|
Hi Mr. Gan, I have indented my
answers below each question. 1. What
are your reasons for running for senator? Short Answer: We can
balance our budget and work toward full employment. This is my assignment to
myself as a candidate. History! We are in
our 59th consecutive year without a balanced budget, and the people seem to
think that is fine. IT IS NOT FINE. The deficits over the last three
presidents: Democrat President Andrew
Jackson was probably one of our greatest presidents, he balanced his budget 7
of his 8 years, paid the federal debt down to zero and got rid of the “too powerful over the
economy” national bank. More on the 19th
Century Democrats. I believe that if
enough hear the truth about our government that people will work to elect a
government that allows the people to develop solution. That is what worked in
the 19th Century. We have the
opposite in the 20th Century with too much government growth and too much
dependence on government. The government
loves the power and they keep spending and creating debt and if not corrected
by the people, the government will break us. 2. Why do you believe you are most
qualified to be the California Senator among all the running candidates? Of the 34
candidates, I have heard 18 discussing their positions; I believe that
examining history to determine what worked and why that that gives to us
actions we can take to get back onto the successful track. I believe that the
reference to the bright spot in history when Democrat President Andrew
Jackson led the government of our nation and let the people build the country;
such that in less than 300 years from 1605 to 1900 the people brought us from
a fledgling start to a world power. This growth was stymied
by the growth of government in the period from 1902 to today. My hope is to
bring the truth to
the table. 3. How is Measure AA significant to you? No direct
significance as I live in 4. While Measure AA will reduce pollution
in the San Francisco Bay, improve water quality, restore the habitat for the
wildlife, protect communities from floods, and increase shoreline public
access, what do you think are the most significant downsides of measure AA? If the basis is
climate change (with about a 5 inch rise of the ocean in the next 100 years,)
that change would seem to be a natural improvement to the bay. It would be wise
for developers to plan with the 5 inch per Century growth in mind. The San Francisco
Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) was created in 1965, in my
opinion should be absorbed into the local government for continued policing
of pollution. I would vote
against Measure AA. Sincerely, Herbert G Peters Candidate for US Senator Thank you for your time! Paul G. Return: Home Copyright © 2016 Reducing
the Cost of Government Sample
annual cost of our government: 1792: Government annual cost $.89 per person, 1900: Government annual cost $8.80 per person, a reasonable increase. 2012: Government annual cost $7,793.33 per person, unreasonable increase. The
curse of progressivism brought about the excessive cost of government. Government
Costs that we Can and Must Reduce Our federal
government must limit itself to the constitution, as written. This would
probably solve many if not most of our problems. To reduce the cost
of living we must reduce the cost of government: · We
can and must stop policing the world, (instead of policing the world we could
have missionaries reaching out to the world teaching the gospel of Jesus
Christ.) · We
can and we must end our propensity to go to war at will, schools used to
teach that we only went to war in self defense, · We
can and we must end our
occupation of about 800 bases in foreign countries, and another
article pertaining to bases, · Terror
Attacks are likely blowback from our excessive occupation of bases around the
world, both of the above articles hint that foreign bases could be the cause
of terror attacks, · We
can and we must end all foreign aid, · We
can and we must end all subsidies, domestic and foreign, · We
can and we must terminate many federal government jobs and reduce pay
significantly for the few workers that remain employed by the federal
government. Our
federal work force is compensated at a rate that is double the private sector.
We cannot afford this excessive overhead. Constitution, as
Written The constitution
enumerates the powers that Congress shall have; Social
Security is not included. A Supreme Court, however - coerced by FDR approved
of Social Security in Helvering v. Davis, U.S. Supreme Court, 1937, 301 U.S. 619. A friend at the The virtually
fatal blow to the “free market” came in 1913 with the enactment of the
“Income Tax” and “The Federal Reserve System.” Our free market was derailed. To get our country
back on track we must phase out Social Security, and other progressive
programs, repeal the “Federal Reserve System” and replace the Income Tax with
a Federal Sales Tax that applies to all documented sales, no exceptions. When interest
rates are restored to natural law rates almost any person can save for
retirement AND beat Social Security returns. The constitution
does not enumerate power to Congress to finance or manage health care or
education or welfare. Medical Care We must phase out
all federal medical programs. In the 50’s a doctor visit was $5 with no
health insurance. In 1960 the cost for childbirth, without health insurance
was $150 for doctor and $150 for hospital. Education Harvard was
established over 150 years before the constitution was adopted; the
constitution (as written) gives NO power to the Congress to finance or manage
education. The entire “Department of Education” should be repealed; and
the federal government must end all education subsidies. Its usefulness
is questionable. We
must restore the “free
market” which led us to the healthiest, most robust economy of all time.
The free market brought us from our infancy to the greatest country of all
time. But now we are dying. We
are in our 59th year without a balanced budget; the last three
presidents and their deficits: In
2007 and 2010
our deficits were so high that if the IRS taxed us at 100% we would still
have had a deficit. Return:
Home Copyright ©
2016
|