Republicans for the Big-Government Guy ( General ) by David Boaz
Lieberman followed the liberal line in opposing oil drilling in ANWR, Bush tax cuts, overtime pay reform, the energy bill, and bans on partial-birth abortion and same-sex marriage. Similarly, he voted in support of Roe vs. Wade and for banning assault weapons and bunker buster bombs. His only two pro-Bush votes were to fund the Iraq war and support missile defense (duplicating Sen. Hillary Clinton's course on both). Lieberman's most recent ratings by the American Conservative Union were 7 percent in 2003, zero in 2004 and 8 percent in 2005.I actually agree with him on a couple of those votes, though I wouldn't expect that conservatives would. The National Taxpayers Union says that he votes with taxpayers 9 percent of the time, worse than Chris Dodd or Barbara Boxer. Only if you believe that continuing to support the war in Iraq outweighs all other issues combined can a conservative reasonably support Joe Lieberman. And apparently a lot of Republicans and conservatives are willing to toss aside his commitment to high taxes, higher spending, more regulation, and entitlement expansion in order to get that vote for Bush's war.
Posted on August 19, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
From Your Blog to God’s Ears ( General ) by David Boaz
Posted on August 19, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
Labeling Dictators ( General ) by David Boaz
Gen. Alfredo Stroessner, the military strongman who ruled Paraguay from 1954 until 1989. Among 20th century Latin American leaders, only Cuban President Fidel Castro has served longer.Why is Stroessner a "military strongman" while Castro is "Cuban President"? Both came to power through bullets, not ballots, and ruled with an iron hand. Stroessner actually held elections every five years, sometimes with opposition candidates, though of course there was no doubt of the outcome. Castro dispensed with even the pretense of elections. Both ruled with the support of the army. In Cuba's case the armed forces were headed by Castro's brother, and indeed he has just turned over power to his brother who heads the military. So why does the Journal not give Stroessner his formal title of "president," and why does it not describe Castro accurately as a "military strongman"?
Posted on August 19, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
Terrorism? Drugs? No, Backdating Stock Options ( General ) by David Boaz
Former Comverse Technology chief executive Jacob "Kobi" Alexander was declared a fugitive by the FBI, which issued an alert calling for his arrest. An international manhunt was launched late last month, shortly before authorities unsealed a criminal complaint.
Posted on August 17, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
Your Tax Dollars at Work ( General ) by David Boaz
The federal program that provides legal help to poor Americans turns away half of its applicants for lack of resources. But that hasn't stopped its executives from lavishing expensive meals, chauffeur-driven cars and foreign trips on themselves. Agency documents obtained by The Associated Press detail the luxuries that executives of the Legal Services Corp. have given themselves with federal money -- from $14 "Death by Chocolate" desserts to $400 chauffeured rides to locations within cab distance of their offices. The government-funded corporation also has a spacious headquarters in Washington's tony Georgetown district -- with views of the Potomac River and a rent significantly higher than other tenants in the same building.Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, is upset. Maybe at last he can turn his attention from oversight of private charities and universities to his actual job, oversight of federal spending.
Posted on August 17, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
Censorship Is Worse Than Fake News ( General ) by David Boaz
Posted on August 16, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
If This Is Wrong I Don’t Want to Be Reich ( General ) by David Boaz
Posted on August 16, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
Political Governance vs. Corporate Governance ( General ) by David Boaz
The authority over government is split among the branches of government. In business, Mr. Yu writes, “even if directors have stepped up their governance in recent years, institutional norms still stack the deck in favor of C.E.O.’s.” And while chief executives and directors can serve forever, politicians need to face re-election regularly. When it comes to corporate governance, maybe there is something to be learned from governments.Well, let's see. According to a Booz Allen study, dismissals of corporate CEOs have risen sharply in the past decade. Among the world's 2,500 largest public companies, "CEOs are as likely to leave prematurely as to retire normally. Continuing a pattern from 2004, in 2005 nearly half of all CEO departures were due to poor performance or mergers." Meanwhile, almost no members of Congress are removed from office involuntarily. As this chart shows, House reelection rates are approaching 100 percent. Does that mean that the U.S. government is performing so much better than the average company that there's no need for change? It seems unlikely that even the Times columnist would make that claim. No, if you read the links above from Booz Allen and the Washington Monthly, you can see some of the differences between politics and business: Business is competitive, to begin with. There are 2,500 large companies in the survey, all competing with one another and with millions of upstart challengers. If Sears and K-Mart don't stay on their toes, Target and Wal-Mart will take their business. Wikipedia lists pages and pages of defunct companies, all of which failed to satisfy customers. Executives lost their jobs, and shareholders lost their money, and those realities are a powerful incentive to executives and shareholders of other companies. Corporate boards are getting more aggressive, and different companies are testing different rules for governance -- outsider CEOs, separating the jobs of CEO and chairman, acquisitions, divestitures, going public, going private -- in an attempt to find the rules that will produce the greatest customer satisfaction and thus the greatest profits. Contrast that with government. Failed bureaucrats are almost never fired; indeed, the standard response to bureaucratic failure is to appropriate more money for the agency. Gerrymandering, campaign finance restrictions, and taxpayer-funded constituent service and propaganda make it almost impossible for a member of Congress to be turned out of office. People spend other people's money far less efficiently than their own. I think the Times got it backwards. It would be more appropriate to say, "When it comes to government, maybe there is something to be learned from corporate governance" -- such as the value of decentralization and competition, retirement ages or term limits, and real penalties for poor performance. Since those factors are unlikely to occur in political systems, the best lesson is to keep as much of life as possible in the private sector.
Posted on August 16, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
Where Are the Conservatives? ( General ) by David Boaz
There would be interference in textbook choices, curricula, staffing, salaries, the make-up of student bodies, building designs, and all other irritants that the government has invented to harass the population. These decisions which are now made in the local school or school district will slowly but surely be transferred to Washington.Dissenting from the committee report that recommended establishing the department, Erlenborn and seven other Republicans wrote, "The Department of Education will end up being the Nation's super schoolboard. That is something we can all do without.'' That's why Ronald Reagan promised to abolish Jimmy Carter's Department of Education in his 1980 campaign. And why House Budget Committee chairman John Kasich put abolition of the department in his budget proposal after the 1994 GOP takeover of Congress. But things changed. Instead of eliminating or at least reducing federal intervention in local schools, Republicans in 2001 decided to dramatically escalate it with the No Child Left Behind Act. And now Jeb Bush, whom some conservatives call the best governor in the country, writes in the Washington Post (along with Michael Bloomberg) that we should strengthen NCLB. Make it tougher, they write, with real standards and real enforcement. Create data systems to "track" every student. Create federal standards for teachers. If there's an earthquake this week, it may be caused by Madison, Taft, Goldwater, and Reagan turning over in their graves. Imagine it: the leading conservative governor in America, considered a pioneer in education reform, wants the distant federal government to come into his state's schools and impose tougher rules and regulations. And even the Wall Street Journal's redoubtable editorial page deplores "rampant noncompliance" with federal mandates and "lax enforcement" by Big Brother in Washington. In its new issue, American Conservative magazines asks two dozen leading intellectuals "What is left? What is right? Does it matter?" Not if leading conservatives have made their peace with federal control of local schools--and are demanding that the feds crack down on the locals.
Posted on August 14, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty
Another Fiscal Conservative Sighted? ( General ) by David Boaz
Posted on August 14, 2006 Posted to Cato@Liberty