President Bush was in Orlando today on the campaign trail. Many people naturally assumed I would go, but I saw him here in 2000 the Sunday before the election and it was the same stump speech he gave throughout the campaign; the one where he said that taxes are the people's money and not the government's money. He kept that promise. Now I'm watching the speech on C-SPAN tape delay. He's wearing a more casual button down shirt with no tie and his delivery is more casual. Both seem to be assets. The most striking thing is the number of American flags at the event and the emotion of the crowd when he mentions love of America. I wish I had gone. It's exciting to be around a bunch of people who aren't shy about loving their country.
I'm not saying that liberals don't love their country, but they must love it in a more detached sort of way. They defend their standoffishness by accusing conservatives of being jingoistic. Their approach seems to be that they'd love their country a lot more if it had the socialism of Europe and foreign policy of Africa. If they could only shape it towards utopia it would be more palatable.
I'm happy most with Bush when he reminds me that he had the guts to go after the terrorists. I'm least happy with Bush when he proposes the kinds of spending proposals that were DOA when Clinton wanted them.
I was happy to see Congressman Tom Feeney at the event. Feeney reportedly told Bush that he couldn't vote for the Medicare increases because he came to Washington to cut entitlements not expand them. Bush then reportedly hung up on him. My Congressman Ric Keller enthusiastically supported the Medicare expansion. It's pasted all over the his homepage. I wrote Congressman Keller on March 8th after I read the Heritage Foundation's proposals for reducing the size of government. I'm still waiting for a response. Here's what I wrote:
Dear Mr. Keller,
I've been worried that federal spending is getting out of control. I have a great deal of respect for President Bush, especially in foreign policy, but I fear that Congress has been rubber stamping his budget increases. I've paid thousands of dollars into Social Security and Medicare programs that I know won’t be solvent when I retire. Now the President has pushed forward an expansion of Medicare. Defense spending is justified, but an increase in other areas of government seems frivolous in a time of war.
The Heritage Foundation has a thoughtful proposal (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1733.cfm) on getting the budget back under control. I’m sure you follow their good work. Do you think any of the proposals could be enacted?
Would Congress be less apt to spend a ton of money if a President Kerry were proposing the same programs? Wouldn’t the natural adversarial relationship between the President and Congress be a good way to curb big budgets? I can’t stand John Kerry, but if a Republican Congress and a Republican President cannot reduce the size of government, why did we elect one in the first place?
Compassionate Conservatism seems to be aimed at a great many people who would never consider voting for a Republican. You rarely see the Democrats rewarding the opposition when they’re in power.
Please help me to get back the excitement I had in 1994 when the Republicans captured Congress and promised a balance budget amendment and term limits. I would be grateful to hear your thoughts and better informed opinions on these questions.
Thomas Stamper
Keller is a decent guy. He's around my age and probably has the kind of ambitions that make him want to get along. Feeney was the Speaker of the Florida House before running for Congress, and is much more willing to buck the executive branch, even when it's occupied by his own party. I prefer the Feeney method. Friendly debate and disagreement is healthy over specific policies.
If spending continues to go unchecked, divided government will seem like a better and better idea. Of the two branches, a Republican Congress will be a better way to limited government than a Republican President. We're at war and it's not like I'm going to vote for anyone other than Bush, but I would be more enthusiastic about it if he reminds us that he's a protector of individual liberty over government largesse.
No comments:
Post a Comment