Taxation WITH representation...

President Obama chided corporate leaders for taking bailout money and using it to fund junkets to Vegas, executive compensation and "golden parachutes". So now the full ramifications of federal bailout are becoming clear for bailout recipients. The federal government is now the 1000 pound gorilla lurking in the corner of the corporate board room.

I vehemently oppose using federal money to purchase a stake in private enterprise. However, if it's going to happen anyway, the beneficiaries have to understand that they've given up the right to control their corporate destiny.

The government is not structured to manage a private company in any way. Companies have to actually, you know... make a profit and if they fail, they close, people lose their jobs, yada yada. It's a natural, albeit unpleasant fact of the capitalist economic model. Winners and losers. (Kids, that's why you get the best education you can so when you have to find another job, you're actually qualified, but I digress) Our current federal overseers have the idea that government can step in and interrupt this natural economic flow. I'm extremely dubious that the policy direction currently underway will help in the short run. It will most likely hurt in the long run by saddling us and our grand kids with unbearable debt and inflation... time will tell.

That's not really the point of this post.

As many states (and some cities) line up for their "fair share" of the federal stimulus dollars, I'd like to ask our legislators to consider something.

Citizens of some states have chosen to provide amenities to their citizenry. In our federalist national governance model, that is just fine and dandy. If California wants to allow its kids to attend public university free of charge, great! If New York want's to pay double the price for roads and bridges by requiring union labor, or minority contractor participation, whoopee! That's one of the things that's so great about our country. Each state can experiment with policy. If things work, we can all learn from them and impliment those programs we like in other states.

Sometimes things don't work.

When the economy is humming along, states can afford to make some mistakes, shut programs down and move on. Sure, it may be a bit costly, but as long as the money is coming in, they can bury the costs and eventually recover.

When states look to the federal government for a bailout, the rules change. Remember that federal money is actually our money (assuming you're a taxpayer and not a cabinet nominee). Like private industry, when states receive bailout money, they give up the right to control their own destiny. And as one whose tax money is going to fund these lavish state policies, I want my voice heard in those states. Taxation WITH representation.

I'm not advocating that federal government take over the role of state government. They're no more equipt to do that than they are to run GM or Bank of America.

But as a defacto California taxpayer, we should have a seat in California government. If a state bill is passed to pay for all kids to attend graduate school, we should have veto power. If the California state legislature passes a law baring oil exploration on the inner continental shelf, we should have the power to veto that ban.

Don't use my money to support failed state policies without even giving me a voice in that states' policy debate.