Government must work to restore public’s confidence
By Kirk Hancock, columnist La Grange News

The elections are behind us. It is time to get something done. I fear that we cannot go two more years allowing our problems to fester and grow. A recent Rasmussen poll found that a plurality of Americans believe our best days (as a nation) have come and gone. Many Americans are becoming disillusioned with our federal government. That was evidenced in the recent election with the rise of the Tea Party and the Republican advances in Congress. I am deeply concerned that this disillusionment will metastasize and the American people will begin to be convinced that the government cannot work.

The federal government needs to demonstrate it can tackle the big problems, not all of them but at least a few of them. We must put hyper-partisanship aside and reach a compromise on big issues. The government needs a win to stem the negative tide of perception.

I see two chronic issues that are of great national importance and could be solved. A successful resolution of these problems could set the stage to solve the more complex problems we are facing.

The first is immigration. It is a purely political issue. By that, I mean the solution is not dictated by cruel economics, unlike Social Security, which I will address later. The issue is pretty simple. We have 15 million to 20 million illegal immigrants in the country. Both parties are guilty of this problem - from Reagan to Obama. We looked the other way while they came into the country in huge numbers and became an integral part of our economy, culture and society. There are consequences for this and we must face them. I think a real solution, would look a lot like this:

1. Get control of the border - build a fence a mile high if you have too. There is no rational argument that would allow unrestricted flow of illegals into any country. Period.

2. Allow the illegals already here to stay. They are not going anywhere. There is no way in the world we are going to deport 12-plus-million people. We let them in when we turned a blind eye to the problem so we have to deal with it.

3. Now that the illegals are here, establish a modified green card system (let’s call it a blue card) which would allow them to work in the United States. Each illegal would be required to have a background check. If they have a criminal record, deport them. If not, allow them to work in the United States. This will integrate them into the economy and society. It would not allow them to vote.

4. Now for the tricky one - the path to citizenship. This is pure politics. Most of the current illegal citizens do not want citizenship. They just want the opportunity to work hard and provide for their families, here and back home. I would propose that any blue card holding immigrant could apply for citizenship after a specified number of years. The caveat is they have to be approved just like the legal immigrants. We already have quotas and requirements for traditional paths to citizenship.

The extremists on both sides would give something but in the end we would have secure borders and bring the illegal immigrants out of the shadow economy. This is not hard; both sides just have to give a little.

Now for Social Security, another huge issue we are facing. This problem is the opposite of the immigration problem. It is governed by cold hard economics. Social Security is relatively simple - there are just a few variables, age of retirement, tax rate, income taxed and growth in benefits.

A simple solution would look a lot like this. Increase the age of retirement by three years in a phased approach for all people younger than 40. For those younger than 40, increase retirement age one year. For those younger than 30, increase the retirement age by two years, and younger than 20, increase it three years. We are living longer, and it is unrealistic to have a retirement system fund 20 plus years of retirement.

When Social Security was founded, the average life expectancy was close to 65 years and there were 10-plus workers paying in to support each retiree. Life expectancy in now approaching 80, and there are only 3.3 workers supporting each retiree. This cannot last. The answer is not hard to figure out; just no one likes the answer. That does not change the answer though.

These are tough decisions but they are not hard. Health care is hard. Iran is hard. The budget deficit is hard. We need to fix what we can. Not just because the problem needs addressing, but more importantly because we must re-ignite the confidence of the American people that our government can work. Without that confidence, our best days will be behind us.

A Letter to the New Superintendent

As you may know, a search is underway to hire the next school superintendent for Troup County. This is one of the most important positions in our county government. This person sets the tone for how our schools will be managed. More importantly, he or she is uniquely positioned to become a champion for changing how education is perceived and delivered in our county. This is an open letter to the next school superintendent for Troup County.

Involve the Parents
This is the most important. I did not know whether to lead or close with this. We ask too much of the schools and too little from the parents. The prior administration made the decision to go it alone. They had No Child Left Behind performance measures they had to meet and their job and careers were on the line. That sense of urgency drove them to take the mantle of education on their own and build a process that was not dependent on parents. If the parents were involved, great, but they could not count on them. This was not a bad decision. It was reality. Historically, far too many Troup county parents take a passive role in their child’s education. The educators had to show progress and they did not have time or the confidence that the parents were on board.
Create avenues for the parents to get involved. EXPECT the parents to get involved. This area needs your firm leadership. It won’t be easy but a world-class education will not happen without active parental involvement from all parents.

Involve the Teachers
The Troup county teachers are our best asset. Most of them love their profession and students. Be aggressive in finding ways to empower the teachers to do the job they want to do. Challenge them every day to do their best and I am confident most will over-deliver. I say most, because as with any business, some employees will do better than others. Take immediate action to assist the underperformers. Don’t cover for them. They exist; your teachers know who they are. If the under performers don’t respond, get rid of them. Teaching is real time, and we cannot afford a bad teacher.

Involve the Students
Our students want to learn. They are connected to their world in ways we (parents and grandparents) can barely comprehend. They talk to kids from around the world on Facebook and Skype. Computers and the Internet are mere appliances. They are exposed to more information in a year than our grandparents were in a lifetime. Far too many of our students suffer from low expectations – from their parents and from the school system. Challenge them. Expect more from them. You are uniquely positioned to lead this effort. Do not lead alone - but with the help of the parents, the teachers and the community.

Involve the Community
There are certain facts that shape our local community. They are not bad or good, they just are. We need to recognize them, embrace them and then leverage them to make our community even better than it already is. Here are a few of the facts as I see them.

We are a legacy mill town. That means for generations education was not a high priority for the majority of students and families. The mills would take care of you –cradle to grave. That generational de-emphasis on education has carried over to today.

Our community is comprised of three high schools, and one of them has historically dominated the others. It is not their fault; it is just a byproduct of prior generations of the county’s governing and professional class attending the old city school. We tend to be too parochial and care only about “our” school. While the schools are slightly more balanced now, the legacy remains. We need to revel in the fun rivalry between the schools but all work together to build a great school system.

Engage the business community to help. While we still do a god job of attracting new industry, we lose too many potential newcomers to the likes of Auburn and Newnan because of their superior educational systems. That should be a concern to the entire business community. Challenge and engage the business community and they will respond.

You will uncover many strengths and weaknesses as you start your new role. Build on our strengths but don’t hide our weaknesses. Make them public and challenge us – the parents, teachers, students and the community at large – to address these problems. It is through this process that we can make the changes needed to make Troup County the world-class education system our children must have to compete in this global economy.

HOPE program needs immediate attention

There is no doubt that there is trouble ahead for Georgia’s Hope scholarship program. The program has been hit by the perfect storm – an increase in students attending college, years of increasing tuition costs and reduced income from the lottery. The result is that the Hope program is running out of money and fast.
Rep. Len Walker summed it up this way. “This is not a train wreck about to happen. The train wreck has happened.” Projections show a $244 million shortfall this fiscal year and a $317 million shortfall in 2012. These shortfalls will greatly diminish the $1 billion reserve in two short years. There is no doubt something must be done to halt the red ink while we preserve the very best of the popular and successful program.

Our representatives under the Gold Dome in Atlanta are keenly aware of this problem and are scared. They have every reason to be. The Hope scholarship program is wildly popular. It is argued to be the most successful scholarship program in the country. This is from a state not known for its academic prowess.
There are several trains of thought (excuse the metaphor) on how to preserve the program. All have merit and all have potentially severe long-term consequences. Here are a few of the ideas circulating:

• Means Testing – this is perhaps the most logical on its surface. The original program capped eligibility at incomes above $66,000 then rose to $100,000 and then subsequently the cap was lifted in its entirety. While this solution may seem like a no-brainer it will cost the state dearly in the long term. One huge benefit of the no cap Hope is the profound ability for the state to retain it very best and brightest students. Yes, these students will go to university with or without Hope. However, time has shown that they will overwhelmingly attend universities with better reputations outside of the state. University of Virginia, UNC- Chapel Hill, etc. come to mind.

The dramatic rise in stature of Georgia’s universities, especially the flagship UGA and Georgia Tech is astonishing in academic circles. University reputations take decades, if not generations to take hold. Our universities are experiencing meteoric rises in stature due in large part of Georgia keeping its very best and brightest students. This has profound positive long term benefit to the state’s economy as the students graduate and stay in our state.
Most political pundits say this approach will not pass due to the popularity of the current program. Given that reality, other approaches are needed.

• Fixed Scholarship amounts – This idea is to fund a fixed portion of the tuition rather than the entire tuition. This is easy to implement and retains the entire pool of eligible students. Education tuition keeps rising much faster than inflation. This is due in part because so many students do not pay tuition. Who cares if tuition goes up? Hope will pay for it. An unintended consequence of Hope is it has weakened the checks and balances need to ensure economic efficiency. I think this approach has two drawbacks. One, it will disproportionately hurt the poorer students. Secondly, it is a slippery slope that will gradually result in less and less of tuition being covered by Hope. Once the entire tuition goal is tamperered with, it is only a matter of time as tuition rises and the scholarship amount falls. Keep the state’s feet to the fire to ensure the integrity of the program.

• Eliminate Re-eligibility – Eliminate the second chance provision in the program. Only 46 percent of students who start with Hope are eligible at the 30 hour mark (1 year for most students). This option says that once you lose Hope eligibility you cannot regain it. Under this solution, all qualified students have a chance at a world class college education in our state. Everyone has to work harder in today’s world. There is no reason our students cannot do the same. I support Maureen Downey, from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution when she states “demanding more merit from the scholars rather than more money from their parents seems a better tack.”

These will be difficult choices. Time is running out. Our politicians will wait until after the Fall elections to address the problem. No one wants to open that can of worm weeks before they are up for election. Hopefully, they will put this time to good use and find a solution that preserves the best Hope has to offer while recognizing the painful economic realities. I for one think the eliminate re-eligibility option preserves the best of the current program while bending to the current economic forces.

Published in LaGrange Daily News 8.12.10

Obama's Presidency is at Risk

Since taking office Barak Obama has positioned his presidency on the premise that a much more active and robust federal government is the answer to the difficult problems we face. One of his first actions was passing a trillion dollar stimulus package built on the assumption that the federal government could spend us out of the recession. He outsourced the details to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Congress was more than happy drawing up a trillion dollar spending list. It looked so easy. He was not concerned with the details; Congress could take care of them. He was above the petty squabbles of legislators. This was our first indication on how President Obama would govern as an executive.

Next up was the healthcare debate. The President chose to take advantage of the crisis. Based on the relative ease of his stimulus legislation, Obama decided to bet his presidency on reforming healthcare. After all, he and the federal government knew what the people needed. After a tiring and exhaustive battle, he finally passed Obamacare. He did so despite a lack of support from the electorate. This was not their issue. President Obama knew best and crammed the reform down the electorate’s throat.

President Obama never defined his plan for healthcare. He gave a general outline and left it to Congress to do the heavy lifting. Again, he was detached from the specific s and he stayed above the fray.

We see this detachment play out again in his administration, when the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General fail to read the Arizona illegal immigrant law. They were quick to denounce the law but they never took the time to read it. Yet again, we see an almost surreal detachment from the details. The President’s management style is pervasive throughout his administration.

Now President Obama faces the biggest crisis of his presidency, the BP Oil Spill. He was slow to realize the enormity of this disaster. Even to this day, he seems strangely detached from the calamity. He is trying to change this perception by making another trip, this time a two-day trip, to the gulf coast to show that he cares. He will follow it up with his answer to everything, a speech. This won’t work. This time he cannot turn to Congress to deal with the issue. The issue requires the skills of an experienced executive; someone who can access the situation, assemble a team and hold the team responsible.

During the campaign, candidate Obama was calm, cool and collected. He appeared above the fray of the mere mortals electing him. He was transcendent. He was the one we have been waiting for.

A year and a half later these very traits are kicking the president in the proverbial rear end. Rather than looking for someone else’s backside to kick, the traits that made him a great candidate, are exposing his weaknesses as a leader.
Peggy Noonan summed it up this way. From the very beginning of the oil spill, President Obama “tried to distance himself from the gusher and his presidency.” - just like he tried to do with the stimulus package and healthcare. “He wanted the people to associate the disaster with BP and not him.”

We are seeing President Obama in a new light, one in which he has little experience. We are seeing him face severe adversity. Every president faces these times. Most have faced significant adversity and even failures numerous times, prior to ascending to the presidency. This is new territory for this president.
These difficult days will stress test the president’s most basic, almost primal, instinct; the federal government can fix our problems. This assumption is running smack-dab into a freight train of public opinion which is heading in the opposite direction. The public has seen the promise of an all knowing and effective federal government fail when they needed it the most. Katrina was the first example. When the people of New Orleans needed it, the federal government proved incompetent. But that was easily dismissed as a failure of George W Bush. Surely the surreal, new president would do better.

The public then became jaded when the trillion dollar stimulus package failed to keep unemployment under 8% as the President promised. We now see 10% unemployment extending for years. We then saw the raw power of the federal government when it enacted a healthcare bill without the public’s support. We now get word that the costs associated the reform will be much higher than originally forecast, just a few months ago.

Now we have a single oil leak on the bottom of Gulf. In the grand scheme of things this seems infinitely more solvable that the economic collapse and healthcare reform and a flooded city. Yet, here again, the Federal government is unable to fix the problem.

President Obama is on the cusp of losing the public. His core belief is no longer accepted by the public. He is losing the trust and the patience of the American people. Without a Clintonian change in political philosophy, a turn to the center, he is headed to a profound, failed, one-term presidency.

What are our leaders really thinking?

Something is terribly wrong. On Saturday night, a terrorist tried to detonate a car bomb in Times Square. Times Square happens to be the heart of New York City. New York City happens to be the Islamic terrorists’ favorite target. Some might remember that Islamic terrorists tried to blow up the World Trade center in 1993 and were successful in 2001. It seems like we might have to remind those in charge in Washington and even the mayor of New York City.

Shortly after the discovery of the bomb, Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security opined that it was “likely a one-off”. Chuck Schumer, the New York Senator quickly concluded “The odds are quite high that this was a lone wolf.” The mayor of New York concluded it was a lunatic American. He stated to Katie Couric that it was “home-grown, maybe a mentally deranged person or somebody with a political agenda that doesn't like the health care bill or something. It could be anything.” All of these descriptions seem to infer a rogue American (think Tea Partier or tea party sympathizer) rather than the more logical choice, an Islamic terrorist.

These are professional politicians. They speak in political nuance. Of course they did not “blame” the tea partiers but the innuendo was clear. This was the work of a Tea Partier. Do these politicians really hate Tea Partiers that much? What does it mean when their first instinct is to suspect fellow Americans rather than the stated sworn enemies of the United States? The very enemies we have been at war with for a decade and who have repeatedly targeted New York City.

In the heat of the moment, instinctual or gut reactions are critical. In the absence of all of the facts they guide which way a leader going to act. Do these leaders really distrust their fellow Americans, especially the tea partiers, so much they immediately assume they are the enemy? Don’t answer that. I am afraid it was a rhetorical question.

Letter to the editor at the LDN

Inequity prompts frustration with tax system

Tax day has come and gone and what have we learned? For one, this tax day was a little different. Taxpayers were a little more contentious as evidenced by tea parties around the country. Perhaps, they had good reason to be frustrated. In an April 14th Gallup poll 48% of Americans thought their taxes were too high, while 45% thought they were about right. An astonishing 3% thought they were too low! I think there is a simple explanation for these statistics. On the same day it was reported that 47% of all Americans pay no, let me say that again, no, federal income tax. Imagine that – 45% of taxpayers thought their tax burden was about right. Do you think it closely aligns to the 47% of taxpayers who pay zero federal income tax?

Nothing evokes the electoral passion like taxes. Just ask the British who lost the American colonies over a simple tax on tea. Just look at the hundreds of modern tea parties where modern Americans express their frustration with today’s tax code and more importantly where the tax structure and rates are headed.

At the heart of the frustration with the tax system is its inherent inequity. On April 7th the Tax Policy Center reported that 47%, almost half, of all Americans will pay no federal income taxes in 2009. This is due to either low incomes or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to reduce their liability to zero.

The result is that our primary tax system exempts half of its citizens from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. Of course everyone pays other forms of federal taxes including social security, Medicare and excise taxes on gasoline, cigarette and alcohol. But at the heart of the federal tax system is the income tax and it is broken and the people know it.

The actual breakdown of who pays federal income tax is startling. The Tax Foundation reported the following data as of 2007. Keep in mind these statistics will be further skewed based on the policies instituted by President Obama. You can see this data at www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/23408.html. This data is not political. It is merely a compilation of all tax returns.

The top 1% of income earners paid 40.4% of the total income taxes. The top 5% paid 60.6% and the top 50% paid 97.1% of all federal income tax. The bottom 50% of income earners paid 2.9% of total federal income taxes. Think about that for a moment. Once you peel away the rhetoric you have to ask yourself is this fair. More importantly, do you really think this group can pay substantially more?

The startling fact of this is not that this group is paying too much in taxes. That is an article for another day. The disturbing fact is that it is it is President Obama’s stated intention to further increase the taxes on this group as well. He believes that it is in the nation’s interest for the top 5% to pay an even larger and even more disproportionate share of taxes.

The federal income tax is the federal government’s largest source of revenue raising a little less than half of the government’s total revenue. It has long held a degree of progressiveness in its rate structure. That means those with higher incomes pay a higher percentage of their income than those with lower income. To a certain degree this is entirely appropriate. However to exclude almost half of the citizenry is dangerous. Keep in mind that in 2007, approximately 38% of households paid no income tax. In 2009 that figures has jumped to 47%. This is a trend that cannot and must not continue. It undermines the very foundation and fairness it tries to seek.

We are about to find out what happens in our democracy (actually a republic) when a voting majority of citizens pay no federal income tax and have the ability to vote increases on the minority (actual tax payers) with impunity. We are at that tipping point right now. This does not bode well in my opinion.

Most Americans understand that this structure is unfair and unsustainable. We have a voluntary tax compliance system. If the people lose confidence in the system this could pose significant problems regarding the integrity of the entire tax system.

Now I want to come back to the opening paragraph. Is it any wonder 48% of Americans think their taxes are too high? I would argue it is no coincidence. That is the percentage of Americans who pay federal income taxes! I would like to know what the 45% of respondents were thinking when they said taxes were just about right. How many of them actually paid federal income taxes. How much above zero taxes would be too much? As for the 3% who thought taxes were too low, these people give a whole new meaning to the statistical phrase – margin of error.


Published in the LaGrange Daily News - April 22, 2010

To Fix the Economy - Government Must Take Less

This president just does not get it. Washington does not create jobs. In fact it competes against the private sector for jobs. If the central government could create (and sustain) jobs, the old Soviet Union would be a world power.

There is no doubt the economy is reeling. The defining contribution of the Clinton presidency may well be his campaign axiom “it’s the economy, stupid.” After a year in office, President Obama is beginning to recognize this truism. The only problem is he and his team has no idea how to fix the economy.

The US economy is driven in large part by two fundamentally related drivers – consumer spending and employment. When Americans are employed they spend money. It really is that simple. The question is – what can we do to get more people employed?

Small businesses are the backbone of our economy. Small business employs 50 percent of all private sector employees. More importantly, they create 68% of all new jobs. The key to any recovery is a thriving small business economy.

Now back to my statement the president does not have a clue. He and his congressional wunderkinds (Pelosi and Reid) are trying to pass a “jobs” bill. The problem is not one of them has ever created a private sector job. This issue is made worse because Obama’s entire cabinet lacks significant private sector experience. Forbes magazine recently reported that Obama’s cabinet has the least private sector experience of any administration since 1900. According to Forbes.com only 20 percent of Obama’s cabinet has private sector experience. This compares to an average of 44 percent since the Teddy Roosevelt administration.

Why does that matter? According to Forbes, this trend demonstrates that this marks a departure from the traditional reliance on a balance of public and private sector experiences. The Obama cabinet and his Democratic allies have railed against the private sector. This sentiment is best demonstrated by Barney Frank’s statement “The private sector got us into this mess. The government has to get us out of it.” This belief system is disastrous.

This kind of thinking explains why President Obama and Congress are proposing a government solution and/or intrusion for everything, including healthcare. After the public thoroughly rejected ObamaCare, he had a chance to reset and try a new approach. After weeks of analysis he decided to double down and continue with a 2000 plus page plan, 35 government agency healthcare bureaucracy. Why does this both me so much?

Let’s look at two of the federal governments biggest “solutions” to the crisis of their time. I am talking about the Department of Education and the Department of Energy. Both departments were created by Jimmy Carter to bring the full weight and power of the federal government to address the pressing issue of their day.

The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil. Since then the government has spent hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars and our dependence on foreign oil has risen from 28 percent in the late 70’s to 57 percent today. It is projected to be in excess of 75 percent in the next 20 years.

The federal government again came to the rescue to save America’s education system in 1979. At the time the United States ranked first among industrialized nations. Since then, the federal government has spent in excess of $1.5 trillion dollars and our standing is now 18 out of 36 among our peers. Another smashing federal success.

First it was education, then energy and now healthcare. Why am I so skeptical?

People whose entire careers have been in academia or the public sector do not understand what it takes to be small business owner. They have been insulated from the do or die pressures of starting a business, making payroll and supporting their employees and their families.

They are incapable of understanding what drives someone to risk everything to start a new business. An entrepreneur has to have the arrogance or naiveté to think they can create a business and do it better than everyone else before them. They have to commit everything - the house, the credit cards, the family savings, everything. They then take on the responsibility of hiring employees to grow their business. They risk everything for a dream.

There is only one way to fix our economy. The government must take less. It must empower the entrepreneur, the small business owner and yes even the big businesses of America. Every dollar the federal government takes from its citizen is a dollar unavailable to grow a business and in turn hire an employee.

The best stimulus would be for the government to get out of the way and trust its citizens. The federal government is incapable of investing as astutely and flexibly as the private sector. It is time for some humility from our leaders in Washington. Sometimes government is not the solution, it is the problem.

Published in LDN - 2/25/10

The Healthcare Debacle is Obama’s Own Mess

Candidate Obama ran on a post-partisan theme. He was going to rise above the lethal Washington partisanship to accomplish his change agenda. If he had done this he would not be in the mess he and his fellow Democrats are in right now. The legislative impasse is one hundred percent his own creation.

President Obama outsourced the development of the healthcare bill (as well as the cap and trade and bailout bills) to the hyper-partisan Congress. The Democratic congress was beside itself with legislative super-majorities and saw no need to involve the Republicans on the largest piece of social legislation since social security. The congressional leadership saw an opportunity to get what they wanted and did not need the Republicans for anything, or so they thought. As we all know, it did not turn out that way.

For just a moment consider what would have happened if President Obama acted like candidate Obama and incorporated a few Republican ideas into the current legislation. Not meaningful concessions, just a few bones to throw the more liberal Republicans. He could have easily picked up 3-5 Republicans who were eager to pass healthcare legislation. If he had done this, he would not have been scrambling to secure the 60th vote. There would have been no Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker kickback, labor union buy-off’s, etc. He would have had this legislation passed in the Fall and the Democrats would not be facing the 2010 electoral tsunami they are looking at now.

If only president Obama had led as he campaigned, he would have his precious legislation. He has no one to blame, not even the Republicans, other than himself. To that end I say “the Lord works in mysterious ways.”

LDN - 1.20.10

A Few Items You Might Have Missed This Year

This past year has had more than its fair share of news items. From the economic crisis, to the inauguration of America’s first African American president, to the apparent passage of a massive healthcare bill, this year has been one for the record books. Lost in all of these headlines are a few events that you might have missed. Some of these items are just bizarre while others might give you pause.

• A priest in Northern England told his congregation that it is acceptable for desperate people to shoplift as long as they do it at large national chain stores, rather than small family businesses. The Reverend Tom Jones of York said that shoplifting could help people who are legally entitled to government welfare benefits but have the benefits delayed for bureaucratic reasons. What a load of bunk. You can steal from Belk’s but you can’t steal from Solomon’s. I can just see Charlton Heston carrying the Ten Commandments in a wagon because Thou Shall Not Steal had been annotated with footnotes explaining the difference between a national chain and a family owned store.

• The world met in Copenhagen last week with the goal of establishing far reaching targets and mandates to control the world’s carbon emissions – all in the hope to manage global warming. Before you run off and buy your Prius you may want to consider this interesting news item:
Man’s best friend’s, aka your family dog, carbon footprint is more than double that of a gas guzzling SUV. Researchers Robert and Brenda Vale have concluded that the land required to generate the food for a medium sized dog is twice that of a 4x4 driving 6,000 miles a year.

Just so you cat lovers do feel glib, cats were found to have an “eco-footprint equivalent to a driving a Volkswagen Golf for a year. Two hamsters equate to a plasma TV and even the lowly goldfish is the equivalent to two mobile phones.
The results were confirmed by the Stockholm Environment Institute in York England. Something weird is going on in York (that is where the shoplifting priest is from – go figure). The Institute concluded that “owning a dog really is quite an extravagance.”

• This little factoid is probably one of the more obvious but this time it is backed by facts.

Democrats are feeling stimulated these days. Jerry Brito and Veronique de Rugy of the Mercatus Center tracked stimulus spending in all 435 congressional districts plus the District of Columbia. They found that the amount of stimulus money received by a district was influenced by its partisan representation, rather than economic need. Districts with a Democratic congressman received almost twice as many dollars as those with Republican representation, whereas there was no relationship between a district’s unemployment level and the amount of stimulus money it received.

• In Wellington New Zealand cops warned two nude Kiwi men after they were found cycling without a helmet. The men said they were cycling naked because "they wanted to experience total freedom". The officer said to them ''the way you're heading, you're going to experience total confinement.” The officer issued them with a warning for not wearing protective headgear and sent them home. What can you say to top that one?

• The US national debt is over eleven trillion. The 2009 debt was almost two trillion. It was not that long ago we used to worry about billion dollar deficits. Now the magic number is a trillion. It is impossible for the human mind to comprehend a trillion. This might put it into perspective:
o A million seconds is 12 days ago
o A billion seconds 31 years ago
o A trillion seconds is longer than recorded history – 31,688 years ago

That might help but here is another way of looking at a trillion. A trillion is approximately the sum total of income taxes collected by the federal government. So to eliminate next year’s projected 2 trillion dollar deficit your income tax would have to triple. That’s right – you federal income tax would have to triple to eliminate next years projected deficit. Think about that the next time our politicians offer us something that we don’t have to pay for.

The year 2009 is over and 2010 has just started. The only thing that can be said for certain is 2010 will hold as many surprises as 2009. I just hope and pray they are more pleasant than the surprises of 2009. Happy New Year!

Published in the LaGrange Daily News
December 31, 2009