Author: Redactor

Categories
insider corruption

Moonlighting as President?

The presidency of the United States isn’t easy.  So, what does it say when a president takes a second job?

Our federal union’s chief executive, Barack Obama, has gone and done just that: He now serves as public relations flak for the city of Chicago. The Windy City wants to host the 2016 Summer Olympics, so he flew off to Copenhagen to lobby the International Olympic Committee.

Now, I wasn’t rooting for Chicago to get the Olympics. I have friends there, folks I’d rather not see fleeced with higher taxes to pay for it — nor forced to suffer the many inconveniences of such an event.

But here’s my real problem with Obama’s moonlighting: It shows that his priorities are way out of whack. Why is he being side-tracked with something so insignificant as where an athletic event will be held?

Oh, we’ve been told he can zoom there and back on Air Force One in no time, not to worry. But don’t be fooled. Time and focus on this Olympic bid business costs both Obama and his staff. Cost is opportunity foregone. The executive branch has enough to do without adding on the Olympics.

Could it be that Obama shares that ol’ special-interest class obsession with using a public position for the benefit of one’s own — as well as one’s buddies’ — private interests?

Next thing he’ll be running GM in his spare time.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

A Regulatory Assault Taxis Into Law

When the politicians in our nation’s capital aren’t the butt of jokes for, say, not paying their taxes or behaving scandalously, well, they’re causing even more trouble.

One of their favorite areas of official mischief-making is assaulting — er, regulating — the city’s taxicabs. Last week a number of cabbies went on strike, protesting a proposed system, not dissimilar to New York’s taxi regime. The new scheme would require cab owners to buy a very expensive medallion to operate each cab.

Larry Frankel, one of the strikers quoted in the Washington Post, said, “We are here to protect our rights as owners and operators.”

The protesting cabbies object that this is not just another expensive regulation. This one threatens their very livelihoods. It’s almost designed to favor large companies over driver-owned cabs.

Which seems almost universally the case with regulations: They protect big interests from competition.

District Council member Jim Graham, who introduced the bill to “medallionize” taxicabs, said he feared the city would be “overrun” with taxis. There are 8,000 already, with 300 adding on every month.

Why, some day there could be more cabs than politicians and lobbyists combined! Imagine the disaster: Folks getting across town too easily or, worse yet, too inexpensively.

Just another bit of ill-thought-out regulation. It is par for the course in our nation’s capital. It makes you proud to . . . live somewhere else.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

News Flash: After this commentary was recorded, the FBI arrested a top aide to DC City Councilman Jim Graham on charges of accepting cash bribes and free trips in exchange for pushing the taxicab legislation discussed here. (See this news coverage and this article in the Washington Post.)

Categories
term limits

The Revenge of the Mantra

“We have term limits; they’re called elections.” That’s the beloved mantra of term limits’ opponents.

For all their professed love of elections, though, these politicians don’t care much for the elections in which voters have enacted term limits. They regularly try any and every trick in the book to overturn such votes — anything to stay longer in office.

Take New York City. Voters passed term limits in one election; years later they smashed a term-limit weakening measure put on the ballot by the city council. But then Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the city council found a legal loophole, allowing themselves an extra term.

And they refused to permit the people any vote on their power grab.

But just weeks ago there was an election. Seventeen council members who had voted to weaken their own term limits faced primary opponents. Three were defeated. Two more are in races too close to call — with re-counts now underway. Another six won in very, very close contests.

The New York Times called the results “the greatest repudiation of incumbents in a generation.”

According to David Birdsell, dean of Baruch College’s School of Public Affairs, “Public frustration with what seems to be self-serving government officials is at a fever pitch right now.”

Call it “the revenge of the mantra”: Take away term limits, and voters will take away future terms the old-fashioned way . . . with elections.

This is . . . wonderful! This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
too much government

American Opinion versus the Political Mandate

American politics is often dominated by a myth, the myth of the “mandate.”

Mandates, it is said, come from winning elections. The word used to be applied to big wins. Now that’s been watered down.

But elections do not a mandate make.

The recent shift from united government under the Republicans to united government under the Democrats has been dubbed a mandate, a mandate for “change” — which, in the programs of President Barack Obama and his powerful allies in Congress, seems to mean “more government.” Lots more.

Meanwhile, the American people hold different notions. A recent Gallup poll shows that 57 percent of Americans think that government is doing too much. Only 38 percent of respondents to the poll thought that government should do more. And regarding business and industry? Twenty-four percent thought government did too little; 45 percent thought government regulates business too heavily as it is.

According to most Americans, there’s too much government overall.

So how does this square with the picture provided by major media, and emphasized on the left? Not very well. Democrats came into the recent situation thinking they had a mandate. They were wrong.

What Democrats had was a win from Americans repudiating the Republicans for general incompetence, and for (yes) growing government too much. If Democrats continue their government growth agenda, the mirage they see as a mandate will completely vanish.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access

Citizen Canes

Gutta-percha is a Southeast Asian tree. A cane made from its wood was wielded in the U.S. Senate by Congressman Preston Brooks, against a sitting senator, Charles Sumner — literally sitting there at his desk. Sumner nearly died from the beating.

Congressman Brooks hailed from South Carolina. His constituents so approved his violence that they sent him dozens of replacement canes. One was engraved “hit him again.”

One-hundred fifty-three years later and we’re still much exericized by the actions of a South Carolinian congressman, this time one Joe Wilson, who shouted “You lie!” at the president. The in-crowd reacts as if those words were gutta-percha.

Jonathan Alter, in Newsweek, says today’s problem is too many “jackasses.” According to his assessment, if we adopted the new electoral system adopted in Washington state, which he calls the “open primary,” the “jackass quotient” among our representatives would decrease.

Alter seriously errs. Washington’s new electoral system, usually called “Top Two primary,” replaces the state’s historic — and justly named — “open primary.” But this new “Top Two” scheme marginalizes minor parties and independent candidates, raises campaign costs, and makes it easier for incumbents to stay in office. I’ve argued against it before.

Good thing is, next June, Californians can beat down this idea, when “Top Two” hits the state’s ballot, courtesy of the incumbent politicians who placed it there.

Citizens won’t need canes. Just votes.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
First Amendment rights too much government

The First Casualty of Health Care Reform

The first casualty of war is truth. The first casualty of health care reform? Free speech.

While most health care insurers have gone along with reform proposals, even helping write the bills, a few insurance companies fall outside the insiders’ perimeter, fearful of more regulation. The regulatory environment is already oppressive, after all — though, for the insurance industry these regs come mainly from the states.

So, we now learn, at least one medical insurance provider, Humana, sent out a special letter to policyholders who also participate in the Medicare Advantage program, advising them of what the effects of new reforms on their coverage would likely be.

What happened next?

If you guessed “gag order,” you got it.

After Humana’s expression of First Amendment rights, the Department of Health and Human Services told all insurers participating in Medicare Advantage to zip it, stifle themselves, express their thoughts in no way about any proposed reform to their policyholders — even if all such expression amounts to is a list of facts.

Penalties include both fines and jail time.

Yes, folks, this is what unlimited government means. Increase government’s role and “hasta la vista” to some very basic freedoms.

Just as government micromanagement of markets leads to shortages and rising prices, so increased government has predictable consequences. We pay for big government in lost freedom as well as dollars.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
First Amendment rights property rights too much government

California Crackdowns

A government agency practicing extortion . . . who’d’a thunk it?

In 1987, the California Coastal Commission lost a Supreme Court case about its attempt to demand beach access from property owners in exchange for building permits. One justice said it was practicing extortion.

Nevertheless, the agency still dictates what land owners must do to receive permits — which are required even to move piles of dirt around. In one instance, the unelected Commission ordered that most of an owner’s land be given over to farming. The Pacific Legal Foundation is fighting this insanity in court.

Richard Oshen decided to produce a documentary about the CCC after friends told him how it was interfering with their own property. The agency had even gone so far as to prohibit them from tape recording its inspection of their land.

Oshen spent years conducting interviews. He even managed to film a conversation with CCC head Peter Douglas in which Douglas downplayed the agency’s dictatorial powers. But Reason magazine reports that Douglas now wants to revoke the permission he gave to use that interview. He’s also demanding to see a pre-release version of the movie — either to try to prevent its release or just on general principles of harassing critics of tyranny.

I’ve reported on the commission before. It behaves as a kind of environmentalist mafia operating under color of law — and clearly the CCC is no fan of free speech.

Let’s hope that Douglas fails, Oshen succeeds, and California land owners get a reprieve.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access initiative, referendum, and recall insider corruption tax policy

Ballot Box News

With all that’s going on in Washington, don’t forget: There’s a lot happening on state and local ballots. Consider these recent newsline items from Ballot Box News:

Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Alvarez is under fire for giving big-ticket raises to favored insiders while calling for steep budget cuts. A day after a poll found that 58 percent of registered voters favor the recall of Alvarez, another local mayor filed a lawsuit to undo controversial requirements that make it much more difficult to recall sitting politicians.

There’s a link to the rest of the story at the Miami Herald

.Republican lawmakers are lining up against a citizen initiative effort to impose stringent ethics guidelines on the Utah Legislature. Complained the state senate’s majority leader, “If there are people out there who have political intentions they will use this as a club time and time again.”

Uh, sir, that would be the idea. Without people clubbing politicians on ethics, how can we root out corruption in politics? Can we trust you to do it, based on your good word as an incumbent?

Full story in The Salt Lake Tribune.

We’re told California’s cash-strapped state government would be virtually wallowing in piles of cash if a proposed wealth tax makes it to the ballot. And is approved by voters. And survives legal challenge. I don’t support it. Tax-the-rich schemes are unjust, and don’t work.

But I do support BallotBoxNews.com, where you can find out more about this proposed tax, and many other hot-button issues.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
term limits

Tupperware Really Locks You In

Plastics: yesterday’s future, today’s convenience.

Reading a report from Jefferson City, Missouri, I learned that I already knew something that the politicians in Missouri didn’t: The difference between polystyrene and polypropylene.

Polystyrene, when expanded, makes that wonderful white stuff we usually call “Styrofoam.” Polypropylene makes dishwasher-safe stuff like Tupperware.

Anyway, the solons of the great state of Missouri, concerned about floating debris from abandoned foam coolers on the state’s waterways, banned the wrong plastic. Instead of polystyrene, they banned polypropylene.

So now, slobs who leave their beer coolers out on the river still run free (along with responsible styrofoam users), while tidy folk who take Tupperware to the river could be nabbed and put in jail for a year.

It appears an innocent mistake. Lawmakers, trying to avoid brand names, wanted to get technical. They were just incompetent. Opponents of term limits might blame Missouri’s term-limited, less-than-exhaustively experienced reps. But everyone knows that this happens as much or more with the most calcified legislators.

Anyone could make the mistake, really. For the life of me, it’s simply a fluke that I remember the difference between the two poly-substances. Maybe it was because I once knew a girl named Polly.

In any case, the goofy law will not be enforced. It will almost certainly be amended in the next session.

And Missourians will remain free to pop and seal their Tupperware lids even at the river.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Accountability national politics & policies too much government

Drop Out of the Bucket

Does $40.3 million seem like a lot of money to you? It does to me.

But to the Social Security Administration? It’s a drop in the bucket.

Or, a drop out of the bucket.

You see, while the federal government is scheduled to soon reinstate the estate tax on the wealth of deceased people, we now learn that it has also been giving money to the dearly departed.

Yes, an internal audit of the Social Security Administration revealed that it paid out more than $40 million to over six thousand dead people.

These benefits were given out weeks, months, years after receiving death certificates. The bureaucracy had been duly notified. And yet it went blithely on, continuing to send monthly checks.

Bureaucratic error. Hey, we all make mistakes. But it’s worth noting that this was an internal audit. Who knows what we’d catch if it were an external audit, with teeth?

Lately, the federal government has been talking over car companies and banks. Now the president and Congress plan to take control of the medical sector of our economy. They tell us they’ll cut medical costs by cutting waste. Yeah, right.

On a cheerier note, we needn’t fear the institution of those so-called “death panels” to cut costs. The way the feds work, there’d be no savings — they’d still be paying for care long after the patients were dead and gone.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.