Intention Of This Site
By W. Guy Finley | February 13, 2009
It was always my intention for this site when I set it up for to offer a place for Libertarian Republicans to gather together and share some takes on pressing issues. During the general election I was working very hard on a state senate campaign for Dan Duffy (R-Barrington) and now have my own re-election to school board in April.
So I handed off the reins of this website to someone who wanted to contribute that I didn’t really know that well. Unfortunately, that plan has led this site down a path it was never intended to go down.
Inflammatory partisan bomb throwing was never the intention of this site. I have no qualm if someone wants to do that on their own but when they take on the mantle of an organization in the process that is wrong.
Therefore, I am reasserting my administration of the RLC Illinois website and will be keeping a much more watchful eye over what is published here. My apologies to anyone who was offended at some of the prior postings here.
W. Guy Finley
Co-Coordinator
Republican Liberty Caucus of Illinois
Topics: Announcements, RLC-IL | No Comments »
The Auto Industry Bail out, Politics and making the hard choice
By RMWStanford | December 12, 2008
In politics a lot of times politicians make the wrong choose because the right choice is the hard, this is the story of the auto bail bill. The easy decision for most politicians is to support the bail out bill and pretend that they are saving an American industry. At the moment there are 15 car companies that have manufacturing plants based in the United States, the big 3 and 12 international companies. While the international companies that have plants located in the United States employee fewer workers directly than the big 3, they produce more cars, their stock is owned by millions of Americans and they do a lot of research and design work in their American base locations. Like the big three they add a number of good paying high skilled jobs and add billions of dollars of value to the United States economy and unlike the Big 3 they are not asking for bail out.
These companies are doing better than the Big 3 because of better management, yes the Detroit has a number of legacy cost but many other business in other industries face similar cost but they either changed their benefit system or they died. Detroit has refused to change in part because of past assistance from the government and the belief that if they faced a major crisis the government would bail them out, and it seems that they are right. The big 3 have also made a number of bad decisions that have harmed them they allowed themselves to fall behind the international car companies in a number of different areas and they failed to adapt with changes in consumer needs and tastes in both the domestic and international market. Detroit has promised that they will change if they get the bail out but there is no reason to believe them so far they have resisted change and have refused to admit that they are not still competing in a market place that they could dominate like in the past. Will the government force them to make the changes that need to be made? The odds are probably not, any government forced restructuring of the Big 3 is likely to be influenced as much by politics as by economic needs. The changes that are made will probably be a poor mixture of economically need changes, political motivated changes that are not beneficial and could make the problem worse in the long run and many changes that are need will likely not be made because they are politically difficult. At best the bail out will just stave off the problems that the Big 3 are facing not fix them and sooner or later they will face another crisis.
What will happen if the Auto Industry in the United State collapse and will 2 million people lose there job like the Big 3 and the UAW claim? The mostly likely answer is no they wont, the international companies will certainly not fail and 2 million people will not lose their jobs. One or more of the companies will likely enter bankruptcy, Ford might have enough reserve to avoid bankruptcy, but GM is likely to enter bankruptcy. People need to keep in mind that corporate bankruptcy does not necessarily mean the company will cease to exist but that the company will under go court restructuring. This means that the company will have an opportunity to renegotiate the terms of the debts that they owe, labor contracts and restructure and streamline their operations. Many companies have emerge far stronger, more competitive and better able to face a changing market place after going through bankruptcy. Yes it will be unpleasant for the company, its shareholder, workers and debt holders but it has a better chance of producing an out come that will fix the long term problems faced by the Big 3.
Even if the one or more the Big 3 cease to exist does that mean the auto industry in the United States will collapse? No, not at all the American consumer and economy will still demand a similar number of cars a year, with or with out the Big 3, more cars that can be produced by the current number of plants owned by international car companies. Something will have to happen to increase the supply of cars to the United States market, imports could increase but imported cars are at disadvantage compares to similar cars produce in country hence the reason that many international producers have located in the United States. In the long run you will see international producers expand their productions with in the United States and new companies might well enter the market. In long run many of the plants, workers and production equipment of any Big 3 company that fails might well end up being employed again by a different producer.
In the long run for the American economy the best thing is for the government to make the hard choice and not bail out the Big 3 and let the market run it course. It might be hard at first but in the long run it will strength both the American Auto industry and the economy.
Topics: Commentary, Congressional Issues | No Comments »
Think You Know Obama?
By W. Guy Finley | October 8, 2008
Barack Obama talks about change and a new direction for the country, the only issue is you have to be included in his vision the way he sees it. If you’re unlucky enough to be born alive but unwanted he has no interest in protecting you.
I have a difficult time with the abortion issue, I must admit. I believe it is morally wrong but I never look to force my morals on others. Many times I find myself walking a fine line on abortion issues and how I feel and where I stand. However, one thing that has always chilled me to the core is partial-birth abortion and a practice I wasn’t even aware of — “born alive abortion”. A practice, more or less, where labor is induced and babies are left to die.
This all started with me watching this obviously pro right to life video:
So I figured, these are just some pro-life activists who have found a couple of votes made by Barack Obama (good luck with that given the number of times he voted “present” as an Illinois State Senator) and twisted it a bit. But when I looked into it, turns out I was wrong, this video is completely accurate.
According to an investigation by Annenberg Political FactCheck he did vote against protecting these children three times.
Obama opposed the 2001 and 2002 “born alive” bills as backdoor attacks on a woman’s legal right to abortion, but he says he would have been “fully in support” of a similar federal bill that President Bush had signed in 2002, because it contained protections for Roe v. Wade.
We find that, as the NRLC said in a recent statement, Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported. Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee’s 2003 mark-up session.
So, my question is, do you folks know the real Barack Obama and what he stands for? I don’t think you do because this is legislation that on a federal level passed 98-0 in the US Senate and was supported by Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy. Obama voted against it not once but three times in Illinois and has the audacity to call those brave enough to point it out liars:
I suppose that FactCheck are liars now too Barack? I have a better idea, you are.
Topics: Executive Issues, National | No Comments »
Daily Herald | Lake Co. forest preserve wants to buy more land
By W. Guy Finley | October 8, 2008
Daily Herald | Lake Co. forest preserve wants to buy more land
Well, it looks like $170 million over the past several referenda isn’t enough for the Lake County Forest Preserve District. They want to do another referenda that exceeds the last three successful referenda combined, oh, but it won’t raise your taxes.
First of all, I challenge anyone in this county to find a place where it takes them more than ten minutes to drive to a forest preserve. Then I challenge you to drive more than 10 minutes to find one of those parcels that just has a sign saying it was bought “thanks to your support” and yet the district hasn’t done anything with it yet. Then I challenge you, after using that gas, to put together enough money to play golf at one of the high end golf courses the district owns that is far beyond the reach of most of the average taxpayers. It’s clear to me the folks at the Forest Preserve District have become out of touch, and that means some of your Lake County Board members have let the administration go too far.
According to the Herald article the district has 27,000 acres of land already — 27,000 acres of land that will never yield another tax dollar to any entity. Property acquired by the Forest Preserve comes off of the tax rolls and obviously that tax revenue has to be made up somewhere else, usually by the homeowner.
The Forest Preserve is also engaging in an alarming new tactic - come up with another bond issue when one is expiring so you can get more money but claim that taxes won’t go up. Previous bonds are going to be retired, taxes would actually come down (what a novel concept) if this measure failed. So the district puts out a proposal to borrow more money than its previous three successful referenda combined when the stock market is in the tank and folks are just trying to get enough money to put gas in their car.
The voters have taken care of the Forest Preserve very well over the the past fifteen years, it’s time to turn off the spigot and tell them no, that’s enough now.
Topics: Illinois, Local Issues | No Comments »
A Republic If You Can Keep It
By RMWStanford | June 14, 2008
When he was asked about what kind of government the Constitutional Convention had produced, Ben Franklin was said to have replied a Republic if you can keep it. The key word that we should take note of in that statement is if you can keep it, Franklin new that a Republic is a difficult form of government to keep because it requires it citizens to be well informed and involved in the political process in order for a republican government to function properly. Too many people in the United States do not do their duty as citizens, they don’t stay up to date on the issues facing the country, they don’t stay informed and they don’t vote. They make excuse for this behavior by saying that one person can’t make a difference, that they don’t have the time, that it doesn’t affect them, but when the average person chooses to divorce themselves from the political process this special interest groups to gain more and more influence and this is one of the reason why it seems at times that government policies serve the interest of a relatively small set of interest groups not the general public.
I know that in Illinois there are many people that are share the set of core beliefs of the Republican Liberty Caucus that are not involved in the political process because they are turned off by the candidates offered by the Republican party right now or because of actions of the Illinois GOP. If anyone reading this is one of those people I hope that you will take a second to consider that instead of waiting and hoping for the Illinois GOP to changes or for some candidate to come around and inspire you that you should start working to things. Instead of waiting for some one else to inspire you to go out and get involved in the political process you should inspire yourself to do so and work to inspire other similar minded people to get involved. Political work takes sacrifice, it requires people to give up their time, time that they could be spend with family, friend, ect, and some times it requires us to give of our money too but I truly believe this sacrifice is more than worth it if it helps to produce a better nation for all of us. Once again if you are reading this and you are one of those people who is sitting on the political side line I would ask you to read over the positions of the Republican Liberty Caucus and take some time to think about them and if they make sense to you and seem like good government policy, then please join us and help to build a better us to build a better Illinois GOP, a better Illinois and better nation.
Topics: Commentary | No Comments »
A Time For Choosing In November
By W. Guy Finley | June 4, 2008
44 years ago a former Democrat took to the stage and told the country how the Republican candidate was the man for the job in November. The Democratic candidate was full of lofty ideals, talking about his “Great Society” and how it was time for a change.
Sound familiar? Yes it does, let’s hope that election doesn’t repeat itself because we know what it led to — the worsening of a conflict in another land, creation of vast amounts of government spending in new programs, a failed public housing policy (see also Robert Taylor Homes and Cabrini Green) amongst other failed policies.
I thought I’d share some of the words of that former Democrat with you, if you are interested in the entire speech you can watch it or read it.
Topics: Commentary, Executive Issues, GOP, National | No Comments »
The Value of the RLC
By Michael Tams | March 27, 2008
I’m currently reading “Origins of the Bill of Rights” by Leonard W. Levy, which is so far a fascinating primer on why the BoR was both deemed unnecessary and later a condition of ratification. A great quote from this book got me thinking tonight.
Regarding the Convention, George Mason wrote:
“America has certainly upon this occasion drawn forth her first characters… of purest intentions.”
The value of organizations in the liberty movement - such as the RLC - is best understood in this context: in the founding generation, the best and brightest were well-known throughout the country. Part of this may be that there were fewer people; part of this may be that there was less “entertainment noise” for lack of a better word. There was more focus on relevant topics and ideas, and less distraction with both the frivolous, and the baser aspects of society. Notable exception notwithstanding, it was a wholly superior culture.
I do think that Providence has played the starring role in the history of this country, and that this American Revolution is not complete. When the time is right, once again, the first characters of this Republic will be called upon to do the work that is required. It is groups like the RLC which create the foundation for the future success of the Republic; when the time is right, we’ll be prepared to lead. I’ve been encouraging every liberty-loving person I know to work to take back the GOP, but also to find ways to connect with like-minded people outside the party apparatus.
The networks we build today will be our friendships and alliances tomorrow.
Topics: GOP | No Comments »
First Post at RLCIL: What’s Wrong with the GOP
By Michael Tams | March 24, 2008
Thank you to the gentlemen behind the Illinois chapter of the RLC.
Instead of listing my CV or a 10,000 word essay on my political philosophy, I think if one simply googled my name or, perhaps, “American Federalist Blog” you’d find plenty of information; if folks are interested in checking out my prior writing and philosophy, they can have at it. If not, they can skip that and I avoid the appearance of shameless self-promotion.
With that out of the way, let’s get started.
I heard a prominent GOP official tonight lamenting that the problem facing the Republican Party is sort of a guilt-by-association one; it’s not the GOP that’s bad, it’s just that they get lumped in there with the Democrats who are really responsible for bad governance. With all due respect - hence, no names - this guy couldn’t be more wrong. Our problem is one of people. We’ve allowed the party bosses to pick the wrong ones, and not recruit the right ones.
This gentleman was making his case, and the usual litany was employed with limited effect. I say limited, for I am certain that some Republicans in attendance bought his pitch. He rattled off the usual: infighting among Democrats make Springfield toxic; Republicans try to work with their colleagues across the aisle, and the Dems don’t; the opposition is fiscally irresponsible, we’re not. He spoke in defense of the party, expressing the need for a capital bill (”they” want $25B, “we” only want $6B), the importance of the CTA legislation, and, of course, the warning to watch out for tax increases.
Topics: Commentary, GOP, Illinois | No Comments »
Repairing the Illinois Republican Brand Name
By RMWStanford | March 17, 2008
It should be clear to anyone that follows Illinois Politics in least that the Illinois Republican Party is in pretty bad shape when it is losing elections in districts that it should be easily winning and in which President Bush carried over 50 percent of the vote in previous years. An imprisoned Governor, a string of poor showings and candidates in statewide elections and bad decision on the part of the state leadership have left the Republican brand name in Illinois badly damage and the Republican Party should take a few ideas from marketing to help repair it’s brand name.
Product Differentiation- The Republican Party needs to present a clear well thought out alternative to the Illinois State Democrat Party, not a mushy mixed of slight differences between the Republican Candidates and the Democrat Candidates. We need to present a clear vision and set of policies based off personal freedom, small government and reduced government spending, pro-economic growth, government reform and anti-corruption. The Republican Party is at its best when it is the party of ideas and that what we need to return, not running on platform of being slightly better than the Democrats. We need to make it clear that we will not tolerate any kind of corruption on the part of Republican candidates and office holders.
Market Segmentation- The Republican Party needs to do a better job of identifying different voting blocks and then tailoring it message to address the concerns of those groups. After identifying different voter groups and their needs we Republicans need to find ways to package our message so that it appeals to these voters’ needs and problems and show them that our policies will give them a better opportunity to improve their lives. This does not mean pandering to different groups of voters as the Democrats and many Republicans do, but showing people how our policies can help them help themselves, not trying to buy them off with more government programs that do not work or help them. Like a business can have the best product in the world but if can not find a way to make it appeal to different groups of consumers they will not be able to sell it, the same goes for political parties, they can have the best set of ideas and policies in the world, but if you can not package them in a way that appeals to different groups of voters they will not be able to get their candidates elected.
Advertising- This does not just mean campaign ads during elections season, but it means getting candidates, potential candidates, and Republican volunteers out into the public and communities all of the time. Having volunteers and when ever possible, particular in local elections, candidates walking precincts so that voters can see them face to face and talk with them. Having local Republican leaders attend community events and gatherings not to push political agendas at them or troll for votes but to establish connects and ties to people with in the community that may pay off in future elections.
Topics: Commentary | No Comments »
More Politics — Illinois Style
By W. Guy Finley | March 12, 2008
Yesterday I wrote a bit about the Rezko trial, today’s Daily Herald and other outlets had some interesting news based on the testimony of a former attorney for the hospital facilities board. One interesting development was how State Representative Jack Franks (D-Woodstock) made pleas to state administrators to write favorable recommendations for a proposed hospital in Crystal lake. The letters written to the board members were entered as evidence.
Franks states he just supported the plan and felt it was good for McHenry County though. Should we take him at his word when you consider that Franks is an attorney who just so happened to be representing Mercy Hospital, who was seeking the approval, at the time? Franks states he only took his action apart from his position as a state representative.
So, if you’re the head of the Illinois Department of Revenue (one of the letters presented as evidence) and an attorney representing Mercy Hospital calls you to write a letter in support of their proposal, he isn’t going to notice that you also happen to be a state representative? It’s interesting that as a school board member I have to file a Statement of Economic Interest every year, more or less disclosing any business interest I have in firms doing business with our board but it’s just fine for a state representative to work as an attorney for a hospital seeking state approval to build a new facility.
The Sun-Times also covered how the attorney for the board testified about the vote in question for the Mercy proposal. According to her testimony a member of the board originally voted “present” or abstained but after it was clear the vote would fail the chairman (a Rezko backed appointee) spoke to another board member Stuart Levine (who has already pleaded guilty to accepting kickbacks) who then went over to the member in question and had a private conversation with him — in the middle of taking the vote! The member then changed his vote to “aye” and the Mercy proposal passed. Although it passed the facilities board the hospital was never built.
Most of these stories have gotten beaten to interior pages thanks to Obama’s primary victory in Mississippi and other news. This case is giving yet another inside glimpse to the seedy world of Illinois politics. The question is, is anyone paying attention?
Topics: Illinois, News | No Comments »