The following is a collection of links to the social media sites of the candidates who have announced that they are running to represent the NY 23rd in 2019-2020. Included are links to their website, Facebook page, Twitter feed, and their Ithaca Times Article and Interview Video. Not all candidates have all of the sources listed. If that changes I will update the page.
Instead of listing Candidates’ email addresses, I assume the ones listed on the campaign websites are the proper ones to use. I listed the candidates’ occupations as reported on Politics1.com. Also, you may want to view the Federal Election Commissions data, which includes their fund raising information. Ballotpedia is another site that has information about our race.
If more than one democrat files nominating petitions with 1,250 valid democratic signatures there will be a democratic primary in June 2018. (You need to be a registered democrat by Friday, October 13 to be able to vote in the June Democratic Primary.) The Indpenendent Candidates will not need to have a primary but will need to file petitions with 1,250 valid signatures of registered voters who did not sign another petition for this race.
James Clasby (Ind):
- Tompkins County
- Self-Employed & Navy Veteran
Max Della Pia (Dem):
Rick Gallant (Dem):
Ian Golden (Dem):
John Hertzler (Ind):
Tracy Mitrano (Dem):
Tom Reed (Rep):
Eddie Sundquist (Dem):
Karl Warrington (Dem):
Charles Whalen (Dem):
Posted in 2018
Tagged Charles Whalen, Eddie Sundguist, Ian Golden, James Clasby, John Hertzler, Karl Warrington, Max Della Pia, NY23rd Candidates, Rick Gallant, Tom Reed, Tracy Mitrano
Our goal is to create good paying, high-quality jobs while cutting taxes for the middle class. This can be done through incentivizing the manufacturing sector and small business growth, as well as lowering rates on businesses and investments. This path will ensure that hard-working folks of our region, and across America, have more money in their pockets.–Tom Reed (facebook)
We need to focus on uniting for the victims and their families.–Tom Reed (facebook)
There is no need to make these ideas up; one sees them frequently on Tom Reed’s facebook page.
- Laissez-faire is all the government we need.
- States can do everything better than the Federal Govt.
- We should return to the gold standard.
- The government should be funded with tariffs on imported goods.
- Another war might be necessary.
- People need arms for a possible insurrection.
- The rich should be taxed less, the poor more.
- We spend too much on those in need.
- Tax cuts for the rich benefit all of us.
- Cutting taxes increases revenue.
- Consumption taxes are fairer than income taxes.
- Income tax is (or ought to be) unconstitutional.
- Any firearm regulation is (or ought to be) unconstitutional.
- Gun toting citizens are an answer to crime and violence.
- Everyone, rich or poor, has what they deserve.
- Effective firearm regulations are impossible.
- Government can do no good.
- Recessions and depressions are inevitable.
Some of us are believers in these. Their beliefs are immune to argument; they are based on faith not fact. Are believers influenced by relatives, fake news, political propaganda, little education, or what, one wonders?
My father claimed to be a “rugged individualist” and an “independent voter.” He favored Hoover over FDR. During the depression, he said, it wasn’t the government but people helping each other that mattered. But when he was older, when inflation had depleted his savings, when he was dependent on Social Security and Medicare, he softened his views. I got more raises from Social Security than I ever got from my boss, he avowed.
While focusing on hurricanes, NFL players, and Las Vegas, we may have not realized that the Congress missed the September 30 deadline to reautherize the Childen’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). CHIP provides Federal Funds to States for inexpensive health insurance to children in lower-income families.
According to The Hill, a study of the Kaiser Family Foundation reports that 10 States, including New York, will run out of CHIP funds at the end of the year. It would be appropriate to ask your County Legislators how this will affect your county. Have they contact Rep. Reed to protest the lost of support your residents. Contact your State Senator and Assemblymember and try to get information about how our State will react to the lost of CHIP funds. Hold our representatives accountable!
Also, call Congressman Tom Reed, and ask what did he do to try to convince the Speaker of the House to re-authorize CHIP. There has been nothing on his website or Facebook page about not renewing it. I thought he cared about his constituents.
Rep. Reed’s Office Numbers.
- Washington (202) 225-3161
- Corning (607) 654-7566
- Geneva (315) 759-5229
- Ithaca (607) 222-2027
- Jamestown (716) 708-6369
- Olean (716) 379-8434
Below is the number of children affected in the NY-23rd Counties as of September, 2017.
It was great to see my good friend, Congressman Steve Scalise, return to the House today. His recovery from the tragic shooting in June is remarkable. We in Congress, now more than ever, need to come together and focus on what unites. We are all here to work on behalf of the American people, regardless of party.–Tom Reed
Tom Reed has announced, via email, three October 14th meetings. These are likely to be raucous and newsworthy. Tom will take care to have many supporter’s attend. How will he handle questions?
- Will he claim to be committed to bipartisan cooperation?
- Will he continue to insist that proposed tax reforms would benefit the middle class?
- What will he say if asked about Alternative Minimum Tax or Estate Tax?
- Will he continue to insist that Obamacare must be repealed?
- How would he explain delays in authorizing funding for community health centers?
- Will he maintain that effective firearm regulations conflict with the Second Amendment?
- What about cheap and easy modifications for rapid firing of guns?
- What will he say about Trump’s unpresidential tweets?
- What will he say about North Korea?
- How would he answer a question about Trump Administration nepotism?
- What will he say if questioned about wasteful administration travel
- What will he say about the ongoing investigation of Trump’s election?
- What will he say about Puerto Rico?
- Will he feign outrage if NRA political contributions are questioned?
- Will he feign outrage if the evident conflict of interest with his “wife’s business” is questioned?
- What will he say if asked to release his tax returns?
Tom will try to deflect these questions, perhaps turning on the questioner or denying the obvious. Tom will likely pose as a moderate, bipartisan, caring person motivated by common sense. He will portray critics as radical, misguided,and rude. He may ask for respect.
Those who attend should bring agree/disagree cards.
From February, 2017:
Tax loopholes aren’t the problem, they are a symptom of a problem–Congress is the problem.
Tax loopholes don’t grow on trees, they are enacted by Congress. Some may serve a worthwhile purpose, others only serve to reward special interests.
It is our corrupt system rather than individual members of Congress which is at fault. As Tom Reed has noted, members of the House can only vote yes or no on bills and amendments that House leaders allow on the floor. If an important bill is considered, there may be no way to dump undesirable provisions other than to reject the entire bill.
Individual members didn’t create the system that leaves them dependent on legal bribery for funding, but they have to live with it. The Constitution makes each House responsible for it’s own rules, which makes needed reform difficult if not impossible. While we understandably applaud the First Amendment, when interpreted to allow unlimited spending by special interests, it stands in the way of honest government.
Reportedly business interests plan to spend immense sums lobbying Congress on tax reform. Can there be any doubt whose interests proposed reform will serve? Proponents of reform may talk of eliminating special interest loopholes, but this is empty talk–money talks. Even if loopholes were eliminated, unless Congress itself is reformed, they are certain to creep back in.
Former congressman Michael Grimm, out of prison after a tax fraud conviction, plans to run for Congress again. Will he win the GOP nomination? If elected, he will fit right in.
Reducing Support for Children and Families
On Sept. 28, Tom Reed (R-NY) wrote:
Glad to see HR 2824 (Increasing Opportunity and Success for Children and Parents through Evidence-Based Home Visiting Act) pass the House this week! This bill included reauthorizing the Maternal Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program as well as our Standard DATA act. Standard DATA will improve data matching within and across programs, increase administrative efficiency and allow caseworkers to spend more time solving problems. Streamlining government is a good thing for taxpayers.
In an email, dated Sept. 29, Rep. Capuano (D-MA) explains:
On Tuesday the House considered H.R. 2824, “Increasing Opportunity and Success for Children and Parents through Evidence-Based Home Visiting Act.” This legislation reauthorizes the Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV) for five years. Qualified pregnant women and parents of children up to kindergarten age benefit from this initiative which provides home visits by educators, medical staff, social workers and other professionals. The goal is to support young families, help prepare small children for school and improve family health. Unfortunately, the money authorized will only cover 6% of eligible families. H.R. 2824 makes it harder for families to benefit from the MIECHV program.
The legislation also adds some requirements to the program while providing no additional money for implementation. It requires the home visits to include monitoring of employment and family income as well as child safety and development. The problem with this is that the program doesn’t offer any employment counseling or resources for families, and doesn’t add any money to pay for them. H.R. 2824 will also require all states participating in the MIECHV to start matching all funds they receive for MIECHV. This will inevitably lead to a reduction in access in some states which may not have the additional funds to supplement the program. It will also be at risk of funding cuts if states face unanticipated expenses such as a natural disaster.
What a difference in perspective!
It is offensive for anyone, especially children, to be forced to conform with someone else’s concept of patriotism.
- I remember when the the religious phrase was added to the Pledge of Allegiance. We were assured that we need not say the offensive phrase if we didn’t want to.
- I remember Clint Eastwood’s movie with a scene showing a policeman threatening a Japanese woman, the wife of a Japanese soldier, for not displaying the Japanese flag during the war.
- I think of frequent disrespect for the flag: flag clothing, flags flapping from moving cars, flags left flying overnight unlighted, flags left flying in the rain.
- I think of the National Anthem played over loudspeakers ignored by the people.
- I remember being bullied for not having a flag pin in my lapel during the Vietnam war.
- When compelled to stand for the pledge, as at Tom Reed’s meetings, I remember that it was written by an American Socialist–Francis Bellamy
I find these offensive–the casual disrespect of the flag as well as efforts to force conformance with another’s concept of patriotism.