More Politician Tricks than Treats This Halloween

Election Day is almost upon us for the Senate and Governor races and as usual, I’ve approached them with a heavy dose of cynicism. Do any of these jokers actually care about our well being or are they only in it for a buck? Do any of them have new ideas for improving our daily lives or will it just be more of the same slow swirl down the drain of graft, higher costs, lower incomes, and fewer freedoms?

Since virtually all politicians spew the same negative junk in their campaign ads, using millions of dollars in donations just to create spots that look and sound more like Bravo TV reality show commercials than messages that share their actual platforms, I decided to do something different this year. I mailed 10 Yes/No questions to 11 different local Georgia politicians. There was one set for the federal office seekers and another set for the state office seekers. I knew going in that most wouldn’t bother answering me. After all, politicians want your blind allegiance based on party affiliation and generic platitudes they can later redefine to suit any given crisis. They don’t want to earn your vote through availability, transparency, honesty, and hard work. Nevertheless, I thought it would be an interesting exercise and it was.

Here are the 10 questions I sent the Federal office seekers:

1.       Would you vote in support of the Keystone Pipeline?

2.       Would you vote to send ground troops to battle ISIS?

3.       Would you vote to continue sending financial support to Middle East allies such as Israel, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq?

4.       Would you vote in support of lowering corporate tax rates based on the percentage of American workers on the company payroll?

5.       Would you vote in support of legalizing the sale and possession of marijuana?

6.       Would you vote to eliminate imprisonment sentencing for drug possession (not including the intent to sell)?

7.       Would you vote in support of the funding and construction of a Border Wall with Mexico?

8.       Would you vote in support of Congressional term limits?

9.       Would you vote in support of a Balanced Budget Amendment?

10.   Would you vote in support of a substantial reduction and/or elimination in federal farm subsidies

I sent this first list to David Purdue, Amanda Swafford, Michelle Nunn, and Bob Montigel. Purdue, Nunn, and Swafford are running for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by the retiring Saxby Chambliss. Montigel is running for Georgia’s 6^th district spot in the House of Representatives against incumbent Tom Price.

I sent the state list to Andrew Hunt, Jason Carter, Connie Stokes, Fran Millar, Tamara Johnson, Elena Parent, Scott Holcomb, Brady Young, and Karen Bennett. Hunt and Carter are running against incumbent Republican Governor, Nathan Deal. Stokes, Millar, Johnson, Parent, Holcomb, Young, and Bennett are running for State Senate seats.

You’ll notice I didn’t mail many incumbents. The reason for that is two-fold. First, like just about every other person in this country if you believe the polls, I’m dissatisfied with our current leadership. I’m a firm believer that if you want change, you need to create change. Second, most politicians seem to dissuade communication once they are elected. Their websites don’t offer email addresses. Their online forms demand addresses and phone numbers. Funny how that works, isn’t it? They only want to hear from you when they need your vote. Once they’re in office, bureaucracy and general voter apathy tends to keep them in power as long as they like.

Just one of the 11 politicians bothered to answer my questions. Montigel replied but didn’t provide any answers. Parent asked me where I lived in her district and when I explained that I lived in a neighboring district, she promptly went silent. Nunn had the gall to add me to a mailing list, spamming me with eight campaign messages already. Only Andrew Hunt was willing to give me the answers that will allow me to intelligently decide whether I want to vote for him or not. Those answers were:

1.       Would you vote in support of toll lanes on Georgia highways? Only if reduction in gas tax along with this.

2.       Would you vote in support of raising gas taxes in Georgia? Only if other taxes are reduced more than this would increase taxes.

3.       Would you vote in support of blocking direct Tesla sales in Georgia? No and I would allow other cars also direct sales.

4.       Would you vote in support of solar panel leasing in Georgia? Yes

5.       Would you vote in support of an amendment allowing newly formed cities to create their own school systems? Yes, and all cities.

6.       Would you vote in support of legalizing the sale and possession of marijuana in Georgia? No. but I am for decriminalization and medical.

7.       Would you vote for stricter gun laws in Georgia and if so, what restrictions would you add? No

8.       Would you vote for stricter abortion laws in Georgia and if so, what restrictions would you add? No, but I will inspire more private groups to offer women good path to life options.

9.       Would you vote in favor of restrictions on PAC contributions to candidates for Georgia elections? Yes if they can be enforced.

10.   Would you vote in favor of raising the state minimum wage? If so, to what? Yes. By inflation. I have Job Powerhouse program that will incentivize full time jobs paying $11/hr or more.

If you’ve read many of my past blog posts, you’ll know that most of his answers match what I’m looking for in a political leader. Even though a few don’t, the fact is, he showed an interest in me as a constituent and a willingness to provide real answers. That’s more than any of the other ten candidates or un-mailed incumbents were willing to do. Andrew Hunt just earned my vote on Tuesday. I hope you’ll consider giving him yours too.

The Unemployment Conundrum

There is a growing unemployment crisis in the United States that the bogus 6.7% unemployment rate touted by the Obama administration purposely obscures. A smaller percentage of Americans are in the work force today than any time since 1978, coincidently, the last time a big government Democrat was in the Oval Office. Only 62.8% of Americans are in the work force. The rest rely on government assistance and/or retirement savings in order to survive.

The current argument between Democrats and Republicans is whether to extend recently expired unemployment benefits to the long-term unemployed. The Democrats of course, want to extend them in the belief that we must help the poor and that the best way to do it is to offer them charity. On the other hand, the Republicans want to cut the overall unemployment benefit budget by half, essentially gutting most assistance to the less fortunate and apparently deciding they can fend for themselves. The problem is, they can’t.

Paying people for years to not work is bad policy and even worse budgeting, but leaving millions of citizens destitute and starving is not only horrible, it’s probably cause for violent revolution. You’d think with Congress currently housing its biggest share of millionaires ever, we’d have plenty of financial geniuses in office that are capable of fixing these sorts of things. Laughable, I know. Our current Congress is easily one of the worst in our nation’s history. They’re lazy, corrupt, inept, and in more cases than most of us would care to imagine, many seem to be downright stupid.

Given this lack of leadership and ability to propose ideas that might actually find compromise between the two parties, let me offer three that I believe could make a huge difference in our economy. None of them is truly new, but expansions on ideas I’ve posted in the past and/or read about from others.

The Border Wall – While both parties agree that it should be easier for immigrants to obtain work visas and citizenship, Republicans want to tighten border control first. I side with Republicans on this one. Making better rules for how to enter and stay in our country legally is nearly useless if it’s easy to break those rules. The majority of long term unemployed workers are in the west and south and have backgrounds in manufacturing and construction. Anyone else seeing a 1+1 here? A giant public/private venture to build a wall across the entire border with Mexico could generate tens of thousands of jobs over the next decade in a variety of fields including those manufacturing the wall components and those then building it. Cities along the border such as San Diego, Tucson, and El Paso would need to build additional housing, open new schools, restaurants, shops, and health facilities. Plants would need to purchase more ore and hire more workers to create the necessary steel and other materials. Once built, the wall’s gates would need additional border patrol officers. So how would all of this be paid for? The federal government would chip in any money saved from cutting benefits as well as any profits gained by the sale of the bank and automobile assets it purchased during the 2008 bailout. Border states would be required to pay their share based on the increased tax revenues these new jobs would bring into their coffers. And finally, private firms should be partnered with in terms of advertising space on the wall in the more heavily populated areas.

The Keystone Pipeline – Another political hot potato and potential giant project is the Keystone Pipeline that would transport crude oil from Canada and the northern United States all the way across the country to the Gulf of Mexico. Like a Border Wall, this has the potential to create thousands of blue-collar jobs. It would also be one more step toward reducing energy dependence on the Middle East. The Republicans in favor of this project will need to make some environmental concessions with Democrats if it’s going to get approved in Congress, but the result could be a huge boon to the western U.S. job market.

Fracking – Yet another energy-related industry that rankles many in environmental circles, but this new form of underground drilling has created a booming industry and helped turn the U.S. into one of the largest oil producing countries in the world. Why isn’t the government funding training programs in these states instead of handing out welfare checks? Why not help fund housing near these drill sites to encourage more of the workers to bring their families and boost the local economies? If countries like Saudi Arabia can teach us anything, it’s that oil export can make a nation rich. Our government should be doing more to encourage this industry while also improving safety where possible.

These are just a few ideas, but there are many others. In short, our government should start prioritizing American job creation instead of encouraging welfare dependence. It should stop supporting off-shoring, automating, and fattening Wall Street and executive wallets while the middle class suffers. It should also stop spending billions of dollars propping up religious factions in the Middle East. Instead, it should start spending that money at home where it could do more good. This seems like a reminder to our elected officials that ought to be unnecessary, but where the preamble to our Constitution states “We the People”, it’s referring to us, not to the people of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, or any other foreign nation. America needs jobs and if our government officials refuse to spend their time and effort creating and supporting them, then those officials have failed us and need to be replaced.