Blog Archives
Frederic Bastiat’s The Law- Theory of Governmental Regression
The 1998 Foundation for Economic Education republication of Fredrick Bastiat’s classic, The Law, creates a powerful diagram of government duties and how quickly those duties can degenerate. Bastiat believes the only duty of the government is to protect liberty though means of justice. He believes that government’s duty is to “defend [individuals] person, his liberty and his property”. (p. 2) Fatal tendencies of mankind, however, lead the government to plunder property (redistribute property) for legal (p. 17) or philanthropic reasons (p. 27). Increased plundering leads to a degeneration of government from protectionism to communist (p. 23) and creates a governmental god complex where legislators believe they can micromanage society. This god complex allows politicians to rationalize plundering as creating more utility thus allowing politician to believe they know what is better for an individual than the individual. The continued growing of the god complex ultimately leads to a government that micromanages all parts of society and takes away all free will.
The most astute revelation Bastiat realizes in his book is the life cycle of government and the continued degeneration of any ruling entity. While he uses an Aristotelian format, he particular focuses on the degeneration of representative democracies. He believes that most government start with the inception of protectionist policies which ensure the freedom of individuals, but as redistributive policies increase, individuals lose their freedom because the individual loses the rights to the products of their labor. One might ask Bastiat what part of the life cycle contemporary United States is in right now and he would point to the language of our politicians.
Bastiat would cite the increased use of the term “worker” instead of “employee” in popular lexicon and compare this with a parallel regression of contextual free will by individuals in the United States. If one looks at the 1973 edition of The Random House’s College dictionary, one finds the stark difference in context of the two terms. Bastiat would cite the dictionary definition of “Employee” as “a person working for another person or a business firm for pay” (p. 434). In this connotation, the employee retains sovereignty from the employer and works in a contractual sense to receive payment. The employee can then use that payment to buy things he or she finds as important. Bastiat would then cite the term “worker” as “a person or thing that works” (p. 1517) The connotation of this word places people and lifeless objects on equal footing thus making the worker subservient to a greater power. This loss of free will as indicated by contemporary lexicon is a lagging indicator on how the legislators and media view the individual.
One might question Bastiat regarding contextual sense of language. How can the use of a word lead to the loss of individual free will? Bastiat would argue that language does not precipitate the loss of free will, but reinforces the loss of free will. If one follows Bastiat’s regression of government, one believes there will be a continual loss of liberty and thus free will after any government’s inception. Language is merely the popular acceptance of this reality. One might then ask how Bastiat would suggest increasing liberty to the individual. Bastiat would argue that the mere recognition of individuals as employees instead of workers would go a long way toward restoring individual freedom and free will.
Cuccinelli Discusses his Support of the Repeal Amendment
Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews recently to discuss the repeal amendment. The repeal amendment basically gives states the ability to overturn any federal law they don’t like. Cuccinelli is strongly in support of this amendment, and there is no doubt that this amendment would be warranted with the current Administration.
Watch Ken’s appearance:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
As for my views on the repeal amendment, I feel like this is a good move towards allowing states to have more power and cut down on the “Nanny State” regulations.
Republican Liberty Caucus Rejects TSA's Assault on Passenger Privacy Rights
I received this release from the Republican Liberty Caucus on TSA violating the passenger’s right to privacy before boarding a flight.
AUSTIN, TX — The Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC) denounces the recent changes in the airport passenger screening practices of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
RLC Chairman Dave Nalle said the intrusive nature of new TSA procedures draws attention to the fundamental flaws in the government’s strategy of attempting to address the threat of terrorism through increasingly draconian domestic security measures.
“In the name of public safety, government agencies have been given more and more power at great cost to our civil liberties and in violation of the Bill of Rights,” Nalle said. “The emergence of an unaccountable state security apparatus in America is a reminder of Ben Franklin’s maxim that ‘they who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety’.”
“The new TSA procedures of giving randomly selected passengers a choice between a full body, backscatter x-ray scan and an intrusive, hands-on body search are unacceptable,” Nalle contends. “These searches are a clear violation of our 4th Amendment rights, because they are not reasonable and are carried out with no probable cause. The increase in security at airports with more technology and more violation of the privacy rights of passengers cannot be justified on the basis of any increase in the threat of terrorism, because there has been no such increase,” Nalle explained.
The Republican Liberty Caucus believes that Americans have seen enough abuses of the Constitution and calls on the federal government to curb abuses by the TSA and other agencies. We recommend putting control of passenger security in the hands of the airlines, which have a vested interest in making sure that flights are safe. We also support Representative Ron Paul’s “American Traveler Dignity Act” (H.R. 6416), which would make TSA employees accountable for their actions.
Nalle observed, “With the increasing level of government intrusion into our lives in the name of security, America reminds me too much of what I saw in the Soviet Union, where I lived as a teenager. How long will it be before police will be stopping us in the street at random to ask for our identity papers?”
The Republican Liberty Caucus, founded in 1991, exists to promote individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise within the Republican Party.
###
One thing particularly interesting is how Congress is addressing this issue. Many of our elected officials are just as outraged. Recently, Rep. Ron Paul introduced H.R. 6416: American Traveler Dignity Act. This bill will ensure that certain Federal employees would be subject to the same screenings as everyone else.
During a recent floor speech introducing the bill, Paul said:
In one recent well-publicized case, a TSA official is recorded during an attempted body search saying, “By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights.” I strongly disagree and am sure I am not alone in believing that we Americans should never give up our rights in order to travel. As our Declaration of Independence states, our rights are inalienable. This TSA version of our rights looks more like the “rights” granted in the old Soviet Constitutions, where freedoms were granted to Soviet citizens — right up to the moment the state decided to remove those freedoms.
The incident of the so-called “underwear bomber” last Christmas is given as justification for the billions of dollars the federal government is spending on the new full-body imaging machines, but a Government Accountability Office study earlier this year concluded that had these scanners been in use they may not have detected the explosive material that was allegedly brought onto the airplane. Additionally, there have been recent press reports calling into question the accuracy and adequacy of these potentially dangerous machines.
Source: Daily Paul
Hasn’t this gone on for far too long? Hopefully, Congress will end this treatment, but it looks highly unlikely at this point with the Democrats applauding the assaults.
YouTube/Google Deletes The Obama Deception
Google-owned YouTube.com has deleted the most viewed (over 6.5 million) posting of The Obama Deception at ChangeDaChannel. Here’s the video from another site so you can see it before it is taken down:
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=7886780711843120756&hl=en&fs=true
UPDATE [07/19/2010]: The Obama Deception is back, with 6.5 million+ views, on ChangeDaChannel’s Youtube Channel.
How Scary is this?
If you look at the comments from National Juggernaut‘s post, this cartoon points to many of the things happening today under President Obama’s administration. This is a pretty scary cartoon.
Governor McDonnell Signs Virginia Health Care Freedom Act Legislation
Governor Bob McDonnell signed Virginia’s health care freedom act today, joined by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and members of the General Assembly. This legislation will allow Virginians to choose whether or not to have health care coverage and will challenge President Obama’s health care laws. Below are McDonnell’s statements about the legislation:
Speaking about the Virginia Healthcare Freedom Act, Governor McDonnell noted, “We all agree that we must expand access to quality health care and reduce costs for all Virginians. However, that should not be accomplished through an unprecedented federal mandate on individuals that we believe violates the U.S. Constitution. The Virginia Healthcare Freedom Act sets as the policy of the Commonwealth that no individual, with several specific exceptions, can be required to purchase health insurance coverage. The Act was passed with bipartisan support, in sharp contrast to the narrow straight line partisan vote that enacted the federal health care bill on Sunday night. Virginia’s Healthcare Freedom Act received the votes of leading Democratic Senators, as well as the Democratic House Minority Leader. It was an important step to sign this bipartisan legislation today.”
The Governor continued, “The states have long been leaders in identifying and implementing innovative policies to expand access to, and improve the affordability of, healthcare coverage. Virginia will continue to play that important role. We will do this through promoting incentives for the purchase of long term care and individual medical savings accounts, focusing on preventative health and combating obesity, studying our medical delivery systems with the objective of reforming them to work better for our citizens, expanding free clinics and aggressively finding new ways to reduce the cost of our Medicaid system, which has already grown 1600% in the past 25 years. There are fiscally responsible ways by which we can reform healthcare and expand quality coverage that do not involve the forcing of unfunded and unprecedented mandates onto individuals and states, and the unsustainable growing of our national debt.”
Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who was present at the event said:
“Virginians spoke loudly and clearly in rallies, in town halls, and at the ballot box about their opposition to the new federal health care law. The governor and both Democrats and Republicans in the General Assembly heard them, and as a result, the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act is being signed today.”
The Attorney General added, “The traditional role of the attorney general is to defend Virginia’s laws. It is now my job to vigorously defend this law from the federal government’s overreach of the Constitution and its attempted encroachment on the rights of Virginians. That is my mandate, and that is my promise to our citizens.”
McDonnell signed four health care freedom bills into law: HB 10, SB 417, SB 283, and SB 311.
Health Care Aftermath
Last night, the U.S. House of Representatives passed health care reform legislation (219-212) that will dramatically impact Americans, especially those receiving public assistance in Virginia. Aside from Congress’s actions to rob the American people of their liberty to choose whether or not to be enrolled in a health insurance plan, there is no doubt that negative ramifications and aftershocks will occur in the days ahead, particularly if President Obama signs the bill into law.
Let’s take some insight into what the health care reform proposals will entail. Brian over at Too Conservative has a great post detailing what the new health care legislation will do over time, while The Wall Street Journal offers a glimpse into each of the proposals that were at one point on the table.
Meanwhile, others have weighed on the health care legislation. Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) released the following statement:
“For nearly a year now the American people have rejected the Democrats’ health care proposals. They have sent letters and e-mails, made phone calls, attended town hall meetings and come to Washington to rally at the Capitol. Their message has been simple and consistent: We don’t want a government takeover of our health care system.
With complete and total disregard for the will of the American people, House Democrats pushed through their health care legislation, which is defined by federal regulations, mandates, a myriad of new big government programs, and a significant increase in federal spending and debt at a cost to our country too high to bear. This legislation, which I voted against, gives Washington bureaucrats ultimate control over what is best for you and your family – deciding when and what treatment you can receive.
I know Americans are frustrated by rising health care costs, and that is why we in Congress must work in a bipartisan way to cut health insurance costs and make health care better, more available, and more affordable for all Americans. Unfortunately, the only thing bipartisan about the health care bill that passed the House tonight is the strong bipartisan opposition to the bill. It raises taxes, raises health care costs, adds to our national debt, and hurts America’s seniors, families and small businesses.
Specifically, the Democrats’ health care bill includes $569 billion in new taxes and over a trillion dollars in new government spending. This includes $52 billion in new taxes on employers, including small businesses, that cannot afford to provide health coverage or that don’t offer coverage. The effect of this type of tax, similar to a payroll tax increase, would ultimately fall squarely on workers in the form of lower wages or reduced employment. Additionally, the legislation includes $17 billion in new taxes on Americans who do not comply with the individual insurance mandate which is sure to further stifle economic growth.
Additionally, the Democrats’ health care bill includes $523 billion in Medicare cuts, including $200 billion in cuts to the popular Medicare Advantage program which will hurt millions of seniors.
It’s your job to make health care decisions for your family. The government’s job is to ensure you have access to affordable alternatives and then get out of the way. That is why I strongly support the Republican alternative that would empower patients with choices, make high quality coverage more affordable, and protect and preserve the doctor-patient relationship. Unlike the Democrats’ plan, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that the plan offered by House Republicans will lower premiums by up to 10 percent and reduce the deficit by $68 billion over 10 years, all without imposing tax increases on families and small businesses and while improving the quality of your health care. It allows for the purchase of health insurance across state lines, allows individuals and small businesses to join large pools to get more competitive rates, provides tort reform to cut down the high cost of defensive medicine, allows full tax deductibility of health insurance premiums, portability of health insurance and protection against pre-existing condition exclusions. This legislation, that I support, focuses on strategies that help Americans obtain the best quality health care at the least cost, and ensures that the government fosters increased access to quality care based on individual choice, not by taking away choices from people on the grounds that government knows best.”
RPV Chairman Pat Mullins released the following statement in response to the House Health Care vote:
“Let me be perfectly clear. The action taken in Congress tonight will forever alter the size and scope of our Federal government. The legislation that the Obama/Pelosi Democrats forced on the American people tonight will bury our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren in mountains of debt,” Mullins said. “Bureaucrats in Washington D.C. will now know better than you and your doctor what medical treatments you need. And our federal government will become more entwined with our daily lives than our founding fathers could have ever imagined.”
“Ultimately, Congressmen Gerry Connolly and Tom Perriello cast the deciding votes on this legislation. They had the opportunity not once, but twice, to stand up and listen to their constituents, but each time they choose to stand with their party bosses,” he said. “They had the power to stop this monstrosity, but they chose not to act.”
“While Congressmen Connolly and Perriello may have cast tonight’s decisive votes to allow for the federal takeover of our healthcare system, it was Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb who cast the deciding votes in the Senate in the dead of night on Christmas Eve that made today’s legislative fiasco possible. Had either Senators Warner or Webb listened to the people of Virginia, we wouldn’t be here tonight. They too will ultimately be held responsible for the actions that took place in Congress today.”
“In one fell swoop, Congressmen Connolly and Perriello, along with Senators Warner and Webb have:
• Put Virginia taxpayers on the hook for sweetheart deals in Nebraska, Louisiana, Florida, Hawaii and others.
• Raised taxes by nearly $1 trillion on individuals and businesses, including the first ever tax on simply being alive.
• Turned the IRS into the national health insurance police.
• Levied a huge unfunded mandate onto Virginia and other states that will either require tax increases or cuts to core services like education and public safety.
• Made it highly likely that dozens of states will pull out of the federal Medicaid program.
• Set the stage for either crippling levels of deficit spending, or the collapse of Medicare as we know it.“Thousands of Virginians called their member of Congress, Senator Warner, and Senator Webb, emailed them, faxed them, attended town hall meetings, met privately with them, traveled to Washington D.C. and voiced their opposition to this legislation,” he said. “Despite all of their efforts, they could not force Congressmen Connolly and Perriello and Senators Warner and Webb to vote for the will of the people.”
“Unfortunately, Congressmen Connolly and Perriello, Senators Warner and Webb have made their choice and the people of Virginia will have to deal with the consequences,” he said. “While the people of Virginia may not have been heard tonight, I can guarantee you that they will be heard this November when Congressmen Connolly and Perriello become one-term Members of Congress.”
Lastly, Governor Bob McDonnell released a statement on the House Health Care vote:
“Expanding access to reasonably priced quality healthcare is a bipartisan goal. We all agree that we must make it easier for Americans to purchase and retain health insurance.
However, this massive and complex piece of legislation allows the federal government to exercise control over one-sixth of the United States economy. The continued intrusion of this Congress into the free enterprise system, and the placing of new mandates on states, is shocking to the American system of federalism. Most disconcerting is the provision mandating that every American must purchase health insurance or face a monetary penalty. This is an unprecedented expansion of federal power. It is hard to imagine our Founder’s agreeing that the United States Constitution permits Congress to mandate the purchase of a good or service under penalty of law. Just a few days ago I approved a bill, passed on a bipartisan basis, which prohibits mandatory insurance purchases for Virginians. Virginia’s Attorney General has rightly chosen to challenge the constitutionality of the federal mandate. I anticipate that he will be joined by a number of other states. The issues raised by Attorney General Cuccinelli require a full and prompt review by the judicial branch.
While individuals face a mandate in this legislation, so too do the states. The proposed expansion of Medicaid is an historic unfunded federal mandate on the states. This expansion will put at least 400,000 more individuals on Virginia’s Medicaid rolls. The Virginia Department of Medical Assistance Services has estimated that it will cost the Commonwealth an additional $1.1 billion by 2022. Virginia, and the other 49 states, will bear the financial burden of one of the biggest unfunded mandates in the history of our nation. This will have a significant and unavoidable impact on the bottom line of our state budget, and the general fiscal welfare of Virginia. We simply cannot afford this expansion.
The bill will cut over $500 billion from Medicare, and may reduce the quality of the care our seniors depend upon. The Medicare system is already underfunded and overburdened. This legislation only exacerbates the problems facing the system.
This legislation will raise taxes on individuals and businesses. Our small business owners, who generate nearly 98% of the new jobs in Virginia, will see their taxes go up. This will occur at the same time that federal tax cuts from the early part of last decade expire. We will face significantly higher federal taxes at a time when we need to be keeping taxes low and freeing capital for job creation and economic development. It can also be anticipated that Virginians’ insurance premiums will increase in the years ahead after passage of this legislation.
I am further disappointed that a bill so massive in size is so limited in its approach. Congressional Republicans were right to call for allowing the purchase of health insurance across state lines, and this provision should have been included in the bill.
States have long been leaders in the effort to identify and implement innovative healthcare solutions. Regardless of the future of this legislation, we must continue to play that important role in our federal system. In Virginia we will promote incentives for the purchase of long term care, and promote individual medical savings accounts. We will focus on preventative health and combating obesity. We will study our medical delivery systems with the objective of reforming them to work better for our citizens. Free clinics are an important piece of the coverage equation, and I will look for ways by which the Commonwealth can help with the expansion of these important facilities. We will be aggressive in finding every way by which we can reduce the cost of our Medicaid system, which has already grown 1600% in the past 25 years. It is unsustainable.
Every American should have the opportunity to purchase good quality healthcare coverage. But we will not improve our healthcare system by implementing a massive one-size fits all federal policy that dramatically increases the deficit, puts unprecedented mandates on states and individuals, and jeopardizes the good coverage most citizens already have. I am disappointed in the passage of this bill, and I thank the bipartisan majority of Virginia’s congressional delegation for voting against it.”
The aftermath is far from over. If this is signed into law, there will be several challenges in the judicial system in regards to the unconstitutional nature of the legislation. Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is one who is prepared to file the case that very day. Right now, it is a wait and see period to see if the U.S. Senate will follow suit in passing this detrimental legislation that violates the liberty to choose health care (a privilege…not a guarantee) coverage.
Ron Paul Speech at CPAC 2010
UPDATE: Ron Paul wins 2010 CPAC straw poll and talks about it on FOXNews:
Obama: Maybe, you can't keep your health insurance
Isn’t this comforting? Over the weekend, the House Republican Conference held their retreat in Baltimore and invited President Obama to speak during their event. During the President’s remarks, Obama made a nice little reference about the health care reform bill by saying that under the plan you might not be able to keep your health insurance. For those satisfied with their health care plan, this is stealing your liberties once again.
Interview with Ken Cuccinelli
Recently, I had the chance to talk with Ken Cuccinelli about the race and the issues facing the Attorney General’s office. Cuccinelli is a small business owner and partner in the law firm, Cuccinelli & Day, PLLC in Fairfax. Additionally, Cuccinelli is a State Senator representing the 37th District, a seat that he has held since 2002. As State Senator, Cuccinelli serves on the following committees: Courts of Justice, Transportation Committee, Local Government Committee, and the Rehabilitation and Social Services Committee.
During the interview, Cuccinelli highlighted some of the differences between both him and his opponent, Democrat Steve Shannon. Below is the interview.
CCC: When you have been door-to-door and talking with voters on the phone, what do you believe is the number one issue that they have been focused on? How do you think the campaign is going thus far?
Ken Cuccinelli: Well, the campaign has been going really well. So far, I expect to be outspent, and I hope that a solid foundation can help carry me forward.
As for the top issues, I have been hearing a lot of people voicing concerns about crime and the economy. Criminal justice is one of the most popular issues, and in previous attorney general races, nothing matched criminal justice. My opponent [Steve Shannon] does not want to talk about the economic issues. He [Shannon] has been funded by the unions and has supported tax increases, while serving as Delegate.
CCC: Have you heard much from voters about illegal immigration?
KC: I hear about the illegal immigration issue a lot. My opponent has been afraid to talk about the subject, especially since he has voted on a bill that would allow illegal immigrants to attend public universities. In fact, I have had more bills in the Senate that addressed illegal immigration than any other Senator since I’ve been there – these have addressed stopping human trafficking, and clearing the voter rolls of illegal immigrants.
CCC: During the summer, you called for a special session, in regards to a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court with Melendez vs. Diaz, could you explain a little about the case and the implications that it would have on Virginians? Why do you believe your opponent decided not to call on Governor Kaine to have a special session?
KC: First, I’ll give a little background on Melendez vs. Diaz. Melendez vs. Diaz was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court and basically, it defends a person’s right to call witnesses. While this is great, it also creates a problem with Virginia law. After talking with several prosecutors, many drunk drivers and drug dealers were being released. In fact, Fairfax County lost five cases due to Melendez vs. Diaz.
So, after reading the case and talking with prosecutors, I decided to petition Governor Kaine for a special session of the General Assembly to address this issue and fix Virginia law. I also sent a letter to my opponent urging him to call the special session. My opponent called this a “political stunt,” and asked me why I did not support his bill to stop the Melendez bill. This bill (HB 3086) would have no impact on the Melendez problem in DUI cases. I sent my opponent’s bill off to six prosecutors and asked if this bill would solve the issues posed by Melendez in Virginia. Five of the six prosecutors said it would make things worse, and the other one said it would be a disaster.
Governor Kaine called a special session on August 19th to address this problem and we fixed it. We haven’t lost a case since passing legislation to solve the problem. We rewrote a bill, while my opponent just wrote a bill and put his name on it. This is the stuff that the Attorney General deals with, and he totally got it wrong. We focused on this in an ad.
Meanwhile, my opponent got the law wrong and played politics with it. His immediate reaction was to call this a political stunt. He got burned by this.
CCC: As State Senator, I know you were quite active with property rights legislation. Could you perhaps discuss what you will do as Attorney General to protect the property rights of Virginians and what you might do if there is a challenge to the Supreme Court decision of Kelo v. New London? Also, do you think that your opponent, Steve Shannon, has any solid issue stance on this important issue?
KC: If there is a challenge to Kelo, I will make sure to continue fighting for property rights. As Attorney General, I will fight to get property rights protected in the Virginia Constitution. My opponent has been against this all along. Another thing is that Creigh Deeds was the tie breaking vote to kill property rights in the Constitution. The vote was 8-7.
Property rights is a great dividing line between those who care more about special interests and those who care about property rights. My opponent cares more about special interests, and I still have more work to do to protect property rights.
CCC: With the Defense of Marriage Act being challenged at the Federal level, how will this impact Virginia and the marriage amendment that was passed by the voters in 2006?
KC: The office of Attorney General is the only office that matters in this debate. My opponent is against the marriage amendment. I am certain that this will come up within the next four years, and it will be fought by the AGs. I have been a strong advocate for protecting the marriage amendment.
CCC: Your opponent, in your debate on WTOP, shows that he is in favor of the harmful and economically devastating climate change legislation. What is your position on this legislation and what will you do as Attorney General to prevent the after effects of this legislation?
KC: This was important enough to be my opponent’s first question during this debate. I oppose climate change legislation. It will be economically destructive to Southside and southwestern Virginia. Currently, unemployment rates are at 20% in Southside. If this legislation is passed, the Attorney General could be involved with regulatory aspects. I would be deeply involved in the fight for Virginia to regulate itself, and I would do the same thing with other Congressional legislation, such as Card Check. As Attorney General, I would be very aggressive in using the 10th Amendment.
In fact, with card check, this would be a 10th Amendment issue, as Virginia is a right-to-work state.
CCC: Your opponent also attended a seminar in Baltimore recently that gave lessons on how to attack private employers on environmental grounds. Could you talk about your business record and what you will do as Attorney General to protect business?
KC: I am a small business owner, who was endorsed by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)-Virginia Chapter and the Virginia Farm Bureau. Agribusiness comprises about 10% of Virginia’s workforce.
I would bring a free market approach to the economic side of the Attorney General’s office. I would reduce regulations, instead of increasing them. Additionally, I would put in place a methodical way to deal with regulations to ensure a cost-benefit analysis. If there is something that takes away from benefits, then I would take a closer look at the costs involved.
CCC: What challenges do you anticipate will be waiting for the next Attorney General? Why do you think that you will be the best candidate to face these challenges?
KC: I feel that the biggest challenge will be the right to work legislation from Congress. I am the only one who will do anything about it. Democrats might say that they are against card check and for right to work, but they will not do anything about it. I will fight with anybody, if I think they are wrong. I think my strongest trait is that I have the independent willingness to stand on my own.
In terms of criminal justice, I have been endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, and it is the only grassroots endorsement in this race. The 71 lodges and their members all voted, and I won that vote. On the day that this announcement took place, my opponent announced his endorsement by the Virginia Police Benevolent Association and six Commonwealth Attorneys. I have received the endorsement of 79 Commonwealth’s Attorneys and Sheriffs combined.
For more about Cuccinelli, click here.
