Column for March 25, 2010

There are some things that government can do well. Just this morning, my wife was remarking about how efficient the Town of Selma is about picking up yard debris and other items left at the side of the road. This weekend we did a lot of needed yard work. We also have moved furniture, boxes, limbs, etc. to the curb and they were quickly removed.

Compare that to the road kill that never seems to get picked up along side the highways of North Carolina. I have literally seen deer carcasses rot away to nothing after laying around for a month or two. The state, it seems, is not as efficient at managing the minutia as a small town. This is true of most things the higher up you go in levels of government.

The national government is good at doing a few things. They seem to be good at fielding a military that is quite capable of blowing things up and killing people. That is what I want a military to be able to do. The government seems to be good at building roads, which is good for all citizens.

The national government is not, however, efficient at running people's lives for them. The Social Security system is about broke. The Post Office is broke. The Medicare system is broke. And yet the same government that has run these institutions into the ground now expects us to trust them with our health care system.

I went to bed in a free country and woke up in a socialist nation this morning. "Welkum to Amerika, Comrades" is my greeting to you all. 219 men and women who are either willfully ignorant of or blatantly disregard the Constitution of the United States have voted for and passed sweeping health care legislation that is sure to be signed into law. Forget the fact that most of them have not read the bill much less understand it.

Just about every week, I have joined two friends of mine and taught on the US Constitution and read line upon line the notes from the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Nowhere can I find a single line or even a hint that the government should assist with much less regulate how you seek medical care. For that matter, I do not see where the Social Security system or Medicare is legal, either.

In order to buy the votes of some so called "pro-life" Democrats, President Obama has issued an executive order (also nowhere to be found in the Constitution) prohibiting the use of federal tax dollars to fund abortions, even though such a provision exists in the law. Sorry, but law trumps a presidential edict. So much for being pro-life.

There are a couple of other things I found that government does well. First, spend money. I do not have a problem with the government spending money on principle. I do however, believe that the spending should be parsimonious, legal, and done with great wisdom. Waste, fraud, and abuse are rampant in our state and national governments. Unconstitutional spending abounds at the federal level. I am convinced that if the national government would just cease all spending not permitted by the US Constitution, our national debt and budget would diminish to a fraction of current status.

Second, government excels at taking away freedom. Whether it is Selma's attempt at controlling land outside its town limits with an extra-territorial jurisdiction expansion and forced annexation or the federal government regulating your health care options, government is good at chipping away at your liberty.

James Madison said, "All that seems indispensable in stating the account between the dead and the living, is to see that the debts against the latter do not exceed the advances made by the former." That is exactly what we have been doing in this nation since The New Deal under Franklin Roosevelt and further broadened under Johnson's Great Society. Now we have Obamacare and profligate spending with job bills and stimulus spending packages.

There is no way that we can continue this degradation in Amerika. We can not afford to go the way of socialized medicine, profligate spending, and redistribution of wealth. They have failed everywhere else in the world that they have been tried, so why, comrades, do we go down this same path here in Amerika?

Column for March 4, 2010

Just like a bad penny, some things just keep showing up. The federal government take over of the health care system is one of those things. The problem is that we have to be incessantly vigilant against such intrusions and control. Every single time it comes up, we have to say "NO!" It only takes one single time to say "Yes" and we are permanently hosed. Government intrusion is not limited to the feds, however.
Just like the health care take over, the Town of Selma is again seeking to extend its tentacles of control into more unincorporated territory in the county. Johnstonians as far as two whole miles away from the town limits may wind up beholden to this little town. This is repulsive to the principles of American freedom and is patently unethical. There is absolutely no way that a town this small geographically and in population should be allowed to control territory greater than its corporate limits just because it wants to.

The bottom line is that there is but one reason a town would extend its planning jurisdiction, regardless of the fallacious arguments about wanting development consistent with it's own. The reason is to be a precursor to forced annexation. I have read the statutes on extraterritorial jurisdiction. The entire context of having an ETJ is for the future expansion of a town.

Once again, this unfair, unaccountable, and unethical issue has come up like the proverbial bad penny. The concept of an ETJ amounts to regulation without representation. People are subjected to the regulatory whims of the town even though they live outside the corporate limits and have zero voting capability for those who make such regulations. The only representation that they do get is on the Planning Board, which is an advisory board only.

This is one of the very frustrations that led me to take the decision to not seek another term on that board. During my travels, I sometimes run across current and former members of Selma's Planning Board. To a person I hear the complaint that they feel/felt like they are/were wasting their time. Regardless of the recommendations of the board, there is no binding authority behind decisions taken. Sure, a few ideas may be taken into consideration to help shape the town's zoning ordinances, but I personally have a hard time reconciling the idea of taking personal freedom away from people. I have read too much behind the Founding Fathers to be a partaker in abridgment of freedom.

Make no mistake. I have no issue with the work of the Planning Board and the Planning Director to simplify the town's zoning ordinances. They needed to be simpler and clearer. However, I take great umbrage at the idea of exercising control over people outside the town limits who have absolutely no say or sway in a Republican government. People, we fought a war over ideas like that.

My plea to the town council and mayor would be to please stop exerting control where you have no business controlling. Honor the freedom of those outside the town. Do not even think about setting up forced annexation in years to come. Let freedom reign. The county already has planning laws and the they are fairly consistent with the town's.
A reason such as bringing the zoning of outlying territories into close approximation to Selma's is a moot one. I have seen the maps and compared. I served on the Planning Board when this came up the first time. Heck, I even commented that if we are going to look towards the proposed ETJ map then we should assign zoning similar to its present use and as congruent as possible to our own zoning. Right after that, I refused to vote in favor of the adoption of said map so that I would not be a party to extending the tentacles of control where they do not belong. I thought that if we were going to move in a direction I abhor, then the town should at least do it right.

In order to preserve freedom, each and every time some immoral plan like this comes forward, we have to say "No!" It is much like saying no to personal temptation. It only takes one time of saying yes to fall into sin, or in this case, institute a soft tyranny.

Column for Aug. 6, 2009

At the last two Planning Board meetings here in Selma, we have taken up the issue of limiting the sort of lodging establishments that can be built in town. There is a proposal to prohibit motels from being built and only allowing hotel type lodging. This does not affect existing businesses, but rather future growth or replacement structures.

The difference between a hotel and a motel, as proposed by the town, is the manner of construction. A motel would be defined as having room access from the exterior of the building whereas a hotel would have interior corridors. It is argued that a hotel type business attracts (in general) a higher class of customer and brings in higher taxes than a motel.

I do a significant amount of traveling in my job and personal life. Just recently, I stayed at a fine Best Western motel (as defined by proposed Selma ordinance). I have stayed at some fine hotels, as well.

It was the opinion of the Planning Board that the town ought not adopt an ordinance discriminating against motel type facilities in favor of hotels. The reasons were several, including the infringement upon the private property rights of a motel franchisee, discrimination against a viable form of business, and losing potential tax revenue from fine motel type establishments.

Let's face it, Selma will never attract a Hilton Garden or Embassy Suites. We are a crossroads on Interstate 95 and not a major tourist, convention, or business destination. Interstate travelers are looking for a clean, comfortable, affordable room, not a luxury suite.

Let's also face this fact. Selma does indeed have several establishments that I would term "flea bag motels". At one time, I am sure that they were decent establishments. Now they are aged, lacking in amenities, attract a lot of drug users and dealers, and some are high crime areas. It is precisely these sorts of clients that the town seeks to eliminate. I am all for that, but at what price? Sure, you are not as likely to find that sort of activity at the Holiday Inn Express or Hampton Inn. That is the nature of the franchises and clients to whom they cater, not necessarily construction.

The Village Inn in Smithfield has been a well run motel for years, as have several others. On the other hand, there were several fine motels that degraded into drug havens and cesspools. Some have since been torn down to make way for nicer businesses. That is all about the commitment to fine management and respect for the community versus trying to get a few bucks from a sleazy clientele roster.

If one of our craptacular motels here in Selma was to burn down or be demolished (which would not hurt my feelings. I will refrain from naming business names), the proposed ordinance would prohibit any type of lodging establishment that did not offer only interior corridors for room access.
Don't get me wrong, I love Microtel and have a stack of hotel rewards program cards for different hotel chains in my desk. However, if a Best Western, Red Roof Inn, Motel 6, or other company wanted to build a nice, clean, new facility that just happened to provide rooms accessible from the exterior of the building, I have a hard time with the Town of Selma saying, "Sorry, but we do not want your million dollar facility on our tax rolls, we are holding out for hallways."

Furthermore, unless one of our existing motels is indeed demolished, there are few places for the construction of a new facility. However, since we are not a major tourist destination, I doubt we will attract much more than we already have. Roanoke Rapids attracted a Hilton Garden, but they also have a major music theater on site, and we see how negatively that whole scenario worked out for the town.

I have a few thoughts about the argument that a hotel brings in more tax revenue than a motel. First, show me some hard numbers and I may soften my position, but property rights still prevail in my estimation. Second, I had guests in July and will have family here in September. Both parties elected to stay in a local lodging establishment since we do not have much room for accommodations at the house. Both parties chose lodging near the Factory Stores. Selma lost tax revenue since I advised against the flea bag motels, and the corridor edifices in town exceeded the cost they were willing to pay.

I do not know what the Town Council will decide on this issue, as they have been known to ignore recommendations by the Planning Board for various reasons. Will we uphold property rights and freedom while potentially missing out on property and room taxes from establishments that do not conform to fancier corridor construction?

Column for May 7, 2009

Swine flu, government control, and your personal freedom

It is axiomatic that those who have power do not voluntarily relinquish it. Rather, those with power usually seek more of it. We have seen this as a society on all levels of life, whether it is business, small town government, state, or national government.

I have received scathing reviews for pointing these things out, though they should be plain as day even to a casual observer. Along with the warnings about power grabs have come real life examples. Yet I was called an alarmist, as if I was the little boy who cried wolf.

What happens when the wolf is indeed stalking his prey? What if the wolf was so cunning that he was able to take advantage of a diversionary scare in order to secure his position? Folks, that is exactly what we see going on right now.

I type this while coughing from time to time and sniffling. This is not to mention the lack of energy that comes from the onset of a head cold. And yet I don't mind saying that the current scare of the Swine Flu is no big deal. In fact, I am tired of hearing about it. Every day, every hour, newscasts are barraging us with fears of some mild strain of influenza. Why are we hearing so much about it? It is a mere scare tactic to condition sheeple into accepting government directed control for the sake of avoiding an epidemic. And the news media is soaking it up for a lazy sell in order to have something to report.

Amongst the clamor of the alarmist rants about an epidemic, I have actually heard health experts occasionally get their message through that the Swine Flu is nothing to worry about. In fact, there will be fewer cases of Swine Flu infections than normal influenza. And yet we hear the newest death toll each hour on the radio.

Scared sheeple will buy into the tactics and allow themselves to be controlled over something minor. Yet these same sheeple have criticized people like myself who have been warning about socialist incursions into our everyday lives.

I was told I was crying wolf about socialism and yet now the federal government owns huge chunks of General Motors, Chrysler, AIG, and Citi Bank at your expense. I was told I was crying wolf about attempts at gun control, yet I have read about legislative bill after bill that provide for stringent restrictions on your freedoms. I was told that I was crying wolf about the increasing control on what you can and can not express in public, and yet I read just this week about a mayor of a small town that had one of the town council members arrested for speaking his mind at a town council meeting. The list goes on and on, folks.

I am amazed at the hysteria over a mild strain of influenza by both the government and the media and yet there is no call for sealing off the southern border of the United States, which is where most carriers of this illness enter the country. Of course it would not be politically correct to call for that, since these same people are the ones who want wide open borders and do not mind an influx of people from third world nations full of disease.

In the Bible, in Matthew chapter 10, Jesus said, "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." That is a good principle to follow in life in general, not just in Christianity. We are told that there are "wiles of the devil". There are wiles of the world's system as well. One very effective wile is to scare people into accepting more and more control and to give up more and more freedom in the name of peace or safety. As Benjamin Franklin said, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

In the coming days, keep watching the news, keep listening to the tactics employed by the mainstream media, and watch what our governments at all levels do. You will see the Law of Entropy at work. It does not only apply to thermodynamics; it also applies to our society as well.