Wisconsinize Colorado? Yes!

(Denver Post, March 27) A useful new verb was coined the other day when Republicans joined Democrats to propose higher pension contributions by public employees and a union boss called it a “blatant attempt to Wisconsinize the Colorado budget process.” What a great idea, thought many a tired and worried taxpayer. Wisconsinize away, legislators – what took you so long?Statewide unemployment is record-awful, and metro Denver unemployment worse still. Why shouldn’t these job-secure teachers and state workers kick in a little more toward their comfy (but now shaky) retirement plans? As recession maintains its grip despite cheery official statistics, the dirty secret is out: Government employees at all levels across the land are better compensated than you and me in the private sector.

So, yes, by all means. Colorado should not only Wisconsinize downward its public pay and benefit packages, along with the union bargaining leverage that drives them. It should also New Jersey-ize transportation, Florida-ize health care, Utah-ize the schools, and Texas-ize the tax system. Other states are making hard choices for fiscal survival and economic revival – and doing it on the spending side, not with revenue grabs. We can too.

“Colorado cannot expect to grow its way out of its budget problems,” warned Charlie Brown, veteran of decades on the legislative staff and now head of DU’s fiscal think tank, in a much-noticed report last month. Our state has a revenue problem as well as a spending problem, agrees Henry Sobanet, budget director for Gov. John Hickenlooper. But do we really? It depends on your assumptions.

Former state Rep. Penn Pfiffner starts his fiscal slide show with a chart showing that total state spending from taxes, fees, and federal funds has never decreased in modern times. Never. Pfiffner is now with the Independence Institute, and he directed their Citizens Budget project, which published a “road map for sustainable government in Colorado” several weeks ago.

Working from a projected $1 billion gap between the trend lines for revenue and spending, his citizen budgeteers identified specific, realistic savings in K-12 education, health care, corrections, higher education, transportation, and pensions that would more than balance the budget – and bend the spending curve down in future years, so the structural deficit identified in DU’s study wouldn’t persist.

The resulting 168-page book (of which I peer-reviewed a chapter) plows through grainy detail in department after department until your eyes ache. No rosy generalities or unspecified “waste, fraud, and abuse” cuts for this corps of academicians and experts. No throwing grandma out in the snow, either. Their roadmap could actually get us home, provided we’re grown up enough to follow it.

“To assume,” says a bad pun and good proverb, “can make an ass of U and me.” Pfiffner and company reject the assumed inevitability of Sobanet’s revenue deficiency and Brown’s grimly rising graphs for spending on schools, prisons, and Medicaid out to 2025. They assume instead that we control our own destiny, in the problem of over-government as in every other area of political life – and all history is on their side.

Liberals such as Sen. Rollie Heath are so sure revenue is the problem that they want to raise income taxes and sales taxes. Conservatives such as Jon Caldara, who funded the Pfiffner counter-budget, are so sure it’s not that they’re proposing a tax cut. Reduce income taxes in the face of a doomsday deficit? How Reaganistically visionary. How Wisconsinish.

But then, Texas has no income tax at all, and it’s booming. Utah schools outperform Colorado with much larger classes. Florida Gov. Rick Scott turned down big money from Obama for a health-insurance exchange (which some Republicans here seem to want). New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie nixed that expensive tunnel. Grownups can do this stuff. Now is the time.

Raise or cut Colo. taxes?

Taxes in Colorado at this time of record unemployment should be reduced, not increased, says John Andrews in the March round of Head On TV debates. Maybe you'd prefer no taxes at all, replies Susan Barnes-Gelt satirically. John on the right, Susan on the left, also go at it this month over the fiscal mess in Washington and the mayor's race in Denver. But they're in rare agreement over Obama's Libyan intervention and Japan's triple tragedy. Head On has been a daily feature on Colorado Public Television since 1997. Here are all five scripts for March: 1. COLORADO FISCAL WARS

John: Liberal Democrats want Coloradans to pay more income taxes and sales taxes so politicians don’t have to control spending like the rest of us. They say it’s temporary. Fat chance. We should instead pass the competing proposal to cut taxes. That would grow the economy and create jobs as we face record unemployment.

Susan: Right. Let's eliminate taxes. Each of us can build our own roads. Home school our kids, K-12. Build our own university, public park, social service system, jail and hospital. We can change the state motto to "me for me, you for you" and have a tea party- bring your own bag, kettle, cup and burner.

John: Nice try, Joan Rivers, but you misfire with your satire. I pay my taxes cheerfully. They are the price of a civilized society. But the power to tax is also the power to destroy. In Colorado's case, the Democrats' tax increase would destroy even more jobs - and voters know that.

Susan: Colorado voters can decide whether or not they want to have great schools, higher ed, public safety, and transportation. Though the legislature can increase fees without the public’s approval, voters determine a tax increase. It may surprise you that Coloradans want to invest in themselves and the future.

2. WASHINGTON FISCAL WARS

John: With an exploding national debt and a deficit of 1.5 trillion dollars this year alone, America will be as broke as Greece unless we get some adult leadership now. Obama’s spending cut of 6 billion is pathetic. The House Republican cut of 60 billion is little better. I say 500 billion or bust.

Susan: I have an idea. Why don't all the Senators and congresspeople who want to cut taxes and abolish programs in order to stimulate the economy, quit their well-paid, richly benefitted public trough jobs and start a business and create jobs? $500 billion is nuts - unless we abolish the Pentagon!

John: Whoa, yesterday you wanted to zero out taxes, today you want zero out Congress. The sarcasm is heavy. We have too many zeroes already, Susan – too much reckless spending, on entitlements in particular. Tackle them as Rand Paul and Paul Ryan want to do, and America can still be saved.

Susan: Yes –and your party’s fiscal hawks are talking straight about social security, Medicare and Medicaid. Au contraire – they are quibbling over pennies when billions are at stake. The squeaky wheels get all the attention – at both ends of the spectrum. America needs a grown up in charge.

3. MAYORAL RACE

John: “Can’t buy me love,” sang the Beatles. Denver mayoral candidates Michael Hancock, James Mejia, and Carol Boigon hope it’s true, as front runner Chris Romer has nearly as much in the bank as the other three put together. Will the deep pockets win, or will the black-Latino-woman factor upset Romer?

Susan: Romer gets to the run off - money, name I D and Daddy. Boigon doesn't get there, despite the big bucks she and her spouse will put into her campaign. Linkhart has name ID, but no juice - a chronic elected with scant vision, leadership skills or backbone. Hancock and Mejia are vying for the second spot.

John: I was Roy Romer's opponent for governor in 1990. He waxed me. Now his son leads the race for mayor of Denver, where my son and daughters are building their lives and raising the next generation. Chris Romer's experience and leadership impress me. I wish I could vote for him.

Susan: Bet he’d welcome your endorsement. None of the top candidates has the experience balancing a complex budget, overseeing strategic investments or managing a large, diverse workforce. The race has no pulse. Denver voters must do their homework to make an informed choice.

4. DISASTER in JAPAN

Susan: An earthquake, a tsunami and the threat of massive nuclear meltdown. Japan is facing unfathomable disaster-8500 dead and 13,000 missing -so far. Radiation contamination threatens lives, food sources and long -term recovery. Though many will try to reap political advantage from this tragedy - it's too soon to reach definitive conclusions.

John: At our house this awful news was personal – my cousin’s family lives in Tokyo. Japan’s threefold tragedy and courageous response should touch all our hearts in a human way and engage our best thinking as citizens of a fragile industrialized society. But let’s avoid panicky reactions against nuclear power.

Susan: Recent events demonstrate there’s no fail-safe energy source: the Gulf oil spill, last year’s West Virginia coal mine disaster, the untold cost in lives and treasure spent to protect our mid-East petroleum dependence. Solar, natural gas, and geothermal combined with conservation must be in the mix.

John: There’s no fail-safe approach to life, period. Earth is a hospitable planet for mankind most of the time, and we are very blessed to be here, but it can turn brutally hospitable in a second. Japan’s ordeal is another reminder of worldwide human inter-dependence – economically, technologically, culturally, and yes, spiritually.

5. LIBYA

Susan: Qaddafi is a mad man and has been for 40 years. Does the US have vital interests in Libya? The despot has been guilty of human rights atrocities for 4 decades. Why are we there now? Obama promises no boots on the ground, but Qaddafi is a cornered animal - capable of anything. We cannot afford another war.

John: Madman vs. weak man. That’s the matchup between Qaddafi and Obama. Under this incompetent president, America has relinquished its role as leader of the free world. That’s what we cannot afford. US intervention in Libya, if any, should be purposeful, fierce, and decisive. So far it’s none of those.

Susan: U.S intervention in Libya shouldn’t be – period. We have no vital interest there – Our resources are spread too thin, with troops be deployed 5, 6 or 7 times. Qaddafi is a monster. But our abuse of American troops may be the real tragedy.

John: Making war is the ultimate act of political responsibility – or for this president, irresponsibility. Obama ignored the US Congress and took his lead from a UN committee, attacking Libya with no clear justification or plan. America these days uses force too often and too casually. Our Founders would be horrified.

Wrong Way Obama rolls on

President Obama has joined Mexico's side by suing Arizona for trying to protect its borders. He has joined unions in opposing the governor of Wisconsin, who is trying to protect the taxpayers. He has defied a majority of the people in this country who agree with God's determination of marriage between one man and one woman as his administration announced it no longer will defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court. Where is the defiance leading and when will it end?

Anti-Zionism abets anti-Semitism

By Pamela Zuker On the night of November 9, 1938, Nazis unleashed unimaginable violence on the Jews of Germany. The wave of atrocities became known as Kristallnacht, the night of broken glass. Adolf Hitler, in one of his frequent cynical attempts to cloak pagan barbarism with Christian respectability, declared that the horrors were inflicted in honor of the vehemently anti-Jewish Martin Luther’s birthday the next day.

(Editor: Anti-Israel divestiture efforts at the University of Colorado prompted this historical essay by our friend Pamela Zuker, a scholar and writer in Aspen, on the long and shameful history of Jew-hatred. As she notes, it is a legacy in which Christians have sometimes participated, though without any valid theological warrant -- in repudiation of which, the Christ-followers in my family and church solemnly vow, in much the same words as Zuker quotes at the end from our brave Jewish friends: “Never again.”)

Until Kristallnacht -- despite the enactment of laws prohibiting intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews, a national boycott of Jewish stores, the exclusion of Jews from respected professions, the expulsion of Jewish students from German schools, the revocation of the German citizenship of all German Jews, and even the requirement that Jews wear yellow “Jude” stars on their clothing -- many Jews had refused to flee the country, believing that German anti-Semitism would abate.

In the immediate aftermath of Kristallnacht, however, virtually every remaining Jew in Germany attempted to emigrate. Sadly, even after the Nazi atrocities were known to the world, few countries would provide Jews asylum. When asked how many Jews his country could accommodate, a high government official in Canada replied, “None is too many.”? The British, bent on thwarting Zionism (the desire to create a sovereign Jewish State in Israel), imposed a prohibition on Jewish emigration to the Land of Israel, and even refused safe passage to a ship that arrived in British-controlled “Palestine” bursting with Jewish Holocaust refugees. By escorting them back to Europe, the British ensured that when Jews needed their ancestral home the most, it would not be their safe haven.

That dismal chapter in Jewish history finally cemented in the minds of the world’s Jewry the urgent necessity to return to a world with a sovereign Jewish State.

In 136 C.E., Romans forcibly expelled the Jews from the Land of Israel (then called Israel, Judea and Samaria). This expulsion brought to an end more than one thousand years of Jewish reign (with several intermittent periods of external rule by conquest), compelling the global dispersion of the world’s Jews, and inaugurating eighteen centuries of cruel oppression and genocidal persecution. In the nearly two thousand years between Jewish expulsion from Israel and their return, Jews were variously subjected to forced conversions, confiscations of land, money, and personal property, expulsions from several countries, slavery, prohibitions on the practice of Judaism, frequent massacres, the burning of sacred books, the burning of Synagogues, and being burned alive. Several countries attempted to obliterate their Jews, resulting in the annihilation of a third of the Jewish population of Germany and Northern France, during the first thousand years of exile. The entire population of Jews in England was murdered and/or imprisoned in the 13th century, and in 1472, when all Jews were expelled from Spain, even the descendants of Jewish converts to Christianity were prohibited from attending university, joining religious orders, holding public office, or entering any of a long list of professions. One third of Poland’s Jews were slaughtered in the 1600s, and during the Greek War of Independence in the 1820s, Jews there were massacred to complete elimination. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were murdered in Russian pogroms in the 19th and 20th centuries. The pogroms that accompanied the Revolution of 1917 alone orphaned more than 300,000 Jewish children.

The staggering Jewish genocide during what Jews have come to call the “Shoah” (calamity) of World War II, saw approximately six million Jews sadistically tortured and murdered at the hands of Nazis and their collaborators. At the war’s end, fully one-third of the world’s total Jewish population had been brutally butchered.

The history of Jews outside of Israel until the end of World War II is largely a history of oppression, genocide, and expulsion – punctuated by burnings at the stake, public torture, and insidious, malicious libel. Remarkably, Jewish “displaced persons” continuously assimilated into other cultures around the world while retaining their unique religion and identity as a people, a feat that Jews all across the globe are somehow still able to accomplish.

Eighteen hundred twelve years after Rome exiled the Jews from their homes in Eretz Yisroel (the land of Israel), and changed the names of the Jewish lands to Palaestinia (the land of the Philistines – so named in an attempt to sever Jews’ ties to their land), descendents of 2nd century Jewish refugees returned home as 20th century Jewish refugees.

In the first year of the existence of the State of Israel, roughly 500,000 homeless European Jews emigrated. Within ten years, the population of Israel had grown to two million. The majority of the Jewish immigrants, including 700,000 refugees from Arab countries, arrived with no possessions.

In contradistinction to neighboring states, Israel established free and fair elections, universal suffrage, a free press, and the right to a fair trial with an independent judiciary. Arab citizens of Israel, regardless of religious affiliation, are afforded the same rights and privileges as Jewish citizens, and all women who are citizens of Israel, regardless of religious affiliation, are afforded rights equal to those of men. In Israel, Jews created a country that allows both the freedom of religion and full access to Jerusalem’s Jewish, Christian and Muslim Holy sites that were denied Jews when Jerusalem was not under Jewish rule.

Despite this, in the rest of the world, particularly in difficult economic times, antisemitism rears its ugly head. Even – or perhaps more accurately, especially – in the world’s most respected international forum, the United Nations, antisemitism is rampant.

On November 10th, 1975, the 37th anniversary of Kristallnacht, rather than issuing a statement in memory of the Jewish victims of Nazi savagery, the United Nations passed Resolution 3379 branding Zionism, the reestablishment of a Jewish State in Israel, “a form of racism.” Although renounced by Daniel Patrick Moynihan, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., as “obscene,” it was through this resolution that Jew-hatred was sanitized, repackaged, and propagated globally as politically correct “anti-Zionism.” It took the collapse of the Soviet Union, which had voted in lockstep with Arab nations and other countries with anti-Jewish interests, for the U.N. to officially revoke the resolution, but the damage had been done and the precedent set.

As a particularly ludicrous example of the United Nations’ stance toward Israel, at the International Women’s Year Conference in 1975, a resolution denounced Zionism as an enemy of all women (despite women’s equal rights in Israel) but did not denounce sexism as an enemy of all women because the call for women’s rights was seen as an attack on the Arab-Muslim world.

Appallingly, on June 8, 2010, a Syrian representative at the United Nations perpetuated a modern version of the ancient blood libel to the United Nations Human Rights Council: “Let me quote a song that a group of children on a school bus in Israel sing merrily as they go to school,” he said, “and I quote, ‘With my teeth I will rip your flesh. With my mouth I will suck your blood.’” As shocking as this is, it should not be surprising given that these myths persist not only in Muslim countries, but even, according to anthropologists in a 2008 study, among Catholics and Orthodox Christians of all social classes in places as far from the Middle East as Southeastern Poland.

In November, 2010 the annual UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People featured speeches from Libyan and Syrian demagogues that referred to Israel as, “the cancerous settlement in all the Palestinian territories,” and included statements such as, “Zionism, in reality, is the worst form of racism,” “Israel shows and rears its ugly face,” and, “the word Israel has become synonymous with words such as aggression, killing, racism, terrorism.”

Words like “butchering,” “apartheid,” “ethnic cleansing,” “genocide,” “racism,” “brutality,” “crimes against humanity,” “torture,” “killing in cold blood” and “barbarism” were invoked not to describe the reasons for the creation of the state of Israel, but to condemn it. Opposition to “Judaization” – Jewish presence on what is perceived as Arab territory – was proclaimed and by default, legitimized.

For some reason, the depictions of a “cancerous” Jewish state with its “ugly, bloodthirsty” Jewish occupants – utterances that would be recognized as unambiguously anti-Semitic if spoken elsewhere – are not considered beyond the pale at the United Nations. By the end of 2010, half of the country-specific condemnatory resolutions and decisions ever adopted by the UN Human Rights Council targeted Israel.

Yet somehow, in the face of this, in the 1970s, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat had the courage to sign a peace treaty with Israel. In advance of the Israeli-Egyptian peace talks, Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir famously remarked with sadness to Sadat, “We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours.”

Today in Colorado, Palestinian advocate Michael Rabb and his group “CU Divest” hope to convince the Board of Regents at the University of Colorado to divest its portfolio of any investments linked to our staunchest ally in a troubled and increasingly less stable region. While we have every right to choose to disagree with Israel’s policies, it is essential that we protect, defend, and support its right to exist and to defend its inhabitants from virtually unceasing violent incursions.

One can only hope the University will recognize that weakening Israel will not facilitate peace in the Middle East. In fact, only a strong and globally acknowledged Jewish state of Israel with widespread support from the world’s democracies will allow others in the region to enjoy the human and civil rights taken for granted in the U.S., Israel, and Europe.

In the decades since the Holocaust, the haunting mantra, “Never Forget” serves to define the Jewish people’s role and responsibility to humanity as a constant reminder of the moral imperative to treat every human being – regardless of race or religion – justly and with decency, dignity and compassion. The existence of Israel is a necessity for the world’s Jews as a safeguard against a recurrence of the horrors of the last two thousand years and a protection of Jews’ human rights. But it is also a necessity for the human rights of those surrounding that tiny island of democracy. It is how the world treats Israel that will determine whether it is possible to move toward a world with universal human rights.

The citizens of Israel along with the citizens of other democracies across the globe share a fervent hope that Israel’s neighbors will one day know freedom, prosperity and true peace.

Until then, Israel is their last best hope.

What's Jay Say? No mo' DOMA

President Obama proclaimed that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which states that marriage is between one man and one woman, is unconstitutional. He has instructed the US Attorney General to not defend the lawsuit against DOMA. Didn't the president swear to uphold the laws of the land? DOMA was passed by the Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. What else will Obama proclaim? This should concern everyone--unless you like dictatorships, which are being deposed now in north Africa.