In the movie Shawshank Redemption, the character played by Morgan Freeman cautiously defends his friend, Brooks, after he has acted out irrationally. Realizing that his friend has become institutionalized, Freeman notes “The man has been in here 50 years…this is all he knows.” Freeman goes on to say while most of us hate big institutions at first, “then you get used to them, enough time passes you get so that you depend upon them.”

The institution that has rightfully come under great scrutiny lately is our federal government. Over the last decade, we have all watched the federal government grow dramatically in both size and scope. To put this in prospective, while the federal budget represented 33% of GDP in 2000, it is projected to represent 45% in 2010.

While it is easy to proclaim that the government is too big and as a result needs to be shrunk, these are empty words until we address the root cause of the problem.

Democrats will blame Republicans, and Republicans will blame Democrats. The simple truth is that this explosion of government occurred over a time when both parties were in control, and this cannot be simplified into a partisan issue.

Though the problem is very complex, it also contains a simple truth – the walls of government are being built each day by the very people that depend on them. This is why politicians on both sides of the aisle continue to make decisions not based on ideology, but on what centralizes power within the federal government. These decisions have the unintended consequences of continuing a cycle where political leaders accumulate more power, making it more difficult to replace them. This centralized power in Washington unfortunately also leads to more influence and government spending, further distorting our free market system.

Only in Washington could we see misguided policies such as bailing out the automotive industry, and then turning around and creating a program like “Cash for Clunkers” for people to buy cars from the very companies that are now government-owned. This is only one outrageous example of many where the government has grown in scope and continues to interfere with free markets.

In fact, during 2009 approximately $3.3 billion was spent in Washington lobbying elected officials, $19 million which came from bankrupt GM and Chrysler. I am sure it is no surprise to hear that the average elected official who voted for the automotive bailout received almost twice as much in political contributions than one who voted against it.

While we have quietly been going about our lives, we have a government that has entrenched itself. We must now take the steps to change this. It will not be easy, but the reward is well worth the fight. To do so, I believe it is time we revisit term limits.

We must return to our Founding Fathers’ notion of citizen legislators, not career politicians. Previous attempts to move this agenda forward focused on 6 year term limits enacted immediately. This attempt in the mid 1990s to change the way Washington works did not succeed for two reasons. First, many people did not feel 6 years was enough, noting that it takes time to bring about change and understand the complexities of our government’s problems. Second, the fact that an overwhelming majority of Congress would effectively be voting themselves out of a job was insurmountable.

Due to these shortcomings, I believe we can make 2 straightforward changes to the term limit platform which can help bring them to fruition. We should first double the limit to 12 years, allowing for 2 full Senate terms, or 6 terms in the House of Representatives. In addition, there should be a “grandfather clause” excluding all sitting legislators. While this is not a perfect solution, I believe it provides the best chance of enacting this needed reform. These changes can help ensure that we have elected officials who will focus more on the needs of the nation, rather than the needs of government which is the source of centralized power.

83% of Americans support term limits, because they know it will create a churn of leaders, which will provide a continuing flow of fresh ideas and individuals with outside perspectives, which we need now more than ever.

This will get at the root cause of the problem. It will create a completely different mentality and dynamic within Congress. It will allow us to have political leaders that are looking to tear down the walls of government, as opposed to those who are propping them up in an effort to centralize more power in Washington.

America has some of the best doctors, hospitals and pharmaceutical companies in the world. The problem is that health care costs are sky-rocketing.

The plans being debated in Washington will only make matters worse. Much worse.

Despite the claims of an “open and transparent” government, Democrat leaders are meeting behind closed doors to force through their version of health care reform. No matter what your opinion of this complicated issue, we can all agree that such a momentous task as this one should not be rushed.

Perhaps the only thing more troubling than the process by which this landmark legislation is being handled is the substance within it. Almost every economist agrees that any true reform must contain costs and work to reduce spending on what is an unsustainable curve. The real debate is about how this can be done.

I believe that the proposals being debated by Congressional Democrats will do nothing to contain costs, and will only succeed in exploding our deficit further.

There are policies we can enact rather quickly, in a bipartisan way, that would help lower the costs of health care and improve access to quality care.

As is often the case, our elected leaders are ignoring some commonsense, reasonable reforms at the expense of radical and unsustainable policies that will bankrupt our children, and cripple our ability to compete in the marketplace. There are ideas that would not result in a catastrophic increase in deficit spending, and that have a track record of achieving meaningful reforms.

Competition is the keystone to open markets, which leads to increased productivity and quality, and a better standard of living. Why not allow purchasers of health insurance to compare and contrast all available plans? Currently, we are only able to purchase health care plans that are available in our respective states. Pennsylvanians can’t get a plan provided in New Jersey, even if it is more affordable and provides the ideal coverage the customer wants. The creation of state health insurance exchanges would provide consumers with the information and options they deserve to make the best decisions for themselves and their loved ones, and to purchase plans available across state lines.

True health care reform must include tort reform as well. It is clear that many primary care providers practice defensive medicine for no other reason than the fear of litigation. This is an unacceptable waste of resources and care. It is time that we encourage states to provide alternative means to address medical malpractice claims, such as health courts or medical expert panels.

While leaders in Washington are looking at ways to create a new, trillion dollar entitlement program, it would be far wiser to allow Americans more freedom to use their hard-earned money that they have set aside for health care costs. Many individuals and families invest in Health Savings Accounts, which allow for tax-free contributions that can be used for qualified medical expenses. Why not allow these individuals and families to use these successful investment vehicles to pay for health insurance premiums, and without penalties? This would empower individuals to take more responsibility and ownership over their health care, and make all of us customers, not merely policy-holders.

I believe if the Pelosi-Reid health care bill is passed, we are marching down a dangerous path that will be very difficult to turn back from: a growing national bureaucracy that will eat-up billions of dollars, and will still leave countless Americans without access to the best health care in the world. Everyone agrees that we need reforms, but we cannot bankrupt future generations and ignore solutions that work.

We don’t need polls to tell us that Americans are not happy with Congress’ agenda. Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts was a clear signal that Congressional leaders better change the focus of their policies.

Let’s hope Congressional Democrats can hear this message behind those closed doors.

Thought you would like to hear part of my speech to local Republican leaders about why I am running for Congress. As you’ll see, my passion comes from wanting to make sure that the American Dream is available to all generations, and putting a stop to the excesses and misguided policies in Congress. Let me know what you think!

Steve Welch visits where he started his first company, Mitos Group, from the ground up right in the heart of Frazer, PA. Steve started the company in the 6^th District that went on to create dozens of jobs in Chester County.