Author: Redactor

Categories
First Amendment rights too much government

You Go, Google

A few weeks back I asked what was going on with Google’s pledge to stop helping the Chinese government censor search results for sensitive topics like Falun Gong and Tiananmen Square. Google was presumably using its threat of withdrawal from the Chinese market as a negotiating chip to wrest privileged status from the Chinese authorities.

But the hope was naive. It was unlikely in the extreme that China would give up its program of censoring mainland culture and especially politics. It wants to control the dialogue and thwart political dissent. So I told Google, “Google, ya gotta go. Stop enabling Chinese censorship. Do as you promised and provide a desperately needed and inspiring example of refusing any longer to cooperate with tyranny.”

I feared Google would retreat from its public commitment. But now Google agrees that for the Chinese government, “self-​censorship is a non-​negotiable legal requirement.” So Google is redirecting Chinese users of its search engine (Google​.cn) to its Hong Kong search engine (Google​.com​.hk), where results are not currently censored because of the “one country, two systems” policy that has been at least roughly followed since China took over Hong Kong in 1997.

Whether citizens on the mainland will be able to get uncensored search results from the Hong Kong Google search engine is an open question at best. But any censorship of those results will now be perpetrated by China without Google’s active cooperation. Good for Google.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
First Amendment rights local leaders

Intimidation in Southborough

We have free speech in America. Guaranteed by the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. But a First Amendment guarantee doesn’t make freedom a certainty. It’s not as if we don’t have to stand up for our rights.

But stand up to whom? 

Usually, threats to free speech come from government … most recently, the government of the town of Southborough, Massachusetts.

The blog MySouthborough​.com, run by Susan Fitzgerald, is devoted to her town, providing a platform for residents to speak out and get heard.

And there’s the rub. Sometimes people in government don’t like criticism.

Fitzgerald’s website irked local head honchos last autumn. Someone calling himself (or herself) “Marty” had commented, online, about how the town’s Police Chief Selection Committee was meeting behind closed doors. Marty suggested that committee members were breaking the state’s open meeting requirements, and insinuated that the whole process was prejudiced in favor of one particular applicant. 

Sounds fairly innocuous? Not to the town’s counsel, who demanded to know “Marty’s” actual name. 

Fitzgerald wouldn’t give it to him, free speech and all. The lawyer blustered about how Marty was intimidating the selection panel. A laughable claim. A blog comment is intimidation? 

And then the counsel warned her — intimidating her — to watch more carefully what’s posted on her blog.

Fitzgerald remains firm. And she defends anonymous contributors. “Choosing anonymity doesn’t make their opinion any less valid,” she states.

Or any less protected. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

Sometimes a Great Prediction

Five years ago, I compared Social Security to the Titanic. Insolvency played the part of fatal iceberg. On Monday I noted that the first stage of insolvency —  projected back then to take place in 2017 — has been refigured to arrive early. This year.

So much for our leaders’ plan of “not putting off till tomorrow what can be put off a decade.” Decades sure aren’t what they used to be.

Neither are the budget numbers politicians throw around. Take the Democrats’ just-​passed medical reform package. Do you really believe it will save us money?

Who’s right depends on the reliability of the reform package’s cost projections. And, from what I can tell, those projections are filled with trickery. 

A typical sleight of hand is to project ten years in advance, and extoll how that decade’s first years don’t add much burden to the taxpayer. But that’s only because chunks of the programs stagger into effect over the first half of the decade.

But before you go poring over the bill’s two thousand and more pages, checking the  numbers, ask yourself: When have government economists correctly predicted costs of a major new entitlement? 

Never.

Take Medicare. Initial projections for catastrophic coverage were half of the real amount; Medicare as a whole grew nine times over its promised size; and the costs of Medicare’s Disproportionate Share Hospital Adjustment program proved 17 times higher than originally predicted.

Congress is in the business of making bad law, not good prophecy.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access initiative, referendum, and recall term limits

The One-​Man Petition Drive

Hurray for John Smelser!

After five months of unfailing footwork, in late February, the 67-​year-​old celebrated his 5,500th signature for a petition to limit the terms of council members in Menifee, California. That’s over 2,000 more than the 3,382 he needed to qualify the measure for the ballot. But he didn’t rest on his laurels. He kept working right up until the March 12 deadline, submitting nearly 6,000 signatures.

Smelser believes every elected official’s tenure in office should be limited. If his term limit measure passes in November, Menifee council members would be able to serve only two four-​year terms consecutively. They would be able to run for office again after two years out of office. Smelser believes it’ll pass with an 80 percent majority. 

He may be right. He’s certainly taken the pulse of the town on this issue.

Incumbent Menifee Mayor Wallace Edgerton insists that regular elections are all you need to bring new blood into government. But he admits that Smelser has a point: Two terms should be enough to achieve what you ran for office to achieve.

Smelser’s one-​man show is obviously not a feat you could replicate in Los Angeles or New York City. But it’s still pretty impressive. It shows not only the dedication and conviction of Mr. Smelser, but also the enthusiasm for term limits of so many voters.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

The $2.5 Trillion Tip of the Iceberg

This year, Social Security goes into the red, unable to pay out all that’s been promised … without somehow finding new funds. Five years ago, the estimated date for this was 2017. An economic downturn later and seven years disappear. Just like that.

It’s obviously time for a major overhaul. But Congress and the President had other priorities. Don’t fix the old entitlement program — add a new one to bankrupt the country, “health care reform.”

What to do? Well, Associated Press’s Stephen Ohlemacher writes that it is time to cash in the IOUs that Congress owes the Social Security Administration. Congress has been siphoning off the system’s revenue surplus since the ’80s.

Congress, that august body of spendthrifts and thieves, actually accounted for these funds by printing up non-​negotiable bonds, rather than leaving them as electronic IOUs. They are stored in a folder in Parkersburg, West Virginia.

Fat lot of good that does us, though. To pay the bonds, Congress would have to raise taxes or borrow even more money.

Or it could auction off some property. Selling vast tracts of BLM land might make sense, but you won’t see that brought up. Instead, Congress will be sorely tempted to debase our money further. 

Congress’s IOUs to Social Security add up, to $2.5 trillion. Of course, the money promised Americans in basic retirement is far more than that. The two-​and-​a-​half trillion is just the tip of a very large iceberg … heading this way.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

The Willamantic Refuseniks

Thirty-​five years ago, the people of Willimantic, Connecticut, confirmed my belief in the value of citizen initiative rights. And they did it without using the initiative!

In 1974, Willimantic citizens rejected the city budget three times in a row, finally compelling a 9 percent tax cut. Willimantic had been hard hit by a recession. Property taxes were high, per capita income low. The town’s biggest employer, the American Thread Company, had just laid off a lot of people. (A decade later, the company would leave the area.) The citizenry was in a rebellious mood. They demanded budget and tax cuts.

They didn’t do it via citizen initiative. Willimantic was following an old town meeting model of governance, under which any citizen who shows up can vote on the city budget. And they did.

Most places aren’t run on this model. But it has distinct similarities to citizen initiatives, whereby voters can directly curb taxes and spending. Which is why politicians attack initiative rights where citizens have them, and try to stop citizens from gaining initiative rights where they don’t yet have them.

You and me, working together, we have to do something about this. We must protect and use a process whereby the people can make laws the politicians must obey.

Fittingly, I first read about Willimantic in economist Murray Rothbard’s introduction to Étienne de La Boétie’s classic essay on “The Politics of Obedience,” usually translated as The Discourse on Voluntary Servitude.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.