William A. Alexander – 9/13/06

This page was last updated on September 21, 2006.

The real changes since 2000; William A. Alexander; Beaver County Times; September 13, 2006.

Mr. Alexander has written at least 16 letters since December 2004, and they all bashed Republicans for something.

As you will read, this is another fact-challenged effort by Mr. Alexander.

Below is a detailed critique of the letter.

“We are seeing ads from U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum and U.S. Rep. Melissa Hart noting all the fine things they have done for us, unless the nasty Democrats stopped them.

“They have been rubber stamps for the Bush administration, both voting with Bush 98 percent of the time. There is no way they could vote with Bush 98 percent of the time and be voting in the best interest of the people of Pennsylvania or, in Hart’s case, the 4th Congressional District. Instead, they have voted with the administration and the K Street lobbyists who want and wrote the administration’s legislation.”

[RWC] As I’ve written before, I love the “rubber stamp” criticism when a Republican tends to vote for proposals put forth by a Republican president or other Republicans. They have the same basic beliefs so what should we expect? Is it rubber-stamping when a Democrat supports Democrat presidents and other Democrats? Are the Democrats in the General Assembly rubber stamps for Gov. Rendell?

Regarding the 98% figure, I don’t know if it’s true or not. The only hits I got in a Google search were from Democrat/liberal websites bashing Sen. Santorum. I didn’t find any such claims for Rep. Hart.

“Santorum and Hart have gotten most of their multimillion-dollar campaign war chests from these lobbyists; most of their money did not come from people or corporations from the areas they represent.”

[RWC] FEC data shows Mr. Alexander’s allegations are untrue. FYI, so-called “K Street lobbyists” are lobbyists who set up shop in Washington, DC.

Regarding Rep. Hart, FEC reports to date indicate 45% of her contributions came from individuals and 55% came from PACs. To date, 84% of contributions came from within PA. In comparison, only 74% of her opponent’s contributions have come from within PA. At $284,387, as would be expected the Pittsburgh area is her largest contributing area by far. The next closest area was Washington, DC, at $48,123.

Regarding Sen. Santorum, FEC reports to date indicate 77% of his contributions came from individuals and only 19% came from PACs. To date, 57% of contributions came from within PA.

Except apparently for Mr. Alexander, it’s generally well known that campaign contributions by corporations are illegal. According to FindLaw, “Direct corporate contributions to candidates are obviously prohibited, but so are any uses of corporate facilities, resources, or employees provided by the corporation to a campaign. These prohibitions are stringent, and both the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice are aggressive in enforcing them with civil and criminal actions.”

“Here are a few numbers just to put it in perspective as to whether the direction of the Bush administration from 2000 to 2006 and the Santorum/Hart rubber stamps changed our lives for the better.

“The percentage of change from 2000 to 2006: total outstanding consumer debt, up 18 percent; savings as percentage of personal disposable income, up 122 percent; number of people receiving food stamps, up 48 percent; corporate profits before taxes, up 145 percent; exchange rate (dollars to euros), up 42 percent; oil prices (dollars per barrel, up 202 percent; and the national debt (from $5.7 trillion to $8.5 trillion), up 49 percent.”

[RWC] Given Mr. Alexander’s history with presenting correct data, I suggest taking these figures with at least a grain of salt.

Mr. Alexander wants us to believe these figures are all bad and all are the result of bad government.

For the life of me, I don’t know what’s wrong with increased personal savings and increased business profits. Increasing profits are indicative of a growing economy and this means more jobs. This is borne out by the low unemployment rate (4.7%) and the generation of 5.7 million jobs since August 2003.

Regarding consumer debt and oil prices, how does the government control them?

Regarding the exchange rate increase, that makes U.S. goods and services cheaper to buy relative to foreign goods and services.

“It has been good for corporations, especially oil, but real wages have gone down, benefits have gone down, savings have gone down, etc.”

[RWC] Mr. Alexander needs to check with The New York Times. During late August in two separate articles, the NYT reported overall compensation was trending upward as well as real wages.

“The Bush budget in 2001 was a surplus from Clinton (plus $281 billion), and in 2005 the deficit was $541 billion.”

[RWC] Again I’m not sure where Mr. Alexander gets his data. As you will read, Mr. Alexander inflates the good number for Bill Clinton and the bad numbers for President Bush.

According to historical tables published by the Office of Management and Budget, the surplus from fiscal year 2001 was $128 billion, not Mr. Alexander’s claim of $281 billion. Perhaps Mr. Alexander simply transposed some digits.

Mr. Alexander also neglected to mention the size of the surplus was only about half that of the previous year. Why? In addition to a declining budget surplus, Bill Clinton also left President Bush with a recession.

Regarding the alleged 2005 deficit of $541 billion, The Washington Post reported the 2005 deficit was $318 billion. The estimated deficit for 2006 was revised downward to under $300 billion.

“Vote in November and ask yourself, ‘Can we stand two more years of Bush rubber stamps?’ I hope your answer is ‘no.’”

[RWC] The real question may be, “Can we stand more fact-challenged letters from Mr. Alexander?” <g>