Effort to boot unethical congressman laudable, but will it really help?

By David McElroy · November 18, 2011

Insider trading is considered such a serious offense by the federal government that it routinely prosecutes people and sends them to jail for it — unless you’re a member of Congress, in which case the rules don’t seem to apply.

Spencer Bachus is a Republican congressman from the district in Alabama where I live. I’ve met him and I have friends who know him, but I can’t say I know the man. He’s been in the news lately, but for all the wrong reasons. When CBS News’ magazine “60 Minutes” ran a story last Sunday about members of Congress who were involved in insider trading, Bachus was prominently mentioned. It appears that Bachus was taking secret information he was getting as a member of the House Committee on Financial Services and using that to trade banking stocks that he knew were about to go down in value.

Bachus says that nothing he did was illegal, but he also says he quit trading stocks late last year. I wonder why he quit doing what he was doing if it was perfectly legal and ethical.

Here in Alabama, many conservatives and Republicans are outraged about Bachus’ behavior and are calling on him to resign. About 50 or 6o conservatives gathered at Bachus’ Birmingham office Thursday to protest.

It’s a good thing that conservatives recognize that the man they’ve been supporting as their congressman is unethical and needs to go, but I have a question for them. Who do they expect to be a good replacement? If this man has been able to fool them since he was elected in 1992, what makes them think their next choice will be any better? And what makes them think that simply replacing individual pieces of a corrupt and coercive system is going to make any difference?

I understand that people are angry. I understand that they’ve been trained to believe that “getting the right person for the job” is going to solve everything. But have they ever seen any credible evidence that this is the case?

The problem isn’t the unethical people we send to be members of Congress or to run various parts of government. The problem is the system itself. Getting rid of Bachus — or even throwing out all of the incumbents and replacing them with new people — doesn’t fix the basic flaws in the system. The core issue that we give a group of people unlimited power to grant favors and do whatever they decide to do to the rest of us. Whoever we place in that position is going to become corrupt, because what we’re sending them to do is immoral in the first place. The sign here would be more accurate if you struck the word “big” and replaced it with “coercive,” but coercive government is still a criminal enterprise even if it’s small.

We tell ourselves that it’s an honor and a responsibility to be elected to high office. The truth is that we’re sending people to operate levers of a machine that enslaves and kills. In the belly of that beast, what’s a little insider trading? Every now and then, the rabble get angry and demand a sacrifice of the election gods — and someone such as Bachus is thrown overboard. But does it really change anything? Is the system any different?

It’s time to change the system. Don’t just boot a congressman. Boot the entire coercive state.

Share on Social Networks

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

For four years, Donald Trump’s supporters screamed that everything that went wrong was the fault of Joe Biden. They were sometimes right and they were sometimes delusional. (Anybody who knows me understands that I can’t stand Biden any more than I can stand Trump, just for different reasons.) But for two months, Trump has rampaged through U.S. political life — vandalizing pretty much everything in sight — and the vast majority of his supporters are silent at best. Many watch as he blows up the world economy and they make excuses for him. They’re in absolute denial, even about things that Trump is doing very intentionally. Anybody who understands economics and history knows that tariffs are a terrible idea from a pragmatic point of view. Anybody who values individual freedom knows that tariffs are massive taxes on individuals — and they’re a tool of political control over the ability of people to trade freely. Trump is the antithesis of everything which political conservatives stood for just a few years ago. It’s far past time for people who claim to be conservatives to reclaim the principles and values which they used to claim — and stop this mad man before he can accelerate the day when we experience economic and social collapse. Open your eyes to reality and reject this lying narcissist.

Related Posts