ThisIsCommonSense.org

Thomas Wolfe said, “You can’t go home again.” But Vice-​President Al Gore is desperately trying to go home.We’d love to help him.

The only problem is: where’s home?

Let me tell you why I’m a little confused. First, Gore attacks his Democratic opponent, former New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley, for leaving Washington. Then Gore turns around and, with great fanfare, moves his presidential campaign headquarters out of Washington.

You see the point of the switcheroo, don’t you? Americans would rather have a President who hasn’t spent his whole career cloistered in Washington. The GOP front-​runner is a Texan, and nobody thinks of him as a creature of the Beltway.

Bradley, Gore’s Democratic opponent, served three terms in the U.S. Senate, but then retired. One minute Gore attacks Bradley for leaving Washington and the next Gore moves his campaign headquarters to Tennessee to distance himself from Washington.

But Gore has lived most of his life in Washington, not Tennessee. He grew up in D.C. and already has a 24-​year career as a politician. Gore isn’t alone among career politicians in finding it hard to figure out where home really is.

Many remain in Washington, D.C. after they retire, never returning to live in the states they hold so dear. Former Speaker Tom Foley never returned to Spokane. Kansas Senator Bob Dole isn’t in Kansas anymore. The only home career politicians know is in the heart of power. For citizen legislators, home is where the heart is.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

The St. Louis Rams are the only undefeated team in the National Football League. One big reason is Kurt Warner, the lowest paid and highest rated quarterback in the NFL.

Warner’s success story demonstrates the importance of never giving up. In college, he played football for little Northern Iowa, and wasn’t in the starting line-​up until his final year. In the second game, he was injured and out for the rest of the season. No NFL team drafted him.

The Green Bay Packers gave him a shot, but then cut him after training camp. He went home to a minimum-​wage job stocking grocery store shelves. But he didn’t give up on his dream. Soon he was playing in the Arena Football League. That earned him a try-​out with the Chicago Bears.

But he deferred the try-​out for something more important: his marriage to Brenda, a single mother of two. On their honeymoon, a scorpion bit him and his arm swelled so he couldn’t throw a football. His try-​out was canceled and the Bears never called again.

Last year, the Rams signed him to play in the European league. Warner excelled and came back to the U.S. as a back-​up. Then the Rams’ first-​string quarterback was injured and a star was born! Nothing is as powerful as perseverance a lesson for political reformers to heed as well.

Those who seek to limit the power of politicians and empower their fellow citizens have always been the underdogs. What’s the difference between those who succeed and those who fail? Winners never quit.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

“Indian-​giver” used to mean someone who gave you something and then took it back. You don’t hear this phrase anymore; it was deemed offensive to American Indians.

But wait a second. The term doesn’t apply to Indians; it applies to the politicians in Washington. In treaties between Indians and the U.S. Government, Indians have kept their word, while the federal government has repeatedly broken theirs. And the duplicity is not all in the past, either.

Earlier this year Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt was found in contempt of court for what a federal judge called a “shocking pattern of deception” that “abused the rights of Indians.” The case involved the mishandling by the Interior Department of 300,000 Indian trust fund accounts worth $2.5 billion.

Babbitt is also being investigated over a large campaign contribution to the Democrats from one Indian tribe, which may have led Babbitt to deny a casino license to another tribe. Republicans have been quick to blame Babbitt to score political points.

But what about their oversight responsibility? Why don’t they act to solve the problem?

The only action coming from Congress is to give Interior even greater control over the Indian tribes. New legislation hands bureaucrats virtually unlimited authority to redistribute federal money between the tribes. Congress complains about the bureaucracy, but ignores their abuses. Congress’ job isn’t to assign blame, but to require accountability.

As Indians have learned, career politicians speak with forked tongue.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

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.