State of the Union
As always, the President delivers a good speech, and I embrace his commitment to concepts like nuclear energy, the freezing of some government spending, though in my opinion, not enough, and the beginning of an apparent commitment to the War on Terror, something I believe has been neglected in the first year of his administration.
However, with respect to health care, I remain convinced that the proposed "reforms" will result in less innovation, more expense, and the loss of America's long-term and historic leadership in medical fields. I am concerned that the President, in his own words, feels that the problem with his health care reform plan, failed to properly explain it to the American people, a simple restatement of the Democrat's recent assertion that the "citizens just don't get it." The problem isn't that the plan wasn't well explained. We do understand it, Mr. President, and, like the voters in Massachusetts, we reject it. And I do not believe that anyone should be fined for refusing to buy insurance, particularly when the Administration is already willing to negotiate that provision away to some constituencies, though not to others. Finally, I remain pro-life; I do not believe that federal funds should be used for the purposes of abortion and could not support such provisions.
Jobs have been the issue for twelve of the last twelve months. Tonight, the President finally added jobs as an issue to his agenda and I applaud him for that. Congress and the President should focus on growth and jobs as their primary issue. The War on Terror is also at the top of the list. Events at Fort Hood (unmentioned in the President's speech) and on Christmas Day have put on wide display the lack of emphasis on fighting Terror over the past year. But providing for the common defense remains the primary mission of the federal government.
Finally, as I said earlier, the President delivers a good speech. But over the past year, he has enjoyed an 80 vote majority in the House of Representatives, and a 20 vote, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, majorities of such a scale that no Republican President has enjoyed them in more than three generations. His new-found commitment to bipartisanism and his pledge to meet with Republican leadership would have been precedent-setting a year ago; today it simply seems a tired reaction to a serious political setback. In fact, despite possessing the largest majorities any President could hope for, the President still cites gridlock and still casts aspersions toward the Republicans as the "party of no." He stated he would welcome ideas from Republicans on healthcare, but he has still, apparently, never read the bill that Republicans have been trying to present to him for seven months - and he still will not embrace the idea of tort reform, which Republicans have been trying to suggest to him since the beginning of his term.
Back to Media