Author: Redactor

When it comes to war, the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare it and makes the President the commander-​in-​chief to wage the war. Of course, the Constitution has long been ignored in this area and congressional power handed over to the executive branch.

When the United States fought in Korea and Vietnam tens of thousands of American boys gave their lives without Congress ever taking political responsibility by declaring war. It seems strange that while Congress began to fill with career politicians, they were willing to trade away their congressional power to avoid responsibility.

Congress, the branch of government our Founders gave the power over issues of war, has become silent on foreign policy. One Capitol Hill newspaper asked the question: “Should Congress have a voice on Kosovo?” One response came from columnist Robert Novak, who said:

“We have lost the Constitution’s clear mandate that only the Congress has the power ‘to declare war.’ Declarations of war long ago became passe , and now a president dispatches remote-​control weapons without congressional approval. Such awesome power is magnified when the United States is the last superpower accountable to nobody in the world. This cries out for input by Congress. The president cannot make minor changes in Medicare or farm supports without congressional approval but can wage wars around the world on his own. That is hardly what the Founding Fathers envisioned.”

The Founders envisioned a Congress of citizen statesmen, not one of career politicians afraid of their constitutional responsibility.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Want to know how Washington works?

Anne Eppard is a Washington lobbyist. Last year she earned $1.5 million. That’s a lot of money! But what’s truly amazing is that her lobbying fees kept coming in even after she was indicted on seven felony counts alleging among other things that she took $230,000 in payoffs to steer government contracts to special interests.

“Eppard’s experience since her indictment,” writes The Washington Post , “provides a pointed illustration of the realpolitik of the Washington lobbying world: What matters most to clients is not who you are, but who you know, and your ability to get results.”

You see Anne Eppard is a very close friend of Congressman Bud Schuster, the powerful chairman of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee. You’ll remember that Schuster is a leading pork-​barreler whose committee was caught offering members of Congress an extra $25 million of wasteful spending in their districts in exchange for their votes on last year’s transportation bill.

Relationships like Eppard’s and Schuster’s, which compromise our government and waste our precious tax dollars, don’t spring up overnight. This one has developed over the 25 years while she worked as a staffer for Schuster. Nor do most congressmen go to Congress believing that the federal government is their personal plaything.

But sometimes, especially after almost 30 years in office, that arrogant attitude takes over. So this is how Washington works with the sweetheart deals between lobbyists and career politicians. But of course, that means Washington doesn’t work.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Remember Tiananmen Square?

The student who stood bravely blocking tanks only a satchel of books in his hand. These students’ courage was moving and so was their reverence for American symbols of freedom. They passed out our Declaration of Independence on the square. And out of crude materials they fashioned a beautiful “lady liberty” after our own Statute of Liberty.

This June marks the 10th anniversary of the crackdown on the pro-​democracy students. Chinese leaders rolled tanks over the bodies of young people asking for the simple freedom we must never take for granted. The world owes the U.S. of A. a debt for being a shining beacon of liberty. Our institutions have served as real examples to other people who yearn to be free.

But we owe it to ourselves, and the world, to protect these freedoms.

A recent Fox News poll shows a majority of Americans believe President Clinton traded national secrets to the Chinese for campaign contributions. We know the chief of China’s military intelligence funneled money to the president’s reelection fund. The career politicians’ greedy desire to win reelection at all costs is at work here.

Whether or not Clinton was aware of all the rotten activities, he clearly was concerned with raising the funds to get reelected, and everything else including the security of our country be damned. Our free society is a beacon to the world, but is U.S. policy made in China? The very question is a slap in the face to our heritage.

Thank goodness for the two-​term limit on the president.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Ask the average person if they’ve ever had to live within a budget and the answer is: “Of course.” We all have to and we take pride in being able to stretch a dollar.

But there is one group in our society that doesn’t think they should have to live within a budget. How did you guess? It’s our congressmen.

The Congress has set-​up a spending cap. Why? Well, while the politicians tell you that the budget is balanced, that’s true only when they take all the money being paid in for Social Security. And that leaves a disaster of gigantic proportions just around the corner for millions of retired folks counting on that Social Security money Congress is spending right now.

In order to prevent Congress from spending all the money coming in during these good economic times, and leaving Social Security in bankruptcy, reformers pushed for spending caps. Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska recently complained, “I don’t think we can live under these [spending] caps.” Not surprising because as a career politician for the last 30 years, he’s grown accustomed to spending all the money he feels like. Last year when a budget was passed, out went the spending caps. President Clinton demanded more spending on his pet projects and then Republicans in Congress grabbed more money for their favorite government programs.

So the President and the Congress had a food fight with our money. The interesting thing is that for the most part these are not bad men. But when they’re in Washington term after term spending other people’s money, they change. To them it’s only money ours.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath which says, “Do no harm.” Politicians should really have something like this.

When it comes to the First Amendment, they do. Our Founders took no chances in protecting the ability of citizens to speak out, assemble, petition government and communicate politically. The First Amendment guards our freedom of speech with it’s opening phrase: “Congress shall make no law …”

Our Founders knew that allowing Congress to regulate speech was like letting the fox guard the chicken coop. Congressmen were thought likely to regulate for their own advantage and against their political opponents. Our Founders were right.

It’s no accident that every so-​called campaign finance reform passed by politicians has made it tougher for challengers and easier for them to stay in office. We’ll never get real reform from careerists.

The legislation being considered in Congress would actually make it a crime for independent groups to mention a candidate’s name or show his picture. One congressman said we can’t have both fair elections and the First Amendment.

Outrageous! Safe incumbents wouldn’t know a fair election if it bit them, and yet they’re ready to destroy our rights.

There’s a better way. A recent study in California found that since term limits were passed campaign spending has gone down and been more equal than at any time in the 20-​year period studied. But career politicians aren’t interested in reform, or the facts. If they were, they would support term limits and step down themselves. Until then, maybe they better stick with the Hypocrites Oath.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Our Founders were very wise.

“The natural progress of things,” said Thomas Jefferson, “is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.” That’s why they created a system of checks and balances to keep government under control and protect our freedom.

One important check is the citizen initiative. The initiative process which only 23 out of 50 states enjoy allows citizens to gather petitions to require a vote on a law or constitutional amendment. The initiative prevents legislators from monopolizing law-​making power, giving the people ultimate authority. Without the initiative, many states would never have passed campaign reforms or tax cut measures.

Legislators in virtually every state refused to abide by the popular clamor for term limits. Today, 18 states have passed term limits laws, all but one with the initiative process. But some question whether the people can be trusted passing laws directly. If the people can be trusted to elect representatives, why can’t we be trusted to decide issues?

This country’s strength has always been the good sense and the common decency of the average American, not an elite in Washington or the state capitals making decisions for us. Our founders supported a representative form of government not to keep the people out of decision-​making, but because we couldn’t all afford to abandon our jobs and travel to the capitol. The whole purpose was a government where ‘We the People’ rule. That’s why we cannot allow our legislators to hold a monopoly on passing laws.

The initiative process puts the people in charge, and that’s the American way.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.