Sunday, March 05, 2006

I need a few good Republicans to make some comments!

I started this blog in July of 2005. I posted a long series of posts about The "Contract with America." I am re-reading, editing, and re-posting these posts over the next few days due to popular request. I hope many local Republicans will post some comments. I want to know how many of you agree with my take on the results of "The Contract with America!" I especially hope Andrew, AWB, Jeff Fraser, Bill Larsen and Mitch Harper partake!

In 1994 The Republican Party swept to power with an unprecedented political ploy. They made a "Contract with America." In this "Contract" they promised to do certain things. It turns out, they lied.

I was a devout Republican in 1994. I was deployed overseas on a nuclear submarine when the "Contract" came out. When I read it I was extremely excited. I mailed a contribution into the Republican Party in our next port visit. I thought that our politicians were finally going to straighten Washington out. I was wrong. The Republicans used the "Contract" as a political promise to get in power. Once they got in power, they became just like the politicians they replaced. The voters need to remember that and get rid of these politicians.

There are two portions of the "Contract." The first part of the "Contract" has a total of eight items that The Republicans promised to handle on the first day of the Republican majority. The second half of the "Contract" consists of ten items The Republicans promised to implement within the first hundred days.

Over ten years have passed since this "Contract" allowed The Republicans to take power in Congress. Each year the Republican majority has gotten larger and larger. There is no reason why the Republicans could not have passed all eighteen items over the last ten years. All eighteen items should be law. They are not! We will analyze all eighteen items over the next few days. Our very own Congressional Representative, Mark Souder, was elected on this platform. We will grade his progress on his promises. I want to know how you all feel about this "Contract!"

I especially want to know what local Republicans think about "The Contract with America."

9 comments:

William Larsen said...

I too thought “The contract with America” would make a difference. However, all I have seen is increased spending, cutting taxes resulting in higher deficits and an increase in the National Debt. We are mortgaging our children’s future. In my opinion this is criminal negligence. It is no different than those who ran Enron. In scouting we leave a campsite in the same if not better condition than when we found it. Our representatives, that we vote for are leaving this country in worse shape than when we inherited it.

This is the main reason I decided to run for US Representative. I have five children and they deserve better.

They are buying votes using our money. The Rx drug program is a pure example of a give away. Will those age 65 and over, ever pay the cost of this program or will the funds be borrowed? I have never seen an analysis of where the funds come from to pay for this program.

Seniors Shouldn’t Get Another Multi Trillion Dollar Handout

Prescription Benefit Will Imitate Social Security’s Short Comings

Federal Drug Plan is Vote Buying Scheme of a Very Costly Variety

The Bush tax cuts were the wrong taxes to cut. Instead of cutting Federal Income Taxes, they should have cut the FICA tax. More workers pay more in Social Security taxes than they do in Federal Income Taxes. If you want to spur the economy, cut the FICA tax and let people save, invest and prosper.

The Larsen Plan

Its time we laid off these fuzzy math politicians for our sakes as well as our children. Can anyone just say no to two more years?

Editor said...

As you may well know, you can introduce 100 bills and only end up passing 3 of them. The Republicans had a contract, and they introduced the bills and a good portion of them are in effect today.

We can't grade Souder's 2006 qualification as a congressman with this contract. This was written in 1994 and is no longer of concern. While the issues are important, the original contract is not relevant.

Maybe you should grade both candidates on modern issues. Except, Hayhurst doesn't exhibit any issues. His web site platform says he is a hard worker, and so forth. Voters should demand his position on the issues.

William Larsen said...

Here is what Souder has said about Social Security. This should be of prime importance to at least those under 40 and in my opinion those under 50.

Mark Souder spoke to Prime Time 39 on 3-12-2004 and referred to Social Security as a "shell game." He stated, "For people under 30 its probably going to be income based. I am not saying we're going to pass that. It will probably be passed after I am dead." He continued "If you're 40, you might make it through the system. But if you're under 40, and certainly under 30, you had better start planning because if you want to have a decent retirement you’re going to need supplemental funds." Mark supports Social Security Savings Accounts. Tax-free savings is an oxymoron. We have a $8 Trillion national debt and ran a $726 Billion deficit in 2005. This is no different than you borrowing money to pay for retirement. Tax credits reduce federal income taxes; increasing the deficit.

Souder has no plan for Social Security. He wants you to save more! He does not care about those under 40 or the future. Souder voted for a $540 Billion unfunded Rx Drug program for seniors and that was just the first ten years cost. The second ten years is estimated at greater than $2.5 Trillion.

We can't pay for the programs we have now and Souder votes to add more programs?

I enlisted in the Navy and served my country. I know first hand what it is like to be in a military hospital. I know first hand what it is like to stay in the VA hospital in Fort Wayne. I know how difficult it is to get treatment from the VA. Who do you think Veterans would feel more comfortable dealing with veterans’ issues, a veteran or a conscientious objector?

John Good said...

How about a comment from a Good Democrat? Mark Souder needs booted immediately. He promised to serve no more than 6 terms, and his time (and my patience) is gone.

LP Mike Sylvester said...

Let there be no doubt I will NOT be voting for Mark Souder under any circumstances. I think he is the SECOND MOST despicable sitting politician in America.

Kennedy is number one...

William Larsen said...

John goode, what are your three most important issues?

John Good said...

William Larsen,

My top priority is for people to spell my name correctly. ;)

Let's see. . .

1. Fixing the fiscal nightmare of the last six years and returning to a balanced budget. How could so much be squandered so quickly by one administration.

2. Affordable health care for all, and better regulation of the insurance industry. Premiums are out of control and coverage of many conditions is limited or non-existent.

3. Restoring America's reputation with the rest of the world, if that is still possible at this juncture. The entire planet was American on 9/12. Bush blew it, BIG time.

William Larsen said...

John, how do you define affordable health care? The reason why I ask is those least able to afford health care subsidize seniors Medicare and on top of this, Medicare cost shifts back to those who have no insurance.

Dr. Hayhurst has made this a top priority, but I have not seen any thing more than three words "affordable health care. We could stay with the basics like we had in the 60's. That certainly would reduce health care costs.

I truly believe the reason is pretty simple. Same number of doctors as a percent of working population, but with the declining birth rate for the past two hundred years, the median age in this country is rising. As it rises, we get a compounding factor due to age and larger percentage of those on Medicare relative to those working. 4% inflation compounded by 3% growth in senior population compounded by new services and drugs 4% plus the standard of living of doctors to maintain.

However, before anyone runs on this issue, they should first have a plan. Otherwise you would be voting on a sound bite and nothing of any real substance. In fact I seriously doubt there is a government solution to the health care question. I think government is the cause behind the high cost of insurance and health care.

My reason is pretty clear. Over the past thirty years I have heard people refer to health insurance as a benefit to use? You pay for it, use it. The problem is they raise the rates because we use it. The more they raise the rates, more we dislike it and we intend to get our money's worth.

Maybe we need to sit back and take stock of what our actually medical bills are. If the average person goes the doctor three times a year at $70 a pop plus a Rx at $45 a pop, them maybe we should all be resigned to paying the very first $345 times the number in your family. We might even want to look at raising the level so that we ourselves cover all costs up to 2 sigma. We then pay a low premium for catastrophic coverage. Nothing is free.

Anonymous said...

Very cool design! Useful information. Go on! Vaude splash 25 backpack valium diazepam information Girl's bedroom furniture Compusa pci tv tuner problem Arcade game sales diazepam ingredients Vietnam anal Timeshare resorts tenerife apply credit card mazda Used infiniti g20 sr20de transmission buy tramadol online muscluar hot thugs with huge cocks Leadership free training How to install a pci-e video card 10 quit smoking ways swetlana w. diazepam toner cartridges