Our nervousness when powerful financial players are trying to override our system must not short out our principles but rather supercharge our advocacy of Liberty.
Indeed. Our government is nothing if not relentless in its misuse of power. Give it more to remedy what may very well be a significant problem, and it won't be long at all before that additional power is used against other targets.
How would you implement that? Would you restrict other groups as well? How about the National Association of Realtors? The AMA? The American Hospital Association? AARP? The U.S. Chamber of Commerce?
No difference. A shareholder like a doctor can decide to give their personal contribution to a PAC which represents their interests. The difference is that they are not using corporate funds to do so. I have no problem with individuals banding together and using their own funds to make a difference in our politics.
Much like the original sin of US healthcare, the problem with corporate sponsored speech is in the tax code. 401k retirement plans give large corporate interests an outsized soap box bought with OPM, several layers removed from the opinions and informed consent of their shareholders. The problem is government - Hawley needs to stop trying to fix it with more government. End the 14th Amendment violations that are unequal tax treatment.
On TikTok and other similar platforms, few have actually articulated the real risk. The problem is that the CCP can and is propagandizing the youth of the US through algorithmic manipulation. There's no legislative solution to "ban" TikTok that would pass constitutional muster. However, we know the FBI has already been "banning" voices they want silenced via third party voluntary compliance.
We know for a fact that was happening at Twitter, and we can assume it's also still happening at Amazon, Google, and Apple. They know TikTok is an infosec and propaganda threat, so why haven't they pressured the various app stores to deplatform it? We were bombarded with Ad Council campaigns to give the COVID vaccine to children. Where's the Ad Council campaign warning parents about TikTok?
Great column. I’m *not* a “fan” of Hawley.
Our nervousness when powerful financial players are trying to override our system must not short out our principles but rather supercharge our advocacy of Liberty.
Indeed. Our government is nothing if not relentless in its misuse of power. Give it more to remedy what may very well be a significant problem, and it won't be long at all before that additional power is used against other targets.
It's hard to speak about liberty if an oligarchy of corporate interests gives us the best government money can buy.
Again, what's the remedy? More power to the government? The rent-seeking behavior will only amplify.
The remedy is less power to the corporations through restricting their ability to influence elections through their funds.
How would you implement that? Would you restrict other groups as well? How about the National Association of Realtors? The AMA? The American Hospital Association? AARP? The U.S. Chamber of Commerce?
Groups such as the AMA could use the donations made by individuals who were members.
What's the difference between a doctor joining the AMA and a shareholder buying a piece of a company?
Or, if you prefer, does that doctor have *any* more voice re AMA lobbying than a small shareholder?
No difference. A shareholder like a doctor can decide to give their personal contribution to a PAC which represents their interests. The difference is that they are not using corporate funds to do so. I have no problem with individuals banding together and using their own funds to make a difference in our politics.
Much like the original sin of US healthcare, the problem with corporate sponsored speech is in the tax code. 401k retirement plans give large corporate interests an outsized soap box bought with OPM, several layers removed from the opinions and informed consent of their shareholders. The problem is government - Hawley needs to stop trying to fix it with more government. End the 14th Amendment violations that are unequal tax treatment.
On TikTok and other similar platforms, few have actually articulated the real risk. The problem is that the CCP can and is propagandizing the youth of the US through algorithmic manipulation. There's no legislative solution to "ban" TikTok that would pass constitutional muster. However, we know the FBI has already been "banning" voices they want silenced via third party voluntary compliance.
We know for a fact that was happening at Twitter, and we can assume it's also still happening at Amazon, Google, and Apple. They know TikTok is an infosec and propaganda threat, so why haven't they pressured the various app stores to deplatform it? We were bombarded with Ad Council campaigns to give the COVID vaccine to children. Where's the Ad Council campaign warning parents about TikTok?