Categories
Accountability First Amendment rights folly general freedom ideological culture media and media people moral hazard nannyism national politics & policies Regulating Protest too much government U.S. Constitution

Freedom “Weaponized”

Justice Elena Kagan has a way with words. The conservative majority on the court, she said after two recent rulings, is “weaponizing the First Amendment.”

What a phrase! But what does it mean?

“Conservative groups, borrowing and building on arguments developed by liberals,” explains The New York Times, “have used the First Amendment to justify unlimited campaign spending, discrimination against gay couples and attacks on the regulation of tobacco, pharmaceuticals and guns.”

First: if “liberals” now find themselves not supporting the idea of particular freedoms, or freedom in general, are they really “liberal”?

Second: “borrowing arguments” is what we expect to happen. Logic isn’t partisan.

Third: the point of the Bill of Rights is to “weaponize” the defense of freedom.

Remember, it is freedom of speech; freedom of the press; freedom of association; freedom of exercising one’s religion. The First Amendment weaponizes their defense by disallowing Congress from legislating against them.

Now, it has long been a “problem” that these listed freedoms blend together. They all work together or don’t work at all. And each points to freedom more broadly.

Kagan wants to read freedoms narrowly — though liberals historically have, indeed, read them broadly.

She’s objecting to two recent rulings. The first prohibits states from requiring pregnancy centers to talk up abortion options to their clients. An obvious free speech issue. The second prohibits governments from backing unions in their extraction of “agency fees” from non-members. An incontrovertible issue of freedom of association.

Kagan and The New York Times apparently think that “liberalism” means defending some freedoms in some contexts, but denying freedom in others.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

 


 

Illustration by Newtown grafitti

 

Categories
First Amendment rights general freedom media and media people moral hazard national politics & policies Regulating Protest too much government

Crossing the Twitter Rubicon

No sooner had I upbraided media folks for overreacting to various presidential peccadillos regarding Puerto Rico, when Donald J. Trump, in his running media battle, crossed a line with this week’s most notorious tweet.

He first complained, perhaps correctly, that, “Fake @NBCNews made up a story that I wanted a ‘tenfold’ increase in our U.S. nuclear arsenal. Pure fiction, made up to demean.” But then the chief executive officer of the United States of America tweeted this: “With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their License?”

The answer to his question is: never.

The Federal Communications Commission licenses the network affiliates of ABC, NBC and CBS across the country — not the networks themselves — to broadcast their television signals using public airwaves. Still, through those affiliates a tyrannical FCC could no doubt damage the networks.

Government licensing of media outlets is anathema to the First Amendment. And the thought of the POTUS actively threatening the ability of NBC or other networks to report the news as they freely decide is . . . well, unthinkable.

I don’t buy the accusations that Trump is undermining freedom of the press by criticizing the press — even arguing by tweet, “The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @CNN, @NBCNews and many more) . . . is the enemy of the American People!” The president is as free to criticize the media as the media is free to criticize the president.

It might be his duty.

But considering the use of official government power to potentially “shut down NBC and other American networks,” as UK’s Independent reported, or just to temper their coverage?

Despotism.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 


PDF for printing

 

Categories
meme too much government

Freedom, not Force

Categories
Accountability crime and punishment general freedom local leaders moral hazard nannyism national politics & policies privacy property rights responsibility too much government U.S. Constitution

The Minimal Use of a Finger

Drivers in Washington State have a new law to . . . swerve from?

“New distracted driving law starts Sunday, July 23,” the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) tweeted last week. “The law forbids,” Washingtonians were told,  “virtually all use of handheld gadgets such as phones, tablets, laptop computers and gaming devices while driving.”

The idea is to prevent accidents. Though distracted driving’s danger has been contested, texting while driving certainly seems a kind of crazy.  

Thankfully, it’s possible to talk “hands free.”

Which, it turns out, the new law does allow. Drivers may activate and de-activate hands-free devices (and apps) with the “minimal use of a finger.”

Eating and drinking while driving are also disallowed, but those are “secondary offenses,” which police are not allowed to pull you over for.

At this point, another meaning of “minimal use of a finger” may occur to some readers. What starts out as secondary offenses have been known to be upgraded, legally and practically, to primary offense status.

Does a shiver runs down your back?

Yet another rule! More fines!

More interactions with police.

And if all this doesn’t feel “police state-y” enough for you, there is argument in Seattle about whether pedestrians should be prohibited from “distracted walking.”

Yes, some are actually considering that.

I’m reminded of an argument against socialism: government-run enterprises tend to be run “ruthlessly and with special attention to prosecution (and overburdening) of the poor.” Why would anyone want such techniques writ society-wide, in every sector?

Meanwhile, we apparently must live and drive with more rules and more fines and more harassment.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Printable PDF

 

Categories
Common Sense free trade & free markets general freedom initiative, referendum, and recall U.S. Constitution

Compatriots, We — For Liberty!

Thank you. It’s Thanksgiving, a good day to say so.

What a great idea for a holiday — a thoroughly American one, unpretentious and unspoiled. Centered on family and friends, the day may be the most important of the year, something we all share, in no small part because it is when we count (and publicly acknowledge) our blessings.

First on the list?

The blessing of liberty, of course. The freedom to work and produce and to keep the fruits of your labor. In order to put food on the table (a LOT of GOOD food.)

And, because man does not live by bread alone, to do it your way, independently, by the sweat of your own brow and the work of your wits — not as any man’s slave, nor riding anyone’s back . . . including the taxpayer.

Thanksgiving thus serves to celebrate that quintessential American Dream: standing on one’s own two feet . . . with friends, family, and freedom.

I have a further reason to thank you, though, other than this date on the calendar.

And no, it’s not simply for reading Common Sense and allowing me to bring you heaping helpings of honest outrage, and resolve, stories of perseverance, commitment to principle, tales of “doing something about it,” offering a bit of humor, hopefully providing some good information and argumentative ammunition, a perspective on smart grassroots politics in this state or that, a lens on corrupt politicians and their latest schemes in a city or town all the way across the country.

I’m thanking you for something even more important.

Don’t get me wrong. Common Sense is important. I love riffing on the latest insanity, or success — especially presenting stories that can spur copy-cat campaigns, initiatives, legal actions and, in a word, ACTION.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, after all.

You and I: we’re the folks taking responsibility for the future of freedom. We’re committed to doing the hard work of political reform.

Right?

It ain’t easy. We need to support each other, learn from one another, and work together — even when we are many miles apart. We have to build a smarter, more united pro-liberty community.

That’s why I write Common Sense.

To communicate with you . . . and other important individuals. All of us hanging together — and not “hanging separately,” as old Ben Franklin once quipped — because our efforts are absolutely essential to protecting the values of freedom, responsibility and independence.

Friend, we pay our dues (and more) — for otherwise your children and grandchildren, and mine, will face a world without what we hold so dear.

I started Liberty Initiative Fund to help citizen activists place tax limits, term limits, criminal justice reforms, and other pro-liberty and anti-crony measures on state and local ballots. I also serve as president of Citizens in Charge Foundation, which protects our crucial ability to use the citizen initiative and referendum process to hold government accountable.

Thankfully, Citizens in Charge Foundation financially supports Common Sense, allowing my compatriots to make tax-deductible contributions to keep this communication network alive and kicking.

Of course, it all comes down to you. This program, this Common Sense network doesn’t exist without your caring and support.

You know, I adore the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. As I know you do, too. But words on paper don’t keep us free unless there are people, like you and me, standing up for those words.

Stand with me again today and support Common Sense by joining Team 1776.

What’s “Team 1776”? It’s a group of folks like you who believe in the values of liberty and in building a network around those values through this communication vehicle. Members of Team 1776 care enough to provide our financial foundation by making a one-time gift of $1,776. Or they donate more. Or less. Whatever they can afford to give.

Many join Team 1776 with a monthly pledge of $17.76, which doesn’t hit the checkbook so hard (less than 60-cents a day), but adds up big-time for Common Sense — especially with more people stepping up to make that commitment.

Between today and the end of the year, I need to raise $30,000 to keep the Common Sense coming. I hope you have a great Thanksgiving Day and that you’ll claim this Common Sense program as one of your blessings.

Thanks for all you do and for your consideration now.

This is Common Sense. You make it possible. I’m Paul Jacob . . . and mighty grateful.


P.S. Your gift to Citizens in Charge Foundation for Common Sense is fully tax-deductible and 100 percent will go to the support and expansion of this program. Be part of Team 1776 by making a contribution or a monthly pledge today. Click here to make a donation by credit card. If you prefer to mail a check, please write “Team 1776” in the memo line.

P.P.S. My rough draft of this letter was titled, “Hey Comrades — Send Money!” I chuckled. My Web guy chuckled. But “comrades” is a commie word. We’re not even socialists, right? Sociable individualists, I like to think of us. Patriotic Americans. Compatriots. The word “compatriot” means both fellow countryman and colleague. And most of my readers (though certainly not all) are Americans like me, and almost all of you are colleagues (“comrades” without the bad connotations) in an important cause, a cause that must triumph. So this may be a better way to think of us: Compatriots for Freedom! Let’s make an impact . . . by saving civilization.

P.P.P.S. Thanks again. Happy Turkey Day!


Printable PDF

 

Categories
Common Sense crime and punishment general freedom

Ultra Anti-Civilization

The stabbing event at a Thursday “Gay Pride” march in Jerusalem reveals an element of the much-talked-about “clash of civilizations” not often discussed any longer. But it used to dominate the conversation.

Why? It was not a Muslim jihadist who stabbed six people and ultimately killed one of them, a 16-year-old girl (she died in the hospital this weekend).

It was an Orthodox Jew.

That is, the man arrested at the event, identified as Yishai Schlissel, certainly looked Orthodox, when I saw him on TV, briefly, in an early report. The BBC now refers to him an “ultra-Orthodox Jew” (“ultra” theirs; emphasis, mine). He had previously carried out a similar attack in 2005.

“Israel’s government would have ‘zero tolerance’ for Jewish extremists, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a security cabinet meeting on Sunday,” according to a BBC report.

What suspect Schlissel shares with other terrorists is not merely a rock-hard belief that certain other people are sinful and corrupt, etc. He somehow also believes that he may assume the role of judge and executioner . . . of people he only knows by their differences.

This is beyond “ultra.” Schlissel repudiates not only the rule of law (since he acts outside it), but a basic idea that has grown in Western civilization — from roots found in his own religion.

Liberty.

The essence of liberty? Leaving peaceful people you disagree with alone.

It is more than possible for the religiously orthodox to get along with the un-orthodox. We can all get along if we respect each others’ rights, regardless of our differences.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Printable PDF

Against tolerance