Recently in Politics Category

Yesterday morning I was one of 1,000 Rabbis listening in on a conference call with President Obama on the hot button issue of heath care reform. The call was organized by coalition of Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist organizatoins including
The Central Conference of American Rabbis, Union for Reform Judaism, Rabbinical Assembly, Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association, and coordinated by the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.

Technically speaking I'm not sure I'm "supposed" to write about the call. The intent of the call was less informative on Obama's position, but more for the Rabbis to explore how to address the health care controversy in their upcoming High Holiday sermons. (In a nice move by Obama's handler's he began his health care discussion by referencing unetaneh tokef). Nevertheless there were point which I took away from the call that I feel are worth sharing with the public at large.

A few months ago I wrote a short article for the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals' new journal Conversations. The purpose of this journal is to promote communal dialogue on various issues facing the Jewish community. Unlike the Edah/Meorot journals, the journal is supposed to be more accessible than academic and so I was given two editorial conditions:1. keep it short and 2. no footnotes.

As longtime blog readers know, that last condition was a tough one to overcome.

At any rate, I'm posting my article "A Fair And Balanced Approach To Jewish Social Justice" and I plan on revisiting the motivations for the article at some later point.

This campaign season JP Morgan Chase has been holding Town Halls featuring various presidential candidates. Apparently one of CEO Jamie Dimon's mandates was that the company become more involved politically in terms financial support or interest. Thus far the company has not only supported multiple candidates, but has assigned senior people as liaisons to various campaigns. (One would assume such support dwindles once front runners are more established). Furthermore, by holding Town Halls, we give the impression that JP Morgan Chase does not only financially support candidates, but its employees are politically interested.

The implications should be obvious that a multi-billion dollar company is attempting to gain influence in politics, no doubt to advance its own financial benefit. In fact JP Morgan Chase has its own PAC responsible for among other things donations (PDF).¹ On the candidate's side, they get more money and exposure. From the employees perspective, we get to bask in the glory of a presidential hopeful and get away from our desks for a bit.

But as the emcee pointed out, the main problem with running these events is that the candidates have more important things to be doing - like trying to get elected. As the campaign continues, the only people who will be available will be the ones who have already lost or have nothing left for which to run. A few months ago, JPMC scored Hillary Clinton - and event which I was unable to attend. This brings us to today's event featuring Senator Fred Thompson, which didn't quite fill the 200 seat auditorium.

Unfortunately the entire program was roughly 30 minutes. Sen. Thompson spoke for about 15 minutes followed by 3 audience questions. Given the time constraints I cannot blame Sen. Thompson for not going too in depth on any particular issue. My quick impression was that he seemed subdued, down-to-earth, and very straightforward. He outlined the main principles of his platform which sounded typically Republican (free markets, free trade, strong military, lower corporate and personal taxes). Of particular interest was his policy on social security reform which would tie benefits to inflation as opposed to wages.

Given more time, I would have liked to hear his response to William Voegeli's pragmatic assessment of Republican policies but considering the current polls that might not be an issue.

I will say that from a personality perspective, Sen. Thomson came across as a "straight-shooter." He calmly presented what he feels are the most important concerns of the country and what he would do differently. Perhaps it was the lack of mainstream media and celebrity, but I found the tone refreshing.

There were some requests for other candidates including Rudy Giuliani and Barack Obama, which I doubt would leave open seats. I'll post if anything interesting come up in the future.

1. I A quick survey of the PDF shows n 2006, JP Morgan's PAC made 820 donations nationally totaling $1,342,909.78. It seems that on a national level JPMC tries to hedge between Democrats and Republicans. Certain imbalances are due to JPMC reporting donations made by companies which were later taken over by JPMC. The largest individual beneficiary I saw was Ways and Means Chairmen Charles Rangel with a $10,000 donation.

Despite being a demographic minority in America, Jews seemingly wield a disproportionate influence in American politics such that the "Jewish Vote" becomes an annual topic of interest. Politicians are concerned with this minority that both Democrats and Republicans equally compete for the "pro-Israel" label, and any missteps must be swiftly addressed. There has been some recent discussion as to the nature, significance, and future of the Jewish vote specifically mostly focusing on party affiliation and voting patterns. Today on YUTOPIA we will be reconsidering if partisanship is really the ideal context for defining the Jewish vote.

In a recent Newsweek article, devout atheist Sam Harris laments religion's influence in American politics and in shaping public policy. While we might expect such arguments to assert the seperation of church and state, Harris' main objection is that religions are fundamentally immoral and unethical.1

SIW is reporting on Orthodox mayors and not surprisingly, good 'ol Springfield, NJ gets overlooked once again. Not only have we had an Orthodox mayor in Clara Harelik, but a female Orthodox mayor who has served several terms1 and recently won the Mayor of the Year award for Union County.

Who knew Springfield could be so progressive?

1. For some wacky reasoning you don't vote for mayors directly in Springfield, but for a five-member Township Committee who selects the mayor from among themselves.