Smith claims to be a moderate Democrat and self-styled “fiscal hawk.” To recount Smith’s record (which is largely absent from any of his campaign ads), our “fiscal hawk” is responsible for voting for the $356 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (aka “bank bailout”) and the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (aka “stimulus”), which has not resulted in any stimulus of the economy save for Smith’s counterfactual arguments that things would be worse without it.

Smith’s coup de grâce, however, was his vote for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare), which Smith promised would “bend the cost curve of health care.” The Congressional Budget Office noted on July 17 that the cost curve raised as a result of Obamacare.

In March, Smith acknowledged that health care was not playing too well in some parts of the country – particularly the 9th District, which he purports to represent. As such, he told President Obama that it was not simply a matter of “all hold hands and jump off the cliff together . . . This is going to be difficult.”

Smith deliberately chose to dismiss the will of his constituents and “jump off the cliff” with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Don’t give Smith the parachute for safe landing. Vote for Dick Muri to represent the 9th District.

It’s the spending, stupid.

Once again, The News Tribune has demonstrated that it is part of the problem and not the solution by endorsing the same incumbents who voted for massive increases in government spending. I used to think Adam Smith was a nice pragmatic guy, too, but over the past several years he has shifted hard to the left in favor of big government and big spending.

He was a yes vote on the massive, ineffective stimulus bill and Obamacare, and has supported Nancy Pelosi’s far-left agenda in almost all the votes he’s taken.

Smith talks a great game about being moderate and having reservations about the health care bill, but when it comes time to cast his votes he has reliably voted yes to every one of the Democrats’ big spending bills.

However, when it comes to basic responsibilities of Congress, he and his Democratic majority have failed to even pass a budget for the fiscal year that started two weeks ago, nor one single appropriation bill. On top of that, he and his Democratic majority have failed to extend the middle-class tax cuts, meaning we’re all facing a big tax increase come January 2011 (not just rich folks).

This is what we want to endorse? I’m casting my vote for Dick Muri. I can count on Muri to vote against big government spending programs, to work to reduce the deficit and to support the private sector as the true engine of job creation.

In the past, Smith has been touted as a moderate but he has voted with Nancy Pelosi’s agenda more than 96 percent of the time. He supported all of the bailouts even though the Inspector General has stated that the fraud and waste has run into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

He voted for the cap and trade bill even though it will cost the average family close to $1,600 more in energy costs when fully implemented. When Congress was getting ready to pass Obamacare, the Republicans offered an amendment to put Congress in the same plan as the rest of the country but the Democrats said no way.

Smith went along with the party on the financial reform law even though it did nothing about the real money losers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Muri will work to undo the damage caused by the Pelosi agenda whereas Smith will only continue to support more of the same.

Perhaps Smith is confused about which Washington he is referring to, because the last time I checked, his top contributors were lobbyists ($48,922) and lawyers ($43,450), whereas Muri’s top contributors were local retired ($21,925) and defense employees ($3,700).

Smith wants us all to think he’s a moderate, a maverick and a fiscal hawk. However, during his 14 years in the other Washington he has voted 97 percent of the time with his party, he hasn’t sponsored one bill that became law, he’s held no leadership positions except those on subcommittees, and has most recently supported hundreds of billions of dollars in “stimulus packages” for which our children and grandchildren will have to pay.

Just a few:

• The ad says Muri voted himself a 21 percent pay raise (TNT, 11-22-2006). Distorted and wrong. The Pierce County Council voted a raise for the county executive, bringing that position’s salary in line with similar positions. By charter, the rest of the council automatically received the 21 percent raise.

Although Muri did vote “yes,” the article specifically states that he would not receive the raise at that time, only if re-elected in the next cycle.

• The ad mentions that Muri voted to extend term limits (TNT, 10-26-2009). That is misleading. The article states Muri was tasked to draft the charter amendments that the public would vote on, not the County Council.

• The ad says that Muri cut public safety funding (TNT, 11-12-2009). That has some validity. During Muri’s tenure, budgeting for public safety increased from 73 percent to 78 percent of the overall budget. For the 2010 budget, the entire council did vote cuts, including 15 sheriff’s deputies.

Please consider the time line: Government at all levels, except federal, was making the hard cuts to reduce or avoid deficits. It stinks, but I am happy there are those responsible enough to do it.

Shame on Smith. If he is not comfortable running on his own record while in Congress, or too scared, perhaps he shouldn’t be running at all.

Susan Murphy

How can anyone who has voted for bailouts of $700 billion, a $787 billion stimulus package and a monstrosity of a health care system, the cost of which can only be regarded conceptually, seriously present himself as a fiscal hawk?

Smith is this election’s poster child for Abe Lincoln’s famous saying, “You can fool some of the people all of the time; you can fool all of the people some of the time; but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Gig’s up, Adam!

In this “year of the tea party,” many candidates are presenting themselves as fiscally responsible moderates, when their voting record shows them to be big-spending, big-government proponents. Rep. Adam Smith is an example of such a politician.

He voted for the deficit–ridden stimulus bill, the hugely expensive “cap and trade” bill and Obamacare. However, when it is time to appeal to the voters for re-election, Smith portrays himself as “fiscal hawk” and glosses over these pivotal votes.

Smith has been in Congress since 1997. He is a part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Washington voters deserve a congressman with true fiscal integrity. As a Pierce County councilman, Dick Muri has a proven track record of addressing the issues that face our county in a fiscally responsible manner. It is time Muri is given the chance to bring his fiscal common sense to national issues.

Adam Smith did that following the flood of 1,001 homes and 15 businesses in the City of Pacific in January 2009. He came to Pacific in person and walked the flooded area talking to its victims. He dedicated staff members to work with the city and these victims to help them through the FEMA process and other needs.

But it did not stop there. Understanding that it will take years for mitigation projects to be finished, he worked with the Army Corps of Engineers and others to secure temporary flood protection by means of a HESCO wall from our City Park to the county line. He heard the fears of families and children that this flooding might happen again before more permanent fixes could be made.

When it mattered most, Smith came to my city, listened to our citizens’ fears and needs, and then found a way to get the job done.

(Hildreth, a Democrat, is the mayor of Pacific.)

I checked this claim out using www.votesmart.org, a nonpartisan site providing information on how our elected officials have voted, as well as how they are rated by various organizations. I found the following on Smith: In 2007-2008, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Smith a grade of A; in 2006, he supported the interest of the Disabled American Veterans 100 percent.

For comparison purposes I chose Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio. McCain received the following comparable ratings: In 2007-2008 Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave him a grade of D; in 2006, McCain supported the interest of the Disabled American Veterans 20 percent.

Boehner received the following: In 2007-2008 Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave him a grade of B; in 2006, Boehner supported the interest of the Disabled American Veterans 66 percent.

If Muri ended up voting along with his Republican colleagues, then it would be Smith who would be a better fit.

So the writer claims Congressman Adam Smith can only appreciate a veteran’s military experience “vicariously”?

As a veteran, I can appreciate the fact that Smith has been part of a Democratic-controlled Congress that has increased veterans benefits more than has been done in 40 years and reversed the “slash and burn” policies of the previous Republican administration and Congress. Smith has served on key congressional committees responsible for the increases in veterans benefits.

The writer may appreciate the vacuous flag-waving and empty promises of the Republicans, but this veteran will go with the real accomplishments of Democrats like Smith.