This is Caroline Kennedy’s introduction to Sen. Ted Kennedy at the Democratic Convention. The idea that Kennedy is my senator really struck me. I have lived in conservative states most of my adult life and most of the time since I have been a lefty. So, I have always felt more represented by Kennedy than by those who have officially represented me in Congress.
Once when talking to a student about being a Democrat, that student asked/stated: “But it is not like you are Ted Kennedy Democrat.” I responded: “Well, I am a liberal, so I must be a Ted Kennedy Democrat.” That shock him and in a way it did me. Kennedy was the devil when I was a conservative in my youth. Now, I agree with him on just about every policy issue. Today, I am proud to be a Ted Kennedy Democrat. Teddy is still my Senator, too.
Doug D. said,
September 29, 2009 at 9:01 am
Chris.
Thought I’d thread jack Kennedy. I figured he wouldn’t mind since the discussion would be on welfare, wealth redistribution, the constitution, and the role of the federal government. All things Kennedy work for / with.
I’m glad you responded. You were one of the people I was truly hoping to hear from because I thought you would take a genuine and honest crack at explaining things to me. As I’ve said in posts on the M* blog, I don’t so much want to debate the issue as understand another perspective. I’m hoping I can get there through some questions and your explanations if you have the patience.
)
My point of view tends to center on a strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution with a solid emphasis on the 10th amendment. There are many portions of the federal government that I don’t agree with because of this. Oddly, I have less of an issue with state policies that perform the same functions. For example, my state (VT) has a health care program that is taxpayer funded for kids, Dr. Dynosaur (don’t know who came up with the spelling), and a health care program for adults who’s employers don’t offer health care, Catamount Health Care. I have considerably less of an issue with these than I do with a federal program doing the same thing.
That said, they still irk me to some degree because I see taxes as overtly coercive in the sense that you pay them or go to prison. My personal opinion is that this should place a heavy burden on politicians to spend wisely and prudently. Things like highways, defense, courts, etc I have no real issue with paying for. It’s things like welfare, health care (especially abortion subsidies), and other social programs that I find harder to swallow. Perhaps this is me rebelling against authority? Or perhaps I’ve read too many stories about wastes in the system, and met too many people who have worked the system for their benefit.
In any event, regardless of my perspective I know there are plenty of intelligent, active, LDS people out there (such as yourself) who hold an entirely different view from myself on this issue. So, I’m hoping to understand the other side of the fence so to speak.
One thing I have noticed in the past, even on M*, is that often if I suggest that some government plan my not be a Constitutionally enumerated power for the federal government, people just brush it aside. I find this troublesome since our country has done pretty well (compared to the rest of the world) for 200+ years following the Constitution. So, I guess my first question would be do you believe that constitutionality should be a concern when deciding if the government should take action?
For example, health care for everyone would be nice. Should this be a federal program or a state program? Should the federal government mandate that the states provide it (which would seem like a federal program again).
My second question is do you believe taxes are coercive? Meaning do you believe that paying them is pretty much involuntary? I see it as pay your taxes or go to jail, but there may be another viewpoint here.
If taxes are coercive, is there an implicit burden on politicians to spend those dollars wisely and in a constitutionally mandated manner?
In the end I’m left feeling like I’m forced to pay for programs I don’t agree with (such as tax payer subsidies for abortions), and yet I have very little to no recourse. Even if I were to convince my congressmen he is either one of fifty in the case of the senate or one of 435 for the House. That means if I win over my representative I’ve won 2% or 0.23% of the 50% majority I need for something to happen in the legislative branch. This lack of empowerment or options is one of the things I chaff against.
Sorry for the long post. Hope you’re still awake. I look forward to your reply, because I truly hope to be able to see the other side of this issue. I’m tired of hearing pundits on both sides accuse the other side of being commie thieves or racist homophobes. I know that there are millions of genuine people who see this issue from each of these sides. I’m hoping to see both.
Thanks,
Doug