Various Observations
By Ryan Walsh (05/18/04)
Some thoughts and perspective on the vexing issues of our time:
- We keep hearing that this is—and will be—"the dirtiest, most negative presidential campaign yet." Those who make this assertion lack an understanding of American history. In the election of 1828, a bitter Andrew Jackson ran against the incumbent John Quincy Adams. In the course of the campaign, the Jackson campaign painted Adams as a gambler, a spendthrift, and an arrogant prude that disregarded the common man. Adam’s supporters in the press likewise claimed: "General Jackson’s mother was a Common Prostitute, brought to this country by British soldiers! She afterwards married a Mulatto Man, by whom she had several children, of which number General Jackson is one!" They also accused Jackson of living in sin with Rachel, who—the story went—was not yet his wife. This turned out to be false. Do political commentators really think this summer will be worse than that of 1828?
- U.S. government subsidies in general are bad news: they distort the balance between supply and demand. None, however, is as patently insane and bang-your-head-against-the-wall stupid as the subsidization of American farms. In 1930, President Hoover signed the Smoot-Hawley tariff, which imposed a tax or "duty" on virtually every known commodity. An international trade war began, and so other nations imposed similar taxes on imports. Consequently, American farmers lost around a third of their markets. As demand weakened, agricultural prices dropped. Like an arsonist calling the fire department on himself, Hoover summoned the Federal Farm Board to purchase surplus farm supplies in order to re-stabilize prices. FDR accelerated this policy during the first New Deal. Under the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA), the Roosevelt Administration paid farmers to destroy extra crops and cattle—this during the Great Depression, when countless people went starving. Farm subsidies still exist; in fact, Congress passed and Bush signed a farm bill in 2002 that will cost around $180 billion over the next ten years…how’s your blood pressure?
- Revisionist historians are already at work downplaying the legacy of Ronald Reagan—or, in this case, flat-out lying about it. In Princeton Review’s Cracking the AP U.S. History Exam, the authors explain the budget deficits of the 1980s in a simple sentence: "Government spending increased while government revenues shrank, forcing the government to borrow money." True, government spending did increase, but so did revenue. According to the Office of Management and Budget, federal revenue increased by 28 percent in the '80s, but spending increased by 36 percent. The supply-siders were correct: cutting taxes creates more revenue. When studying for the AP U.S. History Exam, it is important to memorize only the myths; the facts will throw you off.
- The American Library Association (ALA) despises the Patriot Act because it allows the government to monitor your library records. The section of the law to which they are apparently referring, section 215, doesn’t even contain the word "library." The law permits federal agents to obtain, with a court order, the private records of a suspected terrorist. For the record, federal agents have used section 215 exactly zero times so far. If the ALA’s mission is truly to "ensure access to information for all," then why doesn’t the organization direct its indignant rage toward the imprisonment of "renegade" librarians and the censorship of freedom-promoting books in Castro’s Cuba?
- Democratic Senator Chris Dodd recently praised veteran Democratic Senator Robert Byrd on the Senate floor. Dodd noted that Byrd would have been a "great leader" at any time in our country’s history, including the Civil War. The thought of Byrd, an ex-member of the KKK, as a leader during the Civil War makes one wonder to which side he would pledge allegiance. After the incident, Dodd apologized and everything was fine. If this story sounds familiar, it’s because almost the exact same thing happened a couple years ago, only it involved two Republicans. The media swarmed and called for the Republican at fault, Trent Lott, to resign. The media are biased; so what else is new?
(Printer friendly version) Email: Ryan Walsh
