Yes, this is the real Steve Novick. Thanks for the feedback--I was starting to feel like I was drinking from a firehose anyway. We're back in contact with the moderator and he is going to run things properly from here on out.
I will take every opportunity to make environmental issues a focus of my service in the Senate. Whenever anyone asks which committees I want to serve on, I list the Environment and Public Works Committee, and explain that I would list the Energy and Natural Resources Committee if Oregon Senator Ron Wyden's presence there did not make such an appointment extremely unlikely. I hope that given my background at the Justice Department and my decade of service on the Oregon Environmental Council Board, Senate leaders will grant my request to serve on EPW.
I need all the help I can get from the netroots across the United States. I don't have the DSCC tapping big national donors on my behalf and we are accepting contributions from all states via ActBlue, where my campaign total is currently third highest for all Senate candidates. I suppose some might argue I should only take money from Oregonians, but the reality is that campaigns take money and I'll be proud to stand up in the Senate for progressive folks from across the country. It is only through citizens from across the nation coming together to demand real change that we are going to change the direction of the U.S. Senate.
I would suggest that Oregon's attempt at universal health care never got off the ground because major portions of it were blocked by the Republican-controlled legislature. I think that experience underscores the need for us to address health care reform at a national level. The path our health care system is on is clearly unsustainable, with exploding costs and declining coverage. I think there are several comprehensive plans out there to ensure everyone has affordable health care, while tackling the cost of care. Here's a fuller explanation of what I think that will take and several measures we need to take to control costs.
With the current path we are on, we will need to raise taxes or slash benefits to cover the cost of Medicare when baby boomers retire. Neither of those are good options. That is why we must reform our system now, before it is too late and we are faced with unacceptable options.
I have been willing to buck the establishment in this campaign and I think voters will appreciate that. But let me make clear that I am a Democrat through and through and will stay in the party no matter what. As Paul Wellstone said about himself, "I represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party."
I will continue to stand up for my principles, even when I disagree with my fellow Democrats. But I truly believe that by expressing the progressive values, we will strengthen the Democratic Party. It is that willingness to tell the truth, regardless the consequences that I see as my biggest contrast with the D.C. Democratic establishment.
The first step on the path to fiscal responsibility is help the American public understand where their tax dollars go. In terms of federal spending, roughly 20 percent goes to defense, 20 percent to Medicare & Medicaid, 20 percent to Social Security, 8 percent to interest on the debt, and everything else is a relatively small portion for things like transportation, education and the environment. Even the earmarks that have been recently decried are only about 1 percent of the budget. Of course those earmarks include obvious pork like the "Bridge to Nowhere," but getting our fiscal house in order is going to take more than cracking down on appropriations.
Part of what I would propose are moves towards tax fairness, like repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, or the capital gains and Social Security tax reforms I mentioned in a previous reply. But we also need to spend our taxes more wisely. I do think there are some programs - like the V-22 Osprey or the International Space Station - that are not a great investment of our tax dollars. I also think we can give federal agencies more of an incentive to save by rewarding them if they come in under budget.
Thanks for the question. Environmental action has been one of the centerpieces of my record of public service. I spent over eight years at the U.S. Justice Department, suing polluters for violations of the Clean Air and Clean Water Act and I was a board member of the Oregon Environmental Council for the past decade.
But in other instances, like making the investment in renewable energy or expanding mass transit and other conservation initiatives, it will cost some money. That is why in this campaign I have been advocating several moves towards better fairness in our tax code like requiring people who make their money buying and selling stock to pay the same rate as what people pay on regular income. Or that people making a million dollars pay Social Security tax on all of their income, not just the first $100,000. In the long run, reducing our energy consumption, using it more efficiently and reducing the massive cost of global warming and pollution to our economy, health care system and communities will save money. But you are absolutely right that it will take some money up front. I'm committed to telling folks the truth about that and how we are going to pay for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, this is the real Steve Novick. Thanks for the feedback--I was starting to feel like I was drinking from a firehose anyway. We're back in contact with the moderator and he is going to run things properly from here on out.
I will take every opportunity to make environmental issues a focus of my service in the Senate. Whenever anyone asks which committees I want to serve on, I list the Environment and Public Works Committee, and explain that I would list the Energy and Natural Resources Committee if Oregon Senator Ron Wyden's presence there did not make such an appointment extremely unlikely. I hope that given my background at the Justice Department and my decade of service on the Oregon Environmental Council Board, Senate leaders will grant my request to serve on EPW.
I need all the help I can get from the netroots across the United States. I don't have the DSCC tapping big national donors on my behalf and we are accepting contributions from all states via ActBlue, where my campaign total is currently third highest for all Senate candidates. I suppose some might argue I should only take money from Oregonians, but the reality is that campaigns take money and I'll be proud to stand up in the Senate for progressive folks from across the country. It is only through citizens from across the nation coming together to demand real change that we are going to change the direction of the U.S. Senate.
Thanks for your help!
I would suggest that Oregon's attempt at universal health care never got off the ground because major portions of it were blocked by the Republican-controlled legislature. I think that experience underscores the need for us to address health care reform at a national level. The path our health care system is on is clearly unsustainable, with exploding costs and declining coverage. I think there are several comprehensive plans out there to ensure everyone has affordable health care, while tackling the cost of care. Here's a fuller explanation of what I think that will take and several measures we need to take to control costs.
With the current path we are on, we will need to raise taxes or slash benefits to cover the cost of Medicare when baby boomers retire. Neither of those are good options. That is why we must reform our system now, before it is too late and we are faced with unacceptable options.
I have been willing to buck the establishment in this campaign and I think voters will appreciate that. But let me make clear that I am a Democrat through and through and will stay in the party no matter what. As Paul Wellstone said about himself, "I represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party."
I will continue to stand up for my principles, even when I disagree with my fellow Democrats. But I truly believe that by expressing the progressive values, we will strengthen the Democratic Party. It is that willingness to tell the truth, regardless the consequences that I see as my biggest contrast with the D.C. Democratic establishment.
The first step on the path to fiscal responsibility is help the American public understand where their tax dollars go. In terms of federal spending, roughly 20 percent goes to defense, 20 percent to Medicare & Medicaid, 20 percent to Social Security, 8 percent to interest on the debt, and everything else is a relatively small portion for things like transportation, education and the environment. Even the earmarks that have been recently decried are only about 1 percent of the budget. Of course those earmarks include obvious pork like the "Bridge to Nowhere," but getting our fiscal house in order is going to take more than cracking down on appropriations.
Part of what I would propose are moves towards tax fairness, like repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, or the capital gains and Social Security tax reforms I mentioned in a previous reply. But we also need to spend our taxes more wisely. I do think there are some programs - like the V-22 Osprey or the International Space Station - that are not a great investment of our tax dollars. I also think we can give federal agencies more of an incentive to save by rewarding them if they come in under budget.
You can read a bunch more about this and my record of working to educate the public on budget and tax policy, as well as fighting waste in the Oregon State Lottery.
Thanks, geekoid. The typo has been fixed, and in the spirit of the Bush Administration, the person responsible has been given a raise and promotion.
Thanks for the question. Environmental action has been one of the centerpieces of my record of public service. I spent over eight years at the U.S. Justice Department, suing polluters for violations of the Clean Air and Clean Water Act and I was a board member of the Oregon Environmental Council for the past decade.
Your question does raise a challenge of transitioning to sustainable practices. In some instances, like Superfund cleanup, there are steps we could take right now to reduce the burden on average taxpayers by restoring the polluter pays principles that originally paid for toxic waste cleanup.
But in other instances, like making the investment in renewable energy or expanding mass transit and other conservation initiatives, it will cost some money. That is why in this campaign I have been advocating several moves towards better fairness in our tax code like requiring people who make their money buying and selling stock to pay the same rate as what people pay on regular income. Or that people making a million dollars pay Social Security tax on all of their income, not just the first $100,000. In the long run, reducing our energy consumption, using it more efficiently and reducing the massive cost of global warming and pollution to our economy, health care system and communities will save money. But you are absolutely right that it will take some money up front. I'm committed to telling folks the truth about that and how we are going to pay for it.