Author: Redactor

Categories
media and media people political challengers

The Big Christie Problem

The demands of media are not the demands of the American people. Everyone knows this. 

Basically, journalists favor big, juicy stories. They like colorful characters and charisma. And they like puffing up some — inflating reputations as if they were balloons waiting for hot air — only to puncture them later on.

That’s what’s behind the continual discussion of Sarah Palin, the non-candidate.

She’s a media person herself. She’s the media’s No. 1 non-candidate.

The media’s No. 2 non-​candidate? Gov. Chris Christie.

I’m a big fan of Christie, and I had positive things to say about Sarah Palin, very early in the last election cycle. But the attention given to these two, during the current campaign, has been mostly objectionable. It shows more what’s wrong with media folks than with the current slate of Republican presidential candidates. 

Christie’s pluses — a no-​nonsense limited government perspective from a successful state executive — are shared by at least one other candidate, former governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson … who has been barred from most debates and virtually ignored by the media.

So why the fixation on Christie?

He makes for good story. He’s big. He fills the screen. And he’s more glib and polished than Johnson, or Paul or Bachmann or Perry.

In a perfect world, journalists would leave candidate selection to the parties and the people.

This is not a perfect world. 

This, too, is not breaking news. But then, this is not reportage, either.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
First Amendment rights general freedom ideological culture

Ninety-​Nine Percent Pure

Politics is dominated by pious, politic lies and half-​truths. Every nation has them, and Turkey’s are most impressive.

Turkey has been a vanguard, in the Muslim world, of “Westernizing” and “modernizing” tendencies. But it still has one foot in the deep past. One of its great pious half-​truths is that Turkey is “99 percent Muslim” yet possesses a “secular state” where “all religions are equal.”

With some religions more equal than others.

An Alevi spokesman, Izzettin Dogan, charges that the country “is actually a Sunni Islamic state.” There are 30 million Alevis in Turkey, according to the New York Times, and they are not alone in getting the short end of the stick in “secular Turkey”:

“The state collects taxes from all of us and spends billions on Sunni Islam alone, while millions of Alevis as well as Christians, Jews and other faiths don’t receive a penny,” Mr. Dogan said, referring to the $1.5 billion budget of the Religious Affairs Department. “What kind of secularism is that?”

Good question.

And it gets to the heart of one of the reasons I’m so happy to live in America. Our government may be a mess, but we still have some basic freedoms. We’ve long gotten over the ancient fixation on the union of religion and state.

In ancient empires, kings styled themselves as gods.

We know better. 

And we know better than to subsidize religion — or use it as a branch of the government.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
folly

Pension Reforms Un-Ravel?

Jerry Brown has done some good work as California’s governor. When he promised to take on the common practice of pension double-​dipping, he spotted a problem and appeared to be on the right track.

But if you want to hire well-​connected, experienced and (therefore, or presumably, competent) civil servants to help you in your crusade to save your state, what do you do?

Why, you hire retired civil servants. They each get their salaries — plus their pensions.

There may be something faulty in the above rationale. But that’s what happened. 

Shane Goldmacher and Patrick McGreevy of the Los Angeles Times showed just how big this problem is, in a current exposé. They lead with the facts in the case of Ann Ravel, who “gets a paycheck from her salary as chairwoman of California’s ethics watchdog agency and a second, bigger check from her public pension as a retiree.” She makes a good living, since the two sources of income “total more than $305,000 a year.” 

This is not a good policy. Marcia Fritz, president of California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility, says such double dipping “violates the whole premise of having a retirement program.”

I see her point.

Still, it wouldn’t be an issue if pensioners received retirement payments not in amounts promised by politicians and guaranteed by taxpayers, but instead coming from actual investments — defined contributions, not defined benefits — in something like each one’s individual 401(k).

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture tax policy

A Social Contract You Can’t Refuse

Massachusetts U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren really worked up “progressives” with a rant about “fair taxation.”

“There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own — nobody.”

As A. Barton Hinkle points out, no one suggests otherwise. But the real meat of her argument is worth studying … for a peculiar pathology in logic:

You built a factory out there? … You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police-​forces and fire-​forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory — and hire someone to protect against this — because of the work the rest of us did.

Upon this rests her case for ramped-​up progressive tax rates.

Apparently, according to Ms. Warren, successful businessfolk are takers only. But all along the way, businesses pay for the services they hire. Indeed, they pay for roads, too. Truckers, for instance, pay special weight-​rate taxes and licenses for carrying heavy loads across roadways. 

Her “argument” no more justifies government taxing truckers or factories more than a similar argument, mutatis mutandis, would allow the kid who mows your lawn to reach into your wallet when you aren’t looking.

The social contract doesn’t originate the way Warren specifies. Her logic establishes only that she’s not thinking clearly about obligations and lacks an appreciation for making a business succeed.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Winners and Losers

California’s initiative process gets blamed for every political problem the state confronts … that is, by many legislators and political insiders. 

Two measures receive the bulk of the ire: Proposition 13 and Proposition 98. 

Liberals bemoan Prop 13’s requirement of a two-​thirds legislative vote to raise taxes, preventing state government from getting “the proper revenues.” They are welcome to their opinion.

But 33 years ago, Californians passed the measure 65 to 35 percent. Last week, a Field Poll showed it just as popular today. Additionally, the pollsters reported, “In each of four previous Field Poll surveys conducted since its passage, Prop. 13 has been backed by Californians by double-​digit margins.”

Conservatives oppose Prop 98, which passed very narrowly in 1988. It creates a floor for K‑12 education spending of roughly 40 percent of the state budget. 

That’s why some charge that initiatives dictate too much of the budget. But, were legislators otherwise planning to zero-​out public school funding? I doubt it. Spending was around 40 percent before Prop 98.

One other thing: Prop 98 incorporated a provision allowing the legislature to suspend the 40 percent mandate. The legislature has done so twice.

I would have voted against it, but unless Californians who oppose 98 can put a repeal onto the ballot and convince the majority of their fellow voters to agree, well, they’ll have to live with it.

At least, until the next election. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Accountability free trade & free markets too much government

Who Creates Jobs?

There’s way too much pressure on politicians to “do something.” Most of the things they can do are bad. “Do something” too easily translates to “do anything,” and odds are that “anything” will end up as catastrophe.

There’s a division of labor in doing things: Investors, capitalists, and entrepreneurs create businesses which employ people; legislators and government executives have the more humble task of setting up and refining the groundrules, allowing others to do the great works.

Politicians don’t create jobs as such.

Few politicians understands this. But Gary Johnson, former two-​term governor of New Mexico, does — and he’s running for the Republican presidential nomination.

“The fact is,” he said in the recent debate, “I can unequivocally say that I did not create a single job while I was governor.” He went on to say how proud he was of this fact. New Mexico underwent an “11.6 percent job growth” rate during his two terms. All he did was get government out of the way of businesses.

Now, I understand: The “politician as jobs creator” talk is sometimes just a way to focus attention on getting policy right. National Review Online called Johnson “the best job creator” of all the candidates. The august journal didn’t mean much by it, other than note the statistic.

But too often politicians decide they can create jobs by taking money from all of us in taxes and investing it in private companies or new government programs. Those politicians aren’t creating jobs for us, but doing a job on us. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.