Categories
Accountability

Downtime on Our Dime

What happens if you misbehave at work? Are you given a paid vacation?

No? Oh, you poor thing. You don’t work for the federal government.

The General Accounting Office — the extremely busy outfit tasked to investigate all the myriad rip-offs perpetrated against taxpayers  — has issued a new report. Seems federal workers accused of and often punished for bad behavior at work — from charging personal items on government credit cards to downloading porn — are regularly kept on paid leave for months and even years, while charges against them are investigated.

We’re talking somewhere upwards of 57,000 employees, costing $775 million over a three-year period for not showing up, for not working.

That’s only counting straight salary. These non-working workers also accrue sick leave and vacation time, as well as pad their pensions and move up the pay ladder.

Government rules already say that paid leave is only for “rare circumstances.”

The new meaning of “rare” appears to be “common.”

As The Washington Post explains, “Federal employees are generally entitled to more due process than their counterparts at private companies, which explains why the leave is paid.”

But it doesn’t explain why federal workers should be so “entitled.” We’re all equal, but some are more equal than others?

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) is working with Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) on a bill to narrowly define the rules on paid leave, limiting it to no more than a few days.

Don’t hold your breath, though. In our nation’s capital, reform has been on unpaid leave for quite some time.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Thought

Barry Goldwater

Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken course stems from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen. Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.

Categories
Today

October 26, Continental Congress

On October 26, 1774, the first Continental Congress adjourned in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Exactly one year later, King George III of Great Britain went before Parliament to declare the American colonies in rebellion. And one year later, to the day, in 1776, Benjamin Franklin departed from America for France, seeking financial support for the American Revolution.

Categories
links

Townhall: Paid Handsomely for Ugly Behavior

Over at Townhall, the idea of holding our “public servant” bureaucrats to the same standard we hold all others. Paul Jacob makes the case for doing so, in the course of explaining how cushy our federal government’s employees have it when investigated for workplace wrongdoing.

Click on over; then come back here for more:

Surely government workers shouldn’t have special privileges?!?

On the other hand, it wouldn’t be exactly “fair” for the bureaucracy to have to follow the rules, when folks in the Obama Administration and in Congress don’t seem to have to follow any.

Categories
video

Video: The Honest Person in the Race

A conversation with the candidate for governor of Florida who doesn’t sport an R or a D after his name:

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall

Of Wolves and Politicians

Should Michigan’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR) create a wolf-hunting season? That question will be on the statewide ballot this November.

Twice.

Twice? Yes, voters will decide two separate referendums: Proposal 1 and Proposal 2. And yet, voters may not actually determine with either vote whether there will be a wolf hunt.

What’s going on has less to do with killing wolves than it does with politicians butchering democratic checks to their power.

Until 2012, wolves were a federally protected endangered species. Now some say the estimated 650 wolves in Michigan have become a nuisance.

It has long been legal to shoot wolves threatening livestock or people, so that’s not at issue.

What is at issue? Last year’s legislation, which gave the DNR power to establish a wolf-hunting season. Animal protection activists objected, gathering more than 250,000 signatures to put the law to a statewide vote.

Okay, let the people decide, right?

Wrong. Legislators intent on not permitting citizen control passed a brand new law to have it their way — the people be damned. So tenacious citizens signed more petitions to put this second statute to a referendum.

Hence the two referendums on the ballot.

Legislators still weren’t finished, though. They passed a third bill, this time slapping an unrelated appropriation in it, thus blocking a referendum. That law faces a legal challenge.

This seems a choice between the government regulating wildlife matters with or without any popular check on that power. By voting NO on both Proposals 1 and 2, Michiganders can tell the wannabe dictators in Lansing that their democracy-hunting season is over.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Thought

Karl Jaspers

Man is always something more than what he knows of himself. He is not what he is simply once and for all, but is a process…

Categories
Thought

Karl Jaspers

One who would influence the masses must have recourse to the art of advertisement. The clamour of puffery is to-day requisite even for an intellectual movement.

Categories
crime and punishment free trade & free markets media and media people

This Ain’t Laissez-Faire

Things are what they are, not their opposite. Can we accept that as a starting point?

Not if we’re scoring ideological points regardless of the cost to clarity.

Newsweek calls drug-war violence in Long Island “a harrowing example of free-market, laissez-faire capitalism.” To this, Cato Institute’s David Boaz objects that “the competition between the local Crips and Bloods [is described] in terms not usually seen in articles about, say, Apple and Microsoft or Ford and Toyota.”

Under a truly free market, the rights of buyers and sellers to peaceably trade are legally protected from theft and violence, and their contracts defended from fraud. Black markets, on the other hand, are made up of illegal exchanges, actively prohibited trade.

Sure, black-market trade has something in common with legal trade. As with legal exchanges, persons willingly participate in black-market trades and expect to benefit.

But economic activity that can easily get you jailed is fundamentally different in just this respect from that conducted in a relatively laissez-faire context.

The difference has consequences.

You can’t go to court if you have a grievance with a black-market trading partner or competitor. And persons less scrupulous, more violent, more criminal than the norm tend to be disproportionately represented among sellers of illegal goods that have especially big markups precisely because they’re illegal.

So Boaz is right.

The legal capitalism at K-Mart, J. C. Penny, or a post-Prohibition-Era liquor store isn’t fertile ground for the gang warfare invited by the War on Drugs. We can’t tell the difference, though, if we ignore the difference.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Today

October 23, women’s rights conference

On October 23, 1850, the first National Women’s Rights Convention began in Worcester, Massachusetts.

On the same October date 106 years later, thousands of Hungarians rose up against Soviet rule.