What with Kerry taking flack for his supposed lack of policy positions I thought I'd propose a few. He needs big picture ideas, things that distinguish him from Bush, particularly on Iraq. However, he also needs straightforward, easy to understand, sensible ideas that will be relatively easy to implement. So I've tried to come up with a few. Some are related to current Kerry points. All of them might flop, but all try to take on a Bush issue head on and spin it to our advantage.
- Missile defenseless. Scrap missile defense and specifically earmark the resultant funds for improvement of security against threats. Propose canceling the instillation of interceptors in Alaska until they can be shown to actually work. Fred Kaplan of Slate recently explained that so far the system has only been demonstrated to work if the controllers know when and where the target missile is going, its going slower than usual, its emitting a beam that enhances its radar signature, its alone, and its flying during daytime. The defense department is planning on spending $50 billion dollars on this. Bush wants to spend twice as much next year ($10.7 billion) on missile defense as he does on customs and border patrol. That's insane. Leave some funds, say %10 to continue research if there is any prospect of making the system ever actually work. This turns what was probably a winning issue for Bush into a good Kerry stump speech item.
- Torture isn't Christian. Make the ongoing use of torture at Gauntanamo, in Iraq and elsewhere an issue. Use the case of the Canadian national who was deported to Syria and tortured brutally for nine months. Bring up the issue particularly at churches, and in appeals to religious voters. Get up in front of a room of moderate evangelicals and ask them if they really want their president hooking people up to electrodes. This isn't just the recent photos, but the ongoing and widely acknowledged use of torture on suspected terrorist by the US.
- A Prayer for the Poor. Propose enhanced funding for childcare programs and other social services offered by churches. Make the funds religion/lack thereof blind. Criticize Bush for not funding his office of faith based at the levels he promised. Criticize the office for giving its first major grant from that office to an organization run by Pat Robertson. Remember that the majority of evangelicals view the man as a crook and a mountebank (and almost all of those that might vote for us do). Emphasize that the programs are meant to enhance church social services that already provide daycare and social services to working mothers. Cap the size of the grants so that they can't go to super-ministries like Robertson's. I admit I stole this one half from Amy Sullivan's essay "do democrats have a prayer" and half from Stanley Greenberg's The Two Americas....
So, what do you think? The ideas aren't all original, but I've tried to add my own wrinkles and express them succinctly and clearly. Would these be bad ideas? Do you have a better idea? I'd love to talk about it...