Nicholson's border policies make sense
Last updated 10/13/2006 at Noon
Kevin Jeffries tries to fool us with “simple,” and unviable, solutions.
Jeffries, who never served in the military or the National Guard, seems unaware that the Guard has other tasks at hand. They are fighting two wars; many have been deployed twice, or more. They are also called upon in time of natural disasters, such as hurricanes and earthquakes.
My son, a Guardsman, has been called to duty over 15 times in the last several years. He says the Guard now is no place for anyone trying to build a civilian career.
Many have been killed or maimed. Many return with post-traumatic stress disorder. Frequently, their jobs are gone when they return home, or they return to their now bankrupt small business, or to a divorce.
Oblivious to their sacrifices, Jeffries proposes sending them to the border.
He ignores budgeting, paying or recruiting. Is he going to raise taxes to pay for it?
Will he post Guardsmen at neighboring states’ borders when they come through other states? Or does he not think that far ahead?
There’s a trend in Jeffries’ policymaking. His simple solutions, like his traffic congestion policy, sound attractive at first but show no real thought, no willingness to pay for them, no concern for the impact that they have on those affected and no evidence that they are viable.
For 66th Assembly District seat I’m voting for Laurel Nicholson, whose border policies make sense.