Why They Win While We Whine
By AZ Senator Pamela Gorman
SenGorman@cox.net
Here’s a hint: You are sitting on it.
One fellow solid conservative legislator called me to commiserate the total lack of support out there for the conservative ideals and candidates as well as the very lackluster effort by supposed “conservatives” in our state government. I remarked, “Sometimes I don’t know what we are fighting for anymore.” He astutely observed, “No, Pamela, we do know WHAT we are fighting for… We just aren’t sure anymore WHO we are fighting for.” Well said, my friend.
The left runs largely on raw emotion. That emotion drives the ill-informed and the power hungry on the left alike to do the things it takes to win. Those winning behaviors are distasteful to us. Here are a few of the key winning behaviors to consider… Which ones have YOU engaged in lately (or ever)?
1. Give money to campaigns. (ouch)
2. Knock on doors for campaigns.
3. Make phone calls to friends and strangers.
4. Stand outside polling places wearing your “team” colors.
5. Email out personal notes begging folks to vote.
6. Drive carloads of voters to the polls.
7. Do fundraising calls to bring in other donations.
8. Use your technology talents to bring our message delivery into the 21st century in order to capture online small donors and the minds of a growingly networked society.
The reality is that “we” are busy with our priorities of family, work, hobbies and other time/treasure consuming outlets.
The logic of our position and the fact that it’s correct is pointless if the education of the masses (read: the majority of voters) never happens. If they can’t hear it or can’s translate the idea that their very freedom is dependent upon having the right folks in office, then it is little more than a well-kept insider’s secret. Then, again, reaching and convincing them simply isn’t enough. They must be motivated to vote, and they must have a means to cast that vote.
This is why ACORN succeeds in swinging elections. They do it all. I have to believe that if we did even a portion of the work the big government folks do to remain in power, our message of truth would win out. Fact is, we don’t.
So, you could say the problem is that you are sitting on your rear end. But, more likely it is because you are sitting on your wallet.
Money buys postage, pays the printer, the speechwriters, the strategists, and it pays for airtime on radio and TV. It also pays for graphic designers to create an appealing presentation that deserves the attention of a message-weary public.
In the Obama campaign, it bought access to technology that ran the famous (infamous?) texting/online giving portions of his campaign. McCain’s camp was offered the same, I’m told, but simply couldn’t afford it. Why? We didn’t want to stop sitting on our wallets and help fund a campaign that might have saved America from this abomination we now call our U.S. government.
At the local level, giving is even more pathetic. At some point, true conservatives (like myself) have to realize that if YOU don’t care enough to invest in the future, then we will constantly be on the losing end, which moves us logically to the inevitable honest reflection of our own sacrifices to serve.
If you want good people to stay in politics, send their campaigns some cash. Do it today. Even $25 tells us that you give a rip about the constant headaches we face with the left, as well as the financial and personal sacrifice we make in order to fight for YOU. If you can’t part with $25, I assure you that our growing monster of government will help you part with at least 10 times that before the next election. You choose. Invest in better representation or continue to “sit on it” and wait for the taxman to come and kick your chair out from under you so he can clean out your cash. Heck, he may walk away with your chair, to boot.
Get off your wallet, and while you’re up, stay off your rear end. We are at war and your time/talents/treasure is needed if we are to win!
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Significance of “Climategate” Deciphered
Significance of “Climategate” Deciphered
By Senator Pamela Gorman
The story is everywhere on the web and social media. Most who read it are either annoyed to have to deal with it (those in the cap-n-trade camp) or intrigued by it. But, unless you have been following the spoof of science that is the whole global warming debate (now called “climate change”… when it got colder, they had to change the name of the movement), the significance of these pages and pages of emails and document files recently uncovered by hackers may not be apparent.
It all boils down to this.
In order to use the theories of global warming to substantiate sweeping public policy decisions that are unpopular and economy crushing, one must accept one premise to be true. Namely, you must accept that humans in the post-industrial age are to blame for the earth’s changes. Why? Because only in accepting humans are causing it can you possibly extrapolate a theory that humans can fix it. The religion of global warming is based on the idea that it is unethical to NOT fix it, since they “know” we can…(if we would just give up our way of life and prevent 3rd world countries from modernizing, etc.)
So what is all the excitement with the documents that hackers pulled off the computers of the scientists who published the data on which global warming theories are based? The short answer is: the data was corrupt, mismanaged, and manipulated. The bigger issue, though, is the idea that the core people working to prove man-made global warming KNEW this to be true and toiled in their emails to one another about what to do about the fact that the research data was not supporting their theories. That, my friends, is the big deal here. Because if this is all more than just bad science or a hoax, but actually a coordinated effort to deceive millions of people, then the public policy that has followed is an unnecessary burden on the inhabitants of this planet and some very big shot people have a lot of explaining to do.
The bottom line is this.
The naysayers of Gore’s broken science theories have contended from the start that there is no argument that the planet’s climate is, has always, and will continue to change. So, the key for the global warming zealots was to “prove” that man’s contribution to the naturally-occurring warming and cooling periods is so significant that a correlation can be drawn between changing our behavior and stopping the cycle. With this latest exposure of the embarrassing truth that the “movement” got so married to their theories that they falsified the results to support them, then it takes them back to square one with only a theory and nothing more. But, it goes further. Because the real research shows a never-ending cycle of climate change in our earth’s history (the current flux being mild compared to some before industrialization), it would appear our current human lifestyles are not, in fact, “causing it.” If the humans didn’t cause it, and trying to stop it would increase human suffering (likely without any benefit towards stopping what has gone on for millenniums), then no public policy should ever be brought forth based on the old theories of climate change. Ouch.
By Senator Pamela Gorman
The story is everywhere on the web and social media. Most who read it are either annoyed to have to deal with it (those in the cap-n-trade camp) or intrigued by it. But, unless you have been following the spoof of science that is the whole global warming debate (now called “climate change”… when it got colder, they had to change the name of the movement), the significance of these pages and pages of emails and document files recently uncovered by hackers may not be apparent.
It all boils down to this.
In order to use the theories of global warming to substantiate sweeping public policy decisions that are unpopular and economy crushing, one must accept one premise to be true. Namely, you must accept that humans in the post-industrial age are to blame for the earth’s changes. Why? Because only in accepting humans are causing it can you possibly extrapolate a theory that humans can fix it. The religion of global warming is based on the idea that it is unethical to NOT fix it, since they “know” we can…(if we would just give up our way of life and prevent 3rd world countries from modernizing, etc.)
So what is all the excitement with the documents that hackers pulled off the computers of the scientists who published the data on which global warming theories are based? The short answer is: the data was corrupt, mismanaged, and manipulated. The bigger issue, though, is the idea that the core people working to prove man-made global warming KNEW this to be true and toiled in their emails to one another about what to do about the fact that the research data was not supporting their theories. That, my friends, is the big deal here. Because if this is all more than just bad science or a hoax, but actually a coordinated effort to deceive millions of people, then the public policy that has followed is an unnecessary burden on the inhabitants of this planet and some very big shot people have a lot of explaining to do.
The bottom line is this.
The naysayers of Gore’s broken science theories have contended from the start that there is no argument that the planet’s climate is, has always, and will continue to change. So, the key for the global warming zealots was to “prove” that man’s contribution to the naturally-occurring warming and cooling periods is so significant that a correlation can be drawn between changing our behavior and stopping the cycle. With this latest exposure of the embarrassing truth that the “movement” got so married to their theories that they falsified the results to support them, then it takes them back to square one with only a theory and nothing more. But, it goes further. Because the real research shows a never-ending cycle of climate change in our earth’s history (the current flux being mild compared to some before industrialization), it would appear our current human lifestyles are not, in fact, “causing it.” If the humans didn’t cause it, and trying to stop it would increase human suffering (likely without any benefit towards stopping what has gone on for millenniums), then no public policy should ever be brought forth based on the old theories of climate change. Ouch.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Time for Take Out
Time for Take Out
By Senator Pamela Gorman
I love to experiment with new recipes and improvised combinations of ingredients when I cook. But, one of the important rules I follow is that if it tastes bad, I order take out quickly and without hesitation.
In the last couple of elections, Americans wanted to try something new, too. So, they voted for a bunch of new congressmen and a new president. Fair enough. After eight years with W, a Republican-held Congress that didn’t honor their “Contract with America,” and a constant daily beating on both by the press, who could blame them for believing they needed to try something new?
But, I think it is time for any thinking American to acknowledge that this new “recipe” is a complete and utter failure. Let’s see, where should we start on examples of how the new federal government offends our senses? For starters, there’s the lining of corporate pockets through the bank bailouts (fail) and the Cash-for-Clunkers program (fail). Then there’s the stimulus plan which forced us deeper into debt with foreign entities but produced no real measurable new jobs, left our economy decidedly un-stimulated, and acted to further hamstring state governments through an avalanche of new mandates (fail). Add to this the crushing Cap and Trade policy (fail), Healthcare policy (fail), and preferential treatment of terrorists (fail), and we have a new America that quite frankly leaves a nasty taste in the mouths of many.
This is not to slam the Americans who voted in this new group of federal politicians. But, I think it is time to recognize that this little test has failed. It is now time for a big order of take out.
By Senator Pamela Gorman
I love to experiment with new recipes and improvised combinations of ingredients when I cook. But, one of the important rules I follow is that if it tastes bad, I order take out quickly and without hesitation.
In the last couple of elections, Americans wanted to try something new, too. So, they voted for a bunch of new congressmen and a new president. Fair enough. After eight years with W, a Republican-held Congress that didn’t honor their “Contract with America,” and a constant daily beating on both by the press, who could blame them for believing they needed to try something new?
But, I think it is time for any thinking American to acknowledge that this new “recipe” is a complete and utter failure. Let’s see, where should we start on examples of how the new federal government offends our senses? For starters, there’s the lining of corporate pockets through the bank bailouts (fail) and the Cash-for-Clunkers program (fail). Then there’s the stimulus plan which forced us deeper into debt with foreign entities but produced no real measurable new jobs, left our economy decidedly un-stimulated, and acted to further hamstring state governments through an avalanche of new mandates (fail). Add to this the crushing Cap and Trade policy (fail), Healthcare policy (fail), and preferential treatment of terrorists (fail), and we have a new America that quite frankly leaves a nasty taste in the mouths of many.
This is not to slam the Americans who voted in this new group of federal politicians. But, I think it is time to recognize that this little test has failed. It is now time for a big order of take out.
Monday, November 09, 2009
Army Psychiatrists Failed to Report Hasan’s Behavior?
Army Psychiatrists Failed to Report Hasan’s Behavior?
Ok. I’ll admit that we have all had bad days and I have occasionally shot my mouth off without thinking it through. So, when first reports came out that the Ft. Hood Killer had said strange anti-American things to people, I paused but didn’t read too much into it. Maybe he was just scared to go to war and made some off-the-cuff comments about that, I imagined... But, now other Doctors (psychiatrists to be exact) have come out and told of the killer’s rant during a meeting about how “infidels should have their throats cut and hot oil poured down their throats” when Major Hasan was supposed to be giving a presentation on some medical matter. Wait. What?! I think that is pretty clear indication, and should have been to this room full of psychiatrists, that Hasan was more than just a little stressed in his job. When asked why they didn’t report him, one Doctor said they were worried about appearing to be discriminating against a Muslim psychiatrist. (http://bit.ly/3SRTRF)
Ok, so who are the “infidels?” Apparently, that includes all non-believers.
I would like to suggest to our military that they drop the Political Correctness doctrine before they get more of our soldiers killed. If one of your own goes berserk with homicidal suggestions in front of a room of psychiatrists, can we at least agree that the soldier needs some serious evaluation (and probably a padded cell until you could work out the details)? I mean, you ARE head doctors, right? What do we pay you for?!
If anyone yells “Fire” in a crowded theater or even jokes about bombs when in an airport, everyday Americans will see their rights to free speech gone faster than you can say, “Off with the heads of all infidels.” So, WHY would an Army Muslim psychiatrist be extended greater freedoms than the rest of us? Because of the killer’s religion and politically correct behavior by fellow Army colleagues? Seriously?!
When people choose to enlist in our armed forces, they give up many rights. It is part of the commitment. Our armed forces personnel sign away rights to all kinds of things and they heroically go out and risk their lives to fight for the freedoms of those of us who didn’t sign away those rights. One of the things Army personnel should NOT retain a right to do is to openly threaten to kill other Army personnel strictly on the basis of their religion (or lack thereof, as the case with the whole infidel thing). These soldiers can’t even take over-the-counter meds that aren’t approved by the military, but this Hasan character can stay in active ARMED duty - on base - after making the public comments he did? Something stinks here.
Also, the news coverage of the day when 13 were killed and 30 wounded by Major Hasan included an interview with the guy’s brother. I about choked when they aired him saying, “He is a good guy.” NO, he is NOT a good guy! Good guys don’t murder innocent people in cold blood and try to blame it on some goofy interpretation of their religion. He may have been a good guy at one time, maybe in his childhood, but he became a monster at some point and is certainly, most definitely, NOT a good guy.
Too many people knew about his "issues" and did nothing to stop Major Hasan before he went on his holy killing rampage against his fellow soldiers. Good psychiatrists don’t ignore major warning signs and fail to report when another life is in danger. Political correctness has no place in our armed forces. The guy was a ticking bomb.
Ok. I’ll admit that we have all had bad days and I have occasionally shot my mouth off without thinking it through. So, when first reports came out that the Ft. Hood Killer had said strange anti-American things to people, I paused but didn’t read too much into it. Maybe he was just scared to go to war and made some off-the-cuff comments about that, I imagined... But, now other Doctors (psychiatrists to be exact) have come out and told of the killer’s rant during a meeting about how “infidels should have their throats cut and hot oil poured down their throats” when Major Hasan was supposed to be giving a presentation on some medical matter. Wait. What?! I think that is pretty clear indication, and should have been to this room full of psychiatrists, that Hasan was more than just a little stressed in his job. When asked why they didn’t report him, one Doctor said they were worried about appearing to be discriminating against a Muslim psychiatrist. (http://bit.ly/3SRTRF)
Ok, so who are the “infidels?” Apparently, that includes all non-believers.
I would like to suggest to our military that they drop the Political Correctness doctrine before they get more of our soldiers killed. If one of your own goes berserk with homicidal suggestions in front of a room of psychiatrists, can we at least agree that the soldier needs some serious evaluation (and probably a padded cell until you could work out the details)? I mean, you ARE head doctors, right? What do we pay you for?!
If anyone yells “Fire” in a crowded theater or even jokes about bombs when in an airport, everyday Americans will see their rights to free speech gone faster than you can say, “Off with the heads of all infidels.” So, WHY would an Army Muslim psychiatrist be extended greater freedoms than the rest of us? Because of the killer’s religion and politically correct behavior by fellow Army colleagues? Seriously?!
When people choose to enlist in our armed forces, they give up many rights. It is part of the commitment. Our armed forces personnel sign away rights to all kinds of things and they heroically go out and risk their lives to fight for the freedoms of those of us who didn’t sign away those rights. One of the things Army personnel should NOT retain a right to do is to openly threaten to kill other Army personnel strictly on the basis of their religion (or lack thereof, as the case with the whole infidel thing). These soldiers can’t even take over-the-counter meds that aren’t approved by the military, but this Hasan character can stay in active ARMED duty - on base - after making the public comments he did? Something stinks here.
Also, the news coverage of the day when 13 were killed and 30 wounded by Major Hasan included an interview with the guy’s brother. I about choked when they aired him saying, “He is a good guy.” NO, he is NOT a good guy! Good guys don’t murder innocent people in cold blood and try to blame it on some goofy interpretation of their religion. He may have been a good guy at one time, maybe in his childhood, but he became a monster at some point and is certainly, most definitely, NOT a good guy.
Too many people knew about his "issues" and did nothing to stop Major Hasan before he went on his holy killing rampage against his fellow soldiers. Good psychiatrists don’t ignore major warning signs and fail to report when another life is in danger. Political correctness has no place in our armed forces. The guy was a ticking bomb.
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Liberals, Losers, and Moderates
Liberals, Losers, and Moderates
According to recent remarks given by Senator Melvin in a speech to a group, he believes these to be the only categories of Republicans in his own caucus: Liberals, Losers, and Moderates. To be fair, the “losers” are affectionately called “Loser-tarians.” I assume this is the fun way to take a poke at Libertarians.
It was a curious choice of audiences for Senator Melvin to role out his word-smithing arts, as this was an event sponsored by the Goldwater Institute. The Goldwater Institute is largely a Libertarian leaning think tank. But, I guess he would know that if he had any real experience in his job. I am sure he knows it now.
The good Senator also pointed out that most of the Republican senators in his caucus, including him, are moderates. I wonder how popular that public announcement is with the 13 other senators he lumped into this bizarre round of self-deprecating name calling? For the record, our AZ Senate Republican caucus is much more conservative than Senator Melvin reports.
He didn’t name the “two liberals” or the “two Loser-tarians” but I am pretty sure he is counting me in the loser group. The commonly repeated message by Randy Pullen (GOP state chairman) and his puppet master, Chuck Coughlin (lobbyist and lead advisor to Governor Brewer) has been that I am not really a Republican because I am somehow a Libertarian just pretending to be Republican. While I am sure Coughlin and Pullen know that I am a straight-line Republican platform gal, I would be shocked if freshman Senator Melvin understands how ridiculous he sounds in repeating their dribble. If he did, he wouldn’t repeat it.
Perhaps the most perplexing aspect of his choice of word morphing name-calling is the complete disregard for the meaning of the word “loser.” I didn’t see a tax increase mentioned on the ballot this week. The tax increase is what I objected to (and defeated, if you believe the press). It is the same tax increase Governor Brewer insisted on, that Pullen, Coughlin, and moderate senators fought for so they could continue to grow government in spite of the economic spiral we are in. So who is the loser here, Senator Melvin?
According to recent remarks given by Senator Melvin in a speech to a group, he believes these to be the only categories of Republicans in his own caucus: Liberals, Losers, and Moderates. To be fair, the “losers” are affectionately called “Loser-tarians.” I assume this is the fun way to take a poke at Libertarians.
It was a curious choice of audiences for Senator Melvin to role out his word-smithing arts, as this was an event sponsored by the Goldwater Institute. The Goldwater Institute is largely a Libertarian leaning think tank. But, I guess he would know that if he had any real experience in his job. I am sure he knows it now.
The good Senator also pointed out that most of the Republican senators in his caucus, including him, are moderates. I wonder how popular that public announcement is with the 13 other senators he lumped into this bizarre round of self-deprecating name calling? For the record, our AZ Senate Republican caucus is much more conservative than Senator Melvin reports.
He didn’t name the “two liberals” or the “two Loser-tarians” but I am pretty sure he is counting me in the loser group. The commonly repeated message by Randy Pullen (GOP state chairman) and his puppet master, Chuck Coughlin (lobbyist and lead advisor to Governor Brewer) has been that I am not really a Republican because I am somehow a Libertarian just pretending to be Republican. While I am sure Coughlin and Pullen know that I am a straight-line Republican platform gal, I would be shocked if freshman Senator Melvin understands how ridiculous he sounds in repeating their dribble. If he did, he wouldn’t repeat it.
Perhaps the most perplexing aspect of his choice of word morphing name-calling is the complete disregard for the meaning of the word “loser.” I didn’t see a tax increase mentioned on the ballot this week. The tax increase is what I objected to (and defeated, if you believe the press). It is the same tax increase Governor Brewer insisted on, that Pullen, Coughlin, and moderate senators fought for so they could continue to grow government in spite of the economic spiral we are in. So who is the loser here, Senator Melvin?
Friday, October 30, 2009
Call or Fax Senator Joe Lieberman NOW to say a simple "thanks"- Read why!
This will take only a minute of your time.
I received communication from a friend of mine who is on a lot of the “community organizer” mailing lists still after his now-regretful support for Obama’s election. He is concerned because there is a well-organized effort being put forth to slam Joe Lieberman for standing against his party and the Healthcare bill in Congress. They are gathering their troops and heading to the airwaves and the internet to mount a huge campaign against him in an effort to sway him to switch his position so they can pass their healthcare agenda.
Having a rather intimate knowledge of what it is like to have your “friends” organize against you and launch an attack, I feel it is important that (as a nation) we send encouragement to Lieberman in an overwhelming fashion. There is a tendency when the effort against you is orchestrated to begin to feel that this represents the whole. But, if we balance the “noise” coming into his office with our own appreciation, he will be encouraged to hold the line. If not for the almost unanimous outcry from my constituents in support of my opposition to my own party’s push for a tax increase last session; I might have started to believe people really wanted to be taxed more. Sounds silly, in retrospect, but it is the power of organized grass roots and it is a dangerous place to leave Lieberman hanging.
Please join me in contacting Joe Lieberman’s office to tip the scales on behalf of “real” Americans. Partisan politics aside, he has a heavy lift to stand up to Pelosi and Reid and Obama and their well-greased and well-organized grass roots machine. If you want to stop the government take-over of our healthcare system, now is the time to act. Fax, call, do both. I am encouraging you to contact both his DC office and his local office, in case they have already overwhelmed his phone lines.
When you call, keep your message succinct and positive, as this is far more effective. A simple, “Thank you for standing against the public option- I support you!” would do. Please use no threats, no treatise on why you feel this way, and nothing to detract from your core message of “Thank you, keep it up.” Thank you, in advance, for your 10 minutes of help on this. The fight isn’t over yet!
Contact Senator Joe Lieberman at:
Washington, DC Office
706 Hart Office Building Washington, DC 20510 (202) 224-4041 Voice (202) 224-9750 Fax
Connecticut Office
One Constitution Plaza 7th Floor Hartford, CT 06103 (860) 549-8463 Voice (800) 225-5605 In CT (866) 317-2242 Fax
I received communication from a friend of mine who is on a lot of the “community organizer” mailing lists still after his now-regretful support for Obama’s election. He is concerned because there is a well-organized effort being put forth to slam Joe Lieberman for standing against his party and the Healthcare bill in Congress. They are gathering their troops and heading to the airwaves and the internet to mount a huge campaign against him in an effort to sway him to switch his position so they can pass their healthcare agenda.
Having a rather intimate knowledge of what it is like to have your “friends” organize against you and launch an attack, I feel it is important that (as a nation) we send encouragement to Lieberman in an overwhelming fashion. There is a tendency when the effort against you is orchestrated to begin to feel that this represents the whole. But, if we balance the “noise” coming into his office with our own appreciation, he will be encouraged to hold the line. If not for the almost unanimous outcry from my constituents in support of my opposition to my own party’s push for a tax increase last session; I might have started to believe people really wanted to be taxed more. Sounds silly, in retrospect, but it is the power of organized grass roots and it is a dangerous place to leave Lieberman hanging.
Please join me in contacting Joe Lieberman’s office to tip the scales on behalf of “real” Americans. Partisan politics aside, he has a heavy lift to stand up to Pelosi and Reid and Obama and their well-greased and well-organized grass roots machine. If you want to stop the government take-over of our healthcare system, now is the time to act. Fax, call, do both. I am encouraging you to contact both his DC office and his local office, in case they have already overwhelmed his phone lines.
When you call, keep your message succinct and positive, as this is far more effective. A simple, “Thank you for standing against the public option- I support you!” would do. Please use no threats, no treatise on why you feel this way, and nothing to detract from your core message of “Thank you, keep it up.” Thank you, in advance, for your 10 minutes of help on this. The fight isn’t over yet!
Contact Senator Joe Lieberman at:
Washington, DC Office
706 Hart Office Building Washington, DC 20510 (202) 224-4041 Voice (202) 224-9750 Fax
Connecticut Office
One Constitution Plaza 7th Floor Hartford, CT 06103 (860) 549-8463 Voice (800) 225-5605 In CT (866) 317-2242 Fax
Fiscal Policy Nudging Freedom
Fiscal Policy Nudging Freedom
By Senator Pamela Gorman, Arizona State Senate
It is commonly said that tax policy is a form of social engineering. I don’t disagree. But, I believe that statement needs to be expanded to say that all fiscal policy is social engineering. The ways we spend the money we take away from Americans matter, but are often overlooked when considering how the populace will behave.
It all comes down to motivations. What motivates a man to work, to handle his finances responsibly, and yes, to give generously of his time and treasure? It is my long-held belief that the left has a different core belief on this, and while we may all want the same things for the country in general terms (i.e. happy, fed, safe people), we disagree on the path to get there.
As an example, consider a smart man who is working fewer hours than he could. Does he work an extra shift each week so that he can pay more taxes by being bumped into a higher tax bracket? Or, consider an entrepreneur. Does he open a new business in a state that skims off his profits through high taxation? Probably not, as that would be the opposite of smart. Rather, the tax policies guide a thinking man’s behavior and create the government-engineered circumstances that have a negative ripple effect in the economy.
As for spending as a way to engineer society, we need only look as far as recent actions by our federal government for a great example. Congress took our money and spent it on subsidies to new car buyers. So, people bought new cars. Normally, in an economic crisis, people don’t put buying a new car at the top of their “needs” list. But, the behavior was changed by the nudge of the opportunity to get a new car at least partially paid for by other Americans.
In the same way, does a smart man buy health insurance from a private company to offset his healthcare cost risk if he can get better benefits for less through a government subsidized plan? No. That would be the opposite of smart. So the behavior is steered, not by tax policy but by spending policy. The decision to spend money to subsidize healthcare plans has a very direct and destructive effect on the industry. In Arizona, this is already going on with our own state-subsidized Healthcare Group plan and the full blown state-paid healthcare system of AHCCCS. If Obama has his way, we will see this all across the United States.
As the policies of the Obama administration and our current Congress reach further into the realm of possibilities for social engineering through the combined “power tools” of taxation and spending policies, our choices for how we will live our own lives are being limited a little more with each passing day. The reason is that as behaviors are changed to accommodate the path of least resistance to the most basic needs of man, the market for previously desired products, activities, and services shrinks. Eventually, they will just go away entirely.
Indeed, the danger of the social engineering being engaged by our current Democrat-controlled Congress and President Obama may appear at first blush to be mostly about growing national debt and over-bearing government intrusions into our daily lives. But, the sleeper issue that keeps me up at night is the loss of our freedom to choose once infrastructures and industries have re-tooled to adapt to the rush of behavioral changes that evolve from the left’s current and proposed policies. When we lose our choices, our freedom isn’t far behind.
By Senator Pamela Gorman, Arizona State Senate
It is commonly said that tax policy is a form of social engineering. I don’t disagree. But, I believe that statement needs to be expanded to say that all fiscal policy is social engineering. The ways we spend the money we take away from Americans matter, but are often overlooked when considering how the populace will behave.
It all comes down to motivations. What motivates a man to work, to handle his finances responsibly, and yes, to give generously of his time and treasure? It is my long-held belief that the left has a different core belief on this, and while we may all want the same things for the country in general terms (i.e. happy, fed, safe people), we disagree on the path to get there.
As an example, consider a smart man who is working fewer hours than he could. Does he work an extra shift each week so that he can pay more taxes by being bumped into a higher tax bracket? Or, consider an entrepreneur. Does he open a new business in a state that skims off his profits through high taxation? Probably not, as that would be the opposite of smart. Rather, the tax policies guide a thinking man’s behavior and create the government-engineered circumstances that have a negative ripple effect in the economy.
As for spending as a way to engineer society, we need only look as far as recent actions by our federal government for a great example. Congress took our money and spent it on subsidies to new car buyers. So, people bought new cars. Normally, in an economic crisis, people don’t put buying a new car at the top of their “needs” list. But, the behavior was changed by the nudge of the opportunity to get a new car at least partially paid for by other Americans.
In the same way, does a smart man buy health insurance from a private company to offset his healthcare cost risk if he can get better benefits for less through a government subsidized plan? No. That would be the opposite of smart. So the behavior is steered, not by tax policy but by spending policy. The decision to spend money to subsidize healthcare plans has a very direct and destructive effect on the industry. In Arizona, this is already going on with our own state-subsidized Healthcare Group plan and the full blown state-paid healthcare system of AHCCCS. If Obama has his way, we will see this all across the United States.
As the policies of the Obama administration and our current Congress reach further into the realm of possibilities for social engineering through the combined “power tools” of taxation and spending policies, our choices for how we will live our own lives are being limited a little more with each passing day. The reason is that as behaviors are changed to accommodate the path of least resistance to the most basic needs of man, the market for previously desired products, activities, and services shrinks. Eventually, they will just go away entirely.
Indeed, the danger of the social engineering being engaged by our current Democrat-controlled Congress and President Obama may appear at first blush to be mostly about growing national debt and over-bearing government intrusions into our daily lives. But, the sleeper issue that keeps me up at night is the loss of our freedom to choose once infrastructures and industries have re-tooled to adapt to the rush of behavioral changes that evolve from the left’s current and proposed policies. When we lose our choices, our freedom isn’t far behind.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
The Problem with Well Wishes and Good Intentions
The Problem with Well Wishes and Good Intentions
By Pamela Gorman, Arizona Senator
In the governance of people, there is an American ideal that we get what we ask for. We have free elections and heavily regulated campaigns. There is every opportunity to elect people to the roles in public office that will represent the values of the nation. Your vote matters… but it isn’t enough.
At the risk of offending many good people, including my own supporters, I am going to put out some cold hard truths. Your “support” for a candidate is not as strong as you might think, if you simply cast your vote. You need to multiply your vote with the votes of others of like-mind, if you hope to make a difference in the policies that will affect you, your business, your quality of life, your safety, and your freedoms. One vote isn’t a bad thing, but it is relatively worthless when it is up against a legion of other voters who have been rounded up by a well-executed “community organizing” effort from the other side.
So, how do you multiply your vote in an effort to be properly represented? Two things work: money and time. When I am offered help in my campaigns, my inner voice says, “Really? Will that be help in the form of your time or your money?” That cynicism is not because I think people are lying. It is because I realize that they don’t realize that if they want to help, I need either their money or time (preferably both). And, experience shows that most people have good intentions, but lousy follow through. Most people are hard pressed to part with either their money or their time, but those that do are key to shaping a nation and here’s why…
Money buys a campaign the tools needed to get the message out to other voters, so their votes will come in to accompany yours. This is sort of why campaign donations are protected under the constitutional right to free speech. Postage, printing, graphic design, writing, mailing lists, polling, and professional campaign consulting all cost real hard dollars. Being the best candidate in the race and the best man/woman for the job doesn’t pay the bills. Money pays the bills. It is a reality that weighs on every candidate every day. If you don’t have money, you can help raise money from others. But, if you are serious about wanting a candidate to represent you, putting a little of your treasure toward helping them bring in additional votes must be a core of your strategy. Without money, there is no feasible way to communicate the candidate’s ideas or their suitability for the job to would-be voters. It’s a cold hard reality.
Time is finite and not transferrable. We each only get 24 hours in a day. Share even an hour a day or a few hours on the weekend, and most people will be investing an hour a day or a few hours on the weekend more than they ever have before. It is the sad but honest truth. Offering your time requires you to carve out time from some of life’s other activities for a few months. It might mean you don’t finish that scrapbook as fast or get to put in 45 minutes of cardio every day… Election day waits for no man, as I like to say. So, we don’t need your 3rd Saturday in November, when your bunko group is on break. Honestly, we are not trying to be picky, it is just that our elections are already over by then. Campaigns are a human resource heavy business in a time when people have very little time they can give without sacrificing another area of their lives to give it. But they must.
A curious but common problem is also that many people offer to “help” but then find all available duties of a campaign volunteer to be unpleasant or inconvenient. So, in the interest of full disclosure, consider that there really aren’t that many envelopes to be stuffed. Rather, what your candidate needs your time and help with are various hands-on voter contact activities, like knocking on doors in the district. They need folks sitting with a phone and a call list reaching out to potential voters with call after call after call. They need smiling faces outside the polls to talk to last minute undecided voters before they enter the polling places on election day. They need “handlers” to accompany them to campaign events and fundraisers to keep them moving in the crowds efficiently and safely. They need schedulers to be working to fill their calendar with opportunities to meet potential voters. They need pleasant people to stand at craft fairs and community festivals handing out information and asking for votes. If you don’t like people, or work strange hours, they need people willing to go out with a truck full of supplies and swing a heavy fence pole hammer to erect campaign signs around town. Or, blog and utilize social media, if that is your bag…
Time and money are how you change things. Time and money are the way the people “speak” to other voters to bring them to the polls to vote for the candidate who will fight for the policies you care about. Sure, you can hope for change. You can cast your one vote for change. But, while one vote, a lot of hope, and a dollar may buy you a cup of coffee, it won’t win an election.
By Pamela Gorman, Arizona Senator
In the governance of people, there is an American ideal that we get what we ask for. We have free elections and heavily regulated campaigns. There is every opportunity to elect people to the roles in public office that will represent the values of the nation. Your vote matters… but it isn’t enough.
At the risk of offending many good people, including my own supporters, I am going to put out some cold hard truths. Your “support” for a candidate is not as strong as you might think, if you simply cast your vote. You need to multiply your vote with the votes of others of like-mind, if you hope to make a difference in the policies that will affect you, your business, your quality of life, your safety, and your freedoms. One vote isn’t a bad thing, but it is relatively worthless when it is up against a legion of other voters who have been rounded up by a well-executed “community organizing” effort from the other side.
So, how do you multiply your vote in an effort to be properly represented? Two things work: money and time. When I am offered help in my campaigns, my inner voice says, “Really? Will that be help in the form of your time or your money?” That cynicism is not because I think people are lying. It is because I realize that they don’t realize that if they want to help, I need either their money or time (preferably both). And, experience shows that most people have good intentions, but lousy follow through. Most people are hard pressed to part with either their money or their time, but those that do are key to shaping a nation and here’s why…
Money buys a campaign the tools needed to get the message out to other voters, so their votes will come in to accompany yours. This is sort of why campaign donations are protected under the constitutional right to free speech. Postage, printing, graphic design, writing, mailing lists, polling, and professional campaign consulting all cost real hard dollars. Being the best candidate in the race and the best man/woman for the job doesn’t pay the bills. Money pays the bills. It is a reality that weighs on every candidate every day. If you don’t have money, you can help raise money from others. But, if you are serious about wanting a candidate to represent you, putting a little of your treasure toward helping them bring in additional votes must be a core of your strategy. Without money, there is no feasible way to communicate the candidate’s ideas or their suitability for the job to would-be voters. It’s a cold hard reality.
Time is finite and not transferrable. We each only get 24 hours in a day. Share even an hour a day or a few hours on the weekend, and most people will be investing an hour a day or a few hours on the weekend more than they ever have before. It is the sad but honest truth. Offering your time requires you to carve out time from some of life’s other activities for a few months. It might mean you don’t finish that scrapbook as fast or get to put in 45 minutes of cardio every day… Election day waits for no man, as I like to say. So, we don’t need your 3rd Saturday in November, when your bunko group is on break. Honestly, we are not trying to be picky, it is just that our elections are already over by then. Campaigns are a human resource heavy business in a time when people have very little time they can give without sacrificing another area of their lives to give it. But they must.
A curious but common problem is also that many people offer to “help” but then find all available duties of a campaign volunteer to be unpleasant or inconvenient. So, in the interest of full disclosure, consider that there really aren’t that many envelopes to be stuffed. Rather, what your candidate needs your time and help with are various hands-on voter contact activities, like knocking on doors in the district. They need folks sitting with a phone and a call list reaching out to potential voters with call after call after call. They need smiling faces outside the polls to talk to last minute undecided voters before they enter the polling places on election day. They need “handlers” to accompany them to campaign events and fundraisers to keep them moving in the crowds efficiently and safely. They need schedulers to be working to fill their calendar with opportunities to meet potential voters. They need pleasant people to stand at craft fairs and community festivals handing out information and asking for votes. If you don’t like people, or work strange hours, they need people willing to go out with a truck full of supplies and swing a heavy fence pole hammer to erect campaign signs around town. Or, blog and utilize social media, if that is your bag…
Time and money are how you change things. Time and money are the way the people “speak” to other voters to bring them to the polls to vote for the candidate who will fight for the policies you care about. Sure, you can hope for change. You can cast your one vote for change. But, while one vote, a lot of hope, and a dollar may buy you a cup of coffee, it won’t win an election.
Monday, October 26, 2009
They say never to pick a fight with anyone who buys ink by the barrell
A recent article in The Arizona Daily Star (written by their editorial staff with no byline) makes an outlandish statement that I simply cannot let go unanswered. In the editorial headlined “Hiding under the bed won't fix the budget” (Oct 26, 2009), they make the following goofball statement: “But after a six-month regular session bickering over the budget and two more months of a special session, no one in the Legislature wanted to do anything about it.” Really, Star? Really?!
If this was a letter from a reader, I could understand the lack of insider understanding or the misunderstanding of the process and the obvious ability to see budget votes online that disprove this statement. But, for this article to come from their journalistic staff? Smells of political activism by a newspaper employee with a specific agenda, to me.
The facts are what they are… The current legislature spent an entire session plus a 2 month long special session wrestling with balancing an unprecedented shortfall, largely created by former Governor Napolitano’s strong arm tactics and all-too-eager minority party members who were able to line up a handful of Republican legislators to help them pass their bloated irresponsible budgets. This legislature not only “wanted to do something about it” but they DID do something about it. The problem is that not a single democrat would agree to any of the necessary cuts. Yes, that is right. Not ONE democrat. Add to this the Governor’s repeat use of the veto power to do away with any cuts that would have helped Arizona go forward with a spending level that more closely resembles the revenues, and you will have a much more accurate view of the budget process and the inevitable unbalanced budget.
The legislature (or to be more accurate, the Republican majority) worked tirelessly to balance the budget and took a courageous move in bringing spending back to levels they should have been before Napolitano’s Democrat-enabled spending spree for the last six years. The votes are there to prove it. Not one budget fix, but several, were passed by the legislature in the last session and special session that followed. The record also shows that the budget went imbalanced when Governor Brewer vetoed several cuts to spending. Her office claims that she did this because she didn't get the legislature to approve her tax increase proposal. But that translates to this screwy logic: Since you didn't give me more revenue to balance the budget, I am going to increase spending. What?! No one called her on it. They just shrugged and said, "Well, she DID feel very strongly about winning the tax increase policy. Guess we could have expected her to veto part of the budget deal she previously agreed to." What? Really?! (more on this in a later post).
So, while I recognize it is an easy poke to accuse the legislature of “hiding under the bed” in a liberal publication like the Arizona Daily Star (affectionately called the “Red Star” by insiders), it is journalistic laziness. I expect you all to fight for a tax increase, vs. cutting bloated government programs. I get it that we have vastly different economic theories by which we base our opinions… But, to say that “no one in the legislature wanted to do anything” about the budget problem is false and ridiculous in the face of indisputable public record.
If this was a letter from a reader, I could understand the lack of insider understanding or the misunderstanding of the process and the obvious ability to see budget votes online that disprove this statement. But, for this article to come from their journalistic staff? Smells of political activism by a newspaper employee with a specific agenda, to me.
The facts are what they are… The current legislature spent an entire session plus a 2 month long special session wrestling with balancing an unprecedented shortfall, largely created by former Governor Napolitano’s strong arm tactics and all-too-eager minority party members who were able to line up a handful of Republican legislators to help them pass their bloated irresponsible budgets. This legislature not only “wanted to do something about it” but they DID do something about it. The problem is that not a single democrat would agree to any of the necessary cuts. Yes, that is right. Not ONE democrat. Add to this the Governor’s repeat use of the veto power to do away with any cuts that would have helped Arizona go forward with a spending level that more closely resembles the revenues, and you will have a much more accurate view of the budget process and the inevitable unbalanced budget.
The legislature (or to be more accurate, the Republican majority) worked tirelessly to balance the budget and took a courageous move in bringing spending back to levels they should have been before Napolitano’s Democrat-enabled spending spree for the last six years. The votes are there to prove it. Not one budget fix, but several, were passed by the legislature in the last session and special session that followed. The record also shows that the budget went imbalanced when Governor Brewer vetoed several cuts to spending. Her office claims that she did this because she didn't get the legislature to approve her tax increase proposal. But that translates to this screwy logic: Since you didn't give me more revenue to balance the budget, I am going to increase spending. What?! No one called her on it. They just shrugged and said, "Well, she DID feel very strongly about winning the tax increase policy. Guess we could have expected her to veto part of the budget deal she previously agreed to." What? Really?! (more on this in a later post).
So, while I recognize it is an easy poke to accuse the legislature of “hiding under the bed” in a liberal publication like the Arizona Daily Star (affectionately called the “Red Star” by insiders), it is journalistic laziness. I expect you all to fight for a tax increase, vs. cutting bloated government programs. I get it that we have vastly different economic theories by which we base our opinions… But, to say that “no one in the legislature wanted to do anything” about the budget problem is false and ridiculous in the face of indisputable public record.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Balloon Boy, Universal Healthcare Inevitability, and other Hoaxes
Balloon Boy, Universal Healthcare Inevitability, and other Hoaxes
By Senator Pamela Gorman, (R-AZ)
I will admit it. I watched the silver saucer balloon in horror for an hour. I prayed. I worried. I squinted at the still image with the smudge hanging below the balloon to see if it looked like a falling object. I monitored the Twitter public feed for updated news… Then, I caught wind of some cracks in the story with this thing and started doing some research online while I waited to see if the little boy would be safe when the balloon landed. I discovered the family’s rather unusual behaviors captured on video and uploaded to YouTube (by them?). The characters involved here subjected themselves and their children to being contestants in a reality show, they chose “Wife Swap” as their chance to shine for all of America, they produced a profanity-rich rap video with the six year old lost boy and his brothers, they host a fringe pseudo-science TV show, and they chase deadly storms as a fun family hobby. Ozzie and Harriet, they are not. My cynical instinct told me that there is a good chance the kid was never in the belly of the backyard science project. I start to think that this is possibly a rouse, but more likely a very common kid thing and “Falcon” is likely fine and either hiding or hanging out somewhere completely unaware of his new fame. I am not so far gone in my cynicism, however, that I immediately thought it was a publicity stunt hoax.
Yet the mainstream press ignored all of this weirdness that Internet users were easily discovering and passing around through social media in real time… They droned on and on, continuing to build the hype that there was a 6 year old boy in peril, high above the Colorado landscape. They talked about random and distantly related things, but never invited their viewers to stray far from the story of their choosing and the video feed of a balloon in the air (only slightly less exciting to watch than a white Ford Bronco driving on a freeway). In fact, even when the boy was found alive and hiding in his own home, CNN didn’t interrupt ‘ol Wolfe Blitzer’s banter to inform their viewers. No, I learned that bit of breaking news on Twitter’s public feed first. Roughly 250 strangers “told me” the truth before CNN got around to admitting the kid was fine and was never in harms way and that this part of the ratings-boosting storyline was over. Later, we learned the little boy did it because his screwball parents had told him to do it “for the show” (the kid blurted out the admittance on national TV- oops- from the mouths of babes, as they say). It was a total hoax.
Hoaxes are interesting. They work. They are created to capture our attention and cause us to take interest in and believe in something we otherwise would not. I am surprised there aren’t more big ones like this to point to in history. Mostly they are for fun or for garnering 15 minutes of fame or to kick off a promotion with a big splashy marketing campaign. But, what if there was a hoax created to change your behavior and attitudes about current events? What if one side of a major policy change created the hoax?
I believe the current message of “Olympia Snowe voted with the Democrats for the Healthcare bill, now they will have their 60 votes to push it through on the floor, it is over, go home, nice try, thanks for coming” is a hoax.
Folks, this is not the time to admit defeat and start cutting your losses and spending time doing evaluations of what went wrong in your activism attempt so you can do better next time. On the contrary, THIS IS GO TIME and you should be stepping up your efforts as this bill makes its way through conference committee and then possibly to the floor for a final vote. The press is all talking about how it is all over but the shouting. Where do you think they are getting that message? Why, in the world, would intelligent engaged people who have seen the Obama machine work the press with skillful finesse for years, suddenly start believing the message? Admittedly, even impressive insiders in Washington seem to have lost their faith. But, maybe they really just don’t have faith in the likelihood of the American people to turn it up a notch here in the final seconds of the game clock…
Picture this. A bunch of political strategists are sitting around a table strewn with soda cans and coffee cups among the stacks of polling data and focus group reports. One particularly agitated team member cuts through the chatter with, “Ok, people. We need to focus here. We are losing this damn healthcare debate and we shouldn’t be. We have the press. We have Hollywood. We have the bully pulpits everywhere it matters in federal government. We are losing because of otherwise disengaged Americans who suddenly have decided to put down their fish sticks and Xbox controls and pay attention to public policy. They are playing this game with us using the internet, a technology we CAN’T control (yet), and we have no way to make them stop. What are we going to do to get these people off the backs of our weaker Democrats so we can get this thing done?!” Then, the generally-quiet-but-often-profound PR genius says, “These people just need to decide to stop trying. They need to believe it is pointless and a waste of their time. They will go back to doing whatever it was they did before they started paying attention to public policy debates and that will be that.” Bada-bing. A hoax is born. The hoax is the false reality that” you have lost this battle because it is all over anyway because of one Senate Committee vote. Go home. Nothing to see here, folks.”
I implore you, do not be duped. It isn’t hopeless until the ink is dry on the bill on the president’s desk after the bill has gone a long way from where it is now. You should definitely be sensing an urgency, though, and fighting louder and harder! This is like 22 seconds on game the clock, you are 4th and goal, and you need a touchdown followed by the recovery of an on-side kick, followed by a field goal … It isn’t easy, maybe statistically unlikely, but there is a chance! It is your game to lose, at this point. You still have the ball. Are you going to try and score? Or are you going to accept defeat before the game ends and just start shaking hands with the other team and thinking about what you are going to order for take out on the way home from the game? I think you should stay and fight for the score. But, that’s just me. This actually matters to me a great deal. How much does your freedom matter to you?
This game isn’t over. The idea that it is somehow “over” is little more than a hoax created by a historically proven very savvy group of White House strategists. Or, perhaps it is just a mirage, unintentionally created, but benefitting the Obama administration nonetheless. In any case, don’t fall for it. The “balloon boy” hoax was a nuisance and a huge waste of our time. But the “go home and give up hoax” is much more dangerous for America’s future. That is because when THIS feel-good-yes-we-can-free-healthcare-for-all balloon finally hits the ground, America will gasp when they realize once again that the thing they were hoping to find inside was never really there. And, the joke will be on us. All of us.
By Senator Pamela Gorman, (R-AZ)
I will admit it. I watched the silver saucer balloon in horror for an hour. I prayed. I worried. I squinted at the still image with the smudge hanging below the balloon to see if it looked like a falling object. I monitored the Twitter public feed for updated news… Then, I caught wind of some cracks in the story with this thing and started doing some research online while I waited to see if the little boy would be safe when the balloon landed. I discovered the family’s rather unusual behaviors captured on video and uploaded to YouTube (by them?). The characters involved here subjected themselves and their children to being contestants in a reality show, they chose “Wife Swap” as their chance to shine for all of America, they produced a profanity-rich rap video with the six year old lost boy and his brothers, they host a fringe pseudo-science TV show, and they chase deadly storms as a fun family hobby. Ozzie and Harriet, they are not. My cynical instinct told me that there is a good chance the kid was never in the belly of the backyard science project. I start to think that this is possibly a rouse, but more likely a very common kid thing and “Falcon” is likely fine and either hiding or hanging out somewhere completely unaware of his new fame. I am not so far gone in my cynicism, however, that I immediately thought it was a publicity stunt hoax.
Yet the mainstream press ignored all of this weirdness that Internet users were easily discovering and passing around through social media in real time… They droned on and on, continuing to build the hype that there was a 6 year old boy in peril, high above the Colorado landscape. They talked about random and distantly related things, but never invited their viewers to stray far from the story of their choosing and the video feed of a balloon in the air (only slightly less exciting to watch than a white Ford Bronco driving on a freeway). In fact, even when the boy was found alive and hiding in his own home, CNN didn’t interrupt ‘ol Wolfe Blitzer’s banter to inform their viewers. No, I learned that bit of breaking news on Twitter’s public feed first. Roughly 250 strangers “told me” the truth before CNN got around to admitting the kid was fine and was never in harms way and that this part of the ratings-boosting storyline was over. Later, we learned the little boy did it because his screwball parents had told him to do it “for the show” (the kid blurted out the admittance on national TV- oops- from the mouths of babes, as they say). It was a total hoax.
Hoaxes are interesting. They work. They are created to capture our attention and cause us to take interest in and believe in something we otherwise would not. I am surprised there aren’t more big ones like this to point to in history. Mostly they are for fun or for garnering 15 minutes of fame or to kick off a promotion with a big splashy marketing campaign. But, what if there was a hoax created to change your behavior and attitudes about current events? What if one side of a major policy change created the hoax?
I believe the current message of “Olympia Snowe voted with the Democrats for the Healthcare bill, now they will have their 60 votes to push it through on the floor, it is over, go home, nice try, thanks for coming” is a hoax.
Folks, this is not the time to admit defeat and start cutting your losses and spending time doing evaluations of what went wrong in your activism attempt so you can do better next time. On the contrary, THIS IS GO TIME and you should be stepping up your efforts as this bill makes its way through conference committee and then possibly to the floor for a final vote. The press is all talking about how it is all over but the shouting. Where do you think they are getting that message? Why, in the world, would intelligent engaged people who have seen the Obama machine work the press with skillful finesse for years, suddenly start believing the message? Admittedly, even impressive insiders in Washington seem to have lost their faith. But, maybe they really just don’t have faith in the likelihood of the American people to turn it up a notch here in the final seconds of the game clock…
Picture this. A bunch of political strategists are sitting around a table strewn with soda cans and coffee cups among the stacks of polling data and focus group reports. One particularly agitated team member cuts through the chatter with, “Ok, people. We need to focus here. We are losing this damn healthcare debate and we shouldn’t be. We have the press. We have Hollywood. We have the bully pulpits everywhere it matters in federal government. We are losing because of otherwise disengaged Americans who suddenly have decided to put down their fish sticks and Xbox controls and pay attention to public policy. They are playing this game with us using the internet, a technology we CAN’T control (yet), and we have no way to make them stop. What are we going to do to get these people off the backs of our weaker Democrats so we can get this thing done?!” Then, the generally-quiet-but-often-profound PR genius says, “These people just need to decide to stop trying. They need to believe it is pointless and a waste of their time. They will go back to doing whatever it was they did before they started paying attention to public policy debates and that will be that.” Bada-bing. A hoax is born. The hoax is the false reality that” you have lost this battle because it is all over anyway because of one Senate Committee vote. Go home. Nothing to see here, folks.”
I implore you, do not be duped. It isn’t hopeless until the ink is dry on the bill on the president’s desk after the bill has gone a long way from where it is now. You should definitely be sensing an urgency, though, and fighting louder and harder! This is like 22 seconds on game the clock, you are 4th and goal, and you need a touchdown followed by the recovery of an on-side kick, followed by a field goal … It isn’t easy, maybe statistically unlikely, but there is a chance! It is your game to lose, at this point. You still have the ball. Are you going to try and score? Or are you going to accept defeat before the game ends and just start shaking hands with the other team and thinking about what you are going to order for take out on the way home from the game? I think you should stay and fight for the score. But, that’s just me. This actually matters to me a great deal. How much does your freedom matter to you?
This game isn’t over. The idea that it is somehow “over” is little more than a hoax created by a historically proven very savvy group of White House strategists. Or, perhaps it is just a mirage, unintentionally created, but benefitting the Obama administration nonetheless. In any case, don’t fall for it. The “balloon boy” hoax was a nuisance and a huge waste of our time. But the “go home and give up hoax” is much more dangerous for America’s future. That is because when THIS feel-good-yes-we-can-free-healthcare-for-all balloon finally hits the ground, America will gasp when they realize once again that the thing they were hoping to find inside was never really there. And, the joke will be on us. All of us.
Monday, August 24, 2009
The Tax Package Deal that Wasn't Really a Deal at All
In a surreal turn of events, I have been invited to respond to a "hit piece" my own Republican district leadership has used the internal email list to help circulate misinformation to my fellow Precinct Committeemen. This email was designed to get PC's to call and lobby me to vote for a tax increase. In this alternate reality where voting "yes" on a property tax repeal is reported to be voting "no" and stopping a tax increase is reported to be voting against an entire budget, I hardly know where to start to explain...
First, I think a little background is important to understand. For those who were not aware, the "budget" is really a series of bills that move through the system (usually, but not necessarily, together one after the other). The main bill contains the numbers for funding levels and is referred to as the "feed” bill internally. The balance of the budget bills are filled with policy instructions on how the money in the feed bill is to be spent and reforms to be carried out to create savings. Internally, we refer to these companion bills as "BRB's" (pronounced Burbs- stands for Budget Reconciliation Bills).
The tax referral demanded by the governor was always in a separate bill that was not a regular BRB or the feed bill. It's connection to the actual budget is one of Governor Brewer's invention, but there is no logical connection because the revenue which the tax increase will produce is not affecting the Fiscal Year 2010 budget for planning purposes. It is a stand-alone bill, with only a connection in terms of the psychology of Brewers continued commitment to a tax increase.
One of those budget bills (SB1025) I caused to be amended in a "sit cow" (this means the bill was run through Committee of the Whole an additional time to further amend it). This amendment put the $250 million property tax repeal directly into the budget "BRB" bill, in order to save it from the certain death it faced if left combined with a tax increase bill. I voted FOR this bill and have voted for ALL of the budget bills in every budget all session... Those that tell you otherwise are trying to invent reality by playing with words. I did, however, cast a NO vote for the tax increase bill. I make no excuses for voting against a tax increase and to be honest, I don't think I should have to.
You have also possibly heard of the late-entry new idea the tax increase crowd came up with designed to encourage conservatives to become complicit in the sales tax increase's passage. What you haven't heard is the "rest of the story" and, I presume, why Sam Crump, Andy Biggs, Ron Gould, and I all refused to support this trade off. Trust me, it was no "deal" that anyone should take. Unfortunately, several otherwise smart folks have failed to see this from all angles and jumped on board early in a very public way and now that the details are surfacing, their names and logos are being used to suggest they support a tax increase bait and switch scheme of sorts. Here's the basic outline...
In return for getting out of the way of a sales tax increase by throwing our vote onto the referral bill (which we all feel has a very strong chance of passing) there was a DELAYED cut to corporate and personal income taxes offered (the lion's share in terms of percentage being corporate tax cuts).
Here's one BIG problem with this: The delayed cuts would not be scheduled to kick in until 2011. And, until those revenue changes begin to affect the general fund, ALL of our legal advisors have unanimously advised the legislature that these cuts will not be protected by Prop 108 (Prop 108 requires a 2/3 vote for a tax increase to be passed). This means that in a few months we will have a perfect storm of events that will almost certainly crush any hopes we have that those cuts would ever go into effect and begin to “pay back” the billions of dollars the sales tax increase will take from Arizona families. Here is a sketch of what I mean: We will have this same governor (who insists we need more revenue and less cuts to spending), the same legislators (who could not muster the courage to make necessary cuts in a non-election year), at least a $2 billion revenue shortfall, no more federal bailout money coming in, and the looming "potential" of reduced revenue to the tune of $400 million from these "future" cuts. The drop in revenue from the cuts will be seen as a problem that needs to be rectified by repealing them or delaying them with a simply majority vote before they go into effect. No one really doubts that there will be a huge effort to delay or outright repeal those cuts before they ever see the light of day. So, essentially, this is a Popeye cartoon situation where you are told "Give me a burger today and I will pay you on Tuesday." In a word, the cuts are but a fantasy. And, it takes only 12 Democrats (all of whom are against the cuts enacting) and 4 Republicans (I can name 5 of them who would vote to delay or repeal them) to do away with the sweetened part of the pot and leave only the tax increase standing. Some of the folks buying into the “fantasy” do it because they are not well versed in our process, others don’t understand the political dynamics of the personalities currently in public office. Those of us who do are not being fooled. There are others out there (possibly including the authors of the cowardly anonymous YouTube video) who understand this full and well and it is actually part of their overall plan to get more revenue through a tax hike now, knowing they will never lose future revenues to the tax cuts because they will never come to fruition.
Additionally, there is the very real economic issue to contend with in regard to the tax increase itself. When you want to turn an economy around, you try to stimulate it by giving folks money to go out and spend in the community. By pulling a billion dollars in spending capacity out of the hands of Arizonans, you will be doing the OPPOSITE of stimulating the economy. You will, in effect, slow it down and prolong the recession and at the same time cripple Arizona families who are desperately just trying to hang on in this economy. They estimate the average family will pay the government an extra $400 if this sales tax passes. Think about it. How many groceries can you buy for $400? Car payment? School fees and books? What will those families choose to live without once they are sending that money to the state instead of infusing the same dollars into our economy? Tax increases are bad. Tax increases during a recession are irresponsible. A tax increase to cover over-spending is un-Republican.
Incidentally, the polling supports this sales tax passing even BEFORE the multi-million dollars in special interest money come pouring in to support a slick ad campaign to make sure it passes. Remember Prop 400? Same crew running this show, but this time they will have even more support from Teacher's Unions, Firefighter's Unions, Hospital Associations, etc. To those that find solace in saying "I will vote to push it forward, but will vote against it at the polls," I think a reality check is in order. It will be like David and Goliath. Heck, look at the professionally produced hit ad they did on me already just to get my ONE vote!
You also have heard a lot about the $250 million property tax permanent repeal. This is an effort, which I have always supported. It is doing away with the only property tax on your tax bill that comes to the state. We tried to repeal it when times were good, but could only get it suspended under Napolitano. As such, it will come back online next year without action by the legislature and the governor to make it permanent. I have now voted in support of this 3 times. It was my stubborn persistence that got it put into this BRB on the day we voted the budget out of the Senate last Wednesday. It was vetoed twice before (once by Napolitano and once by Brewer) but is now part of the budget bill SB1025 on its way to the governor again. I am hopeful she will hear from all of you and choose to sign it into law, once and for all. While it only represents on average $67 for homeowners, every little bit helps. For business, it is a much larger hit should this tax come back automatically.
Now that you have the background, let me state some basic facts.
1. The proposal is a likely sales tax hike in exchange for
"slim chance" tax cuts - but it is still a net tax increase for nearly everyone in our district at least in the next few years.
I can’t support hitting the citizens of our district with a tax
increase - both because that is what I promised you and
because too many Arizonans can't afford it in this recession, which will only be longer and harsher if the sales tax is increased.
2. As much as I believe in cutting corporate taxes to someday entice business to move to our state once the global recession has passed and businesses begin expanding again, the price here – an immediate tax
increase on taxpayers- is too much to ask in exchange for a shot-in-the-dark chance at getting those future tax cuts.
3. I believe the tax hike will pass. And, due to the current political situation at the capitol and the economic situation in the state, the tax cuts will never see the light of day.
4. A majority of members, when faced with cutting spending or getting rid of tax cuts would choose ditching the tax cuts to retain that revenue for continued over-spending. Even today, many would rather choose higher taxes over
making the cuts necessary to balance the budget.
4. I have voted FOR the property tax repeal 3 times but the
governor vetoed it, presumably holding it hostage in order to extort support for higher taxes. I am not willing to trade a tax hike, that if passes would cost the average family $400 a year, in exchange for a property tax break of $67 (on average) per family. So, I hope Governor Brewer will sign the bill and cease holding that issue in jeopardy as part of a tax hike plan.
5. I have been a consistent and vocal supporter of real tax cuts
for Arizona and no one has stood more firmly in opposition to higher taxes.
6. I did vote FOR the Republican budget, which included the $250 million property tax repeal. I voted AGAINST a $1 billion tax increase.
7. I am very disappointed that paid political operatives have been
allowed to hijack the LD6 email list to encourage you to lobby me
armed with half-truths and, in some cases, patently false information. I not only
welcome, but encourage you to get the facts about the tax plan and remember
that the majority of the LD6 delegation is on record opposing it.
8. Good well-meaning people with very similar ideas will still sometimes disagree. Everyone has their reasons and professional/personal priorities when determining how they will vote. There has been an enormous amount of pressure applied from all sides on this. While I wish my colleagues would use the power of their vote to prevent this harmful tax increase from going to the ballot at their hand, I do not judge.
First, I think a little background is important to understand. For those who were not aware, the "budget" is really a series of bills that move through the system (usually, but not necessarily, together one after the other). The main bill contains the numbers for funding levels and is referred to as the "feed” bill internally. The balance of the budget bills are filled with policy instructions on how the money in the feed bill is to be spent and reforms to be carried out to create savings. Internally, we refer to these companion bills as "BRB's" (pronounced Burbs- stands for Budget Reconciliation Bills).
The tax referral demanded by the governor was always in a separate bill that was not a regular BRB or the feed bill. It's connection to the actual budget is one of Governor Brewer's invention, but there is no logical connection because the revenue which the tax increase will produce is not affecting the Fiscal Year 2010 budget for planning purposes. It is a stand-alone bill, with only a connection in terms of the psychology of Brewers continued commitment to a tax increase.
One of those budget bills (SB1025) I caused to be amended in a "sit cow" (this means the bill was run through Committee of the Whole an additional time to further amend it). This amendment put the $250 million property tax repeal directly into the budget "BRB" bill, in order to save it from the certain death it faced if left combined with a tax increase bill. I voted FOR this bill and have voted for ALL of the budget bills in every budget all session... Those that tell you otherwise are trying to invent reality by playing with words. I did, however, cast a NO vote for the tax increase bill. I make no excuses for voting against a tax increase and to be honest, I don't think I should have to.
You have also possibly heard of the late-entry new idea the tax increase crowd came up with designed to encourage conservatives to become complicit in the sales tax increase's passage. What you haven't heard is the "rest of the story" and, I presume, why Sam Crump, Andy Biggs, Ron Gould, and I all refused to support this trade off. Trust me, it was no "deal" that anyone should take. Unfortunately, several otherwise smart folks have failed to see this from all angles and jumped on board early in a very public way and now that the details are surfacing, their names and logos are being used to suggest they support a tax increase bait and switch scheme of sorts. Here's the basic outline...
In return for getting out of the way of a sales tax increase by throwing our vote onto the referral bill (which we all feel has a very strong chance of passing) there was a DELAYED cut to corporate and personal income taxes offered (the lion's share in terms of percentage being corporate tax cuts).
Here's one BIG problem with this: The delayed cuts would not be scheduled to kick in until 2011. And, until those revenue changes begin to affect the general fund, ALL of our legal advisors have unanimously advised the legislature that these cuts will not be protected by Prop 108 (Prop 108 requires a 2/3 vote for a tax increase to be passed). This means that in a few months we will have a perfect storm of events that will almost certainly crush any hopes we have that those cuts would ever go into effect and begin to “pay back” the billions of dollars the sales tax increase will take from Arizona families. Here is a sketch of what I mean: We will have this same governor (who insists we need more revenue and less cuts to spending), the same legislators (who could not muster the courage to make necessary cuts in a non-election year), at least a $2 billion revenue shortfall, no more federal bailout money coming in, and the looming "potential" of reduced revenue to the tune of $400 million from these "future" cuts. The drop in revenue from the cuts will be seen as a problem that needs to be rectified by repealing them or delaying them with a simply majority vote before they go into effect. No one really doubts that there will be a huge effort to delay or outright repeal those cuts before they ever see the light of day. So, essentially, this is a Popeye cartoon situation where you are told "Give me a burger today and I will pay you on Tuesday." In a word, the cuts are but a fantasy. And, it takes only 12 Democrats (all of whom are against the cuts enacting) and 4 Republicans (I can name 5 of them who would vote to delay or repeal them) to do away with the sweetened part of the pot and leave only the tax increase standing. Some of the folks buying into the “fantasy” do it because they are not well versed in our process, others don’t understand the political dynamics of the personalities currently in public office. Those of us who do are not being fooled. There are others out there (possibly including the authors of the cowardly anonymous YouTube video) who understand this full and well and it is actually part of their overall plan to get more revenue through a tax hike now, knowing they will never lose future revenues to the tax cuts because they will never come to fruition.
Additionally, there is the very real economic issue to contend with in regard to the tax increase itself. When you want to turn an economy around, you try to stimulate it by giving folks money to go out and spend in the community. By pulling a billion dollars in spending capacity out of the hands of Arizonans, you will be doing the OPPOSITE of stimulating the economy. You will, in effect, slow it down and prolong the recession and at the same time cripple Arizona families who are desperately just trying to hang on in this economy. They estimate the average family will pay the government an extra $400 if this sales tax passes. Think about it. How many groceries can you buy for $400? Car payment? School fees and books? What will those families choose to live without once they are sending that money to the state instead of infusing the same dollars into our economy? Tax increases are bad. Tax increases during a recession are irresponsible. A tax increase to cover over-spending is un-Republican.
Incidentally, the polling supports this sales tax passing even BEFORE the multi-million dollars in special interest money come pouring in to support a slick ad campaign to make sure it passes. Remember Prop 400? Same crew running this show, but this time they will have even more support from Teacher's Unions, Firefighter's Unions, Hospital Associations, etc. To those that find solace in saying "I will vote to push it forward, but will vote against it at the polls," I think a reality check is in order. It will be like David and Goliath. Heck, look at the professionally produced hit ad they did on me already just to get my ONE vote!
You also have heard a lot about the $250 million property tax permanent repeal. This is an effort, which I have always supported. It is doing away with the only property tax on your tax bill that comes to the state. We tried to repeal it when times were good, but could only get it suspended under Napolitano. As such, it will come back online next year without action by the legislature and the governor to make it permanent. I have now voted in support of this 3 times. It was my stubborn persistence that got it put into this BRB on the day we voted the budget out of the Senate last Wednesday. It was vetoed twice before (once by Napolitano and once by Brewer) but is now part of the budget bill SB1025 on its way to the governor again. I am hopeful she will hear from all of you and choose to sign it into law, once and for all. While it only represents on average $67 for homeowners, every little bit helps. For business, it is a much larger hit should this tax come back automatically.
Now that you have the background, let me state some basic facts.
1. The proposal is a likely sales tax hike in exchange for
"slim chance" tax cuts - but it is still a net tax increase for nearly everyone in our district at least in the next few years.
I can’t support hitting the citizens of our district with a tax
increase - both because that is what I promised you and
because too many Arizonans can't afford it in this recession, which will only be longer and harsher if the sales tax is increased.
2. As much as I believe in cutting corporate taxes to someday entice business to move to our state once the global recession has passed and businesses begin expanding again, the price here – an immediate tax
increase on taxpayers- is too much to ask in exchange for a shot-in-the-dark chance at getting those future tax cuts.
3. I believe the tax hike will pass. And, due to the current political situation at the capitol and the economic situation in the state, the tax cuts will never see the light of day.
4. A majority of members, when faced with cutting spending or getting rid of tax cuts would choose ditching the tax cuts to retain that revenue for continued over-spending. Even today, many would rather choose higher taxes over
making the cuts necessary to balance the budget.
4. I have voted FOR the property tax repeal 3 times but the
governor vetoed it, presumably holding it hostage in order to extort support for higher taxes. I am not willing to trade a tax hike, that if passes would cost the average family $400 a year, in exchange for a property tax break of $67 (on average) per family. So, I hope Governor Brewer will sign the bill and cease holding that issue in jeopardy as part of a tax hike plan.
5. I have been a consistent and vocal supporter of real tax cuts
for Arizona and no one has stood more firmly in opposition to higher taxes.
6. I did vote FOR the Republican budget, which included the $250 million property tax repeal. I voted AGAINST a $1 billion tax increase.
7. I am very disappointed that paid political operatives have been
allowed to hijack the LD6 email list to encourage you to lobby me
armed with half-truths and, in some cases, patently false information. I not only
welcome, but encourage you to get the facts about the tax plan and remember
that the majority of the LD6 delegation is on record opposing it.
8. Good well-meaning people with very similar ideas will still sometimes disagree. Everyone has their reasons and professional/personal priorities when determining how they will vote. There has been an enormous amount of pressure applied from all sides on this. While I wish my colleagues would use the power of their vote to prevent this harmful tax increase from going to the ballot at their hand, I do not judge.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Call me melodramatic, but...
What a difference a year makes... Last year's billion dollar deficit blossomed. Now, we are looking at having to go back and shave another $1.6 Billion dollars off last year's budget just to keep the doors open through the end of the fiscal year in June.
Some might recall that a year ago I was hopeful that we would look at our then-ugly-but-now-strangely-beautiful-by-comparison "little" billion dollar problem and respond with downsizing and efficiency steps that would make us healthier. I was thinking "pruning" was in order (and it was). I never, even in my darkest Guiness-inspired moments of jaded despondency, imagined that former (excuse me while I stop and reflect on how good it feels to write that... aaahhh... thank you) Governor Napolitano would pull the stunt she did in the closing days of our last session. Sure, I thought that a big spender like this "lady" would surely ignore the gravity of our billion dollar deficit and coerce us into accepting less efficiency reforms and more borrowing and accounting gimmicks in order to avoid a veto from her well-worn veto stamp. But, did I think she would gather her minions and push through a secret budget in the middle of the night that would take us to the brink of bankruptcy only a few months later? No. I didn't. I thought that even if she had lost interest in Arizona, had barely graced a single budget negotiation meeting, and generally didn't seem to really give a rip, that perhaps her Democrat legislators would recognize that they still have to live here when she is gone. I thought they would refuse her idiotic suggestion that they not only ignore the deficit, but find a way to spend another billion or so that we simply didn't have through debt, debt, and more debt. But, like abused children trying to please an overbearing mother, they fell in line and said, "Yes, yes, yes... let's spend what we don't have on some new stuff we don't need and then take a loan to cover it all! Thank you, ma'am, may I have another?!"
Now the billion dollar deficit has become a $1.6 billion deficit (soon to be $1.8 billion, they tell us). And, we can look forward to another $3 billion shortfall in our next budget, which will go into effect in only 6 months. At the risk of sounding melodramatic, I will point out that we have a very very big, monstrous, seemingly insurmountable problem here. We are required, as you recall, to create a balanced budget. And, since we very much would like the economy to recover sooner rather than later, we have to recognize that no economist worth his salt would suggest that increasing taxes is going to provide a healthier economy, and so that is not really a viable option. Soooooo. That leaves us with cutting the size of government back to levels around the turn of the century (THIS century, silly, not the last one).
So, we are looking at across-the-board cuts and attempting to hold harmless, to the greatest degree, those essential government functions like public safety, education, and the like. Yet the cash-cow institutions of state government* are out running around with their heads on fire spreading discontent and misinformation, prompting numerous emails and phone calls and faxes to our offices. The leaders of these bureaucratic strongholds are trying to use a campaign of misinformation-driven grass roots to to force deeper cuts into healthcare, transportation, and public safety so that they don't have to face the realities of this national economic crisis like the rest of the nation, the state, and even their own students.
*If I may, I would like to point out the audacity of a man who terrifies trusting, but generally uninformed, students and their parents with untrue statements so they will scream, cry, and gnash their teeth at the legislature... I have to believe that if we pay this University President roughly 3/4 of a MILLION dollars a year (not including the $160,000 his wife also makes as a "consultant" to the University), he is bright enough to know the difference between a 6% cut and a 40% cut. So, I have to see his prolific emails to alumni and the like to be disingenuous and not just ignorant.
Call me melodramatic, but we have very limited choices here. We can either limp along in a dimly lit energy-saver mode until the economy bounces back or we can simply burn-baby-burn and party like it's 1999 until the lights abruptly go out... I'm thinking I would rather tell the stories to my grandchildren of the "slim" days than admit I was bullied into driving the state into a complete shut down.
Some might recall that a year ago I was hopeful that we would look at our then-ugly-but-now-strangely-beautiful-by-comparison "little" billion dollar problem and respond with downsizing and efficiency steps that would make us healthier. I was thinking "pruning" was in order (and it was). I never, even in my darkest Guiness-inspired moments of jaded despondency, imagined that former (excuse me while I stop and reflect on how good it feels to write that... aaahhh... thank you) Governor Napolitano would pull the stunt she did in the closing days of our last session. Sure, I thought that a big spender like this "lady" would surely ignore the gravity of our billion dollar deficit and coerce us into accepting less efficiency reforms and more borrowing and accounting gimmicks in order to avoid a veto from her well-worn veto stamp. But, did I think she would gather her minions and push through a secret budget in the middle of the night that would take us to the brink of bankruptcy only a few months later? No. I didn't. I thought that even if she had lost interest in Arizona, had barely graced a single budget negotiation meeting, and generally didn't seem to really give a rip, that perhaps her Democrat legislators would recognize that they still have to live here when she is gone. I thought they would refuse her idiotic suggestion that they not only ignore the deficit, but find a way to spend another billion or so that we simply didn't have through debt, debt, and more debt. But, like abused children trying to please an overbearing mother, they fell in line and said, "Yes, yes, yes... let's spend what we don't have on some new stuff we don't need and then take a loan to cover it all! Thank you, ma'am, may I have another?!"
Now the billion dollar deficit has become a $1.6 billion deficit (soon to be $1.8 billion, they tell us). And, we can look forward to another $3 billion shortfall in our next budget, which will go into effect in only 6 months. At the risk of sounding melodramatic, I will point out that we have a very very big, monstrous, seemingly insurmountable problem here. We are required, as you recall, to create a balanced budget. And, since we very much would like the economy to recover sooner rather than later, we have to recognize that no economist worth his salt would suggest that increasing taxes is going to provide a healthier economy, and so that is not really a viable option. Soooooo. That leaves us with cutting the size of government back to levels around the turn of the century (THIS century, silly, not the last one).
So, we are looking at across-the-board cuts and attempting to hold harmless, to the greatest degree, those essential government functions like public safety, education, and the like. Yet the cash-cow institutions of state government* are out running around with their heads on fire spreading discontent and misinformation, prompting numerous emails and phone calls and faxes to our offices. The leaders of these bureaucratic strongholds are trying to use a campaign of misinformation-driven grass roots to to force deeper cuts into healthcare, transportation, and public safety so that they don't have to face the realities of this national economic crisis like the rest of the nation, the state, and even their own students.
*If I may, I would like to point out the audacity of a man who terrifies trusting, but generally uninformed, students and their parents with untrue statements so they will scream, cry, and gnash their teeth at the legislature... I have to believe that if we pay this University President roughly 3/4 of a MILLION dollars a year (not including the $160,000 his wife also makes as a "consultant" to the University), he is bright enough to know the difference between a 6% cut and a 40% cut. So, I have to see his prolific emails to alumni and the like to be disingenuous and not just ignorant.
Call me melodramatic, but we have very limited choices here. We can either limp along in a dimly lit energy-saver mode until the economy bounces back or we can simply burn-baby-burn and party like it's 1999 until the lights abruptly go out... I'm thinking I would rather tell the stories to my grandchildren of the "slim" days than admit I was bullied into driving the state into a complete shut down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
