A lot of our trouble in understanding what is happening to our political and economic system is tied up in comprehension.\u00a0 People who do not understand that which is presented to them tend to follow the leader, often any leader.<\/p>\n
I once served in a state legislature; it might be instructive to investigate how that system works.<\/p>\n
First, we should always remember that the legislature is, as was taught to us in civics class, a great deliberative body, a place where each member can question and comment on any change to the law.\u00a0 As a matter of constitutional law each bill introduced for consideration is to be read and debated, in its entirety on three different days, in full, to the entire body.\u00a0 That is in theory, but in practice, as the clerk begins to read the bill, a member stands and says, “I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the bill be dispensed with,” whereupon the Speaker asks, “is there objection?” … “Hearing none, Bill (such and such) is remanded to Committee (such and such) for recommendation.”\u00a0 If the committee chairman where the bill is sent doesn’t like the bill it goes into his desk drawer, never to see daylight again.\u00a0 If he wishes it to be considered, he brings it before the committee for consideration. (This of course after he has counted the votes so as to know its disposition)\u00a0 The committee at its pleasure then returns the bill to the floor, with their recommendation, for its Second reading, which is expedited in the same manner as the first reading … “I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the bill be dispensed with” or by the Speaker peremptorily saying “without objection the bill will be advanced to the third reading calendar,”\u00a0whereupon it is posted at the bottom of the Third Reading Calendar for final consideration.\u00a0 Thereafter it is considered in order with the other bills on the calendar.\u00a0 Upon final consideration, once again, a proponent often asks that “further reading” be dispensed with.\u00a0 The pattern is that the proponent (generally a popular and respected member) gets up and since he too has probably not read it, (or it is a pet project) says something like, “good bill, should pass” and then sits down.\u00a0 Often that is the sum total of the debate.\u00a0 Bewildered members who have not read the bill and do not know its contents after gazing around the room, noting that their friends are voting for it, do likewise.\u00a0 Of course the ethical thing to do when you do not understand the implications of the bill is to vote “no”, but that would likely make your peers angry … better to vote yes … better safe than sorry.\u00a0 So it is, this is how these bills become law.\u00a0 I might add that the bill itself is usually the work of a pressure group or a lobbyist.\u00a0 It is often the case that the proponent has not read the bill … it is a certainty that most of the members have not.\u00a0 So why is it that these bills pass?\u00a0 The answer lies in man’s herd instinct.\u00a0 If you do not object to the call for “unanimous consent”, how could you object to the bill?\u00a0 It is obvious that you don’t care what is in the bill, so why should you object to its passage into law.\u00a0 The truth is, that if you object, a sigh of disdain can be heard throughout the House.\u00a0 If you object regularly, you will be branded a pariah; if you vote against a bill because you don’t understand it you will be seen as an “aginner.”\u00a0 The better way is to “go along to get along.”\u00a0 If you do that, you will be almost certainly a long term member of the body.\u00a0 Of course, you are not being true to the precepts of deliberative law making, or to your constituents, or to yourself.\u00a0 The tactics described here are just the tip of ways in which the legislative herd is stampeded, but suffice it to say, that you can be assured that the above is the general practice.<\/p>\n
I think that you may perceive that the legislative process is not well understood, but neither is much else about politics.\u00a0 What about money?\u00a0 I have been going on for some time about the enormity of the number one trillion.\u00a0 Those zeros make a lot of difference.\u00a0 Thousand, million, billion, trillion … each equally easy to say, but each a thousand times bigger than the last.\u00a0 Recently, as I was watching the tube over the period of several days, I several times saw Governor Mike Huckabee explaining the ills of “Obamacare” saying that it was going to cost a trillion dollars.\u00a0 This was all being done in a very polished, Madison avenue-esk video ad.\u00a0 Below Mike’s talking figure, in the lower right corner of the ad, when Mike said, “trillion” there appeared the number $1,000,000,000.\u00a0 The point I am trying to make here is that the ad people had no concept of a trillion dollars and Mike, presumably proof reading it, didn’t either.\u00a0 The ad only missed the trillion dollar mark by $999,000,000,000.<\/p>\n
Another thing that interests me is that when gold (as it is likely to do this fall) hits $2,000 per ounce, a dollar will buy precisely what a penny would when many of our readers were born.\u00a0 I can’t help but remembering my grandfather telling me that when he was a boy, he could buy five, foot long sticks of candy (horehound) for a penny.<\/p>\n
Tonight, I was listening to a pundit explain how we could get jobs back by injecting “short term” government stimulus.\u00a0 I got to thinking, is he talking about the theories of John Maynard Keynes?\u00a0 A lot of people seem to like the Keynesian idea of expanding the money supply by just printing it in order to inject “liquidity” into the economy to avert monetary woes.\u00a0 FDR tried it for many years, but, as hindsight analysis informs us, nothing worked until we became embroiled in WWII.\u00a0 As a matter of fact, I have not personally been able discern any large monetary woe that has not been fomented by the Federal Reserve Bank’s easy money policies.\u00a0 Have you?\u00a0 Can you think of any present day political crisis that is not the fault of the federal government doing things not delegated to it in the Constitution?<\/p>\n
Is it possible that America is great in spite of the Federal Government and its profligate Federal Reserve Bank, instead of because of it, as the Progressives say?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A lot of our trouble in understanding what is happening to our political and economic system is tied up in comprehension.\u00a0 People who do not understand that which is presented to them tend to follow the leader, often any leader. … Continue reading