Do recalls equate to fascism?

The Sam Adams Alliance has a daily email of their feature called "Common Sense" written by Paul Jacob. Today's column features a quote by an op-ed writer, Jack Lessenberry (who is also the ombudsman for our Toledo Blade newspaper) about the petition drive to recall Michigan legislators who voted for the recent tax hike in that state.

Recalling Mussolini!

October 26, 2007

Leon Drolet and the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance are not very popular . . . with politicians and Lansing insiders.

But they were clear. Michigan taxpayers told legislators they would launch recalls against those who voted to push big tax increases against citizens.

So, after legislators did hike taxes, what could they expect?

The Michigan Taxpayers Alliance is now working with local leaders on recall petitions against those who voted to raise taxes. Recalls have already been filed against six legislators, and MTA promises that ten — five Democrats and five Republicans — will face recall in what the group calls the “first round.”

Citizen action sure can make a difference.

I love seeing voters hold elected officials accountable. Some folks? Not so much. Remember all the moaning by insiders over the recall of California Governor Gray Davis? Today, in Michigan, there’s even more hysteria.

In Detroit’s Metro Times, Jack Lessenberry impugns the recalls as “a form of fascism.” He compares recall to “When Benito Mussolini . . . [and] his Blackshirts used to intimidate and kill members of Parliament. . . .”

Amazing! Petitioning one’s government for a vote of the people to determine who will represent those people gets equated with political death squads murdering their opponents in cold blood. Who’d think that?

Someone without a good argument. Get a grip, Mr. Lessenberry.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Here is Lessenberry's original column with the second item, "Political terrorism, Michigan-style:", featuring the quote.

Also, in my search for Lessenberry's original column, I came across this commentary on the issue. While it has some interesting email exchanges between the author and Lessenberry, I find myself agreeing with the following two statements:

"While I have mixed-feelings about recalls generally, there is no question in my mind of the People's right to use them at will..."

"Whether a recall is right should only be judged by whether enough people sign petitions asking for one."

'This is NOT business friendly' post #3

Boy - I really wish this weren't my third posting on this topic, but it is ... I'll probably have to start a new label for these kinds of stories if they continue, and that makes me very sad.

Today's Blade carries this article on the Ohio Civil Rights Commission's vote for mandated maternity leave.

"The Ohio Civil Rights Commission voted 4-1 yesterday to require companies with four or more employees to allow women 12 weeks of unpaid maternity leave.

The policy change now goes to a legislative rule review committee that generally approves measures without issue.

But the Ohio Chamber of Commerce said it will argue that the commission overstepped its authority with the change, which should be debated by the state legislature.

With the requirement, Ohio would join at least 18 other states that provide more generous maternity benefits than required in federal mandates."

Perhaps it's just my lack of knowledge about the structure of this commission, but I guess I didn't think that having a child was a "right."

And why does any state commission get to take a vote that mandates what is, basically, a new law - and then have this new 'law' go into effect through a legislative rule review committee (JCARR?) without ever having been debated in the legislature?

I realize that some state agencies are tasked with developing the rules to implement laws that are passed, but this mandated maternity leave for companies with as few as 4 employees seems to go beyond anything the legislature intended. And that appears to be the position the Ohio Chamber of Commerce is taking.

When you consider this post about Ohio's bottom ranking in business-friendly states, this one about mandated paid sick days, and this latest from the OCRC, the environment in Ohio isn't looking good for our job providers.

Preview of tonight's show

I've added a note in the side column in my blog, featuring each day's Eye on Toledo topic. Additionally, I plan to do a daily post that will highlight any background information that listeners may find helpful.

Tonight's topic will be a follow-up of the LCIC situation and we'll be looking at today's Blade article on the subject. We'll also bring in an aspect that hasn't been covered yet - the impact all this has on our local Workforce Investment Board, another non-profit organization who has a contract with the LCIC.

We'll also discuss the recent comments Commissioner Pete Gerken made about potential funding sources for the new downtown arena. I've long had financial concerns about this project and the recent comments do nothing to allay them. For perspective, please read this post from last August.

Looking forward to discussing these with you tonight!

Interesting tidbits

Here they are, global, national and local:

*** "House Democrats, convinced that President Bush blundered by vetoing an expansion of a children's health care program, plan to approve a very similar bill this week even as the administration offered new concessions Tuesday," reports the Associated Press. "The Democrats' revised bill would reduce the number of adults and higher-income families potentially eligible for the health insurance subsidies, presumably making it easier for Republicans to back it while saving face. But on the key issue of spending, Democrats say they will not budge from the original $35 billion pricetag." (emphasis added)

Umm...how do you reduce the number of adults and the number of higher-income families and still need the same amount of increase???? Anti-logic!

*** House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., announced today some proposed changes in tax law. Among them:

- a repeal of the alternative minimum tax starting Jan. 1, 2008 - Good!
- a 4% surtax on incomes above $150,000 for a single earner or incomes above $200,000 for a married couple - bad, because it contributes to the philosophy that the 'rich,' defined by income rather than assets, should pay more.
- an increase in the value of the child tax credit for those earning too little to owe federal income taxes - questionable, because I don't understand why people who don't owe federal income taxes in the first place need more of a federal tax break.
- extension of the research-and-development tax credit, tax breaks for teachers buying schools supplies and a deduction for state and local sales taxes - Good!

Rangel doesn't expect this to come to a vote this year, so we can watch and see how his plan works out in terms of specific legislation. As they say, the devil is in the details.

*** California wildfires are thought to be the work of an arsonist...SICK!

*** China has surged ahead of Germany for the first time to become the world's top exporter. They vaulted past the US at the beginning of this year. Machinery, equipment and cars now make up 46% of their total exports, while textiles are fading from the picture.

But in a related story, Palm Bay, Fla., may ban the purchase of products made in China. Residents would still be free to purchase whatever goods they want, but the city itself would face restrictions. Mayor John Mazziotti cites the questionable quality and safety of the goods, China's rights abuses, its record of pollution and the fact that American manufacturing jobs have been lost to China as reasons for proposing the ban.

*** Toledo's Westgate Mall is adding The Fresh Market ... woo hoo! Westgate owner Liz Holland said Fresh Market signed a lease last week. According to Holland, surveys of residents in the Westgate area showed the first preference was a gourmet grocer. Their stores feature a meat department with a butcher on duty, a European-style delicatessen, a bakery, a produce department, and fresh seafood flown into stores six times per week.

*** Toledo's ABLE plans to transform a downtown landmark that's been mostly vacant since the 1970s into a Center for Equal Justice. They want to raise $5 million over the next year to turn the former Western Union building their new headquarters for the work they do in 32 Ohio counties. Legal Aid of Western Ohio will join in the fundraising efforts.

They're offering naming rights for certain levels of donations and plan to raise half the amount from the legal community and the other half from the general public. And, so far, they've not asked for any tax dollars - how refreshing!

*** On a personal note, I had a pleasant conversation with my former colleague and current president of the Board of County Commissioners, Tina Skeldon Wozniak. She reminded me of a comment she made last year, predicting that I'd end up in radio at some point in the future. Yes, Tina, turns out you were right. And we both had a good laugh over how many times I've said that to her...

Conspiracy or coincidence with the LCIC?

The executive director of the Lucas County Improvement Corporation (LCIC), Shawn Ferguson, resigned yesterday to 'head off being fired,' according to today's Blade.

In my previous post about the County Commissioners' issues with this organization, I said that there was a 'story behind the story' and this is certainly true.

Considering Comm. Pete Gerken's 'blame' of Shawn Ferguson for a signing a contract that Gerken pushed, I can't help but wonder if Ferguson is the pawn being sacrificed. And then I look at Comm. Ben Konop's criticism of Ferguson (most not his responsibility and really the fault of the LCIC's executive committee dominated by Pete Gerken) and my political instinct sends up huge red flags.

I have nothing other than instinct on which to base my speculations, but after 15 years in Toledo-Lucas County politics, I've learned to trust such instincts. And what are they telling me?

That we should not be surprised if we learn that Ferguson did only as he was told and Konop's sudden concerns were part of a carefully orchestrated plan designed to force the resignation (or firing) of Ferguson in order to protect Gerken from legitimate criticism over how he's manipulating the LCIC.

Some of you may say that they're just not smart enough to come up with such a plan and that it's probably just coincidence or convergence of events. But having watched them all and the extents they go to in order to maintain their power and control, I wouldn't put it past them. Time will tell.

In the meantime, Ferguson has 'fallen upon the sword,' giving both the LCIC and Gerken a scapegoat. I predict Gerken and Konop will have a 'unity meeting' over the subject of the LCIC and all will be sunny again in Lucas County. And things will then proceed as they always have - with Lucas County having the highest unemployment of all Ohio's urban areas, population continuing to decline, taxes going up, etc., etc., etc.

Tell me again why government - instead of the private sector - is supposed to lead economic development????

NOTE: For discussion on this and other details which will help you connect the dots, tune in tonight at 6 p.m. on Eye On Toledo.

Ohio senators demonstrate their priorities

The Senate voted 68 to 26 today to kill the "The Children's Health Care First Act" today. This amendment would have required Congress to prioritize providing health care to children rather than pork projects for politicians. Senate Labor/HHS/Education Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Tom Harkin has stated that the Labor-HHS-Education bill would 'demonstrate to the American people what our priorities are.'

Ohio Senators Brown and Voinovich both voted to table this amendment, effectively killing it for now.

Guess we know what their priorities are...

Toledo School Board debate

I was going to make a post about the Toledo School Board debate Thursday at DeVeaux Jr. High, as I met several of the coordinators at last night's school board forum at the library.

However, Lisa Renee at Glass City Jungle beat me to it, so I'll just link to her post. Thanks, Lisa.

Another "this is NOT business friendly" post

In an earlier post, I mentioned how the 2008 State Business Tax Climate Index ranked Ohio in the bottom five of "business friendly" states. Curtis Dubay, a co-author of the study said, "States need to constantly be on the lookout for ways to improve their business tax climates."

Unfortunately, it seems that such advice is falling on deaf ears in Ohio as the "Sick Days Ohio" group would rather focus on creating a 'family-friendly' state.

Sick Days Ohio is the website for Ohioans for Healthy Families who identifies themselves as:

"Ohioans for Healthy Families is a growing statewide coalition of citizens and organizations who are leading the effort to make Ohio the most family-friendly state in America.

Working together, religious, community, labor, health care, professional and family groups are advocating for Ohio employees to earn paid sick days so they can take care of themselves or their family members when illness hits.

The partner groups and leaders who make up Ohioans for Healthy Families come from diverse backgrounds and different parts of the state, but they share one thing in common: They value Ohio families and believe our citizens shouldn't have to choose between taking care of a sick child or spouse and their paycheck."

They have proposed and are supporting a new law, the Ohio Healthy Families Act, that would require employers with 25 or more employees to provide up to 7 paid sick days each year. They state that the Act, "would ensure middle-class workers — the backbone of Ohio's economy — have the opportunity to earn paid sick days." Of course, the sick days would actually apply to ALL employees, not just middle-class workers, and the definition of 'full-time' in order to qualify for the 7 paid days is 30 hours/week. Oh - and having the state mandate, though law, those days does NOT equate to "earning" them.

The group has gathered around 140,000 signatures but plans to continue to gather more before submitting the proposal to the legislature in January, according to campaign manager Brian Dunn. The issue needs at least 120,683 valid signatures. After submission of the petitions, the legislature has four months to enact the bill. If it fails to do so, the Ohioans for Healthy Families coalition has 90 days to collect the same amount of additional valid signatures to place the measure on the fall 2008 ballot for a vote by Ohioans.

Some interesting components of the proposed Act:

* people who work part-time would get pro-rated days

* the sick leave would accumulate monthly and accrual would start immediately, even if a new employee might not be able to access said days until after being employed 90 days (probationary period)

* you could carry over days, but employers wouldn't be required to permit the accumulation of more than 7 per year (meaning employers could allow them to accumulate to whatever level they choose above the 7 days)

* you can accumulate and use the sick time in hourly increments

* an employer may only require an employee to provide certification from a health professional if the absence covers more than three consecutive work days, and the employee would then have to provide the employer with such certification within thirty days

* employers could be fined for not properly posting the notice of this law

* employers may not eliminate or reduce existing leave policies to comply with the provisions of the proposed law and should not be discouraged from providing a more generous leave policy

* unions could still bargain for more leave

* employers cannot use paid sick leave taken pursuant to this Act as a negative factor in an employment action, such as hiring, promotion, or a disciplinary action; or count the use of paid sick leave under a no-fault attendance policy

Wow - and those are just the highlights that do not include the record-keeping and auditing requirements. I wonder if anyone's bothered to calculate the cost such a mandate would impose upon companies.

This is NOT a business-friendly act - though it certainly sounds good on the surface. But while it may appear to be family-friendly in the short term, it has significant potential for long-term negative consequences.

I've got news for you, Ohioans for Healthy Families: If you want a family-friendly state, you need a state that first has JOBS for those families - not laws that drive businesses - and eventually families - away.

Steyn on SCHIP: Ponzi scheme?

I've long been a fan of Mark Steyn, a Canadian columnist and author, and his unique perspective on American politics. It was my husband who, after reading several of his columns online, introduced me to Steyn's witty and informative commentary.

As a Canadian, he often comments about the good things in America, especially compared to the more socialistic tendencies of European nations. His most recent analysis of SCHIP is no exception, making light of the 'for the children' catch phrase in contrast to what he describes as the real 'war on children.'

Last Thursday, Nancy Pelosi, as is the fashion, used the phrase "the children" like some twitchy verbal tic, a kind of Democrat Tourette's syndrome: "This is a discussion about America's children … We could establish ourselves as the children's Congress … Come forward on behalf of the children ... I tried to do that when I was sworn in as speaker surrounded by children. It was a spontaneous moment, but it was one that was clear in its message: we are gaveling this House to order on behalf of the children."

Etc. So what is the best thing America could do "for the children"? Well, it could try not to make the same mistake as most of the rest of the Western world and avoid bequeathing the next generation a system of unsustainable entitlements that turns the entire nation into a giant Ponzi scheme.

Steyn is always a thought-provoking read - but this column goes a step further and asks us to think not just about the short-term impact of a SCHIP expansion, but the cumulative effect it - and other entitlement programs - have ... especially on 'the children.'

UPDATED: Turns out Taxmanblog, Porkopolis and Wizbang blogs have posts on this article as well...

My new job in radio

After taking a well-deserved rest from politics, I've accepted a job that deals primarily with ... politics. Actually, my new position as host of WSPD's Eye on Toledo show (6-7 p.m. Mon-Fri) brings me full circle back to my college major.

I majored in communication at The University of Toledo, writing for the Collegian for four years. While I never did radio at school, I've been an ocassional guest host for Eye on Toledo over the last 10 months. As much as I enjoyed writing for the Collegian, I find that I relish the interaction with callers that a talk radio show provides.

My intent with the show is to provide information, education and interaction, but in an entertaining way ... focusing mainly on local news from Toledo and the surrounding area. When relevant, we'll also touch on state and national items of interest.

In case you're wondering, the reason an opening exists for Eye on Toledo is because my predecessor, Kevin Milliken, will be taking over the position of morning show news anchor. As Fred Lefebvre's morning show is the #1 rated morning talk show in Toledo, this is a nice assignment for Kevin and congrats are certainly in order.

I hope you'll tune in (1370 AM) or listen live via the Internet if you're outside the range of the station. And please call in - it is a 'talk' show, after all.

Additionally, The Toledo Free Press has asked me to do an op-ed column for them. My first column, which I will link to here, will be in the Oct. 27/28 weekend edition.

I will continue to blog, but I'm not sure how much my new responsibilities might impact the frequency of my posts. But between Eye on Toledo, the Free Press and my blog, you'll be able to find plenty of Thurber's Thoughts.

Ohio senators vote for Rangel's 'Monument to Me'

Amanda Carpenter, National Political Reporter for Townhall.com, included this interesting item in her column today:

Sen. Jim DeMint (R.-S.C.) tried to persuade his fellow Senators to remove a project sponsored by New York Rep. Charles Rangel (D.) that would give $2 million in federal money to the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Policy, the Rangel Conference Center, and the Charles Rangel Library at the City College of New York.

Freshman Rep. John Campbell (R.-Calif.) has sarcastically called the earmark Rangel’s “Monument to Me.”

Promotional literature describes the project as “kind of like a presidential library, but without the president.”

Final vote on the earmark was 61-34 with 13 Republicans voting to keep it in the bill. The wording was to "provide a limitation on funds with respect to the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service" so a NAY vote was a vote to keep the $2 million earmark...Ohio's Senators Brown and Voinovich both voted nay. Perhaps they have plans for their own personal monuments at some point in the future?

I just hope they both remember this when they complain about a lack of funds for their own pet projects - remember the Corp of Engineers, Sen. Voinovich?

Minimum Wage for some - but not poll workers

Just passing along two posts about the issue of whether or not poll workers qualify for minimum wage.

Right Angle Blog wonders why Attorney General Marc Dann doesn't want poll workers to be treated like everyone else.

Crabby Fat Guy (love the name, btw!) has a link to the opinion and this comment:

"In further poll work news the Board of Elections is short poll workers for the upcoming elections. I wonder why? Duh!"

Do they even know the definition of a recession in order to be polled?

I came across this latest story by CNN about their polling of American's perspective of the state of the economy.

"WASHINGTON (CNN) — Nearly half of Americans feel the U.S. economy is in a recession, marked by a significant decline in economic activity, according to a survey released Thursday.

The poll by the CNN-Opinion Research Corporation found that while 46 percent of Americans hold that belief, 51 percent don't."

The article does define what constitutes a recession, but offers no explanation of whether or not such definition was read to those polled prior to asking their opinion.

InvestorWords.com offers the following defintion which is a bit easier to understand:

"A period of general economic decline; specifically, a decline in GDP for two or more consecutive quarters."

Interestingly, 2007 second quarter GDP growth was 3.8%, which is an increase over the first quarter growth of .6% (source). Obviously, with an increase between first and second quarters of 2007, we do not have a decline 'for two or more consecutive quarters.' In fact, according to this chart from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (did you even know it existed?), GDP has shown growth in every quarter since the third quarter of 2001 (based on chained 2000 dollars).

About two weeks ago, there was a interesting discussion on Swamp Bubbles about the economic figures that had just been released. The question I asked, which remains unanswered, was 'if these are bad numbers, what do they have to be to indicate a 'good' economy?' Most people judge an economy by their own personal perspectives often attributing the overall economy to be indicative of their personal situation. Some believe that they're doing okay, but based upon stories and news reports, think their neighbors are having a tough time, contributing to the subjective perspective of the economy as a whole.

And that discussion, combined with this poll, makes me wonder why we even bother to conduct such polls. It's clear that if 46% of those polled think we're in a recession, they do not understand how a recession is defined and are thus 'unqualified' to offer an opinion. If we polled economists, those who are supposed to be 'experts' or at least authoritative on the issue, would they say the same thing as the "public"?

So what is the purpose of such polls? And why is that no one asks qualifying questions before asking one's opinion and then extrapolating that into what 'America' thinks?

UPDATE: a rather succinct perspective on WHY 46% think it's a recession is available here.

This is how the mayor makes decisions???

According to today's Blade, a city council candidate made a suggestion during a public directors' meeting that Toledo water meter readers should look for housing code violations when they're out reading meters.

Now, I'm sure many can question why we're turning all our public employees into enforcement officers - after all, the city is facing a huge deficit next year because they don't know how to reduce spending...

And I'm sure that others will question how close we're getting to George Orwell's "1984" as we monitor all activities of our citizens.

But I'm more interested in focusing on the decision-making process that led the mayor to decree 'make it so.' Turns out, there wasn't one. This is yet another example of Carty Finkbeiner exercising his ready-shoot-aim philosophy.

"Public Utilities Director Bob Williams initially objected, saying meter readers' work could be made more difficult if they are viewed as "intruders." He said meter readers already are expected to report unsafe situations involving children or senior citizens.

He was quickly overruled by the mayor, who said, "that is a great suggestion. Do it. All they have to do is write an address down. I don't even want any debate about it. Just do it.""

Notice that potential issues or concerns were not even permitted to be discussed, with the mayor stating "I don't even want any debate about it."

So, here are the questions the mayor should have asked:

* are there any legal provisions that would enhance or detract from our ability to implement such a policy?

* are the meter readers knowledgeable about housing violations that they can accurately report potential problems?

* would there need to be any sort of training to bring meter readers up to speed on the housing code?

* is there any cost the city would incur to proceed with such a policy?

* are there union contract terms that would have to be consulted or negotiated if we do this?

* is it likely that the union may ask for more money as a result of the increased duties?

* since all the meter readers would be doing is forwarding addresses, do we have the staff to perform the necessary follow-up?

* as housing violations are citeable into court, do we need to be concerned about any inaccuracies in the meter readers referrals?

* what obstacles or challenges would we face in implementing such a policy?

* who would oppose such a policy and what valid arguments might any opponents make?

* would the public embrace it or see it as further intrusion of government into their lives?

* if it turns out that we CAN implement such a policy, SHOULD we?

And these are just the questions I've come up with off the top of my head. There could easily be many more based upon the answers these questions generate.

But, sadly, the Mayor has spoken and now, despite any legitimate issue or concern, he's already started down the path to turning water meter readers into 'enforcement' agents. And, as we've seen in so many other instances, there is likely to be unintended consequences that usually result in additional cost to taxpayers, one way or the other.

"A man who does not think and plan long ahead will find trouble right at his door." ~ Confucius

Screeners missed fake bombs, but can we learn from history?

According to this story in USA Today, security screeners failed to find fake bombs hidden on undercover agents.

"Security screeners at two of the nation's busiest airports failed to find fake bombs hidden on undercover agents posing as passengers in more than 60% of tests last year, according to a classified report obtained by USA TODAY.

Screeners at Los Angeles International Airport missed about 75% of simulated explosives and bomb parts that Transportation Security Administration testers hid under their clothes or in carry-on bags at checkpoints, the TSA report shows.

At Chicago O'Hare International Airport, screeners missed about 60% of hidden bomb materials that were packed in everyday carry-ons — including toiletry kits, briefcases and CD players. San Francisco International Airport screeners, who work for a private company instead of the TSA, missed about 20% of the bombs, the report shows. The TSA ran about 70 tests at Los Angeles, 75 at Chicago and 145 at San Francisco."

Interestingly, the private company only missed about 20% of the bombs while TSA agents at LAX missed about 75%.

Perhaps they're just more focused on whether or not we take off our shoes and ensuring that all those selected for 'individual screening' match the general demographics of the nation.

And then there was this statement further down in the article:

"The failure rates at Los Angeles and Chicago are "somewhat misleading" because they don't reflect screeners' improved ability to find bombs,..."

Super - so their failure rate is actually an improvement.

More and more, I think the Isrealis have the right idea about such security issues in that they screen for behavior rather than objects.

And then I came across this interesting column by Becky Akers from the Foundation for Economic Education in which she compares the bandits who robbed trains to the terrorists of today and the need to keep both forms of transportation safe for passengers.

"The railroads, like the airlines, might have turned to government for protection; they certainly never hesitated to demand the State’s help in acquiring land, financing their operations, or enforcing a cartel to squash competitors. But aside from the rewards some states posted and the lawmen they paid for capturing criminals “dead or alive,” the railroads assumed most of this responsibility themselves. That left them free to protect their passengers and equipment in ways prohibited to the airlines.

First, rather than relying on bureaucrats and hacks for security, the railroads hired the best companies available. Their agents concentrated on pursuing—literally—the culprits. They would have laughed at the idea that they should harass, search, and delay passengers at depots while waiting for the outlaws to come to them."

And she goes on to explain that, like so many 'solutions' today, it's easier to establish new bureaucracies with the appearance of solving the problem rather than take the more difficult steps to actually solve the problem.

"It’s far safer and easier to search law-abiding passengers than to track criminals, but it’s also useless: during the TSA’s four-and-a-half years of existence, not one of its employees has caught a terrorist. In lieu of bad guys, then, the TSA protects us from each other, from flyers who break the agency’s whimsical and ever-changing rules, from men named David Nelson (this name has unexplicably earned passengers close scrutiny) and Cat Stevens (aka Yusuf Islam), and from women wielding lipsticks. The list of mistakes and misdeeds that turn travelers into terrorists will continue to expand as the TSA tries to justify its existence and its $5 billion yearly budget—and as the government reaps revenue from the fines “terrorists” pay.

The railroads also confronted a real enemy. They neither lied nor exaggerated the risks because that would cost them customers. Contrast that with the bureaucrats at the TSA and its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security. They depend on taxpayers’ fears of ubiquitous, magically lethal terrorists for their jobs and cushy offices. (The TSA’s headquarters boasts $500,000 worth of silk plants and artwork, a 4,200-square-foot fitness center, and seven kitchens.) So does their army of 45,000 airport screeners. Indeed, the government’s incentives are not only perverse but directly opposite the railroads’: the bigger the threat, the more government passengers “need” and the more eagerly they cede their freedom."

Akers doesn't believe that privatizing security is the cure-all. But she does suggest, and I agree, that "weaning the airlines from taxpayer-funded, politically driven “security”—and from the federal straitjacket accompanying it—would result in the same no-nonsense approach the railroads took. Jets worth billions guarantee the airlines’ scrupulous attention to providing their own foolproof protection. And repeat business comes only from living customers who reach their destinations in one piece."

I fear, however, that we've come too far down the road of dependence upon government for everything to every believe that a solution not government initiated would be a viable alternative.

Happy 231st Birthday, United States Navy!

Anchors Aweigh

Stand Navy out to sea, Fight our Battle Cry;
We'll never change our course, So vicious foe steer shy-y-y-y.
Roll out the TNT, Anchors Aweigh. Sail on to Victory
And sink their bones to Davy Jones, Hooray!

Anchors Away, my boys, Anchors Aweigh.
Farewell to foreign shores,
We sail at break of day-ay-ay-ay.
Through our last night on shore, Drink to the foam,
Until we meet once more.
Here's wishing you a happy voyage home.

Blue of the Mighty Deep; Gold of God's Sun
Let these colors be till all of time be done, done, done,
On seven seas we learn Navy's stern call:
Faith, Courage, Service true, with Honor, Over Honor, Over All.

-Words by CAPT Alfred H. Miles, USN, 1906.
Anchors Aweigh is not an official Navy song.

More on SCHIP

For a further update on the debacle that is SCHIP, cruise over to BizzyBlog for this informative post...where Tom defends the blogosphere's research...

Not good news for Ohio

The newly released 2008 State Business Tax Climate Index ranks how "business friendly" the 50 state tax systems are, providing a roadmap for state lawmakers concerned with keeping their states tax-competitive, says the Tax Foundation.

According to the Foundation:

* The five most business friendly states are Wyoming, South Dakota, Nevada, Alaska and Florida.
* Next on the list are Montana, New Hampshire, Texas, Delaware and Oregon.
* At the opposite end of the spectrum are Rhode Island, New Jersey, New York, California and Ohio, the least business friendly states.
* Following those are Iowa, Vermont, Nebraska, Minnesota and Maine.

"There's no question that states are competing with one another for companies, jobs and people," said study co-author Curtis Dubay. "Taxes matter to businesses and the states with better business tax climates will reap the rewards."

Dubay added, "States need to constantly be on the lookout for ways to improve their business tax climates. If they're standing still, they're losing ground to states actively improving their climates."

Source: "Which States Are Best for Business? The 2008 State Business Tax Climate Index," Tax Foundation, October 10, 2007.

Quote of the Day

"If by the liberty of the press were understood merely the liberty of discussing the propriety of public measures and political opinions, let us have as much of it as you please: But if it means the liberty of affronting, calumniating and defaming one another, I, for my part, own myself willing to part with my share of it, whenever our legislators shall please so to alter the law and shall chearfully consent to exchange my liberty of abusing others for the privilege of not being abused myself."

-- Benjamin Franklin (An Account of the Supremest Court of
Judicature in Pennsylvania, viz. The Court of the Press, 12
September 1789)

The Patriot Post

Family weddings

I love weddings!!!!

I love the pomp, and seeing people I haven't seen, and sharing in the joy as two people become one...

So, if postings are a bit slim over the next several days, it's because I'm helping out with a family wedding. My cousin Mandy and her fiance Jarrod will exchange vows on Saturday, so I'm helping with trips to the airport to pick up arriving guests, food preparation and anything else that needs to be done at the last minute.

But check back, because I'll certainly be commenting on the goings-on around town. And thanks for reading my blog - you've set a record for page views over the last several days!