These are classic discussions published back in August 2005
State Convention
Stop by our booth this Saturday at the Republican Party State Convention. We’d like to visit with you and, if you haven’t signed up yet to help with the campaign, we’d love to welcome you to the team.
It should be a fun day. We’ll elect party leadership, vote on some resolutions, and, after convention, I hear someone is catering a retirement party.
Flat Tax v. Fair Tax
Our federal tax system is a joke. Not a funny one, but a joke nonetheless. Our taxes are much too high, and the complexity of the code begs for mistakes, abuse, and backroom dealings.
Good laws and legal systems are simple and transparent; people readily can know the law, follow the law, and watch how elected officials propose to tamper with the law. By contrast, the mess that is our current tax system creates a grotesque scene where lobbyists and elected officials can cut marginal deals in the tax code without the public having much real opportunity to weigh in. The deals only add to campaign coffers and taxpayers’ burdens. The system must be simplified.
Two tax proposals deserve attention at the federal level – the flat tax and the “fair tax.” Steve Forbes provides a thoughtful discussion on the flat tax, which would impose a 17% tax on personal income and corporate profits.
Another... (read more)
The Rule of Law – Cowardice
Last Monday, I observed that the Rule of Law is challenged by cowardice – politicians ducking tough issues. I wrote, “Think of immigration. Why are we stuck with flawed and dangerous immigration policy? Because Congress is too scared to deal with it.” This is a theme I’ve been pounding on lately in public.
Well, according to Tuesday’s Tribune: “Calling his colleagues in Congress ‘gutless’ for refusing to address immigration reform, [Orrin] Hatch mentioned his sponsorship of the DREAM Act, which allows states to grant in-state tuition to the children of illegal immigrants.”
Okay. So where have the courageous politicians been hanging out the last 30 years? Surely not on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which should have been dealing with immigration.
Immigration policy is seriously flawed. All sides of the issue agree on that. So, why hasn’t the Senate Judiciary Committee addressed immigration reform in a serious manner? Cowardice, I would guess.
Rather than deal with the issue... (read more)
The Rule of Law – Federal Activism
Do you care whether your voice is heard in government? If so, insist that the federal government get itself under control.
The Founders created a federal government of limited authority, leaving most decisions to the local level – where your voice can be heard. Now, though, Congress sees nothing it won’t address – except the issues it is supposed to address.
It’s a beautiful design. We should have 50 laboratories in which to experiment, find best practices, and meet the particular needs of a diverse nation. Utah doesn’t have to be New York, and New York doesn’t have to be Utah.
But Congress simply can’t resist the temptation to control everything. It’s just got to be the super legislature, city council and school board all wrapped into one. Why? Because Congress believes it knows best. It has completely lost discipline.
As I’ve discussed here and here, federal activism robs you of your rights. It... (read more)
The Rule of Law – Judicial Activism
Judges steal your rights when they remove issues from democratic process and the reach of voters. This is serious disenfranchisement. In short, judges should interpret law, not make law. Leave lawmaking to the people we can throw out of office. This is what the Constitution specifies: Congress, not courts, makes laws. Right?
I started my Sutherland Institute speech with a math quiz: what is 2 plus 2? Four. Well, what if you really want it to be 3 or 5? Does it hurt anything if you bend the rules a little? I addressed how, today, we live in a political environment where, increasingly, outcomes are unpredictable. The outcomes are up for grabs. If we support the rule of law, we need to do so consistently. We cannot fall into the trap of making 2 plus 2 equal 3 or 5 as we might desire on a specific issue.
Conservatives dislike... (read more)
The Rule of Law
Last week, I gave the keynote address at the Sutherland Institute’s symposium on the rule of law.
This week, I will post a few entries on the rule of law. Here are some background thoughts for those entries.
The Constitution intends to drive our divisive, complex and plain-ugly issues into the legislative arena for resolution. Other countries lack such a process and settle their differences in the streets with mobs and violence.
What happens in America, when the rule of law is sidestepped and complex issues are not addressed in the proper arena?
This week, I’ll present three problem areas, and I’ll tell you what I would do to uphold the rule of law in the United States Senate. In all three areas, your rights currently are being stolen and destroyed. Those areas are (1) judicial activism (judges completely removing issues from democratic process and the reach of voters), (2) federal activism (Congress removing issues from the real... (read more)
Dare To Be Strong
I’ll respond here to some of the comments left on the last post. When I say I’m going back to D.C. to make a difference, people ask “How?” and “What about the pressure to go along?”
In politics, like life, people are as tough as they choose to be. And it always surprises me that they don’t choose to be stronger. By choosing to be strong on core conservative principles, I add value to the team and make life easier for myself. Politicians who have it the roughest are the ones easiest to sway; that’s where all the pressure goes, because lobbyists and leaders know their chances of getting movement are best with the weakest members. Strong members, on the other hand, get more respect than pressure.
The members I like best (and who are the best) are the ones who know how to plant their feet. A great example of this is Rep. Stuart Adams... (read more)
Real Fights, Slap Fights and the Supreme Court