Jim Ferruchie – 10/12/06

This page was last updated on October 15, 2006.

Hart ducking a debate; Jim Ferruchie; Beaver County Times; October 12, 2006.

As Mr. Ferruchie’s last letter, this one is nothing more than a recitation of Democrat talking points. In that previous letter, Mr. Ferruchie asserted, “George W. Bush is not only the worst president in history, he is arguably the worst head of state the world has ever known.” That allows Mr. Ferruchie to claim President Bush is worse than Hirohito, Hitler, Mao, Saddam Hussein, Stalin, et cetera without even mentioning their names.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“U.S. Rep. Melissa Hart, thus far, has refused to debate her opponent, Jason Altmire, in the upcoming election. An examination of her congressional voting record may explain why.”

[RWC] Rep. Hart isn’t the first person to refuse a debate, especially when your opponent has no record and thus can say whatever he wants without fear of being challenged. That said, if Rep. Hart is a good debater, I’d like to have seen her debate Mr. Altmire.

“Hart on jobs and the economy: She voted ‘yes’ for the Central American, U.S.-Australian and U.S.-Singapore free trade agreements.”

[RWC] Sounds good so far.

“The result: 8.5 million manufacturing jobs lost in six years, and an 87 percent anti-union voting rating by the AFL-CIO.”

[RWC] If we lost so many jobs, why are we at an employment level usually referred to as “full” employment?

Assuming the figure is correct, the “87 percent anti-union voting rating by the AFL-CIO” is a good thing.

“Hart on Social Security: She supports the Bush/Cheney/Santorum Social Security privatization scheme.”

[RWC] Ignoring the fact the proposal was not “privatization” of Socialist Security, this “scheme” – as Mr. Ferruchie calls it – was originally proposed by Democrats in the late 1990s.

What does Mr. Altmire say about Socialist Security, a system everyone – even including the Beaver County Times – acknowledges is a fiscal mess? According to his campaign website, Mr. Altmire refers to Socialist Security as “a program that has worked well for more than 70 years” and doesn’t even acknowledge its problems. That explains why his website has no proposal to deal with Socialist Security.

“The result: Hart has earned a zero rating on senior citizen issues by the Alliance for Retired Americans.”

[RWC] Does anyone care to guess why Mr. Ferruchie failed to note the ARA is a “nationwide organization of more than 3 million union retirees” founded by AFL-CIO affiliated unions in 2001? Again, I believe a “bad” rating from an organization founded and run by labor union management is a good thing for the rest of us.

If Rep. Hart is so bad on “senior citizen issues,” why do retired person PACs contribute so much to her election campaigns? You’ll read what I mean below.

“Hart on energy and oil: She voted ‘yes’ for the Bush/Cheney energy policy and to continue Halliburton’s no-bid contracts and ‘no’ on incentives for alternative energy research.”

[RWC] Mr. Ferruchie doesn’t tell us what’s wrong with “the Bush/Cheney energy policy.”

What do “Halliburton’s no-bid contracts” – the same kind awarded Halliburton by the Clinton administration – have to do with “energy and oil?” The no-bid contracts were for a myriad of support services for the military in Iraq.

I don’t know what Mr. Ferruchie means when he claims Rep. Hart “voted … ‘no’ on incentives for alternative energy research.” Was he referring to a specific bill?

In any case, why does the federal government need to fund “alternative energy research?” We already have plenty of alternative energy sources. The effort is to make them economically feasible.

What is Mr. Altmire’s energy policy? According to his website, Mr. Altmire will encourage “scientists to research and develop alternative energy resources” and support legislation imposing price controls on gasoline. Yep, that’s a plan.

“The result: $99,000 (to date) in campaign contributions from Halliburton and the oil and gas industries.”

[RWC] Mr. Ferruchie needs to check his facts before he rants.

The figures I cite below are based on the candidate FEC reports for the June 30^th report. The next reports are due by October 15^th for contributions through September 30^th.

First, “campaign contributions from Halliburton?” Campaign contributions by corporations are illegal. Anyway, according to the FEC, employees who contributed to the Halliburton Company PAC contributed a whopping $2,500, all in 2000. FYI, this is $2,500 out of Hart’s total contributions of about $5.6 million since and including the 2000 campaign.

Second, I don’t know where the $99,000 figure comes from. According to FEC data, total contributions from the oil & gas industry since 2000 have been $108,003. This is good for #13 on the list. For a little context, retired person PACs come in at #7 ($158,050) and building trade unions come in at #18 ($75,000). For the 2006 election, oil & gas comes in at #19 ($21,550), retired person PACs are #8 ($37,650), and building trade unions are #18 ($23,000) out of a total of $1,272,736.

“Hart has been consistent though. She’s managed to maintain a 98 percent pro-Bush voting record over six years. With this record, it’s no wonder she’s ducking a debate.”

[RWC] “98%?” That’s up two points from Mr. Ferruchie’s last claim of 96%.

Finally, continuing the trend I’ve mentioned in the Santorum-Casey contest, Mr. Ferruchie doesn’t tell us why we should vote for Mr. Altmire. I guess he read Mr. Altmire’s website. <g>