All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 20, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:08
January 20, 2006, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
That's absolutely right, and you can be on with us by calling 800-282-2882.
And uh, ladies and gentlemen, this final hour on Friday, the final day of the week, uh I like to spend it talking about a uh a controversy that's come up, and it has to do with uh Jack Abramhoff.
Uh he's the uh Washington lobby lobbyist who's pled guilty to uh charges of conspiracy, fraud, and tax evasion.
And this is this man has uh showered the uh the coffers, the campaign coffers of both Democrats and Republicans.
Matter of fact, a lot of times a lot of people want to make it a a an entirely Republican affair, but it turns out, according to a Washington Post article, that uh Abranoff has given one million dollars to Republican uh Congressmen and and Senators, and 758,000 to uh Democrats.
Now, uh you find a lot of Congressmen right now, uh they're saying, Well, what are we gonna do uh about the uh about the the pet the influence peddling in Washington by uh lobbyists?
And many of them, many Congressmen and many politicians are seeking to distance themselves from Abraham.
Uh you know, it's kind of like the uh kid who got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Uh he's uh these congressmen are giving the money back.
They're giving it to different uh charities.
They're saying we don't want any evil uh Abrahoff uh money, and they plan to take uh measures against the uh the uh lobbying abuses.
Matter of fact, uh Senator uh Senate Majority Leader Bill Fritz, in reaction to Abraham's uh guilty plea, he's pledged to examine and act on any necessary changes, these are his words, to improve the transparency and accountability for our body when it comes to lobbying.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, whatever actions Congress might take in the matter of lobbying are going to be just as disappointing in ending influencing influence peddling as their uh bipartisan campaign reform act of 2002, uh sometimes people call it the McCain Fine Goal Act.
Whatever Congress does with respect to lobbying, all that is going to do is change the form of influence peddling.
Just as the McCain Fine Gold Bill just changed the form of influence peddling.
So, fellow Americans, let's let's ask ourselves the question, let's not be bamboozled by Congress.
Let's do our own analysis.
And our own analysis might start start off with the question why do corporations, unions, and other interest groups fork over millions of dollars to the campaign coffers of politicians.
Why do they do that?
Is it because these groups are are just have a special or extraordinary interest in making sure Congress uh upholds and defends the Constitution of the United States?
Or might it be that these uh uh groups uh that number just uh the number in the thousands lobby organizations just love participating in the political process.
Do you think that's the reason that they fork over millions of dollars to these people?
If you do, then you probably believe that uh babies are delivered by Starks and that there is a Santa Claus and there is a tooth ferry, if you believe that, if you would give affirmative answers to that.
Now, I think a much better explanation for the millions of dollars going into the campaign coffers of Washington politician lies in the awesome growth Of government control over our lives,
uh uh the government control in terms of starting up businesses, the government control uh of employment, the the government control over our property and other areas of our lives.
Now, when Congress has that kind of control, then they have that kind of power to grant favors to different Americans.
The greater the Congress's power to grant favors, the greater will be the value of being able to influence Congress.
And, ladies and gentlemen, there's no better influence of Congress than money.
Now, you say, well, Williams, what are you talking about?
Well, what what favor do these lobbyists want from Congress?
Now, here's the generic answer to this.
They want to go to Congress, they want to get Congress under one ruse or another to grant them a privilege or a right that will be denied another American.
That's the generic uh that's what they that's the favor that they're looking for.
Um a variant of this favor or privilege is that they want to get Congress to do something that would be illegal or criminal if done privately.
Okay, for example, let me just give one example one among thousands of examples.
Now you take um a company like uh Archer Daniels Midland.
Okay.
Now, if they if if if the if that corporation, I'm just using it, I'm not picking on, I'm not singling out that uh corporation uh as the only person doing it, they all do it.
Now, now Archer Daniel Midland, if they use goons and violence from to stop people from buying sugar from a Caribbean producer of sugar in order to raise the price of sugar so that they can sell more of their corn syrup as a sweetener, well they'd wind up in jail.
That is if they if they just got guns and say, Williams, uh pointing his gun, I dare you to buy some sugar from a Caribbean producer, they'd go to jail.
Okay.
Now, if they line the coffers of a Congressman, they can buy the same result without risking imprisonment.
That is, they just have Congress.
Congress just simply does the dirty work for them by enacting sugar import quotas and tariffs.
Uh another favor that they get from Congress.
The two most powerful committees of Congress, the committees that Congressmen uh fight to be on, uh the two committees are the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee.
Now, these committees are in charge of tax favors.
A tweak in a tax code here and a tweak in the tax code there might mean millions of dollars.
So you can get your tweak in your favor if you line the coffers of a congressman or a senator.
Um there's there's another insidious part of this favor granting by Congress.
It's called I it's bad cop, good cop.
It's kind of extortion.
Now, Congressman might come up to me, Williams and say, let's say I'm the owner of a corporation.
Uh Congressman Joe might come up to me and say, Well, Williams, um Congressman Bill is planning some kind of environmental regulation or uh or some kind of OSHA regulation that's gonna cost you millions of dollars.
Now, I'll fight this guy on the floor if you give me a campaign contribution.
And so I'll fight Congressman Bill on this bill if you give me a campaign contribution.
Now, Congressman Joe and Congressman Bill, they may get together on this in advance.
They say, well, look, I'm going to try to push some bill called OSHA 123 on your company.
And say, hey, that's a good idea.
I'll go there and I'll tell them I'll fight you if they will pay me off.
And then I'll tell your people that I'm going to have EPA 123.
And you tell them you can get some money from your constituent by saying you'll fight me if they give you some money.
This is nothing less than extortion.
Now, what's the solution?
Well, the solution is to take that kind of power away from Congress.
Eliminate that kind of power.
I'm not quite sure how we eliminate it.
I believe that the best way to eliminate it is to force our congressmen, our representatives, to obey the United States Constitution.
Because in the United States Constitution, there are no provisions for favor granting and privilege granting in the United States Constitution.
But maybe it's too difficult to get Congress to obey the United States Constitution.
And the idea was suggested to me by Nobel laureate Friedrich Hayek, very eminent.
dead now but a very eminent economist uh we were having dinner one night and I asked him I said uh Professor Hayek if you could write one law that would help protect Americans against the increase in growth of government what would that law be uh Hayek just smiled and he says I would just write one law.
He said that law would be that whatever Congress does for one American it would have to do it for all Americans and so I asked him I said could you explain he said for example Congress pays some Americans not to raise pigs he said now we should have a law that if Congress pays some Americans not to raise pigs,
well any other American not raising pigs ought to get the same amount of money.
He said Williams you would get some money because you're not raising pigs are you well I think I I I would like to see a bill introduced on the floor that Congress had to treat every single American equally if they gave one Americ if it gave one American a food stamp give every American a food stamp.
If you gave one American special parking privileges give every American special parking parking privileges and so if we had such a law we wouldn't have all this privilege granting by the United States Congress because they just would not have that kind of power.
We'll be back with your calls after this we're back and you can be on with us by calling 800 28282 and let's go to the phones.
Hi Mr Williams thank you so much for taking my call I really appreciate it.
Um I'd like to just reverse directions a little bit if I might hello yeah yes yes uh matter of fact uh uh Brett Winterbull said that you wanted to talk about the subject we were talking about the last hour.
Right, right.
I'm an education major and um I left class and immediately got in my car and turned on my radio to get my daily dose of rush like I always do and I felt like I'd had a bucket of ice water just thrown on me.
Because Rush was not here.
No you you're very very interesting.
It wasn't so much that I'm an education major and I'm starting what we call at the University of Louisiana where I attend um our block courses and this is my first semester of methods courses and I'm very excited about it.
And I was in class and I was so inspired by what my professor who by the way is a very fine woman was saying and I was so excited about my chosen profession, what I was going to be a part of.
And then you heard me.
I was so proud of of my choice.
And I was so inspired and I couldn't wait to get out there and be a part of this.
I'm the daughter of an educator.
My mother and father-in-law are retired educators, and I see the struggle they've been through and make a contribution to this, and just to say that we're like the bottom of the barrel on campus.
Well well that no mean that that's now of course now not everyone is at the bottom of the barrel, but most of most of the people are education majors are.
I mean, uh d do you deny the facts.
That is education majors have the lowest SAT scores of any other major.
I don't I don't know the statistics.
But that's available.
I come into contact every single day, and I see their dedication.
It's not just their chosen profession, but to their college careers as well.
Wait a minute.
Wait a minute, an idiot can be dedicated.
I mean, but so so that so the fact that you're dedicated doesn't necessarily mean that uh uh you can be dedicated putting uh trying to put uh square pegs and round holes, but that doesn't mean that you're intelligent or or academic gift list.
Look, look the the point is is that that it it there's it's no it's by no it's there's no dispute whatsoever that that the that education majors score the lowest SAT scores.
Then this is also available, you can just do searches on the internet through Google searches when it when people who have education degrees when they graduate and take a GRE graduate record exam to get into graduate school or the LSAT uh exam uh or the uh G or the uh MCAT exam, they score the lowest of any other major.
I don't know about that.
I think from a perspective that I'm not aware of.
I'm only speaking to you from the perspective I'm not even okay, but you have to become aware of these perspectives.
That is the I mean matter of fact, let me let me give you one more exp uh uh actually a personal experience.
When I was teaching at at uh at Temple University, I used to teach a master's course for people who are going to be business majors.
And this one guy, you know, he he was uh friendly and he was uh jovial, and he used to come by my office, uh, you know, cracking jokes, and I said, What kind of work do you do?
He says, I I w I work in uh in in South Philadelphia at a at a uh at a high school.
And he started talking about his colleagues and you know and and you know, ineptness and things like this and how he talks to them.
And I said, Aren't you afraid you're gonna be fired?
He said, No.
It was an elementary school he was working in.
He said, No, because I'm the only teacher that can do long division.
I mean, no, but that's okay, wait wait a minute, wait a minute.
That's that's unfortunate, isn't it?
Okay, look, if that it was the case, then yes, that would be a good idea.
Look, one one more question, one more question.
Look, and you can verify this yourself.
There's a c the California basic education skills test.
Mm-hmm.
Uh is no mean that's you know, uh the test for people to take who are gonna become teachers.
Right, I heard you with the Okay, now what do you what do you think about a question like that being on a test to become a teacher and and people missing that test.
And for those who that's absolutely ridiculous.
I think you're gonna have idiots in every single field.
I think that's a good idea.
Wait, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
Same theory, but we call it the praxis.
Now, I've taken the first part of the practice, which that sort of question had it been asked, it would have been on the first part.
We had nothing even remotely.
Well okay, well, okay.
Check out the it's called C Best, I believe it's CBS.org, California Basic Education Skills that there I mean these are are facts that we have to confront.
As long as we're saying that, oh, we have wonderful teachers, teach all the teachers smart, etc.
etc.
We're not going to cope with one aspect of our education problem, and that is fairly low quality people in there teaching our kids.
I mean, and there's there was one there's one publication I can't think of right now, but the it's a publication a guy wrote of of notes to parents from teachers.
And and if you look at the the grammar in those notes, you would you would not accept that from a a ninth grader.
And so the point is these things are not very comfortable to talk about.
But if we're going to make changes in our education system, we have to be willing to talk about them, number one, and make changes.
And this information I just gave the uh gave the listeners and I gave it to you, Holly.
This information is readily available through uh checking out Google.
Just do L S A T and Major.
You know, just put L S A T major or G R E and Major.
We'll be back with your calls after this.
We're back, uh Walter Williams, uh filling in for Rush and Rush will be back on Monday, and you can be on with us by calling 800-282-2882.
And um, Holly, stay tuned if you're still listening.
Uh, we're not going to talk about education, but we're still going to push back the frontiers of ignorance, and we're going to welcome Ron on his cell phone from Mount Joy, Pennsylvania.
Welcome to the show, Ron.
Dr. Williams, it's an honor.
Thank you.
And I am uh very much inspired by your conversation by be violating the contract I have with your call screener to talk about anything other than my original reason for calling, and that is when you talked about passing a law, one single law for all Americans.
The law that comes to mind for me would be something in terms of a fair tax, a national sales tax, eliminate all this tax code and corporate taxes and level the playing field.
Your reaction, sir.
Well, I I I think that the uh the income tax, the way that we tax now, I think it is uh it is a national disgrace.
I think that our founding fathers uh anticipated the uh the potential abuse of it by uh in our in the Constitution, they said no direct taxes, and we had to amend the Constitution with the 16th Amendment to allow for an income tax, and I think that uh our founding fathers would uh be rolling in their graves if they knew that we're so stupid to do that.
Sure.
And uh but however, a lot of people talk about the fair tax, and I think that there's much to be said for the fair tax.
I think it's H.R. 25 being pushed by uh uh Congressman Linder.
Yes, sir.
There's much to be said about it.
But the only way that I would go for a fair tax, this national sales tax, is under one under the condition that we repeal the sixteenth amendment, because if we don't repeal the sixteenth amendment 16th amendment, we're going to have a sales tax and an income tax.
Good point.
Now, but however, having said that, I think that the major uh issue that Americans should confront is not the tax side of government, but the spending side of government.
That is for from 1787 until 1920, except during wartime, the federal government was only three percent of the GNP.
Today it's over 20 percent of the GNP, and possibly higher than that, depending on what numbers you're looking at.
Now, if the federal government remained at three percent of the GNP, well, then any old tax system is okay.
Even the old income tax system is okay.
It's not gonna be burdensome.
But if government spending, let's say hypothetically becomes fifty or sixty percent of the GNP, then any tax system is going to be abusive.
Then Dr. Williams, you you've just suggested to me that I widen my horizon to number one, the fair tax, and I would commend to anyone the reading of this very simple book and a very simple procedure which does away with so much stupidity, it's unbelievable.
Number one, implement the fair tax.
Number two, revoke the sixteenth amendment, and number three, pass a balanced budget amendment.
No, not uh not a balanced budget amendment.
You you're you're you're okay so far, but you made one error.
Not a balanced budget amendment.
What we'd like to have is a spending limitation amendment.
That is limit federal spending to a pr certain percentage of GNP.
Now, I was on a very distinguished panel with Milton Friedman, uh uh Bob Bork and uh a bunch and Niskanon and a bunch of other people in in the late 70s, and we wrote a spending a spending limitation amendment to the United States Constitution.
And uh matter of fact, uh uh uh Senator Luger introduced the amendment that we wrote uh to the Senate and it passed the Senate in nineteen eighty-two and but however it did not pass the House and it was reintroduced in nineteen eighty six and it didn't even pass the Senate.
Now what our amendment said was that the federal government can spend I believe it was something like 18 or 17 or 18 percent of GNP they could not spend any more than that.
The treasurer could not write a check for any more money than 17% of the GNP.
Yet Kit asked me, was there war exception?
Yes, there was.
There was an emergency exception where there had to be a supermajority vote on the emergency, and it could only be valid for one year, and there had to be a supermajority the next year.
There was an exception.
Now, when we were writing this amendment, my proposal, see, I'm one of these radical people like the framers of the Constitution, my proposal was, let's limit federal spending to 10% of the GNP.
And people would ask me, why 10%?
I say, well, if 10% is good enough for the Baptist Church, it ought to be good enough for the United States Congress.
But our political pros said that would just never sell.
So the point is, our true protection is to cap federal spending because –
I don't want to get into i it's it's too much too much it'll take too much time right now for me to get into the argument why the budget is always balanced anyway that is in any kind of true economic sense there's never a deficit unless you believe in Santa Claus or the tooth ferry but that's a subject for another kind as a matter of fact I might do a column on it.
I might do a column on it so you guys just uh just uh look at my website Walter E. Williams dot com or either um uh Jewish world review one of these sites that carry my column and look for um let's see what what am I gonna name it?
I think I'm going to name it, what James Madison would have been proud of Williams'writing.
That's what I think I'm going to do.
He's my favorite founder.
Let's go to one more call.
Let's go to Randy from Tennessee.
Welcome to the show, Randy.
Hi, Walter.
Hey, thanks for taking my call.
I sure appreciate it.
Thank you.
I like the program today.
And what I'm calling about is thanking you for touching base on this Abramoff thing.
I really hope that the media in our country and people like you don't forget about this thing and let the politicians just kind of shove it under a carpet someplace.
I write about these people all the time.
But see, Randy, I hate to cut you short on this, but see, our big problem, my big problem, or my goal is to try to convince my fellow Americans on the moral superiority of liberty and limited government now I believe that we see politicians behaving the way that they do is because I think that many Americans want them to behave that way.
Many Americans believe uh that government should be in the business of taking one person's property and giving it to another person to whom it does not belong through the tax code.
Now and so Randy you might say well not we people in Tennessee do you believe that in Tennessee?
No.
Yes you do you your your fellow Tennesseans believe that imagine for example okay let me ask you the question Randy okay I'm running for the Senate I'm gonna run for the Senate in Tennessee and I'm gonna go back and forth across the state and I'm gonna tell the people in Tennessee look I've read the United States Constitution I know what Congress can do and what it cannot do.
So if you elect me to the Senate from Tennessee, don't expect for me to bring back uh aid to higher education money, meals on wheels, highway construction funds, etc, etc do you think I'll get elected to the Senate from Tennessee?
I get your point.
Okay so because I wouldn't be doing you don't hear it.
Yes well okay I'll I missed the point.
But um what I what I what I'd like to say is that uh our politicians they don't once they get to Washington, they don't they're not paying attention to the constituents anymore uh from the states that they're from.
They don't even know who these people are.
All they pay attention to are the special interest groups.
These are the people with the money, and these are the people that motivate the politicians.
Well, look, Randy, uh we're we're up against the clock right now, but but everybody is a special interest.
Everybody is a special interest.
That is, uh there's a i at at your at your university there's a special interest, that is people want more buildings.
Uh for the uh for the old geezers like myself, there's a special interest.
We think that uh that you young people should buy us prescription drugs and things like that.
And so we're all special interest.
So what I would like s uh see us all do is say, let's back off and we're going to obey the United States Constitution and we'll be back to your calls after this.
We're back uh filling in for Russian, he'll be back on Monday, and you can be on with us by calling 800-282-2882, and let's go back to the phones and chuck on a cell phone from Pennsylvania.
Welcome to the show, Chuck.
Thank you very much, Mr. Williams.
There's one thing you said that uh Jack Abern Abernoff gave money to Democrats, and I haven't seen any proof where he's given himself one dime to any democratic senator or congressman has not happened.
What about directed money?
I mean, the you have this guy, uh uh Byron Dorgan uh who is a uh he's a uh Democrat, isn't he, and he's given sixty seven thousand back.
Why is he doing that if he didn't get any uh he's giving he's giving it to whom?
Oh he he's he he's he's giving it to no but he's getting rid of it, getting out of his out of his coffers.
Well the the thing of it is you said Jack I Abermoff is giving money to Democrats, and that's not true.
Okay, well okay, well the he's so I'm correct.
No, wait, that statement.
Okay, right.
Okay, do you agree that he's directed Indian tribes to give money to certain congressmen and senators who are also Republicans in that you're speaking about a senator from Nevada, am I correct?
No, no, no, no, no.
Because that that is Wait, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
Only one person talking.
Wait a minute, only one person talking.
Now now if you if you go to I'll I'll give you everybody the source, it's Washington Post, and they uh and it's uh let's see, it doesn't get updates, but the Washington Post said it's uh and the to article is called how Abramov spread the wealth.
And it turns out that it the total amount of directed money uh went to Republicans, uh was uh uh from the Indian tribes uh directed by Abranoff was a million dollars and seven hundred and fifty-eight thousand dollars to Democrats.
Okay, the thing of it is the thing of it is what?
Okay, let me answer before.
I mean, uh I mean all of them were involved.
Pardon me?
I'm gonna answer your question.
Okay.
Okay.
Now you're saying that Indian tribes are given to Democrats, too.
No, no, no, no.
Wait, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
Abranoff directed them.
Well, Abramov has has not admitted to doing that yet.
So I don't know where the Washington Post, which is notoriously incorrect.
And is actually notoriously liberal.
Uh no.
Not not the post, I'm sorry.
Not the Washington Post, okay.
Okay, but okay.
Let's forget about that for a moment.
But uh what what do you think about my proposal of treating every American equally?
That is, if Congress does for one American, he has d do it for all Americans.
I I'm you know, I have no problem treating all Americans equal.
Uh-huh.
I I just want to see the truth get out there and there's a lot of misinformation.
Well the truth is out there, and I mean the if you check this Washington Post article, it it matter of fact, it it says the it gives the top twenty individual recipients of uh uh of uh Abranoff directed money.
Now how how are they defining Abramoff direct at money?
Well, well, I I think wait wait wait a minute I I think that the politicians are doing it that is you have to tell us why a uh where's where's Dorgan from I I think you said okay wait a minute the politicians therefore what you're saying is the Washington Post is repeating what the the Republicans are trying to say they're trying to spread the blame out when they know that the other ones that are in trouble for this are the Republicans okay Chuck Chuck uh let me ask this question one Democrat that's been
Wait a minute.
Let me ask you.
Wait.
Look, look.
I'm going to drop the dime on you unless you act nice.
Okay, I'm trying to act nice.
Okay, now why would Byron Dorgan from North Dakota, why would he be giving back $67,000?
Because you're trying to paint him the same way you're painting everybody.
No, no, I'm just asking you a question.
why would he give back $7,000 saying he doesn't want to have anything
to do with Abramov you have to ask him I don't he he hasn't confirmed with you okay well I would well when he confirm when he confers with you call in again let's go to John from Bloomfield New Jersey welcome to show uh hi Dr. Williams I want to thank you for uh your wonderful suggestions about Christmas gift giving I've been married for 41 years and this is the first time I got it right.
Oh I I've been married 46.
Okay now uh what do you what'd you give your wife?
Oh well uh you know you said it should be something practical and it's the gift wrapping that counts more than anything else yeah that's right yeah well uh she has a back problem like Mrs. Williams her doctor advised her not to lift anything heavy so I followed your suggestion and I got her one of those child snow shovels.
Okay.
And you wrap the nice yeah that's that's what Ms. I knew it was going to be cold out there while she was uh shoveling the sidewalk in the uh driveway so I wrapped it in a full length pink coat.
Oh, no, no, no.
Oh, come on.
That doesn't count.
But that's fine.
That's a wonderful idea.
But it just doesn't match mine.
Now, do you notice, what I notice is that with that little children's shovel, that takes my wife a longer time to clean the driveway.
Yes, it does.
Yeah, that's the only problem.
I'm thinking about hiring an 18-year-old girl to help her.
You better watch that.
But thanks a lot, John, for calling in.
Hey, by the way, you know, a lot of people consult my website, and I just never believed that it would be envy in the rush audience.
Let me just tell you, I get letters, like, from some of you guys that are just plain jealous of my good looks.
Some of you guys say, you know, Walter, you ought to be ashamed of having the picture of your son on your website.
That's not my son.
That's me.
I'm just plain youthful and handsome.
and
one guy said uh I see you too a lot of Botox I didn't know what Botox was I had to ask somebody what Botox was uh uh and so you know as as Mrs Williams says uh I and she's and it's a little bit racial too uh a lot of people say well how come you look so young well Mrs. Williams says black don't crack so that's a now I don't know whether she's being racial and or not but uh anyway uh she said we'll be back your calls after this we're
Back, wind up the last minute or so.
You know, when I was talking to Randy of Tennessee, you know, one of the tragedies that has happened in our country, that is, as I was telling you, to use an example, I'm running for the Senate, and I'm saying I'm not going to bring this back and that back, billions of dollars back to Tennessee.
Well, the people of Tennessee would be acting absolutely correctly in terms of their own interests.
And the reason why is that if I don't bring back billions of dollars dollars to Tennessee that doesn't mean that Tennesseans will pay a lower federal income tax all that it means is that Kentucky will get it instead.
And so the here's the problem ladies and gentlemen once legalized theft begins it pays for everybody to get involved because those who don't get involved will wind up holding for those in the rural area you'll know what I mean the brown end of the stick.
▲
Export Selection