Schedule Your Tee Times!
The Libertarian Party of Hendricks County is hosting a golf outing. The proceeds will be divided between the county party and the Kole Campaign- two very worthy beneficiaries! Here are the details:
What: 2006 LPHC Golf Outing
Where: Oak Tree Golf Course on East US 40 in Plainfield on
When: Saturday, May 13, 2006. Play begins at 1:00 p.m. with dinner at the Elk's Club afterwards.
Cost: $65 for an individual entry - $240 for a foursome
Details: Shotgun start / scramble play. Dinner provided afterwards at the Elk's Club. Door Prizes awarded at Dinner. Cost includes fees and cart for play, beverage cart availability, and awards dinner afterward at Elk's.
For more information and signup details visit http://www.lphc.org/
I'll speak briefly at dinner. Big Thanks to the Hendricks County Libertarians, especially County Chair Todd Singer and Event Coordinator David Washburn.
Monday, March 20, 2006
Thursday, March 16, 2006
New Polls
First, the results on the old polls. The voters are mainly Hoosier Libertarians, with the numbers looking like this:
Voted for in '04:
Gividen 19
Daniels 9
Kernan 2
If given a second chance in '06:
Gividen 21
Daniels 5
Kernan 1
None of the above 4
With the legislative session having just concluded, I thought the time was right to reflect on what just passed (or didn't), and to think about the 2007 legislative session.
My highlight was the passage of the eminent domain bill. It wasn't everything the defenders of private property rights could have wanted, but it is an improvement over what was law before, and we found that there are some legislators, like Dave Wolkins, who do respect private property.
My lowlight was the overactivity of the session. The old quote is that no one's life or liberty is safe when the legislature is in session. The short session is supposed to be for the consideration of emergency legislation. The only item that qualified was the eminent domain bill, in light of the state's "negoatiations" with the NK Hurst Company. Most everything else was just puffery designed to make the legislators look significant. Well, that doesn't explain Major Moves, does it?
My top priority for 2007 is across-the-board budget cuts of at least 1%. The full session is the budgetary session, so Libertarians need to put pressure on the GOP to make this their priority so long as they have the majority... which they might not have by time the session begins.
If your top issues aren't in the poll, clue me in with comments!
First, the results on the old polls. The voters are mainly Hoosier Libertarians, with the numbers looking like this:
Voted for in '04:
Gividen 19
Daniels 9
Kernan 2
If given a second chance in '06:
Gividen 21
Daniels 5
Kernan 1
None of the above 4
With the legislative session having just concluded, I thought the time was right to reflect on what just passed (or didn't), and to think about the 2007 legislative session.
My highlight was the passage of the eminent domain bill. It wasn't everything the defenders of private property rights could have wanted, but it is an improvement over what was law before, and we found that there are some legislators, like Dave Wolkins, who do respect private property.
My lowlight was the overactivity of the session. The old quote is that no one's life or liberty is safe when the legislature is in session. The short session is supposed to be for the consideration of emergency legislation. The only item that qualified was the eminent domain bill, in light of the state's "negoatiations" with the NK Hurst Company. Most everything else was just puffery designed to make the legislators look significant. Well, that doesn't explain Major Moves, does it?
My top priority for 2007 is across-the-board budget cuts of at least 1%. The full session is the budgetary session, so Libertarians need to put pressure on the GOP to make this their priority so long as they have the majority... which they might not have by time the session begins.
If your top issues aren't in the poll, clue me in with comments!
People Vote With Their Feet
Today's Indy Star published an interesting article by Bill Ruthhart this morning. It should serve as a lesson for Marion County's elected officials, and a cautionary tale for Hamilton County's. From Ruthhart's article:
What the article did not do is site anyone willing to make a political statement as to why the shift. As a former Marion County resident who chose to become a Hamilton County resident, I can shed some light: people vote with their feet.
The policies that carry the day in Marion County today drive wealth away. When living in Marion County, I could see that my tax burdens were only going to go up, and that my reward for staying would be a fight against urban decay. Consider:
Here's the biggest difference I found in attitude. I sent my son to IPS for exactly one half year. His teacher was excellent. When he goofed off, she called me on her cell phone to let me know. That was effort beyond the call of duty on her part, and I appreciated it.
I sat in her classroom one day and, being a product of private schooling that included a regiment of corporal punishment, I was appalled at the amount of time wasted just trying to get kids to sit down and settle down sufficient to hear the instruction. At a break I asked the teacher why it is as it is, understanding that the yardstick and paddle aren't available any more.
She told me that it didn't matter if she held the yardstick or if the parents did, as long as one of them held it. Didn't even have to use it, just hold it. She reported that a majority of parents would actually argue with her about the child's behavior, telling her it didn't happen the way she was reporting, and besides, it's her job to educate. It's the parent's job to get the kid to the bus stop.
Simply put, here in Hamilton County, a majority of parents expect their kids to produce in school and to succeed. That attitude makes all the difference.
At the core of it, the difference between Marion County and Hamilton County is the present population's relationship to the concept of self-responsibility.
That's why I am concerned for the future of Hamilton County. Just as so many people who reject self-responsibility embrace Marion County for that place's tolerance of it, Hamilton County is moving towards policies that will make it more hospitable to those who reject self-responsibility. The prime example of this is the embrace of public transportation. It is plain that the riders of mass transit do not foot the bill alone, but that others who never use it bear the lion's share of the cost.
Add to mass transit the approval of low-income housing apartments in Noblesville, the proliferation of Habitat for Humanity housing, also mainly in Noblesville, higher taxes and bigger government, and you have the makings for the reinvention of Marion County north of 96th Street.
Especially when you have children, you consider things like these. If you have the means, you go where you think it best for your children. There was simply no way I was going to be willing to stay in Indianapolis with a newborn in our future, so we moved.
People have been running away from the dominant policies of the dominant population centers for centuries. I come from immigrant stock on four sides- Irish, Polish, Hungarian, and Slovenian. Three of my four forebearers fled starvation. Two additionally fled political persecution. Today's immigrants continue to flee poverty, seeking opportunity. While the flight of wealth is a new American phenomenon, the impetous is the same- people just yearn to be free.
At some point, we need to reverse the dominant public policies in our core cities and return them to self-responsibility so that Americans will not continue this trend of leaving rotted cores for cities and consuming ever more land in developing new cities. You want to stop sprawl? Make the cities more attractive. Want to make the cities more attractive? Make people of means feel safe in cities- financially, in their person, esthetically, and especially, intellectually.
Today's Indy Star published an interesting article by Bill Ruthhart this morning. It should serve as a lesson for Marion County's elected officials, and a cautionary tale for Hamilton County's. From Ruthhart's article:
Some of the suburban county's growth is at the expense of Marion County, where the population drain is evident in the census estimates.
From 2000 to 2005, Hamilton County's population increased 32 percent, making it the 18th fastest-growing in the nation. Hendricks was the only other Indiana county to crack the Top 100, ranking as the 75th fastest-growing county with a 22 percent increase.
"An awful lot of this is coming from what we call suburban flight," said Vince Thompson, an economic research analyst with the Indiana Business Research Center in Bloomington.
While the newcomers moving into Central Indiana's suburban areas surged over the past five years, Marion County has seen people continue to move out. From 2000 to 2005, the number of U.S. residents moving out of Marion County outnumbered those moving in by more than 47,000.
What the article did not do is site anyone willing to make a political statement as to why the shift. As a former Marion County resident who chose to become a Hamilton County resident, I can shed some light: people vote with their feet.
The policies that carry the day in Marion County today drive wealth away. When living in Marion County, I could see that my tax burdens were only going to go up, and that my reward for staying would be a fight against urban decay. Consider:
- IndyGo is more than 80% funded by tax dollars.
- IPS continues to reach for ever more tax dollars without improving test scores or even security.
- The streets and sidewalks (where you can find sidewalks) were crumbling.
- The sewers lack the capacity to handle rainfalls of greater than a half-inch.
- Etc. I mean, you could go on endlessly.
Here's the biggest difference I found in attitude. I sent my son to IPS for exactly one half year. His teacher was excellent. When he goofed off, she called me on her cell phone to let me know. That was effort beyond the call of duty on her part, and I appreciated it.
I sat in her classroom one day and, being a product of private schooling that included a regiment of corporal punishment, I was appalled at the amount of time wasted just trying to get kids to sit down and settle down sufficient to hear the instruction. At a break I asked the teacher why it is as it is, understanding that the yardstick and paddle aren't available any more.
She told me that it didn't matter if she held the yardstick or if the parents did, as long as one of them held it. Didn't even have to use it, just hold it. She reported that a majority of parents would actually argue with her about the child's behavior, telling her it didn't happen the way she was reporting, and besides, it's her job to educate. It's the parent's job to get the kid to the bus stop.
Simply put, here in Hamilton County, a majority of parents expect their kids to produce in school and to succeed. That attitude makes all the difference.
At the core of it, the difference between Marion County and Hamilton County is the present population's relationship to the concept of self-responsibility.
That's why I am concerned for the future of Hamilton County. Just as so many people who reject self-responsibility embrace Marion County for that place's tolerance of it, Hamilton County is moving towards policies that will make it more hospitable to those who reject self-responsibility. The prime example of this is the embrace of public transportation. It is plain that the riders of mass transit do not foot the bill alone, but that others who never use it bear the lion's share of the cost.
Add to mass transit the approval of low-income housing apartments in Noblesville, the proliferation of Habitat for Humanity housing, also mainly in Noblesville, higher taxes and bigger government, and you have the makings for the reinvention of Marion County north of 96th Street.
Especially when you have children, you consider things like these. If you have the means, you go where you think it best for your children. There was simply no way I was going to be willing to stay in Indianapolis with a newborn in our future, so we moved.
People have been running away from the dominant policies of the dominant population centers for centuries. I come from immigrant stock on four sides- Irish, Polish, Hungarian, and Slovenian. Three of my four forebearers fled starvation. Two additionally fled political persecution. Today's immigrants continue to flee poverty, seeking opportunity. While the flight of wealth is a new American phenomenon, the impetous is the same- people just yearn to be free.
At some point, we need to reverse the dominant public policies in our core cities and return them to self-responsibility so that Americans will not continue this trend of leaving rotted cores for cities and consuming ever more land in developing new cities. You want to stop sprawl? Make the cities more attractive. Want to make the cities more attractive? Make people of means feel safe in cities- financially, in their person, esthetically, and especially, intellectually.
Hillary in '08?
Here's a nice cartoon laff for you: link. It looks like one of those Jib-Jab cartoons you will recall from the '04 presidential campaigns.
It would have been a tad funnier to me personally if Dennis Kucinich was on the chorus line. That's just me, though. (Kucinich was my US Rep. when I lived in Cleveland.)
Here's a nice cartoon laff for you: link. It looks like one of those Jib-Jab cartoons you will recall from the '04 presidential campaigns.
It would have been a tad funnier to me personally if Dennis Kucinich was on the chorus line. That's just me, though. (Kucinich was my US Rep. when I lived in Cleveland.)
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Fort Wayne TV Appearance Tomorrow
I will be the guest of the Fort Wayne Libertarians tomorrow at 7pm on their live broadcast on cable TV channel 57. Doug Horner is the host, and we'll take calls.
I plan to discuss the highlights and low points of the recently concluded legislative session and issues Libertarians would like to see taken up in next year's session, such as the gerrymandering of electoral districts, and a 1% across-the-board budget cut.
It would be great to get a DVD of this show and the other two I have appeared on, to get clips available for viewing here or on the campaign website.
I will be the guest of the Fort Wayne Libertarians tomorrow at 7pm on their live broadcast on cable TV channel 57. Doug Horner is the host, and we'll take calls.
I plan to discuss the highlights and low points of the recently concluded legislative session and issues Libertarians would like to see taken up in next year's session, such as the gerrymandering of electoral districts, and a 1% across-the-board budget cut.
It would be great to get a DVD of this show and the other two I have appeared on, to get clips available for viewing here or on the campaign website.
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Tentative Good News Announcement
Just as the blind squirrel finds a nut, the General Assembly is poised to pass minor property tax relief. From an Indy Star report:
Let's not get crazy with full celebration mode yet. The final vote hasn't happened yet, and if new municipal taxes are attached to it, this is just a shift in how you pay. After all, if there are $227 million in tax cuts without commensurate cuts in spending, one of two things must happen- new tax burdens created elsewhere, or deficit spending.
Now- let's see the final tally on Major Moves!
Just as the blind squirrel finds a nut, the General Assembly is poised to pass minor property tax relief. From an Indy Star report:
Legislative negotiators sealed a deal this afternoon on a property tax relief plan that will give homeowners $227 million worth of tax breaks this year and next.
The final version of House Bill 1001, which will be voted on today, provides $100 million in property tax credit for homeowners in 2006. On average, homeowners will pay 4 percent less this year than they would have without this break.
In 2007, the property tax break would become a deduction, which will mean the standard deduction off Hoosiers' assessed valuation will increase from $35,000 per home to $45,000 per home.
Let's not get crazy with full celebration mode yet. The final vote hasn't happened yet, and if new municipal taxes are attached to it, this is just a shift in how you pay. After all, if there are $227 million in tax cuts without commensurate cuts in spending, one of two things must happen- new tax burdens created elsewhere, or deficit spending.
Now- let's see the final tally on Major Moves!
How Should Elected Officials Vote?
Abdul led an interesting conversation on WXNT this morning asking this question. Should elected officials be beholden to the will of the people issue by issue? Or, should they take stock that they were elected to sometimes make tough decisions?
I believe in the latter. They elected you, so it was up to the voters to know what you were about. If it turns out the voters don't like the specifics of what you're about, they can unelect you next time.
The reason Abdul was having this discussion is that the vote on Major Moves happens today. In particular, the northern counties are very opposed to Major Moves, which presumably makes any Republican that votes in favor vulnerable in the next election.
Sticking to your guns is a function of having the strength and courage of your convictions. If Republicans are wavering, it tells me that they aren't completely sold on Major Moves, or that they have failed to do a good job of communicating what Major Moves is about to their voters.
I'll go back to Ronald Reagan, as I have many times in comparing Mitch Daniels. Reagan was brilliant at taking an idea to the people, communicating the benefits of a plan very clearly, often in advance of giving the plan to the legislature. The public was often on board from the beginning, making the decisions for the majority party less difficult. In fact, this is why the phenomenon of Reagan Democrats existed- because Reagan sold plans to the public so well, it became a difficult decision for the other party.
If Mitch Daniels were any kind of communicator, Major Moves might not be a controversial measure at all. If the Republican leadership, such as Kenley, Espich, etc., were any kind of communicators, it might be an easy vote today.
There are still many questions that seem unanswered to the majority of voters, which is why this has become such a controversial issue.
Abdul led an interesting conversation on WXNT this morning asking this question. Should elected officials be beholden to the will of the people issue by issue? Or, should they take stock that they were elected to sometimes make tough decisions?
I believe in the latter. They elected you, so it was up to the voters to know what you were about. If it turns out the voters don't like the specifics of what you're about, they can unelect you next time.
The reason Abdul was having this discussion is that the vote on Major Moves happens today. In particular, the northern counties are very opposed to Major Moves, which presumably makes any Republican that votes in favor vulnerable in the next election.
Sticking to your guns is a function of having the strength and courage of your convictions. If Republicans are wavering, it tells me that they aren't completely sold on Major Moves, or that they have failed to do a good job of communicating what Major Moves is about to their voters.
I'll go back to Ronald Reagan, as I have many times in comparing Mitch Daniels. Reagan was brilliant at taking an idea to the people, communicating the benefits of a plan very clearly, often in advance of giving the plan to the legislature. The public was often on board from the beginning, making the decisions for the majority party less difficult. In fact, this is why the phenomenon of Reagan Democrats existed- because Reagan sold plans to the public so well, it became a difficult decision for the other party.
If Mitch Daniels were any kind of communicator, Major Moves might not be a controversial measure at all. If the Republican leadership, such as Kenley, Espich, etc., were any kind of communicators, it might be an easy vote today.
There are still many questions that seem unanswered to the majority of voters, which is why this has become such a controversial issue.
Sunday, March 12, 2006
Can't Afford It?
Let me see if I got this straight. Earlier this week, the Colts got $120+ million in naming rights for the unbuilt stadium. Today, Edgerrin James signs with the Cardinals- because the Colts can't afford it? From ESPN's report:
Mind boggling. It gets harder and harder to be a Colts fan. From the Indy Star report:
Agreed. Which makes it maddening to not have him back. Oh well, light another cigar with a $100 bill, Mr. Irsay.
Let me see if I got this straight. Earlier this week, the Colts got $120+ million in naming rights for the unbuilt stadium. Today, Edgerrin James signs with the Cardinals- because the Colts can't afford it? From ESPN's report:
The 27-year-old James played the 2005 season with the Colts under the one-year qualifying offer for a franchise tailback. Indianapolis officials had made it clear they could not afford to bring James back for another season, and the Colts likely will look to the draft for a replacement.Did Mr. Irsay just blow all the money on the biggest whopping party since Sodom & Gommorah? How on earth could the Colts not afford to bring James back?
Mind boggling. It gets harder and harder to be a Colts fan. From the Indy Star report:
"If you look at our record, when Edgerrin's played, it's spectacular,'' Dungy about the veteran running back, who joined with Manning and receiver Marvin Harrison to form the Colts' highly acclaimed "Triplets."
With James in the lineup, the Colts posted a 70-26 regular-season record. Without him, they're 7-9.
"That says something about his value,'' Dungy said.
Agreed. Which makes it maddening to not have him back. Oh well, light another cigar with a $100 bill, Mr. Irsay.
Stretch Run
This year's short legislative session is coming to a close, and the pressure is on to deal with the Major Moves proposal.
I wish I could be for it, because I am in favor of this kind of privatization, whereby the state retains its' assets, and the private company manages the operation. However,
75 years is too long. 10 years is ideal.
No new terrain I-69. People along the majority of the route don't want it.
The money must be kept in the upper third of the state. No redistribution of wealth.
The Libertarian Party of Indiana has more details on it's legislative page. The LPIN calls for action! Contact your legislator and make your position known!
Link to Indiana's "Who's My Legislator" page.
This year's short legislative session is coming to a close, and the pressure is on to deal with the Major Moves proposal.
I wish I could be for it, because I am in favor of this kind of privatization, whereby the state retains its' assets, and the private company manages the operation. However,
75 years is too long. 10 years is ideal.
No new terrain I-69. People along the majority of the route don't want it.
The money must be kept in the upper third of the state. No redistribution of wealth.
The Libertarian Party of Indiana has more details on it's legislative page. The LPIN calls for action! Contact your legislator and make your position known!
Link to Indiana's "Who's My Legislator" page.
Saturday, March 11, 2006
Campaign Finance Reform, Eh?
Fascinating to look at today's Washington Post and see an article predicting the financing that will be required of a presidential candidate in 2008. From the Post article:
And who's picture is there to accompany the article? Why, it's John McCain, co-author of McCain-Feingold, one of the badly misnamed campaign finance 'reform' laws. The reason?
McCain plays the populist, but is no such thing. Drafting the laws regarding campaign finance and then running for President is very clever. It certainly gives you an inside track.
Thanks for 'taking the money out of elections', John!
Fascinating to look at today's Washington Post and see an article predicting the financing that will be required of a presidential candidate in 2008. From the Post article:
Michael E. Toner, the chairman of the Federal Election Commission, has some friendly advice for presidential candidates who plan to be taken seriously by the time nominating contests start in early 2008: Bring your wallet.
"There is a growing sense that there is going to be a $100 million entry fee at the end of 2007 to be considered a serious candidate," Toner said in a recent interview.
And who's picture is there to accompany the article? Why, it's John McCain, co-author of McCain-Feingold, one of the badly misnamed campaign finance 'reform' laws. The reason?
One of the least known but most important dimensions of the early competition to raise cash is securing the support of men and women who have proven effective in the past at raising large sums -- usually from a well-tended network of business associates, corporate subordinates and clients.
The 2004 Bush campaign designated these people as "Pioneers" (raised $100,000), "Rangers" ($200,000) and "Super Rangers" ($300,000).
Texas lawyer Thomas G. Loeffler, a Bush Ranger in 2004, has already signed on to help Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in 2008; Northern Virginia real estate developer Dwight C. Schar, a Ranger in 2004, was on the host committee for a Super Bowl fundraiser to benefit Sen. George Allen (R-Va.). A senior GOP strategist said these Bush backers undoubtedly are "being swarmed over" by the president's would-be successors.
McCain plays the populist, but is no such thing. Drafting the laws regarding campaign finance and then running for President is very clever. It certainly gives you an inside track.
Thanks for 'taking the money out of elections', John!
Friday, March 10, 2006
Annie Update
It happened that work took me to Greenfield, so I stopped for a minute to visit Ann Tomie, owner of Annie's Restaurant. I knew that the smoking bans affecting her business had been in effect for nine days, and I wanted to see how business was in this new climate.
The smoking bans are killing her business. This was forseeable by Ann. She knows her customers better than anyone. This is why Ann spoke up at Greenfield City Council meetings in opposition to the bans. She knew it would hurt her.
I stood with Ann Tomey outside her restaurant in October. I stand with her today.
What I didn't know was that Ann had appeared again before the City Council, yesterday, to report to them just how badly it was hurting her. From the Greenfield Reporter article:
I can tell you this, from looking in Ann's face this morning- she doesn't feel good at all.
When I left the restaurant at 11:30 this morning, two diners occupied one table.
The Libertarian Party is the defender of small business owners like Ann Tomey. The Republicans and Democrats work together to crush small business, through their indifference and their unwillingness to consider secondary outcomes. Annie is the proof.
It's a tremendous shame that the people who believe in property rights have not been willing to appear in numbers at Town Council meetings. Without the numbers of citizens to confront government officials, and to run for office against them, they can safely surmise that there really isn't an opinion against them, and they need not change their ways.
People often ask me, "Mike, what can I do?" It's simple.
Be seen. Be heard. Sign your name to letters. Put signs in your front yard. Be enormously visible.
Take stock in John Hancock, signer of the Declaration of Independence. He knew that signing was an act of treason against the British, so he signed with a flourish.
The issues that confront us today and assault our freedoms are significant, but the risk we bear today is miniscule compared to what Hancock signed on for.
It happened that work took me to Greenfield, so I stopped for a minute to visit Ann Tomie, owner of Annie's Restaurant. I knew that the smoking bans affecting her business had been in effect for nine days, and I wanted to see how business was in this new climate.
The smoking bans are killing her business. This was forseeable by Ann. She knows her customers better than anyone. This is why Ann spoke up at Greenfield City Council meetings in opposition to the bans. She knew it would hurt her.
I stood with Ann Tomey outside her restaurant in October. I stand with her today.
What I didn't know was that Ann had appeared again before the City Council, yesterday, to report to them just how badly it was hurting her. From the Greenfield Reporter article:
Tomey approached the council saying she knows it is tired of seeing her and she is tired of coming to meetings, but she wanted the council to know one thing: The new ban on smoking in public is destroying her business.The Greenfield City Council is comprised of six Republicans and one Democrat. These officials did not consult Ann or any other restaurant owner prior to introducing the legislation. They remain unconcerned that her business is suffering. They have never been interested in defending her property rights. They have only been interested in passing feel-good legislation.
“This might be the last thing I ask you to do, but talk to the workers,” Tomey said.
She then read a letter from a waitress at her downtown restaurant. The letter said the waitress cannot survive on the income she makes without tips due the lack of business she blamed on the new ordinance. Tomey said many people have been affected by the smoking ban and she had asked them to come to the meeting, but they didn’t show up.
The council listened, but members didn’t budge when they were again asked to change the law.
There was no sign of the tears that would later cause Tomey to leave the meeting when she told the council that this year she has made only $28,000 from her business, or about $500 to $600 of business daily. Since the smoking ordinance took effect March 1, she has had days where she only makes $125 from her business before expenses.
I can tell you this, from looking in Ann's face this morning- she doesn't feel good at all.
When I left the restaurant at 11:30 this morning, two diners occupied one table.
The Libertarian Party is the defender of small business owners like Ann Tomey. The Republicans and Democrats work together to crush small business, through their indifference and their unwillingness to consider secondary outcomes. Annie is the proof.
It's a tremendous shame that the people who believe in property rights have not been willing to appear in numbers at Town Council meetings. Without the numbers of citizens to confront government officials, and to run for office against them, they can safely surmise that there really isn't an opinion against them, and they need not change their ways.
People often ask me, "Mike, what can I do?" It's simple.
Be seen. Be heard. Sign your name to letters. Put signs in your front yard. Be enormously visible.
Take stock in John Hancock, signer of the Declaration of Independence. He knew that signing was an act of treason against the British, so he signed with a flourish.
The issues that confront us today and assault our freedoms are significant, but the risk we bear today is miniscule compared to what Hancock signed on for.
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Trust Me!
The Indy Star has an interesting report this evening, with the CEO of the Spanish-Australian company making the pitch for the toll road deal. From the Star article:
The Indy Star has an interesting report this evening, with the CEO of the Spanish-Australian company making the pitch for the toll road deal. From the Star article:
At a Statehouse news conference, Stephen Allen, chief executive officer for Macquarie Infrastructure Group of Sydney, sought to ease resistance among some lawmakers and the public to overseas ownership. Macquarie, along with Cintra, a Madrid-based firm, has offered the state an immediate payment of $3.85 billion for the right to take control of Toll Road operations, maintenance and revenues for 75 years.That's true, but he's also talking about minimizing potential, squandering opportunity.
"What I'm actually doing is proposing to invest in Indiana," Allen said. "I'm actually talking about creating jobs here."
Thanks to Greg Kelver and the LaPorte Libertarians for the sign that says it all.
When the CEO of the company feels compelled to try to sell the deal through the media, my nonsense detector starts beeping. When any salesman works too hard to tell you what a great deal he's bringing to you, it's time to run for the door. When the Governor tells you you're for this deal or against the future, you know there is a lack of confidence in the strength of the deal.
Take this together with the fact that the Daniels Administration gave the store away to the Colts on the naming rights deal, and there is every reason to believe this is a Major Mishap waiting to occur.
- 75 years is too long. Get the $3.75 billion for 10 years, and then you're talking a good deal.
- Cut new terrain I-69 from the deal. The people of Perry Township, Morgan County, Monroe County, and on down south don't want new terrain I-69.
- Keep the money in the area that generates it- the northern counties. Otherwise, you're just talking socialism, robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Let's see if House Bill 1008 isn't rightly seen as an anchor around the necks of our legislators who face the voters this November. Libertarians are keeping score.
Legislative Review on WXNT
The "Abdul In The Morning" show continues its series of periodic roundtables, with representatives of each of Indiana's three balloted political parties on to discuss and debate.
Libertarian Party of Indiana Executive Director Dan Drexler will join Mike Edmonson of the Democrats and a top official from the Republicans to discuss this year's nearly completed legislative session.
I love the Libertarian role in these roundtables. While the Ds and Rs claim everything their legislators introduced was great and everything the other side introduced was bunk, Libertarians end up as the voice of reason by agreeing with both parties on some items, and disagreeing on some others, rather than being merely contrarian.
You may recall that I represented the Libertarian Party after the President's State of the Union Address, a few weeks back.
Listen to Newstalk 1430-am Friday morning. If you are outside of reception range, you can stream the signal. Go to www.wxnt.com.
The "Abdul In The Morning" show continues its series of periodic roundtables, with representatives of each of Indiana's three balloted political parties on to discuss and debate.
Libertarian Party of Indiana Executive Director Dan Drexler will join Mike Edmonson of the Democrats and a top official from the Republicans to discuss this year's nearly completed legislative session.
I love the Libertarian role in these roundtables. While the Ds and Rs claim everything their legislators introduced was great and everything the other side introduced was bunk, Libertarians end up as the voice of reason by agreeing with both parties on some items, and disagreeing on some others, rather than being merely contrarian.
You may recall that I represented the Libertarian Party after the President's State of the Union Address, a few weeks back.
Listen to Newstalk 1430-am Friday morning. If you are outside of reception range, you can stream the signal. Go to www.wxnt.com.
Indianapolis Libertarian Meet-Up Info
This Meet-up group has been very successful to date, with about 20 or so participants each time I've visited. Very spirited conversations!
The next Indianapolis Libertarian Meet-up takes place next Wednesday, March 22nd, at 8pm, at the Border's Bookstore at Keystone at the Crossing. Here's a link to the Meet-up group.
This Meet-up group has been very successful to date, with about 20 or so participants each time I've visited. Very spirited conversations!
The next Indianapolis Libertarian Meet-up takes place next Wednesday, March 22nd, at 8pm, at the Border's Bookstore at Keystone at the Crossing. Here's a link to the Meet-up group.
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
The Polls So Far
The latest polls at the right are surprising to me. Mainly, most visitors here wouldn't change their 2004 gubernatorial vote. Then again, the majority who voted in the polls are Libertarians, so I'm not surprised about them.
The number of poll-takers is way below the number of daily visitors, so I'm adding a third poll. It caters to out-of-state visitors on their 2004 gubernatorial and/or presidential votes. In light of Tom Delay's easy primary victory in Texas, perhaps I should expect little difference.
The latest polls at the right are surprising to me. Mainly, most visitors here wouldn't change their 2004 gubernatorial vote. Then again, the majority who voted in the polls are Libertarians, so I'm not surprised about them.
The number of poll-takers is way below the number of daily visitors, so I'm adding a third poll. It caters to out-of-state visitors on their 2004 gubernatorial and/or presidential votes. In light of Tom Delay's easy primary victory in Texas, perhaps I should expect little difference.
Data Mining
As many Libertarian leaders check this site, I'd like to direct them to an excellent Washington Post article that highlights the interest of a Democratic Party faction in developing better data mining techniques.
Why are they interested? For the same reasons we should be. From the Post article:
(Emphasis is mine.)
This is an area where Libertarians could capitalize. The GOP is targeting eminent domain angered voters? Republican officials instigate as many eminent domain grabs as do Democrats. Mitch Daniels and NK Hurst, anyone? Republicans curtail 2nd Amendment rights as fast as Democrats. Etc.
I am pleased that the Libertarian Party of Indiana is taking this seriously, as shown in our recent County Chairs Convention. A 2% or 4% bump could make a huge difference for us county to county in the SoS race, where ballot ranking and other status issues are resolved.
I hope other LP state affiliates also get deeply involved with database development- especially those states that struggle to earn and keep ballot access
As many Libertarian leaders check this site, I'd like to direct them to an excellent Washington Post article that highlights the interest of a Democratic Party faction in developing better data mining techniques.
Why are they interested? For the same reasons we should be. From the Post article:
The pressure on Democrats to begin more aggressive "data mining" in the hunt for votes began after the 2002 midterm elections and intensified after the 2004 presidential contest, when the GOP harnessed data technology to powerful effect.
In 2002, for the first time in recent memory, Republicans ran better get-out-the-vote programs than Democrats. When well done, such drives typically raise a candidate's Election Day performance by two to four percentage points. Democrats have become increasingly fearful that the GOP is capitalizing on high-speed computers and the growing volume of data available from government files and consumer marketing firms -- as well as the party's own surveys -- to better target potential supporters.
The Republican database has allowed the party and its candidates to
tailor messages to individual voters and households, using information
about the kind of magazines they receive, whether they own guns, the churches they attend, their incomes, their charitable contributions and their voting histories.
This makes it possible to specifically address the issues of voters who, in the case of many GOP supporters, may oppose abortion, support gun rights or be angry about government use of eminent domain to take private property. A personalized pitch can be made during door-knocking, through direct mail and e-mail, and via phone banks.
(Emphasis is mine.)
This is an area where Libertarians could capitalize. The GOP is targeting eminent domain angered voters? Republican officials instigate as many eminent domain grabs as do Democrats. Mitch Daniels and NK Hurst, anyone? Republicans curtail 2nd Amendment rights as fast as Democrats. Etc.
I am pleased that the Libertarian Party of Indiana is taking this seriously, as shown in our recent County Chairs Convention. A 2% or 4% bump could make a huge difference for us county to county in the SoS race, where ballot ranking and other status issues are resolved.
I hope other LP state affiliates also get deeply involved with database development- especially those states that struggle to earn and keep ballot access
Monday, March 06, 2006
Frost Illustrated Carries Column
Periodically, I contribute a column to the Libertarian Writers' Bureau. My most recent item was picked up by Fort Wayne's Frost Illustrated.
The column ties the gerrymandering of districts and the relative responsive of elected officials together, citing several examples, including Major Moves:
and
Frost Illustrated serves Fort Wayne's black community as its target audience. Recently, it has been consistently including Libertarian commentary on its pages and website. I am grateful for this. Check out Frost Illustrated.
Thanks to Mike Sylvester for the tip!
Technorati tags: Libertarian, Major Moves, Major Moves, Jerry Torr, Fort Wayne, Mike Sylvester
Periodically, I contribute a column to the Libertarian Writers' Bureau. My most recent item was picked up by Fort Wayne's Frost Illustrated.
The column ties the gerrymandering of districts and the relative responsive of elected officials together, citing several examples, including Major Moves:
The I-80 toll road is likely to be leased to foreign investors, with the strong possibility of increased tolls. Those who live in the region and use the toll road weren't consulted— not even as an afterthought. After all, leasing the toll road is an attempt to solve problems away from the road itself.
and
So, it was very refreshing to see State Rep. Jerry Torr (R-Carmel) pick up the Libertarian Party's top issue in the 2002 Secretary of State race, and introduce HB 1099, which would eliminate the gerrymandering of districts to suit the parties, and would instead draw districts that are balanced in population, yet geographically sensible.
Torr's introduction of the bill is courageous in light of the major parties' interest in preserving the status quo. The bill's passage might lead to a more responsive, more representative government that asks citizens what is important, and then actually carries out their wishes.
Frost Illustrated serves Fort Wayne's black community as its target audience. Recently, it has been consistently including Libertarian commentary on its pages and website. I am grateful for this. Check out Frost Illustrated.
Thanks to Mike Sylvester for the tip!
Technorati tags: Libertarian, Major Moves, Major Moves, Jerry Torr, Fort Wayne, Mike Sylvester
New Polls
I have heard much discussion about Mitch Daniels and his approval ratings. Many of the grumblings actually come from my Republican friends, who are feeling they aren't getting what they bargained for in Daniels.
In particular, I have cause to encounter many elected Republican township officials. They are angry that he would eliminate their livelihood and effectively destroy the GOP grassroots. Actually, I'm kind of amused by their grassroots being mowed down by one of their own. Fire up the Lawn Boy, Mitch!
Mr. Daniels is fond of reminding folks that he doesn't much care what people think of his work, that he does what he thinks is right. I find that admirable, but of course I don't agree with him on everything with regards to right and wrong. See socialized football stadiums and 75-year toll road leases for my prime examples.
Many of my Republican friends tell me that they wish they had voted for Daniels' primary challenger Eric Miller, or Libertarian Kenn Gividen. I've even had a few tell me they would sooner vote for Kernan if they had it to do all over again.
So, let's have it to do all over again here. It obviously doesn't count, but it's a fun exercise.
I voted Gividen in '04, and would happily do so again. What about you?
Technorati Tags: Mitch Daniels, Kenn Gividen, Eric Miller
I have heard much discussion about Mitch Daniels and his approval ratings. Many of the grumblings actually come from my Republican friends, who are feeling they aren't getting what they bargained for in Daniels.
In particular, I have cause to encounter many elected Republican township officials. They are angry that he would eliminate their livelihood and effectively destroy the GOP grassroots. Actually, I'm kind of amused by their grassroots being mowed down by one of their own. Fire up the Lawn Boy, Mitch!
Mr. Daniels is fond of reminding folks that he doesn't much care what people think of his work, that he does what he thinks is right. I find that admirable, but of course I don't agree with him on everything with regards to right and wrong. See socialized football stadiums and 75-year toll road leases for my prime examples.
Many of my Republican friends tell me that they wish they had voted for Daniels' primary challenger Eric Miller, or Libertarian Kenn Gividen. I've even had a few tell me they would sooner vote for Kernan if they had it to do all over again.
So, let's have it to do all over again here. It obviously doesn't count, but it's a fun exercise.
I voted Gividen in '04, and would happily do so again. What about you?
Technorati Tags: Mitch Daniels, Kenn Gividen, Eric Miller
Poll Results In
The last poll question posted on Kole Hard Facts asked, What is the best single issue for a Libertarian to run on? Here are the results:
38% None- Libertarian philosophy as a whole
19% Making government less intrusive
14% Lower taxes
14% Libertarians aren't Democrats or Republicans
10% Implementing the Fair Tax
5% Ending eminent domain abuse
0% Opposing forced annexation
0% Daylight Savings Time (for or against)
The correct answer is- none of the above. It depends on the office being sought, and what matters to the people within the jurisdiction as related to the office being sought.
Even though a majority of respondents cited Libertarian philosophy as a whole, that doesn't work so well, because while libertarians eat it up, the public isn't able to get their arms around the whole of it, and besides, they may embrace 2/3rds of it while rejecting 1/3rd. In sum, if you're running for Dog Catcher, you really have little to gain in talking about the Federal Reserve System.
Clearly, forced annexation is a regional issue. It may not affect the reader in Kokomo, or Florida. Ditto, DST... although both may be contained in "Making government less intrusive".
As I've said, these polls are less than scientific, but fun!
The last poll question posted on Kole Hard Facts asked, What is the best single issue for a Libertarian to run on? Here are the results:
38% None- Libertarian philosophy as a whole
19% Making government less intrusive
14% Lower taxes
14% Libertarians aren't Democrats or Republicans
10% Implementing the Fair Tax
5% Ending eminent domain abuse
0% Opposing forced annexation
0% Daylight Savings Time (for or against)
The correct answer is- none of the above. It depends on the office being sought, and what matters to the people within the jurisdiction as related to the office being sought.
Even though a majority of respondents cited Libertarian philosophy as a whole, that doesn't work so well, because while libertarians eat it up, the public isn't able to get their arms around the whole of it, and besides, they may embrace 2/3rds of it while rejecting 1/3rd. In sum, if you're running for Dog Catcher, you really have little to gain in talking about the Federal Reserve System.
Clearly, forced annexation is a regional issue. It may not affect the reader in Kokomo, or Florida. Ditto, DST... although both may be contained in "Making government less intrusive".
As I've said, these polls are less than scientific, but fun!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)