Category: too much government

Categories
general freedom national politics & policies too much government

The Tyranny Waiver

Democrats filled their 2000-​page healthcare bill — rammed into law despite growing and vehement public opposition — with obscure but costly mandates. As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi confessed, Congress would have to pass the bill before we could learn what they were. After all, who, including congressmen, had time to actually read and assimilate the monstrosity?

Choke down first, chew later. That was the ordained (if unhealthy) order of things. 

Now we suffer the consequences — at least insofar as we can’t wheedle special exemptions, loopholes, workarounds.

One provision of the new law boosts the minimum annual benefit that companies must include in low-​cost medical insurance plans given to low-​wage employees. Many large employers contend that the new costs would force them to drop many employees from their insurance rolls. (So much for the Obama lie that “if you like the insurance coverage you have now,” you’d be able to keep it under Obamacare.)

Federal officials have blinked on this issue. The Department of Health and Human Services and Disservices is now granting waivers to many organizations so that their workers can retain coverage. McDonald’s and a New York teachers union are among the employers receiving the waivers.

This is such a great idea, let’s expand it! Give waivers to everybody for all the tyrannical provisions of the new law. 

What the heck, distribute waivers for every single tyrannical mandate that governments have ever imposed on us.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Brains in Crisis

The Atlantic offers a fascinating portrait of the Honorable Ron Paul in “The Tea Party’s Brain.” Its blurb neatly explains the subject’s significance: “One way to measure the surprising … rise of the Tea Party is to chart the relative position of Ron Paul, who has never flinched from his beliefs. He’s not alone anymore.” 

But I want to focus not on writer Joshua Green’s take on Ron Paul but on Austrian economics — which Rep. Paul, almost alone in Washington, supports — and economic policy regarding crises:

The Austrian school … had fallen away after the Great Depression, which it claimed was caused by an expansion of the money supply and could be met only with chastened submission as the market corrected itself. Herbert Hoover’s Treasury secretary, Andrew Mellon, offered similar counsel, famously urging Hoover to “liquidate” and “purge the rottenness out of the system.” But this failed to stop the catastrophe. 

From Green’s statement you would think that President Hoover had accepted Mellon’s advice. He had not. Hoover often took pride in the fact that he did all sorts of things to prevent prices from coming down — from “liquidating” — after 1929. 

Green followed the above-​quoted passage with a plug for strong, activist government to pry the economy out of crisis. In light of the facts? Not so persuasive. 

A truth for Tea Party brains: The Great Depression featured a spendthrift, meddling Republican prez followed by an even more spendthrift, more meddlesome Democrat. 

A pattern history now repeats.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets national politics & policies too much government

Going After the Gold

What does gold have to do with medical care? Ingested, it’s a poison. It’s not often used in treatment.

So why did the Obama administration place a provision further regulating the buying and selling of gold into the Democrats’ medical reform legislation? 

Economist Thomas Sowell explains, in a recent column, why politicians are obsessed with the yellow metal. Before FDR, gold provided a check against politicians’ desire to spend the money government could “just print.” Because, in those long-​ago days, paper dollars were backed by gold, Americans would cash the paper in for gold when it looked like the Treasury had gone on a printing spree. So inflation (the increase of the supply of money, and the consequent diminishing of its value, leading to increasing prices) was checked.

In 1933, FDR confiscated most of America’s circulating (and hoarded) gold, and Nixon took us off the gold standard completely in the ’70s, morphing our monetary system into a pure fiat (inflationary) standard. 

Also in Nixon’s time, it became legal, again, for Americans to own gold.

So why make it harder, now, to trade in gold — when gold is not money?

Because investors, in times of inflation and crisis, turn to gold as a hedge. Against politicians, basically. And, says Sowell, “the Obama administration sees people’s freedom to buy and sell gold as something that can limit what the government can do.” 

Gold, like freedom, “cramps the government’s style.”

That speaks volumes about gold … and “Obamacare.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Categories
First Amendment rights too much government

Leahy versus the Internet

A censor’s work is never done. So, in a civilization where everybody salutes freedom of speech, censors must be especially clever, seeking new ways to hide their goals.

The latest camel’s rump under the tent? A bill to censor entire Internet domains on the grounds of alleged violations of rights that have not been prosecuted. Pending in the Senate and sponsored by Senator Patrick Leahy, it’s called the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA).

The bill would create two blacklists in response to accusations of copyright violation or sales of counterfeit goods. One would consist of sites to which Internet service providers would be required to block access.

The second would consist of sites to which ISPs would be merely encouraged to block access.

Any chance the government might pressure ISPs to ensure the “voluntary” censorship of disapproved domains … including domains with just a few pages of dubious legality but many pages of criticism of government?

Sounding the alarm, the Electronic Frontier Foundation notes that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act already gives copyright holders a means of taking action against copyright violations. The Foundation argues that Leahy’s bill would enable the U.S. to join the ranks of the “profoundly anti-​democratic regimes that keep their citizens from seeing the whole Internet.”

The Foundation’s message: “Tell Your Senator: No Website Blacklists, No Internet Censorship!”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Ninth Amendment rights Tenth Amendment federalism too much government

Two Words to Know and Share

Two old words, newly relevant: Federalism and nullification.

Last Sunday, on Townhall​.com, I noted ten state ballot measures to watch. Third on my list was Colorado’s Amendment 63:

If swing-​state voters in Colorado join Missouri voters, who in August enacted a state measure protecting citizens from being forced to purchase health insurance through the “Obamacare” mandate, it will go a long way in strengthening GOP backbone to repeal the mandate should Republicans regain control of Congress.

The surface issue is your right to contract, freely, with medical professionals. Or not.

Below the surface lie the doctrines of enumerated powers, individual rights, and state prerogatives. After all, the logic runs, the Constitution — a deal among the states — grants the federal government no power to regulate medicine. And nullification, one of Thomas Jefferson’s favored notions, promises to serve as an actual, effective check on out-​of-​control federal politicians.

A similar storm brews in California, where the state’s Regulate, Control and Tax Marijuana Act goes way beyond a narrow reading of “medical marijuana.” Flouting federal (and probably unconstitutional) law, this citizen initiative seeks to legalize the plant for recreational use.

At issue, really, is not drugs or medicine, but who’s in control: Distant and privileged politicians and bureaucrats, or the citizens of the states.

On the side of the citizens is the founder’s theory of federalism, with its corollary that the states should serve as experiments in legal innovation.

We sure need innovation.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall too much government

Swooning Over Citizen Control?

D. Dowd Muska attacks conservatives and libertarians for so strongly supporting voter initiative and referendum. From the august pages of the Hartford Business Journal, he writes that we’re “hopped up on the false notion that elected officials respond not to voters but the dictates of liberal elites.” It all started, he says, after passage of Proposition 13 in California, back in 1978: “America’s right swooned.”

Well, I plead guilty — for both swooning and then being “hopped up” on citizen access to a path to check their elected know-​it-​alls. Prop 13 not only saved Californians from losing their homes to exploding property taxes, it also touched off a nationwide revolt. Within two years, 43 states passed property tax relief and another 15 states (including California) enacted income tax cuts.

But Muska warns initiatives “have a mixed record.” He points to a number of measures, some initiatives and others placed on the ballot by legislators, which have expanded government spending or regulation.

Talk about astounding revelations! Of course voters aren’t going to always be right. They won’t agree with Muska 100 percent of the time. They won’t even acquiesce to my superior wisdom and vote my way every time.

Still, it seems to me that any decision legitimately the province of our government ought to be open to democratic oversight by citizens. 

Others, like Muska, prefer that voters choose between candidates Tweedledum and Tweedledee — and then to butt out.

Real options work better. For everyone but insiders.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.