McCain and Obama, one and the same

By Ben Childs

Former Gov. Jesse Ventura said it best when he stated that choosing between Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama is like choosing between Coke and Pepsi -- in the long run, they're both the same.

Both have promised to engage in reckless spending if they're elected, and our nation can no longer afford it.

That's why, this Tuesday, I'm voting for the Libertarian candidate for president, Bob Barr.

I have not seen Barr speak, read any of his books or even claim to know much about the man himself -- but I do know the policies that he stands for.

From health care to defense, they all stem from his belief in fiscal responsibility on a national level. He believes that the government has overextended itself in too many areas, whether by regulation or subsidy. He also believes that throwing money at those areas is not only wrong based on principle, but is quickly becoming a danger to our nation's future.

The White House announced that the deficit for the fiscal 2008 budget was a record $455 billion.

Since the recent bailouts (which happened after the budget's fiscal year ended on Sept. 30), many believe that next year's deficit will be somewhere between $750 billion and $1 trillion.

Deficits in the future will no doubt be bigger, as both Social Security and Medicare (which have a combined $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities) are set to be bankrupt in a little over a decade. Whatever your political principles, these numbers are real, and they are a problem.

However, neither Obama nor McCain have a solution. In fact, their respective spending plans are in line with the status quo that got us into this mess.

McCain insists on focusing on short-term, politically charged issues that will buy him votes.

These include eliminating earmarks (less than one percent of the federal budget) and a $300 billion plan to buy back mortgages directly from the American people.

Obama has firmer plans and better intentions, but will spend much more.

He plans on throwing trillions of dollars at energy, infrastructure and health care, while giving up a similar amount in the form of tax cuts and credits with various 10-year plans.

Both candidates plan on expanding the federal government's spending and its role in our everyday lives to unprecedented levels.

Neither has any real way to fund their aims, and both only promise not to raise the national debt. This is a promise neither will be able keep.

Continuing to spend the way we have in the recent past will hurt even more in the future, and the pain is growing exponentially.

Our national debt has grown so large that the famous National Debt Clock in New York City ran out of digits to display it after it surpassed the $10 trillion mark earlier this year.

Constructed in 1989, when the national debt was $2.7 trillion, the owners of the clock did not think that it would need a tens-of-trillions-of-dollars column.

With each passing year, the debt will only get harder and harder to drive down.

Other countries will eventually get tired of buying it up and, someday, ask for their money back.

Whenever that day comes, our entire federal government will be in need of a bailout, and it won't be able to give one to itself.

Deficit spending and the national debt are problems that most voters don't think affect them, but they do.

It is a messy issue and, if there was a perfect solution, it wouldn't be an issue. Still, there is a right direction and there is a wrong direction to head toward as we attempt to solve the problem.

McCain and Obama are both going in the wrong direction, and the taxpayers will be paying dearly for it long after they're out of office.

Voting for a major party candidate that cares about these issues would be ideal, but neither one does.

A Public Policy Institute of California poll released last week has Obama taking California and all of its 55 electoral votes by 23 points.

This means that literally everyone who is voting for McCain and, to a point, all of Obama's surplus voters, will be throwing their votes away. A vote for Barr, in this case, isn't wasted. It's wisely invested.

On Tuesday, I'm going to show the main parties that if they want my vote, they must rise above short-term political pressure.

I'm going to think of my vote as a long-term investment in our nation's future financial solutions.

I'm going to cast a vote that matters for Barr, the Libertarian candidate for president.

Ben Childs is a senior English major.