Author: Redactor

A friend of mine recently suffered an economic setback. He lost a major client. My friend is doing what all businessmen must do when something like this happens. First, he’s trying to drum up some new business. And second, he’s spending more money than ever before. Just as fast as he can. Buying lots of expensive new clothing. Taking lots of trips he doesn’t need to take. Giving his landlord extra rent money, etc. My friend says it’s deficit spending so he can boost the local economy. Is this guy an idiot? Yes. And I made it all up. Gotcha.

Actually, I don’t know anybody at all who would behave this way, not with his own money. What people really do in this kind of case is cut expenses, not increase expenses. They tighten their belts. Yet, when it comes to the whole economy, some people want the federal government to hand out more and more money to anybody who puts in an application. And they call these handouts “stimulus packages.” But the money for the handouts has to come from somewhere, namely, from other people. Which means that those other people now have less money than they had before. Less money to pay their rent or hire new people or what have you. And of course the bureaucratic middleman gets a big cut too.

So this “stimulus” to the economy is really a net drain on the economy. If we want to help the economy, let’s make it easier for people to help themselves to plan better over the long run. That means cut spending AND cut taxes. Not just as a temporary stimulus, but permanently.

This is Common Sense.  I’m Paul Jacob.

Remember Deena Gilbey? She was the British woman at risk of being deported after her husband died in the recent attacks. Her residency status depended on her husband’s work visa. So within days of the 9/11 tragedy, the Immigration and Naturalization Service was telling Mrs. Gilbey that with the end of her husband came the end of her legal residency.  Well, there was such an uproar, the INS backed down and agreed to let her stay. They’ll be kinder and gentler about similar cases, they say. But INS is not the only three-letter acronym causing problems for victims of the tragedy.

The IRS fears that bereaved foreign spouses will pack up and head home, along with all family assets. So they force such widows and widowers to cough up the estate tax immediately. For Americans, the tax affects everything above the first $675,000 of assets. But for foreign nationals, everything above $60,000 is affected. Brutal.

So now one Lucy Thompson also from Britain has to worry about the IRS plunging its meat hooks into her husband’s life insurance and her home in New Jersey the home where the U.S. flag hangs next to the Union Jack. If she moves fast, she might be able to protect the insurance money with a restrictive trust fund.

But why should she have to suffer this assault at all? It’s ironic. The British have been more vocal than anybody in supporting the U.S. during this terrible time. But nobody from anywhere deserves this kind of sledgehammer after losing a loved one. If what’s going on now isn’t an argument to kill the death tax, I don’t know what is.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has done a wonderful job of rallying New Yorkers in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks. In fact, he’s inspired the entire country. His performance has led some pundits to disparage New York City’s term limits law that requires Rudy to step down at the end of the year.

First, they suggested the law should be overturned by the state legislature or the city council under some sort of emergency basis. The mayor considered supporting such a push, but soon rejected that idea. Now the pundits say that Mayor Giuliani is the best argument against term limits. I don’t think so.

Virtually everyone can support term limits if we’re talking about Gary Condit, Bob Packwood, Rostenkowski, or any number of others. But if term limits are a good idea, they are a good idea for even the best people. George Washington comes to mind: a great and noble leader who started the two-term presidential tradition. Term limits gave us a President Jefferson, and term limits may give us a Senator Giuliani too, or a Governor Giuliani or a President Giuliani. Certainly, after he leaves office, there is no stopping Rudy from playing a tremendous role in rebuilding New York.

Recent polls show the mayor has a good or excellent rating from over 90 percent of the city’s electorate. But those same polls asked those same New York City voters if they wanted to keep term limits. Well, they do and by the same margin they passed term limits eight years ago! Oh, ask the voters . . . why didn’t the media think of that?

This is Common Sense . I’m Paul Jacob.

Do you know who I am? Okay, I know you know me the guy on the radio who believes in term limits and putting citizens in charge. What I mean is, do you know what I look like? Have you got a holo-image of my face? My social security number? My thumbprint? Do you have access to the video-cam sweeps being conducted at my most current location?

Well, I don’t really want you to have that information about me. And I don’t want that information about you, either. Not unless you’re a criminal.

Our country has just been attacked big-time, and it’s an awful lot to deal with. Some things we can and must do right away, to protect ourselves. But some proposals that sound good at first, probably won’t sound so good after we’ve had a chance to think them through. A number of people have said that to get a little more security they’d be willing to give up a little, or a lot, of their liberty. But I think any such trade-off will hurt more than it helps.

Consider the notion of a national ID card, which a certain ex-President tried to foist on us back in 1993, along with a national government-run health care plan. We decided against the plan and the card back then, and I think we should say no to the card now, too. It would put too much private information about us in too many hands and be too easy to abuse. Not good for personal security. President Bush seems to agree with me. I don’t want your Social Security number, but I do want your opinion. Let me know.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

It’s hard to miss: The dash for the telephones; the rush to fill a sudden vacuum; the mad scramble. Amazing, yet predictable. Electoral competition. Democracy. Not necessarily every time there’s an election, but at least every time there’s an open seat. Every time an entrenched incumbent finally decides to step down, then we get some action. As we are getting action now in Texas.

A few weeks back Texas Senator Phil Gramm announced that he would not run for reelection next year. After a moment of stunned silence, the scramble for his seat has begun … and also the scramble for other statewide seats, as folks revise their bets and their ambitions in response to a radically altered political landscape.

The Texas attorney general, John Cornyn, is among those who have announced plans to run for Senate. Two former senatorial candidates and the Dallas mayor are also thinking about throwing their hats in the ring. State land commissioner David Dewhurst had planned to run for lieutenant governor but then decided to run for senator, until John Cornyn entered the race. Now Dewhurst is running for lieutenant governor again. So former Supreme Court Justice Greg Abbott, who had been thinking about running for lieutenant governor, is now planning to run for attorney general. Of course, the governor’s seat is wide open too, since the guy who used to be the popular governor, George Bush, recently became President.

Gosh, it’s so confusing. People are running for this, for that, for the other. It’s like you’ve got to read the paper now before you even enter the voting booth. Real democracy kind of cool when you think about it!

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

I’m a loving guy. But some things just make me mad, I’m sorry.

Jefferson Middle School in Fort Wayne, Indiana has an image of a Minuteman on a wall near the main door. It is, or was, a depiction of the kind of man who fought for our freedom and helped to found our great republic. How did the patriots of the Revolutionary War accomplish this deed? With guns, folks. Muskets. And the soldier on that wall of Jefferson Middle School had a musket too. At least, he did until now.

Because now the principal at Jefferson Middle has decided to have that musket painted out of the picture. He says it’s his patriotic duty to do so in these trying times. He says guns have no place in school. I see. And what about the textbooks in the school? Are we going to paint over all the muskets in the pictures and the words there, too? Well, then we’re going to have an awful hard time explaining how we beat the Redcoats and won our independence, because it wasn’t with pitchforks.

We’ll have an even harder time explaining the first clash of the Revolution. After all, it was the attempt of the British General Thomas Gage to seize a munitions depot at Concord that drew the “shot heard ’round the world.”

A gun is a good thing if it’s used by soldiers or police or citizens to defend life and liberty. A gun is a bad thing if it is used to destroy life and liberty. There’s a difference. And that difference can be taught. But, apparently, not in school.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Credit where credit is due. I’ve complained about congressional pork-barrel spending in the past, and I’ll complain about congressional pork-barrel spending in the future. But when Congress exercises the fiscal discipline to do the right thing, I have to say thanks, and keep up the good work. I look forward to seeing more of the same in the very near future.

Just a week or two ago on this program, I complained about all the congressional foot-dragging when it came to closing military bases bases the military itself says are now obsolete. Indeed, there was a whole decade there in which Congress did virtually nothing to implement the military’s recommendations. They treated the bases more as work projects than as a means of defending our country. Closings have been accomplished just the same, but in a very haphazard way, with lots of fits and starts.

But now the U.S. Senate has authorized the Department of Defense to complete a fourth round of closures. John Berthoud, president of National Taxpayers Union, applauds the action and invites the U.S. House to echo the go-ahead. “During times of peace and prosperity,” says Berthoud, “it was easy for Members of Congress to get away with reducing defense spending while increasing pork-barrel spending. . . . Now Congress has the opportunity, and the obligation, to allow the military to do what every government agency should do operate as efficiently as possible, and take whatever cost-cutting measures are necessary to eliminate waste and make the best use of taxpayers’ money.”

Well, I agree, Mr. Berthoud. Time’s a-wastin’. Let’s roll.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Deena Gilbey is a British woman living in New Jersey. Her husband had a work visa to be in the U.S. and she was a “dependent” on that visa. Mrs. Gilbey’s husband was killed in the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. Now somehow she has no legal status in this country.

Within days of the bombing, she received a letter from the government telling her she must leave though her two small children, both American citizens, are free to stay in the country as orphans. That’s not all. The IRS can grab 60 percent of the life insurance benefit her husband left for her. If she were a U.S. citizen, the IRS couldn’t get a penny.

Mrs. Gilbey is understandably shocked. She says, “My husband was murdered in this country, his remains are still there somewhere at Ground Zero, and now the U.S. government is killing us all over again.” An unsettling story. But the reaction of the people in Chatham Township, New Jersey demonstrates all that is good about the American way.

The police chief promises to barricade the house if immigration officials dare to serve a warrant on Mrs. Gilbey. The fire chief agrees, saying, “The American people will simply not allow anyone, including our own government, to disturb or harass Mrs. Gilbey.” Our federal elected officials must take action.

Congress can act to protect not just Mrs. Gilbey, but any person caught in such a ridiculous and callous situation. And President Bush, as the nation’s chief executive, can also use his power to prevent this injustice. Things like this shouldn’t happen. Not in America.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Liberty is expensive. The price is eternal vigilance. If a war is just, it is fought to protect life and liberty. But there is a danger that the battle for liberty will also be used to rationalize restrictions on liberty.

In the early days of the Republic, our second president, John Adams, used a war with France to impose the Alien and Sedition Act. This Act repressed the speech of resident aliens and even American citizens who might oppose the war. The Act also provided for indefinite detention and expulsion of aliens.

Liberty also suffered during other times of crisis. Everyone remembers how Japanese citizens were interned during World War II, no matter how loyal and innocent they were.

Even without explicit government action, open discussion of ideas and policy can be jeopardized. Citizens may sometimes muzzle themselves, out of fearing to seem disloyal.

Joe Andrews is a political reporter who has noticed a drop-off in political debate. He worries, “Will every political difference . . . be portrayed now as an unpatriotic display of partisanship? Our patriotism is premised on our democracy. . . . That is why there is so much danger in politics dying.” Andrews has a legitimate concern. But I am confident that we won’t let the terrorists warp our American way of life.

Most Americans know that in a battle for freedom, the winning strategy is not to support America and shut up, but to support America and speak up. So if you love liberty, practice it. It may be the most patriotic thing you can do.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.