...And last week our Congressman switched gears again, this time lining up with very conservative Republicans, against the President, 45 other Republicans and an almost unanimous Democratic party on help in the mortgage meltdown. He commented callously that taxpayers shouldn't foot the bill for reckless borrowing. His focus seems very narrow minded indeed, because although there's no emergency here in N.J. similar to Florida and Nevada, the danger of dropping house values decimating entire neighborhoods, causing more foreclosures and bank failures, certainly affects the entire nation. Why not say you'd like to see safeguards written into the legislation beforehand, for once, not after, to protect against fraud and abuse; condemn reckless speculators, then hold your nose and vote for it. That would be my position.
If Mr. LoBiondo is going to talk about reckless borrowing, he should be consistent and be for accountability with no exceptions. That's a clear position voters could vote up or down on. But he's for the "taxpayer" one minute and voting for earmarks the next. Or consider this. If a major hurricane hit the New Jersey coastline, using Mr. LoBiondo's logic, would taxpayers be expected "to foot the bill" for reckless beach development to close to water? Or put another way, should residents of Nevada be in favor of beach replenishment every year at the shore? Let's pray a major hurricane doesn't hit the Jersey shore this year, and Mr. LoBiondo has to go seeking help from the other party, when we're in need. He just might get the middle digit.
Being a registered Republican myself, running as an independent candidate in the 2nd district, why am I raising these issues more vociferously than Mr. LoBiondo's Democratic opponent? Will Mr. Kurkowski speak out in favor of new drilling, against wasteful spending, and for lowered public sector expectations? Or will he just be a Democratic talking points type of guy? No, yes, maybe?