A Few Questions for John McCain

[galtgulch]

STRAIGHT TALK

A Few Questions for John McCain

by Radley Balko, Reason.com Hit & Run blog, July 16, 2008

http://www.reason.com ews/show/127584.html

As we near the major party conventions, here are a few questions for presumptive

Republican presidential nominee John McCain:

—In your book Worth the Fighting For, you write, "Our greatness depends upon our

patriotism, and our patriotism is hardly encouraged when we cannot take pride in

the highest public institutions." You've also said that "national pride will not

survive the people's contempt for government." Do you really believe that the

government is the root of American greatness? Would we better off as a nation if

people refrained from criticizing the government? Does patriotism require us to

support our country, "right or wrong?"

—U.S. News reported last December that part of your economic plan includes a new

entitlement program for the unemployed. You've said that the federal government

should make up part of the salary of workers who are forced to take lower-paying

jobs. Economists estimate your plan will cost $4-5 billion per year, but as a

longtime legislator, you should know that new entitlements tend to become more

generous and more comprehensive over time. Should your plan eventually emulate

the Danish worker security plan it's modeled after, it will likely cost $400

billion or more each year. Given that the federal government currently faces

some $59 trillion in unfunded Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security

liabilities, do we really need another federal entitlement?

—In your January primary debate, you referred to "greedy" Wall Street

stockbrokers, and in contrasting your career to the business career of Mass.

Gov. Mitt Romney, you said, "I led the largest squadron in the United States

Navy. And I did it out of patriotism, not for profit." Do you think a career in

public service is inherently more noble and virtuous than a career in the

private sector? Are people who spend their lives on the taxpayer dole as

politicians and government employees simply better people than those who create

wealth and jobs through private enterprise?

—Public choice theory posits that government workers are just as self-interested

and no less altruistic than private sector workers, and that we should

acknowledge as much when making public policy. Do you believe in public choice

theory?

—You're highly critical of businesses and corporations that benefit from

government handouts and pork projects. And rightly so. But you and your wife's

fortune comes from her inheritance of Hensley & Company, a Phoenix-based beer

wholesaler and distributor. Beer wholesalers benefit from what's called the

"three-tiered" alcohol distribution system, an anachronistic Prohibition-era law

that requires beer, wine and liquor producers to first sell alcohol products to

wholesalers, who then sell to retailers. The law essentially mandates a "middle

man" in alcohol sales. It inflates the cost of alcohol for consumers by adding

an extra mark-up—the bulk of which goes to huge companies like Hensley. In other

words, alcohol wholesaling is a government-created and government-subsidized

industry. How, then, does your family fortune jibe with your criticism of

corporate welfare and corporate handouts?

—Is it the government's job to make us better people? If so, by whose definition

of "better?"

—After the Supreme Court's decision in the Heller gun rights case, you admirably

commented, "This ruling does not mark the end of our struggle against those who

seek to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. We must always remain vigilant

in defense of our freedoms." I couldn't agree more. But on the subject of

campaign finance reform, you said in 2006 that, "I would rather have a clean

government than one where, quote, First Amendment rights are being respected,

that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I'd rather have the clean

government." How do you reconcile these two positions? Is a "clean" government

(whatever that means) really more important than the rights and freedoms of its

citizens?

—America was founded on the idea of inalienable, individual rights—our

Declaration of Independence outlined three of the most important rights as

"life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." But your speeches and public

statements seem to show a kind of contempt for individualism, or at least a

preference for a kind of patriotic national collectivism. You've said, for

example, that "each and every one of us has a duty to serve a cause greater than

our own self-interest." You've also said that patriotism should be about

"putting the country first, before party or personal ambition, before anything."

Do you really believe this? Should we put love of country ahead of family?

Faith? Our morality, or sense of justice?

—In 1989, your wife Cindy became addicted to the prescription drugs Percocet and

Vicodin. Eventually, she began stealing medication from the non-profit medical

charity she ran to assist the victims of war and disaster areas. You and your

wife were able to negotiate a settlement with the Justice Department that let

her off with restitution and admission to a rehabilitation center, but no fines,

jail time or even public disclosure. Certainly no one could fault you for trying

to save your spouse from criminal sanction. But you're consistently one of the

most strident drug warriors in Congress. You've voted to strengthen penalties

against those who use and traffic in both illicit drugs and who divert

prescription drugs. You've supported mandatory minimums and harsher penalties

for first-time offenders. Why shouldn't average people without powerful

connections who make the same mistakes your wife made be shown the same leniency

and mercy the criminal justice system showed her?

My next column will pose questions to presumptive Democratic nominee Barack

Obama.

Radley Balko is a senior editor of reason. A version of this article originally

[Chris Grieb]

These are good questions.

Radley Balko is a very bright guy. I read his blog "The Agitator" every day. He sees a host of issues very clearly.

[Martin Radwin]

Too bad none of these very intelligent questions will ever be asked. Most mainstream journalists are simply too stupid and/or uninformed to even think of asking any of them. And if any journalist in a position to ask such a question of a presidential candidate or member of congress ever did, he or she would forever after be denied access to any politicians with rank higher than city dog catcher. Mainstream journalism has long since become the provence of ass kissing lap dogs.

Radley Balko, fine journalist that he is, has never been granted access to any high-level politician. Neither has James Bovard, a man who is, in my opinion, the greatest journalist of our generation. Neither has ever been invited to any white house press conferences. And they never will be.

Martin

[Robert Campbell]

Martin,

Gotta agree with you there.

I don't see Mr. Balko getting an invite to a White House press conference soon...

Sigh...

Robert Campbell

[Neil Parille]

These are good questions, but I paused at this:

In 1989, your wife Cindy became addicted to the prescription drugs Percocet and

Vicodin. Eventually, she began stealing medication from the non-profit medical

charity she ran to assist the victims of war and disaster areas. You and your

wife were able to negotiate a settlement with the Justice Department that let

her off with restitution and admission to a rehabilitation center, but no fines,

jail time or even public disclosure. Certainly no one could fault you for trying

to save your spouse from criminal sanction. But you're consistently one of the

most strident drug warriors in Congress. You've voted to strengthen penalties

against those who use and traffic in both illicit drugs and who divert

prescription drugs. You've supported mandatory minimums and harsher penalties

for first-time offenders. Why shouldn't average people without powerful

connections who make the same mistakes your wife made be shown the same leniency

and mercy the criminal justice system showed her?

I tend to think that most first time offenders in a similar situation would get similar treatment. I think it's something of a myth that prisons are full of convicted drug users.

[Chris Grieb]

Neil; Have you ever heard of Richard Paey? There is a discussion on OL.

McCain may have done nothing wrong. Too many doctors and patients have to worry about the DEA. It should not get any worse.

You might look at Radley Balko's blog "The Agitator".