The Problem Is Politics

A Quarterly Message on Liberty

Spring 2008Volume 6 Number 2

P. J. O’Rourke is America's leading politicalsatirist and an H. L. Mencken research fellow at the Cato Institute. A former editorof National Lampoon, he has written forAmerican Spectator, Esquire, the New Republic, and Rolling Stone. Now a correspondent for the Atlantic, his most recent book is On The Wealth of Nations.O’Rourke gave this speech at the 2008 CatoBenefactor Summit.

ell, I wish I had better news for you, butthe barbarians are at the gates. We arebesieged by pagans—savage, brutishworshippers of big government. Theirs

is not even a golden calf. They’ve abandoned the GoldStandard. They worship the taxing and spending of afiat god, all the more dangerous for being both falseand imaginary.

Now, we thought Ronald Reagan, our Charles Mar-tel, had stopped the pillaging hordes of Jimmy Carterat the Battle of Poitiers—also known as the 1980 elec-tion. Even the heathen slime Bill Clinton said, “Theera of big government is over.” We thought we’d won.

We were wrong. They’re back. And they want to sac-rifice us and all our worldly goods on the blooddrenched altar of politics. These lesser breeds bowdown to four ton senators, to cloven hoofed congress-men, to presidential candidates stinking of collectivistbrimstone and crowned with horns of socialism.

P. J. O’ROURKE

W

The Problem Is Politics

2 • Cato’s Letter SPRING 2008

heirs is a Satanist civics.They will sell their souls inthe belief that government

can heal the sick, raise the dead, makethe old feel young, and make theyoung go out and vote.

They hate our freedom. The part ofour freedom that they hate the most isour free market capitalism. But capital-ism is one of the most important in-ventions in human history. If it weren’tfor debt and equity, all of the innova-tors, manufacturers, and businessmenwho have brought prosperity to thefree world would have to get theirmoney the way the rest of us do—byasking their wives.

So the worshipers of big govern-ment are back with their lies and theirempty promises. And what do we doabout it? I don’t know. I’m too stupidto answer that question.

But in fairness to myself, I’m notjust stupid. I am a student of stupidity.I am a political reporter.

It occurs to me that America couldwind up with a Democratic president.This scares me. Not because I hate De-mocrats—although I do, come to thinkof it—but because a strong Democratic

president and a strong DemocraticCongress could put an end to partisanbickering in Washington and result inpoliticians from both parties workingtogether to solve America’s problems.And then we’re really screwed.

I have been covering politics for 38years. Trust me: we don’t want politics

to quit. That’s why we need a Republi-can president—not because Republi-cans are good but because we needgridlock. I love gridlock. Gridlockmeans government can’t do things.

The two most frightening words inWashington are “bipartisan consen-sus.” Bipartisan consensus is when mydoctor and my lawyer agree with mywife that I need help.

Bipartisan consensus—like thestimulus package that has been deliv-ered to us courtesy of Congress and thepresident. A $168 billion stimuluspackage that is supposed to change thetrajectory of a $13 trillion economy.

Now, even somebody who flunkedhigh school physics—and I did—can tell you that the energy of $168billion is not sufficient to budge $13trillion worth of inertia. It’s like tryingto use Dennis Kucinich to pushHillary Clinton off the Democraticcampaign platform.

We could wind up with a Democrat-ic president. We will wind up with a Democratic Congress. Now, I am a Republican. I’m a rotten Republicanquite a lot of the time, but a Republi-can nonetheless. And as a Republican,

I’ve got to say that the 2006midterm elections made mevery upset at the Republicans. Imean, Jack Abramoff, Bob Ney,Randy “Duke” Cunningham,Tom DeLay, Mark Foley. Theelectorate was almost too nau-seated to make it to the polls tovote Democratic.

It took a Democratic major-ity in the House of Representatives 40years—from 1954 to 1994—to get thatcorrupt and arrogant, and the Republi-cans did it in just 12. And people saythat we Republicans don’t have a loton the ball. The Republicans thoughtthey had the House of Representativesso well redistricted that the only places

If you’re electing Democratsto control governmentspending, then you’re mar-rying Angelina Jolie for herbrains.

““

T

SPRING 2008 Cato’s Letter • 3

where you could elect a Demo-crat were the parts of New Or-leans that are still underwater.Republicans forgot. They for-got that there is such a thing asan angry voter. And hell, I’mone, and I am a Republican.

Republicans deserve tolose. But do we deserve the De-mocrats? Well, the Democratsare going to produce moreethanol. Although, up in theback hills of Kentucky, they’vebeen making high octanestuff out of corn mash for years and Ican’t see that it has done their econo-my a whole lot of good. Under the De-mocrats, the government will negoti-ate with drug companies for Medicaredrug prices. If the government showsthe same hard-headed, tight-fistedbargaining savvy negotiating drugprices that it shows negotiating de-fense contracts, Preparation H willcost $400.

Best of all, there is ethics reform.Congressmen will no longer be able toget a meal from a lobbyist unless thecongressman brings a note from hisdoctor showing that he is bulimic andthe meal will be returned.

There is only one thing that givesme hope as a Republican, and that isthe Democrats. It’s going to be hard todo a worse job running America thanthe Republicans have, but if anybodycan do it, it’s the Democrats.

Two substantive political issues arethe federal budget deficit and the warin Iraq. Now, if you’re electing Democ-rats to control government spending,then you’re marrying Angelina Jolie forher brains.

This leaves the Democrats with onereal issue: Iraq. And so far the best thatany Democratic presidential candidatehas been able to manage with Iraq is tomake what I think of as the high

school sex promise: I will pull out intime, honest dear.

Meanwhile, the Republicans havegot John McCain. Everybody lovesJohn McCain. Everybody respects JohnMcCain: He’s tough. He’s consistent.He’s wrong. John thinks the war inIraq is a good idea; the electorate does-n’t. It’s like McCain’s slogan is “wrongand strong.”

Meanwhile, there is the Democraticside of things, where Barack Obamamay be altering the whole politicalequilibrium. Barack Obama is an indi-cation that America has reached an im-portant benchmark in race relations. Itis now officially more important to becute than it is to be white.

And Barack Obama is cute. He’svery cute. And he’s nice. And it hasbeen a long time since any politicalparty has had the cute, nice vote sewn up.

The problem for Barack is that hejust doesn’t have much politicalstature. But there is a sort of Disneyfactor in American politics. Think ofAmerica’s politicians. Think of themall as the Seven Dwarves. They’re allshort. They’re short on ethics. They’reshort on common sense. They’re shorton experience. They’re short on some-thing. But we keep thinking one ofthose dwarves is going to save ourSnow White butt.

Government controlledhealth care is going to drive the best people out of the business. Who wants to spend years studying to be a doctor,just to become a govern-ment bureaucratic hack?

“

“

We’ve got Dopey right now. We hadSleazy before him. Grumpy lost in2004. Sleepy was great in the eightiesbut he’s dead. So how about Obama?

Which leaves us with Hillary. She’sgoing to reform health care. I guesshealth care being a key political issue,it’s a sign that my baby boom genera-tion is finally maturing.

Now, sure, we’re still as self absorbedand inward looking as we ever were, butwe’re staring up acolonoscopy scopenow, instead of gaz-ing at our navels.

Hey, memo toHillary: You alreadyreformed healthcare 15 years ago.

Just the outlineof Hillary’s 1993health care reformplan was 1,400pages—just the out-line. You couldstand on it to paintthe ceiling.

And of coursethere is a cheaperway to make healthcare less expensive, a simpler way tomake health care less expensive: Justmake it worse. And I think Hillary cando that.

Because government controlledhealth care is going to drive the bestpeople out of the business. Who wantsto spend years studying to be a doctor,just to become a government bureau-cratic hack?

Some day you will be wheeled in fora heart bypass operation, and a sur-geon will be the person who is now be-hind the counter when you renew yourcar registration at the department ofmotor vehicles.

If we’re not careful, we’re going towind up with a health care system like

they’ve got in Canada, a nation that isbroke from health care spending, eventhough Canada is a sparsely populatedcountry with a shortage of gunshotwounds, crack addicts, and huge tortjudgments.

What are we as Americans sup-posed to learn from a medical systemdevoted to hockey injuries, sinus infec-tions, and from trying to pronounceFrench vowels?

Well, we’ll learnto fix prices. Becausethat’s all that healthcare reform really is.It’s just price-fixing.Price-fixing worksgreat in Cuba andNorth Korea andin rent-controlledapartments in NewYork. Everybodyknows how easy it isto find an inexpen-sive apartment in anice neighborhoodin New York City.

Another thingthat gets me aboutHillary is this: why is

price-fixing such a great thing whenshe does it, but if a couple of business-men get together on a golf coursethat’s a big crime?

Contrary to all the rules of politicalhumor, I just hate politics. Politicsstink. Think about how we use theword “politics.” Are office politics evera good thing? When somebody playspolitics to get a promotion, does he de-serve it? When we call a coworker a“real politician,” is that a compliment?Politics stink. And to my mind, liber-tarianism is a room deodorizer. It’s try-ing to keep that bad smell of politicsout of home, school, and office.

But let’s make a distinction be-tween politics and politicians. Be-

4 • Cato’s Letter SPRING 2008

SPRING 2008 Cato’s Letter • 5

cause there are a lot of peoplewho are under a misappre-hension that the problem iscertain politicians who stink.They say that if you impeachGeorge Bush, everything willbe fine. Or if you nab TedKennedy for a DUI, the na-tion’s problems will besolved. But unfortunately it’sjust not that simple.

The problem is not reallypoliticians. The problem ispolitics. Politicians are chefs—some good, some bad—but politics isroad kill. The problem isn’t the cook.The problem is the cookbook. Thekey ingredient of politics is the ideathat all of society’s ills can be curedpolitically. It’s like a cookbook wherethe recipe for everything is to fry it.The fruit cocktail is fried. The soup isfried. The salad is fried. So is the icecream and cake. And your pinot noiris rolled in breadcrumbs and dunkedin the deep fat fryer. It is just no wayto cook up public policy. Politics isgreasy. Politics is slippery. Politicscan’t tell the truth.

But I don’t blame the politiciansfor this. Because just think what thetruth would sound like on the cam-paign stump. Even a little, bitty bit oftruth. “No, I can’t fix public educa-tion. The problem isn’t funding orteachers unions or lack of vouchers orabsence of computer equipment inthe classroom. The problem is yourdamned kids.”

Now, that’s just not going to work.There is only one number that

matters in politics. And you maythink that that’s the number of votes,but that’s not the number. The num-ber that matters in politics is the low-est common denominator. It is theavowed purpose of politics to bringthe policies of our nation down to a

level where they are good for everyone.No matter how foolish, irresponsible,selfish, grasping, or vile everyone maybe, politics seeks fairness for them all.I do not. I am here to speak in favor of unfairness.

I have a 10 year old at home, andshe is always saying, “That’s not fair.”When she says that, I say, “Honey,you’re cute; that’s not fair. Your fami-ly is pretty well off; that’s not fair. You were born in America; that’s notfair. Honey, you had better pray toGod that things don’t start gettingfair for you.”

After all my time covering politics, Iknow a lot of politicians. They’re intel-ligent. They’re diligent. They’re talent-ed. I like them. I count them as friends.But when these friends of mine taketheir intelligence, their diligence, andtheir talent and they put these into theservice of politics, ladies and gentle-men, when they do that, they turn intoleeches upon the commonwealth.

They are dogs chasing the cat offreedom. They are cats tormenting themouse of responsibility. They are micegnawing on the insulated wiring of in-dividualism. They are going to hell in ahand basket, and they stole that basketfrom you. They are the ditch carp inthe great river of democracy. And thisis what one of their friends says.

“The key ingredient of politics is the idea that all of society’s ills can becured politically. It’s like a cookbook where therecipe for everything is to fry it. The fruit cocktail is fried.

“

6 • Cato’s Letter SPRING 2008

What inspired you to leave Microsoft for theworld of public policy?I wanted to do something with more of a so-cial purpose, and I started researching educa-tion in my spare time. I soon realized thatmuch was already known about pedagogicalmethods and curriculum. The problem was-n’t that we didn’t know what effective educa-tional practices looked like; the problem wasthat we didn’t have a system that could reli-ably replicate those practices.

What are the most important issues facingAmerican education today?Problem one is that our current monopolyschool systems lack incentives to be effective,efficient, or responsive to families. Problemtwo is that surprisingly few people under-stand the systemic nature of problem one, be-lieving that the monopoly can be “fixed” if weonly try harder—or by centralizing it evenmore at the national level.

In your view, what is the most promising proposal for reform in education policy?The best realistic policy we’ve developed is acombination of personal use tax credits andscholarship donation tax credits. Basically, ifyou pay for the education of your own orsomeone else’s children, we cut your taxes.Cato published model legislation along thoselines last December and we’ll soon be releas-ing a tool that estimates its fiscal impact. Inall five states we’ve looked at so far, this pro-posal would generate substantial savings.

Why are tax credits superior to vouchers?The key benefit of tax credits is that they reduce compulsion. Under vouchers,everyone has to fund every kind of school;that produces battles over what kinds of schools should get vouchers—for inst-ance over the voucher funding of conserva-tive Islamic schools in the Netherlands. With tax credits, people are either spending their own money on their own children, or they are choosing the scholarship organization that gets their donation. No one has to pay for education they findobjectionable.

What is the status of efforts to promote schoolchoice in America?They are numerous, lively, and growing.

How will the Center for Educational Freedomcontinue to work to improve American education?We will continue to arm school choicegroups around the country with research,model legislation, and fiscal analysis tools tohelp them more powerfully make the casefor market education, we will relentlessly de-flate the claims of would-be central plannersby revealing the failure of their chosen poli-cies domestically and abroad, and we willcontinue reaching out directly to the publicvia books, op-eds, and other media, explain-ing why the value of educational freedomgoes far beyond improving test scores andsaving money.

Cato Scholar Profile:ANDREW J. COULSONANDREW J. COULSON is the director of Cato’s Center forEducational Freedom. He is the author of Market Education:The Unknown History. Coulson’s writings have appeared inthe Journal of Research in Teaching of English and Edu-cation Policy Analysis Archives as well as the New YorkPost, Seattle Times, Detroit Free Press, and Wall StreetJournal. He currently serves on the Advisory Council of the E. G. West Centre for Market Solutions in Education at the Uni-versity of Newcastle, U.K.

SPRING 2008 Cato’s Letter • 7

avid Lockwood, a professor fromEast Lansing Michigan, chose toremember Cato very generously in

his will. He did so, despite the fact that henever signed on as a Cato Sponsor during hislife. His generosity speaks to the fact that Catowas an important part of his life.

David Lockwood’s example serves to illus-trate the point that there is no “correct for-mula” for giving and that it is never “too earlyor too late” to give. Donors occasionally getthe impression that they are obligated to givesequentially—first as lifetime sponsors andlater as testators who make a gift to Catounder their will. The truth is quite to the con-trary: Cato is interested in whatever mode ofgiving that works best for you.

A bequest is a simple and flexible way ofensuring a legacy for Cato. While bequestscan take many forms, there are three basicways of making a bequest. We will give briefexamples of these three basic forms in orderto give you a sense of how bequests work.

Leaving the residue of your estate toCato, after making bequests to other indi-viduals (or organizations), is a simple and ef-fective form of bequest. To make such a gift,your will would say something to the effectof: “I give the residue of my real and person-al estate to the Cato Institute.” This resid-uary gift was the form of bequest used byDavid Lockwood.

It is also possible to leave a fixed percent-

age of your estate to Cato. If you choose touse this method, your will would includephrasing such as “I give 30 percent of theresidue of my estate to the Cato Institute.”Please bear in mind that the percentage givencan be as high or low as you wish—30 percent,50 percent or whatever.

Finally, you have the option of making aspecific bequest to Cato, that is, of leavingCato a specific amount of cash or specificproperty. Under this scenario, your willwould say something like “I give the sum of“$100,000 to the Cato Institute.” Or it couldsay, “I give 500 shares of XYZ stock to theCato Institute.”

Charitable bequests are deductible for es-tate tax purposes. Unlike income taxes andtheir hodgepodge of percentage limitations,there is no limit on deductibility for estate taxpurposes. This broad deductibility oftengives rise to the comment that “you canchoose to give your estate to Uncle Sam or tocharity.” This bit of popular wisdom holdstrue provided your estate is sufficiently largeto be subject to estate taxes.

Cato is deeply grateful for Professor Lock-wood’s magnificent bequest. His friends andfamily can be assured that his legacy will fightthe good fight for liberty.

For more information about bequests andother planned gifts, contact Cato’s directorof planned giving, Gayllis Ward, at 646-717-2080, email gward@cato.org.

D

A PROFILE IN GIVING:

It’s Never Too Late to Give

DAVIDLOCKWOOD:

1000

Mas

sach

uset

ts A

ve.,

N.W

.W

ash

ingt

on, D

.C. 2

0001

ww

w.c

ato.

org

Non

prof

it

Org

aniz

atio

nU

.S. P

osta

ge

PAID

Cat

o In

stit

ute

C A T O I N S T I T U T E W W W . C A T O - U N I V E R S I T Y . O R G

Cato University 2008Freedom’s Campaign in the 21st Century July 20-25, 2008 ● San Diego

PHOTO: Poolside at the Rancho Bernardo

C ato University is the CatoInstitute’s premier educa-tional event of the year.

This annual program bringstogether outstanding facultyand participants from acrossthe country and around the globe who share a commitmentto liberty and learning.

In addition, Cato Universityhas become an opportunity tocreate a family legacy of liberty—with parents participating withchildren, grandparents sharing

the experience with grandchil-dren, and all three generationsjoining together.

THIS YEAR’S PROGRAM – Freedom’s Campaign in the 21st Century will be held at the Rancho Bernardo Inn, aluxurious resort near San Diego.It will energetically take you thr-ough the prospects for andthreats to freedom in the UnitedStates and around the globe.

PRICECato University’s low price of$925 covers all meals, recep-tions, lectures, materials,books, and evening events, butnot overnight room charges atthe Rancho Bernardo Inn.

FULL DETAILS– includingthe list of faculty and a convenient online registrationform are available atwww.cato-university.org.