National interests are local, state, and sometimes federal

And why do we Americans feel comfortable seeking guidance from “studies”, especially “narrow academic” studies, and listening to pandering national party politicians; instead of using our own experiences and common sense to decide who our future leaders are to be? After all, most don’t want to be politicians, nor have the time to do it full time, but we do have full time concerns about our future, especially our kids’ future. And so many of these concerns are local and even state, with the federal concerns coming in third to so many Americans.

One humorous (as in sarcastic) element is the national media reporting about the trials and dilemmas of the various federal candidates. It’s a tough world out there for all of us, and that includes our politicians in this blood sport called the primaries. But why do they get sympathetic media coverage over their problems when our neighbors working and raising a family do not? Why are pundits handicapping the various federal election prospects and not our local American prospects? And why does the national media let politicians not running get away with murder, so to speak. As an example, why does inland Senator Lamar Alexander get away with legislation restricting off shore wind farms that make electricity when an obvious conflict of interest exists over his beachfront real estate investments. Add in his partnership with Senator Kennedy who did similar things because the wind towers would interfere (at least in his mind) with where he has always sailed. While this can be explained away as “this is how America has always worked” in the past, perhaps our collective national interests have progressed to where we have a “plate at the table”. In the wind farms example, perhaps all the talk about energy independence, conservation, and alternative sources of energy, should influence the Senator from Tennessee about where to invest in land; or influence the Senator from Massachusetts to review the sailing “rules of the road”. An obvious one is don’t hit the tower if it is bigger than your boat.

And so what are national interests? The idea is not the same as national security, though national security is in our national interest, and often a federal issue. But there are so many national interest priorities that only local and state elections providing us new leaders can address since so many “old” leaders have not done so. The basics are in our national interests, the basics that seem “assumed” these days as in on “auto-pilot”. Let us keep it simple in terms of basic home security and police and fire protection, public health as in vaccination programs along with clean water and septic systems, public education to make our young people good trained citizens for our future, local policies and practices that bring in good jobs and attract young families, and taxing to support infrastructure for our common good. Bridges that do not fall down is a good example of a basic.

The preceding is a full plate. But how we Americans today decide how to get things done in our national interest is not limited by the status quo and history. For example, the federal government redistributing federal tax income in block grants to states to do the basics is inherently and morally wrong. The states should be doing the taxing for the same reasons, and of course the voters should be saying so in their votes. In this will come hard decisions and votes, and results. Many political and bureaucratic careers will be ruined, but then again, is our national interest future about we Americans, or our political and hired and appointed bureaucratic ruling classes? And of course these Americans can get new jobs, too, just like the rest of us.