imported post
I posted this in response to another thread, but it still applies.
Although she may support gun rights, there are other things to consider. A few key reasons not to supportSharron Angle
1) She was in the IAP for many years as a Nye county School Board member. She only changed to being a Republican after losing election for another office.
Nothing against the IAP, I just wonder if her decision to change parties was based on the fact that she had very little chance to advance her career whilein the IAP.
2) She is ineffective. She introduced 43 bills as a legislator and only passed 1.
This is a pass rate of just 2.3%. Do we really want to rely on someone on the national level who only had a success rate of 2.3% on the state level?
3) She is a deficit spender. Shealways voted for all appropriations, just never funding them. Even during the 2003, she voted for more spending than could balance the budget.
Thelaw of the state requires a balanced budget, once the legislature passes the budget, and the governor signs it, it must be funded. Sue voted to pass a budget that wouldhave caused a deficit, this required an increase in revenue, she voted against the tax increase which was required to fund the budgetthat she voted for and encouraged others to join her. This resulted in2 extended special sessions which cost the state $50,000 a day. The 2sessionslasted a total of 37 days, costingthe state $1,850,000.
Voting for the budget, but then voting against funding it reminds me of a rather well known quote "I actually voted for the 87 billion before I voted against it."
In the 2005 session, she never introduced a single bill to roll back or eliminate any of the taxes of the 2003 session and again voted for all of the spending.
Considering that her biggest claim to fame is being a tax fighter, this is a problem.
4)In the 2003 session, she tried to get the State of Nevada to fund sendingNevada inmates with substance abuse problems to a Mexico rehab center run by the Church of Scientology.
Why would we send our inmates to Mexico, unless that is where they belonged in the first place?
5)In2004, she actively recruited Republicans to run against Republicans to try and secure more votes to get herself into leadership at the expense ofthe Assembly Republican caucus. She specifically targeted Republicans who had defied her and voted for the tax increase to cover the budget during the previous session. (A budget which she voted for, but refused to fund.)
She was somewhat successful, several of these seats went to Democrats as a result.
If this is the kind of game playing that you want in Washington, then why not leave Harry in office?