The American Freedom Network

Remembering Daniel Webster

March 7, 2010 – 12:10 pm

     Today is the Seventh of March.  Until the 1960s revolutionized education (for the worse, in my opinion), no course on American history would have been complete without mentioning Daniel Webster, arguably one of the 10 greatest Senators of all time.  His reputation was built to a considerable degree, not only on his skill as a legislator, but on his unmatched, both in the U.S. Senate and in American life and letters ion general, oratorical ability, in an age when such gifts were highly esteemed.  Webster had been famous since at least the “Dartmouth College Case” he argued, successfully, before the Supreme Court to save his alma mater from a hostile takeover by the New Hampshire Legislature.  So great was Sen. Webster’s reputation as an orator that, a lifetime after his passing, Stephen Vincent Benet had him win a man’s soul from the Devil in one of his stories.  His long career, which took him to the House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate, to being Secretary of State, and back to the Senate, before ending his career and life as Secretary of State once again, reached its’ climax with the speech he delivered on behalf of the Compromise of 1850 on this day.
     The Seventh of March Speech made enemies of many of his Abolitionist friends, whose leader he had been for two generations, and who idolized him for classic orations such as his Second Reply to Sen. Hayne (D-S.C.):  “Liberty and Union, Now and Forever, One and Inseparable!”  It did accomplish its’ purpose, however, in rallying moderates on both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line by giving them cover to support Henry Clay’s last great compromise, the Compromise of 1850.  The Union remained intact for another decade, until after the voices of the Compromise Generation’s great champions – Webster, Clay and John C. Calhoun – were stilled.
     It is well to remember Daniel Webster’s sacrifice of reputation and popularity in the service of America on the anniversary of this crowning achievement of his old age.
Without his effort, his reputation with his friends and supporters may have outlived America, as the Republic may not have survived a plunge into civil war a decade earlier than it ultimately did.  For this reason, Daniel Webster was included among the six Senators then-Senator John F. Kennedy chose to honor with his Profiles In Courage (a favorite read of this writer’s in his youth).  And for this reason also, Sen. Webster is remembered here, today.  Rest in Peace.

Posted in News | 1 Comment »

The Politics of Gimme

March 4, 2010 – 6:27 pm

    Protesters at campuses nationwide demanded more money be spent on them.  These ’students’ took time out of the classroom to demand their ‘right’ to a college education be funded.  Without having hard data to back it up, one can surmise that students majoring in engineering, computer science, architecture and other hard -science disciplines were not well-represented among the protesters.  While this writer, a college instructor and the father of college students, is sympathetic to the financial plight of college students, no sympathy is forthcoming for a gimme attitude that does not address the root causes of spiraling higher education costs.  These are, IMHO:
1.)  Colleges jacking up tuition because they can have students ask third parties to pay the additional cost through ‘financial aid’ in the form of grants and usorious loans.  The more ‘aid’ available, the higher the cost of college goes.
2.)  Textbook racketeering adds thousands of dollars to college attendance for filler-laden books that are obsolete as soon as the next edition is published.  No one ought to have to pay $200.00 or more for a door stop.
3.)  Junk majors that students take that will not lead to career employment flood the system with consumers who delay becoming producers while they pursue superfluous degrees in ‘Women’s Studies,’ ethnic/racial grievance studies majors, and most subjects ending in ‘-ology.’ The money spent on supporting people in these programs is largely wasted.
4.)  Unnecessary, ‘required’ classes in p.c. subjects that raise ‘awareness’ of some issue dear to an influential pressure group add to the cost and length of a degree program.
5.)  Legitimate ‘required’ classes are not always offered often enough for the average student to graduate in four years.  Students are customers, and colleges often try to keep their longer than the traditional four years by not offering classes they require often enough in order to milk another year’s tuition out of them.
6.) Colleges often get addicted to the latest and greatest technology, and practically force their students to keep up.  If their on-line courses, student self-serve webpages, et cetera require Windows XP or newer, or the university standard is MS OFfice 2007, then students who could otherwise get by with older computers and equipment have to upgrade. 
7.)  Public universities practice ‘market socialism’ by competing with each other when they open satellite campuses in each others’ back yard.  Using public money to so compete, without a true price mechanism to control supply and demand, is inefficient, as was demonstrated in the 1930s in the famous Lange-Lerner debates.  It also encourages inefficient use of tax-funded resources.
8.)  Universities spend lots of money offering remedial classes to students who are not academically prepared to be in college.  This waste of resources to do what K-12 schools did not do lengthens students’ stay in college, and with it their total expense to obtain a degree – if they ever do.

    Better approaches exist.  Lansing Community College, for example, sets its’ technology requirements low enough that anyone running Mac OS 9 or Windows 2000 can use its’ on-line resources.  Open-Source textbooks, written by professors like Dr. Preston McAfee, can be used, at no cost, in lieu of more-expensive commercial options.  (Dr. McAfee’s economics textbook is available for download at www.lulu.com.  For a small cost, they will print and ship it, or you can download a .pdf version for free.)  Students not academically prepared for college should be referred to a local adult education program. (There are also some students are not ;college material,’ and schools that enroll them do them a disservice.)  Some colleges offer ‘no frills’ curricula, often by distance education, and can save a student thousands of dollars.  Excelsior College (my alma mater) and Governors Western University are two examples of this.
      Students-protesters should be protesting the above, and not the reality of funding cuts at a time when states are releasing prisoners early, pension funds are under-funded, workers are being laid off, and virtually every other service and program is being cut.  They might also remember that a college education is not a right, but that would imply that they didn’t skip their American Government class to go out and protest…

Posted in News | 1 Comment »

Texas tea?

February 28, 2010 – 8:58 am

     A Tea Party insurgent is within striking distance of forcing a runoff in the Texas GOp primary.  Gov. perry may have to square off against a Ron Paulesque woman who talks up Austrian School economics and St. Augustine.  Debra Medina appears to be the real deal – no teleprompter or crib notes for this Texas woman.  Unlike Scott Brown, she is not a good campaigner who happens to be an establishment Republican riding the crest of voter anger to a major upset.  Ms. Medina is challenging GOP heavy-hitters Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Gov. Rick Perry for the governorship.  She does it with an unabashedly populist and libertarian mix of policy positions that dovetail nicely with core elements of Texas political character.  More than Scott Brown, this could be a game-changer, as the Tea party seeks power, rather than supporting others seeking power.  As Gov. Huckabee said when courting evangelical voters in 2008, “I don’t come to you because I come from you.”  Much the same could be said of Debra Medina. 
    Let the March madness begin with an upset in the Lone Star State!

Posted in News | No Comments »

The New Normal – Living With Less Under More Pressure

February 27, 2010 – 7:59 pm

     America’s entry into what forecaster Gerald Celente calls “The Greatest Depression” was preceded by Michigan’s falling into a one-state Slough of Despond in 2001 from which the Big Mitten has yet to recover.  As Americans come to grips with the reality of national bankruptcy and what a friend of mine calls, “The Era of Broken Promises,” we will have to adjust to living with less until the wreckage of a generation’s profligacy is dealt with.
     What does that mean for the average American?  Local governments will seek more tax revenue, either through tax increases or by nuisance taxes disguised as traffic tickets, aggressive use of civil infraction ordinances, civil forfeiture abuse, which we’ve already seen in Michigan, and stealth moves to act without public oversight.
     Both families and governments will have to live with less.  Both will seek to avoid facing this reality, because that is human nature.  Luxury item spending will hold up long after the average Joe cuts back on the basics.  Governments will remain in denial for the same reasons.  Public Choice economics, pioneered by Nobel laureate James Buchanan, explains that there is no difference between human action inside or outside of government; that is, government workers and the organizations they staff will seek to expand their reach, increase their budgets and raise their earnings, just as do private sector individuals and businesses.  Thus, the public will have to counteract the natural human tendency to delay the unpleasant by ignoring the inevitable in the arena of public spending.  (This applies to all those who depend on government for a living, not just public-sector employees; contractors will be just as resistant to having ‘their’ programs cut.)
     Citizens interested in avoiding higher taxes should consider lobbying their governments, especially at the local level, so that their representatives understand that the times require preserving only essential services, and that they are willing to do without things that previously were taken for granted.  (Which local programs that you use are you willing to give up?  Adult enrichment classes at the local high school, dial-a-ride service, street sweeping, et cetera?)  They might also push for a more radical reform of government, for example, by having county sheriffs perform all local law enforcement (which would entail consolidation of local police departments and significant cuts in staffing), enrolling all public employees in a statewide health care plan to save money, elimination of intermediate school districts and other layers of administration normally hidden from public view. 
    Each battle will be fierce, however, as those with a vested interest and who stand to lose much will fight hard to retain the status quo, while their opponents will have only a general interest in containing spending and stand to lose relatively little if they fail to achieve their sought-after reform.  (A tax increase enacted may cost a local property owner a few hundred dollars annually; a failed tax proposal may cost some people their livelihoods; thus their greater interest in achieving their goals.)
      More pernicious than a slew of millage proposals are hidden, de facto nuisance taxes, such as more-agressive ordinance enforcement, emphasis on ticketing speeders as a revenue tool, or seizing the cars of people who are never convicted, and often never even charged with a crime.  “Civil Forfeiture” is de-facto theft, but with a twist:  The carjacking is done by law enforcement, and it is often on the flimsiest of excuses – making eye contact with a vice squad decoy may be called soliciting a prostitute, and although such a case would never stand up in court, it is excuse enough to take the motorist’s car, impound it, and either charge as much as $900.00 to return it (in Michigan), or to auction it, all without charges ever being filed.  Some police departments are quite frank about this being all about the money, and not about justice.
     The great danger lies in letting apathy overtake urgency in addressing the need for action now; otherwise, incremental actions that negatively affect only a few – property owners, those losing cars to civil forfeiture, smokers, beer drinkers, and so on – will eventually affect all, either through imposition of one or more taxes or indirectly as the economy continues to suffer from excessive public sector spending.
     Action now, even if no more than writing a polite, informed letter to a legislator, can have consequences.  The alternative is to pay more while living on less, both financially and in terms of personal liberty.

Posted in News | No Comments »

Michigan ConCon Considerations

February 19, 2010 – 9:14 pm

     Every 16 years, Michigan’s Constitution of 1963 requires a referendum on holding a Convention.  The current Constitution came into being after the State of Michigan was unable to meet payroll in the last of a series of periodic fiscal crises that plagued it since the beginning of the 20th century.  The cause was a very unstable tax base, heavily dependent on excsies of various kinds and subject to significant fluctuation. 
     The product of the constitutional convention of 1960-63 is what is at stake now.  Michigan has survived budget crises since, mainly the result of the state’s economy being over-dependent on the automobile industry.  (No tax system is likely to provide a shock-absorber for the rough ride of a highly cyclic industry.)  Michigan maintained a ‘Rainy Day Fund’ that bankrolled state government when revenues fell short in the past; that fund was exhausted early in this decade, as the pre-9/11 recession never ended here.  What has sustained Michigan since then have been one-time fixes (moving money from special accounts to cover shortfalls, delaying certain payments, cutting revenue sharing to local governments, cutting school aid, tobacco settlement funds, and lastly, stimulus cash).
     The fault lies, in this writer’s opinion, not in the Constitution of 1963, but in our current political leadership.  Any system can be gamed, and even a bad system can be made to work, even if only poorly.  The Inca built their empire as an isolated, totalitarian socialist state, and it might well still be in existence if invaders from what amounts to another world had not destroyed it.  By our standards, it produced a poor existence for virtually all its’ subjects, and stunted their humanity in the process, but it self-perpetuated for many generations.  The Mamlukes ruled Egypt and made her a great power for two and a half centuries using a system based on kidnapping children from foreign lands, making them slaves, and then letting the ablest and most ruthless ascend the ranks of their army, with the throne usually achieved by assassination.  So, it is not necessarily the the particulars of a system, but who runs it that is important.  Michigan’s Constitution is designed for a people capable of self-government, and in particular is suited to the genius of a people who embrace a ‘Protestant work ethic,’ a sense of fair play, a Progressive bent in favoring citizen participation in government, a focus on education (the words of the Northwest ordinance concerning ’schools and the means of education’ to forever be encouraged appear verbatim in the document), and an abhorrence of the death penalty, which Michigan has never had as a state.  If the people elected to govern fit the system they inherited, they would govern well.
     That Michigan is in crisis is not news; that Michigan’s fiscal problems are not the worst in the nation may be.  Other states, such as California, Illinois and New York,
 are in worse shape, even though they have only experienced hard economic times since 2007, whereas Michigan never recovered from the recession of 2000.  Muddling through deserves no plaudits, but greater censure should be reserved for those who had more resources and have suffered relatively less. 
     Michigan therefore cannot be said to be badly governed.  It could be governed better, and that it is not is due to a failure of leadership in both parties, in all branches of government, and broadly in an electorate that has not risen up to demand better.  To make the Constitution the scapegoat is to ignore the reality of poor leadership that has failed to do more than kick the can from one election cycle to the next.  Even if a new Constitution could be agreed upon and enacted into law, at least two years would be absorbed in the ConCon process, with an ongoing crisis that will demand resolution much sooner.  That resolution may well obviate the reason for calling a ConCon in the first place; a failure to resolve the problems Michigan faces will make the ConCon a sideshow as Michigan joins the list of failed states unable to govern themselves.
    Michigan’s vote on a ConCon is a test.  It tests whether voters will blame the politicians now in office for not better addressing our fiscal woes, or whether they will decide that the system itself is broken.  If it is indeed the latter, look to see the social contract rewritten, with no entitlement sacred.  Michigan may be the first to go down this road, but it will not be the last.  Other states will have to face voter anger over failures of governance, and that anger may crystallize in wholesale rewriting of constitutions deemed perfectly adequate only a few years ago. 
     Tea Party activists may find themselves shut out of partisan elections, but voter anger could propel them into ConCons as delegates, giving them scope and opportunity to take concrete action in support of their beliefs.  This may be one of the most important legacies of Michigan’s ConCon opportunity, if it serves as the platform for a basic reordering of the was state and local governments operate.  Whether for well or ill, we stand on the verge of momentous choices.  May we, for the sake of all who come after us, choose rightly.

Posted in News | No Comments »

The Good Judge

February 10, 2010 – 12:35 pm

Ruling by Judge William Young, US District Court.

Prior to sentencing, the Judge asked the defendant if he had anything to say. His response: After admitting his guilt to the court for the record, Reid also admitted his ‘allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah,’ defiantly stating, ‘I think I will not apologize for my actions,’ and told the court ‘I am at war with your country.’

Judge Young then delivered the statement quoted below:

January 30, 2009, United States vs. Reid. 

Judge Young: ‘Mr. Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you.

On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the custody of the United States Attorney General. On counts 2, 3, 4and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count, the sentence on each count to run consecutively. (That’s 80 years.)

On count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years again, to be served consecutively to the 80 years just imposed.. The Court imposes upon you for each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000 that’s an aggregate fine of $2 million.. The Court accepts the government’s recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines.

The Court imposes upon you an $800 special assessment. The Court imposes upon you five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need go no further. 

This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes. It is a fair and just sentence. It is a righteous sentence..

Now, let me explain this to you. We are not afraid of you or any of your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid. We are Americans. We have been through the fire before. There is too much war talk here and I say that to everyone with the utmost respect. Here in this court, we deal with individuals as individuals and care for individuals as individuals. As human beings, we reach out for justice.

You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist.. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier, gives you far too much stature.. Whether the officers of government do it or your attorney does it, or if you think you are a soldier, you are not—– you are a terrorist. And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not meet with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists. We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.

So war talk is way out of line in this court. You are a big fellow. But you are not that big. You’re no warrior. I’ve known warriors. You are a terrorist. A species of criminal that is guilty of multiple attempted murders. In a very real sense, State Trooper Santiago had it right when you first were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and the TV crews were, and he said: ‘You’re no big deal.’

You are no big deal.

What your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific. What was it that led you here to this courtroom today?

I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing? And, I have an answer for you. It may not satisfy you, but as I search this entire record, it comes as close to understanding as I know. 

It seems to me you hate the one thing that to us is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose. Here, in this society, the very wind carries freedom. It carries it everywhere from sea to shining sea. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom, so that everyone can see, truly see, that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely. It is for freedom’s sake that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf, have filed appeals, will go on in their representation of you before other judges.

We Americans are all about freedom. Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties. Make no mistake though. It is yet true that we will bear any burden; pay any price, to preserve our freedoms. Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. The day after tomorrow, it will be forgotten, but this, however, will long endure.

Here in this courtroom and courtrooms all across America , the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done. The very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice.

See that flag, Mr. Reid? That’s the flag of the United States of America . That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag stands for freedom. And it always will.

Mr. Custody Officer. Stand him down.

Posted in Law, News, Terror | 1 Comment »

Econ Rap – Hayek vs. Keynes

February 6, 2010 – 9:41 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

     This YouTube video is both hilarious and accurate in presenting the opposing worldviews of the Austrian and Keynesian schools of economic thought.  Given our continuing slide into depression and debt crisis, what could be more topical than economics?  Watch and enjoy!

Posted in News | Comments Off

Enslaving our young

January 26, 2010 – 10:21 am

If this doesn’t make young people nervous…it should

This is YOUR debt kids.  What have you got to show for it???

Figures on government spending and debt (last six digits are eliminated). The
government's fiscal year runs Oct. 1 through Sept. 30.
Total public debt subject to limit Jan. 22		12,245,872
Statutory debt limit					12,394,000
Total public debt outstanding Jan. 22			12,302,465
Operating balance Jan. 22				   142,454
Interest fiscal year 2009				   383,365
Interest fiscal year 2008				   451,154
Deficit fiscal year 2009				 1,417,121
Deficit fiscal year 2008				   454,798
Receipts fiscal year 2009				 2,104,613
Receipts fiscal year 2008				 2,523,642
Outlays fiscal year 2009				 3,521,734
Outlays fiscal year 2008				 2,978,440
Gold assets in September				    11,041

Posted in Economics, Government, Youth | Comments Off

Why do they love and trust government?

January 24, 2010 – 10:27 am

Why do leftists and collectivists love government so much?  Why do they trust that government can correct the ills of society?  Governments are made up of people, fallible, failed humans.  What has any government program done to better society?  Governments should be constrained in order to ensure the liberty of the citizens.

“If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government……” James Madison

Leftists are motivated by their own arrogance, hubris, envy and greed.  All things they ascribe to those who oppose overweening government.  Its simple, they think that they and government bureaucrats are better suited to run your life than you are.

Posted in Culture, Government | Comments Off

Use up THEIRS!

January 20, 2010 – 2:11 pm

John Stossel writes a good article supporting this theme.

I don’t care about energy independence.  We have so much carbon energy in the U.S. its just ridiculous.  The only thing limiting its exploitation are collectivist weenies and Gaea worshipers.

I don’t mind though.  I’d much prefer to buy up ALL of the Arab, South American, Euro, Mexican and Canuck oil before we exploit our own.

Economic Freedom and Capitalism are fueled by carbon based fuels.  Burn it up!  We can and will develop alternatives if and as the market and subordinate demand dictate.  Letting Statist Politocrats dictate is just a recipe for economic ruination and for slavery for the American people.

Posted in Economics, Energy, Environmentalism, Internet Reviews, Politics | 4 Comments »