Letters To The Editor, July 6

Letters To The Editor: Taxpayers Shouldn't Pay For Kaine's DNC Events

Taxpayers Shouldn't Pay For Kaine's DNC Events
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Gov. Tim Kaine's communications director recently said Kaine has no legal obligation to provide the Republican Party of Virginia with records of his out-of-state travel.

No mention was made of the moral obligation to the taxpayers of Virginia, who would expect their governor to apply his focus and energies to conditions in the commonwealth (particularly in the current fiscal crisis) rather than to fundraising for his party.

And now Kaine has said the Democratic National Committee will reimburse the commonwealth for the expenses of his executive protection unit during these trips. If this now an issue, why weren't these expenses reimbursed prior to their examination in the media?

Over and over we hear politicians lean on the crutch of their legal obligations in issues of disclosure with no apparent concern for and certainly no responsibility to the taxpayers.

Kaine should make a decision as to where his priorities lie: as governor of Virginia or working for the Democratic Party. Regardless of political affiliation, taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize his participation with the DNC, nor his political future. A.S. Powell. Mechanicsville.

As Dollars Add Up, Democrats Jump Ship
Editor, Times-Dispatch:

President Barack Obama can't get members of his own party on board with his liberal plans. After deciding to make socialized medicine his latest cause, now he is forced to backpedal while watching his fellow Democrats jump ship. Even they can't stomach the trillions of dollars this plan is going to cost taxpayers, while it does nothing to improve the quality of our health care system.

To make it even more embarrassing, the Republicans have already released their plan, which would improve affordability and access to health care, while the Democrats are still floundering.

Not only is the president's health care proposal failing, but his cap-and-trade energy plan may be falling apart as well. Many rural Democrats realize that this legislation will adversely affect the people in their districts, like farmers and coal miners. On these and many other issues, even Democrats realize that this country cannot afford Obama's liberal goals.

Bretiss Zacek.
Richmond.

Three of the past four Democratic governors (Gerald Baliles, Mark Warner, and Tim Kaine) repeatedly and emphatically pledged not to raise taxes during their campaigns. They all unrepentantly and unabashedly violated their campaign pledges. In fact, Baliles had barely lowered his right arm from taking the inaugural oath before proposing the largest tax increase in Virginia history.

The current gubernatorial campaign has barely begun. At the Boys State Convention in Lynchburg recently, Democratic hopeful Creigh Deeds said twice, "I have no plans to raise taxes." I guess that leaves him an out to do so if elected. In the past, Democrats have been known to famously parse. He must be following the tradition of his predecessors to campaign as a non-taxer and then take a "who, me?" approach once elected. Why should candidate Deeds be any different from candidates Baliles, Warner, and Kaine?

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Max Maizels.
Richmond.

I have always believed that the main reason for having a central government was to provide a standing army to protect American citizens from all enemies. It doesn't take much to recognize that if we are attacked by a foreign country or foreign terrorists, our Army should stand ready to defend us. It also shouldn't be too difficult to understand that we can be attacked in many different ways: bombs, planes, invasions of people, and invasions of illicit drugs.

What good is it if the military is guarding our shores and our air space, but a foreigner is building a tunnel from another country into ours and sending through death and destruction of another kind?

The very idea of a turf war between the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon is ludicrous, just as it was between the FBI and the CIA before 9/11. Both departments are there to protect us and there should never be any dispute between them about what they are there for. If we need troops, our first line of defense, on the Mexican or Canadian borders, then there should never be any argument against them.

Air Force Gen. Victor Renuart Jr., head of the U.S. Northern Command, says we shouldn't always depend on the Department of Defense to fulfill every need. I ask, if it is a matter of national security, why not? The military's role should be to defend us wherever needed. If we can't count on the defense of our very borders, where can we? It has certainly been in very short supply in the past few years as evidenced by the people and drugs that pour into the country while we continue our interagency food fight.

Dorothy T. Edwards.
Richmond.