What we know Thomas Jefferson said

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

-- attributed to Thomas Jefferson

Whether he actually said that or not is unknown. We do know, however, Thomas Jefferson in 1802 wrote to Thomas Cooper a subtly more profound statement.

If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy.

-- Thomas Jefferson (reference)

Thomas Cooper, like Thomas Jefferson, was a politician and academic. The "we" to which Mr. Jefferson refers, then, are those with political power. Continuing with his logic while linking back to the attribution, it is imperative we are diligent in electing officials who hold, and will act in support of, our beliefs. Unfortunately, at least from my experience, there are too few individuals running for office so inclined.

Reference

TITLE: To Thomas Cooper.

EDITION: Washington ed. iv, 453.

EDITION: Ford ed., viii, 178.

PLACE: Washington
DATE: 1802

http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/foley-page?id=JCE2358

Foodie’s Secret - Addendum

S. Pellegrino's annual "World's 50 Best Restaurants" list was released yesterday. I noticed Chicago, New York and even Yountville, California among the eight restaurants on the list of those located in the United States. Surely it must have been an oversight for none of Wichita’s “unique and gourmet restaurants” to be included!


Reference: http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/04/27/fifty.best.restaurants/index.html

Carrying On

I traveled this week. Both flights we were delayed as people boarding in the last groups brought on luggage for which there was no overhead storage space. As the people last to board are disproportionately seated in the back of the airplane, it takes inordinately more time to transfer the luggage up to the crew at the front door to be checked. One airline, Spirit, has incentivized passengers not to carry on their luggage. For this sensible move, the airline is being vilified. New York Senator Charles Schumer stated "Airline passengers have always had the right to bring a carry-on bag without having to worry about getting nickeled and dimed by an airline company" [reference a)]. Since when did a carry-on bag become a right? Let alone that it become one for which no charge is associated? If an airline prohibited me from carrying on my laptop, I would not fly on them. If enough people took the same position, the airline would change its policy. A solution without the government's involvement. By the way, Spirit is not going to charge for laptops or personal items or strollers or cameras or diaper bags or reading materials or any other personal item that is fitted under the seat [reference b)].

Why would the federal government insert itself into something for which it is unnecessary and at best a stretch of the intent of the Constitution's Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3)? I suggest there are several answers. First - power. They do because they can and sometimes it makes our so-called leaders feel good they are doing what they think is good for us. Eroding the power of the people on minor matters such as this allows for further erosion down the road on items we would otherwise find unacceptable. Second - elitism. Whether they have read The Republic or not, I suspect they see themselves as The Guardians, the elite wise enough to make the appropriate decisions the masses are unable to make. Third and most importantly - money. The big bad airlines, or at least Spirit, has found a way to charge the consumer without giving a cut to the federal government. While it may be appropriate for the Secretary of the Treasury not to pay all the taxes he owes - tax evasion, it seems unacceptable for Spirit to use the regulations and legally not pay taxes on a source of income - tax avoidance. Here is what I believe is the root of the matter. In a revision to a federal rule written in January, airlines can exclude from their taxes fees earned on things deemed unessential to air travel [reference c)]. Senator Schumer suspects Spirit will lower their ticket price by the cost of the bag fees, and only pay taxes on the remainder. While I doubt Spirit will do that, I applaud them if they do. Why did the government revise the rule if it did not want the airlines to act upon it? If the government deems it is necessary to intervene, then why not simplify the tax code or require all fees and taxes be included in the price of a ticket so consumers can compare our flight options? Oh, I forgot, I am not a Guardians, therefore I can not be expected to understand the nuances and wisdom of the government's direction.

Senators Schumer (D, NY), Menendez (D, NJ), and Cardin (D, MD) have said they will pursue whatever measure works best if airlines do not relent [reference c)]. The bully pulpit seems to work as American, Delta, JetBlue, United, and US Airways have agreed not to follow Spirit's lead [reference d)] and consequently decrease the number of checked bags and increase the delays and commotion on our flights.

References:

a) http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/chuck_to_carry_on_vs_bag_fee_JN54gm5XPohAVqcxKCLenJ#ixzz0m8ENbkPX

b) http://www.spiritair.com/Policiesbags.aspx#CarryOnBag

c) http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2010/04/schumer-offers-bill-to-bag-car.html#ixzz0m8Kwi6o

d) http://www.newser.com/story/86345/5-airlines-agree-not-to-charge-fee-for-carry-on-bags.html

Foodies' Secret?

I suspect with some pride, my sister recently sent me an article about the restaurant selections in my home town of Wichita, Kansas. The 14 April 2010 article, Wichita Named "Best Kept Secret" For Foodies, posted on http://www.kake.com/home/headlines/90901159.html states: "A nationwide study reveals Wichita as a 'best kept secret' when it comes to food. Wichita was named among ten top cities for foodies. The study based its findings on unique and gourmet restaurants."

Home town pride is generally a good thing. The population in Wichita probably eats out more often than in other cities and supply meets the demand. The entrepreneurial spirit that created White Castle and Pizza Hut remains alive. My favorite Cal-Mex chain restaurant, On the Border, was in Wichita well before it came to the Chicago area. Nonetheless, the survey results surprise me and must be taken in the context of the size of the cities. There are far more unique and gourmet restaurants in Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, Seattle, and even Kansas City than there are in Wichita. The home town pride must be tempered with reality. While you can get good food in Wichita, generally speaking the food has the characteristics associated with Kansas and it residents: solid, safe, and good-value. Like Kansas though, there is nothing that particularly stands out for which people will travel there (e.g., such as in Seattle you must eat salmon, in New Orleans you must eat the barbeque shrimp). Other than Scotch and Sirloin, can one even get a great steak?

The article did bring back memories of places I have frequented that are no longer in Wichita. Amarillo Grill, for example, even though it was Texan in both its name and flavoring (mesquite) was always a place I greatly enjoyed. I have yet to find a Mexican restaurant in the northwest suburbs of Chicago that favorably compares to several restaurants in Wichita, but only Felipe's is still around. Grandy's was a fast, inexpensive, tasty way to clog my arteries. Well, at least Nu-Way remains.