Obama Indistinguishable From Bush, Yet Again

Civil libertarians are getting a real good look at what Obama meant by 'change'. It means, 'status quo'. Cue up that line from that Who song, and read this item from the Electronic Frontier Foundation:

Friday evening, in a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA, EFF's litigation against the National Security Agency for the warrantless wiretapping of countless Americans, the Obama Administration's made two deeply troubling arguments.

First, they argued, exactly as the Bush Administration did on countless occasions, that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue out of hand. They argue that simply allowing the case to continue "would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security." As in the past, this is a blatant ploy to dismiss the litigation without allowing the courts to consider the evidence.

It's an especially disappointing argument to hear from the Obama Administration. As a candidate, Senator Obama lamented that the Bush Administration "invoked a legal tool known as the 'state secrets' privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court." He was right then, and we're dismayed that he and his team seem to have forgotten.

Sad as that is, it's the Department Of Justice's second argument that is the most pernicious. The DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying — that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes.

This is a radical assertion that is utterly unprecedented. No one — not the White House, not the Justice Department, not any member of Congress, and not the Bush Administration — has ever interpreted the law this way.

Ok, so I was wrong. Obama is worse than Bush. Yikes.

I guess power is so tempting, so delicious, that when the people around you build you up endlessly, you start to believe that even though that same power was dangerous in the other guy's hands, because you and you alone are righteous, the old arguments don't apply.

That's hypocrisy, of course. Pure civil libertarians like EFF are noting it. The partisan left seems defensive, not wanting to face up to the disappointment of the Administration not yet 100 days old. When you bought the lines "hope" and especially "change", you might have thought it could wane in time, as memory fades. But in less than 100 days? We're in for a long, rough ride.

Free Speech Under Attack

The wolf comes wearing sheep's clothing. American newspapers are faltering for their refusal to evolve (covered in this previous post), and here comes a US Senator, offering to 'help'. From Reuters report:

With many U.S. newspapers struggling to survive, a Democratic senator on Tuesday introduced a bill to help them by allowing newspaper companies to restructure as nonprofits with a variety of tax breaks.

"This may not be the optimal choice for some major newspapers or corporate media chains but it should be an option for many newspapers that are struggling to stay afloat," said Senator Benjamin Cardin.

A Cardin spokesman said the bill had yet to attract any co-sponsors, but had sparked plenty of interest within the media, which has seen plunging revenues and many journalist layoffs.

Cardin's Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies.

Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements. (Emphasis supplied.)

From time to time, I feel the need to remind readers that I am a former Democrat. This becomes necessary because I so frequently write about things economic, and because I defend the free market as generally the best solution to issues surrounding exchange, I get pegged as a Republican of some sort.

No, I was a Democrat. My biggest issue was the 1st Amendment. So, the first big doubts I ever had with the Democratic Party came in the late 1980s, when Al Gore's wife, Tipper Gore, began railing against music with salty lyrics. It hit me like a total betrayal. I was always told by my fellow Dems that it was the Republicans who had fascistic tendencies. So, how to explain Tipper Gore?

So, this just looks like part of a continuum to me. Just as Republicans love to enjoy the reputation of being free marketeers and friends of smaller government, but aren't, Democrats love to enjoy the undeserved reputation of being steadfast defenders of free speech.

In either case, D or R, the commitment is to government control. This bill is an attempt to worm control into the newspapers, as government worms into anything- slowly, and in the guise of 'help'.

I'm glad there are no co-sponsors to date.

Note to my Democratic friends: Your party is becoming just as drunk with power as the Republicans were after the 2002 elections. Be on guard! You need to smack your party down, lest they go the way the Republicans went, crossing their base over and over again, especially on the things the base is correct about, to the extent that you eventually lose the entire middle.

Here's the text of the First Amendment, for those who need the refresher, including Senator Cardin:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (Emphasis supplied.)

Pretty simple.

The More Things Change...

So, Obama has ordered more troops into Afghanistan. I get the feeling the nation could have had that by voting for McCain. From Time Magazine's article, "Obama Afghanistan Plan Breaks Old Ground":

Did George Bush leave one of his old speeches in the Resolute Desk? As President Obama unveiled his Afghanistan-Pakistan policy Friday, it was hard to miss the echoes of his predecessor's "surge" strategy in Iraq. Indeed, says James Dobbins, the State Department veteran who served as President Bush's first envoy to Afghanistan, Obama's plan is "largely an extension of where the Bush Administration, in its last years, was heading, with some refinements and additions."

Will we be seeing lefties putting bumper stickers on their cars with an 'O' with a circle around it and line through it? Or perhaps an "01.19.2013 - Obama's last day in office" sticker? The wars were the Number One reason the left was against Bush until the economy tanked. Well, Obama is doing exactly what Bush did to prop the economy- stimulus packages and bailouts.

I imagine that dissent isn't as patriotic to some as it was a half-year ago. Imagine that? Partisan blindness. Who'd a thunk it?

I admire the protesters I saw in San Francisco last Saturday. They were not blind partisans. They believe in their anti-war positions enough to see the continuation of the same policy for what it is, and they called it out. What about our Blue Hoosiers? Will they just shove it on down and look the other way? Or, will they call Obama out on it?

More Change You Can Believe In

I might have thought that this one was made up by The Onion. Alas. The Washington Post reported this item, that should turn anyone who is half-conscious or has even a shred of intellectual honesty into a cynic:

The Obama administration appears to be backing away from the phrase "global war on terror," a signature rhetorical legacy of its predecessor.

In a memo e-mailed this week to Pentagon staff members, the Defense Department's office of security review noted that "this administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror' [GWOT.] Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation.' "

And the stand-up comics lamented the passing of the Bush Administration. Bwaaaahahahahaha! The White House is always a barrel of laughs.

RIP, Jonesy's Jukebox & Indie 103

You may have noticed a little set of links to the lower right under the header of "Stuff I Like". Nothing political there, just other things that brighten the world for me.

Well, sadly, Indie 103, a Los Angeles radio station, was plowed under in January in favor of programming in Espanol.

I loved that station, as much as a guy in Central Indiana could. Steve Jones was the main attraction for me. The Sex Pistols guitarist did a very entertaining daily show, where he played things he liked, because he wanted to hear them. He invited guests from his musical background, but also tapped into the Hollywood celebrity network to do interviews that were not the standard.

Jones would often break out his guitar and into song mid-thought. He would whistle a tune. It was decidedly unformatted, and a lot of fun for this college radio lifer. I listened to every podcast, and often listened to the live stream while I worked at my desk. Now it's gone.

I completely relate to what Jones had to say about his future prospects in radio, via the LA Times:

"Wherever I go, I will still do my show the same; I wouldn't change it. I don't think I should, and I hope any of these people that are thinking of hiring me aren't going to try to mold me into something else," Jones said. "I'd be bored out of me brain. I'd last two weeks if they had me reading some nonsense. If you want someone to read a piece of paper, just hire someone else. There's loads of people that do that."

Bingo. That's exactly why I never ventured into commercial radio after the college radio days, because after having the freedom to do exactly what I wanted as a creative process, I couldn't take being on a radio assembly line. I can't listen to it, either.

I had a brief exchange on Facebook about self-indulgence and artists, where this quality was issued as a put-down. For my money, the best art is created by the self-indulgent, perhaps narcissistic individuals. I don't think of Jonesy as the latter, but certainly his show was the former, and it was all the better for being a reflection of him rather than being something that pandered to an audience, or tried to generate an audience via calculated moves. When I think of my favorite artists (Dali), authors (Clancy, Quinnell, O'Brien, Dostoyevsky, Rand), bands (Sex Pistols, Gary Numan, Minutemen/Mike Watt), it is the idiosyncrasies and self-indulgences that make them notable, distinct, and worth my time.

Jonesy's Jukebox was spontaneous and riveting, which is about the best compliment I can issue to live radio. Commercial radio has generally choked the daylights out of spontaneity and wonders why it is dying on the music side. Notice that the talk thrives, even if it is doctrinaire, because the hosts have talent enough to be spontaneous.

It's a shame to see Indie 103 and Jonesy's Jukebox go. I'm glad the station was podcasting highlights of JJ, because I still have the MP3s. Sadly, I'll have to delete something special from the "Stuff I Like" list.

Yes, We're In San Francisco Now

(San Francisco, CA)- A notice was just slipped under the door by the hotel's management. It seems that there is going to be an anti-war rally and march very near to the hotel, and management wanted to let patrons know so that they could allow extra travel time.

I thought about it for a moment. March 21... Hmm... Why, that's the day the US began, not declared in the Congress, war against Iraq. So, I did a generic Google search on 'anti-war San Francisco' and turned up this link, for the sponsor of the event. 

There are still references to President Bush as a 'war criminal'- one that is carefully worded to give President Obama a pass on that charge. Check out the language from their flyer:

The U.S. leaders who have initiated and conducted this criminal war should be tried and jailed for war crimes.

The war in Afghanistan is expanding. Robert Gates, Bush's defense secretary, who was kept at his post by President Obama, has announced that the troop levels in Afghanistan may double in the coming months. Both he and Vice President Biden predicted higher casualties in the coming period.

Amusingly partisan. If one official is a criminal for conducting a criminal war, how is another not a criminal for continuing to conduct that war? Nation of laws, not of men, folks.

Don't give Obama a free pass. He has been in office for 60 days now. He could have withdrawn the troops by now, if it were any priority to him. It obviously isn't. If he were an anti-war politician, he wouldn't be planning to expand in Afghanistan. He obviously isn't. If the left gives Obama a free pass, they will get delivery on anti-war issues in the same way conservatives who gave Bush a free pass on fiscal issues, which is to say, no delivery. 

So, the protest. I might go out there and support a limited anti-war part of their message, nad tweak 'em on their warmongering President Obama.

My Mecca

(San Jose, CA)- After about 30-35 road trips to see the San Jose Sharks play places other than San Jose, I finally went to the HP Pavilion, aka the Shark Tank, to see my favorite team play. It was an excellent experience!

I started the evening with the CalTrain trip from San Francisco. It was great to see Sharks fans board at the stops along the way, wearing their Sharks jerseys.

It was really great not being one of the odd fans wearing the road team's colors, 'accidentally' having beers spilled on me when my team scores. Loads of fun to see fans having jerseys with names from the past, like Gaetz, Wilson, Makarov, Nolan, and Damphousse.

CalTrain station at 4th & King, SF

I went to the fights and a hockey game broke out. Staubitz vs. Tootoo, win Staubitz

Staubitz is the new local hero. Big cheers during the post-game interview

Bay Area Fun

(San Francisco, CA)- I have often raved about the medical profession, for their genius in placing conferences in places people actually like to visit. This stands in stark contrast to the engineering profession. I've gone to conferences in Madison, WI in January, Pittsburgh and New Jersey. No, with Ame's conferences, we've gone to Hilton Head, Los Cabos Mexico and now San Francisco.

The Bay Area has so much to offer. Yesterday, I took Isabel to Ghirardelli Square for ice cream and chocolate, and then Ame jogged up the Embarcadero to meet us at Pier 39 for lunch.

One happy little girl!

Isabel watches the sea lions struggle for territorial dominance on Pier 39.

Today's adventure involves a trip north across the Golden Gate Bridge to Muir Woods, and perhaps a trip on a ferry!

New Podcast Added

This week's edition of the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast features 2008 candidate for governor Andy Horning. We discussed the Indiana Federalism bill vis-a-vis state sovereignty, and why he loves constitutions: rule of law vs. nation of men.

Check it out via this link.

Andy surprised me a bit in not being thoroughly ecstatic with the bill proposed in Indiana. As always, though, Andy has deep thoughts to back up his positions.

Longest podcast to date, and very substantial.

New Podcast Posted

I spoke recently with Chris Spangle, the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Executive Director, about the sort of nuts-and-bolts things an executive does to run a state party.

The thing that struck me is that he's an organizational person. That's different, because when there are many hats to wear, EDs tend to be Political Directors, since the policy is what got them into the game in the first place. Chris is very interested in social networking, and is looking to recruit the people best suited to wear the hats he isn't best suited to wear. Sounds like a good plan.

Check it out by way of this link.

New Podcasts Posted

Go to the LPIN podcast archive to check out the following:

3/9: Two-term Hagerstown Judge Susan Bell discusses her election and re-election, and her acceptance as a Libertarian office holder.

3/6: Tim Maguire talks about the political fallout related to Ed Coleman's party switch. He discusses the rules that address the inclusion, or exclusion, of third party council members. It is clear that most government bodies lack rules that fully address the integration of third party members.

From the archive page, you can subscribe and have new podcasts automatically downloaded to your iTunes. Pretty snappy.

Dying Newspapers

A friend who grew up in Cleveland with me sent me a link to a Time Magazine article, saying that Cleveland's only remaining daily newspaper might close, and is among the 10 most endangered US papers.

I have a twinge of sadness about that, because I was a carrier for the Plain Dealer when I was a teen, and was a big team player. (We hated the Cleveland Press, advancing the rivalries managements had. We had rivalries with the kids who carried The Press, and celebrated when The Press folded. We picked up many of their former customers.) I have a twinge of sadness now for the rapid death of the newspapers, because they were once great institutions, at least when there were the rivalries, and papers tried to get the scoop on- get this- the local news!

But I do like to chuckle and enjoy the idea that the writers at any American daily tend to be left-of-center, that those left-of-center tend to believe in evolution, and that their livelihood is dying because they have failed, no, refused to evolve.

Going back to Cleveland, I'll never forget how The Guild refused to write for Cleveland Live when it started, because they were The Guild, and therefore above that newfangled internet fad. Cool by me! I was a free lance writer, and picked up some supplemental income on the 'fad'. Then The Guild reversed course after boatloads of money was spent on freelancers- because they were The Guild! The true professionals that belonged as the face of the 'newspaper'! Bwaaahahahaha!

I believe that newspapers made themselves irrelevant by refusing to be local. Hell- I can get all the national news I want as it happens- on cable news, talk radio, and internet. What do I need a repeat of what I know for, especially when that AP report is printed tomorrow? Even if they gave it as they happened, what makes their carriage of an AP report different than anyone else's? Look at the Indy Star, the Plain Dealer, or any other American daily, and you'll see the bulk of the paper filled by AP reports, or articles from the Washington Post or New York Times.

It's foolish. We have the national papers that have made their national niches: the NY Times, by virtue of being in NY; the Washington Post, by virtue of being in DC; the Wall Street Journal, by virtue of being on Wall Street. Every other paper in the US is dooming itself to go the way of the dinosaur, for refusal to evolve. Hell- those papers are national in a large way because they are local! Their locality happens to generate news of national interest.

Most papers have pretty good sports sections. Well, that's local news. How can they be so blind?

Darwin, newspaper! Darwin!

Yet Another New Podcast Posted

Beyond the petty retribution Ed Coleman received, another thing revealed was that the City-County Council may have rules that address the political parties and where they fit into the structure of power, those rules are vague at best, and at worst do little more than protect the two parties currently holding power.

As the Ds and Rs consistently fail to deliver, I can foresee a greater number of third party victories at all levels of government, not just for Libertarians, but for Greens and perhaps a new party or two. The voters aren't going to be happy to learn, when the day comes, that the people they elect are essentially without a voice- and that it's all perfectly within the rules.

I spoke with Tim Maguire about the rules. Maguire is the Chair of the Marion County Libertarians.

Link to the podcast archive.

More Podcasting on Ed Coleman

When then-Republican City-County Councilor Ed Coleman left for the Libertarian Party, I felt 100% certain that there would be a political price for him to pay. Talking with party insiders, the general consensus was that he would probably be removed from one or more of the committees on which he served.

In fact, he was removed from all of them on Monday. Again- no real surprise. Politics is a bare-knuckled game, and retaliation, no matter how silly or childish it may seem, is a way of political life just as much as favors and back scratching is on the flip side.

I got a better sense of why Ed left yesterday, when I interviewed him again for the Libertarian party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast. This wasn't the first retaliation against Ed by the Republicans, nor the first time he was stripped of a committee appointment. Because Ed was speaking out on issues against the grain of his former party's leadership, he was stripped of committee appointments, and then assigned to different committees. To summarize Ed, he was advised that being reassigned was a warning, and that he should shut up and toe the line.

Here's the link to the podcast archive. Check out Podcast #011, released March 5. It is incredibly revealing in details about how local government works. Or doesn't.

I asked Ed if the members of the City-County Council read the ordinances they vote on. Interesting answer, to say the least.

Still In Iraq

Barack Obama has been President 42 days, and we're still in Iraq, and looking at the prospect of increasing war activity in Afghanistan.

If McCain was elected, I doubt that the left would agree that August 2010 would be soon enough for withdrawl from Iraq. Why is it ok for the Obama Administration?

Latest Podcast Posted

#10 features Ed Angleton, the former 2-day Jeopardy champ and recent candidate for Indiana House in Marion County's District 100. Ed contributes to the Libertarian Party of Indiana's legislative review blog, and shared his thoughts on the best and worst law before the state's legislature this session.

Link to the podcast archive.

LPIN's legislative review blog is yet another thing the other parties won't do, because it entails taking a broad stand for or against a bill. Sure, there's room for diverging viewpoints, but if a political party is supposed to be a vehicle for moving public policy in a defined direction, how can it hope to do so unless it is willing to publicly take a stand one way or another? Is it any wonder our states and nation seem to be busy, but never moving the policy anywhere in particular?

Great Oratory

I watched the Obama speech last night, and on the whole found it pretty useless, even though it was excellent oratory. He's easily the best speech giving President in my lifetime, better than Reagan or Clinton even. Impressions:

Obama is a quick study. After months of campaigning on Hope(tm) and then ditching Hope (tm) for Fear Itself in his first press conference, Obama rediscovered Hope(tm). It was a campaign speech, loaded with platitudes and warm fuzzies.

Like any campaign speech by any politician, it promised all kinds of goodies, all while cutting taxes and the budget. Well! The Obama Administration, with the help of his rubber stamp Congress, has already doubled the deficit 'he inherited' in just one short month with the 'stimulus'. How is it going to be possible to spend even a penny more and yet manage to cut anything? This I want to see.

Obama talked about 'not governing from anger', and yet couldn't resist taking jabs at the CEO who spent bailout money on drapes, and the CEO who bought a corporate jet. That's one of the sources of popular anger, as if he didn't know.

The Republican response was hilarious, except that The Office wasn't going to be on for another half hour. It may not have seemed like an actual response, because it didn't address the speech terribly well and sounded like one man's campaign and story time. But, that's what made it an actual response, because Obama's speech didn't address the country's problems terribly well and sounded like one man's campaign and story time.

If anyone, Obama of the Congress, would like to address the real problems, here is where to go to work:

Cut spending
Cut spending
Treat the banks like you treat the automakers
Cut spending
Stop printing money without value to back it
Cut spending
Cut spending
Get out of Iraq already
Cut spending

Pretty simple, but then, our problems are actually pretty simple: We borrow and spend too much.

New LPIN Podcast Posted

This week's edition features Hagerstown Libertarian Rex Bell. He ran for Indiana House in District 54, and put up some fantastic numbers:

2006: 14.3% in a 3-way race, D-L-R
2008: 33.5% in a 2-way race, L-R

One of the planks of Rex's platform was the elimination of property taxes. He believes that was a key position to take in getting these results. I asked him to discuss the proposed property tax caps, which he did in some great detail.

Podcast archive. You know what to do.

This Can't Be True

This is a hoax, right? Mencken and the 'Bathtub Hoax', but more mean-spirited, right? From the Lafayette Journal & Courier:

BUFFALO, N.Y. - Police say an upstate New York television executive who sought to improve the image of Muslims in the media beheaded his wife after she filed for divorce.

Muzzammil Hassan (moo-ZAHM'-mel HAH'-sahn) is charged with murdering his wife, Aasiya (AH'-see-ya) Hassan. Police say she had an order of protection against her husband and he had been kicked out of the house they shared in Orchard Park, near Buffalo.

They accuse the 44-year-old Hassan of cutting off his wife's head at the TV station where he launched his Bridges TV network in 2004. In an AP interview, he said he hoped the network would balance negative portrayals of Muslims following the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

I'd say that if true, his TV work pretty much was in vain.

Ed Coleman Press Conference Audio

It is available now, in an unedited form, on the latest podcast.

Ed Coleman is now recognized as the highest-ranking elected Libertarian in the USA.

Here is the statement of welcome, from Libertarian National Committee Chair William Redpath:

"I commend Ed Coleman on his courage and his recognition that the Libertarian Party is the only political party in Indiana and the United States that truly stands for limited, fiscally responsible government and real respect for civil liberties. I gratefully welcome him, as I hope to do with other elected officials who are tired of the now clearly unaffordable politics as usual, and who yearn to join 'The Party of Principle.'"

No Change Chronicles

I was discussing with a friend Bush's Shock Doctrine, as described by Naomi Klein. Darned if the tactic doesn't seem exactly what Obama used to promote the 'stimulus'.

Yesterday's Cato Daily Podcast discusses exactly this, with David Boaz citing Rahm Emanuel, Paul Krugman, and Arianna Huffington promoting crisis as a political opportunity. I love Boaz's line about Obama's tenor:

Hope helps you get elected, but fear helps you get your program through.

Excellent. He also calls this the "Bush-Obama Era". So far, I have to agree. Check out the Cato Podcast for Feb 17 2009 via their archive.

Podcast With Ed Coleman

I was able to sit down with Ed Coleman this afternoon, to discuss his defection from the Republicans to the Libertarians. Coleman is a sitting Indianapolis City-County Councilor, who was elected 'at-large' in 2007.

Link to Podcast archive.

Welcome Home, Ed!

In about an hour, sitting Indianapolis City-County Council member Ed Coleman will take the podium at a press conference, announcing his switch from the Republican Party, to the Libertarian Party. From Coleman's press release statement:

This is not a decision I take lightly, nor did I come to it without deep reflection. I have found that the direction of the Republican Party has changed, and it is not the same party I joined many years ago. Nor do I believe its current leaders truly represent the ideals that the party markets and advertises to voters.

Both of the old two parties have forgotten their ties to the common man, and instead focus on power and control as elitists. I am a common man, I campaigned for the common people, and I still represent the common people; the voters and taxpayers.
I have come to find that my politics are actually more aligned with the Libertarian Party than any other; a party that still allows free thought, a party where dissent is not necessarily a dirty word.

Both of the old parties endeavor to silence dissent. During the Council’s previous period of Democrat control, the majority’s powers were used to silence Republicans. Now, under Republican control, the Council majority abuses their power to weaken Democrat influence. Over the past year I have been criticized for votes I made in response to the concerns I heard from my constituents. As a leader I have spoken out again the secretive and expensive affairs of the Capital Improvement Board; but the two old parties want obedient followers, not leaders.

Indy Star article. I can understand those kinds of thoughts. The Republican Party has changed its' direction more than any other party over the years. The Democrats have been steady on the march to socialism. The Libertarians have been steady on the march to liberty. The Republicans? They go from Nixon's Keynesism to Reagan's quasi-Goldwaterism, and back to George W. Bush's Keynesism. Locally, they seem even more rudderless. You could take a certain 'my way or the highway' if there was some consistent direction you could get behind, but there isn't. The one area where Republicans show some consistency, the Republican Liberty Caucus, is treated like the the red-headed stepchild. There is clearly no room for libertarian thought in the GOP, so why stay there?

I will be most interested to sit down with Ed to get the full story for the podcast!

Old Boss, New Boss Chronicles

The more I see of President Obama, the more I think he's the four-year extension of the Bush Administration McCain was supposed to be. Likewise, the Democratic Congress. I love this passage, from a NY Post article:

The push to get the bill through before the holiday weekend was so frantic, members of Congress didn't have a chance to read all 1,071 pages of the document before they could vote.

"In a perfect world it would have been nice to have had more time to process it," said Ilan Kayatsky, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).

Perfect? Heck, in a good world, we read the bills we're voting on. Is there a Democrat out there who, with a straight face, can express joy over not reading the bill prior to voting? You want to open the door to corruption? This is a GREAT way to do it. Allow staffers to write god-knows-what, and then vote on it.

Well, this is as good a chance as any to remind you of Downsize DC's "Read The Bills Act".

There's a basic principle at stake here. America was founded on the slogan, “No taxation without representation.” A similar slogan applies to this situation:
“No LEGISLATION without representation.”

We hold this truth to be self-evident, that those in Congress who vote on legislation they have not read, have not represented their constituents. They have misrepresented them.

Obama's promise to post bills for five days before passage is nice, but it's empty transparency. Posting the stimulus five days before VOTING on it would have been the real deal. It kinda reminds me of my favorite Che Guevara quote:

"We can hold the trials any time, so long as the executions happen now".

Honest government is unafraid of debate, unafraid of scrutiny, and is in no rush to get the signatures on the dotted lest anyone read the fine print. Alas.

New Podcast Posted

I've added a special edition of the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast, to include more dialogue from Dr. Eric Schansberg. I asked him about the prudent ways Indiana should spend the stimulus money, since it seems certain that we aren't going to pull a Utah and say, "No thanks!" - plus the traps our state should avoid.

I very happy with the timeliness and the content!

I am very interested to talk soon with Ed Angleton (hopefully this week) about legislation at the Statehouse, and I have conversations with the dynamic duo of Susan & Rex Bell in the can, so there will be plenty more to listen to!

Incongruous Thoughts on Lincoln

Yesterday was Lincoln's 200th birthday, and of all the nice things said, I hadn't noticed anywhere that Abe Lincoln was once making a living in a way quite impossible to now: as a self-taught lawyer. If it was good enough to be self-taught then, and it produced Abe Lincoln...

The Lincoln penny was introduced in 1909, at Lincoln's 100th birthday. The Lincoln penny replaced the Indian Head penny, and is currently the longest running unchanged coin, at least on the obverse. In 1959, the 150th anniversary of Lincoln's birth, the reverse changed from images of wheat to the Lincoln Memorial. I still get about 5-10 "wheat pennies" every year in change, and I keep them all, just because. It's been about a year since I got a pre-1965 silver Roosevelt dime. I love getting those!

There is some talk about eliminating the penny altogether, on the basis of cost savings to the US Treasury. Now, I really like any cost savings that can be found. But there are other things I like about American money, such as the stability of the images of it, and, the fact that inflation, for all the damage it has done, has still not made the American penny as useless as, say, the Danish 25 Ore coin, which was just eliminated a few months ago.

Podcast Update

There are now five installments of the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast available for your stimulation, and download. The most recent, just posted minutes ago, features Dr. Eric Schansberg, discussing the bailouts and stimulus, and whether the diseases might be less threatening than the cures.

Here's the linkages:

Dr. Eric Schansberg on stimulus and bailout

Chris Ward on business property rights vis smoking laws

Tim Maguire on the role appointed Libertarians can fulfill

Todd Singer on the Libertarian outlook for the new year

Mike Kole's intro podcast. Way exciting.

LPIN podcast archive

You can subscribe from the above archive link, and new episodes will be sent to your iTunes. Give me convenience, or give me death.

Cato's Retort

Obama made the claim that:

There is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan
that will help to jumpstart the economy

To this, the libertarian think tank The Cato Institute created a full-page newspaper ad that ran in several papers, including the NY Times. The ad preceded the Obama press conference by several days. The ad begins:

With all due respect Mr. President, that is not true.

Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan’s “lost decade” in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

Then followed the names of 200+ economists who signed on, including Nobel Laureates. A second edition of the ad was created, because more than 100 other economists also wished to sign on.

So, I tend to think that Obama probably was speaking very specifically to libertarians when he marginalized those who would prefer no or little action as better than the deleterious 'stimulus'.

Indiana economists Cecil Bohanon and Courtenay Stone (both of Ball State) and Eric Schansberg (Indiana Southern Univ) are among the signers.

The Sky Is Falling!

President Obama is going all-in on the first hand dealt to him. That does one of two things in a poker tournament- it doubles your chip stack (political capital) or it sends you out of the tournament (see you in four years). That's a heavy gamble to take with a nation. From Obama's press conference:

So what I'm trying to underscore is what the people in Elkhart already understand: that this is not your ordinary run-of-the-mill recession. We are going through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We've lost now 3.6 million jobs, but what's perhaps even more disturbing is that almost half of that job loss has taken place over the last three months, which means that the problems are accelerating instead of getting better.

and

If there's anyone out there who still doesn't believe this constitutes a full-blown crisis, I suggest speaking to one of the millions of Americans whose lives have been turned upside down because they don't know where their next paycheck is coming from.

So, was 2008 the worst year since the Great Depression? Hardly.

Now, I like science rather than articles of faith. Show me the facts. Take a look at the Misery Index. You will see that 2008's numbers are actually better than the first year of Clinton's first term, better than all four years of George HW Bush's term, the first five years of Reagan's presidency, all four years of Carter's term, all three years of Ford's term, and three of the five Nixon years.

Obama is appealing to emotion, not facts. Rather than speaking to someone who has lost his job- something you can do any day of any year, of any decade, of any century- I'd rather look at the economy as a whole, as a nation, by judging the facts.

Now, if I have it straight, the Left likes to say that it prefers facts over faith, science over emotion. (See: 'global warming', etc.) Well, stick to it!

The definition of propaganda and 'assertion' are useful to review here, especially since Obama said the debate over whether or not to have a stimulus is 'over'.

Full disclosure: I don't know where my next paycheck is coming from. I have had one new job come in since October 1, where I like to keep a portfolio of 50-60. Hardly a time to panic, though. It's been a time to get my house in order, to position for the next opprtunities. But, if Obama directs you to talk to me, I'll tell you that he's full of shit. I spent my time when making money paying off my debt and lining up a savings- something everybody else should have done. It shouldn't be my problem if they blew their dough on entertainment, and failed to pay down debt and save. One's financial woes are self-created, beginning with how one chose to educate himself, continuing forward to the decisions they made in better times, including what they bring to the table as a potential employee, and whether or not one should run through their money, or rack up unsustainable debt, as though it wholly impossible that the money could stop.

What Would A Libertarian Do?

President Obama really alienated me last night with his press conference/sales pitch for the 'stimulus' package, going out of his way to single out people who would prefer we did little or nothing in terms of government intervention. This had to be a jab at libertarians, because Republicans had made an Exhibit 'A' case for their brand of economic interventions and 'stimulus', especially in the first 6 years of the Bush Administration.

When is it better to do nothing? When the 'solution' is worse than the malady. In the words of Harvard's Jeffrey A. Miron, via CNN:

When libertarians question the merit of President Obama's stimulus package, a frequent rejoinder is, "Well, we have to do something." This is hardly a persuasive response. If the cure is worse than the disease, it is better to live with the disease.

In any case, libertarians do not argue for doing nothing; rather, they advocate eliminating or adjusting policies that are bad for the economy independent of the recession.

Biron's actions would include the following:

1. Repeal the Corporate Income Tax
2. Increase Carbon Taxes While Lowering Marginal Tax Rates
3. Moderate the Growth of Entitlements
4. Eliminate Wasteful Spending
5. Withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan
6. Limit Union Power
7. Renew the U.S. Commitment to Free Trade
8. Expand Legal Immigration
9. Stop Bailing out Businesses that Took on Too Much Risk

That's hardly a list of 'do nothing', in any case.

American leadership has gotten positively batty with overreactions and crisis. In this sense, Obama is a real continuum from Bush.

Is it bad out there? Sure, it's bad. Is the solution the same as taking all the money and going to Vegas and putting it all on 'red'? No, but it isn't far off, either.

Dog And Pony Show For Failure

It was mere months ago that Republicans were alarmists. So, what is President Obama's tone? It was mere months ago that President Bush's borrow-and-spend was failed policy. So, why are we to believe it is no longer failed policy?

So, here is Obama in my state, sounding alarmist, and promoting proven failure. From an Indy Star report:

Campaigning for action in the most dire terms, President Barack Obama said Monday that if Congress does not quickly pass an economic stimulus package, the nation will slip into a crisis so deep that “we may be unable to reverse” it.

“We can't afford to wait. We can't wait to see and hope for the best,” Obama said in Elkhart, Ind., a community reeling in job losses during the recession that has defined Obama's young presidency. “We can't posture and bicker and resort to the same failed ideas that got us in into this mess in the first place.”

Sorry- If Congress does pass this badly misnamed 'stimulus', that is when we slip into crisis that we may not be able to reverse. That is when we take Bush's recession and turn it into Obama's depression.

I am not suggesting 'doing nothing', although allowing failing businesses to go under would be good. It would be justice, for one thing. It would punish bad business practices, which would also be good. Rewarding failure with bailouts ensures continued bad business practices.

If you want to stimulate the economy, stop dragging it down with so many taxes. Reduce Federal spending by 25% or more, and stop ALL borrow-and-spend.

But, how about the panic in Obama's rhetoric? Where is the steady voice of Obama The Campaigner?

Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire

Or, as The Who sang, "Here comes the new boss, same as the old boss".

Then-candidate Obama was 100% correct when he described then-President Bush's bailout as 'Bush's failed economic policy of borrow-and-spend'.

Unfortunately, President Obama calls the same economic policy 'stimulus'.

In what meaningful way is it different from what Bush was doing? Are we going to hear a peep of criticism from Democrats about this?

I doubt it. In an Indy Star story covering Obama's planned visit to Elkhart, we see what 'stimulus' is all about. Pork, and paying off constituency groups, at the expense of the nation.

"Instead of focusing on a stimulus that will continue to open up the credit markets and create jobs, this bill spends billions on Democrats' wish-list projects," Indiana Rep. Mark Souder said last month after voting against the House version of the package. Souder, a Republican, represents part of Elkhart County.

The Bush bailout was spent on Republican cronies. The Obama bailout will be spent on Democratic cronies. The country will continue to slide towards depression. Thanks for nothing. Is this what 'change' amounts to? Different cronies? Is that the best we could do?

Let Me Tell You About My Narcissism

My friend, Cleveland Plain Dealer reporter Laura DeMarco, writes a weekly entry on visitors and ex-Clevelanders returning to Cle, with their impressions of the city. She quoted me on the immigrant backgrounds of Cle vs. Indy, sausage and corned beef, and on eating ethnic food:

What impressed him the most -- besides the corned beef, that is? "Cleveland's ethnic diversity is fantastic," he says. "I notice it because the depth of diversity is missing in Indy, because it wasn't an immigrant city until about 20 years ago, whereas Cleveland has a long history of immigration. Nothing better than eating my way through ethnic Cleveland! . . . If ethnic diversity was measured in nothing more than sausage, Cleveland runs rings around Indy."

I made comment also about Cleveland's shrinking industrial landscape. That's something I truly miss. I love the steel mills and rail yards, and every time I go back, I drive through for a look. I guess that wasn't sexy enough to print.

I wish Indy had some industrial landscape to speak of. I do get my fix here in Indiana by cruising through Gary on the way to Chicago when work takes me there. Yes, I detour through Gary. For the scenery.

Smoking Ban Testimony

I was reminded yesterday what an unpleasant business law-making is, as I testified before a House Committee in opposition to Indiana HB 1213, which proposes a statewide smoking ban in private workplaces.

Two hours was alotted for the proponents, and then two hours for the opponents. There were many speakers for both sides, so I winnowed my remarks, from four pages to one and a half. I was quoted in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette:

“At first blush, you think this is a noble cause, but there needs to be a balance,” said Mike Smith, president of the casino group. Mike Kole, a central Indiana resident, echoed Smith’s concerns.

“It sends a signal to business that we like to meddle in how you run your affairs,” he said.

Here are the 'full' comments I presented to the Committee:

I do not smoke. I do not own a restaurant or a bar, a bowling alley, or a casino. I'm a regular citizen who has been concerned enough about the direction our governments are moving in to have run for office as a Libertarian candidate. I am ceoncerene about this law because of the messages and signals it sends, both by design, and unintentionally.

Because I don't smoke, and don't like secondhand smoke, I choose smoke-free restautants. For the same reasons, directing myself towards work that would not have me be in a smoking environment was something I did by conscious design, by choice. That's an important value. Choice.

I am dismayed with the ease with which proponents disregard the value of being free to choose, in order that a few more places will be how they like them to be.

With all due respect to Mr. Maurer, creating a healthy business climate, where Indiana attracts employers, is not created by passing a law like this. It sending the signal to business that we like to meddle in how you run your affairs. I don't think you'lll find a business owner that is drawn because of regulations or higher costs of operation.

In fact, the business owner from Lexington, Kentucky made the case that businesses adjust. That's true! They do! They respond to customer feedback. If business does better without smoking in their establishments, as he says they do, they would respond to that fact, as he said they do, and embrace the policy voluntarily.

Just as Voltaire famously made the case for free speech by saying, "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it", I take a similar approach to this issue. Nobody thinks smoking is good for you, but tobacco is a legal product. And since we aren't calling for a prohibition of tobacco, and since this is still the land of the free, business owners should retain the right to set their policies within their four walls. Even if it isn't the policy I would set.

If government must be involved in this issue, it would be adequate to fully inform would-be patrons and workers of the smoking policy. I disagree with the person who gave testimony earlier, equating the signing of a waiver, which fully informs the worker of the working conditions, as 'intimidation'. It's information! And in a free society, we are able to make informed decisions. Post a sign indicating the smoking policy of the building and be done.

I urge you not to pass this bill, in the name of liberty, choice, and property rights.

Health should not come at the expense of these things.

I was a little astonished at the rudeness of many of the proponents. After the opponents sat quietly through two hours of their testimony, about half of their side left. About half of the remaining backers were talking loudly and answering their phones during their testimony, and some were even laughing at the opponents during their testimony.

Three women seated next to me were full of guffaws as a representative of the casino industry testified. When I returned from my turn to speak, I had to walk behind them to get back to my seat. As I sat down, the woman next to me leaned over and said, "I'm a libertarian, too".

I was completely stunned. I'm not sure in what universe the correlation between her rude behavior and her words has any meaning. I said nothing to her. If she's voting Libertarian, I'm glad of it, but she's doing so for all the wrong reasons.

The whole exercise reminded me just how much I dislike this process. Hearing two hours of the other side just made me cringe, for the complete disinterest they have in liberty, and in knowing they are probably a majority view. It take a tough hide, or completely mercenary disposition to tolerate it on a daily basis.

And that reminds me how much I've come to not respect the political mercenaries. I saw someone on the other side who smokes and whom I had come to believe was one who believes in liberty- especially as regards business property. That person is now deeply involved with the advancing of this bill, and I was told it is not at all about belief in right and proper government, but about being involved with a win.

That's just mindblowing and wholly contemptable. I've been known to get along just fine with socialists and other un-libertarians, on the basis of a good and vigorous debate that starts with the premise that we are interested in doing the best we can in the public arena. I can respect that person, even if I think they're wrong on their conclusions. What good is the political mercenary, who will even advance laws they think are bad, and not proper? This isn't a game. If you need to win at something that involves deception and cunning, play chess or poker, and leave the rest of us alone. Get the feather in your cap elsewhere.

In any case, this may not amount to much this year, as the Committee has to decide whether or not the bill will advance beyond the Committee. That vote is expected to happen next week.

New Podcast

The Indiana House Public Policy Committee is hearing testimony Wednesday morning on House Bill 1213, which would ban smoking in all Indiana workplaces if passed. 

I spoke with Chris Ward, the 2007 candidate for Lawrence Mayor in a special edition of the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast. Chris has a useful perspective. He is a former smoker, and works in a restaurant that currently allows smoking in the bar area of the building. We talked about the health issues related to smoking in the workplace, worker choice, and the rights of business property owners.

For my part, I am scheduled to speak on the side of opponents of the bill in the House Chamber. I don't smoke, and I don't own a bar or a restaurant, but I believe in the primacy of the right of business owners over the intrusion of the state on the behalf of others.

Great Editorial Cartoon

Sometimes, a picture really is worth 1,000 words. This one says a lot about the reality of it:

Michael Ramirez does fine work. He appears in the Investors Business Daily, a fine newspaper if there ever was one.

(h/t Duncan Adams)

Poor Winners

I generally dislike end-zone celebrations after a touchdown. I can see some exuberance after a score, especially one to end a long drive, or on a play where several tackles were broken. In that case, go ahead- spike the ball.

I prefer guys like Barry Sanders or Steve Largent- pros who acted like they had been to the end zone a hundred times in their life. When they scored, they didn't taunt or do a dance. They handed the ball to the ref and trotted off the field.

Now that the Democrats have elected a President and re-elected a Democratic Congress, the gloves are off among leftward bloggers and pundits, revelling in the kind of infantile and mean-spirited name calling reserved those not used to winning. They not only have spiked the ball, but they're in the face of the other side.

It's hard to even read a left blog these days. Mostly, it's the followers and their comments, but sometimes the bloggers themselves. I've pretty well had it with anyone, left or right, who uses the terms, 'wingnut' (as though they could only be right-wing-nuts, and not left-wing-nuts), moonbat, righttard, lefttard, Paultard (or anything-tard, for that matter). You generally need not go more than two posts deep to see it. Shallow posts with ad hominem attacks and name calling, or even goofy pictures, rule the day.

There were many messages Obama put out, won support for, and was elected on. Apparently, his message of inclusive government was not one of them. It seems to have been ignored by the dyed-in-the-wool Democrats. It's too bad, because both Democrats and Republicans have something to offer. As a Libertarian, that's plain to see, because I share many things with each camp. Maybe that's what two party dominance has caused- a great 'my team's way or the highway' antipathy for the other side.

Obama's position is correct. I wouldn't mind seeing some display of it by his choir.

Podcast Update

I have now conducted two interviews for the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast- one with LPIN Chair Todd Singer, and now newly elected Marion County Chair Timothy Maguire. Both had great insights to share, and I really appreciate their willingness to visit me in my 'home studio'.

Bugs are getting worked out. My recording of Singer is sub-par, in that his volume levels are far too low. That has been corrected with the Maguire interview. I am very satisfied with that latter recording, which is unusual for me. I usually am not comfortable with my newer productions until they've been tweaked for months. Chalk it up to old age and experience.

Here is the link to the podcasts. You can subscribe and have them automatically downloaded to your iTunes as new episodes are released. 

I have to say, as a subscriber to about a half dozen podcasts, I get a real kick out of seeing one I've produced line up in the 'Downloads' queue on iTunes.

I'm open to suggestion for interview subjects or topics to cover. Obviously, the news writes itself, and the bailouts and economy are on the top of my list. Where else should I turn?

Big Surprise

So, when the libertarians were saying that losers shouldn't be bailed out, because bailouts allieve them of pain, and cause them not to revise bad decision making, this is one of the things we were talking about. From the NY Post:

High-flying Citigroup executives, trying desperately to hang on to their new, $50 million luxury jet, took heavy flak yesterday from the White House and Congress after The Post revealed how the beleaguerred bank is blowing taxpayers' rescue funds.

What to say to the Congress and Obama? "Well, you voted for it!"

If they want to blame someone, they need to rush to the nearest mirror.

To repeat, if you want to stop bad decision-making, stop rewarding bad decision-making. It really, truly is that simple.

Legislative Review

The Libertarian Party of Indiana has been reviewing legislation being proposed in the state House & Senate for the past several sessions, and 2009 is no exception. A slew of bills have already been reviewed, and while the cynic might expect Libertarians to be opposed to all of them, there are several bills the Party backs.

I like the new changes. It is still a blog format, but includes room for comments, and also a quick checkoff for 'agree' or 'disagree'.

Check it out here.

One thing I am doing is adding the LPIN Legislative Review to my 'Hot Off The Press" item, at the right. Readers here can see the latest review, and click through.

New Podcast

I had been mulling about for sometime on what to do next in my effort to promote liberty, and rather than running for another office, I kept returning to broadcast media. Being in studio last week with Abdul-Hakim Shabazz on WXNT for the State of the State speech reinforced the idea.

What will emerge is a weekly podcast for the Libertarian Party of Indiana. It will be available on the Party's website, www.lpin.org, and on iTunes, as well as here via the Kole Hard Facts.

I will be the host of the podcast, interviewing others promoting liberty in more meaningful ways than me- candidates, authors, researchers, and LP leaders- to get their takes on the events of the day, and what they are doing to advance their cause.

I sat down with LPIN State Chair Todd Singer tonight to record the basic interviews for a couple of podcasts. The finished product will be available next week.

This blog will continue, with all the wit and verve readers have come to expect. But I'm looking forward to being involved with regular broadcasting again. It's been more than six years since I had the opportunity, but podcasting makes it easy to do.

Never Wonder How We Got Soft

It starts with school, or, in this case, lack of school. It's -10 degrees out there, and I say, "BIG DEAL". Get in the classroom and learn. 306 school closings in Central Indiana? There isn't even any snowfall!

They don't even walk to school anyhow. They ride a bus, or parents drive them in. The kids face the onerous task of going from house to vehicle, then vehicle to school. Wow, that's rough.

The lesson we teach with these school closings is this: It's cold? Give up. Don't bother. Education certainly isn't worth overcoming predictable circumstances. Just give up.

Think the kids in Winnipeg stop going to school as soon as the temps fall below zero? No. they attend. They cope. They overcome.

That would be a good lesson for our kids.

State of the State Reviewed

The speech sounded like one delivered by a governor re-elected to his final term by a landslide percentage. In fact, he sounded rather like a libertarian, sounding the call for tighter budgets as the only common sense approach to tough economic times.

It was certainly music to my ears. I have been calling here for a 5% across-the-board budget cut for the last three years. Although such cuts would have done even more good in positioning our state better than New York or California, it's better late than never, and all to the good.

The real question I have is how effective Mitch Daniels can be in lashing the legislature on to do his bidding. Republicans like to spend tax dollars just as surely as Democrats. Daniels did the Reagan thing by going to the public with his strong appeal for cuts. Was the public listening? Will the public assert to their representatives in the Indiana House and Senate their desire to implement the governor's call for cuts?

Here are some lines from the Governor's speech that could have as easily come from a Libertarian governor:

First, no tax increases. A state striving for economic greatness should constantly be looking for ways to reduce its burden on workers and enterprise. A time of recession is the very last time at which government should add to the struggles of the citizens for whom it works.

Preserving government intact at the expense of families and businesses would be wrong in human terms and backwards in economic terms. The dollars claimed by higher taxes would come from families who need them more than ever to get by. They would come from businesses which would otherwise use them to keep someone on the payroll, or add a new job. Let's agree right now that, whatever course we take this budget year, higher taxes will play no part in it.

Bravo! Could have been written by Andy Horning or Kenn Gividen. Excellent!

The other good news was that Daniels urged the shelving of funding for full-day kindergarten and guaranteed college tuition. The budget can't be maintained if this bloat is added.

There was no word about the State's legacy costs, beyond a promise not to rob the pension fund in order to suppliment the budget. That's a glaring omission in light of the wreckage legacy costs have visited upon Ford, GM, and Chrysler. Governments give the fattest benefit packages in the country. This will come home to roost, and should be dealt with now, before we have the kinds of problems California is already beginning to experience.

Daniels continued to push for his consolidation plan. I'm just not sold on it because it looks merely like a panacea for those who want smaller government. For those who have wanted it and never seen it, smaller government includes smaller budgets, eliminated departments, and significantly fewer bureaucrats. So, let's look at one area of proposed consolidation, from the Kernan-Shepard recommendations:

Consolidation of Township Assessors. Property is still going to be assessed, because it is still going to be taxed. In a county with 9 townships, consolidating to the county level doesn't mean that one person is going to do the work of 9. It means that those who did the work will simply be housed in one location. Ok, that yields the savings on office space, and that shouldn't be overlooked. But that's nipping at the fringe of the cost.

Worse, it will make assessment less accountable, not more. Currently, the resident of the township can go to the Township Assessor's office if there is a dispute over the assessment. One-ninth of the County elects the Township Assessor, so if the township's people are dissatisfied with the work of that official, they can back a candidate and run them in the next primary. Under consolidation, if the citizens of one township are completely dissatisfied with the work of the County Assessor, they not only have to win their township, they have to win the votes of the other 8 townships with their candidate at the primary. In fact, a County Assessor can screw one township completely and be re-elected comfortably, if that screwed township generally votes for the minority party.

If you want to see how this plays out, a nice parallel exists in Hamilton County, where the County Commisioners members ostensibly represent a district, but are voted on at-large countywide. They sometimes lose their districts while winning on the backs of the areas they do not represent.

If you want smaller government, don't goof around with consolidation. Cut a department. Cut budgets by 20% instead of 5%. That's the real deal.

Bottom Line: Good speech, with nice substance for libertarians, even if it doesn't go nearly far enough towards more appropriately sized government.

Text of the speech.

For Your Listening Pleasure

...Or discomfort. I'll be on a special edition of WXNT's "Abdul in the Morning" show, this evening at 7pm, to discuss the governor's 'State of the State' speech. I will represent the Libertarian Party, alongside the other guys. Tune in to 1420-am, or listen online at www.wxnt.com.

Many thanks to Abdul for having me again. I was on a similar special show two years ago with him.

We Vote With Our Feet

This is a theme I have returned to many times over the years, because I myself have done it a few times.

I once lived in Cleveland and worked in suburban Parma, OH. Each city had a municipal income tax of 2%. When I finally gave up on my rough, decaying Cleveland neighborhood and moved to Parma, I gave myself a 2% raise. I got to thinking that I had to be an idiot to stay where the schools sucked, the crime rate was high, my auto and homeowners insurance rates were higher, and my commute was longer besides.

Later, I moved to Indianapolis. The Indiana tate income tax was lower than Ohio's, 3.1% to 7%; the sales tax was lower, then 6% to 8%; the property taxes were then about a third of what Ohio's were. Again, I thought what an idiot I would have to be choose Ohio.

Then we moved to Fishers. Again, the schools are better, the crime lower, the property taxes lower, the county income taxes lower, the insurance rates lower. Yet again, the thought of what kind of idiot I would have to be to choose Indy over Fishers came to mind, and continues to every time I learn of a violent crime in our previous neighborhood.

I expect to see a lot of migration in the next few years, as high tax jurisdictions are exposed for their empty rewards. From an AP report:

The number of people leaving California for another state outstripped the number moving in from another state during the year ending on July 1, 2008. California lost a net total of 144,000 people during that period — more than any other state, according to census estimates. That is about equal to the population of Syracuse, N.Y.

The state with the next-highest net loss through migration between states was New York, which lost just over 126,000 residents.

Two high-tax states lose population- before the economy really began to tank! It isn't news to me. We're going to see a lot more of it. Just wait until the legacy costs of those states and their cities do to them what they've done to GM, Ford, and Chrysler.

Among other things: California's unemployment rate hit 8.4 percent in November, the third-highest in the nation, and it is expected to get worse. A record 236,000 foreclosures are projected for 2008, more than the prior nine years combined, according to research firm MDA DataQuick. Personal income was about flat last year.

With state government facing a $41.6 billion budget hole over 18 months, residents are bracing for higher taxes, cuts in education and postponed tax rebates. A multibillion-dollar plan to remake downtown Los Angeles has stalled, and office vacancy rates there and in San Diego and San Jose surpass the 10.2 percent national average.

What I observed first-hand about Cleveland seems to hold true anywhere: The combination of high taxes and lousy schools is lethal. People of means and high values flee. Cities become magnets for the poor and the stupid.

In 1950, Cleveland's population was a shade under 915,000. By 2006, Cleveland had lost more than half its population. Chart.

Cities don't learn. Rather than lowering the taxes so as to attract people of means, they are wed to the glories that are their 'services', so they raise taxes evermore in order to keep revenues up, thereby chasing evermore people from their jurisdiction. The population gets poorer and dumber.

There are exceptions. Places like New York can get away with it because of the incredible cultural offerings. But, Detroit? Cleveland? Indianapolis? I think when the legacy costs come home to roost, you will see an exodus from NYC as well.

Blame the highways. Blame 'white flight'- although blacks with means flee all the same. Blame anything, but unless you start looking at tax policy and ask people of means just how much they value the 'services' provided by government, you're going to miss the mark. Notice that people of means leave the places with the most services, and taxes. They prefer to leave what they built behind for others, starting completely new in another area, just to be left alone, away from the greedy hands that gobble taxes.

I will probably vote with my feet again, if Fishers continues to grow, and add services, and employees, and legacy costs. I don't want any of that stuff, but the Bigger Brains create it and fatten it, so I'll eventually flee it.

It should become an environmental cause to lower taxes. Hey- it would prevent sprawl!

(h/t: Duncan Adams, for the California article)

Obama Takes Lesson From Bush

Change? Seriously, when will we be seeing some of this change Obama spoke of for about a year?

We can split hairs on this down the page, but the bottom line is this: Obama criticized outgoing President Bush for tax-cut-and-spend policies. Now Obama proposes massive tax-cut-and-spend policy. From CNN:

President-elect Barack Obama launched his campaign Monday for a massive package of tax cuts and spending proposals aimed at reviving an economy mired in recession.

...

Middle-class tax cut: Obama would offer a tax cut equal to $500 a year for individuals and $1,000 for couples. The credit would work essentially as a payroll tax credit, meaning the money could be delivered fairly quickly. Companies could simply reduce the tax they withhold from employees' paychecks.

The tax credit is likely to be offered only to those below a certain income level, but the Obama team hasn't specified where the cut-off point would be. The credit also would be refundable, meaning that even tax filers without any tax liability -- typically very low-income workers -- would receive one.

The credible criticism of Bush was that cutting taxes while drastically increasing spending will bring a deficit. This is something Obama was correct in identifying. Now that he is The Office of President Elect, it is suddenly something that works?

"We're working with Congress to develop a tax-cut package based on a simple principle - what will have the biggest and most immediate impact on creating private sector jobs and strengthening the middle class. We're guided by what works, not by any ideology or special interests," an Obama spokesperson told CNNMoney.com in an e-mail.

So, tax-cut-and-spend now works, with the difference being that the right constituent group are the recipients of the tax break. Some change. The math is exactly the George W. Bush same. Democrats were complaining that Laffer was wrong, and that marginal tax cuts do not yield higher returns. Is Laffer suddenly right? Is George Bush? Is there really a substantial difference in letting the middle class be favored to keep a slice of their earnings versus the highest wage earners?

I think tax cut and larger spending cut is the right recipe for this economic climate. Tax cut and spending freeze comes in second. Tax cut and spending spree comes in a very distant third.

Going to be a long 2009.

When Idealism Becomes Realism

Many of the things that have come home to roost lately are things libertarians have been warning against for years. Back then, it was the stuff of conspiracy, of loony tinfoil hat wearing eggheads, studying things that looked like such minutiae in the glory days of the 90s bubble.

So, let's look at some of the things that we are doing now, and consider that we were right on our predictions then, so we might just have a grasp on what to expect with what is being done now. We looked idealistic then. Applying our principles now would be a good, necessary dose of realism.

The bailouts are a disaster. It is said that these businesses being propped up are too big to fail, or too important to just stand back and do nothing about. So, our federal government, with bi-partisan Republican and Democratic support, is giving them money.

If the problem is that President Bush approved budgets submitted by Congresses that had majorities from each party that were characterized by deficit spending, and much of our economic distress can be traced to our deficit, does it make sense to expand or contract the size of government, and therefore the cost of the government?

If the problem in lending is that lenders made bad, greedy decisions in making certain loans, which would correct the problem most swiftly? Letting them fail on the outcome of those decisions, or rewarding them?

If the problem is that borrowers took loans that they had no hope of repaying, or put them in a situation that they were one hiccup from foreclosure, which would correct the problem most swiftly and make sure it doesn't happen again? Letting them fail on the outcome of having extended themselves dangerously, or forgiving that behavior?

If the problem is that some automakers have legacy costs so severe that they cannot compete with others, will they be inclined to address their legacy cost issues if they are flush with cash, or if they are on a tight budget?

If the problem is that companies' executives lavish themselves with outlandish compensation packages, will that problem be best corrected by giving the companies free money, or if they have just enough to continue operations?

We can look at some local issues, too.

If the problem is that citizens of Indianapolis feel unsafe because of violent crime in the city, will they feel safer if they, as law abiding citizens, are stripped of their guns? Or, will they simply move out of Indianapolis for the suburbs, leaving the criminals who are not inclined to follow the law to remain, making the city even more violent and criminal?

If the problem is that employers leave the city for a rural area because of high taxes, will more businesses stay or leave if taxes are raised?

How is additional regulation supposed to fix these problems? Why are we putting our faith in more government? Americans have looked to the past for clues, and are convinced that we 'did nothing' about the problems that led to the stock market crash of 1929, and therefore created the Great Depression. Whatever the merit to that argument, it does not correspond to today's situation, where doing nothing would be exactly the right tonic for bad lenders, bad borrowers, and bad business leaders. It would be corrective, and instructive. It would also be just.

I cannot think of anything more unjust than what we are doing right now- taking from everyone to reward failure. It's just as wrong as wrong can be. It's wrong from an idealistic standpoint, and from a realistic standpoint.

Well, maybe we could do something. Our leaders could be leaders, and send the right signals to the people, by browbeating all these groups in public forums.

Smoking, Again

It appears that Indiana is poised to consider a statewide ban on smoking in places of public accommodation. No sir, I don't like it.

I don't smoke. Never have. I detest the smell of tobacco smoke. What I do like are property rights.

There's no doubt that smoking can kill you, and that secondhand smoke can also kill you. I'm not advocating smoking or hanging around in smoky bars. But people engage in this behavior, using a legal product, for a variety of reasons, none of which especially needs to be justified to me.

I trust business owners to set their own policies. Some restaurant owners long ago set smoke-free policies as a matter of their business plan, hoping to attract a clientele that prefers a smoke-free atmosphere. But there is clearly also a market for restaurants that permit a post-meal smoke. If the owner permits it, and you chose to walk in, who is harmed?

Some say that the people who work there are harmed. Sure they are, if they choose to work in a smoky environment. Who is taking what gun and pointing it to their heads, forcing them to be there? But, it's their job!

Well, no. It isn't their job. The job, like the building, belong to the employer. The employee is one who agrees to be there, on an agreed-to set of terms. Now, there may be some stupid employees out there, who didn't bother to discuss the terms, or who were somehow non-observant of the conditions of the workplace when they accepted the job of their own volition.

If the employer permits smoking by employees, the smoker isn't 'intervening' into the non-smoker's space. He is smoking in the space provided by the employer. The life, liberty of the property owner comes before the non-property owner who is invited into the building. It's the primacy of the property owner over the visitor that is important.

Consider your home for a minute. Would you not consider it absurd to invite guests over and then have them determine the policies of your home? So, why is a place of business any different?

America is really losing its' way with regards to freedom, and understanding freedom. When anybody but the property owner can dictate the policies affecting that property, there is no freedom, but fascism.

But, since it's clear that there are health risks associated with the use of tobacco, it seems prudent for those offering smoking policies to warn their potential guests. We have warning labels on cigarette packages. There is no reason why we can't have the smoking policy of various establishments clearly posted at all entrances so that informed choices can be made. This way, those who hate smoke, like me, can figure out if we want to enter or not. those who smoke can go where they want to as well.

Seems like a nice, King Solomon compromise solution- One that respects freedom.

And, Here's The Inflation

Well, I guess the rate can't be cut much lower than 0.5%, so what's left to do? Fire up the printing presses! Make some of that 'money' out of thin air! From CNNMoney:

...the Fed will likely continue to use its new favorite tool, quantitative easing, "Fed-speak" for pouring new money into the economy.

In addition to lowering rates, the Fed has increased its lending to financial institutions and foreign central banks throughout the year to ease the credit crunch. But when the financial markets exploded into crisis-mode in mid-September, the Fed's reserve of Treasurys to support its lending began to run low. As a result, the central bank began firing up the printing presses, financing drastically increased lending to banks, purchases of corporate debt and bailouts of troubled institutions like AIG.

So, I hope you did invest in gold, or some other commodity that can hold its' value. Your currency isn't going to be worth anything.

"The end result of all of this could be the next major problem: the crisis of confidence in the dollar," said Baumohl. "At some point, foreign investors are not going to come to the table to buy U.S. debt, leading to a dollar decline."

I'm more worried about by purchasing power, although to hear the disciples of FDR, a body blow to my purchasing power is a blessing.

I can't wait to watch the left struggle to explain itself. How is it that the Clinton era was so prosperous under the anti-inflationary eye of Alan Greenspan, and we are to return to prosperity with Obama under an inflationary course?

I get to thinking about my favorite stories of Weimar Germany, hoping it never reaches us. From a nice, short history via PBS:

Pianos, wrote the British historian Adam Fergusson, were bought even by unmusical families. Sellers held back because the Mark was worth less every day. As prices went up, the amounts of currency demanded were greater, and the German Central Bank responded to the demands. Yet the ruling authorities did not see anything wrong. A leading financial newspaper said that the amounts of money in circulation were not excessively high. Dr. Rudolf Havenstein, the president of the Reichsbank (equivalent to the Federal Reserve) told an economics professor that he needed a new suit but wasn't going to buy one until prices came down.

Why did the German government not act to halt the inflation? It was a shaky, fragile government, especially after the assassination. The vengeful French sent their army into the Ruhr to enforce their demands for reparations, and the Germans were powerless to resist. More than inflation, the Germans feared unemployment. In 1919 Communists had tried to take over, and severe unemployment might give the Communists another chance. The great German industrial combines -- Krupp, Thyssen, Farben, Stinnes -- condoned the inflation and survived it well. A cheaper Mark, they reasoned, would make German goods cheap and easy to export, and they needed the export earnings to buy raw materials abroad. Inflation kept everyone working.

So the printing presses ran, and once they began to run, they were hard to stop. The price increases began to be dizzying. Menus in cafes could not be revised quickly enough. A student at Freiburg University ordered a cup of coffee at a cafe. The price on the menu was 5,000 Marks. He had two cups. When the bill came, it was for 14,000 Marks. "If you want to save money," he was told, "and you want two cups of coffee, you should order them both at the same time."

and

The flight from currency that had begun with the buying of diamonds, gold, country houses, and antiques now extended to minor and almost useless items -- bric-a-brac, soap, hairpins. The law-abiding country crumbled into petty thievery. Copper pipes and brass armatures weren't safe. Gasoline was siphoned from cars. People bought things they didn't need and used them to barter -- a pair of shoes for a shirt, some crockery for coffee. Berlin had a "witches' Sabbath" atmosphere. Prostitutes of both sexes roamed the streets. Cocaine was the fashionable drug. In the cabarets the newly rich and their foreign friends could dance and spend money. Other reports noted that not all the young people had a bad time. Their parents had taught them to work and save, and that was clearly wrong, so they could spend money, enjoy themselves, and flout the old.

The publisher Leopold Ullstein wrote: "People just didn't understand what was happening. All the economic theory they had been taught didn't provide for the phenomenon. There was a feeling of utter dependence on anonymous powers -- almost as a primitive people believed in magic -- that somebody must be in the know, and that this small group of 'somebodies' must be a conspiracy."

When the 1,000-billion Mark note came out, few bothered to collect the change when they spent it. By November 1923, with one dollar equal to one trillion Marks, the breakdown was complete. The currency had lost meaning.

I hope it never comes to this. Perhaps we will only go as far as revisiting the 1970s economy. This crisis has all the markings of history repeating itself, though, by way of willful ignorance of economics, and a mindless scoffing at sound money as 'mere ideology'.

Best be prepared.

Recession Economics

When times are tight and money isn't a-flowing from your wallet, would you prefer that your dollar had greater purchasing power, or weaker? Would you prefer that your cost of living increased, or decreased?

With the economic in the tank, government intervention is seen by many as the best way to revive it. One person held as a hero to many for economic turnaround is FDR. One of the tools FDR used to try to revive the economy was inflation. One of the hallmarks of the prosperity of the 1990's under the Clinton Administration and Alan Greenspan's Fed was the very low rate of inflation.

These endless bailouts are going to generate inflation, whether that is the design or not, because the money being doled out doesn't exist. It has to be printed or borrowed, and with our borrowing capacity nearly tapped, it's going to have to be printed- created out of thin air.

Obama is in favor of the bailouts, so by extension, he is in favor of inflation.

Here's an interesting bit of propaganda from 1933, extolling the virtues of inflation, i.e.: the weakening of your purchasing power and the raising of your cost of living.



(h/t: Chris Spangle)