Interview with Robert Howard
10/28/05 Interview with Robert Howard by Steve Smith, © Nebraska Citizen.
I called Robert Howard to confirm that he was running for the Nebraska Legislature - District 2, and that the information that I had was correct. Robert wanted to give me a bit more information than the biographical information that I was asking for. We started out talking about the economy. Robert believes the best way to help the economy is to take entitlement revenue off the tax roles. To Robert, this means eliminating the State's tax on Social Security revenue, military retirement income and civil service income. He believes that this would encourage people who have worked for Offutt to return when they retire. He also feels that fewer people would leave the State if their retirement income was not taxed.
Robert is cynical about LB775. He feels that the bill is a failure. "Tax cuts should go to people who bring money into the State, not take it out of the State." This doesn't mean that Robert opposes all economic incentives. He believes that such incentives should go to people or companies that are headquartered in the State.
Robert worked as a blue collar worker doing quality control inspections. He spent much of his life doing repair work. He is a Democrat because he feels the Democratic party does a better job of representing the employee. However, he doesn't agree with the party on everything. For example, he believes the Democrats are wrong on the gun issue. Robert is a gun owner himself.
On the subject of abortion, Robert says that "nobody is in favor of abortion, but correcting it by making it illegal may end up with the same results as prohibition.” He feels that making it easier for the mother to choose life may be more effective.
Robert believes individual rights are important. It is one of his key beliefs. People who don't want to be annexed shouldn't be forced. A person shouldn't have to live with a feedlot that might affect their health.
In his eyes, there are a couple of ways to deal with industries that are detrimental to the quality of life in a community. One way is to place the facility in a remote area so that there is a large buffer between it and the community. The other way is to enclose such facilities to control air and water quality.
Robert knows that groundwater is a major issue for Nebraska but doesn't feel he is knowledgeable enough to be able to form an opinion as to how it should be handled. Robert believes he would be one of forty-nine Legislators and the best way to accomplish things is to work as a group to find what is best for the State.
He believes his greatest power is to be able to bring things to the table.
Our conversation moved over to schools. Robert believes the schools are doing pretty well. However, he believes that private schools with a history of providing a good education shouldn't have to bear all of the financial burden alone. Robert could support vouchers where a community has a proven need. For example, if there is a large Hispanic population, then perhaps there would be enough children to justify teaching some of the primary classes in Spanish as the children learn English.
Robert wants to be on the Judicial Committee because he wants to be able to protect individual rights. He also wants to be on the Ways and Means Committee so that he can help guide the direction of Economic Development.
Robert would like to emphasize that he is in favor of tax cuts, especially State taxes on Federal entitlements.
Comments
"He believes his greatest power is to be able to bring things to the table"
Isn't this kind of a prerequisite for the job?
In addition he seems very tax cut happy ... I wonder where he plans to make up for that lost revenue. I hope he isn't putting to much faith into the states economy, we all know how that’s going.
Next, his view on how to mitigate negative externalities on communities (i.e. feedlots next to communities) is answered with shallow solutions and thought. I want to know how he plans to amend zoning changes from the legislature and how he plans forcibly withhold permits if one is sought. It almost sounds as if he wants to be involved in both local and regional issues. While this is a great goal and one that I look highly upon … I hope he is careful in not steeping on other people shoes.
Lastly on annexation, the state's enabling legislation is quite clear in this matter. In general, if a city doesn't have 10,000 residents they can be annex as long as the one that is annexing can provide stable and adequate services. I really don't know what he really plans to do in this matter if he reaches the legislature...
It sounds like he wants to solve a bunch of local issues, perhaps he should with draw and run for a more local office to pursue change.
Anyway, good luck to him, I hope he is able to hold onto his guns and stick with the campaign.
KJ
Posted by: Kurt | October 30, 2005 01:40 PM
Thank You Kurt
Tax cut to middle and low-income strengthen the economy.
Tax breaks to out of state companies shift the burden on the local companies too small to get a break for expanding.
Bring ideas to the table is not a prerequisite for the job of legislator it is part of the job.
I cannot bring these ideas to the legislature until I am a legislator
The local issues I commented on, I was asked my opinions.
I know I do not have all the answers to every question.
I am running to help find answers, not dictate answer.
I hope we have more in common than you have with any of my opponents.
Robert Howard
Posted by: Robert Howard | October 30, 2005 06:02 PM
Thanks for the great interview, Steve.
As for Mr. Howard, I think his tax cuts are economically sound. But do I detect an anti-feedlot bias? (Just kidding. I blog from one.)
Kurt, the annexation law's nuances are still being defined. They aren't carved in granite, or in the State Constitution, either.
Posted by: PTG | November 4, 2005 04:53 PM
I got the impression from Robert that he wasn’t opposed to feedlots but that he simply wanted to make sure that whoever was there first didn’t have their rights stepped on. I asked him to clarify that as one could get the impression that there isn’t any place in the State that would be permitted to build a new facility. I am still not sure how he would deal with that.
Posted by: steve | November 4, 2005 05:36 PM
I will listen to all sides before voting; that’s why we have hearings!
Posted by: Robert Howard | November 11, 2005 04:40 PM
Personally, I think Mr. Howard’s responses are rather refreshing. I think it is time for someone different to address the issues of our citizens. His concern about individual rights is clearly one that will touch every voter. He will certainly be a challenge to the close minded. I see that his not being part of the "machine" and coming from a blue collar background will appeal to many in our district who often feel their elected representation is not from the same social class as their own. I wish him good luck in this journey. We need new blood in the Unicameral and if he is elected, I sincerely hope his vision can be understood by all.
Terry
Posted by: Terry D. Tilson | November 18, 2005 01:03 PM