Reinventing TPS discussion

Well, I was told that the discussion during Eye on Education on WSPD tonight was going to be about dissolving the Toledo Public School system, but they never got around to that discussion.

They did say that they are just beginning the discussion and did talk about the possibility of a pilot program - pulling the best practices from both public and charter schools and applying them at a single school - perhaps in one of the buildings scheduled to be closed and auctioned by TPS.

They did mention that New Orleans, after Hurricane Katrina, is an example of an approach that could be considered. New Orleans was faced with the need to do something 'right away' to be able to provide an education system for their students, so they came up with a solution worth considering here.

(Click here for more details on the New Orleans approach.)

You'll have to listen to future shows for further discussions.

Why you should pay attention to the Midwest ISO plans

Ever hear of Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator (Midwest ISO)? Me neither - at least, not until a few days ago - but they're likely to have a huge impact on Midwest utility bills, including ours and those paid by people just across the state line in Michigan.

According to their website, Midwest ISO is "an essential link in the safe, cost-effective delivery of electric power across much of North America. The Midwest ISO is committed to reliability, the nondiscriminatory operation of the bulk power transmission system, and to working with all stakeholders to create cost-effective and innovative solutions for our changing industry." Tells you a lot, huh?

The Midwest ISO brags that it "was approved as the nation's first regional transmission organization (RTO) in 2001." They say they're "an independent, nonprofit organization that supports the reliable delivery of electricity in 13 U.S. states and the Canadian province of Manitoba."

As one of their press releases described:

The Midwest ISO ensures reliable operation of, and equal access to power lines in 13 U.S. states and the Canadian province of Manitoba. The Midwest ISO manages one of the world's largest energy markets, clearing nearly $23 billion in energy transactions annually. ... The non-profit 501(C)(4) organization is governed by an independent Board of Directors, and is headquartered in Carmel, Indiana, with operations centers in Carmel and St. Paul, Minnesota. Membership in the organization is voluntary.

This map shows their 'regional reliability' area and this link lists their members, which includes the City of Cleveland, Consumers Energy Company, DTE Energy and FirstEnergy (which includes Toledo Edison).

So now that you know what Midwest ISO is, why is it relevant? Well, because they've recently received approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to share the millions of dollars of cost to connect wind power to the transmission grid across all their member areas. In effect, they're going to allocate the transmission costs across their entire member area, even if a particular area isn't receiving any benefit from the particular source of energy.

As the Wall Street Journal explained (subscription may be required to read entire article):

"You'd think poor Michigan has enough economic troubles without the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission placing a $300 million to $500 million annual surtax on the state's electric utility bills. But on December 16 FERC Chairman Jon Wellinghoff announced new rules that would essentially socialize the cost of transmission lines across 13 states in the Midwest.

That region-wide pricing scheme, according to a study commissioned by utility companies, will force Michigan to pay about 20% of as much as $20 billion in new high-voltage transmission lines—though Michigan businesses and homeowners will get little benefit. Thanks to FERC's new tariff, nearly everything in Michigan—from cars and trucks to Frosted Flakes—will be more expensive to make. Indiana will also absorb new costs, as will industrial users and utility rate payers in Illinois, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

This is another discriminatory subsidy for wind energy that will raise electricity prices on everyone, notably on those who don't rely on wind for electric power. FERC's grand vision is to build hundreds of miles of transmission lines across the Midwest, linked to windmills in Iowa and the Dakotas. Mr. Wellinghoff says this new ruling "is the next step in the evolution of its transmission and cost allocation process."

In fact, this is the first step in a FERC scheme to socialize transmission costs nationwide."

While the article doesn't mention Ohio, we are included as well.

The WSJ details other problems with the FERC ruling, including that it breaks with the tradition and law of users paying for the cost of the electricity they use, and that it establishes "by regulatory fiat a national energy policy that Congress has refused to endorse."

The article continues:

The wind industry has essentially conceded that without the ability to socialize the cost of multibillion dollar transmission lines, its projects can't compete with coal, natural gas and nuclear power.

The FERC pricing scheme is politically insidious, and arguably unconstitutional, because it enables states with renewable standards to export the costs of those policies to other states without these laws. Why should a factory in Pontiac, Michigan subsidize the wind energy costs of a plant in Elgin, Illinois? Michigan has a renewable energy standard, but it is already complying through instate renewables.

The governors of at least 15 Western and Northeastern states have sent a letter to Congress objecting to the socializing of costs, complaining that the pricing plans would make electricity more expensive. But Mr. Wellinghoff rebuffed Michigan's plea to exclude the state from the cost-sharing plan.

Good questions to ask, but apparently the FERC doesn't care about what you or I think of additional costs for electricity we don't use.

Beginning on page 23 of this document, you can read for yourself some of the concerns about the plan approved by the FERC, including a too-broad definition, the allocation of costs to consumers who see no benefit, the lack of requirements for the need for new transmission lines, the potential for wasteful capital investment to the detriment of cost to the consumer, how projects qualify for meeting 'public policy' mandates, and a lack of definition for "regional public policy benefits."

Fortunately, Fred Upton (R), incomeing chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is from Michigan. It's bad policy to let politicians push for energy sources that cost more than consumers are willing to pay. I hope Rep. Upton look at what this means to consumers rather than to policy makers and let the market - rather than the government - decide.

The Education Revolution Town Hall

Press Release from the Ohio Chapter of Americans for Prosperity - it goes along with the education discussion tonight on WSPD on dissolving the Toledo Public School system:

American 15-year-olds rank 35th out of 57 countries in math and literacy, behind almost all industrialized nations! I don’t believe America should be 35th in anything. It’s time to restore America’s Exceptionalism!

On Monday, January 24, Americans for Prosperity Ohio will co-host an exciting town hall in the greater Cleveland area with Fox News Commentator Juan Williams and national radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt! Click here for a full list of sponsoring organizations.

You can register for this free-ticketed event HERE!

Be a part of the revolution to restore America’s exceptionalism! Hugh Hewitt and Juan Williams will be taking your town hall questions at The Education Revolution– Restoring American Exceptionalism Town Hall!

The Education Revolution is not a partisan issue. It’s an American issue –and our future depends on it!

Rebecca Heimlich
Ohio State Director
Americans for Prosperity

There is also a VIP reception at 5:30p.m. prior to the Education Revolution town hall. Tickets include a photo op with Juan Williams and Hugh Hewitt. Following the photo op/reception, dinner will be served at 6 p.m. and then VIP reception guests are invited to the main town hall event. The cost for the VIP reception is $99.

Tracking what you eat - the food stamp slippery slope

As a county commissioner, I saw first-hand the efforts to increase the number of people receiving food stamps - now called SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Access Program).

The problem, the government said, was that millions of eligible Americans weren't actually participating. Imagine that - people who qualified for a government hand-out weren't actually signing up for it.

Some claimed it was the stigma of the paper coupons that embarrassed people to the point that they'd go without the magnanimity of the government. So they went to Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards, similar to debit cards to make it less obvious to others in a checkout lane that you were using government handouts. And they changed the name to make it sound more palatable.

Voila! Success - as the participation rate increased to roughly 66% of those eligible.

But that wasn't the only thing. Massive advertising campaigns - everything from commercials on radio and television to workers placed at food banks - encouraged more people to apply.

And then there was the eligibility rules. While the federal government sets the eligibility, states were able to do 'special' things - like automatically grant food stamps to people already enrolled in other welfare programs like TANF - Temporary Assistance to Needy Families - without checking their actual income and assets to see if they'd qualify for SNAP alone. And some areas got waivers, based upon statistical data like unemployment rates, and increased the eligibility level from 130% of poverty level up to as much as 400% of poverty level. That raised the amount of money a family could make and still get the assistance.

So it should come as no surprise that we see a record number of people now enrolled in the program - 42.9 million as of September 2010. Despite what many claim, it's clear that the increased levels of eligibility along with the massive enrollment efforts have had as much of an impact as the economy in increasing the numbers of participants.

Such programs claim to be a 'helping hand,' but I believe they're really just another method to create a dependent class who rely upon politicians for their daily needs. While that is insidious enough, there is a further danger that seems to fit so well into the current Washington discussions led by First Lady Michelle Obama - controlling what we choose to eat.

Now I know that there are many people of all political persuasions who believe that individuals in SNAP should be restricted in what they purchase. The logic is that if you're so poor that you need other people's tax dollars in order to feed your family, you shouldn't be living on TV dinners, soda pop, munchies and candy. And there is a lot of validity to that perspective.

But the new EBT cards - like frequent buyer cards - can track what you purchase. And that makes them a new tool in government control, as this article from Reason.com explains:

With its EBT system, it (U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service) can now intimately monitor and potentially influence the eating habits of more than 40 million Americans. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has already floated the idea of making soda off-limits for SNAP recipients. (In 2004, the U.S. Department of Agriculture denied Minnesota permission to enact a similar ban.) Hank Cardello, author of Stuffed: An Insider’s Look at Who’s (Really) Making America Fat, thinks a more general form of gastronomic policing is the way to go. “Rather than create a modern-day Prohibition on specific foods or beverages, the food stamp program should be restructured to cap the total calories purchased each month,” he writes at The Atlantic.

So far the government has shown more interest in rewarding good behavior than punishing bad. In December 2011, the FNS will start testing a “healthy incentives” program in Hampden County, Massachusetts. Participants will receive a 30 percent discount on their EBT purchases of fruits and vegetables. As coercion goes, this may qualify as pretty benign stuff. You give millions of hungry Americans money for food. And then you give them even more money if they agree to eat like upscale locavores battling Big Corn Syrup.

But locavores want to decentralize the food system in an effort to reclaim control over what goes into their bodies. SNAP is moving in the opposite direction. And as its new status as a behavior modification tool grows increasingly apparent, so too does the realization that the program’s growth, commonly attributed to economic desperation, is fueled at least as much by policy imperatives. Food stamp use has hit historic highs because the government’s effort to expand the program has hit historic highs. Even more than McDonald’s, the feds have mastered the art of supersizing.

The technology exists and can be used. My Kroger card tracks what I purchase and sends me coupons in the mail for items I purchase regularly.

The bigger problem, though, is that so many who need to take advantage of the food stamp program probably don't even know about this. And, if they do, perhaps they figure it's an acceptable price to pay for the assistance. They might even justify it as a proper control, even if it's not being used ... today.

But in the future - what, exactly, will the federal government do with the information they can easily collect? As the Bard says, "Aye, there's the rub."

Legal Center asks Ohio Supreme Court to accept smoking ban challenge

From 1851 Center for Constitutional Law:

Legal Center Asks High Court to Accept Smoking Ban Challenge

1851 Center Files Jurisdictional Motion with Ohio Supreme Court


COLUMBUS - The 1851 Center for Constitutional Law, a public interest law firm, yesterday asked the Ohio Supreme Court to make a final determination on the legality of Ohio's state smoking ban, and its enforcement. The legal center argues that state health officials' misguided enforcement of the law violates Ohio constitutional protections, and unduly punishes innocent business owners. Also, the center argues the law itself is unconstitutional, when applied to certain types of bars. A copy of the court filing is available here.

"Irrespective of what one thinks of the merits of this law, it was never intended to result in the indiscriminate imposition of $5,000 citations on innocent business owners," said 1851 Center Executive Director Maurice Thompson. "These enforcement complications are largely a function of trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. At local 'mom and pop' taverns, alcohol and cigarette consumption have always gone hand-in-hand, and owners of these properties have a right to decide how their indoor air is used, just as potential patrons have a right to freely enter or exit."

In 2009, after a politically charged filing against Columbus Bar Zeno's by Attorney General Richard Cordray, the 1851 Center challenged the constitutionality and enforcement of the Ohio smoking ban. The legal center argued the smoking ban unconstitutionally deprived business owners of fundamental property rights. It also argued that the state health officials' methods while enforcing the ban exceeded their constitutional authority, and is at odds with the plain language of the ban.

A Franklin County Common Pleas court agreed and ruled that state and local health officials had overstepped their authority in enforcing the law. "When an individual is asked to stop smoking but refuses, liability is transferred from the property owner to the individual," wrote Judge David E. Cain in his February 2010 decision.

The Ohio attorney general appealed the decision to the Tenth District Court of Appeals, which overturned the lower court and prompted the current appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court.

"The Health Department and its designees have and continue to exceed their limited executive branch authority when they employ a policy of strict liability for the presence of smoking against Ohio's business and property owners," wrote Thompson in the Ohio Supreme Court filing.

Also yesterday, the Ohio Licensed Beverage Association, Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Association, Ohio Liberty Council, COAST, and the Ohio Freedom Alliance filed amicus briefs with the high court supporting the 1851 Center's position.

The 1851 Center for Constitutional Law is a non-profit, non-partisan legal center dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights of Ohioans from government abuse. The center litigates constitutional issues related to property rights, voting rights, regulation, taxation, and search and seizures.

-30-

Dissolving the Toledo Public School system?

Should the Toledo Public School System be dissolved?

That will be the topic of discussion when Darlene Chambers, executive director of the Ohio Council of Community Schools, and pollster Fritz Wenzel of Wenzel Strategies host a special Eye on Education on NewsTalk 1370 WSPD Thursday at 6 p.m.

Is this a radical idea? Definitely. But with TPS facing a $38 million deficit and knowing that 58% of voters said no to their last levy request, it's time to 'think outside the box.'

School Board President Bob Vasquez has called for "transformative change" and promptly set up a committee. That committee, comprised of business people, politicians, education professionals, non-profit and union representatives, has been meeting in private for several months.

Of course, one of the key recommendations to make the light of day was to hire a consultant to run a huge public forum in February so that people could 'feel' like they have a say in the process of changing TPS. The cost? $72,000. But that's a bargain because the original idea was to pay the consultant $240,000 for six months to guide the schools district through the public forums and then help implement the agreed-upon changes. So what will the $72,000 get us? Three months of service from the Cady Group to do the forum and then 'teach' groups how to work together.

Of course, with a $38 million budget deficit for the 2011-12 school year, where will TPS find the money to pay someone to host a forum? Perhaps they could actually heed the suggestions and comments they get at their monthly board meetings as an alternative.

But is dissolving the school system a good alternative? Well, New Orleans has seen success with a similar approach following Hurricane Katrina. From the Christian Science Monitor:

New Orleans has become a laboratory for education reform, largely by necessity. With virtually all its students and teachers evacuated for the better part of the 2005-06 school year, it had to dramatically downsize and regroup. In the wake of the storm, the state became the overseer of most schools through its Recovery School District (RSD), originally set up to take over academically failing schools.

That paved the way for New Orleans to be named the most “reform friendly” for education out of 30 cities analyzed recently by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

This distinction is partly because of the dominance of charter schools, which are free to experiment and which the RSD has encouraged. Out of 88 public schools in New Orleans, 61 are charters run by a variety of state and local operators. That represents 70 percent of the city’s 40,000 students (there were 65,000 before Katrina). The percentage is much higher than in any other school system in the United States.

In addition to the charters, a small number of schools are run by the local school board, and the rest are run by the RSD.

Among the changes in New Orleans schools: One structure that gave way was the collective bargaining agreement with the teachers union, which reformers have praised for giving schools more flexibility on salaries and work hours. Many new teachers have flocked to the city through alternative training programs such as Teach for America.

Demographically, the student population hasn’t changed much. Ninety percent of public-school students are African-American, and 82 percent are low-income. Both figures are within five percentage points of pre-storm figures. But it’s not clear how many are returnees versus new to the city.

Before Katrina, 64 percent of New Orleans schools were deemed academically unacceptable by the state. By 2009, that was down to 42 percent.

Another good sign: In the RSD, the number of seniors who made it to graduation rose from 50 percent in 2007 to about 90 percent in 2010.

New Orleans students still test well below the state average in math and reading. They were improving before Katrina, but since schools have reopened, they’ve made gains at a much faster rate than the state.

On the 10th-grade Graduate Exit Exam, the portion of local students scoring at or above the basic level in English language arts rose from 37 percent in 2007 to 52 percent in 2010. Statewide, that number rose from 56 percent to 65 percent.

With so many changes, it’s difficult to pinpoint the cause of such gains, but several factors appear to be playing a role, says Shannon Jones, executive director of the Cowen Institute for Public Education Initiatives at Tulane University in New Orleans, which published a recent report on the schools.

For one, “schools are being held accountable for results” in a new way, she says, because parents now can choose any school in the district.

Could TPS do something similar? Maybe - maybe not. But it's definitely worth discussion.

I hope you'll tune in to AM 1370 Thursday at 6 p.m. or you can listen online if you're not in the area.

Happy New Year's Eve!

As we say goodbye to 2010 and look forward to 2011, let us remember that freedom requires vigilance to maintain - and that it is far easier to defend against an invasion of an enemy force than it is to defend against the encroachment of our liberties by our government and elected representatives.

"Coercion by government, the main fear of our founding fathers, is now its most common attribute." ~ Philip K. Howard

"Civil libertarians must often remind government officials (and others) that if the First Amendment only protected the expression of popular and agreeable ideas, it would be totally unnecessary since those ideas would never be threatened by our democratic form of government. Our society's commitment to free speech is tested when we encounter the expression of ideas that are disagreeable -- or even offensive." ~ Timothy Lynch

Ice boating videos

We spent the day ice boating and I wanted to share some video that we took. This first one is Sam on the runner plank with our friend Josh Kerst sailing Ragtime, the Renegade that my father built. It should be noted that riding on the plank is not really the best way to ice boat, but Sam wanted to be able to show people what it's like and that is pretty hard to do when you're actually sailing and working on that whole 'safety first' aspect.



This second video was taken by our friend Scott Decker. He's sailing Ragtime now and his son, Matthew, is in our DN for his second solo ride.



I think they give you a good idea of what it's like to sail across hard water. Sam's pretty sure they hit 50 mph - and it would have been more if he hadn't been on the plank. You'll also note after watching both of them how much less 'bouncy' the ride is when you're in the seat of the Renegade like Scott, than when you're on the plank like Sam was.

This is how I spent my winters growing up and it's nice to see our nieces and nephews and our friends' children learning and enjoying as well.

Tracking Santa and 'A Christmas Story' on Christmas Eve!

Each year, we do an open house on Christmas Eve for any family and friends who are in town. We know that many people have plans for Christmas Eve, and sometimes it's just a few of us - but other years, it's a full house. And that's what Christmas is all about for us - spending time with family and friends, enjoying their company and laughter around good food and drink.

One of my personal joys is something I discovered several years ago - NORAD Santa Tracker. I open up my laptop and put it on the official NORAD Santa Tracker page and we watch as Santa makes his way across the globe. My great nieces and nephews - and our friends' children - all enjoy knowing where he is. There's a learning component as well, as you can click on his stops and get information about the place and some of their traditions.

If you've not shared this with the children (of all ages) in your family, I hope you will as it's lots of fun.

Of course, that competes with the movie "A Christmas Story" which TBS airs repeatedly beginning at 8 p.m. tonight. While "The Princess Bride" is my all-time favorite movie (which was on last night), "A Christmas Story" is my all-time favorite Christmas movie - primarily because it captures the memories all of us have of a special toy or gift we once wanted ... and the machinations we went through to let our parents know as well as the anticipation of finding it under the tree on Christmas Day. If you've never seen "A Christmas Story," I hope you'll watch it with your family tonight or tomorrow.

Besides - it's got some of the best one-liners, making it great for adults as well as kids.

Whatever you do tonight or tomorrow, I hope you, too, will do it in the company of those you love.

Merry Christmas

Filling in on WSPD

Save the date! I'll be filling in for Brian Wilson on Wednesday, December 29th from 3-6 p.m. You can join me at 1370 AM or you can listen live via the Internet.

On federal authority to do whatever they want

In light of the FCC's ruling 'granting' the federal government (i.e. themselves) the ability to regulate the internet, I thought these two quotes particularly timely:

"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and nlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." ~ James Madison

"The power of the legislative being derived from the people by a positive voluntary grant and institution, can be no other than what that positive grant conveyed, which being only to make laws, and not to make legislators, the legislative can have no power to transfer their authority of making laws, and place it in other hands." ~ John Locke

Jacob letter to alumni over union dispute on UT reorganization

This letter was sent to University of Toledo alumni from President Dr. Lloyd Jacobs. It includes a link to the court ruling denying a request for an injunction on the reorganization requested by the union representing UT faculty:

To Alumni:

Over the past week or so news reports have talked about a request by the UT- AAUP, the union representing the University's faculty, for an injunction to maintain the status quo while a grievance by the union over the University's Reorganization Plan is processed.

The Reorganization Plan merges the Judith Herb College of Education and the College of Health Science and Human Service and reorganizes the College of Arts and Sciences into three colleges. The new Colleges are the College of Visual and Performing Arts, College of Natural Science and Mathematics and the College of Language, Literature and Social Science. The Honors College and the College of Innovative Learning have also been created. Additionally, twelve interdisciplinary schools have been created.

Most importantly, the reorganization will, we believe, make the University more accessible to students, parents and other stakeholders. We believe it will create synergies that will enhance our creativity. We will always keep students in our minds as we make changes, valuing highly our commitment to student centeredness.

On December 13, 2010 Lucas County Common Pleas Court Judge Gary Cook denied the request of the UT-AAUP allowing the reorganization to move forward. Should you wish to read Judge Cook’s ruling, please click on the link below.

http://www.utoledo.edu/utcommcenter/pdfs/caseCI107390.pdf

It is important to see this occurrence in broader context. The world of Higher Education is changing rapidly. The University of Toledo is committed to staying relevant and therefore must change. Indeed, our desire to be in a leadership role for the region and nation requires flexibility and responsiveness. While I am saddened that the exchange between the Faculty and the Trustees and President took place in a courtroom, the exchange itself was healthy and addresses issues that all of Higher Education is facing.

I will continue to communicate with you our valued UT alumni about the ongoing reorganization and all of the exciting events going forward at your University of Toledo.

Happy Holidays.


Sincerely,
Lloyd A. Jacobs, M.D.
President

Our founding principles transcend time

In an email from The Cato Institute:

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, together, address mankind's most basic political questions. Resting on a firm moral foundation, they articulate the first principles of political organization. Thus, they were meant to serve not merely the 18th century but generations to come, which would face those same basic questions, whatever their particular circumstances, whatever their state of material progress. Because the principles the Founders articulated transcend both time and technology, they will serve us well as we move through the 21st century, if only we understand them correctly and apply them well.

This is why we should always look to the basic principle of an issue - not the issue itself or whether a potential governmental action is 'needed,' 'wanted' or a 'good idea' before acting on it.

Of course, Thomas Jefferson also realized that not only would the Constitution give us a foundation, it was written to prevent unlimited power for a governmental structure, thus ensuring that the basic principles would be adhered to over time.

"I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That 'all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people' (10th Amendment). To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible to any definition."

Do you agree?

Refraining from raising taxes is not the same as cutting them

There's been a lot of talk about the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, the fact that they expire at the end of the year and the President Barack Obama-Republican plan to extend them for two years while also providing an extension of federal unemployment.

The description many opposed to the extensions have used is 'tax cuts for the rich.' I've already blogged (insert link) about how it's not about the 'rich' but about small business owners...

But the rhetoric around this subject isn't just about the tax 'cuts.' It's indicative of general bureaucratic - big government thinking.

The key point to understand is that refraining from raising taxes is not the same thing as a tax cut.

If you are not charged more for your water usage, you are not getting your water bill cut - or reduced.

If a gas station fails to raise the price from $2.75 to $3.00, you have not had a 'cut' in your gas price.

If you continue to pay your babysitter $4.00 per hour instead of raising it to $4.50, you've not 'cut' her pay.

This is the same thing that is happening with the current tax rates. Yes, they were lowered - FOR EVERYBODY!!! - in 2001 and in 2003. But these rates have been in effect now for 10 years. If Congress doesn't raise them back up, they are not giving a tax cut.

But if you follow the failed logic of politicians and bureaucrats, you can understand why they may think so.

Too many times, we've seen this accounting gimmick. For example:

An agency or department has a budget of $100 million. For their next year's budget, they request $125 million. But members of the legislative authority (Congress or a state legislature or a city council), debate setting their budget at $115 million. All of a sudden, everyone is talking about the fact that they just can't live with a $10 million cut.

Now, if you paid close attention, you'll see that they're actually getting $15 million MORE than what they had previously. That's just common sense to anyone who bothers to note the starting point. Unfortunately, it works to the advantage of politicians and bureaucrats to try to portray the situation as a $10 million cut rather than a $15 million increase.

And, sadly, too many Americans go along with the non-logical reasoning.

This is what is happening with the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. Those opposed are saying that government cannot afford NOT to have that money. But they've been 'going without' for 10 years now - and the lack of those funds in the hands of the government rather than in the hands of the people who earned it, really hasn't stopped Washington from spending recklessly or doing whatever they wanted anyway. And it won't change now.

The current tax rates should be made permanent - not just extended for another two years. All an extension does is move the discussion into the future and allow Congress to continue the status quo instead of addressing the real problems of their massive debt and failure to curtail spending as they should.

***Aside: The Ludwig Von Mises Institute also makes the same point about the correct description of the pending tax hikes not being a 'cut.'

Hardened criminals and college co-eds

No - it's not a porn movie, though you might question the intent after reading this....

It's actually a college-level program designed to bring college students and incarcerated individuals together as equals to discuss various issues. It's called the Inside-Out Prison Exchange Program. According to their website, it:

"...increases opportunities for men and women, inside and outside of prison, to have transformative learning experiences that emphasize collaboration and dialogue, inviting participants to take leadership in addressing crime, justice, and other issues of social concern."

It came to my attention thanks to an article in our local paper (link) about the class being sponsored by The University of Toledo and the Toledo Correctional Institute. The paper said four other colleges in Ohio also offer the program.

From the program website, we learn about the purpose and coursework of the class:

Inside-Out brings college students together with incarcerated men and women to study as peers in a seminar behind prison walls. The core of the Inside-Out Program is a semester-long academic course, meeting once a week, through which 15 to 18 “outside” (i.e.: undergraduate) students and the same number of “inside” (i.e.: incarcerated) students attend class together inside prison. All participants read a variety of texts and write several papers; during class sessions, students discuss issues in small and large groups. In the final month of the class, students work together on a class project.

Inside-Out is an opportunity for college students to go behind the walls to reconsider what they have come to know about crime and justice. At the same time, it is also an opportunity for those inside prison to place their life experiences in a larger framework. Inside-Out creates a paradigm shift for participants, encouraging transformation and change agency in individuals and, in so doing, serves as an engine for social change.

Through college classes and community exchanges, individuals on both sides of prison walls are able to engage in a collaborative, dialogic examination of issues of social significance through the particular lens that is the “prism of prison.”

But the newspaper article gives you a different sort of view:

"Inside-Out instructors prefer to be called "facilitators" rather than professors, because they start the class with ice-breaker exercises to spark talking and laughing before student-led discussion begins. Lucas County Assistant Prosecutor Dean Mandros and University of Toledo Interim Dean of Students Michele Martinez were among the civic leaders, university administrators, and prison personnel to participate in the final session Tuesday that started with questions such as, "What is your most embarrassing moment?" and "How would you like to improve yourself?"

After the exercise, participants sat in a circle and were asked how the exercise made them feel. Answers ranged from anxious and overwhelmed to comfortable and enlightened."

How they "feel"??? And here I thought college was all about learning how to think critically.

Having worked with the criminal justice system during my political career (as a clerk of court and as a county commissioner), I'm familiar with many types of rehabilitation programs. As a member of a criminal justice committee for the National Association of Counties, I was particularly interested in re-entry programs, so I'm supportive of the efforts to not only help incarcerated individuals when you have them as a 'captive' audience, but also the need to provide specialized assistance upon their exit from the system to reduce the likelihood that they will re-offend.

So I don't want to criticize a program based upon what I read in our local paper, which doesn't have the most stellar reputation for sharing all the facts. But the majority of Toledoans - and others who may read this - will do just that. And the impression is not good, especially when it includes quotes like this:

Liz, a University of Toledo senior majoring in political science, said she isn't curious about the crimes that resulted in her classmates' imprisonment. The experience left her reconsidering law school, in favor of furthering her education to teach in the prison system.

"All I see are people, and all I see are great people," Liz said. "And I don't want to ask that, I don't want to know. You don't have to know someone's past to know them."

Really? Your past is what forms who you are today. But this student, for some odd reason, professes not even curiosity about what her 'classmates' may have done to get them into TCI.

Interestingly, 949 of TCI's 1165 inmates are classified into level 3 Close Security (1 is minimum and 4 is maximum security). I couldn't find any listing on the Dept. of Corrections website that details what types of crimes get a person placed in Close Security, but considering it's one step down from Maximum, I'm pretty certain it includes crimes of violence.

And while the classroom setting inside the prison may be a relatively 'safe' environment, I would be cautious of someone if I knew that their past crime involved murder, or rape or assault. That would certainly make a difference to me and how I handled myself around the individual.

And it apparently matters to others, as well. From the comments on the article:

"What exactly are they learning? According to this article they discuss polictical and social issues for credit. The ice breaking questions sound like therapy not college class. This is a joke. The inmates are just gathering mental porn for when they go back to their cells and the girls get to brag about how they hang out with criminals to make their parents nervous. What a waste"

"Send your daughter to college...
...so she can meet a convict. I believe in rehabilitation as much as the next guy, but; no thanks."

"Does getting perps and co-eds together to play pictionary serve a clear, distinct purpose in the education of either? Really? The wrap-up was prisoners singing love songs and students reciting anti-prison system poetry and stories about "getting close?" The nice thing about this is that it relieves me of the nagging need to return my alumni appeal gift."

"Forget the fox watching the hen house
Just bring the little chickies to the foxs den!"

And if you're a parent paying for your child's education, is this what you expected from a political science class? Or better yet, how many of the participants got federal grants or loans using taxpayer money? While this isn't the worst of classes I've seen offered, it certainly doesn't inspire confidence, especially when the newspaper highlights this:

Before the conclusion of the course, a prisoner sang and performed a love song on the keyboard, and a college student read a poem about the flaws of the prison system.

Our educational system has serious flaws - and I know our penal system is far from perfect. But I don't believe that this type of program is the way to address either of those issues, especially when the focus is on feelings rather than critical thinking and acceptance rather than discernment.

Top 10 worst economic myths

Every year the Business & Media Institute reviews the year's news and comes up with their top 10 worst economic myths. Here is their 2010 list:

10. GM Repayment Shows Taxpayer Bailout Worked

9. All the Economy Needs is More Stimulus

8. Soda is Like Cocaine and Ads Cause Obesity

7. Obama the Tax Cutter

6. The Tea Parties are Astroturf, but Green Groups Aren't.

5. Despite Largest Budget in History, Obama is Fiscally Conservative

4. Lack of Press Freedom in Gulf Doesn't Point to Obama

3. Nearly 10 Percent Unemployment Isn't So Bad

2. ClimateGate? What ClimateGate?

1. The Chamber of Commerce is Taking "Secret Foreign Money" for Election

For details and background on why these items made the top 10 worst economy myths list, see the full article here.

Should ethanol subsidies be on the chopping block?

I'm not in favor of governmental subsidies in any form for numerous reasons - starting with the fact that they're unconstitutional, to the interference in the free market, to the fact that they're used to extract favors and votes for politicians. As subsidies for ethanol are set to expire, I thought this, from the Cato Institute was very timely:

Lawmakers have until December 31 to decide on extending tax subsidies for corn-ethanol, and support for the once-popular biofuel appears to be wavering. So should taxpayers subsidize ethanol? Cato scholars Jerry Taylor and Harry de Gorter have looked at all the evidence and argue that the most commonly offered rationales -- that ethanol reduces harm caused by our reliance on foreign oil and a host of air pollution problems -- do not hold up to scrutiny.

- Ethanol: Let Protectionism Expire, by Harry de Gorter and Jerry Taylor
- The Ethanol Tax Credit -- It's Worse Than You Think, by Jerry Taylor and Harry de Gorter
- An Economic Critique of Corn-Ethanol Subsidies, by Jerry Taylor

I hope you'll encourage lawmakers to oppose further subsidies for ethanol - and all other industries.

Quote of the Day

"As the Founding Fathers knew well, a government that does not trust its honest, law-abiding, taxpaying citizens with the means of self-defense is not itself worthy of trust. Laws disarming honest citizens proclaim that the government is the master, not the servant of the people... The Bill of Rights does not grant rights to the people, such that its repeal would legitimately confer upon government the powers otherwise proscribed. The Bill of Rights is the list of the fundamental, inalienable rights, endowed in man by his Creator, that define what it means to be a free and independent people, the rights which must exist to ensure that government governs only with the consent of the people." ~ Jeffrey R. Snyder

Core philosophies shape our paths

I enjoy getting a 'founders quote daily' in my email inbox from The Patriot Post every morning. More often than not, it makes me stop and think about what the wise men who bequeathed to us this great nation were thinking.

Today's quote made me stop to think about a core difference between those who value freedom above government and those who value government above freedom.

"As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form. Were the pictures which have been drawn by the political jealousy of some among us, faithful likenesses of the human character, the inference would be that there is not sufficient virtue among men for self-government; and that nothing less than the chains of despotism can restrain them from destroying and devouring one another." ~ James Madison, Federalist No. 55, 1788

This is a core philosophical perspective and, depending on where you stand, will lead to completely opposite decisions.

If you believe that man will care for his neighbor in times of trouble, you don't seek to have a government program to do just that. If you believe that man is capable of making good decisions, you don't seek to make them for him. If you believe man will do what is right, you don't seek to mandate that of him.

Now, obviously, I'm talking about generalities for we are all human and certainly aren't perfect - and we know there are bad apples in every bunch. But we also know that making mistakes allows us to learn lessons that prevent similar mistakes in the future - thus we develop the skills and knowledge to survive better. And Madison acknowledged such when he explains that our republic presupposes the better qualities exist at a higher degree than other forms of governance - not that the worst of qualities don't exist at all.

Those who don't believe in such things - or who believe the worst of man outweighs the good - will seek a larger role for the government to, as Madison explains, 'restrain' us from devouring each other. But this is a fundamental difference in what is thought to be the role of government.

Our founders believed they were instituting a government to protect our individual liberties. That means a government would have the authority to establish laws dealing with the infringement upon those liberties, imposing penalties for such infringements - laws against theft, harm, etc. At the core of their thought was the individual's inherent (not given by government) right to life, liberty and the pursuit (not the attainment) of happiness.

They didn't establish a government to protect us from all harm because such protection is impossible, especially when done by our own hand. They didn't establish a government to do for us what we should do for ourselves and each other - only to do the things we could not do individually - like protect the nation from invasion by others.

Contrary to the perspective some would have you believe, our founders (and those who support their positions today) are not anti-government as they - and we - believe there is a proper role for the government. But determining that proper role depends upon your view as Madison describes it: one of trust in one's fellow man or one where you believe a government of despotism is the only thing that can give us a 'proper' society.

This goes right along with Benjamin Franklin's quote: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Too many Americans today believe that their own security, temporary as it is, is something to be traded for their individual liberty - and it's not just with the Transportation Security Agency.

Some today are willing to give up economic liberty for the promise of future care. That's what Social Security is - every person mandated to pay to the government an amount that is, in most upcoming cases, not going to result in being paid back out to us in the future - or, if it is, paid out at less than what we could have accumulated for ourselves individually.

Many gladly give up their medical liberty for the promise of 'all bills being paid' by the government. Of course, that also means that government gets to make the decisions about what costs you can incur, requiring you to cede your freedom to make such decisions to the bureaucrats hundreds of miles away.

The list goes on: intellectual freedom, educational freedom, freedom to make mistakes...all among the growing numbers of liberties too many are trading for not even a temporary safety, but just an often empty promise of safety.

And it all goes back to what you believe, as typified by Madison's quote.

I cannot help but wonder where men like are founders are today. If we had to establish a new country, would we have the wisdom and fortitude to create one as successful as what we have? Or are we too far gone down the road to despotism?

FDR's Pearl Harbor Address to the nation

Today is December 7th, known forever, thanks to the speech by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, as a day which will live in infamy. From American Rhetoric, here is his speech to the nation:

Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives:

Yesterday, December 7th, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.

Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.

Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island.

And this morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph -- so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.