KY3 Political Notebook

David Catanese on C-SPAN talking about the South Carolina Senate race

2010-06-14T15:44:00.001-05:00

Where Scott Eckersley stands on 9 issues

2010-06-09T09:27:00.002-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
We must secure the borders. It is more than an immigration issue; it is a question of national security. As for the Arizona law, I respect a states' right to govern itself. I do not support legislation that may impinge on Fourth Amendment protections of citizens of the United States. I will be an interested observer as Arizona enforces this law and as the courts take up its constitutionality. Regardless, it is time for President Obama to close the border now. This administration and Congress must address meaningful immigration reform this year.
Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

Taxes are too high. We must reduce taxes on individuals and corporations in order to spur economic growth and provide jobs. Government debt and out-of-control spending chill investment and stagnates job growth. It's time for congress to balance the budget and make the cuts necessary to unburden the American taxpayer. These steps toward stability will spur investment, innovation, and prosperity will follow.
Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

Our educational standards need to be set high. Our kids need to compete worldwide and the federal government has a role to play in setting these standards and incentivizing performance thereto. We are all stakeholders. It is up to parents, school boards, local communities, the state, and federal government to ensure our children's success.

Additionally, the federal government needs to set low interest rate loans for college students. Rising tuition costs and high rates of return are burying our students in debt.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
I am opposed to earmarks. It's time to increase transparency at the federal level. Right now, we need legislators with the courage to vote on our nations laws, not based on what's in it for them. I want a vote on the bill, not on the special interest pay-off.
Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
The fundamental question is can we afford this bill. We cannot. I would not have voted for the healthcare bill and I submit that it must undergo significant revision to be sustainable. The solution to the country's healthcare crisis is in improving the health of its citizens. I would like to see bipartisan support for a revision of this bill that focuses on the root cause of health costs and not a more expensive bandage.
Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
We need off-shore drilling to decrease our dependence on foreign oil. By putting in place stronger regulations and bigger penalties for failures, fewer failures will result. I support drilling for oil to decrease our dependence on middle-east oil. It is also important to protect park lands.
Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
It's a delicate balance. We live in a free country. The government is expected to protect its citizens. The government and its agencies need to share information and take the least intrusive approach to safeguarding America and protect its principles of freedom.
Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?
It's time to exercise serious "fiscal constraint" in government spending. We must both plan and take steps certain to balance the federal budget. Entitlement programs need to be addressed to ensure fiscal viability. Income taxes must be reduced on individuals and capital gains taxes need to be reduced to spur business investment and jobs creation.
Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?
The President has appointed a bi-partisan committee to address federal debt and spending. The report is expected to come out December 1. It is my understanding all tax and spend items are on the table, including social security. I intend to review the findings and work with members of congress to ensure social security benefits are protected now and funded in the future.

Q&A with Scott Eckersley

2010-06-09T09:26:00.002-05:00

by Joe Daues, KSPR News

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: I think you've got to have the guts to stand up strong when you believe in something. I think as a Congressman, among that many people, that many voices, especially a freshman Congressman, I think you really need to have the mettle to believe in what you say and follow through. And that's something I bring to the table.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: I think right now the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation is probably one and the same: it's jobs, it's this economy. Out-of-control spending is not helping the situation - it's hurting. We've got to find ways to balance the budget - number one - and then look at ways to reduce the federal deficit. Without that, I'm not sure there's much hope. So I'm planing to go to Washington to do both of those things.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?

A: I've seen some of that. My experience has shown me, maybe, some of the uglier sides of politics. It's not what I'm about. It never has been. I haven't changed. I've been a conservative. I continue to be a conservative. But also conservative in Missouri morals, Missouri values. The fingerpointing needs to stop. I think the solutions need to be reached in a bipartisan way. Now more than ever, I believe folks are looking for a person, not a party.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: I think this election is interesting. I do believe I'm the right person for this job. And I look forward to shaking hands with folks all across this region, looking them in the eye and telling them, "I am the person for this job." It's time for somebody who has stood up to establishment. Everyone's saying it - I've done it. I can stand up to the establishment and just have the mettle to do it, but actually prevail. That's what I've done.
<br>

Where Gary Nodler stands on 9 key issues

2010-06-08T09:04:00.001-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
The first priority should be to secure our border. I would support the use of our armed forces to secure our southern border. I am not sure if the Arizona law is the best answer, but I am not going to be quick to criticize the efforts of states to protect their citizens when the federal government has failed to do so.
Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

We need to insure adequate access to credit from the banking industry by reducing regulatory barriers to lending. We need to lower tax burdens on businesses that create incentives to move commerce offshore. Cap & Trade legislation needs to be defeated which would add to the cost of business in the Midwest. We also need tort reform.
Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

Education is not a constitutional responsibility of the federal government. It is the first responsibility of Missouri state government under our state constitution, after the payment of public debt. The federal government should not burden states with federal education rules.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
Americans are fed up with the buying, selling and trading of votes through earmarks. I would favor a rule change that would make it an ethics violation to promise an appropriation in exchange for a vote for or against unrelated legislation. I am not in favor of the United States House of Representatives abandoning its constitutional responsibility to line item the federal budget. That would give President Obama and his bureaucrats control over spending that rightfully belongs to the elected representatives of the people.
Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
I will fight for the repeal of “Obama care.” If we are unable to repeal it, I would vote to starve it through the appropriation process. This battle is not over and I will fight to protect patient choice and access to health care.
Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
I would support more drilling options on land in National parks and preserves. I also think we would be better served if the offshore drilling was being done by American companies and not foreign interests drilling near the United States.
Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
This is a very difficult question. In order to achieve greater security we must sacrifice some of our liberties, but if the loss of liberty is too great the terrorists can achieve part of their goal by forcing us to lose some of our freedom. We must be constantly vigilant to make sure that our pursuit of security does not lead to a loss of the basic freedoms defined by our Founding Fathers.
Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?

The first step in bringing our debt under control is to stop adding to it. Beyond that we must find ways to stimulate economic growth and fight to make sure that spending rises more slowly than the expansion of our economy. We cannot solve this problem without robust economic growth.
Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?
Any changes in social security must be prospective and far enough in the future to insure that we are not breaking our promise to existing recipients or those who have paid-in for a substantial amount of time. We should not change the rules in the middle of the game for hard working Americans who have done their part, and now have the right to expect the government to do its part. As with the previous question, this solution requires robust growth in our economy.

Q&A with Gary Nodler

2010-06-08T09:03:00.001-05:00

by Joe Daues, KSPR News

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: One of the advantages I bring to this race is experience. I worked for the Congress for 20 years. I worked in the executive branch for the first President Bush as a regional administrator for the SBA, and at the cabinet level, at the Economic Policy Council of the White House. I already know what needs to be done. I know how you get from the Cannon Office Building over to the House floor to vote. There’s no learning curve; I’m ready to begin on day one to be an effective voice for southwest Missouri.
Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: There are a number of very serious issues, but I think right now jobs is the most pressing need for our citizens. We need to put people back to work. The government can’t do that. That has to be done by the private sector. The government can’t create jobs – only the private sector can. We need to do something about access to credit. The banks need to be given the opportunity to extend credit to good customers who’ve paid their bills. When we get that going, this economy can recover.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?
A: I can only do that by myself bringing an attitude of openness and being willing to work across party lines to try to convince others. I’ve done that at the state level as chairman of the Senate Appropriations committee where I worked with Sen. Joan Bray, one of the most liberal members of the Missouri Senate. And yet we were able to produce unanimous committee reports to the Senate and that’s hard work. It doesn’t come naturally. It takes effort.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: Experience and the fact that I grew up in the 7th Congressional district. I’m a product of our educational system. I reflect the values and the attitudes of our people because I’m one of the people of the 7th district.

Learn more about Gary Nodler's campaign at his website

Where Billy Long stands on 9 key issues

2010-06-07T14:39:00.003-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
The first thing that we must do is secure the border with Mexico. If the border is not secured against illegal entry then any other policy solution will be temporary at best and ultimately ineffective. In order to secure the borders, America should deploy every tool available to us, including the construction of a border fence and increasing the number of border patrol agents along the border. If necessary, we should deploy national guard troops to make sure it is secure. Having a porous border is also a threat to our national security and we need to take it seriously.

The law in Arizona is a common sense reaction to a lack of leadership from Washington. When police encounter a situation where they believe that illegal immigration is a factor they should be able to take action. Right now the federal government either cannot, or will not, enforce its own immigration laws. That has to change or individual states will continue to pass their own laws.

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

Jobs are created by private businesses, not by the government. What the national government can do is create an environment where the free market can flourish naturally through measures such as low taxes on business and the elimination of the capital gains tax, which will encourage people to invest money in job producing activities.

Congress can also ease its regulatory burden to reduce the cost of creating a new job. Since our economy runs on energy the government can lift restrictions on exploration and recovery that would channel more energy resources into the economy.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

The best way that Congress can make our education system more effective is by sending power back to the states, the local school districts, and ultimately to the parents themselves. No one is more vested in providing for the education of a child than the child's parents and the dedicated teachers who work with the child on a daily basis. Local teachers and parents should be free to educate their children without interference from a bureaucrat located in some distant federal department. Each child is different, as is each school district, and as a result no single solution imposed from the top down will be the best solution for every one of the diverse districts across a nation as vast as America.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
I have made a firm pledge not to take any earmarks. Earmarks are a corrupting influence on the legislative process and they should be completely eliminated. They are a preferred way to bestow favor on political supporters and for Congressmen to engage in vote buying by bringing pet projects back to their districts. We need to stop pork spending whenever possible and earmarks are a part of that problem.
Additionally, as a matter of principle, the government should allocate spending through a merit based process that evaluates each item of spending to determine if it is the best use of public resources. We should not be allocating resources based on the seniority of the Congressman requesting the spending.
Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
The health care reform bill that recently passed Congress should be repealed immediately. Health care needs reform, but all the Congressional health care bill did was add a new tangle of bureaucracy on top of a system that was already weighed down under the burden of too much government.
Congress should work on tort reform, to limit excessive recoveries that drive up costs. Congress should exercise its power over commerce to insist that the free market be allowed to work with insurance policies by requiring such products to be available for sale across state lines. Congress should allow individuals to save money in tax free accounts to pay for future medical expenses and it should work to eliminate the waste that exists in current health care programs.
Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
I support a "Drill Here, Drill Now" policy that provides for oil exploration wherever it is economically viable to do so. We need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. America also has a record as one of the cleanest, safest oil producers in the world. We have high standards and the best technology in the world. We will learn the lessons from this disaster to reduce the chance of future oil spills.
Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
I believe deeply in our civil liberties and they should be fully protected. The purpose of America, our Constitution, and our government, is to make and keep us all free. However, we can preserve freedom while pursuing terrorists. I believe we should aggressively monitor terrorist threats in this country and abroad. I do not agree with those who would extend our rights and privileges that we enjoy as Americans to terrorists.

Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?
The best way, and only way in my view, to cut the federal debt is to stop spending money. In an over three trillion dollar budget there is plenty of waste, fraud and abuse. We should also eliminate earmark funding and stop bailing out Wall Street banks and private companies. Ronald Reagan was right when he said that Washington does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. However, the career politicians in Washington do not seem to have the will to make tough choices. I will.

Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?
Social Security as it currently exists has become unsustainable and reform is urgently needed. We must keep the promises that we have made and that means we must firmly guarantee the Social Security benefits for all seniors. In contemplating reform for the future, the first thing that Congress must do is stop spending trust fund money. Unfortunately, Congress has severely mismanaged Social Security by spending the vast sums of excess money that was collected for decades to pay for future retirees. We cannot recover the funds that were spent, but we can at least stop the last horse from leaving the barn by not wasting any more of the Social Security money that we're still taking in. Congress' abysmal record in safeguarding retiree funds makes clear the need for additional protections on future retirement money.

However, the only way we can reform social security is to work on a bi-partisan solution. This is not a Republican problem, or an Democrat problem; it is an American problem. We cannot have partisan solutions when an issue is this important. There are many good proposals out there, but we need to take the politics out of it. We all want the same thing: we want social security to be there when we need it. I would work to make sure that Social Security will be there when we need it.

Q& with Billy Long

2010-06-07T14:39:00.000-05:00

by Joe Daues, KSPR News

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: I think you need to go in with a common sense attitude. I’m running as a business person and I think you need to take common sense values to D.C. Our founding fathers envisioned citizen legislators, not legislator legislators. So I look at it like I’m going in there with a different perspective than people who’ve risen through the ranks of politics. So I think that’s the best way to approach it: just Ozarks common sense values.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: Jobs. We have to get people back to work. And spending, which kind of runs part and parcel. We’re over-regulating, overtaxating, overlitigating business. Seven out of 10 people work for a small business. The government doesn’t create jobs. The course we’ve been on over the last year or so is that we think the government is going to create jobs with all this stimulus and shovel-ready projects and go-to-work for the government. That doesn’t work, Joe. We need to get people working for small businesses and let small businesses be able to thrive.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?

A: You go in with an outsider’s (inaudible). You don’t go in as a Republican or Democrat. You go in as a person, as a citizen of the United States, as a citizen of the 7th district. You take a citizen’s attitude up there. You don’t take a politician’s attitude. The healthcare bill they just voted on sometime ago? 60 Democrats didn’t see any reason to vote against it. 40 Republicans didn’t see any reason to vote for it. That kind of thinking has to stop. We need to work together and you need to send people up there that don’t care about going back. I think that’s where we get the rancor and the vileness and the fighting. All they care about is getting re-elected so they can get back up there for another year. They want to go along with their party’s upper echelon. I don’t think that’s what we need to do. I think we need to be concerned about doing what’s right for the people of the 7th district and the United States, not what’s right for the party.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: I’m a citizen. I’ll be a citizen legislator. I’ve never run for office before in my life. I’ve run a small business for 30 years. Started out went off to auction school 30 years ago. Asked Mom & Dad to help me. Built that business. Built a real estate company up. I signed the front of a check for over 30 years. I think that’s important. I’ve worked. I know what regulations and taxation do to small businesses. And again, small businesses are the backbone of this country. I want to go up there and be your eyes and ears in Washington. I don’t want to go up there for the title or the power, the prestige. I want to do what’s right: stay a few years and come home.

Learn more about Billy Long's campaign at his website.

Where Jeff Wisdom stands on 9 key issues

2010-06-04T09:17:00.002-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
We must defend and enforce our borders. I would support a crackdown on businesses who hire illegal workers. Those here illegally should be deported immediately to their home of origin. I would put National Guard troops along the Mexican border to assist Border Patrol agents with the defense of our national sovereignty.

I would create two new modern "Ellis Island" locations in Tucson, Arizona and El Paso, Texas. Those wishing to enter the United States to work - legally - would be processed quickly at these facilities. These processing stations would be operated by the Border Patrol and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Individuals would be picked up at specific locations along the border and transported to these locations. These stations would conduct background checks and medical exams to approve these individuals for possible work visas in the United States. They would provide basic living accommodations to these individuals while they undergo processing.

I support the state of Arizona in enforcing immigration laws already on the books. The federal government has not effectively protected the southern border. Therefore, the state is simply exercising its authority and responsibility to enforce the law.

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

Congress can facilitate economic growth and prosperity by reducing the tax and regulatory burden on entrepreneurship, especially with small businesses. Tax reform is paramount. Income taxes inhibit productivity. They are oppressive and stifle job creation. It is my belief that Congress should eliminate all income and payroll taxes, replacing them with the fair tax - a national consumption tax paid at the point of purchase.

As an alternative to the current system, I have proposed an economic plan that would end federal taxation of individuals and businesses. Americans would pay taxes only at the state and local level, thereby keeping revenue in local communities where it is badly needed and most effective. Under this system, funding for the federal government would come from taxation of each state as one complete entity using a formula derived from an array of economic criteria, such as state population and per capita income.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

The single most effective action Congress can take to improve the American educational system is the elimination of the U.S. Department of Education. The teaching of our children should be a function of state and local governments, period. Our federal government has no constitutional authority or responsibility over education. Decisions regarding the education of children should be determined by educational leaders in the local communities, not bureaucrats in Washington.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?

Although Congress is granted the power to appropriate funds in the federal budget, I am opposed to earmarks. The earmarking process in Congress has been corrupted. Earmarks rely essentially on a "quid pro quo" environment where members of Congress vote to fund projects for colleagues in return for funding of their own pet projects. I see earmarking as a way for members of Congress to "bribe" constituents.

Under an economic plan that I have proposed, tax revenues would be collected and held by the state and local governments. This would eliminate the need for earmarks or grants from the federal government for a local project. The money would already be in the local communities. It makes no sense to send taxes to Washington, DC, in order for bureaucrats to decide where to spend the money. Let the people in the states and local communities determine that.

Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
Obamacare, the health care reform plan passed by Congress back in March, spells nothing but economic disaster for the American economy and the quality of care in the United States. It places an unconstitutional mandate on individuals - the requirement for every individual to purchase a health care policy.

My preference would be to repeal Obamacare and work to enact common sense and practical approaches to health care reform that are founded in free market ideals and principles. Allow individuals to purchase coverage across state boundaries. Impose pragmatic limitations on punitive damages imposed on health care practioners and facilities to lower malpractice insurance costs.

The federal government could provide catastrophic care coverage under a public/private partnership that would lessen the risk undertaken by private insurance companies. If health insurance companies carried only risk for basic health care services (doctor visits, emergency room treatment, etc.) up to a limit of $25,000, health care premiums would be significantly lower. This would make coverage affordable for all.

Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
I support drilling for oil on U.S. soil and offshore, including national parks such as ANWR. We must become more self-sufficient in our supply of energy and less dependent on foreign sources of oil. Our reliance on foreign sources of energy makes the United States economically vulnerable to international political events.

The prevention of another oil slick, such as the one in the Gulf of Mexico, should be a priority of both the public and private sector. There is inherently a risk involved anytime we drill for oil or mine a fossil fuel such as coal. Nonetheless, it is in our vital political and economic interest to pursue energy independence. Appropriate safety protocols must be developed and followed.

Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
One thing is certain - there are ruthless enemies of the United States who wish to harm or kill our citizens. Therefore, we must be vigilant and diligent in the prevention of terrorist activities against our people, our sovereignty, and our economic interests. That being said, if we compromise our liberties and personal freedoms then terrorists have succeeded in interrupting our daily lives. I do not support mirandizing terrorists. Foreign terrorists who carry out, or attempt to carry out, an act against the citizens of the United States should be dealt with swiftly and harshly. The battlefield of terrorists is virtually anywhere, including Times Square, Fort Hood, or an in-bound airliner.

There are key elements of the Patriot Act that I support, such as the monitoring of cell phone conversations between suspected operatives in the United States and known terrorist networks abroad. Law enforcement officials must also be able to scrutinize financial records of individuals funneling monies to terror cells. The Patriot Act has enhanced our security and kept our country safe from another large-scale attack for almost a decade.
Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?
The only means by which the federal government can realistically cut the national debt is through a balanced budget requirement, something to which virtually all state and local governments must constitutionally adhere. Congress should have its credit card privileges revoked. It has lived well beyond its means for far too long, placing a significant debt burden on future generations of taxpayers.

My economic plan would shift power over monetary resources and tax revenues to the states and the people as the founding fathers envisioned. Tax revenue would be collected from individuals only at the state and local level. Funding of the federal budget would require monies collected from each of the fifty states. A funding formula based on several key economic criteria would determine the tax revenue each state would appropriate toward the federal budget.

If the 17th Amendment is repealed, returning the selection of U.S. senators back to the state governments, it would become feasible to rein in the size and scope of federal spending. Senators, acting in the interests of the states, could then curtail the level of spending at the federal level to ensure more tax revenue remains in the states to fund local projects deemed appropriate and necessary by the people, such as schools and road construction.
Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?
Although the reform of Social Security is a volatile issue with many voters, the reality is that the viability of the system, as well as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, depends on significant changes and restructuring. Within the coming years, the Social Security system will become insolvent. Major reform is the only alternative to save the system from collapse.

Younger workers under the age of 45 must be phased out of the system. This could occur in stages through a buy-out according to birth year. The taxes paid to Social Security by these workers could be transferred to a private investment account of the individual's choosing (i.e. a Roth IRA). Those between the ages of 46-55 could be given an optional buy-out in return for a reduction or elimination of benefits. Those who opt to remain in the system will have their retirement ages increased and/or benefits recalculated. Individuals 56 and older would be guaranteed retirement benefits under the current system. We must uphold our nation's commitment and promise to these individuals.

I would support an optional buy-out for those 56 and over who meet higher retirement income criteria, minus any benefits they have already received from the system. Funding for all proposed buy-outs could be acquired from a number of sources, including the elimination of unnecessary, ineffective, and unconstitutional programs in the discretionary budget. One more note, any individual accepting a buy-out option would pay no federal income taxes on the monies received or reinvested. These were initially tax revenue collections, so to tax them as income would constitute double taxation.

Q&A with Jeff Wisdom, Republican candidate for Congress

2010-06-04T09:16:00.000-05:00

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?
A: A freshman member of Congress is only going to have so much power and so much of a voice. To be very vocal, you have to build on the experiences that have defined you as a person. Myself - I'm a veteran. There are lots of veterans in this district. So I can be an advocate for them. I'm also an economist. I know what we need to do to create jobs and fix the economy. So I'm hoping that my colleagues in Congress will look to me for ideas as we move forward in building policy for the future.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?
A: The most important issue facing the entire country - not just southwest Missouri - is how to stimulate the economy. The approach that the current administration has taken has not worked. We're still seeing an unemployment rate right at the 10 percent mark. We're starting to see some growth in gross domestic product, but I believe that's going to be short-term. What we have to do is a lay a foundation where the private sector can create long-term propersity for job growth. The government can only create jobs for a short period of time for stimulus projects and then those jobs go away.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?
A: Americans don't want gridlock. They want Democrats and Republicans to work together. I will be a member of Congress that can work with the other side. I will never compromise my conservative principles and values. I look to Reagan as an example. Reagan, as presdient, governed as a conservative president - a Republican president. He got his agenda passed through a very liberal, Democratic Congress. He worked hand-in-hand with Tip O'Neil to work in the best interests of the country. I want to be that type of Congressman in Washington, D.C.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?
A: I'm real. I'm not all about the money. I'm not a career politician. I have vast experience in the economy. I'm a veteran. I can be an advocate for military families, veterans issues. I also believe in the system. I want to make it work. I want to do the right thing for America. I feel I can be a very strong advocate for southwest Missouri if given the opportunity.

Learn more about Jeff Wisdom's campaign at his website.

Where Darrell Moore stands on 9 key issues

2010-06-03T12:07:00.003-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
My position remains the same as it was last year. On my website under “Issues” I took the position last summer that one way we can improve national security is to
safeguard our southern border by:

Enhancing border security with Mexico.
Enforcing immigration and workplace laws.
Reforming U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to handle legal immigration better.
Enhancing the legal worker programs to provide legal avenues that meet the needs of employers and immigrants, providing a better option than illegal immigration.
Focusing more attention on Central and South America.

We must promote economic development and good governance in Latin America to provide potential illegal immigrants with employment opportunities at home in an environment of political stability and public safety. For example, Mexico is rapidly deteriorating, creating a great threat to the safety of our citizens.
As for the recent immigration law passed by Arizona, I understand the frustration of the citizens of Arizona given the ongoing failure of the federal government to deal with this issue. However this issue is best handled on the federal level, with true immigration reform and realistic policies to stem illegal immigration being laws which include the elements I outline above. Jason Whitlock states it well when he says: “Illegal immigration is far from a new problem. Arizona should not be tackling this issue alone. Given the endless domestic and international ramifications, it’s a quandary best solved by our politicians in Washington.” Jason Whitlock, “Arizona immigration debacle foretells our demise?” KansasCity.com, posted Tuesday, May, 4, 2010.

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

First, what the Congress should be doing right now (and what it should have been doing in 2009) is establishing a fiscally realistic, balanced and sustainable budget that keeps revenues and expenditures in line and which eventually retires federal debt. That process requires the examination of all federal programs to determine the purpose of each program, whether that purpose is proper for the federal government to pursue and if it is producing the desired result.

Congress should be focusing primarily on proposals that would get the budget in order, as described above. The bills we should be hearing and reading about in the daily news are ones such as Congressman Paul Ryan's "The Roadmap for America's Future" as proposed in 2008. Or, the "SOS: Stop Over-Spending Act"(s) of 2006, 2007 and 2008 as proposed by Senators Judd Gregg and Mitch McConnell and up to twenty-two other Republican senators. These types of bills are more important now than the recently passed health care reform, climate caps or so called stimulus plans. The American people understand the concept that we should get our finances in order before taking on new, ambitious projects.

Second, I support Congressman Ryan’s proposal to create jobs and a healthy economy by adopting a flat income tax to replace the complicated current income tax; the elimination of taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends; replacing the corporate income tax with a business consumption tax; and capping federal revenue produced from the federal income tax and business consumption tax at nineteen (19) percent of GDP. For more details on Ryan’s plan, go to www.roadmap.republican.budget.house.gov.

The combination of curtailing and reducing federal expenditures with adoption of the tax reforms outlined above will spur investment in and the creation of new jobs.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

Congress can make the education system, particularly for grades K-12, more effective by stepping back and letting local governments and states have full control over the funding and goals of the educational system. Decisions on education are best made at the local and state level, where all the relevant players (parents, teachers, businesses, other community organizations and individuals) have a better chance of being involved in the discussion and establishment of education policy.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
While earmarks make up a small percentage of the federal budget, they have become symbolic in the public’s mind of selfish, parochial spending. One of the main themes of my campaign is Stewardship—Renewing the American Spirit. Stewardship is the careful and responsible management of something entrusted to one’s care. It is time for governments, nongovernmental organizations and each citizen to adopt a mindset of stewardship of resources, including money, abilities, talents, people and the environment.
Our current social, economic, and environmental problems are due, in large part, to selfishness, greed and other irresponsible actions. The federal government, and in particular Congress, must lead the way by modeling stewardship over the resources and responsibilities entrusted to it by the people. Earmarks should be abolished, not because of the economic impact on total federal spending, but for Congress to signify to the American people that it understands that Congress must be a better steward of the resources entrusted to it.
Allowing individual Congressmen to insert spending for pet projects (like the bridge to nowhere) does not inspire confidence in the people, especially during a time of financial crisis. Eliminating earmarks is a small sacrifice to make to help restore the trust of the American people in the Congress.
Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
My response is as contained in my blog of March 25, 2010:
"I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crises. The great point is to bring them the real facts." Abraham Lincoln.

The Democratic majority in Congress has managed to pass health care legislation that supposedly extends coverage to those currently not covered by health insurance but does little else. It is neither true reform, nor does it improve the quality of health care for all Americans. As Lincoln said, once the American people see the true impact this bill will have on those who already have insurance by increasing premium costs, an expanded entitlement program that will drive the deficit up by billions (see Congressman Paul Ryan's website), increasing taxes in a weak economy and other negative effects, the majority of people will express their displeasure with ObamaCare when they vote in this fall's Congressional and Senatorial elections.
However, it is not enough for Republicans and Independents to just say "we will repeal this bill! It cannot stand!" As a party, Republicans need to unite behind a health care reform package to offer to the American people as a replacement for the bill enacted this [spring]. Our bill will focus on people controlling their health care, not the government; provide for affordability and portability of health insurance; reduce health care costs in a free market; improve the quality of health care; all without increasing taxes by billions and without creating a huge new entitlement program that we cannot afford.
By the fall campaign, we must be united behind a health care reform plan to offer to the American people as a replacement for the ill-advised and poorly crafted bill that was signed into law this week. Congressman Paul Ryan, Newt Gingrich and others have proposed such plans for health care reform. We need to meld those ideas into a plan that is best for the American people. If we do, I have every confidence they will understand that our plan is best, and vote for candidates in the fall election who support our health care plan as the replacement for ObamaCare.
We need to recognize, and educate the American people, that our plan will not be enacted and replace ObamaCare in the near future. It will be at least a three year process, requiring return of control of the Congress to Republicans through the elections of 2010 and 2012, and electing a Republican President in 2012.

In summary, as succinctly stated by the Wall Street Journal's lead editorial on Tuesday, March 23rd, "Many Republicans are already calling for 'repeal' of ObamaCare, and that's fine with us, although they should also be honest with voters about the prospects. The GOP can't repeal anything as long as Mr. Obama is President, even if they take back Congress in November. That will take two large electoral victories in a row. What they can do now is take credit for fighting on principle, hold Democrats accountable for their votes and consequences, and pledge if elected in November to stop cold Mr. Obama's march to ever-larger government." [Wall Street Journal, Tuesday, March 23, 2010, page A20].
Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
As outlined on my issues page on my website, I believe that we should zealously pursue energy independence by:

Developing and producing energy in a responsible manner from existing natural resources in the United States.
Allow drilling for oil and natural gas offshore and in Alaska. At present, I would not support drilling for oil in national park lands. There is no absolute means to prevent another gulf oil leak. To decrease the odds of such a leak occurring again, the federal government must strictly monitor and enforce safety standards on oil platforms, and work with the oil industry to ensure a better response to contain oil leaks before they spread.
Lift the ban on development of oil shale in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah.
Build more refineries.
Encourage new clean coal development plants.
Build more nuclear power plants.
Encourage breakthroughs in alternative energy technologies.
Make the solar and wind tax credits permanent.
Offer a series of prizes to accelerate development of alternative energy sources.

Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
Thus far I believe the Congress has managed to walk the fine line between legislation empowering law enforcement agencies to gather information and take steps to protect us from terrorism and still protecting our right to privacy. It is interesting to note that even the Obama administration has kept in place the provisions of the Patriot Act. As a career prosecutor, I am fully aware of the constitutional protections afforded by the 4th and 5th amendments of the U.S. Constitution, and would never support legislation that would in effect void those protections.
Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?
First, it must do as I have suggested since last year:

Establish a fiscally realistic, balanced and sustainable budget that keeps revenues and expenditures in line without needlessly raising taxes, and which eventually retires federal debt. A key part of that process requires the examination of all federal programs to determine the purpose of the program, whether that purpose is proper for the federal government to
pursue and if it is producing the desired result. Until this process is completed:
Total federal expenditures must be frozen.
No new taxes and no increases in current federal taxes.
Funding increases for an existing or new program must come from
reduction of funds from or elimination of another program

Second, I would refer back to the answer to question (2) above. I support Congressman Ryan’s proposal to create jobs, a healthy economy, balanced budget and reduction of the national debt by adopting a flat income tax to replace the complicated current income tax; the elimination of taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends; replacing the corporate income tax with a business consumption tax; and capping federal revenue produced from the federal income tax and business consumption tax at nineteen (19) percent of GDP.

The combination of curtailing and reducing federal expenditures with adoption of the tax reforms outlined above will spur investment in and the creation of new jobs. It will, if faithfully pursued as policy, put us on the path to not only balancing the budget, but also gradually reducing our national debt.

Americans will have greater confidence in and actually experience a long term economic recovery if the above plan is pursued. Greece should serve as a warning of what will happen here in five years if we do not adopt such a plan soon.
Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?
Again, I would support as a beginning discussion point the ideas on Social Security and Medicare reform as proposed in the “Roadmap for America’s Future.” Go to www.roadmap.republican.budget.house.gov.

Q&A with Darrell Moore

2010-06-03T12:07:00.000-05:00

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: I think the first thing you do is you study what’s going on. I’ve become a big fan of Paul Ryan. I intend to introduce myself to him and make it clear that I think he has some good ideas that we ought to be following, not only as a party but for the whole country. I think the first few weeks – and maybe months – I will be introducing myself, learning the key players, especially Paul Ryan – to let him know he has an ally in his corner.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: Obviously, it’s jobs, the economy. Until we get the economic situation under control, we’re in trouble. The number one problem in the country today is the fact that we run tremendous deficits, we’re not creating new jobs. So I believe we have to get the deficit under control, restrain federal spending, limit government size. Adn then I think we need to eliminate taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?

A: I think I have a public record on this. People know I have taken positions on issues, principled stands on issues, without being disagreeable. I think you can do that. I’ve always been courteous. I listen to other people. I think that’s a key part of this thing is that we need to start listening to each other instead of following political agendas and trying to have our speaking points - like right now what’s going on in Washington. Obviously, everyone’s posturing for the November election. That’s not productive.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: I think the fact that I do have a proven history of public service. I have a record not only in public safety, of being tough on crime, but also as a chief justice agent, being smart on crime. But the public knows I’ve been involved in other public policy issues, just not crime issues. But how can we make the future better for our kids? So I’ve been involved with the community including the school system on improving school attendance. You may recall that was a little bit controversial. But that’s taken on. I’ve been involved in dealing with issues like underage drinking and other issues in the community that affect the quality of life. So I think I have a proven track record that I’m not a stranger or new to public policy issues that affect people. That I really do care about people and that I intend to pursue those issues as their next Congressman.

Learn more about Darrell Moore's campaign at his website.

Where Michael Wardell stands on 9 key issues

2010-06-02T11:22:00.004-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?

First, I don't believe the problem rests solely as a problem with Mexico, but it is the conduit for most of the illegal trafficking of drugs and people into the U.S. We must secure our porous border. Congress approved funding to build a barrier to reduce illegal immigration, but building the wall remains an elusive goal.

Missouri's requires all employers to verify their employees are documented as citizens or legal immigrants before they begin work. This is a good step. The challenge is taking it to the national level because under the 10th Amendment, the States have the right and responsibility to enforce corporate regulation. As a parent of a dual-citizen child, the process in place to ensure correct and lawful immigration is sound, but execution and enforcement of the law continues to fail. The People of the Great State of Arizona through the process of the legislation, passed a law that they felt was necessary for the people in that state. Yes, there are howls of protest against it, but when you have 70% of the citizens favor the new law, it's difficult to dispute its importance to the state. Questioning someone about their status only after stopping them for another legal reason seems reasonable.

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

Looking back in time over the last 200 plus years of our Nation's history, the greatest growth period was when the federal government lowered controls, corporate taxes, and got out of the way of industry and business. Think about it for a minute, from the year 1812, our last little scrap with England, until 1912 our population exploded 13 fold from seven million to 92 million people.

People came here to escape the problems of the Europe and the rest of the world. We went from a fledgling nation to one of a global economic might in 100 years. The best way for our Government to promote economic growth is get out of the way of the American people, cut the federal budget in half, and let the people keep more of their money. But the MOST important thing to gauge is who, without Congress as a whole or needing 217 votes to pass a bill, is going to facilitate jobs and economic growth here in the district?

I believe that it is time for us in the 7th to think out of the box, and begin doing things different to get families working again. Since I am unwilling to wait until, at a minimum, 2013 to get any type of tax relief for small businesses and working families, I’ve started an initiative to get the people of the 7th working again. Even if someone is a 2 man operation, exporting goods to a market that is not damaged as ours will diversify a company’s markets as well as create orders that need to be filled. With this increased demand for goods, it will require an increase in jobs needed to fill those orders.

The one advantage we have in this economy is a weak Dollar, and we can exploit that advantage with great Missouri products at very competitive prices, globally. My upcoming trade mission to Japan is precisely what South West Missouri needs. Someone who not only can work within the confines of Congress, but can and will lead the Businesses and the families of the 7th out of the economic doldrums we are experiencing today. With the ability to empower businesses with a guide to expand their sales on the global stage, we can and will overcome our unacceptable level of unemployment.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?
Give the power of education back to the states. The one solution fits all Department of Education thinking doesn’t meet the educational needs in Nixa, Missouri; Bonita, California; or Bar Harbor, Maine, but the people in those cities and states do.

Since the federal government took over the public education, creating the Department of Education, test scores have continued to drop. We once were a nation of great engineers, and now American companies are outsourcing and leaving our country in search of engineers. It’s obvious the Department of Education fails our children.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?

I will quote Ron Paul extensively on this one. Although I do not agree with Dr. Paul on everything, I wholeheartedly agree with him here:

I think there is a lot of misunderstanding about exactly what it means to vote against an earmark. It's very popular today to condemn earmarks and even hold up legislation because of this.

The truth is that if you removed all the earmarks from the budget you would not save one dime. The money was already appropriated when the federal budget was passed. The budget must be cut to have any impact on the national debt. Earmarks have become a catchphrase that magnifies the anger at Washington, but the overall problem is the trillions and trillions approved in each yearly budget. Earmarks come out of this mass of spending appropriations after Congress approves the money to spend. In other words, the money will be spent regardless of whether you earmark or not. To sign no earmark pledges and work to return this money to the district robs Southwest Missouri of jobs and economic development and it hurts the district. What we need to enforce is earmark reform that ensures earmarks meet the 18 enumerated powers given to Congress.

So, in many ways what congress is doing is reneging on their responsibilities. It is the responsibility of the Congress to earmark. Congress is supposed to tell the people how we're spending the money. Not to just deliver it in the lump sum to the executive branch and let them deal with it. Do the people of Southwest Missouri want the Obama administration to seize this power and make appropriation decisions for the country? Of course not, but that’s exactly the reality of Congress removing the earmark process. Actually, if you voted against all the earmarks there would be less transparency. Earmarks allow transparency and we know exactly where federal money is spent, in spite of what my fellow republicans who have pledged against them.

The real issue is the spending. If I don't like the spending, then I'll vote against the bill. But the principle of earmarking is something that we have to think about because we're just further undermining the responsibilities that I'll have in the Congress if elected. If we want to get things under control it won't be because I vote against an earmark and make a big deal of attacking earmarks because it doesn't address the subject.

In reality what we need are more earmarks. Just think of the 350 billion dollars that congress appropriated and gave to the Treasury Department. Afterwards, everybody was running around and saying, "We don't know where the money went, we just gave it to them in a lump sum". We should have earmarked everything. It should have been designated where the money is going. So instead of too many earmarks we don't have enough earmarks. Transparency is the only way we can find the underlying cause of this and if you make everything earmarked, it requires the author to be known

The definition of an earmark is very, very confusing. If you would vote to support the embassy in Baghdad which came up to nearly a billion dollars, that's not called an earmark. But if you have an earmark for a highway or a building here in the United States, that is called an earmark. But if you vote for a weapons system, it would support and help a district and that's not considered an earmark. When people are yelling and screaming about getting rid of earmarks, they're not talking about getting rid of weapons systems or building buildings and bridges and highways in foreign countries. They only talk about earmarks when it is designated that certain money will be spent a certain way in this country.

The bottom line is this: The sooner Congress wakes up to their responsibilities, understand what earmarks are, and understand why we need earmarks, then we will come to our senses why earmarks benefit our district. Earmarks are transparent with exception of the so-called "airdropped earmark" that is one that suddenly appears in the conference report between the two chambers when it appears in neither the House nor the Senate version prior to the conference. I'm all in favor of killing “airdropped earmarks.” So the sooner congress realizes that, I think it will be better for the taxpayer.

Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?

I do not believe for a New York minute the piece of legislation called the 'Health Care Bill' has anything to do with health care for three reasons.

It excludes some members of the House, Senate, and Executive Branch and their respective senior staff from the bill, so much for the equal protection clause.

Tort reform was not in the bill and it should have been. We can't lower malpractice insurance until we get the lawyers under control. Nevertheless, that does not mean that doctors are immune from being sued, but caps should be put in place.

Where in the U.S. Constitution enumerates Congress to enact this law? Nowhere. If those who counter argue with the 'regulate business' then insurance companies will incorporate in every state, knocking the government’s nose out from under the tent.

Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?

You can't prevent another accident through legislation. The same question would then apply to the question "How do you prevent another car accident on I-44?" Drilling for Oil on National Park Land is referring to ANWR. Again the question needs to asked" where in the U.S. Constitution does the Federal Gov have the right besides the 10 square miles noted and military bases, to own land? Nowhere.

There are always risks associated with exploration that benefits the human condition, and we must work to limit those risks while not sacrificing the human condition. We are killing the American spirit with this idea of limiting exploration that improves our lives.

Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.

Freedom and Personal Privacy are paramount as they are bedrock principles of our Republic. To alter them in the name of security, is not and should not be the policy of this nation.

It’s interesting to note that prior to 9/11 only 33 air marshals were employed by the Gov. and Pilots were not allowed to be armed. Had they been, e-mail monitoring, cell phone tapping, full body scanners and the patriot act would not exist. The balance should be personal responsibility and freedom over so called ‘Protection’ the Government can not protect us from the lone nut job or two, but it is empowered to protect the Nation from Foreign powers that wish us harm i.e. monitoring communication overseas and getting warrants to tap phones given probable cause .

I just stated, no amount of legislation will stop a terrorist with a mission, but an individual exercising all his or her freedoms will go further than any agency of the Federal Government.

Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?

Cutting the Debt means, you start with the budget. This is no different than our personal checkbook, you either cut spending and use the difference to pay down the balance, or you increase taxes and do the same. I’m not in favor of raising taxes.

I’m in favor of cutting Federal Gov. employee salaries to include members of Congress and the President. If they don’t hurt it will never get fixed. Cut out agencies that do not have enumerated powers would be a great start. Education, Dept of Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, to name a few. These services, if needed, are left up to the states or the people (10th Amendment) Although this sounds unrealistic, the alternative is worse.

Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?

When I announced my run for the 7th Congressional District back in October of last year, I wrote:

With a 40+ Trillion Dollar deficit pending, there is no way we can continue down this path of destruction. For those who have been planning on Social Security as part of their retirement, we ensure that we honor our commitment. For those who have some time to adjust, we allow them to invent themselves, all the way, partly, or not at all. Government has shown that the Bernie Madoff school of investing doesn’t work. The bottom line is this, I can fire Wall St., I can’t fire D.C. This is the only way to ensure solvency.

Q&A with Michael Wardell, Republican for Congress

2010-06-02T11:22:00.002-05:00

by Joe Daues, KSPR News

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: That's a pretty loud voice you're going to have to have. There's a lot of noise that's being done in Washington. What we have to do is we have to start making ourselves a lot more accessible to foreign markets. I'm going to drift a little bit and I'll come back. Just being normal isn't not going to work here. We've got to do things a little bit out of the box. We've got to start looking for jobs elsewhere. We've got to start doing things differently here. I plan on doing that from the get-go.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: Jobs is arguably the key point here. We've got 10 percent unemployment, 17% under-employment. The thing of it is we've got a situation here in the Ozarks - we've got great products; we've got great manufacturing but nobody is capitalizing on the foreign markets. We can export to Japan. We can export to Brazil and into China. Their economies are very vibrant right now. Ours isn't. Ours is struggling. One of the things I bring to the table is the ability to communicate and open those lines of communication to those venues overseas.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?

A: I don't think anyone's ever going to be able to cut through any of that. The House is a very,very partisan House. It's designed that way. I think civility, I think a little bit of personal diplomacy. We're not going to agree on 100 percent of the things we're going to talk about. There's probably 80 percent of the things we're going to disagree on. But there's 20 percent of the things we can agree on and those things should be talked about so we can move forward to help the people of southwest Missouri.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: Like I said about my jobs plan, everyone else is talking about cutting taxes and I couldn't agree more with it. But let's be frank: we'd have to win the House. We're going to have to take hold of the Senate. We're going to have to win the White House back before we're ever going to get any kind of tax cut legislation through the legislature. The president's not going to sign anything. My plan of trying to build exports and export our products and bring jobs into the district can work whether we're in the minority or we're in the majority. If we're in the majority, cutting taxes is going to help. But right now everyone else is talking tax cuts. I'm talking about opening roads to China, to Europe and to South America so we can begin bringing jobs back here.

Learn more about Michael Wardell's campaign at his website.

Nick Ladendorf on 9 key issues

2010-05-31T21:18:00.000-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
The Arizona law invites violations of the 4th amendment, and it treats the effect rather than the cause of the immigration problem. I'm against this law. Illegal immigrants from Mexico come here as economic refugees. We can change this by putting political pressure on Mexico to crack down on economic inequities. We also need to minimize our impact on the Mexican economy. This includes phasing out corn subsidies and ending the pointless prohibition of marijuana. Implementing these changes would reduce the need of Mexican workers to move north to find work .

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

We need to cut off corporate welfare. Congress keeps giving money to immensely profitable corporations, creating to an unfair advantage over smaller companies and start-ups. There are fewer risks for start-ups when you have a truly level playing field.

It also wouldn't hurt to put more people to work, instead of into our judicial system, by legalizing marijuana.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

We need to stop teaching kids how to pass tests and start giving them the tools to pursue their passions. Teaching children to pass standardized tests will not help inspire the kind of innovators that have made this country great. I intend to push legislation that changes the goals our education system to value thinking over memorization. I envision an education system that creates more self-motivated entrepreneurs.
Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
Earmarks aren't inherently evil, but they are inherently prone to abuse. As my great-grandfather would say "where there's money there's larceny." As a member of the Progressive Party I cannot accept corporate donations. I can't image a lobbyist would believe they can sway me while I refuse their money.

Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
Did we reform healthcare? Isn't this "reform" just more of the same? Making everyone buy insurance doesn't solve any problems. It only creates more customers for insurance companies. I don't see any quick fixes or the possibility of sweeping reforms. We need to have series of discussion over small improvements, weighing the implications of each individually.
To test out different approaches we need to expand states' rights to regulate healthcare. More conservative states will be able to experiment with market-based strategies such as buying insurance across state lines, More liberal states can attempt to implement statewide universal healthcare without fear of being sued by insurance companies.
Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
To prevent future oil spills we need to use less oil. Regulation doesn't do enough to prevent accidents because those regulations are either not enforced or are knowingly violated when the potential profits are greater than the fines. Because of the oil companies' disregard for the rule of law, I would not trust them to drill off our shores or in our parks.
I will initiate legislation to ensure that taxpayers do not pick up any of the tab when there is an oil spill. We can ensure that the interests of the environment and corporate obligations to stockholders that are in sync by giving congress the power and the will to "foreclose" on drill sites that does not meet their contractual obligations.

Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
There is no conflict between protecting our civil rights and public safety. Most of these government overreaches have been used to harass political enemies instead of finding terrorists. I don't understand why we would respond to an attack on our freedoms by voluntarily giving away those very freedoms. That would be like taking all my money out of the bank and burning it as an anti-tax protest (not that I have much to burn but I'm painting a metaphor here).
Standard investigative tools are sufficient for catching terrorist. There is no evidence that excessive government monitoring would have prevented the Oklahoma City Bombing, the USS Cole attack, or even 9/11. After a disaster there will always be speculation about what could have been done differently. More importantly, no matter how many rights we give up we cannot guaranty that there will never again be an attack on American soil.

Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?
Stop borrowing from the Federal Reserve. I think a lot of people assume the Fed is part of the government. It is not. I've purposed the creation of a new gold standard on my website. We must cut spending on programs that don't benefit society. Let's not give tax money to companies so they can export jobs. Let's not subsidize fossil fuels while energy companies are making record profits (or anytime really). Let's not waste money on the prohibition of marijuana ($14.1 BILLION in 2009).

Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security ?
Social Security may seem philosophically wrong but is socially necessary. The most important thing is to protect those funds from the Congress. We need to ensure that government spending is never again obscured by raiding Social Security, the way Clinton did in the '90's. We can advance the goal of Social Security by requiring that a portion of our insurance premiums are placed in a transferable health savings plan.

Q&A with Nick Ladendorf

2010-05-31T21:16:00.000-05:00

by Joe Daues, KSPR News

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: What I’m doing is I’m putting my agenda out there, my views. I’m hoping the voters will see that their values line up with mine. I’m not going to put my finger to the wind and try to get, you know, figure out what they want to hear.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: The closest thing I could see to a quick fix with all the economic issues we’re having is the legalization of marijuana and hemp. We just can’t continue to fund this war on drugs and lock up people, breaking up families and all the other issues that come up with it.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?

A: I’m neither a Republican or Democrat. I don’t really have anything invested in picking one side or the other. I’m interested in getting things done. Bickering is fine as long as people wrap it up at the end of the day and get through the issues.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: I think anybody who looks at what I’m proposing will see that I have thought about every issue. I’ve taken many sides of every issues and figured out, “If this is the right idea, why is it the right idea?” And then really examined everything. I think I have a more comprehensive view on it than a lot of people.

Learn more about Nick Ladendorf's campaign at his website
Find out where Nick Ladendorf stands on nine key issues.

Where Jack Goodman stands on 9 key issues

2010-05-30T19:08:00.002-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
We must secure our borders. The failure to accomplish this is one of the biggest failures of the federal government and both political parties. Additionally, we must not grant amnesty to those who enterred this country illegally.

Due to the failure of the federal government to address the serious problem of illegal immigration, states have been forced to take action. I worked with my colleagues in the Missouri legislature to pass strong legislation on the issue in recent years. I support an aggressive approach to this problem, but we must also protect the Constitutional rights of all Americans who are in this great nation legally.

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

By getting government out of the way. Government does not create beneficial jobs, it can only create a climate in which Americans have the confidence to take the necessary risks to create jobs for others in our communities. Washington must stop creating uncertainty among job creators and must stop pursuing policies that punish those who risk their own earnings to create jobs for others.
Washington must keep the tax burden low and leave more money in the hands of those who will create jobs with it. The burden of such flawed policies as the recent government takeover of healthcare and proposals like "cap & tax" leave job creators unable to grow, out of concern that the government will be taking the earnings that could be spent on additional payroll.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

The best thing that Congress could do is return education to the state and local level. The federal Department of Education should be eliminated. The people of our local communities know better than bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., how to teach our kids and use our resources.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
I am against Earmarks under the current appropriations process used by Congress. We have seen too many times that the system can be corrupted and lead to wasteful spending and projects. Last year, I called for a moratorium on all earmarks until the spending process can be reformed to bring openness, transparency and accountability.

Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
If elected to Congress I have pledged to fight to repeal the harmful components of the recently passed healthcare legislation. While we do need to work to make healthcare more affordable in America, we are still the best nation in the world for healthcare. We must work to solve our problems without destroying all of the parts that work so well.
We must restore patients to the driver's seat in their healthcare decisions, freeing them to shop the marketplace for the best quality care at the best price. The bureaucracies of government and insurance companies have displaced patient's from this position and hurt competition.
Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is a terrible disaster with serious consequences, but we should not halt the domestic exploration for oil and natural gas based on this event. Gas prices are again inching toward $3 a gallon, and probably beyond. America must have an “all of the above strategy” to free ourselves from our current dependence on foreign oil. We cannot continue buying oil, sending money to people that hate us, or we will see ourselves facing much more severe problems down the road.
Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
It is important to be aggressive in discovering and preventing terrorist activity. It is also important to protect the fundamental freedoms of American citizens. The government must be careful to strike the appropriate balance to protect the safety and freedoms of Americans, which will be an ongoing, difficult task.

Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?
In Missouri, we are forced by the State Constitution to have a balanced budget. During my service in the state legislature, I have worked through many tough choices to reach that balanced budget. Although it is difficult, the balanced budget requirement forces government to live within its means like many American families and businesses.
The federal government needs to remember that it does not earn the money it spends. It simply takes money from those who do earn it. The federal government must drastically cut spending and implement a balanced budget amendment on the federal level before we can even address our debt problem.
Next, we have to look at all aspects of the Federal Government and start making the tough choices like we have done in Missouri. Our debt is at such a level that is will soon be a national security risk. It will take generations to pay off our current levels of debt, but if we grow our economy and slash spending, it can be done.

Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?
Social Security must be treated as a trust fund. Washington politicians must stop robbing the fund to pay for other things. We must be sure there are resources to make good on the promise made to all who have been forced to pay into the system. I also support giving workers the choice to invest a portion of their withholdings into other programs that offer a better return.

Q&A with Jack Goodman

2010-05-30T19:07:00.002-05:00

by Joe Daues, KSPR News
Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?
A: You know, the same way that I went to the Missouri state legislature. I first got into public service because I was frustrated with problems in Missouri. And I very quickly became a member of the leadership team in the House – went on to do that in the Missouri Senate. Just by knowing your principles, sticking to your principles, clearly articulating your principles with real solutions to the problems that we face and being a person who’s known for their honesty.
Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: The biggest issue facing the people of the Ozarks is certainly the need for more jobs. We need to address that by getting government out of the way of those that want to take the risks in our communities to provide those jobs for the other people who live here. We’re looking at tax burdens, regulatory burdens and government intrusions from a federal government that is reaching far beyond what it should be doing, and actually discouraging people from creating the jobs we need.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?
A: You have to recognize which people you work with who are really interested in solving problems. Some are there to push an agenda, but most are there to solve the same set of problems, just with a disagreement on how to solve those problems. You have to work with people. Earn their respect. Seek out those who you can respect and try to come to the truth of what the problems are and how best to solve them.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: I think I’m the person in this race that entered public service for the right reason and that has a real track record of fixing what’s broken. I got into public service at the state level just a few years ago because I was very frustrated with how Missouri was leading in the all the wrong directions. I believed that complaining about it wasn’t fixing it. I put myself out there to try to fix things. Missouri is much stronger than it was when I entered public service. I believe I come into this race as people’s neighbor who gets it but has a real track record of fixing what’s broken.

Learn more about Jack Goodman's campaign at his website.

Find out where Jack Goodman stands on nine key issues.

Tim Davis answers 9 policy questions

2010-05-28T10:38:00.001-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
    There are distinct issues related to the influx of people from Mexico. Border crime is the most serious as violence from the Mexican cartels spills into the U.S.    Enhanced border security, perhaps including the creation of a solid barrier, is a rational response to the violence.
    Separately, undocumented Mexican laborers have become a staple of some American industries.   This is a problem because the employment of illegal immigrants encourages tax evasion, puts workers at risk of exploitation and breeds contempt for the law.    At the same time – imported workers create wealth and, to the extent they spend money in the U.S., they boost aggregate demand, thereby creating jobs for American citizens.   U.S. immigration policy should adjust to ensure we have access to the labor the economy needs, without resort to illegal immigration.
    The Arizona law mandates that state, county and municipal officials follow a policy of enforcing Federal immigration law to the fullest extent.   On its face – the law requires every state, county and municipal officer to spend all day, every day, seeking out, detaining, and handing over illegal immigrants to Federal immigration officials, or, if they refuse, or feel their time might be better spent doing something else, these civil servants can face a penalty of up to $5,000 per day.   Any legal resident of Arizona has standing to file a lawsuit to enforce the civil penalty in state court.
The law requires people who look like they might be illegal immigrants – meaning anyone of Hispanic descent – to carry government issued identification or face possible arrest. The law also forces state and local police to turn over to Federal authorities any illegal alien whom they contact.   The unfortunate result of this requirement is that it automatically stops the 500,000 or so undocumented workers in Arizona from communicating with police about domestic violence, drug trafficking, and other serious crimes. The downside of Arizona’s law is steep:   it deprives the police of vital information; it ensures that family violence in the immigrant community goes unchecked, and it diverts state resources from established uses to the capture and detention of undocumented but otherwise productive people.

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

Other than adjourning for major holidays, there are at least four things Congress does to create growth and jobs:
(1) Congress funds law enforcement agencies and the U.S. military;
(2) Congress creates types of private property and the means to trade and protect such property;
(3) Congress funds the acquisition and protection of public property; and
(4) Congress makes investments in infrastructure, education, defense and other areas the private sector cannot handle adequately. In essence, smart government provides a framework that allows the private sector to create wealth and jobs.
    That said -- what Congress cannot do, and should not attempt, is to manage American business.   When it comes to business, the government has no profit motive, no means to assess whether it is using resources wisely, and therefore no rationality.   The government take-over of any industry is accompanied by the law of unintended consequences; this tends to stymie innovation, limit consumer choice and drive up costs. When the government intrudes, management decisions cease to focus on the creation of wealth and instead become a function of politics. The collapse of the Soviet economy illustrates the outcome of central planning, pushed to the extreme.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?
    Inflation-adjusted spending on K-12 education has increased from an average of $4,000 per student in 1970 to more than $10,000 today.    Despite this increase in real spending, reading scores for elementary, junior high and high school students remained steady.    It seems that the quality of education must be a function of something other than aggregate spending.
    The missing element is likely competition in the market for education. Federal and state initiatives that increase competition among schools have been shown to increase the quality of education.   To improve competition Congress ought to encourage these programs:
(1) Public school choice – public school choice allows parents to choose the best public school for their children;
(2) Charter schools – charter schools are publicly funded, but privately managed schools; and
(3) Congress ought to permit state and local policy makers to chart their own course in education, without universal mandates from the U.S. Department of Education.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
Earmarks account for 1.5% of Federal spending. It is a trivial sum in the context of the overall deficit crises.   Also – while people may chafe about their member of Congress appropriating funds for specific local projects, there is no guarantee that spending decisions by unelected bureaucrats in Washington would be any better.
Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
     To be successful, government involvement in health care must accomplish one of three things:   (1) it must reduce the real costs incurred by health care providers; (2) it must increase the capacity of the health care system; or (3) it must shift bargaining power to consumers.   Given the novelty and complexity of the recent health care bill, it remains to be seen how effectively it accomplishes these objectives.
    In the meantime – opponents of the bill have mounted a constitutional challenge that will take years to work through the Federal courts. Ultimately, I expect the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether the fee imposed on people who refuse to buy health insurance is a tax (and therefore authorized by the constitution) or a penalty.   And, if it is a penalty, the Court must decide whether it is constitutional.
    If the fee is declared unconstitutional, the health care system Congress just enacted will collapse because the system is predicated on putting young and healthy people into the same insurance pool as people who are older or in poor health.   Without the cross-subsidy from young people who pay above-market insurance rates, the health insurance system must operate at a deficit. And, obviously, that is not sustainable.

Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
     Through the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, the Federal government owns a combined 623 million acres – equivalent to the total land mass of France, Spain, German, Poland, Italy, the U.K., Austria, Switzerland, Belgium and the Netherlands.
    Productive use ought to be made of this land.   Typically, however, the commercial use of public land results in the privatization of gains and the socialization of environmental costs. Private profits are reaped from oil and minerals exploration.   But the environmental costs of cleaning up defunct mines or oil slicks are shifted to the public.   This is no accident; it reflects circumspect lobbying by the mining and petroleum industries.
The oil slick in the Gulf is a case in point:   Under current law, British Petroleum must pay the actual clean up costs of the spill. That is to say, BP must pay for the physical damage to real and personal property. But BP’s liability for economic injury – a separate category of damage in tort law – is capped at $75 million by reason of the 1990 Oil Pollution Act.   The damage cap allows BP to partly shift the environmental costs of its lax safety measures to U.S. taxpayers.    This is unfair.   And it causes BP and other producers to be less careful about how they drill for oil, in that, the costs of their mistakes are certain to be borne by someone else.   Removing the damage cap and/or forcing drilling firms to buy adequate insurance would put an end to the socialization of environmental costs.

Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
     The restraint on police power built into Federal and state criminal procedures reflects a balance struck between individual rights and the need to protect the public from traditional types of crime. In reaching this balance, the potential crime the criminal justice system sought to prevent was of an isolated nature, affecting one or a handful of victims of any single criminal act.
    The nihilistic mission of al Quaeda shifts this balance. The militants are not in business to commit isolated crimes.   They seek death on an apocalyptic scale.   Because of the potential for widespread catastrophe, state and local police and Federal intelligence services should be given latitude in their monitoring and pursuit of terror cells. Additional screening at airports is a necessary, albeit unwelcome, part of curbing terror.

Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?
     A deficit occurs when Federal spending exceeds tax revenues.   Personal income and payroll taxes are the primary sources of tax revenues.   These taxes, combined with a handful of others, have historically generated revenues at about 18.2% of GDP.    Tax revenues, as a percentage of GDP, are not affected by marginal tax rates. Stated another way – if Congress raises tax rates, people respond by tax evasion or avoidance so as to deprive the Treasury of whatever it hoped to gain.
    Because of this limited ability to tax – the Federal deficit will only disappear if Federal spending falls to the range of 18% of GDP.   Right now, Federal spending is approaching 25% of GDP, having increased by 32% in fiscal year 2009.   The country is on an unsustainable course.
    The sectors driving the increase in spending are (1st) housing – with an annual rate of increase of 79% from 2001 to 2009; (2nd) national defense – with an annual rate of increase of 8%; (3rd) social security – with an annual rate of increase of 3%; (4th) Medicare – with an annual rate of increase of 6%; and (5th) Medicaid – with an annual rate of increase of 6.3%.   In light of these figures, the Federal government should stop intervening in the housing market; this would have saved us $760 billion in fiscal year 2009. Defense spending will continue at or above current levels. The entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid) are where the real crunch occurs:   they are slated to absorb 75% of the Federal budget by 2030 and 100% of the Federal budget by 2050.
    Simply put – we cannot meet our long term obligations under Social Security and Medicare unless the U.S. economy begins to grow more rapidly.    Based on assumed growth of 2.5%, the Congressional Budget Office still puts the present value of our unfunded liabilities for Medicare and Social Security at $37.9 trillion and $7.7 trillion, respectively.
    My own estimate is that the economy must average annual growth of 4% or the Federal government goes into default.    I believe this rate of growth is possible.   But it will require competitive tax rates, a renewed commitment to market-based solutions, rational regulation of industries across the board, and the attraction of capital and entrepreneurial ability from abroad.

Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?      The fiscal pressures created by Social Security are small compared to those coming from Medicare.   The U.S. government’s unfunded liabilities associated with Medicare and Social Security are $37.9 trillion and $7.7 trillion, respectively.
    The future liabilities of Social Security can be reduced 40% simply by changing the index used to calculate the annual rate of increase in payments.   The remaining 60% of unfunded liabilities can be handled, I think, by an increase in economic growth. Whether Medicare can be fully funded going forward depends on whether health care costs are brought under control.   And that, of course, depends on whether Congress has the political will to challenge those with a vested interest in the status quo.

Q&A with Tim Davis, Democratic Candidate for the Missouri 7th

2010-05-28T10:37:00.003-05:00

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: Joe, it’s sometimes thought that one member of Congress can’t make a difference. But I know that’s not the case and I’ll tell you why. I was travelling recently in the Middle East as I try to get a handle on what’s going on there. And I was standing in the middle of a stadium in Ephesus where a craftsman named Demetrius was complaining about the apostle Paul. That one man and his handful of friends had come there to Ephesus and the craftsman said, “These people have turned the world upside down." That makes me think that one person committed to what they’re standing for can make a big difference.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: The most important issue we’re facing right now is the federal deficit. Here’s why it’s a problem: the deficit undermines the financial well-being that our children and grandchildren are going to face. It also tends to cause a net loss of jobs. Here’s how that happens: because the deficit is being financed by foreign borrowing mostly, the influx of foreign capital bids up the value of the U.S. dollar relative to foreign currencies. It makes imports seem cheaper to us, makes our exports harder to send abroad and thereby destroys manufacturing. Also, to the extent the deficit is financed by domestic borrowing, it tends to crowd out capital that would otherwise go to small business. That’s why we see small businesses having such a hard time raising money right now.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?

A: It’s not in my nature to be blindly partisan. Also, my policies tend to be middle-of-the-road. So they’re going to appeal to Democrats and moderate Republicans. For that reason, I don’t anticipate that I’ll get sucked into the partisan debate.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: There are criteria for real leadership. I meet those criteria better than anyone else. First of all, it is required of a leader that they be people of integrity. And with that in view, I have built into my life and into my schedule relationships that bring accountability to keep me on track. Also, in terms of expertise, I have a Ph.D. in economics. I have a law degree from Oxford. My research is published worldwide by Cambridge University Press. I know what it takes to create jobs. I know what it takes to get the economy going.

Learn more about Tim Davis' campaign at his website
Find out where Tim Davis stands on nine key issues.

Kevin Craig on 9 key issues

2010-05-28T10:37:00.001-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
The "immigration problem" is actually a federal government problem.
Immigration is good. The federal government is not.
Immigration always raises the national standard of living.
The Declaration of Independence criticizes King George III for restricting immigration.
The Constitution gives the federal government no authority to restrict immigration. It only provides that immigrants in Arizona would have the same requirements to become citizens as immigrants in California. The Constitution gives the federal government no power to build a fence or "secure the borders."
Mexicans are endowed by our Creator with a right to travel, to work, and to live in America.
Americans are endowed by their Creator with a right to hire Mexicans and make our businesses more competitive by lowering production costs.
Consumers have a God-given right to benefit from lower prices.
All the problems experienced in Arizona in connection with immigrants are the result of unconstitutional federal laws.
• Government welfare lowers our national standard of living.
• Laws requiring drugs to be sold by criminals lower our standard of living.
• Laws requiring immigrant children to attend atheistic schools lower our standard of living.

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

By getting out of the way of the Free Market.
Congress has no constitutional authority to try to "promote economic growth."
Congress can only impede economic growth.
If Congress shut down and went home, economic growth would begin.
• Minimum wage laws make it illegal to give a job to unskilled workers who cannot produce more than the minimum wage.
• Licensing laws make it illegal for consumers to hire the worker they want to employ, and stifle economic growth.
• Corporate taxes and regulation compete for the resources needed to create jobs.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

Get the federal government out of education.
The Constitution gives Congress no authority to tinker with education. We need "the separation of school and state."
Education, like groceries, computers, and clothing, should be produced by the Free Market, not the government.
If parents want Christian schools, they should be able to choose them. If parents want schools that don't teach morality, they should be free to choose such schools.
Most parents want their children to be taught that God says "Thou shalt not steal." The federal government denies them their choice.

When our current Congressman, Roy Blunt, was first elected to Congress in 1996, the Republican National Platform promised to abolish the federal Department of Education. Not only did Republicans fail to do this (when they controlled all three branches of government), they doubled federal education spending from what it was under Bill Clinton.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
"Earmarks" is a red herring.
Every penny of Congressionally-appropriated funds should be earmarked.
But Congress should not appropriate funds for unconstitutional projects.
If Congress (including representatives from Missouri's neighboring states) passes an unconstitutional transportation bill, Missouri's representative has a duty to earmark the funds in a way that does the least harm to Missouri.
Otherwise, the earmarking is done by the executive branch, which is even more unconstitutional, and serves political interests rather than the general welfare of Missouri.
I will vote against all unconstitutional spending, and to increase transparency will clearly earmark as many as possible of the funds unconstitutionally appropriated by Congress.

Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
The federal government has not reformed healthcare, but has further DEformed it.
All federal laws regulating health care should be repealed. They are unconstitutional.
States should "nullify" unconstitutional infringements of the Free Market by refusing to enforce unconstitutional federal mandates.
The Free Market gave us the best healthcare system in the world, until the goverment began meddling with it. More people get better quality healthcare under capitalism than under socialism.

Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
Congress has no constitutional authority to attempt to prevent oil slicks.
Oil slicks are best prevented by protecting private property and holding polluters liable for the damage they inflict on the private property of others.
Socialist governments have had a far more detrimental effect on the environment than capitalist businesses.
The federal government should stop subsidizing the oil industry and let a Free Market choose the clean energy it wants.

Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
Do we really have to choose between living in a Muslim state where women are forced to wear Burkas, or living in an Orwellian state where women can be seen naked by government airport screeners?

How about a nation of "Liberty Under God" where we enjoy the Fourth Amendment and the government does not invade and terrorize Muslim nations in order to pave the way for multinational oil pipelines?

Terrorism is "blowback" from unconstitutional U.S. foreign intervention. The answer to terrorism is not more unconstitutional domestic intervention. When Osama bin Laden declared a "fatwah" (holy war) on the U.S., he did so because the U.S. was killing Muslims. The U.S. should repent of its unconstitutional imperialism, even as Muslims should forgive the U.S.
for its sinful acts, rather than take vengeance on us.
Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?

Cut federal spending. Abolish unconstitutional programs. Voters must stop demanding that the federal government steal from others and redistribute to the voters. This isn't rocket science.
The National Debt is also increased by the ability of the Federal Reserve System to engage in the "monetization of debt." This is a fancy phrase meaning "create money out of thin air." The new money is created into the hands of borrowers, whether private or public. The Constitution says that no state shall "make any thing but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts."
It is more difficult to create a gold debt than to create a paper debt. We must abolish the Fed.

Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?
It can't. Abolish it. A Ponzi Scheme cannot be reformed.
It is an evil system, unethical and immoral.
If a private corporation administered its pension program the way the federal government administers Social Security, corporate officers would go to prison.
The Social Security system is Bernie Madoff on steroids.
Just like the last level of investors in a Ponzi Scheme are going to get ripped off, so an entire generation of Americans who expect Social Security benefits are going to lose. It is inevitable. Planning is better than denial.

Q&A with Kevin Craig, Libertarian canddiate for the Missouri 7th

2010-05-28T10:36:00.001-05:00

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: Well, my only hope for being elected is if southwest Missouri’s voice is one for liberty. Too often I think our voters want security rather than liberty – which our founding fathers warned against. They think they can get something for nothing from Washington which is a real delusion. The Libertarian Party stands for liberty, the ideas of liberty, property, the pursuit of happiness and no government interference, personal responsibility (rather than government security). So unless that’s the voice of the voters, I won’t be the first Libertarian they send to Congress.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: Well, I think the most important issue is the big picture, not just one of these little issues. If the founding fathers were here, they would note that the Boston Tea Party – the tax was three pences per pound of tax – we pay ten times more on every gallon of gas. We pay 30 times more in taxes than they did in 1776 and I don’t think the Congress really represents us. We have what the founders would call a tyranny. The government they abolished in 1776 was nothing compared to the government we have today. And so we have to realize that we have a false god that we trust government rather than the divine providence that the Declaration of Independence talks about. That’s the big picture we need to shift to.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?

A: I think the rancor on Capitol Hill is caused by the Republicans and Democrats viewing politics as a competitive team sport. If the other team gets more pork for their constituents, we’ve got to get more pork for our constituents. They just ratchet up government spending and debt until we’re at the position we’re in now. Libertarians play the game of politics like golf. We play against the course: the Constitution. The Republicans and Democrats have handicaps of 100, 200. Libertarians are zero handicappers because we play the game of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: If the job is protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I’m the only one who is really committed to that principle. I think the other candidates, they want to bring home the bacon to the district, which means redistributing money from elsewhere, taking it here, which is an act of theft and only increases the size of our tyrannical government.

Where Dean Moore stands on 8 key issues

2010-05-26T11:01:00.002-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?
The border enforcement problem we have been facing for decades, is not really an “Immigration problem” - it’s a criminal alien problem. Immigrants are folks who immigrate to a country, folks who plan to make a life in their new country, assimilate to some extent and intend to become Americans. Those folks can still be proud of the old homeland, but expect to make their future as Americans. We are Blessed as a nation, that Freedom-loving people from every tribe and nation still want to come to these shores.
     The people for whom the Arizona law is directed, are not those folks. Criminal aliens make their first impression upon the United States by breaking our laws, and have no intention of assimilating into our culture. I have no problem with folks wanting to become Americans, in fact I love it. I do have a problem with people trying to abuse the United States and the generosity of Americans.
   I haven’t read the entire Arizona law yet, but it appears to be crafted to mirror existing federal law, only allowing law enforcement to ask legal status after being approached for something else. If so, it is entirely correct. Resident Aliens and visitors to the U.S. are already required to carry I.D. with them at all times while in the country, and anytime a citizen is stopped by law enforcement and questioned, it’s expected that we have to show I.D.
    I agree that it’s a responsibility of the federal government to defend our national borders, The constitution requires the federal government to protect against invasion. “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion... (Article 4 Section 4) Otherwise, the Constitution only really requires the federal government to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization” (Article 1, section 8)
    Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that a state cannot protect its own borders, in fact the assumption is that each state is sovereign and can work on its own behalf. I believe that in the Constitutional scheme of things, Arizona is fully within its sovereign rights to enforce its own border, and utilize for itself, existing federal laws for its own citizens welfare and protection.

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

     Restore manufacturing jobs, domestic energy, and lower taxes.
    The single biggest force exporting jobs from the United States is the federal government and its overwhelming regulations and mandates (and taxes). We need to be encouraging manufacturing jobs here at home. How much of what you buy is still made in the USA? Not nearly as much as it was 30 years ago, I assure you. From light bulbs and wiper blades to appliances and sheetrock, much of what you buy is imported today, simply because it’s too expensive or even impossible to manufacture these items in the United States.
     From the Zenith TV plant, here in Springfield, to textile plants, mining, the auto industry and all its suppliers are going overseas due to impossible overhead here in the states. The recent activity by the EPA over carbon dioxide is a key example. Moderate producers of carbon dioxide like small manufacturing companies are going to be treated as major polluters by the federal government. Small businesses will have to get permits and beg for the privilege of doing business. Energy-dependent industries such as agriculture, transportation and manufacturing will not be able to compete in a global economy, or in many cases even stay in business. We just cannot build things here as we used to, we need to build things here again if we are to grow our economy back to health.

    Some industries have already seen the beginning of this unfolding tragedy. The EPA’s recently released, 125-page mandate on cement manufacturing regulation has all but locked down the industry in the United States. Cement companies have shut down plants due to the regulations that do not do anything for air or water quality above current regulations. As a result, hiring and investing will essentially be stopped, and imports of cement from overseas will increase.

    If the upcoming greenhouse regulations are allowed to be put in place, any industry that relies on plants and factories that burn fuel will have to give up and relocate overseas for good. They will outsource what is left of our manufacturing economy not because of corporate greed but because Washington DC will have made it impossible to stay in business in the United States. Industries leave for Mexico or China, not because they want to, they leave because they cannot make a profit and compete when shackled by high taxes and often unreasonable regulations. I haven’t even gotten into the effects on agriculture, but these kinds of regulations will continue to drive our food supply overseas as well.

   Today some people think that making a profit is somehow bad, but profit provides paychecks, raises, future growth for the company and dividends for your retirement accounts. Profits without morals is a bad thing, and States do have a legitimate duty to regulate, but we can have growth, without overbearing regulation, and need even less from the federal government.
   We also need to be energy independent. There is simply no compelling reason to import as much oil as we do, and pay the going rate set by OPEC. We have all the necessary oil, coal and natural resources, as well as the best workforce in the world, and we squander it all by allowing the federal government to inject itself in areas that it does not have a clear Constitutional duty to do so. We need an “all of the above” energy policy to include coal, gas, nuclear, hydro and all the various other green sources where they make sense.
   We also have serious infrastructure needs all over the United States. We need to be replacing power lines and gas lines for example. Utilities, governments and insurance companies spend billions each year on storm damage to power lines, I suggest that we encourage burying lines as much as possible, to avert storm damage, and even protect against possible attacks. This would create jobs for quite a while, and save money for years to come, as well as keep the power on for folks in times of need. We are Americans, and we can still do great things, but we don’t want or need the federal government to do it.
   The House might start with lowering taxes on those that produce jobs, and lower taxes on those that work those jobs. Eliminating the many layers of regulatory agencies and bureaucracies would be another step in the right direction.
    I would further suggest that repealing the 16th Amendment and replacing it with a consumption tax (such as the Fairtax), would go a long way towards working off our enormous debt and trade imbalance as well. Our current system is highly inefficient, and costly. It costs Americans Billions each year to comply with, and Trillions more in lost commerce and productivity. High taxes always stop or slow the affected activity, so why would you want to tax hard work? By taxing items only at the point of sale on new items, it allows families to decide when and where to pay their taxes, or to reduce their taxes by buying used items instead. I would oppose any VAT tax however, as it is regressive as well, and would be implemented on top of our current income tax.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?

     The federal government needs to get out of the education business altogether. At the most, it should perhaps establish grade level standards in association with the states, and administer a cheat-proof standardized test at various times during student’s educational career so parents can accurately judge their student’s education against other districts and states. The states need to administer education in conjunction with local schools and educators. Federal involvement in education has been a disastrous mistaken experiment, and has sentenced several generations of gifted Americans to a lower standard of living than they would have had otherwise. It has supported failing schools and beaurocrats and burdened the good schools unnecessarily as well.
    As a former private school teacher, I have seen what a good student-parent-teacher relationship can produce, and what government top-down bureaucracy can produce. I think most parents want better for their kids than they are getting now, and most teachers do as well. Local control of schools puts the power where the interested parties are located, parents, students, local teachers and administrators.
   A good teacher is a national treasure, and a resource not to be wasted. We spend about $9,300 per student per year nationally (about $235k per classroom of 25 kids) do you think we are getting our money’s worth? Do you like selling cookie dough and chocolate? I like my kid’s current schools here in Spokane, but how much better could they be if they had that money to use there on campus? Moreover, how much better could bad local schools get if parents and teachers had access to that amount at the campus level? It can be done better and cheaper, it happens every day in private schools all across the country. The school I taught at had an advertised tuition of $3500/yr, and many didn’t even pay that, yet with little money we outscored well funded government schools around us every year.
    Currently our education system is over controlled, and under educating. We have smaller classes, bigger budgets and poorer results. Teachers and parents here at home know what works for their students, and should be the defining power, not bureaucrats in Virginia.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?
    I do not support creating winners and losers with custom tailored regulations or with the tax code. An earmark is a legislative provision that directs funds to specific projects or that directs specific exemptions from taxes or mandated fees. While they are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, creating regulations that favor one state over another is mentioned and prohibited. (Article 1, Section 9, Clause 6) “No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another. Clause 7: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.”
    I understand that this is how members of Congress bring home the pork for their home district, and that many people think it’s ok if their district benefits, but ALL Americans pay for these projects. Projects necessary to the United States need to be in the benefit of all of us, and if the best solution happens to be in your district, then great, we all benefit. I further understand that I may not bring home the pork to the 7th District as some may expect, but if we cut the special projects, everybody will benefit. Here in the 7th District we have so many great resources that don’t need back room deals to “help us out”.
     I also support the idea of single-issue bills, no omnibus bills or add-on earmarks. All additions and amendments would have to have a direct and clear relation to the subject bill. All additions and amendments should also be clearly identifiable by author. Each congress has the ability and responsibility to set the rules for each session of congress, so I would support those kinds of rules..
    I support the enumerated powers act, which would require every bill to show where in the Constitution that particular bill or idea is permitted. In Article 1 Section 8, the duties and responsibilities of the federal government are clearly spelled out, About 18 things. The general welfare clause and the supremacy clause also give the government some exclusive room to move on these things, but the 10th Amendment clearly limits the government to these things, and these things only. If we were focused on just these things, we would not be Trillions in debt.
   I support the balanced budget Amendment, which would greatly limit spending sprees on our dime as well.

Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
    States should nullify it as it is clearly beyond the scope of the federal government’s power, and then it should be repealed by a future congress, (despite Speaker Pelosi’s “cannot repeal” clause).
     Healthcare should be between you and your doctor. Prices could be better controlled by several means, competition is one, listing prices for common procedures, and allowing people to change plans outside of open enrollment, as well as tort reform would do much more to control costs, this current plan will only reduce care, and increase costs. We also need to educate people on the difference between health insurance for catastrophic illnesses, and routine healthcare. Nobody is denied emergency care, and people without insurance do have the ability to pay for services on their own (which is sometimes cheaper anyway) Forcing citizens to buy insurance under penalty of fines and jail is moronic.

Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?
     Yes, drill anywhere it can be done cleanly, and with regard to state input. If we were drilling more on land, we wouldn’t need to drill in 5000 ft of water. We have trillions of barrels of oil on shore, and hundreds or thousands of years of natural resources on tap here, but since Congress has put most of it off-limits, oil companies must drill offshore where it’s harder and more expensive, the risk of disaster is also much higher. I don’t know how to prevent this from happening again. We have been drilling in the gulf for decades; this is our first incident of this scope. The rigs are supposed to have “Christmas trees” that cut the flow of oil in case of trouble; this was an exploratory drill I hear, so perhaps it wasn’t installed yet? This spill will have ramifications for decades to come, and must be addressed, it should have been ringed within hours, and a plan implemented to cap the well. At the time of this writing, the government and BP have both appeared to act horribly slow in this event.

Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.
     75% of the Patriot Act is a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment, and should be repealed and nullified. Any attempt to read emails or tap into communications of any American citizen, should follow the guidance of the Constitution and 4th Amendment. However, I do not think that the 4th Amendment applies to criminal aliens, some foreign nationals, and terrorists in particular. The Constitution applies to U.S. citizens, legal visitors, and guests, Illegal visitors and enemy combatants do not have full Constitutional rights, they do have basic human rights, just not Constitutional rights.
    That said, there is no right to get on an airplane, but the public has every reason to feel safe in a public place within the United States. Airport body scanners are a terrible invasion of personal privacy, and unnecessary if we would use common sense and proper use of profiling passengers.
     The aversion to “profiling” is absurd, if Catholic nuns were blowing up planes, I wouldn’t support frisking the Amish. I understand that Muslims would be upset with being singled out, but I would be more sympathetic if they were more outraged by terrorist acts within their ranks. Flying Imams and dancing in the streets after 9-11 really isn’t helping their case. If Baptists were blowing up planes, I would understand it when I was stopped and checked at the airport. But stopping everyone so as not to offend one group I cannot tolerate.
     If people enjoy their personal freedoms, they should realize that freedom comes with responsibility. However the real issue is not just freedom, its liberty. The liberties of any American citizen should never be infringed without the protections of Constitutional due process. Freedom and liberty are not free, they have been paid for with a very high price, and are worth defending. I am also opposed to a national ID, and any ID with biometric information included in it. I’m opposed to OBD III in our cars and any other mandatory tracking technology.
Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?

     Cut federal spending and grow the economy.
     We realistically can only grow out of the hole we are in. This hole was dug pretty deep by many factors, but most of them had the government and bad policy in common. From Fannie and Freddie encouraging bad loans with our money, to the EPA running many manufacturing industries overseas and government agencies contracting out for $1800 hammers and $200 textbooks.
    We need to drastically cut federal spending and eliminate entire federal agencies. The states are fully able to take on many of these activities, and in many cases are already doing many things concurrently with the federal government.
    The people of the United States need lower taxes so the economy can grow; we need our manufacturing jobs to return to the United States, we need access to OUR stable domestic energy. Government jobs do not grow the economy; I understand that over a lifetime, a typical federal job requires 11 typical taxpayers to pay for it, which is simply not sustainable.
     The federal government only has about 18 Constitutional responsibilities, if we were only doing 18 things, instead of 18,000 we wouldn’t be bankrupt. The 10th Amendment says that everything beyond those delegated to the federal government, are the responsibility of the states, or the people. As screwed up as Jeff City is, we have more control of the Public servants there, than we do the ones in Washington D.C.

Q&A with Dean Moore, independent candidate for Congress

2010-05-26T11:00:00.002-05:00

by Joe Daues, KSPR News

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?

A: My whole platform is essentially the United States Constitution. It starts off with, "We the People." The people are in charge of our government. In our day and age, it’s more like the government lords it over the people. But the people really control the government. And as an independent, I’m not going to be sitting in some cubicle for the first two years raising money for a party. Representative Massa, when he left a few weeks, months ago, kind of let the cat out of the bag that as a freshman representative, for either party, you’re going to be sitting in a cubicle for 10 hours a day for most of your time, raising money for the party. As an independent, I won’t be doing that at all. I can go right out and try and enforce the Constitution.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?

A: Jobs and the loss of our manufacturing base. The United States government is the number one source of our jobs leaving the United States for foreign countries. The EPA, overregulation, high taxes – all these things are things the government directly does that directly impacts the lack of jobs in our economy. By trimming government back to its Constitutional foundations, we can bring most of those jobs back.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?

A: As an independent, I’m not bound by either party’s pet interest groups. I’m there to represent the people. I’m there to be a representative of the people in the 7th district and to enforce the Constitution which gives them the power, not the parties and not any political hierarchy or whatever.

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?

A: There’s a lot of good people in this race. I think I’ve been uniquely gifted. I’ve lived in California. I was a youth pastor out there. I taught Christian high school out there. I’ve seen where the wrong road goes. A lot of people are busy living their life here. They don’t understand where we’re going. Maybe they do but they haven’t lived it. I’ve seen where this goes and I know the people in the 7th district don’t want to go there.

Learn more about Dean Moore's campaign at his website.
Find out where Dean Moore stands on eight key issues.

Where Mike Moon stands on 9 key issues

2010-05-25T10:38:00.000-05:00

Q: How should we hand the immigration problem with Mexico? What do you think of the Arizona law?

A: Effective methods of immigration and naturalization are in place to provide opportunities for those desiring to become a citizen of the great United States. To offer complete amnesty to illegal immigrants, whether South American (Mexican), North American (Canadian), European, Asian, or otherwise would be a “slap in the face” to those who have completed the naturalization process. Anyone coming to the United States should have a purpose and every immigrant should have possession of proper credentials. Anyone found to be in the States illegally should be detained and ultimately deported. Anyone found to be providing employment to illegal immigrants should be fined and/or imprisoned. Anything short of this will only perpetuate the problem.

The Arizona law, although not “politically correct” is Constitutional and is already producing the desired results: illegals are threatening to leave the State (and the law is not expected to take effect until the summer of 2010).

Here’s a humorous, yet truthful, view of how some compare the U.S. with other nations:
If you cross the North Korean border illegally, you get 12 years hard labor.
If you cross the Iranian border illegally, you are detained indefinitely.
If you cross the Afghan border illegally, you get shot.
If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally, you will be jailed.
If you cross the Chinese border illegally, you may never be heard from again.
If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally, you will be branded as a spy.
If you cross the Cuban border illegally, you will be thrown into political prison.
If you cross the U.S border illegally, you get:

- a job;
- a driver’s license;
- a social security card
- welfare;
- food stamps;
- subsidized rent;
- free education;
- free health care;
- and the right to carry your country’s flag while you protest against the United States.

Lastly, prolific writer, Jeannie DeAngelis asks a pointed question: If someone 9 months pregnant broke into your house, gave birth in your living room and then claimed to own the house because the baby was born there, would you set up a nursery, move out of the top floor into the basement and keep paying the mortgage?

Sound familiar? This is a picture of what happens when illegal immigrants make their way to the States, deliver a baby and stake claim to our country! Let’s help them find their way back home! Kudos to Arizona!

Q: How can the Congress promote economic growth and jobs?

People work to provide for themselves and their families’ needs; and to prosper: to save; to invest; and to increase personal wealth. Oppressive taxation and unnecessary regulation stifles production and punishes individual efforts to earn greater amounts of money. As a result, loop holes are searched for and created to circumvent the tax laws. While this “creates” jobs for some, especially those in the government sector, it chokes the life out of a healthy economy. The best thing the government can do to promote economic growth and private sector jobs is to allow business to do what it does best by taking a “laissez-faire” (leave it alone) approach, reduce taxation, and unnecessary regulation.

Q: What can Congress do to make our education system more effective?
A: Eliminate the federal Department of Education and return complete control of education to the States. The primary responsibility of educating children lies with parents. Placing all education decisions under parental authority will allow parents to be in control of their children’s education. This renewed influence will foster more parental involvement, resulting in the student’s desire to learn, and stimulate competition between schools. In time, the United States will rise to the top when compared to the educational standards of competing nations.

Q: Earmarks: what do you think about them and why?

A: Article 1.8.1 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to tax and … “promote the general welfare” of the United States. The word general refers to the whole as in all the States of the Union. The founder’s original intent was to distribute the money collected by taxation among the States according to population, not to a specific State, a specific district, a specific business, or a specific individual. The process of earmarking changes the original intent of the founding Fathers. Earmarking promotes a “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” mentality among elected officials, an approach of bringing home the “pork” to a specific district (despite the Nation’s economic condition), and breeds corruption.

According to the Republican Party Platform’s plan to control spending, “Earmarking must stop.” I agree.

Q: Health care: where do we go from here now that the U.S. has reformed health care?
A: Repeal the healthcare law, pass tort reform, and allow individual citizens to make their own personal health care decisions.

Q: What is your opinion of drilling for oil in national park land and how do you prevent another Gulf oil slick?

A: Article 1.8.17 of the Constitution gives the federal government authority to own a 10 square mile section of land, presently Washington, D.C., and “over all places purchased by consent of the State legislature… for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock yards and other needful buildings….”

According to the 1787 Northwest Ordinance, when new territories were granted statehood, the people of the state would be given the opportunity to acquire all but a small area of land to be use by the federal government for the aforementioned purpose. The federal government owns 96% of Alaska, 87% of Nevada, and extremely large portions of other western states. These federally owned lands have not been used for the purposes authorized in the Constitution and, therefore, should be sold to the citizens of the respective states (proceeds from the sale could be use to reduce our national debt). The decision to drill for oil would then be in the hands of the legislature of the respective States. Energy independence is within our reach. This would be a step in that direction.

Oil companies should take every precaution to avoid an oil spill. If/when a spill occurs, the company should be held responsible for clean-up and restoration.

Q: Discuss the balance between personal privacy and individual freedoms versus protection from terrorists.

Americans, for the most part, appreciate the liberties and freedoms we have come to know and enjoy. Most realize trading security and protection for freedom and liberty results in a loss of freedom and liberty. It is also apparent that a fine line exists between the over-reaching arm of government and the private lives of U.S. citizens. The opportunity for abuse is ever present. The IV Amendment to the Constitution affords protection of our personal property from “unreasonable searches and seizures.”

Certainly, no freedom-loving U.S. citizen wants another 9/11. At the same time, no clear-thinking U.S. citizen wants intrusive government (including unbridled wire-tapping, the search of personal records, etc.). In the end, for our government to be able to fulfill its duty to “provide for the common defence” it appears that we must allow our military and law enforcement agencies some leeway in securing necessary intelligence of our enemies – both foreign and domestic. Still, there must be checks and balances between necessary government and the precious freedom of the people. To ensure the balance, we must elect representatives we trust to keep the government in check. Then, and only then, will we be able to rest easy, knowing that our freedoms are protected without unnecessary invasion.

Q: How can our government realistically cut the federal debt?

A: Many Cabinet-level positions could be eliminated to cut spending and in turn reduce the federal debt. I would begin with the Czars (in alphabetical order): Afghanistan, Aids, Auto Recovery, Border, Car, Domestic Violence, Drug, Economic, Energy and Environment, Faith-based, Great Lakes, Green Jobs, Guantanamo, Health, Information, International Climate, Mideast Peace, Regulatory, Science, Stimulus Accountability, Sudan, Tarp, Terrorism, Technology, Urban Affairs, Weapons, and Weapons of Mass Destruction.

The following is an incomplete list of departments and agencies to consider cutting:

Various agencies with the Department of Health and Human Services

Small Business Administration

Energy

Education

Ambassador to the United Nations (and dues paid to the U.N.)

Environmental Protection Agency

Department of the Interior

Housing and Urban Development

The Social Security Administration must be phased out to allow younger workers to plan and fund their retirement and pay promised benefits to older workers and those already retired.

The responsibility of welfare and other entitlements must also be returned to the States. Local controls will allow for better oversight and elimination of fraud.

There are hundreds of additional agencies which must be scrutinized for Constitutional authority, necessity, and effectiveness. The money saved from these programs should be used to pay down the debt.

Q: How can the federal government reform Social Security?
Promises made to U. S. citizens must be honored. A plan to privatize Social Security without reneging on prior commitments is necessary because the plan, as it stands today, is not sustainable. Furthermore, the amount of money paid by the plan will not sustain individuals during retirement. Currently, there are three workers contributing to Social Security for each recipient. By 2030, it is estimated that there will be only two contributors for each recipient. Following retirement from regular employment, supplemental retirement plans are necessary for most individuals to maintain the chosen lifestyle. It is logical then, to allow workers, especially those just entering the workforce, to invest their earnings in an account of their choosing – and enjoy the freedom of taking full responsibility for their retirement earnings. This is the American way!

Q&A with Mike Moon, Republican candidate for Congress

2010-05-25T10:36:00.002-05:00

By Joe Daues, KSPR News

Q: As a brand new Congressman, how do you plan to make southwest Missouri’s voice heard in a body of 435 people?
A: 435 people in the Congress. As you probably realize Joe, freshmen Congressmen probably sit on the fringe of the floor and they’re probably not going to be given a lot of emphasis and floor time. In fact, at the end of each day, they will generally, as historically is done, give one minute to each Congressman to say whatever they want to during the last minute. Probably, not a whole lot on the floor. But I will be making friends and meeting all the other Congressional leaders.

In fact, right now, I’m doing some comparison, contrast each Monday morning where I’m able to take a look at some conservatives, some not-so conservatives Congressional leaders and just determine what their view points are to get to know them beforehand. So when I get there, I’ll be a step ahead.

Q: What’s the most important issue facing the Ozarks and the nation? How do you intend to address it as a Congressman?
A: There are lots of issues. I believe that getting people back to work is one of them. How do we create jobs in southwest Missouri? Can the government in Washington, D.C., create jobs? Yes they can. In fact, in this economy, we’re losing jobs nationwide. But the government is increasing jobs – that’s kind of strange. They don’t produce a product; all they do is collect taxes. As long as they collect taxes, they’ll be able to employ people. When that’s stops, it’s going to be changed. I think (reducing) taxation and reducing the regulation on companies and individuals will be what produces jobs and brings that back to the district.

Q: How do you plan to cut through the bitterness and rancor of Capitol Hill so it’s not more of the same old debate?
A: I’m not going to Congress to be popular. I think I’m going to add to it. But I’m going to do it from a constitutional standpoint. I believe the greatest charter ever written was the U.S. Constitution. It’s not being followed by the majority of Congressional leaders. So, I’m going to be holding my Constitution up just like I’ve got here right today and say, “Guys, we’ve got to follow it. It’s the rulebook we have to follow.”

Q: What makes you the right person for this job?
A: I rub elbows and shoulders everyday with working people. I know their concerns. I’ve gained their trust. I probably don’t have the biggest name recognition but I’m meeting people who believe in what I’ve got to say. Mikemoonforcongress.dom is where you need go look.

Learn more about Mike Moon's campaign at his website.
Find out where Mike Moon stands on nine key issues.

Nixon Right Size Government Speech on KY3.com

2010-03-11T14:40:00.001-06:00

Read Missouri Governor Nixon's speech on cutting $500 million from next year's budget at KY3.com

Pawlenty backs Blunt

2010-02-26T22:05:00.002-06:00

From AP:

Republican Senate candidate Roy Blunt is getting some help from a potential presidential candidate.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty came to Missouri on Friday night (2-26) as the keynote speaker for the Republicans' annual Lincoln Days conference.

While in the St. Louis area, Pawlenty hosted a fundraiser for Blunt and publicly praised the southwest Missouri congressman's Senate campaign.

Pawlenty is considering a presidential run in 2012 and is making stops at similar Republican events across the country.

In Missouri, he criticized the Democratic-led Congress and President Barack Obama for running up the nation's debt with "massive" and "ridiculous" spending.

He also accused Obama of weakening the U.S. by taking an appeasement approach on international policy.

New Missouri State Poll shows positive marks for Gov. Nixon

2010-02-12T16:09:00.000-06:00

MSUPOLLfeb10

Wisdom announces fundraising totals

2010-02-02T08:38:00.001-06:00

From his press release:

The Wisdom for Congress Committee is pleased to release its most recent fund raising and expenditure totals reported to the Federal Election Commission.

As of December 31, 2009, the Wisdom for Congress Campaign has recorded the following:

Contributions: $5,407.45

Expenditures: $4,800.96

Cash-on-Hand: $606.49

Candidate Self-Financing: $3,119.58

The Wisdom for Congress Committee is proud of its balanced and conservative approach to fund raising and expenditures during the current election cycle. According to FEC records, Jeff Wisdom was the only candidate to report self-financing. The campaign has accepted no Political Action Committee contributions.

He plans to file officially as a candidate seeking the Republican nomination for Congress in Missouri’s Seventh District on February 23, 2010, the first day any candidate may legally file.

Boozman to Run for U.S. Senate

2010-01-29T14:46:00.001-06:00

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - A source says Republican congressman John Boozman will challenge two-term incumbent Democrat Blanche Lincoln this year for one of Arkansas' U.S. Senate seats. He will be the third of Arkansas' four congressmen to scrap a re-election bid.

Boozman is the 10th Republican to enter the race. The source said the Republican from northwestern Arkansas would announce his decision Feb. 6. The source spoke on condition of anonymity so as to not undermine the official announcement.

Democratic congressmen Marion Berry and Vic Snyder announced
this month they would not seek re-election.

Boozman has been in Congress since 2001. His office said the
congressman planned an "important announcement" in Little Rock on
Feb. 6.

Conversation with candidates for Missouri 62nd House district race

2010-01-29T10:42:00.000-06:00

Nita Jane Ayres, Republican, and Patty Tweedle, Libertarian, spoke with Brad Belote about the upcoming election.

SOTU Response from Rep. Blunt

2010-01-28T10:13:00.001-06:00

State of the Union responses

2010-01-28T09:54:00.001-06:00

Republicans lining for Rep. Roy Blunt’s seat in Congress shared their thoughts on Wednesday night’s State of the Union Address:

State Sen. Jack Goodman

"Southwest Missourians are looking for real solutions to our very real problems like job-loss and out of control government spending. Tonight, we did not hear any solutions; just more rhetoric. Sadly, President Obama and those that run Washington D.C. are not listening to the American people.

Americans are putting politicians on notice that they will no longer stand by while Congress recklessly spends their tax dollars on bailouts, stimulus bills and federal healthcare takeovers. While I commend the president for proposing a spending freeze for next year, we need to pass a balanced budget amendment, implement a moratorium on all earmarks and an immediate across the board spending freeze on non-essential services to return America to a sound financial foundation.

Until we see this administration actually leading on things like deficit and debt reduction, healthcare solutions with patients driving the marketplace, job creation and getting back to the free market principles that have made our nation great, America will be prevented from achieving its greatest potential and putting families back to work."

Billy Long

Tonight, President Obama outlined his plans to revive his failed health care proposal and curtail government spending, but his speech fell far short of offering real solutions to the nation's rapidly-growing problems.

"The solution to the high cost of health care is not a big-government takeover," Billy Long explained. "What we need instead is the proven success of free market competition and fair business practices. Congress should make insurance companies compete across state lines, which would reduce prices and encourage better service. Insurance companies should be required to fulfill their obligations to premium payers by covering pre-existing conditions. We should also allow more flexibility in how insurance plans are structured so that people are not forced to buy insurance for conditions that they don't want to have covered."

"The problem with the President's health care bill is the same problem you see with all of his proposals," Billy continued. "The President seems to have an unshakable faith in the power of big government when he should be placing his trust in the strength of the American people. I welcome the President’s call for a spending freeze to help curb the enormous deficits we have had – according to Fox News, the 2009 deficit of $1.4 trillion was 9.9% of our GDP and the 2010 deficit looks to be of a similar size. Unfortunately, the President is not serious about his ‘spending freeze’ – it would still have the government borrowing over one trillion dollars per year and would save only 250 billion dollars over the course of a decade, far less than what is needed to balance the budget. Borrowed government money won't fix the economy. Only individual Americans and small business owners can create jobs and grow our economy. Every dollar the President borrows for pork barrel spending and political favors just makes the task before American entrepreneurs that much harder."

Watch Out for Springfield's Money

2010-01-26T16:29:00.002-06:00

The City of Springfield is seeking applications from citizens interested in serving on the new Citizens' Sales Tax Oversight Committee approved by the City Council on Monday night.

The application form is available online

Citizens without computer or Internet access can request a mailed application by calling 864-1010, or pick up an application at the Busch Municipal Building, 840 Boonville Ave., during normal business hours.

The application deadline is: 5 p.m., Feb. 9, 2010.

The Citizens' Sales Tax Oversight Committee's charge is to review and monitor the collection of the ¾-cent Pension Fund Sales Tax revenues and allocations to ensure that the revenues received by the City are properly deposited into the City's self-funded Police-Fire Pension Fund. The Committee Chair will be asked to report to the City Council at least once every six months. The Committee's role may be expanded in the future to include monitoring other sales-tax revenue sources.

The Committee is expected to meet quarterly. Mayor Jim O'Neal proposed creation of this group after learning about a similar committee established in Joplin to provide oversight of tax-revenue collections.

The City Council's Public Involvement Committee will select the nine-member committee and forward its recommendations to the full Council for approval. The Committee will be comprised of at least five members who live within Springfield City limits. It will serve as an advisory committee to the City Council, so its role will be governed by Sections 15.2 and 15.5 of the City Charter.

For more information, contact: City Manager Greg Burris, 864-1006; or Louise Whall, Director of Public Information, 864-1010.

Mo. Senate leaders commit to full school funding

2010-01-25T18:29:00.002-06:00

(AP) - Republican Senate leaders say they're committed to giving Missouri schools the full amount of money called for under the state's school financing formula.

Senate President Pro Tem Charlie Shields and Majority Leader
Kevin Engler said Monday that other parts of the budget would have
to be cut to carry out their pledge for K-12 schools. But they said schools must be the priority.

Last week, Gov. Jay Nixon proposed a budget that would give schools barely one-sixth of the funding increase called for under the formula next school year. Nixon said that still would be a
record amount.

Some public school officials have said they would have to make cuts or seek local tax increases if the state formula were not fully funded.

Rasmussen Poll: Blunt 49%, Carnahan 43%

2010-01-21T09:19:00.000-06:00

The latest Rasmussen poll has Rep. Roy Blunt leading secretary of state Robin Carnahan in the race for the U.S. Senate.

The poll of likely voters has Blunt at 49%, Carnahan at 43%, with 3% supporting someone else and 5% undecided. Rasmussen reports anger over healthcare reform legislation is hurting the Democrat Carnahan.

Fresh off his state of the state address, Gov. Jay Nixon has a 61% approval rating.

Billy Long raises $126,816 for Congressional Campaign

2010-01-13T10:17:00.001-06:00

Billy Long announced his fourth quarter take for his campaign for Congress: $126,816. According to a press release, Long's fundraising effort for the 7th Congressional district has netted $478,641.

More fundraising reports will trickle in over the next few weeks.

Election Watch: February 2

2010-01-11T12:34:00.001-06:00

The February 2, 2010, ballot in southwest Missouri will be one of the lightest in a long time: two issues/races.

Voters in the Mark Twain school district are being asked to consider a property tax levy. The district wants an 89 cent increase that would generate $60,000. The money would not create new programs but instead just keep the status quo. Superintendent Bruce Forrest says he's worried about the school's ability to stay open because of declining enrollment, less state money and less money coming from the federal government. Much of Mark Twain's district includes land in the Mark Twain National Forest.

Sample Ballot

Voters in Missouri's 62nd state house district will decide who will fill the seat of Dennis Wood. Wood resigned in September to accept the appointment by Gov. Jay Nixon to be Stone County presiding commissioner.

Republicans chose Nita Jane Ayres to appear on the ballot. Ayres had hoped to get the commissioner job. Libertarians also have a candidate: Patty Tweedle.

According to Missouri Ethics Commission reports, through December 31, Ayres had raised $20,355 during the fourth quarter of 2009. She had just $11,000 left after buying signs, t-shirts, and mailers for her campaign.

As of this writing, the Tweedle campaign did not have any reports on file with the MEC.

Where's a Democrat? James "Jim" Rynard had gotten the support of local Dems. But according to the Stone County Gazette, he was removed from the ballot for failing to file the proper paperwork. Rynard told Chad Livengood he did that intentionally since he was closing his law firm and moving out of the area.

The winner will only get to enjoy the victory for a few months. The seat will be open again in the fall. Filing for the August primary begins February 23.

Sample Ballot

Nixon Wants Tax Credit Limit to be Fuzzy for Some Businesses

2010-01-05T10:36:00.001-06:00

From the Associated Press:
As part of his Tuesday visit to Springfield, Gov. Jay Nixon will call on new legislation that would allow the Department of Economic Development to exceed the normal tax credit cap for established Missouri businesses that choose to expand in-state instead of elsewhere.

Nixon will tour American Dehydrated Foods Tuesday afternoon.

Nixon in Springfield Tuesday for Jobs Program

2010-01-04T16:33:00.000-06:00

Gov. Jay Nixon will be in Springfield and Kansas City Tuesday to roll out a jobs program. He'll appear at

As the release puts it, Nixon will announce '“Missouri First,” an initiative that will retool the state’s economic incentives to help existing Missouri companies expand and create jobs.

Nixon will be American Dehydrated Foods in Springfield.

Nixon and Missouri begin the year with 9.5% unemployment in November, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Missouri Department of Economic Development puts the figure at 9.2%. The December figures are due January 18.

The Springfield MSA numbers were 5.9% in November 2008 and 8.2% a year later.

The Notebook's Final 2009 List

2009-12-31T12:30:00.000-06:00

THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES
The Players, Moments & Words That Defined Missouri Politics in 2009

Most Defining Political Moment: Sen. Bond's retirement announcement

Worst Idea: Nixon administration attempting to ban reporter cell phones at a news conference in the Governor's office

15 Minutes of Fame: Linda Martinez, Dave Coonrod

Best Comeback: Springfield sales tax; FAILED in February 52%-47%, PASSED in November 55%-45%

GOP Up & Comers: Springfield City Councilman Nick Ibarra, #140th District House candidate Lincoln Hough

DEM Up & Comers: Rep. Jason Kander (#44th House District), 8th District U.S. House candidate Tommy Sowers

Best New Blog: The Missouri Record

Fastest Rise: Billy Long

Words Added to the Lexicon: E.Coli-gate, Shovel-ready, Birthers, MIAC (pronounced My-yack), Cash for Clunkers, Green Balloons

Toughest Call: Motorcycle Helmet Law

Political Play of The Year: Tom Schweich striking a deal to run for Auditor instead of U.S. Senate in exchange for Republican establishment support

Gutsiest Move: Sen. Claire McCaskill's series of summer townhall meetings

Biggest Diss: Gov. Nixon not telling Lt. Gov. Kinder about his trip to the Middle East before he left

R.I.P: Gov. Warren Hearnes

Reporter of The Year: Karen Dillon, Kansas City Star

Anonymous Quote Of The Year: "When Karen Dillon calls you, you know you're already f*$!ed. She doesn't call until she's got you by the balls."

5 Best On The Record Quotes:
1. "So stick it up your ass." -- Rep. Ike Skelton, caught on an open microphone on the House floor, in reference to Rep. Todd Akin.

2. "Alaska doesn't know we have our own Sarah." -- Sen. Claire McCaskill, in a speech in Hannibal, referencing Sarah Steelman's potential challenge to Congressman Roy Blunt in the GOP primary for U.S. Senate. Steelman decided against a run.

3. "I don't think people care that much about when I'm brushing my teeth." -- Robin Carnahan, dismissing the social media tool Twitter. Months later, her campaign had signed up for an account

4. "Can you see me behind this mic?" -- Billy Long, in his opening line on stage in a summer speech at "Patriots in the Park"

5. "If somebody's actively opposing me and then I win the election, am I going to support that person in 2012? Well, no." -- Tom Schweich, answering a question on whether he'd pledge to serve a full 4-year term if elected State Auditor

Most Outlandish Political Attack: Calls to boycott President Obama's school speech to students for fears of "indoctrination"

Fairest Political Attack: That members of the Nixon administration mislead the public and the media about E.Coli-gate

Most Unfortunate Final Tweet: "Betsy is tomorrow" 10:15 p.m. Dec. 6th from txt, by @jedijetton

Rising Pundits: Missouri State University's Brian Calfano, Democrat/Springfield attorney Kris Barefield

Republicans Who Should Get on Twitter: Former Gov. Matt Blunt, David Steelman

Democrats Who Should Get on Twitter: Jack Cardetti, Former Gov. Bob Holden

5 Top Notebook VIDS:
1. Matt Blunt's scooter accident LINK
2. Ralph Manley abruptly resigns LINK
3. Nixon testily responds to Kinder question LINK
4. Bond jokes about Carnahan tracker LINK
5. Lawmaker Caught Snoozing LINK

***

To the loyal readers of this little experiment I fondly call The Notebook, my whole-hearted thanks to each of you for your loyalty, your encouragement, your level-headed critiques -- but most of all, for caring about politics and your government.

I'll see you @POLITICO on January 18th.

Until then, keep in touch via TWITTER/FACEBOOK.

For now, 2010 is . . .

DEVELOPING . . .

AM Radio With Steelman

2009-12-30T01:26:00.003-06:00

Former State Treasurer Sarah Steelman hosts The Notebook on KWTO NewsTalk Radio Wednesday morning to talk about politics.

Tune in HERE.

I'll appear roughly between 7:30 and 9 a.m.

Steelman guest hosts the show between 6-9 a.m. 140th District Springfield GOP House candidate Lincoln Hough is also scheduled to appear.

2009: The Biggest Stories in Missouri Politics

2009-12-30T01:03:00.006-06:00

It was the year of the stimulus, swine flu and in Springfield -- a controversial sales tax.

Three major Democrats took the reigns of power -- Barack Obama as president, Jay Nixon as governor and Jim O'Neal in the mayor's office in Springfield.

WATCH MY FINAL KY3 NEWS @ 10 REPORT HERE

***The Notebook's Top 10 Stories in Missouri Politics in 2009***

1. Sen. Kit Bond Retirement Announcement Spurs Shake-Up
2. E.Coli-gate
3. Sen. Claire McCaskill's summer townhall meetings
4. Tea Party rallies/movement
5. Sarah Steelman's decision not to run for U.S. Senate
6. Lawmakers resign amid corruption/ethical charges
7. Assault charge filed against former House Speaker Rod Jetton
8. Gov. Nixon's Budget Cuts
9. Billy Long's rise in the 7th District
10. Controversy over MIAC report

FINAL LIST still DEVELOPING . . .

Last Call

2009-12-29T15:09:00.002-06:00

The Year In Review In Politics . . .

Tonight on Ky3 News @ 10 . . .

PLUS: The Notebook's FINAL List

What's the political play of the year? Who got 15 Minutes of Fame? What words were added to our political vocabulary? What were the top clips of political VID in Missouri politics?

We're making the list and checking it twice . . .

DEVELOPING . . .

The 10 Most Influential Tweeps in Missouri Politics

2009-12-29T00:58:00.002-06:00

POWER TWEEPS

There is no perfect formula to any list -- and that's the point, really. The Notebook's 10 most influential Tweeps is meant to drive discussion more than it's designed to dictate it. (Are Missouri conservatives & Republicans more active and effective users of Twitter -- or are there just more of them in the Twitterverse -- and, if so, Why?) Being an elected official held considerable weight, as did the number of followers one has collected. But there are also the immeasurables and intangibles -- the willingness to show some flair, the ability to deepen or widen a debate, the audacity to take some risk. Overall, this list tries to encompass the people in Missouri politics who most heavily influence debate regularly with their Twitter accounts. 2009 will be remembered as the year when Twitter exploded as a powerful tool in politics -- Here's The Notebook's list of the 10 most powerful politicos on Twitter.

1. @clairecmc - The undisputed Queen of Tweet in Missouri is also one of the most influential Twitterers in the country. Sen. Claire McCaskill openly believes the power of Twitter can change politics and is proving her own point by engaging even her most disparaging critics for all the Twitterverse to see. The most fascinating thing is not how often she Tweets, but how viscerally she responds to others inquiries. How many other pols would take the time to lend 140 characters to a faceless, at times, insulting inquiry past midnight? And if this is what she shares, can you imagine what she's holding back? Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, you have to admire the window she's provided into her life. Whether it's being a proud mom (Lily all packed, ready to go to ballet camp in Vermont), trashing talking sports (Why is it so much fun to beat the Cubbies?) or admitting a flaw (Guess all the criticism gets under my skin sometimes. It shouldn't, sorry) -- McCaskill's messages are allowing fans, foes and those in between to learn more about their junior U.S. Senator than any other pol in Missouri.

2. @tonymess - Anyone who cares about the sausage-making legislative process in Jefferson City knows that Tony Messenger's Tweet-by-Tweet of the action is indispensable reading. His late-night tweets (along with @ChadLivengood -- see below) for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch during the final stretch of the session managed to capture all the blood, sweat, tears, exhaustion, lunacy and hilarity of the waning hours. Tony even created potential drinking games for filibusters. Plus, follow Messenger and you'll always know the Rockies score. But, be warned, you'll have to put up with updates of that foreign sport, some refer to as "soccer".

3. @ChadLivengood - He may not admit it, but the Springfield News Leader's state capitol reporter was once upon a time a bit of a Twitter skeptic. But amid covering his first legislative session, Chad Livengood quickly began cranking out the Tweets and building up his list of followers. Like @tonymess, Livengood's Jefferson City updates became invaluable to politicos, citizens and even reporters like me who didn't have the wherewithal to sit through it all ourselves. At times, Livengood and Messenger would (seemingly in tandem) Tweet questions and answers back and forth to each other from the House and Senate -- producing live give-and-take reporting and analysis that fueled conversation and shaped the legislative debate. In addition to keeping tabs on the political action in the Show-Me state, Livengood sprinkles in a good amount of Tweets about his old reporting stomping ground in Michigan and the waning state of print journalism. Because of geography and followers, Tony gets a slight edge over Chad in Tweet power -- but only by a twit.

4. @DLoesch - Her bio says it all: Mother, blogger, talk radio host, smart aleck. And all those traits are reflected in the tweets produced by Dana Loesch. The conservative radio host writes tweets that punch with personality and she's steadily approaching the 7,000 followers mark. But she's also got purpose. She uses her St. Louis based sounding board to rail against the left and President Obama's agenda. But more specifically, she's got her eye on Rep. Russ Carnahan and Sen. Claire McCaskill. (Carnahan just fibbed: http://bit.ly/2ceEMn . It adds over $200b to the deficit, she Tweeted on July 20th.) Still, the real charm is the seamless balance Loesch demonstrates between Tweeting the personal and political. A recent fav: JEEBUS. Sorry pizza guy that my son answered the door with no pants on! So glad you weren't a pervert! If you can learn something and laugh, that's a worthy follow.

5. @JakeWagman - At times, one might think Jake Wagman picked the wrong beat. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch political reporter is full of Cardinal stats, play-by-play and commentary. Sure, his Tweets are filled with the latest campaign and political news for the state's most influential paper -- but Wagman always finds time to pepper in the question or comment of the moment on the Cards, the NFL season or other sports trivia. A sample: Who will start in left field tonight? Don't rule out Joe Thurston, though Ank was 2-5 against Moehler last year with a dinger . . . to . . . Scratch that -- game called, Cards win. Does this count as a complete game for Wainwright? We're hoping for more mixed political-sports metaphors are in his Tweeting future.

6. @PeterKinder - As speculation grows over the Lieutenant Governor's 2012 plans, his Twitter account will draw more eyeballs and scrutiny. There's no lack of passion in Peter Kinder's Tweets: Sebelius: EVERYONE will pay for abortion coverage. Take that, all us pro-life Missourians! He also enjoys striking the Caps Lock key: "THAT'S MSNBC FOR YOU" But strikingly, he's rarely used the platform to directly engage his rival, Gov. Jay Nixon (That's left to Chief of Staff @RichAuBuchon and Communications Director @gmcelyea). Instead, Kinder has focused his attention on national affairs, like President Obama's popularity and the healthcare debate. Some GOPers privately believe Kinder should suspend his Twitter account if he wants to be taken seriously. His "I was first the Tweet it" over a false alarm hostage scare in Jefferson City earned him considerable flack from his critics -- and prompted some telling deletions from his feed. The incident exemplified how Twitter can be used as a political tool but also as a self-inflicted dagger. In 2006, it was the Macaca moment on YouTube that sent Sen. George Allen packing. In 2010 or 2012, could Twitter similarly bury a candidate that's too quick to Tweet?

7. @RoyBlunt - It's unclear how much of the Ozarks Congressman's Tweeting is done by himself as opposed to aides, and many of the messages are formulaic and predictable. But Roy Blunt showed he can drive some news through the Twitterverse. His recent Tweet of a Charlie Cook prediction of a 2010 U.S. Senate campaign win drew attention and debate. And @RobinCarnahan's initial diss of Twitter has helped him build a healthy lead in followers over the Secretary of State. Both accounts will be mandatory viewing for politicos throughout 2010, but Blunt's camp seems a bit more comfortable and aggressive in Tweetland.

8. @MayorSlay - The mayor of St. Louis uses his characters less to drive political debate and more to inform the Twitterverse about events, trends and developments in the city under the arch: El Monstero plays their second night at The Pageant tonight. Francis Slay's Tweets are normally short, direct and helpful -- especially if you're an out of towner. But they also exude the calm command of a leader in charge and in touch, with slices of humor: Mayoral rules for office parties: try every dish, smile, don't wear a Santa hat for the picture. Next step, wearing the hat and having the chutzpah to Twitpic it.

9. @JolieJustus -As far as progressives go, this Kansas City State Senator is one of the leaders in the Twitterworld. Jolie Justus' messages are lively, consistent and her personality easily shines through the computer screen. She also varies her Tweet topics, which is important in order to lure followers outside the political realm. She'll dive into current events: "While MO newspapers have suffered massive layoffs, I heard an radio story this wkd that quoted the NYT "scent" editor. Must be nice." And have a little fun with (can you believe it) a Governor from her own party?!: Dear Gov, why do you hate turkeys? Even Palin pardoned a turkey. RT@Missourinet No pardon for Missouri's turkeys. For lawmakers who want to boost followers, they should keep an eye on the Justus model.

10. @Ed4Congress - More than any other candidate in Missouri, Gov. Matt Blunt's former chief of staff Ed Martin has build a significant portion of a Congressional campaign around Twitter. He's one of the state's most prolific Tweeps -- and some would argue he's an example of someone who Tweets too much. But persistence can pay dividends. Martin's scored close to 1,900 followers with just over 3,100 Tweets -- a pretty good ratio. There's no evidence all the typing will aid his bid against @RepCarnahan, but Martin certainly sees Twitter as a top campaign tool.

If There Were 20 (in no particular order):
Honorable mentions -- @Mommentator, @FiredUpMissouri, @ReneeHulshof, @MoRecord, @jrosenbaum, @johncombest, @shanamarchio, @senjasoncrowell, @KrisKetz, @AFPMissouri

Who'd I miss?
What did I get wrong?

Leave your own list in the comment sections.

Jericho Out; BlogTalkRadio Podcast Tuesday

2009-12-28T23:34:00.004-06:00

RADIO SHACK

An employee with Journal Broadcast Media tells The Notebook that controversial conservative radio talk show host Vincent David Jericho is no longer employed with KSGF.

On Monday afternoon, Bruce Delay was listed as the new morning host on the KSGF website. Jericho was no longer listed as personality. An employee with an affiliated station said he could not elaborate on the reason for Jericho's departure. By Monday evening, fans were offering their prayers for Jericho on his Facebook page.

In August, Jericho, who had been on the air with KSGF for more than five years, made national news during an interview with Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele. Steele said he agreed with the often bombastic host on a point he was making about politicians "who can't behave themselves." "When stuff gets in the crapper, you got to clean it out," said Steele, leaving the impression to many that he was referring directly to Congressman Roy Blunt.

Jericho has also been a vociferous critic of Blunt and 7th District executive director Mavis Busiek. "If you don't kiss Mavis Busiek's ring, and if you aren't 800 years old, they don't let you in," Jericho said on his program during the Steele interview.
***
ALSO: TUESDAY: BLOGTALKRADIO
11 A.M CST

On my last day with Ky3 News, tune in for a podcast with KSPR news director Brad Belote in a discussion about politics and my move to POLITICO next month.

Call 917-932-1277 with your questions OR LISTEN HERE.

Nixon's 2009 Final Report Card

2009-12-27T17:11:00.000-06:00

NIXON'S 2nd HALF GRADE: C
NIXON's MIDTERM GRADE: B
NIXON's FINAL 2009 GRADE: B-

On his midterm report card in July, Gov. Jay Nixon earned a solid B for an above average approval rating, his ability to squeak out a jobs bill through the legislature and for dodging substantial criticism on first year budget cuts. But the second half of the year proved to be more challenging for Nixon as his administration battled the slow drip of E.Coligate, which fueled public cynicism about government secrecy and lead to the sacking of a loyal aide. Some of Nixon's best moments of the second half included smooth handling of more budget withholds, a 23-0 override-proof veto session and a renewed focus on job growth through growing successful existing businesses, luring high-tech industries and boosting training at community colleges. But over the last 23 weeks, Nixon also earned his first failing weekly grades. In all, he was awarded three F's, including two in a row at the end of September and the beginning of October, when reporters uncovered that top Nixon aides knew about the high E.coli levels in Lake of the Ozarks much sooner than the administration had previously acknowledged. Cabinet official Mark Templeton had to be placed on leave and Communications director Jack Cardetti came close to acknowledging he mislead reporters. Nixon also saw his public poll position deteriorate throughout the fall. Still, much of the criticism lobbed against Nixon by Republicans seems hallow and has failed to cut through. The GOP has repeatedly griped about a new license fee office system that a Republican legislature helped put into place. They took shots at Economic Development director Linda Martinez's abrupt and questionable departure, but she ended up going out with a whimper, not a roar. Republicans even slapped Nixon for taking credit for a tuition freeze that they claimed would have occurred anyway. But overall, Nixon deftly avoided major partisan fights on policy. When he slashed $204 million dollars in late October, the GOP budget chair's critique was that Nixon didn't go far enough. Meanwhile, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch characterized Nixon as a "warmed-over Matt Blunt." And even E.Coligate lost the legs it had been growing earlier this fall. Politically, Nixon remains relatively healthy. Besides the partisans, main street GOPers seem, if not satisfied, at least comfortable with Nixon's direction so far. And Missouri's neutered progressive movement can bark, but hasn't shown it can bite on holding Nixon to campaign promises like Medicaid enrollment. The Governor continues to pad his campaign coffers and the GOP lacks a leader with the stature to match him toe-to-toe on day-to-day business. Unemployment will be his main challenge as he enters his second year, but he's already signaling a bi-partisan tone for 2010. That agenda will be tested in a mid-term election year where conservatives are energized and Republicans sense opportunity. It's impossible to forecast the unknowns that will inevitably pop up in the new year. But Nixon's moderate sensibilities and his ability to measure the pulse of the state puts him in a better position than other Governors around the country to thrive in a challenging economic environment.

2009 GRADING BREAKDOWN

In 49 WEEKS: Nixon won 8 A's, 20 B's, 15 C's, 3 D's & 3 F's

HIGH POINTS: Inauguration Speech, New Jobs in Republic (3/1), 60% Approval Rating (4/12), Jobs Bill Passes (5/17), Bipartisan Praise for Healthcare Training at Colleges; Kinder Bungles Criticism (5/31), Dodging Criticism for Budget Ax (6/28), Rural Broadband Plan Announced (8/16), Public Works/Construction $$$ (11/15), Tuition Freeze Year 2 (11/22), Property Tax Subsidy Passes Housing Commission (12/20)

LOW POINTS: Misses Deadline to Pass Jobs Bill By Spring Break (3/15), Backtracks & Scraps MIAC Report Amid Controversy (3/29), Tourism Money Not Released As Promised; STL Rep. Accuses Gov. of "Ignoring the Plight of Blacks" (5/3), Threatens to Cut '09 Tour of Missouri (7/12), E.Coligate Breaks (7/19), 10-point Approval Rating Drop (9/6), Aides Knew More About E.Coligate Than They Revealed/Templeton on Leave (10/4), Approval Drops to 40s/9.5% Unemployment (12/1)

Carnahan: Legislation Takes "Important Steps"

2009-12-24T19:45:00.003-06:00

Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate Robin Carnahan continued to carefully craft her public position on federal healthcare legislation Thursday, saying the Senate bill "takes important steps" without wholeheartedly backing the entirety of the complex measure.

The Senate approved the measure early Thursday, 60-39, free of Republican votes. It sets the stage for a complicated conference committee negotiation, where House and Senate Democrats will attempt to push for final passage before President Obama's State of the Union address on February 2nd.

"While more needs to be done to get tough on insurance companies by creating more competition to drive down costs for all consumers, this legislation takes important steps to stop insurance companies from denying people insurance due to preexisting conditions, and to insure nearly 800,000 more Missourians," Carnahan said in a statement.

While Democrats from the president on down billed the vote as "historic," Republicans, like Congressman Roy Blunt framed it as a catastrophic mistake clouded by "political payoffs."

"It takes huge cuts out of Medicare for seniors, to spend on new programs that don't help seniors. Families will pay higher premiums for a new system that will move inevitably into rationing and ever deeper control by a huge new government bureaucracy. State budgets in Missouri and across the nation will be slammed with unfunded mandates from Washington, threatening funding for schools, public safety, and other vital purposes," Blunt said in a statement.

Blunt also made clear that Carnahan would have been among the Democrats voting "yes" if she held Sen. Kit Bond's seat.

The Missouri Republican Party used the season to land their charge: "On Christmas Eve, Robin Carnahan delivered a lump of coal to Missouri's families, businesses, and seniors when she declared what we already knew to be true: that she would have voted for the Democrats' reckless and expensive government-takeover of health care," said MoGOP executive director Lloyd Smith.

While conventional wisdom might permit the assumption that Carnahan would have been a "yes" vote, the Secretary of State has steered clear of taking a unequivocal position on the ever-changing legislation.

In early November, Carnahan said she was both "excited and concerned" about the legislation. What's unclear is where Carnahan stands on some of the most contentious differences between the House and Senate bills -- like the necessity of a public option, the level of abortion restrictions and who to tax to pay for the massive expansion of coverage.

A recent Rasmussen Reports survey showed Missouri voters opposed to Congressional healthcare legislation by a 57% to 40% margin. Carnahan lead Blunt overwhelmingly among those who favor the plan and held a surprising edge among those "somewhat opposed."

In her statement, for the first time, Carnahan also directly took a shot at Blunt's alternative plan, which focused on reigning in frivolous lawsuits and associated health plans through larger "risk pools."

"The alternative offered by Congressman Blunt, not only would increase premiums and push more Missourians onto the rolls of the uninsured but it also would let insurance companies continue their worst abuses like denying Missourians the care they need for the sake of profits. That is completely unacceptable," Carnahan said.

Meanwhile, one of the candidates aiming to replace Blunt mirrored some of the same language of the 7th District Congressman to lambaste passage.

"States like Missouri will see their budgets wrecked with more unfunded mandates from Washington, taking away from other essential services like education," said Mt. Vernon State Sen. Jack Goodman.

Goodman also pledged to work to overturn the legislation if elected, something former House Speaker Newt Gingrich already predicted would become a major campaign theme for Republicans in 2010.

The early-morning Christmas Eve vote allowed lawmakers to get home for the holiday. CNN showed video of Sen. Claire McCaskill, who voted yes, bolting through the parking lot as soon as the job was done.

Washington's WJLA reported that Sen. Bond, who voted no, also raced to the airport for a flight back to Kansas City.

"There's a blizzard due at 6 p.m. We're due to land at 3:30 p.m. Close counts in horseshoes, but I'm not sure about landing airplanes," Bond said.

Nixon Eyes Bipartisan Priorities As A Democrat Laments

2009-12-23T21:30:00.001-06:00

A high-tech economic development package, mandating insurance companies to cover children with autism and installing tougher ethics laws for elected officials are Gov. Jay Nixon's three top priorities heading into the 2010 legislative session.

And while some of the details differ, there appears to be initial bipartisan agreement on the broad underlying principals involved in all three areas.

On two of the issues -- autism coverage and ethics reform -- Republicans have publicly touted their support for similar changes. In early December, Nixon traveled the state with Republican Senators to push for autism coverage, which died in the House last year. And although at the Springfield stop, GOP House members were noticeably absent from Nixon's news conference, Speaker Ron Richard has indicated the legislation will get an early calendar slot in January.

While there's expected to be another tussle over re-instituting campaign contribution limits, the federal guilty pleas of three ex-lawmakers has fueled a emerging political consensus that some action needs to be taken to stifle corruption and cronyism in the state capitol.

"There's a lot of basic blocking and tackling in ethics that needs to get done," Nixon said in an interview last week. Watch a clip of Nixon's goals ABOVE.

Republican leaders in both chambers have pre-filed ethics legislation. And Republican Rep. Tim Flook has teamed up with Democratic Rep. Jason Kander on a bill that would boost penalties for "money laundering" in campaigns.

Flook, who also chairs a key house economic development committee, has indicated that creation of a biotechnology incentive fund -- which Nixon touted earlier this month -- would also be a top priority of his.

"We've got to have tools to compete with other tools, and in the high-tech area, we've got to get that bill passed," Nixon said.

A GOP legislative aide said the Senate is eager to work with Nixon "where we can agree," but added that the state budget would be where lines are drawn and more partisan fights ensue.

"A budget is always about priorities, especially in this tough year. We don't know his yet, and that's going to drive the session," the aide said, speaking anonymously, in order to talk more candidly.

But one Democrat who works in Jefferson City and bills himself as a Nixon supporter has deep concerns about the Governor's political position heading into his second year.

This veteran Democratic lobbyist, who regularly exchanges e-mails with this reporter, requested anonymity because of fears that public comments could hurt his dealings in the capitol and rub raw feelings among those in his party.

"Two polls showing the Governor polling in the low to mid 40's just a year after a smashing electoral route should raise some alarm bells among Nixon aides and supporters," wrote the Democrat, referring to SurveyUSA monthly tracking numbers.

While some on the left are carping about Nixon's failure to broadly expand healthcare to low-income residents, this Democrat said the Governor's main mistake was overpromising during the campaign.

"I don't think we have the money to do what the left wants so I am with Jay on that. But Jay made a big mistake assuring the base that he could do all these things when pretty much everyone in Jeff City knew the budget was going south. I am not with them on the issue. We can't continue to spend more and more money but I think they legitimately feel lied to," said the source.

Liberal lawmakers told The Notebook that they understand Nixon's practical budget constraints in a dour economic environment, but would like to see the Governor put more "skin in the game" on traditionally Democratic issues.

"I'd like to see him renew his effort on healthcare this session," said Rep. Jeanette Mott Oxford, a St. Louis Democrat. "I haven't heard a whole lot about that yet."

Sen. Jolie Justus of Kansas City, who calls her self a progressive pragmatist, said she often has to temper expectations of her constituents who live "in their own little liberal bubble."

"Are we impatient? Yeah. Would my district prefer to have a Governor that's not for executing prisoners? Yeah, they would. We don't have that kind of Governor," Justus said.

"There was no way Gov. Nixon was going to come in and do sweeping change," she went on. "I know Gov. Nixon spends a lot of time courting liberal constituencies, but I'm a realist. We're a red state with big blue bubbles on each side," Justus added.

Or as the Governor himself put it, "You've got to reflect your state."

Most Democrats acknowledge that economic priorities have to come before healthcare, but the Jefferson City Democrat said that he's heard repeatedly from other Democratic insiders that Nixon's economic development initiatives are driven by polling, conducted regularly by Nixon consultant Ken Morley.

"Many believe these programs can be very costly with little jobs to actually show because many of the jobs would have happen anyways. You also hear why should the state be favoring one industry over another," said the Democrat.

"Jay is saying we are doing good on the job front because we are below the national average (on unemployment). But if you look at this our unemployment rate is actually 31st so we are worse than most states. If you compare us to the surrounding states we really look bad. In your neck of the woods Kansas, Arkansas and Oklahoma are all more than 2 percent lowers than ours," he added.

Nixon dismissed a question that asked him to evaluate himself politically after his first year, but said that politics does not drive his agenda.

"While politics is involved in this job, I think people would be stunned about how little time I think about politics," Nixon said.

But the anonymous Democratic lobbyist lamented that Nixon's "obsessively" loyal and secretive staff is the most troubling part of the administration.

"I had a meeting with two people who have been working with Jay's office on an issue. They were frustrated with how the staff in the office has handled the issue. Not with the end result but with the level of competence, secrecy, and the "gutter politics" that was played," said the source.

"Just the perception that everything is about Jay and no one else. In this case they were mad at the Chief of Staff (John Watson) and the Policy Director (Jeff Harris). But I have heard negative comments about basically the entire staff," he added.

Nixon said that he's become a better listener during his first year and hopes to use that to his advantage going into his second. But this Democrat said Nixon should re-evaluate who he's listening to.

"The Republicans have focused a lot on (Jack) Cardetti. I think he was less than honest in the E.Coli matter but oddly enough he doesn't get as much criticism as some. I have heard from multiple people that the staff is worse than Holden's," said the source.

"If you know anything about the Holden administration that is a pretty tough on Nixon statement," he concluded.

NRCC Robocalling Skelton

2009-12-22T21:30:00.003-06:00

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) launched end-of-the-year robocalls Tuesday targeting 4th District Democrat Ike Skelton.

"Somehow, Ike Skelton still hasn’t gotten the message that Americans have had enough of his party’s agenda of higher taxes, more government takeovers and fewer jobs," said NRCC Communications Director Ken Spain.

The script of the call notes Missouri's 9.5 percent unemployment rate and Skelton's vote for the economic stimulus package.

FULL SCRIPT BELOW:
"Hello, I’m calling on behalf of the NRCC with an end of year action alert about Congressman Ike Skelton. Ike Skelton has been in congress for over 33 years and has lost touch with what Missouri workers are going through. Unemployment in Missouri is 9.5% but Ike Skelton spent 2009 helping liberal Speaker Nancy Pelosi push a massive $787 billion pork-laden spending bill he called a ‘stimulus’ but that has not helped the Missouri economy. To make matters worse Skelton voted for the liberal cap-and-trade bill that will increase energy costs for Missouri families at the worst time. Call Ike Skelton at 573-635-3499 and tell him your New Year’s resolution is to watch his votes in 2010 to make sure he is voting for Missouri workers, not the liberal agenda of the Democrat party leaders in Washington. Paid for by the National Republican Congressional Committee and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. 202-479-7000."

Sen. Bill Stouffer and Vicky Hartzler appear to be the two top Republicans vying to challenge Skelton.

Cooking Up A Prediction For Blunt?

2009-12-22T17:49:00.004-06:00

The Cook Political Report's Charlie Cook predicts that Republicans will pick up between four and six U.S. Senate seats in 2010 -- strongly suggesting without explicitly saying that Roy Blunt will prevail over likely Democratic opponent Robin Carnahan.

@RoyBlunt touted the news in a TWEET Tuesday afternoon.

"I suspect a Republican gain of between four and six seats between four and six seats, predicated on Democrats being unlikely to beat any Republican open-seat Senate candidate or being able to unseat any Republican Senate incumbent. Democrats will have to be more concerned with defending their own seats.," wrote Cook in his Dec. 18th update.

THE CAVEAT: "Obviously much can and much will happen between now and November 2nd, 2010 and our estimates will undoubtedly change dozens of times over the next year," Cook concludes.

His colleague Jennifer Duffy is more conservative in her Republican upswing, estimating

the Senate could run from a wash, with neither party gaining a net seat on the other, up to a three seat gain for Republicans.

The difference between Duffy & Cook's analysis? Cook places greater weight on national dynamics while Duffy focuses on local developments within states.

The latest Rasmussen Reports poll gave Carnahan a statistically insignificant 2 percentage point edge, 46%-44%, over the Ozarks Congressman.

"You're Responsible For A Lot of Things"

2009-12-21T20:22:00.008-06:00

NIXON'S E.COLI-GATE LESSON

No single story damaged Gov. Jay Nixon's administration more in its first year than the revelations that officials withheld test results from the public that showed high levels of E.Coli at Lake of the Ozarks near the start of the summer tourist season.

In an interview with Ky3 News, Nixon brushed aside concerns that what's now known as "E.Coli-gate" undermined his administration in any way, but said the ordeal taught him a valuable lesson about the size of the state government he heads.

"From my perspective, it's a big government. Teaches you frankly, that you're responsible for a lot of things going out there," Nixon said, when asked whether he had regrets about how the situation was handled.

*WATCH E.COLI EXCHANGE ABOVE*

ALSO: Seemingly answering his critics who have called for more firings, Nixon said he hoped "we can take the energy for this to clean up the water."

"I hope that that same level of energy is used to clean up the Lake of the Ozarks, to clean up Bull Shoals, to clean up the waters of the state of Missouri," he added.

Missouri Gives Its Pols End of Year Polling Boost

2009-12-21T00:44:00.004-06:00

DECEMBER BUMP
Missourians gave their leaders early Christmas presents this weekend, delivering a batch of bolstered approval numbers to their stockings, according to the latest SurveyUSA polling.

President Obama, Gov. Jay Nixon and Sen. Kit Bond all saw their approval ratings inch up over the past month. Sen. Claire McCaskill's approval number stayed stable at 48 percent.

December Approval Ratings:
Sen. Kit Bond 49% Approve
Gov. Jay Nixon 49% Approve
Sen. Claire McCaskill 48% Approve
President Obama 45% Approve

600 adults surveyed Dec. 11-13th/MOE 4.1%
***
But overall 2009 was a tough year for all four politicians.

Since January, Bond has lost 6 points and McCaskill has lost four points. Nixon and Obama saw more dramatic drops in their first year. The governor has lost 14 points since January and the president has experienced a 20 point decline.

Week 49: Nixon's Grade

2009-12-20T18:25:00.003-06:00

NIXON'S WEEK 49 GRADE: B +

Governor Nixon was buoyant and upbeat during his year-end round of interviews with television stations from around the state on Thursday. Despite some acknowledged setbacks, he seemed satisfied with the position of his administration twelve months in, yet energized about his sophomore year legislative agenda. He scored a easy win by getting a property tax break through the Housing Commission and while lawmakers aren't saying much about last week's duel economic proposals, the Governor won mostly positive media out of the community college and high-tech job announcements. He even played sports commentator by suggesting Mizzou should consider conference hopping to the Big Ten. And while he indicated to me he's not a big fan of the SurveyUSA or Rasmussen Reports polling methods, both groups offered the Governor better news with bolstered numbers this week. Even a few GOPers at a holiday party last week, begrudging and privately acknowledged they are satisfied with Nixon thusfar. "He comes out of that old conservative Democratic Jefferson County tradition, and so far, he's mostly governed in that way," said one Republican. Despite all that, there are concerns among some Democrats about Nixon's campaign promises, who he surrounds himself with and the overall vision for his term. (More on that later). But for now, while those worries are considerable, they're mostly quiet and private.

Nixon Reads Frank Luntz

2009-12-20T18:10:00.000-06:00

Governor Jay Nixon said he finds GOP consultant and pollster Frank Luntz useful and recently attempted to get through one of the conservative commentator's books.

"I find him to be very interesting and very insightful," Nixon said of Luntz, as part of a wide-ranging year end interview with Ky3 News last week. Though the Governor added that Luntz can be "oddly repetitive."

First Lady Georganne Nixon said the couple have "big piles of books" at their bedside.

"We're very eclectic in our reading," said the Governor. "She dramatically underestimates how much she reads," he added, referring to Georganne's literary habits.

To find out what else the First Couple is reading . . .

***CLICK ABOVE***

Nixon VID: Most Difficult Decision & Biggest Disappointment

2009-12-18T20:56:00.022-06:00

Governor Jay Nixon beat back any suggestion he broke a campaign promise by cutting Medicaid reimbursements to doctors this fall, a year after campaigning on reversing the healthcare cuts his predecessor made.

In an interview in the Governor's Mansion Thursday, Nixon said the biggest disappointment of his first year was failing to push through his deal with the Missouri Hospital Association, which would have expanded healthcare coverage to an estimated 35,000 uninsured.

But he was clear about who was to blame for that shortcoming.

"Literally as we sit here at the holiday season, 35-thousand working poor in Missouri don't have healthcare," Nixon said. "Even though the Missouri Senate and the Governor overwhelmingly supported that for zero pennies cost to the state," he added.

***WATCH EXCHANGE ABOVE***

ALSO: STAYS NEUTRAL ON SENATE HEALTHCARE LEGISLATION

BUT SAYS: "The bottom line is we look to receive significant benefits from the federal government by the time this legislature gets back and gets its teeth into the budget, we should have an answer from Washington, D.C."

The Governor also said cutting the state workforce by almost 2-thousand was the most difficult decision of his first twelve months.

"Cutting the state workforce by almost 2,000. It's challenging. You know these people, you know their families," Nixon said.

"When Out of CBO There Arose Such A Clatter"

2009-12-18T18:24:00.003-06:00

Sen. Kit Bond has put together another offbeat video with a play on "Twas The Night Before Christmas".

In his lyrics, Sen. Bond, accompanied by his dog, Tiger, and spokeswoman Shana Marchio's dog, Pooley takes aim at Senate Democrats -- including eight by name.

Talking Points Memo has The VID.

An excerpt:

"Now Schumer, now Sanders, now Durbin and HarkinOn Landrieu, on Nelson, on Bayh and LincolnTo the well of the Senate, to the top of the wallVote away! Vote Away! Vote Away all!
As spending before the wild deficits flyRoll over all obstacles, mount to the skySo up to the house-top, the debt it flewWith a sleigh full of goodies, cap-and-trade too!"

Kinder Opposes Property Tax Subsidy

2009-12-18T17:42:00.003-06:00

Republican Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder was the lone "no" vote on a Missouri Housing Development Commission proposal that would use state dollars to pay the property taxes of income-eligible homebuyers next year.

The vote on the $35 million dollar plan was 7 to 1.

The MHDC approved using $15 million dollars from the federal stimulus package and $20 million from a reserve fund to spurt home buying and construction. Officials estimate that 9,000 households could qualify for a $1,250 subsidy to go towards their property taxes next year.

Supporters, including Gov. Jay Nixon and Treasurer Clint Zweifel are touting it as a tax cut. But critics call it a unnecessary subsidy.

"This program will help thousands of Missouri families realize the dream of home ownership by relieving their property tax burden for one year and encourage fiscally sound, resource-saving practices. By offering this tax relief, working Missourians will be able to pump more money into our economy, and I applaud the MHDC for taking this important step today," said Nixon in a statement.

GREEN HOME INCENTIVE: Also part of the plan is a $500 stipend for those who purchase an energy-efficient home or items to make the home more energy efficient.

The total tax relief for any one family would be capped at $1,750.

Missouri Dems Say Blunt Flyer Violates Ethics Laws

2009-12-18T15:20:00.001-06:00

VIDEO BELOW: HOSMER'S PRESSER

ISSUE PIECE OR CAMPAIGN FLYER?

The Missouri Democratic Party is filing ethics complaints against Congressman Roy Blunt for sending a flyer to his constituents that defends himself against attacks for opposing cap and trade energy legislation.

Party chair Craig Hosmer said Friday that the four page mailer, (pictured above), paid for by Blunt's Congressional office, is a misuse of taxpayer dollars. Hosmer said the flyer violated House Franking Commission rules, which approves mailings sent by members of Congress.

"It's clear that this mailer is a direct response to a political ad that Congressman Blunt has repeatedly talked about in his Senate campaign," said Hosmer at a news conference. "Quite frankly, this mailer raises serious questions about what Congressman Blunt is doing in his Washington, D.C. Congressional office." **WATCH Q&A with Hosmer BELOW**

The mailer is clearly designed to combat a League of Conservation Voters television ad that attacked Blunt for campaign contributions from oil and other energy interests.

"Don't Be Fooled -- I Don't Work For The Interests Of Bil Oil Or The Energy Industry," blares Blunt's flyer.

Blunt deputy chief of staff Burson Snyder pointed out that the Franking Commission already approved Blunt's flyer and provided The Notebook with a Dec. 10th letter signed by Jack Dail of the commission's staff.

"When you follow the rules, you don't have to worry about these kinds of false political charges. Nancy Pelosi's employees on the Franking Commission approved this mailer, and it is unfortunate that the Democrats do not want Missourians to know the truth about this job-killing cap and tax bill. Unfortunately we cannot communicate with Southwest Missourians for free, but Congressman Blunt believes it's important to make sure the people he works for know where he stands on the issues, like his opposition to the national energy tax.," Snyder said in a statement.

Hosmer called on Blunt to reimburse taxpayers for the expense of the mailer.

"This is a campaign expense and it should be paid for by his campaign and not Missouri voters," Hosmer said.

A few hours after the Democratic Party's complaint, the Missouri Republican Party announced a similar complaint against Democrat Robin Carnahan.

GOP Executive Director Lloyd Smith said Carnahan "abused taxpayer dollars by airing self-promotional radio advertisements" in Wyoming and Mississippi.

But earlier this year, Carnahan's office noted that the money used for those public service ads come from fines paid by those convicted of securities fraud and that no tax dollars are used.

More on this story on Ky3 News @ 5, 6 & 10.

Nixon Goal: Keep Unemployment Below National Average

2009-12-17T18:46:00.010-06:00

Governor Jay Nixon said a chief of his goal of his administration over the next year is to keep Missouri's unemployment rate below the national average and work towards five or six percent unemployment by the end of his first term.

WATCH THE KY3 NEWS @ 10 REPORT HERE

Nixon made the comments during an in-depth interview with Ky3 News interview Thursday in the Governor's Mansion, seated next to the First Lady.

Missouri's unemployment rate was 8 percent when Nixon took office. It is 9.5. percent now. The national rate sits at 10 percent.

*WATCH EXCHANGE ABOVE*

Asked if he can have a direct impact on the unemployment rate in Missouri, the Governor replied, "You have a direct impact on making a difference where you can."

ON UNEMPLOYMENT 1 YEAR FROM NOW: "I'd like to see us consistently, constantly stay below the national average."

ON THE JOB PICTURE LONG-TERM: "We certainly would like to get that down into what most economists say is the number in the five to six range . . . I think a lot will depend on how and when inflation comes late in the term.

Not Goodbye, Just See Ya From The East Side

2009-12-16T18:03:00.001-06:00

During my year in graduate school for journalism in Chicago, the print and television sections were like the Jets and the Sharks.

The newspaper students were a bit brainier but more reclusive. My TV colleagues were charismatic and aggressive but, as a whole, not as well read or attentive to detail.

On Fridays after class, the printies finished their drinks at the bar at a reasonable hour and went home at a responsible time. The broadcast folks stayed longer into the night to debate politics and contemplate big dreams, and strolled into classes late the next morning.

The print folks always seemed prepared for in-class debates about media ethics, but the broadcast students often scored stronger points with their confident yet succinct arguments.

TV folks called newspaper reporters "print dinosaurs"; The printies derided us as "Ron Burgundy wanna-bees."

Each side had some fair points to make.

The rivalry was healthy and the competition was fun, but above all, I took away the importance of both mediums in a rapid 24-hour news cycle. As a professor told me once, no one remembers reading about September 11th or an election night. But you probably shouldn't watch TV if you're looking for an in-depth piece on stem cell research or the intricacies of campaign finance reform.

For the past five years at Ky3, I've tried to tap all mediums -- print, video, audio -- to bring informative, fast-breaking, thought-provoking political news to the Ozarks and beyond. So many people have been so generous with their time, knowledge and most importantly their "scoops" about Missouri politics.

In a few weeks, I'll take everything the Show-Me state "showed me" to a new job as a national politics reporter at POLITICO in Washington, D.C.

This decision was not as easy as it might sound. Leaving TV for a print/online media job did leave me with questions. "How will I survive without the little old ladies at the check-out counter at Wal-Mart not recognizing me?"

Yes, TV serves as an ego boost. I'd be less than candid, shall we say "political", to claim otherwise. (Yes, I'll probably always be a TV guy in my heart, but hopefully one who can hold his own writing once in awhile;)

But a shot at covering national politics is an offer I couldn't refuse.

There are so many people I need to thank, but most of them I can't name here, because they gave me treasure troves of information, tips and guidance "off the record" each day or over drinks at night. (Remember I am a TV guy at heart) You know who you are.

And to (some of) the critics, thanks for keeping tabs and keeping me honest. There will be more occasions to do so.

To be clear, I'll still be covering Missouri politics, just at a different venue, and in addition to other 2010 hotspots. But you can bet our 2010 U.S. Senate race and top U.S. House contests will get my fair share of attention in my new assignment.

I'll finish my tenure at Ky3 on December 29th.

As for my beloved KY3 Political Notebook, details are still hazy for its future. (I hope they become clearer in the weeks ahead.)

But I'll be reporting and blogging through the end of the year, so if you're out there and got something -- call me with a going away scoop!

Nixon Dedicates $12M to Produce Jobs Through Community Colleges

2009-12-15T22:49:00.000-06:00

Governor Jay Nixon brought his push for new jobs to Springfield Tuesday, announcing a $12 million dollar pot of money available for community college training programs.

WATCH THE KY3 NEWS @ 10 REPORT HERE

The idea is targeting job sectors with a growing need -- and the state's 12 community colleges will compete for the funds. The Governor said applications will be judged on who can create or expand programs that will get people to work the fastest. The program targets such fields at veterinary and pharmacy technicians, nursing aides and other skilled crafts.

*WATCH CLIPS ABOVE*

"This is not about building a bureaucracy. This is about building people," Nixon said.

WOULD NOT set the program's job goal yet -- saying "we should have a pretty solid matrix" come mid-February when applications are due.

Skelton "Greatly Troubled" By Problems with Combat Gear

2009-12-15T21:01:00.003-06:00

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton has written top Pentagon leaders that he's "greatly troubled" by stories from soldiers in war zones about improper training and the lack of suitable combat gear.

The Associated Press writes: "Soldiers are being issued a rucksack made of plastic that is not comfortable or effective in combat situations, Skelton and Ortiz found during a recent trip to Germany and Italy where they met with members of the 503rd Infantry Regiment and the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team."

ALSO: "Skelton and Ortiz said many of the soldiers they talked to are using their own money to buy better packs from commercial suppliers."

AND: The lawmakers said they were told troops are being taken straight from boot camp and being sent to Afghanistan and Iraq without extensive training at stateside bases. "Is this a common practice now"? Skelton asks. "And will the upcoming surge into Afghanistan exacerbate this situation?"

***

MEANWHILE: Despite wishful thinking from Missouri Republicans, Skelton's spokesperson tells the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) the Democratic incumbent will seek another term.

PLUS: 4th District GOP candidate Vicky Hartzler sends a release criticizing Skelton's staff for "stonewalling" questions about about the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

"Now, gay rights champion Barney Frank of Massachusetts has said that next year’s defense authorizations bill, which Mr. Skelton will handle, will repeal ‘don’t ask/don’t tell.’ Our brave troops do not support this. When Barney Frank announced the deal, I challenged Mr. Skelton to tell us the facts. He stonewalled. Now, his taxpayer-financed staff refuses to answer media questions about Barney Frank’s statement on a bill that Ike Skelton will handle in the House," said Hartzler in a statement.

Layman Running for OTC Board

2009-12-15T20:15:00.007-06:00

Political fundraiser and Sarah Steelman ally Jeff Layman is taking the plunge into local politics himself, with a bid for a slot on the Ozarks Technical Community College Board of Trustees.

The OTC Board consists of six members elected from the district at large. Members are elected for terms of six years, with two members being elected in each even-numbered year.

See the current members HERE.

The terms of vice president Jackie McKinsey and Dolores Brooks are up. Tuesday was the first day of filing for the April election. It's unclear if both will seek re-election. The top two vote getters win seats on the board.

"It's amazing how OTC has impacted so many people’s lives in the Ozarks," said Layman in a statement Tuesday. "It is also very exciting to see how far OTC has come in recent years. I really feel the possibilities are unlimited for the college, along with its faculty, students and graduates. It would be an honor for me to be a part of such a respected and established institution," he added.

Layman is a senior vice president and wealth advisor at Morgan Stanley Smith Barney in Springfield Missouri. He's also a Republican fundraiser and is aiding the 7th District Congressional campaign of auctioneer Billy Long.

Zweifel Will Webcast Housing Meeting

2009-12-15T14:56:00.002-06:00

State Treasurer Cliff Zweifel announced Tuesday that the Missouri Housing Development Commission (MHDC) will webcast its meeting live for the first time in the board's history this Friday.

Zweifel, who chairs the MHDC, said the move has been made to increase transparency and accountability. The first webcast will serve as a test.

The meeting’s webcast will be a test for the agency as it looks for the best way to provide the service at all future meetings.

"I asked MHDC staff to look into how we could make webcasting work, and this is our first test as we learn how we can provide this service at all meetings. This is a step in the right direction of continuing to make government more transparent and continuing to build the public trust," Zweifel said.

The webcast will be available at www.mhdc.com/webcast and begin at 9 a.m.

Jordan Valley Doesn't Make Stimulus Cut

2009-12-14T23:40:00.001-06:00

WATCH THE KY3 NEWS @ 10 REPORT HERE

Another batch of economic stimulus money is heading to community health centers around the country, but Missouri has been shut out of the funds this round.

In all, twelve centers in Missouri, including Springfield's Jordan Valley Health Clinic, applied for a $500 million dollar pot of money to expand healthcare services. But the complete shutout of Missouri is raising questions about the process.

These awards were allocated through a competitive federal grant process. And Jordan Valley isn't quite sure why they fell short. But the decision will put a halt on plans for a new facility.

In its application, Jordan Valley said the project would create 100 construction jobs over two years and employ an additional 30 dental and behavioral health workers.

"The concern I would have is how proportionately the funds are distributed, whether we all had poor applications," said Jordan Valley CEO Brooks Miller, who expressed disappointment with the decision. "What is the criteria? Why was the money so distributed to the northeast or the west?," he asked.

Republican Sen. Kit Bond questioned whether the competitive bid process was run fairly.

"The Administration can’t tell me that the need for health services is any less in rural and urban Missouri than those communities funded in Massachusetts and California," Bond said, pointing to reports that showed Massachusetts receiving $80 million dollars and California getting $65 million dollars.

Bond also used the opportunity to tout the earmarking process -- where Senators insert pet projects into large appropriation bills.

"If they're going to have a stimulus then they should have a similarly transparent process and get some Congressional review," Bond said in an interview.

But the earmarking practice is being increasingly lambasted by conservatives and Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill. McCaskill was unavailable for comment late Monday. But her communications director said their office had found no evidence that the competitive grant process had not been fair.

McCaskill spokeswoman Adrianne Marsh said grants were still preferable to earmarks, which are politically charged and potentially wasteful.

"If we're going to really correct our spending habits to address the out-of-control deficit, we're going to have to start ending the politics behind the earmarking process. That continues to be the bigger problem. We cannot continue to spend the public's money based on election goals, seniority and power in Congress. There has to be a level of accountability or we're never going to get our spending problems under control," Marsh said.

The criteria for winning grants varies by agency. They can be based on such factors as need, matching funds and the amount of jobs created.

Miller said Jordan Valley isn't sure yet how it will proceed and will go back to the drawing board on funding for an expansion.

Nixon Plans "Major Economic" Announcement Tuesday

2009-12-14T21:25:00.002-06:00

Governor Jay Nixon will outline what aides are dubbing "a major component of his economic development plan for the 2010 legislative session" in a speech Tuesday.

Nixon is scheduled to address the annual conference of the Missouri Biotechnology Association at the Tan-Tar-A-Resort in Osage Beach at 12:45 p.m.

***

Before that Nixon will visit Ozarks Technical Community College at 10:30 a.m. to announce a training initiative designed to prepare workers for 21st century jobs.

Bond Says He Would Have Voted For Omnibus

2009-12-14T20:31:00.014-06:00

Senator Kit Bond said he would have voted for the $1.1 trillion dollar omnibus spending bill that most Republicans opposed this weekend.

*LISTEN TO AUDIO ABOVE*

In a telephone interview, Bond said he didn't make this weekend's vote because he had two meetings set up with Venture Capital regarding renewable fuel projects in Missouri. "There's some people who want to stay in Washington week after week after week and Harry Reid apparently doesn't want to go back to Nevada," Bond said.

He added that although he wasn't there, he "supported it and obviously the Democrats had the vote to pass it."

Asked about the 10 percent spending increase for state agencies, Bond said: "I voted against the budget resolution which put that money in, but once we have the budget resolution, we work with what we have."

***

Bond communication director Shana Marchio explained that the Senator opposed the Senate Budget Resolution that "set the increases for government spending." "It's the budget resolution that determines the overall amount Congress can spend. After the budget resolution passes, the Appropriations Chairmen then allocate that amount by spending subcommittee," Marchio explained.

HERE is the vote Marchio is referring to.

Davis Drops Auditor Speculation, Backs Icet

2009-12-14T11:31:00.005-06:00

ATTACKS SCHWEICH
SUGGESTS HE SHOULD HAVE FILED AS A DEM

Republican State Representative Cynthia Davis announced Monday she is passing on a bid for State Auditor and endorsing her House colleague Rep. Allen Icet in his 2010 campaign.

Davis also questioned the "conservative credentials" of Icet's GOP rival for the nomination, Tom Schweich, and suggested the former U.S. ambassador is running for office in the wrong party.

"Allen is the best candidate Missourians could ask for in a State Auditor. Not only is Allen a proven fiscal conservative, but he is the only candidate who has experience in balancing a state budget," Davis said in a statement first obtained by The Notebook.

Davis also took a swipe at Schweich for his ties to Washington and for making a past campaign donation to the auditor campaign of Democrat Claire McCaskill. When Schweich flirted with a U.S. Senate run earlier this year, allies to Congressman Roy Blunt floated the same attack against Schweich to degrade his credibility within the party.

"I don't understand how Republican voters could support someone who came out of the bureaucratic morass of Washington, D.C. where Schweich has been for many years before showing up expecting to be anointed to win a statewide office," Davis said.

"Worse, he expects Missouri Republicans to support him, when he donated money to and supported Democrat Claire McCaskill and praised President Obama for choosing what Schweich called 'an all-star cabinet.' Given Schweich's support for the president and Claire McCaskill, he might have been more comfortable filing in the Democratic primary," Davis said.

In a brief phone conversation, Schweich said twice he had no comment on any of Davis' remarks.

Icet and Schweich are in the middle of a heated primary battle which has divided the establishment ranks of the Missouri Republican Party. While Icet is backed by most of his colleagues in the State House, Schweich has picked up some endorsements from GOP Senators and is backed by Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder and former U.S. Senator Jack Danforth.

Schweich has also racked up a commanding fundraising advantage over Icet, but recently rubbed some in his party the wrong way by sending unclear signals about whether he would fill out a full term if elected.

With her announcement, Davis ended any speculation about her own intentions to run for statewide office in 2010.

"I plan on being a candidate in 2010, but not for Missouri State Auditor," Davis said.

Bond Touts Omnibus Earmarks, McCaskill Votes 'No'

2009-12-13T22:47:00.003-06:00

Senator Claire McCaskill was one of just three Democrats who voted against a $1.1 trillion dollar spending bill that included millions of dollars for projects around the Ozarks.

Sen. Kit Bond touted $118 million dollars in earmarked projects for Missouri in the omnibus spending bill he did not vote on.

Those projects include:

$1 million for technology upgrades at Missouri State University
$1 million for construction at James River Freeway and Campbell in Springfield
$750,000 for upgrades at the Jordan Valley Community Health Center
$584,000 for an Army Brigade Headquarters to be built at Ft. Leonard Wood
$2.75 million for a new airport runway in Lamar
$1.25 million for new interchange at Highway 13 in Osceola

The Associated Press notes that McCaskill, Sens. Evan Bayh and Russ Feingold "voted no only after (Sen. Joe) Lieberman arrived to ensure the bill would advance." All but three Republicans opposed the measure as "wasteful spending".

McCaskill TWEETED Sunday night that she voted 'no" because of a 10 percent spending increase over last year and "wayyyyy too many earmarks."

"Too often unaccountable bureaucrats don’t understand state and local needs," Bond said in a statement. "Local and community leaders in Missouri asked me to help send some of their tax dollars back home for local priorities and with today’s passage these critical projects are close to becoming a reality," he added.

McCaskill's Vote "On Hold" For Healthcare?

2009-12-13T18:46:00.006-06:00

Claire's Conditions

Sen. Claire McCaskill stopped short of fully committing her vote for the Senate healthcare bill Sunday, saying her support would be determined by the Congressional Budget Office.

McCaskill appeared on FOX News Sunday: "If the current healthcare compromise doesn't bend the cost curve and bring down the deficit, it's back to the drawing board," she said. "Until we get the numbers back from the Congressional Budget Office we're all on hold. I have to be assured that this is going to bring down the deficit and is going to bring down healthcare costs for Missouri families," she added.

McCaskill is seen as likely to support the legislation, but her comments underscore the uncertainty that remains in the delicate legislative negotiations Democrats are navigating as the year comes to a close. At least two key Democrats -- Sen. Ben Nelson & Sen. Joe Lieberman -- say a Medicare "buy-in" option for ages 55 and up is a deal breaker.

The Congressional Budget Office is expected to release its analysis this week on the revised bill's cost.

Week 48: Nixon's Grade

2009-12-13T17:40:00.003-06:00

NIXON'S WEEK 48 GRADE: B +

In a legislative session that will likely be defined by budget restraints and deep cuts, the DWI crackdown unveiled last week is just the type of bill that Gov. Jay Nixon could potentially score as a win come May. While some provisions raise constitutional issues with attorneys (and even some Democrats), the tough-on-crime, bipartisan approach is where Nixon is most comfortable. But as the St. Louis Post-Dispatch noted in an editorial, "lawmakers have cracked down on drunk driving repeatedly in years past. In most cases, they failed to provide enough funding to ensure that reforms worked as planned." Still, new Missouri unemployment numbers (up to 9.5%) out Friday were a stark reminder of what will be Nixon's top priority. Republicans say they are willing to work with Nixon on where they agree (tougher DWI laws, autism insurance). But they won't really have clear gameplan on the financial fight ahead until Nixon draws the line in the sand with his budget outline next month.

Blunt, Skelton Both Oppose Financial Rewrite

2009-12-11T21:15:00.003-06:00

TARP WARS

Congressman Roy Blunt and Congressman Ike Skelton both voted against a sweeping rewrite of complex financial regulations.

Despite 27 Democrats peeling away, the legislation passed 223 to 202.

The legislation would force more control over the country's financial institutions. Blunt, who voted for the financial bailout last fall, said this plan would bankrupt new generations and kill jobs.

"End TARP and send all unspent funds to pay down the massive national debt," Blunt said in a statement. "Instead, national Democrats voted today to make the bailout permanent and spend even more taxpayer money."

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee pounced on Blunt, a GOP candidate for U.S. Senate in 2010, calling him "a hypocrite": "Roy Blunt voted to bailout the banks, then opposes steps to keep them accountable,” said Democratic Senatorial Campaign Communications Director Eric Schultz. "Blunt pretends to be a friend of the taxpayer, but today’s proposal includes common-sense, pragmatic steps to protect consumers."

***

SKELTON VOTES 'NO' AGAIN

Congressman Ike Skelton said: "While the House bill is well-intentioned and I support much of it, the measure falls short in my goal to target Wall Street without disrupting Main Street banks and bank customers."

MORE SKELTON: "As important as these new regulations are to our country, Congress must be careful in writing them. We must focus tough regulations like a laser beam on Wall Street and other bad actors while not wrapping our home town banks into costly and complex sets of new rules. Community banks and credit unions have been playing by the rules for years. They are conservative with their money and did not cause last year’s economic mess. They and their customers ought not pay the price for Wall Street’s misdeeds any more than they, like all Americans, have already been asked to do."

More Sunday Claire

2009-12-11T21:03:00.003-06:00

U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill makes the Sunday talk show tip sheet once again with an appearance on Fox News Sunday this week.

McCaskill is slated to appear with Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH). Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) are also scheduled for the show.

Get your complete Sunday morning TV tipsheet HERE.

Goodman's Cooks

2009-12-11T20:31:00.004-06:00

The Cook family will hold a fundraiser for Sen. Jack Goodman's 7th District Congressional campaign next week as the final quarter of year winds to a close.

Chip, Loren and Jerry Cook are headlining an event for Goodman at the Doubletree Hotel on North Glenstone on Tuesday evening.

Rep. Charlie Denison, Rep. Shane Schoeller, Rep. Ray Weter and Rep. Jay Wasson as well as GOP fundraiser Neal Ethridge are also listed on the fundraising invitation.

Goodman trails both Sen. Gary Nodler and auctioneer Billy Long in fundraising.

PLUS: Nodler backer Gregg Hartley TWEETS of shifting alliances:

"MO-7 Congressional race: watch year end reports to see donors who are shifting allegiance;2 candidates have shifting sands," proclaimed Hartley in a Friday Tweet.

McCaskill: Healthcare Bill Come The New Year

2009-12-10T23:40:00.006-06:00

Sen. Claire McCaskill predicted Thursday on MSNBC's Hardball that the U.S. Senate would produce a healthcare bill "come the New Year."

While that timing can be interpreted a few ways, McCaskill warned there is "no margin of error here and everyone's tired and tensions are high."

Missouri's junior Senator also seemed to temper the wishes of the more liberal wing of her party and hinted Missouri public opinion may not be with her on changes to the healthcare system.

"People need to remember. We are the governing party because we have diversity of opinion in our party. We're not pure. We have moderates and we have more progressives and the reason we're governing right now is because we defeated moderate Republicans with moderate Democrats and people need to be patient about that and realize that compromise is not evil," McCaskill said. "No one's going to be really happy here. That's the process of legislating. It's about compromise . . . As we work through the compromises in our caucus, the progressives understand that everybody's going to have to bend a little to get to that final product that we can get across the finish line for the American people."

Asked whether her state was behind her, McCaskill hedged: "There's a lot of misinformation out there Chris. People are angry and cynical, in many instances, for good reasons. And they believing some of the stuff they are hearing, that the sky's going to fall."

Adding: "In Missouri, it's a 50-50 state, so I'm kind of used to half the state being mad at me."

But Vowing: "We're going to pass this bill and the sky is not going to fall."
***
ALSO: McCaskill said the legislation would ultimately "reverse the trend that is killing most families in this country and that is they're having to go in their pocket for more and more money, for healthcare every year . . . We're also going to bring some insurance companies to heel here," she said.

GOPers Blast Dem Spending Bill, Skelton Peels Away

2009-12-10T20:59:00.003-06:00

Congressman Ike Skelton joined a unanimous Republican caucus in opposing a $447 billion dollar spending bill passed by the House Thursday.

The A.P. notes: The 1,088-page, $1.1 trillion measure would provide $447 billion in operating budgets for 10 Cabinet departments, awarding increases averaging almost 10 percent.

"The Democrats on Capitol Hill today spent more good money on a bad fix for what is broken," Congressman Roy Blunt said. "Today they rolled six appropriations bills into one massive spending bill worth nearly $447 billion dollars and representing the largest single-year increase in spending in our nation’s history," he added.

Skelton joined the 202 "no" votes.
***
ALSO: GOPer Jeff Parnell tells The Notebook he's still weighing a bid against Skelton and is "getting closer" to a decision. "I have yet to see anyone as passionate about the issues and our country's predicament as myself and am disturbed that none of the current candidates sensed the import of Skelton's remarks," Parnell said, referring to Skelton's recent comments about President Obama's Afghanistan decision.

Parnell said he is "disappointed and troubled" that Skelton is allowing himself "to be used as a tool by the Obama administration when the lives of American troops are at stake."

"After the long delay in responding to General McChrystal's requests, the last thing we need is to further "lawyer" the subject to death by asking inane questions such as "What do we believe must be accomplished in the next 18 months?," Parnell said.

Rove Notes Donation to Blunt

2009-12-10T19:16:00.002-06:00

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Republican strategist Karl Rove celebrates a "stellar" class of GOP U.S. Senate candidates for the 2010 cycle and notes that of the two Republicans he's contributed financially to, one is Roy Blunt.

"Republicans have also recruited good candidates for their open seats. New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte is competitive, as are Ohio's Rob Portman and Missouri's Roy Blunt," writes Rove.

"Republicans in Florida have to get through a primary fight, but either Gov. Charlie Crist or former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio will likely hold the seat. (I've donated to Messrs. Blunt and Rubio.) ," he continues.

Read Rove's entire piece HERE.

VoteVets Endorses Sowers

2009-12-10T15:15:00.004-06:00

VoteVets.org has endorsed Tommy Sowers in his bid for Congress in the 8th Congressional District.

VoteVets.org's Political Action Committee says its already helped raise $6,000 for Sowers' challenge to Republican Rep. Jo Ann Emerson.

"Tommy Sowers is a rare breed – an elite soldier and accomplished scholar,” said Jon Soltz, Iraq War Veteran and Chairman of VoteVets.org PAC. “His entire life can be summed up in two words: Hard Work. From his military career which took him all the way to special forces and leading a team of Green Berets, to going to the London School of Economics on scholarship and then teaching at West Point, Tommy has simply never rested. That quality will make him an exemplary leader in Congress, and an incredible servant for his constituents," Soltz added.

Soltz also said Sowers' "real war experience in Iraq will bring another credible voice to the important debate we are having about where and when to deploy troops."

Read the entire release HERE.

Ameren Rate Hike Battle, Take Two

2009-12-10T14:21:00.003-06:00

A group of Missouri businesses have fired another warning shot against a plan to allow AmerenUE to raise rates its by 18 percent.

The plan is before the state's Public Service Commission and FERAF -- Fair Electricity Rate Action Fund -- said Thursday it will "educated Missourians through every available means about the impact" of the hike at a time when Missouri's unemployment rate hangs around 9 percent.

"As FERAF members, we respect the PSC and its process and want to make sure as many Missourians as possible know about Ameren’s requested 18% rate hike,” said Bob Quinn, Executive Director of the Missouri Association for Social Welfare, and a FERAF member.

Members of FERAF include the AARP, the Missouri Rice Research & Merchandising Council and the Consumer Council of Missouri.

Ameren had planned to build a second nuclear reactor in mid-Missouri. But earlier this year, the company suspended those plans after lawmakers failed to repeal a 1976 law barring utilities from charging customers for certain costs of a new power plant before it starts producing electricity.

Nixon Targets Repeat DWI Offenders

2009-12-09T23:44:00.000-06:00

WATCH THE KY3 NEWS @ 10 REPORT HERE

Gov. Jay Nixon is getting tough on driving drunk, throwing his support behind a host of sweeping changes meant to target repeat offenders.

The legislative package boosts penalties for offenders with higher blood-alcohol levels and is designed crack down on repeat drunk drivers.

No legislation will bring Kim Kinnaird's son back. But her story is just one of many that could help change a flawed system.

Authorities believe a drunk driver plowed into 20-year-old Daniel Kinnaird on Highway 60 on November 3rd. The crash landed him in critical condition.

His mother held onto hope, but six days later, Kinnaird was dead.

"I tell people, when people ask me, I say it's like going to hell and back," said Kinnaird.

Continue reading at Ky3.com.

Talent To Keynote Greene County Lincoln Days

2009-12-09T21:24:00.003-06:00

Former U.S. Senator Jim Talent will keynote Greene County's annual Lincoln Day event in March, organizers tell The Notebook.

This year's GOP get-together is slated for Saturday, March 20th at the University Plaza Hotel & Convention Center.

Former Gov. Matt Blunt will serve on a "Future of the Party" morning panel with 7th District Executive Director Mavis Busiek, GOP State Chairman David Cole and GOP executive director Lloyd Smith.

Former State Treasurer Sarah Steelman and U.S. Senate candidate Roy Blunt are also scheduled to to attend the luncheon, when Talent presents the keynote address, between 12:30-1 p.m.

Leigh Anne Garren and Lucas Case are serving as co-chairs for the event. Tickets can be purchased by calling GOP headquarters at 417-823-9130.