Posts tagged republican
Posts tagged republican
Just wanted to give everyone a quick update on the GOP Primary.
Nevada - The state went to Romney, as it did in the 2008 primary. Gingrich, Paul and Sanatorium came in second, third and forth respectively.
Maine - The caucus began on Feb. 4 and will end on Feb. 11.
Today are the Colorado and Minnesota caucuses. Rick Sanatorium, who is polling favorably in these states, is looking for a strong victory.
Either today will see the eventual nominee become more presumptive or the race will be shaken up. The 2012 GOP Primary season has been characterized by a level of unpredictability. We will know more tonight! Stay tuned!
PS: Keep you questions about tough issues coming!!!
Thank You to everyone who is following our blog! Now we would like you to submit questions or topics that you would like us to answer/discus. Send us a message or ask us a question in the ask anything box!
-Braedon and Madilynn
With these eight words, the United States begins its yearly political ritual known as the State of the Union Address. This address is required by the Second Article of the U.S. Constitution: “He shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” The Address being yearly is merely tradition set forth by the college of presidents. Also, it important to note that before President Woodrow Wilson, many presidents did not give an address in person rather sent a letter to congress, fulfilling the Constitutional requirement. Tonight we will once again enjoy an amazing American political custom. Co-Contributor Michael Burleson will be providing a commentary of our President Barack Obama and I will be providing the commentary for the Republican response by Governor Mitch Daniels (R-IN) and the Tea Party Response giving by former Republican Presidential Candidate Herman Cain.
In honor of the palmetto state primary today I thought I would do a recap of Thursday nights debate. This debate was likely the most exciting of the season so far. With only four remaining candidates I felt like each one received adequate time (meaning candidates were not buzzed to stop talking) to fully answer questions and respond to objections from their opponents directly. However, Ron Paul did not get equal air time. Before each paragraph I will be stating the question or topic that was discussed.
Personal History and the Presidency
The debate began with controversy. Speaker Gingrich was ask about an interview with one of his ex-wives and him wanting an “open marriage.”. He responded with a pointed attack at CNN calling discussing this at a presidential debate “despicable.” Each of the other candidates chimed in with their thoughts, Santorum: all people are fallen and sinful, Romney: move on, and Paul: I have been married for fifty year, low blow.
Federal programs to put people back work
Each candidate responded with their plan to put people back to work. Paul wants a sound currency (gold standard), reduce income taxes and in force the law in the areas of bankruptcy and current economic regulations. Gingrich as president would repeal the Dodd-Frank bill and institute a more efficient work force by focusing less of studies and research and more on implementing what we know. Romney feels the tax code needs refines, remove over regulation, crack down on china and crony capitalism, and prevent situations like GM and Solendra from happening. Finally, Santorum would remove the creation of economic squalor by pulling for the working people of this country, a national right to work amendment and returning manufacturing to the states.
A disappointing response:
In the previous dialogue the issue of Romney and Bain Capital surfaced. When ask to respond Romney avoided the question initially by attacking the President and then giving the same numbers and information he has in the past. There is nothing wrong with profit and sometimes companies fail.
Should the Government help subsidies young veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan?
Paul the only veteran on the stage says he would focus on making the economy beneficial for everyone by cutting taxes getting rid of debt and getting everyone on in this country back to work. Santorum focused his answer on the cutting of the military budget. He believes this country should be aggressive in caring for its veterans especially for mental illness from war. With this treatment he thinks more people would be equipped to return to the workforce. Romney made it a states rights issue, as president he would turn veterans affairs to the states (still funded by federal dollars) because in his opinion they would better handle it then the federal government. Finally, Gingrich would institute another GI Bill, tax cuts and focus on the transition process for soldiers.
Affordable Care Act:
Romney would begin by issuing an executive order to allow for a state opt out program, then urge congress for a complete repeal, replace it and allow people to buy their own insurance regardless of preexisting conditions. Gingrich thinks its a total mess, distrusts congress. When ask about 22-26 year olds getting to stay on their parents insurance his response was they can get their own insurance and a job (this is difficult though when many people this age are still in college getting a high level degree and cannot hold jobs that will provide insurance or enough money to buy insurance). Santorum feels Obamacare is an abject failure, would institute health savings accounts and turn health care provision completely to the private sector.
Paul: not released at all, does not think it is needed because he does not consort with lobbyists
Romney: “Maybe” in April, but will not release multiple years until they are gone though
Gingrich: an hour ago (during the debate)
Santorum: does his own taxes, when he gets home he will release them
Apple computers and foreign manufacturing
Santorum has a specific plan to cut corporate taxes, specifically in manufacturing. Government gets in they way of energy policy and regulation cuts. He thinks there should be a national right to work amendment. Paul feels the right conditions need to be created to perpetuate consumerism again focusing on the importance of right to work. The other candidates focused on attacks and did not contribute anything substantial.
Gingrich thinks SOPA is censorship, he favors freedom and not the interests of corporations. Romney thinks SOPA got it right just not in the way it was being implemented. Paul thinks republicans are on the wrong side of a bipartisan movement to protect American intellectual property. Finally, Santorum said the Internet is not a free zone to do anything, there should be laws but SOPA is not the way to accomplish the regulation.
What would you change about your campaign:
Newt: not a traditional candidate focus, more on the Internet
Romney: 25 more votes in Iowa, more time about Obama
Santorum: would change nothing, good ideas and hard work still pay off in the US
Paul: deliver message better
Gingrich wants to control the border by deploying up to half of the DHS along the border, supports English as the official language, make it easier to deport people and institute a guest worker program and sanction employers of illegals. Romney is hesitant
At first to answer the states he would make a private worker company where employers would have to check the card. If people came here illegally they would have a grace period to order affairs but then have to go home and “get in line.” Paul sees an economic incentive to immigration and we should institute and reform immigration so it is more generous. Finally, Santorum thinks immigration in the best option but people that come here illegally disrespect our laws do not deserve to stay. America is worth the wait.
Paul: protection of liberty, reduce debt
Newt: principal victory, overcome billon dollar campaign, wants Lincoln-Douglas debates
Romney: entitlement society, return to the principals that made American great
Santorum: conviction conservative and a clear contrast, reduce government, record defeated a democratic incumbent, won a swing state
- Braedon Taylor
South Carolina GOP Debate Highlights
(Candidates are in the order that they first spoke)
Gingrich: When asked about his attacks on Romney, he said that he raised harsh questions because that Romney’s record would not stand up to Obama in the fall. When asked how long unemployment benefits should go on, he said that there should be required job training while on those benefits. He cited that 90 weeks is the equivalent of an Associates degree and a government should help people who help themselves. Supports a 15% tax rate. When asked about his statement about poor adolescents being “lazy” and proposed that impoverished students should work as janitors in their schools. He cited that if students work, they will learn an ethic and show up for school, which will eventually improve their economic situation. Wants to offer a private retirement savings account that is voluntary. He pointed to the model in Chile, where the private accounts have a much higher return. Wants to consolidate programs that are used to help the poor into a single one and then use what’s left to balance the budget. Called No Child Left Behind a failure, says to get rid of regulation, the department of education and return that power to the states and the individual school districts.
Romney: Defending his work in the private sector, Romney said that in his experience, there was some success and some loss. He quickly moved from his record in the private sector to his record as Governor and the successes he had there. When asked if he believed that felons who have served their time should be given the right to vote, he said that people who have committed violent crimes should not be able to vote. When asked about keeping the financial system going, he said that importance would come in getting government out of business, reforming the tax system, opening up new markets across the world and getting people back to work. Supported lower tax rates of about 25%. Anticipates releasing his income tax records around April. When asked about his position on immigration and the Dream Act, he said that people who come to the U.S. illegally should not be given extra help over people who come the “correct” way and said that he would veto the Dream Act if he has the chance as President. When asked about the War on Terror and negotiations he said absolutely not and that America needs to recognize that we are under attack and to have a military so strong and pursue interests around the world so that no other force would consider the challenge. Said that he supports the National Defense Authorization Act. On retirement, he said that he would balance social security by offering higher benefits for lower income people and lowering it for higher income reciepients. and offer a premium medicare plan where people could buy extra care and letting competition exist. Does not support new gun laws.
Perry: He is still leaning on his efforts as Governor and the very strong Texas economy. He then stated that his tax records have been public for several years, Gingrich will soon release his and then he called on Romney to release his. He said that he plans on repealing business regulations that “strangle” the economy. Supported a flat tax rate. When asked if Turkey still belongs in NATO due to the current situation there, he responded with “no” as well as not giving foreign aid to countries that are a threat. On help to the housing market, he cited his proposed flat tax, which he says would give people peace of mind on their investment. He cited the “healthy and growing” Texas housing market and moved on to his proposal of a balanced budget amendment and making congress a part time position so they “could live under the laws they pass” Wants to secure the border within a year of his presidency.
Ron Paul: When asked about some of the adds his campaign ran being too harsh towards the other candidates, he said that he pointed to Santorum’s voting record. When asked about proposed in military cuts, he said he wants to cut defense spending that is outside of the country and bringing more of those troops back to the U.S. He cited that he receives more than twice the funding from the military than all of the other candidates. 0% tax rate? Asked how he would fix disparities in arrest rates in minorities, he cited discrimination in sentencing as well as the drug war that unfairly hits the minority. When asked about the War on Terror, he said he wants to end the war, and that we should not do to other countries things that we do not want done to us.
Santorum: Responding to Ron Paul’s comments on his voting record, he said that he is “not perfect” and there are things that he would repeal in office that he previously voted for like NCLB. When asked about extending jobless benefits, he said he did not support benefits that extended over 90 weeks. He said that he would give decisions like unemployment programs back to the states to meet their individual needs. Has two tax rates similar to Reagan Era. When asked about the situation on poverty, he said cited a study that said the ways to avoid poverty are to work, finish high school and get married before having children. Does not support a military mission in Syria. About the National Defense Authorization Act, said that the standard of due process and habeaus corpus should be upheld. Supports a flat tax rate for big and small companies that would level the playing field here. He strongly supports savings plans as well as balancing the budget. Supported trigger locks and background checks on gun purchases. He also voted with the NRA.
Well, they do heavy campaigning, of course. In the last election cycle, President Obama raised over $760 Million and is expected to top that by raising over $1 Billion this year. The year, the candidates over all are predicted to spend over $8 Billion.
But besides vamping up on the re-election campaign, President Obama is taking steps to appeal to the “undeclared” voters that he may have gotten in the last election that are in the toss up this round. Today, the President called on Congress for the power to shrink the size of the federal government, something that the GOP candidates are really pushing. This proposal comes at a very strategic time and poses a contrast to statement made by GOP candidates who have called the Obama Administration a far-left, government expanding, ploy.
Bottom line, we can look forward to proposals and promises that appeal to middle of the road voters from both sides.
Before we look at the current views on education, let’s look at education historically.
The Constitution does not explicitly state anything about education and at the time children would have received education in the form of common life lessons from their parents in between household duties and possibly working on their family’s land. The closest thing the federal government did was suggest that an education system be in place as states enter the union in the Northwest Land Ordinance of 1787.
“ Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged”
Then looking back at the Constitution once more:
"The powers not delegated to the Unites States by this Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states, respectively, or to the people."
According to these documents, education should be left up to the states. But because our nation and our educational needs have changed so dramatically, should these documents be able to “breathe” to accommodate? Are mandates for education an “implied power?” In the 1700s, it would have been impossible to demand that children attend school on a regular basis because children had a great deal of responsibility in the farming sector. (Our school calendars are still based on harvest seasons.) Not to mention, new states entering the union may not have had the chance to build a great infrastructure yet and poor infrastructure coupled with making children attend school on a regular basis… the impacts of disease could have been terrible.
Our economic future depends on an educated population. It will be high tech and international, no doubt about it. But if we left education up to the states and parents today would our nation be prepared for that future?
Here is what the current candidates had to say on education:
Presidential candidate Ron Paul has stated that he wants to get rid of the Department of Education and leave the matter up to individual states and parents. Stated that No Child Left Behind hooks institutions on federal funding. He wants to encourage homeschooling and private school through a tax write off.
Romney supported No Child Left Behind but knows that it hasn’t met all of the needs in the education system. He supports private and homeschooling as well as standardized testing that “holds schools accountable.” He also supports better pay for teachers.
Santorum voted in favor of No Child Left Behind but does not believe that it serves the consumer, which is the student. He voted in favor of tax-free education savings accounts but voted no on shifting $11B in corporate tax loopholes to education. (Check out the Kennedy amendment relative to education funding.)
Rick Perry promotes school choice as well as the voucher system. Perry turned down $700M in 2010 for federal stimulus money for education saying that “there were strings attached” that would have required Texas to adopt national standards, claiming they would have cost about $3B.
Gingrich said that giving out student loans leads to students who take fewer hours and opt to not work, which, he said, leads to more time spent in college and higher debt. He wants to dramatically shrink the size of the Federal Department of Education, giving more power to the states and parents. He proposed “paying kids” as an incentive to succeed in math and science from an early age and then waive interest on student loans for math and science grads. He also said that the U.S. should replace multiculturalism with a more patriotic education. Gingrich also stated that teachers should be paid based on their performance.
Huntsman has cited the failure of No Child Left Behind and believes in localization of education. He has also mentioned that early learning is critical and supports the pursuit of languages as well as math in order to ensure a strong economic future. He has also said that in order to ensure first-rate students, we need to pay for first-rate teachers.
With all that said, if education was left up to parents now, would our education system be better off?
What about private schools?
About 5 million students, only 10%, of students in the U.S. attend a private school, 80% of which are religiously affiliated. The median cost of private school is $17,441. (That number comes front he National Association of Independent Schools.) First of all, WOAH. Most of these candidates are encouraging private schools and want to provide some sort of tax incentive for families who send their children there. $17 grand worth? If someone told me that a single mother with two children is going to be motivated to send her kids to school for close to $40,000 a year because of a tax incentive, I would call that bluff immediately. A possibility is that families with higher income would send their children to high performing private schools while families that couldn’t afford, it and didn’t have the option, would send their children to public school which would be regulate by state standards.
I just realized that I could go on all night about unequal access to quality education, but I’ll save that for another time.
First in the Nation state, New Hampshire holds it’s Primary tonight. For those of you who don’t know, New Hampshire is not a closed election, meaning those who are not affiliated with the party-undeclared voters-are able to vote in the Primary. (Undeclared DOES NOT mean undecided) New Hampshire actually passed a law to ensure that they would be the first state in the nation to hold a Primary election (Iowa slipped through the cracks because they hold a Caucus) but when other states tried to schedule their election earlier than the year before, New Hampshire would just move theirs to the week before. The state has historically been a good indicator of who would win the nomination for their prospective party and the winner did receive the nomination up until the pattern broke in 1992 in Clinton. After he lost the New Hampshire Primary, he claimed himself “the Comeback Kid” and went on to receive the nomination and the Presidency. Since 1992 the winner of New Hampshire has NOT gone on to win the nomination, Obama lost to Hillary in 2008, who dropped out of the race in early June and endorsed Obama.
Over the past forty years the nomination process for President of the United States has radically changed. Beginning in the 1970s, both Democrats and Republicans began to caucus in Iowa as a way to get more people involved in the nomination process. Before this, New Hampshire did have a primary election but many other states did not have a popular nominating process at all. Most presidential candidates were chosen at the respective parties convention rather then directly by the people (delegates were sent to the convention by being nominated by the the individual state legislatures) and the candidates were primarily chosen by regional differences then ideological stances. Once the Iowa caucuses began other states quickly followed suit and by 1980 every state in the union was holding either a primary or caucus giving the people a direct opportunity to choose their candidate for president. Since first holding the caucus in 1972 the eventual nominee for the Republican party has won the Iowa caucuses three of the five contested elections. However; well known presidents/candidates John McCain finished fourth, George Bush Sr. third and Ronald Regan second all went on to win the nomination. Iowa will have a place in determining the eventually nominee, but it will primarily narrow down the playing field going into New Hampshire and South Carolina.