Author: Redactor

Categories
insider corruption too much government

Get Real, Mr. Rael

Political ads are not much different from normal, commercial ads. Effective advertisements usually make it pretty clear what the hoped-​for outcome is.

Buy a widget? Patronize a business? In politics, it’s “Vote for X” … or A, B, or C.

Last political season, in New Mexico’s Bernalillo, Sandoval, and Valencia counties, ads ballyhooed a Rio Metro expansion project. They very clearly concluded by telling voters to “Make a Difference on November 4th,” and offering up a certain website that also promoted voting for the tax increase to expand the transit system.

So why did Lawrence Rael of the political entity responsible for Rio Metro deny the obvious? “We’re not saying ‘vote for the tax’ as an advocacy committee would do,” he explained. “We’re just simply saying, ‘Look, this issue is on the ballot … Here’s what it’s about.’”

Oh, get real, Mr. Rael.

The reason for his reticence? Governments in a republic aren’t supposed to influence voters but be influenced by voters. That’s the point of an election, where our tax dollars ought not be on either side.

Paul Gessing, of the Rio Grande Foundation, wrote in the Albuquerque Journal, “Having advocates for these proposals working on the taxpayer dime obviously tilts the advantage in the direction of higher taxes. But giving the pro-​tax side the additional advantage of a significant advertising budget is simply too much, and is truly unfair.”

No wonder government keeps growing, eh?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption

Battle of the Corrupt States

The name. The hair. The gall. Illinois Governor Rod Blogojevich is getting lots of attention.

However, the governor’s favor-​trading is unique only in blatancy. The longer politicians hold power, the more readily they regard pay-​to-​play corruption as acceptable, profitable. Which is one reason I advocate initiative rights, term limits, mandatory caps on taxes and spending, and other reforms that pay-​to-​play politicos despise.

The desire to thwart such reform begets even more corruption.

Pundits say that if Illinois’s state government isn’t the most corrupt in the union, it’s in the running. But I nominate Oklahoma for the title. In Oklahoma, the bad-​old-​boy political establishment is so eager to thwart reform that politicians are willing to jail you for the “crime” of abetting democracy.

Two citizen activists and I found this out the hard way, when Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson indicted us in October 2007 for allegedly “defrauding” the state by running a petition drive to curb state spending.

The charges are phony, and Oklahoma’s residency law for signature gatherers — which we did not violate — has just been ruled unconstitutional.

Winning attorney Todd Graves said the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling “upholds an important free speech principle and joins other federal courts in upholding citizens’ First Amendment right to petition their government without threat of political prosecution.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
U.S. Constitution

Meet the Moots

The meaning of institutions, like words, changes over time.

Take Congress. The Constitution hands legislative power to the two houses of Congress. With the growth of government Congress has delegated more and more of its powers to the executive branch.

In a recent column, George F. Will identified the most recent “development” of this trend. Will’s example is the automaker bailout. Congress did not authorize it: The package failed in the Senate. But President Bush simply took money from another bailout bill and dumped it at the failing automobile manufacturers.

Even if you think the bailout is good policy, the president should be censured. “With the automakers,” Will writes, “executive branch overreaching now extends to the essence of domestic policy — spending.…

George Will’s Washington Post column is titled “Making Congress Moot.” Droll, that. “Moot” is an ancient term for a deliberative body. Philologist and fantasist J.R.R. Tolkien used it to designate his congress of “treeherders.” Remember “entmoot”?

The phrase “moot point” used to mean “open to debate.” It now usually means “an issue raised whose determination cannot have any practical effect.”

Congress has gone from an august, important deliberative body — a moot — to a mere debating society. As the meaning of the word “moot” has decayed, so too has Congress.

Think of 535 moot points.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Common Sense

Change and Hope

’Tis the season of “Hope” and “Change.” All the more so, since those are the bywords of the President-Elect.

It’s too early to see whether his changes will match our hopes, but that doesn’t mean we can’t still hope for better days and ways.

This Common Sense program is all about hope. I hope that Americans will work together to restore citizen control of government. I share examples of citizens fighting to hold government accountable, hoping that regular folks doing unusually good deeds will inspire more people to join the cause.

For the last two years, we’ve been sponsored by the freedom fighters at the Sam Adams Alliance. The Alliance trains and links allies in the freedom movement. They’ve helped bloggers and activists throughout the country, emphasizing new online media.

I owe the folks at Team Sam a deep debt of gratitude. But change is good, too, and for 2009 this program is moving to a new sponsor, the Citizens in Charge Foundation.

I’m the president of the Citizens in Charge Foundation. We work to educate the public on the importance of voter initiative and referendum, and we defend the petition rights of citizens in the courts.

I’ll continue to speak out on the need for reform, for citizens to be empowered and politicians held accountable. I hope you’ll keep listening. In the end, what we think, what we decide, and what we do will make all the difference.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
local leaders

Farewell, Freedom’s Champions

As we enter a new year, I’d like to remember all the wonderful souls who have passed from this world in 2008.

In politics, it’s easy to look on the bleak side. Yet, I’m hopeful for our republic, believing that “yes, we can” protect freedom.

One reason? The example set by several men who died this year, men who believed in doing what they thought was right, who stood up for justice and truth. Men I respect.

Marshall Fritz, who founded Advocates for Self-​Government, was a man of boundless energy and good cheer.

William F. Buckley, who I had the privilege of meeting in 1988 when Ron Paul ran for President on the Libertarian Party ticket and I got to accompany him to tape Buckley’s Firing Line program.

Allan Schmid passed away just weeks ago. Folks outside of Michigan may not know the name, but Al was one of the first proponents of term limits. He also pushed for tax limitation. He was a good and great man. Al’s son, Greg Schmid, continues his legacy of actively defending liberty.

Paul Weyrich, a conservative exemplar, died just before Christmas. Paul was very kind to me when I came to Washington in 1991. He provided sage advice to the term limits movement, and was one of the first conservatives to realize the importance of the voter initiative process. Paul never traded principle for political expedience.

Thank you, kind gentlemen, for the examples you set.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
judiciary

Help Is Not on the Way

Think twice before you save people about to lose their lives, at least if you live in California.

The state supreme court there just ruled that good Samaritans can be held liable if they cause or aggravate an injury while rendering emergency help if that help is not medical.

A 1980 California law protects persons who render emergency aid from just such liability. But in a recent decision, the high court divined that this protection only pertains to “medical” care.

Therefore, Lisa Torti is liable for damages for pulling her coworker, Alexandra Van Horn, out of a car wreck in 2004. Van Horn became a paraplegic as a result of the accident. Ms. Torti did not cause the crash, but she was reluctant to stand by to witness her friend die should the car explode.

In his dissent, Justice Marvin Baxter observes that the perverse result of the ruling is that a person “who dives into swirling waters to retrieve a drowning swimmer can be sued for incidental injury he or she causes while bringing the victim to shore, but is immune for harm he or she produces while thereafter trying to revive the victim.”

So, hide your identity when you rescue people in California. That way, when you save somebody’s life and he yells, “Who was that masked man? Because I want to sue!” — he’ll be out of luck.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.