"The house we hope to build is not for my generation but for yours. It is your future that matters. And I hope that when you are my age, you will be able to say as I have been able to say: We lived in freedom. We lived lives that were a statement, not an apology."


Sunday, November 05, 2006

'06 PLU GOP Platform: Social Security

In 1950, there were 16 workers to support every one beneficiary of Social Security. Today, there are only 3.3 workers supporting every Social Security beneficiary. By the time today’s young workers begin to retire there will only be 2 workers to support every recipient. Under the current system, today's 30-year-old worker will face a 26% benefit cut when he or she reaches normal retirement age.

To keep the current social security system as it stands is to ensure a grim financial future for retirees. A sure fire way around this is to allow citizens who so choose to create personal savings accounts invested in the stock market. Over the past 17 years the stock market has produced an average 12% gain, certainly better than the 26% loss the current system will provide.

Personal savings accounts will guarantee today’s young workers not only security in retirement, but prosperity. A twenty-year old male can expect to pay $418, 517 in Social Security taxes over his working life. He can expect to receive $2, 734 in monthly Social Security benefits when he retires, amounting to a pathetic -0.95% rate of return.

However, if that twenty-year old male had been allowed to place all of his Social Security taxes in a personal savings account he would have a total of $1,192,881 in accrued wealth at retirement. Monthly benefits would end up being $9,717, or $6,983 more a month than he would receive under the current Social Security system.

At the very least, the federal government must stop spending the annual Social Security surplus on programs and expenditures completely unrelated to Social Security. That surplus should either be saved for the day when the current Social Security program is no longer solvent or, as we propose, it should be returned to those who pay into the system via the Social Security tax for a smaller personal savings account, which would compliment the regular Social Security benefits they would receive upon retirement in the current system.

* Co-authored with Chris Allen, Policy Advisor, PLU GOP.

'06 PLU GOP Platform: The Economy

As Republicans, the PLU GOP intrinsically believes that government governs best when it governs least. We hold this especially true regarding the economy.

For the economy to be prosperous and dynamic, the American people must be left more of their own money to spend, save, or invest as they see fit. We believe the individual American taxpayer, not the government, knows the best manner through which to handle their own money. For this reason, we support the president's tax cuts and advocate their permanent extension.

Moreover, we believe the federal tax code should be reformed altogether, with the current anti-growth IRS code being replaced by what the president called in his 2004 acceptance speech a "simpler, fairer, pro-growth code." Instead of discouraging economic growth by taxing earnings and savings and investment, we should tax consumption at one flat rate, with exemptions for those with the lowest incomes. Such a transition, estimates Harvard economist Dale Jorgenson, would permanently increase national income by 10-15 percent. It would undoubtedly be a huge wind to the sails of our economy to abolish the IRS, double taxation on savings, the death tax, and taxes on dividends and capital gains.

The role we do envision the government playing in the economy is a very limited one. We believe that the government should help Americans acquire the tools they need in order to thrive and make a good living, and then get out of the way. Government should be there, whenever possible, to provide financial assistance to Americans seeking a college education or technical training to gain an expertise in a specific career field. The government should promote self-sufficiency by giving the individual the tools he or she needs to be self-sufficient. The government should also make self-sufficiency easier to maintain by, we reiterate, taxing less of what working individuals earn.

We also call upon the federal government to restrain wasteful government spending. Government should be no different than any home or business. It should live within its means and, wherever possible, balance its budget and minimize its debt.

We openly acknowledge that as the majority in both houses of congress it has been Republicans who have routinely ignored this approach over the years. Accordingly, the PLU GOP calls upon both parties---Republican and Democrat---to end the wasteful pork-barrel spending that has existed in Washington D.C. for too long and to set responsible budgets that do not saddle ours and future generations with exorbitant debt.

'06 PLU GOP Platform: Iraq

Whether you agreed with the decision to liberate Iraq or not, that debate is immaterial to the one we need to have now that we are there. The question we must answer at this point is do we stay in Iraq until that country has established a stable, republican government and a capacity to secure itself, or do we withdraw—or set a timetable for withdrawal—before those objectives have been met? We, the PLU GOP, believe we must stay and fulfill the mission in Iraq, for several reasons.

One, to retreat from Iraq would make America less safe. It would leave us a defeated nation and the Islamic holy warriors and jihadists of the world would know it. They would become even more emboldened, more ruthless, and more murderous in their barbarous mission to kill Americans. As President Bush has said, the terrorists we are fighting in Iraq "will follow us" should we prematurely leave Iraq. Security here at home depends upon us winning the fight against terror in Iraq.

Second, an American retreat from Iraq would only empower Iran and North Korea in their pursuit and possession of nuclear weapons. Demonstrating America’s strength by staying in Iraq until victory will leave us in a much stronger position to check the belligerence of both rogue nations. The diplomacy of a strong and victorious nation carries much more weight and credibility than that of a defeated and disgraced one.

Third, to do anything other than fulfill our mission in Iraq would be to break the commitment we have made to the Iraqi people. They have begun the process of rebuilding their nation. They have voted in the midst of violence. They have fought and died for their nation. They have done all of this because the United States of America has stood behind them and promised to support them in their quest to build a new, free Iraq. It would be a tragic dishonor and blight upon this nation to break that promise.

Finally, we must stay in Iraq to honor the ultimate sacrifice thousands of brave American men and women have made there. They fought and died so that Iraq may be free and the United States and the world may be more secure. America must not forsake their sacrifice and we must insure they did not die for nothing. If for no other reason, we must stay in Iraq until our mission is complete for our lost servicemen and women. We owe them nothing less.

Friday, November 03, 2006

Mike McGavick for U.S. Senate

(Letter to the Editor, The Mast, November 3, 2006 Volume LXXXIV, NO. 8)

From the war in Iraq to the deficit and health care, this nation is faced with significant challenges. The resolution of these challenges demands leaders and representatives who are serious about working with those with whom they both agree and disagree, not ones more interested in playing the game of partisan politics. We need leaders in this day and age, not politicians.

For this reason, the PLU GOP endorses Mike McGavick for U.S. Senate. Mike isn't interested in the politics as usual prevalent in Washington D.C. today. He isn't interested in the common practice of looking towards his party to know how to vote, or in engaging in the rancorous and bitter political discourse that has poisoned our political process.

Mike McGavick is dedicated to working with others to solve problems and confront challenges, and he has the experience to do it. When Mike took over at SAFECO Insurance as CEO the company was losing $1 billion a year. However, by demonstrating strong leadership and making tough decisions to solve problems, SAFECO was profitable by the time he left.

If elected to the Senate, Mike will demonstrate the same determination and leadership in solving the problems and challenges that confront our great nation. We agree with The Seattle Times: "McGavick...showed at SAFECO that he was able to take on big problems. We think he could make an innovative and influential senator for Washington."

We urge our fellow Lutes to cast their votes for Mike McGavick for U.S. Senate.