WritersBureau.org • Kenn Gividen

Increased taxes result in decreased approval rating for governor

2005-11-01T19:57:00.000-08:00

by Kenn Gividen

Is Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels riding the president's coat tails down a slippery slope? Nope. Daniels is making his own errors, thank you. And I suspect the governor’s dismal approval rating can be attributed to higher taxes; specifically, property taxes.

First, let’s look at the governor’s approval rating, or the lack thereof.

SurveyUSA reports that only 44 percent of Hoosiers say they approve of the job Mitch Daniels is doing as governor. While that’s five points higher than the president’s approval rating, Daniels trails behind twenty one of the other twenty eight Republican governors. In addition, more than a third — 36 percent — of Hoosier Republicans do not approve of the governor’s job performance.

Of those identifying themselves as politically conservative, the governor received a mere 58 percent approval rating. Other demographics reveal the governor is trailing among all age groups, both sexes and those who have attended college. Both blacks and white don’t like the way the governor is managing the state. Only 45 percent of white Hoosiers and 27 percent of blacks give the governor a thumbs up. (Surprisingly, Daniels highest approval rating is among hispanics at 75 percent.)

Conclusion?

Considering the governor's agenda includes capping property tax relief, as imposed by Gov. Otis "Doc" Bowen in the 1970s, the disapproval rating is understandable.

Here’s why.

• Hoosiers disapprove of Daniel’s decision to transfer the property tax burden to local governments. They know it will lead to a increased tax rates.

A 1973 law limited the amount local and county governments could raise through property taxes. As long as they stayed within their limits, the state would provide subsidies equaling 20 percent. By capping the property tax subsidies, the governor is giving local and county governments the green light to gouge property owners as they did prior to the Bowen administration. It’s good for the state budget, but potentially devastating for the family budgets.

Granted, the governor’s decision will help alleviate the state’s $600 deficit inherited from Gov. Joe Kernan’s administration. But increasing the burden on property owners is hardly the most effective solution.

• Higher property taxes will result in decreased taxable income. That, in turn, will reduce the cash flow from taxpayers to the state’s coffers. Hoosiers will be paying more in taxes with less going to the state. While the governor is filling a $600 million pothole by removing the subsidies, he is simultaneously digging another deficit by reducing income tax revenue, the lifeblood of the state’s budget.

While the inflow of tax dollars to the state will dwindle, county bureaucrats, politicians and cronies will be floating bonds to construct gaudy school buildings, garish county structures and new jails worthy of a higher class of criminals. Because property owners will be stuck with bond payments for generations to come, the prospect of rescinding the increased taxes will be non-existent.

• Increased property taxes will discourage investment in Indiana. When Cummins Engine Company moved 500 jobs from Columbus, Indiana to New York, it was to take advantage of decreased business costs. When looking for a locale to build factories, business leaders first look at their bottom line. And tax abatements will do little to soften the blow. They will simply increase the tax burden even more on home owners and small businesses.

• Hoosiers remember the recent sales tax increase. The added money was needed, we were told, to fill the gap caused by government excess. With increased property taxes looming on the horizon, Hoosiers mindful of a 6 percent sales tax rate can hardly be expected to give the governor their voice of approval.

• Add the beverage tax afforded to Indiana counties to increased sales and property taxes. One can fully understand why Hoosiers are discontent. And there’s more. While the governor is removing property tax relief, he is increasing entitlements to help pay home heating bills. In reality, the entitlements go to the utility companies. And Hoosiers know it.

###

Kenn Gividen was the Libertarian Party's candidate for governor in 2004.

Hollywood will rewrite history of Katrina

2005-09-06T22:47:00.000-07:00

It's bound to happen.

Within a few months someone in Hollywood will produce a movie about the devastation in New Orleans. It will be TV movie, of course. Such fare won't play well in the theaters. And though I make no claim to be a connoisseur of made-for-TV films, I can predict with reasonable accuracy the story line.

Here's what to expect.

Though the script will call for Eddie Murphy to play the role of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, Murphy will actually be playing Rudolph W. Giuliani. Acting like Nagin would damage the actor's career.

PeeWee Herman will take on the role of President George Bush. (Hollywood producers tend to be Democrats.) The opening scene will find Herman aka Bush swinging a nine iron while wondering aloud about the impending hurricane. 'Someone needs to do something," he'll say. 'But who?" he'll ask Dick Cheney, played by Barney the Purple Dinosaur.

The next scene will be that of an attractive, well-spoken CNN anchor. Because we viewers are considered too dumb to follow the storyline, the news anchor will pop up throughout the movie to keep us on track and to remind us that Fox isn't the only cable news channel.

That will take us to New Orleans.

A hitherto unknown screenwriter will merge the lives of touring New Zealand students with a upstanding black clergyman, his gorgeous wife and sharp-dressed kids. The group will rescue a beer-bellied, gun-toting redneck named Bubba and his clan from a squalled trailer park. Bubba will be crude, dumb, ungrateful and wearing a shabby t-shirt, replete with emblazoned confederate flag.

The group will fight their way through the storm ravaged streets of New Orleans as they make their way to Superdome. Along the way, they will, of necessity, loot the local Walmart. The movie producer will be careful to remind us that looters are great people — just like the folks at church — who merely want to survive.

The minister, of course, will take nothing more than food to sustain his family and fellow-travelers. Bubba, on the other hand, will snag a higher-power rifle, color TV and six pack of Blue Ribbon beer. The reverend will shake his head in disgust.

Upon entering the Superdome, the group will befriend an elderly couple. The wife will die the next day. All but Bubba will show compassion.

They will also meet a young expectant mother. The preacher's wife, named Hillary in the script, will protect her from roaming gangs of politically correct, racially diverse thugs.

The movie will consist of horrid scenes of terror within the dome. The savagery will be caused, not by the roaming gangs of thugs, but by the negligence of PeeWee and his sidekick purple dinosaur.

Expect Bubba to exasperate the discontent throughout the flick. And through it all, the expectant mother will jerk our tears as she suffers labor pains. Eventually, she will give birth in the midst of the squalor; the words 'Darn Republicans" whispered through her pain.

The movie will climax when a Jesse Jackson look-alike arrives in town, utters a string of corny, alliterated words, and, in scene suitable for Moses, miraculously makes the flooding disappear. The sun will shine, a new baby will be wailing, and a stream of Greyhounds will haul off a slew of bad actors pretending to be exhausted.

Just before mounting the bus, Hillary will suggest the young mother name her newborn, 'Katrina."

'No," Mom will say, cuddling her cooing bundle of joy. 'I think I'll name her Hope." And with that, she'll disappear through the Greyhound doors, on her way back to Arkansas.

'Nuts!" we'll all say, as we dab tears from our eyes, 'If Bill were still president, this hurricane never would have happened."

Then, with our brains thoroughly saturated with nonsense, we'll click off our televisions and forget reality

Eminent domain hearing gives Hoosiers chance to fight back

2005-08-02T02:57:00.000-07:00

On Wednesday, August 10, Hoosiers will have the opportunity to voice their views on eminent domain.

A hearing, hosted by the House Summer Study Committee, is scheduled for 1 pm and will be conducted in the auditorium of the Government Center South. Plans for the hearing were prompted by a recent Supreme Court decision. Last month the court determined that your local government has the constitutional right to force you to sell your property to a private organization for non-public use.

There are four reasons why Hoosiers should voice their opinions August 10th.

• Cronyism. While Indiana may be the heart of the Bible belt, its not exempt from political favoritism, dirty tricks and punitive maneuvering.

Anyone who dares oppose city hall will risk the wrath of corrupt local bureaucrats willing to use eminent domain laws to get even. Community activists who fall out of favor with government officials may well find their homesteads bulldozed to make room for a Biggy Burger franchise, Holiday Inn or whatever is deemed to be “in the public interest”.

• Reality. The prospect of property owners being bullied into selling to private developers is more than a future prospect. It’s already happening.

There are six states — Connecticut, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and North Dakota — that permit local governments to effectively confiscate private property for economic development. In addition the states of Arkansas, California, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, South Carolina and Washington allow private property in “blighted areas” to be condemned for private redevelopment.

In recent months, local governments in Indiana have begun following suit.

In Indianapolis the threat of eminent domain was evoked in hopes of bulldozing a 60-year old business. The reason? The city-county council says it needs the space for a parking lot for the new Colts stadium.

And when the Indianapolis city bureaucrats grew weary of negotiating with the owner of a parking garage, they simply took his property. The city plans to sell the land to a private developer.

Another example can be found in Mishawaka County. When a new car manufacturer wanted to expand its facility, county officials used the threat of eminent domain to force the owners of 51 homes to get out of the way. That was five years ago.

• Ineptness. One needs look no further than a local license branch to discover that good intentions don’t make for good planning.

Local governments in Indiana have a long history of making bad decisions, such as over-spending on government works projects. Even Gov. Mitch Daniels acknowledges the spending binge for government school facilities is excessive. In Wayne County, taxpayers cringed when local officials spent nearly $29 million for a new jail project.

When the Republican-controlled General Assembly granted counties the right to impose food and beverage taxes, many eagerly obliged. Local governments will also move ahead with enthusiasm if given the green light to abuse eminent domain.

• Unfairness. The motive to abuse eminent domain is simple: It will increase the property tax base. When property owners are forced to sell, the government gets more money. The tragedy is that low income families are the logical targets.

One example was seen in New London, Connecticut where local residents were forced to sell their modest homes. According to the Institute for Justice, “The City handed over its power of eminent domain—the ability to take private property for public use—to the New London Development Corporation (NLDC), a private body, to take the entire neighborhood for private development.”

One resident, Susette Kelo, sued NLCD for the right to retain her home. The case was heard by the United States Supreme Court. Kelo lost her case.

In the wake of the Kelo vs. New London decision looms a threat to every property owner in Indiana. Your local government can force you to sell your property to a private body. Unless, that is, Gov. Daniels and the Indiana state legislature take the necessary steps to prevent it.

Or, as Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said, “The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.”

On August 10th, your voice can help change that..

National ID cards have more than Australians concerned

2005-07-17T21:20:00.000-07:00

by Kenn Gividen
HillarysVillage.com

Fearful that terrorists will next target Australia, Prime Minister John Howard broke the silence this week. He reopened the debate on issuing mandated national ID cards.

Those who live topside and think that internal political decisions made down under will have little bearing on our lives, should think again.

A national ID system in Australia will do more than raid that nation of personal liberty. It will set a precedent to be followed by the rest of the world.

So what's the big deal?

Once the national ID card is adopted in Australia, its effectiveness in curbing terrorism, illegal immigration and host of other social ills will be realized. That will make for an easy sell to Americans, Europeans and others weary of what ails society. The national ID will be seen as a quick fix.

The logical progression will lead to an international interlink between nations. An international ID card will be established. Then, to thwart card theft, the business-card sized documents will be replaced with permanent IDs: computer chips implanted in the hand (for convenience) and the forehead (for permanence).

Once established, implanted IDs will lend themselves for other conveniences, such as biotechnical debit cards and health histories.

So long to liberty

Implanted IDs will be effective. They will do wonders to end terrorism, tax evasion, kidnapping, money laundering and even purse snatching. With the exception of the cumbersome act of bartering, implanted IDs will be required for commerce of any kind. No ID implant? No buying and no selling.

While international IDs will provide a panache of benifits, they will also end personal liberty as we know it. And that, many believe, will be a fair exchange.

End of national sovereignty

The move toward internationalism is not new. What is new is a report issued recently by the Council on Foreign Relations. Like John Howard's quest to fend off terrorism, the CFR says terrorism can be held at bay if the Americas will form a coalition similar to the European Union.

Called "Building a North American Community," the plan calls for a "community" (rather than "union") of nations. It also mandates that national borders be replaced with "common perimeters".

Those who believe Americans would never agree to such a blantant abandon of national sovereignty will be surprised to know that conversative Republican George W. Bush has already agreed to the plan. Along with Mexican president Vincent Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, Bush committed the government to the CFR plan on March 23, 2005. That, you will remember, is that date that Bush, Fox and Martin met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas.

What a plan!

In addition to effectively erasing national borders, the plan calls for American taxpayers to provide the following:

• "Long-term loans in pesos" to shore up Mexico's economy
• A North American Investment Fund to send U.S. private capital to Mexico.
• A "permanent tribunal [ie, court] for North American dispute resolution." (And you thought the Supreme Court's decisions were painful.)
• "Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." That is, illegal immigrants living in the United States and will benefit from the Social Security system, a virtual guarantee of the its collapse.
• A fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges.

The move in Australia to impose a national ID system on that nation's citizens will get little press attention in America, Europe or elsewhere. But once affected and proven effective, Australia's national ID program will be one more step toward internationalism, the demise of national sovereignty and an end to personal liberty.

And it's all sold as an antidote for terrorism.

Most Recent Comments

2005-07-14T19:56:00.000-07:00

People say — and do — the dumbest things

2005-07-07T17:32:00.000-07:00

When Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Spector exercised his right to free speech last week, he prompted a quick response from Robert Bork. Known for being the first Supreme Court Justice nominee to be, well, “borked,” the judge was in no mood for Spector’s silliness. “I know Specter,” he retorted, “and the truth is not in him.”

What prompted Bork’s remark was the Senator’s suggestion — make that accusation — that the judge “had original intent, and if his original intent stood, we’d still be segregating the United States Senate with African Americans on one side and Caucasians on the other side.”

Both remarks were made Sunday on CNN’s Late Edition.

That Spector’s right to free speech is a highly valued freedom is without question. But the right to speak freely falls short of excusing some of the asinine excesses and down right abuses that often accompany that freedom.

It’s one of the minor discombobulations of living in a free society. People have the right to say — and do — dumb things. And they exercise that freedom liberally.

Columnist Morton Marcus, for example, may have out-trumped Spector. While musing in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s recent eminent domain decision, he wrote that private property is “a privilege conferred by the government.” That, of course, would have come as a shock to the founders of our nation whose sacrifices provided the framework for private ownership. It also irked Ross Bell, a Wayne County Libertarian. In response to Marcus opinion, Bell quipped, “Welcome to the USSA.”

Then there was the incident at the University of Georgia’s School of Journalism, reported in the Athens Banner-Herarld.

John Soloski’s expressed concern for a co-worker’s safety — coupled with a compliment for her appearance — got him in hot water for sexual harassment. The compliment on his part turned to a complaint on her part and Soloski was found guilty. At the time, she didn’t act offended, he claimed. Soloski is the school’s dean.

Another recent abuse of free speech occurred in Victorville, California.

Bethany Hauf, a 34-year student at the local community college, requested permission to write a term paper. The subject? The effect of Christianity on the development of the United States. Her professor, apparently unacquainted with free speech or common sense, granted permission. But he added one stipulation: “No mention of big ‘G’ gods, i.e., one, true god argumentation.”

The professor, it seems, feared other students would be offended at the mere mention of a “big ‘G’ god.” Common sense prevailed. Hauf ignored the nutty professor and mentioned God 41 times. She received an F. The professor received a law suit, compliments of American Center for Law and Justice. The story was reported in The Daily Press.

More insanity was seen in nearby Long Beach, California. According to The Los Angeles Times, a representative of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) voiced his objection to the Aquarium of the Pacific's cafeteria offering fish. "Serving fish at an aquarium is like serving poodle burgers at a dog show,” he said.

Speaking of animal rights, silliness isn’t uniquely American. The French have their own share of curious folk. According to AFP reports, Jacques Peyrat, the mayor of the Riviera city Nice, was accused of being cruel towards the rat he killed last week.

The report noted that Peyrat was visiting a trash collection area in Nice’s historic center when he spotted “a rat almost as big as a cat.” He grabbed a shovel and brought it down on the rodent, killing it.

France’s Society for the Protection of Animals (SPA) has lodged a criminal complaint against the Mayor. The report quoted SPA’s regional chief as saying, “A huge rat-clearing operation is necessary, but nothing justifies going off on a punitive expedition against these animals, which are attracted to the trash cans left out at night in the Old City by restaurants.”

But most noticeable is the good ol’ boy from Tennessee who is expressing his right to free speech by toting a Confederate Battle Flag across Dixie. H.K. Edgerton’s 1,300-mile odyssey is designed to draw attention to southern heritage. He plans to march all the way to Texas.

Upon entering Marysville, Tennessee, Edgerton took time to lambaste the flag-banning school board for practicing what he termed “cultural genocide” that is dividing blacks and whites, according to the Marysville Daily Times.

“I’m just an ordinary country boy from the South who loves the Southland,” he added. Edgerton, by the way, is black. And that causes one to wonder if he would agree that Arlen Spector’s attack on Robert Bork was, indeed, out of line.

Privatization will work well in Indiana

2005-06-08T00:57:00.000-07:00

by Kenn Gividen

Barely five months into his term in office, and Gov. Mitch Daniels has already reneged on a key campaign promise. “Buy Indiana,” he said, and “sell Indiana." Daniels made a commitment to voters that their tax dollars would go to Hoosier-based businesses. But the administration has signed a contract to send $258 million to Philadelphia.

Now, I’m not complaining. The governor’s decision to get the best deal for Indiana taxpayers is a wise move. It’s the campaign promise that was wrong. Furthermore, Daniel’s decision to privatize food services for the state’s prison system is also a wise move.

The recipient of our $258 million is Aramark Correctional Services. The contract extends for ten years, even though state law only allows for a four-year contract. The option is open to sign for the additional years.

The governor would be well advised to continue his move toward privatization of government services. It’s good for the state. Here’s why.

• Privatize Indiana’s Prison System

By privatizing Indiana’s prison system, the state would not only save taxpayers millions of dollars — about $5 per prisoner per day — but would provide quality service to the state’s inmates. Besides the economic advantage, the privatization of Indiana’s prisons has proven to be a legally and politically feasible management option.

And Daniels is moving in that direction. Privatizing the New Castle Correctional Facility is on his agenda. He’s on the right track.

Also boding well for privatization of Indiana’s prison system is the fact that the state’s correction commissioner, J. David Donahue, is a former vice president of the industry’s premier contractor, U.S. Corrections Corp.

• Privatizing Police Departments

The privatization of law enforcement may challenge the sensitivities of those who presume public safety is an inherent responsibility of state and local governments. And it is.

But when augmented by private policing, government law enforcement is not diminished. It is enhanced.

Fifty neighborhoods in the South-East of England, for example, are paying for private security patrols. The cost? About $550 per year per residence. Granted, the neighborhoods tend to be among the wealthiest in Britain, but their investment relieves over-worked government police. More importantly, the private police are successful in catching burglars. One area covering 300 homes in north London claims to have cut crime by 65 percent.

While private police patrols tend to serve Indiana’s wealthiest neighborhoods, high crime areas benefit as well. Private police help ease the workload of government police departments. And that, in turn, allows them to focus their efforts on crime-ridden neighborhoods.

• Privatizing Government Schools

Government education is single largest entitlement program in Indiana. When including the cost of higher education, it consumes about 51 percent of the state's budget.

Fully privatizing all schools in Indiana would be monumental, if not impossible. But converting our institutions to charter schools is a plausible concept worth considering.

To qualify for the charter, each school must meet basic requirements. These include academic standards and adequate facilities. Each school will be given $4,500 per student enrolled. Parents will have the freedom to enroll their children in any school. Schools with high academic achievement, safety and discipline will attract more students and, consequently, more dollars. School that lag behind will be forced to improve or simply close.

Here’s how it will be accomplished.

Each charter school in Indiana will be controlled by the parents of the children who attend that school. Parents will elect a Board of Trustees who will manage the school. The trustees will perform management duties, including hiring staff, arranging for facilities and other business functions.

Secondary schools will include one student on the Board of Trustees. Parents, then, will have the freedom to select curriculum that is most effective.School corporations and school boards will be eliminated. These levels of bureaucracy will no longer be needed. Indiana taxpayers will save millions. Students will benefit as their parents choose schools based on academic needs rather than government mandate.

Not all government institutions can be privatized. Nor should the be.

The thought of turning Indiana’s judicial system over to judges-for-hire, for example, is senseless, not to mention illegal. But most, if not all, of the state’s government services could be privatized. Not only would government become more efficient, but the cost to taxpayers would decrease dramatically.

The move toward privatization, of course, will require Hoosiers to think outside the proverbial box. But the state’s financial pressures and political climate may be paving the way for the economic efficiency it affords.

Liberals lose grip on media, but not humor

2005-04-26T05:36:00.000-07:00

by Kenn Gividen
Libertarian Writers' Bureau

Thank goodness for liberals.

The never-ending exploits of attention-starved left-wingers provide some amusing insights into that peculiar wasteland called liberal thought. Their meanderings are chucked full of unadulterated entertainment value. In fact, if it weren’t for their selfless contributions to political dialog, the rest of us may be bored into oblivion.

Such was not always the case.

During the golden age of liberal media domination, the likes of Wally C (e.g., Walter Cronkite) routinely saturated our minds with such doldrums as a game called “stack the panel with liberals.” The only entertainment value in those days was the corny magic trick in which left-leaning pundits would open their mouths and (wah lah!) their brains would disappear.

Today, a mere glimmering remnant of those nostalgic times lingers in the form of PBS, where Charlie Rose bores the socks off both his viewers at taxpayers’ expense.

But, alas, these advocates of big-government solutions to what ails us can no longer boast dominance of the network news media. Fox News, The Drudge Report, the former MSNBC and a host of other middle-of-the-road enterprises have wrenched public dialog out of the hands of the major networks. Consequently, the big-government left is, uh, left with no option but to seek alternate means of communicating their opinions.

(By the way: How long is CNN going to hang in there? Good grief. Die already!)

Not to worry. Although their monopoly of major news outlets is as passe' as Rona Barrett's 1970s harido, liberals still manage to get their share of media attention. And you gotta hand it to these guys. They are creative. Just take a look at their latest antics.

• Throw pies

Columnist Ann Coulter recently took a pie in the face while speaking at the University of Arizona. David Horowitz got smacked at Butler University in April, yet still had the presence of mind to call his attackers “fascists.” (Tell ‘em, Dave.) Conservative icon Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, was assaulted a few days earlier by a pie-tosser at Earlham College in Richmond, Ind.

Pie-pumping liberalism has become an epidemic. I don’t know about you, but I’m impressed with their savvy and cunning! And you’ll have to admit, a pie in the face does make more sense than Al Franken.

• Blow whistles

When challenged by free-speechers, liberal protesters often counter with their own brand of free speech: shrill whistle blowing. Yep. There’s nothin’ gonna convince me to save baby whales any more than a few screeching, stringy-haired, whistle-blowing kooks.

When volunteers for the Minuteman Project (that’s two dozen Americans trying to stop 2 million Mexicans from crossing the nation’s border) gathered their supporters at a rally in Tuscon, Ariz., a slew of left-leaning protestors showed up and not only blew whistles, but banged on pots and pans!

They shoulda sent the pan bangers to the border. That'd scare 'em away!

• Throw paint on people

OK, here’s a trick question. There are two people walking down the street. One is a middle-aged woman wearing a fur coat. The other is a burly Hell’s Angel-type clad in a genuine, cowhide leather motorcycle jacket. An animal-rights nut is going to protest animal-skin garments by dousing one of the offenders with a can of red paint. Which one will he choose? Hmmmm.

Then there was the incident in March when Colombia's Vice-President Santos was attacked by a paint-tossing maniac who (and I’m only guessing here) didn’t care for VP’s speech.

• Being downright rude

Here’s a convincing strategy. Most of us remember watching John Stossel on ABC’S 20/20 when the reporter was asked by three college girls at Brown University to leave their campus. Though the threesome was clearly speaking in behalf of the rest of the 6.4 billion people on planet earth, Stossel ignored their demands and continued with his interview. He then included a few video shots the obnoxious students on his nationwide television program.

And the left-wing hecklers who shouted obscentities at Ann Coulter while she spoke at St. Thomas College this week made their point perfectly clear: These people really don't like Ann Coulter.

So what is it the political left? Why do they stoop to such odd behavior?

Could it be they are frustrated that they no longer dominate the media? Are they frustrated that, when forced to weigh in equally with non-liberals, they always look like idiots? (You have seen Hannity and Colmes; right?)

Could it be they are so stupid they don’t even know they are stupid? (Now there’s a thought). One never knows what’s going through their minds — if anything.

Next week: The Limbaughnic Plague — How Republicans pretend to be advocates for sane government.

Restricting cold remedies won't remedy meth crisis

2005-04-24T04:09:00.000-07:00

By Kenn Gividen
Sheri Conover Sharlow contributed to this article

Indiana police shut down 1,549 methamphetamine labs in 2004. Law enforcement estimates that for every meth lab discovered, another eight to 10 go undetected.

Conclusion? There are 12,392 to 15,490 methamphetamine labs in Indiana. Considering Indiana's population is just over 6 million, that's one meth lab for every 387 to 484 Hoosiers.

During my 12 years as a Baptist pastor, I learned the serious consequences of drug abuse and narcotic trafficking. One drug-dealing father confided that he was attempting to “help his son” get arrested for dealing. Once in prison, his son could earn enough from selling narcotics to retire upon his release.

That drug trafficking is a state crisis is indisputable. That the Republicans are clueless in finding a remedy is equally indisputable.

• Why are Methamphetamines so popular?

"An investment of a few hundred dollars in over-the-counter medications and chemicals can produce thousands of dollars worth of methamphetamine," Indiana GOP chairman, Jim Kittle, Jr. said on the state Republican Party’s Web site.

"There is no way to overstate the damage this drug is doing,” Gov. Mitch Daniels said recently. “And as far as I am concerned, there is no way to overreact. There is no step too strong to take in combating it."

• No step too strong?

Daniels wants to place medications containing ephedrine and pseudoephedrine behind the counter (Senate Bill 444). These ingredients, found in many over-the-counter cold medicines, are used to make meth.

Kittle cites a similar effort in Oklahoma that reduced meth-lab arrests by more than 50 percent. It’s not as astonishing as it seems. A similar success rate in Indiana would reduce meth labs from one per 387 Hoosiers to one per 774 Hoosiers. Meth would still be readily available.

To justify the program, Kittle noted that "The overall cost of methamphetamine costs the state an estimated $100 million dollars a year in law enforcement, corrections, child services, and
environmental cleanup."

• The problem with meth

While Daniels’ solution is shortsighted and expensive, his concern is valid.

According to drugabuse.gov, “The methamphetamine user experiences an intense sensation, called a 'rush' or 'flash,' that lasts only a few minutes and is described as extremely pleasurable.” Meth users also experience euphoria, hyperactivity, and invulnerability. The thought of “invulnerable” meth users barreling down the interstate at the proposed 70 mph speed limit causes great concern.

In exchange for the short-lived high, meth users may encounter irreversible damage to blood vessels in the brain, producing strokes. Other effects include respiratory problems, irregular heartbeat and extreme anorexia. Its use can
result in cardiovascular collapse and death.

• The new law won't work

So give the governor credit for his concern. But there are more effective — and less expensive — solutions than tossing another 1,500 meth-makers in the slammer. And without forcing miserable cold-sufferers to needlessly stand in long lines for relief.

First, the market is answering the problem. Pfizer, which makes Sudafed, switched in January to its pseudoephedrine-free formula sold in Europe. It cannot be used to make meth. Pfizer wanted to regain profits lost to non-pseudoephedrine products while it removed the stigma from Sudafed.

Addicts won’t steal reformulated Sudafed. Stores will stock meth-proof medications because they make more money on goods that aren’t stolen. Other drug companies will follow Pfizer’s lead to compete. Second, closing down small meth labs will not necessarily reduce methamphetamine abuse.

While the number of meth labs in Okalahoma decreased by 50 percent, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Web site reported that crystal methamphetamine use is growing. Meth traffic from Mexico is filling the void in Oklahoma. Rather than reduce drug abuse, restrictions tend to boost the price and profitability of illegal drugs. Mexican traffickers happily cashed in.

• Federal law proposed

Predictably, Washington politicians want credit for stopping a scourge. Congressional legislation, introduced by Sens. Jim Talent (R-Mo.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), is modeled after Oklahoma's law. Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) introduced a similar House bill.

If passed, there will be fewer illegal meth labs, just like in Oklahoma. And, just like in Oklahoma, lower supply will raise profits and attract drug lords. This ineffective bill would make Indiana’s ineffective bill redundant. But that’s meaningless to Hoosier politicians. They can brag that they cared first.

Why Christian and atheist libertarians get along

2005-04-11T19:40:00.000-07:00

I’m the most religious guy in the Libertarian Party. At least that’s what my friend, Charlie, decided. I don’t know if his bit of insight was meant to be a compliment or a mere observation. Either way, I suppose there are others more deserving.

For his part, Charlie is a declared atheist. And, therein lays a dilemma for some libertarians. How can I — a certified, card-carrying Bible thumper — stand shoulder to shoulder with a guy who’s never thumped a Bible in his life?

In spite of ourselves

One may assume there is a détente in which the discussion of religion is avoided like a trip to the dentist. One would be wrong. I find few things more intellectually stimulating than a lively spat with a well-informed atheist — particularly when feeble attempts are made to defend the untenable; eg, evolution.

Or, one may assume there is a level of irreconcilable toleration. Not so. Some of the best Christians I know are atheists. By that, I mean, atheists usually surpass Christians in areas such as morality, decency and human kindness. I don’t tolerate these people. I like them. I enjoy their company. I’d rather hang out with a crowd of honest atheists than a church full of back-stabbing Baptists any day of the week, including Sunday.

So why do libertarian Christians and atheists get along?

Exclusion doesn’t work

The answer can be found in the word, “inclusion.” Think about it.

When Protestants control a government – say Northern Ireland, for example – Catholics and other non-Protestants have a tough way to go. And when Catholics take charge – as in Ireland – Protestants find themselves on the outside looking in.

Come to think of it, when any religious group takes control, all others face dire consequences. Consider the history of England. Bloody Mary had at least 275 Protestants burned at the stake (including the Archbishop of Canterbury) during her brief five-year term as Queen of England. A century later, Protestant Elizabeth I was executing Catholics. For their part, Muslims have a history of killing both Protestants and Catholics, not to mention Jews.

Life, some think, would be simpler — if not safer — if no religious sect controlled government. Let’s put atheists in charge, they say. That would end sectarian bloodletting.

The inherent problem with atheists at the helm of government can be seen by recounting life under the rule of French atheist Maximilien Robespierre. More than a century after Queen Elizabeth executed Catholics, and 200 years after Bloody Mary was being bloody, Robespierre was sending thousands to the guillotine. The atheistic government of Joseph Stalin killed millions and Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge slaughtered hundreds of thousands.

Protestants, Catholics, Muslims and atheists have one thing in common: When any sectarian group controls government, people die. Yet that was the norm of world history until the 17th century.

A place at the table

Perhaps the most momentous day in American history was February 5, 1631 when a free-thinking British preacher named Roger Williams alit from a ship in Boston’s harbor.
Williams purchased land from the Indians and founded a community that became Rhode Island. Unlike the other colonies, Rhode Island separated civil and ecclesiastical governments. No sect would control government. Rather, all would have a place at the table.

Williams’ philosophy of religious liberty was perceived to be an invitation to disaster. But the anticipated quarreling among the sects never materialized. In fact, the arrangement resulted in religious harmony. No religious institution felt threatened by any other, for all were free to believe (or not believe) as they pleased. There was no reason to burn your neighbors at the stake for having too many holes in their sleeves.

And that takes us back to the original question.

Why do Libertarians — Christians, atheists and other sectarians — manage to get along? The answer is simple. Like Williams, we understand the principle of inclusion. Everyone has a place at the table.
And so, I can relish the thought of being the most religious guy in the Libertarian Party without fear of Charlie sending me to the gulag. Erstwhile, my Christian friends will continue to call me the most libertarian guy in the Baptist church.

###

Read Kenn's quotes at KennGividen.com

10 Steps to MLM Success

2005-03-13T20:43:00.000-08:00

by Kenn Gividen
KennGividen@writersbureau.org

First, here’s my tip of the day: There are proverbs etched on the bellies of those statues on Easter Island. And one of ‘em is: He who laughs at your stupid jokes is up to no good. (Remember that next time you go on a date.)

Now for the story: Markel didn’t want me to be left out of his latest ground floor business opportunity — something called MoDough, Inc. — that’s been around since the serpent in Mel Gibson’s movie conned Eve.

So we showed up at Denny’s restaurant where a room full of glassy-eyed goofballs were pretending to be sharp business people. It reminded me of another Easter Island etching “Being doted on by a crowd of annoying scamsters is not a good thing.” That’s when I asked Markel if this was some kind of weird used-car salesmen cult. The whole room roared with laughter evoking eerie images of ugly statues.

The Chief Scamster arose to click his Power Point presentation about the time my Tex-Mex Chicken-in-a-Bagel Skillet arrived. Before he found MoDough, this guy said he lived on the edge of bankruptcy in a roach-infested trailer park. Now he lives in a 39-room, 4,000 square foot home on a lake. Geez, I thought, I wonder if that’s the same apartment building where Uncle Alfred lives?

All you need do is enroll eight people, he said while flailing his arms with help-I’m-being-attacked-by-a-swarm-of-wasps enthusiasm. “If you enroll eight people this week who enroll eight people who enroll eight people, in eleven short weeks all 6.4 billion inhabitants of the earth will be in your down line and an extra 2 billion from some unknown galaxy, including Madonna.”

How could I refuse?

$29.95 buys my own business. “That’s less than a McDonald franchise,” he added.

For that I get the privilege to annoy my friends with a catalog full of Ward and June Cleaver-looking models using over-priced detergent, vitamins and cosmetics in concentrate. And it comes in a handsome binder.

“Any questions?” he asked.

Silence.

“There are no stupid questions,” he added. (He’s never met Uncle Alfred.)

I like a challenge. So I asked, “If chickens don’t have noses, where do they keep their boogers?”

The woman across the table, named Hannibal-Lector-in-a-Dress, nodded. “Good question,” she said, “I’ve always wondered that myself.”

“And what if I buy this stuff and find out its crap?”

The group chuckled at my naiveté.

“I cut my arm off a year ago and took some of these here vitamins,” one guy testified. “And whaddaya know?! My arm grew back. Hairs and all.”

Chief Scamster then told how to make the big bucks roll in.

First, be your own best customer. Dump all your cleaning supplies, laundry detergent and cosmetics in the trash and replace them with overpriced concentrate — it's a sure sign of financial genius, he explained. It proves you believe in your product.

Second, make a list of everyone you want to annoy. This includes friends, family, coworkers and everyone in the white pages from the three nearest towns.

Third, systematically annoy everyone on your list. Invite them out to dinner where they, too, can be immersed in a crowd of glassy-eyed, goofy-looking scamsters.

Fourth, act giddy. Phony enthusiasm is a proven sales gimmick, especially when coupled with idiotic product testimonials.

Fifth, emphasize the success potential by pointing out the vast number of gullible people who think they are all destined to be pyramid millionaires.

Sixth, encourage your friends to quit their jobs and work part time for a six-figure income. (Don’t tell them that four of the six digits are to the right of the decimal.)

Seventh, never use the words “multi-level marketing” because someone may get the idea that your multi-level marketing scheme is a multi-level marketing scheme.

Eighth, project the image of success by buying a new Lexus. Getting in debt up to your glassy eyeballs is a tried-and-proven sales strategy.

Ninth, just think of all the stuff you can deduct from your income taxes, like one eighth of your bedroom if you use the corner for a home-office. Yes sir, you can pave your road to riches by wasting long hours for a tiny tax deduction.

Tenth, stay motivated by squandering an obscene amount of money on motivational tapes and CDs. Someday, when you hit the big time, you, too, can screw your down line out of thousands of dollars.

Next week. How to retire early buying lottery tickets.

###

HOW TO DATE ANN COULTER (IF YOU MUST)

2005-03-02T01:46:00.000-08:00

by Kenn Gividen
KennGividen@WritersBureau.org

I’ve decided to go public with my intentions: I will not be asking Ann Coulter for a date. There are some good reasons.

First, I’m married. Second, there is a substantial age differential. And, third, I fear rejection.

While reading Coulter’s book, How to Talk to Liberals (If You Must), I thought about the prospects.

A single, middle-aged guy who’s still trying to look like he’s in his 20s would make a perfect match. But before you pick up the phone to pop the question, there are some things you need to know.

Keep in mind, for example, that Ann Coulter is relatively good looking. “Relative to what?” you ask. “A ’58 Buick? Tapioca? Phyllis Schlafly?"

Yes.

You’ll also want to know that Coulter was born and raised in the Bubba Belt. That’s important. Not because she’s Ann Coulter, but because it’s a date. Any guy who’s opened the door for feminist, been called a chauvinist and then jabbed with an upper right (knee) knows all about this. Coulter is no feminist. You will open the door for her. And if you don’t, you may get jabbed with an upper right.

And that brings me to another announcement. Thursday, April 1, all the women of the world are to meet in my living room. If you are a feminist, you will be tattooed with an X on your forehead. If you are not a feminist, you will be marked with an O. That will end door-opening offenses for women and considerable pain for men.

Back to our date with Coulter.

You will pick her up at her stylish Washington, D.C. apartment, say, 5ish. When you first see the flow of long blond hair covering the left-side of her face [see photo here], you may want to raise your eyebrows twice. That’s body language. It means “hubba-hubba” in Bubbaland. However, the significance of the left-face covering should not be noticed. Just gaze into her gorgeous right eyeball.

The preferred date for the evening will be the NBA game. The Indiana Pacers will be playing the Detroit Bullets-oops-Pistons. Granted, it’s an unlikely event in Washington, but this is an imaginary date. Don’t get excited.

Small talk in route to the event will be in order. You will notice Coulter loves words that no one can use or understand, except for her and William F. Buckley, Jr. The most common is “felonious.” According the dictionary.com, the word is defined as “adj., relating to anyone Ann Coulter finds disagreeable.”

It also works well in titles. There was Alexander the Great, Richard the Lionhearted and, according the Coulter, Bill Clinton the Felonious Liar.

Sitting somewhere in the arena will be interesting. Coulter will glare with her right eye at the massive structure and lament that its lugubrious bathos was built with lachrymose tax dollars by schadenfreude liberals; all words found on pages 128 and 129 of her book.

Not to worry. Excuse yourself during the first fight and go to the gift shop in the lobby. You’ll want to buy a voice-activated electronic dictionary with a LCD screen. There is no gift shop, but there is the hair-coming-out-his-nose hotdog stand guy and — just your luck — he’s still got a few electronic dictionaries for $14.95; $16.95 with mustard.

Back in the stands, you can now understand Coulter. Contretemps, you learn, means, affliction; epiphanic means something akin to religious, and @#%&* (page 309) means Hillary’s serious about running for president.

Wise guy that you are, you’ll want to have a bit of humor ready when the Pacers and Pistons square off in row 12. While Artest is punching an epiphanic (page 105) fan in the nose, you will turn and look Coulter in the eye and quip, “Geez, I didn’t know these guys could play hockey!!”

If she sniggles (not in her book), you’ve made a hit. If she rambles on about why white hockey players don’t get fined for fighting because they’re, uh, white, then you’ve got a ways to go.

With the game over, it’s time to escort Coulter to a fine dining establishment. At your date’s behest, you mark Ben and Jerry’s off the list. Chinese sounds good and if you can’t understand your waiter, does it matter? You can’t understand your date, either.

The conversation turns to politics. (Who woulda known.) Coulter’s right eye gleams as she rants about feminist cornpones (page 235), gun owners’ rights and the need to squarsh the IRS like a bug. So far so good. You decide you may have met your match.

But then you bring up civil liberties and Coulter tussles her hair and – gasp! – she has a left eye after all. Her right eye now covered, she goes apoplectic over the smarminess of the war on drugs (pages 246 and 44.) “It’s not about drugs,” you explain. “It’s about personal rights.”

Her left eye glares.

“You know,” you add, “like the Patriot Act.”

Her left eye bugs out.

Enough is enough, you decide. Noting the O tattooed on her forehead, you get to pick up the tab. And the tip.

The evening ends when you walk Coulter to the door of her crib and give her a friendly kiss her on her tattoo. “No wonder,” you surmise, “the Libertarians in Connecticut didn’t want her on their ticket.”

Your conclusion is ineluctable (page 30.)

F.A.M.I.L.I.E.S.

2005-02-28T18:28:00.000-08:00

There is a revolutionary new social program that I think may work. It's called Fathers and Mothers in Love Inevitably Enhance Society (or F.A M.I.L.I.E.S). It is comprised of (a) a father, (b) a mother, (c) children and (d) optional dog.

The program works like this: The person most qualified to earn income (usually the father) assumes the primary responsibility for that function. The person most qualified for bearing children (usually the mother) assumes that function. Fathers participate in the nurturing process while mothers are encouraged to participate in earning income as secondary roles. As children mature, particularly into adolescence stages, they also participate in bringing income into the household assist in the nurturing process of younger siblings.

Fathers and mothers share the responsibility for managing the household finances, while teaching their children the intricacies of the same. Housework, called “chores,” is also shared by family members. Mothers and daughters, for example, may want to assume surface maintenance, such as vacuuming and laundry, while fathers and sons provide technical maintenance, heavy labor and lawn care.

In the F.A.M.I.L.I.E.S. program Fathers and mothers are primary teachers with lessons in reading, writing and arithmetic. They also teach good manners and practical living skills. Parents may consider the option of farming the siblings out to government schools where they can also learn social graces (such as smuggery, swearing and petty theft).

Parents are advised to set aside ten percent of their incomes, or more, for unforeseen emergencies and retirement. As children enter the adult phases of their lives, parents may opt to provide temporary financial assistance while their offspring establish their own F.A.M.I.L.I.E.S. In addition, parents should prepare to meet the needs of their parents (called “grandparents”) as needed.

Parents are encouraged to learn roles of their mate, in the unlikely event that one dies, becomes infirm or incapacitated.

It is suggested the government — on all levels — resist the temptation to tamper with the F.A.M.I.L.I.E.S. program, lest their good intentions roil the waters of effective functionality.

Alternate arrangements should also be discouraged. One father with multiple mother arrangements, for example, tend to fail as do commune-style arrangements where fathers and mothers intermingle. Father and father or mother and mother arrangements also do not work.

###

From the book, Late Great United States, by Kenn Gividen

Why Democrats Lose Elections: They aren't dumb. They're asleep.

2005-01-29T04:23:00.000-08:00

Give the GOP credit. Unlike the Democrats — whose collective IQ seems to register somewhere between a ’58 Buick and box of rocks — the Republicans are astutely aware of their political surroundings. That’s why they win and Democrats don’t.

In reality, the Democrats aren’t dumb.

Anyone who was privileged to bask in the presence of former Gov. Joe Kernan know him as a passionate leader who truly cared for Hoosiers. The sharp mind of former Democratic Party State Chair Kip Tew was an asset to the party. And former Lt. Kathy Gov. Davis was bright, witty, and personable. In short, they were a class act.

No, the Democrats aren’t dumb. They’re asleep.

The GOP, by contrast, paid close attention to the elections in 2003 when Libertarian Greg Dixon took nearly 15 percent of the vote in his bid for Indianapolis City Council. That put a sizeable ding in the confidence of his Republican challenger. More bothersome was the fact that Libertarians proved they could plan and execute an effective campaign. The GOP took note. The Democrats snoozed.

That same year the Libertarians’ candidate for mayor in Carmel snatched nearly 25 percent of the vote from the Republican incumbent. That was no small task, considering Hamilton County is a bastion of Republicanism. In nearby Noblesville, the GOP saw over 40 percent of its vote go to Libertarians in two of their City Council races. In Wayne County, Susan Bell flat out squashed her Republican opponent and became the Hoosier state’s first Libertarian judge. All told, twelve Libertarians are holding office across the state.

To the ears of Republicans, the above has the ring of an alarm clock. To the Democrats it’s a lullaby.

Simply said, the GOP gets it. Indiana has three political parties. They are vulnerable. In 2004 they responded accordingly and won.

The Democrats don’t get it. One would think the party of Birch Bayh would have the good sense to exploit the Republicans' soft spot. Exploit it? They don’t even seem to know it exists.

Consider, for example, the GOP’s gubernatorial primary in May of 2004. Eric Miller, a pro-life, sun-tanned poster child for the religious right, challenged the man who would ultimately become the next governor. The Republican Party was divided. To thinking folks, that translated into vulnerability. To the Democrats — who are not thinking folks — it meant nothing.

While Democrats had no chance of snatching Miller’s followers, they did have a wide-open opportunity to send them to the Libertarian. It would have taken only 8 percent of Miller’s supporters to tilt the election in favor of Democrat Joe Kernan. But the Democrats did nothing. Snore.

The Republicans, meanwhile, did plenty.

For starters, a here-to-fore unknown PAC dumped a ton of cold cash into a direct mail campaign. The target was Joe Kernan. The benefactor was the Libertarian challenger. The result? Kernan lost votes. Those were votes the Republicans would never have captured. Nice play.

What’s more, the Republicans kept close tabs on their Libertarian opponent. Stuffing his Web site with e-mail addresses, the GOP received the Libertarian’s weekly updates. Any appeal to Miller supporters was noted and challenged. The risk of losing Miller votes was a chance they would not take. Another nice play.

The Democrats, meanwhile, were sound asleep. One Miller supporter went so far as to personally appeal to the Democrats for support. A win by Daniels, he knew, would keep Miller from running in the next election. The election returns proved the Republicans right and the Democrats to be snoozing.

Another case in point was the defeat of Democratic Congressman Baron Hill by Republican Mike Sodrel. The margin of victory was less than 2,000 votes. The Libertarian challenged garnered 4,698 votes. Had the Democrats offered the Libertarian candidate even a modest amount of support, the election would have likely tilted toward the Democrat.

The groggy-eyed Democrats, meanwhile, are outside looking in, clueless as to what happened. But who knows? Maybe between now and 2006 they’ll wake up.

Inaugural speech speaks of "chapter 49" or hints chapter 11?

2005-01-11T18:49:00.000-08:00

In his inaugural speech Monday, Gov. Mitch Daniels — Indiana's 49th
governor — referred to his new term in office as "Chapter 49." And
so, through the application of analogy, Daniels is about to pen the
pages of Indiana's continuing saga. It's a book that, so far, has
read more like a scary Stephen King novel than a fairy tale. Let's
take a look.

The last chapter — the Kernan years — found Republicans in the
Indiana Senate howling at the absurdities of liberal Democrats
running the Indiana House. In a peculiar twist of events, the GOP
managed to adopt many of the tax-and-spend policies of the Democrats.
Like the mystery of the body snatchers, real small-government
conservatives were indistinguishable from the phonies. Here are some
examples:

• Through the Skills Enhancement Fund, thousands of small businesses
were forced to contribute vicariously to larger corporations. The
redistribution of wealth received the blessings of the GOP.

• The Interstate-69 project — a gruesome diversion of $1 billion —
promises to mar some of Indiana's finest landscape. In Chapter 48 we
found the fiscally conservative Republicans cheering on the
bulldozers. Scary.

• Then, of course, there is the run-away building binge. Hundreds of
millions of property tax dollars are wasted to construct excessively
extravagant government school facilities. One high school in
Republican-stronghold Johnson County cost about $100 million. With
teachers' unions leading the charge and finance companies reaping
huge profits, the whole thing smacks of a conspiracy. Charter schools
are locked out of the equation, senior citizens are forced out of
their homes and the kids, meanwhile, are getting dumber.

• Then there is the insurance scam. The average Hoosier family will
pay $10,280 this year for health insurance, a 13 percent increase
from last year. With health insurance providers securely locked into
17 pre-determined coverage mandates, Hoosier employers can't afford
to insure their workers. Very scary.

What Indiana needs is a tough-guy hero. We need a true leader who
will have the courage and character to attack the state government's
financial burgeoning blob.

Hopefully, Chapter 49 will produce such a leader in Mitch Daniel. The
story line may read like this.

• In 2005, Daniels and his small band of remnant Republican
conservatives attack the Skills Enhancement Fund, drive a stake
through its heart and free the small business community from this
hellish nightmare.

• Meanwhile, $1 billion in federal highway dollars are rescued from
the grips of insane alien invaders. (Who else would want to build the
new terrain I-69?) Daniels returns the funds to their proper home:
Maintenance of Indiana's interstate highway system. Then, in one bold
move, our hero engages in a plan to construct express truck toll
lanes along the I-65 corridor, adding revenue to the state and safety
for motorists.

• In a stroke of genius, Chapter 49 finds Daniels proposing
legislation that would limit state funding for new school
construction projects. The law sets a limit of 160 square feet per
student in high schools. For elementary schools, the law sets the
maximum per-student square-footage requirement at 120 square feet per
student.

• The story reaches a climax when the governor allows
health-insurance providers to market less restrictive products to
employers. Thousands of Hoosiers bask in the sunlight of inexpensive
health coverage.

But that's not the end of the story.

Insane seat-belt laws are repealed, medical marijuana (gasp!) is
legalized, and legislation to end property tax is proposed. What's
more, Chapter 49 finds the state's multiple departments and agencies
posting performance data on the internet. Then, as the sun rises on
the economic horizon, Indiana's counties and municipalities are
provided with one-stop permit centers with fast track permitting
programs and are encouraged to hire ombudsmen, facilitators and
liaisons to streamline new business ventures in the Hoosier state.

But that, of course, is merely a script of how Chapter 49 could — and
should — be written by our new governor.

In reality, the Republicans, in spite of their small-government
rhetoric, are painfully similar to the Democrats. Chapter 49 will
likely be a continuing tale of cronyism, favoritism and bigger
government. And if that be the case, Indiana may have no Chapter 49.

It may be Chapter 11.

BUILDING BINGE FOR BARTHOLOMEW COUNTY MAY BE IMMENENT

2004-12-21T22:55:00.000-08:00

OPINION

Maybe it's coincidence.

But the increase in volume of Irwin Financial Corporation's stock suggests that savvy investors know something. Rarely do more than 75,000 shares of IFC trade in a given session. But December 17th saw 314,000 shares trade hands. That’s the highest one-day volume since early May when the school board election season drew to a close. The following two sessions, December 20th and 21st also saw the stock trade at high volumes: 276,200 and 211,200 respectively.

Granted, the increased interest could be a reflection of the market’s end-of-the-year rally (volume on the Dow also spiked on the 17th). And it could be investors simply think IFC is a good buy. After all, a P/E ratio of 11.79 ain’t bad. But, considering the stock’s price has added 10 percent in value from December 8th to December 21st suggests, again, that savvy investors know something.

SO WHAT’S IN STORE?

Could it be that insiders know a new building program is in the works? Is it time for a new elementary school? High school? Jail? Senior center? Parking garage? All the above?

For answers, consider that The Republic turned the community’s attention toward more government — excuse me, “public” — construction projects this week. When added to an increase in IFC’s stock price and volume, that could suggest that we are, indeed, facing another building binge.

READING BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC’S LINES

On Sunday, December 19th, The Republic puffed a number of key personalities and Monday’s edition took fiscal conservatives to task for repelling the $115-million building project a few years ago. One has to wonder if the newspaper is softening the community for another building binge, or are they simply applying common-sense, community-pulse reporting. We would hope the latter. But either way, Monday’s front-page article offered insight into the thinking of community leaders.

Quoting Commissioner Paul Franke, the Republic said, “You could say that taxpayers, or a certain group, felt like they had reached the limit with the remonstrance on the school.”

In another example, The Republic quoted the mayor as saying “You have to build something before they will come.”

Such logic works in movies, but not real world economics. Anyone who compared the economy of Hong Kong to that of China in that last decade can clearly see why. Hong Kong’s building spree was driven by enterprise, while Beijing tried to drive its economy by building vast wastelands of perennial empty government-sponsored industrial parks.

China has since learned its lesson and is enjoying the blessings of a market driven (as opposed to government-construction driven) economy. Political and business leaders in Bartholomew County haven’t caught on. Will they ever?

Residual terrorism takes toll in Indiana

2004-12-05T09:57:00.000-08:00

Residual terrorism takes toll in Indiana
by Kenn Gividen

Terrorist activity in Indiana continues to wreak havoc and no one seems to care. The reason, no doubt, is that only overt acts of terrorism demand headlines. Few realize that the lingering after-effects often cause more damage than initial strikes.

I call it residual terrorism. It’s the destruction caused by vicious acts of violence long after the first hit. What makes residual terrorism damaging to Indiana is not the mindless acts of bomb-toting religious zealots or anti-government extremists with a grudge. Rather, it’s the dimwitted reaction — dare I say complicity — of our own policy makers.

• Brain drain at Indiana Universities

Consider, for example, the toll residual terrorism is taking on higher education in Indiana.

Foreign students, once welcomed to Hoosier campuses, are finding it more difficult to get visas. The loss to our state is more than financial. The loss of intellectual capital, caused by excluding the finest scholars from across the globe, is incalculable. One report cites a 14 percent decline in foreign students applying to Indiana University’s undergrad programs. We also miss the opportunity to export American ideals when graduating students return home.

• Absence of the Indiana National Guard

The Indiana National Guard is our state’s first line of defense in the event of terrorist attacks. Unfortunately, many of Indiana’s finest are not in the state. They’re not even in the country.

There are currently more than 5,500 Indiana Guard and reserve troops from the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines on active duty. The Indiana National Guard’s 76th Infantry Brigade is in Afghanistan. It has assumed the responsibility for training the Afghan National Army. The Guard's 2nd Battalion, 152nd Mechanized Infantry, is in Tuzla, Bosnia.

And this week the Anderson-based A Company, 138th Signal Battalion was ordered to report to Camp Shelby in Mississippi in January.

The loss to Indiana extends beyond protection and emergency response. The export of Hoosier Guardsmen leaves gaping holes in Hoosier communities as professionals, such as business owners and physicians, are exported offshore.

Even the most dogmatic libertarians understand the need for military response to foreign attacks on our nation. But forcing the National Guard to leave their posts in Indiana for duty on foreign soil misses that mark. It falls outside the bounds of reasonable response and into the hands of our enemies, should they choose a target in Indiana.

• Wasted tax dollars

“This is unacceptable.” Those were the words to former Department of Homeland Security Secretary, Tom Ridge. The pointed sentence appeared in an open letter from Danielle Brian, Executive Director of the Project on Government Oversight.

At issue was $37.5 million in security grants to “big oil companies, such as Citgo, ConocoPhillips and ChevronTexaco,” according to Brian. “The states and their municipalities are under-funded and left vulnerable to terrorist attacks, while these mult-billion dollar, multi-national corporations reap the benefits of government security funding,” she added.

In a similar tone, David Evans, writing for Bloomberg Market, criticized Homeland Security for dolling out billions of dollars in contracts to companies whose officers serve on the department’s Security Advisory Council.

Ostensibly, the purpose of the Department of Homeland Security was to slam the door on terrorists. Instead, it has opened a floodgate of funding to anyone with the connections to tap into the federal government’s cash trough. The thought of dollars flowing from the pockets of taxpayers to the accounts of mega-corporations will not sit well with most Hoosiers. But to the terrorists, the ability to vicariously score a direct hit on your family’s pocketbook must be most satisfying.

2004/11.04 When the religious right gets it wrong

2004-11-04T20:34:00.000-08:00

Actions speak louder than words
When the religious right gets it wrong

Moral values weighed heavy in the November 2 elections. Christian conservatives vented their righteous indignation at the polls, sending left-leaning Democrats packing and handing the Indiana General Assembly to religious-friendly Republicans.

But the religious right is on the verge of losing credibility. And that, in turn, will cost them more than credence. It will likely cost elections in coming years if they don’t mend their ways.

Here’s why.

Conservative Christians are adamant in their appeal for moral values and vocally denounce America’s culture shift toward permissiveness; a trend, they say, that will lead to the ultimate destruction of our society.

But their actions betray a lack of genuine sincerity. What the religious right verbally denounces, it actively supports. If that be true — and it is — then conservative Christians are, in fact, party to the very destruction they claim to be repelling.

Here are a few examples:

• Government schools

Conservatives denounce the gay lifestyle; a philosophy that is promoted in many government schools as a normal alternative to heterosexual behavior. What’s more, virtually every government school in Indiana teaches the evolution theory as fact. Most conservatives, on the other hand, are committed creationists. And government schools routinely teach sex-education, positioning themselves to be surrogate parents.

But when the conservative Southern Baptists convened in Indianapolis this summer, they were offered a resolution to formally renounce government schools. The resolution was soundly rejected. And conservative Christians are often found at the forefront of excessive government school construction projects that needlessly waste hundreds of millions of Hoosiers' tax dollars.

• The Bush fiscal policy

The budget proposal of George W. Bush included $51 billion for the Department of Education, an exorbitant amount of money even by the standards of “liberal” Bill Clinton. The Clinton budget included $37 billion for the DOE. What’s more, the Bush administration increased its annual funding to the National Endowment for the Arts by $18 million each year.

But during the administrations of left-leaning Democrats, Christian conservatives called for end to funding the NEA and the closure of the Department of Education. Those same programs are vicariously embraced by the religious right through the president they helped elect to office.

• Governor-elect Daniels

Mitch Daniels is a quality man who will get about the business of governing the Hoosier state with the aid of transvestites and gays, according to his Web site. It’s no wonder the religious right rallied behind fundamentalist Eric Miller during the Republican primary.

But after Daniels won the primary, all but a handful of conservatives clung to the Republican fold. They supported Daniels en masse. Whether Daniel’s hiring policy is right or wrong is inconsequential to the point being offered. What is important is the double starndard of the religious right. The same conservative Christians who cried aloud for an amendment banning gay marriages helped elect the very candidate who postured himself during the election as a friend of the gay community.

• Censorship

The antics of the likes of Howard Stern rile most conservative Christians. Shock jocks, they say, are polluting the airwaves with lewd behavior and unrestrained profanity. The religious right would have them fined into oblivion by the FCC, if not banned altogether. Howard Stern in Indianapolis? Not if the religious right has its way.

But the same Christians that rail against shock jocks openly embrace the likes of Rush Limbaugh. They overlook his frequent use of profanity, occasional allusions to immoral behavior, and double entendres. Polluting the airwaves seems to be wrong, unless you’re a Republican.

The end analysis is that the religious right is not always wrong in its convictions. It’s simply that the movement fails to march to its own drummer. It denounces situational ethics, but embraces Republicans who defy the conservative agenda. Conservative Christians may have a sound moral message. But most simply don’t practice what they preach.