DACA - Why Ending the Executive Order is Good, and Why the LP Completely Blew It

Trump's recent executive order to repeal "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" has been making the news lately, with much heated debate between both Democrats and Republicans.

The Libertarian Party recently announced that it was denouncing the end of DACA, completely missing the mark and making themselves look like fools to much of their own party.

Quite honestly, the national party completely blew it. This could have been our time to shine, to point out how flawed the two-party system truly is, and how dangerous legislation through executive mandate can be, that one administration's policies can simply be undone with the stroke of a pen by the next administration, and that without following the process of turning a bill into law, that these executive orders are counter-productive to the welfare of our great nation.

Executive orders are the most removed from representation possible. There's a reason our laws are supposed to be approved by both the House and Senate - to ensure equal representation. Unilaterally implementing an executive order to change the immigration system does not present fair and equal representation of the people.

Our immigration system is very broken, and any executive order such as DACA is just a temporary, short-term fix, which can be easily undone as we've seen in these past few days. We must press Congress to permanently fix our immigration system through legislation. By ending the DACA executive order, congress must now act.

If this was a sudden, abrupt end to DACA, then the LP's article would be much more appropriate. It isn't. This is a 6-month phase-out, giving congress plenty of time to push through legislation to reform our broken immigration system and fix things permanently. Instead, the LP went with the kneejerk "sky is falling" reaction.

In a time when the country is so divided, and every reaction to government actions so polarized, the Libertarian Party could shine as the voice of calm and reason.

But just like when the LP Vice Chair called service members moralless murderers, the national party seems completely out of touch with its members.

Simply put, the LP completely blew it.

The is an opinion piece by Ken Buckler, independent contributor.

A “right” to health care? A “right” to a job? These are Euro-Socialist Rights by Jeff Jared

A “right” to health care? A “right” to a job? These are Euro-Socialist Rights by Jeff Jared

DECLARATION ON SOCIAL RIGHTS 

We the People sincerely hope for a society where: (1) no individual lives at a level of poverty below a certain minimum (1) (2) no individual who is capable goes without a job2 (3) no individual goes without adequate health care (3) (4) no individual goes without adequate education (4) (5) no individual gets paid less for equal work (5) (6) no individual goes without social security or pensions (6) (7) no individual goes without leisure, recreation, vacations and holidays with pay (7) and (8) no individual is privately discriminated against. (8)

 

But the well-intentioned elevation of these ideals to "rights" would be counterproductive and directly violate the Principle of Individual Consent, thus ultimately showing disrespect for the individual and the concept of equally applicable universal human rights. For these laudable ideals are "positive" rights which ultimately and logically lead to a property claim on things that other individuals already have prior inalienable rights to. 

Such positive rights cannot be retained equally by all, thus they violate the principle of equal protection of the laws (Art. I, Sect. 1, Subsect. 7). Some people in wealthier societies, for example, would have "more" rights. But universal rights, by definition, are equal and timeless for all humans everywhere. 

By elevating ideals to the status of rights, we tend to trivialize and inflate the notion of basic rights. "Negative" universal rights are really just rights from government coercion-interference (or coercion-interference from anyone else); they do not require anything to be actively done by government, only that governments passively refrain from doing anything. 

A right to contract, for example, (Art. I, Sect. 1, Subsect. 5) does not mean government will guarantee an individual a contract for something; it merely means that a government shall not impair the obligation of contract (9) while it is in the process of forming or once it has already been undertaken between two or more consenting and capable adults. 

A right to free speech doesn't mean the gov't must provide a website to you at no cost; it just means if you get one up and running, it can't take it down.    
     
Social rights are prohibited because they require a right to something (usually the time, money, or property of another individual) that another individual already has prior rights to.  Money--before taxation--belongs to the individual--as an extension of his body when he "mixed" his labor with property,10 and/or as a result of earning it through a consensual labor contract.  Government actually produces nothing itself; it only takes via taxation.
     
Finally, giving government the moral mandate to operate a social welfare state also, unfortunately, gives it the opportunity to ever-expand.  Universal, natural, individual human rights precede the state; they are not derived from it as social rights are. 

If giving money or time is to help a fellow human being and is voluntary, then it is no longer taxation but, rather, compassionate, charitable and loving gift-giving. This kind of love, not more taxation, is the solution to our mutual human problems. And the intermediary private institutions of civil society including but not limited to church, labor organization, insurance pool, neighborhood association, community, club and family will provide these if left alone by government. 

We the People hold once and for all that the superstitious 19th and 20th century belief that only governments can help the poor, underprivileged, unfortunate, and disabled is an outdated anachronism. We the People can and will take care of each other if left free to do so by governments. 

1 From Article 25 of the UN Declaration, 1948.

2 From Article 23 of the UN Declaration, 1948.

3 From Article 12 of the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, 1966.

4 From Article 26 of the UN Declaration, 1948.

5 From Article 23, Paragraph 2 of the UN Declaration, 1948.

6 From Article 22 of the UN Declaration, 1948.

7 From Article 24 of the UN Declaration, 1948.

8 From Article 2 of the UN Declaration, 1948.

9 From Art. I, Sect. 10, Para. 1 of the United States Constitution, 1789.

10 From the philosophy of John Locke and his "labor theory of value," Two Treatises on Government, 1678.

This contribution is from Washington-based independent journalist and Lawyer, Jeff Jared of the Law Office of Jeff E. Jared.

The Government's Contribution to Pollution by Michael Wilson

How much we humans contribute to Global Warming is a question that may never be answered to anyone’s satisfaction, but here are a few comments that may help mitigate the problem.

1. Using concrete instead of asphalt for roads and other surfaces will reflect the sun’s rays instead of absorbing them and result in a reduction of the air temperature of the surrounding area.

2.  The same applies to roofs.  White roofs reflect the sun’s rays and reduce the temperature of the surrounding area.

      

 "Globally, roofs account for 25% of the surface of most cities, and pavement accounts for about 35%. If all were switched to reflective material in 100 major urban areas, it would offset 44 metric gigatons of greenhouse gasses, which have been trapping heat in the atmosphere and altering the climate on a potentially dangerous scale."

We don’t want to mandate that you or anyone else paint their roof white, but we do think that since the government is building roads and putting up buildings of all kinds, then they should follow these simple suggestions.  Maybe you can help by doing this on your own.

3.  Open the transit market to competition.  Some of the most polluting vehicles are those owned by low-income people who do not have access to other transportation services because in most American cities the government has made it virtually impossible to own and operate a private transportation business.  By opening the transportation business to other types of providers, low-income people will then have access to alternatives that may reduce the number older polluting cars on the roads.  One source estimates that widespread use of jitneys for urban transit could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50%, or more but other studies are not so sure. As the market changes, we will know more.

4.  Advancements in the technology of LED, light emitting diodes, may significantly change the way we light our homes and workplaces.  Some estimate that the saving in electricity will be in the hundreds of terawatts. Regulations that slow the adoption of new technologies need to be repealed.

 "If all of the world's light bulbs were replaced with LEDs for ten years, Schubert and Kim estimate the following benefits would be realized:

• Energy savings of 1.9 × 10²⁰ joules
• Electrical energy consumption would be reduced by terawatt hours
• Financial savings of $1.83 trillion
• Carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced by 10.68 gigatons
• Crude oil consumption would be reduced by 962 million barrels
• The number of required global power plants would be reduced by 280 "

5.  The U.S. military and its worldwide deployment to some 700, or more bases in 130 countries worldwide uses a huge amount of petroleum products that can be reduced significantly.  Thus reducing pollution and saving considerable amounts.

 “It's impossible to overstate the challenge facing Defense. It is the single-largest consumer of petroleum in the world. Oil fuels the world economy; specifically, it fuels every weapons system operated by the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard.” 

6.  Agricultural subsidies have shifted food production from areas near our cities to cross country sites that require long distance trucking and are subject to other numerous problems from the food-borne diseases rapid spread of agricultural pest and disease.

7. The land management policies of government agencies have created more intensive fires than what common sense would have thought possible thus adding to the pollution problems.

CO2 released by fire contribute significantly to the issue, and poorly managed forests that burn hotter contribute even more.

8. Zoning and other housing regulations have spread our cities out and require more driving which contributes to unnecessary auto emissions.  We need to repeal zoning and other related laws.

This contribution is from Michael Wilson, Activist in the Libertarian Party of Washington.

Syria Bombing Proof of Failed Two Party System

One of the biggest arguments I heard from Trump supporters, on why people shouldn't vote for Clinton, was that a vote for Clinton was a vote for a war with Russia.

Yesterday, Trump authorized the bombing of a Syria air base.

For those not aware, Syria and Russia are close allies. In fact, Russia provides a lot of weapons to Syria. So apparently, a vote for Trump was also a vote for a war with Russia.

Don't get me wrong, the use of chemical weapons, especially against civilians, is a heinous crime and should not be tolerated. However, the United States is not the world's police force - that's what the United Nations is for.

Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson received a large amount of criticism for asking "What is Aleppo?" during an interview. Personally, I'd rather have a president who doesn't know where Aleppo is, compared to one who wants to bomb it.

But I digress. The fact of the matter is, we now have had multiple consecutive presidents from both parties take military action against other countries without congressional approval. Enough is enough. It's time we started electing leaders who will actually follow the constitution, and work to preserve peace, not wage war.

It's time to vote Liberty.

Ken is an independent contributor for the Liberty Chronicle Independent.

Bellevue Eastside Men's Shelter Debate 2017

This is a hot topic in Bellevue, Washington and has been for almost a year. This is a huge issue in King County as homelessness has been increasing every year since 2013.The market crash in 2007 set this off when people lost their jobs and/or houses in the crash. Figures show that when the market stabilized in 2010, the homeless rate dropped slightly and continued until 2013. While there are probably numerous reasons including growth of the city, the rate has increased year over year of homeless and one night unsheltered (on the streets) count. In 2014 Seattle metro area was ranked #4 in the nation for the highest homeless population in the United States.

There are figures showing that the demand for housing doesn't meet the increase in migration to the area. This could be why inflation of rents have gone up and continue to do so. Seattle decided to strike down micro housing as of late. I don't notice Bellevue picking up the idea either. While Seattle has been throwing money at their issue with temporary shelters and policing campsites (herding the homeless at times). Mayor Ed Murray has been throwing money at this in the last few years, $47 million in 2016. Has anything improved? While the city and himself are raising taxes that will effect low income people. Like the new sales and the potential soda tax. Then last month King County Executive Dow Constantine proposing a tax hike of $469 Million for Art, Science and Cultural programs as Mayor Murray of Seattle proposing a $275 Million levy for homelessness. Where are the priorities of these leaders?

Numbers are not what matters most however they do help reflect the needs and efficiency of programs or changes in policy that will reduce homelessness within the County or in general. The numbers of one night stay outdoors is scary. This number is increasing from 3,772 in 2015 to 4,505 in 2016 a 19 percent increase in a year. While only a few hundred (134 in 2015 and 245 in 2016) are concentrated on the Eastside that's still too much with the rapid growth the area has encountered. There are also other issues going on that is pushing currently housed individuals out on the streets. Rents are rising, the cost of fuel or transportation, costs of food and lack of "living wage" jobs.These issues have been brought up and addressed, however the solutions are lacking proper thought. With the 15 Now crowd we have seen what the minimum wage is doing. It's creating less growth in employment, rising costs of food and merchandise, shutting down businesses, higher rents and businesses not being created.

With Bellevue homelessness not being as big of a problem right now as Seattle has, the city council is expecting growth of the area to exceed Seattle's population in 20 years. However are they addressing the real issue of affordable housing and job creation for these residents? When I say these two things there is thought that the public sector must be involved. Yes they have to be involved with lowering taxes and regulations to attain this goal. Also we could model Houston, Texas as they have had the same issue as Seattle with high concentrations of homeless on the streets. We could allow the private charities to do their work and have a network system to link them altogether so they can refer people to different services offered by the different organizations. Houston decided that they may wish to create programs to transition these people to regular housing.

Congregations for the Homeless is this private group in Bellevue who has already been helping with temporary shelter solutions in the last some years. They already receive public funding and will receive more with this appropriation from the Council exactly $8,551,000, 9,906,000 in tax credits and 1,280,000 in private funding. This new shelter is supposed to be a more "long term" solution for these people with potential job resources and transitioning into permanent housing.

This has a few sides going on right now and the community is semi divided. There are a couple NIMBY style groups. One of them being Eastside Residents Coalition which has a petition on Change.org ( https://www.change.org/p/i-am-against-the-low-barrier-men-s-shelter-in-eastgate ). Some of the people within don't want this shelter anywhere in the community, some want it at a different location and others who are willing to work with it based on a public safety level. There are also the people who are for it and agree with the council. Most of the concerns are the fact of public safety and drug use. As a flyer I saw shows the attack of a woman who was cornered and raped in a park bathroom (In Seattle Golden Gardens) and then another instance of a transient burning down a mosque, the Islamic Center of the Eastside in January. This can be understood however those who end up in a shelter tend to want to better themselves, where as those that don't are the ones that typically stay in parks or sleep on trails. Those people will exist on the streets even if this shelter didn't open. There'd be those living in their cars. Also the city is talking about cracking down camping in recreational vehicles on the sides of streets in the area. This sounds like a potentially dangerous idea that could create an added homelessness issue.

With homelessness there are various factors. We could go into drug laws and decriminalization treating it more like a health issue. We have mental illness as well that effects even those who aren't homeless while this is also controversial. Most of the time it's just someone who slipped and fell in life. They made a bad choice or two or three, maybe they got in trouble with the law? Those with felonies tend to not be able to find employment or even housing. We live in a "one strike and you're out" society right now with the legal system. Some of these people just need a chance and people to listen to them? While yes there are those who are harmful to community and we need to address that when it comes down to it. There are several questions to ask but in the end we should look at where we can help those who ask for it, right?

You can find data on this project if you live in king county on the Bellevue city website. There have been several hearings. One of them a study session on 04/03/2017 that I attended as well as the council meeting that followed with residents and community members addressing their concerns. The final hearing will be held at Bellevue City Hall on Monday 04/17/17. Then the community will hopefully have decided on the right solution for them. Either way the community and private market can always step up to the needs that the public sector fails on.

I have listed some data and sources if you want to read more into this. Also here are some residents voicing their opinions as this is a community issue. 

To View the council sessions for 04/03/17 Click Here

For the Study: http://bellevue.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=4992

For the Council: http://bellevue.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=4993

Sources: http://www.bellevuewa.gov/eastside-mens-shelter.htm

http://www.cfhomeless.org/

http://www.homelessinfo.org/what_we_do/one_night_count/2016_results.php

http://mynorthwest.com/590795/regional-sales-tax-proposed-for-king-county-to-combat-homelessness/?utm_content=buffer7a290&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=MyNW+buffer

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/houstons-solution-to-the-homeless-crisis-housing-and-lots-of-it/

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/eastside/battle-brews-in-bellevue-over-sheltering-the-homeless/

http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2015/11/seattle-set-to-spend-more-than-47-million-on-homelessness-in-2016/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2015/03/16/we-are-seeing-the-effects-of-seattles-15-an-hour-minimum-wage/#506c823f3a22

http://www.sightline.org/2016/09/06/how-seattle-killed-micro-housing/

http://q13fox.com/2017/01/14/man-arrested-after-overnight-fire-at-bellevue-mosque/

http://invw.org/2015/03/03/what-homelessness-looks-like-here-in-four-charts/

http://mynorthwest.com/577956/king-county-exec-touts-new-homeless-shelter-treatment-centers-in-state-of-county-speech/

Alex Love is an independent journalist from Lynnwood, WA / Phoenix, AZ. He is a community servant and activist who also runs a non profit called Love 4 Liberty.

The Real Authoritarians vs Trump by Rosario Sicario

There has been a lot of hype about supposed Russian connections with the Trump campaign/administration. Any reasonable person can see there is a lot of smoke but no fire. The only solid “links” have been General Mike Flynn’s contacts with the Russian government, which was part of his job as national security adviser, and Paul Manafort, Trump’s convention manager, who helped Viktor Yanucovich’s campaign in Ukraine. In short, all of the supposed links between President Trump and Vladimir Putin are tenuous at best. Regardless, it doesn’t stop the Mainstream Media from pushing this fiction in what is clearly an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the 45th President by accusing him of being an authoritarian puppet of the Kremlin. Even though it’s fiction, it’s made strange bedfellows of the cucked #NeverTrump republicans and the bitter Democrats that still cannot come to terms with the real reasons that they lost the 2016 Presidential election.

There seems to be one theme that unites the #NeverTrump and Left in their opposition to the God Emperor, America’s LORD and Savior, the 45th President of the United States – Donald J. Trump. That theme is that Trump is an authoritarian. Yes, you read that right, our President is supposedly looking to singlehandedly destroy our Republic, decimate our institutions, and usher in a new era of mass oppression under his reign such as we haven’t seen since the 1930s.

What the fake news, mainstream media that gives voice to this absurd narrative fails to inform you about is that the US has already been living under an oppressive regime that has been eroding our liberties for years. Ever since FDR, our federal government’s bureaucracies have been growing like a malignant cancer. Our politicians have created department after department, passed law after law, and executive order after executive order that has encroached on our Constitutional Rights. This deep State regime allows the NSA to spy on us, the IRS to target us for contrary political beliefs, and even allows the TSA to molest us should we choose to board a flight.

If the definition of authoritarianism is:

“of or relating to a governmental or political system, principle, or practice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinate to the power or authority of the state, centered either in one person or a small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people..”

Then how can we not acknowledge that we have been already living under that kind of system for decades? The truth is we have had an “authoritarian” government since Kennedy was assassinated – we’ve had a government controlled by the special interests of the military-industrial complex, Wall Street, and multinational corporate interests. Why? Because most of our US politicians, especially those that have served as POTUS, have been mere puppets of these interests. Indebted to them by their campaign contributions. Furthermore, none of those special interests groups are accountable to the American public. None. Not one.

Imagine the worst thing about President Trump that you possibly can but the one thing that is undeniable is that he is not controlled by these special interests. How do we know that? His FEC filings, most of his campaign contributions came from individual donations and out of his own pocket. We know that all of the special interests monies went to opposing, not supporting him. In light of this, it is easy to see why brainwashed individuals on the “left” taking in heavy doses of CNN, NY times inspired fake news could be lead to believe our that President is an authoritarian simply because he is taking bold lawful actions that our past Presidents have needed permission to do. He is wielding the authority of the executive branch in the way that he’s sees fit to make America Great Again. Not the way Bill Kristol and the neocons want, not the way the Left wants, not the way the special interests groups want, and that has to make a lot of those people very angry, so they’re lashing out. Let them eat cake.

True patriots like us don’t see Trump as a Mussolini or Hitler, albeit some of us like to use that trope to gaslight the Left, but in our heart of hearts we see our President as a champion of liberty and American exceptionalism. For years he has seen our Nation being ripped off while American workers got the short end of the stick in a Global economy. President Trump has seen how political correctness warped our culture by restraining free speech and expression, so he ran a very anti-PC campaign that galvanized the support of college-aged males that contributed to his massive electoral victory in critical swing States. Bottom line, Trump isn’t an authoritarian, but he will act with his executive authority unapologetically to make America safe, prosperous, wealthy and greater than ever before.

Rosario Sicario is an independent journalist from Washington.

All contributors to The Liberty Chronicle Independent are independent, volunteer contributors.

All content is property of its respective independent contributor. The Liberty Chronicle Independent and its Editor make no claims or endorsements regarding independently contributed content.

Trump Protestors on Inauguration Day, I can not Stand with You by David Malekar

Normally, I would completely support protesting Big Government and the Militarized Police State. Sadly, I can not tomorrow.

People are protesting for the wrong reasons, against a guy who isn't putting us in a war with Russia and starting WW3. (link:http://heatst.com/politics/kremlin-clinton-victory-would-have-led-to-world-war-3-between-russia-and-the-us/)

A guy who isn't forcing us to go into a mandatory draft that would have taken both men and women unlike Clinton. (link:http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-clinton-women-draft-register-224390)

A guy who spoke for a long time about 50 state legalization of Medical Marijuana (link:http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/19/why-pot-industry-will-keep-growing-under-trump-commentary.html)

A guy who spoke constantly about helping minorities and people within inner-cities (link:http://www.libertychronicle.net/2016/08/donald-trump-holds-rally-in-washington.html)

A guy who wants to help veterans with healthcare and more. (link:https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/veterans-affairs-reform)

A guy who helps businesses create jobs in the United States at a record pace. (link:https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/veterans-affairs-reform)

A guy who supports LGBT without question (link:http://www.inquisitr.com/3702676/donald-trump-surprise-president-elect-supports-lgbt-community-holds-rainbow-flag-at-colorado-rally-lgbt-for-trump/)

I could continue this list for hours, but I want to get this piece out tonight rather than next week.

I am closing this with a video of the Seattle Anti-Trump Protest I attended on November 13, 2016, a few days after Trump had been elected by the Electoral College.

LCI Exclusive: Seattle Anti-Trump Protest Rally 11.13.2016

 

I wanted to give coverage of the protestors to show that they were not violent, that they were just out there to express concern. I was dressed in a black suit and tie, with my press credentials showing clearly I was with the Press and was there to cover the event; I had no political attire or affiliations on or with me. I was the only journalist to cover the event from start to finish, walking with these folks for miles in the rain. I had contracted Walking Pneumonia that I had to fight for over 2 months to recover from. As you can see, I had gone into this giving it everything I have as I always do when covering something, almost 4 hours worth of video coverage. At the very end of the protest, I spoke on a bullhorn to the crowd that had dwindled down from 400+ to about 30 people.

I wish I could say the experience was overall a great one, but it was not. I was attacked from nearly the start by random folks, yelling in my face and attacking me in crowds. I posed no threat and was there to help these people get exposure. I was a man of the Press and I was seen as the enemy. You don't have to just take my word for it, feel free to watch the video. A journalist shouldn't have to defend themselves for covering a live event in a public place. I was doing them a favor by being there and giving them uncut, uncensored coverage. What did I get in return? The Walking Pneumonia for 2 months that I had mentioned and looked down upon like I was subhuman. This Piscataway Native that they claim to stand up for, put me down. I never experienced such bigotry in my life until moving to Seattle.

So I can not stand with you, Protestors; you have made me your enemy without even realizing I was trying to cover you in a positive light. I waited months before finally writing and officially publishing this video in an article because of how disappointed i was at them. We wanted to stand with you, people of the "left;" but you chose to stand against us.

Independent Associate Editor of the LCI speaks to Anti-Trump Protestors on November 13, 2016

This contribution is from Seattle-based independent journalist, David Malekar, Independent Associate Editor for the Liberty Chronicle Independent; who publishes content to the WashCo Chronicle and other online publications.

The "Fake News" Accusations Have Begun Against Independent News Sites

Well, it's finally happened. The "Fake News" accusations have begun against independent media.

There's a growing problem in the United States and the rest of the world - truth in media is almost nonexistent when it comes to mainstream media news sources.

Years ago, I set out to solve this problem, by creating my own news site. This site has no advertisers, no paid staff. Only volunteers committed to writing the truth.

Now, this news site is under attack, with claims that our articles are fake.

Unlike traditional media which rushes to be the first to break a story, Liberty Chronicle Independent puts quality above quantity, carefully verifying any article we write or share from another news site.

I want you to ask yourself a question for a moment - what would we have to gain here for fake news? We have no advertisers, and any news from outside sources we share, we get zero revenue from their advertisers.

Could it be, that we are trying to just make a difference? Could it be that we're trying to restore integrity to journalism?

I don't have to run Liberty Chronicle Independent. It costs me money to host the site, money which I don't try to recoup at all.  It's my way of giving back to the community.

Want to help? Submit an article. Anybody can do it, and if our verification of the article checks out (because we will check the sources you include), we will publish it.

Still think we're fake news? Well, I'm sorry to hear it. Please feel free to return to whatever fake news mainstream media site you frequently visit, and continue to wear blinders for the rest of your life. But for those of you who want to, for those of you who choose to, you can join us on our mission of restoring integrity to journalism, and promoting liberty.

Ken is the editor of the Liberty Chronicle Independent

Hogan's Accidental War on Full-Time Workers

ANNAPOLIS, MD - Yesterday Maryland Governor Larry Hogan announced he intends to introduce legislation which will require companies with 50 or more workers who work 30 hours or more per week to provide 40 hours of paid sick leave per year.

At face value, this seems like an excellent attempt at helping full time workers stay home when they're sick, so they can take care of themselves and not spread illness to others.

Unfortunately, as the famous saying goes, "results may vary".

For some companies, offering a week of paid sick leave to 50 employees may be too much to impact their bottom line. You see, when an employee calls off sick, if the job is something such as warehouse or manufacturing, the employer has to make a choice - either allow production to be negatively impacted (which costs money), or call in another employee to take over that shift (which also costs money). Now, the business must also cover the employee's pay as if they were still at work.

I know what you're thinking - but don't many businesses offer paid sick leave? Yes, many do. In fact, my own employer, which has less than 10 employees, offers a week of paid sick leave. However, that is part of why I chose my current employer, because of the employee benefits.

Benefits, not just wages, are a driving force behind employment decisions. A prospective employee is more likely to work for a business with lower pay and good benefits, than work for an employer with higher pay and no benefits.

So what is a business to do, if it has over 50 employees but can't afford to pay them a full week of sick leave? The business has two options - either cut back on the number of full time employees (thanks Obama!), or leave Maryland completely just like Beretta is doing because of Maryland's gun laws. Neither of these options is good for the employees or the state.

In all fairness, Governor Hogan is on the right track with his $20,000 tax incentive for paid sick leave for businesses under 50 employees. In my opinion, giving a business a tax break, instead of fining or penalizing them, is always preferable. Imagine how many additional full time jobs Maryland could possibly create if we created a sliding scale, not just offering tax breaks for businesses under 50 employees offering paid sick leave, but increasingly larger tax breaks for larger businesses.

Very rarely do I utilize this site to vocalize my own beliefs, and I absolutely believe businesses should offer their workers paid sick leave. But I cannot support forcing them to do so.

Please contact Governor Hogan today, and tell him this is a bad deal for Maryland workers. We want Maryland to be open for business, not driving away business.

Ken is the editor of the Liberty Chronicle. This editorial does not reflect or represent the view of his employers or clients.

Why Wages Aren’t Rising by Jeff Jared

Why Wages Aren’t Rising by Jeff Jared

Why aren’t wages rising like they used to, when they were the source of the American Dream for millions? Well, because the natural power balance/equilibrium between labor and management has been artificially distorted by gov’t to favor owners over workers.

Owners of the means of production (a Marxist phrase, but one can use it w/out advocating communism) / the banks / the lenders / the stock owning class (20% of Americans) / the capital controllers / big business owners are artificially gaining an advantage to keep the wealth of America swirling around the top rather than torrenting down, like it would in a truly free market. The economic rules, with the aid of gov’t, have rigged it in favor of the upper class against the middle & working classes.

By the natural equilibrium / balance of power between labor & management being tilted toward owners and away from laborers. We’ve a class of debtors now in America living paycheck to paycheck. Economic distortions favoring the well-to-do stagnate wages. This is a classic example of the market not working because of gov’t meddling in the economy, and its slamming the poor & middle classes.

How is this done, you ask?

The Fed’s holding down interest rates and bailouts subsidize the investment class at the expense of workers. The Federal Reserve Bank artificially holds down interest rates which favors banks. Bailouts privatize profits, but socialize losses--meaning taxpayers pay bankers. Same for FDIC subsidized bank insurance. Subsidized insurance subsidizes risk. Bankers & owners benefit, while workers suffer.

But liberals and unions have missed this point, instead wrong-headedly focusing on the minimum wage--which hurts the very people its designed to help. Focusing on ending the Fed and its ugly sister, crony capitalism, would do far more for workers than any gov’t intervention in the economy. Economics 101 should teach us all that.

A free market wouldn’t tilt like this in favor of elites, and wages, correspondingly would rise like they naturally should in a free enterprise society.

This contribution is from Washington-based independent journalist and Lawyer, Jeff Jared of the Law Office of Jeff E. Jared.