The Observer is a student-run, daily print & online newspaper serving Notre Dame, Saint Mary's & Holy Cross. Learn about us.



Record doesn’t lie

Mickey Gardella | Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Joe Donnelly the legislator is a lot different than Joe Donnelly the campaigner. His record contradicts what he is campaigning on. He wants you to think he has supported policies that have created jobs, is fiscally prudent, and is independent, but his record points starkly in the other direction.

The fact is Joe Donnelly voted with Nancy Pelosi 88 percent of the time, voted for the trillion-dollar (at least) government takeover of health care, and voted for the $800 billion stimulus that sent taxpayer dollars to foreign firms while the American economy has lost about three million jobs since it passed. The Democrats promised the unemployment rate would not rise above eight percent if the government implemented the stimulus. Not surprisingly, the unemployment rate is still over nine percent.

No one has to wonder where Indiana State Representative Jackie Walorski stands on the issues. As Assistant Floor Leader in the Indiana House of Representatives, Jackie was a leader in the fight for a balanced budget and responsible government. Jackie’s message is very simple: cut spending, cut taxes and get the government out of the way so businesses can expand and create jobs.

While many states are in fiscal disaster, Indiana has sound finances. She is a committed budget hawk, who wants less government and lower taxes. The longer the federal government drags its feet on the economy, the more painful Indiana’s budget and other state budgets will be.

Donnelly the campaigner would have you believe he has fought for a balanced federal budget, when in reality the national debt has risen $5 trillion since he and the Democrats took office in 2007. He says he supports using unused stimulus funds to pay down the debt. With his record of nearly maxing out the nation’s credit card, why should we believe him? Do his empty campaign promises trump his record of reckless spending?

Donnelly says he supports the extension of the Bush tax cuts for two years. Does anyone seriously think that we will be out of the woods in two years? So instead of supporting it now, Joe Donnelly supports the largest tax increase in American history two years down the road. I’m sure the business community is thrilled.

Every American person, family and business will pay higher taxes if Joe Donnelly gets his way, whether next year or in two years. He refuses to unequivocally support no new tax increases, and his and the Democrats’ position has a crippling effect on business and consumer confidence in this country.

In Indiana Jackie was part of a coalition that turned a budget deficit into a surplus. She was a leader in the fight for property tax reform and supported legislation that brought Hoosier homeowners the largest property tax decrease in state history.

She has made it clear to the Republican leadership that, if elected, she will not rubber stamp whatever they introduce. She will stick to her limited government, pro-business, and pro-life principles no matter the situation.

Every federal agency and department must be audited to cut waste and fraud. She supports freezing spending with the exception of defense to restore sanity to the system. Jackie supports extending all of the Bush tax cuts permanently to instill a sense of certainty in businesses and consumers.

The number one obstacle to economic growth in Indiana is the federal government. Joe Donnelly voted for the health care law that more Americans oppose than favor consistently in poll after poll. Donnelly claims he supports small businesses, but the health care law is loaded with regulations and mandates on businesses.

The law that Donnelly voted for requires businesses to file 1099 forms with the IRS each time they purchase something that exceeds $600. The business community is understandably up in arms, as this senseless requirement, among many others in the law, will divert billions of dollars to satisfy the demands of big government instead of creating jobs.

Donnelly was somehow convinced at the final moment that the health care bill would not cover abortions because of an executive order from the most pro-choice president in U.S. History. The language of the law has not changed; it leaves the door open to taxpayer-funded abortions, as pro-life groups affirm. Accordingly, pro-life groups like National Right to Life have thrown their support behind the truly pro-life candidate, Jackie Walorski.

Jackie Walorski supports the repeal of the disastrous Obama Care law and will return the focus to the doctor-patient relationship instead of putting the IRS and the Department of Health and Human Services in charge of your health care. She supports interstate purchase, coverage for pre-existing conditions, tax-free health savings accounts, and medical malpractice reform.

Because of his devastating legislative record, Donnelly has resorted to distorting Jackie’s positions. Independent watchdog groups have called out Donnelly on his ads. He said Jackie supported the elimination of Pell Grants for students, which Fact Check.org said is not true.

He said she supports the privatization of Social Security, which is not true. The Associated Press said that Donnelly’s attack ads on Social Security “do not resemble actual Republican proposals.”

Jackie wholeheartedly supports Social Security for current beneficiaries and those nearing retirement. She has proposed that Americans have a serious conversation about reforming the system for younger generations because it is going broke. She supports allowing younger generations to invest a portion of their payroll taxes in personal accounts.

Don’t let Joe Donnelly fool you. If re-elected he will continue the failed Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda, while Jackie Walorski will lead to spur job creation and get government spending under control.


Mickey Gardella is a sophomore and the Chairman of the Notre Dame College Republicans Campaign Committee. He can be reached at [email protected]

The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of The Observer.