Fletcher deserves a second term in U.S. House The Kentucky Advocate — Sunday, October 22, 2000 It's unfortunate that the race to represent Kentucky's Sixth District in the U.S. House of Representatives has become identified in the minds of many voters with a slew of television attack ads from both sides. Seen as a key contest by both the Democratic and Republican national parties, millions of dollars have been spent on the kind of advertising that basically distorts the records and achievements of both candidates. At the same time, being a key battleground congressional district does have its advantages. This election year has brought plenty of federal money for such things as Millennium Park and the airport in Boyle County, to say nothing of a major rescue for Kentucky's belabored tobacco farmers. Perhaps, the constant barrage of stupid TV advertising is worth putting up with when it is accompanied by substantial federal dollars—which are, after all, our money—for local programs. Putting aside, for a moment, all of the election year baloney, the time is coming when voters in the Sixth District (which includes Boyle, Garrard, and Mercer counties, and part of Lincoln County) are going to have to decide between Democrat Scotty Baesler and Republican Ernie Fletcher. Actually, judging from some of the other House races across the state, voters in the Sixth District are fortunate to have the opportunity to choose between two such well-qualified candidates. Both men are experienced, competent, and upstanding citizens. We would, however, have to give the edge to Fletcher for these reasons: There is no reason to make a change. Fletcher was elected to the office in 1998 after Baesler, who had held the post for six years, gave it up to run for the Senate. In our view, Baesler had his chance. Over the past two years, Fletcher has done an outstanding job taking care of constituent concerns, dealing with issues that are specific to Kentucky and working on national issues, such as health care. There's no reason to toss him out now and give the job back to a man who didn't like it enough to want to stay with it. Fletcher is on the right side on tax relief. He voted to repeal the so-called "marriage tax," which penalizes about 25 million married couples an average of $1,400 each just for being married. And he has voted to repeal the "death tax," under which the government confiscates a major hunk of people's life savings at the time of death. Repeal of the tax is particularly important to Kentucky farmers and small business people whose heirs may be forced to sell the family farm or business to pay taxes. The failure of both of these tax-relief measures can be blamed on the Democrats in Congress and the Democratic president in the White House. President Clinton vetoed both bills, and congressional Democrats would not muster enough votes to help the Republicans override those vetoes. Fletcher needs to get another chance to get these bills passed, hopefully, with the help of a Republican in the White House. Fletcher is the right person to deal with health-care issues. The congressman's position on health maintenance organizations has been greatly misrepresented by the TV attack ads. As a physician, he's very knowledgeable about the issues involved in protecting "patient' rights." He has supported a common-sense approach to the issue that gives patients greater control over their health care without lining the trial lawyer's pockets and discouraging businesses from providing health coverage for their employees. Furthermore, the Republican leadership acknowledged Fletcher's expertise on the subject by naming him to a joint House-Senate negotiating committee on patients' rights. On prescription drugs, Fletcher has been on the forefront in looking for ways to help senior citizens pay for prescription drugs. Months ago, long before drug costs became a hot-button issue in this national election, Fletcher co-sponsored legislation that would have paid for prescription drugs for poor seniors and provided insurance coverage for others. In short, who is more qualified than a doctor to work in our behalf on health-care issues? Certainly, not Baesler, a lawyer who's spent most of his adult life in politics. Voters need to give Fletcher the opportunity to continue to work on these health-care issues. Finally, Fletcher has represented the Sixth District well. He has "brought home the bacon" to his district in the form of federal grants and projects (some of which are mentioned above). More importantly, he has worked very hard to try to save that endangered species - the Kentucky farmer. He deserves much credit for the recent passage of legislation in the House that would eliminate the huge tobacco surplus, thus opening the door for increased burley quotas. He's also worked to force the Clinton administration, which is hostile to tobacco, to promote the sale of American-grown burley abroad. On these and other issues, Fletcher has been busy the past couple of years representing the people of the Sixth District in Washington. His record of achievements, impressive for a freshman in a seniority-based institution, proves that he's worked hard for the people of central Kentucky. Clearly, he's earned a second term. TOP | BACK