ThisIsCommonSense.org

Nearly everyone says they support “campaign finance reform.” But people don’t agree on what that reform should be. And when you consider that any so-​called reform will be written by the career politicians themselves, well, it’s easy to get discouraged.

Moreover, if lightning strikes and a reform is passed that doesn’t just increase the advantages for incumbents, the incumbents could still thwart the reform through the Federal Election Commission. The FEC is very political. It’s comprised by an equal number of Republicans and Democrats. Anytime both parties flagrantly break the laws, as they did in the 1996 campaign, career politicians get a free pass.

Meanwhile, the FEC illegally harasses groups that run issue ads discussing the records of congressmen. A federal judge fined the agency for such conduct. Interesting, isn’t it, that the FEC lawlessly assaults groups that career politicians don’t like, but can’t manage to enforce the laws that are on the books.

But the problem is deeper than one renegade agency. It’s career politicians in Congress who talk reform but seek to block information that might hurt them politically. Why should Congress have any power at all to muzzle groups or individuals, even if they do call for an incumbent to be defeated? The First Amendment that guarantees free speech specifically tells Congress to butt out.

Freedom of speech means the freedom to say even those things that the people in power don’t like. This is America.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Money is not the root of all evil. I like it. Everyone I know likes it.

Money can be very helpful. They charge money at the movies, the cleaners, the grocery store. Of course, some of the things folks do to get money aren’t too kosher. Most Americans believe their representative in Congress has traded votes for money. Now that’s evil. It’s why people want to regulate money in politics. But the regulations haven’t worked.

Now enemies of the initiative process claim money is corrupting the people’s lawmaking and seek severe restrictions. That’s just silly. Unlike candidates, who can be bribed by contributions, initiatives are written down in black-​and-​white. Initiatives can’t change their legal wording after passage the way politicians discard campaign promises once in office.

Compare the initiative process to candidates. Even when initiative proponents outspend opponents by a two-​to-​one margin or more, most initiatives lose at the ballot box. Money doesn’t dictate the outcome.

But in candidate races, the bigger spenders win 96 percent of the time. Money’s an inanimate object. Money isn’t the problem, but power corrupting the individual. It’s when money buys our elected officials that we have a problem.

So, hands off the initiative process and let’s break up the power that corrupts our representatives with term limits.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

For years Syria has been on America’s official list of terrorist nations. Recently the Syrian dictator, Hafez Assad, died after three decades of a brutal reign of power. His government allowed no political freedom whatsoever. Dissent was a crime.

“I always respected him,” said Clinton, praising Assad for taking part in peace talks. Respected Hafez Assad? A dictator? A sponsor of terrorism? Does Mr. Clinton know something that the State Department doesn’t know?

Oh sure, Assad sometimes cooperated with the U.S. on the public scene, when he wasn’t befriending terrorists behind the scenes. Maybe he did want to improve his standing in the eyes of the international community.

But that’s what manipulative dictators do. They play the power game. But does that make them heroes of freedom, peace and democracy? Well, maybe Clinton just admires the guy’s staying power; Clinton would love another 30 years in power himself.

I guess it would have been a terrible shock to international diplomacy if our President had simply said, “Another thug bites the dust. Hooray!” But can’t we have a little respect for the men and women and children who have been maimed or killed, in body and in spirit, over the past thirty years: the victims of Hafez Assad?

Some argue we have to deal with dictators as we try to achieve piece in a war-​torn part of the world. But we don’t have to send roses to their funerals.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

How much should our opinion matter? I think my opinion should count a lot, especially when it’s well informed, which is usually.

No doubt you feel the same way. When it comes to representative government, our opinions certainly should be important. Not all-​important, of course. We want representatives who share our values, but we want them to rule by principles, not just by polls.

But sometimes public opinion should carry a great deal of weight, even if our representatives have a different opinion.

Foreign policy is one example. Should our congressmen be making life-​and-​death commitments for us around the world, against our will, without the support of the very people who will have to pay the ultimate price for the policy?

According to a recent survey by Rasmussen Research, most Americans think the U.S. should commit to the military defense of just four nations Canada and Mexico on this side of the globe, and across the pond, Great Britain and France.

Yet for one reason or another, the United States currently has troops in more than 100 countries. And we are committed to defend scores of allies. A lot of us were very skeptical of the bombing in Kosovo. But our doubts didn’t stop our representatives from giving a green light to the action. When troops are sent abroad, life and limb is at stake.

In a situation like that, our representatives had better listen to what the people have to tell them. Don’t you think? That’s my opinion, anyway.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

I got a call the other day from a woman who wanted to know why I liked President Clinton so much. Huh? It was news to me.

In her view, if I can’t give Republican George Nethercutt a free pass for breaking his word to step down this year, I must be a Clinton-​lover. Weird logic.

We may be terrible, but the other party is even worse. George Nethercutt is the guy who defeated House Speaker Tom Foley in 1994. Nethercutt is now breaking his commitment to serve no more than three terms.

When the President admitted he had lied to the country about Monica what’s-​her-​name, Nethercutt called for Clinton’s resignation saying, “Your word is your bond, whether it’s your public life or private life. The honorable thing for him to do is resign.”

Republicans braved negative public opinion to impeach Mr. Clinton for lying under oath. Was it just because he was a Democrat? These same Republicans are rushing to the defense of Mr. Nethercutt, who broke his oath. National Republicans are funding a $200,000 ad blitz attacking, well … us! U.S. Term Limits. My group.

What did we do? Well, we put the issue of term limits and the issue of integrity dare I say it? Above party, either party, any party. I’d rather be right than be Republican or Democrat. As Rep. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma says, “I don’t want to be associated with people that tell Americans one thing and do another.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

When money was tight the career politicians in Washington were spending it like there was no tomorrow.

Now with a surplus watch out!

There are lots of “good ideas” in this world. Of course, since every good idea costs money except maybe one we can’t afford to do everything for everyone.

But sometimes government thinks it can. Who can be against a new hospital? More money for the needy? Higher pay for soldiers, and teachers, and policemen? Shouldn’t we fund NASA and reach for the stars? Find cures for diseases! A chicken in every pot. A computer for every child! End poverty! Abolish unemployment and mandate eternal happiness for all! Swell ideas, each of them.

But we have to ask ourselves a question: Do we have the right, constitutional or moral right, to spend our neighbor’s money to fund our dreams? If we do, so do the millionaire ball club owners who want their stadiums built at taxpayer expense.

Jeff Flake, a congressional candidates who has signed the term limits pledge, says that, “If anybody can conclude that spending public money on a football stadium is OK at the local level, then heaven knows what they would do at the federal level in that candy store.” Those, like Flake, who don’t want a political career sure are a lot better at saying NO to demands for more candy.

Here’s another idea: maybe folks should pay their own way in life and not be dependent on government. Hmmm, I like that one.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.