Outrageous Mortgage Foreclosure Settlement Rewards Irresponsible Homeowners

     Forty-nine of the American states (all except Oklahoma) recently accepted a settlement with five major banks for $25 billion of a lawsuit brought by the Obama Administration. The lawsuit was brought ostensibly to fix the problem of reckless mortgage foreclosures by the banks. 

     The banks violated the law with hasty paperwork, but few of the foreclosures were improper. However, the relief for those few homeowners who were improperly foreclosed upon is paltry – only $2,000. Much of the money from the deal is instead intended for people other than these true victims.

     The foreclosure deal includes much help for homeowners whose home values have dropped below the value of their mortgages. They will receive principal reductions. Other homeowners having difficulty making their payments will also receive help. Many of these homeowners lied about their creditworthiness or got in over their heads by borrowing money for homes much larger than needed. Most of these people were irresponsible homeowners. Therefore, this deal rewards cheating and irresponsibility. 

     Although this money from the mortgage deal is private, not public money, it was forced by government. The cost will be passed onto bank customers. The money supplants other Obama Administration aid to irresponsible homeowners. 

     The mortgage crisis was caused by federal government policies. Both the Carter and Clinton Administrations forced banks to make loans more widely available (i.e. to decrease the standard for creditworthiness) in order for more poor people, especially minorities, to own homes. The easy credit policies were exacerbated by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which had implied they were backed by the federal government, which had chartered them. Thus, more people bought homes who were not prepared for the financial responsibility. Some of these irresponsible homeowners were unable to keep up with the payments from the beginning, but when interest rates rose on mortgages, most of the rest also became unable to keep up with the payments. In turn, the real estate values dropped, trapping these homeowners “underwater,” as the loan (the mortgage) exceeded the value of the collateral (the home). 

     When the crisis occurred, liberals, who ignored repeated warnings by the Bush Administration about this problem, blamed the crisis they had created not only on Bush and the Republicans, but especially on the greed of the rich banks, as if the banks had forced all of their loans on the poor. Predictably, the liberals used the crisis to demonize bankers, blame the free market and seize more power for the federal government. Although there were certainly irresponsible and even predatory lending practices, greed and other abuses, this crisis was caused primarily by the distortion of the free market by government, as well as by the greed of the irresponsible borrowers to which government had appealed. 

     Responsible homeowners whose home values have dropped because of the mortgage foreclosure crisis but who are not underwater on their mortgages will receive no compensation for their loss.

     Many on both the left and populist right have criticized the bailouts of the banks. They argue that the money from the mortgage settlement essentially had been set aside by the banks from the bailout funds, which means that the banks do not need to pass along the costs to all customers, including responsible homeowners. The liberal argument in particular is that the banks received billions of dollars that they should not keep, but pass along the money to the struggling homeowners, including the irresponsible ones. I shall take this opportunity to refute some of the criticism of the bank bailouts. 

     As with other so-called “bailouts,” the federal money given to the banks was in the form of loans, not grants, much of which have been paid back with interest. The money was not necessarily sought by the banks. Indeed, some were forced to accept it. Moreover, the loans to the banks were necessary in order to make up for the considerable economic harm caused by federal policies. It was far more cost-effective to loan banks to prevent their collapse and the seizing up of credit than to bail out all bank deposits insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. In other words, the loans represented a “depositor bailout” more than a bank bailout, in addition to restoring credit for all who needed to borrow money. One can reasonably disagree with the policy of risking tax money in order to aid businesses, but my point is that a reasonable exception ought to be recognized when government creates the problem in the first place. 

     This mortgage foreclosure settlement is even more unfair and outrageous than the earlier Obama Administration programs that gave federal tax dollars to irresponsible homeowners – the same policy that sparked the Tea Party movement. I call upon conservatives to oppose more vociferously all unnecessary government intereference in the free market, especially those policies that reward irresponsibility and punish responsibility. 

Three-Year Blog Visit Report

     In the three years since StatCounter has been tracking hits to my blog, there have been nearly 4,400 visits, not including my own and strictly defining a visit as a pageview at least one hour after someone’s last pageview. Thank you for visiting my blog.

     Since my last report, there was a record 23 visits in one day on May 2, 2011. 

     In addition to Pennsylvania, there have been more than 100 visits each from California, New York, Texas, Florida and Ohio since StatCounter began tracking visits to my blog three years ago. There have been visits from all 50 American states and several territories. The most visits outside the United States over the three years came from Malaysia, Algeria, Canada, United Kingdom, India, Australia and Pakistan, which represents little change from the last report, ranging from just under 50 to over 200 visits apiece. There have been visits from over 100 foreign states and several other territories. 

     Interesting hits since my last report included visits from Mali and Vietnam, the United States Defense Department at West Point, the European Central Bank, the National League of Cities, the Spartanburg Herald Journal and the South African Broadcasting Corporation. As usual, there were visits from numerous other government entities, as well as schools and major businesses.

     Since my last report, the list of my blog’s most popular posts has changed. The Rise and Fall of Islamic Civilization continues to be the most popular, by far, with nearly 960 visits, but it is now followed by Commentary on the Roman Influence on America Exhibit at the National Constitution Center; then by The Economy, Deficit and Debt at George W. Bush’s Inauguration; both of which have been visited at least 280 times. Four other posts have been visited over 100 times: Misleading Media Phrases; Obama Did Not Inherit the Economy from Bush; Radicals in the Obama Administration and Follow-Up on the Rise and Fall of Islamic Civilization, followed closely by Lepanto, by GK Chesterton. 

     I shall continue to post of major milestones. 

     I am especially grateful to you repeat visitors to my blog. Please continue to visit regularly and to post comments. Thank you. I wish everyone a Happy Easter!

Pennsylvania Welcomes Home Veterans of the Vietnamese War

     Today, veterans of the Vietnamese War, which ended in 1975, were finally welcomed home officially in Pennsylvania.

     Ceremonies were held across the Commonwealth, including in Reading, to welcome home the veterans who were never officially celebrated as heroes and instead often faced hostility upon their arrival home after having served their country with honor in a noble cause for liberty.  The Pennsylvania General Assembly passed a resolution declaring March 30, 2012 as “Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day.”  Numerous state and federal elected officials participated in the events.  My father was among the Vietnamese War veterans who spoke at the ceremony in Reading at the Vietnamese War memorial in City Park.  The day was justly intended to right the wrong of the disrespect shown to the veterans of the unpopular war and to emphasize the necessity of supporting and honoring the troops, regardless of the popularity of their cause.

     Although the United States never lost a battle in the Vietnamese War, the Communist North Vietnamese took over the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam).  Nevertheless,    the war represented a campaign in the broader Cold War between the Communist Soviet Union and the U.S.  The American victory in the Cold War was partly gained by the Vietnamese War, despite the Communist takeover of South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, as it prevented further Communist advances and forced the Soviets to expend resources it could less afford to expend than the Americans.  The defeat of Soviet Communism liberated tens of millions of people around the world. 

     Let us continue to oppose tyranny and support liberty around the world, including in Communist Vietnam and Laos.  Let us never allow opposition to a war to be expressed as hostility to the soldiers tasked to fight it for their country.  I thank all the American and allied veterans of the Vietnamese War for their service to the cause of liberty.  Welcome, home Vietnamese War veterans.

Corbett Signs a Principled Natural Gas Impact Fee

     Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett, a Republican, recently signed the bill to impose an impact fee on natural gas drillers, thereby keeping his promise not to impose a tax on the industry in addition to the high state corporate taxes it already pays.

     As I have posted repeatedly, natural gas drillers do pay state business taxes in Pennsylvania, as well as various local government taxes, in addition to the increase in tax revenue the industry generates from landowners’ royalties and from employment and other economic activity. The push from the left to get the drillers to “pay taxes” implies otherwise. What the liberals meant is that they wanted to single out one industry to pay an additional tax, even though the industry is of enormous fiscal and economic benefit to the state. 

     A responsible impact fee differs from a tax because it is intended to offset the extra expenses generated by the industry subject to the fee, not simply to raise revenue like a tax. However, a small portion of the money from the natural gas impact fee will be diverted for other purposes, which arguably makes it a tax to that extent. Nevertheless, it generally maintains the principled practice of imposing mostly a fee, not a tax. 

     In addition, the new law eliminates the power of local governments to prohibit drilling. This provision is sound because natural gas drilling is a statewide interest while local concerns about the impacts are addressed by the new law. Counties and local municipalities benefit much from the industry because of increased local taxes and road improvements made by the drilling industry. Thus, the new law offsets the burdens of the industry from local government, while allowing it to keep the benefits.

     Meanwhile, all Pennsylvanians are benefiting not only from the extra tax revenue generated by the industry, but from lower electricity prices, in addition to those who are receiving lower natural gas bills. Thousands of Pennsylvanians are benefiting through employment by the industry or by the economic activity the presence of natural gas drillers generates. As natural gas burns more cleanly than coal, natural gas drilling is an environmentally safer method of electricity generation. The Commonwealth’s new impact fee and environmental regulation strike the proper balance between economic and environmental concerns. While Pennsylvania is benefiting from the Marcellus natural gas play, the new law lays the groundwork for the future drilling of the larger Utica play that underlies it.

Corbett Signs the Voter ID Requirement into Pennsylvania Law

     Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett, a Republican, signed a bill into law that requires all voters in the Commonwealth to present photographic identification in order for their votes to be counted. 

     Voters without ID may cast a provisional ballot and then present an ID within six days for their votes to be counted.  The Commonwealth will make obtaining photo IDs easy.  The law addresses widespread concerns about voter fraud. 

     Democrats opposed the bill, dismissing the concerns as exaggerated.  As someone involved in politics, I can confidently report, as I have posted before, that the problem of voter fraud is much more widespread than the number of cases that are successfully prosecuted.  I was victimized in a Democratic area by voter impersonation during my 2000 state legislative campaign, for example, and I have observed firsthand and become aware of numerous reports of irregularities of all kinds over the years.  Liberal Democrats are likely to run to court, as usual, to block the popular legislation that was publicly debated and duly passed, but a large majority of the U.S. Supreme Court has such laws constitutional.

     Reducing voter fraud prevents the dilution of honest votes, increases confidence in the outcome of elections and in the counting of the votes and restores the benefit of public accountability that popular elections in a representative republic are intended to produce.

Follow-Up on the Obama Administration’s Violation of Religious Liberty

     The “accommodation” offered by the Obama Administration on its mandate that employers provide their employees health insurance coverage for sterilization, contraception and abortifacients falls short of adequately protecting religious liberty.

     See my post from last month, The Obama Administration Plans to Violate Religious Liberty, http://www.williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2012/02/obama-administration-plans-to-violate.html.
 
     The accommodation no longer requires employers to pay directly for sterilization, contraception and abortifacients, but requires insurers to provide them free of charge, which means that their cost will be passed along in higher premiums. Thus, religiously-affiliated organizations (e.g. hospitals, charities, schools) would still be complicit in sterilization, contraception and abortion because their employees’ access to them would be by virtue of their employment. Also, religiously-affiliated organizations that self-insure would be required to provide them. Insurers who oppose sterilization, contraception and abortifacients would be required to provide coverage of them. Individual employers who oppose them for religious reasons would be required to provide the coverage. Those employers, including religiously-affiliated employers, who refuse would be levied heavy fines, which is tantamount to a tax on the free exercise of religion.

     Abortion and contraception are moral issues. Because religious doctrines require morality, religious objections to moral issues are therefore legally valid objections under the free exercise of religion. Religious liberty does not depend upon the whim of executive policy to make exemptions; freedom of religion is natural law that is guaranteed in the state and federal constitution, and enforced by legislation. 

     A pattern of hostility to freedom of religion has been discernible in the Obama Administration’s policies. It has favored the term “freedom of worship” over “freedom of religion.” The former expression refers narrowly to worshipping at a particular house of worship, while the more robust latter expression refers to the liberty to act publicly in accordance with one’s belief. The Obama Administration has denied licensing to Catholic charitable organizations for providing foster care for victims of human trafficking because of the Catholic Church’s opposition to placing children with same-sex couples. The Administration recently lost a case unanimously before the United States Supreme Court in which it tried to narrow the ministerial exemption which allows congregations to hire their own ministers. 

     There has been much misinformation in the debate about the Obama Administration mandate and the subject of contraception in particular. A few points are necessary to be made. Women who take prescribed contraceptives for certain health reasons are not necessarily contracepting. Pregnancy is not a disease; abortion is not healthcare. Providing “free” contraception to all women encourages sex outside of marriage. The objections of Catholics and Orthodox, however, are broader than that valid concern; they oppose artificial contraception in all instances because of their belief in the unitive and procreative purposes of the marital act. 

     Some of the misinformation on this controversy centers particularly on Catholics, who have been the most vociferous in their opposition to the mandate and who operate the most hospitals and schools of any religious denomination in the U.S. Contrary to some contentions, the Catholic Bishops opposed the federalization of health insurance bill signed into law by Obama in the first place. Indeed, during the debate over the plan by the Obama Administration and the liberal Democratic majority in Congress to federalize health insurance, the fear expressed by the plan’s opponents that it would lead to mandated insurance coverage of abortion has turned out to be well founded, as some contraceptives work in a number of ways, including the inducement of abortions (i.e. they are abortifacients). Also, there have been exaggerations about how many Catholics contracept. Regardless of the number, the point is that those devout Catholics or Orthodox who oppose contraception cannot be made to subsidize it without violating their religious liberty. 

     As I have continued to note, the issue of the contraception mandate is part of a broader issue of the general mandate by government to provide health insurance. Such a mandate from the federal government violates the Commerce Clause, which allows it only to regulate interstate commerce, not commerce within states – let alone decisions not to engage in commerce. It thereby violates the principle of federalism established by the Founding Fathers. Although it is right that Catholics and Orthodox oppose the contraception mandate, together with a great many others who are sympathetic to them because of the clear violation of religious liberty, Catholics should also oppose the general mandate and the federalization of health insurance on the grounds that it violates the principle of subsidiarity, in which it is held that local authorities are best suited to handle matters of local concern, such as providing health care for members of one’s family or community. The contraception mandate is exposing the dangers of the centralization of power. It is only one of many such regulations to come should the federalization of health insurance not be overturned or repealed.

Elections in Authoritarian Russia and Iran Produce Similar Results

     Although there were some key differences, the elections in both Russia and Iran were remarkably similar. Predictably, the authoritarian regimes in both states won. 

     In Russia, Vladimir Putin was returned to the office of the presidency. He had remained the power behind the Premier in the meantime. His election followed a recent parliamentary election in which his allies easily won. Both elections were characterized by state control of the media, limits on freedom of assembly and intimidation of opponents, which created an atmosphere of little competition, except mostly from fringe candidates. Both elections were also marred by widespread fraud. The parliamentary elections produced the largest public protests of Putin’s regime. The Russian people would have to rise up much more forcefully after the presidential election in order to effect real change in Russian government. 

     In the parliamentary elections in Iran, the hard-line theocratic forces defeated an attempt by the President to gain independence from the mullahs. Those opposed to the theocracy, and increasingly even moderates, are barred even from running for office. The elections suggest that the Islamic Republic’s crackdown on dissent has been unusually effective. There were fewer allegations of fraud this time because there was less competition tolerated.

     Iran’s regime is similar to Communist regimes. The mullahs, like Communist Party officials, are the real powers, despite elections for civil officials. The officials owe their allegiance to the mullahs in Iran, just as they do the Communist Party in Communist states. Communist Putin’s authoritarian regime is also reminiscent of Communist regimes, but it is less overt, as it maintains more of a façade of democracy. The freedoms of religion and speech are somewhat tolerated, but not of assembly or press, while the rule of law is arbitrary. There is no question, however, that both Russia and Iran are dictatorships, to one degree or another. Therefore, these periodic elections are not likely to liberate the Russian and Iranian people until these peoples are able to bring much greater pressure on their governments for freedom.

Unintended Obama Economic Stimulus: Increased Gun Sales

     There was another report of increased gun sales because of United States President Barak Obama. This time, the reason is the fear of his reelection. Obama is hostile to the right to keep and bear arms. 

     I had posted about an increase in the sale of arms early in Obama’s Administration, in October of 2009 in my post, Two Unintended Positive Consequences of Obama’s Policies, http://williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2009/10/two-positive-unintended-consequences-of.html. I was right that the increase in gun sales is one of the few areas in which Obama has successfully stimulated the economy.

Rep. Frank Wolfe Proposes to Restore February 22 as a Federal Holiday for Washington's Birthday

    
     United States Representative Frank Wolfe (R-VA) has proposed to restore George Washington’s Birthday as a federal holiday on February 22 to replace the diluted Presidents’ Day holiday.

     “Presidents’ Day” – an unofficial name for the federal holiday originally intended to honor Washington – never falls on February 22, Washington’s birthday, but is instead celebrated on the third Monday in February.  In 1971, Congress changed several holidays to Mondays, including Washington’s Birthday.  Wolfe cited the historical precedent of the return of Veterans’ Day from a Monday to November 11, the date of Armistice Day, the date commemorating the end of the First World War.

     Wolfe expressed concern that the loss of a day honoring the Father of our country contributes to the lack of historical education among American youth today and also relegates the day as a three-day weekend most noted for commercial sales. He notes that Washington is the only president intended to be honored with a federal holiday and that the date was celebrated in Washington’s lifetime – even before the creation of the presidency.  Wolfe’s proposal, which is supported by the Mount Vernon Association, would honor Washington not only as the greatest American president, but as a soldier and statesman.  

     I have expressed concerns similar to those raised by Wolfe.  See my posts, Presidents’ Day vs. Washington’s Birthday http://www.williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2009/02/presidents-day-vs-washingtons-birthday.html from February of 2009 and Eliminate the Presidents’ Day Holiday http://www.williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2010/02/eliminate-presidents-day-holiday.html from February of 2010.  I note that the day is intended to honor Washington for all his contributions to America, not only his presidency.  I also observe that currently the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is the only American honored with a holiday on his birthday (although also celebrated on a Monday, the date can fall on King’s birthday), but not America’s greatest Founding Father. 

     See also my post from February of 2009, George Washington the Great http://www.williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2009/02/george-washington-great.html.

     I urge my fellow conservatives to join me in support of Wolfe’s proposal to restore Washington’s Birthday as a federal holiday on February 22, not only because George Washington uniquely deserves a holiday, but to educate all Americans about his greatness and the legacy he has left us, for which we should be most grateful and most vigilant to maintain.

Peru Gains a Victory in the War on Terrorism

     Peru has captured the leader of the Shining Path, the vicious Marxist narco-terrorists responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people. He was wanted by both Peru and the United States.

     The Maoist Shining Path is infamous for its brutality. Its leader, who was wounded during his capture, led one of two small separate remaining bands of the once sizable force that had been dealt a heavy blow twenty years ago with the killing of its first leader. It has still been responsible nevetheless for the deaths of 20-30 people per year. It is hoped that this capture will end the cause of establishing a socialist state that its leader admitted is impossible. The Peruvian government has been making gains against the rebels, as has Colombia against its Marxist terrorists who, like the Shining Path, also derive their income from the illegal production and sale of narcotics. 

     I congratulate Peru for its successful contribution to the War on Terrorism and the fight against the scourge of drugs.

European Monetary Union Update: Greece Passes Another Austerity Plan

    The Greek Parliament approved another harsh austerity plan in order to receive the latest tranche of bailout money from the European Monetary Union, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund to avoid default on its sovereign debt or having to leave the eurozone.

     Debt-ridden Greece's creditors had demanded it approve the plan in order to receive over $170 billion in bailout loans because the Greeks had failed to implement fully the necessary spending cuts after receiving the first tranche of $145 billion.  The latest Greek austerity package saves an additional $5 billion in spending by sharply cutting the minimum wage and pensions and eliminating tens of thousand of public sector jobs, among other cuts.  The austerity plan will also facilitate a separate deal with Greece's bondholders to write off a large percentage of Greece's tens of billions of dollars of sovereign debt.

     The austerity program had been approved by Greece's caretaker national unity government led by Lucas Papademos, meaning that it was approved by most of the main parties, including both the socialists and conservatives.  Only one smaller party in the coalition opposed the measure, although some members of the two major parties also did.  Cabinet members who opposed it were fired and members of parliament who voted against it were expelled.  Both major parties have agreed in writing to implement the program, regardless of which one wins snap elections in April, as demanded by the European creditors, who will only release the money once the plan is implemented. The measure still passed easily, despite violent popular opposition. 

     Papademos had identified overspending as the cause of the debt.  In opposition to further spending cuts, Greeks have been rioting and striking, which not only harms the economy that has been mired in a deep recession that is unlikely to end in the forseeable future and thereby adds to the public debt, but undermines investor confidence in Greece.  Although the riots have been particularly violent in Greece, the same phenomenon has hampered the efforts of other European governments to reduce debt.  Europeans, especially Greeks, had become so accustomed to government largess that they fail to recognize that the benefits to which they were encouraged to feel entitled were the cause of the debt, for which they rightfully must share the burden, as I have noted before.  I also understand, as previously noted, the Greek loss of sovereignty, as Greeks feel as though they are being dictated to by Europeans, especially Germans.  The Greek national unity government deserves praise for recognizing that it had to approve the harsh, unpopular measures, lest even greater ills befall the country.   

     I also note the uncertainty over the passage of the plan affected the markets adversely, as has the passage of every new plan by every government in the eurozone affected by the sovereign debt crisis, even though the governments have majorities to approve the plans in parliament.  Although the uncertainty is partly understandable because of popular opposition, I cannot help but suspect, as Italians did during Silvio Berlusconi's premiership, that speculators benefit from market fluctuations based upon exaggerated fear.  These uncertainties result in higher interest rates on sovereign debt, for example, which make it even more difficult for governments to afford to service their debt.  There ought to be some confidence that these governments will continue to act responsibility, despite the political challenge, which would be beneficial for all.  It would help if people refrain from violence and strikes.  If anyone takes to the streets to demonstrate peacefully, it should be the supporters of the governments to give them, their creditors and the markets the confidence they need during this crisis.

American Casualties of Jihad in the U.S. Homeland Should be Awarded Purple Hearts

     Some members of Congress have proposed that United States servicemen who were killed or wounded in jihadist attacks by militant Islamists in the American homeland should be awarded Purple Heart medals as casualties in the War on Terrorism. The medal is given to casualties of hostile action, including “terrorist attacks.” The Obama Administration opposes the proposal. 

     President Barak Obama has declined to award the soldiers Purple Hearts because, for political reasons, the Administration does not want to acknowledge the incidents as hostile action by the enemy, either as acts of terrorism or even as acts of jihad, as if the murders were workplace incidents. 

     Specifically, the incidents in question are the Ft. Hood, Texas massacre that killed twelve servicemen and one civilian and wounded 30 other American servicemen and civilians and the killing of a servicemen and wounding of another in Arkansas at a military recruiting station. Both attacks were in 2009 and were carried out by Islamists who admitted to have been motivated by jihad, Islamic holy war. 

     As I have posted several times, terrorism is the targeting of violence against innocent civilians in order to intimidate the populace into giving into the demands of the terrorists. Therefore, attacks against the military are not “terrorist attacks.” They are, however, hostile action in the War on Terrorism because they are militant acts of war by the same enemy as the terrorists and motivated by exactly the same ideology of Islamism, i.e. militant Islam that wages violent, aggressive jihad against “infidels” in order to make them submit. The War on Terrorism is a war not only on the tactic of terrorism employed by the Islamists, but on the Islamism that motivates it. It does not matter whether or not the perpetrators are American citizens or were working with foreign terrorist organizations. The perpetrator of the Ft. Hood massacre was motivated by the leader of al-Qaeda in Yemen, but it does not matter where geographically the source of his Islamist beliefs came. Thus, the distinction about whether or not these acts were “terrorist” is irrelevant. A jihadist is an enemy in the War on Terrorism when he engages in hostile action against American soldiers, which meets the definition for the awarding of the Purple Hearts to the casualties of his attacks. These soldiers in Ft. Hood and Arkansas were killed or wounded in the War on Terrorism. Indeed, some of the Ft. Hood victims were targeted by the jihadist because they were about to deploy overseas in the War.

     The Obama Administration is unwilling to identify the enemy as militant Islamists because it is afraid of blaming a religious motivation for violent jihad. Because the Administration’s position is that Islam itself is not the ideological source of terrorism, it is unable or unwilling to ascribe Islamism as the source, despite militant Islam’s obvious religious origin. The Administration and its liberal supporters maintain that Islamism is an Islamic heresy, as if the Obama Administration is the human authority for what is the true interpretation of Islam, which ignores the self-described Islamic orthodoxy of Islamists. The Administration and its liberal supporters do not recognize that it does not matter whether or not Islamism represents true Islam, but only that Islamism comes from Islam. Therefore, the Administration is incapable of differentiating between Islam in general and Islamism in particular, and between Islamic jihad that is purely spiritual and peaceful and that which is violent. It has thus gone to such a degree as falsely to deny any religious motivation whatsoever for admitted acts of jihad and, as a result, to decline the proper awarding of Purple Hearts to its victims, as if the Obama Administration has the power to deny the truth and rewrite history.

     The Obama Administration’s failure to identify the enemy and his motivations makes victory in the War more difficult to achieve because it is impossible to defeat an enemy that cannot be distinguished, as I have noted repeatedly.

     Conservatives should continue to call upon Congress to pass a bill to award Purple hearts to the casualties of these attacks by the militant Islamist enemy in the War on Terrorism in the American homeland.

The U.S. Navy Should Name a Ship for Rep. Leo J. Ryan

     The United States Navy recently announced that it was naming a ship, a littoral combat ship, after former U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona. As I noted in my post in January Commentary on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' Resignation, http://www.williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2012/01/commentary-on-rep-gabrielle-giffords.html, she resigned from Congress last month in order to focus on her recovery from an attempted assassination attempt. An apparently insane gunman shot Giffords at a meeting with constituents, killing and wounding several others.  In that post, I expressed for the second time my hope that she recovers fully, noting that the shooting was an attack on representative government, even if by a madman.

     Individuals honored by having ships named for them usually have some connection to the Navy, either having served in it or in its civilian command, or having supported it significantly in Congress.  Giffords' husband is a Naval aviator who was also a Space Shuttle pilot.  The Navy customarily does not name ships after people who are still living.  The only exceptions in the last century and a half have been for individuals advanced in age.  Giffords, 41, expressed her hope to recover fully and return to Congress.  Because I hope that Giffords recovers fully and is able to return to public life, either in Congress or in some other capacity, I regard this high honor as premature and based upon an insufficient connection to the Navy.  In the meantime, I do believe that the federal government should honor her in some other significant way for her bravery for continuing to serve in Congress after her would-be assassination.

     Rep. Leo J. Ryan (D-CA) was the only member of Congress killed in the line of duty. He had served in the U.S. Navy during the Second World War and afterward as a submariner.  Ryan was assassinated in 1978 in Guyana by members of the Peoples Temple, led by Rev. Jim Jones, formerly of Ryan’s district. Jones and over 900 of his expatriate American followers in Jonestown committed mass suicide or were murdered immediately thereafter. Ryan was personally investigating reports that members of the cult were not free to leave. He was successfully facilitating the release of some of the members at the time of his murder.

     Ryan has been honored by the federal government in a number of ways, but if a Congressman who were wounded in an assassination attempt is honored by having a ship named for her, then one who was killed ought to be honored similarly, at least, especially one who was a Navy veteran.  A U.S. Navy submarine should be named the U.S.S. Leo J. Ryan.

Foreign Digest: Cambodia, Haiti, Falkland Islands, Iran and Syria

     I commend Cambodia for convicting and sentencing to life imprisonment the chief jailer of the Khmer Rhouge for his atrocities when that regime held power in the 1970s. His crimes against humanity included the torture and murder of hundreds of thousands, including political dissidents and innocent people, who were among the many killed by the Cambodian Communist dictatorship.

     I commend Haiti’s decision to put former dictator Jean Claude Duvalier on trial. I had praised Haiti for arresting him upon his return in my post in last February, Foreign Digest: Haiti, Portugal, European Union http://williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2011/02/foreign-digest-haiti-portugal-european.html.

     I urge Argentina’s left-wing government to tone down its imperialist rhetoric in regard to the Falkland Islands. The rhetoric between Argentina and the United Kingdom has heated up as the thirtieth anniversary of the Falklands War approaches. The British colony, inhabited only by loyal Britons, was invaded by Argentina’s military dictatorship in 1982, but the British took back the islands and maintain a force there to defend it. The formidable British Royal Navy is sending its most lethal ship to the Falklands. 

     I am pleased that more international sanctions are being placed on Iran by the United States, Europe and others, but disappointed in Russia and China for vetoing a United Nations Security Council Resolution calling for Bashar Assad, the dictator of Iran’s ally, Syria, to resign. Syria has been cracking down on dissent in the indiscriminately violent style of the late Libyan dictator, Muammar Qaddafi, who was killed last year by Libyan rebels backed by NATO. The U.S. is leading the just effort to put international pressure on Syria to relent on its crackdown and allow the self-determination of the Syrian people. Assad is following the policies of his father, the previous dictator, who killed tens of thousands of people in 1982 by shelling Homs with tank artillery when the citizens of that city, among others, rebelled against his tyranny.

Italian Fiscal and Economic Progress

     Italy’s fiscal and economic reforms are paying off in a number of areas, which is reflecting increased investor confidence. 

     The Italian stock market has risen, while the yield on Italian bonds has dropped significantly and the spread between the price of Italian and German bonds has decreased sharply. The yield has dropped below the critical 7% level to nearly 5.5%, while the spread dropped from the critical 500 basis points over the price of German bunds to well below 400. These decreases will ease the Italian debt service.  When sovereign debt of other states in the European Union reached those critical levels, they were forced to seek a bailout.  Italy has been the only one to escape such a fate after hitting those levels.

     Meanwhile it was reported by ANSA that millions of euros have been collected since last year, when the Berlusconi government introduced measures to crack down on tax cheating. According to the Italian news agency, efforts to match income to tax reports have borne fruit, while Italy is also cooperating better with Switzerland in reducing tax havens. The Monti government is increasing the efforts, ANSA reports. 

     The Italian Parliament has approved a measure to prevent a scheduled large increase in Members’ pay, according to ANSA. Italy’s large parliament is among the highest paid in Europe, ANSA reports. The measure follows the lead of Premier Mario Monti, who is giving up all of his pay, during this period of austerity. 

     ANSA also reported that Fiat turned a profit of more than a billion and a half dollars, thanks to Chrysler, which earned a its first full-year profit since 1997, despite repaying the American and Canadian governments several hundred millions of dollars in loans six years early. 

     Italy’s progress is continuing to win praise across Europe. It is refocusing attention on Greece, as people are gaining confidence that Italy, the European Monetary Union’s firewall against debt contagion, will hold, despite fears of a Greek default.

The Obama Administration Plans to Violate Religious Liberty

     The Obama Administration, in implementing its plan to federalize health insurance, is requiring all health-care providers to include sterilization, contraception and abortion-inducing “contraception” in their health insurance coverage for their employees. In an unusual move, it has also decided not to allow conscientious objection for religious healthcare providers who morally oppose these practices and object to being made to pay for them. 

     Catholics, who invented hospitals in the Middle Ages, comprise over a quarter of the population of the United States. Catholic hospitals are the largest provider of healthcare in the U.S., as caring for the sick is part of Catholic belief. The only exemption to the regulation requiring insurance coverage for contraception the Administration is offering Catholic hospitals, under a narrow interpretation of religious liberty, would be if the hospitals provided care only for Catholics. The Catholic Bishops have made it clear, however, that even this exemption would violate Catholics’ religious beliefs which require them to care for all people, not only fellow Catholics. The American Catholic Bishops have objected vociferously to the Administration’s proposed regulation, citing religious liberty under the First Amendment to the Constitution, as the practices Catholic hospitals would be required to administer violate its moral and religious teaching. They cite the “unjust law” doctrine in declaring their refusal to comply with the regulation, unless it is repealed or amended to allow an exemption for religious liberty.

     I have noted that employers are not required to provide health insurance for their employees. The practice of providing this benefit was a circumvention of World War II-era wage controls. In response to the generosity of employers in providing this benefit – a form of non-cash compensation that employees receive tax-free – the liberal Democratic Congress and the Administration criticized employers who chose to pay their employees higher wages instead of providing the benefit and required all employers to provide health insurance, thereby overriding the right of employers and employees to bargain. Catholic hospitals are considering dropping health insurance coverage for their employees in response to the Administration’s regulation. However, they would then be liable for financial penalties. Thus, they are essentially being forced to provide the service. At the least, their economic freedom to offer a benefit to their employees would be violated because of the underlying violation of religious liberty.

     Although most of the media’s focus has understandably been on Catholics, the Becket Fund has taken up the civil cases of two colleges, including a non-Catholic Christian one, against the requirement to provide abortifacients in health insurance. The Eastern Orthodox and some Anglicans share Catholics’ opposition to contraception, but all Protestants had changed their minds on the matter by 1930. However, some contraceptives induce abortions by killing the embryo (i.e. after contraception) prior to implantation. This distinction is of critical importance to understand, as some in the anti-life side try to blur the line between contraception and abortion by redefining conception by some arbitrary later point (e.g implantation) in order to avoid acknowledging that many so-called “contraceptives” are not truly contraceptives, but abortifacients. As many Protestants oppose abortion, they also object to the Obama Administration’s proposed regulation, in addition to sympathizing with Catholics’ case for religious liberty. 

     Conservatives of all religious belief, including those with none, must stand in favor of religious liberty and against the Obama Administration’s proposal to violate the religious beliefs of Americans. We must continue to oppose the federalization of health insurance and resist all such attempts at imposing a government-run system of health insurance or health care, whether by direct control (socialism) or indirect control (fascism). We must stand for both civil liberty and the free market.

Designate Venezuela a State Sponsor of Terrorism

     In my post in August of 2010, 2,000 Visits to My Blog, http://williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2010/08/2000-visits-to-my-blog.html, I mentioned a bill sponsored by United States Representative Connie Mack (R-FL) to require the State Department to designate Venezuela a state sponsor of terrorism. Current congressional hearings have given new weight to his cause.

     In addition to Venezuela’s support for the Marxist narcoterrorists, FARC (The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), the regime of dictator Hugo Chavez supports the leftist Basque separatists, the ETA, a recognized terrorist organization, and its banks provide financial safe harbor to Iranian-sponsored terrorist organizations, such as Hezbollah, which has been expanding its influence in the Western Hemisphere. 

     Designation as a state sponsor of terrorism by the State Department triggers a set of harsh sanctions and restrictions on the regime. Currently, Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria are the only states on the list. Chavez, who admires Cuba’s Fidel Castro, has become a central figure in the Axis of Rogues I mentioned previously. He has established particularly warm relations with Iran, among other rogue states, and has attempted to spread his Marxist revolution throughout Latin America. Designating his regime as a terrorist sponsor would call attention to the threat he poses to liberty in the Western Hemisphere and help keep him in check by denying him the oil revenue he earns from Americans to fund his sinister machinations. 

Another Reason Holder Must Resign or Be Removed from Office

     In my post last month, U.S. Attorney General Holder Must Resign or Be Removed from Office, http://www.williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2011/12/us-attorney-general-holder-must-resign.html, I listed several reasons why United States Attorney General Eric Holder must no longer hold his office. One of the reasons mentioned was his failure to prosecute the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation because the defendants were black and his office’s policy was only to prosecute whites for voter intimidation against certain protected minorities. An additional reason Holder must resign or be fired or impeached proves that the Black Panther case is part of a larger pattern of ignoring election improprieties that benefit Democrats. 

     Holder, in an effort to oppose state laws requiring voter identification, recently was reported to have described voter fraud as “uncommon.” His excuse is that such laws against fraud make it more difficult to exercise the privilege to vote, but what he really means is that such laws make it more difficult for Democrats to cheat.

     Voter fraud, as those of us involved in politics know, is more widespread than many people realize. Although there have only been a few prosecutions against public officials in several states (all against Democrats and their allies), these are sufficient to undermine voter confidence in the results of elections, let alone in the accurate enumeration of the vote totals. As many people have observed, a fraudulent vote negates a legitimate vote; voter fraud dilutes honest voting. Holder’s citation of the statistics of relatively few successful prosecutions ignores the facts that voter fraud is often not aggressively prosecuted, if the perpetrators even get caught in the first place.

     The key is to prevent voter fraud – in a manner that does not disenfranchise honest voters. With improvements in technology and the upholding of state laws requiring voter identification by the U.S. Supreme Court, the old Democratic excuse that laws against voter fraud are targeted against blacks, and thus Democrats, is loosing its effectiveness.

     The Attorney General is charged with the responsibility of enforcing laws, including federal election laws, which the integrity of which is essential for representative government. Eric Holder’s refusal to enforce these laws for partisan reasons disqualifies him from continuing to serve in office.

Oscar Luigi Scalfaro, Rest in Peace

     Oscar Luigi Scalfaro, former President of Italy who helped draft its republican constitution and who was one of the founders of its most dominant political party, died today at the age of 93 in Rome, Italy.

     Scalfaro, a devout Catholic from Novara, earned a law degree from the Catholic University of Milan. During the Second World War, he aided the families of imprisoned anti-fascists. Scalfaro won a seat in the national assembly in 1946.

     When the monarchy was abolished by popular vote the following year, Scalfaro helped draft the new Italian Republic’s constitution. He was known for his adherence to constitutional principles, especially the independence of the judiciary.

     Scalfaro was one of the founders of the Christian Democratic Party, which dominated Italian politics until the 1990s. The party is credited with preventing Italy from electing Communists to power. During its rule, Italy also became known for its economic growth, despite its political instability.

     Scalfaro was elected to Parliament in 1948 and served in a number of high posts, including the Cabinet, until becoming President in 1992. He served as President until 1999, whereupon he became a Life Senator.

     In the liberal media’s (e.g. the Associated Press) reporting on the death of Scalfaro, it characterizes the office of Italian president as “largely ceremonial,” although it contradicts itself by reporting Scalfaro’s critical role in changing governments in the 1990s. The Italian president is the head of state while the prime minister is the head of government. However, the president of the Italian Republic is not like a constitutional monarch who holds great power but defers almost entirely to the prime minister. While the Italian prime minister exercises most powers, the Italian president must also exercise significant powers, although his role is mostly advisory. An Italian president’s patriotism, character and experience earn him the requisite respect to carry out his duty. Current Italian President Giorgio Napolitano praised Scalfaro for his performance in office. 

     May Scalfaro’s example inspire Italians and others to continue to adhere to republican principles guided by their Christian faith.

Pro-Life Progress in American States and Europe

     At the start of the 40th year since the infamous Roe v. Wade decision by the United States Supreme Court that overturned state laws against abortion, there is some good news to report in both the American states and in Europe.

     The number of state laws approved in 2011 restricting abortion more than doubled, according to Americans United for Life. The group declared Louisiana the most pro-life state in the Union, followed closely by Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Nebraska and Arkansas. Pennsylvania was the only northeastern state in the top half. I had posted last month in Corbett Signs Several Bills into Law in Corbett Signs Several Bills into Law, http://williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2011/12/corbett-signs-several-bills-into-law.html, on the approval of a law regulating abortion facilities like other surgical centers. The Keystone State, where the number of abortions performed continues to decline, is now considering a law requiring people seeking abortions to view ultrasounds of their fetuses before receiving an abortion, as other states require, for informed consent. 

     The 47-member Council of Europe declared euthanasia always to be prohibited, according to the Conservative News Service. Calling abuses violations of human rights, the body ruled against all forms of drug-induced homicide or suicide, as well as the removal of feeding tubes, CNS reports. The Council urged the right to life to be respected always whenever there was a doubt, according to CNS. Member states with weak protections of the right to life, such as Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg and Switzerland, are urged to review their laws in order to comply with the ruling, CNS reports. Member states elect members of the Council’s parliament.

Commentary on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' Resignation

 
     United States Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) resigned from the House of Representatives yesterday in order to focus on her recovery from an attempted assassination attempt a year ago.

     Giffords' moving letter of resignation was read to the House, as she still suffers from a speech impediment after being shot in the head, and presented to Speaker John Boehner at the rostrum.  In the letter, she expressed her desire to seek election to the House upon her recovery.  Giffords received a standing ovation from the members of both parties.

     Alas, the resignation effectuates the intent of the would-be-assassin by removing her from Congress.  However, Rep. Giffords, was at least able to return to the House for several months and, as her recovery gradually progresses, she may yet again.  If she does, Americans will again cheer her, as her personal victory over her wounds would also be a triumph of representative government over unnecessary political violence.

Joe Paterno, Rest in Peace

     Joseph Vincent Paterno died today at the age of 85 in State College, Pennsylvania.  The winningest Division I college football coach in history was also famous as a supporter of academics.

     Paterno was born in 1926 in Brooklyn, New York into an Italian-American family.  He served in the Army during the Second World War and graduated from Brown University in 1950. 

     Pennsylvania State University named Paterno its Assistant Football Coach that year, where his former college coach was Head Coach.  Paterno succeeded him as Head Coach in 1966, winning 409 games over the course of his career, including many bowl games and winning two national championships (1982 and 1986) for the Penn State Nittany Lions.  He holds numerous coaching records and won many awards.

     Paterno was known for promoting academics, insisting that his athletes do well in school.  The successful results of his efforts have been measured.  Paterno's legacy across the United States in this regard alone has been enormous, as he became a model for what is expected of athletic coaches.  I can attest, for example, as a former School Director, that I voted to hire coaches in the Joe Paterno mold. 

     Paterno strongly supported philanthropic efforts, particularly ones that supported academics at Penn State.  He was a conservative who delivered a speech on behalf of his friend, George H.W. Bush at the 1988 Republican National Convention.  Paterno also spoke at an event during the Columbus Quincentenary in 1992 in Reading, Pennsylvania, which held one of the largest celebrations in the United States.  He reflected on his pride in his Italian heritage and the values it gave him.

     Despite his great professional and personal record, Paterno was dismissed as Penn State Head Coach in 2011, although he remained a professor at the school, because of an alleged child molestation incident involving a former assistant coach and a minor above the age of reason in 2002, which was one incident among a larger scandal involving that assistant coach.  Paterno was told of the incident (i.e. hearsay), although not of a specific crime, which he nevertheless relayed to campus officials, including one in charge of the campus police.  Those officials failed to follow through adequately.  The State Attorney General's office declared that the Penn State Head Coach had acted in accordance with the law.  Nevertheless, the University's Board of Trustees relieved him as Head Coach, in part because of its concern that he would no longer be able to perform his duties effectively because of the scandal. 

     Paterno's reputation has been sullied unfairly by those who misrepresent the significance of the scandal.  People have a duty to report a crime (i.e. if they are witnesses), but not hearsay (what someone else says he witnessed), especially if what one hears does not specify any crime.  We are not responsible for the failure of officials to perform their duties, as we are not expected to follow up with them.  Otherwise, a much higher standard applies to one specific type of crime, at least, than for any other type of crime, both in terms of reporting and in what further responsibility one has to follow up.  It would be a scary proposition that witnesses and even those who learn of hearsay would be held responsible for inaction by law enforcement. 

     It is difficult not to see typical left-wing iconoclasm directed at Paterno, as the image of someone, especially a Catholic conservative, who promoted the value of education and character, must not be allowed by liberals to stand.  It is the duty of conservatives to defend other conservatives who promote virtue whenever they come under assault from the left, but it is an even greater duty to stand for the virtues themselves.

     Joe Paterno successfully coached thousands of athletes and inspired countless other students, athletes and coaches.  May his legacy continue to inspire people to achieve academic and moral success.

Obama Praises Monti's Actions

     United States President Barak Obama has again praised Italy, this time referring to the fiscal and economic actions of Prime Minister Mario Monti, according to ANSA, the Italian news agency.

     I had posted of Obama's praise for Italy's fiscal reforms and economic strength at the end of the premiership of Silvio Berlusconi in my November of 2011 post, European Monetary Union Update: New Governments for Greece and Italy, http://www.williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2011/11/european-monetary-union-update-new.html.

     ANSA reports that Obama referred to the “strong spirit of historic friendship” between the United States and Italy.  The American President also expressed his great respect for his Italian counterpart, Georgio Napolitano, according to ANSA.

     The praise from the United States is helpful in encouraging investor confidence in Italy in particular and Europe in general amidst the crisis in the Eurozone, of which Italy is of critical significance.  Despite growing fears over Greece and Portugal, bond prices are reflecting an increase in confidence in the Italian budget and economy, which, in turn, decreases Italy's borrowing costs.

The Obama Administration Should Declare Missile Defense Is Intended to Defend against Both Iran and Russia

    
     The Obama Administration has again stated its planned missile defense system for Europe is intended to defend against the threat of nuclear missiles from Iran, not Russia, in order to assuage Russian concerns that the shield could undermine its nuclear deterrent.  The United States and its NATO allies should publicly declare that as long as Russia is led by an authoritarian ex-KGB Communist leader and possesses thousands of nuclear warheads, the American-built missile defense system is intended to defend against Russia, as well.

     As I explain in my post from September of 2009, Obama Betrays Allies, Appeases Russia, http://williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2009/09/obama-betrays-allies-appeases-russia.html, the Obama Administration is allowing its consideration of Russian concerns to determine its placement of missiles in Eastern Europe. 

     The U.S. abrogated the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the former Soviet Union under President George W. Bush.  The treaty had barred missile defense.  President Ronald Reagan’s proposed missile defense system and its research and development during the Cold War was critically important to defeating the Soviets.  Bush implemented a domestic missile defense and planned to implement one in Eastern Europe to defend NATO, which President Barak Obama scrapped because of Russian objections.  Bush also concluded a treaty with Russia for both the Americans and Russians to eliminate a large number of nuclear warheads.  The treaty was ratified by both sides. 

     Obama concluded a smaller treaty with Russia, which has also been mutually ratified, that further reduces warheads.  The Obama Administration, while reassuring the Russians that the U.S. has no hostile intent toward Russia, should focus on responsible nuclear disarmament that maintains the American deterrent through a robust program of modernization and testing. It could work with the Russians on missile defense without sacrificing American interests or those of its allies.  Among those interests are the right to avoid intimidation by an increasingly aggressive Russia.

     Regardless of any potential threat from Russia, the concern about the threat from Iran must supercede Russian concerns, as the Islamist Shi’ite Iranian regime, unlike atheistic Communists, believes in martyrdom through suicide attacks on “infidels.”  But the proximity and massive capability of Russia's nuclear arsenal cannot be ignored, even in diplomatic speech.  Although the U.S. should avoid unnecessary provocations of Russia while the two continue to cooperate in other matters, it must make it clear to the Russians that it will act in its interests.

The Corbett Administration Is Right to Include Assets in Measuring Wealth

     Under the Administration of Republican Governor Tom Corbett, Pennsylvania will include assets, in addition to income, in measuring people's wealth for the purpose of determining eligibility for food stamps.  The move, which bucks a trend accross the American Union, is permissible under the federal law that establishes the welfare program.

     The Commonwealth will deny food stamps to any otherwise eligible applicant with over $2,000 in cash in a bank or who owns a second car worth over $4,500.  The inclusion of assets as part of the means-testing to determine eligibility for food stamps was dropped by the Democratic Administration of Governor Ed Rendell.  In accordance with the policy of the Obama Administration to increase the number of food stamp recipients, the asset threshold has been eliminated in many other states, or at least has been raised. 

     The Corbett Administration has adopted a policy of cracking down on welfare fraud to reduce spending in order to avoid tax increases.  See also my post, Governor Corbett Signs Pennsylvania's Budget and Welfare Reform Legislation from July of 2011: http://williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2011/07/governor-corbett-signs-pennsylvanias.html.  The possession of significant assets by food stamp applicants is cited by critics as an example of waste, fraud and abuse, as the assets prove that the applicants can afford to feed themselves.

     Liberal supporters of welfare hysterically criticized the decision to reestablish an assets threshold to means-teast food stamp eligibility because it will remove thousands of recipients from the welfare rolls.  A seemingly reasonable counterargument has been raised that the assets threshold discourages people from saving for emergency, but this criticism misses the point that the emergency intended to be covered by the program is strictly a lack of money for food, not additional emergencies.  People are not entitled to someone else's money, especially if they do not need it for what it was intended.

     The larger reason I posted about this decision is that it reflects common sense that wealth should be measured based upon both income and assets, and not only annual income.  For example, we define a “millionaire” as one who has a million dollars, not one who earns a million dollars in gross income annually.  The federal government, however, defines poverty strictly in terms of income, thereby falsely categorizing many people as “poor” who are relatively wealthy in assets, especially when compared to the poor or even the middle class of foreign states.  A rich person who has a relatively bad year is no more poor than a poor person who has a relatively good year is rich.  A person's ability to save and manage money is part of the overall determination of one's wealth and is an independent factor in the macroeconomy.  Thus, an increase in mismanagement does not reflect a downturn in the economy and vice versa.

     Although there is less income temporarily in the current economy, it is important not to overstate the amount of poverty there is by failing to account for the increase in the standard of living of the poor.  The comparison of income data from year to year (adjusted for inflation) is helpful in discerning the rising or falling of the economy, but the figures always overstate the poverty of individuals.  The federal definition of poverty additionally overstates poverty by failing to account for differences in cost of living in different states that make the purchasing power of a dollar different from state to state. 

     Liberals see more poverty than there really is in order to justify more welfare.  Thus, they not only have a bias toward overstating it when conservatives are in power in order to oppose conservative policies, but also even when liberals themselves are in power.  The exaggeration of the amount of poverty also reflects general leftist opposition to the free market and support of more socialist policies.

     Conservatives should praise Pennsylvania for its leadership and its example should be followed across the Union, not only for determining the eligibility for food stamps or other welfare programs, but in other regards, as well.  They would also be making the case that the free market in America, not welfare statism, has produced wealth as never before in human history and improved the standard of living dramatically for Americans.