Tuesday, June 26, 2012
A Short Hiatus
After a short hiatus in following political events (and posting to the blog), I realize that truly significant political events occur infrequently.
One such event was the Supreme Court's decision this week regarding Arizona's immigration law. The Court found that Arizona police could question persons who they had reason to believe were in the country illegally. However, the Court limited the police power by denying them the power of arrest in such instances. Also voided were parts of the law that made certain actions by undocumented residents a state crime by virtue of their status.
However much that the Obama administration may declare victory in this case, we should remember that Arizona (and other states) have carried the major burden of the inaction of the federal government to enforce its own laws. Since the courts have now closed the option for state remedy, the only viable option is for action at the federal level.
The problem of illegal immigration has festered too long. We, as a country, should be embarrassed by the lack of resolution. Both sides can blame the other but the fact remains that compromise will be required to resolve this issue and get it behind us.
It is time for politicians of all persuasions to get off the soap boxes and start working with each other in the public interest.
Sunday, June 10, 2012
The Road Ahead: The Choice in Nov. Becomes Clearer.
This has been a watershed week.
Last Tuesday, June 5, the voters in Wisconsin decided to continue Gov. Scott Walker in office in a recall election. In this weekend's "The Wall Street Journal" in an article titled: "What's Changed After Wisconsin", Peggy Noonan states: "The big meaning of Wisconsin is that a public injustice is in the process of being righted because a public mood is changing."
The "public injustice" referred to is that public employees in Wisconsin were being compensated better than the average private worker (and taxpayer). Gov. Walker reduced government costs by reducing pension and health care costs; he did not lay off public employees. The governor (and others) have shown that it is possible to cut spending in a rational way without endangering public safety and education as the unions allege.
On Friday, June 8, President Obama said in a news conference: "The private sector is doing fine." He went on to say that "Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government--oftentimes, cuts initiated by governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don't have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in."(WSJ editorial in this weekend's edition).
The editorial goes on to say that in fact state and local revenues have increased 6% over the last two years and that the president continues to believe "--that the more government spending is the key to faster growth and that government really doesn't need to reform." I would add that the president seems indifferent about our national debt and unsustainable public spending; perhaps he missed that class in economics 101.
Finally, during the past week, the Obama team seems in disarray. As Peggy Noonan stated in the above cited article: "It just increasingly looks like a house of cards". She points out the president's avoidance of the Wisconsin recall election, his recent misstatement about spending in his administration, breaches of security in Washington and Bill Clinton's statements about Mitt Romney's "sterling record" and other comments by Clinton regarding tax policy and campaign tactics. Noonan concludes: "But maybe Bubba's looking at the president and seeing what far more than half of Washington sees: a man who is limited, who thinks himself clever, and who doesn't know that clever right now doesn't cut it."
The final record of this historical campaign will not be fully known until November. There are some important events yet to occur. The Supreme Court will shortly announce its decision on the issues raised by Obamacare, Republicans will choose a vice president nominee and conventions and debates will take place.
But the positions that define each nominee are now in clear focus. President Obama represents big government, more spending and debt, a diminished economy and lost opportunities for all. The contrast with the Romney position couldn't be clearer: limited government, less spending, free enterprise, a growing economy and greater opportunity and freedom for all.
Last Tuesday, June 5, the voters in Wisconsin decided to continue Gov. Scott Walker in office in a recall election. In this weekend's "The Wall Street Journal" in an article titled: "What's Changed After Wisconsin", Peggy Noonan states: "The big meaning of Wisconsin is that a public injustice is in the process of being righted because a public mood is changing."
The "public injustice" referred to is that public employees in Wisconsin were being compensated better than the average private worker (and taxpayer). Gov. Walker reduced government costs by reducing pension and health care costs; he did not lay off public employees. The governor (and others) have shown that it is possible to cut spending in a rational way without endangering public safety and education as the unions allege.
On Friday, June 8, President Obama said in a news conference: "The private sector is doing fine." He went on to say that "Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government--oftentimes, cuts initiated by governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past from the federal government and who don't have the same kind of flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in."(WSJ editorial in this weekend's edition).
The editorial goes on to say that in fact state and local revenues have increased 6% over the last two years and that the president continues to believe "--that the more government spending is the key to faster growth and that government really doesn't need to reform." I would add that the president seems indifferent about our national debt and unsustainable public spending; perhaps he missed that class in economics 101.
Finally, during the past week, the Obama team seems in disarray. As Peggy Noonan stated in the above cited article: "It just increasingly looks like a house of cards". She points out the president's avoidance of the Wisconsin recall election, his recent misstatement about spending in his administration, breaches of security in Washington and Bill Clinton's statements about Mitt Romney's "sterling record" and other comments by Clinton regarding tax policy and campaign tactics. Noonan concludes: "But maybe Bubba's looking at the president and seeing what far more than half of Washington sees: a man who is limited, who thinks himself clever, and who doesn't know that clever right now doesn't cut it."
The final record of this historical campaign will not be fully known until November. There are some important events yet to occur. The Supreme Court will shortly announce its decision on the issues raised by Obamacare, Republicans will choose a vice president nominee and conventions and debates will take place.
But the positions that define each nominee are now in clear focus. President Obama represents big government, more spending and debt, a diminished economy and lost opportunities for all. The contrast with the Romney position couldn't be clearer: limited government, less spending, free enterprise, a growing economy and greater opportunity and freedom for all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)