Senate Steineger Addresses Address to AFP Summit

We received this email from State Senator Chris Steineger earlier today, and we wanted to share it with you uncut and unedited.

Who says we don't encourage an free and open exchange of ideas?

To the editor,

Recently, I spoke at the American’s for Prosperity Defending the American Dream Summit. I saw the Summit as an opportunity to discuss my message that combines my values of fiscal conservatism and environmental conservation. As I gave my presentation, I noticed quite a few heads nodding in agreement and found a genuinely open and receptive audience. The feedback I received there strengthened my belief that the following message appeals to a great many Kansans: Environmental conservation is the same as fiscal conservatism.

Both ideas represent living within our means – living a sustainable lifestyle. Our government and its people have been living well beyond our means. The increased National debt, the federal government budget deficit, and the under funding of Social Security and Medicare all represent a nation living beyond its means, a nation living unsustainably. For its people, buying too much house, huge credit card debt for throw away consumer goods, and driving gas guzzler vehicles exemplify families and individuals living beyond their means, living unsustainably.

Never in the history of human events have so many borrowed so much to spend on products that ultimately are thrown away. We must work together for America to succed (sic) for another 250 years. The only way for America to last that long is for us to reduce our consumption of throw away products, conserve our natural resources, and most importantly to stop borrowing and spending so much money.

Senator Chris Steineger

I appreciate Senator Steineger's letter, and while I don't believe all deficit spending at the federal level is a bad thing (it all depends on what the money is being spent), encouraging Kansans and our state government to "live sustainably" is a good message. How we achieve that goal- a goal that will be different for everyone playing the game- is much trickier.

Say we consolidate school districts or counties so we have fewer entities receiving state funds. While we won't have to worry about some building upkeep and some personnel cost, we'll still have the same number of schools, the same number of teachers, the same or very similar numbers of sheriff's deputies. There are savings there, certainly- but how much? And at what cost to local government attentiveness or responsiveness?

Senator Steineger has ideas, Speaker of the House Mike O'Neal has ideas, Governor Kathleen Sebelius has ideas. Let's hope, as Kansans, all those ideas put together result in something that can address the problem in both the sort and long term.

Senate Steineger Addresses Address to AFP Summit