2010 is here and with it comes Congressional elections. Much has been made of the potential for Republicans to make in-roads around the country in Democrat held seats given the partisan, liberal tenor currently in Washington D.C. Here in Southeast Mississippi, Gene Taylor (D-Bay St. Louis) has held the 4th District Congressional seat since 1989. Taylor, a former City Councilman and Mississippi State Senator, is well versed in what it takes to win in this district, which by the way is one of, if not the most conservative Republican districts in the nation (no Democrat Presidential candidate has carried the 4th since 1956). Political newcomer Joe Tegerdine hopes to unseat the incumbent Taylor and change that (D) to a (R) for South Mississippi.
For those who have yet to hear of Joe Tegerdine, you will soon as he has now filed his paperwork to run for the 4th District seat. He is an energetic man, someone I have come to enjoy speaking with on my radio show. He is grounded in the Constitution and has cast a broad vision of fiscal responsibility, new House leadership, strong national defense, and limited government. Here is a quick biography of the 4th Congressional District Republican candidate adapted from his website (www.joetegerdine.com).
Tegerdine was born in Portland, Oregon and grew up in the Northwest. He was raised by a single mother for most of his childhood and learned early on to work hard and hold true to the things he was taught. Shortly after graduating from high school, Tegerdine served as a missionary in Taiwan. After spending almost two years overseas, he headed home to the United States and attended college at Brigham Young University, earning a B.A. in Communications. While in college he met and married his wife and in 2002, they moved to Tallahassee, Florida where he earned a Juris Doctorate degree from the Florida State University College of Law. Tegerdine is currently employed as Senior Director of Business Development for WNC Satcom Group. He relocated to Hattiesburg, Mississippi in the spring of 2007 and settled in Petal where he currently lives with his wife and four children.
Given the previous elections in the 4th Congressional District since Taylor has held the seat, Tegerdine has an uphill challenge indeed. Taylor has won the last four elections by taking between 64-75% of the vote. His voting record in the House of Representatives is a mixed bag, however; he has walked the tight rope between party and populist for many years and thus far has mastered it with only the occasional wobble which he quickly balances. He is seemingly pro-life and pro-gun (anything else in this part of Mississippi and he would have been out a long time ago), yet he has supported his party and its leaders inconspicuously (voting for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker) knowing that if he carried too much of the party's water he would be on the proverbial hot seat come election time at home. He knows how to appear as if he is fighting for his constituents while not making too many waves in Washington D.C. His tenure and party connections landed him an important seat on the Armed Services Committee and the Shipbuilding Caucus, making him increasingly valuable to his 4th District constituents. Taylor's good ole boy persona coupled with his staff's superb PR work in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina make him a force that only the perfect storm or perhaps some truly informed, inspired, involved, and fed up voters could take down.
I believe that we in the 4th District can and should do better than Gene Taylor (hey, that almost rhymed...perhaps there's a campaign slogan in there for Tegerdine). Taylor is deeply entrenched and knows how to work the system, both locally, through ensuring that the proper spin is applied when needed, and nationally, by being content to sit on the sidelines and following the party line as necessary. Gene Taylor is not a bad guy; heck, he's not all that bad of a Congressman if you judge his body of work through a narrow lens and confine it to babies, bullets, and budgets. America and the future of our great nation are about something bigger than such narrow, spin driven, seat ensuring issues. Yes, those things do matter greatly to me as a conservative and should matter to us all but when our nation's debt is increasing at such a rapid pace, private business is being taken over by government, our Constitution is threatened daily, healthcare is on its way to being rationed in every sense of the word, and on and on I could go we don't need a pacifist Congressman representing our area here in Southeast Mississippi. We need a Congressman that will stand up and fight for the Constitution, for the freedoms we hold dear, to speak against the ills of the day and actively support a different direction than what is being proposed by those now in leadership - a leadership supported and encouraged by Taylor himself. We need a change in the 4th District and soon.
The real question, and the most disturbing part of this discussion to me, is this: How does Gene Taylor, a Democrat, keep getting elected in one of the most conservative Republican district in the nation? For the sake of time and space, I'll cut to the chase - Republicans put him there. There's no other answer. If you live in the 4th District I challenge you to ask your Republican friends that actually vote who they voted for in the last Congressional election. Check the campaign finance reports for Taylor, as well, and you'll find normally Republican donors sprinkled in among the typical Democrat patrons.
So how does Tegerdine reverse this trend in 2010? How can he topple this Goliath? The only way is for conservative Republicans to break out of their self-induced habit and vote Republican. Tegerdine must appeal to the true conservatives, creating a sense of urgency that now is the time for a change. He must work to unite a strong conservative base and educate them on the realities at hand. Twenty years is long enough for Mr. Taylor's trip to Washington.
A few years ago this 4th District seat didn't seem all that important. Having one or two Democrat Congressmen wasn't a big deal most thought. They have tenure, clout among their peers. But now, with the make up of Congress, the Speaker of the House, the Senate in full control and the White House locked up, this Southeast Mississippi seat needs to symbolize and portray how we in this area truly believe to our core. Tegerdine must portray that in all he does over the coming months if he is to get within a stone's throw of Taylor.
As a side note, another Republican challenger, John McCay (which ran against Taylor in 2008 and lost by a margin of 75%-25%), told me recently he was planning to make another run for the seat as well. I'm not aware at this time if he has filed to run. McCay will have the same challenges as Tegerdine should he run and win the party nomination.
Truth is both Tegerdine and McCay are relative unknowns in the Mississippi political scene meaning that they must brand their name, ideals, and message in voters' minds quickly to have any chance at Taylor. Republicans will have to get on board with their party's candidate, not only here in the 4th District, but in the State Republican Party as well. Southeast Mississippi and the nation deserve better than Gene Taylor and his Democrat friends. I believe we can do better...but unless people wake up, get in the fight, and get engaged in the 4th Congressional District, history tells us we won't.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Monday, January 4, 2010
The Tax Masquerade
Most of you have heard the term "nanny state." Wikipedia defines "nanny state" as a term that refers to state protectionism, economic interventionism, or regulatory policies (of economic, social or other nature), and the perception that these policies are becoming institutionalized as common practice. Its usage varies by political context, but in general it is used in reference to policies where the state is characterized as being excessive in its desire to protect (as a nanny would protect a child), govern or control particular aspects of society. The term can refer to public health interventions and consumer protectionism that removes or controls otherwise free choices, as well as national economic and social policies (regulation and intervention) that affect large and state-favored businesses. Politically conservative groups (those that support free market principles and capitalism) object to excessive state action to protect people from the consequences of their actions by restricting citizen options and with good reason - it's unconstitutional and goes against the essence of the Founders' spirit.
The story below taken from WLOX, an ABC affiliate in Biloxi, is a perfect example of how we as a society have dumbed down our individual freedoms and reliance on the Constitution and are now allowing our state and federal government to act as a nanny who dictates what we eat, where we go, what products we use, what cars we buy, which doctor we see, and on and on. As you read the story, keep in mind the explanation above and see if you can see the nanny's hand at work. I have italicized and a few interesting parts of the story for your ease of understanding:
BILOXI, MS (WLOX) - If your list of must-have drinks include soda, it could cost you close to 50 cents more under a proposed soda tax bill. The tax would also apply to pre-sweetened drinks like certain juices, teas, and energy drinks.
As the bill is written now, only wholesalers of sodas and sugary drinks would be taxed. But, the bill's creator, Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, Mississippi, says he's aware that most or all of the cost could be handed down to consumers. The idea of the tax is stirring up mixed reactions among South Mississippians.
Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, the man behind the bill, says the Stennis Institute is currently conducting a study on the tax and estimates it could raise anywhere from $110 and $147 Million.
Mayo says the push behind the bill is two-fold. The representative says he hopes to encourage Mississippians to make smarter, healthier choices and to pay for programs teaching people how to make healthier food choices and live healthier lives.
The representative would like to see the money go to the Department of Health, Department of Education and the Mississippi Development Authority. Mayo says the hope is to get Mississippi thinking more in terms of preventative care as opposed to being in reactionary mode.
"I hope it passes this year. It's focusing attention on what are healthy choices and what are not; it's a start." He goes on to say, "If you choose to be fat by making unhealthy choices, why should those of us who choose to be healthy pay for your obesity."
Did you hear the nanny's voice in this story? In case you didn't notice, it was prevalent throughout. Perhaps you even found yourself asking these questions as you read the story: why only certain businesses, why only certain drinks, why does the state need to be so involved in my life, why should the state have a say in what I eat and drink, why is the government involved in the health care industry, and many more.
For decades now, our state and federal governments have eased into the role of nanny as they have taxed some businesses and products more than others to encourage the average consumer to use or not use said products as is deemed politically expedient for the whims of the day. The problem with such selective government endorsements is that all of the products are legal and hold equal standing under the law. Such "sin" taxes masquerade as concern, but is essentially legal product discrimination authorized by the government.
So why do we allow certain industries to be taxed more than others? Why is it acceptable to tax alcohol more than milk? Why is it fine to tax cigarettes more than chewing gum? Why should we tax sodas more than Grandma's fried chicken or Momma's chocolate pie? Heck, why don't we tax the dinner-on-the-grounds at the churches or the family holiday feast?
In 1961, Ronald Reagan made a recording aimed at speaking against socialized medicine. He said, "...back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program. One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it..."
I would add that most people are just as reluctant to oppose efforts to curtail the use of socially questionable products, i.e. cigarettes, alcohol, and now sodas and sugary foods, even when you raise taxes. It has become easy to disguise public health care and obesity concerns with the unconstitutional singling out of legal products and businesses while imposing big government taxation, essentially creating the nanny state. And once the nanny state becomes the norm, our American way of life as defined by the Constitution erodes and soon we will no longer recognize our American existence, that of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - freedom of individual choice.
It's time we unmask the debates of our day and see the realities at hand. Selectively taxing legal products under the guise of public health is a slippery slope that could result in the loss of much more than just a few cents here or there. We must be diligent to assess these and other issues as we continue to perfect our Republic.
The story below taken from WLOX, an ABC affiliate in Biloxi, is a perfect example of how we as a society have dumbed down our individual freedoms and reliance on the Constitution and are now allowing our state and federal government to act as a nanny who dictates what we eat, where we go, what products we use, what cars we buy, which doctor we see, and on and on. As you read the story, keep in mind the explanation above and see if you can see the nanny's hand at work. I have italicized and a few interesting parts of the story for your ease of understanding:
BILOXI, MS (WLOX) - If your list of must-have drinks include soda, it could cost you close to 50 cents more under a proposed soda tax bill. The tax would also apply to pre-sweetened drinks like certain juices, teas, and energy drinks.
As the bill is written now, only wholesalers of sodas and sugary drinks would be taxed. But, the bill's creator, Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, Mississippi, says he's aware that most or all of the cost could be handed down to consumers. The idea of the tax is stirring up mixed reactions among South Mississippians.
Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, the man behind the bill, says the Stennis Institute is currently conducting a study on the tax and estimates it could raise anywhere from $110 and $147 Million.
Mayo says the push behind the bill is two-fold. The representative says he hopes to encourage Mississippians to make smarter, healthier choices and to pay for programs teaching people how to make healthier food choices and live healthier lives.
The representative would like to see the money go to the Department of Health, Department of Education and the Mississippi Development Authority. Mayo says the hope is to get Mississippi thinking more in terms of preventative care as opposed to being in reactionary mode.
"I hope it passes this year. It's focusing attention on what are healthy choices and what are not; it's a start." He goes on to say, "If you choose to be fat by making unhealthy choices, why should those of us who choose to be healthy pay for your obesity."
Did you hear the nanny's voice in this story? In case you didn't notice, it was prevalent throughout. Perhaps you even found yourself asking these questions as you read the story: why only certain businesses, why only certain drinks, why does the state need to be so involved in my life, why should the state have a say in what I eat and drink, why is the government involved in the health care industry, and many more.
For decades now, our state and federal governments have eased into the role of nanny as they have taxed some businesses and products more than others to encourage the average consumer to use or not use said products as is deemed politically expedient for the whims of the day. The problem with such selective government endorsements is that all of the products are legal and hold equal standing under the law. Such "sin" taxes masquerade as concern, but is essentially legal product discrimination authorized by the government.
So why do we allow certain industries to be taxed more than others? Why is it acceptable to tax alcohol more than milk? Why is it fine to tax cigarettes more than chewing gum? Why should we tax sodas more than Grandma's fried chicken or Momma's chocolate pie? Heck, why don't we tax the dinner-on-the-grounds at the churches or the family holiday feast?
In 1961, Ronald Reagan made a recording aimed at speaking against socialized medicine. He said, "...back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program. One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it..."
I would add that most people are just as reluctant to oppose efforts to curtail the use of socially questionable products, i.e. cigarettes, alcohol, and now sodas and sugary foods, even when you raise taxes. It has become easy to disguise public health care and obesity concerns with the unconstitutional singling out of legal products and businesses while imposing big government taxation, essentially creating the nanny state. And once the nanny state becomes the norm, our American way of life as defined by the Constitution erodes and soon we will no longer recognize our American existence, that of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - freedom of individual choice.
It's time we unmask the debates of our day and see the realities at hand. Selectively taxing legal products under the guise of public health is a slippery slope that could result in the loss of much more than just a few cents here or there. We must be diligent to assess these and other issues as we continue to perfect our Republic.
The Politics of the Census
Soon the questionnaire will arrive in the mail and you'll hear that familiar once-every-ten-year knock at the door. Census version 2010 is coming. You've heard the Census is important for your city, county, and state and that we all should be diligent to participate; this is certainly true. While it does impact many factors from federal appropriations to emergency response to national perception to even how we're seen on the world stage, the most important result of the Census is the apportionment or redistricting of voting boundaries for local, state, and federal elections.
Properly delineated voting districts ensure the concept of "one man, one vote," the equal protection clause. It is through these boundaries that all of the other aforementioned results of the Census and more take shape. In theory, every voting district, whether for city, county, state, or federal elections, should have an equal number of people located within each district thus ensuring equal representation. The only problem with that simple notion is that politicians are in charge of drawing these boundaries and when politicians are involved, the potential for gerrymandering exists.
By definition, gerrymandering is a form of redistricting where electoral districts are deliberately modified producing a contorted or unusual shape. Gerrymandering may be used to achieve desired electoral results for a particular party, or may be used to help or hinder a particular group of constituents, such as a political, racial, or other group. It is used most often in favor of ruling incumbents. This has been an evident result of the Democratic leadership in our state legislature for decades.
Take a look at the Jackson County House and Senate District maps and you'll see with your own eyes what I mean. Go to http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_house/jackson.pdf for the House map and http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_senate/jackson.pdf for the Senate map. On the House map, see District 111 (bottom, aqua color). It takes in South Pascagoula, grazes Gautier, and jumps in between Districts 112 and 113 to take in the outskirts of Ocean Springs. On the Senate map, District 47 (top left, blue color) dives in between Districts 51 and 52. What you don't see on the Senate map is that District 47 starts over in Pearl River County and meanders through Harrison and Stone counties before entering Jackson County. Oh, and if you keep reading, it'll be no surprise that Senate District 47 is held by a Democrat, Senator Ezell Lee.
According to the House and Senate reports from the 2000 Census, the ideal House District size is 23,317 with the ideal Senate District size being 54,705. Both reports allow for a maximum 5% deviation, with the highest deviation on the House side at 4.99% and 4.67% on the Senate. What's interesting about this is that the districts that traditionally vote for the more liberal candidate or are considered more independent (normally vote Democrat or a toss-up in the Presidential elections) see the most negative deviation which allows for an increased number of representatives from those areas.
Now, see the state House district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_house.html), the state Senate district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_senate.html), and a map showing traditional voting trends (http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/US_election/figs/MS.png) with Democrat in blue and Republican in red. Just for example, compare House Districts 5 (-4.8%), 9 (-4.9%), 11 (-4.9%), 26 (-4.9%), 29 (-4.9%) and 30 (-4.9%) to the trends map. There are others. Then compare Senate districts 11 (-3.9%), 16 (-4.6%), 24 (-4.4%), 26 (-3.2%), 32 (-3.9%), and 36 (-2.9%) to the trends map. See anything interesting? I would guess you do. And if you trend it throughout the state in both the House and Senate, it's interesting to note the deviation between regions (north, central, and south).
So what does all of this mean? With the Senate leadership having shown a willingness to work in a bipartisan spirit, the Senate Legislative Reapportionment Chairman Sen. Terry Burton(R) and Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant should seek to reverse the trends above and bring about more equalized representation. In the House, Speaker Billy McCoy (D) has shown no sign of working in a bipartisan spirit and as House Legislative Reapportionment Chair Rep. Tommy Reynolds (D) begins his work, you will see significant jockeying among Representatives and the House leadership in an effort to protect their perceived voting base and vulnerable Democrat members. This should be of no surprise given the way in which the House Speaker vote went down after the last election. It is widely known that one vote allowed Speaker McCoy to retain his chair, which brings us back to Jackson County.
Given the population shift from the coastal cities into the county since Hurricane Katrina, it's conceivable to believe that Senate District 47 could be taken out of Jackson County and Districts 51 and 52 could assume the electorate there. As for the House seats in Jackson County, it is plausible that the Democrat House leadership will seek to ensure that District 111, the seat that was a Republican stronghold for two decades and that was narrowly won by 11 votes by Democrat Rep. Brandon Jones (who cast that deciding Speaker vote mentioned earlier), remains in their corner, perhaps by significantly redistricting the boundaries to gain more like-minded voters. In addition, with the aforementioned population shift and the measures to protect Democrat members, the possibility of losing one House seat in Jackson County is a concern.
You've heard it said that all politics is local; that is indeed true here. As we look toward 2011 and the state elections, it is imperative that we participate in the 2010 Census and begin now to focus on continuing the progress we have made of putting true conservative leaders into state government, leaders that will be fiscally responsible, reduce our tax burden, protect our individual liberties, and advance Mississippi on the national and international stage through positive economic development. Republican in Mississippi hasn't always been the norm, but we're making strides to that end everyday.
And just for the record, I am of the opinion that the Census should only ask for the number in a household and if you are a legal American citizen, which means a little extra work for some but well worth the effort to get an accurate, legal accounting of our nation's citizens.
So make sure you get counted in the 2010 Census. No matter how frustrating it can be, stay involved in your government. After all, all politics is local.
Properly delineated voting districts ensure the concept of "one man, one vote," the equal protection clause. It is through these boundaries that all of the other aforementioned results of the Census and more take shape. In theory, every voting district, whether for city, county, state, or federal elections, should have an equal number of people located within each district thus ensuring equal representation. The only problem with that simple notion is that politicians are in charge of drawing these boundaries and when politicians are involved, the potential for gerrymandering exists.
By definition, gerrymandering is a form of redistricting where electoral districts are deliberately modified producing a contorted or unusual shape. Gerrymandering may be used to achieve desired electoral results for a particular party, or may be used to help or hinder a particular group of constituents, such as a political, racial, or other group. It is used most often in favor of ruling incumbents. This has been an evident result of the Democratic leadership in our state legislature for decades.
Take a look at the Jackson County House and Senate District maps and you'll see with your own eyes what I mean. Go to http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_house/jackson.pdf for the House map and http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_senate/jackson.pdf for the Senate map. On the House map, see District 111 (bottom, aqua color). It takes in South Pascagoula, grazes Gautier, and jumps in between Districts 112 and 113 to take in the outskirts of Ocean Springs. On the Senate map, District 47 (top left, blue color) dives in between Districts 51 and 52. What you don't see on the Senate map is that District 47 starts over in Pearl River County and meanders through Harrison and Stone counties before entering Jackson County. Oh, and if you keep reading, it'll be no surprise that Senate District 47 is held by a Democrat, Senator Ezell Lee.
According to the House and Senate reports from the 2000 Census, the ideal House District size is 23,317 with the ideal Senate District size being 54,705. Both reports allow for a maximum 5% deviation, with the highest deviation on the House side at 4.99% and 4.67% on the Senate. What's interesting about this is that the districts that traditionally vote for the more liberal candidate or are considered more independent (normally vote Democrat or a toss-up in the Presidential elections) see the most negative deviation which allows for an increased number of representatives from those areas.
Now, see the state House district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_house.html), the state Senate district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_senate.html), and a map showing traditional voting trends (http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/US_election/figs/MS.png) with Democrat in blue and Republican in red. Just for example, compare House Districts 5 (-4.8%), 9 (-4.9%), 11 (-4.9%), 26 (-4.9%), 29 (-4.9%) and 30 (-4.9%) to the trends map. There are others. Then compare Senate districts 11 (-3.9%), 16 (-4.6%), 24 (-4.4%), 26 (-3.2%), 32 (-3.9%), and 36 (-2.9%) to the trends map. See anything interesting? I would guess you do. And if you trend it throughout the state in both the House and Senate, it's interesting to note the deviation between regions (north, central, and south).
So what does all of this mean? With the Senate leadership having shown a willingness to work in a bipartisan spirit, the Senate Legislative Reapportionment Chairman Sen. Terry Burton(R) and Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant should seek to reverse the trends above and bring about more equalized representation. In the House, Speaker Billy McCoy (D) has shown no sign of working in a bipartisan spirit and as House Legislative Reapportionment Chair Rep. Tommy Reynolds (D) begins his work, you will see significant jockeying among Representatives and the House leadership in an effort to protect their perceived voting base and vulnerable Democrat members. This should be of no surprise given the way in which the House Speaker vote went down after the last election. It is widely known that one vote allowed Speaker McCoy to retain his chair, which brings us back to Jackson County.
Given the population shift from the coastal cities into the county since Hurricane Katrina, it's conceivable to believe that Senate District 47 could be taken out of Jackson County and Districts 51 and 52 could assume the electorate there. As for the House seats in Jackson County, it is plausible that the Democrat House leadership will seek to ensure that District 111, the seat that was a Republican stronghold for two decades and that was narrowly won by 11 votes by Democrat Rep. Brandon Jones (who cast that deciding Speaker vote mentioned earlier), remains in their corner, perhaps by significantly redistricting the boundaries to gain more like-minded voters. In addition, with the aforementioned population shift and the measures to protect Democrat members, the possibility of losing one House seat in Jackson County is a concern.
You've heard it said that all politics is local; that is indeed true here. As we look toward 2011 and the state elections, it is imperative that we participate in the 2010 Census and begin now to focus on continuing the progress we have made of putting true conservative leaders into state government, leaders that will be fiscally responsible, reduce our tax burden, protect our individual liberties, and advance Mississippi on the national and international stage through positive economic development. Republican in Mississippi hasn't always been the norm, but we're making strides to that end everyday.
And just for the record, I am of the opinion that the Census should only ask for the number in a household and if you are a legal American citizen, which means a little extra work for some but well worth the effort to get an accurate, legal accounting of our nation's citizens.
So make sure you get counted in the 2010 Census. No matter how frustrating it can be, stay involved in your government. After all, all politics is local.
Mississippi and Education in 2010
Much has already been said and written regarding the possibility of school consolidation since Gov. Haley Barbour released his FY 2011 budget recommendations. The Commission on Mississippi Education Structure has even been formed and appointed by the Governor, with its goal being to outline how to best achieve consolidation, capitalize on cost savings, and identify a process by which the 152 school districts can be paired down. The Governor's vision is to merge the 152 districts in Mississippi's 82 counties into close to 100 districts saying that "by consolidating districts, we can make sure state and local tax dollars are spent on educating our students and increase the quality of educational opportunities for Mississippi's children."
I would agree that there would seem to be a duplication of services (primarily in administration) in our current school district format, especially when you consider the number of students being served in some of the more rural, sparsely populated areas in our state versus the denser, urban regions. It would seem obvious to contend that some level of cost savings would be gained by consolidating school districts given the amount that is spent on hiring highly educated, experienced superintendents and other administrative staff. At first blush, such an idea as consolidation has merit. It is only until you begin to talk through the practicality and impact of the issue that the subject takes a turn.
I have seen the idea of school district consolidation work all of my life. Here along the coast, where most cities enjoy their own school district, the children in the cities of Pascagoula and Gautier have for decades been guided by one school district, the Pascagoula Municipal Separate School District. While there are some obvious factions of rivalry that exist between the two citizenry, the students, parents, and school staffs all have allowed this system to work and work well. What other school district can tout not one, but two national Blue Ribbon high schools?
When you talk school district consolidation, there are more than just dollars and cents to figure; you have to account for the communities you are affecting. The elected leaders and the general public of the cities and counties must be willing to enter into school consolidation, or it will never work. While cross town or county rivalry is all in good fun, there must be an overarching sense that such merging is beneficial to all involved and doesn't adversely impact one area more than another. Believe me, people keep score even in the best of environments.
Along a similar vein, school districts are their own taxing districts. The citizens, businesses, and industries located within those districts all make up the tax base for the area schools. We all choose to live in or relocate to an area for a reason, i.e. schools, employment, quality of life, etc. Redrawing these districts will greatly impact the level of funding schools obtain thus impacting the level of service they will be able to provide putting the quality of education enjoyed now by some areas at risk while increasing the viability of others.
Take the Pascagoula School District for example. The Pascagoula School District has a total current enrollment of approximately 7,100 students with 70% eligible for free or reduced lunch. The demographics are 43% white, 47% black, and 10% Hispanic, Asian, etc. The estimated local per pupil expenditure for Pascagoula is $4,765 as compared to the Mississippi local average expenditure of $2,476. Redrawing the school taxing district or mandating consolidation with a neighboring school district would significantly impact Pascagoula schools and the students currently residing in the area.
Of course, playing Robin Hood with school taxing districts is not a new idea. Going on three years ago, then-State Senator Tommy Robertson, at the urging of county officials, authored legislation and attached it to a bill allowing for Jackson County, Moss Point, and Ocean Springs school districts to essentially rob the Pascagoula School District of its tax dollars from the Chevron Refinery, saying that the industry was located in the county, not the City of Pascagoula and that the taxes collected should be shared by all county school districts. While the refinery has always been in the Pascagoula district since its inception and school taxing districts are not held to municipal boundaries, nor have they ever been state-wide, the legislation passed and attempts to repeal the unconstitutional law has yet to be approved by the state legislature. The law is now being challenged and is scheduled to be heard sometime in the spring of 2010.
In theory, Robin Hood is a great children's story, robbing from the oppressive rich to give to the belittled poor, but such action is terrible economic and taxing policy. The term "fairness" has been thrown around for such efforts, saying it is only "fair" for all to benefit, at least to some percent, from the wealth enjoyed by some. No slice of the proverbial pie is adequate when you are entitled by law to the full pie. I contend that rewriting law and robbing taxing districts to simply meet the whims of the day is damaging not only to an area but to the core beliefs of this country and to the Constitution. But I digress.
When talking school consolidation, it would seem prudent to further discuss local funding. For my friends around the state, this will not be an easy pill to swallow, but local communities should be funding themselves at an appropriate level so as not to depend so heavily on the state for assistance. I am not a fan nor a proponent of tax increases; we pay too much, too often now. However, if we as a state are to ever advance our education system, local school districts must begin to tax their local residents at a level so they can pay the bills, and yes, that includes my own. Relying on the state to subsidize local school districts is a disease we must cure. The Mississippi Adequate Education Program (MAEP) has been a politically charged joke for too long. Education funding is the number one burden on the backs of taxpayers in our state and it's high time the state change its course and encourage local school districts to adequately fund their own districts. Please don't misunderstand me; our state's children are worth the investment but if you want to talk school consolidation, then separate the wheat from the tares and require all districts to fund themselves at an appropriate level. It will be quickly seen as to what districts need consolidation.
Another line of thought being promoted locally and in the Capitol is the expansion of the charter schools law. By definition, charter schools are public, nonsectarian schools created through a contract or charter with a state approved granting agency, usually a school district but at times a for-profit organization. They are publicly funded but operate outside some of the traditional school policies and regulations. Supporters of charter schools contend that these schools create competition within the public school system and serve to improve the education for all children. Opponents of charter schools contend that such schools drain the traditional public schools of motivated, involved families and create a competition of funding resources and community perception, essentially creating a publically funded "private" school.
Many in my own political party, even some local state elected officials, are pushing to broaden charter school legislation. I am not here to debate the pros and cons of charter schools, however, I am of the opinion that charter schools may be of some merit in a number of areas around our state at some point in the future, just not now given our state's financial situation. Promoting charter schools while pushing school district consolidation would by definition be an oxymoron. On one hand the state is compelled to reduce non-essential education spending through consolidation while on the other hand the state would authorize the expansion and implementation of more schools which would require more tax dollars and only for a specific, select few students. Such talk at this juncture given our financial condition would be unwise indeed.
The issue of school consolidation is sure to be one storyline worth tracking over the next few months, with the state legislature gaveling in next week and the Commission on Mississippi Education Structure slated to issue a report by April 1, 2010. Below are a few quotes from others on this issue you might find interesting:
"It's been my observation everybody wants to consolidate everybody else's district, but not their own," said House Education Committee Chair Cecil Brown, D-Jackson.
"I think I might disappear if consolidation happened in some of my school districts," said Senate Education Chair Videt Carmichael, R-Meridian.
"I'm being told by people who study these numbers that because of their financial situations, the state could be looking at taking over 30 districts, maybe more..If the state of Mississippi is taking them over, that could be justifiable reason for merging those districts," said State Senator Doug Davis, R-Hernando.
"I don't think anyone can show the governor where there's any great savings by consolidating. I don't really see consolidating schools being a huge topic in the legislature this session," said Dr. John Jordan, interim state superintendent of Mississippi schools.
While I for one am not opposed to school district consolidation in theory especially given our financial circumstances, I believe much needs to be considered and carefully worked through if our state is going to take up this mantle. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as has been done with the Congressional health care reform debate, isn't prudent. Gov. Barbour has served our state well thus far and I am sure he will guide this ship just as diligently. The team he's enlisted on the Commission will be facing an enormous task. I only hope that at the end of the day sound Constitutional principles will be upheld (especially in terms of taxing districts) while thinking first of the students that will be impacted, the affect on and the responsibility of the local communities, and the application of sound fiscal guidelines that will buoy our state now and in the future.
I would agree that there would seem to be a duplication of services (primarily in administration) in our current school district format, especially when you consider the number of students being served in some of the more rural, sparsely populated areas in our state versus the denser, urban regions. It would seem obvious to contend that some level of cost savings would be gained by consolidating school districts given the amount that is spent on hiring highly educated, experienced superintendents and other administrative staff. At first blush, such an idea as consolidation has merit. It is only until you begin to talk through the practicality and impact of the issue that the subject takes a turn.
I have seen the idea of school district consolidation work all of my life. Here along the coast, where most cities enjoy their own school district, the children in the cities of Pascagoula and Gautier have for decades been guided by one school district, the Pascagoula Municipal Separate School District. While there are some obvious factions of rivalry that exist between the two citizenry, the students, parents, and school staffs all have allowed this system to work and work well. What other school district can tout not one, but two national Blue Ribbon high schools?
When you talk school district consolidation, there are more than just dollars and cents to figure; you have to account for the communities you are affecting. The elected leaders and the general public of the cities and counties must be willing to enter into school consolidation, or it will never work. While cross town or county rivalry is all in good fun, there must be an overarching sense that such merging is beneficial to all involved and doesn't adversely impact one area more than another. Believe me, people keep score even in the best of environments.
Along a similar vein, school districts are their own taxing districts. The citizens, businesses, and industries located within those districts all make up the tax base for the area schools. We all choose to live in or relocate to an area for a reason, i.e. schools, employment, quality of life, etc. Redrawing these districts will greatly impact the level of funding schools obtain thus impacting the level of service they will be able to provide putting the quality of education enjoyed now by some areas at risk while increasing the viability of others.
Take the Pascagoula School District for example. The Pascagoula School District has a total current enrollment of approximately 7,100 students with 70% eligible for free or reduced lunch. The demographics are 43% white, 47% black, and 10% Hispanic, Asian, etc. The estimated local per pupil expenditure for Pascagoula is $4,765 as compared to the Mississippi local average expenditure of $2,476. Redrawing the school taxing district or mandating consolidation with a neighboring school district would significantly impact Pascagoula schools and the students currently residing in the area.
Of course, playing Robin Hood with school taxing districts is not a new idea. Going on three years ago, then-State Senator Tommy Robertson, at the urging of county officials, authored legislation and attached it to a bill allowing for Jackson County, Moss Point, and Ocean Springs school districts to essentially rob the Pascagoula School District of its tax dollars from the Chevron Refinery, saying that the industry was located in the county, not the City of Pascagoula and that the taxes collected should be shared by all county school districts. While the refinery has always been in the Pascagoula district since its inception and school taxing districts are not held to municipal boundaries, nor have they ever been state-wide, the legislation passed and attempts to repeal the unconstitutional law has yet to be approved by the state legislature. The law is now being challenged and is scheduled to be heard sometime in the spring of 2010.
In theory, Robin Hood is a great children's story, robbing from the oppressive rich to give to the belittled poor, but such action is terrible economic and taxing policy. The term "fairness" has been thrown around for such efforts, saying it is only "fair" for all to benefit, at least to some percent, from the wealth enjoyed by some. No slice of the proverbial pie is adequate when you are entitled by law to the full pie. I contend that rewriting law and robbing taxing districts to simply meet the whims of the day is damaging not only to an area but to the core beliefs of this country and to the Constitution. But I digress.
When talking school consolidation, it would seem prudent to further discuss local funding. For my friends around the state, this will not be an easy pill to swallow, but local communities should be funding themselves at an appropriate level so as not to depend so heavily on the state for assistance. I am not a fan nor a proponent of tax increases; we pay too much, too often now. However, if we as a state are to ever advance our education system, local school districts must begin to tax their local residents at a level so they can pay the bills, and yes, that includes my own. Relying on the state to subsidize local school districts is a disease we must cure. The Mississippi Adequate Education Program (MAEP) has been a politically charged joke for too long. Education funding is the number one burden on the backs of taxpayers in our state and it's high time the state change its course and encourage local school districts to adequately fund their own districts. Please don't misunderstand me; our state's children are worth the investment but if you want to talk school consolidation, then separate the wheat from the tares and require all districts to fund themselves at an appropriate level. It will be quickly seen as to what districts need consolidation.
Another line of thought being promoted locally and in the Capitol is the expansion of the charter schools law. By definition, charter schools are public, nonsectarian schools created through a contract or charter with a state approved granting agency, usually a school district but at times a for-profit organization. They are publicly funded but operate outside some of the traditional school policies and regulations. Supporters of charter schools contend that these schools create competition within the public school system and serve to improve the education for all children. Opponents of charter schools contend that such schools drain the traditional public schools of motivated, involved families and create a competition of funding resources and community perception, essentially creating a publically funded "private" school.
Many in my own political party, even some local state elected officials, are pushing to broaden charter school legislation. I am not here to debate the pros and cons of charter schools, however, I am of the opinion that charter schools may be of some merit in a number of areas around our state at some point in the future, just not now given our state's financial situation. Promoting charter schools while pushing school district consolidation would by definition be an oxymoron. On one hand the state is compelled to reduce non-essential education spending through consolidation while on the other hand the state would authorize the expansion and implementation of more schools which would require more tax dollars and only for a specific, select few students. Such talk at this juncture given our financial condition would be unwise indeed.
The issue of school consolidation is sure to be one storyline worth tracking over the next few months, with the state legislature gaveling in next week and the Commission on Mississippi Education Structure slated to issue a report by April 1, 2010. Below are a few quotes from others on this issue you might find interesting:
"It's been my observation everybody wants to consolidate everybody else's district, but not their own," said House Education Committee Chair Cecil Brown, D-Jackson.
"I think I might disappear if consolidation happened in some of my school districts," said Senate Education Chair Videt Carmichael, R-Meridian.
"I'm being told by people who study these numbers that because of their financial situations, the state could be looking at taking over 30 districts, maybe more..If the state of Mississippi is taking them over, that could be justifiable reason for merging those districts," said State Senator Doug Davis, R-Hernando.
"I don't think anyone can show the governor where there's any great savings by consolidating. I don't really see consolidating schools being a huge topic in the legislature this session," said Dr. John Jordan, interim state superintendent of Mississippi schools.
While I for one am not opposed to school district consolidation in theory especially given our financial circumstances, I believe much needs to be considered and carefully worked through if our state is going to take up this mantle. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as has been done with the Congressional health care reform debate, isn't prudent. Gov. Barbour has served our state well thus far and I am sure he will guide this ship just as diligently. The team he's enlisted on the Commission will be facing an enormous task. I only hope that at the end of the day sound Constitutional principles will be upheld (especially in terms of taxing districts) while thinking first of the students that will be impacted, the affect on and the responsibility of the local communities, and the application of sound fiscal guidelines that will buoy our state now and in the future.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Response to Sound Off
Response to Sound Off
Below is a letter to the editor of the Mississippi Press regarding a few comments printed in the Sound Off column on Saturday, September 26, and Sunday, September 27. I, unlike these Sound Off callers, take responsibility for what I say and do and willing put my name to it. Please read the letter below for further understanding:
-----------------------
Letter to Editor of Mississippi Press:
I want to take a minute to clarify a comment I made at the Pascagoula Main Street Awards Gala. It seems it struck a nerve with someone who apparently routinely uses the Sound Off as a means of expression. Since it is my normal practice to speak directly to those who need assistance but can't due to the unnamed accusation, I would be remiss if I did not attempt to address this concern with all of you. Since the Sound Off caller is unnamed (which is just one problem I have with such forums) I cannot address this directly to them; I am forced to direct it to you all in hopes that it reaches the few.
The unnamed Sound Off caller is quoted as saying, "I went to the Pascagoula Main Street Gala last night, which was very nice. Some very deserving people won awards. The only issue I had was with the one councilman who was there. He made a comment about the cowards calling in on Sound Off. That's unfair to call your constituents cowards. If we can't talk at council meetings and we don't know your phone number, are we not supposed to have an opinion? Sound Off has been great to show that people do care about our community."
If I were to be able to address this caller's concerns directly, I would concur that the event was excellent. I've attended them all, having been a part of the team that first implemented the Gala. Yes, each year we have sought to highlight some very deserving people as we did this year. And yes, I was the only councilman there other than the mayor which is why I am responding. Unlike the nameless caller, I respond to offer my remarks and attach my name.
I would then seek to first clarify my comments and ensure they applied them in the proper context. I encourage you all to read the transcript of the speech by visiting www.frankcorder.com/blog.
After the proper context was understood, I would then seek to discuss my distaste for the Sound Off and such nameless forums. Since I cannot speak directly to that caller, please read the blog I wrote a while back entitled "Quit Sitting on the Sidelines." It discusses my opinion of the Sound Off and other nameless forums: http://www.frankcorder.com/blog/?y=2009&m=4.
After that discussion, I would seek to ease their minds as to this comment - "That's unfair to call your constituents cowards. If we can't talk at council meetings and we don't know your phone number, are we not supposed to have an opinion?"
With the phrase "your constituents" it must mean you live in Ward 4. If you do live in Ward 4, within the past 2 years, I have canvassed that ward on foot a total of 6 times from one edge to the other handing out cards with my name, cell phone number (which most elected officials aren't so quick to give out), and email address on them. I also held the first ever Ward 4 Dialogue where I invited as many people as possible to a town hall style meeting and I'm planning another for this year. In addition, I have a website listing my cell phone number and email address. Plus, City Hall has the number and has been told to freely give out my cell as needed. The number is also on the City's website. Most, if not all, who were in attendance know where I work and many have called me there. I also have a weekly TV and radio show that normally gives my email address and on occasion my cell phone number. So for one not to be able to find my phone number or email address with the slightest of effort is to me a little absurd especially since I have most of the email addresses of those in attendance and have emailed most of you all at least once over the past few months.
As to the "coward" comment. If you've read the two links I provided above, I trust that is clarified. The exact quote from my speech was "...so don't be one of those nameless, spineless accusers in the Sound Off or on those internet blogs. Don't talk down about those around you. If you've got something to say, say it productively and be ready to invest yourself in solving the issue at hand."
The part of the Sound Off comment saying "we can't talk at council meetings" is blatantly false. My colleagues and I, in this current council and the previous one, have always encouraged attendance at council meetings and always seek productive citizen comments. There is a process provided to be added to the agenda formally, yes, but we also ask for comments from the audience every meeting even if you don't follow that process. We want to hear from you.
Again, all of this should and could have been said directly to that nameless Sound Off caller if they would have addressed me directly instead of running to such a forum. I have sought to be extremely available and accessible during my tenure and am probably one of the more involved and visible elected officials out there. I say this not to gloat or not demonstrate humility, but I say this since I attend so many meetings and host many others and I know the other elected officials that attend as well. I always ask for comments, criticisms, complaints, and praises. I want to hear them all. It takes us all listening and being engaged to make our city what we all want it to be.
So to you who did not call but read the comment, I apologize for the long discourse. To you who did call, I'm glad you attended the Gala; I'm sure I saw you there. Perhaps I even shook your hand. I wish you had caught me afterwards or contacted me the next day. But since apparently you don't have my number or email, my cell is 228.623.1236 and my email is frank@frankcorder.com. If I don't answer the cell immediately (which is rare) leave a message and I'll call you back as soon as possible. By the way, you are always welcome to come to the council meetings. Hopefully you will not remain a nameless accuser but will be proud enough to address such concerns directly to me or others and then help us make a difference. We could use your passion.
Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman
Cell: (228) 623.1236
Email: frank@frankcorder.com
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Transcript of speech given at Pascagoula Main Street Awards Gala
Transcript of speech given at
You see, Rocky is the classic American story. A man of modest means yearning to be something other than "just another bum from the neighborhood," so he does what he has learned to do best while trying to survive on the streets in I have a file where I keep quotes that have touched my life through the years, and in it are many such axioms from Rocky. One quote is taken from the latest installment in the series, Rocky Balboa. The old fighter is talking to his son. The son likes to blame his dad for all of his life's shortcomings. The son, like many of us, blames everyone other than himself for the way his life is. In one of the most inspirational moments in the movie, Rocky seeks to encourage his son. Listen to what he says…"You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't how hard you hit; it's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done. Now, if you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hit, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you are because of him, or her, or anybody. Cowards do that and that ain't you. You're better than that!" Wise words from an old fighter. The essence of what Rocky is saying here can be applied to many areas in life, including our passion and zeal for the betterment of your community as well as the state of business here in We have all weathered literal and economic storms. We've been through alot, but yet we are still standing. No, all of the problems and issues are not resolved and redevelopment and recovery still seems to be moving largely at a snail's pace, but As the manager of a local small business I have seen the decline in my revenues and have had to rethink and restructure. Change is no longer a four letter word (think about that for a minute)- change is a must. Do or die. I have looked into the eyes of dedicated, longtime employees as I tell them they are being laid off, knowing full well what their families will be facing. I feel the stress and know the sleepless nights. From where I sit not only as a business manager but more so as an elected official, I believe that it is time that we light a fire under ourselves and our fellow citizens by uniting together to encourage everyone who truly cares about Pascagoula and its future to make our money and ourselves count! As Rocky said, "If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth." The truth is that those in And I have to tell you…I hear almost every day how we need more retail shopping options or more restaurants or more this kind of business or that kind of business - we've all heard and said this. The truth is that unless we first support what we have now we will never have more. I have talked to many struggling business owners and managers who have caught the vision of what Being in business in But we as small business managers and owners must take ownership as well for how our line of business fairs. There is no pile of money any government is providing - local, state, or federal. It is up to us to do the small things right first. And we can begin by asking ourselves the tough questions - * Am I open during hours to best serve the public or best serve me? * Am I selling products or services that are marketable in this area or just selling items that I want? * Am I pricing myself out of this market? This is a major concern in this area and we must acknowledge this fact. * Is my customer service up to a level where people feel welcome and served with a smile? Am I people focused? * Am I open to criticism, good and the bad, or do I shy away from productive ideas? * Am I properly capitalized before I go into business? This is another major factor. So often people go into business ill prepared for what that means. And we're all left thinking that we won't support new businesses and that is not always the case - sometimes new business owners just don't quite know the ropes fully. * Is my product or service consistent? Can I go in a get the same steak cooked the same way each time? Can I get the same shirt or dress? Is there someone at the desk that I'll know when I walk in? Consistency is key. And on and on I could go. The small business owner and manager must think about the public, the location and area the business is in, and be open to change if they want to succeed and thrive. It's not 1959; heck it's not 1999; it's 2009 and we must meet the challenges head on. Local government also must come to the table. We as a City must be business friendly and think customer service above all else just like these businesses. This means at City Hall, at Code Enforcement, and elsewhere. We must create an environment where businesses want to locate and people want to live. The great German author and philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe once stated, "Treat a man as he appears to be and you make him worse. But treat a man as if he already were what he potentially could be, and you make him what he should be." I believe this to be true in regards to As long as the citizens and leaders of It is time we treat It has been my personal goal for some time now to invest myself into So don't be one of those nameless, spineless accusers in the Sound Off or on those internet blogs. Don't talk down about those around you. You got something to say, say it productively and be ready to invest yourself in solving the issue at hand. When people come to me with an issue, I'll be more than happy to listen and counsel, but I'm going to expect action from that person. We must lift each other up and hold each other accountable. So let me encourage you to represent a positive Each of us need to be treating Pascagoula as if it had already reached its potential, thus enabling Pascagoula to be what it should be - a truly great place to live, work, worship and play. And don't forget what that old fighter said, "It ain't how hard you hit; it's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done. Now, if you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hit, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you are because of him, or her, or anybody. Cowards do that and that ain't you. You're better than that" - you're from |
Monday, September 7, 2009
Testing the Waters
Testing the Waters
Bath time with the kids is always an adventure, from earplugs to tangled hair to the inevitable wet floor. My son can't wait to jump in the tub and splash around. My daughter, however, has always been more cautious, carefully sticking her toes in first to test the temperature of the water. She doesn't want it to be too hot or too cold; she wants it to be just right (Goldilocks and the three bears come to mind, but I digress).
It seems the Obama administration is doing just that - they are testing the waters to see just how deep they can wade in while promoting the ideals of socialism (and let's be perfectly honest, they are following the playbook nicely) before they dive in completely. If they go too quick, the chances for re-election and marble effigies dwindle. If they go too slow, the Democrats may miss their opportunity while they still hold the keys to both Houses of Congress and the White House (2010 is shaping up to be fun). The Democrats and this administration are surgically working through their long standing belief that increased government control will dictate fairness and equality and to them, create progress and success. They want to see just how far the American people are willing to be pushed without creating an insurmountable backlash while continuing to craft and implement their plans.
The administration started immediately upon swearing in (perhaps even before given the Democrat controlled Congress and a lame duck President under fire) with the call to pass the Stimulus Plan. We all heard the passionate pleas. This was out of national need, we were told, while they rattled their sabers and promoted political doom and gloom scare tactics. The result was $787 billion of spending (which we can't back in the treasury) and a national debt that grows larger day after day.
Then came the auto industry collapse and in came Obama riding in on his white horse to save the day. The bailouts were injected, the industry was demonized, and Obama came out of the deal as POTUS and CEO of our new government automaker.
Next, the administration and Congress have sought to increase regulations and taxation on energy providers in an already tight economy and under challenging times as these same companies are being asked to do more with less. Cap and trade is a not so subtle attempt to align us with the liberal energy policies of Europe and Asia. Call it Global Warming 101. You think your power bill is high now, just wait my friends; you ain't seen nothing yet (pardon the slang).
The great debate of our day has followed - healthcare. It has taken center stage this summer. The administration tossed it out there and has steadily back tracked as citizens have in mass loudly opposed much of the reforms. Yet a bill still looms for a possible late fall or early winter vote. Word out of the White House is that they will present a bill if Congress can't agree on one. The old adage says that a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, and this administration will take every step, every inch it seems that we'll give them. They'll use emotion, passion, promises, politics, and altered facts and figures all to sell their reforms so that we as citizens will buy into them. Truman once said, "If you can't convince them, confuse them.". The administration is ascribing to this philosophy well. Increased national debt, higher taxes, a single payer "trigger option" system, and the eventual collapse of the entire medical insurance industry and perhaps many private medical practices will be the result of this current proposal.
Now comes a nationwide back-to-school address from the President to all of our school children. On the surface this sounds like a great lesson in civics and an opportunity to take part in history. But when the administration put out lesson plans encouraging teachers to follow with their classes, complete with questions asking how each child could help the President, instead of the country, eyebrows were raised. Reagan and Bush Sr. both offered classroom videos and both were met with equal resistance from the opposition party. But now, it's the conservatives questioning the anointed one's school room address, not for what Obama will say (a stay in school message is always welcome), but for what he and his administration propagate and imply through their promotional materials and the suspect timing of the address (on the heels of declining approval ratings, heated public forums, new Congressional session, etc.).
In each of these cases, the boundaries of our Republic are being pushed. They are inching us toward bigger government at grave costs, possibly even the beginnings of socialism. Big government is not the answer. Hard work, individual responsibility, care and compassion for your fellow man, and a sense of pride in your city, state, and nation can guide us back to our Republic's foundation. Government should provide the opportunity for all to succeed, not ensure our success through mandated reforms that increasingly regulate individual lives, the private sector, and play Robin Hood with our tax dollars. Yet, most of us sit idly by hoping for the best with no real commitment to resist and no true care to understand the facts.
Don't be fooled by the pretty packages. Now is not the time for the faint of heart. We must not let down our guard. The administration is indeed testing the water. Unfortunately, in many places across our land, the water is warming to such ideals. How will they find it near you?
Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
