ThisIsCommonSense.org

Happy New Year! As we begin this campaign year of 2008, the Federal Election Commission lacks a quorum. It can’t make decisions regarding violations of federal campaign laws. The FEC will also lack the ability to send out matching fund checks to those presidential candidates who still play the matching funds game.

That’s actually good, since most federal campaign laws are blatant abridgments of our freedom of speech in the first place.Also good may be the mess itself. It’s a sign of the bankruptcy of the whole system of federal regulation of politics.

How big is the mess? As big as the parties can make it. Democrats won’t confirm the latest Republican nominee for the FEC … and Republicans follow suit, refusing to confirm the Democrats’ nominees. Stalemate.

The underlying problem is the unduly partisan nature of the FEC. The commissioners are appointed by their party affiliation. This means an equal number of Republicans and Democrats, who can essentially block enforcement against their party.

But if you aren’t a Republican or a Democrat, say you’re an independent or a Libertarian or a Green, then the FEC certainly isn’t set up to equally protect your political rights. Its very make-​up violates the 14th Amendment’s requirement of equal protection under the law.

Partisan politics ought not shut down the FEC. Our Constitution should.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

It was the battle of 2006 and could be the battle of 2008.

In this corner, Senator Tom Coburn, inveterate foe of porkbarrel spending and other rampant congressional abuses. In the other, shameless porkbarreller par excellence Senator Ted Stevens.

In the American Spectator, Stephen Moore reports on an altercation between the two Republicans. Happened right after the election. It seems Stevens slithered over to Coburn and whined, “Well, Tom, I hope you’re satisfied for helping us lose the election.” In reply Coburn pointedly pointed out the obvious: “No, Ted, you lost us the election.”

Stevens, so stuck inside Beltway corruption that he can’t see his own faults for what they are, takes no blame for the GOP’s ‘06 electoral debacle. Rather, he holds criticism of his kind of bad behavior, by those who witnessed it — including insiders like Tom Coburn — as the problem.

For Stevens, engaging in logrolling and runaway trough-​sloppery are okay. But complaining about it … that’s unforgivable! Members of the political club just don’t do that to each other, dontcha know.

Well, Coburn doesn’t know. He probably figures that unless staying in power is considered an end in itself, you obviously have to address the very problems you’re seeking to correct.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

It was the battle of 2006 and could be the battle of 2008.

In this corner, Senator Tom Coburn, inveterate foe of porkbarrel spending and other rampant congressional abuses. In the other, shameless porkbarreller par excellence Senator Ted Stevens.

In the American Spectator, Stephen Moore reports on an altercation between the two Republicans. Happened right after the election. It seems Stevens slithered over to Coburn and whined, “Well, Tom, I hope you’re satisfied for helping us lose the election.” In reply Coburn pointedly pointed out the obvious: “No, Ted, you lost us the election.”

Stevens, so stuck inside Beltway corruption that he can’t see his own faults for what they are, takes no blame for the GOP’s ‘06 electoral debacle. Rather, he holds criticism of his kind of bad behavior, by those who witnessed it — including insiders like Tom Coburn — as the problem.

For Stevens, engaging in logrolling and runaway trough-​sloppery are okay. But complaining about it … that’s unforgivable! Members of the political club just don’t do that to each other, dontcha know.

Well, Coburn doesn’t know. He probably figures that unless staying in power is considered an end in itself, you obviously have to address the very problems you’re seeking to correct.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

This isn’t just another story about zero-​common-​sense policies in the schools. It’s about how families can show zero tolerance for these policies by taking matters into their own hands.

Brandon and his girlfriend Andra attended the Caney Creek High School in Conroe, Texas. They are both asthmatic and they both use inhalers. The exact same inhaler. Well, one day Andra forgot to bring hers and she had an asthma attack. Now, Brandon could have told her, “I’m sorry, but as far as I know, the strange minutiae of zero-​tolerance school policy may prevent me from letting you use my inhaler to alleviate your suffering.” Or he could have just let Andra use his inhaler. He let her use the inhaler, of course. “It made a big difference,” says Andra. “It did save my life.”

Next thing you know, bam, Brandon is arrested and kicked out of school for “delivering a dangerous drug.” It’s a three-​day suspension pending the school’s decision on what to do next. And what they do next is decide to expel him. Sadly, these stories are a dime a dozen these days.

But I like the happy ending for this one. Brandon’s expulsion, or semi-​expulsion, is not permanent. He can return to school next year. But that’s not the happy ending I’m talking about. Brandon says, “I’m expelled till after Christmas and I can come back after Christmas, but I won’t.” Instead he and Andra have decided to go the homeschooling route. They’ll do their learning at home. They’ve already learned one lesson here, that’s for sure.

This is Common Sense.  I’m Paul Jacob.

The FBI is supposed to protect us from terrorists. Or so I thought. They aren’t supposed to have terrorists on the payroll, are they? And they aren’t supposed to let those guys kill innocent people. They aren’t supposed to cover it up when they do kill innocent people, are they? Nor are they supposed to knowingly allow an innocent person to mistakenly take the rap for a murder, serving for decades in prison. But that is what our FBI did.

The Washington Post reports: “A House committee concluded yesterday that the FBI shielded from prosecution known killers and other criminals whom it used as informants to investigate organized crime in New England.” And no one is being held accountable. In a statement, the FBI recognized “misconduct by a few FBI employees,” but went on to “recognize the importance of human source information …” In other words: “Aw shucks, we’re real sorry and all that Americans were murdered, but what can you expect? We have to have our intelligence sources; to make an omelet you have to break some eggs.”

We’re talking about double-​digit homicides by paid informants to the FBI. With an innocent man serving 30 years in prison for one of the crimes. And FBI officials not only knew about it, but tried to cover it up.

There is no substitute for citizen control of government. Without more meaningful checks on raw and often secret political power, that power may not only fail to protect us from terrorists, that power can become terrorism.

This is Common Sense.  I’m Paul Jacob.

Truth is the first casualty of war. In the war against initiative and referendum, we’ve heard an awful lot that, well, just ain’t so.

Leon Panetta tells us that California is, quote, “increasingly paralyzed by initiatives.” David Broder writes that politicians “have little room to maneuver.” Laura Tyson says California is “ungovernable” and claims initiatives dictate 70 percent of state spending. And The Economist babbles that while “Empowering the people sounds nice in theory; in practice, it makes it very hard for Sacramento politicians to balance the budget and take care of other state business.” Sounds terrifying except for those pesky facts.

Professor John Matsusaka of the University of Southern California did a study. Turns out that voter initiatives do not control 70 percent of California’s state budget. Actually, about 2 percent of California spending is dictated by voter initiatives. Granted, a 1988 initiative requires a minimum level of state education spending.

However, education spending is well in excess of this minimum level, so the voter mandate has not even kicked in. Professor Matsusaka notes that “The conclusion that voter initiatives have not caused the California budget crisis squares with other research on the effect of direct democracy nationwide.… [T]he initiative process is a scapegoat for the inability of elected officials to manage the competing demands for public funds in a period of declining revenue.” What a shocker, eh?

This is Common Sense.  I’m Paul Jacob.