This Week in Politics

Now through the November election, columnist Dennis Maley will rundown the week's big local, state and national political stories in this new, exclusive TBT feature. This week – what does "getting tough with China" mean? Also, it looks like more funny business in the State Attorney race, and we finally understand undecided voters.

****************************************************************
During Tuesday night's debate, there was plenty of back and forth regarding trade policy with China. Unfortunately, not only were most observers unlikely to understand the issue, but those that did were likely throwing things at the screen. Neither candidate is presenting an honest picture of our trade relationship with the world's second largest economy, nor arguing for reforms that are rational or even intelligible.

The truth is, the valuation of China's currency and our trade relationship are much more complicated than either candidate suggests and a trade war fought over politically-motivated protectionist policies is not a sound answer. Check out an excellent post by Ramesh Ponnuru on Bloomberg.com this week that details some of the phony baloney being peddled by the two opponents on the Chinese trade issue.

****************************************************************

While we're on the subject of the debates, I'll confess that I'm starting to understand that elusive, undecided voter. I've long said that if you're not sure which party you want to vote for by this point, you've been living in a cave. But after watching two debates, it's clear that the biggest challenge for people who do not regularly follow government is that by tuning in near the end, you only hear both sides selling you exactly what you want to buy. Neither of them are telling you the truth, but it sounds good.

Then again, even if you're a truly moderate and reasonably informed voter, you have to contend with the fact that neither one of them are making sense once the facts are considered. They're both offering plans that lack specifics on solutions to very complicated challenges. This gives the impression that neither has the answer or that both understand the limitations of the office well enough to know that it's not likely they'll be able to solve them even if they did. Coke or Pepsi, on many issues it seems likely to taste somewhat the same.

****************************************************************

In the continuing saga of the State Attorney race, the misuse of the state's DAVID database by employees in the State Attorney office to access the records of John Torraco, a candidate who is running against the office's chief deputy for the seat, keeps getting weirder. Records of the correspondence between the office and the FLHSMV seem to indicate that the office determined that there was no attempt to misuse information learned from the illegal inquiries - get this - before they even investigated the unauthorized inquiries.

It was weeks after the office had stated that finding before they even questioned the former employee involved. They say they were unable to determine why the inquiries were made, but stood by their original position that it was pretty much no big deal. I hope if I ever find myself in front of their office, they'll be just as quick to preconceive my innocence.

*****************************************************************