Greg Awtry

During the primary election there were three excellent candidates running for the Republican nomination, and of course the blast from the past Bob Kerrey seemingly tapped as the Democrat candidate facing little if any challenge from within his party.

Deb Fischer was running a distant third and with little statewide name recognition she was up against the better known State Attorney General Jon Bruning and State Treasurer Don Stenberg.
The York News-Times listened to all three as they visited York.

We came out early and were the first newspaper in the state to endorse Deb Fisher. We liked what we saw in this effective legislator. She was articulate, had a no-nonsense way about her and most importantly was not engrossed in partisan politics.

Fisher won. Kerrey won. Now the two are asking for our support in the general election next week.

The York News-Times has decided not to endorse either candidate, even though the ramifications of this statewide race could have an enormous impact on Washington. This contest could decide no less than the balance of power in the United States Senate.

We can’t endorse Bob Kerrey. The single most important reason is that he has not cared enough about York citizens to do a single campaign stop in our city. He has on two separate occasions told us he would schedule a stop, but has not fulfilled his promises. How could we possibly endorse a candidate who breaks promises before the election? You see, words mean things, promises mean things, and broken promises speak louder than words.

Deb Fischer on the other hand did stop in York, but it is clear this is not the Deb Fischer of only a few short months ago when she was running in the primary. There are two reasons we cannot endorse Fischer.

Fischer signed the Grover Norquist tax pledge. On the surface you might think this is a good move. Who wants higher taxes? On second thought, Deb Fischer could be elected to a six-year term and to go into office pledging not to raise income taxes. With our country $16 trillion in debt her pledge does not show a willingness to address our fiscal crisis in a meaningful way.

That $16 trillion in debt belongs to us, our generation, not our children or grandchildren, and regardless of the overspending in Washington there is no way we can simply cut our way to a balanced budget and repay our debt. At some point, we as a generation have to pony up and pay for the government we wanted, and repay the money we borrowed to fund it.

Signing a pledge saying no increase in income tax is irresponsible and short sighted. Fischer, not knowing what the future holds, has limited her options, limited her ability to compromise and reduced the American people’s chance of clawing our way out of the fiscal crisis we are in right now.

Another reason we cannot endorse Fischer is because she is willing to put the waters of Nebraska at risk, which could not only jeopardize our entire economy but endanger citizens’ health as well. She is in favor of the Keystone XL pipeline, a pipeline owned by a foreign corporation which wants to transport extremely dangerous DilBit through our state, so much of it can exported tax free from the Gulf of Mexico.

She ignores TransCanada’s dismal safety record, as cited by Canada’s National Energy Board just two weeks ago. She ignores the fact Keystone won’t divulge the contents of the substances they will transport. She ignores the fact the new pipeline bill signed in January of this year calls for a two-year study on DilBit and the pipelines that will carry it. Fischer ignores the people from her own district who are fighting like warriors to preserve and protect Nebraska’s waters.

Fischer isn’t willing, even as a candidate, to stand up and fight for property owners who have been threatened with eminent domain by a foreign corporation that has yet to receive a federal permit, isn’t willing to preserve the rivers and Ogallala Aquifer at all costs and doesn’t seem concerned about the danger to Nebraskans’ health if this pipeline is allowed to go though our groundwater.

There is no way this newspaper could endorse a candidate whose political ambitions seem greater than the needs of the people.

Meanwhile, in Washington, the most powerful political figure in the U.S. is Harry Reid, the Majority Leader in the Senate, who has singlehandedly shut down Congress by not allowing bills that have been passed in the House to come up for votes in the Senate. Reid, hiding behind his majority, has not even passed a budget in more than three years. He needs to go.

The only way this happens is if the Republicans get a majority in the Senate. Fischer’s win, if it happens, will help in that cause, but we cannot in good conscience endorse Fischer. Nor can we endorse Kerrey, who was encouraged to run by the very same Harry Reid.

At this time all we can do is hope Washington and the winner of Fischer/Kerrey realize the work of the American people is not being done, and that they must use every ounce of energy to break the partisan gridlock and cross party lines to advance the will of the people.

The York News-Times will remain ever diligent and will continue to report how well the winner of this Fischer/Kerrey contest does the people’s work: How they spend our money and how they vote to put this nation back on a promising fiscal path.

Follow Greg on Twitter, Facebook and read his Blog

Nebraskans are lucky to have two extremely qualified candidates running for the open U.S. Senate seat left vacant by the retiring Ben Nelson. Until now State Senator Deb Fischer and former Senator Bob Kerrey have been campaigning solo across our state. That ended when the two faced off in a debate staged at the Nebraska State Fair in Grand Island.

If you took the time to go to, listen to, or watch this first debate, it wouldn’t take long to see these two candidates are focused squarely on the issues, and for a political junkie, it was a refreshing to finally see two candidates discuss America instead of each other.

They openly spoke with passion about Nebraska and their love of this great country. The issues of experience, public service, rural versus urban, or Kerry’s stint away from Nebraska, are no longer in question. They agree on little politically, but there is no question they are on the same page when it comes to their desires to help our nation through difficult times and to lay down a path for a prosperous future. Their paths though, travel very different routes.

Fischer is a self-admitted smaller government candidate, focusing on the core fundamentals of government. Kerry, on the other hand is one quick to turn to federal programs on a wide range of issues. Fischer wants lower taxes, while Kerry wants higher taxes. Both want to reform entitlements albeit it in different ways. Both say they will work across party lines, but then all candidates say that… few actually do it.

Kerry is smart. Fischer is tough. Kerry seems stuck in the nineties, referencing the past many times during the debate, while Fischer seems firmly positioned in the present. Neither gave a clear vision of the future during the debate.

I listened to every word. They seemed to disagree about TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline, but when pressured a bit, both are in favor. Kerry is more of a wind energy guy, Fischer a drill baby drill position, although both believe in alternate forms of energy production, especially ethanol.

They have major differences on immigration. Kerrey more along the traditional liberal lines of pathways to citizenship and Fischer stressing border security and employment enforcement.

But as I listened to everything from their opening to their closing remarks I couldn’t help but focus on a statement Bob Kerrey made in both his opening and closing. He said he promised to “narrow the gap between rich and poor”. What exactly does he propose? It is eerily similar to the “redistribute the wealth” talk we hear about President Obama. But it was important enough to Kerrey to mention it in his first and his last comments.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it claim government’s responsibility is to “narrow the gap between the rich and the poor.” It is not a fundamental role of government to control the amount of wealth one may or may not accumulate in their lifetime. Although there are many things one can find to agree with regarding Kerrey’s positions on issues, this reoccurring comment about narrowing the gap is very revealing. He must expand on this promise.

We know he favors Obamacare. We know he favors the federal department of education. We know he favors more government than we can afford. We know he wants to raise taxes. And now we know that he wants to use the senate to help him reduce the gap between the rich and the poor. What we don’t know is how and at what cost to the taxpayers.

As the next few months unfold, beware of campaign promises. As these two candidates come to your town, seek them out, ask questions, make them be specific about not only how they can make campaign promises a reality but how much will it cost, and more importantly, ask them if we can afford it.

At one point in the debate, Kerrey said it would take only a high school chemistry class to figure out we are undergoing man-made climate change. I would remind Kerrey that a Nebraska grade school student could figure out with their lunch money that borrowing $4 billion a day to fund a government we cannot afford is a more immediate threat and a larger government is not the answer.

Follow Greg on Twitter, @YNTgreg Facebook and read his Blog

Isn’t it comforting to know we all will have Obamacare as our nation goes broke? Isn’t it comforting to know women will have free contraception as our nation goes broke? Isn’t it comforting to know college tuition won’t go up as our nation goes broke? Isn’t it nice to know men can marry men and women can marry women as our nation goes broke?

Isn’t it nice to know Romney cut off a student’s hair while in high school, or that he kenneled a dog on the top of his car on a family road trip, or that Obama once ate a dog as a child, all while our nation goes broke.

Folks the Obama and Romney campaigns are disgusting. They are both out there fiddling while “Rome” burns.

The people get up every morning and wonder if they can make their house payment or fill up their car. Congress, equally disgusting, walks into the Halls of Congress to take a seat firmly on its hands, all the while a country is desperately seeking strong and honest leadership.

Instead of vision we get venom. Instead of progress we get partisanship. Instead of hope we get hate.

So far the American people are witness to two campaigns begging for money so they can continue what will be the most expensive and divisive presidential campaign in history.

And if you think it is bad now, just wait a few months. By the end of the year our country is facing massive tax increases. We are once again nearing our debt limit that will have to be increased or we’ll face government shutdowns again.

They govern like there is no tomorrow, which is more truth than fiction if Congress doesn’t take up and solve our fiscal insanity.

President Obama, our nation’s leader, had his last three budget votes go down in defeat by a combined vote of 610 to zero! His budgets are so bad not one Democrat has voted yes. And this man wants another four years to lead us to prosperity! Is he nuts or are we?

Mitt Romney is not much better. He should be called “The Finger-pointer in Chief.” He got this far by clearing the Republican field with negative campaigning and now it looks like that sorry strategy will be his tactic as he finger-points all the way to November. If he campaigns that way, will he also govern that way?

We, the American people, working our tails off to improve our country and ourselves, deserve an honest discussion between these two egocentric candidates. We demand ideas and solutions. We demand answers and action. We have earned it.

Washington, get the hell out of our bedrooms, get the hell out of our businesses, get the hell out of the nation-building-war-making world view of utopia and get up each and every morning and go to work attacking the country’s fiscal crisis with the zeal you put into fighting terrorists.

President Obama and Governor Romney, you have a country filled with hardworking Americans ready and able to move into action to help get us out of the mess you and your ilk have gotten us into. You have a country blessed with abundant natural resources and innovative businesses ready to retake the economic high ground in this global economy.

We the people are ready. We’ll roll up our sleeves and work harder than ever if either one of you decide to treat us like intelligent adults by sharing your vision of the future and stop beating up the past. We are smart. We know Washington has failed. We know blame can be laid at the feet of both parties. We know all that, so stop spending millions telling us. We get it already!

Inspire us. Hey, Obama’s underlying theme of “It could have been worse” just doesn’t do it for the voters. Inspire us. Romney, lay off the whole community organizer thing. Inspire us. Motivate us. Mobilize us into an economic engine like the one we engineered during World War II. Only this time the fight is not against communism. This time we must pull together to overcome the shortcomings of our own government, which is so blindly spending away our very future.

The people are ready. It’s a crying shame our presidential candidates and United States Congress are not.

Follow Greg on Twitter,
Facebook and read his Blog

The big debate for Nebraska Republican Senatorial candidates came and went without substantial and specific dialogue about how any of the candidates would solve the nations’ problems.

Deb Fischer, Jon Bruning and Don Stenberg spent the entire hour with the tired old position statements, “I’m for this,” or “I am against that.” The debate began flat, stayed flat and ended flat.

Here they were, debating at a college campus, and not a college student in sight. No live audience, very little pressure from the panel to seek out specifics, and voters had to come away with more questions than answers on who best will go to Washington with a plan and a vision to fundamentally change this country.

All three candidates said time after time they supported a balanced budget amendment. All three do not want to increase taxes. That means we would have to cut a trillion in spending each year to balance the budget. Folks, that is cutting one third of our government.

Here’s a question that wasn’t asked. “What specifically would you cut or eliminate that would add up to a trillion dollars a year?”

All three said they are against illegal immigration, and do not support amnesty for millions of illegals who are already here. Here’s a question that wasn’t asked. “What would you do with the millions of illegal immigrants who are in the United States right now?”

Would they deport millions of people? Would they aggressively go after employers who are illegally hiring immigrants? They all want a secure border. Are they in favor of a fence? How would they secure the border?

Instead we got questions about who could they work with in the senate or explain a mistake you made and regret. We got questions asking about opponents’ weaknesses which to his credit, Bruning refused to answer.

All three candidates want to reduce the size and scope of the federal government. My question would be, “Please explain and be specific!”

All three want to drastically reduce the regulatory burdens of federal agencies. My question would be, “Please explain and be specific!”

The panel that questioned these candidates missed a heck of an opportunity to dig past the “position statements” and uncover the candidates’ real solutions to problems facing America.

The voters were left empty handed with no more knowledge of the candidates and their solutions, if any, than when the debate began.

Follow Greg on Twitter, Facebook

How a candidate campaigns sheds light on how the candidate will govern.

Six years ago the senatorial race between Ben Nelson and Pete Ricketts revealed how low campaigns can go.

The York News-Times received more letters concerning the two candidates’ gutter politicking than letters in support or against either man.

The York News-Times publically made it clear that any future endorsements of candidates by this newspaper would put as much emphasis on how a candidate conducts his or her campaign as it puts on the candidate’s message.

In the end, Nelson, with much larger name recognition, won the embarrassing Senate race and stayed true to his campaign style.

Nelson went on to embarrass Nebraskans when he cast the controversial vote for Obama’s health care plan resulting in the now infamous Cornhusker Kickback, which became the topic of the nation in all major media outlets.

Fast forward to 2012. We have four serious candidates vying for the Republican nod: Jon Bruning, Don Stenberg, Deb Fischer and Pat Flynn.

We have one serious candidate, Bob Kerrey, running on the Democratic side. The York News-Times has followed each campaign, listened to their messages, both by personal interviews conducted by this newspaper as well as their public campaign messages in other media.

If how the candidates conduct their campaigns carries as much weight as their messages, and it does with this newspaper, then the clear choice for Nebraska is State Senator Deb Fischer.

We dismiss Bob Kerrey, not so much for his political views but because he has not made a clear case why he wants the Senate seat.

He has not been a convincing candidate since he waffled on whether he would even run, first deciding no, and then changing his mind to yes.

We don’t feel Bob Kerry is driven to serve, evident by his original indecision, nor is he as in tune with Nebraska as he should be.

Jon Bruning, Don Stenberg, Deb Fischer and Pat Flynn have all run serious campaigns. Name recognition goes to Bruning and Stenberg, but voting simply on name recognition is irresponsible.

Voting on character and political positions is what the York News-Times looks at when considering an endorsement.

Since all four are Republicans, they have similar views on the nation’s issues.

They want to reduce federal spending, reform the tax code, repeal Obamacare, deal with illegal immigration, reduce the national debt and rein in the growth of government and over regulation.

Bruning is making a national name for himself and would be a strong voice for Nebraska. Stenberg would be a consistent conservative and would also represent Nebraska well.

In our view Deb Fischer, who has conducted her campaign with dignity and class, is the clear choice to become the next United States senator from Nebraska.

Fischer made a decision early on that her current job as state senator and chairperson of the Transportation Committee was her first priority. That decision is a noble one even though her dedication to fulfill her obligation in the State Senate has hampered her campaign.

She was doing the work Nebraskans hired her to do instead of freely campaigning across the state. Now that the legislative session is over we’ll see more of her.

Who is Deb Fischer? She is a Sandhills rancher with a rural work ethic to go with it. Fischer takes issues head-on in a calm analytical style and most importantly can build a political coalition.

As head of the Transportation Committee, Fischer had to deal with the fundamentally critical issue of road funding.

It has been an uphill battle, one she won after years of trying to get a fair and sustainable approach to ensuring state dollars are adequately appropriated for roads.

Deb Fischer is sharp as barbed wire and tougher then a cedar fence post. She knows who she is, what she stands for and has not succumbed to the finger-pointing accusatory campaign styles of other candidates.

This indicates Fischer will be less likely to play Washington’s gridlock game, nor get caught up in putting party above sensible politics.

Deb Fischer has shown she can rise above the political rhetoric and focus on issues. At the end of the day, that is what the York News-Times finds so refreshing about her campaign and why we endorse Senator Deb Fischer for United States Senate.

The last time she visited the York News-Times Fischer was comfortable in her conservative positions, refused to tear down her opponents and displayed a very professional and deliberate approach to solving the nation’s issues.

Although the day she was in York she had no dirt under her fingernails, one quickly got the sense this tough Sandhills rancher knows what it is like to put in a long day of hard work.

The very soil that makes our state so valuable has been all over her hands many times.

Fischer understands rural Americans.

She is one.

Washington needs people like Deb Fischer.