Everything New is Old Again

As a county commissioner, I have some powerful new friends behind me.  These people go to bat for me and my fellow county employees in Lansing and in Washington DC.  They are the Michigan Association of Counties and the National Association of Counties respectively.  Big MAC and NACo, or as they like to call themselves "The Voice of America's Counties", represents the elected officials and employees of the 83 counties in Michigan and the 3,143 counties in the U. S.  They supposedly have my best interest in mind, as well as, I'm sure, the millions of taxpayers who support us all.  After reading about their positions on a number of national issues, which were recently adopted at their last convention, I'm not so sure they do have our best interests in mind.  I know they don't share mine.

Under the heading "Board adopts new policy positions at conference", NACo reports the following:

• Oppose cuts to USDA Rural Development 
• Oppose cuts to Community Development Block Grants 
• Oppose cuts to Department of Housing and Urban Development 
• Oppose cuts to the Administration's Foreclosure and Neighborhood Stabilization Programs
• Supports federal funding for continued education and scientific study of ocean acidification
• Supports the Healthy Food Financing Initiative
• Supports the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)
• Oppose cuts to Community Services Block Grants

What's new about these policies?  Had they opposed them in the past?  I don't think so.  They further urge Congress to "control the rising budget deficit" by these statements:

1. Congress cannot solve the budget deficit by only cutting domestic, non-military discretionary programs.
2. Federal assistance to state and local governments will help mitigate further layoffs.
3. Federal investment in state and local infrastructure produces private sector jobs. (Editor's Note: And with the help of prevailing wage laws, those funds could purchase half of what we could otherwise pay for without them.)  
4. Deficit reduction should not be accomplished by shifting costs to counties, imposing unfunded mandates, or pre-empting county programs or taxing authority.

They leave us with this out-of-the-box pearl.  "The National Association of Counties supports maintaining federal financial assistance for county programs at the 2010 fiscal year levels."  The only thing missing from this report is the White House logo.  

I will give NACo credit for opposing the EPA's Boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology, new rules which would effectively adopt Obama's failed cap and trade plan.  All but Al Gore do.  They also urge Congress to repeal expanded 1099 reporting requirement as part of Obamacare.  Even the President agrees with this.  And, they are pretty clear about opposing expanded federal authority regarding local land, water, and energy usage.  Bravo for their protection of these and other property rights.  But after the 2010 elections, where Republican victories were responsible for taking back the House in Congress, winning twenty-nine governorships, and gaining a majority of state legislatures across this country, county government, on the other hand, still seems to be dominated by liberal politics.  That is certainly the case here in Saginaw County where the Democrats enjoy a 9 to 6 majority.  As Tip O'Neill used to say, "all politics is local."  If indeed this be true, then let's do what we can to turn county government around by electing more conservatives to local offices.  It's imperative if we ever hope to get control of spending. 

  

Still Fiddling

I read where another congressional study, and there have been several over the past 45 years, that once again cast a critical pall over the performance of the federal Head Start program.  Since 1965, as part of President Johnson's "War on Poverty", Washington has spent $167 billion on trying to ready, mostly low income, three and four year olds for kindergarten by providing taxpayer funds which have attempted to "enhance the social and cognitive development of children through the provision of educational, health, nutritional, social and other services to enrolled children and families." The U. S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families' Office of Head Start website further states that the program "engage parents in their children's learning and help them in making progress toward their educational, literacy and employment goals. Significant emphasis is placed on the involvement of parents in the administration of local Head Start programs."  Sounds wonderful.  Too bad it doesn't work.


As I said, there have been a number of independent studies over the years that have concluded that these program children come to school with no more social or cognitive abilities than their non-program counterparts.  So why then do we continue to pay for this failure?  Let me repeat.  "Significant emphasis is placed on the involvement of parents in the administration of local Head Start programs."  In other words, we pay the very same people, the parents of these children, who are often themselves academically and socially needy, to teach their own not to emulate the destructive and debilitating behavior and practices they witness everyday in their own homes and neighborhoods.  Yeah, that's gonna work. 


Yesterday morning I watched Sen. Tom Coburn defend the Republican opposition to our president's healthcare plan by siting a new government study, this one by the Institute of Medicine, which has concluded that our healthcare system wastes $800 billion by not controlling costs.  This is $800 billion that Sen. Coburn rightly pointed out, "that doesn't cure anyone or prevent anyone from even getting sick."  The scarier fact, and I think we all know this, is that Obamacare will do nothing to prevent this from continuing.  Sen. Coburn was also struck by the fact that despite an overwhelming preponderance of Americans who want government spending brought under control, and even the president's own bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform recommends some impressive cuts, most Democrats (and even some Republicans), including President Obama, can't seem to cut much of anything.  What's the point then, I have to ask, of paying for studies or commissioning deliberative bodies for expert advice if the default position is going to be to ignore their input?  Enough already.
   

President Hamlet

Excellent article and critique of President Obama's performance, or lack thereof, on a number of critical issues.  Happy St. Patrick's Day!

President Hamlet - Victor Davis Hanson - National Review Online

Blacks and Republicans

Blacks and Republicans

Madison

Elections have consequences.  2008 ushered in Obama's Chicago style politics of back room deals led by, and favorable to, organized labor overlords who for years have dominated Democrat Party politics.  As a result, we got the $800 plus billion stimulus which benefited labor unions by temporality propping up state budgets that staved off public employee layoffs.  Then we got the GM and Chrysler bailouts that stole private ownership from bondholders and gave it to unions who now own a 17.5% stake in GM.  Then we got Obamacare, but the union's own "Cadillac plans" were exempted.  On top of all that, we have a labor run National Labor Relations Board that has lost any vestige of impartiality or neutrality in deciding labor disputes, and who are currently trying to promote "micro unions" in lieu of an equally job-killing enterprise known as card check.  Is it any wonder then that when the electorate spoke back loudly in 2010 that all that just might be in jeopardy?

Governor Walker versus public employee unions in Wisconsin is just the beginning of what will become the defining issue of the 2012 elections.  Where does America stand in the fight for controlling their own destiny in wresting control over local, state, and even national budgets?  Despite the scenes of angry union members and supporters in and around the state capitol of Wisconsin, and guaranteed to be replicated soon in states like Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and any other capitol where Republicans rule (even some Democrat strongholds like California and New York), I'll place my bets and fortune with the opposition.  If organized labor thinks that they can win back independents for Obama and their Democrats by defending larger than average pay and benefits, for people who pay less than what most people pay for even less bountiful rewards, then they are even more ignorant and obtuse then even I can credit them.

I predict the power and influence of public sector unions will be greatly diminished over the course of the next few years and rightly so.  Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey has said of his fight with public unions, including the New Jersey Education Association, "If we don't win this fight, there's no other fight left."  As the Wall Street Journal put it recently, public-sector unions "may be the single biggest problem...for the U.S. economy and small-d democratic governance."  Even President Franklin Delano Roosevelt warned against the idea of public employee unions.  "Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relations and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government...The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service."  He reasoned, that "a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to obstruct the operations of government until their demands are satisfied.  Such action looking toward the paralysis of government by those who have sworn to support it is unthinkable and intolerable."

A New York Supreme Court in 1943 held:

To tolerate or recognize any combination of civil service employees of the government as a labor organization or union is not only incompatible with the spirit of democracy, but inconsistent with every principle upon which our government is founded.  Nothing is more dangerous to public welfare than to admit that hired servants of the State can dictate to the government the hours, the wages and conditions under which they will carry on essential services vital to the welfare, safety, and security of the citizen.  To admit as true that government employees have power to halt or check the functions of government unless their demands are satisfied, is to transfer to them all legislative, executive and judicial power.  Nothing would be more ridiculous.

Yet despite those sentiments, most state and local governments have become door mats for public sector unions and the bill has come due.  I proudly stand with Governor Christie, FDR, the New York Supreme Court, and any other entity willing to speak truth to power.  We are on the cusp of a realignment that could potentially free public employees, including teachers, from the debilitative cookie cutter world of forced unionization, and unleash their real talent and productivity to the market forces of free enterprise.  It all starts in Madison.

...And We're Off

Governor Rick Snyder delivered his much anticipated budget today amidst the louder than usual groans and protests from  Lansing's class of nattering nabobs and takers.  "Simple, fair and efficient" is the way in which Governor Snyder would like to structure the tax code and Michigan's budget going forward.  I agree, and applaud his leadership and courage to challenge the status quo and create the kind of kinetic climate we need to kick start our sorry state of affairs.  As a county commissioner, I look forward to working with his administration in helping to make Saginaw County a shining example of economic growth and prosperity.

President Obama's $3.7 trillion budget for 2012 on the other hand reflects a politician's budget, one  which demonstrates an incredible lack of leadership, and a willing suspension of disbelief in his ability to manage our affairs responsibly or effectively.  Speaker Boehner's early, and seeming, reluctance to enjoin the battle by not fully embracing fellow Republican Rep. Paul Ryan's "Road Map for America", promises to repeat the old familiar Washington two-step.  We've witnessed this budgetary pas de deux before and it ain't going to be pretty, much less inspirational.

My advise to Speaker Boehner is to grow a pair and lead this nation where it needs to go - as debt free as possible, and with a smaller footprint then we're used to on the backs of U. S. citizens, corporations and taxpayers.  Further advice is to govern like you ran for office - unafraid of those who already oppose you and comforted in the fact that those who do will reward you for your efforts.  It's time for bold, sweeping, moves like those being demonstrated by Republican governors (and even some Democrats) across this country, like Michigan's own Governor Snyder.  Together with the Republican House leadership, they can all provide a portrait of leadership for Obama to emulate and match.

   

Kickin' It Old School

Last year I wrote a post entitled Gender Bender, about the National Science Foundation spending $135 million on a "gender bias program" called Advance, which was/is aimed at improving the lot of women in the sciences.  If you read the article, you'll find that the NSF does more harm than good in helping women to advance.  It should come as no surprise then that in a recent article by John Tierney, printed in the New York Times, at a recent conference of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, a social psychologist found that his research on the very people who do all these various studies are, themselves, extremely biased.  In other words, psychologists and other lettered people who study our behavior regarding racial prejudice, homophobia, sexism, stereotype threat and unconscious bias against minorities, are themselves bigoted against those who might have a different opinion.

Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist at the University of Virginia, polled an audience recently by asking how many considered themselves liberal.  By Dr. Haidt's count, roughly 80% of the crowd affirmed this political allegiance.  "This is a statistically impossible lack of diversity," Dr. Haidt concluded, noting polls showing 40% of Americans are conservative and 20% are liberal.  Dr. Haidt said that social psychologists are a "tribal-moral community" united by "sacred values" that hinder research and blind them to the hostile climate they've created for non-liberals.

The New York Times article claims that studies independent of Dr. Haidt's find "that Democrats typically outnumber Republicans at elite universities by at least six to one among the general faculty, and by higher ratios in the humanities and social sciences."  A  2007 study found that university psychologists who identify themselves as Democrats, outnumber their Republican counterparts 12 to 1.  According to Dr. Haidt, psychology, sociology and anthropology always attracted more liberals, but that their numbers increased disproportionately in the 1960's.  "The fight for civil rights and against racism became the sacred cause unifying the left throughout American society, and within the academy," he said, and that this shared morality both "binds and blinds."

Typical of this mindset was the criticism directed at Daniel Patrick Moynihan in 1965 for his warnings that welfare assistance was leading to a rise in unmarried parenthood and welfare dependency amongst blacks.  "Moynihan was shunned by many of his colleagues at Harvard as racist," Dr. Haidt said.  "Open minded inquiry into the problems of the black family was shut down for decades, precisely the decades in which it was most urgently needed.  Only in the last few years have liberal sociologists begun to acknowledge that Moynihan was right all along."