Common Sense with Paul Jacob

Remember “Field of Dreams”? A farmer is going bankrupt. About to lose his farm, a voice tells him to build a baseball field on prime farmland “build it and they will come.” And they do come.

This year’s Republican primaries have seen phenomenal voter turnout. In Michigan, more than twice as many voters came to the polls as four years ago over 1 million people took time out from their hectic schedules to vote. Voter turnout was way up in South Carolina, too.

Why? Because this time, people believe there’s something to vote for. That’s not common. Few races are competitive. Incumbents win more than 98 percent of the time. Most states don’t have citizen initiatives so voters don’t get to decide issues or even weigh in on them directly.

But in the Republican primaries, people see a chance for their vote to count. Neither Bush nor McCain is an incumbent. And both candidates are talking about reform.

A friend from Arkansas told me that in 1992 he waited in line for over an hour to cast a vote for term limits. Wow, a whole hour. I’ve certainly never had to do that in Virginia. With no initiative process and rarely a competitive race at any level, I get in and out of my polling place with ease. But I’d rather wait in line, if it meant I had a choice.

We the people are not apathetic. We want reform. Hold an election that means something and we will come.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Career politicians love to be perceived as reformers, just as long as they don’t have to submit to any actual reform.

Term limits have teeth. We like term limits but politicians don’t. Better for politicians to favor some sort of complex reform scheme that offers lots of wiggle room and a scapegoat to blame when the planned failure occurs. That way they can play the corrupt game even while condemning the game they’re playing.

The Washington Post recently defended campaign reformers who only talk the talk, writing, “It seems too much to demand that a campaign reformer raise no money from the lobbyists he denounces …” Only in Washington do people justify raising money from those they denounce as evil.

If you don’t like this squishy thinking, there is a different view. Rep. Matt Salmon of Arizona knows the problem is careerism. That’s why he has term-​limited himself to three terms. Why doesn’t Congress reform? Salmon says, “I have seen countless people come to Washington with a zeal for reform only to be seduced by the power, status and privilege that come with the office. And like an addictive narcotic, many people simply can’t give up power and influence after they’ve taken their first hit.”

“Only term limits can change the character of the people who aspire to serve in Congress,” says Salmon. “And until we do that, real reform will have to wait.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

In football, it doesn’t get any better than the NFL. That’s what it means to be a pro. In politics, to be “a pro” means something very different.

Missouri State Sen. John Schneider has been in office for 30 years. He doesn’t like the term limits that 75 percent of Missouri voters imposed on the legislature. With typical arrogance, Schneider has introduced legislation to water-​down limits so he can stay even longer. Comparing legislators to professional football players, he said, “There’s a whole lot of difference between the NFL quarterback who’s a rookie and the NFL quarterback who’s got some seasoning.”

Oh yeah? Missouri is home to the NFL world champion St. Louis Rams who were led this year by an unheralded rookie quarterback who grabbed most valuable player honors as well as MVP of the Super Bowl. More rookies please.

In California, Michigan, Colorado, Oregon, Arkansas, and Maine where term limits have already gone into effect the new “rookies” are doing just fine AND cleaning up messes left by the old pros. Give us the amateurs. An amateur is someone who does something for the “love of it.” If you aren’t in public office because you love this country, if it’s all about you and your benefits and your career, then get out.

Congressman Matt Salmon of Arizona is stepping down after six productive years as a citizen legislator. He puts it another way: “If the NBA operated like Congress, they would have a bunch of fat, old men shooting free throws.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

We can argue about the nature of God from our different religious persuasions, but I’m certain we’ll agree He isn’t a member of either the Republican or Democratic Party.

Though politicians would probably argue the point.

Arguing is what the Washington crowd does best, after all. And, they’re at it again. The simplest decision in Congress, if it requires even the tiniest bit of cooperation between Democrats and Republicans, becomes the equivalent of the Paris Peace Talks.

Now the leadership of both parties are squabbling about who should be the new chaplain of the House of Representatives. Democrats want a Catholic priest and Republicans want a Protestant minister. As usual, the career politicians in Congress are acting like children.

If they can’t get along any better than this, they don’t deserve to have a chaplain at all. It’s bad enough that they sling mud, but now they want to drag people’s religious faith into the mud with them.

Enough is enough.

And pray tell what does this signal about their ability to solve any of the problems that we confront? If they can’t choose a chaplain without a partisan jihad, do you really expect them to work together to solve more complex problems? All their bloody fighting only demonstrates the critical need in Congress for new blood.

When he was the chaplain for the Senate, Edward Everett Hale was once asked, “Do you pray for the Senators, Dr. Hale?” “No,” he replied, “I look at the Senators and I pray for the country.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Incumbent congressmen have many advantages over their challengers. So many that after two terms their reelection rate goes from an incredible 98.5 percent to an untouchable 100 percent.

Perhaps the biggest advantage is their ability to use the power of the federal government for their friends and against their enemies. Recently Congressman Jay Dickey of Arkansas told a group of black farmers that he would not support a judgement in a lawsuit that the farmers had won against the Department of Agriculture. His reasoning? Dickey said, “You want us to take away from projects that serve our base and give it to people who not only don’t vote for you but work for your defeat?”

There you have it. The merits aren’t the concern here, but rather, how effectively various interest groups can be bribed for their votes. As one of Dickey’s opponents said: “It shows what kind of man Mr. Dickey is, that they have to prove they are going to help him get elected before he will provide representation for them.”

Now we can see why politicians who seek a career tend to want an ever bigger and more powerful federal government. They can wield that power to protect a lifelong ride on the congressional gravy train.

A representative should do the right thing whether it wins him votes or not. That means they need to view their service as a calling, not a career.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

In the real world when two people have a disagreement and seek a compromise, they usually meet somewhere in the middle of their two positions.

That’s not how it works in Washington.

Back in 1997, Congress and the President made a compromise agreement that a paltry $580 billion dollars would be spent on discretionary programs in the 2000 budget. That agreement was ignored. The President sent Congress a discretionary budget spending $592 billion dollars, or $12 billion over the agreed on cap. That called for some consultations between Congress and the White House, and of course, a “compromise.”

But when they reached what they called a compromise the spending was $617 billion $37 billion over the agreed on cap and $25 billion more than the President asked for. Usually in a compromise, both sides give up something. But when Washington politicians compromise, they spend even more and send the taxpayers the bill.

Same thing happened with an agriculture bill. President Clinton asked for $469 million dollars. The Senate approved $474 million. Their compromise hiked spending to $486 million.

No wonder a compromise has been defined as, “An agreement between two men to do what both agree is wrong.” In the real world, you fight the good fight by compromising over details, but never compromising your principles. In the world of Washington, when the career politicians start talking of “compromise,” taxpayers better hold on tight to their wallets.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

President Clinton reminds me of my Mother. Boy, they both have a lot of energy!

And both Bill Clinton and my Mother seem to want to take care of me. But unlike my Mom, President Clinton thinks I’m entitled to an awful lot of things. And when I think about the part of my paycheck I don’t get to bring home, I remember my Mother never taught me I was entitled to stuff. I always had to earn things on my own and be independent. The flip side of that is that I don’t owe anybody else a living either.

Of course, sometimes people are down on their luck through no fault of their own, and Americans have always been generous when it comes to charity. But Bill wants to turn us all into charity cases. The Cato Institute counted Bill’s state of the union wish list. One hundred and four separate policy demands. All portrayed by Mr. Bill as wonderful benefits our government should bestow upon us. No mention was made of the cost of all the goodies, or whether the government can actually deliver the utopia it promises.

Looks like the era of big government isn’t quite over after all. Do we really believe that our government can or should take care of us every step of the way, cradle to grave? Is that what life is all about, a whole lot of something for nothing? I think most of us know different. Thanks Mom. Thank you for teaching me about the importance of personal responsibility and earning my own keep.

This is Common Sense.  I’m Paul Jacob.

As the presidential campaign heats up, politicians are apt to get even nastier in attacking their opponents. No one does that better than Vice-​President Al Gore.

Gore has claimed to be the inventor of the Internet, the inspiration for the book Love Story, and a ghostwriter for Hubert Humphrey in 1968. In each case, our impressive Vice-​President has been forced to admit his claims were, let’s just say, not true.

Now comes an ugly scene in New Hampshire where Gore’s campaign workers splashed mud on Senator Bob Kerry of Nebraska and called Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York “fatso.” All of this came as both men were campaigning for Gore’s Democratic opponent, Bill Bradley. It was intended to prevent the two from speaking to reporters.

Gore’s spokesman later defended the thuggish behavior as merely an exercising of the First Amendment. But here’s the kicker: Gore has attacked Bradley for stepping down from the U.S. Senate after 3 terms, as if everyone should worship the idea of a lifetime of Washington power-​wielding. And now his campaign workers chant “Quitter, quitter” at Sen. Kerry, who is leaving office after 18 years.

Our country was founded by those striving to limit political power. George Washington stepped down after two terms as president to make the point that our country shouldn’t allow anyone to monopolize political power. Abraham Lincoln stepped down after one term in Congress.

Were Lincoln and Washington quitters? Ask Al Gore.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

You hear a lot about politicians breaking their promises. It’s a dog bites man story. Not terribly surprising.What politicians tell us when they’re still just regular people usually gets confused, complex and oh so costly when they begin to pursue a career in Congress.

But there are exceptions to the run-​of-​the-​mill, slippery-​tongued operators: those who take the term limits pledge. Most have kept their word over 80 percent of them. Now that’s a man bites dog story. Sure, a guy like George Nethercutt, who wins office on his term limits pledge and then betrays the voters, gets all the media attention. The vast majority who keep their pledge don’t get headlines for being honorable. But the few who break their word pay a heavy price.

As Rep. Bob Schaffer told fellow members of Congress, “You can lie under oath, you can look the American people in the eye and lie directly, you can sexually harass a subordinate in the Oval office, but break a term-​limits pledge and you’re in real trouble.” Ask George Nethercutt his support has nose-​dived along with his reputation.

The overwhelming majority have kept their term-​limit promises to step down from power. They also keep other pledges they make. They act as citizen legislators, not career politicians. They fight the congressional establishment to do what they came to Washington to do. They’re not interested in politics for their own personal benefit. Ask the congressional candidates in your district if they’re willing to make the term limits pledge. That tells the story.

This is Common Sense.  I’m Paul Jacob.