NOTE: Because of an oversight on my part, the politics blog post dated January 6, 2006 was not uploaded to the Web server when I originally wrote it back then. I posted it for the first time on June 6, 2008.
Monthly links this yearPolitical archives, etc.Topical archives:Annual archives
|
NOTE: Because of an oversight on my part, the politics blog post dated January 6, 2006 was not uploaded to the Web server when I originally wrote it back then. I posted it for the first time on June 6, 2008. January 3, 2006 [LINK] Abramoff cops blea bargainLobbyist Jack Abramoff has pleaded guilty to charges of tax evasion, and will cooperate with Federal prosecutors by testifying against others. He and partner Michael Scanlon arranged a kickback scheme by which the clients of their public relations firm were defrauded. Abramoff admitted that money did not go to certain charities as had been intended, but rather paid for overseas junkets and other perks. Abramoff is known for his close ties to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Grover Norquist (head of Americans for Tax Reform), and Ralph Reed (former Christian Coalition leader). See CNN.com. Since such plea bargains almost always involve the pursuit of "higher-up" individuals, this implies that members of Congress or the Bush administration are being targeted. Saturday's Washington Post had a background article by R. Jeffrey Smith, detailing the complex financial Web between various congressmen and Russian oil businessmen, Indian tribes, and other special interests, with Abramoff serving as the intermediary. The name of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay figures prominently in this scheme. Hang on, folks, this promises to be a bumpy, hair-raising ride! Happy Newt Year?While many folks in the Republican Party have been making excuses for Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, and Karl Rove, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich remains focused on radical reform, in the Party of Lincoln, as well as in the nation as a whole. I don't necessarily agree with all of his positions, but he is virtually alone in the Republican Party these days in seeing the Big Picture, and thinking in strategic policy terms, rather than in tactical terms of how to win the next election. He was interviewed on C-SPAN 2 this morning, will be addressing the Conservative Political Action Committee meeting next week. See www.newt.org. Phony civil libertarians(UPDATE) Dinocrat makes a good point in response to those who are in an uproar over the surveillance of international communication: "the next time your friends start in with the Ben Franklin quote and their airy-fairy theoretical concerns about the loss of liberty, light a cigarette and see what happens." (via Phil Faranda) January 4, 2006 [LINK] Former News Leader publisher sets record straightAn op-ed piece in today's Staunton News Leader by Evarts W. Opie, Jr., former publisher of the local newspaper, laments the "gratuitous personal attack" on then-commissioner of revenue Ray Ergenbright that appeared in an editorial on December 16. He lays out the facts about the difficult transition to the new tax revenue software system and concludes, "Instead of throwing brickbats at the outgoing commissioner we should be thanking him for 11 years of good and faithful service." It was gratifying to read such a strong condemnation of the unfair campaign against Ergenbright (and former Treasurer Elnora Hazlett) by a person who used to run the newspaper, before it was bought out by the Gannett Corporation several years ago. Unfortunately, this is one of those situations where the phrase "better late than never" does not apply. In my mind, the fact that the voters of Staunton were deprived of the full story behind the property tax software controversy when they went into the polling booths on November 8 was an outright travesty. As I noted on October 20, I remain mystified by the motivations behind the editorial bias that seems to have affected the News Leader's coverage of local news. Small town intrigues... Marion Barry robbedFormer mayor Marion Barry was robbed at gunpoint in his own kitchen by two youths who had been helping him to bring groceries inside yesterday. This quote from the roguish Barry is a perfect illustration of the prevailing mindset in Washington, making lame excuses for criminal behavior. There is a sort of an unwritten code in Washington, among the underworld and the hustlers and these other guys, that I am their friend. ... I don't advocate what they do. I advocate conditions to change what they do. I was a little hurt that this betrayal did happen. [SOURCE: Washington Post; apologies for the prior omission] Barry also used the opportunity to call for stricter gun control laws, notwithstanding the fact that the District already has one of the toughest (and largely futile) anti-gun laws in the country. This incident, and Barry's reaction to it, further undermines the city's image just as the confrontation over stadium financing between the city government and Major League Baseball has escalated, a time when prestige matters the most. January 5, 2006 [LINK] Dirty money give-backsIn the wake of the guilty pleas by Jack Abramoff, President Bush will donate to charity $6,000 in campaign funds that were directly given to him by Abramoff. The lobbyist raised a total of $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign, however, and the Public Citizen group called Bush's action insufficient. Although Republicans are clearly in the most trouble over the Abramoff affair, some Democrats such as Dick Durbin and Harry Reid may be implicated in it as well. See Washington Post. Since this scandal has been brewing since at least last summer, it would have looked better if this gesture had been made several months ago. In Virginia, Rep. Eric Cantor, a 42-year young Republican from Richmond who has risen quickly to the post of Chief Deputy Majority Whip, declared that he will give away $10,000 of Abramoff's money. Cantor, along with Dennis Hastert, Tom DeLay, and Roy Blunt -- the four leaders of the majority caucus in the House -- signed a letter that urged Secretary of Interior Gale Norton on June 10, 2003 to turn down a request for off-reservation gambling establishments by certain Indian tribes, apparently at the behest of Jack Abramoff. The other primary target of the corruption inquiry is Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio. See Judicial Watch. UPDATE: The Associated Press has a long list of politicians who have given back campaign donations from Jack Abramoff or his associates in recent months. First place "honors" go to Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT), who donated about $150,000. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) donated $2,000 of campaign funds that came from Abramoff, about the average amount that most senators and representatives received. Swann for GovernorOn the bright side for the GOP, former Pittsburgh Steelers running back Lynn Swann announced he is running for Governor of Pennsylvania this year as a Republican. See AP.com. February 7, 2006 [LINK] Muslims on (belated) rampageWhat can possibly explain the fact that the sudden outburst of violent riots by Muslims around the world is taking place several months after the offending cartoons were published in a Danish newspaper? An orchestrated campaign by Islamofascists in Syria, that's what. The Baathist dictatorship of Bashar Assad in Damascus is under increasing pressure to reform itself, and decided to contrive the outrage among Muslims to reassert its domestic authority. This "rent-a-mob" tactic is also aimed at rekindling ethnic tension in Lebanon as a way to regain a foothold for Syria, from whence they were forced to retreat almost a year ago. For a "rogue regime" that has long been a sponsor of terrorism, such practices are just par for the course. The violence has spread to various European countries, Indonesia, and now to Afghanistan. See Washington Post. Latent anti-American sentiment is being blamed, which shows how absurd and delusional much of the Muslim world is today; the United States had nothing to do with those cartoons! This latest incident demonstrates, once again, the futility of trying to appease Islamic extremism and the various nationalistic movements that fall under its umbrella. Victor Davis Hanson (via Instapundit) asks whether the escalating offensive by Muslim fanatics may elicit a "European Awakening Against Islamic Fascism." Each in their own way, the governments of Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, and Denmark are showing increasing backbone in response to Islamic bullying, almost making the Bush administration look tame by comparison. UPDATE: As usual, Belmont Club has much more in-depth coverage of this latest flare-up in the "clash of civilizations," including the destruction of the Danish Embassy in Damascus by government mobs, and makes an excellent suggestion: Show solidarity with Denmark! Pay a visit to the Danish Embassy in Washington, which issued a press release on this incident yesterday: Minister for Foreign Affairs Per Stig Møller vehemently condemns the attack and he states: "Syria has failed its obligations, and it is utterly unacceptable that the Embassy was not protected by the Syrians. I reserve the right to take all steps vis-à-vis the Syrian Government." In the old days, what happened in Damascus would be a cause for war. McCain rebukes ObamaSen. Barack Obama, the young Illinois moderate who is widely considered to be the Democrats' "Great Multicultural Hope" for some future presidential race, has run afoul of Sen. John McCain. Obama had made a personal pledge to cooperate with McCain in a bipartisan push for lobbying reform legislation, and then backed out at the behest of his party leaders, leaving McCain in the lurch. In response, McCain wrote an unusually blunt and sarcastic letter (link via Chad Dotson) expressing regret that Obama reneged on his commitment. Whenever a moderate like McCain gets riled up, you know there must be a very good reason for it. Whenever some fresh new face like Obama's arrives on the national stage, I usually reserve judgment while everyone else fawns in premature adulation. I think my initial hesitation about Obama's leadership credentials has been borne out by events. Obama has responded, professing to have no idea at what prompted McCain's rebuke. He says that he thought the "Honest Leadership Act" introduced by Minority Leader Harry Reid "should be the basis for a bipartisan solution." Yeah, right. (link via Instapundit) January 11, 2006 [LINK] Alito hearings get under wayThe enormous tension and hype surrounding the Samuel Alito confirmation hearings made the actual event quite anti-climactic, almost farcical. Democrats made their predictable pompous speeches about the importance of judicial precedent (stare decisis) and the invidual right to privacy; to his credit, Alito acknowledged that such a right exists. Unlike her colleagues, Sen. Diane Feinstein actually asked questions, and listened. For their part, the Republicans mostly lobbed easy questions and made gestures of fawning admiration. I was disappointed in Sen. Lindsey Graham, known as an independent-minded conservative, for his lame "wouldn't you agree?" lectures about the rights of prisoners of war, or the lack thereof. What is the point of making everyone wait through that? Almost everyone has made their position known, and few if any senators' votes will be swayed, whatever Alito says to the Judiciary Committee. Alito may not be as perfectly poised as John Roberts, but I was impressed by him nonetheless. He did slightly better than Roberts in terms of answering questions directly. Regarding the opinion he wrote in 1985 -- that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion" -- I didn't like his excuse that that "was as a line attorney in the Department of Justice in the Reagan administration." (see the Washington Post) He did say he would appraoch any case that came before him with an "open mind," which is all anyone can ask. Unless someone can find evidence that he has gone back on his word on important matters in the past, there is no reason to doubt him. He handled the grilling well, and demonstrated that he has the mind and temperment to serve as a judge on the highest court. All indications are that the Democrats were prepared for an all-out attack. On NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday, Tim Russert really put Sen. Chuck Schumer on the spot. Since the Republican minority went along with the nominations of avowed liberals Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer when they were nominated by Bill Clinton early in his term, and since the standing committee of the American Bar Association rated Alito "'Well Qualified' by unanimous vote" (with one recusal; that is the highest possible rating), why not let the majority have its way with Alito? Schumer responded with a forced grin, and he must have been in agony. He knew he was in the wrong, but he had to stick to the party line. The Republicans have been upbraided for all sorts of bad things lately, but this was one of those times that reminds me why I'm glad I'm no longer sympathetic to the Democrats. So, will the Democrats really invoke the "extraordinary circumstances" criterion to justify a filibuster on Alito? Frankly, I find that hard to believe, but it cannot be ruled out entirely. Anyone who truly believes that Alito is "extreme" or "outside the mainstream," as Senators Durbin and Schumer keep saying, is just plain nuts. The Supreme Court table has been updated. Note on Roe v. WadeIt's too bad more Democrats can't make the distinction between having an opinion on the issue of abortion, versus having an opinion on the constitutional propriety of the Roe v. Wade decision. Stretching the implied constitutional right to privacy into the right to a medical procedure to which many people vehemently object shows scant regard for the actual words of the Constitution. If interpretations can be made so loosely by one court, then they could be made just as loosely by a different court in the future, in a way that might not be nearly as favorable. As classical liberals (as opposed to modern liberals) know, the Constitution protects us all from the abuse of power by government officials, and Roe v. Wade was a classic abuse of power. What goes around comes around. Virginia Cost Cutting blogDelegate Chris Saxman, who represents the 20th District in the House of Delegates, has begun a new blog to keep constituents informed about ongoing progress in his efforts to trim fat in the state budget and to put the brakes on those who want to spend the burgeoning (and unnecessary) surplus before taxpayers in the Old Dominion figure out what is going on. See Virginia Cost Cutting. January 12, 2006 [LINK] Alito withstands Dems' "torture"The Alito hearings are about to conclude, and the nominee has acquitted himself exceedingly well, leaving little doubt that he will be confirmed. The Democrats' attempts to wear him down psychologically with smears and innuendos backfired when his wife left the room in tears yesterday. The suggestion by Sen. Kennedy and other Democrats that Alito's past membership in the "Concerned Alumni of Princeton" was indicative of hostility to minority rights was not borne out by any other evidence. This time Sen. Lindsey Graham played a very useful role in coming to Alito's defense when he really needed such verbal support. Rush Limbaugh noted that the treatment inflicted upon Alito was tantamount to "torture," which is a bit of a stretch, but it may well fit the absurdly loose definitions of torture that have been applied by many leftists in recent months at least. Actually, Jacqueline drew that clever comparison the day before, on Tuesday. ¡Megadittos, mi amor! Does this prove that torture cannot be counted on to coax information out of people being interrogated? I wouldn't entirely discount worries about Alito's membership in that Princeton group, given what has been written by some people who have knowledge about that group, but his explanation about the ROTC expulsion from Princeton seems convincing. In any case, we shouldn't hold a person's past organizational affiliations (think Sen. Robert Byrd, D-WV) or youthful indiscretions (think Bill Clinton) against him or her many years later. Most of us do grow up and acquire more mature, responsible attitudes. There is no question that Alito is such a person of superb character and mature judgment. Sen. Chuck Schumer was practically fuming that Alito stuck to his guns by answering questions about hypothetical future cases by explaining the process by which he would reach a decision, reserving judgment about what decision he would probably reach. That is exactly what good, impartial judges are supposed to do! Schumer's demand that Alito state in advance how he would vote on abortion cases -- i.e., the outcome -- shows that he is not the least bit interested in Alito's judicial capacity and integrity, but merely wants him to make a pledge on a woman's "freedom to choose" as a prerequisite for ascending to the Supreme Court. The Democrats' inability to lay a glove on Alito means they will have to rethink their strategy as a minority party, and the need to impose self-discipline on themselves to avoid grandstanding. The party's most notorious loud-mouths are now getting their comeuppance, and most of them will hopefully remain relatively muted for a few weeks. Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, a stalwart moderate liberal, laments the Democrats' wrong-headed approach, zeroing in on Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE), the loudest of the loud-mouths: [Biden's] manic-obsessive running of the mouth has become the functional equivalent of womanizing or some other character weakness that disqualifies a man for the presidency. It is his version of corruption, of alcoholism, of a fierce temper or vile views -- all the sorts of things that have crippled candidates in the past. It's the same glory-craving affliction that has plagued many good men and women in public service, including Sen. John McCain. Finally, let us pay respects to Sen. Arlen Specter, who is recovering from cancer treatments and has a full head of hair once again, for standing up against the bullying of Ted Kennedy yesterday. Some Republicans have misgivings about the moderates on their side of the aisle, but Specter showed that his desire to maintain civility in the halls of Congress does not mean that he will put up with arrogance and disruptive behavior by members of the opposition party, especially not when it is part of a smear campaign reminiscent of the Joe McCarthy era. "Have they no sense of decency?" Liberal speaks outUPDATE: From Power Line Blog comes this first-hand perspective from Susan Sullivan, a "card carrying member of the ACLU" who worked as a law clerk with Alito in 1990-1991. She wrote an op-ed piece defending the judge: As a liberal, what scares me is not the prospect of having Sam Alito on the Supreme Court; what scares me is the way my fellow Liberal Democrats are behaving in response to the nomination. I'm appalled and embarrassed by the fear mongering, the personal attacks and what I see as an irresponsible and misleading distortion of his real judicial record as well as his character. Now the threat of a filibuster lurks and Senator Kennedy's tirade about documents being concealed, seems like little more than a pretext to justify a filibuster. January 13, 2006 [LINK] Rising tensions with Canada?While most Americans' security fears are directed toward the southern border, our northern frontier cannot be ignored either. Sadly, public opinion in Canada is turning against the Good Ol' U.S.A., to the extent that cooperation on security matters may be hindered. Prime Minister Paul Martin, who is fighting for his political life amidst a massive corruption scandal, recently warned that his fair country might become susceptible to "right-wing extremism" like the United States. [See CNN.com.] Say it isn't so! Coincidentally or not, the Washington Post recently published an amusing feature story in the Style section by Peter Carlson, "Raiding the Icebox," which described the contingency plans for a U.S. invasion of Canada, since 1930. Surprisingly, Canada had developed plans for an attack against the United States nine years previously! Michael Ignatieff, a Canadian professor of political science who currently teaches at Harvard, has gotten into trouble in his home country by defending, with some reservations, U.S. policy in Iraq. Daniel Drezner discusses this case. Unmentionable wackosYou may notice that I don't spend much time bewailing the idiocy of various nitwits who say obnoxious, absurd things just to attract public attention. To be perfectly clear, the following individuals are considered "beyond the pale" of rational discussion and will henceforth be ignored on this blog:
January 16, 2006 [LINK] "RINOs" in Richmond save PottsThe Virginia General Assembly convened one week ago, and one of the first questions was what to do about Sen. Russ Potts, who has long identified himself as a Republican, but who ran as an independent candidate for governor last year. He didn't draw enough votes to have made a difference in the outcome, but it was a clear gesture of repudiation to the state party organization nonetheless. Earlier in the week, GOP conservatives tried to remove Potts as chairman of the Senate Education and Health Committee, on the grounds that he did not truly belong to a political party as required by Senate rules, but they were unable to muster a majority to do so. Just to make sure they could not do so again, "the Senate approved, 35-4, a new rule declaring that only the chamber could decide -- by a minimum of two-thirds, or 27 votes -- whether a member, indeed, has quit his or her political party." While they were at it, they eliminated one of the staff positions in the office of Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling, a clear slap in the face to the man who has just taken office. See Richmond Times-Dispatch. "Commonwealth Conservative" blogger Chad Dotson identifies the three Republican senators who voted with the Democrats to keep Potts in his current chairmanship: Fred Quayle, John Chichester, Charles Hawkins. To me, this is all too bizarre to comprehend. I am on record (see posts from Dec. 14, Dec. 9, and May 21, 2005) as viewing with strong distaste the epithet "RINO" (Republicans In Name Only), seeing that as unduly exclusionary of moderates within the party. Of course, I tend toward the moderate side in some areas, especially environmental and social issues, and I remain firmly committed to maintaining constructive dialogue not only within the Republican party but between the Republican and Democrat parties. I believe in building a strong majority that can govern effectively and carry out much-needed reforms of our statist, entitlement-plagued society. That being said, I must voice outrage at the Republican moderates in the Virginia Senate for undermining party cohesiveness. It is one thing to take a dissenting position on grounds of principle, but if people who go the next step and actively work against the party without being punished for it, then the party will be begin to crumble. After all, what in blazes is the point of being a party member if there is no discipline or sense of common purpose? The rain on KaineThe inauguration of Tim Kaine as Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia took place in Williamsburg, the capital of Virginia until 1780, because the Capitol building in Richmond is undergoing extensive repairs. The event was marred by steady, chilly rain, ruining the chance to showcase the historical charms of Colonial Williamsburg ( Warner's parting shotOne of former Governor Mark Warner's last official acts was to grant voting rights to 3,414 convicted felons. This was several times more than any other recent governor, of either party. See Washington Times (via Steve Kijak.) It reminds one of former President Clinton's pardon of mega-swindler Marc Rich in the final days of his term. January 17, 2006 [LINK] Kling on dialogue with liberalsIn Tech Central Station (via Instapundit), Arnold Kling has begun a series of essays aimed at reaching out to liberals, most of whom are prone to put down conservatives without seriously considering the merits of the argument. He brings up a problem known as "confirmation bias," the common human tendency to pay more attention to things that reinforce our ingrained beliefs, and vice versa. He discusses the recent passage by the Maryland legislature (overriding the veto of Gov. Bob Ehrlich) of a law requiring Wal-Mart to pay higher health benefits to its workers. The law did not specify Wal-Mart by name, but its criteria were obviously aimed at that company and no one else. Kling applies cool logic to show why this measure will almost certainly backfire, reducing take-home pay and/or job opportunities for low-skill people. That outcome seems not to matter to folks who derive pleasure from sticking it to the evil big corporations, however. Is there any way to get through to people who base policy preferences on crude emotion? Ultimately, I think, Kling's patient, earnest approach will yield better results than the strident, tit-for-tat rhetoric of those such as Ann Coulter, author of How to Talk to a Liberal (see amazon.com). Ray Nagin flirts with kookhoodNew Orleans mayor Ray Nagin is veering dangerously close to the "unmentionable wacko" category I established last week. He took the occasion of Martin Luther King's birthday to say that last year's hurricanes showed that "God is mad at America." Then he promised to keep New Orleans a "chocolate" city. How would people react if a white mayor in a similar situation pledged to keep whites a majority in his city? Obviously, we as a people are far from living up to King's dream of a society that is blind with respect to skin color. See Yahoo news (via Phil Faranda). January 19, 2006 [LINK] Rice redeploys diplomatsSpeaking at Georgetown University, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced a major transfer of American diplomatic resources away from Europe, and toward the Middle East and other strategic parts of the Third World. This was a long-overdue move that will help the United States cope more effectively with the wide variety of challenges we face in this rapidly-evolving world. What was particularly interesting was the way Ms. Rice tied this move to a broader intellectual framework for guiding policy, i.e., "transformational diplomacy": The greatest threats now emerge more within states than between them. ... The fundamental character of regimes now matters more than the international distribution of power. (SOURCE: Washington Post) In a nutshell, this brief quote distills the essence of what distinguishes "neoclassical" realists, with whom I identify, from the traditional "state-centric" realists, such as Ken Waltz. I saw him on a panel at the APSA meeting in Washington in early September, and everyone agreed that the war in Iraq was a disaster. To me, the lack of serious debate over this issue indicated a profound intellectual blind spot, a sign of stagnation within the discipline. It so happens that my dissertation explicitly dealt with the ambiguous structure of the international system to which Rice alluded: "anarchic" (corresponding to traditional sovereignty) vs. "hierarchic" (which allows for varying degrees of state consolidation within the system, as is the case in today's world). Perhaps the time is ripe for those of us with an unconventional take on international relations... Merkel visits WashingtonIt is interesting that this historic de-emphasis of Europe in American diplomacy comes so soon after Angela Merkel, who was just sworn in as the first woman chancellor of Germany, visited the White House. Her conservative government is a welcome breath of fresh air after the chilly relations that were brought about by her predecessor, the Social Democrat Gerhard Schroeder. Lacking a majority, however, she must tread lightly in foreign affairs, so her desire to restore traditional warm German-American relations is constrained by domestic politics. This may be why she made a major point about urging the United States to close down the Guantanamo prison for terrorists. Bush demurred, with good reason, but I really think he should have taken the opportunity to reward Ms. Merkel's outstretched hand of friendship with a concrete gesture of reciprocity. For a transcript of the joint press conference, see whitehouse.gov. January 22, 2006 [LINK] Bipartisan war on corruption!?If there is one thing that all American people can agree on, it's that corruption is BAD -- especially when the other party is implicated in it! Today on ABC's This Week, Sen. John Kerry declared flat out that corruption is a Republican problem, rejecting the suggestion that Democrats might be connected in any significant way to the Jack Abramoff Web of scandals. A fair-minded person would say that corruption is a problem that has a disproportional effect on whichever party currently holds a majority. You don't bribe someone unless he or she has the power to give you want you want. Sen. Harry Reid apologized on Thursday after his office put out a news release in which he said, "The idea of Republicans reforming themselves is like asking John Gotti to clean up organized crime." See Washington Post. Well, at least he didn't make any comparisons to Hitler or Pol Pot. To put the alleged misdeeds of the Bush administration and Republican congressmen in perspective, it would be only fair to review some of the past naughty deeds committed by the Democrats. Earlier this month, Sen. Hillary Clinton's 2000 senatorial campaign received a fine of $35,000 for failing to report over $700,000 in fund-raising expenses. This was part of an agreement under which the Federal Election Commission declared that Mrs. Clinton did not violate any campaign finance laws. This will allow her supporters to claim that it was just an "innocent oversight." Perhaps. (See Washington Post.) The ten-year inquiry into former HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros for tax evasion and was finally closed without any indictments, and the prosecutor blamed former Clinton officials for successfully stonewalling. Independent counsel David M. Barrett "a coverup at high levels of our government," citing FBI and IRS employees who complained that their findings were being ignored by higher officials. Cisneros was indicated on 18 counts, but pleaded guilty to a single count, for which President Clinton pardoned him, along with Marc Rich and dozens of other swindlers. Barrett was criticized by various people for wasting taxpayer money in pursuit of a grand conspiracy which he never could prove. (See Washington Post.) In a court of law, we are all presumed innocent until proven guilty, but we also know that crooks do get away with it some times. Meanwhile, reform-minded Republicans are quietly lining up votes for new leaders and new ethics rules for the post-DeLay era. A third contender for the House Majority Leader position has emerged: Rep. John Shadegg, of Arizona; he first drew my attention on July 30. In opinionjournal.com, he calls on Republicans to recapture "The Spirit of 1994." Well, they'd better get a move on if they hope to retain a solid majority after next fall's elections. Tax hike for transportation?Not content to have enacted one of the biggest tax hikes in Virginia history two years ago, creating a huge and wasteful surplus in the state treasury, "moderates" in the General Assembly are taking a cue from new Governor Tim Kaine, proposing a sweeping set of tax increase related to transportation. I'm on record as supporting tax increases on energy (especially petroleum fuel) to encourage conservation by consumers and businesses, as well as for environmental and revenue reasons, but the proposed package goes way overboard. I was encouraged that Virginia Centrist cried out against this unwarranted grab by the politicians in Richmond. I felt compelled to join in and make a point in a comment: Why doesn't anyone make a distinction between different kinds of taxes, i.e., income vs. excise? Excess truck traffic is in part a result of the huge implicit state subsidy to highways from the general fund. This problem would remedy itself if there were a constitutional amendment barring any spending on highways from revenues other than those raised by taxes on fuel or vehicles. People who drive should bear the full cost of highway construction and maintenance. January 23, 2006 [LINK] Elections in CanadaUnbeknownst to most Americans, Canadians are voting for a new parliament today. Prime Minister Paul Martin's Liberal Party, which has held a strong majority for the last eleven years, is behind by at least ten percent in some polls. Fearing for his political life, he has become ever more strident in his dire warnings of a "extreme right-wing" takeover in Ottawa. Golly. Martin is a former finance minister who had a nasty run-in with fellow Liberal Jean Chretien, who stepped aside in Martin's favor in late [2003]. As in the United States, previously-marginalized conservative voices are coming to the forefront through the miracle of the blogosphere. For example, see Red Ensign Standard, who observes of the paranoid reaction to this new phenomenon by the left-Liberal establishment North of the Border: "Free speech, it would seem, is not a Liberal value." (via Instapundit). The wildly exaggerated notion spread by Martin that the U.S.A. is a hotbed of religious fascism was expressed by Margaret Atwood in her novel A Handmaid's Tale, which was made into a movie starring Robert Duvall. I wondered what she thought about this election, and found an interview with her at jam.canoe.ca. She won't come right out and say she opposes the Conservatives, but she doesn't leave much doubt. In her mind, the biggest issues faced by Canada are avian flu and global warming. UPDATE: The Conservatives have won a plurality of seats, as expected, but they fell well short of a majority. The new Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, will be hard pressed to get much accomplished, given the bitter, die-hard opposition of the outgoing Liberals. Are they getting political advice from Paul Begala or Dick Durbin, by any chance? Since most of the polls indicated the Liberals were likely to lose, it makes you wonder what the point of those frantic last-minute anti-American ads was. To poison the political atmosphere to prevent the Tories from governing effectively? I am very disappointed in P.M. Paul Martin, who seemed to be focused on reform when he became the national leader [just over two years] ago. Election in PortugalFormer Prime Minister Anibal Cavaco Silva, a conservative, was just elected President of Portugal. That post is less powerful than prime minister, however, so he will have only limited input on economic policy in the Socialist-led government. See CNN.com. I did some research on Portugal in graduate school at U.Va., and it is a fascinating country that has had a much bigger impact on the world than its small size might suggest: colonies in Brazil, Angola, Mozambique, Macau, Goa, and Eastern Timor, among others. Giving up its old imperial pretensions in the mid-1970s was very traumatic to many Portuguese people, but they were fortunate to have pragmatic politicians who eased the way into the modern era, joining the European Union in the 1980s. Interestingly, the United States played a large role in encouraging a transition toward a liberal democracy during the late 1970s, under U.S. Ambassador Frank Carlucci. Much like Spain, the Socialist Party has generally played a relatively responsible role in policy-making. Democracy in AfricaMost of the political news from Africa over the last year has been discouraging, with U.N. peacekeepers being killed in Congo, and hostages being taken by separatists in southern Nigeria. Meanwhile, the Islamofascist dictatorship in Sudan continues its campaign of genocide against the (mostly Christian) people in Darfur, and as President Mugabe cracks down on opponents in Zimbabwe, which is becoming a dictatorship. There are two bright spots, however: Liberia, which has been torn by civil war for most of the last two decades, managed to hold free and open elections in November. The reform-oriented Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf won in the second round, thus becoming the first woman ever to be elected president in Africa. She was just inaugurated last week; see BBC.com. In Tanzania, the old authoritarian regime of Julius Nyerere seems to be withering away under the new government of President Jakaya Kikwete, who took office in December. January 24, 2006 [LINK] Fallout from Canada's electionIt was rather exciting watching the live coverage of Canada's election last night on C-SPAN. To their credit, no preliminary vote tallies were released until polling stations in all parts of the country had closed. It was the first time I had heard Stephen Harper make a speech, and he did fairly well, though he seems not to have as strong a command of French as Paul Martin. Some Liberal politicians made graceful gestures to the victors, which will hopefully restore a much-needed comity. Canadians have a well-deserved reputation for politeness and civility, and I for one hope they resist any temptation to emulate the coarse style of contemporary politics in the U.S.A. Canada is riven by distrust not only between French and English speakers, but between the urban east and the rural west. The schism between eastern and western conservatives was ended in 2003, thanks in part to the leadership of Stephen Harper, who has roots in both parts of the country. He was born and raised in Toronto, but presently lives in Calgary, where he teaches economics. See the Canada Conservative Party. For their part, the Left in Canada has long been divided between the mainstream Liberals and the radical-pacifist alternative embodied in the New Democratic Party, which often holds the balance in the parliamentary system. Comparing the number of seats won with the overall percent of votes cast (see table below) illustrates how parties with a sharp regional focus have an advantage in winner-take-all legislative election systems with single-member districts. The Bloc Quebecois has nearly twice as many seats as the New Democratic Party, even though it had a much smaller share of the national vote. Canadian Parliament
SOURCE: Toronto Globe and Mail 
I took this photo of the Parliament Building in Ottawa during my cross-continent journey in 1987. Foreign leaders pagePrompted by the election in Canada, I have put together yet another background information page: Foreign leaders. It covers the major industrialized countries other than the United States, plus Russia, China, and India. Part of my never-ending quest to assemble vital information about the world into a convenient, easy-to-access format, it is similar to the chronology of Latin American presidents. January 26, 2006 [LINK] Are we on the road to ruin?
Robert Samuelson ridicules the conventional approach to health care policy, with a delicious combination of amusing wit and cold, hard logic. Talk about "fixing" the health care system is complete balderdash, as I have noted often in the past. Americans are oblivious to the fundamental economic reality of scarcity, and therefore believe that it is somehow possible to make health care available to all Americans, with a range of choices for patients, at a reasonable cost. Not! Any two of those goals can be compatible with each other, but not all three. Sooner or later, people will have to make a choice. Perhaps the biggest obstacle is getting folks to face up to the distorting effects of exempting their employer health care benefits from income taxes, which drains $126 billion+ from the U.S. Treasury every year and shifts the cost onto those unlucky enough not to enjoy such benefits. Just try suggesting a reform of that to some vote-conscious legislator. To me, the worst part is that most health care "experts" blithely assume that public policy must follow the dictates of popular preference, even if it flatly contradicts the basic laws of supply and demand. As Samuelson writes, "We're living in a fantasy world." If you ask me, it is all a monstrous crime, and when the system starts to crumble people will scream bloody murder. Is it not obvious that the Bush administration has been turning a blind eye to this mounting crisis? The Medicare prescription benefit, the crown jewel of the bogus "compassionate conservatism," is becoming a complete boondoggle, and it may backfire badly for the Republicans. Is it too late to get back on track of market-oriented social policy? The conformist attitude that denies anything can be done to change things reminds me of the 1970s and 1980s, when the budget deficit exploded and the entitlements morass deepened. Back then the unimaginative policy stagnation in Washington was called "Demosclerosis," the term coined by Jonathan Rausch. Two men with true leadership qualities -- Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich -- took on the status quo, defied the odds and, for a while at least, accomplished a great deal. Are such conservative leaders waiting in the wings today? January 27, 2006 [LINK] Palestine and "democratic peace"The sweeping victory by the terrorist organization Hamas in the parliamentary elections in Palestine has caused great angst in Washington. What went wrong?? The axiomatic notion that democracies are more peaceful is one of the few broad points of agreement between Washington policy circles and academia. Even the Bush administration and its neoconservative policy advisers parrot this line, hardly ever bothering to distinguish between liberal democracies like ours, and illiberal democracies such as Venezuela. In the latter case, there are few if any constitutional constraints on government power, so whoever wins the election can run roughshod over his opponents. The process of insitutionalizing liberal constitutional norms takes decades or even centuries. U.Va.'s Prof. John Owen (author of Liberal War, Liberal Peace) is one of those who does make a clear distinction in this regard, emphasizing that liberal regimes tend not to fight one another, even though they may be quite prone to attacking illiberal regimes. That is different than saying they themselves are inherently more peaceful; it would be more accurate to say that liberal communities of nations (Western Europe, North America) are more peaceful. Today's lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal wisely points out that the Hamas victory "may even have the long-run benefit of educating Palestinians about the terrible cost of their political choices." It also reminds us of the real reason for the collapse of the peace process: "Ever since its return to the Palestinian territories in the mid-1990s following the Oslo 'peace' accords, Fatah has fed Palestinians on a diet of extremist, anti-Semitic propaganda." In other words, the Palestine Liberation Organization and its political wing Fatah were the embodiment of Islamofascism par excellence. (And to think Yasser Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize.) Given the choice between corrupt, cynical, inconsistent terrorists versus grimly determined terrorists, it's not hard to understand the result. Before we start bewailing the failure of embryonic democratization to bring instantaneous peace, let us remember why democracies are generally associated with successful development, over the long run: First, they institutionalize uncertainty, which implies (among other things) that the incentives for businessmen to bribe government officials are greatly reduced, because you can't be sure if Bureaucrat X will still be in office next year. Second, they create a built-in steering mechanism that allows for periodic shifts in policy in response to changed circumstances, encouraging innovative practices, while punishing elected leaders who consistently fail to deliver on their promises. (Indeed, the Latin root word gubernare means "to steer," as in a ship.) Dictatorships tend to rot over time because differences of opinion are systematically repressed. For the Palestinians, the experience of having their nascent country be "steered" by fanatical mass murderers will be a rude awakening that will teach them a dear lesson. As the WSJ suggested, it may be just the jolt they need to get a genuine liberal-minded reform party started. January 28, 2006 [LINK] L'autonomia per a Catalunya? *Catalonia, the northeastern region of Spain centered upon Barcelona, may gain additional autonomous prerogatives under a bill submitted to the Spanish Cortés (parliament) by Prime Minister Zapatero, a Socialist. In consideration for its distinct language and cultural traditions, Catalonia has enjoyed some degree of autonomy since 1980. Its drive for full independence during the 1930s was one of the main causes of the Spanish Civil War, and the lingering franquista sentiment within the armed forces casts a pall over Spain's otherwise thriving democracy. That is why a general who objected to the bill as contrary to the constitutional unity of Spain was fired. A government spokesman denied that Zapatero was pandering to fringe parties in order to keep his coalition together. See Washington Post. Catalonia ("Cataluña," en español) is transparent to most Americans, but many famous Spaniards were born or raised in Catalonia, including artists Pablo Picasso and Joan Miró, and cellist Pablo Casals. Spain is rather like the United Kingdom in being an amalgam of regions with distinct traditions, each of which was joined to the larger country under unique circumstances, and with special understandings. For that reason, the suggestion that those countries adopt a federal system like the United States is not really appropriate, because the smaller units are not really co-equal, as are states in the U.S.A. In principle, legislation aimed simply at facilitating the expression of multicultural diversity (!) should not be too dangerous. What worries me is that the proposed law may provide justification for latent grudges among the various parts of Spain, over who gets more and who gets less in return for the tax revenues they pay, for instance. As one example of this, I recently learned about the silly boycott of Catalonian products by people in other parts of Spain who resent special favors for Catalonia from our friends Montserrat and Josep. *(They kindly gave us the Angles-Català dictionary that allowed me to write the title above. Moltes gràcies!) This is a situation in which the conservative reluctance to upset the apple cart for fear of unleashing chaos is well taken. The comparison with the Quebec independence movement is certainly apt, but Spain has sharper internal divisions than Canada, and a history of political violence. Granting additional autonomous rights to Catalonia will certainly lead the Basque people to demand more autonomy for their region. (Recall that former Prime Minister Aznar initially reacted to the March 2004 Madrid bombings by blaming Basque terrorists.) To many observers, it is an irony that the modern world of global economic interdependence is fostering increased demands for political separateness. Or, it could be a case of one thing leading to the other. Prime Minister Zapatero's unduly harsh words toward the United States and his warm gestures toward the quasi-authoritarian regime of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela raise serious questions about his fitness to lead Spain. As he moves ahead with the Catalonian autonomy issue, I hope he proceeds with extreme caution, so as not to ignite a second civil war in Spain. Smooth sailing for AlitoThankfully, most Senate Democrats have realized that there is simply no objective basis for opposing the nomination of Sam Alito to the Supreme Court, so his accession is all but assured. (In anticipation of that, the question mark next to his name on the Supreme Court page has been removed.) Fears about what what the idea of a "unitary executive" implies seem overblown, from what I can tell. It's simple logic that the president, as chief executive, should be in charge of the executive branch, as long as he respects the statutory independence of agencies such as the CIA or BLS. The junior senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Kerry, indulged in a bit of paranoia by warning that Alito would grant permission to armed government agents barging into people's homes. In response, Donald Sensing reminds us about an ugly incident involving a tiny lad named Elian Gonzalez. Been there, done that... January 31, 2006 [LINK] Will on Bush's "cynicism"Much like his rhetorically gifted predecessor, George W. Bush is learning that basing U.S. foreign policy on high, noble ideas is a risky proposition. As compromises and accommodations to reality are made, charges of hypocrisy are almost inevitable. Last week's elections in Palestine indeed call into question the Neocons' vision that democratization in the Middle East would bear quick fruit in terms of peace and stability. Well, maybe not right away. There is a desperate need for Condoleeza Rice to speak up at Cabinet meetings and make a stronger pitch for paying greater heed to the realist approach to international relations. As the President prepares to deliver his State of the Union address tonight, George Will predicts in today's Washington Post that Bush will conveniently gloss over the setback represented by the Hamas victory. He cites Edmund Burke's warning about the moral ambiguity of liberty, which allows people to choose good or evil, and wryly notes that Bush's previous disavowal of imposing "our" form of democracy on other countries has provided an opportunity for malign illiberal forms of democracy to arise. How will Bush handle the disconnect between past rhetoric and present reality in places like Palestine and Haiti? Will wishful thinking descend into cynicism, as Will says? The erudite pundit's pent-up exasperation with the waywardness of the Bush administration exploded in the Harriet Miers episode, but he has not yet to stooped to the kind of insult he once leveled at Bush the Elder, whose voice, Will once said, had the "tinny arf of a lap dog." As for tonight's big speech, I predict that Bush will give "equal time" to sober reflection and high inspiration, in line with the recent shift in White House communications strategy. Bush is often criticized for living in a "bubble," blissfully unaware of criticism or public sentiment, but that does not apply to his advisers. Bush has established a clear pattern of foiling the low expectations of pundits and rousing the audience with clear, resonant speeches just in the nick of time. He may pull it off once again, but that high-wire act can't go on forever. Millennium Challenge Corp.Almost every modern U.S. administration creates some new official or quasi-official insititution to put its own stamp on international "do-goodism," from the Peace Corps to the National Endowment for Democracy. Under the Bush administration, the new Millennium Challenge Corporation has taken a leading role in formulating U.S. overseas development policy. Today's Washington Post provides some background on the MCC and its new leader, John Danilovich. Two of the biggest recipients of MCC assistance packages are Nicaragua and Honduras, which suffered greatly during the civil wars of the 1980s. In general, I support the idea that U.S. foreign aid should be conditioned on the worthiness of recipients, but there is always a risk of political favoritism whenever such discretion is emphasized. It also illustrates, once again, the inherent dilemma of involvement in other countries' affairs: We risk either being seen as meddlesome, or else turning a blind eye to bad behavior. UPDATE: Alito is inThe Senate approved the nomination of Samuel Alito today by a vote of 58 to 42. I heard Sen. Chuck Schumer on the radio today bitterly ruing the accession of the conservative judge, voicing the resentment of Democrats who think they are still the majority party. He said that the response to Bush's State of the Union address tonight will be the sound of "one hand clapping." That's free publicity for Donald Sensing! |
This is ironic, to say the least.
)
Opinion columns by two stalwart conservatives in today's Washington Post explain in a nutshell why the Republicans in Congress have strayed so far from their roots, thereby putting their majority status in jeopardy. 