Categories
Accountability initiative, referendum, and recall responsibility

Gold Medal Worthy

The 2024 Summer Olympics will not be held in Boston.

Beantown abandoned its bid to host the games after Mayor Marty Walsh refused to sign a contract that would have left the city responsible for billions in possible cost overruns.

Did I say possible?

Call it seemingly inevitable.

“I cannot commit to putting the taxpayers at risk,” declared Walsh.

People throughout the Bay State can now rest easy — no tax hike or debt burden to build expensive infrastructure . . . and produce bigger traffic jams. Of course, polls had long shown voters opposed to the idea. But that doesn’t matter to career politicians. Nor to the mayor — until recently.

Mayor Walsh’s deep concern for taxpayers notwithstanding, citizen activism made the difference. A month ago, the Yes on 1 committee joined together with Evan Falchuk, chairman of Citizens for a Say, in supporting a ballot measure to prohibit spending any tax dollars on the Olympics.

Last year, I worked with Yes on 1 — led by Steve Aylward, Rep. Geoff Diehl, Marty Lamb and Rep. Shaunna O’Connell — to pass Question 1, ending automatic gas tax increases in Massachusetts. Olympic officials had been assured a ballot measure was unlikely to get in the way; then came the Yes on 1 folks with the know-how to petition just such a measure onto the ballot.

Walsh claimed this opposition had nothing to do with his decision, calling them “about ten people on Twitter and a couple people out there who are constantly feeding the drumbeat.”

Dancing to a different drummer, Mr. Mayor.

Bostonians can thank the state’s ballot initiative process, which provides a way for the people to be heard. And, of course, citizen leaders who take the initiative.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Printable PDF

Yes On 1

 

Categories
crime and punishment education and schooling

Play Gun Theater

Stop me if I repeat myself . . . but maybe we don’t need elaborate explanations for poor performance in America’s public schools.

Maybe it comes down to this: they are run by people as unhinged as the administrators of the Stacy Middle School in Middleford, Massachusetts.

Yes, it’s time again for American Play Gun Theater, in which children (usually boys) pretend to have toy guns in their empty hands, emit fake gun sounds from their mouths, and scare the living Horace Mann’s out of government employees.

The current case? That of Master Nickolas Taylor,. He formed his hand to vaguely resemble a revolver (index finger as barrel, thumb as hammer — don’t try this at home, kids!) and mimicked some ray gun sounds towards two girls in lunch line, and then blew his finger tip, as if smoke drifted up from firing.

I am not aware of ray guns needing this, but it does have panache.

His punishment? Suspension. The 10-year-old malefactor needed to be taught a lesson, by gum.

Had he done something truly dishonorable, like cut in line, some punishment was probably in order. But if all he did was pretend to have a toy gun (two layers of pretense here at least!), then the worst probably should have been to put him in Pretend Jail, with no bars and no irons and some irony.

The lad’s father and grandmother came to his defense; the local newspaper put him on the front page.

The lesson? For supporters of today’s abysmal public schools: Don’t reload. Rethink.

And if I’ve said this before, point a finger at me and make ray gun noises.

But hey: I may raise my special Deflect-o-shield.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy

Automatic Tax Hike Nixed

The contest? Uneven, in a sense. My side was outspent more than 17 to one.

But, in another sense, the odds were closer, maybe even on my side.

Well, our side.

That is, Liberty Initiative Fund, my 501(c)(4) outfit, was the largest contributor to a referendum campaign in Massachusetts.

In 2013, the legislature had passed a bill to turn a fuel tax of 24 cents per gallon into a more permanent rate structure, increasing the tax every year as the Consumer Price Index rose.

Citizens of “Taxachusetts” objected to the idea of automating tax hikes. Perhaps thinking about their wallets, they were hardly amused by their state government piling further taxes on whenever prices, including fuel prices, rose. It’s one thing to have to pay more when supplies get tight or demand bids up prices, making gasoline and diesel more expensive. But why pay extra to the government?

Automatically. Without a legislative vote on the record.

So citizens petitioned to have the law referred to a general vote. The measure became Question 1 on last week’s ballot.

It won with a 53 percent majority. The automatic tax hike was nixed.

So, who outspent us? Who wanted the permanent, automatic tax hike? The extra tax revenues, I wrote before the election, “are slated to go toward road construction and maintenance in the Bay State. And — surprise, surprise — the biggest opponents of Question 1 are construction companies doing business with the state.”

But, despite special interests dumping tons of money, citizens won.

The money spent by Liberty Initiative Fund was leveraged effectively. Because, on issues like this, siding with the people is no long shot.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption too much government

Squelching the Revolution

During the months of primaries and caucuses, the popularity of Ron Paul was a fear expressed amongst both neoconservative and “mainstream” Republican insiders in hushed tones, rarely ever surfacing, but instead roiling under politics’ prudential lid. Now that Mitt Romney has sealed the nomination with enough delegates from the primary states, GOP insiders are trying to solidify their position.

Instead of magnanimously bringing Ron Paul’s supporters into the party to court them for the next four years, they seem to be doing their darnedest to keep them out. Take Romney’s gubernatorial state, Massachusetts.No Revolution

The GOP machine, there, has required that the Ron Paul nominees to the Tampa convention sign an affidavit to support Mitt. This is something new. Just for Ron Paul delegates. And of course some

libertarian-leaning delegates balked at the notion of signing legal affidavits pledging what they had committed verbally at the caucuses where they were elected. Many later submitted them, but not until after the deadline.

As a result, the committee disqualified them, winnowing the number of Liberty delegates and alternates to the convention from 35 to 19. . . .

Not surprisingly, the duly elected delegates “feel cheated.”

A spokesman for the Massachusetts Republican Party would not say why the affidavits were required of delegates this year, and the chairman of the Allocations Committee would not agree to an interview. Instead, the chairman offered an e-mailed statement saying that the Romney campaign, through its representative on his committee, had the right to reject delegates for “just cause.”

When I prophesy negative consequences of a Mitt Romney presidency, this sort of thing lingers in my mind. What is the GOP afraid of? Actual limits on government?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Pacé Richard Dreyfuss

In Suffolk County, Massachusetts, a new wrinkle on the old Producers-like scam hit the spotlight as a grand jury indicted Daniel Adams, a film impresario with several films under his belt, on ten counts larceny and false claims to the state in the financing of two movies set in the Cape Cod area, The Golden Boys (2008) and The Lightkeepers (2009).

According to Boston.com, Adams is charged with taking “advantage of a state incentive that allows film makers to apply for a tax credit equal to 25 percent of eligible production expenses. But prosecutors said he deceived the state about his expenses, claiming, for instance, that he paid [actor Richard] Dreyfuss $2.5 million, when in fact he paid him only $400,000.”

Adams has pleaded not guilty, and his legal standing is for a jury to decide.

More important is the general policy — funding movies is just not a legitimate use of tax money.

The only possibly legitimate argument for taxation is that the forcibly extracted money serves all the people it’s extracted from, by fulfilling very general, truly public interests. Making movies is not that.

One wag notes that “[t]he real crime is that a movie starring Richard Dreyfuss ever qualified for taxpayer funds in the first place.” That sounds almost like a criticism of Dreyfuss. Hey, I like the actor.

The point is that no film, either starring the greatest of greats or the least of unknowns, should be financed with conscripted money.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
First Amendment rights local leaders

Intimidation in Southborough

We have free speech in America. Guaranteed by the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. But a First Amendment guarantee doesn’t make freedom a certainty. It’s not as if we don’t have to stand up for our rights.

But stand up to whom?

Usually, threats to free speech come from government . . . most recently, the government of the town of Southborough, Massachusetts.

The blog MySouthborough.com, run by Susan Fitzgerald, is devoted to her town, providing a platform for residents to speak out and get heard.

And there’s the rub. Sometimes people in government don’t like criticism.

Fitzgerald’s website irked local head honchos last autumn. Someone calling himself (or herself) “Marty” had commented, online, about how the town’s Police Chief Selection Committee was meeting behind closed doors. Marty suggested that committee members were breaking the state’s open meeting requirements, and insinuated that the whole process was prejudiced in favor of one particular applicant.

Sounds fairly innocuous? Not to the town’s counsel, who demanded to know “Marty’s” actual name.

Fitzgerald wouldn’t give it to him, free speech and all. The lawyer blustered about how Marty was intimidating the selection panel. A laughable claim. A blog comment is intimidation?

And then the counsel warned her — intimidating her — to watch more carefully what’s posted on her blog.

Fitzgerald remains firm. And she defends anonymous contributors. “Choosing anonymity doesn’t make their opinion any less valid,” she states.

Or any less protected.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.