Cagle World

President Obama has had a rather challenging start to the Summer of 2010: Gen. McChrystal’s remarks to Rolling Stone magazine and the resulting shift of NATO control in Afghanistan to Gen. Petraeus; the continuation of the high-profile and painful BP oil spill; the Elena Kagan Supreme Court nomination hearings; and the move by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer to enact strict immigration control policies within her overwhelmed state.

In it all, the president has had the opportunity to step up and re-assert himself after a bad few months for him politically. And in part, he was able to do just that. His pick of Gen. Petraeus to step in for Gen. McChrystal was the smart move from a political and military perspective; however, it opened a wound within his party that he will most assuredly face in December when the issue of our Afghanistan policy is once again debated.

Gen, Petraeus would not publicly commit to the merits of a July 2011 timeline as many Democrats have been demanding. The administration knew that the general would sail through his nomination and it could not have gone much better than it did — 99-0! However, they merely tabled the debate that will come later this year when the likes of MoveOn.Org, Senators Durbin, Schumer and Reid, and Speaker Pelosi once again make their demands for withdrawal public. And this time they will be able to fight that fight without the threat of looming mid-term elections — possibly putting the president on the defensive as he turns his attention to his own re-election effort.

The BP oil spill continues to weigh as an anchor that will not release itself from the hull of this administration any time soon. We are more than 70 days into the spill, and oil continues to flow into the gulf at an alarming rate – and, unfortunately for the president, this flow is continually televised in a manner that rightfully stokes the ire of Americans who cannot understand why the federal government and BP cannot get things right. All the while, too many hard working Americans on our Gulf Coast are losing money, and potentially their professional industries, in the process.

While it appears that Elena Kagan will become the next United States Supreme Court Justice — filling the vacancy left by retiring Justice John Paul Stevens — Republican Senators appeared to be emboldened by her lack of a judicial record and achievements and have homed in on a period during her tenure as the Dean of Harvard’s prestigious law school where she refused to allow the military to recruit on campus. Such an argument, while seemingly not enough to derail her nomination, will feed the firestorm already brewing around the country around the president’s patriotism and reverence to the military.

Lastly, we have seen a governor in a western state who has taken matters into her own hands when it comes to the out-of-control flow of illegal immigration. Today, Phoenix has a higher kidnapping rate than Kabul, Afghanistan, and the federal government continues to do nothing about it.except threaten to take court action against the Arizona law. Americans are fed up and, rather than take action to defend our border and our nation, this administration talks about amnesty rather than security.

This summer is heating up for President Obama, but not in a way he has envisioned. He has much work ahead to try and right the ship before it is his turn to ask the voters for a second term. And right now, his fate is far less certain than many pundits were predicting just last summer.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who until today was the leader of U.S, and NATO forces in Afghanistan, has resigned in the wake of derogatory comments made by the general and his staff during an interview with Rolling Stone magazine.

Cartoon by Daryl Cagle - msnbc.com (click to reprint)

One can only guess at this point why the general chose to publicly disclose his feelings on an array of topics in an on-the-record capacity to a journalist associated with this particular magazine, not one generally associated with thought-provoking foreign policy pieces. The president chose wisely in quickly replacing Gen. McChrystal with someone with impeccable credentials and a record of accomplishing military objectives that at first glance may seem to be unobtainable.

You may remember this man as Gen. David Petraeus, the former commander of forces in Iraq who crafted, implemented and led the famous surge that ultimately saved countless American and Iraqi lives. Interestingly, this is the same David Petraeus who faced the wrath of the uber-progressive MoveOn.org during that same timeframe. MoveOn launched a controversial ad entitled “Petraeus Betray Us,” which drew the wrath of a majority of Americans who felt it wholly inappropriate to attack a United States general who was in the field leading American personnel into battle. At the time, 72 sitting United States senators agreed.

On September 20, 2007, Senator John Cornyn of Texas (R) offered Senate Amendment 2934, which set out to: “express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces.” The measure passed overwhelmingly with 72 “yeas” to 25 “nays” and 3 not voting.

It will not surprise many of you to see the likes of Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer or Harry Reid voting against a measure that supported the leader of our armed forces engaged in battle in favor of a progressive grassroots organization. But what should concern many of us is that then-Sen. Obama decided to seek political refuge by not casting a vote. Then-Sen. Joe Biden did the same.

Gen. McChrystal, despite his proud military record, exercised extremely poor judgment in allowing such dismissing comments about the Obama administration to be aired in a public forum. The president’s choice to replace him is an understandable decision.

Less understandable is how President Obama can demand a respect he has been inconsistent in offering to others. In 2007, he was unwilling to stand up to the liberal elements of his party in defense of Gen. Petraeus. As he now calls on that same general to rescue him from the political firestorm flowing today and continue the surge in Afghanistan, I express only the greatest admiration for the honor and integrity of David Petraeus.

The war in Afghanistan stands at a crucial point as more American forces pour into the region. While I have nothing but confidence in Gen. Petraeus, the resignation of Gen. McChrystal is an unfortunate loss, and one symptomatic of the tension between the civilian and military dimensions of this effort. As President Obama and Gen. Petraeus move foward in this conflict, I hope the president will begin to take proactive steps to reconcile this divide, listen to the counsel of generals in the field, and increase coordination between all aspects of the fight in Afghanistan. That country, and ours, can afford no less.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

As we pass the 50-day mark of the terrible oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, it seems like the more things change the more they stay the same.

As I have previously discussed, sometimes terrible tragedies occur for which even the most diligent administrations cannot prepare. While it can and should be properly debated whether this tragedy is one of those events, our collective priority must be the well-being of our ecosystem and the many Gulf Coast residents who are being impacted. We must also continue to keep the family members of those lost during the initial accident in our thoughts and prayers.

But today we must also explore the attitude and focus of the Obama administration as this terrible tragedy unfolds — seemingly around them.

What President Obama must learn is that his job is more than chief executive — it is also chief communicator. And on that side of the equation, his administration has failed terribly, always seeming to play catch-up when it comes to the unfolding Gulf narrative. At times the president has seemed distant and even disinterested — publicly partying with musicians or welcoming victorious basketball squads to the White House. He has seems oblivious to the fact that many of the cable networks carry his appearances alongside a live box of oil flowing from an underground pipe — poisoning our environment each passing moment he addresses another subject.

In a purely defensive posture, the president has tried to counter such criticisms by saying that he is not in the business of the “theater” but rather the business of leading on behalf of the people. And in a perfect world he would be right. But this is reality — a reality the president himself came to just a few days later when he used his pre-planned zinger about finding the right asses to kick in order to hold people accountable on the spill.

Simply put, the administration is trying everything it can think of to get its arms around this issue. At times, they seem just as concerned with trying to stop the leak of public opinion as trying to figure out a way to stop the Gulf leak from spewing oil.

With poll after poll showing that the public feels that both the administration and BP are equally at fault in not doing enough to get this disaster under control, the Obama presidency finds itself staring at further erosion of the support of a nation that overwhelmingly supported their change agenda. If they don’t resolve this matter by figuring out how the get this leak under control, clean up the habitat and protect Gulf residents from further harm, they may find themselves looking at the kind of political changes reserved for one-term presidencies.

For the good of our nation, especially our neighbors down south, and for his own political viability, President Obama better find a plan and a message that puts an end to a tragedy that is running 24/7 on cable news.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

This week Chinese officials brushed off U.S. Defense Secretary Gates on a proposed meeting to discuss looming military issues and bolster communication. Their reason? It was “inconvenient.”

I would find China’s casual and indifferent response to our efforts disturbing under any circumstances. We must take care that neither China nor any other nation would so easily dismiss high-level discussions with American leadership.

Cartoon by Cam Cardow - Ottawa Citizen (click to purchase)

But for China to act in this manner — at a time when we are facing multiple international crises in Asia alone — is deeply alarming. Moreover, the public manner in which they handled this further undermines our credibility in a tumultuous region and sparks a new sense of anxiety between the world’s lone superpower and the nation that aims to assume that title.

These hot spots should trouble China as well, and deserve careful attention. In particular, recent events on the Korean peninsula have sparked regional fears. Before the North Korean government rebuffed efforts, China was a partner with the United States and other key nations in six-party talks regarding North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. North Korea’s nuclear aims — and their nuclear tests — now continue unabated.

The Korean peninsula now faces an even more immediate threat, however, in the uneasy relations between North and South Korea. Investigations by the South Korean government found that the March sinking of one of their warships was the result of a torpedo fired on orders from North Korea. South Korea has chosen not retaliate militarily for the deaths of their 46 sailors, but tensions remain high. Just last week North Korea further threatened South Korean ships, and economic and political sanctions continue to strain relations.

With nearly 30,000 American troops stationed in South Korea, it should be of great concern to have the Chinese summarily dismiss a meeting with our defense secretary. Our leaders should be fully engaged in an open and honest dialogue concerning the best ways to diffuse the situation and also ensure that adequate contingency plans are in place on the remote chance that further military confrontations between the South and North should occur.

More directly, the United States and China are in sharp disagreement on the matter of Taiwan. This past January, Chinese and American officials clashed on a proposed $6.4 billion arms sale to Taiwan. The American government has historically supported Taiwan’s 1949 break from mainland China, and promised to defend them against invasion in a 1955 resolution. This American sale of arms to Taiwan is in stark contrast to the U.S. ban on American companies selling weapons to mainland China for the past 20 years.

With such strong disagreements between our nations on matters that impact our economic and foreign policy well-being, China’s discouraging dismissal of talks may sound curious. Some argue that it is merely diplomatic gamesmanship. However, I subscribe to the theory that with China remaining the largest holder of U.S. debt — nearly $900 billion as of March 2010 — they in part feel emboldened to treat us as subordinates.

In order to secure our standing in the international community and take away this strategic advantage from the Chinese, our nation must reduce its rapidly growing deficit and debt burden to loan sharks such as the Chinese. To truly engage China, this administration must realize that debt reduction is as important to our security as any military weapons program. And if we do make this a national priority, perhaps in 10 years such high-level overtures will be met with greater response and respect from our friends in Beijing.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Since last month’s oil-spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, two very different leadership styles have been on display. On the one hand we have President Obama, who took nine days before making a public statement on the spill. On the other, we have Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who has been intensely and vocally involved from the beginning.

Cartoon by John Darkow - Columbia Daily Tribune (click to purchase)

Now, we must all recognize that during the course of a presidency unexpected and unprecedented events will occur that cannot be blamed on the administration. And this is one of those cases. However, it is not always the event itself that causes the most trouble — it is the response to the situation that usually gets you.

In the wake of recent criticism, President Obama has been forced to backtrack and step up his attention to the oil spill. The spill — which may have already released 90 million gallons of oil into the Gulf and has now reached the marshes of Louisiana, “oiling” some 84 miles of the coast —is undoubtedly the greatest national disaster of the Obama presidency. Yet despite intense Democratic criticism for President Bush’s response to a natural disaster, Hurricane Katrina, in this same state, President Obama’s response has been underwhelming, to say the least.

Under the justification of maintaining a regular schedule and demonstrating calm, President Obama has cavalierly gone about with casual events, even fundraisers, choosing to keep most of his disaster response effort private. So private, in fact, that those of us living far away from the slick might even be forgiven for forgetting about it.

This is not a superficial matter for a president. Even if President Obama’s administration were, in fact, exercising the highest level of competency in dealing with the catastrophe, it is the job of a president to handle not only the practical matters of government, but to also be the public face to encourage, motivate, and inform the public. This is a job he is failing.

Down in Louisiana, people have seen a very different story. Gov. Jindal has engaged completely in all aspects of disaster relief efforts. He has been a tireless advocate for his state, challenging mistaken federal approaches and pressuring BP to make every possible effort to quell this spill. And when the focus is fully switched to clean-up efforts, the people of Louisiana can have every confidence that Gov. Jindal will continue in the manner he has begun.

BP’s latest attempt to staunch the oil, their “top kill” tactic, is now underway. This effort will involve pumping an intense concentration of heavy mud and cement into the oil flow in an effort to staunch the flow. Initial results are promising, but only time will tell how effective this will be.

Right now, residents of the Gulf Coast need the administration to demonstrate the type of leadership being exercised by Gov. Bobby Jindal. President Obama is now talking about the future of off-shore drilling, placing additional restrictions and extending the moratorium on drilling. None of this, however, deals with the realities of the oil currently pouring into the ocean, and the livelihoods of Louisianans which are being destroyed.

Again we see a pattern of lackluster efforts from our president. Words and a veneer of calm are not a demonstration of leadership. They do not serve as action and progress. And coming from an administration whose party trounced President Bush for his conduct in the Gulf, such “leadership” is not only ineffective, but actually hypocritical.

I will be watching with the rest of the country to see where the President goes from here. I hope he will exceed the pattern he has shown us so far. And in the meantime, my prayers and support are with Gov. Jindal and the good people of Louisiana in the face of this tragedy.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Kentucky is not normally a state that is seen as a bellwether to the national political mood. Comfortably in the “Red,” the Bluegrass State often passes through the electoral season with very little national fanfare. Last night that changed.

Cartoon by RJ Matson - St. Louis Post-Dispatch (click to reprint)

For the first time since its rapid evolvement, the Tea Party movement helped a significant political candidate earn electoral victory — marking a notable increase in the movement’s importance to candidates across the country. No longer can anyone call this a fluke.

Now many will be quick to say that this is simply a result of the normal enthusiasm gap that comes into play when one party has been swept into power. And others will say that this new group symbolizes a modern shift into a third wing of American electoral politics. I disagree with both.

You see, what the Tea Party movement stands for is nothing new to those of us who remember the days of the Grand Old Party remaining true to its core principles — a Republican Party that believed that uttering anything related to “increased government spending” was akin to dropping a four-letter curse word.

What the Tea Party followers are demanding is simply a return to the days of old — the days where Republican leaders like my father stood for smaller government, less spending and the implementation of policies that allow the American economy to grow, rather than punishing families and small businesses for being productive.

Today, if you visit any state Republican convention or any other gathering of Republicans, you will see a wide array of conservative organizations using my father’s likeness to promote their cause. From the issue of life to immigration, they claim the Reagan mantra.

However, when it comes to the Tea Party, these folks are actually out there demanding a return to the real Reagan principles. They are demanding that our government return more power to the people. I can assure you that my father would not only have approved of their efforts, he would be standing by them as they help return our nation to one by the people, for the people, of the people.

What’s more, the Tea Party has now proven that they can not only talk a good game, but they can actually put solid, principled Republicans in office. This should serve to send a strong message to Republican leadership that the Tea Party can be an ally in electing the best candidates, rather than a political rapid to be navigated. And as we look towards the coming general elections, Tea Party organizers must remember that the resources and support of the Republican Party can work on their behalf as well. We are strongest when we are working together.

Last night’s win was historic for the Tea Party movement. But we must not stop now. It’s time to hold candidates and office-holders accountable when it comes to spending, the deficit and the tax burden being placed on our families.

By pushing hard on this front, in a couple of years, we will be able to stand up and ask President Obama just how he takes his tea.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

In politics, incumbency usually provides a significant advantage to a candidate. Usually special interests and large-dollar donors flow to those who are currently in power and have control over government purse strings. Incumbents also carry the distinct advantage of staying in the public eye simply in the course of their duties and at the public expense, making campaigning considerably easier. So, election after elections, odds are you get to keep your seat.

Cartoon by Jeff Parker - Florida Today (click to purchase)

No more, however. Today, there is an electoral tide turning against this once-impenetrable head-start. Today, it seems that being an incumbent now works against you.

There has been a string of incumbent losses in primaries, most recently Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., and Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah. Shockingly, Bennett finished third in delegate votes, getting only 26 percent of the total, and Mollohan, a 14-term incumbent, lost in the polls by 12 percent. Looking to the future, Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., and Arlen Specter, D-Pa., both incumbent senators, are looking rather nervous in the face of serious challenges for their primaries May 18. We’ve already seen other political forces toppled, such as Florida Gov. Charlie Crist’s public defeat and then defection from the Republican Party.

This trend seems to be holding true on all levels, with even local incumbents being ousted from school boards and county seats in elections across the country,

And of course this impact is felt at the highest levels, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid desperately fighting to keep his Nevada Senate seat. Arizona Sen. John McCain, the Republican Party’s 2008 presidential nominee, will also be facing a primary challenge.

Not surprisingly, polls show that the American people are notably and consistently disenchanted with Congress. Last week’s NBC/Wall Street Journal poll on Congressional job performance gave Congress a mere 21 percent approval rating, with a full 72 percent outright disapproving.

“What is this all about?” you ask.

I believe the answer is simple: accountability. Conservative, moderate and even some progressive-minded Americans are tired of hearing the perpetual campaign rhetoric concerning cutting wasteful spending and lessening the burden on American taxpayers. It all started when the TARP legislation was passed and has only become amplified when additional so-called stimulus bills were rammed through and hit a fever pitch with the passage of the unaffordable health care legislation.

Republicans are not blameless in this mess. When in power, Republicans lost their way — spending at historic rates. Our talk of fiscal conservatism was washed away by our actions when we were at the helm, and some of our own leaders are paying a political price this year.

What our representatives in Washington need to understand is that if each of us must to learn to do more with less during tough times, the government should be no different. Spending money that the nation does not have used to be easier to do, but those days are gone. Americans are watching closely — and when their incumbent representatives act imprudently, they are willing to fire them.

The days of free-spending and massive national debts are no longer acceptable to voters — incumbents beware.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

In days past, other nations needed a sophisticated and highly trained espionage operation to know the details of America’s military might. Now, they only need a subscription to The New York Times.

Cartoon by Cam Cardow - Ottawa Citizen (click to purchase)

This week, the Obama administration released information regarding the number of nuclear weapons we have stockpiled: 5,113 precisely. This is a mere 16 percent of the nuclear weapons we once had, and the smallest number of nuclear weapons on hand since the Eisenhower administration.

Now, let’s be completely clear that 5,113 nuclear weapons are more than enough. I don’t particularly care to contemplate how many times over the world could be annihilated with that number of nukes. My father, Ronald Reagan, dreamed of a world where our stockpile would be reduced to zero, and that destructive power would be entirely eliminated.

But regardless of the merits of reducing the size of our stockpile — an effort which has spanned decades and multiple presidencies — what I cannot applaud is this administration’s loose treatment of American interests.

In so many ways, President Obama seems to have forgotten that we are still a sovereign nation facing real threats and irrational enemies. Once again, he has made a substantive offer of American intelligence and resources without any known return on investment.

This deeply disturbing pattern would have appalled my father.

Since his inauguration, President Obama has made multiple overtures towards the Iranian government. The response? A report released just this past February by the International Atomic Energy Agency said the Iranians are working even more determinedly in their pursuit of atomic weapons. Their massive enrichment program, perhaps be too large to halt, is now certainly too large for the Iranian government to easily surrender.

During the international climate negotiations in Copenhagen, the United States was only stopped from surrendering massive shares of its economic power by the complete unwillingness to engage on the part of large developing nations such as China, India, and Indonesia.

In dealing with rogue nation North Korea, President Obama has only seen the situation with that intractable county disintegrate. Just over a year ago, North Korea pulled out of six-party talks and ejected all nuclear inspectors. A month later, they publicly tested a nuclear weapon. Now, a South Korean naval vessel has sunk under suspicious circumstances, and even if North Korea is to blame, no one seems quite sure what recourse is available.

And while the Obama administration claims a warm relationship with China, we can’t help but look at tensions over North Korea, Taiwan, currency — even Google — and ask: Really? Does a friendly diplomatic meeting do us any good if we walk away with no progress?

From his multi-nation apology tour to stalled foreign policy promises to this preemptive release of our nuclear secrets, President Obama has repeatedly demonstrated his willingness to give away the store and gain little to nothing in return.

Last week’s attempted bombing in Times Square should have driven home, once again, the very real threats America still faces in this world. The economic, military, and diplomatic strength our country has known for the past half-century is not inevitable. Without strong, strategic leadership this nation, like so many before it, will peak and fade.

President Obama seems not to know, or not to care, and that is one quality we can not afford in our leader.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

Today, many of our states are facing serious budget shortfalls as a result of a number of factors, including shrinking sales tax revenues. Politicians now face the untenable choice between decreased services and higher tax rates or the imposition of new “fees” — neither approach very appealing to the electorate.

Cartoon by Daryl Cagle - msnbc.com (click to purchase)

One key element of these budget shortfalls that has not gained as much attention, however, comes in the form of government employee pension payouts. Many state pension programs have been hit hard by the previous three-year downturn in the stock market, states withholding their own payments into their respective plans, and a growing number of retirees becoming eligible for retirement benefits.

Some of our nation’s most populous states such as New Jersey, Illinois and even my home state of California are now tackling the serious problem of pension obligations (California alone faces upwards of a $500 billion pension gap).

In California, Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger has proposed increasing the age of non-public safety, government workers who are eligible for retirement benefits from age 55 to 65. Moreover, the state would also then base retirement benefits for pensions on an average of the last three years of service, rather than the old system, which was based exclusively on the last year of service — inviting employees boost their final salary through overtime work and hoarded vacation.

In New Jersey, Republican Gov. Christie is decreasing the state’s generous pension benefits for new hires. And in Illinois the state has reached bi-partisan compromise to create a two-tiered pension system that raises the age of retirement for government employees to 67 and also reduces pension benefits for new hires. Work underway in other states again proves the capability of states to govern through pragmatic, results-based solutions.

But now, there are calls for the federal government to step in and provide funding to help states meet these pension obligations — something that should make every American taxpayer shudder. Instead of following the lead of California, Illinois and New Jersey, Democrats in Washington want to spend more money that they don’t have in order to appease a significant portion of their base — government employees and their unions.

With Democrats in Washington taking control of banks, our auto industry and our health care system, they now are investigating ways to take on another financial obligation we simply cannot afford- – covering unfunded pension programs. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, when tidbits of a Value Added Tax were being floated, our antennas should have been raised. If we take on pension supplementation, I fear a VAT and increased income taxes will be sure to follow.

You may remember at one time military retirees received 100 percent of their pay in retirement; however, the government scaled that back dramatically to save money. The military has no union and those who served our nation with great distinction for 20 years simply had to accept the change. That is what today’s public employees must accept as well.

With public sector employees earning as much as $5 more per hour in benefits than their private sector counterparts, it only seems fair that they and their unions do their part during these turbulent times. We simply cannot afford the alternative.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

As President Obama pushes for stricter regulations on Wall Street institutions, I want to call us back to caution. Undoubtedly, we should learn from past mistakes and forge a path through to prosperity and an understanding of proper limits on the dangers associated with potentially catastrophic lending and investment practices. But without appropriate caution, we will jump the gun with an over-expanded and unjustifiably influential federal government in the financial sector.

Cartoon by Jeff Parker - Florida Today (click to purchase)

It is imperative that we look at our past to truly understand how we got here. And we need not look further than the Carter administration’s Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 for the answer. That act required banks to lend to un-creditworthy borrowers, mostly in underprivileged and minority communities.

While the concept of putting more Americans in homes comes across as a “feel good” policy, the fact of the matter is that these types of policies saddle families who don’t have the income or earning potential to meet their payment obligations, leading to foreclosure and displacement.

This type of enabling legislation, coupled with predatory lenders and institutions, including those under federal government control, who would push potential investors into home-buying and other schemes for which they were not fiscally viable, formed an all-too-powerful formula that led to an almost paralyzing economic bust.

Democrats in Washington have looked at this scenario as a political opportunity in the run-up to the midterm elections. Without acknowledging the complexity or history of the issue, they hope to score easy points with a hit on Wall Street and the promise of reform. But insensible reform is nothing but reckless.

Last week, all 41 Republican senators, under the leadership of Mitch McConnell, signed a letter stating their opposition to the current version of the “Wall Street reform bill.” If needed, this type of unity could stop the bill.

Key Republicans have declared their intent to use their unity as a negotiating position with which to improve the bill, rather than as a tool to kill it. Sen. John McCain said, “This one is a little bit different [than the health care bill]. We want to keep 41 votes together to have a negotiating position; on healthcare, we didn’t like any of it.”

This is the type of measured, strategic leadership we need in Washington. Promising bipartisan talks are underway, and if Republicans stay strong, we can see a way through to a reasonable reform which does not increase the size and influence of the federal government at the expense of the core components of our economy.

There are a few key provisions Republicans must continue to fight:

First, the suggested creation of a new “Consumer Protection Agency” to tighten government oversight is a blatantly unnecessary power-grab. Its proposed duties could be easily handled through existing agencies.

Second, Democrats are pushing for the creation of a $50 billion fund which could be used by the government to seize and dismantle large, failing financial agencies. This proposal only endorses “too big to fail” and institutionalizes the misguided bailouts of the past two years.

Third, Republicans must oppose a proposed tax on bank liabilities, to the tune of $90 billion over 10 years, which would be designed to help the government recoup losses from the recent bailouts. While Americans are entitled to recoup their lost tax dollars, placing a new tax on a weak financial sector is not the way to go about it.

Lastly, we can expect new regulatory standards for derivatives to soon be passed through committee. Abuse of derivatives must end, but the private sector rightly argues that these proposed regulations are too intrusive and restrictive and would harm America’s ability to compete internationally. More risky investments and sales would potentially be prohibited. We need smart — not smothering — reform on derivatives.

As Washington grapples with these important issues, and the president seeks camera time in our nation’s financial capital, it is important for us all to remember that the reforms of a past failing Democratic administration enabled the very issues over which they are now indignant.

Too-broad reform only serves as a mask for an expanded federal government and will ultimately lead to greater economic uncertainty and market paralysis. When it comes to market innovation, Americans will vote far more effectively with their wallet than through misguided and self-interested members of Congress.

More than ever, we need smart and realistic leadership, not another Washington power grab.

—–

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to [email protected].

©2010 Mike Reagan. If you’re not a paying subscriber to our service, you must contact us to print or Web post this column. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc., newspaper syndicate. For info contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.