Uncategorized

For years, pretty much everything about the U.S. Postal Service has been a political nightmare. Decisions at the failing service are made because different political players demand things, not because they’re in line with market reality.

Earlier this week, the postmaster general — which is a fancy state title for CEO — said that continuing losses are going to doom Saturday delivery and cut service to three days per week.

I don’t have an opinion about whether there’s a market for mail that’s delivered six days a week. I doubt anyone else has a realistic assessment, either, because the market for mail services has never been submitted to private competition in this country to see what people want and are willing to pay for.

Keep Reading

I’m still thinking today about that public hearing I went to Wednesday where federal environmental officials were supposedly listening to the public’s concerns about pollution. I know it’s impolite to point out something this obvious, but they weren’t there to listen to citizens. They were there to perform for TV cameras.

I heard the emotional appeal about children several times during the meeting. (Remember that I’ve produced plenty of manipulative political material over the years, so I’m very sensitive to the pious invocation of kids’ needs.) Ignacia Moreno, the assistant attorney general who was headlining Wednesday’s show, spoke of having to be away from her children traveling around the country. A man in the audience talked about his two daughters’ health problems. There were others, too.

Here’s the question, though. Why did they bother to put on this public show? Was anything said that anybody didn’t already know? I knew walking in what the various players on the federal side were going to say. The state and federal officials knew, too. The truth is that we weren’t there for the content of what was being said. It was all about putting on a show for the television cameras.

Keep Reading

There’s something wrong with the “justice” system when a jury convicts a man of a crime, but sends a note to the judge saying, “We’ve all reached a verdict. To us we feel he has been wronged. Please consider that in his sentencing.”

In other words, the jury felt that the accused was actually the victim in the case, but they still did what the judge and prosecutor told them to do. That’s wrong. (They’ve probably never heard of jury nullification, because judges work pretty hard to make sure jurors aren’t aware of their real rights and responsibilities.)

A Texas jury convicted a man of resisting arrest after police mistook him for a burglar and broke into his home — and he tried to escape from them. Police say a neighbor reported — wrongly — seeing a black male kicking in a door to the house. For some odd reason, this Hispanic man apparently didn’t trust that police who had just broken into his own home had his best interests at heart.

The man’s attorney says his client has the mind of a child and also struggles with the English/Spanish language barrier, but I’d say the guy showed good judgement in resisting the people who were breaking in and trying to grab him, whether they were dressed in police costumes or not.

Keep Reading