8/17/1993

What I Believe

I believe...

  1. That people must look to themselves to better their lives.  
  2. The problem with thinking that government can improve your life is that you come to expect government to improve your life.  
  3. We get more of what we subsidize, less of what we tax.  
  4. We tax income and subisidize unemployment.  
  5. That equality and liberty are diametrically opposed principles.  
  6. It is easier to lose than gain new freedoms.  
  7. That government has an insatiable appetite for power and control.  
  8. We must fight diligently to retain our freedoms from subtle as well as blatant encroachment.  
  9. The wealth of the nation consists of the sum of its' goods and services.  
  10. Money is worth only what it can purchase.  
  11. The forced transfer of a dollar from producer to non-producer dilutes the value of that dollar.  
  12. The dilution in value of a dollar due to forced transfer increases proportionally with the percentage of total dollars transferred.  
  13. We could double the number of dollars in circulation without increasing the wealth of the nation one bit.  
  14. Families must provide sustenance, discipline and love to raise healthy, productive children.  
  15. Government can provide sustenance and punishment (an inefficient form of discipline due to its reactive rather than proactive nature), but certainly not love.  
  16. I believe you can legislate equality but not respect.  
  17. I believe respect must be earned.  
  18. We will not have racial harmony until there is mutual respect among the races.  
  19. I believe that sometimes less is more.  
  20. Statistics can lie.  
  21. If people stop working, the unemployment rate goes up.  
  22. If people stop looking for work, the unemployment rate goes down.  
  23. If people start looking for work, the unemployment rate goes up.  
  24. If people find work, the unemployment rate goes down.  
  25. I believe that unemployment statistics can be twisted to mean anything.  
  26. I believe that policies based upon incorrect assumptions are worse than no policy at all.  
  27. I believe there were no homeless before Ronald Reagan became president.  
  28. I believe there were bag ladies and bums before Ronald Reagan became president (this film clip is from 1979, a year before Reagan was elected).  
  29. Drug use is at the root of most of our problems.  
  30. Reducing demand for drugs will be more effective than trying to reduce supply.  
  31. I believe that the death penalty for drug kingpins is not a deterrent because they have endured greater threats to their security in achieving the status of "kingpin".  
  32. If we wish to penalize suppliers, we should reserve our harshest penalties for the frontline pushers in order to make the risk/reward relationship undesirable.  
  33. I believe the private sector is more efficient at creating jobs than the government.  
  34. Government investment should be limited to projects that are necessary for the national good.  
  35. I believe that the military, courts, highway and transportation systems, the post office, law enforcement, basic scientific research and education are for the national good.  
  36. I believe we need to distinguish between nice-to-have and need-to-have programs.  
  37. The space station, the super-collider, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities and public television are nice to have.

8/09/1993

In Support of Two Lakota High Schools

I would like to express my support for building at least one additional high school to complement the one we already have. As a local business owner who employs a fair number of Lakota High School students, I have both a personal interest in, and first hand insight into the quality of local education.

Most of those opposed to the multiple school approach cite incremental costs and fear of "splitting" the community as their primary objections to multiple schools.  I firmly believe that the benefits of multiple schools will more than offset these potential drawbacks for several reasons.

First, the costs of operating a single mega school will most likely end up higher than estimated due to the expense of responding to the greater social ills that can come about in a large high school.  Already I hear stories of students cutting classes without fear of being caught, not to mention drug use and the presence of weapons on school property. These problems can be controlled much more easily in smaller school settings.

Second, the quality of education will be naturally improved within a smaller school setting, since fewer students will be allowed, or even tempted, to fall through the cracks. This will happen naturally as students are known on a personal level throughout the student body, faculty and administration.  Problem students thrive on anonymity, a phenomenon that increases proportionally to the size of any institution.

Third, the chance to participate in sports and extracurricular activities will increase dramatically, increasing opportunities not only for students today, but for them later in life as they move onto college and the working world.  The discipline and drive required to participate successfully in outside activities are important indicators of a student's ability.  And as much as we might wish to deny it, recruiters look more favorably upon certain extracurricular activities than others.  We should try to maximize these opportunities for our children.

Last, the fear of splitting the community is exaggerated. Yes, allegiances will be divided, especially for sports.  But dedication to the overall education system will be enhanced as our children receive top-notch educations in safe neighborhood schools, where they retain their personal identity rather than becoming numbers and statistics. I grew up in a community (Utica, Michigan) that was very similar to West Chester today.  Between 1960 and 1975 our district, covering two cities and two townships, grew from one to four high schools.  Today, as in 1960, one will find Realtors listing "Utica Schools" as a selling point.  Despite the growth and additional schools, the district  never became split, approving every levy between 1960 and 1983 when I moved away.  Athletics and academics have thrived, as have friendly rivalries.

We would all love to offer our children the best education at the lowest cost, but no option is perfect or cost-free.  Even a voucher system would simply result in public funds being used to build and staff private schools.  In the end, it is imperative that we provide our children the best education possible, for they truly are our future.  I firmly believe that minimizing the size of the school and the distance traveled to get there is the best means to that end.  To do otherwise would be shortsighted and selfish.