More GOP Rumblings

A cursory glance at the history of the leadership at the Federal level shows that the American public prefers two-party governance. Periods such as this, where Republicans have the Presidency and enjoy majorities in the House and Senate are very rare, and don't usually last long.

I seem to be surrounded by the scenario. I live in Indiana, which has a Republican governor and GOP majorities in the State House and Senate, and in Hamilton County, which hasn't elected a single Democrat to countywide office in two generations.

My observation has been that while many Republicans talk the limited government, personal responsibility talk, few walk the walk. This morning's scan of news and blog sites show that the trend I see is seen by many others.

Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit fame had a lenghty article run yesterday on MSNBC, called, "A Conservative Crack-Up? Reynolds observes:

There's also a lot of contradiction lately. After talking about small
government and the rule of law, Republicans overwhelmingly supported a piece of
legislation intended to influence a single case, that of Terri Schiavo.

and

One may argue that libertarians and small-government conservatives aren't a big
part of Bush's coalition, but his victory wasn't so huge that the Republicans
can surrender very many votes and still expect to win. So this is a real
threat.

Reynolds cites an article by Pejman Yousefzadeh on the alliance between libertarians and small-government conservatives. Yousefzadeh's inclusion of a quote is particularly enlightening:

It is worth noting the comments of one prominent libertarian-conservative
Republican leader on the issue of making common cause between libertarians and
conservatives:

"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals -- if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is."

...

The conservative Republican who said these words was Ronald
Reagan. While his comments are thirty years old, they are still applicable to
the debate we are having. We shouldn't forget them.

Alas.

Because Neal Boortz has found himself opposite the GOP talking points on the Schiavo case, he is discovering the difference between the GOP and LP can be acute, despite travelling the same path. From Neal's Nuze:

Think about this for a moment. Attending physicians conduct their examinations and make their reports. The matter moves into the courts and is adjudicated ... adjudicated extensively. Nineteen state judges, one Federal District Court judge, one Court of Appeals, and three now four trips to the U.S. Supreme Court. Still, politicians aren't happy with the results ... so now the State contemplates using its police power to seize the body of Terri Schiavo so that she can be forced to endure this horrible existence for years to come.

and

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think that there are many people out there who,
when faced with medical disaster, want to be turned over to politicians to be
used as political pawns. I'm wondering if these people will be anxious to
keep Republicans in power.

Let's just hope that those disaffected supporters of limited government don't tune out altogether, but find the Libertarian Party- especially here in Indiana and in Hamilton County.

Update: Today on www.townhall.com, Cal Thomas sounds the same note in his article, The Capital Spenders.

Republicans have been in charge of the budget and appropriations process for a decade. They promised things would be different if voters gave them a majority. Newt Gingrich promised an audit to expose the wasteful spending of House Democrats during their 40-year rule.

Sadly, Republicans have been seduced by the love of other people's money and many (there are a few holdouts, but not enough to change much) have succumbed to the same temptations that enveloped big-spending Democrats. Only the "uniforms" have changed. The rules of this game remain the same.

Poker Tonight

Barley Island is hosting another 5-week shootout, starting tonight. Deal me in!

The skinny: no buy-in, play for chips and fun. Poker Prodigy runs the show and keeps score. At the end of the five weeks, scoreboard leaders advance to a broader tournament. You pretty much have to win a night in order to advance. Proof? I finished with points all four of the five weeks I played, with three final tables, good for 750 points. I didn't advance.

No matter. Good fun! See you there.

Another Disaffected Republican

I'm seeing more and more signs of this, and frankly, it's about time. The GOP periodically gets back in touch with being in favor of limited government and personal responsibility (think Goldwater, then Reagan, the Gingrich), but this is not one of those times.

Here is a letter from someone in my hometown, in today's Indy Star:

GOP has trouble framing its role

If I were a patriotic Republican these days, I would be very concerned about what is happening to my party. From the righteous deceit in the shifting justification of the Iraqi war to the self-righteous intervention into the lives of Michael and Terri Schiavo, the Republican Party seems to have trouble framing its role appropriately in our system of governance.

Lowell Bartel
Fishers

While I tend to focus on state and local issues, this is someone more focused on national issues. Different focus, same conclusions.

Enlightened European Work Schedules

I have had a good many international friends over the years, plus even more Europhiles, in addition to my 3 recent trips to Europe. I wish I had 6 Danish Kroner for every time one of these let me know how they admired the enlightened shorter work week.

Don't get me wrong- it's a great deal if you can find an employer willing to give you 40 hours wages for 35 hours worth of work. I don't expect any employer to think it's a great deal, though.

Apparently, neither does France, anymore. France has abolished the 35-hour work week. From Bloomberg:

A parliament report last year concluded that the legislation had helped create 350,000 jobs at a cost of 4.5 billion euros ($5.9 billion). The jobless rate in Europe's third-biggest economy fell to an 18-year low of 8.6 percent in mid-2001 from 11.8 percent at the start of 1998.

The 35-hour week has ``heavily weighed on wage increases,'' French Finance
Minister Thierry Breton said March 15, responding to a question from a Socialist
lawmaker in parliament. ``You wanted to share jobs, people had to share wages.''

Go figure. Cause and effect.

Get a load of those unemployment rates! 8.6% is an 18-year low? I shudder at the thought of the 18-year high, then.

Had Enough Yet, Fiscal Conservatives?

Hamilton County is quickly being overrun by liberal Republicans who seem bent on showing how unnecessary liberal Democrats are by concocting new schemes for expanding the size and scope of government so quickly it can barely be charted. They are showing how necessary Libertarians are. To wit:

• Republican leaders from across the County have endorsed an $800 million light rail boondoggle that would decrease traffic on I-69 by a mere 4% on its best day.
  
• County and Town of Fishers officials are gearing up to remove a perfectly good, popular airport in a useful location in order to build one from scratch.
  
• Noblesville is expanding City Hall, which doesn’t expand unless government is growing. The City is risking chasing a prominent retailer away over so crucial an issue as the size of a sign.
  
• The City of Carmel has floated bonds for everything from road projects that fail to significantly expand capacity to a $55 million park and an $80 million concert hall.
  
• Carmel and Westfield are engaged in an annexation war that offers the residents virtually nothing except the promise of municipal taxes.

State Senator Luke Kenley has taken the lead in the legislature to craft a bill for socialized football that would tax service industries in Marion County-for now. Critics within Marion County point out that the residents of the region, including Hamilton County, enjoy the team, and therefore should share the bill. A compromise that imposes taxes on services provided in Hamilton County does not seem too far fetched, especially since Kenley is open to the idea.
It's hard to draw any conclusion other than that the fiscal conservative is a constituent the GOP is no longer interested in.

One of the most common things I hear from people who believe in limited government goes like this: “I didn’t leave the Republican Party. The Republican Party left me”. These people are joining the Libertarian Party.

The County Convention of the Libertarian Party of Hamilton County will be held at 11am on Saturday, April 9, 2005, at the Delaware Township Government Center, 9191 E. 131 Street, in Fishers.

Terry Schiavo and Gary Numan

What's the connection? Gary Numan wrote a great song called "The Life Machine" that was a part of an even greater album called Tubeway Army. It was released in 1978, and has been one of my all-time favorite records since I first heard it in the 1980s.

The song is somber, with the bass drum leading in sounding like a heartbeat. The lyrics sum up my own thoughts on the Schiavo case, along with my own thoughts for myself, should I ever be int he situation. In any case, I believe every adult should have a living will that specifies instructions for these kinds of situations.

The Life Machine

Me I've just died
But some machine keeps on humming
I'm just an extra piece of dead meat to keep running
Why won't you let me die in peace?
Why won't you let me die with some kind of honour?
Why won't you let me die at all?
I know
You've got your principles

My body lies immobile
I left it days ago
And me I watch from somewhere as the loved ones come and go
I see them glancing at the switch
I hear them whispering "maybe it's better that way"
I see the love turn into feelings
I know
Aren't quite the same

I see the men of learning
Pacing to and fro
But how can I expect the sane to ever know?
I'd rather die than have no mind
I know my brain is gone "damaged beyond repair"
I see an empty shell below me
I know
I've had my time

Nothing To Do With Montana

From time to time, I find myself supremely bothered by the lack of action taken by some of our sister LP state affiliates. There are so many taxes and stifling, useless regulations to attack that would bring those states such good will and earn such support that it just frustrates me when those are simply given a free pass.

The only thing worse than this inaction is the action taken on positions that will leave a majority of voters to conclude that Libertarians are kooks. Most recently, the New York party conducted giveaways of toy guns in response to an NYC buy-back program that replaced kids toy guns with other toys. The LP action was poorly received by a public concerned about youth violence. Sure, the philosophical libertarian could grumble about this public policy, but a toy buy-back hardly stands as the most egregious public policy in Manhattan, what with all of the taxes there. But, that's what New York acted on, and got press on- all of it negative.

Therefore, I would like to make clear that I have nothing to do with the Libertarian Party of Montana. There is a world of difference between Indiana and Montana, and it goes like this- the LPIN takes policy positions in support of small business owners and property rights. The LP of Montana takes pet positions despite whatever negative backlash might come.

Can you think of any reason to support drinking alcohol while driving? The Montana LP does. Curiously, Montana is one of the few states that still permits drinking while driving, so long as the driver does not get intoxicated. From the LP News:

Legislative hearings are open to the public in Montana, and Mike Fellows -- chairman of the Libertarian Party of Montana -- is one of several people who have attended hearings on the proposed bills to speak out against the proposal.

Fellows doesn't oppose the legislation because he thinks people should be allowed to drive while drunk, but because he doesn't think the new law is necessary, he told members of the House Judiciary Committee in recent testimony.

While that's a fairly reasonable position to take, the problem lies in the press. How many times does the Montana LP get quoted? If this is the only thing they have testified on this year, too many people in Montana will know the Libertarian Party for one thing- standing up for the right to drink in one's car. It doesn't matter that this is an incomplete impression of what the Party stands for. What matters is what the people perceive the Party to stand for- and this is it. What's worse is when the AP picks up the story and runs it in newspapers where the local LP hasn't laid the groundwork for readers to know more broadly what libertarians are about. They know nothing about libertarians, conclude that some are 'in favor of drinking and driving', and summarize that libertarians are kooks.

This is why it is crucially important to prioritize issues, going after the ones that a majority of people can back right away, even if the press only partially quotes or covers you. I would be concerned about the LPIN's work on Indianapolis' proposed smoking bans if we hadn't been enormously on record in opposition to new taxes, budgetary increases, new stadium funding, $800 million for a light rail boondoggle, $80 million for a concert hall, etc., first. People in Indiana know us as fiscal conservatives first, and that matters, because so many Hoosiers are fiscal conservatives, too.

When we go after the proposed smoking laws, we always make sure to include a phrase about the right of business owners to set their own policies within their own establishments regarding the use of a legal product. It signals not only a broad support for property rights, but also tells a key constituency- business owners- who is on their side, and who is not. Montana simply went out there on a principle, and that's fine, except that there is very little to gain, and quite a lot to lose where it matters- with the voters. I hope like heck this item is not picked up by the AP.

NCAA Picks

A pool circulated around the office on NCAA picks, so I threw in my lot. Here are my winners:

Round 1, Chicago

#1 Illinois
#2 Oklahoma St.
#3 Arizona
#4 Boston College
#12 Wisconsin-Milwaukee over #5 Alabama (first upset pick!)
#6 LSU
#10 St. Mary's CA over #7 So. Illinois (can't really call this an upset pick)
#9 Nevada over #8 Texas

Round 1, Albuquerque

#1 Washington
#2 Wake Forest
#3 Gonzaga
#4 Louisville
#12 George Washington over #5 Georgia Tech (I like the #12's)
#6 Texas Tech
#7 West Virginia
#9 Pittsburgh over #8 Pacific

Round 1, Austin

#1 Duke
#2 Kentucky
#3 Oklahoma
#13 Vermont over #4 Syracuse (Everybody needs one crazy upset pick.)
#5 Michigan St.
#6 Utah
#7 Cincinnati
#8 Stanford

Round 1, Syracuse

#1 North Carolina
#2 U Conn
#3 Kansas
#4 Florida
#12 New Mexico over #5 Villanova (another #12!)
#6 Wisconsin
#10 NC State over #7 Charlotte
#9 Iowa St. over #8 Minnesota


My Final Four: Illinois, Louisville, Duke, U Conn.
My Final matchup: Illinois-Duke
My Champion: Duke

Let's see how this shakes out.

Tuesday Boortz Poll

Syndicated talk radio host Neal Boortz hosted a poll on his webpage yesterday regarding Republicans and limited government. Interesting comments:

Yesterday we had a poll right here on Nealz Nuze. The question was "Do you think Republicans are still committed to the concepts of smaller government and individual liberty?" Only 13% of the people who responded said yes. A not-surprising 87% said no.

Hey ... I'm with the 87%. At this point anyone who actually thinks that the Republican Party has any intention whatsoever to shrink the size of the massive, bloated Imperial Federal Government of the United States is living in a dreamland. Republicans or Democrats .. doesn't matter. Government will continue to grow and personal liberties will continue to fade. Are there advantages with either party? At least the Republicans recognize that cutting taxes actually increases government revenue, and the Republicans seem to be willing to protect our nation and our interests. In times like these when the terrorist threat is so great, this is a huge plus for the Republican side. We may end up as slaves to the massive federal bureaucracy, but at least we'll be safer, not safe ... just safer ... from Islamic goon squads.

But what about freedom and smaller government. The answer is as it was. The Libertarian Party.

What's true here in Indiana is true nationally. This why so many fiscal conservatives and former Republicans come to the Libertarian Party and tell me, "I didn't leave the Republican Party. The Republican Party left me".

The Latest Liberal Republican From Hamilton County

Today's award goes to State Senator Luke Kenley of Noblesville. He has taken the lead in the Legislature to craft a bill for socialized football. From the Indy Star:

"We're kind of in the third quarter of this game and we're running out of time-outs," said Senate Tax and Fiscal Policy Committee Chairman Luke Kenley, referring to the planned April 29 end of the year's General Assembly session. The Noblesville Republican has organized a working group of city, state and Colts officials that will meet today to begin hammering out a bill.

Kenley used a lot of football jargon, so I will too. The right thing to do would be to go back to the huddle.

I don't object to legislators getting involved to create a group that will produce a stadium. That would be exactly the right thing to do, getting investors together who would create a private company and build the stadium with private funds.

Unfortunately, what passes for leadership these days is spearheading a team of cronies who conspire to produce new laws that take taxpayer dollars and redistribute them to favored citizens. Kenley has worked hard to position himself as a fiscal conservative, but this proves plainly that he is no such thing.

Luke Kenley is just another one of the many liberal Hamilton County Republicans.

Another Uncredited Joke

I really would like to provide a link and credit to the magazine who published this joke, recently circulating by email. Alas. Enjoy!

Three politicians in a bar were discussing where they liked their wives to be during sex.
The Republican said, "On the bottom, of course, as God intended."
The Libertarian said, "I see nothing wrong with the woman being on top."
The Democrat said, "I prefer my wife to be out of town."

Ironic

It's funny. I have heard many general objections to the idea of Libertarians serving in government, usually based on misconceptions, resulting in preposterous doomsday scenarios.

My favorite is the hog farm scenario. Because Libertarians believe in the right of private owners to enjoy the fullest property rights possible, some interpret this to mean that hog farms will sprout up next to their fine suburban home or church. They want zoning to ensure that the hog farm will be kept away. What would really keep the hog farm away is the value of land in the area. If there are $200,000 homes on $40,000 half-acre sites, there is no way a hog farmer will be interested in the adjacent parcels. In order to make a living, a hog farmer needs acreage that goes for about $4,000/acre, not $80,000/acre. That price will keep him away better than any zoning regulation. After all, zoning regs vanish with the payment of the variance fee.

In the confusion over the distinction between libertarianism and libertinage, we find that some people think that anarchy will plague any jurisdiction that elects even one Libertarian, with rioting in the streets, and the city in flames.

So, at last, I arrive at my long-winded irony. Whenever I see a major party mayor or governor looking at a tight budget, the first thing out of their mouths is the threat of layoffs affecting police or fire forces.

Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson, a Democrat, proposed an intriguing plan to consolidate the police and sheriffs departments. It's worth a look, and if the consolidation can produce savings to the taxpayers without a loss in efficiency and effectiveness, it's worth doing.

Because the consolidation apparently needs legislative approval, and the Republicans in the legislature are stringing the approval along, the Mayor fell back on scare tactics. Peterson put the following items on the block, to various degrees, per the Indy Star:

Mayor Bart Peterson outlined some services he said could be cut if his
Indianapolis Works plan to streamline local government is not approved by the
General Assembly. Peterson said not all of the cuts likely would have to be
made. Here are examples:

Police officer layoffs
Firefighter layoffs
Reduce street sweeping
Reduce garbage collections
Eliminate non-required water qulaity monitoring
Close city parks
Reduce staff in the Mayor's Action Center
Eliminate historic preservation planning.

This is the kind of slash-and-burn cutting that we get accused of, but would never propose. We propose the removal of frivolities. Mayor Peterson proposes to eliminate the essentials first while maintaining the frivolities, to reduce quality of life for all citizens rather than for political hacks.

"We need to do whatever it takes to avoid making these choices," Peterson said.

Very well! A Libertarian wants to cut many things from a city budget. Funding for the police or fire is not one of them. I wouldn't dream of proposing to close parks or stop picking up garbage. Since he seems to be begging for it, let's give the Mayor a little free help.

Any lobbying a city does, such as for a football stadium, should be cut immediately. No city or other government entity should ever be involved in the promotion of the arts. Art is in the eye of the beholder, so the last thing I want is a soul-less bureaucracy enforcing official beauty. Cut all associated expenses immediately. Pie-in-the-sky, speculative alternative transportation is the stuff of billionaire adventurers, not responsible cities. Cut it immediately. Is it really necessary that the Mayor's staff be as large as it is? Cut it immediately.

Go to the City's website. www.indygov.org/home.htm There is all kinds of pork ready to be chopped. Chop it out and see if there isn't plenty of money suddenly available for the proper functions of government, such as safety forces.

Hamilton County Liberal Republicans 2

If you want proof that government is growing, look no futher than the buildings government occupies.

The City of Noblesville's government is growing. The proof is the land the City purchased, and the buildings on that land that were demolished or being moved. From the Noblesville Ledger story:

In February, the Noblesville Common Council approved a maximum $16.4 million
budget to build a two-story addition and renovate the existing City Hall. The
budget is based on an estimated cost of $175 per square foot.

If you want proof that local Republicans are becoming tax-and-spend brethren of the Democratic Party, look no further than the language loaded with mollifying justifications.

"We don't anticipate it will cost that much," Mayor John Ditslear said
Wednesday, pointing out that costs were estimated high.

A resident who owns a $150,000 home would pay an additional $21 in annual
property taxes in 2006 if the city approves the maximum budget. In 2007, the tax
goes up by $31, the highest increase expected during the 21 years needed to pay
off the bond issue.

The problem with this attitude, whether in Noblesville or in Carmel, is that there is a cumulative effect to be considered. This Noblesville bond will be repaid over 21 years. How many other bonds, existing and yet to be concocted, will City residents also be paying off over that time? To paraphrase Senator Dirksen, $31 here, $31 there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.

What possible benefit will the citizens really gain from the additions to City Hall? I can't think of any, and I haven't seen any specified. I can point to the costs, though. Since it is true that if you build space for bureaucrats, the space will be filled with bureaucrats, we can expect that in addition to the cost of the building, and the cost of taking the land off the tax roll, there will be the cost of the bureaucrats- salaries, benefits, vehicles, clothing, etc.

Hamilton County Republicans continually show themselves to be fiscal liberals. This is just the latest example.

Don't Let The Door Hit You

Tonight is Dan Rather's last telecast. When Rather announced that he was leaving, I thought that after years of not watching network news, and with him and Brokaw both leaving, I would give the networks another shot.

I did. Once. I quickly remembered why I stopped watching. Most of what they air just doesn't strike me as news that matters. Since they are broadcasting to a national audience, I expect issues of national importance to be covered. Wars, the Congress, the White House, the economy- these are all items of national importance.

Local weather events don't qualify, even if they are of great magnitude. Random acts of violence don't qualify, either. Yet, these make up the bulk of the reports. Thus, it's a waste of my time.

Like an increasing number of people on this planet, I get my news online. I go to news sites I like and in 10 seconds or less, I skim the headlines. If anything grabs my attention, I read the article. No waiting for a loathsome story on an ice storm in Wisconsin to pass. No yawns as a story about shootings in Mississippi drags along. I like to cut to the chase.

Rather's last broadcast doesn't interest me in the least.

Liberal Republicans Overrun Hamilton County

The re-invention of Marion County is beginning to get out of hand up here. The worst public proposal in the history of the County, seemingly backed by every Hamilton County Republican, is the $800 million light rail boondoggle proposed for the Nickel Plate railroad corridor. If successful, it would remove almost 4% of cars from I-69. Almost. If it removed 60%, I'd be impressed. Alas.

Pointless waste of this magnatude is hard to top, but three-term City of Carmel Mayor Jim Brainard is doing his level best.

The first project proposal that rankled fiscal conservatives was the lavish Central Park. I am all in favor of public parks and greenspace. However, this item includes building a water park, which is something best left to private enterprise. Sadly, there was very little backlash within the GOP.

Finally, the most recent proposal has allowed some Republicans to notice that the spending outside the proper functions of government is getting ridiculously out of control. This time, the Republican mayor wishes to build an $80 million concert hall. From the Sunday Star:

One of Indiana's most affluent cities soon will begin debating whether to build an $80 million concert hall -- but amid growing concern that Carmel finally has found something it can't afford.

and

"The mayor has spent thousands and thousands of dollars getting this project to this point, and he's just assuming, like everything else, that we're all going to buy into this," said City Council President Kevin Kirby, among critics who suggest Carmel should deal with problems such as annexation and traffic congestion before signing the biggest check in city history.

"To me, $80 million seems like an absurd number. Right now, there's not a whole lot of support on the council for this."

Good. There shouldn't be any support on the council for this. $80 is an absurd number when talking about the proper role of government and spending on an arts center. Government shouldn't even be spending a nickel.

One correct role for the office of mayor when seeking a concert hall is to seek a private developer to build it, and a promoter to operate it. The proper role of city government is to ensure the public safety, to manage the public infrastructure, and to manage a small number of services. Anything above and beyond that is the sort of liberal noodling the GOP used to torment the Democrats about. This is especially true on the arts, where certain Republicans made a living attacking the funding the NEA received. Anymore, it's hard to tell the difference between the two parites.

Sunday's Letters

The Indy Star featured two letters from Libertarians- from me and from Chris Ward. Here's Chris':

I am sincerely dismayed at the actions of the House Democrats this week. Sacrificing the people's business to counter what they perceive as a Republican "power grab" was narrow-minded and extremely arrogant.

Wasting two days of the General Assembly cost Hoosier taxpayers thousands of dollars. Democrats should be ashamed of their fiscal irresponsibility. First, they ran up the deficit the state currently has, now they want to waste even more of the taxpayers' money by not even showing up to work?

In 2006, I hope that citizens remember what happened this week. If you want true bipartisanship and officials who care about your individual needs, vote Libertarian.

Christopher D. Ward
5th District Representative, Libertarian Party of Indiana
New Palestine

I can't say what Chris originally wrote, but my letter was slimmed down a little bit. Here's what the Star printed:

Michele McNeil's article on lobbyist activity was enlightening. It is important to track the various interests that try to influence legislation.

So, it was of great interest to see that the city of Indianapolis was listed as one of the top 10 lobbyists, ranking ahead of AT&T, the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association and Trump Casinos.

I expect gambling interests to spend big money to influence legislation. While the ethics of lobbying and its effects are subject to debate, nobody can question the fact that it's their money to spend. In the case of the city's lobbying efforts, tax dollars are being spent.

This is a moral outrage and an indictment on the priorities set by the mayor. Given the chance, the people would never vote to have tax dollars spent on lobbying.

Tax dollars should be used for funding safety, sewers that work and other proper functions of government.

Mike Kole
Secretary, Libertarian Party of Indiana
Fishers

Edits occurred in the original's final two paragraphs, with portions chopped out highlighted in bold, as shown below:

This is a moral outrage, and an indictment on the priorities set by the Mayor. Given the chance, the people would never vote to have tax dollars spent on lobbying. The Mayor struggled for months to find the money for the Police, but could squander six figures on lobbying for a stadium.

If the Mayor wants to secure his legacy with the help of the legislature, he should spend his own money. Tax dollars should be used for funding safety forces, sewers that work, and other proper functions of government.

I was pretty keen on reminding people that the Mayor played hardball with the Police, claiming there was no money. If there is no money for police, a very proper governmental function, how is there money for a frivolity such as lobbying? I was also very interested in making an overture towards the possible motivation for this spending, and to name the moral outrage. Trump spent his own money on lobbying, so I won't be taking him to task. The Mayor spent the people's money! While I might raise an eyebrow at the Mayor if he spent his own money, I wouldn't be able to cite it as a moral outrage. It would be his money down the hole, and his money is his to blow.

Poker Roundup

Knowing that I had to finish in the top three in order to have a prayer of advancing in this five-week tournament, I resolved that I would play a disciplined game, grinding out advancement through folding, if necessary.

It was necessary, and boring. Sheesh! I played only six hands all night. I won four, which was nice. Another was a split. My only losing hand was at the final table, leaving me in sixth place. This was my best finish yet, but won't get me to the next round.

I caught rags all night long. The first table would have been an opportunity to clean up had I caught anything, since the table was in with four or more players almost every time, and they were playing crap. Fold, fold, fold, fold, fold, fold, fold, fold... I was disciplined, allowing the others to carve each other up and knock each other out. I advanced through inaction.

Ah, well. There will be other tournaments. This was a nice initiation. I figure if I can get to the final table every time in a group of 40, I'll win one soon enough.

One Way To Get To A Restructuring

The NHL owners and players have been at an impasse for eight months and the 2004-05 has been scrapped. Neither side seems to be moving toward the other. What will move things along?

How about losing all 30 current owners? That's a proposal the NHL listened to, as Bain Capital Partners LLC and Game Plan International made an offer to buy the league lock, stock, and barrel. From ESPN:

Bain managing partner Steven Pagliuca, co-owner of the NBA's Boston Celtics, and Game Plan, which recently acted as an adviser on the sale of the Ottawa Senators, are betting that many NHL owners would welcome the chance to get out of the hockey business.

The NHL, which because of its ongoing player lockout recently became the first major North American pro sports league to cancel an entire season, has said its teams have lost a collective $500 million over the past two seasons.

and

NHL executive vice president Bill Daly was cautious in describing the level of interest the proposal received from the governors.

"I'm not going to characterize it," Daly told the Globe and Mail. "I would imagine different clubs had different feelings. The board listened to a presentation and that's about it."

Daly said the league was compelled to listen based on the significance of the offer.

"When someone's offering over $3 billion, we felt we had an obligation to the board to have them, at least, hear it from the proposed purchaser," Daly added.

That's the most astute observation I've heard from NHL brass throughout the turmoil. I don't think it will happen, but it might have the effect of waking some owners up. Let's hope.

Vive Free Speech!

I remember the huge disappointment cable TV was when I discovered that most channels air cut or edited versions of R-rated material rather than the uncut original. Comedy Central, TNT, Bravo, A&E, etc., all err on the side of edits?

I've always asked, "Why"? I don't like the idea that broadcast television is edited, but I concede the rationale that broadcast TV and radio are freely available, and kids could hear f-bombs or see a titty. I still think that these things are not a huge problem, and that parents should be the keeper of the remote, not the FCC. As consumers who pay the bill for cable and satellite radio, we should choose to hear the profanity, if that's what we want.

Bad news: Now Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) wants to impose the FCC's broadcast TV and radio rules on the cable and satellite networks. From CNN:

"Cable is a much greater violator in the indecency area," the Alaska Republican told the National Association of Broadcasters, which represents most local television and radio affiliates. "I think we have the same power to deal with cable as over-the-air" broadcasters.

"There has to be some standard of decency," he said. But he also cautioned that "No one wants censorship."

Stevens told reporters afterward that he would push legislation to apply the standards to cable TV and satellite radio and television. It could become part of a pending bill to boost fines on broadcasters who violate indecency restrictions or of an effort to overhaul U.S. communications laws.

If Stevens is successful, it could pose new problems for raunchy radio host Howard Stern, who has said he was forced to leave broadcast radio for satellite radio to avoid decency limits -- and Federal Communications Commission fines.

All this in the wake of Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction". Thanks, Justin.

There's hope from an unexpected source.

While lawmakers and some parents groups are anxious to wipe the airwaves clean of indecency after singer Janet Jackson bared her breast last year during the Super Bowl halftime show, President Bush has said parents are the first line of defense and can just "turn it off."

Amen, Mr. President. It never surprises me when Republicans want to alter or censor broadcasts to eliminate cuss words. What disappoints me (it doesn't surprise me anymore) is whena Republican like Stevens puffs his chest to let business know that the governement is supreme, and business better know its' place.

Stevens said he disagreed "violently" with assertions by the cable industry
that Congress does not have the authority to impose limits on its content.

"If that's the issue they want to take on, we'll take it on and let the
Supreme Court decide," he said.

For my lefty friends, this is the danger of describing the airwaves as "the public airwaves" rather than the private property they should rightly be. If they are "public" the government absolutely does have in its power the ability to dictate and to censor. Best to ensure that they are private property so as to weaken this power.

Odd Gambit

The Indiana House Democrats did not relent in their boycott of the legislative session, sitting it out in caucus as the deadline to vote on bills expired. The Star's update. In order to kill two bills, they took down 132.

House Democrats were so opposed to bills creating an inspector general for the governor and requiring voters to show ID at the polls that they sacrificed 130 other bills during the 15-hour standoff. They sacrificed, for example, a plan to help fellow Democrat and Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson build a new Colts football stadium with state money.

"There are some issues so important that they're worth standing up and fighting for," said Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, who took to the floor just after 9 p.m. to report the concerns of his caucus.

The problem with this is that the Dems just didn't get anything as a result of their antics. Sure, they took down the two items they opposed, but had they negotiated, they could have done that and more, getting some things they wanted in other bills. All they did was show that they were willing to go to the wall. Now what?

Well, the Senate takes over. The Senate has a very comfortable Republican majority, which if I'm not mistaken, is large enough to ram through any bill it wants to. All the Senate needs to do now to get what the House Democrats tried to block is to amend a surviving bill to include those items.

We call this a zero sum game.

I have to think that Pat Bauer and the Democratic leadership believes that there will not be a backlash against his party in 2006, when voters return to the polls. The next general election is more than 20 months away, and the turnout for that cycle is usually very low. No need to worry about accountability under such circumstances. In the meantime, it's probably a first-class hoot for Democrats to watch Republicans howl.

I would like to point out that if Libertarians were in the House, we would not boycott the proceedings. We would work to build a coalition of opposition sufficient to defeat measures we disapprove of. We would speak on the floor to our objections. We would vote against objectionable bills. We might lose some votes, but we would be moving the business along.

It is uncommon that I completely agree with a Star editorial, but here it is:

By late afternoon Tuesday, any sympathy earned in recent weeks by Democrats in the Indiana House had been exhausted.

Instead, Minority Leader Pat Bauer and his stubborn band of followers unintentionally reminded Hoosiers why voters had turned Democrats out of power in November.

Partisanship. Pettiness. Short-sightedness. Bauer managed to put all of his lesser qualities on display this week by keeping his caucus off the House floor for the better part of two days. The resulting lack of a quorum wasted lawmakers' time and taxpayers' money. And it endangered important pieces of legislation for no justifiable reason.

Almost two months remain in a legislative session that started off with great promise. It's time to stop the silliness in the Statehouse and move ahead with fixing a state government that hasn't functioned properly in years.

So Far, So Walked Out

The Democrats threatened to walk out on the legislative proceedings, and so far, they've kept their word. Here's the lunchtime update, from the Star:

Bosma said House Republicans would return to the chamber about 11 a.m. to do business. But House Minority Caucus Chairman Dale Grubb, D-Covington, would not promise a return by Democrats. Only Democratic Reps. Chester Dobis, D-Merrillville, and Scott Pelath, D-Michigan City, showed up at 11:15 a.m. as House Republicans tried to do business. They demanded a quorum call, which showed only 54 of 100 House members present, not enough to do business.

Another quorum call at noon also failed to produce enough House lawmakers to do business.

"Respectfully, Mr. Speaker, I cannot give you a time" when Democrats will return, Grubb told Bosma as Bosma pressed him.

Bosma had sad he hoped to resume at 2 p.m., but the Democrats remained in caucus.
Republicans control the chamber by a 52-48 margin, but two-thirds of members must be present in the chamber to do business.

The amazing thing is, the Democrats haven't put anything on the table. If I were going to throw up a roadblock like this, I would be saying that I want 'X' or 'Y' or 'Z' if I'm going to come back. Get something, for Pete's sake!

No, this is just posturing for its own sake. Power for power's sake. Zzzzzzzzzz.

Another Walkout?

Last year, Republicans walked out of the Indiana Statehouse over the crucial issue of gay marriage. There was a minor backlash against these legislators, mainly on the basis of getting priorities straight. Budget and property taxes first, everything else second.

Since then, the GOP has taken over control of both houses and the governor's office. Obviously whatever backlash there was over that walkout had no lasting effect. Perhaps that is the thinking behind the Democrats walking out yesterday. From the Indy Star:

House Democrats offered a prelude Monday to the legislative showdown that could gridlock bills today -- a crucial deadline day for the General Assembly.

At stake are bills that would require Indiana to observe daylight-saving time, give Gov. Mitch Daniels his own special prosecutor and help fund a new stadium for the Indianapolis Colts.

But there's no telling when Democrats will come to the floor to work today.

Monday, they stalled for nearly seven hours because of a crush of last-minute amendments, one of which would steer control of a Colts stadium project toward the governor.

I kind of like gridlock, generally. It means that taxes won't be raised. There aren't any tax cuts or budgete cuts on the table, so why not just wipe out the whole session? Well, mainly because the people voted to put these Representatives in the seats to vote on legislation. If the Dems don't like the proposals, they should simply vote against them.

In the Star's follow-up story today, the Dems gave a first impression that they would do business, but then went back to playing games:

Democrats showed up about 9:20 a.m., voted to register their presence and heard a rambling speech to the entire chamber by House Minority Leader B. Patrick Bauer, D-South Bend, before retreating behind closed doors 16 minutes later.

I have to think that Libertarian reps would be far more valuable to the process.

Spending Outrage

Something caught my eye in an article in today's Star about gambling interests and their lobbying efforts.

Did you know that the City of Indianapolis spends tax money on lobbying? In fact, the City ranks #4 so far this legislative session, according to the Star.

This is good journalism, but the issue of the City's lobbying must be raised. It is important to track the various interests who try to influence the laws the citizens of this state will be subject to. The City of Indianapolis ranked in spending ahead of AT&T, the Indiana Trial Lawyers, and Trump Casinos even.

I expect gambling interests to spend big money in the hopes of influencing legislation. While the morality and ethics of lobbying and its effects are subject to debate, nobody can question the fact that it's their money to spend. In the case of the City's lobbying efforts, tax dollars are being spent.

This is a moral outrage, and an indictment on the priorities set by the Mayor. Given the chance, the people would never vote to have tax dollars spent on lobbying. The Mayor struggled for months to find the money for the Police, but could squander six figures on lobbying for a stadium.

If the Mayor wants to secure his legacy with the help of the legislature, he should spend his own money. Tax dollars should be used for funding safety forces, sewers that work, and other proper functions of government.

Best Radio In Indy

Easy call: WXNT, 1430-am. Abdul Hakim-Shabazz is the only talker in Indy who is doing heavy issue-oriented talk and hosting the lawmakers on all levels, from governor Mitch Daniels, down to the various City-County Councilors, with the state legislators in between. Abdul in the Morning airs from 6-9am, weekdays. Get the online feed if you are outside the range of the airwaves.

WIBC-am could be doing this, especially in light of their large news staff, so it is surprising that they haven't been. That high-watt signal is positively wasted on Garrison.

The amazing thing about Abdul's head-first plunge into Hoosier politics is that he is coming from the Chicago area. Undaunted, he has aggressively pursued policy makers, so his learning curve has been sharp. Beyond that, he includes Libertarians in the mix, which always scores highly with me. Abdul self-describes as a "consistent conservative", but my assessment of him is that of a small-l libertarian. He is in favor of more public policy than I am, and he believes that the Republican Party is still the best vehicle for limited government policy.

WXNT is as close to a libertarian station as you could get. In addition to Abdul, all three hours of the Neal Boortz show air from Noon to 3pm. Boortz alone would make WXNT a favorite. Conservatives Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Laura Ingraham are also on.

Minor downside- Michael Savage is unfortunately on, too. The man is simply nasty and unyieldingly negative. Thank goodness he is not a libertarian, or we would suffer a disastrous negative association we can't afford.

Oh well, on the average, WXNT is a great station. Check 'em out!

Poker Report

My third tourney date was rather like the second- a little bit better than the time before, and another nice lesson on the game was learned.

My play was generally very sound. This time, I finished eighth overall, good for 200 points. I'm climbing the ladder, but by baby steps. I'll need that quantum leap next time. Scoreboard. I'm still in 15th. Only the top five advance to an invitational tourney.

I stuck with my game plan and it paid off. Going into the final table, I was in third place. Problem was, the chip leader had 4x more chips than me, and I only had about 2x those at the bottom. I had a real opportunity to surge ahead, but I messed it up.

Until the final table is formed, the players deal their own hands. At the final table, ten players were crushed together along with a dealer. On the second hand, I lost sight of the fact that the dealer was not a player. I was dealt pocket sixes while being the big blind. The flop turned up another six. I was excited. Since I was sitting to the left of the dealer and I wanted to just capture the blinds and the first round of bets, I called all-in. Problem was, I was out of sequence. The action was three players ahead of me. Some of them were going to bet, but they quickly folded up. Exposed, I went all-in anyway and picked up the pot. Had I been aware of the sequence, I would have captured at least an extra 1,000 or so chips.

Lesson: PAY ATTENTION TO SEQUENCE!

From there on, it was downhill. A player looking to leave the table because his wife was ready to go started playing every hand all-in. I played a K-Q suited against his all-in 3-7 off-suit. Hard to feel bad about that, right? Here comes the flop. Two 3s and a 7. Nuts! What can you do? It cut my chip stack by two-thirds, and I limped through the rest of my limited time at the final table.

Weekly Poker Fun

Tonight is the third tournament of five being held at Barley Island in Noblesville. Come on down and join the fun. Registration is 6pm, play starts at 7pm. No buy-in, no cash on the table = fun atmosphere.

I'll try to advance in the standings again this week. I'll need to leap up rather than crawl.

Marion County's Latest Disincentive

Thank goodness I left Marion County, which means Indianapolis, just inside a year ago. Had I stayed, I would be subject to a new income tax increase. Indy Star report.

Proponents will point out that the increase is only raising the tax a mere 0.3%, from 0.7% to 1.0%. This now puts Marion County's tax on par with every suburban county that surrounds it. Until now, there was actually a very minor incentive for people making large incomes to stay in Marion- that 0.3% difference. No big difference? Marion County needs all the advantages it can get.

The reason for the tax increase is to build more jails. The Marion County jails are so stuffed full of inmates that the County chooses to release many of them. Some have taken advantage of their early release to commit murder.

This sounds like a place I am glad to have left behind.

I am not at all convinced, though, that Marion County's jails are stuffed full of violent criminals. I have no doubt that there are a significant number who have committed non-violent, victimless crimes. It is unfortunate that rather than doing the job of sorting out the violent from non-violent offenders, the City-County Council, lead by Democrats, simply committed to building more prisons.

Aren't the Democrats usually the ones leading the charge against American society werehousing inner city minorities and the poor in jails? I guess they are now in favor of it. The vote was 21-7. All seven opposed were Republicans. All 15 Democrats voted in favor.

Very delighted to live somewhere else. No doubt others will continue to follow in hordes.

Big Eminent Domain Case Heard Today

The US Supreme Court will hear arguments on a case that matters to everyone who believes in property rights, and is opposed to the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one property owner to another private property owner for a different use. CNN Story.

Eminent Domain was meant to be a means to acquire land for obvious common benefit uses: roadways and bridges mainly. That use was meant to be employed sparingly and as a last resort in the event civil negotiations broke down to an impasse. In the best case scenario, the government makes a fair market offer and the property owner agrees to a deal.

But today, governements on all levels, especially municipalities, are using eminent domain as a tool beyond its original intention. Eminent Domain is now being used by cities for taking property away from the current owners and giving to to other private entities- usually developers- on the basis that the new use will create jobs and a bigger tax base, which are certainly public benefits and sufficient justification for getting around negotiation and agreement.

This is important because all of us live in some kind of housing. We care about our homes, especially if we are homeowners. Home ownership is the cornerstone of the middle class. These cities are showing us that homeowners are increasingly becoming a class to be oppressed and disregarded. It should cause great alarm. From CNN:

"A recent study by the property rights group Institute for Justice, which is representing the New London homeowners in court, found about 10,000 cases from 1998 to 2002 of local governments in 41 states using or threatening to use eminent domain to transfer home and properties from one private owner to another. Courts in at least six states have upheld the practice."

Neal Boortz has much to say on this, thank goodness, on his website and on his radio show. The Institute For Justice is a non-profit legal organization that takes eminent domain abuse cases, and is one of the litigants in today's case on behalf of the property owners.

Fear And Loathing Inside One's Own Head

The shocking news of the apparent suicide of Hunter S. Thompson hit the news late last night, and brought immediate response inside literary and cultural circles. Thompson was credited with being among the "New Journalists" and applied the term "Gonzo Journalism" to his own methods. AP story, with pics on Yahoo.

The results were books such as "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" and "The Hells Angels". This latter was my introduction to Thompson, and I was impressed with the courage and the fortitude required of him to gain complete acceptance by the then-outlaw biker gang, at a great physical cost.

Here are some links to fine tributes to Hunter S. Thompson: Blogcritics has no less than six obits, plus a review of his new book, "Hey Rube" by Dave Nalle. Hoosier Libertarian Al Barger has his own treatment. From Lileks' Bleat.

Governor Daniels on Amtrak

No, he's not riding the train, he's in favor of ending the preposterous subsidies Amtrak receives. Daniels will not fight to preserve the subsidies. From the Indy Star:

"Amtrak costs Indiana taxpayers a fortune," Daniels said. "Every time someone gets on an Amtrak train it would be less expensive to buy them an airplane ticket and hand it to them on the platform."

My goodness, but that's a breath of fresh air! Less expensive still would be to allow transportation to be the concern of those using the transportation, but I'll refrain from nitpicking. Right on, Gov!

The downside in the immediate future is that the Amtrak facility in Beech Grove could be shut down without the continued subsidies. That's unfortunate for the workers and families at the facility. I know that they are skilled workers, so they should be able to translate those skills into jobs in other facilities.

The upside is that all residents of this state will be spared some measure of tax burden. This is big picture thinking, and for that, Daniels deserves credit.

Predictably, there are politicians who are looking small picture. US Senator Evan Bayh and US Representative Julia Carson are two have so announced themselves.

"The Beech Grove facility and Amtrak not only provide hundreds of Hoosier jobs but also help improve our air quality and cuts down on traffic congestion and similar problems," Bayh said in a statement.

Unfortunately, the hundreds of jobs that produce for no particular demand is a drag on all six million Hoosiers.

Moreover, the idea that Amtrak reduces traffic congestion is a myth. Most riders are leisure travelers who prefer the leisurely pace of the train. The one exception is the Northeast Corridors, where there is actual commuter demand. Here in Indy? People don't want to take the train. It's way too slow from a-to-b (4:50 by train, 3:00 by car) and still leaves the rider renting a car at the station of destination.

Proof that nobody rides? There is only one direct roundtrip train available daily. The other three offerings are BUS RIDES! This is from Amtrak's website! The current Amtrak fare for an Indy- round trip Chicago is $20. Twenty stinkin' bucks! When demand is low, so is the number of runs, and the prices follow.

Now, let us hope that Daniels, a Republican, can take this very logical position on subsidized rail and prevail on the various Republican regional leaders who are backing another subsidized rail boondoggle on the old Nickel Plate railroad, from Fishers to Indianapolis. Quoth Daniels,

"...the idea of downsizing Amtrak to places where people actually ride trains, as opposed to hitting the taxpayers of Indiana and America over and over for hundreds of millions of dollars to support a losing venture is not something I support."

It's true on the national scale, and true on the local scale.

Poker Results

My second evening of tourney play showed more improvement, as I finished 9th overall, which put me the points for the second week in a row. More on that later.

The most fun I had all evening was the first hand I won. It was a fairly unremarkable hand. There was an ace on the flop, I had an ace in hand, and I check-raised hard. The player making the initial bet correctly guessed that I had the ace, but asked me to tell him. That wasn't happening, so I trotted out one of my favorite Matt Damon lines from Rounders: "Sorry. Funny enough, I forgot".

He was pissed! He said something to the effect that he would get me later. I snickered and acknowledged that he might well.

I was eliminated on the last hand before consolidating the last two tables into the final table. My new friend was nowhere to be found. Again, in losing, there were lessons to be learned.

There are plenty of novices at the table besides myself, but in addition to that, since there is no buy-in, the players tend to be really loose and agressive in betting up lousy hands. What the heck, they aren't betting the rent. As a result, tight play can help a player survive as wild play takes several players out. I took this route. It helped me later, as players reacted to my larger bets assuming that I had the cards since I wasn't playing anything weak.

I discovered that I could bully anybody with a shorter stack of chips. If another player started the betting, so long as nobody else made a bet, and I could raise the bet to put the betting player all-in. Invariably, they chose certain survival over potential elimination. They would fold and I would rake in the chips. Best yet, I never had to show the cards.

I used this ploy successfully four times before being moved to a table where all of the players but one had greater stacks then I did. That one player had only a little more than enough to make the big blind, which she had to put up. She went all-in without even looking at her cards. I was on her left, and another player with a larger stack was on my left. After I called the big blind, he quickly went all-in, and I figured it was little more than an attempt to run her off the table. I believed that he probably didn't have much more than a K-Q or A-10, and with his full stack on the table, he would scare everybody else away. I had pocket 8s. A pair of Jacks showed on the flop. I went all-in, even though I couldn't cover his bet, which was over 1,000 chips. I had about 900. He was shocked that I called. We turned the cards over.

He had a Jack. So, he got much more than he bargained for, taking down two players at once and an extra 900 chips above what he had planned. The lesson is: stick to the game plan, especially when it is working. Two pair was a nice hand, but I was only in for 80 when he went all-in. I could have easily folded and kept the 900 chips, and more importantly, kept playing deeper into the tourney.

Now, as the tournament scoreboard goes, I was in the points both weeks- 50 points for best hand of the night last week, 100 points for 9th place this time. I'm going to need to do much more if I'm going to advance to the next round. In fact, I pretty much have to win a night. Only the top five in points will advance, and winning is good for 1,000 points. I'm guessing there will be five winners, so five players with at least 1,000 points. Points system.

LPIN Central Committee member Chris Ward and his girlfriend Beth did not fare so well this time. Still, with Beth's 4th place finish in the first week, she's in a position I would happily trade for.

See you at Barley Island next Thursday!

Poker Tonight

Join me for Texas Hold 'Em tonight in Noblesville, at the Barley Island Brewery. Nothing to lose- there is no buy-in fee, just a nice for-fun tournament setting. Registration is from 6-7pm, with play starting at 7:00.

Fellow LP leader Chris Ward will be there, too. Let's see if I can't outlast him tonight.

Another Distraction

With another recent post, I began to chronicle the difference between the issues the candidates were campaigning on and what they are bringing up as legislative proposals.

This time? Abortion.

Nobody volunteered positions on abortion after the primaries, when Republicans were trying to sort out there allegiences. Now, there are ten different bills circulating that address the topic.

There is a budget crisis in this state. I do not describe the abortion issue as a crisis. Abortion is still the law of the land, and should probably be revisited in debate at the Federal level. So, at the state level, I describe it as a distraction from dealing with the real crisis, which is the budget.

Observe this lengthy quote from the Indy Star story, where the circus-like, emotional gushing makes what seems to me the perfect distraction.

"During Wednesday's House debate, several lawmakers shared emotional, personal stories.

Rep. Bob Alderman, R-Fort Wayne and chairman of the House Public Policy and Veterans Affairs Committee, talked about his own rough childhood and how that shaped his anti-abortion views. Rep. Terri Austin, D-Anderson, stormed out of the room in tears before returning to talk about the babies she lost during pregnancy.

Austin's story brought Rep. Robert Kuzman, D-Merrillville, to tears. Kuzman, who was adopted and who adopted a child of his own, has worked to improve Indiana's adoption laws.

Rep. Cleo Duncan, R-Greensburg, cried as she talked about how a near-abortion affected her family.

And an angry Vanessa Summers, D-Indianapolis, left the hearing after her vote and yelled to an anti-abortion proponent who approached her: "In the name of Jesus, get out of my face," before threatening to call in Indiana State Police troopers.

The Statehouse is turning into Bedlam. Please- Don't forget about the budget. It is still the real Number One priority.

Interesting Comments By A Conservative

George Will talks about something he calls "the church of true conservatism" in his most recent column. He mentions libertarianism, and clarifies that libertarianism is distinct from "true conservatism".

I couldn't agree more. What gets my attention is not the mere mention of libertarianism in his column. It is that Will, a highly respected and influential conservative columnist, describes Arnold Schwartzeneggar as a libertarian conservative, and says that, "his conservatism ... Is the point of the spear in conservatism's primary political challenge -- defeating liberalism's attempt to Europeanize America".

Libertarian purists might bristle Will's description of Arnold as a libertarian. However, Will cites thusly:

"His libertarianism extends beyond the theory of political economy he
encountered as a young man in the writings of Milton Friedman, and beyond the
exuberant entrepreneurialism of his life, to social issues. He favors abortion
rights, does not care if any state's voters endorse gay marriage, and has "no
use" for a constitutional amendment barring that."

It is the fiscal side that Gov. Ah-nohd is focusing on, and in that area, the Governor is a-ok. I like that Will has reminded conservatives of Friedman. They need that reminder. In fact, we could use a Governor here in Indiana much like him. Ironic that Mitch Daniels had the nickname 'The Blade' when in DC on the Bush Administration. Daniels' solution to budgetary shortfalls? A laughable 'temporary' tax on those earning $100,000 or more. Arnold, as a Libertarian governor would do, proposes cuts across the board. From Will:

"He proposes to cut spending across the board when the budget is not balanced,
and to adopt nonpartisan redistricting by a panel of retired judges. This latter
might pick the lock that the Democratic Party and its base in the public
employees unions have on the Legislature. Schwarzenegger's program aims to
curtail the distributional politics that drive government's expansion."

In fact, all of these could as easily have come from a libertarian governor.

I like that will credits Arnold's libertarianism. If the case of California is to be in the public eye, and Arnold is instituting libertarian solutions to the extent his state's legislature will allow it, let's make sure that libertarianism is credited when the successful outcomes arrive.

Google-O-Rama

I get a kick out of the searches that bring people to this page. Check out some of the recent ones, either Google or Yahoo searches:

On Yahoo, "the evil Mitch Daniels," this page turns up 5th from the top. I don't think Mitch is evil, but I do think that he could cut the budget 2% across the board.

On Google, "Nancy Pelosi's Makeup at 2005 State of the Union response", this page turns up 12th from the top. I have no idea why. I didn't notice a thing about her makeup in the response. Harry Reid, however...

Back to Yahoo for, "Mitch Daniels Sucks," this page turns up 11th from the top. Why all the Mitch hate? I don't think Mitch sucks. Actually, I admire his boldness. I don't agree with him on everything, especially when he proposes raising taxes, and I certainly would have preferred a Governor Gividen, but it beats a Governor Kernan so far.

On Yahoo, the #1 response for the query, "Facts on Atocha train station", is the Kole Hard Facts blog. I'm ahead of CBS, MSNBC, and other news agencies. Go figure that. I happened to be at Atocha station about six weeks before it was bombed last year, so I blogged my experience at the station. It's a wonderful station, or was, with luscious tropical plants and trees throughout the interior. I included a link to some of my pictures. Maybe that did it.

It amazing to me that since this is mainly a political blog, I get more hits on things non-political. The name "Victoria Snelgrove" still ranks as the highest bringing people to my site. She was killed in a crowd control effort after the Red Sox won the World Series. I might have thought that the word 'libertarian' would have been the top draw. Alas. What the heck- I'm glad for people checking out the site, and the libertarian politics, even if they were looking for other things.

Texas Hold 'Em Fun

I was delighted to get an email from LP Central Committee District Rep Chris Ward, asking me if I would join him at a Texas Hold 'Em tournament. You bet I would! Best part of all- no buy-in cost.

Barley Island brewery in Noblesville is hosting the event every Thursday in the hopes of drumming up some business. About 40 people played. The atmosphere was very friendly. After all, there was no buy-in, so nobody was losing the rent.

This was my first tournament play of any size greater than one table, so I was pleased enough just to not be the first thrown off the island. I made it past the first third of eliminated players, but not much further. Again, I was pleased.

I only had about five hands to really play, and fortunately, two of them were very good hands. The first was the opening hand of the night, so I was set up to play for a long time as long as I didn't get reckless. After the blinds were raised the first time, I was in with my table's chip leader for a big pot. I had the big hand, with a full house, Aces over 8's. That hand stood up as the best hand of the night. Where I did lose big was on a hand where I had a flush, but another player had a better flush. After that, the blinds ate me up.

Chris did very well, surviving into the final third of players. His girlfriend Beth did even better, finishing 4th. I think she knocked him out of the game, which should have made for some entertaining banter on the drive home.

I'll be looking forward to playing again at Barley Island next Thursday, but also to using Hold 'Em tourneys as fun team-builders in the campaign.

Priority Number One?

I was pretty involved with the campaigning throughout Indiana in 2004. As a county chair of a political party, I had my eyes and ears open on issues, looking for an angle to supply my candidates. As a secretary of a state political party, I often submitted letter and op-eds to newspapers across the state in response to positions taken by high-profile candidates, such as those running for governor. I even attended one of the two gubernatorial debates. Overall, I have a pretty good feel for what the candidates from any party were running on.

Here's my ranking for issues, as they were discussed on the trail.

1. State Budget.
2. Jobs.
3. Education.

These three were miles ahead of everything else. Here are the also-rans.

4. The extention of I-69.
5. Daylight Savings Time.
6. The future of the Indianapolis Colts.
7. Same-sex marriage.

Also, many legislators and legislative candidates took No New Taxes Pledges.

So, it has been fascinating to watch Governor Daniels make DST the first issue out of the gate; to watch the Legislature propose myriad new taxes; to watch same-sex marriage and the future of the Colts leap-frog jobs in terms of public discussion; to watch I-69 and education fade from discussion; and to watch the Legislature propose a slew of new traffic laws.

Traffic laws? Nobody even campaigned on this. Why is it now priority #1?

A Bill would allow the installation of cameras at intersections, designed to nab red light runners. Another would increase the speed limit. Another would ban the use of cell phones in vehicles. I'm missing some others.

Whatever happened to priorities? How about legislating in accordance with the campaigns? Is this too much to ask?

Report Card Is In

Governing Magazine issued report cards on the governments of all 50 states in their February 2005 issue. It is an interesting report, but prepared to take it with some minor grains of salt.

No state was given an overall grade lower than C-. No state was graded higher than A-. That's a pretty tight set of results. Shouldn't someone have gotten an A+ or an F? Grades at a glance.

But overall, the analysis looks very sound, especially in light of this highlighted sentence that summed up state government:

"Historically tight-fisted Indiana got in trouble when it continued spending as
if the recession hadn't happened."

Preach it! Indiana was graded an overall C+.

Notably, 20 categories were spotlighted and ranked "Strength", "Mid-Level", and "Weakness". Indiana was assessed "Weakness" in 10 categories, (including Long-Term Outlook, Structural Balance, and Budgeting Performance) and "Strength" in just one (Intergovernmental Coordination). More data and analysis.

So what are they focusing on in the Statehouse? Traffic laws, gay marriage, and smoking. Amazing. Pathetic.

Boredom Follow-up

The NFL's choice of a halftime performer was designed to reduce complaints to the FCC. Mission accomplished. According to Fox Sports:

"Last year, Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" resulted in more than
500,000 complaints to the Federal Communications Commission.

This year, Paul McCartney's halftime performance resulted in just two ...
by viewers who found the show to be far less titillating than last
year's."

Boring. Boring, dreadful, dreary, and awful. Last year's show was dreadful and awful, but at least it was interesting.

Lamest Ever

I've watched many Super Bowl broadcasts over the years, and I have to say that this one was easily the least interesting. The NFL has regained the rights to the moniker No Fun League.

It was the lamest close championship game I've ever seen, in any sport. New England is masterful in allowing a game to look close on the scoreboard without the oppostion, or any viewer, ever believing that a comeback is possible. There was no tension whatsoever.

The commercials were the least entertaining in the time I've been aware of them. Only once did I laugh out loud (the guy holding the cat in one hand, the knife in the other, and the red sauce on the cat and the floor). Not once did I go, "Ooh! Wow! Cool".

In an attempt to not repeat the Janet Jackson incident from last year, the Super Bowl chose Paul McCartney to perform. Amazing- in the 60s, the Beatles were the fore of the counter culture, unpredictable and daring. Today, McCartney is safe as milk, predictable and boring.

The broadcast team of Buck, Collinsworth, and Aikman make a graduate course in statistics seem exciting. The commentary might have been more exciting if stand-up comic Richard Wright gave his deadpan delivery. Only adding Pat Summerall could have made the team more dull.

That's four hours of my life I'll never get back. At least I got the laundry done.

You can't even hate the Patriots' dynasty, due to the austere, team-oriented nature of all involved. These aren't the evil Yankees or even the juvenile Red Sox. You almost want Tom Brady to brag that he's never lost a playoff game. It ain't braggin', after all- he's done it.

Way to go, NFL.

Most innovative use of lost time by a TV network: Animal Planet aired something during the game called the Puppy Bowl. It was merely a playpen for about 8 puppies, with six different cameras. The puppies played, and a different camera angle was shown about every 10 seconds or so. Cute and cheap to produce.

Ayn Rand's 100th Birthday

No book influenced my thinking more than Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. It was first recommended to me by a girlfriend's mother when I was 18. I couldn't bring myself to wade through 1100 pages in the summer before college. I picked it up again when I was 26, and I was transformed from a liberal Democrat to a Libertarian. My premises were largely the same, but for the first time I began to see economic issues in terms of individual rights in the same way I had seen issues affecting other areas of life. My premise was and is the right to self-determination. I had missed that economic issues should be applied in the same way.

There are many fine tributes out there, and I will not duplicate them. Reason Magazine dedicated the cover of the current issue to Rand's 100th, and columnist Cathy Young's tribute is the feature article. Fellow Hoosier Libertarian Al Barger penned a tribute. The Ayn Rand Institute is hosting Rand Centenary Conferences, that are a bit pricey, but interesting. There is even a Rand fan dating service. It surprises me that the male-female ratio is only 3:1.

As for my own more personal tribute, I will stay at my desk until I fall asleep working.

Nutshell State of the Union Review

I'm not so big on Federal issues as some. Obviously, they greatly affect our lives and matter enormously. Yet, the state and local issues are the ones dearest to me.

That said, it was impossible to avoid watching the SOTU speech, and the opposition response, following an election. The campaigning is over, and the question for me is, 'Lame duck or hard-charging policy maker/legacy builder'? Clearly, Bush is going for the latter.

Here's my idealism showing: I expect a SOTU speech to say, 'this is where we were, this is where we are, and this is where we are going'. I found the speech to be long on emotion and rhetoric, and short on the boardroom report. New Indiana governor Mitch Daniels gave me more of what I expect of these kinds of missives.

Alas, the State of the Union Address is a President's hour on the bully pulpit. He is free to talk about whatever he wishes, and for as long as I can remember, these speeches have sounded more like ongoing campaigning than the boardroom report.

I was amused by Nancy Pelosi's part of the Democratic response. I was quickly interested as she also noted the emphasis of rhetoric in her complaint, but then my enthusiasm vanished as she offered her own rhetoric as the Democratic solution.

The honoring of the parents of the slain Marine was the touching high point. The embrace of the mother with the Iraqi woman fresh off her first vote was a most effective use of props. I'm a pretty tough critic, but I was very moved by the scene, especially as the mother held her son's dog tag, and the chain tangled in the Iraqi's dress. That's the kind of symbolism the speechwriting team wishes it could have staged.

Since Iraq and foreign policy is where the President will eternally hang his hat, the bulk of the speech revolved around these issues. Again, this is a disappointment to me, due to my deeper interest in domestic policy. When will we get out of Iraq? The President was as vague as possible. Will this War on Terrorism become an eternal campaign? The door is certainly open for it, but no obvious plan was set forth.

On the domestic side, Social Security was discussed in more detail than anything was, and made for me the clear distinction between Republicans, Libertarians, and Democrats on the issue.

Democrats have been posturing towards leaving the system alone to run as is, despite the obvious train wreck awaiting this Ponzi scheme, as more people enter the receiving side then enter the contributing side. Libertarians prefer anything from a complete elimination of the program (it's your money, take it all home and spend or invest it as you see fit) to a complete privatization. Bush is proposing middle ground to these, with a very gradual shift in the allocation of a small fraction of the contributions into private accounts. Bush and the Republicans clearly continue to agree with Democrats that government is correct to mandate that a percentage of one's income must be set aside into retirement accounts.

Notable: The budget will continue to have a structural deficit that builds upon the existing deficit. It's amazing that this Administration can make Democrats look fiscally responsible. Freezes in spending in some areas is nice, but cuts across the board would have been more than refreshing- it is the right thing to do.

Campaign Photos

Big thanks to Bob & Cindy Kirkpatrick for their work on my campaign photos. Bob shot the pics, while Cindy helped me with poses and in keeping the mood light.

The Glorious Acts of Our Legislature, II

If you are a legislator, why deal with the budget and other things that really matter when you can seem suitably busy writing laws that appear to make our streets safer?

First it was House Bill 1508, that would ban the use of cell phones. Now, it's Senate Bill 570, that would install the eye in the sky cameras designed to catch those who run a red light.

Once again, on the surface, this seems laudable enough. Nab those who blow through red lights automatically. The camera captures the image of the offender, the license plate number is observed, and the offender gets the fine in the mail.

Think a little deeper, though. If I have a legitimate emergency with my son, and I'm not willing to wait for the ambulance, I'll blow through every red light in town to get to the hospital, and I'm going to have a thousand dollars in fines to deal with. I'll do this every time in order to get my son the treatement he needs in an emergency situation.

When in a rough part of town at 2am at a deserted intersection, and there are menacing young men approach the vehicle waiting at the red light, it's not uncommon to see drivers blow through the red light without endangering anyone, and in fact, taking themselves out of danger.

Then, of course, there are the considerations of the costs of the cameras, and of Big Brother. Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson has chimed in, so that we'll all understand. From the Star:

"What's the difference between having a police officer sit there at an
intersection versus having a camera do it?" Peterson asked. "Red-light cameras
will significantly reduce the number of people running red lights."

The difference is discretion. A human being on patrol upon seeing an infraction can quickly deduce the danger created by running a red light. The officer pulls over the driver and learns whether the driver is drunk, impatient, or has a legitimate emergency. The camera takes none of this into account. It doesn't care whether running the light created any danger or not. Pass too late, pay a price.

This proposal is just as unnecessary as the proposed cell phone law. If you get in a wreck because you used a cell phone or ran a red light, you are at fault, and you get the citation. If you do either and nobody is harmed, should you be penalized for the harm that wasn't caused?

There are studies out there on this topic. The wind-up is that longer yellow lights help give drivers more time to make the stop before red.

There is poetic justice out there, too. In several locations, the owners of vehicles were getting scads of violation notices with fines for running red lights. These owners were the cities that installed the cameras. After all, nobody runs red lights more than police, fire, and other municipal emergency vehicles.

The Glorious Acts of Our Indiana Legislature

I always have to remember to take a deep breath when examining the laws being proposed by our grand Legislature. I detest most of the new legislation on the table, but have to forgive our representatives in the House and Senate for it. After all, writing laws is what a Legislature does, and if they don’t write enough laws, it can begin to look like they’ve been loafing.

Call me strange, but I rather prefer a Legislature that goofs off and under produces new laws. I’m convinced we have enough of them already, and agree with Mark Twain, who famously said that no man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the Legislature is in session.

Mainly, that is because no lawmaker wants to look like a slacker, especially so soon after an election. It’s bad form. As a result, we get some hideous proposals that I would chalk up as an effort to hide behind some broad good intention while looking meaningful, or at least busy.

House Bill 1508 is a textbook case as one such proposal.

Representative Vanessa Summers, an Indianapolis Democrat, has introduced legislation that would prohibit the use of cell phones, making exceptions for hands-free devices and for emergency use. The proposed fine for violations of the law would be up to $25. Indy Star story.

The intent is to make our streets a little less hazardous. We have all groused at the idiot guilty of driving while in conversation that cut us off or made us miss a light, and we have cursed the driver and his cell phone. Summers’ proposal takes its cue from similar laws passed in New York and the District of Columbia. As everyone knows, these cities now have the safest streets in the world.

This law is rife with problems, from practical application to the higher concerns of individual liberty.

I know four friends, right off the top of my head, who would gladly pay up to $25 per call, as a cost of doing business. They think this highly of each and every one of their calls. $25 is no kind of deterrent for these people.

What is emergency use? I define emergency use of a cell phone as a frantic call to a friend because I suddenly had two tickets offered to me for a Colts’ playoff game, and I have to accept within five minutes, or the tickets will be passed on to a co-worker. My wife defines it as having found a deal on furniture, and she’s on her way home so I can look at fabric swatches. I’m betting that this is not what the Representative had in mind. Some revisions will be in order.

But why just cell phones? If the real intent of the law is to eliminate distractions from our roadways, why not ban them all? Summers could justifiably expand the proposal to include a ban on smoking in the car, adjusting the radio or inserting a Britney Spears CD, eating fast food, scolding the rug rats in the backseat, talking with your spouse, shaving or applying makeup, doing the crossword puzzle, using a laptop computer, using on-screen directions to Starbucks, and rehearsing your excuse that explains your tardiness to the boss.

Could we really ban Britney Spears CDs? I digress.

Before the law is done with revisions, no common person will be able to read and understand it, and mainly, drivers will just continue to take their chances.

This begs the significant philosophical question: Why bother?

Isn’t it sufficient that citations can already be issued if the use of a cell phone is the cause of an accident? Why pile on? No harm, no foul: If the use of a cell phone isn’t endangering anyone in the moment, why penalize for the harm that was not caused?

Ah, the law is to be a deterrent, to eliminate the possibility of harm. But won’t it also become more than that? How much of a stretch is it to envision police pulling over drivers who endanger nobody on a deserted road at 11pm, but who are guilty of making a cell call, just so the officer can meet his monthly quota? Isn’t that a harm all its own?

Say, if the police pull a driver over to the side of the road, isn’t that the sort of distraction that could cause an accident? It should be banned!

Let’s hope this Bill dies in committee. If it passes, Summers will run for re-election in 2006 on the basis of having produced this wonderful law… and of having been suitably busy.

The Latest From The Libertarian Writer's Bureau

Ah, the economics of disaster. While there has been much hand-wringing and accusation about the stinginess of American giving (bunk, of course), there is a correct place for accusation against American policy in one area: trade. Sri Lanka is a poor country. American policy on trade coming from Sri Lanka hasn't helped. From Dr. Eric Schansberg, and the Libertarian Writer's Bureau:

Worse Than Tsunami, Trade Protectionism Hurts Third World Citizens

by Dr. Eric Schansberg
Libertarian Writers' Bureau

Last Thursday, I was heartened to read the news that my church, Southeast Christian Church in Louisville, KY, had collected $732,000 from its members (beyond its weekly giving) for tsunami relief in Southeast Asia. That partially offset the news I had read the previous Thursday-- as reported in the Wall Street Journal-- that tariffs imposed on Sri Lanka were nearly $250,000,000 in 2003.

Nearly all of that amount was taxes imposed on the Sri Lankan textile industry. And the amount imposed on that one foreign industry exceeded all of the tariffs imposed on all trade with all six Scandinavian countries-- despite the fact that those countries export nearly 12 times more to the U.S., have about 10 times more GDP thanSri Lanka's, and have people whose per capita incomes are far higher than those in Sri Lanka.

Why does this occur?

The textile industry in this country is one of many special interest groups that benefits from having their competition restricted. They and their politicians find it favorable to impose discriminatory taxes on foreign producers and American consumers.

In contrast to the obvious benefits for politicians and the protected industry, the costs imposed are subtle. How many consumers know that they pay significantly higher prices for clothing because of these laws? How many voters care that foreign workers and investors in poor countries are impeded in their ability to sell product within the wealthiest market in the world?

Because Christians tend to pay almost exclusive attention to relatively few (albeit important) issues, they often ignore other important policies. The passions of the Religious Right flair on issues of social morality and abortion, but they rarely think about issues of economic justice. The Scriptures, especially through theprophets, give a more balanced picture. The interests of the Religious Left are centered more tightly around the fate of the poor.

But their policy attentions in that realm are relatively narrow, focusing mostly on welfare and foreign aid. Pragmatism would seem to warrant discussion of a wider set of issues. Christian Libertarians are excited about voluntary displays of charity, but saddened that political shenanigans can so easily swamp the efforts of compassionate people.

All that said, care for the poor and oppressed is not a strictly Christian exercise. And very few people-Christian or not-are informed about the primary and secondary consequences of significant policy issues. Although Southeast Christian Church can be pleased and honored to pay part of Uncle Sam's tax bill for the Sri Lankans,perhaps all of us should pay more attention to the larger issues of trade protectionism and the mechanics of economic justice.

Eric Schansberg
Professor of Economics
Indiana University Southeast
author of Turn Neither to the Right nor to the Left: A Thinking Christian's Guide to Politics and Public Policy