Thoughts on the election.

Let's get down to it. It's only one week after the election, and I have to admit I was surprised to see none other than Bill O' Reilly make nothing less than an astute analysis of Tuesday's Presidential election.

“The voters, many of them, feel this economic system is stacked against them and they want stuff." Opined O' Reilly. "People feel that they are entitled to things."

Well, maybe a little less than astute. Stuff. Things. Two words my third grade teacher insisted that I never use as answer to a question. So, to help out Bill O' Reilly, I thought I would share what some of those "things" are.

I expect the government to pay me social security benefits when I reach old age.

I expect public schools to teach our youth. I expect our public colleges and universities to educate people of all ages.

I expect our government to protect people from predatory lending and usurious interest rates.

I expect to have water on my tap that is clean and safe to drink.

Social Security: You paid for it, you are entitled to it.

I expect that when I call 911 to report an emergency, someone will pick up the phone.

I expect -- nay -- demand that every returning war veteran come home with a job waiting for him or her.

I expect these things not as charity, but as services owed to me as a taxpayer.

I have been a taxpayer ever since I was 10 years old, when I paid sales taxes on my Gatorade and Skittles purchases. Two decades later, I pay taxes to the feds, to the city and state of New York, to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and Social Security. And Medicare. I'm not living off the government; I am a paying customer. And a loyal one. No matter who wins, I am not going to Canada. 

I also have my liberal fantasies. A world where billionaire investors pay a higher percentage of their income on taxes than their secretary's. Where our public schools have enough teachers to educate every child. Where every single man and woman with the talent and motivation has a job. A world where every paycheck is enough to afford a roof over one's head. No more ghettos. No more shoddy public housing projects. A world where people have enough to live on so that they have something to live for.

That's the America I dream of.

Are these dreams far fetched? Perhaps. Maybe to idealistic. Then again--perhaps not. Consider the journey we have traveled in just a few short years.

In 2004, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts legalized gay marriage. Opponents cried foul. Outrage! They said. Activist judges ruling against the will of the people. The legislature must decide.

Last year in New York, the state legislature did decide. Democrats and Republicans voted together and without compromise to allow marriage eqaulity in their state.

Proponents rejoiced, but again, the opposition cried foul. Wrong! They shouted. Out of touch politicians should not make decisions like these! The will of the people can only be decided by ballot initiative!

Last week, the people decided. In Maine, in Maryland and in Washington state, gays got down on one knee and proposed marriage equity on the ballot. In each state, the voters saw the proposal for marriage equality and said, "I do!" The people have spoken, and they left absolutely nothing to doubt with the firmness of their conviction. 

That wasn't all the voters said. In Colorado, voters saw the war in drugs and said, no more. No more locking up otherwise law abiding citizens for small possession of Jamaican lung confetti. The Louis Armstrong cigarette is now legal.

A Civil Rights issue? Absolutely. In 2000, the predominantly black Weaver High School in Hartford, Connecticut held an election for Senior class president. The candidates were, and I kid you not, Al Gore and George Bush. Two young African-American students who happened to have the exact same name as two candidates for U.S. President. If that George Bush, or if that Al Gore, had been caught for possession if marijuana, could they have expected the same lenient treatment as the white men who share their same name? Could they expect to find careers in government and the private industry if they had served jail time?

Reforming our drug laws in such a way to separate marijuana from other, more serious substances like crack and heroin is no doubt good policy. Reforming our drug laws in such a way that chemically addicted individuals get the treatment they need instead of jail time is good policy--for all of us. And it is the way of the future.

Perhaps then my liberal dream of economic freedom is not so far-fetched after all. Reducing massive income inequality is also a social issue--perhaps the greatest social issue of our time. Ideologues may shout and holler that to do is Communism. That a doctor should earn more money than a janitor. And there is some truth to this. A doctor has more training and skill to do his job then a janitor. But why, why, should a doctor earn less money than a Kim Kardashian, an Alex Rodriguez, or a Bill O' Reilly?

I refuse to believe that Kim K is worth $18 million a year

More importantly, we must understand that a janitor too, saves lives. When he or she mops the floors and cleans the toilets, that janitor is preventing the potential spread of dangerous diseases that could potentially kill someone. The chemicals a janitor uses to clean an area, if mixed improperly, could be fatal. Make no mistake: Janitorial work is serious skilled labor.

So yes, while a doctor is entitled to a generous salary, so to is the person who mops the floors and cleans the bathrooms. A janitor by no means should make as much money in a single year as a neurosurgeon, but that janitor should make enough to pay his or her bills and lead a decent lifestyle. There can be no excuse for workers of any trade to live in poverty. None.

And who knows what the limit for one's potential can be. Maybe that person who is scrubbing the floors of the hospital today is doing so in hopes to pay for college. Perhaps that person may go on to make a big discovery that makes solar energy affordable, or develops a new medicine that can combat cancer. If we ensure that everyone has a chance in life, we all benefit. And if that means that the Mitt Romney's and Warren Buffets of the world should pay the same percentage if their income in taxes to achieve that goal, so be it. I'm sure they will be fine. Perhaps better than they ever imagined. Perhaps reducing our great economic divide will be etched in stone and made the law of the land. Perhaps I am not so naive to dream after all.

And I have a feeling that no matter who you voted for on Tuesday, on many levels, you agree with me.