In an editorial in the September 18, 2005 Wichita Eagle, Randy Scholfield wrote “Less government is a laudable goal.”
The dictionary defines laudable as “Deserving commendation; praiseworthy” or “Deserving honor, respect, or admiration.” Mr. Scholfield’s past writings don’t treat the goal of less government this way. In fact, it doesn’t seem there is a single government program that Mr. Scholfield doesn’t like and praise.
On September 13, 2004, he advocated more funding for early childhood education, writing “… the state Legislature needs to do the right thing for the state’s children and future, and invest in early childhood education.”
He seems to automatically believe that schools need more money.
He believes in government subsidies. In an editorial in The Wichita Eagle published on April 19, 2005, he wrote: “Wichita should stick to its subsidies. They’re fostering competition, not stifling it, and paying off big-time for the community by lowering airfares and boosting economic development.”
He has consistently supported the government building the downtown Wichita arena.
He advocates more government spending on arts (August 9, 2005 “Culture requires community support”).
He supports more funding for Exploration Place.
Mr. Scholfield, is there any government program you have opposed, any example that would lend credibility to your claim that less government is a laudable goal?