Mike Montandon

Our ignorance is assumed, even counted on, in the war against our freedoms. Even a cursory examination of the history of the first ten amendments to our Constitution, the Bill of Rights, would give us an indisputable argument against the forces that assail our liberties.

First, why was it amended right off the bat? The discussion amongst the framers of the Constitution as to whether or not to include a Bill of Rights in the original document was lengthy and heated. It was concluded that it wasn’t needed. That a country knowledgeable enough to understand and create a government like our new Constitution would create, would not need to re-iterate the inalienable rights that allowed us to become a nation. But the States needed an assurance; an assurance that if they were to become a part of this type of government, that its power would be limited as to not usurp the power of the citizens, or the States they lived in. Thus was born the Bill of Rights; the conditions upon which the citizens of the individual States were willing to accept this new Federal government that the Constitution would create.

Each of the amendments is specific, simple, and in a specific order. The first amendment covers all of the basic issues that a non-warlike citizenry found of utmost importance. In the vernacular, they said to their new leaders, “We’re in, but your not going to tell us how to worship, and we’re going to talk about what we want, amongst ourselves, in groups, or in print; and if we aren’t happy with the way you are running this government, we are not only going to tell you about it, we want to be able to do something about it.” Pretty simple and direct, and covers most of the ways to deal with power getting out of control.

History had proven itself, and has continued to prove that all of the courteous means of redress are only effective if the ability to protect individual rights exist. The citizens knew that States had no rights that were not individual rights of its citizens, an inasmuch as citizens could defend their rights, so could the States. Therefore, the second amendment was placed immediately following. It is crystal clear. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

The second amendment is not about hunting. It is about self-defense. It is about the States rights to exercise their citizens rights to defend themselves against an over-reaching Federal government. The States were willing to be part of a Nation that was willing and capable of defending itself against other Nations. Given the vast natural resources of the land we occupied, it was likely that we would have to defend ourselves as a Nation. But the States were equally concerned about protecting themselves from our own Nation run amok. History had provided more examples of this than any library could have gracing the pages of its books.

Today, supporters of the second amendment fight daily against what they believe are attempts to take away arms. The reality is that fight has already been lost in the purpose for which the amendment was written. As soon as we began to allow a difference between the effectiveness of the weapons that the States (citizens) could have vs. the Federal government, the battle was lost. Citizens involved can continue to fight the small fights, over ammunition rationing, concealed vs. open carry, etc., but they are just distractions. They distract us from the big issue. While we may have the ability to defend ourselves against our own ilk gone awry, we have lost the ability to defend ourselves from a Federal government gone awry. Without that ability, we are simply left to stretch out the loss of our other rights through the exercise of our best diplomatic abilities.

There is an old Marine saying that goes something like, “if you find yourself in a fair fight, you haven’t planned well.” Our leaders know this well and demagogue the issue well. No one would intentionally allow a leader to say that they are afraid of a fair fight and therefore would like to make sure that are better equipped than we are. True citizens would never give in to that. They appeal to our emotions by portraying a truly depraved individual using a highly effective weapon to do evil. “We cannot let this happen to our children”, we hear, and the result is that the law abiding citizens no longer have weapons as effective as the Federal government. It has very little effect on the depraved, as they have no intention on obeying one law in the act of breaking another. If arms as we know them did not exist, poison, bombs, disease or weapons of another sort would take their place. Weapons are not evil of themselves. They are simply tools to make either defense or destruction more effective. There are few limits on the mind of the truly devious.

It is not my argument that we should not continue to fight against the incursions on our rights at all levels. However, we cannot allow each fight to become a distraction from the real issue. We must never fail to use the most powerful weapon we have at our disposal; our voice. We must speak out. To do it well, we must be educated. We must be knowledgeable on the issues on which we choose to speak. We cannot allow our ignorance to be an assumption made by our enemies or our leaders. It takes very few IQ points to blindly be opposed to any issue. It takes both mental capacity and mental effort to be actively in favor of that which is right. We cannot go into this fight outgunned, especially by those fighting with lies or limited information. The war is ours to win or lose.

Republicans had a great event up just north of Reno this weekend. Sally Miller opened up her ranch for a gool ol’ fashioned country breakfast. A bluegrass band played great live music all morning, the food and weather were perfect, and the company was wonderful. I met a lot of great people and it was nice to get in touch with the ranching lifestyle that has been a part of Nevada for so many years. I didn’t catch exactly how many years the Miller’s Quail Canyon Ranch had been active, but the night before I was out at Assemblyman James Settlemeyer’s ranch in Douglas County. He told me his ranch had been worked growing hay and raising stock since 1880.

The breakfast wound up with the branding of the calves. That was quite an experience to see. Parents and kids worked together on horseback and foot to rope the calves. Kids as young as 7 were roping, and having a great time. The calves had a morning they would probably like to forget, but it was good to see how the market works and what the beef looks like before it gets to the butcher block. Thanks again to all who put the event together.

It really is that simple. The Empowerment School model works. It works because America works, and our free market system works, and it is a model of that system. An empowerment school reverses the direction of the flow of money. In our current system, the money flows to administration (central), and from there to the schools in the form of labor and resources. In the Empowerment Model, the money goes to the school, and the school purchases resources. The majority of the resources will likely be purchased from Central, but only if they are provided efficiently. For example, if a school needs printing services, and Kinko’s can provide the necessary printing more efficiently than Central, the school should use Kinko’s. Competition would force Central to be more efficient (productive). This is a basic principle of the American economic system.

The Clark County School District currently operates about 5% of their schools as empowerment schools, with remarkable results at the schools. The Empowerment Model has not yet had much effect on the efficiency of Central, nor will it ever at a 5% level. The efficiencies at Central will not happen until the district operates entirely, or close to it, on the Empowerment model. As long as one small group of schools is still forced to use the resources of Central, now matter how inefficient, Central will never have the incentive to increase productivity. The CCSD experiment could likely continue for a short time longer at less than a 10% level, but will soon have to implemented district wide, or fail. Those who would like to see it fail could accomplish their goal by delaying full implementation.

Can it fail upon full implementation? Successes in other areas indicate that is not likely. I have heard it argued that the management of an empowerment school is more complex and not all Principals could handle it. This is a socialist hogwash argument. The most likely scenario is that Principals, given the opportunity, would outshine their clients (students and families) greatest expectations. Second, a free market system demands that excellence can only be had when the system can replace inefficient operations and operators.

We have tasted the success with 17 schools in the CCSD (as of May, 2009). The real story will only come with full implementation.

Last weekend, my wife and I had a great opportunity to see a great deal of western Nevada. We were invited to the annual dinner of the Stillwater Firearms Association in Fallon, so we decided to drive this time, since the view from the window seat of Southwest Airlines never changes. We happened to have a copy of a great book with us called “A Roadside History of Nevada”. It made a lot of the mining towns along the way much more interesting. We saw county courthouses from boomtown days in the 1800’s still in operation, visited a cemetary in Goldfield, and found great burger joints truly in the middle of nowhere. The drive skirts the western edge of the Air Force range, but also goes through miles of sun-soaking high desert where solar cells could be located.

Fallon was fantastic. We attended a Cub Scout Blue and Gold Banquet, as well as the SFA dinner, and met some fine people. I got some good ideas for some Scout skits, and was reminded that 10 year olds everywhere enjoy the same laughs. The SFA dinner had over 150 of their 500 members show up for a great dinner at the Eagles Lodge. A few of us politicians showed up, and they even invited me to speak, but we weren’t the reason for the event. It was great to see people enjoy each others company that much. Nevada has a lot to see, and if you haven’t seen the Toiyabe’s and other great sites, you are missing much, but I found that meeting more of the people was even a greater experience. Thanks, Fallon.

An aquaintance of mine, Matt Russell, shared some thoughts with me about the stimulus bill. Although I don’t believe a word of it, those currently in power say the purpose of the stimulus package is primarily to create jobs.
I personally think it is more about pork, a way to retain/increase their power base and to advance a big government agenda.

If they want to create jobs and give an adrenalin shot directly into the heart of the economy, the following is a better way.

Historically 3 out of every 4 new jobs in America have been created by small business. They should loan (not give) the entire 1 trillion dollars to small business at very low interest rates (say 2%, which is above prime). The money has to be used to start or expand a business that currently does less than $3 million a year in gross sales. For every $1 million dollars loaned, half of it has to go to new hires. This would create 16 - $30,000 a year jobs or 10 - $50,000 a year jobs. Lets split the difference and say 13 - $40,000 a year jobs average – far above what most of the unemployed are accustomed to earning. The 1 trillion dollars they are talking about spending would create 13 million new jobs immediately.

As of December, 2008 there were 11.3 million unemployed people in the US. This plan would employ every one of them (assuming they wanted to work) plus nearly two million additional illegal aliens. It would put the entire trillion dollars into the economy within 12 months. Now these 13 million new hires would need to buy cars, TV’s, houses and the like which would create millions of additional jobs. Also all these new companies have to buy computers, chairs, buildings, marketing services etc creating even more jobs. Now many of these companies would fail, but others would succeed and expand offsetting lost jobs.

So how to administer such a plan without increasing the size of big government or people ripping it off? Just use the current Small Business Administration which already has all the guidelines and controls in place. The loans would range from $50,000 to $5 million max creating about 500,000 new companies or 10,000 per state. Hire 50 attorneys/accountants in each state to oversee 200 businesses each. Most anyone that applies for a loan can get one providing they submit a reasonable business plan and budget. However, they don’t get all the money at once, only two month’s worth at a time. If they don’t show purchase of assets and new hires per the budget, they don’t get any more money. No one person can make over $80,000 a year until the loan is repaid in full. Anyone who is caught cheating automatically gets 10 years in prison.

The current stimulus package addresses none of this. Most all of the projects in the current bill are for things like building water parks and bridges which are a one-time thing and most of the money will go to people who own engineering and concrete companies. The best part is that unlike the current bill, at some point, taxpayers would get most or all of the money back.

My wife and I have a twice a year conversation about what we want to plant in the little corner of the yard that would be barely recognizable as a garden…more like an organic graveyard where healthy little seedlings go to die. We make our attempt at growing vegetables every year because it makes us feel good and sometimes it offers up food that may make it to the dinner table. I’m actually surprised each growing season (we have more than one here in Vegas) how much we can get out of that little patch of earth.

We would die if we depended on our little back yard hobby to feed us day in and day out. We take our daily food sources for granted. In Southern Nevada we are isolated from our main food sources by many miles of desert. We need to develop greater sources of locally grown food. It’s possible through sciences such as hydroponics, a method of growing vegetables and fruit in a small amount of water instead of soil in a greenhouse environment. It makes virtually any area a place to grow more food, with less water, in a year round safe environment.

We can feed our community in our community, and in doing so we can keep our food prices low, our food sources safe, our natural resources conserved, and the availability of great produce all year around.