Category: Chris Freind

Chris Freind: Duchess Kate: May we have another?

By Chris Freind

Dear Duchess Kate,

Congratulations on your new baby — and our new hope!

We know you have your hands full, but at the risk of sounding anxious, please do us a favor — have another child. Quickly. And two or three more after that. Perhaps more than anyone else on the planet, you hold the key, by your position and charisma, to lead us out of our literal death spiral. The negative birthrates of Europe, Japan, and yes, America, have placed us on a collision course with the end of an empire — not colonialism, but the greatest, most benevolent civilizations the world has ever known. Not to heap any more pressure on you, but freedom, respect for the rule of law, and the spirit of nationalism hang in the balance.

Oh, in case you’re having trouble agreeing on a name, Prince Christopher has a nice ring to it.

Sincerely,

The West

Interestingly, the bankruptcy of Detroit and the new royal baby — assuming William and Kate are not one-and-done-ers — are interrelated. If the royal couple can inspire those in negative-birthrate countries to once again go forth and procreate, tragedies like the one in Detroit could be avoided in the future.

Detroit, like most big American cities (and many European countries), has been horrifically managed for decades. As despair increased due to lack of jobs, productive workers left for greener pastures, such as Texas and Arizona, where job growth has been explosive. Those left behind, from retirees to those unwilling to start a family (thus no future workers), could not afford the escalating pension obligations and other costs that always accompany the promise of a “guaranteed” social safety net.

The result? Collapse.

It’s no different in Western nations whose economies are hanging by a thread — tragedies of their own making because of ill-advised cultural, economic and political decisions. As a result, birthrates have been steadily plummeting, and all have fallen well below the 2.1 children per family threshold necessary just to achieve zero population growth.

For nations in this precarious situation, there are three courses of action, but only one true solution:

1. They can import labor, typically from Asia, Africa and the Middle East. This massive immigration flow, particularly in Europe, produces a destabilizing effect in those countries because most permanent foreign workers have no desire to assimilate and become “European.” Instead, they often view Euro-culture with outright disdain, despite enjoying freedoms most would never even dream about in their home countries. It is similar, but not quite as pronounced — yet — in America, with millions of illegal immigrants swearing allegiance to countries other than the United States.

The underlying tensions between indigenous populations and the workers they import continue to simmer just below the surface, occasionally bursting through, but for the most part, held in check by misguided labels of xenophobia. Too often, political correctness is employed to assuage the “offended” immigrants, swinging the pendulum unfairly away from Europeans and their hallowed traditions and cultural norms. Adding fuel to this “Balkanization” powder keg is when relatively well-heeled immigrants living in Europe engage in terrorism, such as when they bomb trains in London and Madrid.

If this policy continues unabated, Europe will either fade away without so much as a whimper, becoming unrecognizable in fifty years as its indigenous population declines by several hundred million, or it will engage in an ultra-nationalistic backlash of immense proportions, with bloodshed on a grand scale. European history all but guarantees it.

2. Countries such as Japan can continue to abhor immigration while starving itself to death. Japan has the most elderly population on Earth, and the most negative birthrate, yet absolutely eschews immigration, for mostly cultural reasons.

So a country that in the mid-19th century spectacularly entered the world stage, eventually becoming the second-largest economy on Earth in 1990 (despite being smaller than California), is now a sad shadow of itself, with half as many children than in 1950, yet having eight times as many senior citizens.

Anyone care to look at how Japan is faring? While the tsunami/nuclear issues haven’t helped, Japan has been significantly diminishing for decades, a pace which is only accelerating.

3. Countries can take a hard look at their anti-family policies and correct them. And if dynamic world leaders like William and Kate choose to make family life and having children their priority issues, the situation can be reversed. But both must go hand-in-hand, as neither one by itself can be successful.

And it’s no easy task, as there are many reasons for negative birthrates.

While not apologizing for capitalism, for it is the fairest economic system on earth, it is inarguable that too many in the West have succumbed to materialistic gluttony, coupled with “it’s all about me” and “do whatever makes you feel good” attitudes.

Such mentalities are anathema to getting married, having children, and being diligent parents, for it is much easier to go with the flow without the commitment and cost — aka “baggage” — of children.

And since many countries offer lavish, “guaranteed,” government-funded retirement plans, the incentive for having children to eventually take care of the parents is washed away.

Yet, there are millions who want several children, but are forced to have none or just one because of immoral tax codes. And make no mistake; when the government takes more than half of what people and businesses earn, even from the grave via inheritance taxes, that is absolutely immoral.

If crushing taxes were reduced, placing a higher level of income back where it belongs — with the people — more families could survive on one salary, allowing them to afford their dream of a larger family and reversing the negative birth trend.

Healthy populations in Western nations will produce more than they consume, and become a rising tide that lifts all boats. But it’s not just lost productivity that is a casualty of negative birthrates, but the loss of those who will never exist: Brilliant scientists who will never find a cure for cancer or discover other planets; teachers who will never inspire their students to believe that the sky’s the limit; doctors who will never comfort and cure their patients; and artists who will never leave their audiences breathless, searching for words to describe out-of-this-world performances that bring out the humanity in all of us.

It is inevitable that nationalistic spirit dies when a nation experiences population decline. While nationalism has unfortunately become a dirty word for some, to be beaten back at every turn, it is nonetheless mandatory for the cohesiveness of a people. In the same way that the Olympics bring out the very best in folks, where love of country and pride in one’s national identity makes for peaceful rivalry, hearty camaraderie and great sportsmanship, nationalism on a political scale drives the engine of innovation, creation and competition. And that’s the way it should be.

But as the spirit of optimism disintegrates, a new threat rises in the East, as enemies sworn to oppose freedom multiply by the millions, menacing what is left of the West. One can only hope that smarter leaders will emerge, unshackling the bonds holding population growth hostage. And with that, a royal family that is royally large.

Duchess, congratulations, and please keep them coming!

Race Relations Worse Than Ever In USA

OK, let’s get it out of the way. I wholeheartedly agree with the outcome in the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman fiasco. So to those who felt entitled to a “guilty” verdict, I am undoubtedly insensitive, heartless and uncaring. Oh, I almost forgot the most important, albeit vastly overused labels: Racist and bigoted.

Spitballs off a battleship.

The real tragedy that has been lost in all the white noise surrounding the verdict is the true victim: Race relations in America, as our goal of a color-blind society now stands at its lowest point in modern American history.

Never mind that the jury did the only rational thing — find Zimmerman not guilty — and that in doing so actually followed that ever-eroding thing called the law (read the manslaughter statute — Zimmerman may have used poor judgment, but he clearly did not intentionally commit an act that caused the death of Trayvon).

It’s an indisputable fact that had this been black-on-black or white-on-white, there never would have even been a trial. And equally true, a national media starved for ratings, and advocacy groups desperately trying to affirm a relevance they never had, created this entire debacle on the false premise that it was all about “race.”

Because some Trayvon supporters thought they were entitled to a guilty verdict, regardless of facts or legal statute, anything less was a travesty of justice, racist, and a tacit endorsement for rioting and death threats against Zimmerman.

Welcome to an America that revels in its path of racial regression.

There is no better illustration of how badly we botch race relations than the differences in the Paula Deen and Trayvon Martin cases.

On the one hand, we demonize Paula Deen for words she was honest enough to admit using years ago, mainly in the context of jokes. It’s bad enough Americans have lost their sense of humor in favor of getting offended by absolutely everything, but honestly, who among us — of all colors — hasn’t used or laughed at “racial” words in jokes (including black comedians who openly use the “N” word). Does doing so make one a bigot? Of course not. Is Paula Deen by extension a racist? Based on everything we know about her, no. While some of what she said clearly isn’t defensible, the piling-on reaction of talking heads and gutless companies who know nothing of loyalty and forgiveness was disgraceful.

There is a very simple reason we took down Paula Deen in the name of “race relations.” Because it was easy. That’s it. No hard work or effort was required to put her on a dartboard and destroy such an easy target. Those who did so chalked up a “win” in their personal agenda column, lying to themselves and the public that it was done in the name of improving race relations. In reality, such actions set the whole debate backwards.

And yet, we barely mention that virtually every big- city mayor and police chief nationwide felt it necessary to urge calm, pleading with Trayvon supporters not to riot and incite bloodshed in the event of a “not guilty” verdict. All for a case, by the way, where most people, both white and black, didn’t have the foggiest idea of Florida law and how it, and nothing else, dictated the outcome.

The inconsistencies are mindboggling, but not surprising.

Race relations had a rocky road in this country, but as we look back, it was clearly a right-versus-wrong struggle, a fight where the oppressed eventually triumphed. Through their perseverance, and the support of millions of fair-minded whites, blacks ultimately achieved legal equality — a monumental feat realized more quickly than even the most optimistic could have hoped.

And yet now, by our own choosing, the pendulum has swung back. We are separate once more. And our nation is divided again — ironically, after it had come such a long way to heal the wounds of the past.

Unconscionably, too many on all sides accept that situation, and even embrace it.

In all the recent media coverage, was there any mention of the thousands of blacks killed each year in urban war zones, primarily by other blacks? Or of the staggeringly high percentage that die, or will go to prison, or be on parole or probation, while still so young? Was there a conversation about what could be done to reverse that trend?

Was there any serious debate about why our American cities are in such a tragic state, where murder, violence, drugs, homelessness, poverty, crushing taxes and horrendous education kill all hope and create a bitter divide between the haves and the have-nots? And about how, despite all the billions spent and feel-good reforms, things are only getting worse? Were the roots of these problems discussed? Any viable solutions offered?

Was there any leader willing to look at the big picture, unafraid to incur the wrath of the loudmouthed, name-calling brigades, to point out that Black Caucuses and Black Parents’ Weekends at colleges do not celebrate diversity and culture, but serve only to drive a sharp wedge between people — people who should, at this point in our history, view themselves as just “Americans” — with no hyphens?

None to all. But as long as we rally around “race cases” that serve no meaningful purpose in advancing race relations, that’s all that matters.

Too many of all colors look the other way when race is injected, fearful of being labeled if an opinion is expressed. And for good reason, as Bill Cosby knows all too well. After a speech several years ago in which he expressed blunt opinions, though with noble intent, about improving the state of young blacks, he was vilified by black leaders and called an “Uncle Tom.” Blowhards got their airtime, and the status quo remained intact.

That’s not a solution. That’s a tragedy.

Things won’t change until our leaders, the media, and most of all, ourselves, demand it. But since we keep being treated to pictures of Trayvon as a boy instead of a man, and racist phrases such as Zimmerman being a “white Hispanic” (what does that even mean?), don’t expect progress anytime soon.

So long as America chooses to look through the black and white prism while ignoring the one that eliminates color, race relations and tension among fellow countrymen will continue to erode, erasing so much of what courageous leaders of the past, both black and white, achieved.

The only colors Martin Luther King, Jr. saw were red, white and blue. It’s truly pathetic that nearly half a century later, we now have made race relations brown. And that doesn’t refer to skin color.

Race Relations Worse Than Ever In USA

Race Relations Worse Than Ever In USA

Tom Corbett and GOP Fail Pennsylvania — Again

 

If you strike out two of every three times at bat, you’re a Hall of Famer. One out of four gives you a long career. But go 0 for the season and your contract won’t be renewed.

On that last point, welcome to the lives of Gov. Tom Corbett and the Republican-controlled Pennsylvania legislature.

Once again, the pols have recessed for the summer with zero success passing any major initiatives, keeping Pennsylvania stuck in the dark ages. So where does that leave us? Do we carry the torch of hope that lights the way to a better tomorrow? Do we still possess the faith that each successive generation will fare better than the one before it?

Nope.

And because Corbett, who had a 10-point victory in 2010, and the Republican legislature, which enjoys historic majorities in both houses, lack the courage to fix our once-great commonwealth, Pennsylvania further plummets into the oblivion of mediocrity.

If things were peachy, doing nothing would be acceptable. But they aren’t, and “business as usual” — the endless routine of committee meetings, press releases, and little substantive action — won’t break the logjam created by years of inaction.

Our politicians don’t understand — or don’t care — that this crisis has put the economic health of our state in serious jeopardy. Too many hide and duck or are just flat-out incompetent, breeding a climate of cynicism and mistrust — toxic to the optimism so necessary for growth.

Not all that long ago, Pennsylvania was the leading industrial state in the country — and a leader on the world stage. It was a powerful magnet for companies to locate here, and with them came the best and brightest workforce in America. Our children were educated in the state, and actually stayed in Pennsylvania because of the jobs created by a booming economy.

But now, with our well-deserved reputation for corruption and a government seemingly hostile to all but the insiders, we stand at the brink.
And yet with everything in their favor, including widespread support on a number of issues, the Governor and legislature dropped the ball — again. Consider:

1. Liquor privatization: Despite the vast majority of Pennsylvanians favoring the state getting out of the liquor business — with the reasonable expectation that consumer choice would rise and prices would fall — nothing happened. Given the Republicans’ total control, this abysmal failure must be laid at the feet of Corbett. Saying “I want privatization” but not lifting a finger to get it is pathetic. There was no barnstorming the state, no use of the bully pulpit, no playing hardball with recalcitrant Republicans. In fact, he all but ignored the legislature until the 11th hour, and even then screwed the pooch. But what else is new?

The only silver lining is that the privatization bills were ill-conceived, as none eliminated the whopping 18 percent Johnstown Flood Tax (of 1936) levied on every bottle of wine and liquor. Failure to do so in the future (and the odds are long that anything will happen in the fall) will only serve to lessen choice and raise prices, making “privatization” a bad word. Leave it to Corbett to take a great idea and turn it to dung. Bottom line: Do it right, or don’t do it at all.

2. Pension reform: The problem of massively ballooning pension payments over the next several years is so monumental that it threatens the very stability of the state. Given that Corbett has demonstrated an inability to handle even the most basic matters, the assumption that he could tackle such a pressing problem was a fairy tale. But he and the legislature punted on even the most fundamental reform: requiring all future state employees be given a 401k plan rather than a pension. A no-brainer, to be sure, and one that no reasonable person could oppose, since public employees should never have a hands-down advantage over those in the private sector. But nothing was done.

And the next generation will thank Corbett for this massive debt load by fleeing as soon as they can. Brilliant.

3. Transportation: This is yet another issue that, while long overdue, thankfully didn’t happen. Incomprehensibly, the Senate passed a bill that would have placed a 37-cent-per-gallon gas tax on Pennsylvanians to fix roads and bridges. Thankfully the House nixed that, but here’s the kicker: Corbett wanted upward of a 75-cent-per-gallon tax, which would have made Pennsylvania’s gas tax the highest in the nation.

Since when is breaking the backs of Pennsylvanians the path to prosperity? Instead of raising taxes, here’s an idea: Why not increase revenue by instituting pro-growth policies? It’s really not that hard. If you make Pennsylvania a viable place to do business, companies will come, as will their employees — and a whole boatload of revenue follows. The more money pumped into the economy, the more state coffers fill. But that remains a foreign concept, with Pennsylvania maintaining one of the most hostile business climates in the nation.

But what do you expect from lawyers/politicians with virtually no real-world business experience? Who have never encountered innovation-stifling and job-killing rules and regulations? Who have never had to meet a payroll? Who don’t know what it’s like to look a longtime employee in the eye and issue a pink slip because the government forces his hand?

We should expect exactly what we get. Nothing.

4. Second-highest corporate tax: One way not to attract business is by maintaining the second-highest corporate net income tax in the country. Lowering it is an issue both business and labor could and should agree upon, and it should have been done on Day One. Creating jobs floats all boats, union and otherwise. But nothing was done.

Astoundingly, the Corbett plan recently unveiled is to lower that rate by just three points — but over 12 years! Seriously? What savvy CEO will jump on the “opportunity” to come to Pennsylvania on the off-chance that the state will lower its tax by 2025? That level of obtuseness is so great that I am, for once, at a loss of words.

OK, that’s not true. But the words are unprintable.

5. Philadelphia’s schools. The way not to bail out the black hole called Philly schools is by throwing more taxpayer money at the problem and holding onto jobs that need to be eliminated. Shedding 3,800 school district positions isn’t a travesty — it’s a good start. Cutting art and music isn’t the answer, however — increasing revenue is. But rather than force Mayor Nutter and Philadelphia to live within its means, however, like families and businesses do, Corbett and the legislature just perpetuated a failed system.

The chance to fix education through school choice, competition and other reforms came and went. So things will only get worse, if that’s even possible. However, if city revenue were increased by attracting business and residents, then at least the rest of the state wouldn’t yet again be funding Philadelphia’s bad habits. But it’s a case of chicken and the egg. How do you entice companies when you are the cumulatively highest-taxed city in the nation with skyrocketing levels of crime, homeless and poverty?

Common sense dictates that the answer isn’t throwing money, with no accountability, at the problem, nor extending the city’s 8 percent sales tax. But that’s exactly what they did.

After the Hurricane Katrina debacle, there was absolutely nothing George W. Bush could do to save his presidency or his party. With reelection numbers in the 20s, Tom Corbett is in the same position. (Republicans already lost 10 percent of their Senate membership in 2012, and the first-ever Democrat was elected as attorney general, Corbett’s prior position.) The only difference between Bush and Corbett is that it only took our
governor two years to achieve such a distinction.

If there were All Star voting in politics, Tom Corbett wouldn’t even be on the ballot.

 

Tom Corbett and GOP Fail Pennsylvania — Again

No Sugary Drinks For Food Stamps

No Sugary Drinks For Food Stamps

We recently experienced a “super moon,” an event where that celestial body is at its closest point to Earth all year.

As everyone knows, full moons bring out eccentric behavior in people. But this super moon was an extra doozy for me. Against all odds, I found myself agreeing with not just Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter (first time ever), but 17 other big city mayors. Talk about strange bedfellows.

This Gang of 18 sent the federal government a letter requesting that soda and sugary drinks become ineligible purchases for those in the food stamps program (known as SNAP — Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). And since more people (47 million) receive food stamps than the population of Spain, that’s a big deal.

The mayors have the right idea, but to some extent, are pushing it for the wrong reason.

They are making their case to combat obesity and other health-related diseases, citing the huge health care costs associated with that enormous problem. While it’s noble trying to take a chunk out of obesity, this issue is much more basic.

When you’re on the public dole, there are strings attached. Period. And that’s exactly how it should be.

It’s totally irrelevant whether soda causes or contributes to diabetes, heart disease or obesity. Inarguably, there are no nutritional aspects to sugary drinks; So, given that the word “nutrition” appears in the program’s very name, allowing soda is contradictory.

Not surprisingly, many in the food stamp program have expressed righteous indignation with the mayors’ proposal, as have numerous advocacy groups. (Help me out with that one. Why do we need advocates for people receiving free food? Only in America.)

Talk about an entitlement mentality. Taxpayers foot the bill, and that’s still not enough. The expectation is that the recipient — not the donor — should be calling the shots.

Common sense tells us that those receiving generous SNAP benefits, courtesy of those who actually work for a living, should have no say whatsoever in what they can and cannot buy with food stamps. But too often they do, evidenced by the fact that this soda debate has raged for years with no action.

The same rationale applies to why welfare recipients should have to pass a mandatory drug test before receiving benefits. If those reaping taxpayers’ largesse don’t like the criteria by which they must comply, that’s fine. There’s a very simple alternative. As “The Big Lebowski” says, “Condolences. The bums lost. My advice is to do what your parents did. Get a job!”

Food stamp recipients aren’t the only ones opposed. The American Beverage Association has been whining that sugary drinks shouldn’t be singled out, stating that obesity is “a complex health condition that affects Americans of all income levels.” Hey, diet soda doesn’t contribute to obesity, but has no nutritional value, so it too should be banned from SNAP.

“Targeting struggling families who rely on (food stamps’) vital safety net will not make America healthier or reduce government spending,” it also stated.

Fantastic. If only that made any sense. But it doesn’t.

First, soda isn’t being singled out as the cause for obesity. We all know it’s the “thyroid problem” that all members of the fat brigade seem to have. Well, that, and the infinite supply of cheap, fattening comfort foods (along with soda) and the fact that it’s a lot easier to don sweatpants (as George Costanza says, a sign you’ve “given up”), and sit in your chair watching reality TV shows instead of going outside for a walk or, God forbid, work out once a week.

Attempts have also been made to ban candy and other zero-nutrition items from the food stamp program, to no avail, so the beverage folks need to sit down and shut up on this one. It’s not about soda. It’s about taxpayer money being spent unwisely.

And for the record, reduced government spending has nothing to do with it. The cost of the food stamp program won’t change because soda is banned. It just means people will have to use their gift card — and it is a gift card — on nutritional food.

Oh, and of course we’re “targeting” families on food stamps, because we can. Whom else should we target? Free market consumers using their own money? Notwithstanding New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s insane attempts to restrict soda portions, no one is doing that, nor should they. Sure, obesity is a national epidemic, and we are all paying for it at a skyrocketing rate, but you will never stop it with government bans. Personal responsibility, individual choices and suffering the consequences of bad decisions will, and should, rule the day.

But those things don’t apply, or at least they shouldn’t, when public assistance is involved.

Interestingly, some of the Right don’t agree with the mayors’ push, arguing that it is too paternalistic, too Big Brother for the government to tell people what they are permitted to buy. Others argue that such restrictions would discourage the needy from joining the program.

Really?

A. If you don’t apply for food stamp subsidies because you can’t buy grape soda, great. Don’t let the door hit you in your large posterior on the way out.

B. So what if it’s paternalistic? It obviously needs to be. You aren’t permitted to buy alcohol or cigarettes (though some still do), and you shouldn’t be hauling live lobsters home either. No one is saying you can’t buy sugary drinks — you just shouldn’t be able to do so with other people’s money.

This will be a fascinating political development to watch, as it is Democrats imploring other Democrats to put in place what is ultimately a Republican idea.

Knocking back the sense of entitlement, instilling accountability into a government program, teaching personal responsibility, and even making people a little healthier. Hopefully, all it will take is a spoonful of sugar to make that medicine go down.

No Sugary Drinks For Food Stamps

Mandated Public Sewers Should Be Unconstitutional

Mandated Public Sewers Should Be Unconstitutional

First, a disclaimer: “Obamacare” is about to be referenced, even though today’s topic is not regarding health care. So for those opposed, don’t immediately use this column as toilet paper.

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Obamacare was constitutional on the grounds that it was a tax. Had it been a mandatory purchase, where government required citizens to buy something, it would have undoubtedly not passed legal muster.

Which makes the situation occurring in, but not limited to, Upper Providence Township, Delaware County, absolutely mind-blowing. The local government, via its sewer authority, has been mandating residents pay huge out-of-pocket costs to connect to the new public sewer system being installed throughout the township — even if one’s septic system is working flawlessly.

In other words, if your house is less than 250 feet from the road, which the vast majority are, you are required by a duty-to-connect ordinance to shell out big bucks for something you might not want, need, nor can afford (despite already paying substantial taxes). There are no opt-outs, negotiations, exceptions. You buy in, or else.

And “or else” is staggeringly severe.

But first, a brief primer:

While the sewer authority is officially a “separate” entity from the township, we’re going to dispense with the legalese and consider them interchangeable. The township council created the authority and chooses its members, so without question, if it disagreed with the program, forced sewers would have been a non-starter. Bottom line: They’re all in this cesspool together.

Several years ago, it was determined by paternalistic Upper Providence leaders — who obviously know what is best for the people — that building public sewers was the way to go. So they enacted ordinances requiring residents to participate in what amounted to a double-whammy initiative. (Disclaimer No. 2: I am not an Upper Providence resident, so am not affected).

The first step is to pay for the sewer line that runs along the street, known as the “tapping fee.” The bill? Six thousand dollars per household. (Technically, the fee is $5,700, but the sewer authority rubs salt in the wound by tacking on a $300 “permit application fee.” That’s great — making you pay for a permit after having a $5,700 bill shoved down your throat. Real classy.)

Here’s a thought for the township council and sewer authority: As stewards of the people’s money — and it is their money, not yours — you shouldn’t forge ahead on unnecessary projects, especially if the municipality can’t afford them. That’s a lesson Chris Christie has been teaching, and it’s paying huge dividends. Passing the buck to residents because you want a pet project is unconscionable.

And what if you don’t play ball? What if you don’t have an extra $6,000 lying around? What if you are a cash-strapped new homeowner, or have several tuition bills? What if your job is on shaky ground, or you already lost it? What if you are a senior on a fixed income, just trying to live your golden years, but are now forced to choose between medicine, food, heat (all skyrocketing in price), or forking over money to the government for something you don’t need?

In case you’re wondering, no financing is offered by Upper Providence. So for many, good luck getting a loan, since banks aren’t exactly lending to the under- or unemployed and retired seniors. And if you can’t foot the bill, the government can place a lien on your home, robbing you of your right to sell your most valuable asset. Where are we? Venezuela? Hugo Chavez, eat your decomposing heart out!

But that’s only the beginning. After the tapping installation is completed, homeowners are required, again on their own dime, to connect to the sewer line via private contractor within 90 days. The financial toll of that whopper? It varies, but another $6,000 to 8,000 is not uncommon (including yes, another permit fee!).

In addition to liens, homeowners also face a summary offense and fines of up to $1,000 per day for not connecting, and no, that’s not a misprint. So now the government can bankrupt you and render your house unsellable, all for the high crime of using an operational septic system that isn’t legally banned in a situation where there are no aggrieved parties.

And what if you just forked over $20,000 or $30,000 for a new septic system? Tough excrement. You get a minimal reprieve of a few years before you are required to hook up, but that’s it. Those unlucky people get doubly flushed down the toilet, losing their investment and paying for a totally unnecessary sewer connection. To top it all off, residents also must pay to have their septic systems professionally pumped out, have holes punched in the bottom prior to backfilling, and remove lids from the existing tanks. Not cheap.

How can the government be so utterly callous with the hardship they cause? The answer, directly from its website, is nauseating:

“From a philosophical view, if government and industry continue to put off spending, the recession will only continue. Projects such as this sewer project are in fact good for the economy and provide jobs for companies and employees.”

Gee, what a great rationale for upending people’s lives! Seriously! What planet are these nincompoops living on? Uranus?

Do they have any idea how the local economy could really be booming if residents didn’t have to shell out $15,000 for a project that is no more ecologically sound than the septic systems it replaces? How many home improvement projects of real value could have been constructed? Or new businesses that may have started? Or new cars that would have been purchased? Nights out on the town? All curtailed or completely kyboshed because of Big Brother.

Yet the free market could have easily solved the problem. If most people on a given street opted for public sewers, they would be able to sell their houses for substantially more than those who remained on septic. Prospective buyers, anticipating they might want to connect at a later date, would factor that into their lower offer price. A win-win, as individuals, not the government, would have chosen what was best for them. Case closed.

Instead, for those who don’t connect, the government snatches away the right to sell their house, while potentially fining them incalculable sums, creating immense animosity where there should be harmony.

The only thing more surprising than this in-your-face bullying is that too few expressed public outrage or tried to stop the program in court. It’s too late now for Upper Providence residents, but perhaps not for others in the region, such as those in Edgmont Township, where their government is moving in the same forced-sewer direction.

But give Upper Providence credit for one thing. On the “History” section of its website, it states that the area once “was an open and free land.”

At least they got the tense correct.

Mandated Public Sewers Should Be Unconstitutional

Americans Becoming Prisoners To Fear

“Fear stifles our thinking and actions. It creates indecisiveness that results in stagnation. I have known talented people who procrastinate indefinitely rather than risk failure. Lost opportunities cause erosion of confidence, and the downward spiral begins.” — Pastor Charles Stanley.

It is without question that we find ourselves in the middle of a downward spiral. There are of course many reasons for America’s decline — the death of manufacturing, dependence of foreign oil, political correctness — but there is one that overrides them all, a cancer so insidious that it eats away at the very essence of this nation’s life force.

Fear.

It has grown at an exponential rate largely due to the 24/7 super-hyped news cycle, and now that fear threatens to destroy the very fabric that holds America together.

Its latest victim was the NFL, which this week banned pocketbooks and bags from all its games in the name of “security,” a move largely in response to the Boston bombings. (Although, not surprisingly, it is selling its own NFL clear tote bag as an acceptable alternative.)

How many bombings have there been at NFL games? None. For that matter, how many terrorist bombings have there been in the nation during the Age of Fear (post 9/11)? One. And, no offense to the victims, that was amateur night.

So given the infinitesimally small probability that there will be any bombing, let alone one at an NFL game, why the overreaction?

Because that’s the society in which we have chosen to live, naively believing that we can be “100 percent” safe.

Sure, most fans are upset at the NFL’s new rule, but that ire will fade, stadiums will still be filled (with concession revenue way up), and we will accept yet another stupid regulation based on nothing but a myth, succumbing to fear once again. And every time we give in to fear, it becomes further embedded in the next generation as “normal.”

It’s time to take the gloves off as to what is really behind the mass shootings in our country, since too many continue to blame extraneous things.

It’s not guns — not “assault weapons,” magazine capacities or the availability of firearms, since all were more restricted at the time of the Columbine massacre, and less restricted before, when there were no such attacks. It’s not violent video games and television, though these things don’t help when coupled with complacent or out-to-lunch parents. And it’s not because mental health has been hijacked by political correctness.

They are all Band-Aid solutions on a gaping wound.

As Pogo famously said, “We have met the enemy and he is us.” We are the problem.

We have warped a generation, producing manic children conditioned to fear everything — can’t walk to the bus stop alone because you’ll be kidnapped; can’t ride a bike because you’ll get hit by a car (despite a Kevlar helmet and 78 protective pads); can’t play sports because you might get injured; can’t play cops-and-robbers because you might become a mass murderer; can’t settle your own disputes on the playground, so parents must pick their children’s teams. Everything is so precisely planned and organized — what the hell is a “play date?” — by helicopter parents obsessively hovering over their children. The creativity and curiosity that comes with being a child has been erased, replaced with a structure so unnatural that social skills are nearly nonexistent.

But it doesn’t stop there. We have ingrained such an irrational fear of suffering “hurt feelings” that many teachers don’t grade tests (some would do better than others, so it’s best to make everything equal and tell everyone “good job”), we don’t keep score at sports games and league standings are often taken offline so as to not offend the last-place team. Everyone gets a trophy because we have mandated a homogenous society, and individual achievement is often frowned upon if not outright ridiculed.

We have attempted to whitewash all “bad things,” which, not that long ago, were known as something else: Valuable life lessons.

We have become so fearful of risk — God forbid someone might not succeed at something — that children don’t know how to fail.

And when they don’t learn how to fall down — an inescapable human trait, by the way — they don’t know how to pick themselves up and try again. Instead, they are growing up in an artificial world of absolutes that we created — that everything must be 100 percent guaranteed safe.

We no longer encourage, let alone teach, entrepreneurship and self-reliance, having relegated “no risk, no reward” to the trash heap. The result? Many of today’s job seekers, fearful of being on their own, go on interviews with their parents! Mom and Dad negotiate salaries, ask the questions, take over the process and ream out the hiring manager when Junior doesn’t get the job to which they think he was entitled.

Many end up merely dysfunctional until the real world shatters the protective cocoon that has surrounded them for so long.

But for some — a small fraction, thankfully — they snap when something finally doesn’t go their way. Someone doesn’t like them, they get fired, a teacher or boss disciplines them, and they go on a rampage. They kill whatever is in their way, and, usually themselves, because of their complete inability to deal with Life.

Just a generation or two ago, children walked home from school, even at lunchtime. School doors were never locked. Fights in the schoolyard were quick, and the “combatants” were friends again 15 minutes later. Children played ghost-in-the-graveyard until they were called in, and all survived. Scoreboards weren’t turned off in a rout, and losing teams always worked harder to get better, which served them well in school and, later, the workplace. And you know what? There were virtually no shootings, and no one lived in fear. Imagine that.

Since the nation’s beginning, Americans’ courage has been exceptional. Our Founding Fathers risked (and many lost) everything, when they could have done nothing and enjoyed the good life. Americans engaged themselves in ferocious wars to save the world from tyranny, yet never flinched. Civil rights leaders, at risk to life and limb, overcame unimaginable hurdles to achieve freedom and justice.

With such a legacy of success, why have we become so scared of our own shadow, impotent to build upon that history and forge ahead in arguably the most exciting time in human history?

The real world doesn’t change — it has been and always will be filled with risk and danger. Managing those things without being a prisoner of fear is the only way for a nation, and a people, to prosper.

It’s time for the helicopter parents to come in for a permanent landing, or soon we will all crash and burn.

Chris Freind can be found at http://freindlyfirezone.com/

 

Americans Becoming Prisoners To Fear

 

Security Is No Excuse For Spying On Americans

By Chris Freind

“I don’t care if the government reads my mail or tracks my phone calls — I have nothing to hide … if it makes us safer, I am for it.”

Such naïve pronouncements might be expected from average folks. But you know it’s bad when a U.S. senator — a Republican, no less — feels the same way. As South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham stated, “I’m a Verizon customer. I could care less if they’re looking at my phone records. … If you’re not getting a call from a terrorist organization, you got nothing to worry about.”

Really, Lindsey? Nothing to worry about? Hmmm. Try telling that to those illegally targeted by the IRS. Since they hadn’t done anything wrong, they shouldn’t have had anything to “worry about.” But that wasn’t the case, was it? And tell that to Associated Press reporters whose constitutional protections were callously cast aside by the government on a witch-hunt. Turns out those who thought they had “nothing to worry about” were wrong. Very wrong.

And for the record, the government that did those things is the exact same one that is, and has been, poring over private phone and email data of American citizens via the National Security Agency. Not just a few targets for which it had probable cause, mind you, but untold millions who never received “a call from a terrorist organization.”

So forgive the majority of Americans who aren’t exactly comforted by assurances that they have nothing to worry about from Big Brother snooping through their personal lives. And excuse their skepticism that the government isn’t engaged in much more intrusive activities that have yet to be revealed.

And what is the government’s rationale for spying on innocent Americans?

That’s easy. It’s the nebulous, catch-all buzz phrase of “national security.” But who will protect us from our overzealous national security protectors? Who is watching the “watchers?”

As President Obama said in defense of these programs, “It’s important to recognize that you can’t have 100 percent security and also then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience.”

Thank God, he cleared that up.

Of course, anyone in their right mind would never believe that we could be 100 percent secure or have 100 percent privacy, as there are no absolutes in life. But this level of domestic spying is way out of bounds.

Are our leaders so insulated as to believe spying on American citizens is the best way to “prevent a terrorist attack?” That trampling over the Constitution is acceptable to beat al-Qaida? And that disregarding the fundamental rights of freedom, privacy and the protection from unreasonable search and seizure is OK, since it’s in the name of “protecting the people?”

Frighteningly, the answers are yes. And with every revelation, Americans become more fearful of their government — one that has seriously deviated from being of the people, by the people and for the people.

Here’s a newsflash. If we continue down our incremental path to totalitarianism, jettisoning unique American safeguards in the name of “security” — whatever that means — we might as well throw up the world’s biggest white flag. America will have become just like the very enemies it proclaims to abhor.

We are infinitesimally better than our foes, so why are we punishing our own in the name of fighting them?

Let’s review:

1. Spying on American citizens without probable cause is, or at least used to be, illegal. Yet, this is nothing new. The NSA has been doing this for decades, as certain microwave towers in its Fort Meade, Md., facility in the 1980s had only one purpose — domestic electronic surveillance, according to reports. The big issues now are that a.) it has finally become widely known that the NSA is engaging in such activities, and b.) their technology, which is exponentially more advanced than anything on the private market, has intrusion capabilities beyond comprehension, allowing them free reign over every informational aspect of our lives.

2. Are we really to believe that the government won’t take its activities to the next level, assuming it hasn’t already done so? Sorry, but that doesn’t pass the sniff test. Has there ever been a government that hasn’t eventually abused expanded powers, even those granted legitimately? And would the American people really have consented to such intrusions had they known the reach of these programs?

3. Is it even working? Beyond the always-vague and conveniently unverifiable “we stopped a domestic terrorist attack” line, is this destruction of privacy worth the cost? Did all their phone records searches and data mining programs stop 9/11? Nope. You know what could have? A competent FBI supervisor in Washington using old-fashioned common sense and brainpower. But instead of listening to the Minnesota agent begging for action because well-funded Muslims fitting a terrorist profile were taking flying lessons, yet refusing to learn how to land the plane, nothing was done. And the rest is history.

Ditto for the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber — both foiled not because of NSA spy programs, but terrorist incompetence and courageous passengers. Did the NSA prevent any of the mass shootings or the Boston bombing? No.

And need we ask if the spooks’ super-computers stopped the Times Square bomber? Remember him? He tried to bomb New York City, fled to the airport, bought a one-way ticket to the Middle East (Red Flag One), in cash (Red Flag Two), fit a terrorist profile (Flag Three), and here’s the kicker — boarded the plane despite being on the Government No-Fly List. Which, I think, qualifies as Red Flags Four through 100.

We have relegated human intelligence, in all its forms, to the back burner, choosing an over-reliance on technology. It’s bad enough it doesn’t work anywhere near advertised. But to lose our freedoms because it? No way.

4. We violate the inner sanctum of American lives in the name of stopping terrorism, yet refuse, because of an allegiance to political correctness, to do the one thing that, hands down, does more to thwart terrorism and gain intelligence than anything else — profiling. Go figure.

5. Everyone has something “to hide” because anything can be taken out of context and used by an unscrupulous agent for extortion and blackmail. Financial records, email conversations, photos, phone calls — you name it. The potential for abuse is astronomically high — a price Americans should not have to pay. Ever.

It’s time to use our intelligence the right way, through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court replete with added oversight, to protect us without destroying who we are and what we hold dear: Our inalienable rights that make us the envy of the world.

Ben Franklin said it best: “Those willing to give up liberty for security gain neither and will lose both.”

How right he was.

Freindly Fire Recap

Freindly Fire Recap
By Chris Freind

It’s been another banner week for battering common sense, but what else is new? However, there was one bright spot, and that leads off our weekly recap:

Tom Corbett’s NCAA Lawsuit Folly: Honest to God, Corbett acts more like Adam Sandler’s deer-in-the-headlights characters every day – slow, clueless, out-to-lunch. The only differences are that 1) People are laughing at Corbett, not with him, and 2) Sandler always wins at the end of the movie. In Tommy Boy’s case, the final scene is coming quickly, and there will be no contract renewal for a sequel.

The latest scene in The Tom and Jerry (Sandusky) Show was the common sense ruling – a no-brainer to everyone but Corbett – by federal Judge Yvette Kane. By her throwing out Corbett’s baseless lawsuit against the NCAA for its sanctions levied against Penn State, the governor gets the worst of both worlds: his crass political move spectacularly backfired, further tanking his already basement-dwelling approval rating.

Were the sanctions an outrageous over-reach? Absolutely. But remember that Gov. Corbett, as a Penn State trustee, agreed to and approved of the sanctions. In an overtly calculated effort to show he “cared” about Penn State – and to improve his abysmal approval rating – he sued the NCAA over those very same penalties.

And what are the reviews for Corbett now? Well, a Quinnipiac poll conducted right before the court decision found that six of 10 Pennsylvanians think Corbett, as then-attorney general, mishandled the Sandusky investigation – a significant reason why a majority (by a whopping 20 percentage points) do not believe he deserves reelection.

Any guesses as to how his embarrassing NCAA-lawsuit thumping will affect those numbers? Single digits, here he comes!


* * *

 

Chrysler Rejecting Jeep Recall: In some respects, this case has the potential to be just as disconcerting as the IRS and AP phone record scandals. The government, via the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, is threatening a federal lawsuit against Chrysler if it doesn’t recall nearly three million Jeeps, alleging that those vehicles’ gas tanks pose a safety issue in rear-end collisions.

Forget the fact that the government’s data is very sketchy (37 accidents and 51 deaths, for Jeeps going back as far as 1993, which, Chrysler states, is about one fatality every one million miles driven).

The big issue is that the vehicles in question meet federal safety requirements – which the government does not contest! In other words, if you accomplish everything you are mandated to do, meeting or exceeding all requirements, the government can still completely disregard that compliance on the whim of bureaucrats seeking a mega-power trip. And for the record, the NHTSA stated the Jeep’s gas tank design “may”, not “does,” pose a safety issue. Way to try to spend other people’s money, in this case hundreds of millions.

When a government is above the very law that it creates, everyone and everything is at risk. Kudos to Chrysler for having the guts – rare indeed – to shove it right back up the government’s tailpipe.


* * *

 

Major League Baseball’s Insane Lawsuit: Speaking of lawsuits with absolutely no merit, the action of Major League Baseball regarding the latest steroid saga is downright foul.

Don’t forget that baseball, and Commissioner Bud Selig in particular, have been the sporting world’s biggest hypocrites when it comes to banning steroids. For years, they officially condemned such substances while not lifting a finger to outlaw them, (having done so only several years ago), instead cashing in big-time on players clearly using “juice.”

Now it wants to appear “tough,” but is vastly overstepping its bounds. In an action that should have no legal standing whatsoever, the League filed a lawsuit accusing Anthony Bosch, owner of Biogenesis, a now-closed anti-aging clinic, for “intentional and unjustified tortious interference” with contracts between MLB and its players by providing them with steroids and possibly other banned substances.

There are frivolous lawsuits, and then there is this.

How can Major League Baseball possibly have grounds to sue a private individual for interfering with the contracts of players?

What’s next? Will baseball sue the Netherlands in World Court if players smoke pot in Amsterdam, which, while legal there, would undoubtedly be interfering with player contracts here?

Stay tuned, as this subject will be revisited.



* * *

 

Chris Christie’s special election: Taxpayer-friendly? New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has always fashioned himself an advocate of taxpayers, eliminating wasteful spending. He has done a fantastic job, which makes his latest action somewhat troubling.

Upon the death of Sen. Frank Lautenberg, Christie used his power to schedule a special election. The problem is that he did so for this October, just a month before the November election, in which he is on the ballot for re-election.

Millions in taxpayer money are used to process a statewide election. So the obvious question stands: Why not save that dough and just have the special election on the same date as the general? Common sense, it would seem. And since New Jersey is already being represented in Washington by the new interim senator, it’s not be like there was an urgency to fill a vacancy.

The real reason, obviously, is that Christie does not want to share the ballot with Cory Booker, the popular mayor of Newark who will undoubtedly be the Democratic candidate for Senate. It’s not that Christie himself is in danger of losing, as he is the most popular governor in the country with a stellar track record. (Anyone listening in Pennsylvania? Anyone?) But most observers believe he wants his reelection margin to be as large as possible, since winning big would help him in 2016 infinitely more than edging out a lesser opponent.

Is this a sound move? In most places, it wouldn’t be, as the political motivations are obvious. But Christie is Christie, and New Jerseyans, used to the roughest, most callous politicians in the nation, won’t even bat an eye. So while Christie will get a free pass on this one, it is nonetheless disappointing to see such a blatant compromise of political principles for such an openly political reason.

We can only hope that’s where Christie’s slippery slope ends.

The Tyranny That Has Become Youth Sports

Another Mother’s Day has passed, and with it the usual activities: Brunch, cookouts, a walk in the park with Mom. And sports games.

No, not a family outing at the Phils, but youth sports: Baseball, lacrosse, field hockey, soccer. You name it, they’re playing it. Do mothers love watching their children play? Sure. But is it really necessary to play on Mother’s Day? Is nothing sacred?

Have we lapsed so far into vicariously living through our children that common sense — and common courtesy — are now nonexistent? Are we so far gone that we can’t even assign a few sports “blackout” dates when family should come first? Sadly, yes.

And while coaches and league commissioners are largely responsible for these warped priorities, the ultimate blame must be placed on parents. As upset as some are that their Mother’s Day, Independence Day and Memorial Day holidays are blown to accommodate sports schedules, most refuse to say “no.” Instead, they go along with the insanity, which only serves as an enabler, ensuring that things will get worse.

And they have. Much worse.

Playing sports is wonderful for children, but it can be carried too far, such as parents who permit their child to play three and four sports per season. Not only does this rip apart families, but it deprives children of the one thing they need, and want, the most: Just being a child. As important as organized sports are, it is even more valuable to play Wiffle ball, capture the flag, cards, and cops and robbers — though they better do that last one quickly, before it’s outlawed, but that another story.

Worse than the hyper-schedules is the inexcusable behavior of some coaches and parents, and the politically correct social-engineering that is ever more prevalent in youth sports. Consider:

Extreme Coaching: Recently, I was witness to a rotund, loud-mouthed head baseball coach chewing out a player so intensely, 3 inches from his face, that the berating could be heard three towns over. That humiliating barrage didn’t teach the player anything, since he was in tears and only 7. But the show had just begun. The coach then proceeded to publicly scream at his “third base coach” (aka volunteer parent) for not sending a runner home. To his credit, that guy exercised self-control, choosing not to knock out fatboy’s teeth.

Then there are those who play “Daddy” and “Mommy” ball, becoming coaches just to ensure their child makes the “A” team, starts every game, gets the most playing time and wins the awards. Merit and ability sit the bench while favoritism wins the day, poisoning what should have been a fruitful and fun experience.

While there are still many coaches who do their best to teach fundamentals in a “normal” way, it seems that an increasing number get into coaching not for the children, but themselves. A power trip, they are either reliving their glory days or, more likely, making up for the glory days they never had. To those folks, a piece of advice: Screaming at little children, having a heart attack on the sidelines and otherwise acting like a jackass doesn’t make you a jock. And it’s a horrible example for the children — the only ones who matter.

Extreme parenting: Orthopedic surgeons will tell you that children should never play the same sport for more than three consecutive months, since that invites injury to their still-growing bodies.

Yet, the number of sports-related injuries, such as torn rotator cuffs, is rising substantially. Why? Because too many parents live in la-la land, convinced their child is the next Roy Halladay, Pele or LeBron James. So they sign up their “star” for several leagues (simultaneously), often hire a personal trainer and run their children ragged all year-round. And then have the gall to get angry when an injury sidelines their child.

Additionally, many place immense pressure on their children to win sports scholarships to high school and college. So when 9-year-olds talk about such things, you know it’s gotten out-of-control.

Political correctness: Opposite coaches running up the score just to humiliate an opponent and make themselves feel superior, we have coaches and leagues that immediately jump to “mercy rules,” turning off scoreboards and telling players not to score when an opponent falls behind by several goals.

Talk about confusing young players. Practice diligently, execute on the field, yet do the opposite of all you’ve learned — simply because you were successful? That is the antithesis to what sports are supposed to teach.

There are, of course, ways to be sporting when beating an opponent. Prolific scorers can be placed on defense or in goal (though cutting their playing time, solely because they are good, is wrong). A classy football team will not pass the ball when up big, but it doesn’t give up. And the game doesn’t end prematurely just because of a lopsided score. To do so would be grossly unfair to both teams.

But we have become a society where “everyone gets a trophy.” Individual and team achievements are whitewashed so as not to hurt the feeling of nonchampions. Everyone and everything must be homogenized, a “spread the wealth” mentality whereby awards are doled out not by merit — by who is best — but by who hasn’t won yet. Far be it for a player to win MVP in two sports, as that is deemed “unfair.” There’s a term for mandating equality: Communism. And all along I thought we beat the Soviets.

The end result is a closet full of dusty trophies, statues with absolutely no meaning.

The longer-term effect is more chilling: A dysfunctional generation, expecting everything yet prepared for nothing. When faced by that thing called The Real World, they respond dismally. America cannot fight a war without bowing to political correctness. Business is suffering as jobs are outsourced to those not expecting entitlements. College graduates, expecting six-figure salaries, find themselves adrift, lost because of an inability to cope with life’s challenges after discovering that the “trophy days” are over.

Sports used to teach children priceless lessons to make them successful in life. How to win graciously. How to lose with one’s chin up, a motivation to work harder to achieve victory the next time. The message that reward only comes with effort and that healthy competition makes us better.

Life is a series of wins and losses, of passing and failing. You pass or fail in school, your job, marriage, as a parent. But those lessons are being sidelined and we are losing the game.

Free of political correctness, asinine coaches and “helicopter” parents hovering over their children, sports, in its purest form, is the best teacher. Teamwork, camaraderie, competition, and the incentive to be the best — these are the values America once embraced and they made us the envy of the world.

Somewhere along the way, we have lost that playbook and if we don’t find it soon, starting with youth sports, we will be watching the rest of the world from the penalty box.

 

The Tyranny That Has Become Youth Sports

No Cheers For Corbett In Alcohol Sting

No Cheers For Corbett In Alcohol Sting

The season has finally arrived!

Memorial Day weekend ushered in the unofficial start of summer when people relax with family and friends, enjoying what little leisure time is left in America.

But Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett made it abundantly clear he wasn’t interested in that season.

For him, it was all about making it Open Season — on Pennsylvanians.

In a move that defies every ounce of common sense for a governor touting the lowest popularity in the nation, Corbett had his state police slip across the border over the weekend to engage in sting operations, targeting Pennsylvanians for the capital crime of buying liquor in Delaware and crossing back into the Keystone State.

And what was the mammoth haul of Tommy’s troopers?

The equivalent of 17 cases of beer, 10 cases of wine, and 15 bottles of liquor.

At least Pennsylvania has no other pressing problems to which its increasingly limited resources should be allocated. Oh, wait. It does. A lot, actually.

That was made readily apparent watching the local news when, immediately after the liquor confiscation story, it was reported that Pennsylvania had the worst, most dangerous bridges in the nation (while Delaware’s were second best).

How can the governor reconcile those things? Despite having historic Republican majorities in both legislative chambers, Corbett has made zero headway fixing our crumbling infrastructure, yet prioritizes undercover operations (which nab three people) buying alcohol in another state. Going out on a limb here, but wouldn’t the substantial resources spent on operations in Delaware be better utilized elsewhere? Like in Pennsylvania?

How much taxpayer money was wasted on logistics, fuel costs, and troopers’ salaries, compared to the miniscule tax Pennsylvania “lost?” The numbers aren’t even in the same ballpark, so what were they doing? Squandering resources just to make a point — whatever that point is?

Try explaining that to the family who loses a loved one to a drunk driver who maybe, just maybe, could have been stopped had the state police been patrolling in-state. Or to those victimized by burglary, assault and numerous other crimes while their police were busy making out-of-state, small-time liquor busts.

On a holiday weekend where there is always an upswing in driving while intoxicated (there were five fatal DUI crashes, according to state police), the governor unleashed his dogs on those simply trying to avoid the whopping 18 percent Johnstown Flood Tax of 1936 (plus the additional sales tax) that Pennsylvania levies on wine and liquor.

Is this his way of strong-arming his liquor privatization plan? A kind of “pass my bill or it’ll be like this until you do” message?

Great, except that his bill wouldn’t keep people from flocking to other states to buy liquor, as Freindly Fire explained in a prior column. No one is a bigger privatization proponent than I, but do it right or not at all. But since neither Corbett’s nor the Legislature’s plan eliminate the Johnstown tax, prices will remain high or, quite likely, further increase, if either proposal passes.

And if Delaware stings aren’t about liquor privatization, then what are they about? And why?

Give Tom Corbett credit for one thing: If he’s trying to attain a single-digit approval rating, he is succeeding better than the Democrats ever dreamed.

Aside from the sheer stupidity of engaging in such an operation, several questions are worth asking:

1. Are Pennsylvania State Police legally permitted to operate in other states? If so, why? A call to the Delaware State Police yielded no information, as two individuals had no knowledge of Pennsylvania’s actions. Which makes sense, since it is not in Delaware’s interest to put a damper on legal Delaware commerce.

2. How is this not a violation on the Interstate Commerce Clause? It should be, but the 21st Amendment has a provision allowing states to regulate alcohol almost any way they want. It should be changed.

3. Since random, empty liquor boxes are used to package alcoholic and non-alcoholic bottles at the checkout counter, do the police have probable cause to search one’s trunk after the border crossing is made? How do the police know that the Grey Goose box doesn’t contain soda and non-alcoholic beer? As long as we’re talking about amendments, the governor and police should read the Fourth one. It’s kind of important.

4. When Corbett’s liquor privatization plan doesn’t pass this month — and it probably won’t — will the number of search and seizures escalate? Bet you a case of Delaware liquor they will.

Corbett continues to rationalize why his Jerry Sandusky investigation took so long. One excuse was that he didn’t have the necessary resources, since as attorney general, he didn’t control the state police — the governor did. Under that rationale, Tom Corbett as governor is, and must be, responsible for all operations of the state police under his command, so the buck stops with him on these heavy-handed liquor stings.

As the backlash grows, it has become yet another reason why next year’s re-election chances looks very sobering for Tom Corbett.

 

No Cheers For Corbett In Alcohol Sting