Letters to the Editor 10-11-2000
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
- Debate? What Debate? - Project Derailed
Debate? What Debate?
Editor, Times-Union:While experts debate who won the first presidential debates, the real losers were the American public, who didn't hear a genuine alternative like Libertarian presidential candidate Harry Browne.
The debate wasn't a choice, it was an echo. For 90 minutes, the words "liberty" or "freedom" weren't mentioned a single time.
Instead, you had one candidate, Republican George W. Bush, who wants to make government much bigger, and you had another candidate, Democrat Al Gore, who wants to make government much, much bigger.
Where was the candidate who could forcefully argue that government is already too big, that taxes are too high, that Social Security needs to be completely replaced by private retirement accounts, that government intervenes too much in medical decisions and that schools can only be truly reformed by the power of the free market?
That candidate would have been Harry Browne, but he was locked out of this non-debate so Bush and Gore could engage in a pro-government love fest.
Not once did Bush or Gore use the words "liberty" or "freedom," since those concepts are irrelevant to making the federal government bigger, more expensive and more intrusive.
Neither Bush nor Gore made the case that the federal government is already doing too much, and doing it badly. Neither made a principled case for limited government, individual liberty and personal responsibility.
Take the debate over tax cuts.
Bush wants a tax cut of $1.3 trillion over 10 years, which, as he noted, would amount to 5 percent of the $25 trillion the federal government expects to collect in revenue over the next decade. Gore, by contrast, wants to dole out a tax cut of $500 billion. That amounts to 2 percent of the federal government's revenue over 10 years.
There you have it. Gore wants the government to get 98 percent of its expected revenue; Bush wants the government to pocket 95 percent of its expected revenue. That isn't a debate; that's a profound agreement, with some quibbling over a few minor details. Neither one admits that Social Security still faces a $10 trillion unfunded liability, and that massive tax increases are inevitable. And neither wants to give Americans the freedom to keep their own money, and save for their own retirements with private accounts that politicians can't touch.
The fact that Gore and Bush fundamentally agree about the size and cost of the federal government effectively torpedoed any chance that the first presidential debate would be, a debate.
If you want a real debate, then Libertarian Harry Browne should be invited to participate. Only Harry Browne is guaranteed to mention the word "liberty." Only Harry Browne will champion the proper, limited role of government. And only Harry Browne will stand up for individual Americans, and against the big-government visions of Al Gore and George W. Bush. Now that would be a debate worth seeing.
Daniel Stevens
Warsaw
via e-mail
Project Derailed
Editor, Times-Union:Last fall, the DNR was considering a project that would raise the water level of a local Clay Township lake significantly, causing flooding and slow farm field drainage. When local residents learned of this project, several hundred objected and approximately 125 people signed and presented a remonstrance petition to the DNR for a hearing to speak out against the project.
On behalf of the farm families that would have their lives and livelihoods affected and all others who opposed the project, let me express sincere gratitude to Representative Bill Ruppel, who courageously reviewed the proposal and took a firm stand in support of the people. Representative Ruppel did not just sit on the sidelines or make political excuses as to why he could not help us. We need more people in political service like Bill Ruppel, who care more about the "service" to people and less about the personal "political" implications.
Also, a grateful "thank you" to Representative David Wolkins, without whom we would have unknowingly missed the impending deadline to present our remonstrance and public hearing petition.
Robert Tess
Warsaw
[[In-content Ad]]
- Debate? What Debate? - Project Derailed
Debate? What Debate?
Editor, Times-Union:While experts debate who won the first presidential debates, the real losers were the American public, who didn't hear a genuine alternative like Libertarian presidential candidate Harry Browne.
The debate wasn't a choice, it was an echo. For 90 minutes, the words "liberty" or "freedom" weren't mentioned a single time.
Instead, you had one candidate, Republican George W. Bush, who wants to make government much bigger, and you had another candidate, Democrat Al Gore, who wants to make government much, much bigger.
Where was the candidate who could forcefully argue that government is already too big, that taxes are too high, that Social Security needs to be completely replaced by private retirement accounts, that government intervenes too much in medical decisions and that schools can only be truly reformed by the power of the free market?
That candidate would have been Harry Browne, but he was locked out of this non-debate so Bush and Gore could engage in a pro-government love fest.
Not once did Bush or Gore use the words "liberty" or "freedom," since those concepts are irrelevant to making the federal government bigger, more expensive and more intrusive.
Neither Bush nor Gore made the case that the federal government is already doing too much, and doing it badly. Neither made a principled case for limited government, individual liberty and personal responsibility.
Take the debate over tax cuts.
Bush wants a tax cut of $1.3 trillion over 10 years, which, as he noted, would amount to 5 percent of the $25 trillion the federal government expects to collect in revenue over the next decade. Gore, by contrast, wants to dole out a tax cut of $500 billion. That amounts to 2 percent of the federal government's revenue over 10 years.
There you have it. Gore wants the government to get 98 percent of its expected revenue; Bush wants the government to pocket 95 percent of its expected revenue. That isn't a debate; that's a profound agreement, with some quibbling over a few minor details. Neither one admits that Social Security still faces a $10 trillion unfunded liability, and that massive tax increases are inevitable. And neither wants to give Americans the freedom to keep their own money, and save for their own retirements with private accounts that politicians can't touch.
The fact that Gore and Bush fundamentally agree about the size and cost of the federal government effectively torpedoed any chance that the first presidential debate would be, a debate.
If you want a real debate, then Libertarian Harry Browne should be invited to participate. Only Harry Browne is guaranteed to mention the word "liberty." Only Harry Browne will champion the proper, limited role of government. And only Harry Browne will stand up for individual Americans, and against the big-government visions of Al Gore and George W. Bush. Now that would be a debate worth seeing.
Daniel Stevens
Warsaw
via e-mail
Project Derailed
Editor, Times-Union:Last fall, the DNR was considering a project that would raise the water level of a local Clay Township lake significantly, causing flooding and slow farm field drainage. When local residents learned of this project, several hundred objected and approximately 125 people signed and presented a remonstrance petition to the DNR for a hearing to speak out against the project.
On behalf of the farm families that would have their lives and livelihoods affected and all others who opposed the project, let me express sincere gratitude to Representative Bill Ruppel, who courageously reviewed the proposal and took a firm stand in support of the people. Representative Ruppel did not just sit on the sidelines or make political excuses as to why he could not help us. We need more people in political service like Bill Ruppel, who care more about the "service" to people and less about the personal "political" implications.
Also, a grateful "thank you" to Representative David Wolkins, without whom we would have unknowingly missed the impending deadline to present our remonstrance and public hearing petition.
Robert Tess
Warsaw
[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092