Two years ago, West Virginia had a choice for the United States Senate. One option was a lifelong political maverick who campaigned on cheaper American made energy a year and a half before it grew into a major concern. John Raese did not blow smoke at voters, he challenged them. Raese's campaign aimed ideas at the electorate and fired continually. You never needed to worry about John Raese's stance, he would tell you very candidly.
The other option was Robert C. Byrd. In his time he served as an effective diverter of federal funds to a poor state. The Democratic Party led us to believe that if re-elected, Byrd would retain his spot on the Appropriations Committee and fight hard for his state. Republican concerns that his advanced age might form an obstacle were brushed aside as ingratitude.
Well, 2008 swept the left into power and they started cleaning house. Long serving Democrats, such as Byrd, found that these new varmints cared not a whit for seniority. What does that mean for West Virginia?
It means less federal funding because Byrd has lost most of his influence.
It means we have to rely on Jay Rockefeller to fight for coal against an apparently hostile administration. I don't think coal should be the alpha and omega of our economy, but we certainly do need it as a pillar.
Voting in John Raese in 2006 would have given us a younger and very dynamic voice defending our interests in the Senate. I mean no disrespect to Byrd because he truly fought as hard as possible for West Virginia. I disagree with his ideas on how to build an economy, but he did care. Unfortunately, like Johnny Unitas playing for the Chargers, this term is the impression he leaves, old, tired, and ineffective.
No comments:
Post a Comment