Category: national politics & policies

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

The $2.5 Trillion Tip of the Iceberg

This year, Social Security goes into the red, unable to pay out all that’s been promised … without somehow finding new funds. Five years ago, the estimated date for this was 2017. An economic downturn later and seven years disappear. Just like that.

It’s obviously time for a major overhaul. But Congress and the President had other priorities. Don’t fix the old entitlement program — add a new one to bankrupt the country, “health care reform.”

What to do? Well, Associated Press’s Stephen Ohlemacher writes that it is time to cash in the IOUs that Congress owes the Social Security Administration. Congress has been siphoning off the system’s revenue surplus since the ’80s.

Congress, that august body of spendthrifts and thieves, actually accounted for these funds by printing up non-​negotiable bonds, rather than leaving them as electronic IOUs. They are stored in a folder in Parkersburg, West Virginia.

Fat lot of good that does us, though. To pay the bonds, Congress would have to raise taxes or borrow even more money.

Or it could auction off some property. Selling vast tracts of BLM land might make sense, but you won’t see that brought up. Instead, Congress will be sorely tempted to debase our money further. 

Congress’s IOUs to Social Security add up, to $2.5 trillion. Of course, the money promised Americans in basic retirement is far more than that. The two-​and-​a-​half trillion is just the tip of a very large iceberg … heading this way.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets national politics & policies too much government

In Case You Were Worried

It’s magic. Not only does the recently passed health care reform cover more people, it cuts deficits too.

Ha! You know it, I know, we all know it: Major government entitlement programs always end up costing far, far more than their original advocates claim. 

Or should we just trust trust the reform’s advocates no matter what past experience and rational accounting say?

Democratic Congressman Jim Clyburn turned to MSNBC to explain all about how Obamacare would slash the deficit. “We’re extending the life of Medicare by nine years, and if you’re taking the waste, fraud and abuse out of this, the savings that you get there will come as things grow. Savings will grow.”

Ah, waste! Fraud! Abuse! Politicians love such talk, at least until the waste and fraud gets renamed “stimulus spending.”

Then Clyburn said: “You look at the community health centers. Savings will grow more in out years than in the first few years. So I believe — well, that’s my assessment, and that’s the way I’m explaining it to members. I hope I’m right.”

So there is hope. 

Also, 32 million people will be coming into insurance plans and out of emergency rooms. (Unless there’s an emergency.) Also, Clyburn’s wife had bypass surgery and the bill included $15 for an aspirin. What we must understand is that the new command-​and-​control regime will “build savings into the system.”

Could what this third-​ranking House Democrat really be trying to say is that he has no idea what he’s talking about?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies Tenth Amendment federalism too much government

Idaho’s Healthy “No”

By hook and by crook — ignoring the constitution and twisting parliamentary rules — the president and his congressional allies are succeeding in imposing command-​and-​control health care on all Americans.

If the new law is allowed to stand, the scraps of freedom we still enjoy in matters of health care will dwindle as provisions of the bill kick in. And that’s only the prequel. Pelosi and other Democrats promise to introduce even more constrictive legislation once Obamacare Round One has been rammed through.

Friends of freedom aren’t giving up. There’s an election in 2010, for one thing. But many state governments aren’t waiting for that. The Idaho legislature just passed the Idaho Health Care Freedom Act, which states, in part, that “every person within the state of Idaho is and shall be free to choose or decline to choose any mode of securing health care services without penalty or threat of penalty.” Governor Otter is signing the Act because, in his view, health care laws should treat people as individuals “rather than as an amorphous mass whose only purpose in this world is to obey federal mandates.”

Idaho is the first state to pass such a measure, but similar legislation has been proposed in 22 others. Such declarations will most likely have only symbolic significance if Obamacare remains in effect and other legal challenges on the grounds of federalism get beaten down. But those are two big ifs. Americans aren’t ready to surrender to the health care commissars just yet.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
government transparency national politics & policies too much government

How to Find Out What’s In the Health Care Bill

When I heard what Nancy Pelosi said about the health care bill the other day, I did a double-​take. And had to double-​check the press release issued by Pelosi’s own office.

Yikes! She really said it! Then published it on her website to the accompaniment of bugles and trumpets! 

Okay, maybe I invented the bugles and trumpets. But not the words:

“Prevention, prevention, prevention — it’s about diet, not diabetes. It’s going to be very, very exciting. But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”

Ah yes, the “fog of the controversy”! The way critics of this 2000-​page legislation have exposed the regimentation, price controls, new taxes, and choked-​off choices we’ll all suffer if the bill passes. How dare we!

Terrible that there’s actually debate about whether we should permanently lose more of our freedoms. Can’t we all agree to be trampled and then find out what it all means? After it’s too late to stop it?

No. Let’s dispel the fog right now. Let the government mail a copy of the bill to every voter. 

And let Congress agree that every voter must pass a 500-​question multiple choice quiz on its contents before Congress moves forward. 

Let’s dispel the fog before we’re saddled with this thing.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

Republicans Still Not Serious

Picnicking on railroad tracks? Not dangerous. Most of the time the tracks are free. Take out the picnic basket and pass the chips. Glug down a few drinks. 

The tracks are safe when there’s no train. 

After the train? Well, you’re dead. Not dangerous then, either.

Only in the moments while the train blares down on you is it actually dangerous.

This is modern politics. Our politicians have set us to party on the tracks, heedless of dangers. Increasing deficits? Mounting debt? Those are future problems!

That’s what politicians have been saying, in effect, for decades.

Irresponsible? Yes. So what else is new?

Republicans are lambasting Democrats for not taking deficits and debt seriously. But how serious are Republicans, really? Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan has put forward what he calls a “road map” to solvency. He’s taking into consideration “entitlement” as well as “discretionary” spending; he’s elaborated a set of spending cuts, program cuts, as well as a tax abolition and a new business consumption tax that all together zero out the deficit and balance the budget … by 2063. 

So, have Republicans jumped onto his cause? No. They are, with the exception of nine co-​sponsors, avoiding him as if he were the onrushing train.

Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute calls Ryan’s Roadmap “a test” and says, “right now the Republican Party is failing it.” 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies

Democrats versus Majoritarian Tyranny

Senate Democrats are firmly against any attempt to circumvent the 60-​vote majority that Senate rules require to prevent a filibuster of major legislation. On principle!

Forget that the recent election of Republican Scott Brown deprives Democrats of their filibuster-​proof majority. Democrats won’t even consider trying to shunt that rule aside so they can foist Obamacare on us. No, no, no.

Of course, strangely, newspaper reports say they looking at doing just that. But I can prove otherwise. With evidence from five years ago. Here’s what Senator Obama had to say in 2005: “… prompting a change in the Senate rules that really, I think, would change the character of the Senate forever … Majoritarian absolute power.… and that’s just not what the Founders intended.”

Senator Schumer: “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a constitutional crisis. The checks and balances which have been at the core of this republic are about to be evaporated by the ‘nuclear option.’ The checks and balances which say that if you get 51 percent of the vote, you don’t get your way 100 percent of the time.”

Senator Reid: “Mr. President, the right to extend debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House. In these cases, the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”

Wow. Sounds like they really mean it. And they do, right?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies

The Obama Approach

President Obama’s credo seems to be that if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. He’s “doubling down,” as the phrase goes. We’re going to get his killer dose of government-​controlled medicine whether we want it or not.

Scott Brown’s upset victory in the Massachusetts U.S. Senate race killed the Democrats’ filibuster-​proof 60-​vote advantage. So Obama is now in favor of “bipartisanship.” He’s pretending to listen to Republican doubts about strangling what’s left of freedom in the medical industry.

But Obama’s new health care bill seeks simply to reconcile the House Democrat plan with the Senate Democrat plan. It’s more bichambership than bipartisanship. Under the “new” plan, Americans would still be socked with lots of penalties and commandments.

One addition, though. Obama also wants to create a federal agency that can veto supposedly “unreasonable” increases in health insurance rates. So what happens when the only practical response to huge new costs under the vast panoply of new requirements is to raise rates … and government prohibits this? 

Might insurance companies be forced out of business? 

Might Washington be waiting in the wings, eager to finish the takeover and shove us all into a “public option”?

Obama is pretty relentless, trying to gulp up a huge sector of the economy despite growing and cogent opposition. Not, I think, a particularly admirable quality in this context.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
First Amendment rights national politics & policies too much government

Idealism or Brute Power Play?

Senator John McCain and other politicians advocate violating your right to contribute as much as you want to the political candidates you support. They also advocate violating your right to speak as much as you want, either positively or negatively, about a candidate.

Do they support these repressive doctrines out of misguided idealism, or misguided pragmatic politics? Doubtless the answer depends on the individual. But McCain certainly acts as if today’s confusing welter of campaign finance regulation best serves as a very convenient club to beat an upstart challenger over the head and shoulders.

McCain faces a tough primary. His conservative challenger, J.D. Hayworth, a former congressman, is also a radio talk show host. Or at least he was until buddies of the senator began yelping to the Federal Election Commission. See, Hayworth attacked McCain on his show, which supposedly makes his show a form of “political advertising.” As a result of this pressure, Hayworth and the station agreed to take the show off the air. 

Jason Rose, who works with Hayworth, calls what happened a “political mugging.” Sounds right to me.

McCain is on record endorsing what his friends did here. So … Hayworth can say anything he wants to — à la the First Amendment — unless it’s a criticism of McCain. 

Funny how the framers failed to stipulate this when they were putting together the Constitution and that First Amendment.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies responsibility

A Deficit of Common Sense

Congress has just raised the federal debt “ceiling” to $14.3 trillion. 

Yes, it’s called a “ceiling,” though I cannot recall seeing any other ceiling so adjustable.

The Associated Press reassures us: The new ceiling means that congressmen won’t have to pass an even higher ceiling until after November. According to the AP, if Congress had to raise the debt limit too close to the election, this would “[feed] a sense among voters that the government is spending too much and putting future generations under a mountain of debt to do it.”

“Feed a sense”? Yes, committing fiscal crime in broad daylight might serve to “feed a sense” that the crime is in fact being committed.

Meanwhile, Moody’s, the Wall Street credit agency, warns that the U.S. is at risk of losing its triple‑A credit rating. The federal government must stop its fashionable trillion-​dollar annual deficits. But Moody’s also proclaims to understand why the government has run these trillion-​dollar deficits. Seeing as how we’re in a recession, it would be politically tough to trim budgets right now. 

Let me get this straight. If you’ve been taking on way too much debt, the best solution to the problem is to borrow money even faster and even more irresponsibly? But only for now? Then kick the habit later … when it’s suddenly real easy?

No, I don’t think so. Try again, Moody’s.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies

Ice Is Also Great

We all like talking about the weather, and one reason “global warming” theory caught on was not because of the science, but because it gives us a “just-so”-type scenario to spice up any conversation.

Here on the East Coast, we’ve endured one of the snowiest winters in years. Elsewhere, the winter’s been moderate.

Must be global warming!

The tendency to make every kind of weather a paradigm-​case instance of global warming has become something of a joke. We all know that “weather is not climate,” but we’ve also heard a lot of silliness about how this or that weather proves a coming global warming catastrophe.

Al Gore almost invented the technique.

Last week a quip — a “tweet” — from Senator Jim DeMint made the rounds. He wrote that “It’s going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries ‘uncle.’”

Droll. But the truth remains that one cold snap does not a climate make. What counts for global climate depends on averages, highs, lows, medians, means, and all that.

Knowing this — and knowing that world climate has been much cooler than now as well as much warmer — still leaves me something of a skeptic about the notion that human civilization is the major factor.

Or that warming is altogether bad. An Ice Age, which scientists have been saying we’re overdue for, would be worse.

Brrr. Do I know!

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.