Not Bailout, Bankruptcy

Yesterday, the United States House of Representatives voted down the 700 billion dollar financial bailout of financial institutions that are on their way to default.

Regarding this current financial mess, on September 25th I posted on the American Conservative Party website, www.americanconservativeparty.org, that, “There is only one equitable resolution to the current problem, Chapter 11 Bankruptcy.” Frankly, for some time I felt that my opinion must be of no value because it was not validated by others. But, come today I see that Jeffrey A. Miron, a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University had this to say, in part;

“The obvious alternative to a bailout is letting troubled financial institutions declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy means that shareholders typically get wiped out and the creditors own the company.

Bankruptcy does not mean the company disappears; it is just owned by someone new (as has occurred with several airlines). Bankruptcy punishes those who took excessive risks while preserving those aspects of a businesses that remain profitable.”

I feel better now…

Gustav, I see it coming

When the levees failed during Hurricane Katrina, the Corp of Engineers estimated it would take until at least the year 2010 before restoration and improvement would be accomplished. I am watching television, 10:30 A.M. Baton Rouge, as I write and the TV picture shows one canal levee “over-topping.” We have several more hours to go before the winds die down. If the levees should fail again, it will be President Bush to blame by the Democrats. I see it coming.

Conservative? Show them.

There is a modern-day taunt to those that speak with empty words to “walk the talk!” In my age, we would say that one should “put their money where their mouth is.” Using the thought behind these two phrases, I would like to discuss Conservative activism.

We hear the chant repeatedly, “I am a Conservative.” But it begs the question, “Are you walking the talk?” To most, the meaning of conservatism is one of a common sense emotion rather than principled statements like those contained in our U.S. Constitution. In many ways, that’s not all bad and can be illustrated by how we follow our culture in everyday living. Culture is the act of development by education. Education not necessarily “higher education” but, civilization handed down. As a young child, I was constantly reminded by my immigrant parents to “trust your culture.” Not words like that, but an exact quote!

Culture is similar to “averaging” in mathematics. My electric bill goes up and down from month to month. But having lived in my home for such a long period of time, I can predict what my next month’s bill will be. An outcome of averaging. But, what if my electric bill next month has doubled? Quick answer is that I find out why, and attempt to remedy the situation.

We have about 400 years of culture in America. Until recently, our citizens could arise in the morning and know what to expect. Oh yes, unfortunate things happened, and there were social adjustments along the way, even wars, but generally, we are a positive attitude nation and live on the expectation that “the sun will come up tomorrow.” There existed a sort of “cultural average” that we lived with and expected.

However, as I illustrated with my utility bill, Americans have now arisen to find that there has been a “spike” of cultural change in our country during the past twenty years. The problem is that the “vast majority” (my use) recognize the spiked change, don’t like the changes involved, and want to reverse most of them. Still, there will be those that will quickly use my utility bill illustration against any cultural remedy, by stating, “Perhaps the reason your electric bill was so high was that you left the air conditioner at 68 degrees and went off for a month vacation.” In other words, “It’s your entire fault.” If facts reveal that it was indeed my fault in leaving the air conditioner on while away, I accept the responsibility of my action. But what if not, and it had something to do beyond my responsibility. What then? Accept, or fight back?

It is my contention that most reasonably enlightened Americans understand that changes will occur, and that our national cultural average will rise and fall slightly over time, given the nature of averaging. Where the ordinary citizens become enraged and overcome with frustration is in believing that they have been left out of the averaging equation. Frustration and controlled rage are emotions, and can be good motivational drivers to initiate action. But, again, even with an emotional assist, what attempt by direct action do most make to reverse an unwanted change? Unfortunately, not much. Too often the response about inaction is that it is beyond the capacity of the individual.

Not so. If we really believe that conservatism revolves around the individual, then, remedies to unwanted changes also revolve around the individual. However, the rub is too many individuals in today’s society have been “schooled” in the idea that all societal change falls in the “Sacrament of National Government.” I would like, here, to postulate three simple rules of activism, there are many more, that are available to all at the individual level.

1. Written Criticism

Any complaint or criticism, even when made in person, should be evidenced in writing whenever possible. Never phone. Politicians and public servants get real nervous when anything in writing can become part of the record.

2. Identify your accuser

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution says, in part, “…to be confronted with the witness against him;” That concept has real meaning at the individual’s level beyond its normally held judicial use. Let me give you an illustration. About a year ago, I received a notice from my City public works department demanding that I cut the grass on a vacant commercial lot I own. The city ordinances permit vacant lots to have grass higher than what you might expect in a residential neighborhood. Knowing something was fishy; I took a photograph of a yardstick stuck in the grass at my lot, and then went “downtown.” I asked to meet the inspector that issued the notice. The reply was, “Oh that complaint was phoned in by a neighbor. We didn’t inspect it.” “In other words” I replied, after showing the photograph, “your department issued an official notice to cut grass, over the signature of an inspector making a false statement.” Never heard about the matter again!

I simply use this illustration to recommend that any notice you receive over the signature of a public servant, insist that you deal with that person, face-to-face and/or in writing.

3. Make your own donations

In my opinion, one of the greatest community failures in recent history has been in the area of non-profit organizations. If one delves into the controlling management structure of many, they will be found to be managed by corporate type individuals, and not the volunteer type of past. Dollars become important, while mission becomes less important. Do not give to “omnibus” charities. Make your own charitable decisions. If you are pro-life, why would you donate to a United Givers campaign only to have the agency grant funds to an abortion clinic? In one stroke of a decision, you have made a meaningful pro-life difference. And it was done at the local level without any necessity of “permission” by a legislative body.

I can go on, but I will not. You have been kind when you made it this far with me. I thank you. Please remember that common sense actions accomplished by just one individual, when multiplied by others, can make a difference in restoring our “cultural average.”

United nations

With the continued debate about the necessity of the United Nations, especially in times as now with the Russia/Georgia conflict, many cry out to “get the USA out of the UN.” My idea is a bit different. I say that we should move the UN to Central Africa, or Southeast Asia, to assist some developing nation.

There should be a limit

This comment is without regard to party. About a week ago I watched on television Sen. Robert Byrd, WV chair the Senate Committee on Appropriations. Sad. Watching a 91 year old Senator struggle with text obviously written for him by staff. I am old myself, 78. I enjoy the fact that I have been blessed with a keen mind to this date. Yet, I am mindful that my present state will erode over more years.

The Catholic Church has a rule that clerics in leadership must submit their resignations at age 75. Beyond that, they serve at the pleasure of the Pope.

There should be some mechanism that would require the Chairpersons of any congressional committee be subject to a four year limitation of serving as chairman or chairwoman, and be less than 71 years of age at the time of election to head any committee.

What is evident to me over time is that the State of West Virginia is represented in congress by staff. That’s not representative government.

I see this issue as one of the most important to be solved because it masks the underlying problem which is a Congress that has grown “superior to the people.” Congress belongs to all the people. Yes, if West Virginia wants to continue voting in Sen. Byrd, so be it. As an aside though, they do because he is number one in bringing home the “pork.”

If Congress belongs to the people, then it is a given that Congressional committees belong to the people. The Appropriations Committee is one of the most important committees in Congress. The fact that the Senate makes its own rules is within reason, PROVIDED, the rules are reasonable in the eyes of the people, NOT the eyes of senate leaders.

Is a religious cleric any less holy beyond the age of 75? I think not. Probably more so. But the wisdom of limiting a cleric beyond some age in matters of administrative and operational leadership is valid, in my opinion. Sen. Bryd can sit in the Senate and cast his vote for West Virginia until he is 105 years old. But, operating as a Congressional leader for all the people is something different.

Where the rub is in all this, comes from use of staff. Any person growing older becomes slowly attached to a helpmate. The sibling, “Mary,” begins to take “Mama” to the grocery store as “Mama” grows older. At some point, “Mary” tells “Mama,” “Why don’t we go to my store? It’s closer.” “Mama,” says, “Absolutely not. If you will not take me where I want to go, I’ll find someone else to drive me.”

But “Mama” reaches a point in age where her attitude changes. “Mama” is willing to be taken to any grocery store by “Mary” because “Mary” has won out, and “Mama” no longer resists.

At the moment that any Congressional staff becomes superior in importance to a legislator, the people, all the people, have lost representation of that legislator. The legislator becomes a puppet. We have in the instant case, in my opinion, one of the most important Senate committees in Congress indirectly chaired by staff. Sen. Bryd is a puppet.

The rules of the Senate belong to the people because the rules are there to conduct the business of the people. We may joke that Congress is a “club.” But, I agree. It is a club that needs to be broken up and reorganized so that it represents ALL THE PEOPLE.

Two political parties no more.

I believe that we may now have the opportunity to achieve by change the notion that political representation should be a fluid process and not impeded by self-serving personal and political interests. I’m starting to back away from the “term limit” idea as the method to correct the representation injustice. Not because the “term limit” result is bad, but because I believe the desired result can be made elsewhere with less effort, but requiring patience. As Glen Beck, conservative commentator, says on TV each evening, “Here’s how I got there.”

My thought is that in about 8 years, two national election cycles, the Republican and Democrat party will now longer dominate politics. For decades, NBC, CBS, and ABC were the primary source of television news and content. Enter the Cable Network, and each “over the air” network is fighting for survival. People, now given a choice to select TV channels for themselves, no longer walk in TV lockstep. For decades, the print media was the primary source of print news and content. Enter the Internet, and the print media is fighting for survival. People, now given a choice on what to view about news and opinion on the Internet, no longer walk in “print” lockstep.

Today, now that news, content, and opinion, is no longer “filtered” by the national and local media because it can be obtained “where, what, and when” by personal choice, the divergent political views of our voters will become segmented along the same lines as the way the public chooses media has become segmented. And because the voters will be segmented, they now longer can be controlled through media “filtration.” Example. When cable started, one channel was the Food Network. Generally, media was indifferent to this channel because in the Media mind the amount of content they were providing about food in bits and pieces was enough. That’s filtration. Trouble was, the public wanted 24/7 food content.

Here is how, in my opinion, it is going to impact politics soon. Voters are becoming strongly politically segmented because the voter is adhering to the same knowledge pattern “unfiltered.” Means this. Political third parties will no longer assemble prior to national elections, then fall apart after the election. They will no longer be protest parties, but political parties representing the advocacy of the segmented group from which they rose. And like the Food Network, the new parties are not going to fade away.

So, Gallo, “What does all of this have to do with term limits?”

Envision a Congress ten years into the future. I believe you will see a Congress made up of many parties, none of which dominate the legislative landscape. I believe that all the “bad” which we believe can be corrected by term limits, can be corrected by simple legislative action. Not constitutional amendments, but Acts of Congress. So, what should a new political party like the Conservative Party USA of which I am a member advocate at this time? I believe we should advocate new legislative law, because new laws can be passed given the complexion of the future Congress.

My suggestions for new acts of law;

1. Shifting the “pay” of Congress to the district level. Article I, Sect 6., of the U.S. Constitution says, “The senators and representatives shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.” Consequently, this “pay” change is a change of law, not a constitutional amendment.

2. No retention of campaign funds. Elections should be level playing fields. Therefore, residual campaign funds of both the successful and unsuccessful candidates should be transmitted to the United States Treasury for deposit in the “pay” account for the respective election district. A law, not a constitutional amendment.

3. Rotation Of Committee Chairpersons. Article I, Sect. 5., of the U.S. Constitution says, “Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, … The American Conservative Party should move to effect change of the rules of the respective body to provide that the chairmanship of committees is term limited to 4 years.

4. Bills must be germane. We must stop the ability of a legislator to introduce a pet project into a non-germane act in exchange for a vote.

These 4 items, and others that may and should be added, will begin to halt the sense of political superiority of Congress. I believe, with what is my vision of the future Congress, legislators will act to serve the will of the people. What is exciting to me is that it all can be achieved “drop by drop” by a Congress truly made up in membership that mirrors the “real” United States.

How old?

This comment is without regard to party. At this moment I am watching Sen. Robert Byrd, WV chair the Senate Committee on Appropriations. Sad. Watching a 91 year old Senator struggle with text obviously written for him by staff. I am old myself, 78. I enjoy the fact that I have been blessed with a keen mind to this date. Yet, I am mindful that my present state will erode over more years.

The Catholic Church has a rule that clerics in leadership must submit their resignations at age 75. Beyond that, they serve at the pleasure of the Pope.

There should be some mechanism that would require the Chairpersons of any congressional committee be subject to an age limitation of 75 years of age. Beyond that, they must pass a vote of 2/3rds of the entire body on the issue of mental capacity.

What is evident to me over time is that the State of West Virginia is represented in congress by staff. That’s not representative government.

No Funds for the Arts

Government may purchase art, by contract or vendor, and may award art prizes and scholarships. Art is defined as, but not limited to, the written word, painting, video, movie, musical, play, and television production. Government has no authority to use tax funds to function as a patron of the arts. This is best left to the public.

Louisiana Conservative Party

I have been involved in the conservative political movement after leaving the Republican party after 58 years. Why? As I write here in the future, I believe you will easily see the answer. Today I wrote this blog on the American Conservative party website.

I feel somewhat like the founding fathers must have felt after the last day of the constitutional convention in Philadelphia, satisfied, yet a bit apprehensive. Today, I filed the Articles of Incorporation of the Louisiana Conservative Party, Inc. with the Secretary of State and the Parish Clerk of Court. So, Louisiana is now legally in business.

As my state party moves forward, it moves, not as a protest political party, but a party to be built upon the principled law created by our nation’s founding fathers. The unfortunate part is that most citizens today lack the knowledge about our nation’s creation. So, a great deal of the time consumed by the conservative movement will by necessity be in re-educating our fellow citizens about America’s constitutional history. We will not succeed moving our party forward through protest, and we will not move our conservative values forward until minds are educated.

Quite often the remark is made about the success of the American “revolution.” “How could it have happened?” is asked. John Adams is quoted as having addressed the answer, when he said that the revolution was already in the hearts and mind of the colonists. I believe, as I know most of you do, that down deep, America’s people know what is right. It is in their hearts and minds, but they have not had an outlet for expression during the past several decades. It is so evident today with the presidential campaigns. The Republican party moves to the center, hoping to entice the “Conservative Republicans.” On the other hand, the Democratic party moves to the center, hoping to entice the “Blue Dog” conservatives. Everyone wants “middle America.”

Ladies and Gentlemen, our party is the center! It’s easy. America is made of citizens, most all to the center. It is in their hearts and minds. Our job is to get them to have the courage to act through their hearts and minds.

How did “it” all get in our hearts and minds, both now, and in 1776? It was because the intellectual foundation was based on the biblical view of man’s inalienable rights. A natural order “created” by a supreme being, call it what you wish. I call it God.

Mark me delusional…I’m not! But, the conservative movement, and our party, is guaranteed ultimate success because our success already exists in our hearts and minds. We see it being revealed each day as America rebels against the “disorder” in our present political system. It is in disorder because the present system offends the values of America’s “middle.” So, in conclusion, let us not identify our party in juxtaposition to the others. Let us claim the “middle” as ours! We own it!