Tax-financed federal programs are used to subsidize the lobbying and political activities of special-interest groups. The programs give grants or contracts to non-governmental groups that are not nonpolitical charities. Under current federal law, most groups receiving federal funds -- or using paid volunteers funded by taxpayers -- are not banned from political activities.
Some examples of the activities by groups that get government funds include:
The "top ten" federal programs that actively subsidize political and lobbying activity cost federal taxpayers an estimated $1.8 billion in fiscal year 1995.
Source: Charles P. Griffin, "Top Ten Political Slush Funds," Backgrounder No. 1069, March 4, 1996, Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20002, (202) 546-4400.
A recent Freedom Forum poll of journalists revealed that 89 percent of Washington reporters voted for Clinton in the 1992 presidential election, along with 60 percent of newspaper editors across the country. Yet only 43 percent of voting Americans did so.
These figures would seem to support the wide-spread and long-standing complaint that the media are far more liberal than the rest of the country.
Some other revealing findings:
Just one example of how this orientation manifested itself: 3 percent of reporters called the Contract With America a serious reform; almost 60 percent called it an election year campaign ploy.
More disturbing is the fact that apparently reporters do not see themselves as "reporters." Ninety-six percent of reporters polled saw their role as that of "educating" the public. Sixty-two percent saw their role as "sometimes to suggest potential solutions to social problems," yet 88 percent still described themselves as objective reporters.
Such press establishment bias leaves little mystery as to why presidential candidate Steve Forbes and the flat-tax received such negative coverage during the primaries, according to media analysts. Forbes press coverage was 66 percent negative and the flat-tax plan was covered in a negative manner 62 percent of the time.
Source: Thomas McArdle, "When Liberals Rule the Media," Investor's Business Daily, May 6, 1996.
The National Education Association, the powerful teachers' union, is involved with a host of causes -- only one of which concerns the education of children, according to some observers.
The causes it champions range from "civil rights" and "human rights," to Social Security, voting reform and health care. In every case, the union's agenda is for bigger and more expensive government, experts say. The NEA has 2.2 million members and estimated 1993 annual revenues of $750 million.
The Alexis de Tocqueville Institution studied the group's 1994 legislative agenda and found:
Critics say the NEA is wandering far afield from its stated mission to advance education for children. They also note that it is vehemently opposed to privatizing education -- an educational reform which many hope will upgrade the quality of teaching in the nation's classrooms.
Source: Editorial, "Power, Not Pupils," Investor's Business Daily, May 6, 1996.
Surveys by Freedom House show that two-thirds of the world's population continues to live in economies that are not free. Also, with few exceptions, those nations that are not economically free are also not politically free.
Analysts noted that economic freedom does not mean simply disentangling government from the day-to-day economic decisions of its citizens. It also requires setting and enforcing the rules to create an environment within which force and fraud are suppressed, contracts enforced and property rights defined.
Here are some examples of countries which are nominally dedicated to economic freedom but deny their citizens its benefits.
These shortcomings are often compounded by judicial systems too weak or corrupt to resolve even simple contract disputes in a timely and unbiased fashion.
In the post-Communist world, optimism is running high as governments are privatizing state-owned industries and social services, lifting wages and price controls and making other sweeping economic reforms. But experts caution against euphoria until many of these nations also create an infrastructure of political freedom to support these economic reforms.
Source: Richard E. Messick (Freedom House), "Economic Freedom Around the World," Wall Street Journal, May 6, 1996.
In 1995, stock equity exceeded home equity for the first time since the early 1970s, according to Federal Reserve data. To the Clinton administration, this could be one more reason to tinker around in the housing market and use government to boost homeownership.
But economists say that is unnecessary and would be counter-productive: funds are being directed to their best use -- which recently has been stocks.
While home prices have been pacing inflation in recent years, gains in the stock market have far outpaced inflation. From 1990 to the present, the Dow Jones industrial average has doubled; whereas the consumer price index rose just 19 percent.
Some analysts believe the current boom in individual participation in the stock market and phenomenal purchases of mutual fund shares are a result of baby-boomers and even younger generations realizing that Social Security is a weak reed to depend upon for retirement. Many are taking responsibility for their old-age needs by flocking to stocks.
Failing to understand this reversal of investment priorities, some in government want to accelerate housing investment.
But others caution against using federal policy to direct distribution of resources, whether to promote housing or any other asset.
Source: Carl Horowitz, "Do We Need to Boost Housing?" Investor's Business Daily, May 10, 1996.
Polls show that President Clinton leads Bob Dole among women by 20 points, and pundits say the gender gap will cost Dole the election. But some analysts think that's jumping the gun. While women have told pollsters they're Democrats in pre-election polls since after the 1980 election, they've voted Republican in ever-growing numbers.
Women are also shifting toward the right. They are twice as likely to describe their ideology as conservative than as liberal. Younger women are particularly drawn to the GOP.
But there is still a flaw in trying to predict voter performance by simply concentrating on the "gender gap." In fact, analysts point out that sex is among the least compelling demographic measurements by which to examine an electorate and predict how it will vote. There are major differences in the way women vote based on their age, marital status, geography, socioeconomic status and race. For example:
In blind polls, Republican solutions to such problems as welfare, crime and taxes are favored over Democratic approaches. When the Republican label is put on the plans, that support tends to wane. Critics note that no one understands this better than President Clinton, which is why he takes GOP ideas and puts his own spin on them.
Source: Kellyanne Fitzpatrick (president, The Polling Company), "Beyond the Gender Gap," The Wall Street Journal, May 17, 1996.