Getting The Right Issues Correct
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
As the 2011 Special Election for Nevada’s Congressional 2 seat takes shape, I couldn’t help but notice the philosophic direction the major candidates are offering. This difference will give those of us who will be voting an opportunity to clearly identify our support for a choice of growing our national government into a more expensive, intrusive burden – or selecting a candidate who says that government needs to gain a handle on its over-spending and restrain its actions which undermine the ability of the private sector to be an effective economic engine.
In listening to one interview, the candidate spoke of how important it was to focus on education and jobs. Both are very important and issues that Nevada citizens are interested in. Our state’s education system isn’t providing us with the output we need in terms of graduation and achievement. Likewise, our employment situation and the high number of those who aren’t working and drawing paychecks from their work, is a serious problem that has been dragging on for far too long.
Is an election of a U.S. Congressman a factor in either of these two issue areas?
As someone who believes that the last thing we need is more federal government involvement in our education problems, I’m not certain that a candidate for Congress is going to gain my vote posturing on education – unless they would be inclined to point out that education is a local and state issue which the federal government should stay the heck out of (that’s not where I believe this candidate will be going with this theme).
In regard to “jobs” being a serious issue in need of attention – Amen! Here again the solution lies in less government…not more. Our current debt situation (caused by runaway spending of those elected to be our representatives) is having a major consequence on the ability of the private sector to have the potential of profitability. Sending someone to Washington, D.C. who is going to be inclined to spend more and increase taxes to pay for the spending, doesn’t seem to be an idea we need to vote for.
We’ve already got more than enough elected representatives who believe that growing government, increasing spending and taxation to accomplish their mission, is the solution we simply need more of.
Look around at how well that approach has been working.
When you listen to the campaign messaging and consider the ideas being expressed, you are able to get past the rambling rhetoric and sort down to the basic choices before us. Do we want a Congressional representative who will be part of limiting the expansion of the federal government – or a Congressional representative who will part of expanding the federal government…
September 13th will be the day when we make our choice for the way we would like to go.
As the 2011 Special Election for Nevada’s Congressional 2 seat takes shape, I couldn’t help but notice the philosophic direction the major candidates are offering. This difference will give those of us who will be voting an opportunity to clearly identify our support for a choice of growing our national government into a more expensive, intrusive burden – or selecting a candidate who says that government needs to gain a handle on its over-spending and restrain its actions which undermine the ability of the private sector to be an effective economic engine.
In listening to one interview, the candidate spoke of how important it was to focus on education and jobs. Both are very important and issues that Nevada citizens are interested in. Our state’s education system isn’t providing us with the output we need in terms of graduation and achievement. Likewise, our employment situation and the high number of those who aren’t working and drawing paychecks from their work, is a serious problem that has been dragging on for far too long.
Is an election of a U.S. Congressman a factor in either of these two issue areas?
As someone who believes that the last thing we need is more federal government involvement in our education problems, I’m not certain that a candidate for Congress is going to gain my vote posturing on education – unless they would be inclined to point out that education is a local and state issue which the federal government should stay the heck out of (that’s not where I believe this candidate will be going with this theme).
In regard to “jobs” being a serious issue in need of attention – Amen! Here again the solution lies in less government…not more. Our current debt situation (caused by runaway spending of those elected to be our representatives) is having a major consequence on the ability of the private sector to have the potential of profitability. Sending someone to Washington, D.C. who is going to be inclined to spend more and increase taxes to pay for the spending, doesn’t seem to be an idea we need to vote for.
We’ve already got more than enough elected representatives who believe that growing government, increasing spending and taxation to accomplish their mission, is the solution we simply need more of.
Look around at how well that approach has been working.
When you listen to the campaign messaging and consider the ideas being expressed, you are able to get past the rambling rhetoric and sort down to the basic choices before us. Do we want a Congressional representative who will be part of limiting the expansion of the federal government – or a Congressional representative who will part of expanding the federal government…
September 13th will be the day when we make our choice for the way we would like to go.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 7/6/2011 7:33 AM 
Categories: Congress
Tags: Nevada Congress Special Election Nevada Congressional 2 District
Categories: Congress
Tags: Nevada Congress Special Election Nevada Congressional 2 District
I notice conservatives are always fond of saying "less government" as long as the government keeps subsidizing them without restriction. Case in point: Big Oil. Then government "interference" is welcome. It's when the government demands responsibility and restricts bad practices that, suddenly, the government is interfering.
Reply to this
Lamar - you make a good point on the need for looking at the subsidy issue. If you have information on the specifics of what should be changed, I'd appreciate offering it here for others to review as well. This would likely be a very good subject for discussion and debate as it relates to the campaign for Congress too. I think in order for it to be an effective discussion it would need to get specific on details and not just banter over differing rhetorical accusations.
Reply to this