Bush's Pivot Point

Dallas Morning News | William McKenzie:

“He's reaching out to left and right on health, immigration and education, and that could give his presidency the boost it needs”

Ed Cognoski responds:

The first half of the Bush Presidency was all unilateral. Tax cuts; pre-emptive war; to hell with the Democrats, the Europeans and the Arabs. Bush continued this approach to governing into his second term with unilateral initiatives for remaking Social Security and the tax code. As those initiatives died on the vine and the man-made disaster in Iraq became harder to deny and the natural disaster called Katrina revealed incompetence at home, President Bush's approval ratings sank. It seemed as if only the hard-core conservative base was still with him. Then, through some clumsy moves, he alienated even his base. The Harriet Miers nomination and the sale of port management to Dubai Ports World raised howls of protest from Republicans.

Mr McKenzie sees President Bush's latest proposals on health, immigration and education as reaching out to left and right. In the worst case, he may find he just alienates his base even more, without winning support from Democrats. If so, his approval ratings will sink to historic lows and he will leave office a failed President. I think that outcome to be at least as likely as Mr McKenzie's prediction of a popularity boost.

That pesky thing we call a constitution

DallasBlog.com | Tara Ross:

“Last week, a coalition of former congressmen announced a new campaign designed to tear apart the system by which Americans elect their Presidents. They think that they have found an all-new and unique end-run around the Electoral College. If their plan works, the Electoral College will essentially be gone, at the behest of a mere handful of states. Potentially, the 11 largest states could dictate this change, even if the other 39 states disagree.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Ms Ross acts as if this would be an insidious new evil. In fact, our existing Electoral College system already decrees that the 11 largest states can decide the next President, even if the other 39 states disagree. That's how the Electoral College system works already.

The proposed change is the Campaign for the National Popular Vote, spearheaded by former Sen. Birch Bayh (D-IN) and Rep. John Anderson (R-IL). The change actually tempers the power of big states. Those 11 big states would agree to abide by the wishes of the voters in the country as a whole. If the voters as a whole choose a different candidate, those 11 big states would agree to cast their electoral votes in favor of the candidate most popular to the country as a whole instead of the candidate who managed to win majorities in just those 11 big states. Such an outcome would be more democratic. Characterizing this scheme as being undemocratic and those proposing it as being hypocritical is unjustified.

Ms Ross mentions only in passing the real problem with this scheme. It's that matter of recounts. Florida 2000 revealed the dirty little secret that our voting processes are flawed, so much so that we can never get an accurate vote count even in just one state. If a close election like 1960 or 2000 were replayed under this new scheme, we might be looking at trying to get a recount, not just in a single state, but in the nation as a whole. Given that one side would use every legal strategy (and some of questionable legality) to obstruct and delay a recount, like George W. Bush partisans did in 2000, imagine the controversy any attempt at a national recount would create. No, flawed as it is, and as biased as it is in favor of small states (and so-called red states), the Electoral College system does have one advantage. It avoids the need to ever attempt a national recount.

Ms Ross, having written a book on the Electoral College, is certainly aware that this proposal doesn't "tear apart" the Electoral College. It is not an "end run" around it. It is not "undemocratic". And it certainly does not reflect "unmitigated arrogance of attempting to effect constitutional change without bothering to first obtain the consent of the governed." Ms Ross conveniently neglects to tell her readers what the Constitution itself has to say about the Electoral College: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors." We already have variations among the states in how their electors are chosen. The Constitution empowers the states to adopt variations as they see fit. This latest proposed variation is just one more. The constitutionality of the proposal is not an issue. Ms Ross doesn't say what her real reasons are for opposing this change, but defense of the Constitution isn't it.

A Democrat's view of the Texas education conundrum

DallasBlog.com | Ed Ishmael:

“Texas has until June 1, 2006 , to fix our education funding mess. That’s the Texas Supreme Court deadline for replacing the current unconstitutional school taxing system with a constitutional one. Republican leaders, it seems, are looking for ways to starve public schools even though the vast majority of Texans want to provide their children with world class public education. And considering the numerous failed attempts by the Republican controlled legislature to fix Texas Public Education, there is considerable doubt they’ll get it right this time.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Mr Ishmael supplies excellent background information on the crisis in Texas school finance. It starts with the Texas constitution's call "for the support and maintenance of an efficient public free school." It's complicated by the constitution's prohibition against a state property tax and the legislature's setting a cap on the property tax rates that local school districts can impose. With the share of education costs being borne by the state declining, local school districts find themselves with little discretion in setting local property tax rates. Even the maximum rates allowed by law are barely sufficient to meet the growing demands of unfunded federal and state education mandates. This lack of discretion amounts to a de facto state property tax that the courts have ruled unconstitutional.

Mr Ishmael's series is worth reading to gain an appreciation for exactly where we are and how we got here. Not surprisingly, that insight also shows the way out of the crisis. It begins with electing representatives to the Texas legislature who believe that "a general diffusion of knowledge [is] essential to the preservation of the liberties and the rights of the people." That is the reason spelled out in the Texas constitution for a Texas "public free school" system in the first place. Our current legislature has proven that they don't believe in the constitution. Electing representatives who do is the first step out of our present crisis.

Texas Nonprofit Is Cleared After GOP-Prompted Audit

Washington Post:

“The Internal Revenue Service recently audited the books of a Texas nonprofit group that was critical of campaign spending by former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) after receiving a request for the audit from one of DeLay's political allies in the House, [House Ways and Means Committee member Sam Johnson (R-Tex.)]. ... Johnson, a member of the subcommittee responsible for oversight of the tax agency, sparked the IRS's interest by telling IRS Commissioner Mark W. Everson in a letter dated Aug. 3, 2004, that he had ‘uncovered some disturbing information’ and received complaints of possible tax violations. Johnson said he was sure the IRS would follow up. ‘I ask you to report back your findings of each of these investigations directly to me,’ he told Everson in the letter, according to a copy obtained by The Washington Post.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

This abuse of the IRS is an open secret in Washington. Each year, dozens or hundreds of such audits are triggered by requests from Congress or the White House. Many Americans are under the mistaken notion that such abuses ended with President Richard Nixon's resignation. In fact, Presidents and Congressmen since have continued to abuse the IRS, if a little less blatantly. It takes the form of forwarding to the IRS newspaper articles or constituents' letters accusing tax-exempt groups of behavior that would invalidate their tax-exempt status. The IRS maintains that decisions to conduct audits are its own, but political pressure is obvious when a Congressman like Sam Johnson calls the forwarded information "disturbing" and asks the IRS to report the results of its investigation directly to the Congressman.

Rep. Johnson's actions may be standard operating procedure in Washington, but such behavior is as dishonorable today as it was when Congress began drawing up articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon, including the charge that he endeavored "to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigation to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner." It's been over thirty years since Richard Nixon resigned. It's time such abuses stop.

Dying for a rate cut

Startle Grams | Paul Bourgeois:

“There's something terribly wrong when we have old people dying because they can't heat their home and the Texas Public Utility Commission won't even consider a rate cut.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

There are legitimate arguments whether the PUC should consider a rate cut, but Mr Bourgeois' argument is not one of them. The elderly couple died not because they could not afford gas service. They died because they moved into their house only the week before, hadn't yet had gas service restored, and were heating their house with a charcoal burner. They died because the public is still not educated enough about the dangers of carbon monoxide poisoning.

Besides, subsidies targeted specifically at the poor would be more effective than rate cuts in ensuring the poor have adequate heating in winter and air conditioning in summer. In return for approval of last year's rate increases, TXU, for one, agreed to help low income customers pay their electric bills. If Mr Bourgeois is truly concerned with the poor, he should investigate the effectiveness of that program.

Toll booth on the free-ride highway

Guns, God and Good Government | J.R. Labbe:

“Georgia's House of Representatives took a step last week to try to recoup some of the state's outlay for those services by adopting a surcharge for wire transfers. If passed by the Senate and signed by the governor, the Illegal Immigration Fee Act would impose a 5 percent fee on wire transfers made by anyone who can't prove they are in the country legally. The fee would be waived for people who can produce a pay stub or tax return that shows they paid taxes in Georgia. And please, don't cry for me, Argentina, if your economy goes mushy because the United States starts enforcing its immigration laws.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Yet another case of exploiting the poor. The vast majority of the illegal aliens are nothing more than poor, hard-working people wanting only to labor to provide for themselves and their families. They come to the United States because the opportunities for work are better than in their home countries. Texas' history is full of immigrants. Sam Houston himself was an immigrant from Tennesee. So, too, was Davy Crockett, hero of the Alamo. Not all the early immigrants from the United States met Mexico's rather strict conditions for legal immigration.

If modern day Texas no longer wants immigrants, it ought to eliminate what draws them here. It ought to target the employers who exploit illegal immigrants. Georgia's legislation is the polar opposite. It just makes the situation worse. The employers are untouched. The poor's meager pay is docked even more, making them poorer and more desperate. Georgia is less interested in ending illegal immigration than it is in extracting yet more blood, toil, tears and sweat from our immigrant poor.

A century ago, America recognized that its greatness came from being the land of opportunity. America would do well to remember and live up to the sentiments expressed in Emma Lazarus' poem enshrined at the Statue of Liberty:

Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

It's not Argentina that ought to be crying. It's America.

Contradiction in Europe?

Star-Telegram | Editorials:

“Recent European affairs have presented the world with a paradoxical take on free speech. On the one hand, many European news outlets locked arms in defending the right to publish caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. ... Meanwhile, Austria's national court has sentenced controversial British historian and author David Irving, 67, to three years in prison for voicing opinions in that country in 1989 in which he denied that the Nazis had killed millions of Jews during World War II. ... Can there be peace between secularism and religion? God help us if the answer is: ‘No.’ Out of Europe has come some tough questions. ”

Ed Cognoski responds:

The Star-Telegram asks an important question, but sidesteps answering it, so it earns a thumbs-down. Maybe the editorial board's reluctance is due to a sad suspicion that the answer really is 'No.' There can be no peace between secularism and religion. Secularism assumes, secularism demands, the separation of church and state. Many religions demand that God come first, that God inspire and influence all of one's actions, that the individual dedicate his life to doing God's will. Inevitably, different faiths will interpret God's will in contradictory ways. Secular government will be forced to choose, disrupting the always uneasy peace.

The conflict between secularism and religion can never be eliminated, only managed. Different situations demand different solutions. Anti-Semitism was such a destructive force in Europe in the mid-20th century that societies passes laws forbidding Holocaust denial. Perhaps as that dark period recedes in history, the need for such laws will pass and the laws will be repealed. Perhaps in the early 21st century Christian-Islamic relations will fray and tear so seriously that anti-blasphemy laws will be deemed necessary for the survival of European civilization. At any given time, contradictions will exist between textbook freedom of speech and the laws needed for the survival of society. It's a delicate balancing act. It's a perpetual challenge. While there can never be peace between secularism and religion, with good sense and respect for others, we can maintain an uneasy truce for very long periods of time.

Saudi Arabia: Positive Appraisal

DallasBlog.com | Wes Riddle:

“One does not, of course, want to leave the impression that there is no problem with terrorists in Saudi Arabia, because that would be untrue. The point is that Saudi authorities have been aggressive and largely successful containing and making excellent end roads against the problem.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

This viewpoint is published the same morning as news reports detail a foiled terrorist attack on Saudi oil facilities. Saudi Arabia has selfish reasons to oppose terrorism. Much of it is aimed at the Saudi ruling family itself. Our so-called war on terror is not as simple as a war against evil doers who hate our Western liberties.

Saudi Arabia tries to keep an uneasy balance with militant Islam. Inside the kingdom, the Saudi princes and their families are allowed to accumulate vast oil riches and live in extravagant luxury. In return, Saudis fund terrorism under the table, on the understanding that the targets of that terrorism lie outside the kingdom -- in Israel, Lebanon, Iraq, Europe, the United States. That balance is hard to maintain. Some terrorists refuse to go along. They hate the decadent Saudi ruling family as much as they hate the decadent West. On the other side, Americans publicly insist that Saudis suppress terrorism. So far, it's a balancing act that Saudis play well, buying off the West with oil and public relations and checking the militants with a combination of bribes and suppression.

In the long run, it's in the Saudis own selfish interest to defeat terrorism. But too aggressive an attack on militant Islam now, while wounds like the Palestinian/Israeli conflict still bleed freely, would cost Saudis the support of Arabs and Muslims the world over. So, expect Saudi cooperation with the United States to continue, but not so much as to threaten the Saudis' relationship with their neighbors.

America needs to act just as deftly. Unfortunately, Americans tend to see the world simplistically, as black and white, as good and evil. It's a worldview that will likely lead to spectacular failure in a part of the world where nothing is quite as it seems.

If the center cannot hold

Star-Telegram | Editorials:

“‘From the 16th to the 20th centuries, the course of Iraqi history was affected by the continuing conflicts between the Safavid Empire in Iran and the Ottoman Turks,’ says the Library of Congress' country study of Iraq. ‘The Safavids, who were the first to declare Shia Islam the official religion of Iran, sought to control Iraq both because of the Shia holy places at An Najaf and Karbala and because Baghdad, the seat of the old Abbasid Empire, had great symbolic value. The Ottomans, fearing that Shia Islam would spread to Anatolia (Asia Minor), sought to maintain Iraq as a Sunni-controlled buffer state.’ ”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Silly Americans. We insist on forcing global politics into a mold created by 9/11. We are waging a war against terrorism, against evil doers who hate our Western liberal democratic liberties or our wealth or our religion. America blunders into Iraq oblivious of history like that documented by the Library of Congress' country study of Iraq. Not one American in a thousand ever heard of the Safavids or the Ottomans. Yet, like politics the world over, the struggle in Iraq turns out to be about local politics. More about ancient grudges between next door neighbors than anything to do with the World Trade Center in New York City.

The prescription of Doctor Bush? Spread democracy. Hold elections -- in Iraq, in Palestine, in Egypt -- and the people will respond by turning their backs on centuries of sectarian struggle, tribal struggle, imperial struggle. It's as sophisticated as a sixth grade civics lesson. Which, given Americans' appalling lack of education about world history, is probably all that it is based on. Silly Americans.

Cartoons don't justify Islamic violence

DallasBlog.com | Tom Pauken:

“We in the United States and Western Europe are very open about allowing all faiths to practice their religion openly, including those who follow the Muslim faith. It is what we mean when we speak about the importance of religious liberty. Yet, in a number of Islamic nations, Christians and Jews cannot openly practice their faith. I think of Saudi Arabia as one example of this. Isn’t it time for Muslims to show similar respect for other faiths that we show for theirs?”

Ed Cognoski responds:

It would be convenient if the rest of the world shared our Western values, but they don't. Freedom of religion is the exception in human history. Neutrality towards religion is even more a rarity, even in the world today. Even Great Britain, the birthplace of Western liberal democracy, has an official state religion. A nation being Islamic doesn't prevent religious tolerance. Malaysia, where Islam is the official state religion, has a constitution that guarantees religious liberty. But the norm for many nations in the Middle East is both an official state religion and the practice of discrimination against other religions.

Like it or not, we don't have the right to demand other nations adopt our concept of individual liberties. We need to live in a world where others don't respect those liberties. For the most practical of reasons, we need to focus more on how we must behave to survive and thrive rather than on how our adversaries should behave to live up to our values and ideals.

We need to continue to respect Islam and all religions, because such respect is of value to us regardless whether it is reciprocated. We need to defend ourselves against attacks by those who are offended by Westerners exercising their freedoms. We need to use common sense to avoid foolishly provoking other societies just because we can. We need to continue to show by example why our notion of Western liberal democracy, is, as we firmly believe, morally and practically superior.

Leave those smokers alone

Star-Telegram | Joseph Blast:

“The only legitimate grounds for interfering in smokers' choices are the potentially harmful effects of secondhand smoke on nonsmokers. Anti-smoking activists say secondhand smoke contains 4,000 poisons and carcinogens -- that even a tiny dose can cause severe health effects. They claim that ‘there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke.’ This is pure junk science. The first principle of toxicology is that the dose makes the poison. We are exposed to thousands of natural poisons and carcinogens in our diets every day, but they don't hurt us because the exposure is too small to overcome our bodies' natural defenses. The same is true of secondhand smoke. No victim of cancer, heart disease, etc., can ‘prove’ that his or her cancer or heart disease was caused by exposure to secondhand smoke.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Oh spare me. The days are long gone when smokers could argue that the connection between tobacco smoke and disease was not proven. Yet they persist in arguing that nonsmokers should put up with noxious fumes because the quantities of carcinogens in secondhand smoke are insufficient to prove to the smokers that they are harming others' health. Why should the burden of proof be on the victim at all? It should be enough that the victim doesn't want to breathe your foul exhaled smoke. I'm willing to have smoking bans in restaurants, offices, stores, and other public places just because the smoke annoys the hell out of the others. It makes some eyes water. It aggravates asthma in others. It makes everyone's clothes stink. This is real harm, physical harm, even if it doesn't cause the victim to immediately keel over with a heart attack, stroke, or cancer. When smokers violate everyone else's rights to breathe clean air, I have no moral objections to restricting smokers' own so-called rights. I'm sure John Stuart Mill would agree.

Ports in a storm

Dallas Morning News | Mark Davis:

“National unity has been hard to find since just after 9/11, but it's back. President Bush, long maligned for dividing America, has truly brought together young and old, red states and blue states, men and women. This rare moment of unity is the visceral reaction to an idea so stunningly unwise that political opponents are stumbling over one another to reach the same cameras and microphones to say the same thing – stop the ports takeover now.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

President Bush's decision is stunningly unwise -- as far as domestic politics are concerned. No question. It's on a scale comparable to his politically tone deaf decision to nominate Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. But is it so unwise in terms of national security? In terms of global politics? There, the answer is much less certain.

The reaction by the President's detractors furnishes evidence of what many Muslims have suspected all along. That America's war on terror is really a war on Islam. That many Americans believe that an ally of America in its war on terror should be discriminated against solely because it is Islamic. Up to now, Americans have not minded, have not even noticed, that their shipping industry -- ports, ships, containers -- has been owned and operated by foreigners for years, maybe decades. The only difference in this case is that it is an Islamic country that America is doing business with.

President Bush's decision is stunningly unwise, not on its merits, but because it gives pundits like Mark Davis reason to rant and rave. What's being said in American newspapers, on talk radio and by cable television spinmeisters, is used as evidence by radical Muslims (who, of course, do exist) to convince their fellow Muslims that they have no friend in America. It supports the arguments made by our enemies.

Like the war in Iraq itself, which only succeeded in spawning new terrorists, this latest move by President Bush, designed perhaps to cement a friendly relationship with a strategic ally in the Persian Gulf, ends up only further antagonizing the relationship between America and the Islamic world. The record of blunders of Bush foreign policy has one more citation on its long list of failures.

You are being watched. Gonna be, anyway

DallasBlog.com | Trey Garrison:

“The Dallas Police Department is in the initial phase of installing 34 cameras at ‘major flash points’ for activity in the central business district, paid for by a one-year, $840,000 grant from the Meadows Foundation, and has the approval of the city council’s public safety committee. The police can't wait to expand the program and create a surveillance net across the city. Even though the evidence is there that police cameras are an expensive boondoggle that don't reduce crime.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

People want more police on patrol. Cameras are a more cost-effective way to do it than hiring and training humans. Kudos to police departments that try to use technology to contain costs.

Criminals tend to commit their offenses where people aren't looking. Cameras, being immobile, have a disadvantage over patrolling police. Humans can look down alleys and around corners where cameras can't. So, it's no surprise that a London study found evidence that cameras were most effective in parking lots, where criminals have no choice -- if they want to break into a car, they have to do it where the cars are, out in the open where the cameras can see them.

So, use of cameras is a wise step, but they should be installed in areas where they are most likely to have an effect. I hope that's the plan in the city of Dallas.

Oh, and that cost: $840,000 for 34 cameras for one year. Wow. I hope the per camera cost comes down drastically for cameras beyond the original 34. And in years two, three, and later.

The new conservatism: It's crunchy

Dallas Morning News | Rod Dreher:

“As a general rule, my Earth-Mother Republican wife and I prefer Small, Local, Old and Particular over Big, Global, New and Abstract. We believe big business deserves as much skepticism as big government. We believe God calls mankind to be good stewards of the natural world. Most important, we hold with Russell Kirk that the family is the institution most important to conserve, and our entire politics is constructed around that goal.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Mr Dreher's new conservatism sounds a lot like the 1960s' old counterculture - return to nature; environmentalism; organic foods; down with big government, big corporations, mass media and conformist schooling; quit the rat race, unplug, drop out; tune in to one another. One difference is that the hippies moved to communes and dabbled in yoga and Buddhism. Mr Dreher's crunchy cons withdraw to the nuclear family and Christian home schooling. In either case, it's a collection of personal lifestyle choices, not a political movement.

Some sentiments of the 1960s counterculture lifestyle, like environmentalism, found a lasting home in the Democratic Party. Perhaps some of the crunchy cons' sentiments might infiltrate the Republican Party and find a permanent home, too. Environmentalism, apparently a favorite of liberals and crunchy cons both, is an obvious candidate, as it is essential for humanity's long-term survival on this planet.

But large parts of crunchy conservatism will go the way of all periodic rejections of worldly ways. While the fad gets its fifteen minutes of fame each generation or two, technology continues its unstoppable advance always. In one era, railroads and highways cover the landscape. In the next, radio and television fill the airwaves. Today, people scatter into a splintered world of broadband, video games, MP3 music players, and blogs. Mr Dreher and the crunchy cons will find a niche in that world where they can find personal satisfaction and raise families to share their values. I am happy for them. I just don't expect them to change the world.

Look at the coal hard facts about air pollution in Texas

Star-Telegram | R.A. Dyer:

“State environmental regulators are now considering permits for seven new coal-burning power plants in Texas -- plants that will add 14,000 tons of pollution to our air every year, much of which will exacerbate summertime smog in Dallas-Fort Worth. But rather than wait until the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) puts into effect new rules to reduce emissions by electric utilities in East Texas by 70 percent, Gov. Rick Perry has issued an executive order expediting the permitting of these new plants.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

According to this recent article in the Star-Telegram, "the governor received more than $66,500 in campaign contributions from TXU’s employees and political-action committees during the 2004 election cycle." Our electoral system is broken. Candidates like Rick Perry rush through coal-burning permits that lead to pumping more pollutants into our already dirty air. In return, they rake in campaign contributions from the polluters. Candidates who advocate clean air, clean water, and public health can't afford to run a competitive race. Texans can take a stand to end this vicious circle by voting no to Rick Perry for another term as Governor and insisting that the other candidates stand up for clean air and public health.

Asia's tiger economy may fail

DallasBlog.com | Tom Pauken II:

“Statements of possible gloom and doom sound out of synch in the Asian-Pacific region where nations like China and South Korea have shown such explosive growth in recent decades. But, Asia is not immune to a possible downturn in the world economy.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Even the global Great Depression was only a temporary setback to American economic hegemony during the 20th Century -- the American Century. East Asia may experience periodic financial crises as its anachronistic interlocking business/family relationships (Japanese keiretsu, Korean chaebol, Hong Kong hongs, Taiwan guanxi qiye) evolve into more modern forms. But those crises won't upset the long-term trend. The 21st Century may be beginning as another American Century, but our political leadership is doing nothing to change the trend that predicts the 21st Century will end as the Asian Century.

Huge trade deficits and loss of manufacturing jobs go hand in hand

DallasBlog.com | Tom Pauken:

“Here is what [Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard] Fisher had to say about our trade deficit: ‘What the numbers tell you is that we are far richer as individuals and as a nation than when we last ran a trade surplus. We are hardly ….. becoming weaker as we have incurred trade deficits.’ If you believe those words from Fisher, then I have a bridge to sell you. ... Our huge trade deficits ($726 billion last year) are unsustainable no matter what pretty face Richard Fisher tries to paint on that pig.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Mr Pauken uses Mr Fisher's speech in order to lobby for a border-adjusted business tax. From the speech, it's not clear what might be Mr Fisher's opinion of such a change in our tax laws. He understands that globalization heightens tax competition among nations. If a border-adjusted tax is part of that open, free market competition, Mr Fisher may welcome it. But if it is an instinctive protectionist reaction to disruptions caused by a changing economy, Mr Fisher may likely oppose it.

Mr Fisher's point is that we shouldn't allow the trade deficits to rush us into the false remedies of protectionism. The American economy is strong, even after thirty years of trade deficits. Globalization is ushering in a new period of "creative destruction." Our country has experienced such discontinuities before and has emerged from each more prosperous than before. Government attempts at protectionism usually made things worse in the meantime and delayed the recoveries. Mr Fisher's speech explains it better:

In his book, Business Cycles, [Joseph Schumpeter] wrote: “A railroad through new country, i.e., country not yet served by railroads, as soon as it gets into working order upsets all conditions of location, all cost calculations, all production functions within its radius of influence; and hardly any ‘ways of doing things’ which have been optimal before remain so afterward.”

Here is where China and India and all the bristling new economic entrants come in. They are today’s equivalent of Schumpeter’s railroads. They and the phenomenon of globalization are agents of creative destruction writ large. From now on, hardly any way of doing things which used to be optimal will ever be the same.
...
As long as the Federal Reserve does its job of holding inflation at bay, and as long as our political leaders resist protectionism and other forms of interference with creative destruction and let the private sector get on with its work, we will remain the world’s predominant economic machine.

Even if border adjusted taxes do not lead to escalating protectionism, there is not a consensus on their impact on trade deficits. An article in MarketWatch reports this less than optimistic view:

Economist Glenn Hubbard, dean of the Columbia University Graduate School of Business and former chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, agreed that border adjustments would be unlikely to significantly alter the trade gap. When it comes to causes of the trade deficit, "the tax code is probably not the biggest feature," Hubbard told the committee. "I don't think you should expect a border-adjusted tax, per se, to [close] huge deficits."

Cheney's code of silence hurts White House

Dallas Morning News | Editorials:

“By now, everybody except the shrillest partisans is sick of the Dick Cheney hunting accident story.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Vice President Cheney shot a man on Saturday. The public learned of it on Sunday. On Friday, the Dallas Morning News editorial board finally gets around to commenting on it. Even they recognize just how late they are to the scene. They introduce their editorial almost with an apology, admitting that everyone is sick of hearing what they are finally going to write about five days after the news broke.

Right there you have, in a nutshell, why newspapers are doomed. They are dinosaurs in today's world of 24-7 television news channels, talk radio, Internet news, blogs, podcasts, email, instant messaging. The printed news cycle - gather, write, edit, print, deliver -- can never keep up with electronic media. By the time most new media are relegating the story to the historians, the DMN is finally weighing in on the subject. Newspapers are becoming stale news outlets. They aren't any better as history books.

Right Cross: Is George W. Bush a conservative?

Dallas Observer | Robert Wilonsky:

“Author Bruce Bartlett doesn't think so, and saying that cost him his job. ... Bush-bashing from the right has almost become a trend. By month's end, Bruce Bartlett will be the trend's poster boy. On February 28, Bartlett's book Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy will arrive in bookstores, adding its author to the growing list of conservatives who are lashing out at the president for his being what Bartlett calls ‘a pretend conservative [who] has more in common with liberals, who see no limits to state power as long as it is used to advance what they think is right.’”

Ed Cognoski responds:

What drives George W. Bush? Tax cuts have been a consistent pillar of his political philosophy. But to what purpose? Conservatives have always thought it was to reduce the size of government. Starve the beast. How do you square that with the growth in government under Bush? Defense and Homeland Security spending. The hugely expensive Medicare prescription drug plan. The earmark process that facilitates out-of-control pork barrel spending? The promise to spend whatever it takes to rebuild New Orleans?

There are winners and losers in both tax cuts and increased government spending. The clear winners are wealthy individuals whose tax bill is cut and whose stock portfolio is fattened. The so-called military-industrial complex. Drug companies. Insurance companies. Oil companies.

The traditional conservative theory was that, by reducing government, free enterprise would thrive and, all by itself, lead to prosperity for all. The new theory seems to be that government must grow in size and power to ensure that the country's wealth is invested in the right kinds of enterprises. Free enterprise must be funded by government, as paradoxical as that sounds. Bush economic policy makes most sense as a scheme to use government to redistribute wealth to the wealthy, so it can be put to good use and not immediately just consumed.

Power follows wealth. And wealth follows power. The recent claims of executive power in the name of national security have people talking again about the imperial Presidency. Hardly the stuff of President Reagan's vision of small government. President Reagan famously declared, "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." President Bush seems bent on obliterating that notion, from Big Brother domestic spying to defense of marriage Constitutional amendments to federal education officials grading the performance of neighborhood elementary schools.

The surprise isn't that a lifelong conservative like Bruce Bartlett would write a book like Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy. The surprise is that other conservatives are offended by the book. Just what is it about George W Bush and his political philosophy that can still be considered conservative?

Dick Cheney and the Culture of Entertainment

DallasBlog.com | William Murchison:

“Where I part company with the knights of the blogs and the kings of late night comedy is over the grisly P. T. Barnum culture of hokum amid which the really serious stuff plays out -- wars, hurricanes, budgets, bombings.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Mr Murchison implies that the laughs at Vice President Cheney's expense are all that there is. That this little bit of comic relief shows that all the serious criticism of this administration's handling of wars, hurricanes, budgets, bombings should not be taken seriously after all, that it's all just part of a circus.

President Ford beaned a spectator with a golf ball. President Carter was attacked by a killer rabbit. Mr Murchison remembers these events thirty years later. I bet he remembers the administrations of the time too, none too fondly. The events are remembered because they were real life symbols of Presidencies beset with haplessness and fecklessness. All that was well documented in serious criticism that served as a backdrop for the late night comedians' jokes.

Likewise, Vice President Cheney shooting a hunting partner is symptomatic of a Washington gang that can't shoot straight in wars, hurricanes, budgets and bombings, and won't talk straight afterwards. The humor bites because of the reality behind the story. That's why this accident, too, will be remembered thirty years from now.

P.S. Dean Acheson was Secretary of State under Harry Truman. Our country today would be better off if Yale student George W Bush had read Acheson's memoirs, Present at the Creation, instead of partied.

The late reporting of Cheney's hunting accident

Dallas Morning News | Mark Davis:

“I did not learn of Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident until a friend mentioned it to me late Sunday afternoon. I asked the normal first question:
‘When did it happen?’
‘Yesterday,’ he told me.
Uh-oh. ... A press release. A 30-second announcement. Either one of these at midnight Saturday, and this is the non-story it deserves to be. But in the absence of that, the administration has received a public spanking that it pains me to say it deserves. Thank heaven these people run a war better than a hunting accident. ”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Huh?!? A neocon Vice President on an illegal hunting expedition almost kills someone; the White House stonewalls, refusing to inform the American people; when news finally leaks out, the VP refuses to take responsibility, refuses even to talk; the VP's apologists blame the victim, even the victim's dog.

And Mark Davis not only doesn't see a parallel between this event and the incompetent prosecution of the war in Iraq, he actually thanks heavens that "these people run a war better than a hunting accident." It's a sign that Bush and Cheney still have one talent as good as ever. That's the ability to pull the wool over the eyes of right-wing talk radio hosts.

A modest suggestion for House Republicans

DallasBlog.com | Tom Pauken:

“The [trade] deficit ballooned by $108 billion over the preceding year. Meanwhile, Russia, Germany, Japan and China all reported trade surpluses. Isn’t anyone in Washington concerned that we are losing our manufacturing base in this country? Where are the leaders of either party addressing the disadvantage our domestic manufacturers face in competing with trading partners who have a 17% or more built-in edge over U.S. domestic companies because of our flawed corporate tax system which has the perverse incentive of encouraging U.S. companies to ship jobs overseas. Isn’t it time our policymakers started listening to Texas businessman David Hartman who has offered a sound proposal to rebuild our manufacturing base by replacing our current corporate income tax with a border-adjusted tax?”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Republicans are interested in cutting taxes. Democrats are interested in preserving entitlements. These are their larger interests. Tax reform is held hostage in the middle. Any discussion of tax reform is going to be used by both sides as an opening to secure an advantage for their larger interests, rather than a means to rebuild our manufacturing base, on which the two sides might otherwise find common ground. As long as this dynamic holds, tax reform is out of reach. It's like two men drowning because each believes it more important to keep the other out of the lifeboat that could easily have saved them both.

Crime and Punishment

DallasBlog.com | Caroline Walker:

“Clearly there are deeds so vile that they constitute an affront to civilized society and demand commensurate punishment: I just don’t think that creating a special class of victims represents a step in the right direction. It’s just plain delusional to suppose that mankind will cease committing atrocities if only we would implement a national program of sensitivity training.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

The event that triggered these thoughts was the execution of the man convicted of the torture-slaying of Amy Robinson, a mentally challenged 19 year old woman. Ms Walker's remembrance of Ms Robinson is but a convenient hook for her to criticize what she calls "the diversity racket." The Amy Robinson murder is only background for her denunciation of laws against hate crimes.

Hate crimes target individuals or groups because of their race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, or disability. Blacks are given no more protection than whites. Jews are given no more protection than Christians. Gays are given no more protection than heterosexuals. You don't "get more points for your homicide if you’re black or gay." It's not the color of your skin that differentiates a hate crime. It's the motivation behind the murder. Murder is still murder. But targeting the victim because he is black or gay, or white or straight for that matter, should be a crime as well. We're all protected equally.

Ms Walker recognizes that there are some "deeds so vile that they constitute an affront to civilized society and demand commensurate punishment." Hate crimes meet this standard. The horrific murders of James Byrd, Jr (motivated because he was African-American) and Matthew Shepard (motivated because he was homosexual) are examples. The horrific murder of Amy Robinson (a mentally challenged woman) is another. But where society sees deeds so vile, Ms Walker sees only a "diversity racket" aiming to "implement a national program of sensitivity training." For whatever reason, she just doesn't understand.

VP Cheney accidentally shoots man on South Texas hunting trip

DallasBlog.com:

“Vice President Dick Cheney's spokeswoman says Mr. Cheney accidentally shot and injured a man during a weekend quail hunting trip in South Texas.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

I wish the accident victim a swift and full recovery...

OK, has a decent interval passed yet???????

Guns don't shoot people. Cheney shoots people.

The new fashion color in Washington is suddenly blaze orange.

It's not Cheney's fault. The victim was too close to the Mexican border without displaying proof of citizenship.

Cheney should get the Presidential Medal of Freedom. The victim coulda been packin' WMD. He coulda. He coulda.

At last, Cheney can now defend sending young Americans into harm's way by saying he, too, knows what it's like to shoot a man.

Don't worry. The quail hunter insurgency is in its last throes.

and last, but not least...

Dickie, you're doin' a heck of a job.

This doesn't make sense

DallasBlog.com | Tom Pauken:

“In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Federal Appeals in New York has banned Christian symbols in New York schools while allowing Jewish and Islamic symbols to be displayed. ”

Ed Cognoski responds:

The logic makes sense. It's the facts that the court has wrong.

The court's ruling is designed to allow the display of secular symbols of the holidays, but not purely religious symbols. You might not like the result, but the court is trying to apply a common rule to all faiths. That part makes sense.

The problem is that the court has determined that the menorah and the star-and-crescent are secular symbols and therefore are allowed, much like a Christmas tree is considered secular, and is also allowed. Christians are upset that their more pointed religious symbols, like a creche scene, aren't allowed. On the other hand, Jews and some Muslims are upset that their symbols are relegated to mere secular symbols and are not recognized as the religious symbols these faiths cherish.

Everybody's upset. This ruling doesn't stand a chance in the Supreme Court.

P.S. Just in case anyone is not so busy getting riled up over this new front in the so-called war on Christmas, and instead is interested in learning about religious symbolism, and why the star-and-crescent is not quite like the cross, the article Crescent Moon: Symbol of Islam? is one place to get some questions answered.

P.P.S. Today is the 197th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth. RIP, Mr Darwin. Today's controversy isn't about you.

Former President defends son from attacks at King funeral

DallasBlog.com:

“Former President George H.W. Bush was so upset by the critical remarks made about his son by some speakers at Mrs. King's funeral that he made the following statement to CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer: ‘In terms of the political shots at the president who was sitting there with his wife, I didn't like it and I thought it was kind of ugly frankly. Anybody that shoots at the president of the United States at a funeral. I just didn't appreciate that.’ The former President apparently was unhappy with critical remarks made by former President Carter and the Rev. Joseph Lowery about his son.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

A lot of Republicans went nuts over that funeral. Speaking truth to power has a way of doing that. Anyone who expected truth to take a holiday at the funeral for one of America's civil rights icons, famous for speaking truth to power, is either naive or is faking umbrage for political purposes themselves. President George H.W. Bush is not naive.

P.S. President Carter made no critical comments about President Bush. If Republicans read it that way, it must be because they see some similarity between the unjust wiretapping of the Kings four decades ago with the current President's own illegal domestic spying program today. President Carter himself did not draw that parallel.

Cities revive east-west rail push

Dallas Morning News:

“Over the last year, Addison and Richardson – another city along the proposed route – have spent more than $330,000 to mount a public relations campaign to sell the benefits of light-rail service along the Cotton Belt line. That effort kicked into high gear last month, when the ‘Cotton Belt – Smart for DART’ campaign was announced at the University of Texas at Dallas in Richardson. The timing of the campaign is critical: DART is expected to finalize its 2030 system plan this year. Addison and Richardson officials want to ensure that the Cotton Belt line is included the long-range goals.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

To me, this is a no-brainer. Richardson already is home to UT-Dallas and Telecom Corridor. It sits astride the intersection of US 75 and the Bush Tollway. DART already runs a north-south rail line from downtown Dallas to Plano through the heart of Richardson. The addition of an east-west DART line from Richardson through Addison and other northern suburbs to D/FW Airport would complete the network of roads and rail needed to boost economic development in this, the oldest ring of suburbs north of Dallas.

Twenty years ago, I might have agreed that a line along LBJ Freeway made more sense. But the center of gravity of north Dallas continues to migrate northward. Already today, the Cotton Belt line would best serve the needs of businesses and communities between LBJ and the Bush Tollway. By 2030, we'll look back and wonder what the debate was about. Like I said, it's a no-brainer.

Just make up your mind

Dallas Morning News | Letters:

“Two of yesterday's editorials – ‘Not Above the Law,’ followed by ‘This May Have Promise’ – are confusing, to say the least. You advocate strict adherence to current law by the Bush administration in its effort to protect our nation but then you approve of the Dallas school district changing current law so it can employ illegal immigrants to teach. You can't have it both ways.
-- Billy Keller, Richardson”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Mr Keller might be confused, but it's not because the editorials were confusing. The position of the DMN was consistent in both editorials. Obey the law. Advocate for changes in the law, if you must, but in the meantime, obey the law.

Trustee Joe May of the DISD sees an unmet need for more bilingual teachers in the DISD and an untapped source for such teachers. To tap that source, DISD will need a change in the law against knowingly hiring illegal aliens. DMN does not advocate disobeying the law, only that Congress should consider changing it.

Critics of President Bush, on the other hand, charge him with disobeying the law against warrantless wiretapping. DMN urges the President to obey the law, but if the law is insufficient to protect our freedoms, the President should ask Congress to change the law. The criticism of the President is because he is neither obeying the law nor asking Congress to change it. This position is obvious from the editorial's title, of which Mr Keller left off the second half: "Not Above the Law: If surveillance act doesn't work, fix it".

Perry's chance

Dallas Morning News | Editorials:

“The state can deploy all the agents, guns and cameras it wants, and it still won't solve the border problems. As President Bush keeps saying, people are doing everything possible to get here for work. Until we as a nation deal with the economic realities driving immigration, border troubles won't end. Here's where [Texas Governor Rick] Perry can make a difference. A huge one. As a conservative, he can get Washington's attention if he starts to speak as loudly about the economic piece as the security dimension.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

What can I say? Sometimes, the Dallas Morning News editorial board gets it exactly right.

Except... the event that prompted DMN to write this editorial has nothing to do with illegal immigration and guest workers. The event was Governor Perry's Operation Rio Grande, a law enforcement effort to crack down on drug gang violence spilling over the border into Texas. That must be fought, no matter what we do about the illegal immigrants living and working peacefully in communities far from the border, all across America.

Not Above the Law: If surveillance act doesn't work, fix it

Dallas Morning News | Editorials:

“This nation cannot have a chief executive, now or in the future, who believes he is entitled to decide on his own which laws he has to obey for the sake of some higher good.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

I don't know which is more astonishing: a President who claims unchecked, unreviewable, unlimited powers in the name of national security, or an electorate that seems willing to go along with him.

I'm a believer in President Reagan's sage advice. Trust, but verify. Trust the Executive to protect and defend the United States of America, but have the Judiciary independently verify requests for domestic surveillance and issue warrants when justified. How ironic is it, that only one generation removed from a Republican President who stood for smaller government, and is still revered by his party for his philosophy, that we have another Republican President who daily sets new records for unconstrained government debt and unconstrained government power?

This May Have Promise: Trustee's idea could be guest-worker pilot

Dallas Morning News | Editorials:

“Oh, that Joe May. What will he think of next? First, a bilingual mandate for principals. Now, hiring illegal immigrants to teach bilingual education. ... Let DISD provide the lab. Set up a pilot program here that would grant the school district a waiver from legal-status requirements for, say, 200 teachers. ... Require noncitizen hires to get in line for citizenship and sign five-year teaching contracts that have the force of deportation if the employee leaves for any reason short of extraordinary. If Mr. May is right, DISD gets the teachers it needs, 200 formerly illegal immigrants pay America back for their opportunity, and, most important, some kids get the teachers they need. Sounds like a win-win-win to us.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Sounds like win-win? I don't think so. Sounds like indentured servitude. The people in front of the classroom will be there under penalty of deportation if they decide one, two or three years into their teaching career that they are unsuited to teaching. We ought to be attracting teachers who are there for the love of teaching. Not because it's either the classroom or the border.

A guest worker program can do much to address the problem arising from our country being home to eleven million illegal aliens. But any such program needs to be based on our free enterprise system of free labor markets. Guest workers should be free to change jobs and still maintain their guest worker status. The program should not be based on indentured servitude.

Dallas chapter of CAIR organizes letter writing campaign

DallasBlog.com | Trey Garrison:

“The Dallas-Fort Worth chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations is organizing a letter-writing campaign targeting area dailies regarding the issue of the Danish cartoons that caricature Mohammed and the ensuing Islamic rage in Europe and Asia they have sparked.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Maybe my concerns are addressed in the full email from CAIR-DFW, of which Dallas Blog only published a little. I'm concerned that CAIR-DFW makes no mention of the violent protests that were precipitated by the offensive cartoons. I don't think most non-Muslims need to have explained to them why the cartoons might be deemed offensive. But non-Muslims might need to be told why, if Islam is a non-violent religion, so many Muslims have responded with riots, burning of embassies, and calls for death to the cartoonists. From a public relations standpoint, CAIR-DFW should at least condemn the violence. Emulating the comments from CAIR-MI, as reported in the Detroit Free Press, would be a good start:

"This kind of violence is contrary to the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad," said Dawud Walid, Michigan head of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. "These cartoons should never have been printed, but the Prophet Muhammad said that we should not reciprocate by returning evil for evil. We are to reply to evil only with good."

Park designers seek input on Woodall Rodgers Park

DallasBlog.com | Trey Garrison:

“One of Dallas’ most ambitious and innovative urban revitalization plans ever is quickly becoming a reality - the remaking of Woodall Rodgers into a covered green space. ”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Freeways kill city life. They hem downtowns in. Or slice through them. Death starts on their edges and expands for blocks. Tunneling is too expensive. Can capping an existing trench be done affordably? Projections are for a $60M price tag, of which only $20M is from city taxpayers.

This could be a huge boost to development on both sides of Woodall Rodgers, tying the Arts District to Uptown, enhancing both immeasurably. This could be more significant to a downtown Dallas renewal than the much more publicized bridges across the Trinity, which at heart are just more freeways, freeways that kill cities.

Voter fraud must stop

Star-Telegram | Greg Abbott:

“With more law enforcement officers and prosecutors on the alert, we hope that those who would commit fraud will think twice. If they do it anyway, let this be their notice that we will come after them. We must do all we can to ensure the validity of our elections. Voter fraud strikes at the heart of our democratic process, and it must stop.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Who could possibly be against a crackdown on voter fraud? Right? The Star-Telegram does a disservice by presenting only one side of this matter. Much of the indignation over voter fraud is not coming from nonpartisan, civic-minded citizens for good government. It is coming from partisan, politically-motivated, Republican activists out to discourage voting by minorities and the poor. Greg Abbott is the Republican Attorney General of Texas.

In many states, this so-called crackdown on voter fraud has led to demands for identification and proof of residence in the form of drivers' licenses, utility bills, etc.. This amounts to a 21st century version of a poll tax. The elderly, the poor, the kind of people most likely to live in apartments and ride the city bus and lack the kind of documentation being insisted on, will be shut out of the polling place. It's no coincidence that these people tend to vote Democratic.

We've seen cases of Republican office-holders warning ex-felons against voting illegally. These threats were delivered to thousands of voters who were eligible to vote, either because of a mix-up in names or just because the officials got the eligibility rules for ex-felons wrong. Again, the target of this intimidation tended to be minorities and the poor.

Attorney General Abbott, wrapping himself in the American flag and claiming to be only fighting voter fraud, conveniently ignores voter intimidation perpetrated by the right. This makes me skeptical of his own intentions. Clean up voter fraud, sure, but tackle it in all its guises, and that includes the current dishonest attacks on our electoral system by those claiming to be defending it.

Drawing the line

Dallas Morning News | Mark Davis:

“An artist does not need to ridicule or demonize the prophet Muhammad in order to make the point that some Muslims are murderous lunatics.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Mr Davis' position is that the artist was not justified in his choice of metaphor, but had the freedom to do it. Mr Davis misses the artist's point, which is larger than that "some" Muslims are murderous lunatics. Muhammad is a metaphor for Islam itself. The artist's point is that Islam as a religion is a murderous lunacy. And that is a much more provocative point, not just some violation of a technical stricture against showing images of Allah or the prophets. The fact that the artist's point has been lost in the violent reaction is a shame. This is about more than the abstract principle of free speech. The world needs, Islam itself needs, an open and honest debate about the nature of Islam.

Will Alito join the resistance?

Star-Telegram | Don Erler:

“Defenders of constitutional law can hope, however, that the precise legal reasoning of the new chief justice and the week-old Justice Alito will weaken the resolve of the Supreme Court's four liberal ideologues to continue their assault on the Constitution. ... And make no mistake: As I told some seasoned citizens in a recent talk on how ‘alive’ our Constitution is, the Supreme Court in recent decades has essentially ruled unconstitutional key provisions of the Constitution.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Who one thinks is assaulting the Constitution all depends on where one sits. Mr Erler presents his opinion on the matter as settled fact, instead of mere opinion, which it is.

Take his black and white statement, "True, the 1973 decision has no defensible legal or constitutional rationale." He makes no attempt to back up this bald statement with any defensible legal or constitutional rationale himself. He just throws it out there as if he is saying, "True, the sun comes up in the east." The Supreme Court's majority opinion in Roe v Wade offers a defensible legal and constitutional rationale for upholding a woman's right to control her own body. Mr Erler is welcome to dispute it, but to dismiss it as if no counter-argument to his beliefs even exists, is blatantly false.

Take his claim that "political advertising close to an election can be banned by law." That remains to be seen. Campaign finance reform legislation has been passed by Congress, but much of it remains to be tested in the courts. I will be surprised if much of it isn't struck down as unconstitutional. Ironically, Mr Erler, who seems to celebrate Europeans for being ruled by "laws drafted in the give-and-take of legislative compromise", will probably be the first to cheer American courts if they overturn, on constitutional grounds, provisions of campaign finance reform. If that happens, the fact that the laws were drafted in the give-and-take of legislative compromise will hold no magical significance to Mr Erler. Like I said, it all depends on where one sits.

Take Mr Erler's equating the Dred Scott decision with Roe v Wade. One could take offense at Mr Erler treating fully adult African-Americans as legally and morally no more significant than a fertilized egg. But he's right that there are Constitutional issues involved in both cases. Just as the Dred Scott decision took a Constitutional amendment to overturn, Roe v Wade should, too. The Republican Party saw to it that America passed the Thirteenth Amendment, to its everlasting credit. If Mr Erler wants to extend personhood to fertilized eggs, he ought to be working on another Constitutional amendment to that effect. And quit trying to get activist judges to invent and assert such a right. The assault on the Constitution can come from both sides of the partisan debate, despite Mr Erler's attempt to claim the high moral ground.

A Call for Civility: Both sides out of line over Danish cartoons

Dallas Morning News | Editorials:

“A Danish newspaper delivered a totally insensitive insult with its call last fall for cartoonists to draw pictures of the prophet Muhammad. Such depictions violate Muslim law, and the newspaper had proposed the assignment to test whether cartoonists would censor themselves. Now, months after publication, radical Islamists have used this ridiculous cartoon experiment as an excuse to manipulate violent political demonstrations and destruction across Europe and the Middle East. The provocation – almost a "let's kick the anthill and see what happens" mentality – and the virulent, deadly protests that have followed show both sides at their worst.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

This editorial fails on many levels, starting with the headline. Asking cartoonists to refrain from provoking anger is a call for civility. On the other side, civility demands much more than merely refraining from burning embassies and killing Danes. Civility isn't even an option until one side quits calling for the deaths of the other.

We're not dealing with a case of wanton boys kicking at a peaceful ant hill here. We're dealing with a situation where the "ants" have been trying to kill us. The "ants" are not innocent. Cartoonists used their pens to point this out to the rest of us. Even if the cartoonists were set up to provoke Muslims, there is still not a balance of offenses. It's been said that the pen is mightier than the sword, but that's figurative, people. In real life, the pen stings one's feelings; the sword kills, literally.

There is a serious debate underway about the nature of Islam and jihad and whether suicide bombing and terror are compatible with the religion of Muhammad. It is the political cartoonist's job to find the crux of the debate and highlight that in a simple drawing. The cartoon of Muhammad wearing a bomb as a turban is an effective work of satire. That it provoked such a visceral reaction among Muslims is a sign that it touched a raw nerve. Muslims themselves face an internal struggle to define the nature of their religion. They themselves are divided.

Asking artists to pretend the raw nerve doesn't exist, to choose subjects that don't provoke the mind and the heart, in short, to be civil, is to cripple art itself. The American press, of all institutions, should understand that and resist the calls for self-censorship over sensitive subjects in the name of civility.

No Formula for Learning: Perry's '65 percent rule' comes up short

Dallas Morning News | Editorials:

“For the last five months, Gov. Rick Perry has had three words when it comes to improving our schools: 65 percent rule. The governor's executive order that classroom expenses make up 65 percent of the total school spending sounds catchy if not reasonable – until you read the fine print. For starters, let's just all agree that there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to improving schools. Texas is made up of more than 1,000 school districts, each with diverse student populations who have varying needs. Mr. Perry's initial 65 percent plan included, for example, the costs of field trips and salaries for football coaches, but left out resources vital to a productive learning environment, such as libraries, computer labs, counselors and teacher training.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Governor Perry's plan is flawed. It's simplistic. It's overreaching. It should be scrapped.

What sounds good on paper in Austin often doesn't work in Amarillo or Corpus Christi or Mexia or Marfa. The same reasons why it's not a good idea for Washington to dictate educational standards to Texas apply to the state/local situation as well. Depending on the needs of the individual school district, often even the individual school, spending on counselors, librarians, and teacher training may be critical to success. Capping such spending at any artificial limit ties the hands of local school administrators, saying Austin knows better what the students in each school need than the teachers, administrators and school boards of that district do. It's simply doesn't work that way.

The example of football coaches' field trips being considered a legitimate classroom expense but not librarians' salaries is a good example of a part of this regulation that doesn't make sense anywhere. Texas may be a football state and Governor Perry may be an ex-cheerleader, but give local districts the authority to decide for themselves whether the next marginal dollar of property tax they raise in their community should be spent on a coach's field trip or another librarian.

The governor holds out the false hope that if only wasteful school districts redirected money to classrooms instead of administration, all would be well. But there are school districts that already comply with the '65 percent rule.' They are already at the state-mandated property tax cap. They are finding expenses rising faster than revenues. The governor's '65 percent rule' distracts the public's attention from the fact that the legislature refuses to put needed money into education. That may be the real purpose it serves.

DFW chapter of CAIR alerts members about rising row over Danish Mohammed cartoons

DallasBlog.com | Trey Garrison:

“Violence, threats and protests by Muslims have erupted from Europe to southwest Asia, while on the other side a number of Western newspapers in France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and Germany have reprinted the cartoons as an act of free speech solidarity.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

This conflict arises from different cultures wanting to live by different rules. The West wants to live by rules that respect freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The Muslim world wants to live by rules dictated by the word of God. Blasphemy is a crime under Islamic law. Blasphemy is not a crime under the West's secular laws.

For Muslims to tolerate these cartoons, they would first have to surrender their beliefs that the world should be ruled by Islamic Law. Perhaps that will happen in some distant future, just like medieval Christians eventually relegated canon law to church life. The epic struggle playing out today is not so much a battle between Islam and Christianity, as it is a battle between Islam and liberal democracy. We in the West can fervently hope that liberal democracy triumphs, but, in the meantime, we need to be prepared for a long-term war of ideas that sometimes might flare up into physical violence.

Even conservative members of Congress are unhappy with President's speech

DallasBlog.com | Tom Pauken:

“Our own Scott Bennett didn’t think all that much of the President’s State of the Union speech on Tuesday evening. Not surprisingly, neither did our Viewpoints columnist, Ken Molberg. One of our regular bloggers, longtime Republican activist Sandy McDonough, came to Bush’s defense and praised the President’s address. Now, conservative columnist Robert Novak reports that even conservative members of Congress were disappointed in what the President had to say.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

The polarization of America accelerates. The left excoriates Democrats for not having spine enough to filibuster the Alito nomination. The right excoriates Bush for backing away from privatization of Social Security and major tax reform. Bush, trying to govern without money in the treasury or political capital to spend, is back on his heels.

This is not the time for a big swing of the bat. It's time for small ball. Look for bunts, maybe a single here and there. Ethanol. Teachers. Meanwhile the Democrats start moving their fielders in. The President snarls "defeatism" to keep them at bay. The Republicans in the stands cheer every swing, but grow more and more restless with every miss. The President stubbornly talks about "guest workers" to show he won't be cowed, even by the home crowd. In the end, he doesn't hit a home run, but he doesn't strike out, either. Finally, he goes back to the dugout just thankful that the inning is over.

Kicking the Addiction: Bush must follow oil challenge with actions

Dallas Morning News | Editorials:

“In his State of the Union address, President Bush once again placed on the table the nation's ravenous appetite for energy, calling America ‘addicted to oil,’ a stunningly frank comment from a man who grew up breathing West Texas crude. Is this a Nixon-to-China moment, where only President Nixon, because of his deep roots in the anti-communist camp, could bring about detente? Only if – as Mr. Nixon did with China – Mr. Bush is willing to go to the mat with political capital on the hard energy choices. Otherwise, the result will be more years of energy-dependence chatter without significant accomplishments.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

I'm afraid it was only a sound bite calculated to help the President politically, not to do anything serious about the problem. The Bush deficits leave this President with no money for grand new spending programs. The Iraq War, the Katrina Hurricane, the tax cuts leave both the treasury bare and President Bush's political capital expended as well. Calling for energy independence from the Middle East serves many purposes. It plays to Americans' visceral distaste for the oil sheiks of the Persian Gulf. It sets the stage for renewal of calls for more drilling in the Arctic and the Gulf of Mexico. It presents the appearance of reaching out to Democrats.

But is the President serious about energy independence? Judging by how little of substance he proposed, no. The funding for research only restores funding he himself cut when he first took office, which was never all that much to begin with. There was no mention of conservation in his speech. The Vice President once famously dismissed conservation as "a sign of personal virtue", not a sound energy policy. Until the nation, led by the President and Vice President, reverse that attitude and promote conservation with federal regulations, tax and spending policies, the President's seriousness is in question.

Also, the President's speech failed to mention global warming. That slowly developing, long-term global disaster could be a prime justification for an alternative energy program by the United States and the world. Yet, the President shies away, not only from conceding the strength of the science, but from even mentioning the phenomenon in his speech to the nation. Why? Surely not to show how serious he is about weaning America from its "addiction to oil".

The proof that Americans are right to be skeptical came less than a day later, when the Secretary of Energy clarified the President's comments. He explained that, today, America imports over 2 million barrels of oil per day from the Middle East. In 2025, that's expected to be 6 million. But the President's initiatives will keep it from being even higher. New technologies can displace what would otherwise be demand for another 5 million barrels per day, or over 75 percent of our expected imports. In other words, we import 60 percent of our oil today; we'll be importing 60 percent in 2025.

So, why would the President present it all as a plan to "make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past"? Politics. It plays well for the 2006 mid-terms. And by 2025, the President himself will be long gone back to the ranch.

State Board of Education Votes 10-5 to Nix National Dues

DallasBlog.com | Terri Leo:

“In a bold move the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) voted 10-5, a vote which split down party lines, to remove itself from membership in the National Association of State School Boards (NASBE). I put forth the motion because many of NASBE's policies are out of touch with mainstream America and because NASBE has taken positions with which the majority of the SBOE disagrees.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Ms Leo lists three areas of disagreement:

• the SBOE thinks that highlighting separation of church and state as a First Amendment right is "misinformation"
• the SBOE does not support comprehensive sex education
• the SBOE does not want homosexuals to be a victim category in any policy on bullying

This offers insight into why education in Texas is in a sorry state. It's not only that the legislature won't fund it. It's also that the SBOE is more interested in promoting a narrow cultural agenda than in educating our children.

Instead, the SBOE should let the churches break down the Constitutional separation of church and state, if they want to try to change our laws. The SBOE should let the churches pass moral judgment on contraception and homosexuality, if they want. The SBOE should quit letting some churches dictate the public school curriculum for all of Texas' children. The SBOE should focus on educating our children, and that means reading, writing, arithmetic, ... and biology and the facts surrounding human reproduction, in other words, sex education. The SBOE should focus on creating an environment where learning can happen for all of Texas' children... and not let schools tolerate bullying, including bullying of gays and lesbians. The SBOE should get back into the education business and out of the religion business.

Don't get bogged down in lobby reform

Dallas Morning News | William McKenzie:

“House Republicans are stumbling over one another as they rush into the nunnery, hoping to distance themselves from the corrupt lobby culture they helped create. ... It's a mistake for House Republicans to get so deep into their nunnery that they miss the additional issues that could alienate them from everyday voters – and their Republican base. Cleaning up Washington is important, but other problems affect Americans more directly and could impact the 2006 and 2008 elections.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Mr McKenzie is too quick to give this Republican Congress an excuse to paper over the lobbying scandals. Sure, there are other important issues to tackle. But cleaning up Washington is a prerequisite to solving other things. Business as usual is what created the problems in the first place.

The Greenspan Challenge: Republicans have no interest in trimming the rest of the budget in order to pay for tax cuts or the war in Iraq or reconstruction of New Orleans. Pet projects, pork, corporate welfare, all would come under attack before entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. Instead, the Republican grand strategy is to let the deficit grow and grow until the whole system collapses, bringing the entitlements down with it.

The Alternative Minimum Tax: You would think Republicans would be eager to end the AMT. Think again. The AMT hits hardest where state income taxes are highest. Think California and the blue states in general. The Republican strategy here is to hold out until Democratic constituencies feel the pain. Then Republicans will insist on tax cuts for dividends and capital gains in any package that includes elimination of the AMT.

Immigration: Conservatives don't want anything to do with President Bush's guest worker program. They want jails and walls. Perhaps some kind of compromise that includes both amnesty and tougher borders can be worked out. But don't count on it.

Because there are powerful forces working against Republican passage of meaningful legislation in any of these areas, I'm inclined to encourage the Republicans in their "rush into the nunnery." Lobbying reform is one area where they might actually do some good, if Americans keep the pressure on, instead of suggesting distractions for Congress to focus on instead.