Author: Redactor

Oh those poor rich people. Don’t they need a little more help from the government? Now, don’t get me wrong. If somebody has more money than me and they’ve earned their money fair and square, that’s fine with me. Let them buy all the Lexuses they want. It’s their money, let them keep it and enjoy it. And while you’re at it, let me keep my money, too.

But welfare for the well-​to-​do is a completely different thing. Almost everyone, except for career politicians, would agree that’s just not right. Still, the new edition of the Cato Institute’s Handbook for Congress has a long list of examples of corporate welfare in the federal budget. There’s the sugar price supports. You pay more at the grocery store so $1.4 billion in propped up profits can benefit the 33 largest sugar cane plantations. There’s a “wool and mohair” subsidy that’s supposed to benefit people with small herds of sheep, but last we looked ABC television journalist Sam Donaldson collects almost $100,000 in subsidies every year.

And how about this for corporate welfare: every year the Agriculture Department splurges $80 million to subsidize the overseas advertising of food exporters, little guys like McDonald’s and Coca-​Cola. There’s an amendment proposed every session of Congress to kill this beauty, but somehow it always survives. So why does this nonsense happen? Oh, politics as usual, brought to you by career politicians.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

It’s official. Passage of Congressman Mike Castle’s “Franked Mail Savings Act of 2001” is one of the top priorities this year of the National Taxpayer’s Union. That means that congressmen who votes against it will lose points with NTU, which rates congressional performance every session.

The franking privilege is one of the most flagrant abuses of taxpayer dollars that Congress engages in. As former House Press Secretary John Solomon admits, “the purpose of these mailings has become little more than to remind citizens of who their elected officials are before they vote. It’s an unfair perk of incumbency.” Only about 10 percent of franked mail is sent out in response to the mail of a constituent. Most of the time, it is nothing more than political advertising, a prepaid political benefit that comes at the expense of both taxpayers and fair electoral competition.

In 1999, individual postage limits for congressmen were lifted, making it easier than ever to abuse the franking privilege. Mr. Castle’s bill would define a “mass mailing” as being 250 pieces or more of mail. And it would prohibit such mailings within 180 days of general elections and 90 days of primaries. Of course, many other advantages of incumbency would remain untouched. But passing this bill would be a step in the right direction. Let’s see if our representatives do the right thing. Even if they don’t care what the National Taxpayers Union thinks, they should probably give a darn what the nation’s taxpayers think.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

How do you a boil a frog? Very slowly. Because if you just toss a frog into boiling water it will jump right back out again. I don’t want to say Congressman Robert Ehrlich is the same as a frog. But the heat IS being turned up very slowly and he DOES seem to like the temperature just fine.

In 1994, when he arrived in the nation’s capital, Ehrlich had already served 8 years as a legislator in Maryland. So he felt right at home. So much at home, in fact, that he never quite got the hang of rebelling against the out-​of-​control ways of the Congress. You can imagine a self-​limiter like Tom Coburn proposing 115 amendments to an appropriations bill to try to curb runaway spending. Not Mr. Ehrlich. “I’m a process kind of guy,” he says. Of course, citizen legislators know how to work with their colleagues. But since they don’t have to fret about a political career, they know when to get ornery, too.

By contrast, Ehrlich tells National Journal that he’s had “more realistic expectations, maybe lower expectations.” He’s wondering now whether to hold on to his House seat or run for governor. Of course, if you have “lowered expectations” about what you can do, you don’t push as hard. You just sort of settle down in that comfortable sauna, getting boiled. “It’s about as good as it gets in the House,” says Ehrlich. “Is it worth giving up this seat?” Ask the frog.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

It’s going to be a long, tough battle to term-​limit the Congress. Why is that? Well, not because term limits are controversial. My goodness, more than 70 percent of Americans, in every possible group, consistently favor limiting the number of terms a congressman can serve. Very few of us oppose term limits. But within that tiny minority lies the most intensely interested segment of the population. They’re fanatical about term limits … fanatically negative. They are called politicians.

They think we thunk up the idea just to be nasty and thwart their well-​intentioned attempts to rule over us. That’s about half-​right. Nah, term limits supporters aren’t angry at particular politicians or out to get them. Sure, there are a couple of really bad apples, but that’s not the problem. The problem is much more systematic and serious. Even the best legislators become, shall we say, significantly less good over time. Career politicians lose touch with the folks back home and buy into a corrupt system of special interests and special privilege. Plus, incumbents have so many reelection advantages that fewer and fewer regular citizens run for Congress. It’s a vicious cycle.

Term limits won’t come easily. The politicians will fight us every step of the way. But we can’t be denied our right to self-​government forever. History shows that good ideas can triumph even over great odds. As the famous World War II song goes: “They’ll be blue birds over the white cliffs of Dover tomorrow, just you wait and see.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Good men are not that hard to find. But you do have to take the trouble to look for them.

In September of 1999, a few months after confirming that he would step down after his third term in the House, Congressman Matt Salmon of Arizona held a press conference to endorse fellow term limit supporter Jeff Flake as his successor. Salmon stepped down just as promised and Flake was elected in his stead. After making term limits the centerpiece of his campaign, Flake defeated four competitors to win the Republican nomination. In the general election, Flake’s opponent refused to take the term-​limit pledge.

Jeff is into the Vision Thing. His interest in public policy has taken him everywhere from Washington, D.C., where he started a public affairs firm in 1987, to the southern African nation of Namibia, where he directed a foundation that monitoring political reform in the country. In 1992, Jeff returned to Arizona to run the Goldwater Institute, where he promoted his philosophy of less government, more freedom and individual responsibility.

Many observers credit the Goldwater Institute for its work on school choice and competition, ideas that have made Arizona a leader in education reform. The Goldwater Institute has sponsored a lot of path-​breaking work on one of the most exciting school choice innovations of the 1990s, charter schools. Now Jeff Flake is back in Washington. Just for a little while. Accepting a temporary trust, cementing a tradition. An honorable tradition that will show the way for other citizen legislators to come.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Sometimes candidates for office say anything to get elected. Even things they don’t really mean. Hey, try to contain your astonishment. And yes, some of them even lie when they pledge to limit their terms in office.

A few years ago, one congressional candidate pledged to self-​limit and then, just two or three days after being elected, said, “Oops, ha ha, forget what I promised during the campaign! I don’t regard myself as bound by that term-​limit pledge after all!” It’s the kind of thing that gives cynical manipulation a bad name. Thank goodness, then, that there are folks like John Thune, a South Dakota congressman elected in 1996 who has repeatedly affirmed his term-​limit pledge, following in the footsteps of honorable citizen legislators like Tom Coburn, Mark Sanford and Matt Salmon.

Congressman Thune is scheduled to leave Congress in 2002, and he’s not wavering. Thune explains it this way: “People in the country today are too cynical because of politicians who say one thing and do another,” he says. “I was sincere about [my term-​limits pledge] when I said it, I mean it, and I will honor it.” On his web site, Thune lists as part of his credo that “public policy must encourage personal responsibility.” His personal integrity shows that those words have meaning for him. A political leader who says what he means and means what he says? It can happen. On important stuff, too. It just warms my heart.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.