-
Recent Posts
- Kamala’s brother-in-law fleeced taxpayers for billions to give to left-wing groups and lawyers | New York Post | 8.24. 24
- Coming: Global Political Recalibration
- Clark Judge: FDR, Reagan, and European Nationalism | NatCon Rome 2020
- Lady Gaga Tells All
- Trial Lawyers Use COVID-19 to Prey on America’s Corporations | Real Clear Policy | 12.1.20
Categories
- Book Reviews (12)
- Communication Strategy (23)
- Constitution and Law (14)
- Economic Policy: General (33)
- Economic Policy: Health Care (30)
- Economic Policy: The Great Financial Crisis (15)
- Economic Policy: US Debt Crisis (32)
- Education Policy (1)
- Global Issues (57)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2008 (18)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2012 (43)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2020 (5)
- Political Commentary: General (122)
- Politics & Policy (6)
- Ronald Reagan and the Reagan Administration (11)
- Speeches/Lectures (9)
- Uncategorized (6)
Archives
- September 2024
- March 2023
- July 2022
- April 2022
- December 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- November 2019
- December 2018
- September 2017
- April 2017
- January 2017
- October 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- June 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- June 2006
- October 2005
- August 2005
- March 2005
- November 2004
- August 2004
- June 2004
- December 2003
- October 2003
- August 2003
- April 2003
- July 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- May 2001
- December 2000
- June 2000
- January 1995
- August 1994
- August 1992
- June 1991
- July 1990
- September 1989
- July 1989
- March 1989
Tags
2012 2012 election Benghazi campaign constitution debt debt crisis Democrats economy election 2012 Energy Financial Times fiscal cliff foreign policy Gingrich Global Warming GOP Hoover Digest hughhewitt HughHewitt.com Immigration IRS National Review New York Post New York Times Obama Obamacare Republicans Ricochet Ricochet.com Romney Russia Scandal Senate SOTU speech Supreme Court Syria Tea Party Trump U.S. News Ukraine Wall Street Journal war Washington Times
Rick Perry’s Indictment: The Price of Integrity | Hugh Hewitt |08.27.14
As the Manhattan Institute’s Diana Furchtgott-Roth wrote at Real Clear Markets not long ago (http://bit.ly/1oQyWBT), the indictment of Rick Perry looks straight out of the Saul Alinsky playbook: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it.” It is America’s current misfortune to have a major party in the hands of a faction that embraces the most toxic kind of political practices.
But since he is in the news, what of Mr. Perry? Furtchgott-Roth goes on to detail Texas’ stellar economic performance during his governorship. Was he just standing there or did he actually do something that gives him claim on credit for all that prosperity in the midst of national stagnation?
Here is my own Rick Perry story, which, to me at least, answers the question.
Early in 2012 I appeared on a panel at a Heritage Foundation conference in Dallas. My session was in the afternoon. In the morning, I was walking through the lobby of the hosting hotel and stopped to chat with a Washington-based reporter I knew. After a few minutes, up came an energetic, spirited, very attractive woman. She was a candidate for the U.S. Senate seat Ted Cruz ultimately won and my friend’s next interview. At their invitation, I sat in on their talk.
As it turned out, she wanted to discuss state more than national politics. Just that morning the legislature had voted down a move to abolish the Texas Railroad Commission and replace it with a state agency. You may know that, for historical reasons, the commission has tremendous power over the oil and gas industry in Texas. At one time that power made it a global force, influence unique among agencies of American states, indeed of state, provincial and regional governments throughout the world.
The commission’s design (three independently elected commissioners) is a model of good governing practice. There is a literature in economics about governance of regulatory bodies. The Railroad Commission is set up in just the way you would want to prevent corruption and abuse. The commissioners act as a check on one another. If something is amiss, two unite to stop the third, or if the two are the issue, the third blows the whistle with the legislature. That’s the theory, and, I gather, that ‘s how the Texas Railroad Commission has performed over the years.
So this commissioner and candidate was jubilant that the effort to change things had been defeated. She told us how the victory had come about. It was a close run thing right up to the last week. Then Governor Perry had stepped in. Quietly he made a phone call here and gave an indication there. With a series of almost imperceptible nudges, the close run thing had become a done deal.
From very good seats, I have watched several governors of several states and both parties in such moments. Perry’s performance was just how first class chief executives work with their legislatures. On most issues, there is no fanfare, no grandstanding, but at critical moments a quiet shifting of weight settles the outcome in favor of the broad public interest, which is exactly the interest a governor is elected to represent.
If a state – or the nation – has such an executive at the top, its government will know a minimum of corruption or abuse of power. Bad laws will be defeated. Incompetent officials will be dismissed. The law will be enforced in an evenhanded manner. Leaving that meeting, I thought, Rick Perry is a first-class chief executive. I felt certain that he had played a significant role in Texas’ triumph during his tenure.
Setting aside the Alinsky factor, the indictment of Governor Perry looks like a sleazy prosecutor revenging a crony. From what I learned that morning in Dallas, Perry is just the kind of governor who would have such political low-lifes as enemies. It is in perfect keeping with his character that he would take steps to force out an official – any official — who was pulled over for driving drunk and responded by kicking at and threatening the arresting officer. Such an official does not belong in public office, particularly an office charged with policing the integrity of other officials.
For all the unseemliness of the prosecutor’s vendetta, this incident highlights how a good governor gets the people’s work done, day in, day out, making public bodies serve the general good. My guess is that the indictment will end up putting a plus the column of Governor Perry’s national reputation. Mr. Perry will deserve that plus.