Author: Redactor

There’s been lots of bad news lately. But our country is strong and our economy is strong. We’ll pull through.

I’m not so sure about certain parts of the economy, though. In particular, I’m not so sure about a certain giant socialistic company called Amtrak. The reason is the red ink that Amtrak spills year after fiscal year.

Congress keeps threatening to pull the plug on subsidies to Amtrak, saying it better balance the books or else. But then, the very next time Amtrak admits it is losing money and needs more of our tax dollars, Congress bails them out anyway.

Amtrak has scooped up over $25 billion in subsidies over the 30 years of its existence. And now things are getting really ridiculous. Some lawmakers in Washington now want to pour $3.2 billion into Amtrak’s coffers even though Congress has “instructed” the company to whip itself into shape by 2002.

Of course, Congress won’t allow Amtrak to cut any of the unprofitable routes. To top it all off, some legislators are selling this $3.2 billion as “emergency money.”

Huh?

The airlines got emergency bailouts because they lost riders in the wake of the terrorist attacks. Meanwhile, Amtrak has gained riders. Get it?

Whereas up until now Amtrak was burdened with too little business, now it’s suffering from too much. Whatever.

But if an enterprise can’t survive with customers, maybe it’s time to let others try this job without the subsidies. People do ride trains, and pay for tickets.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Oh, sure, he’s a jolly old elf most of the time. But just ask Mrs. Claus, he’s got a temper.

Not long ago, I compared Congress to Santa Claus, because both hand out lots of goodies. Well, Santa was not amused.

“How in the name of the North Pole can you compare me with the politicians in Congress?” Santa wanted to know. “My elves and I produce our presents ourselves and we make a list so they go to the nice people. The Congress takes from others and often gives the loot to folks who are naughty.”

He’s got a point. And who wants to argue with Santa, especially this time of year? Then came the flap in Kensington, Maryland, where the long tradition of Santa lighting the town Christmas tree was ended this year because a few families who don’t celebrate Christmas complained.

It seemed another case of political correctness run amok. Santa called and I was ready for an earful but Santa wasn’t mad at the families who complained or the town officials. “Christmas is my holiday,” Santa said calmly, “and I’ll not let anyone turn it into something that’s forced on people. I don’t want anyone forced to pay taxes against their will to celebrate Christmas. That’s not my style. And that’s what’s been going on in this little town taxpayer funded Christmas cheer.

“I don’t need any government mandates, after all, hundreds of people in Santa suits brought their own holiday cheer to the Kensington tree lighting this year. The spirit of Christmas is something you give, not something you take. Ho! Ho! Ho! Merry Christmas!”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Years ago there was a cartoon about Soviet society in which a reporter is interviewing a Russian citizen about life under Communism.

He asks the woman about Soviet transportation and she seems to have no problem with it.

“Eh, I can’t complain,” she says, shrugging.

Bread lines? “I can’t complain,” she says indifferently.

Housing? “I can’t complain,” she says.

Finally, the exasperated interviewer asks, “Well, ma’am, is there anything about living in Russia you don’t like?” And the woman shrieks: “I CAN’T COMPLAIN!!”

Which is what freedom of speech is all about. Any totalitarian government will let you talk as much as you want, so long as you agree with them. Agreement is not the issue. It’s the dissent, the complaints, that bother the people in power.

America is, of course, a country in which you and I can complain. I believe we will always enjoy that freedom. Still, it is disturbing to hear the U.S. Attorney General, John Ashcroft, say that critics of the administration’s anti-​terrorism proposals are providing, quote-​unquote, “ammunition to America’s enemies.”

He told Congress that those who “scare peace-​loving people with phantoms of lost liberty … only aid terrorists.”

A pretty sweeping generalization. Now, some of the criticisms may be valid, some not. And the motives of the critics are probably all over the map too. But geez, this is a country where we have the right to talk things over, openly, isn’t it?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

There’s something about democracy that makes the heart glad.

Of course, it’s a little more happiness-​making if you have real elections, and not just legislators-​for-​life. That’s why I like term limits. And that’s why it tickles me no end when the critics make claims about term limits that are the opposite of the truth. I guess they have to pretend to like something that at bottom they really don’t like that much at all.

Anyway … one thing the critics like to say is that under term limits, all the power to do anything in a legislature will quickly drift away. To the governor or the lobbyists or the regulators or the staffers anybody but the legislative newcomers who got the opportunity to serve because of term limits and who actually have the political authority to introduce legislation and vote on it.

Actually, under term limits the new guys hop off the bench a lot faster than they used to. And far from being ineffectual clowns, they are often quite the contenders.

Certainly that’s true in Ohio, one of the 50 or so states of the union suffering a few budget problems right now. The governor there, Bob Taft, wants to deal with the shortfall by cutting some government spending and also by raising some taxes.

Many legislators in Columbus’s term-​limited chambers feel that these approaches would cancel each other out. So the new guys have been flexing their muscles, opposing tax hikes.

They don’t want to follow the governor’s playbook. Maybe they’ll win, maybe they’ll lose. But obviously they’re more than puppets, eh guv’nor?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

I think I’ve found an approach we can all live with.

I’ve caught flak lately for suggesting that maybe an individual’s rights are relevant to how we should deal with persons suspected of terrorism or of knowing a terrorist or saying hello to a terrorist.

These are dangerous times, granted. So dangerous that some people believe we dare not pause to check whether there’s any actual evidence of nefarious dealings before locking people away. Let’s not be too dainty when everybody’s life is on the line, is the feeling.

Of course, that feeling might change just a little if the feds come knocking on OUR door. And while we’re detaining and investigating people for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time or being in the wrong place at the wrong time, who knows … ? Maybe we’re wasting investigative resources that could be spent on more substantial leads.

Even some former FBI officials are raising a red flag about how the U.S. is going about things now. In any case, I’ve found a compromise that I’m sure will please all parties.

It’s from a fan who writes that maybe we should just, quote, “strap the occasional suspect into a chair in the Capitol Building and make him sit through an Appropriations Committee mark-​up. The sound of the hogs feeding at the trough of government revenues is almost certain to drive the a truly guilty party to confession, contrition, and repentance.”

This could work. The very idea of having to witness this kind of activity makes me want to confess, and I ain’t done nothin’. I swear.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Ah, the power of the mass media.

No sooner had I taped not broadcast, mind you, just taped my latest installment of “Common Sense,” than the gears started going into motion.

Somebody at the studio must have phoned Montgomery County, Maryland, and said, “Hey, Paul Jacob is against this! You’d better veto it if you know what’s good fer ya!” And that’s what County Executive Douglas Duncan did.

Although he had supported it before, Duncan promptly killed council legislation that would have turned Montgomery residents into prisoners.

Imagine it! Prohibited from smoking in the privacy of your own home, if some vindictive neighbor decides to go after you. The new law would have fined people $750 for each separate infraction.

Quite a steep tax for being politically incorrect. Next they’d be throwing you in jail for burning a hamburger in the kitchen. You know, that’s what they can do if you refuse to pay a fine: throw you in jail.

Oh, sure. The uproar over this particular piece of Puritanical paternalism was instantaneous and worldwide. On ABC’s “This Week,” George Will compared the Montgomery Council to the Taliban. John Stossel made it the focus of his “Give Me a Break” segment on “20/​20.” The ACLU threatened to sue.

Even the Moscow Times weighed in. You know you’re in trouble when the Russians start wagging their fingers at you for going over the top. But I still give myself the sole credit for stopping the Montgomery home smoking ban in its tracks.

After all … This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.