My small voice will make no great impact upon this year's election results; however, I'll speak my conservative Republican piece anyway.
Candidates should be judged on their integrity, credibility and, most important, their philosophy and knowledge on issues relevant to those they will represent.
Single-issue voters are not only suckers, they are blind and clueless. Those who base their vote on slick ads, with their out-of -context quotes and unflattering pictures of political opponents should be banned from the polling booth. But sadly, these are the most prominent sources from which the majority of citizens do base their decisions.
I am not a Republican because I am pro-choice or pro-life. I am not a Republican because I am for or against nuclear waste being stored in Nevada. I am not a Republican because I am for or against the death penalty.
A few reasons why I am a Republican: I believe in the basic philosophy of the Republican Party. I want government control out of our private lives as much as is realistically possible; and, local governments to control local issues; I believe the federal government cannot solve all of life's problems; I believe in the free enterprise system.
Taking all of the above into consideration - character; integrity; knowledge and philosophy on issues relevant to my beliefs - here are a few reasons why I will vote for the following candidates:
George W. Bush - He wants to take the "federal surplus" and return it to the people via tax cuts. I agree, if a reduction in the national debt is part of the program. Al Gore's proposals indicate he would continue to follow the current administration's eight-year history of creating more federal assistance programs.
Bush promotes restraint and caution in the deployment of our military forces. The past eight years we have seen our once powerful armed forces spread dangerously thin - we cannot be the world's police force. Gore has been part of and supported this worldwide deployment.
Bush raised the standards of Texas public schools, particularly among minorities. Tougher accountability standards have been adopted. He supports giving all parents a choice in schools, not just the rich.
Bush is willing to look at new, innovative ideas for protecting our Social Security taxes from greedy bi-partisan congressional dipping. Questions remain, but his idea of giving taxpayers the option of placing a small portion of their Social Security tax in a carefully regulated private stock investment fund deserves public review. Gore has not come up with any new, substantive proposals.
John Ensign - He will be a strong voice of support for the Bush agenda.
Ensign is knowledgeable on the many and varied issues important to those living throughout Nevada. A most important issue is water.
The numerous federal mandates emanating from the current administration are not only taking away the state's right to determine what is best for those who live here, but are threatening their economic well being as well.
Ensign knows the impacts the new federal guidelines for arsenic in drinking water will have on Douglas and Churchill counties. (Those of you who have paid no attention to this issue - because the water keeps tumbling out of your spigot - better start paying heed.) He knows the impacts federal proposals regarding Walker Lake will have on Mason Valley's agricultural community.
His opponent doesn't have a clue. He has been too busy chasing ambulances and making a very healthy living off overly generous liability laws. Republicans would like to see limits put on court awards. What do you suppose Ensign's lawyer opponent feels about this?
Local legislative races - Though unlikely to occur, Roger Bishop deserves a chance. Joe Dini has done a number of positive things during his lengthy legislative service, but where has his influential voice been recently as his constituents struggle with federal proposals pertinent to Walker Lake, mandated burdens of supporting tax exempt affordable housing, postponing of the widening of Highway 50 east, to mention a few. Bishop is a political novice, but he is bright, with new ideas. It is time for a change.
I recommend the following:
Jeanne Simons - She deserves the support of those who want to see changes in the deteriorating quality of Nevada's educational product. Her opponent is an unabashed tool of a teachers' union that has lost sight of what should be its primary goal - quality education for Nevada's students. And, just as her opponent did two years ago as a new legislator, Jeanne is quite capable of becoming better informed on the broader issues of her district and state. The difference is, Jeanne will be a fiscal and politically conservative voice.
Agree or disagree with me, that is your choice; but please, exercise your inherent American right to vote and make an informed choice. An apathetic public makes us all losers.
Think about it.
