To my wife, family, friends, employees and associates:

I AM WRITING, not so much to influence your opinion about the coming elections, but to share sincerely held views with those I love and respect. I am concerned about the sharp divisions that have developed in our country; but at the same time I am encouraged at least by the dialogue that this election year has inspired. Most importantly, I am convinced that we must become personally involved in this discussion, and the ultimate decision, if we care about the future of our nation.

I approach this election from a singular perspective: my ownership in a small domestic manufacturing company; as one whose work and interests have taken me throughout the nation and other parts of the world; as a nearly lifelong resident of Alamance County, in the North Carolina Piedmont; as one who has had the pleasure of meeting some of the world's brightest minds, leading scientists, dedicated educators, and respected religious leaders - nearly all of them open to new ideas and different perspectives.

Let there be no question about it: I appreciate how fortunate I am to live in America, and I am grateful for the freedoms we enjoy - our access to a surplus of food, clothing and adequate shelter for millions of our citizens. But we not yet reached Nirvana. I have found the past few years to have been difficult, both personally and emotionally. I believe the direction in which my partner and staff are taking our company, T.S. Designs Inc., will allow us to be more sustainable. I am confident that our present course is the right one, and this is what gives my associates and me the energy we need to push forward.

But like many of our colleagues in the textile-related industry, we dwell in a world of uncertainties. In the past few years, we have seen a lot of our business move to offshore competitors, who produce cheap goods using cheap labor. We have been forced to lay off workers, totaling about half of our staff. Our remaining employees labor under sometimes-intense pressure as we move into our new, more sustainable business model, which will enable us to continue our struggle to survive.

I am personally working more hours for far less money. Still, my wife Lisa and I enjoy a life of comfort, and by some standards, one of relative abundance. For example, we have two homes, two cars and a truck. But I remind myself every day that billions of people in other parts of the world do not share our freedoms and good fortune, or even life's basic necessities.

I am constantly aware that my life is not sustainable: I am not carbon neutral, and I take a great deal more from this world than I give. But Lisa and I are attempting to learn every day how to improve, how to consume less and to give more. Over the last year, Lisa and I have ended our reliance on petroleum-based fuels in our personal cars. We have joined a CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) organization. We continue to reduce our personal consumption and economize on the use of household utilities. Our personal goal is to live one day in a home that produces its own power so we may no longer be dependent on coal-fired electricity and natural gas.

Lisa, my wife of over 20 years has been extremely supportive, coming home from work most nights after 7 pm, traveling away from home at least 20 weekends a year, helping to cover expenses during those times when I do not bring home a paycheck. It seems fair to me that as an owner who has the much to gain from our company's success, I should be the first to sacrifice. I have come to appreciate, in business as in my personal life, that the most important objective is not making money. I realize, too, how fortunate I am to have as a life's partner one who joins me in wanting to help make the world a better place by helping those who cannot help themselves.

Let me make it clear that I do not blame the current administration for all the tough times that have befallen our nation, or my manufacturing business. However, I do believe we are handicapped now by leadership in Washington whose focus is limited, which is not able to address many of a growing list of serious, issues, like the survival of American jobs and essential industries. Agreements like NAFTA, which was adopted more than ten years ago, have not worked as well as many of us had hoped; we obviously are in great need of an enlightened, informed leadership that recognizes the negative and positive aspects of globalization and which begins to address them.

From the first election in which I voted, I have been a registered Republican. I have always considered myself a fiscal conservative, and I still do. But today, I have come to the conclusion that President Bush has taken our country in the wrong direction and that four more years of his on-again, off-again attention to many serious affairs of state could be disastrous for our nation. We need a President who can address many vital issues at the same time, one not solely focused on the "war on terror," although that must remain a priority for the United States, as for all free nations. We also need a President who is willing to admit his mistakes and change course when facts and reason dictate. President Bush has shown that he is inflexible to the point of being unable to acknowledge policies gone awry. He has clearly demonstrated an inability to multi-task - to deal effectively with many problems at the same time - which is an essential requirement of strong, decisive leadership.

There are issues that I wish to address, and about which I can speak from first-hand knowledge and experience. In all candor, I do not expect that the Democratic candidate for President will be able to do everything he sets out to do or resolve all the errors of the past. But I do sincerely believe that John Kerry has the requisite ability and commitment to set our nation back on the right track of respected leadership. 

Some issues about which I am most concerned: 

HEALTH CARE: This problem did not begin on George W. Bush's watch, but it has grown steadily worse due to his inattention. We are the richest nation on earth. To have millions of our citizens without health insurance is inexcusable. At our company, in recent years insurance rates have regularly increased by double digits annually. We can only pay a portion of our employees' health care costs. We have some employees who do not have and can't afford even minimal health care insurance. This situation causes me great pain. The Bush solution for our business and employees so far has been a small Band-Aid, thus we continually seek an affordable cure to this problem. John Kerry has a much more aggressive health care program, which I am confident will start correcting the failure of the present administration.

TAX CUT & DEFICIT SPENDING: Years ago I studied to be an economist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. President Bush has taken a budget surplus of five billion dollars and turned it into a projected deficit of untold billions over the next few years. I have a few friends who greatly benefited from the Bush Tax Cut. Giving tax breaks to the wealthiest top 5% of the population, while we are at war, is foolhardy. Not putting into place incentives that value everyone - tax incentives for renewable energy is one idea that makes sense - is shortsighted. The tax policy of the Bush Administration is irresponsible and has had little impact on shoring up our still-lagging economy. 

JOBS: As a nation, we are starting to add jobs, though not enough to absorb prospective new entries into the workplace. Without question, the tragic events of 9/11 had a tremendous negative impact on the stability of employment, as it did on our personal sense of security. But if you look behind the numbers cited by the Administration, you will see that most of the new jobs are in lower-wage occupations - fast foods, retail, hospitality and other lower-paying service industries. Are these jobs to form the backbone of a renewed middleclass in America? Education alone is no answer if we are to continue to outsource jobs to countries with likewise able college graduates, many of with degrees from U.S. colleges and universities.

ENVIRONMENT: This is a subject close to my heart and soul. I have had an interest in environmental issues for more than thirty years, starting with an organic garden behind my parents' home in Burlington, NC. I hope that anyone with children would discover a similar interest. What kind of world do we expect to leave our children, and our children's children?  President Bush does not have an environmental policy, except to tear down what has taken Congress and previous administrations many years to put in place. It is no surprise that the environment is not a major issue in this election.  Republicans should be proud to recall that it was Richard Nixon who launched the Environmental Protection Agency. The scientific community has never been as united as it is today in opposition to this President for his attacks on the environment. His administration has continued to show a contemptuous practice of trading off long-term gains for short-term savings. A perfect example of the Administration's focus is a so-called "Clear Skies" initiative that allows coal-fired power plants off the hook by not requiring them to upgrade their plants. Its CAFÉ standards (which relate to miles-per-gallon required for new car models) are now worse than ever. It is beyond absurd to justify a huge tax discount to purchasers of gas-guzzling Hummers! 

I purposely did not put a lot of web links in this email, everybody can do there own research pretty easily on the web, but I did want to share one link that points out further the damage that this administration has done to the environment. Check out http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/default.asp published by Natural Resources Defense Council who Robert Kennedy Jr. is associated with.  I have had both the opportunity to hear and meet Robert who I believe does the a very good job of clearly describing what Bush is doing to our environment. 

GLOBAL WARMING: I list this as an item separate from other environmental issues because of its potential impact on our world, but also to underscore the sheer arrogance of this Administration. Science has proved beyond any doubt that global warming is a pure-tee fact, doubters to the contrary notwithstanding. The CIA and the Department of Defense have pointed out that global warming is one of the single greatest threats to our national security.  The Bush response to these warnings? Almost immediately after assuming office, the President pulled the plug on U.S. support of international efforts to address global warming. The President's obvious lack of concern has undermined policies that might have begun to address this issue. You have to ask why? His decision was clearly not based on science; it seems far more likely that he merely yielded to pressure from special interests of which he has been unalterably supportive.

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE: Is there a connection between U.S. aggression in the Middle East and the region's vast petroleum reserves? The simple fact is that we import more than 60% of our crude oil from this part of the world. Some estimates suggest this figure will grow to more than 70% in the next few years. Even a casual reading of history demonstrates that a society cannot prosper if it has to depend on others to supply a vital resource for its survival. We should be gravely concerned about the likelihood that we will deplete all supplies of cheap oil within the next 30 to 50 years.  As a nation, we are addicted to oil. We must have leadership that acknowledges this fact and encourages changes in oil consumption before it is too late. Vice President Dick Cheney developed - behind closed doors, aided by representatives of companies like Enron - the Administration's energy plan, which is still awaiting action in Congress. It would give tax breaks and incentives to the U.S. oil industry, an industry to which the Vice President and the President are closely allied. Even so, U.S. consumers who complain about $2-a-gallon gasoline should know that they are actually getting a great deal, since the cost of the gasoline they burn does not cover the product's economic impact on our environment and national security. Even National Geographic, a very conservative magazine has pegged the price many times higher than $2 a gallon for the true costs of gasoline in the U.S., and that estimate fails to take into account any national security component. At our company, we have installed a $50,000 2-kilowatt solar photovoltaic array. This installation provides power for the operation of some of our critical computer equipment. You might think the government that promotes energy independence, and subsidizes the oil industry, might at least give middling priority to this type innovation. If so, you would be wrong. We receive exactly no tax credit from the federal government.  We need a national plan for energy independence. But such a plan is not likely to occur as long as petroleum interests are at the helm of the Washington government. Sadly, regardless of who is in the White House during the next four years, the price of gasoline at the pump will continue to rise. That is not an idle prediction, but a reliable scientific certainty. 
 
WAR ON TERROR: Although this is an extremely important issue, it is not the only matter of importance that the U. S. faces, as President Bush appears to have us believe, mainly, I suspect, because he wishes to distract the electorate from issues he has neglected or does not wish to act upon. Like most of my friends, I supported pursuing terrorists in Afghanistan - we had the facts to justify our action, and we had the support of most of the free world as we pursued Osama bin Laden and his Taliban protectors. But it is becoming clearer each day that the U.S. did not have reliable information that would support our rush to war in Iraq. Both President Bush and Vice President Cheney, and their chorus of sycophants, continue to insist that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, this despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. There is scant evidence that Saddam had more than a casual connection to Al-Qeada, if that. There is no verifiable, demonstrable evidence that Saddam had any connection to 9/11. President Bush insists that even if Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction, and if he had no hand in the events of 9/11, the world is still better off by his capture. It is just as possible, though, that sanctions against Iraq were having the desired effect of keeping Saddam in check. We do know that we would have benefited - and saved thousands of lives and billions of dollars - if the President had allowed the efforts of the United Nations to proceed, while seeking greater participation of more of our major allies. It is disturbing to note that President Bush acted so hastily in Iraq, but can't assume leadership in matters that promise long-term, positive outcomes, like the Kyoto agreement, and the quest for energy independence. I suspect we agree that the war in Iraq has not met our expectations. Perhaps we would begin to gain meaningful support from our allies and the Iraqi people if we willing to acknowledge our miscalculations and errors. President Bush's failure to concede any misjudgment or mismanagement of this conflict continues to alienate potential allies and an overwhelming majority of opinion leaders throughout the world. 
 
ARROGANCE: This is a subject that should cause us all great concern. Comments like, "You are either with us or against us," are counterproductive. The prevailing attitude of the Bush Administration is that questioning the war in Iraq is near traitorous. Good citizens who questioned the actions of their government founded this nation. It is not unpatriotic to point out that the Bush Administration has given millions of dollars in no-bid, cost-plus contracts to businesses with close ties to the White House. How can the President know of our mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners and at the same time fail to reprimand his Secretary of Defense, who he instead continues to praise, despite multiple failures. "for his good job"? Each of us, including the President and his Administration, must be held accountable for our actions. 
 
FINALLY, we as individuals and as a nation have an undeniable responsibility to be more sustainable. We have a responsibility to change our behavior for the sake of the less fortunate, to guarantee the survivability of future generations, and to prevent the extinction of life on Earth. Vice President Dick Cheney said a few months ago that the American lifestyle is not up for negotiation. That kind of thinking ignores reality. Trends of living in bigger houses, of driving bigger, less efficient automobiles, and acquiring more and more "stuff," is not a given. Nor should it be. We must reduce consumption in order for others to have a decent shot at a fulfilling life. We need to be responsible about where and how we spend our money. This is not an appeal to reign in Wal-Mart or to eliminate from our stores "Made in China" labels. But it seems reasonable to ask ourselves, What is the potential social and environmental impact of the choices we are about to make? The business community needs to become more responsible and not solely measure costs by traditional standards. Rather, we need to determine the costs - and possible consequences - of the total life and impact of our products and services. I am convinced that businesses that appreciate this measurement of costs will be the ones that survive and prosper. 
 
IN DEVELOPING a plan for a sustainable business and for my personal life, I have concluded that the best choice for me is to help, to the extent that I am able, to alter the course of our government's direction. More than ever we need to rethink and adjust our nation's perilous course by acknowledging new realities. That is why I intend to cast my vote in the coming election for U.S. Senators John Kerry and John Edwards for President and Vice President of the United States.  I do not expect unanimous agreement with my choices or with my arguments, but I earnestly welcome your comments and greatly appreciate your hearing me out.

All the best,

Eric M. Henry