“Our Hands Are Tied”

Posted on 2009-03-16 by David

Despite rumors to the contrary, this country is still based on the rule of law – especially when the law favors a guy who has a "bonus" in excess of $6 Million dollars coming to him. By now almost everybody has certainly heard about the $165 Million of bonuses being paid to AIG execs. In a discussion on NPR this morning Renée Montagne asked why the government could not cancel the payments considering that they own 80% of AIG through their $170 Billion in bailouts. The answer was that the government can’t just rip up an existing contract because this is a country ruled by law. That is a nice answer that is true on the surface so long as you only give it a passing glance in near total darkness. Just since the beginning of this year Congress has passed a law allowing judges to rewrite the terms of an existing, legal mortgage contract. (I use that example not because it is better or worse than nullifying the payments of bonuses stipulated in a legal employment contract but because it is so similar to what we are saying can’t be done because we are a country ruled by law.)

The question remains, what does all this mean. We do not actually want to become a country where the government can come alter a private, legal agreement anytime they decide it would be a good idea to do so. Let’s see what we can learn from some of the options that have been proposed.

Tear Up the Contracts

If we want to admit that we are not a country that follows our own laws this would be the best course of action. That’s not going to happen because it runs contrary to our sensibilities as a nation. We may break our own laws, but we won’t admit it openly like this. A "bonus" that is guaranteed is no bonus, it’s a salary – one that these executives have proven they don’t deserve. A company that would offer or even accept an employee on such compensation terms should not be receiving a government bailout – in fact it should not even be in business.

Executives Voluntarily Forgo Their "Bonuses"

This would be the morally correct course of action for those who stand to receive their bonuses. This won’t happen because those who will receive the bonuses know that having AIG on their resume for 2008 may make them virtually unemployable for a while if they ever need another job. They also know that AIG is not financially sound even with the government money it has received so they can’t be assured that their current jobs won’t evaporate. They are going to take what they can get legally for as long as they can so that they can ride whatever storms may come their way.

Give Them Another Bailout

This one won’t sound popular on the surface – and it won’t happen either – but I have to throw it in here. This was an early idea of mine. The government should offer AIG another bailout that would be structured like so – The government gives AIG another $135 Million in bailout money on the condition that all those who stand to receive bonuses sign a contract that nullifies their bonuses – thus the company receive the benefit of an extra $300 Million while the taxpayers only foot another $135 Million of the bill. If AIG refuses the offer (which they would) it would prove that they don’t need the money as much as we were told to believe they were – just like the stories on NPR this morning about all the banks who are opting out of the TARP funds because of the "excessive" restrictions that Congress has written into the TARP legislation (plus those who want to opt out, but aren’t sure they can). The fact is that many of the businesses that are taking our government funny money are doing so because it’s being offered more than because they need it. (Why put yourself at a competitive disadvantage if you can stomach the attached strings?) I hope that Congress continues to make these funds more and more restrictive.

Reduce Their Salaries to $1 for 2009

I wish (but doubt) that the nation is not foolish enough to fall for this ploy. This is the most likely course of action because it is the one that AIG has proposed. Most of the people getting these bonuses should not even be employed based on their past performance. Reducing their salaries would be a generous act even if we were to also strip their bonuses. Besides, they may take a salary of $1 for the year, but they will also take a new bonuses next year after our outrage has died down (and they’ll weather our new outrage again if need be). Most of them are receiving bonuses that exceed the annual income of the majority of American households. They can live on the $1 salary comfortably if they want to because of the bonuses that that "punishment" would allow them to take.

Posted in culture, National | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

End of the Session

Posted on 2009-03-13 by David

When the legislative session started in January my representative, Becky Edwards, promised to blog each day of the session. Now that the session has ended I want to thank her for keeping that promise as well as the rest of her efforts to keep her constituents informed of what she was doing to represent us including publishing her votes each day for the last half of the session (every day since she got the vote tracking tool to record her votes – a total of more than 300 votes before yesterday).

I hope that she slept in today as much as she deserved – and then I’d love to see a list of the votes she cast yesterday. (It’s probably a huge list.)

Posted in State | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Senate Session Wrap Up

Posted on 2009-03-12 by David

The legislative process has been compared to sausage making and we are often told that we don’t want to see the process. At the blogger meeting in the Senate President’s office yesterday what we got among all the talk about various bills was a peek at the sausage making process. Personally I found the insight fascinating because what we may be aware of in the process may not be representative of the reality. I think the best thing that I could do with that is to share some of the notes I took at the time – here they are as I wrote them (with links added later):

Before the meeting started I heard a very telling comment between a couple of interns – they said that nobody could possibly have any idea of what actually happens at the State Capital by reading/listening to the news.

Glen Warchol just showed up and the tone of the meeting immediately changed to be more confrontational. He’s complaining about the ethics bill and the rule about legislators turning lobbyist. Specifically we have Senator Stephenson who is a lobbyist by trade. It seems to me that the people have the choice to elect a lobbyist if they choose. Electing someone and then having them become a lobbyist is a different issue.

Look at the Voter Registration bill – SB25

Glen just left – I’m betting that the rest of the meeting will be more congenial from here on out.

The idea of VMT in place of (or addition to) gas tax is not happening now. I had suggested on a comment once that we could use our odometer readings rather than GPS tracking. Sen Killpack (majority leader) made the observation that out of state trips would be taxed by that method.

Ric Cantrell "If citizens abdicate their responsibility there’s nobody to pick up the slack."

Posted in State | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

A False Dichotomy

Posted on 2009-03-11 by David

I have never been a fan of Rush Limbaugh or Governor Huntsman which makes the false dichotomy presented here all the more ironic for me.

Rush Limbaugh told a recent gathering of conservatives that the party needed to return to its conservative roots to start winning again.

But Huntsman has been attracting national attention as a moderate, thanks to his support of climate change and civil unions and condemnation of his party’s lack of alternatives to the Democrat’s federal stimulus package.

"The poll shows a majority of Americans are in line with the governor’s belief that we need solution-oriented leaders," Huntsman spokeswoman Lisa Roskelley said, . . . "the governor feels it’s important to look at the party in a more inclusive way."

The suggestion that the Republican party must be more conservative or more inclusive perpetuates the myth of the single axis political grid. The truth is that Rush represents a certain brand of conservatism and pushing that single brand to be more prominent in the party is what makes the party less inclusive. Whatever disagreements I may have with my governor, Huntsman is absolutely right that we need to focus on finding solution oriented leaders in the GOP. That does not mean that we have to abandon our principles.

To be fair, it is the article and not necessarily the governor that is suggesting that a solution oriented approach is incompatible with an adherance to conservative principles.

Posted in General | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

International Hazing/Initiation

Posted on 2009-03-10 by David

Yesterday there was a very short story on NPR that caught my attention. Apparently a number of Chinese military ships came very close to an unarmed American military ship in international waters. Close was specified to be under 20 feet at one point which is very close in nautical terms. The suggestion by the reporter was that this was a test of the Obama administration by the Chinese government similar to the capture of an American spy plane by the Chinese very early in the Bush administration.

As I heard that the thought came to me that the situation sounds very much like a high school hazing or a fraternity initiation – except that the stakes are much higher. Either the leaders of China are foolishly playing games with their military, or they are making sure of each new administration in case they ever feel the need to becopme belligerent. (Personally I think the safest assumption is to believe the latter option.)

Posted in General | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Federalist Nos. 55 – 56

Posted on 2009-03-09 by David

Federalist No. 55 and Federalist No. 56 explore a subject which has grown increasingly interesting and important to me the more I have studied – that is a consideration of the proper size of the House of Representatives. Here I find, unsurprisingly, that a few assumptions were made which have proven to be critically incorrect.

It will not be thought an extravagant conjecture that the first census will, at the rate of one for every thirty thousand, raise the number of representatives to at least one hundred. . . At the expiration of twenty-five years, according to the computed rate of increase, the number of representatives will amount to two hundred, and of fifty years, to four hundred. This is a number which, I presume, will put an end to all fears arising from the smallness of the body.

I found it ironic that the projections ended at 400 representatives because we now have 435 voting representatives and we can see that with our current population (exceeding 300 Million) that number is decidedly insufficient – not simply because 435 is not enough, but because 435 is not enough for the expanded (and expanding) role that government has come to take in our nation. The problems that have arisen through a House that is too small to be properly representative could have been prevented by including not only a minimum number which a representative could represent (thirty thousand) but also a maximum number they could represent. The range could even be fairly large (say a maximum of  one quarter million active voters per representative – which is over eight times the minimum) to produce a body which could never become fully detached from the people they are meant to represent.

The first wrong assumption was that the ratio would bear some resemblance to the minimum of thirty thousand that had been specified. The second was that we could never have cause for concern with a representative body exceeding four hundred members.

Another wrong assumption is shown in this statement from Federalist No. 56:

It is a sound and important principle that the representative ought to be acquainted with the interests and circumstances of his constituents. But this principle can extend no further than to those circumstances and interests to which the authority and care of the representative relate.

The assumption was that the interests and authority of the representative body in question would remain limited according to the Constitution. Not only does this show a poor assumption but it exposes another avenue for alleviating the problems of our too-small representative body. A reduction in the scope of authority for Congress would also serve to make it possible for a body of 435 to be more faithfully representative of the populous.

A fourth false assumption was:

I am unable to conceive that the people of America, in their present temper, or under any circumstances which can speedily happen, will choose, and every second year repeat the choice of, sixty-five or a hundred men who would be disposed to form and pursue a scheme of tyranny or treachery.

Indeed we live in a time when the people of America choose and repeat the choice of over 400 representatives who consistently pursue some treacherous policies. Whatever changes we do see in the faces of the House it should be noted that attrition takes many more from their seats than being unseated by the vote of the people.

In fairness, our founders were aware of their limitations:

What change of circumstances, time, and a fuller population of our country may produce, requires a prophetic spirit to declare, which makes no part of my pretensions.

They also thought they had addressed the pitfalls before them by allowing for an increase in the number of representatives:

The foresight of the convention has accordingly taken care that the progress of population may be accompanied with a proper increase of the representative branch of the government.

What they missed was that we need to require increases at some point. Whatever their failings of foresight, their conclusion remains true:

a representative for every THIRTY THOUSAND INHABITANTS will render the {inhabitants} both a safe and competent guardian of the interests which will be confided to it.

Today we are in great need to pursue some combination of increasing the size of our representative body or decreasing the scope of authority for that body. There are indications that increasing the size may naturally result in pressures to decrease the authority that rests in the federal government – I would hope that to be the case.

Posted in National | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Loving America

Posted on 2009-03-06 by David

It’s been a long time since I stumbled across something that belongs in my personal perspectives series, but I could not pass this up when someone I’ve long interacted with describes his love for America (which love I share):

I too love America. I love her for the ideals and principles of liberty upon which she was founded. I love her natural and man-made beauties. I love her for the great amount of good she has accomplished and which ordinary free Americans achieve on their own. Perhaps more than anything else, I love her for the hope she inspires in individuals domestically and throughout the world.

The United States of America is the greatest nation on the face of the earth today. It is a grand place, but it is not a perfect place. While it seems vogue in some circles to see only America’s faults, problems, and failures to live up to her stated ideals, I believe America is wonderful and beautiful even when all of these are considered.

And I do believe that it is very wise to consider America’s flaws. But I also feel that it is wrong to make them the central feature of our individual view of America. To do so is to ignore the greater grandeur of the whole picture.

To me, a true American is one that loves this country with his eyes wide open. A true American feels rapture when the U.S. Flag is raised and when he sings the National Anthem, regardless of which political faction is in control at the moment. A true American stands proudly by America when she is in the right and lovingly works to correct her when she strays.

(emphasis added)

I don’t see how any citizen who has taken the time to learn about our nation, whatever their political leanings, can feel differently about our nation – warts and all.

Posted in General, Local | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Predictable Responses

Posted on 2009-03-05 by David

As newspaper Editorial Boards begin to write about SB 208 their positions mirror what I called the tip of the iceberg and what we expected on the day that SB 208 was announced. In fact, one might almost wonder in passing if the editorial in the Standard Examiner was written by the same person who wrote the editorial in the Deseret News. Both dismiss the idea that they oppose this because it cuts into the revenue they get from publishing legal notices and both suggest that a state run website would not treat all legal notices equally. Also, neither editorial mentioned that this website would help city governments and citizens to save money on all the legal notices that they are required to publish. Essentially all their objections boil down to scare tactics as shown by this response to the Standard Examiner editorial.

As I read the Deseret News version I had a thought about an amendment to the bill that would expose the sincerity of the newspapers in their "public service" claim for opposing this. If the bill were amended to stipulate that the legal notices website allow bulk uploads of legal notices from entities such as newspapers (at bulk rates), and also allow a feed or other source for newspapers to print or otherwise republish the notices from that site (if they so choose) then I can see no reason for newspapers to object – besides the revenue competition. If the papers really are not afraid of the competition – if they honestly believe they are opposing this on public service grounds – they should simply offer to post on the state website any legal notices they receive so that their service complies with the new law (assuming it passes).

The Deseret News also provided two claims that need to be debunked.

In addition, as any Web surfer can attest, Web sites are not dependable. They are subject to technical issues, and they don’t make a reliable and enduring archivable record the way newspapers do.

As a long-time web developer I can say that whatever temporary glitches a website may have does not change the fact that web sites can produce reliable and enduring archivable records. In fact, the most reliable archivable records of newspapers are digital. For proof of that simply go look at archive.org. I can pull up old websites of mine that I know no longer exist on any computer where I ever published them. Even if a government site went down it is not likely that it would be lost.

The bill claims it would cost the state nothing. However, Web sites require considerable maintenance and personnel. Even if this new site were to fall under existing state government Web services, it still would cost taxpayers. Newspapers, on the other hand, store and archive data for nothing other than the cost of a legal notice.

This statement completely ignores what was actually said when SB 208 was first unveiled. The site would not cost taxpayers anything not because Sen. Urquhart is ignoring the cost of running a site, but because the site would charge a nominal fee to cover the costs of the website.

I have nothing against the newspapers – sometimes they have useful information – but they have yet to show a solid reason why they deserve a captive market for legal notices. To prove that, I would encourage a removal of the cap on what they can charge for legal notices (this would be even more broad than what they are pushing for in SB 161) if SB 208 is passed.

Posted in State, technology | Tagged , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

D.C. Voting – House vs Senate

Posted on 2009-03-04 by David

Apparently the Senate cloture vote is more newsworthy than the House rules vote on a bill. We have heard on many bills that the cloture vote is the bottleneck or the hurdle that can trip up a bill. In the House the rules vote is the procedural hurdle that must precede the actual vote and can be used to kill or hamper a bill. This is taking place right now with the D.C. Voting Rights Act. I am not particularly a fan of using technicalities, but considering my position on this bill I’m happy to see any delay.

I figure that each passing day makes the bill less enticing for Utah as we draw ever closer to getting our extra seat anyway. In fact, if this bill had still not passed by 2013 and Hatch were still in office I would love to see him reverse position on the bill once Utah were no longer next in line to get the "balancing" extra seat. (I would doubly expect this if the state next in line for a seat leaned Democratic.)

Having studied the issues surrounding this bill there is no doubt that the residents of D.C. have a complaint worth addressing – the only problem is that it must be addressed within the constraints of the law. The only issues that are truly clear cut here are the tax related arguments. The proper resolution for those arguments is not a simple bill but a constitutional amendment to the effect that "The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states and all territories subject to the same federal taxes as the several states."

I don’t claim that the threshold for an amendment is an easy one to climb, but I think that a majority of fair minded people could be brought to support such an amendment along with the requisite supermajorities of both houses of Congress. Problem solved, constitutional objections averted.

Posted in National | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Envision the GOP to Come

Posted on 2009-03-03 by David

In the current discussions regarding the future direction of the GOP as the Republican party seeks to find ways back to leading the nation there are many ideas being suggested. Some of those ideas deserve no consideration, such as abdicating our conservative roots and embracing an expanding government. Other ideas merit serious consideration, such as how we talk about and react to evidence of climate change. Finally there are some ideas which I believe should be embraced by the party quickly to help us build a party culture that will attract the support of reasonable people from across the political landscape. Two such ideas come to mind instantly. One is the need for smaller government. With Democrats in power proposing expansive programs we have already seen out elected Republicans paying lip service to the ideas of smaller government. Some of them might even actually believe what they are saying right now. The second idea that we should embrace without delay is to promote a Humbler Foreign Policy.

This might seem to contradict the longstanding party talking point of having a strong military, but if we stop to look at foreign policy separate from military strength it is easy to see that there is a vast difference between having a big stick and using it excessively.

What, after all, was conservative about George W. Bush’s post-9/11 pledges to "rid the world of evil" and "end tyranny in our world?" Conservatives used to believe that there were limits to the federal government’s capabilities. And yet, today, many of the same people who ridicule "midnight basketball" programs at home support ambitious nation-building projects abroad.

Do we really need new aircraft carriers, fighter planes, and a bigger army to fight men who live in caves, and attack us with box cutters? Why, in an era of trillion-dollar deficits, do we spend more on "defense" than the next 12 nations combined, maintain an empire of over 700 bases in 144 countries, and provide defense welfare for South Korea, Western Europe, and Japan, who are perfectly capable of defending themselves?

Conservatives seem to have forgotten the wisdom of one of their intellectual founders, Russell Kirk, who resisted empire and militarism, and maintained that war had to be a last resort, because it might "make the American president a virtual dictator, diminish the constitutional powers of Congress, contract civil liberties, [and] distort the economy."

(emphasis added)

I would not be one to argue that our military should be reduced in strength or that we should not continually seek to improve our capabilities to match advances in military reality. I would argue that carrying the big stick has led to abuses of our military might and a presidency that has grown alarmingly close to dictatorial in its power. We need to learn the difference between carrying a big stick and owning a big stick. We may have to endure inaccurate accusations of being isolationist but it’s better to be an isolationist than a bully if you must err on one side or the other.

Posted in National | Tagged , , , , | 7 Comments