Posts Tagged ‘jon fournier’

The Democrats held up the Coronavirus stimulus so they could try and steal elections

Posted: April 16, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,

It is absolutely unconscionable that Speaker Nancy Pelosi held up the Coronavrius relief package for about a week in order to advance a progressive wish list.  The worst provisions of this progressive wish list were those that were supposed to federalized elections.  This would have guaranteed that Democrats would win the majority of all elections going forward, especially presidential elections.

The provisions imposing voting by mail and same day registration on all states would have opened US elections to an enormous amounts of fraud.  This is nothing compared to the amount of fraud that would have unleashed on US elections if the provision discussed in this Breitbart article Pelosi ‘Stimulus’ Bill Imposes Nationwide ‘Ballot Harvesting’ Without ‘Any Limit’ was imposed on all 50 states.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s new stimulus bill would mandate nationwide “ballot harvesting,” allowing party operatives to return other people’s ballots to polling places without “any limit” on the number of ballots.

“Ballot harvesting” was legalized in California in 2016, and first used in the 2018 midterm elections. It allows anyone to drop off someone else’s mail-in ballot at a polling station. There is no process for vetting or verifying those delivering the ballots — no background checks or identification requirements. Democrats dropped hundreds of thousands of ballots off at polling stations in 2018, helping Democrats as they flipped seven Republican seats.

Here is the actual text of the ballot harvesting provision.

shall permit a voter to designate any person to return a voted and sealed absentee ballot to the post office, a ballot drop-off location, tribally designated building, or election office so long as the person designated to return the ballot does not receive any form of compensation based on the number of ballots that the person has returned and no individual, group, or organization provides compensation on this basis; and (B) may not put any limit on how many voted and sealed absentee ballots any designated person can return to the post office, a ballot drop off location, tribally designated building, or election office.

When Nancy Pelosi attempted to insert the ballot harvesting provision into the bailout legislation she knew well that it will lead to Democrats stealing elections because it succeeded when it was tried in California.  This is documented in the Breitbart article Blue State Blues: Democrats Stole the Election in California — Legally, Through ‘Ballot Harvesting’

California Democrats “stole” the midterm election using a new method that is illegal elsewhere but completely legal in the Golden State: a practice called “ballot harvesting,” which allows third parties to submit mail-in ballots for voters.

The practice explains several mysteries about the 2018 election, such as: why mail-in ballots caused massive shifts toward Democrats in races Republicans thought they won on Election Night; why Republicans won the turnout battle in the primary, but lost it in the general election; and why Democrats with party backing defeated fellow Democrats without it — even when the latter had more money.

It is true that the proposed changes to election law could favor both parties however the Democrats have demonstrated a remarkable proclivity for cheating and fraud.  That is because they have embraced Marxist philosophies and Saul Allinsky’s Rule for Radicals. Their success is documented in this San Francisco Chronicle article

California Democrats took advantage of seemingly minor changes in a 2016 law to score their stunningly successful midterm election results, providing a target for GOP unhappiness that is tinged with a bit of admiration…Few people noticed when Gov. Jerry Brown signed the changes in AB1921 into law two years ago. In the past, California allowed only relatives or people living in the same household to drop off mail ballots for another voter. The new law allowed anyone, even a paid political campaign worker, to collect and return ballots — “harvesting” them, in political slang.

In Orange County alone, where every House seat went Democratic, “the number of Election Day vote-by-mail dropoffs was unprecedented — over 250,000,” Fred Whitaker, chairman of the county Republican Party, said in a note to supporters. “This is a direct result of ballot harvesting allowed under California law for the first time. That directly caused the switch from being ahead on election night to losing two weeks later.”

Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Senate Republicans must hold strong.  They must make sure the Democrats never take control of our electoral system.

The great toilet paper shortage was caused by laws that prevent price gouging

Posted: April 9, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,

Anti price gouging laws were enacted across this nation with the best intentions however they very often produce shortages of essential goods.  This is exactly what happened at the beginning of the Coronavirus crisis.  In a purely free market economy the shortage of toilet paper would have been mush less severe.  We probably would not have witnessed near riots and even fist fights over a shortage of this so necessary product.

When the mass buying toilet paper began and store inventories began to run low the store keepers should have automatically raised prices.  A drastic run on  toilet paper should have led to a drastic rise in the price.  This would have discouraged the mass buying and hording when inventories in the stores began to run low.

Because of the increased sale of toilet paper the store owners would have ordered more toilet paper from their suppliers who would then charge the store owners more if their supplies began to run low.  Quickly, because of free market forces the increased price and demand of toilet paper would have reached the manufacturers who would produce more and ship it faster down the supply chain to the stores.

Here is how the Foundation for Economic Education explained the factors behind the toilet paper shortage:

From an economic perspective, the value of toilet paper is much higher now than it was pre-pandemic. But with the price of toilet paper the same as it always was and not reflecting its increased value, there is nothing to prevent individuals from buying as much of it as possible. Indeed, that’s the rational consumer response. But if shopkeepers increased the price of toilet paper to reflect its new value, suddenly we would think twice about hoarding it and only take as much as we need. These rising prices would also signal supply chains of the increased value of toilet paper, prompting toilet paper manufacturers to boost production.

In natural disasters, like a hurricane or an earthquake or a pandemic, we often hear people decry “price gouging” and blame “greedy shopkeepers” for trying to profit off of misery. Yet, price gouging is an unfair term. If the shopkeeper raises the price of toilet paper (or hand sanitizer or bleach or eggs or any of the other items that are currently in high demand), then it incentivizes the consumer not to hoard and to buy only as much of an item as is truly needed. It’s not greedy, it’s responsive.

If the store charges too much customers will not buy the product or they will buy very little then the store will need to lower the price.  When more product becomes available the store will need to lower the price if it does not sell.  The store will eventually need to order less causing the price up the supply chain to fall signaling the producers to produce less.

Because of the price controls restricting the price the store can charge they are not able to pay their suppliers more.  The suppliers are not able to pay the manufacturers more.  There is no incentive for the producers to rapidly produce more and no incentive for the suppliers to rush the product down the supply chain resulting in delays in restocking shelves.

Government interference in the free market always produces far more negative results than positive no matter how well intentioned they are.  Unfortunately most colleges do not teach free market economics and politicians who  do not support anti price gouging laws are decried as monsters.

President Trump’s deregulation efforts have saved a lot of lives

Posted: April 2, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,

I’ve maintained for many years that government regulations do far more harm than good.  Unfortunately the Coronavirus crises has more than proved me right.  Government red tape cost the lives of many Americans early on during this pandemic and the deregulation efforts by President Trump will have saved a substantial number of Americans before the crisis is over.  If you think I’m being melodramatic check out the Townhall article The Red Tape Pandemic by John Stossel.

The number of test kits available when the crisis began to unfold was disgrace and directly attributable to government regulations.  This had a major impact on how far and how fast the virus spread across the United States.  The Townhall article explains how a much larger number of test kits in South Korea resulted in a much less dire situation than we now face here.

Coronavirus deaths leveled off in South Korea.

That’s because people in Korea could easily find out if they had the disease. There are hundreds of testing locations — even pop-up drive-thru testing centers.

We can compare that to what happened here due to the low number of test kits.

In America, a shortage of COVID-19 tests has made it hard for people to get tested. Even those who show all the symptoms have a difficult time.

Why weren’t there enough tests?

Because our government insists on control of medical innovation.

The shortage of test kits was caused by government regulations.

When coronavirus appeared, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention made its own tests and insisted that people only use those CDC tests. But the CDC test often gave inaccurate results. Some early versions of the test couldn’t distinguish between coronavirus and water.

Private companies might have offered better tests, and more of them, but that wasn’t allowed. The World Health Organization even released information on how to make such tests, but our government still said no. Instead, all tests must go through the government’s cumbersome approval process. That takes months. Or years.

Hundreds of labs had the ability to test for the virus, but they weren’t allowed to test.

As a result, doctors can’t be sure exactly where outbreaks are happening. Instead of quarantining just sick people, state governors are forcing entire states to go on lockdown.

At the same time, many people who show no symptoms do have COVID-19. Without widespread testing, we don’t know who they are, and so the symptomless sick are infecting others.

The shortage of test kits was relieved by President Trump relaxing regulations.

A few weeks ago, the government finally gave up its monopoly and said it was relaxing the rules. There would be quick “emergency use authorizations” replacing the months- or years-long wait for approval. But even that took so long that few independent tests were approved.

So President Donald Trump waived those rules, too.

Now tests are finally being made. But that delay killed people. It’s still killing people.

Doctor and nurse shortages have also impacted the Coronavirus crisis.  This issue was solved by a combination of President Trump and the governors of many states.

In some states, there’s a shortage of doctors or nurses. That, too, is often a product of bad law — state licensing laws that make it illegal for professionals licensed in one state to work in another. Trump said he would waive “license requirements so that the doctors from other states can provide services to states with the greatest need.” Then it turned out that he could only allow that for Medicare; he didn’t have the power to override stupid state licensing rules.

Fortunately, many states finally waived harmful licensing laws on their own.

It’s good that governments finally removed some rules.

This National Review article Deregulate to Help the Private Sector Fight Coronavirus also proves that government regulations have been costly in the fight against Coronavirus.

Amid the humanitarian and economic crisis brought on by the coronavirus pandemic, an intelligent policy response can save lives and livelihoods. In addition to the many measures being introduced and passed into law, including economic-stimulus measures and funding for testing, one critically important government response is to cut red tape and regulatory burdens that stand in the way of a quick and impactful response from businesses that can meaningfully help in the crisis.

The level of food and necessities has stabilized in the past few days.  One deregulation effort by President Trump’s administration helped bring that about.

since 1938, federal regulations limit most commercial truck drivers to eleven hours of driving time in a 14-hour workday. The restriction is intended to reduce accidents caused by highway fatigue. The rule doesn’t necessarily encourage safety, however, as truckers may be forced off the road at the end of their workday in areas not hospitable to truckers…Last Friday, after the president’s declaration of a national emergency, the Department of Transportation announced a nationwide exemption to the 82-year-old rules. Now truckers can help deliver badly needed supplies more quickly and efficiently while still safely splitting their required ten-hour rest period into two separate breaks instead of having to all take it at once.

Hopefully when the Coronavirus pandemic is over we will remember that government regulations made the crises worse and relaxing the regulations had very positive results. When it comes to getting rid of government regulations we need to go much further

We can’t let this become the new normal

Posted: March 26, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , ,

I was completely startled at how rapidly everything escalated over just one week.  One minute I was watching a Red Sox preseason game where they were talking about the possibility of the halting preseason games, then, with in a few days governments at all levels were shutting down just about all normal activity.  Everything that happened was so unprecedented here in the United States. 

I’m worried that since it has happened once it will now happen over and over again.  Am I being paranoid about that?  I don’t think so.  Over the past decade I’ve studied history in great detail, with a particular emphasis on different forms of government.  The one theme that has repeated itself most often is that once a government body has tasted power it will soon become addicted to it and will wield it as often as it can. 

Were all of the orders to shelter in place and shutter businesses necessary?  I don’t know.  The only way to prove that it wasn’t is if governments did nothing,  I believe the price for that may have been a very steep price, just look at conditions in Italy.

We the people must take careful steps to make sure that this type of government forced social disruptions happens only when absolutely needed, only under the most dire of circumstances.  The way we do this is different for each level of government.

The way to prevent the federal government from abusing emergency powers and closing society down is simply to read the Constitution, understand the Constitution, and make sure the federal government follows the Constitution.  Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted the power to restrict what individuals and businesses can do under any circumstances, even during an emergency.  That power is not granted to the federal government anywhere in the Constitution therefore it is left up to the state and local government levels.  If you don’t agree check out this Tenth Amendment Center article.

I believe some state governments, especially the governors, have gone too far with their Coronavirus measures.  Now that they have done it once I believe some governors will do it for much less of a crisis or a made up crisis such as climate change.  The residents of all of the states need to order their state governments to reign in emergency declaration powers through legislation.  Most governors can declare emergencies on their without the approval of the state legislatures.  I believe that if an emergency will last more than 48 hours the state legislatures should approve all plans and measures.  What constitutes an actual emergency must also be defined by legislation. Clear guidelines must be included in the legislation to protect the tights of individuals while protecting the health of everyone.

Local governments should be the freest when it comes to declaring emergencies and should have the least restrictions because most emergencies are local.

We the people must remain vigilant and make sure that the federal government and state governments do not make emergencies such as the one we’re dealing with now common place.  I fear that they will.

Older Entries
Newer Entries