Category: too much government

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Washington to Regulate
Your Bake Sale

Informal production and distribution, from small farms and homes, were once not only common, but the backbone of everyday life.

Today, there’s a revival of much of this, as people begin to realize that corporate practices have increasingly relied upon putting additives in foods and plastics in other products.

I have sad news for locavores and other health food fans hoping to buck the trend of corporate practice: H.R. 875, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009. This new bill, now worming its way through the corridors of Capitol Hill, would require anyone who stores or sells any food products to any third party to register with the federal government and keep extensive records about every product bought, produced, modified, or sold. 

How far will the law reach? I suspect it will have no limit, which one section clarifies: “In any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction shall be presumed to exist.”

In other words, the federal government will, if this bill is passed and “successfully” administered, regulate everything, including (and down to) your local organic truck farm, festival, or bake sale.

This bit of food totalitarianism thus takes its place in a long line of federal government regulations that, in the name of safety, regulates small operations out of existence.

It makes no sense.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Accountability national politics & policies too much government

Enough at Tea Time

On April 15, more than 2,000 Tea Parties were held across the country, many with thousands in attendance. These weren’t dainty luncheon ceremonies. They were protests, named after our revolutionary Boston Tea Party. 

In Washington, D.C., it rained like the dickens, but people still came out to say “Enough.” Regular folks sounded off. They work hard, and they’ve had enough of paying the bills for politicians and favored political interests.

Some big media personalities and major political figures showed up. Governor Rick Perry of Texas spoke at the Austin, Texas event. He’s called the federal government “oppressive.” In South Carolina, Governor Mark Sanford told folks that “Real change begins in the hearts and minds of people who are willing to stand … against an ever-​encroaching government.”

Meanwhile, much of television news media behaved badly, trying to marginalize or even demonize the protests as “anti-​government.” CNN correspondent Susan Roesgen was particularly argumentative, suggesting to one guy that he should be grateful for the $50 billion President Obama was sending to his state.

When a woman protester accused Roesgen of slanted coverage, she asked the woman why she was there. “We’re here,” the woman responded, “because we are sick and tired of the government taking our money and spending it in ways that we have no say in. We have no say whatsoever.”

And that’s what has to change. The people must be heard. Not just on one day, but every day.

This is Common sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
property rights too much government

Controlling the Message

In Portland, Oregon, the difference between Constitutional takings and just plain theft by government can be seen in bright neon.

The “Made In Oregon” sign on what used to be called the Bickel Building, on Burnside Street, is something of a landmark. It’s huge. It used to say “White Stag Sportswear.” It still features a white stag atop the sign. To much hullabaloo, every Christmas season the white stag’s nose gets lit, red. 

Over the years, the sign’s ownership has changed. Now there are political rumblings to condemn the sign and make it public property, so to “control its message.” That’s city councilor Randy Leonard’s notion. Mayor Sam Adams (certainly not my favorite Sam Adams) and Commissioner Nick Fish have batted around the idea to buy the sign.

Jeff Alan, of the Cascade Policy Institute, makes the obvious point: If the city has a half million dollars to buy the sign, why not spend that money on real needs — like road repair or something — rather than on a neon sign?

How different were things back in 1925, when a portion of the Bickel Building, upon which the sign stands, was condemned to make room for the Burnside Bridge. 

That displayed a commonsensical notion of public use. 

Buying — or, worse, forcing the sale of — a sign to signal an official message? That’s Orwellian … if it even makes that much sense.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Accountability too much government

Deep, Deep Waters

Are you surprised? I’m not surprised.

Turns out Congresswoman Maxine Waters had “family financial ties” to a bank for which she personally helped solicit bailout money. Without regard to its relative need or value to the economy. 

Shocker.

Trillions in stimulus money, bailout money. And we expect politicians will allocate it according to some impersonal calculus that has nothing to do with who their chums are?

Nor can we expect the politicians and bureaucrats to sit back and let the market, or what’s left of it, function unhampered once bailout money has been forked over.

Many banks seemed to think they would simply be allowed to spend the subsidies according to their own judgment about how best to promote the health of their enterprises. But once the bailouts failed to work the instant magic they were supposed to, politicians began attaching strings. So that voters angry about the bailouts could see that there’s “accountability.”

It’s not just about trimming fat executive bonuses. The banks are also supposed to obey orders to cancel employee training, reduce dividends to shareholders, stop hiring employees from overseas, etc. This is about social engineering, not economic efficiency.

So, many banks now say they’ll give the money back. Good idea; great idea. But it would really surprise me if it found its way all the way back to taxpayers.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

What Not to Blame

You’ve heard the calumny: The current economic debacle is the result of free markets.

This charge — often made with lip-​smacking glee — makes no sense.

I’ve discussed some specifics, before. Here are three more points:

1. We haven’t had a free market. We live in a heavily regulated, subsidized, coddled-​and-​attacked, over-​taxed society. If the current debacle proves any system unfeasible, then the one proven wrong is the one we have. It’s the mixed economy that has proven to have worse than mixed results.

2. Many on the left as well as on the right like to pretend that Republican talk of free markets has been effective. Both sides lie. The alleged party of “small-​government” and “free markets” pigged out at the government trough, increasing the size and scope of government. To not see growth of regulation and spending and government debt under Republican governance is to not see the corpulent elephant in the room. 

3. Blaming free markets is especially galling to actual proponents of free markets for a historical reason, too: Our idea grew up in reaction not to socialism, but to a system of government interference much like what we have today. Adam Smith called it “mercantilism.” Thomas Jefferson called it “Parasite Institutions.”

And it’s the parasite institutions that caused the current mess. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies porkbarrel politics too much government

Homeless Red Ink

I have a prediction.

Even though President Obama insists that all of the trillions in so-​called “stimulus” spending will be expertly managed and masterfully allocated — of course, to only the most deserving and stimulating beneficiaries — lots of the hastily cobbled new spending will end up being wasted.

I’m afraid I cheated with this prediction. I already have an example in hand. The town of Union, New York, is slated to receive almost $600,000 from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Why? To combat homelessness.

Problem? There isn’t one — that is, there isn’t a homeless problem in Union. Which is why the town does not have any programs for dealing with the homeless and it has no means of administering the money that’s been flung at it. Nor did the town request the funds. Town supervisor John Bernardo says, “We were surprised. We’ve never been a recipient before.”

A less honest man would have trucked in some homeless guys and warbled, “Thank goodness we’re finally getting these funds.” But what Union lacks, Washington provides: A HUD spokesman says the new grant recipients should employ “creative strategies” in figuring out how to spend the money.

So that more than half-​million dollars will find a home somewhere — anywhere but the wallets it came from.

You see why I shake my head and say, “I could have predicted this.” This isn’t change. It’s more — way more — of the same.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.