Guarino

Hagan's Nominees

I had a chance to review Kay Hagan's recently announced nominees to various federal posts.  There were two that aroused my interest.

First, Hagan nominated Al Stewart to be U.S. Marshal for the Middle District of North Carolina.  Many of us will recall that Mr. Stewart played a fairly prominent role in the Rhino series written by Jerrry Bledsoe.  My recollection is that Mr. Stewart's input was relied upon to justify action against David Wray and his men.  It appears Senator Hagan has, intentionally or unwittingly, taken sides with respect to the handling of the GPD fiasco with this particular nomination.  (She also nominated W.R. Stafford, who was being considered for the job of chief when Wray was selected).

Second, she nominated Ripley Rand-- the son of Senate Majority Leader Tony Rand-- to be U.S. Attorney.  Hagan once served with Tony Rand as a part of the Senate leadership.  That one should also raise a few eyebrows.

A couple of petitions to sign

Americans for Prosperity has two online petitions.

One asks our state representatives to refrain from raising state income taxes.

The second asks our representatives in Washington to vote against the current conception of health care reform, and to choose a different path instead.

These are worth signing if you agree with the message.

City Council Dialogue: A Fictional Short Play

It is a warm summer night in the Politically Virtuous City.  The scene opens in the council chambers at City Hall, where the City Council is in session.  A politically contentious item is being considered-- an expression of "regret" for an incident that had occurred 30 years ago.  Two council members discuss the issue, and in the process peer into each other's souls:

Councilman Harbour:  My concern with this measure is that we are opening up the city to repeated rounds of litigation and liability.  I am just not sure that it's appropriate for us to be voting on this measure in its present form.

(Councilwoman Yells begins to make chirping noises, and scowls openly before the TV camera.  She tries to disrupt Harbour.) 

Councilman Lobby:  Now, I don't think we should be missing an opportunity here.  Sometimes, we have to take responsibility, and seize the opportunity for some reconciliation.  We have some fine city staff, and I know our city attorney can draft language that can overcome any concerns over liability. 

Councilman Harbour: It's not just a matter of liability, Councilman.  This is simply not a good idea.    I don't think the city should be apologizing when it was the involved parties who were really at fault. This seems to me to be a bogus exercise-- particularly when the city, in practical terms, would assume all the liability, and the parties truly responsible would not.

Councilman Lobby: (With emphasis) Remember! We're not apologizing.  We are regretting.

Councilman Harbour:  And what precisely are we regretting, Councilman?

Councilman Lobby:  Oh, I suppose we are not regretting anything in particular.  We're just regretting.  Don't you understand?

Councilman Harbour: If we are not regretting anything specific, Councilman, then what is the whole point?  Why are we wasting our time?  Why bother with this?

Councilman Lobby:  It is symbolism, Councilman.  We have a large minority population in our city that feels aggrieved over this incident, and that has felt oppressed over the years.  We need to make a symbolic gesture to make them feel like we are apologizing.  Once we get past this debate, then we can return to the business of pushing through development projects, with the full support of their elected representatives.  Remember that I used to oppose this whole thing.  But sometimes, we need to do things that are a bit uncomfortable in order to create a perception of social justice, and to satisfy those who keep agitating on a given issue.  And in the process, we appear enlightened.

(The council chambers erupt in spontaneous applause.  Observers begin to murmur among themselves about how Councilman Lobby has grown.)

Councilman Harbour: Our city can't seem to rid itself of this whole psychology of victimization.  We hold on to our victim status, we embrace it, we relish it.  I think we have better things to do, and I can't believe how much time we are idling away with this discussion.

Councilman Lobby: I don't think you get the point.  Ever since Michael died, I have been trying to keep the lines of communication open with their political community in various ways.  Michael was my point man, but now he is gone.  I stuck with them through the police department mess, and did what I could to keep the city manager in power.  They are not going to give us what we want if we don't support them on their issues.

(A hush falls over the council chambers.  Moments later, the crowd rises to give a standing ovation as the motion passes.)

Tax Increment Financing for New Greensboro Downtown Hotel?

Sam Hieb posted Wednesday regarding a very questionable deal in the works to provide public financing for the downtown hotel that is to be located near the new GCS headquarters.  Of course, these projects are merely being discussed at this point, and we do not know if they will be completed.

I followed all the links in Sam's post, and was unable to convince myself that taxpayers would not be paying for at least part of the initial investment in this hotel.  Other parties have questioned whether Greensboro needs additional hotel space at this time.  But the premise that taxpayers should be footing part of the bill should be anathema to all concerned parties locally.

While there may be some sentiment in favor of restoring this particular part of downtown, that does not mean we should do things that are unwise.  While I am reasonably certain that  some development interests undoubtedly see benefits associated with these projects proceeding, the city simply needs to back off.

Would Abortions Be Covered Under New Public Health Plan?

World Magazine's blog recently reported that a group of 19 pro-life Democrats in the House told Speaker Pelosi they would not support a public option if it covers abortion.  These Dems may be a bit naive, because even if the plan did not cover the awful procedure initially, it could be changed later to to do so.

Meanwhile, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council answers the question as to whether health care reform will force taxpayers to pay for abortion:

The short answer is yes, because there is no explicit provision in the bill to:

• Prevent taxpayer funding of abortions as part of the health care benefit Congress is considering. It is ironic that taxpayer-funded abortions would be considered a "health care benefit" since the baby gets no health care benefit from abortion.

Meanwhile, Newsmax reports that various groups from the religious left are running radio advertisements in support of more socialized medicine.  Once again, we have heard no protests from the usual places regarding the need to maintain a strict wall of separationism.

Update: Perkins shows us that a Senate committee hearing reveals taxpayer funding of abortion is part of the plan:

Cops in Black and White, Part LXXX

Jerry Bledsoe's series in the Rhino continues with a report on the RMA report's discussion of what took place at a critical meeting during June, 2005.  The following is a summary.

Recall that James Hinson had gone public with his allegations; and David Wray called a meeting of his command staff to hear from Scott Sanders and Brian Bissett regarding previous monitoring and investigations.

The RMA report alleged Sanders and Bissett made an assertion that Hinson was connected to an illegal business enterprise.  But that assertion was not made.  Instead, they gave a full account of their previous work. 

RMA also claimed a legitimate business interest between James Hinson and Elton Turnbull, the drug kingpin, was the explanation for the fact that Hinson's phone numbers were found in Turnbull's possession.  That "legitimate business relationship" was the sale of a home Hinson owned to Turnbull. RMA did not give specifics or prove its implied assertion, however, that this was the extent of that relationship; and did not give sufficient mention or weight to other pieces of evidence that raised concern about this relationship between the two men (and the real estate transaction).

RMA falsely asserted that Sanders and Bissett withheld information during the meeting; and that Wray and Randall Brady knew the legitimate explanation for the fact that Hinson's numbers were found in Turnbull's possession.  In fact, the two special intelligence officers presented all necessary information in an exhaustive way.  And RMA could not be certain that Wray and Brady knew the "legitimate explanation" for Hinson's circumstances.  In fact, they could not know that the explanation was legitimate.

RMA suggested the statement by Sanders and Bissett that listeners should "draw their own conclusions" about Hinson and Turnbull was not truthful; and that it was part of a pattern of embellishments and veracity issues on their part.  In fact, Sanders and Bissett were implying that the listener had to make his own judgment.  RMA claimed two men had provided information to Wray with regard to veracity issues concerning these two special intelligence officers, but they had not.

RMA claimed Bissett and Sanders were evasive and "less than truthful" about the "black book" at the meeting.  But they were not, and RMA does not produce any specifics or evidence.  And in fact, no one had asked about a "black book" specifically at the meeting.  It was not clear that the rumors and accusations regarding the "black book" had yet been heard by Wray.  Photo line-ups, however, were discussed at the meeting.  RMA claimed Brady already had the "black book" in his possession at that point, but he did not.  (Of course, the entire "black book" accusation has since been debunked.)

Infrastructure, eh?

The News and Record reports a major enhancement to Greensboro's infrastructure as a result of the Barack Obama/Kay Hagan stimulus package.

Eminent Domain Bill in NC Shot Down

A bill in the NC House was intended to advance an amendment to the state constitution that would prohibit the taking of private property for economic development; and that would require just compensation for any private property taken.  The need for this amendment was highlighted by the Kelo decision of the US Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, Dome reports that it was sent back to committee.

It is incredible that the political class in Raleigh-- and the Democratic majority-- is unable to pass this proposed constitutional amendment that is so plainly warranted.  It is hard to believe there is not an overwhelming interest in protecting private property in North Carolina's state legislature-- particuarly in the wake of the Kelo decision.

ConvergeRight 2009

Tony Wilkins reports about a major event that took place last night at NewBridge Bank Park.  A group of local conservative bloggers got together for a Grasshoppers game; but I don't think there was much baseball-watching:

From left to right: Sam Hieb of Piedmont Publius: Sam Spagnola; Jeff Sykes of A Priori and Conservative NC; Tony Wilkins of Busy Being Born; Beelzebubba; Cheripicker; me; Bubba (Bob Grenier) of Noteworthy; and Keith Brown of Triad Watch.

A good time was had by all.  There was much laughter; and the time flew by as we enjoyed comparing notes, reminiscing past blog interactions, and trading anecdotes. 

It was great to get to meet a couple of folks for the first time; and to see other blog friends once again.  Let's do it again.

And kudos to Jeff Sykes for originating the idea.

Update: Jeff has more.  Also, Keith, Sam Spagnola, Sam Hieb, and Bubba-- who called the group "your local vast right wing conspirators".

Young Conservatives' Anthem

Being a conservative student at Dartmouth College can be a lonely experience.  But a couple of them joined together to produce a YouTube in which they use rap music to express their worldview.

I am not a big fan of rap music, but got a kick out of what they produced:

Health Care Reform: National Democrats Adopting Elements of Failed Massachusetts Model

The great national debate on health care reform continues.

We need to understand some of the key concepts the national Democrats are advancing as part of their plan to increase socialized medicine in the United States.  The plans currently discussed call for an employer mandate to purchase health insurance for employees; a personal mandate for individuals and families to purchase coverage; expanded public insurance options requiring public subsidies; and the establishment of health insurance exchanges or "connectors".

A couple of observers have noted that these same policies were all incorporated into the model adopted by the state of Massachusetts a few years ago.  And that model is failing in some very important ways.

Sally Pipes:

(A) substantial portion of Massachusetts' newly insured still can't afford to purchase even basic medical services, and are effectively no better off than before the law's passage. Meanwhile, government health spending is spiraling out of control, adding to the state's already massive public debt.

The numbers are staggering. In seven of the last eight years, per-capita health spending in Massachusetts has increased faster than the national average, according to Alan Sager, a professor of health policy at Boston University.

Overall health insurance costs in Massachusetts are almost a third higher than the national average, with a basic plan costing almost $17,000 for a typical family of four. Nearly 30 percent of Massachusetts residents report that their medical costs have increased since MassCare's implementation.

It's a similar story for government healthcare spending. Public health insurance expenditures are expected to be up 42 percent, to roughly $595 million, this year compared to 2006.

The centerpiece of Massachusetts' 2006 health reform bill is Commonwealth Care, a government program that provides free and subsidized insurance plans to low- and moderate-income patients. It's spending has doubled in the last two years, jumping from $630 million in 2007 to an estimated $1.3 billion in fiscal year 2009.

Last year, rising costs lead Commonwealth Care officials to approve a 12 percent rate increase, meaning that basic insurance costs will cut even deeper into the incomes of most participating patients...

And employers, now required to contribute to employee coverage or pay a tax penalty, are drowning under ballooning healthcare costs. Indeed, businesses that sponsor high-quality insurance plans have seen annual rate increases of 10 to 15 percent since MassCare's inception. This has made it harder and harder for businesses to stay in the state. And it's made the state less attractive for entrepreneurs and investors.

So what are Massachusetts residents getting for all that money? About 432,000 people previously without insurance are now covered, dropping the state uninsured rate to just 2.6 percent -- the lowest in the nation.

But many of the newly "insured" still can't access medical care. In fact, over the last 12 months, about 10 percent of state residents failed to fill a prescription, missed a payment on a medical bill, or skipped essential medical care.

The reason? As Harvard Medical School professor Dr. David Himmelstein explained, "Many of the policies out there have such huge copayments and deductibles that people can't afford care." In other words, many patients are nominally "insured," but they're spending so much on coverage that they can't afford the most basic medical services.

Indeed, the least expensive policy for a young family of four costs about $9,500 annually. But that family will have to pay a $3,500 deductible before many of their benefits kick in.

Because of these costs, 23 percent of the patient population still relies on emergency room (ER) care for basic medical treatments, the same percentage as before MassCare was implemented in April 2006.

Between 2005 and 2007, the number of ER visits increased seven percent, and total ER costs have gone up 17 percent over the last two years. Most disturbingly, patients on state-subsidized insurance use ER care 14 percent more than the average Bay Stater. Hospital officials have calculated that half of patients visiting the ER could have had their ailments addressed by a regular primary care doctor.

Michael Tanner:

The best estimates suggest that more than 200,000 Massachusetts residents remain uninsured, out of the 670,000 uninsured in 2006. That’s a far cry from the “universal coverage” that was promised when the bill was passed...

New regulation and bureaucracy are limiting consumer choice and adding to costs. A new mandate for prescription-drug coverage was added, and high-deductible policies were restricted. Some Massachusetts residents who were happy with their old insurance policies have had to change their coverage in order to comply with the mandates.

Although much of the burden falls on individual policy-holders, the costs to the taxpayers have also skyrocketed. Despite one tax increase already, the program faces huge deficits in the future. As a result, the state is considering caps on insurance premiums, cuts in reimbursements to providers, and even the possibility of a “global budget” on health-care spending — with its attendant rationing.

The reforms have added a new burden on companies, especially smaller ones, wanting to do business in the state. The Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council cites the Massachusetts health-care regulations and the mandate on companies as its reasons for ranking Massachusetts dead last among the 50 states for business-friendly health-care policies.

A shortage of providers, combined with higher demand, is increasing waiting times to see a physician, especially primary-care providers. The wait for seeing an internist, for example, has nearly doubled since the reforms were implemented.

The state of Massachusetts provides a real-world experience in the United States that demonstrates the schemes being planned by the national Democrats are not going to deliver the outcomes promised. 

Jersey Boys

This past weekend, I had the opportunity to see a touring production of "Jersey Boys" at the performing arts center in Raleigh.  This particular show has been on Broadway for several years.

It chronicles the trajectory of Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons in the various forms the group assumed over the years.  I had particular interest because the young men who started the group had a background very similar to mine.  Valli was born in Newark, NJ; and the entire original group was of Italian descent, with very humble beginnings.

First, the downside.  The play at times was quite vulgar and profane-- to the point of seeming gratuitous.  In fact, it was to such an extent that the theater management felt the need to post warning signs in the lobby to warn North Carolina audiences.  And suffice it to say that the lives of Valli and the other members of the group were not unlike those of many others in the entertainment industry.

But the highlight of the production was the manner in which the music was showcased.  This was unapologetically pop music; but the sense of fun, and an almost poignant sense of nostalgia, literally filled the auditorium.

When I was growing up, I was not necessarily a big fan of this group in particular.  But the music was omnipresent; and received ample play time on the top 40 stations over a period of many years.  I frankly was unaware of how many songs I heard repeatedly as a young person were all the work of this group-- even with Valli's distinctive falsetto voice.  As I heard them all on Sunday (and there were many)  I remember thinking to myself--  I did not know it was the Four Seasons that did that particular song.  The sounds were a big part of the auditory background of our lives when many of us were young.

Counter-Rally to Health Care Protest: Be There

The liberal group MoveOn.org is holding a rally outside the Greensboro office of Senator Kay Hagan to pressure her to support socialized medicine. 

An effort has germinated today to hold a counter-protest for those opposed to socialized medicine.  Jeff Sykes has brought this to our attention.  If you wish to participate, it will be held at 12:00 noon Thursday.  The location is 701 Green Valley Road, Suite 201. 

A website has been set up to provide further details.  It would be great if everyone who is able to attend would do so.

Identity Politics and School Resource Officers

We learn once again in a front-page story, with a large banner headline, that school board vice chairman Amos Quick is advancing the effort to get rid of school resource officers:

Quick said he wants to review the use of police officers in middle schools and middle school athletics.

Quick said there may be ways to provide safe campuses and recreation for students at a reduced cost.

“Our budget this year may need to put classroom instruction and those that provide classroom instruction at a higher priority than those things,” he said.

Perhaps we should question whether this is a well-intentioned effort to reduce expenses; or whether it is yet another manifestation of antipathy toward police in our local African-American political and clerical communities, and the identity politics that reflects.

Maintaining some semblance of order in the public school setting is a very difficult task.  Having SRO's is not sufficient to maintain order and safety--because the schools have problems in these areas even when SRO's are present.  That is a reflection of our society, the inadequacy of the public school model, and the way our local school system operates.

But the presence of SRO's is still needed, and I do not know whether surrogates would be sufficient in fulfilling the role they play.  We need to be extremely wary of the motives of those who are seeking to eliminate SRO's, and the worldview they bring to the debate.

An Open Letter to Obama Invoking the Declaration

Samuel Rohrer, a state legislator from Pennsylvania, penned an open letter to Barack Obama this past Independence Day weekend.  I will not reproduce the whole piece here, but will excerpt heavily.  He invokes the text and spirit of the Declaration of Independence, and compares the President in an oblique manner to King George III:

(N)ow that you are in office, your actions are inspiring fear and distrust...

You know what is happening within the hearts and minds of the average American. That is why state legislatures are offering and passing resolutions, re-affirming the 10th Amendment and state sovereignty issue. That is why the Tea Party movement is growing by the day and is attended by rich and poor alike. That is why you and Congress are hearing from the American public in record numbers on an increasing range of major issues including the bail-out, the stimulus plan, “cap and tax”, and government intrusion into health care...

Mr. President, it is clear by your speech and actions that your oath to the Constitution is not binding to you and, therefore, is a broken oath. On many fronts, so much of significance has happened in such a short time. You (and the Congress) are overriding state sovereignty and encouraging the states into unsustainable programs through Stimulus Funds: this will force them to beg you and the elite in Washington for help when the funding runs out. Your policies are destroying the wealth of hard-working Americans by plunging this nation into inescapable debt to our enemies and by justifying the disastrous printing of trillions in fiat money. What you and the Federal Reserve do not destroy immediately by exploding our debt, will be completely devoured by the ensuing hyper-inflation. What an insidious way for you and Congress to spend what you do not have by robbing it from every hard-working American who has responsibly worked and saved!

You have violated historic contract law by choosing who wins and who loses, while Chrysler and General Motors are eviscerated and turned into ‘Government Motors’. You have thumbed your nose at the ‘Balance of Power’, so carefully conceived and implemented by our Founders, by appointing unaccountable “Czars” to function as your direct emissaries over fundamental areas of public policy, thereby blatantly by-passing the checks and balances of Congressional oversight. You pursue special interest agendas motivated by the faddish science of “Global Warming” or “Climate Change”, or whatever it will be called next. In the ‘cap and tax’ plan, you justify the biggest tax assault on the American people ever conceived. Yet, you boldly assure the American people that it will cost them nothing, since only the “polluters” will pay. But, in the process you will destroy thousands of truly sustainable jobs (in exchange for temporary “green” jobs – like insulating buildings and re-caulking windows). Bringing America to its knees in financial dependence, in energy dependence, and a gutted manufacturing sector is sadly what’s happening...

So Mr. President, these things that I and the American people have come to observe and conclude are bringing this nation to a point closer each day that resembles the circumstances that forced the hearts, the minds and then the hands of our Founders. As we quickly approach the remembering of Independence Day – July 4, 2009, please remember that as you make your choices, so must we. May you and all the American people reread the Declaration of Independence – very carefully. Identify the principles they clearly stated and then apply them to today. Feel the intensity of the letter sent to the King. Understand the careful steps they undertook to make the moral case for freedom and independence in the context of the history of mankind. Note in particular the foundational precepts woven into paragraph two, written as much for the benefit of Americans yet unknown and unborn as it was a message to King George. As the President who holds the highest elected position in both honor and responsibility in this Republic, place yourself in the position of the King, look in the mirror, and then look across this great land at the faces of our great people and listen to their pleas. The King didn’t know for sure all that Declaration Letter would mean for him, but I am certain that he knew he had ignited the will and passion of a freedom-loving people for which only time would prove the outcome.

So it is today. Now, we have the Constitution against which to compare the words and actions of those in public office. The people, Mr. President, are awaking. They are realigning their priorities, purifying their motivations, and galvanizing their wills. Their freedom and their families are what they love and, thankfully, what they will defend. As to what comes next, I cannot say. I do know that another Declaration Letter is not necessary since this country already belongs to us. Our freedom and this republic are already ours. It is the return of freedom they demand. It is nothing less than the adherence to the Constitution and to the oath we have both taken that they demand. We, continuing to carefully note and compare as our Founders did, are also coming to serious and reasoned conclusions. Our path is charted – unknown perhaps as to its ultimate outcome – but certain as to its demand upon us.

Obama/ Chavez Collaboration on Honduras?

AIM:

Tom Hayden, once known as Mr. Jane Fonda because of his marriage to the pro-communist actress, has written a piece for the Talking Points Memo website about "new diplomatic collaboration" between Obama-who swore an oath to represent American interests in foreign affairs-and Chavez, who represents the interests of Iran and the Castro brothers.

The destabilization of Honduras and the attempted forced return of exiled leftist president Manuel "Mel" Zelaya could represent "a new era" of friendly U.S. relations with Chavez and other anti-American governments throughout Latin America, Hayden suggests. 

Cliff Kincaid of AIM also decries the international news media's misreporting of this entire episode; and relates the complaints of native Hondurans regarding the media's misrepresentations.

New Energy Taxes in North Carolina?

Most people are aware that their energy costs are going to go up significantly if Cap 'n Trade is passed in Washington.  But fewer are cognizant that new energy taxes are also being proposed at the state level here in North Carolina. 

All of this seems to put to rest the premise that the Democrats are not raising taxes on working class and middle class Americans.  They are seeking to do so, with gusto.

Americans for Prosperity has set up a website to enable citizens to express their opposition to the plan to raise taxes on electricity 3% - 6.75% in North Carolina.  This increase would affect individual households and small businesses.  Go here to tell your lawmakers to cease and desist.

North Carolina's Plight

Some interesting items have arisen in connection with North Carolina's precarious situation, and the pattern of leadership we have had at the state level:

Item: Our state has been identified as being among a handful across the nation with dire budget situations.  We are getting unfavorable national attention because of the poor manner in which money has been handled at the state level in recent years.

Item: Because of the recalcitrance of state Democratic leaders on charter schools, we may be losing out on some federal monies tied to this objective.  Recall that when some Republican governors were trying to refuse stimulus money, they were being vilified.  But if state Democrats refuse federal money that would conflict with the demands of one of its key interest groups, there is much less outrage.  It is funny how that works.

Item: Carolina Journal reports that North Carolina would lose more than 2,800 jobs if the plan to raise income taxes passed by the state House were to become enacted.

Meanwhile, we have a governor running around saying it does not matter which of our taxes are being increased.  One common underlying theme is the extent to which the state Democrats' allegiance to its education interest groups is distorting what they might ordinarily be doing on behalf of citizens.  But there are other areas in which spending cuts have been minimized to the detriment of the state's long-term interests. 

Since I began blogging, I have noted how some decisions made by North Carolina leaders have placed the state on the same path as that previously taken by declining states elsewhere in the nation.  I am particularly sensitive to this possibility because of the manner in which New York declined when I was growing up there.

It seems they never learn.

Health Care: The Wrong Fixes, and the Right Fixes

More right thinking on health care:

An Insufficient Response to Annexation Abuses in NC

Carolina Politics Online reports on the activities of the North Carolina legislature.  Apparently there is a new bill to reform our annexation law.  But it would require obtaining signatures from 15% of registered voters in the city in order to block annexation of new territory.

If the goal was to erect a nearly insurmountable barrier to challenging annexation grabs made by larger North Carolina cities, the House Finance Committee has found the formula with this particular bill.