This should be left to the voters at a local, state, or federal level. Although we sympathize with the economic implications
of unwanted children and the cost on society, we recognize that for most people this is an intensely personal and
religious issue, and therefore would prefer to leave it for others to decide.
Although The Party of Common Sense believes in free markets and capitalism, we also recognize that in the 1800's there
existed totally unfettered free market economies, and they were detrimental to society. For example, one could own a factory
that pollutes a stream which kills all the fish and puts the fishermen out of business. With totally free market economy,
there is no incentive for me to stop polluting, regardless of the cost to the society as a whole. In fact, to keep my factory
as cost effective as possible, there is actually an incentive not to spend the money to reduce my pollution. Ultimately,
we realize that as a society we need protection to ensure that our rights and freedoms don't infringe upon the rights and
freedoms of others. In addition, as a society, we recognize that there are situations, such as extreme poverty, lack of education,
and lack of available healthcare that increase crime and make our society less enjoyable for everyone. As such, the government
intervention and social safety nets are required. The goal is to be constantly vigilant, reducing government programs and
regulations to minimize the size and impact of government. As examples, we would eliminate or drastically reduce trade protections
and agriculture subsidies.
The Party of Common Sense believes in the American dream: With hard work, determination, and often a little luck anyone in America can
get ahead and should be able to reap the rewards. Should you make it, certainly one of those privileges is to give your prodigy
every advantage in life. However, it does America a disservice to have generations of Paris Hiltons in the world, with billion
dollar trust funds. Andrew Carnegie wrote in his The Gospel of Wealth a discussion of the three possible ways to dispose
of wealth: (1) leave it to the families of decedents, (2) bequeath it for public purposes, and (3) administer it during one's
life. Carnegie abhorred the first, tolerated the second, and encouraged the third. In Carnegie's spirit Warren Buffett
and Bill Gates are following, and we at The Party of Common Sense would like to see others incented to follow. We would
suggest that the inheritance tax be set at $10,000,000, indexed to the cost of inflation, and an inheritance tax rate for would
any money above this threshold would be set at least 40%.
In 2009, tax revenues are expected to be $2,700 billion made up of $1,210 billion in individual income tax receipts, $950 billion
in Social Security, $340 billion in corporate income tax, and $200 billion in various other taxes (customs, excise, estate, etc...).
Spending is expected to be $3,100 billion, with the largest spending categories being $644 billion on Social Security, $515 billion
on defense (and another $145 billion for the Global War on Terror), $408 billion on Medicare, $360 billion on unemployment and
welfare, $224 billion on Medicaid and State Children Health Insurance Program, and $260 billion on interest and debt. The remaining
$544 billion is spread out among the remaining programs including transportation, education, agriculture, energy, etc...
Note that receipts minus spending shows a $400 billion deficit gap. Using real world accrual accounting (treating the government
as if it were a business), we'd have a $2.8 trillion deficit, thanks to off budget items such as the Stimulus. Entitlement programs
of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid account for $1,276 billion, or approximately 41% of our budget. If we assume that defense
and interest on debt are unavoidable we come to $2,196 billion, or 70.8% of the total budget. You can only squeeze so much out the
remaining 28.2% of the budget. This forces us to look hard at the entitlement programs. Our overall debt is $12.8 trillion. Keep
in mind that US annual GDP is only $14.4 trillion. Clearly, we have a problem and it�s getting worse. This doesn't even
take into account the impending Social Security meltdown, where Social Security is paying out more than it brings in. The time to
fix the problem is now. The Party of Common Sense recommends that the Social Security contract needs to be altered. Rather than
pay out what an individual pays in, the program should become a social safety net, only paying for those in need, and on a sliding scale
(100% or more for the poorest, down to 0% for the most wealthy) to help balance the deficit. In addition, the social security surplus
($950 billion taken in this year, $644 paid out this year, leaving a 2009 surplus of $306) should be invested by the government in
mutual funds to provide better rates of returns and to avoid the temptation to comingle the social security surplus with
the general budget.
Strong education is critical to the continued success of our country. This includes maintaining the strength of our higher education community
and continuing to attract the best and brightest from all around the world to our university system. For our children, No Child Left
Behind should be a funded mandated with opt-in by state. Education is a local and state issue and shouldn't be controlled by
the Federal Government. The argument concerning No Child Left Behind is a classic Math and Science education vs. a Liberal Arts education.
With a Liberal Arts education, the institution teaches people to think and problem solve independently, while an Engineering school teaches
by memorizing and applying proscribed solutions. However, even in a Liberal Arts degree, one has to learn the basics by rote. Reading,
Writing, and Arithmetic are critical to being able to function in our society and, so, "teaching to the test" isn�t a bad thing.
To inject some free market reforms into the system, The Party of Common Sense suggests basing a bonus of up to 25% of a teacher's
salary on a 360 degree review (by parents, students, and colleagues) with criteria set locally.
A preponderance of scientific evidence makes it clear that global warming is real and caused by man. Those doubters seem to be afraid of
the lifestyle sacrifices that might be associated with tackling the problem, egged on by industries who will likely have to change the
way they do business. Those that refute it generally fall into three camps: (1) those that keep their head in the sand and refuse to
accept the overwhelming scientific evidence; (2) those that claim it is a natural occurrence and therefore if warming is God's
will, we shouldn't interfere with His plans; (3) those that believe that the death of some toads in South America don't
make an emergency and that when the water is lapping at their door we will find some solution to the problem. The problem is that
many scientists believe there may be a tipping point, where the freefall may begin - and we are close to that point. Now is the
time to act. Although the use of pollution credit trading seems to be the best solution to utilize free market economies to identify
and weed out the worst of the polluters. In the US, in the 1990's the EPA tried to mandate reductions in sulfur dioxide emissions,
but met with much industry resistance citing the cost of improvements. So the EPA created a sulfur dioxide credit trading. It was
initially successful, but the market for the credits quickly collapsed. In the EU, the market for carbon emissions (CO2)
credits was established in 2005 and it collapsed in 2006. The reason for the collapse of these markets isn�t because credit markets
don't work, it's that they worked too well. It seems to have been much cheaper to reduce emissions than the industry claimed,
and therefore it was much cheaper to fix the pollution problem than to buy emission credits. It seems free markets incentives are
more effective than legislated fiats.
With the expulsion of the Neo-conservatives from the administration, The Party of Common Sense welcomes with relief the realists who
recognize that diplomacy, although not a quick fix, backed by the most powerful armed forces the world has ever known, provide the
basis for negotiating America's role in the world. Although we recognize that at times we must intervene in global affairs
either to protect our national interests or to protect those that are powerless to protect themselves, we do not see America's
role as one to force ideas, forms of government, or culture on others. Much as free markets triumphed over communist planned
economies on their merits, in time, we believe democracy will triumph over all other forms of governments including dictatorships
and fundamentalism. The rise of the Radical Islamic Conservative movement is a backlash to globalization and as response to
America's actions in the past. Globalization is here and western culture is expanding, the Islamic community needs to learn adapt,
perhaps by picking those aspects that it sees as good and rejecting those that it sees as bad, but not by trying to silence the
West. As America, by minimizing our footprint on the rest of the world, we reduce the anti-American hatred. We must remember
that most problems started as solutions. We should keep a low profile and, as Google puts it, "do no evil&qout;, and allow
a superior form of government to work its magic.
The Party of Common Sense supports the responsible use of guns. Strict penalties should be levied for those caught committing a crime
with an unregistered weapon, for being caught with an unregistered weapon, or for the possession of automatic weapons, weapons
of mass destruction or otherwise prohibited weapons. Common sense tells you that there is no need for anyone to own rocket
launchers, armor piercing bullets, machine guns, handguns, or other weapons that have no use except the killing of other
individuals. There are 29,000 deaths from guns annually, with 17,000 murders, 11,000 suicides, and 1,000 accidental deaths.
Part of the problems with guns is the ease of killing. If there were strong deterrents to obtaining weapons, such as rigorous
background checks and high taxes on weapons, there would be fewer weapons were owned. Without a gun, one might think twice before
committing suicide or pause and let the 'heat of the moment' pass before committing murder.
Healthcare is in a state of disrepair. According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) projected health care
expenditures are estimated to be $2.16 trillion in 2006, and are projected to rise to over $4 trillion in 2015. Per person
health spending is $7,110 in 2006, more than double the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) average
and the highest of the 30 OECD countries surveyed, and is projected to increase to $12,320 by 2015. Health spending continues
to increase much faster than the overall economy (i.e., gross domestic product, or GDP). Since 1970, health care spending
has grown at an average annual rate of 9.9%, or about 2.5 percentage points faster than GDP. As a share of the economy,
health care has risen from 7.2% of GDP in 1965 to over 16% of GDP today, and it is projected to be 20% of GDP just 10 years
from now. Baby boomers are just beginning to retire, which will put an additional strain on an already overburdened system.
In aggregate, we as a society will need to determine what percentage of our GDP we are willing to spend on healthcare -
then it becomes a matter of maximizing the care we can get for those limited resources. The first step is measure costs.
There are low hanging fruit, for example, preemptive healthcare measures can be much more economical than treating a patient
with a terminal illness. We just need to figure out where the money goes and why. The Party of Common Sense proposes a
new payroll tax that would redirect money currently being spent on employer sponsored health plans to the government.
The government would then reimburse up to $7,000 per person in medical related expenses and insurance. To be eligible each
person would have to purchase a High Deductible Health Plan which would protect against catastrophic illness or injury and
open a Health Savings Account. High risk individuals would be put into a high risk pool and divided up at preset rates to
all insurers. By indexing this $7,000 to inflation and by having people pay out-of-pocket for the first several thousand
dollars of medical bills themselves, this will create a forced rationing of limited medical resources and help eliminate waste
with informed, cost conscience consumers.
America's greatness has been forged by: "Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free."
America attracts immigrant populations - those people that are willing to take risks to create a better life for
themselves and their families. Historically, it's these hardworking immigrants, people that are willing to give up
the safety and comfort of their support networks to strike out for something new that create new businesses, create new jobs,
invent new things and generally make the US the economic superpower that we are. We need to continue to feed that innovation
and tenacity with new blood. Rather than shut our boarders we should embrace immigration. There will be 15 million fewer
people in the workforce as the baby boomers retire. It's not a question of those jobs going away, but who will fill
them? It's estimated that there is 8 million to 9 million illegal aliens in our country now. There are one million
legal immigrants receiving residency every year with an estimated additional 500,000 illegally entering the country.
The current immigration system is broken. Politicians want to protect local businesses that create the backbone of the tax base.
As such, they pressure the government not to raid their local businesses. With pressure to leave businesses alone, immigration
services are happy to focus their energies on protecting the borders. Businesses rely on illegal immigration to provide
their workforce. Which in turn helps get politicians elected, which starts the cycle all over again. Although much has
been made about the underground economy, many of the workers and employers pay taxes - though the use of false
identities. However, there is the negative effect of the underground economy and that illegal immigrants are often taken
advantage of, since they are unable to go to the authorities.
Raising the number of legal immigrants by 500,000 per year would help meet the demand of businesses for workers and help
stem the flow of illegal workers. We are for strong boarder protection, and enforcing the rule of law, however, it
can't be done when there is such a demand for workers. From a practical matter, why not grant those illegal
aliens that are already in the country, established as productive members of the community, and are assimilating into
the community - rather than throw them out and replace them with someone with no grounding in the community? The
Party of Common Sense suggests that in addition to the specialized visas such as those for education, high-tech
workers, and the like, there should be another 500,000 visas per year for unskilled workers that would work as a lottery
system. Anyone, inside America or out, could apply. Once accepted they worker would have up to five years on probation
to obtain citizenship. During that time certain restrictions would apply: they must be employed at least 50% of any one
fiscal year the time (with certain exceptions), cannot commit any felonies, must learn English and pass a citizenship test.
When being employed, a smart ID card would be used issued. Law enforcement and employers would use readers to verify
the individual, track their employment history, and report back via GPS and cell phone technology to ICE.
The Party of Common Sense would like to see the Department of Defense, return to its roots as the Department of Defense
- abandoning the NeoConservatives' concept of "Preemptive War". A strong, professional military is
necessary for the US to maintain its status as a World Super Power, however it can be done in a smarter fashion. There
has always been, and always should be, civilian oversight over the US military, however, The Party of Common Sense would
like to see the Powel Doctrine (think Gulf War One) reinstated and dropping Rumsfeld's micromanagement of the military
(think Gulf War Two). "Speak softly and carry a big stick" (Theodore Rosevelt) is an apt motto for the US. The
threat of force is more valuable than the actual application of the use of force. Furthermore, the military should be
divided into a "Hammer" force (conventional war force) and an "Anvil" force (which would conduct peace
keeping, nation building, and anti-insurgency campaigns). This separate would allow the forces to better training for
specific duties and would send a strong signal to the rest of the world about the United States' intentions in any
conflict.
The Party of Common Sense believes strongly in the separation of Church and State. We believe that phrases such as
"In God We Trust" are acceptable, since one can interpret the term "God" in any way one pleases
(including atheism and multiple gods). However, any enforcement of beliefs specific to any one religion is a fundamentally
wrong and anti-constitutional.
Here at The Party of Common Sense we are particularly in favor of Tort Reform. In the US, the legal system has turned from a
means to establish justice and right wrongs, to form of lottery. According to the Pacific Research Institute, 76% of
tort cases are excessive and tort cases now consume 2.22% of the US' GDP. This staggering amount, twice as high as
other industrialized nations and it doesn't stop there: In 2002, the U.S. tort system returned less than 50 cents of
every tort-cost dollar to injured claimants, those it was designed to help, and it returned only 22 cents to injured
parties to compensate them for actual economic losses. So not only does it create a huge drag on society, it also puts
as much money into the pockets of system (lawyers) than it does those actually injured. The Party of Common Sense suggests
damage caps. The deterrent effect of damage caps are supported by a study by Mark J. Browne and Robert Puelz that found
the imposition of a non-economic damage cap produced a 65-percent reduction in the probability of a claim filing,
and the authors noted that non-economic damage caps provided the greatest disincentive to file a lawsuit of any reforms
examined. To help prevent frivolous lawsuits, a law should be created to allow victims of frivolous lawsuits to sue to
recoup legal costs, holding both the lawyer and plaintiff responsible. Furthermore, in addition to non-economic damages,
limits should be placed on legal fees (the lawyers should have to prove they are able actually bill clients their stated
fees when recouping fees), percentages of settlements for non-economic damages should be limited to 25% for the legal
team, 25% for the plaintiffs, and 50% should go into a federal catastrophe fund, to be used to by the government to offset
disaster assistance by the Federal government. This last position, provide economic hardship to the guilty party without
creating a windfall to the aggrieved, and without it going into a general fund thereby becoming a governmental revenue source.
Footnotes
1 With a nod to Eric Moore
