Alabama basketball wins SEC, gets NCAA number one seeding
On Sunday, the University of Alabama men’s basketball team defeated Texas A&M in the Southeastern Conference (SEC) tournament championship game 82 to 63. The Bama men were 29 and 5 this year and 16 and 2 in SEC play, winning the SEC regular season. Alabama enters the NCAA tournament as the number one team in the Associated Press poll for only the second time in program history. CBS Sports rates Alabama as the number one team in the country for strength of schedule. Star Forward Brandon Miller has completely dominated the competition in his first – and likely last – college basketball season. The freshman has averaged 19.5 points per game, 8.2 rebounds per game, and two assists per game in one of the greatest seasons on the court by a Tide basketball player in program history. The six foot nine inch Miller is projected to be one of the top four picks in the upcoming NBA draft if he goes pro. Miller scored 23 points, had 12 rebounds, and four assists in Sunday’s championship game. Miller was named the SEC Tournament Most Valuable Player. He was also named to the 2023 SEC all-conference team Sunday. “The funnest part is coming out here, getting the win with my guys in the SEC championship,” Miller told reporters after the win. Coach Nate Oates is a contender for the Coach of the Year award. Alabama will begin its NCAA tournament run as the number one seed in the South bracket. The Tide was the number one team overall, according to the selection committee. Their first-round opponent is the winner of the Texas A&M Corpus Christie Islanders and Southeast Missouri State game. The Tide is a prohibitive favorite. The game will be in Birmingham, on Thursday at 1:45 p.m. and will be broadcast by CBS Sports. If Alabama gets by the TXAMCC v. SE Miss. St. winner, they will then play the winner of the Maryland and West Virginia game. Alabama’s magical season, in many ways, has been overshadowed by an incident that occurred off the court. Former Tide basketball player Darius Miles was indicted by the Tuscaloosa grand jury last week for the murder of 23-year-old Jamea Harris. The young mom and her boyfriend were at a club on the Tuscaloosa strip when according to the Tuscaloosa Police, Miles approached Harris, and a scuffle with Harris’s boyfriend ensued. A Tuscaloosa detective testified that Miles then texted Miller, who had dropped off Miles, to come back and bring Miles’ gun. Miller complied with the request. Harris and her boyfriend were attempting to leave the scene but, according to some press reports, were blocked in by Miller’s vehicle. Miles then allegedly gave the gun to a friend Michael Davis. Davis then fired the gun into the vehicle. Harris was killed. Both Davis and Miles have been indicted in the slaying, while Miller, arguably the most talented basketball talent in UA history, was not charged as an accessory. Coach Oates did not even suspend Miller for a game, though Miles was kicked off the team. Miller has faced chants of “lock him up” on road games since his reported involvement in the slaying has become public knowledge, and the killing has drawn national attention. The Auburn Tigers also made the NCAA tournament. They are the number 9 seed in the Midwest bracket and will play number 8 seed Iowa. The game will be in Birmingham. Some national sports pundits have complained that the Birmingham location was unfair to Iowa, who was the higher seed. Auburn finished 20 and 12 overall and 10 and 8 in SEC play. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Conservatives hold rally and prayer service in front of the Alabama State Capital
On Thursday, a variety of conservative groups held a prayer service and rally for their issues in front of the Alabama Statehouse. The Alabama Citizens Action Program (ALCAP) and Alabama Eagle Forum held a prayer service and followed that with a rally by the Campaign for Common Sense. The welcome-back rally urged legislators to advance a socially conservative agenda in the 2023 Alabama Regular Legislative Session that began on Tuesday. ALCAP President and CEO and talk radio host Greg Davis said on Facebook, “We had a blessed time of prayer in Montgomery at the Statehouse steps yesterday with ALCAP – Alabama Citizens Action Program. I encourage all Christians to include those who serve us thru Government on your prayer lists and then truly lift them up to God!” Several speakers urged the Legislators to jettison the unpopular Common Core educational standards – renamed the Alabama College and Career Ready Standards by the state school board. The Rev. John Killian said that the state will not succeed educationally while Common Core remains in place. The Campaign for Common Sense Director Lou Campenosi said, “We have been coming here for 13 years, and still nothing has been done.” Campenosi said that the state of Alabama had gone from 20th in educational performance to 52nd in state educational rankings since switching to the Alabama College and Career Ready Standards. The Director of Alabama Eagle Forum, Becky Gerritson, told Alabama Today that State Sen. Larry Stutts and State Rep. Susan Dubose will introduce legislation in each House to prevent pregnant women from being able to obtain medical marijuana – which will become legal in Alabama by the end of the year. Gerritson said that the group would also support a bill to expand school choice for families across Alabama – the Universal School Choice Act. State Auditor Andrew Sorrell advocated for legislation to give his office powers similar to that of other state auditors. Sorrell said that he had been criticized as being “too conservative,” but in the recent November general election, it was he who won by the largest margin showing that true conservatives can win. Sorrell said that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis governed as a conservative and was rewarded with an easy re-election. State Rep. Ernie Yarbrough vowed to support the school choice bill. Former ALCAP Director Joe Godfrey said on Facebook, “Glad to have been a part of the ALCAP Prayer Rally led by Greg Davis.” Stephanie Durnin with the Healthcare Freedom group advocated for passage of the Healthcare Freedom Act. The controversial legislation would prevent employers from being able to require employees to be vaccinated. Durnin said that some workers who refused to get the vaccine are required to submit frequent COVID-19 tests. Durnin said that this was unfair and unjust. Healthcare Freedom wrote on Facebook, “We expect our legislators to pass the #neveragain legislation called the Alabama Health Freedom Act (AHFA) this session. We need your help to make this happen. Here’s your first CALL TO ACTION to kick off this legislative session right…” Other speakers included: former State Auditor Jim Zeigler, 1819 news podcaster Bryan Dawson, Jarman Leatherwood, Angela Shepard, Jackie Connell, Dr. Rick Lance, and others. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Daniel Sutter: Social Security insolvency
Social Security has been long viewed as untouchable in American politics. An aging population seemingly only further entrenches this. Yet cuts may be coming if Democrats and Republicans do not act today. Social Security’s potential insolvency would trigger benefit cuts. Here’s how Veronique de Rugy of the Mercatus Center describes it, “Failure to reform, in fact, means benefits will automatically get cut. … [W]hen the Trust Fund runs out of IOUs around 2033, Social Security benefits by law will be cut by about one-fifth.” To unpack this, let’s start with the structure of Social Security. The taxes funding Social Security, primarily the payroll tax, goes into a Trust Fund (technically two funds, but money can be shifted between them), from which benefits are paid. Any surplus is invested in U.S. Treasury securities. The program operates on a pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) basis instead of accumulating assets like a private pension. Today benefits slightly exceed tax revenues, so the Fund operates at an annual deficit. Thanks to earlier surpluses, the Fund has a balance of $2.6 trillion. The annual deficits are projected to grow over the next decade, and insolvency occurs when the balance is zero. The Social Security system’s trustees project this in 2035, while the Congressional Budget Office predicts 2032. Which year is correct is immaterial. The Antideficiency Act prohibits Federal agencies from spending funds they do not have. Social Security revenues are projected to be 80 percent of annual benefits at insolvency. This yields the 20 percent benefit cut. Yet the Social Security Act creates a legal entitlement to benefits. Insolvency will bring these two laws into conflict. The Congressional Research Service is unsure which law will take precedence. Warnings of impending cuts presume the Antideficiency Act will rule, so benefit cuts are not written in stone. Also, Congress could hike the payroll tax to avoid insolvency. Why does this matter? Economist Thomas Sowell says that the first lesson of economics is scarcity, while the first lesson of politics is to deny the first lesson of economics. Economists, I think, should be clear whether scarcity or rules and procedures force choices on us. Rules and procedures drive the feared benefit cuts, not scarcity. Scarcity means that the current 12.4 percent payroll tax is inadequate; either Social Security taxes must increase, benefits must be cut, or both. Will Social Security become unaffordable? Some commentators offer very scary projections, but here’s a straightforward approach. Our aging population is lowering the worker-to-retiree ratio, stressing our PAYGO program. This ratio exceeded three in the 1990s, currently stands at 2.8, and may eventually fall to two. Since a 12 percent payroll tax covered annual benefits with three workers per retiree, an 18 percent tax should fund current benefits with two. Careful calculations suggest a lower rate will suffice. The Congressional Research Service estimates that a 15.6 percent rate rising eventually to 16.7 percent will fund benefits. I do not favor any tax increase, but a four-percentage point increase will not cause economic ruin. Medicare is on weaker ground going forward, but I am only considering Social Security’s sustainability today. Social Security has problems making it poor public policy. Most significantly, PAYGO produces an atrocious rate of return compared to true pensions. According to one estimate, the average participant will get $698,000 in benefits for $698,000 in taxes. A better public pension plan should enable reform long-term. Social Security’s funding problem reflects a larger problem facing our nation. We want more from government than we are willing to pay for in taxes. This fiscal imbalance produces our ballooning national debt and traces back, I believe, to the partial Reagan Revolution. President [Ronald] Reagan wanted to cut government, both taxes and spending. Spending cuts proved unattainable, but tax cuts remained politically popular, so President Reagan proceeded with tax cuts culminating in the landmark 1986 tax overhaul. This locked in low taxes, which persist today. To sustain current Social Security benefits or Federal spending, Americans will have to pay more in taxes. I hope we choose less government and more freedom, but scarcity will force a choice soon. Daniel Sutter is the Charles G. Koch Professor of Economics with the Manuel H. Johnson Center for Political Economy at Troy University and host of Econversations on TrojanVision. The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of Troy University.
Will Sellers: The forgotten Hungarian revolution
The desire for freedom and liberty is universal, but achieving it can take the effort of a lifetime. On March 15, 1848 – 175 years ago – Hungary revolted against the constraints imposed by both its Austrian masters and the authoritarianism of its ruling class. As a former Warsaw Pact country, little is known about the history of democratic institutions in Hungary. And it would be easy to conclude that the country’s experience with self-determination and independent government is recent. To the contrary, Hungary has a rich history of pursuing freedom and embracing liberty. The Hungarian Revolution of 1848 was the culmination of a nation-state seeking to chart its own course with a separate identity and elected government. After the defeat of Napoleon and the beginning of temporary peace and stability in Europe, the world economy flourished with open trade creating new opportunities for a middle class. But with economic growth and improved living conditions, people yearned for greater autonomy in living their lives and conducting their affairs. Hungary, like many countries, had a ruling class that felt no desire for change and possessed no appetite for reforms that would undermine its power. Since the aristocracy paid no taxes and had almost total control over the government, there was no incentive for any change. But, like most governing elites, they failed to see that expanding the freedoms of the people would have provided more stability and ultimately increased both their wealth and influence. By holding on to power, the aristocracy fumbled, and their stature decreased when the revolution came to Hungary. The seeds of revolution started in France when its government banned conventions of opposing political parties and used force to suppress political speech. This led to mass demonstrations resulting in the end of the constitutional monarchy. As other countries heard this news, many were inspired to attempt the same thing. Upon learning of the events in Paris, Hungarian patriots appealed to the Hapsburg Monarchy in Vienna to award greater freedom and autonomy. When these demands were transmitted to Austria, crowds in Vienna gathered and demanded greater freedoms too. The Hapsburg Monarch, Franz Joseph, was only 17 years old. His advisors panicked and appeared to accept the Hungarian petition. Even though the terms were not defined, once news of this achievement reached Hungary, there were large public gatherings in favor of independence. Unlike other revolutions of 1848, the Hungarian movement was bloodless and culminated in a demand of various rights to create an independent nation. Rather than take up arms, occupy buildings, or assassinate leaders, the real revolution was an intellectual exercise of expressing ideas that motivated the people to embrace a new vision of their country. These ideas started from the pen of the poet and now national hero, Sandor Petofi. He was an unlikely revolutionary, but with other young enlightenment scholars, he drafted a proposal, The 12 Points, that still resonates today. The aspirations of the Hungarian people were explained in 12 simple points that not only express ideas for individual liberty but also the practical needs for a new nation. Of individual rights, Petofi asserted that Hungarians wanted freedom of the press and an end to censorship. This was his first demand, highlighting the importance of having an unfettered media to disseminate information without fear of repression. The desire for a free press and an elimination of censorship was radical. Elites, regardless of political stripe or persuasion, enjoy censorship and desire to control information as a means to govern. The Hungarians, like others reformers before and after, realized the need for a free press. Other rights demanded were the abolition of separate laws for the nobility and freeing all political prisoners. The Hungarians wanted everyone to be treated equally under a stable and predictable legal system. They also demanded expanded participation in courts and juries, beyond the nobility, so that anyone with the necessary education could serve in government and on a jury. Religious liberty was also a cornerstone of the Hungarian revolution. The people simply wanted freedom to worship without conforming to and paying for a state-sponsored religion. Even 175 years ago, Hungary still had vestiges of a feudal system that limited the rights of serfs to own property, elevated the rights of the nobility to demand payments from serfs, and prevented the free movement of labor. The reformers demanded that the limitations, discriminations, and humiliations of feudalism be eradicated. Petofi’s 12 Points also made demands for things that would make Hungary a nation and not a part of the Hapsburg Empire. One critical ingredient for statehood was the need for a national bank and separate currency. To be truly independent, the country needed financial independence, and reformers saw a national bank as a means to achieve that result. These demands also critically included the formation of an independent government and a national assembly with members who were not selected by the aristocracy but were democratically elected. Experience had taught them not to limit the frequency or duration of the assembly. Previously, a national parliament could only convene at the behest of an absentee ruler. Unlike the young United States, Hungary envisioned the critical need for a standing national army that would take a loyalty oath to a Hungarian Constitution but not serve outside the country’s borders. When these demands were submitted to Vienna, they were accepted, and Hungary then moved to implement them to become an independent nation. Sadly, Hungary’s aspirations were short-lived when the national assembly was unable to adequately provide representation to and expand the rights of various ethnic minorities. This led to a civil war, with Austria opportunistically aligning itself against the Hungarian government. In less than 2 years, the independent nation ceased to exist when the Russians invaded, abolished the Hungarian constitution, and brutally oppressed the people. Petofi would die fighting for the freedom of the ideals he treasured for his country. His larger-than-life statute occupies a square in Budapest, where the Hungarian Revolution is forever immortalized. Will Sellers is a
Eyeing their share, Alabama cities seek more online tax data
Mayors of Alabama’s largest cities want to open up the hood on the state’s online sales tax program, amid worries that cities that impose high sales tax rates may be losing out on revenue. AL.com reports mayors of the state’s 10 largest cities want state lawmakers this year to mandate more data be provided about online sales taxes. While the combined city, county, and state sales tax rate in most Alabama cities is higher than 9%, the state’s Simplified Sellers Use Tax collects only 8%. Whether traditional sales tax or online tax is collected, the state gets a 4% cut. Cities get 60% of the other half of the 8% online rate, while counties get 40%, with individual amounts determined by population. That’s a good deal for counties because Alabama cities often reap a larger share of local sales tax revenue. Cities and counties fought over how the money was divided in 2018 and 2019. The program generated $634 million in the budget year ended September 30, up 65% over two years. Mayors aren’t yet proposing a re-division. Instead, they say they want figures on where purchases are coming from, so they can compare that to their current shares of online sales tax. “With transparency, we can ensure that our schools, police departments, and road networks are receiving the investments they have earned,” Tuscaloosa Mayor Walt Maddox said. No bill to require more data has yet been filed. Sonny Brasfield, executive director of the Association of County Commissions of Alabama, said he believes mayors want a larger share of the pie. He said that to meet mayors’ demands, the state would have to repeal confidentiality laws that bar disclosure of how much any one taxpayer pays. “No city in Alabama can disclose the amount of sales tax paid by an individual business inside its jurisdiction,” Brasfield said. “That information is private and essential to a business’ success.” The mayors say they need to know the total online sales tax activity originating in their cities, not how much any one business pays. They also argue that the 8% rate is unfair to businesses that must charge higher rates for purchases made at their stores. “We think that cities, counties, school systems, and Alabama taxpayers ought to be able to get a clear picture of our how online sales tax system works in order to have certainty and plan for the future and know that our local small businesses are being treated fairly,” said Mobile Mayor Sandy Stimpson. Frank Miles, a spokesman for the Alabama Department of Revenue, said state law currently precludes the type of disclosures the mayors might be seeking, because Alabama only collects statewide online sales figures and is barred from collecting local-level data. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
