Endorsing Candidates
September 3, 2009
It may be hard to believe, but two different candidates for statewide office have asked me for an endorsement. I explained that I didn’t think my opinion carried much weight, but that I would think about it. Most politicians, Republican and Democrat, are actually very charismatic. If they aren’t, they usually don’t get elected. The problem with charismatic people is that they are charismatic. Many of them will tell you what they think you want to hear and it is likely that you will like them for the wrong reasons. I guess I am stating the obvious.
Most Republican candidates can enunciate the standard ‘conservative’ line about smaller government, lower taxes, strong defense and protection of our Constitutional rights. Fewer of them do anything to actually forward those goals. The problem is that when you ask them to enunciate their ideas they rarely if ever can. The Contract with America was a cheat sheet for House Republican Candidates in 1994 – unfortunately there is no cheat sheet today. My test for a candidate is pretty simple, what are you ideas on the major issues of the day. For Congressional candidates I ask for their plans on:
And if I believe those ideas are a) conservative, b) grounded in common sense, c) possible and d) they promise to work tirelessly to pass their ideas into law – I might endorse the candidate (not that my endorsement matters) and more importantly they would get my vote. We should judge politicians not on their past voting record, not on their charisma, not on their bank account – but on what they promise to accomplish. We shouldn’t elect people who have no plans. We shouldn’t elect people who fail to pass their plans. Why do we treat our Congressmen like our buddies? Why don’t we treat them like employees – they either get the job done or we replace them.
If I can spent a couple of hours writing my own plans on this blog, surely our elected officials can do the same. They should put their plans in writing and we should insist they work to enact them.
My conservative mentor and roll model, Newt Gingrich, recently announced he was endorsing Michael Williams for U.S. Senate here in Texas. Based on Newt’s endorsement I am likely to give Williams the benefit of the doubt, but his website doesn’t really give me much to go on. Check out his position on the ‘issues‘.
On Health Care: Nothing.
On Immigration Reform: “To reduce illegal immigration, we must secure the border first with both physical and virtual fences as well as more patrols; aggressively enforce sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants; immediately deport immigrant felons; require applicants for a temporary work visa to return home and maintain a tamper-proof identification card. We must end the cover provided by lawless sanctuary cities to illegal immigrants.”
Is this really a plan? We have 20 million illegal immigrants here in the US already. Is build a fence a way to fix the problem? No. Should we build a fence – sure I think it would be smart to control our borders better. I think it is a national security issue more than an immigration issue. With regard to the rest – those ideas do NOT address the problem. What do we do with the 20 million illegal immigrants already in the United States. Why is it so hard for any Republican to offer a rational plan to solve the problem? Simple: we demonized the idea of amnesty long ago. Any workable idea can, at some level, be called amnesty. We need to stop being idea-logs, and start being conservative problem solvers. If we can accept that there are 20 million people already here the only ideas that have any chance of success require a path to citizenship. There I said it. Here is my plan.
On Tax Reform: “The federal income tax system is unfair. We should eliminate death and capital gains taxes, move to an optional single rate flat tax, allow the investment in new equipment to be written off in one year and make permanent the research and development tax credit.”
Wow, now he is speaking my language. My only request would be that he be more specific. How would it work? Who would be exempt? The devil is in the details. Ironically, support is in the details as well. If we can show voters that make less than $50,000 that we don’t want to tax them I suspect we might be able to get quite a bit of support for this sort of plan. Most people don’t understand the idea of a flat tax – we need to start explaining that a flat tax helps the poor and middle class the most. We aren’t for the rich – we are for Americans. Here is my plan.
On Energy and Environment: “On energy, our motto should be “all of the above”. We should drill for more American oil and natural gas here in America. We should accelerate the commercialization of clean coal technologies with carbon capture and storage, build more nuclear plants to reduce carbon emissions, and expand the utilization of alternative and renewable energy sources. We can have a strong economy and a healthy environment. But that requires pro-growth energy and environment solutions. Pro-growth energy and environment solutions – those that rely on innovation, entrepreneurship and new technology—will yield more clean, affordable and reliable energy for America’s families and businesses.”
Again, I agree. I would like to see more concrete plans to build more nuclear power plants. We need to show voters how this will save them money over the long run. We need to show them how investing in capital improvements versus stupid plans like cash for clunkers can actually make our country stronger. Here is my plan.
So in general Williams has been very smart. He said the right things (in general) without going into too much detail. I think we as Republicans need to start offering more concrete solutions. So you still want my endorsement? Tell me where you stand on the issues and share your plans with me.
No Comments
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
