Big Government

Redux

Redux

The last few weeks I have touched on three key topics and want to revisit them today as each has made headlines, reiterating my concerns, or in one case giving hope and contradicting my thoughts. Last week I touched on energy policy, the failure of the Department of Energy to meet its mandate by President Carter, and cornucopian ignorance by conservatives. The prior week I alerted you to my concern over failing state governments. Three weeks ago I hit on the issue of entertainment and sports prevailing as the interest to Americans instead of citizenship. I typically write this column on the weekend preceding publication so it has been fascinating to watch thoughts, predictions, and trends materialize.

Snowstorms battered the mid-Atlantic and northeast again this past week reiterating my focus on state governments running budget deficits and the upcoming economic malaise. The same week I wrote my column the governors of the states met and voiced concern over impending shortfalls. In world headlines, Greece continues to make the news, but the state of California is the eighth largest economy in the world and remains on the brink of failure. On the U.S. east coast snowstorms may bankrupt individual states. For example, Georgia has no budget for snow removal but has spent $5 million. Virginia has suffered; outspending its $79 million snow removal budget by another $70 million. Those are critical monies ordinarily available for social services, schools, libraries, and road maintenance. In Virginia, the state Continue reading…

March 3, 2010 by Big Government Peak Oil

Energy Policy

America’s energy policy over the last 40 years has been lacking direction, but President Obama took a big step forward last week. Prior to 1972 America was an exporter of oil, not only supplying all of our own needs but exporting oil to other countries. It is hard to imagine, but in the early 20th century oil literally flowed to the top of the ground in places like Pennsylvania, no wells, no deep sea drilling; it could be had by scraping it off the ground. In 1956 a geophysicist, Dr. M. King Hubbert predicted by 1970 America would reach its “peak”, the point where U.S. oil production would peak. However, the concept of “Peak Oil” is scoffed at since we continue to discover more oil reserves, dismissing that every new barrel costs more to obtain than the previous. In 1973 the OPEC crisis catalyzed our country’s quest for energy independence; seven presidents since influenced America’s energy policies, but yet we remain hostage to foreign sources.

In 1977 President Carter created the Department of Energy; a bloated bureaucracy failing to meet its original mandate. Specifically, the DOE was created to ensure “the U.S. will never again import as much oil as it did in 1977.” At its creation, America imported 8.6 million bbls/day, now we import 10.4 million bbls/day. The DOE has grown from zero employees and zero budget to over 16,000 taxpayer paid civil servants, 100,000 contractors and an annual budget of $28 billion. Today America remains as dependent on foreign sources of energy as in 1977. Contrastingly, President Reagan brought a different view to office regarding energy. Sadly, his view is one that has stayed with Republicans during the last 25 years. Regan, a cornucopian, believed an innovative, technological solution, would appear in time to save us from the tragedy of our misdeeds. Of course, President Reagan, and his British counterpart Margaret Thatcher, were saved by the huge North Sea oil discoveries in the 1980s. Thus, the UK had a thriving economy and postponed energy policy decisions and likewise America did the same.

In the summer of 2008 every American received a wake-up call to energy policy. Stunned, we watched the price of gasoline at the pump soar past $4.00/gallon, considered buying “Smart” cars and left the SUV in the garage. Of course, this brought out the charlatans and snake-oil salesmen seeking government monies and investors for wind farms, off-shore wave generators, battery powered cars, oil sands recovery, and the now famous food-for-fuel, or ethanol disaster. However, grabbing a calculator and doing some math will show many of these methods require more energy than produced, do more environmental damage, or are just silly when considering large-scale implementation.

This past week President Obama made an excellent decision regarding energy policy; announcing $8.3 billion in loan guarantees to build two nuclear reactors in Georgia, the first in the U.S. in 30 years. Ironically, it is a decision that defies his party’s typical philosophy regarding nuclear energy and I am certain the likes of Jane Fonda, and the rest of the anti-nuke crowd, are troubled by this. However, the Hollywood crowd driving Toyota Prius automobiles must understand their energy requirements will come from the “grid”. President Obama, as a Senator and candidate, has consistently supported nuclear power. I would suggest the President add geo-thermal energy to the quest for clean-energy independence. With the unspent stimulus monies President Obama could focus a moonwalk like quest on energy and lead us out of recession and away from dependence on our enemies in the middle-east and South America.

March 3, 2010 by Big Government Peak Oil

Snowstorms

The last several weeks living in North Georgia have made me long for the warm weather of New Smyrna. Snow has fallen across the mountains and into the Mid-Atlantic States. Mentioned in the news, but not garnering huge attention, has been the concern over budget shortfalls to handle snow removal and storm effects. The next economic storm brewing is more significant than this winter’s snowstorms though, it is the budget shortfalls at city, county, and state levels. Unlike the Federal government the other levels of government cannot run deficit budgets, leaving IOUs, payment vouchers, and possible insolvency as their only options.

Currently, California’s state budget is $40 billion, and assumes $9.6 billion in revenue will come from the Federal government, although it is rumored unlikely. Watching the news, the “Governator” remains firm on passing budgets, leaving programs intact, and not raising taxes. Sadly, Arnold has been at the front of the line grabbing monies for his state, in sharp contrast to what most Republican governors tend to do. Along with California; Illinois, Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin are also on the verge of fiscal disaster. Each of these states shares in common an increase in spending to fund public pension plans and support social programs that outpaced revenues. Coupled with the economic downturn, and housing crisis, revenues have fallen sharply. States like Arizona and Florida saw legislators enjoy spending due to property tax growth and found themselves like giddy children with an unlimited budget in a toy store full of opportunity.

Compounding the state problems are unfunded pension liabilities. Teachers, firefighters, policemen, and other public service employees enjoy an opportunity that allows productive members of society to work a limited number of years and then retire. In California the projected teacher pension shortfall is currently $43 billion, a huge number that can only be made up through taxes, additional contributions, or reduced benefits.

At the municipal level, foreclosures have created property tax deficits and reduced spending has cut sales tax revenues. Adding to revenue problems, and wiping out reserves, is increased expense for snowstorms, ice storms, and potential hurricanes this summer. “USA Today” ran an article on February 3rd, 2010 examining road maintenance under the caption, “Tight times put gravel on the road.” The article noted gravel roads are emerging as a sign of financial struggle in rural towns. In this case, budgets are so constrained that regular maintenance can no longer be performed on asphalt roads, something we all take for granted. Additionally, we have seen the fantastic examples of bridge failures, and can expect more infrastructure failures of roads, sewer, and water.

Listening to a podcast during the last week the discussion turned to the economy and the participants talked about local insolvencies, and mortgage resets, making an observation, “if it were really that bad wouldn’t someone tell us?” In hindsight, no warnings were given leading to the housing bust, or the market crash in March 2009. Looking back further, the headlines of the 1930’s are hilarious with weekly pontifications of better times coming and I believe our economic recovery is going to echo a similar path. I realize that comment contradicts the optimistic news presented daily. However too many factors remain: unemployment, reduced tax revenues, drains on local spending, excessive quantitative easing, Chinese currency manipulation, and increased spending. It seems like Americans have become the proverbial frog in a pot of hot water, slowly being boiled to death, oblivious to the impending doom.

February 19, 2010 by Big Government

Happy New Year


Many of us are taking a look at the last year and reflecting on what we did right and wrong and how to improve for 2010. I hope our government is doing the same, taking this time to reflect and improve its performance. Annually I make goals, not resolutions, but goals. After making a list of goals I prioritize and determine the actionable items needed to succeed. Unfortunately, I feel our government and country fall short similarly because there is no long-term vision, no goal. In contrast, President Kennedy did an excellent job of creating direction for the country when he set a goal of putting a man on the moon before 1970. Since then our Presidents have spoken in grandiose prose with no answerability thus allowing them to avoid political failure.

The past year, with a new administration, and significantly reshaped Congress offers an excellent opportunity for reflection. One year ago today we had no stimulus plan, no healthcare plan, no Copenhagen Agreement, and less troops committed to Afghanistan. At the same time, the U-6 unemployment rate was 13.5% versus 17% today, the new Whitehouse forecast unemployment to increase if stimulus was not passed, we were promised the automotive companies would not file bankruptcy if we bailed them out, and housing markets were forecasted to improve along with foreclosures dropping. Sadly, America has become sicker as unemployment skyrocketed, housing foreclosures hit historic highs, credit stopped flowing to consumers, commercial real estate markets teeter on collapse, the dollar is losing favor as the currency standard, and consumers curtailed their retail spending more than expected.

As individuals when our goals and plans do not work we have to reassess and change course. The most successful people consider this not a failure, but an opportunity. Watching and listening to pundits from political and financial news shows brings a plethora of analysts willing to pontificate blame. What we need is a leader; a year ago President Obama promised “Hope and Change”, but today’s polls show his approval rating at the lowest ever recorded for a first year president, disappointing even his most avowed supporters. I think the President’s single biggest failure has not been his desires for Hope and Change, but his insistent rearview perspective of placing blame on his predecessors. Leaders do not focus on blame, instead they own their circumstances, develop responsible goals and plans, and move forward.

Our government needs to change focus now and save our society before we fall like the empires of the past. Our Founding Fathers had a radical vision for a new republic and famously changed the world with the Constitution. President Roosevelt navigated the waters of the depression with specific actionable programs. President Kennedy motivated an entire generation to put public service first and a man on the moon. Mayor Giuliani cleaned up New York City and gave its residents hope after 9/11. The consistent leadership trait among these leaders is vision and accountability.

With a new year upon us I hope our leaders in government, Obama, Reid, and Pelosi, will focus less on their political future and stop blaming those who have been gone from power for more than a year. The minority leadership can help craft a vision side by side too and the majority must understand that dissent means debate and not continue to plow forward over unanimous objection. A new year brings new opportunity and can erase thoughts of the past; I hope our government leadership, looks forward and stops looking backward.

January 10, 2010 by Big Government

Merry Christmas from Congress

As the Christmas holiday comes upon us this week I feel compelled to take a look at our government and what has happened in the past year. Driving this is speculation over whether Senator Harry Reid will force a vote on healthcare Christmas Eve. Personally, I hope the vote is squashed, not because of my feelings on government run health care, but because of the actions and methods of this new Democratic Party run government.

I am concerned by the cloak of secrecy and selling votes to force healthcare to fruition. In contrast to Congress’ actions right now, I have had the opportunity to sit on several government boards in Florida and the “Sunshine Laws” have been drilled into me. On one hand they are frustrating as these laws regarding open, transparent government make it difficult to negotiate contracts, bid on projects, and protect the tax payer in some instances. But, this smaller issue is far outweighed by eliminating secrecy in government. Florida is renowned for putting a high priority on the public’s right of access to governmental meetings and records. In fact, the principles of open government are not only embodied in Florida statutes, but also are guaranteed in the state Constitution.

Similar to the Sunshine Laws, President Obama proposed “Sunlight Before Signing” stating “Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, I will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” However, this has been done far less than 50% of the time since taking office. Additionally, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously declared on September 24th she would make the healthcare bills available for review at least 72-hours prior to any votes, but as we know that was not the case. The American people learned how this new majority party government would work when the stimulus bill passed last spring was voted on without accommodation for members of Congress to read it, rushed through for signature, and even President Obama did not follow his own directive for “Sunlight Before Signing”.

Open government protects us, the citizens from potential tyranny by our elected officials. I am dismayed at closed-door meetings in Washington, the President calling members of a single party to the Whitehouse, or caucus meetings to promise hundreds of millions of dollars to a single congressional district or state. Sadly, at the national level straw polls are taken, potential votes counted, and strategies are determined to allow some members of congress to even vote “Nay” in an effort to protect them from political backlash over certain legislation. Thus, a bill may pass by the slimmest majority, but a majority nonetheless when a single party controls Congress; all in sharp contrast to Florida’s open government laws.

This week much political maneuvering regarding procedures will take place while most of us are distracted with holiday events. One must wonder why if the proposed healthcare bill is critical to one-sixth of our economy, our well-being, and best for the country then why must negotiation be done secretly. Like Santa Claus, the Senate will come together Christmas Eve to deliver the “gift” of healthcare over the objection of the majority of Americans.

December 24, 2009 by Big Government Health care

Civil Rights

Civil rights are a class of rights and freedoms protecting individuals from unwarranted government action and ensuring one’s ability to participate in the civil and political life of the state without discrimination or repression. I believe most of us take these rights for granted and have no appreciation for these freedoms conveyed upon us. Furthermore, we turn a blind eye to the litigation by brave citizens taking place everyday across the country, as there generally is no publicity, but yet these court cases effect all of us in ways we cannot imagine.

Protection of civil rights is not an issue of political values, whether you are on the Right or the Left. These are rights neutral to politics, but often the court cases surrounding an issue become the source of political argument instead of the issue at hand. For example, my wife and I recently watched the movie, “The People vs. Larry Flynt” covering the landmark Supreme Court Case about first amendment rights and protection of speech. When the arguments were made the Moral Majority dominated public opinion and the Right was blind to the larger concern of speech versus Larry Flynt’s association with the porn industry. Ironically, this case provides Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck with the freedom they need to criticize and satirize the current president.

In Georgia a current case is before the Federal Court of Appeals regarding gun rights and carrying guns on MARTA (the public transit system) when properly licensed with a firearm’s permit. Anti-gun groups from the Left argue these rights should not persist in the name of safety or terrorist concerns. From a civil rights standpoint though, the interesting fact in this case is the 4th Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizure. The Georgia Carry Organization (GCO) has argues stopping a citizen, who is committing no crime, to check ID and firearms licensure is the same as the Supreme Court’s previously affirmed position that police cannot stop a motorist, who is committing no crime, just to check for a valid driver’s license. A loss in a case like this will permit law enforcement to stop anyone regardless of circumstances.

Similar to the case above, every American has willfully given up civil rights since the terrorist acts of September 11th, 2001. To cross the borders between states every traveler is subject to verification of identity and search including scanning, pat-down, and removal of shoes. Of course, this takes place at airports and applies to millions of daily passengers. With no clear directive, TSA has taken wide sweeping liberties to extend authority to include screening for crimes which may or may not be in progress. For instance, in 2008 an aide, Steve Bierfeldt, to Congressman Ron Paul was detained by TSA at St. Louis-Lambert International Airport and questioned although no crime was committed. In this case, he refused to answer questions regarding why he was carrying $4,700 in cash and had no reason to comply because no crime was in process and it was a violation of his 4th Amendment rights. Fortunately for all travelers, he prevailed and TSA is slowly issuing new policies limiting screenings to searches for “terrorist related” items.

It is easy to criticize Larry Flynt if you are offended by pornography. It is easy to criticize the actions of the GCO if you do not support gun rights. It is easy to defend the actions of TSA in the name of protection. However, it is hard to stand up to the government, fight battles in court, and protect civil rights. These are the unsung heroes of the Left and the Right, fighting battles for all of us each day.

Copyright (C) 2009 John R. Nelson. All Rights Reserved.

December 20, 2009 by Big Government Civil Rights

Big Brother IS Watching

The next time you enter Wal-Mart look up and smile while walking into the store. It is stunning, but you will see a dozen cameras scanning the parking lot. Do the same at a major intersection while waiting for the light to change; note the cameras at the top of the traffic lights and count cameras watching the intersection. Willfully, the public has submitted to the pervasiveness of closed circuit television in the name of perceived safety. Ben Franklin wrote, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

For years we have not been able to go in a store without “Theft TV” watching our actions in the name of crime prevention. Municipalities are adding cameras throughout their cities to prevent crimes. Currently, no one has more than the British; in 2001 the country had over one million cameras, by 2005 that number had quadrupled. One measure used is the number of cameras per thousand people. In England, the borough of Wandsworth has the highest number of CCTV cameras in London, with just under four cameras per 1,000 people. Its total number of cameras – 1,113 – is more than the police departments of Boston, Johannesburg and Dublin City Council combined.

The web site, “patrolcctv.com” advertises the latest camera proposals, are vehicles equipped with CCTV. The site advertizes it “stabilizes images, reads license plates at 250FT.” These always on systems analyze license plate numbers to search for a relationship between vehicles, names, and criminals. Furthermore, the date, time, and GPS location of the vehicle may be stored for future reference in a database. Just like software scanning state databases of driver’s license photos for “probable hits” the same will be done for vehicles. Ultimately, all of us now stand in a police line-up every day by virtue of having a driver’s license and are under constant stake-out by driving vehicles.

The saturation of cameras in Britain and the United States has soared due to successes when major crimes are caught on film. Of course, the camera makes police work much easier and the public tends to feel a sense of safety. I on the other hand am bothered by the pervasiveness of CCTV and the potential for misuse by authorities or private agencies. I believe government, when given the opportunity, will ultimately use data-mining, facial recognition software, and other surveillance means to identify potential criminals. At the same time, I believe such use suffers from a high probability of potential error. Sadly, the burden of proof will shift from one of guilt made by prosecutors to one of innocence argued by citizens.

On one side the claim for cameras is obvious: increased public safety and crime prevention. On the other hand, there appears to be no conclusive evidence cameras are a crime deterrent. We believe George Orwell’s “1984” would never happen, but we are now living with Big Brother watching everything we do. Willfully, we submitted in the belief of safety and instead, like Franklin warned, have lost our liberties. Look up and smile the next time you think you are alone.

December 10, 2009 by Big Government Civil Rights

Cruise Ships

One of the highlights of a cruise ship trip to the Bahamas is a visit to the local market. Some bargaining will take place; you will feel good about your purchase, getting a great price, and the vendor will have sold one of his wares. This system works and has stood the test of time because there are no price floors or ceilings.

For example if I want to buy a handmade blanket for $20 in the above example with a little negotiating I can buy the blanket for $16. Still not comfortable with the price, I can walk away and the vendor will make a finally offer of $14. Because I know there are three other vendors selling similar, not necessarily the same, blankets nearby I can refuse the offer. Both of us are free to negotiate, up or down, in this scenario. I can pay $14, the vendor can lower his price to $13, or the deal can come to an end.

What would happen if the cruise ship company decided to check each vendor to ensure they were worthy, provide them perks, and guarantee a certain number of customers each day or pay him for any lost business? Furthermore, the cruise ship company agrees they will take Continue reading…

October 22, 2009 by Big Government Health care Obama

Democracy or Republic?

One of my pet peeves is lexicon misuse. This was recently reinforced by an email link I received from a friend that offered to explain our form of government and make comparisons to other common forms such as oligarchy, monarchy and anarchy. Most of us believe the United States is a democracy. However, the video I received focused on the view that our founding fathers intended the United States to be a republic. My question, of course, was what’s the difference? More important, if there is a difference does it really matter?

A quick trip to the dictionary, or in this case the online version of Merriam-Webster, would most surely shed some light on the distinctions between the two words. I found a “democracy” is “government by the people; especially : rule of the majority (b) : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.”

Fair enough I thought, and it sounds like the United States. So how is a republic defined? A republic is a “government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (b) a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law.” Again similar to the United States in definition and at least not significantly different to help me distinguish the subtleties of the two words. Now, I felt thoroughly confused and I wondered if it mattered to the founding fathers whether our nation was to be a democracy or a republic. As a democracy our society would be subject to majority rule and the will of the people on all decisions. As a republic, it appeared that elected representation by the people would take precedence.

In today’s time with Congress typically having the lowest approval ratings of all of the branches of government, couldn’t we, as a democracy eliminate the House of Representatives and the Senate? With technology today this seems feasible. Anytime an issue arises we could put it to a vote of the people using the internet, our cable television remotes, or a telephone dial-in system. Arguably, the establishment of the Electoral College, our Congress, and even the inauguration dates of the President appear based on the lack of communication technology existing in 1776 as much as they do with the intent of the founding fathers. Maybe our government is more an outdated concept tied obstacles of the time.

However, a careful review of the Constitution confirms our founding fathers intended a republic. The Pledge of Allegiance, “and to the Republic for which it stands”, instantly reminds us if we have any doubt. Article IV section 4 of the Constitution is quite clear, “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican Form of Government”.

You may wonder why I am focused on the importance of what appears to be an argument in semantics. I believe our founding fathers carefully worded the Constitution to ensure its legacy would stand the test of time. Furthermore, they had personally shed blood to flee tyranny and knew that mobs and simple majority rule were not effective means of government. In a democracy, any group of individuals comprising the minority has no protection against the unlimited power of the majority. Thus, as we watch our elected representatives’ debate critical issues affecting future generations, trust in our founding fathers that our republic will facilitate the best possible outcome regardless of the intensity of the debate.

Copyright (c) 2009 John R. Nelson. All Rights Reserved.

October 16, 2009 by Big Government