In this section I'll discuss my viewpoints regarding various political and economic issues.
While probably all Americans wish for taxes to be lower, and politicians are usually willing to pander to that desire in a transparent attempt to buy votes, it is basically immoral and fiscally irresponsible for politicians to use surplus tax money (on those rare occasions when it is available) to buy votes rather than to pay down the crushing debt accumulated during previous government largesse and irresponsibility.
Ultimately, the only lasting, permanent, legitimate and meaningful tax cut will come after we no longer have to pay interest on the Federal debt. Remember that this is not an insignificant issue: until recently, the interest on the Federal debt was a larger expense each year than the entire military budget (and the only reason it's come down recently is due to lower interest rates).
By paying down the Federal debt with any budget surplus, we put investable capital back into the private-sector economy. There, it can be used to finance home mortgages, invest in productive new technologies and for other productive, worthwhile purposes.
Paying down the Federal debt (besides a direct reduction in interest expense) will also relieve the pressure on the capital markets, helping to hold down the interest rates that the government (and the taxpayers!) have to pay on the remaining Federal debt.
It is simply outrageous that the Republican legislators in Washington purport to be fiscally responsible at the same time they seem to be so desperate to do anything else with the budget surplus (and leave our generation's children, and their children, and their children's children to pay interest forever) rather than using it to pay down the Federal debt!
One of the most singularly basic responsibilities of the folks we voters send to Washington every few years is that they are supposed (in fact, they are there sworn under oath) to represent their constituents, and to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America.
Rarely has the discrepancy between the seriousness of that obligation and the blatantly partisan political interests of those "public servants" been quite so glaring as it was on December 19, 1998 when the Republican Majority in the House and Senate collectively thumbed their noses at the overwhelming and patently clear desire of the American public and proceeded with their outrageous, costly and pathetic circus of partisan politics... their impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton.
Regardless of what one thinks about President Bill Clinton's personal life and possible indiscretions, the fact remains that the impeachment proceedings themselves did far more damage to this country, and to the institution of the Presidency, than any possible sexual or other pecadilloes of which the President might have been guilty.
Some of those politicians figured that they could get away with their absolutely incredible game since it was going to be several years before the next major elections, and they figured that the voters would forget between time. We need to make sure that we voters do not forget!
While I don't personally use or encourage the use of marijuana or other illicit drugs (hell, I don't even drink coffee!), I think it is ludicrous for the Federal government (again, which let's remember supposedly represents the will of this country) to go to increasingly ridiculous extremes in attempting to prevent the legitimate, medically recommended use of it (or indeed any other drug).
There are a lot of prescription drugs which are available which are a great deal more dangerous (and probably of more dubious efficacy or safety) than marijuana.
If a licensed physician feels that a patient's condition calls for the medicinal use of marijuana (or indeed any other medicinal substance that's reasonably likely to help the patient's condition) then they should have the right to prescribe that drug. (That does not mean that I support the smoking of marijuana in public... even under a doctor's prescription. It is certainly reasonable to require that it (or any other drug) be administered privately and discreetly)
In any case, it is simply outrageous for elected Washington officials to stand stubbornly on the floor of Congress between a doctor and his or her patient, dictating which of the safe and effective treatments the doctor may and may not use.
It is even more outrageous when that same Congress violates the most basic precepts of democratic government by forbidding the free and fair elections in which the public is demanding their right to vote, and for those votes to be counted and reflected in public policy.
And, as in the case with Presidential pecadilloes, we are again confronted with a related case where the 'cure' is at least arguably worse than the disease. We have tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans sitting in prison (at huge expense to the nation's taxpayers) when their sole crime was possession and use of small, personal-use quantities of marijuana... and where they are likely to be less well able (physically, financially, socially and mentally) to participate profitably and fully in society after getting out of prison than they were when they went in.
It is about time that we started seriously trying to make sure that the punishment fits the seriousness (or lack thereof) of the crime. While there might be a reasonable case made against the sale of marijuana, simple possession of personal-use quantities (or personal use in private) ought to be decriminalized. Punishing these largely victimless crimes does far more harm to society than the "crime" does.
Use the BACK control on your Web browser, or click here to return to my main home page.
This page and all linked contents originating with me are Copyright (C) 1999 by Gordon E. Peterson II, all rights reserved worldwide. Last revised September 27, 1999.