Dear Senator,
I am very concerned by two issues. One is the proposed bailout of Detroit automakers and the second is the return to Minority Leader by Sen. Mitch McConnell.
Detroit Automaker deserve no bailout and taxpayer supported relief. For one, these business need to be allowed to fail so they can renegotiate toxic labor agreements that will forever put the Big Three at a competitive disadvantage. The labor monopoly that the UAW has in Detroit will never allow GM, Ford or Chrysler compete globally. In 1998 when Detroit was actually making money selling SUVs, the UAW decided to strike GM costing the company over $2 Billion. GM had not choice but to cave into the wildly insane demands of the union. Caving made Detroit wages over $30/hr higher than the Japanese. Unfortunately Detroit autoworkers are not $30/hr more productive than the Japanese.
Second, Management at the Big Three has failed multiple times over the last 40 years to make good strategic decisions. They missed the small car revolution in the 1970’s and again failed to prepare for fuel the efficient models customers wanted when gasoline prices shot to over $4/gallon. In addition, management teams that failed to pursue value-creating strategies are still in place today.
Finally, government needs to stay out of the car business. The CAFE standards that the US Congress has approved over the years have done little to drive fuel conservation. Putting the onus on automakers to improve efficiency is not going to solve the “problem.” If Congress is serious about fuel economy, raise the gasoline tax. Consumers will demand and buy more fuel-sipping vehicles rather than SUVs.
The additional $50 Billion that Detroit is requesting is an insane figure. That amount of money is over seven times the existing market capitalization of Ford and GM as of Friday. This Government would be better off buying the companies and liquidating them to the highest bidder. Plus, there is no need for a Big Three. Chrysler should have been allowed to fail 25 years ago and if it would have failed, GM and Ford might not be in the perilous situation they are today. To put this number in perspective, you could give every employee of both Ford and GM over $100,000 with $50 Billion. This will cost each American household over $500.
Please allow the market to work through this situation in Detroit. Bankruptcy is a good thing in this case. Some entity will buy these distressed assets and turn the companies around and make them competitive once again. Resist the temptation to do anything and watch what great things will happen.
Finally, I request that you reject Mitch McConnell as Senate Minority Leader. The Republican Party has failed us for the last 8 years. Poor leadership from people like Sen. McConnell transformed the Republican majority into big spending, big government Democrats. Not the fiscally conservative Republicans that most of us support. Poor leadership not only hurt the Republican Party, but America as well as we know have the most liberal member of the US Senate as our President-Elect.
Respectfully submitted,
Showing posts with label letters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label letters. Show all posts
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Friday, October 31, 2008
Letter to Congress
Dear Senator:
I am very concerned about the current actions being undertaken by Congress. Nearly $1 Trillion is being spent without any coherent plan. We now have all sort of companies from Autos, Alternative Energy, Hedge Funds, Banks and even States looking for a piece of the government bonanza of spending.
Congress has created the largest moral hazard in the history of man by socializing the huge losses by companies that took on too much risk in investments they did not understand. This is just providing more evidence that government involvement in business is costly to the prosperity of society. Your actions in Congress will saddle our children’s children with more debt than they can realistically sustain.
I ask that Congress actually take the appropriate action which is nothing. Let firms go bankrupt that made bad decisions. Let stronger companies buy whatever is left of those firms and move on. The natural workings of the free market will repair the damage that has been caused by bad government policies from the last 40 years. It will take time to unwind what was been done, but more government involvement will only make matters worse over the long run.
There is undoubtedly pressure for Congress to do something. However, resist that pressure and temptation and let events take their course. This will prove to be the right action over time.
Respectfully yours,
XXX
Wichita, KS
I am very concerned about the current actions being undertaken by Congress. Nearly $1 Trillion is being spent without any coherent plan. We now have all sort of companies from Autos, Alternative Energy, Hedge Funds, Banks and even States looking for a piece of the government bonanza of spending.
Congress has created the largest moral hazard in the history of man by socializing the huge losses by companies that took on too much risk in investments they did not understand. This is just providing more evidence that government involvement in business is costly to the prosperity of society. Your actions in Congress will saddle our children’s children with more debt than they can realistically sustain.
I ask that Congress actually take the appropriate action which is nothing. Let firms go bankrupt that made bad decisions. Let stronger companies buy whatever is left of those firms and move on. The natural workings of the free market will repair the damage that has been caused by bad government policies from the last 40 years. It will take time to unwind what was been done, but more government involvement will only make matters worse over the long run.
There is undoubtedly pressure for Congress to do something. However, resist that pressure and temptation and let events take their course. This will prove to be the right action over time.
Respectfully yours,
XXX
Wichita, KS
Monday, September 15, 2008
Letter to Congressmen
Dear Senator:
I am very troubled by the prospects of the US Government providing $50 Billion in funding to the domestic auto industry. This industry has time and again failed to operate by basic business principles. Executives have failed to deliver what customers want and negotiated labor deals that were sure to send the companies into bankruptcy.
The US Government needs to stay out of the auto industry malaise. If these companies go bankrupt, so be it. Company assets will be bought by other investors at pennies on the dollar and labor agreements will be renegotiated. This will result in stronger companies and better long-term industry prospects.
Another item that needs to be reconsidered are the CAFÉ standards. If Congress wants people to use less gasoline, tax it. Forcing the auto makers to design cars to use less gas makes them design products consumers do not want. If the price of gasoline stays around $4/gallon, people will start buying those fuel efficient vehicles that GM, Ford and others are selling around the globe. We can solve the energy conservation problem without legislation by a Congress that knows little about automotive design. What we need is a market-based solution, not a bureaucratic one.
Sincerely,
Wichita, KS
I am very troubled by the prospects of the US Government providing $50 Billion in funding to the domestic auto industry. This industry has time and again failed to operate by basic business principles. Executives have failed to deliver what customers want and negotiated labor deals that were sure to send the companies into bankruptcy.
The US Government needs to stay out of the auto industry malaise. If these companies go bankrupt, so be it. Company assets will be bought by other investors at pennies on the dollar and labor agreements will be renegotiated. This will result in stronger companies and better long-term industry prospects.
Another item that needs to be reconsidered are the CAFÉ standards. If Congress wants people to use less gasoline, tax it. Forcing the auto makers to design cars to use less gas makes them design products consumers do not want. If the price of gasoline stays around $4/gallon, people will start buying those fuel efficient vehicles that GM, Ford and others are selling around the globe. We can solve the energy conservation problem without legislation by a Congress that knows little about automotive design. What we need is a market-based solution, not a bureaucratic one.
Sincerely,
Wichita, KS
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Another Classic Letter
Prof. Boudreaux writes another great letter...
Don Boudreaux
Here's a letter that I sent today to the Boston Globe:
Derrick Jackson wants government to reduce income differences among Americans ("Politely declining to touch the income gap," August 19). Forget that even poor Americans today generally have greater access to goods and services than did middle-income Americans of a generation ago. Instead ask: what kind of philosophy demands that government adopt and act on values that all decent parents teach their children to reject?
Who among us sends our children to school or to the playground with admonitions to begrudge classmates or playmates possessing nicer clothing or fancier toys? Who among us counsels our youngsters to form schoolyard coalitions for forcibly confiscating expensive sneakers and video games from 'rich' kids for "redistribution" to poorer kids? Who among us would not scold our children for such envy, and punish them severely if they participated in such thievery?
Children should avoid envy and learn to thrive by producing rather than by taking. The same is true for adults.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Don Boudreaux
Here's a letter that I sent today to the Boston Globe:
Derrick Jackson wants government to reduce income differences among Americans ("Politely declining to touch the income gap," August 19). Forget that even poor Americans today generally have greater access to goods and services than did middle-income Americans of a generation ago. Instead ask: what kind of philosophy demands that government adopt and act on values that all decent parents teach their children to reject?
Who among us sends our children to school or to the playground with admonitions to begrudge classmates or playmates possessing nicer clothing or fancier toys? Who among us counsels our youngsters to form schoolyard coalitions for forcibly confiscating expensive sneakers and video games from 'rich' kids for "redistribution" to poorer kids? Who among us would not scold our children for such envy, and punish them severely if they participated in such thievery?
Children should avoid envy and learn to thrive by producing rather than by taking. The same is true for adults.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Thursday, April 3, 2008
When $17B does not matter.
Here is a recent letter I received back from Senator Roberts in response to a request to eliminate earmarks and support the McCain-DeMint Bill (which neither Kansas Senator did).
Dear Mr. XXXX:
Thank you for contacting me regarding earmark reform. I appreciate your taking the time to get in touch.
I have long supported efforts to reduce federal spending and make certain our tax dollars are used as efficiently as possible. Recently there has been a lot of negative attention surrounding the appropriations procedure known as "earmarking." Earmarking is the process by which a Member of Congress prioritizes the allocation of appropriations to their state or district. It is important to note that earmarking does not increase budget outlays. In other words, if the funds are not earmarked for a particular use, they will still be spent by the administrative department or agency according to their discretion. I have always maintained that it is more effective for an elected, accountable Member of Congress to determine spending priorities in their state or district than for an appointed bureaucrat in Washington, who may have no tie to the region, to make those decisions. In addition, it is important to note that this year, earmarks account for less than two percent of budget outlays, leaving the remaining bulk of federal spending decisions to the administrative branch.
I understand concerns over the potential for earmarking to become corrupted. That is why I have always supported transparency in the process. I disclose earmarks that I secure for the state of Kansas, and I have consistently voted in favor of bills to increase transparency in the appropriations and earmarking process. Most recently, I supported the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (P.L. 110-81), which includes several provisions directed at increasing earmark transparency.
President Bush has also made earmark reform an executive branch priority. He recently signed an executive order directing agencies to ignore earmarks in future spending bills that are not specifically in the text of the appropriations bills. This measure provides another guarantee of transparency in the earmarking process.
Again thank you for taking the time to contact me. You may rest assured that I will continue to work for ethical appropriations procedures. If you would like more information on issues before the Senate, please visit my website at http://roberts.senate.gov. You may also sign up on my home page for a monthly electronic newsletter that will provide additional updates on my work for Kansas.
With every best wish,
Sincerely,
Pat Roberts
What really makes me angry is how insignificant $17B has become to our elected officials. To this letter, is sent the following response:
Dear Senator,
I am concerned about the response you gave me on recent letter I sent you regarding earmark reform. Here it is:
While $17B may not be a big part of a $3T budget, it is still tax payer money and should be spent wisely. This money should not to be used to secure favor with constituents and campaign donors. $17B represents over $200 for a family of four in this country. I am 100% certain that every family can find a way to spend this money better than politicians in DC.
Doug
Dear Mr. XXXX:
Thank you for contacting me regarding earmark reform. I appreciate your taking the time to get in touch.
I have long supported efforts to reduce federal spending and make certain our tax dollars are used as efficiently as possible. Recently there has been a lot of negative attention surrounding the appropriations procedure known as "earmarking." Earmarking is the process by which a Member of Congress prioritizes the allocation of appropriations to their state or district. It is important to note that earmarking does not increase budget outlays. In other words, if the funds are not earmarked for a particular use, they will still be spent by the administrative department or agency according to their discretion. I have always maintained that it is more effective for an elected, accountable Member of Congress to determine spending priorities in their state or district than for an appointed bureaucrat in Washington, who may have no tie to the region, to make those decisions. In addition, it is important to note that this year, earmarks account for less than two percent of budget outlays, leaving the remaining bulk of federal spending decisions to the administrative branch.
I understand concerns over the potential for earmarking to become corrupted. That is why I have always supported transparency in the process. I disclose earmarks that I secure for the state of Kansas, and I have consistently voted in favor of bills to increase transparency in the appropriations and earmarking process. Most recently, I supported the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (P.L. 110-81), which includes several provisions directed at increasing earmark transparency.
President Bush has also made earmark reform an executive branch priority. He recently signed an executive order directing agencies to ignore earmarks in future spending bills that are not specifically in the text of the appropriations bills. This measure provides another guarantee of transparency in the earmarking process.
Again thank you for taking the time to contact me. You may rest assured that I will continue to work for ethical appropriations procedures. If you would like more information on issues before the Senate, please visit my website at http://roberts.senate.gov. You may also sign up on my home page for a monthly electronic newsletter that will provide additional updates on my work for Kansas.
With every best wish,
Sincerely,
Pat Roberts
What really makes me angry is how insignificant $17B has become to our elected officials. To this letter, is sent the following response:
Dear Senator,
I am concerned about the response you gave me on recent letter I sent you regarding earmark reform. Here it is:
It is important to note that earmarking does not increase budget outlays. InI have to wonder why this money has to be spent at all. If the different agencies do not need this money, which I am assuming since the Congressmen doing earmarks are spending based on what they seem to think is important, why budget these dollars in the first place? I am confident that if the spending was critical, the government agencies would make every effort to secure the funding they need.
other words, if the funds are not earmarked for a particular use, they will
still be spent by the administrative department or agency according to their
discretion.
While $17B may not be a big part of a $3T budget, it is still tax payer money and should be spent wisely. This money should not to be used to secure favor with constituents and campaign donors. $17B represents over $200 for a family of four in this country. I am 100% certain that every family can find a way to spend this money better than politicians in DC.
Doug
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
