More Barr on Heller

Bob Barr, on Heller

Barr issued a statement on this Supreme Court case, and again, it sets him apart from both Obama and McCain. Here's the text, emphasis supplied in bold:

Bob Barr Calls Heller Decision on Gun Rights “One of Court’s Most Important Rulings on behalf of Liberty”

Washington, DC - Today the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the individual right of Americans to own guns in District of Columbia v. Heller. The ruling “will go down as one of the Supreme Court’s most important rulings on behalf of liberty,” says Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr.

Until today, the Court had never held that the Second Amendment directly applied to individuals. “Today’s decision marks a new era for gun rights in America,” explains Barr, who is a member of the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association.

Barr also drafted the Libertarian Party’s amicus curiae brief in Heller. “By protecting an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, the Second Amendment ensures that all Americans are able to participate in sporting activities, hunt, and protect themselves and their families,” he explains.

The right to self-defense is particularly important for women and minorities in a city like Washington, D.C. “Where crime rates are high, a gun may be the only means for law-abiding citizens to safeguard themselves and their families,” Barr notes. “Lawful gun ownership deters an untold number of crimes every year.”But the Court’s ruling, though welcome, is not enough.

“It is important to have a president who also supports the right of Americans to own firearms,” says Barr. “Sen. Barack Obama says that he believes in such a constitutional right, but he supports the District of Columbia’s ban, which gives criminals an advantage over law-abiding citizens,” notes Barr.

Sen. McCain has not advocated an absolute prohibition, “but he cosponsored legislation which could require registration of attendees at gun shows and even ban such shows,” Barr warns. And Sen. McCain’s campaign legislation “curtailed the First Amendment right of gun owners to protect their rights by participating in election campaigns.”

As part of the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment undergirds American liberty. “The individual’s right to keep and bear arms helps ensure all of our freedoms,” says Barr. “The Supreme Court’s recognition of the constitutional right to gun ownership is a recognition of the right to life, liberty, and property for all Americans.”

Good on Barr, yet again.

Heller Decision In - Pretty Good!

Neither the 2nd Amendment, nor the Bill of Rights, were particularly trashed by the Supreme Court today. That's about as uplifting as 'good news' gets these days. The Washington Post report's first paragraph says a lot:

The Supreme Court, splitting along ideological lines, today declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns for self-defense, striking down the District of Columbia's ban on handgun ownership as unconstitutional.

Well, thank goodness for the affirmation of the 2nd Amendment! As I stated earlier today, my understanding of the Constitution is that it is a document that limits government and affirms individual rights. So, gun laws such as DC's should be smacked down.

I'm tired of splits along ideological lines. Interpreting the Constitution shouldn't come down to ideology. Either the document conveys a right or it does not. Either it limits government or it does not. Don't get me wrong- I'm glad the 2nd Amendment was affirmed. This kind of affirmation, and this kind of Supreme Court, simply is going to return results based on the whim of nine robed individuals, which means, the process of nominating new Justices will be just as political and stupid as it has been for the past 25 years or so.

Now, this is only pretty good news, though, because within the majority decision, this concession could be found:

Scalia wrote that the Constitution leaves the District a number of options for combating the problem of handgun violence, "including some measures regulating handguns."

So, DC only 'went too far'. You can bet that DC will write a new law banning handguns, with language that 'goes far enough'.

I can see that in certain states, where language isn't strongly in affirmation of the right to keep and bear arms, that bans that only 'go far enough', will be deemed Constitutional. Indiana could easily enough be one such state. Here's the language on firearms, as such- Article 12:

Section 1. A militia shall be provided and shall consist of all persons over the age of seventeen (17) years, except those persons who may be exempted by the laws of the United States or of this state. The militia may be divided into active and inactive classes and consist of such military organizations as may be provided by law.(History: As Amended November 3, 1936; November 5, 1974).
Section 2. The Governor is Commander-in-Chief of the militia and other military forces of this state.(History: As Amended November 5, 1974).
Section 3. There shall be an Adjutant General, who shall be appointed by the Governor.(History: As Amended November 5, 1974).
Section 4. No person, conscientiously opposed to bearing arms, shall be compelled to do so in the militia.(History: As Amended November 5, 1974).

That's it. Nothing clear at all. Militia? What militia?

Ohio's language is exceptionally crisp, and therefore, better. Article 1, Section 4:

The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be kept up; and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

On the practical side, there were people in DC, including Mayor Adrien Fenty, gathered in protest of the decision, some holding signs suggesting that firearm bans make for safer streets. Talk about being guided by blind dogmatism. The DC law was passed in 1976. Has DC been anyone's idea of a safe place, where gun violence is unheard of, in the last 32 years? Bwaahahaha.

Update: How come I couldn't find Article 1, Section 32 when looking up the Indiana Constitution on the Indiana Gov't website? Seems curious, no? When you search the Indiana gov't website and type "Indiana Constitution" into the search window, you get a link to Article 1, Sections 1-16 only.

Thanks, Roberta X, for the link to IU's site with the full text!

In Anticipation of the Heller Decision

The Supreme Court is expected to release today its' decision on the Heller case. While most fears with regard to possible loss of individual rights hinge directly on the 2nd Amendment, I am most fearful for the decay of the Bill of Rights as a whole.

Most analysts explain that the case involves the verbal distinction found in the 2nd Amendment. Wikipedia has a line that summarizes the modern confusion:

Another major point of contention is whether it protects an individual right to personal firearms or a collective State militia right

I know you all remember verbatim each of the 10 Amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights, but out of stubbornness, I'll include the language of the 2nd here:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

So, here's what I'm worried about. The Constitution was designed by the Founders as a limit of government power, not on individual rights. The Bill of Rights was to further clarify. This decision could begin an unravelling of the entire Bill of Rights. If the 2nd Amendment is found not to be a limitation on government but on individuals, there is no reason I can see for the same thinking to be applied to the 1st Amendment (goodbye freedom of speech), etc.

This could be a historic, dark day.

Crisis In Confidence?

(h/t electvibe) It's funny to watch the partisans. Those on the left crow about President Bush's lousy approval rating of 23%, while those on the right crow about the Democratically controlled Congress' 12% confidence rating.

Guess what? Both sides are right to crow. Democrats and Republicans together have made a wreckage of our country, our states, our counties, and our municipalities. Change I can believe in? Let's dismantle this trash! Are you really going to continue to elect the very people who have shaken your confidence to the core?

The Gallup poll that shows the current state of confidence in Congress also measures other institutions, such as the military, small business, big business, organized labor, organized religion, and a host of others. It's shocking to see the results. Check out the article, and look to the side-bar at the right. Article after article about the public's lost faith in banks, in Congress, in President Bush, in the Supreme Court. It's amazing the city isn't in flames as we speak.

All this government isn't working. If it worked, there would be no more poverty, thanks to the anti-poverty programs. There wouldn't be any crime, thanks to all the law enforcement expenditure. Etc., etc.

As a libertarian, I get a lot of noise about how if we returned to the principles of limited government this country was founded upon, we would have chaos and dissatisfaction, or, how it's impractical utopian dreaming. I have to say, all this government is the impractical utopian dreaming. It hasn't improved a thing, and it's sure made a whole lot worse. The people seem to get that.

So, why will they vote for the same things masquerading as 'change' or as a 'maverick'? I just don't get that.

Health Care Preview

Quoth Mencken: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

Seems like us free marketeers are on the unpopular side of the health care numbers, so it won't surprise me when the day comes that American doctors inspect us like cattle, and if our wastelines are greater than the prescribed measurement, we will be declared officially overweight, and subject to fines.

Dystopian libertarian scare tactic? No- it's what happens in Japan today. Link to CNN video.

When everybody is responsible for the cost of everybody else's health care, you can bet we'll all be interested in the size of your waist.

I'll laugh my ass off, because I'm trim enough not to worry, and so many of those who thought socialized health care was a great idea will be off to the fat farm, miserable in having to actually exercise. Good. I'd be happier left alone, and fending for myself on my family's health care bills, but I don't think I'm going to have that chance for much longer, so I may as well take pleasure where I still can. If I have to pay for you, I'll be the biggest health nanny this planet has ever seen, harassing fat people in the street, merely as a cost prevention measure.

Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it. Hard. As you deserve.

Goodnight, Mr. Carlin

Comic George Carlin died the other day, as was widely reported. I thought it was nice to see so many articles of praise for the man on his passing. Article: "How Carlin Changed Comedy".

Many cited his "Seven Words You Can Never Say On Telelvision" routine, and the Supreme Court case that followed. Well, me too. It had a big effect on me, twice.

The first was as a 12-year-old. We just got cable TV, and I had never heard such a string of profanity used a) so profusely, and b) so calmly in a discourse. I was deeply impressed, as any smart-ass lad of 12 might be.

The insights ran a bit deeper at age 19, when I became Program Director at my college radio station, WCSB-FM. It was my job to understand the convoluted interpretation of the "7 Words Supreme Court case as they affected broadcast radio. I was the law at the station, but also the teacher. I had to instruct new recruits on the things you could air and the things you couldn't, without risk of fines or even loss of license, such was the atmosphere created by the FCC in response to 'obscenity' and 'indecency'.

To get it, let's examine the words "shit" and "fuck".

If you aired something that went, "what a shitty thing to do!", this was okay to air late at night, for it was merely indecent. If you aired something that went, "your dog took a shit on my lawn!", this was not okay to air, for it was obscene. The difference? The use of the word to mean an excretory function, which was deemed bad.

So, "fuck you!" was okay at night, as indecent. "He fucked her at the motel" was forbidden, as obscene. The use of the word as a sexual function was bad, in the eyes of the FCC.

The way I took it was that our country, or at least our government, was afraid to talk about two of the most common, basic things human beings can do, in non-clinical language. Afraid of words! Banning them! In America! Pathetic.

George Carlin, on the other hand, was not afraid of words. He explored them deeply. It's how he came up with routines like this. Carlin was hereby established as a hero to me.

Free speech was something I cherished, and as the representative of a radio station to the FCC, thus, to the federal government, I got one of my first real-life instances where I came to find government to be a pointless, restrictive ogre. After all- if one didn't like what they heard, they were perfectly free to use one of two buttons: the on/off button, or the frequency dial.

So, thanks, George, for the laughs and the formative experience. Thanks, and goodnight.

Here's the "Seven Words" routine. Don't click if you can't have the cuss words fill the room!

5 Years!

Today is my 5th Wedding Anniversary! Here are some pictures from our day.

My cousin, Doug Carson, married Ame & I. Doug also baptized me.

Ame's Dad, Chuck, brought a prop that made for a great photo, but caused the catering staff to panic and call the police.

Just a little dot of frosting on the groom's nose.

Bob Barr vs Obama & McCain

OK, here's another place Barr is not like McCain... but where McCain is like Obama: the issue of surveillance against the American people. Senators McCain and Obama both support the FISA bill.

Bob Barr's Statement, issued today:

The House on Friday passed legislation that greatly expands the power of the government to surreptitiously surveil phone calls and e-mails of American citizens. If, as expected, this legislation is passed by the Senate and the President, as promised, signs it into law, it will represent the greatest expansion of the government’s ability to conduct warrantless surveillance of Americans ever.

While the Administration will tout this as a bill to “listen in to phone calls with al Qaeda” and other terrorist organizations (a power the government already possesses), the fact is, under this legislation, every phone call or email that takes
place between a US citizen in the United States and any person “reasonably believed to be” overseas, can be surreptitiously surveilled by the government without ever going to a judge. Yes – it is that broad.

It also gives telecommunications companies that previously allowed government agents full access to the private records and calls of their subscribers in violation of the 1978-FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) completely off the hook for such privacy-invasive actions; it grants them prospective immunity as well.

The day before the bill passed in the House by a 293-129 margin, Barr issued the following press release:

Bob Barr Urges Congress: No Surveillance of Americans Without Fourth Amendment Protections

June 19, 2008 6:33 pm EST

Atlanta, GA -- “In asserting his power to conduct warrantless searches of Americans, President George W. Bush has expressed his clear contempt for the Fourth Amendment. So has Sen. John McCain, despite his reputation as a supposed maverick,” says Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. Now the Democratic-led Congress is preparing to approve a so-called compromise that gives the Bush administration almost everything it wants in order to expand dramatically the power of the federal government to surveil American citizens without court orders. “America desperately needs leaders who will stand up for the Bill of Rights,” observes Barr, “not those who flaunt its vital and time-honored protections.”

The president already has the power to conduct surveillance of foreign terrorists. The 30-year old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act provides for court oversight, along with the requirement that the government get a warrant. “The court has virtually never rejected a request,” notes Barr. “Changes in technology require updating the law, not gutting it.”

However, the bill being advanced by the Democratic leadership “would allow the government to listen to millions of phone calls by Americans with neither an individualized warrant nor an assessment of probable cause,” he adds. Although the law would offer some protection when a particular American was expressly targeted, even then “the proposed rules fall short of what the Fourth Amendment mandates.”

Moreover, the bill would immunize telephone companies from wrong-doing, protecting them against law suits even when the firms violated the law by helping the government conduct warrantless searches. Past cases would simply be dismissed. “Conservatives once said, ‘you do the crime, you do the time,’ but no longer,” observes Barr. Now virtually the entire Republican Party is prepared to sacrifice the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans in favor of federal government power.

And the Democratic leadership is ready to do the same. Congressional Democrats privately say that they don’t want to take the political risk of opposing the president. “But the individual liberty of Americans is not a political football, something to be tossed about when an election looms,” insists Barr. “It is the constitutional duty of lawmakers of both parties to defend the Constitution, even when they believe doing so might be politically inconvenient.”

Advocates of abandoning the Constitution warn us that we live in dangerous times. But Americans have long lived in dangerous times. “That didn’t stop the nation’s founders from creating a Constitution that secured individual liberty and limited government,” notes Barr. “It shouldn’t stop us from following the Constitution today.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizens’ right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

"Advocates of abandoning the Constitution". I like that tag, for both McCain and Obama.

Please- don't give me this "lesser of two evils" crap when discussing McCain or Obama. It's no more healthy than the "lesser of two eye gouges", or the "lesser of two genitalia mutilations".
It would take some kind of sado-masochism or willful ignorance to go that route this year.

What A Good President Should Be...

...John McCain is Not. Here are some differences between McCain and Bob Barr, per Barr:

Ron Paul's Ongoing Campaign

(Fishers, IN)- While Ron Paul is officially out of the race for the Republican Party's nomination for President, he is continuing his efforts with the launch of Ron Paul's Campaign For Liberty. It's a Political Action Committee with the following as it's mission statement:

The mission of the Campaign for Liberty is to promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity.

With this launch, and without an endorsement of Bob Barr, to read between the lines is to conclude thusly: Ron Paul is continuing to work to "reform" the Republican Party. If you can have a mission statement like this, and not endorse Barr, I'm not sure what else there is to conclude.

I for one am not interested in reforming the Republican Party. I'm not interested in doing anything besides relegating it to the scrap heap of failed American political parties. They'd look good resting among the ashes of the Free Soil Party and the Communist Party USA. Paul gave it a fair shot, but was soundly rejected by Republicans in their primaries and caucuses. Republicans don't want liberty. They had their chance, and stomped on it.

I hope Paul's work of supporting candidates who promote liberty isn't limited to mostly Republicans and a few Democrats. It would render his PAC as the equal of the Club For Growth, which also mistakenly promotes mostly Republicans, and finds itself staring at an ever-growing government, with ever-growing amounts of taxes taken from the people, and ever-growing debt being generated as future taxes on future Americans.

It's Illegal For You, But A Civic Good If We Do It

(Mt. Sterling, OH)- Funny, I thought the City of Indianapolis was against billboards, because they are "ugly" and an "eyesore".

So, here's the City, after removing some commercial billboards after a protracted legal struggle, now installing some of it's own. I guess all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. From the Indy Star report:

A citywide campaign encouraging residents to report crimes launched today as community leaders unveiled a new billboard conveying the message: "It's not snitching -- it's caring."

and

While city leaders have always embraced the movement, this is the first year it has become a "major city initiative", said Marcus Barlow, a spokesman for Mayor Greg Ballard.

So, shame on me. I was once excited by Mayor Ballard, seemingly in tune with the rights of the people. Forgive me, but in retrospect, I think I was more excited just to see Bart Peterson unelected. 

Some day I'll learn not to get excited when a Republican or Democrat is elected to replace a proven loser. How's that Who song go?

Andy Horning's Platform

(Mt. Sterling, OH)- Andy Horning is the Libertarian candidate for Indiana governor, and he has a unique platform- The Indiana Constitution.

Andy's assertion is that, just like our US Constitution is ignored in the making of laws by the Congress, our state's Constitution is likewise ignored by our state legislature. Where does the governor come into play? The governor signs, or refuses to sign, bills into law. Andy Horning would not sign unconstitutional bills into law.

Check out this link to Andy's blog, where he was commented on the entire Indiana Constitution, bringing the document of 1851 into relevance for today.

Back-Up Beeps

(Mt. Sterling, OH)- I recently reacted to anti-hockey comments made Tiger Woods in a post, and since then, there have been some interesting developments. First, a sort-of retraction by Woods, by way of the Detroit Free Press:

"Oh yeah, I've gotten a lot of grief over that," Woods said Tuesday at Torrey Pines. "I love the sport. I love watching it, but I don't like watching it on TV. In person, it's absolutely incredible, what they're able to do and what they can do. TV doesn't do justice to that. But then neither does -- a lot of sports are the same way".

I'm glad he got a lot of grief. He earned it.  Golf is nearly as exciting as watching paint dry- in person, or on TV, and this retraction scarcely apologizes. In the meantime, I gave Gatorade some grief by sending them an email, expressing my displeasure. Here's their response:

Mike: 

We are sorry that you were offended by a remark the Tiger Wood (sic) made during his news conference at Oakland Hills Country Club.

Please be assured that we're sharing your comments with our sports marketing team. Our sponsorship of the NHL and our partnership with Sidney Crosby as a Gatorade athlete is clear indication of our respect for the sport of ice hockey, the National Hockey League, and the athletes.

Thank you for sharing our thoughts with us, Mike. We hope you will continue to hydrate at your hockey games by drinking Gatorade.

Michael

Gatorade Consumer Response

I imagine Michael was a busy guy, washing his hands of Woods. Well, this is all nice, and I appreciate the responsiveness by Gatorade, but Tiger Woods must pay. I'd be satisfied with a short scrap with Link Gaetz.

Game on!

Petty Little Tyrants

Abdul Hakim-Shabazz recently blogged that there may be retribution directed at those vocal Marion County opponents of property taxes when the reassessments are released. Ed Angleton reports that he is seeing such retribution:

I attended all the rallies, filed an appeal, and spoke unkindly about the ability of the Center Township Assessor's Office to assess their way out of a paper bag. Our neighbors did none of these.

Now comes the reassessment.

My assessment dropped from $256,000 to $232,000.
My neighbors dropped from $225,00 to $141,300.

Futhermore, I can point to two other neighbors who exprienced similar decreases, one for $193,00 to $114,000 and another that went from $254,400 to $170,200.

So, did the petty little tyrants choose to drop the hammer on my wife and I for speaking up?

You bet they did.

Petty little tyrants, indeed. This is government at its worst- when decision-making is arbitrary and capricious, when it is directed by revenge.

It is when I learn of stories like these that I think back to days gone by, when the oppressed tarred and feathered unjust officials, or sent them out of town on a rail, and think that such action was wholly justified. The apparent lack of ethics on the part of the Center Township Assessor's Office is staggering, and should be met with some punishment. We'll start here in the Court of Public Opinion, but somewhere, some higher authority should be slamming a hammer down on the Assessor's Office.

East St. Louis

Funny enough, when I was working in St. Clair County Illinois last week, I was sitting in the motel room drawing site sketches with the TV on for background noise. What should come on but Death Wish, 3. I thought, "was this filmed on location in East St. Louis?"

Here are two sites I had to photograph. The first series is of an actual job site. AT&T is building infrastructure that would provide high speed internet and video services. AT&T often takes criticism that it 'serves the rich folk first'. Hogwash. This area is bombed out. It reminds me of photos of WW2 Dresden. There are virtually no buildings left standing here. But AT&T is serving the poor folk. First. Pointlessly. Well, it's politically correct.

Standing at the AT&T manhole, looking at potential customers? This is one of three buildings in a 1000' radius. The rest are mere rubble and overgrowth.

This is a roadway. No kidding.

Next site is a church that I happened upon while looking for another site. Location is 9th & Summit. Unbelievable. When churches are left in this kind of state, you have a feel for how other property is regarded.

Barr Has Proven His Libertarian Chops

I hope at some point the left-libertarians become comfortable with Bob Barr such that he can stop going out of his way to show his “Libertarian Chops” like this and get to hammering on the biggest issues of the day more exclusively: Iraq/foreign policy; the dollar/taxes/spending/borrowing; energy policy.

There is a great opportunity for Barr to reach the American people very broadly, and it is important that he not self-marginalize by reaching so strenuously within the Libertarian Party. The nomination is won, and the time for this kind of campaigning is over. It ended in Denver, a few weeks ago.

So, as Bill Clinton got "It's the Economy, Stupid" down pat, let's see Barr get these down:

1. Iraq/foreign policy

2. The dollar/taxes/spending/borrowing

3. Energy policy

Barr's positions on the three most important issues of the day are winners. There's no point in him bogging down with correctness on issues of lesser weight.

Brown Bear, Brown Bear

Sad news to the Koles, frequent visitors to the Indy Zoo, from the Indy Star:

A Kodiak bear has died at the Indianapolis Zoo, the second bear to die this year and the third since November.

Ahkiok, a 21-year-old male, was found dead in his den at the zoo about 7 a.m. Tuesday, said Judith L. Gagen, the zoo’s director of communications. “It’s very sad for us. He was one of the favorites at the zoo,” she said.

Monday was Isabel's 3rd birthday, so we took her to the Zoo as part of her big day. One of her favorite books is Eric Carle's "Brown Bear, Brown Bear", and one of her favorite animals was this Kodiak Bear.

It's a bit of a shock, because he looked fine, lolling around in a pool of water to keep cool on a hot, humid Monday. Also, Ahkiok's brother died earlier this year, and we saw him just a day or two before he was put down.

Barr on Bloomberg Late Night



Let's hope supporters of liberty can now get beyond this "late to the dance" hang up. Anyone who comes around to liberty, no matter where they came from, is ok with me.

Part Two, on state's rights, abortion, public religious displays, and more:



Part Three, difference between McCain and Barr, and the difference between Ron Paul & Barr on support by racists, and Barr's approach to Iraq and foreign policy:

What The Hell Are We Doing?

OK, it's time to stir the puddin' a bit here, because the property tax furor is about to reignite. That salve that the Indiana Legislature tossed out hushed some voices for a while, but the uproar was about the cost, the burden of the tax, and that has not been addressed. From Abdul Hakim-Shabazz:

Marion County lawmakers got a briefing tonight on the property reconciliation bills that are going out this week and when it’s all said and done homeowners will wish their property was under 10 feet of water.

According to one lawmaker, “this is not going to be pretty.”

The briefing was conducted by Marion County Treasurer Mike Rodman. Residents will see very little, if any relief in most cases.

The lawmaker, who asked not to be identified said, “the people who were the most vocal last summer will be the ones who see the least amount of relief.”

That latter's real cute, isn't it? Well, many of these lawmakers may at long last find themselves unelected. Ask Indy Mayor Bart Peterson for some insights on it. Now, to the issue...

The base expenditure to come out of the property taxes are the schools. In any given county, anywhere from 50-70% of the property tax dollars go to the schools. In my county, Hamilton, it's 70%.

There were many reports in the Indy Star, USA Today, and other places, about the IPS graduation rates, being around 45%. This means that at least in Marion County/Indianapolis, taxpayers are dedicating huge amounts of money to the schools, which a majority of the recipients are REJECTING.

Maybe this is the right time to begin questioning the wisdom of education being publicly funded. If the recipients are rejecting it, and the people are crushed by the burden of paying for what is being rejected, then what in the hell are we doing? Are we just stupid?