Vote on Tuesday

I was actually planning to  publish a post titled “Vote on Tuesday?  Don’t Bother.”  Both parties run on platforms designed to energize their base and then, when elected, move toward the middle.  The result is that both parties are indistinguishable and nothing ever changes, at least not on the critical issues of immigration and trade.

Then this came in the mail yesterday:

It seems that Lance Enderle is running to replace incumbent Mike Rogers in Michigan’s 8th Congressional District.  Since moving to Michigan in ’01, I have supported Republican Mike Rogers because of his opposition to illegal immigration and amnesty for illegals.  But, like virtaully all Republicans and Democrats, Mike was a staunch supporter of free trade.  So I had to hold my nose each time I voted.  Besides, Mike’s opposition to illegal immigration was more passive than active.  Being in a “throw the bums out” frame of mind, I’d probably have voted against him this time around anyway. 

As you should know by now, there are only two issues that I believe affect the direction of this economy – trade and immigration.  Everything else is a side-show that ultimately has little impact on our economy.  Since both parties generally support high rates of immigration and free trade, I’ve had no enthusiasm for this election.  They’re all the same and no one is going to take a stand on these issues. 

But, as you can see, Lance Enderle has clearly stated his belief that NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) should be repealed, and he believes in raising tariffs on all imports.  While that actually goes further than I would (I’d only raise tariffs on manufactured imports from overpopulated nations), it’s a step in the right direction.  Tariffs on all imports would be better than what we have now.  At least now I have a reason to go to the polls on Tuesday.  And, if Enderle is elected, at least we’d have one advocate for sensible trade policy in Congress.  If he makes it, I hope he doesn’t disappoint me on these promises in the way that Obama did.

16 Responses to Vote on Tuesday

  1. hungry4food says:

    Why is Obama set to Give away our Great lakes too the United Nations ???

    OBAMA pursuing Sec.2 Policy(B-iii) accession 2 Law of Sea Convention gives away our Great lakes to the UN , WHY ?

  2. Robert says:


    I did a quick look up on Mr. Enderle and I found this quote of him:

    “If we don’t do the right thing on immigration we’ll end up with the same problem that Japan has now– a shrinking, aging population, and young people increasingly burdened by supporting older generations”
    Tell me how this view is in line with your view on cutting back on immigration? From what I can tell, he seems to have the same view as most Democrats(pretty much unlimited immigration), tell me where I’m wrong. With just a little searching I also came across a comment by Mr. Enderle where he supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform(Amnesty). Mr Enderle views are one of the main reasons I left the Democrat party. Yes he’s got it right on NAFTA and our other free trade agreements but why in the world is he for CIR?

    • Pete Murphy says:

      My choice is between the incumbent, who staunchly supports free trade while opposing illegal immigration, and Enderle, who opposes free trade while supporting immigration. I choose the latter because the immediate effects of free trade on our economy are far worse than that of immigration. Free trade with only 8 nations (Japan, Ireland, Mexico, Germany, Italy, South Korea, Malaysia and China) has raised our “effective” population density to 242 people per square mile. Throw in all nations and it rises to almost 400. (Our actual population density is about 85.) It would take over 100 years of immigration at today’s rate to raise our actual population to that same level. Therefore, trade is the far more immediate threat to the economy than immigration.

      Until some candidate comes along who’s opposed to both free trade and immigration, I have to choose from the lesser of two evils. All I was saying with this post is that it’s refreshing to find a candidate who “gets it” on trade. I hope it’s an indication of the start of a trend.

      P.S.: The incumbent’s opposition to illegal immigration has been passive at best. He hasn’t introduced any legislation to address the issue. Talk is cheap. I want to see action. The same goes for Enderle. If elected, unless he follows through with action to address the trade issue, I’ll be voting for his opponent in the next election.

  3. Jeanne Diamond says:

    I don’t think we will win the war on free trade in the political battles. They are too heavily stacked against us, in part because so few people really understand the difference between free trade and fair trade. We need to educate, and mobilize the masses into a grassroots movement. When the public understands and commits to purchasing only fair trade, we win.

    • Pete Murphy says:

      Jeanne, be careful with the concept of “fair trade.” Free trade advocates throw this term around to ward off pressure for protectionist measures. They want us to believe that if we just stick with free trade long enough and correct things like inequities in labor and environmental protections, then it will work. The fact is that free trade with overpopulated nations will never, ever work. Only the use of tariffs can provide for restoration of balance in trade with such countries.

  4. hungry4food says:


    • hungry4food says:

      and scroll down to Sec.2 Policy(B-iii) you will read the line (iii)under “The United States shall promote this policy by”: pursuing the United States’ accession to the Law of the Sea Convention; the ” Law of the SEA Convention ” Which regulates ONLY ” International Waters ” what Obama wants to do Is place USA waterways into control under this UNITED NATION REGULATORY POLICY Which would Require the United States to Conform on USA Land to the Environmental Management and Commercial Developments of our Water Ways as How the United nations would DICTATE the USAGE LAWS

      • hungry4food says:

        I don’t see how the Dollar can retain any form of Intrinsic value if the Waters of the USA are placed under control of the United nations . All Industrial Production and Processes use Water in their Productions of Materials and Manufacturing , and if the United Nations can Force regulations on USA industry then the Free markets will see this as a Uncertainty and we will see further restrictive growth from this action , as international Environmentalist Organizations will push the Policies of Limited Productions for the sake of saving earth from man .

      • hungry4food says:

        Go to this site to read the International Laws on what Obama wants to roll USA water control into .

      • Pete Murphy says:

        Hungry, this issue is outside my field of expertise, but just thought I should point out that the Great Lakes are international waters since they’re shared with Canada.

      • hungry4food says:

        Pete the Waters of the Great lakes are split with Borders between Canada and the USA , the UN Law of the SEA Convention has No jurisdiction over these waters now .
        But Pete its more than just the Great lakes . and the transfer of USA water usage regulations takes WE the People out of the Decision making Process , what do you think about that ?? this was what Happened when they Formed the WTO , we lost Our we the people policy over Trade negotiations with the WTO and it became a one vote policy for the USA . We wouldn’t even be able to have a say in the Law of the SEA convention Policy if its allowed to expand over USA waters .

      • hungry4food says:

        Pete the only reason to bring this into the debate over trader is because if this goes into effect in the Lame Duck session you could see the Challenge for Reserve currency made by the BRIC nations First Coming from OPEC now that Iran is President of the Oil Cartel and have made it clear with China and Russia that they want the Dollar dropped and a basket of Currencies to take the position of trade Currency .

      • Pete Murphy says:

        I’m afraid you’ve lost me in all of this. I don’t understand the relationship between the Great Lakes issue and currencies. Besides, I think the whole currency issue is a red herring. It won’t make a bit of difference in our trade imbalance – the whole point of the series I’ve been doing about the lack of relationship between currency exchange rates and trade imbalances.

      • hungry4food says:

        Pete you won’t have The Dollar as the Reserve Currency Much Longer .
        You have to have a wealth of Natural Resources to back it up . The Dollar has NO Intrinsic value backing it any longer and certainly if the Water Resources are taken away that will be the End of the Dollars as it will have lost all forms of Intrinsic value to back its worth , and the countries we trade with will reject the Dollar for the Durables we want to buy from them , I saying this will happen by the end of this year or probably next year . The BRIC nations control 98 % of the raw materials in the world now and they do not need the Dollar for their trades between themselves any longer and so it has become a worthless piece of paper to them .
        OPEC is getting ready to Reject the dollar for their Oil , and Have made a deal with China to sell them the oil instead of the USA , in exchange for durables , Without any Dollars involved , and they are doing this all South American Countries as well . This Effects your analogy greatly because the Dollar is going to collapse and this will isolate the USA from the rest of the trade Nations as they begin to reject Dollars , this is why the FEDERAL reserve is Printing Dollars and Buying USA Bonds and Treasury Notes to Fund the US Government .

  5. hungry4food says:

    You have been seeing more and more Push for a Change in the Trade currency by the BRIC nations and they together control the majority of the worlds Raw material Resources and these Guys are Part of the BRIC ALLIANCES ; OPEC NATIONS CALLING FOR NEW WORLD ORDER !!!!!!!!

    You can see where this is going ….

  6. hungry4food says:

    Tell Me the USA is NOT on the ROPES , Watch the First part of this Video and Listen to Bernanke ,Who is really running the Federal Reserve But they are Sticking the USA taxpayers with the DEBT for the Bailout to Foreign nations ??? WHY didn’t Chairman Barney FRANK And REP Allen Grayson Call for BEN Bernanke’s RESIGNATION ON THE SPOT HERE IN THIS VIDEO ???

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: