Burns puts up 17 points as Maine edges Canisius 84-79Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of guest commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here . ••• As a lifelong moderate conservative, I often find myself stranded in the political no-man’s-land of today’s hyperpartisan climate. Our nation is divided, with every issue becoming a battleground for competing extremes. While most agree this toxicity is fracturing society, solutions remain elusive. I propose we start with a simple yet radical idea: compromise. To move forward, we must recognize that we have all the necessary voices in the room. We just need to engage with one another. Often, opposing camps share similar goals but diverge on how to achieve them. By focusing on these shared outcomes, and having empathy for one another, we can find common ground. Here I will fly through nine complex and controversial issues. I have no illusion that the task will be easy or that my specific suggestion ought to be the final destination. I do hope to plant seeds for engagement that might lead our policymakers and our people “back to the table.” Immigration: Addressing root causes Immigration reform must begin with empathy. Many fleeing their homelands face unimaginable hardship. While maintaining the rule of law, we could work to address the root causes of migration — poverty, violence and corruption — while crafting fair and enforceable policies. Education: Accountability over dogma The failures of our education system, particularly in underserved urban areas, are undeniable. Instead of throwing money at the problem or fighting over vouchers, why not just emphasize accountability? Transparent performance metrics for teachers and schools could reward excellence and address underperformance, benefiting students above all. There seems to be a tribalized battle over what is taught so why not just let parents make the decision for their children? Gun control: Balancing rights with responsibility The debate over guns often devolves into shouting matches, yet a potential compromise exists. We can protect recreational firearms while restricting military-grade weapons. Universal gun registration should be a nonnegotiable baseline — both a constitutional safeguard and a public safety measure. Gender and tolerance The debate over gender issues highlights our divided values. Here’s a proposal: Tolerate others’ identities and orientations without demanding universal celebration. This balance respects individual freedoms without mandating ideological conformity. Race: Listening over labeling Discussions of race often degenerate into personal accusations of “racist,” or focused oversimplifications that obscure the nuances of systemic issues. We must find a way to both recognize historical harms and envision a path forward to a shared future. Instead of adopting polarizing slogans, we could unite behind the principle that all lives matter equally and listen to diverse perspectives. Only then can we design solutions that work for everyone. The Middle East: Shared humanity The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a powder-keg, and partisanship often blinds us to shared values. While Israel must defend itself, we must also advocate against the collateral suffering of innocent civilians. Uniting against Hamas, a universally recognized evil, could pave the way for a more nuanced discussion of peace and security might be a good start. Abortion: Revisiting reasonable limits Abortion remains among the most divisive issues. Following Roe v. Wade’s repeal, states have implemented extreme laws on both sides. Why not settle on reasonable limits, such as a defined time frame for elective procedures with exceptions for rape and incest — an approach that once reflected national consensus? Health care: Basic coverage for all Our health care system is broken, with costs spiraling out of control. A universal basic care model, offering essential services while allowing supplemental private insurance, could mirror successful systems in other nations. This approach defines just how much health care expense every American is entitled to (as is done in most countries in the West), but allows everyone access to care without dismantling innovation. Restoring civility and responsibility Our society has drifted from virtues like modesty, humility and service. Instead, we’ve become a nation of victims, fixated on entitlements. Fiscal irresponsibility has deepened this crisis, with our national debt threatening future generations. As John F. Kennedy so powerfully urged, we must shift our focus from what the country can do for us to what we can do for the country. A final plea: Compromise over ideology In my decades of political engagement, I’ve seen statesmanship replaced by self-serving partisanship. Leaders now prioritize power over progress, enforcing rigid ideological purity. What lesson does this teach future generations? Tribalism is a destructive force. Let’s look for the values that can unite us. These values are not a sign of weakness, but the foundation of a functioning democracy – and are most likely to a robust shared future. It’s time to step back from the brink. Let’s stop screaming past one another and embrace the timeless principles of tolerance, cooperation and compromise. I’m not necessarily advocating for blanket centrism, but rather believe that only by bringing the best ideas from each side into constructive collaboration can we heal our fractured nation. I know that compromise is not easy and takes commitment, courage and requires seeking to understand before being understood. It also requires trusted relationships. A few years ago, I was in a prayer meeting with eight U.S. Senators in the Capitol. Half were Republicans and half Democrats. I floated the idea of passing a law that would mandate that each member would have to vote against their party lines at least 10% of the time. They loved it, as it would provide political cover for voting their conscience when in disagreement with the party line. It would also be a big incentive for the compromise needed in politics. That might be a great start. Ward Brehm lives in Minneapolis.
Nwifuru preaches love, kindness, generosity
Disney dream comes trueAsk Dr. Scott: Hypertension becomes highly prevalent in aging America
Carbon markets critical for Fiji’s low carbon development
Analysis - Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is loath to spend too much time looking backwards. In a half-hour interview with RNZ marking the coalition's anniversary, he hails its record as a success, reflecting on a year of seismic policy shifts and corresponding protest. But invited to share any lessons from his first year as PM, Luxon draws something of a blank: "There's a lot of challenge in the job, the hard stuff comes your way, but that hasn't been surprising. "There's no real surprises for me." Asked what he might do differently with hindsight, Luxon offers up only some communication difficulties "on the margins". "I don't think there's much I'd do differently," he says. "The big things that we've got to get right for the future of the country ... I'm very satisfied with." What about the cancer drugs promise ? "I think there was a communication challenge initially... but I'm very proud of where we got to." And his housing allowance faux pas ? "Yeah, yeah. I mean, yeah, all that sort of stuff, but I moved on that pretty quickly." Luxon also declines the opportunity to consider whether he would renegotiate any parts of the coalition agreement if he could turn back time. "I don't think there's any value in that sort of exercise." Treaty Principles Bill worth it to form government, PM says The most contentious element of the coalition agreement has undoubtedly proven to be the Treaty Principles Bill, championed by ACT leader David Seymour. ACT had wanted to take it all the way to a public referendum, but National agreed only to send it through one vote and then off to select committee. At first, Luxon hedged over whether National would vote the bill down at second reading , saying only that that was the party's "intention". Only after Waitangi Day did he firm up that commitment . The decision to allow the bill even a short life-span has prompted widespread protest, culminating in a hīkoi to Parliament , the largest to ever reach the capital. Given the obvious angst and division on display, was it still a worthwhile deal? Was it all worth it for Luxon to form government? To that, he says: "Yeah, because it's part of... the reality of being a political leader in a coalition in an MMP environment. "You have to do deals, you have to do compromises, you have to do trade-offs. It's naive, I think, to think otherwise." Former National minister Christopher Finlayson has publicly opined that Luxon should have called Seymour's bluff and spurned the deal , suggesting that is what former prime minister Sir John Key would have done. But Luxon disagrees: "Each leader faces a different set of challenges, and 2008 is very different from 2023." PM doesn't begrudge ACT undermining and criticising his position As well as prompting such public opposition, the Treaty Principles deal has at times seemed to strain coalition relations, or at least the public perception. Luxon has repeatedly had his statements on the topic undercut by his coalition partner . Seymour once described Luxon's position on the Treaty Principles Bill as "disrespectful and anti-democratic" and said National was afraid of the "hard issues". Such comments are "quite fine", Luxon tells RNZ, and simply part of the "maturity of MMP". He says such differences are common in coalitions across Western Europe. "There's been no dramas and screaming, shouting, ranting or raving," he says. "We don't run that way. It's a pretty calm... and consistent show." And he invites people to compare that with the approach of previous coalitions. "You look at other coalition governments in recent times, and you haven't got the parties actually even talking to each other," Luxon says. "[They're] communicating formally through written text and letters and all that stuff, and through staff, rather than through the leaders." Is there a risk for Luxon that in allowing the minor parties such public freedom, that they are perceived as the ones pulling the strings? Luxon does not think that is the view of voters: "They like this government. They see it as being coherent. They see it as being coordinated." And yet the ACT party itself has boasted of its "disproportionate impact" in the coalition, claiming credit for many of the policy decisions. Cue Luxon's rejoinder: "No, I think it's got a fair influence, and I think we've navigated it very well." A 1News Verian poll in April found 51 percent of voters thought the prime minister had the most influence on government decisions. That compared with 23 percent who named Peters and 10 percent who named Seymour. In about six months - at roughly the same time the Treaty Principles Bill is expected to return to Parliament to be voted down - Seymour will take the reins as deputy prime minister from NZ First leader Winston Peters. Luxon rejects any suggestion there might be difficulty with that transition: "You've got to understand the dynamic we have... it's highly functioning." Watch the full interview here . Luxon takes credit for lower inflation but not higher unemployment; refuses to give surplus commitment The National Party was elected on a platform of "delivery", a response to the previous Labour government's woeful record on the likes of KiwiBuild and Auckland light rail. As such, Luxon has established a series of public targets and goals: "We don't want to just be another government that boils the ocean." No surprise then that he's keen to talk about areas where the government has made progress, such as emergency housing, where the number of families living in motels has dropped by more than half . Luxon similarly touts his government's "fiscal policy and fiscal discipline" for helping to bring inflation back to 2.2 percent, down from 5.6 percent. He refuses, however, to take any responsibility for the increasing unemployment over the same period. The unemployment rate has climbed from 3.9 percent to 4.8 percent, meaning 30,000 more people are now unemployed. Luxon argues that is a lag effect from Labour's mismanagement and says the plan now is to grow the economy. "[Labour] took the keys to the car, they drove it full bore into a big ditch, and we're now hauling it out of the ditch and getting it turned up the right way and into first and second gear." Alas, the economy right now is in recession, with dismal growth rates. In its most recent update, Treasury warned the government's financial outlook was deteriorating due to a falling tax take, making it harder to bring the books back to balance. Tellingly, Luxon refuses to commit to returning to surplus in 2027/28 as indicated in the last Budget. Already, that was a year later than National had promised on the campaign trail. "We'll have more to say when we see the forecasts and the latest updates coming forward." Tough on crime? Gang numbers up, police numbers down National also campaigned on "restoring law and order", but despite the government's much-publicised gang crackdown, the number of people on the National Gang List has increased by nearly 200. Luxon says that amounts to a 1 percent jump and claims the coalition has "stabilised gang growth" compared to the explosion under Labour. But the police also removed almost 800 names off that list this year in a special audit. Taking that into account, the increase is closer to 10 percent - the exact same as in Labour's last year of government. Luxon simply does not want to hear it: "You'd be insane to argue, mate, that that was a great record from the Labour government ... but more importantly, what we're interested in is actually seeing a reduction in crime." Last week, the government celebrated a 3 percent drop in overall victimisations between January and the end of September . Theft and related offences, however, had jumped by 12 percent. Is that really a grand success? Luxon thinks so: "Isn't that great? It's a start, isn't it? It's better than where we were heading under the previous lot." And if the statistics bounce up again? "I'll be very accountable about it. I don't have a problem with accountability." The coalition has also struggled to make traction on its promise to boost the size of the police force. The National-NZ First agreement pledges to increase police by 500 over two years. But, now at the halfway point, the number of officers has dropped by 52 , meaning the government is further away from its goal than a year ago. Still, Luxon insists the government will be able to turn it around through record recruitment: "It's going to be pretty challenging, but we're going to do it. "Judge me by the results when we get there." Talk to you again this time next year, prime minister. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.