Focus Is Needed on Economic Issues in Presidential Election

This upcoming election year is the first in which I will be able to vote. I’m the type of person who gets really excited about voting. I’m reminded of the scene in The Breakfast Club when the character Brian is asked why he needs a fake ID and he responds, “to vote.” I look at voting as my chance to do something with my views and opinions.

This year, however, I’m not as charged as I thought I would be. There are so many problems that need to be addressed in America, but I do not feel the right problems are getting the limelight. At times, I feel that there is too much emphasis on issues surrounding personal choices rather than finances.

I know that each candidate has a view on every issue, and I have seen and watched debates focus on the current economic crisis, the war in the Middle East, defense spending, health care and the national debt.

But what is making the headlines are the candidates’ views on the personal choice controversies such as birth control, abortion and gay marriage. While I understand why these issues are as controversial as they are, and I understand why the media focuses on them, I believe there is too much focus.

The focus should be on issues such as the war, the national debt and education. I argue that in light of what is taking place in America and in the world, should the highest importance be placed on laws regarding who can distribute birth control?

I have very strong beliefs surrounding these issues, but in the best interest of our country, needs must be met. And needs aren’t being met.

America’s imports are higher than exports. The national debt is in the trillions. Inflation is up. Unemployment is somewhere around 9 percent. Our energy sources are dwindling. Homelessness and extreme poverty are high too. Education funding is being severely cut.

Social issues are important, but America needs to be financially stable as well.

And many of the social issues that candidates focus on would cause immediate party politics, gridlock and fuel the flames of the culture wars across the country. We’ve seen where party politics have gotten us in the past years, and progress was slow. Should we really continue down a path of slow progress, and even more a path that doesn’t solve burning financial problems?

When I talk to those around me about the presidential candidates, very rarely do they know their stance on economic issues. But they always know their stance on social issues.

The media is partly to blame for this, because they know that people get more riled up and outspoken about social problems versus financial problems. And less serious forms of media, such as comedy shows like Saturday Night Live or late time talk shows can get really good material from social issues.

But this causes people to only base their choice for a president on the social problems, without fully considering every aspect of a candidate’s platform.

People tend to feel stronger about controversies that threatens their own beliefs, but we cannot let that blind us. We have to see that certain priorities need to be placed first, in order to establish a stable country.

Voters are not the only ones who should be aware of this. I personally do not feel that candidates should be leading a platform that puts as much emphasis on social issues than economic issues as well.

But like the media, presidential candidates can get more press and attention for their views on social problems.

This is where I become uncharged to vote. I was once excited to have some form of say in certain issues, especially education funding. But now I become confused. Am I choosing a candidate who really cares about the economy? If this candidate is elected, are they going to try to fix the financial problems, or wage a war against opposing ideologies?

I ask myself: Where is the candidate who is going to meet America’s basic needs?