellent at this, not just during the campaign, but throughout their public careers. (They have also both been very generous of their time meeting with this particular blogger and I appreciate that.) Advantage both.

The biggest thing that struck me looking at what both have done and where both stand on the issues, is that there isn’t much difference between them. The progressives have taken on Andrew Romanoff as one of them. And he has moved a bit in that direction during the primary. The fact that many progressives want Romanoff to be their progressive hero does not mean he is.

So here’s my question Romanoff team – why should I consider voting for Andrew Romanoff? Keep in mind that “Colorado should have a choice” and “Obama should not pick our Senator” are not, in my opinion (and therefore my vote), reasons to vote for or against anyone. What someone did yesterday for us is not relevant, except where it is an indicator of what they will do tomorrow (ie, the Senate is not a thank you for a great job as Speaker). What I care about is which one of you will be better for America. I haven’t seen any compelling argument from your campaign that you would be better. Not on the above four key issues, nor on anything else.

So, do you have anything? Not a throw-away line or two but clear specific compelling arguments about why having Andrew Romanoff instead of Michael Bennet in the U.S. Senate will make a significant positive difference? Because if you don’t have that, if the two of you are basically equivalent, I’ll take the one already in the Senate seat and vote for Senator Bennet.

 Loading ...