Here is a link where Chet Edwards, of the 17th US District in Texas, was asked a series of questions by the Waco Tribune. I thought I would share the link and give what would have been my answers at the time included just below.
http://www.chetedwards.com/node/349
Enjoy.
Q What will you do to create jobs in Central Texas, if elected?
I am more interested in ensuring those that live in Central Texas have jobs. The unemployment rate has remained essentially constant over a 20 year period, give or take. Yet, this has been in an environment of population growth and job creation. Therefore, I cannot conclude creation of jobs is essential to Texans. Too often, the government’s plan to increase jobs is to create tax funded government jobs. While this may have had a place in a New Deal era, it will undermine a long-term growth of an area by putting the burden on the taxpayers and therefore cannot be expected to grow indefinitely. At some point, the taxable base will not be able to fund the additional growth, resulting in a mass exodus of that tax base, and killing the economics of that area. A constituent only wants to feel secure and comfortable in the area they call home. A better question for a potential representative might be, “What will you do to protect the people/jobs in Central Texas, if elected?”
Q What do you consider an earmark? How do you define whether it’s pork or a worthy project?
Earmarks are simply appropriations directed by US legislation and thus are effected as law. These appropriations generally apply to a particular legislative district such as the 17th district of Texas. Although pork is a bad word and considered that which is directed towards a small set of constituents, indicating some form of special treatment for a particular small sect, earmarks can and should be considered just as bad if the constituents and district does not in majority agree with those earmarks. In other words, an earmark’s (federal spending) worthiness can only be determined by the constituents. Anything otherwise should be considered pork. It is the responsibility of their representative to respond to his/her constituent’s wishes. Therefore, it behooves the representative to work closer with his constituents than other members of his/her party or even with other members of congress.
Q How would you describe the state of the economy in Central Texas?
I believe the economy is strong in this district. Census records indicate a higher percentage of the labor force draw a much higher salary than the state average. This indicates a stronger healthier workforce than the state as a whole. In addition, these same records indicate the increase to higher income has grown faster than the state average. This indicates a stable workforce. Also, the cost of living in the district is relatively low. However, unemployment rate in the 17th district is higher than the state average. And as the major indicator on economic health, this rate does put this district in a slightly sickly light. However, I question these numbers as the Work Force is defined as persons age 16 and over however no indication is made on the inclusion of secondary school enrollments. As we know, there are a couple of major secondary schools in this district. However, let’s take the worst case scenario and assume the secondary school enrollment has already been removed from the labor force number, and that the unemployment rate IS higher than the state average. Certainly, this is an indication this district’s state of economy may be worse than the state average. I would like these Texans to work. Another indication to me on the healthiness of the area’s economics is how many jobs are tax burden (government) jobs. US 2000 Census records indicate that of the 72K employed workers in Brazos county, 22K or 31% of them are considered government workers and is much higher than the state average. As mentioned in the initial question, ideally, workers should work for themselves, paid by consumers, not by taxes unless the general public agrees or votes to allow tax money be applied to those workers. Otherwise, there is undesired burden on taxpayers. And as far as the government is concerned, if the burden in these cases is unwanted, the burden is unneeded (assuming it does not interfere with the government’s responsibility to protects its borders.)
Q Do you support the health care plan of the presidential nominee of your party? How, specifically, do you see it benefitting this district?
As I do not claim a party, other than the constituents of the district, I cannot effect an answer to this question. Health care is a benefit. However, most constituents of any region would agree that caring and provision of health care for all is important. Both major parties should also agree with that. The question is, how to manage a system like this. County hospitals are known for providing emergency care to the uninsured, at the cost of taxpayers. Some believe universal health care would further this concept and give all the ability for all to get proper health care. Some believe mandating health insurance, similar to mandated car insurance, is the answer. Under this plan, those that could not afford insurance, could get supplements from the taxpayers. In order to burden the taxpayers to provide any additional funds, whether it be for universal health care access or for supplemental monies for the poor to pay for some government required insurance mandate, there has to be a transparency with the insurance companies and the care providers. Most people distrust these relationships and find it as confusing as the US income tax code. Taxpayers simply want to know that their money is being provided justly and to a worthy system. A very large study recently found Denmark as the happiest country in the world, yet they have one of the highest tax burdens in the world. The study concluded that the tax system was very transparent and gave the residents the feeling that they knew their money was taking care of their own. If the US government is to provide health care, it better ensure the taxpayers agree and can see where the money flows.
Q Name one issue that your party’s presidential candidate and you disagree on.
Again, not truly applicable to me. I disagree with McCain’s insistence that we MUST WIN in Iraq. This train of thought does not allow for the conceding idea that perhaps we should have never invaded. Any military leader must be honest enough with himself to know when troops have to be drawn back for lack of a ultimate goal or the inability to reach the ultimate goal. Of all people, I would hope McCain would understand that. I disagree with Obama’s taxation ideas. In no way should any person who is eligible to be in labor force, be given income tax credit/money when they do not pay income taxes under the current tax code. I believe that government has overstepped its role with the public in numerous ways, by providing government building projects, by issuing unworthy grants, and by providing money to failing businesses, to name some general examples. And as a result, our government takes on more responsibility than it should. These fiscal responsibilities ought to be removed, and would remove some of the tax burden on the public.
Q What would be your plan for the war in Iraq? How will it affect us?
The US government has some very fundamental responsibilities. One is to protect the citizens of the US. Another is to do the will of the people. If the war in Iraq cannot be proven to be one of national security, we should not expose American lives and should not dump American money over there. I understand national security is a bit ambiguous. McCain believes that Iraq will breed terrorists should we pull out without democracy in place first. I say we let Iraqi’s deal with Iraqi problems. Should Iraq prove to be a threat to the US, then the US will deal with Iraq. We deal with countries first by putting economic sanctions on them, and then putting political pressure and them, and should aggression be imminent, then bring that county to their knees with our military. We then sometimes will simply have to pull back and wait. The people of a county have to determine whether democracy is worth fighting for in their county, not an outside country like the US. We bring the military and political threat to its knees and then let the general population determine how to rebuild the government. Should they want our help, we should provide that help to the extent that taxpayers are willing to provide. One problem with our presence in Iraq is that it has no real affect on the security of the US other than the tax burden.
No comments:
Post a Comment