Tag: Democrats

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies

My Enemy’s Money

American democracy is uglier than necessary. We don’t have to talk so nasty about our opponents. Or their money.

The usual snipe about this process is that funders of “our side” (whichever side that happens to be) are Good and True and Selfless, while funders of the other side are Evil and Dishonest and Selfish.

So, Democrats decry — and often seek to regulate — the spending of wealthy conservatives and “major corporate lobbyists”; Republicans decry — and, perhaps less often, seek to limit — the spending of unions and billionaires such as George Soros.

Because organizations like MoveOn have been funded by Soros, they are said to be somehow less “legitimate.”

When it was discovered that the Koch brothers of Koch Industries had funded various “Tea Party” organizations to the tune of (it is said) many millions, Obama-hurrahing pundits and activists decried this, charging that it proved that there was no “grassroots” element to the movement. “Astroturf!” they cried.

All nonsense.

Now, Democrats from Obama on down claim that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is using foreign money for ads. But Democrats haven’t produced a shred of evidence. It’s simply a wild accusation.

Look: It’s not tainted money when the other side gets it and you don’t. Or vice versa. Besides, rich people should be as free as less rich folks to give to their causes.

And perhaps we’d see less money pouring into politics from billionaires were campaign contributions for the rest of us less limited.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies

A Halloween Sermon

It’s amazing how often my online critics assume that I am a Republican. Hey, I’m not a member of either major party.

Still, I reserve the right to hold Republican feet to the fire — using their own principles. Democrats, likewise. I have to: Politicians in both parties control too much of our lives and ignore too many of their principles.

I was driving the other day and caught businesses putting up their Halloween-themed promotions. I almost drove off the road: Halloween is almost here?

Of course, the holiday is several weeks away, but as I wrapped my mind around the idea of a “Halloween Season,” it hit me: So it is with politics.

Christmas is a notoriously imperialistic holiday. The season keeps starting earlier and earlier — gobbling up more of the calendar.

The Democratic Party is like Christmas. It has its Santa figures and its lore about sleighs full of goodies and a lot of activity in chimneys, being swept clean, etc.

The Republican Party is like Halloween: A bit scary sometimes — sometimes too eager to throw out the Bill of Rights . . . and its own Santa-ish treat giveaways.

But the chief function of Halloween is to put an early, pre-Thanksgiving stop to the imperialist creep of the big-spending Christmas Season.

And maybe the real meaning of a Democrat Christmas is to stop the foolery of the Republican’s Halloween.

As an independent, of course my favorite holiday is Independence Day.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
too much government

American Opinion versus the Political Mandate

American politics is often dominated by a myth, the myth of the “mandate.”

Mandates, it is said, come from winning elections. The word used to be applied to big wins. Now that’s been watered down.

But elections do not a mandate make.

The recent shift from united government under the Republicans to united government under the Democrats has been dubbed a mandate, a mandate for “change” — which, in the programs of President Barack Obama and his powerful allies in Congress, seems to mean “more government.” Lots more.

Meanwhile, the American people hold different notions. A recent Gallup poll shows that 57 percent of Americans think that government is doing too much. Only 38 percent of respondents to the poll thought that government should do more. And regarding business and industry? Twenty-four percent thought government did too little; 45 percent thought government regulates business too heavily as it is.

According to most Americans, there’s too much government overall.

So how does this square with the picture provided by major media, and emphasized on the left? Not very well. Democrats came into the recent situation thinking they had a mandate. They were wrong.

What Democrats had was a win from Americans repudiating the Republicans for general incompetence, and for (yes) growing government too much. If Democrats continue their government growth agenda, the mirage they see as a mandate will completely vanish.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption national politics & policies

After Kennedy

This is a difficult time for the Kennedy clan, with Ted Kennedy’s death coming so soon after that of his sister Eunice. I’m no fan of Kennedy’s politics, but may he rest in peace.

At such a time, I am inclined to abstain from criticism of Kennedy’s ideals and means. But I can’t help noticing that Kennedy himself did not regard even the occasion of his own passing as exempt from one more try at political game-playing.

Shortly before his death, Kennedy urged the Massachusetts legislature to change the rules governing how he’d be replaced. Currently, when a U.S. senate seat in Massachusetts is prematurely vacated, there’s a special election. Kennedy urged that the rules be changed so that the governor would instead appoint the replacement. The incumbent governor is a Democrat, who would likely pick a Democrat.

Yet back in 2004, when Senator John Kerry might have become president, it was also Kennedy who urged switching from gubernatorial appointments — the rule at the time — to conducting special elections. The legislature complied. Back then, you see, the incumbent governor was Republican, unlikely to pick a Democrat had replacing Kerry become necessary.

Let’s have one policy or the other — not a switch every time there’s a vacancy, in just such a way as to serve the most partisan of goals. Such rigging of the system has become all too common.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
government transparency term limits

Committee Chair Limits, RIP?

Advocates of limited government have lamented the decline and fall of the 1994 Republican “revolution” since, well, not long after the so-called revolution began. But before it melted into a puddle of politics-as-usual, there were some serious efforts at reform.

One procedural reform that survived was term limits on committee chairmen. The Democratic leadership, after gaining a majority in 2006, decided to keep these limits.

But now, with their majority increased, a Democrat headed to the White House, and economic collapse as a distraction, they apparently feel the time has become as ripe as a freckled banana to peel away such impediments to their rule. The scuttling of committee chair limits is now part of their new rules package.

The package also limits the ability of Republicans to force votes on bills that would be politically difficult for Democrats to vote on. Sheesh, I thought voting on stuff was the whole idea.

The minority Republicans have sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi, complaining, “This is not the kind of openness and transparency that President-elect Obama promised.”

But they shouldn’t stop there, even if the new rules are implemented over their protest. In politics, it often pays to keep fighting.

Term limits remain very popular with the many of the same voters who also like the openness and accountability the new president keeps talking about.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.