The most basic principle to being a free American is the notion that we as individuals are responsible for our own lives and decisions. We do not have the right to rob our neighbors to make up for our mistakes, neither does our neighbor have any right to tell us how to live, so long as we aren’t infringing on their rights. Freedom to make bad decisions is inherent in the freedom to make good ones. If we are only free to make good decisions, we are not really free.
Socialist ideologies blur this line between self reliance and government control because the mistakes of the individual are spread to everyone else. Thus the government becomes very interested in your decisions and way of life, with the justification that you could make a mistake others will have to pay for. The end result is, of course, that everyone loses privacy and control over their own lives. Whether they realize it or not, they are no longer truly free.
This week in Congress brought some examples from both sides of the aisle on these issues of freedom and personal responsibility. We talked about online gambling quite a bit with the markup of some legislation dealing with the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. Now, I am not someone who enjoys throwing money away, but I am someone who understands issues of freedom and self-ownership. As such, I strongly support the right of free people to do with their hard-earned money as they please. Gambling is ultimately a matter of personal choice, and some people find it entertaining. As long as I am not forced to underwrite their losses, it is none of my business what gamblers do with their time and money.
There are those that feel online gambling is morally wrong and financially irresponsible, which I do not argue with, but they also feel that because of this, the government should step in and prevent or punish people for taking part in these activities. This attitude is anathema to the ideas of liberty.
However, most of the same anti-gambling crowd sang an entirely different tune when we discussed giving away free birth control in schools. All of a sudden, they did not want others making decisions about their lifestyles and families, while the other side felt the need to interfere. It is interesting that the same group that feels parents have the absolute right and ability to control how and when their kids get birth control, are powerless to monitor their internet activity and must enlist government regulatory assistance to protect against gambling or predators. Which is it? Are parents the ones to parent, or not? Both sides switch their positions based on the subject at hand, but the philosophy of liberty is elegantly simple and consistent.
I can assure you of this – once the government gains a foothold into regulating the internet, even for benevolent reason, the wonders of the free internet will soon be a thing of the past. Parents, with modern day technology, are quite capable of monitoring their children’s internet activity. The internet must remain a government-free zone to maintain its integrity and usefulness to modern society, and that is something for which I will continue to fight.
Saturday
Monday
A MAJOR VICTORY FOR TEXAS
I am pleased to report that last week we received notice that the Texas Department of Transportation will recommend the I-69 Project be developed using existing highway facilities instead of the proposed massive new Trans Texas Corridor/NAFTA Superhighway. According to the Texas Transportation Commissioner, consideration is no longer being given to new corridors and other proposals for a new highway footprint for this project. A major looming threat to property rights and national sovereignty is removed with this encouraging announcement.
Public outcry was cited as the main reason for this decision. I was very impressed to learn that the TxDOT received nearly 28,000 public comments on this matter, and that some 12,000 Texans attended the 47 public hearings held earlier this year. They could not ignore this tsunami of strong public opinion against the proposed plans. I was especially proud of how informed my constituents became on the subject, and how eloquently and respectfully they spoke and conducted themselves, considering how upsetting the plans were for our communities in Texas .
This is a major victory for the people of Texas , and a reminder of what we can accomplish with civic involvement. The informed and active citizen truly is a force to be reckoned with, as we have seen with the defeat of this proposal. We must keep fighting the good fight, and remain ever diligent against the encroachments of big government. We must do this if we wish to maintain our traditional standard of living in this country. As tempting as it may be to simply live our lives with no regard to government, apathy will inevitably be punished by ever more government intrusion. That is what this fight was all about. We can win if we stick together.
However, now is not the time to rest on our laurels. The bittersweet aspect of this victory is that we had to fight at all. We took time away from family and friends, doing other things, to attend these meetings, inform others, write letters, post signs and submit our complaints, and we should not have had to. Government should let us be, if we are peaceful citizens, harming no one. In a perfect world, government could be trusted to act in the best interests of the people without overwhelming pressure of this kind. This is not a perfect world. Constant pressure is needed to keep government in check, and we succeeded this time. But this will not be the last time citizen efforts and involvement will be required. We still face many unreasonable encroachments of big government today, from confiscatory, economy-strangling taxation to creeping disregard of the right of habeas corpus and other Constitutional rights, to thousands of nuisance bureaucratic regulations interfering with our every day lives. We have drifted far from what the founding fathers envisioned for this nation. Last week was just one victory towards getting back on the right path. We must continue to hold politicians’ feet to the Constitutional fire. If I had to guess, they will probably try to implement the NAFTA Superhighway again sometime in the future.
It is a never-ending battle, but it must be fought, and can be won. I am proud to stand with my constituents in this fight, and in the other fights we have ahead of us.
Public outcry was cited as the main reason for this decision. I was very impressed to learn that the TxDOT received nearly 28,000 public comments on this matter, and that some 12,000 Texans attended the 47 public hearings held earlier this year. They could not ignore this tsunami of strong public opinion against the proposed plans. I was especially proud of how informed my constituents became on the subject, and how eloquently and respectfully they spoke and conducted themselves, considering how upsetting the plans were for our communities in Texas .
This is a major victory for the people of Texas , and a reminder of what we can accomplish with civic involvement. The informed and active citizen truly is a force to be reckoned with, as we have seen with the defeat of this proposal. We must keep fighting the good fight, and remain ever diligent against the encroachments of big government. We must do this if we wish to maintain our traditional standard of living in this country. As tempting as it may be to simply live our lives with no regard to government, apathy will inevitably be punished by ever more government intrusion. That is what this fight was all about. We can win if we stick together.
However, now is not the time to rest on our laurels. The bittersweet aspect of this victory is that we had to fight at all. We took time away from family and friends, doing other things, to attend these meetings, inform others, write letters, post signs and submit our complaints, and we should not have had to. Government should let us be, if we are peaceful citizens, harming no one. In a perfect world, government could be trusted to act in the best interests of the people without overwhelming pressure of this kind. This is not a perfect world. Constant pressure is needed to keep government in check, and we succeeded this time. But this will not be the last time citizen efforts and involvement will be required. We still face many unreasonable encroachments of big government today, from confiscatory, economy-strangling taxation to creeping disregard of the right of habeas corpus and other Constitutional rights, to thousands of nuisance bureaucratic regulations interfering with our every day lives. We have drifted far from what the founding fathers envisioned for this nation. Last week was just one victory towards getting back on the right path. We must continue to hold politicians’ feet to the Constitutional fire. If I had to guess, they will probably try to implement the NAFTA Superhighway again sometime in the future.
It is a never-ending battle, but it must be fought, and can be won. I am proud to stand with my constituents in this fight, and in the other fights we have ahead of us.
Tuesday
IRAQ OR THE ECONOMY?
What is the importance of the war in Iraq relative to other current issues? This is a question I am often asked, especially as Americans continue to become increasingly aware that something is very wrong with the economy. The difficulty with the way the question is often asked relates to the perception that we are somehow able to divide such issues, or to isolate the cost of war into arbitrarily defined areas such as national security or international relations. War is an all-encompassing governmental activity. The impact of war on our ability to defend ourselves from future attack, and upon America ’s standing in the world, is only a mere fraction of the total overall effect that war has on our nation and the policies of its government.
The cost of this particular war is enormous, and therefore its of great importance. There is no single issue that is more important at this particular time. The war has, of course, made us less safe as a nation and damaged our credibility with allies and hostile nations alike. Moreover, years of growing deficits have been spurred on by the high price tag of war, and the decision to pay that price primarily by supplemental spending rather than traditional “on-budget” accounting.
War takes what would otherwise be productive economic capacity and transfers both that capacity, and the wealth it would generate in normal, peaceful, times into far less economically viable activities. It also impacts budget priorities in ways that are detrimental to our nation. I have often pointed to the fact that we are building bridges in Iraq while they are collapsing in the United States.
All war, but most particularly war funded by monetary inflation, bleeds a country in multiple ways. Obviously, many of the young people who are in the military literally give their blood, and sometimes their lives, fighting in wars of this type. Meanwhile, those who do not fight the war, but fund it, are forced to pay both the immediate costs, as well as seeing their long term purchasing power erode, as the twin pillars of debt and inflation are foisted upon the backs of current taxpayers and future generations. Neither conspiracy nor coincidence explains steep increases in the price of gas as the war drags on. No, this is simply a reality of the inflationary policies that, among other things, make this war possible.
As people are continually asked to choose whether our nation’s teetering economy or the failed foreign policy of the past several decades is most important as we look forward, it is well for those of us who understand that these two issues are closely linked, to continue to explain this fact to our fellow citizens. To fix the problem requires a proper diagnosis.
The cost of this particular war is enormous, and therefore its of great importance. There is no single issue that is more important at this particular time. The war has, of course, made us less safe as a nation and damaged our credibility with allies and hostile nations alike. Moreover, years of growing deficits have been spurred on by the high price tag of war, and the decision to pay that price primarily by supplemental spending rather than traditional “on-budget” accounting.
War takes what would otherwise be productive economic capacity and transfers both that capacity, and the wealth it would generate in normal, peaceful, times into far less economically viable activities. It also impacts budget priorities in ways that are detrimental to our nation. I have often pointed to the fact that we are building bridges in Iraq while they are collapsing in the United States.
All war, but most particularly war funded by monetary inflation, bleeds a country in multiple ways. Obviously, many of the young people who are in the military literally give their blood, and sometimes their lives, fighting in wars of this type. Meanwhile, those who do not fight the war, but fund it, are forced to pay both the immediate costs, as well as seeing their long term purchasing power erode, as the twin pillars of debt and inflation are foisted upon the backs of current taxpayers and future generations. Neither conspiracy nor coincidence explains steep increases in the price of gas as the war drags on. No, this is simply a reality of the inflationary policies that, among other things, make this war possible.
As people are continually asked to choose whether our nation’s teetering economy or the failed foreign policy of the past several decades is most important as we look forward, it is well for those of us who understand that these two issues are closely linked, to continue to explain this fact to our fellow citizens. To fix the problem requires a proper diagnosis.
Thursday
A GOOD IDEA
Maverick GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul has booked an arena in Minneapolis for a "mini-convention" that could steal some of John McCain's thunder just days before he accepts the Republican nomination.
A Paul campaign aide said the Texas congressman hopes to pack about 11,000 supporters into the Williams Arena at the University of Minnesota on Sept. 2, which coincides with the second day of the Republican National Convention at the Xcel Energy Center in neighboring St. Paul.
Paul, 72, will announce details for the rally Thursday at the start of the Texas Republican Convention in Houston.
The campaign hopes the daylong event will "send a message to the Republican Party," Paul campaign spokesman Jesse Benton tells the Tribune-Review.
"There is a growing surge of people out there just craving" for a return "to traditional American government, limited government that places personal liberty first and places an emphasis on personal responsibility and essentially gets out of the way after that," Benton said. "The buzz we get from supporters is that they are very eager to come to St. Paul and very eager to send a strong message."
McCain spokesman Jeff Sadosky declined comment. Paul has won 35 convention delegates, but was not invited to speak in St. Paul because he refuses to endorse McCain, according to his campaign.
Paul's plan to stage his own event is bad news for McCain, said G. Terry Madonna, a political scientist at Franklin & Marshall College.
"Conventions are about demonstrating unity and purpose and showcasing the nominee. They are media events made for prime-time TV. Any distraction from the central message of the convention is not helpful," Madonna said.
McCain clinched the nomination on March 4 after gaining enough delegates to reach the 1,191 needed to win. Although Paul conceded in March he'd lost his bid for the White House, he's maintained a scaled-down campaign.
Paul, a Green Tree native, surprised most of the political establishment by raising about $35 million, mostly via the Internet. Paul's Libertarian-leaning views created a following across a broad political spectrum.
Paul did not win any primaries or caucuses, but continued to pick up significant votes in key states such as New Mexico and Pennsylvania even after McCain had clinched the nomination.
Jerry Shuster, a political communications expert at the University of Pittsburgh, said Paul's timing for the event is likely to put him in a media spotlight during at least one day of the convention.
Paul's forum probably won't be aimed at hurting the GOP, Shuster said.
"He never seemed to be an open opponent of the Republican Party, but more about what the Republicans need to get back to," Shuster said. "This is a golden opportunity for him to do that. The media is all going to be there so it's just a matter of going down the block to see him.
"You know he's going to get his 15 minutes on national news."
A Paul campaign aide said the Texas congressman hopes to pack about 11,000 supporters into the Williams Arena at the University of Minnesota on Sept. 2, which coincides with the second day of the Republican National Convention at the Xcel Energy Center in neighboring St. Paul.
Paul, 72, will announce details for the rally Thursday at the start of the Texas Republican Convention in Houston.
The campaign hopes the daylong event will "send a message to the Republican Party," Paul campaign spokesman Jesse Benton tells the Tribune-Review.
"There is a growing surge of people out there just craving" for a return "to traditional American government, limited government that places personal liberty first and places an emphasis on personal responsibility and essentially gets out of the way after that," Benton said. "The buzz we get from supporters is that they are very eager to come to St. Paul and very eager to send a strong message."
McCain spokesman Jeff Sadosky declined comment. Paul has won 35 convention delegates, but was not invited to speak in St. Paul because he refuses to endorse McCain, according to his campaign.
Paul's plan to stage his own event is bad news for McCain, said G. Terry Madonna, a political scientist at Franklin & Marshall College.
"Conventions are about demonstrating unity and purpose and showcasing the nominee. They are media events made for prime-time TV. Any distraction from the central message of the convention is not helpful," Madonna said.
McCain clinched the nomination on March 4 after gaining enough delegates to reach the 1,191 needed to win. Although Paul conceded in March he'd lost his bid for the White House, he's maintained a scaled-down campaign.
Paul, a Green Tree native, surprised most of the political establishment by raising about $35 million, mostly via the Internet. Paul's Libertarian-leaning views created a following across a broad political spectrum.
Paul did not win any primaries or caucuses, but continued to pick up significant votes in key states such as New Mexico and Pennsylvania even after McCain had clinched the nomination.
Jerry Shuster, a political communications expert at the University of Pittsburgh, said Paul's timing for the event is likely to put him in a media spotlight during at least one day of the convention.
Paul's forum probably won't be aimed at hurting the GOP, Shuster said.
"He never seemed to be an open opponent of the Republican Party, but more about what the Republicans need to get back to," Shuster said. "This is a golden opportunity for him to do that. The media is all going to be there so it's just a matter of going down the block to see him.
"You know he's going to get his 15 minutes on national news."
Tuesday
RISING ENERGY PRICES AND THE FALLING DOLLAR
Oil prices are on the minds of many Americans as gas hits $4 a gallon, and continues to surge. How high can prices go? How can we solve these problems? What, or who, is to blame?
Part of the answer lies in understanding bubbles and monetary inflation, but especially the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve is charged with controlling inflation through interest rate manipulation, however, many fail to realize that creating money, and therefore inflation, is really its only tool. When the Federal Reserve inflates the dollar as drastically as it has in the past few decades, the first users of the newly created money go in search of investments for their dollars. They must invest this money quickly and aggressively before it loses value. This causes certain sectors to expand beyond what would naturally occur in the free market. Eventually the sector overheats and the bubble bursts. Overinvestment in dotcoms eventually led to a collapse of the NASDAQ. Next we had the housing bubble, and now we are seeing the price of oil being bid up in the creation of another new bubble. Investors are now looking to commodities like oil, for stability and growth as they pull capital out of real estate. This increased demand for investment vehicles related to oil contributes to driving up the price of the actual product.
If the Fed continues with its bubble blowing policies of the past, the new commodities bubble will continue to grow, gas prices will continue to go up, as the value of your dollars go down. We will see an overinvestment in these commodities as solutions are desperately sought for a supply shortage, which is only part of the problem. Make no mistake, though, this is not the free market at work. Government manipulations have added levels of complication and unintended consequences to the marketplace.
This is not the time for members of Congress to take political potshots at each other, or to imagine that the free market is somehow to blame. This is the time to understand and fix problems. That begins with making sure the decision makers have a firm grasp on the causes of the problems and possible effects of their decisions. This is absolutely crucial if we want to get it right this time. That is why I am in the process of calling for hearings on Capitol Hill on how the falling value of the dollar affects energy prices.
Governments need to get out of the way and let the people get back to work so that we can get our economy back on stable footing. Our destructive regulatory environment, confiscatory tax policies, and managed, rather than free trade have chased many businesses overseas. The bottom line is average Americans are being seriously hurt by these flawed policies, and they are not getting good information about the true dynamics at work. The important thing now is to get the diagnosis absolutely correct so we can administer the appropriate treatment and move on to a healthier economic future. To do this it is absolutely necessary to address the subjects of central banking and fiat money.
Part of the answer lies in understanding bubbles and monetary inflation, but especially the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve is charged with controlling inflation through interest rate manipulation, however, many fail to realize that creating money, and therefore inflation, is really its only tool. When the Federal Reserve inflates the dollar as drastically as it has in the past few decades, the first users of the newly created money go in search of investments for their dollars. They must invest this money quickly and aggressively before it loses value. This causes certain sectors to expand beyond what would naturally occur in the free market. Eventually the sector overheats and the bubble bursts. Overinvestment in dotcoms eventually led to a collapse of the NASDAQ. Next we had the housing bubble, and now we are seeing the price of oil being bid up in the creation of another new bubble. Investors are now looking to commodities like oil, for stability and growth as they pull capital out of real estate. This increased demand for investment vehicles related to oil contributes to driving up the price of the actual product.
If the Fed continues with its bubble blowing policies of the past, the new commodities bubble will continue to grow, gas prices will continue to go up, as the value of your dollars go down. We will see an overinvestment in these commodities as solutions are desperately sought for a supply shortage, which is only part of the problem. Make no mistake, though, this is not the free market at work. Government manipulations have added levels of complication and unintended consequences to the marketplace.
This is not the time for members of Congress to take political potshots at each other, or to imagine that the free market is somehow to blame. This is the time to understand and fix problems. That begins with making sure the decision makers have a firm grasp on the causes of the problems and possible effects of their decisions. This is absolutely crucial if we want to get it right this time. That is why I am in the process of calling for hearings on Capitol Hill on how the falling value of the dollar affects energy prices.
Governments need to get out of the way and let the people get back to work so that we can get our economy back on stable footing. Our destructive regulatory environment, confiscatory tax policies, and managed, rather than free trade have chased many businesses overseas. The bottom line is average Americans are being seriously hurt by these flawed policies, and they are not getting good information about the true dynamics at work. The important thing now is to get the diagnosis absolutely correct so we can administer the appropriate treatment and move on to a healthier economic future. To do this it is absolutely necessary to address the subjects of central banking and fiat money.
Monday
SOWING MORE BIG GOVERNMENT WITH THE FARM BILL
Recently Congress sent the latest Farm Bill to the president. The bill features brand new federal programs, expansion of existing subsidies, more food stamps and more foreign food aid. This bill hits the taxpayer hard, while at the same time ensuring food prices will remain elevated. The president vetoed the bill, citing concerns over its costs and subsidies for the wealthy in a time of high food prices and record farm income. Nevertheless, this over-reaching, government-expanding Farm Bill will soon be law.
The truth is most farmers simply want honest pay for honest work. However, if the government is providing competing farms with advantages, and one wants to remain a farmer, one must seek a proportional advantage from government. It is a difficult position for the farmer. Some are better at qualifying for taxpayers’ largesse than others as evidenced by the fact that more than 60% of the subsidies go to just 10% of recipients, edging out the small family farm. This entire system is unfair and demoralizing. It disproportionately benefits big agribusiness at the expense of struggling family farms.
Third world countries also lose with these continued government manipulations. Agricultural subsidies lead to overproduction, which leads to foreign food aid as a form of dumping. By “dumping” government-created agricultural surpluses, agrarian economies are artificially kept in a constant state of economic depression. The would-be third world farmer cannot compete with “free” grain, thus he and his countrymen remain perpetual beggars rather than competitive producers. Also, by keeping food prices high, we keep more of our own citizens dependent on government food stamps, instead of paying fair market prices for food.
Free trade helps farmers and consumers much more than this convoluted system of subsidies, surpluses and central planning. Newly opened markets would create increased demand for what we produce. There is absolutely no reason we trade with China , yet not with Cuba . With energy and transportation prices as high as they are, opening up trade with a country as close as Cuba just makes sense. The recent power shift from Fidel Castro to his brother Raul, and the somewhat positive steps he has taken, provides an opportunity to lift the embargo.
Removing unreasonable, confiscatory tax policies would also make good farm policy. We need to permanently repeal the estate tax, which would again take a devastating 55% cut of family farms upon death of an owner. This tax will force the sale of many family farms, and further huge corporate agriculture.
Those who believe federal farm programs benefit independent farmers, should take note that after 70 years of this type of government intervention, small farms continue to struggle while large corporate farms control an ever-increasing share of the agricultural market. Subsidies for agribusiness should be stopped and the free market should be allowed to work. With commodity and food prices on the rise, Congress had an opportunity to scale down government controls and taxpayer funding of agriculture. Instead, despite the warning sent by an 18% approval rating, Congress stubbornly opted for more of the same.
The truth is most farmers simply want honest pay for honest work. However, if the government is providing competing farms with advantages, and one wants to remain a farmer, one must seek a proportional advantage from government. It is a difficult position for the farmer. Some are better at qualifying for taxpayers’ largesse than others as evidenced by the fact that more than 60% of the subsidies go to just 10% of recipients, edging out the small family farm. This entire system is unfair and demoralizing. It disproportionately benefits big agribusiness at the expense of struggling family farms.
Third world countries also lose with these continued government manipulations. Agricultural subsidies lead to overproduction, which leads to foreign food aid as a form of dumping. By “dumping” government-created agricultural surpluses, agrarian economies are artificially kept in a constant state of economic depression. The would-be third world farmer cannot compete with “free” grain, thus he and his countrymen remain perpetual beggars rather than competitive producers. Also, by keeping food prices high, we keep more of our own citizens dependent on government food stamps, instead of paying fair market prices for food.
Free trade helps farmers and consumers much more than this convoluted system of subsidies, surpluses and central planning. Newly opened markets would create increased demand for what we produce. There is absolutely no reason we trade with China , yet not with Cuba . With energy and transportation prices as high as they are, opening up trade with a country as close as Cuba just makes sense. The recent power shift from Fidel Castro to his brother Raul, and the somewhat positive steps he has taken, provides an opportunity to lift the embargo.
Removing unreasonable, confiscatory tax policies would also make good farm policy. We need to permanently repeal the estate tax, which would again take a devastating 55% cut of family farms upon death of an owner. This tax will force the sale of many family farms, and further huge corporate agriculture.
Those who believe federal farm programs benefit independent farmers, should take note that after 70 years of this type of government intervention, small farms continue to struggle while large corporate farms control an ever-increasing share of the agricultural market. Subsidies for agribusiness should be stopped and the free market should be allowed to work. With commodity and food prices on the rise, Congress had an opportunity to scale down government controls and taxpayer funding of agriculture. Instead, despite the warning sent by an 18% approval rating, Congress stubbornly opted for more of the same.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
