• The cover story “Reviving the Tenth Amendment” discusses the need for states to reassert their 10^th Amendment rights in order to counter the growing dysfunction of the federal government.
• “Why the U.S. Needs a Balanced Budget Amendment” addresses America’s current unsustainable fiscal path and a constitutional tool for returning America to firm financial footing. 
• Creating healthy academic environments at our colleges and universities is the topic of “America’s Campuses as an Ideological Battlefield” and “The Quest for Honesty in Academe: Classical Liberalism and the Koch Brothers.”
• “Virtual Schooling Expands Education Choices” and “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: A New Charter School for At-Risk Students Overcomes Resistance and Opens Its Doors” explores options for improving K-12 education.
• “Putting the Genie Back in the Bottle: Public Employees, Civil Service, and Florida’s Future” re-examines the nature of public employment and the ideal of a professional civil service system free of political influence and accountable to taxpayers.

A veritable policy smorgasbord, this edition also delves into election reform, growth management, Medicaid reform, the influence of talk radio, and more as well as provides historical retrospectives on 9/11 and JMI’s new home, The Columns.

• How diversifying our economy could help prevent a recurrence of the historic “boom-and-bust” cycle caused by an overreliance on too narrow an array of economic assets.
• How the long-festering problems in Florida’s property insurance market could threaten the private sector’s recovery and the state government’s solvency.
• Why several of Florida’s major cities now face severe budget problems arising from the lavish pensions won by public employee unions — and what can be done about it.
• Why barring government entities from collecting union dues via payroll deductions can yield a better balance between the rights of taxpayers and public employees.
• Why increases in government spending should be capped at no more than the rate of inflation and population growth – unless voters approve exceeding the cap.
• How unrealistic “renewable energy” mandates could result in utility rates that are not competitive with those in other states, making Florida less attractive for business.
• Why the Obama Administration’s transportation plan, which emphasizes a costly expansion of passenger rail service, is not a good fit for Florida’s infrastructure needs.
• Why expanding the array of educational options that parents may choose for their children can build on Florida’s progress thus far as a national leader in school reform.
• Why high school graduation standards need to be raised if Florida is to benefit from the global emphasis on STEM: science, technology, engineering, and math.
• Why the premature evaluation of U.S. Presidents can be a risky business.

Editor’s Note: Three amendments — approved by the Legislature and originally scheduled to be numbered as Amendments 3, 7, and 9 on the November ballot – were struck down by the Florida Supreme Court and removed from the ballot. Therefore, no discussion of them appears in this article. To read about the amendments that were removed, click here. 

Meanwhile, as of this writing, the Florida Supreme Court had also agreed to review a challenge to Amendment 8, which would modify the 2002 Class Size Amendment. The teachers union sued, alleging that Amendment 8’s ballot language could confuse voters. A circuit court judge disagreed with the union’s argument, but the case ultimately will be decided by the high court. If the Court agrees with the union, then any votes actually cast for or against Amendment 8 will be null and void. 

AMENDMENT 1

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT,
ARTICLE VI, SECTION 7

REPEAL OF PUBLIC CAMPAIGN FINANCING REQUIREMENT. Proposing the repeal of the provision in the State Constitution that requires public financing of campaigns of candidates for elective statewide office who agree to campaign spending limits.
To read the full text of the proposed amendment, click here.

Sponsor: The Florida Legislature

Background: Since 1986, Florida law has offered public financing for the political campaigns of certain candidates for statewide office. In 1998, Florida’s Constitution Revision Commission placed on the ballot an amendment – subsequently approved by voters — enshrining this option in the State Constitution. Candidates may receive public funds, but only if they agree to limit their own campaign spending. Participating candidates may receive contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund, plus additional subsidies if a non-participating opponent spends more than $2 per registered voter – currently just under $25 million. In June, gubernatorial candidate Rick Scott sued in federal court to challenge the practice of providing subsidies to his opponent if Scott exceeded the $2-per-registered-voter limit. He argued that the spending limit was a burden on his right of free speech. The 11^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed and issued an injunction that prohibited his primary opponent, Bill McCollum, from receiving the additional public funds for his campaign. If Amendment 1 passes, Article VI, Section 7 of the Florida Constitution would be repealed, leaving only the statutory provisions for public campaign financing.

Analysis: Several recent court decisions suggest that some of the spending-limit provisions found in many public campaign financing laws, including Florida’s, may very well violate certain candidates’ First Amendment rights. Supporters of these laws claim they help ensure fairness, but the 11^th U.S. Circuit Court’s recent ruling in the case brought by Rick Scott affirmed that it is not fair to penalize candidates for spending their own money for their political campaign, regardless of the amount spent. It’s also worth recognizing that the financial and economic situation in 1998 when Florida’s Constitution Revision Commission placed the original public campaign financing requirement on the ballot was much better than it is today. At present it is difficult to justify potentially spending millions of taxpayer dollars in each election cycle on campaigns when that money could either stay in the pockets of taxpayers or be applied to fund essential state services.

Pro: Proponents of Amendment 1 wish to repeal the state Constitution’s provision on campaign financing. They argue that tax dollars should not be used to fund political campaigns, especially during periods of budget austerity. They also note that in the nine states where public funds can be used to aid political campaigns, there is no evidence to support the notion that this practice has helped lesser-known or minor party candidates compete more effectively.

Con: Opponents of Amendment 1 point out that voters in 1998 approved a constitutional amendment providing for public financing of political campaigns, and that the problem the amendment was intended to address persists: that candidates who lack personal wealth necessary to fund a statewide campaign from their own pocket find it difficult to compete against wealthy individuals or well-established candidates, particularly incumbents.

Recommendation: On balance, the proponents’ positions are more persuasive. Therefore, we recommend YES on Amendment 1. 

AMENDMENT 2

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT,
ARTICLE VII, SECTION 3; ARTICLE XII, SECTION 31

HOMESTEAD AD VALOREM TAX CREDIT FOR DEPLOYED MILITARY PERSONNEL. Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to require the Legislature to provide an additional homestead property tax exemption by law for members of the United States military or military reserves, the United States Coast Guard or its reserves, or the Florida National Guard who receive a homestead exemption and were deployed in the previous year on active duty outside the continental United States, Alaska, or Hawaii in support of military operations designated by the Legislature. The exempt amount will be based upon the number of days in the previous calendar year that the person was deployed on active duty outside the continental United States, Alaska, or Hawaii in support of military operations designated by the Legislature. The amendment is scheduled to take effect January 1, 2011.
To read the full text of the proposed amendment, click here.

Sponsor: The Florida Legislature

Background: On February 11, 2009, Rep. Mike Horner filed House Joint Resolution 833 which originally proposed this constitutional amendment. The Senate version, Senate Joint Resolution 1302, was subsequently filed by Sen. Andy Gardiner. After clearing committee assignments, the amendment passed out of the Legislature unanimously on May 1, 2009.

Analysis: There are more than 25,000 active duty military personnel who live in Florida. Allowing this additional tax exemption would recognize their service and sacrifice.

Pro: Proponents argue that this additional property tax exemption would provide financial help to military personnel and their families when the personnel are deployed abroad.

Con: There is no formal opposition to this measure, but it could slightly reduce property tax revenues that support services provided by local governments and school districts.

Recommendation: The fiscal impact on local governments would be minor, while the financial aid for military personnel who are deployed abroad could pay dividends by solidifying Florida’s standing as a place where military personnel are welcome to live and to retire when their active duty ends. Therefore, we recommend YES on Amendment 2.

AMENDMENT 4

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT,
ARTICLE II, SECTION 7

REFERENDA REQUIRED FOR ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANS. Establishes that before a local government may adopt a new comprehensive land use plan, or amend a comprehensive land use plan, the proposed plan or amendment shall be subject to vote of the electors of the local government by referendum, following preparation by the local planning agency, consideration by the governing body and notice. Provides definitions.
To read the full text of the proposed amendment, click here.

Sponsor: Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc.

Background: Amendment 4 is a citizen-driven, initiative petition proposal led by Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc. and Lesley Blackner, an environmental lawyer from West Palm Beach. This amendment was originally approved by the Division of Elections in June 2005, and the ballot summary was approved by the Florida Supreme Court in September 2006. The proposed amendment made the ballot in June 2009 after the necessary 676,811 signatures were gathered and certified by the State. Since this time, the amendment has withstood several legal challenges, and complaints to the Florida Elections Commission, to remain active for the November ballot.

Analysis: This proposed amendment would require voter approval of proposals that change local growth-management plans. Comprehensive or “comp” plans, as they are known, are blueprints that cities and counties use to lay out a vision of future communities. An argument can be made that voters are already in control of comprehensive plans by electing city and county officials who best represent their views on development.

Pro: Supporters claim that voters deserve “a seat at the table” on growth decisions in their city or county for issues affecting their homes and our communities. They say Amendment 4 will end the atmosphere of corruption and distrust in local government by giving voters the ability to veto or approve new projects and changes to existing developments, thereby fixing the broken system currently in place. Proponents also claim that Florida’s real estate bust and the related foreclosure crisis were caused in part by overdevelopment that occurred when elected city and county officials too easily approved the plans of developers from whom they regularly receive large campaign contributions. 

Con: Opponents say that Amendment 4 will cost jobs and hurt Florida’s economy by stifling growth, thereby costing taxpayers millions of dollars. They also claim that the amendment is poorly written and doesn’t provide exceptions for vital community needs such as hospitals, police stations, and schools. Some opponents also claim that Amendment 4 paradoxically could create more of the urban sprawl that its advocates decry by forcing developers to look for lands on the urban fringes where their plans would be less likely to meet resistance from nearby neighborhoods. Opponents also note that because of the large numbers of comprehensive plan amendments proposed in many jurisdictions during each election cycle, the presence on the ballot of scores of highly technical questions may exacerbate Election Day congestion at polling places. However, by far the most persuasive argument against Amendment 4 may be the experience of St. Petersburg Beach, where a local version this measure has been blamed for causing higher taxes, a loss of jobs, and endless litigation.

 Recommendation: The evidence against Amendment 4 is overwhelming. Currently, more than 334 organizations, associations, and local governments, plus every daily newspaper in the state, have taken a position against this amendment…and for good reason. Because of the detrimental impacts this amendment would have on Florida’s  economy and on citizens’ property rights, we recommend NO on Amendment 4.

AMENDMENT 5

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT,
ARTICLE III, SECTION 21

STANDARDS FOR LEGISLATURE TO FOLLOW IN LEGISLATIVE REDISTRICTING. Legislative districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county, and geographical boundaries.
To read the full text of the proposed amendment, click here.

Sponsor: Fair Districts Florida

Background: Reform of the redistricting process emerged as a major issue in recent years, after the two major political parties became competitive in Florida following decades of dominance by one party. According to Orlando Sentinel writer Aaron Deslatte, the fact that Republicans “hold 15 of the state’s 25 U.S. House seats and 102 of 160 seats in the Legislature … prompted unions, personal-injury lawyers and other Democrat-leaning groups to spend more than $4.2 million during the past three years to place Amendments 5 and 6 before voters this fall.”

Analysis: Amendment 5 dealing with legislative redistricting — and its companion, Amendment 6 dealing with congressional redistricting — might have been workable, though still cumbersome, if the Florida Supreme Court had not removed Amendment 7 from the ballot. That amendment, passed by the Legislature, sought to clarify the application of the standards set forth in Amendments 5 and 6. In a 5-2 ruling, however, the Court held that it was unconstitutional because the ballot summary did not accurately represent the amendment.

Pro: Supporters of Amendment 5 complain that the legislators choose their constituents rather than the other way around, intended primarily to protect incumbents and partisan advantage. They also note that some legislative and congressional districts are geographically so misshapen that many voters do not even realize who represents them in Tallahassee or Washington, D.C.

Con: Opponents of Amendment 5 say compliance with Amendment 5’s standards would be difficult, if not impossible, because of the nature of Florida’s diverse demographics. They complain that in practice these standards are contradictory and confusing – akin to the practical joke that some old-line college coaches used to play on their freshmen players by shouting, “All right, you guys! Line up alphabetically by height.”

Recommendation: Enactment of the confusing and contradictory standards mandated in Amendment 5 would increase the likelihood that any redistricting plan devised by the Florida Legislature would be subject to protracted litigation and would ultimately be replaced by a plan devised by appointed judges rather than by the people’s elected representatives. Therefore, we recommend NO on Amendment 5.     

AMENDMENT 6

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT,
ARTICLE III, SECTION 20

STANDARDS FOR LEGISLATURE TO FOLLOW IN CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING. Congressional districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county, and geographical boundaries.
To read the full text of the proposed amendment, click here.

Sponsor: Fair Districts Florida

Background: Amendment 6 is identical to Amendment 5 in its origins and philosophy. Indeed, they were initially presented as a single amendment, but the Florida Supreme Court correctly held that the proposals must be presented as two separate questions in case, for example, a voter wanted to reform redistricting for the Legislature but not for Congress – or vice versa. The only substantive difference between the two ballot measures is that Amendment 6 applies to congressional redistricting while Amendment 5 applies to legislative redistricting. There is one procedural difference, however: The Legislature’s plan redrawing congressional districts is subject to gubernatorial review and, potentially, to a veto. (The Governor – under the separation of powers doctrine – has no official role in the redistricting of the Legislature.)

Analysis: Amendment 6, with its confusing and contradictory standards for congressional redistricting, suffers from the same flaws as Amendment 5.

Pro and Con: See Amendment 5.

Recommendation: As with Amendment 5, enactment of the confusing and contradictory standards mandated in Amendment 6 would increase the likelihood that any redistricting plan devised by the Florida Legislature would be subject to protracted litigation and would ultimately be replaced by a plan devised by appointed judges rather than by elected representatives. Therefore, we recommend NO on Amendment 6.

AMENDMENT 8

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT,
ARTICLE IX, SECTION 1 and ARTICLE XII, SECTION 31

REVISION OF THE CLASS SIZE REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS. The Florida Constitution currently limits the maximum number of students assigned to each teacher in public school classrooms in the following grade groupings: for prekindergarten through grade 3, 18 students; for grades 4 through 8, 22 students; and for grades 9 through 12, 25 students. Under this amendment, the current limits on the maximum number of students assigned to each teacher in public school classrooms would become limits on the average number of students assigned per class to each teacher, by specified grade grouping, in each public school. This amendment also adopts new limits on the maximum number of students assigned to each teacher in an individual classroom as follows: for prekindergarten through grade 3, 21 students; for grades 4 through 8, 27 students; and for grades 9 through 12, 30 students. This amendment specifies that class size limits do not apply to virtual classes, requires the Legislature to provide sufficient funds to maintain the average number of students required by this amendment, and schedules these revisions to take effect upon approval by the electors of this state and to operate retroactively to the beginning of the 2010-2011 school year.
To read the full text of the proposed amendment, click here.

Sponsor: The Florida Legislature

Background: Florida voters approved the so-called “class size amendment” in 2002 by a relatively narrow margin that would be insufficient to meet the current requirement of 60 percent of the vote. The margin of victory came mainly from two Southeast Florida counties, Miami-Dade and Broward, where unions affiliated with the American Federation of Teachers (AFL-CIO) and compliant school boards had repeatedly negotiated contracts increasing class sizes in order to provide salary increases at percentages higher than the percentage increases in state and local funding per pupil. The boards achieved this by crowding more students into each classroom, triggering an outcry from parents. Then, having largely contributed to the problem, the unions pushed the class-size amendment as a solution. The smaller classes also meant the hiring of more teachers, meaning more dues revenue for the union coffers. Meanwhile, there is no conclusive evidence suggesting that class size alone is directly correlated with student achievement. On the other hand, there is conclusive evidence to suggest that teacher competence has a direct bearing on student achievement. However, the same teachers unions that pushed for passage of the class size amendment in 2002 – and have gone to court this year in an effort to deny voters a chance to vote on Amendment 8 – have repeatedly resisted credible efforts to measure and reward teacher competence.

Analysis: Florida has spent an estimated $16 billion to comply with the 2002 class size amendment, despite evidence suggesting that merely limiting class size does not have a significant impact on students’ achievement. Now the state is facing many budget challenges. Therefore, the money still flowing into school construction and other measures necessary to comply with the rigid 2002 class size limits, which are finally taking full effect this fall, could be better spent on other approaches to improving student achievement – including rewards for the most effective teachers.

Pro: Amendment 8’s slight relaxation of the class size amendment’s overly rigid limits would solve the problem of “the 19^th student.” That is, if the absolute limit in the early grades is 18 students, what happens when all the classes are at the maximum and a 19^th student shows up a couple of weeks after school starts? Or what happens when a high school senior needs one last math course to graduate and all of the sections are filled?  Slightly modifying the overly rigid limits to allow for a school-wide average within the respective grade groupings would avoid these problems.

Con: The teachers unions and some parental groups argue that passage of Amendment 8 would allow class sizes to creep back upward to unacceptable levels at which teachers have too many students assigned to them and cannot provide students with enough individual attention. They also claim that the gains in student achievement are attributable to smaller classes rather than to the other reforms that have included charter schools, vouchers, and a testing regimen to measure students’ academic progress.  

Recommendation: In order to provide schools with a reasonable degree of flexibility with respect to class sizes, we recommend YES on Amendment 8.

REFERENDUM 1

BALANCING THE FEDERAL BUDGET
A NONBINDING REFERENDUM CALLING FOR AN AMENDMENT
TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

In order to stop the uncontrolled growth of our national debt and prevent excessive borrowing by the Federal Government, which threatens our economy and national security, should the United States Constitution be amended to require a balanced federal budget without raising taxes?
To read the full text of the proposed referendum, click here.

Sponsor: The Florida Legislature

Background: Florida lawmakers passed this proposed constitutional amendment during the 2010 legislative session in response to the economic problems associated with large federal deficits. Lawmakers also passed Senate Concurrent Resolution 10, which calls on Congress to call a constitutional convention for the sole purpose of considering a balanced budget amendment. The passage of this resolution made Florida the 20th state to call for such an amendment. The U.S. Constitution requires two-thirds of the states to call for a constitutional convention for one to actually convene.

Analysis: Although this referendum is nonbinding, a powerful message could be sent to Congress if a vast majority of Floridians expressed a desire see our federal deficits reduced by cutting spending.

 Recommendation: We recommend YES on Referendum 1.

From the Editor’s Desk – Robert F. Sanchez
In a momentous mid-term election year, the importance of enduring principles can be lost in a political process that focuses both money and attention on the quest for power.

COVER STORY

The Quest for Excellence Should Not Be Absent from the Debate on Teacher Pay and Tenure
By William Mattox
To improve education, Florida must overcome the teacher union’s opposition and reward the state’s best teachers — those who make a difference.

ARTICLES

Salvaging What’s Left of the Everglades Is Vitally Important for Florida’s Future
By Robert F. Sanchez
Will Florida’s proposed purchase of thousands of acres of land from U.S. Sugar help or hurt? In the words of Fox News, “We report, you decide.”

Economic Interests and Private Property Rights Can Be Preserved, Along with the Everglades
By Thom Rumberger
The acquisition of the U.S. Sugar property is a key piece of a much larger puzzle.

Governor Crist’s Everglades Land Buy Costs Too Much, Won’t Do the Job
By Michael Collins
The cost of acquiring the U.S. Sugar property will hurt other vital projects.

Behind the Texas Textbook Fracas
By Thomas V. DiBacco
The Lone Star State historically set the standard for fairness in textbook selection.

‘Climategate’ Provides Lessons for Policy Makers
By Robert J. Bebber
Exposure of scientists’ e-mails raised red flags about the validity of their research.

Floridians Finally Will Get a Chance to See Where Their Tax Money Goes
By Rep. Greg Evers
Government spends your money. You deserve to know where it goes.
Soon you may.

23 Reasons Why Think Tanks Are Effective in Changing Public Policy
(And One Reason Why They Are Not)
By Jeff Judson
The former head of the Texas Public Policy Institute offers his insight into the movement.

America’s First Encounters with Terrorists
By Thomas V. DiBacco
The Barbary pirates’ predations provided an early challenge to the young republic. As President, James Madison put a halt to years of payoffs, diplomacy, and appeasement.

BOOK REVIEWS

A New American Tea Party: The Counterrevolution Against Bailouts, Handouts, Reckless Spending, and More Taxes
A BOOK BY JOHN M. O’HARA
— Reviewed by Ben VanMetre and Joshua Hall
The book’s author analyzes the “Tea Party” movement, comparing and contrasting its beliefs and its tactics with those of the so-called “progressive” groups that emerged in recent years on the left side of the political spectrum.

Similarly, a political science instructor at East Ridge High School in Clermont sent a packet of nearly 100 letters that his students wrote to the Senate President as a class assignment.  The teacher claimed he presented the bill with “a neutral connotation” – and expressed “total amazement” when all of his students opposed S.B. 6. 

Yet, included in the packet – no doubt by accident – was the teacher’s actual assignment, which included “talking points” against S.B. 6 that had been copied from a memo (also enclosed) written from teachers unions’ perspective.  No arguments in support of S.B. 6 were included with the assignment.

Not surprisingly, the students’ letters echo arguments found in the “talking points” memo – sometimes word-for-word.  To review these letters and the teacher’s assignment, view the attached “SB6 Student Assignment” document.

From the Editor’s Desk – Robert F. Sanchez
Government transparency’s next step: ‘growing panes’.

Letters to the Editor
Readers offer their thoughts on a variety of topics.

COVER STORY
Will Florida Join the List of ‘Failed States’? – J. Robert McClure
The dire experience of California serves as a warning for other states, including Florida.

ARTICLES

States May (and Should) Opt Out of Federal Healthcare Mandate – Christie Herrera
State lawmakers ought to strike a blow for individual liberty.

Freedom Matters, Freedom Works – U.S. Rep. Connie Mack
Yet the Federal Government is ignoring our nation’s founding principles.

Wade Hopping: Champion of Freedom – Toby Prince Brigham
A tribute to one of Florida’s staunchest defenders of property rights.

Technology Could Virtually Transform Florida Education – Paticia Levesque
Before that can occur, however, obstacles need to be removed.

Our Self-Imposed Obstacles to Energy Independence – James L. Martin
Florida’s senior citizens will be among the biggest losers under current energy policies.

Florida Has a Huge Stake in the ‘Death Tax’ Debate – Dick Patten
Estate taxes penalize thrift and diminish the capital available for job creation.

State Farm Florida: Good Neighbor or Good Riddance? – Kelton M. Farris
Florida’s regulatory climate remains unfriendly to private property insurers.

Hope Is on the Horizon for Harried Florida Motorists – Robert Poole
The state now has two powerful tools for reducing traffic congestion.

What Will Become of Newspapers? -Neil Skene
A veteran journalist contemplates the altered state of the print media- and the impact.

The Obscure Journalist Who Inspired the Political Left – Thomas V. DiBacco
How Herbert Croly laid the intellectual foundation for a vast expansion of government.

BOOK REVIEWS
Origins of American Health Insurance:
A History of Industrial Sickness Funds
BY JOHN E. MURRAY
-Reviewed by Ben VanMetre and Joshua Hall
The current Debate in Washington concerning healthcare “reform” echoes many issues being debated a century ago.

The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers,
and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics
BY MATT BAI
40 More Years: How the Democrats
Will Rule the Next Generation
BY JAMES CARVILLE WITH REBECCA BUCKWALTER-POZA
-Reviewed by Francisco Gonzalez
These two books offer an inside look at how the forces of big government are planning to prevail in the historic “battle of ideas” now raging in Washington and in many state capitals.

From the Editor’s Desk
“Tea parties” reflect taxpayers’ anger.

Letters to the Editor
Readers offer their thoughts on a variety of topics.

COVER STORY

‘Old School’ Civics for a New Age - William R. Mattox, Jr.
Why founding principles should be the foundation of civics education.

ARTICLES

Sandra Day O’Connor on Civics Education – Sandra Day O’Connor
The former Supreme Court Justice’s remarks to the Florida Legislature.

The Crisis of Economic Illiteracy – Sandra Czelusniac
Survey says: Most of the nation’s students (and grown-ups) are clueless about economics.

Great Myths of the Great Depression – Lawrence Reed
What most Americans are taught about the Depression’s causes and cures is wrong.

Resurgent Labor Unions Reach for More Power – Scott Dilley
Labor bosses would love to make membership mandatory – and expensive.

Obama’s Climate/Energy Agenda: Trouble for Florida - James M. Taylor
Drilling bans and “Cap and Trade” schemes will cost jobs and hurt the state’s economy.

Uniformity Rulings Jeopardize School Choice Programs – Doug Tuthill
Are the politicians who run government schools trying to rub out the competition?

Best Kept Secret in Florida Education – Kathy Mizerek
Private, for-profit schools and colleges serve by catering to their customers’ needs.

Transparency Can Keep Government Accountable – Barbara A. Peterson
Taxpayers deserve to see where their money goes – and it shouldn’t be so difficult.

Antony Fisher, Margaret Thatcher, and the James Madison Institute – J. Stanley Marshall
How a chicken farming British war hero changed the course of history.

If at First You Don’t Secede… - Thomas V. DiBacco
We’ve only seen one official secession succeed, but we’ve had several informal ones.

BOOK REVIEWS

Funding Fathers: The Unsung Heroes
of the Conservative Movement.
By Nicole Hoplin and Ron Robinson
- Reviewed by J. Stanley Marshall
Without the flow of money and ideas from supporters of liberty, the conservative movement might have withered on the vine.

48 Liberal Lies About American History
(That You Probably Learned in School)
By Larry Schweikart
- Reviewed by Francisco Gonzalez
This book offers a cautionary tale about a potential downside to the overdue effort to revive the teaching of “civics,” broadly defined to include history, economics, and other subjects that citizens arguably need to know in order to participate intelligently in the nation’s civic affairs. The author shows that the version of history being taught does matter.

Here’s what Barack Obama could do as President to improve American education.

From the Editor’s Desk

Healthcare reform: Mr. (Adam) Smith goes to Washington.

Letter to the Editor

A reader recalls an interesting afternoon spent in West Virginia with “James Madison.’

Cover Story

Beware When Government Runs Both Politics and the Economy – J. Robert McClure

Our nation’s founders knew: Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Articles

Government Policies Led to Wall Street’s Risky Business – Randall Holcombe

Congress is now ducking responsibility for a mess its mandates helped to create.

The National Financial Crisis and Hurricane Insurance – Donald D. Brown, Dennis A. Ross, and Leonard Schulte

To avoid financial ruin, Florida needs to restore the private market in property insurance.

Fixing Social Security: Private Accounts Still Make Sense, Despite Wall Street’s Woes – Heidi Biggs

Some of the “solutions’ being considered in Congress would be job killers.

A Disturbing Erosion of Property Rights in Florida – Ari Bargil

When is your property no longer yours? When the Florida Supreme Court says so.

Recent Merit-Selection Reform Can Improve Florida’s Courts – William Large

Nominating commissions help Florida avoid some of the drawbacks of electing judges.

Credit James Madison for “Full Faith and Credit’ – Thomas V. DiBacco

This provision of the Constitution “is mired today in controversies regarding whether states, including Florida, may be required to accept same-sex marriages of other states.”

Point-Counterpoint: Healthcare

The Case for Single-Payer National Health Insurance – Ray Bellamy, M.D.

America’s current healthcare system is broken. The year ahead could see the federal government finally taking steps toward a viable solution.

Healthcare Reform Must Empower Individuals – David McKalip, M.D.

America’s current healthcare system is broken. The year ahead could see the federal government misdiagnosing the problem and prescribing the wrong solution.

Book Reviews

Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning (A book by Jonah Goldberg) – Reviewed by Francisco Gonzalez

Liberals have tried to pin the blame for Fascism on the political Right. They’re wrong.

Somebody’s Gotta Say It (A book by Neal Boortz) – Reviewed by Jim Ashlock

The libertarian lawyer and talk-show firebrand makes some valid points if you can get past his in-your-face style and inflammatory rhetoric.