Ordinary American Heroes

Photo Credit: Tracy A Woodward

In honor of Independence Day, the Prolix Patriot and the Missus watched two movies over the weekend listed under the “patriotic” section on the DVR: “Flags of Our Fathers” and “1776.” At first glance, the dark and ugly cynical realism of the former and the lighthearted Technicolor ebullience of the latter would seem to have little in common, but on a deeper level, the two films both explore the very essence of what it means to be an American.

A repeated theme in “Flags” is that the world-famous picture wasn’t actually the first flag-raising. The six men immortalized in bronze on a hill overlooking Washington, D.C. were actually the second group of U.S. Marines to raise a flag at the summit of Suribachi. Similarly, in “1776,” we learn that the vote for independence we celebrate on the fourth was actually achieved on the second. The fourth was simply the day that the Declaration of Independence was made public.

In addition to the temporal confusion surrounding both events that persists to this day, both movies are at pains to remind us that the men who took part in these famous events were ordinary people. A common motif in “Flags” is the facelessness of the Marines fighting at Iwo Jima. The photo of the second flag-raising was especially poignant--and popular--because those men could have been anybody’s son, anybody’s father, or anybody’s brother.

Similarly, men like Roger Sherman of Connecticut, Judge James Wilson of Pennsylvania, Dr. Lyman Hall of Georgia, and Governor Stephen Hopkins of Rhode Island are largely forgotten today despite their impressive accomplishments. Aside from the mostly erroneous dramatizations of these lesser-known figures in “1776,” even the more famous founding fathers were ordinary men with ordinary desires.  Thomas Jefferson had an obsession with macaroni and George Washington had a sweet tooth for ice cream--he probably even got brain-freeze from time to time.

Finally, we must remember that the events depicted in both films were only the beginning of the fighting. Just as the flag-raising on Suribachi took place on the fourth day of a battle that would continue for another full month before the island was finally secured on March 26, 1945, so too the Declaration of Independence would not be recognized by Britain until the victory at Yorktown in 1781 and the eventual Treaty of Paris in 1783 which in turn was not ratified until January 14, 1784.

In a larger sense, this is the story of America. The movie “1776” has Benjamin Franklin counseling John Adams at the climactic moment of the plot:

Besides, what would posterity think we were? Demi-gods? We're men, no more no less, trying to get a nation started against greater odds than a more generous God would have allowed. First things first, John. Independence; America. If we don't secure that, what difference will the rest make?

Even though Franklin probably never uttered those exact words, the movie correctly summarize the founders belief that the future of this new thing called the “United States of America” would depend on the care and judgment of future generations. The founders gave us independence and the Constitution, but they left the rest to us.

The sacrifices of those who fought and died on Iwo Jima and in every battle before and since make clear that the fight for freedom is one that never ends. All of us have a duty to never stop fighting for those self-evident rights of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom from persecution and tyranny which were endowed to us by our creator. It is easy to feel patriotic on the Fourth of July. What matters though is what we do on the other 364 days of the year.

Share

Great Expectations

With this week's announcement of "worse than expected" unemployment numbers, it is worth investigating how often the experts have gotten their predictions wrong.  While admittedly an unscientific approach, a comparison of Google search results is a quick and easy way to compare news coverage of the economy.  Below are screen captures of the Google results for the phrases "better than expected" and "worse than expected" plus unemployment.

While both searches show an increasing trend over time, this is probably attributable to better access to recent data with the growth of the Internet.  On the other hand, there is a clear bias in favor of "worse than expected" economic reports by a margin of about 28,300 to 18,100, or roughly three "bad" stories for every two "good" ones.

In is impossible to predict the future with any certainty, so it's hardly newsworthy when reality fails to meet projected targets.  However, we should be concerned when journalists distort uncertain economic predictions in order to manipulate public opinion.  If journalists were honest in their reporting, we would expect an even number of articles for better than expected and worse than expected economic performance.

By consistently favoring bad news which undermines consumer confidence, journalists create a self-fulfilling prophecy of negative feedback that makes it all the more difficult for the economy to recover.  Worse still, this unsophisticated approach to economics also undermines the vital role of the press in maintaining the educated public which is at the core of republican self-government.

Share

The Hydra's Keeper

Like the many-headed Hydra of Greek legend, the federal government is a massive and poisonous beast that defies all efforts to control it. Despite Herculean efforts at reforming government over the past several decades, the deep cuts, layoffs, and efficiency gains that were promised have never materialized. Worse still, despite many attempts at reform, the growth of government waste and abuse has only accelerated.

In 1978, President Jimmy Carter fulfilled a campaign promise to make it easier to fire incompetent federal employees with the Civil Service Reform Act. Nevertheless, anybody who has worked for or interacted with the federal government knows that incompetence is still rife. Even under the improved regulations, it still takes months of repeated offenses and endless piles of red tape to get rid of problem employees.

Because of the difficulty of eliminating incompetent civil servants, President Bill Clinton sought to reform the procurement process so that the federal government could more easily hire (and fire) contractors while at the same time eliminating the burden of lavish government benefits and pensions. Despite these changes, it is harder than ever for businesses to win government contracts and the government is spending more than ever on litigation due to conflicts of interest and non-performance.

Then, in 2001, President George W. Bush articulated his President’s Management Agenda, which sought to eliminate underperforming government programs and duplication of effort. Despite ten years under the new guidelines, Congress has created countless new commissions, agencies, and panels of bureaucrats with new powers while President Obama has filled his administration with “czars” for every conceivable pet issue.

Earlier this week, the Obama’s Director of Digital Strategy observed in a blog post that, “an overall online landscape of literally thousands of websites – each focusing on a specific topic or organization – can create confusion and inefficiency” and sets a goal of eliminating half of them. If only the Obama Administration had figured this out sooner we might have been spared the onslaught of new government websites that began with the dubious change.gov, continued with recovery.gov, healthcare.gov, and goes on and on.

While it is refreshing to hear somebody in the Obama Administration talk about making government smaller in some way, the lessons of history are clear: every attempt at reform that originated with the President has met with failure. Congress has overruled attempts at reform by creating new offices, new regulations, and increasing spending.

If we are to bring the vast federal bureaucracy under control, a new mindset is needed in Congress. Instead of creating new laws to tackle problems, Congress needs to revisit the laws that are already on the books and eliminate provisions that aren’t working or are no longer needed. Instead of hiding pet projects in massive 2,000 page omnibus spending bills, every dollar the government spends should be held up to scrutiny and every program should be forced to defend its existence.

Otherwise, the leviathan of government, like the Hydra of myth, will only continue to grow with a plethora of new and even uglier faces.

Share

An International Game of Dreidel

President Obama announced with great fanfare yesterday his solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict: just rewind the clock to 1967 and everybody will be happy!

There's one big problem with this solution though.  Prior to the 1967 six-day war, the territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip that now constitute the Palestinian Authority were controlled by Jordan and Egypt respectively.  Thus, prior to 1967, the sum total of Palestinian lands was exactly zilch, zero, nothing, nada, etc.

In essence, Obama is telling one of our closest allies to give up more land to an entity that was created from Israeli territory under the 1993 Oslo Accords.  In return, Israel will get...nothing.  Even after previous Israeli concessions in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, terrorist attacks have continued unabated.  Obama's rhetoric may win points with his UN admirers, but it is not a serious path to peace.

This is reminscent of the old Jewish folktale about Herschel of Ostropol who was fond of playing practical jokes.  In one popular re-telling for children, Herschel uses a dreidel and the false logic of "heads I win, tails you lose" to outsmart one of the Hannukah goblins that has been terrorizing a small town.  It's a safe bet that the Israelis will not fall for the same trick.

Share

Metro Keeps Opening Doors

Earlier in these pages, we compared DC's proposed streetcar network and existing Metro system to the original DC Transit, circa 1958 when the system was at its zenith.

Today, prompted by a conversation with the author of the Blog of the Courtier, we endeavor to show how mass transit is a critical ingredient for population density.  Using the same streetcar map and comparing it to the 2010 census population data for each of the 180-odd census tracts within the District, we can see an almost uncanny conincidence betweena areas of high density and the original streetcar network.

Prior to the 1960's, there were few bridges across the Anacostia river, so large parts of far Southeast were never served by streetcars.  However, at the same time, large areas of Northeast D.C. which are not served by Metro had extensive streetcar service.

Intuitively, it makes sense that density conincides with streetcars.  Proponents of bus service argue that routes can be changed easily to accomodate changing trends and population shifts--indeed, Metro has a page dedicated to bus route changes, but this is exactly why bus lines do not promote density.  Metro can decide on a whim to reroute the bus line that used to take you straight to your office.

On the other hand, a streetcar or subway line cannot be moved very easily, so developers and residents have confidence that they will continue to have regular transit service.  Even after more than 50 years, the only areas of higher density that have emerged in the district are the pockets in far Southeast that are now served by Metro.

Share

How To Lie With Statistics

Let us ignore some of the more glaring inaccuracies with the new "Tax Receipt" calculator that was created by the White House on Monday and instead focus on the more subtle manipulation of the data to accomplish President Obama's political goal of shifting attention away from entitlement reform.

Using the White House's default setting for a family of four making $80,000/year, the application helpfully breaks down how much of this hypothetical family's taxes go to different categories.  However, what immediately jumps out is that the (large) portion of taxes that go to Social Security and Medicare are not included in the percentages even though they are counted towards the total spending at the bottom.

By omitting entitlements, the percentage for defense spending is inflated drastically so that it appears as the largest share of spending, just narrowly edging out the next largest category--health care.  However, if we include entitlements, the picture changes dramatically.  According to the White House numbers, defense spending is really only 12% of overall spending, not 26%.

Also, if we look at the broad categories of welfare spending vs. government spending on constitutionally enumerated powers like defense, law enforcement, and foreign relations, we can easily see that spending on the welfare state in this country accounts for more than 80% of the hypothetical family's tax payments for that year.

Worse still, if we conjecture that the parents of this family are under the age of 40, it is almost guaranteed that neither parent will ever see a dime of the money that they are currently paying into the system, because Social Security and Medicare will be completely bankrupt and interest on the national debt will have overtaken non-defense discretionary spending by the time they retire.  Meanwhile, their children will be left with a debt they will never be able to pay down.

The hard truth that Obama doesn't want you to know is that the 20th century welfare state is at its breaking point.  The welfare programs currently in place benefit some, but unless Congress is able to implement drastic reforms, these programs will cease to function within our lifetimes.  The choice now is clear: we can follow President Obama in ignoring and obfuscating the problem, or we can have the courage to make serious reforms.

Share

Your Government In Action, Part 7

It's been a while since we last had one of these. In today's installment, you have to read the fine print to discover it's not actually a mistake. Tax Day will be postponed this year due to a District of Columbia holiday. If you've ever seen one of those D.C. license plates that says "Taxation Without Representation," now you know that it's a lie.

Share