They presumably believed it was worth spending wildly on two of their favorite initiatives: the war in Iraq and tax cuts for the rich.

Yes, our national debt is a major problem if uncorrected over the coming years.

But the recession we’re trying to climb out of is also very dangerous. It will be disastrous for millions of suffering people, as well as for the country’s future prosperity, if the economy stays in the doldrums.

How can we significantly reduce the budget deficit unless many more people can find adequate work?

Once people are getting paid, and not living in constant fear of losing their jobs or their houses, they’ll be spending more money, and when individuals and companies are earning more, government revenues will increase, thereby reducing the deficit.

The escalating cost of health care to our overall economy will still be a challenge, but thanks to healthcare reform brought about by President Obama and the Democratic Congress, access to decent health care should gradually improve for most Americans, and the staggering burden of insurance premiums on employers should gradually be reduced.

That is, the healthcare cost problem is manageable given the political will to solve it in a way that is good for Americans’ physical and fiscal health.

It’s amazing that some of the fiercest critics of the deficit seem uninterested in avoiding waste in healthcare spending. They haven’t minded healthcare costs as long as private-sector insurers, pharmaceuticals, and other companies are making big profits, often at the expense of our well-being. (Witness the Republican-engineered Medicare Part D, with its prohibition against Medicare’s bargaining for prescription drugs, and the infamous doughnut hole. Fortunately the healthcare reform legislation of 2010 will improve Medicare.)

State budgets across the country are undergoing severe cuts as a result of tax revenues lost because workers and employers aren’t making enough money. (By law, most states are forced to balance their budgets.)

When enough revenue isn’t coming in, states must make painful cuts. Cuts that affect each of us in some way, whether it’s larger class sizes for our kids; slower response by EMTs, fire, and police; deteriorating public buildings and parks; unrepaired roads; weakened public health initiatives; excessive college fees; lack of investment in projects that would improve quality of life; more people suffering from insufficient food, shelter, and other basic necessities.

The budget reductions in many states (and note that the fiscal woes of big states, like California, have economic impacts on the rest of us) will add to the number of Americans who are unemployed. That will further depress economic activity.

The constant drumbeat — led by Republicans in Congress, followed by some Democrats in Republican-leaning states — at this moment about the country’s deficit (admittedly a serious problem) is weakening the political will to extend unemployment benefits and to continue stimulating job growth.

Somehow the foolish idea of “cutting off your nose to spite your face” has taken hold with some citizens frustrated by current economic conditions.

Especially in times like this, we need government policies that protect people from disaster and that invest in America’s future prosperity.

We won’t climb out of the hole if we adopt the Republican philosophy of tax cuts for the rich (it’s the rich who mostly benefit from tax cutting), trickle-down on everyone else.

As President Obama said recently, “After they drove the car into the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want the keys back. No! You can’t drive. We don’t want to have to go back into the ditch. We just got the car out.”

All Americans have reasons to be grateful for Democratic initiatives that to date have prevented this economic collapse from becoming another Great Depression.

If you don’t know what misery the Great Depression brought about, ask your grandparents or watch a movie about the 1930s.

In those years, they didn’t have unemployment insurance, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, FDIC insurance to protect people from bank failures.

Thanks to FDR and other Democratic presidents, Democratic congresses, Democratic governors, and Democratic state legislatures, these and other programs for the common good have prevented much of the desperate hunger and widespread homelessness of the 1930s from recurring today.

Don’t hand the keys over in November.

You and your parents must also now be experts in the staggering cost of tuition, books, and living expenses.

It used to be that going to a state school was inexpensive, and if you lived at home and/or had a part-time job you could emerge from college without much debt. That must seem amazing to current students.

Something isn’t right when students who can perform at a college level, have an interest in learning more, and need a college degree to obtain a decent job face so many obstacles.

It’s not good for our whole society, since an educated work force is key to our future prosperity.

I’ve heard some older people complaining that today’s young people have it too easy. They question how teenagers can afford expensive coffee lattes, cell phones, MP3 players, laptop computers, and their own cars.

But every youthful generation has its own pleasures and legitimate needs. Many of us older folks spent plenty of our teenage allowances or summer wages at the record store for Elvis or Beatles songs or at the soda fountain counter for raspberry cokes that gave us a mouthful of cavities.

But we didn’t have to mortgage our future in order to attend college. It was expensive, but nothing like what it is today.

A couple of weeks ago, as part of the new health care and education reform legislation, President Obama signed into law major improvements in financial aid for college students.

Here’s how the President described it:

“You see, for almost two decades, we’ve been trying to fix a sweetheart deal in federal law that essentially gave billions of dollars to banks to act as unnecessary middlemen in administering student loans. So those are billions of dollars that could have been spent helping more of our students attend and complete college; that could have been spent advancing the dreams of our children; that could have been spent easing the burden of tuition on middle-class families. Instead, that money was spent padding student lenders’ profits.

“… I didn’t stand with the banks and the financial industries in this fight. That’s not why I came to Washington. And neither did any of the members of Congress who are here today. We stood with you. We stood with America’s students…

“In the 21st century, when the success of every American hinges more than ever on the quality of their education, and when America’s success as a nation rests more than ever on an educated workforce that is second to none, we can’t afford to waste billions of dollars on giveaways to banks.

“We need to invest that money in our students. We need to invest in our community colleges. We need to invest in the future of this country. We need to meet the goal I set last year and graduate more of our students than any other nation by the year 2020…

“By cutting out the middleman, we’ll save American taxpayers $68 billion in the coming years — $68 billion. That’s real money – real savings that we’ll reinvest to help improve the quality of higher education and make it more affordable.”

The new financial aid legislation isn’t as big an improvement as many of us would like, but it’s a major step in the right direction.

All Senate Republicans, including Scott Brown of Massachusetts and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, voted against this legislation.

Luckily for the future of our country, there were enough brave Democrats in the House and Senate to lead the country forward on health care and financial aid.

Most of us have forgotten – if we ever knew – the big fights that had to be waged for almost every major program that benefits Americans who aren’t rich. Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Medicare, are all examples of improvements in Americans’ lives that our country was able to bring about when a Democrat was President and Democrats were in the majority in the House and Senate.

Democrats have a record of helping young people afford college in ways that our whole society benefited from. If you doubt that, check out the history of financial aid in this country.

As Democratic President Lyndon Johnson said, “We believe, that is, you and I, that education is not an expense. We believe it is an investment.”

Or, as John Kenneth Galbraith said, “Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable.”

We can probably agree that politics is not the art of perfection.  It’s not for purists.

But it’s the only way that citizens of a democracy can bring about a better future.

The untiring efforts – over decades of service — of people of good will are occasionally rewarded by an inching forward of progressive legislation.  It has been painful to follow the developments, but the health care legislation passed first in the House of Representatives, and then in the Senate on Christmas Eve, may become law early this year, if difficult compromises can be made between the House and Senate versions.

If it is does become law, once all the provisions are implemented (which will occur over several years) it will provide a significant relief for millions of Americans who now can barely pay their health insurance premiums, or can’t afford any insurance, or are denied insurance because of ill health, or who must stay in a terrible job just to maintain insurance for their families.  It will also mean that the rest of us don’t fall into those categories in the future. Many lives will be happier, healthier, and longer.

The disastrous choice is what we have today for a health insurance “system” for those not old enough for Medicare. Without the new legislation, in the coming years our health and our country’s economic well-being would be further threatened.

In future it may be possible to pass laws that do more to improve access to appropriate health care. (Other advanced countries have done it, with far less political turmoil.) Historians point out that when Social Security was first enacted, many Americans were not entitled to its benefits. In later years, as the public became more conscious of its positive effects, Social Security was expanded.

One of the clear lessons of the present health care debate is that political parties do matter. 

Republicans in Congress are doing everything they can to block progress on health care. This isn’t new. Republicans have traditionally voted in large numbers against legislation that would improve the lives of millions–such as Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, and Medicare–when it was first introduced.  After programs become popular with voters, Republican opposition is less vocal, but it’s always lurking (remember that our last Republican President tried to “privatize” Social Security).

Another lesson is how hard it is to get progressive legislation through the Senate even after it has passed in the House.

It takes 60 votes in the Senate to prevent a Republican filibuster. Currently the Senate has 58 Democrats and 2 independents. One independent is Sanders of Vermont, always a progressive voice; the other is Lieberman of Connecticut, who left the Democratic Party during the last election but whose vote was desperately sought in order to prevent Senate Republicans from blocking the legislation.

Another staggering fact about the Senate is that every single state has two senators and therefore gets two of the hundred possible votes.

Rural states get two votes. Industrial states get two votes. Heavily populated states get two votes (for example California, with almost 37 million residents). States with almost no one living there get two votes (for example Wyoming, with half a million people). Southern states get two votes. Northern states get two votes. States with more Republicans get two votes. States with more Democrats get two votes.  And so on.

Massachusetts has two precious votes. We must keep our two Senators in the Democratic column, working and voting – like Kennedy and Kerry –for the common good, for improving the lives of people, for a more just and compassionate society.

Don’t forget to go to your polling location on January 19 to vote for Martha Coakley, Democratic candidate for Senate in the special election to fill the seat formerly held by Kennedy. Polls are open from 7am to 8pm.

If you know that you won’t be able to get there on January 19, call or visit your town /city hall today to make arrangements for an absentee ballot:

Gloucester City Clerk, Dale Avenue, 978-281-9720

Manchester Town Clerk, 10 Central Street, 978-526-2040

Rockport Town Clerk, 34 Broadway, 978-546-6894

Your vote affects what gets done – or not done – in Washington. Many close elections have been lost because a few supporters stayed home.  Circle Tuesday, January 19, on your new calendar now!

On December 8 you can vote in the primary for the special election to fill the Senate seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy. The result of the primary election determines who will represent each party on the general election ballot in January. In Massachusetts, you may vote in the primary of your party, or, if you are “unenrolled” (registered but not enrolled in a party), in any party’s primary.

You’d be shocked at how few people participate in the selection of the parties’ candidates. If you’re concerned about the quality of your representation, please participate in this critical winnowing process and vote on December 8.

The Senate has enormous power to help our country make progress on all fronts – or to block progress.

Ted Kennedy used his influence on Senate subcommittees to help millions of people in Massachusetts and many more millions across the country and the globe. Kennedy led and sponsored hundreds of bills that were enacted into law – a list far too long to include here.

Kennedy’s work in the Senate benefited—in various ways– the lives of everyone among your circle of family and friends…and also of those with no family and few friends.

Kennedy helped low-paid workers, workers who lose their jobs, people who work in unsafe conditions; children needing health care, better nutrition, an earlier start to learning; seniors receiving “meals on wheels” or dependent upon Social Security; the disabled; those needing assistance improving their home’s energy efficiency. He led the fight to end discrimination in voting, housing, education, and the workplace. He helped millions of students afford college. His efforts led to national community service programs.

But all of us are better protected by Kennedy’s persistent fight against an array of ills, including –to name a few–unsafe food, drugs, medical devices, guns; bioterrorism threats; and money in politics.

You probably wish we were further along when it comes to our country’s overall economic and social well-being.

But remember what Kennedy said in 1980 at the Democratic convention and take heart:

“For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.”

It’s up to us, We the People, to make sure that the work goes on.

Step 1: If you’re not registered to vote, register soon. Fill out a voter registration form (available at city/town clerk offices, by mail or Internet – see Voter Information below). In order to register, you’ll need to be 18 or older on election day, a US citizen, and a state resident. You can vote in the primary if you’re registered to vote by Wednesday, November 18.

Step 2: Register as a Democrat. If you appreciate what Senator Kennedy did for our state, our country, and our world, register to vote as a Democrat. Although Kennedy is famous for “reaching across the aisle,” he never gave up trying to achieve his Democratic goals. He also knew when to compromise — when otherwise he wouldn’t get enough votes to transform his ideas into action.

You’ll send a message to all politicians if you register as a Democrat and thus make clear your preference for the fundamental Democratic Party philosophy –so well exemplified in Kennedy’s achievements– of working for the common good.

Step 3: Vote in the Democratic Primary. On December 8, go to your polling place and vote in the Democratic primary. Help decide who becomes the Democratic candidate for Senator in the general election.

Step 4: Vote for the Democrat in January. If you’re registered to vote as of December 30, vote for the Democratic candidate on Tuesday, January 19.

Only a Democrat will carry on Kennedy’s work for the common good, ensuring that the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream – of a world healthier and safer for all –doesn’t die.

Information for All Voters
• Election day: All Massachusetts polling locations are open 7 am – 8 pm for state elections.
• Locations: Call the city/town clerk if you don’t know where to vote – or check out http://www.wheredoivotema.com.
• Absentee ballots: If you can’t be in town during voting hours, make arrangements in advance to cast an absentee ballot. Ask your city/town clerk or see the rules at http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ELE/eleifv/howabs.htm.
• Registration forms. The US Elections Assistance Commission http://www.eac.gov/voter links to a national voter registration form, which can be printed out and mailed. Or contact:
Gloucester City Clerk, 9 Dale Avenue, 978- 281-9720, hours (through Nov. 1): 8:30 am – 4 pm, Tues-Wed 10:30 am – 4 pm, Thurs 10:30 am – 6:30 pm, Fri 8:30 am – 12:30 pm
Manchester Town Clerk, 10 Central Street, 978-526-2040, hours: Mon-Wed 8:30 am- 5 pm, Thurs 8:30 am – 8 pm
Rockport Town Clerk, 34 Broadway, 978-546-6894, hours: Mon 8 am – 4 pm, Tues 8 am-6 pm, Wed-Thurs 8 am – 4 pm, Fri 8 am – 1 pm
Secretary of State, 617-727-2828 or 1-800-462-VOTE

The Reclessi family pays for all its purchases in cash and refuses on principle to enter into debt. Two older children are working full-time rather than attending college, because the family doesn’t have enough savings to help with tuition. The youngest child doesn’t have a regular pediatrician because of the cost. The Reclessis’ twenty-year-old roof has been leaking, and after they reviewed contractors’ estimates they decided to go with a patch rather than a replacement.

The Decentos have reluctantly borrowed money, with a plan to pay off the loans over the next decade. Their eleven-year-old has buck teeth, and the parents have decided to get her braces even though they’ll have to charge the orthodontist’s bills to their credit card. They already have a second mortgage because they’re helping pay for two children in college. They took out a loan to replace the leaking nineteen-year-old roof.

Which family is fiscally responsible?

How do the parents’ decisions reflect their moral values?

Which family is likely to be better off financially in twenty years?

The Decento parents enter into debt in order to make investments in their children’s futures as well as house repairs that will likely save money in the long run. As a result they’re making personal sacrifices—they’ll probably need to work past “retirement age” to pay off their loans—but they’re concerned about the long-term well-being of the family as a whole.

The Reclessi parents are proud of their “fiscal responsibility,” but it’s misguided. Their children’s futures are likely to be less financially secure without additional schooling. The youngest child’s health may be adversely affected by spotty medical care. If the Reclessis keep paying contractors to patch the roof instead of replacing it, they’ll probably end up spending more money. It’s possible that the parents will be able to retire at sixty-five, but their children may not prosper. If the parents run into financial problems later on, the children — in jobs that don’t require college educations —may not be able to assist them.

The people we elected to represent us are faced right now with similar decisions.

In January, our new Democratic President and Congress inherited an enormous deficit as a result of the previous administration’s reckless war, reckless tax cuts for the rich, and reckless laissez-faire approach to big business.

Now the economy has unraveled, with huge job losses, home foreclosures, falling tax revenues, etc. — we’re in the deepest recession since the Great Depression.

We’re in a mess, and there are no perfect choices.

Most Democrats are closer in philosophy to the Decentos than to the Reclessis. We hate seeing the deficit getting bigger (we’re proud that President Clinton transformed another Republican’s budget deficit into a surplus), but we’re willing to enter into loans now for worthwhile long-term investments, such as health care for all, college affordability, and public infrastructure. We’re concerned about the well-being of the whole American family and believe that investing now is the best way to strengthen the economy over time.

Most Republicans — and a handful of Democrats from Republican-leaning states —prefer the Reclessis’ approach: They refuse to invest in health care, education, and infrastructure if it means borrowing, even if the lack of investment is penny-wise, pound-foolish. They pride themselves on being “fiscal conservatives” with “moral values” but there’s more than a whiff of selfishness in their attitude. (Republicans never seem to mind borrowing when it permits tax cuts for the rich!)

Republicans fought Social Security and Medicare when they were introduced under Democratic administrations many years ago. Today they are fighting tooth and nail against a national “public option” for health insurance— even though it will reduce administrative waste and save the whole country money— perhaps because they worry about the profits of insurance companies. (Are you familiar with the Medicare prescription program, enacted by Republicans under President Bush? It forbids the government from negotiating with the pharmaceutical industry to lower drug costs…How “fiscally conservative” is that?)

If you believe that the Decento philosophy is a decent choice, please register as a Democrat and vote for Democratic candidates. (Don’t forget to vote in primaries, so that you help the best candidates become Democratic leaders.) Try to persuade friends who live in “fiscally conservative” states to do the same.

We the People have the power to elect representatives who will work for the common good—for the long-term well-being of the whole American family.

 We saw the Bush tax cuts give back thousands and thousands of dollars to the rich and a pittance to most Americans.

 Our country piled up debt while the rich piled up more wealth.

 Executives who didn’t believe in public service were put in charge at the highest levels of government. 

 Volunteer soldiers were sent to fight a reckless war with inadequate plans and armor, while private-sector military contractors were paid enormous sums without proper accounting controls. 

 Good-paying jobs became scarcer.  Public education suffered.  Many Americans lost the ability to get decent medical care. Government scientists were overruled whenever private profits were threatened.  The twin dangers of dependence on foreign oil and climate change were ignored. 

 It’s not just that forward progress was blocked. We fell backward.

 Readers of this column can easily list more examples of how our good country grew weaker during that Republican-led period.

 A few days from now, President Obama will have been in office for three short months. While hiring his top managers, he is dealing with unprecedented national and global problems—a legacy of the previous Republican administration.

 Obama has appointed well-qualified people to lead the myriad functions of government, most of which languished from lack of leadership and resources during the Bush administration.  You won’t find anyone leading FEMA whose previous job was Judges and Stewards Commissioner for the International Arabian Horse Association (remember “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job” of Hurricane Katrina?).

 Our President is taking action (including international diplomacy) to try to prevent the global economy from spiraling further down into a nightmare depression. 

 Last week, the House and Senate approved budgets incorporating many of Obama’s priorities for next fiscal year.  Not a single Republican voted in favor.  Although individual appropriation bills to be enacted later will determine the details, the budget resolution provides guidance.

 As Obama stated, “This budget resolution embraces our most fundamental priorities: an energy plan that will end our dependence on foreign oil and spur a new clean energy economy; an education system that will ensure our children will be able to compete in the economy of the 21st century; and health care reform that finally confronts the back-breaking costs plaguing families, businesses and government alike. And by making hard choices and challenging the old ways of doing business, we will cut in half the budget deficit we inherited within four years. … Like the families we serve, we must cut the things we don’t need to invest in those we do.”

 It’s interesting that once again Republicans’ proposals to fix the economic crisis are to shrink domestic spending and … you guessed it, cut taxes (on the rich). It’s amusing to hear Republicans like Senator Pence of Indiana now say “Let’s not borrow from the next generation of Americans”—since he was part of the Republican Congress that supported Bush’s irresponsible tax cuts and mismanagement of resources.

 Thanks to Democrats gaining seats in Congress in 2008, Republicans aren’t able to block every initiative of Obama’s, but they still hold a powerful negotiating tool—the Senate filibuster—since Democrats don’t hold 60 seats in the Senate.

During the Depression of the 1930s, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt faced relentless hostility from the Republican Party when he used government investment to improve the lives of Americans who were suffering from lack of jobs and food and housing.  Republicans called him a “traitor to his class.” Yet virtually every American living today has benefited, in one way or another, from that “traitor” who reduced poverty and broadened the middle class.

We can expect intense Republican resistance to the change that Obama is working on—change that we who voted for him asked him to bring about.

Be sure to listen to Obama’s own explanations of his policies and programs rather than hear about them through Republican talk shows.  Take a few minutes out of your week to watch his press conferences on TV (a big change from the Bush years!) or get them via podcast or transcript. You’ll find very interesting material at www.whitehouse.gov, including Obama’s weekly Saturday address.

The more you learn, the more you’ll see how President Obama is working for the common good.

We will get out 300 wooden cubes, each representing about a million people, and lay them out on the floor, where the map of the U.S. is already outlined.

Squatting in the cold Atlantic, we begin near home, stacking six blocks somewhere along the Mass. Turnpike (we have a population of about six million). Turning north, we lay down one block each for New Hampshire and Maine.

We get up, walk around the top of Maine, and sit on Lake Erie. There we fill in Vermont (1), New York (carefully building a tower of 19 blocks), Pennsylvania (12), Ohio (11), and Michigan (10).

Leaning out, we place blocks on Indiana (6) and Illinois (13).

Crawling west to the chilly waters of Lake Superior, we set up Wisconsin and Minnesota (5 each). Stretching, we can just reach North Dakota (1).

So far we’ve used only 91 blocks — still 209 to go! Most Americans live elsewhere.

To get more done faster, we step west across Canada and stand in the powerful surf of the Pacific. It’s a challenge to stack up 36 blocks on California without them toppling over. Amazing how many Californians there are!

Jumping from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico, we create of tower of 23 blocks on Texas, take care of Mississippi (3) and Alabama (5), move on to Georgia (10). Relaxing in warm coastal waters, we put 18 blocks on Florida.

We’ve now used almost two-thirds of our blocks and haven’t even needed to set foot on U.S. land.

We stop now for lack of time (and patience), but we’ve built a fairly good model of the population of our country.

It’s clear at a glance that the four states with far greater numbers of people are California, Texas, New York, and Florida.

No wonder they have so much political clout. Whereas Massachusetts has 10 U.S. Representatives, California has a whopping 53, Texas 32, New York 29, and Florida 25.

But our Founding Fathers devised a radical solution to give power to small-population states. The Constitution specifies exactly two senators for each state, regardless of how many people live there.

In Massachusetts, we have as much voting power in the Senate as California, with its far greater population. California currently has two Democratic senators representing 36 million people, while Kennedy and Kerry represent only 6 million.

Though fewer than half a million live in Wyoming, it has two (Republican) senators. A Republican stronghold, Wyoming voted two-to-one for McCain/Palin last month.

When it comes to legislation needed to take action on urgent matters—such as global warming, the economic meltdown, and the health care crisis, to name just three—those
Wyoming voters who were two-to-one against Obama will inevitably play some role (through their senators) in legislation affecting the whole country’s three hundred million people.

U.S. actions profoundly affect the rest of the world, and thus those Wyoming senators — representing only half a million people — have an undue influence over the global population of almost seven thousand million people (that is, seven billion).

I mention Wyoming because it happens to be the smallest state by population. But many other states with fairly small populations—through their pair of senators— play an outsized role in the health of our country and planet.

Take Oklahoma. With a population under 4 million, it would get four blocks.

Two-thirds of Oklahomans voted against Obama last month, and Republican Senator Inhofe easily won reelection with almost 60 percent of the vote. He’s the senator who called global warming the “greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” while chairing the Senate environmental committee. Though the committee is now led by a Democrat, Inhofe as the ranking Republican still can have some effect.

The number of Democrats in the Senate will increase in January, but Republicans—when unified—can mount filibusters, delaying action on any bill they wish.

To avoid filibusters, Senate Democrats will of necessity compromise with some Republicans on certain details even at the subcommittee stage. (Democrats with differing priorities have to compromise with each other too.)

It will be interesting to assess Senate votes by state in 2009 and compare them to the views of the American population as a whole.

Fortunately, our new President was elected in many states with good margins. We hope that fact will influence many senators when they vote on legislation that Obama makes top priority.

Will it be the economy? Health care? What about global warming? Will he take bold steps on one or two big issues in his first months in office, or will he proceed cautiously on many fronts? Will he concentrate on short-term needs, long-term strategies, or both?

In some ways, President Obama will face problems that are similar to that of a family suffering from a devastating drop in income.

The struggling family needs to buy groceries, pay the mortgage, get medical care when sick. The family car may need to be replaced to allow commuting to a job farther away. A host of problematic details present themselves daily, such as coming up with money for after-school programs, getting new sneakers for growing feet, paying the oil bill, fixing a leaking sink, paying the vet for mandatory shots for the cat.

The family also must decide whether to continue its monthly savings plan for the children’s college education and the parents’ retirement.

It’s clearly impossible for the struggling family to craft a list of priorities in neat numerical order. It’s a balancing act.

Like many parents these days, Barack Obama will confront compelling priorities competing for constrained resources.

What would Barack Obama’s presidency be like if he had followed Bill Clinton rather than George Bush?

He would not be inheriting the devastation caused by eight years of Republican government (“We’re all on our own”), the astronomical deficit, the economic crisis caused to a large degree by greed and the ideological bias against common-sense regulation.

He would not be inheriting the tragedy of a reckless and ill-planned war. He would not be inheriting federal agencies which many conscientious and hard-working public servants left when science was suppressed by political hacks.

Alas, Obama comes after eight years of reckless and, in fact, immoral leadership.

President Obama, Congress, and “we the people” must deal with our country and our world as we find them today.

In spite of the deep, deep hole that Obama has volunteered to get us out of, here’s what we can expect: Barack Obama — with the help of our Democratic Congress — will work for the common good.

Like the loving and pragmatic parents of a family struggling financially, he may ask us to hold back on some of our requests so that other needs can be handled first. He will talk with us honestly about what needs to be done. He will work on immediate problems and also watch out for the needs of the next generation. He will urge cooperation, understanding, and hard work.

Obama will keep up our spirits during a difficult time and, I hope, we will help him lift up our good country — with a Democratic emphasis on the common good.

He was the governor who seemed to have done good things in Texas and claimed a “bipartisan” approach to governing. He looked genial and good-humored—the folksy candidate most voters preferred to have a beer with.

Now that we have experienced the Bush Presidency, it’s interesting to reexamine what the Republican candidate said during an October 2000 debate with Democrat Al Gore:

“Spending money is one thing, but spending money without a strategic plan can often times be wasted…”

“I want to rebuild the military to keep the peace. I want to make sure the public school system in America fulfills its promise so that no child, not one child, is left behind. And after setting priorities, I want to give some of the — some of your money back. See, I don’t think the surplus is the government’s money. I think it’s the people’s money. I don’t think the surplus exists because of the ingenuity and hard work of the federal government. I think it exists because of the ingenuity and hard work of the American people, and you ought to have some of the surplus so you can save and dream and build.”

The contrast between Bush’s words and his actual “leadership” is painful—

Lives lost and many irreversibly damaged as a result of a reckless “war on terror.” Extreme mismanagement of the Defense Department. Soldiers sent off without adequate equipment while military contractors making millions were inadequately supervised. The budget surplus left behind by Democrat Bill Clinton squandered, leaving our next President with a deficit as far as the eye can see. Enormous tax cuts for the richest. Millions of children left behind. Many more Americans without adequate health care. Transportation systems crumbling. Tainted food supplies. “Home ownership” replaced with home foreclosure.

An even more colossal deficit than was anticipated just a month ago.

Now we see the results of out-of-control deregulation and the consequences of fixating on private-sector solutions to public services, as well as the Republican Party’s perennial hostility to the United Nations.

But make no mistake. The conditions our country is suffering from now are not the result of one misguided, reckless, and incompetent leader.

For most of Bush’s Presidency, Republicans held all the reins of power, since they also had a majority in both houses of Congress. They appointed thousands of people sharing their ideology, including judges who will rule on the bench for years to come.

It has taken time for the gross mismanagement, suppression of scientific knowledge, and myriad falsehoods to come to light.

It was only when Democrats gained a slim majority in Congress that many basic questions could be raised there. At best the questions are now being partially answered (Republicans can still filibuster in the Senate).

This fall, as in every election, the essential choice is not between the candidates’ personalities or styles. It’s a choice between the Republican and Democratic political philosophy.

A President and his party may occasionally be at odds, but that is the exception to the rule.

Republicans stick together. Remember—after McCain lost the Republican primary in 2000, he campaigned for the Republican nominee, saying Bush was ”fully prepared to restore integrity and respect to the White House.”

But when Bush entered the White House, he brought back to Washington shiploads of former Republican officials, including Dick Cheney, and newcomers like the Republican lawyer for the International Arabian Horse Association who did a “heck of a job” in New Orleans.

If McCain should win the Presidency, expect more of the same.

Consider a candidate who would select as the person next-in-line to lead our country someone as inexperienced as Palin.

What does that show about the kind of appointments McCain would make to the Supreme Court, Environmental Protection Agency, FEMA, heads of Social Security and Medicare, IRS, Food and Drug Administration, Secretaries of State and Defense, Ambassador to the United Nations…the list goes on.

The Republican philosophy in a nutshell is “You’re on your own” — unless you’re rich and powerful and suddenly feel a need for government’s helping hand.

The Democratic philosophy is to work for the common good, and Democrats have a record of concrete steps toward economic fairness and prosperity for all.

Be sure to review the actual accomplishments of each party before you vote on November 4.

… he’ll revitalize our economy, defend the working people of America, and meet the global challenges of our time.

Democrats know how to do this. As I recall, President Clinton and the Democrats did it before.

Claire McCaskill
John McCain is running for four more years of the same old politics and exact same failed policies that we had under George Bush. They did tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, they’re doing everything Big Oil asks for, and look where we are.

Jean Shaheen
No more country-club economics at the expense of working families and no more tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.

Lydia Sanchez
There are people listening to me right now who think that the outcome of this election won’t affect them. It will. It will determine whether you have a champion on your side, … or whether you get more of the same failed leadership that has given hard-working families the shaft.

Katherine Marcano
I am tired and overwhelmed, stuck in a system that tells me there is not enough funding for disabled kids like my sister. I am told we have to wait, we have to be patient. But I am running out of patience. And I am done waiting.

Al Gore
Eight years ago, some said there was not much difference between the nominees of the two major parties and it didn’t really matter who became president. … here we all are in 2008, and I doubt anyone would argue now that election didn’t matter.

…John McCain … is now openly endorsing the policies of the Bush-Cheney White House and promising to actually continue them. The same policies all over again? Hey, I believe in recycling, but that’s ridiculous.

Bill Clinton
They actually want us to reward them for the last eight years by giving them four more.  Let’s send them a message that will echo from the Rockies all across America: Thanks, but no thanks.  In this case, the third time is not the charm.

Barbara Boxer
Instead of a president with an Exxon policy, we’ll have a president with an energy policy. … Let’s elect Barack Obama so that the world’s economic and environmental leader will clearly be our nation—the United States of America.

Bob Casey Jr
… he’ll pursue the common good by seeking common ground, rather than trying to divide us. … John McCain calls himself a maverick, but he votes with George Bush 90 percent of the time. That’s not a maverick. That’s a sidekick.

Barbara Mikulski
You know how we women are. We make our to-do lists. We check off our accomplishments. We get things done! And that’s exactly what we Democrats are going to do when we take back the White House!

Ted Kennedy
Yes, we are Americans. … We reach the moon. We scale the heights.  I know it.  I’ve seen it.  I’ve lived it. And we can do it again. … if we set our compass true, we will reach our destination-not merely victory for our party, but renewal for our nation.

The Reverend Leah Daughtry
It is our sacred responsibility to advocate for all the people, most especially the least, the last, and the lost, the discouraged and the despondent, the disenfranchised and the dispossessed. For them and for ourselves, for the work that must be done, for the bridges that must be built, for the children who must be saved, for the sick who must be healed, for the last who must be first.

Joe Biden
Millions of Americans have been knocked down. And this is the time as Americans, together, we get back up. Our people are too good, our debt to our parents and grandparents too great, our obligation to our children is too sacred.

Barack Obama
Our government should work for us, not against us.  It should help us, not hurt us.  It should ensure opportunity not just for those with the most money and influence, but for every American who’s willing to work.

That’s the promise of America – the idea that we are responsible for ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation; the fundamental belief that I am my brother’s keeper; I am my sister’s keeper.