Non Essential Government Services

If Congress doesn’t agree on last year’s spending and doesn’t pass a continuing resolution, the government will be forced to “shut down”.   I have to ask myself, “Is that such a bad thing?”

What is a shutdown?  Nobody really knows but we’re told that Social Security checks will still be sent and that the armed forces will still protect us (and about 90% of everyone else on the planet.)  The only thing that we’re told is that the “non essential government services will be closed and those people will be put on administrative leave.”

Since that’s all the information at hand, I’m going to make some observations and suggestions that may be all wet in light of the complete picture, but I think it’s a start when we think of what this might mean.

The first question that comes to mind is, “Will we get back the $105 Billion that Democrats inappropriately snuck into ObamaCare when they passed it?  It was an authorization bill but they made it into an appropriations bill with nobody but the sneaks who did it knowing about it.  I’m not sure in which of the 2,400 pages of the bill the appropriation is, but it’s there and we want the money back!  Pronto!

Am I surprised they did that?  No, not really.  A former pastor of mine said, “We should never be surprised when sinners act like sinners.”  Without trying to equivocate, I just want to paraphrase and say that we should never be surprised when free-spending liberals act like we have all the money in the world and act according to their true nature.

After recovering from the angst of Dems acting like Dems, I have to ask, “If we shut down non essential services, how will that affect our lives?”  If they’re not essential, I have to think that the answer is, “Not much.”

Next I ask, “If we shout down the non essential services, how much will that save?”  Again, I have to think the answer is, “Not much,” since the meaning of “essential” is left to the operating units themselves.  Some how every bureaucrat will deem himself or herself “essential”.

Let’s shut down the government until Democrats start acting like responsible adults and not like the spoiled rich kids that they are.  I don’t think we’ll see any real difference.  The roads will still have potholes and bridges will be crumbling because Congress raided the Highway Trust Fund in years past.

There are dozens of ways that Congress can get us back on the road to fiscal health, not the least of which is to let private people pay for Harry Reid’s Cowboy Poetry Festival.

Let’s take everyone’s ideas and do them all. Assuming, of course that they’re Constitutional.

On, Wisconsin!

If only public sector workers would put in as much effort in their jobs as they have shown in the Wisconsin demonstrations these past few days and weeks.

I congratulate the Wisconsin legislators for splitting the financial bills so they could get some work done.  Granted, it’s the part that the Democrats (or maybe the unions who control the Democrats) didn’t want to pass.  They have stripped the public employees of many – but not all – of their collective bargaining rights.

So now the Dems are saying that democracy was “stolen” from the people.  Forget that the Dems fled the state to avoid the battle.  Forget that the Dem leader made sure that he was too far away to make it back to Madison in time to vote on anything.  Forget that the Dems themselves were trying to hijack the legislative process by making sure that financial bills could not be voted on.  Oh, and forget that it’s OK for Dems to railroad legislation themselves (can you say, “ObamaCare”?)  Nevertheless, it’s the Republicans who were trying to hijack democracy.

I think the Dems are just angry that they were out maneuvered.  They thought they could bring things to a stand-still.  They simply thought wrong.  Now that they they failed, to save face, it’s somebody else’s fault.  Typical.  They don’t want to take responsibility for their actions.  They were AWOL (but still taking their salaries).  They were the ones refusing to negotiate and debate.  Apparently it’s OK with the Democrats if the state goes belly-up.

But let’s not lose sight of the bigger question.  Should public sector workers at any level (federal, state or local) have collective bargaining rights?  It is this writer’s opinion that they definitely should not.  Bargaining means that responsible labor representatives negotiate with responsible management.  The problem is that the so-called responsible management are politicians who are taking campaign donations from the labor unions with whom they are “negotiating”.

This is conflict of interest at the highest level.  Politicians are not negotiating with money for which they are accountable.  They are using your money simply to buy the unions’ votes.  This is how we get bus drivers making over $150,000 in a year.  This is how we get union members having over 90% of their health care costs covered by your tax dollars.  This is how people get upwards of $100,000 a year in pensions (with full health care).  Try finding that for the average worker in the public sector!  In the private sector, management has to deal with shareholders and boards of directors to keep spending in check.  States simply raise taxes to pay for their promises that make the promise makers rich and re-elected.

Yes, the Dems say that there will be repercussions.  They warn of recall elections and “other things” as they “take back democracy” (whatever that means).  I suppose it could mean that they’ll come out of hiding and return to Madison to do what the people elected them to do in the first place, and that’s represent them and shirk their responsibilities.

However, Dems, beware of unintended consequences.  They say a word to the wise is sufficient so I’m probably wasting valuable keystrokes to write this.  Nevertheless, I feel it must be said:  For the ones not suckling off the teat of the nanny state all this may look like progress toward solvency.  I’d not be surprised if any senator put up for a recall vote didn’t get even more votes in favor of keeping the job due to his or her guts and resolve to keep Wisconsin from going bankrupt.

The simple fact is that the federal government and many of the individual states are broke.  You cannot get blood from a turnip.  Very few people can afford 125% tax rates but that’s where we’re heading if we don’t get a handle on spending, and now.

It’s funny, though, that these people seem to forget that if they don’t like what’s happening, they can quit their jobs and go into the public sector.  I don’t recall any of them saying that someone held a gun to their heads and forced them to work for the state.  Maybe they can start their own businesses.  I doubt that will happen because they’re too used to being molly-coddled by the Nanny State.

Face it, folks.  The free ride is about to end.  The unions know it and they’re running scared.  The producers in the state (and that’s just about everyone not on the state payroll) see this as the most humane way out of the jam.

Free Speech Kill Switch

Late last year Congress introduced a bill to allow the President to turn off the Internet when there is a “significant cyber threat”.  The bill died in committee when Congress adjourned.  Lately, the bill has had a resurgence of support.

Interestingly enough, the legislation was resurrected the same day that Egypt killed the Internet in its country to quell protests against Mubarak’s government.  Also interestingly enough, the bill was reintroduced by a Republican, Susan Collins of Maine.  Republicans are the supposed Bastions of Liberty in the face of the raging incrementalism of Socialism that is overtaking our country.

Perhaps what Ross Perot (and others) have said about the mainstream Republicans and the Democrats not having “a dime’s worth of difference” between them is not so far off.  Senator Collins, of course, does not have the Tea Party to answer to as she was last elected in 2008 and won’t be up for re-election until 2014, two years after the Mayan Calendar recycles, so maybe the world will end by then.

According to Senator Collins, it allows “the government to work with the private sector” when the country is faced by cyber terrorism.  Now, let me ask, when has Big Brother ever “worked” with anyone?  In the face of a cyber terror attack will they call committee meetings or create some joint fact finding commission to determine the threat level?  Heavens, no!  It took the Gulf Oil Spill Commission six months to determine that BP (and others) screwed up.  On the contrary, some Internet Czar will have the power to mandate a “temporary” shut down of segments of the Internet on his or her command.

Why is this bad?  Would not our banking and power grid be at risk if there was a true cyber attack?  Probably yes.  However, giving the Government the power to kill electronic communication is not the answer.

If certain sectors need protecting, then they should put in their own protection.  If it’s in the interest of the banking community to have better electronic protection, they should spend some of the bailout money on protecting their systems and networks rather than giving millions of dollars of that money in bonuses to overpaid executives.

Put the banking community on its own subnet that can be segregated from the rest of the Internet.  You know the military is on its own subnet.  There’s no way we could execute any war if Obama or any other President hit the kill switch on the Internet.  Do the same with the power grid and any other segment that needs to be protected.

This is, however, what the bill’s proponents suggest will be the case.  But which human can determine if any part of the Internet is under attack and what to do about it quickly enough?  When computers can send thousands of messages each second, would a person notice before it’s too late?  Would a human know which sectors to shut down or would it be just “safer” to shut down everything while a committee figured out what the problem was?  Put the software to detect attacks where the systems are that might be attacked.

The danger, as I see it, is yet one more step at eroding our Constitutional rights.  Giving anyone the ability to shut down parts of the Internet is, in my opinion an unconstitutional attack on the First Amendment that prohibits the government from “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Shut down the Internet and you cannot send an e-mail to your Congressperson or Senator.  Shut down the Internet and you cannot electronically assemble with your friends or colleagues.   Shut down the Internet and bloggers (I admit this entry is somewhat self-serving) cannot criticize the ability of the Government to shut down the Internet.

Giving anyone in Government the ability to shut down any kind of communications is just “one small step for eroding freedoms, one giant leap for totalitarianism.”

Oh, it will be for our own good.  Simply ignore the fact that there is a technological solution to this technological problem.  Like all good Socialists, the bill’s supporters believe that only the Government can solve this or any other problem.

This is yet one more proof that we’ll never conquer artificial intelligence until we first overcome natural stupidity.

Politics means never having to say you’re sorry

The democrats lost in the last election as we all know.  Will there be a real change of direction?  A story comes to mind from the Bible.  I’m not pushing Christianity here (I have another blog for that) but I’m also not ashamed to admit that I am a Christian.  This story, however, is pertinent for the moment.  Let me give you my version of it.

A man had two sons.  He asked them both to go out and work in the field.  The first said, “Sure, dad,” but then went off and did his own thing anyway.  The second said, “No way, old man,” but after he left, had a change of heart and worked in the field without telling his dad.  The question that was asked is, “Who is the one who did his father’s bidding?”  Obviously it was the one who at first rebelled.

So what does that have to do with the elections?  Maybe nothing.  It all depends on the behavior we’ll see in the next few months.

President Obama said that the problem with these elections is that he didn’t explain his policies and why we should go along with them well enough.  Nancy Pelosi said she has no regrets over these last 4 years that she was in charge of the House.  Harry Reid was simply defiant in his victory speech.  They all essentially told the American people to go shove it.

The American people have said through the ballot box that they think Obama and Congress went too far too quickly. They sent some Tea Party representatives to put some brakes on this runaway train to Socialism and bankruptcy.

If the American people are the father in the parable above, will the defiant Dems actually yield to the will of the people?  The son never went back to his dad (the people) and apologized.  He simply did what he was asked to do.  Will the seemingly complacent Republicans go off on their way irrespective of what they were asked to do?

Time will tell and so will the next election cycle.  Republicans have just under 2 years to show that they are truly listening to the people.  The Democrats have the same time period to show that they actually got the message of the last election.  Obviously with a Democrat-controlled Senate and White House, Republicans will get little of their agenda accomplished if the Democrats remain steadfast, but the American people are not stupid.  Maybe gridlock is good here.

Fool me once, I’ll throw out the Democrats.  Fool me twice and a third party might be the more viable choice.

A Time for …?

Today’s USA Today had a headline that read, “Now what?  Obama, Republicans face choices of compromise or conflict.”  That may be true for Obama but sadly, each time that Republicans have gotten any kind of power in recent times, they took another choice: Cave.

Mainline Republicans want so much to be loved by Democrats and the main stream media that they have been willing to sacrifice values and their political careers to get on their good side.

When will the learn that some people live to hate them?

This new crop of Republicans in congress seem to have heard the message that this election was not an embracing of Republicans but a repudiation of the Obama plan.  The Republicans seem to have heard this but I doubt the President has.

For once the people have had a chance to speak where Obama and Congress were forced to listen, and for many of them, the message was, “Good bye!”

President Obama in his address yesterday essentially said that he lost track of the voters but that we were not smart enough to understand his policies so he should have explained better.  Which pieces of his policies did the voters not understand?

Was it Cap and Trade, which promised to raise energy prices and put coal miners out of work?  This in a time when unemployment is still very high and most families don’t have a lot of extra money to spend on higher energy bills?

Was it treating the Christmas underwear bomber as a criminal which allowed him to “lawyer up” in place of treating him as the terrorist he is?

Was it the give away programs to the labor unions (Harry Reid owes them big time for his re-election)?

Was it the rising debt that will bankrupt our children and grandchildren as it races to $14 Trillion?

Was it the growing government?  During this time of unemployment, the federal payroll continued to grow.

Was it ObamaCare, the unprecedented takeover of the health system?  I don’t think it was just an unfortunate coincidence that the last big Republican take over of the House happened after HillaryCare was soundly rejected by society.

Every one of the problems that these “fixes” were designed to address have  fixes.  Many of the fixes don’t require rampant socialism.

It is doubtful that the new Congress can repeal ObamaCare outright.  Obama still has the veto pen.  They can, however, deny funding for the federal programs and enact legislation that address the real problems without sacrificing liberty and our futures.  If necessary, we can address some of the more rational fixes.

I sincerely hope the new Congress will follow the mandate given to them in this election.  Let’s break with tradition.  It will take some compromise and a lot of conflict.  Let’s not cave this time.  Maybe the Democrats and media won’t like them but “We the People” will.