Hoping for Change in 2010

By: I. S. Wichman

Michigan State University students will again be voting in 2010, this time probably less enthusiastically than in 2008 when many supported Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama and others were ill-motivated by the weak Republican ticket.

However, students concerned about the role and direction of government would be wrong to “sit out” this election cycle, and especially to fail to realize the importance of the 2010 gubernatorial race. Whoever the eventual candidates may be, and whatever policies they advocate, students need to soberly rue the disaster that has overtaken this beautiful and formerly prosperous state (now with an average family income $5000 below the national average), mostly the result of misguided policies pursued by the current governor during her abysmal eight-year tenure.

Jennifer Granholm, elected governor in 2002 and re-elected in 2006, promised we would all be “blown away” by government-sponsored programs and businesses. The governor was right in one respect. Between 2005-2008, Michigan lost over 550,000 jobs, its economic output declined annually, and out-migration has continued unabated. Blown away, indeed. MSU graduates who hope to find work in Michigan now must turn to states with more economic opportunities and fewer punitive policies making it hard to do business. There are some bright spots, however. Two Men and a Truck continues to move MSU grads to their new, well paying out-of-state jobs.

So, what happened? We were supposed to have “cool cities” to attract our best and brightest. Instead we got bulldozers flattening swaths of uninhabited urban no-go zones in places like Flint and Detroit, and maybe soon in Lansing, too.

We were supposed to “diversify”, “modernize” and “upgrade” the state’s economy as the auto industry declined, but instead we subsidize already grossly profitable Hollywood movie companies and other favored businesses cherry picked for special tax breaks by connected bureaucrats and government functionaries looking out for their own.

The governor was going to improve our public education system in which high school graduates complete a “rigorous” slate of courses to “prepare them for college and the workplace.” But we still have over 60% illiteracy in Detroit and other similarly dysfunctional school districts, thanks partly to teachers’ union protection of incompetent teachers and their opposition to any market-based competition, all with the support of a governor whose two campaigns were largely union financed. MSU students would do well to assess their own high school teachers and programs and then ask if the state’s education (and the teachers union) prepared them adequately for higher education and work.

MSU students are doubtless familiar with those infamous on/off/on again “Promise Grants.” Certainly the $500 a semester helped with books and other marginal expenses for those who qualified. But in the end, the program essentially required taxpayers of Michigan to subsidize the education of future MI emigrants abandoning the state for jobs, work and well-lived lives elsewhere.

The governor was going to work in a “bi-partisan manner” to accomplish all manner of objectives. But instead of focusing on “Job One” – the economy that will or will not create jobs for MSU graduates — she has focused (?) on thousands of meddlesome issues, including banning smoking in public spaces and cutting loose thousands of (hopefully non-violent) criminals from state prisons. She never failed to back the unions, state or private, who have priced the average Michigan worker out of the market. She never took on the teachers union which has helped disable generations of Michigan’s young people.

Certainly there is blame enough to go around. The state Legislature easily comes to mind! Ultimately they too need to make serious proposals and bare their teeth when necessary: our state cannot continue to provide outlandish lifetime pensions to workers who “retire” in their 40s. But if MSU students are to find jobs, it will not be in a state-employed workforce paid for by tax dollars. MSU students will only find jobs in Michigan when state expenses are slashed so small-business tax breaks can grow large enough to make a difference.

The famous phrase, “the buck stops here,” has acquired a cruel and unusual twist in Michigan: the bucks are fleeing to other states. After eight years of Gov. Granholm, the state is worse off, and Michigan is a far less attractive state for MSU graduates to find work and raise families.

If they truly care about their home state MSU students should stay involved in politics, including the 2010 election. “Hope” and “change” are just evocative one-word phrases, which we all now know are empty phrases. The state needs radical tax policies that make Michigan at least as competitive as Indiana when it comes to attracting and keeping businesses. The state needs an overhaul – and reduction of – its punitive business regulations. In addition, Michigan must develop its energy resources – tried and true resources like coal, gas and nuclear – and shelve the delusional notion that “green energy” alone will solve our business and jobs problems.

In 2006 and more recently in 2008 MSU students heard the Pied Piper’s music, and many followed. In 2010, it is time for MSU students to come out of their trances, shake out the cobwebs, sober up, and make voting decisions for “hope and change” that are based not on fantasy but reality.

—-
I. S. Wichman is a professor at the Michigan State Department of Mechanical Engineering

Great Challenges Loom for the Great Lakes

By: Andrew Walker

A new trouble may be looming over the State of Michigan, and this time it has less to do with the economic climate in the state and more to do with the coveted freshwater wonders from which the state derives its nickname: the Great Lakes. These lakes are threatened by an invasive species of fish that could possibly have catastrophic results on all five of the Great Lakes. This fish is commonly known as the Asian Carp.

The Asian Carp were brought to the United States as a food source but are now overpopulated in many lakes and rivers. This poses a problem to Michigan because the species has recently become dangerously close to entering the Great Lakes. It is the mass damage that they create which poses the problem of them entering the lakes.

This species of fish is known to be able to jump out of water eight to ten feet in the air, due to disturbances in their environment. They can be easily scared by boats and other recreational watercraft, causing them to jump. Each fish has the possibility of hitting fishermen and passengers on watercraft. When an impact occurs, it can create severe damage; even bruising the passengers greatly. In addition, these creatures can grow up to 40 pounds or more on average. This can create a potentially dangerous situation for all watercraft operators. Besides this, the Asian Carp also destroys many habitats, killing other fish in the areas where they locate themselves.

Michigan’s tourism and fishing industries could be greatly affected by an invasion of these carp into the Great Lakes. These multi-billion dollar industries would most likely take a turn for the worse, making the Great Lakes nearly impossible to fish in or use for recreational activities. And although the fish have not made their way into the Great Lakes, they are making steady progress.

Currently, the fish have the possibility of entering through the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal. The Army Corps of Engineers has placed an electric barrier in the canal so that the fish would not cross over into Lake Michigan. However, 2009 data shows that Asian Carp DNA was found past the barrier, leaving only one lock as a barrier before entering into Lake Michigan. It is possible that without an immediate closure of the canal in Chicago, these fish could invade and destroy the Great Lakes ecosystem, affecting numerous states and Canadian provinces.

With a limited market for carp today, there is little that can be done to stop these invasive fish due to small harvesting. However, Michigan’s Attorney General, Mike Cox, has proposed that the Chicago canal be immediately closed and is fighting for the future of the Great Lakes in Washington. In addition, Senator Debbie Stabenow and Congressman Dave Camp have spearheaded legislation to close the canal as well. The fight continues today with the U.S. Supreme Court and President Obama, both of which find it unnecessary to close the canal. For more information and to sign a petition to close the Chicago canal and stop the Asian Carp visit www.stopasiancarp.com.

Putting the Promise in Perspective

By: Alanna Powell

I hear people all over campus complaining about their hard-earned scholarship being taken away. They cry out, “This is a violation of our rights!” But let’s be rational. How did you earn your “Promise Scholarship”? Oh, yeah—by making patterns on MEAP test scantrons.

I’m a college student too, and I would love to get $2,000 for free. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as free money. There is, however, something called redistribution. This happens when the government taxes its citizens and then uses that money, among other things, to hand out to certain groups of people under the guise of lofty, feel-good names.

Euphemisms and promises aside, when there’s a $2.8 billion budget deficit in Michigan, we need to see the Promise Scholarship for what it is: not a promise, but an unsustainable social program that shouldn’t have implemented without first considering how to fund it.

This may be a bold claim, but the Promise Scholarship is a pretty bold program. People everywhere are mad that their “promise” has been taken away—but this is the heart of the problem. Nothing has been taken away; the money to fund the Promise Scholarship was never there to begin with. How can you take something that doesn’t exist in the first place? Furthermore, in order to have the money to fund something, our elected officials have to take money from us.

People just don’t seem to get it: social programs are not an inherent right. They aren’t this constant, primordial force of society—they are evidence of tax dollars at work. So, when government officials don’t fund a program, they’re not cheating you out of your rights. And, if you want to make the argument that you’re being cheated out of your hard-earned money, then you should complain on April 15.

Governor Granholm re-vamped the Michigan Promise scholarship program in 2007 when the state was facing a budget deficit of $600 million. That’s right, when the state had negative $600 million, she offered up to $4,000 per student for the Promise Scholarship.

Republicans did the responsible thing by cutting this year’s Promise Scholarship funding—it turns out that you cannot fund things when you do not have funds. For this fiscal year, maintaining this program would require an increase from $80.5 million to $140 million. Democrats can call Republicans heartless for cutting funding, and Republicans can call Democrats heartless for getting people’s hopes up by making false promises. But more importantly, when you look past party politics, it doesn’t matter how many promises politicians make. Because government doesn’t operate on promises, it operates on money.

Michigan simply does not have the money to afford the Promise Scholarship this year. What if, for once, we stopped looking to the government for a solution? What if tuition was lowered? Then, instead of subsidizing education to make it more affordable, it could be directly more affordable. (Plus, one could make the argument that the Promise Scholarship is actually inflating tuition costs). Or, what if taxes were lowered? Then, people could use the money they saved to put toward education directly, thereby eliminating the government middleman.

While Americans may not be ready to accept these Republican principles, the Michigan budget crisis has shown us some of the gaps in the Democratic ideal. Government-intensive social policy is inefficient, and as the lack of Promise Scholarship funding has shown us, it is also unreliable. The unfunded Michigan Promise Scholarship is not a broken promise. If anything, it’s broken idealism.

Regulation not a Democrat or Republican Issue

By: Ameek Sodhi

It is a politician’s job to get elected every two to four years. Once elected for a first time, we as constituents re-elect incumbents overwhelmingly. By that definition, politicians have very little incentive to take a careful and detailed analysis of policy measures. As long as they get 51 percent of the vote, they’re happy. So what is an election-fearing politician to do when a serious, substantive debate comes up? Make a catchy slogan and run with it.

Political slogans have the wittiness of a fourth grade comeback – watch out. They have become commonly used in political elections big and small, and their strategies are pretty simple. If it scares people, brilliant. If the headlines make the other view sound like they have no backbone, wonderful. And if you can mischaracterize your opponent’s intentions, it’s all the better. With Regulation, more than any other issue, this childish rhetoric does not match up to the seriousness the debate requires.

Regulation is probably the most overused word by politicians. Politicians spin the concept which ever way the winds blow, to the tune of their own ideological note. Democrats complain that without regulations, the marketplace will run wild. Republicans insist that overregulation can restrict the healthy, needed risk-taking for a vibrant free market. On face value, both claims make sense. However, a firm understanding of economic history points to a solution more in depth and complex than just misleading catch-phrases.

Frankly, regulation is a case by case issue. There have been industries subject to Soviet-style overregulation where deregulation has worked. An example would be the deregulation of telecommunication industries in India, which has dramatically increased accessibility to cell phones. When I visited India, I noticed that even people with the most modest income could afford cell phones. Also, China has taken many steps in embracing a much less regulated and transparent marketplace. As a result, they have become an economic powerhouse. So in those specific cases, deregulation worked out very well.

On the other hand, there have been cases where eases on regulation have caused for the market to abuse its new found opportunity – particularly in the financial markets. The Asian Financial Crisis in 1997 is a good example. Capital was allowed to flow in and out with virtually no regulations, and caused Indonesia, Malaysia and South Korea to almost collapse. Clearly, more regulation was needed in that case.

Our current recession is another example we should learn from. For years, banks sold risky sub-prime mortgage backed securities under almost no regulation. It caused our markets to come to the precipice of collapse last September. So we know that we must be prudent when it comes to deregulating financial markets. With this case, however, there is more to the story.

For years, Republican and Democrat presidents pressured banks to make these sub-prime loans in the first place. Then, for eight years, a Democrat lead Finance Committee under a Republican president sat on their hands as the problem became much worse. In this instance – which our economy barely escaped economic Armageddon – there were institutional screw-ups, not just the question of regulation. So when politicians complain about the deregulation or regulation of American financial markets, they really are trying to cover their own mess with ideological blabber.

Clearly, regulation is a multifaceted subject that requires a case by case analysis. I look for the few, intelligent politicians from both parties that genuinely take the time to study issues like this with prudence. Some issues are cut and dry, and that is ok. However, there are certain issues where things are not so simple. On those more complex issues, like regulation, it makes sense for us to study the economics, not the rhetoric.

Michigan Republicans Poised for a Comeback

By: Brittany Hartmann

Who would have ever thought that Michigan would have a Republican comeback?

Well, I’m here to tell you it is happening. The Republicans are amped up and excited for the coming campaign season because they know Michigan is tired and fed-up with the way the government is handling things.

Take for instance, the economy. Wasn’t the stimulus package supposed to supply us with more jobs? Wasn’t the Michigan Promise Scholarship supposed to be a promise? Weren’t taxes supposed to stay down and Medicade supposed to get better? Weren’t our roads and public safety supposed to get better? Instead, we have a state government who is allowing convicted felons back on the street. The state can no longer afford to keep them in prison due to the very expensive new building we purchased to house them.

We have a Governor who can’t keep a promise, who can’t create jobs and who can’t give people incentives to stay in Michigan. Michiganders know that we need a new approach. We need a new plan, a new party; hence the comeback of the Republicans.

Recently Michigan had a visit from Michael Steele, Chairman of the Republican National Committee; Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana; and Sarah Palin, former Governor of Alaska and Vice Presidential Nominee for the Republican Party. Michael Steele was the guest of honor at the Kent County Lincoln Day Dinner and he gave a wonderful speech on the power of young people and the their ability to make our party prosper in the future, but they must be given that chance first. Bobby Jindal shared with the Michigan republicans his abilities to stick to conservative ideals, resulting in election victories and changes for his state country.

Sticking to a conservative platform and standing by those ideals to correct and implement policy is one thing that conservatives and republicans must do if we are going to realize the comeback that we are so avidly after. Sarah Palin was in Grand Rapids for the kick-off of her book tour. She made a campaign promise to come back to Michigan because she has a connection to the state, through her son playing hockey here multiple times. She chose Michigan as the starting point of her tour. Unlike President Obama and his inability to keep his campaign promises, and unlike Granholm and her inability to keep a monetary promise, Sarah Palin and the Republican Party can keep their promises!

We can stick to a platform of conservative ideals, keep our promises and bring Michigan back up on its feet again. Michigan needs to thank these fellow Republicans for coming to our state and sparking up a fire that has long been put out by Democrats. It is through the keeping of our promises and the sticking with our ideals of conservatism that Republicans are going to have a powerful comeback in Michigan. So let’s fuel the ignited flame and get ready for 2010. I know the Republicans are.

Affirmative Action Ban Challenged in U.S. Circuit Court

By: Anna Bliss

On Nov. 16, opponents of the 2006 Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) had their day in court, in the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The MCRI was a ban on affirmative action in public institutions. The amendment barred state institutions, agencies and universities from showing preference or discrimination against anyone based on race, sex, ethnicity, gender or national origin.

In 2006, the ballot initiative was passed to amend the state’s constitution by a 58-42 margin.

The proponents of the lawsuit included University of Michigan students, faculty, applicants and various civil rights groups such as the ACLU, NAACP and Immigration Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) who opposed the amendment on the basis that minorities are being underrepresented on the job and in the university because of unfair hiring preferences.

Attorney George Washington, representing BAMN believes that the law is discriminatory, racially-based and does not promote equality.

“It results in creating second-class citizenship for black and latino citizens,” Washington said. “It passed because white people outvoted black people. Black people voted against it by 90 percent. If you put all those things together, this is the most racist law passed in Michigan in many decades.”

Attorney General Mike Cox prosecuted on behalf of the state of Michigan. In 2006, Cox was the only statewide official to support Proposal 2.

“Three years ago, Michigan families spoke loud and clear when they overwhelmingly voted to amend our constitution and end the use of preferences in public institutions,” Cox said. “Today my office is defending that choice at the Court of Appeals and I am confident the court will again reject this attempt by activists to overturn the will of the people.”

International Relations junior Geoff Levin opposes the passage of Proposal 2.

“I think that our society needs to place a value on ensuring that those with academic potential and motivation of every ethnic and racial background get a fair opportunity at a higher education,” Levin said.

Political Theory and Constitutional Democracy junior Aaron Majorana believes that the lawsuit was meritless.

“I think it’s wrong that a small amount of people are tying to overturn the democratic decision of the majority,” Majorana said. “Michigan wanted to eliminate affirmative action and it did, end of story.”

The hearing on Nov. 16 was an appeal from the March 18, 2008 decision by the Federal District Court in Detroit which ruled that the amendment was constitutional and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the state constitution.

While a decision is not expected for several months, it is likely that the case will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. As the case challenges the constitutionality of the amendment, it may be plausible that it will be heard. If the Supreme Court were to rule the ban unconstitutional, this state amendment of the Michigan Constitution would be struck down.

Hoekstra: Michigan Needs a Return to the Basics

A Spartan Review Exclusive

By: Pete Hoekstra

As I campaign across the State of Michigan, I’m often asked, “What can you do to turn around Michigan?” I’ve met with and talked to thousands of Michiganders who love their state, but are so frustrated with the current situation in Lansing. There is a complete void in leadership that has resulted in business out-migration, job loss and ultimately significant population loss.

When you look at the statistics, 53 percent of University of Michigan graduates left Michigan to find work elsewhere. At Michigan State, the number is 49 percent. The inability of our state to keep our graduates is an ominous sign for our economy. We must do better at providing quality opportunities for our graduates. Since we help pay for their education, we must put a premium on keeping them here so we can benefit from their expertise and leadership.

While government doesn’t create jobs, as evidenced by the recent figures from federal stimulus spending, government can create an environment for job providers. By breaking down bureaucratic barriers, creating a more tax-friendly environment and growing a quality work force, Michigan can once again be a national leader.

It wasn’t that long ago that Michigan had a Republican governor who led us to the lowest unemployment rate in the nation at 3.2 percent. We were below the national average in unemployment for several years. More importantly, we were number one in job creation. Our work force was growing and other states looked at our economic development efforts with envy.

That’s why I advocate a return to the basics. Programs with fancy names attract headlines, but that isn’t much of a consolation if they don’t attract jobs. Michigan has fantastic natural resources and a knowledgeable work force. We must build on our strengths. Unfortunately, the longer we wait to take action, the more the brain drain from Michigan accelerates.

When you look at successful states around the country, there are common elements among them. These states have rational tax codes, strong leadership from their governor, and a state bureaucracy that encourages growth, rather than stifling it. Michigan is currently at the wrong end of the spectrum on all of these aspects.

Under a Hoekstra administration, we will immediately scrap the onerous Michigan Business Tax. I will appoint strong department directors and give them the tools they need to help Michigan prosper. My department directors will make improving the Michigan economy their top priority. I will scrap the current Michigan Economic Development Corporation because it has gone from being the top economic development agency in the country to the most ineffective. In its place, we will create an economic development program that works with all businesses, instead of a few select favorites.

We will increase state revenues by growing the tax base, rather than continuously increasing rates on overburdened taxpayers. I will model any replacement taxes after successful models in other states.

I will encourage creativity in our education system, starting with strong support for charter schools and schools of choice. I will provide incentives for consolidation and reducing costs. There’s no reason for taxpayers to fund massages as part of teacher health benefits.

Given my experience on the House Intelligence Committee, I know how important public safety is to our citizens. After all, protecting our citizens is one of the fundamental responsibilities of state government. Our State Police and local sheriff, police and fire departments have been decimated under the current administration. It’s time for Michigan’s governor to respect and support our law enforcement community.

And there are so many other issues I will address during this campaign. This isn’t about grand plans, big spending programs and a bunch of hype to grab headlines. Michigan needs a strong leader with the ability to get the job done. It’s emphasizing the fundamentals and running an administration that responds to the needs of its citizens.

When I came to Michigan from the Netherlands, I was a young child. My parents saw Michigan as the land of opportunity where they could provide a good life for their family. Michigan certainly lived up to that promise. I was able to get a quality education and an M.B.A. from the University of Michigan. That foundation led to a successful career as an executive at Herman Miller.

I thought the capstone of my career would be serving in the United States Congress. I’m very proud of what I’ve been able to achieve for Michigan through that service.

But I won’t rest until we can once again say that Michigan has the lowest unemployment rate in Michigan and is number one in job creation. I will be laser-focused on that goal as your governor, and I look forward to detailing my vision during the upcoming campaign.

—
Pete Hoekstra is a U.S. Representative from Michigan’s second district. More information on his gubernatorial campaign can be found at HoekstraforGovernor.com

The Spartan Review is a non-profit organziation and therefore cannot endorse any candidate for political office. We extended the opportunity to write an op-ed for this print edition to all five republican candidates for governor. Only the George and Hoekstra campaigns responded with articles for this edition. The invitation for the Cox, Bouchard, and Synder campaigns to write an op-ed piece for print never expires. We hope that those campaigns will accept our offer so we can provide our readers their points of view.

Granholm Speaks in Favor of Promise Scholarship Across the State

By: Christian Hokans

Just when students across Michigan had conceded the loss of $4,000 they were “promised” by the Michigan Promise Scholarship, there may be some reason for hope. Governor Granholm embarked on a campaign on Nov. 18 to revive the scholarship, making MSU her first stop on the way. She also stopped off at several other Michigan universities on her whirlwind tour to gain student support for her initiative.

As students filed off to class on a cold Wednesday morning, many turned out to voice their opinion on the matter in front of the Hannah Administration Building. Local news reporters combed the crowd, students carried signs while others distributed symbolic $100 “coupons” to be torn up later. A variety of student groups were represented including ASMSU/COGS, College Republicans and Democrats, Undergraduate Alliance and others.

Some were there in protest to the specific policies that necessitated the removal of the Promise Scholarship including Griffin Sharp, spokesperson for the College Republicans.

“Govorner Granholm’s failure to cut spending has led us to cut vital services like higher education,” Griffin Sharp, spokesman for College Republicans, said. “We believe that the Promise scholarship would still exist if Granholm and Cherry did not tax everyone out of Michigan starting seven years ago.”

Others were present merely to support the Governor’s efforts, including Mitchell Rivard President of the College Democrats.

“We are here to stand in solidarity with the Governor in her fight to bring back the Promise Scholarship,” Rivard said.

After other figures including President Simon spoke, Granholm took the podium. She too stressed the importance of the Promise Scholarship to the future of Michigan. Granholm went further, though, stressing the need for students to get involved in bringing back the scholarship. The Governor called for students to “make their voices heard” by writing their representatives in Lansing.

“A promise is not a promise if you have to rip it up,” Granholm said. “I am encouraging you to engage in democracy, I stand with you.”

The Governor’s campaign brought her to Saginaw Valley State University next where she met with larger crowds. At her stop at Central Michigan University, though, the Governor was criticized by student groups inquiring as to how she would find the money needed to fund the scholarship.

A CMU student editorial later said, “all she did was highlight the benefits of the Michigan Promise without giving a clear solution on how to bring it back.”

Later in the week, however, Granholm visited Eastern Michigan University with a plan in hand. She explained how allocating funds from the Michigan Earned Income Tax Credit will provide the necessary funds. The MEITC is intended to award money to working class families throughout Michigan struggling to provide for themselves amidst tough economic times.

Throughout the campaign, though, the necessity of student involvement was the Governor’s overarching message. The Governor consistently called for students to contact their legislators and ask them to support the reinstatement of the Scholarship. But as next semester’s tuition bills come calling, thousands of Michigan students are left wondering if the Governor’s efforts are too little too late.

Louisiana Governor Speaks in Grand Rapids

By: Nicholas Kowalski

On Tuesday, November 17, the Michigan Republican Party (MRP) hosted a fundraiser at the Amway Grand Plaza Hotel in Grand Rapids with featured speaker, Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA).

The event was held in Grand Rapids to generate revenue for the 2010 GOP gubernatorial candidate, who will be decided by a primary this summer. A bulk of those in attendance were business professionals, politicians, and students from the area. Lunch was served after a few introductory remarks at around 12:30 pm.

MRP Chairman Ron Weiser welcomed the packed Pantlind Ballroom.

“In a year, voters will decide the next chapter in Michigan,” Weiser said.

Weiser stated that the recent election results in New Jersey and Virginia – two mid-Atlantic states that were won by republican candidates for governor – are a sign that the party is back.

College Republican activists from MSU, Hope College, and GRCC composed a large share of the audience. In reference to the substantial number of students, Weiser explained that the “prospect for the future” is the reason for the GOP’s strong response to the massive sums of money being spent and proposed by President Obama and the Democratic Congress.

Next, Peter Secchia, former Vice Chairman of the Republican National Committee, briefly addressed the eager body.

In welcoming the up-and-coming politician from Cajun country, the former U. S. Marine and MSU graduate (’63) made it clear that Governor Jindal views Louisiana State University a bit differently than Michiganders. Secchia explained that Nick Saban, former MSU head football coach (’95-’99), chose to leave East Lansing for Baton Rouge mid-season.

Bobby Jindal, the first Governor of Asian Indian descent, began his speech with a response to Secchia’s playful remark: “[LSU is] fortunate to have another great coach from Michigan in Les Miles.”

On a more serious note, the 38-year-old politician said that Louisiana is similar to Michigan, in a negative way.

“We are both losing our greatest assets now: our sons and daughters,” Jindal said.

The Brown- and Oxford-educated Governor then shared a few interesting facts concerning Louisiana’s economic turnaround. Jindal cited two studies, one by Forbes and another by the Better Government Association – both ranked the Pelican State’s economic standing in 2006 as “poor.” Since Jindal took office in 2008, the economic situation in Louisiana has rebounded, despite the recessionary label of the national economy. In fact, U. S. News and World Report has named Shreveport, Louisiana, as one of the “Best Places to Find a Job” in 2009.

In a laughing manner, Jindal claimed he once told a joke on national television in saying that at any time half of the Bayou State’s politicians are under indictment. The presumable reference is to William “Cash” Jefferson, former U. S. Congressman from New Orleans, who was sentenced to 13 years in jail on 11 counts of corruption for bribery earlier this year.

Having served as U. S. House Majority Whip from 2004-2006, Jindal reminded the body of his commitment to lower taxes. He cited a campaign promise to veto all tax-increase bills – a promise that he has kept. Jindal also noted that the Louisiana state budget for fiscal year 2008 is much lower than it was under former Governor Kathleen Blanco (D) in 2007. For example, Jindal said the state combined two half-filled schools in Baton Rouge in order to save tax-payer revenue, which thus lowered the state budget.

“Unlike the federal government, we can’t create money or borrow from China, so we cut spending,” Jindal said.

The theme of ‘protecting the future’ resurfaced. Jindal said the nation’s top priority should not be oil, gas, or automobiles, but our people, the future workforce.

“Across America, only three-fourths of all kids finish high school. In Louisiana, it is only two-thirds,” Jindal said.

He argued the studies on educational performance prove the point that reform measures are a must for success. For instance, under Jindal, $500 million was allocated for community and technical college programs in Louisiana. Jindal has also increased the number of charter schools in the state, primarily in New Orleans, from 42 to 100 – an act that even garnered praise from President Obama.

It is apparent that Louisiana is “reinvesting and revamping” its workforce through common sense education reform.

Jindal stated that the best perk of being Governor is the opportunity to personally and sincerely thank our troops for their service, saying that he attends every return and departure that he can.

“I have actually held three babies before their fathers have. You hear some truly amazing stories on the job,” Jindal said.

Consequently, the hardest part of the job, says Jindal, is having to call the parents and spouses to inform them that their loved one will not be coming back.

The former Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services for Planning and Evaluation (2001-2003) spoke of two ways that our nation can get back on track: stop addiction to debt and invest in the future.

A prime example of such methodology would be to decrease the taxes levied against health insurance plans, says Jindal.

“We’re spending our children’s and grandchildren’s money. Our parents knew this was wrong, but, for some reason, we have not followed suit,” Jindal said.

He continued by defending the traditional principle of ‘if you can’t pay for it, don’t buy it,’ indicating that his father, Amar, would negotiate with the family’s doctor, shaking his hand and promising to pay what he could, when he could.

Next, an enthused Jindal told a story about his son’s behavioral performance in kindergarten and related it to what the federal government should be doing: working hard (i.e. reduced spending) to achieve a goal (i.e. a balanced budget).

“My son, Shaan, once brought home a ‘purple’ card, signaling that he had not behaved in school,” Jindal said.

Jindal further explained that he asked his son what he thought he needed to do in order to earn a ‘green’ card for good behavior. Shaan replied that he needed to “work harder.”

Jindal concluded his mid-day oration by firmly warning the audience of today’s leaders and the leaders of tomorrow. He noted that the strong disapproval shown by the people in response to the outrageous, unnecessary government spending by Obama, is fueled by fear for future generations.

“We must continue to pressure [the government] so to preserve the privileges for our children and their children,” Jindal said.

The biggest applause of the luncheon came at the expense of intolerable governing by liberal democrats in Louisiana and Michigan.

“We’ve had poor leadership, but we’re not a poor state,” Jindal said.

Letter to the Editor: Past Torture Abuses Should be Investigated

Allegations of torture carried out by U.S. officials may sound like a broken record, but the recent report by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) reveals shocking new details.

The ICRC reports that prisoners held by U.S. government officials in secret CIA prisons were forced to stand for days in painful positions and denied of solid food for just as long. CIA officials wrapped prisoners in plastic, covered them with cold water and smashed them headfirst into walls.

Torture is criminal. These tactics violate U.S. and international law. Thankfully,
President Obama has moved to ensure that torture doesn’t happen again and that Guantanamo is closed. But it is hard for the United States to take steps forward when it keeps tripping over new revelations of past abuse.

The U.S. government shouldn’t have to wait until a well-respected, impartial
organization accuses it of torture to investigate human rights violations. But now that it has, the Obama administration and Congress must seek out a full accounting of past abuses through an independent commission of inquiry. It’s time to expose and finally close this dark chapter in the nation’s history.

Nehal Amer
President, Amnesty International: MSU Chapter

Letter to the Editor
November 17, 2009

Letters to the Editor can be send via email to spartanreview@thespartanreview.com

Next Page »