What Does It Mean To Be A "Conservative?"

Conservatives Treasure the Tried and True

In reflecting on conservatism, also referred to as classical liberalism, some historians have commented that the American Revolution is one of history’s only revolutions to actually succeed, while revolutions in France and later in Russia were catastrophic, resulting in murder and tyranny. Edmund Burke, who had championed revolutionary America’s cause in the British Parliament, understood the difference and in his most famous work, Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790), strongly opposed that revolution even before its murderous Reign of Terror began. The difference between the two revolutions for Burke goes to the heart of what it means to be a conservative.

Burke revered history as well as those institutions that have been tested through the crucible of time. For Burke, the American Revolution was fought not to impose a new order of untried ideas, but to secure rights that had evolved over centuries, from those individual rights provided by the Magna Carta in 1215 to the breaking of the absolute power of the monarchy accomplished through Great Britain’s “Glorious Revolution of 1688.”

Burke was not opposed to change, but he venerated natural change that evolved through time and human experience. The French Revolution, on the other hand, sought through bloodshed and legal decrees to suddenly impose new rights and a new social order that had never before been known in France. The results of radical change in France, like those imposed later by the Bolsheviks in Russia, were disastrous.

In our own country, the nineteenth century was filled with the classical liberalism that was championed and handed on by America’s founders. But in the twentieth century powerful movements in America and throughout the world rejected classical liberalism and began to assert the rights of the collective over those of the individual.

Communists set the collective at war with the rights of the individual; Nazis set the needs of race and nation against individual rights; and fascists and the architects of the welfare state set the material needs of society in conflict with the rights of individuals. Reversing the idea of our founders, they asserted the idea that individuals should serve the state, rather than the state existing at the pleasure of individuals to protect their rights.

It is no accident that those who would overturn the social order and radically change our nation today downplay the teaching of history, ignore giant historical figures, and even distort its lessons. We see references to the efforts of “dead, white men” in attempts to eliminate our religious roots, and to distort the story of America’s discovery and the role of our founding fathers.

By imposing on people ideas that were radical, untried, and alien to human experience, humanity experienced during the twentieth century a century of despotism, depression and war, with approximately 265 million people killed by their own governments. Many believe that the carnage exceeds all previous centuries combined. This barbarous history, so recently experienced, makes clear that Burke was a wise champion for older truths. Indeed, many of these older truths were from the Bible, the world’s greatest chronicle of individual salvation history. It is quite natural then that so many champions of today's conservative movement obtain their world view in transcendent Scriptural truths that have withstood repeated tests from generation to generation.

Perhaps no figure more embodied the spirit of Burke and conservative respect for the tried and true than South Carolina’s own “cast iron man,” John C. Calhoun. He spoke to his time and ours when he warned that “It is harder to preserve than to obtain liberty.”

What Does It Mean To Be A "Conservative?"

Freedom’s Deep Roots in the Hearts and Minds of Man

Irishman Edmund Burke, an 18th century contemporary of America’s founding fathers and an eloquent champion of their cause and ideals, is generally regarded as the philosophical founder of modern conservative thought. However, the roots for what we regard as American conservatism far predates the 18th century. In fact, one American writer on this subject traces its development through five historic cities – Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, London and Philadelphia.

In this long view of history, ideas about the nature and rights of man were molded in Jerusalem with the Old Testament view of a “purposeful moral existence under God.” These ideas were expanded in ancient Athens with the philosophy and insights of Plato, Socrates and Aristotle; they were nurtured in ancient Rome with the Empire’s adherence to universal law intertwined with the Christian understanding of man’s fallen nature and his hope for redemption, brought to Rome by the Apostle Paul. These ideas were then greatly advanced by the development of the parliamentary system in London and the concept of common law, which finally led to the miracle of Philadelphia.

In Philadelphia our founding fathers not only drafted the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, but in doing so created a national government that balanced the conflicting demands of freedom and order and established a remarkably new and effective model for government. This model was a federalism with powers that were so carefully enumerated, separated and restrained, that it would be a true instrument of the people, protecting their rights and drawing its own legitimacy and powers only from the consent of the governed.

Prior to the miracle of Philadelphia, it was commonly believed that rights were granted by the sovereign. However, in the writings of the 17th century British philosopher John Locke, whose influence on Thomas Jefferson is so clearly seen in the Declaration of Independence, people have rights by virtue of having been created in God’s image. Believing that these God-given rights do not flow from governments, Philadelphia turned the world upside down by declaring that government has only those rights that the people choose to give it.

Locke wrote that legitimate governments are instituted for the purpose of protecting rights. The founders understood that for government to serve this noble purpose, people must be free to form governments and to dissolve them, and that the only legitimate purpose for any government is to protect the rights of the people, which America’s Bill of Rights proclaimed to be “inalienable.”

At the foundation of this “classical liberal” view of rights is the idea that one is free to pursue one’s own life, liberty and happiness as long as in doing so one does not violate the right of others to do the same. In this view, there is no obligation to ensure the best interest of others - nor is there a requirement to be selfish. Instead, each person is free to act in his own behalf, but always respecting the right of others to do the same.

The classical liberals and our founding fathers made no distinction between economic liberties and civil liberties. In fact, one can argue that the right to property and to wealth, both of which are economic liberties, is a necessary protection to such rights as the freedom to speak and to worship, both of which are civil liberties.

The respect for man’s full rights, both civil and economic, endured through the nineteenth century, making America both a beacon of freedom and an industrial powerhouse the likes of which had never before been seen on the face of the earth. Sadly that respect for God-given, inalienable, civil and economic rights would be attacked from within our own borders during the twentieth century.

(This is the second installment in a series of reflections on “What Does It Mean to Be A Conservative?”)

What Does It Mean To Be a “Conservative?”

For a half century before the election of President Ronald Reagan, it was politically acceptable throughout much of America to describe oneself as a “liberal” or a “progressive.” Since the election of President Reagan in 1980, it is increasingly difficult to find a self-admitted “liberal,” but politicians of all stripes and philosophies are happy to call themselves conservatives.

Within the Republican Party there are “economic conservatives,” “social conservatives,” “religious conservatives,” “fiscal conservatives,” “neoconservatives,” “paleoconservatives,” and given the enormous growth of government in the past decade here in South Carolina and at the federal level where most Republicans consider themselves conservatives, it appears there are even “big government conservatives,” or as they prefer to call themselves, “compassionate conservatives.” Indeed, both of our political parties contain a mixing of political philosophies, and this mixing can even be found within single candidates and elected officials.

To make matters even more confusing, the terminology we use for describing the major political philosophies has evolved to the point that what we regard as conservative today is really classical liberalism, which was the philosophy of Jefferson and the signers of the Declaration of Independence. It is the philosophy that permeates our founding documents and strongly shaped American thought and history until fairly recently.

Many Americans are frustrated by the inconsistencies, contradictions, and compromises that are all too typical of so many holding offices today. Accordingly, in the coming weeks this blog will attempt to objectively address the history of the conservative movement, its major thinkers and political practitioners, its major philosophical foundations and ideas, and how those ideas translate into policy today.

I am convinced that the ideas upon which our nation was founded account for the freedom and prosperity that we have enjoyed for much of our history and that when we depart from those principles our economy suffers and the social fabric of our nation begins to fray. I am also convinced that only when we understand the great principles, formed through centuries of experience, secured through much bloodshed, and upon which our nation was founded, can we ensure the survival of our great republic, which is, in the words of President Reagan, “the last best hope of men on earth.”

The subject I will tackle in coming weeks is large, but it is an exercise that I believe is important to our state and nation. As always, I hope you will share your thoughts and join the discussion.

Constitutional Amendment: A Trojan Horse?

The solution for South Carolina’s low SAT test scores and its high dropout rates has been much debated. Now a well-meaning group of citizens are suggesting that our state constitution might be holding us back. That constitution mandates a “minimally adequate” education for all students.

There are those who believe that if we change our constitutional mandate for education, our education problems will be solved. Accordingly, an effort is underway to amend our constitution to replace its current mandate for “minimally adequate” to “high quality education, allowing each student to reach his highest potential.”

Who among us could oppose such a noble intent? Certainly, all of us want every student to reach his or her highest potential. And South Carolina for many years has backed up its commitment to its youth with educational spending that places us among the most generous states, particularly as a percentage of per capita income.

Our education leaders often remind us that South Carolina’s education standards are among the highest in the nation. Thus, one might wonder why the wording of a centuries old constitution should matter. If our constitution has not prevented us from establishing some of the highest standards in the nation, it certainly would not prevent us from meeting those same standards.

Those behind this effort to change our state constitution know that if they can change the wording of the constitution, they can circumvent our State Legislature and file suit, as they have done in 45 other states, to get our State Court System to mandate large increases in education spending. In effect, this approach would mandate large increases in taxes as well.

The educational establishment is right in setting high standards for student performance. But reasonable people would be justified in asking whether that establishment has made “minimally adequate” use of the generous resources already provided by the taxpayers of our state. When we require that our education system focus our education tax dollars on teachers in the classrooms, instead of on large administrative bureaucracies, we then will truly begin to offer a high quality education where each student will be allowed to reach his or her highest potential.

Jesse Helms - True to His Convictions

Winston Churchill once remarked: “You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.” Senator Jesse Helms, who passed away on July 4th, built a career on standing for principle against sometimes fierce personal opposition.

The personality trait uniting most politicians is a consuming desire to be liked. Over time, this trait leads many people to take the path of least resistance, or to take positions that are likely to please as many of one’s base as possible regardless of larger consequences. In politics, the “go along to get along” approach can win friendships and the approval of the media, but it doesn’t always serve the larger interests of one’s constituents and the nation.

Jesse Helms was guided by the North Star of what he viewed as right and true. He would as readily challenge Presidents of his own party as he would those of the opposition. One journalist in his home state of North Carolina aptly said of him: “He was not a consensus builder. He didn’t want everybody to vote for him. He just wanted enough.”

As the senator himself put it, “I didn’t come to Washington to be a yes man for any President, Democrat or Republican.” And through a thirty year career that included chairmanships of the Senate Agriculture Committee and later the Foreign Relations Committee, Jesse Helms became one of the most reviled politicians in America for defending his sincere principles. He relished the title of “Senator No,” given to him by his detractors, and kept a big rubber “NO” stamp on his Senate desk.

In 1975, Helms helped arrange a visit to the United States by Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Both Secretary Kissinger and President Ford refused to meet with Solzhenitsyn for fear of offending the leaders of the Soviet Union. Kissinger even forbade State Department employees from attending a major speech Solzhenitsyn delivered in our nation’s capitol. Senator Helms skewered them both for “cowering timidly for fear of offending Communists.”

Over the years Senator Helms voted “no” on higher taxes and on bills designed to increase the size of government. With 60% growth in the size of the federal government during the past eight years, his lone and principled voice is sorely missed.

He voted “no” to seriously flawed international treaties that he felt would undermine American sovereignty and the rights of individual Americans. He voted “no” on foreign aid to third world thugs. He voted “no” on many objectionable nominations for government and diplomatic posts. He voted “no” on taxpayer funded abortions including those in military hospitals. He voted “no” when the National Endowment for the Arts was funding blasphemous, homo-erotic art.

He opposed efforts to limit the Constitutional right to bear arms. He opposed unfair quotas and set-asides. He mobilized hundreds of thousands of citizens in opposing compulsory unionism. And he did all that, and much more, while maintaining a reputation as one of the Senate’s most courtly and gentlemanly members. Madeleine Albright once described Helms as "the kindest, most infuriating, politest, most aggravating and nicest politician I had to deal with in the United States Senate.”

Jesse Helms knew that the greatest service he could render to his country was to be true to his convictions, regardless of how unpopular they may be, and to say “no” when the mob was surging in the wrong direction. For his faithfulness and courage, all Americans are indebted to Jesse Helms. He was a remarkable and unique public servant.

Wishing You a Safe, Blessed, and Happy Fourth of July!

The Fourth of July is the great summer holiday when families come together to enjoy cook-outs, patriotic music, fireworks, and all that has traditionally accompanied our nation’s birthday celebration.

Communities throughout South Carolina will sponsor an array of parades, festivals, and concerts, many culminating with extraordinary firework displays. These great events will be part of the best memories our children will carry through their lives. That is why I would like to suggest that among all the happy events of the day, families pause to realize that this day also represents the extraordinary faith, courage, and dedication of our nation’s founding fathers.

One good way to discern the character of perhaps our most noted founding father is to consider George Washington’s “Earnest Prayer.” The great General, facing military retirement at the close of the Revolutionary War, was in Newburgh, New York on June 14, 1783, when he released a “Circular Letter Addressed to the Governors of all the States on the Disbanding Army.” General Washington wrote in his letter:

“I now make it my earnest prayer that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in His holy protection; that He would incline the hearts of the citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow-citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for brethren who have served in the field; and finally that He would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of mind, which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy nation.”

In these times, no less than in Washington’s time, our nation needs such a spirit of service and dedication. And none should question that it especially needs his “earnest prayer.”

We wish you and yours a safe, blessed, and happy Fourth of July!

The Battle for Freedom Continues

This week the Supreme Court rendered two extremely important decisions in support of the Constitution, freedom, and the individual liberties of every American.

Virtually all of the media attention has been focused on the Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, which upholds the individual right of Americans to own guns in the District of Columbia. Since Washington, D.C. is federal territory, many of those who oppose the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms continue to argue that the Second Amendment simply allows for state militias to possess guns, and they strive to keep and expand state and municipal prohibitions against individual gun ownership. But these state and local laws will now be challenged in light of the new ruling that makes clear that our Constitution and Bill of Rights not only mean what they say, but apply to every American.

In finding the Washington, D.C. gun ban in violation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution, Justice Scalia eloquently affirmed what our founding fathers understood when saying that certain rights are inherent, natural, and from God, not government, and when he explains how the rights affirmed by the founding fathers have their roots deep in ancient British legal history. These natural, God-given rights include the right to defend oneself and one’s family, to safeguard one’s home and property, even to defend one’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness against a tyrannical government.

For a great many Americans, what the Supreme Court has done in this landmark case is to affirm what most of us simply regard as “right thinking” or common sense. Yet the Supreme Court’s ruling in this matter was determined by a razor thin vote of 5 to 4.

The national attention that focused on this Second Amendment ruling has eclipsed another Court decision rendered the same day, but one that is at least as important in that it re-asserts our First Amendment right to free speech. The McCain-Feingold law has been seen by many as an “incumbent protection act” in that it restricts the quantity, content, and timing of political speech during federal elections. One provision, known as the “millionaires’ amendment,” had attempted to subdue wealthy, self-financing candidates by letting their opponents receive triple the standard campaign contribution limit of $2,300 per donor. This provision effectively had limited what one candidate could spend, thereby limiting that candidate’s speech, since it costs money to get one’s message to the voters. Also, by “leveling the playing field” in this way, the law provided an advantage to incumbents who typically are much better known than are their challengers.

This week the Court also determined by a 5 to 4 vote that this provision of the McCain-Feingold law is unconstitutional, thereby upholding the right of a candidate to spend his own money for campaign speech.

While we can be thankful that the Supreme Court has aligned itself on the side of liberties contained in our Bill of Rights, the closeness of these votes reminds us of how very fragile those liberties are.

When we hear legislators boast about how much legislation they have sponsored and passed, we need to remember that every law, whether it is promulgated by local, state, or federal governments, limits someone’s freedom. The challenge is in knowing when to make the trade-off.

There was a time in the nineteenth century when many seriously argued that our Congress was no longer necessary since our nation had all the law it needed. With the threats posed by international terrorism, by a public that increasingly thinks government should solve all problems, and by a government that seeks to manage everything from the nation’s economy to planetary temperatures, our liberties come under constant assault.

The noble battles for liberty fought at Bunker Hill, Ticonderoga, Valley Forge, Charleston, Camden, and Eutaw Springs continue today in both political parties, in our state legislatures, in Congress, and as we have seen this week, in the United States Supreme Court. The fight is never ending.

Free Markets, Not Government, Are the Answer

Americans in every part of our nation are acutely aware that something is causing steep increases in the price of gasoline. At approximately $4 per gallon and continuing its upward climb, some estimate that the price of gasoline could double in the foreseeable future. Such prices not only will create havoc with family budgets, they will stagger our nation’s economy.

We have been given many reasons for the price increases and many solutions to resolve the crisis that these increases have created. But when Congressional Democrats recently called for the federal government to nationalize the refineries, I was reminded of President Reagan’s first inaugural address in which he said:

"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

That is as true of our “present crisis” as it was of the enormous challenges faced by our fortieth President.

For four decades, presidents and Congress have yielded to environmental extremists who have opposed virtually every opportunity to move “we the people” closer to energy self-sufficiency. They have opposed hydropower because of perceived threats to the natural habitat of fish even though hydropower has been used to produce electricity since before the invention of the light bulb, it is nearly free, there are no waste products, and it does not pollute the water or the air. They have opposed nuclear energy even though it provides safe, clean, and inexpensive power to much of the world. They have opposed drilling for oil on western federally-owned lands, in the arctic wasteland, and offshore and in the Outer Continental Shelf of the United States, even while China and Cuba are preparing to drill for oil in those same waters off America’s coast. They have even opposed erecting wind turbines off our coasts that convert kinetic energy in the wind into electricity, because turbines might block the view for boaters and for those with waterfront property. Political leadership should be made of sterner stuff.

Beginning in 1982, Congress began limiting offshore drilling through the appropriations process for the Department of the Interior. In 1990, the elder President Bush issued an executive order restricting new offshore exploration and drilling. In 1998, President Clinton extended these regulations through 2012, and until this past week, our current President has done nothing to relax them. Now, at crisis stage, he indicates that he will support legislation opening the Outer Continental Shelf for exploration and drilling.

Since the 1970’s, American presidents have encouraged the American people to conserve, put on sweaters, and turn down thermostats, with the understanding that the law of supply and demand would keep affordable the inexpensive oil we were importing from the Middle East. Unfortunately, in the intervening years the same governmental leaders that have overseen our energy crisis have presided over the export of America’s manufacturing industries to other countries. As a result, we are no longer the world’s foremost consumer of foreign oil. In fact, there are far more tankers crowding China’s ports than there are in our own, fueling China’s rapidly increasing manufacturing industries. While we might hope that driving less and conserving more will bring down oil prices, hordes of foreign consumers are hungry for our share and more, thus driving up prices.

As a result of America’s energy crisis, both political parties and their candidates will likely be trying to sell us complex energy plans on how government can get us out of this mess that government got us into. As President Reagan wisely understood, comprehensive government plans are not the solution to the crisis we confront; government plans likely are the problem.

The solution to our energy crisis is not nationalization of oil refineries. That is the way of Venezuela, Russia, Cuba, and China. The answer in the United States is for our government to step aside and rescind its Executive Orders, statutes, and volumes of rules and regulations that have all but ruined America’s robust economic engine of exploration, research, development, and production.

America has the same capability it has always had to lead the world in developing new sources of bioenergy from plant matter and animal waste. It can harness geothermal energy from deep within the earth, and the sun’s energy can be more efficiently used for heat and electricity. Hydrogen can be cleanly produced from renewable sources. Tidal forces, when harnessed, offer enormous potential power. And while all of these new technologies are being developed or expanded, we have sufficient deposits of oil and coal in the United States to provide for all of our energy needs for many future decades.

Congress is very good at producing a lot of hot air, but it will not produce a single barrel of oil or one iota of the new energy technologies we need. The seemingly insurmountable problems confronting America’s families and our economy will be more likely to be addressed when voters recognize that their own government, not Middle Eastern sheiks, is causing our energy crisis. Private industry, freed of government shackles, is more than capable of providing America with the safe, clean, reliable, and low cost power our nation needs.

The Legacy of a Great Leader

As the seemingly endless presidential campaign has narrowed to the two major party’s presumptive nominees, some conservative Republicans are nostalgically longing for the Reagan years, and regret that a conservative leader of President Reagan’s stature seems not to have emerged.

President Reagan was an extraordinary leader, and many eloquent voices call him the greatest American of the 20th Century. In her moving eulogy for the late President, Lady Margaret Thatcher pointed out the daunting, historic tasks he set for himself. “Ronald Reagan,” she said, “sought to mend America’s wounded spirit; he sought to restore the strength of the free world, and to free the slaves of communism.”

These she said were “causes hard to accomplish and heavy with risk.” Yet this great, “providential figure” was a man “who knew his own mind, had firm principles, expounded them clearly, and acted on them decisively.” We know that with his unfailing optimism, humor, charm, and persistence under fire, he accomplished all that he set out to do. He won the cold war without firing a shot, and left America and the world far more free, safe, and prosperous.

President Reagan accomplished the impossible and made it look easy. His presidency was very much the culmination of what has been called “the greatest generation.” It was a generation that was forged in the Great Depression, tempered by war, and whose patience, fortitude, and faith was proven through uncertain and dangerous decades when the Cold War’s outcome was far from certain. It takes nothing away from President Reagan’s epic accomplishments to recognize that his great triumphs were the result of service and sacrifice rendered by millions of his generation over the course of their lifetimes.

It is not surprising that in our own difficult day we long for a monumental leader like President Reagan to deal with problems that seem overwhelming. Domestically we are experiencing out-of-control government growth, spending and deficits, growing political support for big government, socialist programs, record costs for oil that not only threaten families, but threaten economic havoc in our nation and throughout the world, a growing trade deficit, the export of American industry and jobs, and the continuing breakdown of the most basic units of civilization, marriage and the family. Internationally we are experiencing a weakened economic and strategic position relative to hostile governments, two costly wars with no end yet in sight, and the constant threat of terrorism with its potential for catastrophic destruction.

These epic threats, like the threats that confronted “the greatest generation,” will not be resolved with one Congress, one presidency, or even one great, historic figure. Overcoming these threats will likely consume the century ahead, and triumphing over them will likely require principled, resolute, and unifying figures like Ronald Reagan to lead the way.

As conservatives and Republicans, we need to remember that the triumph of Ronald Reagan was prepared over decades both by great names and by unknown Americans who were faithful to their present moment, relied on God’s protection, and did what they could, where they were, with what they had. Many did not live to see the great victory to which they contributed, but they share in our triumphs nonetheless.

While Ronald Reagan may have come closer to our ideal of political perfection than any other American in the 20th Century, today we face a choice between two candidates. In that choice, Senator McCain is exceedingly closer to President Reagan than is his opponent. McCain shares Reagan’s love and optimism for the United States and he believes to his core -- and spent over five years of intense suffering in the Hanoi Hilton because he would not renounce these beliefs -- that the US is a force for good in this world. He also believes, as did President Reagan, that individual Americans create our nation’s wealth, build our communities, invent today’s breathtaking new technologies of tomorrow, educate our young, and possess primary responsibility for raising new generations. All of this is in direct contrast to his opponent who believes that these are the responsibilities of nameless bureaucrats working in a labyrinth of government departments, bureaus, and agencies.

Each of us has a God-given role to play in the great epic struggle of our day. In that struggle we need first and foremost to arm ourselves with faith, as though everything depends on God, while we work in our homes, communities, civic groups, and political parties, as though everything depends on us. When we trust in God’s mercy and grace in that struggle, we not only labor to achieve President Reagan’s vision of the “great, shining city on a hill,” we participate in the eventual triumph of good over evil that God has promised to all those who put their trust in Him.

A D-Day Remembrance

Today we commemorate D-Day, the historic allied invasion of Normandy in World War II. This morning my brother forwarded me a letter he received from Captain Mark O'Brien, a close friend of his and a U. S. Navy judge advocate presently serving in Iraq. His letter is so poignant and thoughtful that I decided to publish it in this forum. Captain O’Brien wrote:

"I was thinking of the subject this morning and it occurred to me that D-Day was 64 years ago. When we were born, WWII had ended less than 10 years earlier. Putting that in perspective, Desert Storm, which seems like yesterday to me, was 17 years ago. Seventeen years after WWII was 1962. Our parents’ generation came home from the largest, deadliest, most far reaching war the world has ever seen and by the time I was 7 they had rebuilt the world and acted as if the war didn’t happen. Yet for tens of millions of Americans (who fought in it, worked to support it, lost loves ones to it or just prayed for its end) it had radically altered their lives but they simply carried on without any demands for compensation or claims as victims. They gave our generation and the ones that have followed the most prosperous blessed land God ever graced the earth with. Sadly, today only a handful of people will remember the countless millions of sacrifices made in order for us to enjoy what we have today. So we must remember to say a prayer in thanksgiving for all of those who gave us so much."

Will Anything Last Forever?

In recent weeks workers have been making repairs to our magnificent State House and re-grouting the massive blocks of native granite that form its steps and walls. Our first State House in Columbia, a mere shadow of today’s structure, was originally completed in 1794. The building has been repaired, restored, and enlarged many times, but from its earliest days it has been a monument to our rich and storied heritage and our noblest ideals of freedom and self-government. It is a place where the people rule under the Constitution and the laws they themselves have made. As I observed the workers preserving our state’s most historic building, I was reminded of the poet Shelley’s great sonnet, Ozymandias (see box above).

Shelley tells the story of a once great monument built by the Egyptian pharaoh, Ramses II, to proclaim his power and his belief that the civilization he ruled would last forever. The great temple he built at the center of his realm was even inscribed with a warning to friend and foe: “My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings: Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!”

Yet this once great monument to an emperor’s power and glory, we are told, now lies “sunk,” “shattered,” and ruined in the desert sands, a “colossal wreck” whose scattered columns remind the traveler that all of man’s greatest works, man himself, and the world in which we live will eventually pass away.

Elected officials who work in grand buildings of state, with their marble pillars, grand hallways, marble floors, glittering chandeliers and fine art can come to think of these great buildings as monuments to themselves and their own vainglory. There is a temptation to believe one is entitled, and that having made it to an exclusive club, one can do as one pleases, rather than what one ought.

Many forget that they are merely the people’s servants and, like Ozymandias, come to believe that the ornate structures in which they work proclaim their own individual greatness, and that while they serve they should also be served. Yet all the ambitions, power, chairmanships, seniority and influence quickly pass away and amount to nothing if the object of one’s labors is mere personal aggrandizement or self-interest.

Our nation and the states that comprise it are unique in the world. They were founded not on the basis of ethnicity, personal ambition, feudal land holdings, or the conquest of one group over another, but rather founded on ideas and the Christian ideals of a pilgrim people. But our most cherished monuments, like those who erected them, will one day surely pass away.

It is proper that we build and maintain monuments to our greatest state and national ideals and to those who lived and died for them. But we should always realize that these majestic structures serve to remind us of who we are, what we believe, where we come from, and like lighthouses, they guide us on our way. And we should humbly acknowledge that even our most enduring structures will one day pass away, just as will the most thoughtfully constructed laws, policies, and budgets ever crafted by elected officials.

A 20th century American commentator said that "a politician's legacy will be hollow indeed, unless his motivation is for a goal and a calling greater than himself." All public servants should consider that solemn thought, look squarely in the mirror, and resolve that their every motive and goal will be to promote the overall public good.

Adorning a kitchen wall in my grandparent’s home was a short poem that I understand better now than I did as a child when I first saw it. The thought-provoking poem, speaking to the days of Ozymandias and to our own day, read:

Only one life, ‘twill soon be passed,
Only what’s done for Christ will last.

Remarkable! It should comfort and encourage us to realize that while granite monuments will crumble and civilizations rise and fall, people can do certain things individually that will last forever.

The Fiscal Impact of Runaway Immigration

Last year Americans responded in justifiable anger against the amnesty proposals for illegal immigrants that some of our federal legislators were trying to force on America’s citizens. Yet the people said “no” for many good reasons – our concern for American sovereignty and our belief that the laws of our nation must be upheld, the unfairness of granting citizenship to scofflaws when so many law abiding people continue to wait their turn, the threat that cheap illegal labor has on American jobs by driving down wages, and, in the aftermath of 9/11, the serious threats that unsecured borders pose to our nation.

At the outset, let me emphatically state that I am not opposed to immigration. I am opposed to illegal immigration. We are a nation of immigrants. But immigration must be managed in accordance with our established laws! Every country has a sovereign right to regulate its borders and surely our country does as well.

It concerns me that many do not consider the enormous financial costs that out-of-control immigration imposes on local, state and federal governments. An extraordinary new study on the costs of legal and illegal immigration, “The Economic and Fiscal Impact of Immigration” by Edwin S. Rubenstein, reveals the staggering costs of this crisis and the massive hidden burden it imposes on every American taxpayer. The study analyzes the costs to fifteen federal departments and agencies. Yet as shocking as these findings are, they are only part of the story, because the study does not include the enormous costs to local and state governments.

Rubenstein points out that the U.S. has 37 million legal and illegal immigrants that cost U.S. taxpayers last year more than $346 billion. This means that U.S. taxpayers are providing on average more than $9,000 annually to each immigrant or $36,000 for a family of four. These costs imperil our economy and our nation and they affect virtually every aspect of our national life.

Since most immigrants don’t speak English, 3.8 million children of immigrants enrolled in K-12 schools require special classes and the hiring and training of specialized teachers with annual costs estimated at $1,030 per pupil, or $3.9 billion. In the next few years, immigration will consume the entire planned increase in spending for public schools.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services provides $250 million annually to help hospitals cover part of the costs of providing emergency medical treatment to illegal immigrants, but costs to the hospitals are far greater than the federal reimbursement and as a result some emergency rooms and hospitals have been forced to close.

Our federal prisons house 267,000 criminal aliens in an already overcrowded system. As a result of overcrowding, many dangerous criminals who otherwise should be securely locked-up are out among us.

The Federal Housing Administration has encouraged home ownership among low-income immigrants by requiring down payments as low as $200 to $300. Since these buyers have virtually nothing invested, they often walk away when they can’t meet their mortgage payments, resulting in blighted, abandoned houses and neighborhoods, and high foreclosure rates that threaten our economy.

This entire enormous tab, paid for by the American taxpayers, is increasing while the former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan and many federal representatives in the House and Senate are calling for even higher levels of immigration. Greenspan has said that “significantly opening up immigration to [more] skilled workers solves two problems: Companies can hire educated workers they need. And those workers would compete with high-income people, driving more income equality.”

What this really means is that salaries are being depressed for skilled American workers who will now be forced to compete with a flood of foreign competitors in our own country. American workers are being squeezed, but by whom?

Nearly half a century ago, President Eisenhower, who had been a great military leader, warned Americans of an emerging “military-industrial complex” that even then was seen to be threatening our national sovereignty. In the past year we have seen the enormous power and influence that modern day transnational corporations, with no allegiance to our nation, wield over the decisions of many of our elected representatives.

Time and again the American people have insisted that we want our borders secured and illegal immigration stopped. Yet time and again, through parliamentary maneuvers, last minute amendments, and their own singular determination, many of our elected representatives have sought to give amnesty for illegal immigrants already here, while doing little or nothing to stop this destructive growing tsunami.

America is at a crossroads. Will we allow our businesses and industries to be deported and our people reduced to a mere labor pool for transnational corporations, or will we continue as one nation, under God, the shining city upon a hill? The choice is ours to make.

Several roll call votes on this issue make clear which of our representatives are working for transnational corporations and which are working for “we the people.” It is our civic duty to take notice of who’s who and wield the power we still have at our polling places to literally reclaim our country.

Are We Becoming a Nation of Financial Illiterates?

Because of “Tax Day,” April is a month when many people take stock of their finances. Unfortunately, it is also a grim reminder for many citizens that their personal finances are in trouble. Our personal habits for saving, borrowing and spending not only have a big impact on the well-being of our families, they affect the health of our state and national economies, and even our national security. With this in mind, many community leaders are increasingly involved in efforts to ensure that America’s students have the sound financial literacy skills they will need to be successful in life.

Sadly, America’s lack of personal financial literacy has helped to create some very serious problems in our nation, from massive borrowing and personal debt, the sub-prime mortgage crisis with resulting home foreclosures, trade deficits, our national debt, the large number of people who file for bankruptcy, and high taxes to finance the “safety net” provided for those in economic trouble.

Recognizing that the financial readiness of our youth is essential to their well-being, Governor Sanford proclaimed this past month as “Financial Literacy Month.” And 48 affiliated state groups have organized with nearly 200 major companies under The Jump$tart Coalition to teach the basics of personal finance in schools and to provide educational materials for teachers, parents, and civic groups to use in that effort. The Jump$tart Coalition has also teamed with the Federal Reserve Board to conduct a biennial national literacy survey of America’s students. Results of the most recent survey were just released, and they are disappointing. Among the findings for high school seniors:

• A mere 48 percent correctly understood that a credit card holder who pays only the minimum amount on monthly card balances will pay more in annual finance charges than a card holder who pays the balance in full;
• Only 17 percent correctly answered that stocks are more likely to yield higher returns than savings bonds, savings accounts, and checking accounts even though there has never been a significant period of time where this hasn’t been true; and
• Just 36 percent correctly answered that a house financed with a fixed-rate mortgage is a good hedge during periods of inflation, down from 45 percent who understood this concept in a similar survey two years ago.

In 2005, Governor Sanford signed legislation requiring that the State Board of Education adopt curricula, materials, and guidelines for local school boards to use to implement financial literacy instruction. The legislation requires that this initiative be overseen by a “Financial Literacy Initiative Board of Trustees” that is tasked to improve the financial literacy of SC students in grades K-12. Under state curriculum standards, students are to be given basic instruction in personal finance, the structure of our economic system, an overview of our banking and financial institutions, credit management, and the stock and bond markets.

As with much that we look to our schools to teach, results are spotty at best. But this is an area where retired business leaders, local businesses, business organizations, and civic and community groups have a great opportunity to work with teachers to ensure that students have the basic personal financial tools they will eventually need to be successful in life. Schools should take advantage of the vast experienced volunteer resources that exist within their own communities. Best of all, schools can do so at no additional cost to the taxpayers.

Financial literacy is as important to the future of every student as good reading, math and language skills. Ensuring that every student graduates with basic financial literacy could not only help our economy, lower our tax burden, and result in fewer families in economic distress, it could also prepare young Americans to be more responsible and informed voters who understand the importance of property rights and free enterprise as essential underpinnings of the freedoms that Americans enjoy. Let’s make financial literacy a goal for every American family. As Governor Sanford has proclaimed, “improving financial literacy for the residents of the Palmetto State helps strengthen our families and communities and ensures our continued success in the global marketplace.”

Three Tools for Good Citizenship

After accounting for all government revenues and expenditures, perhaps the greatest responsibility that I have as South Carolina’s Comptroller General is to ensure that our citizens, their government representatives, the media, and the financial markets have clear and easily understood information about our state’s financial activities and performance.

State government will spend more than $20 billion this year generated from taxes imposed on the citizens of South Carolina. Every dollar coming in and going out must be correctly accounted for. Voters must know how their elected representatives are spending their money, and legislators must have clear and reliable information about revenues, expenses, and trends so that they can make informed decisions. Since media representatives have the daily responsibility of reporting on the activities of government, they need information they can easily understand and incorporate into their reporting. And just as credit bureaus are continually determining the credit worthiness of each of us based on our history of paying our bills on time, financial markets are assessing the soundness of our state’s finances and credit worthiness each time state government seeks to borrow money.

The Comptroller General’s Office is responsible for ensuring that every department of state government correctly accounts for revenues and expenses, and we summarize and publicly report that information. National associations regularly evaluate how well we report this financial information to those who use it.

I am proud that South Carolina is annually awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting by the Government Finance Officers Association for our “Comprehensive Annual Financial Report” or CAFR. Our CAFR is an accountant’s dream, because it is a detailed report, numbering nearly 250 pages, loaded with highly technical information that accountants love to read and discuss. We complete and distribute this major report by Thanksgiving each year, much sooner than most states, for the fiscal year that ended the previous June 30. We not only receive commendations for the professionalism and thoroughness of our CAFR, but we are commended consistently for its timeliness because we produce and distribute it sooner than nearly any other state.

This past January we issued an entirely new report called a Popular Annual Financial Report or PAFR. We prepared this very readable and understandable 16 page report for the benefit of our citizens who are not accountants but who are interested in learning more about state government’s performance. Our PAFR reviews the state’s economy, focuses on key financial highlights, and looks at numerous programs and services like highways, prisons, state parks, education, and the state lottery. To date, only a few other states have produced similar reports, although many are now considering doing so. South Carolina is among the leaders in this pioneering effort.

The Association of Government Accountants (AGA), a respected national organization, is working to improve government accountability with better “citizen centric reporting,” that is, meaningful information about the financial condition and performance of government that can be easily understood by the average citizen. The AGA recently challenged our state to prepare a “citizen centric” annual report that would be even more streamlined and understandable than our new 16 page Popular Annual Financial Report.

South Carolina soon will be one of the first states in the nation to provide “A Report to Our Citizens” based on the AGA’s helpful guidelines. Our newest and most readable report is prepared as a four page pamphlet, and it provides citizens with simple charts and statistics on changes in our population, employment, per capita income, public school enrollment, number of state government employees, revenues and expenses, major developments in state government finances, and future challenges.

All three of these reports, ranging from very detailed to very summarized, will be available on our website at www.cg.sc.gov. I ask South Carolinians to email or call me with any questions or suggestions about these reports or any other aspect of the state’s finances.

It is important that we all take greater responsibility for what government does, to hold our elected representatives accountable for spending our money, and to remember that ultimately government is of, by, and for “we the people.” I’m committed to making government more and more transparent and accountable, and I believe these three important reports about state finances will be essential annual tools for good citizenship and conscientious voting. As the great World War II General Omar Bradley once reflected, “If you will help run our government in the American way, then there will never be danger of our government running America in the wrong way.”