Remembering Christopher Lane

I want to get up in front of the cameras at the White House press room today and say this:

“When Christopher Lane was first shot I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Christopher Lane could have been me 35 years ago. When you think about why in our country at least there is a lot of pain around what happened here I think it is important to recognize that the country is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn’t go away.”

Regards, Pete Weldon
americanstance.org

Reality Delivered by a Pop Darling

Who would have thought that a pop darling like Ashton Kutcher would “win” some “Teen Choice” award and deliver a speech that dealt with reality? Not me.

Mr. Kutcher is now 35 years old and offered the following advice to his adoring teen fans:

  1. Opportunities look a lot like work.
  2. The sexiest things in the world are being smart, thoughtful, and generous. “Everything else is crap.”
  3. Build your own life. Don’t live inside a life created by others.

You can click here to view his speech.

Hope appears at unexpected times from unexpected places.

Regards, Pete Weldon
americanstance.org

Race Baiting Does Not Improve Lives

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 outlawed discrimination against racial, ethnic, national and religious minorities, and women. It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public (known as “public accommodations”).

I agree that civil rights laws have noble purpose, were long overdue, and have had a positive net impact in many respects. Their very context, however, requires that human behavior be measured by race, by ethnicity, by religion, and by sex, perpetuating the very distinctions that in human terms are irrelevant. Further, it is notable that we predominantly hear about “black” issues in the media while the civil rights laws address discrimination against any race, any ethnicity, any religion, or either sex.

The Zimmerman case has recently provided new “discrimination against blacks” fodder, incentivizing media overkill in pursuit of eyeballs for the purpose of assuring advertising sales while giving race baiters an opening to demand more political favors.

So is there any relevant reality here? How have things gone since 1964 and is there evidence that writing and enforcing civil rights laws has had a net positive impact as far as the “black” race alone is concerned (to view only one impact of civil rights law)?

Here are some government statistics that may prove relevant to answering the above questions.

The St. Louis FED offers the ability to chart US unemployment by race over time. Based on their data set beginning in 1972 through May 2013 black unemployment has consistently tracked at approximately two times white or Asian unemployment while Hispanic unemployment has consistently tracked at approximately 30% higher than white or Asian unemployment. Click here for the chart.

Conclusion: More than forty five years of civil rights laws have not moved the comparative unemployment statistics by race.

The US Center for Disease Control reports that in 2010 the percentage of births to unwed mothers was 29% for “Whites,” 72.5% for “Blacks,” and 53. 4% for “Hispanics.” (See page 6 of this report.)  The Brookings Institute reports that in 1970 the percentage of births to unwed mothers was 3.1% for “Whites” and 24% for “Blacks.”

Conclusion: More than forty five years of civil rights laws have had no positive impact on the formation of families legally constituted in the personal public commitment of marriage (and may have had a negative effect).

While our President wants us all to have a deeper understanding of the reaction to the Zimmerman verdict in the black community, his understanding shines a bright light on the irrelevance of civil rights laws to the life circumstances of “black” Americans and his administration has been unable to make any measurable positive difference for the “black” community.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the solution to a more secure, rewarding, and non-violent life for all people has nothing to do with laws about race, ethnicity, religion, or sex but instead can be found in the assumption of individual responsibility, a commitment to family, and adoption of a moral code that strives to treat others as each of us would like to be treated.

All those concerned with these issues are encouraged to read the following:

The Decline of the Civil-Rights Establishment  by Shelby Steele.

Zimmerman Defense Comments on President Obama’s Remarks

Regards, Pete Weldon
americanstance.org

Where’s My “Cadillac” Health Plan?

I recently read over the 2012 audit report for a town in New Jersey where I own some property.

It was interesting to note that the actuarial firm calculating their OPEBs (other post employment benefits – liability) notes that health benefits granted by union contract to the town’s employees and retirees will exceed the “Cadillac” plan threshold in Obamacare resulting in an excise tax that will need to be paid. Under Obamacare this tax is to be paid by the insurer, in this case the township (a.k.a., the taxpayers) on behalf of the insured retirees.

The actuarial firm assumes the township will not only pay the excise tax but will also gross it up for income tax purposes and make an additional payment to the insured retirees as the excise tax paid by the township will be imputed income to the insured retirees. This is of course insane but will be a big issue coming before state and local government as Obamacare becomes reality. (The town in question has yet to formalize a policy on the “Cadillac” excise tax or gross up.)

Will the public employee unions throughout the US insist that taxpayers pony up to pay the excise tax on their “Cadillac” health plans and gross it up, or ask Mr, Obama for a waiver? (Here’s a clue – neither course of action will prove politically acceptable.)

Do you know people in the private sector who have “Cadillac” health care plans and who will have their employer reimburse them for any excise tax due under Obamacare or additionally pay for the tax gross up of excise tax reimbursements?

As the realities of Obamacare become real the need to repeal the law will become clear even to public employee unions.

Regards, Pete Weldon
americanstance.org