No, Bruins! (Daily Bruin Endorses Waxman)

On the UCLA Campus, visitors and students will hear "Go Bruins!" UCLA falls within the borders of the new 33rd Congressional District, yet the student editorial board of the Daily Bruin has tipped their had to endorse Congressman Henry Waxman for another term.

Now, all I can shout is "No, Bruins!"

Like the back-handed endorsement for Henry Waxman in the Santa Monica Daily Press, the student paper offered  tepid support for the long-term incumbent:

This board supports Congressman Henry Waxman for re-election. Though his case for a 36th straight year in the House of Representatives isn’t the strongest, his opponent is too flawed to jump into the fray in Washington, D.C.

Bloomfield is "too flawed"? -- that's a strange assessment for choosing to support Waxman for another term, a legislator who has spent more time pursuing inane issues or pushing on this country unpopular legislation that would kill jobs. Waxman is a flawed incumbent because for over three decades he never had to campaign for his seat.

Independent challenger Bill Bloomfield has attacked Waxman on hot-button topics, such as campaign finances and Waxman’s contribution to the national debt as a long-standing representative.

Students in higher education should care more about the national debt, since the deficit spending in Washington is part of the reason why the cost of a college education is sky-rocketing. 

His campaign tilts more anti-Waxman than pro-Bloomfield, while maintaining that he will be a moderate voice in the House.

Every campaign uses persuasive information to win over voters while dissuading them from supporting the opponent. Why should Bloomfield's campaign be any different? Furthermore, Bloomfield would indeed be a moderate voice in Congress, an independent who in refusing to caucus with either party, who in refusing to accept donations from PAC, special interests, or party bosse, will not be beholden to any interest but his views and his voters.

But Bloomfield has failed to lay out concrete plans for governing. The Santa Monica-based businessman seems too concerned with quickly fixing what he calls a “broken” Congress than effectively advocating for local constituents on the federal level.

Point of fact - Mr. Bloomfield is from Manhattan Beach, which bolsters his run for Congress. Unlike Congressman Waxman, who has lived in Maryland for the past three decades, the independent candidates still lives and breathes and has his being here in the 33d. The independent candidate has focused on fixing Washington because the federal government is not serving us who live at the local level; therefore, his mission for reform from the outside-in is a plus, not a negative. 

And what has Waxmandone on a "local level" for the voters? He had not visited the Malibu Democratic club in four years before he started paying attention, and that only because he faced stiff competition this year. Even Loyala Marymount Professor Fernando Guerra conceded that Waxman's focus is all-Washington.We know where Waxman stands on all the issues.

As a representative, he helped push the Affordable Care Act through during his most recent term. In the past he’s fought to maintain Pell Grants for higher education. Along with President Barack Obama, who also gets this board’s endorsement, Waxman has proven that he will support policies addressing the needs of students.

Someone needs to inform this student body that legislation like "ObamaCare" is hurting hospitals all over the country. I wonder how many of those med students will feel when they graduate with their white coats. Will they be facing pink slips and unemployment lines next? How many more hospitals will have to close before  the voters in the 33rd acknowledge that "Affordable Care Act" is in name only?

No matter what the press may publish, the voters have the final say, and the students from UCLA to the residents of the South Bay should say "No!" to Waxmanand "Yes!" to Bill Bloomfield for Congress.