Author: Redactor

This may shock you. Al Gore opposes school choice for kids trapped in failing schools. Instead he supports the same old throw-​more-​money-​at-​it, keep-​the-​bureaucrats-​in-​charge “solutions” that haven’t worked for decades.

But after choosing a former school choice advocate to be his running mate, Mr. Gore made a remarkable concession. Here is what he said: “If I was the parent of a child who went to an inner-​city school that was failing … I might be for vouchers too.”

Huh? I am shocked. A career politician, who knows the right thing to do, but lets politics get in the way? Shocking. Al Gore has dug in his heels in defense of the public school monopoly and has no solution to offer parents at all. Though as a politician he opposes school choice for others, he sends his own kids to private schools. He is not alone.

A Heritage Foundation survey of Congress found that many of the same Congressmen who send their kids to private schools also oppose vouchers. A 1999 education bill would have allowed children in dangerous schools to choose another school using vouchers. Fifty-​seven members who believe in school choice for their own kids, cast a no vote. Had they all voted yes, the measure would have passed.

The pattern has been repeated many times. We get political lip service on how much politicians care about education. But they don’t have the guts to fight for what they know is right if it means losing support from special interests. That’s our most serious educational failure.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Listener Horace Solliday writes: “Dear Paul, I am distressed every time you tell us of the good politicians who are fighting for term limits and then restrict their own terms while none of the career politicians have. Is that common sense? Wouldn’t it make more sense to stay there until they get term limits?”

Thanks Horace; it’s a fair question. But here’s the thing. No constitutional amendment for term limits is going to pass in a Congress dominated by career politicians. We’ve learned that the hard way. So we must change the Congress. That means real leadership, by example. Citizen legislators who walk the walk, not just talk the talk.

Experience hath shown that if our best representatives don’t term-​limit themselves, as the years pass they tend to become co-​opted by the system and play politics as usual. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, in his sixth and final year in Congress, still sleeps on a futon in his office and showers at the House gym, unwilling to become a native of Washington, DC. Says Sanford, “Some people tell me, ‘You know, Mark, you are a lame duck before you’ve even started.’ I respond, ‘You’re wrong. I’m a free duck, and there’s a big difference.’ … Term limits force you to maintain perspective. It’s an anchor.”

Sanford is right. It’s no coincidence that the best people in Congress have term-​limited themselves. The challenge for our free society is to elect more representatives who will be “free ducks.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

The government has issued a big report saying that the entertainment industry is marketing sexually explicit and violent programs to our kids. As a parent, I only wish I could muster up some shock at this revelation. Our culture is often unhealthy. And that makes it tough on parents trying to rear healthy kids.

But the problem won’t be solved in Washington. What can politicians do in a free society? Censorship isn’t the answer. Nor will election year lectures from politicians change the industry. Are we going to ban all violence in the media? Some of us liked Saving Private Ryan , which portrayed the horrible violence of war. It’s anti-​violence. What about Hamlet or Gone With the Wind ? We all have different values. One person’s “excessive violence” is another’s “object moral lesson.”

The V‑chip or other technology can help but it certainly won’t create a world where anyone’s morality agrees 100 percent with what’s produced as entertainment. That’s why the real answer is parents relying on their own sense of right and wrong and exercising moral judgment in their own households. It’s up to us as individuals to reward entertainment that is life affirming and to punish the rot that degrades our society. That may mean boycotts, talking with neighbors and other things that government can’t do. But you and I can.

In the free marketplace of ideas, we have that power not in Washington but in our wallets and in the hearts of our kids.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

School has begun for children around the world, including a small Cuban boy named Elian.

You remember Elian Gonzalez. Last November, his mother fled with him and several others from Cuba to America. Their craft didn’t quite make it to the Florida shore. His mother died. Now, after a bitter international custody battle and an armed raid by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, Elian is back in school in Cuba, and, says Reuters, “finally got to give his name during the teacher’s roll call.” All has ended well for the little tyke, apparently.

The story also notes that Elian repeated the daily chant of all Cuban schoolchildren: “Pioneers for Communism, we will be like Che!” If Communism survives in Cuba, Elian can look forward to a future in which he follows the Communist party line … or else. Many in Cuba will be paying special attention to his conduct. What if he wants to leave the country? Yeah right. What if, heaven forbid, he decides he doesn’t like life under Communism and chooses to speak out against it? Will he be thrown in jail and even tortured, for saying the wrong thing? Many have been.

One cause of Elian’s uncertain future is dictator Fidel Castro, who was recently given a very warm welcome at the United Nations. Castro and Clinton just happened to bump into each other in the hall, and Clinton didn’t hesitate to shake the hand of the dictator. But it’s okay, because Elian got to answer when his name was called.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

I received a letter recently from Edward Watkins of Ledyard, Connecticut. Mr. Watkins writes:

Connecticut Public Radio ran a report tonight that, throughout Connecticut, very few races for local offices even have contenders this year. They contributed it to two factors: (1) low pay in local government offices compared to private sector pay in a booming economy, (2) the high cost of conducting LOCAL campaigns. I would like to add my own important third factor: lack of term limits. Why should any normal person, who wants to be a productive citizen, attempt to run when incumbents have such a large advantage? Public service, it seems, is out the window!

Thanks for the letter Ed. The whole point of pay is to attract qualified candidates. That’s true in business and it’s true for any political job, too. So when some argue that the problem causing a lack of competition is low pay, we can easily test that theory. If the theory is valid, when a council seat opens up, we would have few candidates.

Yet, what we see is that there are plenty of candidates running for office when no incumbent stands in the way. That’s the reality. When incumbents hold power term after term there is little competition regardless of pay or even the relative cost of campaigns. There may indeed be places where the pay is too low, but usually the pay is too high. If we want more electoral competition, we need more open seats. We need term limits.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

We were the first country in which a free people created the government. The Constitution that empowered our government also limited it. But Americans weren’t satisfied that our rights were protected from tyranny until the Bill of Rights was passed, too. That’s why I’m concerned about several stories that suggest IRS audits and federal indictments are being used selectively against those who speak out against abuse of power.

For instance, the IRS is threatening a woman who publicly took both Al Gore and Bill Clinton to task. There isn’t proof that this is being politically orchestrated, but it sure seems strange that she joins the ranks of Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones and Elizabeth Ward Gracen, all of whom have accused Clinton of misconduct and then been audited by the IRS.

And many conservative groups like the NRA and the Heritage Foundation also have been audited in the last few years, raising more red flags. And there’s the whistle-​blower who embarrassed the Justice department by publicly revealing that government authorities had used incendiary weapons at Waco something the feds had long denied.

Now the whistle-​blower, former US attorney William Johnson, may be indicted for withholding some of his personal notes from the FBI. That is a criminal offense. But several others who withheld information are not being indicted. The only difference? They didn’t embarrass the government. Maybe it’s all a big coincidence. But if not, this is a most despicable tyranny.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.