Author: Jim

Democrats’ Own Private Government

Post author By Jim
Post date October 7, 2015
2 Comments on Democrats’ Own Private Government

Rahm Emanuel, Chicago Tribune, Chicago, transparency, government, collage, photomontage, JGill, Paul Jacob, Common Sense

Don’t feel lonely, Mrs. Clinton. You’re not the only public official shielding public actions from the public by using private modes of communication — a private email account and server, or texts on a personal cell phone.

Meet fellow Democrat Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. The Chicago Tribune* recently took the Emanuel administration to court for the second time in three months. The paper charges the mayor is “[violating] state open records laws by refusing to release communications about city business conducted through private emails and text messages.”

Still pending is the World’s Greatest Newspaper’s first lawsuit against the mayor’s office, seeking the full disclosure of emails specifically concerning a $20-million-dollar no-bid public school contract, over which the Feds have now launched a criminal investigation.

The Trib argues in its legal complaint that Freedom of Information Act requests “have been met with a pattern of non-compliance, partial compliance, delay and obfuscation.” But on Chicago Tonight, Mayor Emanuel offered that, “[W]e always comply and work through all of the Freedom of Information [requests] in the most responsive way possible.”

Probably all just a big misunderstanding . . .

What’s especially droll is to find presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, two Democrats who have long fought against privatizing any government function or service no matter how inefficiently performed or delivered, suddenly embracing a creative new approach to privatizing government . . . beginning with their own transparency and accountability.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* In full disclosure, my brother, Mark Jacob, works for the Tribune.

Printable PDF

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Chicago, Chicago Tribune, Hillary Clinton, Presidential campaign 2016, Rahm Emmanuel, transparency

crime and punishment national politics & policies Second Amendment rights

Most Murders?

murder, gun, gun control, statistics, crime, collage, photomontage, JGill, Paul Jacob, Common Sense

As the nation reels from another school-place murder spree, this time at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, The Detroit News took notice of a not wholly unrelated milestone: St. Louis, Missouri, took “title” to “nation’s murder capital” from Detroit, Michigan.

Detroit’s Chief of Police waves, as he put it, a “flag of progress,” not a “flag of success.” Crimes overall are down . . . as are (interestingly) police forces. Still, as the FBI stats for 2013 make clear, “Motor City’s overall violent crime rate remains the nation’s worst for the second straight year for cities of more than 100,000 residents.”

St. Louis scored 50 murders per every 100,000 population; Detroit went down to 44 per 100,000.

But hold your breath: all this is based on a per capita reckoning: Detroit still tallied more murders than did St. Louis, 298 to 59. Detroit just has more population.

In total terms, Chicago actually leads the nation, with 411 murders. (These include all murders, not just gun-related homicides.) New York follows with 333. Then it’s Detroit, followed by Los Angeles (260), Philadelphia (248), Houston (242), and Baltimore (211).

The 2013 murder count for the nation?14,249. Subtract the seven highest grossing murder cities and the number is 12,246.

That’s still a lot, but remember: nationwide, the murder rate (including murders with guns) continues to plummet — even with more guns in private hands. Could it be that more than “more cops” and “more jails,” more guns is the answer?

Dramatic Gun-Free-Zone shootings are trend exceptions. Most usages of guns remain in self-defense. Real gun control has been, in a sense, privatized.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags anti-gun hysteria, crime, gun control, gun panic, murder, statistics

folly term limits

Getting to Know You

term limits, democracy, voting, collage, photomontage, JGill, Paul Jacob, Common Sense

The Fourth Estate is coming undone.

Obviously.

But little did I know the problem was term limits.

Respected journalist Tim Skubick complained last November how incredible is the strain created by “44 mostly unknown faces” coming into the Michigan Legislature, adding, “I have to get to know them.”

Courage, Mr. Skubick, courage.

Then yesterday, the Detroit Free Press announced “a growing number of criticisms, from across the political spectrum . . . on just how catastrophic it has been to leave legislative decision-making, in particular, to people with little time on the job.”

“Catastrophic” to the people of Michigan, who now support term limits in greater numbers than when limits passed 23 years ago?

No, that word might better describe the Free Press’s decades of editorializing for the corrupt status quo.

By “across the political spectrum,” the editorial board really means “insiders from across the spectrum.”

The newspaper “offers five different takes on the trouble with term limits”:

The op-ed editor posits that legislators need greater experience . . . and only legislative service, not experience elsewhere, is valuable.
Another writer argues that being a representative is no different, really, than being a barber or a florist.
Legislators sometimes make sacrifices to serve and then are sad they cannot stay in office longer. (Boo-hoo.)
Two academics, who have long despised term limits, suggest weakening the limits.
A former congressman’s spouse claims elections in this world of social media are term limits. (No evidence offered, there being none.)

All five op-eds oppose term limits; none supported them. This is a liberal broadsheet’s fair and diverse discussion.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags democracy, Detroit Free Press, term limits, Tim Skubick, voting

Common Sense

Weekend with Bernie: Sanders’ Eleven

Post author By Jim
Post date October 2, 2015
1 Comment on Weekend with Bernie: Sanders’ Eleven

Weekend with Bernie Sanders, http://cognitivebiasparade.prosite.com/, Paul Jacob, James Gill

Bernie Sanders has a horde of helpers. Consider the attached visual meme; “Occupy Democrats” seem to have captured Bernie’s philosophy: spend and meddle.

All of the spending in the first item of Bernie’s 11-Step Economic Plan are best directed at the state level. Bernie voters should wonder: why haven’t politicians in the states kept up infrastructure?

There are reasons why some of us want to privatize more infrastructure: more responsible upkeep.

Oh, and why hasn’t the doubled amount spent on public K-12 schooling in my lifetime led to better schools or better-educated grads?

Just let that one hang there, and then contrast it with the disaster the feds have made of college costs while trying to “make college more affordable.”

Expanding Medicaid in one plank, and making “healthcare available to all,” in another, I take as repetition for emphasis. But the fact that Bernie’s backers want to expand spending in programs that recently have seen dramatic expansion — Social Security (in the form of radically increased rates of disability retirements), Medicaid (Obamacare), and food stamp participation (SNAP) — even while the programs lurch into insolvency, along with the whole federal budget, sends up a red flag . . . for irresponsibility.

Then there’s all the fiddling with free employment contracts that they pretend helps the poor, but can’t: unionization, raised wage minimums, and “equal pay” . . . for, presumably, unequal work, since we already have laws enforcing equal pay for equal work.

Several points are vague enough that, as stated, I could jump on board: I, too, want to reform the tax code and . . . “close corporate loopholes.” So does, famously this week, Donald Trump.

But what I mean by this and what progressives like Sanders mean? Big differences, I suspect.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Bernie Sanders, food stamps, Medicaid, Presidential campaign 2016, SNAP, Social Security, Weekend with Bernie

folly general freedom too much government

Worth a Crackdown?

Little Free Library, illustration, Common Sense, Paul Jacob

Charming. That is the best word to describe the “Little Free Library” movement.

Haven’t heard of it? It is the practice by which just plain folks share their books by building these little birdhouse-sized free lending libraries that they place in their yards by the curb. Usually, the little “libraries” encourage folks to take a book, bring a book.

Sometimes they advise readers to just take.

It’s the spirit of the public library, only provided privately, and without great pretense. Or expense.

The example in the artwork, above, is from across the country, in the tiny burg of Cathlamet, Washington. A reader sent me the photo. It is obvious: libraries like this are both quaint and useful — encouraging literacy, the activity of reading, and the appreciation of learning.

And yet, local governments across the country are cracking down.

Andrew Collins, writing at the Franklin Center website, points to an excellent Conor Friedersdorf article published early this year in The Atlantic, “The Danger of Being Neighborly Without a Permit.” Both these pieces present how meddlesome, ugly, intrusive, and anti-social local governments can be. Harassing friendly book providers with cease-and-desist letters, fines, and other niggly, invasive spins on zoning and public nuisance laws is just so idiotic it hardly merits much comment. But I agree with Friedersdorf — folks hosting Little Free Libraries are acting in the “venerable tradition” described by Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy in America, the cooperative, neighborly culture that made our country great.

Government officials attacking this new, endearing bit of Americana are grand examples of the pettiness that is bringing America down.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, government, law, Library, regulation, regulations, The Atlantic

folly general freedom ideological culture

Caliph/f or Nyet

drought, war, Syria, Global Warming, California, illustration

We live in a time when intelligent people expend vital brain power concocting explanations for war that weigh drought as a more significant cause than . . . previous tyranny and warfare.

Yes, the President’s friends and acolytes defend the notion, in all seriousness, that it is unregulated capitalism leading to global warming and Levantine droughts that made Syrians all unruly. This explains everything!

Just blame Islamic State violence on the weather and not on . . . the murderous dictator willing to kill masses of his own people, the intoxicating ideology of jihad, and (definitely not!) on Barack Obama’s Mideast policies.

I emphasized the Syrian dictator’s acts last Sunday. But surely American foreign policy — going back to Bush, at least — destabilized the region, and constitutes a major cause of the violence.

A far greater cause than our car-driving addiction! And coal!

And flatulent cows . . .

Blame shifting is not just a foreign policy vice, though. My Townhall column began not with the nascent Caliphate’s droughts, but California’s. And there’s more than just a few syllables of pronunciation similarity. People are assigning the wrong causes in both regions.

When California’s government-run water system subsidizes almond growing in a near desert, of course there is going to be waste. And yet politicians focus on home water use, scolding folks for taking long showers.

Yet, who sets the price of the water homeowners buy? Who, then, is responsible for the incentives to which consumers react?

The State of California. Suffering no drought of disastrous dictates by politicians in over their heads.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags California, climate change, drought, global warming, oil, war, water

folly ideological culture national politics & policies political challengers too much government

Fiorina Fires Back

Fiorina, employment, HP, CEO, Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer, jobs, Presidential, collage, photomontage, illustration, JGill, Common Sense

Politicians love talking up job creation. Presidential candidates, especially, pretend to a Svengali-like virtuosity in producing paychecks and, if only handed the keys to the White House, creating — presto! — a bunch more.

This year, Republican Carly Fiorina, the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, has been repeatedly attacked by Democrats, democratic socialists and her Republican opponents for firing 30,000 workers during her tenure running the company. As if she did so out of meanness.

Sunday, on Meet the Press, Chuck Todd went at her again.

“I find it very rich,” Fiorina fired back. “Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton, all the Democrats who are attacking me, they’ve never created a job, they’ve never saved a job, and their policies destroy jobs, including Mrs. Clinton’s latest position on Keystone Pipeline.”

Mrs. Fiorina offers context for her “failure”: “I led HP through a very difficult time. The NASDAQ dropped 80 percent. Some of our strongest competitors went out of business altogether, taking every job with them.” As she sees it, her team “saved 80,000 jobs. We went on to grow to 150,000 jobs. We quadrupled the growth rate of the company, quadrupled the cash flow of the company, tripled the rate of innovation of the company. And went from lagging behind to leading in every single product and every single market. I will run on that record all day long.”

I’m not endorsing Fiorina, either as candidate or as CEO. Just sayin’ that those attacking her on 30,000 jobs don’t know anything at all about actually creating even one real one.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Barbara Boxer, Carly Fiorina, CEO, employment, Hillary Clinton, jobs, Presidential campaign 2016

Common Sense First Amendment rights folly national politics & policies political challengers

Trump Speech

Donald Trump, free speech, law suit, collage, photomontage, James Gill, Paul Jacob, Common Sense

What is free speech? Is it what presidential candidate Donald Trump is trying to squelch?

Last week Trump’s lawyers sent a cease-and-desist letter to the Club for Growth. The Club, a well-known 501(c)4 limited government advocacy group, has put out a number of public service messages (“ads” as they witlessly call them in the politics biz — they are in truth anti-advertisements) criticizing Trump for past high-tax/tax-hike stances.

“Rest assured,” the lawyers wrote,

we will not sit idly by and allow special interest groups and political action committees like yours to defame Mr. Trump and cause damage to his reputation and business interests by intentionally disseminating libelous statements you fully know to be untrue and, even worse, continue to purposely mislead the American people for your own financial gain. Toward that end, Mr. Trump has authorized our legal team to take all necessary and appropriate actions to bring an immediate halt to your defamatory Attack Ads.

The lawyers, like Trump himself, must know that the case has zero merit. As Jonathan Adler explained in his coverage, what we have here “is commonly known as a SLAPP suit — a suit that’s designed to shut people up. ‘SLAPP’ stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation and the idea is that well-financed plaintiffs can use lawsuits, and the threat of suits, to discourage speech that they don’t like.”

These days, abridgments of free speech typically come from government coercively stamping out peaceful speech.

Meritless lawsuits, and their threat, are another and quite distinct anti-free-speech affront.

Would you trust anyone who employs such a method?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Tags 2016 Presidential race, Donald Trump, lawsuit, Presidential campaign 2016, SLAPP suit, speech, threat

meme

Term Limits and Jefferson

Post author By Jim
Post date September 27, 2015
No Comments on Term Limits and Jefferson

“My reason for fixing them in office for a term of years rather than for life was that they might have an idea that they were at a certain period to return into the mass of the people and become the governed instead of the governor, which might still keep alive that regard to the public good that otherwise they might perhapsbe induced by their independenceto forget.”