Victory for NPRI
Dear Friend:
We’ve made significant progress in our pursuit of justice for Pastor Victor Fuentes and the Solid Rock Church.
As you know, NPRI’s lawsuit, filed by our Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation, seeks restoration of the church’s baptismal and recreational waters, declaratory and injunctive relief, takings compensation, and restitution from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for negligent actions by the agency that resulted in more than $86,000 in flood damage to the church’s property.
Last week, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada denied each and every attempt by the U.S. attorneys to dismiss all claims and all parties implicated by our suit.
This is an important and essential step forward in our suit and in our ongoing efforts to hold the federal government accountable for its actions.
As Joseph Becker, chief legal officer and director of CJCL, said, “We are gratified that the Court has rejected the government’s numerous motions to dismiss and is allowing our pursuit of justice for Pastor Fuentes to move forward. While the government is desperate to avoid accountability for its irresponsible and destructive actions, the time has now come for government and its officials to face the consequences of their actions.”
As a supporter of NPRI, I know you’re an ardent defender of individual liberty and property rights. We are grateful for your support, and through the Center for Justice we’ll continue to litigate when necessary to protect the fundamental rights of individuals as set forth in the state and federal constitutions.
More information about the case and NPRI’s Center for Justice and Constitutional Litigation can be found here:
http://www.npri.org/litigation/
The defendants’ Answer to our Complaint is expected by month’s end, and I’ll be sure to keep you posted.
Thank you for your ongoing support, which has enabled us to take this vital step toward justice.
Sincerely,
Andy Matthews
President
Read moreThree more days
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
Three more days
As followers of NPRI’s work know, we’ve devoted considerable effort in recent weeks to publicizing the fact that Nevada teachers have the option to leave their union if they wish to do so.
Regrettably, their chance to do so is limited. The timeframe and requirements for leaving the union vary slightly by county, but in just about all cases, this year’s window closes this coming Monday, July 15.
Last year, after NPRI took the lead in informing Clark County teachers of their choices regarding union membership, the Clark County Education Association saw its membership drop by more than 800 teachers. Union leaders, of course, howled, accusing us of “bashing teachers” and describing our efforts as “union busting at its finest.” And I personally received some emails from pro-union types that contained language not appropriate for reprinting here.
So naturally, this year, we’re at it again. Except this time, we’ve taken our campaign statewide.
It’s pretty telling that union leadership feels so threatened by the idea of their own members knowing their options. While the unions do so much to make it difficult for teachers to opt out, all we at NPRI have done is provide teachers with information. We want to empower teachers with the facts, and we think they ought to be trusted to make the decision that’s best for them. And to the union brass, this is offensive and dangerous.
Here’s something for these union leaders to ponder: Might your condescending attitude toward and infantilization of your own members be a contributing factor in why so many want to leave? Just a thought.
Regardless, the window to opt out does exist, and we’re continuing to highlight this fact right up until the end. And you can, too. If you know a teacher who’s a union member, forward this email along and help that teacher make the decision on union membership that’s best for him or her. The window is closing fast, but it’s not closed yet!
For convenience’s sake, included below are county-specific opt-out letters to help teachers through the process:
| School district | Yearly dues | Link to opt-out letter |
|---|---|---|
| Carson City | $618.60 | Link |
| Churchill County | $635.04 | Link* |
| Clark County | $773.88 | Link |
| Douglas County | $711.00 | Link* |
| Elko County | $624.00 | Link* |
| Esmeralda County | ** | Link* |
| Eureka County | $606.24 | Link* |
| Humboldt County | $577.44 | Link* |
| Lander County | $696.00 | Link |
| Lincoln County | $552.00 | Link* |
| Lyon County | $624.00 | Link |
| Mineral County | $300.00 | Link* |
| Nye County | $599.28 | Link |
| Pershing County | $628.44 | Link* |
| Storey County | $720.00 | Link |
| Washoe County | $710.76 (avg.) | Link |
| White Pine County | $600.00 | Link |
* letters must be sent to the school district and the union
** school district did not provide yearly dues amount by publishing deadline
Oh, by the way, a lot of you wrote to tell me that you really enjoyed last week’s column, in which I talked about the new additions to the NPRI family and how they’ve served as nice reminders of why the work we do at NPRI is so important. I want to thank you most sincerely for your kind words. I get a lot of email, so I’m not able to respond to all of it, but please know that your feedback is always appreciated.
Take care, and have a great weekend!
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
Why I do this
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
Why I do this
There are those moments in life that put everything into perspective. It can be a wedding, the death of a loved one, or even a good friend moving away. These moments serve as reminders of what’s really important. And for me, they are reminders of why I do what I do.
The NPRI family has grown in recent weeks. On June 18, Geoff Lawrence, our deputy policy director, and his wife, Jenna, were blessed with their first child, a baby boy. Carson Hayek Lawrence — now that’s a name for a think tank child — has been around barely two weeks, and already he has brought so much joy to his mom and dad.
Carson Hayek Lawrence
And the very next day, June 19, Karen Gray, our education researcher, welcomed her fourth grandchild and first grandson into the world. (I haven’t been able to confirm this, but I hear Parker is already preparing his first public-records request for the Clark County School District.)
Parker Gray Saunders
I spent this past weekend in Massachusetts with my parents, relaxing a bit, catching up and eating every kind of seafood you can think of, and I had some time to reflect on a whole lot of things. I thought back to the first days after Carson was born, when I had a chance to visit with Geoff and Jenna and hold their new baby boy myself. Moments like that have a unique way of crystallizing why it is that I do what I do for a living.
Those of us who work in public policy are attracted to this line of work for different reasons. Some of us love crunching numbers and poring over data. Others enjoy planning major projects and initiatives and strategizing on how to accomplish specific goals. And others are drawn to the opportunity to engage in the back and forth of the policy debates. That stuff is important and, yes, even fun.
But for me — and, I suspect, for most people who work in this field — the real motivation comes from something much deeper. What this is really about, when you get down to it, is improving lives. Or, better yet, it’s about helping to make sure people have the opportunity to improve their own lives and to pursue their own idea of happiness.
We don’t fight for better education policies just for the sake of winning political battles. We don’t try to create a sound tax structure for its own sake. We do these things because we understand that the outcomes of those policy debates have a real impact on people. We want Carson and Parker to grow up in a world full of opportunities. We want their parents to be able provide them with everything they need to get a good start on life.
We want to preserve our nation’s heritage as a land of opportunity, as a place where my parents and others like them were able to pursue their dreams and succeed or fail based on their own abilities and hard work. We want young couples like Geoff and Jenna to be able to do the same.
Sometimes it’s easy to forget all of that, when we’re caught up in the heated arguments over labor policy and pension reform. But it’s worth stopping and looking around once in a while, and remembering what — and who — really matters in life.
And remembering what it is that makes our cause such a worthy one.
Have a happy and safe Independence Day — and I’ll see you next time.
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
Wall Street Journal/Fox Business cover NPRI initiative
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
Wall Street Journal/Fox Business cover NPRI initiative
When it comes to NPRI: What happens in Nevada, doesn’t stay in Nevada.
That’s what we’ve seen this week with National Employee Freedom Week (NEFW), a national effort initiated by NPRI. We started NEFW in the aftermath of our campaign last year to let Clark County teachers know they could leave the Clark County Education Association by submitting written notice to their union from July 1 to 15.
You know what happened, but it’s worth repeating — after learning what their options were, more than 800 teachers left CCEA.
That got us thinking: If 800 teachers in one school district in one smaller state want to leave their union, how many other millions of union members around the country want to leave their union, but don’t know how or when to do so?
That’s why we created National Employee Freedom Week — a national campaign running from June 23 to 29 to let union workers know that they have the ability to leave their union, even in non-Right-to-Work states. Working with the Association of American Educators, we spearheaded the campaign, which has grown to 65 organizations in 37 states! The coalition includes groups like the Heritage Foundation, Americans for Prosperity and dozens of think tanks from around the country.
These groups have done an outstanding job of getting the message of employee freedom out across the nation, and I want to share with you just some of the coverage the campaign has received.
The Wall Street Journal covered NEFW, calling it “the brainchild of the Nevada Policy Research Institute.” National Review Online noted that “National Employee Freedom Week has high potential.”
NPRI’s Victor Joecks was even on Fox Business this morning discussing NEFW, which you can watch by clicking below.
National Employee Freedom Week spokesmen also discussed the week on Fox & Friends and Neil Cavuto’s show.
NPRI had an op-ed run in the Washington Times, and coalition partners wrote pieces on NEFW that ran in Forbes, Investor's Business Daily, The Hill, the Tennessean, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the Waterbury Republican American, the Chattanooga Times Free Press, the Tacoma News Tribune and Oklahoma City Oklahoman.
I could go on and on and mention that pieces also appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Oregonian and Fox News, but I think you get the idea.
National Employee Freedom Week and its 65 coalition partners took the nation by storm and let millions of workers know about their options to leave their unions.
To date, this is the biggest project NPRI’s ever undertaken, and it was phenomenally successful.
I couldn’t be more proud of our staff for their hard work on this, and I also want to thank our supporters. This campaign doesn’t happen without you, and I want you to know that your donations are not only making an impact here in Nevada, but also around the country.
Thank you, and we can’t wait to make this even bigger next year!
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
Know a teacher?
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
Know a teacher?
Do you have any friends in Nevada who are teachers? What are they doing right now?
Well, if they’re like most teachers, they’re resting and recovering from a long school year, with work-related thoughts far from their minds.
And that’s exactly what the teachers union is counting on. That’s because Nevada teachers are able to opt out of union membership — but only by submitting written notice between July 1 and 15. Union officials know that many teachers aren’t interested in spending between $600 and $773 a year to subsidize a union boss taking home over $625,000 a year or seeing the union spend their money on million-dollar political donations.
The union’s tools of choice are ignorance and inconvenience. If teachers don’t know they can leave or forget during the middle of summer vacation, teachers who want to leave will be forced to give union bosses several hundred dollars a year for as long as they teach.
This is where you come in.
We at NPRI are doing our best to let teachers know about this opportunity and provide generic opt-out letters, but you know teachers we don’t. Will you send them this article or forward them this email? Will you share this article, http://www.npri.org/issues/publication/teachers-throughout-nevada-can-drop-union-membership-between-july-1-and-july-15, on Facebook and Twitter to help spread the word?
Together, we can empower every teacher in Nevada with the information needed to make the decision about union membership that’s best for them. Generic opt-out letters for each school district are below.
| School district | Yearly dues | Link to opt-out letter |
|---|---|---|
| Carson City | $618.60 | Link |
| Churchill County | $635.04 | Link* |
| Clark County | $773.88 | Link |
| Douglas County | $711.00 | Link* |
| Elko County | $624.00 | Link* |
| Esmeralda County | ** | Link* |
| Eureka County | $606.24 | Link* |
| Humboldt County | $577.44 | Link* |
| Lander County | $696.00 | Link |
| Lincoln County | $552.00 | Link* |
| Lyon County | $624.00 | Link |
| Mineral County | $300.00 | Link* |
| Nye County | $599.28 | Link |
| Pershing County | $628.44 | Link* |
| Storey County | $720.00 | Link |
| Washoe County | ** | Link |
| White Pine County | $600.00 | Link |
* letters must be sent to the school district and the union
** school district did not provide yearly dues amount by publishing deadline
Also, I enjoyed seeing so many of you at NPRI’s Spring Celebration on Wednesday evening. It was great to see many long-time friends and supporters and be meet many new friends. Also, Cato President John Allison gave an excellent speech detailing the true causes of the financial crisis and America needs to embrace free-market policies to save our country.
Thank you also to all who provided feedback on their favorite free-market books. The most popular response was William F. Buckley’s classic God and Man at Yale.
Until next time,
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
Read a book
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
Read a book
With the legislative session behind us, we political and news junkies are feeling a bit of a void in our lives. (And if you think like I do, you’re probably also feeling a little nauseous over the results.)
But fear not, for I have the perfect solution: Find a good book. Books are engaging, they’re easily portable and, unlike the stuff you peruse online, the government hasn’t yet figured out how to spy on you while you read them … I don’t think.
Now, my suggestion would be that you pick up something on the lighter side — a good action thriller, perhaps — and take a break from the political and policy debates that so often consume your mind. But if you find yourself still needing that political/policy fix, there’s no shortage of superb choices for you to turn to this summer.
With that, here are my top five summer-reading recommendations for bookworms of a conservative/libertarian persuasion.
The Law by Frédéric Bastiat. Short, sweet and easy to digest, The Law makes a concise yet powerful case for limited government and individual liberty. If you know a burgeoning conservative who’s ready to start grounding his political instincts in a deeper and more coherent philosophical argument, this is the place to point him. And it’s also available for free online. Click here to read The Law.
The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich von Hayek. One of the greatest free-market economic thinkers in history, Hayek makes a convincing argument that big and intrusive government, particularly in economic affairs, leads inevitably to tyranny. He also dismantles the myth that socialism and fascism exist at opposite ends of the political spectrum, arguing instead that because of their shared roots in collectivism, they are, in reality, only slightly different variants of state control over the actions of individuals.
The Myth of the Robber Barons by Burton W. Folsom. Remember those stories you used to hear in grade school about the greedy capitalists who got rich at the expense of everyone else? Turns out the truth looks a lot different. Folsom offers a fresh look at the men who built the American business world, and distinguishes the rent seekers (who really are deserving of scorn) from the genuine market entrepreneurs (who ought instead to be appreciated, lauded and emulated).
The Conservative Mind by Russell Kirk. Credited by many as the book that kick-started the modern conservative movement in America, this Kirk classic serves as not only a brilliant articulation of conservative principles, but also an illuminating exploration of the giants of intellectual conservatism’s history, most notably Edmund Burke.
The Financial Crisis and the Free Market Cure by John A. Allison. All right, this one may be a little self-serving, since the author will be the keynote speaker at NPRI’s Spring Celebration in Reno next Wednesday. (Not registered yet? It’s not too late!) But hey, there’s a reason we chose him. Allison offers an incisive analysis of the real reasons behind America’s financial woes and, more importantly, shows how a return to sound, free-market principles is the remedy we need.
It goes without saying that this list overlooks a whole lot of very worthy selections. And you no doubt have your own favorite to recommend. So here’s what I’d like you to do: Email me with the one book you think no right-leaning reader can do without, and I’ll share the most popular selections next week.
As always, thanks for reading, and I’ll see you next time.
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
The not-so-special session
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
The not-so-special session
It had barely begun, and already the 27th Special Session of the Nevada Legislature was over. And just like the regular session that had unfolded over the previous 120 days, this week’s brief special session provided no reason to believe Nevada’s woes are going away anytime soon.
The most notable outcome of the special session was legislative authorization for a constitutionally dubious sales-tax increase in Clark County, which will take effect if and when the county commission passes it, with the additional revenues targeted for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department’s coffers.
The main takeaways — from your wallet — of the regular session? The extension of a series of “temporary” taxes that were supposed to expire in 2011 (and had already been extended once); legislative authorization for sales- and property-tax increases in Washoe County to fund school construction; the passing of an energy plan that will increase your power bill; and, overall, about a $300 million increase in general-fund spending for the next biennium.
Just as significant as what did happen is what did not. There were no meaningful reforms to our broken education system. Liberals killed three such reform efforts — proposals for a tax-credit scholarship program, a parent-trigger law and funding for the successful Teach for America program.
Nor was any legislation passed that would reform PERS or address the fiscal and economic problems stemming from Nevada’s prevailing-wage, construction-defect or minimum-wage laws. And no serious effort was made to remove the many regulatory barriers to job creation in Nevada.
In other words, there were things that could have been done that would have made a real difference for struggling Nevadans, but weren’t. What was done will not.
Does anyone think that raising sales and property taxes will help put more Nevadans back to work? Or that increasing spending on the same education system that has been failing for decades (even as spending has increased dramatically during that time) will do anything to improve student achievement?
Liberal ideas have failed Nevada and are continuing to harm students, taxpayers and business owners.
Yet those politicians who bill themselves as fiscal conservatives were, for the most part, content to allow the debate to be controlled by those who advocate for higher taxes and more government spending. Many supported raising taxes without insisting on the passage of proven, free-market reforms. A great case in point was Gov. Brian Sandoval’s decision to put the Clark County sales-tax hike on the special-session agenda, while leaving his tax-credit scholarship plan — an idea the governor himself had earlier claimed as a top priority — off.
The bottom line? The 2013 regular and special legislative sessions, on the issues of greatest importance to Nevadans, essentially upheld the status quo. And the status quo isn’t good enough.
Thanks for reading, and I’ll see you next time.
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
About that Buffett deal
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
About that Buffett deal
I like entrepreneurs.
Entrepreneurs are, more than anything, what make our economy work. They build businesses, create jobs and can accumulate wealth for themselves by improving the lives of countless people they’ll never even meet.
But entrepreneurship requires more than just a businessman or woman investing in a company. True entrepreneurship only exists when businesses compete for customers. Consumers then have the power to choose the winners and losers in the market place. That system is what we call free-market capitalism.
Unfortunately, that system, which is responsible for more prosperity than anything else ever conceived by mankind, often gets perverted. And what may look like free-market capitalism on its face is really something much different — and often destructive.
Enter Warren Buffett.
As the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports, the Buffett-owned MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co. has announced its plan to purchase NV Energy, the Nevada utility company, in a deal worth $10 billion. The move, quite predictably, is being hailed as a huge boost to the Silver State business climate.
Few business leaders are as admired as Buffett, and his decision to invest here puts Nevada’s corporate world on the map, said Robert Lind, managing partner of local investment brokerage Berkshire Bridge Capital, which is unrelated to Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway conglomerate.
“Anytime we get someone like Warren Buffett to acquire a Nevada company and not get rid of management, it raises the level of perceived sophistication that there are well-managed companies here,” Lind said. “This will shine a flashlight on Nevada for sure.”
Let’s consider for a moment that “decision to invest” in Nevada. In a free-market system, an investment entails both an opportunity to profit and a risk of loss. Warren Buffett has made many such investments over the course of his business career, and as his net worth suggests, he’s pretty skilled at differentiating the good investments from the bad ones.
But the NV Energy deal required no such talent. That’s because NV Energy is a government-protected monopoly, and as such is legally insulated from competition and enjoys a guaranteed customer base. If it is unable to satisfy those customers, or if it increases rates beyond what some would choose to pay, it’s at no risk of losing business, because the government has made competing with it illegal.
In other words, its risk of failure has been outlawed. That’s not how a free market works, and this deal is anything but an “investment” in the free market.
To be clear, this problem isn’t Warren Buffett’s fault. He’s not responsible for NV Energy’s monopoly status, and I’m not going to begrudge him for recognizing a no-risk, all-reward opportunity and pouncing on it. And if his association with Nevada ends up improving the state’s image, then that’s great.
But before we all start reacting to this news by behaving like teenyboppers at a Justin Bieber concert — Kelvin Atkinson, I’m looking at you — will we at least think this through?
Buffett wouldn’t have made this deal if he didn’t think he could make money off of it. Money comes to utility companies from the rates that consumers pay. And if you’re a government-protected monopoly, with profits guaranteed as a percentage of your costs, the way to make more money is to increase production costs.
Literally, utilities receive higher earnings by becoming less efficient — such as by constructing power plants that aren’t even needed. It’s true that this requires regulatory or legislative approval, but NV Energy has proven itself very adept when it comes to lobbying lawmakers to give the firm what it wants.
Indeed, the latest effort — in the form of Senate Bill 123 — is unfolding even as we speak. The bill allows NV Energy to stop using power plants that still have years of life on them just so the company has an excuse to build new ones. Similar legislation passed in Colorado is expected to increase electric rates there by 11 to 50 percent.
Does anyone think Warren Buffett will have more trouble than previous ownership in getting Nevada’s politicians to bend to his will? And does anyone think he’ll be less inclined to try?
When Buffett’s profits go up, we’ll all pay for them with higher rates. And unlike in a free market, we’ll have nowhere else to go.
If this deal really does, as Robert Lind predicts, “shine a flashlight on Nevada,” let’s hope people aren’t so starry-eyed that they miss what’s most important to see: the fundamental flaws in Nevada’s approach to energy policy.
Until next time,
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
Mikayla's story
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
Mikayla's story
Will spending more increase student achievement in Nevada?
That’s the working assumption of many Nevada legislators. For instance, after Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis dropped his attempt to raise Nevada’s job-killing payroll tax on Tuesday, Senate Democrats took to the floor to complain that Nevada doesn’t spend enough on education and hence legislators are “kicking the can down the road again.”
Now it’s easy to refute the idea that spending more will increase student achievement using numbers, and NPRI’s done so many times.
And while those numbers are essential, today I’d like to share a story with you from a mother named Patricia about her daughter, Mikayla. Her story demonstrates that changing who spends Nevada’s education dollars, instead of changing how much we spend, is the key to improving student achievement.
Patricia lives in Indiana, which began a Choice Scholarship Program in 2011. Here’s her family’s story in her own words:
The Choice Scholarship Program has affected my daughter, Mikayla, positively in every aspect of her life.
Have you heard the phrase, “What a difference a day makes?” I’m modifying that to, “What a difference the Choice Scholarship Program makes!”
Mikayla is in seventh grade this year at Trinity Lutheran School in Hobart. She has struggled both academically and behaviorally since about the fourth grade. Before the start of her sixth grade year, I checked out Trinity because I knew she (we) needed a different atmosphere. However, although I was very interested, the cost of tuition prevented me from even considering sending her there since my husband has been unemployed for two and a half years. So, I resigned and braced myself for her first year in middle school.
Only by the grace of God did we make it through last year. For her last term in sixth grade she was barely getting by academically. In contrast, on her October mid-term grades report from Trinity Lutheran, she received an A+, two As, one B+ and four Bs! When Mikayla brought home her grades, I could not stop looking at them. We even invited my sister over for the unveiling of her report card.
Not only has the voucher program affected her grades, but her whole attitude. Last year, Mikayla dreaded going to school. Now, she can’t wait to go to school; she even comments on the weekend that she wishes it were a school day.
Last year, Mikayla was bullied and didn’t want to be involved in any extracurricular school activities. This year, she jumped right in and played on the soccer team and is in the hand bell choir.
Our children are our future. How could anyone oppose changing the life of a child, a family and our world? Thank you to all who supported this program from the bottom of my heart!
Patricia Siroky
How many thousands of Mikaylas are there in Nevada’s public school system? Spending more won’t help them. Changing who spends the money will.
Have a great Memorial Day and thank you to our veterans and their families. We wouldn’t be here without your sacrifices.
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
Bad government!
Every week, NPRI President Andy Matthews writes a column for NPRI's week-in-review email. If you are not getting our emails, which contain our latest commentaries and news stories, you can sign up here to receive them.
Bad government!
Questions surrounding the spate of scandals now enveloping the White House have largely focused on what they tell us about the nature of the Obama administration. That is, is the administration guilty of mere incompetence or out-and-out corruption?
It’s a fine and appropriate question to ask. But to focus on it and it alone runs the risk of missing the most important lesson from these episodes.
In recent days, I’ve heard several observers say that the confluence of these scandals calls to mind the famous words of Lord Acton regarding the corrupting influence of power. Agreed. But that maxim, sage as it is, is a tad too abstract in this case.
Allow me instead to offer a recent comment from David Axelrod, President Obama’s longtime political advisor, who unwittingly (I assume) nailed the problem right on its head. Asked in particular about the IRS scandal — in which the nation’s tax-collecting agency brought enhanced scrutiny and, in some cases, outright harassment to bear upon conservative applicants for non-profit organizational status — Axelrod said this: “Part of being president is, there’s so much underneath you that you can’t know, because the government’s so vast.”
Well … yeah.
It was a pretty amazing moment, really. In one simple sentence, Axelrod managed to offer both a sincere defense of the president, and an incisive indictment of the ideology the president works to advance.
Think about it. Even under the most generous explanation for these scandals, what we have here is the chief executive of the federal government, as well as other top officials, having absolutely no idea what was going on throughout the government they run. The White House, the IRS, the DOJ — they claim everyone was utterly clueless as to what everyone else was doing. And again, that’s their best spin on these scandals.
But let’s be perfectly clear: The issue here runs much deeper than the competence level of a single presidential administration. What we’ve been treated to in the past few days is a compelling case — made by Axelrod in word and by the Obama administration in deed — for limited government. After all, since these kinds of abuses are simply natural outgrowths of having such a “vast” government, the only rational response is to make sure that government shrinks. The alternative — to simply live with the abuse — is unacceptable.
That is the real lesson here. And while I don’t expect Obama or Axelrod to learn it, I’m growing concerned that some who should, won’t.
As many others have already pointed out, one of the more frightening elements of the IRS scandal is the considerable set of new powers the agency is poised to receive under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. Under Obamacare, the IRS, as the health-care law’s enforcement agency, will be even more involved in citizens’ lives than it is already — and in some of the most intimate and personal parts.
Among those concerned about this is Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming. “These are the folks that are supposed to enforce the health care law,” the senator remarked at a press conference. “I can’t imagine the American people are going to be delighted with the misuse of power we’ve seen from the IRS and wanting to entrust them with their health care.”
Nor should they be. But the takeaway from this should not just be that the IRS is unfit to enforce PPACA, true as that may be. It’s that the government is unfit to be involved in health care — or any of the other myriad facets of our lives in which it has become inappropriately entrenched. The former line of thinking suggests we can cure the problem simply by reassigning the IRS’ Obamacare responsibilities to another federal agency. But if the IRS isn’t above abusing its power for partisan political purposes, why on Earth should we assume better of any other group of Washington bureaucrats?
Big government leads, naturally and necessarily, to abusive government.
Let’s hope the events of the past few days will serve to remind an all-too-complacent citizenry of that fact.
Thanks for reading, and I’ll see you next time.
Andy Matthews
NPRI President
Remember, if you'd like to receive the latest from NPRI, sign-up for our emails here.
