Say Anything Blog

As Americans struggle under the burden of higher prices due to rising energy costs North Dakota Senator Kent Conrad is busy in Washington (with the rest of his Democrat cronies) fighting against legislation that would reduce government waste and lower taxes.

Bloomberg - Democrats are united against the budget-cutting plan, saying Republicans are cutting much-needed social programs to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy. Some Republicans, such as Senator Mike DeWine of Ohio, have said they have concerns about some of the spending cuts and a provision to raise money by allowing oil drilling in an Alaska wildlife refuge.

``I have never felt that a budget going through the Congress of the United States is more disconnected from reality than this budget,'' said Senator Kent Conrad, a Democrat from North Dakota.

Conrad said a Republican proposal for $70 billion in tax cuts that is also part of the budget plan will increase the deficit, even with the spending cuts.

``There is no deficit reduction going on here,'' he said.

Apparently Conrad's solution to budget deficits is continued high tax rates. His philosophy is based on the idea that the more taxes our government applies to the citizens the more money it brings in. And that's true, to a point, but right now the tax burden being carried by most Americans has reached a point of diminishing returns. Keeping the tax rates at these high levels depresses the economy, which leads to lower tax receipts for the federal government.

When tax rates are as high as they are right now now tax cuts have historically increased federal tax receipt, not decreased them. Bush's tax cuts from his first term have had an extremely positive impact on both our economy and on the amount of money the government takes in (which, obviously, has a directly positive impact on the deficit Conrad is so busy moaning about).

North Dakotans love Kent Conrad because he brings the pork money home from Congress to our state. Currently North Dakota receives something like $2+ for every $1 we spend in taxes. Now assuming that the amount of pork brought home by a legislator is a good way of measuring that politician's job performance (that's not a theory I subscribe to, but that's a discussion for another post), couldn't we say that Conrad could still bring home the pork without having to tax the hell out of is in return?

Maybe North Dakotans should elect a Congressman who understands that, when possible, money is best left in the hands of the American people rather than in the hands of greed Washington bureaucrats.

(via Flickertail Journal)

BISMARCK - Wal-Mart Stores Inc. says it voluntarily shut down work Monday on all seven stores under construction in North Dakota, including the Grand Forks store, to check for illegal aliens.

"We wanted to be sure contractors are in compliance with applicable laws," said Marty Heires, a spokesman at Wal-Mart's corporate headquarters in Bentonville, Ark. "We were not asked by law enforcement or any government agency to do this."

Heires said construction was halted about noon Monday at the Grand Forks Wal-Mart, which is being converted into a Wal-Mart Supercenter. When finished it will include more amenities, including groceries. A gas station already is complete. He said Tuesday nothing was found at the Grand Forks site.

Construction also was stopped at stores in Minot, Williston, Dickinson and three in Bismarck. Work resumed later in the afternoon at all stores except for two in Bismarck and one in Dickinson, he said.

"Once we have assurances (from contractors) that everything is in order, we'll reopen them," he said.

The crack-down on illegal immigrants in the state was prompted by this incident.

From what I've heard, the state-wide shut down had more to do with the number of illegal workers who have been arrested by immigration authorities or fled the state once the crackdown began than any real concern about having "everything in order." One story I've heard is that a work crew of sixty at one of the construction sites was left with only three people.

Frankly, I'm a bit appalled. I'm a Wal-Mart fan, but bringing in criminals to work in our communities isn't the best way to engender support for your business from the citizens.

BISMARCK – Five Republican legislators’ trip to Antigua early this month shows why the state needs stricter disclosure laws, North Dakota Democratic-NPL lawmakers said Tuesday.

Rep. Jim Kasper of Fargo led the trip to the Caribbean island nation to talk about Internet gambling and trade possibilities between the state and Antiguan officials. The others were Rep. Bette Grande, Rep. Ron Iverson and Rep. Blair Thoreson, all of Fargo, and Rep. Mark Dosch of Bismarck.

Sen. April Fairfield, D-Eldridge, and other Democrats introduced a bill in the 2005 Legislature that strengthened gift disclosure laws, but it was stripped of most of its new language by the Republican majority and then passed over Fairfield’s objections.

Fairfield proposed barring legislators from accepting gifts from lobbyists, with a list of exceptions. That was taken out and the $50 threshold for lobbyists to report expenditures was raised to $60.

“Perhaps now we have a fuller understanding of why Senate Bill 2303 was weakened,” Fairfield said Tuesday. “The question is not whether there are legitimate reasons for legislative travel.”

There are. The question is whether, in the interest of good government, all gifts that may influence public policy should be disclosed.”

Ok, here's where I'm at with this issue:

Kasper and his fellow legislators who traveled with him on this trip to Antigua handled the situation badly. They did not do anything wrong or illegal, but they should have made an announcement about the trip before they left. Because they didn't, the lefty demagogues in the state now have a large arrow in their quiver to aim at Republicans during the legislative session. This was a tactical blunder, not an ethical or legal blunder.

But that's not how it's being played.



It's easy for state Democrats to twist a perfectly legal and acceptable legislative trip to a beautiful place like Antigua into some sort of shady, under-the-table dealing and then cast aspersions about it. Especially when you've got a mouthpiece like the Fargo Forum available to trumpet the innuendo. Were this, say, a free trip to Siberia I doubt we'd be hearing much about it. After all, it's hard to insinuate a picture of greed and corruption with free trips to Siberia.

But, since this wasn't a trip to Siberia, that's exactly what is happening right now. The Forum starts this bouhaha with a rather misleading article about the trip, slams the Republicans with an editorial, and then hands over most of an article (the one above) to quotes from Democrats while burying Republican responses at the bottom of the article.

It seems as though the Forum is only really interested in one side of this story.

Also, this quote from Rep. Fairfield in the article is more than a little misleading:

“Perhaps now we have a fuller understanding of why Senate Bill 2303 was weakened,” Fairfield said Tuesday.

That's right. The Republicans obviously weakened the Senate Bill so they could make shady trips to Antigua.

Give me a break. Fairfield's propsed law, which addressed gifts from lobbyists, wouldn't even have applied in this situation (from the same article):

Secretary of State Al Jaeger said Tuesday that a foreign government is not considered a lobbyist.

Anyway, all that aside, I do think North Dakota needs to reform it's lobbying laws. Here's my proposal:

We place no limits on the amount of money lobbyists can spend on legislators, but we require that details on all money that is spent be made readily available to the public.

See, I have no problem with lobbying. I think it's a normal part of the political process and that when we limit it we risk also limiting political advocacy. That's not a healthy thing. So let's keep the system open, but also keep it transparent.

As for state Democrats, if they want to whine about this sort of thing perhaps they should first direct some questions their Senator Conrad and his relationship with "Aspen Group."

In Illinois we have a state-run lotto. So does North Dakota. Most states now have some kind lottery game. I have never really understood it, until now.

In Illinois every couple weeks the game spins off a $3 million, one-time cash payment to some lucky winner whose life then changes for better or worse forever. The indigent instant millionaire is typically indigent again in a few years.

The big sell when the Illinois lottery started was that it would fund education. After 20 years, after expenses, the amount spent on education is so minimal it is almost insignificant. The lottery in Illinois is a zero sum game. A cynical shell game, at best.



So why? Why publish this false hope in a ticket? I’ll admit it, from time to time when the lotto gets up there I’ll pay this voluntary tax and see if I can fund my retirement. For many people I know, this is their primary retirement strategy. Get old, win the lottery.

The mantra selling the lottery is, “Somebody’s got to win, it might as well be YOU” and “You can’t win if you don’t play”.

The truth about the lottery everyone in Illinois knows is that in the poorest parts of the states the amount of direct welfare money that goes into an area like the poor south and west sides of Chicago equals the amount spent on lottery tickets by the poor.

Hope springs eternal, even among the poor.

Then, I read today’s Wall Street Journal. This is an intentional strategy. If the poor are going to pay this voluntary tax and send back all their welfare money you can send them more welfare money, look really compassionate and you have no net out of pocket expense. Cute eh?

The ultimate refinement of this insight might have been a 1997 paper by economist Sam Papenfuss, which showed a strong correlation between lottery adoption and welfare spending. He concluded that lotteries operate as a mechanism by which taxpayers are able to reclaim the money they're forced to spend on welfare programs.

Lotteries advanced on the same wave of voter frustration that led various states in recent decades to adopt balanced budget amendments, property tax caps and requirements for legislative supermajorities to enact tax hikes. Lotteries are but a symptom of a growing standoff between the beneficiaries of federal transfer programs and the taxpayers called to support them.

And, it doesn’t fund education at all. It’s all a scam.

Lotteries don't solve fiscal problems: The Texas proceeds go into a "Foundation School Fund," but that hasn't stopped legal and political wars over education funding from being the nemesis of the past three Texas governors. Studies increasingly conclude that lotteries don't add to state revenues in the long run. They just shift the burden of taxation from higher-income households to lower-income lottery players.

I didn’t get it. Now I do. Clever. Which walnut shell is the pea under?

Apparently one of my Senators, Byron Dorgan (D-ND), is going to be on Air America tomorrow with Al Franken.

Frankly, that make me a little unhappy. North Dakota isn't like the rest of the country. Our political climate isn't as shriekingly partisan as the rest of the country's and our politicians certainly don't stoop to the depths the likes of Al Franken are capable of.

I would just as soon not see Dorgan associate our state or his distinguished position in the Senate with a crass and unbalanced smear merchant like Franken. If you're a North Dakotan and feel the same way you might want to let Senator Dorgan know.

Robert Kagan:

The Judith Miller-Valerie Plame-Scooter Libby imbroglio is being reduced to a simple narrative about the origins of the Iraq war. Miller, the story goes, was an anti-Saddam Hussein, weapons-of-mass-destruction-hunting zealot and was either an eager participant or an unwitting dupe in a campaign by Bush administration officials and Iraqi exiles to justify the invasion. The New York Times now characterizes the affair as “just one skirmish in the continuing battle over the Bush administration’s justification for the war in Iraq.” Miller may be “best known for her role in a series of Times articles in 2002 and 2003 that strongly suggested Saddam Hussein already had or was acquiring an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.” According to the Times’s critique, she credulously reported information passed on by “a circle of Iraqi informants, defectors and exiles bent on ‘regime change’ in Iraq,” which was then “eagerly confirmed by United States officials convinced of the need to intervene in Iraq.” Many critics outside the Times suggest that Miller’s eagerness to publish the Bush administration’s line was the primary reason Americans went to war. The Times itself is edging closer to this version of events.

There is a big problem with this simple narrative. It is that the Times, along with The Post and other news organizations, ran many alarming stories about Iraq’s weapons programs before the election of George W. Bush. A quick search through the Times archives before 2001 produces such headlines as “Iraq Has Network of Outside Help on Arms, Experts Say”(November 1998), “U.S. Says Iraq Aided Production of Chemical Weapons in Sudan”(August 1998), “Iraq Suspected of Secret Germ War Effort” (February 2000), “Signs of Iraqi Arms Buildup Bedevil U.S. Administration” (February 2000), “Flight Tests Show Iraq Has Resumed a Missile Program” (July 2000). (A somewhat shorter list can be compiled from The Post’s archives, including a September 1998 headline: “Iraqi Work Toward A-Bomb Reported.”) The Times stories were written by Barbara Crossette, Tim Weiner and Steven Lee Myers; Miller shared a byline on one. . . .

As we wage what the Times now calls “the continuing battle over the Bush administration’s justification for the war in Iraq,” we will have to grapple with the stubborn fact that the underlying rationale for the war was already in place when this administration arrived.

Read the whole thing.

I've been fairly convinced that ND Governor John Hoeven isn't going to be running for Senate in 2006, but Taking Back ND has an interesting reader email up that may well prove that Hoeven's announcement that he's not running for Senate was nothing more than a calculated ploy.

Insider friends beleive [sic] Hoeven will emerge from hibernation next spring, ready to change his mind about the Senate. The game pan is to simply "hibernate" over the winter to avoid media frenzy and Conrad attack ad. . . .

The plan calls for a massive " Draft John" outpouring at the convention, just coincidently, held in Hoeven's home town of Minot.

It sounds plausible.

My thought was that if Hoeven moves to the Senate he may wait to make sure he's got a good candidate groomed to come behind him as Governor. Really, who knows? Outside of John himself that is.

The rest of us will just have to wait and see. But, for the record, this North Dakotan is hoping to see John run.

Janell Cole writing in the Fargo Forum:

BISMARCK – Five North Dakota legislators – including four from Fargo – took a four-day, all-expenses paid trip to Antigua earlier this month on an unofficial trade mission paid for by the tiny Caribbean island country.

Rep. Jim Kasper arranged the trip for fellow state House Republican representatives Mark Dosch, Bette Grande, Ron Iverson and Blair Thoreson. All but Dosch, who’s from Bismarck, represent Fargo districts at the Capitol.

Two others, Rep. Dave Weiler, R-Bismarck, and Sen. Duaine Espegard, R-Grand Forks, were invited but did not go.

An Oct. 1 Antiguan government news release said the trip was to discuss Internet gaming.

“High on the agenda will be discussions on Internet gaming and the development of a corresponding banking relationship with the Bank of North Dakota, the only state-owned bank in the United States managed by the legislators,” the release said.

The Bank of North Dakota is actually overseen by the North Dakota Industrial Commission, which is comprised of the governor, attorney general and agriculture commissioner.

The Antiguan news release goes on to say, “… the meetings during the coming week are very important, as the success of the Internet gaming industry is largely dependent on finding corresponding banks who will do business with Internet gaming companies.”

Kasper led the recently unsuccessful legislative charge to have North Dakota become the first state to legalize and regulate Internet gambling, which is now mainly run off-shore.

From the breathless reporting in this piece one gets the idea that this group of Republicans, led by Kasper, did something wrong (the state bank is not actually ran by the legislators!!!) in making a trip down to Antigua. Certainly this sort of thing has been getting a lot of media attention lately on the federal level with politicians from both sides of the aisle getting into hot water over trips paid for by lobbyists, but is this an instance of that same sort of thing happening on the local level? The ND Democrats seem to think it is as they're not typically in the habit of highlighting the legal goings-on of Republicans, but let's see what we find buried in the 26th paragraph of the article:

Unlike members of U.S. Congress and legislators in many states, North Dakota’s elected officials do not have to disclose trips and gifts furnished by businesses, lobbyists or other governments. No state law prohibits them from accepting trips and gifts and no law requires them to even acknowledge such trips.

Well what do you know. This group of Republicans did absolutely nothing illegal. So why then the long article? Why the snarky remarks from commenters over at the state Democrat's official blog?

I think these people would like North Dakotans to think that something fishy went on with this Antigua trip. Unfortunately for them, that isn't even remotely true.

This is cool.

RSS feed for the podcast here.

(via Flickertail Journal)

Update:

Never mind. It's not that cool. The podcast hasn't been updated since March.

A fairly brilliant analysis of unintended consequences and why we don't burn coal to ease our dependence on foreign oil was written today by Rick Justen of Wonder Lake IL:

In 1970, the Coal Mining Health and Safety Act was passed. This gem forbids the burning of high-sulfur coal unless first cleaned by scrubbers, which were then extremely costly. Also in 1970, the Clean Air Act was passed. The immediate result of both laws: Coal production dropped 30 percent.

From 1959 to 1973, a system of quotas existed that restricted the importation of crude oil but encouraged the importation of refined products. The result was that construction of refineries in this country slowed to a crawl.

In 1969, the National Environmental Policy Act was passed. This ridiculous law required that an ''environmental impact'' study be prepared by the Department of Interior and reviewed by Congress before construction of a refinery could even begin. This led to site approval times of three to five years. As a direct result of our lawmakers' insanity, oil companies began to leave for Canada and the Caribbean.

Is it any wonder that this country has become more dependent on foreign sources for our energy requirements? Why is it a mystery to some people that we haven't built any new oil refineries since 1976?

The underlying attitude of the ''blame America first'' crowd and our micro-managing lawmakers can be best illustrated by a quote from Robert Kessler, former head of the federal Food and Drug Administration, when he said: ''Businesses only have the power we let them have.''

Think about that statement. If corporations are going to be constantly vilified and the profit motive constantly belittled, who will invest in our most vital areas of production?

Read the whole thing.

And be sure to thank your local enviro-wacko for all the high-priced gas you've been buying lately.

The Times-Picayune - What hath Katrina wrought? Could the worst natural disaster to strike the United States, a storm that permanently altered the geography of the Gulf Coast, be so powerful it changes the spending habits of the U.S. government?

That's the hope of opinion-mongers on both sides of the blogosphere, and they were in full-throated uproar last week. Electronic pundits on the left and the right briefly joined forces behind a movement dubbed "Porkbusters" and an amendment in the Senate that would trim alleged fat from government projects and use the money for reconstruction in Louisiana and Mississippi.

You want to funnel millions to Louisiana? OK, how much are you willing to deny North Dakota?

As a North Dakotan I will tell the rest of the country that I am willing to deny my state our two current, pork-happy Senators.

Read the whole thing.

The "porkbusters" movement and the change it has sparked in our government's spending habits of late will only last as long as the American people remain vigilant on it. The moment our attention is elsewhere politicians on both sides of the aisle in Washington will be back to throwing ludicrous amounts of our money on pretty much whatever they please. That's what politicians do. The ability to take part of our wealth away from us and spend it on other things is the single most awesome power they possess. The temptation to abuse it is enormous. Without proper oversight these people will tax & spend our economy right into the crapper.

My point is this: "Porkbusting" can't just be a movement, it must become a way of life for Americans. Fiscal responsibility in government is a boon to us all. It means less tax burden for us and more money for our economy.

I noticed that Fargo had zero murders last year.

Wow. I should be impressed. But then neither did Ellendale ND, my home town and they don't even have a police force (just the county sheriff). Everything is relative. I think the Chief might just have bit off more than he should have the right to think he can chew.

The Fargo Police Chief is out applying for a job in CA based on his "stellar" record.

Chris Magnus, the police chief of Fargo, N.D., impressed Mayor Irma Anderson with his enthusiasm for treating violent street crime as a public health issue, which is the way Richmond's mayor sees it.

All due respect to Magnus, but policing in California is a whole 'nother ballgame when compared to policing in Fargo North Dakoa.

I hope they hire him. He'll take a Bite Out of Crime. Or maybe we should bring him to Chicago to straighten out our bloody streets (650 murders a year). Yeah that'll be the ticket.

From the Fargo Forum

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc. temporarily halted construction of a Supercenter and Sam's Club here, a day after two illegal immigrants working on the projects were charged with molesting two 13-year-old Belcourt girls.

We need legal immigration. However by definition Illegal Immigrants are law-breakers. Once someone's caught illegally in this country they should be deported immediately and forever banned from legally immigrating to this country.

Think Progress:

Armed Forces Radio (AFR) is a station that broadcasts to American troops overseas through “over 1,000 outlets in more than 175 countries.” It currently features an hour of programming by right-wing host Rush Limbaugh. There is no comparable progressive program.

Today, that was supposed change. Ed Schultz – the host of the most popular progressive radio show in the country — was supposed to start broadcasting on Armed Forces radio. Jones Radio, the company that syndicates The Ed Shultz Show, received an email on September 29 from an Armed Forces Radio official confirming that one hour of Schultz’s program would begin airing today, October 17.

But this morning at 6AM, the producer of the Ed Schultz show, James Holm, received a call from Pentagon communications aide Allison Barber. She told Holm that she was calling so early to let Schultz know his show would not begin airing on AFR today. You’ll remember Barber as the aide caught coaching troops before a photo-op with President Bush last week.

The post goes on to accuse Barber of canceling Schultz because he criticized her on his show. I'm not sure that's the case.



To most reasonable people (i.e. people who aren't lefty partisans), the "staged" controversy was pure bunkum from the start. A ginned-up bit of faux outrage over something completely innocent and routine that was probably engaged in to draw attention away from the success of the recent balloting in Iraq.

Unfortunately for Schultz (a lefty partisan) he decided to advance this rather ridiculous bit of nonsense on his show. Too bad for him. In order for us to buy into the "staged" meme we must not only believe that the Bush administration is willing to deceive the public (not much of a leap in faith for any politician, up to and including Bush) but that soldiers serving in Iraq are part of the conspiracy as well. Or, at least those troops who support the mission in Iraq and are willing to talk about its progress anyway.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not all that keen on beaming a show to soldiers that accuses them of being Bush administration shills. Not to mention a show that belittles, routinely, their commander-in-chief. Plus, on a larger scale, Schutlz's consistent defeatism on the Iraq war issue wouldn't be at all good for morale.

Frankly, I'm not so much upset that they cut Schultz's show as I'm upset that they considered putting him out to the troops in the first place. Not that I think the troops need to be protected from leftist thought, it just seems that there could be less incendiary sources for that perspective than Schultz.

(via Flickertail Journal)

This article can also be seen at Taking Back ND!

Senator Conrad had a letter in the Grand Forks Herald Sunday. It was on his plan to create a "Social Security Lockbox." I'm glad that now Senator Conrad is finally admitting that he's been spending our retirement money.

I'm also glad that the Grand Forks Herald is catching up with the program. The Washington Post had an article on this plan which I commented upon way back on September 28th.

I think that Senator Conrad bringing up this flawed Social Security reform is a good thing. Social Security reform seems stalled since hurricane Katrina and Senators Conrad's and Voinovich's flawed plan may get Congress working on reform again.

The reason why Senator Conrad's plan is the wrong one compared to other reform plans lies in one of Senator Conrad's basic character flaws. Senator Conrad does not want anyone to own anything without his permission. Senator Conrad's plan would not allow YOU to keep YOUR money. If you died unmarried at age 64 your money that you've "invested" in Senator Conrad's Social Security scheme would go to the government, 100%. You are also (in Senator Conrad's eyes) too stupid to be trusted making investment decisions with YOUR money.

The guidelines that President Bush has announced would recognize that it's your money and you should own it. Most of the good reform ideas center around this basic tenet. You worked hard to get it, you should control it and you should keep it.

In reading the letter that Senators Conrad and Voinovich wrote I found another of Senator Conrad's character flaws. He just can't take responsibility for his behavior. From the Herald link:

But there's one thing everyone in Washington ought to be able to agree on: The raiding of the Social Security trust funds has to stop.

Nobody made you do it Senator.

So far, we have borrowed more than $1.9 trillion from Social Security to finance the rest of government. That's just wrong.

Was he using the Royal "we"? It doesn't sound like he's really sorry.

At a minimum, this financial shell game has eroded the public's trust in government. There was a time when it was believed that payroll taxes would be used to fund our retirement; gas taxes would be used to pay for highway construction...

Gee Senator nobody thought that our gas taxes would go to pay for a canoe trail or a gift to the financial giant Ingersoll Rand either. Who made you do that? By the way Senator, don't canoes go on water?

Unfortunately, the federal government has consistently failed to meet the public's expectation that these funds are being used for their intended purpose.

Actually I don't blame the entire federal government. I think of one particular Senator who's done more than his share of malfesence.

And, perhaps most importantly, our legislation would force the president (sic) and Congress to face up to the true fiscal condition of the country.

I think it would be great if a certain Senator would face the true fiscal condition of this country. You sure can see the respect this man has for the President.

It is time for the federal government to be honest with American taxpayers.

The time for this is long gone. It is now time for North Dakota to get a someone else to represent the values that are true to North Dakotans.

According to the Bureau of Public Debt when Senator Conrad went to Washington the government owed $387 Billion to the various trust funds such as Social Security and Highway. Today after Senator Conrad has been "representing us" for 18 years that number is $3,370 Billion. Senator Conrad has helped steal Three Trillion Dollars from our Social Security Trust Fund (and other funds).

I thought I'd also link to a previous article of mine showing just how far you can trust Senator Conrad when it comes to reforming Social Security. Senator Conrad was the deciding vote to raise taxes on Social Security benefits. (After you've already paid taxes on them in the first place.) Then this spring he introduced a bill to repeal that tax. But when it came time to vote he voted to keep the tax.