Comments on Victor Davis Hanson's Article

The esteemed professor, Victor Davis Hanson has written an article for National Review called Let Obama Be Obama.

Here are some excerpts and my commentary:

After his party’s devastating setback in the 2010 midterm elections, Barack Obama was reelected earlier this month by painting his Republican opponents as heartless in favoring lower taxes for the rich. They were portrayed as nativists for opposing the DREAM Act amnesty for illegal immigrants, and as callous in battling the federal takeover of health care.

 Ah yes, it's the typical Democrat, or I should say, Democrap launch into victim hood. I think most of us are getting sick and tired of it. Of course, the Republicans never hold the Democrats to their lies, but that's beside the point.

Here's where Dr. Hanson gets to the meat of things.

Why doesn’t the Republican-controlled House of Representatives give both voters and President Obama what they wished for?
The current battle over the budget hinges on whether to return to the Clinton-era income-tax rates, at least for those who make more than $250,000 a year. Allowing federal income rates to climb to near 40 percent on that cohort would bring in only about $80 billion in revenue a year — a drop in the bucket when set against the $1.3 trillion annual deficit that grew almost entirely from out-of-control spending since 2009.

 Instead, why not agree to hike federal-income-tax rates only on the true “millionaires and billionaires,” “fat cats,” and “corporate jet owners” whom Obama has so constantly demonized? In other words, skip over the tire-store owner or dentist, and tax those, for example, who make $1 million or more in annual income. Eight out of the ten wealthiest counties in the United States voted for Obama. Corporate lawyers and the affluent in Hollywood and on Wall Street should all not mind “paying their fair share.”

Oh yes, I can hear the whine and cheese party now. Can you imagine George Clooney, Oprah Winfrey, Bruce Springsteen, etc. suddenly finding themselves in a draconian tax bracket with no deductions, because of their income level? 

Upping federal tax rates to well over 40 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year would also offer a compromise: shielding most of the small businesspeople Republicans wish to protect while allowing Obama to tax the 1-percenters whom he believes have so far escaped paying what they owe,...why not close loopholes for billion-dollar estates by taxing their gargantuan bequests to pet foundations that avoid estate taxes? Why should a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates act as if he built his own business and can solely determine how his fat-cat fortune is spent for the next century — meanwhile robbing the government of billions of dollars in lost estate taxes along with any federal say in how such fortunes are put to public use?

Let's set the marginal tax rate for $1 million a year at 70%. Remember it was President Obama who said that there comes a point when you've made enough money. As far as the Warren Buffets and Bill Gateses, Did they build their businesses on their own? Not according to Obama. Oh wait, it's different for  rich Liberals. Isn't Crony Capitalism a wonderful thing.

Now about the immigration problem, Dr. Hanson hits it out of the park.
  

The president flipped in an election year on the DREAM Act. Suddenly, in 2012, Obama decided that he indeed did have the executive power to order amnesty without congressional approval for those who came illegally as children, stayed in school or joined the military, avoided arrest and thus deserved citizenship. In response, Republicans supposedly lost Latino support by insisting that federal immigration law be enforced across the board, regardless of race, class, gender, or national origin.

But why not make the president’s DREAM Act part of the envisioned grand bargain on immigration? Once it is agreed upon that we have the ability to distinguish those foreign nationals deserving of amnesty, then surely we also have the ability to determine who does not meet those agreed-upon criteria.

Why, then, cannot conservatives allow a pathway to citizenship for the play-by-the-rules millions who qualify, while regrettably enforcing an un-DREAM Act for others who just recently arrived illegally; enrolled in, and have remained on, public assistance; or have been convicted of a crime? Who could object to that fair compromise?

Personally, I think it's a wonderful idea. Thank you Dr. Hanson. Hey Liberals, don't you think it's fair? Or do you want Manuel the gardener and Consuela the maid to continue working for you under the table so you don't have to pay their Social Security, or the new emerging health care requirements that Obamacare is forcing on the American people?  Hey, you voted for Obama, maybe he'll give you a waiver. After all, there have already been over 1200 waivers given out to "favored" corporations and various unions. Quid Pro Quo is such a wonderful thing.

Shouldn’t Republicans seek to end all exemptions rather than tackle the improbable task of overturning Obamacare itself? Their motto should be: “Equality for all; special treatment for no one!”

Yup, let Joe The Plumber have the same access to quality health care as Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and President Obama. If the government Apparatchiks and the college educated Nomenklatura in the information age economy, the education industry, and the social services racket have to use the same health care system as the unwashed masses that they despise, you would see a wonderful, efficient, and inexpensive health care system in this country.

Come on hippies. Let's be fair. You are all about fairness, right? Well I guess in your mind some people are created more fair than others...or was it more equal to others? Either way, I hope the Republicans have enough spine to make this mess blow up in your face. However, I'm not holding my breath. Thank you Dr. Victor Davis Hanson for this wonderful article. Please read the whole thing at National Review.

Republican Convention Is Now Over

Being a working musician, I didn't get much chance to watch any of the Republican Convention, but I did get to read all sorts of "expert" analysis from a whole bunch of sanctimonious, elitist, arrogant Liberals in Facebook. Let me just say this to you spoiled brats. I'm glad that I identify a lot more closely with those that you consider to be the scum of the earth. The more I get exposed to your poisonous social venom, the less respect I have for you. You can hold me in the highest level of contempt that you can, but  I have more contempt for you than you have for me. I don't get one red cent about your childish opinions.Your noses are so far up in the air, I'm astonished that you can still breathe. Life isn't fair. Get over it. You are not special.

You may succeed in re-electing Barack Obama to a second term, and you may not. However, if you do and things continue down the path toward European-style Socialism, which is your goal so that you can be the ruling class, you are going to make the working classes more and more angry every day. Americans are not Europeans. We don't recognize your self-ordained superiority. Eventually, something is going to break. From there, who knows what will happen. If you read a lot of blogs like I do, you can start to get a sense that there is a pressure cooker building up a whole lot of pressure, and the regulator valve is broken. Remember what your ideological father, Karl Marx, said. He predicted that the Proletariat would eventually rise up against the Capitalist Bourgeoisie. However, there really isn't a Capitalist Bourgeoisie anymore. All our manufacturing has been sent overseas. YOU are the the new Information Age Bourgeoisie, and yes, the Proletariat are ready to rise up against the Bourgeoisie. Let's hope that that "rising up" happens at the ballot box, and that we get some sensible people steering the ship for a change. If the unemployment rate for working class Americans, not that you care, stays as high as it is, things could get more than just tense. Keep that in mind as you preen your self-ordained moral superiority for all to see. Enough said...

A Transformed America?

Liberals love to claim that we live in a country that is just so unfair. The "rich" need to pay their "fair share." Of course, the Liberal rich already pay their fair share, minus the amount they shield in trusts and Cayman Island bank accounts, it's just the Conservative rich that need to pony up. Alternately, the Liberal uber-rich shouldn't have to pay any more taxes, because they believe in the correct things, and therefor have purchased themselves indulgences due to their "enlightened" Liberal/Progressive/Socialist/Marxist/Progressive/Totalitarian/
Fascist belief system. Fairness for thee but not for me...I'm important. All animals are created equal, but some animals are created more equal than others...If only those stupid rednecks would recognize the greatness of their betters; they need to prostrate themselves on the altar of the Left's superiority. Now now now little people, please accept the fact, that we are your rulers. We know what is better for you that you, you stupid, uneducated, working class, scum...and we are going to do everything in our place to put you in your place and keep you there. How dare you challenge our over-educated, sanctimonious, elitist snobbery. Darwin rules. We have evolved into a higher level of man. Now let me go check up on Manuel, illegal from El Salvador, who is detailing my Prius, and Contessa, illegal from Mexico, who is doing my laundry, wiping my children's behinds, and preparing the family's dinner, while I'm at my Yoga class. Yes, it's all about "fairness." We can't have a system like ours, which has the wealthiest lower middle class and the wealthiest poor people in the world. We need to be just like Europe: In another words, the middle class in the United States is too large, too prosperous, and needs to be taken down a peg or two.

Do you really want a "fair" system? How about this: Liberals, would you embrace a system where everyone's basic needs are provided; there is equal pay for "comparable work;" everyone lives, works, and plays in a planned New Urbanism style community; that planned community has its own transportation system, providing free public transportation for its residents. You don't need a car, but you are allowed to have one. You  can have two if you are married.  Alternately, you can walk to work or ride a bicycle?

Your provided housing is based on "need." You get free medical and dental care. Same for your family. Your salary and/or job is based on your education level, skills, but also on senority.  Having a Bachelors degree, and/or a Masters degree is a requirement for being a member of the ruling class. Having an Associates degree is requirement for the upper reaches of the lower managerial class.  Liberals, what you are embracing is a mirror image of the social structure of the United States Military, particularly the social structure of the United States Air Force. I use the Air Force as an example, because that is the branch of the military that I am most familiar with. Full disclosure: I spent 26 years in the United States Air Force, retiring with the rank of Senior Master Sergeant (E-8).

Hey Liberals, let's be honest. You are totally in favor of a system of government in which rank has its privileges in all aspects of life. Despite your contempt for the military, what you advocate is a society modeled  on the US Military. Just think, your education makes you part of the Officer Corps, and for the most part, those with the least amount of education, end up as Enlisted personnel doing the worst jobs. And of course, there is everything in between. Gee, it sounds just like Utopia. Where are the unicorns? Talk about diversity and everyone being on the same team, you have those with Doctorate degrees and those who barely finished high school all working together for a common cause, no matter what job they do...and everyone knows their place. If you are a junior enlisted person, try buying a beer at the bar in the Officers Club and see what happens. Hey hippies, here is your ultimate caste system.

I'm going to use the Air Force as my example. That is because having spent 26 years in the Air Force, I know the Air Force system better than I know the systems of the other sister services. Let's take a look at an Air Force base and the employment structure of the members of the United States Air Force: An Air Force base, whether stateside or overseas, is a self-contained New Urbanism style planned community. There are areas where you work, areas where you live, and areas where you shop or recreate. You go to work in a shop or office. You live in government provided housing, ranging from junior enlisted barracks to family housing units, and mini-mansions with a staff provided to flag rank officers,  unless you are allowed to reside off-base, for the government's convenience. If you do, you receive a housing allowance as part of your compensation package. That housing allowance is not considered income for tax purposes. In another words, it's another form of welfare.  Those in "essential personnel" jobs, like Base Commanders, are required to live on-base, because they are required to be available for duty, and on call,  24 hours per day. Not only does rank have its privileges, rank has its responsibilities.

Military personnel receive free government provided medical and dental care, which in my opinion, is the finest in the world. I have never had a bad military doctor, surgeon, or dentist. The last time I had surgery, the hospital staff at Malcom Grow Air Force Medical Center made me feel like I was the only patient in the hospital. You have access to government provided legal and spiritual counseling for free. Your salary is based on rank, which is based on education level and assessed skills,  acquired through a rigorous apprenticeship program; you have to attain a certain skill level in order to advance to a certain rank. For the enlisted ranks, you have to pass very tough skill level tests, in order to be eligible for advancement in rank. You have a 3 Level, which advances you from trainee to apprentice, a 5 Level which makes you a journeyman/technician, a 7 Level, which makes you a master technician, and a 9 Level, which moves you into non-executive management and/or an especially high level technician, depending on the job. Also, you must attend, and pass successfully, various professional military education courses, ranging from leadership schools for junior enlisted, to the various war colleges for senior officers, where they earn Masters and Doctorate degrees, and everything in between.

At one time the Air Force had, and the other branches of the services still have, warrant officers.  Traditionally, these were people with highly specialized skills, and were afforded the perks of the Officer Corps, without the executive managerial responsibilities.

The Officer Corps encompasses all Commissioned Officers from the rank of O-1 up to, and including the Commander In Chief, who is the President Of The United States. Below that, you have the Secretary Of Defense, Chief Of Staff, Major Command Commander, Numbered Air Force Commander, Wing Commander, Group Commander, Squadron Commander, Flight Commander, Non-Commissioned Officer In Charge, Squad Leader...the last two being enlisted positions. History lesson: the Vice President is not part of the Chain Of Command. The primary job of the Vice President is President Of The United States Senate. The Vice President becomes President when either the President dies in office, is removed from office by impeachment, or resigns.

Now, let's create a couple of scenarios based on the military system, which after all hippies, is what your idea of "fairness" is all about. Actually it's not. It allows too many qualified people to move to the head of the pack, without the necessary connections that you  cretins rely on, so you can be lazy, yet advance though life without doing much of the real work that the little people need to do, in order just to survive. Many of your arrogant whiners would end up nowhere near the top of the heap. You just aren't good enough, or you just don't have enough ambition. Plus, if you have a "problem with authority," you could end up counting icebergs in Thule, Greenland for a few years.

OK hippies, you want to transform America into something more fare? Let's do it. Let's transform America. Let's transform America into the mirror image of the United States Air Force. All salaries, military, civilian, private sector, will be the same as the salaries of the military. Look how much money they government would save. They would now be able to manufacture their own $600 toilet seats for next to nothing, because they wouldn't have to buy them. They'd just have a bunch of lower junior enlisted, barracks living, laborers make them, like the Chinese slave laborers making the IPhones that you love in the "factories" in China. Oh by the way hippies, there are only a certain number of officer billets, so your access to college is going to be severely limited. Most of you will end up as "enlisted swine" doing the dirty work. I can't wait.

It's Ryan

Mitt Romney announced today, that Paul Ryan would be his running mate. I have no problem with Paul Ryan, but I thought that it would be someone else. Of course, the White House went into full victim hood attack mode, sending out the requisite sound bites to their lapdogs in the media, and to all those whiny victim hood addled Liberals, who can't stand the thought that the American people are not quite ready for Communism.

I hope the Romney/Ryan ticket succeeds in November. I hope that the Republicans get control of the Senate, and increase their control of the House. After that, I want to see some real nasty, mean-spirited Conservatives go after the Left and finish the job Joe McCarthy started in the 1950s. It's time to clean all the Marxists out of our government, military, education system, and corporate America. It's time for some REAL hope and change. 

Health Care 1

I'm still sifting though numerous articles about the Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare. I will post a blog once I think I have done enough research to form an intelligent opinion on the subject. That being said, I do think that we are heading eventually to a government run, single payer system.

Who would lose out  in a  single payer system? Lawyers. If the government ever took over health care in this country for everyone, you can bet that the government would make sure that the government could never be sued. OK, here is the fly in the ointment: A single payer, government run, health care system will not be implemented for a long time, because most of the idiots that we idiots vote into office are lawyers. Consequently, the lawyer lobby has a lot of influence keeping the lawyer idiots that we idiots vote into office, are beholden to the whims of the legal profession,  no matter how much they screw the American people. Once a single payer system is put into place, the malpractice legal industry collapses, followed by the insurance industry, that feeds off of the legal industry. Gee, that might not be a bad thing.

Here is my opinion on a single payer system. I use one, and have access to another one. I am retired military, and continue to use the government run, single payer, military medical system for my medical needs. I have NEVER had a problem with military medicine. I have used the system for everything from emergency room care, gastroenterology, cardiology, primary care, chiropractic, physical therapy, major surgery, and then some. I have never used the Veterans Administration system myself, except for disability evaluations, but I know several veterans who do, and I hear nothing but good things. The only criticisms I hear about the VA system come from Liberals who claim that the VA system is shit. Of course, they would never use such a system themselves, which is ironic, since they are the ones that are pushing for single payer, universal healthcare for all. I guess what they really mean is this: Substandard single payer healthcare for the masses, and a discrete private system for themselves, open only to themselves. If it looks like this is going to occur, the masses have to rise up and make sure it doesn't happen. In the  spirit of fairness, upper middle class, educated, elitist, snobbish liberals have to be forced on the same system that they want to force onto everyone else. If that is the case, a single payer system could work.

Like I said, I use a single payer system, and it works fine. Yes, there are some glitches. 1. You have little say in who your providers are. However, I have never had a bad military medical provider. 2. There is sometimes a fairly long wait in order to see your primary care manager. The work around for this, is you go to the emergency room, and they give you a referral. You then have to see ANY primary care provider in ANY hospital or clinic within a certain time frame. Usually, that is 24 to 48 hours. They will make the appointment for you in the emergency room when they discharge you. In addition, if you can't get in to see your PCM for routine care, you can make an appointment to be seen by any provider in your primary care facility. All your records are electronic, and can be viewed by any medical provider in any government run medical facility, military or civilian, anywhere in the world.

One thing I have noticed over the past 10 years has been the number of contract civilian doctors and nurses working in the military hospitals. This is significant if you think about it, and the fact that eventually, we are going to have a government run, single payer system. Doctors are becoming government employees, so they can avoid paying a staff, and most importantly, they can avoid having to pay outrageous malpractice insurance premiums, driven by greedy lawyers and insurance companies trying to keep ahead of the greedy lawyers. If enough doctors do this, the legal and insurance industries will no longer be able to sustain themselves financially. Like they say, paybacks are hell. Along with this, the ultimate payback is hell, would be "our betters" having to use the same system we "little people" have to use. I can hear the whine and cheese party now.

I see many articles that have come out since the Obamacare decision claiming that this country has now gone past the tipping point, where it will be impossible to prevent us from turning into a Socialist dictatorship. I'm still skeptical about that, but I can see the argument. I do know this, however, if we ever became a top-down Socialist style dictatorship, it would end up being a lot like the military, and military style life is one thing that few Lefties could handle. They would go ballistic when they found out that a vast majority of them would not be part of the ruling class. Hmmm......Maybe something really IS in the works...

Public Transportation

I ride public transportation all the time, and I like it. Even though it takes me longer to get to work that is does by driving, I like the fact that I can catch up on my reading, and/or take a nap if need be. Also, I'm discovering that the less I drive, the more I realize that I hate driving. I wish more people would feel the same way.

I live in the Washington, DC area. We have out-surpassed Los Angeles as the traffic capital of the United States. Driving on the Capital Beltway during rush hour is a royal pain in the ass. It takes forever to go 50 feet. There has to be a way to get people out of their cars and onto public transportation, without punitive measures. As a Conservative, I believe people should have choices. The choice of choosing public transportation for commuting to work, needs to out-way the choice of driving by yourself and sitting in a traffic jam for an hour. Public transportation needs to be safe, convenient, reliable, and cheaper than driving by yourself. If one of these things is missing, people will continue to drive themselves for the "convenience" of having their own car, even though they will raise holy hell about sitting in a traffic jam for over an hour.

Here's my assessment of the Washington, DC, metro system.

Safety: Even though their are reports of assaults and robberies on the Metro and the buses, I haven't witnessed any. I have seen some pretty shady-looking characters hanging out at the Rockville Metro station, however. Increased police patrol, and intense police scrutiny, including the unpopular practice of "stop and frisk" harassment  of these individuals on a regular basis, would chase them away. That would be a good thing. Liberals would scream bloody murder about this, but if the crime rate was reduced  dramatically, and it would be, they would look like the fools that they are. Profiling and harassment work. Several years ago, the Washington, DC Metropolitan Police Department went on a campaign to eliminate an open air drug market at Hanover Place, NW, Washington, DC. They stopped and harassed every white person seen driving on Hanover Place. They set up sting drug deals, and arrested many white suburbanites coming to Hanover Place to buy drugs. Those suburbanites also lost their cars. But of course, you  didn't hear one peep out of the Left about this, because white people were being targeted and arrested. Oh wait, you did hear about how it was terrible that this practice was affecting the livelihood of the neighborhood drug dealers...

Convenience: This is where Metro falls down the most. Out where I live in the inner ring suburbs, in Prince George's County, the Metro Rail runs until midnight on weekdays, and until 3:00am on weekends. Metro Bus, however, stops running somewhere around 10pm. If you are out late, you either have to walk from the station to your home, which in my case is about a mile through a decaying neighborhood, or you have to have someone pick you up, or take a taxi. If you are in Montgomery County things are not as bleak. Both Metrobus and Montgomery County's Ride On buses run well after midnight in some jurisdictions. If you are in the Rockville area, there are late night buses. In downtown DC, some buses run until 4am and start back up at 5am.  Metro needs to adjust its bus schedules, so that buses meet the trains on a regular basis, and that a last bus meets the last train in the evening from each and every suburban stop. That would encourage evening ridership into and out from the entertainment areas of Washington, DC, and the suburbs.

Reliability: DC's Metro system is fairy reliable, but it is aging and needs substantial infrastructure work at this point in its life. Single tracking operations and station closing are ongoing on weekends, which is a major inconvenience for many riders. Metro, however, has not choice. They have to keep the system running.

Cost effectiveness: During rush hour, Metro is not cheap. Yes, you can use your Smart Trip card and ride buses with unlimited transfers for two hours for a buck and a half, but it will take you until next Wednesday to get where you are going. There needs to be a push for more government subsidies (yes, you heard that right. Even as a Conservative, I believe that certain things need to be subsidized by the government) from the federal, state, and DC governments. With EZ Pass technology expanding, it would be very easy to install EZ Pass readers at the Beltway entrance ramps, and collect a nominal toll, say 25 cents for the privilege of driving on the Beltway. If you don't want to pay the toll, you can always take the back roads. We now have the Inter-county Connector and the soon to be Hot Lanes on the Virginia side of the Beltway as precedent. Both use EZ Pass readers to collect tolls. The Inter-county Connector is not cheap either. It's over $4 each way during rush hour, and that's for a road that is just over 20 miles long. A nominal toll would generate millions of dollars for highway maintenance and other transportation projects, freeing up a lot of transportation money for public transportation. In addition, Metro should either lower the cost of parking at their stations, or eliminate the cost all together. Paying $4.75 to park for the day, and then paying rush hour peak fares, does not make riding Metro cost effective for most people. It's cheaper to drive. Charge a dollar if you must. Most people would be willing to pay that. Also, reduce the rush hour fares substantially, and you will have a huge increase in ridership.

I believe that public transportation is the wave of the future, especially in our urban and suburban areas. We need to expand it, and we need to fine tune it. If we do that, people will be willing to use their cars when they really need them for their cargo space, or for recreational purposes. I'm hoping to see more rail-based and dedicated lane express bus public transportation in my lifetime.

UPDATE: July 1, 2012. Metro's fares went up today. Buses are now $1.60 with a Smart Trip card, and $1.80 if paying cash. Rail fares have increased too. So has parking. However, Metro did eliminated the "Peak Of The Peak" fares that made travel by Metro too expensive for many people.They have also added a $1 surcharge for using a paper fare card, rather than a Smart Trip card. Check out Metro's website for more information

Handicapped Spaces

I teach in a private school, where the tuition is more than many people make annually. A common occurrence at this school is parents, or I should say scoff-law parents, parking in  spaces reserved for those with handicapped tags or devices that hang from the rear view mirror when they are not handicapped. One of my colleagues is handicapped, and has handicapped tags. He came to work one day, and couldn't get a handicapped space, so he pulled behind the scoff-law in the space, and blocked her in. When she came out to move her car, she was livid. How dares someone block her in. The fact that she was parked illegally, and should have been issued a $250.00 citation and had her car towed, was irrelevant. She had been inconvenienced, and was late for her yoga class.

This is a perfect example of the class warfare that is permeating this country. You now have a class of meritocratic wealthy people that have no class. It's all about them. Like Marie Antoinette said, "Let them eat cake." Remember what happened to Marie Antoinette.

While I don't advocate the guillotine for selfish jerks parking in a handicapped space, because they feel that because of their wealth they are above the law, I do feel that that individual should have been more than just "inconvenienced." She should have had her car towed, and she should have had to retrieve it in some impound lot that is only open on Tuesdays, while storage charges continue to rack up during the week and the weekend.

This shows the mindset between old money and new money. Old money would never have considered parking in a handicapped spot. New money doesn't care. They are special, and everyone else is a peasant.It's a strange world that we live in.

DC's "Right To Vote."

I hear on more than one occasion from Liberals, that they could never live in the District Of Columbia, because residents of DC don't have the "right to vote." Really? The District has three electoral votes in presidential elections, and elects their mayor and council members. They don't have the "right to vote?"

The Twenty-Third Amendment to the US Constitution, which was proposed by Congress in 1960, and ratified by the states in 1961, gives Washington, DC, three Electoral College votes in presidential elections. It limits the number of Electoral College votes to three, currently, which the amendment specifies is the same number of electors as allowed in the least populated state. As of 2011, that state is Wyoming.

Residents of the District voted in presidential elections for the first time in 1964. Before that time, yes, they didn't have the "right to vote." That voting right continues today. Yes liberals, they do have the "right to vote." What I think these liberals are really saying, is that DC doesn't have a representative in Congress that can vote on the House floor. DC's representative has the same committee voting rights as the representatives of the US Territories: Guam, Marshall Islands, American Samoa, the US Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth Of Puerto Rico. It was the same when Arizona was a territory, North Dakota was a territory, and Hawaii was a territory.

If you read the US Constitution, it specifically states that a Federal District would be established as the center of government, but it would not be a state. DC is not a state. It is a Federal District. In order for DC to have a House floor voting representative, there would have to be a Constitutional Amendment granting DC statehood. With that requiring a 2/3 majority congressional vote from both houses, followed by ratification by 3/4 of the states, that would be just about impossible.

There is a reason why the founders of this country didn't want the center of government to have the same rights as the respective states. At the time, it was expected that those that worked for the Federal Government would live in the District. The idea was to keep those that worked for the government from voting themselves a pay raise, since all bills pertaining to the federal budget begin in the House Of Representatives. Until 1961, they couldn't even vote for the President or Vice-President. That had been in effect since 1789. At the time, and until the 1973, it didn't seem to bother the residents of the District Of Columbia. They lived under a congressional gravy train, with a city government controlled by three Congressional Managers from the House Of Representatives. DC was given home rule by Congress in 1972. Their first mayor, Walter Washington, was elected mayor in 1973.

Here's my idea: make all federal employees, current and retired, no matter where they live, residents of the District Of Columbia as part of their employment contracts. That way no federal employee could vote themselves a pay raise. Those that reside outside of the District would vote by absentee ballot, whether they live in Montgomery County, Maryland, or Omaha, Nebraska. They would also vote for the DC mayor and council, having a say in who controlled the local government of their domicile. With the financial mess that DC is in, that would not be a bad thing.

What about the military? Yes, the military are federal employees. However, there is one fly in the ointment. It's called the Soldiers And Sailors Relieve Act of 1918, reinstated in 1940, and even though it had not expired, reinstated again in 2003 as a formality. One provision allows members of the military to retain their home of record as their legal domicile along as they are members of the active duty military. I was active duty Air Force for 26 years. During that time, I remained a legal resident of Connecticut, which was my home of record when I joined the military. After I retired, I had to become a Maryland resident, since that is where I lived, acquire a Maryland drivers' license, since that is where I lived, and pay state income tax to the State Of Maryland, since that is where I lived, and was now a Maryland resident. While I was active duty, I maintained a Connecticut drivers license, and was subject to Connecticut state income tax, but Connecticut exempts military members on active duty from that tax. That is Connecticut's right under the States Rights provisions of the US Constitution applied to the Soldiers And Sailors Relief Act. The act also covers garnishments and other financial actions, giving them statutory relief while they are in the service of their country. This is a law, not a constitutional provision, so any or all parts of the act could be rescinded by federal law.

The part granting them the right to retain their home of record as their domicile could be rescinded by federal law, while leaving the other provisions in place. However, would Liberals want all members of the US Military to be residents of the District Of Columbia? Most members of the military are Conservatives. Today, and based on my observations, starting about 20 years ago, many military personnel in power and policy positions are fundamentalist, born again Christian, religious Conservatives. They would vote for any Republican running for office in the District. DC might actually end up with a Republican mayor, a Republican council, and a non-floor voting representative that is a Republican. Also, DC's meager three electoral votes would go Republican too.

As a side note: I have never been comfortable with the Fundamentalist Movement that has established itself as the power base of the US Military in recent years. While I respect their right to believe what they believe...after all, their beliefs are protected, constitutional rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, I find it uncomfortable when they promote their religious beliefs in a public forum, or let it be known under the table, that if you  don't belief in a certain aspect of Fundamentalist Christianity, you will not be promoted.  I'm sorry, but this is wrong! I shouldn't have to belong to the "right" church in order to be considered for promotion.

Granting the District more electoral votes by a constitutional amendment would be much easier than granting DC statehood. I believe that most states would go along with that, just like they granted DC residents the right to vote in presidential elections in 1961. That would mean that DC could end up with 7 to 10 electoral votes, rather than 3... maybe more, depending on the size of the federal workforce, including the US Military. If you included retired military, since they are technically still military in retired status, and there are many, it could be 15 to 20 electoral votes, most of whom just might vote Republican...talk about "swing..."

We'll see what happens...

Housing In The Future

I just finished reading an article by Walter Russell Mead called From Levittown To Suburbia. I'm a big fan of Mead. Even though I'm a conservative and he is a liberal, he is a completely common sense liberal, who is not afraid to hold liberalism's feet to the fire. He is a deep-thinking intellectual worth reading on a regular basis.

From Levittown To Suburbia, is one installment in Mead's commentary on America's "Blue Social Model." In this installment, he challenges the current notion that the younger generation preferres to live in New Urbanism style high density housing on top of public transportation lines.

Even though I'm a conservative, I'm a New Urbanism kind of guy; I would prefer to live in a condo above a Metro or high speed rail line, rather than where I live. I live in a small single family home in a former working class suburban neighborhood, but that is just me. Downtown Rockville, Maryland, and Kentlands in Gaithersburb, Maryland, are my models when it comes to housing. I'm also a big fan of public transportation, because I hate driving, especially in the DC area. If I didn't have to haul drum and band equipment, and public transportation ran 24 hours per day, it's more than likely that I wouldn't own a car...back to Mead...

Based on his research, most Millenials would prefer to live in single family homes in the suburbs and exurbs, but they can't afford to. What are we going to return to? We are going to return to the multi-generational single family home of days gone by. Many builders are now offering that kind of housing unit: They are offering large single family homes with separate sections for two or three generations of family members. I can also see this becoming a model for two or three unrelated families that get along well, choosing to live together in this type of housing. If you go back in history, it wasn't that long ago, that multi-generational living arrangements were the norm here in the United States. When my parents were first married, and my father was going to graduate school, they lived in the home where my mother grew up with her 12 brothers and sisters...all but 5 who never married, and continued to live in the same house until the day they died.

I am a New Urbanist Conservative; yes we do exist, I do agree with Mead's assessment. Read his article. It makes total sense. I can see an America, where multiple generations share housing, taking a large burden off of the social services industries when it comes to caring for Grandma and Grandpa in their golden years, while they provide valuable services in helping raise their grandchildren without the need for day care, as well as making things easier for the younger generations to get themselves planted in the American culture and economy, with the help coming from two generations of family stability providing family assistance, as opposed to government assistance.

We'll see...