Other Candidates

ISSUES | BACKGROUND | NEWS COVERAGE | CONTACT | REFERENCE LINKS | FEDERAL BUDGET | SOCIAL SECURITY | ENERGY | RETIREMENT FORMULAS | QUESTIONNAIRES | CHARTS | ODDS & ENDS | Larsen's Guestbook | Volunteer | OTHER CANDIDATES | HEALTHCARE
  
    

Phil Troyer

Specifically, Phill would push for:

  • An elimination of the corrupting practice of pork barrel earmarks
  • A balanced federal budget
  • Paying down the federal debt
  • A simplified tax system
  • More openness in our political process so citizens have time to review and comment upon legislation before it is voted upon
  • A prohibition on unconstitutional and unaccountable Executive Branch "czars"
  • An end to governmental ownership and bailouts of private companies
"The problem in Washington is that too many career politicians act like kids in a candy store who haven't realized they only have a $1 in their pocket. I intend to be one of the adults who can explain that the party on the Potomac is over and it is time for Congress to start living within its means.

That will require me to vote "NAY" - a lot. NAY to deficit spending... NAY to pork barrel spending projects... NAY to bailouts... NAY to attempts to increase the size and scope of government.

At the same time, however, I will vote YEA for measures that promote: more accountability, more openness in our legislative process, more efficiency in necessary programs, and more local control of issues.


I will be unable to run for Congress this year.  I have ran since 2002 with the hope of making a difference for our Ccountry.  However, because of events in past years I am just not able to run a campaign.

What we need is a representative who can JUST SAY NO to government spending. Phil states he will vote "nay" to deficit spending. That is close enough to "just say no." Souder is out of touch with spending, bailouts, earmarks and is unable to "just say no" or "nay."

The National Debt in 1957 was $270,527,171,896 ($271 billion).  Since that time we have had continued deficits based on the difference between this year’s national debt and last year’s national debt.  Who is responsible for this?  After closer examination, I find that it is a bit more complicated than first thought.  Let us assume that we began with a clean slate in 1958.  We have legacy debt. This is debt that existed at the start of 1958. We have Republican debt. This is debt that is accumulated during a republican president.  We have Democrat Debt. This is debt that is accumulated during a democrat president.

 

However, the legacy debt has a steep price. $6.1 Billion in interest was paid in 1958. If we were to treat this as a bank with three account holders and allocate the interest paid each year to each of the three account holders, we would get closer to a true accounting. However, the deficit in 1958 was $5.8 Billion. Had there been no national debt, there would not have been a need to pay $6.1 Billion in interest that year and the surplus actually would have been $0.3 Billion.

 

What I find is that the interest on the debt alone is responsible for 100% of the accumulated National Debt till 2005.  In fact many of the 50’s and 60’s would have been surpluses had it not been for the prior years’ debt and interest payment on this debt. I would have liked to have gone past 2005, but I did not have interest paid on the debt for years past 2005.

 

In 1968, there was a true deficit, but all prior years in this decade were actual surpluses when we allocate the interest appropriately to legacy, republican and democrat accounts. There were only two surplus years in the 70’s two surplus years in the 80’s and seven surplus years in the 90’s.

 

It is not fair to allocate all the interest to this year’s president. Much of the interest is from prior administrations. In fact 70% of all interest paid on the national debt is due to the legacy debt prior to 1958.

 

We can blame congress, democrats, republicans and even presidents, but the truth is we the people are at fault.  Why do deficits increase year after year? Pretty simple, when you think about it; nobody is paying any principal and interest is compounding. It is the exact opposite of what a family does.  A family takes on debt to buy a home and items to fill the home.  Over the years they pay this off and even save a little.  Interest on their debt is decreasing yearly until finally it disappears.  All we are doing is passing on the debt nobody has ever wanted to pay, onto the next generation which takes ever more financing.

 

Every voter has a responsibility to vote responsibly.  Every person needs to voice their opinion and voting is one way to do this. If you care about this country, the future of your children, then I ask you to research this candidate and vote based not one what someone says, or what some sound bite is heard, but on issues.  You are the only one who can make a difference.  Please Vote!