Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Ideas for Paul Ryan!
Sunday’s WSJ reported that Speaker Paul Ryan is going to spend next weekend setting an ambitious idea-driven platform for the Republican House to use in 2016 to show why the Republicans should win the presidency. In other words, something much like the Contract with America that the presidential candidates can get behind and make part of the national conversation. Wouldn’t that be nice?
Here are my top ideas, in order of priority:
1: Passage of the “American Freedom Act“
Any American citizen over the age of 18 shall have the right to freely contract with any other party for any product or service for which they reach mutual agreement. In so doing, however, both parties must explicitly waive all regulatory or legal relief or recourse, save for whatever is specified in their contract. No party shall be considered subject to regulation if they are known to be acting under this specific opt-out law.
This would essentially end all national regulations, in one fell swoop. And do it in a way that is eminently saleable and attractive to American citizens.
2: Work Freedom
All government employees shall be barred from joining unions. No government contracts shall be awarded to firms that do not allow people to opt out of paying union dues.
What are yours?
Published in Domestic Policy
The first proposal, iWe, is especially good. Why, there could be thousands of (fast-growing) new businesses, employing millions of Americans, that operate solely on this basis.
There would need to be legal protection for such businesses, of course, so that they are not deemed subject to regulatory oversight merely by being open to the public or some other such nonsense typically used to take away our property rights.
(I agree with the second proposal, too, and the third that you made in the comments.)
I’m only talking direct land sale to pay down the debt, not benefits from usage! If you want to pay off the debt set a (still pretty reasonable) flat rate of $36,670 per acre of the lands being sold with first come, first served service as sold by each county. The government would almost certainly sell all of it and that would generate $18,775,084,981,440 of revenue to pay off all held debts of the federal government while still preserving 128 million acres of federal land.
For the record that’s 20 million acres over all national park land and military bases, so we’re not losing anything there.
Pretty good idea iWe!
Give parents at least prima fascie status as those best able to make decisions on proper medical care of their children. Right now they are almost entirely–make that “entirely” — hostage to the medical system and its friends in government. (See The Justina Pelletier case.). A lot of you won ‘t like this, I know, and will find cases where the right should be denied, but I believe that parents have long suffered a serious loss of freedom in this area. There is no way to prevent all harm. It is lesser harm that should be the standard.
First off, take all of the regulatory rule-making bodies out the executive branch and into the legislative branch. OSHA still does inspections, but the regulations are set by a separate, congressional agency. The only regulations the executive branch can pass are those devoted to their work practices, like how much time off they get or whether they can file a grievance. The FBI does not write criminal law, why should the FCC or FDA write their own law?
Second, all regulations automatically sunset every 5 years unless explicitly renewed. There are plenty that I would repeal, but this means anything I miss
Third, no government union dues may be collected by payroll deduction, and no government union dues may be used for any political campaign. Government unions are sometimes useful for dealing with insane bosses.
Fourth, mandate zero-base budgeting.
Fifth, regulatory agencies are instructed that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, nuclear power is environmentally friendly, and other truths that seem impossible to grasp.
Finally, implement Pr. Reynolds Repeal the Hollywood Tax Cuts and Revolving Door Surtax proposals.
“Federal control over K-12 education has risen dramatically in recent decades. Congress has increased funding for the schools while imposing layers of rules and regulations on local school districts. Federal expenditures for K-12 education have soared from $12.5 billion in 1965 to $72.8 billion in 2008, measured in constant 2008 dollars.1 The Department of Education funds about 150 aid programs, which come with an array of regulations that extend federal control over state education policy.2 – See more at: http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/education/k-12-education-subsidies#sthash.ZfSEPuDr.dpuf“
What I intended was an actual partitioning of government services into competing, differentiated service providers. Go beyond the kind of competition for contracts between Space-X (Elon Musk) and Blue Origins (Jeff Bezos’ firm) for launch contracts existing today to actual competing versions of NASA – the whole organization.
Since Seppuku is out of the question even though honor demands it.
Here are a few random ideas that I have had:
1.) Return the military to a regimental system.
2.) Move agencies and sub agencies away from the capital and headquarter them around the country in secondary and third tier cities.
Yes plz.
And it is politically saleable! Think of the ads:
We could also do situation-specific versions. Think of the FDA barring experimental medicines versus allowing people to decide for themselves whether they should be able to choose a new cancer or Alzheimer’s drug.
When you propose symbolic laws that have no chance of passing, aren’t you supposed to propose things that will make your Party more popular? And make the other guys look bad? Instead of the other way around?
Promoting Freedom definitely would do that. Far, far better than any of the “we will adjust bracket X, and add exemptions Y and Q” nonsense that the House loves.
Eliminate Fed student loans. Return the value of our universities to the lessons taught in the classroom instead of the sheepskin given at the end. Private lenders and families won’t pony up dough to send someone to learn social justice propaganda for four years at $150K just so they can work at Starbucks after they graduate. Lots of students, professors and staff will magically disappear and have to take their rightful place working in REAL jobs, producing a REAL benefit to the society around them.
You say any contract will be enforceable. So fraud will be legal? False advertising? Sale of poisonous food and killer drugs? Cars that won’t brake?
Or are you going to take the “out” that such contracts are not “voluntary” because the buyer did not have accurate information? In which case, aren’t you right back where you started?
For every problem, there is a solution. Clear. Simple. And wrong.
Huh? Of course freedom means the right to make choices that others would not make. And that means medicines that might not work, or will have nasty side effects. Or do nothing at all. See Homeopathy.
This bill would give Americans back their rights to make their own decisions, right or wrong. And if it is not in the contract, then it is not enforceable. If the seller says, “Warning! These drug may not work, or it might even kill you,” and the buyer buys it anyway, then that is an exercise of freedom.
I want the freedom to go pay a retired doctor who may be unlicensed in my state for medical attention. And I would cheerfully sign away my right to sue for malpractice, if I know and trust the doctor.
Buying medical services like this currently is illegal – which raises the cost of care.
I want the freedom to pay much less to live in housing that may not be up to Code. Those funds could be saved, and used in much more productive ways. And I want the freedom to make that choice. Most Americans do.
I want the freedom to buy meals AirBnB style – any citizen can feed all comers, for much less money than a restaurant, without regulations and inspections, etc.
I also want someone with an airplane to be free to sell me a spare seat if he happens to be going my way.
People who own cigarettes should be allowed to waive regulation, and sell individual cigs to people. Instead of being brought down by police.
My local pizza shop needs regular sign offs by 37 different regulators. His customers would cheerfully sign waivers for regulatory relief in order to get cheaper pies. The proprietor is a good guy, and wants to feed people healthy food – so why should his customers pay double for food in order to pay for the regulators?
etc. etc.
Amazingly, even some in the White House are concerned about the extent to which licensing has impaired people’s ability to earn a living. They seem to be worried about zoning, too.
The proposed Freedom Act would allow anyone to decide for themselves who is qualified to cut their hair or paint their house.
It kills me to disagree here, but companies already try to do this with 34 page end user agreements. In the most egregious cases, the seller stipulates the buyer cannot post any complaints in a public forum. Would the seller have legal recourse if the buyer complained despite signing the lawyer-spawned agreement?
This type of law would seem to favor company which could spend hundreds of hours crafting one sellers agreement, rather than the consumer which would have to spend hours (and possibly a law degree) pouring over a contract for many consumer purchases.
I like the spirit of the law, but am a bit hazy on any consumer protections that would remain.
iWe: I cannot say enough how fantastic it would be if your Work Freedom idea was to become law. The idea that government employees are unionized is so unAmerican it hurts.
I expect a standard boilerplate would emerge, and it would be rated in turn by consumer organizations and their lawyers. So people would choose the nature of the protections they liked.
All who receive a government paycheck–or work for a firm that makes >50% of its revenue from government business–lose the franchise while they are so employed.
LegalZoom should get behind this idea. They’d do a land office business.
I like the idea of selling off some federal lands, and of tax reform, perhaps even something like the flat tax. But we need to be careful about implementation.
I would expect that selling off a substantial portion of federal lands would drive real estate prices down significantly. Which would wipe away a great deal of private wealth and lead to a rash of foreclosures, litigation, bankruptcies, and perhaps a financial crisis.
Most significant changes need to be implemented gradually, to avoid unintended consequences.
Does anyone know if Mitch McConnell informed Paul Ryan that they don’t have the votes to override a veto?
Since Democrats have been anxious to raise taxes, we should do so with Obama providing some political cover—but in such a way that it slams their own base, rather than Republicans’. Thus, my proposal is to remove the federal tax deduction for state and local taxes. New Yorkers would see their tax bills rise, but Texans—with no state income tax—wouldn’t be affected.
There is (was?) a bar in Anchorage AK [the fly by night club] that features “excerpts from our latest health inspection” on the menu.
One of the checkboxes next to “signs of infestation” was for turtles. This led to the headline on the menu – “Come eat in our certified turtle-free environment”.
(Quotes from memory. It’s been a few years.)
I “like” threads or comments that assert our Constitution is treated as if dead”– not even “mostly dead” for you Princess Bride fans. This may explain why those who have sworn to uphold and defend it–the U.S. Constitution–mostly don’t.