By now everyone with any interest in politics and government has heard of Jonathan Gruber. He called the American public "incredibly stupid" in believing the many lies concocted to sell Obamacare to the Congress and the American people.
But his celebrity status comes from his crowing about the fact that he and the other architects of Obamacare knew they were telling lies and are quite proud they got away with it. In Gruber's view, they got away with it because of the stupidity of Americans: In the public debate leading up to the passage of Obamacare in 2010, Americans were gullible in accepting the most far-fetched claims for the proposed "health care reform."
So, professor Gruber is now catching flak for talking so openly about that "dirty little secret of American politics." Yet, let me be so bold as to suggest that maybe he deserves a medal instead of a public whipping.
Truth-telling in politics is a rare commodity, so let's not be so harsh on the beleaguered former paid White House consultant whom Obama now wants to deny ever set foot in the West Wing. In fact, the truth of his statements about American's political stupidity is validated with each passing week and each new political controversy.
How else can we explain the 40 percent popularity of a president who openly defies his oath of office to "faithfully execute" the laws of this nation? And evidently, only those 40 percent of Americans matter to those arbiters of political morality, the mainstream media, because no one is listening or paying any attention to the other 60 percent, who see President Obama as an aspiring dictator.
Obama is working tirelessly to prove to the world that the stupidity Congress showed in passing Obamacare was not an isolated incident. He is striving mightily to show the world that Congress can be equally stupid in submitting without serious challenge to a host of other presidential initiatives – such as a misguided war on fossil fuels, an unconstitutional amnesty and a deal with Iran that guarantees an archenemy and paymaster for terrorist organizations will have nuclear weapons in less than a decade.
But let's not digress into other issues, where Obama is counting on public apathy and stupidity to get him through a temporary storm of controversy. He can ride out the criticism because he knows that when the dust settles, he will have his "legacy" and the Republicans will have only news clippings. Let's instead explore the question of public stupidity itself. Is it really true, and if so, is there a cure for it?
OK, first we have to acknowledge that the American people themselves never voted for Obamacare, Congress did. Or more accurately, Democrats enacted it and did so without a single Republican vote in either the House or Senate. However, that only raises the question – why did the American people choose to elect and re-elect liars and scoundrels who would vote for a 2,000-page bill without even reading it?
Our Constitution anticipated many problems associated with popular passions and public ignorance and built into our government a very astute system of checks and balances. But where is the check or the balance when the representatives themselves encourage and reward public ignorance?
Arguing that Congress and not the American people did x, y and z dodges the question about the depth and durability of American stupidity. We are a representative democracy, so if the people chose to applaud and not restrain the would-be tyrants in our midst, the people themselves must bear the responsibility for the disaster that follows.
I welcome any evidence to the contrary, but our experience tells us that we now live under a system of government that routinely allows and even rewards stupidity at the highest levels of government. So, is there any fix for this problem?
I submit that we are compelled by these dire circumstances to experiment with some new mechanisms for educating the public instead of merely entertaining ourselves with amusing anecdotes that document the depth of public ignorance. I confess I do not yet have a full menu of corrective measures, but I can suggest a place to start.
Thanks to the actions of our current Maximum Leader, Emperor Obama, in the next 20 years we will likely have a wave of 10 to 20 million new naturalized citizens. The law stipulates that applicants for citizenship must pass a pretty rigorous civics test. True, the test is not perfect, and we doubtless can and should improve that civics exam, but my point is a different one.
Naturalized citizens must prove they understand some fundamentals facts about the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, separation of powers, federalism and so forth. But every man-on-the-street interview of voters documents the abysmal ignorance of too many Americans about the fundamental pillars of American freedom. Why not require that every American take and pass the same civics test as new citizens must pass before they indulge in that most sacred civic duty, voting for the representatives who will deliberate and decide on the next public debacle?
That proposal may be too modest for the seriousness of the problem, but we have to start somewhere. We can hope it is not too late to re-learn the importance of a Constitution that not only empowers public officials but restrains them as well.
Media wishing to interview Tom Tancredo, please contact [email protected].
|