|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
Essays, Opinion, & Commentary |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 19, 2004 What a thrill to see SpaceShipOne, the rocket plane designed by Burt Rutan and flown by Mike Melvill, rise high above the earth this June. SpaceShipOne zoomed 62 miles above our planet's surface, to touch the official boundary of space and land safely in the Mojave Desert. Its flight proves that a cheap alternative to NASA is possible. A cheap and private alternative. Paul Allen, the Microsoft co-founder who has been funding SpaceShipOne, has reportedly spent only $20 million so far on the project. Rutan's team may win the X Prize, which was established to honor the first spaceship crew that can demonstrate the viability of commercial space flight. To do so, they must perform the feat of SpaceShipOne twice within two weeks. Regardless, the future looks very exciting. Some are not impressed. They say it's just a billionaire playing with a toy. A flash in the pan that will lead nowhere. I say, the next pilot on board this venture will be called the free market, and the free market will take the space industry to places we can't even imagine yet. As writer Tim Worstall put it, "No one really knows what access to space will be used for, not even those spending their money and pushing it. We can all make a few guesses of course, yet these guesses will be validated by someone actually doing it, making money from it and attracting competitors." Worstall adds that markets are incredibly good at making things cheap that start out expensive. He's right. Do you like your car? That used to be a rich man's toy too. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
August 16, 2004 This is one of those stories where I'm saying, hey, is this good news or bad news? Some school kids in Utah did some research and discovered -- uh, oh -- that legislators often waste time. Shocking but true. Sixteen students studied a session of the Utah state legislature, monitoring the meetings and floor debates. They wanted to learn how efficient the legislators were. The kids concluded that about a quarter of the time, lawmakers are standing around waiting for debate to start. And there are other time-wasters. According to one student, "Meetings often started 10-20 minutes late and 'five-minute breaks' had the tendency to drag into overtime." A student went on to say, "The idle time between bills was lengthy and the recesses were frequent. It is interesting to imagine what could have been accomplished in the extra time had the legislators taken advantage [of] it and focused on the pressing issues at hand." Mmm . . . well, yes, yes. Very interesting. Very interesting, indeed. Thanks kids. Except, you know, I strongly suspect that a great many of the laws that lawmakers pass are laws that we could probably do without. So I'm not so sure it would be a good thing for them to be churning out even more laws. And those folks in the Utah legislature, why, they're not even term-limited. I'm not sure we want the career politicians to figure out how to spend even more time lording it over the rest of us. So, thanks, nice project, hope you learned something about government. But I'm not sure we should send in the efficiency experts just yet. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
August 10, 2004 What a crazy story in the New York Times that somebody sent me. It's all about how the politicians in New York state were failing to pass the budget on time for the 20th consecutive year. That's the 20th consecutive year! Well, politicians like to blame all their failings on term limits, but no luck in this case, because the New York legislature is not term-limited. And neither is the governor's office. It's just one big happy sedentary entrenched family there, with the good ol' boys calling the shots and everybody else bowing and scraping and strewing the paths of the good ol' boys with lotus petals and such. "They're not doing their job, they don't want to address the issues," says one voter quoted in the story, Paul Merritt. "If you run your checkbook the way state government does, where would you be?" Yeah, but it's a tough job being an entrenched, protected incumbent always having to walk around with a bucket of lotus petals. No wonder it's hard to get around to passing the budgets. The Times reporter says, "In a state with a nearly 99 percent return rate for incumbents, even voters are starting to notice" the funding delays caused by the budget delays. This gives the wrong implication, though. It's not failure to "notice" how bad things are in Albany that produces such high incumbency rates and entrenched power. You want to rock the boat in Albany, I'll tell you what you do. You term-limit the place, that's what you do. Give voters alternatives at the ballot box. No more kingdom in Albany, just democracy. And let the politicians buy their own lotus petals. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
August 6, 2004 This program is a mighty force for freedom, a storm for citizen government whose fury sparks fear in career politicians across America. Our billions of listeners are restoring constitutional, common-sense government to this country. And so are the many millions more who receive Common Sense by email by email. Now, we like to keep a sense of humor. Yes, you guessed it -- our political muscle isn't quite so massive. Our listeners don't number in the "billions." But over 100 radio stations carry us. We hear from many of you and, working together, we have righted some wrongs and won some important battles. Politicians even pay attention to us sometimes. Mike Fasano does. He's a Florida state senator and he wrote me a letter. I mentioned a few weeks ago that Senator Fasano got huffy with a constituent, Mr. Philip Weissburg, who opposed pending legislation affecting property rights. Fasano writes, "While your broadcast is accurate . . . you fail to report . . . what transpired after the fact. . . . I apologized to Mr. Weissburg for my curt reply. Additionally, when I learned that the particular bill in question was in fact a dangerous bill . . . I voted against it." Well then, Senator, all's well that ends well. And all in a day's work for this political commentary program. Of course, we won't hog all the credit. Talk radio host Neal Boortz also took up Mr. Weissburg's cause. That Boortz fellow -- I wonder how many billions listen to him? Still, they couldn't be any finer folks than those of you listening right now. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
August 3, 2004 Oops! is an expression we're hearing a lot in Virginia. You see, in the last session, legislators made an awfully bone-headed move. In addition to hiking our taxes, they accidentally resurrected Virginia's "day of rest" law. The old law was designed to protect workers from having to work weekends and, therefore, from missing weekend religious services. The law requires employers to give employees a weekend day off or to pay triple the wages and be subject to further fines. A judge halted enforcement of the law, however, so the governor and legislators were hoping all the attention to their big goof would die down. But it didn't. Businesses were quite concerned about the uncertainty. So legislators were called back to the capitol for a costly one-day special session to correct their mistake. But wait a second . . . can you imagine if this foul-up had happened in a state with legislative term limits? Oh, we'd never hear the end of it. It would be proof positive that term limits create inexperienced legislatures incapable of effectively conducting the people's business . . . blah, blah, blah. So, what does it prove now? When this mistake is committed by a legislature loaded with decades- serving super-incumbents? Experience in office certainly isn't the end-all and be-all. And the Virginia Legislature was in session more days this year than ever in state history -- so call it an argument for shorter sessions, to go along with term limits. Here's the kicker: while legislative lawyers, administration lawyers and the attorney general's office missed it, a fledgling attorney for a private firm caught the error. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
August 1, 2004 Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher has been giving readers an education about education. He informs us that one reason Washington, D.C., cannot seem to find anyone to take the school superintendent job is that few good people want to work with the "permanent bureaucracy" that stifles any effort for change. USC Professor Carl Cohn, a recent candidate for the job, withdrew. Cohn was told by key education leaders in the city that moves to restructure the system were simply off limits because "the system has so many patronage jobs and the city's workforce depends on having all those jobs." Waste is endemic in the Washington school system. Cohn said the city must, "[G]et rid of the land mines -- I mean, $75 million a year for special education transportation alone? Something is deeply wrong: In Long Beach, with a larger student population, we spent $16 million for our entire transportation budget." Last year, Secretary of Education Rod Paige called the District's teachers' unions "terrorists." Nasty overstatement, or astute assessment? Paige was drawing attention to this rich, privileged political cabal that has hijacked public education, and whose interests, time and again, take precedence over our kids'. All over America people are working to reform education, usually against the blind opposition of the education establishment. One thing is clear: parents, rather than terrorists -- I mean, the professional entrenched education establishment -- must be in charge. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
July 24, 2004 Governor Mark Sanford is no stranger to pork-barrel politics. He valiantly fought pork in the nation's capitol, for six years. And then, true to his promise to limit his own terms, he went back into private life. Now he's at the helm of South Carolina, where's he's discovered that pork runs loose in state capitols, too. The Republican majorities in both chambers of the legislature have refused to pass tax reform, education reform, and anything else that even hints at reform. But they're all for pork. The legislature passed a $5.5 billion budget full of pork-barrel projects, even as the state carries an unconstitutional debt on its books. But Sanford hasn't developed any taste for the pork-barrel spending that helps career politicians and hurts the average taxpayer. So he vetoed 106 items in the budget. Unfortunately, legislators quickly overrode nearly every veto. And so, the very next day, Governor Sanford visited the capitol carrying two little piglets named "Pork" and "Barrel" to dramatize the spending problem. Legislators were not amused; they ferociously attacked the governor for the "insulting" event. Citizens Against Government Waste, meanwhile, gave the South Carolina Legislature its Porker of the Month Award for June, and defended Governor Sanford, commenting, "It's ironic that a harmless joke is called 'insulting' but reckless spending is considered respectable." I'm not sure that's irony. But whatever we call it, we know what it really is. Sanford sagely remarked about his little stunt, "I think the average guy out there will get it." This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
July 21, 2004 As term limits have kicked in around the country, it's hard not to be pleased. More choices for voters has got to be a good thing. But let's take the bad with the good. In Oklahoma, journalists have noticed something very interesting: an increase in campaigns from the relatives of term- limited, former incumbents. Yup, more people than usual are following in husbands' and fathers' footsteps, signing up to represent the very districts from which their significant others have been barred. Did I see this coming? I don't know . . . I suppose if someone had asked me, I'd have said, "Yes, I wouldn't put it past 'em," but no one asked me. So it's a not-so-surprising surprise, kind of like the stickiness on the kitchen floor the day after you spill juice. As I see it, this is better than spilt juice. Sure, establishing dynasties is not my favorite American tradition. For every Adams family, there's a Kennedy. But hey: if the voters want to vote in the turkeys-in-law, I won't complain. Much. Besides, most of these attempts will not succeed. In the Eddie Murphy movie "The Distinguished Gentleman," voters were dumb enough to vote a person in on pure name recognition. In the real world, though, this works mainly when there's something more going on, like sympathy for a legislator whose term has been cut short by the Great Term Limiter in the Sky. You know, like Mary Bono running for the seat her late Sonny left behind. So let's wait and see. That, after all, is also what democracy is about. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
July 14, 2004 A.D. 2004 marks the first time politically active American citizens had to wonder whether they could say the name of a congressman or a presidential candidate without fear of criminal prosecution. With Michael Moore's "Farenheit 9/11" hitting theaters, this issue has hit the fans. Will movies soon be regulated so that no candidate for federal office is named in any film or in commercials for the film? If you think this is far-fetched, you don't appreciate the new world of government-regulated speech. A group called Citizens United has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, saying that ads for Moore's movie are "electioneering communications" that violate the McCain-Feingold law. The group's press release says, "Moore has publicly indicated his goal is to impact this election season." Moreover, the movie distributors are indeed longtime Democratic donors. In his own defense, Moore says, "I have not endorsed Kerry. I am an independent, I am not a member of the Democratic Party." Absurd! Are those who have endorsed a candidate or joined a political party no longer free to make movies, write books, speak their minds? Many supporters of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law see the attempt to regulate movies as beyond the pale. But they themselves should pale. The McCain-Feingold law, if it is to be applied equally, will necessarily stretch the long arm of Congress into every mode of communication imaginable. That's the way the law was written. Let's hope this first post-First Amendment election will also be our last. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
July 11, 2004 Golly, this is like that time Tom Hanks kept getting the Oscar. Well, not quite. This particular honor, the Whole Hog Award, has been awarded to Senator Ted Stevens for the second year in a row, and isn't so prestigious. It's a citation by the Citizens Against Government Waste. They've listed him in their "Pig Book" as the guy who has grabbed the most federal moolah per capita for his state. Stevens nabbed for Alaskans a little more than $800 per person -- $524 million total. That's 26 times the national average of $31 of pork per person. One item in the Stevens laundry list is $2 million that goes to recreation in North Pole, Alaska, population 1570. When you divide up $2 million amongst them that's more than 1200 bucks apiece. I don't suppose it will be divided up evenly. And no, this is not a subsidy for Santa's elves. Stevens is unfazed by the criticism. His main response is denial. He's says there's no pork in the money he's obtained for "Alaska's future." But I say: if it looks like pork, smells like pork, and oinks like pork, it's pork. Don't doubt: Stevens has eye, nose, and ear trained for pork. But to him his spending probably does seem pulchritudinous, aromatic, and music to soothe his savaged breast. That's the real training that life-time politicians get, year after year, handling other people's money. That's why their terms must be limited, before pigs appear as angels and oinks sound as symphonies. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
July 9, 2004 Sometimes I've hinted -- okay, more than hinted -- that what the critics of term limits really dislike is democracy as such. A Florida writer named Bill Cotterell thinks Floridians have it wrong about term limits. Even the title of his piece says the equivalent of ". . . Huh?" The title is: "Term limits: a solution in search of a problem." This title assumes that democracy proceeds very smoothly and fairly in the absence of term limits. In fact, without term limits, incumbents throughout the land enjoy a re-election rate in excess of 90 percent. In the U.S. House, that's more like 99 percent. 99 percent is a lot closer to 100 percent than it is to some number signifying some kind of competition going on. The extremely high reelection rate results not so much from the unfailing virtues of incumbents as from their overwhelming electoral advantages. Challengers don't get to re-gerrymander the district to favor their party before the general election begins. Nor can they use the mails for free. Or throw taxpayer money at special interests. These are all perks of incumbency. The result is not democracy -- it's stasis. Real democracy is not static. It is not a pond into which no one ever tosses a pebble. It is competitive and it is messy. It requires more than one person to do the job. It requires wide participation and wide acquaintance with the issues of the day. It's demanding. But then, civilization itself is no piece of cake. Come to think of it, life itself is something of a chore. You get what you put in. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
July 7, 2004 A recent study suggests that Americans who are always on the lookout for new ways to have fun, new ways to pursue happiness, should try something really novel: work. Researchers at Emory University recently published the results of a very interesting experiment. In Group A, volunteers played computer games and were given money for success. In Group B, volunteers received the same rewards without regard to effort or success. All subjects were scanned with an MRI, to monitor brain functions. The results? The pleasure centers in the brains of those who received money for their labor were far more stimulated than those who got money for nothing. Greg Berns, the scientist who conducted the experiment, summarized the results. "When you have to do things for your reward," he said, "it's clearly more important for your brain." This was not just a goofy little experiment. It says something about the importance of work. "People who win the lottery," Berns said, "are not happier a year after they win. . . . It's also fairly clear . . . that people get a lot of satisfaction from the work they do." Berns didn't draw any political conclusions from his work -- at least, none were reported in the news stories I saw. But I think we can hazard a moral to this story. We all dream of getting advantages at "no cost," with minimal effort. That's one reason the pot of money the government collects and distributes seems awfully tempting. Resist the temptation. You won't be happier after you get your windfall, and neither will your tax-paying neighbor. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
July 1, 2004 Suppose Americans had felt this way during the American Revolution? I mean the notion that any idea issuing from out of state may rightly be dismissed as irrelevant, simply because the person advocating it does come from out of state. What if the folks in Pennsylvania had downplayed the Declaration of Independence because it was written by a Virginian? The National Taxpayers Union argues that it would be better for state governments to reform their wild spending habits than to keep raising taxes all the time. They recently made that case in Kansas, where the state legislature just defeated a big tax hike. Advocates of the tax hike attacked NTU for getting involved in state politics. NTU notes that they have 5,000 supporters in Kansas. Reason enough to get involved in a tax battle there. But even if there weren't a single dues-paying member in the state, the organization has a right to have its say. U.S. Term Limits hears this argument about out-of- state influences quite often. Of course, the critics of term limits would like nothing better than for friends of term limits to pack our bags and go home. They don't have any good arguments to make, so they talk about this out-of-state thing instead. Only when it's convenient, though; career politicians love out-of-state influences when it adds to their campaign coffers. In any case, U.S. Term Limits will not back away. We're a national organization, with members in every state. And, of course, the nation is made up of 50 states, and term limits are a good idea for each and every one of them. This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
The opinions expressed in Common Sense are Paul Jacob's and may not necessarily represent the position of U.S. Term Limits or the U.S. Term Limits Foundation. Paul's daily commentaries are heard on radio stations nationwide and on the Internet. To subscribe to Common Sense or notify them of an email address change, send a message to subscribe@termlimits.org or by signing up at the Common Sense home page: http://www.termlimits.org/Press/Common_Sense/ Copyright (c) 2003 by Paul Jacob and reprinted with permission. |
|
Enrich your life with a book about politics and current events... Enrich your political & social life with a politics or news magazine... |
|
|
Common
Sense, by Paul Jacob
|
|
||
|
|
||
[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]
Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, 2002-03, & 2004 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.