TNNWC ENTREPRENEURIAL PUBLICATIONS

TNNWC Publications And Informational Products Division publishes The National Networker (TNNWC) Weekly Newsletter and The BLUE TUESDAY Report especially for entrepreneurs and early-stage venturers; free weekly subscriptions to these informative publications are available online to all entrepreneurial Members of TNNWC.

Membership in TNNWC is free (it's automatic for any subscriber to any TNNWC Publication) and available at our website. When you arrive there, just click on any of the JOIN US or BECOME a MEMBER buttons or links.

Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts

Sunday, April 25, 2010

BALANCING HEALTHCARE, PUBLIC POLICY AND POLITICS: Why the Tea Party Movement Makes the Left Nervous

Balancing Healthcare, Public Policy and Politics with Linda de Seife

On April 15th, tax day, I attended my first Tea Party in front of Town Hall in my community of about 60,000 residents. All in all, it was a pretty sedate affair. It drew about 200 people, some from neighboring towns. Mostly, it was comprised of known Republican activists. Many of the speakers were Republican candidates for statewide office. We were welcomed by our First Selectman (the New England equivalent of mayor). Both my friend and I were surprised that he would publicly support the tea party movement. And, there were a couple of known Democratic leaders who quietly listened, but were subsequently quoted in the local paper, defending their President’s policies.

Prior to rally day, the national tea party movement sent e-mails containing instructions on behavior and warning about potential rowdy infiltrators seeking to paint the movement in an unfavorable light. By preparing, and outing these hooligans, the tea party organizers almost guaranteed that they would not show up. Good for them!

Whether through infiltrating rallies or trying to marginalize the movement, as the President and his supporters have, my question is, “why do they feel it necessary?” What are they afraid of?
Maybe they’re afraid of these statistics:

  • An April 13th Rasmussen poll indicates that 24% of U.S. voters say they consider themselves part of the Tea Party movement. Another 10% say they have close friends and family who are.

  • 48% of voters now say that the average tea party member is closer to their views on major issues than President Obama. 52% believe that the average tea partier has a better understanding of the issues facing America than the average Member of Congress.

  • Just 21% of voters nationwide believe that the federal government now enjoys the consent of the governed.

Add to this the results of a new Pew poll which finds historic levels of unhappiness about the federal government and its role in Americans’ lives. Only 22% said that they can trust the federal government always or almost always, the lowest level in 50 years.

While this level of discontent is a worry for all incumbents, two factors should cause more worry for Democrats: first, they have the most to lose; and, second, the Pew poll also found that the discontent runs more deeply among Independents and Republicans. Those who are highly dissatisfied say they are absolutely certain to vote. Historically, passion and intensity are strongly correlated to turnout and results, especially in mid-term elections.

What else are the tea party bashers afraid of? Maybe what they’re afraid of is that a majority of the American people is not buying in to their culture of dependence. Michael Barone’s April 19th commentary in the Rasmussen Report nailed it. “The Obama Democrats’ vast expansion of the size and scope of government is really not just about economics. It is really a battle about culture… (they) see a society in which ordinary people cannot fend for themselves. They are trying to permanently enlarge government and increase citizens’ dependence on it.”

The tea partiers, on the other hand, believe in the culture of independence which motivated the Founding Fathers and which has enabled America to become the most productive and prosperous nation. We believe in American exceptionalism, Ronald Reagan’s “shining city on the hill.”

Barone further points out that Obama won election in 2008 with a “top-and-bottom” coalition – those dependent on government transfers and benefits, and those in what David Brooks calls “the educated class.” Obama barely exceeded 50% among those between the two extremes. These are the believers in the culture of independence who are fueling the tea party movement.

Although the tea party movement is a grass roots, decentralized one, their message comes together in the “Contract from America” (See www.thecontract.org for more details.) The #1 plank in the contract is protect the Constitution. This is followed by: reject cap and trade, demand a balanced budget, enact fundamental tax reform, and restore fiscal responsibility and constitutionally limited government in Washington.

George McGovern learned the power of the “silent majority” in 1972. When almost half of voters say that the average tea party member is closer to their views than the President is, today we are a not-so-silent majority who support the moral values of the culture of independence and the constitutional values of limited government based on the consent of the governed.

Archibald Mac Leish said, “Criticism in a free man’s country is made on certain assumptions, one of which is the assumption that the government belongs to the people and is at all times subject to the people’s correction and criticism.” The criticism has been loud and clear. November should bring the correction.


Quote of the Month: “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”
-- Ronald Reagan


For more information, please visit Linda's TNNW Bio.




COMMENT/RATE/SHARE THIS ARTICLE; CONTACT THE AUTHOR, & MORE...

The National Networker Companies™

Empowering Emerging Enterprises”

Membership in TNNWC’s Global Interactive Cooperative Business Community is free of charge and entitles you to receive both The National Networker Newsletter and The BLUE TUESDAY Report, as well as access to our unparalleled Suite of Business Services.

Join Us! Simply click on http://bit.ly/JoinTNNWC

Visit our website at http://www.TheNationalNetworker.com


Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Monday, April 19, 2010

THE POINT: It’s in the American DNA to Speak Our Mind – And, Today’s Political Debate is On!

The Point with Brenda Krueger Huffman


Our founding fathers started it all with the first cries for liberty in the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution, to ensure American citizens the right of free speech with the 1st Amendment in the U.S. Constitution. It’s in the DNA of the American culture and the American people to speak our mind politically.

Today’s political debate is on in America from the Internet to family dining room tables. President Obama and Congress have sparked a passion in the American people on all sides of every issue and within all political parties. Americans are engaged and debating their political positions with passion fully exercising their 1st Amendment rights. Voters are joining Facebook political fan pages, following politicians on Twitter, posting political commentary on blogs, writing editorials to traditional newspapers to express their views, and sending politicians emails and letters directly.

They are watching political programs on television or the Internet. They are buying and reading political-themed books, as evidenced by how many of these books are on numerous best-seller lists. Political speakers are the biggest draw on college campuses. Americans are attending rallies, protests, and town hall meetings in record numbers and speaking their mind. With a great following, political blogs and news articles abound on the Internet. This mid-term election year everyone is talking politics with cab drivers, bartenders, hair stylists, fellow employees, friends, family, and just about everyone. Jefferson, Franklin, and Adams would be proud.

Americans question their government and its policies, simply because they can and they care. Voters express their positive and negatives opinions of President Obama, and members of Congress without fear of censorship or reprisal. They debate specific legislation and the way in which their tax dollars are being spent by Congress. As was the debate with the framers of the U.S. Constitution, Americans are discussing what role government, through constitutional law, can and should have in their lives and businesses. This year voters are exploring the benefits of our Christian founding and our capitalist roots. Many today know the definitions of capitalism, socialism, Marxism, and communism which they may not have thought about or discussed a year ago. They are discussing the differences between these political philosophies from an American perspective. They are discussing whether or not America is in fact being fundamentally transformed by this President and Congress with a legislative agenda, and if so, what this change really means in America and for Americans. They are discussing the difference between a democracy and a republic. This all makes for a passionate and sometimes heated debate no matter with which political party and policies you are aligned.

Americans are getting back in touch with the U.S. Constitution. For the first time since high school, many Americans are reading the Constitution again. And many are specifically looking up the 10th Amendment and the Commerce Clause. In today’s world of 2,000+-page legislative health care bills coming out of Congress, a 48-page Pocket United States Constitution that also includes the Bill of Rights, Amendments 11-27, the Declaration of Independence, and a complete index of the Constitution is a big seller, and is even being sold on eBay and other sources online in volume packages. Americans are questioning if the various federal legislation that is being considered, or has passed, is constitutional. They are debating their beliefs and positions on the original framers’ intent of the specific rights given to the people, states, and the federal government in the U.S. Constitution.

Approximately half of all Americans use social media, and political comments and debate are all over the Internet and social media platforms. The rhetoric is usually civil, but sometimes it’s not. With our 1st Amendment rights comes the common sense responsibility to debate your position on issues, and not by demonizing a political party, or with personal attacks and name calling. Everyone has a right to say whatever they want, with a few lawful exceptions. Yet there is also an ethical responsibility in free speech and a true logic in effective debate that doesn’t include spouting political spin and myth as fact.

Voters are engrossed in the political debate, and social media is a perfect platform as evidenced by a simple search on the keyword “political” on Facebook which returned a result count of 9,900 pages the other day. Youtube has political videos and clips too numerous to count. Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty held his first Facebook town hall meeting March 31. It was well received, and proved to be a great use of social media to provide a real-time, transparent, economical, and interactive way to talk with voters. From a Facebook search of top political names for the top fan pages and fan numbers done on April 2, some of the results might surprise you. (These numbers can change at any time of course as fans join or leave the fan page, and I only looked at the “positive” pages for each name.)


Top Positive Fan Page RELATED TO NAME and # of Fans

President Barack Obama 7,982,205

Speaker Nancy Pelosi 18,737

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid 8,680

House Minority Leader John Boehner 58,669

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell 3,782

Newly Elected MA Senator Scott Brown 221,989

Sarah Palin 1,515,481

Glenn Beck 777,465

Jon Stewart’s 558,342

Stephen Colbert’s The Colbert Report 535,480

Anderson Cooper 360 343,323

Sean Hannity 255,385

Bill Maher 177,226

Rachel Maddow Show 129,833

Rush Limbaugh & the EIB 70,026

Keith Olbermann 48,186

Bill O’Reilly 16,081

Chris Matthews 7,985


According to Sysomos’ recent Twitter study:

• Overall, U.S. President Barack Obama is the most popular politician with 2.24 million followers. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is the most popular within the 168 identified members of the political Twittersphere with 68 followers, while President Obama is followed by 56 out of the 168.

• ABC News' Chief Washington Correspondent George Stephanopoulos is the most followed media personality (Group 2). Nansen Malin, a blogger who is on the Republican Party's Executive Board in Washington State, from Group 2, has the most followers within the political Twittersphere.

CNN Breaking News is the most followed news source (Group 3) overall, while the Los Angeles Times Top of the Ticket is the most followed news source among the political Twittersphere.

• Within the political Twittersphere, George Stephanopoulos is followed by the most politicians; Virginia Senator Mark Warner is followed by the most media personalities; and MSNBC cartoonist Darly Cagle is followed by the most news organizations.

Americans are tuning in to politically-based television programs like never before, since the 2008 presidential campaign and election. Whether you like Fox News or not, they tout the “top 13 programs on cable news” and “the most total viewers.” There is no denying FNC programs, The O’Reilly Factor and the Glenn Beck, dominates the ratings. Their viewers grow every day. FNC program contributors, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Juan Williams, and Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, are becoming political rock stars with name recognition similar to pro athletes and well, rock stars like KISS’ Gene Simmons. Glenn Beck is the only person in America other than Oprah Winfrey who is able to catapult a book to the top of popular bestseller book lists simply by mentioning the book on his program. And, these are all political and history-themed books.

Whether you drink coffee, tea, kool-aide or just plain water, everyone has an opinion. There are usually very different ones in the same family. In my own family of four sisters, debate is lively as I suspect it is in every American family. One sister is a die-hard Republican, and one is a died-in-the-wool Democrat. One believes President Obama wants to move America to a European style socialist culture, and one believes social justice policies that redistribute wealth are just fine. One thinks the new health care legislation is unconstitutional, and one believes everyone should have “free” health care. One is upset over the check she had to write when she filed her taxes, since she feels the government already took too much out of her pay all year. And one doesn’t pay any income tax, will receive a refund, and thinks only the rich should be taxed. One can’t wait for the 2012 election that she feels will surely replace President Obama, and the other thinks that sister is just an Obama-hater. Yep, Elizabeth and Rosie are still debating from "The View" inside of my family. The only hot button issue we four of us seem to agree on is that same-sex marriage should be legal, and the Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell policy should not. Then other family members debate us all on our equal human rights position and the definition of marriage.

Thousands of Americans don’t just express opinions with each other. Many also call their representatives in Washington or write them a letter as part of the American political debate. In fact, many in 2010 have done this for the first time in their lives. A good friend of mine who lives in Arizona sent a letter last week to Senator Jon Kyl expressing her opinion of what Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said that morning on television.

With permission, here is her letter:

Dear Senator Kyl,

I find it troublesome that Mr. Geithner holds press conferences discussing legislation like controlling companies from becoming "too big to fail." I find this wrong on several levels. Last I checked, his role as Secretary of the Treasury doesn't include a voting role in the Senate or necessarily the right to propose legislation. Am I wrong in this assessment of his role?

Secondly, I find it horribly un-American to say that if a company is overly successful with too broad a reach the government can step in and say - halt – “You're doing too well.” Could not this in essence be said of Microsoft or Google or our own Government?

And, on that note, the real issue I want to address is why are we not looking at our government as possibly being an entity that would be subject to "too big to fail" fail-safes, as it were? I presume, without too much research, one of the largest employers in the United States is the federal government. I also presume that because its agencies are so large and it employs so many people, it is rare we would think about collapsing one agency or the equivalent of a large company as Mr. Geithner spoke about for the private sector. Am I wrong in my assertions? So, is it wrong to think the reason our government won't consider a more simplified and equitable tax structure is because it would cause a loss of jobs within the IRS? Is it wrong to think we don't seek out changes in the Postal Service, which has been leaking money like a sieve for years, simply because it would mean scaling back on postal employees throughout the country?

Why isn't Washington turning the eye on its own house and demanding it be on time and on budget? Geithner’s expressed "too big too fail" philosophy strikes me as trying to use a broom to clean up after a flood. The reality is this philosophy is only going to create a bigger mess and a bigger infrastructure to house the mess. Good luck with that.

Sincerely,
Lesley Woodring
Concerned Citizen

Some say America‘s best days are behind us. I don’t believe that. As 2010 is already reflecting, Americans are not complacent about our Constitution, politics, politicians, and government policy. The majority of Americans love their country and are willing to fight with debate for their vision for it -- no matter what side of the political aisle they support. Our founding fathers are looking down on us and smiling. They are pleased we are proud of the political roots they firmly planted, and that we are still discussing their work and legacy. They would have liked the Internet, and without a doubt, each would have had their own political blog and offered Facebook town hall meetings. They are fist-bumping each other that we, as American citizens, continue to engage in passionate political debate, and that we regularly utilize our 1st Amendment right of free speech to do so without fear or censorship. This is one of the ways we honor our heritage and their legacy. The political debate is definitely on in 2010 -- as it should be by the intended design of the American culture’s DNA. The spirit of Americans will never be broken.


For more information, please visit Brenda's TNNW Bio





COMMENT/RATE/SHARE THIS ARTICLE;CONTACT THE AUTHOR, & MORE...

The National Networker Companies




Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Thursday, April 01, 2010

THE POINT: Can Voting In Non-Career Politicians Fix Broken Washington?

The Point with Brenda Krueger Huffman


An Interview with MA 9th District U.S. Congressional Candidate, Keith Lepor


With polls and protests reflecting the discontent with Washington, there is a growing anti-incumbent position with voters from all political parties loudly voicing it is time to “take back our country” by “voting out incumbents.” Many voters believe the vast majority of the members of Congress are no longer “of the people and for the people.” Congress is ignoring their constituents expressed desire of fiscal responsibility and job creation being their top priorities.


Many feel current legislation is being pushed through against their will. They see arrogant career politicians who believe they know better than those that sent them to Washington representing them on how to spend their money and how to live their lives. Voters are worried about the creation of massive new entitlement spending and record-breaking deficits, especially during a recession. They are concerned about the effect this will all have on the country’s future economic stability and on the tax rates their children will have to live with throughout their lives to pay for it.


Constituents watch career politicians minimizing voters and calling them names for expressing their opposition views. Many voters feel Congress is out of control. With congressional approval ratings at an all-time low, there is a loud cry for House and Senate term limits. They notice the loyalty in Washington has become to a party and political machine, not to the voters. Voters are stunned by what they see as a shaping up of two classes in America -- the non-political class and the political class.


More and more voters are dissatisfied with politicians they realize have little or no private sector job experience managing large programs and trillions of dollars. They see career politicians demonizing profit, bashing American capitalism, and taking over free market industries. They watch as career politicians take over private companies, and know they have no business doing this. They also realize they have little or no business experience to successfully run a company and suffer no consequences if the company is not successful. They see career politicians minimize obvious corruption and rally around members and their party as opposed to investigating the corruption and holding people accountable.


More and more voters realize the main job creation efforts are in reality establishing a larger government, increasing intrusion into their lives, businesses, and ability to pursue happiness as intended by our founding fathers. Voters see government printing money and career politicians raising the debt ceiling as though these are acceptable answers to more spending. They see what has amounted to over a trillion dollars in bailouts and stimulus spent with political overtones, actions that has not solved economic problems, or positively affected their lives. And many understand that seniors on social security did not receive a cost of living raise while all members of Congress received thousands in an annual raise.


Can voting in more non-career politicians fix our broken Washington? Voters are now more aware than ever of the real world value in having citizens who have actually worked within the private sector and have paid their taxes represent them in Washington. They realize Congress might be more realistic with their money and manage the government better if it had more members that have balanced a budget, met a payroll, and had to make a profit to stay in business. Voters want to be represented by those whom have lived and worked among them in the real world and will live by the same laws imposed upon them by Congress. They want what the American founding fathers originally envisioned for Congressional members -- citizen politicians. This was the intent and spirit described in “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” The founding fathers were not career politicians. They were every-day citizens who returned home to their real jobs, homes, and lives after representing and serving the people of their districts and states in the Congressional session. Being a politician was not their life-long profession. Our founding fathers did not want a ruling class for America exempted from laws and programs imposed on other citizens and receiving a better life and more perks simply because they were in government.


Everyone has heard the sentiment, “If you don’t like something, stop complaining and do something about it.” Some Americans who have never held public office are doing just that -- they are running for Congress as a non-career citizen politician. More and more voters definitely want the out-of-touch career politicians replaced. The obvious question then becomes: Replace them with whom? What qualities would voters want the ideal non-career politician to have to govern effectively with practically?


After much thought, I developed a common sense criteria list:
  • no political background;
  • well-educated;
  • common sense;
  • business experience;
  • military understanding;
  • international affairs understanding (especially of the Middle East);
  • fiscally responsible;
  • socially moderate;
  • has lived within a middle-class income;
  • has overcome hardship understanding;
  • honest;
  • holds new and realistic ideas;
  • committed to representing constituents;
  • supports term limits;
  • and respects voters.

Would it be possible to actually find a non-career politician that fit what voters want or at least most of it? I researched the Internet, and as things often happen, an answer came to me in an unexpected way.


Unrelated to my research, my husband emailed me a YouTube link of a NATO combat photo journalist in Afghanistan filmed by a camera mounted on the helmet of a marine. In the video, the photo journalist, Keith Lepor, was shot by a sniper and pulled to safety by two marines. It turns out that Keith Lepor is a candidate for the Republican nomination for U.S. Congress in the Massachusetts 9th district. Upon deeper exploration, I realized Mr. Lepor met the non-career politician criteria list I posted above.


Raised in a financially challenged household by a single mother (his father died when Keith was 13), Keith Lepor understands hardships. He also overcame cancer as a child. Mr. Lepor graduated from Boston University and continued his education at Oxford University, not with scholarships, but with student loans and work in a variety of part-time jobs, including in restaurants and college security details. Mr. Lepor has a business background. He has worked for an East Asia-focused boutique consulting firm, undertaken business development work for clients in business and finance, and has contributed to articles on international and strategic relations in several publications. He published a book in 1997 entitled After the Cold War (University of Texas Press, 1997). The foreword was written by former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. This book helps focus the international debate and discussion of the emerging world order and the US role therein, and is available now in paperback.


As a photojournalist, Mr. Lepor has worked throughout Africa. His last assignment was in Central Africa with the UN Department of Peace Keeping Operations and Office of the Spokesman, covering instability in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. His most recent significant international assignment was a year spent as a Forward Media Team Leader for the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF/NATO) in Afghanistan. He managed a team of Afghan print and radio journalists, and worked as a combat photojournalist in support of US and Coalition forces in eastern (Kunar, Ghazni, Nangahar, Parwan, Kapisa) and southern Afghanistan (Helmand & Kandahar).


An Interview with Candidate for U.S. Congress MA-9 Keith Lepor

BKH: You were born and grew up in Massachusetts. Tell me about that experience.
KLepor: I was born in Boston and am a former "Jimmy kid" having survived childhood cancer, thanks to the generosity of the people of Massachusetts who donated to the Jimmy Fund in support of cancer research. My father was a pilot, so I actually grew up all over the place including Switzerland, Holland, Hawaii, California, the US Virgin Islands and Seattle.


BKH: I’ve read you graduated from Oxford University. That’s impressive.
KLepor: Education has always been very important to me. I completed my undergraduate work at Boston University, earning two BAs. I continued my graduate work in Middle East Studies in Cairo, Egypt, and continued post graduate education at (St. Antony’s College) Oxford University in Political Economy.


BKH: What made you want to run for U.S. Congress in Massachusetts?
KLepor: I am very concerned about the future of our country. The out-of-control spending and taxes are hurting the small- and medium-size companies that account for 80% of the job creation in the US. We must also address our foreign energy dependence. And I believe we should aggressively pursue realistic alternatives such as natural gas and nuclear energy. Finally, my concern for national security has made me realize it is necessary to take responsibility and make a difference. I can provide the leadership and new ideas required to address these important concerns. For all of these reasons, I have decided to enter the race for Congress in the 9th Congressional District.


BKH: What do you believe you would bring to Congress for the people of Massachusetts?
KLepor: As a fiscal conservative and one who is strong on national defense, I would bring a fresh face, new ideas, and a unique background. I had been an independent voter for years before joining the Republican Party, and I believe I have the temperament which will facilitate my ability to work with members of Congress from both parties. My ability to think outside of the box would lead to creative solutions which will, of course, be developed over time. As a photojournalist who specializes in guerrilla warfare and counter-insurgency, I am tough and have a background that will lend itself to following my own instincts to do what I believe is in the best interest of my constituents and country irrespective of the political leadership.


BKH: Do you see running as a Republican in Massachusetts more difficult than running as a Democrat considering the history of Massachusetts as a strong blue state?
KLepor: Certainly Democrats have a better track record of winning elections in Massachusetts, yet I firmly believe voters are looking for change. They are fed up with the arrogance of power and how out of touch many members of Congress are. They are looking to change the status quo. And I believe being a Republican may now have certain advantages. The un-enrolled, Independent registered voters are looking for change. A balanced, competitive two-party system provides the checks and balances that are necessary for a functioning democracy, so Republicans need to be more competitive in Massachusetts.


BKH: What do you think of the recent Scott Brown Senate win?
KLepor: Scott Brown’s success in the Special Election is indicative of the level of frustration with Washington. His election in January was meant to send a message which appears to have been ignored by Congress and the Administration. The Democrats may pay for that in November.


BKH: What are the three main differences between you and the other Republican primary candidate?
KLepor: I believe that my passion to help our men and women in uniform and our veterans differentiates me from other candidates. Having run with front line combat units in Afghanistan for a year, I am highly motivated to ensure that our men and women in uniform have the best equipment available when they are deployed into hot zones (Afghanistan & Iraq). I am also concerned about vets that return to the U.S. with traumatic brain and other injuries. We must also ensure that vets from Vietnam, Korea and WWII have what they need. Another significant difference between me and other Republican candidates is the nature of the opponent that I face (Stephen Lynch). All of the MA Congressional delegation are perceived as tax and spend liberals.


Stephen Lynch, on the other hand, is falsely perceived by many as a "conservative." [BKH Note: My research reflects Mr. Lynch voted with the Democrats 98% of the time. Some of his illustrative votes included support for continued federal funding of ACORN, burying the investigation of Charles Rangel, embracing Cap & Trade, and his stance on illegal immigration (border security, interior enforcement, amnesty) that seems very much out of step with his constituents.] The Boston Globe published an article on March 24th, titled "Evasive Maneuvers" discussing Mr. Lynch’s recent vote against ObamaCare while last fall he voted in support of it.


Educating the constituents of the 9th [district] to the reality of my opponents’ voting record will be crucial and make fund raising to get the message out that much more important. Finally, although there are others like myself, who have never run for public office before, I believe that my international background differentiates me from my peers and will give me a better perspective from which to look out for the interests of the country, Massachusetts and the constituents of the 9th Congressional District. This will be particularly important vis-à-vis foreign policy, defense policy, intelligence policy and homeland security -- all issues relevant at the federal level.


BKH: What do you think of the health care legislation passed by the House on March 20?
KLepor: I have serious misgivings about ObamaCare and believe that it does nothing to help improve the health care system in the country. This legislation represents billions in new taxes, not to mention the price tag of $940 billion. It raises taxes and premiums while rationing health care with no reduction in costs and pricing. Tort reform and allowing citizens to purchase insurance across state lines would help drive down costs by keeping insurance competitive and medical costs down.


BKH: How do you think Washington can bring down the growing deficit?
KLepor: The Government must live within its means. Reduced spending is desperately needed. Out of control costs and programs continue to add to the national burden. We as individuals must all live within our means, and I believe it is necessary that government do the same. There is no such thing as a free lunch.


BKH: What do you believe are the best ways to get the economy growing again and for creating jobs?
KLepor: The biggest problem we face is the need to create jobs. We will not do that if government keeps raising taxes on business. We need to simplify the tax code. You should not have to hire an accountant to pay your taxes. Much of the tax code unnecessarily works against small business. I will work to simplify government, so that it is more responsive to the needs of the people and creates a better environment for the growth of business that creates jobs in Massachusetts. Government needs to be more efficient in the way it spends our money. It makes no sense to tax to death sound businesses to prop up failing ones.


BKH: If elected to Congress for MA-9, what can the people of Massachusetts count on from you?
KLepor: They can count on me to always look out for the best interests of Massachusetts. I will not be dictated to by any political party. I will always do what I believe to be the best policy for the people. The people of the 9th should also know that I will serve no more than three terms in Congress. Frankly, if I have not been able to accomplish what I have set out to do in six years then I have done a disservice to my district. What we need are citizen politicians. The Internet and social media helps me stay in touch with voters and get my name and message out in real time. Voters can follow me on Twitter and on Facebook.


BKH: Do you believe there will be a rise in citizens without a political background running for Congress in the political climate of today? Will there be more ordinary citizens getting involved? What do you see as the negatives and positives of this?
KLepor: Indeed, I believe there will be. I am one of them. I have encountered some negativity as I have been advised that I need political experience before going after such an important office. I have also been told in no uncertain terms that I need to "pay my dues." Frankly, the one thing that we don’t suffer from in Washington is a lack of professional politicians. What happened to the concept of the citizen politician? I only see positives from the involvement of political "novices." We need a new approach, fresh ideas, less cynicism (willingness to look at bipartisanship) and perhaps even a little enthusiasm. That may sound naïve, but we just need to change the mindset.

***

I believe Keith Lepor, perhaps like other non-career politicians from both parties that run for offices this November and beyond, is indeed running for U.S. Congress MA-9 for the right reasons -- to get back to truly representing constituents and serving America. I believe he is sincere in wanting to make a difference in politics, for our country, and for veteran citizens. Our founding fathers certainly would have wanted politicians crafting legislation affecting American citizens to be “of the people.” The intent and expectation of our founding fathers was those making laws would ensure liberty within those laws, if they themselves had to abide by the same laws imposed on those they represented.


Well, we know how that has turned out. Is it here -- the time to go back to the intent of our founding fathers? I believe so. Americans can begin to fix broken Washington first by supporting and electing those running for offices that really are “of the people.” We have all seen that power does corrupt and career politicians are more susceptible to corruption. Term limits should be a part of the representative equation now for Congress.


More and more citizens with no political background (state or national) are considering and taking action to run for political offices. Our political system generally gives an incumbent the advantage over challengers with the established party machine behind them, enjoying better name recognition, and having well organized money to campaign.


If voters want to send more non-career politicians to Washington to represent them, they will have to put their money where their mouth is in supporting these candidates by seeking out new faces, educating themselves about new non-career candidates, contributing time and money to their campaigns, and helping energize a base to vote them in. And as they say, the proof will be in the founding father’s fig pudding.


For more information, please visit Brenda's TNNW Bio.





COMMENT/RATE/SHARE THIS ARTICLE;CONTACT THE AUTHOR, & MORE...

The National Networker Companies




Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Thursday, February 25, 2010

BALANCING HEALTHCARE, PUBLIC POLICY AND POLITICS: MIA (Missing in Action) - Leadership in Washington

Balancing Healthcare, Public Policy and Politics with Linda De Seife


Here are some headlines that I read over the last few weeks that have inspired this month’s column:

  • “Snow Adds to the Political Drift”
  • “Why Washington Is Frozen”
  • “America’s Candor Gap”
  • “A Year Later, Where did the Hopes for Obama Go?”
  • “No Deficit of Cynicism”
  • “Stimulus Created Jobs, But No Real Optimism”
  • “Debt Ills, Rate Plan Knock U.S. Stocks”
  • “Fudging Jobless Statistics”
  • “Reid Puts His Bill Before Bipartisanship”
  • “White House May Abandon Civilian 9/11 Trial”
  • “Economic Data Stirs Fears”
  • “America’s Greek Tragedy – Greece’s Crisis Holds Warning for Us”

Now this is quite a list, and I could go on, but you probably get the idea. Is it any wonder that Americans are angry? Is it any wonder that, although technically the economy is in recovery, Americans don’t feel it, and so are not spending on houses, cars, or anything else other than the necessities? Is it any wonder that fear and uncertainty are paralyzing our country and holding back the recovery?

One day the headlines say things are getting better; the next day they’re not. One day we’re trying terrorists in civilian trials in New York City, and the next we’re not sure. One day we need a new agency to study global warming; the next day Florida is freezing, and Washington is literally buried in snow. (Although figuratively it’s been feeding us a snow job for years; that’s the problem!)

America is not working, in more ways than one.

Then we have a State of the Union address that is nothing more than a laundry list of legislative initiatives and a scolding of the Congress, Republicans, the previous Administration, and even of the American people by a President who is above it all, blames everyone else, and takes no responsibility for his actions, or inactions, over the last year.

Where is the clear direction, strategy and transparency that was promised? All we’ve gotten for the past year is drift -- from one issue to the next and back again. Tactics, tactics, tactics! Talk, talk, talk!

Now the Democrats are trying to say, and the media has picked up on it, that America is ungovernable. This is nonsense. What America lacks is leadership -- people who know what it takes to make the system work. We have an inexperienced President who, to use a business analogy, instead of being the CEO, is behaving like a functional vice president or department head.

The concept of leadership is very complex. There are many definitions, but there are some common traits of leadership. Some of these are: defining a vision and translating it into reality; trustworthiness; taking responsibility for your actions; inspiring confidence. The management guru, Peter Drucker, has said that “effective leadership is not about making speeches or being liked; leadership is defined by results not attributes.”

One of President Obama’s problems is that during the campaign he sounded like a leader, but, now after the campaign is over, he has not delivered. He seemed to have the attributes, but there have been no results.

The famous psychologist Carl Jung declared, “The true leader is always led.” Bill Clinton realized this after the 1994 elections and worked with the new Republican majority to reform the welfare system and end the era of big government. Obama, to the contrary, refuses to get the message. So it is likely, that he will get more messages in November. We’ll see if he gets it this time.

And the Congress is no better. The long time Speaker of the House, Sam Rayburn, who was legendary for arm-twisting and jaw-boning believed, “You cannot be a leader and ask other people to follow you, unless you know how to follow too.” Today’s so-called Congressional leaders find it easier to buy votes than to truly negotiate the issues by listening to their members and their constituents.

We all know that another key to leadership is trust, but as I look at Washington, where is the trust? Democrats don’t trust Republicans, and Republicans don’t trust Democrats. The people don’t trust the government, and the government doesn’t trust the people.

The President’s words say one thing, and he does another. Then he called a health care summit, but even before the event, he began posturing to paint the Republicans as obstructionists if they don’t just go along. During the event, he again became the lecturing professor. So, Republicans are right to be suspicious of his motives. Have we forgotten the concept of the loyal opposition? Their role is not to just go along; their role is to oppose that which they do not believe in.

Where are the adults in our country today? It’s not the President, much as he tries to play that role by chastising others. It’s certainly not the Congress. The adults, who are trying to lead their leaders and who understand the challenges we face, are the American people. But we can’t do it alone, especially when paralyzed by the indecision and lack of strategy and vision in Washington. We need to feel confident that our country has direction that we can support. Those who voted for Obama thought that’s what they would get, but they were mistaken.

What we have is paralysis, driven by a lack of strategic direction, confidence and optimism, which could tip us back into recession, or, at the very least, is delaying a strong and sustained recovery.

We need leaders, like Ronald Reagan, who had a vision for America and confidence in the people to make that vision a reality. We need leaders with courage, who fulfill their vision based on their passion, not their position. We need leaders who raise people’s aspirations and energize them to achieve great things.

America is not ungovernable, and government is not broken. America lacks leaders who know how to govern, who respect their constituents, and who can build consensus and work through issues for the good of the whole, the way the Founders intended.

What are your thoughts on the subject?


Quote of the Month
“All the ills of mankind, all the tragic misfortunes that fill history books, all the political blunders, all the failures of the great leaders have arisen merely from a lack of skill at dancing.”
-- Moliere


For more information, please visit Linda's TNNW Bio





THIS ARTICLE--THIS AUTHOR--YOUR FEEDBACK

(1) If you would like to post a comment on this article for this author and for other readers to see, or if you would like to read the comments which have been posted by others, simply scroll down to the very bottom of this article (where it says "Posted by...") and click on the small text hyperlink that says "comments": a pop-up window will open which shows all of the comments posted by others. At the end of the other posts, there is a textbox for you to post your own comment.
(2) If you would prefer to contact the author in confidence, or to write at greater length regarding reciprocal links, special projects or professional issues, simply click on the button in this box labeled "CONTACT AUTHOR," and a pop-up form will magically appear for your use. It even allows you to include web and blog urls, downloads and attachments of all sorts.
(3) If you have not yet become a Member of THE NATIONAL NETWORKER COMPANIES (there is no charge), you should do that using the buttons below. Click on FREE NEWSLETTER button to start the process; then choose either the RSS Feed or the Daily Email delivery option.


Contact Author
Join TNNWC
Free Newsletters
Daily Email Extra
Total RSS Feed
BACKTALK! ™




*Follow TNNW on Twitter at http://twitter.com/TNNW_BUZZWORKS
*Published by TNNWC. All rights reserved.*Join our GICBC and receive Your TNNW Newsletter and THE BLUE TUESDAY REPORT! - Click HERE
The National Networker Companies




Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

THE POINT: Remember Bush 41’s “Read my lips, no new taxes” fate? Does President Obama?


The Point with Brenda Krueger Huffman


When I read the February 22, Business Week interview with President Obama’s “agnostic” response to a question referring to his commitment level to his campaign pledge (taxes would remain the same or go down for those making less than $250,000 annually or for roughly 95% of Americans), my first reaction was: Do you remember former President George H.W. Bush’s “Read my lips, no new taxes.” pledge in the 1988 presidential campaign? Do you remember not honoring that and raising taxes in his first term as President severely politically damaged him and greatly contributed to his 1992 reelection loss? Does President Obama? Does Congress? My first thoughts were: President Obama’s “agnostic” response was a cold shoulder to the American taxpayers considering this constant tax pledge during his campaign and first year in office. I believe this tax pledge was one of the deciding factors for many that voted for him.


It is inconceivable to me that anyone in Washington believes they are entitled to spend and tax to the point that all Americans will be looking at huge tax increases and new government fees to pay for all of the new spending. President Obama’s “agnostic” response was a glimpse of realism that tax hikes will also be affecting those making less than $250,000 annually. It may come in an income tax hike for them or in other forms of taxes and fees, but it appears it is coming. President Obama knows it. We really shouldn’t be surprised, for there was a clear warning sign back in August, 2009 as reported by the New York Daily News: White House officials on Sunday refused to rule out hiking taxes as one of the "hard choices" needed to fix the economy over the long haul.


Vice President Joe Biden recently proclaimed “Washington is broken.” I believe he was referring, and spinning actually, to the partisanship he wants to portray as the reason new big government programs legislation, which all include new taxation, has not been passed by Congress yet. Hearing him say this and understanding his definition of what about Washington is broken would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious for the economic future of Americans. It was a stunning display of the tone deafness of Washington and how its definition of broken is different than that of the majority of voters. Most in Washington are not truly representing the majority of the American people whom do not want bigger government and the resulting bigger budget deficits. The American people know this can only lead to more taxes and fees.


Mr. Biden is right about Washington being broken though. The majority of Americans agree, and I have to believe all politicians, especially the President and Vice President, are well aware of the legitimate issues. Both addressed many of the real problems while being interviewed by the voters for their current positions. As with any job interview, they explained how they planned to be an asset to their employers, the voters, and the “change” they would bring to the company, the federal government. Both addressed the lack of accountability in the current company management and assured their prospective employers they would expect to be held accountable. I believe the first place to start with accountability is to change the dynamics of political campaign promises being thrown out as soon as one gets the job. The American people know what was promised in the job interviews by President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden – accepting accountability, eliminating corruption, maximizing transparency, and changing business as usual. I also remember hearing there would be an elimination of earmarks, special interest, and lobbyist. And of course, no tax increases for 95% to name a few.


It appears the majority of these interview talking points, along with several other social change points, were tossed aside in the first few months of the job performance. Why have Americans allowed politicians of both parties, their employees, to get away with such bate and switch tactics for decades? These types of tactics are considered fraud in any other circumstance. Job candidates that do not live up to their interview talk or have misrepresentation in their resumes are fired for dishonesty in the private sector. It is a general understanding by all this is the consequence for such behavior. Should a job applicant employ a “say anything” and “say what the employer wants to hear” strategy in the interview to get the job and then the job performance is lacking; this is not waved away with a casual “Every job candidate does this.” mentality by an employer.


Are politicians really any different than other employees? Should the federal government have different politician employee performance standards than any other U.S. company? Should the voters, their employer, have different expectation standards than other employers? Should we effectively want to fix broken Washington, we must first hold politicians to the same honesty and performance accountability standards any other employer expects from their employees. The voters must change the paradigm of their expectations as employers and realize political campaigns are nothing more and nothing less than a job interview with them doing the hiring.


What politicians say in their job interview should remain solid in their job performance. The politician elected was selected over the other job applicants based on their interview presentation. What they represented in the interview process does matter, and this is where accountability when they get the job starts. If a private company manager employee consistently went over the company’s budget and ran a deficit in their department, the employee could not wave this away, and the employer would not accept this performance as effective management. The manager employee would be fired and replaced with another employee that could manage a budget and show leadership in keeping it balanced. Should we truly want to lower and pay off the deficit, we must hold politicians to the same fiscal standards businesses and families are held to in their budget management. In addition, if an employee talks down to or disregards the opinion of their employer, this is insubordination, and they should be fired.


The bottom line is the U.S. federal government (and many individual state and local government) is broke as we all know. The U.S. deficit is projected to hit $1.6 trillion in 2010. The deficit is the difference between spending and income in one year. Our total debt is now projected to be in excess of 100% of the GDP beginning in 2011. Greece is bankrupt with their government spending 52% of its GDP. Our nation’s credit card is well over its credit limit. We must pay down our credit balance and not even consider adding any new purchases until we do. Pointing fingers, affixing blame, and touting an inherited deficit is of little console and is not an acceptable argument to continue adding to the credit card balance at this point. It’s time to stop the blame game, the political spin, embracing special interest, and making backroom deals. It’s time for our representatives from both major parties to suck it up, show strong leadership, take real corrective action, and start to be a part of the solution and not continue to be a part of the problem. It is time for them to live up to their job interview presentation of their management skill set.


In today’s fragile economic climate, hiking taxes to what amounts to exorbitant rates on any business or family is not the best answer or even a reasonable answer to paying down the deficit. Class warfare may have worked in the past, but it is not working in America now with regard to tax rates. As reported in a recent Rasmussen Poll: "Most Americans favor a law that would limit the amount of taxes paid to state, local and federal governments so that no one would pay more than 50% of their total income in taxes. Even when that standard is applied to someone who earns a million dollars a year, most Americans say that such a fortunate individual should pay less than half of their income in taxes."


It is easily seen as the double-talk that it is for one to talk seriously about paying down the deficit and at the same time to seek huge new government programs and spending. It is time for politicians to grow up, to get real, and to understand American taxpayers (and future generations) are not an open checkbook with funds magically deposited nightly by the money fairy or the Federal Reserve masquerading as our rich uncle. As reported in another recent Rasmussen Poll: "President Obama may have to go back on his campaign promise against raising taxes on Americans making less than $250,000 a year in order to reduce the country's record budget deficit. But a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that even if the president and Congress raise taxes to reduce the federal deficit, 58% of voters think they are more likely to spend the money on new government programs. Separate polling shows that the vast majority of voters nationwide (83%) of Americans say the size of the federal budget deficit is due more to the unwillingness of politicians to cut government spending than to the reluctance of taxpayers to pay more in taxes."


It’s time to acknowledge that significant job creation only occurring in government jobs is not sustainable as true economic recovery. This is in reality only adding more to the deficit in the long run. The private sector creates the wealth and financial stability of our nation, not the public sector. Let’s face it, New York and California can not pay their bills after several state tax hikes due to the enormous obligations of their public employee costs. Western European countries already imposing many of the new program models being considered by Washington have standard high unemployment, growth stifling tax rates, and low innovation. Where is the line for the U.S. when the ability to tax the private sector no longer can afford the only growth being in government jobs?


While politicians tout the stimulus is working, many in America do not agree and are not optimistic with big spending and big tax hikes looming. As reported by ABC News Poll on February 16: "Just 23 percent think things are getting better and 77 percent say the economy is staying the same or getting worse – a chilling assessment given the very low ratings of current sentiment. A key indicator from last week's ABC News/Washington Post poll underscores these persistent negative feelings. Eighty-eight percent think that the economy, despite what economists say to the contrary, is still in a recession. And on a more personal note, 53 percent say that based on their experience the economy has not begun to recover."


Defining the “rich”; and therefore, whom can withstand large tax increases without further damage to unemployment figures and the economy in general, is not as simple as pointing to anyone whom makes $250,000 or more in this current recession-era America. As reported by a Washington Post Poll: "Concern about the impact of recession crosses party lines. More than six in 10 Democrats, Republicans and independents say they have been hurt by the recession. Higher- and lower-income households alike reported significant levels of economic pain."


Blue states and red states – left and right – Democrats and Republicans: The first step to tackling our fiscal problems is to stop consideration of any new spending programs. The next step is to task the newly formed, 10 Democrat and 8 Republican, Deficit Panel with auditing all federal government programs with the goals of eliminating the great waste of taxpayers’ money in service and program duplication and ridiculous earmark spending. Did you know there are 69 federal agencies to administer 10 early education programs as just one example of extreme duplication? We must also look at every existing state specific earmark expenditure, whether 1 year old or 100 years old, and ask the question: Would the taxpayer’s of the state in which the earmark provides benefit be willing to pay higher state taxes in any form to pay for this program to continue it in their state?


All earmarks and pork barrel spending must be seen as unacceptable in Congress’ fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers with no exceptions. Every politician promises a form of this in almost every campaign. As you will recall, President Obama presented that he would not allow earmarks in his 2008 job interview - the 2008 Presidential campaign. It is time for this promise to be a reality without further discussion or consideration of any kind.


We simply can’t afford pork barrel spending and special interests any more. Responsible families don’t buy their children gifts when they can’t afford the house payment – even if their children threaten them with hating them or throw a public tantrum. Politicians seeing it as their duty to “bring home the bacon” of federal money to be spent in their state can no longer be acceptable to Washington or their represented states. The “bacon” must be recognized for what it is - money taken by the federal government in the form of taxes and fees paid by American working families and businesses at all income levels.


I realize many will see the “stop new spending and eliminate old earmarks” as the first steps in tackling our fiscal problems as an extreme answer and politically undoable. Yet, consider a recent Gallup Poll: "Americans are markedly cynical about the amount of waste in federal spending, more so than at several other times in recent history. On average, Americans believe 50 cents of every tax dollar that goes to the government in Washington, D.C., today are wasted. That's an increase from 46 cents per dollar in 2001."


When an American family is laden with debt it must be paid off to enable the family to regain their financial stability, and when an increase in income is not an option; the family eliminates current unnecessary expenditures even if it hurts such as cable, entertainment, dining out, dog grooming, salon services, clothing, etc. They choose one service and eliminate the duplicate service such as cable/satellite, landline/cell, theater/Blockbuster, etc.to cut expenses. And, they do not add any new expense obligations until they have paid down their current debt. They certainly don’t continue to charge up their credit cards insisting that all charges are necessary when they are not. They don’t refuse to realistically look at lifestyle spending cuts that would enable them to pay off their credit card balance to have stability again. They would never consider breaking into their child’s piggy bank or just handing a kindergarten class their bills to pay off when they begin working in 12-20 years.


Political rhetoric about spending being “frozen” that does not take into account examining and eliminating unnecessary existing programs and duplication waste is again really just political double-talk. This does not reflect a sincere or serious approach to making an authentic effort and difference in reducing the deficit. That is the sacrifice families make to pay their bills, and it must be the sacrifice politicians make to pay the nation’s bills. No more political spin about government tightening their belts without actually doing so. No more word games and double talk. Tax increases or new taxes as an answer to deficit reduction is not political belt tightening. Raising the debt ceiling isn’t either. It’s also time to acknowledge that no company or state is too big to fail. Private businesses and families file bankruptcy when they must as sad as this may be for them. (At least financially unsound businesses used to until the federal government began picking losers and winners in private enterprise.) It is not what they want to do or an easy path to take, but it is recognized by law as a last resort option and does provide an ability to restructure and start over on more solid fiscal ground.


I believe President Obama will have the same fate as Bush 41 did in his reelection bid; if like him, he does not live up to his tax campaign pledge. This commitment was not “agnostic” when he was interviewing for the job and should not be allowed to be so now. I believe if he imposes new taxes on even the higher wage earners, which are in reality often business owners; and the result is even higher and longer unemployment rates, his employment contract renewal is also highly unlikely.


With the taxpayers now wide awake and closely watching federal spending and tax policies, it will not matter whether these new taxes come in the form of higher income tax rates (or reworking tax brackets or eliminating some tax deductions), higher payroll taxes, new health insurance policy taxes, new gasoline or energy taxes, any type of new “fees”, or a federal sales or value-added tax. Voters are intelligent. They will recognize a new “tax” that will affect them whether directly in tax hikes, new fees, or deeper unemployment. It will not matter if it is creatively named to hide the fact that it is indeed a new tax obligation coming out of their wallet or purse. They will recognize any new taxes are necessary for the most part only because politicians refuse to manage and spend their money responsibly.


Should the Deficit Panel not recommend seriously eliminating waste and stopping further spending as the first steps to paying down the federal deficit, they will be viewed as simply working from a “justification of new taxes” predisposition. They can call new tax proposals “necessary” and “of a bi-partisan agreement” in their findings, but the taxpayers will not accept this political explanation or direction any more. Should a tax hike be recommended and any group of taxpayers is carved out of it, this will be seen for the pay back to special interest that it is too. And if the Pay/Go order simply becomes another vehicle to justify more taxes, this will be recognized as such by taxpayers.


Should the current path of increased spending and new taxes be the path politicians stay on, I believe the incumbent big spenders of both parties in Congress will look back in January, 2011 and realize Tiger Woods had a better 2010 than they did. Congress certainly will have more to explain and apologize for to the people that should have been considered in their decisions and actions. The reason for this careless behavior will be the same, but most politicians, unlike Mr. Woods, will not likely acknowledge they acted out of self interest and simply felt “entitled”.


I am skeptical, yet I am hopeful too that I am wrong in my skepticism. As Mrs. Woods expressed, the proof will not come in words, but in actions. The voters will be watching the actions. The politicians’ employers, the voters, will be watching their employees, the politicians, and judging them by their interview presentation and job performance match up as well as the overall health of the company, the federal government, under their management. I know America can pull through this hard time, and we must - even if it takes firing every politician employee we have and starting over. I'm hopeful our politician employees have heeded being put on performance probation and will make the necessary changes to have a good performance review in November. If not, like any responsible employer, we'll have to let you go for the good of the all.


For more information, please visit Brenda's TNNW Bio.





THIS ARTICLE--THIS AUTHOR--YOUR FEEDBACK

(1) If you would like to post a comment on this article for this author and for other readers to see, or if you would like to read the comments which have been posted by others, simply scroll down to the very bottom of this article (where it says "Posted by...") and click on the small text hyperlink that says "comments": a pop-up window will open which shows all of the comments posted by others. At the end of the other posts, there is a textbox for you to post your own comment.
(2) If you would prefer to contact the author in confidence, or to write at greater length regarding reciprocal links, special projects or professional issues, simply click on the button in this box labeled "CONTACT AUTHOR," and a pop-up form will magically appear for your use. It even allows you to include web and blog urls, downloads and attachments of all sorts.
(3) If you have not yet become a Member of THE NATIONAL NETWORKER COMPANIES (there is no charge), you should do that using the buttons below. Click on FREE NEWSLETTER button to start the process; then choose either the RSS Feed or the Daily Email delivery option.


Contact Author
Join TNNWC
Free Newsletters
Daily Email Extra
Total RSS Feed
BACKTALK! ™




*Follow TNNW on Twitter at http://twitter.com/TNNW_BUZZWORKS
*Published by TNNWC. All rights reserved.*Join our GICBC and receive Your TNNW Newsletter and THE BLUE TUESDAY REPORT! - Click HERE
The National Networker Companies




Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Monday, February 08, 2010

THE POINT: “Anyone can buy a truck.” No, Mr. President, they can’t.

The Point with Brenda Krueger Huffman


When I saw the television evening news clip of President Obama at the Boston rally urging voters to vote for Martha Coakley on January 17 with his statement “Anyone can buy a truck.”, my first reaction was “No, Mr. President, they can’t.” My first thoughts were: Not only can many not buy a truck right now, but many are having a hard time for the first time in their lives just paying for food and their house payment. Many can’t believe they are facing car repossession, a foreclosure, or even a personal bankruptcy due to a prolonged unemployment rate of officially 10% to a reality rate of 17%; or they can’t believe their business revenue has been down 30% or more for over a year.

Many have seen a doubling and tripling of their credit card interest rate and minimum payments (with little notice) levied by the same banks bailed out by taxpayers even though they have been good customers. And we watched Congress congratulate itself for “credit card reform” legislation enacted last year with enough time before implementation in the legislation for banks to drive up rates and increase payment amounts prior to enactment. We are all seeing a general economic job growth checkmate brought on by uncertain business costs (taxes, health care cost, energy costs) and a government viewed by wary investors as unfriendly to business and profit.

I felt this truck talking point, that was no doubt thought of as clever in the intent of mocking the populous appeal of Scott Brown by the speech writers that wrote it, actually revealed a not so clever absence of being relatable to one or more out of every five Americans struggling and wishing they were in a stable enough financial position to buy a truck. In fact, even those with jobs or a surviving small business would have a hard time buying a truck right now, because bank loans are hard to come by for those without a 700+ FICO score or for those who have any other debt. And given the credit card interest and payment acceleration games going on the last several months, many are now behind on payments or have given up which has ruined their once excellent credit score.

The majority of these same now financially unstable people were quite stable even one or two years ago and generally through most of their lives up until now. These people are not looking for a government bailout – they want an appropriate job again, an end to usury credit card interest rates, an end to unfair credit and insurance practices, and a government that sees uplifting the down economy as priority one. They don’t want deficient spending that will impact the next 50 years in stifling higher tax rates for all – including the middle class - no matter what is promised now. They want the American Dream again for themselves and for their children and grandchildren.

As we all know, the Republican Scott Brown won the Massachusetts senate seat by a 5 point margin – shocking in the bluest of blue Democrat rule states. Actually, I don’t think President Obama’s truck comment or his stump appearance in general lost the race for Coakley. I don’t even think it was completely the health care debate in Washington that changed the seat to the Republican. Simply put, the Independent voters were the deciding factor in both the Scott Brown win in 2010 and the Barack Obama win in 2008. Many voters, even those that are registered Republican or Democrat, are actually more Independent voters in reality. In other words, the more partisan the politics have become in Washington, the more voters have been turned off to being affiliated with either major party. Voters will vote for the candidates they believe hear them and will be a vote in Congress that reflects their voice.

I am currently a registered Republican, but my views are more in line with being an Independent voter. It would benefit politicians wanting to keep their jobs this November and in 2012 to get to know the positions of the true Independent voters again. For example, I am more fiscally responsible than any true liberal. I am more socially tolerant than any true conservative. I can agree to disagree with someone on my political beliefs without name calling or personally demonizing them or their political party. I don’t like it when our elected politicians can not. I don’t expect every citizen or every politician I vote for to agree with me 100% to consider them a good person. I feel I exemplify the Independent voter.

I think it was voters of all parties that were tired of those in Washington not understanding and caring that their political antics and statements are affecting the economy that put Scott Brown in the Senate. Job growth is affected by Washington’s actions when the confidence of investors and banks to provide capital for job growth creation is lowered. When confidence is lowered, business owners are hesitant to increase any cost, especially their largest operating cost, which is usually adding new employees and thus their salaries and benefits. Voters realize that those in Washington are not personally and financially being affected by a hard economy as many of them, the voters, are. Voters resent that government is the largest growth sector especially in Washington D.C. itself. This fact is not a plus for Americans who know all government costs are paid for by taxes, and that all spending by Congress is increasing the national deficit.

It’s obvious to a majority of voters the $787 billion economic stimulus bill has not helped the economy and therefore them personally. It has not created real jobs, stopped lay-offs or slowed corporate or small business closings. It has not made the everyday lives of most Americans more financially stable. They can not simply go and buy that truck as the majority in Washington can, and those in Washington sadly don’t even realize the average American can’t. Voters are frustrated with those in Washington playing games with the language and real results of the stimulus spending “actually” creating permanent and real job growth.

Politicians play word games and political spin games while the unemployed continue to look for real jobs that have not been created. Voters wonder where billions of stimulus dollars were actually spent and for what. Voters raise their eyebrows when they hear each $45,000 per year job cost 8 to 10 times $45,000 to create it. Voters shake their heads when they hear seasonal jobs, part-time jobs, existing jobs, and a salary raise in an existing job are used in the figures to calculate the sum of new jobs created.

Voters can’t continue to borrow more money when loaded with debt. They can’t vote themselves a debt ceiling increase or avoid the consequence of personal pain for being in debt. Voters have personal consequences for not being able to pay their current bills that affect them today. And these consequences may continue to personally affect them for years to come. They get fired if they don’t do a good job. They don’t do one thing and say another and then casually spin it away in front of media cameras. They don’t meet behind closed doors and then say how transparent they are. They don’t consider raising taxes in a struggling business climate as a solution to the rising debt problem. They don’t ignore excessive spending as a root cause of rising debt.

I am not a “right-wing pro-greed, pro-war, corporate loving Republican conservative” or a “left-wing big government is the answer to everything, redistribution, nanny-state Democrat liberal”. I am not an evil, greedy capitalist at all costs. I am not an “everyone deserves the same outcome no matter the output” non-capitalist either. Like most Independent voters, I am sick of extremes. I do not like labels being placed on people or political parties. I am an independent thinker, and I do not think “party” when voting. I have voted for both Democrats and Republicans throughout my life. I vote for the candidate I like and for who has the best ideas for solutions to our country’s challenges.

I respect our founding fathers and our constitution. I am proud of America. I understand America is not perfect. I acknowledge mistakes have been made at times. (I was furious with President Bush and his administration for the failure to act effectively in the wake of the Katrina disaster.) But I also know America is the first country to give aid globally, and Americans are the most generous people in the world. I know “freedom” is not just a word to Americans. Freedom and national security are the first elements in our ability to pursue happiness.

I know government has a given role in America. But, I also know government can be a deterrent to its citizens and their prosperity when it exceeds its given role. Like most Independent voters, I believe in the free-market, yet I don’t believe insurance companies should be allowed to set their own profit agendas that include the practices of denying policy availability to those that have ever been sick or cutting off benefits to those policy holders that do get sick. I believe there is a need for health insurance reform, but I don’t want the government to take over health care or to mandate its purchase. I believe tort reform and interstate competition should be a part of any health care reform discussion as well as honesty to the American taxpayers in the true cost of the proposed reform. I don’t want the cost to break the backs of businesses leading to more unemployment and to taxpayers leading to more personal pain consequences.

I have never been about color or ethnicity. I celebrate the diversity that makes America interesting and strong. I don’t believe any business or company is too big to fail. I don’t believe the government should pick winners and losers in our economy. I don’t believe the government should use the tax code or exemptions to favor one group of citizens over another. I believe in a helping hand safety net to help lift someone to more stable ground, but I don’t believe in the deliberate use of government programs and policies for a redistribution political philosophy. You don’t lift some up by pulling others down. You also don’t ignore those that need a helping hand. But, you don’t offer that helping hand by having government take over a free market segment – any free market segment.

Independent voters are tired of the arrogance of both the Republicans and Democrats in the House and Senate. They are tired of the political rhetoric regarding the struggling middle class without job creation being the number one priority of Congress. They are tired of discussions on health care, cap and trade, and card check even being considered before working to stabilize the economy and affect real job creation which can only be accomplished by free market understanding and expansion. It can not be affected by government expansion which is in reality only taxpayer cost and risk expansion. It can only be affected by creating an economic environment in which confidence in private growth reward outweighs private growth risk. I am not an economist or in the financial industry, but I do have some sense of what has worked historically and what has not. I see what has worked in other countries and what has not.

I feel I have what many regular voters have, which is common sense. What I do know is you stop spending when you have no more money. What I do know is you don’t openly insult, talk down to, or ignore those you represent and their concerns and wishes. I believe this is why Scott Brown won the senate seat. He tapped into what the independent and common sense voters know, and he gave them confidence that he would represent their concerns and wishes in Washington.

He was smart to present himself as his own man and not a party man. He connected well with the independent thinkers and voters no matter the party affiliation they had if any. He drove a truck and didn’t give up when he was 30 points down in the polls a month before the election. He spoke with his voters - not at them or down to them. He listened to voters. He asked for their vote, and he made the voters feel like he deserved it. He assured them he wanted to go to Washington to get things done for them, and not to become a part of any political machine at their peril.

I realized the “truck” Obama used in his comment was really a symbol to me - a symbol of all that is the “American Dream” to many. That’s what Americans want – to be financially stable and to have the opportunity to provide for their families with dignity and pride. They want to be able to afford health care for their family and not have to fight with an insurance company for continued coverage if they get sick. But, they don’t want health care reform laden with excessive government intervention and new taxes. They don’t want new taxes levied on everyone except for those that are politically favored because of campaign contributions and lobbyist. They don’t want any bill completely being written behind closed doors and being rubber stamped by party affiliation without being read by Congress. They want to work hard and to pay their fair share of taxes, but they do not want to be penalized by business-killing tax rates and demonizing rhetoric by their own government for being successful through hard work. The majority of successful American business owners and workers are honest and fair - they want this acknowledged. They want those that aren’t to be appropriately prosecuted and companies that aren’t to be allowed to fail.

Both the Republicans and Democrats in government at all levels need to relearn who they work for and reintroduce themselves to the needs and desires of their “people” as represented in “of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Members of Congress also need to reacquaint themselves with who they were meant to be in the American “people” equation.

It would be smart for members of Congress to hold town hall meetings with the goals of listening and learning. (Voters do not want town hall meetings to simply be another opportunity for political spin.) This would allow meaningful representation of their constituents and ensure that members of Congress understand voters are now more independent thinking than partisan. Voters are intelligent. They are more informed and engaged than ever. And, it wouldn’t hurt to give up the limousine and drive to those town hall meetings to meet the voters in a truck.


For more information, please visit Brenda's TNNW Bio.


COMMENT On This Article!

FREE NEWSLETTER

Published by THE NATIONAL NETWORKER Newsletter. All rights reserved. Subscribe Free For Your TNNW Newsletter and THE BLUE TUESDAY REPORT! - Click HERE.
The National Networker Companies
Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
Share/Save/Bookmark

Blog Archive

BNI News Feed

The Emergence of The Relationship Economy

The Emergence of The Relationship Economy
The Emergence of the Relationship Economy features TNNWC Founder, Adam J. Kovitz as a contributing author and contains some of his early work on The Laws of Relationship Capital. The book is available in hardcopy and e-book formats. With a forward written by Doc Searls (of Cluetrain Manifesto fame), it is considered a "must read" for anyone responsible for the strategic direction of their business. If you would like to purchase your own copy, please click the image above.

Knowledge@Wharton













Site Credits:


Featured in Alltop
ALLTOP Business
News Wire. HOT.
Cool Javascript codes for websites
KeepandShare.com(R)  Fabulous Free Calendars

Create FREE graphics at FlamingText.com