| CURRENT WEATHER: Clear, 59° |
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
February 16, 2005
What the liberals aren't saying
OK, I might have slightly overstated the opposition's position, but not by much. Those who believe the government should grow faster than the economy and in ways never envisioned by the founders will say anything to continue the socialization of our country. Another oddity that would surely confound the writers of the Declaration of Independence and the framers of the Constitution is the degree to which individuals employed by the government also make policy and enact taxes to pay for them. If Benjamin Franklin and Samuel Adams were alive today, their publishing efforts would surely be warning of the folly of such a self-fulfilling and rewarding arrangement. Today we must suffer the tales of horror and devastation being recited by government economists and lobbyists who stand to lose their very livelihoods if real and permanent reductions in entitlements and spending were to occur. And guess what? Entitlements aren't even on the list this year. They have been removed by legislatures that have defined them as non-discretionary spending programs. In other words, they can only get bigger, without any oversight or accountability to anyone. The degree to which such programs are defended at all government levels is both remarkable and disgusting. Mayor Michael Montandon of North Las Vegas is a good example. In testimony before the Legislature, he claimed his community's economic boom could be hamstrung by proposals to cap property tax increases. At no time did he mention the hamstringing of his constituents with the highest average payroll and benefits in Nevada government. Guess he has no concern about whether or not long-term residents might lose their homes when their tax payments exceed their utility and insurance bills. Quite telling as well is the fact the city is attempting to keep off the ballot a measure to allow the voters to have final say on any future labor agreements. This novel approach to contain costs is being pushed by residents because their elected officials have continually given away the farm when it came to payroll negotiations. Even when they claim to have negotiated demands downward, the final contracts still result in huge increases in the cost of government. It might be advisable for Mr. Montandon to study the long-term effect of such free spending habits from the perspective of a credit junkie. Like big government, they believe using a credit card isn't really spending money, at least not until the bills come due. Then, if they can't pay, they go to court, have someone else pick up the cost, and start spending all over again. Using other people's money is easy. Another example is Richard Perkins, D-Las Vegas, and Speaker of the Assembly. As part of his plan to become your next governor, he has proposed using the excess from the last session's tax increase to fund the Millennium Scholarship program. His desire is to keep alive a very successful transfer of money into the education establishment without having to justify the expenditure, thereby creating another entitlement. Sounds good, but there is a lot he is not telling you. For instance, since the program began five years ago, college tuition has skyrocketed, the number of students achieving the minimum 3.0 grade level has increased to 75 percent of all graduating students, and the percentage of remedial students entering college has grown from 36.1 to 40.5 percent. Yep, sounds like just the program we need to throw another $45 or $50 or even $100 million at. This way tuition can increase to keep up with the increase in the salaries, bonuses and benefits of the faculty and administrators. I am not sure how much will be enough for them, if there is an amount, but they are determined to receive three or four times the wage of non-government workers. They teach those workers' children after all. A less than overt reason for Mr. Perkins' support of this program is to steal thunder from and at the same time provide cover for Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas. After all, it might be a conflict of interest for her to propose a spending program from which she would directly benefit. Or not, depending on your party affiliation and benefactor. Regardless, I am sure as a political science professor she teaches her students to understand the difference. At the same time I wonder how many of them knew last Saturday was Abraham Lincoln's birthday. Some might remember it was he who recited the belief our government, as originally established, was one "Of the people, by the people and for the people." He said these words during the Civil War when many hundreds of thousands of our citizens gave their lives so that form of government shall not perish from the face of the earth. I wonder what he would think of our situation today? Little writes from Pahrump. His column, "The Other Side," appears here on Wednesdays. |
