The amount of unsubstantiated commentary printed in the opinion pages continues to amaze me. Local pundit Chris Covington's Sunday letter quickly attracted my attention.
Liberals love to imply support from the NRA or the Koch brothers is a mark of shame. Heaven help you if you support liberty and the Second Amendment. Mr. Covington claims both groups gave money to Bruce Westerman's campaign. I downloaded the federal election commission's data on the "Westerman for Congress" donations from Jan. 1 2017, to May 2, 2018. The NRA gave Mr. Westerman nothing and the Koch brothers donated $1,000. (A shooting industry PAC did donate $1,000.) The Westerman campaign received $1.2 million from 2,450 donors in that period, averaging less than $500 per donor. Hardly an unlimited source of funds and I doubt the Koch brothers will have much influence despite their extravagant donation.
Mr. Covington also seems to have a problem with the tax reduction bill that Congressman Westerman supported, claiming it will cost $3 billion in increased debt. That estimate was made by the Congressional Budget office whose incompetency is well known. I have previously ripped that estimate in a previous opinion page article. The CBO uses a static estimate, which assumes no changes in income because of tax reduction. If you believe nothing will change in our enormous economy, you are a fool! Things change every second and future income is no exception. My estimate indicates a one-half percentage increase in gross taxable income will more than cover any reductions in the tax rates.
Mr. Covington is only partially correct, since governments do not create jabs. However, good tax policy and reduced regulation can stimulate job growth and indirectly create jobs.
Mr. Covington also seems to have a problem with Bruce's campaign machine. I met his machine, all one of her! He has a single campaign manager who uses the county committee staff in the 4th Congressional District to help her candidate.
The Democrat Party has similar structure and his November opponent has no disadvantage here. Ms. Shamel's problem is, she is an unknown, even in her hometown, has no previous political experience and has no financial supporters (neither party will provide sparse cash to a poor candidate) and is running against an extremely popular, noncontroversial and competent incumbent.
Editorial on 05/15/2018
Print Headline: Supports Westerman