Telling It Like It Is

THE ENTERPRISE--HOW TO BALANCE STATE BUDGETS & OTHER MISCELLANY

THE ENTERPRISE--HOW TO BALANCE STATE BUDGETS & OTHER MISCELLANY

MY BRAIN IS STILL REELING FROM OUR GOVERNMENT'S ACTIONS ON THE HEALTH CARE TAKEOVER
(See Thomas Sowell's reaction posted at the end of this edition)
Let's take a week to "cool off" and let this all soak in.  But DO NOT LOSE THE ZEAL TO REPLACE CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS THIS COMING NOVEMBER!
The theme for Nov. elections (suggested by a friend) can be ENOUGH!  

REDISTRICTING WILL BE IMPACTED BY 2010 STATE ELECTIONS AND THE CENSUS OUTCOME
In case you don't realize this, 2010 state elections will have a big impact on the REDISTRICTING coming in 2011 following the census.  How districts are set can dramatically impact who gets elected.  Here's a proposal that is too logical to ever be used:  "Districts must be formed by four straight lines and four 90 degree corners.  The resulting rectangle can be any shape, but it must be a rectangle."  That will eliminate a lot of the "gerrymandering" of districts into serpentine shapes to include ...or exclude... certain blocs of voters.

Meanwhile, let's deal with another place where "state actions" can make a difference.  Get your state lawmakers to work on this one!

DID YOU KNOW?  THESE ARE STAGGERING PIECES OF INFORMATION (from WSJ 3/26/2010)
From Bureau of Labor Statistics info:  

From 1998 to 2008 Public employees comp grew 28.6% while private sector comp grew only 19.3%.  If government employees were compensated at the same level as the private sector employees, states and localities would save $339 BILLION per year!   That savings is larger than the combined deficits of for 2010 AND 2011 of every state in America.  Of the 40 states that have a budget deficit, if public employees pay was cut back to the level of private employees, 28 of them would have a balanced budget.  In Ohio alone, some "retired teachers" are working in new public jobs accruing a second public pension.  Some can earn nearly $200,000/year in pension and salaries.

SO, IF YOUR STATE IS IN FINANCIAL TROUBLE, YOUR LEGISLATURE HAS TO PASS ONLY ONE NEW LAW:
REQUIRE ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PAY AND BENEFITS NOT EXCEED THE PRIVATE SECTOR LEVELS ON AN OVERALL BASIS.
Individual exceptions can be made but the overall total for the state must not exceed benchmarked private levels.  Of course the Public Employee Unions will have a fit--but they will if there isn't enough money to pay them too.  A recent study estimated that State Pension Plans are underfunded by $3.2 trillion or $27,000 for every American household.   If they want to pass another law then pass a RIGHT TO WORK LAW which allows people to NOT join Unions.

OHIO SUPREME COURT GETS IT RIGHT--OVERTURNS POLICY TO AWARD WORK TO NON-COMPETITIVE UNION CONTRACTORS
from the Columbus, OH, Dispatch Editorial: Wrongheaded Policy [my emphasis added]
    "Commissioners' insistence on steering work to unions costs time, money"  Saturday,  March 27, 2010 2:51 AM
    "The Ohio Supreme Court reached a conclusion on Thursday that has been obvious since Day One: The Franklin County commissioners were wrong to throw out, with shaky reasoning, the low bidders on various major construction projects under their supervision. The high court didn't say this, but the contract-bidding policy that commissioners obstinately have followed since 2006, championed first by then-Commissioner Mary Jo Kilroy, was a means to steer contracts to union shops, with scant regard for cost, quality and fairness."  ...
    ..."The commissioners were embarrassed by their application of the policy in 2008: They hired a union plumbing company, Pennsylvania-based W.G. Tomko, to work on Huntington Park, over Ohio-based TP Mechanical, which bid $215,000 lower. TP had four prevailing-wage findings in 2005, because it made payroll errors amounting to $4,000 on a job for which the total payroll was $5.3 million. What knocked the company out of the running was a clerical error for $160 that the company settled with the worker.
    "Later, the company chosen by the commissioners, Tomko, was found to have major safety violations in its past, which led to a worker's death, and to have denied pension payments to an employee who was serving in Iraq. Its owner served time in prison for tax evasion and was accused of stealing from a school district. If that wasn't enough, the company made a mistake in its ballpark work that risked undermining part of the structure and caused nearly $200,000 in damages."...

[Ed. note:  Mary Jo Kilroy was elected to the US House from OH in 2008 in a narrow recount victory over Steve Stivers--a much stronger candidate.  Kilroy was known among many in Columbus as the worst commissioner in the last decade, but out-of-state "special interests" money funded her victory.  Stivers is running against her again in 2010 and I am supporting him and hope he wins this time.]

ANOTHER DARK HORSE POSSIBLE FOR 2012
John Thune, Senator, South Dakota.  I know little about him but it's another new face on the radar screen.  First he has to win reelection to the Senate to prove his appeal beyond any doubt.

MARKETERS EMPLOY TO UNDERSTAND WHY SHOPPERS BEHAVE AS THEY DO
Biometrics, emotional quotients, neuro-marketing--it's a brave new world we are living in.  Marketers have known for years that the emotional response of consumer to colors, shapes, words and brand icons are very important in shopping decisions.  Quantifying this knowledge is much harder.  Consumers must be "instrumented" to monitor biological changes to different stimuli. Thus far, it's not a precise science, just as polygraph tests are not infallible either.  But when a consumers measured biological indicators all move in a "favorable direction" at once, that indefinable appeal is one step closer to being defined.  Someone once said, "I can't define beauty but I know it when I see it."  Another person said, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."  Both are right.  Marketers will pull their hair out before they get all these consumers to line up like magnetic poles--but they won't quit trying.  The stakes are just too high.

RETIREMENT--IS IT A BAD IDEA?  YES, SAY MANY.
This is a teaser.  I just finished reading most of a new book manuscript, not yet on the market, in which the author takes the position that we "need to work."  He just defines "work" as a multi-faceted, tiered activity.  His premise is that most people would be happier--and live longer--if they worked 'til they dropped.  More as the book comes into being.  It will be a good one.

TERM LIMITS--AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME
While working for life may be a good idea, the "career politician" who is still holding down a House or Senate seat after 30 years, as he or she approaches age 80 is a very bad thing for America.  First of all, they inevitably become power brokers and power hungry.  Second, they lose all touch with real people and real life.  Third, no matter how good their health, their vitality is less than it was a decade or two ago.  Finally, they dominate the powerful committee chairs in Congress to the detriment of everyone except themselves and their crony buddies.  It is time for the Federal government to do what it did to the Presidency:  establish term limits for Senators and Congressional Representatives.  How long?  3 terms: 18 years if plenty for a Senator, and 6-8 terms: 12-16 years for a member of the house.  Add a minimum of four years "gap" before they can either "lobby"--or run for another congressional office.  That's a good start.

MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE IN COMPANIES--AND IN SOCIAL SECURITY
It used to be 65, but in today's world, that's probably too young.  Age 70 might be better--for some, that's too old, and for some, that's too young, but there is always "early retirement" starting at age 64.  Full Social Security should start at age 70--and that should be applied to everyone age 50 or younger starting right now.  Those between 50 and 67 (the current retirement age for younger people) should get their retirement age stepped up by 6 months every year until everyone is at age 70 retirement.  Medicare presents a different problem. It is currently massively underfunded.  Even IF the waste were driven down (it will never be driven out--it's a big government program--get real) that won't solve the problem.  Raising the qualifying age will set off a firestorm of protest.  (Lowering it is worse.)  The only answer seems to be "stepping into it" actuarially.  Join Medicare younger, and pay higher premium adders (your choice).  Make more money and pay higher premium adders (because you can afford to pay them!)  Remove the earnings ceiling entirely and pay 2.9 and then 3.8% on everything earned, and that will start to close the deficit gap.  Unpleasant?  Absolutely.  Unavoidable?  Definitely.  Who has the guts to deal with these issues?

CAN SMALL THORIUM REACTORS REPLACE CONVENTIONAL NUCLEAR PLANTS FOR POWER GENERATION?
If you are a science and energy "junkie," open the attached file and read a while. 


I HAVE READ THAT THERE IS PLENTY OF OIL UNDER THE USA IF WE WILL JUST DRILL, EXPLORE, ETC.
But everyone has the NIMBY objection (No In My Back Yard).  Time to push for a higher degree of energy independence  before oil goes no its next roller coaster ride past $100/bbl.   A lot of it is up north in Alaska.  Let's designate Sarah Palin to go work that out.  Then I won't have to see her on TV all the time.  She's getting old--already.

WATER AND ENERGY WILL BE THE ULTIMATE STRATEGIC RESOURCES AND WEAPONS
With enough energy you can do desalination but it take a LOT of energy.  We need to work on both of those resources, while shoring up our borders and our crumbling infrastructure.  Instead of sending $400 million to Ohio to waste on a 3C (Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati) train that is NOT FAST (avg. 39 mph) that solves nothing and will cost us $20 million a year in subsidies to keep operating--how about spending that money on something sensible--or NOT spending it at all (we don't have it!)  The  subsidy per "projected ridership" (which few people believe) will be equal to the fare the riders are paying--but Ohio taxpayers will subsidize the train that takes longer to get from Cleveland to Cinci than a car (or a bus?) on I-71.  Stupid, stupid, stupid.

WE NEED A SECURE NATIONAL ID CARD
Immigrants, air travelers, drivers, voters, everyone needs a secure, reliable ID.  Privacy zealots resist the idea, but there is no better substitute.  There are many technological ways to do it, and none are absolutely foolproof, but our current system is NO system at all.  This ID needs to be the centerpiece of both immigration and homeland security efforts.  Driver's license agencies already exist that can implement the new ID system with only "modest" new equipment installations.  The challenge is to require the right ID to get one.  Maybe a better place to do it is at the Post Office.  It needs new revenue producing work.  Getting a secure ID should be a process like getting a passport.

IF WE CAN'T AFFORD NASA TO GO INTO SPACE, THEN LICENSE PRIVATE INDUSTRY
But one big question:  who will insure it?  Maybe nobody.  Maybe that's OK.  Ride at your own risk.  It's already starting.  Time to put some safety regs in place and license operators, pilots, etc.  There is likely big money--and big risk--in it.  Someone will do it--either here or in China.

OK, THAT'S ENOUGH.  HERE'S A THOUGHT, AND TWO CLOSING PIECES ON THE RECENT POLITICAL CHICANERY THAT PASSES FOR LEGISLATIVE PROCESSES

A NEW ERA OF GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION WILL REQUIRE A WHOLE NEW SET OF STRATEGIES FOR AMERICANS
How to manage our lives, our finances, our investment and our personal affairs will test American ingenuity to the maximum.

BEST, JOHN
===================
This was copied from comments on an article written in the Washington Examiner and is too good not to share.
"The House is passing a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he does not understand it,  passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, but exempts themselves from it, to be signed by a President who hasn't read it either and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese and financed by a country that is broke."

Health-care bill is beginning of the end
Wednesday,  March 24, 2010 2:48 AM
By Thomas Sowell
With the passage of legislation allowing the federal government to take control of our medical-care system, a turning point has been reached in the dismantling  of the values and institutions of America.

Even the massive transfer of crucial decisions from millions of doctors and patients to Washington bureaucrats and panels does not measure the impact of this largely unread and certainly unscrutinized legislation.

If the current legislation does not entail the transmission of all our individual medical records to Washington, it will take only an administrative regulation or, at most, an executive order of the president to do that.

With politicians now having not only access to our most confidential records and having the power of granting or withholding medical care needed to sustain ourselves or our loved ones, how many people will be bold enough to criticize our public servants, who will in fact have become our public masters?

Despite whatever "firewalls" or "lockboxes" there may be to shield our medical records from prying political eyes, nothing is as inevitable as leaks in Washington. Does anyone still remember the hundreds of confidential FBI files that were "accidentally" delivered to the White House during Bill Clinton's administration?

Even before that, J. Edgar Hoover's extensive confidential FBI files on numerous Washington power holders made him someone who could not be fired by any president of the United States, much less by any attorney general, who was nominally his boss.

The corrupt manner in which this massive legislation was rammed through Congress, without any of the committee hearings or extended debates that most landmark legislation has had, has provided a roadmap for pushing through more such sweeping legislation in utter defiance of what the public wants.

Too many critics of the Obama administration have assumed that its arrogant disregard of the voting public will spell political suicide for congressional Democrats and for the president himself. But that is far from certain.

True, President Barack Obama's approval numbers in the polls have fallen below 50 percent, and those of Congress are down around 10 percent. But nobody votes for Congress as a whole, and the president will not be on the ballot until 2012.

They say that, in politics, overnight is a lifetime. Just last month, it was said that the election of Scott Brown to the Senate from Massachusetts doomed the health-care bill. Now some of the same people are saying that passing the health-care bill will doom the administration and the Democrats' control of Congress. As an old song said, "It ain't necessarily so."

The voters will have had no experience with the actual, concrete effect of the government takeover of medical care at the time of either the 2010 congressional  elections or the 2012 presidential elections. All they will have will be conflicting rhetoric - and you can depend on the mainstream media to go along with the rhetoric of those who passed this medical-care bill.

The ruthless and corrupt way this bill was forced through Congress on a party-line vote, and in defiance of public opinion, provides a road map for how other "historic" changes can be imposed by Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

What will it matter if Obama's approval rating is below 50 percent among the voting public, if he can ram through new legislation to create millions of new voters by granting citizenship to illegal immigrants? That can be enough to make him a two-term president, who can appoint enough Supreme Court justices to rubber-stamp further extensions of his power.

When all these new citizens are rounded up on Election Day, that may be enough to salvage the Democrats' control of Congress, as well.

The last opportunity that current American citizens may have to determine who will control Congress may well be the election in November of this year. Off-year elections don't usually bring out as many voters as presidential election years. But the 2010 election may be the last chance to halt the dismantling of America. It can be the point of no return.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace in Stanford, Calif.

-----------------------------------------------------------
 "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world: indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."   Margaret Mead
-----------------------------------------------------------
John L. Mariotti, President & CEO, The Enterprise Group, Phone 614-840-0959  http://www.mariotti.net   http://mariotti.blogs.com/my_weblog/
------------------------------------------------------------

THE ENTERPRISE--WHAT'S WRONG WITH THESE PICTURES?

THE ENTERPRISE--WHAT'S WRONG WITH THESE PICTURES?

I AM SITTING AWAITING WORD THAT THE PRESIDENT AND DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS ARE ABOUT TO PASS A HUGE BILL THAT THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS DO NOT WANT.
I only hope that majority remembers how much these people considered their wishes and opinions.  Find out who voted against it.  Support them.  Find out who voted for it and support an opposing candidate.  The American people's first chance to really be heard is Nov. 2, 2010.  Start the campaign now to make sure that "We the people" are heard, and our influence is felt.

A PRESIDENT THAT CANNOT AND WILL NOT ANSWER STRAIGHT MEDIA QUESTIONS
Bret Baier of FOX News attempted to interview President Obama.  It was deplorable.  No matter what straightforward question Baier asked, Obama answered something else.  In the brief snippets I saw of the so-called interview it was Baier asking a reasonable question, and instead of answering it, Obama on at least two occasions told Baier "something else I knew" (or don't know), or alternatively, said 'I will know..." which directly says that he doesn't know NOW!.  His so-called transparency is such a charade that it's no wonder the man has to use a teleprompter to make his speeches.  Otherwise they would be meandering lectures--which is what his answers are to any live questions--and there is seldom an answer anywhere in the lecture. 

A WONDERFULLY WRITTEN EXPOSE'
Rather than me writing more, I have pasted Peggy Noonan's brilliant and alarming column from this Saturday's WSJ.  Remember when Richard Nixon said "I am not a crook?"  Recall George H. W. Bush saying "Read my lips, no new taxes?"  Certainly we all remember President Bill Clinton attempting to "parse the truth " in his comments on "..it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is', is..."  We knew, in all those cases that the only reasons for those statements were to avoid facing the likelihood that they were not true.  Now, our President, the golden tongued one, without his teleprompter, is exposed--painfully--by a persistent and artful journalist.

MARCH 20, 2010
Now for the Slaughter—On the road to Demon Pass, our leader encounters a Baier.

By PEGGY NOONAN

Excuse me, but it is embarrassing—really, embarrassing to our country—that the president of the United States has again put off a state visit to Australia and Indonesia because he's having trouble passing a piece of domestic legislation he's been promising for a year will be passed next week. What an air of chaos this signals to the world. And to do this to Australia of all countries, a nation that has always had America's back and been America's friend.
How bush league, how undisciplined, how kid's stuff.

You could see the startled looks on the faces of reporters as Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who had the grace to look embarrassed, made the announcement on Thursday afternoon. The president "regrets the delay"—the trip is rescheduled for June—but "passage of the health insurance reform is of paramount importance." Indonesia must be glad to know it's not.  The reporters didn't even provoke or needle in their questions. They seemed hushed. They looked like people who were absorbing the information that we all seem to be absorbing, which is that the wheels seem to be coming off this thing, the administration is wobbling—so early, so painfully and dangerously soon.

Thursday's decision followed the most revealing and important broadcast interview of Barack Obama ever. It revealed his primary weakness in speaking of health care, which is a tendency to dodge, obfuscate and mislead. He grows testy when challenged. It revealed what the president doesn't want revealed, which is that he doesn't want to reveal much about his plan. This furtiveness is not helpful in a time of high public anxiety. At any rate, the interview was what such interviews rarely are, a public service. That it occurred at a high-stakes time, with so much on the line, only made it more electric.

I'm speaking of the interview Wednesday on Fox News Channel's "Special Report With Bret Baier." Fox is owned by News Corp., which also owns this newspaper, so one should probably take pains to demonstrate that one is attempting to speak with disinterest and impartiality, in pursuit of which let me note that Glenn Beck has long appeared to be insane.

That having been said, the Baier interview was something, and right from the beginning. Mr. Baier's first question was whether the president supports the so-called Slaughter rule, alternatively known as "deem and pass," which would avoid a straight up-or-down House vote on the Senate bill. (Tunku Varadarajan in the Daily Beast cleverly notes that it sounds like "demon pass," which it does. Maybe that's the juncture we're at.) Mr. Obama, in his response, made the usual case for ObamaCare. Mr.  Baier pressed him. The president said, "The vote that's taken in the House will be a vote for health-care reform." We shouldn't, he added, concern ourselves with "the procedural issues."

Further in, Mr. Baier: "So you support the deem-and-pass rule?" From the president, obfuscation. But he did mention something new: "They may have to sequence the votes." The bill's opponents would be well advised to look into that one.

Mr. Baier again: So you'll go deem-and-pass and you don't know exactly what will be in the bill?

Mr. Obama's response: "By the time the vote has taken place, not only will I know what's in it, you'll know what's in it, because it's going to be posted and everybody's going to be able to evaluate it on the merits."

That's news in two ways. That it will be posted—one assumes the president means on the Internet and not nailed to a telephone pole—should suggest it will be posted for a while, more than a few hours or days. So American will finally get a look at it. And the president was conceding that no, he doesn't know what's in the bill right now. It is still amazing that one year into the debate this could be true.
Mr. Baier pressed on the public's right to know what is in the bill. We have been debating the bill for a year, the president responded: "The notion that this has been not transparent, that people don't know what's in the bill, everybody knows what's in the bill. I sat for seven hours with—."

Mr. Baier interrupts: "Mr. President, you couldn't tell me what the special deals are that are in or not today."

Mr. Obama: "I just told you what was in and what was not in."

Mr. Baier: "Is Connecticut in?" He was referring to the blandishments—polite word—meant to buy the votes of particular senators.

Mr. Obama: "Connecticut—what are you specifically referring to?"

Mr. Baier: "The $100 million for the hospital? Is Montana in for the asbestos program? Is—you know, listen, there are people—this is real money, people are worried about this stuff."

Mr. Obama: "And as I said before, this—the final provisions are going to be posted for many days before this thing passes."

Mr. Baier pressed the president on his statement as a candidate for the presidency that a 50-plus-one governing mentality is inherently divisive. "You can't govern" that way, Sen. Obama had said. Is the president governing that way now? Mr. Obama did not really answer.

Throughout, Mr. Baier pressed the president. Some thought this bordered on impertinence. I did not. Mr. Obama now routinely filibusters in interviews. He has his message, and he presses it forward smoothly, adroitly. He buries you in words. Are you worried what failure of the bill will do to you? I'm worried about what the status quo will do to the families that are uninsured . . .

Mr. Baier forced him off his well-worn grooves. He did it by stopping long answers with short questions, by cutting off and redirecting. In this he was like a low-speed bumper car. In the end the interview seemed to me a public service because everyone in America right now wants to see the president forced off his grooves and into candor on an issue that involves 17% of the economy. Again, the stakes are high. So Mr. Baier's style seemed—this is admittedly subjective—not rude but within the bounds, and not driven by the antic spirit that sometimes overtakes reporters. He seemed to be trying to get new information. He seemed to be attempting to better inform the public.

Presidents have a right to certain prerogatives, including the expectation of a certain deference. He's the president, this is history. But we seem to have come a long way since Ronald Reagan was regularly barked at by Sam Donaldson, almost literally, and the president shrugged it off. The president—every president—works for us. We don't work for him. We sometimes lose track of this, or rather get the balance wrong. Respect is due and must be palpable, but now and then you have to press, to either force them to be forthcoming or force them to reveal that they won't be. Either way it's revealing.

And so it ends, with a health-care vote expected this weekend. I wonder at what point the administration will realize it wasn't worth it—worth the discord, worth the diminution in popularity and prestige, worth the deepening of the great divide. What has been lost is so vivid, what has been gained so amorphous, blurry and likely illusory. Memo to future presidents: Never stake your entire survival on the painful passing of a bad bill. Never take the country down the road to Demon Pass.

Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

A SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE WHO "SPEAKS WITH FORKED TONGUE" (LIES)
Then there is the "Wicked Witch of the West" (you all know who that is right?)  who doesn't bother with the truth.  She's learned that she can say what she wants even if the fact contradict her.  She said she liked the CBO "numbers" because those numbers are "certain."  In their report, the CBO says quite the opposite, that their "numbers are not certain" and contain a large degree of uncertainty.  She wants the sound bites to reinforce what she wishes were true, not what is really true.  The health care plan is designed to be valued with TEN YEARS of revenue and only SIX YEARS of expenses.  That's the only way to keep the real cost from American citizens.  Finally, she wants to bend every rule to the breaking point--so much so that Rep. Cantor stood up and accused her of malfeasance. (Merriam Webster Dictionary Def.: wrongdoing or misconduct especially by a public official)

DEVOTING ATTENTION TO "WHAT'S WRONG" WILL HELP INFORM US ON "WHAT'S RIGHT!" (OR NOT)
Have you noticed how many indigents (like this man) have expensive cell phones (criminals love them, texting a favorite way to coordinate criminal activities).  While we are giving more and more money to the underclass (and to destitute underprivileged nations), it somehow doesn't fix anything.  Part of it goes into the pockets of the powerful and corrupt (and NO I am not talking about Congress).  Part of it is wasted the same way they have wasted their lives--on quick, feel good hits, and NOT hard work, perseverance and character-building efforts.  I used to joke (only partly) was that the reason taxes were so low in Tennessee (where I lived for 11 years) was that most of the welfare there was for the people to leave the cities and go back into the woods where they could live off the land, hunt game, stay in old decrepit cabins, and generally be better off than on the streets of the cities on welfare. 

At least out there the attacks they needed to worry about were from coyotes and raccoons and the occasional bear--and not the two-legged vermin that got them on the streets.  NOW--what IS WRONG with this picture? 




WHAT ELSE IS WRONG?  POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND PARENTAL ABDICATION/PARANOIA
In days gone by there were teeter-totters, big sliding boards, and merry-go-rounds in the park playground.  More and more parents decided that they were not responsible for raising their children, teaching them values, the difference between right and wrong, and how to "be careful."  Bib brother government needed to take care of the kids, so playgrounds were neutered.  Anything remotely able to cause an injury was banned.  Lawyers and lawsuits transformed makers of playground equipment into defendants.  Schools became child care centers where keeping order and feeding kids was more important than teaching them.  Of course parents couldn't be bothered with helping kids with homework, and teaching them how to do life activities like cooking, laundry, etc.  That fell on the schools too.  These life activity courses squeezed out real academics and surprise--test scores went flat or fell. 

IRRESPONSIBLE CITIZENS AND DEPENDENT-CREATING GOVERNMENT IS WHAT'S WRONG
"The government needs to do something about that," became the cry any time any thing went wrong.  The government regulates toys, playgrounds, cars, bicycles, and every other type of product imaginable.  Does this make things better?  Not really.  Why?  Because kids like risks and ask for (and get) skateboards, snowboards, roller blades, etc.  Those who don't want the outdoor life, become couch potatoes, injuring their thumbs on Blackberries, Nintendo VS-i, and so forth.  TV becomes their world.  Exercise is relegated to gym class, taking more classroom teaching time away.  Buses or parents drive kids to school and a myriad of outside activities, which have developed to replace what kids used to do after school--play outside with friends.  The latest one:  the drive to eliminate round hot dogs since they represent choking hazards.  While they are at it, someone better develop non-round grapes too.

LIFE IS FULL OF RISKS AND CHALLENGES--BECOMING A COMPLETE PERSON MEANS LEARNING TO COPE WITH THEM
Of course, no one in the majority DC would agree with me on these points.  It's their goal for government to take over more and more of our lives, and to take more and more of our earnings to pay for inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary government bureaucracies, controlling things that government had no business controlling.  The final insult is that these bureaucrats earn way more than regular citizens.

WHAT'S RIGHT?  A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WHO AGREE THAT THESE THINGS ARE WRONG

In coming editions of THE ENTERPRISE, we'll talk about more of what can be done, and how to start putting our states and our country back on the right track.

Best, John

THE ENTERPRISE--"WE THE PEOPLE" ACCELERATING TO WHERE?

THE ENTERPRISE--"WE THE PEOPLE" ACCELERATING TO WHERE?

HERE IS A REPORT ON HOW AMERICANS FEEL
This is from a highly credible and large sample of Americans.  It is far more accurate and believable than the "poll of the day" which surveys perhaps 1000 people on a few topics and which are often biased depending on who paid for it or commissioned the poll.  (E.g., CNN and CNBC polls lean one way and FOX polls lean the other.  Wonder why?)  [Note:  my emphasis added in the text below.]

               American Pulse™: Overwhelming Majority Concerned about Financial Future for Kids, Say They No Longer Have a Voice in Washington     

Dissatisfaction Evident in President Obama’s Report Card

COLUMBUS, OH – (MARKET WIRE) – 3/9/10 – 70.6% of Americans say future generations will have to settle for less as a result of rising national debt, according to the latest American Pulse™ survey of 5,311 Americans. Further, 70.4% say they’ve lost their voice when it comes to how the U.S. is being run and that too much is being dictated out of Washington. 68.4% say the U.S. is losing its position as a world economic power.

66.2% of Americans think Congress and President Obama should solve the jobs/economy issue now while healthcare is a distant #2 (16.3%). President Obama’s recent push to pass healthcare reform appears to be out of line with Americans’ priorities and as a result, his report card is suffering.

Grades for President Obama on Key Issues (Adults 18+)

                    Economy          Healthcare         Job Creation
                    Mar-10 Feb-10        Mar-10 Feb-10          Mar-10 Feb-10
A Excellent         4.5%   4.6%          4.8%   5.0%            4.0%   4.1%
B Good                 16.2%  17.8%         16.5%  16.3%       13.4%  14.4%
C Fair                 29.7%  30.3%         27.4%  27.5%       26.5%  26.9%
D Poor              22.2%  22.3%         21.2%  23.0%       23.0%  25.5%
F Failure              27.4%  25.1%         30.1%  28.2%           33.0%  29.1%

Dissatisfaction is also impacting President Obama’s popularity. If the Presidential election were held today, 35.1% of registered voters would vote to re-elect him, compared to 40.5% who would vote for a generic candidate from the Republican Party. Not to be left out, people are also unhappy with the Democrats on Capitol Hill. If the Congressional elections were held today, 37% of registered voters would vote for a Republican vs. 32.3% who would vote for a Democrat.

Other key findings:
•    65% think it is somewhat likely/very likely that another financial crisis is imminent as a result of the bailouts and government spending.
•    Americans say Democrats using reconciliation (56.2%) to pass healthcare reform is worse than Republicans using filibuster (43.8%) to block it.
•    48.3% say Democratic leaders are bullying Democrats into voting for healthcare (v. 21.9% who say they aren’t).

Complimentary report: http://americanpulse.bigresearch.com.

About American Pulse™
The American Pulse™ Survey is collected online by BIGresearch® every month exclusively utilizing Survey Sampling International’s (SSI) U.S. panel covering topics such as politics, pop culture and the economy. Over 5,000 respondents participate, providing greater insights and accuracy of +/- 1%. http://www.bigresearch.com

THE PROBLEMS START CLOSER TO HOME--IN OUR STATES
Over the next few months, I will comment on issues facing states, with particular emphasis on OH where I happen to live--and know more about.  I encourage readers to provide me with "state relevant" information for future issues.  After all, the USA is a Federal republic in which the Constitution grants many rights to the state--rights which are in danger of being revoked, abused, or lost.  States, meanwhile, receive "help" from the Federal government, and many times, this help comes with "strings attached," some of which drive entirely wrong behaviors.  States are mostly as guilty of spending more than their means as the Federal Government is.  This tendency to be fiscally irresponsible is very bad--and must be stopped and reversed or our country and our states--and the citizens in them--will suffer greatly.

WE THE PEOPLE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVAhr4hZDJE

WHAT IS THE TRUTH IN THE TOYOTA DEBACLE

ARE THE TOYOTA PROBLEM REPORTS FUELED BY "HERD MENTALITY, "IRRATIONAL PANIC," HUNGRY LAWYERS AND PUBLICITY SEEKERS? for entire story see: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100311/ap_on_bi_ge/us_prius_panic
[My emphasis added to this March 10 Yahoo News/AP Report]
Reports of sudden acceleration in the Toyota Prius have spiked across the country. But that doesn't mean there's an epidemic of bad gas pedals in the popular hybrid.  Experts on consumer psychology say the relentless negative media attention Toyota has received since the fall makes it much more likely that drivers will mistake anything unexpected — or even a misplaced foot — for actual danger.  Is the US government crucifying the Japanese giant to help the US carmakers (in which it owns large stakes)?
"When people expect problems, they're more likely to find them," said Lars Perner, a professor of clinical marketing at Marshall School of Business at University of Southern California.  In just the first 10 weeks of this year, 272 complaints have been filed nationwide for speed control problems with the Prius, according to an Associated Press analysis of unverified complaints received by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. By comparison, only 74 complaints were filed in all of last year, and just eight the year before that.  Or have people just now caught on to the nature of these problems?

ARE THE PROBLEMS REAL--BROUGHT ON BY THE WIDESPREAD USE OF "DRIVE BY WIRE" SYSTEMS

During the past ten years, automakers and notably Toyota among them abandoned the old mechanical linkages that controlled acceleration, braking and other auto functions in favor of "drive by wire" using computers to control the car.  Has the rapid growth and market share gains of Toyota combined with real flaws--consistently replicated in millions of cars, to create this problem?  For problems with the brakes, rather than the gas, the figures are even more stark: 1,816 filed so far this year versus just 90 in all of 2009 and fewer than 20 in every other year of the last decade. Toyota recalled 440,000 Priuses on Feb. 8 because its antilock brakes seemed to fail momentarily on bumpy roads.  It's doubtful the Priuses of the past two years suddenly became more dangerous than those made in years past. After all, Toyota's own recall for Prius floor mats that can trap gas pedals covers model years 2004 to 2009.  Or is it widespread panic?

TOYOTA HAS BEEN "BURYING COMPLAINTS" FOR A LONG TIME.

The Japanese culture would make you wonder.  Saving face means not raising problems to the top of the organization but handling them at lower levels--or perhaps, hiding them at lower levels?  The vaunted Toyota production system is a masterpiece of consistency--but when something is wrong--it could also be just as consistently wrong.  I know of several instances where Toyota "downplayed problems" (not sudden acceleration however) and managed them by "Special Service Programs" fixing the problems as the cars came in for regular service.




I DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS THE TRUTH OTHER THAN ONE THING.  WHEN A COMPANY LIKE TOYOTA HAS ITS MANAGERIAL CONTROL SWITCHED FROM "ENGINEERS" TO "FINANCIERS" (DURING THIS ERA) AND WHEN IT DRIVES FOR GLOBAL GROWTH AS ITS PREEMINENT GOAL, AND RAPID RELEASES OF NEW CAR VARIANTS--THIS SORT OF PROBLEM CAN OCCUR.  I WONDER IF WE'LL EVER FIGURE IT OUT.

HOWEVER--THERE IS ONE POSSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR THE PRIUS PROBLEMS:  Toyota must have used Eveready batteries in the Prius. You know that Eveready Bunny--he just keeps going and going and going.  [Sorry--I know it's not a laughing matter, but that one was too fitting to resist.]

BIGGEST QUESTION: WHY ARE MORE AMERICANS ARE NOT PANIC STRICKEN ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT'S "RUNAWAY" SPENDING BEHAVIOR?  "UNDESIRED ACCELERATION" DESCRIBES IT PERFECTLY.

It's far worse than Toyota's record.  There is an old joke:  "To err is human, to really screw up, you need to involve the government."  More than half of all Americans want to step on the brake on spending.  A sizable portion of them have both feet firmly planted on the brake pedal, but the message is not getting to President Obama or Congress.  Too bad there is no selector to put in neutral and let them just rev and rev until they run out of gas.

I CANNOT VOUCH FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE FOLLOWING WARNING ABOUT THE CENSUS, BUT IT MAKES SENSE TO ME--And TruthorFiction.com says it is the "TRUTH.

==============
THIS IS PRETTY BASIC ADVICE: Be Cautious About Giving Info to Census Workers by Susan Johnson

With the U.S. Census process beginning, the Better Business Bureau (BBB) advises people to be cooperative, but cautious, so as not to become a victim of fraud or identity theft. The first phase of the 2010 U.S. Census is under way as workers have begun verifying the addresses of households across the country. Eventually, more than 140,000 U.S.   Census workers will count every person in the United States   and will gather information about every person living at each address including name, age, gender, race, and other relevant data.
 
The big question is - how do you tell the difference between a U.S.Census worker and a con artist? BBB offers the following advice:
 If a U.S. Census worker knocks on your door; they will have a badge, a handheld device, a Census Bureau canvas bag, and a confidentiality notice. Ask to see their identification and their badge before answering their questions.  However, you should never invite anyone you don't know into your home.
 
Census workers are currently only knocking on doors to verify address information.  Do not give your Social Security number, credit card or banking information to anyone, even if they claim they need it for the U.S. Census.
 
REMEMBER, NO MATTER WHAT THEY ASK, YOU REALLY ONLY NEED TO TELL THEM HOW MANY PEOPLE LIVE AT YOUR ADDRESS.
 
While the Census Bureau might ask for basic financial information, such as a salary range, YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT  YOUR FINANCIAL SITUATION.  The Census Bureau will not ask for Social Security, bank account, or credit card numbers, nor will employees solicit donations.  Any one asking for that information is NOT with the Census Bureau.
 
AND REMEMBER, THE CENSUS BUREAU HAS DECIDED NOT TO WORK WITH ACORN ON GATHERING THIS INFORMATION..
No Acorn worker should approach you saying he/she is with the Census Bureau. 

Eventually, Census workers may contact you by telephone, mail, or in person at home. However, the Census Bureau will not contact you by Email, so be on the lookout for Email scams impersonating the Census.   Never click on a link or open any attachments in an Email that are supposedly from the U.S. Census Bureau.
 
PLEASE SHARE THIS INFO WITH FAMILY AND FRIENDS...
==============

Don't forget to set your clocks ahead for Daylight Savings Time in the wee hours of Sunday AM.  Have a great week...spring is almost here.

Best, John

-----------------------------------------------------------
 "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world: indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."   Margaret Mea
-----------------------------------------------------------
John L. Mariotti, President & CEO, The Enterprise Group, Phone 614-840-0959  http://www.mariotti.net   http://mariotti.blogs.com/my_weblog/
------------------------------------------------------------

THE ENTERPRISE--A FEW THINGS TO THINK ABOUT

THE ENTERPRISE--A FEW THINGS TO THINK ABOUT

FINALLY, RANGEL HAS STEPPED DOWN
It's about time. His list of illegal and unethical transgressions should have brought him down a long time ago.

BOB LUTZ RETIRES FROM GM
Too bad, but Bob deserves a rest.  He's 78 and has done marvelous things in the US auto industry.

BEST TITLE FOR A COLUMN:  "WHAT A DISASTER LOOKS LIKE"
Peggy Noonan in the WSJ, describing the first 14 months of an Obama presidency.  Her perspective spans back to the Reagan years.

FORD HAS FIGURED OUT HOW TO WIN--AND CONQUER COMPLEXITY--IN A NEW CULTURE
Paul Ingrassia, the WSJ's astute observer of the automotive scene recently did a wonderful article on how Alan Mulally of Ford is reshaping that legendary company. Two of his greatest tools:  eliminate complexity and build a new culture.  Here's a brief excerpt from the longer article.

    "...Ford's recent success is already amazing considering the prior half-dozen years of near-fatal decline. If it continues, Mr. Mulally will be credited with one of the great turnarounds in corporate history. His method has been to simplify, relentlessly and systematically, a business that had grown way too complicated and costly to be managed effectively.
    "Improve Focus, Simplify Operations," reads one of Mr. Mulally's many charts, which he repeats like a sacred mantra. Soon after his arrival Ford began shedding brands—Jaguar, Land Rover and Aston Martin among them—that the company couldn't afford to support. Volvo will be next to go. Meanwhile, the core Ford brand got an investment infusion to replace aging cars and revive a model lineup that had been heavily tilted toward gas-guzzling trucks.
    In the process, Ford cut its number of global platforms, or chassis, to eight from more than 20, and the number of nameplates to 25 from 97. Each platform and model involves hundreds of millions of dollars of engineering costs, which translated to billions of losses because Ford couldn't sell enough of each model.
    Besides revamping the product line Mr. Mulally has overhauled the often-contentious culture in Ford's executive suite. Most of his appointees are company veterans, but they're the sort of people who typically got overlooked when style seemed to count more than substance, as it often did at Ford. ..."

For the entire article, here is a link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704479404575087372469421104.html?KEYWORDS=Ford%27s+renaissance+man

IRAN WILL BE A PROBLEM--NO MATTER WHAT WE DO
It will get a nuke.  (Hopefully not use it, but Ahmadinejad is crazy, so he might.)   We need to make it clear what happens if they nuke anyone, anyplace.  And we better hope our arsenal has  been maintained--in spite of Obama's anti-nuke naivete and stupidity.  Pick sanctions that do not polarize the young, revolutionary Iranians against the USA and in 10-15 years they will overturn the lunatics now in charge.  Meanwhile, it will be tense.

A RECOVERY IS COMING--BUT SLOWLY
Manufacturing is recovering first; services are lagging behind--and the USA is much more a service economy now.  Temp hiring is up.  That is "stage 2" of a job recovery.  The first stage is lengthen the work week of existing employees--hours go up and overtime starts; in stage 2, more temps get hired; finally, then, finally (if companies believe the demand will be sustainable) real hiring starts.  And the "jobs bill," with its token tax incentives will not accelerate those phases one iota.  It is just $15B of hype--mostly wasted--but makes great Congressional PR.

WHAT ARE WE DOING WITH OUR CHILDREN
The most preposterous move is one that I read in a recent column by George Will: jumping rope with no rope, so no child will be embarrassed by tripping on the rope which could harm their self esteem.   No scores for games?  No grades in school?  What's wrong with this kind of thinking?  I have news for everyone (parents, educators, psychologists, etc.) who thinks this nonsense is right.  There are scores in the real world.  There are grades too.  Somebody wins and somebody loses.  If we send a whole generation of kids out who do not realize these facts, we are the guilty ones, setting them up for failure, depression and worse.  Will someone please apply some common sense?

"DRINKING FROM THE INFORMATION FIRE HOSE"
Information overload is affecting everyone.  We all wonder what to do about it.  That was the topic of comments from John Mauldin posted below.  His feelings mirror mine.  George Friedman, CEO of Stratfor the highly regarded intelligence service, also shares these concerns, and presents his thoughts.  My solution is to continue finding the best, most concise presentation of useful and interesting information I can, and "trickle it" to you each week--the same as John does.
From John Mauldin's weekly newsletter [[email protected]]

    "I met with George Friedman of Stratfor this Tuesday. (Tiffani went with me, her first trip away from my granddaughter Lively. Ryan got to play Mr. Mom.) I was sitting in George's office at the end of the day, waiting for everyone else to show up so we could go to dinner. I had been busy trying to coordinate meetings and keep up with my reading and research, emails, and phone calls."
    "George, I have a problem. I feel like I am drinking information through a fire hose. I am addicted to information. It is beginning to interfere with my productivity, as I get so much high-quality material from the best sources that I feel I need to absorb. Each bit of information becomes a clue to the larger puzzle. But I have to write more. I am going to have to start randomly deleting things every now and then if I am going to stay on top of it all, and get some of these books that are in me done."
    I am determined to have a life outside of work (family and friends are important), and am for the most part successful at that, but I am not getting done all that I wish I could do when I'm at work. And there are books piled on my desk that simply scream for attention.
    I thought George would understand. He has some 90 analysts all over the world feeding him up-to-the-minute analysis on country and issue situations. Surely, he must have an idea for me on how to handle the "download" problem.
    "John," he replied quietly, sighing heavily, "I know what you mean. But if I started randomly deleting, I'd be afraid I would miss something important. What else can you do but keep at it?"
    "It is the conundrum of our age. I hope, gentle reader, that I help you in some ways to keep up and stay informed without overloading you! Have a great week, and learn something new!"


WILL HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION BE PASSED BY A SIMPLE MAJORITY?
If it is, so be it.  If those are the rules, and the laws passed abide by the rules, then it will show how little the majority in Congress and our President care about what the American people want--and what they need.  The Democratic cry is that the Republicans have no alternative plan.  That totally ignores Rep. Paul Ryan's very well thought out and documented plans.  Ryan's proposals go far beyond health care.  They set out a path to restore our country to fiscal sanity and solvency--albeit it will take a long time given the GOP/Bush and now Democrat/Obama's prolific and irresponsible spending.  Read some of Ryan's good sense and factual commentary that I have pasted  below.

I also promised to put forth a new potential name to lead our country in 2012 going forward.  MITCH DANIELS governor of Indiana. Read the article follows to learn more about him.

That's plenty for this week.  Have a good one as we look forward to spring, an economic recovery (even if a slow one) and the chance to elect some new people to represent us in Washington in just 8 months!!!  Remember WE, THE PEOPLE, must stand for what we believe in.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVAhr4hZDJE

BEST, JOHN
==================================

OPINION MARCH 4, 2010  ©Dow Jones Reprints:
Dissecting the Real Cost of ObamaCare
The President's own chief Medicare actuary says the Senate and House bills are bending the cost curve up.
By PAUL D. RYAN        [Emphasis added is mine--JLM]
The following are remarks made by Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, about the cost of the House and Senate health-care bills at President Obama's Blair House summit on health care, Feb. 25:
    "Look, we agree on the problem here. And the problem is health inflation is driving us off of a fiscal cliff.
Mr. President, you said health-care reform is budget reform. You're right. We agree with that. Medicare, right now, has a $38 trillion unfunded liability. That's $38 trillion in empty promises to my parents' generation, our generation, our kids' generation. Medicaid's growing at 21 percent each year. It's suffocating states' budgets. It's adding trillions in obligations that we have no means to pay for . . .
    Now, you're right to frame the debate on cost and health inflation. And in September, when you spoke to us in the well of the House, you basically said—and I totally agree with this—I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future.
Since the Congressional Budget Office can't score your bill, because it doesn't have sufficient detail, but it tracks very similar to the Senate bill, I want to unpack the Senate score a little bit.
    And if you take a look at the CBO analysis—analysis from your chief actuary—I think it's very revealing. This bill does not control costs. This bill does not reduce deficits. Instead, this bill adds a new health-care entitlement at a time when we have no idea how to pay for the entitlements we already have.
    Now let me go through why I say that. The majority leader said the bill scores as reducing the deficit $131 billion over the next 10 years. First, a little bit about CBO. I work with them every single day—very good people, great professionals. They do their jobs well. But their job is to score what is placed in front of them. And what has been placed in front of them is a bill that is full of gimmicks and smoke-and-mirrors.
    Now, what do I mean when I say that? Well, first off, the bill has 10 years of tax increases, about half a trillion dollars, with 10 years of Medicare cuts, about half a trillion dollars, to pay for six years of spending. Now, what's the true 10-year cost of this bill in 10 years? That's $2.3 trillion.
    The Senate bill] does [a] couple of other things. It takes $52 billion in higher Social Security tax revenues and counts them as offsets. But that's really reserved for Social Security. So either we're double-counting them or we don't intend on paying those Social Security benefits.
    It takes $72 billion and claims money from the CLASS Act. That's the long-term care insurance program. It takes the money from premiums that are designed for that benefit and instead counts them as offsets.
    The Senate Budget Committee chairman [Kent Conrad] said that this is a Ponzi scheme that would make Bernie Madoff proud.
Now, when you take a look at the Medicare cuts, what this bill essentially does [is treat] Medicare like a piggy bank. It raids a half a trillion dollars out of Medicare, not to shore up Medicare solvency, but to spend on this new government program.
    . . . According to the chief actuary of Medicare . . . as much as 20 percent of Medicare's providers will either go out of business or will have to stop seeing Medicare beneficiaries. Millions of seniors . . . who have chosen Medicare Advantage will lose the coverage that they now enjoy. You can't say that you're using this money to either extend Medicare solvency and also offset the cost of this new program. That's double counting.
    And so when you take a look at all of this; when you strip out the double-counting and what I would call these gimmicks, the full 10-year cost of the bill has a $460 billion deficit. The second 10-year cost of this bill has a $1.4 trillion deficit.
    . . . Probably the most cynical gimmick in this bill is something that we all probably agree on. We don't think we should cut doctors [annual federal reimbursements] 21 percent next year. We've stopped those cuts from occurring every year for the last seven years. We all call this, here in Washington, the doc fix. Well, the doc fix, according to your numbers, costs $371 billion. It was in the first iteration of all of these bills, but because it was a big price tag and it made the score look bad, made it look like a deficit . . . that provision was taken out, and it's been going on in stand-alone legislation. But ignoring these costs does not remove them from the backs of taxpayers. Hiding spending does not reduce spending. And so when you take a look at all of this, it just doesn't add up.
    . . . I'll finish with the cost curve. Are we bending the cost curve down or are we bending the cost curve up?
Well, if you look at your own chief actuary at Medicare, we're bending it up. He's claiming that we're going up $222 billion, adding more to the unsustainable fiscal situation we have.
    And so, when you take a look at this, it's really deeper than the deficits or the budget gimmicks or the actuarial analysis. There really is a difference between us.. . . We've been talking about how much we agree on different issues, but there really is a difference between us. And it's basically this. We don't think the government should be in control of all of this. We want people to be in control. And that, at the end of the day, is the big difference.
    Now, we've offered lots of ideas all last year, all this year. Because we agree the status quo is unsustainable. It's got to get fixed.
It's bankrupting families. It's bankrupting our government. It's hurting families with pre-existing conditions. We all want to fix this.
    But we don't think that this is the . . . the solution. And all of the analysis we get proves that point.  Now, I'll just simply say this. . .     We are all representatives of the American people. We all do town hall meetings. We all talk to our constituents. And I've got to tell you, the American people are engaged. And if you think they want a government takeover of health care, I would respectfully submit you're not listening to them.
    So what we simply want to do is start over, work on a clean-sheeted paper, move through these issues, step by step, and fix them, and bring down health-care costs and not raise them. And that's basically the point."


FROM REAL CLEAR POLITICS.COM, February 26, 2010
Why Mitch Daniels is on the 2012 Short List  By Mona Charen

On the morning of Nov. 5, 2008, the world rocked to news that the United States had elected Barack Obama to the presidency. That same morning, Mitch Daniels, governor of Indiana, joined the list of those most often mentioned as potentially defeating President Obama in 2012.

In what may be a sign of unusual mental health and emotional balance, Daniels persistently declined to be considered a candidate. Among his many reasons, he told Brian Lamb, was reluctance to subject his family to the "savagery" of presidential politics. It is great news for the country, if not for him, that he has at last relented and agreed to keep the door open -- if only a crack.

He earned his spot on the short list of possibilities the hard way: In a quicksand year for Republicans, he managed to win re-election as governor by 18 points (in a state Obama carried). His margin of victory included 24 percent of Democrats, 20 percent of African-Americans, 51 percent of the youth vote, 67 percent of the elderly, and 57 percent of independents.

When Daniels took office in 2004, Indiana, which had been enduring Democratic governors for 16 years, was running an $800 million deficit. Four years later, it had a $1.3 billion surplus. Daniels accomplished this without raising taxes (as 66 percent of states have done); in fact, he passed the largest tax cut in state history. Nor did he cut essential services like education, as 40 states have done. As Mark Hemingway reported in National Review, "In the last three years, the state has repaid $760 million to schools and local governments that had been appropriated to finance the state's deficit spending." Additionally, Indiana has hired 800 new child welfare caseworkers and 250 state troopers, all while cutting the rate of increase in state spending from 5.9 to 2.8 percent annually.

Daniels has successfully courted business investment and has welcomed "two Toyota plants, a Honda factory, a $500 million Nestlé facility, and a British Petroleum project that will bring $3.8 billion to the state ..."

This is a laboratory of successful conservative governance. As Daniels put it to NR, "Our health-care plan is health savings accounts for poor people. Our telecommunications policy is deregulation. Our infrastructure policy was the biggest privatization in state history." And his spending policy was less is more.

A former chief of the Office of Management and Budget (under George W. Bush), Daniels is known for his incisive mind and mastery of detail. In addition to government service (he also worked as an aide to Sen. Richard Lugar and as Ronald Reagan's political director), Daniels has headed a conservative think tank, the Hudson Institute, and served as president of Eli Lilly's North American operations.

This is not a slick, packaged politician. Daniels writes his own speeches -- and they are thoughtful, substantive exercises -- and even pens the content of his political ads. His demeanor is friendly and his posture is forward-looking. He has never run a negative ad. He is a conservative, but not of the grievance variety.

In style, Daniels is low-key and witty without being arrogant. In his first run for governor, he traveled the state on his motorcycle or in his motor home, spending the night as the guest of ordinary Hoosiers. His self-deprecating humor made his travels into a popular show -- "MitchTV" -- still available on YouTube. He treats every voter (supporter or not) with respect. And he's not above enjoying himself at a state fair (his wife won the watermelon seed spitting contest).

He's been called the "anti-Obama," but the contrast is not in style. Both men are poised, intelligent, and well spoken. The most glaring contrast (aside from philosophy) is Daniels' wealth of experience and record of governing success.

Daniels has offered the view that a Republican candidate in 2012 must present a credible plan for solving the spending, deficit, and debt crisis the country is in and campaign to "govern, not just to win."

He'd rather someone else do it, which is understandable. He promised Hoosiers he would serve out his term, and feels duty bound to abide by his promise. But Daniels has a combination of traits -- broad experience, wisdom, skill, and likeability -- that are rarer than rare. Surely Hoosiers would release him from his promise if he asked -- if we all asked.

Copyright 2010, Creators Syndicate Inc.


-----------------------------------------------------------
 "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world: indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."   Margaret Mea
-----------------------------------------------------------
John L. Mariotti, President & CEO, The Enterprise Group, Phone 614-840-0959  http://www.mariotti.net   http://mariotti.blogs.com/my_weblog/