The Washington Times Weekly - - Politics -

A friend and po­lit­i­cal ally of for­mer Pres­i­dent Ge­orge W. Bush is con­sid­er­ing a run for gov­er­nor of Texas — as a Demo­crat.

Tom Schi­ef­fer on March 2 formed a gu­ber­na­to­rial cam­paign com­mit­tee so he can raise money, but he told a press con­fer­ence in Austin, Texas, that a de­ci­sion on run­ning will not be made for sev­eral months, the Hous­ton Chron­i­cle re­ports.

Mr. Schi­ef­fer was the pres­i­dent of the Texas Rangers base­ball club when Mr. Bush was gen­eral manag­ing part­ner. Mr. Schi­ef­fer served as the Repub­li­can pres­i­dent’s am­bas­sador to Aus­tralia and then to Ja­pan.

De­spite his close as­so­ci­a­tion with Mr. Bush, Mr. Schi­ef­fer said, he filled out his ap­pli­ca­tion to be­come an am­bas­sador by list­ing his po­lit­i­cal af­fil­i­a­tion as Demo­crat.

“I’m not new to the Demo­cratic Party,” he said.

He served as a Demo­cratic state leg­is­la­tor from Fort Worth from 1973 to 1978, and was in the same fresh­man group of the Texas House as Repub­li­canSen. Kay Bai­ley Hutchi­son, who is plan­ning to chal­lenge Gov. Rick Perry in next year’s GOP pri­mary.

Mr. Schi­ef­fer, 61, is the younger brother of CBS news­man Bob Schi­ef­fer. in sav­ings over the next decade,’ ” Rea­son mag­a­zine’s Ja­cob Sullum writes at www.rea­son.com.

“But it turns out that tax in­creases ac­count for half of those ‘sav­ings.’ From Obama’s per­spec­tive, it seems, let­ting peo­ple keep their own money qual­i­fies as a ‘waste­ful and in­ef­fec­tive pro­gram.’ That makes sense if you be­lieve all re­sources are the gov­ern­ment’s to dis­trib­ute as it sees fit, which is the premise un­der­ly­ing the mul­ti­tril­lion-dol­lar spending binge that Obama calls ‘A New Era of Re­spon­si­bil­ity,’ ” Mr. Sullum said

“Un­der the Bush ad­min­is­tra­tion, Obama said, ‘a sur­plus be­came an ex­cuse to trans­fer wealth to the wealthy.’ What­ever you think about the wis­dom of Bush’s tax cuts, they amounted to tak­ing less from peo­ple, not giv­ing more to them. Obama makes it sound as if there is no mean­ing­ful dif­fer­ence be­tween rob­bing Peter to pay Paul (which is what he has in mind when he talks about ‘re­bal­anc­ing the tax code’) and leav­ing Peter alone (or, more ac­cu­rately, rob­bing him less thor­oughly) — ex­cept that the lat­ter op­tion is, in Obama’s view, morally in­fe­rior.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.