Conservative Compendium

Meddling Is What Rewards Congressmen With Campaign Funds

Brian Garst — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:16:00 +0000

Single issue organizations often try to piggy-back on the big issues of the day and gain publicity by tying major news items to their agenda. I can hardly fault them for it, but when they use bad logic in an effort to restrict freedoms, I must call them out.

Members of Congress who noted “no” on health care reform legislation late Saturday night have received $2.3 million more in campaign donations from health insurance interests than those who voted in favor of the legislation to overhaul of the nation’s health care system, according to analysis released by a coalition of campaign reform groups.

“The health care debate shows that our campaign finance system is as much in crisis as our health care system,” said David Donnelly, national campaigns director of Public Campaign Action Fund, the watchdog group that conducted the analysis for the coalition. “As measured in campaign donations, it clearly pays to be against reform and with the health insurance interests.”

There are several problems with this hyperventilating account of their findings. First, the difference in donations for the two sides isn’t all that great. One group got $12.5 and the other closer to $10 million. Yet clearly they want to paint it as nefarious to donate to people opposing PelosiCare, but it’s no problem for those who support it.

Which brings me to my second point. They are wrong to assert that the “vote shows the need to transform our current campaign finance system.” Their idea of transforming campaign finance is to restrict the freedom to financially support politicians on the basis of their views, and they argue this is necessary by inferring, but not substantiating, corruption when it comes to voting on health care reform. But their claim that it “clearly pays to be against reform” misses the point: it clearly pays to be on either side of the issue. The $2.3 million difference between being for or against the legislation is minimal compared to the $10+ million difference between not having and having a piece of controversial legislation to vote on in the first place.

Whether they are for or against the particular bills before Congress, both sides are financially better off for having the debate at all. The incentive then is not to switch sides for money, but to threaten governmental interference in all manner of issues, and as often as possible, in order to create more anxiety in the private sector. Every additional “crises” that needs “reform” will bring out new stakeholders with buckets full of cash who want to make sure they don’t get shafted in the process.

Restricting donations is not likely to work. Because both sides – industries who want favorable regulations and politicians who want money with which to seek reelection – are strongly motivated to get around any restrictions, they are unlikely to stop the flow of money. New ways will always emerge for it to get from pocket A into pocket B.

The best solution is not to limit our freedoms, but to limit the powers of Congress. The fewer issues that are within their regulatory purview, the fewer opportunities they have to go around kicking ant mounds in hopes of seeing which deep pockets get stirred up.

News Flash: Socialism Still Failing

Brian Garst — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 04:27:11 +0000

Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and some still find “perplexing” the failures of socialism:

This country may be an energy colossus, with the largest conventional oil reserves outside the Middle East and one of the world’s mightiest hydroelectric systems, but that has not prevented it from enduring serious electricity and water shortages that seem only to be getting worse.

President Hugo Chávez has been facing a public outcry in recent weeks over power failures that, after six nationwide blackouts in the last two years, are cutting electricity for hours each day in rural areas and in industrial cities like Valencia and Ciudad Guayana. Now, water rationing has been introduced here in the capital.

The deterioration of services is perplexing to many here, especially because the country had grown used to cheap, plentiful electricity and water in recent decades. But even as the oil boom was enriching his government and Mr. Chávez asserted greater control over utilities and other industries in this decade, public services seemed only to decay, adding to residents’ frustrations.

In other South American news:

Populist leaders in Latin America are increasingly making legal and political moves to silence their critics in the media, the president of the Inter American Press Association said Friday.

The leaders’ tactics include revoking broadcast licenses, fostering hostility toward journalists and giving a free hand to government supporters who have attacked broadcast stations, newsrooms and printing plants, said the association’s president, Enrique Santos Calderón.

The headline reads, “Latin American Leaders Seek to Rein in Media, Press Group Says,” but thanks to the President’s war on Fox News, the ‘Latin’ qualifier for such stories has been rendered superfluous.

The Lesson From Fort Hood

Brian Garst — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:10:18 +0000

The story of the Fort Hood shooting isn’t all that complicated. Muslim radicalizes and becomes jihadist. Radical jihadist then kills 13 infidels. It’s quickly becoming as common as boy meets girl.

The story of the lead-up to the shooting is far murkier. As the evidence continues to trickle out about the degree to which authorities were aware of Nidal Hasan’s radical beliefs, a single question emerges: just what the hell were they thinking by allowing this jihadist to remain in the military?

Hasan often railed against both U.S. wars in the Middle East and was known to have anti-American views and a propensity for seditious commentary. He also had ties with a radical mosque connected to the 9/11 attacks, and sought to communicate with a terrorist supporting, anti-American imam. Given what the FBI knew of Hasan’s views and actions, it is inexcusable that no action was taken. One can only conclude that excessive multiculturalism contributed to this failure. Questioning or removing a Muslim soldier for radical views would just be too insensitive.

This episode illustrates perfectly our self-imposed incapacity to deal with radical Islamic jihad. Yet we do not learn. Immediately after the attack, as with all radical jihadist attacks, our leaders wring their hands about an “anti-Muslim backlash” that is often predicted but never materializes. Everyone knows this isn’t about Muslims or Islam in general, but a particular and toxic strain that wages war against us. The denialist culture that allowed an outspoken, anti-American jihadist to remain in the US military despite frequent seditious outbursts continues unabated. When will we get serious and treat jihadism as the enemy that it is?

Recycling Is Out!

Brian Garst — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:11:15 +0000

What’s an environmentalist to do when even the epitome of green living – recycling – can’t be depended upon?

California’s State Agency Buy Recycled Campaign grew out of legislation passed in 1989, when times were simpler. Garbage was the enemy. Almost no one talked about global warming.

Now that the state is a leader in the war against climate change and seeking to shrink its carbon footprint, some say it’s time to adapt and measure the effort’s climate impact.

“You can’t automatically assume recycled content is good,” said Robert Tetz, former manager of the state’s environmentally preferable purchasing program at a conference this spring.

“You have to be careful about the energy and environmental impacts we incur in the process of recycling,” he continued. “When we talk about what’s green, a lot of the 100 percent-recycled paper we’re buying in California is not green.”

You know what’s good at informing people about comparative energy use? Prices. Any time recycling comes up I tell people the same thing: if it were really efficient to do it, someone (excluding government) would be paying you for it. While that happens for some commonly recycled items (like aluminum cans), it doesn’t for most.

When local and state governments stepped in to subsidize, and in many cases require, the recycling of goods, it was promoting energy inefficiency. This should have been obvious by the very fact that the state felt a need to force the behavior in the first place.

Most See No Improvement In Race Relations Since Obama’s Election

Brian Garst — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:58:59 +0000

Though they still think it will:

With the election of Barack Obama, the first African American to serve as president, an overwhelming majority of Americans believed that race relations in the United States would improve.

Most still do.

But less than half — 41% — of those surveyed say race relations have improved since Obama’s election in November 2008, the Gallup Poll has found — and one in five of those surveyed said relations had gotten worse.

You don’t say.

Shouldn’t He Like Us By Now?

Brian Garst — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:56:56 +0000

America’s troubles on the world stage were the result of being disliked – disliked because George W. Bush was such a terrible president. That’s what we were told. So why hasn’t a year of Barack Obama’s enlightened foreign policy leadership, promised as the antidote to Bush’s cowboy ineptitude, made the likes of Hugo Chavez less prone to delusional sabre rattling?

President Hugo Chavez ordered Venezuela’s military on Sunday to prepare for a possible armed conflict with Colombia, saying the country’s soldiers should be ready if the United States attempts to provoke a war between the South American neighbors.

“The best way to avoid war is preparing for it,” Chavez told military officers standing at attention during his weekly television and radio program.

Repeating an often-used military adage, he added, “If you want peace, prepare for war.”

Chavez told his supporters that President Barack Obama holds sway over Colombia’s government, and he cautioned the U.S. leader against using his allies in Bogota to mount a military offensive against Venezuela.

“Don’t make a mistake, Mr. Obama, by ordering an attack against Venezuela by way of Colombia,” he said.

It turns out that what we actually do is of little relevance to “world leaders” like this. We are a scapegoat. We are The Other upon which failing socialist dictators can direct the ire of the people, in hopes that they might be distracted their hungry bellies and diminishing freedoms – basically, from the inevitable mess created by a discredited ideology. Instead of operating under the delusion that Chavez is reacting to objective reality, we must realize that he will say things like this no matter what we do, nor who is president.

Does this mean we should just go around not caring who we cross or piss off? Of course not. The point is that we should focus on our national interest and not worry so much about why we are demonized, as if there were some way it could be stopped. So long as failing dictators need an enemy to rally against, we will be disliked. It’s a constant of international affairs, and therefore ought to be completely irrelevant to crafting policy.

Racists Protest Outside The White House

Brian Garst — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:40:41 +0000

Just don’t expect any hyperventilating from Chris Matthews:

Decrying Barack Obama as “white power in black face,” hundreds of African-Americans marched on the White House Saturday to protest policies of the first black US president, and demand that he bring US troops home.

More than 200 people gathered for the first public demonstration by African Americans against the Obama administration since his historic inauguration in January, and slammed the president for continuing what they described as Washington’s “imperialist” agenda around the world.

“We recognize that Barack Hussein Obama is white power in black face,” civil rights activist Omali Yeshitela, chairman of the Black is Back coalition which arranged the protest, called into a megaphone as the group marched outside the mansion’s gates.

We see once again that real racism is borne of left-wing, identity politics. There’s no reason why Obama’s race should have anything to do with troop levels in Afghanistan. There is no black or white policy involved, yet Obama is racially attacked because race-baiters have propagated the destructive idea that ones color has something to do with ones positions on certain issues, even those totally irrelevant to race. In the eyes of liberal, identity-politics practitioners, anyone who strays from the political bounds of their racial identity is fair game for racist attacks.

It’s Bipartisan!

Brian Garst — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:58:57 +0000

Two-hundred and nineteen Democrats and a single Republican voted to pass the health care monstrosity PelosiCare. The Republican was Anh “Joseph” Cao, recently elected to fill William “Frozen Money” Jefferson’s seat. He’s one of the most liberal Republicans in the House in a very blue district. So there isn’t much point getting worked up over his vote, beyond the amusement of listening to the spinners claim use it to claim bipartisanship.

The real bipartisan vote was the opposition, where 39 Democrats defected to oppose the bill. But let’s not kid ourselves, many (like Dennis Kucinich) did it because they think it didn’t offer enough socialism.

All is not lost. Like cap-and-trade has been to date, PelosiCare will likely get bogged down in the Senate. There’s also reason to believe that the House coalition won’t be sustainable if it passes the Senate and returns following reconciliation. It is imperative we keep the pressure on. They must know that there will be costs for destroying American health care, economic prosperity and our general liberties.

Here Comes The Vote

Brian Garst — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:21:59 +0000

The House floor is currently home to a Democrat circus as the latest health care monstrosity is “debated.” You can watch live on C-Span or check out Michelle Malkin’s liveblog.

By my count, we need only 9 of the 29 undecided votes to stop this bill.

Update: The public grows ever more opposed the longer we have to digest just what it is Democrats are trying to do. I bet that has something to do with why they want to do it as fast as possible.

Dems Short On Health Care Votes

Brian Garst — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:32:48 +0000

So says Steny Hoyer:

A House leader says Democrats haven’t yet lined up enough votes to pass their health care overhaul bill.

This couldn’t possibly be related, now could it? But worry not, Pelosi is no doubt busy cracking the whip to bring wayward members, concerned about pesky constituents, back into line with the government takeover of health insurance.