Category: Accountability

Awful Aspirations

Nancy Pelosi, New Green Deal, aspirations,

A funny thing happened on the way to voting on the Democrats’ Green New Deal (GND). With ‘earth in the balance,’ the proposal for fixing climate change — and so much more! — was granted its first procedural vote in the GOP-controlled U.S. Senate.

It failed, 0 – 57.

Sen. Edward Markey (D‑Mass.), the Senate sponsor, along with 41 other Democrats* and independent Bernie Sanders, voted “present” to protest what he called “sabotage,” claiming Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R‑Ky.) “wants to silence your voice.”

Au contraire! McConnell longed to hear Democrats sing the bill’s praises — loud, proud, and on the record.

After the vote, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D‑N.Y.) absurdly made the opposite accusation: Republicans were “climate delaying … costing us lives + destroying communities.”

Meanwhile, “If the Green New Deal came up for a vote in the Democrat-controlled House,” USA Today reports, “it would have trouble passing.”

“It’s a list of aspirations,” says Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who does not plan to bring it to a vote. Though Democrats want to address climate change, the speaker points out that the “bill has many things that have nothing to do with climate.”

Rep. Elaine Luria, (D‑Va.) echoes Pelosi: “[T]he Green New Deal is aspirational.” Rep. Sean Casten, (D‑Ill.) adds, “The aspirations of the Green New Deal are great.”**

But is the GND something “great” to which Americans should aspire?

Only if they yearn for government-monopolized healthcare, free college tuition, micro-management of the economy, and government providing everyone a job, except those who don’t want one … who would get a guaranteed income, regardless.

I aspire to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* In the Senate, three Democrats — Sens. Doug Jones (Ala.), Joe Manchin (W.Va.), and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.) — and independent Sen. Angus King (Maine) joined all 53 Republicans in voting No.

** All four House co-chairs of the New Democrat Coalition’s Climate Change Task Force — Casten and Luria as well as Don Beyer, (D‑Va.) and Susan Wild, (D‑Pa.) — have come out in opposition to the GND.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Nancy Pelosi, New Green Deal, socialism

Accountability ideological culture initiative, referendum, and recall

March Sanity

North Dakota, initiative, citizen initiative, ballot initiative, democracy, suppression

“A public debate on the merits of a measure can reveal its flaws,” the Bismarck Tribune calmly and reasonably editorialized yesterday, “and then we have to trust voters to do the right thing.”

“Why are some legislators so afraid to allow North Dakota voters to decide what is in their constitution?” an earlier Fargo Forum editorial asked. The Forum dubbed one bill — giving the legislature a partial veto on voter-enacted constitutional amendments — “The Voter Nullification Act.”

On the voter initiative, North Dakota’s elected representatives are of a much different mind than these newspapers or the people of North Dakota.

The Flickertail State is hardly alone on this.

Michigan’s legislature made their ballot initiative process more difficult in last December’s lame-duck session. Arkansas politicians have been stabbing at the initiative with rules and regulations for years, and they’re back at it this session. On a recent trip to the Missouri capitol, I heard elected officials privately argue that voters deciding issues directly — without going through the legislature — was a “bastardization” of our republic.

Take Idaho’s Senate Bill 1159, which would hike up the signature requirement from 6 to 10 percent of voters, a 67 percent increase, while also reducing by two-thirds the time allowed for petitioning. The legislation’s stated purpose? “[T]o increase voter involvement.”

“It is odd,” wrote former state Supreme Court Justice Jim Jones in the Idaho State Journal, “that some in the Legislature now wish to drive a stake into the heart of that people-driven legislative process.”

It’s not really very odd. Legislators routinely put their political self-interest before the people — especially when it comes to voters having a democratic check on their power.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags ballot initiative, citizen initiative, democracy, initiative, North Dakota

Accountability folly ideological culture partisanship

#YouToo?

Bill Clinton, impeachment, sexual, #metoo, sex, scandal

“Will Democrats regret if they don’t open an impeachment investigation?” NBC Meet the Press host Chuck Todd asked Heather McGhee, a distinguished senior fellow at Demos.

“It’s important, right?” Ms. McGhee responded. “And we can have, you know, Bill Clinton impeached for obstruction of justice about a sexual affair,” she added dismissively, comparing that to Trump’s possible crimes, which “are things that could amount to treason against the United States.”

“Treason” does seem more ominous than the affair President Bill Clinton had two-plus decades ago with 22-year-old White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

But aren’t we missing a “teachable moment” for the #MeToo Movement?

President Clinton perjured himself about his sordid fling during a deposition in a lawsuit brought by Arkansas state employee Paula Jones. She alleged that he, while serving as governor, had exposed himself and sexually harassed her. An awfully serious charge, for which Clinton paid $850,000 to settle.

“Paula Jones spoke out against the most powerful man in the world, and when his lawyers argued that a sitting president couldn’t be subject to a civil suit, she took them all the way to the Supreme Court and won,” Amanda Hess wrote late last year in The New York Times, two decades after the fact. “In another world, she would be hailed as a feminist icon. But not in this world — not yet.”

Democrats, progressives and much of the popular media ridiculed and attacked Ms. Jones back then — and are still sweeping her story under the rug.

Treating sexual harassment, abuse and assault in a partisan manner, ignoring the sins of your side, is a slap in the face to the #MeToo Movement.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags #metoo, Bill Clinton, impeachment, sex, sexual

Accountability general freedom national politics & policies term limits

The Soul of Citizen Government

Post author By Redactor
Post date February 18, 2019
2 Comments on The Soul of Citizen Government

President's Day, George Wahington, term limits, power

Today’s federal holiday represents a truly spectacular feat of modern public administration: actual downsizing.

By our federal government, no less.

Where once there were two federal holidays, Washington’s Birthday and Lincoln’s Birthday, now there is just one: Presidents’ Day.

There is no equal in public sector simplicity, frugality, efficiency. Stand in awe, fair citizens.*

In that spirit of brevity (the soul of citizen government?) I’ll cut out the middle-man, moi, and let presidents speak to a classic example of less being more, term limits.

“If our American society or the United States Government are overthrown,” Abraham Lincoln wrote, “it will come from the voracious desire for office, this wriggle to live without toil, work, or labor — from which I am not free myself.”

“We want to see new voices and new ideas emerge,” explained President Barack Obama. “That’s part of the reason why I think that term limits are a really useful thing,”

‘Actions speak louder than words’ could have been George Washington’s motto. His greatness may spring more from giving up power than from wielding it. He could have been president for life, but he stepped down after two terms, eight years.

In his second term, President Thomas Jefferson expressed hope that his retirement would help establish that two-term tradition for presidents, ultimately leading to a constitutional requirement.**

Success! This February 27th marks the 68th anniversary of the 1951 ratification of the 22nd Amendment: presidential term limits.

And having declared the 27th to be Term Limits Day, U.S. Term Limits and supporters are rallying all around the country next Wednesday.

Join in celebrating term limits and help push for limits on Congress.

It’s Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* That’s what it seems like, anyway. The true story? Much more complicated. Officially, the U.S. Government still considers Presidents’ Day to be Washington’s Birthday, believe it or not.

** Jefferson had harshly critiqued the new Constitution for its “abandonment in every instance of the necessity of rotation in office, and most particularly in the case of the President.”

Contact U.S. Term Limits:
termlimitsday@termlimits.com

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags George Wahington, President's Day, term limits

Accountability initiative, referendum, and recall term limits

What’s Love Got to Do With It?

Post author By Redactor
Post date February 12, 2019
7 Comments on What’s Love Got to Do With It?

term limits, democracy, representative, congressman, Senate, House of Representatives

“One of the great myths in official Washington,” writes pollster and pundit Scott Rasmussen at Ballotpedia.org, “is that voters hate Congress but love their own representative.”

Working for term limits, boy have I heard this assertion a lot.

Oh, voters do hate Congress; this we know. Less than one in eight Americans approve of the job being done (or not) by Congress, according to a brand new The Economist/YouGov poll.

The remaining question, however, is whether we really like our own congressperson. The correct answer appears to be: Not so much.

A recent ScottRasmussen.com national survey, conducted Feb. 1 – 2, 2019, found that less than one in four voters, only 23 percent, “actually think their own representative is the best person for the job.” A far larger percentage, 38 percent, believe “others in the District are more qualified.”

It is certainly possible, of course, that folks could think there is someone better than their sitting congressperson and, nonetheless, still love their Rep.

Though, doesn’t “love” seem like way too strong a word?

The notion that we are consumed with amorous urges toward our own federal representative is evidenced only by the high re-election rate for incumbent congressmen. But those rates are more likely the result of the powerful advantages of incumbency.

Not gleeful adoration of “our” career politicians.

There is one way to test our level of devotion: Let us vote on term limits and see what happens.

It would lead to a new question: Where did our love go?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Tags Congressman, democracy, representative, Senate, term limits

Accountability First Amendment rights local leaders

Insiders Strike Back

It costs time, not money.

Ron Calzone and others read and consider legislation on their own dime. Calzone’s all-volunteer Missouri First group, which analyzes legislation filed in Jefferson City from a constitutional, pro-liberty perspective, doesn’t even have a bank account.

A small businessman outside of Rolla, Calzone devotes a great deal of time and energy during the legislative session, traveling to the capitol to speak face to face with Show-Me State public servants.

For some reason, establishment politicians and bureaucrats have generally failed to express gratitude.

Back in 2015, the head of Missouri’s “lobbyist guild” filed a complaint, at the urging of two powerful legislators, alleging that Ron Calzone should have to register as a lobbyist. Meaning a $10 fee and lots of paperwork about the money neither he nor his group spends.

“Average citizens have acted in harmony to stop hundreds of millions of dollars worth of graft that would have otherwise benefited the people who hire herds of professional lobbyists,” he responded at the time. “No doubt, it’s hard for those lobbyists to explain how average men and women can, with no budget and with no palm greasing, beat them so often!”

With the assistance of the Freedom Center of Missouri, a wonderful public interest litigator, and the Institute for Free Speech, the national leader in protecting political speech, Mr. Calzone has stood tall against the Missouri Ethics Commission.

Last week, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a 2 – 1 decision against him, agreeing to have all the circuit’s judges weigh in on the case.

In a free society, citizens must not be required to register and pay a fee in order to speak to legislators.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing