Norm Coleman Sent Me An E-Mail

Friends,

I yearn to be more politically active than what I seem to have time for. Like I would love to join up with the Obama campaign and do what I can, but I don't. However, I have written the odd letter to Congress and the President. I wrote one for my dad about the importing of cheap Japanese steel and how it's killing the American steel industry. I wrote one about Bush's ridiculous deforestation plan (remember when forest fires were the cause du jour a few years ago and Bush decided that if National Parks cut down a lot of their trees, then the fires wouldn't happen...and you know, that's exactly the kind of kindergarten wisdom that pisses me off). And after reading Tom's post about Bush proposing cutting the federal funding for Reading Is Fundamental, I followed the link to RIF's website and using their form, and a little additional comment about my fifth grade teaching experience, I sent along a letter decrying this unnecessary funding cut. And today, I got a reply from Senator Norm Coleman.

Now, I know that this is from a lackey of the Senator because I doubt he has time to craft this kind of form letter (the signature was in a different font from the rest of the letter too, and that really hurts its credibility in my book)..but here is what was written to me:

Dear Mr. Johnson:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning President Bush's fiscal year 2009 budget which proposes the elimination of Federal funding for the Reading is Fundamental (RIF) inexpensive book distribution program. I support the goals of RIF and believe this program has been very successful in its efforts to prepare and motivate children to read throughout the years.

As you may be aware, the U.S. Department of Education has granted an annual award to Reading is Fundamental, Inc. (RIF) to provide aid to local nonprofit groups and volunteer organizations that serve low-income children through book distribution and reading motivation activities. Since the year 2000, RIF has received approximately $200 million in federal funds through a noncompetitive contract to carry out these activities.

Although the President has indicated that he supports the goals of the program, he stated that he supports the elimination of public funds for RIF as he is opposed to federal programs that provide noncompetitive, earmarked support to designated entities. He also indicated that it is his belief that RIF Inc's. substantial private donations from corporations and foundations will be able to support this program if federal funds are discontinued.

The President's proposals are a starting point in the overall budget discussion. Please know I will keep your views in mind as Congress moves through the fiscal year 2009 budget process.
Once again thank you for contacting me regarding this issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you or your family.

Sincerely,
Norm Coleman
United States Senate

Okay, Norman, let's see what you said. You suggest that RIF doesn't need the money. And that may be true, private funding could step up. And, considering your conservativism, the government shouldn't be spread out like this in all these social programs. Government should do nothing for the citizenry besides conduct wars and treaties and stay out of everyone's way, right Norm? Yeah? Okay, that's cool with me since that's your belief and from the sound of it, you're sticking to your principles and I admire that in a person. It's not my view, but hey, okay, at least your principled. Now, let's see some consistency of principle then.

So I say, to show your metal, rescind NCLB. Go on. Do it. Remove that unnecessary government interference in the public education system because it is an institution that needs no federal fingerprints. Plus, since NCLB's unstated goal is to eventually privatize all of public education through a voucher system, that is some serious government interference and costs that just don't need to happen. See, poor districts could be fixed if there was school funding was shared evenly within each state instead of basing it off of district property values and a dedicated focus of citizenship education since the homes of the financially depressed typically can't provide that kind of leadership due to constraints on their time working subsistence level jobs.

Also, another interesting point that you said Norm is a sentence that really just blows my mind. I'm going to quote it right out of what you said: "[T]he President ... supports the elimination of public funds for RIF as he is opposed to federal programs that provide noncompetitive, earmarked support to designated entities"

The President isn't a fan of noncompetitive, earmakred supported to designated entities. Okay. Then what's the different between that and, say, the noncompetitive contracts the government made with Halliburton et. al. at the start of the most recent Iraq War? He's okay with the federal government entering noncompetitive contracts, but yet it's different when the government gives money to programs? How? I understand that he wants to cut spending and actually be a financial conservative while in his lame duck stage of his presidency, but this noncompetitive part really just stuns me.

Norm, you can't tell me that it has anything to do with competition and fairness because if this President has a spending policy for the government it has nothing to do with competition and fairness. This is about the ultra-conservative view of government and that's it, Norm. Don't try to massage my innate sense of fairness as a reason for this business. Just be honest with me, Norm. I know it's tough to do in an election year, and the idea that you'll probably be bounced from the Senate since you're rightly labeled as a Rubber-Stamp Republican, but isn't this exactly the time to be brutally honest? Completely surprise your competition. Be blunt, be open, be fresh in your approach istead of just twisting and twisting, trying to be a career politican.

Also, Norm, I like that little dig you put in there with that "I'm sure you know" kind of sentence. If you want to say that I don't know what I'm talking about, I'd respect you more if you just said so. Being coy like that just frustrates me. I appreciate the info as I didn't know about that stuff, but c'mon, Norm, don't do me like that.

Oh, and I think I'm going to send the above text as an e-mail too. I wonder if I'll get the same staffer to reply...but I got a feeling I'll just be ignored.

Viva el mustache (y Al Franken for Senate 2008!)