PA Electoral Choices, 2016: The Economy

As with yesterday's post, this is a "double blind" study.  The candidates are once again mixed around.  I tried to boil the sometimes pages-long statements down to the most relevant parts.  I tried to be fair and give each candidate the same amount of space.  But this could only be approximate.  As with the last two posts, I will reveal who is who when this series is over.

Candidate 1:  "The current tax code is over 80,000 pages and it is written by Washington insiders...I want to eliminate the convoluted, lobbyist-created loopholes in the code." "Pennsylvania small business has been under assault...I will increase jobs in Pennsylvania by lifting federal impediments to small business development..."

Candidate 2:  "Raise the minimum wage to a living wage...and tie it to inflation...There is no reason that someone working full time in the United States of America should not be able to support themselves."  "We can rebuild America rather than spend trillions on foreign wars...We can employ Americans, retrain Americans instead of watching American workers train their foreign replacements..."

Candidate 3: [no statement on website specifically concerning the economy, budget, or jobs]

Candidate 4: "For the sake of our economy, job growth, and future generations, Washington's overspending and rising debt must be fixed." "Millions of Pennsylvania families live within their means every day; it’s time to make the federal government do the same."

Candidate 5: [congress should] "...advance policies that enable families to get ahead — like expanding tax credits that make child care more affordable."  "I support boosting the minimum wage to $15 an hour...We need to celebrate and support hard work." [I believe in] "closing the unfair tax loopholes that incentivize sending jobs overseas and put small businesses at a disadvantage."

Candidate 6: “Congress can strengthen the economy by rolling back the hundreds of thousands of regulations in place for small businesses." [I am] "against unbalanced budgets, all tax increases, and all increases in government spending"  "I am against the federal minimum wage. The federal minimum wage interferes with an individual’s ability to negotiate their own agreement."

Coming next: Gun control, the second amendment, security, and terrorism.  

PA Electoral Choices, 2016: Environmental issues

So there's a lot at stake when you start talking environmental issues.  I, personally, was a Girl Scout, and was taught to "always leave a place better than you found it."  I would love to see our country switch to clean energy.  But I also know that the issue of energy dependence is like a many-pronged brain tumor: Yes, we know it's bad.  Yes, we know it's killing us.  But can we remove it without also killing ourselves?  Our dependence on coal and oil is not just an environmental concern; it's economic and social as well.  Coal is jobs in PA.  It's entire towns.  Since this is such a 'touchy' issue, it's a good one to compare the candidates on.  So without further ado, your candidates for congress:

Candidate 1: "I will...advocate for increases in domestic production of fossil fuels... I believe that it is essential that we utilize more of our own domestic supplies of traditional energy sources..."

Candidate 2: [would like] "...to repeal a variety of subsidies and credits for ... alternative sources of energy."  and "supports allowing more oil exploration in Alaska, the Outer Continental Shelf, and the vast oil shale reserves in America's western states."

Candidate 3: [would like] " to pass commonsense climate protections with investments in energy efficiency and clean energy." and "...support innovations in clean energy technologies."

Candidate 4: [no statement on environmental issues]

Candidate 5: [would like to] "lift federal restrictions on developing natural resources...including but not limited to hydraulic fracturing."  [says] Pennsylvania has a wealth of natural resources such as coal, oil, and natural gas that must be harnessed."

Candidate 6: "We should be investing resources in becoming more energy independent; solar and wind."  "Many of our citizens are descended from miners and oil workers who proudly supported their families with jobs in energy production...[they] will happily take on jobs created by investment in cleaner energy production...should we get the opportunity."

P.S. In case you were wondering, I wasn't kidding about this "double blind" study - I've shifted which one is which from yesterday's post.  I've kept all the answers in my cheat sheet, which I will post when all of this is said and done.

PA Electoral Choices, 2016: What are *your* issues?

So apparently PA has this "reputation" in other states.  I'm not sure if we deserve it or not, but here it is: Supposedly, we in PA tend to vote for a party, rather than a candidate.  As such, we look at whether that person has a "D" or an "R" or an "I" next to his or her name, rather than educate ourselves on the issues.  Only the candidates with money get any kind of pull, since they can campaign, flooding our real and virtual mailboxes with unwanted ads.  But what would it look like if this was a "double blind" study?  Who would you vote for if you didn't see those ads?  So I'm going to do a series of blog posts, covering the issues without naming names.  At the end of this series, I'm going to post a cheat sheet, saying which candidate is which.

First thing's first: what does this candidate THINK the issues are in this election?  What do Americans, specifically Pennsylvanians, REALLY care about?  So all I did for this first post was go to the websites of these people.  All of the websites had an "issues" header.  Some of the websites had "immediate concerns" or "main issues" on the front page.  For those candidates, I have shown "main issues" and "issues".  As you can see, there is a lot of overlap.

Candidate 1:  Main issues: creating new jobs, caring for our communities, protecting the rights of our citizens.
                     Issues: Creating Jobs/Improving the Economy, Improving Education, Clean Energy, Ensuring Affordable Healthcare, Strengthening National Security, Preserving Democracy, Standing up for Women's Rights, Fighting for Equality, Protecting Social Security and Medicare, Gun Safety

Candidate 2:  Main issues: Limit federal government, support individual's rights, Economic Growth.
                     Issues: Reduce the federal debt, Help small businesses more than big business, no Iran Deal, no new gun regulations, no federal minimum wage increase

Candidate 3:  Main issues: Security, Economy.
                     Issues:  The Second Amendment, National Security, Economy, PA Energy, Border Security, Healthcare, Education, Troops & Veterans

Candidate 4:  Issues: Healthcare, Campaign Finance Reform, Environment, Jobs/Wages. 

Candidate 5:  Issues: Agriculture, Forestry, Education, Energy, Marcellus Shale, Natural Gas, Healthcare, Military & Veterans

Candidate 6:  Main issues: Against [opponent]  Issues: Agriculture, Budget, Children/Families, Education, Energy, Healthcare, The Middle East, National Security, Public Safety, Transportation, Veterans

Just this cursory examination of the candidates' websites... what do they think is important to me?  So here's what stands out:  A lot of talk about guns and security, but only candidate 3 considers 'security' a number 1 priority.  A lot of talk about the economy, but only candidate 1 specifically mentions social security.  And a lot of talk about the environment, but only candidate 5 specifically mentions Marcellus Shale.

So these give me a starting point for tomorrow's post: Coming next: PA is big into coal and oil, and 'round here, you get people with VERY strong opinions about wind farms and solar panels. How do these 6 candidates feel about PA's energy crisis?

After that, I'll do some digging and find out economic plans, and include some quotes from the candidates on various economic proposals.

Update: Here is my post about Energy and the Environment