Author: Redactor

Those poor, poor politicians, they get awfully tired. Dodging the tough issues can wear a body out. And having to pretend to serve the people while pursuing the perks and privileges of a power, well . . . sometimes it gets to be too much.

So the politicians in Oregon decided to do something about it to tell the pesky citizens to pay their taxes and then “Butt out!” Legislators filed 50 different bills that would in one way or another destroy the citizen initiative process in the state. After all, it was by citizen initiative that the people passed term limits. The politicians would never have done so.

Virtually every other reform you can imagine has only one good chance to become law. Through the legislature? Ha, not on your life. Only through voter initiative can citizens break up the monopoly politicians have created for themselves. The Oregon Legislature placed a measure on this May’s ballot to increase by a whopping 50 percent the petition signatures required to place a voter-sponsored initiative on the ballot. The supporters of the legislature’s measure admit it will give an advantage to wealthier groups. Even so, a retired state judge said, “It is not a solution, but it would give us a breather.”

A breather? Yes, they want a breather from democracy, so they can better plot removing the people from future decisions. Oh, we’re always happy to give the career politicians a breather. How about term limits?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

When people contribute money to political candidates, I think that’s great. My first thought is that they must agree with the ideas that candidate is campaigning for. But too often career politicians in the Congress show their fundraising efforts are geared to those who want or need to buy influence, not to those who support their general ideas about governance.

Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia, the Chairman of the House Republican campaign committee, is under fire from Democrats because he told multi-billionaire Bill Gates, chairman of Microsoft Corporation, that he had not given Republicans enough money, or as Davis put it, “political support.” Bill Gates and his company, Microsoft, have gone through hell in the courts over the past several years for committing the sin of doing better than their competitors in the marketplace.

If Republicans agree that Microsoft is being harmed by arbitrary court action, they shouldn’t need an additional pay-off from Bill Gates in order to fight for what they believe is right and just. The federal budget should not be a slush fund used by career politicians to reward their friends. Nor should the federal regulatory and police powers be used to threaten political enemies.

But the longer politicians stay in Congress, the more they tend to accept and practice a corrupt doctrine. A doctrine that says the federal government and our tax dollars are theirs to use as clubs to coerce political support. No wonder there’s so much cynicism about Washington.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Wouldn’t it be nice if when you paid your income tax, you could send the money to the programs or projects you thought most important? Here’s one I bet wouldn’t get too many people checking the box: funding the decadent shindigs that we still for some reason call “political conventions.”

This year, Republicans partying in Philadelphia and Democrats celebrating in L.A. will churn through some 26 million of our tax dollars for the all-important cause of hoopla. The Reform Party will get a few million dollars as well. Yes, we taxpayers are buying balloons, confetti, fancy hors d’oeuvres, liquor and entertainment so the political elite can have a swell time. Somehow having my tax dollars given away to fund party favors for politicians just doesn’t warm my heart the way making a donation to a local charity does.

Some will say, “Oh, it’s only a trifling $26 million smackers. What’s the big deal? In a $1.8 trillion budget, that’s nothing.” But you know, a million here and a million there and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.

To take the fruit of someone’s labor away from them is bad enough. But to take it away to fund extravagant parties for a special elite group is a special insult added to injury. My Mother used to say, “Don’t be a party pooper.” Well, sorry Ma, I really don’t have anything against someone having a party; it’s just that when I’m paying the bills, I’m cheap.

At least, cheaper than politicians.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Career politicians always tell us how long it takes to learn the ropes, to climb the seniority ladder and “get things done.” In a recent debate, a candidate for Congress refused to make a term limits pledge saying he thought it would take him 17 years to gain enough seniority to be effective. In other words, just elect and reelect me eight times and then look out because maybe I’ll finally get around to doing something.

Of course, too often what the career politicians call “getting things done” is often better described as pork-barreling for fun and political profit. For instance, Rep. Doug Bereuter of Nebraska, a 22-year incumbent, candidly admits what he and fellow GOP careerists are up to this year, [quote] “avoiding political difficulties and helping constituencies that are favorable.”

In other words, they’re using our tax dollars to reward their supporters and win votes. That’s what they’re getting done. Sound noble to you?

But Rep. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, a freshman, is getting things done right now. He just passed legislation to take $4 billion of the surplus out of the hands of congressional politicians, and instead use it to pay down the national debt. Long-serving members were amazed that a freshman could get such an important bill passed.

Why is Toomey getting things done instead of just marking time? Well, he has no time to waste. He pledged to go to Washington for a short period of public service, three terms, not a career. So waiting around isn’t part of his plan.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Our Constitution begins with the words “We the People.” Was that just a typo?

I ask because David Broder, the Washington Post reporter, has written a book attacking the right of voters to enact laws directly through the initiative process. Broder argues that the process destroys representative government, has no constitutional restraint, and is corrupted by special interests.

Should we fear initiatives? Our Constitution protects us from laws that abridge our rights whether passed by voters or imposed by politicians. But in reality, initiatives are regularly struck down by the same courts that regularly give a free pass to acts of the legislature.

What about corruption? There’s a long, ugly history of legislators taking bribes and doing the bidding of special interests. But can special interests pay off an entire city, an entire state? Get real, Broder. Power corrupts men, but an initiative, a piece of paper, cannot be corrupted.

So why the antagonism for initiatives? Broder, like most of elite Washington, opposes term limits and tax reforms that have come about almost exclusively through the citizen initiative process. If you don’t like it when people regain control over their own lives and their own government, you won’t like initiatives.

Broder doesn’t think much of the average voter. Let career politicians decide all. Dane Waters of the Initiative & Referendum Institute admits that no lawmaking process is perfect, but asks, “If the people can’t be trusted, who can?”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

You may have seen the article in your local newspaper, unless of course you’ve been too busy to read the paper because you’ve been rummaging through old receipts and struggling with various tax equations in order to get your federal income taxes filed. Well, the message from Congress on paying your taxes may be “Why bother?”

You see, the IRS just reported that members of Congress and their staffs owe about $10.5 million dollars in unpaid taxes, “one of the highest rates of delinquency in the federal government” and higher than that of the general public.

I guess they can’t say they gave at the office. You’d think that since members of Congress get to spend all the money, they’d be more willing than the average citizen to pay their share. But apparently no.

I’m troubled, but I’m also sympathetic. You know, the tax bite is huge. Federal income taxes alone are monstrous. But add those state and local taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, the tax on this and the tax on that, and the total bill is tough for anybody to pay. How come we gotta pay all those taxes? Oh, a little thing called “unbridled spending” by greedy career politicians in collusion with greedy special interests.

We have met the enemy and it’s the career politicians in Washington. It is a shame that politicians in Congress must be burdened with so much tax debt. But don’t worry about them. The next time they want to spend more money on some program, they’ll just get it from you.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

The NCAA tournament known as “March Madness” excites millions of fans. Every year the competition is fierce and produces at least a few stunning upsets. The University of North Carolina had one of its worst records in memory. Yet they beat the number one seed in their region and advanced to the Final Four. It just goes to show that you don’t know for sure how a contest will end until you play the game. That’s why they do play the game instead of asking a bunch of self-proclaimed experts to pick the winner in advance.

There’s a lesson here for our political system. People have been arguing about whether the independent or third party candidates should be allowed in the presidential debates. The supposedly non-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates, which incidentally is chaired by former Republican and Democratic Party chairmen, says that only candidates who poll 15 percent support will be invited to participate.

Hold on. Most Americans don’t even think about the candidates until the debates. So it doesn’t make sense to first arbitrarily decide who’s going to win and then disqualify those players that the pundits say can’t win. Of course they can’t win if they don’t even get a shot at the title! In 1992, Ross Perot had less than 10 percent support before the debates. But on Election Day he captured 19 percent.

The Demo-publican power brokers want to kill off political competition. Let’s hope they never get interested in basketball.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Recently President Clinton begged the wealthier countries of the world to provide help to the poorer countries, so that they too could expand their economies and improve the lives of the people.

Now that sounds like a nice charitable sentiment until you think about how the good ole US of A grew from a poor nation into the wealthiest people in the history of the world. We did not become rich because of charity from Great Britain or France. Our ancestors built this country with their bare hands, and their dreams. We had what so many countries did not have: freedom.

If you want a country to be rich, encourage it to be free. Of course, a lesson in free-market economics is probably not a lesson your typical dictator wants to hear. They’d rather have the handouts. The kind that are easy to divert to Swiss bank accounts.

Al Gore shares this same welfare mentality when he calls Internet access “a fundamental right.” Thanks Big Al, but in a free country we’re getting on line just fine on our own. The people who started this country embraced freedom and individual responsibility.

As James Madison said, “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. . . . [but] upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves . . .”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Tim Johnson’s recent victory in Illinois’ Republican primary for Congress didn’t get much notice outside of the Washington Beltway, but it’s important.

Johnson overcame the congressional establishment and hereditary succession by convincing voters he was not just another politician. Too often our next congressman moves back from Washington to run for office. Or goes to Washington to get the blessing and funding of the DC crowd in order to run. Where does that leave the voters of the district? Do we get to choose only after the power elite in Washington make their choice?

House Speaker Dennis Hastert picked his candidate for Illinois’ 15th congressional district State Rep. Bill Brady. He put the enormous power of his congressional office behind Brady. The other candidate against Tim Johnson was Sam Ewing, son of the current congressman Tom Ewing. It’s not rare for congressional seats to go from father to son, but it reminds me of the days when political power followed family bloodlines from king to prince.

Tim Johnson is different. He seeks to represent his district, not join the Washington club. He pledged to return home after three terms, while the others wanted a career in Congress. Said Johnson, “The seniority system in Congress hurts all of us because it rewards those who put their own reelection concerns above all else. I will enter Congress knowing full well the date upon which I will leave. I will focus entirely on the good of my district and my country.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Tell you what. Let’s have the kind of politics in which you support the candidate you actually believe in.

Is electability important? Sure it is. But it’s not an end in itself. Yet too often, folks who crave a seat at the table sacrifice principles to politics. They throw all their weight behind one guy Mr. Electable and throw everyone else to the wolves.

The Democratic primaries were pretty discouraging. Despite all the baggage that comes with Al Gore, most potential contenders bowed out of that contest. Why? Because Gore is an incumbent vice president.

Take the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, for example. Also known as NARAL. What does it tell us when NARAL endorses Al Gore over the only major alternative candidate, Bill Bradley…even though Bradley is the more consistent supporter of their issue? Bradley gets a 99 percent rating from the group, and Gore clocks in at only 61 percent. But NARAL was betting their chips, not promoting their principles.

We’ve seen too much of the same blind calculus in the Republican primaries. A lot of folks who might have preferred McCain, Forbes or Keyes went with the anointed front-runner instead. They made a political calculation, based on the fact that all the support of the Republican establishment was being funneled to one guy, George W. Bush.

Something is wrong in a political system when expediency wins out over principles, as a matter of routine. It’s time for a change.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.