A Word to fellow Conservative Bloggers

One of the several online “Tea Party” groups that I recently joined encourages its members to be active in blogging, chatting on Facebook and Twitter, writing letters to editors, and otherwise being prolific in using the “pen” as a means of spreading the word on the Movement’s agenda. I’d like to go a step further and suggest to those engaged in such worthy activity that we should follow a personal set of guidelines with everything we write in order to have maximum effect and avoid giving ammunition to our adversaries.

There are many that would like to dismiss us as ignorant rednecks and/or racist. Those few that actually fit that description should probably not engage in discussion and frankly bring no value to the Movement. For the rest of us the requirement that we let no hint of racism enter our discussions should be obvious. And name calling or other insults fall into the same category. Our goal is to convince others and to show that we are intelligent, informed citizens, not to score points with those that already agree with us.

We should also take the time to check our grammar and spelling. Everything I write for publication in a blog or elsewhere is written in a program that automatically checks spelling and fundamental grammar. Still I make many mistakes that are picked up only by careful reading and editing. Further, we should be careful about the proper use of homonyms such as two, to, and too; there, their, and they’re, etc, and generally try to write clearly and concisely and do enough research to be sure of our accuracy.

We don't have to be Hemingways, but it's important that we be aware that the delivery matters as much as our message and will make our message much more palatable to those we are trying to influence while giving them nothing to use against us.

Balanced Budget Amendment

There’s been much discussion among conservatives lately about a Balanced Budget Amendment to the United States Constitution. Many feel that if the federal government were forced by the Constitution to maintain a balanced budget then the reckless spending would stop and we would get our fiscal house in order. I strongly doubt such an amendment would be possible, but even if it were it's not a good idea.

I’m as fiscally conservative as anyone I know; I think the government should spend money on law enforcement and a strong military and not much else, but sometimes it’s vital that a country, just like a business, is able to spend money that’s not in the coffers. I can think of several examples in our history when this was the case, but the most compelling one is The Louisiana Purchase. If the central government of the United States had not been allowed to float bonds to pay for Louisiana, then the purchase from France could not have taken place, and America might still be a small nation clinging to the east coast with a dramatically altered history including a war with Napoleon that may not have been winnable. A Balanced Budget Amendment would not be wise, and should not be necessary.

We are a representative republic. American citizens choose representatives to go to Washington and make decisions on our behalf regarding the laws of our country and how our tax money gets spent.  I think our legislators represent us pretty well – they overspend just like we do.

Our Founders and Framers did not invent the concept of a representative republic, but they considered it superior to pure democracy which would be cumbersome at best, and also dangerous - leading to citizens voting themselves unsustainable benefits. They hoped that this danger would be averted by each community sending its best qualified as representatives; that those more sophisticated representatives would understand the proper functions and limits of government and the essential need for fiscal responsibility.

The nation quickly ran low on people the caliber of the Founders and inevitably not-so-sophisticated legislators were sent to Washington, but in spite of this the government remained reasonably fiscally responsible for almost two centuries – overspending only when conditions warranted and then only temporarily. This has changed dramatically in the last few decades and now our government overspends habitually without reservation, but a Balanced Budget Amendment is not the answer because it’s important that our representatives be able to borrow and spend when appropriate and necessary. The solution is representatives with discipline and fiscal understanding. The only way to get representatives with discipline and fiscal understanding is to elect them, and stop electing the ones that go off to Washington and immediately starting spending money that doesn’t exist.

We will have disciplined representatives when we become disciplined and elect them, if it’s not too late. Simply put there are two types of citizens that vote for tax-n-spend politicians – those that directly benefit from the “spend” and those that are not hurt by the “tax”. The latter type are further split into those that pay little or no taxes and those that have so much money that the taxes don’t matter and who benefit from having their consciences eased by having the government help the less fortunate. When these groups constitute a majority or near majority of voters then there will be no solution. I don’t think we are to that point yet, but we are dangerously close and when added to those that vote “liberal” simply out of habit we may be over the threshold in years that all of the above bother to turn out and vote, or when fiscally conservative voters don’t.