Are Rich Politicians Selfless Politicians? - The New York Times

There was an interesting article in today’s New York Times about rich politicians. Basically, “if a wealthy candidate wins, shares of his company often climb.”

Mara Faccio, an assistant professor of management at Vanderbilt University, looked at the cases of 109 capitalists and entrepreneurs who were elected to political office in 47 countries. She chose politicians in two categories: those who owned at least 10 percent of the shares of a publicly traded company (which many economists consider a controlling interest), and those who had been chief executive, president or vice president of such a company.

In a paper published in March in The American Economic Review, Ms. Faccio reported that the politicians’ companies experienced a 2.3 percent increase in their share prices, on average, around the time of their electoral victories. If a politician entered the executive branch of government, the effect was larger — up to a 12 percent lift for companies associated with new presidents, prime ministers and other top officials.

I know I’m getting a little ahead of myself but… Could a Pete Ricketts victory in November mean a huge payday for Pete and his father Joe?

It seemed so simple. One issue, two sides, and crafty yard signs with which to decorate your yard. Oh, those simplistic days!

The great debate of the recently adjourned legislative session centered on the organization of the Omaha-area schools. Many supported the current districting plan. Others favored the ‘one city, one school district’ approach. As it turns out, that mattered little as Ernie Chambers favored neither.

The one, the only, the Ernie Chambers!

As a result, the initial proposal was twisted, turned, and downright beaten to a pulp until we somehow ended up with LB 1024.

A plan that didn’t really exist until the eleventh hour created three separate school districts inside a ‘learning zone’ that will encompass Douglas and Sarpy counties. Sounds like a great plan. Unless of course you oppose segregation. Many critics of the bill argue that the districts were divided along racial lines. After looking at the details, it’s a hard argument to beat. So why would the lone African-American in the Unicam support legislative segregation of the Omaha schools?

Chambers said that since the students in schools attended mostly by minorities are not receiving adequate funding, they will receive a better education if they had more control over their own school district.

Not everybody had such a bright outlook on the situation. As ABC News reported:

Omaha Sen. Pat Bourne decried the bill, saying, “We will go down in history as one of the first states in 20 years to set race relations back.”

Gwen Howard was also at odds with Chambers over the bill.

“History will not, and should not, judge us kindly,” said Sen. Gwen Howard of Omaha.

Putting the entire debate aside, I’d like to ask you all one question: If Chambers can get this Constitutional-defying bill passed in a legislature full of veterans, what is he going to be able to do in a legislature full of rookies? Next year we will have 20 new state senators. Lets all wish them the best of luck, and hopefully this batch will actually read that thing we call the Constitution.