All posts by Camp Director

Taxation, Education, Public Policy Radar, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, Economics

Keynote Address Freedom 21- G. Edward Griffin

This entry is part 3 of 28 in the series Freedom 21 Conference

f21-banner-4G. Edward Griffin has spent years researching the super-secret private banking cartel known as the Federal Reserve System (FED). In his opening address on the subject of “The Creature From Jekyll Island,” Griffin reviewed the history of the creation and the purpose for the creation of the FED. Griffin makes it clear that while the meeting on Jekyll island South Carolina in 1912 was ultra-secret, the details are available to those willing to dig deep enough to find them.

He tied the creation of the FED to the emerging view of competing large corporations that the way to accomplish common goals of the industry was the formation of cartels. The FED is no different from other large business cartel except that it involves the banking industry and not just local banks but national and international banks.

So why would the privately owned and competitive banks want to partner with government? Griffin explained that the purpose is to keep the cartel from acting as an “enforcer” keeping rogue members of the cartel from breaking away from the group. He gave an example of how the dairy cartels got government to pass laws regarding minimum pricing which would require the jailing of dairies not complying with minimum pricing regulations.

What do each of the parties, government and banks, get from the agreement? Politicians get easy access to the  money they need to spend on new government programs through the sale of bonds and increased national debt from banking cartels while the cartel gets the power to create “money” ex nihilo- from NOTHING! The cartel can do this because the government puts its tax revenue deposits into cartel banks thus allowing the creation of the money from nothing on the basis of “fractional reserve” banking. This obviously a perfect partnership, from political and banking perspective. It is a nightmare for the public who watches the value of its money lost through inflation as a form of taxation.

Griffin explained that this is the reason for the gigantic bank bailouts of this and last years. Politicians simply cannot let the system collapse which would actually be in the best interest of the public in general because it would require a complete re-start of the system and the exposure of the participants. Whether or not the economy lapses into inflation or deflation is irrelevent, according to Griffin, because slaves really don’t care what type of methods are used to keep them in economic bondage, they simply want out of the situation but have no control any longer over it. Griffin explained that as long as we continue to accept the existence of government subsidies and handouts the deeper into that bondage we will sink. Only whe the American public demands an end to government intrusion into their lives including demanding econonomic freedom and independence.

As a postscript Griffin said that it was imperative that we end the FED!

Taxation, Public Policy Radar, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, The Vote, Economics

Black Eye On Westerville- The Aftemath

This entry is part 3 of 3 in the series Black Eye On Westerville

Our dollars under assault from greedy governments

…He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people…imposing taxes on us without our consent…

Declaration of Independence- 1776

NEWSFLASH to all governing bodies! There is a finite limit of income that is available to be taxed. Theoretically it is 100% of income. Practically, it is a significantly lower percentage of income.

We only feel the need to point this fact out because it is clear that a new tidal-wave of taxation is currently being generated at all levels of government. The excuses are myriad. The effects will be devastating, as are all tax increases especially during economic downturns.

So why all the talk of tax increases when Westerville residents just voted themselves, a majority of them anyway, a 15% tax-cut? Well, not so fast. It is probably just a temporary reprieve if events in Columbus are any indicator.

During the recent Westerville Income tax increase campaign we asked the question repeatedly- What’s the next bite of the apple? When it became legal for cities to charge residents an income tax it was sold to residents initially as a very small bite of the apple which would eliminate the need for the hated (and unbiblical) city portion of the property tax and piggy-back sales taxes. Most municipalities went for a 0.25-0.5% income tax, promising that this would be more than enough to run the city in perpetuity. The cities would never have to ask for more to run at current levels of government. And that’s the rub. Governments used new revenues to grow far larger and more intrusive than any of those early residents who foolishly voted in income taxes could possibly have imagined.

Not so city planners, professional city managers and other government “experts” who have college degrees in such “progressive” fields as Urban Planning, Regional Governance, Public Affairs, etc. The dream of 19th century “progressive visionaries” is now the nightmare of 21st century urban and suburban tax-slaves. It has been only since the mid-20th century that progressives in small to medium-sized cities created and seized de facto control of zoning and planning commissions, which were originally promoted as bodies designed to protect the freedom of use and value of private property. In fact, they have become agents of modern-day government feudal lords, dictating such matters of grave importance as street curb-cuts (vital to the survival of businesses on a street; if you’re in doubt please examine the state of business in the Morse Rd and Rt. 161 “business” corridors in Columbus which have a system of virtually inaccessible “access” roads, another sign of city tyranny; these areas are also dying or virtually dead zones) grass length, the color of house paint used, the storage of boats and other extra vehicles, the type and placement of fences and even the replacement of hot-water heaters. This kind of intrusion costs money and bureaucracies must come up with new revenues to pay armies of bureaucratic “inspectors.” Hence the wave in the late ’70’s and early ’80’s of income-tax increases to the 1% level. Again, that was all that the cities would ever need.

As city governments continued to grow in size, cost and intrusiveness yet more revenue became necessary. And as the resistance to tax increases grows the tactics of city leadership becomes more sophisticated and demonstrative of their desire to thwart the will of a majority of taxpayers (as opposed to the majority of voters, an extremely important distinction). As this article in the Columbus Dispatch demonstrates, cities like Columbus and Westerville use a combination of “special” election dates, usually in August to minimize voter turnout, and targeting voters who are most likely to vote for tax increases and vote in every election no matter when (the dreadful PROS 2000 campaign in Westerville used an August “special election” date with the same targeted voter strategy). Selected quotes from the article-

On the night of the election, Coleman called it the most sophisticated campaign in which he had been involved…

Brad Sinnott, central committee chairman for the Franklin County Republican Party, said timing trumped strategy for tax-backers.

“There’s no doubt part of their strategy was to get this through in a low-turnout, midsummer election.”

Of course, the city denies that election timing is a legitimate complaint-

But city officials insist that they scheduled an August election not for political advantage but because they need the money now.

Of course, that argument crumbles under the weight of the revelation that voter turnout was not encouraged but that…

The campaign’s target audience was the small pool of voters who never miss an election, no matter what time of year it takes place.

Was the strategy successful? Clearly it was, since a grand total of 8.4% of the registered voters (52% of the 16.2% of registered voters, again, NOT taxpayers, who voted) in Columbus were able to impose a 25% tax increase on the residents of Columbus who pay taxes and, worse, non-resident taxpayers who are completely disenfranchised in municipal elections despite paying most of the taxes. And Columbus utilized the implied promise of continued expansion of social welfare spending to entice voters who pay little or nothing in taxes but receive the benefits to vote themselves largess from the public treasury.

As we have pointed out repeatedly here on this blog, cities long ago slipped into the same form of tyranny that American colonists so courageously resisted in the 1760’s through the 1780’s; over-regulation of the backbone of any economy, the small local business (a rapidly disappearing entity in Columbus), and taxation without representation. As noted in the quotations from the Declaration of Independence, taxes are being imposed without the consent of a significant percentage of the taxed. In fact, 42% of non-resident taxpayers (!) pay 53% (!) of Columbus income taxes (reference here) though they cannot vote and have no say in city government. Westerville’s numbers are similar.

What does this increase in Columbus mean to communities surrounding it? Since Westerville employed an absurd “Tax Fairness” argument, based on Westerville residents who had to pay Columbus and Westerville taxes, in their recent successful campaign to both increase the city income tax and shift the whole burden to a minority of taxpayers who both live and work in the city of Westerville (absurdity exposed here) it is conceivable that Westerville could come back to the voters to demand, in the name of “fairness,” that a new 25% tax increase MUST be passed by taxpayers (a majority of whom would be exempt from the increase, just like the last initiative). Since the city is busy using its windfall from the recent tax hike to hire zoning and planning “inspectors” and other bureaucrats to harass churches over building occupancy permits and businesses who want to remodel buildings for occupancy, buy every dilapidated or limited-use building that comes on the market thus squeezing even private small rental businesses aka taxpayers out of the market, just like they did, for instance, to the Westerville Athletic Club and taking them off the tax roles therefore cutting revenues, and otherwise throwing good money after bad on schemes that will destroy the business viability of the south side of town by imposing a Rt. 161 style “access” road ghetto upon its temporary occupants, it will probably find that it needs more revenue sooner than later and the “tax fairness” argument may have to be dusted off and modified for another run despite promises to the contrary. Think in terms of Westerville Public Schools who now claim they “need” nearly 8 additional  mills to run the new Taj Mahals they have recently built or between $400 and $600 additional dollars per year from the average Westerville School District homeowner.

What should be done about this mess? Well, the first step is at least being considered. The Columbus Dispatch reports here about a bill that would allegedly restrict the use of “special elections” for the purposes of getting around higher voter turnouts. We think the bill in question is Ohio House bill HB 260 but we don’t know for sure, since the atrociously written story in the Dispatch gives exactly NONE of the important details like the bill number, the sponsors or any serious attempt at analysis in depth.

The second and most important step will require, frankly, a great deal of time, effort and money to get done. The cities and those eager to use the current taxation structure of the cities for the purpose of confiscation and redistribution of wealth through disenfranchised taxation (taxation without representation) will never allow the next step without a major fight. That is, either allowing all TAXPAYERS into a city’s treasury the right to vote in city elections, including tax initiatives, and requiring a number of non-resident representatives in City Councils proportional to non-resident revenue derived or, more simply, outlawing the collection of taxes from those who have no say in city government. No city will be willing to swallow either option (they will immediately hide behind The Ohio Constitution’s “Home Rule” provision) without a fight and no state legislators, being political animals, have stepped up to offer any relief to agrieved taxpayers mostly because they are more frightened of the reactions of cities and corporate campaign donors than they are of the mostly quiescent taxpayers who aren’t currently raising a stink.

A state constitutional amendment initiative will almost undoubtedly be required to fix this. It would be a real down and dirty political slugfest, complete with charges of greed and racism. There would be no major corporate support, since major corporations rely on the tax abatements and other city bribes to buy their support and loyalty. When cities are restricted from collecting taxes from non-residents they will have to cancel the 100’s of millions of dollars in tax abatements that corporations enjoy statewide. Major corporations will put millions into the effort to stop the initiative. The campaign will be dirty and ugly. Corporatate management likes the idea that their employees are forced to pay their property taxes in their stead and without their consent.They hate the idea that employees might figure out that they operate on few if any property taxes while their employees are milked with the help of corporate management who donate to the campaign funds to pass the taxes. Politicians will line up at the corporate trough to collect money that will flow like water in an all out effort to stop the attempt to make them pay their property taxes. Many politicians that conservatives thought were their friends will be exposed as phoneys more interested in re-election than fighting the tough fight to restore truly fair taxation.

Here is a Columbus Dispatch article from late July indicating that 95% of Columbus Issue 1 campaign funds came from corporate donors, among them highly tax abated companies like Nationwide Insurance, Grange Mutual Insurance, Limited Brands, NetJets, Corna-Kokosing Construction, Wolfe Enterprises and, surprise, surprise the Dispatch Printing Company, not to mention several engineering firms, all of whom benefit while their employees suffer. The thousands they donated is a small investment against the millions they don’t pay in taxes. The same holds for smaller cities which line up corporate donations in order to maintain tax abatements.

We don’t tell you this to scare you away from the battle. We are being realistic. It will require real time and effort to get this problem fixed and there will be a lot of hard feelings and possibly jobs lost as employees are fired by major corporations for supporting the effort to make them pay the taxes they have maneuvered cities into waiving. It would have to be a true grass roots effort. Are you mad enough for that, yet?

Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, The Vote

Weepin’ George- “I’ll Whine To The End Of My Career”

Don't be scared! It's just another RINO!George Voinovich is nothing if not consistent. If he’s not crying over the confirmation of UN ambassadors then he’s whining about tax cuts or his lower lip quivers at the idea that United States citizens might be permitted to exercise their right to keep and bear arms in more than just their home state. Now comes the report that Weepin’ George can hardly contain his emotions over the state of the Republican party. While this author also marvels over the shambles that state and national party leadership have made of the Republican party our analysis of why could not be further from Sen. Voinovich’s.

According to this CBS (pronounced “See? BS!”) Political Hotseat report George is blubbering that the reason that Republicans keep losing presidential and state and national re-election races is because the Republican party is “being taken over by southerners.” According to CBS, Voinovich believes that “shrinking demographics and southern senators are alienating his conservative constituents.” And this is where Voinovich and Republican party leadership, both in Ohio and nationally, run off the rails, crash and burn like a munitions train. What is alienating conservatives is most assuredly NOT southern conservatives. Voinovich says “[Southern politicians] get on TV and go ‘errrr, errrrr…People hear them and say, ‘These people, they’re southerners. The party’s being taken over by southerners. What they hell they got to do with Ohio?'” (so much for the end of regional stereotyping and bigotry on the part of national office holders).

Wrong, George and while we’re at it wrong, Kevin DeWine, who never misses an opportunity to mis-read the political will of Ohio’s conservative voters. It’s a near certainty that Kevin De Wine will issue some kind of rambling drivel that attempts to use Voinovich’s whimpering as an excuse to further alienate “values voters.” We can see an example of De Wine’s political tin-ear in his attempts to shove his uncle and former US Senator Mike De Wine down the throats of Ohio voters.  Thanks, but we already choked on him and the experience was not one we wish to repeat, as his defeat at the hands of Sherrod Brown, a flaming Marxist, demonstrated in spades.

What the conservative base is saying, by staying home and refusing to vote for the Hobson’s choice of a liberal Democrat or a liberal Republican handed to conservative voters year after year (think John McCain), is that they demand more Jim DeMints and Tom Coburns, not fewer and they want them to run in their own states so that they can safely return to the polls without seriously endangering their first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth ninth and tenth amendment rights. Even George Voinovich hasn’t voted to destroy the third amendment-  yet (if you don’t know what right this one guarantees then read it here). And don’t kid yourself. The reason that liberal Republican candidates are being defeated is because conservative voters are staying home. Hence, the whining about conservative “disloyalty” from Ohio party leaders who themselves defected in droves in the 2006 gubernatorial election to Ted Strickland and actively worked to undermine the Ken Blackwell campaign in a bid to destroy him and his conservative supporters politically. These “leaders” can look in the mirror to see the cause of the Republican party loss of Ohio to the Democrats in the presidential race in 2008

The article also quotes Tim Pawlenty, liberal Republican governor of Minnesota whose lack of intestinal fortitude in the 2008 Minnesota Senatorial election resulted in the most blatant election theft since the Republican party stole the presidential election of 1876 from President Samuel J. Tilden, as lamenting that the Republicans are losing the ability to “…compete in the Northeast, we are losing our ability to compete in Great Lakes states, we cannot compete on the West Coast, we are increasingly in danger of competing in the mid-Atlantic states, and the Democrats are now winning some of the Western states. Indeed, the Republicans can’t compete when they try to become more liberal than Democrats, especially when Democrats are beginning to successfully run “blue dogs” in conservative districts who are more conservative and, as the health care debate demonstrates, have considerably more political backbone than their Republican opponents.

Good-bye, George in 2010 and good riddance! Now if only the Republicans can only come up with a better candidate for the Senate than constitutional flim-flammer Rob Portman (more on that later).

Public Policy Radar, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, Economics, Book Review

Hamilton’s Curse- The Founding Father of Crony Capitalism

This entry is part 6 of 9 in the series Hamilton's Curse

GadsdenThis chapter review is being written on July 4th, after something of a hiatus. Not a hiatus from the work that the Policy Institute does but a hiatus from blogging caused by too much to do in the struggle for liberty and too little time to do it. As Christ said “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers few.”

To the left is the flag that is on this author’s flagpole today. It is the Gadsden flag, an early republican naval ensign. In part that’s because of the flag’s symbolism. A coiled rattlesnake ready to strike was an early symbol of resistance to tyranny, something that is very relevant in today’s political climate.

What does this have to do with Alexander Hamilton? Everything, really. Hamilton was, indeed, a patriot as his military action in battles like the seige of Yorktown demonstrate. Unfortunately, he was also a brilliant and manipulative political strategist who believed that the United States needed to become an aristocratically led monarchy to achieve its destiny as a great empire. And his vision caused him to be involved first in bringing down the Articles of Confederation because they could not be made to conform to his vision of empire, then to rebuild the economy on the model of British mercantilism in order to create the capital necessary to build the empire. Just because a man is both a genius and a patriot, does not mean that he is automatically an admirable figure in a nation’s history, as the book demonstrates.

Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo chronicles the 7 decade struggle to make Hamilton’s economic system the adopted system of the United States and the many faces it wore during that period. It was a see-saw battle which saw Hamilton’s system advance and recede several times, mostly along regional and philosophical lines, before the War Between the States brought Hamilton’s system into use in the United States to stay (for now, at least).

One of the pillars of Hamilton’s system was “crony capitalism,” also called today corporate welfare. It’s modern supporters call the system “tax-financed subsidy.”Modern liberals claim to hate “corporate welfare” but this is a ruse and a political shell game. They are more than willing to supply “tax-financed subsidies” to businesses in the “green economy,” for instance and are more than willing to make revolutionary changes to tax structure to raise the funds for it. When it is pointed out that “tax-financed subsidies” is “corporate welfare,” supporters will launch into lengthy soliloquies on the necessity of the action, all of which purposefully tries to steer the questioner in the opposite direction of his question.  They learned well from Hamilton, whose Report on Manufactures for the new United States government under the Constitution is considered to be either a masterpiece of economic vision or a confusing jumble of economic non-sequiturs, based on the reader’s knowledge of how economies work.

DiLorenzo demonstrates that Hamilton placed himself clearly in the camp of what, in the late 19th century became the “Progressive movement,”  in opposition to Adam Smith’s laissez faire approach to economics. Under Smith’s system (which is not theoretical but empirical, i.e. based on observation), the free market decides where investments are best made. Rewards and punishments come in the form of profitability or bankruptcy. Under the Hamiltonian-mercantilist system, highly educated and specialized central-planning “experts” can best decide where subsidies and protectionist taxation (tariffs) can be applied in order to give a fledgling invention or industry the help it needs in establishing itself. And if the market doesn’t want that particular product? Then obviously, more subsidies are necessary until public perception catches up to “innovation.” DiLorenzo explains in some detail how Smith successfully demonstrated that the best competitors, meaning the best businessmen with the best product wins in a free market. Hamilton argued for the power of government to be used to “level the playing field” but forgot to point out that this means that such a system can be abused to provide rewards for political allies instead of its stated purpose. In British mercantilism the King became a de facto business partner with subsidized business; in Hamilton’s system it is co-operative politicians.

Hamilton’s call for import tariffs had an unintended but not unforseen consequence: the increase of foreign import duties to match. Adan Smith had explained this relationship in the Wealth of Nations. Hamilton arrogantly insisted that Smith’s observations had been mistaken. This led to a form of economic isolationism that Hamilton actually thought a good idea. In fact it created regional strife and industrial stagnation internally and gave foreign manufacturers an advantage in the world market.

Hamilton wrote in his Report on Manufactures of his certainty that only government would have the resources and the motivation necessary to build roads to the interior. Unfortunately for his theory, within 10 years of his publication of the report, state chartered private firms were busily building roads at rates that astounded observers. Road building companies were eagerly invested in by merchants and manufacturers to provide easier access to growing western markets. Unfortunately, this lesson did not make an impression on Hamilton’s enthusiastic supporters later in the 19th century. They insisted in pouring good money after bad in building a system of roads and canals, many of them literally to nowhere, that became a money pit, bankrupting several mid-western states and causing severe economic consequences nationally. A major culprit whose name became prominent later was an ingenious Illinois state legislator and enthusiastic supporter of the Hamiltonoan philosophy who managed to become the key player in bankrupting his state through “internal improvements” crony capitalism in the 1840’s- Abraham Lincoln.

Hamilton’s system went into disgrace for a time, especially during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson. The election of 1800 was a complete repudiation of the Federalist-Hamiltonian philosophy of government. During Jefferson’s first term Hamilton died. Henry Clay became the new champion of what Hamilton had coined the American System. Clay became not only the systems champion but one of its beneficiaries. Being a hemp farmer he received a sizable hemp subsidy (hemp was an important crop because it made the finest marine rope available at the time). As the American System gained ground in the 1820’s in the wake of the War of 1812 it began to cause severe regional divisions between north and south. The industrial north was being subsidized with the tariffs raised by taxing imports into the agrarian south. At the same time the south’s markets were being severely restricted by retaliatory tariffs on agricultural imports. This situation eventually bloomed into the nullification crisis of the early 1830’s and then later into the secession crisis of 1860-61.

In the meantime the twice-chartered national bank, which would have allowed the creation of huge amounts of credit for the federal government was allowed to expire in 1811 and simply killed by withdrawal of funds in 1836. A new national bank was vetoed in 1841 and several times after this. This was an extremely important pillar of the American System. Hamilton’s scheme simply would not work without a vast amount of available credit. Hamilton’s empire was to be built on debt and the creation of fiat money. Jefferson’s system was hard currency (gold and silver based) and “pay as you go.”

As the War Between the States showed, these were incompatible systems and the result was an acrimonious and bloody divorce suit that demonstrated the vast differences between Hamilton’s “living document” method of constitutional interpretation featuring gross abuse of the “General Welfare” and “Elastic” clauses versus the strict constructionist interpretation which posits that the words and phrases in the Constitution have meaning and the intent of the writers of the document should be followed when discernable.

In the next chapter we will see what happened as the American System became dominant and how it got that way.

Public Policy Radar, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, Economics

Hold It A Minute…

constitutionThe Congress shall have Power To… exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings… Article I, § 8 of the US Constitution.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The 10th Amendment to the US Constitution

Frankly, the reading of these two portions of the highest law of the land, the Constitution could not be clearer. The Federal government must have the legislative condent of a state to own property within that state’s borders.

This clear requirement has been completely ignored by the Federal government for over a century and a brewing problem in California is illustrative of the need for states to reassert their authorities as guaranteed in the  1oth Amendment.  You see, California is bankrupt. And as part of that bankruptcy they are discussing the closure of state parks. According to an AP story–

California officials said Wednesday they are trying to avert the federal government’s threat to seize six parks that could be closed to help reduce the state’s ballooning budget deficit

Seize the land by what authority, you might be asking? According to the story-

National Park Service Regional Director Jonathan Jarvis warned in a letter to that all six [stste parks] occupy former federal land that could revert to the U.S. government if the state fails to keep the parks open.

The article quotes Jarvis as writing…

…”Lands conveyed to the State under the Federal Lands to Parks Program must be open for public park and recreation use in perpetuity as a condition of the deed”

Did you catch that? Formerly Federal land, deeded to the state with a caveat? A caveat that the Federal government is prohibited from making? Well, how’s it forbidden from making the caveat, you might be asking?

Since the  state of California has the authority under the two sections of the Constitution stated to simply revoke the permission granted the Federal government to own the land, this caveat is legally meaningless. There is nothing legally from keeping the State of California from simply seizing any particular piece of, or in fact all of, the Federal property in California by a simple act of the California legislature.

In reality it would be foolish for California to seize, for instance, the San Diego Navy Yard. But the Constitution is clear that it is permitted to do so (they might have to give “just compensation” per the 5th Amendment, but of course the US Supreme Court has a terrible track record on arbitrary seizures and property values, so that could work in California’s favor) and that means if they wish they can simply brush Mr. Jarvis’ protestations to the contrary aside as one would a pesky blood-sucking mosquito.

How does this effect Ohio’s public policy? Ohio currently has a “Sovereignty Resolution” before the State Senate, Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 13. In it Ohio merely proclaims that it retains the rights and responsibilities of a sovereign state and intends to use them to make Ohio a place where its citizens can feel free from the over-reach of Federal authority. Like, for instance, forcing the state to keep parks open when it is bankrupt at its own expense.

Just another reason Ohio needs to remind the Federal government that it is a sovereign state.

Public Policy Principles News, Taxation, Public Policy Radar, Commentary

Report From England- Climate Change And The Sun

flare_sxi2_medThe webmaster is in England. Currently I am staying at the North London Rifle Club facility at Camp Bisley, Surrey, England. It is one of the parapets in the UK yet to be stormed in the world-wide effort to remove the absolute last resort tools that private citizens have for protecting their liberties, i.e. guns, from the hands of private citizens.

But that’s another story. Every day as I take the train to London to see the incredible sights there, I have noticed that the ad campaigns are laying it on thick about “climate change.” Daily there is a story in the newspapers (I have yet to turn on a television) about the hundreds of thousands per year who die as a result of “extreme weather conditions” in third-world countries. The newspaper stories and screaming billboards always cite the same research and scientific data to bolster their claims- none. That’s because there isn’t any.

And after all, why should there be? The global warming/climate change campaign is one based on emotion, not logic. Real science is not only ignored, it is an unwelcome encumberance to the goal of convincing people that they should accept government restriction of their lives and learn to live like those third-worlders- for the good of the planet, mind you.

And so, you get pictures of starving third-world children (who have been with us since the beginning of recorded history and, according to Jesus Christ, we will always have with us) and polar bears on isolated ice floes and and completely refuted claims of their impending extinction and the shrinkage of polar ice caps (the polar ice caps have grown significantly during the last two colder than average winters and the polar bear population is on the rise, not declining).

If you pay any attention to the science pages at all you may get a clue that “climate change” has nothing to do with man’s activity but is completely in the hands of God who is in complete control of the Sun and solar system, not to mention the galaxy and the universe. Just this morning I came across a report issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) showing that the latest sunspot cycle activity is “…in a valley–the deepest of the past century.” Many climate change activists (nearly all non-scientists) claim that climate change studies are “settled science.” Or not. Listen to what one NASA researcher says about this sunspot cycle- “In our professional careers, we’ve never seen anything quite like it. Solar minimum has lasted far beyond the date we predicted in 2007.” Does this sound settled or like they really haven’t got a solid handle on the science yet?

Why all of the talk about sunspot activity in relation to global temperature (which, by the way, has plummeted by nearly 0.7 C during this period of low solar activity)? Because there is a strong co-ordination between sunspot activity and global temperature. Look at the chart below. Pay special attention to the current period. The Sun is simply not as active as it was during the 1930’s and 1990’s when temperatures rose after extended high sunspot activity.

maunderminimum_strip2

Note the period between the first quarter of the 17th century through about the first ten of the 18th century. This period of extremely low, if not completely absent, sunspot activity is called the Maunder Minimum and it corresponds nearly exactly with the “Little Ice Age” which was a period of deep global cooling (climate change). Not man caused, God caused.

There are other charts available showing the co-ordination between very high sunspot activity and the Medieval Climate Optimum (climate change) a period of global warming of the 9th to 14th centuries that coincided with, for instance, the Norse exploration and colonization of Iceland and Greenland, which at the time was actually green.

Want a deeper understanding of these issues? Dr. Michael Coffman of Environmental Perspectives, Inc gave a great talk at Camp American last year on global warming and how it is being used by globalists to restrict or completely eliminate basics of liberty such as private property, true stewardship of the earth (as opposed to the pagan religion of environmentalism), private enterprise, etc. Dr. Coffman connects the dots on ownership of private property, economic prosperity, stewardship of the land, bad climate change science and the attempts to use bad science to re-mold the world’s economy. You can get a copy of Dr. Coffman’s lectures here.

Currently, the US (and the EU) is considering the adoption of so-called “cap and trade” legislation which will do nothing but tax US and European energy users into poverty, stifle technological advances for true stewardship of the land, socialize and therefore destroy the economy and keep third-worlders from developing and using the technology they need to make the land pay and continue to pay in the future through stewardship, fight ignorance, disease and death from poor sanitation, cooking and food storage and pulling themselves out of the socialist morass they are in. “Cap and trade” makes sure this cycle of poverty, suffering and dearh will continue in the third-world by setting a limit on technology and then paying third-world slavemasters to sell their nation’s “carbon credits” to the west in a bid to maintain and eventually degrade western standardsof living.

The scientific numbskullery demonstrated by representatives like Henry Waxman of California during hearings on “cap and trade” has been simply stunning. No one expects them to understand all of the tiny details of the science. They are expected however to grasp the fact that there are opposing views based on scientific analysis of existing data that are actually doing a better job of fitting numbers to models than the science they are taking as gospel.

Contact your representatives and ask them to oppose “cap and trade.”

Education, Events, Public Policy Radar, Commentary, Public Policy Principles News, The Church, Biblical Worldview

Institute For Principled Policy Chair on “The State of Ohio” This Week

TelevisionInstitute For Principled Policy Chairman Dr. Mark Hamilton will appear on this weeks “The State of Ohio” program.  The program appears on PBS stations throughout Ohio.

The topic of the program is on the role of clergy in speaking on public policy. Taking an opposite position from Mark’s is Pastor Tim Ahrens of First Church in Columbus Ohio. Mark is the Teaching Elder at Providence Church in Mifflin Twp. (near Ashland). He is also a Professor of Philosophy at Ashland University.

Here is the air and station schedule of “The State of Ohio:”

Fridays

5:30 PM Columbus WOSU-TV34 and Portsmouth WPBO-TV42

7:30 PM Cleveland WVIZ-TV25

10:00 PM Cambridge WOUC-TV44 and

Athens WOUB-TV20

10:30 PM Toledo WGTE-TV30

Saturdays

5:30 AM Akron WEAO-TV49 and Alliance WNEO-TV45

Sundays

6:30AM Cincinnati WCET-TV48

7:00 AM Dayton WPTD-TV16

10:30 AM Oxford WPTO-TV14

12:00 Noon Bowling Green WBGU-TV27

12:00 Noon Cleveland WVIZ-TV25

12:30 PM Cambridge WOUC-TV44 and

Athens WOUB-TV20

CABLECAST on The Ohio Channel

Mondays 10AM, 6PM & 2AM

The Ohio Channel, available on:

Akron – Time Warner Channel 538

Athens – Time Warner Channel 0

Cincinnati – Anderson Union Channel 08, Cable Channel 22 Channel 23,

Media Bridges Channel 15, Norwood Community TV Channel 15,

Waycross Community Media Channel 4, Time Warner Channel 22

Clermont – Time Warner Channel 22

Cleveland – Cox Channel 201, Time Warner Channel 181

Columbus – Time Warner Channel 96 and Digital 34.2, Insight Channel 190,

WOW Channel 150

Dayton – Time Warner Channels 715 & 720

Toledo – Buckeye Cable System Channels 199

Ohio Public Television broadcast channels are also available on local cable channels.

Please let us know what you thought of what Dr. Hamilton had to say.


Biblical Worldview, Education, Events, Private Property, Commentary, Life Issues, The Vote

Camp American- Class Samples and a Special Offer!

calogoIt will come as no shock that the Institute For Principled Policy is involved in biblical worldview education for young men and women. You only need to look at our Divisions and About Us pages to see that education in biblical worldview is one of our main functions.

In keeping with our commitment to solid biblical worldview education the Institute partners with groups whose specialty is biblical worldview training on issues like government, economics, critical thinking skills, history, etc.

Every year the Institute partners with Camp American, a non-partisan, non-denominational Christian worldview and recreation summer camp which specializes in the Institute’s target areas. Several of Camp American’s teachers over the last few years have been members of the  Institute For Principled Policy’s board.

And we’re doing it again this year. From June 14-20, 2009 Camp American is being held at Pokagon State Park in Angola IN. Among the teachers from the Institute For Principled Policy will be Executive Director Barry Sheets and Vice-chairman Chuck Michaelis, who is also Executive Director of Camp American. Other teachers include Tom DeWeese of the American Policy Center, Pastor David Whitney head instructor of the Institute On The Constitution, Mark Harrington of the midwest office of the Center For Bio-ethical Reform,  Dr. Charles Rice Professor Emeritus of Notre Dame Law School and Charlie Smith, a political consultant from Pennsylvania.

You might be asking what Camp American’s classes are like. Here are some short excerpts ofclasses taught last year at Camp American

First, a class on the religuious and philosophical foundations of the Founders taught by Institute Executive Director Barry Sheets

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Egg2SfJmdoo[/youtube]

Next is a class taught by Institute Vice-chairman Chuck Michaelis on the Electoral College

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh97UZa8SNQ[/youtube]

Third is a class taught by Pastor David Whitney of the Institute On The Constitution on the rights and responsibilities of a fully informed jury

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEmVsy7g4E0[/youtube]

Last (but definitely not least) is a class on property rights, globalism and globa warming taught by Dr. Michael Coffman CEO of Environmental Perspectives, Inc.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgmmPFOjdEg[/youtube]

If you want to attend there’s a special offer for our blog readers. You can sign up for Camp American on their online store and you can use a special coupon designed for our readers that you can use to get a $50 discount at checkout. The coupon is IPP. Don’t wait. Spaces will fill up.

Commentary, The Church, Biblical Worldview, Book Review

Prayer: The New Common Denominator?

The Crumbling ChurchDo you pray? Have you thought about prayer?  Christians pray.  Muslims pray.  Hindus pray.  Buddhists pray.  Just about everyone prays.

And this, says Mark Siljander in his book, A Deadly Misunderstanding— is something that can unite people from different faiths.

Especially, he says if they can unite around the person of Jesus.  The Qur’an speaks highly of Jesus, in many ways similarly to the Gospels.  All the great religions have a place for Jesus — or Isa, as He is known in the Qur’an.

So Mr Siljander has been wandering around the world as an ambassador for world peace trying to find ways to bring warring people together.  And this is his solution.

Now, if prayer and Jesus are to be linked together, a proposition I think highly worthy, then I wonder if Mr. Siljander has in mind this prayer:

Our Father, who art in heaven Hallowed by they name. Thy Kingdom come.  Thy will be done On earth, as it is in heaven.

I can’t help but wonder if this is the kind of prayer these men of different faiths had when they came together.  The very idea of a God who exists — in heaven — is a problem for many religions, and, of course, the idea of doing His will on earth, as it is in heaven raises another range of issues many people would rather not talk about.

First and foremost, what is God’s will?  How do we know what it is?  Is it subjective or objective?  Is it merely a matter of the inward leading of the . . . . I was about to say Holy Spirit, but that seems disallowed in the dialogue. Are the characteristics of the Three Persons of the Trinity merely attributes of a one-Person God?  How can an “attribute” speak to an individual inwardly?  This is a question I would like to see Mr. Siljander answer.

Or, on the other hand, is God’s will a matter of written authority?  But now we’re back to the perplexing question of last week.  Should it be Torah, New Testament or Qur’an that takes the top spot?

Keep thinking.  We’re not done, yet.

Have a great week.

Ian Hodge, Ph.D.

P.S.  If you like what you read here, forward this essay to your friends.  For a FREE subscription, go to www.biblicallandmarks.com and select the Subscribe button.


Commentary, The Church, Biblical Worldview

Are Christians, Jews and Muslims all of the one Faith?

1 Comment
The Crumbling ChurchThis perplexing question is answered in a new book by former Michigan Congressman, Mark Siljander.  It’s an interesting proposition.

I had the fortune to meet Mr. Siljander in 1991, when he attempted a new run at Congress from the state of Virginia.  He was not successful. But he has been successful in the diplomatic front in some interesting ways.

Now, in a book entitled  A Deadly Misunderstanding: A Congressman’s Quest to Bridge the Muslim-Christian Divide, Siljander tells us of his own theological journey.  He started with the idea that Islam was the antithesis to Christianity, but has ended with the idea that the Muslim’s Allah is the same as the Christian’s Jehovah, and it is merely that our understanding of God is different, but we’re all referring to the same Person.

For example, Siljander argues that the Muslims attribute to Allah the things that Christians attribute to the Trinity.  He raises the Eastern Orthodox rejection of the Trinity, attempting to argue that in the end it may not really matter whether or not we call the Persons of the Trinity simply “attributes”. It is apparently merely a matter of semantics.  He says,

All three holy books (Torah, New Testament, and Qur’an) describe these three same entities or attributes as Deity — God, Holy Spirit, and Messiah.  I have asked distinguished clerics, both Muslim and Christian, if they could explain to me the interaction of these three deified attributes, and after much bantering back and forth, in the end they have all given me the exact same answer: “Mark, it’s a mystery.”  So what are we arguing about?

This is an interesting proposition.  One that entertains the mind in a  number of ways.  All three books are holy?

You can see in this statement the very question that started me on these series of e-mails 59 weeks ago.  What is your rock-bottom, starting place in theology in terms of the written Word?  This is what determines what the holy books really should be.  Now, Siljander raises the Qur’an to the same level as the Torah and New Testament.

Here’s the challenge:  Where’s the starting point in God’s revelation?  Torah, New Testament, or Qur’an.  Your answer will reveal your basic presupposition about God’s revelation and how we should be seeking that revelation today.

So it seems that the question Siljander has come to is this:  Why can’t the Qur’an have at least equal value with the Torah and the New Testament?

On the other hand, I’ve simply been asking how did the New Testament get equal authority to the Torah.  Now I’ll have to expand this: How does the Qur’an get equal authority with the Torah?  Or, in the case of the Muslims, how did the Qur’an get raised above the Torah?

That ought to get your mind working overtime. Next week, I’ll add some other questions Mr. Siljander does not appear to ask.  Maybe there’s a reason.

Until then, God bless you in your efforts for His Kingdom.

Ian Hodge, Ph.D.

P.S.  If you like what you read here, forward this essay to your friends.  For a FREE subscription, go to www.biblicallandmarks.com and select the Subscribe button