Letter: Scott Brown Is Not For Us

  • Comments (4)
A Shrewsbury resident says Sen. Scott Brown is beholden to lobbyist Grover Norquist.
A Shrewsbury resident says Sen. Scott Brown is beholden to lobbyist Grover Norquist. Photo Credit: File

SHREWSBURY, Mass. — The Shrewsbury Daily Voice accepts letters to the editor. Signed letters may be emailed to jswinconeck@dailyvoice.com.

To the Editor:

Scott Brown is not for us...he has said that he acts as an independent voice for Massachusetts and represents his constituents, but what he fails to mention is that first and foremost, he is actually beholden to Grover Norquist, the Republican lobbyist and operative. Scott Brown has signed the Grover Norquist no new tax pledge, in which he pledges to: ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses; and TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.

Politicians should never make open ended pledges, particularly to a private citizen with a strategy to shrink government by forcing huge cuts in programs important to millions of Americans. When asked about the disenfranchised, Norquist's response is: "They need to learn to take care of themselves." Even President George H.W. Bush has stated that, "The rigidity of those pledges is something I don't like...the circumstances change and you can't be wedded to some formula by Grover Norquist."

The pledge makes it impossible for those who have signed it to represent their states, because, if you sign the no new tax increase pledge, and then vote for a tax increase, Norquist and his money will oppose you at your next re-election campaign. Norquist will spend limitless funds to beat you down and defeat you, and for this reason, those representatives who have signed the pledge will not compromise. They fear for their jobs and they fear Grover Norquist. Therefore, they cannot fully represent their own constituents. The Grover Norquist Tax Pledge totally eliminates the concept of careful thought and compromise.

Whenever a politician claims, like Scott Brown has, that he will strongly support his constituents, we constituents deserve to know whether that support is conditional on not interfering with his prior pledge to Norquist. No one can claim independence if they have voluntarily promised to make opposing any tax increase their top priority in any discussions about debt reduction. Our representatives need to act effectively and compromise when necessary.

We need a Senator who will be an advocate for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, not Grover Norquist, a private citizen in Washington, DC. Please join me in voting for Elizabeth Warren for United States Senate.

Lisa J. Talbot, Shrewsbury

  • 4

Comments (4)

Gee, and all this time I thought I was surrounded by Millionaires, because all of his signs say "He's for us" You mean to tell me that his supporters are not all millionaires? Then why else would they support him? And don't tell me that some of his supporters are Women. Again why?

Elizabeth Warren's agenda seems to be in line with the Marxist Redistribution of Wealth. The Communist Manifesto seems to be Obamas and her playbook.

I would like to know how it benefits any hard working, tax paying American to increase citizens taxes no full well that the Congress will go on another spending binge despite the deficit of 1 trillion dollars and a national debt of 16 trillion dollars. that is a lot of zeros. Ms Warren is another academic elitist like the President that does not have a clue on how to run business, let alone a country. How is Ms Warren going to help the people of Massachusetts, she will fall in line with Mr Harry Reid (if we are lucky the Dems will lose the Senate majority) and vote lock stock and barrel straight down party lines. I don't see how that helps the citizens of Massachusetts. We had another Senator that did that for for 47 years. John Kerry the senior Senator has been in Washington for 27 years. We do not need to continue the democratic monopoly of the Senate anymore. Scott Brown has sided with both sides of the aisle, rarely did John Kerry, I am afraid Ms Warren would keep that tradition. She is a tax and spender, we no longer can afford that mentality, we are broke, facing an economic calamity that will match the Great Depression and be much worse that what the world has just been through. "Live Within Our Means" should be the Washington mantra from both sides of the aisle. We simply can not afford this reckless spending anymore.

Thanks for the politics lesson, Lisa. And the history on Grover Norquist. Can I share a little secret? None of that matters. Instead of a largely lame, one-dimensional argument as to why voters in town shouldn't vote for Scott Brown, why don't you give us a couple of really good reasons why we should vote for Elizabeth Warren?

Or, better yet, why don't you use this space to persuade more people in town to actually vote?! We both know that a low turnout spells doom for either candidate. And that's not good.

Me? I 'm voting for Scott because he seems to understand the (rapidly disappearing) middle class a whole lot better than Elizabeth Warren does. call me crazy, but that's my opinion.

Until I see more information from Liz regarding the positive change she's going to bring to me and my middle-class friends in town here, she's not getting my vote.