FRIST

                At first, I thought FRIST was a misspelling of FIRST. Wrong! FRIST is the correct spelling of the last name of Bill Frist who is a Republican US Senator from Tennessee and is also the Majority Leader in the Senate. Bill Frist is not a household name in the USA, but it might be after the next several weeks. There is a titanic issue boiling in the Senate, and Bill Frist is right in the middle of it. The issue is over the “filibuster”, which is a ploy used to prevent the Senate from voting on specific issues. The filibuster is not a creature of the US Constitution; rather, it is a Senate Rule, created by Senators, implemented by Senators, and used from time to time by Senators. Now it is being used by the Senate Democrats to prevent the full Senate from voting on judicial appointments submitted to the Senate for confirmation by President Bush.

                This is no trifling matter, and one of two things has to happen. Either the Democrats recant their threatened filibusters of the judicial appointments, or the Republican majority will have to change the Senate Rule on cutting off debate. Right now, it takes 60 votes to end debate (i.e., the filibuster), and Bill Frist can only corral 55 or so. But it only takes 51 votes to change the Senate rule on limiting debate. The Democrats describe this as the “nuclear option”. A bit melodramatic perhaps, but it looms as a big deal for sure. But, such is the price that will have to be paid short of acquiescing to the adamant minority of Democrat Senators.

                George Bush has made no secret about appointing “strict constructionists” to the bench. These are Judges who rule on what the Constitution says, and do not go on legalistic detours to create new law to reflect their own views. The liberal and secular Democrats on the other hand delight in “activist” Judges who have no compunction about distorting, twisting or creatively interpreting  the Constitution in order to “legislate” their causes. This has a huge bearing on issues such as homosexual marriage, abortion, gun possession, capital punishment, the Pledge of Allegiance, religion in public life, school prayer, and many others. The last thing in the world the secular Democrats would want is a popular election on these issues, or even an open vote in the House or Senate. Sure loser for them.  Their only hope of success for their agenda is friendly activist Judges. Hence their powerful opposition to the Bush nominees.

                Bill Frist is right in the middle of this major hassle, and if the Senate rules on debate (filibuster) are to be changed, he will have to lead the charge. High visibility is not all bad for him since he has aspirations for the White House in 2008. But tackling this rule change will take a lot of skill, courage and determination. No easy task.

                Bill FRIST. He’ll be making the talk shows and the evening news.

THE HAMMER

     Tom Delay is the Majority Leader in the US House of Representatives. A Texas Republican, he is a hard nosed legislator who is both Pro-Republican and Anti-Democrat. It is hard to tell which category motivates him the most. Right now he is in the gunsights of the Democrats over some Delay wheeling and dealing that are questionable  —  if not illegal or at least ethically suspect. That doesn't make him a whole lot different than many others of our elected Congressional representatives.

     Faily recently,  Delay engineered a congressional re-districting in Texas that resulted in 5 more Republican seats in the House. That success immediately placed a bullseye on Tom's chest. Personally, I think he has made some highly questional if not downright stupid decisions  — such as paying his wife and daughter over $500,000 for “work” done on his re-election campaign, and there are questions about the financing of some of his Congressional boondoggles. Dumb. Now the Democrats look like wolves attacking raw meat. Without a real legislative agenda or constructive issue on which to campaign, Delay is now the target. 

     But the Hammer is one tough customer. He will not go down without a bitter fight. Delay has a lot of House IOU's to cash in. Despite all the battering from the Democrats and the left wing press, the best bet is that Delay will weather the storm. If he does, his memory will be very long. His reputation is well earned.

ARNOLD BLINKED

     With much fanfare, Arnold Schwarzenegger announced his intentions to take four issues directly to Cailfornia voters in the form of ballot initiatives. He did so since it was a forgone conclusion that he would win no support from the Democrat controlled State Assembly. The four issues were mandatory spending caps and controls, revised teacher tenure plus merit pay, re-districting of the State elective offices, and reform of the public employe pension system. Underlying all of this is the financial mess in which the State finds itself.

     Last week, Arnold blinked. He pulled the pension reform issue off the list. Could be that his close advisors urged that he do so since he may have bitten off more than he can chew. Better to back off and fight another day. Translated,  that means that he couldn't win against the powerful opposition of the well-funded labor unions and the Democrats. At least right now.

     Many believe that Arnold has a lot of good arguments going for him on the pension issue since the costs are clearly out of control and will continue to get worse. But he didn't make the case very well, and the Unions beat him to the punch with quick and dirty TV ads. Now is swimming upstream. If the big issue is restoring fiscal sanity to the State budget, the abandonment of pension reform is a huge step backwards. To put it another way, without pension reform, it is virtually impossible to achieve budgetary control of State spending.

     Maybe he will try again in 2006, but that is a long way off, and Arnold's popularity is waning. The brass ring doesn't come around very often. I hope he hasn't missed it.

FAIRWAYS

     Sports fans do not normally turn to the Wall Street Journal to get breaking news, but the WSJ recently carried a full story on golf. Most tried and true golfers know that the game has changed enormously in the past 10 years or so. The rules haven't changed much, and women still can't be members at Augusta National (home of the Masters tournament), but there have been major changes in golf equipment  –  the clubs and the golf balls. Net result?  Good players now can hit the ball much further than they could before. Much further. For example, a 550 yard par five generally took 3 shots to get on the green. Now, the long hitters can get on the green with a wood and a mid-iron. It is commonplace for a pro to get on a 580 yard par five in two strokes, and most are unhappy if they do not.  The athleticism of players plus strength training account for some of the length off the tee, but fundamentally it is the juiced up ball that makes the difference.  Ten years ago, no one would have thought about hitting a 7 iron 180 yards. Now it is ho-hum.

     To stay abreast of the big hitters and lively ball, some courses have been lenthened to 7000 – 7500 yards instead of the general standard of 6500-7000 yards. That change by itself makes golf a lot more difficult for ordinary players. But bigger and longer courses are more expensive to maintain and groom. Thus, costs rise all the way around. Recently, however, a solution  (remedy?) has been proposed. Golf ball manufacturers have been urged to develop a new golf ball that would be “dead-er” and wouldn't fly so far. Makes sense. Current golf courses would not have to be lengthened, and sheer distance would be sacrificed for a greater reliance on just plain skill. Some of the pros and others will no doubt complain, but it is about time that common sense takes over.

     Golf is a game based strongly on tradition, and in that sense it is self defeating for the game to altered significantly to serve technology and TV. There are lots of rules in golf that date back hundreds of years, and there are also rules about club length and golf balls right now. So what is wrong with applying another rule for golf ball design?  Golf is a game that should be enjoyed by the 25-30,000 men and women who play it. There is no reason to change its nature to satisfy the top 200-300 players in the world and the TV sponsors of the PGA events.

     Take a little bit of zip out of the ball and return to the days when a 430 yard par 4 requires a tough second shot, not just a wedge or 9 iron. Trust the good old Wall Street Journal. When something important comes along, they print it. None of the golf ball manufacturers has come up with a “dead-er” ball as yet, but the ball is rolling –  no pun intended. The WSJ will likely keep us informed.

HANOI  JANE

     Jane Fonda has written a book, “My life so far” which will be on the bookstands soon if not already. At an early book signing in Atlanta, the crowd was sparse, but Time Magazine has made up for the absence of early publicity by publishing a feature story on Ms. Fonda in its 4/11/05 issue. Nothing like a huge shot of free publicity. I haven't read the book, but I did read the 7 page Time article which includes a very flattering photo of a 67 year old woman looking like 37.

     To say the least, Jane is presented in a sympathic and otherwise positive light of a person born into privilege and wealth who struggles through all sorts of difficulties including her Battles with Bulemia (otherwise known as ”binging and barfing”), her immediate family spats, her participation in marital depravities with husband Vadim (and others), and the years with Ted Turner. Of course, there is also the matter of the visit to Vietnam and being photographed in a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft battery  (helmet and all). She terms this a mistake in judgment that she will regret until the end of her life. Touching. The Time article (nor the book, presumably) spends little time on the Vietnam military widows or the fatherless children of the Vietnam vets. In the case of many, the “rest of their lives” came 30-35 years ago. Time didn't point that out.

     Hanoi Jane Fonda has blood on her hands. Neither Time Magazine nor her book can wash it off.

BIG CHALLENGE

     Gotta hand it to Arnold Schwarzenegger  — he is one gutsy politician. The line has been drawn in the sand and the battle lines are formed. Arnold is going to directly challege the labor unions that control and dominate the finances of California.

     Arnold is right. California doesn not have a revenue problem  — it has a spending problem. There is no easy way out of the State's huge multi-billion dollar budget deficit without changing the structure of committed costs. He will get nowhere with the politicos and Union leaders who have a vested interest in the status quo, so his only alternative is to take his case directly to the people  — and that is what he is committed to do. The issues and remedies he intends to pose are not trivial  – they are biggies.

     Consider:  A) Implementing merit pay for teachers, and granting tenure after seven years (not 1 or 2). B) Reducing pension costs currently built into the labor agreements of public employe unions. These plans have benefit escalation formulae that will accelerate runaway costs from now on. 3) redistricting legislative districts that are now formed to vitually guarantee incumbent re-election in “safe” districts for both Democrats and Republicans. How are those for starters??

    The propaganda missiles are already flying, and the exchanges are likely to get worse before getting better. No doubt, Arnold still enjoys popularity among the citizens at large. Thus the Unions have no alternative than to try to destroy him personally. That process is already underway. The newspaper/TV ads are already appearing.

     California's financial problems are very real and very big. A band aid approach will solve nothing, and neither will a strategy based on “buying time”. Delay simply means that the structural problems will continue to drive the budget south. As one citizen, I hope Arnold doesn't back off and that he continues to take his messages directly to the citizens at large. There is nobody else on the horizon who can pick up his shoes when it comes to political conviction and courage.

THE POPE

     At the age of 84, Pope John Paul II has died. What a truly remakable life he led. While his virtues and accomplishments are being extolled in the world wide press, the long process has begun to replace him. It is far too premature to guess who his successor might be, but it is none too soon to think about the major issues and decisions that will confront the new Pope. First, there is the issue of making women eligible to serve as priests, and add to that the declining number of new priests being ordained.  Likewise, the marriage of priests is a growing issue in many countries. Then there is the ever present issue of birth control, plus homosexuality in general and same sex marriage in particular. What to do about pedophiles among priests is still on the Vatican agenda, to say nothing about “right to die” kinds of decisions. The new Pope will probably have to hit the gound running. And not by choice.