WILLisms.com: July 2005 Archives

« June 2005 | WILLisms.com | August 2005 »

Light Blogging.

Light blogging over this weekend, obviously.

Summer is fun.

Will pick up the pace soon.

In fact, WILLisms is hosting the History Carnival on Monday. If you have any last minute submissions that deal with history topics, send 'em my way.

Posted by Will Franklin · 31 July 2005 10:49 PM · Comments (3)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 124 -- National Basketball Association.

The NBA-

I support the NBA's decision to implement an age requirement of 19. But my motives are not necessarily pure. I prefer college basketball, and I prefer seeing high school players attend school for at least a year. It's just my preference. The University of Texas just recently got burned by one of its star high school recruits, who chose to go to the NBA rather than UT. Best of luck to him, but I think he would have been better off developing his game for a year in college, rather than warming the bench in the NBA.

One argument for the age requirement (still just 19) is that individuals may learn more discipline and maturity in college than kids who jump to the NBA straight from high school. Thus, college attendees are less likely to get into off-the-court trouble, right?

Well, there is some interesting new research that indicates those who attend all four years of college are actually MORE LIKELY to get into trouble off the court than those who skip college.

For example:

41.4% of NBA players went to school for 4 years.
57.1% of arrested NBA players went to school for 4 years.

8.3% of NBA players attended no college at all.
4.8% of arrested NBA players attended no college at all.

Source:
Sports Law Blog (via Marginal Revolution).

Lots more interesting stuff there. International players, for example, are better behaved than American players.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Unions.

Posted by Will Franklin · 31 July 2005 09:08 AM · Comments (1)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 123 -- Unions.

The Increasingly Irrelevant Labor Union-

The unionized share of the total U.S. work force has been sliding steadily for years, and was down again last year to 12.5% from 12.9% in 2003. In the more dynamic private sector, only 7.9% of employees now carry the union label.

More and more, when people speak of the "bureaucracy," they're talking about unionized public employees, unaccountable to market forces, often unaccountable to the elected administration, and usually unaccountable to the American people.

Expanding or shrinking the size of government, therefore, is a matter of life and death for the public sector employee unions.

Source:

OpinionJournal.com

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Global GDP Growth.

Posted by Will Franklin · 30 July 2005 11:59 AM · Comments (0)

John Culberson's Border Protection Corps.

Immigration is clearly the unheralded political issue of the year. It may not lead the evening network news every night, but with Democrats and Republicans alike moving on this issue, the political landscape is flooded with immigration reform proposals. Every politician wants a piece of the immigration pie; being tough on illegal immigration is going to be a litmus test for many voters across party lines, in upcoming elections. Bank on that.

Illegal immigration : 2005 :: Crime : 1993

If you're perceived as weak on immigration as an individual or a party, you're going to get burned.

It's no wonder that even liberal Hillary Clinton, in an effort to moderate her image, has made rhetorical flourishes on the immigration issue, courting those concerned with illegal immigration. It's also no wonder that the otherwise underwhelming Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo, who has been out in front on the immigration issue for some time now, is generating some buzz as a 2008 candidate, notwithstanding his recent "bomb Mecca" goof. John McCain (along with Senators Kennedy, Brownback, Lieberman, Graham, and Salazar) have offered an immigration measure in the Senate (.pdf). Jon Kyl and John Cornyn countered with a stronger measure (.pdf).

Combatting illegal immigration is increasingly a political no-brainer. Even the controversial Minute Men (a group it was easy to be skeptical about in the beginning) were supported by more Americans than the media let on (.pdf). And their efforts seemed to work. Americans are pragmatic. If it works, go with it.

In comes my Representative, John Culberson.

H.R. 3622, The Border Protection Corps Act of 2005 (.pdf), would authorize Governors of border states to organize citizen-volunteers to patrol America's borders.

The skinny:

Today, U.S. Representative John Culberson and 46 original cosponsors introduced H.R. 3622 to create the Border Protection Corps made up of citizen volunteers working as sworn law enforcement officers under the command of the Governors of the border States and working “in cooperation with State and local law enforcement officials…and the United States Border Patrol.”
Border Protection Corps operations and the costs of detaining, housing and transporting foreign nationals taken into custody by the Corps or by state and local law enforcement would be paid for using the $6.8 billion in Homeland Security first responder funds that have been sitting unspent and untouched in the U. S. Treasury for over two years.

The Border Protection Corps Act invokes Congress’s power under Article I, Section 8 of the U. S. Constitution to “provide for calling forth…organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia… to execute the Laws of the Union,” which H.R. 3622 defines as “patrolling and defending the international border” of the United States “in order to prevent individuals from crossing the international border…at any location other than an authorized port of entry.”

The measure would essentially take the Minutemen idea and legitimize it, integrating able and willing volunteers (of which there are plenty) into the overall border security apparatus of the United States. But it could also stave off potential vigilantism, making the volunteers more accountable to state laws:

H.R. 3622 states that Border Protection Corps members “shall include only United States citizens with no criminal history and no history of mental illness.” Corps members must “take an oath to uphold the laws and Constitution of the United States and of the State… and shall have the right to keep and bear arms… [and can] use any means and any force authorized by state law to prevent individuals from unlawfully entering United States [or] to take into custody individuals who have so entered the United States.”

The Houston Chronicle (via blogHOUSTON), calling the proposal "unusual," notes that Texas Governor Rick Perry is open to the idea.

Culberson's "thunderclap" bill will almost certainly be opposed by the Washington establishment media and certain illegal immigration apologists, but it (along with the Kyl-Cornyn bill) could be effective in preventing scores of illegal aliens, including terrorists, from entering the U.S, all while protecting legal immigration. After all, inattention to illegal immigration could eventually undermine political support for legal immigration, which is so necessary to our culture and economy.

Posted by Will Franklin · 29 July 2005 03:28 PM · Comments (5)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 122 -- Global GDP Growth.

Gross Domestic Product Growth In Major First World Economies, 2004-

The Commerce Department released GDP growth numbers today, indicating that 2nd quarter GDP grew at a 3.4% pace. Some of the numbers from recent years were revised slightly downward. For example, for 2004, GDP growth was revised downward from 4.4% to 4.2%. Even with the revisions, and even with our already-larger economy, economic growth in the U.S. economy still outpaced that of our European friends.

Personal income, incidentally, was revised upward for all three years.

Source:

CIA World Factbook.

Just for reference, in 2004, Singapore's economy grew at a pace of 8.1%, Hong Kong's economy grew at a pace of 7.9%, India's economy grew at a 6.2% pace, China's economy grew at a 9.1% pace, and Russia's economy grew at a 6.7% pace.

Smaller, industrializing economies typically have more room to grow than larger, industrialized economies, which makes America's GDP growth even more astounding. Some Americans (mostly Democrats) want the U.S. to become more European. Seems like a fair deal, as long as "Europe" really means "Ireland." Ireland, as noted in yesterday's Trivia Tidbit, is rapidly becoming an economic leprechaun ("tiger" and "dragon" were already taken).

Following the rainbow to the pot of gold, we can see that Ireland did not become a successful economy by accident:

Ireland doesn’t have a flat tax, but it has slashed its corporate tax rate from 50 percent to 12.5 percent. Combined with other tax cuts, this helped turn the “Sick Man of Europe” into the “Celtic Tiger.” Unemployment has dropped from 17 percent to 5 percent, and Ireland is now the second-richest nation in the European Union.

Lower, flatter taxes and an open and competitive economy-- not a comprehensive European Social Model-- lead to greater economic prosperity. It's not rocket science. We should be more like Hong Kong, Ireland, and Singapore (economically, at least), and less like Old Europe.

I'd wager that few Americans even realize that the U.S., over the past couple of years, has been experiencing such strong economic growth, compared to the rest of the industrialized world. This must change. We must take the burden of economic literacy upon ourselves, one blog at a time.

The 2006 depends on it. Unfortunately, because of some downward revisions today, the headlines may create the impression that our economy is contracting-- that we're in a recession (something a startling number of Americans believe, despite concurrent optimism about their own personal economic circumstances).

And stay tuned for more accumulating evidence supporting the assertion that, YES, AMERICA, THE ECONOMY IS ACTUALLY IN GOOD SHAPE.

Could we do better?

Obviously.

But the way to faster economic growth is not the soft socialism of the increasingly Euro-enamored Democratic Party.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Globalization.

UPDATE:
Doing the fatwa trackback thing.

Posted by Will Franklin · 29 July 2005 10:13 AM · Comments (3)

Quotational Therapy: Part 32 -- Thomas Paine.

Thomas Paine's "The Crisis"-

THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to TAX) but "to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER," and if being bound in that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious; for so unlimited a power can belong only to God.

-Thomas Paine, "The American Crisis," 1776.

-----------------------------

Previous Quotational Therapy Session:

Honest Abe.

The right quote can be therapeutic, so tune in to WILLisms.com for quotational therapy every Monday and Friday.

Posted by Will Franklin · 29 July 2005 09:25 AM · Comments (0)

Social Security Reform Thursday: Week Twenty-Six -- AmeriSave.

Thursdays are good days for reform, because they fall between Wednesdays and Fridays.

That's why WILLisms.com offers a chart or graph, every Thursday, pertinent to Social Security reform.

This week's topic:

The Democrats' AmeriSave Non-Plan.

Democrats this week announced their plan for "retirement security" in America. It's called "AmeriSave."

It is awful.

Just dreadfully bad.

It is so horribly atrocious that it's hard not to break out in a hyena-like, cackling laugh, or vomit a little in your mouth. It's just hilariously dumb.

This is not hyperbole, either.

Many of the ideas in the plan are not entirely objectionable, and there are even some decent (if recycled and non-responsive) ideas. Indeed, Nancy Pelosi even (awkwardly) extolled the virtues of compound interest as she announced the plan:

"Our plan will expand and improve existing investment accounts, such as 401(k)s and IRAs, so that American families can benefit from compound interest while retaining Social Security's guaranteed benefit, creating a comprehensive retirement strategy" said Pelosi.

But in the end AmeriSave is a complete non-sequiter. It does nothing whatsoever to save Social Security.

It's sort of like those Geico commercials.

"I have great news!"

"Oh yeah?"

"I just saved a bunch on my car insurance!"

Well, fantastic for you. But what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

Even if Democrats were serious about this AmeriSave business, Social Security's current trust fund surplus would still become a deficit in 2017, Social Security would still be unable to pay its promised benefits beginning in 2041, we'd still see the same miserable rate of return on the 1 out of every 8 or so dollars we earn that goes toward Social Security, and Social Security would still have an unfunded long-term liability of 11 trillion dollars.

In other words, the Democrats' AmeriSave plan is no plan at all. It's posturing, so as to avoid the appearance of complete do-nothingism and obstruction.

Here is the problem:

Here is what would happen to the problem if we pass AmeriSave:

Nothing. The Democrats' plan is not a plan. This is just so silly. Poor Americans are not going to participate in these AmeriSave accounts, because so much of their paycheck each month already goes toward Social Security payroll taxes.

Most Americans believe we need to have some sort of safety net for our elderly. No American who works his or her entire life should retire into poverty. But we don't need dogmatic adherence to a broken program to achieve that lofty aim. We need real, creative, pro-growth solutions.

What is so unfortunate is that in 2000, the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), the once-moderate wing of the Democratic Party, (it seems, at least) endorsed meaningful Social Security reform (underlining mine):

An ever-growing share of the federal budget today consists of automatic transfers from working Americans to retirees. Moreover, the costs of the big entitlements for the elderly -- Social Security and Medicare -- are growing at rates that will eventually bankrupt them and that could leave little to pay for everything else government does. We can't just spend our way out of the problem; we must find a way to contain future costs. The federal government already spends seven times as much on the elderly as it does on children. To allow that ratio to grow even more imbalanced would be grossly unfair to today's workers and future generations.
In addition, Social Security and Medicare need to be modernized to reflect conditions not envisioned when they were created in the 1930s and the 1960s. Social Security, for example, needs a stronger basic benefit to bolster its critical role in reducing poverty in old age. Medicare needs to offer retirees more choices and a modern benefit package that includes prescription drugs. Such changes, however, will only add to the cost of the programs unless they are accompanied by structural reforms that restrain their growth and limit their claim on the working families whose taxes support the programs.

Goals for 2010

* Honor our commitment to seniors by ensuring the future solvency of Social Security and Medicare.

* Make structural reforms in Social Security and Medicare that slow their future cost growth, modernize benefits (including a prescription drug benefit for Medicare), and give beneficiaries more choice and control over their retirement and health security.

* Create Retirement Savings Accounts to enable low-income Americans to save for their own retirement.

That last point, creating retirement savings accounts for low-income Americans, is interesting. While vague enough to possibly mean "add-on" (rather than "carve-out") accounts, it's hard to argue with a straight face that poorer Americans are going to save for their own retirement on top of the mandatory amount they already pay into Social Security. What incentive is there for them to do so?

The above document, which could have been written by today's Social Security reformers, was signed by 73 elected Democrats at the time, including these high profile officials who remain in office:

U.S. Senators Evan Bayh (IN), John Kerry (MA), Mary Landrieu (LA), Joseph Lieberman (CT), and Blanche Lincoln (AR); U.S. Representatives Jim Davis (FL), James Moran, Jr. (VA), Allyson Schwartz (PA), Ellen Tauscher (CA); and Governors Janet Napolitano (AZ), Kathleen Sebelius (KS), and Tom Vilsack (IA).

Where is the leadership on this issue? Why have these Democrats allowed the DailyKos/MoveOn.org/Howard Dean wing of the party to "just say no" to crucial reform of a broken program, one that President Clinton declared a "crisis" numerous and distinct times?

It's well past time to reform Social Security. Let's get to it, right after the August recess.

The clock is ticking.

--------------------------------

Previous Reform Thursday graphics can be seen here:

-Week One (Costs Exceed Revenues).
-Week Two (Social Security Can't Pay Promised Benefits).
-Week Three (Americans Getting Older).
-Week Three, bonus (The Templeton Curve).
-Week Four (Fewer Workers, More Retirees).
-Week Five (History of Payroll Tax Base Increases).
-Week Six (Seniors Living Longer).
-Week Six, bonus (Less Workers, More Beneficiaries).
-Week Seven (History of Payroll Tax Increases).
-Week Seven, bonus (Personal Accounts Do Achieve Solvency).
-Week Eight (Forty Year Trend Of Increasing Mandatory Spending).
-Week Nine (Diminishing Benefits Sans Reform).
-Week Ten (Elderly Dependence On Social Security).
-Week Eleven (Entitlement Spending Eating The Budget).
-Week Twelve (Benefit Comparison, Bush's Plan versus No Plan).
-Week Thirteen (Younger Americans and Lifecycle Funds).
-Week Fourteen (The Thrift Savings Plan).
-Week Fifteen (Understanding Progressive Indexing).
-Week Sixteen (The Graying of America).
-Week Seventeen (Debunking Myths).
-Week Eighteen (Debunking Myths).
-Week Nineteen (Reform Needed Sooner Rather Than Later).
-Week Twenty (Global Success With Personal Accounts).
-Week Twenty-One (GROW Accounts: Stopping The Raid).
-Week Twenty-Two (Millions of Lockboxes).
-Week Twenty-Three (Support for Ryan-DeMint).
-Week Twenty-Four (KidSave Accounts).
-Week Twenty-Five (Latinos and Social Security).

Tune into WILLisms.com each Thursday for more important graphical data supporting Social Security reform.

Posted by Will Franklin · 28 July 2005 02:14 PM · Comments (4)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 121 -- Globalization.

Globalization-

Robert J. Samuelson, in his "The World Is Still Round" piece (via Townhall.com), explains that economic success is not arbitrary:

The United States, Europe and Japan offer an object lesson. All face, generally speaking, the same opportunities and threats from globalization. But results vary dramatically. Since 1995 American economic growth has averaged 3.3 percent; Europe's, 2 percent; and Japan's, 1.3 percent. (Europe refers to the 12 countries using the euro.) Even in Europe, stark contrasts emerge. Ireland's growth averaged 7.9 percent over the decade; Germany's, 1.3 percent. Somehow national policies, culture and business overshadow globalization....
Localization usually trumps globalization, though countries seem to succeed more when they encourage globalization. In 1990 per capita incomes in Ireland were 28 percent lower than in Germany, reports the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). In 2004 the Irish were 26 percent higher. One reason that Ireland grew faster is that it eagerly welcomed foreign investment. Half of Ireland's manufacturing employment comes from foreign multinationals, compared with Germany's 6 percent, says the OECD.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Economic Literacy.

UPDATE:

Added to the Beltway Jam.

Posted by Will Franklin · 28 July 2005 09:48 AM · Comments (0)

A CAFTA Squeaker: Democrats Run Left.

After passing the Senate 54-45 late last month, the House of Representatives approved the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (.pdf) (DR-CAFTA) 217-215, in a vote that went right down to the wire.

In 1993, 102 Democrats (40% of the party) voted for NAFTA, while 43 Republicans (24% of the party) voted against it. Overall, it passed 234-200.

In 2005, 15 Democrats (7% of the party) voted for CAFTA, while 27 Republicans (12% of the party) voted against it.

The trend was similar in the Senate vote, with Democrats running from trade from 1993 to 2005, and Republicans more-or-less holding steady on the issue over that time frame.

The Associated Press puts its own spin on the squeaker 217-215 vote:

To capture a majority, supporters had to overcome what some have called free trade fatigue, a growing sentiment that free trade deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada have contributed to a loss of well-paying American jobs and the soaring trade deficit.

A growing sentiment, eh?

That's one way to put it, I guess.

UPDATE:

The Democratic Leadership Council, which propelled Bill Clinton to office as a "New Democrat," once set itself apart from the Democratic Party of Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis with support for free trade. Indeed, the DLC is still for free trade today.

But even House Democrats associated with the DLC have eschewed that whole "New Democrat" thing.

38 of the 43 DLC House Democrats (88%) voted against CAFTA, while 10 of the 18 DLC Senate Democrats (56%) voted against CAFTA.

What happened to make the DLC so irrelevant?

I have no earthly idea, do you?

Posted by Will Franklin · 28 July 2005 12:41 AM · Comments (16)

Bigots In My Neighborhood.

I was just in my driveway changing a tire (a flat), swarmed by mosquitoes (killed 7 of them, bitten at least that many times), dripping with sweat, grease splotched all over my hands and on my baby blue Texas Longhorns shirt, when along comes a slightly overweight white man in his late 30s or early 40s, walking his small, fluffy, white dog, looking equally disheveled.

He spots my bumper and does a cartoonish double-take. A Bush/Cheney sticker. From 2000, no less.

Oldschool.

So he engages in conversation-

Him: "Does that say Bush / Cheney?"

Me: "Yes, it does."

Him: "I wouldn't be advertising that if I were you."

Me: "Oh, yeah? Why not?"

Him: "Because it proves that you're a bigot."

Me: "How so?"

Him: "Especially in this neighborhood."

Me: "I don't think so."

At this point, his body language becomes aggressive, and he starts walking toward me.

Him: "You need to get outta here. You are a bigot."

So I pick up my socket wrench, and his dog sort of pulls him down the street in the other direction, stopping his march toward me.

Not wanting to engage (I just want to get my tire changed), I just sort of shake my head "no."

Him: "I can't believe this. When word gets around, it is going to be miserable for you."

Me: "Excuse me?"

Him: "Unbelievable. You bigot."

Me: "What are you suggesting?"

Him: "That you need to take that sticker off your car and stop showing your ignorance."

Me: "No, thanks."

So he walks away, turning over his shoulder a few times to give me a death ray stare. I go on changing my tire, ignoring him, because it's hot and steamy outside, and I just want to get my tire changed.

This whole thing sent me on an eerie flashback to about 15 months ago. All of our neighbors had put Kerry signs in their windows or yards or both. So we put two Bush signs in our second-story windows in response.

The next morning, our across-the-street neighbor, a white man nearing 60, was ranting to another neighbor, a ~35-year old white woman, directing his voice directly toward the signs (and thus, into the window).

It was your typical left-wing litany.

Corporations this; illegal war that; Bush is an idiot; blah blah blah. A few f-bombs, as well. And some other names, seemingly directed my way. I think I recall hearing a "we can't let them do this... why can't they just go away."

Then, a few seconds later, several raps on the window pane. The guy had actually scooped up a few bits of gravel (they were repaving the streets at the time) and thrown them at my window (this was just after Kerry secured the nomination, so emotions were running high for left-wingers).

So I peek out, then decide that's just unacceptable behavior. So I open the blinds and make my way down the stairs, then go outside. They are gone. But I stand outside for several minutes, inspecting the rocks that had been thrown, looking around so they'd know I had caught them in the act.

Yep, there are bigots in the neighborhood, all right. Bigots all over.

UPDATE:
I guess I should explain a little more about my neighborhood, so you have a little context. It's near downtown Houston, and this was a decidedly "Montrose moment," although we're almost more part of River Oaks (President George H. W. Bush's old Congressional district) than Montrose. We even receive the River Oaks Examiner on our doorstep, although we certainly don't pay to subscribe. Montrose (which we're on the border of) is known for its thriving gay community-- and bigotry, apparently.

Posted by Will Franklin · 27 July 2005 02:03 PM · Comments (38)

Wednesday Caption Contest: Part 16.

This week's WILLisms.com Caption Contest photograph:

The actual caption:

A group of dogs is taken to a day camp near Bogota in a bus in this photo taken on June 30, 2005. The Transmiperro system (Transport my Dog) is a day camp for dogs, where a colourful bus takes them to a camp in the village of Cajic, 30 km (19 miles) north of Bogot, where the animals are trained and enjoy games and activities. Each pet owner pays between $34 and $106 per month depending on the program the dog is enrolled in. The dogs are returned home, exhausted, at the end of the day. Picture taken on June 30, 2005. To match feature Colombia-dogs REUTERS/Jose Miguel Gomez

There must be a better caption out there for this photograph.

Entries will remain open until 11:59 PM, Central Standard Time, Tuesday, August 2. Submit your captions in the comments section, or email at WILLisms@gmail.com.

Last week's photo:

Last week's winners (the best contest yet and difficult to judge all the great entries):

Rodney Dill:

Harry Potter and the Prison of Assgrabbin'

I. Ronnie:

"Michael Moore and Sandy Berger searching for secret documents."

Giacomo:

"I love you, man." "You're not gettin' my Bud Light, Thorsten."

Honorable Mention 1.

wunderkraut:

Once again Germany rips Poland a new one.

Honorable Mention 2.

submandave:

Dude, it's Left-Left-Slide Right. Here, let me lead.

Honorable Mention 3.

Jay Tea:

"Hey, this thing really DOES 'lift and separate!'"

I almost totally copped out and gave everyone awards, but I didn't cave in at the end. If you have followed the Caption Contests over the past several weeks, you know that File It Under typically dominates these things. Well, not this week. Sorry, guys.

Captioning is totally classy. Enter today!

Posted by Will Franklin · 27 July 2005 09:39 AM · Comments (30)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 120 -- Economic Literacy.

Economic Literacy-

Let me preface this by saying that I have full faith in the American people to make wise decisions, given that they have the facts before them. But this is troubling:

* The personal saving rate in 2004 was 1% (compared to a 7% average over the past 3 decades) -Alan Greenspan, February 2005
* The 1.4% personal savings rate in 2003 was the lowest it had been since 1938.
-The Bureau of Economic Analysis, September 2004

* Only 15 states require an economics course for graduation.
-NCEE Survey of the States, March 2005

* Only 7 states require students to take personal finance for graduation.
-NCEE Survey of the States, March 2005

* 25% of all employees who are eligible to enroll in their employers' 401(k) savings programs don't contribute a dime.
-Profit Sharing/401(k) Council of America

* 62% of Americans believe that middle and lower income citizens pay income taxes at the highest percentage.
-National Public Radio, Kaiser Family Foundation and the Kennedy School of Government survey

* Nearly two-thirds of those surveyed did not know that in times of inflation money does not hold its value.
-NCEE Harris poll

* 74% of parents feel unprepared to teach their kids about personal finance.
-FleetBoston survey, 2003

* Most Americans believe that corporations make over 46% profit, when in fact the average is 8%.
-Kaiser Family Foundation and The Washington Post survey

* In 2003, 1.6 million consumers filed for bankruptcy (the highest rate in history).
-"The Fragile Middle-Class: Americans in Debt" by Teresa A. Sullivan, Elizabeth Warren and Jay Lawrence

* University administrators state that they lose more students to credit card debt than to academic failure.
-Utah Mentor, 2003

* Today's average 50-year-old has only $2,300 saved toward retirement.
-National Endowment for Financial Education

* 48% of American credit card owners only pay their minimum monthly payment each month.
-Senate Resolution 48, 2003

Wondering about your own economic literacy?

Take the quiz.

You can also download the .pdf of the entire quiz.

Some of the questions are pretty easy (while some are exceedingly difficult without a calculator or professional knowledge of how these things work), which makes America's embarrassingly low scores all the more astounding.

Here are a few samples:

If you put $100 a month in an IRA that earns 6% annually, how much money will you have after 40 years?
$50,000

$150,000

$200,000

$360,000

If you leave $50.00 in a 5% interest-bearing account, how long does it take to double your money?
1 year

8 years

14 years

50 years

How many states have no income tax?
0

3

9

15

Which of the following industries has the lowest profit per employee?
Healthcare facilities

Clothing stores

Restaurants and hotels

Grocery stores

Which of the following pairs of United States Presidents cut taxes the most?
a. Presidents Reagan and Kennedy

b. Presidents George H. Bush and George W. Bush

c. Presidents Carter and Clinton

d. Presidents Ford and Nixon

After taking the quiz, it tells you what percentage people on average answered correctly.

Not so pretty.

Down in the 30-40% range, even.

We clearly need to stress economic literacy more in this country. Stay tuned for more.

Source:

FirstJobs Institute.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Home Sales.

Posted by Will Franklin · 27 July 2005 09:36 AM · Comments (2)

Santiago Calatrava's Chicago Masterpiece.

The Fordham Spire:

Could this finally put Chicago on the map as a respectable city?

Just kidding. If you know you're skyscraper history, you realize that Chicago invented the skyscraper.

The New York Times:

Given the haunting image of the collapsing twin towers, it's hard for many Americans to fathom the enduring urge to build tall.
Yet now come plans for the nation's tallest skyscraper, a condominium and hotel building designed by Santiago Calatrava for Chicago's Near North lakefront. At 2,000 feet, the building, the Fordham Spire, would beat out the 1,776-foot Freedom Tower planned for ground zero.

Internationally, both of these designs are dwarfed by the Burj Tower under construction in Dubai, which is expected to reach 2,300 feet. Once completed, the Burj will overtake Taipei 101, a 1,667-foot office tower, as the world's tallest. And the Taipei building is certainly a short-time record holder; only in October did it surpass the 1,483-foot Petronas Towers in Malaysia.

Seems like the entire world is, once again, in a skyscraper-building mood.

Posted by Will Franklin · 26 July 2005 11:52 PM · Comments (3)

Some Call It A Bonfire/Carnival Of Classiness...

We call it "Classiness, All Around Us."

Click to explore more WILLisms.com.

In no particular order, WILLisms.com presents classiness from the blogosphere (now with 50% more classy!):

Leftyism, San Francisco's Achilles Heel-

File It Under blog explains that San Francisco's political leadership is eschewing a prime tourism opportunity in the permanent berthing of the retired USS Iowa:

I hope that each person who used such pathetic and lame excuses to vote against this measure would be honest enough to look in the mirror and admit that you are political whores and that you sold out your souls and everything worth standing for so you could ensure your continued power. I hope you all trip down a flight of stairs patting each other on the back, you pack of godless jackals.

San Francisco politics is post-modern politics at its worst and part of a troubling emerging trend in left-wing politics of marginalizing-- and even villifying-- the sacrifice of World War II veterans.

Australia's John Howard-

Dean's World blog offers a unique take on John Howard's now-famous rhetorical disrobing of the British reporter:

The more I look at the "anti-war" apologists for terrorism, the more I think they look like victims of battered spouse abuse. Every time we get hit, they blame themselves and everyone else--all except for the batterer.

We didn't start the war on terror, but we're definitely going to finish it.

Canadienne Ridiculousness-

Chrenkoff points out that Canadian Miss Universe Natalie Glebova was forced to take off her sash when Toronto authorities invoked an absurd law prohibiting sexual stereotyping:

Any Toronto readers might enlighten the rest of us whether the local city council is providing good municipal services for the ratepayers' money, or whether they're just too busy making sure that no acts of sexism are occurring within the city boundaries.

Powerline follows up, noting this is not the first time Toronto has invoked this tyrannical rule.

The Elite Media Establishment-

Donald Luskin notes that David Brooks, despite his conservative pedigree, is still part of the elitist media:

Listen to this pearl-drop from David Brooks, defending the only principle to which he is truly loyal (the sanctity of his own profession):

When asked why, according to surveys, the public loathes the (liberal) press, David Brooks replied that it was “because people are idiots. The press is more honest and less salacious now than ever before.”

Just another example of a member of the establishment media not getting "it." And another reason why the proliferation of bloggers, not necessarily part of the Washington establishment, is so important for our Republic.

America's Rail System-

Political Calculations blog examines the failure of subsidized rail in the United States:

There comes a time that when a system breaks down, it must be changed or else it will fail entirely. The time for change for Amtrak will come on September 30, when the President's proposed budget for 2006 would discontinue Amtrak's taxpayer subsidy. Far from being a death knell for the railroad, the President's proposed budget marks a wake-up call for Amtrak's management, workers and passengers, who must brace themselves for the changes that will need to be made to make passenger rail service viable in the long term. For the U.S. Congress and the President, no subsidy should be granted to Amtrak without an enforceable guarantee that the railroad will finally undertake the radical restructuring that it has avoided for so long.

Incentives and disincentives matter. Amtrak needs to understand that there are negative consequences for mismanagement and waste.

Sarbanes-Oxley and the American Economy-

The Liberty Belles blog explains how excessive government regulation hurts investors but is a boon to accountants:

If broken windows hurt the economy, then Sarbanes-Oxley (the nasty piece of legislation produced by Congress after Enron went caput) has been a virtual Kristallnacht for American industry, costing companies over $5.5 billion annually to comply with its gargantuan accounting standards.

The law of unintended consequences at play once again.

Karl Rove-

The Political Teen blog offers an interesting take on the Karl Rove non-scandal:

As a child, do you remember playing the game “telephone”? Telephone is essentially someone whispering gossip in a person’s ear and then in turn they twist the words around and pass it along. To me this is what the Valerie Plame leak, Karl Rove scandal, “Plame Game”, Rove-gate, whatever you want to call it, is. This is a case of rumors getting way out of hand and quite possibly causing the loss of people’s jobs. These rumors have caused a liberal drumbeat that will not stop even if Rove resigns. They will not be happy until all Republicans in power are gone. If they can’t win elections, they might as well start fake scandals.

I completely concur. They couldn't take down Bush, so they went after DeLay. They couldn't take down DeLay, so they went after Rove. If the Democrats' strategy for 2006 and beyond is to drum up scandals, via their partisan "mainstream" media, they will continue to fail to gain the trust and respect of the American people.

John Roberts-

Daly Thoughts blog breaks down the potential persuasiveness of Judge Roberts' Supreme Court advocacy:

...in the cases that were brought before the Court where the result was not unanimous and Roberts was involved, it is clear that JusticeStevens was not often swayed by his arguments. However, the percentage of non-unanimous cases where Justice Kennedy sided with Roberts’ arguments is notable. The sample size is small, but there is some indication that a Justice Roberts might have considerable influence on Justice Kennedy– the primary swing vote on the court.

Winning friends and influencing colleagues is something that the other conservatives on the Court have been mostly unable to do.

Catherine Baker Knoll-

The Nose On Your Face blog offers a hilarious take on the favorite activities of weirdo Lt. Governor of Pennsylvania:

9. Visiting elementary schools during the month of December to inform children that there is no Santa Claus. And that all of their fathers are cheating on their moms.
8. Randomly spelling words backwards in memos to dyslexic state employees.

Read them all.

10.

India and China-

By Dawn's Early Light blog examines how a rising India can help temper the geopolitical aspirations of China:

With 2.4 billion people, ensuring and encouraging democracy in China and India is vital to securing our long term freedom and influencing the South Pacific and thereby winning a front on the Global War on Terror.

America's emerging partnership with India is one of the great underreported stories of the year.

11.

No Child Left Behind-

A Constrained Vision notes that the racial achievement gap in America is narrowing, but the Civil Rights Project (CRP) is not excited:

The civil rights outrage is that so many poor and minority school districts aren't teaching their students basic skills, not that NCLB is catching them. CRP has its priorities all out of whack.

It seems like certain liberal groups care less about educating Americans and more about scoring political points.

12.

Kossians-

No Speed Bumps blog examines some recent infamous Daily Kos quotes:

When all you have to do is directly quote someone to make them look really bad – that is like shooting fish in a barrel.

Republicans need to be able to tie Democrats closely linked with Kos to the kinds of comments profiled therein. Kos is more than tacky, more than unclassy. Daily Kos is a gurgling fever swamp of anti-American nonsense. The American public needs to understand that being a Kos candidate ought to be a disqualifying association.

13.

Iraq-

The Fourth Rail blog looks at the facts about Iraq and the failure of the establishment media to report them:

Other than the brief lull after the Iraqi elections, where much of the media engaged in soul searching, the story du jour from Iraq has been failure. As Iraq continues to move forward politically and the Coalition pushes deeper into Western Iraq, the cries of failure will only grow louder. Much has been invested in this meme, and it will not die easily.

After reading 1776, it is clear to me that if our modern hand-wringing press had been around during the American Revolution, world history would have turned out quite differently.

14.

Seinfeld-

The Evangelical Outpost blog examines the syllogisms of Seinfeld:

Comedians aren't often known for their critical thinking skills and Mr. Spock -- the Vulcan embodiment of cool logic -- wasn't known for his jokes. But in a recent article in Philosophy Now, Julia Nefsky argues that logic has a very real and very important role in humor...

Stand-up comedy just might be one of the most difficult jobs in the world; turning a stand-up routine into the most successful show in television is just mind-boggling. I have a new respect for Jerry Seinfeld.

15.

Social Security Reform-

Captain's Quarters blog notes that the Democrats finally have a Social Security non-plan plan:

The Democrats have taken a lot of criticism for talking about the coming crisis in Social Security financing for a decade before Bush came to office, and then suddenly pretending it didn't exist. When Bush presented his plans to reform Social Security, they tried to convince people that reform was unnecessary, which no one believes, and then deliberately decided to offer no alternative, which no one appreciated. Now they attempt to offer "retirement security" by focusing on the money the government doesn't confiscate without addressing the funds that it does.
Maybe this wan attempt will take some political heat off the party for its obstinate refusal to engage on Social Security. It shouldn't. It looks like yet another attempt to change the subject by ignoring the main problem.

Typical nothingness from the party with no positive agenda.

------------------------------------------------------------

Also, don't forget to check out all the old Trivia Tidbits Of the Day, the Reform Thursday series, the Quotational Therapy sessions, and the Wednesday Caption Contest (entries are due each Tuesday at 11:59 PM Central Standard Time).

Last Week's Classiness Certification from WILLisms.com:

*July 19, 2005.

WILLisms.com offers a weekly classiness roundup as a weekly feature, every Tuesday, with 15 blog posts deemed classy. The criteria for submissions: incisive original analysis, quirky topics nobody else is covering, fantastic graphics, or other posts that took a lot of work. We love to spread the word on upcoming blogs, being that WILLisms.com also fits that description. If you would like to nominate a post on your blog or another blog for inclusion, email us at WILLisms@gmail.com. Write "Classy Nomination" in the subject. You can also utilize this page to make your submissions. The deadline is each Monday at 11:59 PM Central Time.

Classy.

Posted by Will Franklin · 26 July 2005 10:30 AM · Comments (4)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 119 -- U.S. Home Sales.

American Home Sales, 1970 to 2005-

Existing home sales recently hit a record pace.

Some call it a housing bubble (and have been calling it that for years, now), others believe it is just a natural consequence of a growing population, a growing economy, and low interest rates. For those entirely devoted to the housing bubble theory, you should at least differentiate the high density regions of the country from the heartland. You should acknowledge that there very well may be out-of-control housing bubbles in highly populated parts of the country, but there's also plenty of real estate to accomodate growth in much of the middle part of the country. And in the middle part of the country, housing prices have not gone as crazy as New England; a bubble can only burst it if exists.

As long as the population continues to grow, and as long as people want to "trade up," the housing market will remain strong nationally, even as localized bubbles occasionally pop.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Interest Rates.

Posted by Will Franklin · 26 July 2005 06:21 AM · Comments (2)

A Carnival of Carnivals.

*The Carnival of Revolutions
*The Carnival of the Capitalists
*The Carnival of Liberty

Go, enjoy.

Posted by Will Franklin · 25 July 2005 10:59 AM · Comments (0)

Quotational Therapy: Part 31 -- Abraham Lincoln.

Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address-

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate— we can not consecrate— we can not hallow— this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

-Abraham Lincoln, The Gettysburg Address, November 19, 1863.

-----------------------------

Previous Quotational Therapy Session:

Friedrich A. Hayek.

The right quote can be therapeutic, so tune in to WILLisms.com for quotational therapy every Monday and Friday.

Posted by Will Franklin · 25 July 2005 09:38 AM · Comments (1)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 118 -- Interest Rates.

Interest Rates, 2000 to 2005-

Interest rates are near historical lows, but they've been trending upward recently, in part as a response to the strong economic growth America has seen in the past couple of years.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: U.S. GDP Growth.

Posted by Will Franklin · 25 July 2005 09:36 AM · Comments (0)

David Gregory's MEET THE PRESS Moment.

Time and time again, media figures fail to understand why the elite/establishment/mainstream media, collectively, is losing credibility-- and thus is losing readership/viewership.

David Gregory on this week's Meet the Press blathered a bit on the Plame/Wilson quasi-scandal, proving yet again just how out-of-touch he is (underlining mine):

MR. GREGORY: I do think that one--well, one point I disagree with Bill on is I agree that there should be a shield law, and this is an important conversation. But I think what has to accompany that is the debate we have within journalistic circles about when we promise confidentiality and whether it is to put a check on government or whether it is to be a vehicle for what may have been an egregious abuse of power here in smearing someone who's part of our national security apparatus, and I think journalists have to be very careful about this idea of confidentiality, and I'm a little bit troubled, and perhaps at the facts of this case, that there is not more of a national outcry on behalf of Judy Miller and on behalf of the facts of this case.

There's not more of a national outcry on behalf of Judy Miller, because Americans have no respect for Judy Miller. Americans have no respect for The New York Times. And Americans have no respect for the media as a whole. Indeed, "Journalist" is one of the least prestigious jobs in the country.

David Gregory, people don't like you, people don't trust your judgment, and people are fully aware that you and your colleagues constantly distort or misrepresent facts based on your ideological agenda. So, if we barely believe you when you report hard facts, why on earth would we believe your partisan preening, your faux outrage, your overbearing editorializing, and your hysterical rumor-mongering?

Let me get this straight. First, you want us to believe that there is some sort of "egregious abuse of power here in smearing someone who's part of our national security apparatus," yet you are dismayed by the lack of a grassroots campaign to "Free Judy!"

The networks still have enormous power and influence in setting the nation's agenda. But it's only a matter of time, as long as the self-important and hypocritical David Gregorys of the world populate the prominent network reporting positions, before Americans say "enough."

Posted by Will Franklin · 24 July 2005 03:46 PM · Comments (7)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 117 -- U.S. GDP Growth.

Economic Indicators-

Gross Domestic Product Growth:

In the spirit of educating the public about the economy (HEY, AMERICA, THE ECONOMY IS NOT IN THE TANK!), stay tuned for more economic indicators.

By election day 2006, the facts pointing to a strong economy must translate into the public perception thereof.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Record Tax Revenues.

Posted by Will Franklin · 24 July 2005 11:03 AM · Comments (0)

The Wit and Wisdom of John Roberts.

John Roberts is still very much on the job, serving in his capacity as D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge even this week, despite his momentous nomination to the Supreme Court.

In one decision, U.S. v. Tarry M. Jackson (.pdf), Roberts dissents from the majority, and offers a glimpse into his sense of the law-- as well as his sense of humor.

Some brief background on the case, first, as seen by the The New York Times:

The question in the case was whether two police officers had probable cause to search the trunk of a car after stopping its driver, Tarry M. Jackson, late at night for not having a functioning light on a license plate. Mr. Jackson could produce neither a driver's license nor the car's registration, and the officers determined that the license plates were stolen.
The officers found a loaded gun in the trunk. They later justified the search by saying they were looking for additional stolen license plates or evidence that the car itself might have been stolen. Mr. Jackson was sentenced to 21 months for unlawful possession of the gun.

The judges in the majority, Judith W. Rogers and Harry T. Edwards, said the reasons the officers gave for the search were unconvincing, and the judges faulted them for not investigating Mr. Jackson's contention that the car belonged to his girlfriend. Judge Rogers was appointed by President Bill Clinton, Judge Edwards by President Jimmy Carter.

Roberts, agreeing with the original findings of the district court, dissents (underlining mine):

Sometimes a car being driven by an unlicensed driver, with no registration and stolen tags, really does belong to the driver’s friend, and sometimes dogs do eat homework, but in neither case is it reasonable to insist on checking out the story before taking other appropriate action. Even if Jackson had provided contact information for his girlfriend in response to inquiries from the officers, and even if the officers had been able to reach the girlfriend and she were responsive to their questions, I cannot see any conceivable value in the over-the-phone testimony of a suspect’s apparent girlfriend — someone unknown to the officers, whose number was given to them by the suspect himself — that an unregistered car with stolen tags, driven by an unlicensed driver, was indeed hers and was being used with her permission.
Finally, my colleagues’ insistence that police should have further questioned Jackson amounts to prescribing preferred investigative procedures for law enforcement. We have neither the authority nor the expertise for such an enterprise....

In the end, I would leave the judgment as to what lines of inquiry ought to be pursued to the officer himself, and judge probable cause on the facts as they are, rather than on what they might have been had the officer pursued a different course.

I wholeheartedly subscribe to the sentiments expressed in the concurring opinion about the Fourth Amendment’s place among our most prized freedoms. But sentiments do not decide cases; facts and the law do.

Assuredly, groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) will disagree strongly with Roberts' dissent. The concerns of civil libertarians are well-taken, although it does seem inappropriate for the majority in the case to second-guess the police in this instance, given the panoply of unequivocal reasons they had for probable cause.

But, facts of the case aside, the decision is interesting.

1. For the Souter-phobes, Roberts is in the minority against two liberals in the majority. This is just one of many pieces of evidence in the Judge's relatively limited record, indicating that he is no "stealth liberal."

Justice Souter, incidentally, had a 13-year record as a judge before his Supreme Court confirmation, but he still slipped through the cracks:

2. One can understand how Roberts has cultivated his reputation for being affable. He has a witty writing style that should prove interesting reading for Supreme Court junkies for years to come.

3. Roberts clearly errs on the side of not making new law, not mandating new regulations, and not playing the "shoulda, woulda, coulda" game. By all accounts, his judicial philosophy is anything but activist. He is stubbornly adherent to the facts and the law.

4. While this decision very well may have been written before the nomination, it is nothing short of impressive that, in the middle of the greatest whirlwind of attention and scrutiny of his entire life, Roberts could produce such a cogent opinion. With the Supreme Court aging as it is, Roberts' energy and vigor could prove to be an important infusion of productivity into upcoming sessions.

Posted by Will Franklin · 23 July 2005 07:00 PM · Comments (4)

Another Straw Poll.

Speaking of too many polls, Patrick Ruffini has another 2008 straw poll that's sure to prove at least as-- and likely more-- meaningful as the ubiquitous "scientific" media polls on the subject.

Posted by Will Franklin · 23 July 2005 10:09 AM · Comments (1)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 116 -- Tax Revenues.

Largest Tax Revenue Increase In American History-

Source:

Americans for Tax Reform (.pdf).

Spending is also increasing, but at a much less rapid rate than the growth of tax receipts. Thus, the shrinking deficit. Now, imagine if we could institute an across-the-board freeze in the growth of spending, or even just limit spending increases to inflation and population growth.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: The Rise of the Polling Political Culture.

Posted by Will Franklin · 23 July 2005 09:21 AM · Comments (3)

Quotational Therapy: Part 30 -- Friedrich A. Hayek

Friedrich Hayek On Responsibility And Freedom-

So often people misinterpret the meaning of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, or even the concept of liberty itself, thinking that freedom of speech means immunity from criticism.

It manifests itself in the "don't question my patriotism" we hear so often from Democrats when they are criticized for their weakness (or worse) on the war on terror. As if they are supposed to be innoculated from the consequences of their words.

We see it in the media, and in popular culture. When Americans decide to boycott Dan Rather or the Dixie Chicks, we're told that we're somehow violating their liberty.

You've probably experienced it at some point, yourself, in a debate with someone online or elsewhere. It happens all too often. Well, let's put an end to that, shall we?

Friedrich A. Hayek elaborates on the role of responsibility in a free society:

Liberty not only means that the individual has both the opportunity and the burden of choice; it also means that he must bear the consequences of his actions and will receive praise or blame for them. Liberty and responsibility are inseparable. A free society will not function of maintain itself unless its members regard it as right that each individual occupy the position that results from his actions and accept it as due to his own action....
This belief in individual responsibility, which has always been strong when people firmly believed in individual freedom, has remarkably declined, together with the esteem for freedom. Responsibility has become an unpopular concept, a word that experienced speakers or writers avoid because of the obvious boredom or animosity with which it is received by a generation that dislikes all moralizing.

-The Constitution of Liberty, 1960.

I hate to paraphrase a country song in a post about Hayek, but you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything.

And when someone falls for something completely stupid (example: U.S. troops = Pol Pot), it is our responsibility to hold that person responsible.

-----------------------------

Previous Quotational Therapy Session:

Margaret Thatcher.

The right quote can be therapeutic, so tune in to WILLisms.com for quotational therapy every Monday and Friday.

Posted by Will Franklin · 22 July 2005 09:48 AM · Comments (4)

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 115 -- Ubiquitous Polling.

Too many polls-

Polling has gotten out of hand. There are literally dozens of public polls on a variety of subjects in any given week-- many of which directly contradict one another, many of which ask leading, irrelevant, or inaccurate questions designed to promote the media's left-wing narrative, all of which are used by ideological and political partisans to undermine or bolster their respective agendas.

Here's a look at the historical progression:

Source:
The Permanent Campaign and Its Future (You can get the full-text via the AEI website).

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: America's Unemployment Rate.

Posted by Will Franklin · 22 July 2005 05:00 AM · Comments (2)

John Roberts: The Political Contribution Record.

Some conservatives (here, here, here, here, here and here) are worried that John Roberts will become another David Souter (a consistently liberal vote).

One can understand their concerns, but most of the evidence seems to indicate that Roberts is plenty conservative.

Take Roberts' political contribution record, for example.

Capital Eye explains:

As a partner at the Washington, D.C. law firm of Hogan & Hartson, John G. Roberts contributed $1,000 to George W. Bush’s 2000 presidential campaign. Roberts, who Bush nominated last night to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, has donated to just three other federal candidates—all Republicans—over the years in what amounts to a modest record of campaign giving.
Roberts contributed $500 in 2000 to Republican Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana, the state where Roberts was raised. Roberts' other donations to federal candidates came in the 1998 cycle, when he sent a total of $1,235 to Republican Peter Fitzgerald, who went on to defeat Sen. Carol Moseley Braun (D-Ill.), and $1,000 to Indiana Senate candidate Peter Rusthoven, who lost in the Republican primary.

The rest of Roberts’ political contributions went to Hogan & Hartson’s political action committee. Over the years, Roberts donated $7,450 to the PAC in amounts ranging from $850 to $1,100 per year, far below the legal limit. Overall, Roberts has made a total of $11,185 in campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties and PACs.

Capital Eye notes that the Hogan & Hartson PAC has leaned toward contributing to Democrats over the years:

Unlike Roberts, Hogan & Hartson is a major campaign donor. The firm has contributed $2.3 million since 1989 in individual, PAC and soft money contributions, 56 percent to Democrats.

However, in 2004, the Hogan and Hartson PAC gave two-thirds to Republicans, and only a third to Democrats; in 2002 it gave 57% to Republicans and 43% to Democrats; in 2000 it gave 64% to Republicans and 36% to Democrats; in 1998, 55% to Republicans, 45% to Democrats.

Jane Roberts, active in Feminists for Life of America, has a relatively short record of political contributions:

Roberts’ wife, Jane, a partner in the law firm of Shaw, Pittman, has made several contributions to the firm’s PAC totaling $3,772. Her lone contribution to a federal candidate was $250 to Fitzgerald in 1998.

Shaw Pittman PAC, in the 2002 cycle, made 56% of its contributions to Republicans, and 44% to Democrats, quite an out-of-the-ordinary ratio for a legal Political Action Committee. In the 2000 campaign cycle, however, her firm's PAC donated 62% to Democrats and 38% to Republicans. In the 2004 campaign cycle, during which Jane Roberts contributed no money, the PAC leaned Republican over Democrat, 62% to 38%.

None of this really proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that John Roberts will be a solid conservative once on the court, and it does not guarantee that he won't drift off steadily to the left (via M.M.) over the years, but it does provide an important glimpse into his political leanings. The only individual candidates to which John Roberts has given campaign contributions are Republicans. The smart money says that at some point during the confirmation process, at least one Democrat will raise Roberts' contribution to the Bush campaign in 2000 as some kind of scandalous, disqualifying revelation. Those of us in the real world will respond with a head bob, a sigh, and a "hmm, that's nice."

This information, together with other Republican affiliations throughout his career, ought to put conservative Republicans somewhat at ease. More importantly, President Bush, unlike his father, is a movement conservative. And unlike President Reagan, Bush has a relatively friendly Senate and a generally conservative national political climate. Thus, given President Bush's famous aptitude for making quality judgments about people, given Bush's campaigning on the issue since the 1990s, and given how important President Bush considers this choice, it is unlikely that President Bush would pick John Roberts if he believed there is even a chance Roberts could drift off to the left after winning confirmation.

Perhaps the most important point to consider about Roberts' contribution record: much like his relatively short paper trail on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, there's not a whole lot to work with in terms of political contributions. But the little we do have to go by indicates that Roberts was a wise pick on the part of the President.

Posted by Will Franklin · 21 July 2005 03:56 PM · Comments (4)

Social Security Reform Thursday: Week Twenty-Five -- Latinos and Social Security.

Thursdays are good days for reform, because they fall between Wednesdays and Fridays.

That's why WILLisms.com offers a chart or graph, every Thursday, pertinent to Social Security reform.

This week's topic:

Latinos and Social Security.

As Ian Vásquez explains, Social Security reform would disproportionately benefit Latinos:

The current system has failed Hispanics and has failed to reduce poverty in old age among Hispanics. It has made them extremely dependant on Social Security for their pension benefits, putting them in a very precarious situation.
About 24% of Hispanics over the age of 65 live below the poverty line, compared to about 9% of whites and about 25% of blacks. Hispanic families have few assets. The median Hispanic household has about $1,200 in financial assets and less than half of such households were net savers in 1998. The fact that the current system does not allow for the creation of wealth and instead diverts income into the payroll tax, which is the biggest tax that most Hispanic households pay, is holding back Hispanics.

Let's take a look at some facts.

I. Latinos have a longer life expectancy than African-Americans or Anglos.

II. Latinos are less likely to save for their own retirement than other ethnic groups.

III. Elderly Latinos are less likely to receive Social Security benefits than other ethnic groups.

IV. Elderly Latinos are more likely to depend on Social Security just to "get by" than other ethnic groups.

National Council of La Raza (NCLR):

*Among Latinos who receive Social Security benefits, 75% of their income comes from Social Security.
*Social Security is the sole source of income for 31% of elderly Hispanic couples and 49% of unmarried elderly Latinos. This is true for only 11% of elderly White couples and 25% of elderly White singles.

That being said, because fewer Latinos are eligible for Social Security benefits (even though many of them have paid into the system their entire working lives), aggregate dependence on the program is not that much greater than other ethnic groups.

Now, take all this information and put it into the context of the looming Social Security crisis. The consequences of the crisis: major slashing of benefits and/or a major tax hikes. If there is no reform, Latinos, who already rely on Social Security for so much of their retirement existence, would be hardest hit by benefit reductions. Meanwhile, personal accounts have the opportunity to empower the Latino community, giving workers a chance to earn, accumulate (through compound interest), and pass on real assets.

Some left-wing groups, such as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), argue that Latinos are better off without reform and without personal accounts. Their assertions are hardly worth addressing in any great detail, as their findings are part and parcel of the same reactionary 1930s dogma that has taken over much of the Social Security debate. Liberal groups love to repeat the line that Social Security is an insurance program that has successfully kept millions of elderly Americans out of poverty. That may be true to some extent, but there are still far too many people living in poverty in spite of (and maybe even because of) the Social Security program.

The current Social Security system is a failure for Latinos. It has not kept Latinos out of poverty. It does not encourage savings. And the rate of return for continues to diminish for the average Latino:

Social Security, currently, is a bad deal for Latinos. The relatively high payroll tax rate prevents lower- and middle-income Latinos, in particular, from developing a family nest egg. U.S. Treasurer Anna Escobedo Cabral explains:

My father worked hard all his life and paid into the Social Security system. He filed the paperwork to begin receiving benefits, but he died before receiving a single check. We came from a modest upbringing. My father could never really get ahead enough to save money. Social Security was all he would have had to support himself in retirement. He would have given anything to be able to pass those funds on to his children. Instead, the government kept that money.
Under President Bush’s proposal, my father could have passed on his Social Security personal account to his children and our family could have had a nest egg. Personal accounts would allow a younger worker the option to put a portion of their money into a conservative mix of bonds and stocks. That money would have an opportunity to grow over time at a rate greater than the current system can deliver. For example, someone who earns an average of $35,000 a year over their lifetime could expect to have nearly $250,000 saved in an account upon retirement.

Meanwhile, the Latino population is young and is expected to grow rapidly over the next few decades.

Cabral notes:

As the youngest, fastest growing population group in America, Hispanics would directly benefit from the option to save a portion of their payroll taxes in a conservative mix of bond and stock funds. Unlike paying into the Social Security system, personal accounts ensure that your Social Security taxes are saved to pay your Social Security benefits, not spent on other government programs.

Clearly, Latinos have a great deal at stake here. If and when the Latino community becomes fully invested in the President's Ownership Society, it is hard to imagine this GOP-trending group not becoming an entrenched part of the Republican political base over the long-term.

Stopping the raid on the Social Security trust fund surplus which exists over the next dozen years, creating personal accounts for every worker, is a step in the right direction. Let's do it.

Stop The Raid, Grow My Account.

--------------------------------

Previous Reform Thursday graphics can be seen here: