Nicholas Chopiak – 9/24/06

This page was last updated on September 24, 2006.

Senator Stonewaller; Nicholas Chopiak; Beaver County Times; September 24, 2006.

This is Mr. Chopiak’s second Santorum bashing letter within two months.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum has stonewalled my letters of concern for years either with politically correct spin form letters that do not address the issue or just plain stonewalling.”

[RWC] Note Mr. Chopiak acknowledges he received responses from Sen. Santorum’s office. In Mr. Chopiak’s mind, it’s “stonewalling” when he gets a response he doesn’t like.

“For the sake of brevity, I will list only three issues of concern for our nation.

“* Rather than payback the trillion dollars siphoned from the Social Security trust fund so both young and seniors - not just seniors, as the senator’s TV ad claims - can draw money they have paid into for years, Santorum wants to dismantle Social Security by taking it private. After the elections into early next year, another push is planned to take your Social Security money using the fear factor - a ‘bankrupt’ trust fund. ( Letter stonewalled.)”

[RWC] Mr. Chopiak is either ignorant of Sen. Santorum’s plan for Socialist Security or simply repeating Democrat talking points. Based on my research, Sen. Santorum has never proposed dismantling “Social Security by taking it private.” If Mr. Chopiak can prove otherwise, he should present his evidence.

Regarding his comment about “a ‘bankrupt’ trust fund,” Democrats themselves told us this during the late 1990s.

“* The prescription drug bill he helped pass is the biggest fiscally irresponsible policy in the history of our country, written by lobbyists not for your benefit but for the benefit of drug and insurance companies. A detailed letter written on how and why was again stonewalled.”

[RWC] I agree the Medicare prescription drug plan is “fiscally irresponsible,” but it doesn’t hold the record. In my opinion, the programs tied for #1 are Socialist Security, Medicare, and the so-called “War on Poverty” programs.

As I noted in my critique of Mr. Chopiak’s previous letter, is really just bummed the plan doesn’t cover everyone and that Democrats weren’t the ones to pass it.

“* Pork-barrel spending. Politicians are now calling pork barrel ‘ear marks.’ (Sounds better!) This is reckless abandonment of spending at the cost of other necessary programs, including Medicare and child care. There was $24.5 billion of pork in 2004; $64 Billion in 2005. Stonewalled again.”

[RWC] How is pork barrel spending “abandonment of spending?”

What evidence is there that Medicare spending has been cut? Didn’t Mr. Chopiak just complain above about the increased spending for the Medicare drug plan?

Why is spending for childcare a “necessary program?” Is it not the parents’ responsibility to raise their children?

“When the ideology of our republic has been compromised by elected officials who listen to their lobbyists before their constituents and become self-serving, the time has come for change.”

[RWC] This letter continues the trend. To date, not one Santorum bashing letter has given us any reasons to vote for Bob Casey, Jr.