by Dr. Thomas Patterson | Jun 7, 2025 | Opinion
By Dr. Thomas Patterson |
Suppose you were an evil genius who decided to create a permanent underclass out of a particular race. What provisions would you make to ensure that they remained permanently poor and outcast?
Here are some ideas. First, physically separate them from the rest of the population. Give them room to live, but make sure the land is not owned by individuals who could grow their net worth, but by the collective, each tribe with its own sovereign government within the national government.
Encourage economic dependency by supplying them with lots of free stuff, some available only to them. Create a bureaucracy to manage the financial affairs of only this particular race. Grant them special privileges exclusive to their race, such as the right to operate certain businesses, but again on the condition that the ownership is by the collective.
Finally, emphasize the history of oppression this selected race has experienced and how the guilty oppressors owe them these “favors” in perpetuity.
If you’ve deduced that this roughly describes the treatment whites accorded to American Indians, that’s because it does. We all know the story of how this came about. When Europeans settled the New World, the clash of civilizations often wasn’t pretty.
Yes, there were atrocities on both sides, and it probably was historically inevitable that the more technically advanced culture would prevail. Nevertheless, our treatment of the indigenous populations can never be totally defended.
In a better world, when the fighting finally ended, we would have worked out a shared arrangement where both sides would have enjoyed equal citizenship rights and responsibilities. We would all have had the right to participate in the religious and social structures of our choosing with no special legal status belonging to any group.
In short, we could all be Americans, a blessing sought after around the world.
That’s not what happened of course. Instead, in the words of an 1881 Supreme Court ruling, the tribes were fashioned into separate “domestic independent nations” with a relationship like “that of a ward to his guardian.” The federal government began management of the land use and title management for millions of acres in Indian country.
Moreover, the government to a large extent assumed responsibility for the care and upkeep of Indians, including everything from schools and medical care to infrastructure projects and routine maintenance on reservations.
The result in hindsight was predictable. American Indians, no surprise, did not become the first group ever to achieve prosperity through welfare benefits. Instead, of all the racial minority groups in America, they today have the lowest average income, despite, or maybe because of, receiving the most economic aid from government.
In fact, of all our ethnic groups, the less access historically to entitlements they have received, the more wealthy they have become.
Also unsurprisingly, the federal government has done a notoriously terrible job of overseeing Indian economic affairs. For example, 66 million acres of land are held in trust by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), presumably to be managed for the Indians’ benefit. Yet the lands have produced minimal profits for the tribes.
The reservation lands contain abundant uranium, coal, and gas reserves. Still, Senate hearings concluded that only two million of the 15 million acres of energy reserves have been developed, leaving $1.5 trillion in underground resources untapped.
BIA rules or “white tape” often result in stricter regulations for tribes than for others. The result is that up to 49 steps can be required to obtain an oil lease in Indian country that requires four elsewhere. Excessive regulation also explains why valuable farmland is often left unused.
Before the European conquest, American Indians operated self-governing states in which they were “strong, self-sufficient, self-initiating, independent powerful individuals,” according to an historian of the period. Now they’re trapped in a no-man’s land between citizenship and status as wards of the state. Worse, after living under these conditions, many Indians themselves have now developed the habits of chronic dependency.
Some sympathetic observers call for more effective supervision of Indian affairs. But bureaucracies are notoriously resistant to reform. Let’s work instead to achieve for our countrymen full status as free Americans.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
by Dr. Thomas Patterson | May 26, 2025 | Opinion
By Dr. Thomas Patterson |
A German politician arguing the question of whether to admit yet more Afghan nationals cited official government statistics regarding the crime rates, especially rape, committed by these migrants. Under German censorship laws, she has now been found guilty of illegal hate speech twice, fined thousands of euros, and been given a criminal record, simply for stating government-produced facts.
The United Kingdom, once a bastion of free speech, is now moving toward ever more strict speech restrictions. Meanwhile prosecutors, reluctant to anger Islamists, ignore grooming gangs preying on young women.
In the U.S., pro-Palestinian protesters broke into a graduation dinner at the home of the Berkeley law dean, screaming and chanting. No disciplinary measures were taken against the perpetrators, but the dean’s wife was accused of racism and Islamophobia. A civil rights investigation was launched against her.
Although most Americans are not fully aware, Islamist influences in our culture have become much more pronounced in the last few years. Islamists are still committed to the transformation of Western society into a universal Muslim caliphate. Such is Allah’s will. “Submission” (to Allah) is a translation of “Islam.” Time is not of the essence, but success is considered inevitable.
In the past, the never-ending effort to convert or kill unbelievers was carried out mainly through acts of terrorism. Islamists physically attacked crowds, beheaded civilians, and flew planes into buildings hoping to intimidate the infidels.
Western democracies responded with measures sacrificing personal liberties for security, which worked to stymie the high-profile attacks. In the 2016 election, terrorism was the second rated concern for Americans, slightly lagging behind the economy. By 2024, Islamic atrocities didn’t register in the polls.
But as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Muslim and prominent advocate for international women’s rights, pointed out in the Hoover Digest, it would be a mistake to conclude that we defeated or even made any progress against Islamist jihadism. Instead, elements within Islam who argued for more gradual methods of subversion from within prevailed over those favoring frontal assaults.
Agents of radicalization have built up large networks of operators in the U.S. and other democracies. They identify and radicalize subjects vulnerable to Islamist messaging. Their emphasis now is to concentrate on converting one person at a time. One institution, one professor, one community are influenced to reject all thoughts of assimilation and instead join an exciting international movement to change the world.
The Islamists are seeing much greater success with their new strategy. Social media, including TikTok, is especially effective at spreading such messages among the uninformed, often using the language of our historic civil rights movement. Few of the new converts to Islamist wokeness can offer any information on the Gaza “genocide” they protest.
The Internet is being diverted from its former free-speech ideals into a regime of surveillance and censorship. Islamists have successfully infiltrated not only mosques, but universities, political organizations, and immigrant groups. Unassimilated immigrants and young males particularly make ready targets for conversion to Islamism.
The shifts in public opinion resulting from this propaganda campaign are becoming felt. The pervasive rise of virulent antisemitism among the young, especially on college campuses, and the tendency to attribute all social wrongs to Western influence should ring alarm bells. It’s not just the kids either. Teamsters Union members were recently videotaped at their Chicago headquarters learning to chant “death to Israel” and “death to America” —in Farsi, no less.
Islamists have also been able to use our beloved legal protections, unknown in their jurisdictions, against us. The meaning of “Islamophobia” has been changed from an irrational dislike of Muslims to virtually any unfavorable fact or opinion, no matter how justified. Thus Islamists, even as they despise and condemn us, have an all-purpose shield defending them from any criticism, including of their trademark terrorism.
Islamists seem to possess the mindset that their time may have come. The West is weak and vulnerable, with many no longer believing their ideals are worth defending. Western Europe is trending to Islamist-inspired policymaking with regard to speech and law-enforcement.
In the U.S., these threats are more distant, but the trends are ominous. Islamists are content to play the long game. For now, they are gaining ground.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
by Dr. Thomas Patterson | May 9, 2025 | Opinion
By Dr. Thomas Patterson |
There has likely never been a more tendentious transfer of power in presidential history than the Biden-Harris team’s final act. They salted the ground by allocating billions of unspent COVID funds to George Soros and other radical left-wing groups.
Out of spite, they sold the border wall at giveaway prices. They tied down policy preventing offshore oil drilling, granted Social Security benefits to previously ineligible government employees, defied the Supreme Court to forgive student loans, and were uncooperative in relinquishing the VP residence.
Yet by far the most consequential crisis they unleashed is the massive number of illegal aliens now embedded within our borders. Many Americans were astonished to see our leadership not only ignore American immigration law but actively work for its violation.
Now we know for certain their claims that they needed more funding and legislation were made-up excuses. Their successors have reduced daily crossings to near-zero without the benefit of either.
Their attempted deceptions fooled some but not all. As public outcry grew, they doggedly persisted, willing to take the heat in order to transform America’s future electorate.
Worse, they succeeded. No reliable statistics are available for the getaways, unlawful crossings or total new “guests,” but most estimates are in the range of 20 million illegally within our borders.
Many sanctimonious Americans claim these lawbreakers should be allowed to stay for humanitarian reasons since they’re just “seeking a better life” or “fleeing persecution” in the case of the mostly bogus asylum seekers. But when a busload of “victims” was delivered to the left-wing enclave of Martha’s Vineyard, they were speedily transported elsewhere within a day.
That’s understandable, hypocrisy aside. These are not your grandfather’s immigrants, who wanted to be contributing Americans and often endured generations of hardship to assimilate, learn the language, and become self-supporting.
Today’s illegal immigrants are rewarded for wading the Rio Grande by becoming entitled wards of the state. They are fed, sheltered, and transported around the country. They are housed, sometimes in luxury hotels, and introduced by helpful NGOs to benefits like health care, education, and permanent food programs.
No serious consideration was given to the prospect that immigrants or their proxies would bear financial responsibility for all these goods and services. Thus, jurisdictions like New York City are feeling the pinch of what amounts to a sudden, dramatic expansion in their welfare roles, forcing out existing programs.
Trump made the resolution of this threat a major feature of his election campaign by vowing to close our borders and deport millions of illegal immigrants. To his credit, he has made a sincere effort, reducing breaches of the border from 130,000 monthly last April to a mere trickle today.
But reversing the inflow has proved more problematic. As of recently, relying almost solely on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to remove illegals has resulted in a total of 65,000 deportations. Those with criminal records have commendably been prioritized, but at the rate so far achieved, we would deport only 1 million, or about 5%, of those who are eligible, in four years.
Trump often prefers confrontation to resolve conflicts, but there’s a better way, using incentives and voluntary self-removal. Immigrants are attracted to America primarily by work and welfare. If those magnets could be eliminated, immigrants would eventually self-deport.
The welfare piece is relatively simple logistically. There is no coherent reason to grant benefits to those who intentionally defy our laws and take advantage of our generosity.
Government welfare benefits to illegals should be phased out immediately. Moreover, their home countries would benefit from having their working age citizens return.
Jobs are more complicated. E-Verify is the federal system for assuring that illegal immigrants don’t take American jobs, but it has not worked well, partly due to lack of cooperation from employers who frankly prefer foreign nationals who are compliant and work for less.
To prevent a future glut of unskilled, unneeded workers, President Trump must work with Congress to make E-Verify the enforceable law of the land. Like the border itself, it is simply a matter of having the will to make it happen. Lettuce may cost a bit more, but the vegetables will still get picked.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
by Dr. Thomas Patterson | Apr 25, 2025 | Opinion
By Dr. Thomas Patterson |
Like a cruise ship steaming toward an iceberg, America’s economy is headed for disaster.
The federal government reports an interest-bearing debt of $37 trillion. However, the actual unfunded obligations of the government, according to the Medicare and Social Security Trustees’ reports, is an unfathomable $158.6 trillion.
Yet the band plays on. In the latest game of chicken to avoid the dreaded but largely imaginary “government shut down,” Democrats stood fast on the theory that their electoral success depends on shipping the maximum number of dollars out the door. Republicans once again proved an inadequate bulwark. Those taking a principled stand against business as usual were denominated “far-right obstructionists” and run over.
The current Republican plan combines a $4.5 trillion tax cut with doubtful spending reductions of $2 trillion, a plan the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects will eventually raise the interest-bearing debt to $60 trillion. Reminder: the Rs are the cost-cutting party.
Trump’s deficit-busting credentials are suspect. During his first term, he added debt at twice the annual rate than Barack Obama did. Nevertheless, he has unleashed a dramatic program of mass firings, contract canceling, and agency reduction/elimination.
Serious cost cutters know that the most effective strategy is to cut where the fiscal impact is high relative to the resistance produced. The DOGE strategy is the exact opposite, already producing highly publicized and resented cuts with no possibility, even if fully implemented, of resolving our debt crisis.
The elimination of all federal civilian employees, no matter how useless and overpaid many are, would save only 3% of the federal budget. To save money, you have to go where the money is. By far the largest “bucket” of federal spending is transfer payments, which are $3.19 trillion of the $6.7 trillion total budget in 2023.
Federal subsidies to states, including Medicaid, cost $1.15 trillion, while debt interest of $.9 trillion is not available for cutting. Purchases of supplies and salaries, which fund the military and all other governmental functions, cost a combined $1.4 trillion, yet provide relatively scant opportunity for significant reductions.
Meanwhile, the two parties dare each other to actually cut transfer payments and “push granny over the cliff.” Trump’s response is to adamantly repeat that he will never in any way “cut Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid benefits.”
This war of words has the unfortunate effect of handcuffing those legitimately trying to plan for the total depletion of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, scheduled to occur within the decade. It also rules out some of the non-draconian solutions available like work requirements for the able-bodied and gradually raising the retirement age.
When and if we get serious about cost-cutting and generational fraud, a good place to start would be Medicaid, the most abused and inefficient welfare program. Spending on Medicaid has grown an inflation-adjusted 671% since 1990. In fact, as Senator Phil Graham recently pointed out in the Wall Street Journal, the real purchasing power of total government transfer payments is 20 times greater than when the War on Poverty began in 1990, while the official poverty rate remains at 11.6%.
How can that be? Gramm provides the key insight. Eligibility standards for means-tested programs including Medicaid are based on the Census Bureau’s calculations. But the Census vastly overstates the extent of poverty because it doesn’t count as income 88% of the transfer payments, including food stamps, refundable tax credits, and Medicaid itself. This incoherent bias in calculating income eligibility has led to massive waste, far exceeding DOGE’s projected savings.
Interestingly, the CBO in January developed a new metric for determining “poverty” in the traditional sense of not having enough resources to meet basic needs. When transfer payments were deemed income, which they obviously are, the actual poverty rate fell to 0.8%.
This is an opportunity to save substantial sums without harming those actually poor. $1.48 trillion in welfare benefits annually go to families not actually qualifying as poor, using the CBO’s calculation of counting transfer payments as income. Simply using the CBO methodology, combined with work requirements and limiting welfare benefits to those truly in need, would generate meaningful savings if we have the political courage to do so.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
by Dr. Thomas Patterson | Apr 10, 2025 | Opinion
By Dr. Thomas Patterson |
Americans are getting fed up with their government. Why not remove some useless government-provided “stuff” from our lives? It would be cheap and easy.
For example, Daylight Savings Time (DST) can’t compete for attention with issues like inflation, immigration, and geopolitical threats, so it just hangs around. We would be better off without it.
DST was implemented during World War I to help conserve fuel and extend the working hours for which there was sunlight. Some of the early objections to DST were that it was a bad idea to tinker with God’s time and that it upset cows’ digestion to be fed earlier in the day. We blew past these, but no compelling replacement rationale for DST has ever developed.
Although it has been marketed as a fuel saving strategy, an Energy Department study in 2008 showed no effect on overall vehicle gas consumption attributable to DST. Other academic studies also found no benefit in crime statistics, travel times, or trade due to DST, while school and work attendance suffer slightly during the shifts.
Two states, Hawaii and most of Arizona, don’t observe DST anyway, so we have only to endure badly timed phone calls from the East Coast and remembering to adjust the times of televised sports broadcasts. Twenty states have petitioned to go on DST permanently but lack the required federal permission to do so. So, the semi-annual shifts persist as an unattractive irritant with little constituency, which exist mainly because of political inertia.
Then there’s our old friend, the humble penny. Americans have considerable nostalgia for the little guy: a penny saved is a penny earned and all that. Plus it has a picture of Lincoln on it. But cumulative inflation over the years has left the penny less than valueless. In 2024, it cost the U.S. 3.7 cents to produce and distribute a penny, something so colossally stupid only government could even contemplate it.
Moreover, pennies make cash transactions more cumbersome and thus more time-consuming. The average American makes about one cent every two seconds, so if it takes her more than two seconds to fish out and spend a penny, you’re losing money there too.
All these small injuries add up more than you might think. Last year, the U.S. minted 3.2 billion pennies, mostly because they are so worthless that they’re often not returned to circulation, ending up “under the couch cushions.” Do the math.
This is a true no-brainer. There isn’t a significant pro-penny political constituency, and it is logistically simple for Congress to simply order the U.S. Mint to stop making pennies. We eliminated the half-penny in 1857, and life went on. The retail economy is going over to credit cards anyway, so the nickel should also be slated for elimination before long.
HOV lanes were created in the 1970s and 80s in an effort to reduce the total number of cars on the road and (again) reduce fuel consumption. Their creation was part of the great surge of interest in reducing hydrocarbon emissions in the belief that eliminating greenhouse gases would be a feasible way to save the planet.
HOV lanes have never come close to achieving the anticipated result. According to the Reason Foundation, HOV lane miles have gone from 1,500 in 1985 to over 4,000 today. Yet carpooling among commuters dropped from 19.7% in 1980 to under 9% by 2019. The number of people who commute solo has actually risen from 64% to 80% in spite of all the inducements.
The massive investments in transit by our centralized transportation planners have also been fruitless, actually reducing the number of commuters using transit from 6.4% in 1980 to 5.0% in 2019.
Why have HOV lanes failed? Mostly because drivers just aren’t that interested. But enforcement is costly and ineffective. Studies have found that up to 84% of vehicles in HOV lanes are there illegally.
Moreover, during peak periods when freeways are slowed by overutilization, HOV lanes can contribute to the problem by taking a much needed but underutilized lane out of commission. The added freeway congestion meanwhile contributes to the emissions problem HOV lanes are supposed to ameliorate.
It’s time. Just do it.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
Page 1 of 2212345678910...20...»Last »
