Further to my main article on US politics right now, I also read an article by Meghan McCain titled Yes, I'm a Pure Republican, where she ranked herself on the controversial 'purity test' and considers herself to have passed despite what others say (and despite her own disdain for the whole idea of a purity test). I mentally rated myself at the same time, both to see how I would be graded, and how much agreement the two of us have. So, here we go.
1. Smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill.
Yes, of course. This is one of the central pillars of being a Republican.
I think a partial agreement here. The concept of an economic stimulus is something that Eisenhower did too, though I think Obama's stimulus was not a very good one. Reducing the national debt is a no-brainer, it's just a question of how soon (I'd guess Meghan would want action faster than me). Lower deficits is the same, and I'd note only Clinton got a surplus in recent years. Smaller government and lower taxes are something I've actually started leaning towards in the last year or two, so I'll give myself a half point on this right now.
2. Market-based health-care reform and opposition to Obama-style government-run health care.
Yes. I am against universal health care. Especially until we figure out how are we going to pay for it.
Part of me wonders if Meghan has considered that 'market-based' and 'universal' health care are not mutually-exclusive concepst, and there is something of an anachronism here in that 'government-run' healthcare (which was never government-run, come to Britain if you want to see that) proposals have collapsed in favour of an insurance mandate, which I think is the best option. In a way, that could qualify me for a full point, but I'll say another half point here.
3. Market-based energy reforms by opposing cap-and-trade legislation.
Yes and no. I believe in climate change and support market-based energy reforms. I also support cap-and-trade legislation, in theory. But I oppose, as my father says, Obama’s “cap and tax” plan. The Obama administration has used this to tax people instead of encouraging the exploration of new technology. As it is, this philosophy has turned into something that could adversely affect our economy.
So put me down for half a “no.”
Meghan's answers are a bit vague here, making it difficult to see whether I would agree or disagree. We seem to agree on core concepts, the only disagreement being on what to do about the problem. But my instinct here says that underneath the ambiguity, there would probably be serious disagreements, so I'll put myself down for a full no, but with room for compromise.
4. Workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check.
Yes. Of course.
Another subject where I've not looked much into the subject. My Labour heritage makes me sympathetic to the workers and their right to form unions, the main question being which option is best for them here. After a quick look at what card check is, I believe it's not needed. So this is my first full agreement.
5. Legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants.
As this question is phrased, I have to disagree again—with half of it. First, we have to secure our borders. There is a huge problem with drug cartels. Then we need a temporary-worker program, and then we have to address other aspects of immigration.
But I grew up in a border state. I think immigration is an essential part of American history and American culture. And amnesty comes with a lot of gray areas. So again, put me down for half a no.
Immigration is a thorny issue in Britain too, though I think the problems here and in the US are not exactly eqivalent. But Meghan's proposals here seem totally sane from what I know of immigration in the United States, so I'll agree with her position and give myself a half point too.
6. Victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges.
Absolutely. This is probably the issue I am most passionate about.
This immediately made me think of I Drew This (which I still miss). I'll get behind a plan for victory, sure. But only once I'm sure those in charge of the military actually know what 'victory' is and how we're supposed to get there. Not anti-war, anti-stupidity.
So yeah, yet another half point I think.
7. Containment of Iraq and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear-weapons threat.
Yes. Completely.
Iraq? Iraq has a nuclear weapons program? Replace it with Iran and I'll agree. In fact, I've been asking years why on earth we seem to be ignoring potential nuclear threats in favour of Iraq and Afghanistan. But anyway, I think that's a yes.
8. Retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
Here it is. No. As we all know, I’m a huge supporter of marriage equality.
Total agreement here, and I'm glad to see it. I've always sympathized greatly with the gay rights movement.
9. Protecting the lives of vulnerable people by opposing health-care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion.
Yes. I am pro-life.
Now things get harder. I can see where the pro-life lobby is coming from, but just don't agree that strongly. I don't know exactly how 'pro-life' Meghan is, but the 'life begins at conception' crowd just don't appeal to me. I have difficulty empathizing with with a mindless clump of cells. DNA does not a human make, we are not recipes.
I tend to view abortion as a balancing act between the rights of the unborn and the rights of women over their own bodies. I see that both sides have rights in this issue, which is why it's such a difficult subject, and why (unlike marriage equality above) there is little obvious demographic shift. This is an issue that will surely run and run, with no conclusion in sight.
But there is a second part to this, which Meghan completely ignores to my disappointment. Healthcare rationing is not some sinister possibility, it is current reality! Insurance companies have admitted that they ration healthcare already, and rationing is rationing, whether it's the government or private enterprise making the decisions.
Overall, I'm going to have to disagree on all points here. Healthcare rationing is already happening and will continue to happen in the future unless we want to plough huge amounts of government funds into healthcare (which I'm sure Meghan doesn't) and I certainly wouldn't rule out tax money funding abortions for those who cannot afford them.
10. The right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership.
Yes. And I am a proud member of the NRA.
Eh. I've heard both sides of the argument here, and I'm starting to think that gun ownership and gun crime actually have little to do with each other at all. It's not "More Guns, Less Crime", it's guns and crime simply not correlating. But that works out to an agreement from me, since it leaves me with no actual reason to restrict gun ownership.
That's two pure nos and four half nos for a total of 6 out of 10. So, as I fully expected, I fail.
But that was never the point, I really wanted to see where I stand relative to Meghan here, which I think is more important than the actual 'purity test'. In that, I think there's at least room for discussion. #1 and #2 are two areas where my own views are somewhat in flux (and I consider myself an economic pragmatist myself, I'll listen to any ideas that seem to make sense), #3 was very unclear and I may have misjudged where Meghan herself falls, #6 requires more definition of what is actually meant by the question, and #9 appears to be the only really serious sticking point.
So where does this leave us? Well I think the ex-socialist Brit and the Republican daughter of a Republican senator and presidential candidate coming only two points apart on a Republican 'purity test' is somewhat surprising, and the primary conclusion I can see is that the two sides in American politics probably have more in common than they think, it's just an issue of getting them to sit down and actually try to understand each other on various issues rather than using every opportunity to launch yet more attacks.