|
It was chatting with Bugsy about
government and how it works for her social studies class that
got Hooter to pondering the fact he hadn’t written his
Congressman for too long. He’d been too fed up with the
nonsense, frustrated by their failure to recognize reality.
But then he heard himself tell Bugsy
that the only chance elected representatives had to hear your
voice was if you were willing to put sound to that voice in the
first place. So, late one night, Hooter picked up a pen:
Dear President Obama,
First of all, congratulations on
the new dog. I have no personal experience with Portuguese Water
Dogs, but I’ve got all kinds of learning from crossbreds and
mongrels. Far as I can tell, those water dogs like you’ve got
aren’t much to look at, but it sounds like they’re great with
kids. Besides, they’ve got to be an awfully fun breed for Ted
Kennedy to own so many. I was also heartened to hear that
Spaniel breed, which is also classified as a gun dog, could find
a home in the White House, what with your views on the Second
Amendment, which seem to differ from those who authored it.
For what it’s worth used-up ropes
and old hooves make great chew toys. Holler if you need some.
Secondly, thanks for your
historic generosity. Best as I can tell, you’ve approved $1
trillion or there abouts in money to be given or loaned to a
long list of have-nots who were never recognized as such before:
home owners who bought houses they couldn’t afford, businesses
that leveraged themselves beyond solvency and common sense, and
financial institutions who generously financed the above with
signatures rather than collateral. As I understand it, the
federal deficit—already record large when you took office—at a
little over a trillion dollars will blossom to $9 trillion or so
in the next 10 years. Thanks for your optimism.
There are undoubtedly plenty of
detractors to such a bail-out, what with 12.5% of the U.S.
population (37.3 million) living in poverty, according to the
Census Bureau. But, being one among the multiple generations of
tax payers who will finance this national generosity I’m
heartened by your willingness to recognize and help
non-traditional special interest groups (more later). I realize
it’s not all just a gift, with the U.S. government, and I by
association, taking an ownership stake in some of these
concerns. Don’t worry, we’re being realistic about the return;
around here we say that 10% of nothing is the same as 50% of it.
As an aside, it’s tough to
understand how we can tell the businesses receiving the money
how they’re allowed to use it, if that was never specified up
front. It’s a lot like negotiating the weighing conditions on a
pot load of calves after they’re already on the truck. Me and
the folks around here feel confident that using taxation as on
offensive weapon is a big part of what gave birth to the U.S. to
begin with, so we’re hoping you don’t support such proposals.
Speaking of which, taxation gets me to thinking about
representation, or the lack of it.
Admittedly, there are days I get
to thinking I’m out of touch with the rest of America, given
many of the decisions and thinking coming from Washington, D.C.
Then I get to looking at that map of the red and blue states and
it dawns on me that it’s the two coasts and a few states in
between that are out of touch with the majority of this country,
in terms of its land mass, the folks stewarding those resources
and whatnot.
As an example, when you get to
looking at those red and blue states, no offense, but the folks
voting against you live in states that make up about 60% of the
Continental U.S. yet represent only 31% of the electoral votes.
The way it is now, it’s kind of
like once block’s worth of people in a good-sized city telling
the rest of the city how to live when the rest of the city
pretty much has an opposite view. Logic just doesn’t square with
it.
So, if there’s ever such a thing
as weighting geography into the vote—for the land mass supported
by taxpayers in a given state—I’d be plumb in favor it, and I
suspect lots of folks in most of the country would to.
Finally, those new special
interest groups I cited earlier.
Are you aware that there’s only
766,000 or so of us beef cattle producers left in this country?
We’ve lost 10% of our peers—the U.S. has lost 10% of its beef
producers—in the last decade alone. We’ve got fewer beef cattle
in this country than at any time since the 1950s, yet we produce
more beef. We’ve embraced Green technology (before we knew there
was Green technology) to increase efficiency, maintain low
consumer retail prices for beef, as well as a positive source of
net national income through beef exports.
As private owners of so much land
we take better care of it than public entities do—all kinds of
studies vouch for that. We buck Mother Nature and the market
every day because this is what we choose to do, and we thank God
in Heaven for the opportunity.
I’m sure hoping you’re aware of
things like that because so far it doesn’t seem like your
Agriculture Secretary knows much about agriculture one way or
the other.
Anyway, every cattle producer I
know has never expected, asked for, or wanted any kind of
bailout from the government. In fact, I had a cattle-first uncle
who raised a little grain on the side, and he was so adamant
about standing on his own two feet that he wouldn’t even apply
for the grain subsidies he was entitled to.
What we’d like, or at least me
and the folks I know, is to be left alone. Let the markets and
our own common sense guide our decision making. Let us reap the
rewards and suffer the consequences of our response to a free
market that is left unfettered by government intervention and
artificial market signals. I guess, rather than a bailout, what
I’d like to do is bail out you and the federal government, bail
you out of our business.
Again, no offense, but you said
you wanted to know how the voters are thinking.
Back to that new dog of yours. For what it’s worth, I don’t know
much about the tax code, apparently like those appointees of
yours who forgot about paying Uncle Sam, but you may want to be
sure such a gift isn’t taxable.
Sincerely,
Hooter W. McCormick |
