Category: Guest Authors

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

Philly Archbishop Gives Dire Warning

 

“IRS officials have, of course, confessed that they
inappropriately targeted conservative groups — especially those with
‘tea party’ or ‘patriot’ in their names — for extra scrutiny when they
sought non-profit status. Allegations of abuse or harassment have since
broadened to include groups conducting grassroots projects to ‘make
America a better place to live,’ to promote classes about the U.S.
Constitution or to raise support for Israel.

“However, it now appears the IRS also challenged some individuals
and religious groups that, while defending key elements of their faith
traditions, have criticized projects dear to the current White House,
such as health-care reform, abortion rights and same-sex marriage.”

Terry Mattingly, director, Washington Journalism Center; weekly column, May 22

Let’s begin this week with a simple statement of fact. America’s
Catholic bishops started pressing for adequate health-care coverage for
all of our nation’s people decades before the current administration
took office. In the Christian tradition, basic medical care is a matter
of social justice and human dignity. Even now, even with the financial
and structural flaws that critics believe undermine the 2010 Affordable
Care Act, the bishops continue to share the goal of real health-care
reform and affordable medical care for all Americans.

But health care has now morphed into a religious liberty issue
provoked entirely – and needlessly — by the current White House.
Despite a few small concessions under pressure, the administration
refuses to withdraw or reasonably modify a Health and Human Services
(HHS) contraceptive mandate that violates the moral and religious
convictions of many individuals, private employers and religiously
affiliated and inspired organizations.

Coupled with the White House’s refusal to uphold the 1996 Defense of
Marriage Act, and its astonishing disregard for the unique nature of
religious freedom displayed by its arguments in a 9-0 defeat in the 2012
Hosanna-Tabor Supreme Court decision, the HHS mandate can only
be understood as a form of coercion. Access to inexpensive
contraception is a problem nowhere in the United States. The mandate is
thus an ideological statement; the imposition of a preferential option
for infertility. And if millions of Americans disagree with it on
principle – too bad.

The fraud at the heart of our nation’s “reproductive rights”
vocabulary runs very deep and very high. In his April 26 remarks to the
Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the president never once used
the word “abortion,” despite the ongoing Kermit Gosnell trial in
Philadelphia and despite Planned Parenthood’s massive role in the
abortion industry.

Likewise, as Anthony Esolen recently noted so well,
NARAL Pro-Choice America’s public statement on the conviction of
abortionist Gosnell was a masterpiece of corrupt and misleading
language. Gosnell was found guilty of murdering three infants, but no such mention was made anywhere in the NARAL Pro-Choice America statement.

None of this is finally surprising. Christians concerned for the
rights of unborn children, as well as for their mothers, have dealt with
bias in the media and dishonesty from the nation’s abortion syndicate
for 40 years. But there’s a special lesson in our current situation.
Anyone who thinks that our country’s neuralgic sexuality issues can
somehow be worked out respectfully in the public square in the years
ahead, without a parallel and vigorous defense of religious freedom, had
better think again.

As Mollie Hemingway, Stephen Krason and Wayne Laugesen
have all pointed out, the current IRS scandal – involving IRS targeting
of “conservative” organizations – also has a religious dimension.
Selective IRS pressure on religious individuals and organizations has
drawn very little media attention. Nor should we expect any, any time
soon, for reasons Hemingway
outlines for the Intercollegiate Review. But the latest IRS ugliness is
a hint of the treatment disfavored religious groups may face in the
future, if we sleep through the national discussion of religious liberty
now.

The day when Americans could take the Founders’ understanding of religious freedom as a given is over. We need to wake up.

American Catholics are called to observe a second annual
“Fortnight for Freedom” through July 4. For  information, see
the website of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Hat tip Cathy Craddock

 

Philly Archbishop Gives Dire Warning

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

 

One-for-Four Equals Legitimacy

In my opinion, most sane, mature Americans would not abolish the Constitution. Most certainly they would not fool around with the Bill of Rights—those first 10 precious guarantees of individual freedom.

There are of course attempts to attack one or the other sections of the Bill—most notably the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right of citizens to arm themselves, and the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of religion, speech, the press, assembly…

Minutes after some madman uses a firearm illegally in this country, there is normally a well-organized chorus assembled to sing out the evils of the tool he misused, while excusing his temperament, demeanor, or lack of basic humanity.
And should we ban (or even condemn) a religious movement because of its dogmatically-held beliefs—beliefs that may run counter to pop culture or the trending political bias?

My answer would be to judge the person for his action, regardless of the tool being used or the doctrine espoused. Indeed, Article Three of the Constitution establishes our judiciary and levies the authority to apply the law and to issue punishment.

Seems simple: The courts decide what (if any) crime has been committed and what price must be paid by whom. The government attorney states their case and the accused’s attorney states theirs. Beneath it all is a battle for rights—rights of the accused, rights of the public to be safe in their homes, rights of the individual to hold onto and profess solemnly-held spiritual beliefs.
Thank God (and our Founding Fathers) for that Bill of Rights. And here’s more good news…the expense of hiring a judge, jury, attorneys—that can be paid for from our taxes. Even the accused can be represented by government-funded counsel.

And if all else fails, there’s always the ACLU. How they work can be illustrated by two recent examples.

The ACLU defended religious freedom when they joined with the Council on American-Islamic Relations in 2011 to sue the FBI for allegedly violating the civil rights of Muslims in Los Angeles by hiring an undercover agent to infiltrate and monitor mosques there.

So the Administration (our Administration) excludes mosques from being monitored for terrorist support and encouragement. But they keep a close eye on those fanatical Christians, even though, according to Investor’s Business Daily, independent surveys of American mosques reveal about 80 percent preach violent jihad or pass out violent literature to worshippers. Perhaps the ACLU believes that literature is not quite as violent as the Sermon on the Mount.

The ACLU also is considering defending the right to assemble (I guess) by instituting litigation against the City of Wildwood, New Jersey, which recently passed an ordinance that would ban what they see as indecent dress on their boardwalk—clothing that is worn so loose that undergarments or even bare bottoms are displayed.

It’s comforting to know that the ACLU uses its donations to defend our rights, especially the right to preach violence against innocent law-abiding citizens, and the right to walk about in public with your gochies (or more) exposed.

Does it make anyone else wonder what the hell this outfit thinks is important?

(Jim Vanore is a former newspaper editor, middle school teacher and Philadelphia police officer. The article above is excerpted from his website, Good Writers Block.)

Case For Corbett’s Tax Reform

By Nathan A. Benefield

Pennsylvania’s small business owners face a daunting challenge: How can you invest and expand your business while paying the second highest corporate tax rate in the country?  If you can believe it, combined with the federal tax rate, Pennsylvania businesses pay the second highest tax on their profits in the entire industrialized world.

And the sluggish economy isn’t making things any easier.  The good news is that Governor Corbett has proposed tax reform to alleviate some of this burden and make Pennsylvania more competitive. This reform plan will boost the economy—growing jobs and raising personal income across the state.

A new analysis sponsored by the Commonwealth Foundation and conducted by economists at the Beacon Hill Institute demonstrates exactly how the Governor’s tax reform plan will put Pennsylvania on the path to prosperity. Specifically, the plan examines the Governor’s call for reducing the state’s corporate income tax.

The report finds that if these reforms pass this year, the state would see over one billion dollars in additional business investment by 2018.  More investment means more jobs.  The analysis concludes that more than 1,200 additional private sector jobs would be created in five years as a direct result of these tax reforms.  And as investment grows in future years, job growth would accelerate.

Increased employment and investment also lead to wider benefits for families.  Based on our projections, Pennsylvania’s real disposable income would grow by $460 million as a direct result of business tax reform.

This is a real stimulus.  Businesses would be able to invest more and expand their operations, in turn creating additional tax revenue and more jobs and income for the working Pennsylvanians who have suffered in recent years.

Given these benefits, tax reform is a no-brainer.  That’s why Pennsylvania isn’t alone in pursuing this path.  This year, Louisiana, Nebraska, Kansas, and North Carolina have all considered comprehensive tax reform, with each state taking a slightly different approach.  Moreover, in recent years, other states of varying political persuasion—ranging from Washington to Texas to Ohio—have also taken proactive steps to improve their economies by reducing or eliminating onerous corporate income taxes.

The timing couldn’t be better.  Pennsylvania consistently lags the nation in job and income growth.  Contrary to its nickname, the Keystone State ranks among the 10 worst states for businesses, according to a survey of business leaders by CEO Magazine, and 39th in state competitiveness, according to the Beacon Hill Institute.

Unfortunately, some fail to see the benefits of tax reform and suggest we hold off on cutting tax rates. Due to lower than expected tax revenue collections for the state this year, some lawmakers are calling for higher taxes to “invest” in their own spending priorities.  Others suggest we need to increase tax credit programs—that benefit some businesses, but not all—to make it easier for businesses to compete in Pennsylvania.

If creating jobs is our top priority, these ideas need to be scrapped in favor of broad tax relief.  Tax increases impede economic growth, while tax relief unleashes it.  Ending targeted tax breaks and corporate welfare programs would allow Pennsylvania to lower its tax rate for everyone.  To realize these economic benefits even more quickly, lawmakers in Harrisburg should look to accelerate the Governor’s tax reductions.

At a time of heightened partisan bickering, sensible reforms like this are worth pursuing, especially when the benefits are so clear.  Tax reform will give Pennsylvania a competitive edge over its neighbors while encouraging business investment and job growth.

# # #

Nathan A. Benefield is director of policy analysis with the Commonwealth Foundation (CommonwealthFoundation.org).

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.

Successful Pa. Lobby Day

By Whitey Coyne

The Delco Patriots joined Americans for Prosperity ( AFP ) in a successful Lobby Day in Harrisburg on June 4.  A busload of Delco and King of Prussia Tea party members rallied in Harrisburg for a day of speeches, meetings with  local representatives and a powerful explanation of the “Common Core” educational issue by Dr. Peg Luksik. They were joined by patriots from Butler, Berks, Lehigh and Westmoreland counties.

The Common Core initiative is another effort by the federal government to control something that should remain a state and local responsibility.  In education, one size does not fit all and standards should not be reduced to the lowest common denominator. Local teachers and school boards should be the judge of what is appropriate, not federal bureaucrats.

Other issues discussed included “Pension Reform”, “Paycheck Protection” (No coerced union dues), “Prevailing Wage” and tax cuts for Pennsylvania businesses.

Pennsylvania has the second highest corporate tax rate in the United States at 9.99 percent. This high tax added to the federal and local tax burden  discourages employers from locating in Pennsylvania AND encourages PA businesses to locate in other states or overseas.

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