The Democrats have found a new candidate to lead their charge toward becoming relevant in the state of Texas. Wendy Davis announced last Thursday as a candidate for Governor. She jumped from obscurity onto the radar screen and became a national celebrity in June with an 11 hour filibuster against an abortion bill in the Texas legislature. Democrats have trucked her all over the country ever since, raising funds nationally to promote a new female liberal to run in Texas. Of course Texas is the Democrats ultimate prize. They figure if they can win Texas the game would be all over for Republicans in the United States of America. They might be right.
So far Ms. Davis has said mostly the right things. She said she opposes raising sales or property taxes, although she didn't mention anything about income taxes. She claims to have supported business interests in her tenure on the Fort Worth city council. She has a very impressive resume, apparently a very competent attorney with a law degree from Harvard. And of course the best thing she has going for her is she is a woman. Davis is a very legitimate threat to the Republican old boy network in Texas, whether they want to believe it or not.
The one readily identifiable problem with Wendy Davis is that she is on the wrong side of the argument of by far the most important issue regarding the future of America. She is a Democrat, and Democrats want to spend more money on everything (except our national security) whether it does any good or not. A recent article in the Dallas Morning News reported that she said we need to spend more money on public education, highways and health care. As most Democrats do, she calls it investing in the future.
Why can't Democrats ever acknowledge that government spends too much money. They say Republicans don't want to spend money on education, health care and infrastructure. That is just not true. Republicans don't object to spending money, they object to wasting money. Besides, Democrats don't spend money to invest in the future, they spend money we don't have to buy votes.
The real problem is that government is spending too much money on programs and public services that don't do anyone any good. Kids aren't learning anything despite the fact America spends more money per student than any other country in the world. A recent Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) study reported that we spend $15,171 per person in the educational system, or 7.3% of GDP, versus the average for all developed countries of $9,313 and 6.3%. The primary problem is that the ranks and salaries of school administrators have skyrocketed and the incompetent teachers are rewarded the same as the competent ones. Unfortunately, powerful teachers unions control school boards that grant compensation packages the taxpayers cannot afford and institute politically correct curriculums that result in educational mediocrity.
America's health care system has been a disaster for a long time, and ObamaCare will make it even worse. Why would anyone believe that a massive federal bureaucracy could generate better health care services at a better price when everything in history that has been run by such a beast has been a colossal failure. Nothing generates the best results in any endeavor better than free market competition among providers of goods and services who must continually work to offer the best product at the best price. ObamaCare goes in the opposite direction. Besides leading to less favorable outcomes for patients, rules and regulations of ObamaCare are de-incentivizing medical professionals, leading to fewer practitioners down the road. It also is discouraging business enterprises from hiring new employees and encouraging them to reduce the number of full time employees, re-classifying them as part time to reduce health care costs. It is really nothing more than another irrational massive government entitlement program that America cannot afford.
Spending money on infrastructure is often a good idea, but not when it is for some Congressman's or special interest group's unnecessary boondoggle. Furthermore, under the current system of awarding government contracts in most states, necessary infrastructure projects are too costly due to union influence and cronyism when awarding the contracts. In many cases, allowing private enterprise to bid for these projects and manage them once completed produces considerably better results than does awarding contracts to a unionized bidder who happens to be some politicians brother-in-law or fraternity brother.
The people who are generating the income to pay for government's profligacy want their tax dollars to be spent wisely, not wasted. If government is just going to waste the money, or even worse give it away to create more dependency on government (meaning confiscating more money from America's producers), then taxpayers would rather just keep more of what they earn. Democrats, and some Republicans, are salesmen, not managers. They promise everything since it isn't their money. They are good at selling themselves to get elected but couldn't manage a port-o-potty. They do not care about the concepts of efficiency, productivity, and cost versus benefit. They just care about making the sale. They presume they can raise taxes on the middle class and print money indefinitely.
Unfortunately, too many voters don't give a shit about anything mentioned in the last five paragraphs. Blacks and Hispanics will vote for Wendy Davis because she is a Democrat. Women will vote for Wendy Davis because she is a woman. That is what voting has degenerated to in America. Rational policies don't mean a damn thing. Besides, Republicans are doing nothing in Texas to help themselves gain supporters.
Greg Abbott, the Texas Attorney General, is the front running Republican candidate who will most likely oppose Wendy Davis. He has a very strong resume as well, but may suffer with his dependence on the shrinking traditional voting groups Republicans have relied on in Texas. He has cultivated Christian evangelical support around his opposition to abortion and gay marriage. Most liberal commentators declare that those are the issues of the tea party, although I seem to remember the original tea party focus was on limited government, not the religious right's agenda. Whatever, opposing those issues is a losing strategy in today's America. And what is the point of opposing them? That war has been lost.
Republicans in Texas are going to lose if they keep catering to the far right religious wing-nuts. These are the same folks who made Obama president because they didn't vote at all in the last election, apparently because they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Mormon. That is inexcusable. Republicans need to appeal to the largest segment of voters in America today, the intelligent, rational and fiscally conservative independents who are not exactly thrilled with the choices either party produces. Who can blame them?
Republicans need to become more centrist while defining the Democrats in Texas as the irresponsible spenders they would be, and nationally as the left wing extremists they are. Republicans must focus on fiscal responsibility, social tolerance, limited government intrusion into our lives, maintaining viable safety nets for those truly in need, and rebuilding a strong national defense. Making an issue of abortion and gay marriage will lead them into irrelevance. Republicans had better wake up to the world we now live in or they will disappear.
No comments:
Post a Comment