About Me

Name: Scott Ott
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

What Will You Do for Me If I Vote for You?

It wasn't the first time someone had asked me that question.

Last night I drove into downtown Allentown with no destination in mind other than "inner city". The sun was setting, and I found a place to park on the street (I didn't note its name). Dressed in shorts, a polo shirt, and my Vote Scott Ott campaign visor, with a baggy pocket full of campaign bookmarkers, I had walked less than half a block when I met two men and a flurry of children in front of a store. As it turns out, one man owned the store (selling the kind of shoes we used to call sneakers, electronics and more), the second man was his friend. I interrupted their conversation and introduced myself, handing them my campaign bookmarker.
Vote Scott Ott


"What will you do for me if I vote for you?" the shop owner said. "Will you get me a grant for my store?"

I'm a bad politician.

I said (paraphrasing from memory), "The first thing I'll do for you is put an end to the idea that public servants should hand out special favors to people who support them."

I told him that the next thing I could "do for him" was to abolish the idea that government is going to save you from your troubles, and to exchange that for the idea that you are responsible and free, and that no one cares more about your children, your business, your home and your neighborhood than you do. In addition, no one is better equipped to deal with the challenges of your neighborhood than you and your neighbors. But it won't happen until you stop thinking that someone else is to blame, or that some outside agency is going to intervene to fix things.

He looked at me and said, "You're a Republican."

I was delighted that he associates freedom and responsibility with my party. But frankly, my party often fails to convey this message, or to govern by the precepts we espouse. At one point, my new friend reminded me that if we were going to reduce government-run charity, perhaps we should stop funding failed mega-businesses. He expected to get an argument from me. He got none.

During the course of a long, wide-ranging and invigorating discussion they asked me about everything from my opinion of the current president, to the morality of teen girls pushing strollers on the streets (dressed as prostitutes), to whether the U.S. government should pay reparations to the descendants of slaves, and how a man with a criminal background who has cleaned up his act can get a second chance in life.

I tell you honestly, I have not had a such an intensely practical, intelligent discussion about political ideology and freedom with anyone I've met at political gatherings.

These men didn't care about the horse race of my campaign or which candidate had raised the most money. They were grappling with real life issues, and seriously thinking through the role of government.

The shop owner had started out selling socks out of the trunk of his car. When he made some money on that, he bought some t-shirts and started selling them, and so on...pouring profits back into his business. He acquired a storefront (a blessing he attributes to God), and expanded his inventory. As we chatted, he greeted nearly everyone who walked by his store and they all seemed to know him and like him.

It was way past sundown and he had to close up shop, but toward the end of our time he asked me my opinion of the president.

I told him I oppose almost every policy of the president's that I can think of. However, I said that I literally wept with joy the night he won at the thought that a black man had reached such a position in our nation. I said that I admire the fact that our president had worked hard, learned much, translated his skills into wealth through writing books, married a woman and remained faithful to her, and by all accounts is a great Daddy to his girls. I noted that his hard work, persistence, vision, focus and sense of personal responsibility had brought him to his current place. I only wish, I said, that he himself would understand the elements of his success story and recommend them to others, and that he would stop talking about Americans as if we were victims, and stop telling people that government would solve their problems. His message should be, "I grabbed the opportunity that America offers to every citizen, and my diligence has been rewarded beyond my wildest dreams. It's hard work, but it's worth the effort, and you can do it too."

The shop owner said he would check out my website, and asked me if he could put one of my campaign signs in his store window.

As I drove through downtown on my way home, I noticed that the porches and sidewalks of Allentown were teeming with children, teens, and grownups, gathered in clusters...talking, laughing, shouting.

You know, some of us reminisce about a time in American when neighbors sat out on the porch and got to know each other. That still happens, but not in the suburbs where many homes lack porches, and most folks huddle on the couch, glued to some electronic distraction, isolated from their neighbors.

It was oddly comforting to see that, despite her troubles, downtown Allentown has a sense of community that folks in the townships find only in the corners of our memories.

Surely this bond among the people can form the foundation for a rebirth and rejuvenation of the heart of Lehigh County.

Scott Ott is a twice-weekly columnist for the Washington Examiner, co-host of Trifecta on PJTV.com, editor of the world's leading family-friendly news satire source, ScrappleFace.com, and candidate for Lehigh County Executive.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (9) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Is the Health Care Industry a Net Drain on the U.S. Economy?

Today's Washington Post refers to "...the daunting challenge of remaking a health system that consumes $1 out of every $6 spent in the country..."

Did you ever wonder why journalists don't refer to other side of the balance sheet when it comes to the health care industry? Of course, they're just mouthing platitudes put out by politicians and their special-interest supporters, but it doesn't take an accounting genius to consider that across the ledger from "expense" is the word "revenue". By repeated exposure to that '1-in-6' figure, you might get the sense that the health care industry is a net drain on the U.S. economy.

Can you imagine a journalist reporting that $1 out of every $6 spent in this country is "consumed" by the media?

For the sake of this discussion, let's set aside aside the health-related outcomes of the medical business, and strictly consider the financial output.

The $1 that the "health system" allegedly "consumes" doesn't just vanish into the ether. In addition to providing tangible, often-measurable benefits to the customer, the dollar also produces the following...
  • personal income to support families (including little children) of everyone from insurance agents, to scientists, to medical equipment engineers and manufacturers, nurses, doctors, janitors, food service staff, ambulance drivers and the attorneys who chase them, construction workers, architects and many others;
  • tax revenues (real estate, income, sales, corporate, etc.) paid to local, state and federal governments, including politicians who sometimes make factually-inaccurate or misleading statements about the impact of the health care system on the economy;
  • tuition and student loan payments for degrees, from community colleges to med schools and a range of educational institutions in between;
  • contributions to charities, faith communities, public TV & radio, universities from which health care workers earn degrees, and even to incumbent politicians who send out news releases with skewed information about health care and the economy;
  • sales of unrelated goods and services to people who draw their income from health care industry employment: homes, cars, fuel, vacations, clothing, food, even newspapers and cable TV that pay journalists who sometimes report one-sided information about crucial economic issues;
  • investment income to advance medical science, as makers of drugs and medical gear do R&D to increase the effectiveness of their products;
  • retirement income for people who have invested in the stock of medical firms;
  • investment income for medical firm stockholders that then gets spent on luxury goods, commodities and everything in between.
This is not an argument for the current pricing structure (already overly-influenced by government's regulation, price fixing and subsidies). It's an effort to bring balance to the discussion, or at least discussion of the balance sheet.

A dollar "consumed" by anything but government, generally produces a dollar, more or less, in value, as well as a ripple effect through the economy that generates benefits for people in all socioeconomic strata. The one sure way to louse up this beneficent cycle of blessing is to increase control by politicians and bureaucrats who have understanding of neither health care, nor basic economics.

As you travel your community today, look at the homes, the cars, the stores, the people, the medical offices, the hospital and realize that $1 out of every $6 spent in this country supports a quality of life unsurpassed in world history, for you, your family and your neighbors, thanks to the health care industry.

There now, that should make you feel better.

Author, speaker, and Washington Examiner columnist Scott Ott, is candidate for Lehigh County Executive in Eastern Pennsylvania.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Plays 'One of These Things is Not Like the Others'

PRES. OBAMA: "...we must lower the health-care costs that are driving us into debt, create the jobs of the future within our borders, give our workers the skills and training they need to compete for those jobs, and make the tough choices necessary to bring down our deficit in the long run." -- Op-Ed in Washington Post


Do you remember the Sesame Street game "One of these things is not like the others"? You see a grouping of four objects and have to decide which one is different before the song ends.

Look at the president's list above. Can you tell which thing doesn't belong?

Song Over: The only actual federal government responsibility among the four items the president lists is to bring down the deficit. (Unless he's talking about cutting health-care costs for federal employees, or giving federal workers job skills training.) So far, his plan for bringing down the deficit seems to be to spend as much borrowed taxpayer money as possible. Under this plan, the only hope for "deficit reduction" is to alter the definition of one, or both, of those terms.

The president, who has no previous executive experience, seems to think he got elected CEO of USA, Inc. and that every part of your life is a government program over which he exercises control. In the course of his aggressive effort to run your life, he neglects (or perhaps rejects) the job he swore to do: "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Perhaps one could argue that, technically, he is upholding his oath to "execute the office of President of the United States". After all, that verb does have more than one meaning.

Author, speaker, and Washington Examiner columnist Scott Ott, is candidate for Lehigh County Executive in Eastern Pennsylvania.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Did Ginsburg Think Roe Meant Population Control for Minorities, Poor?

Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Excerpt: 
"Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe [v. Wade] was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of [emphasis mine]. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] , the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong." -- New York Times, Place of Women on the Court


Justice Ginsburg was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Bill Clinton in 1993. In 1973, when the Roe v. Wade ruling legalized abortion nationwide, Ms. Ginsburg was an attorney active in so-called reproductive rights issues. If I understand her remarks to the NY Times correctly, Ms. Ginsburg thought a contributing factor to the Court's Roe decision was concern for too much population growth among "populations that we don't want to have too many of." 

I'll grant the possibility that she may have been stating this ironically or tongue-in-cheek...not expressing her own misgivings about the multiplication of certain undesirable populations.

Nevertheless, it's startling to consider that a practicing, liberal feminist attorney could labor for seven years under the misconception (puns intended) that a Supreme Court ruling was, in part, an expression of judicially-sanctioned racial discrimination (or at least of socio-economic discrimination). One would think that Ms. Ginsburg and her colleagues would have taken to the streets in defense of poor, minority women whose wombs had suddenly become chambers of ethnic cleansing. They did not protest.

However, the ethnic cleansing continues to this day, with black and Hispanic babies aborted in numbers all out of proportion to their representation in the general population. They fall victim to knives wielded by inevitably white abortionists.

If I have misinterpreted Justice Ginsburg's remarks, then I can only note that a person who makes her living through specificity in written words may occasionally lack the power of precision in spoken words. 

Or perhaps she said exactly what she meant.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mr. President, This is What the Critics Really Say

EXCERPT FROM PRES. OBAMA SPEECH: Critics “say we are trying to do too much, that we are moving too quickly, and that we all ought to just take a deep breath and scale back our goals,” he said. “These naysayers have short memories. We did not get here by doing what was easy. That is not how a cluster of 13 colonies became the United States of America.”  -- Obama Says American ‘Spirit’ Can Confront, Resolve Challenges, Bloomberg News.


Mr. President, critics don't say that. Your supporter Colin Powell says that.

Critics say, not that you're doing "too much", but that you're doing the wrong things. Critics say that you're ...
--  interfering in free markets in a way that jeopardizes shareholder value, usurps individual rights and compromises the structural integrity of capitalism.

Critics say that you're ...
-- spending money we don't have in amounts we can never repay, thereby
-- devaluing the currency and setting up a swirling downward vortex from which there is no known economic model for escape.

Critics say that you're ...
-- pushing a government-run, taxpayer-funded, single-payer health insurance program under the guise of merely offering a public option (another scheme for which there is no known successful analog).

Critics say that you're ...
-- devastating the petroleum-based economy that has fostered the most prosperous nation in history,
-- ignoring atomic energy despite its limitless capacity to offer clean power, and
-- forcing taxpayers to gamble on so-called 'green' technologies which, despite years of research and billions of dollars of investment, still consume more energy than they generate.

Critics say that you're ...
--  compromising our national security by snuggling up to evil people who are committed to our destruction, and
--  apologizing for our history each time you step onto a foreign shore.

Critics say that you're ...
-- blaming all negatives on your predecessor while claiming credit for positives that have yet to happen, and
-- slamming anyone who disagrees with you as a narrow-minded naysayer with a short memory.

Finally, Mr. President, the 13 colonies did not become free and independent states by confiscating wealth from the productive sector of society and doling it out to the unproductive sector in a way that guarantees the perpetual enslavement of both.

This new nation, conceived in liberty, was brought forth by people who said 'Enough' to a tyrant who capriciously ruled from afar -- people who were willing to risk their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor that succeeding generations might live the freedom they bought with blood.

Mr. President when you compare your socialized insurance program, your speculative wealth confiscation program or your Niagara Falls of spending with the endeavors of those bold patriots, you trivialize their sacrifice while you crown yourself with the Styrofoam diadem of a clown.

Author, speaker, and Washington Examiner columnist Scott Ott, is candidate for Lehigh County Executive in Eastern Pennsylvania.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (19) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »