If the congressional bill that fused a minimum wage hike to an estate tax cut had passed, which of the two would’ve been indexed to inflation?

Yep, it’s the estate tax, meaning the $10 million exemption per couple would’ve forever retained its value – unlike, say, the minimum wage, the alternative minimum tax and low-income heating assistance.

Gosh, I wonder how wealthy constituents have been better able to explain to Congress the pernicious effects of inflation.

Listen up, Pharmacy Board. Let’s say I suddenly decided that I could no longer in good conscience run letters to the editor or cartoons that offend my personal values.

Do you suppose my bosses would make accommodations that allowed me to keep this job? Ha! I’d be reassigned or fired.

Do you suppose the Society of Professional Journalists would take up my cause? Uh, no.

What if I protested, saying the bosses were abridging my First Amendment rights? Well, after they stopped laughing, they’d remind me that I’d still have those rights, just not on their dime. Then they’d tell me that if I wanted to be a professional journalist, I’d have to put the expectations and responsibilities of the job first.

They’re very helpful that way.

Run Medicare like a … never mind. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is running ads throughout the nation touting politicians who supported Medicare Part D, the prescription drug benefit that will cost $400 billion, no, $500 billion, um, $750 billion over the next decade.

Liberal and conservative analysts are already calling it a boondoggle, since it still leaves a gaping hole in coverage, doesn’t allow the government to pursue price discounts and is needlessly confusing.

Put it this way: If Part D were a business, nobody would invest in it.

The U.S. Chamber had to correct an ad that ran in Seattle giving U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert, a Republican, an attaboy for voting for the bill. Reichert wasn’t in office at the time. Maybe it can now explain how a group that espouses the mantra “run government like a business” can support this mess.

Then again, the law is great for the pharmaceutical industry. But it can’t have that much influence. Can it?

Swing shift. I’d like to apologize to Spokane police Officer Karl Thompson for being skeptical about the existence of the Pepsi bottle in the Otto Zehm case.

He was clearly right, though the department did him no favors in failing to release that video in the first place. The department is also doing him no favors in continuing to try to spin what happened.

First, we were told Zehm lunged at the officer, even though Thompson didn’t say that in his interview with the investigating detective and the video shows otherwise. Then we were told – albeit briefly – that Zehm swung the bottle, but Thompson didn’t say that and the video doesn’t show it.

If the department is comfortable with what happened, why does it keep exaggerating Zehm’s actions?