Left of College Station

Law Enforcement to Get $425,000

By Cassie Smith

From the Bryan-College Station Eagle

Brazos County law enforcement agencies will receive more than $425,000 from economic stimulus legislation signed by President Barack Obama last month.

U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards announced Thursday that the money would be distributed through the Justice Assistance Grant program to the Brazos County Sheriff's Department and the College Station and Bryan police departments.

The funds can be used to hire officers, upgrade equipment and keep the streets safe, said Chris Chwastyk, Edwards' chief of staff.

Officials from all three agencies said they were grateful to Edwards for ensuring the funding for their agencies.

Brazos County Sheriff Chris Kirk said his department would use the $23,752 it will get in a responsible manner.

"It's been an unexpected amount of money," Kirk said, adding that he learned about it Thursday.

Kirk said the department might use the funds for technology projects, which have been funded through grant money.

Kirk, who was in Nevada for a sheriffs' convention Thursday, said he would have to review the guidelines for using the money before deciding how to spend it.

"We're excited about it," Kirk said.

The Bryan Police Department will receive $293,158 through the program, and Assistant Chief Wayland Rawls said officials would begin studying where to use the money.

"This is a lot of money, and we want to make sure we use it to the best use for the citizens of Bryan," Rawls said. "We believe if we properly use this money that we can make a drastic impact in crime."

Deputy Chief Peter Scheets said the funds probably would be applied toward equipment, technology and operations.

College Station Police Chief Michael Ikner said his department would likely use its $108,511 to purchase technology and equipment.

The funds will help the department in its mission of reducing crime and the fear of crime, improving the quality of life and building partnerships, he said.

It was unclear Thursday when the money would be disbursed.

POLICE FUNDING

Area law enforcement agencies will receive funding from the economic stimulus legislation

* Brazos County Sheriff's Department: $23,752.

* Bryan Police Department: $293,158.

* College Station Police Department: 108,511.

Published Friday, March 06, 2009

On March 3, the Budget Committee held a hearing on the President's Fiscal Year 2010 Budget.

Edwards Staff Talk Faith Based Hiring

By Sommer Ingram (Staff Writer)

From the Baylor University Lariat

President Obama's recently revamped office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships is rekindling a timeless debate over the rights of federally funded religious organizations to discriminate on the bases of religion in hiring practices.

Representatives of the J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies at Baylor this week met with Stephanie Formas, legislative assistant to Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, to give feedback on this issue, along with other related topics.

"It's important for our staff to meet with local constituencies about a variety of issues," said Chris Chwastyk, chief of staff for Edwards. "The particular concern now is on church-state relations, and Baylor's institution is a leader on that issue."

The meeting served as an informational session that Edwards' office thought was a fundamental step toward a more cohesive effort in using local resources to help guide decisions made on Capitol Hill.

"Because of Edwards' commitment to religious liberty and to understand better what we do here in the institute, Formas thought it would be a good idea to become better acquainted with us and what we do," said Dr. Charles McDaniel, associate director of the institute. "This issue of faith-based hiring has always been a passionate issue for him (Edwards); he's been concerned since the beginning."

Dr. Chris Marsh, the director of the institute, was also at the meeting but was unavailable for comment Thursday.

Earlier in his campaign Obama made a promise to reverse faith-based hiring as practiced under the Bush administration, but now has reportedly turned the issue over to White House and Department of Justice attorneys.

"Our position has always been to guarantee equal protection," Chwastyk said. "Using federal funds to discriminate in hiring is something we've always opposed."

McDaniel said he voiced his concern in the meeting with the fact that Obama has seemingly sidestepped the decision by turning the problem over to the attorneys.

"It's no longer a commitment on the part of Obama," he said. "But I see this as an inevitable consequence of faith-based organizations becoming involved with the government."

However, issues like this may cause religious groups to more carefully evaluate whether they are willing to subject themselves to standards of the government that may go against their theological principles when they accept federal funding.

"My hope is that the controversy may cause some religious groups to think through the potential consequences of involvement in some government programs, especially where standards imposed for participation may conflict with their fundamental theological convictions," McDaniel said. "Private religious organizations can easily get caught up in the pursuit of government funds and lose sight of those values and commitments that make them truly effective."

Though Formas made no promises about what Edwards would do with the information she gathered at the meeting, both parties are confident that this meeting will not be the end of their dialogue.

"I think there is a desire to have an informal relationship so that we can be a part of the network of resources," McDaniel said. "We're open as a resource to anyone who wants to investigate church-state issues."

Chwastyk said he views the meeting as a continuation of an effort put into place long ago that will continue.

"The dialogue on religion started with Herbert Reynolds, former president of Baylor," Chwastyk said. "It has continued since that day and will continue much longer into the future."

Published on Friday, February 20, 2009

Subcommittee Appointment Could Give Chet Edwards More of a Role Addressing Nation's Economic Woes

By Regina Dennis (Tribune-Herald Staff Writer)

From the Waco Tribune-Herald

U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, was appointed to the House Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee on Wednesday, allowing him to be directly involved in addressing the country’s financial troubles.

The subcommittee approves the budgets for the U.S. financial agencies, including the Treasury Department, Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Trade Commission and the Internal Revenue Service.

“The federal financial regulatory agencies have been asleep at the wheel, and it’s time to wake them up,” Edwards said. “They have not done their jobs of regulating our financial markets, and the economy and every American family is now paying the price for that failure. We can use the purse strings to require more accountability from them, and that includes the Treasury stimulus programs, as well as encouraging more-effective oversight of Wall Street.”

The subcommittee also will be hands-on in overseeing the new economic recovery package expected to go through Congress in the next month. The subcommittee will share regulatory power with the House Financial Services Authorization Committee.

“We have to see that the emergency recovery money is being spent more wisely than it has been so far,” Edwards said. “Americans have a lot of questions about how their money is being spent, and they have a right to know that it is being used to strengthen the economy and not just to fatten some people’s wallets on Wall Street.”

Edwards remains the chairman of the Military Construction and Veteran Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee and sits as the second-ranking Democrat on the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee.

Published on Thursday, January 08, 2009

Congressman Chet Edwards has made the decision to stay in Congress, and it is the right decision. In a statement releases yesterday Edwards made his intentions to stay in the House of Representatives clear, and announced that he had informed the President Elect’s transition team of his choice.

Press Release:

“While it is an honor to have been considered for the position of U.S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, I believe I can make the most difference for veterans, our district and country by continuing to serve in Congress. That is why I have informed President-elect Obama’s transition team that I intend to continue representing the 17th Congressional District of Texas.”

With Edward’s stepping aside Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs director Major Tammy Duckworth appears to be the frontrunner for the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. According to an article in the Washington Post organizations such as the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and the Disabled Veterans of America would endorse the choice. Paul Rieckhoff, director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, was quoted in the article as saying that Duckworth “is an incredibly inspiring leader and she has the potential to be our generation's Max Cleland.”

Duckworth also attended a Veterans Day ceremony with Obama at the Bronze Soldiers Memorial at Soldier Field on November 11^th; and the two placed a wreath in front of the memorial and afterwards shared an embrace.
 

This relieves some tension being felt by Democrats in the Texas 17^th Congressional District; a week after the election no prospected was more daunting than a special election in the spring if Edwards had accepted the nomination as Secretary of Veterans Affairs. To be candid there is simply no Democrat with the body of work that could compare to Chet Edwards, who lives in the district, who could compete for the seat.

Also, it makes more sense to promote someone like Duckworth to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs than it does Edwards; Edwards growing seniority in Congress and his  Chairmanship of the House Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee places him in a unique position to support veterans issues.

Also, with the agenda that Obama has set on Veterans Affairs, having someone with Edwards experience in pushing through legislation will be invaluable. Edwards was able to push through the largest increase in funding in the history of the VA. According to Change.gov Obama’s Veterans Affairs agenda includes reversing the 2003 ban on enrolling modest-income veterans and improving care for polytrauma vision impairment, prosthetics, spinal cord injury, aging, and women's health.

Having an Iraq veteran who was wounded in action and a Congressman who pushed for $11.8 billion increase in VA funding should put President Elect Obama’s agenda for Veterans well within reach.

Yes we can, begins today.

Edwards Says He Will Not Give Up His Congressional Seat

By Matthew Watkins

From the Bryan-College Station Eagle

U.S. Rep Chet Edwards quashed rumors that he may be joining the Cabinet of President-elect Barack Obama by announcing Sunday that he will remain in Congress for his upcoming term.

Edwards, who was thought to be a candidate for secretary of veterans affairs, said in a statement released Sunday that he had contacted Obama's presidential transition team and told them he would not be leaving his current job.

"While it is an honor to have been considered for the position ... I believe I can make the most difference for veterans, our district and country by continuing to serve in Congress," he said.

Edwards, a Democrat, was re-elected to his 10th term in Congress this month by picking up 53 percent of the vote. He represents the 17th Congressional District of Texas that includes all of Brazos, Grimes and Madison and parts of Burleson and Robertson counties.

He gained national attention over the summer as one of four finalists vetted as a potential running mate for Obama. When Obama chose Sen. Joe Biden instead, many media reports speculated that Edwards was the front-runner for the veterans affairs position.

Edwards is the chairman of the House subcommittee on military construction, veterans affairs and related agencies, and he is one of the highest-ranking Democrats in Congress.

"I believe I can do more for our military troops, our veterans and their families in my present position than I could as secretary of veterans affairs," he said. "At the same time, I can continue my work to improve roads, economic infrastructure and the quality of life in the 17th District, a district in which I have deep, personal roots."

Many have speculated that Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth, who lost both of her legs in combat, will be Obama's choice for the veterans affairs position. Duckworth is the veterans affairs director for Illinois and publicly visited a veterans memorial with Obama on Veterans Day.

"I have no doubt that President-elect Obama has a number of well-qualified individuals he is considering for secretary of veterans affairs, and I look forward to working closely with the next VA secretary and secretary of defense to strongly support our veterans, our troops and their families," Edwards said.

The current secretary of defense, former Texas A&M President Robert Gates, is rumored to be a candidate to remain in his position during the Obama administration. Both Democratic and Republican legislators have called for Gates to remain in his position, but he has been quiet about his plans.

The Washington Post reported on Sunday that the idea of keeping Gates has lost its appeal to the Obama transition team because many of the top officials around him remain from the unpopular Donald Rumsfeld era.

However, the newspaper reported that Obama may ask Gates to remain in his position for an initial period while a new defense secretary learns the ropes.

Published Monday, November 17, 2008

Edwards, Curnock Debate Taxes, Bringing in Funding

By Matthew Watkins

From the Bryan-College Station Eagle

District 17 congressional candidates Chet Edwards and Rob Curnock sparred on constituent spending and partisan politics Monday in College Station during their only debate of the campaign.

Both opponents stuck mainly to their campaign themes during an hour that featured several heated exchanges. The forum, which was hosted by the Bryan-College Station Chamber of Commerce and WTAW radio at the College Station Hilton Hotel & Conference Center, drew about 200 people.

About three-fourths of the debate was spent discussing national issues, especially taxes.

Curnock, a Republican challenger, spent much of that time attempting to attach Edwards, a nine-term incumbent Democrat, to liberals who he said are unpopular in the district.

"We have a situation where Nancy Pelosi has more representation than most of our district," he said, referring to the speaker of the House. "If Nancy Pelosi wants [Edwards] to vote for a bill, he does. If she doesn't want him to vote for a bill, he doesn't."

Edwards responded by saying that he has won nine consecutive elections by receiving votes from all different kinds of people. Democrats, Republicans and independents vote for him because he supports cooperation and bipartisanship, he said.

"You are not going to hear a lot of shrill partisan verbiage out of me tonight, or any other day for that matter," he said.

Curnock, however, continued to press the differences in the pair's political affiliations by arguing against Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama's tax policy.

"Barack Obama is an unrepentant socialist," Curnock said. "This country does not need socialism. Socialism does not work."

Edwards, who endorsed Obama in March, criticized Curnock's statement.

"For my opponent to call Barack Obama un-American and an unrepentant socialist is beyond the pale," he said. "That is the kind of sharp-edged partisanship that is the problem in Washington D.C."

Edwards has been running campaign ads claiming that Curnock supports a national sales tax with a rate of 30 percent. He reiterated those claims Monday, saying that the presidential budget office estimated that a 30 percent rate would be necessary in order to follow Curnock's tax plan.

"With a lower tax rate you can't have the revenue to support our government without exploding the national deficit," Edwards said. "You can't have your cake and eat it, too."

Curnock, who has raise far fewer campaign funds and has not been running campaign commercials in Brazos County, said he does support a national sales tax in place of an income tax.

The video production business owner said he wants to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and move the tax due date from April 15 to Oct. 15 in order to have taxes fresh on voters minds when they go to the polls.

"I am not interested in raising taxes," he said. "I have been campaigning for the past 10 months on cutting taxes."

Edwards focused on more than $78 million that he brought to Brazos County and Texas A&M University that he helped appropriate over his most recent term.

"Who is going to be more effective in bringing money to the Brazos Valley, a senior member of an appropriations committee or a freshman member of the opposition party?" asked Edwards, who serves on both the House Budget and Appropriations Committees.

Curnock credited Edwards with bringing money into Brazos County, but said he would be able to do the same.

"I am all for getting as much funding to the district in the open air," he said.

However, Curnock was critical of Edward's use of earmarks. An earmark is a controversial addition to an appropriations bill that adds spending measures for pet projects without allowing Congress to vote on the specific project.

"We are getting to the point where earmarks are destroying our country," he said. "I am going to get [to Congress] and get with folks who are like-minded conservative Republicans. When you have numbers, you can get things done."

Edwards disputed the notion that his use of earmarks was wrong or inappropriate, and questioned whether Curnock would be able to acquire the funding he promised.

"Rob Curnock's positions would have caused A&M and the system to lose millions of dollars," he said.

Published Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Candidates for District 17 to Square Off in College Station

Reporter: Steve Fullhart

From KBTX Channel 3

The candidates for Texas's 17th District in Congress will debate Monday night.

Incumbent Democrat Chet Edwards and Republican challenger Rob Curnock will sit down to discuss the issues affecting the district at 6 p.m. at the College Station Hilton.

This is the only scheduled debate between the two men.

The race has picked up over the last week, with Edwards claiming his challenger supports tax hikes, and Curnock claiming the incumbent has voted against funding troops.

Curnock, a Waco businessman and former sportscaster, was the lone Republican in District 17 to run for Congress. In the two previous elections in the district -- redrawn before 2004's election -- primaries were needed to decide the GOP challenger. The Baylor graduate did not escape the primaries in runs for District 11 in 2000 and 2002.

Edwards, also from the northern portion of District 17, narrowly defeated Arlene Wohlgemuth in 2004, and beat Van Taylor by a much wider margin in 2006. The Texas A&M alum is seeking a tenth election to Congress, where he is a high-ranking member of the Democratic-led House of Representatives.

Published on Monday, October 27, 2008

District 17 House Candidates Chet Edwards, Rob Curnock Trade Accusations on Social Security, Taxes

By Erin Quinn (Tribune-Herald staff writer)

From the Waco Tribune-Herald

With less than two weeks until Election Day, both District 17 congressional candidates are accusing each other of mudslinging on issues such as Social Security and taxes.

Nine-term Democratic incumbent Chet Edwards and Republican Rob Curnock, owner of Dub-L Tape in Waco, were among the local candidates who gave five-minute stump speeches to a group of about 50 at a forum Wednesday hosted by the West Kiwanis Club.

In Curnock’s speech, he pointed to a radio ad that Edwards is running in northern parts of the district stating that Curnock wants to raise taxes by 30 percent through his support of a national sales tax. Curnock’s campaign provided the Tribune-Herald with a transcript of the ad.

“What do we really know about politician Rob Curnock?” the ad states. “We know that Curnock supports a new 30 percent national sales tax. A sales tax that would apply to all new purchases, including a house, gasoline, food, medicine for children and prescription drugs for seniors.”

In an interview with the Tribune-Herald after the forum, Curnock said he would consider supporting either the FairTax or “some sort” of national sales tax. He said he would consider taxing items such as cars, homes and luxury items but would want exemptions for items such as groceries.

Fair Tax legislation

According to the Fair Tax Act legislation, which was introduced to Congress in 2005, the sales-tax rate would be set at 23 percent of the total price including the tax, which would be equivalent to a 30 percent traditional sales tax.

Per the legislation, the Internal Revenue Service would dissolve, and the Department of the Treasury would expand and oversee the enforcement of the national sales tax.

While Curnock says he has been running on eliminating the IRS since the first day of his campaign, he said that the ad is not true.

“I have been running since Jan. 2 on cutting taxes and getting the government out of our lives,” Curnock said. “To suddenly come out and say that I want to raise taxes by 30 percent is a breathtaking lie.”

Edwards said, “Unless Rob wants to explode the national debt,” a national sales tax would be a cost to taxpayers.

“For an average family of four making $50,000 in Central Texas, they would see a $3,000-per-year tax increase,” Edwards said in an interview with the Tribune-Herald after the forum in West.

In a response to Edwards’ ad on his campaign Web site, Curnock said, “You are the employer of a congressman, and like an employee who gets caught stealing or lying, Edwards should be fired.”

Also at the forum, Curnock said he was “absolutely stunned” when Edwards told the crowd that his Republican challenger wanted to privatize Social Security, something Curnock said he does not support.

“If we don’t do something, no one will be getting Social Security in the next 20-30 years,” Curnock said. “I think we need to look at everything we can, everything that is on the table, including perhaps allowing younger workers to make a small privatization segment of their retirement. We’re talking like 2 percent.”

Edwards refers to show

Edwards referred to a Temple radio show in which Curnock was a guest in February 2002 during the Republican primary and answered a caller’s question by saying, “. . . quite honestly, not only should we allow for the partial privatization, we have to.”

Edwards’ campaign provided a transcript of the show to the Tribune-Herald on Wednesday.

“First, if he wants to amend, fine-tune, or change his positions, then he ought to admit it,” Edwards said. “But I want to make it clear, that until he was called out on the issue, his position was to allow for partial privatization.”

Edwards added, “If Rob Curnock would have gotten his way, we would have millions of Americans investing billions of dollars into the stock market. And that would have not only undermined the retirement security — given the stock market’s crash — but it would have increased the national debt, by some estimates, as much as $2 trillion.”

Election Day is Nov. 4. Early voting in McLennan County runs through Oct. 31. For a list of early voting sites and times, go to www.co.mclennan.tx.us/elections

Published on Thursday, October 23, 2008

Chet Edwards Seeks 10^th Consecutive Term

By Ashley Corinne Killough (Staff Writer)

From the Baylor University Lariat

It was just two months ago when Central Texas was buzzing with the news that Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, could be Sen. Barack Obama's running mate.

Driving through Hill County during the first week of July, Edwards received a call on his cell phone from the Democratic nominee and thought it was a prank.

"When he said his name, I was about one one-hundredths of a second from saying 'Yeah right, and I'm John McCain,'" Edwards said.

But the congressmen is glad he didn't joke around, as Obama was calling to ask if Edwards would consider joining the short list to be vice president.

"Caroline Kennedy called me on August 10 to let me know my name would soon be leaked to the press," Edwards said. "It was a fascinating experience for my family."

Much to his misfortune, there was another "Edwards" making national news at the same time. John Edwards, former democratic vice presidential nominee, started a major media wave when he admitted to having an extramarital affair that ended two years ago.

"Senator Obama said it would cause too much confusion to have two 'Edwards' in the headlines at the same time," Edwards said.

While the "gold medal" went to Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, Edwards said it was a privilege to even be considered.

With his support for Obama dating back to the senator's speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004, Edwards endorsed him during the primaries, something he had never done so early for a presidential candidate.

"I endorsed Sen. Obama because I believe it's time for change in the country," Edwards said. "He's extremely bright. And he cares deeply about moving the country forward and changing partisanship in Washington."

Edwards is now focusing on his campaign to serve a tenth term in the U.S. House of Representatives, while also working to help ease tension in the financial markets.

Opposing Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's original plan, Edwards voted twice for the Emergency Economic

Stabilization Act.

"I believe it was right in order to keep our economy from prolonging a recession and going into a depression," Edwards said. "It was a very sensitive situation that came down to a choice of taking no action or bold action."

Edwards said the next step is to use the $700 billion to free up credit, so that small businesses can survive and students can get loans.

"I grew up in a middle class family and needed a student loan to graduate," Edwards said. "I just want students today to have the same opportunity I did."

Edwards noted that he voted against a 2005 plan proposed in Congress that would cut $14 billion from student financial aid programs over five years.

For the campaign in District 17, Edwards said his track record is his strongest argument against his opponent and local businessman Rob Curnock.

Elizabeth Connor, campaign manager, said that along with accomplishing local projects for Waco, Edwards has also obtained federal funding for Baylor.

Edwards secured $1.6 million this year for a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder research study conducted by researchers at Baylor and in conjunction with the Waco Veterans Affairs and Fort Hood.

Other funding included $97,000 for the university's Language and Literacy Center and $200,000 for the Mammoth Exhibit at Baylor's Mayborn Museum Complex.

Representing Waco in the Texas State Senate for eight years and on Capitol Hill for 18 years, Edwards has gained wide support for his role as a legislator.

"He lives here and he's one of us," said John Cullar, Baylor graduate and chair of the McLennan County Democratic Party. "He's able to attract votes from people of both parties. The support that he has across the board is reflective of the appreciation that people have of his effectiveness as a representative."

According to the McLennan County Elections Office, Edwards received 65 percent of the vote in the 2006 election against the Republican candidate.

"Rob Curnock will call me a liberal, same thing I've heard from the last 10 opponents I've beat," Edwards said, adding that he's been endorsed by the National Rifle Association, Veterans for Foreign Wars, Texas Farm Bureau and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

"If Curnock thinks those are liberal organizations, then that's scary," Edwards said.

More information about Chet Edwards' campaign can be found at: edwards.house.gov.

Published on Thursday, October 16, 2008 

While speaking to a small group of students on a Texas college campus last week Rob Curnock said that the reason he would be more qualified and a stronger advocate for veterans than Congressman Chet Edwards is because his father served in World War II. “My opponent has nothing on me there.”

As a veteran I can say this will complete authority: when it comes to veterans issues Rob Curnock has nothing on Chet Edwards.

Congressman Edwards has a distinguished voting record on veterans’ issues. In 2006 Edwards received voting rankings from the Disabled American Veterans of 100%, the Retired Enlisted Association of 86%, and the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Edwards a grade of A-. In fact Edwards has received a perfect vote ranking from the Disabled American Veterans for the last three years. As the Chairman of the House Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee Edwards increased veterans' health care funding to $11.8 billion and because of his seniority in Congress is able to be a strong voice for veterans.

Curnock has spent much of his campaign talking about associations, and according to his campaign web site “You are the company you keep…” Apparently the company that Curnock keeps is Senator John McCain and Congressman John Boehner, while the company that Chet Edwards keeps is Senator Barack Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. When it comes to veterans issues the company you keep speaks volumes. McCain has supported veterans’ issues an average of 40.7% of the time, and in 2006 received vote rankings from the Disabled American Veterans of 20%, the Retired Enlisted Association 18%, and the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a grade of D. In 2006 Boehner received vote rankings from the Disabled American Veterans of 66%, the Retired Enlisted Association of 7%, and the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Boehner a grade of C. While in 2006 Obama received voting rankings from the Disabled American Veterans of 80% and the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Obama a grade of B+. Pelosi received voting rankings from the Disabled American Veterans of 100% and the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Pelosi a grade of B+.

In Curnock’s “Open Letter to My Veteran Friends” he suggest that the “the vast majority of America’s veterans” are conservative. I think it is misleading to suggest that the vast majority of veterans are conservative, especially when you consider that more military members have donated to the Obama Campaign than the McCain Campaign; 859 members of the military donated a total of $335,536 to Obama, while McCain received $280,513 from 558 military donors.

In the same letter Curnock suggest that Congressman Edwards does not support the troops because he voted to “cut off funding and bring our troops back in defeat” by voting for HR-1591, which President Bush vowed to veto because it included a timeline for withdrawal, and because prohibited the use of funds offered under the act to deploy any troops to Iraq unless the military has certified to congressional appropriators in advance. However McCain, who is among the company that Curnock keeps, threatened to cut off unlimited funding for the troops before, and has called for troop withdrawal before.

“There's no reason for the US to remain. The American people want them home. I believe the majority of Congress wants them home. What should be the criteria is our immediate, orderly withdrawal. And if we do not do that and other Americans die then I say that the responsibilities for that lie with the Congress who did not exercise their authority under the Constitution. For us to get into nation-building, law and order, etc., I think, is a tragic and terrible mistake."

-Senator John McCain on Somalia in 1993

We must end the war in Iraq. A war that the American people strongly oppose. A war that has cost the lives of 4,180 of our service members. A war that has cost us $562,500,000,000. A war in which the definition of victory has never been made clear. A war that has gone on 1,994 days after the declaration of Mission Accomplished in Iraq. A war that has gone on even though 2,590 days since September 11, 2001 we have still not captured or killed Osama bin Laden.

I am tired of politicians, pundits and others hiding behind words like retreat and surrender; when they have given up nothing and our soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines have given up everything.

There is more to supporting the troops than securing federal funding for veterans and active duty military members, but it is ridiculous to suggest that Congressman Edwards does not “share the core values of the men and women fight for us.” As one of those veterans I can tell you that Chet Edwards unequivocally shares the values of me and my fellow veterans.

Retired four-star General Tom Schwartz, former Commander in Chief of U.S. Forces Korea, said, “In 39 years of military and public service I have never known an elected official who cares so much for our service members and their families. Chet is a leader in fighting for a strong national defense and the well-being of those who serve.”

The truth is that as a veteran I am lead to believe that Rob Curnock is much like the rest of his Republican colleagues; they thank veterans with their words but not with their actions.  

When your opponent is a well respected member of the community, and is an incumbent Democrat, the only thing for a Republican to do is go so far to the right that your opponent appears to be on the far left.

Rob Curnock spoke to a small group of students on a college campus on Wednesday afternoon, and talked for almost an hour without actually saying anything.

Curnock said that Congressman Edwards has “San Francisco values” and is one of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s “top boys in Washington.” Curnock spent a significant amount of time attempting to paint Edwards as a far left liberal, but the truth is that Edwards is only liberal when compared to a far right conservative like Curnock.

The fact is that Congressman Edwards is a moderate and independent Democrat, and if people do look at Edwards’s record, as Curnock has asked them to, it will be simple to distinguish between reality and political rhetoric. The National Journal ranks Senators and Congressman every year from the most liberal to the most conservative based on their voting record. Curnock would likes to label Edwards as a far left liberal; Edwards was ranked as the 206^th most liberal</a> member of the House of Representatives and was on the National Journal’s list of Centrist congressmen.

If Curnock was elected he would not be interested in serving all of his constituents, “We do not need Democrat votes to win.” Instead of representing all of the Brazos Valley Curnock would “advance a conservative agenda” in Washington. Curnock wants to advance this far right agenda because he believes that no one has stood up for conservative values “in the last 30 years.”

While Curnock is laying out his rehearsed stump speech he may sound knowledgeable and to some he may even sound authoritative, however, when he starts taking questions from voters he sounds uninformed and imperceptive.

When was asked about his position in health care and confronted with the fact that of the 47 million people in the United States are uninsured, and that Texas has the highest rate of uninsured in the nation with one out of every four Texans not having health insurance, Curnock stammered and questioned whether or not the statistics are accurate and saying “I don’t know exactly what the number is.” I suppose that the United States Census Bureau and the National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation are not credible sources. Curnock even had the audacity to say that “I know some people don’t have insurance because of their choice.” Then Curnock tried to downplay the plight of the uninsured by suggesting that no one is really uninsured, “everyone is taken care of, the hospitals have to help you.”

As for what Curnock would propose to fix the health care crisis, “sticks and carrots for employers.” According to his own position he would support offering tax credits to individuals to offset the cost of insurance, which is reminiscent of Senator John McCain’s health care plan. “I like most of his plan.” A plain that would cover less than half of the cost of health care, and a plan that would continue to leave millions of Americans uninsured and without health care.

When asked about alternative energy, and specifically about T. Boone Pickens plan for energy independence, Curnock said that “I won’t oppose it.” However he also said, “I’m not sure if the whole country should be nothing but a bunch of windmills around.” This shows a fundamental lack of understanding of what the T. Boone Pickens plan actually is, whether you agree with it or not.

When talking about taxes Curnock said that the “lower middle class gets squeezed,” however according to his own position he would favor a decrease in taxes for everyone except for those that make less than $12,000 a year, but that does not address the real economic problems that the lower middle class are facing.

One of the strangest things that Curnock said was about gun control. Despite the fact that you can have gun control and protect the 2^nd Amendment Curnock said that “I’m a gun owner. I don’t need some momma up in Washington telling me what to do.”

The truth is that Rob Curnock does not have any answers to any real questions, and he is simply a far right conservative that does not care about representing his district in a bi-partisan manner. Curnock is so far right that when he ran in the House District 11 Republican primary in 2002 he lost by almost 45% of the vote. Before that Curnock lost a 2000 primary bid in the same district, finishing 20% behind the two other candidates who later competed in a runoff election. The only reason he won the primary this year: he ran unopposed. In fact he waited until just before the filing deadline so that he would not have to face a Republican primary challenge.

Congressman Edwards has been in the House of Representatives for years trying to best represent the constituents from his district, no matter what their party affiliation or political ideology. If Rob Curnock does not even represent the voters of his own party, then how could he represent the diverse voters of District 17? There is one thing that Rob Curnock represents: the divisive politics that has continued to damage this country.