Although the new Conservative majority of the City Council in Washougal won’t take office until the beginning of 2010, just since the November elections, they have taken several bold actions aimed at benefiting their constituents, in the face of current economic conditions. Presently, they are looking at enacting a 5% cut in their own pay. Considering that the population of Washougal doesn’t go very far into five-figures and that the annual pay of a City Council Member hasn’t made it to five-figures yet, this may seem insignificant to some. While the council members themselves acknowledge this, the significance of their willingness to do this is underscored by the related comments of Jon Russell, a Washougal City Councilman who is also a Candidate for U.S. Congress in Washington’s (now open) 3^rd District, when he said, "I think it's important for the council in particular to show leadership when we're asking so much not only of our own employees but the taxpayers. In these times, it's a justified move for us to also do with less."

This attitude reminds me of the story of the Starfish Thrower. If you’re not familiar with that story, it involves a guy on vacation at the beach who gets up one morning to find that some rogue tidal condition has tossed countless starfish, helplessly, onto the beach. Soon, he noticed another guy, frantically, trying to throw the starfish back into the ocean, one by one. When he saw this, he started laughing and called out to the other guy, “You must be crazy! There are too many! You’ll never be able to help all of those!” The Starfish Thrower looked up at the vacationer briefly and then went straight back to his work. As he did, he could be heard to say, “Helped that one. Helped that one. Helped that one. …” For me, that sort of determination exhibits a quality that has been a key component to Advancing American Greatness and I truly admire it.

Unfortunately, when you look around Southwest Washington, these actions of the Washougal City Council seem to be disappointingly rare. Otherwise, it seems that where you find the highest concentration of government jobs is where you find those who are making out the best. According to current statistics, out of the seven counties that make up Washington’s 3^rd Congressional District, all but one of those counties are experiencing record unemployment, with some nearing 15%. However, one county’s unemployment level seems to be near normal, around 7%, as I recall. That is Thurston County. I wonder if that could be because that’s where our State Capitol is located. If so, I wonder why our State Legislators aren’t taking similar actions to those of Washougal’s City Council. Certainly the impact of such steps in Olympia would be more significant than in Washougal. Based on what I heard from Southwest Washington’s State Legislators, at a Legislative Outlook Breakfast this past Friday, it seems that their hands are tied on this. You see, up to 70% of the state’s budget is considered “untouchable” and much of that is due to “strings” attached to much of that budget as a result of our state’s acceptance of ARRA “stimulus” money. With that in mind, it seems to me that it might have been a good idea for our State Legislators to vote against accepting some of that “stimulus” money. That’s exactly what Jon Russell has done in the City of Washougal. Perhaps it’s because Democrat State Legislators, who are the current majority party, see such steps, aimed at benefiting their constituents, in the face of current economic conditions, as too simplistic. That, in fact, is what Deb Wallace, the State Representative for the District where I live (who immediately announced her candidacy for U.S. Congress when our current U.S. Congressman, Brian Baird, announced his retirement) had to say at Friday’s breakfast. She said she fears such steps as “oversimplification”, without enough consideration for the complex nature of our governmental bureaucracy. My response to Wallace on this would be: The convoluted bureaucracy exists because Career Politicians like you put it in place, looking to government, as the only source of solutions for the challenges we face. If we would focus on the true source of American Greatness … its people, not its government … solutions to our challenges would be simpler and we might even begin to look at them as opportunities, once again.

Last week, President Obama convened a “job summit” at the White House. According to an article in the Washington Times, Obama took this action because he was “Facing rising unemployment rates and uncertain results from the stimulus bill.”

When you consider that the list of invitees to this meeting did include liberal economists credited with shaping the $787 billion stimulus package, union leaders, environmental advocates, etc., while it did not include the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business, you have to wonder what the President’s “real agenda” was for this meeting. For me, that became quite clear from the President’s opening remarks at this event. First, he stated that “many businesses are still skittish about hiring” and that “many have figured out how to squeeze more productivity out of fewer workers”. He summarized those statements by saying “that may result in good profits but it’s not translating into hiring”. Then he went on to talk about the government’s role in fixing this. In other words, Obama’s “real agenda” was the one he has consistently … that the source of problems is those being governed and the ultimate solution is the government.

At almost the same time, I had the opportunity to sit in on a local news outlet interviewing Jon Russell, the candidate I’m supporting for U.S. Congress in, Washington’s 3^rd Congressional District. The topic … job creation and the economy.

The difference in Candidate Russell’s approach to this topic was strikingly different than that of President Obama’s. Jon’s Plan of Action doesn’t involve calling together some Blue Ribbon Panel, looking for answers, or appointing a Czar or, in any way, seeking government control as the solution. In fact, what he had to say in this regard was,

“I firmly believe that small businesses hold the key to economic recovery. If the government was serious about creating jobs and moving us out of the recession, the best thing they could do is to step aside and allow free-market capitalism to work for small businesses. Small businesses make up 70% of our American workforce. They are the solution to economic recovery. The question is, will Congress sober up in time to recognize and leverage this reality or are their policies really more about control than recovery?

My plan of action for strengthening small businesses and creating jobs includes:

• Encouraging small business startup companies of 100 employees or less through allowing them to launch their businesses tax free for two years. That means no payroll taxes and no capital gains tax. Nothing at all goes to the government for the first two years.
• Accelerating the availability of venture capital by permitting venture capitalists to invest in these tax-free start-ups with no federal taxation on their investment for the first two years.
• Boosting the growth of existing small businesses by way of a 20% reduction in over-all federal taxes and making it possible for them to write off losses of the 5 previous years.”

As I said, the difference in Candidate Russell’s approach to this topic was strikingly different than that of President Obama’s. With that said, I think it’s pretty natural to ask some “Why Questions”.

To start with, “Why is a first-term President looking for blue-sky answers in such a convoluted manner while a first-time Congressional Candidate can offer such down-to-earth solutions?” I think the answer to this is in the question itself. With the President, the agenda is political, including his goal to be elected for a second term. With Candidate Russell, the agenda is to be a Representative of the people; term-limiting himself, not seeking another elected office and returning to his family, home and business afterwards.

Another obvious “Why Question” is, “Why do these men have such diametrically opposed views on the source of our economic problems and the source of the solution to these problems?” I think the answer here is pretty obvious too. It’s their experience. Barack Obama has never had a “real job”, let alone any experience as an entrepreneur or any sort of businessman, for that matter. Jon Russell has been an entrepreneur and businessman since his college days. And, from that beginning, his businesses have been modeled to be profitable while meeting underserved needs in the community. Presently, Jon and his Wife, Sarah, run a Family and Urgent Care clinic in Washougal. While that location is successfully winding up its first year, they have committed to opening a second facility in Vancouver. Considering that Jon is doing this while serving as a Washougal City Councilman and now, is running for U.S. Congress, these accomplishments are even more impressive.

Finally, it struck me that the difference in Obama’s approach on this, versus Russell’s approach, is summed up by the theme of Russell’s campaign … Advancing American Greatness. Obama is looking to government, as the source. But our government isn’t what has made us great. Our greatness comes from US … each of US … our families … our churches … our businesses … our communities and everything put into them by US. Any time our government has exhibited greatness, it has come from US. Unlike Barack Obama, Jon Russell recognizes that Advancing American Greatness means taking the focus off of government and putting it back on the true source of American Greatness … its people.