Scalia pilloried for speaking truth

In blaming the Voting Rights Act for "racial entitlements," Justice Antonin Scalia sounded like Archie Bunker, says Susan Barnes-Gelt in the March round of Head On TV debates. Not so, says John Andrews; the VRA does in fact insult blacks and Hispanics with favoritism. John on the right, Susan on the left, also go at it this month over school vouchers, the federal budget sequester, municipal tracking bans, and the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights. Head On has been a daily feature on Colorado Public Television since 1997. Here are all five scripts for March: 1. IS VOTING RIGHTS ACT UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

Susan: Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia asserted “voting rights are a perpetuation of racial entitlement”. He sounded more like Archie Bunker than an esteemed jurist. The 1965 Voting Rights Act empowers the federal government to nullify local laws discriminating against minority voters. Scalia’s arrogance demeans informed conservatives and the court.

John: I want to live under a color-blind constitution where all individuals are equal before the law, not where government treats people differently according to their race. Section V of the Voting Rights Act, criticized by Scalia, does in fact discriminate racially. It insults blacks and Hispanics in the guise of helping them.

Susan: Yeah – a place where all the women are strong, the men good looking and the kids above average. Sadly the NO VACANCY sign is up at your fanciful Lake Wobegon. Republicans are going to need more than discriminatory voting policies to regain relevance in the 21st Century.

John: Equality before the law isn’t fanciful. It’s simply right, nothing more nor less. The alternatives are either treating nonwhites as second-class citizens, or tilting the election process so everybody is represented by someone of their own skin color. The second is just as un-American, just as monstrous, as the first.

2. DOUGLAS COUNTY VOUCHERS WIN ON APPEAL

John: Children in Douglas County are Colorado’s luckiest kids. Nowhere else can moms and dads choose a school that works best for their child and have the education funding go along in the child’s backpack. That kid-friendly idea, called vouchers, was on hold by court order, but no more. Educational freedom, here we come.

Susan: K-12 education is in turmoil. From obsolete governance – volunteer elected school boards to the agrarian-based 8-month a year, 6-hour a day calendar – the system doesn’t work for the 21st Century. Charters, vouchers, magnet schools are a sorry attempt to patch a system in need of reinvention.

John: You are so wrong. Empowering educators to innovate through charter schools without union restrictions is very 21st century. So is empowering parents to choose the best school for their kids through vouchers. Unions will mount a desperate Wisconsin-style campaign to take back Douglas County this fall. Educational freedom terrifies them.

Susan: Bottom line on Doug County vouchers? An appeal to the Colorado Supremes will add years and another million to the tab. The district has huge deficits, is cutting curriculum and eliminating staff. It’s a no win for kids, ideologues or reformers. Revolution now!

3. TABOR CHALLENGED IN COURT

John: Detroit has gone from being one of America’s richest cities to one of the poorest. Reckless spending and high taxes were the cause. States like California and Illinois are headed for a similar crash. Fortunately Colorado is protected by TABOR, the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights. Yet Democrats are in court to nullify TABOR.

Susan: Hundreds of local cities, towns and schools districts have opted out of TABOR - that speaks volumes. Five years of a declining state economy and TABOR’s arbitrary restraints mean government can’t meet the demands of a growing population and economy. TABOR’s ratchet is a hatchet.

John: Fallacies, fallacies – where should I start? One, voters removed the TABOR ratchet years ago. Two, in a slow economy when revenues aren’t growing, TABOR doesn’t operate. And three, as you noted, voters can override the limits any time. Colorado is lucky to have this fiscal guardrail, and judges should leave it alone.

Susan: Of course higher taxes should be voter approved– as TABOR mandates. But the stupidity of shrinking government to anorexia – starving public safety, k-12 and higher ed, highway maintenance and human services is nonsense.Wanna build your own highway? School system? Hire your own police force and maintenance crew? Get a grip!

4. CAN MUNICIPALITIES BAN FRACKING?

Susan: Gov. Hick’s softened his stance that he would sue any local jurisdiction that outlawed the controversial drilling method - fracking -within its boundaries. Stiff opposition from Fort Collin’s city council caused the Hick to backtrack. Sometimes it’s OK when a political leader is windsocky!

John: Hydraulic fracturing is the greatest thing for energy independence and higher living standards since America’s discovery of oil itself. The fluids used are perfectly safe, as Hickenlooper demonstrated by chugging a glass of the stuff. Fort Collins politicians are a bunch of chicken littles and lawbreakers. Sue away, Governor.

Susan: Due respect to our lovable governor – he’s been imbibing weird stuff for decades – homemade beer, experimental weed, fracking fluid . . . No wonder he’s so charming and unpredictable. Local government has the greatest stake in the health and safety of its residents. It’s your conservative mantra!

John: The law requires uniformity of access to mineral resources throughout the state. To allow a crazy quilt of local variations to obstruct development of abundant, affordable energy is legal theft – and economically stupid. Opposing hydraulic fracturing, based on junk science, is like opposing a cure for cancer.

5. SEQUESTER SHENANIGANS

Susan: Na-nana-na-na shenanigans over sequester are the last straw for every DC incumbent. Both parties deserve a trip to the woodshed. Libertarian Senator Rand Paul is the only stand-up elected. He put himself and values on the line in a successful 13-hour filibuster regarding the use of drones in the U.S.

John: The two parties actually differ sharply, Susan. Democrats are bawling like spoiled children over a couple of pennies on the dollar in slower growth – not cuts, just slower growth – to our bloated federal budget. Republicans, though worried about weaker defenses, have embraced the savings like grownups. And the public is with us.

Susan: The public is fed up with DC brinksmanship. The Congress and the White House have lost touch with what’s happening on the streets of this country. Let’s begin the sequester by not paying Congress and the White House. Bet that’ll bring ‘em to the negotiating table.

John: Fortunately, our two-party system gives Americans a choice between the self-perpetuating government approach and the advocates of fiscal sanity. Once again, it’s D versus R. In this corner, Obama and Harry Reid, the tax and spend guys. In that corner, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio, the constitution guys. It’s no contest.

What's your family story?

(Denver Post, Feb. 24) When a prominent man says he is stepping down to spend more time with his family, it’s usually a fib. He invokes the family as a fig leaf for failure, embarrassed to admit the horse bucked him off. But nothing like that is the case, I believe, with Ken Salazar’s return to Colorado after serving as a senator and secretary of the interior. The veteran Democrat’s words rang sweet and true to this Republican's ear when he spoke of living up to “my highest moral responsibility… helping my family.” If there were a medal of honor for unsung homefront heroism, give one to Ken. Our society, however, does not heap honors on fathers and mothers and kids and kin who quietly do right by each other and, in so doing, build the future. It’s a pity, because the institution of the American family is disintegrating before our eyes. The household has literally become a homefront, a battlefield – and the me-first forces are winning everywhere you look.

According to the 2010 census, fewer than six in ten babies are now born to a married mom and dad. For Hispanic children, it’s fewer than five in ten. For blacks, fewer than three in ten. Getting married before getting pregnant is the best single anti-poverty strategy for a woman and her kids. Yet public policy, social signals, and the cultural climate are massively aligned against it. A soft suicide is in progress.

You probably didn’t notice the recent celebration of National Marriage Week. Meager funding and elite indifference doomed it. Most of our tax dollars, philanthropic dollars, advertising dollars, and entertainment dollars pour into America’s selfishness machine. Kids and adults alike are encouraged to believe that people are my instrument, love is my wish list, and sex is my plaything. Me, me, me.

Contrarian groups that work to build a marriage culture through classes and seminars, relying on the best science with a non-religious, non-judgmental tone – such as the Center for Relationship Education under Joneen McKenzie and Friends First under Elycia Cook, to name two of my local favorites – have to scrap for budgetary leftovers as they stand against the flood of money propagandizing for value-free lifestyles.

The collapsing family in our time represents a generational betrayal with few precedents in history. With shameless hedonism, we are abdicating the trust our children and grandchildren ought to be able to place in us. Families are qualitatively ever more dysfunctional and quantitatively ever smaller. A new book by Jonathan V. Last, “What to Expect when No One’s Expecting,” runs the numbers, and they are scary.

What’s to be done? Top-down policy solutions are the smallest part. Attitudes have to change from the bottom up. My family has vowed to do three things. One, respect the long run. Two, stop the selfishness machine. Three, help build the ark.

“In the long run, we’re all dead,” Lord Keynes’ cynical crack, has done worse moral harm in the world than all the harm of his economic theories. We must secure the blessings of liberty to our posterity as well as ourselves, the Founders taught. That means recognizing the far-flung ill effects of modernity’s selfishness machine, calling them out, and resisting them.

And because things may get worse before they get better, we’ll need a vessel of rescue. Every simple word and act that affirms family and fidelity, relationships and self-giving, is another plank in the ark that will float us above the coming flood. Our house has joined the builders. Will yours?

The Salazars of San Luis have a great story. But so do countless other Colorado families. Just putting them on record and praising them is a start. What’s your family story, or a family hero you admire? Email me with nominations. Let’s be the change.

Can we keep America exceptional?

President Obama insists that America is not exceptional. Yet for his flawed economic policies to work, he must rely on an amazing degree of exceptionalness. Like any nation, we are not exempt from the consequences of ill-considered choices. We have the advantage of observing the outcome that decades of overspending and social profligacy have caused in Europe -- welfare dependency, oppressive taxation and insurmountable debt. And riots.

America is indeed exceptional in many important ways: freedom, innovation, opportunity, honor. But bloated government outlays and intrusive, business-thwarting regulations bring economic collapse, even here.

In which Obama gets a 2nd chance but blows it

Might the recent inauguration herald some real hope and change at last, wonders a tongue-in-cheek John Andrews in the February round of Head On TV debates. He even momentarily dons an Obama button before Susan Barnes-Gelt reaffirms the hardball playbook and reminds us it's all the Republicans' fault. John on the right (button quickly discarded) and Susan on the left also go at it this month Hillary Clinton's past, the GOP's future, immigration reform, and gun control. Head On has been a daily feature on Colorado Public Television since 1997. Here are all five scripts for February: 1. PREVIEWING OBAMA’S SECOND TERM

Susan: Obama has four years of on-the-job-training – and he doesn’t have to pander to special interests for re-election. Washington is a swamp and he can apply his will and intelligence to cut entitlements, reform the tax code and protect the vulnerable. Elections have consequences. He must play hardball.

John: Mr. President, sir: Like my [Obama campaign] button? I voted for Mitt, but since I follow a God of second chances, I appeal for you to devote yourself to hope and change. Change your confrontational ways. Stop trying to transform us into France. Give Americans reason to hope for constructive cooperation between Democrats and Republicans.

Susan: Washington’s dysfunction is driven by the politics of partisan primaries. Incumbents who are moderate problem solvers are threatened by right wing ideologues – not Democratic challengers. Majority Speaker Boehner is trying to manage a freak show that has noting to do with Obama’s leadership style.

John: Barack, my friend, this saddens me, but it’s over between us. [Removes button, tosses it away.] You had your chance. Your spokeswoman here, Susan, won’t get off the Alinsky talking points. Second-term hardball, Obama unfettered. Veer to the left, no comprise, consensus be damned. In 2010 that approach cost you dearly. It will again in 2014.

2. ARE REPUBLICANS EVEN RELEVANT ANY MORE?

Susan: After decades of posturing and hyperbole, immigration reform will happen. And human issues – human rights, women’s health, LGBT issues and religion – are no longer the third rail of partisan politics. The reason: young people see the world in chiaroscuro– shades of grey. If Republicans don’t embrace change, they’re doomed.

John: The party of the left keeps helpfully advising the party of the right to come over there with them. Then we’d have both parties proclaiming government is the only answer and relativism is the only truth. Ain’t happening, Susan. The answer is freedom and responsibility. Republicans will stand on that, thank you.

Susan: How’s that workin’ for ya so far? Let see, R’s lost seats in the Senate, the House and – ummm – the White House? Senate Minority leader McConnell and House Majority leader Boehner serve at the will of a fractured herd of nattering nabobs of negativism. They make Spiro Agnew look respectable.

John: In America, freedom and responsibility have always worked better than bureaucracy and dependency. Always will. Democrats can go on being the party of government, Republicans the party of liberty, and we’ll see who has the best winning percentage over time. My money is on liberty.

3. HILLARY’S PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE

John: As Obama builds a new cabinet, America is better off with Hillary Clinton stepping down as Secretary of State. She is dishonest, unscrupulous, and manipulative even by the low standards of Washington. Her evasive Senate testimony about the Benghazi massacre was shameful. America does not need a Clinton third term in 2016.

Susan: Hillary’s tenure as Secretary of State was great for the President, our global partners and the nation’s safety and respect. An unparalleled advocate for the rights of women, children the underserved across the globe – she is a remarkable leader who happens to be female. Kerry has big shoes to fill!

John: John Kerry as incoming Secretary of State is no prize either. The Vietnam peacenik who threw away his war medals will have US enemies laughing at us around the world. Mrs. Clinton leaves him a legacy of weakness and appeasement. She failed as foreign minister and would fail worse as president.

Susan: This country and the world would benefit from Hillary Clinton’s leadership – whether as president of the United States or head of a multi-national organization. She is smart and articulate with impeccable values. She knows who she is and what she stands for and is respected throughout the world.

4. IMMIGRATION REFORM, AGAIN

John: I like Marco Rubio as a rising conservative star, and I like the savory seasoning that Latinos add to the American melting pot. But Rubio is wrong in teaming up with Obama for a so-called path to citizenship, which really means amnesty for lawbreakers. Ten million new Democratic voters? No thanks.

Susan: Republicans will continue to be irrelevant if the old white boys don’t recognize the inevitable. The realities of the 21st Century – from demographics of economic sustainability depend on sane immigration policy. A majority of Americans agree. Marco Rubio is the face of America’s future. Get used to it.

John: The social and economic dysfunction of Mexico has sent opportunity-seekers flooding into the USA for decades. Can we make room for them? Absolutely, on the right terms. But full political participation is not the way. Amnesty failed when Reagan tried it, and will fail again. Secure the border first!

Susan: John F. Kennedy said it best in his 1958 book, A Nation of Immigrants. The United States is and always has been a nation of people who value both tradition and the exploration of new frontiers, people who deserve the freedom to build better lives for themselves in their adopted homeland.

5. GUN CONTROL, AGAIN

John: The gun control proposals by Feinstein in Congress, and by Hickenlooper here in Colorado, take away too much self-protection and self-responsibility and offer too little assurance of greater public safety in return. A government big enough to give us everything we want is big enough to take away everything we have.

Susan: Thirteen. Sixty-four. One hundred and forty two. One hundred and thirteen. Two-hundred and fifty. Four Hundred and fifteen. Thirteen years. 64 mass shootings. One hundred and forty-two guns. One hundred thirteen illegal guns. Two hundred and fifty dead. Four hundred and fifteen injured. Do the math.

John: Firearms are dangerous, no question. But power-hungry big government is far more dangerous. Citizens and politicians alike, including Colorado’s own Democratic senators, need assurances that proposed gun laws will truly deter criminals and lunatics, not just disarm the law-abiding. Then we can deal.

Susan: Thirteen. Sixty-four. One hundred and forty two. One hundred and thirteen. Two-hundred and fifty. Four Hundred and fifteen. Thirteen years. 64 mass shootings. One hundred and forty-two guns. One hundred thirteen illegal guns. Two hundred and fifty dead. Four hundred and fifteen injured. Do the math.

'Keep & bear arms' isn't negotiable

(Denver Post, Feb. 3) Firearms are dangerous. When learning to use a rifle in boyhood, and later when training with a handgun, I was drilled hard on this. Instructors barked at my least show of carelessness. But the force of government and political power is more dangerous than any gun. Our public officials are trustees over the organized monopoly of legitimate violence in this country. Under due process of law, they hold the dispensation of life and death over us all. How chilling if this fearsome power were to be used carelessly. Unfortunately, instances of its careless use are all around us, often on a massive scale and with disastrous consequences. That’s why in these United States we live not only under laws – in which the government tells the people what they may and may not do – but also under constitutions, in which the people tell the government what it may and may not do.

This recently came to mind as I listened to state legislators taking their oath “to support the Constitution of the United States and of the state of Colorado,” and last week to President Obama swearing for his second term “to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

In Barack Obama’s heart, however, it seems his constitutional agenda is more transformative than protective. He’s on the record in a 2001 radio interview, thinking aloud about the need to “break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution [which make it] a charter of negative liberties.”

Such goals as “redistribution of wealth and… political and economic justice in society” are harder to accomplish, the future president explained, because the Constitution says what the states and federal government “can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what [they] must do on your behalf.”

One of the “tragedies of the civil rights movement,” Mr. Obama concluded, was its failure to “put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.”

Tragic? Only if we misunderstand rights as claims on other people. The modern bureaucratic state establishes such claims all the time, obligating one group as givers and privileging another as takers. Society can sustain a certain amount of this without going broke or coming to blows, and opinions differ on how close we are. But if words mean anything, such a process is not the creation of rights. God alone can do that.

Rights, in the American political tradition, mean those equal, natural, inherent endowments of an individual’s very being which no one else – especially government – may arbitrarily take from him. “Negative liberties,” Obama’s term, is correct is that rights are a stern “Thou shalt not” to a grasping, meddling, paternalistic, power-hungry Caesar.

That’s true even when Caesar is cloaked in good intentions and a democratic majority. So the federal Bill of Rights, ten amendments to our U.S. Constitution, and the Colorado Bill of Rights, 31 sections of our state constitution, ban piled upon ban specifying what government “can’t do to you,” are a free people’s best friend.

The latter in particular, established for us since statehood in 1876, deserves your attention as gun control is debated this year. The right to keep and bear arms – federally guaranteed by the Second Amendment, but with a problematic militia clause – shines unclouded in Colorado’s Section 13, where it is justified explicitly by an individual’s “defense of his home, person and property.”

Now come Gov. Hickenlooper and his legislative allies, with their well-meaning proposals to, in some degree, disarm law-abiding Coloradans – supposedly in exchange for new assurances of what government “must do on your behalf” (to quote the President one last time). Don’t they recognize how much Section 13 ties their hands? They need to.