SOUTH DAKOTA STRAIGHT TALK

Citizens expect at a minimum when they elect Legislators either State or Federal that they would take the effort to understand what is in the laws they are enacting.

Lately our Congress has taken inattention to new heights. Last February when Congress finalized the Stimulus Bill, the President and Democrat majority in the Congress told us that the bill had to be passed immediately and sent to the President for his signature post haste.

The bill was passed on Friday rather than let Congress and the Public see and digest the legislative sausage before say voting on it the following Tuesday. No sunshine was allowed. This bill that had to be now was the $800 plus Billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. After the bill was passed on Friday the President then decided he was not in such a hurry to sign the bill. Rather he waited until the following Wednesday for a full blown ceremony and press oppity.

Last week with the U S House passage of the so called Climate Bill (cap and trade et al) similar shenanigans took place.

While in this latest round Democrats are railroading their favorite projects and policies, Republicans have not always been innocent bystanders. Most everyone who pays attention to current events and our federal Congress are very used to seeing Committee hearings that are attended by only two or three Senators or Representative. How many times have you seen on CSPAN floor debate in the U S House or Senate with just a minimum of Members present?

Shouldn’t we expect more attention?

I have been an observer and what might be described as adjunct participant in our State Legislator for almost thirty years. I understand that not all Legislators read every bill. They do depend (at least on the GOP side and I presume the Dem side as well) the Caucus to review legislation. But in Pierre, hearings and session is attended at near 100 percent levels.

Having not attended Session for the past 6 years I was somewhat surprised to hear a new term. “Reader” Recently I was introduced to State Representative R. Blake Curd. As part of his introduction to me by another legislator I was told ‘he is a Reader.” When I inquired what that was, it was explained he was one of the few members that actually read the bills. While I was disappointed to hear that the process and consequently understanding of the impacts and consequences of legislation in South Dakota may be deteriorating, I was impressed by Representative Curd’s intellect and work ethic.

In a Representative Democracy we should expect no less of all our solons and especially our Federal Reps.

Sidebar – It was also pointed out to me that in our last Legislative session because of impacts of the “Stimulus Bill” (referenced above) at the initiation of Representative Curd a Special Legislative Committee was organized to study and understand the federal rules and mandates that came as “rules” with the cash the Feds are sending. Representative Curd was appointed Chairman of Stimulus Committee. This is an impressive recognition of respect for a first year Legislator.

Highlighting what a PR machine the White House has become an economist friend sent me a video that simply yet eloquently demonstrates how the Obama administration places perception over real substance.

The Rahm Emanuel led White House spin machine at the time the President released his Budget Proposal with its $1.6 plus Billion deficit, held the first Cabinet meeting of the Obama administration to tell Americans how fiscally tough and conservative the President is. The White House message of the day was - the President had a Cabinet Meeting. He instructed his Cabinet to collectively find cuts of $100 Million – thus demonstrated that the President was fiscally responsible and making good on his campaign promises to pay as you go, go through the Federal budget line by line, and cut the federal deficit.

Straight Talk commented contemporaneously that instructions to the Cabinet to find budget cuts of $100 million in cuts were so unbelievably small they were a joke.

Straight Talk commentary – On Monday President Obama held another Cabinet Meeting. His first Cabinet Meeting on April 20^th was the fiscal joke of instructing his Cabinet to be fiscally responsible and find $100 million in budget cuts collectively in their departments.

Monday’s Cabinet meeting dubbed Roadmap to Recovery is the continuation of the sham that his Stimulus Packaged rushed thru the Congress in early February is little more than a Democrat big Government giveaway. In January I posted about the so called American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in Stimulus - What Stimulus?:

To be clear our Economy needs a real jump start and stimulus, but to be effective it must put people to work and quickly. The President and Congressional Democrats are using political sleight of hand by saying this “Package” will create or save 3 million jobs. Save jobs? Since they don’t say which jobs they are saving, I guess that means as long as 3 million people are still working – the stimulus package will be a success.

My primary objections are that the funds are not being put to use quickly enough and that overall too little of the money is being used for true stimulus (but rather spending for special projects and more government.)

This Democrat Trojan Horse so called “Stimulus Package” is a sham. It is old time government spending, very little stimulus and way too slow.

The President’s dog and pony show cabinet meeting (note from the picture that the meeting was not held in the Cabinet room at the White House but what appears to be the East Room (though I may be wrong on that) – clearly this was a photo op(porutnity) not serious business. The two important points here are that despite the Administration’s claims the money is not being spent or people being put back to work FAST enough and that little in the Stimulus Bill is real stimulus.

William McGurn’s opinion editorial in The Wall Street Journal titled, “The Media Fall for Phony “Jobs” Claims: McGurn accurately points out that President Obama is spinning his claim that HIS Stimulus Package is working.

At the heat of McGurn’s argument is his assertion –“Mr. Obama's comments yesterday are a perfect illustration of just such a claim. In the months since Congress approved the stimulus, our economy has lost nearly 1.6 million jobs and unemployment has hit 9.4%. Invoke the magic words, however, and -- presto! -- you have the president claiming he has "saved or created" 150,000 jobs. It all makes for a much nicer spin, and helps you forget this is the same team that only a few months ago promised us that passing the stimulus would prevent unemployment from rising over 8%.”

In concert with McGurn and Rosenthal that this is hocus pocus focus, Peter Morici, Professor of International Business at the University of Maryland said, “A lot of this is hokum. All along, (Obama’s) job numbers have kept changing according to the political environment.”

The Media Fall for Phony 'Jobs' Claims

By: William McGurn

The Wall Street Journal

June 10, 2009

The Obama Numbers Are Pure Fiction

Tony Fratto is envious.

Mr. Fratto was a colleague of mine in the Bush administration, and as a senior member of the White House communications shop, he knows just how difficult it can be to deal with a press corps skeptical about presidential economic claims. It now appears, however, that Mr. Fratto's problem was that he simply lacked the magic words -- jobs "saved or created."

"Saved or created" has become the signature phrase for Barack Obama as he describes what his stimulus is doing for American jobs. His latest invocation came yesterday, when the president declared that the stimulus had already saved or created at least 150,000 American jobs -- and announced he was ramping up some of the stimulus spending so he could "save or create" an additional 600,000 jobs this summer. These numbers come in the context of an earlier Obama promise that his recovery plan will "save or create three to four million jobs over the next two years."

Mr. Fratto sees a double standard at play. "We would never have used a formula like 'save or create,'" he tells me. "To begin with, the number is pure fiction -- the administration has no way to measure how many jobs are actually being 'saved.' And if we had tried to use something this flimsy, the press would never have let us get away with it."

Of course, the inability to measure Mr. Obama's jobs formula is part of its attraction. Never mind that no one -- not the Labor Department, not the Treasury, not the Bureau of Labor Statistics -- actually measures "jobs saved." As the New York Times delicately reports, Mr. Obama's jobs claims are "based on macroeconomic estimates, not an actual counting of jobs." Nice work if you can get away with it.

And get away with it he has. However dubious it may be as an economic measure, as a political formula "save or create" allows the president to invoke numbers that convey an illusion of precision. Harvard economist and former Bush economic adviser Greg Mankiw calls it a "non-measurable metric." And on his blog, he acknowledges the political attraction.

"The expression 'create or save,' which has been used regularly by the President and his economic team, is an act of political genius," writes Mr. Mankiw. "You can measure how many jobs are created between two points in time. But there is no way to measure how many jobs are saved. Even if things get much, much worse, the President can say that there would have been 4 million fewer jobs without the stimulus."

Mr. Obama's comments yesterday are a perfect illustration of just such a claim. In the months since Congress approved the stimulus, our economy has lost nearly 1.6 million jobs and unemployment has hit 9.4%. Invoke the magic words, however, and -- presto! -- you have the president claiming he has "saved or created" 150,000 jobs. It all makes for a much nicer spin, and helps you forget this is the same team that only a few months ago promised us that passing the stimulus would prevent unemployment from rising over 8%.

It's not only former Bush staffers such as Messrs. Fratto and Mankiw who have noted the political convenience here. During a March hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, Chairman Max Baucus challenged Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on the formula.

"You created a situation where you cannot be wrong," said the Montana Democrat. "If the economy loses two million jobs over the next few years, you can say yes, but it would've lost 5.5 million jobs. If we create a million jobs, you can say, well, it would have lost 2.5 million jobs. You've given yourself complete leverage where you cannot be wrong, because you can take any scenario and make yourself look correct."

Now, something's wrong when the president invokes a formula that makes it impossible for him to be wrong and it goes largely unchallenged. It's true that almost any government spending will create some jobs and save others. But as Milton Friedman once pointed out, that doesn't tell you much: The government, after all, can create jobs by hiring people to dig holes and fill them in.

If the "saved or created" formula looks brilliant, it's only because Mr. Obama and his team are not being called on their claims. And don't expect much to change. So long as the news continues to repeat the administration's line that the stimulus has already "saved or created" 150,000 jobs over a time period when the U.S. economy suffered an overall job loss 10 times that number, the White House would be insane to give up a formula that allows them to spin job losses into jobs saved.

"You would think that any self-respecting White House press corps would show some of the same skepticism toward President Obama's jobs claims that they did toward President Bush's tax cuts," says Mr. Fratto. "But I'm still waiting."

Note: This post should be considered venting and is not intended to reach the level of a full blown rant. (additional disclaimer – I am an intense user of USPS services and speaking specifically of their service find their pricing competitive, service fast and reliable for small parcels. Besides getting mail pickup and delivery at my place of business, I am generally at the Downtown Post Office twice each day picking up my mail and posting parcels. The window personnel I deal with are professional, knowledgeable, friendly, and relatively efficient (waiting as they wrap packages for patrons can be a little trying).

The United States Postal Service has not had much good news lately with a decrease in mail volume in 2008 of 9 billion pieces or 4½% and it is expected to double in 2009. Losses this year are expected to be $6 Billion. Pretty easy to understand really – the private package delivery services (that cherry pick the business without having to deliver Universal Service and of course Electronic Communications (email), and the recession has crippled mail volume and the junk mailers.

To remedy the decline the Postal Service’s management must change their business plan. To deliver the mail using the model developed by the first Postmaster General Benjamin Franklin (under the Continental Congress from 1785 – 1788) (sorting the mail into little pigeon holes and hand delivering the mail to each patron’s door) does not comport with modern technologies and capability.

Rather than reforming the business plan and reforming management practice to cut expenses, Management are further diminishing revenues by cutting Service. Nationally the Postal Service has had layoffs, consolidations and the Postmaster General has proposed cutting mail delivery from 6 days a week to 5. Do not expect Congress to grant the necessary waiver the Stamp General wants.

This week in an effort to cut costs, the Postal Service put the Sioux Falls Downtown Post Office up for sale. I am not privileged to their logic nor their operating numbers but this seems crazy. This is the same building that there was spent undoubtedly hundreds of thousands of dollars removing asbestos and remodeling two years ago. It may be remembered at the time the furor over changing rental box numbers and sizes and the related expense caused to their patrons. At the time of the reopening Saturday morning business hours were eliminated as was the stamp vending machine in the lobby (try to understanding the logic of that in light of cost cutting). Recently morning service to box holders from 7am to 8am was also eliminated as stated for security reasons. The Meadows Station is still open on Saturday though their hours of service were also recently reduced.

I am not a management expert or efficiency expert but I offer a few suggestions worth considering.

Rather than selling the Downtown location, utilize the large empty plant and offices there by eliminating other properties that are being leased for mail processing and office space for clerical work, marketing and management personnel.

Install at their box locations and Post Offices stamp vending machines, particularly ones that accept credit cards.

For residential mail delivery use box sections on corners, city wide like those found in some newer neighborhoods or like those found in apartments.

Standardize the envelope sizes as an example to #10 and #6 envelopes. Other sizes that are not as machine able for sorting would carry a significant surcharge. Likewise require mailers to use standardized mail labels with 9 digit zip codes. Others too would require a surcharge. Keep in mind that 80% of homes and an even larger % of businesses have access to a personal computer and the Internet. (BTW www.usps.com is a pretty good website and a great way to purchase postage). For those without Internet access, USPS could provide machines in their locations that provide labeling and even put them in other libraries and government buildings.

At the end of the day Good Service will solve their problems not lack thereof. In context of the Government now owning General Motors should we expect that GM will be managed with the vision and execution of the Post Office?

That might be something to think about as we embark on Government sponsored Universal Health Care.

I visited the South Dakota State University campus this week and was briefed on several of the changes taking place on the campus.

Included were briefings and tours of the SDSU / Brookings Research Park otherwise known as Innovation Campus and the new Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences building. Included were presentations about technology transfers and recruitment of research and development partners.

Currently about $45 million in federal government funded research is taking place at State. This is out of a total of (if my numbers are correct) approximately $77 million being spent in South Dakota. SDSU being number one among the South Dakota Universities makes sense because of the emphasis on agriculture and engineering.

There is a real economic development emphasis to the efforts of SDSU, the State of South Dakota, the City of Brookings, and private enterprise who are partners in the Innovation Campus.

While overall I am impressed with the efforts being made and believe it is good for South Dakota. I question fostering applied research with public monies for the benefit of private interests.

Thomas A Edison, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, Bill Gates, and many others transformed their worlds with innovation without an incubator. William Hewlett and David Packard founded their business in Packard’s garage with an investment of $538.

However I was most impressed with my first real look at David Chicoine the new President of South Dakota State University. Chicoine received his Undergraduate Degree from SDSU and several degrees later earned a PhD in Economics from the University of Illinois (Champaign – Urbana). He became a member of the faculty at Illinois where he later served as Dean of the College of Agriculture where he remained for 30 years ultimately becoming a Vice President for Technology and Economic Development and Interim Vice President of Academic Affairs of the University. Over the years he published four books and wrote or peer reviewed more than 100 academic journal articles.

Chicoine was a originally an Elk Point Pointer and is the son of long time Democrat South Dakota Legislator (he served in both the State House and Senate) Roland Chicoine. Chicoine met his wife at SDSU and one of his sons was born in Brookings. His wife was originally from nearby Volga.

From his words and actions (and resume) it is extremely clear that Chicoine is no stranger to the world of Politics. What impressed me most is that he has vision but (perhaps because he is a trained economist) while also focused on both persistence and results. Though I found him very focused he has an easy touch.

His comments at his Investiture as President show insight to his political bent and his vision and understanding of a University education. Of particular note is his belief that Universities are an important engine of the Knowledge Economy.

South Dakota State is fortunate in convincing David Chicoine to return home. The Board of Regents has done a good job in recruiting talent. Not only have they recruited Chicoine but Robert Wharton, the new President of South Dakota School of Mines and Technology a good catch.

Worth noting – President Chicoine while with the Fighting Illini served for eleven years as the University’s representative to the Big 10 Athletic Conference and the NCAA. I acknowledge he was not the Athletic Director but why Mr. President did you ever let Bill Self get away? The answer I suspect is the same reason that Chicoine left Illinois. – The pull of home was too great.

President Chicoine created a little controversy recently when he joined the Monsanto Company’s Board of Directors. Reportedly he will receive compensation including stock options next year of $390,000. Perhaps his new sports car is a celebration of his Monsanto position?

Sonia Sotomayor was nominated by President Obama on Tuesday to be a Justice on the U S Supreme Court.

Her confirmation process should move smoothly through the Senate Judiciary Committee and she will receive the Senate’s consent easily. The President is popular and the Democrats have a substantial Senate majority. Despite Ms. Sotomayor’s political views or judicial philosophy unless there is a dramatic character flaw discovered, her confirmation is pretty much assured. Republicans just don’t have the political juice to block or stall her confirmation.

Extremist both liberal and conservative however are in overdrive encouraging their base to work and particularly contribute to exhort their point of view. Both groups see this as an opportunity to rally the troops.

Fundamentally I do not have a big problem with her nomination. The Democrats won the Big Enchilada. Elections have consequences and while I would have preferred a conservative Republican, Judge Sotomayor is the result of Republican election failure.

Surely it is old news already among the GOP pundits and talking heads, but I read the following in today’s USA today that gave me pause.

“Our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging” Sotomayor said, speaking broadly in 2001 at the University of California-Berkeley. “Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see… I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.”

Without question a Judge brings her background, upbringing, and culture to their thinking. After all it is who they are. Perhaps it is semantic but STATING your gender or heritage would have an effect on your judging I think is over the line. This is troubling, Justice must be blind. Judges rule on Law, not gender, not social position, not economic status, not race. Doing otherwise undermines American Jurisprudence.

Since Americans seem to keep track of these sort of things. Judge Sotomayor will be the 6^th Catholic on the Supreme Court, joining Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and the Chief Justice, John G. Roberts Jr. (note - more Americans are Catholic than any other single religion). Also serving are two Jews, Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer and one Protestant, John Paul Stevens.

Endbar- Justice Stevens is a Chicago native. In 1932 he attended the World Series game at Wrigley Field where he watched Babe Ruth call his shot. Stevens also is a graduate of the University of Chicago Laboratory School, his Bachelor’s degree is from the University of Chicago, and his Law Degree from Northwestern University where he has the highest GPA in the history of the school.

Voter turnout in the Sioux Falls School Board election was way beyond disappointing.

School Board Elections are Important! The Sioux Falls School District has in round numbers 20,000 students, 3,000 employees and a $170 Million budget. School taxes make up the largest share of real property taxes. While the money is important, even more important are the students and their education. The role the School Board plays in assuring our children’s education with all that implies overshadows the important financial aspects of the School Board.

That only a little more than 3200 citizens went to the polls is a big civic problem. There were good candidates to choose from, Tuesday’s election was not one of those lesser of the evils elections.

Perhaps there may be several reasons voter turnouts have been low in recent local and special elections. I suspect that voter apathy is encouraged by the coarseness of our politics, the lack of controversy, and complacency.

Beyond us partisans many voters are turned off by the name calling, partisanship, and negativity. Unless an election is controversial, either a personality or a hot button issues, voters stay at home. Finally the general public has become complacent. Because of the government’s seeming inability to address problems, voters are saying what difference who is elected. Why should I take my time to vote?

If we are to have political accountability and if we want our communities to progress, Citizen interest in public affairs needs to improve.

Pennsylvania U S Senator Arlen Specter’s switch from Republican Party is all about saving his political hide.

Senator Specter concluded that he was 20 points down in polling against former Representative and until just recently President of the Club For Growth Chairman Pat Toomey. Specter wants to stay in the Senate and he simply did not see that happening as a Republican. All his comment is nothing more than window dressing.

Office holders who switch parties while holding office just make me want to barf. Republicans who now are throwing a hissy fit over Specter a moderate don’t have their shorts in a bunch when then Democrats switch to the GOP. Think Senator Richard Shelby or Ben Nighthorse Campbell switched from Democrat to Republican. Likewise Democrats should not be gloating now.

When candidates run for office with a party designation they are using that party’s brand. They are telling voters they are a party member and will caucus with that party. Jumping ship is disingenuous.

Former U S Senator Phil Gramm set the gold standard for party switching. When he was a member of the U S House and decided to switch from Democrat to Republican, he resigned his seat and caused an election to be held. He said that the voters needed to affirm his decision to switch. Though laws do not require resignation it is the honest course of action. Obviously there are seniority and cost considerations that come from having a special election, but it is the right thing to do.

Arlen Specter has been in the public arena and controversial before and really raised the ire of both sides of the aisle. Today it is the GOP that is mad as we were when he borked President Reagan’s nomination of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court. Republican’s cheered though when Specter grilled Anita Hill and even claimed she had committed perjury during the Clarence Thomas Supreme Court confirmation hearings. His prosecution like questioning of Hill some claimed single handedly saved the nomination for Justice Thomas. Specter as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee spearheaded Samuel Alito’s Supreme Court nomination through Committee and the full Senate. Nor was the GOP booing Specter when he killed Hillary Care in 1993. It was Specter’s famous organizational chart of the bureaus, agencies and boards that would oversee national health care that turned the politicians away from the Clinton plan.

Sidebar – Speaking of not being a stranger to controversy, Specter before serving as Prosecutor of Philadelphia, was assistant counsel to the Warren Commission that investigated the assassination of President Kennedy. Specter is the author of the miracle bullet theory.

This is not the first time that Specter has switched parties. In 1965 he ran for Philadelphia District Attorney in the Republican primary although he was a registered Democrat. He subsequently switched parties and became a Republican. He won the primary and the general election.

No one seems to be happy with Senator Specter. He along with the two GOP moderated Maine Senators, Snowe and Collins voted for President Obama’s Stimulus Package in February. The Dems felt that they needed a few Republicans to buttress their claim of bi partisan support. Specter had earmarked in the “stimulus” bill $4 Billion for medical research at the University of Pennsylvania. Dear reader you make your own conclusion about that buy off of bi partisanship.

Since the switch on April 28^th there has been some interesting kabuki as only practiced in Washington. Upon the announcement of the switch it has been assumed that Specter would be the critical 60^th Democrat Senator (assuming Al (now we have a real comedian in the Senate) Franken’s legal victory election.) Specter had spoken to Senate Leader Harry Reid and was assured that if he changed parties he would retain his seniority though he would not assume during this Congress any Chairmanships of full committees.

Interestingly several days later the Democrat Caucus would not affirm Reid’s deal with Specter. It seems that no Democrats wanted to give up their fiefdoms as Sub Committee Chairman. Snubbing their filibuster buster was a dumb move on the part of the Democrats. Killing the deal now cast the maverick minded Specter into the catbird seat over that important 60^th vote. Democrats now would have to buy off Specter each time they wanted to kill a GOP led filibuster.

Subsequently to get the maverick back into the Democrat caucus corral, Senate Democratic Whip, Dick Durbin, on apparently his own initiative has worked a deal to give Specter a sub committee chairmanship on the Crime and Drugs sub committee of the Judiciary Committee.

There have been some suggestion that Democrats will not support the Specter re election. Since President Obama has welcomed Specter to the Party, met with him at the White House and promised to campaign for him, I would not put any stock into Specter having a credible primary opponent. The suggestion is reminiscent of President Bush’s campaigning for Specter in the 2004 Pennsylvania primary when Specter was opposed by Pat Toomey. Specter won the primary 50.82% to 49.18%. Whether Specter will retain his seat is an open question but I wouldn’t sell him short just yet.

Endbar – another factoid about Specter is that his hometown growing up was Russell, Kansas also the home of Bob Dole. It was sometimes said that Russell Kansas had two U S Senators.

Jack Kemp, the heart and soul of the Reagan Revolution in the Republican Party passed away on Saturday.

Kemp was a friend whom I was privileged to know and spend some time with. I am one of his disciples of economic growth, low taxes, and an inclusive Republican Party that seeks opportunity for all. Numerous times both on and off the campaign trail I spent quality time with him.

I first met Jack Kemp when he served as New York’s member of the 1984 GOP Convention’s Platform Committee and I represented South Dakota. Working on that Committee was one of the most thrilling weeks of my life. Also serving as members were other Conservative Opportunists including Newt Gingrich, Vin Weber, Bob Walker, Bill McCollum, Trent Lott, Bob Kasten, and Tom Loeffler. Other members included, Bob Dole, Henry Hyde, Jesse Helms, John Warner, Lowell Wiecker, Kay Orr, and even Phyllis Schafly.

Jack had an affinity for South Dakota as his grandfather and great Uncle were the original settlers of Watertown, South Dakota. The main street in Watertown is Kemp Avenue.

I met with him perhaps fifteen times over the years. I have several notable remembrances of him to relate.

When running for Vice President on the Dole Kemp ticket in 1996 he made one of his first campaign stops to Watertown for a huge rally at the Codington County Courthouse. I greeted him on the tarmac at the Watertown airport and he gave me a bear hug greeting with his huge shoulders, arms, and hands on his athletic frame.

In 1987 when running for the GOP nomination for President, I spent about an hour with him and former Governor Joe Foss in the executive office of then Business Aviation in Sioux Falls. In 1988 South Dakota had the early February primary and was an important State on the election calendar. Joe Foss was joined Kemp in Sioux Falls to endorse his candidacy. Kemp had been the player representative (union head) of the AFL Players Union while Foss was the President of the AFL. While Kemp was the union man and they were on opposite sides of the bargaining table, Foss had great respect for Kemp. They were lifelong friends and both strong Conservatives.

My father was with me that day, and he and Foss spoke of their wartime experiences. Foss of course was the Flying Ace of the South Pacific and a Congressional Medal of Honor winner, while dad was an Army tanker in North Africa and the Italian campaigns. Dad fought and survived the Battle of Kasserine Pass. Later that day after Foss’ endorsement, I observed Kemp when he was interviewed by Jules Witcover, renowned political reporter for the Baltimore Sun. It was fun watching the Big Leagues and fascinating that this jock was so impressive of his understanding on public policy, economics, and domestic and foreign affairs.

The time I probably most remember is when Jack Kemp gave me an economics lesson. He came to Pierre to speak to our annual GOP Legislative Dinner in 1987. I picked him up at the Pierre airport in the afternoon and briefed him on the local political landscape. Governor Mickelson had just been sworn in and had proposed creating the REDI Fund for economic development with a temporary one cent sales tax increase. I wanted to make sure that Kemp understood the local situation before talking about the futility of tax increases before a group of Republicans that did not have to be convinced of that message, while a new Republican Governor was trying to persuade the party faithful at the dinner that his plan was an exception to the rule.

Jack Kemp proceeded to nicely but forcefully lecture me that taxes stymie rather than increase economic growth. He intoned that the worst thing government can do is become a bank. When that happens Kemp said, financial decisions are made based on politics not markets and economics. Since our liquidity crisis ensued last September, I have thought of that day sitting in a motel room at the Kings Inn on that cold February day.

Since the Stimulus Package was passed this February and our federal debt is being increased exponentially, I keep coming back to the only way we will get back to fiscal sanity is supply side economics. Our government must halt the growth of spending and entitlements, cut taxes, create economic growth and literally grow our way to surplus. It is a big if, but if surpluses happen, they should not be another pot of money for the politicians to spend but be used to pay down the debt by buying Treasury securities.

One cannot talk of Jack Kemp without understanding he believed in the worth and potential of all. After the 2008 election, he wrote of the Republican Party:

“The Party of Lincoln, needs to rethink and revisit its historic roots as a party of emancipation, liberation, civil rights and equality of opportunity for all.”

Editorializing Monday “The Wall Street Journal” said of Jack French Kemp, “Importantly, however, and unlike many of today's Republicans, Kemp's populism was inclusive. Across his career, he ventured into neighborhoods where Republicans too rarely tread. His policy innovations included enterprise zones, public-housing vouchers and a free-trade pact for all of North America. Also like Reagan, he believed that immigrants made America stronger and more vibrant. His religious faith was strong but never censorious. Kemp's loquacious optimism was contagious, even if he did sometimes get carried away.” I could never say it any better.

Jack Kemp will be remembered and sorely missed.

A beautiful Spring Saturday was again spent inside the Qwest Center figuratively at the knee of the Greatest Capitalist of our times, Warren Buffet and his sidekick Charlie Munger.

For the past four years I have been privileged to make the Pilgrimage on the first Saturday in May to the Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting. My first time was in 2006 as a guest and my last three trips as a fortunate shareholder.

I went this year with the great expectation to hear Buffet’s wisdom among what has been an economically chaotic past ten months. Buffet and Berkshire both have been part of the story. Buffet said he sees some sparks in the economy particularly in housing, though at lower prices.

The mood at the meeting while not as festive as the past three years was generally optimistic that recovery was not far off. Far off here is being defined generally as six months to three years. When I attended four years ago there were 24,000 in attendance, this year 35,000 despite what was thought would be a smaller crowd because of the flu scare.

Many of those in attendance as did Buffett and Munger believe there are great companies whose shares and bonds are a great value. In sum for those with Cash, there are significant investment opportunities. Timing doesn’t concern the dynamic duo – only value.

As Warren Buffet so simply and eloquently says – investment should be looked at as putting cash out and getting cash back. What investment presents the best opportunity to secure a great return. Berkshire though only invests in businesses they understand and generally avoids whatever is being hyped as the latest and greatest.

Clearly what seemed the Universal Pronouncement was that America still has great days ahead of her. Both agreed that we will see renewed inflation shortly down the road.

On a political note – Warren believed that Government intervention and TARP were justified and need last October to avoid an economic meltdown. When asked about the Stimulus bill, Charlie replied rather emphatically there were not enough real stimulus and not enough tangible physical results. It was referred that a 1930’s style Works Progress Administration program of public facilities construction with real job creation would have been preferable. I agree on both points.

The Future of Newspapers – Berkshire Hathaway owns the Buffalo News and has a substantial holding in The Washington Post Company. When asked about his view of the future of the Newspaper business, Buffet essentially said it is dead. He said “they have the possibility of going to just unending losses.” Of newspapers he said news is available from so many other places and thus the business model can not attract and sustain the necessary advertising revenues. Particularly to the Washington Post their substantial cable business justifies holding onto it.

Munger added thoughtfully, “It’s really a national tragedy.” “These monopoly daily newspapers have been an important sinew to our civilization, they kept government more honest than they would otherwise be.”

Omaha Economic Development Endbar – Shareholders, interested persons, and the financial media come from all over the world to Omaha for this event. It is estimated that this is a $100 million dollar event for Omaha. For example, my modest room at the Comfort Inn on Omaha’s far southwest side went for $165 for the night. My guest and I also had a couple of nice restaurant meals.

Buffet at the meeting was asked with such large crowds why the meeting would not be broadcast on the Internet? Buffett, ever the salesman, responded that it was widely reported by the media and he mentioned specifically the bloggers. Therefore he saw no reason to have any broadcast and thus keep the Woodstock of Capitalism exclusive.