ThisIsCommonSense.org

Benjamin Franklin once said, “In free governments, the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors and sovereigns.”

Our country’s founders believed in the people and our ability to govern ourselves. While the rest of the world denied the rights of the individual, America affirmed them. We put our faith not in kings or experts, but in the common sense and decency of the average person. And in doing so, we moved from a poor backwater nation to become the richest, most powerful country in the world.

But what about today? Do you really think today’s Washington power elite see the people as their superiors? Do they view us as capable of self-government?

A recent Pew Research Center poll asked government officials this question: “Do Americans know enough about issues to form wise opinions about what should be done?” The response from our so-called servants in government, if not surprising, is certainly troubling. Thirty-one percent of congressmen said yes, but 47 percent said no, the public is uninformed.

Of Washington bureaucrats, 14 percent said yes but 81 percent said no. Frankly, the government in Washington doesn’t think you or I know very much. Little wonder then that Washington doesn’t listen to us or think we can govern ourselves.

But Washington is wrong. Self-government made our country great. Let’s remind them we’re the boss.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Charles Dickens’s A Tale of Two Cities begins with these famous words, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness . . .”

But Dickens’s immortal words come in handy today.

Arkansas is experiencing a tale of two Houses. You see there is a very big difference between Arkansas’s two legislative chambers. The House, where term limits went into effect in 1998, is more than half freshmen lawmakers. The Senate is still home to crusty old politicians. After the House finished this year’s session, their work was praised even by many who were originally skeptical of the Legislature’s ability to handle the massive turnover from term limits.

The worries turned out to be unfounded. It was a model session. The Senate had more experience in how government works, but that turned out not to be a good thing. Federal prosecutors issued 133 felony indictments against several powerful long-serving Senators in the most sweeping corruption prosecution in Arkansas history.

These senators knew the system, all right well enough to steal more than $1.3 million from Arkansas taxpayers. The so-called “experienced” legislators have a pretty sorry record. But Arkansas’ Senate gets a fresh start when term limits hit next year.

Then, paraphrasing Dickens, “It will be a far, far better legislature than they have ever known.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

It was career politicians against the people.

The case was U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton . Back in 1995 in a controversial 5 to 4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the 23 state laws limiting congressional terms.

Most of these laws did not actually stop incumbents from being reelected. Instead they limited incumbents from having their names on the ballot. A number of people have been elected to Congress through write-in campaigns.

But the High Court said the effect of the laws would be to “hobble” powerful incumbents, reducing their chances of winning. That could not be allowed.

Now the Court’s decision in the term limits case is being raised again, this time in a case where challengers are being hobbled. The Missouri Legislature passed restrictive limits on campaign contributions. The effect of these limits, whether intended or not, is to make it much harder for challengers to raise the funding necessary to take on powerful incumbents.

A group called Shrink Missouri Government sued to overturn the law. They say it violates the First Amendment rights of candidates and voters. They argue that contribution limits don’t reduce corruption. Instead, they tilt the field against challengers.

Many national advocacy groups, including U.S. Term Limits, have weighed in to support ending these restrictions that hinder challengers, and thus give us less competitive elections. The Court should not allow restrictions that hurt challengers.

We need more democracy, not less. Challengers need a fighting chance.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

We send good people to Washington, but after they get there they seem to change.

That’s one reason voters support term limits. They feel that representatives under term limits, imposed by law or by their own conscience, will be truer to their convictions. Focused on returning home and resuming their former lives, rather than staying in Congress forever, these members won’t be captured by special interests.

Now there’s more than a gut feeling among voters. There’s proof.

The National Taxpayers Union studied the legislation introduced and supported by members of the class of 1994. These congressmen came in like lions. On taxes and spending, the NTU study found those with self-imposed term limits kept faith with their original commitment to people back home. They stayed as strong as lions supporting a cut in government spending even after their first term.

Those seeking a congressional career behaved far differently. They broke faith with taxpayers by supporting 4 times more federal spending after their first term in office. They changed into lambs.

National Taxpayers Union President John Berthoud said, “When politicians plan a career in Washington, they will change their behavior . . . captured by the forces inside the Beltway advocating bigger spending and a larger federal government. Lawmakers who keep their pledge to limit their own terms appear to keep other promises as well lower spending and less government.”

Want representatives who keep the faith? They’re the term-limited ones.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

On too many tough streets it’s a jungle where young people are often pressured into joining gangs. One place you don’t expect gang activity is the halls of our nation’s Capitol.

Yet, in Congress pressure to join the gang is enormous. The congressional gangs are organized by the leadership of both parties. If you question the analogy between the congressional leadership and a street gang, consider the experience of Representative Bob Schaffer of Colorado.

Schaffer is a different breed who pledged to limit his time in Congress. His short-term status in Washington helps him keep his common sense and integrity. He was singled out by the National Taxpayers Union as the most frugal congressman for spending the least tax dollars on his office. Believing Congress is violating the 27th Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits Congress from taking a salary increase without first standing for re-election, Schaffer sued to stop the automatic pay raises career politicians keep giving themselves.

Boy, that really angered the gang in Congress! They kicked Schaffer off the Republican Policy Committee as punishment.

You see, fighting for reform in Washington, doing what you believe is right, and not becoming a career politician is against the rules of the gang.

Now, young people should think for themselves and stay out of gangs. It’s tough to fight peer pressure, but it’s critical that they reject the corruption the gangs bring to the neighborhood. Doesn’t the same go for our congressmen?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Yankee Stadium in New York is called “the house that Ruth built.”

Babe Ruth became a legend in his own time, selling enough tickets to make the Yankees a very successful team, not only in the record books, but also on the team’s bank statement. Ruth brought the fans, fans bought tickets and the Yankees built a great stadium. Those were the days.

Today it’s different. Oh, the games are as fun as ever, but when it comes to building stadiums, a political rip-off is taking place. You see wealthy owners today don’t build stadiums. Increasingly, you build them. That’s right, it’s your money that’s taken in taxes to pay for most of the new stadiums whether you like sports or not. Now, I love sports, but I hate political rip-offs.

It happened in Milwaukee. Voters said no for a publicly financed stadium, but the legislature stiff-armed voters, raising the sales tax to pay for it.

Pittsburgh voters turned down a plan for a new park, but the politicians are still subsidizing it.

In Seattle, voters said no to forking over $285 million for a new stadium, but the state legislature is clipping them with higher taxes and doing it anyway.

People love sports, which generate a lot of money. But when sports teams raking in millions of dollars get in bed with politicians to rip-off the taxpayers for huge subsidies it’s just flat wrong.

We don’t need an instant replay to make the call. “They’re out! Caught stealing.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.