by Missouri Rep. Ed Emery (R-126 including the counties of
Barton, Dade, Jasper and Polk)
"Lots of other places--from Britain to Australia--took a hit in 1929, but, alas, they lacked an FDR to keep it going till the end of the '30s. That's why in other countries they refer to it as 'the Depression,' but only in the US is it 'Great.'" --Mark Steyn, author & commentator [editor's note: also called "the most toxic, rightwing pundit you've never heard of"]
Much of the 2008 election is about two opposing philosophies: (1) bigger government is good, vs. (2) bigger government is bad. In every election we must decide whom we trust, and the best gauge of a man or woman's character (trustworthiness) is history. Most of us will continue on the path that our personal history defines. We must look to the past to predict the future. And predicting the future is what every election is about.
A few years ago I mailed a survey to your homes which asked you to rank multiple institutions relative to trust. As you might expect, the federal government was the least trusted followed by state government. Why then, I ask, do we struggle so hard with the question of whether to turn more of our choices and liberties over to bigger government?
Missouri's ballot will include at least two proposed changes to Missouri's Constitution that require us to choose whom we trust, ourselves or government bureaucrats.
- Amendment 1: Voting yes! This makes English the language of "official proceedings." It will protect taxpayers from a plethora of printing or interpreter mandates that might otherwise arise. It is written to ensure the administration of justice is not compromised by language barriers.
- Amendment 4: Voting yes! It changes how storm water control projects are financed. It could make the distribution of state dollars into storm control more efficient/effective. In my opinion, even if it does little good, it will do no harm.
- Proposition A: Voting no! This removes gambling loss-limits and prohibits reimposing them. It makes education funding more dependent on vice and, I believe, takes Missouri in the wrong direction.
- Proposition B: Voting no! I am opposed to this because it uses the elderly (the same way Proposition A uses children) to justify a major expansion of government and growth in state bureaucracy. It is a big step toward socialism, and I cannot support it.
- Proposition C:Voting no! It mandates increased energy costs to the consumer and I passionately oppose it. All Missourians support a clean environment, but Prop. C replaces personal judgment and common sense with government mandates and political correctness. I am praying Missourians will see through this guise and make their own energy decisions based on their own criteria rather than entrusting those decisions to a layer of government.
Propositions B and C define the choice between more or less government. Both are government expansions and will lessen our freedoms. These initiatives could pass in November because many voters don't envision the cost of increased government involvement. Government is not free - it takes our dollars and our liberties if we allow it; that is its nature as an institution.
On November 4th, from the presidential race all the way down the ballot to the state and local issues, I will ask myself whether the candidate or the issue will increase the power of government or the power of the individual. Personally as a representative of my constituents, it is my intention to vote for them. They are the ones who elected me to protect them and their liberty from harmful government.
For the description of 2008 Missouri ballot measures go here.