By Jim Campbell
The differences between the Dianne Feinstein, the Senior Senator from California, and Elizabeth Emken are many, not the least of which are age and experience. Feinstein graduated from Stanford University in 1955.
Feinstein, the 79 year-old senator is tired. She has spent virtually her entire working career in government while Elizabeth Emken, is far younger with a much broader range of experience.
Emken understands the taxation policies of the tax and spend triplets Feinstein Boxer and Pelosi have driven jobs from the state and in many instances out of the country.
Elizabeth served in management, financial analysis, and corporate operations at IBM. As an efficiency and cost cutting expert, Elizabeth utilized activity-based cost analyses to identify administrative savings across IBM U.S. – helping streamline operations, eliminate waste, and save the company millions of dollars.
Elizabeth graduated from UCLA in 1984 with degrees in Economics and Political Science. Her studies included course work at Cambridge University, where she focused on political and economic issues in China and the Middle East.
Had Elizabeth been the United States Senator representing California she would have voted against Obamacare, and she will work with others when she is elected to ensure that it will be repealed.
This is despite the fact that it contains a very important provision for which she was a leading advocate, ending insurance marketplace discrimination against people with autism.
Like most Americans candidate Emken understands genuine changes are needed to make our health care system even better.
She believes that health insurance should be portable and individuals must be able to control what’s in their benefit package.
The role of government is to establish a set of fair insurance marketplace rules, and then serve as an honest referee. Government run healthcare is not the solution.
Consumers must be more directly involved in decisions about their healthcare services allowing market forces to drive down costs that are presently skewed by government intervention.
The choice this November is easy. With two of three voters wanting to see Obama’s health care denial and rationing system repealed, and 59% of the not voters wanting a bullet train to nowhere.
Voters desiring honest change and repeal of ObamaCare will vote for Elizabeth Emken. Those wanting a $51 billion bullet train starting in the middle of nowhere and ending in the same place will vote for Feinstein. Could it be any simpler?