Credit Where It's Due: Blumenthal Is Right To Take On MLB's Monopoly

My latest column for CTNewsJunkie.com:

I may not be the biggest fan of Sen. Richard Blumenthal but I think he is has this right and it's time I said something about it. Major League Baseball's 100-year-old antitrust exemption has outlived its usefulness. Blumenthal and a bipartisan group of fellow senators are pressuring the league to explain itself in the face of evidence that the exemption serves only to protect the interests of the league and no one else.

To wit:

Speaking of wages, Blumenthal pointed out at a press conference (he likes press conferences) at Dunkin’ Donuts Park in Hartford last week, minor league players who are not on the 40-man roster of their major league organization make between $4,800 and $14,700 per year and are paid only during the baseball season. This would include most of the players on the Double-A Hartford Yard Goats, who play in the very stadium Blumenthal was standing in.

To that I might add, the low pay for minor leaguers disadvantages those whose families don’t have the means to support them while they work for pennies for a long-shot chance to make millions in the big leagues.

Read more ...

Follow @terrycowgill

My latest for @ctnewsjunkie >> I may have my differences with @SenBlumenthal but he's right about the #antitrustexemption enjoyed by @MLB and how unfair it is to all but the well-heeled owners. https://t.co/1d2d77WOCM

— Terry D. Cowgill (@terrycowgill) August 1, 2022

Weiner-gate

I'd considered blogging on Weiner-gate (Wiener-gate?), but after reading Mark Steyn's take, I just gave up. Hey, I know I'm not without talents, but I'd love to be half as clever as the estimable Steyn.

If I want serious discussions of policy, then I know where to turn. But if I want someone to make me ROTF at the hacks who run the U.S. government — and have as far back as I can remember — I turn to Steyn. To wit:

Congressmen are among the few in this land who, in such a situation, can breezily say, as Weiner did to CNN's Dana Bash, "You have statements that my office has put out... ." Herein lies the full horror of American politics in the death throes of the republic: A Congressman has nothing better to do of an evening than Tweet his crotch to coeds, but he requires an "office" with "staffers" to "put out" "statements" on the subject.

 When Weiners have staffers, it's very difficult to have limited government: You cannot have a small state run by big Weiners. If you require an "office" to issue "statements" about your Tweets, it's hardly surprising you're indifferent to statist bloat elsewhere.

Thanks for making me laugh, dude!

Freeze!

This is classic Washington.

Today, President Obama wisely — and bravely, considering the favors he owes public-sector unions — proposed a two-year federal employee pay freeze. Strangely, military personnel are exempted.

How will we ever get spending under control if there are sacred cows?

First time in a while that I've agreed with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who courageously insisted that including the military would have increased savings and added "an element of fairness."

P.S. As Jake Tapper observed on his Twitter feed, "pay freeze does NOT impact legislative branch! which, not coincidentally, will be voting on it."

Get Rid of Public Education?

David Harmer

You've got to give this guy credit. He is nothing if not consistent.

A small-government, libertarian-leaning, Tea Party-endorsed candidate for Congress in California is on-record as having called for the abolition of public education. And the campaign of David Harmer (aptly named, some would say) did not respond to a question from Mother Jones as to whether he stands by his 10-year-old essay that waxes nostalgic about the days when, "Schooling ... was typically funded by parents or other family members responsible for the student, who paid modest tuition."

According to Mother Jones, polling data suggest that Harmer has a better-than-even chance of defeating his incumbent Democratic opponent. Will he maintain that edge after Harmer's rival bashes him over the head with what is surely an unpopular and impractical idea?

As my veteran readers know, I've long been an advocate for charter schools, magnet schools and private school vouchers that offer an alternative to conventional public schools. I'm a firm believer that competition makes most people better.

What incentive do school officials have to improve their schools if they know money will continue to flow into their buildings no matter how poor a job they're doing? Some public school teachers do an outstanding job of motivating students and going the extra mile.

Others, however, sleepwalk through their entire days, secure in the knowledge that any effort to get rid of them will be prohibitively expensive — and therefore unlikely to happen. I think you'd find that if the slackers knew their schools might close unless they pulled their weight, then they just might pick up the pace and help their schools become more competitive.

However, Harmer's idea of abolishing public education simply goes too far. The only way to fund schools attended by the general public is if everyone pays into the system — even those without school-age children. Otherwise the cost would be prohibitive for the consumer and then we'd be left with a largely uneducated public — which, come to think of it — is pretty much the way things were back in Harmer's beloved 19th century.

Clueless In D.C.?

It's looking more and more like the Obama camp is under siege. It seems that every day the administration trots out some mystifying argument against the opposition. Or yet another erstwhile sympathetic pundit writes a column comparing the president to everybody's favorite whipping boy, Jimmy Carter. Or Obama's handlers revive the terrifying specter of George W. Bush.

There is an old saying in politics that if you don't have the facts on your side, then find a wedge issue. That's what the Republicans did most recently in 2008. After all, why talk about Iraq and the economy when you can rail against ACORN or gay marriage?

Now Obama is doing much the same thing. His villain du jour? The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which Obama and VP Biden insist is using foreign funds to influence the midterm elections. As the Columbia Journalism Review has pointed out, this is pretty much a non-scandal lacking any substantive evidence.

There was a very telling moment (see video above) on Face The Nation on Sunday when host Bob Schieffer asked Obama advisor David Axelrod, "Is this the best you can do?" The host then further asked, "Mr. Axelrod, do you have any evidence that it’s anything other than peanuts?" To which Axelrod responded:

Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob? The fact is that the Chamber has asserted that, but they won’t release any information about where their campaign money is coming from.

You know you're in trouble when you resort to demanding that your opponent prove he no longer beats his wife. Unemployment is still pushing 10%, the president's approval ratings are in the 40s, his major accomplishments are unpopular, few Democratic congressional candidates want his help and the most sought-after Democratic stump speaker is Bill Clinton. And, of course, absolutely no one fears Obama.

And to top it off, Obama is faced with the likelihood of a Republican-controlled House of Representatives in January. Now we're supposed to be worried that there might be some foreign money in our elections?

There seems to be a developing consensus — even among some of the Democratic elites — that Obama and his people are simply out of their league when it comes to navigating the roiling political waters of the capital. Witness this fairly devastating piece from Time's Mark Halperin, the non-partisan journalist who co-authored a seminal book on the brilliant 2008 Obama campaign.

At this point, the only thing that will save Obama between now and 2012 is a robust and rebounding economy. Sorry ... but right now, I just don't see that happening.

Delaware Destroyer

Newly minted GOP senate candidate Christine O'Donnell has strong views on sexuality. But can she really afford to lose the pro-masturbation vote? No wonder even Karl Rove thinks she's a nut, although maybe he has other motives?

'They should be abolished!'

Never ever thought I'd hear Barney say those words about Fannie and Freddie. I offer my sincere congrats. Now what would you replace them with? He doesn't say.

That Was Then ...

I normally don't have much use for partisan pit bull Liz Cheney, but this quote given to Politico's Mike Allen is amusing:

"I guess President Obama was for the mosque before he was against it."

As I wrote two posts ago, Obama got it right the first time on Friday. Then when he corrected himself Saturday, he tried to have it both ways and just wound up looking spineless. Good thing he wasn't photographed windsurfing in The Gulf. That would be fatal for 2012!