Democrats defeat Weiner bill, Weiner loudly blames Republicans

For one reason or another, Anthony Weiner was unable to muster enough support in the House today to give 9/11 first responders free health care for life.

It's hard to say exactly why Weiner failed. Obviously no one in Washington gives a damn that we are bankrupt, and, on its face, this bill seems like just the kind of generosity with other peoples' money at which politicians excel.

However, it is not hard to say that, with the full support of his party, Rep. Weiner's bill should have passed. Instead, 22 Democrats chose either to abstain from voting on the measure or to vote against it outright.

Weiner's response? Blame the Republicans. Loudly.



It's at times like these that I like to pretend I'm watching someone else's country self-destruct in (not-so-) slow motion.

America's ruling class

Have you ever wondered why it is that today's politicians, and those that vie for their favor and patronage, seem so much different than the rest of us? It's because they are.

In the American Spectator this month, Angelo Codevilla dissects the origins and manifestations of the growing schism between a vast majority of Americans and the class of self-righteous, self-styled despots that rules over them.

Who are these rulers, and by what right do they rule? How did America change from a place where people could expect to live without bowing to privileged classes to one in which, at best, they might have the chance to climb into them?

First, Codevilla says, it is important to realize that the ruling class is a bipartisan group and

Its first tenet is that "we" are the best and brightest while the rest of Americans are retrograde, racist, and dysfunctional unless properly constrained.

Sound like anyone you know?

Codevilla goes on to explain the extremely negative impact such a world view has on America's economic and social fabric.

By taxing and parceling out more than a third of what Americans produce, through regulations that reach deep into American life, our ruling class is making itself the arbiter of wealth and poverty. While the economic value of anything depends on sellers and buyers agreeing on that value as civil equals in the absence of force, modern government is about nothing if not tampering with civil equality.

[P]icking economic winners and losers redirects the American people's energies to tasks that the political class deems more worthy than what Americans choose for themselves. John Kenneth Galbraith's characterization of America as "private wealth amidst public squalor" (The Affluent Society, 1958) has ever encapsulated our best and brightest's complaint: left to themselves, Americans use land inefficiently in suburbs and exurbs, making it necessary to use energy to transport them to jobs and shopping... Americans think it justice to spend the money they earn to satisfy their private desires even though the ruling class knows that justice lies in improving the community and the planet. The ruling class knows that Americans must learn to live more densely and close to work, that they must drive smaller cars and change their lives to use less energy, that their dietary habits must improve, that they must accept limits in how much medical care they get, that they must divert more of their money to support people, cultural enterprises, and plans for the planet that the ruling class deems worthier...

That is why the ruling class is united and adamant about nothing so much as its right to pronounce definitive, "scientific" judgment on whatever it chooses... Thus when Virginia's attorney general subpoenaed the data by which Professor Michael Mann had concluded, while paid by the state of Virginia, that the earth's temperatures are rising "like a hockey stick" from millennial stability -- a conclusion on which billions of dollars' worth of decisions were made -- to investigate the possibility of fraud, the University of Virginia's faculty senate condemned any inquiry into "scientific endeavor that has satisfied peer review standards" claiming that demands for data "send a chilling message to scientists...and indeed scholars in any discipline." The Washington Post editorialized that the attorney general's demands for data amounted to "an assault on reason." The fact that the "hockey stick" conclusion stands discredited and Mann and associates are on record manipulating peer review, the fact that science-by-secret-data is an oxymoron, the very distinction between truth and error, all matter far less to the ruling class than the distinction between itself and those they rule.

I highly recommend perusing the entire piece at your leisure. It is at once both harrowing and enlightening, and, unfortunately, it seems we are well on our way to achieving the dystopian future these central planners have so long envisioned.

Rumblings of the Big Idea

Naturally, the Governor's narcotized idea machine only decides to stir when I'm at the beach. No matter...the interim report of the Governor's "Commission on Economic Development and Job Creation" has some elements that give me hope that Big Ideas have only been mostly dead during the opening months of the McDonnell administration.

Pushing past the fluff and empire building sections on various tourism, technology and other "funds," we get to the red meat:

Job Creating Tax Reform – In an environment where the competition for jobs and new investment grows more intense every day, Virginia must constantly review its tax policies to maintain its competitive edge and effectively respond to actions taken by other states and countries. [a point we've made repeatedly] Virginia’s current tax structure is burdensome, affects some businesses unevenly and unfairly, while stifling growth, discouraging job creation and perpetuating competitive disadvantages in key industries.

Commission members have identified the BPOL and Machinery and Tools as taxes that are particularly unfair, burdensome and prohibitive to business expansion and job creation and changes to the corporate income tax as an opportunity to potentially stimulate significant economic growth. Working with industry, state and local government stakeholders, the Commission will continue to consider strategies to ensure these burdensome taxes do not stifle economic growth and job creation.

An excellent start. BPOL's roots go back to the War of 1812 and unless I miss my guess, Virginia has long-since repaid its portion of the associated with that conflict. Tertium Quids has been pushing for BPOL repeal for some time and, while the measure has found general favor in the House, the idea manages to die in the Senate, regardless of which party is in the majority. As for the tools tax...

...there was a an effort in the last General Assembly session to do away with this tax. But it ran into the buzzsaw of local government lobbyists and their enablers in the legislature and died a quiet death. With a concerted push, perhaps matters might be different next year (though anytime I read a press release in which the term "local government stakeholders" is used, I cringe. They do indeed hold a stake. Sadly, it's generally held directly over the heart of a sensible idea).

Then there's the corporate income tax. This needs to be ended -- not mended. Done correctly, it could be a huge job creator and give Virginia a formidable competitive edge.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm heading back to the surf.

In which Ezra Klein also thinks you're a racist

For those unfamiliar with the smug and utterly overrated Ezra Klein, here's a link to a cartoon he recently posted on his WaPo blog.

According to Klein, the hilarious picture of a pointy headed white guy wishing for a return to the Constitution "as it was written," which just happened to permit slavery (Get it?), is "worth a thousand words." Thankfully he spared us those words, but no doubt, coming from Klein, they would have been slobberingly obsequious to the centralized authority that he and his progressive buddies worship with such abandon.

For the record though, it's worth noting that our Constitution has been amended 27 times since it was first written and ratified, and for the last 150 years has specifically outlawed involuntary servitude. (A fact which Klein and artist Tom Toles conveniently chose to ignore.)

So why all this sophistry from the Left, as if expecting our government to respect the limits placed on its power by the Constitution as amended is somehow a code for white supremacy?

My guess is that the sputtering outrage of those whose personal and professional relevance is derived solely from suckling at the power teat has a lot more to do with maintaining the flow of milk than it does with any transparent affectations of moral certitude.

F&P Radio: Gun rights, surpluses and Greenpeace

On this edition of F&P Radio...

Nelson Lund, Patrick Henry Professor of Constitutional Law and the Second Amendment at George Mason and member of the Virginia Institute’s Board of Scholars, explains why the latest Supreme Court gun decision should have been 9-0. He tells us why states do not have the right to ignore the Second Amendment in light of the 14th Amendment and discusses the legal grounds on which the Court’s four most liberal justices dissented in the case.

And Scott Lee and I talk about what Greenpeace wants from Ken Cuccinelli. And apparently, Virginia's budget surplus (which does not actually exist) is going many places, but not to the taxpayers, while the Virginia Retirement System remains a huge, unfunded, liability.

Another station to carry Freedom & Prosperity Radio

WHKT AM 1650 in Hampton Roads will being carrying F&P Radio on Sundays from 8-9 A.M.

Freedom & Prosperity Radio is broadcast live each week in the following areas:

* Roanoke and Salem on Sunday nights at 8:00 on WFIR 960 AM
* Charlottesville on Saturdays at 3:00 pm on WCHV 1260 AM and 94.1 FM
* New River Valley and Blacksburg on Saturday mornings at 7:30 and Sunday mornings at 8:00 on WFNR 710 AM
* Martinsville on WMVA 1450 AM at Noon on Sundays
* Waynesboro, Staunton and Lexington on WKCI 970 AM at 1:00 PM on Sundays
* Lynchburg on WLNI 105.9 FM at 7:00 AM and again at 9:00 PM on Sundays -- a full hour in each time slot
* Harrisonburg, WKCY AM 970 and AM 1300 at 1:00 PM on Sundays

The march of freedom, and Scott Lee's dulcet tones, continues...

Bob's biggest jobs stumbling block

I've needled Gov. McDonnell over his jobs agenda, largely for its focus on handing out favors to a select few from the public treasury. But as Dan Mitchell writes, all of these efforts, and more importantly, the private sector's natural resiliency, are in grave peril thanks to the White House:

...what’s happening in Washington gives [businesses] little reason to feel optimistic. A big challenge is that tax rates are going to rise. The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are scheduled to expire as the ball drops in Times Square on New Year’s Eve. This means higher income-tax rates, higher dividend-tax rates, more double-taxation of capital gains and a reinvigorated death tax. Each provision will increase the cost of productive behavior and specifically make it more expensive to provide the capital needed for job creation. …The good news is that the economy is creating some jobs. This is to be expected — the private sector is naturally self-correcting and capable of withstanding lots of bad policy. It takes a lot of missteps in Washington to keep an economy in recession. The bad news is that the United States is gradually becoming a European-style welfare state. This means that we’ll have growth in most years, but it will be tepid growth. It means jobs will be created — but probably not enough to move the unemployment rate from its unacceptably high level. To get truly robust job creation, we need to stop growing government and start getting it out of the way.

There are steps Virginia can take on taxation and regulation to mitigate these looming disasters -- like cutting its own corporate tax rate and taking a hard look at ditching the BPOL tax. But so long as the profoundly anti-market Obama team controls the levers of power, the future for jobs and economic growth in Virginia looks grim indeed.

Boucher's wide lead over Griffith

As dire as matters appear to be for Tom Perriello in the fifth congressional district, they look quite solid for Rick Boucher in the ninth according to SurveyUSA:

Among men, the contest is tied; among women, Boucher leads by 25 points. 1 in 4 Republicans cross over to vote for the Democrat. Independents split. Those with favorable opinions of the Tea Party movement back Griffith 3:1; those with unfavorable opinions of the Tea Party back Boucher 14:1.

Perhaps so. But unlike the Perriello/Hurt poll, which projects a substantial GOP turnout, this one shows a very modest Republican tilt. But even then, House majority leader Morgan Griffith isn't getting much love from self-identified members of his own party. Boucher even claims a third of "conservative" voters in the poll, which is astonishing, considering Boucher's prominent role in the cap and trade bill (but recall, too, that Boucher did vote against Obamacare).

Perhaps even more interesting is that among self-identified members of the tea party movement, Boucher has a 21 percent favorable rating.

I mentioned to a colleague last night that if forced to bet on how many seats would flip in November, I'd put my cash on only one changing partisan hands. We shall see...

Baptists and Bootleggers

A discussion with Bruce Yandle, who popularized the "Baptists and Bootlegger" analogy, on how it applies to a wide array of regulations, not just booze.

Another look at pro-business v. pro-market

James Pethokoukis gets the distinction just right:

...it’s not Washington’s job to be pro-business and make nice with CEOs. That smells of crony capitalism and often just means rewarding big campaign contributors with government favors. The better measure of any given Washington policy is whether it respects markets.

It's not Richmond's job either. But you'll have a devil of a time getting the McDonnell administration and the General Assembly to understand this point.

...while a pro-business agenda may intersect at points with a pro-market one, they are not the same thing. Pro-market public policies make markets function fairer and more efficiently for everyone. They encourage competition and “creative destruction” and entrepreneurial capitalism. Pro-business policies often shift taxpayer money and other government goodies to favored companies, raise barriers to entry and otherwise defend the status quo.

Indeed they do. And one day, perhaps, the local political class will learn this timeless lesson.

Mark Warner's cheek

Attempting to seize on whatever momentum might exist from the enactment of the mammoth financial regulation bill, Mark Warner is emailing the commonwealth to tout his role in its creation.

That's all fine and good. One would expect a politician to do such a thing. But buried deep inside his missive was a very brief mention of what was not done:

The legislation does not address the problems and abuses at the federally supported home loan agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. After we see more signs of stability in the housing markets, Congress must address those challenges – hopefully next year.

Which is nice, considering taxpayers have already poured around $160 billion in the two ailing giants, and the eventual cost could rise as high as $1 trillion.

Which makes Warner's "I don’t want to hear the words 'too big to fail' ever again" line a bit cheeky, if not downright rude.

Cap and trade and the new housing bubble

Wendell Cox and Ron Utt write in the Wall Street Journal that the Kerry-Lieberman "energy" bill would plant the seeds of another destructive housing bubble:

It would do this by providing financial incentives to the federally funded metropolitan planning organizations to shift transportation resources and passengers away from automobiles to public transit and forms of non-motorized transportation such as walking and bicycles. The bill further suggests that these be accomplished through "zoning and other land use regulations" that lead to a more crowded living environment. In turn, these communities of higher population density would be more amenable to forms of transportation common in the decades prior to the invention of the internal combustion engine.

The purpose behind the Senators' attempt to foster archaic living and travel arrangements (often called "smart growth") is the belief that this would lead to lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As it turns out, there is scant evidence to suggest that this would be the consequence of such a strategy, and what evidence there is indicates that the Senators are proposing that Americans trade an empty gesture on the environment for a program that would contribute to restoring house prices to the unaffordable levels reached in 2006–2007.

Good grief...

Ron joined Cato's Jerry Taylor to discuss the Governor's early move to "manage" housing and land use on Freedom & Prosperity Radio.

We talked "smart growth" with Randal O'Toole last September.

And this past weekend, Wendell Cox gave us the scoop on "high speed" rail.

Auction the ABC stores?

It's the idea that gets "the most head nods" from the Governor's restructuring committee, but there are other possibilities, too:

An agency-store model would allow agents of the state to sell liquor.

An "asset monetization" model would allow one company to purchase the assets and revenue stream of the ABC department.

A full-privatization model would allow wine/beer licensees to sell distilled spirits.

Auctions have distinct advantages in that they are fairly efficient at determining a market price. I am interested to know more about the so-called "full privatization model" and what, exactly, that would involve.

According to our study on the possible health effects of moving to a license model, authors Don Boudreaux and Julia Williams found "the data show that control states suffer just as many alcohol-related problems as do license states."

Remember that as this debate moves forward.

Bye-bye Tom?

It's only one poll with a big Republican sample, and it's only July, but if the numbers in the SurveyUSA poll of Virginia's fifth district are remotely indicative of the future, then Tom Perriello may want to start working on his resume. And independent candidate Jeff Clark? He's within the margin of error and not a factor.

And take a look at the "Tea Party Movement" numbers. Despite his tax-hiking past, Hurt earns an 86 percent favorable rating from this segment while Clark polls in the single digits.

Very interesting...

In which the heat finally gets to Jeff Schapiro

In a sign the seersucker has failed him, Jeff Schapiro spins a tale about Jim Webb already running for re-election (of which I do not doubt) against George Allen (about which we will have to wait and see...and perhaps Bob Marshall may have something to say about that). But even that goldmine of good copy might not be enough for our intrepid correspondent:

Could this be the latest sign that Webb is steeling for another contest with Allen, who—despite his aw-shucks, everyman schtick—has been closely aligned with business and industrial interests during a political career that took him to the statehouse and may yet include a shot at the White House?

The Allen for president bandwagon begins its inexorable roll today. Or at least the chance it might begins today, assuming the stars align, the angels sing and every other ambitious Republican pol in Virginia quietly steps out of Allen's way.

His new nickname could be "waffles"

Eric Cantor is asked whether he supports or opposes the Arizona immigration law currently being challenged by the Justice Department (and supported by Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli).

I doubt even Maimonides could make sense of his response:

The problem with wind

The Governor is on a trade mission to Europe and among the items on his agenda, is a meeting with "UK energy ministers to discuss wind energy."

We all know that the administration is a fan of an "all of the above" energy policy (even though it is an invitation to rent seeking) and that the administration has also been repeatedly warned about the iffy, and costly, nature of wind power.

But during his meeting with the British energy czars, I do hope he, or someone in the entourage, asks about the UK's habit of paying wind farmers to turn off their windmills:

...shutting down wind farms is likely to cost the National grid – and ultimately consumers – far more. When wind turbines are turned off, owners are being deprived not only of money for the electricity they would have generated but also lucrative 'green' subsidies for that electricity.

The first successful test shut down of wind farms took place three weeks ago. Scottish Power received £13,000 for closing down two farms for a little over an hour on 30 May at about five in the morning.

The Governor may also ask about the huge subsidies wind firms receive from the government and about the added costs to consumers:

Next month's annual report from Ofgem, the energy regulator, will show that it has risen above £1 billion for the first time, according to analysts at the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF), a green energy think-tank.

It means that renewable energy added an an estimated £13.50 to the average household electricity bill last year. An additional burden fell on industrial users of electricity, who in turn passed on costs to their customers.

I suspect that even while such questions ought to be asked, they won't be, given the administration's embrace of federal stimulus money for a wind project at JMU.

There is a difference

Folks do read this blog...including those at the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Picking up on the point I made here about the very real difference between being pro-business and being pro-market, the editorial page notes:

Economic growth is good and we would not want to live in a world without it. But some of the conservatives who form McDonnell's natural constituency have asked whether the distinction between supporting market economics on the one hand, and supporting specific businesses or sectors on the other, has been lost.

My hope is that it hasn't been lost, but has instead been temporarily misplaced.

That hope is waning. Rather than seeing more items from the McDonnell administration that could genuinely be described as pro-market -- such as sweeping tax reform or fundamental government restructuring, I read instead a stream of press releases about the latest economic development deals involving taxpayer subsidies, goofy "choose Virginia" campaigns, or, far worse, a consciously dishonest narrative about the state's budget "surplus" and the tax increases used to make the books look balanced.

Perhaps some of this will change once the Governor's reform panel comes out with its recommendations, giving those of us who firmly believe in markets and limited government something to embrace.

But we are not going to rely upon the administration to drive change. We're working on our own batch of reform measures for the next Assembly session. More on those efforts in the weeks ahead.

Jobs created and saved, or when Bob met Barack

The Council of Economic Advisers report on the federal stimulus and how many jobs it helped create or save has a rather interesting chart on page 49.

The "Estimated Impact of the ARRA on Employment by State" declared that the stimulus created and/or saved 73,000 jobs in Virginia.

The Governor's "Virginia at Work" paper puts the total number of jobs created at 71,500.

When asked at the press conference about the similarity between the numbers, the Governor's team put it all down to serendipity.

Or the Underpants Gnomes. Take your pick.

Richmond's rail boondoggle

Richmond's business community, which in the recent past resembled a high school clique more than anything else, has focused its attention on a pretty new bauble that it cannot afford -- "high speed" rail. The arguments in favor of spending hundreds of millions of someone else's dollars on the concept are well known: more jobs, less congestion, and finally, a use for the Main Street Station (while never acknowledging that the Station was obsolete the day it was finished in 1901 and as such was soon replaced by Union Station on Broad Street).

But do any of these arguments hold water -- let alone justify the roughly $600 million in improvements required just for tracks in the Richmond area?

Of course not. And if you listen to our interview with transportation expert Wendell Cox about "high speed" rail mania, you'll quickly realize that pouring huge amounts of money we don't have into a rail system we don't need isn't just wrong, it's criminal.