Legislature should eliminate cap on charter schools

State Board of Education awards final charters allowed under current law

AUSTIN – Today’s issuance of the last school charters allowed under current law makes it essential that the Texas Legislature repeal its cap on charter schools.

“Restrictions imposed by the Texas Legislature now deny tens of thousands of students the opportunity to enroll in their preferred public school,” said Brooke Dollens Terry, education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. “The Legislature should get rid of its arbitrary cap on charter schools and provide parents with more public school options for their children.”

The Texas Legislature has capped the number of open-enrollment charters at 215, of which 209 entities had active charters. After two charter operators voluntarily consolidated under another charter to free up two additional slots, the State Board of Education issued the final eight charters at its meeting today. Yesterday, Sen. Dan Patrick filed legislation (SB 308) that would repeal the charter school cap.

In August, the Foundation released a report, “Calculating the Demand for Charter Schools,” which compiled the first-ever, Texas-specific waiting list for charter school enrollment. The report concluded that while 89,156 students attended 355 open-enrollment charter school campuses during the 2007-08 academic year, at least 16,810 children were on waiting lists to attend a charter school – including 7,415 in the Houston area; 5,896 in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex; and 2,110 in the Rio Grande Valley.

“If we value free markets and competition, we should allow as many public schools to open as students will attend,” Terry said. “And by the tens of thousands, Texas public school students and their parents want an alternative to their government-assigned campus.”

Terry emphasized that charter schools are public schools that predominantly serve students who are behind academically upon entering the charter school. Sixty percent of charter school students come from low-income families, and 81 percent are ethnic minorities.

“Many of these parents understand that traditional public schools have failed their children,” she said. “Rather than writing these students off, we need to encourage new options that meet these students where they are so that they can receive the education they’ll need to be productive citizens.”

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

– 30 –

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Improving health care without expanding government

As election season winds down and the 81st legislative session draws nearer, the focus now turns to legislative tactics and fulfilling campaign promises. Advocates of Medicaid expansion have already begun their push to extend Medicaid’s eligibility enrollment period, an effort to incrementally increase the number of people receiving subsidized health care.

In contrast, just last month, in an effort to reign in state spending on Medicaid, the federal government announced stricter guidelines on what Medicaid will cover. Texas would be well advised to follow suit and seek ways to cut Medicaid spending by reducing the public’s reliance on the program.

However, talk of extending Medicaid’s eligibility enrollment period from six months to 12 has been in the air in Austin since the legislature pulled a similar move last session that extended the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) eligibility period. That maneuver, along with other reforms, resulted in a 42 percent growth in CHIP enrollment and a dramatic increase in costs.

The growth of CHIP recipients and the growth in Medicaid recipients that would likely follow an extension of the eligibility period is the result of people remaining enrolled in government programs long after they have exceeded the income limit.

If the goal of extending eligibility periods is to increase individuals’ access to health care, then we can improve that without expanding government programs or spending taxpayer’s dollars.

The way to create more access to health care is to create a more diversified market with more points of access and more provider options.

Today, we funnel people to the highest cost provider – where either the patient pays a nominal fee and the insurance company picks up the rest, or the government pays the entirety of the bill. Why are patients getting eye exams in the hospital or paying more than $100 to be diagnosed with strep throat and prescribed medication?

What if consumers had an alternative to the highest cost provider; the “Wal-Mart” version of health care, if you will? Someone who could make the diagnosis, prescribe the medicine needed, and send you on your way for less than $50 and all in under 30 minutes.

Providers like these exist; they are nurse practitioners and physician’s assistants and many of them work in what people in the medical community call retail clinics. These clinics offer a new model of providing primary care that focuses on providing convenient patient care at low prices.

Often located in retail shopping centers and open late with no need for an appointment, they are directly responding to the demands of their consumers, many of which are the uninsured targeted by government programs.

Forty-three percent of their patients are between the ages of 18 and 24 – the population with the highest uninsured rate – and 33 percent of their patients pay out of pocket for their care, a practice unheard of at a traditional primary care provider’s office.

Unfortunately, Texas is missing out on the rapid growth of this health care option. Laws that limit the scope of practice and require strict oversight for nurse practitioners and physician’s assistants hamper the development of these clinics and limit access to care.

These clinics are a direct response to the needs of patients, but protectionist regulations aimed at ensuring job security and enforced under the guise of consumer safety are limiting Texas’ ability to adequately respond to the needs of its citizens.

These providers could also serve as way to meet the growing demand for health care providers in our state; however, additional requirements that force these providers’ to operate under the watchful eye of physicians make it difficult for these caregivers to provide services in the areas where they are most needed.

Legislators have the opportunity to give Texans the option of affordable, convenient health care by eliminating onerous state regulations. The question is, will they seize the opportunity.

Kalese Hammonds is a health care policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Obama's Change? Forward to the Past

First it was John Podesta (former White House Chief of Staff for the Clinton Administration) who was named to head President Elect Obama's transition team.

Then Obama named Rahm Emanuel (former Assistant to the President for Political Affairs and then Senior Advisor to the President for Policy and Strategy for the Clinton Administration) as Obama's White House Chief of Staff.

Earlier this week the name of Senator Hillary Rodham Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton (former First Lady for the Clinton Administration) began to be bandied about as a possible nomination for Secretary of State.

Shortly thereafter Eric Holder (former Deputy Attorney General of the United States for the Clinton Administration) was named as the designated nominee for the Attorney General's Office.

Now wait folks, I think I'm beginning to see a pattern here...

Former Senator from South Dakota, Tom Daschle (Minority/Majority Leader of the Democrat Senate Caucus during President Clinton's Administration) has just been named to be Secretary of Health and Human Services for the Obama Administration.

Yep, I am definitely seeing a pattern now. It would appear the "Change for the Future" and "The Audacity of Hope" for the Obama Presidency lies not in the future, but in the past.

In the Eighties we had the science-fiction movie "Back to the Future," now we have the political fiction administration "Forward to the Past" starring a whole host of former Clinton Administration has-beens.

Not much "hope" for "change" with a team of holdovers from the Do Nothing Administration soon to take (or should I say retake) office in the White House. Especially when they will be teamed up with the Do Nothing Democrat Congress.

Zero plus Zero still adds up to Zero.

Yep, Obama's supporters are looking more and more foolish and gullible. They voted for "change" and they're getting the same old tired gang. Too, too funny!

I suppose that is what happens when you get your news from SNL, NPR, and the New York Lies; an uninformed electorate who vote for the first snake-oil salesman to come along.

Hey you Liberal idiots, I'm laughing at you, not with you.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Big Three Bailout: This Says It All

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas PolicyCast: Monopolies or markets?

On Monday, the Texas Public Policy Foundation hosted "Monopolies or Markets? How to Power Economic Growth," a Policy Primer on electric deregulation. During his keynote remarks, House Regulated Industries Committee Chairman Phil King discussed Texas' successful transition to a competitive electric market and what should be done to keep Texas on the path toward energy independence. We caught up with Chairman King following the event for this conversation on the Texas electric market.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Foundation: Don’t lock children out of charter schools

AUSTIN – Tens of thousands of Texas school children will be locked out of the school that can best meet their needs once the State Board of Education hits the Texas Legislature’s cap on charter schools later this week.

“The State Board of Education has done what it can to promote competition and innovation in Texas public schools,” said Brooke Dollens Terry, education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. “But restrictions imposed by the Texas Legislature will deny tens of thousands of students the opportunity to enroll in their preferred public school.”

The Texas Legislature has capped the number of open-enrollment charters at 215, of which the State Board of Education has issued 209. The State Board of Education’s Committee on School Initiatives is expected to recommend the final six charters at its 1 p.m. meeting today, with the full board expected to approve those charters at its 9 a.m. meeting tomorrow. Both meetings will take place at the Texas Education Agency headquarters, located at 1701 N. Congress Avenue in Austin.

In August, the Foundation released a report, “Calculating the Demand for Charter Schools,” which compiled the first-ever, Texas-specific waiting list for charter school enrollment. The report concluded that while 89,156 students attended 355 open-enrollment charter school campuses during the 2007-08 academic year, at least 16,810 children were on waiting lists to attend a charter school – including 7,415 in the Houston area; 5,896 in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex; and 2,110 in the Rio Grande Valley.

“If this cap is not lifted, the waiting list will grow, preventing even more students from attending a public charter school,” Terry said.

Terry noted that charter schools are public schools that predominantly serve low-income and minority students who are behind academically upon entering the charter school.

“Many charter schools focus on students who have fallen through the cracks of the public school system,” she said. “Rather than writing these students off, we should increase the range of educational settings and options available to them so that they can receive the education they’ll need to be productive citizens.”

The Texas Public Policy Foundation is a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

Brooke Dollens Terry is an education policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

– 30 –

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Automotive Industry Bailout: Management, Union Out of Touch

Watching the CEO's of the Big Three automakers fly into Washington D.C. in their private jets...three of them...I couldn't help but be reminded of the album released by Commander Cody and the Lost Planet Airmen entitled, "Lost in the Ozone Again".

I can't help but be struck by how out of touch with the average American these members of the elite managerial class are. We have seen other evidence of this lack or perspective by other executives in other industries - the recent excesses of AIG executives comes to mind. Having only days before secured $85 Billion in federal funds to prevent their corporation from failing, they indulged themselves in a lavish $440,000 "retreat" at the St. Regis Resort in Los Angeles, including $23,000 in "spa treatments."

This "Let them eat cake," mentality appears to be endemic to this managerial class. Members of this elite group protect their own. Those who have manifestly failed in their assignments rarely suffer the consequences of their failures. They are merely picked up by the board of directors' brethren and hired by the board of some other corporation. They receive huge compensation packages and even larger "golden parachutes" that make termination or forced retirement prohibitively expensive.

Now I am a capitalist, a free-marketer who believes that government involvement in private industries is not just counter-productive but destructive. Our economic model, the model which made America the most powerful economic force in the world depends on the right of businesses to succeed or fail based on their ability to respond the market forces and the needs of their customers.

Businesses must be allowed to fail when they are no longer viable. Survival of the fittest is not only "the law of the jungle," but should be the law of the market. Competition breeds innovation and keeps prices down.

Capitalism is a two-edged sword. The truth is I have never had a problem with CEO's and other corporate executives making as much money as their stock-holders choose to pay them. If corporate stock-holders choose to give their corporate executives %300 Million golden parachutes, more power to them. Too me these levels of compensation seem wasteful and foolish, but if the market sustains them that's the stock-holders business, not mine...or the government's.

When I do have a problem is when these same wealthy executives come to congress, cap-in-hand, looking for tax-payer dollars to bail them out for poor decisions. That they did so in their corporation's private jets - each separately - suggests that these corporations have not gone to any lengths to cut their overhead costs.

I also have a problem when members of our government, beholden to external parties - like unions - seek to use tax-payer funds to pay those external parties back for their financial and political support. It is clear that the prime motivation behind the push - primarily by Democrat members of Congress - to provide $25 Billion in federal funds is motivated by their political indebtedness.

Corporate America has been gradually moving toward the Democrat Party as they look for a partner to help them compete in the global market; pretty much the antithesis of our historical economic model. I hope they enjoy their new partners in business because if things continue in the direction they are currently moving, these corporate executives will soon be working for the government.

Democrats favor the bailout by a margin of 60:36 Republicans disapprove by the same margin, 65:35. These numbers grant us a unique look into the mindset of both parties. Democrats have always leaned towards the socialist model of economics, Republicans towards the capitalist model. Democrats don't want to be forced to compete for jobs and compensation; they want to be taken care of by a paternalistic government.

What is disturbing is that as many Republicans are supportive of the bailout proposal as do. I've heard all of the arguments, mainly consisting of dire predictions for our economy should the bailout not occur, but until the UAW workers accept contracts which put labor costs-including employee buyouts and pension costs equal to those of the Japanese and Korean car manufacturers' employee expenses, I will remain unsympathetic.

I have heard no compelling evidence that, given carefully structured government warranty guarantees, says that people will not buy a car from a company in Chapter 11 provided the restructuring is based on a sound business plan.

I suggest that the Big Three begin by selling off their fleets of private jets.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas Senator John Cornyn to be Named NRSC Chairman

Go John Go!

I have a big shout out and congratulations to our own Senator John Cornyn for being named National Republican Senate Committee Chairman. This is a really great first step to renewing the Republican Party in Congress.

John is a strong Conservative and has been one of the most effective voices for Conservatism in Congress. Here's the Dallas Morning News' story:

Texas Sen. John Cornyn chosen to lead National Republican Senatorial Committee

02:35 PM CST on Tuesday, November 18, 2008
By TODD J. GILLMAN / The Dallas Morning News
tgillman@dallasnews.com

WASHINGTON – The dwindling ranks of GOP senators chose Texan John Cornyn this morning to lead their campaign effort for the next two years.

"The right policies and the right message are very, very important, but they don’t count for much unless you can win elections," Mr. Cornyn said after Senate Republicans elected leaders for the new Congress. "Now we’ll get to work."

Counting the Senate’s two independents, Democrats will control 58 of 100 seats, up from a one-vote majority just a few years ago but still shy of the 60 needed to ward off filibusters.

Democrats hope to pick up another one to three seats in coming weeks, as contests in Alaska, Minnesota and Georgia are settled.

Let's all hope that this is a portent of things to come and Conservatives will reassert their leadership in the Senate Republican Caucus. Enough with the RINO's.

Once more; Congratulations Senator Cornyn, I wish you great success in this new challenging role. If anyone can set things right, I know you can.

Hip, Hip, Hoorah!

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

NASA, James Hansen, Busted Again for False Global Warming Data

Well folks, here we go again. The eggheads at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) have been caught with their pants down again.

James Hansen's gang of Global Warming thugs have been playing with the temperature numbers again. They reported on November 10th, 2008 that this past October was the "warmest October in 129 years." Turns out that they "mistakenly" plugged September's data into the October slot.

GISS claims that it was an innocent mistake, but this is not the first instance of AGW theory advocates have fudged the data. I reported back in June that the temperature data from the 1970's had been "adjusted" downward to make recent temperature data seem more extreme than previously thought.

This "error" is either a deliberate attempt to deceive the American public into believing their AGW lies in which case, the whole lot of them ought to be sacked, or it is a case of gross incompetence, in which case the whole lot of them ought to be sacked for incompetence.

It appears that a jump of over three quarters of a degree in one year (far exceeding that of any previous year) was insufficient to arouse susupicion among those lauded "scientists."

Thankfully a couple of bloggers were more curious and observant. It took less than a week for two AGW Skeptic's blogs (DENIERS! Burn them! Burn them!) Watts Up With That and Climate Audit to blow a mile wide hole in GISS's data.

The repeated efforts by these priests of the Religion of Anthropogenic Global Warming to deceive the world into buying their flawed theories based not on actual data, but on their computer models is shameful and proves again just how desperate these Gorebots are to prove their dying theories and save their shallow, misguided careers.

This year has been one of the coldest in the past decade and this past October ranks as the 70th warmest October in the past 129 years, not the warmest as was reported.

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a myth...bordering on a lie...intended to force the most successful economies into the doldrums of mediocrity. That was the intended purpose of the Kyoto Accord and it continues to be the intended purpose of Albert Gore, Jr.'s and James Hansen's efforts today.

The data have repeatedly shown AGW to be a lie based on a false assumption. Atmospheric data don't support the lie, recently oceanic data failed to show the temperature rise scientist expected, and now these "scientists" have been forced into distorting the data to continue their charade.

Time to wake up and smell the faux science folks.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Bailout for GM, Ford, and Chrysler Nothing More Than Sop to Unionized Inefficiency

Throwing good money after bad. That seems to be the only ideas coming out of Washington these days and the GM $25 Billion bailout is a perfect example of pandering at the tax-payer's expense.

It's the worst idea to come out of Washington yet in response to the current financial crisis; lets give $Billions to the bloated unions of the automotive industry.

Make no mistake, the proposed $25 Billion bailout for GM is nothing more than that; a sop to the UAW. Everyone knows this, the Democrat demagogues who are pushing the bailout idea know this, they are simply providing a payback for union support in the past election. Republicans know this, that's why they are fighting the GM bailout plan.

There has been a lot of criticism, some of it well deserved, directed at the management of the big three auto-makers, but it is not the manufacture of SUV's and other gas-guzzling vehicles that has been the primary cause of economic distress for US automakers, it is the power of unions in non-right to work states that has been the most egregious negative force on manufacturer profitability.

It is time for the big three to declare bankruptcy and break those bloated union contracts.

I know, I know, I've heard all of those dire predictions of 3 million displaced workers should the automotive industry fail, but those absurd predictions are predicated on a lie. Bankruptcy does not mean the end of a business, it means the restructuring of a business.

Filing Chapter 11 won't mean the loss of millions of jobs, that's just more union/Democrat demagoguery. What it would mean is restructuring those industries with a more profitable business model, more rational benefits packages for their employees, and more realistic pay scales for their employees.

Toyota manufactures a majority of the automobiles they sell to Americans right here in the good ole' USA and they manage to do so profitably. The reason why is simple; they aren't locked into huge pension and benefits packages like the Big Three.

It is estimated that labor under the current contracts between the Big Three and UAW workers cost over $73/ employee. Toyota America costs run about $48/employee. This means that Toyota America has an advantage over GM, Ford and Chrysler of better than $25/employee.

On a per vehicle basis this amounts to an increased cost of $1400.00 in healthcare and pension benefits to current and retired auto-workers over that of Toyota.

Of course it gets even better than that, the unions have also garnered an additional overhead of $1000.00 in holiday pay, work rules, plant-shutdown-pay and line-relief to UAW workers. Thus every automobile that GM manufactures comes with an automatic $2400.00 penalty in union associated costs; expenses that Toyota doesn't have to pay.

Forcing GM and the other United States automobile manufacturers into Chapter 11 would enable them to restructure their debts, renegotiate more reasonable contracts with the unions and instantly become more competitive in the automotive market.

Of course sacking management would probably be a reasonable action as well, which is why GM is begging the government to bail them out at tax-payer expense. Those fat-cat managers won't be able to collect their huge bonuses if they are forced into Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

For those of you average citizens who are inclined to feel sorry for the UAW workers, just remember those hourly numbers:

1. Average hourly compensation for the Big Three, $73
2. Average hourly compensation for Toyota, $48
3. Average hourly compensation for all American workers, $28.48

Democrats need to explain why those "average workers" making $28.48/hour in total compensation should be forced to foot the bill for those Big Three autoworkers pulling down over two and a half times as much money and benefits as those same "average workers."

Break the unions, restructure the automobile manufacturers, and revitalize our economy with tax-breaks. End all corporate taxes (after all, customers pay corporate taxes, not corporations), completely eliminate the capital gains tax, and increase tax incentives for research and development.

Do the above and make the current tax rates permanent and this economy would turn around virtually overnight.

Of course none of this will happen now, because Democrats control both Houses of Congress and the White House, and the unions control Democrats. What will happen instead, is a bailout for the Big Three automakers, forced unionization of Toyota America, an end to the tax-cuts President Bush put in place, an increase in corporate taxes, and an increase in the capital gains tax-rates.

And that is a recipe for economic disaster.

• In six months, GM and the rest will be back for more money because nothing will have been done to solve the core problems in that industry.
• Because of the draconian tax system, the economy will sink into a nighmarish recession which the Democrats will blame on Republicans even though they have been in control of the economy since January 21st, 2007
• Job losses will sky-rocket as will government spending, plunging us into further economic misery.
• More jobs will be lost to overseas companies, again due to the draconian corporate tax-rates imposed by Democrats.
• Gasoline prices will be up over $4.00/gallon by next summer and they will not fall, because Democrats will not support further domestic exploration.
• Energy prices will also sky-rocket as "green" initiatives restrict our ability to build coal-fired electric plants and government invests $ Billions into untested, unproven alternative energy sources.

Pretty grim stuff for the average American citizen. Democrats won't care, because they want high gasoline and oil prices. They figure to leverage your misery into forcing you to use mass transit and drive smaller, more dangerous vehicles.

America always deserves the government for which it votes. Unfortunately the idiots who earn that $28.48 and still voted for Obama and the Democrat Party will force the rest of us to suffer along with them.

The one bright spot in all of this is that probably by 2010, but certainly by 2012, American voters will see once again that the Democrat Party model of high taxes and increased government spending doesn't work (and never has) and the pendulum will swing back towards the free-market model of Conservatism and Republicans (if they don't screw it up).

We may not unseat the messiah of the Democrat Party in 2012, but we will begin to make inroads in Congress and by 2016 the Republican Party will be back in the White House. My only concern is how we survive long enough economically to get there.

I would much prefer a strong economy to the narrow, doubtful pleasures of political gamesmanship, but then I'm a Conservative and therefore unlike my Democrat friends, place the good of my country over the good of my party.

It is time for unions to die their long overdue deaths. They served a real purpose a hundred years ago, but they have been the primary drag on our economy for forty years or so, extorting unrealistically high wage and benefits concessions from corporations, institutionalizing inefficiency, and protecting incompetence.

We see these effects in virtually all industries (and especially so in our federal government where employees are virtually impervious to attempts to terminate them), but nowhere is the problem unions cause more readily apparent than in the problems of our automotive industry.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Bailout Frenzy: Will the Last Capitalist in Congress Please Turn Out the Lights?

First it was TARP, the $700 Billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, intended to provide liquidity in the mortgage lending sector of our economy to "keep our economy running."

Congress wisely said no to this socialist obscenity when it was first proffered as THE solution to the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and mortgage-banking industry collapse. Even having that powerful fiscal Conservative, John McCain "suspend" his campaign to fly into Washington DC and bless this disaster wasn't enough to sway Congressional Republicans.

Ah, but Conservatism's victory was short-lived. Congressional wonks simply did what they usually do and sweetened the deal with another $150 Billion in pork...you remember pork, John McCain, don't you? That did the trick.

Suddenly congressmen who became dyspeptic at the thought of asking American tax-payers to fork over three-quarters of a trillion dollars, overcame their initial nausea and readily voted in favor of this, even more egregious, obscenity.

Even the usually fastidious swinophobe John McCain couldn't wait to place his imprimatur on this porcine abomination. Urgency was all the rage. We were told that TARP was essential if the American economy was to survive. There was no time for careful reflection; no time for debate or even serious questions. Just trust Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson...or was the Pat Paulson, hard to tell the difference...and he, in his infinite wisdom, will show us the way.

Well a fool (337 of them actually, 74 in the Senate and 263 in the House) and his money are soon parted and on October 3rd the House voted to approve the TARP-Revised (the Senate approved it on October 1st). They did this in spite of the very vocal and strenuous objection of a majority of tax-payers; if congressional phone-calls and e-mails and national polling data are to be believed.

Such is the arrogance of our elected representatives leaders.

A couple of weeks later, the news comes out that the Fed (Federal Reserve Bank) had already handed out over $2 Trillion in loans to various banks (the names of which are being withheld) in a further effort to boost liquidity (an effort which to date, has failed miserably). So suddenly the $700 Billion (which was rejected as fiscally irresponsible) that evolved into $850 Billion (apparently fiscal irresponsibility depends on whose pork is being basted), ballooned to $2.85 Trillion.

Ah but the United States Santa Claus (a.k.a. Congress) isn't finished. Now they have decided, in their own generous (with your tax-dollars), socialist way to extend their (our) largess to corporations in financial distress.

Corporations are queuing up for their turn at the tax-payer trough.

• General Motors, $50 Billion? Sure, why not?
• AIG (recipient of $85 Billion already) another $25 Billion? Go ahead.
• Chrysler? Ford? Hey, the more the merrier.
• Airline industry? Well, everybody needs to fly.

What's next, Joe's Bar & Grill? No worries! Our government is rich. If you need more money, no problem, they'll just print some more.

Now we are seeing cities begging for their fair share. There's no end in sight.

Even President Bush, generous to a fault...no I mean it...really, to a fault, is having second thoughts about this treasury free-for-all. Sorry George that horse is out of the barn and you're the guy who opened it. A lot of us could have told you this was going to happen, but you wouldn't have listened.

Oh and the real kicker; Swami Hank Paulson knew his plan wouldn't work. He told the press:

"It was clear to me by the time the bill was signed on October 3rd that we needed to act quickly and forcefully, and that purchasing troubled assets—our initial focus—would take time to implement and would not be sufficient given the severity of the problem.”

Err...WHAT? What's that you say? You lied to us? What was it that Paulson told us back in September?

"I am convinced that this bold approach will cost American families far less than the alternative-a continuing series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets unable to fund economic expansion. The financial security of all Americans...depends on our ability to restore our financial institutions to a sound footing."

Uh...excuse me Mr. Secretary, you left out a few things back then, didn't you? Like, well, let's see...

"This is just the thin end of a huge wedge aimed at the backsides of every American taxpayer."

Or maybe,

"My goal is the eventual institution of a Socialist Economy."

Or probably most appropriate,

"I haven't got a clue as to what I am doing or how to solve this problem, but I figure if we just throw money in every direction, something is bound to happen, so trust me."

The really bad news is that this ballooning "$700 Billion bailout" has shown no signs of slowing down as it is now approaching the $5 Trillion mark. Whatever legacy President Bush had left has probably now been flushed down the toilet of history with his blind trust of Hank Paulson.

By the time this economy shakes out of the upcoming catastrophe, President George W. Bush will be lucky to be rated above Richard M. Nixon, or "GASP!" even Jimmy Carter.

Folks, Paulson was a Democrat before he was Treasury Secretary, so none of his Socialist Economic and Fiscal Policies should come as a surprise. He's a believer in a big, interventionist, paternalistic government. It was this moronic concept of "bi-partisanship" that gave us Mr. Paulson. President Bush has some sort of burning need to be looked at as a nice, reasonable guy. That's why so many of us were rankled by his term "Compassionate Conservative." It was a kowtow to those who falsely asserted that Conservatism was cold-hearted and uncaring.

Now we are paying the price for his personal insecurities. They have arisen time and time again, first with his retention of (Democrat) Norm Minetta as Transportation Secretary and his naming of (RINO) Colin Powell as his Secretary of State (we see how appreciative Powell was when he endorsed Obama for president); it has culminated with (Democrat) Paulson, now dismantling our economy piece-meal by handing out tax-payer money willy-nilly to everyone who requests it.

Unfortunately Corporations have decided to cash in (literally) on this Government Boondoggle and who can blame them? In one fell swoop, they have abandoned the concept of "laissez faire" for "lend me some cash."

Frankly, I'm wondering if I can figure out a way to wrangle a couple of million for myself...hey, if they're giving it out to everyone, I want my "fair share." Of course, by the time the US Treasury finishes printing all this new money, it'll only be worth about 20 bucks.

Bailing out businesses that are failing because they are poorly managed and deserve to fail will only further weaken American businesses and rewards those failed managers and their over-paid union employees.

Bad businesses are supposed to fail. That's how the free-market works. Poorly run businesses fail and are replaced by those whose management understands the market and can succeed. What we are doing now is the equivalent of feeding the weakest and sickest of a herd of cattle and culling the healthy.

Thanks a bunch, President George. You are really trying to wrest the last vestiges of respect I have for you out of my grasp.

Long Live Our American Republic (or is that Socialist Republic?)!!!!

Oh! Will somebody please pass the pork rinds?

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Courage in the face of adversity

We are not living in ordinary times. Our current troubles are many – the global financial mess, the credit crunch, the Wall Street bailout, threats of a recession, and the mortgage meltdown, just to name a few.

And yet, while the trials ahead may test our strength and challenge our will, we must, nevertheless, approach them with a steely resolve knowing that rash action and a panicked mindset will only worsen our present condition.

Rudyard Kipling said it best:

“If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
…
“If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same
…
“Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it.”

Now, that’s not to say that the headlines in the near future won’t continue to be scary – they almost certainly will. Markets will remain volatile, unemployment may rise, and the nation could enter a legitimate recession.

But we, and our nation’s leaders, in particular, should remember that what our country needs most right now is a steady hand to guide us through the storm and return us back to the principles that built this country – truly free markets, limited government, freedom, liberty, and personal responsibility.

Holding fast to these principles has not only made us a great country, it has made us the greatest country and we would do well to remember that. But the need for strong leadership guided by these core principles extends beyond just Washington, D.C. The movement to begin rebuilding our fragile economy begins at the state and local level, and there is no better example of these principles in action than Texas.

Even today as the world’s economies spastically react to the ongoing crises and threaten to implode under the stress, Texas’ robust economy remains remarkably strong.

The state’s September 2008 unemployment estimate came in well below the national average, 5 percent versus 6.1 percent, respectively. Texas’ gross state product – a figure used to measure the state’s economic productivity – swelled in comparison to the national economy, 4.1 percent vs. 1.5 percent during fiscal year 2008. And most importantly, Texas continues to add jobs to its economy – 250,000 over the last 12 months and 1.3 million in the last five years.

It’s no coincidence that Texas’ uninterrupted prosperity in the face of a national economic emergency comes at a time when Texas government is moving toward greater fiscal responsibility and becoming increasingly transparent.

As we move forward, Texas’ continued commitment to limited government, fiscal conservatism, and low taxation, both in times of excess and shortage, will only strengthen what is, arguably, the nation’s strongest economy.

While the global crisis remains a tremendous external threat to the Lone Star State, the fact of the matter is Texas’ economic fundamentals are in place to weather this financial storm. Other states, not as fortunate, need not strain themselves to understand the formula behind Texas’ success: low taxes plus limited government plus fiscal responsibility equals a stronger economy.

The Honorable Talmadge Heflin is Director of the Center for Fiscal Policy at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin. He is a former chairman of the Texas House Appropriations Committee.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Democrat California Legislators Appeal to Courts to Overturn the Will of the People On Proposition 8

I have always been impressed with the Democrat Party's dedication to the principles of democracy. They speak of it so eloquently. They advocate it so broadly when speaking of sharing the wealth of others with those "less fortunate." It seems they just can't get enough of it...unless they disagree with its consequences.

Take California for example. The people approved Proposition 8,