My opponent recently released a letter to the FDA, declaring that their new rules on brewers and ranchers will hurt Oregonian businesses.
He’s absolutely right – but my question is, why has he been funding the FDA with printed money from Washington, and then writing flimsy letters against it?
Wouldn’t the logical solution be to cut off the funding for unConstitutional entities like the FDA and EPA? Why is our Congressman of 16 years so scared to take these Federal behemoths on?
My stance is much different than Congressman Walden’s. I think that the states should be in charge of their own departments, not throttled by Federal bureaucracy. Ranching and brewing are both critical industries to Oregon and we know how to support them, govern them and help them succeed in our neighborhoods and communities.
I’m running for Congress because I think that we have spent too long contenting ourselves with thrashing at the branches of bureaucracy. Establishment Republicans hide behind wimpy letters and empty statements, all the while voting for deficit spending and bigger government, rather than true, Constitutional change.
We all know, in our heart of hearts, that the current state of Federal bureaucracy is wrong. We are taxed on every activity, regulated at every turn and business is discouraged at almost every level (unless, of course, you know someone high-up in politics!). Let’s stop being satisfied with futile rhetoric and empty votes – it’s time to stand up for our freedoms in real, meaningful ways and begin to take our liberties back by dismantling the Federal machine.
A lot of people are asking about my stance on the Bundy Ranch issue in Clark County, Nevada, where the BLM and citizens recently had a stand-off over cattle grazing rights. Many people are pointing out that Cliven Bundy has not paid his fees to the Federal government, and that may be true, although there are several arguments to both sides of the issue. (I’ll put some sources at the bottom of this post).
However, what is not contentious is the atrocious treatment of private citizens by the BLM, the bullying of rural Americans by radical environmentalists and the overwhelming injustice that is Federal monopoly of our public lands.
It seems clear that we’ve reached a point in our history when private citizens and small-business owners are increasingly forced to make public scenes just to survive. Because of the labyrinth of laws, the convoluted nature of crony capitalism and the politically-motivated restrictions on our ways of life, the West in particular is gasping for air and some folks feel, as Mr. Bundy does, that resistance is the only option.
Here in my hometown of Klamath County, we are seeing a very similar chokehold on water rights, livelihoods and ranches that have been passed down for generations. Seeing politically-correct allies control the water and starve out family farms and ranches is heart-breaking and unjust. As Americans and as country folk, we believe we live in the land of opportunity, and we believe in the power of honest hard work. However, those ideals are slipping away. Will we bequeath an indebted, overgrown and overbearing police state to our children, or a land of freedom, opportunity and open sky?
I support the Bundy Ranch, not because they haven’t made mistakes or because their approach has been perfect, but because I think they are a touchstone for a serious debate in American life. I believe the bullying of small-business and rural America by the Federal behemoth has gone on too long. I think we need to demand that our public lands are actually returned to local control, not padlocked by some faraway bureaucracy for a politically-motivated reason. Oregon, let’s learn from the Bundys and start standing up for our own forests and land-rights, or the BLM will come knocking on our door, as well. As we’ve seen, they don’t ask nicely.
I received a note from a supporter that I would like to share.
This was written by someone who has worked tirelessly for public access to the mountains and forests that our tax dollars pay to keep open. The anger and frustration voiced by this man and others is what keeps me motivated to make change for Oregonians. This individual will not be satisfied with empty rhetoric or false promises. For too long we have shrugged aside do-nothing representation and allowed too many excuses about Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
It’s time to start dismantling the Federal tyranny over our open places and lifestyles.
Here’s his letter complete with the graphic which he enclosed:
“Greg Walden’s record on keeping your mountains open – 12 National Forests in his district. 10 are closed to cross country travel, thousands of miles of roads closed, thousands of Oregonians locked out. All during Greg’s tenure as our ‘representative’.??
Is he actually doing something to address a problem that’s keeping him employed? Think about it, if he never fixes it, then he keeps getting to run these ads saying – send me back to DC and I’ll get it right this time.??
I for one don’t believe him,and I’d been told in the past the man was a liar and I didn’t want to believe it, but unfortunately, over the last two years I have learned differently.”
I want to bring to your attention a bill put forth in Utah to transfer Federal control of public lands. While many people fear that the state is no better than the Federal government, I think it’s essential that we start by bringing these lands into the most local arena possible for better management and control. This means states, counties and private owners need to have a say in our lands, and we need to start that process.
In Utah’s bill, in lines 99 through 120 or so, it references the “leadership of United States Senator Thomas Hart Benton from Missouri” which is paramount to this discussion. Benton County Oregon was named after this Senator because of his work in helping to settle Oregon.
Back then, he was spot on in his logic and arguments and this is the exact same fight today.
Please take the time to read this bill and the sample one at ALEC, here. We are not alone in our fight for the right to enjoy, use and prosper from our public lands – we must band together and prove that we will not back down on this issue. With your help, I’m convinced that Oregon can shake off the chains of the Federal bureaucracy.
Only then will our kids and grandkids have access to the mountains and forests that we call home.
“O beautiful for spacious skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain!
America! America!
God shed His grace on thee…”
We all know the words, and we all love the sentiment in this old folk song. Our kids and grandkids probably sing this song in school plays, much as we did at their age. But even as we sing these cherished words, the beauty they represent is slipping away.
Ludwig von Mises, in his preface to Bureaucracy, writes: ”The main issue in present-day social and political conflicts is whether or not man should give away freedom, private initiative, and individual responsibility and surrender to the guardianship of a gigantic apparatus of compulsion and coercion, the socialist state. Should authoritarian totalitarianism be substituted for individualism and democracy?”
This is a searching question, and one we’ve all answered in our own hearts and on our own land with a resounding “no!”. The trouble is, do the proponents of the socialist state listen, and if they don’t, what is our recourse as liberty-loving people of the wide-open ranges?
Every lover of the west should be worried about the unelected bureaucracies driving the Endangered Species Act, the EPA, foolish natural resource policy, restriction of federal land use and endless regulation on hard-working land-owners and businessmen. But even more so, we should be concerned about the seemingly endless stream of borrowed and printed money that funds these unconstitutional hierarchies.
Any businessman or woman knows that money is a driver of action. Therefore, if we cut off the money, we can rein in rampant growth of bureaucracies like the EPA. With an endless stream of printed money and a false sense of security, faraway departments and special interests get to force their will on rural communities and individuals. They can buy media time, sway public opinion and use their money to falsely manipulate the marketplace.
If we elect principled individuals to Congress, who will serve their Constitutionally-mandated duty of controlling the purse and voting against frivolous spending, we can start to beat back these bureaucracies and restore our freedom as agriculturalists.
Congress needs to be held accountable. It’s not enough to blame the President, blame the media or blame our culture – these are all legitimate scapegoats, but they also serve the convenient purpose of absolving us from responsibility when something goes wrong. Congress must be re-elected every two years, and any Congressperson who has not stood firm on his or her principles and the causes we support needs to be challenged in the primaries, and must be rebuked on these votes.
Our government is a democratic republic, intended to represent the people and protect our God-given rights. We have excused well-meaning but ineffectual politicians for long enough, and it’s time to make 2014 the year of fiscal responsibility and free principles. The future of our farms, ranches and children’s agricultural future depends on our ability to require our representatives to truly represent us.
The time to start is now — the future of America the beautiful, with our spacious skies and amber waves of grain — rely on our resolve.
As most Oregonians know, Klamath County (indeed, most of the 2nd District) is in a season of severe drought. Add to this politically motivated backroom deals, and a radical environmentalist agenda with lots of out-of-state clout and capital, and this is a scary situation for rural Oregon.
The problem is simple – we have limited fresh water. Animals and people alike need fresh water for survival, and droughts are part of Earth’s natural cycle. Therefore, we should prepare for such eventualities with dams, reservoirs and other water storage facilities, and we should share the water between all interested parties, not use the strong arm of government to pick politically-correct winners and losers.
Last year, before I was in this Congressional race, I gave a presentation on this topic to the Jackson County Americans for Prosperity group:
And, just last month, Congressman Tom McClintock gave similar thoughts to California Americans For Prosperity:
I hope for the chance to be colleagues in the House with Rep. McClintock and other common-sense conservatives like him. We have to stick up for our food producers, outdoorsmen and others who share and make a living from natural resources. What’s happening in Klamath County and Central California should serve as a warning – we must change our representation and alter our course before it’s too late.
For more information on the specific issues in Klamath County, please read Erika Bentsen’s excellent piece in Western Ag magazine here.
Last week, The Baker City Herald editorial staff wrote, “Rep. Greg Walden has gotten right to the heart of the debate over managing national forest and he only needed to write a four-page bill to do it.”
However, it’s time for a reality check, because although I applaud his effort, it seems clear that Walden only threw this piece of legislative silliness onto the House floor because I am on his heels, chasing his lackluster votes. I have heard for years from hunters, farmers, ranchers, loggers and outdoorsmen worried about their forest access and concerned with the deafness of Washington bureaucrats. They tell me of their frustration in writing endless letters to Walden’s office and their local papers, along with their attempts at “public comment” debacles.
Do you really believe that Representative Walden was suddenly moved by his love for our freedoms as Oregonians, or does this seem politically-motivated to you? Why have our forests been padlocked for years and why has his office been bragging about his ineffectual votes, until now?
The Travel Management Plan comes from an agenda started 10 years ago. That’s when Republicans owned the executive and legislative branches of the federal machine. Yet, this debacle has been growing like a boil beneath the surface and is now, ready to explode. Is this what it takes to get Washington’s attention?
It’s easy to see that this bill is an attempt to score political points without creating real change. Mr. Walden’s bill re-enforces the root problem – a profound disconnect between the boots on the ground and the shiny shoes in the hallowed halls of D.C. He makes the mistake of assuming that keeping power in the federal bureaucracy while giving purely political head-patting bonuses to county commissioners will fix the problem.
As a county commissioner, I can tell you right now that we need much more than this weak attempt – we need ownership, real-world budgets and the ability to open our forests to all kinds of uses without federal overreach.
It’s time for Oregon legislators and our US Congress to explore new options. I believe that we should be transferring all federally managed lands into the various jurisdictions where those lands are contained. We should be giving the resources back to the people with real action, not symbolic four-page bills.
In order to bring back economic vitality, we must sync Oregon’s immense forests with real-world, economic conditions at the local level. A bold strategy, like this, is the only solution big enough to insure the longterm productivity of our vast renewable resources. Washington’s bureaucratic management of natural resources within our state’s boundary is not serving our 2nd Congressional District interests. It’s time for a real change.
The hunters, packers, foresters, campers and OHV users who enjoy these forested areas of Eastern, Central and Southern Oregon, know the history of these lands and know better than others what proper care entails.
Let Oregonians bear the full responsibility for preserving these lands for future generations and allow each of us the privilege of “securing the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity.”
There are a lot of theories being thrown around regarding the missing Malaysian 777. I’ve even had some supporters call with great, well-researched ideas about what might have happened to the plane and how our national security might be compromised because of it. These are essential concepts for our leaders and ourselves to ponder with clear eyes. In a situation like this, we can’t “hope” our way out of the scary reality we live in – that there is evil in the world and terrorism is always a possibility.
(Photo courtesy of Luccio ERRERA/Wikimedia commons)
I definitely feel for the families involved in this case, and I know it must be hard to hear conjecture and theories on every news channel – but I think that this kind of incident is healthy for us to think about. The truth is, when there’s a missing jumbo jet and the very real possibility of seriously high-tech terrorism, it forces us to think about our priorities. In this kind of situation, it matters who we vote for and what we spend our money on. Suddenly, shrinking the military seems foolish and wasting money on endless grants, bail-outs and healthy eating programs seems even sillier. These are endeavors that prosperous nations in peacetime can afford to pay for in moderation, but we’ve become a bloated bureaucratic pool of vanity projects and special-interest payouts. We’ve gotten so comfortable, with 99-week unemployment and worrying about the health of the planet, that we forget there are people in the world who dislike us very much, and are spending their time thinking about how to make us afraid instead of ways to market a lousy healthcare law to hipsters.
This missing flight should remind all of us to vote intentionally, be prudent and be on alert. Because a broke nation is a weak nation, and if we can’t get our financials in order with some strong conservative votes in the House, we won’t be ready for the next terror attack or unforeseen crisis. Evil never sleeps, and so we, as the shining city on a hill, a force for good in the world, should also be vigilant and prudent with our national treasury and defense.
Last week, I was challenged about my reasoning for supporting Israel. The question was, if I’m really dedicated to the Constitution, what is my argument for national support of Israel? Here is my response:
Today’s entire Middle East conflict needs to be addressed to help frame this discussion. The Arab-Israeli conflict is, in truth an Arab conflict with Western, particularly American, culture. Part of the dilemma that our nation faces is one of leadership and influence. Is it appropriate that American ideals get exercised throughout the world, or on a smaller scale, in the Mid-East region?
I think the answer is “Yes”, although my preference is that this influence should come through open commerce and voluntary contractual relationships instead of through foreign aid, or worse, foreign wars.
I will continue to support Israel because Israel is a true friend to the American experiment. America was nation was built upon Constitutionally-insured freedoms. These freedoms have been codified in the Constitution, but there will no doubt be gray areas in how our nation supports other “like-minded” nations. In fact, the term “nation” shows up only two times in our Constitution. Once with regard to regulating commerce and the second time with regard to, “Offenses against the Law of Nations.” This last reference surely calls for recognizing a “Higher Law” concept and would be similar to the Nuremberg “Crimes against Humanity” ideas during World War II. These higher laws hold power above and beyond the government’s assumed power. Thomas Jefferson commented that any rule which violated the higher law was actually null and void.
In terms of a strict Constitutional justification for what we see today, it doesn’t show up in any one sentence. However, we must note that the Constitution doesn’t describe every jot and tittle.
For example, Article 1, Section 8, reads, “To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;” Notice, there are no details about what a “Navy” is supposed to do. That comes under the “make rules” clause. Does this mean policy? Or administrative and organizational management rules? As you can see, its wide open to interpretation. This doesn’t mean that we trample all over the original intent in an attempt to make our wishes seem “Constitutional”, but it does mean that we have to exercise some logic and common sense.
I’ll turn to Professor Paul Eidelberg for more thoughts on America and Israel. Professor Eidelberg conducts seminars on constitutions, diverse parliamentary electoral systems, Jewish law, and related topics for the Jerusalem center of the Foundation for Constitutional Democracy. In 2009, he wrote concerning the larger issues. These were and are legitimate concerns for Iran’s aggressive stance against Israel:
“Let us take a closer look at what a nuclear-armed Iran portends not only for Israel, but for Europe and the United States—indeed, for Western civilization. Here, let us consult Robert Baer, a most farseeing and experienced former CIA operative in the Middle East. Last year, in his book The Devil We Know, Baer convincingly argues that Iran, contrary to what most believe, Iran is not a regime of crazies. Its Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, head of the Revolutionary Guard, is pursuing a political strategy whose goal is to restore the Persian Empire. Iran’s nuclear weapons program must be viewed in these grandiose terms. As for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he is Khamenei’s subordinate.
“Ahmadinejad’s imprecations “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” should not be dismissed as the ranting of a maniac. It is a double entendre. It prompts the naïve to trivialize, hence obscure, Iran’s Machiavellian modus operandi. For the cognoscenti, “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” signify the demise of Christianity and Judaism and the global ascendancy of Islam.”
If we ignore these warnings, it is at our own peril. If the age of the American collapse has begun, will other free nations be able to survive? I think not. I believe that helping to keep those nations’ sovereignty intact is a discussion that warrants prudence, careful policy and a willingness to see our world as the dangerous place it is.
If you’re interested, I also recorded a podcast on this topic (which you can listen to here).
When so-called public servants suggest the increase of Federal land management, it’s usually sold to us as a great resource for our communities. We’re told that we’ll get wide open spaces to hunt, fish, hike, access with OHVs and use for countless other pursuits.
Unfortunately, all too often, once the government gets control of our land, it becomes closed to one or more of these activities. They close forest roads under the guise of “environmental protection”, ignoring the fact that keeping these roads clear aids firefighters in the summer fire season. The bureaucrats insist that they know better than we do how to enjoy our wild places, and so they padlock the woods and force us out of land that should rightfully belong to the local community.
More and more forests in Oregon are being closed to OHV traffic, and our current Congressman seems content with making empty statements and meaningless votes. For those of us who love our open places, this is a serious issue, one that is worth fighting for. We will not be content with empty rhetoric – if we aren’t willing to stand up, our kids will never know the freedom of Oregon’s mountains and forests.
As John George of Forest Access for All recently stated in a petition letter: “Further restrictions to open access of our public lands is not acceptable to the general population of Eastern Oregon and is not an acceptable form of land management for our public lands. OHV access has been a primary means of accessing our public lands for the last 100 plus years and is tied directly to the traditions and cultures of our communities…
…Further restrictions in OHV access through a closed forest ‘no cross country travel’ policy severally limits handicapped and elderly citizens’ ability to access currently accessible lands and disallows them from attaining goods and services they have historically utilized for generations. Open OHV access is key to our mining, livestock, timber and sustenance use of these mountains, any further restriction of this access mode puts our already tenuous existence on a continued downward trend. Simple loop trails are acceptable for some user groups and we support the recognition and development of those opportunities for groups, but those systems do not fully meet out the needs of all OHV users on public lands, and should not be looked at as a mitigation opportunity or strategy to address other OHV user concerns.”
The arrogance and shocking lack of concern toward the lifestyles of rural Oregonians is unjust and immoral. Our local economies suffer from these restrictions and our local governments lose tax revenue when our forests are given over the Federal government and padlocked. Our culture is in jeopardy and our freedoms are being constricted every day. I’m proud to stand with the hunters, OHV users, trappers, fishermen and outdoorsmen who are saying that enough is enough. Let’s take back our lands and manage them with integrity, consistency and the Constitution in mind.
This is National School Choice Week, and I am thrilled to support the efforts of so many brave educators, teachers, lawmakers and parents who are standing up for kids, and the choices of parents and communities to pick what’s right for their families.
School choice is close to my heart, because Diane and I chose to home-school our two children, and were blessed to see our kids not only succeed in academics but excel out in the real world. Living on a ranch 36 miles from town would have meant multiple hours in a school bus every day for our kids, not to mention the countless wasted hours that a public school teacher must spend on discipline, and the lowest-common-denominator approach that so many schools are forced to take, even with well-adjusted, bright students.
So, we decided that our kids would be better served by more freedom, and the choice of home-schooling. By the time our children were in 8th grade, they tested out of High School on their SATs, and they reveled in the freedom to pursue their interests and take on entrepreneurial endeavors in junior high and high school. Children are gifts to us, their parents, and there is nothing that brings me more joy than watching my son build custom furniture using skills I passed on to him, or my daughter enjoying classic literature because my wife and I nurtured that love of English and let her experience the classics at a young age.
Because of my experience with our family, and the way that I see parents fighting for their children’s education every day, I fully support school choice. This doesn’t mean that I think everyone should do what Diane and I did, but that parents should have the freedom to choose the best option for their family and circumstances: whether that is private school, public school, charter school or home-schooling.
I think that parents and communities are the best advocates for children, and they know best how to motivate, teach and inspire their students. Centrally planned and mandated curriculums cannot account for the learning styles, unique capabilities and diverse backgrounds of children across America, and nor should it.
Through the wasteful spending of the Federal education system, the poorly written curriculum of Common Core and the deadly grip of unions in public schools, our kids are being left behind the rest of the world, and an entire generation of students are sentenced to duller futures because we are not giving them the choice to succeed.
For example, the 2012 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) found that: “While the U.S. doesn’t break the top ten on any academic subject, it ranks fifth in educational expenditures at a whopping $115,000 per student. Only Austria, Luxembourg, Norway, and Switzerland spend more. Countries that outperform the United States spend drastically less.” as cited in this Americans for Prosperity article: http://americansforprosperity.org/legislativealerts/what-pisa-tells-us-about-american-education-reform
As the Federation for Children points out:
An estimated 1.1 million students failed to graduate with a diploma in 2011. That is 6,000 dropouts a day or one dropout every 29 seconds.
Nearly half (48 percent) of public schools across the country are labeled as failing, and they serve a disproportionate number of minority students.
Only 24 percent of eighth and 12th grade students have solid writing skills. Students who qualify for the federal free and reduced-price lunch program scored 27 points below students from families with higher incomes.
The national achievement gap between lower- and higher-income students is 27 points.
Students who drop out of school are twice as likely to end up in poverty.
This is a crisis of epic proportions, but opponents of school choice would have us believe that the status quo is “just fine”. Do those numbers seem “just fine” to you? How would you use $115,000 to educate your child, if given the choice?
It must be noted that, although there are certainly a few bad apples, teachers and principals are not the problem – the bureaucracy surrounding public schooling is. We are so worried about the protection of teachers and the satisfaction of the teacher’s union that we are failing our kids on a grand scale. More and more parents and students are begging for school choice and a chance to home-school, attend a private or charter school, or force change in their public schools, but comfortable education professionals and the entrenched status quo are stifling this movement.
We should be risking everything to make our kids’ dreams come true, not holding them back to meet our desires. So I think it’s time to remove the stigma from School Choice and let parents, communities and educators have a say once again.
Every child should have access to quality education, and schools should have to compete for educational dollars, not stifle dissent and punish parents who are simply looking out for their families.
Religious education, learning disabilities or low-income neighborhoods are just a few of the issues that school choice can help solve, so join with me this week, and let’s Amplify Choice – giving every child a hope of a bright future and the kind of healthy, intellectually stimulating education that my kids were blessed to experience.
This is