Author: Redactor

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Amendment 2 … In Plain English

Today in Nashville, Tennessee, two issues are on the ballot. But voters may not  know what they are. Some people don’t want them to know.

You see, Amendment 1, a measure called “English-​Only,” has stirred up lots of controversy. The initiative reads: “Official actions which bind or commit the government shall be taken only in the English language, and all official government communications and publications shall be in English.”

A group called Nashville for All of Us has raised $300,000 and has campaigned against it. In the course of their campaign, every ad urges a vote against both Amendment 1 and Amendment 2.

Yet, strangely, there is absolutely no mention in their ads or on their website as to what Amendment 2 is about — just constant exhortations to vote against it.

Well, in plain English, Amendment 2 has nothing to do with English-​Only. It’s about Nashville voters protecting their initiative rights. Amendment 2 makes it easier to put ballot measures on the general election when the most people come out to vote, rather than on special elections that needlessly cost taxpayers millions of dollars.

Amendment 2 would also standardize and lower the petition requirement to place an issue on the ballot. And Amendment 2 would prevent the Metro Council from amending or repealing measures passed by voters … at least for four years.

No wonder some folks don’t want to discuss Amendment 2.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
First Amendment rights general freedom local leaders

Annoyed by Anti-​Annoyance Law

I’m annoyed by a new law passed in the Michigan town of Brighton City.

According to the ordinance, police may fine anyone who is too annoying in public. Up to $500. The ordinance states: “It shall be unlawful for a person to engage in a course of conduct or repeatedly commit acts that alarm or seriously annoy another person and that serve no legitimate purpose.”

Obviously, many different things annoy many different people, most having little to do with the possible or actual commission of a crime.

If you and I are annoyed, think about how annoyed the folks are who actually live there. One resident, Charles Griffin, told ABC News that the new law is “the most ridiculous thing in the world.”

Area resident Chetly Zarko has written to the council asking them to repeal the law, arguing that it is “unconstitutionally vague … and impedes on free expression rights under the First Amendment.”

Council members say critics are blowing things out of proportion. They say people aren’t going to be ticketed for talking too loud or making complaints to public officials, but for things like persistent harassment of an ex-​girlfriend or the like.

But words mean what they say, don’t they? They don’t mean what they would have meant if only you had said what you meant.

In the spirit of being careful with words, let me revise my opening statement: I am more than merely annoyed.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access initiative, referendum, and recall local leaders

The Spirit of Initiative

Today is inauguration day for President Barack Obama. When I think of presidential inaugurations, I think of John F. Kennedy’s speech on another January 20, back in 1961. Kennedy told Americans to “Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.”

In other words, government ought not be a spectator sport. Government is us. “We the People” must be engaged. And, around the country, people are engaging in all sorts of ways. Many are launching ballot initiatives. You could, too.

Initiatives allow voters a direct say on issues.

In Missouri, for example, Ron Calzone and Missourians for Property Rights are campaigning for two constitutional amendments to fully protect citizens from continuing eminent domain abuse.

Ron and the group worked their hearts out in 2008 to gather hundreds of thousands of signatures on two petitions. Unfortunately, both measures fell short in one of the six required congressional districts.

Would you have given up, saying you did your duty? Well, Calzone’s troops can be called “the minutemen” because they didn’t quit for a minute. They will not rest until governments are prevented from stealing our homes and businesses, at least in Missouri. The group has filed two new initiatives and will soon be gathering signatures for a 2010 vote.

The inaugural will be televised. I’m told the revolution will not be.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets general freedom national politics & policies

The Freedom to Opt Out

A new administration is poised to take over, with medical care a high priority. There’s been lots of talk, lots of trust put on big government. Unfortunately, the doctors, hospitals, insurers and others that opposed HillaryCare, way back when, now jockey to get whatever benefits they can out of whatever new system that develops … which, jumping the gun, they consider a “done deal.”

And yet the simplest, most sensible bit of legislation about health care garners almost no attention.

Introduced by Representative Sam Johnson several months ago, the Medicare Beneficiary Freedom to Choose Act would allow seniors who go on Social Security to opt out of Medicare.

At present, when you retire with Social Security benefits, you are required — forced — to accept Medicare part A benefits. Doctors whom you hire for cash can be penalized.

Quite a system.

You might think anyone who’s for freedom of choice would support the bill.

You might think it uncontroversial, since it simply allows people who have saved money for their own medical care to continue to use that money.

It doesn’t affect anybody negatively. It doesn’t reduce Medicare taxes that anyone is forced to pay. It simply lets people who want to opt out of a bureaucratic system do just that.

And it would save the government money.

Oh, maybe now I get it. The name of the game is money, spending, and … regulation of our lives.

“Congress knows best.”

That is the very antithesis of Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
term limits

Too Much Trouble?

Can you believe it? A new political argument … well, not really.

Over at the Michigan Students for a Free Economy website, Isaac Morehouse reports on what he calls the “most honest anti-​term-​limits argument ever.” It’s too much work! Not only politicians, but lobbyists and reporters, too, find it difficult getting to know all the new guys.

Thanks largely to term limits, there are 46 new lawmakers coming into Lansing. According to Michigan political reporter Tim Skubrick, “It’s a very disconcerting feeling to know that you need to get news out of these folks, but … if you got in the elevator with any one of them you’d have no idea if they were lawmakers, staffers or capitol tourists.”

Sure. How much easier making the same old deals with the same old crowd!

Foes of term limits often claim that lobbyists “love” term limits, because lobbyists can presumably leverage their knowledge of issues to more easily control ignorant freshmen legislators. But term limits are a hassle for lobbyists, too. All those new people to befriend, and try to convince that your special interest is identical to the public interest.

Morehouse sees through the arguments. He says that as a citizen concerned about his wallet, he can do without politicians who “know their way around” the capitol and are experts in politics as usual.

Most people can agree — except those who absolutely hate updating the rolodex.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption

Renting Rangel

Rent control is said to reduce rents. Economists disagree. Only some rents remain low, compared to others, in cities with rent control. If the cities foreswore rent control, most rents would tend to be lower.

There are other reasons to oppose rent control. The policy increases social stratification, as sociologists put it. The people with controlled rents become an elite, and they feed off of insider connections and … well, corruption results.

Congressman Charles Rangel is a classic example. He’s one of New York City’s representative to the U.S. House of Representatives, and he chairs the powerful Ways and Means Committee. And yet he nabbed four rent-​controlled apartments in New York, thereby gaining a huge advantage over many other New Yorkers. He then failed to report his success at the rent control game, as required.

Rangel proved quite the source for corruption stories last year. He had numerous tax difficulties, failing to report this and that. He wrangled $80,000 from his campaign treasury to his son, for doing website work. The son did scant work. After getting a cool million from an oil company for his Charles B. Rangel Center at City College, he then fought for a tax break for that company.

The list goes on.

It’s been famously said that you can’t buy politicians, only rent them. Well, guess what form of rent control I support.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.