Author: Redactor

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

A Law to Be Named Later

Nevada’s legislators have long desired to do something that they haven’t been able to do. 

I understand. It happens in baseball. Two teams want to trade a player, but can’t decide who to trade for that player. So, one team hands over, say, their left-​fielder for “a player to be named later” from the other team.

These deals require tremendous trust.

I wonder how much the people of Nevada trust their state legislature. 

I wonder because what their legislators want is to make the ballot initiative process much, much harder to use.

Years ago, the federal courts struck down a requirement that petition signatures be gathered in three-​fourths of Nevada’s counties. So the state legislature passed a new law requiring signatures from every county. 

Yes, the court struck that law down, too.

Nevada solons came back with legislation mandating that petitions be gathered in each of 42 legislative districts. This makes a petition drive actually 42 drives — greatly increasing costs and the opportunity for error. 

Worried that scheme wouldn’t pass court review, legislators amended the bill to require petitions to come from every U.S. congressional district. But only for this election cycle. There’s a kicker: By 2011, legislators will create “petition districts.” How many districts? They’ll decide later … as many as they determine can get away with.

The bill passed in the last days of the just-​completed session. It’s sort of a policy to be named later. 

Unlike that bill, this is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
local leaders tax policy

Hope for the Hopeless

Illinois is hopeless. When John Tillman hears people say that about government in the Land of Lincoln, he gets pretty peeved.

Tillman, head of the Illinois Policy Institute — a think tank offering what it calls “liberty-​based public policy initiatives” — doesn’t think battling big government is hopeless at all. For instance, the Institute helped generate support for transparency legislation that passed. 

And last week, as the state’s legislative session closed, Governor Pat Quinn’s proposed 50 percent income tax hike was soundly defeated … by the state’s very blue legislature.

How did that happen?

Well, the first step is always to believe enough in your fellow citizens to wage a fight for their “hearts and minds.” Hope helps.

Next step? Getting the facts out.

The argument for huge tax increases is always that government can’t survive without the additional money. In a series of media appearances and grassroots events, Tillman and the Institute kept talking about sensible ways to cut spending.

Governor Quinn talked about the painful consequences if government didn’t have more money. Tillman spoke about the painful consequences if working families, already paying high taxes, had to fork over still more dough.

Kristina Rasmussen, the Institute’s Executive Vice President, published a report entitled, “Would My Family Pay Higher Taxes Under Governor Quinn’s Plan?” The answer for the average Illinois family was: Yes — 17 percent more.

Hope wins again. Helped by hard work.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
judiciary

I Don’t Rule the World

Last week I had some fun with Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s comment to the effect that she was able to make better judicial decisions than a white male because of her experiences as a Latina. 

I don’t take offense “as a white male.” I object as a rational human being.

But while Judge Sotomayor continues to catch flak, I must say, bashing white males has become rather commonplace. 

Being rational, not so much.

For instance, Kathleen Parker, a usually reasonable columnist, had this to say in defending Sotomayor’s statement:

“Could a white man get away with saying something comparable about a Latina? Of course not. After Latinas have run the world for 2,000 years, they won’t be able to say it ever again.”

So the reason it is open season on white males is because we run the world?

You see, I’m a white male and I’ve never ruled the world. Not even for one minute. 

I don’t even want to rule the world. I don’t even want to dictatorially rule my own house — that’s done by a a nice oligarchy of my wife and me, with a barking veto from the dog. 

I’d like my freedom, though, and to have a democratic say in my government.

Oh, and to be judged on my demonstrated character … not blamed for what some other guy with similar skin hues did two thousand years ago.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
education and schooling general freedom too much government

No Smiling, No Hugging

Things sure have changed since I was a kid. It used to be okay to smile. Encouraged even. And hugging someone was considered nice, friendly, compassionate.

Today, in my home state of Virginia, the Department of Motor Vehicles, or DMV, is discouraging smiles. No, not just discouraging smiles, wiping them out entirely. 

The DMV is telling people not to smile — or say “cheese” — when getting their photos taken for their drivers’ licenses. If they do smile, the picture cannot go on their license and they have to take another.

And all over the country, public schools are banning hugging.

Why the official suppression of friendliness and good cheer?

Well, in schools the administrators apparently cannot tell a friendly hug from a sexual grope, or a jovial high-​five from a bullying slap.

So they’re outlawing all touching.

When I was in school, I don’t remember any rules against hugging or holding hands or even kissing — unless folks got carried away. And we trusted teachers and principals to make the judgment as to what was going too far.

Now, any touching invites what one administrator calls a “gray area.”

The DMV may have a better excuse to suppress smiles and grins and such: They are developing facial recognition software, and smiles get in the way. It’s all to protect us from identity theft, they say.

And yet isn’t it odd that protecting us makes us less human? Can that really be protection?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall too much government

Big Brother Plays in Traffic

One of my favorite uncles used to jokingly tell us kids to “go play in traffic.” In reality, not so good for kids. Or for politicians.

Maryland’s recent Senate Bill-​277 brought this to mind. It authorizes the installation of cameras to monitor and ticket for speeding near highway work zones and schools. Legislators insist that the cameras will slow down traffic and bring in needed revenue.

How do voters feel? Well, according to a report at TheNewspaper​.com “no photo enforcement program has ever survived a public vote.”

Voters tend to regard speed cameras as simply another scam to grab yet more money. The cameras also remind one of Big Brother.

So, how come legislators don’t listen to the people? Maybe one reason is that as TheNewspaper​.com also reports, “[P]arties with a direct financial interest in automated ticketing showered members of the Maryland General Assembly and the governor with $707,725 in gifts and campaign cash.”

Oh.

Fortunately, Maryland voters have the right to referendum: They can petition to place this legislation to a vote of the people. 

And that is exactly what the group Maryland for Responsible Enforcement is now doing.

Similar battles are being waged in other states. There’s an effort to take away the 200 speed cameras now on Arizona roads; Montana legislators just banned such cameras in Big Sky Country.

Maybe Big Brother should “go play in traffic.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Accountability free trade & free markets too much government U.S. Constitution

Stop Unconstitutional Stomping

Here’s an idea about how to help businesses survive in this troubled economic climate: Stop allowing an unaccountable regulatory board — unclad by even a fig leaf of constitutionality — to ride roughshod over public companies.

In the wake of the Enron scam and other financial scandals several years ago, Congress enacted a packet of onerous new regulations. This Sarbanes-​Oxley legislation created a regulatory board, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, to issue arbitrary edicts, impose arbitrary penalties, etc.

One problem with this star chamber is that its officers are neither appointed by the executive branch nor approved by Congress, as required by the Constitution.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute and the Free Enterprise Fund want this practice to end. CEI explains that if the president were obliged to appoint and dismiss members of this board, as required by the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, “he will be on the hook for their policy failures, and thus have an interest in making them develop sound policies.… He won’t be able to blame the red tape on an unaccountable agency.…”

But the two organizations are not merely publishing op-​eds and issuing press releases. They have filed suit, taking their case against the oversight board to the courts. And now the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case. 

At last, this oversight board gets some much-​needed oversight.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.