The other day my 24 yr. old son and I were discussing a recent newsletter from one of my clients, a financial analyst. In it, he shared a link to a a rather eye-opening little worksheet published by the NYT: a do-it-yourself budget balancing puzzle (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html). I remarked that it it didn't seem too painful for me to resolve the nation's deficit problem, once given the relevant information and seeing the cause-effect. In fact, when approaching this a citizen of the United States, and not focused on my own special interests, it seemed like a no brainer. And I could see how another person with a different perspective might get to the same place differently. But in either case, getting there wasn't the impossible task we are led to believe.
I asked out loud why our "leaders" in Washington weren't doing the same exercise (based on the findings of the president's bipartisan commission). Why isn't this information out there as publicly as the lives of The Jersey Shore? Why aren't our elected representatives held publicly accountable for taking on the same responsibility, such that their own special interests put in front of the greater good can be seen just as clearly and openly as "the emperor's new clothes?" Why isn't what is obvious to most intelligent people, regarding of political leaning, the focus of public debate, rather than the bickering? Instead we get sound bites, slogans and superficial yet emotionally dramatic diversions from the real issues.
I know I must sound naive, but the alternative seems too depressing. Then my son made a comment that struck me yet again. "It seems crazier to say we can have transparency in congress then it was for John F. Kennedy to say we would put a man on moon. And he didn't even have a clue as to how we would do it. On paper, putting a man on the moon seems a lot more difficult. But in reality when you factor in human behavior it's much more difficult to get transparency in congress."
Ouch.
