Tuesday, January 31, 2012

In Other News

The Florida Republican primary dominated the news cycle today, but there was some interesting news that might threaten Obama's re-election, regardless of whom the GOP nominates. Darrell Issa, who has been one of my heroes for his relentless investigations of Obama administration corruption, and there is plenty, has threatened that miserable hack with contempt for failing to produce documents relating to Fast and Furious.





This is normally Dean's beat, but this news was just too juicy to ignore. Clearly, senior members of the so called Justice Department are obstructing justice. Taking the fifth, threatening stool-pigeons whistleblowers, playing the race card: all part of the Chicago way at inJustice.

This is too egregious not to be used against Obama in November, it will be all the more effective because it goes to his supposed strengths on integrity. Same for Solyndra and other green crony capitalism plays.

Monday, January 30, 2012

Outsourcing Surveillance

Should the federal government or the fed monitor the internet for content? Clearly, they are doing so; that part isn't up for debate. But tougher questions about how they do so come to mind when one considers the implications. At first glance, it seems benign, shouldn't government officials be aware of what is happening on line, in the same way that staffers would compile the relevant news of the day for senior leaders back in the day? Of course, that became "The Early Bird" which eventually became an electronic publication. How "The Early Bird" wasn't a copyright violation always escaped me, because it would be a full article reprint with no excerpting. This is the core of the problem, merely reading some blog sites doesn't constitute a problem for anyone, but the systematic collection of information does become a problem, because that constitutes "surveillance."

The U.S. Constitution provides that:
Mere surveillance by reading publicly available material doesn't seem to violate this prohibition. However, what if the data collection is outsourced to a firm, such as Cyveillance that has questionable practices.
According to their website, the not only monitor HTTP (website) traffic, but they also monitor IRC and Chat rooms. I don’t know about you but if I am in a chat room, I have a least some small expectation of privacy with those that are in that room. I would not expect that some bot is logging everything, keeping it in a database for further review and perhaps sale to another corporation or government.
. . .
As well as IRC and Web spidering, Cyveillance also claims to spider FTP sites. According to J.D. Meadows who operates the Cyveillance Exposed website, his logs show evidence that not only did the Cyveillancebot spider available content, but also tried to search the hard drive for other files and directories. Clearly if true, Cyveillance has participated in actions that are clearly illegal, immoral and unethical.
The beauty of outsourcing data collection has been pointed out by Jr. Deputy Accountant, the government can claim that it is not collecting data, just getting reports. But what protections are in place to ensure that tax dollars aren't funding methods that violate privacy laws? None, that I have been able to find.

I admit to being conflicted over the basic issue. Heuristic algorithms might be developed from web crawling that could predict important trends that government is supposed to respond to. The dilemma is that there seem to be no privacy safeguards in place and the use of outsourcers to do the dirty work just makes us suspicious.

For some specific details on Cyveillance' tactics see the accounts at Jr. Deputy Accountant. It seems likely that the monitoring detailed there is initiated by a federal government contract.

Pictured at top left is Leo Quinn, CEO of QinetiQ, parent firm of Cyveillance. Pictured at top right is Dave Papas, COO of Cyveillance, who enjoys golf and lives in Stafford, Virginia.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

There May be Warming, There is No Crisis

I admit to having vacillated in my beliefs about whether there is scientific basis for a belief in man made causes for global warming. I came to believe that whether or not it is true, the responses proposed by the warmists/alarmists were far out of proportion to the threat. Predictably, the left has seized on the issue to propose any manner of schemes for governments to seize wealth and redistribute it to favored groups, all in the name of "climate justice." Whenever the left argues for some new redistributive scheme to allow their minions in government to get their greedy paws on the wealth created by their betters, they resort to grandiose claims.

Proof that they are insincere is their lack of support for a carbon tax, with an income tax offset. If one conceded that carbon dioxide production was an "externality," impacting the environment, then the most straight-forward, economically sustainable and non-distorting measure would be a carbon tax, with the revenues from that tax used to reduce income taxes. That the left has never supported this approach is evidence that their touting of global warming is a ruse to build bigger government.

In yesterday's WSJ, a group of 16 scientists also believe that catastrophic intervention in the economy is not called for. They do not deny that some warming is occurring, but point to the overblown hysteria about its effects. San Diego's own Roger Cohen, a fellow of the American Physical Society is a signatory on the editorial. Roger's work was featured on Temple of Mut, debunking the lousy science behind AB-23. His outline of how to answer the warmists was also featured on The Daily Caller. From the WSJ editorial.
. . .
. . .
H/T Temple of Mut.

Weekend Music Chill - Bonus Material


Friday, January 27, 2012

Do State Labor Laws Trump Democracy?




Like that last little bit? 116,000 citizens sign a ballot initiative, but because the mayor used his first amendment rights to support the effort, its invalid, according to the unions. To be clear, the labor law cited does nothing to prohibit citizen initiatives, and they are protected by the state constitution. In most states, I would be unfazed, wondering how fast the lawsuit would be tossed. Unfortunately, we live in California, where the rule of law appears more tenuous.

Weekend Music Chill

Getting an early jump on the weekend music. I was thinking about how the tea party has no real candidate in the Presidential race and never did, a too bad to Michele Bachmann, and that dufus who thinks she's queen of the movement. For some reason, the Cars 1979 hit, It's All I Can Do came to mind, with the lyrics It's all I can do, to keep waiting for you, running through my head. I think it makes a nice companion piece to a song that would be on my Desert Island Dozen, Bye-Bye Love.

There's something extra about the studio version of Bye Bye Love, so I included it here.

Caption Contest at SDRostra

Over at sdrostra.com Jim Sills is having some fun with a caption contest, please click here and post your entry. I love this photo, and so does the Temple.

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Defense Spending - Republicans Don't Get It

Budget "cuts" for the Department of Defense proposed by Obama are fairly responsible as far as I can tell. But Republicans are already criticizing the administration's proposals. Predictably, John McCain called the cuts unacceptable. So what are the facts? Most of the spending cuts come from winding down the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The base budget of the Pentagon actually increases beyond fiscal year 2013. Base spending is the spending not going to support the wars. Further, the ground troop strength of the Army and Marine Corps is reduced to somewhat above levels of 2001. Finally, and more controversially, Secretary Panetta called for another round of base closures, setting up a new Base Re-alignment and Closure (BRAC) commission in 2013. (Parochially, speaking the BRAC process has been very good to San Diego, in spite of the closing of the old NTC, now Liberty Station. The move of the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) from DC in the mid-1990s, Mine Warfare Command from TX in the 2000s and additional ships homeported here have added federal spending to the local economy.)

Budgets for hardware procurement in the proposal have their ups and downs, but nothing really major. From McClatchey newspapers.


Republican criticism about the defense budget really misses the mark and paints them as unserious about dealing with spending overall. The one valid criticism actually comes from a Democrat, Senator Carl Levin, who said he wouldn't support closing domestic bases before U.S. bases in Europe were closed. I really applaud that thinking. It costs far more to keep bases open overseas than in the United States because of the costs with rotating troops overseas. The cuts in troop strength are going to lead to longer peacetime deployments. From the LA Times:
Two of the four Army brigades in Europe would be brought home, and the Army and Marines would shift to a rotational training plan under which more units would deploy overseas to conduct exercises with allies in Europe and Asia.
This saps troop morale. They should be enjoying a peace dividend as well. More deployments are also going to raise the expense of maintaining the proposed troop strength. Republicans have enough Congressional leaders with military experience to put forward a more rational critique of this budget. Ron Paul has been the one calling for shuttering overseas bases and having the troops stationed at home. Maybe that's part of the reason why he is the largest recipient of campaign donations from active duty members of the military.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Half Truths and Lies in the News - Indiana to Ban Unions?

The headline on Google News and CBS news is:

Indiana on the cusp of union ban

Of course they aren't going to ban unions, who are protected by federal law. What is really going to happen is that unions won't be allowed to force employers to collect dues on their behalf from workers. If a worker doesn't wish to join a union, even at a union workplace, then he or she won't have to. This doesn't ban unions.

The article actually spends more time shilling for Scott Walker's recall in Wisconsin, falsely claiming that he stripped state workers unions of collective bargaining rights. In fact, the privileges stripped were not rights, because the state of Wisconsin, as a sovereign entity has the right to set conditions of state employment as a matter of law. Little reported is that this is exactly the way my workplace, a part of the federal government, is governed. Unions can bargain all they want, but ultimately, Congress sets pay and benefits. The laws surrounding this were laid down by Democratic Congresses over 40 years ago, for good reasons. FDR also opposed collective bargaining for government employees.
So Scott Walker is to be pilloried for following the example of FDR and the Democratic Congress of the 1978? The left and its fellow travelers in the media need to get a grip on reality.

Romney's Charitable Giving

Amazingly, leftist trolls are trying to insinuate that Mitt Romney's tithing, as revealed on his income tax returns, is something that Republicans, and especially evangelicals will hold against him, since the tithing went to the Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints or Mormon church, colloquially. As a Christian, this facet of Romney's life gives me great hope for the man. In one of the most personal aspects of one's life, he has chosen to consistently put his money where his faith is. It is indicative of his honor and commitment to his beliefs. Meanwhile, I am not surprised to find that Obama and Biden are much less generous, giving 6.1% and .15% of their incomes respectively in their most recent available returns.

I am not saying that one's level of charitable giving is a qualification for President. However, it is an indicator of character, especially if we can view the long term trend for the man, even before he knew he would be running.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Half Truths and Lies - Live Blogging SOTU
















Energetics, wind turbine manufacturer, the next Solyndra?

Clean energy tax breaks, more swag to favored groups.











What are we thinking? Who will win the Super Bowl?










Monday, January 23, 2012

The Problem with Ron Paul

I agree with Ron Paul on just about every subject, but I am not supporting him for President. What gives? First, he occasionally makes a total clown of himself. He can be absolutely correct and so totally befuddle the listener that he gives his ideas a bad name. When your ideas are the best, you should be able to take it the opponents of greater liberty much more effectively than he has. Second, it has become increasingly clear that he is not in the race to win it. His strategy appears to be pick up enough delegates to get his issues aired at the convention. I would normally not object to such a strategy, as the Republican party has proved themselves unworthy of commitment to any actual principle over the years. However, this year, Barack Obama represents an existential threat to the liberty of all Americans, and he must be defeated and Obamacare repealed. This is imperative to getting us of the road to serfdom and back on the highway to prosperity and liberty. Mr. Paul's continued presence and his goal of extracting concessions at the convention will work to the advantage of the President's re-election.

However, my biggest argument is with his foreign policy, actually, his national security policy. Now, I agree that we could do with a huge cutback of bases overseas, and even the defense budget requires scrutiny, but Ron Paul is naive if he believes that neutrality is going to make America more secure. We know from history that it is tyrannies, not democracies that are the source of war and conflict. Further, a stable world political order, in which small nations are not subject to territorial violations by their neighbors keeps the peace, which helps with both United States' and world economic growth. This means that it is in our best interests to work against tyrants and would be tyrants the world over. It also means that we support Israel, as the only true democracy in the Middle East, against aggression from her neighbors. Al Qaeda and its like minded co-conspirators actively believe in pan-Islamic dictatorship, and have simultaneously made the mistake of attacking the United States. This makes defeating them, and killing bin-Laden as part of a legal war of self-defense, legitimate execution of America's national security policy. Ron Paul always seems to get tongue tied when discussing the killing of bin-Laden. One of the principles roles of President is Commander-in-Chief. It seems that Ron Paul is squeamish in exercising our sovereign right of self defense, and that makes him unfit for the Presidency.

Let me be clear that we should not get into a war with every dictator on the planet who might threaten us. Even if that were desirable, we lack the national treasure to do so. For example, I have argued that attacking Iran, even if they obtain nuclear weapons is not a realistic option. We must pick our battles. But we should retain the right of self-defense, and further, the right to intervene in conflicts where tyrants threaten the international order, when that is in the national interest and Congress so authorizes.

Saturday, January 21, 2012


Gingrich's solid victory in today's South Carolina primary got me thinking about what Republicans want most, Barack Obama's defeat. One might argue that such a goal lacks positive vision, but when you have someone bent on destroying our previously accepted limits on the power of the federal government, such a goal is a worthy one to advance the cause of liberty. It seems apparent to me that Romney's inability to handle the questions about his tax returns, not the facts surrounding the returns themselves, caused a breach in his main argument for nomination, his electability. Further, in thinking about my own enthusiasm, I admit I got excited thinking about having Newt Gingrich debating Obama in his inimitable style, demolishing the shibboleths of the left on national television. Romney gives me no confidence on his ability to handle the unexpected, or even the easy to anticipate in a debate with Obama.

But we have to ask, what wins national elections? We have to further ask if experience is a guide to answering such a question. There have been approximately 800 Republican primary debates so far, well closer to 25. However, there will only be three general election debates. In the past, these debates have generally not proven decisive. As Brit Hume pointed out on Fox News today, most people have seemed little swayed by them, with supporters of each candidate believing that their man (we can say that with Bachmann out) being the winner. Primary debates are necessary, in Hume's opinion because the actual differences between the candidates positions in a single party, aren't that great.

But is that changing? Are the American people open to changing their minds if presented with an intellectually compelling exposition of the key issues? The optimist in me, wants to say yes, given the depth of crisis, surely Americans realize that business as usual is no longer acceptable. If one takes this view, then Gingrich is preferable to Romney, but Paul would actually be even more preferable to Gingrich. Of course, Newt's supporters would argue that Paul is too radical on foreign policy and would not defeat Obama. The realist in me thinks that as bad as things have gotten, they aren't bad enough to cause the sort of epistemological change necessary to accept Ron Paul. But such thinking also militates against Gingrich.

Historically, it has been coalition building, organization and getting out the vote that wins Presidential elections. Gingrich has tried to take a different path. He has certainly has some success, but it remains to be seen if that can win the nomination, much less the general. Romney, by contrast, seems to have done a decent job of building a winning organization, it's the candidate himself that seems to have problems. Also, Romney seems to be finding his voice in a more full throated defense of free enterprise, exactly the tack he needs to take in light of the attacks on his role at Bain Capital.

I am still not ready to endorse a candidate, but I am leaning to support for Romney, as much as I love Gingrich's combative debating style.

With respect to his tax returns, Romney needs to explain the facts to the American people. His case also argues for a tax rate that is both low and equal for all forms of income, whether pay, corporate, gains, retained interest, dividends, or interest. No loopholes and a 15% rate would probably pay for everything the government should be doing. Additionally, in order to keep the marginal rate truly flat, perhaps workers below the social security cap would pay a lower rate of 9.8% so that the marginal tax rate is truly flat.

Friday, January 20, 2012

More Loss of Liberty and Freedom of Conscience

Of course it did. The Obama administration is not going to allow Catholic organizations freedom of choice in whether or not to fund insurance coverage of contraception. From the NYTimes.
. . .
“In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences,” said Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of New York, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
. . .
Even beyond religious conscience, this limits everyone's choice. What if I want a plan that costs a lot less? Cutting back on mandated services like contraception that have no co-pay could reduce the cost of insurance. Why isn't that a consumer choice? The assault on freedom from the health care law is so vast, that it sometimes helps to just think about one assault at a time.

Those who argue otherwise just hate me as an individual and hate the whole concept of consumer choice. They are called leftists or statists and they have decided to regulate everyone's lives, individual choice and conscience be damned.

Weekend Music Chill

Barack Obama was on TV today, doing a couple of bars of the Rev Al Green's "Let's Stay Together." It got me thinking about what I might sing on the spur of the moment in public, given my limited vocal talent. Here are two songs I would go with.

And just because I can't resist this cover:

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Romney's Tax Returns






Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Thinking About Pension Reform

I fully support the pension reform initiative that will be on the ballot this June here in San Diego, but I think there are some clarifications needed about the facts surrounding the measure. Some key facts.
  1. Short term savings do not result from a shift to a 401(k) plan. The initiative will save the taxpayers money in both the short and long term. However, closing the defined benefits plan will require a plus up of those accounts as there will be no new entrants into those plans. This is made up for by other means, the most significant being fairer sharing of costs for current employees, a cap on the "pensionable" portion of employee pay and an anti-spiking provision. Further, the plan is not technically a 401(k), but a 401(a) which has less flexibility. A 401(k) is not currently legal for municipal employees by federal law. Call your Congressperson.
  2. The plan does nothing about current retiree health care costs. These costs seem likely to increase as retirees live longer.
  3. The costs of running a 401 style plan are likely to be greater than a defined benefits plan due to the need to manage individual accounts.
  4. The city's contribution rate of 9.2% seems high, but must account for the fact that employees are not part of the social security system a 6.2% contribution. That's a huge benefit to the employees which is often overlooked. Over very long time horizons, employees can expect a return of at least 8% per year as opposed to the paltry 2.6% for a medium income two income couple born in 1985. (Source is social security admin.)

So, am I against the 401(a)? No, I believe that it is better to offload future risk from the taxpaying public to the employee. City employees enjoy very high levels of job security, so the tradeoff should be that the taxpayer is no longer on the hook for supporting them after they retire. I honestly don't know why employees wouldn't prefer this deal.

For a full discussion of public employee pensions in general, and a debunking of many myths, see Governing magazine's article on Pension Puffery by Girard Miller.

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

SOPA Protesting - UPDATE

Wikipedia's front page is dark today over SOPA and fellow SLOB, Dueling Barstools, has a protest page up as well. I would like to remind my readers that the SOPA bill is an example of the Congress working at the behest of big corporations in the entertainment industry to protect their business model, while imposing intrusive and unnecessary regulation on the rest of the world.

In an unusual display of right and left agreement that this is an example of crony capitalism at its filthiest I quote:

The email from DailyKos said this.
And Neil Stevens, at the Daily Caller, opposes the bill as well, saying this:
This portion of the bill has little to do with protecting American interests abroad or with punishing lawbreakers. Instead, this portion of SOPA regulates the Internet at home. It is a framework for domestic censorship only tangentially related to intellectual property rights.
Darrell Issa, one of the few politicians I follow on Twitter deserves credit for crusading against this excrement. He has offered an alternative bill and asked for public comment. Protecting intellectual property rights need not trample our economic rights nor wreck the internet's technical infrastructure. Please put pressure on your Congressperson to oppose this legislation.

Here is what I wrote.

Congresswoman Davis,
The SOPA bill is a dangerous threat to the internet, both from the potential for censorship, misuse by third parties and damage to the internet's technical infrastructure. Please tell me that you will be voting against this bill or its companion Senate measure PIPA.
Regards, B


The protests and congressional contact seem to be having the desired effect. Harry Reid does not appear to have the votes to get a cloture vote on PIPA.

Monday, January 16, 2012

Tweet of the Day

Comes from @SamValley:

Should release his tax returns? Sure, right after Barack Obama releases his college transcripts.

You've got to love Sam's tag line:

Drugs, gangs, pornography, crooked politicians, stupid celebrities and high taxes; what's not to love about The Valley?

More Evidence of Iranian Weakness - Threats to Gulf Oil Producers

Iranian bellicosity against its neighbors demonstrates further weakness in its strategic position. I previously discussed why the threats over closing the Straits of Hormuz showed Iran's weakness. Now, their threats against the Saudis and others over oil production show another pitfall for Iran. The threat:

The comments by Iran’s OPEC governor, published Sunday, came as Saudi Arabia’s oil minister was quoted the same day denying that his country’s earlier pledges to boost output as needed to meet global demand was linked to a potential siphoning of Iranian crude from the market because of sanctions.

. . .


“These acts will not be considered friendly,” Mr. Khatibi said, adding that if the Arab producers “apply prudence and announce that they will not participate in replacing oil, then adventurist countries will not show interest” in the embargo.

Iran's threat is a de facto recognition that there is excess oil production capacity in the world beyond their ability to control. The Saudis appear to be backing down on their previously announced intention to keep prices low. Historically, the behavior of oil producing nations has been only loosely coupled with their announced intention. If I were the Saudis, I would not provoke the Iranians publicly, but would quietly boost production while denying that I was doing so. This makes political sense, because it allows the Saudis to appear not to be allying themselves with the west, while still undercutting the key threat to their existence, a nuclear armed Iran. As the Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States demonstrates, the Iranians and Saudis are already in a shadow war with each other.

Why are the Iranians getting so bellicose? I can only assume that they are desperate. The actions of a country on the verge of achieving tactical military superiority would not look like this. Assassinating nuclear scientists and sanctions seem to be having the desired effect. (Caveat: I don't know who is assassinating Iran's nuclear physicists, but they are dying in numbers and by means that point to assassination.)

Friday, January 13, 2012

Weekend Music Chill

Been watching Justice League (90s cartoon series) on DVD lately as family entertainment. It makes for lively nerd debates on various superheroes. One thing I notices is that even though Batman is by far the more popular DC character, Superman crushes Batman when it comes to pop music themes. I posted two of my favorites last year. Here is one more.

On the whole superhero theme, here is one of the best rockin' renditions of a superhero theme song.

Hypocrisy of Outrage at Marines Pissing on Dead Taliban

I am not condoning what the Marines did in urinating on dead Taliban corpses, but the hue and cry over their actions has me pretty angry. The Taliban were part of a conspiracy that killed over 3,000 Americans; they have mutilated women, killed those trying to educate girls, killed Christians, killed foreign medical workers, beaten and tortured their own people, and generally acted like uncivilized savages unworthy of the protections afforded civilized peoples in the Geneva Convention and the various Hague treaties. So cry me a river when a few of their fighters suffer disrespect in death after they meet up with justice.

Now I understand that it is not in the political interests of the United States for our Marines to act in this fashion. To some extent, as Clausewitz famously pointed out, war is politics carried out by other means. To the extent that this allows our enemies to frame the conflict as a religious one, these actions are detrimental to the interests of the United States. But we should leave it at that, and reserve our moral outrage for true acts of oppression.


Wednesday, January 11, 2012

We Had to Destroy the Fish in Order to Save Them

PG&E operates the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, located near San Luis Obispo is due for a permit to extend its life for another twenty years of delivering electricity to California. Recently, an undersea fault line was discovered in the oceans off San Luis Obispo. In order to get a permit, PG&E must conduct a seismic survey as required by state law.
PG&E has been directed to conduct the survey by the California Energy Commission (CEC) as required by Assembly Bill 1632, authored by Senator Sam Blakeslee. The legislation was enacted in 2006.
To comply with the state law PG&E must recover the costs of the survey from their rate payers, the public. However,
. . .an administrative judge with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) put PG&E on notice that it first must complete high-energy, three-dimensional offshore studies to determine the exact force and velocity of the new fault line discovered three years ago just a few hundred yards off the coast from the nuclear power plant.
Meanwhile, fishermen in the area are very concerned. Presumably, the seismic study is to ensure that the environment in the area is protected, including the fish in the bay, however, the seismic study is likely to kill many fish.
In the midst of many fishers voicing alarm over what they believe will be devastating impacts to fisheries from San Luis Bay to Cambria, the first official environmental impact report on PG&E's proposed deep-water seismic studies of faults that could affect the safety of the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant is tentatively being planned for release in draft form in January by the California State Lands Commission.
. . .
In its notice of preparation of the DEIR, the Commission noted that ever since 1987, there has been "mounting evidence of the potentially significant effects of 'high-energy' survey equipment . . . on marine fish (including eggs and larvae), mammals, and reptiles, both behaviorally and physiologically . . . "
Unconfirmed rumor is that fishermen are being offered serious coin to offset the loss of income if the tests are carried out.

Meanwhile environmentalists are attempting to stop a low carbon source of electricity, while AB32 is requiring new sources of low carbon electricity. I love the stupidity of this state. If we don't totally destroy our own economy, I will be shocked.

(H/T to Dawn Wildman of the SCRTC.)

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Is This Still the GOP?

While not particularly a fan of Mitt Romney, the attacks based on his role at Bain Capital made me wonder which party I joined in 2008. Bain didn't take TARP or any other bail out that I'm aware of, but took over failing companies, in many cases turning them around, in others, liquidating them. Republicans candidates are attacking him over this? Do we really believe in free markets? Ron Paul had it right:


Here's the audio, skip forward to 3:55.

Monday, January 9, 2012

Political Priorities for 2012 - One SD tea party perspective

My day job has become very challenging lately, and may continue to cause light blogging. When I have little time, it concentrates my mind on what is both important and within my sphere of influence. For example, I love following Presidential politics, but as a Californian I am going to little influence on neither the Republican nominating process nor the electoral vote totals. Here are my priorities for this year and how I am feeling.
  1. Defeating Governor Jerry Brown's proposed tax increases; highly confident. Getting his execrable budget killed; not so much.
  2. Getting pension reform passed in San Diego; highly confident.
  3. Getting Carl DeMaio elected Mayor of San Diego; optimistic.*
  4. Reaching out to left, right and center on entitlement reform and ending crony capitalism; cautiously optimistic.**

* The Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition does not endorse candidates, so this is a personal endorsement.
** Kelly, a liberal commenter, comments on why this is important in the comments section on my Saturday post about Rhode Island's Democrat led pension reform.

I hope for a groundswell of support for these goals.

Dang, I can't resist, here is one reason I can't stand Santorum (H/T Temple of Mut):

Saturday, January 7, 2012

Math not Politics - Fixing Pensions in Rhode Island

Rhode Island has achieved a measure of pension reform, despite being a fairly blue state. From the WSJ:
The plan enacted in November cuts $3 billion of the state's $7 billion unfunded liability by raising the retirement age, suspending cost-of-living increases until the pension system is 80% funded, and even moving workers into a hybrid plan that has a smaller guaranteed annuity along with a 401(k)-style defined-contribution plan.
How did this succes come about? State Treasurer, Gina Raimondo, was able to present the facts to the voters of the state.
"No finger pointing" was her mantra, along with a corollary: "Math, not politics."
I like that last little bit. The state treasurer is a Democrat, but that didn't stop her from recognizing that the state's financial situation was untenable. Perhaps Republicans should de-emphasize blaming the unions, even if we believe they are to blame. The actuarial certainties of our entitlement programs, government pensions, medicare, medicaid and social security, are inexorable. Without change, they will eventually bankrupt us. Democrats can be left to demagogue these issues; but by proposing serious reform, it is actually Republicans, like Paul Ryan, who are doing the work necessary to save the social safety nets in this country.

Friday, January 6, 2012

Promises, Promises

Governor Jerry Brown's budget promises to cut public education by $4.8 billion if his tax increases aren't passed next November. Promises, promises. That we could get some cuts in the bloated state educracy would be welcome indeed. The California school system is not performing that well, despite spending about $8,452 per pupil per year, although I think that number is low, it is the official state budget number from 2009-2010. The shock of some budget cuts would be welcome as it might force us to evaluate why we allow the government a near monopoly in delivering education.

In a previous post on Douglas County, CO I laid out why outsourcing public education at 75 cents on the dollar would still save the state money.

[ed. note: For those doing the math the overhead rate is calculated by taking the percent of dollars not spent in the classroom divided by the percent actually spent on the classroom (like teacher's salaries), 39%/61% = .639 or 64%, a ridiculously high overhead rate.]

Defeating the tax hikes should be the number one priority of the tea party movement in California this year. Gerrymandering has essentially neutered partisan politics, but large numbers of Democrats seem willing to vote for the conservative position on ballot measures, including voting against tax increases and against gay marriage in 2008, while Obama was sweeping the state. I think the public instinctively knows two things. First, California taxes are too high. Second, when politicians threaten favored programs if they don't get their way on tax cuts, they are bluffing.

Weekend Music Chill


Another of their hits, Linger.

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Local Republican Crony Capitalism






The Post I Wish I Had Written

Leslie, at Temple of Mut, has written passionately about the need to stay steadfast and think long term in our quest to restore this Republic to its Constitutional roots. She reminds us of the need to accept diversity of opinion in the tea party movement, while sticking to our core principles of limited government and rule of law. Her other message is to reject the top down messaging of the elites, in order to build a true, lasting grass roots movement. My thanks to her for this reminder.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Defense Budget and the SOTU

As reported by Reuters, the Obama administration plans on cutting 10-15% of the nation's ground forces. Supposedly, this will represent a slowing in the growth of the defense budget. Why it doesn't represent a decline in spending is not clear, but it seems that the Marine Corps and Army will be the biggest losers in this scenario. Politico is reporting that getting control of military health care, pay and retirements will also be on the agenda. Retired pay is particularly difficult, because retirees are scattered throughout the country, are often successful people with the means to donate to political campaign and are networked through a number of veteran's organizations.

I would expect the President to discuss defense budgeting and strategy in the State of the Union address. Prior SOTU's have not had much focus on those subjects. Based on the initial leaked reports it looks like the Navy and Air Force face fewer force reductions.

I am torn on the defense issue. The potential for mischief by dictators throughout the world remains high. A win-spoil strategy seems risky, and would seem to invite mischief. However, defense spending can't be a sacred cow any more than any other kind of spending in order for us to get our fiscal house in order.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Tweet of the Day

Comes from Allahpundit:
I cannot believe that the first big GOP race post-tea party is between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.
I can't either. I can understand Romney's tied for first finish (I don't really care about the exact count) because many Republicans view him as the man most likely to beat Obama. Whether that is true or not, remains to be seen, but it is a position I can respect. Santorum appears to have gotten a big lift from evangelicals, who broke for him at the end. This is too bad, as I believe that the Christians, like all Americans, are best served by the limited government perspective espoused by Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. Dueling Barstools provides an excellent critique of Santorum that is worth reading.

The good news is that Iowa is not very good at predicting the Republican nominee. This result probably gives Romney a huge boost, as I don't see Santorum having the organization to seriously challenge

Sunday, January 1, 2012

The Quote to Start the New Year. . .







Picture of Chrystia Freeland from wikipedia.org.