Constitution

The Jefferson Muzzles

This entry was posted in Constitution on by

Hmmmm, I’m puzzled that I missed this the last couple years. Perhaps I think too much of how much more I’m in touch through the blogosphere…
Anyway, here’s the bad news:

the Jefferson Muzzles are awarded as a means to draw national attention to abridgments of free speech and press and, at the same time, foster an appreciation for those tenets of the First Amendment. Because the importance and value of free expression extend far beyond the First Amendment’s limit on government censorship, acts of private censorship are not spared consideration for the dubious honor of receiving a Muzzle.
Unfortunately, each year the finalists for the Jefferson Muzzles have emerged from an alarmingly large group of candidates. For each recipient, a dozen could have been substituted. Further, an examination of previous Jefferson Muzzle recipients reveals that the disregard of First Amendment principles is not the byproduct of a particular political outlook but rather that threats to free expression come from all over the political spectrum.

Without furthar ado here are the 2005 Muzzle Awards.
Via beSpacific.

Public Servants?

This entry was posted in Constitution Democracy Government Information Law Regulation on by

Why are these people even in office?

North Carolina cities and other government agencies are pursuing the authority to sue citizens who ask to see public records.
Lawyers for local governments and the University of North Carolina are talking about pushing for a new state law.
That law would allow pre-emptive lawsuits against citizens, news organizations and private companies to clarify the law when there is a dispute about providing records or opening meetings.

I can think of only one reason for public records not to be disclosed: they contains personal information that should not be released without an individuals consent. Anything else should be provided right now accompanied by a bow and a “May I help you with anything else?”
Via Politech.

Government Failure in the Telecom Industry

This entry was posted in Capitalism Constitution Economics Government Libertarianism Regulation Technology on by

I often agree with Larry Lessig but he is off base here:

But the government also should not act as the cat’s paw for one of the most powerful industries in the nation by making competition against that industry illegal, whether from government or not. This is true, at least, when it is unclear just what kind of “good” such competition might produce.
Broadband is the perfect example. The private market has failed the US so far.

First, he is absolutely correct when we rails against government enforced monopolies which reflects the state of the telecom industry for, well, seemingly forever.
Second, though, what private market has failed us? The heavily regulated, monopolistic telecom industry? No, this is better described as a government failure.
Lessig goes on to suggest:

The solution is not to fire private enterprise; it is instead to encourage more competition.

But it is not market competition he is suggesting. It is governments entering the market.
Lynn Kiesling has a great suggestion:

A better approach would be for governments to strive to be technology neutral, focus on defining the objectives, and work (interjurisdictionally, if necessary) to reduce the transaction costs and other features of the institutional landscape that prevent robust, private competition from occurring.

This is, I think, a very polite way of saying quit mucking with the market and start clearing out the sludge that has been put in the way of effective market functioning.

Legislator Speak

This entry was posted in Business US Capitalism Constitution Economics Libertarianism Regulation on by

It is well known that legislators generally can only be trusted when they promise to take your money. They are not bashful about speaking disengenously, providing misleading information, and, for that matter, outright lying about the impacts of proposed legislation. They’ll regularly contradict themselves in the course of the same conversation.
For instance, the Illinois senate just passed a bill that says:

Working parents would be entitled to 24 hours of unpaid work leave during a school year to attend their children’s school conferences or classroom activities,

One of the sponsors, Senator Iris Martinez, touts the bill:

“I personally feel that when you have employees, and you are sensitive to their parental needs, you have a happy employee,” Martinez said. “It shows the employer cares about family. Then you have families involved in education.”
But Martinez said the legislation provides safeguards so employees don’t abuse the privilege. She said employees would have to give advance notice of their absence and would be required to provide employers with certification from an educator upon their return.

And then the lie:

“We’re making sure the employer doesn’t lose any productivity,” she said. “There are a lot of safety nets put into place.”

Uhh, let’s see: employee gets unpaid time off, there is paper work to process, but there is no productivity lost? She is probably saying this BS with a straight face.
Perhaps the Illinois house will have better sense.
Remember, when stuff like this becomes law we all pay for it through higher prices, reduced wages, and lost jobs.

The Pledge

This entry was posted in Capitalism Constitution Culture Government Law Libertarianism Politics on by

Kenneth Quinnell, in his essay Why I Don’t Say the Pledge of Allegiance states:

But the very concept of a Pledge of Allegiance is wrong in a free country.

He elaborates on this at some length and I could, and I’m sure some others might, debate some of his points.
I do, though, agree with his basic point that free individuals have no obligation to recite a pledge of allegiance.
On the other hand, there is a group who by dint of their position should recite a pledge…probably several times per day. That would be the set of government employees, elected, appointed or hired, throughout the world. Our servants: congress critters, kings and queens, premiers, secretaries of desks and states, governors, presidents, soldiers, firepersons, police, mayors, etc.
They, each and everyone, in every government job throughout the world should start their day with something like:

I pledge allegiance to the people of name your jurisdiction and swear to protect their lives, help them maintain their liberty and assist them in their pursuit of happiness.

…and repeat it frequently throughout the day and once again before going to sleep at night.