Governor Daniels on Amtrak

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Poker Results

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See you at Barley Island next Thursday!

Poker Tonight

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

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

Another Distraction

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

This time? Abortion.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Interesting Comments By A Conservative

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Google-O-Rama

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

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

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

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

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

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

Texas Hold 'Em Fun

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

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

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

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

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

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

Priority Number One?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report Card Is In

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

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

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

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

Preach it! Indiana was graded an overall C+.

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

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

Boredom Follow-up

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

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

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

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

Lamest Ever

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Way to go, NFL.

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

Ayn Rand's 100th Birthday

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

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

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

Nutshell State of the Union Review

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Campaign Photos

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

The Glorious Acts of Our Legislature, II

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Glorious Acts of Our Indiana Legislature

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Could we really ban Britney Spears CDs? I digress.

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

This begs the significant philosophical question: Why bother?

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

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

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

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

The Latest From The Libertarian Writer's Bureau

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

Worse Than Tsunami, Trade Protectionism Hurts Third World Citizens

by Dr. Eric Schansberg
Libertarian Writers' Bureau

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

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

Why does this occur?

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is What You Want, This is What You Get

Worst fears have been confirmed. Governor Mitch Daniels is a Republican of the new mold- not at all a fiscal conservative, but something they self-describe as “fiscally responsible”.

In his State of the State Address tonight, Daniels begun to make good on the implied threat that he would raise taxes to balance the budget. His recommendation to lawmakers is that state income taxes should be raised 1% for those who earn $100,000 or more. Indy Star story.

Fiscal conservatives wanted a Governor who would cut spending at the least, and possibly even cut taxes. What they- and all Hoosiers- got was a liberal Republican, one who believes in the progressive income tax.

One line stuck out, and I was glad to see the Star report it: "The wolf is not at the door, he is inside the cabin," Daniels said. Actually, Daniels is the wolf, and the cabin is the Statehouse.

What is remarkable about this brainburst is that it Hamilton County takes the lion’s share of the credit for electing Daniels. County GOP Vice Chair Charlie White mustered over 700 volunteers in support of the Daniels' campaign. Some thanks White and Hamilton County gets for their effort. Hamilton County is also where a preponderance of those earning $100,000 or more live. Why not just stop by everyone's house to personally slap their faces?

Daniels had the incredibly bad form to recommend a temporary income tax. To paraphrase Will Rogers and speak common wisdom, there is nothing quite as permanent as a temporary tax increase.

This is obvious. It’s so obvious that even a Democrat from Gary could scoff at Daniels’ claim. From another Star article:

Rep. Charlie Brown, D-Gary, "whoever heard of a temporary tax increase?"

Fiscal conservatives have been sold out at the top. The next question is: Will the legislature follow? You can tell that Republicans want to support their man Mitch, but know that promises have been made not to raise taxes.

Rep. Gerald Torr, a Carmel Republican whose constituents would be disproportionately affected by the one-year income tax increase, said he'd like to talk to Daniels about including a provision to refund the tax increase when the state's finances improve.

Torr, whose party took control of the House with 52 of its 100 seats in the last election, said: "There are a lot of us who aren't terribly excited about a tax increase."

Fiscal conservatives had pinned their hopes on Daniels and have been let down. When will you learn?

You need to vote Libertarian if you ever want a significant budget or tax cut. Republicans clearly lack the courage.

The Lighter Side of Flooding

Since most of Indiana has some measure of standing water covering it, and has for about two weeks now, it seems that many are throwing up their hands in realization that Mother Nature will need some time to run its course, taking water from the various streams to the White River, on to the Ohio, the Mississippi, and to the Gulf of Mexico. Ditto, obviously, California and the Pacific Basin.

Ergo, this joke. I wish I could give credit to somebody on it, but it's one of those making the rounds via e-mail without credit. Enjoy!


It was the year 2004 and Noah lives in the United States. The Lord spoke to Noah and said:

"In one year I am going to make it rain and cover the whole earth with water until all is destroyed. But I want you to save the righteous people and two of every kind of living
thing on the earth. Therefore, I am commanding you to build an Ark."

In a flash of lightning, God delivered the specifications for an Ark. Fearful and trembling, Noah took the plans and agreed to build the Ark.

"Remember," said the Lord, "You must complete the Ark and bring everything aboard in one year."

Exactly one year later, a fierce storm cloud covered the earth and all the seas of the earth went into a tumult. The Lord saw Noah sitting in his front yard weeping. "Noah." He shouted, "Where is the Ark?"

"Lord please forgive me!" cried Noah. "I did my best but there were big problems. First, I had to get a permit for construction and your plans did not comply with the codes. I had to hire an engineering firm and redraw the plans. Then I got into a fight with OSHA over whether or not the Ark needed a fire sprinkler system and floatation devices.

"Then my neighbor objected, claiming I was violating zoning ordinances by building the Ark in my front yard, so I had to get a variance from the city planning commission. I had problems getting enough wood for the Ark, because there was a ban on cutting trees
to protect the Spotted Owl, and a substantial tariff on Canadian lumber.

"I finally convinced the US Forest Service that I needed the wood to save the owls. However, the Fish and Wildlife Service won't let me catch any owls. So, no owls. The carpenters formed a union and went out on strike. I had to negotiate a settlement with the National Labor Union.

"Now I have 16 carpenters on the Ark, but still no owls. When I started rounding up the other animals, I got sued by an animal rights group. They objected to me only taking two of each kind aboard. Just when I got the suit dismissed, the EPA notified me that I could not complete the Ark without filing an environmental impact statement on your proposed flood.

"They didn't take very kindly to the idea that they had no jurisdiction over the conduct of
the Creator of the universe.

"Then the Army Corps of Engineers demanded a map of the proposed new flood plain. I sent them a globe.

"Right now, I am trying to resolve a complaint filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that I am practicing discrimination by not taking godless, unbelieving people aboard!

"The IRS has seized all my assets, claiming that I'm building the Ark in preparation to flee the country to avoid paying taxes. I just got a notice from the State that I owe some kind of user tax and failed to register the Ark as a "recreational water craft."

"Finally the ACLU got the courts to issue an injunction against further construction of the Ark, saying that since God is flooding the earth, it is a religious event and therefore unconstitutional.
I really don't think I can finish the Ark for another 5 or 6 years!" Noah wailed.

The sky began to clear, the sun began to shine and the seas began to calm. A rainbow arched across the sky.

Noah looked up hopefully. "You mean you are not going to destroy the earth, Lord?"

"No," said the Lord sadly. "The government already has. "

More How To Govern 101

The boldness of new governor Mitch Daniels is astounding. He hasn't taken a soft item yet. Everything is laced with controversy. I guess that 9-point victory over Joe Kernan is not merely interpreted as a mandate, but as holy writ.

First issue: Daylight savings time, with built-in 50/50 division.
Second issue: Severing the collective bargaining agreement with state employees, creating very interested opposition from the affected unions, and a sizeable percentage of the employees.

New issue: cutting Indiana Medicaid. Indy Star story. Expect to hear the wailing immediately. "Evil Mitch Daniels is taking aid away from the children!" That claim is fact. Medicade stats show that nearly 70% of recipients are children. "Those vicious Republicans are taking away from the poor!" Well, 92% of spending is on the disabled, elderly, and children. Mitch Roob is a human services aide to the governor. His comments in the Star story give all the ammo the opponents will need. Quoth the Star:

"Roob, who used to run Wishard Memorial Hospital, a county-run hospital in
Indianapolis, acknowledged that cutting Medicaid payments could limit access to
pregnant women and children, people with physical and mental disabilities and
seniors who rely on the state-federal program."

The problem with identifying individual programs for cuts is that their defenders pop out, decrying the action as unfair, and say that there are better targets for cuts. Raising taxes on millionaires is popular policy, since most people aren't millionaires, and nobody feels sorry for millionaires anyways. But pregnant women and children?

If you really want to cut a budget, you pretty well have to cut across the board. If this kind of cut is promoted, nobody can claim they have been singled out. No lobby can emerge and call it unfair. You can make it strictly economic and point to the dollars coming in and the current spending commitments, and show the difference.

I prefer a 10% cut across the board. If there is a surplus generated by this, put half in the emergency fund, and return the other half to the taxpayers in a refund check.