A letter-to-the-editor published this morning in response to last week’s Seth Grossman column endorsing 6th District Republican candidate Anna Little illustrates a peculiar challenge for Little and candidates like her: the tendency of her opponents to speak in facile talking points while often not reading the message they are criticizing.
Last week, talk-show host Seth Grossman endorsed Anna Little’s candidacy in the 6th District, one of a few “elections that matter” in this election season. His reason was simple: Little was the only Tea Party-approved candidate who beat out an establishment candidate in order to win her nomination. (Roland Straten, in the 8th District, had the approval of the Certified Constitutional Candidate program but also held The Line; Scott Garrett in the 5th District ran unopposed for his nomination.) As such, Grossman reasoned, Little had enough experience in scoring an upset to do the same thing this fall. He urged his readers and listeners to visit Little’s campaign website to learn more about her candidacy and her ideas.
This morning, Mr. Ralph D. Orsatti of Margate wrote this letter saying that he had done just that. But a close comparison of his letter and the material actually available on the Little site suggests that he did little more than regurgitate typical liberal talking points.
Orsatti makes one glaring factual error. The Little site’s statement on issues reads in part, “Our health care system does need to be reformed.” Somehow Orsatti read the word not in between the words does and need. Little proceeded to list six specific policies that Orsatti failed to mention:
- Tort reform.
- Allowing medical insurers to sell policies across State lines.
- Rescinding the antitrust exemptions that apply to health insurers.
- Encouraging people to establish Health Savings Accounts having rules similar to those for Individual Retirement Arrangements and salary-reduction election plans (401(k), 403(b), 457)
- Cracking down on Medicare and Medicaid fraud
- Eliminating the subsidy of care for persons other than citizens and other lawful residents.
Orsatti highlights Little’s proposal to eliminate existing federal taxes on incomes, capital gains, and estates. But he ignores the tax plan that Little would replace those taxes with: the FairTax plan, essentially a national consumption tax coupled with advance refunds of the taxes that one would pay on certain goods considered “basic necessities.” Americans for Fair Taxation also have a plan to fund Social Security and Medicare, thus giving the lie to another canard in the Orsatti letter–that Little would immediately abolish Social Security and Medicare.
The rest of Orsatti’s letter contains the usual canards against free markets, but fails to state where the Constitution authorizes any interference in those markets. It also assumes without warrant that the ordinary citizen’s ability to cope with the adversity that he cites (expensive medical treatment for the usual class of “pre-existing condition,” credit-card terms and conditions that he no doubt considers tantamount to usury, etc.) would not improve with the removal of government interference in and with those markets.
Letters like this testify damningly to the failures of the American educational system. Happily, Anna Little has her allies in the Tea Party movement who have dedicated themselves to rectifying this sort of problem.
Like this article? Want to be notified of more? Click Subscribe, above.