The Suburban Voluntaryist

Worry Warts in the Indiana Legislature

2012-01-29T18:30:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: Who’s worrying?
SOUTHERN INDIANA — Politicians sure seem to worry a lot. They’ve made the furrowed brow an art form, particularly during a legislative session when they introduce their bills that will supposedly fix the problems that worry them so.

For example, several state legislators are really worried about a problem concerning government education in Indiana. Their worry warts popped out immediately when these politicians found out that cursive writing is no longer a mandatory part of the government school curriculum.

I don’t know why they are so worried about this. If you know anything about the government schools, you know that teachers need to focus their limited time on other skills. Schools need to stop wasting time on cursive and focus on the single most important skill students need to succeed in today’s government school system in our modern age — learning how to correctly fill in answer bubbles with a No. 2 pencil.

(By the way, proponents of this law want to include private schools who accept vouchers. This is the second example I’ve found this legislative session proving that politicians will treat voucher-accepting schools exactly the same as fully funded government schools when creating new laws and regulations.)

Legislators are also worried about the ethics law that was passed a couple of years ago. Politicians say certain organizations that help pay their expenses for out of state trips should be exempt from this law because they are educational groups, not lobbyists, and legislators need to be educated on important topics.

Okay this one has me worried. Obviously Indiana has a bunch of woefully uneducated people who claim to be in charge because they seem to have no clue about how to use technology. I guess they’ve never heard of live online virtual conferences. I guess they’ve never heard of uploading video to the Web. I guess they’ve never heard of podcasts. I guess they’ve never heard of emailing pdfs and PowerPoint presentations. They must think their only alternative to a trip paid for by these “educational” groups is to read long reports written in cursive and sent through the U.S. Postal Service.

Alcohol purchases on Sundays provided another worry for some legislators, but not for long. They have no more worries for this year because the bill has been killed in committee. Part of the discussion centered on the lack of clear evidence that selling alcohol on Sundays would increase the tax revenue collected by the state. And if a legislative action doesn’t help the government collect more money, well, then they’re not going to worry about changing anything.

Hey, why the furrowed brow? You didn’t think the Sunday alcohol proposal was based on a foundational principle of freedom did you? I’m sincerely worried about you if you think individual liberty has anything to do with actions taken by the state legislature.

Finally, let’s talk about the worries of Southern Indiana legislator Rhonda Rhoads. During her campaign she appeared to be very worried about the taxpayer. I have several of her postcard advertisements and they all talk about how worried she is and how she wants to stand up for you, the taxpayer.

But now that she’s been elected she doesn’t seem quite so worried about all taxpayers. She is sponsoring a bill, known as the “parent trigger” that would convert a government school to a charter school if 51 percent of the parents vote for it. But when asked why this proposal does not include all taxpayers forced to support the school in question, Rhoads said the taxpayers without children wouldn’t know enough about what’s going on at the school.

In other words, you ignorant, uninformed taxpayers who have no children in a government school just don’t need to worry your pretty little heads about this politician’s proposed legislation. Just shut up and pay.

No wonder so many people worry when the legislature is in session.

Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson has been unable to find a set of worry beads strong enough to last her through an entire legislative session.

Government Property Controls

2012-01-24T21:29:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: Whose property is it?

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — If asked, most people would say they want control over their property. And yet, at the same time, they often support various government controls, which is the exact opposite. This tendency toward the fickle gets everyone into a pickle and below is a jar full of juicy examples.

Clark Regional Airport

Two government controls are stuffed neatly inside the airport expansion fiasco — zoning and eminent domain. The airport tried to take advantage of government-imposed zoning classifications to seize a neighbor’s property at a lower value. The neighbor sued, won, and is now owed significantly more based on the “highest and best use” of the land. (Another property owner has now piggy-backed off of this ruling and will also get a higher price upon seizure.)

This case leaves county residents in the weird position of feeling better that someone whose property is being seized by the government is getting a better deal, while at the same time realizing that they, as taxpayers, are the ones really paying the price.

In addition, no one really has a clue what the price should be for such property because government interference has corrupted the process. The value of a property can only really be determined when both parties freely consent and the buyer does not use taxpayer dollars to complete the transaction.

Floyd County Parks Department

The dispute concerning property near Budd Road is another twist of the same two government powers. The parks department successfully seized private property through eminent domain but those same private property owners managed to stop the parks system from getting the full zoning classification the department wanted.

Or so the private owners thought. The parks department is accused of ignoring the law and overstepping their zoning classification. I imagine these property owners, who thought zoning laws were there to protect them, are now wondering how true that is when the one you want protection from is the government itself.

Ed Clere’s law

Republican State Rep. Ed Clere, R-New Albany, is pushing for a law to increase tax credits for historical preservation purposes. (He is also taking advantage of the latest political propaganda fad by defining this attempt to increase the benefits given to a government-created special class of property owners as a “jobs bill.”)

One of the problems with such government control is that it creates an atmosphere where no one has any idea what could be done in the voluntary market, with owners controlling their property and making their own preservation decisions.

Greater Clark Schools/city of Jeffersonville

This example is noteworthy because this was a property transaction between government entities. The school system had property in the Franklin Square area that has been sitting vacant and, with the push of a school board member, the property was sold to the city of Jeffersonville for one-third of its appraised value. (Not sure what zoning value was used.) Promoters of the deal are now talking about grand plans that will be of great benefit to all.

No one is saying much about the actual transaction though. The school corporation says it could not sell the property at that price to a private entity, only to another government entity. This means we have no idea how this building may have been used if the offer was open to any potential buyer. All we have are politicians proudly relishing the sweet deal.

Ohio River Bridges Project

One problem associated with the high cost of this project has been the use of a federal historical preservation designation to protect a property from eminent domain seizure. Of course, Ed Clere and anyone else who advocates government-imposed historical preservation can’t really be irritated at them for doing this. After all, those Kentucky folks did exactly what historical preservation proponents would want someone to do: Use government to control how a property is used.

People are so busy running around trying to gain control over other people’s property through zoning, eminent domain seizure and historical preservation that they don’t seem to notice that the same government property controls that can be used to benefit you can also be used to harm you. And in all cases, one way or the other, the sour truth is that you will pay for these controls.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson once found herself in a pickle but ate her way out of it.

Making Indiana a Right To Work State

2012-01-18T14:04:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: Labor intensive

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — How sad to see the waste of human labor, unionized and not unionized, that’s being expended on the political fight in Indiana concerning the right-to-work issue.

Removed from government, unions are simply people united for common goals in their workplace — a marvelous concept. Removed from government, businesses are simply people trying to meet a demand in the market and hiring people to help — a marvelous concept. Removed from government, when there is a need for conflict resolution, the parties involved work to negotiate a mutually satisfying agreement, understanding compromise may be necessary — a marvelous concept.

However, when unions and corporations use government to gain an advantage over the other party, well, that’s not so marvelous.

It’s also not very smart. When government interferes in what should be voluntary interactions, even when one group thinks they benefited and “won” the fight, they still lose because now they are prisoners, handcuffed to the unpredictability of the political process.

We have clear evidence of this in regards to this issue because a right-to-work law was successfully passed in Indiana back in 1957. Then it was repealed in the mid 1960s. Now here it is again, casting a huge shadow over the people in Indiana. And if the legislation passes, it could be repealed at some future point.

What’s worse, all of this action is only a tiny part of a continuing response to previous government actions, much of it on the federal level. On and on we go. And yet we still believe government solves problems.

The only people who really benefit are the politicians because their interference solidifies and intensifies the rift, ensuring their continuing involvement. This interference between these two groups in particular has helped create the huge funding funnels that are essential in maintaining the two major political party machines we see today.

Indiana Republicans are either dense or being completely disingenuous about the right-to-work proposal. The Democrats have it right — this law, if passed, would not make Indiana a right-to-work state.

Yes, it’s true that this law would prohibit contracts between employers and unions that require all employees to pay union representation fees. But that does not mean Indiana residents would then be living in a state where no fees were charged in order to work. It would only mean the fees that are paid would be lowered for some individuals.

Indiana cannot be a right-to-work state as long as it continues to charge its own fees for the so-called right to work, otherwise known as the income tax. And even if the politicians pushing for this right-to-work law decide to be consistent and amend this bill to include repeal of the state income tax, Indiana still wouldn’t be able to completely unshackle hard working individuals because the federal government also charges fees for working.

They don’t call those annual speeches the state of the union for nothing you know.

Business owners/management, unionized workers and nonunionized workers are experiencing the exact same labor struggle — being hindered in their desire to gain higher wages when forced to hand over fees to the state. Unfortunately, as long as these groups focus on fighting each other through the political process, they can’t see this one grievance they actually have in common — the one grievance that can unite them.

And the politicians certainly aren’t going to point it out.

Although it’s now complicated due to previous actions, the root of the right-to-work issue is as simple as any other issue — government should not be interfering in the voluntary interactions between individuals and it’s a mistake for either side in this conflict, business or union, to use it to do so.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson is currently searching for a huge funding funnel of her very own.

Indiana Republican Senator Vaneta Becker's Idea of Freedom

2012-01-08T15:05:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: The land of the free

SOUTHERN INDIANA — It has come to my attention that some of you do not think you are free. I find this particularly horrifying considering that yesterday marked the beginning of a very special time of year — the time when politicians gather together for that wonderful annual expression of freedom known as the Indiana General Assembly. This session promises to be packed with proposals from politicians proving you are indeed free.

Take Republican State Sen. Vaneta Becker for example. When she heard that “The Star-Spangled Banner” is sometimes altered by performers, she decided to propose a law mandating standards when the song is performed at events sponsored by government schools.

Clearly, she only wants everyone to understand what freedom means and there’s no better way to help free people express that freedom than by having government place strict guidelines and rules on how to perform a song.

Her proposal makes even more sense considering it’s focused on expressing freedom properly in government schools. After all, these places are the official centers that government uses to educate the masses about the wonderful freedoms they enjoy. So it’s perfectly natural that politicians like Becker would want to tell individuals who perform inside these compulsory-funded buildings exactly how to sing a song expressing freedom.

Yes, it’s true that Francis Scott Key, the author of “The Star-Spangled Banner” lyrics, wrote that poem to suit himself as he expressed his freedom. However, the song is now the official government anthem, which means it is now used as a hymn for worshiping the nation-state, so clearly it must be performed in a government-approved manner. Surely even you freedom-loving extremists can understand that.

What should really be encouraging to freedom lovers is that if Ms. Becker succeeds in getting her law passed as written, she will be helping even more free people express their freedom properly because her proposal will extend the freedom-loving hand of government to private schools who accept vouchers.

You remember vouchers, right? They were part of one of the laws proving you are free that the Republicans moved through during last year’s annual expression of freedom. The law that the freedom-loving proponents said would provide more freedom to people, while at the same time assuring private schools who accepted the vouchers that they would remain free from increased government intrusion.

Now it’s only one session later, and already a politician is making no differentiation at all between private schools that accept vouchers and fully funded government schools. Oh, wait a minute. Forget I mentioned that. Pay no attention to that camel with his nose under the tent of those private schools. Let’s move on.

The bureaucracy needed to support enforcement of Becker’s proposal is a simple matter. The only requirement for the government schools — and the private schools who accept government vouchers — is that they must record all performances and keep them on file for two years, in case there is a problem with a performer who takes liberties with the song.

According to Becker, these requirements would be easy to fulfill due to technology like cell phones. Now, come on naysayers, you have to admit that this is a marvelous example of how free people make good use of technological advances.

Just imagine how great it will be if Ms. Becker succeeds. Indiana will be bathed in that rocket red glare and the air will be bursting with sounds and words emanating from the collective as they sing, correctly and properly, according to the specific directives set forth by the government.

“Oh, say you can see what it means to be free?”

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson might have more to say about the politicians as they gather together during this most special time of the year.

A Visit To Opinion Addicts Anonymous

2012-01-03T09:33:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: It’s just my opinion, but ...

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Hello, my name is Debbie and I’m an opinion addict. I’m here today at my first meeting of Opinion Addicts Anonymous because I need to re-evaluate and yes, perhaps even change my ways.

I write weekly columns for the local paper and while riding high on opinions, I occasionally run into other people. Sometimes it’s a minor fender bender, sometimes it’s a head-on collision and sometimes I drive right over them.

When I wake up the next morning after one of those binges and see what I’ve done, I sometimes regret my actions. Oh, I don’t really care if I see politicians or government officials with tire tracks on their backs. They chose to get deeply involved in an entity that depends upon the threat of violence and they must accept the consequences of playing a direct part in such a system.

However, I sometimes find myself writing opinions that also sideswipe entities and people who mostly operate in the private voluntary realm. I don’t set out to run over private entities — they get hit because they have somehow become intertwined with the government. (Although it must be said that often this is due to an explicit choice they made at some point.)

Even so, I’m here today because I’m wondering about my behavior in regards to these private entities and people. In theory we should be working together and perhaps I have been wrong to give such entities and the people involved too much grief.

Like me, they have to live within the society that exists today and are often taking actions merely to survive. Perhaps I should sympathize more and regard them as collateral damage to the real problem — society’s collective legitimization of the institution of government.

I gained this insight in part by observing Occupy Wall Street. After speaking directly with people involved and looking at the movement as a whole, I noticed that much of the anger is directed to corporations and the acts of individuals within corporations.

But corporations and the protections it provides to individuals only exist because of government. The reason we end up with crony capitalism is because government is there to create and protect the sleazy partnerships.

I realized the people inside these nationally acting corporations are behaving in regards to the federal government in the same manner as local people inside local entities are when forced to deal with local governments. Yes, it’s a problem when the federal government hands out special benefits to favored entities, just as it is when done on a local level. But all of these deals could not exist if government did not exist.

One other problem related to my opinion addiction is that sometimes people get upset when I write about individuals without making an effort to contact them first. I’m not sure why they want me to do this. I know it has nothing to do with the facts I share because these people never claim my facts were wrong and the newspaper has never had to issue a retraction for incorrect factual information. They just don’t like my conclusions.

Many people do not understand that I am not a newspaper reporter. I am a freelance opinion columnist and as such, I am under no obligation to contact anyone who may be called out by name as I share the facts I’ve used to draw those conclusions.

Readers understand this in regards to opinion columnists who write about larger national issues and people. Those writers generally do not contact the individuals they write about, they just share their opinion. I’m just a writer who does the exact same thing on a local level.

I certainly could contact the people I mention and others may prefer I do so but clearly this issue itself is a matter of opinion. I have and will continue contacting people for more information if I think I need it but in the end an opinion column’s purpose is to share individual conclusions and everyone else is free to share their conclusions in response. Without contacting me first.

That said, I’m here to re-evaluate my actions so perhaps I will attempt to contact the people I mention more often. We’ll see what happens as a result.

Wow, I feel much better now after sharing my story. As a matter of fact what the heck am I even doing at this meeting? I don’t need to work on my opinion addiction. I don’t have a problem like you people do! I’m outta here.

Oh, but before I go, can you guys pass on some information for me? Tell people operating in the private voluntary realm that if they don’t want to get sideswiped, then they might want to try their best to stay away from government. Otherwise they could be standing in the middle of the road that this opinion addict is almost always driving on.

Thanks for listening. Now, I’m off for another year of adventures in opinion sharing.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson is always trying to improve the manner in which she drives her points home.

Clark and Floyd County Officials Cause Harm To Kentuckiana Medical Center

2011-12-25T13:25:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: Where’s the justice?

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Kentuckiana Medical Center may soon be drawing in its last breath. The private hospital has struggled from the start and will now die unless Clark County government acts to help resuscitate.

I wonder how much it hurts the doctors to ask Clark County government for help. I can’t even imagine how nauseating it must feel, considering Clark County government is, in part, directly responsible for the trouble the Medical Center has experienced in the first place.

The current deal supposedly puts a tourniquet on the bleeding medical center; however, the government involvement seems to be drawing blood of its own because if the deal goes through, the county could receive $200,000 per year for participating. This is ironic because one of the reasons the doctors wanted to open their own hospital was to get rid of the administrative middle man.

There’s more to this sordid story. So much so that if you are not currently in good health you may not want to read further.

The original idea was simple: a group of doctors decided to take a risk and provide another health care option for people needing acute medical care. However, Clark and Floyd county government, on behalf of their respective county hospitals, fought this idea. Hard. These people wanted to block competition.

In 2005, both counties’ commissioners assumed power they did not have and passed ordinances creating temporary moratoriums on new hospitals. The private hospital investors sued, successfully obtaining a permanent injunction against enforcement of these ordinances.

The damage had already been done, though. The private investors had to spend time, money and energy fighting the unjust interference instead of pursuing the plan developed and based on variables that existed at the time.

Imagine how much can change in a year. Previous agreements and approvals can expire, construction costs can increase, etc. It was as if the county injected the medical center with a slow-acting poison.

Amazingly though, the center opened and began treating the sick. But the symptoms of disease in the form of financial problems started a year later.

Clearly the government-forced moratorium negatively affected the center. I’m not sure there’s a way to revive the hospital in its current form absent further government involvement. Some might say the moratorium helps justify this deal, but government interference was wrong then and further government action is also wrong.

But what can be done about it now?

I wholly commend the investors for their attempt — if nothing else they have taught us what government entities are willing to do to you if you dare to compete with them. That’s not a satisfactory end to this story though. Those harmed deserve justice. They deserve at least some restitution.

Not from the abstract entity we call county government though. The restitution should come directly from the people responsible for taking individual action that was necessary to create the interference. Those people are the commissioners, and arguably the county attorneys, at the time of the moratorium.

One might want to include individuals in the two hospitals as well, but it was up to the commissioners to enact the ordinance and the attorneys to defend it. They could have done the right thing and ignored the hospitals.

Clark County passed their ordinance unanimously, and the commissioners at that time were Ed Meyer, Vicki Kent Haire and Ralph Guthrie. The county attorney advising them was Daniel Moore.

I do not know the vote or the attorney at the time, but I do know that Commissioners Chuck Freiberger and John Reisert signed the ordinance in Floyd County.

Individuals who act in ways that directly harm other individuals should be held accountable. Isn’t that what a healthy form of justice is all about?

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson would be adversely affected if government officials who cause harm were required to pay restitution because she’d surely have a heart attack.

Year-Round School

2011-12-25T13:17:00.000-05:00

NOTE: I wrote this for publication on Thanksgiving day and just realized I never posted it here. I guess I ate too much that day and just forgot about it.

HARBESON: Talking around the year-round subject

SELLERSBURG — Will you have the pleasure of interacting with school-age kids on Thanksgiving Day? If so, I have a suggestion for you — ask them how they feel about year-round school.

Be careful though. If they don’t know anything about year-round school, their first thought will be that you’re suggesting they attend school for more days of the year than they do now. The very idea would likely freak them out and you could end up with cranberries up your nose for even suggesting such a thing.

So make sure you explain that, at least right now, year-round school means a “balanced schedule.” The mandatory sentence they have to serve out for the crime of being a kid would still be 180 days, but the days off would be spread out somewhat more evenly throughout the year.

If you can get them to understand this before your nostrils fill up, great. Now you should be able to find out whether they would prefer to have most of their time off grouped together during the summer, or whether they would prefer taking time off throughout the year and have a shorter summer break.

If you ask more than one kid, chances are good that the answers will vary. Some will prefer to get the school year over with and enjoy the longer break and others would rather take more frequent breaks in smaller chunks of time.

Some kids will realize that the question is really a request to make a choice that isn’t really much of a choice at all. Fundamentally, the question is just a scheduling detail to these prisoners — I mean kids. Either way, they still have to “do the time.”

I bring this issue up not because I want everyone’s Thanksgiving Day celebration to be punctuated by having little red berries falling out of their noses, although the thought does kind of make me smile.

No, I bring it up because local government school districts are discussing the idea of moving to year-round schedules, mostly because they say it could lead to improved test scores.

Whether or not that’s true, and the data is mixed, school schedules are like everything else related to education — a singular choice mandated for all will never fit the needs and desires of each individual child.

There are possible advantages with year-round school though. This schedule could give kids more experience with real-life math because more frequent breaks provide many more opportunities to calculate and count down the days to the next break.

Year-round school would also help the problem of kids not retaining important lessons while enjoying a longer summer break. For example, year-round school might help kids retain the lesson that what they do outside of school during free unstructured time, while engaged in self-initiated and self-directed play, is not as important as what happens in school where information is injected inside their brains for the purpose of passing a government test.

There would also be more chances to remediate kids, particularly the ones who struggle because they would rather learn in their own way, at their own pace, sparked by their natural born curiosity. Yes, I imagine year-round school could be very useful in helping to retrain those troubled kids.

On the other hand, maybe neither schedule is the answer. Perhaps society should dump the compulsion and work on creating wonderful places that would draw kids in by choice. Places where kids are free to play, investigate, experiment and explore on their own terms. Places that immerse kids in a friendly, respectful environment — one that supports year-round learning rather than year-round schooling. Yes, there is a difference.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson hopes she doesn’t end up with cranberries up her nose on this fine Thanksgiving Day.

Business Pushing for Annexation in Clarksville Indiana

2011-12-16T14:53:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: ‘Clarksville’ company cashing in any way it can

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Usually, when I see the word annexation in the news, the story is about a government entity extending their boundaries to neighboring property owners without their consent. But last week a local business, Rivera Consulting Group, actually requested annexation from the town of Clarksville. NOTE: If you click on the link, scroll down to the "Business Expansion" section.

Why would a business want a local government to annex property they plan to use for expansion? The only logical reason is to receive special government favors. However, I’m unclear at this point as to what the town of Clarksville might be offering.

I know the Indiana Economic Development Corporation has already offered this company $1.1 million in tax credits if they meet specific job creation goals. So maybe the annexation is just a necessary step required by the state and the town is not offering any additional government handouts.

It seems strange that the company is out promoting a move to Clarksville as if all the steps have already been completed. Clearly that’s not the case because the town of Clarksville does not have power or control over the property in question and has yet to present or vote on an annexation ordinance.

Yet Rivera Consulting Group President, Dr. Joey Rivera, has stated that Clarksville was “very aggressive” in keeping the company local and thanked them for their support as he announced the company’s move to Clarksville. On land that isn’t currently in Clarksville.

All of this increased my curiosity about Rivera Consulting Group. A company that promotes a move to Clarksville before the land is yet to be controlled by Clarksville must know a lot about working with governments.

And they do. This company specializes in U.S. Department of Defense software applications and has gained several specific designations that help push them to the front of the pack for certain types of government contracts. The federal government has to “set-aside” and award a certain percentage of contracts to specific groups of people.

Rivera Consulting Group has managed to collect quite a few of these designations, including: Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Veteran-owned and Service-disabled, 8(a) certification, and HUBZone certification. These designations are all meant to give preferential treatment to businesses based on demographics, as opposed to merit.

There are many questionable practices that go along with such designations, one of the more controversial being a price evaluation adjustment, which means that a designated company could bid 10 percent higher than a non-designated competitor and still get the contract.

I am also troubled by the company’s mission statement which is presented on their website as a direct quote from Rivera:

“Our country is at war. Our Mission is to provide sound guidance and expertise to our government customer in a time when technical expertise makes a difference. We are ready to stand side-by-side with our customers as we support the war-fighter. We are ready.”

Remember the column I wrote in October about Indiana’s push to attract federal defense spending and promote businesses that are healthiest during times of war? It appears that this whole setup is another local example of that policy in action.

I can’t really blame this company for taking advantage of the special demographic designations if they meet the requirements. It’s perfectly rational for a company to go after them if it can. Of course, I’m assuming they didn’t have anything to do with the slimy political manipulation that created those programs.

However, is it wise to actively work for new government action, like the pursuit of this annexation, in order to gain even more government benefits? After all, by doing so, this company is actively working to force others to subsidize their growth so they can continue to cash in on war.

Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson invites reader response, but you should know she gives preferential treatment to specially designated groups.

Little Free Library Indiana

2011-12-08T08:36:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: This idea is book smart

SOUTHERN INDIANA — There’s a lot of truth in the phrase, “bigger is not always better.” For example, due to my husband’s love of NASCAR, I’m forever thankful that tiny collectible versions of his favorite cars exist. If they didn’t we’d need a lot more garage space.

I’ve always been fascinated by miniature versions of most anything. (Well, except for those miniature versions of candy bars — that’s just annoying.) So when I first saw a photo of a Little Free Library, I was immediately intrigued. These little libraries look like tiny buildings and are usually mounted outside on posts.

The idea for building tiny libraries began in Wisconsin as a fun way to support literacy and build community. The Little Free Library organization is “building and promoting ‘take a book, leave a book’ structures that fit in a front yard, by a sidewalk, coffee shop or park and are just big enough to hold 20 to 30 books that kids and adults can give and take.”

The idea attracted me on many levels. I’m a voracious reader and I really like the voluntary, local, grass-roots aspect. Even so, I didn’t pursue it any further than bookmarking their website. But then several interesting connections happened.

Through the Courier-Journal, I found out that Jeffersonville resident Phyllis Wilkins has been working on promoting the idea, not only for the local area, but throughout Indiana. She has created Little Free Library Indiana which is a partner with Little Free Library International.

I was glad to see someone else enthused about this idea. We met last week to discuss the project and it was fun talking about all the possibilities. We came up with about a million or so.

Phyllis is planning a Little Free Library in memory of neighbors Charley and Mickey Reisert, who both passed away recently. That was yet another connection for me. Although I only knew him for a short time as a result of writing my column, Charley and I had a couple of interesting lunches discussing books we both read on politics, philosophy and economics.

This brings me to yet another connection. During one of our discussions, Charley told me he wanted to set up a lunch with me, himself and Mayor Tom Galligan. I’m always open to having lunch with anyone, but I can’t help but suspect that Charley just thought it would be fun to watch the fireworks if any heated discussions erupted.

Even though that never happened, being reminded of it did make me think this Little Free Library Indiana project might be good for Galligan. So I’d like to invite Mr. Galligan to join us in this local community project that needs people who enjoy construction. He’s going to need something to do in a few weeks after he’s no longer the mayor anyway and it might be a good idea to keep him away from bulldozers.

As a matter of fact, this project perfectly fits all local politicians recently put out to pasture. They could have complete control over a building project, with no taxpayers breathing down their necks about cost, no council members biting ankles about minor details and no columnists complaining about using government force.

Anyway, no matter who you are, if this project speaks to you as it does to me and you would like to help create little libraries throughout the local area (and there are many ways you can help), I encourage you to get involved. Phyllis is hosting the first “official” meeting of the Little Free Library Indiana at 6 p.m. Friday at the Red Cross office, 1805 E. 8th St., Jeffersonville.

You can also keep updated on this project through the Little Free Library Indiana Facebook page and the Little Free Library Indiana blog, which is at www.littlefreelibraryindiana.wordpress.com.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson thinks the inventor of those miniature bite-sized candy bars must surely be a masochist.

Haven House Revisited

2011-12-06T17:28:00.000-05:00

HARBESON: Reflections on my Haven House column

JEFFERSONVILLE — Every once in a while, after writing about a specific topic, I sometimes wonder if I should have just kept my mouth shut. When this happens, I always know exactly what to do: Keep spouting off about the issue.

The specific column I’m referring to is one I wrote in September about Haven House. I did not expect the reaction I received after stating that I cannot in good conscience contribute to an organization that does not appear to be under competent financial management.

The responses I received, whether in writing or in person, were overwhelmingly in support of what I said and I was surprised to hear from so many people whose work is focused on helping those in need.

Even so, something still didn’t feel quite right and I’ve been trying to figure out why. It may have something to do with the unusual experience I had that led to the writing of that piece.

I subscribe to several email lists that pertain to home education and sometimes general parenting issues are discussed, too. One day, a young mother I’ve never met shared a struggle she was having and asked for support and guidance.

I could relate so well and I knew I could help. It really didn’t take much time to respond and I didn’t think much more about it until the next day when I received a private reply from her.

She told me that I really gave her spiritual food and said it might sound odd, but she had made a personal decision to tithe to people who give her spiritual food. I thought that was very interesting and decided I would accept her offering and pay it forward myself in some manner. The amount was really not that much in the grand scheme of things, but it was far more than I expected.

I’m not sure now why I decided to earmark this little windfall for the homeless. The reason the two of us connected had nothing to do with the homeless — we connected because we both reject spanking as a valid method of raising children.

Still, for whatever reason, I chose to pay this forward to help the homeless in some way. But when I thought about how to go about doing that, it reintroduced old feelings of frustration surrounding the management of Haven House.

I could have just kept my mouth shut and quietly worked around the organization. That’s what I did in the end anyway because after getting a recommendation from someone I trust, I purchased specific items for another group who assists the homeless.

So I could have just completely ignored Haven House and its issues. Instead, I wrote the column. And even though I wouldn’t change a word, I still wonder if I might feel better about the whole tithing experience if I had just quietly paid it forward instead.

Ahh, but maybe the whole purpose of the tithe coming when it did was to get me to say out loud what I, and apparently many others, have been thinking for such a long time.

I think it bothered me for a while because this was a situation where I was not forced to do anything at all. Donating to Haven House or not was completely under my control. No one was pointing a gun at me and telling me what to do like government organizations do.

So why did I feel the need to tell everyone why I would not give to this specific organization? Maybe it’s because even in our voluntary interactions, looking for effective and ethical management of organizations is still an important thing to do.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson only cares about keeping her mouth shut when riding her bike through a gnat cloud.

Indiana State Senator Luke Kenley Pushing for Online Sales Tax

2011-11-21T06:46:00.003-05:00

HARBESON: I’m not buying what they’re selling

SELLERSBURG — State government officials hate the fact that online businesses do not have to charge sales tax on purchases if the company has no actual physical presence in the state where the customer resides.

In Indiana, Republican State Sen. Luke Kenley hates it so much that he even wants the federal government involved.

Like any good politician, Kenley is salivating to spend — he knows lots of transactions happen online and thinks the government should get a cut of the action. He estimates up to $400 million annually could be siphoned off the people if the government can get its hands on 7 percent of the total spent every time a person wants to buy stuff.

He wants states to be able to treat online businesses as badly as they treat brick-and-mortar businesses — by forcing the online companies to become tax collectors too.

Many brick-and-mortar companies are on his side. They say they want to “level the playing field,” which really means they want all businesses to be equally dragged down by government regulations. After all, if they have to perform tax collecting duties, then every other business should be forced to perform tax collecting duties.

I can understand their frustration. Some traditional merchants have found themselves in a situation where they are simply showrooms. Consumers come to look at products and then go home and order online to save money.

To make the situation worse, in 2007, when the big online retailer Amazon created a physical presence in Indiana, the state made a deal that allowed the company to continue not collecting sales tax. As a result, the state is being sued by a large mall retailer to force Amazon to start playing tax collector for the state too — just as the retail merchants in their malls have to do.

It’s too bad that Indiana’s brick-and-mortar companies see the online companies as the problem when they are only trying to remain free from the burden of tax collecting. They should be focused on the entity responsible for forcing any business to collect taxes.

If the brick-and-mortar companies are actually upset enough to come together to take action, maybe they should also refuse to play tax collector. Tell the government to do their own darn dirty work.

Why is any of this an issue in the first place? Because Indiana residents are supposed to report their out-of-state purchases and pay any sales tax they “owe” to the government on those purchases. Few people actually do this, which means the government has a problem.

Sales taxes can still be paid no matter what an online business does or where it physically exists but that’s not happening very often. Evidently the vast, vast majority of people don’t think they owe the government anything when they buy a sweater.

It’s good to hear that the amount of sales tax collected from online sales is tiny in comparison to the transactions that are occurring. It gives me hope to think that there are very few people brainwashed enough to actually believe they owe the government every time they happen to engage in voluntary trade with others, no matter where the buyer and seller happen to live.

If individuals throughout the United States did think they were actually under some sort of moral obligation to pay sales taxes, they’d pay. There would be no issue whatsoever and certainly no need for Kenley to push for federal government involvement so states could force business to collect the payment.

All Kenley’s proposal adds up to is an attempt to validate a government claim to property that the people are simply unwilling to accept.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson thinks the only thing worse than being forced to be a taxpayer is being forced to be a tax collector.

Parks Are Political

2011-11-15T17:31:00.003-05:00

HARBESON: A form of recreational government

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I’m not sure New Albany-Floyd County Parks Superintendent Roger Jeffers understands the inherent nature of his job — he always seems surprised that politics is involved.

For example, he recently said, “We’re not a political group, but we seem to get caught in the middle of political groups.”

Mr. Jeffers is mistaken. All government programs are political. No matter how much he may not want it to be the case, Jeffers simply cannot deny being part of a political group.

Mr. Jeffers is a government employee running a government program. His group does not operate through peaceful voluntary means. He is inside a system that gets its funding through the threat of force.

He will always be part of a political group as long as government is involved in funding and operating local recreation. So if the pursuit of such funding feels political and makes him uncomfortable, well Mr. Jeffers needs to understand that it’s the system he chose to work inside and he must accept this sad truth.

Although Mr. Jeffers doesn’t see himself as part of a political group, he does admit that he’s involved in politics in general, however unwillingly, because he’s also said, “We want to take politics out of it,” when discussing alternative methods of funding parks.

That’s a nice goal, but this, too, is impossible, particularly when considering what Mr. Jeffers thinks is the answer. He has been consistently and continually promoting a proposed attempt to use state government to get what he wants — a special taxing district.

Talk about politics at its worst! If Mr. Jeffers doesn’t want politics involved he certainly should not be supporting a political scheme that would create yet another law upon the people, making it easier to force funding into a particular government entity. By appealing to a higher government authority to get what he wants locally, he would be using the very politics he claims to disdain.

Mr. Jeffers will never be able to “take politics out of it,” as long as it is a government program, and not something offered through the voluntary marketplace. However, when parks are voluntary, anyone who is not a user or involved in some way will never find himself unwillingly pulled into political battles.

No, voluntary groups just quietly go on their way, doing what they do, in whatever manner the people involved decide. We know this can be done even in parks because we have been able to see evidence for ourselves in the local area for 20 years now — Perrin Family Park in Jeffersonville. People who care can develop private recreational facilities through voluntary means.

But when people try to accomplish similar goals through the force of government, everything changes. People who don’t care and don’t want to be involved still have to endure fights over power and control, battles over money, disagreements on how a recreational property should best be used and on and on. It’s a problem because people who happen to live inside a geographical boundary cannot opt out of participating like they can when a park is privately operated.

It’s important to point out the truth when someone who is inside the system like Mr. Jeffers tries to pretend his little niche is different somehow. It’s not. It’s just another government program and we need to at least be honest about that before discussing any related issues.

In the end, I side firmly with Mr. Jeffers in his desire to get “politics out of it.” I’d love to put recreation into the private realm where people can voluntarily and peacefully interact with each other as they work toward common goals.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson would love to get politics out of, well, everything.

Absentee Ballot Controversy in Jeffersonville and Clarksville

2011-11-09T12:50:00.003-05:00

HARBESON: No absence of malice here

SELLERSBURG — After an election consultant, hired by various campaigns in Jeffersonville and Clarksville, was indicted by a Jennings County grand jury on charges related to absentee voter fraud, local campaign officials involved with him have been scrambling to defend their own campaigns in very colorful ways.

For example, while expounding on the intricacies of indictment compared to conviction, one local politician from Jeffersonville said, “You can take a grand jury and get indicted on the color of your lipstick if they want to do that.”

Wow, I was completely unaware of this. I thought grand jury indictments were only for felony charges, not for fashion faux pas.

I had no idea choosing the color of lipstick could make me susceptible to grand jury indictment. I’m glad now that I passed on that great two-for-one offer the other day for a special shade of glossy lipstick called “Smoky Purple Passion Temptress.”

Wearing that is an indictable offense for sure.

I wonder if the release of this information has anything to do with the reason why Clark County has experienced a much larger amount of absentee ballot requests for this municipal election.

Think about it. If a lipstick-loving voter is afraid of possible indictment, what would she (or he, I’m not going to be sexist about this) do about voting? These voters certainly won’t want to risk heading out to the voting booth all gussied up.

On the other hand, they certainly wouldn’t want to be seen in public with naked, pale, dry lips. So the obvious solution to this dilemma is absentee voting.

If this lipstick issue isn’t disturbing enough, a county political party official also made an interesting statement when talking about voter fraud accusations. He said this kind of thing happens all the time, “It’s like farting in an elevator and blaming it on the guy next to you.”

I guess that explains why politics stinks so badly. I’m wondering though — do such activities really happen that often? I have no idea. All I know is that the next time I’m unlucky enough to have to enter a government building, I’m taking the stairs.

A PAC named The Clarksville Democrat Town Committee also hired this guy. Should residents be concerned? Not according to one incumbent candidate — he dismissed any allegations as “political mumbo jumbo.”

I like that phrase. As a matter of fact, if I was an election consultant, I’d recommend using it for their next fundraising dinner so they could serve up some “political mumbo jumbo gumbo.”

No need to pay me for that idea, candidates — I know you can use the money since local campaigns spend tens of thousands of dollars to solicit absentee votes. I’m sure you are spending that much money for pure civic responsibility reasons.

I do have a question though. If lots of absentee voting is due to this form of active solicitation, how knowledgeable are these voters about the individual campaigns and issues in question? It just seems odd that political campaigns work that hard to actively recruit the ignorant.

This recent scandal has brought out calls for reform of absentee voter laws. These people want you to believe that more legislation can fix the problem. The laws are just not written “correctly” and all that’s needed is some tweaking. I’m not so sure — after all, voting is just another government-run program.

Rewriting legislation in an attempt to avoid corruption and abuse is merely putting another coat of possibly indictment-inducing lipstick on the system. It won’t hide the ugly truth that voting is the method of gaining power and control over other people using government force.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson says that from now on she’ll be wearing clear lip gloss when she leaves home, just to be safe.

Government-Created Black Markets and Violence

2011-10-31T20:31:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Who are the real offenders here?

SELLERSBURG — District Attorney Joseph Hogsett has completed his second publicity tour of our local area promoting his Violent Crime Initiative. The catalyst for this initiativecomes from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who became alarmed after noticing a spike in violent gun deaths of law enforcement officers.

Hogsett’s initiative intends to get the “worst of the worst” off the streets by charging and prosecuting suspects through the federal court system, which enables tougher sentencing. I’m trying to build a case that this initiative makes sense, but I’m seeing clues and evidence that just don’t line up with that conclusion.

With Clark County Sheriff Danny Rodden and New Albany Police Chief Todd Bailey by his side, Hogsett reported on the initiative’s progress in his district. It has resulted in higher numbers of felony gun possession charges and drug indictments, in addition to seizing five times more assets from drug traffickers compared to 2010.

Hogsett places great emphasis on drugs. This is why I’m skeptical. It’s not clear to me that increased federal spending and involvement through this initiative is truly centered on the problem.

Hogsett points out that more federal involvement helps because the tougher sentencing gets the worst offenders off the streets for a longer period of time and the location of federal prisons makes it difficult for the prisoner to stay connected to local contacts.

However, the government-created black market for drugs still exists. The demand for drugs and the incentive for desperate and/or vile people to make money buying and selling drugs do not change at all when one person sits in jail longer. This merely gives competitors a chance to come in and gain control. So how much can this initiative help?

We’ve been through this already. Government employees just like Hogsett expressed the same concerns about gun violence and made the same points about the need for tougher enforcement as the solution for removing violent traffickers from the streets. It didn’t work.

But we no longer have those violent alcohol traffickers killing law enforcement. Now if someone would like to drink a gin and tonic, they are free to go buy it from someone in the business of serving the people who would like to drink a gin and tonic.

Why do they refuse to acknowledge drug prohibition as a large part of the problem? These people are trained to gather evidence so why does it seem like they don’t have a clue?

It’s not hard to see how twisted this is — the government prohibits the sale of a product people want, the people ignore this prohibition and some profit from it, the government prosecutes as many of the lawbreakers — and sometimes even innocent people — they can catch, seizing the assets of those who profit when the government prohibits the sale of a product people want ...

Maybe they’re just dizzy — I had to put one hand on the wall to stay balanced just to write that sentence.

These folks either see the evidence, which means they are choosing to ignore it for reasons I don’t even want to imagine, or they don’t see the evidence, which means we should question whether they are even competent to hold the jobs in the first place.

Yes, there may be an immediate need to get the violent criminals the government helped to create off the streets. It’s certainly valid to say that people working inside such a crazy system have to deal with the reality of the system as it is and need to focus on the violent acts that are happening right now.

But when are more people, inside the system and out, going to face the fact that the government plays a significant part in the very problem they are spending money, and human lives, trying to solve?

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson is looking for evidence of people who have a clue.

It's Sick to Depend on War for Economic Health

2011-10-27T15:25:00.007-04:00

HARBESON: At war with state’s business philosophy

SELLERSBURG — During World War I, Randolph Bourne wrote, “War is the health of the state.” Bourne was referring to nation-states of course, but considering what I’ve learned recently, it seems appropriate to say “war is the health of the state of Indiana.”

According to a 2011 Indiana University report, back in 2001, Indiana received $1.8 billion from the federal government in the form of defense contracts. This number grew to more than $4 billion over the next decade. We all know why the growth occurred: War.

This report, titled “Building National Security: The Economic Impact of Indiana’s Defense Industry,” explains that the ability to attract federal defense spending is of great benefit to Indiana. The introductory letter signed by the lieutenant governor and the IU president says, “... it is critical to the state of Indiana and its work force that the defense industry continues to flourish here.”

I don’t agree. It’s extremely unwise to develop an economy based not only on government spending, which requires taxation and/or debt, but which also depends on death and destruction for growth.

As a result of their desire for continued and increased federal defense spending, a private-public partnership firm, Conexus Indiana, and the Indiana Economic Development Corp. have created the Indiana Aerospace and Defense Council for the specific purpose of promoting Indiana as a great place for the federal government to spend its defense budget.

It’s bad enough that state government uses the euphemism “economic development” in an attempt to centrally plan an economy by spending tax money in ways that favor some industries and businesses over others, but using funds to lobby for increased federal spending that supports war attacks the sensibilities of all peace-loving individuals.

But those who directly benefit don’t see it this way. The groups involved — the politicians, the state universities and the corporations — all benefit from the business that results when the nation-state participates in war. No one wants to acknowledge the horrible truth embedded in the fact that pushing the defense industry encourages the development of businesses that are healthiest during wartime — in other words, peace makes them sick.

This council also wants to increase the number of companies involved, but any business owner should be cautious about such a move. Besides the more obvious concerns when businesses get involved in war, there can also be plenty of unanticipated costs.

For example, as I was browsing around the website of CACI, the newest business to locate in New Albany’s Purdue Research Park, I was amazed at how much time, money and energy this company is spending as it works to disassociate itself from the abuse and torture controversy at Abu-Ghraib prison in Iraq. I wonder if they think the contract was worth it.

Indiana is already receiving fewer defense dollars as the federal government’s involvement in the current wars change. However, instead of seeing this as a warning, signaling a need to gain freedom from such dependency, officials are making decisions that will only suck Indiana in even deeper.

Should the businesses in this state increase their dependency on an “industry” that experiences its best growth when the federal government gets involved in nasty wars far from the actual soil they claim to be defending?

Or would it be better to spend energy working to create products and services that enrich lives, thereby encouraging mutually beneficial peaceful trade and friendly relationships?

I am concerned, and even mourning, this realization of where human energy and resources have been focused, because I do not want war to be the health of the state of Indiana.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson is sick of government interference.

TSA Must Really Love Me

2011-10-25T20:28:00.004-04:00

So yeah, it happened again. Returning home from Libertopia 2011 , I was “randomly” selected to go through a TSA body scanner at the San Diego airport. (Actually, as I watched, it looked like almost everyone was chosen to go through the scanner and the “random selection” was for a few people who for some unknown reason just had to go through the metal detector.)

Husband says I bring it on myself, expecting I’ll be selected. Okay if there is anything to this “attraction” stuff, maybe I did attract it last time.

But this time was different. Really. I was relaxed, smiling and singing to myself. (It wasn’t until later that I realized maybe my song choice created an “attraction.” I was mentally enjoying the Temptations’ Get Ready....“Get ready cause here I come!”

Anyway, same as last time, we were both “selected” and once again I opted out. They took me to the side for a “pat down.” But unlike last time, my husband had the camera and recorded the interaction.

At the beginning of the video below, she’s telling me what she’s going to do, "blah, blah, blah, okay?”

I say, "No it’s not okay; I’m only doing this under duress because I want to complete my transaction with the airline company.”

At about :52, she notices John taking video and tells me he has to turn it off. I said he’s perfectly within his right to capture video on this. So she calls her supervisor over and continues to explain what she’s going to do with him witnessing.

She says nothing about the video, but at 1:23 someone off camera says “Hey they’re videotaping…in case you’re wondering.”

The supervisor says “Sir, can you step out of the checkpoint area please?” This is where John thought he was being told told to stop videotaping and he turns it off.

So here’s that first video:

After he turns it off, I tell him he can continue to take video so he turns it back on and the supervisor tells my husband he needs to move “outside of MY checkpoint area,” so he doesn’t interfere.

Now in the second video below, watch where the supervisor positions himself.

They ask me if I want a private screening and say “No, I want everyone to see what you people do.” The rest of the video shows you a “pat down,” done on randomly selected people, guilty until proven innocent with the rubber gloves.

Maybe capturing video of this means nothing. Maybe it’s just spitting in the wind, but at least there was one instance in that particular day when they knew someone was watching THEM for a change.

Yeah, yeah, I know. I “chose” to fly. Yeah, I could have taken days to drive more than 2100 miles to get to the event. However, I would not have made it because that would have added even more travel days than my husband and I wanted to take for this trip. Would not going have made me feel any more free?

If I didn't go, then I couldn't have talked about unschooling to Libertopia attendees who were interested. I couldn't have connected with others who are looking for encouragement, inspiration and camaraderie as they try to get their kids far, far away from the government education system.

And I would not have spent several fascinating and enjoyable days learning along with others who feel the same way I do. So I'm certainly glad I jumped on those airplanes to get there and back.

The real question now about driving is how long will that be a preferred method? How much longer do we even have that choice before we have to endure random searches on the highways?

Think I’m just being paranoid? Think that’s just silly? Think that’s just crazy?

Well, it’s already started in Tennessee:

Tennessee Becomes First State To Fight Terrorism Statewide

One politician seems concerned. But I wonder if he’s just sitting out there in the middle of a long, dark, lonely stretch of road.

****
Edit: Here's another report on the VIPR issue from Wendy McElroy.

Going To The Candidates' Debate

2011-10-17T21:52:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: There’s some debating it

SELLERSBURG — When I heard that Leadership Southern Indiana and the News and Tribune planned to host debates for the three local mayoral races, I decided I would attend the entire series.

Yes, considering my aversion to politics and government in general, I know it seems strange to put myself in such a position but my reasoning is sound — I was looking for a challenge, a truly physically draining endurance event to test my fortitude.

What could be better than putting myself through several hours of listening to politicians make promises while simultaneously breathing in the stifling authoritarian air inside compulsory funded government schools?

The first debate was in New Albany, where four candidates were running, but no incumbent. As I meandered into the auditorium, I felt like I was entering a church — the lights were dimmed and the audience was strangely quiet.

Maybe it was the church-like atmosphere but the entire debate seemed equally subdued. After a while, the candidates blended together and I couldn’t differentiate one dark suit from the next. I lost attention and must confess I slipped out early.

I realized this was going to be harder than I thought and I would need to train harder if I was going to build up enough endurance for two more debates. So I stepped up my training, chaining myself to a chair and listening to every political debate I could find online.

The second debate in Jeffersonville was much easier, but I’m not sure it had anything to do with my training. There was a definite energy in the air, as if people were gathering for a big fight. I attribute this to the “throw the bum out” element that is usually present in any race that includes an incumbent.

Another difference in this debate may have been that the LSI host forgot to mention the “no applause” rule in his opening remarks which gave some audience members an excuse to forget they weren’t supposed to applaud. Even so, most of the time audience members respected the no applause request.

But the audience still needed a way to expend energy and they found it in the head bob. Sitting in the back of the auditorium, I could easily observe which candidate individual audience members supported by watching them aggressively nod in agreement. There was so much vigorous head bobbing during this debate that I bet Jeffersonville’s chiropractors experienced a boost in business the next day.

So thanks to incumbency and the head bobbers, I successfully made it through this entire debate. Since the challenge was now two-thirds complete and knowing the Charlestown mayoral race also had an incumbent, I didn’t bother to do any further training.

As expected, when I entered the auditorium in Charlestown I could feel a serious energy level. But it wasn’t just the incumbency factor — this race was also the only two-candidate race, which increases the “us” versus “them” energy.

The host remembered to request no applause and the audience respected that request at first. But as the debate wore on, I could tell that head bobbing alone was not going to handle the pent-up energy in that room and by the time the last couple of questions were asked, the audience finally erupted.

The most rabid applauders seemed to not really be supporting a candidate’s position as much as they were angrily smacking their hands together against the opponent, a strange act that I can only describe as applause assault.

I came out of this experience with two insights. First, I now know I can do anything I set my mind to and second, most debate attendees are not undecided voters gathering information — they are supporters providing cheerleading services for their candidate.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson noticed how well the debate timekeeper’s paddle fan worked to get politicians to stop talking and now wants one of her own.

Perusing the News

2011-10-11T12:02:00.001-04:00

HARBESON: Which is Which?
> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I need to be more careful when I peruse the news. I used to be able to skim the stories, confident that I had the essence after a few paragraphs which meant I could reliably guess the rest.

But after an experience last week, I realized I might not be as good at guessing as I thought.

During a recent session of news skimming, I noticed separate stories about Cuba and the United States. They seemed quite predictable and I thought I had them figured out, but I was completely wrong.

The first set of news reports told the story of a country whose leader had previously authorized the killing of one of his fellow countrymen. The reports announced the successful completion of this government execution.

I wasn’t very surprised to hear this news; I had heard many stories over the years about Cuba’s Castro having fellow countrymen executed after he determined they were enemies of the state.

I guessed wrong though. It wasn’t about Cuba. It wasn’t about Castro. The story was about the United States and President Obama. The story described the successful government authorized assassination of an American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, who was on a government hit list because he was accused of being a terrorist.

I mistakenly guessed that this story was about the Cuban government’s flagrant denial of human rights. Instead it was about the United States’ denial of due process to one of its own citizens accused of a crime.

It was about a unilateral decision determining that an individual’s actions justified execution without trial — a decision that endangers all citizens who may be faced with criminal accusations made by their own government.

I thought that only happened in Cuba. How could such a story be about America, the land of the free? I would have never predicted that Americans would quietly accept the assassination of a fellow citizen simply because the government declared him to be a terrorist.

How could such a story be happening in a country that is led by a Nobel Peace Prize winner? Maybe I’ve been inaccurately skimming over Peace Prize news too. I need to check and see if the prize produces magical powers, giving the winner some kind of special ability to gain peace by authorizing violent death without due process.

The other set of news reports were about the economic benefits of the free-market. The stories discussed a country that was in economic distress. They made the point that reducing government interference and allowing individuals the freedom to trade with each other would lead to economic growth.

I guessed wrong here too. The stories weren’t about increasing individual freedom in America. They were about increasing individual freedom in Cuba.

Fidel Castro’s brother, Raul, has been in the process of instituting economic reforms into Cuba, as a way of stimulating the economy. This particular story was about how the Cuban people are now free to buy and sell any cars available. Previously, the average Cuban resident could only legally buy and sell cars made prior to 1959.

The stories also reported that the government planned to enact a sales tax as a way to increase government revenue and I knew that was the real reason behind the reform. The government acted as if taxation was a natural, necessary and valid part of the free-market, so you can see why I mistakenly guessed at first that this story was about the United States.

I’ve learned my lesson. From now on, I’m going to read the news very carefully; particularly when the concepts of government and peace or free-market and taxes are mentioned in the same story.

I'm Just High On Life

2011-10-01T07:49:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Picture this
I’ve been wondering how long it would take before someone noticed that there’s something about me that’s kind of odd. I’m finally forced to address it because a reader, who goes by the name of Juan, has been regularly pointing it out in the online comments section of this paper.

It has to do with my current column photo.

From the start, I never liked the original photo taken of me at the newspaper’s office. It wasn’t the photographer’s fault though. He tried his best but every time he turned the camera to show me the shot, I winced. Finally I saw that look all photographers eventually give me that says “Listen lady, that’s what you look like, deal with it.”

So, after using the photo for a year or so, I decided it was time for a change and sent the paper an informal photo I liked. And that’s where my comment stalker, Juan, comes in. Juan has noticed something odd about this photo which he has shared several times.

Here’s the first comment he made: “Harbeson looks higher than Snoop Dogg in her column photo. Good for her. Smoke a blunt for me Deb.” Although it was easy to understand what Juan meant, I did have to look up the word blunt.

Then he wrote this: “I used to shovel snow and rake leaves to make a buck all the time. Thanks for the memories Deb. And man, I need to find some smoke like Harbeson’s toking. She looks higher than Cheech and Chong.”

And finally, “I'm not homeless but I will take some cash for beer Deb. Ha. Stoner.”

So Juan seems to think I really scored some stuff when this photo was taken. He’s right, I do look high. But my brain was completely clear of cannabis. I can see why he thinks I was stoned though — my eyelids do have that mellow droopy look.

I wish I could say it was because I was tired. After all, this picture was taken after I had to stand in line in the hot sun on a concrete parking lot next to a concrete wall so I could grab front and center seats at a Joan Jett concert.

It was one of those days where you could see the heat rise from the ground. Yes, Juan I swear that’s really why the ground appeared wavy to me.

I actually sent the paper two photos to choose from and the other photo was taken at a ZZ Top concert, another outdoor event held on a scorching hot day. My eyelids are drooping in that photo, too. But no Juan, I wasn’t high then either. You can ask my mom. She was there.

I had a third photo ready to send if needed. This one was taken at a Jimmy Buffet concert and although my eyelids were drooping in that photo as well, anyone who’s ever been to a Buffett concert knows that I could not have been high. No one ever gets high at a Jimmy Buffett concert.

As I looked at these photos, I started to wonder why I liked them so much, even though they highlight my odd droopy eyes. Could it be that I like these particular photos because of something only I can see: the memories of good times spent with people I care about? Could it be that, for me, a formal posed photo is merely a meaningless image, unanchored by memory?

Nah, I just like photos taken of me at concerts because it’s one place where my natural droopy eyelids look like everyone else’s for a while.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson always has a smoking good time at concerts.

Haven House, Barbara Anderson and Financial Management

2011-09-25T16:14:00.004-04:00

COLUMN NOTES: The topic of this column concerns a long-running controversy in the local area. There is a lot of back story and history but my main concern is the ability to financially manage. I mentioned this issue once before when it looked like others were going to take over. Unfortunately, even after the property was auctioned off for payroll taxes that were intentionally unpaid, the property still ended up in the same hands. Now the shelter has been in the news again, here and here.

HARBESON: Haven House needs new direction

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Due to concerns about the ability to make financially responsible decisions, it’s generally agreed that if you encounter homeless people on the street, it’s not a good idea to give them money.

I feel the same way about Haven House, at least as long as Barbara Anderson is in charge.

I cannot in good conscience give money to this local organization helping the homeless because the management has simply not proven to be financially responsible. The most recent example is the discovery that Executive Director Anderson decided to ignore the shelter’s sewer bills since 2008, which has now resulted in a lien being placed on the property.

This is not the first time Anderson made her own decision on what she shouldn’t have to pay. The property was taken from her once and sold at auction for unpaid payroll taxes. (Yes, the property ended up back in her hands.)

I was actually a bit sympathetic the first time, since it was a tax she chose not to pay. Too bad she didn’t take this action based on the principle of taxation being theft — I would have supported her in the protest. That wasn’t the case, of course.

Anderson thinks the work her organization does is important. She’s right. It is important. But it’s not exclusively so. Many people do important work that helps their neighbors — important work that is done in charitable organizations, in for-profit ventures and simply within a circle of family and friends.

Yet, somehow everyone is supposed to believe that what she does matters more than the hard work everyone else is doing. It’s just not so. Even a single individual who can only manage to take care of his or her own needs is doing something that matters.

I do not find her financial decisions on behalf of the Haven House organization acceptable. I do not accept her decision to simply not pay the sewer bill because she determined in her own mind, based on her ideas of how society should work, that they should not have to pay.

She tells us that her organization deserves free sewer service, which of course really means that she wants to force other people to pay. Her attitude of entitlement is certainly not an example I want to see set for the people currently living at the shelter. In addition, ignoring utility bills doesn’t exactly teach lessons of financial responsibility does it?

The problem is complicated even further since government operates sewer service. Politics can easily get intertwined and there is potential for corruption in deciding who gets special favors and who does not.

Anderson herself complained that the private citizen who brought this to everyone’s attention only did it for political reasons.

Anderson claims Haven House deserves special treatment because it provides a service to the city. But the city is merely an abstraction. The service is actually provided to people in need and, again, helping people is something many others are busy doing every day in a variety of ways, while still paying their sewer bills.

So I will never give money to Haven House as long as the current management structure exists. Even though the problem may be directed at a certain individual, let’s be clear that it’s specifically tied into the relationship and involvement the person has to the organization in question. My feelings and actions are no different than deciding not to fund any other entity if it has leadership I do not trust for whatever reason.

I’d rather give money directly to a homeless person to get drunk than give it to an organization that has Anderson making financial decisions.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson sometimes solicits money on the street. Not to get drunk, but to get sloshed on soft serve ice cream.

Job Creation: Does Government Help or Hurt?

2011-09-10T17:18:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Here’s to free trade

(COLUMN NOTES: There are quite a few comments on the newspaper's website that you may want to go check out.)

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Politicians spend a lot of time jabbering about jobs. They make a lot of noise, fussing with each other over what to do. But there’s really only one question we need to answer about job creation: Does government help or hurt?

Maybe it can help us find the answer if we strip down the issue. In simplest terms, a job is created when one person pays another person to perform a task. Even young children can do it. So let’s simplify and use a real-life example of a time when my two children created a job for themselves.

Some years ago, our family lived in a condo complex in Jeffersonville and a winter storm dumped a lot of snow overnight. This happened on a weekend, which meant many of the neighbors did not have to go to work, so there were many cars in the parking lot covered with snow.

My daughter and son saw an opportunity and decided to offer their snow-clearing skills to the neighbors. They charged 50 cents a car to clean off the snow and successfully earned a nice chunk of cash that day.

Now, let’s imagine how this could have turned out if they had to deal with the government. What might have happened if government was involved anywhere in the process?

First of all, depending on local ordinances, they would need to apply for an official government-approved solicitor’s permit before they could even knock on a neighbor’s door. Next, this job could require licensing. What if they had to pay fees and attend a government-approved class to get the proper “government training” because everyone who performs this job has to have a license?

What about the working conditions? The government certainly can’t let ambitious individuals decide for themselves when to go inside for a cup of hot chocolate. So they impose a break schedule much stricter than necessary, thereby restricting the number of hours they have available to offer their services.

Since this particular job was a result of a weather “disaster,” the attorney general may decide to take a look to see if they are taking advantage of the situation. If he determines that 50 cents a car was too much it could mean they’d end up being accused of “price gouging” their customers.

Let’s say another kid wants to help out. This prospective employee is very inexperienced and low-skilled, but they offer to pay him 15 cents for every car he helps clean. He agrees. But the government’s minimum wage laws require payment of 30 cents per car.

At that price, he’s not worth hiring, so this kid doesn’t get the job. Even if he’s perfectly willing to work for 15 cents, the government won’t allow it. So there he is, out of a job, unable to buy that superhero coloring book he wants. Until those other kids come along and offer to pay him 10 times the money he’d make cleaning cars to sell drugs. (Yes, the government does know how to create high-paying jobs.)

Finally, if the government was involved, the kids would pay taxes on their earnings, because, well, someone has to pay the salaries for all the jobs created for the people the government hires to enforce all these laws and regulations.

Yes, this is all imaginary, as far as my kids were concerned. They were completely free to offer a service to their neighbors who were free to accept it or not.

But stripping the job creation conversation down to this simple example does make me wonder what would be different if government did not interfere so much in peaceful voluntary trade between supposedly free individuals.

— When it comes to politicians, Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson doesn't even want to pay attention, let alone a salary.

Government is a Malignant Polyp

2011-09-06T15:03:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Cleaning out government

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — For some time now, certain people have been telling me I’m full of it, and as it turns out, they were right. I discovered this last week when I went through the process of having a colonoscopy.

For those of you who don’t know, a colonoscopy is a medical procedure that enables doctors to look inside the colon for any abnormalities such as polyps. Since some polyps can be precancerous, they are removed at the time of the screening.

Now, for a medical professional to have a clear view inside the colon, the organ needs to be thoroughly cleaned out. Although a laxative is taken the day before, the really strong stuff is taken a few hours before the exam.

The directions warned me to be close to a restroom because it’s supposed to work really fast. I took the first half of the bottle expecting to run to the bathroom at any moment. But nothing happened. A half hour went by. Still nothing happened. As I was getting close to taking the second dose I started to think something must really be wrong.

Why wasn’t this working?

I wondered if I should have told them I was a political opinion columnist. Maybe they would have given me a stronger dose. As it turned out though, after the second dose, the stuff started working really well. I was definitely cleaned out in time.

Maybe I was still high on drugs, but after it was all over, I thought the colonoscopy process could serve as a great analogy to understand government. Let me explain by using Clark County as an example.

A few years ago, a group of well-intentioned people on the county council thought they were doing a good thing by cutting property taxes. In essence, they gave county government a laxative to clear out the reserve that had built up over time.

Now Clark County is experiencing severe budget pains. It’s important to note that many local governments are also struggling because there have been other factors at play such as property tax caps.

However, since Clark County did get that extra laxative boost, it did create a unique situation that does allow for a better look inside the inner plumbing to see how government works.

The most glaring example is the various lawsuits that have been filed. First, the county judges sued the county council. Then, the county sheriff sued the county council and the county council is appealing a decision by the Department of Local Government Finance in court.

Yes, they whine and moan that they don’t want to do it, but, gee, they have to spend the money. After all, another department of the same government said so.

You’re supposed to focus on these lawsuits as if one government entity is suing another government entity to get money. But what’s happening here is that these people are really suing you, the taxpayer. You are the one who pays. The lawsuits merely use legal complication to help create an illusion intended to deflect and soften this truth.

So the previous council’s laxative that led to the lawsuits did accomplish something: Now we can clearly see that when the government wants more money, there’s always a way. We now know there is another method inside the government toolbox that officials can, and will, use to get your money.

What can we learn from this? Well, it’s not about getting “new” people in there to deliver a one-time laxative. Such a cleansing can feel good, but government itself is a malignant polyp.

Eventually, we’re going to have to go deeper, snare that abnormality and remove it. Until people accept that, it’s just going to continue to metastasize and cause problems.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson actually kind of enjoyed the time she spent not being so full of it.

Jeffersonville High School Principal Wants More Control

2011-08-27T14:43:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Making a judgment of errors

I don’t understand the uproar surrounding Jeffersonville High School principal James Sexton’s desire to have more control over the school newspaper. The conflict is completely unnecessary.

If Mr. Sexton is being truthful that his concern is not about content, but rather about grammatical errors, typos and other mistakes, then there is a simple solution which would benefit everyone involved.

I propose that the students prepare a newspaper draft chock-full of the various types of errors the principal worries about publishing.

This idea has several benefits. First of all, purposely making mistakes requires a good understanding of the rules that govern any structured activity and can be a great way to learn. So as the students purposely insert errors into their stories, they will learn a lot about writing and journalism in the process.

Inserting errors will also give the students a chance to test the principal and I’m sure this twist would be a refreshing change for teenagers who have grown up with the stifling testing requirements of current state and federal law.

In addition, creating an error-laden draft will go a long way in dealing with a government school principal who craves control. I imagine Mr. Sexton would likely be very happy and content while spending time marking all the errors — using a red and white pen of course.

Perhaps best of all, as an added bonus for the student body at large, Sexton would have less time available to bother others who are actually trying to learn by doing, which includes the freedom to make mistakes and learn from them.

This is the only idea I would bother pursuing. I just can’t recommend spending too much time getting involved in fights between government school employees when there is way too much available out here in the real world for teens genuinely interested in communication and journalism.

I understand they may feel trapped in regards to obtaining credits for their future goals, so I can’t blame them for jumping through the hoops and doing what they need to do, but past that I really encourage teenagers to spend their free time educating themselves.

Teenagers interested in journalism are old enough and smart enough to get out here and jump right in if they wish. It’s so easy and cheap to start your own journalism experimental lab nowadays — one of the easiest is to create a blog using freely available software.

In addition, there are many places to learn about journalism, much of it available for free. I almost missed my deadline because I lost track of time browsing all the resources available online for anyone wanting to learn about journalism.

In an environment where people share information about current events in real time and any cell phone camera can be used to produce video news content, teenagers know that the controls desired by this principal, such as the three-day prior review, would teach them little, if anything of value for a world that is moving at increasing speed.

No one knows how the journalism field will continue to change as technology moves forward.

So my message to teens is to go ahead and do what you need to do to get the credit if you must. But I strongly suggest you spend your free time actually practicing journalism outside of that system.

If you think you need help getting started, let me know. I’ll be happy to share the resources I’ve found and volunteer my time to help you in any way I can. You’ll find out soon enough you don’t need me anyway.

— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson is quite the expert at making mistakes but she’s still working on actually learning from them.

More on the Critical Analysis of War

2011-08-22T16:08:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Some deep thinking about war

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I hesitated before submitting last week’s column wondering whether medals and commemorations may stifle the critical analysis of war. I knew it would probably upset some people and it did.

However, I’m glad I pushed on because I received a very interesting letter from Mr. Sanford “Sandy” Kelson, a veteran who was not upset.

Mr. Kelson was born in 1944 and joined the U. S. Army in 1963. He explains why:

“When I was growing up, my education caused me to believe certain things. Education is not just what you learn in school. It’s what you learn at home, from TV, newspapers, the movies, from music, art, etc. I got a consistent message from all these sources. I learned that we Americans were special. We were better than others. Our form of government was the best; our economic system was the best; our leaders were more intelligent and just; we were more honest, smarter, more trustworthy and brave. God was on our side ...

“So, in 1963, young and patriotic, I enlisted in the U.S. Army for a three year tour of duty ...”

He became a sergeant in charge of a 10-man machine gun squad and although his outfit ended up going to Vietnam, Kelson himself did not. He continued:

“Just before my outfit was due to be shipped out, my commanding officer, a captain, summoned me to his office. He explained that since I had less than 90 days remaining in my three-year tour of duty that I would not be going to Vietnam. My orders were changed from going to Vietnam to being discharged from the Army and being shipped back home to Pittsburgh, Penn., to safety, to the bosom of my family, while my outfit, my buddies, would be going to Vietnam, into harm’s way. I was so naive and stupid that I had no idea what this would mean to me later on.

“After I got home, I started getting letters from my friends who were in Vietnam. The letters told of horror after horror.”

He shared stories about several men from his outfit who were killed or permanently injured. The stories in his email are extremely gory and unpleasant. But, I’m glad he sent them; we should all learn the gory and unpleasant details of war.

He then shared another letter:

“A buddy wrote and said, Sandy, everybody here hates us. I wondered, how could any of them hate us? My friends were dying to protect them from communism, from the North. We were spending billions of dollars in Vietnam. How could they hate us? We were the good guys, we wore the white hats. I was confused. Things didn’t add up. I began to critically think — possibly, for the first time in my life. Up until then, I had believed what I had been told by my government on faith. Faith is the belief in something for which there is no proof. I started going to the library and I read everything I could on Vietnam …”

“I have been speaking to students to tell them my story. I ask that students do not take what I say as truth. If students do, then, in a way, I will have done to them what others did to me as a young person … I ask that you not accept what anybody tells you as truth. Not your parents, not your teachers, not your religious leaders. You must explore, by reading, discussing and critically thinking and find your own truth and then to act on it for the benefit of all the peoples of the world, our brothers and sisters.”

There is much, much more in Mr. Kelson’s email. If you think it’s time you started taking a deeper, more critical look at war, let me know and I will be happy to forward his letter to you.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is hoping to wear out her index finger pushing the forward button on her computer this week.

The (Purple) Heart of the Matter

2011-08-13T15:21:00.005-04:00

HARBESON: The honor in war

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I’ve been thinking a lot about war lately. This is partly due to the U.S. Postal Service’s government-granted monopoly on delivering first-class mail.

See, I recently discovered that the stamps with the odd shape I’ve been using for a while, and slapping on envelopes upside down, are commemorating the Purple Heart. As most of you probably already know, the Purple Heart is an attempt to make us all feel better about the damage done to individuals who were unlucky enough to get physically wounded or killed by our nation-state’s involvement in various wars.

I think it makes a lot of sense to try to do something to acknowledge what has happened to these people and to their families. What concerns me is how such actions may contribute to the continuation of war.

Medals and commemorations worry me because they create an atmosphere of automatic hero-worship over the critical analysis of a given war. Growing up with memorials and commemorations helps build the belief that American wars are always moral. This has led to acceptance of actions from politicians that go far beyond any sensible understanding of defense.

Awards such as the Purple Heart are used by the government to promote abstract moral ideas like honor, glory and service to the country. But little, if any, attention is given to the effectiveness of using violence as a means to resolve conflict.

Ever since the phrase “greatest generation” was embedded in our culture, I’ve always thought it was strange how we talk about our aging veterans as if they all voluntarily consented to join the military. The way our society pretends that all veterans were willing to go kill people in other countries on behalf of this country hides the real dissent that existed in all wars fought.

People were still being conscripted into military service as recently as 1972 and I wonder how some draftees or families feel about the Purple Heart. Does a medal ease the burn or does it further inflame the horrific injustice?

When the draft ended, advertising on behalf of military service began almost immediately. This happened at nearly the same time the government created a law banning some cigarette advertising because, well, those things can kill you.

As Americans, it’s relatively easy to go about our daily lives insulated from the horror of war. We’d have to work hard to even imagine what it would be like to have another country’s military camping on top of the Knobs, claiming to be there in the name of freedom while at the same time killing our children.

So is it possible to hand out medals to soldiers and their families without glorifying war at the same time?

I noticed that the town of Clarksville plans to spend money on “improvements and additions” to its war memorial and the low bid was more than $300,000. Governments spend a lot of money memorializing war; that in itself may be one clue that it might not be a good idea.

Maybe the best we can do is stop focusing war commemoration activities on our singular perspective. Perhaps every time war is memorialized, mourning should include all the human deaths that occurred, the soldiers and the involuntarily conscripted on both sides, as well as the civilians who live in the country where the battles occur who just happened to be born on the wrong piece of dirt at the wrong time in history.

People should certainly be able to empathize with the helplessness felt by families who live in the countries the United States invades. After all, despite the claim on having greater freedom to control the government Americans live under, it still seems impossible to get the politicians, Democratic or Republican, to stop playing their war games.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson wonders if a day will come when a private entity creates a stamp commemorating the end of government.

More Talk About ISTEP Testing

2011-08-06T16:32:00.002-04:00

HARBESON: Playing the percentages

SELLERSBURG — A couple of weeks ago when this newspaper reported on local government schools’ ISTEP testing, I said it made me yawn because the results bear little relationship to my definition of learning.

So when I saw the ISTEP report on Southern Indiana’s two government charter schools, I prepared for a nice nap. However, I was jolted awake by the justifications both charters used to defend their inadequate scores.

Like me, Community Montessori administrators don’t put much stock in ISTEP scores because the learning that occurs in a Montessori environment would not necessarily show up on a standardized test meant for traditional schools. They believe if they did teach in a way that focused on standardized testing, then it wouldn’t be a Montessori school.

But since the school is government funded, it has to accept the strings attached and as a result it spent 20 percent of its time on improving ISTEP scores. So is it really a Montessori school any longer? I suppose we can say it is an 80 percent Montessori school, which is better than any number less than that point. But how much does a 20 percent change affect the philosophical goals?

Take a moment and pick something you value, such as your income, your family or maybe even the number of hours you sleep. Now, if you suddenly lost 20 percent, would anything change? For example, if your spouse suddenly went from being 100 percent faithful to 80 percent faithful, would you still define your relationship as a marriage?

What if we could ask Maria Montessori if she would accept 20 percent less focus on her philosophy? How do you think she might respond?

Of course, the most important person to consider in regards to the 20 percent marker is the actual learner. If a child has to spend time being molded to fit inside a government-imposed test, can we even measure the potential damage this might have on his ability to truly absorb Montessori values about learning?

Now, Rock Creek Community Academy probably doesn’t have it quite as bad. It’s true they had to dump their religious principles to grab government money, but they were already believers in the traditional school model of domination and control, so submitting to the authority of government-imposed testing is not really out of their boundaries.

However, even though the schools are quite different in philosophy, what I found most interesting in their comments is that they both claim to value the growth of the whole child over training skills for a government test. This is a fine goal, but what set my alarm buzzing was both schools’ direct claim on teaching moral development.

These two charter schools have a problem if they want to claim authority to teach moral and character-driven approaches because they are stuck in a moral contradiction of their own — accepting other people’s money taken by force in order to fund what they do.

That’s a tough enough moral quandary for traditional government schools, but these charters have it even worse because they both previously operated in the voluntary market. What is their lesson?

Well, if you are struggling to persuade people to voluntarily fund what you do, then it’s OK to use government to force people to fund it.

ISTEP might make me yawn, but I’m awake enough to realize it wouldn’t be right to lie down and pretend not to notice when ANY entity that uses aggression and coercion claims that their first priority is to teach the moral and character development of children.

I trust that those who believe in these schools and the values they claim to hold will seriously consider the contradictions here. I know it’s uncomfortable. It’s uncomfortable for me, too, because I have personal connections to good people involved in these schools.

But that does not give me an excuse to ignore basic contradictions and not challenge them when I hear them. That just wouldn’t be right — even 20 percent of the time.

— Southern Indiana resident Debbie Harbeson says that when she loses 20 percent of her sleep time, it’s always a nightmare, particularly for the people around her.

Does fitness matter for police?

2011-07-29T11:16:00.004-04:00

HARBESON: Is this a stronger union?

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Note to readers: I’m about to discuss the Jeffersonville Police Union’s contract battle with the city concerning minimum physical standard requirements. I know I’m going to be tempted to mention doughnuts but I want to meet a higher standard for this job. That’s why I’ve imposed the following physical requirement: When I’m tempted to mention doughnuts, I’ll stop writing and run laps around my yard until the feeling goes away.

Why are Jeffersonville police officers so uptight about minimum physical standard requirements in their union contract? Prior to following this controversy, I thought that meeting physical standards on a periodic basis was just a logical part of a police officer’s job.

As I understand the main disagreement, the police union does not want failure to meet these minimum physical standards to be grounds for termination. They think this requirement is punitive and they apparently don’t believe punitive measures work well to motivate and direct human behavior, or at least police officer behavior. They obviously have no problem with punitive measures as an effective means of controlling and directing behavior for the rest of society.

At one point in the negotiations, it was agreed that police officers would not immediately be let go if they failed to meet the minimum physical requirements. Instead, union members would be given three chances to pass and meet the age-graded standards.

In other words, police officers were going to be held to a three strikes and you’re out standard and they didn’t like that at all.

So even though various changes have been proposed about meeting fitness standards, the union has remained firm in its position and it wants any physical standard requirement to be incentive-based. Union members would like a specific reward, such as a monetary bonus, for meeting the minimum standards.

But the purpose of incentives is to spur action and motivate someone to perform at a level significantly above and beyond minimum standards; not for maintaining the basic minimum for the job.

It seems so odd to me that the police union members would balk at demonstrating a minimum standard of physical ability. Where is the sense of pride in themselves and respect for the community that pays their salaries?

I know police officers don’t necessarily think this way because they are used to dealing with those who pay them from a monopoly-based standpoint. I can imagine how different this all might be if they actually had to persuade people to purchase their services in the voluntary market.

Think about it. Instead of being coerced to fund city police, what if you had the freedom to choose from a variety of protection services? (Assuming you wanted to hire one at all.)

Do you think minimum physical standards would be on your list of criteria to consider as you made your decision?

Even when we only consider activities where police officers actually assist peaceful citizens who may be in need, and ignore possible dealings with dangerous (and fit) criminals, it still seems wise to make sure that police maintain minimum physical condition. No one wants to see police officers become part of the story because they let themselves go so much that they were physically incapable of performing the job.

Rather than fighting minimum physical fitness standards as a contractual job requirement, what if the police officers had spent their time and energy for the past two years working to ensure that they and their fellow union members reached their minimum age-graded physical standards? Would any of them really need to worry about holding on to their jobs? If so, then I guess that’s all anyone needs to know.

Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson ran around her yard about 500 times while composing this column. Which means she now deserves a doughnut.

ISTEP Testing Reports Make Me Yawn

2011-07-22T14:47:00.001-04:00

HARBESON: Is this a test?

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Every year when Indiana’s ISTEP testing scores are released, many people who support government schooling feel a rush of energy. They become excited and nervous, and expend that energy cheering for any data that can be defined as “success,” “improvement” or “progress.”

I usually feel a rush of energy too but it comes out in the form of a stretch and prolonged yawn. I can’t cheer because I don’t care about ISTEP test “success.” I care about education and learning.

I don’t cheer when success is defined by a government authorized and an approved standardized testing system. Pride at the state, district and individual school level over test scores only tells me one thing really: that those in the system are merely getting better and better at teaching to the test.

This measure of success is not something I would ever cheer about because I don’t cheer when I see young developing minds forced to suppress their natural curiosity to comply with arbitrary and subjective government mandates detailing exactly what they should be learning and when they should be learning it.

I don’t cheer when teachers feel they must teach to these specific standardized guidelines measured on the tests because I know it leaves very little, if any, time left to explore and learn about anything else.

A lot of energy is wasted on these misguided attempts to standardize a one size fits all education process while ignoring individual differences. The latest proof of this was in a recent story reporting on local results where a government school administrator pointed out how important it is to motivate kids to score higher and “learn what’s being taught.” He said it requires lots of energy to accomplish this.

But it’s not necessary to spend all that time and energy working to motivate kids to “learn what’s being taught.” All they need to do is stop thinking in terms of forced learning and flip the administrator’s comment. Instead of trying to motivate kids to “learn what is being taught,” turn this concept around and “teach them what they want to learn.”

Students are naturally self-motivated when they are already interested. Doesn’t it make much more sense for teachers and administrators to work with that natural energy rather than spending most of their days fighting against it?

If schools focused on individual student’s natural interests and real-life reasons to learn, there would be little need for elaborate standardized testing systems. People would realize that there are many ways to evaluate learning and the best ones focus on the student.

Imagine how different education would be and how much more everyone would learn if teachers and administrators actually collaborated with students to help them self-evaluate and assess for themselves whether they learned what they wanted to learn.

Since I don’t believe it actually accomplishes the goal, I’m not going to waste my energy cheering for standardized testing as a major method of forcing school accountability either. However, I do understand that this was bound to happen in a system based on compulsory funding, where individuals are not free to opt out.

As a result of government involvement in education, we have created institutions that are now almost completely focused on the continual testing and standardizing of students. This is producing young people whose main method of determining whether they should bother learning something or not is to robotically ask a single standardized question of their own: “Will this be on the test?”

And to me, this is nothing to cheer about.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is recuperating from injuries suffered during a recent prolonged yawn.

Another Illogical Government "Solution" in Jeffersonville Indiana

2011-07-15T08:28:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Shutting the door on business

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — At first, I really sympathized with Jeffersonville Mayor Tom Galligan last month when he was quoted in this newspaper as saying: “I don’t want somebody knocking on my door trying to sell me something.”

I don’t like it when politicians come knocking on my door either.

But then I realized he wasn’t talking about politicians, he was referring to hard-working business people and the city of Jeffersonville’s idea to stifle economic growth by interfering in their attempts to reach and interact with potential customers.

Galligan was supporting a moratorium on door-to-door sales and Jeffersonville’s City Council agreed with him. They even suspended the usual three readings so they could quickly and unanimously pass the moratorium.

I’m sure the mayor was quite pleased he didn’t have to knock on their door more than once to get them to buy.

The moratorium is supposedly temporary as they try to figure out how they will handle the activity going forward. I wonder how this will end up. I don’t necessarily care for door-to-door sales either, but it never occurred to me to use government to forcibly ban other people from engaging in the action.

But then again, I’m not a politician.

To be fair, the nuisance factor isn’t the only reason the city decided to declare this moratorium. Officials also said they were concerned about safety due to a “rash” of burglaries where suspects posed as salespeople and then robbed the place if no one was home.

I don’t really understand the reasoning applied here. Isn’t this like banning pedestrians due to a “rash” of carjackings at city road intersections?

And if the main purpose of this government action is to protect residents, then the moratorium as written is still a useless government interference because, as usual, the elected officials have allowed exceptions. In this instance the favored groups getting a pass are all tax-exempt organizations.

Criminals can just as easily pose as someone from one of these tax exempt organizations as they can from a for-profit business, so obviously a government decree would make no difference at all. It only has the potential to harm innocent business people working hard to support their families.

As a matter of fact, again based on the government’s own reasoning, a good case can be made that it’s the nonprofits that should be banned because people may let their guard down even more when they think the person canvassing their neighborhood is working for a charitable cause or promoting a specific church’s way to eternal salvation.

Not to mention the fact that plenty of people consider tax-exempt solicitations at their front door just as much of a nuisance as those coming from a business.

I just don’t understand the thought process that goes through elected officials’ heads when they support these illogical actions. Does it really make any sense to say that one individual can knock on your door and sell you popcorn so a kid can go on a camping trip, but another individual can’t knock on your door and ask you to buy ice cream so he can support his family?

The government will allow one person to sell nutritionally questionable cookies but another person can’t sell plain unbreaded frozen fish fillets?

Mayor Galligan says there are other ways for people to sell their goods and services, and this is true. Of course, the same reasoning applies to the tax-exempt organizations that solicit door-to-door as well.

Even though I don’t care for it, soliciting door-to-door is a method that some businesses and tax-exempt organizations choose to use and government should not interfere. If the mayor or anyone else is annoyed at solicitors of any kind, then all they have to do is shut the door.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson has found a simple, quiet, fail-safe method to get solicitors to leave and never return: She answers the door naked.

Public Intoxication Is Not A Crime

2011-07-11T12:15:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Designate PI law for repeal

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Let’s say you — or someone you care about — had a few drinks one night and, knowing it would not be a good idea to drive, decided to let a sober person take the wheel.

Did you realize you can still be charged with a criminal offense? It’s true. The Indiana Supreme Court just affirmed this in Moore v. State.

Here’s some background on the case. A woman had a couple of beers at a relative’s home. While she was there, another person asked her for a ride. Since she had been drinking, she told him she could not drive so he drove while she rode in the passenger seat and fell asleep.

A police officer pulled them over because a license plate light was out and then discovered that the driver did not have a valid license. When the officer determined that the passenger was too impaired to drive, he arrested her for public intoxication.

There are several issues and concerns surrounding this ruling, one being the implications with regard to society’s strong push to prevent drunken driving by promoting the idea of designated drivers.

It’s not difficult to see possible problems when someone who is responsible enough to use a designated driver can still be charged with criminal behavior. As a matter of fact, as a result of this ruling, when the good folks at New Albany’s Irish Exit give rides to their patrons who have been drinking, it’s now theoretically possible for a police officer to pull their vans over for a minor offense and arrest their customers.

This ruling clearly illustrates problems with laws such as Indiana’s public intoxication law. It’s a good example of unintended consequences, a peril that all written law is susceptible to and is one reason why the less laws we have, the better.

Indiana’s public intoxication law is horrendously vague and depends upon the arbitrary discretion of law enforcement, which means it is open to possible abuse.

Worst of all, this law makes criminals of peaceful people who are not harming others. Lysander Spooner made an excellent case way back in the 1870s when he said “vices are not crimes.” He writes, “Vices are those acts by which a man harms himself or his property. Crimes are those acts by which one man harms the person or property of another.”

When a law exists that can rightly be interpreted to say that one can commit a criminal offense even while sleeping in the passenger seat of a car, clearly we have a problem.

Indiana State Sen. Michael Young agrees that Indiana’s public intoxication law is much too vague and in the most recent legislative session, he authored Senate Bill 156. This bill added language to the law in an attempt to clarify the necessity of additional behaviors above and beyond merely being intoxicated.

It passed in the Senate, with local Sen. Ron Grooms voting for and Sen. Jim Smith voting against. The bill died in the House and Young says he will try again next year.

While it’s good to know some legislators seem to understand that criminal behavior should involve harm to person or property, I highly encourage Young to go further and push for the repeal of Indiana’s public intoxication law.

Adding language to bad laws merely complicates the issue even further and increases the likelihood of even more negative unintended consequences. Surely, Indiana has enough laws on the books for actual criminal behavior that law enforcement can use if necessary.

Other states have no specific laws against public intoxication and some specifically note that an intoxicated person is not committing a crime. To protect innocent individuals who have caused no harm to others, Indiana should do the same and repeal this law.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson grudgingly admits that selecting a “designated driver” is a better idea than her suggestion of selecting the “designated intoxicated.”

Risking Taxpayer Money

2011-06-30T21:02:00.005-04:00

COLUMN NOTES: I changed my mind again. I am going to keep posting the full column here because I want a secondary online depository. I'm also going to try and link to articles and other sources of information I use to write the columns.

HARBESON: Windstream in it for the money

CLARKSVILLE — There’s no doubt Windstream Technologies has developed quite an interesting product. I was initially impressed by the publicity surrounding its wind turbine and when I looked deeper, I saw even greater potential.

First of all, any product that can help people get off the grid is a plus, so a turbine capable of supplying even partial energy needs using wind speeds as low as 4 to 5 mph certainly seems promising.

It’s fairly small and unobtrusive and I even like the design, too. As a matter of fact, I could see one of these babies looking very smart as a coffee or end table in a room decorated in a modern-style design. (Hmm, I wonder if such an installation might actually be operational inside government buildings where politicians are busy blustering.)

In addition, Windstream gained extra publicity when it installed its first turbine as part of the League of Green Embassies program and the company apparently even has a significant amount of preorders waiting.

So with all this going for the company, why does Windstream need to ask taxpayers to take on their risk? Where are the private investors?

If a company can’t convince traditional bankers to assume the risk, there are other ways to raise funds or move a product forward. What has it tried in order to gain access to the nonbank private investment dollar? For that matter, why aren’t the owners trying to sell the idea to an existing company who has the capital and/or infrastructure to build this product?

There are many alternatives and possibilities in the private market.

Do companies like Windstream get tied so strongly into government as the solution because they are in a business which is highly regulated and controlled? Windstream CEO Dan Bates seems to be all for using government to benefit his company because he’s promoted government caps on carbon emissions to force the market to move in ways that benefit his business. Is this really the best means to grow a business?

Maybe New Albany is better off not having companies which constantly look to government goodies. Windstream only came here because Indiana state government bribed them with deals using taxpayer money in the first place. Companies who arrive on such terms are certainly more likely to think they deserve more and more in order to stay.

Windstream ended up in North Vernon, accepting a government-backed loan for less money than they requested from New Albany. This may be partially due to North Vernon’s site being the old Regal Rug factory. A location that was previously used for assembly-type work likely requires less setup costs than New Albany’s retail site. Yet, Windstream still didn’t do it without using local politicians to force taxpayers to take on the company’s risk by providing banking services.

People who promote these special government favors like to label such actions as being “business-friendly.” But for “business-friendly” to be a meaningful term, it must be applied universally, not by handing out special financing deals to certain companies.

A friendly business environment is one that gets out of the way of hard-working, ambitious people so they can develop and grow their product or service without being constantly propped up by government assistance.

Less regulation and less taxation create an environment where self-sustaining businesses are free to invest as they see fit, and no one forces those who don’t gain favor of politicians to subsidize those who do.

It appears that dealing with companies who only come to town because they were bribed means cities will have to deal with demands for even more handouts. Which is kind of like finding out someone only married you for your money.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson wonders if anyone has ever measured the mph that hot air moves inside government buildings filled with politicians.

Is There Such a Thing as "Best Interest of Taxpayers?"

2011-06-18T17:48:00.003-04:00

COLUMN NOTES: I think I'm going to start pasting only part of my columns here from now on and then link back to the paper for the rest. No one told me to do this, I just thought it would be good to have readers go to the site where it was originally published. Then you can see comments others made in response and can also make comments of your own if you want. All reader reactions are in the same place, which is a good thing. I guess.

Or maybe I've just gotten really, really lazy. Maybe I can't even cut and paste a whole column anymore, I only have enough energy to pull my mouse over a piece of a column. Yeah, that's probably really it.

HARBESON: What’s in your best interest?

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I find it fascinating that the New Albany-Floyd County government school system is working hard to find a way to avoid complying with the new state law that helps charter schools make use of empty school buildings.

Who would have thought that an entity in charge of teaching kids would be so against the basic idea of sharing with others?

Read the rest here.

ISTEP Security Breach

2011-06-11T15:22:00.002-04:00

HARBESON: Let me pose a question
SELLERSBURG — When standardized testing is used to evaluate schools, one of the major priorities is preventing the specific questions from becoming public before the test is administered.

In the past, when such a “security breach” occurred, the “breachers” hoped to increase scores. But this year, a test item went public for a very different reason.

This particular question was part of the eighth grade writing portion of the ISTEP+, Indiana’s version of government standardized testing. It was made public because those involved in spreading the question around were upset and thought the question promoted the current administration’s education voucher agenda.

In other words, these teachers were worried that people were using the government education system to indoctrinate the children toward a specific viewpoint.

On the other side, we have the administration’s response, which may be even more interesting. Heather Neal, chief of staff for Indiana’s Department of Education, issued a memo to the schools explaining this ISTEP+ security breach and defending those in charge of government education against this accusation of political manipulation.

In this three-page memo, which you can read for yourself here, Neal includes a table listing 16 steps the test item went through. After its birth at a private test vendor, the test item was then passed around to various groups who punched, poked and prodded the poor thing for two years. She says there is no possible way the question could have been placed in the test to promote a 2011 legislative agenda item.

In other words, the current cost-cutting, efficiency-focused administration used their costly government bureaucracy as a defense against the accusation.

By now you’re probably wondering what that test question said. Well here it is:

“Your school has just announced a program that will allow a group of eighth-graders from your class to attend high school anywhere in the United States. You will have all of your expenses paid for by a special scholarship program.

“Write a persuasive essay to your school’s selection committee explaining why you should be chosen and where you would like to go to high school. In your persuasive essay, tell about the personal qualities you have that would make you a good choice. Explain why you want to go to high school in the town or city you have chosen.”

It is, of course, a matter of personal opinion and interpretation as to whether you think this question could be promoting government vouchers. The question does not explain whether private high schools are included in the program nor does it clarify where the funds for the “special scholarship program” are coming from.

And why should it? Government schools never talk to students about their funding model. This is never part of the curriculum because it would naturally lead to all sorts of uncomfortable questions from the kids as they tried to reconcile this with the lessons teaching that bullying and threatening violence against others to get what you want is wrong.

It’s interesting to see how the content of a single test question mattered so much to both groups. Why were these teachers so upset that this question may be supporting vouchers and why was the current administration so determined to say they had nothing to do with the question, even specifically pointing out that the state superintendent of public instruction had nothing to do with the development of the question?

Could it be that both groups clearly understand that standardized testing is a powerful tool used to control the curriculum and as a result, the very thinking of the students who are forced to comply?

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson thinks a mind is a terrible thing to standardize.

Politicians Behaving Normally?

2011-06-07T21:49:00.002-04:00

HARBESON: There’s always a way to get more money

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Clark County Commissioners learned an important lesson this week: The quickest way to boost attendance at their meetings is to mention a possible benefit reduction for government employees.

Naturally, the employees were concerned and wanted to object. It’s only rational to try to keep what you believe you’ve earned.

We can all sympathize with the frustration of feeling dependent on the actions of politicians, particularly when watching how they behave under pressure.

According to local media reports, during the meeting Commissioner Les Young told a member of the crowd to “shut up,” Commissioner Meyer accused Commissioner Moore of taking stances for political reasons, and previously Moore said the other two were using the employees as political pawns.

Those last two comments belong in the obvious category. After all, princes play polo, possums play dead and politicians play politics.

We’ve seen other instances of questionable behavior, the most notable being the cell phone incident when Moore spit out a string of expletives in a voicemail message to Meyer, who saved it and passed it through his gossip mill.

Even though Young apologized and Moore expressed remorse for that expletive-laced message, clearly none of these men are behaving in ways we’d want our children to emulate.

I’m not sure the rest of us would do much better though. We must keep in mind that the purpose of their government job is to decide how to spend other people’s money that was taken through coercive means. There’s no better recipe for cooking up conflict and it always boils over when governments run low on money.

In this specific instance, the potential spending cut was employee health insurance benefits. Is this the right place to cut? Would another budget item be better?

There is no right answer. It’s simply a matter of opinion based on each individual’s perspective of perceived personal benefit. Any solution is going to taste rotten to someone.

The only easy question to answer is that no matter what government spends money on, the taxpayer ultimately funds it. Even if the insurance benefit is taken away and government employees pay “out of their own pockets,” it’s still taxpayer money when it comes from a government employee’s earnings.

The commissioners’ current argument focuses on the various boxes the government creates to store the coerced funds. Moore wanted to eat into the cumulative capital fund, but according to Indiana Code, I don’t see how employee insurance benefits fit the definition of a county emergency.

If correct, then the expenditure would likely end up in a future SBOA report. Oh heck, that wouldn’t really matter since there is always a lawyer available to make excuses for negative SBOA reports.

The commissioners did reduce government spending at this meeting by eliminating insurance for part-time elected officials. Interestingly, Moore, the lone Republican, voted against this cost-cutting measure. But he receives this government goodie so his action makes sense when you apply the perceived benefit truism I explained earlier.

No matter how this gets resolved, if some part of the county government decides it wants more money, there is always a way to get it, property tax caps or not. Just look at the lawsuits pushing mandates to force loans which would be paid for by the taxpayer.

I remember when Sheriff Danny Rodden was on the Clark County Council pushing for an income tax, which eventually passed. He had statistics and presentations proving how great life will be once the government gained access to that revenue source.

But obviously, government spending problems do not go away no matter what politicians say. It’s simply impossible to supply enough funds to satisfy the hunger of a monopolistic entity that claims the moral right to take your money by force.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson says many recipes exist to lower the conflict count among humans. Individual ingredients vary but the base is always voluntary interaction.

Rapture Prediction Leads to Letters Column

2011-05-30T13:42:00.002-04:00

HARBESON: The emailman delivers> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I’m a little embarrassed because I don’t have a regular column prepared this week. I thought that whole Rapture thing was going to happen over the weekend.

Oh sure, I knew I’d still be here but I also figured chaos would reign long enough that a newspaper column would not be necessary for a while. Oops!

So, I’m relying on my readers to be my personal saviors. Let’s hear what a few of them have to say.

In a column on the subject of vouchers, I pointed out that government officials were celebrating choice while the system itself was still completely controlled through compulsory funding and compulsory attendance.

Several people had a few thoughts to add.

From Tom — “‘School choice’ is one of those subjects that just bugs the (nicely descriptive term deleted) out of me. I’m always running into people who claim that vouchers or tax credits are ‘a move in the direction of freedom,’ and who can’t understand that simply giving people a putative range of choices within a bad system is a way of strengthening that bad system, not weakening it.”

From Jill — “I hope the majority of responses that you receive are about how people hadn’t thought of those aspects (compulsion and coercion — not to mention ‘reform,’ which makes me cringe) of our education system before. Hopefully, you have turned on some ‘light bulbs’ in the minds of your readers. Education is definitely a hot-button issue, and the politicians know it (as they’re always hiding behind children).”

And one more from Fred — “Although many are going ga-ga over the voucher system, I wonder how many have looked far enough ahead to see the potentially negative effects that it will have on the private/parochial sector when they have to adhere to ‘government regulations’ in order to earn government dollars?”

I wrote a column pointing out how the new coffee shop in the New Albany Public Library proves that people are willing to pay for what they use, which generated this response from Dan: “You make it sound like people have to pay to get coffee at the library. Is that true? Are they discriminating against the coffee-poor? Or are they catering to the coffee-rich? (I always get this mixed up.) Clearly ... tax dollars ... should be spent to provide coffee-equality!!!”

In the same column, I discussed the idea of moving from the current coercive funding model to one where library funds are raised through voluntary means. This led to some brainstorming from Christa: “Lots and lots of churches have libraries with no coerced funding. I imagine other community organizations would also create libraries if there were no public libraries. One of my favorite ‘libraries’ is the genealogy collection at our local historical museum which is provided by a private, not-for-profit society.

“And someone could just put books in the Redbox for 99 cents per night (or maybe per week) ... Amazon should just start something like Netflix with real paper books (not just e-books).

“... There are lots of solutions in the free market ... Actually those of us who have to buy the PLAC card are used to paying a sort of subscription to use the library. It’s really not a stretch at all to think that others would pay as well.”

Finally I received several responses from people who think they solved the puzzle of where Clarksville’s lost car engine and Charlestown’s lost receipts for the JayC gift cards ended up. This theory from Tom may be the most likely: “My guess is whomever took the engine is using it as a paperweight to hold down the receipts for 950 gift cards.”

Now that’s what I call a government solution.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is thankful for readers who are willing to be her personal savior by providing column content.

Not a Leg Lamp, But Still Cool

2011-05-22T17:37:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Hey, I got an award!

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Sunday started out like most Sundays for me. Upon waking, my husband and I had our usual skirmish, maneuvering for prime kitchen table space in order to spread out our respective sections of the newspaper while eating breakfast.

After the battle was over and table boundaries agreed upon, I settled into my relaxed Sunday morning reading mode ... until I read something so shocking that I spit active yogurt cultures all over page four.

Apparently, I won second place in the General Interest Column category in Division 4 of the 2011 Associated Press Managing Editor’s Awards. I didn’t even know I was eligible for such an award until Editor Shea Van Hoy invited me to submit three columns from 2010 if I wanted to participate. Thanks Shea.

Yeah, yeah, I understand I received second place, but still it’s an award. I don’t know a lot about it but I wonder if there is some sort of tangible acknowledgment other than a mention in the paper.

I hope so, because I’ve been feeling really jealous when seeing the awards my family has received lately. For example, my mom earned several shiny medals at last year’s local Senior Games.

(By the way, watch out seniors because she is determined to win more medals again this year. The woman is absolutely possessed. She even excused herself from our Mother’s Day party because she needed to “go shoot some hoops.” So if anyone reading this planned to enter in the 79-86 age category, consider this a fair warning to practice.)

Then a couple weeks ago, my daughter and son-in-law received huge sparkly medals for finishing the Derby Festival Mini-Marathon. Are cool medals only reserved for people who actually get off their butts and do something physical?

If so, I still deserve such a medal because writing this column is very physical for me. Just ask my husband. He’ll tell you I often run through the rooms of our house, sometimes yelling and screaming at the same time. I also stomp on the stairs and pound my fingers on the keyboard. I’ve even been known to throw things occasionally.

It’s quite a workout.

So, I’m sure you agree that such activity deserves a medal or maybe even the newspaper equivalent of a leg lamp — that fantastic award the Dad wins in the movie, “A Christmas Story.” Well maybe I shouldn’t expect that much. After all, leg lamps are for major awards and I came in second.

On the other hand, I already know second place will be plenty good enough for my friend, Jim, who will use it to confirm his view that I am part of a horrible group known as the media elite. But if there is such a thing, I still don’t think I’m a member because no one at the paper even told me I won an award before I read the article.

I spent some time wondering why neither Shea nor anyone else at the paper personally informed me I had placed in these awards and I think I know why, at least as far as Shea is concerned.

It’s because he knew I’d just have to write a column about it and this was his way of making sure he would get his name mentioned in an award-winning newspaper column.

Some of you are probably thinking he didn’t tell me because of a concern that I might turn into a prima donna and make crazy demands. However, that can’t possibly happen because I already act like a prima donna and make crazy demands.

It can’t get any worse. Or can it?

— Sellersburg resident and award-winning columnist Debbie Harbeson wonders if the newspaper version of a leg lamp award is a bird cage.

Free Your Family From Government Schooling

2011-05-17T15:44:00.005-04:00

HARBESON: You can choose your child’s education

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Now that Indiana’s government has passed the school voucher law, proponents are excited about increased choice in education.

But let’s be clear, the increased choice they’re talking about still falls inside a coercive system of funding, which means we will see all the associated problems and flaws that always come with force.

All we’ve really seemed to accomplish here is to add one more special interest group — private schools — into the mix of those who will continue to fight to gain access to the pot of government-controlled funds designated for education.

Vouchers just make those fights more complicated because now more fists will fly as they all wrestle in the mud for some of the money.

Meanwhile, individual student needs and interests are still pretty much ignored. For example, vouchers continue to promote the idea that we must choose a single institution, whether government-run or privately-run, for education. Vouchers continue to promote the idea that a curriculum controlled and manipulated by standardized testing can meet individual learning needs.

Is this kind of choice good enough for your child? If so, fine. If not, you can get your family out completely.

If you are tired of all of the constant government manipulation and control you can leave. If your child’s needs are not being met inside government-approved educational institutions of any sort you do have another choice. It is possible to free your family, to become independent and take control if you want.

How? By going independent and choosing home education.

When home educating your family, you have the freedom to focus completely and totally on your child’s individual needs, interests and learning style. There are many ways to help a child learn and by being independent you can choose from a wide array of ideas and find what works for your child.

You can benefit from having immediate flexibility to change any aspect of your child’s education if you decide a specific choice is not working.

You don’t have to worry as much about the effect politicians, school boards, administrators, teacher unions and other special interest groups will have on your child’s education from one school year to the next or from one legislative session to the next. You can let your child’s needs and interests take the lead when you go independent.

Now, you may have concerns and that’s understandable. But if you are interested in this idea, please don’t let anyone try to tell you that you can’t do it. If you want to be independent and take control, you can.

Lots and lots of families have done it already, including mine. And we are glad to help you find the way that works for your family in your individual situation.

For every obstacle you think may be standing in your way, there are others who have overcome the same obstacles. Some have wondered if they had the funds, or the education, or the time and found ways around these obstacles. So if you want to do it, you can do it.

If you are interested, now is the perfect time to investigate the idea further because your family will be taking a summer break from your current schooling option anyway.

So are you interested? Do you want to learn more about home education? Contact me and I’ll be happy to discuss how you can take charge, how you can be independent and still have access to many resources as well as plenty of support and assistance.

You can do it if you want to do it and I’m here to help you. All you need to do is ask.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is willing to wrestle in mud if it could help even one family gain educational independence. But she’d prefer chocolate pudding.

Clarksville and Charlestown Are Really Losing It

2011-05-10T19:49:00.002-04:00

HARBESON: This column is a lost cause

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Have you been keeping up with the State Board of Accounts reports? If so, I’m sure you agree that some of our local governments are really losing it.

For example, after a windstorm hit in 2008, the city of Charlestown purchased 1,000 gift cards from JayC grocery, each worth $20, and doled them out to city residents. However, they only have records for 50 of those cards. They lost track of the other 950.

Officials sound quite puzzled and befuddled about the situation and just can’t understand what could have happened to the rest of the receipts proving they actually did what they said they did.

Yeah, they admit, we lost the papers, but there’s no need to make a big deal about it. They want taxpaying citizens to trust, to believe, to have faith that their government carried out this task correctly.

Besides, some offices were moved after this event so that’s probably why they can’t find the papers. Well, at least they didn’t say the police department’s K-9 dog ate it.

This is really hard to accept because as far as I’ve been able to tell, pushing papers seems to be the main function of all government entities. So you’d think having so much experience moving paper from one tray to another would mean that they’re pretty good at knowing where they put their stuff.

So I just don’t get it.

However, the town of Clarksville is a different story entirely because they lost a Crown Victoria car engine. Now that’s something I completely understand.

Car engines are tricky little buggers. They can easily slip through your hands and if the wind is blowing, who knows where one could end up. These things are constantly disappearing. Everyone’s lost a car engine or two. Come on admit it, you’ve lost one before. I’m sure I’ll hear from many local mechanics writing in to verify what I’m saying.

Even so, I don’t really think this engine was lost. I have a few other theories. Although there is some disagreement on the exact details, it appears that a radiator is also missing. So my first theory is that the engine and radiator simply ran off together, the product of a steamy relationship.

Hey, don’t look at me like that, if the dish can run away with the spoon, why not this?

Another theory I have is that this car engine simply knew too much. About what exactly, I have no idea and I would not even venture to guess. But I’m sure it must have overheard something while in overdrive.

I do think the prosecution got to it first, though. However, my sources tell me that once the engine found out that the witness protection program meant it would have to spend the rest of its life inside a Chevy Impala, where no one would ever look, the engine fired up and fled.

So, for the engine’s safety I hope no one ever finds it.

Yes, once again, all of this is pure speculation on my part. I really have no idea what happened to that car engine. All I know is that if we measure these government losses in pounds, Clarksville is definitely The Biggest Loser in Southern Indiana.

OK, truth be told I can sympathize with Clarksville and Charlestown. I’ve lost stuff before. As a matter of fact, I had a much better column draft this week. It was probably one of the best columns I have ever written — Pulitzer material for sure.

I can’t find it anywhere now though. I think I lost it when I moved some files around on my computer.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson says the only thing she’s really ever lost is her mind.

Bullying: An Essential Component of Government

2011-05-05T22:22:00.006-04:00

COLUMN NOTES: Looks like I fired up a few people in the comments section on the newspaper's website again.
HARBESON: A bolt of inspiration

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I don’t understand why Indiana Democrats are so upset at the possibility of the Republicans introducing an “anti-bolting” amendment this year in order to prevent the minority party from staging future walkouts.

After all, it’s not much different than what they demand of the state’s minors because anti-bolting legislation is really just a compulsory attendance law for legislators.

This should make sense to anyone interested in fairness and equal treatment. If state government is going to make it so difficult for a 16 year old who is not being well-served by the government schools to bolt, then legislators should have to abide by similar laws. Why treat people who support the compulsory government education system any differently than they treat the kids who suffer in that system?

To continue the school comparison, it’s not just me that sees similarities between the legislative walkout issue and school problems. When I typed “Indiana anti-bolting law” into Google, the search engine not only did its job and gave me results for the terms I requested, but also checked to make sure I didn’t mean to search “Indiana anti-bullying law” instead.

I thought about that for a moment and realized Google has a point — bullying is relevant to this discussion.

As far as this year is concerned, I’m sure the Republicans would agree their amendment could just as easily be called “anti-bullying” legislation. We know the Republicans certainly felt bullied when the minority Democrats ran out and spent a month or so away from the legislative session.

So Google is on the right track, but I’d go further and say we should be talking about bullying in regard to the entire government system itself. Bullying is an essential component of all government operations. Legislative bullying is rampant because the main goal of those in the General Assembly is to try to use government to force people to do what they want.

It really gets twisted, too. For example, in this session here’s how the bullying is playing out: Republicans think its fine to bully individuals to pay for another family’s education in a private religious institution, even if those being forced to fund it have deeply held convictions which cause them to object to funding religious institutions.

Similarly, Democrats think it is fine to bully individuals to pay for another person’s abortion, even if those being forced to fund it have deeply held convictions which cause them to object to funding abortion.

Why don’t we consider and think about these inconsistencies, irregularities and downright hypocrisies more than we do?

It’s just like being back in school and being caught between two big hairy bullies who are constantly vying for power. All you, the average citizen, can do is put ice on your black eye while listening to the bullies argue over how they are going to spend your lunch money.

Part of the problem is that we allow legislators, sometimes assisted by the media, to set the tone of the discussion. Legislators work hard to get us to focus on the issue as they want to frame it, which in this case is the “problem” of quorum rules in the legislative session and what, if anything, should be done so the minority party cannot stop everything by staging a walkout.

Maybe it’s time to realize that the issues we should be discussing are never the surface topics that government officials want us to focus on. It’s not about bolting, it’s not about walkouts and it’s not about quorum rules.

Google’s search engine seems to understand there are deeper issues at play. I do too. What about you?

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is always prepared to bolt.

We Don't Need No Government Funded Libraries

2011-04-27T11:15:00.005-04:00

HARBESON: Dispensing some book learning

COLUMN NOTES: You really should go read the comments to this article. I'm particularly gratified that several people do indeed understand my points.

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Last week, as part of my decluttering column, I mentioned local libraries and used $2 coffee as an example of people’s willingness to pay for what they want. As if to prove my point, the same day the paper also had an article about a coffee shop opening inside the New Albany-Floyd County library.

The article made it sound like the library had an innovative idea, which I found odd because the private voluntary market has been pairing coffee and books for years and years. In fact, my husband will tell you that pairing coffee and books really improved his life.

See, my husband loves coffee. He can hang out for hours in a coffee shop. On the other hand, I love books. I can hang out for hours in a bookstore.

But I don’t drink coffee and although my husband likes to read, he doesn’t want to hang around very long in bookstores. He has a problem because when we are out together he always has to do what I want.

But now that bookstores have coffee shops, when we’re out together and I want to browse books and all he wants is coffee, we no longer have a conflict. We just go to a bookstore and enjoy ourselves immensely. He can sit, slurp and burp while I shuffle and skip merrily along the rows of shelves.

Until we get kicked out anyway.

This may be the only thing that is holding our marriage together.

To get back to my point, the idea of pairing coffee shops and books is nothing new; the private market discovered it quite some time ago. So even though the library is a bit behind the times, I’m glad to see the coffee shop open because no one can deny that people will pay for what they want.

Well, politicians will probably still deny it and try to convince us of the need to continue government coercion, but we don’t have to listen to them. We can just throw cold coffee on their drivel.

We don’t need to use government force against our neighbors when we want a cup of coffee and it should be the same when we want to rent a book. That’s mostly what libraries are you know — just coercively funded book rental shops.

People rent stuff all the time. Cars are offered for loan and people rent them. Homes, apartments, furniture and appliances are offered for loan and people rent them. Tools and equipment are offered for loan and people rent them. Clothing for special occasions is offered for loan and people rent them.

You can even rent a date, which I probably would have done if bookstores had not added coffee shops.

I could go on for pages but then I’d be taking up space that this newspaper offers for loan and that people want to rent. This kind of voluntary action happens every day, all day long. No government force involved.

If society is able to find ways to borrow and rent all of these things on a voluntary basis, why should books be any different? There’s nothing special about books as far as a product people want to use on a temporary basis.

It’s completely unnecessary to use the government to force our neighbors to pay rental fees for the books and information we wish to access for a short period of time. We know this is true because if people were really so against voluntarily paying for what they want and use, there would be no coffee and pastry shop inside the government library.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson thinks the best use for coffee, hot or cold, is throwing it on politicians’ drivel.

If Only I Could Clean Out The Clutter of Laws Too

2011-04-16T12:26:00.004-04:00

HARBESON: Debbie de-clutters

COLUMN NOTES: A commenter on the newspaper's site said "The same argument you make for libraries, could just as easily be made for the existence of National Public Radio, Public TV, and for that matter, the National Endowment for the Arts." I agree.

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — The file I use to collect material for possible columns is growing kind of thick which means it’s time to de-clutter. So today let’s take a quick look at a few of these topics before I throw out the trash.

The first item is an article about the Jeffersonville Canal. The government has started purchasing homes in the areas affected but at least one property owner, Fred Collins, says he isn’t interested in selling. When asked how they will handle such situations, government officials said they’d be as fair as they can.

What does this mean? If those in government were truly concerned about being fair, all they have to do is respect his wishes as a legitimate property owner and simply leave him alone. If you have any respect for the principle of individual property ownership, please join me in supporting Mr. Collins as he struggles to keep his home. Don’t let the government treat him as if he’s a bothersome piece of clutter.

Next up in my pile is a letter State Senator Ron Grooms wrote bemoaning the property tax circuit breaker because it affects the funding of one of his most beloved coercively funded institutions: government libraries.

To make his case for increasing the library’s options for additional coercive funding, he points out how many people love the library and gives statistics on local library usage. Grooms wants us to believe this is a valid argument for coercion, but it’s just as valid to argue that popularity proves there is no need to coerce. Such beloved institutions can surely be self-supporting because the many people who use the library and/or claim to love its purpose, as Grooms does, will act to close the funding gap with no need for government force.

For example, according to the numbers Grooms gave in the letter, if the Jeffersonville Township Library only made one change and charged a fee to check out materials, the cost would be less than 60 cents to use an item for several weeks. What library-loving patrons holding their daily $2 cup of coffee or 89 cent big swig of soda would object to this?

Finally, I have several pieces in my file dealing with the crazy clutter of laws we have concerning alcohol. Indiana’s oh-so-wise politicians discovered that elderly people get irritated if asked to show identification when they want to buy a six-pack and have a lot of time on their hands to bug their legislators about the problem. So, to de-clutter their lives, i.e., get the old people off their backs, legislators are messing with this law again, hoping to find that sweet spot, the age where people are desperately clinging to the illusion that they still look young, but are much too busy to complain to their legislators when they realize that’s not why they were carded.

Let’s add one more alcohol-related item to this de-cluttering column. Did you know that wineries need special government permission to sell their product at festivals and can currently only engage in such business activity for 30 days a year? Well, thanks in part to the work of Representatives Rhonda Rhoads and Ed Clere, they might now be allowed to have festival permits for 45 days a year. Shall we all have a drink to celebrate this amazing freedom?

I just don’t get it. I’m sitting here looking at another item I’m about to discard, a postcard from Rhoads’ campaign that says she is for smarter government. Wouldn’t smarter government best be defined by the repeal of such idiotic laws rather than adding to them?

I guess I can understand why politicians love legislative clutter. It gives them work to do because there’s always something for them to “clean-up.”

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson de-clutters so thoroughly that she’s accidentally pitched her husband into the trash several times. No, really, they were accidents.

Can You Relate?

2011-04-09T19:11:00.002-04:00

HARBESON: Relatively speaking

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Clark County Commissioners are sure in a mess, relatively speaking anyway. People are concerned about a conflict of interest because they hired the son of one of the commissioners to work for the county highway department.

The hiring came under scrutiny when other employees with more years of seniority were laid off and Commissioner Ed Meyer’s son was not.

Whether or not the commissioner’s son should remain in the position over the other employees is not the issue. The issue here is whether politicians should ever be involved in hiring relatives.

Government officials have consistently demonstrated a serious inability to see ethical issues obvious to those of us standing outside the coercive institution. At minimum, a politician should have enough sense to excuse himself from making any decision concerning a relative. Yet, we rarely see this.

Of course, hiring relatives also happens in the private realm. Large and/or publicly-held businesses try hard to avoid these situations and often have specific policies in place to protect against possible conflicts of interest, but close relatives often work together in small businesses.

So, there’s nothing inherently wrong with hiring relatives.

If a private company chooses to hire relatives, it’s a risk they take, like any other risk. If at some point, emotions get in the way of good business decisions, then the company faces the consequences. Those uninvolved need not concern themselves at all.

In addition, hiring relatives in the private market can be a positive move. Many companies gain goodwill when they promote their business as family-owned and family-operated, which obviously means relatives are working together.

New generations try to maintain the trust earned by the hard work of previous generations. These businesses will point out how long the business has been in the family, assuring customers that the basic values which made the company successful remain the same.

If people outside the family choose to work for such businesses, they voluntarily accept any consequences that may arise when relatives work together. Employees and customers are free to leave if they see issues or have concerns. So hiring relatives is simply not a problem in the private market. But things change when we move to a coercive, monopolistic system.

When controversial actions occur inside government, we are often treated to ridiculous excuses when those involved are questioned. In defense of this specific situation in Clark County, several government officials said that hiring relatives is extremely common throughout Clark County government. As a matter of fact, we’ve been told that “tons” of relatives are employed in county government departments.

This particular excuse is known as the “everybody does it, so it must be OK” defense. Most of us learned by kindergarten that just saying “everybody does it” isn’t an acceptable reason for explaining an action. But to politicians, the “everybody does it” defense is supposed to be considered a valid reason and should completely shut down any further discussion of the issue.

What’s interesting about such excuses is that when governments admit such truths they are always used as a means to continue doing what’s always been done. These truths are never used to open serious discussion as to the wisdom of continuing the current mode of operation.

Unlike private family businesses, governments just don’t go away due to bad management practices. As a matter of fact, bad management is often a good way for governments to grow.

If, after hiring Aunt Lulu, politicians learn that she just can’t quite handle the job, well then they can just hire Cousin Willy, too. After all, they’re spending other people’s money.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson has “tons” of relatives, but she’s pretty sure there’s not a Lulu in the bunch.

Government-Cell Mitosis

2011-04-01T07:05:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Building a mystery

SELLERSBURG — When I first heard the town of Clarksville appointed two people for the building commissioner position, I was confused. Not about the fact that they squeezed two people into one job, but rather why anyone thought it was odd in the first place.

Why is this news? Isn’t this a normal course of action within government? Isn’t this what bureaucracy is all about? Haven’t we seen repeatedly that governments know how to reproduce and multiply faster than rabbits? Isn’t this just another case of government-cell mitosis?

We’ve all heard the common complaint that government offices end up with at least twice as many people hanging around “working” and being paid as are necessary to perform the tasks.

Of course when people make this complaint, they are only guessing. No one can really know if a government-funded, government-operated office is performing in an economically efficient manner because it’s a monopoly. Governments aren’t guided by natural signals that occur in a competitive market.

And yet, I do wonder how this happened. When it came time to choose someone for the position, did it simply prove to be too difficult for the council to decide between the two people who now have the same job?

Maybe those involved experienced such a bad case of indecisiveness that they had to resort to a coin toss and it somehow landed right on its edge. Nothing they could do would move it. Not shaking the table. Not stomping on the ground. Not even blowing lots of hot air on the coin managed to topple it over, so they just said to heck with it, let’s appoint both guys.

Or maybe someone suggested they resolve the issue by pitting the two guys against each other, making them skip around a circle playing a game of musical chairs and no one realized until after the music was turned off that someone had set out two chairs instead of one.

And I guess the music they played must have been one of Marvin Gaye’s albums which naturally influenced them to decide that in this situation, “it takes two, baby.”

You may be wondering why I’m speculating so much on this issue. Well, it’s because I have no choice. No one in charge really wants to talk about how the town ended up with two people in one position.

A reporter for this newspaper tried to get answers and information from the council person who is the liaison to the building commissioner’s office. She should be the person most knowledgeable about the situation. However, she told him to talk to the town council president.

When the reporter contacted the council president, he told the reporter to talk to the council liaison.

I’m not sure why neither of them would talk to the reporter. Perhaps they were attempting to demonstrate how well government functions when more than one person can be in charge.

One reason I can see for handing over this position to two people, assuming they expected at some point to reduce it to one person, is to entertain themselves as they watched the two fellows fight for the job — a sort of local version of “The Apprentice.”

But if this is the case, then residents should get to enjoy it, too. Everyone should be treated to the full show, just like Donald Trump offers, complete with bickering, bleeped screaming outbursts, phony suspense and bad hair.

But I don’t think it’s going to happen because that would require the council to actually explain their decisions and actions to the people they supposedly “serve.”

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson was given a lab coat to study government-cell mitosis but can’t figure out why the sleeves are so long and tie in the back.

Yes, I Advocate A Form Of Anarchism

2011-03-26T10:14:00.005-04:00

COLUMN NOTES: For those interested in more detail about this headline, I advocate for the type of anarchism generally known as "free-market anarchism." If you interested, I trust you have the ability to do a google search and begin your own journey into the ideas. Of course if you do want to discuss it with me, I'm happy to do so, just contact me.

HARBESON: It’s a voluntary reaction

I see that Floyd County Republican Party chairman Dave Matthews is upset with me again. Poor Dave, he struggles to understand my viewpoint. He’s not the only one.

Others have struggled to understand why they can agree wholeheartedly with me one week and perhaps the very next week find themselves thinking I must be a wacko (insert label here).

Dave did not like what I had to say in a recent column about State Rep. Steve Stemler, who is rumored to be a Democrat. Or is it Republican? I forget. Oh well, it doesn’t really matter.

Anyway, I’m not sure how often Mr. Matthews disagrees with me but I remember the last time he decided to go public about a disagreement. It was after a 2009 column questioning our country’s worship of Abraham Lincoln, after I learned more about his actions while president.

COLUMN NOTE: I wrote a response to him at that time and am linking to it here because I think this entire series of columns and resulting interactions provides a great demonstration of how many of us get stuck in certain thought processes and entrenched in certain positions without really considering whether it's consistent and makes sense.

And yet in between these two instances, I enjoyed a series of cordial e-mail exchanges with Mr. Matthews, beginning when he e-mailed to congratulate me on another column I wrote about a politician. That one was about Lee Hamilton. He enthusiastically commended me for taking an “honest look” at the guy and for being “brave enough to take on an icon.”

He seemed to understand why I was questioning the actions of Hamilton. He seemed to understand when I pointed out that Hamilton played a part in instituting programs that increased federal government involvement into more areas of our lives. (All that money spent to fix problems and what’s in the headlines today? The same issues: health care and education.)

But what Dave seems to miss is that the underlying theme of all three columns is the same: society’s automatic reverence for politicians who claim to be above the fray and constantly spread the myth of government as a virtuous institution.

I realized during our e-mail conversation that he is also confused because he thinks my ultimate goal is smaller government (whatever that means). It’s not.

My goal is a society completely absent of the aggressive institution we call government. My goal is a society of voluntary interactions. Yes, that means I advocate a form of anarchism.

I didn’t always think this way of course. It’s a result of taking a serious look at what I claimed to value. I accept the nonaggression principle and once I decided to apply it consistently, I realized that if it’s not proper for me, as an individual, to initiate force on other individuals then it’s not proper to do it using an institution called government.

So, I must reject government because I reject the initiation of force on peaceful people. I have concluded that voluntary interaction is the only social order matching my values. This means I can’t hold reverence for government, an institution whose very foundation rests on aggression.

I hope Dave understands that this goal cannot be accomplished through politics. Politics is counter to the goal. I know he’s put a lot of time and energy into government as the answer, so I understand he may not be willing or able to accept what I accept.

But still, I have good news for Dave. Even if he doesn’t accept the principle and reach the conclusions I have, I’m not going to try and force him to do so.

Dave has chosen who he will voluntarily associate with by deciding not to read any more of my columns. I fully support him in his decision because freedom of association is one of the very tenets of voluntaryism.

For everyone else, you can follow Dave’s lead and stop reading, or you can continue to read, ponder and critically examine the points I make.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is starting to enjoy being referred to as that wacko “insert label here.”

Should Sellersburg Indiana Bite the Bullet?

2011-03-19T12:29:00.004-04:00

HARBESON: Biting the bullet is tough to swallow

SELLERSBURG — Last month, I wrote a column regarding Sellersburg’s possible purchase of the privately owned Nolan Fieldhouse, so when I heard there was going to be a town meeting at the fieldhouse to discuss the issue, I decided to attend.

The place was bubbling with activity — kids playing, adults chatting. I noticed many people in attendance wearing identical T-shirts. I knew there was something important written on those shirts because women don’t wear neon lime green without a very good reason.

The print was hard for me to see but after staring at several women’s chests as they walked by, hoping I didn’t look too strange, I finally got a good look. It said, “Bite the bullet; buy the Fieldhouse.”

I’m not sure who was supposed to be the intended recipient of that message. In general usage, the phrase “bite the bullet” means to endure a painful or otherwise unpleasant situation that is seen as unavoidable.

However, that doesn’t fit this situation because increasing government spending by purchasing this private property is certainly avoidable — all the town has to do is, well, nothing. (The town did not vote to purchase the building at this meeting, but they did vote to continue pursuing the idea.)

Several “green shirts” spoke during the meeting. Many were parents and grandparents of children who directly benefit from the facility. They were sincere, articulate and passionate about the benefits their families received. These families attended this meeting because they love the fieldhouse and want to keep using it.

Of course, there were also many families who did not attend this meeting. Families who were busy with activities their children enjoy and benefit from, using facilities and equipment they worked hard to purchase with their own money and through private fundraising efforts. In short, families who were elsewhere simply because their interests do not mesh with a fieldhouse.

But never mind them; this is about families who want Sellersburg’s taxpayers to buy this facility. Can you guess the main talking point in favor of this increased government spending? It was, of course, “the children.”

Although many people spoke in favor, two ladies in particular did an exceptionally fine job of using the children, as they scolded and attempted to instill guilt in any town resident who attended hoping to halt government growth.

This really wasn’t quite fair. After all, these two ladies have more experience than most in telling people it’s a good idea to turn privately funded alternatives over to government because they were instrumental in morphing what was previously a private school into the now government-funded Rock Creek charter school.

As they continued to promote government ownership of the fieldhouse, one of them lectured the crowd on developmental assets, the name for the set of values used to develop curriculum in their government school. I must be a slow learner because I’m still not clear which asset supports government over private voluntary means to achieve goals.

Even so, I do agree wholeheartedly about doing things “for the children.” As a matter of fact, in this situation I can think of at least three.

First, we can explain to children why dependence and reliance on government causes problems — economically, morally and socially. Second, we can help our children understand that one family’s interests are not more important than another’s.

And perhaps most important of all, we can explain to children that while it’s one thing to promote the idea that some may want to voluntarily chomp on a bullet in the hopes of reaching a goal, it’s quite another to use government and force other people to bite one.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson wonders if there is ever a good reason to wear neon lime green.

The Most Vital Job for Politicians: Government Apologist

2011-03-13T13:52:00.004-04:00

HARBESON: My reaction to Stemler’s action

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I’ve been watching the accolades pile up for State Rep. Steve Stemler in support of his decision not to walk out with his fellow Democrats.

Locally, Stemler has always had a fair amount of people from both major parties stroking his belly and scratching his ears. But in reality, he’s just another political animal making calculated maneuvers.

Why would Stemler walk out when he’s been working his tail off to gain the favor of Republicans? He learned so well how to roll over to gain their attention that he’s managed to get them to throw him quite the bone: A committee chairmanship.

Apparently, handing out a committee chairmanship to a politician in the opposing party has never been done in the history of the state. So tell me, if you received such a coveted treat, are you going to just ignore that chewy bone and go romp in the junkyard with the other dogs?

Stemler, of Jeffersonville, knows exactly what he’s doing, just like the other Democrat who gained a chairmanship, Rep. Chet Dobis.

Rep. Dobis came up with a slightly different calculation, though, because he did walk out. But according to the Northwest Indiana Times, he did not leave the state to join his party. He just went home to frolic in the fields for a while.

Both men were already not in particularly good standing with the party they used to get elected. Dobis hasn’t attended a party caucus in a year, and according to Jim Shella’s political blog, Stemler’s discussions about the committee appointment were kept from House Minority Leader Pat Bauer.

Stemler is doing a masterful job to spin this and, as usual, he speaks in generalities about our great government system. I’ve often noticed how he loves to use words like duty, honor and respect — words that have little meaning in an institution based on force.

Stemler can talk until he’s blue (or red) in the face but what matters are actions. Stemler has given constituents plenty to puzzle over, particularly voters who mistakenly assumed he stood for what are supposed to be considered Democratic Party principles.

For example, he appears to hold a view that it’s important to keep religion out of government actions and says the voucher proposal would likely be challenged because it could lead to government funding of religious institutions.

And yet, he is a co-author of the bill, recently passed in the House, pushing for a marriage amendment. Gay marriage would not even be an issue were it not for the existence of religious institutions.

Is there any way to reconcile this apparent inconsistency?

Sure. Stemler is just a politician like any other politician, no better and no worse. He’s scrambling to put himself in the place he views as most advantageous to getting what he wants.

In some ways, I can’t blame him. He’s just as much a victim as the rest of us who were born into a society that holds government force in such high esteem. None of us had anything to do with its creation but we all have to figure out how to deal with it, Stemler included.

However, I refuse to sit quietly and listen to him talk about our current government as if it’s the best thing going, as if it’s an honorable institution that should be revered no matter how much evidence we have to the contrary. Government is inconsistent, illogical and often quite harmful to anyone wanting to pursue voluntary interactions.

So don’t expect me to accept it when I see any attempts to nuzzle up using fake platitudes meant to legitimize and maintain government control. I am not fooled into thinking we could ever trust what is arguably the most dangerous breed of politician, the government apologist.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson originally prepared a different column for this week on the topic of cats. But unfortunately the dog ate it.

While Indiana Democrats Staged a Walkout...

2011-03-05T20:42:00.002-05:00

HARBESON: Not everyone’s happy at this hour

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — My husband and I staged a walkout last week. We left the state and traveled to a sunny warm beach.

While there, we had a very, very strange experience. We were out riding our bikes one evening searching for a place to enjoy a drink when we saw a colorful neon cocktail glass and a flashing arrow pointing to a place hopping with activity.

We decided to check it out. This was a huge joint. We entered an area called the rotunda, which was full of people sitting on beach towels, singing and holding up signs. It really looked like a fun place.

But I was soon confused when a muscular tanned guy sitting on the bar told me I couldn’t have a drink because it was happy hour. When I mentioned I didn’t see what was so happy about that, he laughed and said, “Didn’t you see the sign out front? This is “Legislative Theater” night. This is the night when the drinkers choose representatives who then assemble during happy hour and decide on one drink that will be available.”

“Only one? I hope it’s pina coladas.”

He said, “Oh my, no! Those are banned in here. It leads to coconut madness. At least that’s what the tequila lobbyists say.”

Our discussion was interrupted by yelling and booing coming from the balcony. The tanned fellow explained that they were from the mojito party and they were worried. They lost quite a few seats during the election to the other major group, the margarita party.

Apparently, during most happy hour assemblies, there are enough representatives from both parties to ensure a compromise so that the basic mix will be amended in a way that pleases the palates of most drinkers. But this time, the margarita party had the numbers to get pretty much what they wanted without listening to the mojito party. And what they wanted was the right to salt.

Our conversation was interrupted again when the mojito representatives picked up their beach towels and walked out of the bar. Tanned man said, “Wow they’re actually going across the boardwalk this time!”

I watched through the window as the group arranged their towels and began wiggling their rears into the sand. They looked like they were settling in for quite some time.

“This is going to annoy the margarita people because now they don’t have enough representatives here to meet the quorum rules,” said my tanned friend.

A hairy guy with mint leaves sticking out of his Speedo jumped up and yelled, “Yeah, quorum rules, man!”

The tanned fellow rolled his eyes.

I said, “Well he’s got a point. If the drink choice will be forced on everyone by a vote, then a quorum sounds like a good idea because it’ll help legitimize the end result.”

Speedo man yelled again, “Yeah, quorum rules!”

I then asked what the quorum requirement was for the initial representative vote. They both laughed. “What are you talking about? There’s no quorum for the general election!”

“Really? But then how can these people claim they are the legitimate representatives of all the drinkers?”

“Lady, how many pina coladas did you have before you came here? Look, if we did that, we could end up without any representation and that would be a disaster,” said tanned man.

Speedo dude added, “No one would get anything to drink!”

Then they said in unison, “People would die of thirst!”

At this point it was just getting too weird, so we got out of there. It’s so nice to be back home in Indiana — where everything makes so much more sense.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson wonders if there is such thing as coconut madness.

TSA Refuses To Allow Husband To Videotape Patdown

2011-02-28T16:34:00.006-05:00

When I first heard about the new scanners in airports, I did some research and wrote a column on the topic. By the time all of this happened though, my husband and I had already purchased tickets for a vacation so I knew it was possible that I would have to deal with this myself.

I knew the airport we would take off from Standiford Field, Louisville International Airport which does not have the scanners but our destination, Miami International Airport, does so I realized this could affect me if I was randomly selected.

Well guess who was randomly selected?

I said I was not going in the machine and they said that’s fine, you don’t have to, you can opt out. They directed me through the metal detector and out of the way to wait. The lady at the metal detector yelled out to a group behind her, “We need a female for a pat down!”

I stood there for a minute and nothing happened and she yelled again.

“We have a female pat down!”

I started pacing and she said stay where you are and yelled again for a female pat down. I heard the snap of the rubber gloves and knew someone was finally ready for me.

She had me collect my bag and put it on a table near the pat down area and proceeded to tell me what she was going to do, where she was going to touch me and if it I was okay with the procedure.

I said, “Well, no, it’s not okay for you touch me.”

She looked surprised and nervous and then called a man over. She explained to him that I did not give permission for her to touch me and so she wanted him to be there with her when she did it.

He looked at me and said, “You opted out of the machine so we need to give you a pat-down. If you don’t give us permission, we can escort you out of the airport if you prefer. So do you give permission?”

I said, “No. I might end up accepting a pat down but I want to be very clear that I object to this treatment.”

He said, “You have to have the pat-down if you want to go any further.”

By this time, my husband was behind us waiting for me. I wanted him to video tape the pat down but unfortunately I did not plan ahead and had my camera in my bag.

I said, “Okay I will allow it if my husband can video tape it for my protection. The camera’s in my bag so I need to get it out and give it to him.”

The guy immediately said “NO, you can’t do that.”

He looked at John and said “Back away sir!” like he was some sort of threat just standing there waiting for me.

I asked if it was written somewhere that I can’t videotape this and he said yes, it’s on our site. I had no idea whether it was or not but I continued, “I just don’t understand why you won’t let my husband videotape this for my protection.”

He was getting annoyed now and said “You can’t do it. We don’t know what you will do with the tape. Do you want the terrorists to see how we do a pat-down? Do you want to help the terrorists?”

I started to object again and make some obvious points about how silly that was when he said, “I’m not discussing this with you any more. You can get a pat down or I will call the police to escort you out of this airport. It’s your choice.”

We stared at each other for a minute before I told the lady to do her thing. They asked me if I wanted to do it in private and I said, “No way. I want everyone here to see what you guys are doing to people.”

As the lady was feeling around my breasts, I asked her if she liked her job. She said “Someone’s got to do it.”

(I have since looked on the website and am still not sure if I could have pushed to get the camera to my husband. Anyone know for sure?)

Better than Big Butter Jesus?

2011-02-25T17:08:00.004-05:00

COLUMN NOTES: "Big Butter Jesus" is a reference to a song by Heywood Banks about the statue, known as the King of Kings Statue, pictured here to the left. It has since burned to the ground after being struck by lightning. You can hear Heywood's song at the end of this post.

HARBESON: Want to control Theatair X? Buy it

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Last week, I wrote about Reclaim Our Culture Kentuckiana’s — or ROCK — continuing spat with Clarksville politicians in regards to Theatair X.

As I wrote, I knew I was reaching my word limit, but my mind kept saying, “Don’t stop; don’t stop.” So I didn’t. I have to say it feels good to write my first column series.

In part one, I said I didn’t think it was wise for ROCK to put faith in a secular man-made organization that uses the threat of violence and I now hope to help ROCK by suggesting other courses of action.

But first let’s get some clarity on ROCK’s accusation of possible corruption in Clarksville government. ROCK’s president implied that Theatair X might be paying off the town of Clarksville. Well, of course they are. We just give a special name to this sort of extortion: property taxes.

Now that we’ve shined the light of truth on that, let’s take a peep into two possible alternatives for ROCK proponents to use instead of trying so hard to get in bed with government.

The first suggestion: follow the Golden Rule. I realize this can be an abstract theoretical phrase so let’s find a real life example, a model of the behavior the rule encourages. I suggest we use Theatair X.

Theatair X clearly lives by the Golden Rule. This business just quietly goes about meeting a market demand without initiating force on anyone. Theatair X never asks government to control what other people do on their private property.

Theatair X respects everyone’s right to self-ownership and does not force anyone to enter their establishment. Theatair X doesn’t put photos up of people who dislike what they do. They just leave them alone to pursue their lives as they see fit.

Theatair X shows us it is possible to peacefully co-exist with those who have different values. They understand they are doing no harm to anyone’s children. Heck, most of us know from experience that children are way more likely to see real live sex at home. Lock your bedroom doors, parents.

Now, I understand that just leaving this business alone still might be difficult. For some, the desire for control can just be so, well, tempting. So let me offer another idea that perfectly fits those with this strong need for control.

Buy the place. Ownership is really the only way to control what happens on a piece of property. Make them an offer. Everyone has a price.

Sure, it might be expensive but I think if anyone has the chance of doing it, it’s ROCK because they have the backing of churches. See, churches don’t have to hand over the government extortion fee — property tax — that businesses do, so the potential pool of money is even greater.

If ROCK persuades all the local religious organizations not to buy property or build until they have enough money to purchase Theatair X’s property, they could finally have control of that area.

This could be better than the King of Kings, Big Butter Jesus!

Yeah, I know it will be more difficult due to ROCK’s work assisting governments in Louisville and Southern Indiana. They have succeeded in effectively decreasing Theatair X’s competition, making their business worth even more. Oh, if only they hadn’t participated in government force.

I hope ROCK, along with everyone else who is interested, will focus all their energy on using peaceful voluntary means to get what they want. Because that kind of action is what really gets me hot.

And speaking of hot!:

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson isn’t sure what could top Big Butter Jesus, but she and Heywood Banks are sure excited to find out.

No Longer A Virgin

2011-02-18T08:01:00.004-05:00

HARBESON: Get ready for a ROCKin’ good time

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I think I might be developing an obsession with other people’s sex lives. I really never cared before, but since ROCK came to Clarksville, I can’t stop thinking about what other people might be doing.

And now, also because of Reclaim Our Culture Kentuckiana’s influence, for the first time, I purposely went to a website advertised as having mature content. Really. I was a mature content website virgin until ROCK enticed me with titillating advertisements.

I decided to go to the website I saw on their billboard and it took me to a warning page which, of course, only increased my curiosity. I had to enter my birth date to enter the site. I lied of course and said I was 35. They let me in.

That was so much fun, I exited and lied again and said I was 23. They let me in. Realizing I could pretty much do what I wanted, I lied again and claimed to be 19. All of this entering and exiting the website increased my anticipation.

The first thing I noticed was the site’s border, which looked like splatters of black paint. It reminded me of a Jackson Pollock painting. This made me picture Ed Harris, who played Pollock in a movie. I always thought Harris was one sexy dude.

As I started to fan my flushing face, an attractive lady sauntered out from the right side of my computer screen! It was awesome and with that technology I could only imagine what might happen next.

She introduced herself as MaryAnn Gramig, President of ROCK. I listened for a while. She seemed to be really worried about my protection. I tried to tell her I was prepared but she just kept talking, trying to convince me I was in danger. She was really selling fear, which disappointed me because I was looking for sex.

However, I perked up when she started to make her main point. She was stern, which I have to say was kind of sexy. She also made a fist and put her thumb over the top, continuing her lecture. I wasn’t sure why but this made me think about sex, too. Then I remembered it was a favorite gesture of President Clinton’s.

I was now very anxious to get to the photos I heard were on this site. So I muted the lady and scrolled down the page.

What I saw shocked me — and I’ve been married for 29 years. It was truly eye-opening. The photos were not even close to what I expected. Don’t read any further unless you are older than 18.

What I saw were some really bad photos of the current Clarksville town council. I mean it; these photos are not flattering. I don’t know where ROCK found them but my guess is that they had access to their driver’s licenses.

By now, I had lost all interest in having any fun on this site. As I read the comments next to each politician’s photos, I realized all ROCK wanted to do was tell me they are having difficulty working with government officials to get what they want.

I find it hard to care though. I’ve peacefully co-existed my entire life with Theatair X and ROCK knows others agree. This explains why they tied this latest project with the new enforcement of adult businesses in Louisville. ROCK wants us to fear that those businesses will move here.

But if true, this proves that ordinances don’t change anything at a root level. Such government actions only invade property rights. This is not only highly ineffective because we can see that these ordinances just move people around a bit; it also has the potential to backfire and be used against you one day.

ROCK, along with the vast majority of people, still clings to a superstitious faith in a secular man-made organization that uses the threat of violence to control other people.

But what else can they do? Well, more on that next week. Enjoy the anticipation.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson hopes that if a photo of her ever surfaces on a mature content website, it at least shows her good side.

Basketball Courts as a Government Service

2011-02-12T13:13:00.004-05:00

HARBESON: A big ‘whoops’ to government-funded hoops

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — A couple of years ago, the town of Sellersburg decided to lease Nolan Fieldhouse, a site used for basketball and other recreational activities. The fieldhouse was originally built to operate as a private business, but closed when the owner moved from the area.

Sellersburg is losing money on this venture. Lots of money. Last year, the losses were more than $10,000 per month. So what is the proposal now that the lease commitment is about to end and they could just get out?

They want to spend more money and buy it, of course.

On the one hand, officials say that purchasing the property would save money on monthly costs. But then when the details are reported and everyone can see the savings won’t come close to covering the losses, suddenly it’s not about saving money at all. It’s about providing a government “service.”

How can this not be about the money? Well, it has to do with how governments play the game. Let me see if I can explain it in basketball terms. This is how a game scenario would play out if government participated: It’s the last few seconds and the government team is behind. A councilperson pulls up for a jumper and shoots. It’s an air ball, of course, and the buzzer sounds.

Now, a normal game would be over but in this game the government team — and it’s always only the government team that gets to use this special rule — simply directs the scorekeeper to take points earned by the opposing team and give them to the government team.

Understand it better now? Numbers are not as important when you can just take what’s earned by others.

Of course, Sellersburg isn’t the only government that’s involved in playtime. They all do it. It’s costly — the Clarksville Redevelopment Commission just committed funds to the Clarksville Parks and Recreation Department for equipment and property maintenance in the amount of $300,000 — this is per year, for five years.

It’s also divisive; we’ve seen the battles Jeffersonville is experiencing with the new RiverStage, wooded hiking paths and softball fields.

It’s difficult to stop this growth once it gets rolling, but Sellersburg has the chance. If the taxpayers stand strong, maybe they can block this shot and convince the council not to turn more private property into government property.

Maybe Sellersburg can avoid the costs, divisiveness and problems that follow increases in government control.

Don’t misunderstand. Sports facilities are great; I’ve spent a lot of time and money in private sports facilities. But I still do not support using government to force other people who do not use the fieldhouse to pay for it. People can fund the recreational activities of their choice.

If those who enjoy using the fieldhouse really want it to remain, they need to get in the game and find a way to make it happen using private and voluntary means rather than having their recreational choices partially funded by Sellersburg taxpayers, particularly the ones who have no interest in the activities offered there.

Perhaps the person running the Fieldhouse’s Facebook page could focus on networking to search for ways to run it privately rather than encouraging fans to attend government meetings to push for continued government involvement.

I don’t know if the fieldhouse can operate privately and be successful. But if the owner can’t make it work, perhaps someone else wants the property for another business venture. There were other businesses interested at the time Sellersburg decided to lease two years ago.

I don’t know if those businesses or any others would be interested now. All I know is that this should be the property owner’s concern, and not taxpayers who never signed on to take the risk.

Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson has learned how to save lots of money on recreation — she just shoots free throws.

Ron Grooms and Ed Clere Teach Me About Football

2011-02-05T21:52:00.004-05:00

COLUMN NOTES: Boy, several people kicked my butt in the comments on the newspaper's website on this one. I used to respond to comments, but then I realized that if anyone really cared to discuss one of my columns, they'd send me an email.

HARBESON: I call illegal procedure on legislators’ moves

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — This year, I’m much more prepared to watch the Super Bowl and I owe it all to state legislators Ron Grooms and Ed Clere. Thanks to these guys, I now understand what it means to do an “end run.”

In football, an “end run” means the offense attempts to go around, rather than through, the defensive line. If the team can’t use their running game to gain yardage up the middle, they will often try an end run.

Similarly, Grooms and Clere have been running plays for special interest groups who have been unable to break through local government to get what they want. Both men are using their state positions to introduce legislation which will create new local government entities with taxing authority. These politicians are doing end runs around the communities they represent.

Grooms’ end run involves the creation of a regional airport taxing authority. As Grooms runs with this ball, he repeatedly spits out the phrase economic development, as if it’s something new and wonderful.

In reality, it’s merely a modern-day euphemism for the common good, a phrase that sounds much too socialist to the various business interests he is speaking for, including One Southern Indiana, a specific special interest group that endorsed him.

Not only is Grooms doing an end run around Clark County residents, he also wants to force other counties into his game. This is of course under the pretense that they will benefit.

I’m sure all the residents of these other counties feel the love as Grooms grabs their facemasks, acting as if he knows what is best for them and how his law will make their lives better.

Grooms even has the nerve to use the word “partners” when talking about this plan and how other people should pay for it. As if the idea of voluntary cooperation has anything to do with creating new laws and imposing new taxing authorities on individuals.

Grooms wants us to think his law is different. His law will be good for everyone. This cannot be true because it is impossible. A government action is never good for everyone. Never. Someone always loses the game.

Next, we have Ed Clere and his special interest group who have decided that individuals in Floyd County are failing to prioritize parks properly, so Clere wants to do an end run around them. He wants to create a new government entity with special taxing authority, this one specifically for parks in Floyd County.

However, it’s not just Floyd County residents who should be concerned about this end run. If you live in Clark County, or elsewhere in Indiana, be aware that Clere’s law would create the first park taxing district in the state. How long do you think it will take for “those who know best” to use this end run to increase government in your area?

To politicians like Ed and Ron, though, these increases in government are all good because these actions are perfect for their playbook. Ed and Ron are willing to do an end run around you because they think it’s legitimate to use government force to centrally plan your life and set your priorities.

Observing the behavior of these two legislators adds to the evidence that governments will always tend to grow, no matter which party happens to be in possession of the ball.

We can now see that when those who benefit from government can’t force their ideas of how you should prioritize and spend your money in the local community, they will go to the state-level politicians who are more than willing to try an end run.

Don’t let them fake you out. Keep your eye on the ball.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson always keeps her eye on the ball, which has gotten her into trouble a time or two.

Indiana Smoking Ban Demonstrates How Government Works

2011-01-29T08:47:00.005-05:00

COLUMN NOTES: Quite a few comments on the newspaper's website on this one. Very entertaining. Also, I have a strange feeling I used this photo before when writing about some other government actions. I guess that shouldn't surprise me though. (Photo is from wikimedia)

HARBESON: Smoking ban is for stooges

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — In what shall forever remain an undisclosed location, except to say it was somewhere in Indiana, I had a wild experience. Upon entering my room, I heard groaning, squealing and slapping sounds coming from next door. So naturally I put my ear against the wall. What I heard shocked me.

I had apparently stumbled upon a secret legislative caucus. I heard three distinct voices and the following is my reproduction of their conversation, as best as I can recall.

Moe: OK guys, looks like we need to pass a statewide smoking ban this year.

Curly: I don’t know Moe. Why can’t nonsmokers just refuse to patronize places that allow smoking?

Moe: Why I oughta poke you in the eyes for saying that! If people took care of themselves, why would they need us?

Larry: Hey guys, look! Now that I’m a legislator, I have almost 5,000 Facebook friends. They love me!

Curly: But Moe, should we really be telling business owners how to run their business?

Moe: That’s not what this is about you numbskull. Pay attention. This is about the health of the employees that work in these places. You don’t want to force them to breathe smoke while at work do you?

Curly: Soitanly not! But why don’t they get another job?

Moe: What’s the matter with you? You want to force those people to leave their jobs?

Curly: Gee, no. But, hey, what if some people lose their jobs because of a government ban?

Moe: They’ll just have to get another job of course.

(At this point I heard a slapping sound.)

Larry: I just put up a Facebook status, “Curly is slapping himself, ha ha.” Whoa, you should see all the “likes” I’m getting!

Moe: Listen Curly, you can’t think in terms of economics. The health of the people is at stake here.

Curly: Well, it would help I guess.

Moe: Attaboy. Now you’re thinking.

Curly: OK then, let’s ban it.

Larry: You mean, let’s “mostly” ban it. We can’t ban smoking in the casinos.

Curly: We can’t?

Moe: Of course not, dimwit. We get tons of revenue from casinos and lots of smokers gamble. So we can’t create a law that could negatively affect the casino business.

Curly: But Moe, I thought it was about health, not economics. What about the employees in the casinos?

Moe: Imbecile! As legislators we have to weigh things differently when government revenue is concerned. You don’t want to be irresponsible do you Curly?

Curly: Soitanly not! But I thought we were taking responsibility for people by banning smoking everywhere.

Moe: Geez, you just don’t get it. Listen, government revenue from casinos helps provide important government services.

Curly: Like gambling boats?

Moe: Yes. Wait, no. I mean like paying us to write new laws to fix problems.

Curly: OK, I get it. We need to keep people smoking.

Moe: Yes. What? No, we need to keep people gambling. No, wait, what I mean is that we need to give people the freedom to gamble and smoke.

Curly: In government approved areas.

Moe: Now you’ve got it.

Larry: Hey guys, I just changed my status update to “about to head off to lunch.” Wow, lots of people commenting on where we should go. I didn’t even know there was a restaurant called Hell. I wonder if smoking is allowed there.

Moe: Pipe down you slug! We still have one more item on our agenda. There’s a problem with that law we passed last year that forces businesses to card 80-year-old wine drinkers.

Curly: Yeah, we better create another law to fix that or everyone’s going to think we’re just a bunch of stooges.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson swears she isn’t really in the habit of putting her ear against walls. She much prefers peepholes.

Mitch Daniels Fails to Acknowledge the Complete Truth about School Choice

2011-01-22T10:57:00.009-05:00

COLUMN NOTES: After you read this column, let's have some fun and post a comment on what you think would happen if we had compulsory tire rotation laws.

HARBESON: Daniels’ education talk is tiring

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — During his State of the State address, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels was bemoaning the lack of school choice and made an unusual comparison.

He pointed out to the audience that our government does not tell families where to get their tires rotated, but we do tell families which school their children must attend.

Although this is accurate as far as it goes, Daniels failed to continue traveling along this road to tell the audience the complete truth. Instead, he took a sharp turn to the right.

If Daniels had continued traveling down the road he created with his analogy, he would have also pointed out that the reason government does not mandate and assign tire rotation sites is because government does not forcibly take everyone’s money for tire rotation purposes.

This is why there are no huge government tire rotation buildings, filled with lots of useless atrium space. This is why there are no powerful and controlling tire rotation employee unions who dictate the color of their lunch lounge. This is why there are no unending conflicts, disagreements and battles about the best way to go about rotating everyone’s tires. This is why we don’t have to endure politicians telling us about their latest ideas in how to reform our failing tire rotation services or how the tire rotation service providers could do better if only the car owners were more involved.

This is what our tires would look like if we had compulsory tire rotation laws:

Daniels said his proposed reforms of our education system are a matter of justice, but this statement is as devoid of truth as bald tires are of tread.

If he believed in justice, he could never accept and support the idea of a government compelling educational funding and attendance. Justice automatically excludes aggression against peaceful people.

Daniels is only promoting his version of government control over education. He and his carload of supporters are no different than teachers unions and other government school proponents in this regard.

Both believe in educational compulsion. Both ultimately believe that education of the individual must be controlled by government. Their battle is merely over how best to centrally plan the details of this compulsion.

For example, Daniels’ favored reform for this year, vouchers, does not solve the root causes of our problems in education. The compulsion does not disappear; the coerced funding only moves from one school to another.

Ignoring the problem of compulsory funding will never create a healthy environment for learning.

As a matter of fact, not only do voucher programs continue to rely on the false notion that coercion is necessary for education, they even continue to spread many other myths out there concerning education and learning.

Vouchers support the myth that there must be specific physical locations called “schools” for education to occur. Vouchers support the myth that there is such a thing as an ideal communal curriculum that takes precedence over individualized learning and that this curriculum can reliably be tested.

Vouchers support the myth that it takes a lot of money to learn how to read, write and manipulate numbers, when in reality it takes a lot of money to maintain a system built on a foundation of compulsory funding.

If Daniels really wanted to speak the truth to his audience about government education, he would not be making speeches extolling the benefits of his particular government reforms. He would be pointing out that compulsory funding and compulsory attendance laws are the root causes of our problems in education.

Instead, Daniels — like everyone else who benefits when people believe that government compulsion is necessary for education — just continues to steer around the truth.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson believes if government interfered in the tire rotation business, everyone would end up driving in reverse every 6,000 miles.

Photo Courtesy Wikimedia.

Newspaper Columnist Gets Tasty Letters

2011-01-15T16:02:00.006-05:00

HARBESON: Your letters are like a box of chocolates

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I often feel like Forrest Gump when I open column e-mail responses because I never know what I’m going to get. But this week, I truly did feel like Forrest because I actually received a box of chocolates!

They came from a reader who appreciated the column titled “This is water torture,” which was about Charlestown’s water situation and the treatment some concerned citizens received from government officials.

The chocolates look delicious but I can’t figure out how to download them for eating. I’m going to have to call IT support, which means I’ll never meet my deadline. So let’s hear what some other readers have sent my way.

After writing the column titled, “Why is there Wi-Fi welfare?” about Jeffersonville’s government-funded wi-fi zone, I received a very interesting response. However, this person wishes to remain confidential, so I can’t tell you what he said. No, really I can’t.

OK, I’ll tell you one piece of information. This person signed off as Deep Throat, so you know he or she gave me some juicy information. But sorry, I can’t tell you what it was. I promised. And since I’m not a politician I keep my promises.

The column “Sex Sells, Roger Says,” was enough to actually get Roger to phone me. Sorry, I can’t tell you about that either. The paper won’t print the conversation.

The column, “Not all jobs are created equal,” responding to a remark made by economist Morton Marcus produced several responses.

John was fairly succinct, “EXCELLENT article on Job Creation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

If only jobs were as easy to create as exclamation points.

And Thomas had this to say, “Way to smack ’ol Marcus around!”

But Terry wasn’t so crazy about it, “Dear Debbie, I generally stay out of the opinion fray mediated by The Evening News. However, I do read what others are thinking — or read that they obviously are not thinking. Most often I appreciate your humor and quandary over the state of politics at all levels.

“But your article for Thursday, Oct. 28, struck a nerve with me. Now, I don’t know Morton Marcus, but the IU Kelley School of Business is one of the nation’s best. A Ph.D. economist who has been a faculty member there most likely knows his stuff. So, you had better have some real ammunition at hand before calling out someone like that. I haven’t gone back to read his latest article, but you provided the quote you assaulted.

“Here are some arguments that indicate you are wrong:”

I of course quit reading at that point. No, really we had a nice e-mail exchange and I think both of us learned a lot. For example, he learned he was wrong.

Tom was concerned about the rash I contracted after attending the local political rally and offered up his home remedy: “I sure hope your rash clears up soon. I’ve heard that a good cure for political rash is to apply liberal applications of disbelief and skepticism to the affected areas multiple times daily. [grin]”

I’ve been doing that but it’s not working. I think it’s the liberal part that’s the problem.

Another regular reader is also concerned about my welfare. Mike writes, “Hey!! I haven’t e-mailed you in a while, but rest assured I read your column every week. I had to write you today to warn you about messing with Mayor Hall and Mayor Galligan. If you persist in your actions, they are gonna come by your house and pour a bucket of Charlestown water on your car. And you know it contains manganese.”

The fact that readers are so concerned about me may be better than the box of chocolates. But I won’t really know until I can download the stuff.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson wasted her time with IT. They recommended burning to a CD and everyone knows that melts chocolates.

Do We Have a System Focused on Justice?

2011-01-09T13:58:00.004-05:00

HARBESON: Where’s the justice?

Of all government institutions, courts and prisons are probably the ones most vehemently defended as necessary and proper government functions. This is because most people are led to believe that courts and prisons exist to administer justice.

But is this what happens in reality? Do we truly have a justice system, or is it merely another institution with the same problems as any other government monopoly?

A common problem of government monopolies is unchecked growth, and this has clearly happened in Indiana’s prison system. According to a study by the Council of State Governments Justice Center, and the Pew Center on the States, Indiana’s prison population rose by 41 percent over the past 10 years.

One of the reasons stated for this huge growth is that Indiana’s sentencing laws for drugs and theft “do not result in sentences that are proportionate to the severity of the crime.” As a matter of fact, “the average sentence for someone selling drugs in Indiana is nearly 50 percent longer than the average sentence for sexual assault.”

So Indiana’s laws are more focused on punishing those adults who engage in mutual voluntary transactions than the most heinous act that can be done to another person outside of murder.

Is this a system focused on justice?

Another sentencing problem noted in the report concerned property crime. According to the report, “Indiana state statute defines theft, regardless of the value of the stolen material, as a felony offense. In contrast, most states define theft below a certain amount as a misdemeanor.”

As a result, we end up paying to house people in prison for stealing relatively small amounts of money. This is particularly nonsensical considering a person sitting around in prison is doing nothing to provide restitution to the actual victim.

Is this justice?

It’s easy to see how the political process helped create these situations. Everyone has heard politicians huffing and puffing about getting “tough on crime.” Maybe some of you thought this would translate into forms of true justice, but all we have to show for it is an increased prison population with a lowered crime rate not even on par with neighboring states, which had much less increase in prison population.

Is this justice?

These harsh sentencing laws have resulted in more people spending more time in prison. More people in prison means more money is taken from innocent citizens to pay for their incarceration.

Is this justice?

What’s even more horrendous is that now, as a result of those past reforms, from politicians who ignored the ideas of justice, we now have to endure more political blather telling us that more reform is needed to fix the failures of their past reforms.

Is this justice?

If the politicians involved were focused on justice, they would never have created those sentencing laws. People focused on justice understand that drug laws themselves violate basic principles of individual freedom and justice because there is no victim. People focused on justice understand that theft does have a victim, but one who deserves restitution from the criminal, not the additional abuse from government of being forced to pay for the criminal’s housing.

Reforming disproportionate sentencing laws may be helpful now that politicians have already interfered so badly by closing off options. However, I’m afraid all that’s going to happen is that we’ll be forced to endure more of the same by a new breed of reformers, who still seem to be more focused on numbers and the collective rather than the individual.

But this is just proof that government monopolies are never a good idea, especially if you value justice.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson thinks she’s justified in valuing justice, just in case you care.

School Vouchers: Education Stamps

2011-01-02T13:37:00.004-05:00

HARBESON: We don’t need no education ... stamps

If you plan on following the upcoming legislative session in Indiana, I advise you to put on protective gear because it looks like school vouchers are going to be on the Republican agenda.

The idea of vouchers is not new, but has always been very controversial. To more easily understand why, we need to realize that the idea behind vouchers is no different than the idea behind food stamps.

Food stamps help the needy purchase food for their family, and vouchers, or education stamps, help the needy purchase education for their family.

Both are intended to help the needy improve their current situation, so any controversies surrounding each should be identical, but they’re not. This is because government controls education far, far more than it does food.

(This is strange for a society that says it values freedom. After all, the freedom to feed our minds is at least as important as the freedom to feed our bodies, isn’t it?)

Anyway, as it stands now, we do not have government food stores. We do, however, have government education stores; we’ve simply been trained by those in government to refer to them as “public schools.” These government education stores exist solely due to the initiation of force on others.

This is why it’s misleading when politicians like Mitch Daniels say that vouchers will introduce competition into education. To have anything close to true competition in education, all schools would operate under identical market-driven constraints. They would all use voluntary means to gain customers — just like all of our food stores do.

If all we had were privately run schools, then introducing vouchers, or education stamps, would have no more effect on the relative competitiveness of schools than food stamps do on food stores.

What’s even worse, in our current education system, it’s the people who usually express concern for the needy who end up getting in their way. Many of these people fight hard against education stamps for the needy because so many of them make their living off of the government schools.

Naturally, they don’t want to make it easier for their currently trapped customers to leave, so they want to severely constrain the use of education stamps.

We would see the same thing happening with food stamps if we had government food stores. But since we don’t, the needy can go to any store that is approved to accept food stamps.

Parents can buy grapefruit at one food store and then go to another store to purchase hamburger. They can even purchase seeds and grow their own food at home.

But no such freedom would exist with education, even if a school voucher program were passed by Mitch and his buddies because the lack of freedom in education has developed a system that, even in the private realm, is often an odd all-or-nothing venture.

For example, in our current system, a parent would never be able to take education stamps and purchase math services at one private school and go to another private school for reading.

And, of course, none of these families would be able to use vouchers to purchase items that would help them grow their own self-directed education for their individual family.

Therefore, the first step we need to take — if we truly do want to create and develop better educational opportunities for everyone — is to rid our society of these government education stores. We need a competitive private system for education just like we have a competitive private system for food.

When we’ve accomplished this separation of education and state, then we can focus on the problem of government food stamps and vouchers, which promote the myth that it’s moral to initiate force upon others to help the needy rather than using peaceful and voluntary means to do so.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson enjoys the freedom of feeding her mind, but she does try to avoid too much salty language.

We Need an Education Santa

2010-12-26T13:27:00.002-05:00

HARBESON: A wish list for Education Santa

CLARK COUNTY — Don’t you just love the spirit behind the idea of Santa? Santa cares about kids and enjoys asking them questions. Santa is very curious about what a child is interested in.

I wish this spirit could spread to the schools because we desperately need an Education Santa, someone who cares enough to ask kids what they want.

People say our education system is for the children but it’s not. We don’t let students have much say at all in determining what they will learn and how they will go about learning it.

The folks in control don’t bother to ask children questions that could give them information to help teach students what they’d like to learn. Instead, students must sit quietly at their desks while the adults continually fight with each other over what education means and how to make it happen.

It doesn’t take long for most children to learn this vital lesson: individual interests don’t matter. They are quickly smashed down as the system molds kids to fit inside identical boxes, where very specific skills are crammed into a very tight schedule. Then when these students are finally set free and expected to figure out what they are interested in, most of them don’t have a clue.

It’s not that the schools don’t ask kids questions. Schools are hyper-focused on asking kids questions. It’s just that those questions have nothing to do with the individual child. The questions and answers are predesigned and predetermined by those who think a child’s interest is irrelevant.

Some teachers understand this very well and object to being held to standards that are based on how well they get students to succumb to this process. They understand that to excel as a teacher in the current system is to turn out a robotic product that is nearly devoid of any natural curiosity and desire to learn. And it only gets worse as the child moves along the conveyor belt.

A skilled teacher would welcome merit pay in a situation where the child and teacher collaborate together on a topic the student wants to learn. But this is not the purpose of an education system based on the nasty combination of compulsory attendance and funding. Our system is really only looking for teachers willing to train students in the two essential elements necessary to keep the system going: conformity and obedience to authority.

However, for those who really want to, it is possible to play Education Santa and ask the children what they want. I must warn you though, whether you’re a teacher or a parent, if you do decide to play this part, you’ll soon discover that respecting children enough to ask them questions and take their answers seriously will put you at direct odds with the goals of the compulsory system.

The people in charge will likely fight you in any attempts you make to give more respect to the kids. Remember, the system isn’t built on the freedom and flexibility needed to really help a child learn what he’s interested in learning. So if you dare to play Education Santa, you’re probably going to have to climb up the chimney and out of the coercive system.

Rest assured, though, that plenty of other Education Santas are already out there flying around and they would be glad to share the varied resources piled high in their sleds. They’re all happy to assist because they know that helping a child learn by following his interests at his own pace is the best educational gift anyone can give. And it’s just as much fun for the Santas too.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson slipped on some figgy pudding yesterday while chasing 10 lords a leaping at the company Christmas party.

Be True to Your School and Do Some Drugs!

2010-12-19T21:52:00.004-05:00

HARBESON: Drug seizure funding is a drag

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I don’t know how you feel about illegal drug use, but if you are currently against it and you also care about funding government schools, you may want to reconsider your position.

Here’s why: Indiana’s laws are set up so that the government schools can benefit from illegal drug trade through asset forfeiture laws. Of course, it’s kind of a bureaucratic process so a couple steps need to happen before the schools get any money from your illegal transactions.

First of all, your dealer would have to be caught so the government can seize his assets. Yes, that would put a crimp in your future support, but only temporarily. After all, we know from decades of fighting the drug war that someone else will quickly fill the void.

So that part’s really no big deal.

The hard part is the second consideration, making sure government officials actually follow the laws they set up for themselves. In Indiana, the law says that when a county seizes assets from a crime — and everyone agrees that most of these crimes are drug related — they are supposed to deduct the costs of law enforcement and then send the rest to the Common School Fund.

Now, some of you might think it’s kind of creepy to fund schools this way but it makes sense once you understand the drug war. Drug transactions are only crimes because government says so.

There is no victim needing restitution, so asset seizure only benefits the government that made the transactions illegal in the first place. Since this makes the drug war look like an unending profit-making scheme for the government, they have to direct some of the money to areas few will criticize.

But creating a law that tells government officials where to direct funds doesn’t mean they will actually follow it. Recently, a private law firm figured out that most counties in Indiana have not been depositing any money from asset seizures into the Common School Fund. This firm believes these counties are not following the law properly, so they filed suit.

The county prosecutors were completely offended. They said they certainly are acting properly and reminded everyone that the law says they can deduct law enforcement costs first and well, they can’t help it if it just so happens that in all the cases, the enforcement costs exceeds the value of the seized assets.

Supposedly, the law firm that filed the suit thought Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller would investigate this possible abuse of the law on behalf of the citizens. But Zoeller said he was going to defend the prosecutors instead.

Zoeller said there is a state law that says if a prosecutor is sued in connection with his job, Zoeller has to defend him. I know that sounds strangely cozy but, hey, it’s state law.

But even so, Zoeller figured out this was a sticky situation, so of course he’s passing the buck. He said the courts are not the proper place to figure out this problem. He said the state law is unclear and the prosecutors need more direction in determining how much to deposit into the school fund.

So this issue is apparently moving to the wise, all-knowing legislature. You know, the entity who already wrote the previous law that has professional lawyers all across the state confused. The legislature thinks they can come up with a formula, through the political process that will settle this once and for all.

And that will be just great because then those who participate in the illegal drug trade will be able to figure out exactly how many joints it takes to put another brick in the wall.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson bets that many readers of this column are now wondering how much you contributed to the common school fund over the years.

Who's in Charge of the Drainage?

2010-12-15T20:36:00.004-05:00

HARBESON: A draining issue

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Clark County Surveyor Bob Isgrigg appears to have come out on top in two skirmishes with the Clark County Drainage Board.

Isgrigg contended that the Drainage Board spent funds improperly and a State Board of Accounts report backed up this claim. Isgrigg also won a lawsuit against the Drainage Board, accusing them of not following proper procedure when they bypassed the Surveyor to fix two drainage issues.

I’m on Isgrigg’s side as far as the SBOA report is concerned, particularly on the issue of government money being spent where private owners may have been responsible. According to current Drainage Board attorney Greg Fifer, when this issue came to a head, all parties agreed mistakes were made but by that time checks were deposited and the work was done so for various reasons it was declared moot.

(I’m starting to wonder if this is the preferred method of getting things done for our local governments. Just charge ahead, do what you want, ignore any laws or regulations and then when the work is done, shrug your shoulders.)

So, Isgrigg seems to be right on target in relation to the SBOA report. But when it comes to this lawsuit and any possible implications, I’m not so sure.

According to state law, the surveyor is the “technical authority” of all regulated drains in the county. However, for state law to be applicable, the county needs to have “regulated drains.” This is where the important controversy exists.

Does the county have “regulated drains” as defined by state law or not?

Isgrigg says yes. Judge Vicki Carmichael’s judgment, at least as it pertains to the two drains in the lawsuit, agrees. However, it’s the position of the drainage board and its lawyer Greg Fifer that the county does not have “regulated drains.”

Here’s my position: I have no idea. It’s complicated. All I know is that whether or not we have “regulated drains,” we certainly do have what I would call “regulated drainage” because developers are required to submit drainage plans and get approval before they can build in this county. So drainage in general is obviously regulated, but whether or not that has anything to do with “regulated drains” as defined by state law no one seems to know.

Maybe forcing the developers to pay fees and get drainage plan approval does transfer responsibility to the government. If so, that certainly doesn’t sound right. Surely we don’t want to have instances where the developers aren’t responsible for their actions. Yet this appears to be what Isgrigg is celebrating.

Isgrigg sounds giddy when he says homeowners can now sue the county for violating state law. He seems to want the county to be financially responsible for subdivision drainage problems. But why should government be responsible?

Isgrigg says the way the county has been operating meant homeowners needed to get help from developers. But that makes perfect sense. Developers perform the drainage work so naturally they are the responsible party.

If people are having trouble with developers on drainage issues, how does that make the government responsible? Doesn’t that just mean the homeowners need to pursue action against the developers? If class-action lawsuits are a good idea now, against the county, why weren’t class action lawsuits filed against developers?

Who does he think is going to pay if there are judgments against the county? Governments have no wealth; they can only take wealth from the private sector.

Will the taxes the developers paid in drainage approval fees be enough to pay for any drainage responsibility that Isgrigg thinks this lawsuit covers? If not, will only those who directly benefit be the ones to pay? Or will any action drag in others who had no part in any of this and receive no direct benefit? If so, then this is not a win.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is wondering how to handle her own current drainage issue: Should she just sniff or go get a tissue?
Photo courtesy wikimedia

Homeschoolers Caught in the Crossfire

2010-12-09T12:56:00.005-05:00

I made my first video on xtranormal.com. Wow it was really fun. I recommend that site for anyone who wants to have some fun writing scripts and making videos.

This video is in response to a controversy that is brewing in Indiana due to the increased concentration on dropout rates in government schools. Richmond Community Schools has been embroiled in controversy on this issue for some time now. You can read more about that here.

Here's the video I made in response to the controversy:

Citizen Intimidation in Charlestown Indiana?

2010-12-05T18:22:00.005-05:00

HARBESON: This is water torture

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — If you are at all concerned about government intimidation of its own citizens, you’ll want to keep your eye on Charlestown city government.

Charlestown, by way of the Board of Public Works, recently threatened to sue Citizens for Better Government, a local organization that placed an advertisement in a local weekly paper, The Leader.

This ad listed several points about manganese in water systems. After a few minutes on Google, I found a lot of information about manganese and, like many things humans ingest these days, opinions differ on what is considered safe. Just the fact that the effects of manganese are still being studied is enough to merit this as a valid topic to bring to people.

But Charlestown government didn’t think so and they threatened to sue. How did this government arrive at that decision? What thought process did officials use to conclude that they should use taxpayer funds to threaten a group of citizens who decided to share information about an important issue?

According to Mayor Bob Hall and Board attorney Mike Gillenwater, they were concerned about water customers’ fears after seeing this ad. They were concerned people would panic when given information about manganese in the water supply.

I’m not sure what they thought was going to happen. Maybe they thought this ad would send Charlestown’s water customers out in the streets screaming, completely mortified by the sight of a glass of water. Or maybe they thought the movie “Psycho” was nothing compared to the fears people would have now when pulling the shower curtain.

We know they certainly didn’t consider that individuals might follow up on the details. We know they didn’t consider that customers might use the ad to learn more for themselves. We know they didn’t even consider that families in possession of those new government-school-issued laptops might actually use them for real research.

What does this say about Charlestown government’s opinion of the people they serve? How much confidence do they have in the residents’ ability to think for themselves if they assume citizens can be so easily led by one advertisement simply stating information about manganese in the water supply?

Don’t you wonder how they thought this through? Was this action based on the expert advice of attorney Mike Gillenwater? Or was he just following the orders of Hall and others on the Board of Public Works?

We do know that Hall thinks the group implied that Charlestown’s water was unsafe and they wanted to panic customers. And yet we don’t see the mayor upset about the advertisements out there for water filtration systems making implied health claims and listing manganese as a substance their filters can control. To be consistent and fair, shouldn’t he threaten to sue those businesses?

We also know that Gillenwater thinks the group ran the ad to embarrass the mayor before next year’s election. If the attorney advising the city on issues believes this, then how did that affect the discussions on this matter?

The government is reportedly dropping the legal action that initiated the threat of suit and what we’re hearing now is officials inviting these citizens to speak during government meetings.

Who knows what the individuals involved will do, but I know that I wouldn’t care to go to a government meeting and speak under the constraints and imposed rules of those in charge of running such meetings, the same people who were willing to sue.

I’d rather use any and all communication methods available to me in the private realm, and stay as far away as possible from government control, manipulation and most of all, intimidation.

But that’s just me.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson isn’t afraid of showers. However, she goes absolutely psycho if she sees herself in the mirror after stepping out of one.
Photo courtesy wikimedia

Economic Development is the new Common Good

2010-11-28T21:48:00.003-05:00

HARBESON: Bad can come from the common good

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Do you know what the Ohio River Bridges Project and Jeffersonville’s Vissing Park controversies have in common? They are helping citizens see, on the local level anyway, that common ownership through government force doesn’t always work out so well for the individual.

Common ownership by way of government is based on the idea of the common good, a term that could have merit in the voluntary realm but not when used to legitimize government action.

The phrase common good is not used nearly as much as it used to be by government proponents. They have discovered a better term to co-opt: economic development. This language change makes sense once you start noticing the cozy relationship between business and government that exists today.

While your Thanksgiving dinner is cooking, let’s chew on these two local examples and study the damage caused when a decent and morally neutral idea like economic development is taken over by those who think it’s proper to use government to get things done at the expense of individual rights.

The Ohio River Bridges project has been simmering for decades and the one item that has finally gotten many to lift up the pot lid is the idea of tolling all bridges to pay for it. Some are willing to accept this and others are not.

Why? Well, it’s all a matter of winners and losers.

However, this issue does not come down to the clichéd battles of rich vs. poor, or big business vs. independent small business. The tolling of all bridges puts the conflict into a slightly different grouping: those who could benefit from a huge long-term construction project vs. those who are more directly affected by the tolling itself.

Those who will directly benefit from the bridges project include the lower-paid laborer and administrative workers of any company, big or small, that has a part in the project. These people could be employed for a very long time if the entire project gets the go-ahead and tolls would be a minor issue next to the possibility of long term steady employment in jobs that are often susceptible to layoffs.

But others, like local retail businesses who want to draw Louisville customers, will no doubt be harmed by the same action. So will businesses that transport their product over the river. And of course all those who cross a bridge to get to work will lose if they have to pay tolls on existing bridges.

These conflicts and problems are a result of past actions built on the idea of common ownership and the common good. As a matter of fact, Spaghetti Junction mess itself is a testament to the ideas of the common good, government ownership and central planning.

Next, in Jeffersonville, we see that certain residents are angry because government officials decided to clear wooded park land to make way for ball fields. This is partly due to the planned removal of another park because of the canal project.

Of course, those who will use the ball fields like the idea but those who enjoyed the park in its more natural state do not. This is typical of problems that occur when parcels of land are supposedly held in common ownership for the common good because in the end only a select few actually make the decisions.

I’ve never heard of such conflicts and issues happening with the privately owned Perrin Park. As a matter of fact, all those who are concerned about the effects the bulldozing at Vissing Park had on bird habitat can thank the Perrin Family they didn’t just hand their land over to the government. Perhaps any birds needing new homes will find this wonderful private space and be protected from the invasive species known as overly controlling politicians.

I know this park problem has further solidified a desire for a change in mayors for some residents, so I want to issue a warning for the next election. Mike Moore is on record as saying one of the things he’d like to do in the future is to create a park for the newly annexed area. This would of course mean putting yet more land under Jeffersonville government control.

Just something to think about as you talk with this mayoral candidate about his plans.

It’s time to start thinking about what government is doing in the name of economic development and to understand that individual cases of direct harm have little weight. In the name of economic development, officials will add new taxes on existing roads. In the name of economic development, officials will grab the nearest bulldozer and start knocking stuff down. In the name of economic development, government will harm some businesses that owners spent a lifetime growing. In the name of economic development, government officials are even willing to kick people out of their homes.

The next time you listen to anyone who has an idea that requires the use of government force, pay attention to what they say when defending their plan against those who object. Do they talk about the common good and/or use the term economic development?

If so, then they’ve just told you all you need to know about their respect for the individual. Maybe this knowledge will make a difference and maybe it won’t, but at least you’ll understand the truth. And that’s a start.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is working on a spray that will halt the growth of the harmful invasive species known as overly controlling politicians.

Let's Free Airline Security from TSA Control

2010-11-20T14:45:00.029-05:00

COLUMN NOTES: There are several comments at the newspaper's link below where this was originally published if you want to go read those. I really like one person's comments about air travel options. Also, I'm always trying to really find the root causes of issues and this column at antiwar.com really seemed to hammer home how we are playing a part in creating this whole mess.

HARBESON: Put up a fight for flight

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I remember the first time I had to remove my shoes to get through airport security. While putting them back on, someone joked that eventually we’ll be taking off all our clothes to get through security.

I laughed. But I’m not laughing now.

If you haven’t heard already, body scanner machines, which use X-ray technology to see through your clothes, are rapidly being installed in airports around the country. (Louisville does not have scanners. Yet.)

The body scanners are the latest move in the Transportation Security Administration’s reactionary efforts to provide airline safety. Previous actions like the shoe removal and three-ounce liquid limits were met with some initial protest and derision, but in the end were grudgingly accepted.

However, these new scanners are causing a much greater negative response from varied groups. There are many concerns about these body scanners, from radiation exposure, to privacy and even effectiveness. Yet stimulus funds are pouring into the purchase of these machines sold by companies well-connected to lobbyist groups and government officials.

Currently, passengers can opt out of these “naked” body scanners and several groups are using this opt-out process to organize an educational event. “National Opt Out Day” will be Wednesday. (To learn more about this outreach, go to wewontfly.com.)

Other groups say only a full boycott will do because opting out has its own problems. If you opt out of the scanners, you will be subject to an “enhanced pat down” by TSA personnel. If you’re wondering what “enhanced pat down” means, let’s just say that a rubber-gloved TSA agent will grope the areas your momma always told you never to let a stranger touch.

Worst of all, none of this will really make you safe. The inside of the body remains unseen and you can easily guess what the next step will be for the determined terrorist.

So the question then becomes, what are you willing to subject yourself to next? Will you obediently drink the radioactive Kool-Aid if the government tells you it’s the only way you can be safe?

We already know some people will submit to further intrusions on their body. These people say their safety is worth any preventive measure. And they should be free to submit if they want. But this freedom isn’t extended to everyone which is why we have a problem.

Everyone weighs potential dangers and risks differently. There’s a wide range of what people are willing to accept or not accept as they evaluate the statistical probabilities of certain actions.

But individuals are not allowed to weigh risks and benefits of security measures when it comes to flying. The government has taken complete control. Everyone has to submit to their determination, no matter how misguided, political, ineffective and equally dangerous it might be.

Do we really need and benefit from a government monopoly on airline safety? Why not let airline businesses decide what they want to do for security and then let individual customers decide who to patronize?

No one can predict what creative ideas could come from such freedom and competition. The options could be exactly the same as they are now. But it’s more likely that airline security would be very different as airlines cater to a wide variety of customers and take actions to prove they are indeed safe.

I also can’t help but wonder if the result of such competition would mean that that the airline flights I chose would be full of people who understand they must ultimately be ready to take charge of their own safety. I hope so because those are the types of people I’d want around in the unlikely event a terrorist did make it on my plane.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson does not want to opt out of flying because she still hasn’t made it into the Mile High Club.

The Efficiency, Professionalism and Cooperation of Local Governments

2010-11-13T13:41:00.003-05:00

HARBESON: Don’t pool your resources

SELLERSBURG — I can’t say much about the rest of my body, but after diving into the details of the Charlestown pool controversy, my head sure is swimming.

In case you’ve been busy with other recreational activities not run by government, let me catch you up on the basics.

Greater Clark County Schools needed land to expand Charlestown High School. The city government swimming pool happened to be on land the school corporation wanted. So, these two government entities supposedly entered into an agreement for a land swap and the new government school was built.

This is an example of the efficiency, professionalism and cooperation of local governments, right? Wrong.

No written and signed contract exists for this land swap deal, so when the time came to actually complete this transaction, government officials didn’t agree on the details and the fighting began.

Government lawyers — probably the same ones who should have made sure signed contracts were in place to begin with — now had plenty of work to do. After two years of negotiations, appraisals, threatened lawsuits and other legal wrangling, the two government entities settled and the school corporation agreed to pay the city $122,000. No land swap was included.

Now at this point you might think the city would take this money and put it toward replacing the swimming pool that was destroyed. But that’s not what’s happening. Instead the money is going into a fund for a much bigger project.

Mayor Bob Hall wants to spend money on a “total youth and family activities complex” which he says will cost more than $2.5 million. Of course, the mayor has no clear idea where this money will come from.

I don’t know what it is about mayors in Clark County, but every time plans are made that involve water, they fall off the deep end with grand visions that require spending other people’s money at exponential rates.

A group of residents who want the current pool replaced don’t really care for Mayor Hall’s plan. They just want a new pool built. This group collected signatures and showed up to share their views at a recent council meeting.

At one point during the meeting, the pool debate actually started to veer off into the area of voluntary action when a councilman asked a speaker if he would donate land for the pool. The resident said no, but offered to match any voluntary dollar contribution this councilman would donate.

In response, the councilman said something about the resident’s money being “too dirty.”

I don’t know what he meant by that. I do know that any government employee would be very wise not to ever mention the term “dirty money.” Of course, I’m assuming he actually has a real understanding of how the money is collected that pays his salary.

It’s too bad this councilman chose to muddy the conversation right at the point when the discussion was starting to move in the direction of respect for all by way of voluntary donations — particularly since neither the government nor this group of citizens pushing for the pool are considering the people who don’t care to be involved with any form of government-provided water recreation.

When you really stop and think about it, what is government, which was originally set up to protect individual rights, doing in the pool business anyway? Or to put it another way, why aren’t they also in, say, the bowling alley business?

This isn’t really about a pool. This isn’t about swimming. This isn’t even about “the children,” or sprinklers or water guns. This is about who has control of the government gun.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson says her favorite swimming stroke is the unregulated freestyle.

There Are Reasons Why I'm Not A Journalist

2010-11-10T13:27:00.003-05:00

HARBESON: Taking attendance of the community rally

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — There’s really only one miscalculation Lindon Dodd made when preparing for last Saturday’s Community Rally event. He scheduled it so that I’d be able to write a column about it before he could.

Let me start by talking about attendance. I’ve been to at least five politically oriented events at the Clark County 4-H Fairgrounds and although this one was probably the largest, the turnout was still small.

I’ve had several years to think about why all of these events had low attendance and I think I’ve finally figured it out. Most people really only want to come to the fairgrounds so they can experience the excitement and thrill of risky behavior that can only happen at the county fair itself.

I’m sure you know the thrilling experiences I’m talking about. Activities like wearing a brand new pair of shoes just to see if you can get back home without any chicken, cow or hog excrement stuck to them. Or trying to see how many corn dogs and cotton candy swirls you can eat before puking your guts out.

How could any political rally or candidate forum ever compete with such fun?

On the other hand, I could also classify this event’s attendance as too large, at least for my purposes, because I ran out of copies of “The Law.” It’s encouraging to know there are others out there who are interested in educating themselves about political philosophy.

If you’re reading this to find out what the speakers had to say, I’m afraid I won’t be of much help. I’ve already pointed out that I have very short attention spans at these functions. As a matter of fact, at one point, when a speaker was getting way too long-winded, I started imagining how fun it would be to have one of those shepherd hooks — you know, the kind used in vaudeville times to pull bad performers off stage.

In the middle of this mind distraction, I was jerked back to reality when this same fellow apparently went too far with his comments when discussing a specific candidate, something the organizers requested speakers avoid.

I’m not surprised this happened since this speaker is a lawyer. Lawyers consistently rate second, behind only politicians, in the list of professions who often don’t know when to shut up. Of course, coming in a close third are newspaper columnists.

I do mean it though; don’t ask me what this little brouhaha was about. I truly missed most of the details because I was in the middle of that shepherd hook fantasy. This is one reason why I’m not a journalist.

Not long after this ruckus, I found myself faced with my own potential disturbance. I had two fellows come up to me at nearly the same time requesting a book. Having only one book left, I wasn’t sure what to do. Just as I was about to suggest a cage match they worked it out for themselves.

They behaved like perfect gentlemen too, politely engaging each other with phrases such as “Oh, you take it,” “No, you should have it, you were here first …” I learned a lot about these two while watching them work out the problem — neither of these guys would ever cut it as political campaign advertisement writers.

I’m glad I went because I enjoyed meeting several people I’ve only interacted with online until now. There was one downside though — by Sunday evening, I noticed the rash. My doctor warned me this could happen because I’m allergic to anything political.

He says I should engage in less risky behaviors so from now on, I might just stick to riding the Rock-O-Plane on a full stomach.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson prefers the Rock-O-Plane to politics because hanging upside down is much less disorienting.

Can Government Create Jobs?

2010-10-31T19:22:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Not all jobs are created equal

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I don’t know if you’ve noticed but it’s very fashionable this election season to talk about “job creation.” As a matter of fact, using this phrase is almost as popular as big hair was in the 1980s.

I also noticed the way this message is being conveyed by some candidates really has Morton Marcus, an economist who used to be with IU’s Kelley School of Business, upset. In his latest column he complains that a candidate for state representative has promotional items that say, “it is private business — not government — that creates jobs.”

According to Marcus, “This is stupidity if believed; a lie otherwise. A job is created when a person is hired and paid for his/her work. It does not matter in the grand scheme of things if this person works for the private or public sector.”

Marcus is right. And wrong. He’s right that government can create jobs. As a matter of fact, government is pretty darn good at it. Madonna’s past ability to offend people with her MTV music videos pales in comparison.

We can see that they are actual jobs. We can observe that a government employee gets up and trudges off to a job, just like a person does in the private sector. So the job does exist, at least empirically.

However, Marcus is wrong when he says it does not matter whether a person is working in the private or government sector because, at some point, the worker has to be paid.

How does the government get money to pay people holding government jobs? They have to take it from people doing productive work in the private sector. And when this wealth is forcibly taken to pay for government jobs, it lessens the private sector’s ability to invest in private sector jobs, which are the ones that actually pay for government jobs. Anyone see a problem here?

Of course the government has other tricks that only government is allowed do, such as printing money, or operating in a deficit and deferring the forced payments to a later generation. But in the end, it’s the private sector that pays.

It must be true that the private sector pays for government jobs because if not, then we wouldn’t have a jobs problem at all. The government could just create a job for everyone and we’d all be just fine. So, just like it was an illusion that a person had a thinner waist when wearing outfits with those huge shoulder pads, it’s an illusion that a government job actually moves the economy forward.

Morton Marcus wants us to believe that “in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter.” But if we continue to listen to people like him, then at some point “in the grand scheme of things, we’re all going to be broke.” Not to mention morally bankrupt if we keep supporting these schemes.

•••

On a brighter note, how would you like a free book? Really, it’s free! No strings attached. All you have to do is find me at the Community Rally which will be from 11 to 2 Saturday at the Clark County 4-H Fairgrounds.

I have purchased 10 copies of Frederic Bastiat’s “The Law” and will be giving them away to the first 10 people who request one. OK, I guess that means there is one string attached — you do have to risk being seen with me for a few minutes.

But it’ll be worth it. Bastiat’s book is a classic on political philosophy, originally published as a pamphlet in 1850. It’s quite short and very easy to understand. So if you’re interested, look me up on Saturday.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson will not be making any fashion statement Saturday because she’s still recovering from that disastrous stirrup pants episode of 1985.

Some Readers Are Hard To Please

2010-10-25T16:46:00.006-04:00

HARBESON: Sex sells, Roger says

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — I have a friend who’s been complaining about my columns. This friend who I’ll call “Roger” — mostly because that’s his real name — says that my columns have been boring lately. He much prefers it when I write about sex.

Roger’s referring to past columns where, as he so eloquently says it, I defend perverts. These columns defended Theatair X’s private property rights and a father’s desire to watch his son play baseball in a government park even though he used to be on the sex offender’s list.

I want to please my readers but I often can’t keep up. So Roger, if you’re not getting enough from me, then use the Internet. You’ll be able to find all sorts of stories about government employees who find themselves dealing with unfortunate sexual situations. The latest example actually occurred in our state and now “Indiana BMV” and “sex” will be forever linked on search engines.

•••

I also get responses from people who have a difficult time understanding my perspective, particularly when I criticize any political action. I’ve mentioned the philosophy I follow before but I think it’s worth mentioning periodically because I know not many people have heard much about it and mistakenly place me into categories that don’t fit.

I am a Voluntaryist. The most important thing to understand for the purposes of this column is that Voluntaryists are nonpolitical. I reject politics as a valid means to the end I hope society reaches one day, a voluntary society, and am searching for nonpolitical ways to work toward that goal. I believe that lasting change can only happen outside the political realm.

Some people get this but say that while they don’t “want” to get involved; they feel that they must, if only in self-defense. I can sympathize to some extent, but it doesn’t work for me because I can’t see how grabbing control of a violent institution will help develop non-violent institutions. As a Voluntaryist, I understand that if “one takes care of the means, the end will take care of itself.”

This is why I will always be lukewarm at best to any political action. If you want to learn more about Voluntaryists and voluntaryism, I trust you will contact me and/or do your own research.

•••

Finally, I want to help spread the word about an event at the 4-H fairgrounds from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Oct. 30. Lindon Dodd, a long-time columnist for this paper, has taken time from his quest to eat his way through any senior citizen food discount available to arrange a community event so amazing, so strange that I simply cannot miss it.

Why is it so strange? Well it’s a community rally to discuss local issues, right before Tuesday’s elections but no politicians or political candidates are speaking. Also the “citizens just like you” who are speaking have been asked not to endorse specific candidates and will speak for only five or 10 minutes each.

Can you believe that? What are the speakers going to say? Will any “good old boys” show up? Will there be any interesting placards? My curiosity is getting the best of me, how about you?

Now, based on what I just said about being a Voluntaryist, you might think this event has no benefits for me but I’m not so sure. The people who attend are at least willing to consider the effects of government actions on their lives and that is a good first step toward voluntaryism. So I’m going to see what’s up. And I hope you do too.

Oh and Roger, you can come too, but it’s a family event so don’t expect any sexual perversion speeches. However, maybe you, I and anyone else who wants to join us can discuss those topics during any boring parts.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson is looking forward to listening to speeches from regular folk that should be within her attention span.

Business and Government Just Don't Mix

2010-10-18T21:34:00.004-04:00

COLUMN NOTES: There were several responses in the comments section of the paper so if you want to see them, you can click on the linked headline.

HARBESON: Is there power in the PAC?

SELLERSBURG — Until recently, I had never given a lot of thought to the chamber of commerce, now known locally as One Southern Indiana. I always thought of the chamber as a private voluntary organization whose main objective was to help local business people network with each other.

To me, they were simply a business-to-business marketing tool that some found useful.

Although I knew the individual businesses within a chamber of commerce would unfortunately have to deal with governments, I never really thought the chamber itself would purposefully get enmeshed in sticky political activities.

But One Southern Indiana has jumped headfirst into the nasty goo of politics now that it has created a political action committee. This year marks the first time they have really stepped in it and endorsed specific candidates for office.

What a mistake. Business owners, even in a given geographical area, have far too many disparate interests for a chamber of commerce to speak for the area as a whole politically.

Before even looking at details, we already know political action will firmly gel around specific special interests, because that’s the only way government operates. When a politician votes for or against any government action, some businesses win and some lose. The same government action one business celebrates can hurt many others.

So, by endorsing candidates to promote some local business interests, One Southern Indiana will almost surely be actively working against others, even their own members, depending upon the specific government laws enacted.

Which means One Southern Indiana will now help government more than free enterprise.

Even on a very basic level, endorsing candidates does not make sense for an organization that supposedly exists to help local business owners. Helping local business means giving owners the information they need to succeed, not to work against some of them through government action.

The only reason to form a PAC is because the powers that be in the organization want to make sure their particular business’ special interests are served. Now, it’s reasonable to say that the bigger players are putting in most of the money and would therefore control the organization. It’s an association of private businesses after all, and if they want to roll in the political sludge and use government to protect their interests then so be it.

You could also say that as a private, voluntary organization anyone who disagrees with their actions can simply opt out and refuse to support any of their functions. And I would agree with you if that were the case. But I found some muck oozing out that makes this questionable.

For example, did you know that according to 1si’s website one of the “top investors” in One Southern Indiana is the city of Jeffersonville? How does having a government entity as one of the top investors affect what is being done in a so-called business organization?

In addition, one of the candidates endorsed is Ron Grooms, a current Jeffersonville city councilman who is hoping to get a job as a state senator. This means an endorsed candidate is working for a government that is one of the top investors in the, umm, business organization.

I also noticed that one of the PAC members, Marty Bell, represents Greater Clark County Schools, according to the website. Why would the largest government school system in Clark County be a voting member of a PAC for a private business organization?

How do you think all this mixing of government and business would tend to affect the workings of One Southern Indiana? It can’t be in the best interests of those who are working toward more freedom from government control that’s for sure.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson hates to find oozing government muck because it’s really hard to clean off.

A Voluntary Situation or Not?

2010-10-10T19:59:00.005-04:00

COLUMN NOTES: I was spanked for this one by a voluntaryist friend of mine. He made some great points and I want to share them here. First, in general he's not too fond of the United Way. He had an amazingly bad experience when a previous employer treated him badly, even threatened him with a bad job review if he did not donate. He's not the only one and I heard stories even before I wrote this piece and so kind of wondered if I'd hear from anyone about it. He gave me a link he found that shows there are others who have less than favorable views on how companies raise funds for the United Way.

He also pointed out to me that many organizations that get United Way funding are government organizations and/or already funded by the taxpayer.

He also really didn't like the idea of giving a "voluntary salute to the mayor." (For the record I didn't write that headline.) My friend's view on this revolves around the idea that all of these people are parasites living off of coerced funds. But let's hear from him in his own words:

"It bothers me on another level because I can't see someone who lives at the expense of others, who literally lives off of the looted earnings of working people, as having done something praiseworthy because they drop a few of their stolen coins in a box marked 'charity'. Big f'n deal if a mugger drops a few dollars into the Salvation Army kettle at Christmas time, it wasn't his money to take or give. Same way with your mayor and all his tax-parasite employees. Every dime they donate to United Way was stolen from someone else."

And he also said this:
"Giving a 'voluntary salute to the mayor', TO ME, would be like giving a salute to Hitler because he started a voluntary charitable organization
-The Winterhilfswerk (WHW) was an annual drive by the Nationalsozialistische Volkswohlfahrt (the National Socialist People’s Welfare Organization) to help finance charitable work. Its slogan was "None shall starve nor freeze". It ran from 1933-1945 during the months of October through March, and was designed to provide food, clothing, coal, and other items to less fortunate Germans during the inclement months.-

Hell, southern plantation owners used to voluntarily give presents and clothes to their slaves, particularly at Christmas- Praiseworthy?

Ted Bundy took time off from his serial rape/murder spree to voluntarily donate his time to work the phones at the local rape crisis hotline - true story- praiseworthy?"

I will certainly not argue with that logic and I think he makes good points but I still hold on to hope that writing this column may have caused someone, who's not quite where my friend is philosophically, to perhaps think more about voluntary actions versus using the government gun.

What do you think?

HARBESON: I voluntarily salute the mayor

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — This week, I would like to focus my energy on commending and praising Jeffersonville Mayor Tom Galligan. For the third year in a row, he’s helping promote the United Way by entering into a friendly competition with New Albany Mayor Doug England.

The cities compete in a contest to see who can get the most city employee participation. The winner gets possession of a traveling trophy and the loser has to sweep the street around the winner’s city hall.

I find it very refreshing to see local politicians putting their energy into promoting something that is voluntary. It’s also kind of jarring because it’s so odd to see this happen with no ordinances written, no property being forcibly taken from other people, no one controlling anyone else — just respect and voluntary action. And yet it still works somehow.

The United Way is a well-respected organization but it’s not the only one out there. There are hundreds of ways people help each other. Some people also choose to help others by giving time and talent, rather than money. And yet, thousands of dollars are raised despite the fact that the employees are free to decide how much, and if, they want to participate.

Of course, adding the competition factor is a nice way to inject some spark into this charitable effort. The mayors and city employees may give a bit more to the United Way as a result because competition can help motivate people.

Isn’t it interesting to see government officials so deep into freedom-oriented ideas of competition and voluntary cooperation?

To watch how this plays out compared to other work mayors do using government control is instructive. There is no controversial edge to this; it’s just one of those fluffy feel-good stories. There are no critics, no one is forced into it kicking and screaming, everyone involved is respected enough to make his or her own decision.

This kind of action brings forth a completely different energy doesn’t it? It’s by far the best thing Galligan has done since taking office.

This really shouldn’t be so surprising and normally it’s not. Businesses do similar contests and competitions for charitable giving. Charitable giving goes on constantly, some of it through institutions and organizations and there’s also plenty done without any institutional involvement whatsoever: family helping family; friend helping friend. Hardly any of this makes the news because it’s just the normal way we live our daily lives.

But when government officials do it, it’s kind of like a man bites dog story.

If only we’d see more of this type of action from our local politicians. Playing cheerleader for local charities and businesses would be a great way for the mayor to spend his energy. There’d be less time to think about ways to spend other people’s money, which means there’d be more out there for charitable giving and investing in local business. More cheerleading and less controlling would make us all better off, don’t you think?

What would life be like if politicians just got out of the way and let businesses and charities do what they do? I would love to see much more action promoting voluntary methods of interacting with our neighbors and giving individuals the respect to make choices that work for them, their families and their individual situations.

So, Mayor Galligan, let me say well done, sir. Please, do more work cheerleading for voluntary and business causes and put less energy toward using government to control. You could create a more peaceful community everyone would enjoy.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson doesn’t mind mayors playing cheerleader, and even using pom poms, but she draws the line at those skimpy uniforms.

Eagles And Guinea Pigs

2010-10-03T19:59:00.010-04:00

HARBESON: This little piggy went to the arena

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — When my husband asked if I wanted to go with a group of friends to see The Eagles, I wasn’t sure what to say. I’ve done my share of listening to classic rock radio stations, so I questioned the wisdom of spending our entertainment budget to hear “Hotel California” for the 1 billionth time.

I was also concerned because this is the first official event at the KFC YUM! Center which means I would be one of the guinea pigs to help work out the kinks in traffic and parking.

Did I really want to be a part of what is likely to be a painful experiment? When he suggested that being a parking/traffic guinea pig might be a good way to collect column material, I had to agree, so I’m going.

I don’t know whether we’ll use what’s offered in Southern Indiana but it does makes sense for local businesses to try and piggy-back off of arena activity and take advantage of potential parking issues. What doesn’t make so much sense is why government gets so involved.

Jeffersonville’s government is already working on a deal with Louisville to use the government owned and operated Spirit of Jefferson tour boat. The idea is that people will spend money over here and then ferry to the event. It’s not a sure thing that the ferry is good for business. People might just ride the ferry. And even if they do partake of restaurant row, the cars would be parked for hours afterwards so what effect will that have on total sales if it keeps other customers away? And what if entrepreneurs with private boats want to take folks across? Would the government prohibit them from doing so?

Clarksville’s government thought about getting in on the action with shuttles. Rick Dickman, the town’s redevelopment director wanted to close off the bridge so only shuttles and buses could cross during events but he didn’t get his way. Clarksville needed such special treatment if any plan of theirs was going to work because their business hotspots are located farther from the river.

Dickman expressed irritation with Louisville for not including Southern Indiana in the plans. He said “I don’t think they’ve thought about Southern Indiana at all.”

There’s a very important reason for this though: tax revenue.

See, Louisville has little incentive to keep people in Southern Indiana to spend money because one of the ways they are paying off the huge debt is by using sales tax revenue in a designated area. They are already behind because projections at this point were far too optimistic.

As a matter of fact, there is enough concern that Standard and Poor’s warned Louisville that they may downgrade arena bonds to “junk” status if the situation doesn’t change.

Louisville residents will pay more if sales taxes don’t hold up because the Metro government would have to cover costs. So Louisville needs as many of us as possible to spend our money inside their special tax boundaries. I’d say the main reason they are cooperating with Jeffersonville’s government for the boat is because sales tax can apply to ferry rides.

Many Louisville residents are not happy to learn that the arena authority said costs would be covered and now the method of payment may not work out like they said it would. The same thing happens over here of course, the most recent example being Jeffersonville’s recent trolley purchase.

I don’t know what my group will end up doing as far as parking is concerned. I just hope traffic moves so smoothly that I feel like I’m on a dark desert highway, cool wind in my hair.

Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson’s mind is Tiffany-twisted and she got the Mercedes Bends, but she can still read your mail so write her.

Photo courtesy of Steve Alexander through Wikimedia

Flush Forced Annexations

2010-09-26T19:52:00.002-04:00

HARBESON: I was forced to write this column

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Sellersburg government’s attempt to forcibly annex the Covered Bridge subdivision and surrounding areas received more court action last week. Many people in the area do not want to be annexed and by law if at least 65 percent of property owners object and sign a remonstrance, they can stop a local government from grabbing control. In this case, a whopping 81.5 percent of the property owners signed on.

Usually, that’s the end of it, but there is a controversy over whether many of those people who signed can actually do so. Sellersburg government says most of the signatories are property owners who lost their right to object because of a previous agreement made with the original developers when Sellersburg provided sewer service.

This is being battled out in the government court system and Sellersburg’s lawyer explained that the town held up their end of the deal. He said, “Once this sewer service goes into effect, that’s a condition that triggers this particular provision.”

That certainly sets up an interesting situation for the homeowner. I can imagine him now, contentedly sitting on his new toilet in his new home for the very first time, probably reading the opinion page of this newspaper and completely oblivious to the future implications of that first flush.

I have even greater sympathy for the property owners outside of these subdivisions. When the subdivision homeowners are subtracted from the total it still leaves about 136 official signatures. If the battle is about the right to remonstrate, then what about these people? Where do they fit in?

They did not buy their property under any developer-government sewer agreement, so aren’t their rights being completely ignored? If their right to remonstrate for the 65 percent figure is tied to the people in these subdivisions, then their right to remonstrate has been completely taken away from them when they didn’t even sign anything.

It’s one thing to fight over an agreement that developers made with the government over sewer services in those subdivisions, but it’s an entirely other matter for these people who had absolutely nothing to do with that. Do these 136 property owners have the right on their own to tell Sellersburg to go jump in the sewer?

Will their rights even be taken into account during this current court battle? The ability to remonstrate has to exist for Sellersburg to say people signed away the right. So if the courts say the property owners inside the subdivisions can’t remonstrate because they did indeed sign this right away, then it will also be taking the right away for those who did not sign any deed restriction. It would be a self-contradictory judgment.

Forced annexations have to be one of the worst aspects of government and Indiana is not the only state wrestling over this kind of abuse. Last week Rock Hill, S.C., caught lots of attention. The situation was quite similar to what we’ve seen here locally in that the property owners were receiving a single service from a town government, except in this case the service was water. The government made news when they threatened to turn off water service, not for nonpayment, but as a threat against property owners objecting to forced annexation.

Isn’t it amazing how governments work to grow and expand? When a government entity gets involved in providing a service, it’s not good enough that people simply pay for the service.

No, unfortunately power hungry government control freaks will go for nothing less than complete territorial rule. There is one thing to be thankful for though, at least they don’t mark their territory like dogs do.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson can usually be found hanging out in the yard because her favorite activity is marking her territory.

Jeffersonville's Wi-Fi Welfare Zone Creates Government Granted Monopoly

2010-09-19T14:17:00.004-04:00

HARBESON: Why is there Wi-Fi welfare?

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Business owners who happen to be located in Jeffersonville’s new Wi-Fi welfare zone sure seem happy about being given the chance to benefit from other people’s money. I don’t blame them though — it’s not their fault. As far as I know none of them went to the government begging for this handout.

I don’t know where the idea for government-funded Wi-Fi came from. I do know the money is coming from government organizations that need to find ways to look useful and justify their existence. This means creating projects so they can spend the coerced funds that fall under their authority. Well, after they siphon off lots of it for expenses, of course.

The business that won the bid for this project wants you to think this is a great idea because it supports small businesses. This is just another example of someone who benefits from a government program doing their best to frame the message so it sounds fair. But for clarity, accuracy and truth, what the company representative should have said is that this project supports “some” small businesses.

As anyone who’s ever been in the Wi-Fi welfare zone knows, the businesses that have a market-based reason for providing wireless access to their customers could already do so. There was opportunity for any technology-based businesses to make money for their families by offering various competing technological services to these downtown businesses. This opportunity is no longer possible in this Wi-Fi welfare zone. What exists now is a government granted monopoly to boice.net, effectively pushing out competitors.

Also consider the small businesses located in less favored areas of the city. If they decide Wi-Fi is important for their business model, not only do they now need to invest their own money for their business, they also have to support those in the Wi-Fi welfare zone, who could even be direct competitors.

In addition, since Internet users can hook up anywhere in the Wi-Fi welfare zone, they don’t need to spend a dime in anyone’s business. Gone is the natural market environment of mutual cooperation and exchange, where the customer is happy to purchase goods and support a business in return for the extra customer service provided.

This project does not support small business. It only serves as another sad example to clearly demonstrate the harmful consequences of government intervention into free and competitive enterprise.

Some readers might be irritated at my use of the phrase, Wi-Fi welfare zone, and you may have a point. After all — as most of us understand welfare — it is intended to be used for those in hardship or need. Yet this situation is like seeing people who can already afford to eat fancy steak dinners every night and government deciding they need to spend other people’s money so these folks can continue eating the fancy dinners. So I guess it’s not like welfare. It’s worse.

Another stated benefit is that this project will increase the hits to the city’s website. Why is the city trying to buy hits to its government website? Do they want to show increased usage in order to justify future expenditures? And why would more people go there? Are we really supposed to believe that new visitors and shoppers to the area will be spending their time on the Internet so they can watch Mayor Galligan videos?

However, if this project is going to provide links, let me suggest that mises.org would be a great one to add. This would prove useful to anyone interested in learning more about economic freedom and get a better understanding of how government intervention can only lead to dependency.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson creates irritating phrases when she gets irritated. If this irritates you, then irritate her by sending your own irritating phrases to her.

Sheeple In Training?

2010-09-16T10:28:00.004-04:00

Does anyone else find this creepy?

Free the Children!

Staring Blankly Is Hard

2010-09-10T10:23:00.003-04:00

HARBESON: Readers write, Dear Debbie

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — This past weekend, if someone mentioned my column or a local controversial issue, I just stared at them blankly. Even if they mentioned a local politician, I still just stared at them blankly.

Then when they asked if I was feeling OK, I shrugged my shoulders and said I just didn’t have an opinion one way or another. Then they stared at me blankly.

All of this blank staring was beginning to look like a legislative session so to snap us out of it, I explained that I was only trying to celebrate Labor Day weekend the way most people do — by taking a rest from my work.

It completely wore me out.

I don’t have the energy to write a column now so you know what that means. Yes, time to share reader’s opinions.

The column about storing a gun in your locked car while at work led to several people writing in with additional examples of why someone might want to do so.

One writer said, “No pun intended, but you hit a bull’s-eye on this one. There are a myriad of reasons for possessing weapons secured in your automobile on your employers property while you are working. Following are just a few of many:

1. You live in a desolate section of Clark County with the nearest neighbor 1/2 mile through the woods and you return from work at midnight.

2. Your workplace parking lot is unlit and unsecured. You work the second shift. You would want your weapon handy

3. Coming home from work at midnight — or any other time — your car breaks down on a desolate stretch of a county road.

4. Car jackings at night at stop lights are not uncommon. You would want your weapon handy.

You get the drift ... Galligan doesn’t!”

•••

Several people wrote in response to my column on the tax referendum for Clarksville schools, where I suggested that those for a tax can always pay it voluntarily. Some didn’t seem to think my idea would work:

“I’ll bet this one is going to go over well! I’m amazed how often people will demand a general tax increase; but, if there is not one, they will be the LAST people on earth to freely give any money to the cause.”

“Gee, I know those people that voted yes will run right over to the school and give them money.”

•••

After a recycling column, I found out one reader also shares her opinion regularly with the solid waste district:

“Every year the bill irritates me no end; I write [in red] “Paid under Protest” on my check and the bill remittance.”

•••

The responses on the Lee Hamilton column had the predictable love it, hate it responses but I found out that many are a bit conflicted about our government system:

“Your article on Hamilton and career politicians was 100 percent accurate. Hopefully people will listen. Having said that I still would prefer Hamilton over Hill if that were the only choices I had. Naw ... maybe I just wouldn’t vote. I hate voting for the lesser of two evils.”

“… I have to commend you on an honest look at what Lee was saying … Lee did some good things. But I agree with you, he was very instrumental in giving us a huge government that appears to be nearly out of control.”

Finally, let me share one last tidbit from someone advising me on my topic ideas:

“Ease up on my buddy, Tom, would you? Give somebody else your attention for a while. How’s this for an idea: ‘The reason I write so much about Tom Galligan is that he appears to be the only elected official in Clark County who is really making things happen!’ ????”

When I read that, I just stared at my computer screen blankly.

— Sellersburg resident Debbie Harbeson enjoys staring blankly at readers’ responses.