Eric is running for Congress in the 9th District in Indiana. Dr. Schansberg has been a professor of Economics at Indiana University Southeast in New Albany for 30 years and has written two books on public policy. Dr. Schansberg is a disciple of Jesus who has taught Bible studies since 1990. (Check out "The Word Diet"-- the Bible reading guide and the podcast.) Eric has been married to Tonia since 1995 and is father to four boys— two by adoption and two the more conventional way.
posted by Eric Schansberg at 6:52 PM
Saturday at 8pm
AND
Sunday: the 1st hour will be re-run at 8pm-- with the 2nd hour at 9 pm
posted by Eric Schansberg at 1:32 PM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 1:18 PM
October 31, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Schansberg announces Election Day plans
On Friday, Dr. Eric Schansberg, the Libertarian candidate for U.S. Congress in Indiana's 9th District, announced his campaign stops and plans for November 4th.
Freetown Community Center 6:00 – 6:15 AM
Brownstown Courthouse
Seymour High School
North Vernon The Lord's Chapel 8:00 – 8:30 AM
Scottsburg Middle School 9:00 – 9:30 AM
Jeffersonville vote at Wilson Elementary 10:00 AM
Work/Teach IUS
Campaign throughout So. Indiana 3:00 – 6:00 PM
Starting at 6:00, Eric and his wife will host a party in their home for supporters. Members of the media are welcome to attend as well.
October 31, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Schansberg announces Election Day plans
On Friday, Dr. Eric Schansberg, the Libertarian candidate for U.S. Congress in Indiana's 9th District, announced his campaign stops and plans for November 4th.
Freetown Community Center 6:00 – 6:15 AM
Brownstown Courthouse
Seymour High School
North Vernon The Lord's Chapel 8:00 – 8:30 AM
Scottsburg Middle School 9:00 – 9:30 AM
Jeffersonville vote at Wilson Elementary 10:00 AM
Work/Teach IUS
Campaign throughout So. Indiana 3:00 – 6:00 PM
Starting at 6:00, Eric and his wife will host a party in their home for supporters. Members of the media are welcome to attend as well.
END
END
posted by Eric Schansberg at 11:06 AM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 7:17 PM
Schansberg to celebrate 5th anniversary of VET’s demise
On Saturday, Dr. Eric Schansberg will celebrate the fifth anniversary of the end of “vehicle emission testing” (VET) in
The event is a party from
posted by Eric Schansberg at 8:54 AM
On Thursday, Dr. Eric Schansberg offered voters an overview of the key issues in the 9th District’s congressional campaign: “Here are the five key issues where there are significant differences between the candidates.”
On
On “fiscal conservatism”: “If you want someone who is ok for a Democrat, you can choose Hill. If you want someone who is ok for a Republican, you can choose Sodrel. If you want a fiscal conservative, the watchdog groups indicate that I’m your only choice.”
On abortion: “If you’re ‘pro-choice’, you have Hill. If you’re ‘pro-life’, you have me or Sodrel.”
On issues of “economic justice”: “If you want someone who will bring knowledge and zeal to this, you can choose a Christian economist. If you want someone who will largely ignore these issues, you can choose Sodrel. If you want someone who will focus on minor issues and dubious approaches, you have Hill.”
On illegal immigration: “If you want someone who is strong on illegal immigration, you can choose me or Hill. If you want someone who will only focus on border security, you can choose Sodrel.”
posted by Eric Schansberg at 8:41 AM
The C-J editorialists didn’t interview me. You can understand why. Talking to an economics professor must sound like nails on a chalkboard to them. (They didn’t even return our campaign’s emails. Classy!)
They didn’t mention me in their endorsement of Baron Hill. The best explanation? Legitimate concern that some of my positions would take votes away from their preferred candidate.
Hill is “progressive”? Please… Hill has “courage” on
Most voters say they want “change”. In the 9th District, voters have a highly-credible 3rd-party candidate—the only fiscal conservative in the race. Will they embrace change or choose the status quo?
Don’t waste your vote this time; vote Schansberg for Congress.
posted by Eric Schansberg at 6:48 AM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 9:00 AM
For Hill, who has served in the seat for eight of the past 10 years, it's about pragmatism, about getting things done...Sodrel, though, is driven more by his conservative fiscal and social philosophy....
An interesting opening: Sodrel bragged about "getting things done for us", but Hill gets credit for "getting things done". Sodrel gets credit for relying on his "conservative fiscal philosophy", but his failure to adhere to that is one of the top reasons I entered the race in 2006.
This is Hill and Sodrel's fourth straight battle, with Hill winning twice and Sodrel once. Libertarian Eric Schansberg is joining the fray for the second time.
But even though the match-up has been considered one of the nation's most intense, this year's race hasn't had the feel of those in 2004 and 2006 when attack ads and commercials from outside interest groups dominated the conversation...."This is a much cleaner campaign than 2006 and I think that's frankly because Baron's got a large lead and a lot more money," Schansberg said.
Indeed, recent polls by Survey USA show that Hill has opened a double-digit lead on Sodrel, with Schansberg gaining a bit as well....
Schansberg is one of the state's most active Libertarians. He participates in candidate forums, advertises on television and tells voters that he is the real choice for change.
"We've voted ourselves into all kinds of problems with the two-party system the last 100 years, and I think it's time for a real change," he said.
Schansberg is also a conservative. He opposes abortion and all federal funding for Planned Parenthood. He wants to reduce the size of the federal government and constrain it to stricter constitutional bounds. And he supports eliminating the federal income and payroll taxes in favor a single sales tax.
But he also labeled himself the race's "strongest defender of the poor and those in the middle class."...
Sodrel is also a conservative....
posted by Eric Schansberg at 7:33 PM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 7:35 AM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 7:34 PM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 11:58 AM
A debate about the so-called "fair tax" and the "flat tax" emerged as one of the largest differences among the three candidates running in a rematch in the 9th Congressional District....
The candidates also disagreed on congressional term limits, with Sodrel arguing they're a good idea and Hill saying they're unnecessary."We've got term limits now and they're called elections," Hill said.
Term limits shift power away from elected officials and to lobbyists and bureaucrats because lawmakers can't build up power and expertise, Hill said.
But despite the fact that he defeated Hill four years ago, Sodrel argued term limits are necessary, in part because incumbents are able to raise so much money they become nearly unbeatable.
He got a laugh from the crowd when he said there are three parties in Washington, D.C.: Republicans, Democrats and incumbents.
"America has a deep enough bench," Sodrel said. "We don't have to have the same people serving for two generations."
Schansberg said he could support term limits. But he said the debate about that issue misses the larger problem that Republicans and Democrats are too much alike and aren't taking the steps necessary to get spending in check and reduce the size of government.
"We need to go back to a place of fiscal sanity," Schansberg said. Term limits "don't really speak to that."
posted by Eric Schansberg at 10:37 AM
WATCH THE DEBATE BETWEEN ERIC SCHANSBERG, MIKE SODREL AND BARON HILL AT THESE TIMES:
Saturday, Oct 25th @ 8pm
Sunday, Oct 26th @ 4p & 8pm
posted by Eric Schansberg at 10:36 AM
On Tuesday evening, Dr. Eric Schansberg engaged in a two-hour debate with Rep. Baron Hill and former Rep. Mike Sodrel at the
Schansberg commented: “I thought it went well. I enjoyed the format, but wish we’d had more debates and the ability to have different formats. Unfortunately, Baron only allowed us one debate this time. Apparently, he’s far more interested in debating as a challenger than as an incumbent.”
Asked about what went well, Schansberg replied: “I thought I was able to communicate that I am the choice for ‘independent’ voters and the only vote for ‘true change’. People often say they’re independent and they want change. I guess we’ll see how much that’s true on November 4th.”
Asked about any disappointments, Schansberg replied: “We didn’t get a two-minute closing statement—as per the agreement. I was hoping to use that to speak to our on-going efforts in
posted by Eric Schansberg at 8:33 PM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 3:29 PM
On Monday, The Star’s editorial board endorsed Republican Mike Sodrel in the 9th District race, citing “a business owner's experience and expertise”, “a depth of knowledge” from his previous stint in Congress, and “tempered partisan tendencies”.
The board commended Democratic incumbent Baron Hill for showing “encouraging growth in the past two years”, but thought that he “remains the weakest of the three candidates”.
The board also praised Libertarian Eric Schansberg as “well-qualified”, “a strong candidate”, “thoughtful”, “well versed”, and “a prime example of how far the Libertarian Party has advanced in
Schansberg said, “I’m thankful for the complimentary and encouraging words from the most important newspaper in
For more information on the campaign, see: www.SchansbergForCongress.com. To schedule an interview, contact Eric Schansberg at
posted by Eric Schansberg at 9:50 AM
Schansberg commented: “Their decision rule seems to be choosing incumbents who are decent on the 2nd Amendment—rather than those who are best in that area. That said, it still seems odd that they would endorse someone who publicly endorsed Barack Obama.”
In 2006, the NRA and Gun Owners of America (GOA) endorsed Mike Sodrel. In 2006,
When asked about the endorsement and ratings of the two 2nd Amendment groups, Schansberg said “We’re fortunate to have three good candidates on the 2nd Amendment, but you’re not going to beat a Libertarian on gun rights. Hill is solid—and very good for a Democrat. Sodrel is excellent. But we’re glad for the
posted by Eric Schansberg at 6:53 AM
October 13, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Schansberg town hall in New Albany on Thursday
Dr. Eric Schansberg, the Libertarian candidate for the U.S. Congress in Indiana's 9th District, will hold a town-hall meeting in New Albany on Thursday, October 16th at 2:30. (The meeting will be held in the Community Room of the Mark Elrod Tower at the end of Wolf Trace.)
At the town hall, Schansberg will deliver prepared remarks for 15-20 minutes—and then field questions from those in the audience.
In his prepared remarks, Dr. Schansberg will address:
· the attempted bail-outs of the economy over the past year
· gas prices and energy policy—policies that will work (domestic drilling and a stronger dollar) and policies that will not work (regulations on speculators, subsidies to energy companies, etc.)
· the dramatic but overlooked impact of fiscal conservatism
· our on-going efforts in Iraq
· the oppressive burden of payroll/FICA taxes on income and the need for Social Security reform
All interested parties are encouraged to attend. Audio and video recording are permitted.
posted by Eric Schansberg at 9:52 PM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
On Wednesday, Dr. Eric Schansberg agreed to a debate proposal from 9th District Republican Party Chairman Larry Shickles. Shickles proposed that the three candidates would be allowed to ask each other a pre-determined number of questions—while connected to a polygraph lie detector.
In his letter, Shickles expressed a common sentiment—that the race for the 9th District seat during the last four campaigns has been unnecessarily negative and unproductive, because of negative campaigning by Rep. Baron Hill and former Rep. Mike Sodrel.
Schansberg commented: “I’d love to see more debates—whatever the format. But Baron is unlikely to cooperate. After repeatedly demanding debates (immediately after the primaries) in 2006, he is now quite reluctant to debate. It’s hypocritical, but understandable. He has a huge lead in the polls; he has a big money advantage; and his answers are often unimpressive. I can see why he’d want to severely limit his exposure to debates.”
For more information on the campaign, see: www.SchansbergForCongress.com. To schedule an interview, contact Eric Schansberg at
END
posted by Eric Schansberg at 7:12 AM
by John Allison (September 30, 2008; hat tip: Jefferson Review)
Here is a letter by John Allison, President & CEO of BB&T, that was sent to every member of Congress.
Dear Senator/Congressman/Representative:
BB&T is a $136 billion multi-state banking company. We have 1,500 branches throughout the mid-Atlantic and southeast states. While we have been impacted by the real estate markets, we continue to have healthy profitability and a strong capital position.
We think it is important that Congress hear from the well run financial institutions as most of the concerns have been focused on the problem companies. It is inappropriate that the debate is largely being shaped by the financial institutions who made very poor decisions.
Attached are the issues that we believe are relevant from the perspective of healthy banks. Your consideration of these issues is greatly appreciated.
[Signature]
Key Points on a "Rescue" Plan From A Healthy Bank’s Perspective
1. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are the primary cause of the mortgage crisis. These government supported enterprises distorted normal market risk mechanisms. While individual private financial institutions have made serious mistakes, the problems in the financial system have been caused by government policies including, affordable housing (now sub-prime), combined with the market disruptions caused by the Federal Reserve holding interest rates too low and then raising interest rates too high.
2. There is no panic on Main Street and in sound financial institutions. The problems are in high-risk financial institutions and on Wall Street.
3. While all financial intermediaries are being impacted by liquidity issues, this is primarily a bailout of poorly run financial institutions. It is extremely important that the bailout not damage well run companies.
4. Corrections are not all bad. The market correction process eliminates irrational competitors. There were a number of poorly managed institutions and poorly made financial decisions during the real estate boom. It is important that any rules post “rescue” punish the poorly run institutions and not punish the well run companies.
5. A significant and immediate tax credit for purchasing homes would be a far less expensive and more effective cure for the mortgage market and financial system than the proposed “rescue” plan.
6. This is a housing value crisis. It does not make economic sense to purchase credit card loans, automobile loans, etc. The government should directly purchase housing assets, not real estate bonds. This would include lots and houses under construction.
7. The guaranty of money funds by the U.S. Treasury creates enormous risk for the banking industry. Banks have been paying into the FDIC insurance fund since 1933. The fund has a limit of $100,000 per client. An arbitrary, “out of the blue” guarantee of money funds creates risk for the taxpayers and significantly distorts financial markets.
8. Protecting the banking system, which is fundamentally controlled by the Federal Reserve, is an established government function. It is completely unclear why the government needs to or should bailout insurance companies, investment banks, hedge funds and foreign companies.
9. It is extremely unclear how the government will price the problem real estate assets. Priced too low, the real estate markets will be worse off than if the bail out did not exist. Priced too high, the taxpayers will take huge losses. Without a market price, how can you rationally determine value?
10. The proposed bankruptcy “cram down” will severely negatively impact mortgage markets and will damage well run institutions. This will provide an incentive for homeowners who are able to pay their mortgages, but have a loss in their house, to take bankruptcy and force losses on banks. (Banks would not have received the gains had the houses appreciated.) This will substantially increase the risk in mortgage lending and make mortgage pricing much higher in the future.
11. Fair Value accounting should be changed immediately. It does not work when there are no market prices. If we had Fair Value accounting, as interpreted today, in the early 1990’s the United States financial system would have crashed. Accounting should not drive economic activity, it should reflect it.
12. The proposed new merger accounting rules should be deferred for at least five years. The new merger accounting rules are creating uncertainty for high quality companies who might potentially purchase weaker companies.
13. The primary beneficiaries of the proposed rescue are Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. The Treasury has a number of smart individuals, including Hank Paulson. However, Treasury is totally dominated by Wall Street investment bankers. They do not have knowledge of the commercial banking industry. Therefore, they can not be relied on to objectively assess all the implications of government policy on all financial intermediaries. The decision to protect the money funds is a clear example of a material lack of insight into the risk to the total financial system.
14. Arbitrary limits on executive compensation will be self defeating. With these limits, only the failing financial institutions will participate in the “rescue,” effectively making this plan a massive subsidy for incompetence. Also, how will companies attract the leadership talent to manage their business effectively with irrational compensation limits?
And in a report by Bloomberg on "Allison's Alternative":
Allison is retiring in December after 19 years leading BB&T, the 14th-biggest U.S. commercial bank, with assets of $136.5 billion. BB&T avoided subprime lending, option adjustable-rate mortgages and complex debt securities that have slammed Wachovia Corp., Washington Mutual Inc. and other lenders. Still, BB&T more than tripled the money it set aside for loan losses in the second quarter, mainly because of loans to builders and developers in Georgia, Florida and the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area.
Rather than buying distressed assets, the U.S. government could offer a ``significant'' tax credit for home purchases, or even purchase vacant lots or houses under construction, Allison said. The market should be allowed to eliminate ``irrational competitors,'' he said. ``There were a number of poorly managed institutions and poorly made financial decisions during the real estate boom,'' Allison wrote. ``It is important that any rules post-`rescue' punish the poorly run institutions and not punish the well-run companies.''
He said the mortgage crisis was caused primarily by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. The government-chartered companies, which own or guarantee more than 40 percent of the $12 trillion of U.S. home loans, ``distorted normal market-risk mechanisms,'' and were abetted by a Federal Reserve that made the wrong decisions on interest rates, Allison wrote.
posted by Eric Schansberg at 6:45 AM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Undecideds breaking to Hill and Schansberg—as Hill extends his lead over Sodrel
According to the SurveyUSA poll released today, Rep. Baron Hill has extended his lead over Mike Sodrel from 11 to 15%. Dr. Eric Schansberg's share of the vote increased from 5% to 7%. (Hill gained 3%, Sodrel fell 1%.)
Schansberg said: "We're glad to continue building support. In the past month, we've run a lot of radio and TV commercials. And we've had many opportunities to meet voters, talk on the radio about the bailout, and give speeches to groups throughout the District."
On progress by Hill and his own campaign, Schansberg remarked: "It makes sense. Baron and I have been running more active campaigns, especially with paid media. Our commercials seem to have been effective in drawing people to our efforts."
On the impact of Hill's huge lead on his campaign, Schansberg commented: "With a margin of victory that is perceived and expected to be that great, it should be easier for people to vote on their principles instead of worrying about 'wasting their votes'. So, that's good news for us. Of course, I think people are wasting their votes by voting for the same old candidates. If they really want change—like we always hear about—then they have the opportunity this time for a credible and fresh choice in the 9th District."
posted by Eric Schansberg at 5:53 AM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 2:48 PM
posted by Eric Schansberg at 12:20 PM
Schansberg is back on the ballot, as are his better-known, better-financed opponents -- both have run before in this race. Schansberg wages a fight that is both serious and symbolic. He runs commercials, offers a Web site, conducts forums, shakes hands at fairs and debates every opportunity he can.
Still, Schansberg cannot reasonably expect to win. But he does expect to appeal to more of the voters who say they are fed up with politics as usual. Forty percent of voters nationally call themselves independents. Schansberg takes them at their word.
"People know what they're getting," Schansberg said of his candidacy and those he is challenging. "Do they really want one of those two? Or do they want something different?"
Schansberg was born in Louisville and is 43 years old. He was raised primarily in Virginia near Washington, D.C., where he notes he got an up-close-and-personal introduction to politics. He now resides in Jeffersonville. A Ph.D., Schansberg is a full professor of economics at IU Southeast and has some administrative duties there.
He is the father of four children, two of whom he and his wife Tonia adopted. The couple home-schools the children in order to spend more time with them.
"You've got to respect a guy who walks and does the things he says are right," said John Harbeson, Schansberg's campaign treasurer.
Schansberg describes himself as an evangelical Christian. For his Southeast Christian Church, a Louisville-based mega-congregation, Schansberg co-wrote a 21-month discipleship curriculum now also used in about 20 other churches. "Aside from my family, this is the coolest thing I do -- even cooler than politics," he said.
Schansberg received 4.5 percent of the vote in the 2006 election, his first try for the 9th District seat. Using what he learned in that race and building on his base, he asked himself if he could reach double-digits. Is doing better good enough? How outrageous is the prospect of victory?...
To a teacher, a campaign at least provides an inviting platform. "He's trying to make some noise, see who will listen," said Melanie Hughes, who manages Schansberg's candidacy....Schansberg planned this second race all along. He budgets about $30,000, a pittance compared to what his foes spend. Schansberg speaks out against American involvement in Iraq and for increased domestic oil drilling. He opposes the $700 billion plan to bail out the financial sector. He calls himself the only fiscal conservative in the race and the strongest defender of the poor and the middle class.
The race for Congress struggles to attract its fair share of attention, what with a president and a governor also to elect. Schansberg wishes his campaign would be followed more closely by the media. Yet, as with his reception at large, Schansberg forges ahead without discernible worry....
posted by Eric Schansberg at 12:01 PM
First and foremost, I am saved by God's grace as manifested most clearly through the atoning death of Jesus Christ-- and thus, adopted into His family. As a result, I increasingly seek to extend His grace to others in my daily life. On the home front, I am a husband and father to four young men (two by adoption and two the more conventional way). Professionally, I am an economist who loves to teach and is active in public policy circles. Vocationally, I am an active writer and the author of three books (one on the book of Joshua; two on public policy-- one secular, one Christian). Finally, I am the co-author of a 21-month discipleship curriculum, Thoroughly Equipped (and a lighter 36-week version), for developing competent lay-leaders in the Church. Related to that work, Kurt and I have two books, Enough Horses in the Barn and Roll Up Your Sleeves.
