Laws and Responsibility

Back in the day when I served in the state legislature, I often remarked in my speeches that the six most dangerous words in Ohio are “there ought to be a law…” We are over-lawed (new word?). In other words we have too many laws. What we need are accountability and responsibility. If you hurt someone or their property because you were negligent or intentionally destructive, then you should be held accountable. As an example, if you’re texting, drinking or under the influence of prescription drugs and you crash into another car, you should be charged with negligence and failure to maintain control.

Why is it necessary to have traffic laws that ban driving while drinking, driving while texting or any number of potential distractions or performance degraders? If they are necessary, we should include driving while drinking coffee or eating. We might also include shaving or applying makeup as tasks that should be prohibited while one is operating a motor vehicle. There are even more activities that could or should be banned while driving such as reading, talking to a passenger, adjusting the radio or CD player, or picking one’s nose. I have witnessed every one of these distracting behaviors while driving. It isn’t pretty out there, folks.

Obviously as the clever readers you are, you have discerned that I am disturbed by the proliferation of laws that our legislators and regulators have thrust upon us. It is a common practice among despotic or totalitarian governments to pass numerous laws so that nearly every citizen breaks some of them and then selectively enforce them. This bi-polar approach causes the populace to be fretful and fearful but allows the leaders to dole out favorable treatment for friendly elites. For example you may be charged for munching on an Egg McMuffin while pursuing your morning commute, but the police may have strict orders to ignore the Assistant to the Associate Deputy Secretary of Secretarial Assistants when she rabidly consumes a bowl of Frosted Mini Wheats while scampering down the freeway at 20 mph above the legal limit. Lots of laws create a maze of regulatory tape that is impossible to navigate without violating one or more of them…that is “soft tyranny.” The government doesn’t throw you in the clink for no reason, but they do create a multitude of trip wires to legitimize your incarceration.

Paranoia is not a typical condition for me, but the profusion of laws, rules and regulations that impact our behavior, our commerce and our daily lives have caused me to become extremely skeptical about our government’s commitment to individual liberty. For now…if we violate a number of the “gotcha” regulations, we are fined. If enough people systematically fail to follow the proscribed rules, it seems probable that harsher penalties may be employed. There are so many fronts where Big Government is attacking the people that this one may seem trivial, but it can lead to hard tyranny as the government and its big-government supporters and enablers seek to wield control---for our own good….of course.

Too many laws lead to confusion, so why not streamline the criminal code to identify the broad categories of unacceptable activity. The penalties, if any, could be based on outcomes rather than law enforcement personnel seeking to interdict every potential violator. If you drive and you harm someone or their property while negligently distracted, you must pay restitution, fines and jail time if appropriate for the offense and the damage. It shouldn’t matter what activity led to the negligent distraction. It’s the result of the negligence that generates the penalty. As someone who cherishes my liberty, I resent the nitpicking package of laws and regulations that have invaded our lives. As someone who believes strongly in accountability and responsibility as necessary for citizenship, my resistance to the plethora of controlling rules grows greater every day. The Nanny State mentality has drifted from our social welfare policies into law enforcement. It sickens me.

It has been thirty years since I first began uttering the line about “there ought to be a law.” Given the nature of our ineffective, inefficient and dominating government today, those six words may not be the worst…the most evil. They are still noxious and still toxic. We have too many laws. We have too many constraints on our freedom. We must be responsible for our actions, our behavior and our stupidity. When the law becomes too complex, it can become abusive. Liberal progressive socialist busybodies love laws because they narrow the parameters of our liberty. The lefties assume that we are too stupid to live without the benign intervention of the government. They do not yet realize that we may be too angry to live with it.

Comments:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com

www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Tue. & Wed., 6-7pm on 1370 WSPD, Toledo   www.wspd.com

Calling Out Congress

My columns have been rather tough on Speaker Boehner and the GOP House. Several readers have forcefully reminded me that the Democrats hold the Senate and the Socialists are entrenched in the White House. They seem to suggest that I should ease up a bit because Boehner et. al do not have the absolute power necessary for implementing significant change in government practices, policies and procedures. That observation is true……….but the GOP controls the budgeting process, and can initiate legislation that the Senate may reject or the President may veto. Said legislative initiatives would create clear lines of demarcation and force the Progressives/Statists/ Lefties to defend the indefensible….their insistence that the United States drift into Third-World status because of their massive spending, borrowing and taxing schemes. If the GOP House is unwilling to force the issue again and again, the people (voters) will rightly conclude that deal-making and business-as-usual politics remain the standard practice even with a divided House and a frustrated populace.

As Libertarians, Tea Party members and conservatives who desire smaller constitutional government, lower taxes and more personal freedom, we have no impact on the statists in government. They loathe us while they fear us, and they are not about to accept our proscriptions for sound governing. The conservative members of the House GOP caucus are another matter. They are aware of the potential support or fury of our liberty coalition. It is, therefore, absolutely mandatory for us to hold them accountable…..in all ways, all the time. Already we have witnessed some slippage during the debt ceiling fiasco. Some of the newer hot shot members as well as some of the incumbents decided to follow the path of deal-making expediency rather than stand for principle. We can send a daily barrage of emails and phone to Senator Schumer’s office, and they will have no positive effect for good government. If we follow the same tactical program for a newly elected “Tea Party conservative,” he or she will be more likely to hold the line against the overwhelming tsunami of big government. If we hesitate to “call out” the newer and conservative members, then we may be chagrined to discover that they have become enmeshed in the “business as usual” trap.

Every general knows that he cannot command the opposing troops. His influence and power are limited to his own command. He must maneuver his own troops to attack or counter the weaknesses and movements of the enemy. The battle for our nation is warfare of the highest order. At stake are liberty, prosperity and our future. So far the contest has been relatively non-violent, but a government that has demonstrated that it is willing to use coercion and force may resort to extraordinary measures to preserve its power and control. This observation may sound somewhat grim, but it should alert us to the necessity for maintaining pressure on those in government who claim to be our allies for the restoration of our republic. If we back off and permit them to falter, the consequences could degrade into a scenario far worse than our persistent badgering of our affiliated elected officials. In a medical analogy….we’ll be treating the scratch to prevent the infection.

One more analogy to illustrate the importance of maintaining the heat on right-thinking politicians: when an opposing baseball player commits a mental error, our team exploits it. When a member of our team has a “brain fart, “we get on his case to insure that he has the correct mental attitude to help us succeed. Holding the opposition accountable is a pipe dream. Our influence is best used to support and sanction our alleged compatriots in office. Firing off a bevy of emails and phone calls to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi may generate some perverse level of satisfaction, but they will have no substantive effect. Communication with those who share our principles and our goals will inform them that we are here, we are engaged and we are watching. Efforts and watchfulness are best spent where they can be most effective and rewarding. In addition, it is much easier to move a pound than it is a ton, so it follows that it will be much easier to influence someone whose position begins close to ours than a politician whose stance is light-years removed.

The sum total of my rough treatment of Boehner, Cantor, McCarthy, McConnell and their flock of GOP cohorts is that the statists are unsalvageable in my view, but the residing Republican members are either with us or may be convinced to join our movement. Unfortunately some RINO’s may be beyond recovery, but that’s what primaries are for. If too many of the GOP leadership and significant numbers of members resist the return to Constitutional government and principles, then a third-party alternative will become more likely. As a forty-two year member, activist and office-holder as a Republican, I made the third-party move to libertarianism to avoid the rush. Besides, the Arlen Specter’s, Lincoln Chaffee’s, Olympia Snow’s, John McCain’s, Lindsey’s Graham’s, and a collection of RINO’s, weasels and chickens convinced me that I no longer wished to be a part of such a compromising menagerie of weakness.

Comment:    cearlwriting@hotmail.com        or         www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Lesser and Lessor

The purpose of an election is for us, the citizens, to select someone to represent our interests within the parameters established by the charter, state constitution and Constitution of the United States. We often state that we hire those officials to be our surrogates in the halls of power, but I submit that we “lease” them. To hire someone is to assume that we have absolute control over their activities while they are employed by us. Leasing, on the other hand, acknowledges that although we may enjoy an element of control, the actual ownership interest is held by another party. Under present conditions those other parties include but are not limited to special interests, major corporations and party leaders.

The old cliché about the two- party system limiting our choices to the “lesser of two evils,” has never seemed so true. Whoever proves to be victorious in a contest for votes ends up becoming the leading leased lesser for the citizens. As long as we citizens remember that our elected officials are merely leased, then we can treat them like rented mules. J In other words, treat them like the short-term employees they are supposed to be. Even when electing a new fresh face who claims to be fiscally responsible and constitutionally savvy, the electorate should go forward under the assumption that the elected official will be a short termer. No longer should we elect “good” people then focus our attention elsewhere. We must always be vigilant, ever watchful and perpetually wary. If an officeholder begins to show any sign of drifting from the constitutional path, voters should challenge him/her immediately and forcefully.

Just as in any lease, the item under contract is returned following a predetermined period. In the political realm, they’re called term limits, but they truly are unnecessary if the voters or a designated watchdog group monitors every action and vote of the politician. When the officeholder begins to slide, waffle, weasel or dissemble, the alarm is sounded, and the activist groups IMMEDIATELY go into action. No slack should be allowed. If the errant political type is permitted to wiggle off the hook, then the problem will be exacerbated as time goes on. In addition, the longer that the public official remains in office, the more difficult it becomes to dislodge the incumbent. No politician should be allowed to violate her/his constitutional obligations just because of pork barrel spending, or because he or she is a “good person.” There are a lot of good people among us, but they do not have the political power to undermine our constitutional government.

No person is flawless, and even the most constitutionally pure among us will sometimes be tempted to do something for the greater good.  If we understand that aspect of human nature, then we can be vigilant when we follow the careers of politicians whom we have elected. If they err, if they stumble, if they ignore the constitution and the voters who elected them, then their lease must be cancelled at the first opportunity. It will be time for a new lesser of two evils, and perhaps, future holders of the office will have learned a lesson….a lesser leasing lesson.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com  or  www.littlestuff-monoosha.blogspot.com