The Basic Structure of a Voting Plan
Governance is never as straightforward in practice as it is in theory, but Republican gubernatorial candidate John Robitaille provides the basic foundation for a voting strategy:
I will veto any new tax increase that comes to my desk and work vigorously to empower the entrepreneurs who will lead our economy back and position Rhode Island for the 21st Century.
Together, we can reform a broken and bloated government that threatens our prosperity and is creating a lifestyle of dependency. Without restraint and without reform, the burden on Rhode Island’s economy and working families will drive small businesses and taxpayers to seek refuge in other states, and the only employer left will be the government. As a Rhode Island native, this is unacceptable to me.
The veto and the bully pulpit are ultimately the two tools left the governor, by Rhode Island’s constitutional schema. Without enough allies in the General Assembly to sustain his veto, though, the governor lacks that critical tool, so we must elect state senators and representatives who will return that balance to the State House.
And we must elect representatives farther down the ticket — at the municipal level — who will have the fortitude not to merely transfer tax increases from the state level to the local level. Contrary to popular rhetoric, the fact that the state reduces aid to the cities and towns does not mean that it is raising property taxes. There are plenty of strategies that town hall can pursue without driving you out of your home.
This voting principle also applies up the ladder. We must have, in Washington, elected officials who will neither impose new burdens on states and municipalities nor fly to the rescue so as to prevent difficult decisions from having to be made.
That is how we pull our nation back from the brink and begin rebuilding its stature by, first of all, restoring confidence in its structure.