Letters to Politicians

August 20, 2009

Senator Bayh,

After reading the attached letter to you from a fellow Hoosier (Whom I have never met), I need to remind you how I feel as well regarding H.R. 3200 “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act” and any similar bill.  My wife and I have written and called Rep Peter Visclosky, Senator Lugar and your self on various topics during 2008 and 2009.  We have received responses from your office and appreciate them.  Since you represent us, we need to understand what you stand for and what you are doing in Washington.

Concern is growing daily over the direction our current President and Congress are taking us.

As a CPA, I believe in small, medium and large business based on my experiences.  Businesses have adjusted extremely quickly to the recession during the last 9 months.  We have cut cost in order to be able to service our customers, pay our vendors and employ as many people as we can considering the current environment.  We are making these changes so that we can return to creating wealth which can be used to reinvest back into our people and communities.  Those that have not been able to adjust because their business models completely broke down have the Bankruptcy System to re-employ the remaining assets into new productive structures.  It would take years for the US Government to adjust operations/spending the way that American Businesses have already been able to. 

My experience also tells me that the smaller businesses can adjust much more quickly than the very large ones.  That is why growing the US Federal Government with Deficit Spending and unavoidable Increased Taxes is UNACCEPTABLE.  Like AIG and GM etc, the US Government is also not TOO BIG TO FAIL.  Like the US Taxpayer Bailouts of AIG and GM only the US Tax Payer will be able to save the US Government causing extreme pain to those Tax Payers.

I say all this to say that the average tax paying Hoosier is against Government Run Health Care in whatever form or language Congress uses.  The larger the US Government grows the less freedom individual Americans have.  The Doctor expressed this very well.

We ask you to vote against any form of Government Run Health Care and any form of Health Care Reform that increases deficits or raises taxes.

Most importantly, whether you vote for or against Government Run Health Care doesn’t really matter.  What matters is if Government Run Health Care passes.  If it passes than you did not do enough to stop it!  Our only alternative than will be to vote you out of office and replace you with someone who represents us.  My family is prepared to spend our time and resources to see that we are represented in Congress now and in the future. 

No we are not a large special interest, we are Americans!  Our individual voice is small but we have remembered how to use it, and there are many of us.  Please hear us and act on our behalf.


Daniel  XXX, CPA

Hoosier Tax Payer and Voter


They are stealing THEIR MONEY!

They are stealing THEIR MONEY!

Dear Senator Bayh,

In reviewing your voting record over the past few years I was brought to question your current “Nay” vote on the 3.5 trillion dollar budget. In the past politicians (note I do not use the word statesman) in this country figure their constituents look at the last year of their voting record (if at all). You are a smart man. You realize Hoosiers are really a pretty conservative bunch of people who by nature want to work hard and be left alone. Here is my beef with your “Nay” vote on this budget… it comes across as disingenuous when you look at the fact that you are the supposed leader of the “blue dog democrats”. If you really felt that this budget was yet another step in bankrupting our country I would think you would have used your influence to join up with the GOP and at least created a filibuster to this atrocious, socialistic, illogical, spending bill. Do not get me wrong sir, I believe the GOP is at much fault as anyone for this progressive idea that growing the government is a good idea.

You are a professional politician. I am dedicating myself to see you unseated in 2010. I will work as hard as I can to bring a statesman to power. Someone who will not pull punches or waste any influence they have. As you thumb you lapels about how “smart” you were to simply vote “nay” on a bill you knew would get passed and then garner the vote of the conservative Hoosier, know this, there are many like me who are ready to see your kind lose their power over “We the People”. “We the People” are waking up. I attended the April 15th Tea Party at the State Capitol. It was the first political rally I have ever attended. I am now helping organize a July 4th rally. I wonder if your fellow Democrats and our President will continue to make fun of Americans who participate in these events failing to realize that this is not a GOP event, not just republicans, not just libertarians, not just democrats, not just “right wing extremists”, but rather angry Americans who still believe that they have a right to earn a decent wage and keep it for themselves and not be forced to share it with someone who has made BAD choices. These are people who realize that this is punishing good behavior and rewarding bad behavior.

On November 3, 2010 when you wake up wondering what just happened you might want to save this letter and put a note on it that reminds you to “Read me if I lose in 2010”. I might be dreaming that someone as powerful and manipulative as yourself can actually lose with your long history in the state. Rest easy, I am sure you will be fine and I am sure this is just a rant. I am sure you succeeded and fooled all the Hoosiers with your “Nay” vote. You and all the incumbents are going to be fine. Americans really are happy with how things are going. The GOP is not even going to back a candidate in any significant way in Indiana in 2010. They have basically already conceded defeat. It is doubtful that there really is an undercurrent of anger that is brewing and could boil over and wash away many of the politicians who have gotten America into this mess. The funny thing is people keep on talking about how the GOP needs to be rebuilt and how the democrats are on the right track. I find this funny because it seems to me that you all are in the same bed with big business, big lobbyists, and each other in many respects. I find it funny because I (and I pretty sure I am the only one who thinks this so rest easy) have been thinking that both parties need to be scrapped. The players must be replaced. Our liberty must be restored.

So maybe a “thank you” for your “nay” vote on a bill so heinous and destructive that it has the potential of driving our country into a ditch is in order. I for one will withhold my thanks realizing that it was rather easy for a “Blue Dog” in an election year to push the “nay” button knowing that the success of the bill was a foregone conclusion. I have to run and let Mr. Lugar know what I think of his “nay” vote. My sentiment is the same. Once again rest easy… all is well… you are a shoo-in come 2010.


Jeff Petersen

Add to FacebookAdd to NewsvineAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Furl

Below is a story from an involved citizen in the great state of Indiana. I KNOW it is a long read but I ask that you take the time to do so. I have not edited it. I was SO upset after reading this I felt compelled to share it with all of my readers. This story happened back in 2007. This Senator is STILL in power. For now……

I can tell you for a fact that Lugar is FOR amnesty and virtually anything else that rewards illegal aliens. He proudly displays a framed picture of him receiving an award from La Raza in his office. I’ve been to his Indy office many times, along with likeminded friends at times, and have called more times than I can count. I have been told, and yelled at, by his staff that:

1) Being against amnesty is an emotion driven, knee-jerk reaction of uneducated constituents. There is NO reason anyone would be against it.

2) Myself and likeminded Hoosiers are just too simple to understand the big picture or the process of government the way Lugar and other amnesty supporters do.

3) Lugar doesn’t work for his constituents. He’s sent to Washington to do what HE thinks best, regardless of what the majority of his constituents demand or desire. (I kid you not. His staffer said those exact words to me “The Senator is not in Washington to do what his constituents want.”)

Here is the report I wrote after my last visit to Lugar’s office, which was awful, in June, 2007. I dissolved into tears at one point and was so stressed from this incident that I suffered a shingles outbreak the next day (something that always happens with extreme – and I do mean extreme – stress.) I shared this with bloggers, family and friends. ~ Tish

The four of us met outside Lugar’s and Bayh’s offices at around 9 a.m. Our plan was to go into each Senator’s office and register our opposition to SB 1639, the Grand Amnesty, and to formally request that each Senator vote against cloture on that bill later that morning.

I expected to have the same experiences I’ve had in the past: a staffer takes notes of our points, our suggestions, and our requests, followed by a shaking of hands all around and a quick exit from the office; nothing but a semi-friendly exchange of time for all. That is not what happened at all.

The meeting in Lugar’s office, which was conducted with two Lugar staffers, Lane Ralph, Deputy State Director, and Bob Healey, Staff Assistant, started out with Cheree giving points of why we were against the bill. They listened politely – at first.

When I suggested that it was “sheer lunacy” (my words exactly) for our Senators to even be debating amnesty for 12 to 20 million illegals and doubling legal immigration at a time when our system couldn’t even keep up with our current immigration, Lane Ralph said that was my “philosophy” and dismissed me with a wave of his hand. He said, none too friendly, he wasn’t here to discuss philosophical issues. I said it was “reality,” not merely my philosophy and that the people of Indiana agreed with me. I said 90% of the people in Indiana are against amnesty and want our borders secured. He yelled – yelled – “80% of the people in Indiana want change!” He shook his head in a cocky sort of way as he said it. I came back with, “EXACTLY! Giving amnesty is what has always been done. It’s maintaining the status quo.” His intellectual response was, “No it isn’t.” “Sure it is!” I said. He then leaned toward me (he was sitting directly to my right) and condescendingly “explained” what status quo meant, as if to suggest I was too stupid to understand the term. He said it very slowly, as if he was speaking to a mentally impaired person, “Status quo means ‘no change’.” “Yes,” I said, “this will be the 8th amnesty in 20 years. The change people want is for current laws to be enforced.” How the idiot could even suggest with a straight face that giving amnesty is not the same ol’, same ol’ is beyond me!

At this point, rather than discussing something substantive, or doing his job which was to take notes so he could give our message to the Senator, he was more comfortable with insulting me yet again, as if pretending my comments were nothing more than the “philosophical” rantings of an ignorant, mentally impaired woman weren’t enough of an insult. He said, “That is an emotional issue! This shouldn’t be an emotional issue!” I said, “Excuse me, but it is an emotional issue for many and,” kind of laughingly, I said, “I’m not a robot; if you rouse my emotions, you’re gonna see them.” He said, “Well, perhaps you’d be better of discussing this some other place then.” Cheree said, “Oh? Where should we be discussing this issue?” He responded, “Emotional counseling.” I looked at Cheree with a “WTF?!” look on my face because I could not believe what I was hearing. The cat had caught my tongue! I was so shocked that I couldn’t respond.

Helen spoke at length about various things and the entire time she spoke, he would shout over her, as though he was trying to “out” her as ignorant or something. He would aggressively shout over her, throw out demanding questions as if trying to get her to reveal that she didn’t really know what she was talking about. I watched him as he did this, half thinking of striking him, and I noticed his hands were shaking as he yelled. I started wondering if he was, perhaps, a bit unstable because of the amount of outpouring from the public over this issue. Poor staffer, made to deal with the unruly, uneducated, unwashed pestilence called the “American people.” As the meeting progressed, he made it abundantly clear that was HIS philosophy!

When Cheree made the comment about the unusual process the Senate was taking in their attempts to shove amnesty down our throats, Lane Ralph practically jumped out of his chair and, condescendingly, shouted, “You’re wrong! That’s the system. That’s the way the system works! Republicans do it to Democrats when they’re in charge and Democrats do it to Republicans when they’re in charge! That’s our system and it happens all the time!” From all of us came the question, “So Senators pass laws they don’t read all the time?!” He continued yelling “No, they don’t read every word of every bill, but someone does! Senators read summaries of the bills.” He then went into a missive about how our government works. How amendments are made to make bills better or fix them when they’re bad, etc. Cheree said that Senators weren’t being allowed to offer amendments, that they were cherry picked by a select few. Again, he yelled “That’s how it works!”

At this point, Cheree, being every bit as upset as I was, grabbed the picture of her son and said that if that was the system, it was WRONG. She held up the picture. For a moment, I thought she was going to start crying. Bless her heart, she let them have it! “This is my son. He has served and bled for this country, and he’s still being treated at Walter Reed for injuries received in Iraq. He has to fight to get anything from the government. He was just turned down by our government for occupational rehab therapy. His chosen career was law enforcement, but now he’s blind in one eye because of his service to the country. The government is denying him help, but is trying to give rights to people who have broken our laws! Don’t you tell me what’s going on is “right”! She slid the picture across the table and she was angry as hell. The only one who bothered to pick up Troy’s picture was Bob Healey. He asked a few questions about him, like how old he was, and laid the picture down. If my memory serves me correctly, Lane Ralph never glanced at the picture. He wasn’t there for anything but a fight, it seemed. I know I most likely have Cheree’s comments botched, but that was the gist of them. I felt like standing up and applauding when she was done!

I think it was at this time that Tina said that Senator Lugar should listen to and respect the wishes of his constituents. Lane Ralph began yelling something at her again, something about “hundreds of years ago when this government was formed, Senators were sent to do what they felt was best for their constituents.” I smarted off, “Oh oh, that’s a philosophical issue,” but he apparently didn’t hear me because he kept ranting. I interrupted and said things aren’t like they were 100 years ago and that Senators have the ability to learn how their constituents feel. I said a law should be introduced where issues have to be put before the people of the states and that Senators should be forced to vote accordingly. He whipped his head around to look at me, and demanded, “Oh! Like the 55 mph laws?!” Not sure what he was trying to get at, I said yes, maybe “sure”, I don’t really remember. He snorted, like he had “caught” me being stupid or something and yelled, “Oh yeah! People really follow THAT law, don’t they?” and turned away. Again I looked at Cheree and said quietly, “I’m ready to go. This isn’t getting anywhere.”

I didn’t get up to leave because I didn’t want to be rude or leave my group. I couldn’t understand much of what was said after that, except those times I smartassishly piped in, “And yet ANOTHER philosophical issue!” or “Oh, that’s your philosophy.” I remember I said that when he felt it necessary to give us uneducated four a history lesson in government and immigration, particularly at those points when he said everyone who had ever come to America was an “illegal,” that “we are all immigrants,” and that we didn’t know who the indigenous peoples of this land were, that it might even be the Hispanics who are coming here illegally. The man wasn’t there to discuss philosophies – except his own.

The point was made again that the Senator wasn’t listening to Hoosiers on this issue, as evidenced by his votes, and he blew his lid. He was glaring at Tina, I believe, and shouting, “Don’t we take your names, addresses and numbers when you contact us?! We don’t do it because WE want to, we do it BECAUSE THE SENATOR REQUESTS THAT INFORMATION!!! The Senator gets a list every day of those who contact us and why they contacted us!!!!” He was slamming the tip of his finger on the notepad in front of him as he yelled.

I finally had enough of his shouting, arguing, condescension and outright contempt towards us. I said, “That’s it!” and jumped up to leave. I knocked the chair over backwards. I said, “Sorry about the chair,” none too friendly, as I picked it up. I think I told Cheree I was going to the restroom, I don’t really remember. I just had to get away from that condescending, shouting maniac before I did something to land myself in jail. I stormed out, closing the door without taking any precautions to make sure it shut quietly. I found the restroom and my husband called seconds after I walked in. As soon as I heard his voice, I started bawling. I hate getting that angry. And then when it makes me cry, which it always does, I get even angrier for not being strong enough not to cry. I hollered, vented really, in hubby’s ears for a couple of minutes and started working on calming down. I washed my hands, wiped the tears away, and left the restroom to walk around and compose myself. Once that was done, I headed back up to Lugar’s office. I walked in and went straight to the conference room. When I walked through the door, the shouting maniac, Lane Ralph, was standing there as the meeting was coming to an end. He said, “Oh, hey, I’m sorry.” It didn’t seem genuine in the least. I responded through clenched lips which had begun quivering again, threatening tears because I was so angry, “I didn’t come here for a civics lesson. I didn’t come here for a history lesson and I didn’t come here for condescension.” He turned around and walked away. I turned and shook Bob Healey’s hand and said, as Lane Ralph stood on the far side of the conference table, “It was a pleasure meeting YOU,” and thanked him for his time. The next time I looked over, I saw Lane Ralph leaving the conference room through a back door. Good.

The whole experience was a negative, infuriating one. It left me drained and shaking. I’m shaking now, just typing this brief and remembering.

While Mr. Healey was much more friendly and affable than Lane Ralph, he still approached us from the perspective that we were really just too stupid to understand how things really work. He went through a rather lengthy explanation of how the contacts to the Senator’s office are logged and sent to the Senator at one point in the discussion. What they refuse to understand is that no one cares HOW it’s done! If the Senator is going to ignore what the large majority of his constituents want anyway, it makes no difference HOW it’s done or even IF it is done!

None of us deserved the treatment Mr. Ralph unleashed on us that day. We did not go to our Senator’s office to argue, to receive a history lesson, a civics lesson, or to be dismissed as irrelevant and ignorant. Thanks to Lane Ralph, that is precisely what happened.

It was quite clear that these staffers were more interested in telling us HOW to think and intimidating us into adopting their stance rather than listening to anything we had to say. And when we said things they didn’t like or with which they disagreed, the tactic of the day was to scream and insult us.

When we left the office, we met outside to kind of gather ourselves. We couldn’t believe what had just happened. I went to put some change in the parking meter because I had only filled up 40 minutes’ worth at around 9 a.m. The meter showed that my time ran out 59 minutes before. We had been in there for approximately an hour and a half.

I don’t know if Lane Ralph was merely at his breaking point because of the stress of his duties and the pressure from the public or not. I’m inclined to think his treatment of us is merely an extension of his boss’ view towards us, “Those pesky Americans! Why can’t they sit down, shut up and leave us smart people alone so we can do our job?!” They don’t realize that WE are their employers. I hope Hoosiers join me in reminding them at every opportunity that they WORK FOR US and WE PAY THEM. We aren’t their “subjects,” though it’s very clear that is how they would prefer it to be



Bookmark and Share

Dear Senator or Representative,

I have just finished reviewing the “toxic asset” rescue plan. I know that I am suppose to call them “legacy assets” but you will have to excuse me for calling things as I see them. I am just a constituent and not an economist but after reading articles from various sources that both support and oppose the idea. Here are my observations:

1. These Private Investors who are to partner with the Federal Government will invest in these toxic assets with little risk. These investors will have their risk subsidized by using my money (taxpayer money).
2. No one knows who these Private Investors will be but almost everyone agrees that they are going to be given a sweetheart deal.
3. Senator Lindsay Graham, appearing on Greta FOX NEWS, laughed at the notion that everyday people like me would have the opportunity to take part in this sweetheart deal
4. The administration only has 100 billion (only seems to be a funny term when talking about 100 billion dollars) to devote to the project. I am assuming they will need to come back to you for approval for more bailout money if this program is a success.
5. This plan continues to weave the Federal Government into the Private Sectors web.

I want you to understand what I am saying to you loud and clearly. I want you to oppose any further spending and any further involvement in the private sector. I want you to instead of working on new ways to spend my money along with my not yet born grandchildren’s money rather work on balancing the Federal Budget. This will NOT happen by reforming Health Care, developing green energy, or making it easier for young people to get college loans. Rather, you all will have to tighten your belts and cut spending.

Furthermore, I find it sickening that Tim Geitner and the administration are going to partner with the private sector without any congressional oversight. I find this plan to be in contradiction of a free market economy. I find it REPULSIVE that the taxpayer is taking on most or even ALL of the risk in this plan and that my elected officials are not outraged. I know you are powerless over the 100 billion dollars of my money (ok it isn’t all mine but I figured I would personalize it) that is being devoted to this anti free market program.

I refuse to believe all of what I am hearing out of Washington and in the media that the American people and even America itself would or even could crumble because of a company like AIG failing. I realize that this program affects many institutions but the free market demands that these institutions that made bad loans should be held accountable. Could it be that the federal government (that is you) feels guilty about the fact that many of these toxic assets were created by this idea that every American should be able to own a home? Either way the lesson should be learned that government involvement in the private sector makes things worse not better. Please, for the love of the Constitution and the American people, stop spending our money like drunken sailors on failed institutions and on people who do not contribute to the nation.




Bookmark and Share

Folks… here is a letter I sent to Senator Lugar. I found this aid to be less than helpful. This is the problem with Washington. These people have forgotten that they work for US!

Senator Lugar,

I spoke with one of your aids in your Washington DC office by the name of John. I would like to know the following:

1. Why can’t John give me his last name. I run a business and we feel that it is important to give out full names so there can be accountability.

2. I asked John what ex post facto law meant. He said yes. I asked him if he would explain it to me. He told me that he did not have to. I told him how can he explain my concerns to you if he does not understand them.

3. I asked him if he realized that I pay his salary along with your salary and did he realize that he worked for me. His response… I do not have to answer that question.

Senator Lugar,

I called your peer Senator Bayh’s office and was treated substantially better. Considering I vote conservative I find this to be a problem. You work for me as does John.

Let me be clear about my position on this whole AIG bonus garbage. You all legislated this problem into existence. Senator Dodd made an admendment that allowed these bonuses to be honored. The bill was voted on and passed. For you all to try to cover this up and appease the MOB by violating Article 1 section 9 of the U.S. Constitution is unthinkable to me. You swore to uphold this document that protects us from government. We are not a democracy but a republic. Law supercedes the MOB. Please do not allow public opinion to stand in the way of your OATH.


xxxx xxx xxxxx


var addthis_pub=”jspblog”;
Bookmark and Share