Trust & credibility eroding for BHO

President Obama’s poll numbers have been falling, which is to be expected in difficult economic times. It was inevitable that the President’s approval ratings would ebb from his honeymoon period after the election. Simply put: President Obama could not live up to the image that Candidate Obama created. Who could? But there is more behind the change in attitude toward the President than the laws of gravity. Americans clearly discouraged about partisanship and divisiveness, were hoping for a leader who would be the uniter Candidate Obama pledged he would be. Instead, it appears that Washington and partisanship are more divided than ever and the President is engaging in intentional misleading language for the direct purpose of legislative gain.

As I listened to the President’s health-care address to Congress, I was initially encouraged that the White House was going to work in a bipartisan fashion and introduce a bill that addressed the concerns of both sides of the debate. He specifically called to incorporate “...the best ideas of both parties.”

As his speech went on, however, I realized that President Obama was not talking about introducing a new bill, but rather, his passionate but carefully worded oration was an extremely misleading representation of HR 3200. Examples of this deceptive language include statements about no federal funding of abortion and no coverage for illegal immigrants. The President was correct in his assertions that the wording of the legislation does not specifically allow for the provisions of abortions or illegals, however, wording to specifically eliminate these provisions was removed in committee.

This delusive rhetoric creates the impression that the President is not genuine or trustful. These are critical commodities for a President, especially so early in his term.

Perhaps the biggest area of concern for this administration is its credibility on fiscal responsibility. Candidate Obama pledged to go line-by-line through the budget and eliminate waste and inefficiencies. Indeed, the President intends to pay for much of health care reform by eliminating waste and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid. The public becomes skeptical of such overly-optimistic savings, and it begs the question why we are not pursuing these savings now? Americans are seeing the federal deficit skyrocket and they are concerned about wasteful spending. Even though Obama has spoken of fiscal discipline, thus far he has let Congress write legislation which continues the practice of debt financing and the funding of special interest waste. The President must show leadership in legislation and fiscal restraint rather than outsource these responsibilities to Congress, which has a proven lack of discipline.

The President’s greatest asset -- and his albatross -- are his oratory skills. His ability to inspire people is a gift. However, it also holds him to the standard he is setting for himself and for others. If the American people believe his speeches are not genuine nor his word binding, he runs the risk of alienation and dismissal. His has inspired millions of young people previously skeptical or ambivalent to the political process. Now, many of these young people are losing faith as they see another smooth-talking politician long on rhetoric, but short on substance.

All is not lost for the President. In order for him to regain some of his popular support, and perhaps save his Presidency, he only needs to live to the standard he has set and govern to the promises he has made.

Listen, think, decide

Editor: You thought blogging was inherently overheated? This coolly reasoned piece asks for our best as deliberative citizens sifting for truth in the health care melee. Scott Starin is Boulder County Republican chairman, a former candidate for Congress, and an aerospace engineer. The Art of Persuasion

In his book, "Rhetoric," Aristotle describes three fundamental methods of persuasion. The first method is the reasoned approach. Through logic, reason and historical reference, the persuader builds his argument upon facts and acumen. The second approach is the establishment of expertise. The arguer`s reputation precedes her argument and people are persuaded by the stature of the person. The third approach to the art of persuasion is political rhetoric. Political rhetoric plays on people`s emotions and usually has little to do with logic and reason and more on stirring up passions. This method is, unfortunately, most common in today`s political discourse. In considering the arguments on the current health care debate, it is interesting to listen to those trying to persuade and to decide which of these methods they are employing.

Undoubtedly, there has been political rhetoric on both sides of the debate. Examples of political rhetoric include quoting misleading or exaggerated statistics as justification for radical reform. Often these arguments do not indicate how the current legislation will address systemic problems in the healthcare industry. When you hear about disturbing statistics without tangible solutions, that is political rhetoric. On the other side there have been melodramatic descriptions of death panels or forced inclusion into public options. While there are legitimate concerns about the intent and purpose of the wording of legislation and where the interpretation may lead, people have over-stated the consequences of many provisions. When you hear about extreme repercussions without citation of specific code provision, you are listening to political rhetoric.

I have viewed the seven Colorado House Representatives` and two Colorado Senators` Web sites with an eye toward the type of persuasion they use to present their positions. Congressman Jared Polis` overview on healthcare makes an impassioned plea, stating "... Americans have struggled (with) high costs, inferior care, or no care at all. We must not be a nation where helpless children cannot receive necessary medicine or visit their doctors for routine check-ups because it`s too expensive." Can you feel the emotional tug here? Congressman Polis is a strong proponent of a single-payer system, citing reduced overhead rates as justification. Lacking in his argument, however, are examples of countries where the proposed reforms provide superior care and value compared to our current structure. To his credit, Congressman Polis` Web site does have the text of the bill as well as section-by-section analysis, as written by the majority committees. For completeness, minority summaries are highly recommended reading.

I believe that proponents of healthcare reform, as proposed in H.R. 3200, are losing support from the American people, not because of embellished claims of consequences (although that certainly is a component), but rather citizens are becoming more informed about the provisions of the legislation and the projected costs of these new entitlements. People realize that without massive governmental reforms these revolutionary changes to our healthcare system cannot be sustained in an economically viable fashion. Also, in my opinion, proponents of this healthcare reform are not providing adequate explanations of how this legislation will achieve the promises being made.

In today`s 24-hour media cycle, sound-bite society, it is difficult to present a reasoned argument to the American people on any subject, let alone one as complex and far-reaching as healthcare reform. Reasoned debate and critical thought are required to make meaningful decisions that lead to effective legislation. Those who argue that we must make these radical changes quickly do themselves and their constituents a great disservice. As the debate continues on, listen to those presenting their arguments. Without regard for your own preferences, decide whether the information presented is reasoned thought or political rhetoric.

Sausage process belied BHO promises

Many Americans are skeptical of the economic stimulus bill as passed by Congress, and with good reason. We may debate the merits of the Keynesian principles of government stimulated economy versus supply side economics. Both the House and Senate versions of the stimulus package, however, did not embody the true intent of either theory. They are, rather, a dreadful example of social engineering and special interest spending that most Americans denounce. Despite calls to implement the best ideas from all to stimulate the economy and reach a true bipartisan compromise, this bill has been rammed through the legislative process without taking stock of legitimate concerns and proven stimulus techniques or the implications of massive debt on future generations.

Keynesian theory is an economic policy that believes you can stimulate the private sector through tax policies and funding of public projects. As the government spends money on infrastructure it creates jobs and makes America more competitive on the world market through the infrastructure improvements. Even though the stimulus package was presented as primarily Keynesian, both versions stimulus bill of 2009 spend more money on special interest projects and the type of wasteful, uncontrolled spending that is often blamed for our current economic troubles.

Supply side economists believe that the best way to get Americans back to work is to create tax structures that encourage businesses and people to invest capital and create jobs. The United States has the highest corporate tax rate of industrialized nations. I favor a reduction of corporate tax rates from 35 percent to 25 percent, which would directly inject capital into an economy that is sputtering. I also believe there are legitimate infrastructure, scientific and transportation projects that are practical only on a governmental scale that would also make us more efficient and effective.

President Barack Obama made three main promises about taxes, the economy and spending during his campaign. First, he promised that 95 percent of Americans would receive a tax cut. Second, businesses that created or transferred jobs from overseas would receive a $3,000 tax credit, per job. Third, he pledged to go line-by-line through the budget and remove wasteful spending and eliminate special interest pork. It is disappointing that two of three promises have not represented in the economic stimulus package. Although there are some tax cuts, they are nowhere near the extent to which he promised and unlikely to stimulate investment in businesses or create jobs. The Congressional Budget Office's (CBO's) assessment of the current stimulus bills states that the spending will probably result in an economic drag on the economy due to increased debt and insufficient stimulating activities. Further, the CBO analysis concludes there is not enough spending in 2009 to give the economy a jump start and, overall, most expenditures are not stimulating in nature.

I realize that through the art of legislation and politics, many campaign promises are often too difficult or impractical to implement. I believe that the President should have shown true leadership by putting a stop to the wasteful spending and taking the time for serious thought and negotiation. President Obama should have led this process, rather than leave the crafting of this critical legislation to the sausage mill process and divisive House and Senate leaders.

True bipartisanship in Washington would combine the best of both of Keynesian and supply side economic principles while being as fiscally responsible as possible. This is the type of change that Americans want and need. Americans' real hope was for our politicians to resist the temptation to load special interest spending in the stimulus and avoid taking out a second mortgage on our children's future.

Scott Starin works in industry, ran for Congress in 2008, and chairs the Boulder County Republicans. This is from his Sunday column in the Boulder Camera.

Nine lessons from my CD-2 race

Needless to say, 2008 was not a good year for Republicans. Our nation faced major financial and energy crises brought on by direct actions and inactions of Democrats in Congress. Not only did Republicans fail to capitalize on these issues, but we were defeated at nearly every level. It is easy to try to lay the blame on the unpopularity of George Bush, or an ineffective campaign by John McCain or on a media bias. However, if we do not identify and address the root causes of our resounding defeat this year, we are destined to experience further political losses in the future.

Republicans have lost significant ground over the past four years. All areas of political advantage have suffered, including: lack of a positive message that resonates with people; lack of highly qualified, articulate candidates that are backed by the party at all levels; the need to repair the Republican brand which has been severely damaged; poor communication at all levels of the party; lack of leadership from the top – down; the need to appeal to the young generation; and the need to increase Republican voter registration.

Democrats had a full court press of registration while Republicans felt it was somebody else’s job. We must also increase our fund raising efforts at all levels, as well as increase grass-roots community involvement. Because Democrats have a media advantage, we must find alternative and more creative ways to get out our message.

I believe that to regain a majority in the state of Colorado, we need to address these fundamental systemic root causes of a weakened Republican party. Colorado is a center-right state, and we can regain majorities at the state and federal levels by articulating consistent and inspirational messages.

By turning around each of the shortcomings that I observed as a congressional candidate this year, we come up with the following 9-point agenda for a better showing next time.

1. Articulate a Positive Message

We need to articulate a positive message based upon conservative principals and values. People want to be inspired to vote for a candidate, not against the opponent. We must convey a positive message, based on the greatness of America. Ronald Reagan and the ’94 Republican revolution were so successful because we communicated a positive message from the top down. We must communicate that message always, even if it is not articulated from the top.

The fundamental messages that strike a chord with the people include: Personal accountability, freedoms and opportunities, as well as national security. It is acceptable to demonstrate contrast with the Democrats, but primarily negative campaigns never work. While trying to appeal to unaffiliated voters it is acceptable to present contrast, but it should be presented in a non-confrontational manner.

2. Candidate Development

People want to find reasons to vote for candidates, or to join a party. We must develop inspirational candidates and party leaders who think for themselves and are not partisan parrots. We must develop candidates at every level and compete in every race in every district. The Democrats have been very successful with their 64 county approach in Colorado, while Republicans have only tried to maintain status quo.

We cannot grow as a party or as a philosophy with a hunker-down mentality. We must adopt a Fifty-State approach nationally and a 64 county approach in Colorado. State wide races can be won by being competitive in Democratic strongholds. Ignoring these districts will further widen the divide and make is harder to ever change the tide. I believe this in one of the major contributory factors in Republican losses this year.

Unaffiliated voters do not want to be represented by partisan hacks. They want independent thinkers who will stand up for what they believe in. Most voters want the same opportunities and freedoms that make America great. If we communicate the conservative principles that provide the foundation of our decisions, Republicans will attract independents and even Democrats to their side.

Conservatism did not fail us this year, our abandonment of fiscal responsibility and our lack of inspirational leadership failed us. This is demonstrated by the fact that Obama ran on a platform of tax cuts and eliminating wasteful government agencies. Even though Obama lacked specifics, and was not challenged by the media, his message resonated better than McCain’s message.

3. Intra-Party Communications

We have had poor intra-party communications at all levels. Infighting and posturing have diverted energy that should be used to get our message out. I believe we must generate Candidate Handbooks and lessons learned manuals at all levels: Handbooks to include fund-raising ideas, lessons learned, campaigning “dos and don’ts” etc... These handbooks must cover all levels of party organization including State Party, county, and local republican clubs as well as candidates and candidate committees.

We must also collect and share available data about precincts, lists of voters and voting history. Gathering statistical data on registration is a key component in obtaining metrics by which we can gage our progress and focus in on programs that work. The current voter registration data and information process has been too cumbersome and the availability of accurate data has been lacking.

Additionally, Republican organizations must make more effective use of websites, blogs and email blasts. We are not making effective use of the internet for communication, and this must be addressed.

4. Party Leadership

I believe that with several exceptions, our party’s leadership has not adequately supported candidates, state and local organizations. Along with the lack of a strong, consistent and positive message, our national leadership seemed resigned to defeat this year and hoarded resources to a few targeted races. Leadership at the county level must be strengthened. Party leadership must be enforced with defined roles and responsibilities for leadership positions at all levels. We cannot tolerate complacent or indifferent performance from our party leaders. If they do not perform, they should be replaced.

5. Youth Movement

We need to plant seeds and take our message directly to the youth of America through the means they communicate, with a message that resonates with them. Several methods of effective communication are Facebook communication networks, internet sights & blogs, Young Republican and College Republican organizations. I believe county level organizations should subsidize and encourage local youth groups. I recommend at least 10% of county funds go to youth group organizations, such as Young Republicans. We must also focus on issues which resonate with youth including education, the environment, government fiscal responsibility including long-term social security viability.

6. Voter Registration

We have lost significant ground this year on the voter registration front. We must be diligent in our efforts to register as many new voters as possible. To do this we must contact newcomers into the area (County level responsibility). We must also hold registration drives at any public events. We must make people feel welcome and connected to the Republican party. We should find people’s interests and connect with unaffiliated voters to make them realize they identify with the principals of the Republican Party.

7. Fund Raising

Traditionally, Republicans typically held advantages in fund raising. That advantage is gone. We must reignite our find raising efforts at all levels. We focus too much at the top levels and ignore down-ticket candidates. Grass-roots level communication starts at the lower levels and we must support candidates financially to help communicate our message. Further, we must adopt a 64 county approach and support every candidate, every race, every time.

If every registered Republican in a congressional district sent their candidate $10, they would have over $1M to get our message out. This will have a significant affect on raising the tide and making all districts competitive. We must also put pressure on the federal and state levels to adopt this approach. If we had a holistic approach this year, we might be celebrating a McCain victory right now. I also propose adopting a “Change for Change” program that encourages Republicans to start spare-change jars, every two years, tally it up and divide the monies to candidates, with largest apportionment to the top ticket candidates.

8. Community Involvement

The party and all prospective candidates must be continually involved at the community level, and not just in election years. Voters (particularly unaffiliated voters) will vote for candidates they know personally or know of their community involvement. Being active in the community will generate positive press and the voters receive a sense of connectivity with the candidate.

Examples of community level involvement include Rotary Clubs, Optimist Clubs, Schools, PTA, sporting teams, Astronomy Clubs, VFW, Kiwanis etc... I also propose that we hold fund raisers for clubs typically not associated with Republican organizations (for instance environmental causes). Community level activists must also promote national level candidates. As an example, at every town parade I attended this year had dozens of Obama supporters, and no organized McCain supporters. There were people who would carry a McCain sign, but there was no organized effort to show support for the top of our ticket.

9. Communication Methods

We must use all available communication avenues to get our message out. We are the party of ideas, we must articulate those ideas any opportunity we can. Communication venues include: Websites, Blogs, Facebook networks, Yahoo groups, Talk radio, Letters to the editor, Community events and Conventional media (newspapers, TV etc...). There is no debate that most conventional media outlets favor Democrat principles and candidates. It serves no purpose to whine or lament this reality. We must increase our efforts to counter it. With new communication and information venues we can effectively get our message out.

Summary

The Republican Party is the party of ideas and we can regain a majority in Colorado by communicating those ideas in a clear, consistent and positive manner. A clear majority of people identify with our message, so we must be confident and consistent in connecting with people about our message. We must adopt a 64 county approach in Colorado (50 State nationally). We must compete in every race and support our candidates, even in Democrat strongholds. We must develop strong community involved candidates that can effectively articulate our message. Strong party leadership with clearly defined roles and responsibilities will also increase our effectiveness and ability to communicate within the party. We must take advantage of new media communication methods and appeal to a new generation of voters.

I believe that by addressing these systemic issues, we can turn the tide of the political winds, and regain a majority at the state and federal levels, but it will take diligence and determination.

Scott Starin lives in Lafayette and works in the aerospace industry. He was the 2008 Republican nominee for Congress in Colorado's 2nd District.