News reports indicate that senator Matt Bartle was interviewed by federal prosecutors as part of their investigation into corruption in Jefferson City. This along with the various investigations, guilty pleas and resignations from the Missouri legislature have prompted many to take up ethics reform.
Unsurprisingly, politics play a role. Democrats want to limit campaign contributions because they think doing so will hurt Republicans. Republicans agree it will hurt them and therefore are unlikely to support them. Gov Nixon wants to distract his own problems telling the truth about E coli contamination and is happy to focus on the General Assembly.
Legislators also face a conflict of interest. Dare they report colleagues they suspect of being unethical? If the Capitol is so rife with corruption, why won't anyone step forward and name names?
The answer is that no one wants to play the bad guy. So rather than live up to their sworn duty to protect Missourians, legislators want to craft complex ethics rules to try to keep the bad apples among them from being so bad. But the inherent flaw an any legislative effort to fight corruption is that
solutions are reactionary. Bills will always be attempting to correct
the flaws of the previous cycle.
More than likely, complicated ethics rules will serve only to ensnare the well-meaning and label minor missteps as so-called ethical lapses. And it will likely favor seasoned politicians and professional consultants who are more familiar with the process than political upstarts.
A better solution would involve a complete deregulation of campaign finance coupled with much stricter reporting requirements. If Jim Nutter or Rex Sinquefield want to write fat checks, that is their right. And partisans, bloggers and special interests should be able to know of it immediately and act accordingly. This better fits the political skepticism that has characterized the American citizen since before we were a country.
Any other approach is reactive, makes compliance an expensive insiders' game and lacks credibility because it tells voters that the legislature can act ethically even if individual legislators cannot.
As for those legislators with a "personal value system," they should step forward and tell us who among them are the bad guys. Anything less makes them complicit in unethical behavior, and proves that this drive toward more and more ethics regulation is political theatre.
I am a skeptic. I am especially skeptical of economists because I have learned that one can find an economist to say anything . This is a shame, because well-meaning people have one less tool to help them make sound decisions.a column for the St Louis Beacon in which she asserted:
In my brief telephone conversation with Stokes, I asked how he concluded that the Budget Project's study was flawed. Stokes pointed me toward a brief analysis which claims:
Blouin's piece did not address either of these concerns. If, as Stokes claims, she was aware of criticism but did nothing to correct or dispute them, she should not be taken seriously. Missouri voters deserve better.
If Blouin and others can answer these criticisms of methodology and still make an argument against the legislation under consideration, I am sure Missouri voters and legislators would be eager to hear them.
The meetings have no agenda and no guest speakers. Rather, it is intended as an opportunity for liberty-minded activists to gather and network--or just talk shop. One's partisanship or voting patterns is immaterial, as long as you share a belief in more and greater individual freedom.
Remember that guy? He spent his political career wrapped in his military service, and even used the official kickoff of his presidential campaign to remind everyone that he was once a soldier. Then, when people with whom he served started picking apart his military achievements, he whined about it. He also lost his race.
There is nothing new about politicians running on their military records. Our own state representative Jason Kander , pictured below, is quick to point out his own military service. In fact, you can't get away from it. He mentions it in his biography with at least two photos of him in combat gear. He Tweets about it. He puts it in his press releases. News stories have focused on his deployments.
Kander's response does not pass the laugh test. Thurmond served as president of the Reserve Officers Association (ROA) from 1954 to 1955 when he resigned to run as a write-in candidate for the US Senate. He won, and won every subsequent election until he died in 2003. In 1956 he was responsible for the "Southern Manifesto" which opposed the Supreme Court's ruling on segregation.
Kander may want--in this solitary circumstance--to separate his military career from his political career. But that is crass political maneuvering from someone who has gone to great lengths to use his military service for political gain.
Frankly, I have no problem with any reserve officer accepting an award named for Thurmond. In addition to his considerable military contribution (he landed at Normandy on D-Day), he was a strong advocate for the military. As stated previously, he was also a prominent player in national politics. I had the opportunity to meet the Senator at a function back in 1995--I had just finished reading a biography of John C. Calhoun and was eager to discuss with him South Carolina's political history.
But I find it incongruous for Kander to participate in honoring Thurmond because it runs counter to everything he professes to believe. Thurmond was no friend to any of the political causes Kander embraces. Quite the opposite.
If Kander will not make a stand on principle in these rather comfortable circumstances--accepting an award--then how can anyone expect him to make a stand on principle when the situation is more difficult?
If you ever doubted the speed with which state government could speak with one voice to address such a serious issue, worry no more. Nation's Restaurant News reports that Missouri Lawmakers Propose Smoke Ban .
Don't smoke because you'll get cancer. But once you have cancer, by all means, light up!
Today saw the first issue of the Daily Brief go out to our subscribers. The Daily Brief is simply a daily morning email of links to selected national and state news items and blog posts. A copy of the first issue is presented below. To subscribe to future emails, subscribe at http://www.missourirecord.com/subscribe/
Although Thurmond came around in the 1970s, and supported making Martin Luther King's birthday a federal holiday, his career continued to haunt him and others. Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott resigned his position due to a brouhaha after he said, at Thurmond's 100th birthday, "When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud
of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we
wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either."
Now comes Jason Kander, a Washington, DC educated attorney who hews closely to the left's agenda and "progressive values." Kander supports codifying same-sex marriage and considers abortion-on-demand a civil right.
It would be a shame if Kander's principles and concerns for appearances give way to (or turn out to be) mere political ambition and self-seeking.
Governor Nixon is all too happy with high speed rail proposals to link Chicago with St. Louis--will free money from Uncle Sugar--but these too will have little impact and are are unnecessarily subsidized.
Kansas City likes to vote on light rail proposals every so often. It was described to me by a neighbor as a city pass time. Indeed Clay Chastain is already out collecting signatures for his latest crazy train. Voters are right to reject these grandiose plans. Their gut instincts tell them that more government action, more taxes and more and greater city bureaucracies never solve problems.
This is neither recent news nor related specifically to Missouri. But I think watching Milton Friedman talk about the Chrysler bailout and government is general is as pertinent now as it ever was. If you click through to YouTube, you can watch all five segments of the interview.
1/27/2010 7:12:22 AM
Rep Carnahan Embarasses Missouri [ Patrick Tuohey ]KMOX today published an interview with Russ Carnahan with the damning title, "Carnahan awaits direction on health care reform." In the piece, Carnahan just repeats what anyone reading the news already knows: there is talk of this and talk of that and some talk of other things. One gets the impression that Carnahan will vote however he is told, but since no one has told him what to do, he just sits patiently.
The brief piece ends quoting Carnahan as offering mere political pablum, "There's a lot of frustration that people have, Democrats and
Republicans and Independents about where we are with health care. People do want solutions." Whatever the solution, Missourians can be confident that none of it will originate with Rep Carnahan.
1/27/2010 6:45:25 AM
Give States a Chance [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Missouri Record published two pieces this week that carry a similar theme: states as a laboratory of democracy. Mizzou professor David Webber examines Nixon's State of the State speech and compares it with those of other governors. He finds that, "Taken together, the State of the States speeches present a menu of policy ideas in this era of economic stagnation."
Jay Barnes goes it one step further , urging federal authorities to permit "states to try different approaches."
Years ago, the federal government permitted states the leeway to introduce their own welfare programs as long as it met some basic guidelines. The results where impressive, and eventually led to the de-entitlement of that vast and often corrupting system.
If states are able to lead the way on taxes, capital punishment, foreign trade agreements and welfare, why not let them do the same for health care reform? The entire country would benefit.
1/27/2010 5:41:11 AM
Friday, January 22, 2010
Write for The Record! [ Patrick Tuohey ]As we wrote at our launch , The Missouri Record :
is
intended to serve as an interactive statewide commentary or op-ed
section of a newspaper. We need all Missourians to share their views
on politics and policy.
In the subsequent eight months, The Missouri Record has become one of the leading commentary websites in the state, publishing content across the political and ideological spectrum.
This mission continues in the New Year. If you have a view of Missouri politics or policy that deserves statewide attention, let us know. We welcome the opportunity to help improve the quality and quantity of discourse.
1/22/2010 3:46:00 PM
Thursday, January 21, 2010
37 Years of Roe v. Wade [ Jay Barnes ]It was 37 years ago today that the Supreme Court handed down Roe v.
Wade, a decision where we learned that "emanations from penumbras"
(i.e. imaginary stuff in our Constitution) prohibited state governments
from protecting the most innocent of all human lives. Unfortunately,
given the current Court and our nominator-in-chief, Roe will likely
remain law for quite some time. Worse, the Senate's version of health
care reform includes one provision which would use federal tax dollars
for abortion and another which could allow the Obama administration to
require abortion coverage by private insurance companies.
1/21/2010 8:19:43 PM
Uh-Oh in Robinville [ Jay Barnes ]Rasmussen's out with their latest poll on the Missouri Senate race. Not good for Robin Carnahan.
Blunt 49 Carnahan 43
And, in what I believe is a first for this race, the lead is outside the margin of error.
Rasmussen attributes the change to health care. Just wait til Missouri voters hear Robin's views on cap-and-trade tax.
1/21/2010 5:48:58 AM
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
E-Tax: Sinquefield to Let Voters Decide [ Patrick Tuohey ]This arrived in my email inbox this morning:
Jefferson City, Jan. 20,
2010 – Papers were filed today with the Missouri Ethics Commission to establish
a ballot measure committee in support of a statewide voter initiative dealing
with local earnings taxes in Missouri.
# # # http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2010petitions/2010-077.asp
1/20/2010 10:04:53 AM
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
The Massachusetts Miracle [ Patrick Tuohey ]This blog is dedicated to the issues facing Missouri, but having lived in Boston for a few years and still having plenty of family there, I feel a special connection to the state. And, of course, the election results tonight will reverberate all across the country.
I do not think the impact of tonight's election can be overstated. This is a huge loss for the Democratic Party, bot in substance and symbolism. First and most obvious, the Senate seat once held by Ted Kennedy, the Lion of the Senate, and the foremost advocate of a national health care system (and which once might have carried his name ) was won by an outspoken critic of the very same program and on the first anniversary of the Obama adminstration.
Not only will this demoralize moderate other Senate Democrats from Louisiana and Arkansas who face challenges in less comfortable seats, but as the Tea Party movement claims a victory in the state which hosted the very first such party almost 240 years ago, it will mobilize grassroots opponents to the legislation being considered.
Watch now for Democratic fingerpointing and recriminations. Missouri politicians Russ and Robin Carnahan, Ike Skelton and Claire McCaskill are undoubtedly on the phone with their consultants and carefully phrasing their statements (or in Claire's case, her tweets). How they handle this special election is a lesson in politics for us all.
1/19/2010 9:06:17 PM
Monday, January 18, 2010
Mystery KC Billboard [ Patrick Tuohey ]
A billboard on Interstate 29 just north of Kansas City. (Thanks to Paul Hamby for the photo.)
1/18/2010 11:54:38 AM
Thursday, January 14, 2010
GDP In the Age of Obama [ Patrick Tuohey ]In today's Wall Street Journal Don't Like the Numbers? Change 'Em
Boskin asserts that while every president is guilty of trying to put a positive spin on unflattering economic indicators, President Obama "has taken it to a new level."
The Obama administration claims a dubious "Keynesian" multiplier of 1.5
to feed the Democrats' thirst for big spending. The administration's
idea is that virtually all their spending creates jobs for unemployed
people and that additional rounds of spending create still more—raising
income by $1.50 for each dollar of government spending. Economists
differ on such multipliers, with many leading figures pegging them at
well under 1.0 as the government spending in part replaces private
spending and jobs. But all agree that every dollar of spending requires
a present value of a dollar of future taxes, which distorts decisions
to work, save, and invest and raises the cost of the dollar of spending
to well over a dollar. Thus, only spending with large societal benefits
is justified, a criterion unlikely to be met by much current spending
(perusing the projects on recovery.gov doesn't inspire confidence).
Regular readers of The Missouri Record knew of this dubious record keeping two months ago when our own Jay Barnes noted as much in Lies, Damn Lies and GDP in the Age of Obama
To state
the obvious, the American economy will not have sustained economic growth if
income continues to decrease. We might get increased GDP numbers through the
magic of Obama’s budgets. But it will not make the lives of ordinary Americans
better. It will make things worse for this generation, and future generations
charged with paying back the tab Obama and his Democratic Congress are running
up.
The next
time you hear of GDP increasing in the Obama era – check the numbers and
remember the words of Missouri’s own Mark Twain, “There are three kinds of
lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.” In the case of GDP, growth fueled by
government giveaways spending is neither real nor sustainable over the
long-term – despite what the President, his advisors, and GDP may claim.
1/14/2010 12:39:46 PM
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Big Mac Economics [ Patrick Tuohey ]I don't know when the Big Mac became the standard measure of unhealthy food, but it seems everything is compared to the calorie and fat content of the famous sandwich.
Now, I'd like to introduce Big Mac economics.
To the right is a receipt for a Big Mac bought on Main Street in Kansas City. The sandwich was $2.99 and the tax was $.29--amounting to a sales tax of 9.7%. By way of comparison, Big Macs carry a 8.9% sales tax in New York City and 7.0% in Boston.
More importantly, just a few hundred yards outside Missouri--on Rainbow Blvd in Kansas City, Kansas--a $3.49 Big Mac carries a $.26 tax, or 7.45%.Kansas restaurant owners are able to charge more for an identical meal and pay less in taxes. If you were a shop owner, where would you rather set up your operation?
Remember this as the earnings tax debate unfolds, or any debate where taxes are increased to pay for more and growing government. And remember it next time you read about jobs leaving Kansas City. We cannot tax ourselves into prosperity.
1/13/2010 2:13:14 PM
Monday, January 11, 2010
A Tale of Two Citys' Papers [ Patrick Tuohey ]While The Kansas City Star's editorial board has taken to personal attacks and straw-men debate in its handling of the possible earnings tax initiative, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch board has conducted itself as a paper should, giving weight to weighty matters.
After evaluating the amount of money the earnings tax brings in, the Post-Dispatch
Eliminating it without some form of replacement “would result in cuts to public safety services so deep as to end the City’s viability as a place to live, work and visit,” according to the fiscal note the city sent to in response to Mr. Sinquefield’s initiative petitions.
Eliminating the earnings tax would, in effect, be a stark message from the city residents and workers. They’d be telling the rest of the region: On matters of regional public safety, “we can’t take care of this for you any more.”
Importantly, the paper does not necessarily endorse the idea Mr. Sinquefield puts forth, but it does recognize the problem inherent in the existing tax:
We don’t agree that the effect of the earnings tax on the city’s business climate is as negative as Mr. Sinquefield suggests. But it has some negative effect; if you can locate an office in Clayton or downtown, why not choose Clayton and save the 1 percent?
The e-tax has been an “enabler,” preventing the wider region from facing up to its shared problems. It has placed a disproportionate and unfair burden on city businesses and taxpayers in funding police services that provide benefits and stability to the entire region.
Then comes the board's finale, and you suddenly know you aren't reading a newspaper in Kansas City anymore.
Withdrawing the city earnings taxes would be catastrophic for St. Louis if no reliable and equitable substitute is in place. It would represent a form of assisted municipal suicide, with suburban and out-state voters assuming the Dr. Kevorkian role.
The public safety consequences of a failed city to the St. Louis region — and to the state — would be nearly as profound. Everyone else, in the end, would be left to pick up the pieces.
While reserving judgment, we don’t think that’s what Mr. Sinquefield has in mind — or hopes to achieve. We are hearing about lively discussions behind the scenes about possible substitutes to round out the package — both in terms of alternative sources of revenue and cost-saving municipal and pension reforms. [Emphasis added.]
Wow! An editorial board that can describe an issue with some depth, reserve judgment until more is known, and yet be respectful of the people with whom it may disagree. Compare that to the statements The Star made about Sinquefield ("He’s a multimillionaire ideologue who doesn’t have to care about how his goal would affect the city’s future") and our mayor ("Actually, it appears Funkhouser so far has an empty mind on this subject").
The Star editorial board owes an apology to Mssrs. Sinquefield and Funkhouser and to all its remaining readers.
1/11/2010 9:03:45 PM
Missouri Record on the Radio [ Patrick Tuohey ]Kansas City's KCUR-FM interviewed me for a story on the likelihood that Kansas City will face an effort to abolish the earnings tax. I am grateful to host Susan Wilson for giving her listeners the opportunity to hear both sides of the debate.
The story on their site reads:
KANSAS CITY, MO (kcur) - If you live or work in Kansas City, Missouri a 1% earnings tax takes a bite out of your paycheck. The tax has been around for over forty years. But a petition will soon begin circulating around the state, to bring the "e-tax" before all Missouri voters, and possibility outlaw Kansas City, and St. Louis from collecting that type of tax.Deb Hermann , who explained why she thought repealing the earnings tax would have a negative impact on the city. Hermann is chair of the Finance and Audit Committee.Patrick Tuohey , editor of The Missouri Record . He believes that now is the time to begin looking for alternatives to the earnings tax.
You can hear the interview yourself by clicking here .
1/11/2010 2:46:58 PM
Vote Russ Carnahan Porker of the Year! [ Jay Barnes ]Citizen's Against Government Waste has put RebootCongress' video of a particularly embarrassing town hall hosted by the congressman.
Go to http://www.cagw.org/porkeroftheyear/ to give Russ credit for being a porker.
1/11/2010 2:12:18 PM
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Liberty on the Rocks KC - January 12 Meeting [ Patrick Tuohey ]Liberty on the Rocks is a new nationwide effort to gather freedom-loving people together in a social setting on a regular basis. The Kansas City group's next meeting is Tuesday, January 12 from 5:30 PM to 9:30PM at The Levee (16 W 43rd St).
You can contact the KC chapter through its Facebook page. We look forward to seeing you there.
1/10/2010 6:03:19 PM
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Editorial Board Falls for Nixon's Ozark Smokescreen [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Kansas City Star
Political gamesmanship by some Republican legislators should not be
allowed to obscure the big picture when it comes to cleaning up the
Lake of the Ozarks.
One
might get the impression from this and the rest of the piece that Gov
Nixon's earnest effort to clean up the lake is being held up by crass
partisan politics. And who is guilty? "Republican legislators."
The
public records do not support this premise. Nixon's announcement of the
Ozarks cleanup was hastily thrown together to correspond with media reports that Nixon's inner circle knew about the E coli levels and were lying , something we now know to be true. The effort was purely theater.
At that press conference, Nixon was
unable to offer even the most basic details of the plan, including its
goals, cost or timetable. Tony Messenger of the Post-Dispatch wrote of the event:
In front of a throng of reporters and locals from the Lake of the
Ozarks, he announced what he called a "massive" and "unprecedented"
effort to clean up the lake. Yes, he was now coming out and calling
Missouri's tourism gem dirty, and he would be sending inspectors to
every business with a storm-water permit for immediate inspection.
Polluters would not be tolerated.
Nixon called it a bold move, and, indeed, it was.
In a later column, Messenger concluded:
The irony of Nixon's dilemma is this: If he has any hope of escaping
the political damage done by this cover-up and his sudden memory loss,
he might need to stop trying to crawl out from under it and instead
keep pounding the drum of lake cleanup.
That is exactly what Nixon has done and The Kansas City Star editorial board is willing to go along with the whole charade because it benefits their political agenda.
Perhaps the greatest injustice of the editorial is that if gives short shrift to Star reporters who broke the story and asked some of the best questions of Nixon (including, "What did you know and when did you know it?" something he still hasn't addressed).
If the Star editorial board wants to done their short skirts and pom poms for the Nixon administration, that is their right as a private company. But acting as if the effort should be above politics is denying it for what is remains: a stunt.
It is no wonder why editorials--like many of the comments following online stories--are unsigned. Who would want to be associated with such drivel?
1/9/2010 4:46:33 PM
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Sadly, KC Star Plays True to Form on E Tax [ Patrick Tuohey ]Kansas City, indeed all of Missouri, may soon be debating the basics of how cities collect taxes. This is an important debate, and it really hasn't even begun. As Star reporter Dave Helling notes, the ballot initiative that is put forward may exclude Kansas City.
But that hasn't stopped The Star and The Pitch Star's editorial board
Rex Sinquefield wants to kill Kansas City’s earnings tax, and that’s
his right as a private citizen. He’s a multimillionaire ideologue who
doesn’t have to care about how his goal would affect the city’s future.
This is rank class warfare. The Star chooses to describe Sinquefield only as a "multimillionaire ideologue." The Star omits mention that Sinquefield is a self-made man who grew up in an orphanage in Normandy, Missouri and once studied in the seminary. It omits mention that Sinquefield sits on the boards of the St. Louis Symphony
Orchestra, the St. Louis Art Museum, and the Missouri Botanical Garden--but it suggests that he doesn't care about the city's future. Why? I suspect that "self-made multimillionaire philanthropist" doesn't fit The Star's obvious desire to characterize him as a bogeyman.
The Star saves its more deliberate and personal attacks for Mayor Mark Funkhouser (the candidate it endorsed in 2007). It quotes the mayor as saying, "The central problem is our inability to keep middle-class and
upper-class folks in Kansas City. Over the long run, if this (repeal)
would do that for us, then I’m for it." It then excoriates him for not offering a, "shred of evidence that killing a $200 million funding source would meet his objectives of retaining residents." (Remember, this is relating to a ballot initiative campaign that has not yet begun and which may never even include Kansas City .)
Previously, The Star has not had a problem with politicians who keep an open mind.
In an April 4, 1999 love letter to Mayor-elect Kay Barnes, editorial board leader Rich Hood offered, "T here is nothing wrong with not knowing the answer to a question ; there is plenty wrong with embroidery or prevarication." In a May 26, 2004 editorial about Union Station, The Star wrote, "The review committee needs to be independent and willing to consider all kinds of changes and improvements On January 19, 2008, a Star editorial included a comment from Rev. Nelson Thompson, about Mayor Funkhouser, "Instead of becoming more stubborn, he needs to become more flexible and change his attitude." So basically, it's good to admit you don't know the answer, unless it isn't; it's good to be willing to be open to all option, unless it isn't; and it's good to be flexible, unless it isn't.
The Star editorial board has demonstrated that it is not a serious player in city politics and does not have any worthwhile contributions to make. Certainly today's piece is unworthy of the Star's own reporters or of its (tenuous) position as our paper-of-record.
1/7/2010 10:49:22 AM
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Beginning the E Tax Debate [ Patrick Tuohey ]As Kansas City and Missouri begin to debate the merits of the 1% earnings tax, it is advisable that everyone first take a deep breath and do as much background reading as possible. There is going to be a lot of sloppy writing on the matter which will only harm the necessary public discussion.
One can easily find blog posts about the earnings tax on the intermittent Kansas City Post , Tony's Kansas City and Kansas City with the Russian Accent . I wrote previously on the matter here . The Star's Dave Helling , Mike Hendricks and the Pitch's David Martin have offered us their insights. In Martin's case, he wrote about the matter twice, once to make smart-ass remarks about the mental faculties of a man who is eminently more credible on the issue than he , and a second to completely retract that same post because he was so ill-informed on the basics of the tax .
As The Star's Dave Helling has told us, petitioner Marc Ellinger* has proposed several other ballot measures, some of which specifically exclude Kansas City . So far, all of this is a tempest in a tea pot.
Tax policy in Kansas City, however, is not something we can afford to leave as is. Kansas City is dying. The solution is not going to arrive on a train, or riding on a Ferris Wheel; it is not going to check in to a new convention hotel, or play basketball at the Sprint Center; it will not be annexed or paid for with higher taxes; it will not come through more unionized city employees.
The solution will only come from a long and sober look at how we do business and how we can do business better. This frightens a lot of people who have interests in maintaining the status quo, but anything less is unworthy of this great city.
(*Full disclosure: Marc Ellinger is the attorney for Missourians for Responsible Government which publishes The Missouri Record .)
1/6/2010 1:32:55 PM
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Mizzou's Webber to Write for The Missouri Record [ the Board ]University of Missouri associate professor of political science, David J. Webber , has joined The Missouri Record . Webber will write a weekly column entitled On Politics and Policy
The Missouri Record is very pleased to offer Professor Webber's columns, which will appear each Tuesday. His independent viewpoint will be a positive contribution to the political and policy discussions in the Show-Me State and will further cement The Missouri Record's position as the foremost opinion and policy journal in Missouri.
For those not familiar with Prof. Webber, he wrote amid the hoopla of President Obama's elevation of Senators Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton into his administration that:
It is unlikely selecting rivals is a key to a successful administration. Obama's vision for revitalizing the economy, his ability to communicate an "energy-economic-health care-social equity" agenda to Congress and a critical media, and world events will most likely have a larger impact on his fate than his selecting Hillary Clinton for his Cabinet. (Columbia Tribune column, December 7, 2008.)
As Biden and Clinton fade into near-obscurity, Webber's words seem prescient. Webber's commentary about Missouri politics has been just as analytical and dispassionate:
Missouri's gubernatorial nominating process in 2000 and 2004, and now again in 2008, provided voters with no real choices. This affects the kind of governance we get because underlying political disagreements are not dealt with in election campaigns and have flowed over to make the last several sessions of the Missouri General Assembly particularly acrimonious.Columbia Tribune column, December 7, 2008.)
1/5/2010 5:35:33 AM
Monday, January 4, 2010
Restoring Liberty [ Patrick Tuohey ]Liberty Restoration Project (LRP), it became apparent to me how enormous the task of fending off big government has become. The LRP is a Missouri-based group formed by activists from Ron Paul's 2008 presidential race. Their website describes them as,
A politically diverse group of concerned citizens who have decided to
throw down the arbitrary barriers (such as political parties) that
divide us and work together as American Citizens to improve our
country, starting as locally as possible.
The LRP had much success in 2009 including:
Playing
a significant role in enacting legislation in Missouri to opt-out of
the REAL ID Act of 2005. The Act, among other things, established new
national standards for state-issued driver licenses and non-driver
identification cards; Educating Missourians on the role of the Federal Reserve in monetary policy and pushing for national efforts to audit them; and Bringing
attention to the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report
that left the impression that libertarians might be viewed as domestic
terrorists . The report was subsequently retracted and the director of
the organization stepped down. In her remarks last night, LRP executive
director Catherine Bleish said, "There is no reason why we who are
against force, violence, and coercion should be considered a threat." What is most appealing about the LRP is that they have moved beyond the
tit-for-tat of modern partisanship where the other party is guilty of
such awful crimes and one's own candidates are above reproach (while
often continuing the same policies). Rather, the LRP brings attention
to the ever-increasing power of the federal government, regardless of
what party is in control. Furthermore, LRP members are usually young, energetic and often coming to this form of libertarianism from Democratic liberalism.
For 2010, the LRP plans with other similar groups across the country such as Texans for Accountable Government (TAG).
to bring public scrutiny to the 72 fusion centers in the United States
whose job it is to "nationalize and militarize" state and local police,
according to Bleish. Four of those centers are in Missouri.
Fusion centers aim to share information between state, local and federal law enforcement agencies. According to Bleish:
Every time you get pulled over, [that interaction] is run through that fusion center,
every time you call 911 it is run through that fusion center. They have access to private databases and public databases. And this information is accessible--directly or indirectly--by over 500,000 people, not all of whom are Americans.
Bleish claimed that the Springfield, Missouri fusion center admits sharing information with Canada and that an Oklahoma fusion center was discovered to be sharing all drivers' license information with Germany. She asked, "why is my address and my height and my weight and my eye color and my hair color allowed to be processed through these fusion centers and shared with foreign countries?"
The
liberty movement has its work cut out for it. While the Tea Party
movement nobly aims to hold the line on government growth, the LRP and others are
actually seeking to push it back.
1/4/2010 11:50:45 AM
Friday, January 1, 2010
On New Year's Day [ Mark Twain ]New Year's Day--Now is the accepted time to make your regular annual good resolutions. Next week you can begin paving hell with them as usual. Yesterday, everybody smoked his last cigar, took his last drink, and swore his last oath. Today, we are a pious and exemplary community. Thirty days from now, we shall have cast our reformation to the winds and gone to cutting our ancient shortcomings considerably shorter than ever. We shall also reflect pleasantly upon how we did the same old thing last year about this time. However, go in, community. New Year's is a harmless annual institution, of no particular use to anybody save as a scapegoat for promiscuous drunks, and friendly calls, and humbug resolutions, and we wish you to enjoy it with a looseness suited to the greatness of the occasion.
(Taken from a letter to Virginia City, Nevada's Territorial Enterprise , Jan. 1863)
1/1/2010 4:36:49 PM
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Starving the Beast [ Patrick Tuohey ]I read a Jason Noble story in the KC Star (linked through Tony's Kansas City ) that Cole County Commissioner and attorney Marc Ellinger * has been approved to circulate several petitions regarding the earnings tax
in St Louis and Kansas City. Specifically, Ellinger would like to
remove the authority for cities to charge an earning tax or put the
matter up to public vote.
Reactions have been predictable: How can the cities survive if you take away this important source of funding?
My response is that government cannot be streamlined any other way. The beast will not curb its appetite--it must be starved.
During
the 2008 light rail campaign, it was widely reported that City Council
supporters replied to people who expressed reservations about the
project, "we'll find the money." The same can be said of politicians
in Washington who manage to "find the money" for pork barrel spending
and $100 deals for wary states with wary senators. Ask yourself this:
under what circumstances would Kansas City or St Louis ever relinquish
the earnings tax?
The effect of cutting the earnings tax is not as simple as just reducing government income by than amount. The St Louis-based Show-Me Institute published a study a few months ago that claimed:
According to our calculations, ending
the tax would reverse Saint Louis’ current negative growth rate. If
Saint Louis were to eliminate its earnings tax, our projections
indicate that during the next 25 years, the cumulative discounted
income gains would be $1.5 billion. If Kansas City were to do the same,
its cumulative discounted income increase would be even more
substantial, totaling $3.2 billion additional dollars in additional
personal income for the next generation.
Imagine,
dear readers, a reason for business to stay in Kansas City and not leap
at every opportunity into Johnson and Wyandotte Counties!
No,
voters cannot count on City Halls to streamline themselves. We must
simply cut taxes and instruct politicians to "find the money" themselves.
(*Full disclosure: Marc Ellinger is the attorney for Missourians for Responsible Government which publishes The Missouri Record .)
EDITED TO ADD: A more informative story on the initiatives comes from Jake Wagman at the Post-Dispatch .
12/29/2009 3:19:59 PM
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Finally: Carnahan Says Yes to Obamacare [ Jay Barnes ]It took 322 days, but Robin Carnahan has finally opined on Obamacare. She told the AP today she would have voted for the Senate bill this morning.
Merry Christmas
12/24/2009 7:35:50 AM
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Party Switching for Fun and Profit [ Patrick Tuohey ]I wasn't aware that a Democratic member of Congress has switched parties until Jason Rosenbaum posted this on his Twitter account:
Democrats were fine
with party switchers when Jeffords and Specter switched sides. And the
GOP likes it when the Dems defect. It's a game. Rosenbaum is exactly right. Reactions to switches are as
predictable as anything in politics. The switcher himself is either
cast as a conscientious public servant who can no longer abide a
terrible injustice or a calculating politician who seeks nothing more
than personal gain.
The truth, of course, is that all
politicians are calculating self-promoters who both join and leave
parties for exactly the same reason. If Republicans today hail US Rep
Parker Griffith as an honest man, then what was he yesterday? At some
point, Rep Griffith was a politician seeking personal advantage.
In
1983, Texas Rep Phil Gramm switched parties by resigning the seat to
which he was elected as a Democrat and running as a Republican in the
subsequent special election. In 2008, Missouri's own Chris Koster, then a state senator, changed parties effectively offering his constituents a bait and switch. That same year, Sen Joe Lieberman of Connecticut
ran as an independent and won after losing the Democratic primary. Lieberman and Gramm gave the voters a chance to have a say on their switch. To a lesser degree, Koster did too, switching parties as he sought election as attorney general, but he should have resigned from the Senate.
Political identification may be a vague and shifting thing. But if an elected official is going to change the party with which they caucus, the voters ought to be consulted.
12/22/2009 4:48:37 PM
Monday, December 21, 2009
Video Bloggers' Christmas Wish List [ Patrick Tuohey ]
Darin at RebootCongress offers some items every video blogger should have. Items include basic audio recorder, basic cameras, as well as more advanced (read: expensive) equipment. You can read more here .
Apparently the revolution WILL be televised!
12/21/2009 9:40:00 AM
Sunday, December 20, 2009
FiredUp on Ethics [ Patrick Tuohey ]Sean over at FiredUpMissouri wrote a post the other day that I am sorry I missed at the time. Its title: "Why Are $20 Lunches Bad, But $100,000 Checks Okay?" pretty much sums up the content nicely.
Indeed he is right, expending effort to stop $20 lunches is reducing ethics concerns to the absurd. Of course Sean's is a partisan blog, so he intended to slight Rep Tilley for his "refusal to support reasonable limits on campaign contributions," as if everyone agrees on what a "reasonable limit" is.
The larger point is that so-called ethics reform legislation always makes such silly tradeoffs. And, as Missouri Rep Kander has said elsewhere, expecting government to regulate ethics means a permanent effort to close every unforeseen consequence. For example, legislators who seek to limit contributions from wealthy people only encourage those same people to themselves mount hundred million-dollar campaigns a la Michael Bloomberg. This was exactly the national Democratic strategy under chairman Howard Dean, and it brought us a Senate of wealthy oligarchs such as Jon Corzine (NJ), Mark Warner (VA) and John Edwards (NC).
The simplest and most honest way to ensure proper behavior in the legislature is to make sure every transaction can be seen. Yes there are legislators and their spouses who call upon lobbyists when they want to go to the new restaurant in town. It's shameful. But the best way to combat it is not to try to anticipate every sketchy action in advance, but to require full and immediate disclosure.
12/20/2009 11:22:09 AM
Friday, December 18, 2009
Is McCaskill Willing to Risk Her Seat for Obamacare? [ Jay Barnes ]Kim Strassel opines in today’s WSJ that Obamacare is a Democrat suicide pact, noting that national sentiment tracks Missouri sentiment as discussed yesterday regarding Rasmussen’s latest poll in the Blunt-Carnahan race. According to the latest NBC-WSJ poll, just 32 percent of Americans think ObamaCare is a good idea. Sixty-one percent of voters of the age of 55 believe it will increase health costs. Sixty-eight percent believe it will increase the deficit. And 76 percent believe it will raise their taxes.
Those are terrible numbers for Democrats and solid evidence of the common sense of the American public. What’s worse for the Dems are same state-specific numbers. Strassel gives three strong examples. In North Dakota, Sen. Byron Dorgan, a three-term Senator who won re-election with 68 percent of the vote his last time out, trails a hypothetical opponent 55 to 36. In Nevada, Harry Reid has a 38 percent approval rating. In Delaware, Republican candidate Mike Castle unexpectedly leads against the vice president’s son – due in large part to health care.
Missouri politicos and journalists have rightly focused their attention this year on Blunt-Carnahan. But McCaskill’s re-election campaign is not too far down the road. And unlike Carnahan, Sen. McCaskill is not going to be able to duck the questions. She’ll have a record. Is she willing, like Colorado freshman Senator Michael Bennet , to risk her seat for Obamacare? We’ll soon find out.
12/18/2009 5:14:37 AM
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Expect Carnahan to Keep Playing Hide-and-Seek - For Now [ Jay Barnes ]Rasmussen’s out with its latest poll in Carnahan-Blunt - and they're still in a dead heat nearly a million dollars in negative advertising against Roy Blunt and a thus far effective strategy for Carnahan to hide her true self from Missouri voters.
The more interesting numbers are found in the internals of this poll. Missourians are 2 to 1 opposed to Obamacare. We believe (correctly) by 4 to 1 margin that it will increase the deficit. And we believe (correctly, again) by a nearly 6 to 1 margin that Obamacare will result in increased taxes on the middle class.
Given these numbers, don't hold your breath waiting for Robin Carnahan to say anything of substance on health care. For her, it's better to hide than be honest with Missouri voters. If she had the guts to just be honest about her positions, it would spell disaster for her campaign. Eventually, however, she's going to have to say something. You can't run for US Senate without showing up for at least a few events and answering a few questions. And when she does, get ready for those poll numbers to plummet.
12/17/2009 6:17:58 AM
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Samuel Adams Would Be Ashamed [ Ryan Hobart ]"Tea Party" Republican candidates Purgason, Martin, Hartzler and Davis have already tread on us by cutting needed services and wasting taxpayer dollars
Jefferson City, Mo. -- On this day in 1773, colonists in Boston protested not having elected representation by destroying tea imported from Great Britain. More than 200 years later, America has come a long way, now a great example of democracy in the world.
Despite that, and still angry from embarrassing political defeats in 2006 and 2008, a bunch of Republicans now are re-branding themselves as “Tea Party Patriots.” And the so-called new leaders of the ultra-conservative Tea Party Republican group in Missouri seem to be the same old folks who already had their shot at serving the people – but were miserable failures when it came to looking out for Missouri families.
Here are a selected few of the Tea Party Republicans , aided by the megaphones of Tea Party Republican activists such as Dana Loesch and Bill Hennessy:
State Senator Chuck Purgason US Senate candidate and Hater of Health Care
In his bid for US Senate, Sen. Purgason has spent months travelling to tea parties around the state touting his belief in responsible government that works for the people. However, Senator Purgason championed the 2005 legislation that ultimately cut 100,000 Missourians from their Medicaid and reduced health benefits for another 200,000 – many of whom were elderly, low-income and disabled. [St Louis Beacon 7/23/09]. This year, Purgason showed his true colors again by signing on to Sen. Jane Cunningham’s proposal to opt Missouri out of health care reform – regardless of what it might offer Missouri families. Ed Martin Congressional candidate – MO-03 and Abuser of Tax Dollars
While Chief of Staff to former Governor Matt Blunt, Tea Party Republican Martin was caught doing political business on the state’s dime, misusing his state email address to rally political allies to attack then-Attorney General Jay Nixon and to attack the process by which Missouri chooses its judges. [Springfield News-Leader, 9/9/07; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 3/3/09]. The ensuing cover-up spawned a wrongful termination lawsuit and also suits for access to destroyed public records. All together, the fiasco ended up costing the state of Missouri more than $2.1 million in legal fees and costs.
Frmr. State Rep. Vicky Hartzler Congressional Candidate – MO-04 and Fringe Extremist
Former State Rep. Vicky Hartzler has a tough primary for the Republican nomination for the 4th CD, so she’s been speaking at every Tea Party Republican rally she can find to re-brand herself as a fiscal conservative. In fact, a couple months ago she said: "I never voted for a tax increase while I was in Jefferson City. I won't vote for one in Washington, D.C. Unlike my opponents, I believe Americans need lower taxes, not higher taxes." (KY3 Political Notebook, 9/29/09) But in her 1996 re-election fight against Democrat Monte Lee Olsen, Hartzler admitted that she had voted for legislation that required fee and tax increases. Olsen said Hartlzer voted for seven tax and fee increases totaling $9.6 million . According to the Kansas City Star, Hartzler said she did vote for some legislation that required fee and tax increases, such as new Missouri license plates. "There is certainly, unfortunately, a cost of government," Hartzler said. [Kansas City Star, 10/31/96]
State Rep. Cynthia Davis Candidate for __?__ in 2010 and Sarah Palin Wanna-Be
Rep. Davis hasn’t announced yet what office she is seeking in 2010, but folks around the state are abuzz about what this favorite Tea Party Republican will do next. Famous for her position on child hunger: ‘Hunger can be a positive motivator ,’ Davis repeatedly takes extreme stands that hurt Missouri children and families. And she’s not without ethical baggage too: Rep. Davis also has a repeated habit of using campaign funds for personal use. [St. Louis Post Dispatch, 2/15/06] "Samuel Adams must be rolling over in his grave with this group of so-called Tea Partiers,” said Ryan Hobart, spokesperson for the Missouri Democratic Party. “Tea Party Republicans like Purgason, Martin, Hartzler and Davis have had their chance at public service and, quite frankly, they’ve let Missouri families down by wasting taxpayer money and refusing to help the least among us.”
Ryan Hobart is the communications director for the Missouri Democratic Party . The above post was taken from a press release issued December 16, 2009. 12/16/2009 9:45:48 AM
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Ethics Reformers Set Impossible Goals [ Patrick Tuohey ]To their credit, Missouri Reps Kander and Flook are taking on
efforts to reform ethics in the legislature. However, too much of the
talk is pie-in-the-sky rhetoric and suggests either that they are not serious or that they are incredibly naive.
Take as an example this video from a Tony Messenger post on the Post-Dispatch's Political Fix :
Rep
Flook has discovered that people mistrust politicians (!!) despite the
fact that most public servants are honest and well-intentioned. Not
only will this, or any legislation, fail to change people's disposition
toward the legislature, but seeking an ethical government requires that
people remain skeptical of those in power. (The good news is that
Kander and Flook will be unsuccessful at fixing something that isn't a
problem in the first place.)
Later in their press conference,
someone asks Flook how this effort will be any different from previous
measures that did not advance in the legislature. At about the 3:55
mark in this video from Jason Rosenbaum
(who desperately needs a camera stabilizer) Rep Flook alludes to
federal investigations that have resulted in some indictments of state
legislators. Yet the bill they have introduced would not have stopped
those criminal actions.
In another Rosenbaum video ,
Rep Kander again asserts the canard that fighting ethics abuses
requires a never-ending series of tweaks, reforms and re-reforms
(starting at about 1:35). In effect, Kander admits that the public
will never trust politicians and that they are right not to do so.
However, he argues that politicians can be trusted to perpetually change ethics laws to keep themselves ethical. Or something.
Rep Kander and Flook and their colleagues in the legislature need to realize some simple truths:
There will never, ever be a satisfactory method for keeping legislators ethical; An informed public is more powerful than any commission, committee, or do-gooder; The easiest and best way to keep people honest is to remove all
the ineffective ethics "reforms" that clog the system and make
compliance so difficult; and Develop a system that maximizes transparency, and let the various special interests out there do the (often partisan) legwork. 12/15/2009 10:31:06 AM
Monday, December 14, 2009
Show-Me Your Vote [ Stephen Eisele ]
This past weekend the United States Congress passed a $1.1
trillion omnibus
spending bill with a vote of 57 yeas, and 35 nays. The vote broke down primarily on a party
line, with Democrats largely supporting the measure, with the exception of
McCaskill-MO, Bayh-IN and Feingold-WI.
Our senior senator from the State of Missouri, Sen. Kit
Bond, sent out a press release yesterday touting his acquisition of $118
million in earmarks for Missouri projects.
This bill included over 5,000 earmarks totaling a staggering $3.9 billion. The omnibus spending bill increases the budget by
approximately 10% over last year at a time when inflation remains level and the budget deficit
continues to grow.
My question is thus, why did Sen. Kit Bond not vote up or
down on the spending bill? He was one of
only eight senators not to vote on the bill.
This appears to be Washington at its finest; claim you didn’t vote
on the bill, while at the same time take credit for projects in your state.
Sen. Bond states in his press
release that, “unaccountable bureaucrats don’t understand state and local
needs… with today’s passage these critical projects are close to becoming a
reality.”
Washington politicians like to talk a lot about fiscal
responsibility and government accountability, but when the time comes to hold
themselves accountable, they like to have it both ways. Sen. Bond, show-me your vote!
12/14/2009 9:26:43 AM
Friday, December 11, 2009
Shocker! More laws do not reduce crime [ Patrick Tuohey ]Reuters reports on a shocking trend among teenagers: ignoring laws. Specifically, the news wire reports that teens in Los Angeles, California are not heeding laws against texting while driving .such laws are misdirected . Now we learn they are ineffective, too.
12/11/2009 1:53:06 PM
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Broken Windows Politics [ Patrick Tuohey ]Reuters carried a piece the other day that mentioned a speech by John Gillies, FBI Miami Division Special Agent in Charge, in which he argued, "t ransgressions by high-profile public servants
and even perceived social role models, like top golfer Tiger Woods,
currently embroiled in allegations that he had extramarital affairs,
sent the signal to young Americans that cheating and stealing were
acceptable."
Gillies said, "It really gets at the soul and fabric of the
United States when people are out there corrupting ... it all starts
with simple ethics violations."
This made me think of the Broken Windows Theory in crime. According to a story in The Boston Globe , the theory, "suggests that a disorderly environment sends a message that
no one is in charge, thus increasing fear, weakening community
controls, and inviting criminal behavior. It further maintains that
stopping minor offenses and restoring greater order can prevent serious
crime." Police departments that act in accordance with this theory have seen significant decreases in crime.
This matters in Missouri, where recent indictments of state politicians have people thinking again of ethics reform. The organization in charge of monitoring ethics guidelines, the Missouri Ethics Commission, has long been regarded as having insufficient power to act as a legitimate disincentive. Whatever ethics reforms are considered in Missouri, they will be useless if public officials are not held accountable for their behavior. The state must also cultivate a political culture where deception and a lack of transparency are discouraged.
Unfortunately, this is not yet the case. Our top public servant, Governor Nixon, still employs Jack Cardetti as his spokesman. It has been over 70 days since Cardetti admitted lying to reporters and the people of Missouri about his knowledge of dangerous levels of E. coli in the Lake of the Ozarks. Nixon has done exactly nothing to punish this breach of the public trust.
Broken Windows Theory and the words of FBI agent Gillies suggest that by permitting this small infraction, Nixon is telling observers outside his administration as well as to those on the inside that lying and cheating are acceptable. This means that we can only expect more and greater scandal from his administration.
12/10/2009 10:30:20 AM
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Liberty on the Rocks Columbia first meeting [ Patrick Tuohey ]Liberty on the Rocks Columbia is having their first meeting on December 10 at 5PM at the Heidelberg .
12/9/2009 3:35:52 PM
Liberty on the Rocks KC first meeting [ Patrick Tuohey ]Liberty on the Rocks KC held its first get together last night at The Levee in Kansas City. Just over a dozen patriots braved the snow to spend two hours making new friends and networking. Thanks to Darla Jaye for getting out the word and also to tonyskansascity.com for his damning with faint praise. (Despite his post, he actually helped with turnout.)
Our intention is to meet every month, so look for an announcement in January some time.
Here are some pictures from last night. (Thanks to Gary Benefield of American Liberty Republic for the photos.)
12/9/2009 9:44:39 AM
Friday, December 4, 2009
Carnahan Comes Out of Hiding - Takes Hits from Left [ Jay Barnes ]Here at the Missouri Record, we've been a broken record on Robin Carnahan for the past three months. Time and time again we have chastised her campaign for failing to be open with the people of Missouri. And time and time again she has done her best to play hide-and-seek from the Missouri press corps on the key issues in next year's campaign.
Today, we learn that we are not alone. The St. Louis Oracle , a self-described "progessive" (AKA a liberal in search of a new, more popular label), writes today that Ms. Carnahan is in danger of losing her liberal left base because she refuses to just come out and say what everyone already knows: SHE'S A LIBERAL
The Oracle writes:
The nation is currently in the midst of several robust public policy debates concerning President Obama’s proposals, including economic stimulus bills, the “cap and trade” energy act now pending in the Senate, and especially health care reform. Ordinary citizens have taken an extraordinary interest in pending legislation not seen in many years, and that is encouraging. But Robin has not been forthcoming on where she stands. Her indecision even got national attention in September when Politico Dave Catanese Jason Rosenbaum posted video
My early inclination was to support Ms. Carnahan’s candidacy. She had won two statewide races with progressive support, and we have assumed she was progressive. Conventional wisdom is that she is smarter than her disappointing brother, Rep. Russ Carnahan, but at least Russ takes stands (even if they’re just whatever the Speaker’s aides tell him to say). Robin’s indecision makes her look even less attuned to issues than Russ!
Kudos to the Oracle for his honesty. Better a candidate who stands for something than one who tries to be everything to everyone. Still, the question remains, when will Robin Carnahan come out with some honest answers to the important questions of the day.
12/4/2009 10:12:31 AM
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Announcing: Liberty on the Rocks KC [ Patrick Tuohey ]Liberty on the Rocks is a new nationwide effort to gather freedom-loving people together in a social setting on a regular basis. The Kansas City group's first meeting is Tuesday, December 8 from 8PM to 9:30PM at the Levee (16 W 43rd St).
The meeting has no agenda and no guest speakers. Rather, it is intended as an opportunity for liberty-minded activists to gather and network or crossmarket. One's partisanship or voting patterns is immaterial, as long as you share a belief in more and greater individual freedom.
You can contact the KC chapter through its Facebook page. We look forward to seeing you there.
12/2/2009 6:29:00 AM
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Ethics Reforms in Missouri [ Patrick Tuohey ]Missouri State Representative Jason Kander argued for ethics reform in a recent
post in The Kansas City
Star
Kander undercuts himself by leading with federal prosecutions of state
legislators. Obviously, these are people who have broken existing
laws . Does the argument for more ethics laws in Jefferson City
assume that people who are willing to break federal law would not be willing to
break state law? That seems to be a pretty weak position.
Kander also argues for banning, "committee-to-committee donations and
make it a felony to transfer political money for the purpose of hiding the
original donor." I am not a trial attorney, but is this
enforceable? How often would prosecutors be able to prove an intent to
hide?
But what drew my attention is a statement Kander made near the end of the
piece:
We must fight corruption the way we treat the flu — as an ever-adapting
virus that requires an evolving vaccine. Honest governments, like healthy
societies, are the result of eternal vigilance.
I fear that what Rep Kander really means by "we" is "the
government." This is supported by his earlier assertion that, "elected
officials are ultimately responsible for ineffectual ethics laws." His solution? More such laws.
What we need in the age of the Internet is fewer restrictions and more transparency. Voters, journalists and interested parties
(read: market forces) are entirely capable of finding and punishing legitimate
ethical violations when given the power to do so.
Ultimately, Kander engages in circular reasoning. If legislators cannot be
trusted to act ethically, how can they be trusted to ethically enact ethics
guidelines?
12/1/2009 10:44:48 AM
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Citizen Journalism Made Easier [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Show-Me Institute hosted an event in St. Louis last week in which bloggers of all stripes were afforded some tips on how to investigate our government. Trent Seibert of Texas Watchdog led an excellent session on where to go to get started.
In addition to more well-known sites such as the Web page of the Missouri Ethics Commission , and the Missouri Accountability Portal , Trent recommended the following:
I also found a tool for generating FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request letters at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press .
If you are aware of other good sources of information on local and state government, please send them to us at editor@missourirecord.com .
11/24/2009 9:31:53 AM
Monday, November 23, 2009
A Transparent Survey in the 7th CD [ Patrick Tuohey ]The News-Leader's Chad Livengood has a good piece about a recent voter survey in SW Missouri. This is important because (1) often, media reporting on surveys is bad, and (2) surveys themselves are often bad.
But this is not the case here. Wilson Research Strategies, based in Oklahoma, conducted a survey of 301 likely Republican primary voters in Missouri's 7th Congressional District. The sample was small, yielding a margin of error over 5.6%, but the analysis was honest and transparent. Wilson released the full survey questionnaire and crosstab results .
What the data revealed was somewhat less impressive. The race is a four-man dead head for the Republican nomination, with a large contingent (40%) still undecided.
More importantly, Show-Me State voters were finally shown a good story about a good survey.
11/23/2009 5:56:28 AM
Monday, November 16, 2009
Missouri Blogosphere Event [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Show-Me Institute is hosting an event in St.Louis on Saturday, November 21 to provide bloggers new and additional tools for writing about government and policy. The invitation states:
As more cuts are made at mainstream news media outlets, there are
fewer reporters keeping tabs on what local and state government
officials are doing. Increasingly, bloggers have stepped up to break
stories, or call attention to issues that are being ignored. The
Show-Me Institute is hosting its first blogosphere event to help train
and support both Missouri bloggers who are working to help keep
government transparent, and citizens who want to learn how.
A copy of teh full invitation in available here .
11/16/2009 8:56:12 AM
Friday, November 13, 2009
Irony, Thy Name is Missouri Democratic Party [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Missouri Democratic Party has issued five questions it would like Republican Senate candidates to answer, using the gimmicky backdrop of Friday the 13th. Their press release on the matter lists the five questions:
1. If you are elected will you support a no earmark pledge? 2. Charlie Crist or Marco Rubio? 3. Do you support banning lobbyists from giving Members of Congress gifts? 4. How well do you think the Bush/Cheney Administration demonstrated fiscal responsibility and limited government during its 8 years of control? 5. Did you agree with the Wall Street bailout (TARP) and will you accept contributions from institutions that have been bailed out? We're amused by this because it is the Democratic candidate, Robin Carnahan, who is so unwilling to put forth specific policy pronouncements. The idea that Carnahan's party would demand that anyone answer questions struck us as the height of irony . Even her campaign website--where you can post bland stuff without having to answer questions--is devoid of positions.
We wondered how (alleged) candidate Carnahan would answer these herself. Using Google, we simply cut and paste actual statements from Carnahan or her campaign.
If you are elected will you support a no earmark pledge?
"That's not something I am not going to rule out... When you walk up to me and give me some binary choice about something somebody else decided--am I for it or against it--I'd probably come up with a different plan." (Carnahan interviewed by KY3's Dave Catanese)
“I think earmarks as they have been in the past have got to change.” (Carnahan on stimulus , Post-Dispatch Political Fix)
"I'm not over there to take a look at what all these things are right now... the process has got to be reformed." (Carnahan interviewed about earmarks by KY3's Dave Catanese)
Charlie Crist or Marco Rubio?
"I'm going to see what comes out of this compromise, and then I'll talk to you about what it looks like." (Carnahan on card check , KC Star Primebuzz)
I’m happy for a vigorous debate once they sort out who their candidate is." (Carnahan on debating Roy Blunt , Politico.com)
Do you support banning lobbyists from giving Members of Congress gifts?
"We've got to come up with money somewhere." (Carnahan interviewed by KY3's Dave Catanese)
"They’ll be plenty of time to debate important issues closer to the general election. But this type of a challenge 20 months away only exemplifies the type of cynical gamesmanship of which Missouri voters have had far too much.” (Carnahan spokesman , KC Star Primebuzz)
How well do you think the Bush/Cheney Administration demonstrated fiscal responsibility and limited government during its 8 years of control?
“We are in a very unusual time, it’s not time for bickering … and partisan nonsense.” (Carnahan on stimulus , Post-Dispatch Political Fix)
“People who kept saying no to everything … don’t have a lot of credibility on this stuff.” (Carnahan on stimulus , Post-Dispatch Political Fix)
D id you agree with the Wall Street bailout (TARP) and will you accept contributions from institutions that have been bailed out?
"I didn’t read the 1,800-page bill and wasn’t asked to vote on that. There’s no reason for me to kind of talk about something I didn’t have any input on.” (Carnahan on stimulus , Politico.com)
"I don't know what the current form of that is, I will tell you the middle class has taken a lot of hits." (Carnahan on card check , KC Star Primebuzz)
"I'm a little concerned... about the affordability side. ... I know, though, that it's an important first step to get that passed out of the House." (Carnahan on health care bill , Associated Press )
"Goodness knows we've helped tens of thousands of people get billions of dollars back." (Carnahan honoring Ike Skelton , ShowMeProgress.com)
11/13/2009 11:25:58 AM
A Sign of the Times [ Patrick Tuohey ]CJ Janovy, editor of The Pitch She writes :
In one way, it was surprising to see what might appear to be a blasphemous argument coming from the Missouri Record ,Missourians for Responsible Government .Economics of Gay Marriage ."
As a journal of politics and policy, we are eager to publish serious commentary on the issues facing the Show-Me State. We have published arguments attacking and defending Missouri Republicans, pieces in praise of and critical of the Tea Party movement, and even pieces (here and here ) supporting Democrats for their actions in government. Really, what else would you expect of such a journal?
Mr Eisele, who wrote the piece on gay marriage, is no conservative. But he is capable of writing columns that offer readers views to which they might not have been exposed. It is easy enough to write for those who already agree; a challenge to frame arguments in ways that appeal to those who do not. I am a fan of Mr Eisele's writing and we welcome his submissions, but the journal does not necessarily endorse every idea we publish.
The story here is not that a journal would publish ideas with which it does not agree--but that an editor of a magazine would be surprised by it. What does this say of Ms Janovy and The Pitch that it's editor cannot divorce a political view from a worthwhile opinion?
11/13/2009 10:01:09 AM
What the Schweich?! [ Patrick Tuohey ]I could not have written any better a post on Dave Catanese's recent interview with Missouri Auditor candidate Tom Schweich than what Sean over at FiredupMissouri.com wrote . So I will just post his remarks:
Schweich Promises To Serve Full Term As Auditor, Unless Revenge Gets In The Way
Submitted by .Sean on November 13, 2009 - 7:31am What in the world is this all about?
So nine months before Thomas Schweich wins the GOP Auditor primary – to say nothing of actually knocking off Susan Montee -- he can't commit to KY3's Dave Catanese that he'll serve his entire term because he might need to extract revenge in 2012?
Comments like this will no doubt improve his chances of being the
"consensus candidate" in his primary against House Budget Chair Allen Icet , State Rep. Cynthia Davis and perhaps others.
Read the rest here...
11/13/2009 5:53:49 AM
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Carnahan's Previous Statements on Health Care [ Patrick Tuohey ]Intrepid Springfield political reporter (and member of the blogger paparazzi) David Catanese offered proof to The Record that yesterday was not the first time Secretary of State Robin Carnahan had been asked tough questions about health care reform. His own brief interview (recorded by what seems to be a video phone) is dated July 24 and is available here .
Catanese starts off with the accusation from beautiful, dirty, rich Republicans that Carnahan's campaign is merely chillin and not taking hard positions on important issues.
Carnahan: "I'm campaigning a lot and also doing my job. What I think this is really about is just getting things done for folks and not staking out hard and fast partisan positions that sort of cause you to just take pot shots on things but actually figure out how to get things done."
Despite the ol' soft shoe response, Catanese shows he does not want to just dance. He asks her specifically about a public option.Carnahan: "That's not something I am not going to rule out." She goes on about how we need in increase competition and then spins into one of those Dickie Flatt political answers that eats up time yet offers nothing substantive. "We've got to create a system that has pricing pressure. And so I am open for however we do that because that's the only way we're going to get prices down..."Carnahan: "Y'know, depending on what it looks like absolutely.... We have got to do something that keeps insurance companies honest,and if that means a government option--that's a government option. If there is another way to do that and bring prices down, I am open to talking about that."Carnahan: "Well okay I don't think that is going to happen, that hasn't been the history of what has happened with Medicare and Medicaid. We've had government involved in health care for a long time and in a lot of cases it has worked pretty well."
Carnahan: "Congressman Blunt and I disagree about this. He wants the status quo--he seems satisfied with how things are working in health care--I don't. I'm not satisfied at all,either as a consumer, a patient, I'm not satisfied for small businesses where the prices continue to go up and coverage goes down. And I am not satisfied for government where we have these escalating prices at the same time insurance company profits continue to go up. It's a broken system. It needs reform. [Eh, nothing else I can say]."
"We've got to come up with money somewhere and what I'm against is having it be on middle class folks and small businesses."
"I'm not going to take a position on what that number is."
"When you walk up to me and give me some binary choice about something somebody else decided--am I for it or against it--I'd probably come up with a different plan."
Carnahan would like us to think that she is too busy working for the people of Missouri to take time to indulge in lowly partisan politics. Yet she is a partisan--a Democratic candidate--running in a primary to win a political seat. Furthermore, although being in the Senate is probably not as taxing a job as leading an executive department, it is required that she be able to handle several matters at once. Robin is a big girl now, she can be Secretary of State and formulate some opinions on specific health care reform proposals. She just thinks she can rely on voters being starstruck by the fame of her family name.
Her too-busy-to-politick defense is belied by her cogent and complete criticism of Representative Roy Blunt. Make no mistake, Carnahan knows what she thinks about health care reform. The people writing her campaign large checks know what she thinks about health care reform. But her campaign has evidently calculated that those views must be kept quiet in order to avoid a bad romance with voters. Sadly, the Missouri media may be an unwittingly complicit by letting her play this little lovegame.
My years in political research and what I have seen from the voters of the Show-Me State tell me that they are unimpressed with mere political vanity. Unless Carnahan adopts a new strategy, come 2010 her supporters won't have little White House ornaments from Senator Carnahan hanging from their Christmas tree.
(As a tribute to Catanese , the above post contains several Lady Gaga song titles. Can you find all 15?)
11/11/2009 10:53:19 AM
Finally, Robin Carnahan Addresses Health Care [ Patrick Tuohey ]Thanks to Jason Rosenbaum for posting the following video on his Web site :
This is the first time I have seen Secretary Carnahan, reportedly a candidate for the US Senate, asked some straightforward questions about health care. In short, she said nothing. But this is the Internet, so lets examine her statement and try to translate her comments into plain English:
Carnahan: "You know what I think we need to be doing in the health care debate..." [Translation: "Head's up, I am not going to answer your questions."]
Carnahan: "Access, stability and affordability..." [Translation: "Someone conducted focus groups."]
Carnahan: "There is going to be a substantially different view of it, I think, in the Senate...." [Translation: "That is a good question, but I am not going to answer it. Rather, I'll hide behind people already elected."]
Carnahan: "We'll see how it comes out." [Translation: "I'll formulate an opinion when all the hard work is done."]
Carnahan : "I am excited that we are having this debate," [Translation: "I am excited that other people are having this debate."]
Carnahan: "We're moving toward change to make it better and I am in support of that... I think we can make it better." [Translation: "I support good things, but reserve the right to support even better things if they come along. Also, change is good."]
Carnahan: "I don't think we ought to turn what we know is a vital--which is to reform health care in our country--into a debate over abortion. ...Not changing things one way or another." [Translation: "I'm not going to let you trick me into discussing important issues. Also, change is bad."]Carnahan: "People that talk to me [about health care] tell me stories..." [Translation: "You can turn off your recorders now, because I am going to waste a few minutes telling you ridiculous anecdotal stories that mean exactly nothing."]Carnahan: "I think health care is going to be one of those topics that we talk about for a long time." [Translation:"I think health care is going to be one of those topics on which I will obfuscate for a long time."]
Carnahan: "You're welcome to come along." [Translation: "I have bested you, media rubes, come let me rub your noses in it."]
11/11/2009 5:06:23 AM
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Pew Survey Is Anything But Charitable or Trustworthy [ Patrick Tuohey ]FiredUpMissouri presented to their readers , without question,
another survey relating to the views of Missourians. Sadly, the
survey, sponsored by Pew Environmental Group , lacks credibility on it's very face. As a service to anyone interested in serious policy making, we offer what has unintentionally become another in a series of posts examining Missouri-related survey data. (Our previous posts are here and here .) Some simple observations on the Pew release:
Page 5 asks, "Do you favor or oppose the United States taking action to reduce it emissions [sic] of gases like carbon dioxide that cause global warming?" Sixty-eight percent indicate support and 21% indicate opposition. But what does that mean? The question does not propose any specific policy, which would obviously have significant effects on the numbers of support. On page 6 the survey claims: "A Plurality Believe That Reducing Global Warming Will
Create New Jobs." In this case, the plurality refers to the 43% who agree.
Twenty-nine percent believe it will cost jobs, and 18% expect it to
have no effect at all. Writers could have just as easily said that 47%
believe these efforts will either cost jobs or create none, but that
was likely not the policy spin they wanted. Also, the chart
lists another 10% who, well, it doesn't say. It just includes a little
yellow bar. I presume this represents those who answered "don't know"
or "undecided." Page 7 includes the results of this horrible question: Congress
is considering an energy plan that has two key parts. One part would
require factories and power companies to reduce their emissions of the
carbon pollution that causes global warming by 20% by the year 2020 and
by 80% by the year 2050. The other part would require power companies
to generate 15% of their power from clean energy sources like wind and
solar by the year 2025. Would you favor/oppose this entire plan? Nevermind that the question itself is too long and convoluted to generate meaningful feedback. ("Wait, what was that middle part again?") The
real problem is that it assumes people would make political decisions
with only this piece of information. The amazing part to me is not
that 67% would support this, but that 23% would oppose it! The
question might as well have asked, "Do you support good things?" Who are these splenetics who hate the earth?! Pages
8 and 9 make the same wrong assumptions about how voters digest policy. Even if you allow Pew the benefit of the doubt on its analysis, the study doesn't provide the things considered the standard for minimal disclosure
according to the American Association of Public Opinion Researcher's
(AAPOR) code of professional ethics. This includes the exact wording
of
questions and any preceding instruction or explanation that may have
affected the response. (I left a voicemail message with the Pew contact person asking for more info.) Would any responsible policy
advocate use such "research" to promote their agenda? I doubt it. More
than likely, this stuff is used for two purposes: (1) to add a few pages to the Pew Center's reports to donors and (2) to get them attention from
the blindly partisan weblogs that will unquestioningly circulate them.
11/5/2009 5:55:29 PM
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Kinder Answers Our Questions About Yesterday's Vote [ Patrick Tuohey ]Lt. Governor Peter Kinder and Missouri Republican Party Executive Director Lloyd Smith hosted a conference call today to discuss the lessons
of yesterday's election. What follows is our brief exchange with Lt Gov Kinder:
Missouri Record: Notwithstanding the races on the East Coast,
here in Missouri--in Jackson County, in St. Louis and in Springfield--people
did vote to either increase their taxes, expand government control or increase
government spending. What lessons can we
draw from the races we saw here in Missouri about what Missourians are going to
do in 2010?
Kinder: As a lifelong Missourians, I am from the
Show-Me State, I know that Missourians tend to be conservative and tight fisted…. Wherever you can convince Missouri voters
that the money is being well-spent and is accounted for you will get an
affirmative nod. [Specific to votes in
Springfield and St. Louis] I don’t think it sends any broad message about
enthusiasm for higher taxes statewide.
Missouri Record: Are there any results from yesterday's vote
in Missouri that suggest that there is a large or growing bloc of people that are
planning to vote against big government or more spending?
Kinder: I would say that the percent that sent Republican
majorities to both Houses of the legislature--which has returned the Senate a year ago to the 23 to 11 all-time high
that it was when I left the Senate in 2005--[is such a sign].
The House majority, which is a solid majority, is now seven years on
from the election that installed them in 2002.
I think that represents an ongoing vote of confidence in conservative
fiscal management. I would also note that owing to the ascendancy of those
majorities, although Missouri's budget is in trouble with this economic
downturn, we're in better shape than 40 or more other states…. The voters of Missouri have repeatedly heard
campaigns in those legislative races and decided to return the conservative
majorities to power. I will argue that we will do
so again next year, probably picking up seats in both Houses.
Thanks to both gentlemen for the opportunity to participate.
11/4/2009 12:56:37 PM
Blunt Offering Real Solutions; Carnahan Stays Silent [ Jay Barnes ]Roy Blunt opines today in the KC Star on health care reform. Rather than accept the false choices presented by President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Robin Carnahan, he proposes ten different solutions to improve American health care.
If the President and Democratic Congress were serious about their commitment to bi-partisan reform, they’d do well to incorporate several of Blunt’s ideas and ditch their most controversial. If Robin Carnahan were a serious candidate, she’d offer solutions of her own or a critique of Mr. Blunt’s.
Unfortunately, neither is the case. Neither President Obama nor Congressional Democrats are interested in bi-partisanship. And Robin Carnahan is not interested in making this campaign about ideas. She’d rather hide behind that sterling Missouri last name and not say anything which might reveal an ideology at direct odds with the beliefs and interests of most Missourians.
Now that Mr. Blunt’s proposals are on full public display, here’s to hoping the Missouri press corps will demand answers from Ms. Carnahan. Missouri voters deserve to know her precise positions on the issues that will affect their everyday lives.
The Missouri Record offers unlimited space to the Carnahan campaign and any of her supporters to explain her position on health care reform. But we won’t be holding our breath.
11/4/2009 6:21:10 AM
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Icet for Auditor [ Jay Barnes ]When we started the Missouri Record, we promised an open dialogue with no sock puppets or secret agendas. In that spirit, I am pleased to disclose that I am working in a limited capacity with Allen Icet's campaign for State Auditor. I’m excited by the opportunity to work for the only conservative Republican in the race and the only candidate with real experience working on the Missouri budget and an actual track record of protecting Missouri taxpayers.
Regardless of ideological affiliation, all voters should desire a fiscal hawk in the Auditor’s office. For the liberal, an efficient government means more public money can be spent on ever-expanding social programs. For the conservative, an efficient government protects taxpayers and helps create a climate for economic growth. Whether liberal or conservative, Missourians need a State Auditor like Allen Icet – a man who has worked for nearly a decade to protect Missouri taxpayers and will continue to fight on our behalf as Auditor.
11/3/2009 5:39:06 PM
Monday, November 2, 2009
Blunt on Healthcare [ Patrick Tuohey ]Steve Kraske of The Kansas City Star offers us this gem in Friday's online post under the header, "Blunt (finally) talks health care details":
After a fierce, months-long pounding for failing to develop a GOP alternative health care bill, Missouri Congressman and U.S. Senate hopeful Roy Blunt finally trotted out a nine-bill health care package on Friday.
“Nothing I’m proposing is hidden in a 1,990-page bill,” he said, a reference to one Democratic version.
It is completely acceptable for the people of Missouri to expect their congressman to have a position in healthcare reform. But one should also note that in these nine bills, Rep Blunt is not merely speaking for himself, but for the entire Republican caucus. It is understandable that it would take time to formulate solutions for an entire caucus. Heck, even the President's favored bill is just emerging.
Meanwhile, Robin Carnahan, who is competing with Rep Blunt to replace Kit Bond in the US Senate, has yet to speak her own mind on healthcare reform--or anything else. In a check of Nexis.com , one is hard pressed to find any mention from Kraske, the Star's political reporter , of Carnahan's position on healthcare reform. For that matter, Kraske has yet to write about any of her views.
It's fair to be critical of Blunt's policy positions. When will Missouri journalists do the same to his likely opponent?
11/2/2009 7:31:47 AM
Thursday, October 29, 2009
State Employees Face Tough Times in the Nixon Era [ Jay Barnes ]Two facts about state government employment in the Nixon administration.
1. With today's announcement of $200 million in budget cuts to include the termination of nearly 700 state jobs, Gov. Nixon has likely put himself in first place on the list of Missouri executives who have laid off the most workers in the current recession. Combined with previous cuts, Gov. Nixon's actions have led directly to the loss of 2,300 jobs. Meanwhile, the Governor's own office staff remains untouched and so do several state programs which would be better off eliminated or reformed.
2. Missouri also took the bronze in the Missouri Medicaid employers race to the bottom. A report released by the Department of Health revealed Missouri state government was the employer in the state with the third most employees on Medicaid rolls. The state was narrowly edged out by Casey's General Stores (It's all good, yeah, it's all right!) for second place with both registering just over 1,000 employees on Medicaid. Both were trounced by Wal-Mart, the gold medalist with nearly 4,600 employees on the taxpayer dime.
10/29/2009 4:51:39 PM
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Ecoligate and Ethics Reform [ Patrick Tuohey ]The left-leaning blog, FiredUp! Missouri, asked yesterday, "Is
there any chance for real ethics reform next year?" Given the number of indicted politicians and the likelihood there are more to come, it's a good question. However, I
think the chances for legitimate reforms are slim and a significant reason for that is the
burgeoning scandal facing the governor.
Governor Nixon and his top aides are covering up what they knew and when
about high levels of E. coli in the Lake of the Ozarks. Perhaps at the
time they calculated that the political risk of inaction was low (or perhaps
that the risk of taking action was greater). DNR director Mark Templeton
said as much when in
testimony to Senate investigators that he, "didn't believe
there was an urgent need to alert the public that high levels of E. coli had
been found in 29 of 55 coves in one of most popular tourist destinations in the
Midwest." State politics blog The Source
suggests that at least one
child may have become sick by swimming in the lake during a time
when DNR officials knew the waters were unsafe.
Even if no one was made ill, there will be one casualty in the
E. coli affair: the administration's legislative agenda. Another victim likely will be the
legislative ethics reform proposals sponsored by Missouri Representative
Jason Kander and mentioned in the FiredUp! blog post.
Kander's reforms are aimed at cleaning up state campaign financing and
reporting. To his
credit (and as a matter of practicality), he is shopping his ideas around to
gather feedback from Republicans. The Missouri media have published
several pieces about the shady aspects of Missouri campaigning and the need for such reform. I don't know if the Nixon administration is
pushing the story, but they clearly benefit by not being the sole focus of
scandal.
The distraction won't work, and Kander's effort may suffer. Republicans won't be eager to change the subject from
scandal in the executive branch to scandal in the legislature. Doing so would risk letting the administration get away with their obfuscation and deceit in the E. coli matter. It would also cost Republicans a political chit
they have over Nixon.
At some point, the good guys in the Missouri Democratic Party are going to
have to tell Nixon to come clean and take appropriate actions against his
staff. (At least fire Jack Cardetti, who we know intentionally misled the
media and the public 27 days ago .)
Until these Democrats step forward, don't expect much from the next session.
10/27/2009 6:02:33 AM
Monday, October 26, 2009
Tea Party Dilemma: Honey, I Shrunk the Party [ Patrick Tuohey ][This post previously appeared on BigGovernment.com .]
A national coalition of Tea Party activists called Thursday for rallies in several states to announce their dissatisfaction with the Grand Old Party. In an October 22 press release they state :
We are extremely disappointed that the Republican Party (and leaders
like Newt Gingrich) has missed the message of the Tea Parties and
continues to take conservative voters for granted. We applaud all
courageous statesmen (Fred Thompson, Michelle Bachmann, and Dick Armey)
and call on other GOP officials to put America’s values over
traditional, often corrupt and morally bankrupt, power structures.
This
is
nothing new, and it is certainly nothing good. I am no partisan
apologist, mind you, and would not support Ms. Scozzafava. My first significant political activity was on
behalf of Pat Buchanan in the 1992 Republican primary in New
Hampshire against a sitting Republican president . You may remember how
that ended: Buchanan lost the primary, and President Bush lost the
general election.
That
election saw another significant split among
conservatives. Ross Perot earned the votes of one-fifth of the
electorate. While he did less well in 1996 (8%), he significantly
split
fiscal conservatives from Republicans. Bill Clinton never achieved 50%
of the vote in
either election--but took office nonetheless. (This didn't seem to bother Al Gore at the time.) Perot's organization eventually collapsed amid its own internecine struggles.
Grover Norquist, in remarks to the 2009 Conservative Heartland Leadership Conference , offered this about working together:
[The Right] should work to nominate and elect the most Reaganite Republican
we can in any given district or state. Now, we need to understand that
that’s going to be a little bit different in Maine than Texas, and so
it’s like grading on a curve. I want the two Republicans out of
Maine. They are much better than the D’s we would have had out of
Maine. Okay? We’ve been disappointed in their votes from time to
time. There are two teams, there are two major Parties in the United
States. They are heading in completely different directions.
By
picking a fight within the GOP and calling for an inquisition against
RINOs, Tea Party activists are sowing the seeds of all our defeat. There
are plenty of people within the Republican Party with whom we disagree.
But reducing our current 218 members in the US House and Senate to a
more pure 200 or 190 is no victory at all.
Chris Wilson of Wilson Research Strategies--and a fellow brigand from that 1992 Buchanan campaign--published a similar concern :
I don’t necessarily disagree with how the
Tea Party members are expressing their anger and backing a candidate
they believe in; however, their work will split the Republican vote and
give NY CD23 to the Democrats.
The reason I believe the Republican and
Conservative party candidates will fail is because they draw support
from the same vote base. If you split the conservative and moderate
Republicans in just about any race in the nation, the base erodes and
the candidate will lose.
I
understand the urge to clean one's own house, but as I learned from
Morton Blackwell, "don't make the good the enemy of the perfect." The
issue in New York's 23rd may very well be resolved due to pressure from national conservatives, but a campaign of eating our own is not something we should relish.
10/26/2009 7:35:42 AM
Friday, October 23, 2009
Pride Goeth Before Destruction [ Patrick Tuohey ]"Pride goeth before destruction: and the spirit is lifted up before a fall."
Proverbs 16:18
I
fear we are witnessing the collapse of the Tea Party movement.
Today, in St. Louis, activists Dana Loesch and Bill Hennessy plan to call on Missouri political leaders to comment on a political race in the 23rd Congressional District of New
York --800 miles away.
Nevermind the race in St. Louis between Rep
Carnahan and Ed Martin. Nevermind the eight other congressional races
in Missouri, the senate race to replace Kit Bond, or the various races
for seats in the Missouri legislature. Nevermind Tip O'Neill's truism that all politics is local. Nevermind Jefferson City,
Missouri, these activists want to speak to the people of Jefferson, New
York!
Health care reform has not even been finalized, yet Tea
Party groups are full of their own power. Let's be frank--until there
is a vote on health care reform, these groups have yet to finish the battle at hand.
My
fear, expressed elsewhere in this publication, is that as health care
reform is settled one way or another, the crowds that came out to
oppose government intervention in the marketplace will disperse. They
will return home, and will not carry on the fight in their communities
and in their states.
Asking them to focus on distant races in
which they cannot directly participate will not only facilitate this
collapse, it may be completely ineffectual. Voters in Potsdam and
Fulton and Oswego care as much about voters in Mehlville and Oakville
and Webster Groves as we care about them. Worse than ineffectual, it
risks alienating voters wary of outside influences.
Tea Party activists such as Loesch and Hennessy have accomplished a Herculean task in simply getting hundreds of thousands of people
away from their televisions and into the streets. This truly could be the beginning of something great. 24thState.com offers a perfect opportunity for activism by inviting Missourians to take part in Document Parties to review the hundreds of pages of material compiled through Sunshine Law requests. Transforming government will only
come from getting people further involved through local efforts, campaigns and voting
booths--not returning to the couch to wage distant battles by proxy.
10/23/2009 8:02:57 AM
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Ed Martin: No New Taxes [ Jay Barnes ]On the heels of a fundraising victory over Russ Carnahan, Ed Martin announced today that he's signing ATR's tax pledge. As Ed put it:
Of the hundreds of Missourians I have talked to over the past several months, not one person has said to me, "Ed, I'm just not paying enough in taxes." The working men and women in this district, to the contrary, are deeply concerned that new and higher taxes and fees imposed by Congress will actually stymie business expansion and job creation. For that reason, among many others, I am signing the Americans for Tax Reform Taxpayer Protection Pledge.
Mr. Carnahan, of course, won't sign the same thing. He may talk about alleviating the burden of federal taxes for middle class families, but the truth is that he supports the current health care legislation before Congress. And you can't say you're for lower taxes for the middle class and say you're for Obamacare. As discussed by Douglas Holtz-Eakin in the WSJ, the Baucus health care bill is a tax bill.
Most astounding of all is what this Congress is willing to do to struggling middle-class families. The bill would impose nearly $400 billion in new taxes and fees. Nearly 90% of that burden will be shouldered by those making $200,000 or less.
It might not appear that way at first, because the dollars are collected via a 40% tax on sales by insurers of "Cadillac" policies, fees on health insurers, drug companies and device manufacturers, and an assortment of odds and ends.
But the economics are clear. These costs will be passed on to consumers by either directly raising insurance premiums, or by fueling higher health-care costs that inevitably lead to higher premiums. Consumers will pay the excise tax on high-cost plans. The Joint Committee on Taxation indicates that 87% of the burden would fall on Americans making less than $200,000, and more than half on those earning under $100,000.
Industry fees are even worse because Democrats chose to make these fees nondeductible. This means that insurance companies will have to raise premiums significantly just to break even. American families will bear a burden even greater than the $130 billion in fees that the bill intends to collect. According to my analysis, premiums will rise by as much as $200 billion over the next 10 years—and 90% will again fall on the middle class.
10/22/2009 10:52:21 AM
Walking It Off [ Patrick Tuohey ]Toellner Tells it has a great post this morning
about a study which concluded that neighborhoods have a high
"walkability" score increase the value of homes in them. (You can view
a list of KC neighborhoods here .)
This
ought to be a lesson to the would-be urban re-designers in our midst:
light rail advocates and dog park partisans. What people want in
neighborhoods are other people; people walking to stores, walking their
dogs; walking for exercise. Expensive trains and parks for dogs not
only do not increase walkability, they likely deter it. For example, I
prefer to know that dog owners are walking up and down my street
keeping an eye on things, not driving to a park across town.
10/22/2009 12:20:07 PM
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Time Running Out for Nixon [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Nixon administration continues to demonstrate it is not serious about dealing with a matter in which his top aides lied to the public about an important safety measure--dangerously high levels of E. coli in the Lake of the Ozarks. Joe Bindbeutel has been let go for sitting on a report of dangerously high E. coli levels, and Mark Templeton has returned to his post at DNR.
According to the News-Leader's Chad Livengood :
As part of the now complete internal probe by Deputy Director Bill
Bryan, there have been 14 different tests in the past five years where
fecal coliform levels exceeded safe limits for swimming by 10 times the
standard. In each case, the public was not informed. In other words, in response to a specific and unique problems to Nixon's own administration--sitting on test results and then trying to cover up knowledge of them--Nixon appointed a buddy to conclude that, 'hey, this problem has been going on for years.'
But it hasn't. At the time the test results indicated dangerous waters, Joe Bindbeutel was deputy director of DNR, John Watson was DNR liaison to Gov Nixon, Jeff Mazur was the administration's clearing house for press releases, and Jack Cardetti was Nixon's spokesman.
Bindbeutel knew of the results and has been dismissed. Mazur knew of the results, and remains. Cardetti knew of the results, knew that Mazur knew of the results, and lied about both to the media. He also remains. Watson, whose job it was to know the results, claims he did not know. He remains.
Now we learn that Nixon cannot even remember how or when he learned of the withheld information.
The Governor has about two months left to handle the issue properly, which likely means that several of these top staffers must leave. At the very least, spokesman Jack Cardetti, who used his position as the voice of the administration to deceive the public, must go.
The Missouri Record has detailed a few reasons why Governor Nixon must act quickly and credibly to end this mess. So far he has done nothing. We have argued that Cardetti must go to protect Democratic interests , that as the public becomes more sensitive to political scandals Democrats must address the matter quickly, and that even Cardetti would call on Cardetti to resign . We offer the further observations that this matter promises to go on for months and months. This should concern Missouri Democrats more than Republicans (whose agenda will only benefit from a damaged Democratic governor).
The legislature returns in January and this issue will only become
more intense. Administration priorities will likely be caught up
in demands that the Governor clean up his office. One can easily imagine the legislature withholding salaries of the DNR leadership until they feel everyone is being candid. Nixon's political
capital will be significantly reduced. When the Senate investigation releases its report, things will only get worse. Anything the Governor does then will be seen, correctly, as reacting to a scandal rather than taking initiative. No one knows when this investigation will end, it has no termination date. Also, DNR demands an attorney--in this case Patricia Churchill of the AG's office--be present for any interviews with staff, an additional schedule must be considered. Because she was out on vacation the other week, interviews were rescheduled. This does not bode well for a quick resolution. The Governor's investigation was led by Bill Bryan, who the News-Leader described as Nixon's "longtime aide." (Would Attorney General Nixon have allowed Governor Blunt to appoint a longtime aide to investigate him?) Does anyone in Missouri accept the results of his investigation as thorough and genuine? The Post-Dispatch's Tony Messenger writes in a great column that Bryan didn't even submit a report on his findings. How long are Democratic incumbents and candidates willing to allow this to drag on not only into the next legislative session--but into the 2010 campaign season?
Furthermore, how long is the Governor and his allies willing to let Missouri journalists wonder what this is all about? The president of KMBC-TV in Kansas City, wrote an article asserting, "It's difficult for us to believe that the Governor wasn't
informed immediately when key staff members learned about the E. coli
in late May." The Kansas City Star and St. Louis Post Dispatch have also issued calls for clarity.
What these journalists likely are wondering is why Gov. Nixon would expend so much political capital to cover a small public health screw-up, unless he thinks there is something much larger to protect?
10/21/2009 12:53:11 PM
Monday, October 19, 2009
Renewable Energy: The Myth of Germany's "Grun Energie" [ Patrick Tuohey ][The following first appeared on BigGovernment.com ]
Observers of national policy may want to look at other countries'
experiences to see how they have fared with efforts to improve
environmental policies. Previous research on green jobs policies in Spain showed that costs were high and benefits short-lived. But what of the President's example of Germany?
The Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung
(RWI), an independent German economic policy think tank founded in
1926, has released its report on the matter entitled, "Economic impacts
from the promotion of renewable energies: The German experience." To
readers hoping for a government solution to energy problems, page 4
delivers a devastating indictment of the German model:
German
renewable energy policy, and in particular the adopted feed-in tariff
scheme, has failed to harness the market incentives needed to ensure a
viable and cost-effective introduction of renewable energies into the
country's energy portfolio. To the contrary, the government's support
mechanisms have in many respects subverted these incentives, resulting
in massive expenditures that show little long-term promise for
stimulating the economy, protecting the environment, or increasing
energy security.
The German experience has resulted in plenty of government spending
with little to show for it. Here are some of my schadenfreude
favorites:
"The amount of electricity produced through solar photovoltaics [or
PV which are solar panels] was a negligible 0.6% despite being the most
subsidized renewable energy, with a net cost of about 8.4 Bn € (US
$12.4 Bn) for 2008" (page 5). "The real net cost for all [solar panel] modules installed between
2000 and 2008 account for about 35 Bn € (US $ 48 Bn) (in prices of
2007). Future PV installations in 2009 and 2010 may cause further real
cost worth 18.3 Bn € (US $ 25.5 Bn) (Table 4). Adding both figures
yields a total of 53.3 Bn € (US $ 73.2 Bn) for PV alone" (page 15). Nobody said adopting a new energy model would be cheap, and
Americans have certainly taken on large and expensive new endeavors
because of the subsequent economic payoff (e.g. the Interstate Highway System ).
Even if the cost is no object, the RWI study indicates that the benefit
is no incentive. The report tells us that, "currently, the feed-in
tariff for PV is more than eight times higher than the wholesale electricity price
at the power exchange" (page 5, emphasis added). This is after years
of government support of the solar power industry. "Even on-shore
wind [energy], widely regarded as a mature technology, requires feed-in
tariffs that exceed the per-kWh cost of conventional electricity by up to 300%
to remain competitive" (page 5, emphasis added). In other words, even
when green energy industries are up and running for a while, their
costs remain several times higher than conventionally produced energy.
Page 9 of the RWI report addresses the German experience as far as it relates to job creation:
In the
end, Germany’s PV promotion has become a subsidization regime that, on
a per-worker basis, has reached a level that far exceeds average wages,
with per worker subsidies as high as 175,000 € (US $ 240,000).
It is
most likely that whatever jobs are created by renewable energy
promotion would vanish as soon as government support is terminated,
leaving only Germany’s export sector to benefit from the possible
continuation of renewables support in other countries such as the US.
Furthermore, the report states that estimates of green job creation
due to the German energy regime are flawed because they fail to account
for any job losses at less-favored (and likely cheaper) forms of energy.
As Chinese manufacturers produce PV cells cheaper than Germans can, the subsidies end up as a giant transfer of wealth from German taxpayers to Chinese companies .
Because of this, even Germany's leading PV manufacturer is calling for
the subsidies to be cut, both to make the industry more efficient and
to reduce energy costs to consumers. That's right, the Germans are
concluding that reduced subsidies mean greater efficiencies and lower
costs!
Lastly, die-hard environmentalists may say that green energy
production is more important than the cost of energy or number of jobs
it creates (or destroys). But even on its own merits as an
environmental energy, solar is a failure. The report states on page 19:
PV is
among the most expensive greenhouse gas abatement options: Given the
net cost of 41.82 Cents (Cents 63.00 US $) per kWh for modules
installed in 2008 (Table 4), and assuming that PV displaces
conventional electricity generated from a mixture of gas and hard coal
with an emissions factor of 0.584 kg carbon dioxide (CO2) per kWh
(Nitsch et al. 2005:66), then dividing the two figures yields abatement
costs that are as high as 716 € (1,050 US$) per tonne.
The European Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) is about 13.4€ per ton, or 53 times less than
those for solar production. In other words, if you're looking to be
green with your greenback, solar energy production is the worst way to
go.
Notwithstanding the current climate, the United States is by far the
largest economy in the world. The choices we make have far greater
global impact than any other economy. While it is right to look to
other countries for examples of policies that work, the fact remains
that so-called green energy production is a failed experiment. Even
those who pioneered it are looking for a way out. There is simply no
reason to think that even US Rep Peter Hoekstra's magic bureaucrats in Washington, DC can deliver efficient and economic energy from solar power.
10/19/2009 8:17:20 AM
Another Vote on Light Rail for KC [ Patrick Tuohey ]Clay Chastain is back in town and collecting signatures for yet another sales tax increase to build a light rail transit system in Kansas City. Unlike his 2006 plan, which was judged to be legally impossible, and the City's 2008 plan, which was defeated by a 12-point margin, this new plan includes a Ferris wheel. Seriously.
10/19/2009 6:31:07 AM
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Making Political Candidates of Tea Party Patriots [ Patrick Tuohey ][The following first appeared on BigGovernment.com ]
A previous post, Turning Tea Party Patriots into Political Petitioners ,
examined opportunities for new activists to affect change in their home
states. A natural next step is to discuss other options for getting
involved.
It remains to be seen if the political activity that this summer
generated hundreds of Tea Party protests and capacity crowd town hall
meetings turns into a lasting political force. Many will participate
in one event and go back to the daily grind. A few will remain active,
and some may even use their outrage to invest their time and treasure
into political campaigns.
For those who seek to become active, there are plenty of resources. Citizens In Charge and Ballotpedia.org
are both aimed at informing citizens of ballot initiatives and
expanding the rights of citizens to petition government directly.
There are also organizations that will train candidates and campaign staff. Since 1979, Morton Blackwell’s Leadership Institute
has worked to train candidates and activists to run effective campaigns
for office, mostly on the statewide and federal level. But traveling
across a state or a large congressional district for weeks and months
at a time can be too great a sacrifice for most.
For those who want to stay closer to home and still be involved there is American Majority .
Founded just last year by brothers Drew and Ned Ryun (sons of the
former Congressman from Kansas), American Majority focuses on
identifying community leaders and encouraging them to play a role in
local and state politics where they can have the greatest effect. Its
website declares:
American Majority specifically advocates
for a reversal of the seat of government power and a return to true
federalism, wherein states and localities hold the great majority of
everyday government exercise.
This is a great goal, especially when too many political figures who
should know better have been lured to Washington just to offer us
one-size-fits-all Washington-based policies. In an interview with Ryun
during a Kansas City training session, he stressed the organization’s
desire to focus attention on small and local governments. He tells Tea
Party activists:
Let’s move beyond the protesting and the
rallying to doing something about implementing. Let’s move from
protesting freedom to implementing on behalf of freedom. Take over
your local communities. If you have 5,000 people showing up at your
Tea Party, I’m betting out of those 5,000, there are a couple people
that should be running for school board or city council. The rest of
the people should be helping those people win.
To that end, American Majority has developed school board manuals
explaining how a school board works, among other resources. Ryun
explained, “ We have a city council manual. We are offering a county
commission seminar this fall laying out how the system works and
offering ideas for what reform items need to take place in a given
state.”
And while Ryun’s American Majority may focus on smaller political
districts, the focus is still national. “I am going to the state and
local levels, just getting people involved,” said Ryun. “I want people
to be engaged in the process. I want to talk about grassroots action,
explain to people that if they take over their local community as best
they can, they are going to cause national change.”
But Ryun has no illusions about what it takes. “A lot of these
people are realizing that the work ahead is harder than turning out for
two hours and protesting. But if you really want to see change, if you
really want to see something effective happen, you have to implement.”
Despite this, he says that some Tea Party organizations have taken up
the challenge. Many have become bloggers, keeping a watchful eye on
politicians. Some groups have focused their attention to taking over
the city counsel.
And when will American Majority’s work be done? Ryun responds:
There are 15,000 school districts. There
are over 3,000 municipalities. There are 50 state legislatures. The
work is probably never going to be done because there are so many
positions that need to be filled—and because we need so many people
committed to principle running and winning. It’s going to take a long
time.
This echoes Benjamin Franklin’s famous reply to a woman asking what
the Constitutional Convention had wrought. His answer, “A Republic, if
you can keep it,” continues to challenge us to this day. American will
only have the freedoms they are willing to work to defend.
10/13/2009 7:03:52 PM
Monday, October 12, 2009
BREAKING: Nixon Nominated for Onassis Prize [ Patrick Tuohey ]Although prize nominees are kept under tight security, our sources at the Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit Foundation confirm that Missouri Governor Jay Nixon is being considered for the 2010 Aristotle Onassis Prize for the Protection of the Environment . According to news reports, the prize is:
awarded in Hamburg every two years for "outstanding contributions towards protecting and improving the environment, including the long-term economical use of energy". The first award will be in autumn 2010, and the prize may be given to individuals or organisations of all kinds, other than politicians or political parties. It is one of the highest-endowed environmental prizes in the world, carrying an award of EUR 250,000.
Gov Nixon was unavailable for comment on the
prestigious award, though a spokeman assured us that no one in the Governor's office was aware of the prize.
Developing...
10/12/2009 10:52:07 AM
Friday, October 9, 2009
Remember When Jack Cardetti Opposed Lying? [ Patrick Tuohey ]It is now over two months since Jack Cardetti, spokesman for Gov Jay Nixon, lied to the Springfield News-Leader . Here is the story they published at the time:
Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon’s office said Wednesday that it was unaware of
a report on dangerously high levels of E. coli in the Lake of the
Ozarks until days before its release, despite a newspaper report that a
state official sought a copy weeks earlier before a meeting in the
governor’s office. (News-Leader , 7/29)
Two months later, Cardetti finally copped to his deception, but only after everyone already knew it was a lie.
Also on Wednesday, Nixon's chief spokesman, Jack Cardetti, admitted
he knew about Medley and Mazur's communication, even though he made
multiple statements to reporters saying nobody in Nixon's office knew
until June 23. (News-Leader, 10/1)
It's been a week since Cardetti made this admission. In the
meantime, Nixon has temporarily suspected three people at the
Department of Natural Resources for accidentally screwing up another set of E. coli tests. But the
man who intentionally and with forethought lied to the media and the
people of Missouri is still in his job.
Back in 2006, a younger Jack Cardetti said this about the suggestion that a supporter of fee office reform was merely scoring partisan points:
"It's hard to believe the Blunt administration would be spreading lies
in an attempt to stall much needed reforms to fee offices," Cardetti
said. (KY3 Political Notebook, 7/14/06 )
One has to wonder what that Jack Cardetti would think of an
administration that admittedly spread lies in an attempt to stall
investigations regarding public health.
Cardetti has compromised
his effectiveness as an honest broker with reporters and the public. His continued presence in the Nixon administration demonstrates the
Governor is not serious about holding his staff accountable.
For this reason and the others we stated last week , Jack Cardetti must go.
10/9/2009 7:10:26 AM
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Defending Second Injury Fund Settlements [ Jay Barnes ]Critics are blasting Gov. Nixon Friday for problems with the Second Injury Fund, alleging that one of the primary causes for its insolvency was Nixon's "decision to increase settlement payouts from $40,000 to $60,000.
The truth, however, is that in many cases, it is darn near malpractice for an attorney to settle a good Second Injury Fund case for $40k to $60k. Here's why: If not settled with a lump sum payment, Second Injury Fund claims are paid out as essentially a monthly pension to injured employees. Imagine a fairly typical claimant: a 45 year old male who has become permanently disabled as a result of his second workplace injury. Now let's stipulate that the Fund's monthly liability for this claimant is a modest $1,000 a month - payable for life. The present value of such a claim is well beyond $60k, and any attorney who would settle such a claim for $60,000 is doing is client a disservice.
Though it hits the SIF bank account hard in the short-term, settlements like this help keep the fund solvent for the long-term. In most cases, it's a matter of simple math. Where the Fund settles a case for $60k that has a much higher present value, then the Fund is making a good deal, even if it's a short-term hit.
Before continuing with these attacks, those suspicious of the increase in SIF settlements should provide evidence of one, single, solitary SIF claim being settled for an amount greater than its present value. Until then, their allegations should be ignored.
10/8/2009 9:25:26 AM
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Electing Judges? [ Patrick Tuohey ]ShowMe Better Courts has submitted a Constitutional amendment calling for the direct election of judges . According to the Annenberg Public Policy Center , 39 states elect their judges in some fashion. The Center's director adds that, "nearly 65 percent of Americans want to elect those who sit on the bench." The approach, as any, presents some challenges. The three-page Annenberg brief provides some valuable background.
Immediately upon learning of the the filing, some Missouri Democrats were outraged! Jason Kander, a freshman state house representative (and, dare I say, a trial attorney), got on Twitter to bemoan the idea of elected judges . Specifically, Rep Kander dislikes the idea of "partisan
political fundraising." Yet it is this sort of campaign style that
brought us Rep Kander. And Governor Nixon. And President Obama. Does
he really think such campaigning it is all that bad? He is certainly adept at it.
The idea that electing judges is anathema to all that is good and pure in America is a bit much to take. Better Courts will likely make the case that the current method for selecting judges in Missouri is equally flawed and commits an even greater offense to democratic sentiments: an unelected, unaccountable and non-transparent group of elitists who claim to know best. The Missouri Bar and the Association of Trial Attorneys need to choose their strategy carefully lest the feed this perception.
As Missouri voters consider their options, there will be plenty of opportunity to sensibly debate the matter. The Missouri Record looks forward to playing a role in the public discussion. Let's hope that supporters of the status quo come to the table with more than a campaign against voters' desire to vote.
10/7/2009 12:32:18 PM
Blunt v Carnahan: The Momentum Poll [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Arch City Chronicle provides a .pdf of a memo describing a portion of a survey administered to likely Missouri voters. Unlike the Rasmussen poll discussed a few weeks ago , this survey was conducted for private clients, described in the memo as "a group of organizations interested in ballot initiatives in Missouri." Readers are not given any further information, nor is there an opportunity to review cross-tabulated data.
It is also noteworthy that this 'recent poll' was actually conducted on September 15-19, before the Rasmussen survey. Yet it was released yesterday, almost three weeks after the data was collected. That leaves the impression it was released just to provide an alternate story to the Rasmussen poll.
I sent a note to Margie Omero, founder of Momentum Analysis, asking for her to release the names of the survey sponsors, the exact wording of questions and any preceding instruction or explanation that may have affected the response. These items are considered the standard for minimal disclosure according to the American Association of Public Opinion Researcher's (AAPOR) code of professional ethics.
In the meantime, it is important to note that Ms. Omero commits a minor error in subtraction and a more substantive error in representing the meaning of her study. In the second page of the two-page memo, a table shows Robin Carnahan's likely vote at 48%. Roy Blunt's likely vote is 45%, but the third column miscalculates the difference to be 4%. This is likely due to rounding to the nearest whole number, but it is sloppy.
The more serious error is when the study asserts, "Carnahan enjoys a small lead just at the margin of error (+4)." The memo calculates the margin of error at +/- 3.5, but this is for each percentage . Blunt's numbers range from 41.5% to 48.5% and Carnahan's range from 44.5% to 51.5%. The margins overlap so much that differences are, as we say in the industry, "statistically insignificant."
Lastly, the final paragraph of the memo is puzzling:
Carnahan enjoys a large gender gap (+18 among women, -13 with men). Among men, she fares better with older men (-7 among men 55+) or men without a college degree (-7). While Carnahan does a bit better with women than men if they are of the same party, there is a particularly large gender gap among independents (-1 among women, -38 among men). According the the graph on the page, Carnahan is 18 points ahead among women, but 13 points behind among men. She is also one point behind among independent woman and 38 points behind among independent men. Ms. Omero's analysis of sub-sub-groups (eg. men aged 55 or more) dwells on differences that are well within any margin of error and not significant whatsoever.
I cannot say for sure, but the timing of this release, the slapdash analysis, shodding editing and unreleased sponsorship suggest to me that this document is more about comforting Carnahan supporters than providing legitimate analysis. The full report may provide excellent and in-depth analysis on the focus of the study: the various ballot initiatives in Missouri. But that information was not released.
10/7/2009 2:50:09 PM
Monday, October 5, 2009
AMA Endorses Largest Denier of Health Care Claims [ Patrick Tuohey ][The following first appeared on BigGovernment.com ]
What appears to be the official blog of President Obama's administration
is all aflutter because the President will welcome, "doctors from
across the United States to the White House to share their unique
perspective on the struggles that American families face every day when
it comes to health care." (They posted today's agenda in the name of
transparency!)
The post even links to a National Public Radio (NPR) story in which a survey of medical professionals
indicates they are among the biggest supporters of the so-called
"public option." A co-sponsor of the study, Dr. Alex Federman,
indicates that, "physicians favored Medicare when it came to delivering
care to patients. They thought Medicare was better when it came to
autonomy and their decision making and their ability to get patients the care that they thought the patients needed ."
Furthermore, the American Medical Association (AMA) has endorsed the
public option after an appeal from the President and despite, according to ABC News , the fact that "some member physicians at the group's annual meeting [in June] likened the notion to communism."
Beverly Gossage , Research Fellow for Show-Me Institute
and founder of HSA Benefits Consulting wondered which insurance
companies rejected the most claims. She found her answer in the AMA's
own 2008 National Health Insurer Report Card . The chart below appears on page 5 of the 16-page report.
Of the eight insurers listed, Medicare is most likely to reject a
claim, sending away 6.85% of requests. This is more than any private
insurer and double that of the private insurers' average!
In short, the AMA is endorsing a plan whose closest existing example
is the most frequent denier of claims. How the public option
exemplifies "delivering care to patients" is unclear.
10/5/2009 2:46:54 PM
A Campaign Website With Issues [ Patrick Tuohey ]Representative Roy Blunt's senate campaign has launched a new Web site at www.RoyBlunt.com . It looks like standard fare for campaign sites, complete with links to every imaginable social network site (what, no Friendster ?!) It even includes a little graphic to display the latest Rasmussen poll numbers.
But unlike his opponent's site, Blunt's contains a section on issues such as energy, health care and the economy. It is likely that some will disagree with what the find. Others may find it lacking. But they will find it , right there in black and white (and blue).
Meanwhile, there is nothing from the Carnahan site . Nothing. It's been nine months since she announced her candidacy and not only has she not answered questions about policy, she has not even posted issue statements onto her Web site.
Why?
10/5/2009 8:07:06 AM
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Turning Tea Party Patriots into Political Petitioners [ Patrick Tuohey ]Our recent posting on BigGovernment.com :
As Americans rise up all across the country to challenge a political
elite that many believe does not listen to them, it is important to
consider the tools that people in many states have employed to directly
affect change: the petition.
In Missouri, our Constitution includes the following passage:
The people reserve power to propose and enact or reject
laws and amendments to the constitution by the initiative, independent
of the general assembly, and also reserve power to approve or reject by
referendum any act of the general assembly, except as hereinafter
provided. (Article 3, Section 49 )
The document clearly states that the people possess the right to
initiate laws and constitutional amendments, even though they grant
those same powers to their representatives in the legislature. This is
an important since it permits the people to enact laws directly and
without going through the standard legislative process.
Unfortunately, in Missouri and other states where the people enjoy
this right, the initiative process is continually under assault from
state legislatures—Republican and Democrat alike—even to the point of
adopting unconstitutional limitations to them. Such efforts have
included the following:
A 1969 law in Oklahoma required that petition circulators be state
residents. In December 2008, the Tenth Circuit Court unanimously
struck down that law as unconstitutional. The Court did the same to a
similar law in Colorado in 2002. A 2005 law in Ohio that restricted petition gatherers from being
paid per signature was struck down by the Sixth Circuit Court struck in
March 2008. Ohio appealed the decision but the U.S. Supreme Court
declined to hear it. Similar pay-per-signature regulations have been
overruled by federal district courts in Idaho, Maine, Mississippi and
Washington. A Colorado law that required petitioners to wear badges with their
name and whether they were a volunteer or paid circulator was struck
down as unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1999. A common argument for limiting the petition process is that it puts
too much money into politics or that it invites fraud. Yet courts have
found this not to be the case. In the 2005 ruling against Ohio, the
Court concluded that prohibiting payment per signature would increase
the costs and the time necessary to obtain the required signatures. The
Court also rejected the evidence that this particular form of payment
resulted in fraud.
Other legislators worry that petition drives can be funded and
operated by people living out-of-state. In a December interview with
the Springfield News-Leader , Rep. Michael Parson (R-133)
said, “What’s happening is a company or a special-interest group can
come in from out of the state, basically unload the signature gathers
(from a bus), do a marketing campaign and change the Constitution of
the State of Missouri.” It is important to note that Parson’s concern
about out-of-state money and campaign workers doesn’t extend to
candidate elections, like his own. His legislative efforts would only
regulate out of state activity on campaigns for ballot initiatives, not
campaigns for politicians.
Organizations such as Citizens in Charge
are dedicated to preserving petition rights and even expanding them
into new states. This is the first place tea party organizers should
turn when considering how to leverage their clout. Ballotpedia.org
is a website offering information about various ballot initiatives in
Missouri and elsewhere. This service is important, because often the
keys to the petition process are held by the executive and legislative
branches—the very groups that the petition process is intended to
circumvent. Even if a petition makes it to the ballot, the language
that appears on the ballot may be written to opponents to change.
The Missouri general assembly recently debated real and substantive improvements
to the initiative process, but the legislation did not survive the
frenzied final few hours of the session. Look for these efforts to
continue in January, and to remain a battleground all over the country.
10/3/2009 11:08:46 AM
Friday, October 2, 2009
Why are Democrats silent on Missouri scandals? [ Patrick Tuohey ]KCTV 5 in Kansas City recently released a survey of Missouri voters :
Gov. Jay Nixon got a 50 percent approval rating, 41 percent disapproved and 9 percent were unsure.
I am unable to find any methodology details on the study--including when it was conducted or who exactly was surveyed. A Rasmussen survey conducted September 21 gave Nixon an approval rating of 58%. But that was before the recent flap over withheld E. coli report become widely publicized. Let's assume that Governor Nixon's approval rating are hovering just over 50%.
More recently, Rasmussen released a survey of the entire country demonstrating that government ethics and corruption were very important (83%) or somewhat important (13%). This is on par with concern over the economy (82%/15% respectively)!
Given recent guilty pleas of Democratic legislators in St. Louis and the continuing investigation into top Nixon aides regarding a cover up of E. coli test results, how do Democrats think ethics issues will play out in Missouri? We don't know because the Missouri Democratic Party has said nothing about the E. coli issue. (In fact, there is nothing on their Web site about former legislators Smith, Brown or El-Amin.)
Democrats can count on Republicans in the legislature to make this investigation as slow and painful as possible. Why are Democrats complicit in dragging this out? The Party and its leaders should condemn Cardetti for what he has so far
admitted and urge the Governor to quickly remove him and other implicated staffers and put this self-inflicted wound
behind him. Otherwise, statewide Democrats risk going down with the
ship.
10/2/2009 10:01:27 AM
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Cardetti Must Go [ Patrick Tuohey ]The second half of Wednesday’s call between Governor Nixon
and reporters was about the fact that Nixon’s top aides knew about dangerous
levels of E. coli and did nothing about it.
Nixon spokesman Jack Cardetti originally indicated that no one in the Governor’s
office knew about the DNR report until June 23.
Now he admits this was untrue.
According to Tony Messenger,
Cardetti said that he knew of Mazur’s contacts with
former DNR spokesman Suzanne Medley when he told reporters that nobody in the
governor’s office knew about the report.
“I should have flushed that out more clearly,”
Cardetti said.
The Governor’s spokesman admits misleading the media. His only official job is to be truthful and
credible; and he has lost that credibility.
Jack Cardetti must go.
Some readers may dismiss this call as mere partisanship given that it comes
from a right-leaning journal. That would
be understandable. But consider some of
the circumstances in present-day Missouri
politics:
Three
Democratic state legislators have pled guilty to corruption and resigned their
offices. There may be more coming. Even House Minority Leader Paul LeVota (D)
said, "There seems to be some
type of issue with St. Louis Democrats and it seems to be happening way too
much." 2010
is not looking to be a good year for Democrats just because mid-term elections
for the Party in power are often bad.
Add to this the state of the national economy and widespread
dissatisfaction with the president and his policies in Missouri. The
group that Missouri Democrats would rely upon to register, organize and turnout
their vote, ACORN, is so hobbled by scandal that even Representative Russ Carnahan’s
campaign staff are scrubbing their resumes of any mention of the group or its
affiliates. At
some point, Democratic candidates such as Robin Carnahan will be asked to
comment on the E. coli scandal. The only
politically salient answer for them to give right now is that they abhor the
cover up and expect the governor to conduct an investigation, holding those
responsible fully accountable. What they
want to say is that the mistake was regrettable, but that Governor Nixon acted
swiftly to remove those responsible and rededicate his office to transparency
and protecting the public interest. A resignation
from Cardetti is a step in the right direction. The Star
reported that the DNR director said, "Mistakes were clearly made here.” This is an abstract sentence structure that
hides the actor--mistakes do not make themselves. It’s also notable that the same excuse was
offered multiple times by, you guessed it, President Richard M. Nixon amid his
own scandal and cover up.)
10/1/2009 8:18:40 AM
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Distracted Driving [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Drudge Report links to a story in The Washington Post about an epidemic of distracted driving . It includes this passage:
Almost 90 percent of Americans own cellphones, and one national survey
found that eight in 10 drivers talk on their phones while behind the
wheel, about 1 million of them at any given moment. Cellphone use has
been cited as a factor in an estimated 342,000 auto accident injuries.
Despite an awareness that distracted drivers are a hazard, many
Americans continue to use cellphones and text while driving. When AAA
recently studied the habits of Beltway drivers in Virginia, the group
found that more than half of drivers used their cell phones on
Interstate 495 every day, and a quarter of them send or receive text
messages daily.
Anderson said they found that more than half of Beltway drivers are
distracted by cellphone use and that those drivers are twice as likely
to have an accident or a "near-miss."
AAA last week urged all state governments to ban texting while driving. It currently is banned in the District and Virginia, while Maryland's ban will take effect Thursday. The Governors Highway Safety Association ,
a national nonprofit organization which represents state safety
offices, has endorsed a ban on texting and using cellphones for newly
licensed drivers.
The Governors group seems bent on addressing serious problem with a half-hearted response. The story demonstrates the problems of distracted driving, yet the AAA is focused only on banning texting for some people.
For more on the real scope of the problem, and Missouri's politically safe yet inadequate response to it, read Marcus Bowen's column on distracted driving here .
9/29/2009 7:50:31 AM
Monday, September 28, 2009
Missouri's Best Political Newsies? [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Fix, Washington Post's political blog, solicited names of the best state political writers and listed the results here .
For Missouri, the names include:
Tony Messenger Chad Livengood , KY3's David Cantanese [sic], St. Louis Beacon's Jo Mannies
These writers are all fine political reporters, but note that no one from The Kansas City Star is listed. Not even Micheal Mahoney . An oversight? The story linked to reporters' Twitter accounts, so maybe that affected the decision-making. Mahoney doesn't tweet--which makes me respect him all the more.
9/28/2009 11:58:14 AM
Friday, September 25, 2009
The E. Coli Hits the Fan [ Patrick Tuohey ][UPDATE: The Source publishes more info here .]
Despite the Governor's assertion that the Lake of the Ozarks will be cleaner when he leaves office than when he entered, it looks as if it's his administration that needs the cleaning. Chad Livengood at the News-Leader --whose Sunshine requests were denied--has been investigating all along and has a piece on the latest developments .
Writers at The Source have done an excellent job investigating this story and putting forward some hypotheses on what exactly is going on and how it will end. Their latest post is here .
I recommend you read their previous posts listed below.
For some context on the health risks to humans when a lake becomes infected with E. coli, read this piece about a 1995 outbreak in Illinois.
9/25/2009 10:04:12 AM
The Banality of TD's Bribery Scheme [ Jay Barnes ]The Riverfront Times details TD El-Amin's bribery scheme :
According to court documents, and statements made in court by Assistant United States Attorney Hal Goldsmith, during March 2009, El-Amin solicited a cash bribe from a local businessman, referred to as John Doe, who had approached El-Amin for help in dealing with St. Louis city officials relative to the operations of his gasoline station located within El-Amin's 57th district. Unlike Jeff Smith, this is a good ol-fashioned political corruption case. But it's so small as to be laughable. 10 years for $2,600! That's $260 a year - or less than a dollar a day - which is about the rate he'll be working for if he ends up in the clink. Yes, these are serious charges. But I'm actually just as outraged by the amount of the bribe. I expected more than a little pocket-change to be the price of bribery. Seriously, $2,600 is all it took?
9/25/2009 3:10:48 AM
Thursday, September 24, 2009
If It's Bad for Robin, It's Not News to the PD? [ Jay Barnes ]January 14, 2009 - PD Fix Article - Poll: Robin Carnahan Front-Runner in 2010 Senate Field
May 14, 2009 - PD Fix Article - Democratic Poll: Carnahan Leading Potential Opponents in Senate Race
September 24, 2009 - PD Fix Article - ??????????????
Yesterday, as detailed by Patrick Tuohey here at the Missouri Record, Rasmussen released a Missouri poll showing Robin Carnahan and Roy Blunt in a dead heat - good news for Mr. Blunt considering the two polls linked above. Better news could be found in the poll's internals, again, as detailed by Mr. Tuohey, where Ms. Carnahan had significantly higher negatives.
Worse for Carnahan, Missourians have turned decidedly against Obamacare. By a nearly two to one margin (51-27), Missourians believe Obamacare will make the quality of health care worse and 79 percent believe it will require tax hikes on the middle class.
Granted, not every poll is newsworthy. But polls indicating a new dynamic in public opinion are, and this is one such poll.
From the poll's policy internals, it's easy to see why Ms. Carnahan has been splitting her time between Cyprus, Jordan, and an undisclosed bunker deep in the Kirkpatrick building, rather than in front of Missouri voters answering the tough questions.
Now, maybe I'm too quick, hopefully we'll see an article in the PD on the poll sometime soon.
9/24/2009 10:43:15 AM
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Blunt v Carnahan: The Rasmussen Poll [ Patrick Tuohey ]
Rasmussen Reports today released a telephone survey of 500
likely voters in Missouri
conducted on Monday, September 21. The
margin of error for the entire survey is ±4.5%
In a Roy Blunt v Robin Carnahan match up, each candidate gets 46% of
the vote. Five percent indicate they are
unsure and 2% support another candidate. Blunt and Carnahan are seen favorably by similar amounts. But despite
these numbers, all is not equal.
Three-fourths of young voters—those aged 18 to 29—would vote for Carnahan. That is
the only age demographic she wins by a significant margin. And those are the people least likely to
actually show up to vote. They are also
the least engaged, 17% of them—the highest of any other age group—have yet to
make up their mind. Blunt wins 61% of
those aged 30 to 39 and is nine points ahead (49% to 40%) among likely voters
aged 65 and up—two demographics that are strong voting blocs.
While Blunt’s 57% favorable rating is five points greater
than Carnahan’s, the difference is well within the margin of error and can be
said to be insignificant. Interestingly,
Blunt is better thought of among self-described liberals (46% favorable) than
Carnahan is among self-described conservatives (32% favorable). What is significant, however, is that Carnahan
is carrying a 42% unfavorable rating, ten points greater than Blunt’s 33%.
The crosstabs released by Rasmussen deal only in percentages,
not actual count, so a more thorough analysis will have to wait. (While I can determine how many
self-identified liberals like Blunt, I cannot tell how many of them there were…10? 100?)
Furthermore, I am not privy to any data from previous months. While the candidates are at 46% right now,
they could have been 10 points apart six months ago.
If I was advising either campaign—and I am not—I would suggest
that Carnahan’s stealth campaign is not in her best interest. The report shows that demographic groups
important to her think health care will increase costs, add to the deficit, and
will result in middle class tax increases.
Moreover, as she fails to tell voters about her and her policy preferences,
she allows opponents to do that for her. (Unfavorable ratings are very difficult to lower.)
The election is a year away.
With the national mood as it is now, waiting until the Democratic
primary to engage her opponent on the important issues is not a good
strategy. While the Rasmussen report did
not include a generic ballot test for Congress, my guess is that Democrats in Missouri are fairing
worse with each week. Robin Carnahan
does not have the luxury of time to make her case.
9/23/2009 11:37:35 AM
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
KC Schools: The Cost of Failure [ Patrick Tuohey ]John Derbyshire over at National Review Online has an excellent piece on some recent history in the Kansas City school district and their funding. (The piece is a selection from Derbyshire's upcoming book, We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism
Basically, Derbyshire observed that school funding does not impact the quality of education. In fact, this is not a new observation. Derbyshire writes:
The first of the big modern government-sponsored papers on school reform, James Coleman’s 1966 report titled “Equality of Educational Opportunity” (but almost always referred to as “the Coleman Report”), surveyed 645,000 students in over 3,000 schools nationwide. Coleman found almost no relationship between school quality — spending, newness of facilities, teacher credentials — and student achievement. really bad schools, nothing much changes. A truly excellent school with terrific facilities does somewhat better by its students than a mediocre school, but the difference is not great. What makes the difference is family background.
Is anyone other than the usual education advocates surprised by this? The Kansas City School District spends money as fast as it can and has very little to show for it. Superintendent John Covington highlighted some of the waste in observing that similar districts have about 2,300 employees. The Kansas City district has 4,000!
The problems with the district have become so bad that even The Kansas City Star has decided it needs to be audited . This is noteworthy because for years the Star has been afraid to cover the stories of graft and incompetence within the district.
We all wish Mr. Covington success in his effort to bring the school district up to snuff. But he cannot do it alone. Just as family background is the strongest indicator of a student's success, the Kansas City School District will only be as good as parents and educators demand it be.
9/22/2009 6:38:07 AM
Friday, September 18, 2009
Manufacturing Racism [ Patrick Tuohey ]FiredUp! Missouri has a curious post today about a joke Rep Blunt told to a fundraiser about Washington politics. In essence, the joke is about dealing with circumstances as you find them.
But surprise, surprise, blogger Sean finds some additional insidious meaning. By telling a story about a monkey, he writes, Blunt appears to be talking about President Obama.
The formulation of Obama-as-monkey is completely unnecessary to understand the joke. Furthermore, the joke most likely predates Obama's election (politicians never tell new jokes). We've seen this before with the furor over the cartoon depicting the cops shooting a rampaging ape and a joke about the stimulus bill.
The only conclusions I can reach is that either (1) some are so intent on manufacturing racism that they will go to any length to make such a claim, or (2) they themselves see the world through race and are unable to imagine any other point of view.
9/18/2009 3:42:24 PM
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Slight Correction on Complaint about P-D Coverage [ Jay Barnes ]As a reader pointed out, the PD actually did do a blog story on the health care debate challenge Roy Blunt issued to Robin Carnahan.
My complaint, though not stated as accurately as it should have been, was that there was not enough follow-up on Carnahan's refusal. That complaint remains true.
Now that there's been an article in Politico and a long blog post on Ms. Carnahan's disappearing act, maybe we'll get an article in the actual newspaper?
ASIDE: Since she married but kept her maiden name, is it proper to refer to Robin Carnahan as Ms. Carnahan or Mrs. Carnahan? What's the rule here?
9/9/2009 12:48:26 PM
Tea Party Activists in Their Own Words [ Patrick Tuohey ]Much has been written about Tea Party protesters, and much of it has been unflattering. Today The Missouri Record publishes another piece written by activists themselves.
This first column was written by Jedidiah Smith of the Franklin County Patriots. In it, Mr. Smith cites the writings of Alexis de Tocqueville who observed similar angry meetings between politicians and constituents in the 1830s and viewed them as not only uniquely American, but necessary for democracy.
In a second piece , authored by by Janel Allquist, we learn why a 67-year old woman would make a large sign and sit by herself near the intersection of two highways in O'Fallon, Missouri to protest the President's policies. Months later, her solitary effort has been joined by hundreds of people each week.
It is not important that readers share the worldviews of Mr. Smith or Mrs. Allquist. It is important, however, that we all appreciate the time and attention they have given to expressing their views and contributing to the public debate.
9/9/2009 6:34:34 AM
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Obama Gives a Great Speech to School Kids [ Jay Barnes ]This morning, President Obama gave what I believe is destined to be long-remembered speech on the path to success in America. Read it for yourself. It's really good, inspirational stuff. After reading it, I think most hard-working Americans should be thrilled that he gave the speech. I certainly am.
However, that does not change the analysis in Ask Not What Obama Can Do for You , my piece here at the Missouri Record. The concerns about the speech, thankfully, did not come to fruition. But the uproar was not unwarranted. It instead was the direct result of how this White House has operated for the past nine months.
9/8/2009 7:55:47 AM
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Van Who? [ Patrick Tuohey ]I woke up this morning to news that environmental advisor to President Obama, Van Jones, has resigned .
If you've been spending any time at all on the Internet reading news sites or blogs, you know that
Mr. Jones has signed on to petitions espousing the belief that the previous administration was behind the 9-11 attacks; Mr. Jones is a self-described Communist; He this year referred to Republicans using vulgar expletives, and He has used racial identity to explain all sorts of events from school shootings to environmental policy. You also know that this issue has been building over the course of a few weeks and that many had predicted that Mr.Jones would not have his job through the weekend . They were right. If, however, you get your news through the print editions of The Kansas City Star , The St. Louis Post-Dispatch or the Springfield News-Leader The New York Times .)
If you are new to the Internet, or an editor of a major newspaper, and would like to know more about what just happened, I recommend you spend a few minutes reading Gateway Pundit . It's all there.
9/6/2009 7:59:54 AM
Friday, September 4, 2009
Robin Gets a Pass [ Jay Barnes ]
We're half a year into the campaign to replace Kit Bond and still.....still....Robin Carnahan is mum on most of the important issues in the campaign. Most importantly, she’s silent on Obamacare.
Earlier this week, the Blunt campaign pulled the classic stunt of challenging Robin to a debate on health care. She demurred, a Republican challenger with no shot at winning the primary cried about being left out, and PD reporters covered the Republican crier, not the Democratic ducker.
Today, it gets worse. The PD's Fix carries another story on Carnahan and animals. Jake Wagman notes that Carnahan was busy conducting a fake election to determine Missouri's most popular state symbol. This follows an earlier story by Tony Messenger, which noted that Moxie, the name of Carnahan's new foal, is also the name of the PD's internal morale boosting campaign.
Really?
Seriously?
We have a Senate candidate who is scared to take a position on ANYTHING, and the only stories we get on the race from the PD are about state symbols and foals?
C'mon guys - and especially Tony - you're better than that.
9/4/2009 11:28:06 AM
Expand Term Limits [ Matt Hearne ]
Lets expand term limits for all public employees. The Peace Corps does it. Pass a law that says that unless you are in the military you can
only draw a check from the Federal Government for 8 years. Perhaps exempt
clerical positions.
9/4/2009 7:57:13 AM
Thursday, September 3, 2009
STL activists score more victories [ Patrick Tuohey ]Jim Durbin over at 24thState has another great post on SEIU v. Tea Party shenanigans. Apparently, the union attacker, later arrested, filed a workers compensation claim--meaning he considered his injuries to be work-related. Nice. The assailant also apparently claims that the union is footing the bill for his criminal defense but is unlikely to do so for his civil defense.
The St. Louis activists have also claimed a great victory in launching a so-called "buycott" of Whole Foods to support their CEO's letter opposing ObamaCare.
Both events have garnered national attention. Congratulations to the other STL bloggers such as SharpElbowsSTL ,
Patch Adams , Gateway Pundit , Reboot Congress and the STL Activist Hub for their continuing great work in behalf of smaller and less powerful government.
9/3/2009 3:06:39 PM
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
The health care scoop [ Patrick Tuohey ]Congrats to Missouri Record cartoonist Bryan Stalder whose cartoon below correctly predicted that Democrats' so-called "public option" was starting to slide away from them. On Tuesday night Politico published a story detailing the shift in the President's advocacy away from this much maligned policy. If the president can not or will not support this basic tenant of liberal-left reform, the whole initiative may collapse.
9/1/2009 9:33:47 PM
AP notices Ike Skelton’s hard left turn [ Jonathan Prouty ]Once a conservative Democrat who voted more often with Republicans than his own party, Congressman Ike Skelton has recently become an automatic vote for the Pelosi-Reid-Obama agenda. Even the AP has taken notice of Ike Skelton’s growing alliance with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Early in his career, Congressional Quarterly (CQ) named Skelton one of the most conservative Democrats in the US House of Representatives, a title that Skelton often bragged about. Skelton recognized that he represented what he called a “moderate-to-conservative” district, and he voted accordingly. According to CQ, in 1982, Skelton voted with Democrats a mere 40% of the time. Even as recently as 1995, his “party unity” score was below 50%—meaning he actually sided more often with Republicans than his own party.
But recently, Skelton’s voting record has veered hard to the left. This year, Skelton has voted with the liberal wing that controls the Democratic Party more than 97% of the time . His record includes supporting a costly and burdensome national energy tax, co-sponsoring a bill that would remove a worker’s right to a secret ballot, voting for the wasteful and ineffective stimulus package, and voting against additional funding for missile defense.
“The people of Missouri’s 4th Congressional District do not agree with Pelosi 97% of the time—so why does Ike Skelton?” asked David Cole, Chairman of the Missouri Republican Party. “Skelton is no longer the conservative he once claimed to be. Instead, he has become more partisan, more liberal, and more out-of-touch with the people he represents. A vast majority of his constituents strongly oppose implementing a national energy tax, removing a worker’s right to a secret ballot, and reckless borrowing that has contributed to an explosion in the national debt, but it is easier for Skelton to say ‘yes’ to Pelosi in Washington, DC, than to do what is best for his constituents in Missouri.”
Despite his current liberal voting record, Skelton once bragged about being a conservative Democrat:
St. Louis Post-Dispatch , December 30, 1990: Outside of the South, the House Democrat with the most conservative voting record on key issues this year was Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo… Only two House Democrats, both from the Deep South - Reps. W.J. Tauzin, D-La., and Mike Parker, D-Miss. - voted more often with the conservative bloc this year… “I consider myself a moderate Democrat who votes according to his best judgments,” Skelton said last week. A member of the House Armed Services Committee, Skelton says his defense votes usually reflect his conservative stance on military issues. “Back home, I have a moderate-to- conservative constituency, and I listen to what they have to say,” said Skelton, of Lexington. “I don't get leaned on much by the House Democratic leadership.”Kansas City Star, August 1, 1996: Skelton fires back that he is a conservative and points out that Congressional Quarterly recently rated him the most conservative of the non-Southern Democrats in the House.Jonathan Prouty is the spokesman for the Missouri Republican Party . The above post was taken from a press release issued September 1, 2009. 9/1/2009 9:49:33 AM
Friday, August 28, 2009
Elsewhere on The Missouri Record [ Patrick Tuohey ]8/28/2009 7:20:58 AM
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Defending Governor Nixon [ Jay Barnes ]Catanese reports
Gov. Nixon's problem here isn't that he cut too much. It's that he didn't cut enough. Why should my tax dollars go to pay for advertising to benefit wealthy entertainment venue owners in Springfield, Branson, or anywhere else in the state? Branson has a population of 6,050. Why should the other 5,904,545 Missourians subsidize their local economy?
Here's an idea, instead of taking my tax dollars, Taney County should raise its own property taxes, and put together its own advertising campaign to get people to come to their fair city.
8/27/2009 10:01:23 AM
Health care issue separates wheat from chaff [ Patrick Tuohey ]I wrote earlier that I attended Sen McCaskill's health care town
hall meeting at UMKC. At the time, I marveled at how well she has done with constituents.
When town hall crowds first started getting rowdy, she disagreed with
members of her party that the crowds were the result of organized
efforts from political opponents. She was shouted down in St. Louis when she asked if her constituents trusted her. At the UMKC event, she made sure the people selecting the audience questions where dedicated health care opponents. She was greeted with cheers yesterday when she told attendees they could fire her . Today Missourinet reports that some who oppose the reforms before Congress are impressed with Sen McCaskill .refused to discuss health care because there weren't any final bills yet. When he did say something of substance , he had to distance himself from it. Rep Carnahan has acted more like a Washington, DC representative to Missouri than a Missouri representative to Washington. But at least he has said something. His sister Robin, who wants to be a colleague to Sen McCaskill, hasn't said anything of substance on health care.8/27/2009 9:09:53 AM
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
REALLY? KennedyCare? [ Patrick Tuohey ]Ted Kennedy may be the Lion of the Senate and a hero to liberals, but he has also a tried and true fundraiser for Republicans. Before Obama and Pelosi, Kennedy was a favorite poster boy for liberalism run wild. In fact, the rap on Obama in the 2008 campaign was that he was rated more liberal than Kennedy.
Given this, I am shocked that Democrats are considering naming health care legislation for Kennedy. Do they think that conservatives and independents who don't like a government-heavy health reform when it's called "ObamaCare" and going to like "KennedyCare" any better?
8/26/2009 7:13:15 PM
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
What I saw at McCaskill's KC town hall meeting [ Patrick Tuohey ]The story of whether or not large groups are organizing those town hall crowds is probably moot by now. The fact is that the appetite for a large-scale government takeover of health care is rapidly decreasing and taking the President's approval numbers with it.
At the town hall meeting held yesterday at UMKC, I marveled at the number of professionally printed signs and shirts and stickers distributed among proponents of health care reform. Planned Parenthood had signs and shirts as did some unions (no SEIU though). One church group even brought a PA system so that people far away could ignore them.
I saw no such signs of organization among health care reform opponents. I saw an NRA hat, one that read "CAPITALIST," and some handmade signs that could have used an editor.
These events have become media-focused and people show up wearing their colors. But the initial impact remains the same and as a result, whatever reform the legislature passes will be a far cry from what the President wanted.
8/25/2009 7:11:43 AM
Saturday, August 22, 2009
RALLY FAIL: Recess Rally at Rep Cleaver's KC office [ Patrick Tuohey ]Opponents of health care reform scheduled recess rallies intended to keep the pressure on members of Congress. Below is a picture of the Kansas City office of Rep Emanuel Cleaver at the scheduled rally time. At least it was civil.
UPDATE:
The St. Louis rally in front of Rep Carnahan's office had great turnout. SharpElbowsSTL sent us a picture of his favorite sign.
8/22/2009 12:01:05 PM
Friday, August 21, 2009
Some simple ideas for health care reform [ Jay Barnes ]Peggy Noonan weighs
in today on Obamacare and lambasts the President for violating the
K.I.S.S. principle. (Keep It Simple Stupid)
Every
big idea that works is marked by simplicity, by clarity. You can understand it
when you hear it, and you can explain it to people. Social Security: Retired
workers receive a public pension to help them through old age. Medicare: People
over 65 can receive taxpayer-funded health care. Welfare: If you have no money
and cannot support yourself, we will help as you get back on your feet.
These
things are clear. I understand them. You understand them. The president's
health-care plan is not clear, and I mean that not only in the sense of
"he hasn't told us his plan." I mean it in terms of the voodoo
phrases, this gobbledygook, this secret language of government that no one
understands—"single payer," "public option,"
"insurance marketplace exchange." No one understands what this stuff
means, nobody normal. And
when normal people don't know what the words mean, they don't say to
themselves, "I may not understand, but my trusty government surely does,
and will treat me and mine with respect." They think, "I can't get
what these people are talking about. They must be trying to get one past me. So
I'll vote no." How's
this for a simple idea?
1. Allow every American
citizen access to the federal employee health insurance pool .
2. Increase the size
of the pool to guard against adverse selection by requiring every entity which
receives federal funds to make the pool available to its employees.
3. Instead of putting folks
on Medicaid, give them a voucher to access plans within the pool and give them
incentives to pick cost-effective plans. This makes the pool bigger as well.
4. To help those with pre-existing
conditions, forbid insurers within the pool from completely denying coverage on
that basis - but allow them to charge a reasonable surcharge to help cover
additional costs.
5. Make all purchases of
plans within the federal pool tax-deductible, regardless of whether purchased
by an employer or individual.
6. If there's a problem
with funding - and there will be - start with vice taxes for behaviors that
make a person more likely to need substantial medical care.
7. Leave Medicare
alone.
Democratic socialists won't
like this because it's market-based, it transforms Medicaid from the commie
model to a market model, and there is no public option.
Free market Republicans
won't like the vice tax part, the pre-existing condition regs, or the requirement
that every entity which receives a federal dime must buy in. (That throws
the Obame lie, "If you like your health care, you can keep it," out
the window." But federal employees have good health care.)
Couple other points: First,
there'd have to be a transition phase. And second, this is an off-the-cuff
idea, so I'm sure there are other problems I haven't thought of yet.
8/21/2009 9:27:50 AM
HAPPY FUN HEALTH CARE BALL: The Missouri Budget Project makes a mockery of serious scholarship [ Patrick Tuohey ]When writing my column on the Show-Me Institute's recent study of health care reform ,
I was dismayed that I could find many studies on the economic benefits
of a single-payer option, or of universal, low-deductible coverage.
Then yesterday I came across this little gem from The Missouri Budget Project. It is neither scholarly nor serious, but it was fun to read.
It spends the first page detailing how things are bad and getting worse. Fair enough. Some of their footnotes are even from organizations that are not the federal government or proponents for reform!
Page
two tells us some of the things being debated in Congress, with the
caveat that the process is still going on. Each major proposal gets a
paragraph or two. Most of the footnotes refer to the House Energy
& Commerce Committee. So, the evidence to support reform is
provided to us from the proponents of reform. I guess that is a think-tank's way of saying, "Because I said so."
My favorite is this assertion from the report: "The increase in Medicaid would be fully federally funded ." It carries a footnote, which reads, "The financing aspect of the strengthening Medicaid is currently being debated . At this time , the House appears to be moving toward
full federal financing to ensure that states are not burdened with
increased costs." [Emphasis mine.] This reminds me of Kevin Nealon's
Subliminal Man character from Saturday Night Live . The text is full of
confident proclamations, and the footnotes completely backtrack.
On
the final page (this intellectual tour de force is only three pages
long), the report gets to the benefit for Missourians. Never mind that
legislation is still pending and portions of it are being dropped and
reshaped each day. The Missouri Budget Project knows what will be passed and knows that it will be good for you. It states:
"Federal Health Care Reform will provide access to quality , affordable health
care for an expected 374,000 Missourians who are currently uninsured by
2013 and up to 600,000 Missourians by 2019." (Footnote to the
committee debating it.) "Missouri families will have access to affordable health care coverage when they need it most . Families who have a child diagnosed with Autism, or a parent diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer will be able to access care." "Health Care reform will create a more prosperous, productive Missouri economy
by providing the 135,000 Missouri small businesses with tax credits and
affordable options for health care for their employees." "Rural areas of Missouri will benefit significantly from Federal Health Reform." "All Missourians will benefit from federal health reform." "Federal Health Care Reform contains a liquid core, which, if
exposed due to rupture, should not be touched, inhaled, or looked at." "Do not taunt Federal Health Care Reform." Okay, I made up those last two. But you get the idea.
8/21/2009 6:41:52 AM
Thursday, August 20, 2009
ObamaCare and the Show-Me State [ Patrick Tuohey ]I had an opportunity to visit with Donna Arduin, one of the authors of an economic study of ObamaCare , last night. I found Ms. Arduin to be very pleasant, and capable of explaining complex economic principles in a simple way. This is necessary for my sake. Moreover, she even conceded my cynical observation that one can find an economist to say anything these days. But she also pointed out that her co-author, Arthur Laffer, has demonstrated throughout his decades-long career staying power not because his analysis bends to fit any trendy political whim, but because it has been constant. ...and correct.
Ms. Arduin also argued that people intuitively understand the issues at play in health care reform. They understand that while they are pleased with the quality of their own care, costs have risen too fast.
My column on the study is entitled "ObamaCare and the Show-Me state ."
8/20/2009 2:05:48 PM
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
CARTOON: Don't tread on me [ Patrick Tuohey ]
From Northeast News (www.northeastnews.net )
8/19/2009 10:03:17 AM
HEALTH CARE: The casualties of war [ Patrick Tuohey ]US Senator Hiram Johnson is credited with saying, "The first casualty when war comes is truth." This is certainly the truth with the modern health care reform debate. And the debate about the debate.
Today the Show-Me Institute released a study conducted by economists Arthur Laffer and Donna Arduin. The report examines the history of health care cost inflation, its causes and what reforms might best address it. Regardless of the quality of the report, I am skeptical of whether the debate on health care reform is susceptible to any more information. It seems the lines have been drawn. This morning's Drudge Report carries a link to a story suggesting that Democrats in Congress have run out of patience with the minority Party. Although I don't share their political views, I can sympathize with their frustration. Who knows what to believe anymore?
In reviewing the Laffer/Arduin study, I tried to look online for studies that uphold a public option or offer alternate explanations of health care cost inflation. I found one published by Families USA that focuses on the cost increases due to treating the uninsured. Other similar studies must be out there. But again, I fear the lines may have already been drawn and studies such as these just arm partisans.
Another casualty of the health care debate has been how the debate itself has been conducted. Jim Durbin today publishes new evidence on his blog, 24thState.com, suggesting that the removal of Maxine Johnson from Sen McCaskill's town hall in St. Louis has been misrepresented to further some personal agendas! (Imagine that!)
Our own Jay Barnes wrote an excellent response to the Post-Dispatch's Kevin Horrigan, who wondered in print why Missourians are so prone to wacky, hateful right-wingery. The Post-Dispatch has decided that if you can't beat 'em, defame 'em.
Getting back to the Laffer/Arduin study, I will have the opportunity tonight to discuss the study with one of it's authors. I am looking forward to asking about the intersection of economics and politics and learning which informs which.
8/19/2009 9:22:10 AM
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
BORROWED BLOG: Health care reforms I would support (24thState.com) [ Jim Durbin ]
One of my commenters challenged me to
discuss what I would support in health care. In general, I am against new federal taxes,
new federal bureaucracies, single-payer, or other bloated government
monstrosities. Here are 20 ways to address
health care. Some are state, some are federal, all are common sense.
Allow small businesses and individuals to group together and buy insurance. Allow insurers to sell across different states, preventing state
mandates from driving up the cost of insurance. Right now, you’re
stuck paying for anything your state legislators decide should be
covered, which is more than another state's legislators may decide
should be covered. This includes major and minor pieces, but these
unfunded mandates push up the costs for all of us. Mandate the full cost of insurance be shown by employers, so people
aren't suprised when they go on COBRA. COBRA is insurance
portability. It's only wildly expensive if your employer is paying the
lion's share. Which means if you're currently paying $300 a month, and
then find out COBRA will cost you $2000, it's because your employer is
paying $1700 a month for you. Those are hidden wage increases people
don't count as their compensation. Remove tax deductions from insurance for employers, or add them for
individuals and business owners. Level that playing field to increase
the ability to change jobs. For the uninsured, increase the number of local clinics available
for routine treatment. Make it easier for Walgreen’s and Walmart to
address these issues. Allow for more choice of catastrophic coverage – so those with a
tough economic time can go to a clinic for regular treatment, emergency
rooms for real emergencies, and have catastrophic insurance in case of
cancer or other types of illnesses. Close the border. Health care costs association with immigration are crushing border states, and the problem is now moving inward. Allow hospitals to turn away patients without insurance for non-life threatening injuries (this would be a state reform). Work on improving Medicare and Medicaid billing Too many doctors
are not accepting Medicare for new patients, and it's a crisis that is
coming. Fix the problem on the government side. Eliminate the false distinction of the employer portion of Medicare
and Social Security. This is another wage issue, where people are paid
less because employers are forced to contribute money for their
employment. Small businesses and individuals pay the combined employer
and employee tax. Every American should know the total burden is
actually 15.3%. This would raise wages, but that money would still be
gone. Let's do away with these hidden taxes. If we must have a public option, it needs to be a “we’ll stop you
from dying right now, but we’re not taking care of you permanently.”
People need to learn that they have to work harder and pay for
gold-plated insurance. Prevent insurance companies from dropping patients who pay their
premiums on time. Set a ceiling on the amount a premium can be raised
in a year. Create a rating system on billing and complaint response for
insurance companies. One of the major problems is small claims that
aren't worth the time to fight. If you fight a $10.00 charge, it will
cost you more than just accepting it. Create a Better Business Bureau-type of system where companies compete to get the best rating. Make pre-existing conditions apply to all people equally (which
will raise costs). Individuals should be able to purchase as much as
those working for companies (when we had a pre-existing condition, we
incorporated, and the insurance was then paid by the company, which
covered the whole thing). Those who voluntarily choose to forgo insurance are not penalized,
but they should have a waiting period before a non-life threatening
illness is found when they are uninsured. Children’s insurance, S-CHIP, should only be provided for children under the age of 18. Mandate that all federal, state, and local union and government
worker benefits promised in collective bargaining be fully accounted
for and paid up front based on realistic growth scenarios. Do not
allow elected officials to sign contracts pushing costs into the future
when they are out of office, but keeping the taxpayer on the hook. Publish health costs for all elected and confirmed officials in a
lump based on branch. Show Congress, Cabinet Heads and President, and
Supreme Court. We want to see what it costs to keep our
representatives healthy, and compare that with what the rest of us get.
Post final bills for all health system legislation on the Internet for 2 weeks online before they are voted on, to allow the public to see them. Broadcast all negotiations for healthcare changes live on C-SPAN, as was promised by President Obama when he ran for office. Much of this can be accomplished in small bites, and every bit of it
makes sense. It drives the system to more transparency, more
accountability, more freedom, and away from bureaucratic
decisions. It forces people to take responsibility, but works against
allowing insurance companies to take advantage of the individual.
Mostly, it brings the system into parity and eliminates the distortions
that warp choices about jobs, costs, and health choices.
And
while you're at it, you can slash non-essential government programs to
free up room to pay down the deficit and prepare for the Medicare
trainwreck heading our way. A strong economy with a small government
can handle it. A bloated, broke economy and government can not.
Jim Durbin is the the author of 24thState . This column is taken from a post on his site.
8/18/2009 8:00:19 AM
Monday, August 17, 2009
FAMILY MATTERS: The Third Carnahan [ Patrick Tuohey ]It's not often that family members appear on the same ballot, yet here in Missouri we've made a
habit of it. In 2004 and 2008, Carnahans Russ and Robin both appeared on
the ballot--at least in the 3rd Congressional District. In 2004, Blunts
Roy and Matt both appeared on the ballot in the 7th Congressional
District. We are due for a two-fer again in 2010.without getting laughs or
jeers . He has even done a poor job of not communicating, as is evidenced
by the video of him answering questions at a supposedly secretive press
conference . Robin has decided not to campaign at all. In fact, her campaign Web site
is devoid of any substantial national policy discussion. To her credit,
she goes on record on fraud (opposed) and curing cancer (supports).
That's about it.
What makes 2010 special is the third Carnahan in the race: Jean.
And while Russ and Robin seem unwilling to embrace the campaign, Jean
is all fired up! In recent columns on the Web,
Jean dismissed health care opponents as suffering from "mob hysteria"
and making "death threats, and remarks that border on treason."
She even offered us the vulgar "anti-government tea baggers" before wistfully
reminiscing about her days drinking champagne and riding in hot air
balloons. She has accused Republican lawmakers of "inane
speeches and half-witted statements." She wrote of Senator Jim
DeMint , "Here is a man who has fallen out of the stupid tree and hit every
branch on the way down."May 2009 she referred to a North Carolina State
Representative as a "politically fossilized old biddy" and offered
that she was living proof of the adage, "beauty is skin deep, but ugly
goes clear to the bone."
Watching them try to put this Jeanie back in the bottle will be entertaining in itself.
8/17/2009 10:22:48 AM
Thursday, August 13, 2009
ON DEATH PANELS [ Matt Hearne ]
Does anyone remember Logans Run ? It was both a
movie and TV show where the elderly (anyone over 35 or 40) was brought into an
arena. While there, a panel of elder politicians chose who was to live and who was to be
vaporized because they were no longer productive.
8/13/2009 9:15:23 AM
Thursday, August 6, 2009
HEALTH CARE: Initial reports from Rep Carnahan's town hall meeting [ Patrick Tuohey ]Rep Russ Carnahan had his town hall meeting tonight in south St. Louis County. I have heard rumors or arrests from people who were on the scene, but the county police were unable to tell me anything. The media contact number they forwarded me to rang until it went to voicemail. This was about 10:15 PM.
Speaking with Darin from Reboot Congress , I learned the event was well-attended. Though it was supposed to begin at 6 PM, he said that parking was scarce as early at 5:15 PM. Inside the venue, a large number of seats were reserved, allegedly for health care reform supporters. 24thState suggests the reserved chairs is a tactic employed in Tampa, too. Gateway Pundit offers this video which appears to show ACORN or SEIU union members being selectively admitted while others are denied entrance. (SharpElbowsSTL first discovered the separate entrance for health care supporters in this video .)
Meanwhile, out in the parking lot, RebootCongress tells me that the 100+ people denied entrance were singing "God Bless America." So much for angry mobs.
But there were arrests, apparently. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch is claiming that there were at least four arrests, including one of their reporters, Jake Wagman. At least one of the other three arrests was of a supporter of health care reform.
We'll know more in the coming hours. I'd like to know if this event is considered a success by the Carnahan staff and if they look forward to many more just like them. I can't imagine they are happy.
*UPDATE* The Post-Dispatch is now reporting that a man opposed to the health care reform was attacked.
Kenneth Gladney, a 38-year-old conservative activist from St. Louis,
said he was attacked by some of those arrested as he handed out yellow
flags with “Don't tread on me” printed on them. He spoke to the
Post-Dispatch from the emergency room of the St. John's Mercy Medical
Center, where he said he was waiting to be treated for injuries to his
knee, back, elbow, shoulder and face that he suffered in the attack.
Gladney, who is black, said one of his attackers, also a black man,
used a racial slur against him before the attack started.
Apparently, if the Huffington Post is to be believed, the word has come down from Union Bosses to take on health care protesters.
8/6/2009 9:35:52 PM
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
FIREDUP! Honest commentary? [ Patrick Tuohey ]When we launched The Missouri Record some months ago, Jay Barnes listed some of the principles to which we were dedicated. One of them was the idea that public officials and commentators ought to be held accountable for their words and deeds. To that end we are not going to publish anonymous content.
Weeks later, Dave Catanese of Springfield's KY3 wrote about our effort and even quoted us:
"I don't care for Fired Up's
model for several reasons. First, they publish under pseudonym,
something we have committed to not do. Second, Fired Up prints personal
attacks which I don't care for, and third, Fired Up is so rabidly
partisan that it really brings nothing of value to readers, save for
making like-minded partisans more angry," Tuohey said. "When you visit
Fired Up, you already know what you are getting."
Catanese got a reaction from FiredUp's Sean Nicholson, who asserted,
"a significant portion" of the Fired Up community posts
under their own names, and that the decision is left up to the
individual user.
This is important given 24thState.com's recent series of posts about FiredUp! and their web of anonymous contributors, fake names, and duplicate accounts. If, as 24thState suggests, FiredUp! is serving as a mouthpiece for state employees writing on taxpayer time and a small number of political operatives, then it is exactly the type of 'AstroTurf' organization that it accuses others of being.
24thState has provided enough information for reporters to follow up and ask tough questions of elected officials and their staffers. It could be illuminating enough to just ask about their policies on anonymous blogging.
As long as blogs like FiredUp! hide behind anonymity when taking political shots, they deserve the disapproval of responsible journalists and commentators.
8/4/2009 3:57:43 PM
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
PRIMARY CHALLENGES: Are they a bad thing? [ Patrick Tuohey ]Springfield's KY3 political reporter Dave Catanese posted details on an interview he conducted with Missouri state senator Chuck Pergason , who is challenging Rep. Roy Blunt for the right to represent the Republican Party for the seat being vacated by Sen. Kit Bond . Of interest to me is the discussion of primaries and whether or not they are good for a Party.
I am inclined to say that they are, and am uncomfortable with arguments to the contrary. If a candidate cannot withstand a challenge from within, how can they be expected to survive in the general? Why would a Party forgo this important internal vetting process?
In the absence of primaries, how are Parties to determine their candidate? First come, first serve? Unlikely. If Sarah Steelman had announced her candidacy before Blunt, would Party apparatchiks tell Blunt that he should sit this one out because primaries are harmful?
The only people that benefit from this apprehension are the various political insiders and glad-handers who are the last ones to detect serious dissatisfaction with their own leadership.
7/28/2009 1:34:35 PM
Monday, July 13, 2009
FEE-ASCO: MRP fee office complaints fall flat [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Missouri Record is on the email list of the Missouri Republican
Party (MRP). Over the course of eleven days we received three press
releases regarding Nixon's awarding fee offices to his political
allies. Some background on the story is available here .
The MRP's July 9 release contains this quote from
Lloyd Smith the MRP's executive director:
On
Tuesday, Jay Nixon rewarded yet another of his campaign contributors with a
lucrative fee office. This time, Nixon overlooked five other bidders
including the Liberty School District Foundation, awarding the Liberty fee
office instead to longtime donor James Ryan Williams. Williams also
reportedly runs the Lee’s Summit office with Democrat power-player James
Montee, ex-husband of Auditor Susan Montee. Combined, the Liberty and
Lee’s Summit offices generate revenue in excess of $1 million each year.
This
is frustrating to read because the paragraph suggests that the bidding
process was loaded, yet it never explicitly makes that claim. The
facts could show that Williams offered the best bid. And that fact that
he runs another office could just as easily demonstrate his experience
and ability to reduce costs.
Reviewing all the press
statements, the MRP does not mention any politically unconnected people who have been awarded
contracts--suggesting by omission that none have been
awarded. Yet the Post-Dispatch states that non-profits and even Republicans have won contracts and that the whole process is open to public examination. The story concludes:
In its criticism of the process, the Missouri GOP has said that
donors who have given about $80,000 to Nixon have won fee office bids.
But the Republican Party hasn’t pointed to any discrepancies in the
bidding documents to indicate Nixon has given unfair preferential
treatment to Democrats.
Under previous governors, both Democrats and Republicans, the fee
offices were openly granted to political supporters. Nixon vowed to end
that process when he decided to bid out all 183 offices. Lawmakers
could erase the controversy entirely if they passed a bill that would
make it illegal for political donors over a certain amount to bid on
state contracts.
If what is written in the second paragraph is true, then the MRP's objections are even more puzzling. Even
if Nixon is guilty of awarding contracts to political donors, why would the MRP be opposed when, presumably, they were fine with the process
under Republican administrations?
My
fear is that this is just the sort of political tit-for-tat that is
turning us all into hardened cynics. A more forceful position for
Republicans would be to (1) condemn previous Republican administrations
for the fee office practice and cheer Nixon for holding them open for
bids, (
2) excoriate the governor for the appearance of impropriety by
awarding offices to connected donors (the "appearance of impropriety"
tact is always a cheap shot because it requires no evidence and can never be
adequately refuted) and (3) urge legislation just as the Post-Dispatch suggested to remove donors form the process altogether.
7/13/2009 9:52:42 AM
Sunday, July 12, 2009
VACATION: Of roads and regulations [ Patrick Tuohey ]Our family just returned from a two-week 3,900+ drive to New Hampshire and back via Buffalo and Washington, DC. I don't want to incriminate myself, so let's just say we made good time. Really good time. It seems implausible to me now that we once had a national speed limit, and that it was a mere 55 mph.
I recall that when newly elected Republicans in the House and Senate started working to repeal the limit--which was a condition of receiving Federal transportation funds--there was talk of how the roads would run red with the blood of innocents. Of course, it never happened. In fact, a brief search of national highway fatality statisitics shows that the number of deaths per mile traveled are at an all-time low. I'd like to be able to demonstrate that the speed limit change alone was responsible, but there are too many viariables such as more use of seat belts, safer cars, and fewer drivers. But it should be enough to remind people that once, long ago, government was actually backing off.
7/12/2009 2:43:14 PM
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
On The Road Again [ Patrick Tuohey ]My family and I are in Portland, Maine right now, in the middle of our two-week excursion to the east coast. Driving from New Hampshire to Maine, I was reminded of the piece on shrinking the Missouri legislature--something Main attempted this year.
Portland is fogged in and we can't see the much of the ocean. In fact we could not see much of the lighthouses either.
Today we're posting our interview with freshman Missouri Representative Clint Tracy, and the latest cartoon from Bryan Stalder. Enjoy .
7/1/2009 3:40:12 PM
Friday, June 19, 2009
CARTOON: Everyone loves a good cartoon [ Patrick Tuohey ]We at The Missouri Record here . Bryan has starts with some gentle ribbing of Senators Bond and McCaskill. We look forward to bringing you his work on a regular basis. You can read more about Stalder here .
6/19/2009 11:41:36 AM
Friday, June 12, 2009
Phyllis Schlafly and Wendy Wright at CHLC [ Patrick Tuohey ]Happy Friday, everyone.
The Record has just posted Phyllis Schlafly's speech and Wendy Wright's speech to the Conservative Heartland Leadership Conference. I especially enjoyed Mrs. Schlafly's comment that President Obama has more czars than the Romanov's did in 400 years.
Soon we'll publish the speech by Sen. Norm Coleman and the panel discussion on Term Limits. In a few minutes we'll be conducting an interview with freshman Missouri Representative Clint Tracy. We also hope to launch our new political cartoon, Off The Record , next week.
6/12/2009 8:41:48 AM
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Wednesdays with Grover [ Patrick Tuohey ]When I worked for Republican pollster Frank Luntz, one of my duties was to attend Grover Norquist's now famous Wednesday morning meetings. The experience was, well, surreal. Attendees ranged from the pragmatic and politically astute to the not-so-pragmatic and astute.
When Norquist was in St. Louis last week to speak at the Conservative Heartland Leadership Conference, I asked him for an interview. He agreed, but we were never available at the same time. The Record was able to audiotape his talk to the conference and the answers he gave to questions from the audience. A transcript of that is here . It's a considerable read, but it is worthwhile. It will help you understand why Norquist has been such a political survivor and remains a leader of limited government advocates in Washington, DC.
Maybe we'll get that interview next time.
6/11/2009 1:34:42 PM
CHLC: The Missouri Plan and other approaches [ Patrick Tuohey ][REPOST] On Thursday, June 4, speakers from Missouri, Tennessee and Wisconsin
gathered in St. Louis to address the Conservative Heartland Leadership
Conference in a panel on judicial selection.The Missouri Record presents a transcript of the panel discussion here .
Speakers include moderator Bryan Pratt of Missouri, Jim Lembke of
Missouri, Greg Grisham of Tennessee, Richard Esenberg of Wisconsin, and
James Harris of Missouri.
Mind you, I don't know that I would have referred to members of the Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys as 'little goons,' but James Harris has probably dealt with more of their political maneuvering than anyone else.
6/11/2009 12:34:33 PM
It's ALIVE! [ Patrick Tuohey ]
The Missouri Record Read on...
6/11/2009 7:24:21 AM
Friday, June 5, 2009
CHLC: David Limbaugh does not disappoint [ Patrick Tuohey ]I have never heard David Limbaugh speak before, but I can tell you he does not disappoint. He delivered the 'red meat' to the Conservative Heartland Leadership conferees yesterday at their luncheon.
At one point in his remarks, after he lists the crimes of the Left, he remarks after an applause line that the audience could have applauded earlier. But I think the audience was too caught up in Limbaugh's extensive list of liberal offenses--delivered rapid fire--to catch their breath, much less applaud.
You can read a transcript of Limbaugh's speech here .
You can see other reporting of the conference at Reboot Congress , Gateway Pundit and 24th State .
6/5/2009 9:40:51 AM
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
RIGHT WING MEETUP: Conservative Heartland Leadership Conference [ Patrick Tuohey ]I just finished writing a post on the Conservative Heartland Leadership Conference . All the dark overlords of the Midwest right-wing are here. Here are some things seen and heard:
Someone pointed out that Arianna Huffington once referred to tonight's panel moderator, Grover Norquist , as the dark wizard of the right-wing tax groups or something. The bumperstickers provided me by elBryan ("HOPE we're not bankrupt by 2010" and "I already have a MESSIAH") have all already been snatched up. This isn't a gossip column, so you'll have to be satisfied with that. Tomorrow I hope to take some pictures. (EDITED TO ADD: Gateway Pundit posted some pictures here .)
6/3/2009 11:41:57 PM
Monday, June 1, 2009
FUNK'D: Recall fails for now [ Patrick Tuohey ]The effort to recall Kansas City Mayor Mark Funkhouser has apparently come up a few dozen signatures short . I am sure there will be legal challenges to the count.
This episode reminds me of my own time spent collecting signatures for two Missouri Constitutional amendments in 2006. As I recently testified in committee hearings in Jefferson City, the petition process is not what many people think: a grassroots mobilization that takes on the power structure. Rather, legislatures and councils have weakened the people's ability over time. And now groups almost always require professional petition services to be successful. I understand that the recall effort here in KC did not have professionals, and they did not succeed.
If voters are interested in retaining their right to petition government, they should be wary of government efforts to 'clean up' or 'streamline' the process. Or they ought to be prepared to raise tens of thousands of dollars to pay professional signature gatherers who make it their job to understand government regulation.
6/1/2009 5:54:26 PM
CANDOR: The Record talks with Rep. Jason Kander [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Missouri Record published the first half of our interview with Rep. Jason Kander this morning. You can read it here . We are grateful to Rep. Kander for making time to speak with us, especially as he was preparing to leave for a few weeks of officer training.
Kander spoke clearly about what he thought of the Missouri House majority and their tactics. It is the kind of candid assessment that often comes only from a freshman representative and a member of the minority party. If what Kander says about pressure from Republican leadership to vote certain ways is true--and we have no reason not to believe him--we wonder if that is in part due to being in the majority. The majority is expected to actually run the show--backbenchers are free to do as they please. Of course, some others may say that it is Kander's inexperience in the legislature that colors his perception.
The Record will run the second half of our interview with Kander on Wednesday.
6/1/2009 9:09:35 AM
Thursday, May 21, 2009
UP IN SMOKE? Kansas City's smoking ban on trial [ Patrick Tuohey ]I've just returned from the Western District Court of Appeals which heard a challenge to a criminal conviction stemming from Kansas City's smoking ordinance. You can read my longer story on the challenge here .
I am neither an attorney nor a journalist, but I am confident based on the questions asked of counsel that the court was skeptical of the city's argument that a plain reading of the statute permits them to regulate "places" as different from the "public places" specified in Missouri statute.
As we published in our story, the arguments boil down to whether a city can regulate a business explicitly exempted in statute. Mr. Sternberg, arguing for the defendant in this criminal case, argued that Missouri law clearly exempts bars. Mr. Garn, arguing for the city, argued that Missouri statute contemplates additional regulation and therefore permits it. Mr. Sternberg responds that while the city can further regulate what the state has regulated, it cannot redefine what the state has exempted and regulate that.
Providing a legal opinion is above my pay-grade, and probably actionable, but I think the court was leaning toward Mr. Sternberg's view. At one point, Judge James Smart even stated in open court to Mr. Garn, "Mr. Sternberg's syntax makes a little more sense."
The court issues decisions every Tuesday, and this ruling could be available in as soon as one month.
(Note: I have included links to the legal filings from both sides at the bottom of the original story here .)
5/21/2009 12:10:46 PM
Sunday, May 17, 2009
LEGISLATURE: Term limits not to blame for increased partisanship [ Patrick Tuohey ]Yesterday's Columbia Tribune carried an interesting
story in which Missouri
legislators complain about term limits. But the problems they identify have nothing
to do with term limits and everything to do with partisan politics.
The piece started with this:
Dozens of House members elected in 2002 will be
turned out of office after next year, and many are jockeying for position to
run for soon-to-be vacant Senate seats. It helped create an atmosphere that was
more partisan than ever.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Gary Nodler,
R-Joplin, described the situation this way: Five or six House members might
live in a state Senate district where a Senate seat is becoming vacant.
“That has the inevitable effect that members move
more toward their ideologically pure party position in pursuit of the
nomination for that state Senate seat,” Nodler said. “That results in having a
more partisan environment in the House of Representatives because of this
pressure to establish your credentials for your Senate run.
“And I think in that sense it’s destructive,” he
added.
In effect, ambitious House members vote in ways that will appeal to the base
of their party (in this case Republican).
In doing so, members killed an effort to expand a government program. (Nodler is himself considering a run for
higher office. Has crass partisanship
caused him to cast unprincipled votes?)
If we accept Nodler's premise that (a) the bill’s demise is bad and (b) that
those who voted to defeat it were not voting on principle, who or what ought to
be blamed? Nodler thinks we ought to blame term limits. But the example provided suggests that
political parties and the primary system are the culprits since they put a
disproportionate amount of power into the hands of the more-ideological base.
The Tribune also quoted Rep. Chris Kelley, D-Columbia, and his
disdain for the effect of term limits.
“I think that people now are every bit as smart as
they were when I was here before,” Kelly said. “But because they are not as
experienced, they don’t know their colleagues as well, and they may not know
the issues so well, and they look to their caucus for more leadership.”
Democrats and Republicans form caucuses of their
members to exchange ideas, map strategy and define positions. Kelly believes
they meet far more often now than before.
“I think that’s a significant negative,” he said.
“What we do when we go to caucus is we feed each other raw partisan meat and
stoke each other up against the other party, and the party bickering becomes
more important than the public policy. Both parties do it.”
In other words, Kelly believes term limits have decreased legislators' reliance
on colleagues--which was good--and increased their need to rely on their party
caucus--which is bad. Once again it is
not term limit-induced turnover that causes divisiveness, but the
political party structure.
If Nodler and Kelly are opposed to term limits, they ought
to submit a joint resolution to change the state constitution. But if they are serious about addressing the
problems they identify in the Tribune ,
they’d be better served by declaring themselves political independents and encouraging
others to do the same. Only that will
solve the problems of poisonous partisanship.
Term limits is merely a red herring.
5/17/2009 4:56:50 PM
DEATH: Skillicorn--repentance and punishment [ Patrick Tuohey ]The Turner Report has done a great deal of excellent blogging on Dennis Skillicorn's upcoming execution for his involvement in four murders. Specifically, Turner has reported on media coverage and its editorializing in opposition to the death penalty.
The common arguments used against the death penalty are its failure as a deterrent, its lopsided application based on race and/or wealth, and most recently, its cost to the state. Another common tact--used specifically with Skillicorn--is that the condemned is a changed man.
If Skillicorn is indeed a changed man, this is good news. But it need not exempt him from death. There is nothing mutually exclusive about repentance and punishment, and in fact it is likely that the latter facilitates the former.
5/17/2009 11:03:20 AM
Saturday, May 16, 2009
[REPOST] VRWC MEETUP: Conservative Heartland Leadership Conference [ Patrick Tuohey ]The American Issues Project has announced that the Conservative Heartland Leadership Conference
will take place in St. Louis on June 3 and 4. Described as a
"midwestern CPAC," invited speakers include Governor
Bobby Jindal. The conference's stated goal is to: "bring together
conservative policy makers from across the heartland to discuss and
honor conservative principles in practice. Importantly, the CHLC honors
state and local public officials for their service to conservative
principles in practice.
5/16/2009 12:06:07 PM
Thursday, May 14, 2009
SENATE: "There's Something About Sarah" or "Forgetting Sarah Steelman" [ Patrick Tuohey ]I am confident that Sarah Steelman will announce her candidacy for the Republican nomination for US Senate. And I am just as confident that the result will be lots of gnashing of teeth among Republicans that her candidacy will cost us the seat.Rep. Kenny Hulshof would lose. It was a nasty race, it is said, and Hulshof was so damaged that he could not win. I am not privy to the polling data for either the Steelman of Hulshof campaigns, but this appears to me to be a dubious claim.Matt Blunt won a close race against Claire McCaskill in 2004, and he did it in a year when the Democratic National Committee and the Kerry campaign pulled out of the state. Two years later Claire McCaskill defeated incumbent Republican Senator James Talent . Jay Nixon was always ahead of Blunt. This likely contributed to Blunt's decision not to seek re-election. Hulshof and Steelman ran spirited campaigns and Hulshof narrowly won the primary. John McCain either, can they? He won Missouri.) No, our Republican candidates lost all by themselves. Robin Carnahan until it is too late.
5/14/2009 10:57:09 AM
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
C'MON, JOAN: Sen. Bray still won't read the Constitution [ Patrick Tuohey ]In December, Missouri Senator Joan Bray presented SB115 , which required that petition circulators be state residents and forbade circulators from being paid per signature gathered. As detailed in my piece Taking Initiative , similar laws in other states have been struck down as unconstitutional.
But as late as last night, Sen. Bray was at it again. She offered an amendment to SB 569 that restricted payment per signature, which is still unconstitutional. The Senate wisely voted down her amendment.
We get that you don't like petitions, Sen. Bray. But why do you persist in fighting the Constitution?
5/13/2009 3:07:41 PM
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
DEADBEAT GOVERNOR? Nixon withholds millions in taxpayer refunds [ Patrick Tuohey ]Here's a piece from the News-Leader that escaped my attention when it was published a few days ago:
Certainly government needs tax dollars to operate. Liberals and conservatives can argue how much the government ought to tax. But when the government admits that the taxpayers are due a refund, anything less than full and immediate payment is unacceptable.
5/12/2009 6:09:32 PM
Tuesday, February 10 from 5:30 PM to 8:30PM at Coach's (414 W. 103rd St, KCMO). 
which Kander was nominated. The award is named for Strom Thurmond, a man most known for his long career in the US Senate and more specifically for his fierce opposition to desegregation. I wondered if someone who has cast themselves as a purist progressive, who eschews lobbyist gifts of any kind and who worries about even the appearance of impropriety would dare permit his name to be linked with such a prominent segregationist.
The ROA's Strom Thurmond award was first given in 1978, 23 years after he headed the organization. The ROA told me that for years Sen Thurmond was the "go to" person for reserve officer concerns. In other words, the award was named for Thurmond because of his political service, not despite it. Kander's suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous.