After reading Richard August’s diatribe against me and my proposed ideas, I am not overly surprised by his shortsighted approach, probably clouded by resent and hatred towards my candidacy. In his “analysis” of my proposals, and I stress the word ‘proposals’, he pretty much confirms my view that these ideas merit discussion to flesh out the details. Precisely, Mr. August, these are potentially viable changes to the system which suffers from dysfunction. A statewide teacher contract could be widened to cover all workers, working conditions, and could be adjusted to differences in communities. Wow, how radical to leave specific policy details to the legislature. As to the state bank, as I said in proposing it, it would certainly ruffle the present bankers and their minions. Apparently, I was correct. Bankers, like drug dealers, protect their turf vigorously. I clearly indicated my biggest concern was not for the displaced banking interests but that it would be difficult to find honorable people to operate it. The “details” are always up to the General Assembly’s determination. As to capitalization, if the problem of raising it is insurmountable, then how did he become a banking official if such an obstacle existed? And the “progressive” label merely serves to advance my position of his closed mind and use of scare tactics. If an idea is worthy, who really cares if it is liberal, conservative, libertarian, or any other label for such thought? It is the thought that should be the focus, not the philosophy behind it. The legalization of marijuana was to point out the hypocrisy of the state as well as to encourage Rhode Island to think innovatively. My point is that if it is okay to legalize it, then just legalize it. To legalize, still harboring concerns for health and public safety, solely for increasing tax revenues, reeks of the misguided logic so often applied in Rhode Island (such as smoking in casinos). In business, the idea is to eliminate the middleman. If the state has no valid objection to the product for taxation, then where is the valid argument for being the purveyor? Many of Mr. August’s ilk cry out that government needs to run as a business. Unfortunately, they are only looking at the balance sheet. A viable business must be flexible and innovative, constantly assessing itself and determining its product lines. As to election reform, idea four, his argument, which boils down to “stupid voters” and time spent actually deciding how to cast a worthwhile vote, seems a patent two party defense of the same old same old. His concern for people under voting is laughable, given the fact that fewer and fewer voters even want to vote because they have grown discontent with the system as it exists. The application of the system to local races is not out of the question, and in fact, a similar form currently exists in voting for candidates at large on a local level. And, the argument as to purchasing the software is somewhat moot in that the Secretary of State elect has indicated her desire to purchase new voting machines. Mr. August is clearly mistaken when he said that I failed to consider run-off elections. I most certainly gave that option (in the unabridged version the Journal did not print), but I concluded the instant runoff system to be more innovative and would remove the expense of holding another election (not to mention the benefit of not having a few more months of annoying campaign ads). In his staunch defense of the status quo, he demonstrates what is the biggest problem in Rhode Island-- resistance to change. Sure, a retired banker may not want change, but one of every five voters did (he conveniently omits the 22% on short money as being a nationally recognized accomplishment and a blow against his beloved two party system). In attempting to vent his spleen over so many “wasted votes”, his message is that he is secure with the current system. I think Rhode Islanders are seeing through the two party ‘dog and pony show’ and want a government that is working in their interests rather than the entrenched politicians and their hangers-on. It may be fortunate for Mr. August that I finished third, but I am not sure that view is shared as widely amongst the people. Remember the words of little Donny Dark in some God awful Goldie Hawn movie, “There are none so blind as those who will not see”. And remember that song line, “Look to your soul, and open your mind”. Resistance to change is holding us back, and its adherents, such as Mr. August, seem to like it that way. His annoyance with my exercising of my right to run for office under the system, and his perception that I undermined his candidate seems to cloud his thoughts. His desire to have his candidate drive the car fails to incorporate the need to have a car to drive. Rhode Island voters clearly sent a message that they are tired of mindless two party rhetoric. Mr. August’s defense of the system is noble, but futile. The day of reckoning is coming. His style of political thought has gotten us nowhere.
Posted on: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 18:35:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015