Jeff Flake. Jeff Sessions. Ron Johnson. Tim Scott.
Ted Cruz. Marco Rubio. Mike Lee. Rand Paul.
I’m generally pleased with all eight of these guys being in the Senate. They were on opposite sides of the sales tax compact amendment vote, though. If you look at the way Governors split on the issues, you’ll see similar responses. Effective conservative Governors have fallen on both sides, including neighbors Haley Barbour and Bobby Jindal.
I’m fine with the compact. It’s Constitutional and merely lets states preserve existing revenue streams, without having to defy basic economic reality by unilaterally cooperating in the rewrite-the-sales-tax Prisoner’s Dilemma. That is, any one first state that shifts from buyer-owes to seller-owes in sales tax, creating the marketplace of sales taxes that compact opponents favor, automatically creates a disincentive for businesses to set up shop there.
So, we pass the compact as the best practical solution.
Recently at RedState: Ajit Pai on Robert McDowell is worth a read. Then there’s Seton Motley on Marco Rubio challenging Internet regulation.
Continue reading »
Aaron Swartz committed a modern crime: he unlawfully used the MIT computer network, automated the download of many, many copyrighted works from JSTOR, and then infringed on the copyrights of those works by engaging in mass redistribution.
Swartz then, to the great sadness of those who knew him, killed himself rather than face possibly decades in federal prison. That act has infused the entire situation with great emotion, driving left-libertarians out to campaign against copyright. It’s also encouraged some on the right to make the best argument there was against the Swartz prosecution: that it was a case of an overzealous government official seeking to destroy a person, as an example or a feather in a cap.
It turns out that wasn’t the case at all, though. It turns out Aaron Swartz was the only one looking to make an example out of Aaron Swartz.
Continue reading »
New York City’s ban on select beverages larger than 16 ounces struck many of us as a progressive nanny state running its due course. It was a senseless blow to liberty, expanding government in a pointless way, that also happened to affect less-wealthy New Yorkers disproportionately.
But as the city now turns toward enforcement of the ban, new developments in city government point to a disturbing revelation: New York City’s health department knows nothing about science, about testing, or about how to use calibrated instrumentation to make accurate measurements in restaurants.
In expanding the nanny state, Mike Bloomberg reveals New Yorkers probably aren’t very safe under its growing umbrella.
Continue reading »