ThisIsCommonSense.org

You don’t have to be a Ph.D. in the economics of anti-​trust law to see the irony of the federal government’s legal attack on Microsoft. Here we have Microsoft, the leading company in the most productive, competitive and innovative sector of our society, under siege from the least productive and most monopolized element in society the federal government.

Let’s look at the picture before us. The computer industry, which our government argues is being threatened by the alleged monopoly practices of Microsoft, is putting new computers on our desks with ever more effective programs. We can now balance our checkbook, go shopping, design intricate publications and e‑mail our parents the new picture of their grandkid all on our personal computer. And with many more features and power, the prices keep going down.

Now what about the federal government? First, its Board of Directors, the Congress, has monopolized the political process. In the last election 98.5 percent of incumbents were reelected, most without any meaningful competition. For those who had served more than 2 terms, the reelection rate was 100 percent. That’s beyond anything remotely possible in the productive private sector. And more important, when is the last time you saw real innovation in the federal government a problem solved or a true cut in the amount of your tax bill?

Monopolies are known to raise prices and diminish quality. That doesn’t match the record of Microsoft or the computer industry. The real monopoly isn’t Mr. Gates and Microsoft; it’s the career politicians in Washington.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

I like to talk and some people tell me I’m pretty good at it. I even like to argue different points of view. I’m something of a debater.

But there comes a time when the debate has to end a time to act. In the wake of serious violence at public schools in recent months, it wasn’t too surprising that school officials in Decatur, Illinois acted swiftly when students started a brawl at a football game. The students were expelled.

What is surprising, is that the school officials are taking the flak while the out-​of-​control students are being portrayed as victims. Jesse Jackson actually defended the students’ actions saying they didn’t use weapons.

So violence is only wrong if you use a gun? It’s okay to bash people with your fists? It’s true enough that many schools have been overreacting. In Decatur the expulsion was originally 2 years. Maybe that goes a little too far. Now they’ve chopped the penalty down to one year.

But one cannot commit arbitrary violence and then expect official reaction to always be perfectly proportionate. Understand where parents and schools are coming from with these zero-​tolerance policies. Does having a tolerant society mean we tolerate violence?

Unfortunately that’s too often the message as self-​proclaimed experts and politicians endlessly debate the issue. We can’t wait for some kind of educational utopia. As parents, we don’t have that luxury. Our kids must be safe right now if not in public schools, then in private schools or taught at home. Our kids are too important.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Career politicians think they own your wallet. With it, they believe they can work miracles. But the miracles never happen.

The words of the Wizard of Oz come to mind: “I’m not a bad man; I’m just not a very good wizard.”

Citizen legislators, who go to Congress for a strictly limited time, think differently. They know their job is to run the government, not our lives. They also remember where the government’s money comes from from you and me.

Here’s an example of the difference. In the final days of this congressional session, a bill was all set to sail through the House, as it had the Senate, spending $31 million on pork-​barrel projects. These five pork projects would be named for former Senators all in keeping with the good ol’ boy policy of “let’s congratulate and reward ourselves and our fellow politicians first. We can worry about the taxpayers some other time.”

But citizen legislators brought old-​fashioned common sense to bear. Mark Sanford of South Carolina pointed out that $31 million could hire more teachers or pay college tuition for about 4,000 kids.

Rep. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma said he was troubled by spending this money to honor politicians responsible for giving us a $6 trillion debt. “There is something not quite right with that,” said Coburn. This time the good guys won. The bill was defeated.

Term-​limited members made sure the taxpayers were represented, not just the politicians. That’s a big difference.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

We at U.S. Term Limits once criticized Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House at the time, for his hypocrisy over term limits. Upset by our call for simple integrity, Newt angrily exploded, “They don’t have a clue how to run this country!”

He was right, of course. We don’t have a clue about how to run the country. I wouldn’t even try myself. But Newt didn’t know how to run the country either. Nor does Bill Clinton. Nor do any of the presidential wannabes or the congressional candidates.

Of course, no one should be “running” the country. No one should be trying to. The whole purpose of our Constitution is to protect us from would-​be dictators, would-​be managers of the country. In America we each run our own lives and we employ representatives to run the government our government not the country. There’s a big difference between the two. Thomas Jefferson said it best: “Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we would soon want for bread.”

Dr. Tom Coburn, who has limited his terms in Congress, sees the same thing, ” I believe more than ever that our nation’s problems have been created because career politicians have set themselves apart as an elite class of people trying to dictate to us how we run our lives.”

The longer politicians spend in Washington passing laws, listening to lobbyists and giving speeches, the more they delude themselves into thinking they run the country. We know better though, don’t we?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Have you ever been called a “special interest”?

It’s not a term of endearment. It’s an attack and it gets thrown around a lot these days.

One reason is that the career politicians in Washington do indeed cater to special interests, at the expense of the rest of us. Some argue that every group and every individual is a special interest. Their goal is to cloud the issue, not clarify it.

If that were true the phrase would have no meaning. It would be what Ayn Rand called an “anti-​concept.” But it’s not true. There are special interests and general interests and a big difference between the two.

Term limits supporters have been derided as just another special interest. But where term limits are in effect all across the country no one receives a unique benefit unavailable to others. Term limits apply equally to all.

So what’s an example of a special interest?

We pay subsidies to sugar growers. That doesn’t benefit everyone. It benefits the few. Nor did the rest of us ever approve it. Special interests get their way in the backroom, not in the light of day. The White House and various congressmen have begun pushing a special tax law that would give only one man Abe Pollin, owner of the NBA basketball team in Washington a $238 million dollar tax break.

No doubt like the rest of us, Pollin is over-​taxed. But he is also a special interest. Taxes should be reduced for everybody, not just Abe. When the general interest is served, we all benefit.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Have you ever gotten a bill from the phone company or electric company that made you almost fall down dead from shock?

Most of us have been the victim of a billing error. And though it’s not always easy to get it corrected, in the end it all works out. And of course, sometimes there is no error in the bill and we have to struggle to pay it. In these cases we’re usually a lot wiser about using the product or service in the future.

That’s exactly how I feel when I consider my tax bill. There must be some mistake! But there is no mistake. The federal government consumes over 20 percent of our GDP gross domestic product. And when you add up all the other state and local taxes, property tax and sales tax and what not, pretty soon it’s clear that more than 40 percent of our income goes straight to the government, most to the feds.

If we overspend in our personal budget, we feel our own pain. We pay the bill and we change our behavior. But this is about the politics of careerism. We send folks to Washington who say they’ll cut taxes, but when they get to Washington they won’t let go of the power that comes with spending our money.

President Clinton actually had the audacity to say that a one-​percent reduction in spending was “reckless.” It’s time for a change. Time for a few battalions of citizen legislators who understand that cutting at least one paltry percent of discretionary government spending makes a lot more sense then adding to our already outrageous tax bill. It would be nice if we had a few bucks left to pay the rent.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.