Grex Politics Conference

View Responses

Grex Politics Item 6: The Lamar Alexander Campaign Item
Entered by kerouac on Wed Jun 21 23:12:50 UTC 1995:

NAME: Lamar Alexander
AGE: 54
OCCUPATION: Former Governor of Tennesee (R-Tenn), former Secretery of 
            Eudcation in Bush administration.
CANDIDACY ANNOUNCED: February 28, 1995 in Maryville, Tennesee
PLATFORM:
   *States rights advocate, favors drastically reducing the federal
    government and returning many responsibilities to the states.
   *Abolition of Education Dept.  Believes education should be handled
    by the states.
   *Give states responsibility for Welfar reform.
   *Curtail job training, law enforcement, and medicaid
   *Support term limits and limiting congressional sessions to six
    months a year.
QUOTES:

  "...I am absolutely committed to moving responsibility out of
   washington d.c. and giving us the freedom to make decisions for ourselves.
   Because deep down in my heart I believe that we know what to do and
   because I am determined to help renew the American spirit the old
   fashioned way, neighborhood by neighborhood, block by block, family
   by family..."

10 responses total.

#1 of 10 by bruin on Thu Jun 22 00:30:40 1995:

"Support term limits???????"  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice,
shame on me!

#2 of 10 by srw on Thu Jun 22 06:30:02 1995:

I know less about Alexander than the others. 
Based on the platform above, I don't like him much.
Term Limits = a way to prevent a good candidate from being reelected.
I am against term limits. Most of his platform is too drastic.
I am in favor of welfare reform, but I think just setting it to zero,
and turning it over to the states is too strong a reform.
Abolition of aid to education and training is just plain short-sighted.
Curtailing law enforcement strikes me as bizarre.

#3 of 10 by kerouac on Sun Jun 25 00:55:44 1995:

  I think if we abolished the Department of Education, we'd be the
laughingstock of the world.  It would send the message that we dont
view education as a priority.  And down in the south, many of the
state school boards are corrupt and giving them more power isnt going to
do anyone any good.  Its just a bad idea.

#4 of 10 by zook on Sun Jun 25 03:52:43 1995:

I don't know much about this guy.  Moving stuff to the states doesn't make
it any cheaper or more efficient.  It just moves it to the states.

#5 of 10 by rme on Sun Jul 23 01:37:50 1995:

Well zook, moving it to the states will make it cheaper and more efficient.

#6 of 10 by zook on Mon Jul 24 13:33:22 1995:

I am not convinced by that argument (qv srw)

#7 of 10 by nemrac on Fri Mar 1 16:12:10 1996:

I support Alexander.  I think it is a good idea to have term limits.
I also believe that the states should have more power.  That is the way
our Country was set up.

#8 of 10 by kerouac on Sat Mar 2 01:53:06 1996:

  Lamar also wants to eliminate completely the department of education...
thats some message to send out to the rest of the world.

#9 of 10 by aaron on Sat Mar 2 06:57:47 1996:

"Eliminate" might be overkill, but beyond having a small office devoted to
trying to achieve some level of national parity in educational opportunity,
what useful purpose does such a department serve?  Unless we go to the
French notion of a nationally controlled curriculum, that is.  Each state,
after all, also has a "department of education."

#10 of 10 by srw on Sat Mar 2 07:18:06 1996:

I like the idea of the states having more power (actually of the feds having
less), but I do not like term limits. Lamar has to pick up a lot of support
in the South in the very near future, as he is not doing well so far, and
there are a lot of candidates in front of him at this point.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.