Categories
First Amendment rights general freedom

Searching for Google’s China Policy

Google took flak a few years ago when it announced that it would cooperate with Chinese censorship to operate a Chinese version of the Google search engine. The company’s top brass wrung their hands about the decision, since it seemed to clash with Google’s official “do no evil” policy.

In January, Google and other large companies suffered a major cyber attack apparently originating in China. In Google’s case, the target of the assault was the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists. Further investigation in the weeks since then has tended to confirm that the Chinese government sponsored the attack.

In response to the attack and further assaults on freedom of Internet speech in China, Google said that it was “no longer willing to continue censoring” its search results. It said that it would shut down Google​.cn if the government would not let it provide unfiltered results.

Richard MacManus of ReadWriteWeb reports that Google​.cn is still censoring its search results. The Chinese government isn’t about to cave. 

So why hasn’t Google left China?

Sure, it would be disruptive. People would lose their jobs. But in January’s   statement, Google seemed to be taking a belated but praiseworthy stand on principle. They should follow through. If there’s anything worse than doing evil, it’s publicly repenting it and then continuing to do evil as if nothing had happened.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies too much government

Republicans Still Not Serious

Picnicking on railroad tracks? Not dangerous. Most of the time the tracks are free. Take out the picnic basket and pass the chips. Glug down a few drinks. 

The tracks are safe when there’s no train. 

After the train? Well, you’re dead. Not dangerous then, either.

Only in the moments while the train blares down on you is it actually dangerous.

This is modern politics. Our politicians have set us to party on the tracks, heedless of dangers. Increasing deficits? Mounting debt? Those are future problems!

That’s what politicians have been saying, in effect, for decades.

Irresponsible? Yes. So what else is new?

Republicans are lambasting Democrats for not taking deficits and debt seriously. But how serious are Republicans, really? Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan has put forward what he calls a “road map” to solvency. He’s taking into consideration “entitlement” as well as “discretionary” spending; he’s elaborated a set of spending cuts, program cuts, as well as a tax abolition and a new business consumption tax that all together zero out the deficit and balance the budget … by 2063. 

So, have Republicans jumped onto his cause? No. They are, with the exception of nine co-​sponsors, avoiding him as if he were the onrushing train.

Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute calls Ryan’s Roadmap “a test” and says, “right now the Republican Party is failing it.” 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption

Standards of Behavior

When it comes to standards, how low can we go?

Congressman Charlie Rangel had failed to report more than half a million on his congressional financial disclosure forms, violated rent control laws in New York, taken corporate-​funded junkets, and more. After being admonished by the House ethics committee, he has finally decided to take a leave of absence as chairman of the powerful Ways & Means Committee.

But before he stepped down, some excused him. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi argued that Rangel’s behavior “was not something that jeopardized our country in any way.” New York Times columnist Paul Krugman said, “It is worth pointing out that none of these things actually seem to affect national policy.”

Oh, goody! He didn’t destroy the entire country!

Then there’s a local scandal in Washington, D.C. Former crack-​mayor, current Councilmember Marion Barry allegedly earmarked his girlfriend a $15,000 city contract and then took a kickback from her. The council just censured Barry.

But Washington Post columnist Courtland Milloy notes that people in Barry’s 8th Ward are dying of AIDS at an alarming rate, while money appropriated to help has vanished. He writes, “If Barry did take a kickback from his girlfriend, they say, it didn’t result in somebody’s death. So why should he face censure when those who stole the AIDS money got away clean?”

He didn’t kill anyone: Our new standard for ethical behavior. Really?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
general freedom too much government

1984 in 2010

Students in a Pennsylvania school district are learning more about George Orwell’s novel 1984 than they had expected.

No, they’re not being subjected to “a boot stamping on a human face, forever” — the bottom line of Orwell’s bleak techno-​totalitarian dystopia — but they sure have gotten an unexpected taste of the telescreen in every room.

The Lower Merion School District says it intended no such thing when it handed out webcam-​equipped laptops to 1,800 students. It says that the only purpose of its ability to switch on the cams remotely was to help track lost or stolen laptops.

But Blake Robbins, a student at Harriton High, found out different. According to a class action lawsuit against the district, assistant principal Lindy Matsko confronted him about a bad deed he had allegedly done at home. As proof, Matsko pointed to an image on the laptop taken by the webcam. Matsko thought it showed Blake taking drugs. Blake says he had simply been eating Mike & Ike candies. Nor had he reported a lost laptop.

What exactly happened with these webcams will be thrashed out in court. It’s also being investigated by the FBI. But the district admits it never told anybody that it could operate the webcams remotely.

The kicker is this: Kids at the school had just read Orwell’s novel. I guess they’ll remember it better now.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access Common Sense initiative, referendum, and recall local leaders term limits

What Was I Thinking?

Tomorrow, I turn 50. Time flies when you’re having fun.

For the last 30-​plus years — my entire adult life — I’ve worked in politics. That might not seem like much fun. Politics is a constant struggle, a slog. But working for freedom — in one crusade or another — has been both fulfilling and fun.

Maybe it’s because, as a friend once accused, I’m a pathological optimist. Maybe it’s a whole lot more than that.

I’ve worked through nights, bleary-​eyed, peering at voter registration lists. I’ve circulated petitions in 100-​degree heat and freezing temperatures. I’ve been vilified in the press, as well as lionized. I’ve been both hounded and praised. I’ve been imprisoned, and threatened with more of the same.

What was I thinking?

I guess I thought, and indeed still think, that we are called upon to do what we believe is right — come what may. Freedom isn’t free. As much as I love words, actions speak much louder.

It’s been hard sometimes. I was in prison for five and a half months when my oldest was only a year old. I was there for refusing to register for the draft.

What was I thinking?

In the words of then-​presidential candidate Ronald Reagan, I thought: “The draft or draft registration destroys the very values our society is committed to defending.” I could not stand idly by while those cherished values were destroyed, nor certainly be any party to it.

My re-​education in federal custody fortunately didn’t take. And the road I took has made all the difference.

For instance, I met Ron Paul when, as a slightly younger congressman, he testified at my trial. Three years later, in 1988, I nominated him to run for president on the Libertarian Party ticket.

At a meeting in April of that year, the task of putting Congressman Paul on the ballot for president was handed to me. The next morning I was awakened by a phone call at home — at 6:00 am. And for the next six months the phone never stopped ringing.

I remember my wife calling me at the office to tell me our new home phone number — and urging me not to give it out to people! She’s a lot smarter than I am.

Working with wonderful people across the country, we successfully placed Ron on the ballot in 47 states and the District of Columbia. And Guam. Believe me, it took a lot of hours, daylight and late night.

What was I thinking?

I was thinking that given a choice, people would choose greater freedom, limited government and personal responsibility. We didn’t win, of course. But we weren’t through trying.

Howie Rich and Eric O’Keefe noticed my work on the petition drives and offered me a job running the Tax Accountability Amendment in Illinois. Half a million voters signed petitions to put the measure on the ballot. Then, at 77 percent in the polls, the Illinois Supreme Court took it off the ballot. (The same thing happened again four years later with a term limits petition.)

But, suddenly, freedom was breaking out around the world. The Berlin Wall came down. Czechs poured into the streets. Estonians were singing. We watched with inspiration and then horror as students rallied for weeks in Tiananmen Square only to ultimately be crushed under tanks that rolled over them. Their dream was our dream; it was universal.

The end of the Cold War allowed Americans to cast a full glance at city hall, at the state capitol, at Washington, D.C. We didn’t like what we saw.

Along came term limits.

In 1992, I was hired to run U.S. Term Limits. We were able to help activists in 14 states get on the ballot — the most states to ever vote on a single issue on a single day. All 14 states passed term limits, including my home state of Arkansas.

The issue continued to win at the ballot box in the states and in hundreds of cities and counties — from Wyoming to New York City. Politicians sued. Speaker of the House Tom Foley was one.

In 1994, Republicans swept to a majority in the U.S. House for the first time in 40 years, in no small part due to their embrace of term limitation. One of the biggest upsets was Foley, the only Speaker defeated for re-​election since the Civil War, a victim of his own lawsuit to overturn his state’s voters.

And term limits — a case from Arkansas, not Foley’s — went to the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, in a narrow 5 to 4 decision, the court struck down Arkansas’s term limits law, and by implication laws enacted in 22 other states.

What was I thinking?

On the steps of the Supreme Court, I told reporters:

All over Washington today, the politicians and the power brokers are happy. You can hear the sound of champagne corks popping. I have a simple message to them. Drink up; you’re outnumbered.

Term limits went nowhere in Congress, of course. There were a few principled supporters, but most wanted a career of perks and power. It’s very seductive.

I was on the wrong side of an 80/​20 issue. I was with the 80 percent of Americans for term limits.

What an amazing situation: Our representatives refuse to do what 80 percent of the people want. In essence, they refuse to give back the power we’ve given to them.

The issue won’t go away. At every Tea Party, one sees the homemade two-​word signs: Term Limits.

The only negative result of term limits sweeping those states with initiative and referendum has been the backlash. Legislators and their favored special interests have launched a concerted attack on the initiative process for enabling the people to do such a thing in the first place.

What was I thinking?

The initiative process is the greatest protection we citizens have from a government gone wild.

Regular readers of Common Sense know my more recent work in helping citizens across the country petition to put dozens of initiatives on the ballot to protect homes and small businesses from being taken through eminent domain abuse and other initiatives to enact state spending limits.

In the spirit of “no good deed goes unpunished” and in the cesspool that has become our politics, Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson indicted three of us, The Oklahoma Three, for “conspiracy to defraud the state” over a 2006 initiative there.

What was I thinking?

The Oklahoma powers-​that-​be were scared. And they did not want us taking any limits on government spending to a public vote.

And perhaps, for a moment or two, I may have thought “I’m getting too old for this.”

We were innocent of the charge and we fought back. After more than a year and a half with a possible ten-​year prison term hanging over our heads, the charges were dismissed. The AG had campaigned in the press that we were guilty, but he had repeatedly blocked our case from going before a judge for a preliminary hearing to determine if there was enough evidence to even go to a trial.

No such hearing was ever completed. Meanwhile, the state’s petition law was struck down as unconstitutional in federal court.

The AG thought he could threaten us into submission. He had offered my co-​defendant Susan Johnson a deal: plead guilty and all she’d get would be a small slap on the wrist.

Like so many unsung patriots in this country, she told him to stuff it.

What was she thinking?

All that is necessary for the triumph of good is for the majority of people — who are indeed good at heart — to stand up and be counted. The people are not the problem. They are the solution to the problem.

When government becomes Goliath, the initiative is the people’s slingshot.

Times are tough. Even a little scary. But I’ve never had more hope for the future. Together, I’m convinced we can leave our kids and grandkids an insurance policy. Not one that pays money when we’re gone, but something they’ll need even more:

Freedom.

The key to protecting and restoring freedom is to give the intrinsic decency and the common sense of the American people a chance to prevail. That’s what the initiative and referendum process is all about: an opportunity to place some measure of common sense on the public agenda, and when needed, to check the power of the high and mighty.

As I look back on my five decades, I’m thinking how proud and how lucky I am to serve as president of Citizens in Charge and Citizens in Charge Foundation, the only national organizations committed to protecting the right of citizens to initiative and referendum.

Last year, thanks to your support, we worked in 17 states protecting the rights of over 137 million Americans. This year, we’re already helping local leaders in 14 states and we’re engaged in eight lawsuits to overturn unconstitutional restrictions on citizen petitions. And there’s more to come.

Many times through the years I’ve asked you to make a sacrifice to support our mutual cause. Your generosity has made the difference. Again today, I ask you to help support the work of Citizens in Charge Foundation with a contribution.

Don’t donate $50 to Citizens in Charge Foundation just because I’m turning 50. If that were the only motivation, I’d want you to give $49 or $39 or $21. I’d feel younger.

Give whatever you can afford — $50 or $5 or $500 — because your freedom and mine, as well as freedom for our loved ones, is worth every penny.

We’ll put it to good use in mobilizing citizens, organizing coalitions, putting grassroots pressure on elected officials, defending the rights of citizens in court and in the court of public opinion.

My oldest emailed me to say, “This is a pretty big deal birthday.” I told her that I’ll only be one day older.

And each new day I’ll be happy, having fun, defending what we hold dear, working with great people like you to empower the common sense of the American people, to put citizens in charge.

This is Common Sense. I’m still, for one day more, 49-​year old Paul Jacob.

P.S. Please contribute today to our 2010 national campaign to Save the Initiative. And thank you for all you’ve done to stand up for liberty and justice.

P.P.S. When you make a financial gift, your spouse, your friends, your neighbors and co-​workers may ask you: Times are tough — what were you thinking?

So tell them. Freedom needs not only your support, but theirs.

Categories
national politics & policies

Democrats versus Majoritarian Tyranny

Senate Democrats are firmly against any attempt to circumvent the 60-​vote majority that Senate rules require to prevent a filibuster of major legislation. On principle!

Forget that the recent election of Republican Scott Brown deprives Democrats of their filibuster-​proof majority. Democrats won’t even consider trying to shunt that rule aside so they can foist Obamacare on us. No, no, no.

Of course, strangely, newspaper reports say they looking at doing just that. But I can prove otherwise. With evidence from five years ago. Here’s what Senator Obama had to say in 2005: “… prompting a change in the Senate rules that really, I think, would change the character of the Senate forever … Majoritarian absolute power.… and that’s just not what the Founders intended.”

Senator Schumer: “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a constitutional crisis. The checks and balances which have been at the core of this republic are about to be evaporated by the ‘nuclear option.’ The checks and balances which say that if you get 51 percent of the vote, you don’t get your way 100 percent of the time.”

Senator Reid: “Mr. President, the right to extend debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House. In these cases, the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”

Wow. Sounds like they really mean it. And they do, right?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.