August 17, 2012
Honorable Harry Reid
522 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Reid:
There are emerging and struggling democracies around the world who look to the United States as one of the best examples of what a democracy should look like. And in this technological age of instantaneous, worldwide availability of news and information, our every word is being evaluated to judge the attributes of our form of government.
You Sir, have single-handedly done more to discredit the theme and enduring qualities of democracy than any previous event in the history of our nation. It is clear there is nothing you won't do to pursue your agenda. Winning at any cost, by any means, are the tactics of anarchists and revolutionaries and is clearly the path you prefer and have chosen.
This country is bigger and stronger than those who desire to corrupt the values, virtues and principles upon which it was founded. Your legacy will be a constant humiliation for your posterity.
Sincerely,
Bill Monroe
Southlake, TX
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Fast and Furious
June 16, 2012
An Open Letter to the United States House of Representatives:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I watched with dismay your attempt to demand the Attorney General’s resignation. Once again, politics triumphs over truth.
Clearly this was a witch hunt to discredit the Attorney General and the current administration. But the question is, have you served your constituencies and the American people? With the evidence disclosed thus far and nearly 150,000 Department of Justice documents being contemptuously withheld from you, are you absolutely certain the Attorney General did or did not have complicity in the Fast and Furious covert operation? Defending or convicting anyone before all the evidence has been presented is nothing less than contempt for the rule of law and leaves truth as the most serious casualty.
Sadly, witch hunts have become an effective political maneuver. I submit you have succumbed to this practice to the detriment of your individual honor, character, integrity, and the people's confidence in our democracy. How can the American people trust a body that subverts the truth for political advantage? Is this the legacy of public service you envisioned for yourselves when you took your oaths of office? Please thoughtfully consider the following points.
First, the individual at the helm of any endeavor, regardless of its size and scope, must accept responsibility and be held accountable for the actions of their subordinates. This is a resolute principle of effective leadership. The moral and ethical culture of any organization must be clearly articulated and enforced on a consistent and continuing basis. To do otherwise is an implicit endorsement of irresponsible behavior and encourages more of the same. Leaders who ignore or fail in this essential duty must be forced to relinquish command. However, when such a culture has been clearly established, leaders should be insulated from the fallout from incompetence and unauthorized activity on their watch. We must expect the highest standards from those who willingly and voluntarily seek increasing levels of responsibility.
Second, the strength and enduring value of any legitimate collaboration must be larger and stronger than the actions of any individual. If we believe the institutions we have created are all perilously at risk because of the bullies among us, then our great nation has been nothing more than an illusion, doomed from the outset. And here's the irony -- trust is earned when the search for truth is unimpeded by ulterior motive, and when leaders accept risk to themselves when doing the right thing. Those leaders who were unafraid of a public display of dirty laundry were emboldened by their respect for the American people to recognize and honor trustworthiness. In other words, if the Attorney General is forced to step aside even without due process, it does not signal the end of the Democratic party or the current administration. Instead, it reaffirms the nobility of our great nation. The people don't necessarily believe in you, they believe in our form of government and the principles upon which it was founded.
Third, every member of the House of Representatives is obligated to demand the immediate release of all evidence related to this very grave matter. To do otherwise borders on dereliction of duty and is deserving of the harshest allowable penalty. If you haven’t the ability to think for yourself, the courage to stand alone, or a good measure of self-respect , then know you are a big part of the problem and not part of the solution.
Ladies and gentlemen, I implore you to forsake the political tricks, games and maneuvers you have so skillfully devised and employed. Please set aside your affiliations and embrace your individuality. Give us a reason to believe this great nation is in good hands and that our best days are yet to come. And lastly, for the most crafty and cunning among you, if you condescendingly dismiss this letter as altruistic naïveté, then admit to yourselves you have given in to the corrupting effects of influence, power and prestige.
Respectfully,
Bill Monroe
Southlake, TX
An Open Letter to the United States House of Representatives:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I watched with dismay your attempt to demand the Attorney General’s resignation. Once again, politics triumphs over truth.
Clearly this was a witch hunt to discredit the Attorney General and the current administration. But the question is, have you served your constituencies and the American people? With the evidence disclosed thus far and nearly 150,000 Department of Justice documents being contemptuously withheld from you, are you absolutely certain the Attorney General did or did not have complicity in the Fast and Furious covert operation? Defending or convicting anyone before all the evidence has been presented is nothing less than contempt for the rule of law and leaves truth as the most serious casualty.
Sadly, witch hunts have become an effective political maneuver. I submit you have succumbed to this practice to the detriment of your individual honor, character, integrity, and the people's confidence in our democracy. How can the American people trust a body that subverts the truth for political advantage? Is this the legacy of public service you envisioned for yourselves when you took your oaths of office? Please thoughtfully consider the following points.
First, the individual at the helm of any endeavor, regardless of its size and scope, must accept responsibility and be held accountable for the actions of their subordinates. This is a resolute principle of effective leadership. The moral and ethical culture of any organization must be clearly articulated and enforced on a consistent and continuing basis. To do otherwise is an implicit endorsement of irresponsible behavior and encourages more of the same. Leaders who ignore or fail in this essential duty must be forced to relinquish command. However, when such a culture has been clearly established, leaders should be insulated from the fallout from incompetence and unauthorized activity on their watch. We must expect the highest standards from those who willingly and voluntarily seek increasing levels of responsibility.
Second, the strength and enduring value of any legitimate collaboration must be larger and stronger than the actions of any individual. If we believe the institutions we have created are all perilously at risk because of the bullies among us, then our great nation has been nothing more than an illusion, doomed from the outset. And here's the irony -- trust is earned when the search for truth is unimpeded by ulterior motive, and when leaders accept risk to themselves when doing the right thing. Those leaders who were unafraid of a public display of dirty laundry were emboldened by their respect for the American people to recognize and honor trustworthiness. In other words, if the Attorney General is forced to step aside even without due process, it does not signal the end of the Democratic party or the current administration. Instead, it reaffirms the nobility of our great nation. The people don't necessarily believe in you, they believe in our form of government and the principles upon which it was founded.
Third, every member of the House of Representatives is obligated to demand the immediate release of all evidence related to this very grave matter. To do otherwise borders on dereliction of duty and is deserving of the harshest allowable penalty. If you haven’t the ability to think for yourself, the courage to stand alone, or a good measure of self-respect , then know you are a big part of the problem and not part of the solution.
Ladies and gentlemen, I implore you to forsake the political tricks, games and maneuvers you have so skillfully devised and employed. Please set aside your affiliations and embrace your individuality. Give us a reason to believe this great nation is in good hands and that our best days are yet to come. And lastly, for the most crafty and cunning among you, if you condescendingly dismiss this letter as altruistic naïveté, then admit to yourselves you have given in to the corrupting effects of influence, power and prestige.
Respectfully,
Bill Monroe
Southlake, TX
Saturday, March 5, 2011
The Case Against Public-Sector Unions
Unions have their place in a free economy. In the private-sector, union leadership and company management can work together to achieve their mutual best interests. It's a win/win if they succeed and, if they fail, the company goes in search of less expensive labor or the company shuts its doors. The consequences can be devastating to many but the larger economy continues on, uninterrupted, and the displaced workers are eventually absorbed by other employers.
On the other hand, collective-bargaining in the public-sector has obvious shortcomings. First, public-sector unions use a portion of their members' dues to influence or determine the election of public officials who will decide the composition and structure of the union's compensation and benefits. This is clearly a conflict of interest and undermines the public trust of elected officials and public workers. Private-sector unions have limited influence over the appointment of company managers short of owning significant equity in the enterprise.
Second, when the average public-sector employees' compensation and benefits package exceeds the average package for the private-sector worker, we have begun to diminish the incentive for workers to find employment in the private-sector. This will eventually result in the gradual decline and ultimate destruction of the economic engine from which flows our prosperity and the taxes used to pay the public-sector employee.
Third, on the rare occasions when negotiations between public-sector unions and elected officials reach a stalemate, the unions can resort to methods and tactics which can hold the local, state or national economies and respective taxpayers hostage to their demands -- hardly the actions of one who chose public service over personal opportunity. No private-sector union has ever wielded such disruptive power.
Finally, public-sector workers have traditionally served at the pleasure of the taxpayer, as humble servants who provide essential, common services so others can participate and contribute to the creation of our national wealth. We would be wise not to obfuscate their distinctly different roles in our national vitality and welfare.
On the other hand, collective-bargaining in the public-sector has obvious shortcomings. First, public-sector unions use a portion of their members' dues to influence or determine the election of public officials who will decide the composition and structure of the union's compensation and benefits. This is clearly a conflict of interest and undermines the public trust of elected officials and public workers. Private-sector unions have limited influence over the appointment of company managers short of owning significant equity in the enterprise.
Second, when the average public-sector employees' compensation and benefits package exceeds the average package for the private-sector worker, we have begun to diminish the incentive for workers to find employment in the private-sector. This will eventually result in the gradual decline and ultimate destruction of the economic engine from which flows our prosperity and the taxes used to pay the public-sector employee.
Third, on the rare occasions when negotiations between public-sector unions and elected officials reach a stalemate, the unions can resort to methods and tactics which can hold the local, state or national economies and respective taxpayers hostage to their demands -- hardly the actions of one who chose public service over personal opportunity. No private-sector union has ever wielded such disruptive power.
Finally, public-sector workers have traditionally served at the pleasure of the taxpayer, as humble servants who provide essential, common services so others can participate and contribute to the creation of our national wealth. We would be wise not to obfuscate their distinctly different roles in our national vitality and welfare.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
A Rational Approach To Our Immigration Crisis
Compassion for undocumented aliens is to be understood and respected. The world needs powerful voices for those whose pleas are drowned by the cacophony of politics, bigotry and fear. However, there are occasions where the greater good trumps the noble effort.
The continued existence of civilized, democratic societies is wholly-dependent on resolute adherence to the “rule of law”. If we allow the circumstances of the moment to obscure our view of our intended societal continuum, then, in effect, we are choosing which laws to respect and which to ignore, the consequences of which are far more frightening than the threats from any physical aggressor.
There is no question our society can absorb these aliens and that our economy is desperate for their contributions. Let’s not threaten these good and decent people with punitive actions as a requirement for legal status. After all, the negligence of our elected officials in their disregard for the rule of law and their oaths of office is solely responsible for this human crisis. This is what happens when we enable others to avoid direct confrontation with their most pressing issues.
Let’s be sane and rational. Simply require all undocumented aliens to report to our immigration authorities for identification and registration within a reasonable amount time. Accept no further registrants at the end of this period. Failure to report shall constitute cause for deportation. The requirements for remaining in the United States should be:
1. Affirm no criminal record or behavior.
2. Identify any and all family members also in the United States legally and illegally.
3. Take an oath not to encourage nor facilitate illegal immigration by family and friends not presently in the U.S.
4. Promise to become U.S. citizens within five years of the date of registration.
5. Allow registrants to apply for visas for immediate family members after three years from date of registration providing the requesting individual remains in good standing with our immigration authorities.
6. Promise to carry a U.S. government issued identification card as proof of registrations and which must be presented to authorities and employers when requested until such time they become U.S. citizens.
The concept of “paying a fine” for illegally crossing our borders serves no purpose other than creating a hindrance to the registration process. And requiring the individual to learn the English language is also pointless. English is the international language of commerce and anyone who chooses to ignore this reality is choosing to resign themselves to a life with limited opportunity. As in previous waves of immigration, the first generation didn’t learn our language; the second generation learned both English and the family tongue; and the third generation learned only English. Economics will prevail over those who promote a multi-lingual society.
And quite frankly, we don’t need to build fences along our borders. Those who have yet to come will be disincentivized from entering when they learn they have to compete for jobs with the millions of lawfully registered illegal immigrants already here.
And to those who have and who continue to wait patiently in line for the privilege to immigrate to America, you have my sincerest apology. Life isn’t always fair but you have the comfort of knowing you have respected the “rule of law” and possess the conscience of an honorable individual.
The continued existence of civilized, democratic societies is wholly-dependent on resolute adherence to the “rule of law”. If we allow the circumstances of the moment to obscure our view of our intended societal continuum, then, in effect, we are choosing which laws to respect and which to ignore, the consequences of which are far more frightening than the threats from any physical aggressor.
There is no question our society can absorb these aliens and that our economy is desperate for their contributions. Let’s not threaten these good and decent people with punitive actions as a requirement for legal status. After all, the negligence of our elected officials in their disregard for the rule of law and their oaths of office is solely responsible for this human crisis. This is what happens when we enable others to avoid direct confrontation with their most pressing issues.
Let’s be sane and rational. Simply require all undocumented aliens to report to our immigration authorities for identification and registration within a reasonable amount time. Accept no further registrants at the end of this period. Failure to report shall constitute cause for deportation. The requirements for remaining in the United States should be:
1. Affirm no criminal record or behavior.
2. Identify any and all family members also in the United States legally and illegally.
3. Take an oath not to encourage nor facilitate illegal immigration by family and friends not presently in the U.S.
4. Promise to become U.S. citizens within five years of the date of registration.
5. Allow registrants to apply for visas for immediate family members after three years from date of registration providing the requesting individual remains in good standing with our immigration authorities.
6. Promise to carry a U.S. government issued identification card as proof of registrations and which must be presented to authorities and employers when requested until such time they become U.S. citizens.
The concept of “paying a fine” for illegally crossing our borders serves no purpose other than creating a hindrance to the registration process. And requiring the individual to learn the English language is also pointless. English is the international language of commerce and anyone who chooses to ignore this reality is choosing to resign themselves to a life with limited opportunity. As in previous waves of immigration, the first generation didn’t learn our language; the second generation learned both English and the family tongue; and the third generation learned only English. Economics will prevail over those who promote a multi-lingual society.
And quite frankly, we don’t need to build fences along our borders. Those who have yet to come will be disincentivized from entering when they learn they have to compete for jobs with the millions of lawfully registered illegal immigrants already here.
And to those who have and who continue to wait patiently in line for the privilege to immigrate to America, you have my sincerest apology. Life isn’t always fair but you have the comfort of knowing you have respected the “rule of law” and possess the conscience of an honorable individual.
Monday, August 17, 2009
The President's Primary Duty
August 17, 2009
President Barack H. Obama
The Whitehouse
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
It is the primary duty of the President of the United States to protect and defend its citizens against all enemies foreign and domestic. That is the oath you pledged and your solemn promise to the American people.
The most immediate enemy confronting the American way of life is economic ruin. We can debate indefinitely the issue as to what or who to blame for our current recession. However, what we cannot ignore is the impending, almost certain, devaluation of the American dollar as a consequence of our national debt and our deteriorating credit worthiness. We have put ourselves in harm’s way – at the mercy of our foreign creditors. Inflation, or worse, hyper-inflation, is certain to follow.
But you know this -- you are an intelligent man surrounded by very competent advisors. The question then becomes, why would you jeopardize the livelihoods and prosperity of 300 million Americans for social and environmental policies which will surely aggravate and accelerate the crisis? Shouldn’t your first priority be to take those steps necessary to avert a head-on collision with economic reality?
I can only conclude from your writings, your words, and the company you keep and have kept, that you are fundamentally a revolutionary, an anarchist, whose primary objective is to redistribute American wealth and fundamentally alter the economic landscape of our nation. As in any revolution or noble cause, immediate and short-term casualties are acceptable and to be expected. In other words, your proposed reforms are simply a means to an end.
Tell me I’m wrong Mr. President. Even you must acknowledge that wealth, influence and power will always gravitate to industrious and ambitious individuals regardless of prevailing politics. When everything appears to have changed, in fact, nothing has changed. A majority of the people will still be manipulated by the bullies among us. Will you not agree that evolution has been unequivocally superior to revolution in bringing about necessary change in an orderly and peaceful fashion? Or, do you have a different legacy in mind?
Respectfully,
Bill Monroe
President Barack H. Obama
The Whitehouse
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
It is the primary duty of the President of the United States to protect and defend its citizens against all enemies foreign and domestic. That is the oath you pledged and your solemn promise to the American people.
The most immediate enemy confronting the American way of life is economic ruin. We can debate indefinitely the issue as to what or who to blame for our current recession. However, what we cannot ignore is the impending, almost certain, devaluation of the American dollar as a consequence of our national debt and our deteriorating credit worthiness. We have put ourselves in harm’s way – at the mercy of our foreign creditors. Inflation, or worse, hyper-inflation, is certain to follow.
But you know this -- you are an intelligent man surrounded by very competent advisors. The question then becomes, why would you jeopardize the livelihoods and prosperity of 300 million Americans for social and environmental policies which will surely aggravate and accelerate the crisis? Shouldn’t your first priority be to take those steps necessary to avert a head-on collision with economic reality?
I can only conclude from your writings, your words, and the company you keep and have kept, that you are fundamentally a revolutionary, an anarchist, whose primary objective is to redistribute American wealth and fundamentally alter the economic landscape of our nation. As in any revolution or noble cause, immediate and short-term casualties are acceptable and to be expected. In other words, your proposed reforms are simply a means to an end.
Tell me I’m wrong Mr. President. Even you must acknowledge that wealth, influence and power will always gravitate to industrious and ambitious individuals regardless of prevailing politics. When everything appears to have changed, in fact, nothing has changed. A majority of the people will still be manipulated by the bullies among us. Will you not agree that evolution has been unequivocally superior to revolution in bringing about necessary change in an orderly and peaceful fashion? Or, do you have a different legacy in mind?
Respectfully,
Bill Monroe
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Life Is the End-Game
March 19, 2009
President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Obama:
I watched with interest last week when you reversed the government’s moratorium on using public funds for stem cell research. During this media opportunity, your claim to be a man of faith did not go unnoticed. With all due respect Sir, it may be you don’t understand what that means, or, more likely, you do but it requires more than you are able to give.
Your campaign was built on the premise that you will be the guardian and defender of the common man, the laborer, the disadvantaged, the persecuted, and the weakest and poorest among us. How then can you ignore the life conceived and living within its mother’s womb? I realize this is the crux of the matter – when does this new creation become life and become worthy of our protection? I’m not confused on this issue but evidently you are. However, confusion is the most compelling argument to err on the side of caution. Unless you have indisputable, irrefutable evidence of when life begins, it is your sacred duty to provide the safeguards for every potential and actual life even when it infringes on the rights of others. Are you willing to decide which life is more valuable than the next? I believe you stated that such decisions are “above your pay grade”. I often wonder at how many great achievements have been postponed because the achiever was aborted.
The lifting of this moratorium also says volumes about your faith and confidence in American ingenuity, creativity and imagination. There are always other ways to achieve the desired results and it is your role to challenge our best and brightest minds to explore beyond the boundaries of our current knowledge. It is your role to provide the leadership, the encouragement and the incentives necessary for great achievement.
I have observed in my lifetime that unwanted pregnancies are never “punishment” for indiscretions or poor judgment. I can’t recall ever having heard or learned of a woman who said having an abortion was a good decision. And, as I said in a previous letter, if life is the end-game, then everything else are just simply rules of the game.
All the best,
Bill Monroe
President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Obama:
I watched with interest last week when you reversed the government’s moratorium on using public funds for stem cell research. During this media opportunity, your claim to be a man of faith did not go unnoticed. With all due respect Sir, it may be you don’t understand what that means, or, more likely, you do but it requires more than you are able to give.
Your campaign was built on the premise that you will be the guardian and defender of the common man, the laborer, the disadvantaged, the persecuted, and the weakest and poorest among us. How then can you ignore the life conceived and living within its mother’s womb? I realize this is the crux of the matter – when does this new creation become life and become worthy of our protection? I’m not confused on this issue but evidently you are. However, confusion is the most compelling argument to err on the side of caution. Unless you have indisputable, irrefutable evidence of when life begins, it is your sacred duty to provide the safeguards for every potential and actual life even when it infringes on the rights of others. Are you willing to decide which life is more valuable than the next? I believe you stated that such decisions are “above your pay grade”. I often wonder at how many great achievements have been postponed because the achiever was aborted.
The lifting of this moratorium also says volumes about your faith and confidence in American ingenuity, creativity and imagination. There are always other ways to achieve the desired results and it is your role to challenge our best and brightest minds to explore beyond the boundaries of our current knowledge. It is your role to provide the leadership, the encouragement and the incentives necessary for great achievement.
I have observed in my lifetime that unwanted pregnancies are never “punishment” for indiscretions or poor judgment. I can’t recall ever having heard or learned of a woman who said having an abortion was a good decision. And, as I said in a previous letter, if life is the end-game, then everything else are just simply rules of the game.
All the best,
Bill Monroe
Monday, March 16, 2009
Another Letter to President Obama
March 8, 2009
President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Obama:
I’m really trying to understand who you are as a person, what values you embrace, and what you want to accomplish as our President. I realize the current state of our economy is a big distraction for you and this has further confused my ability to see you for who you really are, assuming that we can ever really know anyone.
My first point of confusion is your position on tax rates as they apply to the most financially successful Americans. I assume you have been told by your economic advisors that somewhere between $8 trillion and $11 trillion U.S. dollars are being sequestered by Americans from the probing eyes of the I.R.S in overseas accounts. (I should add that I’m not one of those Americans and I don’t condone such practices). This begs the question, why isn’t that money working hard for us right here in the U.S.A. and especially right now? You know the answer as well as I do; our income tax policies have driven and are driving wealth out of this country. And who do you think owns most of that overseas wealth? Well, it’s the same people who you plan to assess with higher tax rates. (The fact they can afford higher rates is a silly and irrelevant argument.) And why don’t we both try to guess what their response might be? Yep, more dollars heading into overseas accounts to avoid excessive taxation. And there are an alarming number of U.S. corporations and U.S. citizens moving (permanently) to less burdensome tax environments. Is this un-American or un-patriotic? Not relevant given the current state of our economy. (I won’t even addressed the issue of foreign corporate employers who avoid U.S. tax exposure like a modern plague, and the class warfare created by our taxation policies.)
I do know two of your administration’s major objectives are universal health care and free public education through four years of college, which brings me to my second point of confusion. Both are extremely expensive initiatives in concept but can become downright unaffordable when managed and administered by a government bureaucracy. (Maybe we could pay for these programs by creating another large enforcement bureaucracy to chase down those overseas dollars, punish their owners, and tax these funds to the fullest extent of the law – just kidding). Seriously, and lets be candid; we would be hard pressed to find any examples of sustained bureaucratic effectiveness and efficiency in any political ideology.
President Barack H. Obama
Page Two
March 8, 2009
So there you have it – dramatically increase annual government expenditures while chasing away the people best able to foot the bill. Do you see why I’m confused?
Now, here’s what I really want to know. What motivates your desire to significantly increase the size of government? Is it because you really believe it’s the right thing to do and somehow we will find a way to indefinitely provide the necessary financial resources for generations to come? Are you subtly waging a campaign against capitalism because it favors the most ambitious among us? Or, are you like most intellectual liberals who believe the masses need to be controlled to prevent them from doing harm to themselves? Given that socialism has failed and is failing everywhere around the world and has never set a precedent for producing sustainable growth and prosperity, that most socialist and totalitarian governments have embraced some tools of capitalism to varying degrees, that even the Israelis have abandoned the kibbutzim, and that capitalism has produced the highest standard of living the world has ever known, I guess the answer is obvious -- government knows what’s best for the citizenry better than the people themselves, and it has the added benefit of allowing you and other intellectual elitists to secure for yourselves a lifetime of influence, power and position in a big government society. Does that pretty much sum it up?
Your campaign promised “change we can believe in” and “transparency”. It seems to me in less than sixty days you have succumbed to and embraced the culture of Washington politics. You listen to staff members who live in fear of losing their prestigious jobs and being embarrassed on a national scale, your decisions seem exclusively driven by pollsters, and you rely more on your style than your substance, e.g., blaming the 8,000 earmarks in the stimulus budget on the previous administration. Have we become such a “sound bite” nation that courageous, honest and humble leadership is far too risky for political survival? Had today’s political leaders existed during the late 1700’s, we probably would still be a British colony, or we would have become Mexico’s northern most state or Canada’s southern most province.
I will continue to try to get to know you and understand your motivations. Since we probably won’t become personally acquainted, I’ll have to draw my conclusions from your actions.
All the best,
Bill Monroe
President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Obama:
I’m really trying to understand who you are as a person, what values you embrace, and what you want to accomplish as our President. I realize the current state of our economy is a big distraction for you and this has further confused my ability to see you for who you really are, assuming that we can ever really know anyone.
My first point of confusion is your position on tax rates as they apply to the most financially successful Americans. I assume you have been told by your economic advisors that somewhere between $8 trillion and $11 trillion U.S. dollars are being sequestered by Americans from the probing eyes of the I.R.S in overseas accounts. (I should add that I’m not one of those Americans and I don’t condone such practices). This begs the question, why isn’t that money working hard for us right here in the U.S.A. and especially right now? You know the answer as well as I do; our income tax policies have driven and are driving wealth out of this country. And who do you think owns most of that overseas wealth? Well, it’s the same people who you plan to assess with higher tax rates. (The fact they can afford higher rates is a silly and irrelevant argument.) And why don’t we both try to guess what their response might be? Yep, more dollars heading into overseas accounts to avoid excessive taxation. And there are an alarming number of U.S. corporations and U.S. citizens moving (permanently) to less burdensome tax environments. Is this un-American or un-patriotic? Not relevant given the current state of our economy. (I won’t even addressed the issue of foreign corporate employers who avoid U.S. tax exposure like a modern plague, and the class warfare created by our taxation policies.)
I do know two of your administration’s major objectives are universal health care and free public education through four years of college, which brings me to my second point of confusion. Both are extremely expensive initiatives in concept but can become downright unaffordable when managed and administered by a government bureaucracy. (Maybe we could pay for these programs by creating another large enforcement bureaucracy to chase down those overseas dollars, punish their owners, and tax these funds to the fullest extent of the law – just kidding). Seriously, and lets be candid; we would be hard pressed to find any examples of sustained bureaucratic effectiveness and efficiency in any political ideology.
President Barack H. Obama
Page Two
March 8, 2009
So there you have it – dramatically increase annual government expenditures while chasing away the people best able to foot the bill. Do you see why I’m confused?
Now, here’s what I really want to know. What motivates your desire to significantly increase the size of government? Is it because you really believe it’s the right thing to do and somehow we will find a way to indefinitely provide the necessary financial resources for generations to come? Are you subtly waging a campaign against capitalism because it favors the most ambitious among us? Or, are you like most intellectual liberals who believe the masses need to be controlled to prevent them from doing harm to themselves? Given that socialism has failed and is failing everywhere around the world and has never set a precedent for producing sustainable growth and prosperity, that most socialist and totalitarian governments have embraced some tools of capitalism to varying degrees, that even the Israelis have abandoned the kibbutzim, and that capitalism has produced the highest standard of living the world has ever known, I guess the answer is obvious -- government knows what’s best for the citizenry better than the people themselves, and it has the added benefit of allowing you and other intellectual elitists to secure for yourselves a lifetime of influence, power and position in a big government society. Does that pretty much sum it up?
Your campaign promised “change we can believe in” and “transparency”. It seems to me in less than sixty days you have succumbed to and embraced the culture of Washington politics. You listen to staff members who live in fear of losing their prestigious jobs and being embarrassed on a national scale, your decisions seem exclusively driven by pollsters, and you rely more on your style than your substance, e.g., blaming the 8,000 earmarks in the stimulus budget on the previous administration. Have we become such a “sound bite” nation that courageous, honest and humble leadership is far too risky for political survival? Had today’s political leaders existed during the late 1700’s, we probably would still be a British colony, or we would have become Mexico’s northern most state or Canada’s southern most province.
I will continue to try to get to know you and understand your motivations. Since we probably won’t become personally acquainted, I’ll have to draw my conclusions from your actions.
All the best,
Bill Monroe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
