Right Minded Online

Conservative Commentary from Mark A. Rose

Archive for December 2007

Historical marker blogging

without comments

Downtown Memphis, Tennessee

Downtown Memphis, Tennessee

Written by Mark

December 31, 2007 at 8:47 AM

Posted in History, Pictures

Tagged with

Ridiculous

without comments

According to the the Recording Industry Association of America, it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

Whether customers may copy their CDs onto their computers — an act at the very heart of the digital revolution — has a murky legal foundation, the RIAA argues. The industry’s own Web site says that making a personal copy of a CD that you bought legitimately may not be a legal right, but it “won’t usually raise concerns,” as long as you don’t give away the music or lend it to anyone.

Let me get this straight. If I go buy a CD, bring that CD home, copy it to my computer, and listen to that music on my iPod instead of my stereo, and never share those music files in any way, I have still broken the law? Come on.

Written by Mark

December 31, 2007 at 8:37 AM

Posted in Crime

Titans-Chargers II

without comments

They did it. The Tennessee Titans, who were 7-6 following the game that got away, won their last three games of the regular season, including a 16-10 victory at Indianapolis yesterday evening to clinch the very last playoff spot in the AFC. Even though Tony Dungy pulled many of his starters in the second quarter, the Titans were still down 10-7 when quarterback Vince Young left with an injury in the third quarter. Enter Kerry Collins, who completed 10 of 13 passes for 106 yards. The ever-dependable Rob Bironas nailed three second-half field goals, and the Titan defense shut out the Colts over the final 24 minutes to secure the victory.

It is the first time in four years that the Titans have made the playoffs. They will play the Chargers in San Diego on Sunday. Should the Titans win there, they would be “rewarded” with a trip to New England the following week.

What’s amazing about the Titans is their efficiency. They finished the season 10-6, but scored only four more points than they allowed during the course of the season (301-297). Given that ratio, they should have gone about 8-8. Although the Titans finished with the sixth-best record in the AFC, there were nine teams (out of 16) that scored more points. They got it done on defense, however, giving up the fifth-fewest points in the AFC. And the Titans really do not have a true superstar on the teams. There are many good players — Vince Young, Rob Bironas, LenDale White, Albert Haynesworth, Kyle Vanden Bosch — but no real superstars. Also, the Titans had just 9 passing touchdowns the entire season, and 28 touchdowns in all. By comparison, Tom Brady of the Patriots threw 50 touchdown passes by himself. So thank goodness for Rob Bironas, who personally accounted for 133 (44%) of the Titans’ points. He attempted 39 field goals during the season, and missed only four of them. But Bironas is not the team’s MVP. That distinction belongs to Albert Haynesworth, with whom the Titans were 10-3, and without whom they were 0-3. Enough said.

Written by Mark

December 31, 2007 at 8:36 AM

Posted in Sports

Tagged with

Eye of the Tiger

without comments

The Memphis Tigers beat the Arizona Wildcats last evening 76-63 at the FedEx Forum in lovely downtown Memphis, Tennessee. The Tigers (ranked #2 in the AP, ESPN/USA Today, and the RPI) trailed 14-6 early on, but closed the first half on a 28-10 run, and were ahead by ten points at halftime over Arizona (ranked #17 in the AP, #18 in the ESPN/USA Today, and #1 in the RPI).

With the win, the Tigers move to 11-0, matching their second-best start ever. They also began the 1982-1983 season 11-0, and were ranked #1 in January of that season. The same day (Monday) the polls came out, the Tigers traveled to Virginia Tech and promptly lost something like 69-56, thus falling out of the #1 spot the next week. It was the only time Memphis has ever been ranked #1.

Three years later, the Tigers started the season 20-0, and peaked at #2. That season, North Carolina was the #1 team, but lost a game, putting Memphis in the position of moving into the #1 spot. On a Saturday, two days before the new polls would be released, Memphis played a Metro Conference game on the road, and lost. The team? Virginia Tech. And so we did not move up to #1.

That was 22 years ago, and we have not been ranked as high as #2 since then until this season. (We did reach #3 early in the 1995-1996 season, and spent some time at #3 two years ago.)

Memphis has some good wins this year. We have now beaten three ranked teams (USC, Georgetown, and Arizona). We are 3-0 against Big East teams (UConn, Cincinnati, and Georgetown), 2-0 against the Pac-10 (USC and Arizona), and 1-0 against the Big 12 (Oklahoma). The only game that has been decided by less than 10 points was the USC game.

Just like 22 years ago, Memphis is chasing the North Carolina Tar Heels, who are ranked #1. This is particularly frustrating, because the Tar Heels are 12-0, but have played a powder-puff non-conference schedule. They are ranked #4 in the RPI. The Tigers, of course, are ranked #2 in the RPI, and knocked off the #1 RPI team last evening. I had hoped the Tigers would leapfrog UNC after the Georgetown win last Saturday, but we didn’t. Although Memphis received several first-place votes, UNC received more, and retained their position at the top. Perhaps we will move up when the new polls come out tomorrow, but I’m not getting my hopes up anymore.

At any rate, the 2007-2008 Memphis Tigers are possibly the best we’ve ever had since I began following them during the 1981-1982 season. They are better than last year’s team, which went 33-4 and advanced to the Elite Eight, even better than the 2005-2006 team that also went 33-4 and advanced to the Elite Eight. They may even be better than the 1984-1985 team that went 31-4 and on to the Final Four. None of those teams started 11-0. The 1982-1983 team that started 11-0 eventually got knocked out of the NCAA Tournament by Houston in the regional semifinals. The 1985-1986 team that started 20-0 went 8-6 thereafter, and lost in the second round of the NCAA Tournament to LSU on a buzzer-beater. But neither of those teams ran the non-conference gauntlet the way this year’s team is doing.

Written by Mark

December 30, 2007 at 8:50 AM

Posted in Sports

Tagged with

Historical marker blogging

without comments

Beale Street, Memphis

Beale Street, Memphis

Beale Street, Memphis

Beale Street, Memphis

Written by Mark

December 30, 2007 at 8:48 AM

Posted in History, Pictures

Tagged with

Historical marker blogging

without comments

Beale Street, Memphis

Beale Street, Memphis

Written by Mark

December 27, 2007 at 8:47 AM

Posted in History, Pictures

Tagged with

Unpublished column on how Right Minded would have handled the latest GOP debate

without comments

The Republican presidential candidates held a debate in Iowa on December 12 that really turned out to be a dud, primarily because the candidates (with the exception of Fred Thompson) are so unwilling to consistently put forth conservative ideas. The debate was hosted Carolyn Washburn of the Des Moines Register, a liberal, which presents another area of frustration. The GOP keeps allowing mainstream media liberals to moderate their debates. What I wouldn’t give to see just one debate moderated by Ann Coulter. At any rate, here are some of the questions that were asked of the candidates, followed by the answers that I would have given had I been a participant.

Q: The comptroller general has said the U.S. faces a tsunami of debt that is a great threat to our national security. Do you agree our country’s financial situation creates a security risk? And why or why not?

A: Not at all. We face much larger security risks from terrorists, those nations which harbor terrorism, and tyrannical nations that either have or are pursuing nuclear weapons.

Q: What sacrifices would you ask Americans to make to lower the country’s debt?

A: None. Elected officials will have to be the ones to make sacrifices by giving up some of the power they have accumulated in creating our entitlement system. We have spent more money fighting the War on Poverty just in the last 42 years than the entire national debt. We must therefore dismantle the liberal government programs that have wasted so much of our resources while accomplishing so little.

Q: Are there programs or situations that are so important that you’d be willing to run a deficit to pay for them?

A: Yes, defending the freedom and autonomy of United States of America.

Q: Who in this country is paying more than a fair share of taxes relative to everyone else: the wealthy, the middle class, the poor or corporations?

A: Very few Americans actually pay a fair share of taxes. Most either pay a disproportionately large share of their income, or little to no share at all. This is why I support the fair tax, which is based entirely on consumption, or at least a flat tax that would ensure that everyone pays the same percentage of their income.

Q: How many of you believe global climate change is a serious threat and caused by human activity?

A: I don’t. Humans are incapable of altering the climate, and those changes that do occur are purely the result of natural cycles that would occur with or without us.

Q: What impact on the economy would be acceptable in order to reverse global warming and greenhouse gas emissions?

A: Ignorance is our most expensive “commodity.” Global warming is nothing more than an attempt by leftists to gain more control of our lives and our paychecks in the form of government regulation and higher taxes. I say that, because every solution that is advocated by global warming alarmists involves more government control and higher taxes. They have been able to advance their hokey theories only because of the ignorance and gullibility of others. Zero impact is the only acceptable impact on the economy with respect to global warming.

Q: What educational standards does the U.S. need to adopt or improve to compete in the global economy, and what will you do to move us toward those standards, and what’s your timetable?

A: None. The federal government does not belong in the business of establishing educational standards. Schools and curriculum are best controlled at the local level — not by lawmakers and bureaucrats sitting in Washington, D.C. My goal as president would be to abolish the Department of Education and cut taxes accordingly.

Q: What’s the biggest obstacle standing in the way of improving education in the United States, and how would you address it?

A: Government and teachers unions, both of which protect the status quo at the expense of effective education. The best way to improve education is to get the federal government out of education and promote school choice. I would do this by offering tax credits (or, in the very least, tax deductions) for families who send their children to private schools or homeschool. No person or entity has a greater interest in a child’s education than that child’s parents, and I trust parents to make those decisions. Competition works in the free market, and it would work in the education market if we only allowed it.

Q: Do you think it’s more important for the next president to be a fiscal conservative or a social conservative?

A: Both. President Bush’s three greatest achievements have been 1) executing the War on Terrorism, 2) cutting taxes, which have spurred economic growth, lowered the unemployment rate, and lowered federal deficits, and 3) getting two conservatives placed on the Supreme Court. All of these will yield long-lasting benefits for the United States, and these achievements reflect a blend of both fiscal and social conservatism. Conservatism, after all, works every time it’s tried.

Written by Mark

December 26, 2007 at 6:49 PM

An insatiable sense of entitlement

without comments

Hurricane Katrina revealed liberalism at its filthiest. New Orleans is a city owned and operated lock, stock, and barrel by Democrats, and where Democrats are in charge, you can bet there’s a complex web of public assistance. Such is New Orleans, where the hurricane uncovered a large population of citizens who are so dependent on government for everything that they could not follow through on the simple act of leaving town on their own. We all remember how Congress couldn’t resist throwing public assistance money at hurricane victims, and it has since been revealed that a big chunk of our tax dollars were misused by various recipients for various reasons.

Michelle Malkin had a recent post which exposes one resident living in taxpayer-subsidized housing complaining about her plight:

Sharon Jasper, a former St. Bernard complex resident presented by activists Tuesday as a victim of changing public housing policies, took a moment before the start of the City Hall protest to complain about her subsidized private apartment, which she called a “slum.” A HANO voucher covers her rent on a unit in an old Faubourg St. John home, but she said she faced several hundred dollars in deposit charges and now faces a steep utility bill.

An accompanying photograph in the Times-Picayune article reveals that Ms. Jasper is also the proud owner of a 60-inch color TV.

Related story: Hurricane Katrina rent subsidies expire–along with Houstonians’ patience

Written by Mark

December 26, 2007 at 6:47 PM

Historical marker blogging

without comments

Beale Street, Memphis

Beale Street, Memphis

Beale Street, Memphis

Beale Street, Memphis

Written by Mark

December 25, 2007 at 3:31 PM

Posted in History, Pictures

Tagged with

Historical marker blogging

without comments

Beale Street, Memphis

Beale Street, Memphis

Written by Mark

December 24, 2007 at 8:44 AM

Posted in History, Pictures

Tagged with

Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

without comments

It appears that the federal government is becoming more involved in the mortgage “crisis.”

A deal with the mortgage industry will freeze the low introductory “teaser” rates for five years on some subprime mortgages – loans to people with spotty credit histories. The rates were to climb much higher, making the mortgages unaffordable for many people and putting their homes at risk of foreclosure.

The hope is that this agreement will buy time for the housing market to rebound. That would make it easier for these homeowners to refinance to more affordable fixed-rate loans.

But estimates are that only about 250,000 people will end up getting a rate freeze – a fraction of the 3.5 million home loans that could go into default over the next 2 1/2 years.

The administration also is working with Congress to increase the $417,000 cap on the size of loans that the big mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can handle. This step could help in high-cost housing areas such as California.

In addition, the administration is supporting legislation that would boost aid to lower-income homeowners by increasing the scope of mortgage insurance programs handled by the Federal Housing Administration.

These efforts may help at the margins. They do not, however, address one of the biggest threats to the economy: a spreading credit crisis triggered by the soaring defaults on subprime mortgages.

When did it become the duty of taxpayers to bail out those who behave irresponsibly by purchasing homes they cannot afford? What about those of us who have made our mortgage payments for years without ever missing? In other words, those who behave with financial responsibility are not only paying our own way, we are being asked to pay the way for those who have behaved with irresponsibility and no foresight.

Written by Mark

December 23, 2007 at 10:53 AM

Posted in Economics, Government

Ideology over substance

without comments

We know liberals are all about helping the poor, right? Wrong.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State is threatening two South Carolina school districts with legal action if they continue to allow a church-sponsored shoe giveaway.

Laces 4 Love began in 2001 after founding members noticed schoolchildren wearing shoes that didn’t fit or were inappropriate for cold weather. The group has distributed more than 12,000 pairs of free shoes to students throughout Edgefield and Aiken counties.

The Alliance Defense Fund is offering free legal defense to the school districts.

“It is unconscionable to deny needy schoolchildren new shoes simply because the group sponsoring the program is a religious one,” ADF’s David Cortman said. “Instead of honoring acts of human kindness through this program, Americans United has once again used its bully tactics to try to prohibit a very worthwhile effort.”

Jan Markell, founder of Olive Tree Ministries, said the culture makes it difficult for Christians to do the good works Christ commanded.

“This is a ministry reaching out in Christian love, and if I had the opportunity to give these children shoes, I would be first in line to do it,” she said. “But we’ve always got the Left standing in our way and trying to block righteousness.”

[Link]

Written by Mark

December 23, 2007 at 10:44 AM

Courthouse blogging

without comments

Today we have the Shelby County courthouse situated in downtown Memphis, Tennessee. This is the 58th Tennessee courthouse I have personally photographed and posted here at Right Minded.

Today we have the Shelby County courthouse situated in downtown Memphis, Tennessee. This is the 58th Tennessee courthouse I have personally photographed and posted here at Right Minded.

Written by Mark

December 23, 2007 at 10:34 AM

Posted in Pictures, Tennessee

Tagged with

No blues on Beale Street today

without comments

Exactly one week after taking my ten-year-old to the Sommet Center in Nashville to take in the Memphis Tigers’ less-than-impressive 65-41 victory over MTSU, we journeyed to the FedEx Forum in downtown Memphis to watch the Tigers take on the fourth-ranked Gerogetown Hoyas earlier today. It was the first time Memphis had ever hosted a game between two top 5 teams, and the #2 Tigers hit on all cylinders, beating Georgetown convincingly, 85-71.

With the win, the 10-0 Tigers have made an excellent case to take over the nation’s #1 ranking when the polls come out Monday. The current #1 team, North Carolina, beat Nicholls State and UC-Santa Barbara this week — not exactly heady competition — while the Tigers beat two Big East teams by double digits, having won 79-69 at Cincinnati on Wednesday evening.

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

FedEx Forum

Beale Street

Beale Street

Written by Mark

December 22, 2007 at 7:42 PM

Posted in Pictures, Sports

Tagged with

An addendum

without comments

A good friend of mine, I’ll call him “D,” proofreads a lot of my columns before they are submitted, and the subject matter from yesterday’s piece was right down his alley. D is well-read in this area and had some valuable comments that would have gone well in the column, but there was simply no room left, so I got his permission to post them on the blog instead.

It is an interesting coincidence that you sent this particular article to me at this particular time. I have been reading three books written by A. S. Neill during the early twentieth century (”The Problem Child,” “The Problem Parent” and “The Problem Family”). He was an educator who ran a “free school” in England and ascribed to far left liberal theology. He once told an organizer for the Communist Party that one of the main reasons he couldn’t align himself with the CP was because they did not embrace the idea of sexual freedom for youth (i.e., they weren’t amoral enough).

In his book, “The Problem Family” (1949) he wrote that a person can not “believe in freedom and religion at the same time,” and asserted that the terms are “contradictory.” He was one of the first members of the far left to help fuel the modern movement to promote radical individualism and to suggest that a person cannot be fully free unless he frees himself from all “higher authorities”-including God. He and his humanist allies believed in the innate goodness of man and that if man were freed from all authority, society would naturally become more peaceful, loving and caring. Whereas, such beliefs might allow a relatively small community (like A. S. Neill’s free school) to develop a workable set of laws based on a shared morality, it is ridiculously idealistic to think such beliefs could be the foundation for a government designed to rule over a country as diverse and large as the United States. Only a belief in God, and a certain set of moral truths, can establish the starting point for guaranteed natural rights (as you pointed out). Otherwise, freedoms designed and dispensed by a tribune of men could always be withdrawn by a later tribunal. No freedoms would be guaranteed. A stable, unified government could never exist, no universal moral codes could ever be adopted, and society would naturally devolve into anarchy and hedonism (as you also rightly pointed out).

The main thing that Romney understands, and made clear in his speech, is that there is a big difference between the individual’s freedom to believe whatever he wishes, and the need for general moral concepts, based on a “greater universal wisdom” (i.e., God), to support the important government interest to foster unity, brotherhood and purpose of mission. Radical individualism and freedom without religion-when applied to an entire country-fosters the exact opposite: disunity, egotism, and lack of a shared mission (simply because the belief in original sin is correct and “original goodness” is incorrect!). A country that can foster neither unity, brotherhood nor purpose, is a country destined for the trash heap of history.

I don’t know if you’d like to incorporate a little about A. S. Neill to provide a historical context for Barry Lynn’s nonsensical viewpoint. However, I thought you would find it interesting nonetheless-especially Neill’s specific comment about how religion and freedom are contradictory terms. Barry Lynn is disingenuous because he knows that his viewpoint has less to do with the Constitution than it does to further his humanist belief that man is innately good and does not “need” a Creator. That’s the danger of Barry Lynn’s view of the Constitution as a “living document”-a living document can be interpreted to mean anything someone wants it to mean and gives the humanists an open door to abort America’s religious heritage and to create a path to a new godless future. If Romney is genuine in what he says, I would think he would also understand how important it is to find justices for the Supreme Court who will interpret the Constitution in context with its original intent.

Written by Mark

December 19, 2007 at 6:50 AM

Posted in Church & State

Today’s Lebanon Democrat column: “Religious faith essential to American democracy”

without comments

Back on December 6, Mitt Romney gave what may be the best speech so far this campaign season. Entitled “Faith in America,” it was delivered at the George Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas, and was a stirring reminder of the importance of religious faith throughout the history of the United States.

One of many praiseworthy quotes made during the speech contains an unforgettable passage from our second president. Said Romney, “There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation’s founders, for they, when our nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator. And further, they discovered the essential connection between the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom. In John Adams’ words: ‘We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion… Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.’”

Indeed, religion without freedom results in tyranny, while freedom without religion results in anarchy and hedonism.

Our great nation was founded by wise and Godly men who understood that every person is created equal and that we are granted, by our Creator, the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The United States is also the freest, wealthiest, and most powerful nation on earth. The latter is a direct result of the former.

Barry Lynn, who heads the organization Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU), ripped Governor Romney for his speech, asserting “I was disappointed in Romney’s statement. The founders of our Constitution meant for religion and government to be completely separate.”

No, they did not.

Those who advocate separation of church and state are not rooted in the intent of the founders. Their interpretation does not reflect what the U.S. Constitution states, but rather what they wish it stated.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution begins “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The first part is known as the Establishment Clause. The second part is known as the Free Exercise Clause. Overall, it’s perhaps the most misinterpreted sixteen words in the entire document.

When the Bill of Rights was written in 1789, several states had their own religions. The Establishment Clause was written to prevent Congress from establishing a national church, which would have trumped the various state churches. The words “separation of church and state” do not appear in the Constitution, explicitly or implicitly. That phrase was found in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists dated January 1, 1802.

The phrase “separation of church and state” wasn’t introduced into American jurisprudence until 1947 by Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black (Everson v. Board of Education). This was 158 years after Congress passed the Bill of Rights.

There are three elements to the Establishment Clause. They are: (1) Congress must (2) make a law that (3) establishes a religion. Not only did Romney’s speech violate no part of the Establishment Clause, but was completely protected by the Free Exercise Clause.

Civil libertarians have done a masterful job the last forty years or so of convincing a significant percentage of the American people that separation of church and state is in our founding document and that those words are actually engraved in the Bill of Rights. Not only are the words not there, the concept isn’t either. It is an extra-constitutional construct fabricated by those who are motivated by an anti-evangelical bias and who endeavor to re-write the history of our founding in order to portray our founders as secularists.

In other words, the gains of civil libertarians with respect to religion and government are coincident with the retreat of those who are ignorant of the letter of the Constitution and the content of our history. You don’t have to be a lawyer to understand this. The Constitution is written in plain English. The words mean the same today what they meant when they were written.

If you really want to know what how the Founders felt about government and religion, all you have to do is read the Declaration of Independence, or Washington’s Thanksgiving address of October 14, 1789, which began “WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour….”

At any rate, Lynn’s hypocrisy is glaring. While routinely criticizing conservative Christians and intimidating evangelical churches into silence during election season, Lynn rarely (if ever) offers criticism of liberals who use churches to make campaign speeches.

For example, Senator Barack Obama makes routine campaign appearances in churches, and in June he appeared at the United Church of Christ gathering in Hartford, Connecticut. Barry Lynn excused the appearance, asserting “I find no evidence that a violation of the federal tax law against church electioneering occurred.” Likewise, when Senator Obama was endorsed by Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson, Lynn excused the mix of politics and religion with the excuse “He [Robinson] stressed that his endorsement was as an individual, not as bishop.”

In October, Senator Obama spoke at the Redemption World Outreach Center in Greenville, South Carolina, where he remarked “I think it’s important, particularly for those of us in the Democratic Party, to not cede values and faith to any one party.”

Also in October, while speaking before religious leaders and others at what he called an “interfaith forum on climate change,” Senator Obama said God has entrusted humans with the responsibility of caring for the earth, and “we are not acting as good stewards of God’s earth when our bottom line puts the size of our profits before the future of our planet.”

And you could hear the crickets chirping at AU.

There’s nothing non-partisan about Barry Lynn or his organization, which prides itself on being non-partisan. In fact, the title of his most recent book is “Piety and Politics: The Right-Wing Assault on Religious Freedom.” And you don’t have to be on AU’s website for very long to observe that this non-partisan organization is as left-wing as I am right-wing. I used to believe that civil libertarians weren’t necessarily against religion, just Christianity, but a more accurate statement might be that civil libertarians aren’t necessarily against religion, just when it is espoused by conservatives.

Written by Mark

December 18, 2007 at 5:39 PM

Tax cuts for the rich

without comments

Don’t believe that the Bush tax cuts were for the wealthy. According to Treasurey Department statistics, as cited by Ben Cunningham, the top 1% of income earners made 21% of the income in the U.S. in 2000, and paid 37% of the taxes. By 2005, the top 1% still earned 21% of the income, but paid 39% of the taxes. The top 5% of income earners made 35% of the income in 2000, but paid 56% of the taxes. Five years later, this group earned 36% of the income, but paid 60% of the taxes. In other words, the supposed beneficiaries of the Bush tax cuts are paying a larger percentage of the taxes now than they did before the tax cuts.

Written by Mark

December 18, 2007 at 7:33 AM

Posted in Death & Taxes

Map maker

without comments

Ben Cunningham points the way.

Written by Mark

December 18, 2007 at 7:31 AM

Zero tolerance leads to zero common sense

without comments

A fifth-grader in Ocala, Florida has been arrested for bringing a knife to school — that she used to cut her meat at lunch.

Written by Mark

December 18, 2007 at 7:18 AM

Posted in Education

Today’s Lebanon Democrat column: “State budget woes lie in spending — not tax collections”

without comments

After four years of running enormous budget surpluses, the state of Tennessee is running in the red three months into the current fiscal year. Late last month, it was reported that tax collections were running $135.9 million less than what had been budgeted. Despite the fact that tax collections are up 3.2% over last year at this time, the budget passed by the Tennessee General Assembly earlier this year grew spending far beyond what the tax base can sustain.

In other words, we do not have a revenue problem. We never have. We do have a spending problem. In Tennessee, we have this thing called the “Copeland Cap,” which is supposed to limit the state’s annual budget increase to the rate of economic growth. Unfortunately, it only requires a simply majority vote to override the Copeland Cap, which the Legislature does pretty much every year.

As for the budget we’re operating under right now, not only did the General Assembly increase spending as much as the Copeland Cap allowed them to, they voted to increase the budget by $723 million ABOVE the cap, or $60.25 million dollars per month. In other words, had the Legislature abided by the Copeland Cap, we would instead be enjoying a surplus of nearly $45 million instead of a deficit of $135.9 million.

The Bredesen administration is trying to blame the deficit on a slow economy, yet the administration’s own figures show that unemployment in Tennessee is 4.6%, which is down from 5.1% a year ago. Besides, slowing economies don’t produce 3.2% in revenue growth.

Republicans are as much to blame as the Democrats this time. The 2007-2008 budget, which grew government beyond what our tax base can sustain, violated the Copeland Cap, squandered the previous year’s budget surplus, and raised the cigarette tax by 62 cents per pack could have been stopped in the Senate, where the the Speaker is a Republican and most of the committees are controlled by Republicans. Not only did the GOP let this behemoth slip through committee, only two Senators voted against it. (Mae Beavers was one of them.)

In the House, the vote was 87-8, which means that a large majority of the Republicans went along with the Democrats to pass the $28 billion budget.

As a solution, the Bredesen administration is conceding that some state services may have to be cut, or, as Finance Commissioner Dave Goetz laments, “we’re going to be putting together a much smaller improvement package for next year’s budget.” (Oh, the horror!)

In addition, the administration is poring over the list of items that don’t get taxed in Tennessee, such as prescription medicine, advertising, laundromats, and newspapers, among many, and will consider removing some of those exemptions in order to raise revenue. In all, the state will “lose” $6.4 billion in revenue because of all the things that aren’t taxed. At least the Bredesen administration calls this a loss. In truth, the state doesn’t lose anything through sales tax exemptions, because you cannot lose what you do not have in the first place.

So one way or another, we taxpayers are going to have to pay for the fiscal recklessness of the people we elect to public office. Like parents with out-of-control offspring, we always do.

What is sorely needed is for Republicans to start acting like Republicans and stop giving the Democrats everything they want. Democrats are Democrats. They are born to grow government. This is who they are.

Since the Senate is the one entity the GOP actually controls here in Tennessee, it would behoove Speaker Ron Ramsey and his fifteen fellow Republicans to start running the Senate the way Jimmy Naifeh runs the House — under total lockstep partisanship, where the Republicans would control every committee, and Democrats would be largely shut out of the process of passing legislation. No more Mr. Nice Guy.

Had the General Assembly stayed within the Copeland Cap, the issue of taxes and spending would be completely different than they really are. Nashville journalist and blogger Bill Hobbs, an expert on state finances, has studied the Copeland Cap and calculated that if it had been strictly adhered to over the years, the $28 billion budget would be less than $25 billion — a savings for taxpayers that would allow the total elimination of the sales tax on food and a reduction in the overall sales tax from 7 cents on the dollar to about 4.5 cents.

Instead, the Legislature has spent nearly every dime of four years worth of surpluses growing government, and we are to the point now that the taxpayers cannot keep up with our free-spending legislators. This is the same fiscally irresponsible behavior that brought us to the brink of a state income tax years ago, and, unless, Republicans can start behaving responsibly by insisting that the General Assembly restrain itself when passing budgets, it’s where we are headed again. We taxpayers learned a lesson from that debacle. Our elected representatives haven’t.

Written by Mark

December 11, 2007 at 2:58 PM