How To Be A Great President

Since the days of Harry Truman, presidential administrations have been ranked by their approval, expressed as a percentage.  Looking at the approval rating of all presidents from that time forward as they left office, only two were higher than 60%.  As far as greatness goes, these two men can truly be said to have been great presidents.

Ronald Reagan left office with the highest approval rating to that date, at 63%.  During the eight years he was in office, the cold war ended, tax cuts for individuals increased, nuclear arms were reduced worldwide, the war in Afghanistan ended (that didn't last very long), the first female Supreme Court Justice was appointed, the Air Traffic Controllers who went on strike were fired (they would have cost the tax payers $700 million had they received their outrageous demands), a successful rescue mission was launched in Grenada and the Strategic Defense Initiative was implemented.

When Reagan left office, the country was prosperous and at peace.  The Dow Jones Industrial Average stood at 950.68 on the day Reagan took office.  When he left, it was at 2,235.36.  

While Reagan's 63% approval rating certainly sounds impressive, and it especially is when compared with the 34% that both Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush had when they left office, or the pitiful 24% that disgraced Richard Nixon's administration.  But impressive as 63% is, it was not to remain the highest.  That title is currently held by William J. Clinton who left office with a 66% approval rating.  Highlights of the Clinton years included an impressive 115 months of economic expansion, 22 months of job creation, the highest home ownership in American history, the lowest unemployment rate to date, the lowest crime rate in 26 years, the smallest welfare rolls in 32 years, the lowest poverty rate in 20 years, the first female Attorney General and the first female Secretary of State and the conversion of the deficit to a surplus.

When Clinton left office, the country was again prosperous and at peace.  He took office with the Dow Jones Industrial Average at 3,241.95 and left when it was a staggering 10,578.24.  

These two men have one very important fact in common, and it is this commonality that made them great.  Reagan was a Republican, but the House was controlled by the Democrats.  The Republicans held a slim control of the Senate, which they lost in 1987.

Clinton is a Democrat and his first two years saw him with a Democratically lead House and Senate.  That reversed in year three when the Republicans took control of both houses and that control remained until the end of Clinton's presidency.

What each of these men had to do was work with the opposition.  No president runs this country on his own.  They all have to have the backing of the other elected officials in order to be successful and the truly great know that in order for this country to excel, no one political party can ever have its way to the detriment of the other party.  There has to be a negotiation where each party gets some of what it wants but neither party gets it all.  When we have this balance, when we work together, we are truly the United States of America and our history shows that when this happens, we can achieve greatness.

Governor Christie and the George Washington Bridge

By now everyone has probably heard about the problems New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is facing with a certain incident on the George Washington Bridge.  For anyone unfamiliar with the story, it happened when Christie was in the middle of his re-election campaign.  The George Washington Bridge connects New Jersey with New York City and enters Jersey in the city of Fort Lee.  Fort Lee's Mayor, Mark Sokolich is a Democrat (Christie is Republican) and did not support Christie in the election.

A top aide to Christie (Bridget Anne Kelly) sent an email to Port Authority of New York and New Jersey representative David Wildstein, who was appointed to this post by Christie.  The email said, "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee."  Wildstein replied with, "Got it."  He then ordered the closure of two of the three traffic lanes going into New York and kept them closed for four days.

Estimates are that as many as 500,000 vehicles were impacted by this action, resulting in millions of dollars in lost wages and time spent in unnecessarily heavy traffic.  There is also one death that has potentially been attributed to the closure.

Wildstein has resigned his position and when the cause of the closure was determined, Christie fired Kelly as his aide.  In press conferences Christie has maintained that he did not know anything about this incident until long after it was done and even went so far as to personally apologize to Mayor Sokolich for the unfortunate event.

All of this is well and good and on the surface makes it seem that Christie should not be implicated in this, however there is more to it.  Christie hired Kelly.  He should have either done a more extensive check of her background and moral character or at the very least made sure she understood that he had zero tolerance for such political shenanigans.  Christie also appointed Wildstein and he should have ensured that Wildstein was instructed appropriately as well.  Obviously, this was not done.

Christie is now considering a run for the office of President of the United States.  As President he will be appointing the entire Cabinet of his administration, as well as Ambasaddors and Judges, including possibly Supreme Court Judges.  Given his record of hiring and appointments, I have to seriously question whether he is the best person to be given this responsibility.  We don't need people like Bridget Kelly and David Wildstein running any part of our country.  

What is McCain Doing?

What is John McCain doing? During the last election, it seems to me that he was able to defeat other candidates (many of whom I considered much more worthy) by showing people what a nice person he is. Now that he's the last man standing, that niceness has fallen off of him like teeth from a hockey player.

Now that the election is down to two opponents, McCain has taken the gloves off. Actually, I think it's more accurate to say he's taken the mask off and is showing his true face. He doesn't seem to have any interest in telling us what he will do if elected, but rather by telling us what he believes Obama would do if Obama were elected. McCain is apparently clairvoyant.

Clairvoyance is a wonderful ability to have, and certainly one that would be a bonus to a president, but before we all go rushing off to the polls to vote Republican, we have to remember that McCain has not proven that he is clairvoyant; he has only attempted clairvoyance.

I think the best thing that McCain can do at this point is to tell us what will happen next week. Who will die, who will file for divorce, where will the next major tragedy strike, how well will Madonna's next album do, etc. The things that matter. Once he's done this, then we can look at his predictions and decide for ourselves if he actually has the gift or not. If he does, we would do well to vote for him. If he doesn't, then Obama might be a better choice.

Clairvoyance certainly isn't the only ability that a president should have, but in looking over the last eight years, and the last campaigns, I can't help but be concerned. The Republicans have shown a history of running smere campaigns, particularly when they run candidates without much merit (I know, many people believe that no Republicans have merit, but I'm not going there). Looking at McCain's campaign, what I see is an extension of the current administration.

Sorry John. You almost had my vote. I was concerned that Obama's lack of experience would not be in the best interest of this country, and that is still a concern to me, but your campaign tactics make me question your abilities even more. I've ordered my Obama bumper sticker and will be supporting the Democrat this time around.

One suggestion for any future campaigns; stick to your strengths. Tell the people what you can do that will make you the best person for the job. Don't tell us what someone else won't do (or will do that's bad), because you don't know that. Don't tell us why the other person is not the right person for the job; we have Fox News for that. Tell us what makes you the right person. Without that, you tell us that you're not.

The High Price of Oil

The following is a message I sent to my Representative in Congress, the Honorable Brad Sherman:

Representative Sherman:

It seems to me that our country works best when we all work together. The current overly-inflated gasoline price is a prime example of an area where we must come to an agreement. President Bush recently called for a moratorium on Congress’ ban on offshore drilling for oil and gas. I think this is an area that needs to be explored, rather than being dismissed immediately.

If the Democrats and the Republicans work together, we can do something to solve this crisis, however, it would be foolish to simply lift the ban, as the President has suggested. This ban has been in place for nearly 30 years, and has received large support from both Democrats and Republicans and to simply lift it is to invite abuse.

What I would suggest is a compromise that would be beneficial to the Democrats, as it shows our willingness to work with the current administration, as well as to the American people as it will help alleviate the high price of oil.

In the area of offshore drilling, the agreement would be that no drilling will be allowed offshore until the entire 68 million acres currently under lease on federal lands and waters outside of the ban area are developed. Only after this has been done will offshore drilling be considered.

Additionally, all oil extracted from the United States must be capped at fifty dollars per barrel, without exception. In no event can any oil from the United States be sold for an amount higher than this. Such a restriction would bring down prices considerably.

Next, any oil extracted from the United States must remain within the United States. It can only be sold here, it can only be refined here and the gasoline created can only be sold at stations in the United States. Further, those stations can only sell the gasoline at a price that would reflect the fifty dollar per barrel maximum. This would bring gasoline prices back down to less than half of where they are today.

Further, once oil prices on the open market drop to a level below seventy five dollars per barrel, all drilling in the United States that was begun to confront the high cost of oil must cease. Production can only resume when (and if) oil is once again trading at a rate higher than seventy five dollars per barrel.

Once all oil has been depleted from the 68 million acres currently under lease to oil companies on federal lands and waters, then and only then can Congress debate the idea of offshore drilling.

I welcome your response to this idea.

Sincerely,

Mr. Patt Gavin