LETTER: Change for the sake of change?
To the Editor:
By now we all know the buzz word among DFL candidates is "change" -- but what exactly are those candidates trying to tell us needs to be changed?
One of the definitions in my American Heritage Dictionary says change is "a substitution of one thing for another" (but it doesn't say that is necessarily positive) so what good is "change" simply for the sake of change?
Given the positive history of Kitty Rhodes our state assembly person, who worked to see that Senior Care, the prescription drug program for low-income seniors is fully funded, who stopped the $18 billion tax increase that Gov. Doyle and the DFL wanted to impose upon our families, and whose hard work to see that a property tax freeze was approved, I wonder what Sarah Bruch thinks she should "change?" (If it ain't broke, why fix it!)
With her support of the proposed government-run Healthy Wisconsin 1 health care plan, (read socialized medicine anyone?) Sarah Bruch would bring "change" with a $15 billion price tag--which means we, the taxpayers, lose more of our paycheck every month.
Her "change" also means we'll give illegal aliens, the unemployed and even people who don't live in Wisconsin, great health care? Can you afford that?
Kitty has worked long and hard in our state government to build bi-partisan relationships so she can get these things done! If we prize experience in our doctors, pilots and teachers (among others), why would we want to replace our experienced Assembly person, Kitty Rhodes, who has proven herself able, hard-working, honest and a woman of integrity, with someone with no political experience what so ever? I trust Kitty's experience and hard work-- I hope you will too!
(1 -- Wall street Journal 7/24/07)