My THANKS!

I appreciate all of you who supported me with your vote at the convention on Saturday. You made a difference. Your vote was heard, not only by me, but by those in the party who believe in pre-determined nominations.  In three and a half months, you took the campaign from a grassroots beginning to a force within the party.

I spoke to many delegates and others right after the vote and again after the results announcement. I’ve also received an overwhelming number of emails from you since Saturday. Your message to me has been clear: stay involved! Well, let me tell you that I am listening.

In the coming months I will be working to get Democrats elected this November. I’ve offered help to races in both fundraising and speaking engagements. Together we can make a difference and together we can get Democrats elected in Utah.

I ask that you take a moment and donate $10 or $15 to my campaign in order help reduce some of the expenses that I have personally paid over the last several weeks. It will go a long way. While you’re at it, visit Stout Supporters for Peter Corroon and donate $25 – Peter is our best chance at winning the governor’s office in quite awhile and he needs our financial support.

Thanks again for all your support!

 

Doing the work…

My campaign began January 23, 2010. My intent has always been to take this race to delegates with solid, concrete solutions. I have done the work talking to thousands of delegates in person, telephone and email . I’ve attended events and as many county conventions as I could in the limited time I had. I’ve even managed to obtain some endorsements — even well known Utahn who will nominate me tomorrow.

This is a Senate campaign. Doing the work means that people know where you are on issues and how you plan to tackle the most difficult problems facing the country. Doing the work means coming up with solutions and being able to lead. Doing the work means meeting your opponents head on. Delegates know where I stand and they know what I want to do.

I have stated this before: A candidate who has been in race for almost a year should have a million dollars in the bank, a good base of volunteers and should be able to tell you where he stands on the issues. Sam Granato fails on all three counts. I believe that it is because he has not done the work that is crucial for anyone who intends to serve as a U.S. Senator and that is to offer real, concrete solutions and direction for the state and the country. Only being able to summarize the problem shows a lack of vision. A true leader, a true visionary is able to see the problems as well as the solution. That’s doing the work.

I will not waste the opportunity given me. I realize that much work needs to be done after tomorrow. I am ready to win in November and will do the work necessary to accomplish that goal.

 

Clean up, Baby, Clean up

America’s addiction to oil has caused an environmental disaster of the highest order along the Gulf Coast that continues to grow each day. Several protected areas such as Grand Bay in Mississippi, Weeks Bay in Alabama, and Golf Islands National Seashore in Florida are threatened. Each day as the slick gets bigger, we must be reminded that our energy needs are too dependent on resources which cause damage to our environment and ultimately humans. Now, instead of committing resources elsewhere, we must face the expensive clean-up of the Gulf Coast. Of course, this also means that gasoline prices will rise, which is ironic since drilling in the Gulf was supposed to reduce oil prices.

Protecting our environment must be the number one concern in meeting our energy needs. This doesn’t mean that we can’t continue to use coal, oil or natural gas, but we must make strides in renewable energy resources. However, these strides will certainly not come fast enough. I believe that we can reduce environmental impacts, both concerning drilling for oil and climate change by a short term, temporary conversion to natural gas automobiles. We should also invest in replacement of aging nuclear reactors and reprocessing technologies — on-site at current operating plants. Both of these options have less of an impact environmentally than oil.

Drilling off-shore has a greater risk of environmental and economic disaster and proved to be when the Deepwater Horizon exploded and sank. It’s time to drastically reduce our addiction to oil once and for all, it’s good for the economy and the environment.

 

I’ve been encouraged to see that Sam Granato has been identifying issues that are important to Utahns. However, there still is no substance. I, too, have talked with thousands of people about the issues. But the difference between the two candidate is that I have offered solutions to the problems — I have taken positions on the issues. Delegates know where I stand and what I want to accomplish as Senator.

It’s been almost a month since the other campaign put up a website and a week to go before convention and still there is no substance to the campaign. While I have clear, concise solutions to bring recovery, growth and prosperity to Utah and the country, Sam does not. While I have clear, concise solutions to reduce the national debt, Sam does not. While I have outlined positions on national defense including immigration and veteran care, Sam has not. While I have outlined positions on how to bring about transparency and effective governing back to the Senate, Sam has not. While I have outlined solutions to become energy independent, Sam has not. I’ve stated my positions on equal rights, opportunity, and health care, Sam has not. I’ve outlined solutions to for elementary and secondary education, Sam has not.

I’ve been reaching out to delegates since I entered the race in January. I will continue to reach out to delegates with strong leadership and ideas that will move Utah and the country forward.

 

Party Building

When I was down in Delta for the Millard County Convention, an interesting discussion ensued about how to build the once prominent party in the county. Ed Phillips gave an impassioned speech that the group needed to do something to get young people involved. Ed, incidentally, was newly elected as the county party chairman. It’s tough to see something that you have so much pride in wither away because the current generation isn’t involved. Yet involvement is key to the success and survival of the party in Utah.

As I have been stating since January, the most likely candidate to emerge from the Republican convention will be Mike Lee. Recently, the number two, Tim Bridgewater, has also emerged. While there is a possibility that Bennett can overtake Bridgewater, the polls indicate that it will be a difficult task. We have a chance to do something for the first time in 18 years and that is to pursue an open Senate seat. Again, involvement is the key to success.

During the Obama campaign, I was disappointed that our volunteer effort here in Utah was being used in states other than Utah. To me, it said that Utah is a “lost cause” when it comes to building support among Democrat candidates. It is time to stop this defeatist attitude. We need to take seriously our responsibility to build the party. I believe that the key to winning the U.S. Senate seat is involvement. My campaign is committed to building the party through interpersonal connections one voter at a time and not necessarily through party officials. While those are important, and I do intend to keep building relationships within the party, they do not overcome the frustrations that Ed Phillips spoke about.

I believe that the best way to build candidate and party recognition is at the grass roots level. We need to focus on independents, moderate Republicans, and unregistered voters. We need a voter registration drive and a voter “head” count. We need to find out what those in the voter precincts are really thinking. This is going to require us to go door to door. This is going to require involvement at all levels. We need to understand the issues that drive these voters — not through polls but through interpersonal connections. Not only will my Senate campaign benefit from this, but every candidate in the state will.  

I’ve always like the question, “How do you eat an elephant?” The answer, of course, “One bite at a time”.  The real problem, however, is that we need to start trying to eat the elephant rather than complaining about the size of it. I’m accepted the size of the elephant for dozens of years. Now it’s time to start taking bites, and I intend to do it one voter at a time and one issue at a time.

 

Substance v. Establishment

Since I announced in January, I have been offering my thoughts on the Republican nominee. Many have believed that Senator Bennett would make it out of convention –without the nomination but would win the primary. I’ve had my doubts since Mike Lee entered the race. I’ve paid attention to the chatter on the blogs and have participated in several key debates with all the Republican challengers, with the most recent one at UVU in Orem on April 2nd. That one was important because Senator Bennett participated. It was announced that 130 Republican delegates were in attendance. The straw poll that was taken placed Bennett 5th, with Mike Lee placing 1st with nearly 50%. I placed a respectable 7th — ahead of the three of the lesser known Republican challengers. At the Davis County Republican Convention nearly 500 delegates were polled and Bennett came in third. Most recently, 1,000 Republican delegates statewide were polled and Bennett came in third again. Those delegates when asked about a second choice, Bennett came in third again. Third place means there will be a new Senator in November.

I believe that Mike Lee will be the eventual Republican nominee. I am the only candidate that will be able to win support from moderate Republicans and Independents in November.  I have contacted our party delegates by email and by telephone to explain my vision to move Utah and the nation forward. Increasingly, I have been contacted by those participating in the party for the first time — attending caucus and conventions. They are excited to hear that my campaign has substance and not rhetoric. Voters respond to substance. I have taken solid positions on jobs, the economy, and reducing the debt — and I have since announcing my candidacy.  I have been running a campaign aimed at delegates — those who represent the average voters and, ultimately those who will decide who will be the nominee. The substance of my campaign stands up in November while other candidates are still trying to figure theirs out.

 

When the U.S. Constitution was drafted there were no guaranteed rights. Some of the founding fathers, including the author of the Bill of Rights, James Madison, believed that rights didn’t need to be written – they just existed.  Jefferson wrote in the Declaration that there are self-evident truths, that all men are created equal, and that there are certain inalienable rights. Jefferson’s view, however, was that these rights existed either with or without government and whether they were written or not. He also believed that the proper role of government must ensure that individuals do not infringe upon the rights of others and that government does not reduce or minimize the rights of individuals.

From the beginning of the Republic, however, all people, while created equal, have not been treated equal. Throughout our history, rights have been enumerated by Constitutional amendments, through legislation and judicial review. We do this because it is the right thing to do to ensure the survival of the Republic and to ensure that all people have opportunity. Opportunity is the foundation of everything that we do. Without opportunity our nation cannot progress and cannot succeed. Those with less opportunity are at a disadvantage in exercising their rights.

Our citizens do not ask for special rights, because as Jefferson points out, everyone has the same rights – there are no “special rights”. What our citizens ask is for the same consideration and the same opportunity as all others. We must take seriously the complaints of those who feel they do not have the same opportunity as others. We must overcome the barriers that prevent people from having the same rights afforded others.  All people, regardless of age, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion or ability are equal.

As a Democrat, I have always believed that everyone is equal. I will take to the U.S. Senate those values and will work towards Equality for All.

 

Where’s Granato’s Message?

Here it is April 1, 2010 and Sam Granato has been pursuing the nomination for 9 months. We don’t know what his message is and we don’t know what he wants to accomplish as Senator. He’s taken no stand on the important issues of the day – the economy, jobs, the debt or the deficit. His website is still devoid of any inkling that he has any ideas. Today, I’m beginning to wonder if Granato’s campaign is one big April fool’s joke on Utah’s Democrats.

My campaign is nearly 10 weeks old. I have taken positions on every important issue that faces Utah and the nation. I’m a lifelong Democrat native Utahn who loves my country and who loves Utah. I’m not a politician, but an accountant who is self-employed. In November when I made the decision to seek elective office, I did so because of the health care debate. I wanted to let Utahns know that there are reasonable, rational candidates out there who understands the issues. My decision to run was in part due to the lack of information about Sam and his positions. Had he taken a strong stand on issues, I would not have run.

I have been told by many prominent members of the party that they like my ideas and could support me – after I win the nomination.  They tell me that because they have supported Sam, they can’t really support me openly or financially.  Sam Granato has not won the nomination. This is not a de facto appointment – even though many believe that to be the case because he has name recognition and can raise money. This, however, is far from the case. He’s been unable to raise money here in Utah and is looking for outside sources, in part because his organization and message is extremely poor. I personally contacted more than 600 delegates. Not very many of them knew who Sam Granato was. Some did, most did not. Anyone with money and message can get name recognition. Sam has neither. I have one and the ability to get the other.

So far, Sam seems to be running on the fact that so many have endorsed him – most of which were obtained before I announced. Some of those making endorsements have privately indicated to me that they made a mistake. Endorsements are never a substitution for taking a stand on issues.  Recently he has stated that he will be “Utah’s Salesman” to bring more money to the state. As one who is fiscally responsible, it has been this line of thinking that has put the country in the mess that it is in today. We need leadership and direction – not a “Salesman”.  I want to be partners with Utahns, not their salesman.  I want to lead on issues that directly affect Utahns. As Senator, I will provide leadership not trying to meet a sales goal.

I’ve been criticized because I haven’t raised enough money. First, my strategy is to win the nomination at convention through a common sense approach to open, honest and frank discussion with delegates. Second, my campaign is ten weeks old. I can’t be expected to have amassed a small fortune in donations – especially when the party has an anointed candidate. However, it brings to light the Grand Paradox of the Utah Democratic Party: We don’t donate money unless we think the candidate can win and we don’t think the candidate can win unless the campaign has money.

My advice to the delegates, donors, and party officials: Get behind the candidate that has the best interests of Utah in mind and the ability to move the party in the right direction. Get behind the candidate who wants to lead. My advice to those not willing to support me because they don’t want to cross party officials: Take a stand. I will support you and defend you. Do the right thing.

 

I’ve never really liked labels because they are so limiting. Some labels are appropriate, but others miss the mark.  A true fiscal conservative wants to reduce government spending and the national debt in addition to balancing the budget which excludes deficit spending as an option. Additionally, there are a few other trademarks of a fiscal conservative, such as free trade, deregulation, and lower taxes.

As an accountant, I realize the importance of deficit spending as a necessary tool to spur the economy during a recession. The deep recession that the country was in during the late 1970’s was turned into economic growth by policies of the Reagan administration. The two main factors that attributed to this were lower taxes and increased military spending. At the time, the administration was responsible for the largest increase in the national debt. The debt held by the nation was $998 billion in September 1981 and had increased to $2.85 trillion in September 1989 when Reagan’s final budget ran its course.

Government deficit spending is necessary during a deep recession when the private sector is unable or unwilling to grow the economy. However, when deficit spending is done without an economic need the effects are disastrous. Ideally debt should only be used either as a long term investment or in emergencies.  My viewpoint concerning deficit spending does not fit with the classic definition of fiscal conservative.

Reducing government spending simply to reduce spending is not prudent. We must evaluate spending as it relates to the benefits provided and whether it is wasteful. Spending cuts must first come through elimination of waste. They must come through a thoughtful and purposeful evaluation of the programs. Continuous examination of programs to make them efficient and effective will reduce government spending. However, the national debt is another issue.

The interest that will be required to pay on the current national debt will add between $5 and $7 trillion to the debt in the next ten years depending on interest rates. The debt has the ability to suffocate our economy. We need to develop and implement a method to pay this down. Reducing taxes may stimulate the economy; however, the last tax cuts reduced the treasury by $1.1 trillion and we still ended up in the worst recession since the Great Depression.

We are faced with a huge problem which I believe can best be solved by reducing waste and unneeded programs and by increasing investment in programs that will grow the treasury. This doesn’t mean tax increases across the board, but increasing real incomes across the board. Free trade is crucial to our recovery and economy, but only if small businesses are given a leg up. I believe that the best way to do this is through government backed loans and tax incentives that will increase investment in small businesses that create jobs. However, regulation is necessary to prevent another financial meltdown similar to the one in 2008.

While many of my viewpoints peg me as a Fiscal Conservative, the label is not completely appropriate. I would label myself as Fiscal Responsible, which means (1) Eliminate waste and work towards efficient, effective programs (2) Invest in human capital to grow the treasury and (3) Pay down the debt. I believe the best way to accomplish this is to have 10 year debt reduction revenue/outlay mandates in Congress. This is something I will work towards as Senator.

 

There exists a moral obligation for the health care system to meet the needs of the people that it serves. The argument that has been used against reform is that there exists no “right” to health care – simply because it is not enumerated in the U.S. Constitution. However, the fundamental basis of freedom in the United States is opportunity. Freedom is based on opportunity for all and not opportunity for those of a certain color, certain sex, certain religion or even certain wealth.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is greatly diminished in this country when health care is denied to our citizens.  Our system of health care delivery is a patchwork of effectiveness and ineffectiveness, efficiency and inefficiency.  Those that have total access to the health care network are the very poor, the very rich and to a limited extent, the old and the young. Anyone not in these groups may have some access to health care, but certainly not effective health care. If they have insurance and become extremely sick, the risk of losing their coverage or reaching their lifetime cap is a very real possibility. If they have a pre-existing condition, insurance companies won’t insure the condition or will make premiums unaffordable.

For-profit corporations make decisions that affect the bottom line. As an accountant, I recognize the business decisions that drive health care providers.  However, it is a fundamental flaw in the process. Why would a company pay out more than $2 million in claims for a person who is adversely affecting the bottom line? From a financial viewpoint it makes complete sense. From a moral viewpoint, however, it is reprehensible.

Without Life there can be no Liberty. Without Liberty there can be no Pursuit of Happiness. Liberty comes from the ability of the individual to exercise freedoms enumerated in the Constitution. However, there are also freedoms that are not enumerated that James Madison warned us about when he proposed the Bill of Rights. In Utah, we currently are being bombarded by the issue of states’ rights, of which I am a firm supporter. This course of action, though, must be balanced with the rights that are not specifically enumerated. I believe that the right to health care is one of those rights. If the individual states won’t protect this right, then it rests on the shoulders of the federal government.  Simply because it is not enumerated does not mean that the right does not exist.

A person deprived of Life has no rights. Our justice system takes precious time in depriving a man of his Life. There is a process by which the condemned can prove his case. There exists no process for those whose Life is being deprived due to lack of health care. They simply die. The same is true for the man deprived of Liberty because of his actions. There is a process by which the accused go through before denied Liberty. There exists no process for those who are denied health care. They must give up Liberty to qualify for health care. They must no longer have the assets or ability to obtain assets to qualify. They must surrender everything except their life in order to save their life. Patrick Henry’s call to “Give me Liberty or Give me Death” has a whole new meaning with respect to health care. Lack of health care access erodes our personal liberty and eventually shortens our life.

Our moral obligation exists to first provide the freedom and liberty necessary to obtain health care. We must not deny health insurance coverage based on pre-existing conditions. We must provide universal coverage for everyone. We must provide choices. Our next moral obligation is to provide the best quality health care in order to preserve life and our quality of life. Once we understand our moral obligation, we must decide the best way to preserve our right to health care.