Category Archives: politics

Joe Rooney vs. 1% Allyson

Posted on by

Joe Rooney – PA 13th Congressional District

It’s almost over, really it is!  And it’s taking everything I have to write just one more Election 2012 post.  Not sure I can make to the end, but the importance of this election mandates not only a change in The White House.  This election calls for wholesale changes at the Congressional and Senate levels as well!

I have given you my reasonings for both Mitt Romney and Tom Smith for the Pennsylvania Senate race against Bob “Senator Zero” Casey.  Now let’s take a look at the race in the Pennsylvania 13th Congressional District.

I met Joe Rooney in February of this year as he made the rounds of the GOP establishment trying to drum up support for his primary candidacy.  I was immediately impressed by Joe’s honest, straight-at-you demeanor and his grasp of the important issues facing us.  My reaction to his visit and remarks were that he was head-and-shoulders over the entire field that vied for the same primary endorsement in 2010.  There were 5 …. or 6 candidates back then; and none of them seemed strong enough to shine their lights through a brown bag, let alone in competition with Allyson Schwartz.  (Joe Rooney for Congress website)

But all that changed once Joe began laying out his background, experiences (including service to this Country as a Marine pilot flying F-4 Phantoms and F/A-18 Hornets, the mainstay of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps air fleets), and goals for Congressional service and the interests of PA 13th constituencies.  Like many well-rounded military officers, Joe Rooney had his political game wound tightly and focused.  He has confidence in his understanding of what the Country needs to be successful domestically, internationally, and Economically.

Joe Rooney is an American Optimist.

 “The American economy can be the engine that drives the rest of the world out of the economic hole that currently exists.”   –  Joe Rooney

His message resonates with Everyone, whether you are hard-working mother or father trying to get your take-home pay to at least wave at your Budget, if not actually try to meet it!  It resonates with retirees on fixed incomes, with students who will be out looking for Jobs in the years to come.  Joe’s message will especially resonate with those who have been victimized by an Economy mired in 8% Unemployment, 12.3 million people out of Jobs, mounting debt both National (up from $10 trillion to $16 trillion during the Obama/Schwartz years) and personal.

One thing about Joe Rooney really impressed me.  He was ready to take on all comers to earn the right to face Allyson Schwartz in this crucial election.

Allyson Schwartz swings a big stick when it comes to Democratic competition

Allyson Schwartz of the 1% had an entirely different approach to entertaining an opposing voice in the Democrat primaries.  She very coldly forced one Occupy Wall Street candidate, Nate Kleinman out of the primary race through dirty tricks (making a staff-less Kleinman sit with a team of Schwartz operatives to verify each individual nominating petition) and through financial intimidation (filing lawsuits intended to make Kleinman responsible for the legal costs incurred by the Schwartz campaign).

Not exactly the kind of free and open Democracy we are used to, eh?  Why, it was downright Nixonian!  Yes, Richard Millhouse would be very, very proud!

But that’s what happens when The Queen rules the roost.

Schwartz has benefitted mightily from a wide array of political benefactors in the form of large dollar corporate donors and Political Action Committees.

Schwartz’s funding for the 2011-12 election cycle came primarily from large individual contributors (57%) and Political Action Committees (38%), only 3% came from small individual contributors.  Her biggest corporate and association sponsors include Comcast Corp, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and the American Association of  Orthopaedic Surgeons.  Her top industry support comes from lawyers, health professionals, pharmaceutical and insurance companies.

Not exactly residents of the 99% …

Now no one really knows how the headline political confrontation will end up Tuesday – or whenever the last Electoral College votes get cast; but certainly it’s easy to see which candidate in the PA’s 13th Congressional District is more like you and me!

It’s Joe Rooney for Congress!

Has anyone seen Bob Casey?!?

Posted on by

The only place to find Senator Bob Casey

In Pennsylvania, we’re deeply concerned.  It seems that one of our U.S. Senators is MISSING!!

At first, no one was very concerned.  After all, Senator Bob Casey wasn’t exactly a Public Presence anywhere in Washington, D.C. – let alone in Pennsylvania – for almost the entire SIX YEARS that he’s been Pennsylvania’s lesser light in U.S. Senate.

Go ahead and take a minute … Think back as far as you can over the past six years and ask yourself, how many times you have heard of Bob Casey accomplishing anything for Pennsylvania or anything for the country?  How many times have you heard Senator Zero speak out to you – as Pennsylvanians or as Americans – on the important issues of the day?  What has he DONE during his SIX YEARS in the U.S. Senate?

For comparison look to the public profile of Pennsylvania’s other U.S. Senator, Pat Toomey.  If you pay attention, you will see him cable and TV news outlets, advocating for those programs and actions he believes would improve the country. Whether you agree or disagree with Toomey is immaterial; he is out there putting his reputation and political future on the line!

Senator Zero – The REAL Bob Casey

Bob Casey?  His biggest contribution as a U.S. Senator has been as a Silent Supporter of President Obama’s policies and programs, including Obamacare, the Economy with its 12.3 million people out of work, the National Debt which is up from $10 Trillion to $16 Trillion, and the decisions to “distance” the U.S. from Israel.

Then ask yourself, Where has Senator Casey been on the important social issues of the day?  Issues like women’s choice or gay marriage??  As a devout Catholic, Bob Casey believes Rowe v. Wade should be overturned and is opposed to gay marriage.  Yet a review of Bob Casey’s website shows NOTHING on EITHER subject.

You want to know why you won’t find them?  You won’t find them because Bob Casey knows many Democrats, those who will vote this Tuesday for President Obama, would not normally vote for an anti-Choice, anti-gay marriage candidate!

Bob Casey would rather stay SILENT than take a public stand that would potentially damage his Political Prospects!

.

Tom Smith … Facing the Issues. Bob Casey? Not so much …

Tom Smith is a self-made man, who mortgaged everything he had to create Jobs and Opportunity in Pennsylvania.  He managed several successful Businesses through tough economies in highly regulated industries.

As a fiscal conservative, he wants to simplify the tax code and to reign in out-of-control Federal spending.  As a successful creator of energy jobs in Pennsylvania, Mr. Smith is in favor of developing American energy opportunities to provide jobs for Americans.

Visit the Tom Smith for Senate website to learn more or to make a donation to the American Red Cross for those affected by Hurricane Sandy.  You can also check out Tom Smith’s DETAILED plans for the Country on his issues website.

You may not agree with Tom Smith on every issue; but at least he’s not shy about telling you where he stands!

Then, when you leave the Smith website, take a wander over to Bob Casey’s website for the three-sentence blurbs he provides on the important issues in this country.

Just don’t expect anything on Women’s Rights or LGBT issues.  They aren’t there, and for good reason.

Senator Zero – The REAL Bob Casey

Now ask yourself, is this the kind of Senator Pennsylvania needs?

My case for Mitt Romney

Posted on by

As the most anticipated Election Day in years approaches, it’s time to make my last pitch for Mitt Romney in what has been a loooooong, LOUD, and contentious process.  At least fellow Pennsylvanians – on both sides of The Great Divide – can give thanks for one small advantage; we don’t live in Ohio, where the Political Saturation Level is reaching the Please-Just-End-This-Madness stage.

I hold no illusions that this will change any minds, let alone sway the end result one way or the other.  But if it helps anyone to firm up their position in support of Change in The Oval Office, it will be well worth the effort.

My approach will mirror that which I suspect most voters will consider when it comes time to decide which man will lead the country over the next four years:

  • Are We better off today than We were four years ago?
  • Has the President performed as well as We expected, and prioritized as he should have since taking office in January 2009?
  • Does Mitt Romney offer Us the Vision and Leadership that would make a significant improvement in Our lives?

Déjà vu all over again … Are You better off today than you were in 2009?

Jimmy “Malaise in a Cardigan” Carter

Who has been confident in what the Economy has had to offer in the past four years?  Yes, President Obama was dealt a crappy economy when he came into office, as was Jimmy Carter, as was Ronald Reagan.  And yes, that comparison was deliberate!  It’s been four years – almost; and what have we seen?  Forty-three months of unemployment over 8%, with the real unemployment rate – which includes those who have lost all Confidence in finding employment – estimated to be as high as 11%!  (The recent down-tick in unemployment from 8.1% to 7.8% was most likely the result of seasonal holiday, part-time job offerings.)

Priorities has been President Obama’s problem when it comes to improving the Economic picture.   At a time when bailouts were needed to keep banks from failing and automakers from going belly up, when the Democrats held an eight-month stranglehold on Legislative decision-making, the focus of the Obama Administration was not on the Economy.  Instead their focus was on an age-old Liberal bugaboo, finding a way to steer the American system – including its economic engine – towards Socialized Medicine.  (That’s not to claim that this is what the Affordable Care Act accomplishes at this point.  The ACA is simply the first step in the process.  A simple Google search including the words “Obama socialized medicine” will give you plenty of information that proves the point.)

All their political capital was expended in that single decision to make Obamacare the over-riding priority of those heady days of Democrat dominance over Washington, D.C.!  The Economy?  Not so much …

So what it that instills Confidence in Mitt Romney?  SUCCESS!

Confidence is the most powerful word one can use when describing the psyche of a successful Economy.  Confidence breeds investment.  Confidence encourages Business – both Big and Small – to plan bigger, to expand, and to hire more workers in the expectation of Opportunity and Success.  Confidence encourages those, who have stopped looking for work, to get back out into the job market.  Confidence drives the Economy.

For all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over Mitt Romney’s taxes, his wealth, his reign at Bain Capital, there is a very large, very common thread … He was Successful!  He was successful at Bain Capital where 80% of the companies Bain worked with increased revenues, and investors that included pension plans, college funds, and charitable organizations realized positive returns on their investments.  Check out the stories of Bain Capital and Staples or The Sports Authority or Bright Horizons (a leader in employer-provided child-care) or Physio Control (developer/manufacturer of critical care medical devices).  The list goes on and on and on …

Mitt Romney saved the 2002 Olympics

Romney was Successful when he left Bain in 1999 to save a debt-ridden, scandal scarred 2002 Olympics.  He was Successful when he was elected Governor of Massachusetts’ and worked across  the aisle to fix the State’s budget shortfall and continue Massachusetts inroads to improving Education.  Ask yourself the question, what has President Obama ever turned around that didn’t require a massive infusion of TAXPAYER money?

So you have to wonder why is Mitt Romney and his Success such a target of the Obama campaign?  Wealth is not what preys on the Middle Class.  If Confidence drives the Economy, investment – which comes from excess wealth – feeds the Economic engine.

Economic stagnation is what kills all classes of society.  It kills jobs; kills nest eggs; kills buying power; and it kills prospects of greater opportunity for EVERYONE!  Wealth is what feeds the country’s Economic Engine.  Wealth creates investment, expansion, spending and – most importantly right now – JOBS!  When the Economy is cooking properly, ALL CLASSES of society benefit!

That is the definition of a Confident Economy!

The Lion of Ozbama

Political Courage is a short commodity.  It requires Leadership in the face of difficult decisions.  It requires the Vision to tackle National priorities when Populist ideals are competing for attention.  It requires the Will to stand tall on the Beliefs you hold, and damn the political consequences.  Political Courage is something that has been lacking in the Obama White House.

Consider the following:

  • When the Economy needed Action and Leadership to jumpstart growth; to expand Opportunities; to get people back to work President Obama took to the backseat, as House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid drove a legislative bulldozer towards a single-payer healthcare that did NOTHING to reign in the costs of medical care.  Actions taken to sustain long-term Economic Growth: NONE
  • When it came to implementation of the Affordable Care Act, President Obama ensured that it’s most dramatic and costly provisions would not take effect until AFTER the 2012 election.  They will not go into effect until 2014!  Actions taken to promote sustained growth in Employment: NONE
  • In an era that almost BEGS for the deficit-slashing approach of former President Bill Clinton, the U.S. of A. must absorb the “gift” of deficits that increased from $10 trillion to $16 trillion; 13 million disadvantaged added to the food stamps rolls; and little in Hope that the credit card spending will Change!
  • During a National Debate on the question of Gay Marriage, everyone KNEW where President Obama would eventually come down on the subject.  But as weeks turned into months and acrimony built, nothing was heard from The White House.  Why?  Because President Obama knew his position – during an election year – would cause him problems with those of his own Political Base with devout religious beliefs.  If it hadn’t been for VP Joe “Shoot from the Hip” Biden, President Obama would still be in the proverbial closet!
  • When President Obama did “come out of the closet”, it was not until the night before a fund-raiser in Hollywood – a region full of campaign cash and most decisively in favor of expanding gay rights – on the tennis courts of actor George Clooney!  And that’s when the Lion finally found “courage”!!
  • LATE BREAKING NEWS:  Des Moines Register blasts President Obama for not allowing his presentation – in an attempt to win their Editorial Board’s endorsement – from being released publicly to the voters of Iowa. an extremely close swing state!  If President Obama only had Courage in his convictions!

As you can tell, I’m not a big fan of President Obama; and certainly I believe his priorities have not been where they should be, especially when it comes to the Economy!

And what does Mitt Romney offer us?

Throughout the debate cycle, Mitt Romney has effectively cast off every wild dispersion the Democrats have attempted to heap on him.  He proved he has the temperament and Vision to be a successful President.  He has provided his framework for digging the Economy out its hole; for re-energizing the Job Market; and for reducing the choking debt that will eventually kill the U.S. Economy if not turned around.

The Right Man for right now!

Romney’s plan for tax cuts across all but the highest tax brackets, combined with reductions in tax deductions is a sound solution that involves little pain.  By reducing taxes, the Economy will be reinvigorated with Confidence that will encourage Investment and expansion.  A more robust Economy will generate additional business, more jobs and a greater demand for manufactured goods and construction materials.  This higher level of business activity begets greater tax revenue across a much broader segment of the Market, even as tax rates are lowered!  The result will be an off-set of those tax reductions, lower debt aided by cuts to expenses, and fewer claims for welfare subsistence as the result of increased employment levels.

It’s a simple, logical approach that will put people back to work while increasing tax revenues that can be used to pay down the deficits.

This election will be about the Economy.  It must be because our continually escalating debt has become the BIGGEST threat to our National Security.  Between being over-leveraged in debt to the Chinese and the enormous stress the costs of servicing that debt (i.e. interest paid), the debt threatens to choke our country’s ability to provide essential social services; maintain a fully equipped, technologically advanced military; and protect the future of our children.

Regardless of what you believe about how we got into this Economic morass, you must recognize the fact that not only has the last four years yielded little – if any – progress, President Obama’s policies and misplaced priorities have only worsened the situation.

Now is the time to make a change and put a man in charge who KNOWS how to reverse a desperate situation before it’s too late!

Vote for a return to Prosperity!  Vote for Mitt Romney!

Romney clearly the winner in Round 1!

Posted on by

Wow … Was I impressed!

I do not normally watch presidential debates.  I find them full of platitudes and generalizations.  And this was true of tonight’s debate at times. But I watched anyway, knowing this election is an important one.  (There’s also that thing that if you’re going to blog about politics, you ought to pay attention.  So watch I did.)

Frankly, I thought by the end of the debate, the President looked tired and harried … almost disheveled.  He was strongest early in the debate; but I thought Mitt Romney constantly out-pointed The President on the Economic issues.  (Something I have been convinced he would do if given the chance.)

Mitt Romney looked more energetic, animated, and decisive.  He definitely proved that he has the presence and weight – personality wise – to be presidential.  

Romney was clear on his message; rejected the continued attempt at misdirection by the President; and demonstrated that he is extremely comfortable speaking on the Economy.  He was clear in his explanations of his framework for getting the country out of its Economic Malaise; reducing the deficit; and improving healthcare.

All-in-all Mitt Romney decisively took Round 1 of the Presidential Debates!!  He surprised me with the strength of his performance and his grasp of the solutions we need.  

Well done, Mitt!!

Half correct on 47% still tells the ugly truth

Posted on by

It’s imperative that write something today, just to break the lazy hangover I have enjoyed all week following the frantic, emotional stress of Mike Jr.’s wedding last week.  I promise to follow-up with details and pictures of the great time we had; but that would require sorting through 8000 photos (my estimate) to pick those that would best tell the story of our Lost Weekend in Williamsport.  (Trust me.  That title connotes a very favorable experience within the crazy motions and emotions of a son’s (or daughter’s) wedding.  More on that later … )

I could write about my recent lawn treatment.  But that would require an uptick in my Lawn Geek Level that I’m not willing to invest in this Sunday morning.

And so I’ll turn to more recent news, and one of my favorite pastimes … Cranky Political Observations.

First, let’s look at Mitt Romney and some of the absolutely ridiculous claims President Obama‘s campaign and supporters continue to make when it comes to Romney’s wealth and tax history.  The important thing to keep in mind is every minute spent defending Romney against such nonsenseical attacks is time diverted from hammering away at the sorry state of The Obama Economy.

Afterall, with almost four years of President Obama’s stewardship, the Economy – or lack thereof – is rightfully his to won!  (You only get to blame your predecessor for so long, and certainly not through a full term in The Oval Office when – as President – you have shown no Leadership whatsoever on Issues of Economic Recovery.)

Now Mitt admittedly caused himself a self-inflicted wound with his meanderings on the “47% of Americans who do not pay taxes”.  Not paying taxes does not automatically make you a slouch.  There are plenty of people, rightfully classified as disabled, aging veterans, etc. who fall into that very broad 47% category.  Mitt might have bitten off more than he could chew; but let’s be honest, he was at least 53% correct about that 47%.

Regardless of the dangers associated with judging-by-percentages into which Romney stumbled, we ALL KNOW what he meant.  Within that group is a hardcore class of people who have not the slightest interest or desire to break their dependence on the REDISTRIBUTION of other people’s hard work and income!  And within that sub-class is another that not only shows little-to-no interest in self-sufficiency, they REVEL in their status as Economic Sponges!

Even Bill Clinton recognized the need to fix this when he joined with Congressional Republicans to pass the Welfare Reform Act of 1996.  So this is not news to even the most hardened of Liberals.

Sunday’s Philadelphia Inquirer attempts to make the claim that REDISTRIBUTION of income is not a “bad word”.  They try to soft sell this idea by stating that REDISTRIBUTION is used for small business loans, Pell Grants for college education, veterans’ benefits, etc.  Of course they also throw in food stamps and welfare, but almost as an afterthought.

Intelligent, reality-educated people can distinguish between good uses for REDISTRIBUTED INCOME and other programs that simply rely on the toils and work ethic of the majority of Americans to fund the never-ending cycle of handouts to perpetual non-contributors.  And that’s what MOST objectors to the Welfare Mentality think of when they hear INCOME REDISTRIBUTION … not Pell Grants, small business loans and taking care of aging veterans.

Liberals – and Obama supporters – KNOW this; but it suits their intentions in this 2012 election year to make it about the whole of benefits that come from INCOME REDISTRIBUTION, not the perfectly acceptable Social Contract that expects those who work at good jobs to provide TEMPORARY assistance to those who need a hand up in tough times or even those with legitimate long-term disabilities and maladies that prevent even part-time employment.

Do not allow them to suggest that there is no difference between Good Income Redistribution and the ugly realities of the Welfare State of Mind!

As for Mitt’s tax records, one observation is enough to put that entire subject into perspective.  If President Obama’s proxies, like the half-baked Liar from Arizona – Harry Reid, are so desperate as to criticize Romney for tax rates and wealth shelters that were perfectly acceptable for Al Gore (2000) and John “Heinz 57” Kerry (2004), then you must recognize them for what those attacks are … Deperate attempts to distract you, me, and all voters from the Unemployed Economy.

So the more we spend talking about this, the less time we have to address what the REAL PROBLEM is in 2012, the stagnant National Economy and the broken stewardship of a Leadership-challenged President!  Those of us longing for REAL Economic Leadership need to ignore these straw men and do what we can to refocus on the horrible state of President Obama’s own Economic Malaise!

.

Tom Smith for U.S. Senate

Will Pennsylvania U.S. Senate candidate Tom Smith ever get the chance to smoke out do-nothing U.S. Senator Bob Casey in his race to challenge a man who has nothing on his resume’ other than a famous father?

You can’t find anything on Bob Casey’s re-election campaign without a brace of media savvy internet bloodhounds.  Casey refuses to come out into the open, like any politician with little track record, and a recognizable name.  (How many voters still think they are voting for his father?)  Casey continues to hide behind Barack Obama, even while doing anything to avoid endorsing him too much, too often.

He and Congressional REP Allyson Schwartz (See Joe Rooney) are probably sharing the same remote Pocono cabin; waiting for election day to come so they can sneak into their neighborhood polling location and hope for the best … meaning of course, voters who don’t bother looking at how their support of a poor Presidential leader has contributed to the Economic Stagnation we still face after four years of Democrat control over the U.S. Government.

For that reason alone, Bob Casey, Jr. would gladly spend this election cycle hiding under his bed!  Add to that his opposition to the Liberal Litmus that is Abortion, his obvious implied stance against Gay Marriage,  (Go ahead and try to find any reference to Gay Marriage on his official campaign or Senate websites!) and you have a Liberal Democrat’s biggest nightmare … Supporting a family values candidate that disdains everything a Good Liberal loves all because he has a “D” connected to his father’s name!

The REAL Bob Casey

Fortunately for Pennsylvania Liberals, Casey’s middle name is not “Fracking”!

Tom Smith stands for Ending Out-of-Control Federal Spending, Reducing Job-Killing Regulations, Promoting American Energy to Provide American Jobs, Simplified Tax Codes, and reasonable solutions to Healthcare and the long-term viability of Social Security and Medicare.  These are the issues of the day that need discussing.  But Bob Casey will not be found this election season discussing anything you care about in the presence of Tom Smith, and that’s a shame for all Pennsylvania voters!

.

Finally, if you get the chance, read Trudy Rubin’s column on The Real Muslim Movie Outrage in the Philadelphia Inquirer’s Opinion page this Sunday.  I rarely agree with Ms. Rubin’s view on domestic politics, but her concise, honest review of the radical Islamic elements working to inflate Muslim tensions is enlightening.

A 1% President?

Posted on by

(Enjoy this re-post both timely and appropriate for this week of  the Democratic National Committee convention in Charlotte, NC. Previously posted in January 2012.)

Democratic Party officials announced recently that President Obama will accept his party’s nomination on the last night of their national convention at Bank of America Stadium.

It’s an odd choice, given the recent spate of Occupy Wall Street events originating from the most liberal wings of the Democratic Party.  The visuals will not be very comforting to those who believe that the richest 1% of the country set the rules that elevates, protects and perpetuates their wealth, while at the same time oppresses the remaining 99%.

The re-election imagery for OWS’s Presumptive Hero could be a Recipe for Disaster …

  • Standing in front of a Bank of America backdrop, which BofA paid $100 million just for 20 years worth of naming rights …
  • In the Home of the Carolina Panthers and their 1% athletes …
  • Who are owned by Jerry Richardson, former CEO of Flagstar, whose net worth is estimated at $500 million …
  • In front of Democrat contributors willing to pay up to $1.5 million for the full-blown Premiere Events Package.
  • Serve over 8.5% Unemployment and the “disappearing middle class”

Hmmmmm …

Well, the good news is that it will be a heck of a lot warmer for the good Occupy Wall Street people in Charlotte in early September than it was on Wall Street this past November.  That’s assuming of course that they even bother to show up to drag this particular demographic of the 1% out into the glaring media light.

I’m not holding my breath … 

If you too want the Superbox Treatment”, consider your options:

Suzi Emmerling, a spokeswoman for the Charlotte Host Committee, confirmed a Bloomberg report that those deals — presented to Washington lobbyists last month — include an escalating menu of packages starting with the $1 million “presidential” level. Those who buy in will receive a “premier uptown hotel room,” a “platinum events package and “concierge services.” Another $500,000 “Gold Rush” level includes hotel room, credentials and a “premiere events package.”

Myself?  I’ll be home watching the Democratic National Convention on TV with my 99% compadres, all the while marveling at how the Democratic 1% get to live it so large!

Disenfranchised by Politics or Apathy?

Posted on by
Judge Robert Simpson

Judge Robert Simpson

Wednesday’s decision by Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson to uphold the new Pennsylvania voter ID law was neither surprising nor was it the final word on the mater.  Simpson’s decision is just the first step in a judicial review process that will definitely end up in Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court and perhaps even wind its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

To make matters worse for those who oppose the law, Judge Simpson laid out a detailed, well-reasoned 70-page opinion supporting the Pennsylvania legislature’s power to regulate elections in this way, and refused to issue an injunction that would hold off implementation of the law’s requirements until the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania hears the inevitable appeal.  Despite moving testimony from individuals who claimed unnecessary burdens to exercising their right to vote, Simpson found that the law applies equally to all Pennsylvanians in a politically neutral, non-discriminatory manner.

As a result, the law will be viewed as constitutional in Pennsylvania until such time as adequate proof can be mustered to support claims of discriminatory restriction.  This is a daunting task for the critics.  And even considering the normal route to challenge such laws in federal court as an affront to the Voting Rights Act, the law’s opponents face the reality that a similar law – applied by Indiana in 2008 – was found constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Simpson’s ruling appears to remove the specter that the law’s requirements are too difficult to meet in the 5 months between its March 2012 passage and the November election.  Opposition to the law attempted to feed just such a perception through tales of elderly and poor working class voters at the mercy of inconsistent documentation requirements and inadequately trained clerks in far off, hard to reach PENNDOT offices.  

Victory on appeal is going to be a tough nut to crack now that Judge Simpson has laid out a solid footing for its constitutionality.  

By now you have heard all the arguments; listened to the vitriol from those on both sides of the issue; gotten into a few heated discussions; and perhaps, came to decide for yourself whether Pennsylvania’s new voter ID law is a legitimate attempt to further secure our vote or a blatant attempt by one political party to gain an election year advantage over their opponents. 

As I am often motivated to do in such cases where most of the obvious arguments have already been made, I suggest we leave legal wranglings to the judges, the lawyers, and the politicians; and instead, let’s take a look at how the law has affected voter and political behavior.

Philadelphia Councilman Bill Green

Already we have numerous election officials, exclusively Democrats, who now say they will not enforce the legally passed, Court-affirmed election law.  From poll watchers to at least one Judge of Elections we hear from those who have decided to take interpretation of the law into their own hands and will not enforce the law.  In Philadelphia, City Councilman Bill Green tweeted, “Let them come and enforce it!  If WE believe it violates the Constitution, we have the RIGHT to keep our OATH.”  (Emphasis added.)  

And suddenly all those suspicions about urban politicians ginning up election numbers based on their own, personal interpretation of what is “constitutional” and lawful do not seem all that far-fetched.

Personally, I have been muttering for weeks over the inconsistent coverage the voter ID issue has received in local media.  On television news, you rarely hear a word about the new law.  Yet newspapers and on-line media outlets – like our local Patch network – have been a constant resource for discussions of the law’s requirements, the difficulties experienced in its execution, and in a lot of cases reader-fueled demagoguery over the motivations of both politicians and activists.  All good stuff when it meshes with the goal promoting awareness of the new law and its requirements far in advance of Election Day. 

On the other hand, my normal paper ‘n ink habit – The Philadelphia Inquirer – killed many a tree on some days running multiple articles from different perspectives, overwhelmingly in opposition to the voter ID law.  That anyone would be surprised by that would be … well … surprising.  And yet, even their attempts to portray the law as an onerous affront to voting rights provided an interesting peek at the REAL problem that should be scaring the bejesus out of Pennsylvania’s Democrats.

In a July 12 article, Karen Heller of The Philadelphia Inquirer reported that only 2744 Pennsylvanians had obtained new voter photo identification.  

That’s only 0.28% (based on the most draconian predictions of 1 million potentially disenfranchised voters) have pursued the documentation and ID requirements to a successful conclusion.  This phenomena cannot be attributed to any unreasonable level of documentation requirements, or even those claims that PENNDOT’s ID-issuing system is not up to the task.

0.28% … My own attempts to downplay the 1 million voter claim would bump that all the way up to 0.6%!

There is no doubt on my part that the claims of 1 million affected voters was way overstated.  Yet by even the most conservative estimates,  the response in active attempts to obtain the necessary ID goes beyond the definition of “anemic”.  Even if one takes a leap of faith that new voter IDs issued before November grows by several orders of magnitude, the end result would fall woefully short of what anyone could define as an honest attempt on the part of the potentially disenfranchised to meet the law’s requirements.  

0.28 % … It suggests rather loudly that not enough people care.  That to them the effort isn’t worth it.  What this says about the Pennsylvania electorate goes so much deeper than nefarious plots to influence the outcome of an election or the prospect of hundreds of illegal voters flooding inner city polling places.  It’s an admission that many voters simply don’t care; don’t pay attention; and perhaps worse of all, don’t want to make any effort to comply with a simple authentication requirement.

0.28% = Not even trying …

Eat mor kow!

Posted on by

“Eat mor Kow!”

That would have been the best reaction to the strong position against gay marriage struck by Dan Cathy, CEO of the Chick-Fil-A franchise system.  If you disagree, you simply take your appetite – and your money – somewhere else.

Cathy’s stated position was a lightening rod for LGBT proponents for recognition of gay unions.  That he held these positions was no surprise to anyone who knows even the least of Chick-Fil-A’s corporate development and very public record.  That he dared express those views was treated as if he single-handedly threatened the civil rights of every non-hetero American.

Usually, I don’t allow myself to get caught up in these social battles.  But it was the reaction of officials from several large U.S. cities that prompted to me to leap to Cathy’s defense.

When you hear government officials of any stripe talking about running a prominent and successful businessman out of “their city” for doing nothing else but expressing his opinion, consistent with his long-held religious beliefs and personal philosophy, you should be compelled to object! 

From cities like Philadelphia, Boston, New York City and Chicago you heard local officials threaten to close Chick-Fil-A franchises or to deny them business opportunities.  And that’s when I decided to stand up for Dan Cathy’s freedom to express his views free from retribution by those who did not agree.  This was also the basis for such actions as the Same Sex Kiss Day planned by LGBT groups targeting Chick-Fil-A franchises.  The objective is to embarrass the public face of the Chick-Fil-A corporation in an attempt to shut them up.  

These are exactly the kind of politicians of whom you should really be afraid.  The ones who will condemn a successful corporation and endorse efforts to deny it business opportunities based on the expression of an unpopular opinion.  If they will stoop to that level over a position on a social issue, imagine what they might do if … say … you balked at their sugary drink policy or refused to donate to their political party!   

But their suggested sanctions won’t hurt Chick-Fil-A.  Given the support the restaurant chain received yesterday, I’m certain Cathy would have no problem moving his franchises and JOBS out to the suburbs.

Warrington Chick-Fil-A crowd

Based on the reactions seen all over the country on Wednesday. Chick-Fil-A may very well experience the best single week in terms of retail sales than ever before.  When I attempted to treat the wife to Chick-Fil-A takeout Wednesday evening (Yeah, she was a bit flummoxed.), we could not get close to their Warrington, PA location.  The standing line went out the door and threaded itself far enough along to wrap around the building at least once.  The drive-thru line went around the building, out the driveway, and hundreds of yards down PA Rt 611.  Reports had the wait for service running between 60-90 minutes at 7:00 PM!

Many of those who made the trek and withstood the lines (We decided not to.), certainly were motivated by former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee’s original social media call to honor Cathy’s stand against gay marriage.  But many – like I – were simply there to recognize and support Cathy’s right to believe what he believes; to speak freely in accordance with those beliefs; and to be free of intimidation and punitive action by those who disagree … particularly those in government with no legal basis to judge or penalize such expressions.    

The LGBT/Chick-Fil-A confrontation is a challenging lesson in the demands of American citizenship.  Freedom of Speech requires that you endure messages and viewpoints that are guaranteed to make your blood boil.  That’s what Freedom of Speech requires at its very core. 

The question really comes down to this … Are you strong enough to LIVE what you claim to embrace?

When the crazies kill, why sanction the legal and responsible?

Posted on by

Here we go again …

Another crazy gets hold of an arsenal of weapons; breaks almost every law in the books; and shoots scores of innocents.  And the result is predictable … a groundswell of opinion that never wavers … PASS LAWS TO RESTRICT GUN OWNERSHIP!

The problem with that sentiment is that third word … “LAWS”.  Because “laws” only apply to those inclined to obey them in the first place!  

It’s one thing if our elected leaders had the backbone to take on such an unpopular position (unpopular that is to most people who do not live in large, liberal-run cities) and accept the political consequences.  But that’s rarely ever the case, when politics and power are of greater value.  And that’s exactly the sentiment that was expressed by Democrat stalwart Senator (CA) Dianne Feinstein, who stated, although a sane discussion on gun control and a ban on military-type assault rifles was important, an election year was not the time to address it. 

Huh?!?  Wouldn’t that be the PERFECT time to address the issue?!?

Apparently the Democrats see a discussion of gun control to be a political loser in a year when President Obama is fighting for re-election in what is expected to be a close election.  For these Democrats, the subject of limiting gun violence by restricting access to guns for everyone is trumped by White House aspirations.  It says much about where the issue really sits with the political animals of the Democratic Party.  So, if they refuse to have this discussion now, why should they be taken seriously when they finally get around to it? 

In that same vein, we are still waiting for The President to get around to his 2008 campaign promises on gun control.  Instead, President Obama has signed bills allowing guns in national parks and even on Amtrak!   He has steadfastly refused to seek reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban.  And maybe that’s the real reason Democrats – like Senator Feinstein – do not wish to bring it up now!

But in truth, even if we did have this conversation today, it would accomplish NOTHING for keeping guns of all shapes, sizes, and magazine capacities from the criminals and the crazies. 

If it were that easy, we wouldn’t have had Aurora … or Columbine … or Howard Unruh … or the University of Texas clock tower … or Virginia Tech …

That’s the REAL problem … the criminals and the crazies.  You have no right to ask law-biding citizens to give up access to responsible gun ownership if you have no prospects for denying similar weapons to the criminals and the crazies.  And it’s mind-boggling that anyone would propose such a ban in an age where our own Federal Government openly distributed guns to the most dangerous criminals currently on the continent.  They must solve the problem of keeping automatic assault weapons from the drug runners, the gangs, and criminally insane before asking John Q. Citizen to even consider doing the same.   

I ain’t holding my breath on the former, but fully expect continued efforts to do the latter.

For another reason entirely, I laugh when gun opponents run up the flag of the Founding Fathers to claim that they had no intention for gun ownership to exist outside what was needed for the purposes of organized state militias.  That may well have been their original intent, just like it was to restrict the voting rights of women or to count African slaves as 3/5 of a person.  In reality, the concept of militia had little-to-nothing to do historically with the development of a gun culture in the United States.

Every household in 18th century America REQUIRED the possession of a firearm.  This was not a legal requirement; it was a requirement for survival.  For if you lived anywhere other than the relative safety of early American cities, a gun was as important as food in surviving the dangers and hostilities of the unsettled frontier. 

Whether it was dealing with the growing hostility of a native population or using the point-of-a-gun to discourage foreign intervention and push American civilization West across the North American continent, the National Government fostered the concept of private gun ownership – far removed from the concept of militia service – among its citizens.  Huge tracts of territory were settled and controlled; colonial forces from Spain, Britain, and France were pushed out; and the Wild West was colonized, then civilized with the help of armed citizens that NEVER once stepped foot into a militia formation.

It renders the concept of “militia” a convenient interpretation of a badly worded phrase in the Bill of Rights.  So for better or worse – depending on your point-of-view – America grew and flourished as the result of a gun culture that was accepted by a Government led directly by those same Founding Fathers.  The same ones who supposedly never intended private gun ownership outside of a quasi-military apparatus. 

The irony seems lost on those who want to blame the carnage on law-biding citizens and their long-held rights.

Exaggerating the Pennsylvania Voter ID “crisis”

Posted on by
Nelson Mandela expresses his views on Voter ID laws

Nelson Mandela expresses his views on Voter ID laws

The news sent shock waves throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the national political media networks.  Over 700,000 Pennsylvanians lacked the most common, state-provided form of photo identification, meaning that over 9% of the Pennsylvania’s registered voters might be unable to vote in this year’s Presidential election!!

The claims of a voting rights armaggedon were prolific!  Ten percent of registered Pennsylvanian voters would be turned away at the polls because they lacked photo ID!  In Philadelphia, the numbers are supposedly TWICE as bad!  The nefarious plot, born of Republican designs to defeat President Obama in November, was working to perfection!  Woe is us!  Democracy was D-E-A-D!!!

As you can see, I love an overabundance of exclamation points!  It never really makes silly arguments any more plausible or intellectually honest; but it does gives the eyes a thrill.  Best of all, it might even distract one from looking at what’s behind the numbers.

So let’s take a peek under the curtain.

The first statistic that jumps out is that 22% of those 758,000 Pennsylvania voters would statistically fall into the “inactive voter” category, meaning that they have not voted since 2007.  In other words, these 170,000 Pennsylvanians have been sitting on their voting hands for at least 5 years.  It also means – by the way – that not a single one of them bothered to vote in the 2008 Presidential election. 

Frankly, I find that 22% to be well on the low side.  From my own experience working on the polls in Horsham Township, the number of voters who do not bother to vote in even the most important presidential races is much closer to 40% than it is to 20%.  A 22% inactive voter rate would conversely suggest a 78% voter turnout, which has not been experienced in Pennsylvania since 1992 (82%).  In 2008, in one of the most provocative national elections in U.S. history, only 68% of Pennsylvania voters cast ballots.  That’s a 32% “no-vote rate”.  If that rate is applied to the 758,000 without PA photo IDs, 242,000 would not be expected to vote in this year’s Presidential contest.   

In addition, the gap in voter registration-to-PENNDOT photo ID includes college students who lived in Pennsylvania while attending in-state colleges and universities; registered to vote during their studies here; then left the state following graduation to pursue their careers.  There are roughly 590,000 college students attending over 3200 schools in Pennsylvania.  According to a 2010 Student Retention Survey, Philadelphia enjoys a 58% student retention figure.  Even though this would be considered a bit on the high side for the entire state, let’s assume it applies.  It still suggests that every four years roughly 62,000 college students leave the state (590,000/4 years x 42%). 

Without even trying all that hard with admittedly fuzzy math, I’m able to whack that 758,000 by 40% (304,000).  And that’s without addressing the multitudes living in large city environs who simply have not needed a PENNDOT drivers license because they rely on mass transit. 

Now let’s consider that a goodly number of these mismatched Pennsylvania voters have other acceptable forms of identification: 

  • Accredited Pennsylvania colleges or universities (with photo and expiration date)
  • Pennsylvania care facilities
  • Military identification
  • Valid U.S. passports (cannot be expired)
  • Other photo identification issued by the federal or Pennsylvania government
  • Employee identification issued by the federal, Pennsylvania, or a county or municipal government

It’s impossible to count those who will have the above at their disposal; but a valid assumption is they would significantly reduce the number of those left without acceptable forms of voter ID.

Finally, comes a number that illustrates why Democrats really fear the numbers being thrown around by PENNDOT.  That number is 2477, or the total number of voters – according to Karen Heller’s column in The Philadelphia Inquirer – who have sought photo voter IDs from PENNDOT since the new voting law was passed in March 2012.  That’s just 620 people per month!

Is that a systemic problem, caused by inaccessible PENNDOT facilities, long lines, poor transportation options, bad customer service, overly complicated documentation requirements, etc.?  Or is there another reason why citizen response has been slow and not nearly adequate to address this “constitutional crisis”?

The critics would like you to believe that all the remaining individuals who haven’t bothered to seek the required photo IDs, are all physically disabled, obscenely poor, or 93-year-old grandmothers born in far away Southern states where racial discrimination rendered them unable to produce native state birth certificates. 

The real problem for Democrats might just be that those they count on to carry the vote in urban locales – like Philadelphia – simply won’t be motivated enough by their precious constitutional right to vote to bother trying to get a valid photo ID.  Excuses will abound for this.  Some will be valid; others will be nothing more than excuses.  You can be certain that, if our newly minted and recently upheld Affordable Care Act required a photo ID to obtain federally subsidized health insurance, the lines outside local PENNDOT offices would be long and suddenly so very easy to reach.

Certainly the truth lies somewhere in between my admittedly cynical, sometimes sarcastic analysis and the breast-beating wails of Jim Crow and poll taxes.  If you were in Houston this week, you could have heard the Obama Administration’s view of the voter ID controversy from none other than U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who addressed the NAACP’s convention on the issue.  Unfortunately you could only get inside the convention site by showing up with your government-approved photo ID!!

For me, it’s incredibly difficult to reconcile a view that requires photo ID to cash a check, ride an airplane, visit a new doctor, sign for a mortgage, or taking an opportunity to listen to the insights of the U.S. Attorney General, yet shuns the same added integrity and transparency for one of our most precious freedoms with the same level of effort.

Only in America …