(Editor’s Note: Congressional District 20 represents parts of 10 counties and stretches from Poughkeepsie to Lake Placid. The following article was published yesterday at Newscopy.org.)

Congressman Murphy Has Some Explaining To Do: Will Republicans Take Back The 20th?
By: Raquel Okyay

Rep. Scott Murphy (D) has some explaining to do.

He voted for the unpopular “health insurance reform legislation” even though District 20 has rejected government controlled health care and are calling for smaller government. Murphy cannot claim to be an “independent voice” and “fiscal conservative” while at the same time approving legislation filled with congressional bribes, government bureaucracy, and huge tax increases. He must think us fools if he expects us to believe he stands on fiscal conservatism, he obviously does not.

Murphy offers the same untruths, assumptions, and talking points on a health care “reform” package that Americans despise, want repealed and have mounted a campaign to do so. His own words reveal a Congressman that either does not understand the fundamental problems with the legislation as he should or someone who chooses to appease his party’s Congressional majority, instead of his own constituents.

Murphy’s YES vote for a hotly contested, highly partisan, radically transformational, likely unconstitutional, law, which passed by using procedural tricks and not before seen propaganda-like tactics, will prove to be a mistake.

At his website, Murphy claims, “The President’s health insurance reform legislation will stop the out of control growth of health care costs.” Even an imbecile knows a bloated government cannot wave a magic wand and make rising health care costs disappear. Murphy would be wise to start talking about the out of control growth of government that is the talk of the town, and maybe the public could take him seriously.

Rather, he purports the same nonsensical points that did not persuade Americans to support the law before it was enacted, and is not persuasive now, “The President’s health insurance reform legislation protects our local industries and jobs from unfair taxes.” This legislation does nothing of the sort and comes with a hefty price tag – all entitlement programs do. It is not fiscally sound nor is it business friendly to ask the business community – through regulation and fines – to subsidize health care costs for the majority of Americans. Murphy cannot pretend regulation helps industry, and that it is cost effective to redirect funds normally invested in the economy to the health care system.

“This bill is fiscally conservative and slows the growth of health care costs and spending…as a fiscal conservative, I can support a bill that takes strong steps towards reducing the deficit.”

This statement is no more plausible than Rep. Bart Stupak’s claim to be pro-life despite the fact he helped facilitate the largest expansion of abortion rights since Roe v. Wade. The decision by Stupak to not seek re-election is telling. Not only did he go against the will of his district which is bad enough, but he claims to be something he is not and no one likes a hypocrite. Similarly, Murphy will have a tough time explaining how one can be a fiscal conservative yet supportive of every half baked idea from today’s Congress that uses borrowed money with interest, to fund.

Touting Congressional Budget Office (CBO) numbers is not enough to claim cost efficiency. The CBO, while non-partisan, still works at the pleasure of the Democrat controlled Congress. The CBO, working with exaggerated projections of tax revenue and savings, submitted a preliminary report to meet a midnight deadline that concludes subjective and unrealistic figures, yet Murphy boasts the following, “[According to the CBO, the law] will result in dramatic savings for the American people by reducing the deficit by $138 billion the first decade and by $1.2 trillion in the second decade.”

Officially the CBO is only meant to calculate one decade out, because of the uncertainty of forecasting beyond Ten years. Indeed, the CBO emphasized that the report was preliminary and based on ideas and projections, not written and applied law. Murphy utilizes these dubious numbers nonetheless, and ignores the reality that the economy is in big trouble because an absurd amount of reckless spending by Congress has caused the deficit to triple in one year. Promoting expansion of government control over finances and resources is not a fiscal conservative tenant – someone should tell Murphy he acts more like a back-stabber than a crusader for economic constraint.

Republican Take Back?

The good news is Murphy is up for re-election this year, in a district some say is vulnerable for Democrats, I say open season. Murphy won the seat in a special election last year by fewer than 1000 votes against the Republican candidate, Assemblyman Jim Tedisco. This year, Ten County Chairman of the Republican Party has endorsed retired Army colonel and decorated war hero from Kinderhook, Chris Gibson.

Gibson signed the “Repeal It” pledge and advocates “job creation” as a top issue. He taught American government at West Point, served one tour in Kosovo, and several tours in the Middle East; he’s the kind of candidate that deserves a second look for sure. What moved me to publicly support Chris Gibson, however, is the following statement issued by the Hudson Valley Campaign for Liberty after meeting him in person:

As organizers of the Hudson Valley Campaign we hosted a meet-up with Chris Gibson last Thursday, April 1, 2010. Five patriot groups were represented in the attendance with about 60 people present. After consulting with the organizers and many individuals who were present, we can say on behalf of the freedom movement in our area, we enthusiastically support Chris Gibson! Chris Gibson’s ability to listen was outstanding. We were pleased that he said that he would represent the people of his district, not special interests, corporations, or even the Republican Party. We were happy that he promised to read the bills, as Congressman, before he would vote on them. We believe that he is humble and willing to listen to the people and do their will in accordance with the Constitution.

There is a clear difference in this election cycle between the two candidates in District 20. One willing to listen to the people and act in accordance with the Constitution, or the other who offers empty rhetoric, arrogant ignorance of what is important to the voters, and even more dastardly, pretends to be someone that he is not.

Chris Gibson is the only candidate calling for a “change of guard” in Washington DC. Let’s make that happen and elect Chris Gibson to Congress.