Category: government transparency

Categories
Common Sense crime and punishment general freedom government transparency national politics & policies U.S. Constitution

Swarms of Officers to Harass

Playing cards

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

It’s simple but true. And, as a corollary, let me add that using the power of the federal government to harass individuals or groups one happens to dislike or disagree with is wrong.

You might recall that our Declaration of Independence rebuked King George for sending “hither swarms of Officers to harass our people.” Or consider the recent civil-rights-violating behavior of the IRS against conservative groups during President Obama’s administration.

Yesterday, I proposed to end all taxpayer subsidies to Planned Parenthood. Obviously, I’m not a fan of the organization. And neither are the Republican presidential candidates — especially Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.

“Planned Parenthood had better hope that Hillary Clinton wins this election,” Jindal boasted at last week’s JV presidential debate hosted by Fox News, “because I guarantee you that under President Jindal, January 2017, the Department of Justice and the IRS and everybody else that we can send from the federal government will be [looking] into Planned Parenthood.”

Speaking with reporters after the debate, Mr. Jindal doubled down, suggesting there might also be a role for the Environmental Protection Agency and perhaps other tentacles of the federal Leviathan.

Jindal has removed Planned Parenthood from Louisiana’s Medicaid program. That’s within his legitimate power. But directing an assault against anyone using the IRS and other federal agencies is both wrong and . . . against the law.

It promises not change but the same rotten, rights-robbing, goon-squad government we have now. Just with a different color shirt.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Playing cards

 

Categories
Accountability government transparency term limits

Listen to Lobbyists

Institutional Memory

With 25 of 40 council seats turning over, “term limit advocates are enthusiastic about the influx of new folks and ideas,” explains Tennessean columnist Frank Daniels III, “but many council members are worried about the loss of knowledge and institutional memory.”

More precisely, “many council members” fret that the city cannot afford the loss of their “knowledge.” Politicians so want to kill such thinking that on today’s Nashville ballot is not one, but two measures to weaken the “eight is enough” council limit. Amendment 1 weakens the limits by 50 percent — from two terms, eight years to three terms, twelve years.

Amendment 2 weakens term limits just like Amendment 1 does. But Amendment 2 also reduces the size of the metro council from 40 representatives to 27. Reducing the number of “politicians” has some popular support, but what’s needed is closer representation. Which means more representatives, not fewer.

Nevertheless, when Amendment 2’s proponent, Councilwoman Emily Evans, was asked why the reduction in the council was combined with weakening term limits, she replied, “You have to give the voters something.”

The perennial argument against term limits asserts that lobbyists, special interests and the bureaucracy will have greater “institutional memory” and, therefore, take advantage of council members.

Talk about hollow! The group pushing Amendment 2 just released their campaign finance report. Their largest donor is the Service Employees International Union, representing city workers — followed by lobbyist after lobbyist, after developer, after payday loan company CEO, and a horde of politicians.

The open secret of our age: lobbyists hate term limits, voters love ’em.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

 

P.S. And if you live in Nashville, don’t forget to vote today, yet again, to keep the citizen-initiated, voter-enacted, three times voter re-affirmed term limits against the latest ballot schemes of politicians and their cronies

Printable PDF

Institutional Memory

 

Categories
government transparency initiative, referendum, and recall

Temporal Redistricting

Sneaky Democracy

They must be proud of themselves, the Little Rock insiders who pushed through a vote on a bond measure in hot-as-Hades mid-July.

Less than 4 percent of eligible voters turned out for the off-cycle exercise in 100-degree democracy. The measure, which refinances previous library bonds and puts an influx of cash into Little Rock public library branches, passed with over four-fifths of the minuscule turnout.

Now, as bond measures go, this one sure seems like a dream; its advocates say it will reduce, not increase, taxes.

But that July 14 vote!

“There was no organized opposition to the bond refinancing campaign,” we read, courtesy of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. “Still, Pulaski County Election Commission Executive Director Bryan Poe expected a higher voter turnout.” He thought they would get at least 6,000 voters. Still, even that many votes would have amounted to less than 5 percent of the over 126,000 registered city voters.

It certainly wasn’t any surprise, then, that turnout would be tiny and democratic decision-making left to a tiny fraction of the public.

Detect a certain odor?

It stinks of redistricting. When politicians redistrict voters so that predictable partisan outcomes can be reached — somehow to the benefit of those doing the redistricting — the insiders are not really trying to provide representation to voters. They are trying to continue their business as usual.

“Insiders know best”?

By selecting a summer date for the vote, insiders in effect redistrict the voters using time as the gerrymandering boundary. Call it temporal redistricting, advantaging those with the most at stake in the vote’s outcome.

Call it democracy for the 1 (or 3½) percent.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Sneaky Democracy

 

Categories
Accountability crime and punishment government transparency

Impeach IRS Boss Now

Impeach him

Last week National Review reported that Republicans in the U.S. House have long been pondering impeachment of IRS Commissioner John Koskinen for stonewalling about whether Lois Lerner’s emails were lost and irretrievable.

Lerner is the former IRS official who oversaw the obstructing of applications for non-profit status by right-leaning and Tea Party organizations. The timeline that has the GOP considering impeachment of the IRS boss goes like this:

  • March 2014: Koskinen testifies before Congress to the effect that it would take quite a while to retrieve Lois Lerner’s archived emails.
  • June 2014. Koskinen tells Congress (eliciting “audible gasps”) that many of Lerner’s scandal-relevant emails had been lost in a “computer crash.” (What happens when you hit hard drives with hammers. . . .)
  • June 2015. Congress learns from the Treasury Department’s inspector general that IRS wasn’t merely lethargic about finding the emails, and didn’t accidentally lose them to a sweeping Lerner-targeting technical glitch, but actively sought to destroy files “most likely to have contained Lerner’s emails.”

However, investigators have recovered data, including 30,000 Lerner emails, that probably do contain many scandal-related epistles. Which anybody who knows anything about the Internet and servers and backups knows had never been lost to begin with — not prior to specific attempts to lose them.

How many weeks must drag on before Congress does what is necessary? Koskinen strung Congress along for his benefit, not ours — giving him more time only plays into his hands.

Stop procrastinating, Congress. Do it. Now.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printble PDF

Impeach him

 

Categories
folly general freedom government transparency national politics & policies too much government

Safety, Savings and Symbolism

NSA Hydra

How can the U. S. save $2.5 billion a year, reduce the federal workforce by 4,000 hires, and engage in a symbolic act of undoubted patriotism, all at the same time?

Get rid of the Department of Homeland Security.

Matt A. Mayer, a former DHS employee who claims to have “written more on DHS than just about anyone,” writes in Reason that dismantling DHS would increase co-ordination and decrease inefficiencies.

Since DHS was put in place, in 2003, to increase governmental co-ordination in the face of terrorist threats, Mayer’s charge that it serves the opposite cause should . . . give us pause.

Establishing the DHS didn’t get rid of turf wars. Why would it? It increased the turf rather than merely reroute chains of communication and command. All other agencies still exist. Extra turf exacerbates co-ordination difficulty.

And then there’s what state and local law enforcement faces: “the multi-headed hydra.” The federal operation remains fragmented, which “only ensures that key items will fall through the cracks between these departments, whose personnel spend far too much time fighting each other for primacy than they should. Our enemies couldn’t ask for a more fertile environment within which to attack us.”

I added the italics, for emphasis.

Ever since Jimmy Carter ran for the presidency on consolidating bureaucratic departments in the nation’s capital, but delivered, instead, new departments, the “logic” of adding new bureaucracies onto old has proven to be the “easy answer” for insiders. But a transparent failure, for everyone else.

So, start over. Get rid of the inefficient monster.

And take heart: republics don’t have “homelands”; empires do. Let’s stop playing the wrong game.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

NSA Hydra

 

Categories
general freedom government transparency national politics & policies privacy too much government

Rand to the Rescue

Rand Paul vs. the Surveillance State

Nothing gets done in Washington?

Tell that to Kentucky Senator and presidential hopeful Rand Paul. Last night, he single-handily “repealed” Section 215 of the Patriot Act, ending the federal government’s mass collection of our phone records.

At least, for the next few days.

On the floor of the Senate, Paul blocked the USA Freedom Act, a “compromise” bill passed by the House. It would’ve required private telecoms to keep the data, allowing the government to query that data with a warrant.

“I’m supportive of the part that ends the bulk collection by the government,” said Paul. “My concern is that we might be exchanging bulk collection by the government [with] bulk collection by the phone companies.”

In a Time magazine op-ed, he argued, “We should not be debating modifying an illegal program. We should simply end this illegal program.”

Also last week, the Tea Party Patriots joined the ACLU in agreeing with Paul’s position: the USA Freedom Act doesn’t go far enough . . . to protect our civil rights.

Others warn we aren’t safe without maximum snooping and info-scooping by government:

  • CIA Director John Brennan called the metadata program “integral to making sure that we’re able to stop terrorists in their tracks.”
  • Attorney General Loretta Lynch said the expiration amounted to “a serious lapse.”
  • James Clapper, director of National Intelligence — most famous now for lying to Congress about the existence of the metadata program — declared we “would lose entirely an important capability that helps us identify potential U.S.-based associates of foreign terrorists.”

Yet, there’s not a single case where this bulk phone data helped capture a terrorist or stop an attack.

Sen. Paul believes “we can still catch terrorists using the Constitution.”

Printable PDF

Rand Paul vs. the Surveillance State

 

Categories
crime and punishment general freedom government transparency judiciary national politics & policies

Court Vindicates Snowden

Edward Snowden

Sometimes if you postpone something long enough, someone else will do the job.

Last week, when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled the National Security Agency’s metadata collection program unlawful, I immediately saw it as a vindication of Edward Snowden and his “illegal” leaks.

It will be hard to charge the man with treason for uncovering programs that have been determined, in court, to be themselves treasonous — or at least unconstitutional.

But I was busy last week; didn’t have time to make the case.

Nicely, Noah Feldman made it for me, at Bloomberg View. “This is the most serious blow to date,” writes Feldman in his May 7 article, a blow against “the legacy of the USA Patriot Act and the surveillance overreach that followed 9/11.”

The linkage with Snowden is in no way an imposition on the story:

The first striking thing about the court’s opinion was how openly it relied on Snowden’s revelations of classified material.  The court described how the program was known — by Snowden’s leaks. It also analyzed the NSA order to Verizon, leaked by Snowden, that proved the existence of the program and revealed indirectly the legal reasoning that the government relied on to authorize the metadata collection.

More importantly, Feldman recognizes that the decision rightly breaks “the bad precedent of secret law created by the NSA.”

A republic isn’t a republic if its laws are secret.

Now, of course, it’s time for Americans to cease their procrastination. If we don’t recognize that our government is out of control, no one else’s determination will matter.

Except, perhaps, history’s.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Edward Snowden

 

Categories
general freedom government transparency tax policy

Latest Learned About Lois Lerner

Lois Lerner, IRS, collage, photomontage, puzzle, investigation, illustration, editorial, abuse, law, foundations, harassment,

Is it time to spell out the IRS as the Internal Revenue Scandal?

The IRS has so many scandals under its belt.

But the biggest, from a broad, threat-to-the-republic point of view, surely remains the agency’s targeting of Tea Party and conservative organizations seeking 501c(3) and 501c(4) nonprofit status. Agents ideologically tagged their applications for special obstruction in the run-up to the 2012 presidential campaign. And after.

I don’t bother Googling to get my IRS-scandal updates, I just visit the indefatigable Paul Caron’s TaxProf Blog. Day in, day out, for the past 700+ days and counting, TaxProf has aggregated all the latest reportage and analysis about this abuse of power.

Lois Lerner — former head of the IRS’s stomp-conservative-nonprofit-applicants division — has both declared herself innocent of any wrongdoing and asserted her Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate herself.

But evidence is piling up of her actual attitudes and what-she-knew-when.

TaxProf points to an email by Lerner from way back in February of 2012 in which she advocates training for IRS staffers in the fine art of “understand[ing] the potential pitfalls” of providing too much information to Congress. A 2013 email by Lerner states that she can understand “why the IRS criteria” leading to the targeting of Tea Party and other groups “might raise some questions.”

The documents are out in the wild now, thanks to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act requests. JW has been relentless in trying to hold the IRS accountable.

Which has to be one of the very toughest jobs on earth.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Lois Lerner

 

Categories
folly government transparency porkbarrel politics too much government

Lagniappes à la Legislators

Arkansas Fools

Finally, a legislator with the guts to strike directly at the root of the problem: the People.

Well, not all the people. Just the ones who speak out, who show a lack respect for their elected betters.

In recent years, the Arkansas Legislature has heroically tried to control the chaotic and dangerous excesses of freedom and democracy in the Natural State. Legislators have proposed laws clamping down on citizen petitions, requiring employees to friend their employers on Facebook, outlawing photography in public and . . . well, you get the picture.

Last November, legislators convinced voters to amend the state constitution to weaken term limits and establish an independent commission (appointed by legislators) to raise their pay 148 percent. How? By astutely telling voters that the amendment would “set term limits,” while saying nothing about the pay hike.

Legislators also cleverly curtailed the citizen initiative process, regulating paid petitioners in ways the state constitution prohibits. But they got a pass on that; the eminent state supreme court has ruled in their favor. Then, unwilling to rest on their laurels, legislators introduced a new bill requiring petition campaigns to conduct costly criminal background checks on their paid petitioners.

One opponent called this deeply thoughtful measure “mean-spirited” and “unnecessary.”

Sen. Jon Woods argued the legislation doesn’t go far enough. He filed Senate Bill 0401, which mandates that any person speaking out in any way not in sync with the legislature must shut up.

“Enough pussy-footing around. Let’s end all this free speech hogwash,” Woods said. “We’re the boss!”

For real?

Unfortunately, everything prior to the previous three paragraphs is 100 percent true. Yup, every day is April Fools’ Day at the Arkansas Legislature.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Arkansas Fools

 

Categories
Accountability Common Sense government transparency term limits

The Article V Path

Can Americans term-limit Congress?

Twenty-three states had passed term limits on their congressional delegations by 1995 — many while simultaneously term-limiting state lawmakers.

Voters in most other states lack statewide initiative rights. But if the term limits passed by the 23 had been left alone, the pressure would have been enormous to bring term limits to the whole Congress.

Alas, in its 1995 Thornton decision, the Supreme Court ruled, five to four, that this method of building a more perfect union is constitutionally imperfect.

U.S. Term Limits currently backs an amendment that would originate in Congress to limit House members to three two-year terms and senators to two six-year terms. Just in case congressmen don’t get around to passing such an amendment, though, USTL has also endorsed the Article V path to term limits being promoted by Citizens for Self-Governance.

Article V of the Constitution authorizes states to call a constitutional convention if two thirds of them apply. In 2014, Georgia, Alaska and Florida did formally apply for a convention to consider term limits and other reforms. Lawmakers in many other states advocate similar applications. As with congressionally proposed amendments, any amendment offered by the states’ convention would then have to be ratified by three fourths of the states.

Is Article V a long shot? Yes. Every means of imposing congressional term limits has proven to be a long shot.

When we get there, it will be because one of the long shots paid off.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Click on the thumbnail below to see larger version

article-vScreenshot

 

Printable PDF