Written by George Kennedy   

Electing a president can be distilled in its very essence to the process by which each of us, as voters, selects someone (the package) who represents our values and ideas on a panoply of life's myriad components. Lives are multi-faceted and behind each facet is a set of learned expectations we feel our candidate shares. This is the thought process of the voter in the voting booth.

What are those values and ideas? Well, this is America and old fashioned ideas of fairness, equity, a “fair shake” still resonate. America as a land of practically unlimited opportunity for all did not ring hollow until recently. From the earliest immigrants to our shores to today's undocumented visitors from below our Southern border, each group believed in going for the “brass ring” called the American dream.

... And, individual pursuits by those enshrined in our Pantheon of heroic figures were not in conflict with the necessity, even for them, to form a community around shared beliefs and the desire to survive and prosper. On the frontier and within isolated settlements in the original 13 colonies, unity brought strength, survival, and prosperity.

In the 21st century, the idea of community still has a core meaning to most of us. It speaks to the collective we inherited and seek to preserve. Here is a fundamental example: education as a building block for a civilized society and, individually, the path to a brighter, more prosperous future. Education began the process of leveling the playing field for many of us.

It is now stagnant and under continuous assault from conservatives with a possible legislative outcome that national standards will be abolished producing uneven results throughout the fifty states and a diminished capacity for this country to compete in the realm of ideas, research, and technological prowess. As a harbinger of things to come, conservative presidential candidates appeal to their “values voters” on the basis they would limit rather than expand knowledge, deny fundamental rights, and impose their values.

This might appear really archaic but someone's word was their bond and trust was essential to friendship. Your word was not just a convenient campaign slogan but a promissory note of sorts. There is no longer trust of public officials to include the highest levels of government. Those we elected to represent these values were expected to share them, hence the basis for our trust and support.

Trust or public confidence in elected members of Congress is below 15 percent and that of the President at 41 percent. Our Congress and our President legislate and govern in isolation and with impunity. On this latter point, we the people share responsibility because we do not hold them accountable. They depend on that.

Ninety-nine percent of us are witnessing the passing of an era during which these simple, but deeply ingrained, values formed part of the bedrock of America. Each succeeding generation adopted the ideas embodied in these values as mantra – what it meant to be a citizen. And, we all spoke the same language. Yes, there were fierce debates and political and social conflict to ensure equal access to the rights and responsibilities of citizenship – but, we all spoke from the same sheet music, read from the same rule book, accepted the Pledge of Allegiance and, ultimately, strengthened the collective we call America.

Our President was the ultimate personification of our values and our ideas. The pubic and private institutions we built and sustained and made profitable, were directed by those cut from the same “values cloth.” No more! What happened?

We have evolved into a society where those who represent the one-percent no longer speak the same language as the rest of us. Polls reveal we speak at each other more frequently, to each other rarely, and now fail to communicate on issues vital to the continued cohesion of this country.

Our frame of reference was to be our value structure. Values define a culture and when they change, and change fundamentally, without consent from the rest of us, the seeds of conflict begin to take root.

Here is some of what I hear from conservatives: opportunities are limited in scope and quantity. Therefore, dream small. Social justice is a function of a broader need to contain seeds of dissent and demands for changes that would impinge on the rights and privileges of the few.

Quality of life concerns must be subordinate to any regulations that limit the freedom of the private sector (with tax subsidies) to exploit our environment for natural resources and profit. The privileges of citizenship no longer includes public health protections or basic guarantees of clean air, water, our natural environment, and preservation of public lands, for example.

I believe the idea at the heart of voter concerns going into the 2012 elections is the structure of the world's greatest economy: will our candidate be able to forge a consensus between government and the private sector on the conditions most conducive to creating jobs? The future for the average American still lies in the opportunities that emerge from the American economy. Yet, the Federal Reserve of Philadelphia forecasts that unemployment will not fall below 7 percent until at least 2015.

So, the idea that American corporations are permitted to shape legislation that confers tax advantages to ship production offshore, create millions of jobs offshore, and hold profits offshore, while eliminating employment opportunities for Americans, reducing their standard of living, and impoverishing millions, is pure anathema and does not engender public confidence in the run-up to the next elections. “The purpose of a society is not merely the creation of wealth, especially if most of it goes to the few” says David Rothkopf (Redefining The Meaning ofNo. 1, Sun. NYT, Oct. 9. 2011, Sunday Review, page 1.)

Another idea that Americans cannot abandon is a society that no longer subscribes to the concept of the greatest good for the greatest number. In the final analysis, our President must believe it and, absent a threat to our national security, be willing to stake his presidency on it. This is why we support a federal governing authority. The singular pursuit of profit cannot define our national character, our national purpose. Our collective will – to include public entities – traditionally ensured our social well-being.

That was not the charge of the private sector. Why have we allowed this to change? Each generation expected to bequeath a better society. For the first time, we are failing to meet this expectation. Ask the Millennials. Yet, conservatives define them, and their supporters, as a threat to society because they question the reordering of national priorities and demand change. Perhaps they view the demonstrations around the country as a catalyzing event much as Tea Party demonstrations were two years ago.

The outcome of the 2012 elections just may advance the decline of the world's most extraordinary society. As we said, values define a culture. We still take considerable pride in the belief we are the best country in the world. But what makes us better? Certainly not being the biggest militarily, with poverty on the rise, sustained high unemployment,democratic values skewed to and for the few, and class conflict.

In 2012, will we elect a president who embodies the values that Americans have fought and died for? If so, when will they announce their candidacy?