2019 Kentucky Election: The Aftermath

Tuesday's election should set aside any further discussions about which side of the fence Kentucky is on. With a near perfect sweep of offices by the Kentucky Republican Party, the state is now firmly "red". The GOP took all of the Constitutional offices, including the two most important, the Attorney General and the Secretary of State. The only office where the Republican Party didn't fare so well was the top seat, the Governor's office, but more on that latter. Let's look at some of the key offices first.

The incumbent, Allison Ball (R), out performed her opponent, Michael Bowman (D) convincingly, winning by a 300,935 spread with 69.7% of the vote to 39.3% in the race for Treasurer. As I wrote previously, Allison had the better qualifications. Her opponent, Michael Bowman was simply outmatched and outspent (Ball raised close to $200,000 compared to Bowman who raised close to $40,000).

That's not to say that Bowman is wrong for political office. He certainly has some good experience, however, I think shooting for a statewide office at this stage of his political career without previously holding an elected office and, frankly, lacking the level the same level of education and professional experience as Allison, was reaching too far. As for Allison, I think she has a very bright future ahead of her in politics. She's not just quite intelligent and responsive to citizens, but very personable as well. Kentucky did well to reelect Allison Ball as its State Treasurer.

In the State Auditor's race, it was again the incumbent who won convincingly. Incumbent Mike Harmon (R) garnered 55. 7% of the vote compared to his opponents Sheri Donahue (D) and Kyle Hugenberg (L) who received 41.0% and 3.3% respectively. The actual vote difference was 204, 960 between Mike and Sherri with Kyle capturing 46,562 (obviously, even if the Libertarian wasn't in the race, the outcome wouldn't have changed).

Once more this was a more experienced individual winning out. Like Allison, Mike Harmon is a very intelligent and responsive. Sherri has an excellent professional and academic background, however, with a degree in Industrial Engineering and professional experience more in the cyber security field, it simply wasn't a good match for the seat she was seeking. Sherri would do well to find a position within government rather than through elected office.

In Kyle's case, it's a bit different. Both his education and experience are in accounting, which matches up well with Auditor. What he lacked was the political expertise and, of course, money which buys the necessary exposure. Given that he ran as something other than one of the two corporate owned parties, the only exposure he's going to get is what he can buy.

Next was the Secretary of State's office. This was particularly interesting election since it pitted a well known veteran's advocate, former Second Lady of Kentucky, and a Miss America against a much less known election law attorney. Nevertheless, it was the attorney who won. Michael G Adams (R) won the seat with 52.3% of the vote compared to the Democrat, Heather French Henry's 47.7%. The actual numerical difference was 64,562 votes. So why did the better known and, frankly, more popular candidate lose?

Heather French Henry has been in the public eye ever since she won the Miss Kentucky Pageant back in 1999. She went on to win the Miss America title the following year. Heather has also been a pro-active advocate for veterans from the beginning of her public career. Her husband, Steve Henry, is a well known orthopedic surgeon and equally involved in veteran issues. He was elected Lt. Governor in 1995. One or the other always attended my district meetings when I was 3rd District Commander of the DAV along with our state conventions.

Steve ran into some legal issues. He was charged with campaign finance law violations in 2007, resulting in Steve having to personally assume financial responsibility for $600,000 dollars in loans, a $10,000 fine, and a 12 month prison sentence. However, both Steve and Heather have remained popular with veterans, with Heather serving as State Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner of Veteran Affairs.

Given recent legal problems within the Secretary of State's office over misuse of voter rolls, allegations of intimidation, and campaign election laws violations, voters seemed tired of the "business as usual" mishandling of the office. In addition, Kentuckians clearly want to modernize a outdated election system. Adams, an election law attorney, appeared the best person for the job. Furthermore, Adams had a better grasp of the nuances of the office than Henry did. In the end, it was experience over popularity
.
The second most important office in the state is Attorney General. The office isn't just the state's top lawyer, it's been used as the governor's chief enforcer as well as the governor's chief opponent. This was on full display when Greg Stumbo (D) was elected AG in 2003 and set about hamstringing Governor Ernie Fletcher (R) at every turn. Personally, I believe the office should be strictly non-partisan, along with most of the Constitutional offices. The Attorney General should focus solely on legal issues, not engage in partisan politics, and apparently Kentucky voters agreed this time around.

Faced between the political "retread", Greg Stumbo, who was seeking to reprise his role as "Chief Legal Obstructer" and a political newcomer with some serious political ties to Majority Leader, Senator Mitch McConnell, Daniel Cameron. Stumbo tried desperately to link Cameron to Senator McConnell (which wasn't hard to do since he served as his attorney) and his role as a Washington lobbyist. Senator McConnell isn't exactly a popular figure in Kentucky politics. Not even many Republicans like him that well, and no one likes lobbyists.

By the way, Cameron also happens to be black, a non-issue with voters, and while Cameron isn't the first person of color to run for a statewide office, he is far from the first to win elected office either in Kentucky on the Republican ticket. In fact, the current Lt. Governor, Jenean Hampton (R), happens to be black too. Color is not a barrier in Kentucky politics despite some--mainly from the Left---trying to make it one by accusing Cameron of not caring enough about black issues and being out of touch with the black community.

So, how well did Daniel Cameron do against Greg Stumbo? Pretty well as it turned out. Cameron won with 57.8% of vote compared to Stumbo's 42.2%; a voter margin of 221,125. In terms of money, Stumbo raised right around $560,000 while Cameron was able to raise just over $836,000 (with a lot of help from McConnell no doubt). Clearly Kentuckians were ready for a change, and as I previously wrote, it's time for Greg Stumbo and those like him to disappear from the political scene.

Perhaps the most continuous race was for governor. In fact, despite the election results, the race hasn't been settled yet. The current governor, Matt Bevin (R) is calling for a recanvassing, citing some "irregularities" in the ballots. Of course, that's nothing new in Kentucky politics! Voting "irregularities" are almost tradition like bourbon and horse racing. Speaking from personal experience, there was a great deal of electioneering and questionable ballot casting when I ran for Metro Council back in 2001.

So, let's look at the results as they now stand. Andy Beshear (D), son of former governor Steve Beshear, appears to be the winner with 709,846 votes to Governor Bevin's 704,760, a difference of 5,086. Meanwhile Libertarian John Hicks got 28,442 votes. In terms of percentages, Beshear received 49.2% while Bevin got 48.8% and Hicks picked up 2.0%. It was by far the closest race of the evening.

There's been a number of Republicans attempting to blame John Hicks and the Libertarians for Matt Bevin's apparent loss. I will have to respectfully disagree with those who claim John Hicks was the "spoiler" in the election, which, as a result, threw the governorship to Andy Beshear. Those who voted for Hicks did so because they either supported his position on the issues (or at least most of them), particularly on medical marijuana, or because they simply disliked what the Republicans or Democrats were offering.

At least those voters cared enough about the election to bother showing up, unlike many of the Democrat or (especially) Republican voters who decided to stay at home. For that matter, one could make a solid argument that if the Republicans had a actual political party in Jefferson County instead of a East end clique, Bevin wouldn't have lost the county by over a 100,000 votes. The same argument could be made for the GOP in other counties in the state as well except the other Republicans candidates did pretty well, so perhaps Bevin and not Hicks is to blame after all.

Claiming that a third party candidate or an Independent is no better than a "spoiler" or "wasted" vote presupposes that the current corporate controlled duopoly is the only legitimate form of government, which I find to be absolutely preposterous. What it demonstrates is that 28,000+ Kentuckians didn't like either the Democrat or Republican choice for governor. In addition, despite the media's misrepresentation, Indies are the largest voting bloc in the country and growing while the Democrat and Republican parties are shrinking. Indies and third parties, especially Libertarians, are also growing in Kentucky. It's time that attitudes change regarding non-conforming candidates.

Lastly, for all the Democrats gloating about winning the governorship (technically), here's a little reminder. Matt Bevin was for most of early 2019 the most disliked governor in America. Just recently he moved up a notch to the second most disliked governor in American (the "honor" of the most disliked went to Massachusetts Governor, Charles Baker). That means Andy Beshear barely beat someone at the bottom of the list of governors. Honestly, that's nothing to brag about folks.

So, what's the takeaway? First and foremost, Kentucky is squarely in the "red" column for the foreseeable future. A Beshear Administration will face a super majority in Kentucky Legislature (both the House and Senate are controlled by the GOP), as well as all the state's Constitutional office, including the powerful Attorney General. Plus all but one of Kentucky's federal offices are held by Republicans starting with powerful Senator Mitch McConnell. Beshear, while a Democrat, is going to be playing by Republican rules or find himself basically impotent as governor. Of course, all this presupposes that Bevin's recanvassing doesn't change the results which in all likelihood it won't. Additionally, Bevin tied himself closely to President Trump.

Trump was at one time very popular with Kentucky voters. Not so any more. His popularity rating has dropped about 20%. Anyone attempting to ride Trump's coattails as Bevin did may find them very short indeed. McConnell's popularity isn't great either, just 18%, which is the same as Congress. Cameron was successful primarily because the unpopularity of his opponent was greater than that of McConnell. Lastly, third parties and Indies are on the rise in the state. Get use to it. The winds of change are blowing, even in the hollers of Kentucky.

Lastly, a big shout out to all my fellow veterans, especially the disabled veterans out there on this Veterans Day. Thank you for everything...literally. Fair winds and calm seas to all.

The 2019 Kentucky Election: The Main Event---Attorney General and the Governorship

The second most important political office in Kentucky is Attorney General. Although it's officially a "law enforcement" office, it's typically been used as the "Anti-Governor" office, depending on the political allegiance of the other occupant. It's also the office best suited for a future run for Governor. Again, this is another open seat. The two candidates are Daniel Cameron (R) and Greg Stumbo (R). Both candidates are, as required, lawyers; having both graduated from University of Louisville's Brandeis School of Law, but that ends the similarities.

Daniel Cameron is basically a political newbie. He clerked for Federal Judge Greg van Tatenhove in Eastern Kentucky for two years. He then served as Senator Mitch McConnell's general counsel, and is generally regarded as being McConnell's political protégé. Cameron regards himself as a strict Constitutionalist and says that he will try and "depoliticize" the office. He also says that he will work closely with "Trump-appointed" federal prosecutors, especially in going after drug traffickers (a major problem in Eastern Kentucky). He does not support expanded gaming and is strongly "Pro-Life". Finally, he cites having strong Christian beliefs and believes in active political engagement by fellow Christians.

Greg Stumbo is the quintessential Kentucky "good ole boy" in every way. A dyed-in-the-wool Democrat and icon of the state's backward status quo image. He's what Kentuckians call a political "retread". He has served as State Representative, State Senator (including Speaker of the House), and previously as the Attorney General opponent of Republican Governor Ernie Fletcher (the first GOP governor since 1969. Stumbo did everything in his power to challenge and derail Fletcher. As an aside, he had also served as AG under the previous governor, Steve Beshear).

He cites his 40 years as a trial advocate and prior experience as his best qualifications. Though he cites the importance of family values, it's worth nothing that Stumbo fathered a child out of wedlock, denied paternity, and was successfully sued for back child support. Stumbo is known to be very cunning; even devious, making him a tough opponent. According to Stumbo, he will focus on the opioid crisis, consumer scams, and Medicaid fraud. Although he acknowledges that the AG office has no role in expanding gaming, he's a supporter.

There's no doubt that Greg Stumbo knows the job. He knows it in ways that only an insider could. Stumbo is part of what's wrong with Kentucky in every sense of the word. While no political office should be "politicized", this is especially true of Attorney General, which should be a non-partisan office to begin along with most of the other Constitutional offices. Greg Stumbo, in my opinion, needs to be consigned to the Kentucky's "dustbin of history"; a product of a bygone and soon-to-be forgotten era. Nevertheless, despite Cameron's association with McConnell, his fresh approach may just be what Kentucky needs.

Matt Bevin is the least popular governor in America, at least according to a Morning Consult poll. In July 2019, his disapproval rating was 56%. He's now the second least popular governor. Massachusetts' Charlie Baker has that honor. As an aside, Mitch McConnell was the least liked US Senator. Still, Governor Bevin has brought Kentucky into the 21st Century, albeit kicking, screaming, and biting the whole way.

The Colorado born and New Hampshire raised governor is a businessman by profession. He earned a BA Degree in East Asian Studies from Washington and Lee University in Virginia on a ROTC scholarship, becoming fluent in Japanese. Bevin is also former military, having risen to the rank of Captain. Matt has been around the political block so to speak a few times at well.

In 2011 he considered a run against incumbent Representative John Yarmuth (D), but backed off after determining that partisan gerrymandering had made a run all but impossible to win (Bevin claimed that Senator Mitch McConnell had recruited him to run. McConnell's office denied it). In 2014 he challenged Senator McConnell for his seat and lost with 35.42% of the vote. As an aside, McConnell and Bevin haven't exactly been best of pals since.

In 2015, Bevin ran for governor, but unlike his opponents in the primary and general elections, focused on economic rather than social issues. He won, narrowing beating James Comer (R) in the primary by 30.90% to 30.87% (or 43 votes). He later beat Jack Conway (D), the state's Attorney General in the general election by successfully linking him with the hugely unpopular President Barack Obama.

There's been a lot of controversy during Bevin's tenure in office; some of it real while much of it smoke and mirrors by the local media such as over the delinquent taxes and a "sweetheart" sale of a house. However, Bevin did gut Kynect, the state's insurance exchange, cut Medicaid dental and vision coverage for about 460,000 Kentuckians (a computer glitch accidently included some children, disabled adults and pregnant women which made it worse). He also issued a cease and desist order to Planned Parenthood in Louisville, claiming that they lacked proper licenses and had "illegally" performed 23 abortions, although Governor Beshear's inspector general had just authorized their performance of the procedures prior to leaving office. Matt also caught a lot of flak by replacing his popular Lt. Governor, Jenean Hampton with Ralph Alvarado, a state senator with alleged ties to Senator McConnell.

Lastly, the teacher's strike. The Kentucky Education Association and the Jefferson County Teacher's Association are perhaps the state's most powerful unions. Bevin faced off with both over pension funding. For years , the pension system was grossly underfunded under Democratic administrations (and one Republican). Fed up, the teachers staged a series of "sick outs" and protests in Frankfort. Despite this, Governor Bevin was able, through the legislature, to fully fund the state's contribution portion, but you'd never know it by the response the unions and local media gave. Bevin has promised to continue work for long term sustainability of state pensions. He also increased individual funding per student to the highest amount in the state's history.

Perhaps the cold shoulder was because Bevin moved to make Kentucky a "Right to Work". Kentucky has always been a blue collar state, and while it was never exactly a "pro-union" state, it did have quite a few strong unions. However, those faded as the state lost many of its manufacturing companies and railroads, but it remains very much "working class". He has lower personal and corporate taxes by 17%, at least according to his website. Bevin also declared that Kentucky would not permit any so-called "sanctuary" cities or communities; this despite attempts by certain mayors. Lastly, Matt Bevin has tied his coattails to the President Trump as I pointed out earlier. Given the decline in the president's popularity, this may prove to be a curse more than a blessing.

Andy Beshear (D) is the son of the former governor, Steve Beshear. Like Matt, Andy sees education as a key issue in this election. He promises to increase teacher pay and further increase funding for schools. How? He doesn't say, but I suspect it will mean a tax increase for somebody. He also promises to reduce class sizes, which means we'll need more teachers and classrooms.

Beshear also promises to reduce drug costs for seniors, aggressively pursue the opioid crisis, stop robocalls and scammers, increase funding for the Seniors Health Insurance Program, restore voting rights for felons who've served their time, reduce the costs of attending public universities and technical schools, expand gaming, support medical marijuana, end "Right to Work", promote marriage equality (ie: gay marriage), and attract more decent jobs. Finally, Andy Beshear is on the record as being pro-choice.

I couldn't find any specific details about how he intends to accomplish any of these, which will obviously require the support of the legislature (the Kentucky Senate is controlled by the Republicans and the democrats narrowly control the House). It will also require a great deal of money, and that means tax increases. Kentucky is ranked 24th in highest taxes (23rd for businesses). You can't attract businesses by raising corporate taxes. That means personal and consumption taxes---gas, property, sales, and a myriad of others. Kentucky's infrastructure is ranked 34th in the nation while its quality of its healthcare and financial stability are ranked 44th and 45th respectively (the state is ranked 40th overall).

Beshear's choice for Lt. Governor is Jackie Coleman, a teacher and current assistant principal from Mercer County. She is also founder of Lead Kentucky, a non-profit which helps women in college obtain leaderships positions both on and off campus. She is also a participant of Emerge Kentucky which trains Democratic women to seek public office.

Finally, we come to the third candidate in the governor's race. Libertarian John Hicks. John is a Vietnam Era Army veteran, a former school teacher, and currently an IT consultant. He has a BA Degree in Political Science and History. He has never held political office, but ran previously for State Representative (District 43) in 2018. John is pro-life and believes government should stay out of personal issues.

John supports the legalization of marijuana, expanded gaming, and the development of hemp as sources of additional state revenue (better than raising taxes!). He also believes that the best way to compensate for budget shortfalls is to reduce the size of government and streamlining operations. Additionally, John Hicks supports election reform; specifically by introducing run-offs, using ranked choice voting, proportional representation, multi member districts which would end partisan gerrymandering.

On education, Hicks supports expanding education and, as he says, "removing any barriers" to obtaining access to education. Thus, he supports expanding work-visa programs for immigrants wanting to study at state schools. Regarding illegal immigration, he believes the current immigration system is "absurd" and those here illegally should be treated with "respect and humanity". He is also pro-Second Amendment, and stresses the need for individual liberty as well as limited government. His choice for Lt Governor is Ann Cormican, a factory employee. She has a BS Degree in Agricultural Economics from the University of Wyoming. She previously ran for State Representative (District 72) in 2018.

So, there you have it. I've met Governor Bevin on several occasions. I like him. He's interesting to listen to and has the necessary acumen of a successful businessman (and the same learning curve when it comes to politics). I agree with many of things Bevin has done as governor. However, there are also several things I disagree with (specifically his handling of the insurance crisis, dropping Jenean Compton, and his opposition to legalized medical marijuana).
As for Andy Beshear, I'm not impressed (I wasn't impressed with his father either). He talks a lot about what he opposes but not much about what he supports and how he's going to pay for it. That's something I'd like to know before casting my vote. His failure to provide details makes me nervous. I don't want to pay more taxes. I'm sure other Kentuckians don't either.

I do agree with Andy's positions on some issues (such as legalized marijuana) and expanded gaming (provided it doesn't all go to Churchill Downs). I think that gaming reform could be a major boon for increased tax revenue if it's done right. Same with legalized marijuana, which would also go a long way to ending the state's opioid problem. I've never met Andy, but the impression he creates is one of a privileged brat. He's depending heavily on his daddy's name (and he wasn't all that popular). I don't care for the negatively of either individual's campaigns, but understand that if the other side throws dirt, you throw manure. That's politics.

I do like John Hicks. Like him, I'm big on keeping government out of my personal life. In theory, I support a small government, but in practice believe government should be more elastic, depending on the economy. I am pro-Second Amendment, and I believe Kentucky has to do much more in terms of education. Employers are attracted by low tax rate, but they are equally attracted to a educated and trained workforce. Until we can provide that, the good paying jobs aren't coming. Kentucky need serious government, election, and tax reforms too. John's biggest flaw, as I see it, is his support of illegal immigration (which is a federal issue), and the fact that he's woefully underfunded. The fact that the media has all but ignored him doesn't help.

Lastly, I want to remind you that the local newspapers will be doing their "endorsements". I urge to completely ignore these. The media should be in the business of reporting the news fairly, honestly, and balanced, not trying to manipulate public opinion and influence elections in support of their agenda. Do your own research and make your own decisions. Don't let someone else---even a newspaper---decide for you. Voting is too important.


Stumbo's family values theme is plain phony


Matt Bevin no longer most unpopular governor in America in latest survey

USA News and World Report: Best States Ranked

What An Increase in Minimum Wage Means

The federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour. That's works out to be $290.00 for a 40 hour week or $15,080.00 a year, excluding any unpaid time off. That's not much, and that's before taxes (in post-Depression 1938, when minimum wage was established under the Roosevelt Administration, the minimum wage was 25 cent an hour). Of course, minimum wage is a bit higher in the District of Columbia and 19 other states while four states have a lower minimum wage and five states (all Southeastern) have no minimum wage laws. President Obama favors an increase of the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. Fast food employees, as many of you know, have been protesting for an increase to $15.00 an hour. 13 states have increased their minimum wage effect January 2014. In Kentucky, State Senator Greg Stumbo (D-Prestonsburg) favors an increase in the minimum wage to around $10.00 an hour while other states are considering similar increases.

Many corporate CEOs are, naturally enough, opposed to an increase in the minimum wage, at least to $15.00. Some cite a statistic by the Bureau of Labor Statistics which states that most individuals earning minimum wage are not working adults supporting a family, but are primarily teenagers still living at home and, at least in part, still being supported by their parents; specifically, 24% of 3.6 million workers earning minimum wage, and another 25% were under 25 years of age. In addition, for those who are attempting to support a family, many if not most are qualified for some form of taxpayer based assistance like food stamps (SNAP---Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) or earned income tax credits for children.

With 3/4 of Americans calling for an increase in the minimum wage, advocates also cite CEO salaries in the US are now 357% over the average company worker; the highest in the world (some estimates put it closer to 495% when their total compensation package is taken in account). The top 20% of the richest people in America now control 89% of all wealth in this country. Now if that doesn't give you pause, consider that the top 1% of the world's richest control 46% of world's total wealth according to a Reuter's report released on October 9, 2013! In America, the top 1% control 40% of the nation's total wealth. Therefore, this excess of wealth needs to spread around proponents claim. Those on the Right argue that the wage gap is justified; it's just a part of the capitalist system. They further claim that it's corporate (and personal) profits that allow them to employ the majority of the nation's workforce.

But, what about from an economic perspective? What happens when there's an increase in minimum wage? Well, obviously a broad based income increase will result in an increase in purchasing power, at least temporarily. That means there will be a sudden demand for products; usually high end products such as cars, houses, as well as appliances and entertainment, but also to groceries, utilities, and even taxes. Typically, very little of the wage differential (the difference between the original wage and the new wage) will go into savings or similar investments, though some may find its way in paying down debt, statistically this tends to be minimum at best. Instead, overall debt tends to rise. As the economy adjusts to the influx of additional income, there is always a slight delayed rise in costs to offset the sudden rise in demand. However, once supply reaches a equilibrium with demand, the newly set increase in price will always adjust itself upward to match the new level of demand.

This generally tends to have two secondary actions. First, with the increase in demand, there will be a resulting delayed increase in retail costs as wholesale costs begin to rise to compensate for the declining level of supply and a rush to acquire raw material at a newer, higher premium prices to match the demand. Secondly, there's a short term increase of cost to the manufactures/producers in terms of wages and other internal costs as companies attempt to catch up with demand. This could be simply increasing work hours through overtime or additional shifts; perhaps even temporary hiring. However, as prices of merchandise rise, the demand will begin to drop until it reaches a price equilibrium. This results in less demand for the product and a corresponding reduction of hours to original levels, or even a drop in hours worked.

To put it another way, there's a short term benefit to the employees but as demand increases, the costs rise to meet the level of supply, so that in the end, most everyone is back where they started from but everything has increased in price and in some case, more than by the percentage of the wage increase. Some companies may find that the demand for whatever it is they do has dropped (especially if it's considered a non-essential item). The result will be a reduction in hours or workforce, or even closure. Therefore, employees may be no better off than before; some could even be far worse off. So, how do we get out of this predicament?

A lot of politicians like to talk about increasing minimum wage since it sounds like they're "giving" the people something for free. The reality, however, is that they're not giving them anything. Companies have to raise prices to offset the increase in wages. The money has to come from somewhere after all doesn't it? And you can sure bet it won't be coming out of profits margins. With increased prices, demand could drop. This may mean layoffs or a cutback in work hours with employees having to pick up the slack. For those not affected by the wage increase, they'll be forced to pay more as prices increase while not bringing home any more money. This is especially true for those who are unemployed or on a fixed income.

Free market advocates (or libertarians for that matter) might call for doing away with the minimum wage and allowing demand compete with supply. Employers offering the best salary (and benefits) would attract the most potential employees while those who don't will be forced to adjust the wages upward to attract workers. Of course, those who, at least initially, offer better wages will attract the most potential employees, thus the supply will obviously exceed the available positions which will, in turn, result in employees willing to work for less money in hopes of getting at least an acceptable wage while the employer would get the most qualifed individuals at the lower wage.

Perhaps, then, the best solution would be mandatory increases in wages tied to the inflation. As prices "naturally" rise due to demand over time, wages would match the increase accordingly. Such an increase would simply keep pace with the change in prices and would have little to no adverse affect since the wage adjustment would apply to everyone. A secondary solution would be the complete overall of the US tax code and the adoption of a national consumption tax in lieu of a federal income tax. People could manage their level of taxation based on their purchases. The rich would obviously pay more since they tend to buy more while the poor would pay less since they buy less. Nevertheless, an increase in the minimum wage comes with a price.




Minimum Wage Laws by States
http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm


Fast Food Workers Cry Poverty Wages
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/12/03/248567592/fast-food-workers-cry-poverty-wages-as-mcdonalds-buys-luxury-jet


13 states raising pay for minimum wage workers
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/12/29/states-raising-minimum-wage/4221773/


Disclosed: The Pay Gap Between CEOs and Employees
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-05-02/disclosed-the-pay-gap-between-ceos-and-employees

Illegal Immigration and Kentucky: HB 321 and SB 6

I know this is going to be hard to believe, but the Kentucky House of Representatives actually thought out of the box for a change. On February 3rd, the House Committee on Labor and Industry passed HB 321, otherwise known as the E-Verify Bill, by a margin of 93 to 3 (the three nays were John Bell (D-23), Kelly Flood (D-75), and Mary Lou Marzian (D-34). The bill will now move to the Senate for approval (http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/10RS/HB321.htm).

The bill’s aim is to curtail illegal immigration by eliminating its principal cause, employment. If the bill becomes law, contractors would face a five year ban from government contracts, and includes contractors who deal with local school districts. The bill’s lead sponsor is Bob Damron, a Democrat representing House District 39.

There are 14 other states that have similar legislation designed to eliminate employment of illegal immigrants while another 17 are either considering E-Verify or strengthening existing legislation. However, in rural states such as Kentucky, the main source of employment is in agriculture. Outlying counties such as Anderson, Warren, Barren, Fayette, Garrad, and Scott are the hardest hit by the costs of illegal immigration. Democrat Greg Stumbo (D-95) is considering introducing a bill that applies E-Verify to all employers in Kentucky, which would obviously make more sense (http://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/illegal-immigration/map-states-mandatory-e-verify-laws.html). Stumbo is also the Speaker of the House.

As for the Arizona like SB1070, Kentucky Senate Bill 6, which would give police and other law enforcement authorities the power to question and detain individuals suspected of being the country illegally, is going nowhere. Senate Bill 6, which was introduced by State Senator John Schickel (R-11), came under a barrage of protests lead by the liberal leaning Jobs for Justice, as well as numerous churches, Labor unions and pro-amnesty groups. While supporters of the bill were present, the media, as expected, gave primary coverage to the bill’s opponents. However, from what I was able to find out, the Anti forces, anticipating Senate Bill 6, were out in front with their organizational efforts while the supporters of the bill were lagging far behind as if they expected to be given a fair hearing. I wonder what they were thinking?

According to a poll published by Pure Politics on March 2, 2011, support for the House Bill (the E-Verify bill) was 64% while support for Senate Bill 6 was only 25% with 12% giving no response or didn’t care (http://mycn2.com/politics/immigration-cn2-poll).

Meanwhile, other states such as New Mexico are moving ahead with their own versions of the Arizona’s SB 1070 to head off the problem before it becomes more a serious issue like it has in Arizona. With a poll approval of the bill of 85%, New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez signed into law SB 152 which would allow law enforcement to question and detain individuals here illegally. It would not allow law enforcement officials to stop someone solely on immigration status (http://www.dailylobo.com/index.php/article/2011/02/legislator_immigration_law_reeks_of_arizona).

In Colorado, a bill allowing law enforcement officials to report suspected illegals to prosecutors has passed its first hurtle in the Colorado State House. The bill, HB 1088, was introduced by Republican Mark Barker. The bill would also force bail bondsmen to forfeit the bond if the individual is deported. According to Barker, who originally withdrew and then reintroduced the bill, he wanted to change the language of the bill from “probable cause” to “reasonable grounds” in order to avoid possible legal challenges when determining legal status. The bill will face another vote in the House before moving on to the Senate (http://denver.cbslocal.com/2011/02/24/colorado-house-oks-bill-to-report-illegal-immigrants/).

So, while other states move ahead with pro-active legislation, Kentucky continues to muddle along. Nevertheless, HB 321 is a good start. Hopefully Stumbo or someone else will step up to plate and put forward some more expansive legislation to do the job that SB 6 could have done.


From the Middle East to the Midwest

In case you haven’t noticed, gas prices are skyrocketing (and welcome back to earth by the way). Oil prices on the open market are setting near record highs at $104.00 a barrel. Truly black gold. To compound matters is the most of the oil producing countries are facing internal instability, which is a politically correct way of saying the people are tired of being on the short end of the oil stick. Most of these nations are ruled by autocratic royalty, principally installed there by their former colonialist masters like Great Britain and France. Others are ruled by maniacal tyrants under such misleading names as “People’s Republic” with titles like “President” or “Great Leader” living in worlds apart from their struggling citizens.

Remember the “liberation” of Kuwait? It was better known as the First Persian Gulf War or Operation Desert Storm, though Operation Desert Shield was aimed at removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Saddam Hussein invaded oil rich Kuwait under the pretext that it was in actuality a “disputed” province which properly belonged to the “people of Iraq”. In truth, Hussein wanted control of the oil fields and direct access of the Persian Gulf and shipping lanes. The Hitler-wannabe thought the West would do nothing due to the costs and time factor of mounting an invasion. He wasn’t concerned about his Arab neighbors. He had already cowered them (the Arab mindset seems to appreciate and respect force or at least its threat of it).

Anticipating Western (especially American) sensibilities, the royal Al-Sabah family of Kuwait promised political reform (especially for women and Christians, who would actually be allowed to practice their religion with a minimum of interference from the state authorities. Hussein, in what has to be one of the top three military blunders of all time (the other two being Napoleon’s and Hitler’s invasions of Russia), allowed Western troops almost six months of military buildup. Secondly, his generals planned a stagnated front war similar to the earlier war between Iraq and Iran.

Had Hussein agreed to maintain (or increase) oil production at current or lower prices, it’s doubtful there would have been any serious resistance to his occupation of Kuwait other than the usual empty rhetoric of the impotent United Nations. Given the proximity of his military forces to Saudi Arabia and the other regional oil producers, a little implied threat would have ensured their cooperation. The Kuwaiti royals would have found a comfortable exile in one of the neighboring capitals. Of course, that’s now a matter for War Colleges and historians to examine.

In the end, Hussein was militarily neutered and Kuwait was liberated. Of the new freedoms promised by the royal family, few have been implemented. Women were given the right to vote and participate in politics in 2005 by a narrow vote of 35 to 23. Freedom of religion for non-Moslems and freedom of speech are still sketchy. Such then was the first global resource war. There will be many to come, except these may pit Western nations against each other while facing another, mightier threat in the form of China and India.

Tunisia was the first to accomplish its revolution, followed by Egypt. Both countries had a minimum body count. The media seems to make big copy over 10 or 20 dead. Revolutions are bloody affairs. Those in power never willingly relinquish it. In revolutions and coups past, thousands dead were not unheard of. In a regional known for its brutal strongmen, individuals like Hosni Mubarak deserve some praise. He could have made things much worse. However, men like Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi are more typical.

Gadhafi came to power in the usual fashion, by military coup. Another Hitler admirer, he quickly allied himself to the more militant Mideastern factions. He was hosted (and protected) on numerous occasions various terrorists and terrorist organizations like Carlos “The Jackal” Ramirez who masterminded numerous terrorists operations during the 1970’s; Black September which was responsible for the Munich Massacres (which Carlos also had a hand in); Abdul Abbas, the hijacker of the Achilles Lauro; and of course, Yasser Arafat, who was head of the PLO. Gadhafi, anxious to try his hand at state supported murder, sponsored the downing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, resulting in the deaths of 270 individuals in 1988 and the earlier bombing of a discotheque in Berlin in 1986. Of course, all the while, he continued to drift further and further from reality and the brutality of regime only increase until it reached its present boiling point.

The Libyan dictator now faces uncertain domestic military support (he’s allegedly ordered the murder of some bomber pilots who refused to attack civilian populations). As a result, he has hired Algerian mercenary pilots and gunmen to kill his own people and destroy oil production. If he can’t have it, no one will I suppose.

So, what will be the outcome? Well, first, there’s no doubt that this psychopath’s days in power are limited. Pressure is on for the US or other nation to provide military support in the form of equipment and/or tactical intelligence. At present, the situation is at a stalemate with rebel forces controlling the Eastern part of the country where most of the oil wells are located. Even if Gadhafi survives, his reign will remain highly unstable. It will only be a matter of time before there is either another better organized attempt or Gadhafi is assassinated. Meanwhile, the pro-democracy revolution continues to spread across the Middle East into Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Oman, and Bahrain. It’s only a matter of time before it makes its way to Saudi Arabia and Iran. The more unstable the region becomes, the more you can expect to pay at the pump. Oil executives don’t need much of an excuse to bump up prices (and profits).

With the increased instability in the Middle East, as well as the dwindling supplies (most oil producing nations have either reached or passed oil producing peak capacity. The US passed theirs in the 1970’s), coupled with the developing super-nations like China and India, as well as lesser third world countries, we can only expect demand to dramatically increase as we also must cope with climate change. We, and I mean America, has to get serious about finding alternatives to oil and gas. We will never totally replace either, but we can, and must, lessen our dependence on petroleum derived energy through solar, wind, hybrid, water, and nuclear power. Until that day comes, you better get used to the idea of $5.00 and higher prices at the pump.