Congressman Pomeroy,

You don’t know me, but I am a constituent of yours from Jamestown, ND. I am writing to you today because I feel very strongly about the subject.

You and your fellow Congressmen are scheduled to vote on House Bill #3962. While I cannot argue that we do need some sort of reform in health care, this bill is not the way to do it.

Let me give you an example. My wife recently started a business. A business that is contributing to the well-being of our family and contributing to our local economy. If Congress passes this bill, her company will be forced to either provide health care for the employees, or pay a tax so that they can have the public option. Even if we agree that the tax would be the cheaper of the two options, it is still a 8% tax! In the case of my wife’s business, that wouldn’t just force the firing of employees, but would likely shut the business down. In effect, it would be taxed out of existence.

This is just one example of many why you MUST vote NO on this bill. It is not good for the country and it certainly isn’t good for North Dakota, a state that I know you love.

Please do the right thing for North Dakota on Saturday.

Finally, I thank you for your many years of service to this country and this state. But, I feel that I must remind you that the people of this state and this country are watching. We are watching like we have never watched before. I won’t threaten your position, as that ultimately is at the mercy of the people of North Dakota. But, it will be awfully hard to explain why you voted yes on a bill that raised taxes on businesses by 8%, raised taxes as a penalty to those that cannot afford health care (how is that helping them?), raised taxes on “medical devices” that include drug store items such as condoms and tampons, and establishes the beginnings of a Government run health-care system (which is unconstitutional, I might add.).

Again,
Thank you for your time, Congressman.

There were two measures in ND that dealt with the tax surplus that the state has.  It’s rather large.  The first would have created a oil trust fund that would have been used for budget defecits in the future.  It was a borderline measure and I voted against it.  It lost.  I think that’s good.  The second measure would have given a 50% tax reduction of personal income taxes as well as a smaller reduction of corporate income tax.  I voted for it and it lost.

I must admit that both the Sand loss and the Measure 2 loss disturb me.  Pomeroy voted against the first bailout bill that did just the bailout.  He then voted for the “sweetened” bailout bill.  Why?  Special Interests.  The day after the vote for the second bill, he received nearly $100,000 in campaign contributions from the very same companies that he voted to bailout.  Why a company in need of a bailout is giving campaign contributions is another arguement.  The obviousness of the reasoning isn’t.

The loss of Measure 2 disturbs me because it was a very cut and dry measure.  There is way too much tax surplus right now.  And it’s only logical that if there is too much surplus, we’re taking in too much in taxes.  So, rather than find a way to spend that surplus, we should give it back to the people from whence it came.  Unfortunately, the people would rather have that money go towards social welfare programs and other pet projects.  Many used the excuse that by defeating the measure, they could then push harder for property tax reductions.  We’ll see if that materializes or not.

The problem with much of this state and much of this country is that too many of the people believe that they are entitled to something.  Because they are US citizens, they are entitled to good health care.  They are entitled to a secure retirement.  They are entitled to a good paying job.  What they forget is that those things existed before the government stepped in.  They still exist for people willing to work for them.  Unfortunately, we spend too much time trying to get what we are “entitled” to, and not enough time doing any honest work.

What we should have done with this election is to cut back on legislators who feed the entitlement and cater to special interests.  I believe Duane Sand would have done that.  We should also have cut back the taxes that the government is taking from us.  The government shouldn’t take any more in tax revenue than they need to operate.  They have done that, and as a result, that money should be returned or they should reduce the amount that they take in future years.

Instead of doing those things, we gave Earl Pomeroy a ticket to continue with the same old corruptive practices that he’s been doing. And we gave the government yet another chance to hold on to our money and find a way to spend it rather than give it back to us.

Just plain stupid.

Besides the Presidential election on which I’ve already made my choice, I’ll also be voting for Governor, and Representative to the U.S. Congress.    In North Dakota, the race is between the incumbent, Earl Pomeroy (D), and his opponent, Duane Sand (R).

I’ve decided that I’ll be voting for Duane Sand.  In looking at Rep. Pomeroy’s voting record, I find that it is against most of the things that I believe in.  Therefore, he is not a viable candidate for representing me as a citizen of his state.  Pomeroy voted yes on both bailout bills that came across for voting for instance.  I don’t think either should have passed, but especially the second one that eventually did pass.

Duane Sand doesn’t have a voting record to go off of, but based on his issues stances on his website, I feel comfortable enough to say that he is much more aligned with my beliefs to be a much better representative for me.  And that’s what a representative government is all about, right?

Go and check out Duane’s website.  I hope you’ll join me in supporting his candidacy for U.S. Congress.