Comments on House District 111

            Mississippi in 2011 promises to be interesting.  The political rumor mill is beginning to churn throughout the state not only for the predominant eight statewide races but also for those in the state legislature and in county offices.  Here in Jackson County, the rumor mill is going strong. 

Today I was asked by the local press if I was planning to run for the House District 111 seat currently held by Democrat state Rep. Brandon Jones in 2011.  In an effort to stay fully engaged with you in Pascagoula as well as those who have supported me thus far in public office, I feel it prudent to offer up my response to the local press here on this blog to ensure that you are aware and in the know and to allow for the full content of my response.  Please read below:

"I've been asked from numerous individuals and organizations not only in Pascagoula and Jackson County but from around the state to explore a run for House District 111.  At this point I am actively exploring that option, meeting with supporters and the business community as well as with area and state Republicans, and listening to the citizens in this area. 

Truth is whether I run or not there needs to be a change in that seat that better reflects the conservative values of the people in House District 111. 

At his recent fundraisers, the current representative showed his true liberal bent by aligning himself with those listed as donors, some of the most recognized liberal Democrats in Mississippi. 

Mississippi, Meet Lady Justice

                In county courthouses and city halls, Supreme Court buildings and state capitols all around America you'll find a statue of Lady Justice.  Her eyes are adorned with a blindfold and stately robes drape her elegant figure.  Lady Justice wields a set of scales in one hand and a sword in the other.  The scales are where she weighs the merits of a case's prosecution and defense.  The sword is her power to convey reason and justice, for or against any in her presence.   Lady Justice stands as a symbol of the fair and equal dispensation of the law, without partiality or corruption, but in truth and with candor. 

                The ideals of Lady Justice can be found in Mississippi's judicial elections; judges are elected in a non-partisan manner.  According to the Secretary of State's Judicial Candidate Guide, political parties and any committee affiliated with a political party is prohibited from engaging in fundraising on behalf of a candidate, nor can they accept a contribution or endorsement from a political party or related committee.  The judicial candidate cannot personally solicit or accept campaign contributions or personally solicit publicly stated support.  No judicial candidate can use or allow the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit of the candidate or others.  While every judge brings to the bench their own personal life experience and sense of right and wrong, the ultimate intent here is to remove the possibility of outside influence, whether through money or politics.

                I must admit, I have often wondered why, if judges are statutorily required to remain non-partisan to ensure they adorn Lady Justice's blindfold and wield both the scales and sword without bias, those acting on behalf of and legally representing the people are not held to an equally politically isolated standard?  Why do we allow the state Attorney General and local District Attorneys to run in partisan races but not judges?  Should not they, too, act on behalf of the people to prosecute offenders without political partiality or under the influence of hefty donors?  It would seem plausible to require the Attorney General and District Attorneys to put on the same blindfold of justice and propagate the law for the betterment of all citizens, regardless of various persuasions.

                With the partisanship exemplified in Attorney General Jim Hood's ongoing actions (or rather, inactions as it pertains to the health care debate) Mississippi may do well to require the state's chief prosecutor, lead law enforcement official, and primary legal advisor to visit Lady Justice.  All but refusing to represent the state's interest in cases directly affecting our citizens out of what can only be defined as purely political associations is not properly attending to the law, nor is it upholding the oath to defend the Constitution of Mississippi or of the United States.  While no person is completely impartial in their private thoughts, Mississippi would conceivably do well to have a neutral public interpreter of the law whose sole intention was to protect the interest and rights of the taxpayers of our state. 

                I am not foolish enough to believe that removing party classifications and restricting campaign fundraising will change our system or bring about a revolution in Mississippi's legal world.  I do, however, question the system that allows for obvious prejudices on the one hand but not the other.  Should Mississippi continue to allow such inequity in our highest legal offices locally and in the state, why not revert to partisan judicial elections? 

Many in Mississippi and around the country are sick and tired of liberal, activist judges.  While justice is meant to be blind, all too often judges impose their hidden political ideologies into their rulings.  Wouldn't it be easier if we already knew their political bent before they took a seat at the bench?  We know the Attorney General or District Attorney's party affiliation, why not the judge's? 

                I am of the belief that political party affiliation matters, whether you like it or not.  Who a candidate aligns him or herself with is telling of how they will handle the business of the people.  Party affiliation can also point to one's character and patterns of belief in terms of their philosophy of humanity, freedom, liberty, and spirituality.  Further, I believe that the voting public, for the most part, is cognizant of what both Democrats and Republicans stand for (not so much for Independents or other Third Party candidates).  The voting public generally knows the difference between liberal and conservative policies and ideologies.  Party affiliation speaks volumes in our day.

                While this discourse has raised a number of questions and possibilities, I am not promoting any one solution here; my only intent is to make you think, to create an environment that encourages the open exchange of ideas.  Consistently questioning such oxymoronic governmentally induced practices only serves to provide a dialogue conducive to refining our uniquely Mississippian and American experience.  Lady Justice would be proud of you for weighing such ramblings.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

The New Era of Principle

Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College Alpha Beta Gamma Business Honor Society Initiation Keynote Speech

April 1, 2010

It's indeed an honor for me to share this time with you all and to be able to speak to you this evening.  Ben Franklin once said, "He that speaks much is much mistaken," so tonight I'll do my best to be engaging yet relatively brief.

          I won't try and deduce your thoughts and beliefs; I've found that assumptions often lead to a number of ills.  I will, however, share my thoughts in the hopes that perhaps through this discourse you may begin to formulate your own circle of beliefs, which we'll talk more about shortly.  My ultimate goal is nothing more than to make you think, and if I have done that, then my time with you this evening will have been productive.

Our nation is growing increasingly divided and I'm not sure if that's all bad.for the future of business and government in America that is.  It does, however, challenge our personal sense of community. 

The American people on the left and the right, liberals and conservatives are digging in their heels on a variety of issues, many of which directly relate to the long standing belief in the American dream, you know the idea that through hard work every American can have a better, richer, and fuller life.  Also at issue is the idea of American exceptionalism - the belief that the United States holds a special place among the nation's of the world because of how from such diverse immigrant backgrounds we have been able to find a common bond in standing up for the inalienable rights of all mankind, those of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Such long accepted ideas are now the catalyst for much debate amongst the American public. 

In the early 19^th century, Alexis de Tocqueville, a Frenchman (yes, a Frenchman) wrote a major work entitled Democracy in America where he said,

"The position of the Americans is therefore quite exceptional, and it may be believed that no democratic people will ever be placed in a similar one. 

Their strictly Puritanical origin, their exclusively commercial habits, even the country they inhabit, which seems to divert their minds from the pursuit of science, literature, and the arts, the proximity of Europe, which allows them to neglect these pursuits without relapsing into barbarism, a thousand special causes, of which I have only been able to point out the most important, have singularly concurred to fix the mind of the American upon purely practical objects.  

His passions, his wants, his education, and everything about him seem to unite in drawing the native of the United States earthward; his religion alone bids him turn, from time to time, a transient and distracted glance to heaven.  

Let us cease, then, to view all democratic nations under the example of the American people."

When was the last time you heard someone, anyone from another country speak in such awe of our America.  Heck, when was the last time you heard an American speak with such reverence.  I challenge you to listen objectively to the mainstream media.  Pick any TV or radio station.  See if you, too, sense the ever-widening rift between everyday America, where you and I live, and the perceived America propagated by the 24/7 media pundits and yes, Hollywood.

Yet, the great divide of our day is not as much about partisan politics as you might think; it is more about a system of basic American belief.  If the divide was purely about politics, then bipartisanship would at times win the day.  You see, in politics, everyone wants to win and no one wants to be hung out to dry by themselves if they can help it. Many a vote has changed out of fear of standing alone.  Believe me, I have seen it first hand at City Hall.

For these reasons and more, I believe this divide goes much deeper than the usual scapegoat of politics.  I am of the belief that America is rapidly exiting an era of compromise and entering an era of principle, not unlike the era which spurred the comments by Tocqueville.  In this new era of principle, it will be up to us as individuals to search for truth diligently and to actively engage our communities, not necessarily to win their vote or approval, but to once again promote and instill the basic foundations of our uniquely American experience.  It was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. that once said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."  America matters.

I have learned in my brief, yet thankfully full years that there is a circle of beliefs, or philosophies, we each must cultivate within ourselves if we're going to be well rounded, engaged people in the society and time in which we live.  Picture with me a circle with three points spaced equidistantly around the sphere.  The three points represent one's philosophy of business, one's philosophy of government, and one's philosophy of community.  As we put these philosophies into practice, they move around the circle and interact with the others.  Each of these three philosophies in some measure influences the other two, often to a vast degree.

Take my circle of beliefs for example.  My philosophy of business is rooted in the system of capitalism.  And what is capitalism?  The basic principle of capitalism is founded in the 17^th and 18^th century ideas that saw man as free moral agents with a free will to make decisions and ultimately control their own success or failure.  Capitalism, by definition, is an economic system based on the private ownership (not government) of the means of production and distribution of goods, characterized by a free competitive market and motivation by profit.  Capitalism encourages a person, a business owner to decide what type of business they operate, how they manage that business, and who their business will cater to.  

I believe that free markets ultimately help to keep a people free.  It is the uninhibited ingenuity of the entrepreneur, the capitalist that has been the backbone of our American society, from the mom and pop shops to the national chains, and has allowed our country to grow and expand more than any nation in the history of the world.  As Calvin Coolidge once said, "The chief business of the American people is business."

With such a philosophy of business, it is fairly easy to discern my philosophy of government.  In my mind, a government primarily exists to protect us from each other and from outside threats, not to protect us from ourselves.  To paraphrase Thomas Paine, government, even in its best state, is a necessary evil and in its worst, an intolerable one.  Government, then, must be limited in its reach to ensure that it does not infringe on the rights of its citizens. 

Government's role is to provide equal opportunity for all to succeed, not mandate that we all succeed equally.  You see, government isn't meant to be the savior of its people, to ensure its people never face struggles or hardships.  The inalienable rights of man must include the right to fail.  Without failure, there is no opportunity for success.  Even as hard as failing may be, there is something liberating about standing on your own two feet without a crutch.  Failing makes you appreciate and respect success, but not expect it or feel you are entitled to succeed to the same extent as your neighbor - it's up to you.  Thomas Jefferson said, "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have." 

I also believe that you and I know what to do with our money better than the government, which is why my philosophy of government calls for limited, low taxation on all levels, from city halls to state capitols to Congress.  I do not espouse the belief that just because someone earns more than me that they should be taxed more than me; I don't buy into such a Robin Hood mentality.  The problem is, you eventually run out of other people's money.  Robin Hood was a great children's story, but it makes for terrible economic and government policy.  Why should anyone, regardless of their earnings, be penalized for working hard and succeeding in America?  When the government requires less, every American has more.  There are more jobs, more free market competition, and more charitable giving, which is where my philosophy of community comes in.

My philosophy of community is centered in my personal belief in the Creator God who I believe instills in each of us the yearning to support and care for our fellow man.  I believe it is the responsibility of the local community through neighbor helping neighbor, communities of faith, charitable organizations, and the like to take up the reigns where government should leave off.  Local people know far better what the needs are of those in their community.  You see, the idea here is that we all can do more for the people in need in our local communities when we recognize the value of giving and engage passionately in service, rather than being forced by a government that will impose the redistribution of wealth and forced taxation for similar means.  Are you more willing to fully invest yourself into a project or work if you are told or commanded to or if you offer your hand willingly and freely? 

It seems we now have a culture that fears the spirit of the American people so the inclination is to mandate and regulate morality and caring through government programs.  But living in fear is easier than understanding.  We foster goodwill and public sympathy not by force, but through freedom.  In general, the more people have, the more they are willing to give.  That's why it is paramount that we require less of government and instill in our citizens a positive, active, and caring philosophy of community.  An individual that freely invests their all into understanding and caring for their fellow man can do more for society than any government mandated program ever will.

So that's my personal circle of beliefs.  Each of my philosophies, whether business, government, or community, is influenced by the other two.  Together they produce the guiding principles upon which I live my life, which brings us back to the first part of our discussion.  I said at the outset that our nation is growing increasingly divided and I'm not sure if that's all bad, that is, for the future of business and government in America.  I also said that such division does, however, challenge our personal sense of community.

I am of the belief that the division we are seeing today within the minds of the American people will have one of two effects: either our nation will spiral down the slippery slope toward European style socialism with the further nationalization of private business (such as the banks, auto dealers, health providers, and student lenders), increased government intrusion in individual freedoms (from sin taxes to dictating what you buy and at what cost to restrictions on food, medicine, cars, etc.), and an ever growing national deficit, or the sleeping giant that is the American people will awaken and will rise up to once again instill the principles upon which our nation was founded - limited government, free market economics, limited taxation, community involvement - all leading to a resurgence of the American spirit, with a hope in the American dream and a belief in the exceptionalism of the American nation.  Whatever the path, it is up to each of us to maintain civility and rapport as we continue to refine this uniquely American experiment.

So as we leave an era of compromise and enter this new era of principle, I encourage you to actively cultivate your philosophies of business, government, and community now so you will be prepared to meet the challenges of tomorrow head on by choosing principles over pragmatism or power.  As the next generation of business leaders here in South Mississippi and America, you must consider your own circle of beliefs and put them into practice; don't wait until you're out of school or in the workforce or have a family of your own.  Search diligently for the truth now and invest yourself in our collective future.

Let me leave you with one final word.  To quote Ronald Reagan,

"I'm convinced that today the majority of Americans want what those first Americans wanted:  A better life for themselves and their children; a minimum of government authority.  Very simply, they want to be left alone in peace and safety to take care of the family by earning an honest dollar and putting away some savings.  This may not sound too exciting, but there is something magnificent about it.  On the farm, on the street corner, in the factory and in the kitchen, millions of us ask nothing more, but certainly nothing less than to live our own lives according to our values - at peace with ourselves, our neighbors and the world."

You future business leaders are the tip of the spear in this new era of principle.  What you do in your profession, your innovation, your ingenuity, your spirit will buoy our nation into the future.  Don't go quietly into the night; set the pace so others will follow.

Thank for you for the opportunity to share in your special evening and for your attention.

Given by Frank Corder, Pascagoula City Councilman

Mississippi's Cycle of Insanity

                Almost a year ago I wrote a blog entitled "Tug Fork River Running through Mississippi" (click here to read).  In it I paralleled the feud over the state budget between the Governor and Speaker McCoy's House with the classic tale of the Hatfields and McCoys.  It's conceivable to think that the lawmakers would have taken something away from the 2009 session, namely the understanding that revenues are down, expenses need to be cut across the board, and the budget must be priority number one going into 2010.  Now we're nearing the end of the 2010 session and after listening to the floor proceedings and talking to some in the know, it seems we're right back in the same position this year.  

                What we are seeing in the legislature is simply unacceptable.  The state budget is the primary task facing lawmakers each January.  I'm of the opinion that no other business should be allowed to come to the floor until the state budget is adopted.  Lawmakers should be working on it day in and day out, without excuse, without attention to other proposed legislation.  No other issue is as important on the annual agenda as the state budget.  And no matter how much the House leadership tries to pass the blame, the Governor is not at fault; yes, he has input, but ultimately the Governor only signs or vetoes what is sent to him by the state legislature.  Now, due to the legislators' lack of handling with their primary task, our state is extending the annual session, possibly even forcing a special session, the mere mention of which is an affront to all Mississippi taxpayers in these tight fiscal times.  The excuse as of this week: $187 million in one time federal funds.

It has long been said by citizens and politicians alike that Mississippi seems to always be at the "bottom of the good lists and at the top of the bad ones," from education to health to housing to the jobs and more.  Numerous social, educational, and political campaigns have hinged on the idea of advancing Mississippi, of climbing the ladder of measurable success.  Yet, each year in the Mississippi state legislature we continue to hear the same tired rhetoric by the same out of touch liberal leadership (especially in the House of Representatives) that produces the same futile results.  State lawmakers continually do the same thing over and over again, year in and year out, and expect different results.  It would seem, by Einstein's definition, we are in a perpetual cycle of insanity in the Mississippi legislature. 

Nowhere is this cycle of insanity more prevalent than in the state budget process.  Mississippi needs a legislature that will refuse to use one time funds to balance our state budget.  One time funds are icing on the already baked cake.  If the state budget was drafted and balanced using revenues solely generated by and from Mississippi, when those one time funds do come, imagine the doors that those monies would open for our state.  Yes, living within our means will require us to make significant cuts, even in areas we are hesitant to do so, but the ultimate result would surely justify the actions.  Mississippi will be more solvent, state government will be more efficient and less intrusive, and local communities will be more in control of their own futures by their lessened reliance on the state.

I know full well what I am suggesting is controversial, especially when it comes to the unfortunate political hot potato of education.  I can hear the debate now.   But local school districts should not rely so heavily on the state to fund their systems.  Depending on the state to subsidize local school districts is a disease we must cure.  The willingness of local school districts to live off the state coffers must stop.  Upwards of 60% of our state budget is currently spent on education and yet we still have struggling schools and more requests for funding each year.  When will we wake up to the fact that money isn't always the issue?  Often, government intrusion is the issue and the more money you take from the government, the more intrusion there is.

Believe me, I agree that education is important and worthwhile.  I fully support it in my community.  But just like with other federal and state mandates, education in Mississippi's local school districts suffers at the hands of those not directly involved in the life of the local community.  It is far too easy to legislate away from the masses.  Thomas Jefferson once said, "The expense of...schools for every county is proposed to be levied on the wealth of the county..."  Jefferson understood that it was the responsibility of the local community to support the local schools, if for no other reason than to properly influence and direct the schools' focus for their children.   Jefferson also said, "If twelve or fifteen hundred schools are to be placed under one general administration, an attention so divided will amount to a dereliction of them to themselves.  It is surely better, then, to place each school at once under the care of those most interested in its conduct." 

Mississippi can see better education but first we must require local school districts to adequately fund themselves, stop playing Robin Hood with local taxing districts, only allow state funding for short term needs or special items as the state budget allows, and demand less state and federal mandates and oversight.  It's amazing how innovative school districts truly are, especially when they lack funding and when they are allowed to think outside the box.  If we move towards true fiscal reform in Mississippi and away from the cycle of insanity, soon you will see a revolution in education thanks to enterprising school administrations.  Partnerships will be formed between the public and private sectors, between parents and teachers, between neighboring communities and counties.  Innovative ways of teaching will emerge and the sterile, boxed in, government controlled environment we have created will be transformed over time, with some growing pains for sure, into a self sustaining, self reliant system of education that best fits that local community.  I know that sounds utopian and yes, there are flaws in the argument, but in theory and with a little elbow grease such a notion could revolutionize our public school systems.

Education is just one area, though likely the most notable that must be taken out of the legislature's annual cycle of insanity.  There are other areas that need to be weaned off the state and/or federal till if we are ever going to effectively move forward in Mississippi.  A true balanced budget, minus the one time monies, that weans the continual over reliance on the state coffers would be a major first step in breaking the cycle of insanity the Mississippi legislature perpetuates.  I trust in reading this you hear the spirit in which I write.  It is meant to open a dialogue on issues such as these as we attempt to right the ship in Mississippi.

Of course, another equally impressive step would be to place true conservative lawmakers in the state House and Senate.  Do away with the liberal disconnect and thoughts of spend it now and pray for tomorrow as the Speaker and others in his partisan leadership propagate.  Thank goodness 2011 is almost here; maybe we can finally stop this cycle of insanity in Mississippi once and for all.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

Questioning Health Care Legislation

Above is a letter I have penned regarding the passing of the health care legislation in Congress and have forwarded it to Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood with copies sent to Governor Haley Barbour, Lt. Governor Phil Bryant and House Speaker Billy McCoy. (a printable pdf version can be accessed by clicking the link just above this blog post)

I would call on other concerned local elected officials and citizens from around Mississippi to implore Attorney General Hood and the state legislature to challenge the constitutionality of this flawed health care legislation.  I commend the states of Virginia and Idaho for their stance on this legislation and hope other states, especially my state of Mississippi, will join in the fight.

As I wrote in a recent blog, principled government - the kind of government that enriches individual liberty and freedom, upholds and defends the Constitution, and promotes the interest of the sum, not the part while maintaining as limited a role as possible - starts in the City Halls all around this country.  We must demand better, more principled government from our city hall to our state capitol to Washington D.C.  We can make a difference and rightful restoration can be made of our American foundations.  Make your voice heard.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

Grading Taylor:

Mississippi 4^th District Democrat Rep. Gene Taylor In Review

                Since 1989, Gene Taylor (D-Bay St. Louis) has held the 4th Congressional District seat here in Southeast Mississippi.  Taylor, a former city councilman and state senator, is well versed in what it takes to win in this district, which by the way is one of, if not the most conservative Republican districts in the nation (no Democrat Presidential candidate has carried the 4th since 1956).  His voting record is a mixed bag; he has walked the tight rope between party and populist for many years and thus far has mastered it with only the occasional wobble which has quickly balanced.  He proclaims to be pro-life and pro-gun (anything else in Mississippi and he would have been out a long time ago), yet he has supported his party and its leaders inconspicuously (voting for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker) knowing that if he carried too much of the party's water he would be on the proverbial hot seat come election time.  He knows how to appear as if he is fighting for his constituents while not making too many waves in Washington D.C.  His tenure and party connections landed him an important seat on the Armed Services Committee and the Shipbuilding Caucus, making him increasingly valuable to his 4th District constituents.  But could 2010 be a perfect storm that even Taylor can't weather?

                Now that the qualifying date for Mississippi's 4^th Congressional District has come and gone, Taylor has drawn four challengers: Republicans State Rep. Steven Palazzo and Joe Tegerdine, Libertarian Tim Hampton, and Reformer Anna Jewel Revies.  While the two third-tier party candidates are realistically a stretch, the two Republicans, Palazzo and Tegerdine, perhaps have the best chance in years to take down the long-term representative.

I thought I would take a few minutes (with some help from various sources I've listed below) and give Democrat Rep. Gene Taylor his election review.  Take a few minutes and see what grade you would give Rep. Taylor based on his record:

·          Gov Track (www.govtrack.us) reports:

-          Gene Taylor missed 276 (2%) of 12,694 votes since Jan 23, 1990.

-          Taylor is a follower according to our statistical analysis of bills in this legislative session.  Taylor tends to cosponsor the bills of other members of Congress who do not cosponsor Taylor's own bills.

-          Gene Taylor has sponsored 34 bills since Jan 3, 1989, of which 20 haven't made it out of committee and 6 were successfully enacted, at least 5 of which were to name Post Office locations around the district.  Taylor has co-sponsored 1,215 bills during the same time period.

·          Open Secrets (www.opensecrets.org) reports:

-          During the 2009-2010 period to date, Taylor raised $238,949, spent $213,612, and has $225,779 cash on hand.

-          Taylor's top donors during the 2009-2010 election cycle were FedEx Corp. and General Dynamics (each with $6,000). Other donors of note include John Larson for Congress of Connecticut ($4,000), Operating Engineers Union ($5,000), National Rifle Association ($1,000), and NFL Vikings ($4,800).   The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

-          Taylor receives most of his contributions from the following industries: sea transport ($22,750), transportation unions ($15,500), defense aerospace ($15,000), air transport ($12,500), lawyers and law firms ($12,000), defense electronics ($12,000), and building trade unions ($7,500).

-          During the 2009-2010 cycle to date, 61% of Taylor's contributions have come from In-State sources, with the majority from the Hattiesburg metro area.  The 2007-2008 cycle garnered 62% from In-State sources with the Hattiesburg constituency making up the majority of contributions as well. 

·         Project Vote Smart (www.votesmart.org) reports:

-          Project Vote Smart is a non-profit, non-partisan research organization that collects and distributes information on candidates for public office in the United States founded in 1992 by 40 national leaders, including Barry Goldwater, John McCain, former U.S. Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.  The group administers the Political Courage Test.  The Political Courage Test is a key component of Project Vote Smart's Voter Self-Defense system.  Major leaders of the media, major parties and Project Vote Smart repetitiously ask candidates one central question: "Are you willing to tell citizens your positions on the issues you will most likely face on their behalf?"  The Political Courage Test is administered to all candidates for presidential, congressional, gubernatorial, and state legislative offices.  Taylor repeatedly refused to answer the 2008 Political Courage Test.

-          Taylor did complete the 1996 National Political Awareness Test.  Here's a few of his responses on a variety of issues (many of the questions had multiple choice answers):

Abortion:

Abortions should be legal only when the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape or when the life of the woman is endangered.

Affirmative Action:

The federal government should not provide any affirmative action programs.

Balanced Budget Amendment:

Do you support amending the US Constitution to require an annual balanced federal budget?  Yes.

Prayer in School:

Do you support amending the United States Constitution to allow voluntary prayer and/or moment of silence in public schools?  Yes.

Immigration:

Further limit the number of immigrants allowed into the country, Establish English as the official and recognized language of the United States, Restrict the eligibility of legal immigrants for certain social programs (i.e. AFDC, HUD housing, food stamps, etc.), and Children of illegal immigrants, born in the United States, should not automatically receive US citizenship.

Term Limits:  

No answer

Legislative Priorities:

Balance the budget Eliminate or reduce national debt.

                Hopefully this brief review stirs your curiosity as you begin to assess this 4^th Congressional District race.  There are numerous other points and resources that could be cited on Taylor but for the sake of space and time I will not attempt to delve further; I would, however, encourage you to do your homework on this race.  Grade Taylor's body of work and see if you believe we can do better in the 4^th District in 2010.

                Gene Taylor is not a bad guy; heck, he's not all that bad of a Congressman if you judge his body of work through a narrowed lens.  America and the future of our great nation are about something bigger than narrow, spin driven, seat ensuring issues that sound good on the campaign trail but are often forgotten in D.C.  We need a Congressman that will stand up and fight for Mississippi.  We need a Congressman who will stand on the principles of the Constitution, for the freedoms we hold dear, to speak against the ills of the day and actively support a different direction than what is being proposed by those now in leadership (leadership supported and encouraged by Taylor himself).  It would seem that we need a change in the 4th District, but I'll leave that up to you to decide.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

Principled Government Starts at City Hall

                A few months ago, I met a gentleman at the National League of Cities conference in San Antonio named John McAlister.  John is a fellow City Council member from Gahanna, Ohio, a suburb of Columbus.  As we waited for a boat tour of the downtown San Antonio Riverwalk, John and I discussed politics in our hometowns, a common discussion at such conferences.  Soon our discussion turned to national politics and the challenges facing our country.  I learned of John's steadfast commitment to the oath of office he took as a City Councilman to uphold and defend the Constitution, an oath that City Council members and Boards of Aldermen take all across this country.  John is a strong believer that we can regain limited federal government by holding local politicians accountable for their votes.  I found his zeal for such thoughts refreshing and reassuring.

                One of many truths that can be gleaned from John McAlister can be found on his website, www.localpoliticians.net.  There he wrote, "If you check the background of your local member of the U.S. House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate you will find that most of these people started out in politics as a city council representative, county commissioner, etc.  Many went on to their state legislatures.  What if we were only sending people to higher office who had proved their worthiness of upholding the Constitution at the local level?  Might we then start to get state legislatures and a U.S. Congress made up of people who honor freedom and the founding principles of limited government and a government that secures our rights rather than tramples on them?"  How profound.

                Principled government - the kind of government that enriches individual liberty and freedom, upholds and defends the Constitution, and promotes the interest of the sum, not the part while maintaining as limited a role as possible - starts in the City Halls all around this country.  It is in the local communities, not the state capitols or Washington D.C. that a fundamental change can begin to reverse the course of the "nanny state" and rightful restoration can be made of our American foundations.  The continual overreaching of government can be combated best and most effectively by city officials who stand on solid principles and act at times against their own inclinations, with an eye on the Constitution and an ear listening to the voice of the people. 

                There are times, I will admit, when the will of the people is in direct contrast to the Constitution and to the principles of good Republic government.  Many, even some traditional conservatives, will accept more government intrusion into their personal lives and support laws that chip away at our Constitutional foundations for what could be seen as a humanitarian or medical cause or even for a slight bit of comfort all the while consigning the founding principles of our Republic to a mere afterthought.  Former President Ronald Reagan once said, "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine.  It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project."  In recent days, we have seen such relegation of principles in cities around Mississippi, big government ideals disguised within seemingly worthwhile causes.  While there are numerous examples, one now up for debate in my city comes to mind - a smoking ban. 

Proponents of a smoking ban believe restaurants, bars, and other such establishments to be "public" places, which allow local governments to regulate such activity.  They use phrases such as, "Your right to smoke ends when my right to breath begins," and "If I want to eat in that restaurant I should be able to do so without breathing in smoke."  They point to the medical community's research that secondhand smoke is harmful.  They say that smokers cost society by way of increased likelihood for the need for medical treatment which in part falls on the general taxpayers.  Proponents also say that all such establishments should be mandated to comply with a smoking ban to level the playing field for all who do business in the area. 

I trust by now you can recognize the inherent flaws in the smoking ban proponents' arguments in terms of principled government.  In case you missed it, allow me to elaborate.  (To qualify my statements to follow, I do not smoke.  Actually, I personally do not care to be around smoke nor would I condone the use of cigarettes.  With that said, I will now continue.)

Restaurants, bars, and other such establishments are not "public" places as defined in government terms; they are privately owned businesses.  "Public" places are areas that are owned by the city, county, or state, such as parks, ball fields, and government buildings.  Private businesses can refuse service should they choose; public areas are accessible by all taxpayers. 

America was built on capitalism, free enterprise, and an entrepreneurial spirit.  Capitalism by definition is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods, characterized by a free competitive market and motivation by profit.  Capitalism has been the backbone of our society and has allowed our country to grow and expand more than any nation in the history of the world.  Allowing a person to decide what type of business they operate and how they manage that business has been what has made this country great.  A business owner's right to choose who their business will cater to and what services and goods they supply to the public is capitalism at its best.  So for me, as an elected official, to hamper in any manner a private business person's right to run their business as they see fit is a detriment to capitalism and our economic system.   That is what a smoking ban on private, commercial businesses does; it takes the business owner's right to choose who their business will cater to and disregards capitalism.  A smoking ban is over regulation, big government, and infringement on freedom at its core.

 Additionally, I personally find it disconcerting that business owners who support a smoking ban and that would be impacted by such an ordinance would essentially turn over the direction of their companies to a local governing body.   If a business owner wants to ban smoking in their establishment, then by all means post a no smoking sign and lead by example.  The truth is, however, that those who will not act on their own merit fear the loss of revenue it will cause if they act alone.  In their train of thought, if all such businesses are required to comply with a smoking ban, they stand to lose less customers and revenue because all of the like businesses in the area will be under the same mandate; there will not be an alternate choice for the consumer.  While I follow their thinking, I find it in stark contrast with my ideals of principled government.

As for the medical studies, yes, smoking is not healthy and secondhand smoke can be and often is harmful.  And yes, often times, poor choices by the few adversely cost the sum.  I would agree with those statements and concerns.  But please don't miss the greatness of our country here.  You and I have the choice to be a patron of any business we choose.  And those businesses will succeed or fail based on if you and I support them.  That is our freedom, our privilege in a society based on free enterprise.  Your patronage of a business will determine that business's health.  And if enough of us do not buy from a business it will inevitably die.  That is capitalism.  So if a business owner chooses to cater to smokers and provides such an atmosphere, it is that business owner's choice; he or she will succeed or fail based on that choice.  It is not up to me as a local elected official to mandate to a private business owner what he or she can and cannot do with their private business in terms of offering smoking within their establishment.  After all, the last time I checked, cigarettes and cigars were still legal products for sale and purchase in the United States.  Capitalism allows for success if the market will sustain it and failure if it cannot.  Why over regulate businesses if the market will ultimately decide their fate?  That's the greatness of free enterprise. 

This, of course, is just one example of where city leaders who are grounded in good, principled government can demonstrate their intent to uphold their oath of office and further the restoration of our founding ideals of government.  I can think of other examples as well, some even in our state government: "sin taxes," pseudoephedrine ban, etc.

As difficult as it may be to accept for some, the Constitution and principled government should never play second fiddle to personal comforts, charitable or humane endeavors, or yes, even religious viewpoints.  Indeed, faith and values influence our decisions and should play a profound role in our lives.  The founders of our country, however, never intended to allow government to legislate morality or mandate how an individual lives his or her life.  The point of government should be to foster an environment where everyone can prosper and achieve, while holding fast to their individual eccentricities that indeed make them autonomous and unique.  It is the proper role of government to provide equal opportunity for all to succeed, not mandate that we all succeed equally.  Thus it is both the challenge and the responsibility of local elected officials to uphold the principles of their oath while effectively guiding those they represent in the understanding of such fundamental basics of Republic governance. 

                To be a city official and to promote principled government is not an easy task.  City officials are not insulated from their constituents as are state and federal leaders.  City Hall is just around the corner, not hundreds of miles away.  Local politics is prevalent in the grocery stores, schools, churches, and corner drug store.  While state and federal leaders may encounter professional lobbyists and well funded special interest groups in their daily political world, city officials must hear from their friends, family, coworkers, pastors, and small business leaders every single day.  It is easy for a city leader to be torn between sound government principles and what may make their next day at work, the weekly trip to the store, or next Sunday morning a little easier to endure.  But expedience only breeds future governmental ills.  The sooner those serving in cities around the nation recognize their own strategic importance in the political struggles of the day, the sooner America will return to principled government.

                To quote Reagan once again, "I'm convinced that today the majority of Americans want what those first Americans wanted: A better life for themselves and their children; a minimum of government authority.  Very simply, they want to be left alone in peace and safety to take care of the family by earning an honest dollar and putting away some savings.  This may not sound too exciting, but there is something magnificent about it.  On the farm, on the street corner, in the factory and in the kitchen, millions of us ask nothing more, but certainly nothing less than to live our own lives according to our values - at peace with ourselves, our neighbors and the world."

America can experience a governmental awakening, but it will not start in the state capitols or Washington D.C.; it will start in the City Halls and family kitchens throughout this great country.  City leaders must be steadfast to uphold their oaths and choose daily to actively stand firm in principled government, and if they do, we will surely see a true American reformation.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

Could Taylor Face a Democrat Challenger?

                Fourth Congressional District Democrat Incumbent Gene Taylor could be facing a challenge from within his own party.  That's the word out of a local Democrat party member with knowledge of the race. 

Speaking this morning on my radio show, "On the Edge" on WPMP 1580 AM (www.wpmpradio.com), the Jackson County Democrat member did confirm that there were some within the Mississippi Gulf Coast Democrat ranks that are actively seeking a challenger to the 20-year incumbent Congressman.

                At issue for the local Democrats is Taylor's vocal challenge of the President and other Congressional Democrat leaders on the usual party issues, namely health care reform.  Taylor, who is a long-time member of the Blue Dogs and touts himself as a conservative Democrat, has effectively rode the political party fence by opposing abortion, gun control, and other  conservative mantles while often times voting for and alongside the liberal House leadership.  Such stances have allowed Taylor to defray criticism at home while remaining relevant in D.C. 

                The shear notion that Taylor could face a challenger from within his own party adds to the already rising tide sweeping through the national political scene of those fed up with business as usual in Washington.  Such feeling was never more prevalent than with the win by Scott Brown in the recent Massachusetts Senate race.  Many believe Brown's win to be a precursor of things to come during the 2010 Congressional elections.  It seems that now, more than ever, people on both sides of the aisle want to know where their elected representatives stand on the issues of the day and don't want to wander on a consistent basis where their allegiance lies. 

                Taylor has already drawn two Republican challengers to date - State Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-District 116) and Petal Businessman Joe Tegerdine.  There are rumors within the Jackson County Republican Party, as was also revealed on "On the Edge" this morning by a local Republican party member, that State Senator Michael Watson (R-District 51) was exploring a run for the 4^th Congressional seat as well.  Watson, in a January 31 story by the Clarion Ledger, said that he is "not currently planning on" challenging Taylor for the seat. 

The qualifying deadline is March 1^st.  In politics, that's a long time for the landscape to change.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

4^th Congressional District Race Heats Up:

Palazzo Throws His Hat in the Ring

                State Representative Steven Palazzo (R-District 116) announced this morning while on the Paul Gallo Show on Supertalk MS that he will throw his hat in the ring to challenge 4^th Congressional District Democrat Congressman Gene Taylor.  Palazzo must first face Joe Tegerdine in the Republican primary.  Tegerdine has already qualified to run for the seat and has been working to form a grassroots organization while visiting locations throughout the district.

                According to his state representative website, Palazzo is a native of the Mississippi Gulf Coast and has lived there his entire life with the exception of temporary work assignments and tours of duty in the US and overseas.  He is committed and dedicated to helping the MS Gulf Coast recover and meet the challenges ahead.  Palazzo touts his experience as a small business owner, CPA, and employee that has provided him with a keen insight and understanding of what it means to hold yourself and others accountable for their actions.  He understands the need for a balanced industry to sustain economic and job development.  Education is important to Palazzo as he sees it as the key to our future and creating a competitive workforce.  As a US Marine veteran of the Persian Gulf War and current Mississippi National Guardsman he understands the importance of promises made and promises kept to our active military, reserves, and retirees.  

                Palazzo made headlines recently when he requested Mississippi's Attorney General prepare for action against the federal government in case the pending health care legislation is passed in its current form.  In one interview, Palazzo stated, "The vast majority of American people oppose a government takeover of healthcare.  We are all seeing firsthand the bold corruption and calamitous nature of our federal government unfold in front of our eyes.  This is truly sickening to watch."

                The Jackson Free Press did a story on Palazzo recently as their Person of the Day.  The December 31, 2009 article spoke to the aforementioned letter to Attorney General Hood and other points.  Here's an excerpt:

"Mississippi legislators take an oath of office to never vote for any measure in exchange for a promise or vote for another measure or person," Palazzo wrote in his letter. "The blatant federal deal brokering to BUY votes is immoral and unethical."

Not content to merely castigate Congress' deal making, Palazzo also alleged that health-care reform would actually violate the Constitution.

"Furthermore, it is unconstitutional to pass such an unfunded mandate onto the states," he wrote. "Simply put, I along with a majority of Mississippians, see this as a violation of equal protection of the law, an affront to our sovereignty, and a breach of the U.S. Constitution."

Palazzo has carried the banner for right-wing national politics before, notably on a resolution from the 2009 legislative session recognizing Worker's Memorial Day, a commemoration supported by labor unions of Americans who have died on the job. The house bill, sponsored by Rep. Jim Evans, D-Jackson, sparked thirty minutes of bloviating on both sides, after Palazzo insisted on attaching an amendment that offered a veiled criticism of the proposed, union-supported Employee Free Choice Act a favorite bogeyman of conservative political commentators.

                It says something about the politics and character of Palazzo when the Jackson Free Press makes an issue of him.  The first part of the article starts with "While he represents Biloxi in the Mississippi Legislature, Rep. Steven Palazzo often seems to be acting on a national stage."  Could even they see potential?

Palazzo does bring conservative credibility to his Congressional run and will be able to actively compete with the Gulf Coast voting base.  He will also be a viable fundraiser, a must to effectively brand his name and message in the minds and hearts of the 4^th District electorate.  Palazzo brings to the table name recognition and a proven record of public service, both of which are weighty campaign needs especially taking on such an incumbent as Democrat Gene Taylor.  Additionally, Palazzo will be able to speak to the needs of the people of Mississippi and the hardships facing the state due in large part to the current Presidential administration as well Democrat controlled Congress.

I expect a gentlemanly race between Tegerdine and Palazzo.  Either way, we've seen what twenty years has given us in the 4th District.  I truly desire our nation to be more than it is today; America desperately needs the next generation of leaders to begin to take hold now, not tomorrow.  I encourage you all to consider the 2010 Congressional race and help America be more.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

Voter ID Ballot Referendum Moving Forward

                Mississippi's Voter ID petition drive is moving forward and has acquired the numbers needed to continue the process to place the initiative on the state wide ballot. 

                The petition drive had to capture 90,000 signatures divided between the five old congressional districts.  According to sources close to the effort, over 22,000 signatures have been compiled in the First, Second, and Third Congressional Districts.  The Fourth District has just over 20,000 signatures and the old Fifth District has over 21,000.  In Circuit Clerk offices across the state there are several hundred more signatures awaiting certification and the certified totals in all districts are expected to rise.  The hope is to have each district exceed 22,000 signatures at the end of the effort and given the totals thus far it looks promising.  Plans are to deliver the petitions to the Secretary of State's office February 11^th.

                Many around the state have invested much of their time and effort to compile these signatures from walking streets and knocking on doors to businesses that have actively promoted and publicized the effort.  This has truly been a grassroots initiative to change the face of Mississippi's voting future.   

Showing an ID in order to prevent voter fraud just makes sense in the world in which we live.  Many around the state have united to demand accurate and honest elections by ensuring that each and every vote is cast in the proper manner.  Through the groundbreaking work of so many, there will be no more of the ploys and countless excuses to prevent Voter ID in Mississippi.  There will be no more of the good ole boy politics, no more of the "vote early and vote often" mentality that abounds throughout our state.  This one initiative will ensure that when you go to the polls and cast your ballot, your vote will count.  After all, you vote to make a difference and to be heard.  You vote because it's a right of our Republic.  You vote so that the will of the people can be accomplished.  So why not help protect this most sacred of all Republic rights and support the need for Voter ID.  Thanks to so many, we may all finally have that chance.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

Peeking In:

The House Apportionment and Elections Committee

                After glancing through the Mississippi House of Representatives committees, I thought I would offer up for your deliberation a few bills currently under consideration in the House Apportionment and Elections Committee.  I have long considered this committee one of the most vital groups in state government given its subject matter.  Elections are the very fabric of our Republic and this committee indeed serves a crucial function. 

The bills below may never come out of committee and see the light of day on the House floor but they are definitely good conversation starters around the water cooler.

State Superintendent of Public Education

                Should we elect the State Superintendent of Public Education?  If Rep. John Moore (R-District 60) has his way, we just may have that opportunity. 

House Bill (HB) 491 provides for the election of the State Superintendent starting with the 2011 elections.  Under the bill, the State Superintendent would serve a four year term and follow the same electoral guidelines as the other eight state wide elected offices.  The compensation for the State Superintendent, as defined by this HB 491, would be equal to 90% of the salary of the Commissioner of Higher Education, which is currently the pay structure for the appointed position.  This equates to over $300,000 annually or $200,000 more than what the Governor is presently paid.  The bill would require the State Superintendent to hold at least a master's degree in any field and a minimum of five years experience in educational administration. 

Click here to read HB 491.

Political Party Switching

                In the past few months, we have seen quite a few Democrats switch parties (i.e. Simpson County, etc.).  It would seem plausible that such activity provoked Rep. Bob Evans (D-District 91) to file House Bill (HB) 1457.  And just for the record, District 91 does include Copiah, Covington, Jefferson Davis, Lawrence, and yes, Simpson counties.

                HB 1457 would prohibit an elected official from changing political party affiliation during their term in office.  Should a party switch be made, the bill states that a change of party affiliation would be considered a resignation from that elected office and the vacancy should be filled in a manner as provided by law for that office. 

Sour grapes?  Click here to read HB 1457. 

Mississippi's Version of the Fairness Doctrine Creeping In

                According to the Heritage Foundation, legislation known as the "fairness doctrine," entitled the "Fairness in Broadcasting Act," required broadcasters to "afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of public importance."  The fairness doctrine was overturned by the FCC in 1987.  The FCC discarded the rule because, contrary to its purpose, it failed to encourage the discussion of more controversial issues.  There were also concerns that it was in violation of First Amendment free speech principles.  Mississippi House Bill (HB) 144 authored by Rep. John Mayo (D-District 25) comes uncomfortably close to revisiting this failed, flawed federal legislation.

                HB 144 would require certain broadcasting stations (Supertalk MS, have you read this yet?) that receive public funds to afford equal opportunity in use of their stations to all candidates for office and would require stations to allow equal opportunity and time for rebuttals to positions taken by its on-air announcers or commentators during a certain period of time before an election. 

                I guess some people will try and skin a cat more than one way.  Click here to read HB 144. 

Judges and Party Affiliation

                Many around Mississippi, and even more so across the country, are sick and tired of liberal, activist judges.  While justice is supposed to be blind, often judges impose their hidden political ideologies into their rulings.  Wouldn't it be easier if we already knew their political bent before they got in office? 

Rep. John Moore (R-District 60) has filed House Bill (HB) 494 that would repeal the Nonpartisan Judicial Election Act, meaning that judges would be forced to identify their political party affiliation when qualifying to run for office.  Guess that's one way to uncover the truth.

Click here to read HB 494.  Also, click here to read my prior blog post on why "Party Matters." 

                These are just a few of the more interesting and thought provoking bills currently sitting in the House Apportionment and Elections Committee.  James Buchanan, our 15^th President, once said, "I love the noise of democracy."  It's high time we all made some noise to ensure the future of our Republic.  I would encourage you all to take the time to browse through the bills being considered during this legislative session.  Get involved in your local and state government.  Read and study for yourself.  Then, let your voice be heard. 

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

More Trial Lawyer Politics in Mississippi

                The Mississippi Association for Justice, formerly the Mississippi Trial Lawyers Association, has as its motto on its website (www.msaj.org) "Lawyers Representing People Not Corporations."  In theory, such a phrase would seem appropriate and be well received by most.  It suggests that there are trial lawyers who seek to rush to the rescue of the people of Mississippi as they fight for legal justice when facing the well-funded corporate giants who are ever prepared to defend their interests perhaps to the detriment of those citizens who can't.  Sounds plausible enough, even chivalrous.  But the truth is that many trial lawyers, seemingly more often than not, pursue frivolous lawsuits that drive up costs that ultimately are passed on to the average consumer.  They lurk and prey, waiting for just the right moment to strike.  When they pounce, they seek often exorbitant monetary damages where they feel they have the best chance to win and pad their own pocketbooks.  It's not really about the individual client or the cause; it's about their careers.  The same can be said of trial lawyers who get elected to public office.

                Trial lawyers who become elected public officials have a tendency to bring their "Lawyers Representing People Not Corporations" philosophy into the public policy arena.  Just as the story of Robin Hood is a good children's story but makes terrible economic and public policy, so too does this trial lawyer motto.  Here's an example.

                A bill has been filed in the Mississippi House of Representatives (HB 1007) that creates the duty for persons operating trains to keep a lookout for persons and property on railroad tracks.  Sounds innocent enough, right?  Keep reading for an excerpt from the bill below:

(1) (a) It shall be the duty of all persons running trains in this state upon any railroad to keep a constant lookout for all persons, including licensees and trespassers, and property upon the track of any and all railroads.

(b) If any person or property is killed or injured by the neglect of any employee of any railroad to keep a lookout, the company owning or operating any railroad or its agents, servants and employees shall be liable and responsible to the person injured for all damages resulting from neglect to keep a lookout.

(2) (a) In any action brought for failure to keep a lookout, contributory negligence shall not bar recovery of damages for any injury, property damage, or death where the negligence of the person injured or killed is of a lesser degree than the negligence of the employee or employees in charge of the train of the company.

(b) In all such actions accruing for negligence resulting in personal injuries or wrongful death or injury to property, the contributory negligence shall not prevent a recovery where any negligence of the person so injured, damaged or killed is of a lesser degree than any negligence of the person, firm or corporation causing the damage.  However, where contributory negligence is shown on the part of the person injured, damaged or killed, the amount of the recovery shall be diminished in proportion to such contributory negligence.

Did you catch what was written there?  Railroad companies, train operators, and their employees could be held liable if any person is injured or killed or if any property is harmed while on a track under the guise of the railroad employees' not "keeping a lookout."  Does the bill's author not believe that railroad employees who are traveling at such high rates of speed are not "keeping a lookout?"  How would such action even be proven?  Moreover, how realistic is it to believe that a train traveling at such speeds could essentially stop on a dime even if the operator saw a person or an object especially given the many twists and turns in Mississippi's tracks? 

The bill goes on to say that even if the person that is harmed is found to be at fault through "contributory negligence," the rail company could still be held liable.  The bill's author tries to sugarcoat this last part by adding that "the amount of the recovery shall be diminished in proportion to such contributory negligence."  "Diminished?"  Really?  The vagueness of the implication allows trial lawyers the opportunity to at least go after something under the banner of "representing people not corporations."

It shouldn't surprise you that the author of this bill is a trial lawyer himself - Rep. Brandon Jones (D-Pascagoula). 

It is bills and subsequent laws such as these that harm our economy, put companies out of business, cause job loss, increase costs to citizens, and ultimately create an environment that is detrimental to growth and prosperity for local communities.  The frivolous lawsuits that will come as a result of this bill if it passes will only serve to pad the pockets of trial lawyers around the state, giving them yet another avenue to continue the trend of attempting to play Robin Hood.

I wonder: Could this be a precursor to things to come?  Will we see more such attempts to encourage irresponsible litigation?  Could the tort reform progress we have seen in Mississippi be eroded by similar efforts?  Let's all hope for the sake of our state and our collective futures that this bill and others like it meet a quick, fiery death.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

The Parents' Campaign Pushing for House Bill 392

                The Mississippi House of Representatives passed House Bill 392 yesterday.  The bill would achieve the House Democrats' plan to limit the amount that can be cut from the budget ($374 million) and force the Governor to raid the rainy day fund of $50 million to shore up state agencies and use $61 million in federal stimulus money, both one-time money sources which Gov. Barbour and many other fiscal conservatives have emphatically opposed.  Such notions play squarely in to Speaker Billy McCoy's theory of spend now, pray later.

                State Democrats and their related special interest groups are now trying to rally support for HB 392.  Just today, The Parents' Campaign sent out emails encouraging its readers to support HB 392 and to contact their Senators to support the bill as well.  They even provided a list of who voted for and against the measure.  Click here to view the vote record.  Here's the email:

The House of Representatives passed today House Bill 392, a good alternative to Governor Barbour's request for additional budget cuts authority.Please thank our legislators who voted in favor of this bill. We will need your help to get this bill through the Senate.

House Bill 392 allows the governor to exempt from cuts the Department of Corrections, the National Board Certified Teacher supplement, the Ayers settlement, the Veteran's Affairs Board (Nursing Homes), the Chickasaw Cession, debt service, and the courts. It also requires that the governor use the $61-million in available ARRA funds and $50-million from the state Rainy Day Fund before making further cuts.

According to House Education Chairman Cecil Brown, the measures in this bill would leave only $13-million in cuts necessary to balance the budget. There is $48-million in cuts that can still be made before all agencies reach the 5% threshold (which education has already reached).Therefore, under this plan, no additional cuts would need to be made to the education budget. 

We need to get this bill passed in the Senate. Please call your senator.Ask your senator to support HB 392 as it passed the House. 

Your phone call will be very important. It could help us save our schools from devastating cuts. Please ask your friends and family to call too. Our kids are counting on us!

                True to form, when the state Democrats struggle to get their way, they turn to beating the education drum and enlist their special interest groups to do their dirty work despite the realities at hand. 

                There continues to be a disconnect between the House leadership and Gov. Barbour as to just how dire the state's financial situation is now and could be in the near future.  Also at issue here is the seven year tug of war: McCoy and his liberal boys versus Gov. Barbour.  

The real question on this issue I believe is who do you trust more with the state budget: the state-wide elected, full-time fiscally conservative Governor who is seeking to uphold his constitutional duties for a balanced budget or district-elected, part-time House Democrat representatives who consistently bring to the table their own wish list of spend now, pray later programs?  Can you guess who I side with?

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

Party Matters

                For some time now, many across Mississippi and around the nation have questioned whether there is a need for political party designations in local municipal and county races.  As a matter of fact, there is a bill in the Mississippi House of Representatives submitted by Rep. Becky Currie (R-District 92) that would create the "Non-partisan County Elections Act."  House Bill 304 would make county offices (such as Supervisor, Sheriff, Chancery Clerk, Tax Assessor, etc.) in Mississippi non-partisan and would prohibit a candidate from campaigning or qualifying for such an office based on part affiliation. 

                Taking party politics out of local decision making would seem to have merit.  In theory and in a utopian society such a notion would be ideal.  Often, it can be argued, local issues can be negatively impacted by the politics of party on both sides of the spectrum and can cloud the better judgment of some in local elected office.  But in the day and time in which we live, the truth is, party does matter, perhaps even more so now locally than ever.   Allow me to explain.       

As a local elected official, I take my position as a City Councilman seriously.  I am on the front lines of the political landscape day in and day out, in the grocery store, the doctor's office, at football games, and walking down the street.  Not a day goes by that no less than a few dozen of my constituents call, email, come by, or stop and talk local, state, or national politics.  I cherish every minute of the interaction with each of them.  I love being able to help resolve issues within the city or just listen to their thoughts on the condition of our city, state, and nation. 

No other political office is quite like a local elected official in that they have the opportunity to live and work with the people they represent every day and then go handle the city's or county's business just down the street amongst friends and family.  State Representatives, Congressmen and Senators, Governors and Presidents are shielded from doing business amidst the masses.  These offices have a cushion of location, if you will.  Yes, such close contacts locally can offer their own challenges but the positives definitely outweigh the negatives because local elected officials get to see how their decisions make a difference each and every day.  Local elected officials aren't allowed to lose their foundation and that's a healthy position for those in governing bodies to be in. 

All of this and more is why political party affiliation matters at the local level of government.  Who a candidate or local official aligns him or herself with is telling of how they will handle the business of the people in local government from taxation to land use to economic development to fiscal budgeting to law enforcement to a host of other locally sensitive issues.  Party affiliation can also point to one's character and patterns of beliefs in terms of humanity, freedom, liberty, and spirituality.

A local elected official's party of choice speaks volumes.  The voting public is, for the most part, cognizant of what Democrats and Republicans stand for (not so much for Independents or even third party candidates).  The voting public generally knows the difference between liberal and conservative policies.  They know what party's ideals of government best align with their own and they want to be able to trust that those ideals are carried out.  I would argue that such is true even more so in the local communities where they have chosen to live, work, worship, and play.  

It was Thomas Jefferson that said, "That government is best which is closest to the people."  Local elected officials should continue to declare their party affiliation so the public knows by what standard they live their lives and to what ideals they will lead their communities.  Party matters.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

Support the Need for Voter ID

Everyone wants fair, honest elections.  When you go to the polls and cast that ballot, you want your vote to count.  You vote to make a difference and to be heard.  You vote because it's a right of our Republic.  You vote so that the will of the people can be accomplished.  So why not help protect this most sacred of all Republic rights and support the need for Voter ID.

Surely by now you've heard of the state-wide ballot initiative to require a photo ID when voting.  Voter ID is an important issue.  Showing an ID in order to prevent voter fraud just makes sense in the world in which we live.  We need to unite to demand accurate and honest elections by ensuring that each and every vote is cast in the proper manner.  No more of the ploys and countless excuses to prevent Voter ID.  No more of the good ole boy politics.  No more of the "vote early and vote often" mentality that abounds throughout our state.  Your help is needed to ensure fair elections in Mississippi and all it takes is a signature.  So have you signed the Voter ID petition?

If you have not signed a Voter ID petition or would like to help collect signatures, please visit one of the locations below in Jackson and Harrison Counties.  Or you can visit www.msgop.org and click on the "Support Voter ID" link to request a petition via mail.

Jackson County Pickup/Dropoff Locations:

• Ocean Springs:  Miner's Toy Store, Washington Avenue
• Gautier:  Coldwell-Banker Realty, Hwy 90
• Gautier:  Sleep King, Hwy 90
• Gautier:  David Thompson (at bank between McDonald's & Wendys on Highway 90 - ask for David)
• Pascagoula:  Anderson's Bakery, Market Street
• Pascagoula:  Sleep King, Denny Avenue
• Vancleave: Coles Service Center, Poticaw Bayou Road
• Wade/Hurley/Big Point area: Farm Bureau Insurance, 16913 Highway 63 (10 miles north of I-10, 1 mile north of the power plant, 4 miles south of Wade-Vancleave Rd.)

Harrison County Pickup/Dropoff Locations:

• Sweet Pepper's Deli on the west side of Hwy. 49 in Saucier.  Ask for David or Joyce.
• Comvest Properties on Beauvoir Rd. in Biloxi.  Across from Autozone. 
• Vintage Station on Courthouse Rd. in Gulfport.  After 5pm.  Just north of the railroad.
• Bernie's restaurant in Biloxi.
• Hallmark Mortgage on Cowan Rd. in Gulfport.  Just north of Hwy. 90.
• Palazzo CPA's.  1/2 mile north of I-10 at exit 41/Woolmarket.
• Any Sleep King location.  Denny Ave. in Pascagoula.  Eisenhower Dr. in Biloxi.  Hwy. 49 in Gulfport next to Best Buy.  Dedeaux Rd. in Gulfport, 1 mile east of Hwy. 49.  Hwy. 90 in Gautier.  Pass Rd. in Gulfport, next to Center Point Energy.  Sangani Blvd. in D'Iberville next to Lowe's.

Also, to assist you in completing the Voter ID petition, here are a few guidelines:

• Official petition forms are 2-sided legal size. Sheet must have printing on back to be valid. Use official forms.
• Print name and address as listed on voter rolls (Clerk compares name and address to voter rolls to certify each signature)
• No P.O. Boxes.
• Black or blue ink is OK.
• Don't worry about precinct or congressional district (not necessary)
• Keep different counties on separate sheets.
• Sign at the bottom of the sheet as the circulator.
• Deliver completed sheets to drop-off points AS THEY ARE COMPLETED (we want to avoid a bottleneck at the Clerks's office). Our deadline for turning in sheets to the drop-off points is January 31^st.

Join in the fight to protect our most sacred of all Republic rights.  Support the need for voter ID.  Enough is enough - no more voter fraud or the potential for such practices in our great state.  Sign a petition today and get in the fight.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

Analysis of Taylor's Town Hall

Mississippi's 4^th Congressional District

                In Mississippi's 4^th Congressional District, Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Bay St. Louis) held a town hall meeting in Ocean Springs January 11, 2010.  Taylor, currently running for reelection, represents the most conservative district in Mississippi, yet has held the Congressional seat as a Democrat for 20 years. 

                After opening the meeting with a prayer and the pledge of allegiance, Taylor praised Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding for their agreement to build the new DDG-51 while Bath Iron Works will build the 1000s.  The Congressman then highlighted his support for increasing the depth of the shipping channels and for restoring the barrier islands.  After making these two points, Taylor took questions from the audience.

                Looking around the room, it was obvious that campaign season was in full swing.  "Joe Tegerdine for Congress" t-shirts were sprinkled in the crowd and various media outlets hung on Taylor's every word.  Citizens were looking for answers, asking direct, often poignant questions, and at times even expressed their reluctance for Taylor's recent actions and continued liberal party support.

                Taylor is no stranger to walking the line between party loyalist and populist pleasing conservative.  It would seem, however, that those in attendance and even more throughout the 4^th District, are not as willfully drinking the Taylor Kool-Aid this go around as in years past.  I could sense an undercurrent starting to swell seeking to right the 4^th District's left leaning ship.  Taylor seems to sense it too, given his temperament with some members of the audience.

                Having held town hall meetings of my own and now hold public hearings on a regular basis as a Councilman, I expect to be cut off, interrupted, and even challenged at times.  And when those times come, as a public servant hired by the people, it is imperative those situations be handled with care.  There is a right and a wrong way to ask someone to not interrupt or blurt out a comment, to wait their turn.  After all, as a public servant you are there for the people you represent; they're not there for you.  The people are your bosses.  They put you in office.  Perhaps spending 20 years in D.C. and not directly involved in the day-to-day lives of those he serves has allowed Taylor to forget these truths and exactly for whom he works. 

                Taylor repeatedly commented that it was his town hall meeting, not those in attendance.  Of course, that didn't go over too well with more than a few, with some shouting out that he worked for them, it was their meeting.  Taylor commented that his name was on the invitation and announcement; it was his meeting.  He even addressed one gentleman by saying if you interrupt again, you'll be asked to leave and that you can hold your own town hall meeting when you wish.  One lady, a local access television host, who had had her hand raised since the beginning of the question and answer period, finally got tired of waiting and addressed the Congressman by name asking to be heard, but Taylor cut her off, saying not to interrupt and that by interrupting your question would not be taken.  Hers never was, yet her hand remained raised throughout the remainder of the meeting.

                Questions ranged from insurance concerns to health care to the overreaching of the federal government.  Here are a few interesting comments from Taylor as he answered the crowd.  I have paraphrased the comments while attempting to quote them as close as possible:

·         In response to his voting for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker:  I voted for me.  I voted for the Democrat slate (in essence saying his vote for Pelosi gave him the best chance to be in the leadership).

·         Concerning the comments made by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in the wake of the failed Christmas terror attack:  I'm no fan of hers, and she's no fan of mine.I would hope she would be replaced.

·         On his opinion of President Obama's appointments thus far:  I can count on one hand the appointments this President has made that I like (Secretary of Defense Gates, Secretary of the Navy Mabus, and Secretary of Veterans Affairs Shinseki were a few).

·         Relating to big government spending:  I'm a co-author of Rep. Ron Paul's audit the fed bill.

·         In response to Congress getting pay raises:  There will be no raise for Congress this year.

·         Regarding the recent comments by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada):  I did not call for Trent Lott's head.I'm not the thought police.

·         Concerning what's been said by media pundits:  The guys on talk radio don't really have a lot to do all day.

·         On what good he believed President Obama's election will bring:  A good thing about Obama being elected was that the barrier was broke (meaning that a black man reached the highest office).

While I was unfortunately unable to quote the Congressman word for word, there were at least three video cameras in the audience that I'm sure would confirm my assessment of these answers as well as point to Taylor's aforementioned lack of patience with the audience.

On a personal note, it seems that Taylor or at least his staffers have read my previous writings concerning the Congressman and the 4^th Congressional District.  Now fully aware of this fact, allow me to reiterate what I have said previously, which can be read in full by clicking here and here:  

"A few years ago this 4th District seat didn't seem all that important.  Having one or two Democrat Congressmen wasn't a big deal most thought.  They have tenure, clout among their peers.  But now, with the make up of Congress, the Speaker of the House, the Senate in full control and the White House locked up, this Southeast Mississippi seat needs to symbolize and portray how we in this area truly believe to our core.Shakespeare once said, "We know what we are, but know not what we may be."  We've seen what 20 years has given us in the 4th District.  I truly desire our nation to be more than it is today; America desperately needs the next generation of leaders to begin to take hold now, not tomorrow.  I encourage you all to consider the 2010 Congressional race and help America be more."

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

Double Standard and One Citizenship

                Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) made news this weekend over comments from a yet-to-be-released book, "Game Change."  The book revealed that Reid described in private then-Sen. Barack Obama as "light skinned" and "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."  Reid has since apologized to Obama and the President has accepted the apology. 

                While the acknowledgement of the remarks is a start, I do find it interesting that such double standard lies within the D.C. Beltway.  In 2002, Obama wasn't so quick to forgive now former Senator Trent Lott, our Mississippi Senator.  Obama is quoted as saying, "It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do."  Obama went on to say, "The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott.  If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party."

Liberals are content to accept an apology from their own but not from their opponents.  Lott apologized, more than once, but no forgiveness came and it ultimately cost him his position.  While I holdfast that Republicans should continue to take the high road, some consistency in thought and reaction would be nice from the left and the media. 

I believe this incident points to a much larger, ongoing problem.  I wrote of it in a recent blog entitled "One Citizenship."  For those who have not read it, I invite you to read on. 

"One Citizenship"

Since the beginning of our great nation, one singular issue has remained at the center of every political, social, and religious debate.  One issue has divided this land of opportunity into brother against brother, father against son, denomination against denomination, poor against rich.  It has started riots, fires, funerals, and wars.  Jobs have been lost and industries have been built; buses have been made into memorials and crosses into ash all because of one issue. 
          Racial or ethnic equality is the driving force behind so many of our ills today, and yet the debate still rages because we as citizens allow it to persist and linger.  Some even propagate its existence to stir animosity and resentment, to garner political favor, and to justify and satisfy their own personal prejudices.  These vultures strive to divide; they fight against unity.
          I ask you - what good is going undone while we allow such prideful foolery to inhabit our own minds and the minds of those around us?  What could our country be if this issue wasn't diluting our communities and ruining relationships?
          We must move past labels and reclaim our national identity, not as individuals, but as one citizenship in this Republic.  Such unity can only begin in the depths of each soul, which will require exploration into ones deepest sense of self.  Allow me to elaborate.
          My ancestry nor my ethnic background makes me who I am.  I live in this present condition, at this time in history, and am tasked with serving my fellow man and my God right here, right now.  My eye is fixed on the future, not the past, for I cannot change those who came before me; I may only learn and gain wisdom from studying where they erred, determining to not falter where they faltered, and at times celebrating their achievements.
          Running through my veins is blood that was created by the Almighty right here in America, not Europe or Asia or Africa.  In ages past, whoever courted my kin to these shores of freedom and by whatever trials befell them on their journey is of no true consequence to me now.  While it is indeed enlightening to learn those lessons, dwelling on such things would only serve to divide me from my neighbor.  I live today and strive to live on for tomorrow, not for myself, but for my Lord, my family and my community.
          I cannot thank my Creator enough for placing me in such a liberating place.  Thanks be to God that I was born an American.  I am not white or black, Anglo-Saxon or African-American, Hispanic or Vietnamese, Baptist or Catholic, Jew or Hindu.  I am simply an American, and that is enough.  Such is the essence of our hope and existence as one citizenship in this Republic.
          Those who seek to label and wander in the midst of confusion and lore seek only to stir emotions for their own causes.  We are people, not pawns.  I do not condone nor do I support many past actions in my own beloved country, actions that at times have divided families, neighbors, and countrymen.  But my hope is not in the past; my hope is not in the present; my hope is in the future and in the Republic I strive for each day in my own minute way and would die to protect should that be required of me.
          When we as Americans begin to see this common thread weaving each of us together and we lay down our pride and our labels of prejudice and division, this country will flourish beyond any of our imaginations.  If America is ever going to overcome and reach its destined potential, we must openly and without shame or malice address this wound and nurture it to health.  The scars may linger, but it is our choice not to prick those sensitive areas as it mends.
          I ask you today to join me in promoting one citizenship in this Republic.  Our preferences, philosophies, and ideologies may differ in the church house, school house, or White House, but our one citizenship should always guide us in overcoming any self serving motives, striving together as fellow Americans within a spirit of unity, humility, and respect for our countrymen.
          Join with me; be one citizenship in this Republic.  Discard the labels and antiquated mentality. Proclaim yourself as an American, no more, no less, and be proud of it.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

The Race is On

Taylor, Tegerdine, and the 4^th Congressional District

                2010 is here and with it comes Congressional elections.  Much has been made of the potential for Republicans to make in-roads around the country in Democrat held seats given the partisan, liberal tenor currently in Washington D.C.  Here in Southeast Mississippi, Gene Taylor (D-Bay St. Louis) has held the 4th District Congressional seat since 1989.  Taylor, a former City Councilman and Mississippi State Senator, is well versed in what it takes to win in this district, which by the way is one of, if not the most conservative Republican districts in the nation (no Democrat Presidential candidate has carried the 4th since 1956). Political newcomer Joe Tegerdine hopes to unseat the incumbent Taylor and change that (D) to a (R) for South Mississippi.

For those who have yet to hear of Joe Tegerdine, you will soon as he has now filed his paperwork to run for the 4^th District seat.  He is an energetic man, someone I have come to enjoy speaking with on my radio show.  He is grounded in the Constitution and has cast a broad vision of fiscal responsibility, new House leadership, strong national defense, and limited government.  Here is a quick biography of the 4^th Congressional District Republican candidate adapted from his website (www.joetegerdine.com).

Tegerdine was born in Portland, Oregon and grew up in the Northwest.  He was raised by a single mother for most of his childhood and learned early on to work hard and hold true to the things he was taught.  Shortly after graduating from high school, Tegerdine served as a missionary in Taiwan.  After spending almost two years overseas, he headed home to the United States and attended college at Brigham Young University, earning a B.A. in Communications.  While in college he met and married his wife and in 2002, they moved to Tallahassee, Florida where he earned a Juris Doctorate degree from the Florida State University College of Law.  Tegerdine is currently employed as Senior Director of Business Development for WNC Satcom Group.  He relocated to Hattiesburg, Mississippi in the spring of 2007 and settled in Petal where he currently lives with his wife and four children. 

Given the previous elections in the 4^th Congressional District since Taylor has held the seat, Tegerdine has an uphill challenge indeed.  Taylor has won the last four elections by taking between 64-75% of the vote.  His voting record in the House of Representatives is a mixed bag, however; he has walked the tight rope between party and populist for many years and thus far has mastered it with only the occasional wobble which he quickly balances.  He is seemingly pro-life and pro-gun (anything else in this part of Mississippi and he would have been out a long time ago), yet he has supported his party and its leaders inconspicuously (voting for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker) knowing that if he carried too much of the party's water he would be on the proverbial hot seat come election time at home.  He knows how to appear as if he is fighting for his constituents while not making too many waves in Washington D.C.  His tenure and party connections landed him an important seat on the Armed Services Committee and the Shipbuilding Caucus, making him increasingly valuable to his 4th District constituents.  Taylor's good ole boy persona coupled with his staff's superb PR work in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina make him a force that only the perfect storm or perhaps some truly informed, inspired, involved, and fed up voters could take down.

I believe that we in the 4th District can and should do better than Gene Taylor (hey, that almost rhymed...perhaps there's a campaign slogan in there for Tegerdine).  Taylor is deeply entrenched and knows how to work the system, both locally, through ensuring that the proper spin is applied when needed, and nationally, by being content to sit on the sidelines and following the party line as necessary.  Gene Taylor is not a bad guy; heck, he's not all that bad of a Congressman if you judge his body of work through a narrow lens and confine it to babies, bullets, and budgets.  America and the future of our great nation are about something bigger than such narrow, spin driven, seat ensuring issues.  Yes, those things do matter greatly to me as a conservative and should matter to us all but when our nation's debt is increasing at such a rapid pace, private business is being taken over by government, our Constitution is threatened daily, healthcare is on its way to being rationed in every sense of the word, and on and on I could go we don't need a pacifist Congressman representing our area here in Southeast Mississippi.  We need a Congressman that will stand up and fight for the Constitution, for the freedoms we hold dear, to speak against the ills of the day and actively support a different direction than what is being proposed by those now in leadership - a leadership supported and encouraged by Taylor himself.  We need a change in the 4th District and soon.

The real question, and the most disturbing part of this discussion to me, is this:  How does Gene Taylor, a Democrat, keep getting elected in one of the most conservative Republican district in the nation?  For the sake of time and space, I'll cut to the chase - Republicans put him there.  There's no other answer.  If you live in the 4th District I challenge you to ask your Republican friends that actually vote who they voted for in the last Congressional election.  Check the campaign finance reports for Taylor, as well, and you'll find normally Republican donors sprinkled in among the typical Democrat patrons.
          So how does Tegerdine reverse this trend in 2010?  How can he topple this Goliath?  The only way is for conservative Republicans to break out of their self-induced habit and vote Republican.  Tegerdine must appeal to the true conservatives, creating a sense of urgency that now is the time for a change.  He must work to unite a strong conservative base and educate them on the realities at hand.  Twenty years is long enough for Mr. Taylor's trip to Washington.  

A few years ago this 4th District seat didn't seem all that important.  Having one or two Democrat Congressmen wasn't a big deal most thought.  They have tenure, clout among their peers.  But now, with the make up of Congress, the Speaker of the House, the Senate in full control and the White House locked up, this Southeast Mississippi seat needs to symbolize and portray how we in this area truly believe to our core.  Tegerdine must portray that in all he does over the coming months if he is to get within a stone's throw of Taylor. 

As a side note, another Republican challenger, John McCay (which ran against Taylor in 2008 and lost by a margin of 75%-25%), told me recently he was planning to make another run for the seat as well.  I'm not aware at this time if he has filed to run.  McCay will have the same challenges as Tegerdine should he run and win the party nomination. 

Truth is both Tegerdine and McCay are relative unknowns in the Mississippi political scene meaning that they must brand their name, ideals, and message in voters' minds quickly to have any chance at Taylor.  Republicans will have to get on board with their party's candidate, not only here in the 4^th District, but in the State Republican Party as well.  Southeast Mississippi and the nation deserve better than Gene Taylor and his Democrat friends.  I believe we can do better...but unless people wake up, get in the fight, and get engaged in the 4^th Congressional District, history tells us we won't. 

Frank Corder

Pascagoula City Councilman

The Tax Masquerade

                Most of you have heard the term "nanny state."  Wikipedia defines "nanny state" as a term that refers to state protectionism, economic interventionism, or regulatory policies (of economic, social or other nature), and the perception that these policies are becoming institutionalized as common practice.  Its usage varies by political context, but in general it is used in reference to policies where the state is characterized as being excessive in its desire to protect (as a nanny would protect a child), govern or control particular aspects of society.  The term can refer to public health interventions and consumer protectionism that removes or controls otherwise free choices, as well as national economic and social policies (regulation and intervention) that affect large and state-favored businesses.  Politically conservative groups (those that support free market principles and capitalism) object to excessive state action to protect people from the consequences of their actions by restricting citizen options and with good reason - it's unconstitutional and goes against the essence of the Founders' spirit.

                The story below taken from WLOX, an ABC affiliate in Biloxi, is a perfect example of how we as a society have dumbed down our individual freedoms and reliance on the Constitution and are now allowing our state and federal government to act as a nanny who dictates what we eat, where we go, what products we use, what cars we buy, which doctor we see, and on and on.  As you read the story, keep in mind the explanation above and see if you can see the nanny's hand at work.  I have italicized and underlined a few interesting parts of the story for your ease of understanding:

BILOXI, MS (WLOX) - If your list of must-have drinks include soda, it could cost you close to 50 cents more under a proposed soda tax bill.  The tax would also apply to pre-sweetened drinks like certain juices, teas, and energy drinks.

As the bill is written now, only wholesalers of sodas and sugary drinks would be taxed.  But, the bill's creator, Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, Mississippi, says he's aware that most or all of the cost could be handed down to consumers.  The idea of the tax is stirring up mixed reactions among South Mississippians.

.Representative John Mayo, of Clarksdale, the man behind the bill, says the Stennis Institute is currently conducting a study on the tax and estimates it could raise anywhere from $110 and $147 Million.

Mayo says the push behind the bill is two-fold.  The representative says he hopes to encourage Mississippians to make smarter, healthier choices and to pay for programs teaching people how to make healthier food choices and live healthier lives.

The representative would like to see the money go to the Department of Health, Department of Education and the Mississippi Development Authority.  Mayo says the hope is to get Mississippi thinking more in terms of preventative care as opposed to being in reactionary mode.

"I hope it passes this year.  It's focusing attention on what are healthy choices and what are not; it's a start."  He goes on to say, "If you choose to be fat by making unhealthy choices, why should those of us who choose to be healthy pay for your obesity."

Did you hear the nanny's voice in this story?  In case you didn't notice, it was prevalent throughout.  Perhaps you even found yourself asking these questions as you read the story: why only certain businesses, why only certain drinks, why does the state need to be so involved in my life, why should the state have a say in what I eat and drink, why is the government involved in the health care industry, and many more. 

For decades now, our state and federal governments have eased into the role of nanny as they have taxed some businesses and products more than others to encourage the average consumer to use or not use said products as is deemed politically expedient for the whims of the day.  The problem with such selective government endorsements is that all of the products are legal and hold equal standing under the law.  Such "sin" taxes masquerade as concern, but is essentially legal product discrimination authorized by the government.  

So why do we allow certain industries to be taxed more than others?  Why is it acceptable to tax alcohol more than milk?  Why is it fine to tax cigarettes more than chewing gum?  Why should we tax sodas more than Grandma's fried chicken or Momma's chocolate pie?  Heck, why don't we tax the dinner-on-the-grounds at the churches or the family holiday feast?

In 1961, Ronald Reagan made a recording aimed at speaking against socialized medicine.  He said, ".back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism.  But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.  One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine.  It's very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project.  Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it." 

I would add that most people are just as reluctant to oppose efforts to curtail the use of socially questionable products, i.e. cigarettes, alcohol, and now sodas and sugary foods, even when you raise taxes.  It has become easy to disguise public health care and obesity concerns with the unconstitutional singling out of legal products and businesses while imposing big government taxation, essentially creating the nanny state.  And once the nanny state becomes the norm, our American way of life as defined by the Constitution erodes and soon we will no longer recognize our American existence, that of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - freedom of individual choice.

It's time we unmask the debates of our day and see the realities at hand.  Selectively taxing legal products under the guise of public health is a slippery slope that could result in the loss of much more than just a few cents here or there.  We must be diligent to assess these and other issues as we continue to perfect our Republic.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

The Politics of the Census

Soon the questionnaire will arrive in the mail and you'll hear that familiar once-every-ten-year knock at the door.  Census version 2010 is coming.  You've heard the Census is important for your city, county, and state and that we all should be diligent to participate; this is certainly true.  While it does impact many factors from federal appropriations to emergency response to national perception to even how we're seen on the world stage, the most important result of the Census is the apportionment or redistricting of voting boundaries for local, state, and federal elections. 

Properly delineated voting districts ensure the concept of "one man, one vote," the equal protection clause.  It is through these boundaries that all of the other aforementioned results of the Census and more take shape.  In theory, every voting district, whether for city, county, state, or federal elections, should have an equal number of people located within each district thus ensuring equal representation.  The only problem with that simple notion is that politicians are in charge of drawing these boundaries and when politicians are involved, the potential for gerrymandering exists.

By definition, gerrymandering is a form of redistricting where electoral districts are deliberately modified producing a contorted or unusual shape.  Gerrymandering may be used to achieve desired electoral results for a particular party, or may be used to help or hinder a particular group of constituents, such as a political, racial, or other group.  It is used most often in favor of ruling incumbents.  This has been an evident result of the Democratic leadership in our state legislature for decades. 

Take a look at the Jackson County House and Senate District maps and you'll see with your own eyes what I mean.  Go to http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_house/jackson.pdf for the House map and http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/county_senate/jackson.pdf for the Senate map.  On the House map, see District 111 (bottom, aqua color).  It takes in South Pascagoula, grazes Gautier, and jumps in between Districts 112 and 113 to take in the outskirts of Ocean Springs.  On the Senate map, District 47 (top left, blue color) dives in between Districts 51 and 52.  What you don't see on the Senate map is that District 47 starts over in Pearl River County and meanders through Harrison and Stone counties before entering Jackson County.  Oh, and if you keep reading, it'll be no surprise that Senate District 47 is held by a Democrat, Senator Ezell Lee. 
                According to the House and Senate reports from the 2000 Census, the ideal House District size is 23,317 with the ideal Senate District size being 54,705.  Both reports allow for a maximum 5% deviation, with the highest deviation on the House side at 4.99% and 4.67% on the Senate.  What's interesting about this is that the districts that traditionally vote for the more liberal candidate or are considered more independent (normally vote Democrat or a toss-up in the Presidential elections) see the most negative deviation which allows for an increased number of representatives from those areas.

                Now, see the state House district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_house.html), the state Senate district map (http://www.msjrc.state.ms.us/ms_senate.html), and a map showing traditional voting trends (http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/healey/US_election/figs/MS.png) with Democrat in blue and Republican in red.  Just for example, compare House Districts 5 (-4.8%), 9 (-4.9%), 11 (-4.9%), 26 (-4.9%), 29 (-4.9%) and 30 (-4.9%) to the trends map.  There are others.  Then compare Senate districts 11 (-3.9%), 16 (-4.6%), 24 (-4.4%), 26 (-3.2%), 32 (-3.9%), and 36 (-2.9%) to the trends map.  See anything interesting?  I would guess you do.  And if you trend it throughout the state in both the House and Senate, it's interesting to note the deviation between regions (north, central, and south).
                So what does all of this mean?  With the Senate leadership having shown a willingness to work in a bipartisan spirit, the Senate Legislative Reapportionment Chairman Sen. Terry Burton(R) and Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant should seek to reverse the trends above and bring about more equalized representation.  In the House, Speaker Billy McCoy (D) has shown no sign of working in a bipartisan spirit and as House Legislative Reapportionment Chair Rep. Tommy Reynolds (D) begins his work, you will see significant jockeying among Representatives and the House leadership in an effort to protect their perceived voting base and vulnerable Democrat members.  This should be of no surprise given the way in which the House Speaker vote went down after the last election.  It is widely known that one vote allowed Speaker McCoy to retain his chair, which brings us back to Jackson County.  
                Given the population shift from the coastal cities into the county since Hurricane Katrina, it's conceivable to believe that Senate District 47 could be taken out of Jackson County and Districts 51 and 52 could assume the electorate there.  As for the House seats in Jackson County, it is plausible that the Democrat House leadership will seek to ensure that District 111, the seat that was a Republican stronghold for two decades and that was narrowly won by 11 votes by Democrat Rep. Brandon Jones (who cast that deciding Speaker vote mentioned earlier), remains in their corner, perhaps by significantly redistricting the boundaries to gain more like-minded voters.  In addition, with the aforementioned population shift and the measures to protect Democrat members, the possibility of losing one House seat in Jackson County is a concern.
                You've heard it said that all politics is local; that is indeed true here.  As we look toward 2011 and the state elections, it is imperative that we participate in the 2010 Census and begin now to focus on continuing the progress we have made of putting true conservative leaders into state government, leaders that will be fiscally responsible, reduce our tax burden, protect our individual liberties, and advance Mississippi on the national and international stage through positive economic development.  Republican in Mississippi hasn't always been the norm, but we're making strides to that end everyday.

                And just for the record, I am of the opinion that the Census should only ask for the number in a household and if you are a legal American citizen, which means a little extra work for some but well worth the effort to get an accurate, legal accounting of our nation's citizens.

                So make sure you get counted in the 2010 Census.  No matter how frustrating it can be, stay involved in your government.  After all, all politics is local.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman

Testing the Waters

          Bath time with the kids is always an adventure, from earplugs to tangled hair to the inevitable wet floor. My son can't wait to jump in the tub and splash around. My daughter, however, has always been more cautious, carefully sticking her toes in first to test the temperature of the water. She doesn't want it to be too hot or too cold; she wants it to be just right (Goldilocks and the three bears come to mind, but I digress). 
          It seems the Obama administration is doing just that - they are testing the waters to see just how deep they can wade in while promoting the ideals of socialism (and let's be perfectly honest, they are following the playbook nicely) before they dive in completely. If they go too quick, the chances for re-election and marble effigies dwindle. If they go too slow, the Democrats may miss their opportunity while they still hold the keys to both Houses of Congress and the White House (2010 is shaping up to be fun). The Democrats and this administration are surgically working through their long standing belief that increased government control will dictate fairness and equality and to them, create progress and success. They want to see just how far the American people are willing to be pushed without creating an insurmountable backlash while continuing to craft and implement their plans.
          The administration started immediately upon swearing in (perhaps even before given the Democrat controlled Congress and a lame duck President under fire) with the call to pass the Stimulus Plan. We all heard the passionate pleas. This was out of national need, we were told, while they rattled their sabers and promoted political doom and gloom scare tactics. The result was $787 billion of spending (which we can't back in the treasury) and a national debt that grows larger day after day.
          Then came the auto industry collapse and in came Obama riding in on his white horse to save the day. The bailouts were injected, the industry was demonized, and Obama came out of the deal as POTUS and CEO of our new government automaker.  
          Next, the administration and Congress have sought to increase regulations and taxation on energy providers in an already tight economy and under challenging times as these same companies are being asked to do more with less. Cap and trade is a not so subtle attempt to align us with the liberal energy policies of Europe and Asia. Call it Global Warming 101. You think your power bill is high now, just wait my friends; you ain't seen nothing yet (pardon the slang).
          The great debate of our day has followed - healthcare. It has taken center stage this summer. The administration tossed it out there and has steadily back tracked as citizens have in mass loudly opposed much of the reforms. Yet a bill still looms for a possible late fall or early winter vote. Word out of the White House is that they will present a bill if Congress can't agree on one. The old adage says that a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, and this administration will take every step, every inch it seems that we'll give them. They'll use emotion, passion, promises, politics, and altered facts and figures all to sell their reforms so that we as citizens will buy into them. Truman once said, "If you can't convince them, confuse them.". The administration is ascribing to this philosophy well. Increased national debt, higher taxes, a single payer "trigger option" system, and the eventual collapse of the entire medical insurance industry and perhaps many private medical practices will be the result of this current proposal.
          Now comes a nationwide back-to-school address from the President to all of our school children. On the surface this sounds like a great lesson in civics and an opportunity to take part in history. But when the administration put out lesson plans encouraging teachers to follow with their classes, complete with questions asking how each child could help the President, instead of the country, eyebrows were raised. Reagan and Bush Sr. both offered classroom videos and both were met with equal resistance from the opposition party. But now, it's the conservatives questioning the anointed one's school room address, not for what Obama will say (a stay in school message is always welcome), but for what he and his administration propagate and imply through their promotional materials and the suspect timing of the address (on the heels of declining approval ratings, heated public forums, new Congressional session, etc.).
          In each of these cases, the boundaries of our Republic are being pushed. They are inching us toward bigger government at grave costs, possibly even the beginnings of socialism. Big government is not the answer. Hard work, individual responsibility, care and compassion for your fellow man, and a sense of pride in your city, state, and nation can guide us back to our Republic's foundation. Government should provide the opportunity for all to succeed, not ensure our success through mandated reforms that increasingly regulate individual lives, the private sector, and play Robin Hood with our tax dollars. Yet, most of us sit idly by hoping for the best with no real commitment to resist and no true care to understand the facts.
          Don't be fooled by the pretty packages. Now is not the time for the faint of heart. We must not let down our guard. The administration is indeed testing the water. Unfortunately, in many places across our land, the water is warming to such ideals. How will they find it near you?

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

One Citizenship

           Since the beginning of our great nation, one singular issue has remained at the center of every political, social, and religious debate. One issue has divided this land of opportunity into brother against brother, father against son, denomination against denomination, poor against rich. It has started riots, fires, funerals, and wars. Jobs have been lost and industries have been built; buses have been made into memorials and crosses into ash all because of one issue. 
          Racial or ethnic equality is the driving force behind so many of our ills today, and yet the debate still rages because we as citizens allow it to persist and linger. Some even propagate it's existence to stir animosity and resentment, to garner political favor, and to justify and satisfy their own personal prejudices. These vultures strive to divide; they fight against unity.
          I ask you-what good is going undone while we allow such prideful foolery to inhabit our own minds and the minds of those around us? What could our country be if this issue wasn't diluting our communities and ruining relationships?
          We must move past labels and reclaim our national identity, not as individuals, but as one citizenship in this Republic. Such unity can only begin in the depths of each soul, which will require exploration into ones deepest sense of self. Allow me to elaborate.
          My ancestry nor my ethnic background make me who I am. I live in this present condition, at this time in history, and am tasked with serving my fellow man and my God right here, right now. My eye is fixed on the future, not the past, for I cannot change those who came before me; I may only learn and gain wisdom from studying where they erred, determining to not falter where they faltered, and at times celebrating their achievements.
          Running through my veins is blood that was created by the Almighty right here in America, not Europe or Asia or Africa. In ages past, whoever courted my kin to these shores of freedom and by whatever trials befell them on their journey is of no true consequence to me now. While it is indeed enlightening to learn those lessons, dwelling on such things would only serve to divide me from my neighbor. I live today and strive to live on for tomorrow, not for myself, but for my Lord, my family and my community.
          I cannot thank my Creator enough for placing me in such a liberating place. Thanks be to God that I was born an American. I am not white or black, Anglo-Saxon or African-American, Hispanic or Vietnamese, Baptist or Catholic, Jew or Hindu. I am simply an American, and that is enough. Such is the essence of our hope and existence as one citizenship in this Republic.
          Those who seek to label and wander in the midst of confusion and lore seek only to stir emotions for their own causes. We are people, not pawns. I do not condone nor do I support many past actions in my own beloved country, actions that at times have divided families, neighbors, and countrymen. But my hope is not in the past; my hope is not in the present; my hope is in the future and in the Republic I strive for each day in my own minute way and would die to protect should that be required of me.
          When we as Americans begin to see this common thread weaving each of us together and we lay down our pride and our labels of prejudice and division, this country will flourish beyond any of our imaginations. If America is ever going to overcome and reach its destined potential, we must openly and without shame or malice address this wound and nurture it to health. The scars may linger, but it is our choice not to prick those sensitive areas as it mends.
          I ask you today to join me in promoting one citizenship in this Republic. Our preferences, philosophies, and ideologies may differ in the church house, school house, or White House, but our one citizenship should always guide us in overcoming any self serving motives, striving together as fellow Americans within a spirit of unity, humility, and respect for our countrymen.
          Join with me; be one citizenship in this Republic. Discard the labels and antiquated mentality. Proclaim yourself as an American, no more, no less, and be proud of it.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman-Ward 4

Question with Boldness

          I awoke today with my mind settled on a story I have often told but for the life of me I cannot remember where and when I first read or heard it. I thought I'd share it with you despite the unintended lack of appropriate reference. (If the original story teller is reading this, please forgive my elaboration)

          As the 1960's (you know, the hippie-era) came to an end, those old rock-n-roll refugees of San Francisco began moving down the coast to Santa Cruz. They got married and had children, though usually not in that order, and soon set up a nice place to call home and raise a family. Now, these once hippie parents never named their children what we would consider normal names, like Bob, Jack, Melissa, or Janice. No, they gave their children lovely names, meaningful names, like Sea Foam, Moonbeam, and Snow Princess. Soon, the people in the area grew accustomed to having their little Billy and Suzy play ball with little Spring Fever and Time Warp. And eventually, many children with names like Precious Promise and Earth Love all ended up in the public schools.

It is during that time that one kindergarten teacher first met Fruit Stand (yes, that's right - Fruit Stand).

          On the first day of school, a little boy stepped off his bus wearing a name tag hung around his neck displaying his name - Fruit Stand. The kindergarten teacher thought the boy's name was odd, but no odder really than the other children's now coming through the school.

          Throughout that first day, the teacher tried her best not to make the boy feel self-conscious about his name. She tried to use his name as much as possible to help make it second nature for her and his classmates.

          "Would you like to play with the blocks, Fruit Stand?" she asked. "Fruit Stand, how about a snack?"

          By the afternoon recess, his name didn't seem much odder than Jill or Sun Ray or Fairy Queen.

          At the final bell of the day, the teacher led the children out to the bus loading area. "Fruit Stand, do you know which bus is yours?" the teacher asked. The little boy didn't answer, which wasn't particularly strange since he hadn't answered her all day. The teacher understood that lots of children were just shy on their first day of school.

          As the teacher searched for the bus Fruit Stand should be on, she remembered that she had asked each parent to write the name of the child's bus stop on the back of the name tag hanging around their neck. Just as she was putting the little boy on the bus and said, "Goodbye. See you tomorrow, Fruit Stand," she turned the tag over. There, neatly printed, was the word "Anthony."

          Within that simple story you can see how preconceived notions can cause significant problems. I believe we as Americans often fall into this trap. We assume and hope for the best without getting involved. We all want to believe and trust our government and her leaders; that is our natural instinct. But the truth is we must fight against such blind allegiance. We need to be engaged in our government and ready to stand up for what we believe. It's time we ask questions and demand answers, or as Thomas Jefferson once said, "Question with boldness."

          It is time we as Americans turn over those name tags and check out the facts. We must be more active, more willing to get in the fight at every level of government from our cities to our state to our nation. It's time we put our money, our time, and our elbow grease where our mouth is. We have taken our government's word for granted for far too long (on both sides of the aisle - Democrat and Republican) and we are now paying dearly.

          Do you believe in the government running healthcare? Do you believe in $9 trillion in national debt? Do you believe in an entitlement state? Do you believe it is right to tax one person more to pay for another? Do you believe in cap and trade? Do you believe you spend your way out of debt? And on and on and on I could go.

          As a local elected official who sits in City Council meetings regularly, I'm always amazed at the lack of involvement by citizens even at the local government level. On average, most City Council meetings are only attended by a handful of citizens, and most of those are attending for a specific personal purpose (i.e. variance, special request, etc.), not just because they want to learn and be engaged in the City's business. Don't get me wrong, I get those phone calls about drainage problems and potholes, but where's the concern over the local budget? Where's the concern about cleanliness and upkeep? Why do we only care about such problems when they effect us? Why are people reactive to government and not proactive? If people asked questions and were involved in the process, the outcome they complain about could be avoided. But such involvement takes effort and commitment, and in our day and time both are severely lacking. And now we are where we are as a nation and we wonder why.

          All politics is local and that's where government works the best, closest to the people. So what are you waiting for? Will you get in the fight? Ask questions, be engaged, and give of yourself for the betterment of your city, state, and nation.

          President Obama once said, "...change never begins from the top down. It begins from the bottom up." It seems he and many more have forgotten this truth. I still believe in the people, not the government. I ask you to join with me, to get on the bus and remind our government that it is the people, you and I, who matter and it's high time they remembered that, even if your name is Fruit Stand.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

Obama Channels Truman

          I must admit, I do like reading President Harry Truman's biography and the interviews he gave. While there are many political policies and governing philosophies where I would differ from the former President, Truman was a straight-forward man of humble beginnings who found himself consistently in the right place (politically speaking) at the right time, rising from local elected office to be the leader of the free world, all in a matter of a few short years. 
        While there is much to learn from Truman (good and bad in the public policy realm), it seems that our current President has come across an aspect of Truman's liberal wisdom that would be best forgotten. Truman once said, "I learned that a great leader is a man who has the ability to get other people to do what they don't want to do and like it." President Obama is attempting to master this philosophy in much of the policies he is currently championing, especially healthcare reform, or what may be termed as Obamacare. 
        Obama has often said that he admires Lincoln. Heck, his buddies in the mainstream media seem to paint him as Lincoln reincarnated. But if you read about Truman and listen to his own words, the ideals of the liberal movement that began then are embedded deep within today's great debates and Obama is the proud standard-bearer with an eye to leaving his mark (and name and image) on history. 
        Listen to these quotes from Truman and see if you too sense Obama's attempt to channel the spirit of Truman:
                    "If you can't convince them, confuse them."
                    "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell."
                    "Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
        And my personal favorite of them all (especially given that the Democrat leadership in Congress and especially President Obama has mastered this point) - "Always be sincere, even if you don't mean it."
        Obama is no Lincoln; such a reference is a slap in the face to all conservative, common sense Americans. Instead, Obama has decided to channel the founders of the social reforms that have begun to bankrupt our beloved country and now he is putting their philosophies into practice. Wake up, my fellow Americans. Don't be duped by the soft music, the cheering crowds, the eloquent words, and the nicely wrapped package. 
        The change we were promised has come, and it has been for the worse. Washington is more divided, more partisan, and less representative of real, down-home America than ever before. The slope is increasingly slippery. We must unite and take back our country before it's too late. We must choose principles over power and party. 
        We would all do well to remember the words of another former President, Thomas Jefferson. "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Jefferson can be heard again saying, "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have." May we all recall these words often and continue to remind President Obama and his pawns of such wisdom each time they revert back to the days of Truman.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman

 We Can Do Better...but We Won't
4th District Taylor's to Lose 

          2010 is just around the corner and that means federal House of Representative seats are coming up for grabs.  Soon, we will be hearing and seeing alot of talk and debate from the potential candidates.  Just today, I saw where State Senator Alan Nunnelee (R-Tupelo) has entered the fray to challenge 1st District Congressman Travis Childers (D-Booneville).  Reading this news made me ponder my area, the 4th District.  I know of a gentleman from Petal, an attorney by the name of Joe Tegerdine, who has decided to throw his name in the ring, but I must admit (and believe me, it is hard for me to say and I don't want to believe it but...) the 4th District is Gene Taylor's to lose once again, just as it's been now for 20 years.  Mr. Tegerdine may be nice enough and he may be an astute campaigner; I personally haven't had the chance to meet him just yet.  Reality is, however, no matter who you are as a challenger to Taylor, the underlying issues and assumptions must be addressed and brought to light.
          Since 1989, Gene Taylor (Democrat-Bay St. Louis) has held the 4th District Congressional seat here in Southeast Mississippi.  Taylor, a former city councilman and state senator, is well versed in what it takes to win in this district, which by the way is one of, if not the most conservative Republican districts in the nation (no Democrat Presidential candidate has carried the 4th since 1956). His voting record is a mixed bag; he has walked the tight rope between party and populist for many years and thus far has mastered it with only the occasional wobble which he quickly balances.  He is seemingly pro-life and pro-gun (anything else in Mississippi and he would have been out a long time ago), yet he has supported his party and its leaders inconspicuously (voting for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker) knowing that if he carried too much of the party's water he would be on the proverbial hot seat come election time.  He knows how to appear as if he is fighting for his constituents while not making too many waves in Washington D.C.  His tenure and party connections landed him an important seat on the Armed Services Committee and the Shipbuilding Caucus, making him increasingly valuable to his 4th District constituents.  Taylor's good ole boy persona coupled with his staff's superb PR work after Katrina (i.e. lost his home, fought his insurance company, offered insurance changes, etc.) make him a force that only the perfect storm or perhaps some truly informed, inspired, and involved voters could take down. 
          I believe that we in the 4th District can and should do better than Gene Taylor (hey, that almost rhymed...perhaps there's a campaign slogan in there somewhere).  Taylor is deeply entrenched and knows how to work the system, both locally, through ensuring that the proper spin is applied when needed, and nationally, by being content to sit on the sidelines and following the party line as necessary.  Gene Taylor is not a bad guy; heck, he's not all that bad of a Congressman if you judge his body of work through a narrow lens and confine it to babies, bullets, and budgets.  America and the future of our great nation is about something bigger than such narrow, spin driven, seat ensuring issues.  Yes, those things do matter to me and should matter to us all but when our nation's debt is increasing at such a rapid pace, private business is being taken over by government, healthcare is on its way to being rationed in every sense of the word, and on and on I could go we don't need a pacifist Congressman representing our area here in Southeast Mississippi.  We need a Congressman that will stand up and fight for the Constitution, for the freedoms we hold dear, to speak against the ills of the day and actively support a different direction than what is being proposed by those now in leadership (leadership supported and encouraged by Taylor himself).  We need a change in the 4th District and soon.
          It is important for a person who is in political office to clearly outline their party affiliation and to be able to outline why they align themselves with that party.  Taylor (whether out of savvy or confusion) chose to be a Democrat.  He is quick to add the "conservative" tag to his label.  Surprisingly enough (as if you couldn't tell by now) I am a Republican.  I am proud to carry the mantle of Lincoln and Reagan.  I say this because who one chooses to associate with says much about that person's character and beliefs.  Now don't get me wrong, there are many in both parties, Democrats and Republicans, that break from their party at times (Taylor and his Blue Dog buddies would speak to this point well, if nothing more than to attempt to veil their allegiance), but I tell you when it comes down to the core issues and to the heart of a matter, those same people will choose to side with their party 99% of the time (again, think of the Pelosi vote).  Don't be fooled by the tag lines added to sway your votes on election day or in election years.  I've yet to meet a Conservative Democrat - that's an oxymoron in my book.
           The real question, and the most disturbing part of this discussion to me, is this:  How does Gene Taylor, a Democrat, keep getting elected in the most conservative Republican district in the nation?  For the sake of time and space, I'll cut to the chase - Republicans put him there.  There's no other answer.  If you live in the 4th District I challenge you to ask your Republican friends that actually vote who they voted for last time for Congress.  I would be amazed if you could find more than 3 out of 10 that say someone other than Gene Taylor (if they do, I would almost bet they are fibbing given that Taylor hasn't taken less than 75% of the vote except once since 1998). 
          So how do we reverse this trend?  How can we in the 4th District topple this Goliath?  The only way is for conservative Republicans to break out of their self-induced habit and vote Republican.  We true conservatives must unite together and take back this country one seat at a time, locally, statewide, and nationally.  Twenty years is long enough for Mr. Taylor's trip to Washington.  A few years ago this 4th District seat didn't seem all that important.  Now, with the make up of Congress, the Speaker, the Senate in full control and the White House locked up, this Southeast Mississippi seat should symbolize and portray how we in this area truly believe to our core.  The 4th District seat should be a sign to the rest of the nation that we are fed up with government intrusion, rising debt, unreconciled domestic and foreign affairs, and needless taxation.  The truth is, Southeast Mississippi and the nation deserves better than Gene Taylor and his Democrat friends.  I believe we can do better...but unless people wake up, get in the fight, and get engaged history tells me we won't.
          Shakespeare once said, "We know what we are, but know not what we may be."  We've seen what 20 years has given us in the 4th District.  I truly desire our nation to be more than it is today; America desperately needs the next generation of leaders to begin to take hold now, not tomorrow.  I encourage you all to consider the 2010 Congressional race and help America be more.  We can and must do better!    

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman - Ward 4

Low Ball Hurler:
President Pitches Policies Like He Pitches Baseballs

Before you read on, watch the video of President Obama's First Pitch at the MLB All Star Game by clicking this link:
http://www.videosurf.com/video/president-obama-throws-out-first-pitch-70924959

          If you happened to watch the Major League Baseball All Star game the other night, then you probably caught President Obama once again on your TV screen.  No, he wasn't talking taking more taxes from the wealthy or nationalizing healthcare.  He wasn't taking over another company, booting a CEO, or naming another czar.  He wasn't speaking about the economy so the Dow didn't bottom out (is it just me or does it seem as if everytime President Obama talks about the economy the stock market takes a nose dive).  As other presidents before him, Obama was at the All Star game to simply throw out the ceremonial first pitch.  Easy enough, right?  One would think.
          Decked in his shiny white tennis shoes and fresh Chicago White Sox jacket, President Obama made his way to the pitcher's mound.  He waved and smiled to the adoring baseball fans.  Behind homeplate to catch the President's pitch was Albert Pujols.  After more waving and smiling, President Obama semi winds up and throws his pitch.  It's an arching curve that's short and low, making Pujols have to extend over the plate to catch the pitch to cover for the President's poor attempt.  After all, the media darling President Obama is had to have his pitch caught.  Oh the horror if it hit the dirt.  How would that have looked? 
          As I sat and watched that scene I couldn't help but draw the correlation between the President's poor baseball pitching and his even poorer pitching of recent domestic policies for our great nation.  Many see him as untouchable, as off limits to critique or question.  The liberal thought is that his sheer charisma and persona should be enough to delude the general masses into following him, so when he throws a bad pitch or two no one will care.  Truth is, in baseball and in politics, every pitch counts.  President Obama is a low ball hurler who's struggling to even reach the plate but because of who he is (be it his perceived historical significance due to his race, the fact that he is following Bush, or other glaring factors) and the vast media bias, the plate is covered and his every pitch is being caught.

Economy

          When it comes to the economy, Vice President Biden recently admitted that the administration underestimated the severity of the situation.  Biden said, "We misread how bad the economy was..."  That's a low ball estimate in my mind by President Obama and his administration.  Yet, because the Democrats were out of power for six years and they had a ton of pent up pet projects they were eager to ramrod through, the President and the Democratic leaders in Congress pushed through the $787 billion "stimulus" bill which has yet to produce even a glimmer of the hope and change advertised. 
          Let's be honest, Mr. President.  Jobs are not being added as promised, infrastructure funding projects are slow and almost not even worth the trouble to jump through all of the bureaucratic hoops, the national debt continues to increase daily, locally sales tax is in the pot and more businesses are closing leaving vacant buildings all around our city, the credit market is in shambles, we as taxpayers now hold controlling interest in a private company (I'm still waiting to see what my personal share of that company is so I can sell my stock now - I could use the extra gallon of gas), and on and on I could go.  The President threw a low pitch on such a dire economy and didn't even come close to the plate, oh but the media has covered him well; they caught the pitch and continue to spin the White House advertisement as the President makes his daily TV appearances.  Smile and wave and it will all be ok seems to be the new mantra.
          What we need in this country is not another "stimulus" bill as is being discussed even now; heck, we didn't need nor can we afford the first one.  What we need in this country is lower taxes on the individual so they keep more of what they make.  We need lower taxes on businesses so they can afford to invest in their employees, expand their product and service lines, create more jobs, and provide healthcare.  We need to only spend what we take in and no more.  We need to get government out of propping up businesses and let the market regulate itself.  Enough is enough.  No more low ball pitches.   

Healthcare

          It is beyond my comprehension as to why we would as a country want to go from having the best possible healthcare system in the world (yes, there are flaws, but it's still the best) and make it second rate almost instantly, right out of the box?  Nationalizing healthcare puts every citizen's well being under the government's purview.  The government will control your health.  The government will decide which doctors you see, when you see them, how often you see them, and so on.  The government will also in essence tell doctors how and when to treat patients.  Your every healthcare concern will be managed and controlled by bureaucrats and politicians.  In addition to all of this, such a plan will cost upwards of an estimated $1 trillion over a decade and still leave 15 million plus uninsured.
          Jefferson once wisely expounded, "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny."  Involving the government in the intricate parts of people's lives is the last thing I want to see happen.  Government needs no role in deciding doctors, hospitals, insurance and the like for citizens.  But yet, that is exactly what will happen when the current Congress and Presidential administration have their way with healthcare.  Yet another low ball pitch from President Obama that misses the plate and still, the other members of his Party and the media cover the obvious deficiencies of such a notion.  The answer again lies in empowering the private sector to create wealth and opportunity.  The government only subsidizes wealth.  I only wish the words of Jefferson would be recalled, for the bodies of so many will soon be wrecked by the political agenda of a few.

Playing Catch

          Now is not the time in our nation's history for the President and the Congress to be playing catch with such delicate issues.  The old adage advises that ultimate power corrupts ultimately.  With the super-majority now reached in the Senate (thanks to the resolution of the Franken-Coleman saga), the House well in hand, and the White House under lock and key, the country is at the whim and pleasure of the Democrats.  There was a time, not all that long ago, such a statement wouldn't have frightened me so, but that time is long since past.  The President has proved to be a low ball hurler who can't reach the plate.  The Democrat contolled Congressional leadership is carrying the President's mantle for the most part and ensuring he doesn't skip a pitch in the dirt.  And of course, the media is playing their part like the Shakespearean actors they are. 
          Every pitch counts in politics and baseball.  Now is the time for all concerned citizens to stand up and get in the fight.  We must demand real hope and change for the betterment and sustainability of our country.  No more low ball, short pitches.  No more covering for the President.  We can take back our country and set her aright once again; it just takes stability through commitment and passion.  Be committed.  Be passionate.  Be the difference. 

As always - Think Pascagoula First,

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman - Ward 4

Listening to Jefferson

            Summer for many is a time to unwind, vacation, and hit the beach, especially here along the Gulf Coast - surf, sand, and a big glass of ice tea.  The party starts Memorial Day weekend, kicks into high gear around the 4^th of July, and dwindles off around Labor Day.  Fun in the sun is the name of the game.

            For me, summer brings reflection.  Oh, believe me, I could use a vacation as much as anyone, but ever since I was a young boy, this time of year has filled my spirit with a certain sense of poignancy and reverence.  I read and engross myself into the writings of the American giants - Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Truman, Reagan.  I watch documentaries and period epics surrounding these figures and the events of their day.  Summer beckons my inner patriot and calls me to action.  It ignites a fire within me to hearken back to the founding fathers and listen once again to their wisdom.  I am moved by their sacrifice and astounded by their foresight and vision. 

            One such American giant is Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States and arguably one of, if not the most influential of the founding fathers.  His handiwork in drafting the Declaration of Independence is still marveled by scholars today.  Each of us learned the basic ideal of Jefferson in school.  We know of Jefferson in theory.  But if you study Jefferson and read his writings, if you delve deeper into his reasoning I trust you will find a great deal to your interest, much of which is extremely applicable to our day in practice, not simply in theory.  I challenge you to listen to Jefferson in the quotes below and as I offer some relevance for today.  It is surprising how prophetic words written over 200 years ago can be.

            "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." - Thomas Jefferson

I have said many times that it is not the government's responsibility to ensure people succeed, but that every person has an equal opportunity for success through hard work, personal commitment and individual responsibility.  When government at any level, whether locally or nationally, seeks to usurp the individual responsibility of its citizens and replace it with a centralized, equitable program or body of work, then government has indeed grown past the point of its original intent.  Equality for all through government mandate and oversight was not the rallying cry of our founders nor should it be today.  Opportunity for all through individual responsibility should be shouted and supported.

            "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson

            Today, this very debate is raging in our national Capitol. I believe this quote speaks well to the issue of nationalized healthcare.  Involving the government in the intricate parts of people's lives is the last thing I want to see happen.  Government needs no role in deciding doctors, hospitals, insurance and the like for citizens.  But yet, that is exactly what will happen when the current Congress and Presidential administration have their way with healthcare.  I only wish they would heed the words of Jefferson, for the bodies of so many will soon be wrecked by the political agenda of a few.   

"That government is best which is closest to the people." - Thomas Jefferson

            I love this quote, especially as a local elected official on the City Council.  Day in and day out I see where the federal government is growing by leaps and bounds, which essentially makes local City boards nothing more than rubber-stamping bodies that must enforce and take the heat for what those in D.C. and even in Jackson decide.  Admittedly, I get very frustrated with the bureaucratic red-tape and the ever moving targets we as a local Council have to overcome to simply help our city and our people.  This has never been more evident than after Hurricane Katrina.  Those in D.C. and even in Jackson for the most part are insulated from such constant local struggles; they often times miss the boat and put politics before people.  I emphatically agree with Jefferson that the best government is the government nearest the people.

            "That government which governs best, governs least." - Thomas Jefferson

            Oh, how I wish the current Mississippi House of Representatives, the national Congress (both houses) and the President would truly let this fact sink in.  You want to see America succeed, then get the government out of our way.  Cities would rebound, jobs would return, homes would rebuild, and a new sense of individual responsibility would rule the day.  It's time we cut the lifeline a bit.  As long as the government continues to interfere and encourages citizens to rely so heavily on its purse strings, America will not be the strong, healthy nation we all want it to be.  Ronald Reagan, another American giant, was exactly right when he said, "Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them." 

            Those are only a few quotes of so many more as I listened to Jefferson.  As with anyone other than myself (and even then I am often conflicted), I do not agree with every ideal or thought put forth by the third President, however, I stand in awe at his immense knowledge and foresight of the issues our republic would be faced with even in his day.  Reading Jefferson and others like him brings me great comfort proving I am not alone in how I feel both about my country and about my convictions.  I trust these words will help to strengthen and enliven you this summer as you reflect on our Independence and those who have given so much for the freedoms we enjoy.  May we never forget the principles on which we were founded and on which we have built the greatest nation ever to inhabit this planet. 

            Shhhh..can you hear it?  Jefferson and the other American giants are speaking to us today.  Are you listening?

            May God Bless Pascagoula, Mississippi, America, and You.

As always, Think Pascagoula First,

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman - Ward 4

Tug Fork River Running Through Mississippi

Cue the "Dueling Banjos" (for the full effect as you read this blog, listen to the song by visiting http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2krbLoYYWU ) and please excuse my occasional "country-style" writing.   

            Tug Fork River, a tributary off the Big Sandy River, is the dividing point for one of America's most famous hill-folk family feuds.  Along West Virginia's bank of the river lived the McCoys.  On the Kentucky shore, the Hatfields.  The bad blood between these two families is the stuff of legend and folklore dating back to the end of the Civil War.  Pigs, murders, massacres, hangings, affairs, judicial impropriety, land wars all add up to decade after decade of unrelenting hatred and bitterness that has gone down in history as the epitome of territorial fighting with a hillbilly twang. 

I dare say most, if not all, of you reading this have heard of the Hatfields and McCoys.  You may have even seen the old Bugs Bunny cartoon parodying this story.  What you may not know is that it took the two families nearly 40 years and numerous lives lost to end their quarrel with the last feud trial in 1901.   What is even more interesting and perhaps curiously ironic in a modern day sense was the appearance by the two families on the game show "Family Feud" back in 1979 where they competed for a cash prize and a pig which was kept on stage during the show taping. But I digress.

Today, the banks of the Tug Fork River seem to have overflowed and meandered its way into Mississippi, finding a new home at the Capitol.  A familiar name is still on one shore - the McCoys; Billy and the boys that is.  Across the great divide, on the other shore - the Barbours; Haley, Phil, and the gang.  Everyone knows the Barbours and the McCoys feud every year.  Heck, for six years now there's been one shot after another fired between the two.  Medicaid, MAEP, rainy day funds, stimulus funds, voter identification and on it goes.  The current budget debacle by the State Legislature is just another in the long list of feuds, adding to the already tense territorial fighting.

The McCoys are fighting to stay afloat and the water is rising around them.  One vote and Billy wouldn't be swinging our Speaker's gavel.  A member of the House budget conference committee, who by the way was the chairman of Medicaid (one of the major sticking points in the budget), was caught voting present somehow while he was in Disney World.  A slight miscommunication the McCoys say.  Partisan politics is the name of the game for the McCoys where if you aren't a member of their band of liberal merry men you are intentionally kept out of the loop.  Papa Billy rules the roost.  Staying relevant is becoming increasingly more challenging for the McCoys in these economic times when their initial reaction is to shoot first (in legislative terms, throw money at a problem) and ask questions later.  Yet for some reason and despite these and other examples, Billy's boys remain loyal to their patriarch.  Makes you question their common sense.  Also makes you question how in tune they actually are with their constituents.

The Barbours have dug in and fortified their shore with sound fiscally conservative policies, common sense bi-partisan communication, and far less petty name calling and character assassinations.  Haley and the gang are holding the line on spending during these tough economic times by making prudent use of the rainy day fund and calling on state agencies to make the necessary cuts to weather the storm.  The Barbours aren't willing to spend a bunch more money than we need to or can afford to spend.  Heck, they're even willing to take a little heat and make some difficult decisions that aren't popular.  Quite a concept, don't you think?   (Are you paying attention Mr. President and Congressional Leaders?  You could learn a thing or two if you watch the Gov.)

The impasse and deadlock we are now seeing in our State Legislature is simply unacceptable and ludicrous.  Truth is, my fellow Mississippians, whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, you should be appalled that your State Legislature had five months to get the job done and have yet to come to a reasonable agreement on a state budget.  The state budget is a legislator's primary task every session.  They should be working on it day in and day out, without excuse.  The Governor is not to blame; yes, he has input, but ultimately only signs or vetoes what is sent to him by the State Legislature.  And now due to the legislators' lack of care and handling with their primary task, our state is on the cusp of completely shutting down.

With that said, I do believe that our state will have a budget by the deadline of June 30^th at the impetus and call of the Governor.  His use of the Special Session will force the hand of the State Legislature, and Billy and his boys will have to come to the table either willingly or kicking and screaming.  My guess it will be the latter.

My main concern is the cost of this year's feuding over the budget as well as the message such inefficiency sends our citizens and the rest of the nation.  A Special Session costs about $30,000+ per day, so depending on how the session is structured our state will take a significant immediate budget hit against an already tight bottom-line.  How in the world such sessions can be justified is beyond me.  Plus, our State image with our citizens and the rest of the nation is once again hindered by the ineptitude of those supposedly looking out for our best interest.

Let me just throw this out there for discussion: let's start a movement, a petition drive to change state law that when the State Legislature has to be called back for a Special Session to handle business which is under their designated scope of work as outlined in the State Constitution NO pay will be given to those legislators.  Such a change should serve to light a fire under their collective behinds and encourage them to get their primary tasks accomplished in the timeframe allotted and budgeted for annually.  They seem to need a little boost so let's help them find the momentum. 

Wirt Yerger Jr. recently said, "Always choose principles over pragmatism and power."  It's time we turned back the Tug Fork River running through Mississippi.  The bad blood between the Barbours and the McCoys, the conservatives and the liberals, the Republicans and the Democrats has to come to an end.  There will always be philosophical differences between the two but no matter how you slice it, sound fiscal policy today coupled with an eye to the future will pay enormous dividends for years to come, especially in our current day and time.  I feel confident the Barbours will extend a hand once again and welcome any healthy, productive discussion.  I just hope the McCoys cease fire long enough to see through the smoke they're hiding within. 

Perhaps a good game of "Family Feud" wouldn't hurt; it helped that other notorious feuding family across Tug Fork put their ghosts to rest.  I know I'd watch that.

Frank Corder,

Pascagoula City Councilman - Ward 4

Splinters in the Rear

        Thursday, May 7th, was the annual National Day of Prayer for 2009.  Millions of people of all faiths and backgrounds came out to courthouses, city halls, state capitols, and even within the halls of Congress to be a part of this national event.  From the birth of our nation to this very day, men and women of this great land have relied on the simple act of prayer to sustain them through the tribulations and sorrows of life and to sing the praises and thanks for the blessings God has poured out on our country. 
        Since the days of George Washington and the Continental Congress in 1775, America has recognized the power and importance of prayer.  President Lincoln called for a day of "humiliation, fasting, and prayer" in 1863.  President Truman, backed by a joint resolution from Congress, declared a national day of prayer in 1952 and every sitting American President since then has signed a proclamation recognizing this day.  Along with such Presidential Proclamations, it has become a tradition for the White House to host a National Day of Prayer event, highlighting the importance of the day that much more.  But not this year and not this President. 
        Yes, President Obama issued the Presidential Proclamation (which is required by law), but no other recognition of this national day of prayer was practiced by his administration.  I wonder if he had not been legally bound to sign the proclamation, would President Obama have done so.  When asked about the President's obvious absence of ceremony, his press secretary chose to offer only that the President prays in private.  OK, that is great to know and I truly do hope that is in fact the case.  However, like other issues to date, he missed the boat on this one.  The national day of prayer isn't about the President or any one person; at its core, the national day of prayer is paying homage to the freedom of all people in this great land to have and express their faith without fear of persecution and even in public when appropriate. Instead of understanding this ideal, President Obama turned what was a positive, non-partisan, non-denominational day of historical significance into a political hot potato thrown directly at the conservative minded demographic within our country. 
        As an elected official myself, all be it on a much smaller scale than the President, I have to ask this question - why choose this fight?  Is the President that partisan, that liberal-minded to shoot such a shot across the bow over such a historically all-inclusive day?  In politics and in life, making unneccesary waves is fruitless and can cause much trouble.  The President has said on many, many (and may I add many) occasions that he wants the country to come together under a common bond to forge a new way forward for the betterment of all Americans.  At a recent National Prayer Breakfast back in February, President Obama stated that that event was "one of the rare occasions that still brings much of the world together in a moment of peace and goodwill."  Later in his remarks he quoted St. Augustine by saying, "Pray as though everything depended on God, then work as though everything depended on you."  He then added, "So let us pray together...but then let us also work together in all the days and months ahead, for it is only through common struggles and common effort as brothers and sisters that we fulfill our highest purpose as beloved children of God."  The President then asked for those in attendance to pray for he and his family and for the nation.
        Obviously, the act of prayer isn't offensive or derided by President Obama otherwise why would he ask others to pray for him.  It would seem obvious to me that a national call to pray for this country when we are facing such dire straits would be more than appropriate, no matter one's beliefs, backgrounds, or opinions.  In fact, there has been 134 national calls to prayer, humiliation, fasting, and thanksgiving by a sitting United States President.  Prayer in itself is a healthy expression of what is felt deep within one's soul.  Offering a prayer among others shows a unity in purpose and a reliance on something other than oneself.  So again, why pick this battle?
        To be fair to the President and his administration, while he didn't participate in a National Day of Prayer event, his legal team is engaged in a fight to protect the very existence of the annual observance.  The administration, Republican lawmakers, and the American Center for Law and Justice recently asked a Wisconsin federal court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Freedom From Religion Foundation that argues that "mandated prayer proclamations by the president exhorting each citizen to pray constitutes an unabashed endorsement of religion" which violates the First Amendment of the Constitution.  The President's administration legal team contends that the national day of prayer proclamation does not promote religion.  They also state that the practice is a tradition dating back to the founding of our country. 
        While I am certainly glad to see some common sense being used by the White House on this matter in this lawsuit, I have to wonder why President Obama is straddling the proverbial fence on this issue.  If he sits there much longer he's sure to gain a few splinters in his rearend.  The media darling he is cannot always make everyone happy, so he needs to stop trying now.  If he is a praying President, then he needs to be who he is and not be ashamed of it.  He should stand on his foundations and not be shaken to the core.  Listening to the liberal left wing agents too long can make anyone's head ache.  I know the President is under alot of pressure to carry the liberal torch.  I pray for President Obama every day.  I only hope and pray he can climb off that fence, pick out the splitters, and be his own man instead of catering to the pressures within his party. 
        I want to conclude this thought with a couple of quotes from noteworthy figures in America's history:

               "To be a Christian without prayer is no more possible than to be alive without breathing." - Martin Luther King Jr.

               "It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible." - George Washington

               "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

               "[Americans] must seek Divine guidance in the policies of their government and the promulgation of their laws." - Ronald Reagan

        I invite you all to join me in prayer for our President and the other elected and appointed leaders serving our country from the White House to city hall whatever your personal beliefs may be.

Frank Corder,
Pascagoula City Councilman - Ward 4

Why All This Matters

     I take my position as your councilman seriously.  As a local elected official, I am on the front lines of the political landscape day in and day out, in the grocery store, the doctor's office, at the football games, and walking down the street.  Not a day goes by that no less than a few dozen of you, my constituents, call, email, come by, or stop and talk local, state or national politics.  I cherish every minute of the interaction with each of you.  I love being able to help you resolve your issues within our great city or just listen to your thoughts on why the nation is going down the drain.  No other political office is quite like a local city position in that we as councilmen have the opportunity to live and work with you, the people we represent, every day and then go handle the city's business just down the street amongst our friends and family.  State representatives, congressmen, and senators, governors and presidents are shielded from doing business amidst the masses.  They have a cushion, if you will.  Yes, such close contacts here locally can offer their own challenges but the positives definitely outweigh the negatives because we as local officials get to see how we are making a difference each and every day.  We aren't allowed to lose our foundation and that's a healthy position for those in governing bodies to be in.

     I believe it is important for a person who is in political office to clearly outline their party affiliation and to be able to outline why they align themselves with that party.  And if you have read any of my ramblings in the past you know by now that I am a Republican.  I am proud to carry the mantle of Lincoln and Reagan.  I say this because who one chooses to associate with says much about that person's character and beliefs.  Now don't get me wrong, there are many in both parties, Democrats and Republicans, that break from their party at times, but I tell you when it comes down to the core issues and to the heart of the matter, those same people will choose to side with their party 99.9% of the time.  Don't be fooled by the tag lines added to sway your votes on election day or in election years.  I've yet to meet a Conservative Democrat - that's an oxymoron.  Ever heard of a Liberal Republican?  Neither have I.   

     So in this presidential election year, I thought I would take a minute to demonstrate to you here in Pascagoula how my being a Republican makes a difference for you in how I handle issues that come across my desk as a local public official, utilizing the Republican's core beliefs taken from the Republican National Committee's website.  Below you'll see the core beliefs of my party and then I'll discuss how I put each belief into practice in my dealings, and why all this party stuff matters:

A New Day Has Dawned

Is it a great day or what?  I can see the future of my beloved Republican Party this morning and not since the days of Ronald Reagan have I been more proud.  Last night, America and the world was introduced to Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.  Gov. Palin stood tall in the face of her critics, high heels and all, proudly proclaiming the mantra of what the conservative movement in America is all about.  She was poised and confident, while feminine and ladylike; tough and forthright, while at ease and comfortable.  Gov. Palin showed that you don't have to wear pant suits and act like a man to be taken seriously as a woman candidate in this country; you can dress and speak as a lady, while stating your case and doing your business. 

As I watched in awe of the history that was indeed being made within my party, hoping and praying that Gov. Palin lived up to the hype surrounding her, I couldn't help but grin and cheer like I was watching a Pascagoula Panther football game as she methodically and strategically picked apart every piece of a do-nothing liberal attack machine propagated both by the Democratic Party and the left-wing national media.  Gov. Palin plainly said that she did not care what the media made of her; she wasn't trying to please them - as Vice President she will be working for you and me, not the special interests, not the liberal, socialist, left-wing, drive-by media, and not the entrenched Washington bureaucrats who have forgotten what matters to the everyday Joe.  She spoke of being energy independent by drilling now, not later, but also pursuing alternative energy sources built by Americans for Americans.  Gov. Palin, who by the way knows how to fire an AK-47, was strong on national security and rightly criticized the liberals for wanting us to read terrorists their rights.  This lady had me on my feet, my friends.

As a city councilman, I sympathize with and relate to Gov. Palin in many ways, her having served on a local city council, then as mayor and then as governor.  To those out there who think that this lady doesn't have the experience to lead our nation, I would beg to differ on the basis of what I know I do everyday here in Pascagoula and what I've seen our Governor here in Mississippi do day in and day out.  Being a local elected official is probably the toughest elected office you can hold in terms of public contact and public awareness.  Everyday you see your constituents, in the stores, the churches, the schools, the restaurants, at the park, all over town.  You do not get a break from dealing with local issues.  Fortunately, I, like Gov. Palin, thrive off of helping my fellow man achieve more.  Public service isn't for the faint of heart, my friends.  Don't be fooled.  All politics is local.  When a disaster strikes or a street drain needs cleaned or a tax increase is proposed, it's not the state and federal officials who do the work - it's the local officials who are on the ground.  A local elected official's perspective leading our country would serve us well if we are ever going to turn our country around and stop relying on the federal government to rescue us from all of our problems.  Gov. Palin is exactly right - she has more executive experience in one finger than does the entire Democratic ticket.  And when that 3:00am call does come, should Gov. Palin have to answer it, I know she'll be ready because she, like you and I who have had babies, will probably be up with hers taking care of her young one while looking out for us.

I, for one, can see a bright future for my party with Gov. Palin helping to lead us into a new day.  I have long been a proponent of cultivating local individuals, young people, who show promise and interest in public and community service, helping them to step up and step in to local elected positions that we as Republicans must maintain and secure for the betterment of our cities, counties, states, and nation.  Our opponents work hard to paint the GOP as old, gray-haired white guys who are out of touch and out of reach from Main Street America.  The local, state, and national Republican Party must take this opportunity and seize the day.  We must expand our party and reach out to the next generation, pass the baton, and cultivate leaders who can do exactly what Gov. Palin has done both in Alaska and now in America - energize our base, expose the truth about the liberal's socialist plans, and reach out to those independent and undecided voters in a way that makes sense and is genuine. 

I know a few of you reading this may be surprised that I would be quite so vocal about a national race.  But if you know me at all, you know that I feel strongly about my city, my county, my state, and my country.  And since all politics is local, and party ideals and platforms do matter, I want to do all I can to help shape my country for the better.  Because you see, what we as local elected officials have to enforce to a large extent is mandated by those in Washington D.C., so having Gov. Palin in arms length to the White House, her knowing local issues, local gripes, local problems and frustrations, sure does help put me at ease. 

A new day has dawned in the Republican Party and I am proud to say that Gov. Palin is my choice for Vice President of the United States of America.  I hope she is yours too.

Frank Corder

Pascagoula City Councilman - Ward 4

Politics is Life

I'm a political junky; I admit it.  I truly enjoy politics.  Now, don't get me wrong, there are some areas of the political world I could surely complain about, but even with the problems I would much prefer our system of government to any on the face of the earth to date.  There is nothing in our world other than faith that is so all encompassing that it can touch the general populace's lives more than being in the political world.  From setting local ordinances on noise to the discussion on gas and grocery prices to being the leader of the free world, all politics is life.  And if you're like me, you watch the news networks consistently to see what is going on in our country and around the world because, like it or not, we live in an era when one slight word or deed can seemingly make or break each of our lives.  One word from Fed Chairman Mr. Bernanke and Wall Street and your 401k rises or falls.  One sign of aggression from some Middle Eastern regime and oil prices shoot through the roof.  One comment by our state insurance commissioner Mr. Chaney and our wallets feel the strain.   One action taken by our city council on local taxes, road repairs, property cleanup, or any other issue you may think of and in some form it can and most likely will directly effect you.  All politics is life.

I thought that I would take a minute today to share with you who read my ramblings on a consistent basis a few of my political hot button issues that have been on my mind as of late.  I will try and focus primarily on local areas of note but please forgive me now if I delve into state or national politics as I continue to write.  Often times local issues are more influenced by state and even federal politics than one may think.

First, I would like to begin by addressing the upcoming local city elections which will be held next spring.  There seems to be alot of talk starting to swirl concerning the state of our city and potential names for council seats.  Putting the right people in the right seats is a must if Pascagoula is going to reach her full potential.  I have said that consistently for many years.  It is up to you, the voters, to choose wisely who will lead your city the next four years when the time comes.  Please look at the substance of the person, not just a name or a family lineage.  Base your decision of supporting a candidate on what their qualifications are and how their stated values align with your own.  I have been humbled and blessed by the support I have been shown by being allowed to serve you and I hope to continue to serve you for many years to come in whatever capacity you the people should require of me.

I know for me when I am vetting a candidate for office I look for a strong moral and fiscal conservative with a proven record of being a voice for the people while being actively involved in the day to day life of their community and work.  I am using those same standards as I now focus on the state and national elections facing us.  I am unashamedly a conservative Republican.  I know it is not popular in this day and time to be so out front with such a view point but that is who I am and I believe in the party of Lincoln.  I worry at the liberalism and dare I say socialism that is steadily creeping into our society more and more, perpetrated primarily by those on the other side of the aisle.  I have said for years that having a "D" beside your name may not mean much in a city election but it means alot when you start talking about county, state, and national policy.  As the old preacher once said, "When you wallow with the pigs, you'll start to stink too."  Jackson County has long been known as the conservative foundation of our great state.  I truly hope we can reclaim that title in the upcoming elections over the next few years. 

My conservative values drive me on many issues facing Pascagoula in the upcoming months.  One such issue very much on my mind is the discussion of city taxes as it pertains to the recent reassessment of property values coming out of the tax assessor's office.  I mentioned this issue briefly in a previous posting but did not have the full scoop at that time.  I feel I now have a better grasp of what is at stake and how to frame this discussion.  As it sits, most of you reading this experienced a 30% increase in your property assessments this year, which depending on the value of your home could equate into an increase of city and school district taxes due by 70-520%.  In real dollars your tax increase for the city and school district could be between $200-850 when you add the two together.  You recently may have seen that the county voted to lower their mills by 1.5 which does help alleviate some of the burden, but there is still an increase that you will see.  When you couple all of this with the recent news that two of our larger insurance companies have once again raised rates by about 14% and the continued high price of gas and other necessary items such as milk and groceries, I am concerned for you and your families. 

The city is healthy fiscally speaking, yes, but the cost of doing business does not go down and has not gone down.  It takes more money every year to operate our city's services and continue to try and promote the growth we all want to see.  I have been outspoken on this issue for years calling on us to actively seek ways to diversify our tax base by attracting small business and by getting new commercial construction out of the ground, while limiting the number of tax exemptions we grant our local industries.  We have done much to promote small business growth within Pascagoula and it is slowly coming along, and if it were not for the state and federal bureaucratic red-tape we would see more commercial buildings out of the ground helping us to reach our goal of diversifying our tax base by following our plan for renewal and redevelopment.  But I say all of that to say that it is my goal to try and reduce your tax burden as much as is reasonably possible while also being fiscally responsible with the city's budgetary needs.  Yes, the cost of doing business does keep rising, but like my grandfather always said, "You can't get blood from a turnip."  In these tough economic times we are in now, any little bit helps - I know that.  That's why I am trying to watch out for your wallet as we discuss these local taxes this year.

You may have seen that the city council recently passed a noise ordinance.  This was a direct result of your calls and emails to me asking for something to be done.  After meeting with our police chief and city attorney, I read numerous ordinances trying to find the right fit for our city.  The impetus for the ordinance was the boom cars - you know, the loud stereos in cars that make your dishes shake in your home and your ears ring when you're parked next to them at a red light.  The city attorney, police chief and I mulled through many, many ordinances on our way to the one that was passed to make it as easily enforceable by our officers but that had teeth so it took care of the problem.  The ordinance ended up addressing all kinds of loud disturbances with a fine of up to $1,000 and / or 30 days in jail.  I am proud to say that the ordinance passed unanimously and has been active since the 15th of August.  Chief tells me it seems to be working well.  Thank you for expressing your interest in the health of our city by sharing your concerns with me.  You made a difference.

If you keep up with state politics as I do, then you've probably seen the discussion on voter identification.  It seems that some representatives in our state house have been playing politics with a very important issue that is higher than their pay grade.  And while I respect their concern and have listened to their arguments for why they felt the need of birddogging an issue that truly is a Secretary of State matter, it seems that the people of Mississippi got dooped on this one.  Mr. Hosemann, our secretary of state, spent month and months traveling around the state speaking with local county clerks and election officials working through the complexities of voter identification.  It is his job which he was elected to by a statewide vote to handle these issues and put them forth into a format for consideration as law, not local representatives who are not statewide elected officials. 

If you will indulge me for a minute I'd like to explore voter ID.  I understand the history of our state and fully respect our history.  Does our history make voter ID a little more touchy of a subject for some?  Why sure it does.  That is no secret.  How do you overcome any conflict or negativity in life?  Through open dialogue and factual evidence.  Our society today is designed to show some form of ID at the bank, when you check into a hotel, when you use your check or credit card, when you go to a doctor - everyone has some form of identification.  To me, there is nothing more sacred to our republic than the right to vote.  Our right to vote gives us, the people, the power to choose our government.  By all means I want that right protected at all costs and if I have to reach in my wallet and pull out my ID to vote, then I am glad to take that extra ten seconds to do so.  To those who say it is a way of disenfranchising some voters please excuse my ire at such a comment.  Some in our country love to throw up the ills of our past when it suits them and their agenda.  I for one on this issue do not take that excuse in 2008 as reason for not voting.  So thank you Mr. Hosemann for all you have done and to you representatives who think it cute to play with the most sacred of our rights as citizens of this great country, grow up.

On a lighter note, I'd like to thank all of the volunteers who gave of their time to help with the Dixie Youth Ozone World Series.  From the committee to the volunteers to the players and coaches and parents, it was a great week of baseball that will be remembered around our city for years to come.  Congratulations to the players on that team.

Finally, the three year anniversary of Katrina is coming up Friday.  It seems like yesterday in many ways to me, as I am sure it does to you as well.  The monument at Beach Park will forever be a reminder of what we went through that day and the days thereafter.  I am still so humbled that the words I penned were chosen to rest on the granite marker at the foot of the monument.  Those words still ring so true to me today as I reflect on what all has happened since August 29, 2005 and as I look optimistically into the future that is head of Pascagoula.  I hope you find some of the peace and understanding in the words below as I have:

"May the wind of destruction and the waves of sorrow forever remind us of the opportunity and hope we have found."

However you choose to mark this date, I want you to know that it is a honor and privilege to serve you on this city council.  If there is ever anything I can do to assist you in any way, please do not hesitate to contact me. 

All politics is life.  I encourage you to stay informed and stay involved.  What you may think is small, can make a big difference in the life of your community.  Oh, and by the way, don't forget to come out and cheer on the Panthers in their opening game Friday the 29th at the High School Stadium against Gautier.  Go 'Goula!

Frank Corder

Pascagoula City Councilman - Ward 4

     Government Should Enrich Freedom

     As an elected official here in Pascagoula, one of my responsibilities is to enact ordinances, laws if you will, that enhance and enrich our way of life, while penalizing those who choose to act outside of the perimeters set forth. This is a heavy task and one that should not be taken lightly. Much thought and deliberation must be given to ensure that what is legislated is proper and fair for the whole. But more importantly, laws should only be passed that enrich our freedom as citizens of this great city, state, and nation.

     Laws that enrich our freedom apply to us all, regardless of race, gender, socio-economic status, heredity, place of work, place of worship, etc. There is no room for discrimination or polarization, only equality and progress. Laws that prohibit murder and rape enrich every one of us, giving each the right to live without fear of death or bodily harm. No argument can be made supporting these activities. History has proven that banning murder and rape is fundamental to the safety and security of our society. Such bans only serve to enhance life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for every single person, thus the laws prohibiting these activities enrich the freedom of the whole. The essence of a good law should be then that it serves the interest of the whole, not a portion or segment of society.

     If you flip the coin, laws that infringe on our freedoms have just the opposite effect by appealing to certain segments of our society, in essence pandering to the person or group that shouts the loudest and longest. It has become an all too common occurrence that such laws infringing on our freedom are being legislated both locally and nationally. Needless legislation is running rampant. The founders of our country never intended to allow its government to legislate morality or mandate how an individual lives his or her life. The point of government should be to create an environment that everyone can prosper and achieve in, while holding fast to their individual eccentricities that indeed make them autonomous and unique.

     Many of you will, I am sure, disagree with me or think me profoundly neurotic, but for the sake of an example I will offer my opinion up for critique. One such needless law which infringes on my personal freedom is the seat belt law. I know most of you are thinking "seat belts save lives," and while that is true and a recorded, proven fact, why do I, an adult who is responsible for my actions, need to be told to wear my seat belt? Do I not have the right to operate a motor vehicle that has passed its inspection, is street-legal, and meets all of the necessary safety and operating requirements and not wear a seat belt? Will wearing a seat belt save anyone besides me? Is my life not my own or does the government own me? Why does the government feel the need to protect me from me? Yes, I see the need to buckle up infants and children; they are not yet at a place where they are responsible for themselves. But I, as an adult of legal age and understanding, am. That is just one of the laws that really get me going in terms of personal freedom.

     Nowhere is this infringement of freedom more evident than in the business community. It has long been my belief that governments who value freedom and free enterprise do not tell businesses how to operate. Yes, government should have a hand in outlining proper business practices to ensure no illicit activity is being perpetrated on the general public. But only when a business acts in a manner contrary to the laws of the land should the government intervene. And unfortunately, the inherent flaw of that statement rest on the fact that there are simply too many laws; business is over regulated and vastly over burdened by those in our country who support the big government mentality. The imposition that is placed on the business owner both locally and nationally is ridiculous. When it becomes more profitable and easier to hire workers and purchase goods from outside our own borders, the extent of over regulation is evident. And make no mistake about it, every imposition placed on business is felt, both in our wallets and in the steady decline in our freedom.

     Allow me to provide an example of over regulation and infringement on capitalism. I know this will spark another debate as did the previous example, but please indulge me and continue to read as I elaborate. It has become trendy for cities and towns all across our country to ban smoking in commercial buildings, in an effort to create a clean and safe environment. Now, before I continue, please note that I am a non-smoker so my views of which I am about to express cannot be simply extinguished as defending my habit. With that said, I for one cannot and will not support a smoking ban on private, commercial businesses. That may shock some of you reading this, but please allow me to explain my reasoning.

     America is built on capitalism, free enterprise. My handy-dandy Encarta defines capitalism as an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods, characterized by a free competitive market and motivation by profit. Capitalism has been the backbone of our society and has allowed our country to grow and expand more than any nation in the history of the world. Allowing a person to decide what type of business and how they run that business has been what has made this country great. A business owner's right to choose who their business will cater to and what services and goods they supply to the public is capitalism at its best.

     So for me, as an elected official to hamper in any manner a private business person's right to run their business as they see fit is a detriment to capitalism and our economic system. That is what a smoking ban on private, commercial businesses does; it takes the business owner's right to choose who their business will cater to and disregards capitalism. A smoking ban is over regulation and infringement at its core.

     Some will say, "Smoking kills. It causes cancer. Even second hand smoke has been proven harmful to your health. I should be able to dine or shop in a smoke-free environment at that business." I hear your concerns. I have had similar thoughts before as well. Yes, smoking is not healthy and second hand smoke can be and often is harmful. But please don't miss the greatness of our country here. You and I have the choice to be a patron of any business. And those businesses will succeed or fail based on if you and I support them. That is our freedom, our privilege in a society based on free enterprise. Your patronage of a business will determine that business's health. And if enough of us do not buy from a business it will inevitably die. That is capitalism.

     Likewise, if a business owner chooses to cater to smokers and provides such an atmosphere, it is that business owner's choice and he or she will succeed or fail based on that choice. It is not up to me as an elected official to mandate to a private business owner what he or she can and cannot do with their private business in terms of offering smoking within their establishment. Capitalism allows for success if the market will sustain it and failure if cannot. Why over regulate businesses if the market will ultimately decide their fate? That's the greatness of free enterprise.

     If a law does not enrich our freedom, then I for one cannot and will not support its passage. Infringement on our freedom is the mentality of big government and it has begun to disguise itself as being healthy or safe or practical. True freedom should leave the door wide open to us as citizens of our city, state, and nation. True freedom should encourage capitalism and support free enterprise and not burden down business owners. True freedom does not listen to the segments of society, but does the business of the whole for the betterment of the whole. True freedom creates an environment that allows you and me to succeed and fail out of our own making. That is what makes Pascagoula great and that is what makes our state and country great as well.

Frank Corder

Pascagoula City Councilman Ward 4