The Rheins Act

Oct 29, 2024 | Politics

“How,” you might ask, “are federal bureaucrats allowed to make federal law when only Congress has that authority?”Congress has long delegated “rulemaking” power to federal agencies. And although the Supreme Court has long recognized that Congress’s lawmaking power can’t be delegated, it’s long been unwilling to enforce that in the context of federal regulations—even though they’re laws.These federal regulations come at a steep cost to hardworking Americans. By virtue of the way federal regulations operate, most Americans remain largely unaware of how costly they are. While it’s difficult to assess with precision the cost to the American economy of compliance with federal regulations, most estimates are measured in the trillions of dollars—with some people putting it as high as $4 trillion.It’s easy for people to assume that those compliance costs are borne by big corporations and a few wealthy individuals. That simply isn’t true. But it can be easy to assume that because most people don’t see how much more they pay for everything due to federal regulations. That’s what makes lawmaking by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats so dangerous.Most Americans don’t know how much more difficult, inconvenient, and (especially) expensive life is because of federal regulations. Even when Americans become aware of how much they’re being harmed by federal regulations, their ability to fix it is limited by the unholy alliance between Congress and federal bureaucrats.It was with good reason that the Constitution entrusted the lawmaking power only to Congress. The lawmaking power is the most dangers of the powers wielded by each branch of the U.S. government. The Constitution assigned the lawmaking power to the legislative branch because it’s the branch that stands most accountable to voters, and at the most regular intervals. All U.S. representatives can be fired by their voters every two years. One-third of U.S. senators can be fired by their voters every two years. Essentially no one can fire a federal bureaucrat.So why does Congress give up so much lawmaking power—handing it over to unelected, unaccountable “experts” who can’t be fired—knowing of the harm it causes to the American people? Short answer: it makes the job of Congress easier and gives members of Congress deniability.This arrangement between Congress and federal bureaucrats—making life easier for members of Congress and making bureaucrats more powerful—can last only as long as the American people remain unaware of the arrangement’s existence and cost, economically and in terms of liberty.From how much you pay for almost everything you buy to how much you’re paid to the number of federal crimes on the books (at least 300,000), federal regulations have a far deeper impact on Americans than most realize. Do you miss real light bulbs? Do you miss dishwashers, washing machines, and dryers that got the job done consistently—like they used to? Shower heads and toilets that weren’t so stingy with water? Those too have been lost to actions taken by federal bureaucrats.Yes, this is a longstanding, expensive, difficult, and complicated problem. Fortunately, we have access to a simple solution.There’s a bill called the REINS Act that would require all “major rule” federal regulations to be enacted into law *by Congress* before taking effect. This is a simple, elegant solution to a nasty problem.In essence, the REINS Act requires Congress to comply with what the Constitution already requires. If you think Congress should pass the REINS Act, please find out where your members of (or candidates for) Congress stand on it.If they say they support it, ask them what they are willing to do to help move it forward. With all that’s at stake, there should be no higher legislative priority for Congress than passing the REINS Act.

J6 | Transcripts Show President Trump’s Directives to Pentagon Leadership to “Keep January 6 Safe” Were Deliberately Ignored

Sep 30, 2024 | Politics

Mark Zuckerberg Finally Admits His Complicity With Government Censors

Aug 27, 2024 | Politics

The Honorable Jim Jordan Chairman Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives 2138 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515Chairman Jordan:I appreciate the Committee's interest in content moderation on online platforms. As you are aware, Meta has produced thousands of documents as part of your investigation and made a dozen employees available for transcribed interviews. Further to our cooperation with your investigation, I welcome the opportunity to share what I've taken away from this process.There's a lot of talk right now around how the U.S. government interacts with companies like Meta, and I want to be clear about our position. Our platforms are for everyone - we're about promoting speech and helping people connect in a safe and secure way. As part of this, we regularly hear from governments around the world and others with various concerns around public discourse and public safety.In 2021, senior officials from the Biden Administration, including the White House, repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, and expressed a lot of frustration with our teams when we didn't agree. Ultimately, it was our decision whether or not to take content down, and we own our decisions, including COVID-19-related changes we made to our enforcement in the wake of this pressure. I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it. I also think we made some choices that, with the benefit of hindsight and new information, we wouldn't make today. Like I said to our teams at the time, I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to pressure from any Administration in either direction - and we're ready to push back if something like this happens again.In a separate situation, the FBI warned us about a potential Russian disinformation operation about the Biden family and Burisma in the lead up to the 2020 election. That fall, when we saw a New York Post story reporting on corruption allegations involving then-Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden's family, we sent that story to fact-checkers for review and temporarily demoted it while waiting for a reply. It's since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn't have demoted the story. We've changed our policies and processes to make sure this doesn't happen again -- for instance, we no longer temporarily demote things in the U.S. while waiting for fact-checkers.Apart from content moderation, I want to address the contributions I made during the last presidential cycle to support electoral infrastructure. The idea here was to make sure local election jurisdictions across the country had the resources they needed to help people vote safely during a global pandemic. I made these contributions through the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. They were designed to be non-partisan -- spread across urban, rural, and suburban communities. Still, despite the analyses I've seen showing otherwise, I know that some people believe this work benefited one party over the other. My goal is to be neutral and not play a role one way or another - or to even appear to be playing a role. So I don't plan on making a similar contribution this cycle.Respectfully, /s/ Mark Zuckerberg Mark Zuckerberg Founder, Chairman & CEO Meta Platforms, Inc.

For those of us who have criticized Facebook for years for its role in the massive censorship system, Zuckerberg’s belated contrition was more insulting than inspiring. It had all of the genuine regret of a stalker found hiding under the bed of a victim.

Zuckerberg’s sudden regret only came after his company fought for years to conceal the evidence of its work with the government to censor opposing views. Zuckerberg was finally compelled to release the documents by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and the House Judiciary Committee.Now forced to admit what many of us have long alleged, Zuckerberg is really, really sorry.

I noted that Zuckerberg continued to refuse to release this information after Elon Musk exposed this system in his release of the “Twitter Files.”Zuckerberg stayed silent as Musk was viciously attacked by anti-free speech figures in Congress and the media. He was fully aware of his own company’s similar conduct but stayed silent.When the White House and President Joe Biden repeatedly claimed that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation, Facebook continued to withhold evidence that they too were pressured to suppress the story before the election.When the censorship system was recently put before the Supreme Court in Murthy v. Missouri, the justices asked about evidence of coordination and pressure from the government. In Murthy, states successfully showed lower courts that there was coercion from the government in securing an injunction. The Biden administration denied such pressure and the Court rejected the standing of plaintiffs, blocked an order to stop the censorship, and sent the case back down to the lower court.Zuckerberg still remained silent.

Trump Assasination Attempt Fails

Jul 15, 2024 | Politics

“1776 represented the culmination of thousands of years of Western civilization and the triumph of not only spirit, but of wisdom, philosophy, and reason. And yet, as we meet here tonight, there is a growing danger that threatens every blessing our ancestors fought so hard for, struggled, they bled to secure. Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials, and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities. Many of these people have no idea why they’re doing this, but some know what they are doing. They think the American people are weak and soft and submissive, but no, the American people are strong and proud and they will not allow our country and all of its values, history, and culture to be taken from them.”“…In our schools, our newsrooms, even our corporate boardrooms, there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance. If you do not speak its language, perform its rituals, recite its mantras, and follow its commandments, then you will be censored, banished, blacklisted, persecuted, and punished. It’s not going to happen to us.”“Make no mistake. This left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution. In so doing they would destroy the very civilization that rescued billions from poverty, disease, violence, and hunger, and that lifted humanity to new heights of achievement, discovery, and progress.”[1]

One Should Not Have “Faith” in Any Legal System

Jun 3, 2024 | Politics