Ohio, Pennsylvania in play for presidential horse race

Super “Duper” Tuesday with its 24 primaries and caucuses was supposed to be the defining moment in the Democratic and Republican presidential nominating sweepstakes. It wasn’t — much to our relief. Why? Because it means that the primary season has not come to a screeching halt, and that Ohio and Pennsylvania still matter.

Ohio’s primary on March 4 — Texas will also be going to the polls on that day — and Pennsylvania’s contest on April 21 are crucial because they come at a time of great economic turmoil in the nation. In the weeks leading up to the elections, Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and Republicans John McCain, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee will be expected to discuss in detail how they would address the declining confidence, both domestically and globally, in America’s economic stability.

The 370-point drop in the stock market Tuesday came amidst a report that service sector jobs, like those in the industrial sector, are on the decline.

Leading up to Super Tuesday, candidates on both sides were so intent on visiting as many states as they could, that there was little opportunity for in-depth discussions of the issue voters have identified as being their top priority.

But now that a more reasonable primary and caucus schedule is left before the party conventions, we believe the time has come for more than campaign slogans and television news sound bites.

In that regard, the state of Ohio, which lost more than 200,000 high-paying manufacturing jobs in the past four years and is now facing a state budget meltdown, is the ideal setting for just such a debate.

Spending plan

President Bush’s $3.1 trillion budget plan, which increases spending on the military, cuts spending on Medicare, Medicaid and reduces or eliminates 151 programs, but still boosts the budget deficit to $410 billion this year, would be an appropriate starting point.

While it is true that the Democratic controlled Congress will not rubber stamp the Republican president’s spending blueprint, Clinton, Obama, McCain, Romney and Huckabee have an obligation to tell the voters of this state how they intend to reverse the course that Bush has charted.

The president’s contention that the budget will be balanced by 2012 flies in the face of reality — he wants his tax cuts to be made permanent and still wants military spending to be increased.

On the foreign policy front, his successor will inherit ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, uncertainty in the Middle East and possible political turmoil in Pakistan, America’s chief ally in the war on global terrorism.

Domestically, the next president will be confronted with the same issues that existed when Bush took office in 2001, among them, a growing health care crisis, a weak public education system in urban areas and the seemingly intractable problem of crime in many of nation’s cities.

Again, there is a need for thoughtful discourse — as opposed to whether one candidate used the word “deadline” with regard to the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq or whether a proposal to provide health care coverage to the working poor is socialism.

The candidates for president should not contribute to the dummying down of politics in this country. They have a responsibility to raise the level of discourse so as to encourage voters to think about the pressing issues of the day.