12 February 2010
Today’s Tabbloid
PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
The Federal Government Is
Bribing States to Create More
Welfare Dependency?!? [Cato at
Liberty]
FEB 11, 2010 09:04P.M.
By Daniel J. Mitchell
If you want to get depressed or angry, the New York Times has an article
celebrating the effort by politicians at all levels of government to lure
more people into the food stamp program. New York City is running ads
in foreign languagues asking people to stick their snouts in the public
trough. The City is even signing up prisoners when they get out of jail.
The state of New York, meanwhile, actually set up quotas for enrolling
new recipients. And on the federal level, there apparently is a program
that gives states “bonuses” for putting more people on the dole. No
wonder one out of every eight Americans is receiving food stamps. By the
way, this is not just the fault of Democrats. The ranking Republican on
the Agriculture Committee is a big defender of the program, in part
because of the sordid pact among urban and rural politicians to support
each other’s handouts. And President George W. Bush’s food stamp
administrator actually had the gall to assert “food stamps is not welfare.”
No wonder the burden of federal spending skyrocketed during the reign
of so-called compassionate conservatism. The correct policy, of course, is
to get the federal government out of the welfare business. If Mayor
Bloomberg thinks it is a “civic duty” to expand food stamps, he should
see whether New York City voters agree with him – and want to foot the
bill.
A decade ago, New York City officials were so reluctant to give out food
stamps, they made people register one day and return the next just to get
an application. The welfare commissioner said the program caused
dependency and the poor were “better off” without it. Now the city urges
the needy to seek aid (in languages from Albanian to Yiddish).
Neighborhood groups recruit clients at churches and grocery stores, with
materials that all but proclaim a civic duty to apply — to “help New York
farmers, grocers, and businesses.” There is even a program on Rikers
Island to enroll inmates leaving the jail. “Applying for food stamps is
easier than ever,” city posters say. …These changes, combined with
soaring unemployment, have pushed enrollment to record highs, with
one in eight Americans now getting aid. “I’ve seen a remarkable shift,”
said Senator Richard G. Lugar, an Indiana Republican and prominent
food stamp supporter. “People now see that it’s necessary to have a
1
strong food stamp program.” …The program has commercial allies, in
farmers and grocery stores, and it got an unexpected boost from
President George W. Bush, whose food stamp administrator, Eric Bost,
proved an ardent supporter. “I assure you, food stamps is not welfare,”
Mr. Bost said in a recent interview. Still, some critics see it as welfare in
disguise and advocate more restraints. …The federal government now
gives bonuses to states that enroll the most eligible people. …In 2008,
the program got an upbeat new name: the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program — SNAP. …Since Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg took
office eight years ago, the rolls have doubled, to 1.6 million people…
Albany made a parallel push to enroll the working poor, setting an
explicit goal for caseload growth. “This is all federal money — it drives
dollars to local economies,” said Russell Sykes, a senior program official.
But Mr. Turner, now a consultant in Milwaukee, warns that the aid
encourages the poor to work less and therefore remain in need. “It’s
going to be very difficult with large swaths of the lower middle class
tasting the fruits of dependency to be weaned from this,” he said.
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
President Palin? [Cato at
Liberty]
FEB 11, 2010 05:39P.M.
By David Boaz
“Take Sarah Palin seriously,” David Broder writes in the Washington
Post. ”In the present mood of the country, Palin is by all odds a threat to
the more uptight Republican aspirants such as Mitt Romney and Tim
Pawlenty — and potentially, to Obama as well.” Palin’s own Captain
Ahab, Andrew Sullivan, wrings his hands that she’s the “leader of the
opposition” and a real threat to be president. Time’s Joe Klein goes even
further: “Is Sarah Palin the favorite to win the Republican nomination
and therefore someone to be taken absolutely seriously? You betcha.”
Yes, well, I’m old enough to remember that Newsweek prepared six
covers for the week of the 1968 election (I was very precocious), and one
of them proclaimed “President-elect George Wallace.” Wasn’t gonna
happen. Nor is this. As for those who compare Palin to Ronald Reagan,
yes, there are some similarities. They both lived in the West, they’re both
“conservative” in some sense, and they were both dismissed by effete
East Coast intellectuals. But I see just a few differences:
1. Reagan served eight years as governor of a very large state; he didn’t
quit after half a term.
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com
2. Reagan had spent a long time developing a real political philosophy,
one that had changed a great deal during his adult life. In his time as
president of the actors’ union, 1947-52, he was known as a liberal, anti-
communist Democrat. A long life of watching the world, paying taxes,
and reading moved him to the libertarian right. Palin couldn’t name any
newspapers she reads. Reagan told Rowland Evans in an interview, “I’ve
always been a voracious reader — I have read the economic views of von
Mises and Hayek, and … Bastiat…. I know about Cobden and Bright in
England — and the elimination of the corn laws and so forth, the great
burst of economy or prosperity for England that followed.” Reagan
thought a lot about what he believed, and his deep understanding of a set
of political principles was perhaps his most notable characteristic when
he emerged on the political stage.
3. Reagan was smart and could articulate his views on public policy. One
of the standard defenses of Palin is “liberals said Reagan was dumb.”
Yes, they did, even after he out-debated Bobby Kennedy in an
internationally televised debate just months after he became governor.
Democratic mandarin Clark Clifford, who didn’t realize that the bank he
chaired was run by actual criminals, famously called Reagan an “amiable
dunce.” But now that Reagan’s hand-written radio commentary scripts
have been published, no one really makes this claim any more. Read
Reagan in His Own Hand, read the commentaries he wrote on yellow
pads while being driven from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara, and ask
yourself: Could Sarah Palin do that?
Sarah Palin can be a dazzling performer. But she’s still capable of saying
that Obama could improve his chances for reelection if he ”played the
war card … decided to declare war on Iran.” Her articulation of political
ideas remains remarkably thin. The Republican bench may be weak, but
I don’t think it’s that weak.
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
The Census and the
Constitution [Cato at Liberty]
FEB 11, 2010 04:45P.M.
By David Boaz
The Washington Post profiles Daniel Weinberg, assistant director of the
Census, who says:
“Since the decennial census is in our Constitution, it is the
most important task a government statistician can undertake.
The census is key to our democratic society by making sure
that our congressional districts are equal in size so that we
have representative democracy. To be involved in something
that is central to our democracy is pretty exciting.”
Good point. The census is indeed in the Constitution, Article I, Section 2.
The Constitution provides that every ten years an enumeration of the
2
12 February 2010
population of each state shall be made in order to allocate members of
the House of Representatives.
Unfortunately, the census has been loaded down with intrusive questions
not authorized in the Constitution and bearing no relation to the
constitutional necessity of reapportionment. This year the Census
Bureau is boasting of “one of the shortest forms in history,” which is all
to the good. Still, it does ask respondents to list their race, which really
should be irrelevant to government. And to tell whether they own their
home or have a mortgage, in order “to administer housing programs and
to inform planning decisions.” (That’s worked out well!) And of course
they need age and sex data, in order to facilitate various government
programs and mandates and to assist “sociologists, economists, and
other researchers who analyze social and economic trends.”
Through the American Community Survey, the Census Bureau continues
to ask Americans many more questions, from whether you’re on food
stamps to how many bathrooms you have. All very interesting to
sociologists and planners, of course, but hardly what Madison
anticipated when he and his colleagues provided for an “actual
enumeration” of the constituents of Congress.
Writing in Slate back in 2000, Tom Palmer complained that the Census
Bureau was selling the census as a kind of Super Lotto: You can’t win if
you don’t play! “The numbers are used to help determine the
distribution of hundreds of billions of dollars in federal and state funds.
We’re talking hospitals, highways, stadiums and school lunch programs.”
Come on! Get your piece of other people’s tax dollars!
In 1990 David Kopel reviewed the Census Bureau’s promise of
confidentiality.
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
Quick Analysis of Tax
Provisions in So-Called “Jobs”
Bill [Americans for Tax Reform]
FEB 11, 2010 04:20P.M.
Language (though not yet a score) is out for the Senate “jobs bill” which
will be considered after the President’s Day recess. The cheesy DC
acronym is the “HIRE Act” (w...
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
Obama Budget’s Tax Hikes on
Families Making Less Than
$250,000 [Americans for Tax
Reform]
FEB 11, 2010 03:44P.M.
On the day that President Obama announced his “agnosticism” about
raising taxes on middle-income families, it seems prudent to go through
his latest budget with a fine-toothed comb. Af...
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
ObamaCare = Litigation
Bonanza [Cato at Liberty]
FEB 11, 2010 02:52P.M.
By Michael F. Cannon
At a recent conference, former Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX) remarked, “The
Democrats don’t have a health care bill. They have an empty shell.” At
the time, I thought the shell would be filled through regulation. But in
today’s Wall Street Journal, the Committee for Justice’s Curt Levey
reminds us it would also be filled through litigation:
By creating new federally enforceable rights and obligations,
layers of complex federal regulations, and dozens of new
programs and agencies—not to mention 50 newfangled
“exchanges”—ObamaCare would guarantee a flood of
litigation. That means more money wasted on attorney fees,
physicians focused on legal rather than medical
considerations, and growing delays in our already-
overburdened courts…
Lawsuits claiming equal protection violations will be limited
only by the human capacity to feel discriminated against…
Liberals who complained about the interference of federal
courts in the Terri Schiavo case may wind up regretting their
push to federalize health care…
Supporters of the legislation favored by the president and
most of his party point to socialized medicine in Europe as
evidence that federalizing health care won’t be the disaster
that many predict. But European nations are not nearly as
litigious as our own. The uniquely American combination of
bureaucrats, trial lawyers, and judges running our health-
care system will prove more costly and deadly than anyone
3
12 February 2010
can imagine.
Levey runs through a long list of issues that will be litigated in the courts
— but he overlooked that there would be First Amendment litigation,
too.
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
The Government Can Monitor
Your Location All Day Every
Day Without Implicating Your
Fourth Amendment Rights
[Cato at Liberty]
FEB 11, 2010 02:50P.M.
By Jim Harper
If you have a mobile phone, that’s the upshot of an argument being put
forward by the government in a case being argued before the Third
Circuit Court of Appeals tomorrow. The case is called In the Matter of
the Application of the United States of America For An Order Directing
A Provider of Electronic Communication Service To Disclose Records to
the Government.
Declan McCullagh reports:
In that case, the Obama administration has argued that
Americans enjoy no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in
their—or at least their cell phones’—whereabouts. U.S.
Department of Justice lawyers say that “a customer’s Fourth
Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company
reveals to the government its own records” that show where a
mobile device placed and received calls.
The government can maintain this position because of the retrograde
“third party doctrine.” That doctrine arose from a pair of cases in the
early 1970s in which the Supreme Court found no Fourth Amendment
problems when the government required service providers to maintain
records about their customers, and later required those service providers
to hand the records over to the government.
I wrote about these cases, and the courts’ misunderstanding of privacy
since 1967’s Katz decision, in an American University Law Review
article titled “Reforming Fourth Amendment Privacy Doctrine“:
These holdings were never right, but they grow more wrong
with each step forward in modern, connected living.
Incredibly deep reservoirs of information are constantly
collected by third-party service providers today. Cellular
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com
telephone networks pinpoint customers’ locations throughout
the day through the movement of their phones. Internet
service providers maintain copies of huge swaths of the
information that crosses their networks, tied to customer
identifiers. Search engines maintain logs of searches that can
be correlated to specific computers and usually the
individuals that use them. Payment systems record each
instance of commerce, and the time and place it occurred.
The totality of these records are very, very revealing of
people’s lives. They are a window onto each individual’s
spiritual nature, feelings, and intellect. They reflect each
American’s beliefs, thoughts, emotions, and sensations. They
ought to be protected, as they are the modern iteration of our
“papers and effects.”
This is a case to watch, as it will help determine whether or not your
digital life is an open book to government investigators.
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
Fisking Gingrich & Goodman on
Health Care Reform [Cato at
Liberty]
FEB 11, 2010 01:42P.M.
By Michael F. Cannon
I much prefer the ideas of Newt Gingrich and John Goodman to those of
President Obama. But their recent oped in the Wall Street Journal
shows why conservatives and Republicans still have a ways to go if they
want to stop getting their clocks cleaned on health care. Here’s a fisk of
the objectionable passages:
• “The current taxation of health insurance…giv[es] lavish
subsidies…” There ain’t no such thing as a “tax subsidy.” Or a
“tax expenditure.” If that’s what you call it when a tax break
reduces federal revenue, don’t be surprised when politicians try to
“reclaim” that “expenditure” (read: increase taxes) and spend it
someplace else.
• “Many health economists conclude that tax relief for
health insurance should be a fixed-dollar amount…” Many
economists also conclude that Medicare’s administrative costs are
low, but that doesn’t make it true, nor does it mean Medicare is a
good idea. If conservatives actually believe in limited government
and they want to improve health care, they should advocate
policies that will help eliminate tax breaks for health care. Targeted
tax “breaks” are merely another example of destructive government
meddling.
• “Employers should be encouraged to provide
4
12 February 2010
employees…” Nyet, comrades. That’s not the government’s job.
Government should stop encouraging anyone to do anything in
health care, unless it’s encouraging people to keep their promises
(read: enforcing contracts) or encouraging producers not to hurt
consumers (read: tort liability).
• “A good model for self-management is the Cash and
Counseling program for the homebound disabled under
Medicaid.” Sure it is — if you want to increase dependence on
government.
• “We should also encourage health plans to
specialize…For example, special-needs plans in Medicare
Advantage actively compete to enroll and cover the
sickest Medicare beneficiaries.” Re encouragement, I refer
my right honourable friends to the answer I gave some moments
ago. And do we really want to hold up Medicare Advantage —
which is even more government-heavy than the Democrats’ health
insurance exchanges — as a model for reform?
• “Don’t cut Medicare.” Really? And you’d prefer dealing with
Medicare’s $80 trillion unfunded liability…how?
• “A viable bridge to Medicare can be built by allowing
employers to obtain individually owned insurance for
their retirees at group rates.” A Bridge To Medicare. Please
let that be the slogan for Gingrich’s presidential primary campaign.
Of course, that bridge would require more regulation.
• “Eliminate junk lawsuits. Last year the president pledged
to consider civil justice reform. We do not need to study
or test medical malpractice any longer.” For all their talk
about limited government and the rule of law, conservatives and
Republicans just can’t seem to stop advocating unconstitutional
federal limits on med mal liability. Maybe they’ve convinced
themselves that all doctors are angels and all trial lawyers are
demons.
• “We can help prevent [health care fraud] by using
responsible approaches such as enhanced coordination of
benefits, third-party liability verification, and electronic
payment.” We will prevent health care fraud when we get the
government out of health care — not before. For a good take on the
silliness of government fraud-prevention efforts, see David
Hyman’s Medicare Meets Mephistopheles.
Whew, this list is longer than I thought it would be. Just two more:
• “Make medical breakthroughs accessible to patients…by
cutting red tape before and during review by the Food
and Drug Administration.” The FDA is constitutionally
incapable of striking the right balance between speed and safety. It
must be eliminated. Getting other reforms right first — reforming
the tax code, reforming Medicare, allowing people to purchase
insurance across state lines — will make eliminating the FDA
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com
easier.
• “The solutions presented here can be the foundation for a
patient-centered system.” The authors must have in mind a
different oped than the one I read.
To emphasize, there’s a lot that Gingrich & Goodman get right. But if
conservatives and Republicans wonder why government already controls
so much of America’s health care sector, and why the Left is so close to
having government takeover the rest, they might consider some of their
own misguided ideas about health care reform.
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
Bernanke’s Testimony [Larry
Kudlow’s Money Politic$]
FEB 11, 2010 10:26A.M.
I’d like to take a brief moment to discuss Fed head Ben Bernanke’s
recently released monetary-exit testimony.
Here’s an initial question: How in the world is Bernanke going to reduce
the Fed’s swollen balance sheet and ultra-easy zero-interest-rate
monetary explosion? How is he going to do it?
And here are some questions with big ramifications: Have financial
markets, including stocks, become totally addicted to the Federal
Reserve’s zero interest rate and huge money build-up? And when the
time finally arrives to implement an exit strategy — whenever that is — is
there going to be a total stock market train wreck as the money stimulus
is reeled in?
Stocks got the jitters as soon as the Bernanke testimony was released.
That may very well be a harbinger of future financial market problems.
This is one of those ominous storm clouds out there that we’ve got to
keep our eyes on. We must consider this potential threat.
The price of gold has jumped nearly 40 percent since late 2008 when the
central bank started pumping up money to the tune of around $1.5
trillion. So far, stock and bond markets have cheered. But what happens
once all that cash is drained from the system? It could be a major market
problem. It may very well be a major economic-recovery problem.
Further complicating matters, if the Fed doesn’t drain the excess cash,
there could be a major inflation problem as well.
5
12 February 2010
FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS
A Time for Less Government?
[Cato at Liberty]
FEB 11, 2010 10:11A.M.
By Doug Bandow
The public is unhappy with government. How could it be otherwise,
given the mess our governors have made? Reports the Washington Post:
Two-thirds of Americans are “dissatisfied” or downright
“angry” about the way the federal government is working,
according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. On
average, the public estimates that 53 cents of every tax dollar
they send to Washington is “wasted.”
Despite the disapproval of government, few Americans say
they know much about the “tea party” movement, which
emerged last year and attracted voters angry at a government
they thought was spending recklessly and overstepping its
constitutional powers. And the new poll shows that the
political standing of former Republican vice presidential
nominee Sarah Palin, who was the keynote speaker last week
at the first National Tea Party Convention, has deteriorated
significantly.
The opening is clear: Public dissatisfaction with how
Washington operates is at its highest level in Post-ABC
polling in more than a decade — since the months after the
Republican-led government shutdown in 1996 — and
negative ratings of the two major parties hover near record
highs.
Surely this is a moment for a true political entrepreneur, someone who
believes in liberty–across the board–willing to challenge Washington’s
bipartisan consensus that government should grow ever bigger and more
expensive. Someone who opposes expensive, and often deadly, social
engineering at home and abroad. Someone willing to simply leave the
American people alone, rather than determined to conscript them into
yet another annoying, intrusive, and expensive national crusade.
Someone willing to back up his or her rhetoric about individual liberty
with action.
Today’s Tabbloid PERSONAL NEWS FOR lgn@limitedgovernmentnetwork.com 12 February 2010

FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG FEEDS

Shocking Quote of the Day [The

Club for Growth]
FEB 11, 2010 09:27A.M.

From Bloomberg News [emphasis mine]: President Barack Obama said

he and his administration have pursued a for the free market, rejecting
corporate criticism of his policies.