Email I received from Sen. Specter today

[Lazydog]

Today I received an email from Sen. Specter to justify his vote on the stimulus package.
I had written him and informed him how dissatisfied I was that he voted for this.

Dear Mr. ********:



Thank you for contacting me regarding the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (H.R.1, P.L. 111-5). This legislation passed the
Senate 60-38 and was signed into law by the President on February 17,
2009. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.



I supported the economic stimulus package for one simple reason: The
country could not afford not to take action. The unemployment figures,
the latest earnings reports and the continuing crisis in banking made it
clear that failure to act would have left the United States facing a far
deeper crisis in the future.



I carefully weighed the vote on the stimulus package because of the
large deficit and the large national debt faced by future generations.
But the economy is in a desperate situation. Just in the month of
January, 2009 we lost 600,000 jobs, added to the loss of 2.8 million in
2008. There are millions of people who are having their homes
foreclosed. The economists tell us that if we do not act that the
current severe recession could well develop into a full-fledged
depression like 1929.



The agreement we reached was the best one we could under the
circumstances. We were able to cut out $100 billion from the package.
My preference would have been Senator John McCain's proposal, a $421
billion alternative focused largely on income tax reductions and
business tax breaks. Unfortunately, this amendment failed 40-57. I
voted for the Reagan tax cuts back in 1981 and that would be the best
course, but in a legislative body it is important to be able to
compromise and pass legislation, as opposed to inaction.



I was impressed with the position of the United States Chamber of
Commerce which was for the bill very solidly. The Chamber is for the
bill because it supports pro-growth tax initiatives. The Chamber is for
the bill because it applauds the inclusion of tax relief. The Chamber
is for the bill because many of the spending-side provisions in the
legislation will also provide stimulus to get Americans back to work,
focusing on infrastructure spending for roads, rails, public
transportation, aviation, inland waterways and ports.



Many provisions of the bill affecting small businesses were based on
legislation I have introduced in the 111th Congress. The Act delays
the 3% withholding tax on payments to businesses that sell goods or
services to governments. My bill, S.292, would repeal this withholding
tax. For small businesses, the Act extends the Net Operating Loss (NOL)
carryback period to five years for 2008. My bill, S.293, which I
originally introduced in the 110th Congress, would extend the NOL to
five years for 2008 and 2009. The Act also extends two provisions that
were enacted as part of the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, and mirror my
bill, S. 294. The 50 percent bonus depreciation and the increased
$250,000 limit for the Small Business Expensing Allowance are extended
for an additional year.



Thank you for taking the time to bring your views on this important
matter to my attention. As a United States Senator, it is essential
that I be kept fully informed on the issues of concern to my
constituents. Should you have any further questions, please do not
hesitate to contact my office or visit my website at
http://specter.senate.gov <http://specter.senate.gov/> .




Sincerely,





Arlen Specter

If his preference would have been Senator John McCain's proposal, then why vote for this bill?
I already told him in the original email that I could not vote for him very again.

[pirateron]

well, his reply makes it all better....
sleep easy now all, Sen Specter is on our side.















**** disclaimer**** This is just my opinion, not meant to be condescending or demeaning if contrary to others opinions on this subject.

[Posit]

Well, I feel better now??

The letter is self serving BS.

He was interviewed the night of the vote, said he was aware that his constituents were strongly opposed... his phones had been ringing for days, and because of it he would have real problems getting reelected (he's 79 - surely he intends to run again...).

I don't understand who he represents?

[tes151]

Well, I feel better now??

The letter is self serving BS.

He was interviewed the night of the vote, said he was aware that his constituents were strongly opposed... his phones had been ringing for days, and because of it he would have real problems getting reelected (he's 79 - surely he intends to run again...).

I don't understand who he represents?

Right there is the reason most of these politicians need to be booted out of office. They actually think they have the right to vote how THEY want to. They seem to forget that they are sent to Washington to vote the way WE THE PEOPLE want them to vote. Pretty simple if you ask me.

[FNG19]

and because of it he would have real problems getting reelected (he's 79 - surely he intends to run again...).

When a politician starts doing "the right thing" despite the wishes of his constituency, it's a pretty good sign that he's thinking about legacy instead of reelection. My guess? This term is his swan song.

[mjfletcher]

Well, I feel better now??

The letter is self serving BS.

He was interviewed the night of the vote, said he was aware that his constituents were strongly opposed... his phones had been ringing for days, and because of it he would have real problems getting reelected (he's 79 - surely he intends to run again...).

I don't understand who he represents?

He represents the people that put him in office, but not in the manner that those people believe. His job isn't to just do what the court of public opinion says he should, his job is to do what's in the best interests of those he represents even if they don't want it. The reason for that is quite simple, the "ignorant masses" that our Founding Fathers feared.

The average person doesn't have time to take classes in economics, talk to economists, research economic trends, etc to gain the understanding of the subject necessary to determine what is in the best interests of the people. The same is true of all areas politics deals with. Our elected representatives have the time to educate themself on such things, to speak to experts in the field, to read reports from experts, etc etc and thats what we elect them to do.

Their job is to look at all the facts that we don't have the time to look at and decide what is in our best interests regardless of what we think of it. Serving the public does not mean catering to all the publics whims, it means doing what is best for the public and that is not always popular.

[mjfletcher]

Right there is the reason most of these politicians need to be booted out of office. They actually think they have the right to vote how THEY want to. They seem to forget that they are sent to Washington to vote the way WE THE PEOPLE want them to vote. Pretty simple if you ask me.

Read my previous post for the long version. Short version, they're sent to washington to vote the way the best interests of their constituents and the country requires them to.

[Posit]

MJ: I take your point and agree to a large extent. I don't believe, for example, that the average citizen comprehends the possible impacts lf life without bailing out the banks... economic stimulus package... help for homeowners.

The danger of this line of thinking on the part of our elected reps, however, is immense... I think the average citizen is fully capable of deciding for himself issues such as the right to keep and bear arms (as a classic example for this forum.

If our elected reps take it upon themselves to govern as they see fit, regardless of the opinion of their constituency, I think we're treading on the narrow edge of disaster.

I don't have a solution, but understand the issue. Ultimately, though, if the governement is "of the people and by the people", our reps should be paying attention.

[IV_Warrior]

Same bullshit form response he sent me a little while back. When I wrote back asking how he could have possibly "carefully weighed the vote on the stimulus package" when there in NO possible way he even READ the entire bill between the time it was finalized and the time it was voted upon, he didn't reply.

It's absolutely impossible that ANYONE read this bill in its entirety in the time between finalization and the vote. There's just too many pages for the little time that was available. The final version was completed one night, and the vote was the next day. There's 185,947 words in the bill. That's about 129 words per minute, without a break, just to read it in 24 hours. (and they had less than 24 hours between finalization and vote, so you'd have to read even faster) Know anyone who can read that fast? Neither do I. I especially don't know anyone who could read that fast, and also research things in the bill that reference other bills/policies.......

In short, anyone who voted for this bill sold their county out, and voted on a bill they had no idea of everything that was contained in it.

[mjfletcher]

MJ: I take your point and agree to a large extent. I don't believe, for example, that the average citizen comprehends the possible impacts lf life without bailing out the banks... economic stimulus package... help for homeowners.

The danger of this line of thinking on the part of our elected reps, however, is immense... I think the average citizen is fully capable of deciding for himself issues such as the right to keep and bear arms (as a classic example for this forum.

If our elected reps take it upon themselves to govern as they see fit, regardless of the opinion of their constituency, I think we're treading on the narrow edge of disaster.

I don't have a solution, but understand the issue. Ultimately, though, if the governement is "of the people and by the people", our reps should be paying attention.

I completely agree that there are some issues which the government shouldn't be deciding for us. The Constitution grants the fed gov authority over very specific areas, and "We the People" need to wake up and make sure it does not exceed its authority by making sure our representatives are accountable for their decisions.

We on this forum (and in this thread specifically) are a perfect example.

A constituent disagreed with the way his rep voted, contacted him to state that and get information as to why he voted the way he did, and the rep responded to him explaining his reasons. Even if we do not agree with the way he voted or why he voted that way, he has been required to explain his reasoning giving us the ability to look into it further (if we choose) to make a decision on whether or not he is right. The question is, how many people who now know his reasoning will check to see if he did the right thing rather than just going with their uninformed initial beliefs?

Our government is a finely tuned machine, it would take little to throw off the balance of power between the branches of government and the people. The general apathy of the people today is the biggest threat to that balance that currently exists. Too few of the people hold their representatives accountable by making them explain their decisions. Too few contact their representatives to voice their opinions or ask questions. Too few people care enough to even take notice of what their reps are doing.

If our government gets out of control, it is because "We the People" have fallen asleep at the wheel allowing the car to go wherever chance takes it.