How I Differ From Doc Hastings

A Series

Part 2 – Health Care

(Please note that this is not the first I have written about my position on the Health Care legislation that has recently been enacted into law – please see my first Blog post – go to my web site, click on the “blog” button on the left of the home page and then go to the bottom of the blog page for my earliest post.)

As I have been campaigning all across the 4^th District I have been asked how do I differ on the issues with Doc Hastings.  In this series of posts, I would like to specify exactly where I differ.  I believe that as you see these areas of difference you will find that my stand on the issues more closely reflects the majority of the voters in this District.  It is time that your voice was heard in the halls of power in Washington D. C.

To see how we (Doc Hastings and I) differ on the issue of health care, let me begin by quoting from a post on Doc Hastings’ web site referencing his position on the Health Care law that recently passed Congress.  This is from his weekly column and is dated March 26, 2010.  He states, “While everyone agrees that improvements must be made to our health care system . . .” My question is, if everyone agrees that improvements must be made, how come during the first 6 years of the Bush administration, when we had a Republican majority in the Congress, a Republican majority in the Senate, and a Republican President, why didn’t the Republicans “improve our health care system” then?  My first difference with Doc Hastings is, that not only are the Republicans in Washington D. C. the party of NO now, they have been the “party of no solutions” all along, during the years that they had complete control of both the House, the Senate, and the Presidency!  They truly have been and still are the “party of no!”

It seems to me to be very un-business-like to be in charge, do nothing to solve the problems, then, after someone else comes along with a proposed fix that you don’t like, to suddenly say we have a better way.  Why weren’t Doc Hastings and the other Republicans doing something to solve these problems for years before this?  He states, “I am committed to doing everything possible to repeal this government takeover of health care and get to work on common sense reforms that will actually lower health care costs, increase choices, and put people back to work.”  Doc where were these “common sense reforms” years ago?  You have been there for 16 years.  As I understand it, health care didn’t just become a problem since 2009.  Where were the ideas to “actually lower health care costs” during the last 16 years that you have been our Representative? 

In Doc’s article he states, “Congress must focus on common sense solutions like ending lawsuit abuse, allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines, expanding health savings accounts and helping small businesses band together and purchase insurance for the same price as large corporations. “  As I have already noted above, these “common sense solutions” that he proposes now seem rather hollow, when, for the past 16 years, and especially for the first 6 years of the Bush administration, we heard nothing about these “solutions.”  Why don’t we have limits on lawsuit abuse?  Where are the laws allowing us to purchase health insurance across state lines?  In reality, neither Doc nor the Republicans have provided any solutions or any leadership on this critical issue.

Here is my solution to the Health Care Problem.

First the current law is ridiculously large, excessively bureaucratic, and its implementation is stretched over such a long period of time as to be completely ineffective in the next 10 years, when we need improvement NOW!

First, I would propose that we must tackle the issue of the ever escalating cost of health insurance.  For many years Americans have had groups like Blue Cross and Blue Shield which began as not for profit organizations.  In fact it was not until the mid 1990s that this large insurer became a fully “for profit” company.  Thus the idea that all medical insurance must be “for profit” to fit into the American capitalistic way, is simply not true.  We must be able to assess what types of medical insurance plans we want and create a broad spectrum of insurance choices.  I think it is very instructive to note where and how Blue Shield began.  Note this quotation from Wikipedia, “The Blue Shield concept was developed at the beginning of the 20th century by employers in lumber and mining camps of the Pacific Northwest to provide medical care by paying monthly fees to medical service bureaus composed of groups of physicians.” 

By assuring that there is not a single monopoly of either for profit companies, or of not for profit groups, and cooperatives, we can assure a competitive balance in the market place and provide both choice in insurance plans and choice in types of health care coverage.  Currently, as an employee of the State of Washington, that is what I am offered.  I am not limited to a single option and I have chosen the option that grants me the greatest freedom in choosing where and from whom I get medical care.  It is critical to remember that in a capitalistic society, capitalism works best when government assures the broadest spectrum of choices available.

During the years when I was manager of a small business, I found that the most cost effective approach was to purchase major medical insurance coverage from an insurance company that would pay 100% of all cost over $5,000 and then to self insure each employee up to that amount.  In this way each employee had complete freedom of choice as to doctors, pharmacies, etc.  This innovative approach saved the company thousands of dollars in premiums.  Solutions like this could be provided and implemented in law.

Secondly, I would address the issue of tort (lawsuit) reform.  This would serve to limit the cost of medical mal-practice insurance that is affecting the cost of services by physicians, clinics, and hospitals.  There is significant room in our society for real reforms in this area.  Reforms that do provide for adequate protection from negligent care and adequately compensate the unfortunate individuals that are harmed by such unfortunate incidents can and should be made in our legal system.  As these unrealistic and detrimental excesses are dealt with we can rightly expect this cost component of our medical care to lessen its impact on the overall costs that are associated with medical care.

Thirdly, we must assess which cost are the responsibility of government via plans like Medicare and Medicaid and which costs must continue to be the elective choice of the individual.  We, as citizens, can not demand that the government control its spending and not realize that that very control will mean limits to the things that government is expected to pay for.  During the course of my life I have witnessed a dramatic change in what government is expected to provide but a failure of our society (we the people) to understand that these services come at a cost.  Till now, our politicians have been content to over promise and under-manage.  They have gotten away with this by excessive government borrowing.  But it is clear that this is a path that is unsustainable.  Can we as a society come to terms with these issues?  Of course we can.  That is the “American way.”  Will all of these decisions be easy ones?  NO!  But it is what we can do and now, unfortunately, what we must do.

The difference between Doc Hastings’ approach and mine are dramatic.  He has not provided leadership, nor has he provided real solutions.  He and the Republican Party along with their Democrat Party counterparts have allowed these problems to fester until they threaten the foundations of our freedom. 

It is past time to stop the “political game playing” and vote for something different, a real focus on solutions.  Think independent, be independent, and Vote independent – Leland Yialelis for Congress in 2010.

Saving Social Security

How I Differ From Doc Hastings

A Series

Part 1 – Social Security

As I have been campaigning all across the 4^th District I have been asked how do I differ on the issues with Doc Hastings.  In this series of posts, I would like to specify exactly where I differ.  I believe that as you see these areas of difference you will find that my stand on the issues more closely reflects the majority of the voters in this District.  It is time that your voice was heard in the halls of power in Washington D. C.

One of the most fundamental and I believe one of the most critical differences between us is our vision for Social Security.  Here let me quote passages from Doc Hastings Congressional web site on the issue of Social Security:

• “We cannot afford to increase payroll taxes high enough to keep Social Security from going broke – the burden on hardworking Americans would be much too great.”
• “Younger workers should have the choice of voluntarily investing a portion of their money in personal, protected retirement accounts so they can build a nest egg for themselves and their families.”

These two statements tell us a great deal about how Doc Hastings is really representing his constituents, the very ones that have kept him in Washington for 16 years.  His position on this most critical issue facing each and every one of us living and working in the 4^th District is exactly the Republican Party line.  Unfortunately, while it may be the Republican Party’s position on this issue it shows how far from the facts both the Republican Party and Doc Hastings are when it comes to being up front with the voters of this District and in fact with all Americans. 

For 90% of Americans, Social Security forms the very backbone of their retirement.  As every one of us knows, Social Security is facing a huge problem in just a few years.  It will be seriously under-funded.  Unless changes are made, senior citizens who have been paying for a lifetime into this system will be short changed on this most critical program.  They will be told that there is no money and that their benefits must be reduced.  This is what the Republican Party and Doc Hastings are telling you.  Note his words, “We cannot afford to increase payroll taxes high enough to keep Social Security from going broke.”  He is telling you, the people that have trusted him for 16 years to be doing his best to represent you, that while he has been a member of Congress, your voice in Congress, he has known that Social Security is going broke and for 16 years, neither he nor the Republican Party have done anything to fix this problem.  When were they going to step up and do something?  Was it after you have begun to receive reduced Social Security payments because they did nothing! 

Also note what else he says, ““We cannot afford to increase payroll taxes high enough to keep Social Security from going broke – the burden on hardworking Americans would be much too great.”  (emphasis supplied)  It is clear that Doc Hastings believes that the only way to keep Social Security from going broke is to raise YOUR Social Security taxes.  He offers no solution other than raising your taxes or allowing the system to go broke!  And this man who has been your elected leader in Washington wants another term!  Why would you elect him again if this is the kind of leadership that he offers.

He will counter by saying that he has proposed a solution.  Well lets take a closer look at it.  Here it is again, “Younger workers should have the choice of voluntarily investing a portion of their money in personal, protected retirement accounts so they can build a nest egg for themselves and their families.”  Do you get this?  He is proposing that the only thing that can be done is to allow “younger workers” to take a “portion of their money” (he doesn’t say it straight out, but would that "portion",  be a portion of the Social Security taxes they are now paying?) and invest it in “protected retirement accounts.”  Several issues immediately present themselves.  First how is lowering the amount the government takes in Social Security taxes going to keep the system from going broke?  What kind of “protected retirement accounts” does he have in mind?  Investments in the Stock Market? The financial collapse of the last few years certainly makes that seem unwise.  I wonder, and I hope that you have too, has he forgotten what happened in the Great Depression when millions of Americans lost their retirement savings and never got them back?  It was exactly then that America said there is a better way and we Americans created the Social Security system that we have today.  Do you realize that what Doc Hastings and the Republican Party want to do is to take you all back to those pre-Depression era ways?

Here is my solution to the Social Security Problem.

It is very simple and it preserves two very critical things.  First it preserves Social Security well into the next century without increasing “the burden on hardworking Americans.”  My solution is based on the very same facts that Doc Hastings has available to him, but that he clearly refuses to stand up for.  I hope you ask him, why he hasn’t told you about this solution on his web site.  I have it on mine.

Here it is and it is straight from a report by the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging.  An article on this report can be found in U S News and World Report (Emily Brandon, On Tuesday May 18, 2010, 11:32 am EDT.  The title of the article is, “12 Ways to fix social security”) 

Here is the solution that the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging cites, “Modify the Social Security tax cap. Workers pay into the Social Security system on earnings up to $106,800 in 2010. About 83 percent of worker earnings were subject to Social Security payroll taxes in 2008. If all earned income above $106,800 annually were subject to Social Security contributions but did not count toward benefits, Social Security's projected deficit would be completely eliminated. If the higher income counted toward Social Security benefits, about 95 percent of the shortfall would be absolved. Other ideas: apply a new Social Security formula to earnings above the current cap or raise the amount of the income cap to apply to 90 percent of all worker earnings.” 

I hope you have noted how elegantly simple this solution is.  Simply include all income in the Social Security tax.  That is it!  Notice their words – “If all earned income above $106,800 annually were subject to Social Security contributions but did not count toward benefits, Social Security's projected deficit would be completely eliminated.”  No burden on “hardworking Americans”.  By the way “hardworking Americans” already pay Social Security on 100% of their income.  When was the last time a majority of people in the 4^th District earned more than $106,000 per year?  Ask yourself this question, “If I, who makes a lot less than $106,000 per year can pay Social Security on 100% of my income why can’t someone who is making more than that?  In fact ask yourself that question when you pick up your pen to vote this year. 

Do you want solutions coming out of Washington? Or are you going to settle for the very same fables that you have been getting for 16 years? 

Do you want a SECURE future for Social Security?  There is one simple solution, VOTE INDEPENDENT, VOTE FOR LELAND YIALELIS INDEPENDENT AND SECURE THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL SECURITY FOR YOU AND FOR YOUR CHILDREN!

Controlling Illegal Immigration, Whose Job Is It?

 

Today’s (May 31, 2010) Wenatchee World has an article detailing some of the issues that have developed from the Federal audit by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement of Gebbers Farms.  The impact to the town of Brewster as well as Gebbers Farms has proven to not be as bad as initially feared.  But this situation highlights the serious issues confronting our society just at time that the issue has gained national prominence through the actions that have been taken in Arizona in an attempt to deal with the issue of illegal immigration.  The local story highlights how interconnected we all are to these issues and hopefully that we should all be willing to work together in a non-partisan way to find a permanent solution. 

It is clear that when it comes to running an orchard that is dependent on seasonal labor the matter of finding willing workers at the wages that that type of work supports is a critical issue.  But the matter does not only affect the orchardist.  It affects the town’s businesses that meet the needs of these workers.  It affects the town’s schools that are dependent on a predictable student enrollment. 

This local incident highlights the dual nature of the problem and the complexity that we face in finding a solution to it.  The complexity of the problem is highlighted by the reality that “residents who held jobs here for 10 and 20 years were suddenly let go following the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acting in December.”  The issue is not only that we must stop illegal immigration across our southern border, but we must find a solution that works for all of us legal Americans and solves the problems that arise as we try to integrate the millions of illegals that have become an integral part of our communities often for decades. 

The issue of gaining control of our southern border is not a partisan one.  There is not a Democrat way to protect the border and there is not a Republican way to protect the border.  There is a way to close the border that will work and there are ways that won’t work.  We must identify what works and then work it.  Very simply the reality is that we have not really put in a serious effort to control our border with Mexico.  This must be done.  The first issue is very clearly to control the flow across the border.  Those who cross it should be doing so legally, whether that is to immigrate to the U.S. permanently or whether they are coming as temporary laborers / guest workers. 

The second problem that must be dealt with is determining how best to deal with the millions of illegals who now reside – some for decades as the article notes – among us and have become an integral part of our society.  One thing is clear, we do not have the capability to round up all of these people and deport them to their country of origin.  But neither must we look the other way and ignore the reality of their illegal status.  Allowing millions of people to exist as a separate and illegal sub-group is not healthy for our society nor for them.  I do not support simply granting amnesty as was done during the Reagan presidency.  We, as legal American citizens, face consequences when we break our own laws.  The same should apply to those whose very presence here began by the breaking of the law that requires that entry into the United States be done in a legal manner. 

As we face the resolution of these two components of the “illegal immigration” problem we should face up to another issue that is highlighted by this story in the Wenatchee World.  As I have already posted on my web site more than a month ago, I believe that we must repeal the laws that were put in place that attempt to get the American employer to do the job that till now the Federal Government has been unable to do and that is to identify and control illegal immigrants that are looking for work.  While this may have seemed like a reasonable approach to some and obviously it did as it is the law of the land, it simply makes no sense that we are penalizing good solid American businesses, very often small businesses, for being willing to put willing people to work. 

While we struggle to overcome the “welfare state” mentality where people look to government for a handout, we are penalizing both the employers and those willing to work by this muddle headed approach as an attempt to control illegal immigration.  Does it make any sense to create a law that, in effect acknowledges the government’s own inability to control the border by saying, we know that illegal immigrants come for work so the best way to stop them from coming is to penalize the American employer for offering a job to someone that has apparently legal papers and wants to work? 

As the accompanying article in the Wenatchee World notes, a reliance on the guest worker program, as it currently exists, for the seasonal labor that our agriculture depends on is actually more expensive than hiring those who are already here and are willing to take these jobs.  A rational approach to this issue would suggest that there is a more reasonable way to resolve these problems.  We as Americans need to de-politicize these issues.  We need to look at them closely and recognize that reasonable solutions can be found.  Solutions that actually respect our laws and our Constitution, particularly our Bill of Rights and especially the 4^th amendment that protects all of us who are citizens of this great land.  As one who wishes to represent you and this district, I can assure you that there is nothing more important than preserving the democratic principles that this great nation was founded upon.

The Bureaucrasorous Rex, A Pattern of Failure, and Your Vote

The American voter is besieged with two seemingly easy choices.  The conservatives and teabagers are clamoring for smaller government and lower taxes, though they don’t specify which government programs they would cut to balance the budget.  The liberals and the left supposedly are clamoring for more government and higher taxes.  But this seemingly simple picture quickly breaks down when we take a look at what has really been happening in our government.  During the past 30 years we have had the opportunity to see both sides in power.  First we had a Republican president and a Democrat congress.  Then we had a Democrat president and a Republican congress.  Then we had a Republican president and a Republican congress.  Now once again, we have a Democrat president and a Democrat congress.  The one thing that has remained constant is the completely dysfunctional bureaucratic branch of government. 

The great tragedy of 9/11/2001 was in part attributable to the fact that the parts of the government meant to protect us from such horrors regrettably dropped the ball in the few instances they had knowledge of suspicious behavior and information that had it been followed had they investigated would have led them to the plot.  We discovered that the CIA and the FBI weren’t doing a good job of communicating with each other.  We discovered that the security system in place at the time was inadequate to detect the type of instruments used by the hijackers.  Our response was to create a new mega-branch of government that we call Homeland Security. 

Since then we have seen other branches of the bureaucracy fail.  FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), lead by the former head of the Arabian Horse Association –  Michael Brown - failed in dealing with hurricane Katrina.  The SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) failed to respond to warning after warning that was actually mailed to their offices that Madoff was nothing but a giant “Ponzi” scheme and due to that failure thousands of people and even institutions lost billions of dollars.  The SEC failed to properly perform its role in monitoring the management of the banks and their investment branches and the worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression drug down our nation’s economy and brought the world’s economy to the very brink of a failure that we can only imagine.  While there were several dimensions of our economy that played a part in the economic failure of 2008 the role of the SEC should not be minimized.  Now we learn that some of those within the SEC who should have been acting to protect the American economy were actually down loading porn onto their government computers.

Now we have the MMS (Minerals Management Service a part of the U S Department of the Interior) that is supposed to supervise the drilling operations in the United States.  Unfortunately we have learned that, “the government did not require oil firms to have back-up systems for their blowout preventers.”  (Earth Times, Wed. May 12, 2010)  As we have learned elsewhere, unfortunately, large corporations care more about the bottom line than about responsible management and decisions such as having a back-up system for something as critical as a blowout preventer can not be left up to the company.  It is not their eco system that will suffer incredible damage for decades due to a catastrophic spill.  It is ours, the American public’s, that is at risk and we have the right and the responsibility to manage those who would profit from the minerals and the oil to do it in the safest manner possible.

NASA has failed to plan.  Since the shuttle was designed in the late 1970s, no new, replacement system for getting astronauts into space has been developed.  In spite of the evident problems with the shuttle nothing has been done for 30 years to plan what the next step would be.  Now we find ourselves dependent on the Russians to get us to the International Space Station, for at least the next four years.

Unfortunately the bureaucratic failures don’t stop with these.  As we are all painfully aware, we have millions of illegal immigrants that have come to the United States.  Our southern border is more porous than the proverbial “Swiss cheese.”  Not only is the Border Patrol (a department of Homeland Security) at fault, but so are the Department of Labor and the Department of State.  All three of these agencies interact in either closing the border, issuing work permits, and producing the documents that those coming to work in America need.  When a person tries to sort through the maze of regulations, laws, and bureaucratic requirements that should exist to control immigration across the border you quickly realize how amazingly difficult it is.

This brief review is sufficient to illustrate the problems that exist within our governmental agencies that are supposed to be working to make our nation function.  As Joe Klein in a recent article in Time magazine notes, “Democrats tend to be more interested in legislating than in managing.  They come to office filled with irrational exuberance, pass giant fur balls of legislation – stuff that often sounds fabulous, in principle - and expect a stultified bureaucracy, bereft of the incentives and punishments of the private sector, to mange it all with the efficiency of a bounty hunter.  This has always been the strongest conservative argument against government activism.  Traditionally, Republicans were more concerned with the good management than Democrats – until the Reagan era, when the “government is the problem” mantra took hold.  If you don’t believe in the government, you don’t bother much with governing efficiently.  You hire political cronies for jobs that professionals should be doing.  Eventually, you wind up with the former head of the Arabian Horse Association- the infamous Michael Brown-trying to organize federal aid after Hurricane Katrina.”  (Time May 17, 2010)

The pattern is overwhelming.  The government we have simply isn’t functioning.  The bureaucrats aren’t doing their job and our elected officials are so caught up in the political one-up-man-ship-game that they have done nothing to change this pattern of failure.  This cannot be allowed to continue.  One of the first steps that must be taken is to bring accountability back to every level of government.  Until we elect political leaders who understand this,  the problem is going to continue.  Bringing accountability back to the bureaucratic levels of government will be one of my highest priorities if elected.

Bring accountability back to government, vote INDEPENDENT.

 A Clear Political Choice and Washington’s New Election Law

As I have begun to campaign I have been pleased to meet three distinct types of voters: the traditional Republican voter, the traditional Democrat voter, and the independent voter.  While in the past this pattern may not have been significant, that is no longer the case.  The change in the way Washingtonian’s will be voting, because of the new election law, will make this year different and the primary election in August much more important    The election in November will no longer offer voters all of the traditional choices.  No longer will voters find a Republican, a Democrat, and other minor party or independent candidates on the November ballot.  The voters will find only two names on the November ballot, the two names that finished the Primary election with the most votes.  Thus, in November we could have a Republican and a Democrat on the ballot.  But we could have a Republican and an Independent.  We could have a Democrat and an Independent.  We could have two Republicans.  We could have two Independents. 

The Primary in August takes on much more significance because it will shape the choices for the November elections.  With that in mind the voters of the 4^th district have an important choice in August: which two individuals in the race represent the best choices for November?  Of course many could simply choose to vote in their traditional patterns, Republicans for the Republican candidate, Democrats for the Democrat candidate, and the others for their choice.  But given the voting patterns within the 4^th District over the past 16 years, if this is the way the voters in the Primary vote it seems rather clear what the result will be in November.

If the voters of the 4^th District are happy with the government as we have had it for most of our lifetime’s than that voting pattern will get us exactly the same result.  As voters in a democracy we must realize that ultimately WE are the government.  While there is much railing about the failings of “the government” today, as if the government were something that we have no choice in creating, the simple fact is that we the voters are the ultimate “government.”  If there is gridlock in Washington D C it is because we put it there.  If there are no solutions to the issues of “big” government it is because we have continued to vote in the same ways, following our traditional political bent whether it produced the government we wanted or not.  As the saying goes, “Insanity is doing the same thing expecting different results.”  If we continue to make choices in the way we vote because we think we must choose one or the other of the two major parties we will get exactly what we have.  In other words, we are stuck on the horns of a false dilemma.  The way to get off those horns, the way to stop the partisan gridlock, the way to actually begin to get the government that we want is to begin to make different choices.

If we want a more cost effective and efficient government, then we have to vote for a Representative to Congress who is going to take that message.  If we want a government that understands that it is impossible to borrow our way to financial health than we need a Representative who will take that message to Congress.  If we want a government that controls our borders and solves the illegal immigration problem than we need to send a Representative who will take that message to Congress.  If we want a government that is going to manage Social Security and Medicare in the best interest of the American people than we need a Representative who can take that message

What is clear is that the Republicans have had their chance.  For the first 8 years of this decade they controlled the White House.  For the first 6 years of this decade they controlled the House of Representatives and the Senate as well as the White House.  Did we get smaller government?  Did we get a decrease in government spending?  Did we get better control of our border with Mexico?  Did we become more energy independent?  Did the Republicans do anything to try to control the ever-escalating cost of health care? 

If we would choose the Democrat candidate would any of these problems be more likely to be solved?  Up until the 1994 election we had a congress, both the House and the Senate that was controlled by the Democrats.  Did they ever give us balanced budgets?  Did they ever solve the problem of illegal immigration by improving the way our border was guarded?  Did they ever seek to implement policies and programs that would protect and improve the middle class?  Maybe the most important question for those who are not of the classical Republican persuasion is this: is it very likely that the 4^th District will ever elect a Democrat as their representative? 

I believe that as the voters of the 4^th District consider the upcoming election, it is important to understand that the way they vote in the August primary will determine the choice they have in the November election.  If they vote in typical Republican and Democrat patterns the results of the November election will be what the national parties are predicting – that this is a “safe Republican seat.” 

However, if we, the voters of the 4^th District, are ready for a change in our government, to one that more closely expresses the independent nature of our lifestyle and our western culture, a government that is strong on personal responsibility, while being fiscally conservative, than I believe the choice is clear. 

Think Independent, Be Independent, Vote Independent!

Notes from the Campaign Trail

 

The campaign began its first weekend of actual campaigning, that is to say, I spent time out on the streets and sidewalks meeting people and inviting them to interact with me and extending to them an invitation to visit the campaign website to become more informed on the issues as I as an independent view them.  I am very pleased to report that there was a very significant positive reaction.  I was pleased to be able to offer cards to those who requested campaign materials to begin distributing to others based on their first contact.  I received assurance of space to post campaign signs along some of our major highways on frontage owned by those who are already enthusiastic supporters of the campaign. There were invitations to bring the campaign to other towns in District 4 and I am really looking forward to that opportunity. And not unimportantly, the campaign has received a very generous financial donation from enthusiastic supporters who believe that this is the message and that Central Washington needs a fresh voice as its representative.  It is clear that there is a significant group of Central Washington voters that are looking for a viable alternative to the “party” line that has for too long been the only choice.  It was affirming and also challenging to find such a positive response to the message, that it is well past time that America’s politicians focus on solutions for the problems that we as citizens and as a country face and get away from the partisan gridlock that is detrimental to this great country.

 

I am also delighted to have had several response sent through the web site.  The responses have been to volunteer to become active in this campaign and ones asking for further clarification of issues that are of vital importance like the future of Social Security and how to make the tax code fair to all Americans. There were also contacts made on the blog as people are beginning to look at some of the issues that I have already posted there.

 

Based on these earlier responses it is clear that it is going to be a very exciting and active election period prior to the Primary on August 17.  I look forward to your continued interaction at every level of this campaign.  This campaign will succeed only if all of us continue to work together to make our democracy once again a democracy of the people, by the people, and for the people of this great land of ours.

 

Thank you for your thoughtful responses, your questions, your enthusiasm, and your encouragement.  All of these show that we are on the right path for Central Washington and affirms your belief that this independent voice can and does speak for the voters of Central Washington.

The Space Shuttle and what is right and what is wrong with America

The International Space Station and the Space Shuttle is a classic example of both what is great about this country and what needs some fixing.  I shall never forget that day in 1962 when the entire class, in fact the entire school was glued to the radio to hear the news of John Glenn, America’s first man to orbit the earth.  From that day to this, America had the goal of being the world’s leading space-faring nation.  We took great pride in announcing that we would be the first to put a man on the moon and we did.  Once again we achieved a monumental moment when not only Americans, but the entire world marveled at American ingenuity, American courage, American technology, American vision, and America’s “can do” mentality.  President Kennedy had set the goal and two presidents later America achieved that goal.  From there we began planning for greater accomplishments in space, the shuttle was designed in the 70’s for the purpose of providing a vehicle designed to become the work-horse of space access and truly it has been.  A space vehicle like the shuttle could only have done the amazing achievement of the creation of the International Space Station.

While this history stirs us with national pride, as well it should, 2010 will mark a very sad year, not only for the American space program but for the heart and the spirit of America.  At the close of this year, we Americans will have no vehicle to put men into orbit.  We will have no vehicle for making use of the International Space Station, that we played the major role in building.  We will be dependent on the Russians for access to space.  If that last sentence doesn’t shock you, it does me.  What has gone wrong with this once great country?

Instead of political leadership we have experienced the ultimate in political stalemate and political partisanship that is slowly killing this once great country.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that at some point during the last 30 years someone should have raised the question, what is our next step after the shuttle?  Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans either in the White House or in the halls of Congress have given any thought or leadership to this once great program.  No one, no legislator, no senator, no president paid any attention to the fact that we were dependent on a space system designed more than 30 years ago.  No one made plans until it was too late to forestall an absurd gap in our capabilities in space.  True, President Bush did initiate a program to create the Orion and the Constellation programs (in 2004) that were to take us back to the moon by 2015 and not later than 2020.  Note the following:

“Second, the United States will begin developing a new manned exploration vehicle to explore beyond our orbit to other worlds -- the first of its kind since the Apollo Command Module. The new spacecraft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle, will be developed and tested by 2008 and will conduct its first manned mission no later than 2014. The Crew Exploration Vehicle will also be capable of transporting astronauts and scientists to the International Space Station after the Shuttle is retired.” For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary January 14, 2004

But these plans came too late and were unfortunately never pursued aggressively.  As we know, no testing of a new Crew Exploration Vehicle was conducted in 2008 nor since, for that matter.  As the saying goes, the Bush initiatives were a day late and a dollar short.  And now, the Obama administration has sidelined the entire manned space effort, with platitudes about the private sector and plans for Mars.

American leaders at every level of our Federal Government, from Congress to the White House have taken to partisan bickering rather than serious minded governance.  What has happened to one of the most visible elements of American knowledge and know how has been allowed to decay into bureaucratic intransigence where nothing happens and no one seems to really care.  This was a very easily foreseeable situation.  But nobody seems to have been guiding the ship of state and now we are degenerating into ever more acrimonious debates over issues that are clearly in the nation’s best interest.  We have moved from space dominance and independence to space dependents.  The Russians and the Chinese will soon be more capable than we are.  This is a national embarrassment.

If we the American people do not exercise our rights as citizens of a democracy and create the changes in leadership, we will see that what has happened so starkly in our space program will only be repeated in every other area or our national heritage and we will end up not only borrowing money from the foreign countries that once looked to us for leadership, we will be begging for a “lift” to the space station that we were once the proud builders of.  I grew up in an America that was different than this and I do not believe that we should settle for less.  Join with me in becoming an independent agent for change.

 

Reject dependency, think, be, and vote INDEPENDENT!

"Our children and grandchildren... will be asked to pay back, with interest, the trillions our federal government has been borrowing to offset our loss of tax revenue from wealthy taxpayers."<< MORE >>

We wouldn’t think the Doctor’s advice was too good if we went to him / her with a problem and they said “Wait two years, take an aspirin, wait two more years, visit a therapist, and wait two more years and then if you aren’t better come back to see me.” << MORE >>