I’ve recently been made aware (via the usual emails, phone calls and polls) of SC Sen. Lee Bright’s campaign to unseat U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham in the upcoming South Carolina Republican primary. I’m not a big fan of Lindsey Graham, so I visited Sen. Bright’s website <www.brightforsenate.com>, naively hopeful, to check him out.
But . . . disappointment. Sen. Bright, like nearly all politicians these days, seems to be laser focused on “issues”. Unfortunately “issues” are not the real issue in our elections, or at least they shouldn’t be. Here’s the issues I have with “issues”.
Senator Bright’s campaign issues are: Immigration, Pro-Life, Taxes, Obamacare, National Security, Budget and Spending, Second Amendment, and Civil Liberties. (his website list)
If that list sounds familiar, well, that’s because most of these “issues” have been in the political campaigns of almost every candidate for any office for decades. Many of them are not issues for the federal government but should be addressed at the State and local levels. Some of them are of a nature that makes it unconstitutional for the federal government to even consider them.
Nevertheless, we-the-voters are passionate about our “issues”, and that gives the candidates an easy way to campaign. They just promise to fix our issues, we vote for them, and they go to Washington with our votes and our money in their pocket.
But they won’t fix anything. They will sponsor bills (which they know will never be passed and likely will never come to a vote), they will make speeches on the floor of the congress (to an empty house, after hours, just for the congressional record). Nothing will change.
Then, in the next campaign they will blame the other party for their failure and again promise to fix our issues. We will vote for them, they will go to Washington and the cycle will repeat, and repeat, and repeat.
In case you are unaware, we-the-voters have reelected 85%to 95% of our U.S. Representatives every election since 1964 < http://www.opensecrets.org > regardless of their performance or lack thereof. They do not fix “issues”, they cannot, they don’t want to, and they never will. We reelect them anyway.
So maybe we-the-voters should be smarter. Maybe we should stop voting for the federal candidates who promise to fix our pet issues and never do it. When was the last time you enthusiastically voted for a candidate of either party?
It’s been a long time for me. I almost always wind up not voting for anyone but against the worst of the candidates. The difference is usually small, and I leave the polls with a long-lasting sense of futility.
I would love to see a lot of Not-Democrat and Not-Republican candidates run for office. I would welcome rank amateurs and first-timers. I would vote for candidates who would ignore the issues, ignore the political parties and campaign hard to rebuild a truly reformed, constitutional government in Washington, D.C. How cool would that be.
So what if they don’t get enough votes to win. They might easily get enough to really rattle the Democratic and/or Republican parties, and the election after that would really be fun.
Ross Perot with his 1992 on-again, off-again third-party campaign got almost 20 % of the national vote, and the result was the Republican’s 1995 “Contract with America”. It made a big difference.
If we-the-voters could get out of our issues rut, we might finally get some real choices at the polls instead of the bad-or-worse situation we currently face in every election, and we could begin to make real progress in getting reacquainted with the U.S. Constitution. We too could make a big difference.
What about Issues? If we had a functional government the issues would be easy to handle, and the solutions would more likely be good ones. The States would handle the problems they are supposed to handle, we could keep the Feds out of it, and that’s the way it was meant to be. If you doubt that, you should refresh your understanding of the Constitution. If you want a Constitution refresher Try The Plain English Constitution for easy reading.
Voters know that politicians, from both sides of the isle, lie to get elected.
That’s why we must judge all politicians by their voting records, and by who contributed to their campaigns.
Sen Graham’s support has dwindled to to only 38% of the registered voters. This is because of his votes on Grahamnesty and Obamacare, which hurt every family in South Carolina.
Sen Bright’s backs his words with his voting record, which is 100% for the families in South Carolina. That’s why Sen Bright polls higher than all the other contenders combined.
Like the author says, SC Families have no choice but to base their vote on the voting records, not on the issues. Like the author recommends, Sen Bright needs to stay away from the issues and stick with promoting his voting record.
None of the other contenders can compete because they have no voting records and they can’t prove that they aren’t lying to the voters.
Thanks for the comment. You might want to be a little careful judging politicians by their voting records. Congressmen many times know whether a bill will pass or fail before the vote takes place, so they vote either, yea or nay, whichever looks best on their voting record. Sounds cynical, I know. But it’s true. Also, one thing you should know about Sen. Bright’s 100% “voting for families”. I’m not sure what that means, but I am sure there is no provision for that in the U.S. Constitution. The 10th Amendment says any power not specifically given to the feds is reserved for the states or the people. So, it’s not something Sen. Bright will be voting on if he makes it to Washington.
I disagree with this. Voting for people who can’t possibly win is an exercise in futility. Ross Perot was the reason we ended up with Bill Clinton. Yes, we often do end up voting for “the lesser of two evils,” although being active in the PRIMARIES is where we can make a difference. Also, getting behind solid Liberty candidates (like Lee Bright who has a proven track record as a fighter and a solid conservative,) is essential. Liberty candidates need a LOT of help when they take on powerful and well-funded incumbents. In addition, we as voters need to be a little less nasty to the candidates, realizing that they are PEOPLE who are not perfect and to stop nit-picking over every skeleton that the media either digs up or makes up.
Thanks for the comment. I didn’t mean to be “nasty” in pointing out that Sen. Bright’s campaign promises are re-runs from the last few decades. It’s just that that gives me little reason to expect any different results. As for Ross Perot – yes he helped elect Clinton, but that 19% vote he got drove Newt Gingrich and the Republicans to launch their “Contract with America” and 2 yrs. later to gain control of both the House and the Senate. From there, they were able to squash many of the Clinton’s liberal initiatives. Perot’s losing campaign absolutely did make a positive difference. And thanks again for the comment. I do appreciate your input.
It sounds to me like this site speaks to the Liberals out there. Even though you talk about Rep candidates and you make it sound as though that is how you vote, it still sounds like Liberal speak to me. And I don’t take heed to much of anything with a Liberal slant. Although, you do make some valid points on the subject of issues. However, just as I said I don’t take heed to Liberalism, I am not an extrem Rightest either. I am an informed citizen of the US OF A because I inform myself. And a lot of my information resources say it is an important factor to consider candidates voting statistics. But my most important issue right now is getting people to INFORM themselves before going to the polls right now. I have lots to say, but will stop at this, I personally don’t think you are well-informed either, unless your information is “old school” information because THIS president, more than any one who has come before him, has most definitely abused Congress, the Constitution, and we, the people.