Spending

All Americans should have the freedom to determine their own spending priorities.

Tax cuts and spending are not the same. They do not have the same effect on the economy or on the federal budget. Tax cuts allow American workers, families, business owners, and investors to keep more of their own money. New spending requires the government to take control of a bigger slice of the economy. We recognize the problem is not that the American people are taxed too little, but that the federal government spends too much. To ensure that the federal government respects the burdens on taxpayers and spends only as much as is necessary to accomplish our common goals, we support extending the pay-as-you-go requirement for mandatory spending only.

Given the liberals frequent mention of the $4 trillion national debt, it seems gravely irresponsible to propose billions and billions of dollars in NEW spending, on top of our already rapidly growing entitlement commitments. What is perhaps most unbelievable, is that liberals seem to think the American people will believe that they can pay for all new spending, pay for existing entitlement increases and balance the budget simply by increasing taxes slightly on the “very rich”.

Tax Policy

“We believe that good government is based on a system of limited taxes and spending. Furthermore, we believe that the federal government should be limited and restricted to the functions mandated by the United States Constitution. The taxation system should not be used to redistribute wealth or fund ever-increasing entitlements and social programs.” – Excerpt from RNC Platform 2004

The key difference between liberals and conservatives on taxes go back to a basic difference on the problems the country faces. Liberals believe the basic problems a lot of Americans are facing right now can be solved if the Government has MORE money. They believe increasing the amount the “rich” pay, can help redistribute money to the less well-off through various government programs and initiatives. I, on the other hand, believe that the basic problems faced by most Americans these days, from healthcare, to energy, to education costs are because the average American needs MORE money and opportunity, not the government.

What is most disconcerting when thinking about what a liberal White House means to the taxes of the American people is this basic point. They can promise to only tax the rich, but once they accept the principle that economic hardship can be solved through increasing taxes, there is no telling where they will really stop. In the face of an economic slow-down, it seems the best way to create new jobs and generate more wealth for more Americans is to allow for reinvestment in the economy by starting new businesses, making capital improvements in them, and increasing banks’ monetary supplies through savings.

Labor Policy

We affirm the time-honored right of individuals to voluntarily participate in labor organizations and to bargain collectively. We also believe that no American should be coerced into an association they do not wish to join. And no one should be kept out of a job for which they are qualified simply because they choose to remain independent of labor unions. We therefore support the right of states to enact Right-to-Work laws.

In a time of a slowing economy, why would we want to make the business climate increasingly worse? According to the National Institute for Labor Relations, states with so-called “Right to Work” laws experienced twice the job growth as “forced union” states from 1995-2005. In recent years, all of the new auto factories have been built in “Right to Work” states while states with the highest union membership per capita, like Michigan and Ohio, have gone through a sizeable downturn in their economy. Furthermore, a “forced union” requirement is a violation of one of America’s greatest constitutional rights, namely, freedom of association.

When it comes to paycheck protection statutes, it is purely a matter of principle. When a union member pays union dues, some of that money matriculates into a political fund to give contributions to candidates and conduct independent expenditure campaigns, often for causes and candidates whose values run contrary to those of the union member. There have even been instances where a union member, who decided to run for office, ends up contributing to their competitor through this system.

Davis-Bacon laws, originally drafted by Republicans in the early part of the 20th century, are costly and often a roadblock to progress in that they force the federal government to pay the “prevailing” wage in the area for any project work done on its behalf. However, Democrats oppose any suspension of such laws in the event of a natural disaster or other declared emergency, often times slowing reconstruction and hindering the recovery of areas hit hardest by an emergency.

Foreign Policy

The liberals’ foreign policy is an exercise in confusion. They say Iraq was a mistake from the get-go, yet also state that there can’t be a safe haven for terrorists. Which one is it? If they deny Iraq was a safe haven for terrorists, then how do they explain Abu Nadal’s shelter (he was for a time the most wanted terrorist in the world and worked out of an official Iraqi government office), or Abdul Yassin’s hiding? How can they explain Saddam’s shelter of the man who murdered Leon Klinghoffer? They cannot have it both ways.

Furthermore, the naiveté behind the liberal position is astounding. What is to be accomplished by meeting directly with murderous dictators without preconditions other than to validate them to their people? The dictators in Iran already know the stakes, they already know where the West stands, and so what is it that these meetings intend to accomplish? What compromise can there be?