John Quincy Adams On Immigration

In honor of what is turning out to be the most closely analyzed transitions in the history of the American presidency, I am happy to share a piece I have been working on here and there since before the election got into full swing. As we wait to see where the chips will end up on everything from taxes to trade to immigration, I offer an in-depth analysis of a well-known writing from former President John Quincy Adams when he was serving as Secretary of State and provided his views on immigration to a German member of high society who was contemplating a move to the new U.S. nation in 1819.

Click here to read John Quincy Adams On Immigration.

U.S. Supreme Court Orders Taxifornia Taxpayers To Continue To Help Pay For College For Illegal Immigrants

Apparently, the U.S. Supreme Court, Taxifornia Supreme Court, Illegal Immigrant rights groups, Dream Act supporters, a bunch of bleeding-heart liberals, and the three to four million illegal immigrants living in Taxifornia are all in agreement that the Taxifornia taxpayer has a money tree in their backyard, should pay for anything and everything that society asks for, no matter how ridiculous, and that once again, the 41% of us who receive no government aid need to continue to foot the bill for the other 59% to continue to live a standard of life that frankly, they do not earn themselves like the rest of us.

According to the Boston Harold, “The U.S. Supreme Court decision Monday to uphold California’s policy of granting reduced, in-state tuition to college students who are illegal immigrants is likely to bolster similar proposals across the nation as well as a California measure to provide financial aid for the undocumented.”

This means that the Taxifornia taxpayer will need to foot the bill for a tuition discount for 41,000 students that rings up at annual costs of $23,000 at a UC school, $11,000 at a Cal State school, and $4,400 at community colleges. Correct me if I am wrong, but was not the in-state tuition discount set up so that the children of people who had lived and worked in Taxifornia – paid Taxifornia income tax, and worse yet, federal income tax, could get a break when sending their kids to college? Why then, would that discount, at the taxpayer’s expense, be extended to the non-income-tax-paying non-citizen?

Not that I was ever in agreement with the taxpayer footing tuition bills (Yes, I’m one of those nut-jobs that believes you should pay for college yourself), but this really continues to be a step too far for a state government that spends way too much money and relies too heavily on the hard work of some people, while completely turning a blind eye to law-breaking and lack of hard work from others.

You want to go to college? You want to send your kids to college? Then start saving. Start putting money away. You and your parents shouldn’t get to not plan ahead, then on high school graduation day, stick your hand out and expect us to foot the bill.

So, if this wasn’t bad enough, the Boston Harold continues with their story: “Undocumented students and their advocates said they will use the court’s action to push for passage of the California Dream Act, state legislation that would allow illegal immigrants to receive campus-based aid and the state’s Cal Grants for their bills at UC, Cal State and community colleges. It could cost about $32.2 million annually, according to an analysis by the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The measure, proposed by Democratic Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, recently passed the state Assembly and is being considered in the state Senate. The Legislature approved a similar measure but former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed it last year as he had with previous versions. Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat, ‘supports the principles of the Dream Act and would closely consider any legislation that reaches his desk,’ his spokesman Evan Westrup said Monday."

So, not only is Taxifornia asking the idiot taxpayer to help foot tuition bills for illegal immigrants, but it may soon be asking them to foot the bill for state-funded financial aid as well.

No accountability, no personal responsibility, and no respect for the law of the land for some, and accountability, personal responsibility, and a heavy load of taxes for others. Freedom to do what you want, when you want, all with no consequences for some, and jail time if you don’t pay your taxes for others.

GobiernoUSA.gov

One of the ideals that I still remain steadfast in, and most likely will for the foreseeable future, is that just how a nation has a flag, a national symbol, a national anthem, and so on, so should a nation have an official language. As many of you are currently reading this musing in my native American tongue of English (or American English to the English) could probably guess, I propose that our official language in the USA should be English. I propose that no child graduate from high school in the United States without at least a remidial command of the English language (I know we say that now, but I mean, really, actually be able to speak English), and more importantly, I think that any interaction you have with the federal, state, and local government should be in English.

So, you're saying to yourself, I've been reading Old Man Savastano's rantings for years, and this is nothing new, so why the re-hash on making English the official language of the USA?

Well, I bought a new computer and was cleaning up the pre-supplied "Favorites" that Microsoft thinks I will need and one of the folders is "Websites For United States", and in that folder is one familiar web site, "USA.gov" and the one unfamiliar web site, "GobiernoUSA.gov". Go on, check it out. http://www.gobiernousa.gov. It is so nice to see the American taxpayer paying for twice the web site because we, as a nation, have never really had the balls to pick an official language, even though we all have known for quite some time which one it should be.

How much of our tax dollars go to creating web sites and printing things in other languages? Should not part of the process of being naturalized be that you can do so in English? Oh, wait, hold on a second, it is part of the process. You DO need to have a basic command of the English language in order to pass our naturalization tests. So, why then, would you need a U.S. government website in Spanish? Oh yeah, that's right. We can't forget to take care of our uninvited guests as well. I mean, when you throw a party and people that you have never even met before and don't seem to know anyone you invited just happen to show up, you offer them a drink and a seat, don't you? Quite clearly, in America we do, and to top it off, we make sure that we offer you those bebidas and sillas en Espanol because though you have no respect for our laws, we still want you to feel right at home...

Illegal Immigration & The DREAM Act

I admittedly have failed to comment properly on my feelings and position on the so-called DREAM Act and the reason why I am opposed to it. This has not been due to a lack of position, but, in fact, due to my inability to craft a piece that did my position justice.

In short, I feel that EVERY FOREIGN-BORN person should go through the SAME path to U.S. citizenship. Seems fair, doesn't it? If everyone follows the law, then everyone is on equal footing at the time they start the process. Should you get special consideration and get an easier path to citizenship because you have already been living here for many years, using our public education system and social services? The only scenario by which that could happen would be if you were violating U.S. Immigration law, so the answer to that question should be a resounding, "No!"

My position on this piece of legislation also stems from my view on illegal immigration, and my belief that you should receive punishment for breaking the law, not a reward, especially a reward of preferential treatment. Rather than rehash my own personal view on illegal immigration, I would like to provide for you the following excerpt from "Two Californias" by Victor Hanson.

This excerpt below is from Hanson's larger piece on his experiences while traveling through California's once-rich Central Valley, Hanson's home soil, commenting on the desolate wasteland of poverty and welfare-state conditions that the valley has now become due to overregulation and illegal immigration.

This piece holds a special personal significance to me because of my own family's tie in the first half of the 1900s to agriculture, not in the Central Valley, but right here, in Orange County, where four generations ago, my forbearers took the LEGAL path to citizenship:

Fresno’s California State University campus is embroiled in controversy over the student body president’s announcing that he is an illegal alien, with all the requisite protests in favor of the DREAM Act. I won’t comment on the legislation per se, but again only note the anomaly. I taught at CSUF for 21 years. I think it fair to say that the predominant theme of the Chicano and Latin American Studies program’s sizable curriculum was a fuzzy American culpability. By that I mean that students in those classes heard of the sins of America more often than its attractions. In my home town, Mexican flag decals on car windows are far more common than their American counterparts.

I note this because hundreds of students here illegally are now terrified of being deported to Mexico. I can understand that, given the chaos in Mexico and their own long residency in the United States. But here is what still confuses me: If one were to consider the classes that deal with Mexico at the university, or the visible displays of national chauvinism, then one might conclude that Mexico is a far more attractive and moral place than the United States.

So there is a surreal nature to these protests: something like, “Please do not send me back to the culture I nostalgically praise; please let me stay in the culture that I ignore or deprecate.” I think the DREAM Act protestors might have been far more successful in winning public opinion had they stopped blaming the U.S. for suggesting that they might have to leave at some point, and instead explained why, in fact, they want to stay. What is it about America that makes a youth of 21 go on a hunger strike or demonstrate to be allowed to remain in this country rather than return to the place of his birth?

I think I know the answer to this paradox. Missing entirely in the above description is the attitude of the host, which by any historical standard can only be termed “indifferent.” California does not care whether one broke the law to arrive here or continues to break it by staying. It asks nothing of the illegal immigrant — no proficiency in English, no acquaintance with American history and values, no proof of income, no record of education or skills.

It does provide all the public assistance that it can afford (and more that it borrows for), and apparently waives enforcement of most of California’s burdensome regulations and civic statutes that increasingly have plagued productive citizens to the point of driving them out.

How odd that we over-regulate those who are citizens and have capital to the point of banishing them from the state, but do not regulate those who are aliens and without capital to the point of encouraging millions more to follow in their footsteps. How odd — to paraphrase what Critias once said of ancient Sparta — that California is at once both the nation’s most unfree and most free state, the most repressed and the wildest.

I think Hanson makes some fantastically valid points here. While I understand that illegal immigration and the DREAM Act can be very emotional subjects for quite a large number of people living here in the United States, both citizen and non-citizen alike, I think that a good deal of the people who fall on my side of the fence on this issue are troubled mostly by two factors. This group of people's widespread inability to first admit, then hold themselves accountable for violating the law of the land in which they so desire to live, and secondly, what seems to be more of an allegiance to the place in which they do not want to live than to the place in which they do want to live.

When American citizens break the law, we pay fines or get to live in one of our many taxpayer-funded state or federal correctional institutions. Should it not be the case for the non-citizen who knowingly violated U.S. immigration law?

While it is not my intention to ruffle feathers, but my intention to get people on both sides of the argument to think rationally about this issue, I must ask the question. "If Mexico is so fantastic, why are you here in the United States? If you love Mexico so so very much, why did you not stay and try to fix it - try to fight to make your beloved homeland a better place, even if it is just in your neighborhood, or home town? Why do you fly the Mexican flag above the U.S. flag, yet make the choice to live in the country whose flag you fly below the flag of that nation that you chose to not live in anymore?"

These are not rhetorical questions, mind you. These are questions that many of the people that are being flagged as "racists" for opposing illegal immigration and the DREAM Act genuinely would like to have answered by the people on the opposite side of the argument.

Before you get on your soap box and start yelling out charges of elitism and racism, think on one thing - something that Hanson touches on in his article. If you are playing any game, any sport, in the world in which you are on a team, would you not want the person sitting or standing next to you to have an allegiance to your team above all other teams? Would you not want them playing their heart out just as much as you for your team and not have an underlying allegiance to the other team?

Now, consider, that you are not just playing a game, but you are ensuring the future of the greatest democracy to ever exist in the history of mankind - securing its future for your children, your loved ones, securing it for all the good that nation does in the world. Wouldn't you want the person standing next to you to have an allegiance above all others to your nation, and not some other nation? This is what America wants of her citizens, and I do not think it to be an unreasonable request.

If you watch a documentary on people taking the legal path to citizenship, you will see that there is a point in the immigration process where they are asked to pledge their allegiance to the United States of America above all other nations in the world, including the nation which they have left to come to America. You will see that the people making this pledge take that part of the process very seriously - that they labor on it and give it much thought - they struggle with it, but in most cases, they make that pledge. Most notably, you will see by their emotions, that their pledge is genuine.

The illegal immigrant has never had to make that pledge. They have never actually had to contemplate that choice between allegiance to their home country and ours. They get to straddle the fence. They get to live here while their true loyalty remains elsewhere. We are letting them skip a very important and noteworthy step in joining our team. I do not think it is wrong for Americans to want the people living in this country to not be allowed to skip that step.

We have a legal immigration process in place that has served this nation for quite some time. A legal immigration process that does not reward violation of that process, but in fact, deters violation. Many of us believe that our nation is best served by keeping things that way. That's not elitism, and that's not racism. That, my friends, is American Patriotism, and that, my friends, is what we want from those of you who make the choice to join our team...AMERICAN patriotism.

Not only are you incorrect in thinking that most of those who oppose illegal immigration and the DREAM Act do not want you to be able to join the team, but I believe you would find that most of us actually want you on the team. All we are asking is that you join the team according to the rule book - the same rule book that we are going to expect you to follow once you are a member of the team. You are asking us to believe that you are going to follow that rule book when you and yours have already broken its rules. Do you see how that might be of concern to us? Sadly, I don't think that you do.

Dennis Miller said it best when he commented, "We don't mind you joining the party, we just want you to sign the guest book so we know who's here." Again, it's not that Americans don't want you to join the team, we just want you to do it the right way, and we want you to be dedicated 100% to our team. I don't think that is too much to ask.

Why I Oppose The Mosque Near Ground Zero

I must admit that I agree more with the people who do not want the Muslim Community Center and Mosque built near Ground Zero than those who do. I do see Mayor Michael Bloomberg's point about being able to build what you want on the land that you own, and I do see the Master and Commander's view on religious freedom in America and the message it might send, though as I said yesterday, I highly disagree with his invocation of the Founding Fathers to make his point, and more importantly, disagree with his position on the issue.

But, do you know what else I see? I see why if your loved one was killed on 9/11/01, you might not want to have to walk by a Muslim Community Center and Mosque with a questionable background on the way to the "hallowed ground" of the World Trade Center to visit the 9/11 memorial, or just to spend some time in the general area that you know your loved one spent the last few minutes of their life.

Do some research, and you will find that there were, in fact, a number of Muslims that died as victims of the attacks, but even the highest most trustworthy estimates put that number at well under 100 of the almost 3,000 victims that perished that day. A much larger number of the victims were believers in Christ-based faiths and Judaism. While the conspiracy theorists, far-leaning thinkers, and honestly, U.S.-haters, do not want us classifying them as such, the 19 men that caused 9/11 considered themselves to be Muslim. Regardless of the merits and beliefs of Islam and how the religious beliefs of most Muslims (especially those here in the U.S.) greatly differ in belief from what was carried out on 9/11, all the evidence seems to point to the fact that these 19 guys considered themselves to be Muslim and considered themselves to be waging a holy war against America and its Christians and Jews. All that being said, you really can see how the families of the victims and a large number of Americans might not want that Muslim Community Center and Mosque built right there, just a couple blocks from Ground Zero. I tend to find myself agreeing with this point.

What I would like to know more about, however, in light of this debate that I am hearing, is the background and financing trail of this group that wants to build this Muslim Community Center and Mosque right there next to Ground Zero. So, show me that this is a 100% completely upstanding group of Muslims who do not believe in violence, and do not believe that the September 11th attacks were something that we had coming, and maybe you will sway me. It just seems right now, that the jury is still out on that.

Do they have ties to terrorist groups and does their money have ties to terrorist groups? It seems no one is able to give us a straight answer on that, including the people that want to build the mosque. The people who want this mosque most definietly do not seem to be able to prove without a reasonable doubt that absolutely none of their money and support comes from extremist groups with an agenda. I do see that as a huge problem and a major part of this story, and my decision, which as I said, leans more towards the fact that this mosque should not be built there.

Yes, Mr. Bloomberg, they own the land and should be able to build what they want to on it by the letter of the law, and yes, Mr. Master and Commander, in that perfect little world that seems to only exist in your mind, we should live by the letter of the law in regards to religious freedom and what that means in America today, however, there are times when you need to look at things subjectively, regardless of what the laws say on paper. Isn't that what you believe about illegal immigration, Senor Obamos?

So, for now, I oppose the building of this mosque that close to Ground Zero. I understand the New York City Mayor's position, but disagree with it. I understand the President of The United States of America's position, but disagree with it, and will go as far as to say that I think he is speaking prematurely and has made a mistake that will cost him and his party some support from the American middle.

I understand what the separation is between the average everyday Muslim and these fanatical extremists, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking that there are not extremist Muslims with agendas still living and working in this country. And let's not forget what a small group of dedicated, like-minded people out to kill as many Americans as they can are capable of doing.

My Take On Illegal Immigration - Part 2

While I view most of it as political fluff, the Master and Commander claims to have done quite a bit already in working towards solving the illegal immigration issue:

"The President and his administration have provided the technical assistance to develop key elements of a bipartisan immigration bill and have taken important steps to make interior enforcement smarter, more effective, and reflective of our values, as well as addressing problems in the detention system to improve accountability and safety."

This may be the only part of what this administration claims to have done that has any substance, though, in reality, all this is saying they have done is dedicate taxpayer funded resources to drafting this new immigration bill and inactively starting working against enforcement of our current immigration laws.

I will talk a bit more on the lawsuit that my federal government just filed against one of the states in our union a bit later, but a good example of this passive stance against enforcement is the fact that one of the reasons cited in this lawsuit for not enforcing current immigration law is that we do not have the facilities to house those that would be detained. So, you just let people break the law because you don't have room for them in your jails? That makes sense. I am sure that will help create a safer America.

"A proposal for comprehensive immigration reform has been presented in the Senate, based on a bipartisan framework the administration helped Senators Schumer and Graham develop."

This bill will be far from bi-partisan by the time it is on the Master and Commander's desk to be signed into law, and really, probably isn't that bipartisan as it stands right now. One party makes a deal with one member of the other party, and all the sudden, a state of bipartisanship exists? I am not buying it.

"The President's unprecedented strategic and integrated approach to border protection and security efforts have increased pressure on illegal trafficking organizations, resulting in record seizures of illegal weapons and bulk cash transiting from the United States to Mexico, lowered average violent crime statistics in states along the Southwest border, and reduced illegal immigration into the United States."

Just because you are doing more than ever before, doesn't necessarily mean that you are doing enough. Record seizures also mean that a record amount of illegal drugs, drug money, and criminals, are still getting through our porous border. While violent crime statistics may be down in the border states, the workload of those trying to enforce our immigration laws is also unprecedented. The reduced number of illegal immigrants has nothing to do with any type of new enforcement methods, or any efforts of the current administration. Illegal immigration is down as a result of America's faltering economy.

"The administration has also eliminated the FBI backlog of background checks for legal immigration applications, and launched a new website that allows legal immigrants to check the status of their applications online and via text message for the first time ever. In its first month alone, three million people registered to receive text message updates on their applications."

This is fantastic news! I am happy to hear it, but I would really like to know how our system is going to handle the millions and millions of applications that are to be filed when amnesty is granted by the passage of the Master and Commander's reform. Who will be in place, and how will they handle that workload? What resources are going to be in place to apprehend and detain those who do not come in and register and those that do not pass the review process?

While these may be some "fine examples" of some of the steps that have been taken, I still think that this administration has been greatly lacking in their response, especially when it comes to securing the border and enforcing our current immigration laws. Where are the numbers that prove that the Master and Commander is taking a stand and enforcing our current immigration laws? Where is the proof that they are doing nothing more than sitting back, waiting, and trying to get through to the coming elections, pushing a bill that will bring about changes that we may not have the resources to support? I just don't see what I was looking for on your website, Master and Commander...

My Take On Illegal Immigration - Part 1

If you type "Barak Obama on illegal immigration" into Bing, the top search result is the Master and Commander's own web site that was created when he was running for office, www.barakobama.com. I decided that I should grab and re-post a part of his plan on how to deal with illegal immigration before it disappears from the site like it was a bad review of General Petraeus on www.moveon.org.

Here is the first part of Obama's web site info (more on the second part later):

The President has made it clear that the only way to truly secure the borders and have an orderly immigration system that honors our traditions as both a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants is through comprehensive reform grounded in the principles of responsibility and accountability:

Responsibility from the federal government to secure our borders: The Obama administration takes this responsibility very seriously and has dedicated unprecedented resources to securing our borders and reducing the flow of illegal traffic in both directions.

Responsibility from unscrupulous businesses that break the law: Employers who exploit undocumented workers undermine American workers, and they have to be held accountable.

Responsibility from people who are living in the United States illegally: Undocumented workers who are in good standing must admit that they broke the law, pay taxes and a penalty, learn English, and get right with the law before they can get in line to earn their citizenship.

Comprehensive immigration reform is essential to continuing the tradition of innovation that immigrants have brought to the American economy and to ensuring a level playing field for American workers. It's also essential to providing lasting and dedicated security for our borders.

I agree that we need to overhaul the current immigration system, and that we need to secure the border. I believe that changing current U.S. policy can effect the tide of illegal immigration to the point at which many of illegal immigration's problems can be solved. I believe there is a diplomatic solution, but until your diplomacy starts working, you put boots on the ground to solve the problems now. You use actions and not words. You don't push policy and wait for it to work so that the extra boots are not needed. I sometimes believe this is what the Master and Commander is hoping for; a way to be involved without actually getting involved.

I believe that we should crack down on the businesses that are hiring and exploiting illegal immigrants. Now, I know not every business that hires illegal immigrants is exploiting them, but realistically, I have to think it is widespread enough that we should be doing something about it. While it may be unpopular, in the mean time, until the law changes, we need to enforce the current laws by citing and heavily fining the business owner and deporting the workers that are working for them illegally. It is the letter of the law, regardless of its popularity.

I laugh at the administration's use of the phrase "undocumented workers who are in good standing". That really shows you how the Master and Commander and his administration view our current U.S. immigration policy. They view it as unjust and they want to change it. They, in my opinion, do not view crossing the border into the U.S. illegally as a crime.

You name the laws that we as citizens can break that will continue to leave us in "good standing". Try getting a traffic ticket and not paying it, then see the "standing" in which you find yourself. It should not be up to us to determine which laws we choose to obey and which laws we choose to ignore, and it should most definitely not be up to an illegal immigrant or a Presidential administration to make that decision either.

Since we are knee-deep in changing decades-old policy while the Master and Commander is in command, how about we make these two minor changes? In order to be citizen of the United States, you can no longer just blindly marry into it. If you are a citizen and want to marry a non-citizen, how about that person become a citizen in the same manner that everyone else has to? Also, how about if neither you, nor your wife or partner are citizens, and you just happen to have a baby while you are "visiting" the United States, you and your partner have to apply for citizenship for you and your baby, again, that same way everyone else has to?

That's no immigration by marriage, and no anchor babies. I'll even meet you in the middle and agree that everyone born here from now on, regardless of their parent's citizenship be required to go through a citizenship process at the age of maturity. I'll take your citizenship test and your English test -- bring it on. Oh, and by the way, just to clarify, if I decided to move to France tomorrow and become a member of their collective society, I would have no problem with the understanding that I would have to learn French and pass a citizenship test over there. That's only fair, right?

I know that so many on the other side of the aisle want to paint this as a race and segregation issue, but for many of us, it is just not the case. We are wanting people to abide by the laws like we do, pay taxes like we do, and be just as loyal to our nation as we are.

We want to see you rooting for America, abiding by its laws (all of them), and helping us to continue to build what many of us believe to be the greatest nation in the history of mankind. I always quote back to Dennis Miller who said that he doesn't mind you joining the party, he just would like you to sign the guest book so we know who is here.

Oh, and don't think I purposely glossed over this part: "Undocumented workers who are in good standing must admit that they broke the law, pay taxes and a penalty, learn English, and get right with the law before they can get in line to earn their citizenship." What this means, is that once the new policy is enacted by the Master and Commander, the policy of the United States of America will no longer be to deport people who have entered the country illegally as long as they meet certain criteria, doing away with our current policy of deporting in all cases except for reasons of political asylum.

I am honestly torn on this issue because I do agree with our current law, but at the same time, we have to be realistic about the cost and probability of deporting literally millions of people. If we see a policy that calls for illegal immigrants to actually admit that they have broken the law, agree to pay fines, back taxes and penalties on those back taxes, learn our language, and then get in line to be reviewed for citizenship, just like everyone else, I fully understand that supporting it might be the best thing for everyone.

I would also like to see, however, the resources in place that are ready to act with the full support of the administration to deport the people who do not come in and register, pay their fines, back taxes and penalties and/or who are denied citizenship in the review process for whatever reason. You will excuse my skepticism about the Master and Commander acting against the largest single pool of potential voters and their families and friends who already have the vote once his new immigration policy is in place.

More on this issue later...

"This Things I Believe..."

I do not support raising taxes for the sake of fairness, regardless of the negative impact it is likely to have on the economy. In fact, I support equal taxation by percentage across the board, regardless of income levels.

I believe the federal government has gone too far in bailing out the auto, insurance and finance industries.

I do not support illegal immigration. I also realize that a solution that is completely in line with my principles and ideals is not practical. I support a registration program that includes a fine as penalty and requires the payment of estimated back taxes implemented simultaneously with a new guest worker program.

I believe that English should be the official language of the United States, though we have to give new arrivals a chance to learn the language, even if we help them on the government's dime.

I have not completely agreed with the large expansion in social spending and welfare that we have seen over the past decade and I believe that the time to start cutting back benefits is just around the corner. There should be length of time, education and work requirements for all able-bodied Americans on welfare programs.

I believe that if the effort that recently went into socialized medicine had gone into creating jobs, we would be better off today.

I did not support the creation of a national health insurance program administered by the U.S. Federal Government. While recognizing the need for reform, a completely partisan bill rammed through the congress was not the right solution, especially from a man who said he was going to unite the country. I believe that once the federal government is dictating prices and eligibility to doctors and hospitals, the quality and availability of healthcare will be greatly reduced. Those with no insurance will now have insurance at the cost of the 50% of Americans that actually pay income taxes and those who already had insurance will see the quality of their care decline. I also believe that the development of new medicine and treatments will greatly suffer under the weight of this new federal health insurance program.

I believe that we should eliminate teacher tenure and increase the use of performance standards and accountability.

I believe that our armed forces should remain an all-volunteer force.

I do not believe that federal employees should be allowed to unionize if they serve in positions critical to safety and security. I do believe that union elections and initiatives should have secret ballots.