Election Spoils - December 2006

To the victors, go the spoils.

By now, the Democrats in Washington are picking their new offices in the various legislative office buildings near the Capitol. Whenever one party takes over majority rule in either the Senate or the House of Representatives, its members get to choose the best offices. That usually means evicting the losing party’s members from their former suites which usually are larger and closer to the voting chambers.

Was this election really a total victory for the Democrats? Or just voter resentment of the status quo in Washington?

Certainly the Democrats reversed the 15 seat Republican majority in the House and ended up with a similar majority for themselves. And won the Senate. They also won a number of important Governor’s races throughout the country including my home state of Maryland.

Locally, Republicans in Broward County lost their County Commissioner, a long-time Congressman, and a State Representative. In each case, the Democrats did a better job of getting out their base and in convincing a majority of Independents and a notable number of Republicans that their candidates would bring new ideas to their elected bodies.

Martin Kiar, the Democrat who replaced our western Broward Republican State Representative, should be congratulated for his campaign which included endorsements from, and involvement of, several Broward County Democratic power brokers. Let’s hope he can gain similar access to Republican leadership in Tallahassee for the benefit of western Broward.

The 2006 election certainly was a wake-up call for the Republicans. As I had opined in several past columns in this publication, the Republican majority was too concerned with keeping power than in passing or retracting laws to better our country. A number were challenged by easy access to favors provided by lobbyists. Others made sure their districts received millions of dollars in pork barrel appropriations rather than helping to reduce the size of government.

But before the left starts acting as if they have a liberal mandate to socialize more of our economy and government with another Great Society effort, they need to realize that a vast majority of those new Democrats who won stood for many conservative principles.

It will be fun to watch San Francisco Pelosi and her team of old line liberals trying to push through progressive legislation. If you do not remember Congressmen Dingell, or Waxman, or Rangel from the ‘80s and early ‘90s, I’m sure you will know who they are in 2007! I also expect our own Congresswoman Wasserman-Schultz to gain more national notoriety as she joins that left-leaning leadership in some capacity.

And it will be fun to watch the action in the Senate. Former Connecticut Democrat Joe Lieberman won as an Independent with support from mostly the Republicans and other non-Democratic voters. In other words, the Connecticut Democrats could not elect their candidate who was the favored candidate of the anti-war, anti-Bush crowd. Even top national Democrats raised money and campaigned for their Democratic candidate to no avail. Sorry Hillary and Barack, you are not as influential as you think!

Lieberman, the former Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate in 2000 will now be the most powerful man in the Senate since if he chooses at any time to caucus with the Republicans, the Democrats will lose their majority. This same scenario happened in 2001 when “jumping Jim” Jeffords of New Hampshire switched to the Democratic caucus and upset the then balance of Republican power.

My biggest concern about the effect of the 2006 election will be its impact on our country’s economy. The Bush tax cuts which have led our country to tremendous growth in jobs and other economic activity - and in record federal tax receipts – will likely be altered by the Democrats. Some are already calling for more “fairness” as if having 10% of our tax payers funding nearly 70% of our federal taxes is not progressive enough!

And Hillary has already said that national healthcare will be a bad dream for those who thought her socialized medicine was laid to rest along with the Democratic control of Congress in 1994. Sometimes history repeats itself. Perhaps it will again in 2008.

A Question Of Ethics - November 2006

What is the similarity between Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid, his secret $1 million land deal, his questionable use of campaign money to pay holiday bonuses for staff at his personal condo, and the liberal press?

Or between Democratic Congressman William Jefferson, $90,000 in cash found wrapped in his freezer, and the liberal press?

Or Democratic Congressman Allan Mollohan, $ 200 million in federal pork spending earmarked to his campaign contributors’ organizations, and the liberal press?

The similarity is that all of these stories had a very short shelf life in the liberal press.

Now compare the limited coverage for the above ethical lapses with the amount of ink and airtime spent on the fallout from former Congressman Foley’s sexually provocative emails to pages. Or on former Congressman Tom Delay’s fund raising efforts. Or on Vice-President Cheney’s former staffer “Scooter” Libby who was allegedly involved in the naming of CIA employee Valerie Plame Wilson.

It is interesting to note that each of the Republicans is a “former” government employee while each of the Democrats cited are still in office!

This fact is oddly similar to the comparison of Republicans forcing President Nixon to resign for his attempts to cover-up a typical campaign dirty trick while the Democrats let President Clinton stay in office for lying under oath regardless of what he was trying to cover-up.

Why do the Democrats usually look the other way when one of their own allegedly breaks the law? And why do the Republicans do a better job of self-policing their ranks? Could it be that the liberal press keeps Republican lapses in the news longer to fester in the public mind?

Of course ethical failures are not limited to national politics.

A Hollywood City Commissioner was recently suspended from office after being charged with 5 felony counts for his alleged behind the scenes involvement in a contract for sewage treatment services for the city. And of course, there was the Town of Davie’s former Administrator who was fired after being charged with allegedly stealing $500,000 from the town’s coffers.

And then there are the Cities of Hialeah and Miami, and Miami-Dade County! Many a Miami Herald writer have established their careers by doing little more than just waiting to cover the various politicians who were corrupted while serving as elected officials in those local governments. One columnist’s career actually ended earlier this year when he withheld information about a politician who killed himself after being hounded by the press for alleged sexual and financial transgressions.

So why do so many politicians get caught in ethical lapses? Have the temptations for easy money and unchecked power become just too great to turn down? Has the divisiveness of partisan politics scared away decent and honest people from running for office? Or are politicians simply reflective of a dark side of society now affecting the business world and everyday life?

When I ran for a State Senate seat some years ago, I quickly learned of the reality of influence brokering as I campaigned. Several entrenched politicians from both political parties worked together to limit my access to potential campaign funds and organized support. Other special interest groups were afraid of losing influence with my opponent if they outwardly supported my efforts despite their discontent with her.

As I have watched other people I know run in more competitive local and state races than was mine, the behind the scenes shenanigans have been even more notable and challenging. I have concluded that it is just human nature and economic self-interest for politicians and their supporters to work together to win elections and share in the spoils of victory.

I find nothing wrong with that as long as nobody crosses that implied or legal ethical line. All we can hope is that the government investigators, opposing politicians, and the press continue to expose those politicians who misuse our trust. Now if the liberal press could only be as hard on the national Democrats as they are on Republicans.

Political Parties - October 2006

During the recent September 5th primary election, less than 14% of the registered Democrats and Republicans in Broward County took the time to vote to choose their respective party’s gubernatorial candidate for November’s general election. Even less voted to choose their U.S. Senate candidate or vote in other contested races.

Do political parties even matter anymore? Only 105,000 of your Broward County neighbors out of 765,535 registered Democrats and Republicans think they do. In other words, more than a half million of our neighbors who are registered with a political party felt their lives were too busy to vote by mail, vote during the two week early voting period, or show up on election day at which they would have seen dozens of voting booths going unused most of the day.

Why vote? Does it really matter? If you do not believe voting is important to choose your elected representatives in Washington, Tallahassee, and in your local community, then I suppose you really do not care how they vote to set and spend your taxes, regulate your lives, run your schools, maintain your roads, protect you, or prepare to assist you after natural disasters.

It is very simple. We live in a representative republic in which we elect politicians to represent us in the legislative branches of our government. They in turn propose and vote to approve our rules and laws. And it normally takes 50% of them + 1 to affirmatively pass those laws for the Governor or President to sign or veto.

Over time, politicians formed voting blocs and political parties to try and reach that majority. So working hard to support and elect members of your political party in order to have that voting majority is important as well as having a Governor or President of your same party to sign those laws. Today the Republican Party is the majority party in both Tallahassee and in Washington and also holds the Governorship and Presidency.

The Republicans are statistically assured to keep their legislative majority in Tallahassee in November although our area does have a contested State House race with incumbent Representative Susan Goldstein seeking her second term. If you want our area to continue to be part of that ruling party majority in Tallahassee – with access to its leadership and funding – I heartily recommend you vote for Representative Goldstein who has already done much for Davie, Southwest Ranches, and Weston.

And if you believe, as I do, that Governor Bush has done a great job of making Florida the envy of the country for its economic growth engine, its accountable schools, and its safe streets, I hope you will join me in voting for Charlie Crist to keep the Governorship in Republican hands to ensure swift passage of legislation to keep our state prosperous and effective.

Our area also has a say in the election of a U.S. Senator in November although recent polling is showing that incumbent Democrat Bill Nelson has a large lead over his opponent Katherine Harris. I still urge you to vote for the Senatorial candidate of your choice because we all learned six years ago that a few hundred votes can decide an election!

Regardless of whether you are a Democrat, Republican, or are not affiliated with either party, please remember to vote this November. Our democracy depends on it!

America's Healthcare Mess - September 2006

The healthcare system in the United States is spiraling out of control. Who should we blame? Insurance companies? Doctors? Lawyers? Government agencies? The Democrats? The Republicans? Or we consumers?

There is enough blame to go around for everyone. It seemed so much simpler when I was a young child. The doctor came to our house, his office sent my parents a reasonable bill, and then my parents sent him a check.

Then everything changed in 1965 when President Lyndon Johnson created Medicare from which Uncle Sam would pay most of the bills for our elderly. Since those consumers no longer had to worry as much about the cost, the medical community was able to raise their rates with little scrutiny. Soon self-pay patients were billed similarly higher rates as were the employed whose employers offered either self-funded health benefits or health insurance coverage.

Thanks to those runaway costs, diagnostic payment codes, health maintenance organizations and preferred provider organizations became the darlings of government and private industry. With today’s new Medicare prescription drug plan adding to the healthcare mess, it is no wonder that our healthcare system is being heatedly discussed in the halls of Congress and elsewhere.

This issue is also starting to get personal to me. The practice of medicine and the processing of insurance claims have become cold and impersonal. It is now only about the money and not about the patient. Only a small percentage of staff even smile any more.

My well-liked general physician dropped my original insurance carrier several years ago forcing me to seek a new doctor. I read that he recently became one of those “boutique” upscale doctors who charges $ 2,500 per year just to be his patient. You still have to make your copayments for his insurance claims.

My wife and I have been told by numerous specialists that they don’t accept the plan we have from our insurance carrier but they do accept that carrier’s other plans. In one situation, she was given clearance over the phone by the doctor’s office only to be rejected when she showed up in pain for her appointment.

Because of such frustrations, my company finally dropped that carrier only to find the same problem with our new carrier and its variety of plans. Frankly, I feel sorry for doctors and hospitals having to deal with so many insurance carriers each with a variety of plans with different specifications.

But doctors are not without guilt in today’s healthcare crisis. One of my doctors – at my request – sent me for a basic diagnostic test but would not explain the results unless I paid him for another office visit. Instead he just gave me the printout to interpret myself which, fortunately, I was easily able to do. Most doctors now want to be paid upfront for copayments or procedures not covered by insurance.

My wife was almost charged for a last minute appointment cancellation because of a family emergency. Yet that same healthcare professional had no qualms about canceling a previous appointment at the last moment because of her own emergency with no regret for affecting my wife’s work schedule.

If you have the misfortune of needing to go to the emergency room at one of our local public hospitals, you need to pitch a tent while either waiting to be seen or to be given a room if overnight observation is needed thanks to the high number of uninsured who turn to the ER for routine medical care.

Understanding the paperwork blitz from doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies has become more challenging than were my graduate studies in business. I see the look of puzzlement on my in-laws when they receive their Medicare statements.

And then there are the questionable number of tests and screenings prescribed by doctors who are afraid of being sued by the unnecessarily large number of medical malpractice law firms. Proactive medicine has unfortunately become expensive defensive medicine.

Maybe HillaryCare is the best solution to our deteriorating healthcare system with the high federal taxes to fund it. Or maybe requiring all employers to at least provide catastrophic coverage and access to health savings accounts to all of their employees is the best way to bring logic back to the medical industry.

Maybe our public hospitals will devise a new system for less expensive non-emergent medical care for those uninsured non-American citizens who clog up our emergency rooms at taxpayer expense. And our country will also need to have a serious debate about whether our tax dollars should be spent providing expensive emergency care to uninsured non-Americans.

Sooner than later, our politicians will have to bring order to our chaotic healthcare marketplace and the American public will have to swallow the bitter pill necessary to bring logic and fairness to this growing problem.

I predict the ultimate solution will be single payer national healthcare, with income-based and behavior-based copays, provided by the most cost-efficient private industry and public providers. Healthier Americans will pay lower rates than those who choose to smoke, eat poorly, and not exercise just as they do for life insurance. An annual preventive care physical will help determine those rates.

All bills will be processed with consistent prices and guidelines so doctors can focus on medicine rather than needing a large staff just to process and contest insurance claims. Private industry will compete to be among the firms which process the claims under a central administration.

If all Americans are covered by the same plan, there will be tremendous economies of scale because the risk of care will be spread amongst everybody. Insurance rates will be reduced and there will be lower taxes since the cost of today’s uninsured care will no longer be a burden on all taxpayers.

Certainly there is much more to discuss and debate about a single payer solution but if we do not start that difficult discussion soon, the cost of fixing it will only increase.

Middle East Mess - August 2006

As I write this column, Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists in Lebanon and Gaza are firing Syrian and Iranian supplied missiles into Israel. At the same time, the Israeli military is using its air and naval superiority to knock out terrorist supply lines, safe houses, and training camps which – typical of terrorist tactics – are located in residential areas causing unfortunate civilian casualties.

I sincerely hope by the time this column is printed that Israel has finally finished the mission from which it has been held back by the United Nations and numerous American administrations. This time will hopefully be different because all of the moderate Arab states have as much to gain by Israel’s success as does the Jewish state. Even the Druze and Christians in Lebanon were quoted as rooting for the Israelis to rid their country of freedom-fearing terrorists.

Some on the left – including Democratic Chairman Howard Dean – have already said the lack of world standing of the Bush administration is the reason that Iran and Syria felt confident to have their surrogate thugs attack America’s most important friend in the Middle East. Everything is a “Blame Bush” issue to him. Former Clinton Secretary Of State Madeline Albright was quick to say that “negotiation” was necessary to end this latest battle.

When will the left realize that Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda and their sympathizers see partisan bickering and any negotiations, land givebacks or cease-fires as evidence of a weak west. They live by the saying “If not today, then tomorrow.” When Hillary Clinton hugged the wife of the late Hamas leader Yasser Arafat, did that not encourage the terrorists to believe that their strategy of talk peace, prepare for war was working and would give them added time to prepare for future conflicts while the west celebrated the Oslo Accords?

Let’s face reality. The Mullahs who run Iran, the arms smuggler who rules Syria, and their Islamic terrorist trouble makers in Lebanon, Gaza, and elsewhere have only one goal in mind. And that would be implementation of their flawed interpretation of Islamic rule throughout the Muslim world. There are many peace loving Muslims throughout the globe who are embarrassed to have their religion used as a tool by fundamentalist Islamic terrorists. It is time for Muslims to rid their ranks of these terrorists.

Fortunately, it appears that President Mubarak of Egypt, King Abdullah of Jordan, and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia know what is at stake and have been quietly working with the Bush Administration and other western leaders to hunt down terrorists in their countries, rid them of hate spewing religious leaders, and properly fund their respective social service programs to win back the support of their people from terrorist-funded assistance and brain washing efforts.

How will this all end? It won’t end until the Islamic fundamentalists are finally crushed militarily, captured and jailed for life for their crimes against humanity, or dealt with in the same manner in which they treat their enemies. Hopefully the Bush administration, and our next Republican President, will continue to show the resolve necessary – even if unpopular in the short term – to eliminate Islamic terrorist operations throughout the Middle East and the rest of the world so our future generations can continue to enjoy democracy and freedom for which our forefathers fought and died on our behalf.

Partisan Gamesmanship - July 2006

This month, I was asked to write about whatever political issue was most bothersome to me these days. And that would be my concern about the partisan games being played in Washington. Even nationally hyped books about liberalism, or movies about the environment and 9/11 have become partisan tools. Is it time for a viable third party to break the tug of war in our nation’s capital?

The battle against terrorism, immigration enforcement, corrupt Congressmen – one was recently caught with $ 90,000 in his freezer, and taxes are among the many important issues of the day that have become more about strategic positions for this November’s Congressional elections than about the current and future needs of our country. And the American people are suffering because of it.

For the first time since I became active in politics while growing up in D.C., I am actually starting to tune out much of the political fracas and focus only on those candidates who represent my views. I am so disappointed and embarrassed by the big spending and grandstanding of the Republican House and Senate that America might be better off without them in control.

Of course, I cannot imagine today’s Democratic House leaders in control either. Can you? The thought of Charlie Rangel running Ways & Means, John Dingell running Energy and Commerce, John Conyers running Judiciary, or Nancy Pelosi as Speaker certainly motivates me to vote Republican again.

But has our political system become too partisan? Has it become too petty? Or is the behavior of today’s politicians and their political parties the same as it has been since the days of the Federalists, Anti-Federalists, Democratic-Republicans, Whigs, Unionists and the various derivations of each which have become the modern day Democratic and Republican parties?

From my understanding of history, political campaigns have always been nasty and politicians from different ideologies have always bickered and traded favors and votes for power. And there have always been power brokers behind the scenes. It was only a few decades ago that the bootlegging, rum running father of one candidate supposedly bought the Presidency for him with some help from special friends in West Virginia and Illinois.

So where do we go from here? Could a faction of Republican or Democratic office holders break off and form a new party as happened during our country’s early years? Could the special interests that currently bind the Democrats to big labor and trial lawyers and the Republicans to business and religious groups force a splintering of one or both parties and the formation of a new party?

Or could a charismatic national leader with vision - and access to money - materialize and capture the White House as an independent? Ross Perot captured enough votes with his Reform Party in 1992 to put Bill Clinton into the White House and preclude Herbert Walker Bush from winning a second term.

Only time will tell. But I am rooting for a third party to help tame the partisanship in Washington.

Property Insurance Woes - June 2006

In October 1989 I remember being in San Francisco at a business meeting when the ground shook badly and the building in which I was meeting lost windows and walls. To be more specific, I had experienced the magnitude 7.1 earthquake which the country saw live during a televised World Series game. What was more interesting is what I observed the next day.

I remember walking down to the Marina District where multi-million dollar homes had sunk into the dirt used to fill in the bay to create the area decades ago. And I remember property owners complaining to the media that the government would have to help them pay for those damages which their insurance would not cover.

Lastly, I remember hearing a number of residents debating why the government should get involved since the homeowners chose to live in a known earthquake zone. Sound familiar? We are undergoing the same property insurance debate here in Florida where we have all chosen to live in a known hurricane zone.

My beliefs and my wallet are causing conflicting priorities in my thoughts about how to resolve our property insurance crisis in Florida and what role government should be playing. My beliefs tell me the insurance industry should be able to charge whatever they need to earn a reasonable profit. My wallet tells me that a proposed 70% increase in property insurance for many South Floridians is unreasonable and the government needs to provide a fair solution to resolve this marketplace mess.

After Hurricane Andrew many major property insurance companies formed self-funding subsidiaries to solely serve Florida. In doing so, they minimized the benefit to Floridians of spreading windstorm damage risk to property owners outside of the state. They also started to separate “windstorm” protection from other property insurance coverage so they could further ensure that their biggest risk had its own actuarial basis.

Other insurance companies simply decided to stop writing any policies in our state. And thus came the need for the state to help form a last resort insurance carrier which initially had even fewer policy holders among whom they could spread the risk.

The result in each of these cases has been enormous increases in individual property insurance rates especially for windstorm protection. The result is that many homeowners and businesses are simply leaving the state for less expensive areas. When you add the high cost of housing, can you doubt why many have moved?

Since the insurance carriers have chosen to stop spreading much of the risk of providing property insurance coverage in Florida to their other customers throughout the country and since our state guided last resort carrier is buckling under the weight of so many new customers, perhaps it is time for the federal government to step in.

In 1968, the federal government did just that to help property owners obtain affordable protection against flood damages. Today, the National Flood Insurance Program assists property owners in 20,000 communities around the country. Most South Floridians are benefiting from this program. Perhaps it is now time for the federal government to implement a National Windstorm Insurance Program to help property owners to also obtain affordable windstorm coverage throughout communities in hurricane and tornado zones as long as stringent building codes are required for new and existing homes.

Such a program was proposed by the United States Congress several times in the last decade. Perhaps after last year’s devastation from Katrina and Wilma, there will be enough votes to finally pass it. While my beliefs are against another potentially large federal government program, my wallet is rooting for such a victory!

Illegal Immigration - May 2006

“We should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon that person becoming in every facet an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. We have room for but one flag, the American flag. We have room for but one language, and that is the English language. And we have room for but one loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people. “

Those words were said by President Teddy Roosevelt shortly before he died in 1919. Back then our country was facing immigration challenges as millions were coming to this country from Ireland, Germany, Italy, England, and various areas of Scandinavia and Eastern Europe. My paternal grandparents were among them. President Roosevelt’s biggest concern was that our country would become a web of tangled nationalities rather than continuing as a single union.

Today, our country is again at a dividing point about how to handle an influx of foreign-born into our country. Unlike 100 years ago, today’s immigrants are as likely to enter our country illegally as they are to have the proper papers to come here. Or they overstay their visas to do so. President Roosevelt’s concerns about a divided America echoed again recently as illegal immigrants from our southern neighbor proudly displayed the Mexican flag during their protests. And you can see flags of dozens of other Latin and Caribbean nations on display in various car windows in South Florida.

I do not recall my grandparents ever talking about “how things were in my country” as I frequently hear in conversations today. My grandparents proudly worked in garment factories in Baltimore during the day and took English classes at night so they could be part of their new nation. They legally came to our shores by steamship steerage and were processed into this country at the federal immigration station unlike many of today’s immigrants who illegally slip across our borders from Mexico or Canada or are dropped off by smugglers using speedboats and fishing boats.

This country was built by immigrants and we should continue to welcome others to our country to share our American dream. But I do not know how today’s illegal immigrants can ever be expected to fully respect our rule of law if their first act in our country was ignoring our immigration laws. In 1986, the United States made the mistake of giving amnesty to earlier illegal immigrants through the Immigration and Reform Control Act which was, thereafter, supposed to stop the further flow of illegals by prosecuting those that employ them. That law did not work and we again are talking about an immigration bill which includes some form of amnesty.

Hopefully our leaders will not make the same mistake as they did 20 years ago and will require illegal immigrants who want to stay in our country to come forward and register with our immigration service, qualify to become American citizens, start paying taxes, and be required to pay a fine for breaking our laws or leave the country with their families and come back legally. Those that illegally came here simply to earn money to send back home, and do not plan to become citizens, should be deported immediately and be required to enter our country using the normal Temporary Employment Visas. We are a country of laws and we must enforce our immigration laws or face an unending inflow of illegals who will continue to burden our healthcare and educational systems.

Protectionism. Repeating Past Mistakes? - April 2006

Can you remember the year? The United States Congress was concerned about growing imports of foreign goods and capital and their impact on the American way of life. It had only been about a decade since the world was at war and distrust of foreign governments and firms was still high.

If you said 1930, you are correct. That was the year that Congress passed the Smoot-Hawleys Tariff Act which many believe was the final trigger causing our country’s Great Depression. Its purpose was to protect American goods and American industries by raising the costs for entry of foreign goods used in our economy.

When other countries retaliated by doing the same to our goods, our highly leveraged economy collapsed and decades of economic misery followed. In other countries, weak governments failed and nationalist dictators took their helm which many scholars believe led thereafter to the next world war.

Sound familiar? The recent debacle with a United Arab Emirates entity trying to buy a British firm which managed some of our port terminals brought our Congress to the brink of similar protectionist legislation. Already many of our allies in the Middle East are thinking of kicking out American firms doing business in their locales.

Many in Congress still want to pass laws protecting our “critical infrastructure” – whatever that means. Don’t get me wrong. I had a problem with a foreign government with strong ties to Islamic fundamentalists owning a firm which helps bring containers into our ports. And I fault the Bush administration for not putting out a directive to its staff to involve the key decision makers when such a highly sensitive investment was put on the table for their review.

That said, we cannot let our political leaders take us back to the 1930s. The reality is that the flow of foreign investments in the U.S. is a sign of economic strength. Our thriving economy – thanks to the investment friendly Bush Administration – has brought $ 4 billion of foreign investment into our economy according to a recent analysis by the Wall Street Journal. During the same time, the U.S. has created four times as many new jobs as all of Europe and Japan combined.

Most important, those foreign investors and firms are responsible for more than 5 million U.S. jobs according to the Wall Street Journal. Best of all those jobs pay an annual wage which is twice the average rate for U.S. wages. Where would our economy be today without Toyota and its cost effective and dependable cars and its massive investment in auto manufacturing plants in our country? It was only about 60 years ago that Japan was our mortal enemy. Where would our country be without the engineering and production expertise of many German-based firms doing business here?

Certainly I would support any legislation that strengthened the current foreign investment review process to ensure that those foreign firms or governments do not have questionable ties to bad people with bad intents toward our country. And I would agree that we should ensure that our most vulnerable and potentially life threatening assets such as nuclear power plants, domestic bomb making facilities, and water distribution and treatment firms get even closer scrutiny. Frankly, some of them may already be under foreign ownership. Are we already less safe?

But the American people need to step back and realize how the world economy works. Without foreign investment here in the U.S. and without the opportunities for our firms and people to invest abroad, our American economy would not be the envy of the world.

And foreign investments in this country give those firms and governments a continuing stake in our success – including working with us to ensure the safety and security of their investments. While it is foreseeable that a nefarious firm or government may try to weaken our defenses by investing in our free society, we must make sure that our fears of such do not hinder the importance of our involvement in the world economy.

How To Improve Bush's Public Image - March 2006

In about 9 months, President Bush will not only face a new Congress after the November mid-term elections, he will also be facing the reality that media and voter attention will start to focus on his replacement to be elected in 2008.

Worse, the next Congress in 2007 may not contain Republican majorities in the House or Senate if the current elected Republicans cannot start acting like the fiscally and socially conservative representatives which the American public expected when we voted them into office during the past few years.

Thus, the next few months may be President Bush’s last chance to ensure that his legislative priorities are taken seriously and are passed by the current Congress. Many are saying that his “image” is already so low that he has no leverage to propose or pass any laws. Should President Bush be worried about that “image”?

President Bush has always maintained that he does not look at poll numbers or worry about what the media is writing about him. Certainly, his steadfast persistence in promoting such important issues as Social Security Reform, a restructuring of the income tax codes, a movement towards an ownership society, and the war on terror prove that his vision is not swayed by polling.

Our President should not make decisions based on poll or image numbers. Unfortunately, his advisors and the Congress do. Thus, if President Bush wants his agenda passed during this current Congress, he must start getting more of the Americans public behind his vision and efforts.

Fortunately, the President has proven that he has the skill and energy to inform and rally the American public when he needs to get his unedited message delivered. The recent wiretapping controversy was a perfect example of the President being able to explain to the American public what was really being done.

When the New York Times and their secret sources started writing that the President had authorized supposedly illegal domestic wiretaps of US citizens, the President went around the country to explain that only transcontinental communications coming from, or going to, suspected terrorists and organizations were being monitored. Now almost every Democrat is singing the praise of those efforts! And Bush’s poll numbers increased.

The President needs to follow that same road rally and multiple press conference plan to continue improving his image and his chances to get his legislative agenda passed. He needs to talk directly to the American public about the importance of getting the Patriot Act extended, about making his dividend and estate tax cuts permanent, and he needs to lead the discussion about immigration reform.

I’ll admit that I used to be concerned about President Bush’s ability to handle press conferences. During his first term, he seemed unprepared for many of the questions. Now, I believe he has a commendable grasp of most issues and has learned how to get his points across in a calm and convincing matter. If the President continues to increase his public presence, I believe his image will continue to increase as will the chances for his legislative agenda.

Grading President Bush - January 2006

Six years ago I was so concerned about the possibility of Al Gore becoming President that I got up out of my favorite family room chair and joined others to wave signs and walk neighborhoods on behalf of candidate George W. Bush. I even volunteered to be an observer at the infamous ballot recount.

Two years ago, my support for the Bush presidency progressed to being a Broward County Regional Chairman in charge of grassroots efforts in Southwest Broward. I oversaw hundreds of dedicated volunteers who visited tens of thousands of homes for his campaign. I even had the honor of being a driver for one of the vehicles in a Presidential motorcade when President Bush campaigned down here.

Were my efforts worth it? Has the President met my expectations? Here are my thoughts and grades on his performance to date.

Economy: B

The Bush Income Tax Cuts rescued our economy from the dot.com crash and ensuing recession Bush inherited from the previous administration as well as from the paralyzing effects of the 911 tragedy. Furthermore, his reduction of taxes on dividends and capital gains has resulted in unprecedented growth in business formation and jobs.

President Bush continues to work hard to end the “death” tax which takes money from the children of those who have worked hard to create successful small businesses, farms, and family wealth. Too many businesses and farms have folded because of inheritance tax issues.

Unfortunately, the Bush presidency has also allowed some of the largest growth in government spending in our country’s history. His failure to veto any spending bills has given Congress the ability to spend, spend, spend, and borrow, borrow, borrow to pay those bills which will continue to impact our economy for decades to come.

Domestic Agenda: B

A good leader has a vision for his country and remains steadfast in his determination. President Bush’s vision for the United States includes an “ownership” society where individuals have added tools to make decisions for themselves or acquire their own assets rather than relying on Uncle Sam to guide their lives. Record levels of minority home ownership are just one example of that vision’s success.

President Bush proposed necessary changes to Social Security where individuals could start determining how some of their hard-earned FICA retirement funds should be invested. He was willing to touch that “third rail” of Social Security despite the political risk. Only a confident leader would tackle that initiative which, unfortunately, has faltered because of the spinelessness of both political parties in Congress.

The Bush administration has brought accountability to public education with his No Child Left Behind program and an emphasis on education choices where parents of students from failing schools can utilize part of their school taxes to send their child to better schools.

Earlier this year, President signed into law the first national energy plan in many years. This plan provides economic incentives for consumers and businesses to invest in new technologies to supplement our nation’s reliance on fossil fuels. Those incentives should also help improve our energy transmission infrastructure which has proved to be old and unreliable.

The implementation of the Homeland Security Department and the passage of the Patriot Act brought new tools to the table for our intelligence agencies to work closer together to identify, track, and bring in for questioning suspected terrorists and collaborators located here in the United States.

From his choices for Supreme Court Justices and other Federal judges to his Administration’s reversal or elimination of thousands of intrusive or useless government policies, President Bush has left a mark on the governance of this country that will hopefully last for decades to come.

International Relations: C

Nearly two years ago, President Bush declared “Mission Accomplished” in Iraq. Most people, including me, interpreted that to mean the hard work was over. Since then, however, we have all learned that the hard and deadly work had just begun.

Our Commander in Chief and his defense advisers failed to properly gauge and anticipate the insurgency from the remaining Hussein regime thugs and foreign terrorists who have worked together in an attempt to cripple Iraq. And our intelligence was flawed.

Fortunately, the men and women of our military continue to make our country proud as they risk their lives to spread freedom and democracy to Iraq and surrounding areas. Their efforts have resulted in several successful elections as Iraq forms its new government and a population in which, as polls have recently indicated, 77% of the citizens are happy with their lives.

On other international issues, President Bush and his administration have found themselves at odds with other countries over such issues as the Kyoto Protocols, democracy in Eastern Europe, and various trade agreements. To some, the President’s actions have hurt our international reputation. To me, the President is doing what he should do which is look out for our nation’s best interests.

Overall Grade: B

Overall, President Bush has exceeded some of my expectations but has disappointed me with other actions. I believe that when history judges him, President Bush will be remembered as one who helped spread political freedom around the world and economic freedom within the United States.