Archives

An email message from the Marijuana Policy Project informs that White House Drug Czar John Walters is illegally using taxpayer money to interfere in state politics::::

Just this week, White House Drug Czar John Walters traveled to Nevada, where he held a news conference to attack MPP’s initiative to tax and regulate marijuana similarly to alcohol. Walters called marijuana an “addictive, accident causing, dependence-producing substance” and urged Nevadans to vote against MPP’s initiative on November 7.

:::I laughed when I read that, because Walters was making MPP’s argument for them. Alcohol, much more so than marijuana, is an “addictive, accident causing, and dependence-producing substance,” yet MPP wants marijuana to be taxed and regulated just like alcohol.::::::It’s maddening that our government pays the salary for a guy like John Walters. The MPP message continues::::

This isn’t the first time Drug Czar John Walters has attempted to scare and mislead voters. He campaigned against the medical marijuana laws that MPP successfully passed in Rhode Island in January of this year and in Montana and Vermont in 2004, and he has a history of barraging the TV airwaves with inaccurate and fear-mongering ads during the last few weeks of MPP’s initiative campaigns.::::::Walters was also rebuked by Nevada’s then attorney general for “excessive” and “disturbing” interference in the state’s vote on MPP’s first initiative in Nevada in 2002 … and Walters has refused to file with the state government any campaign finance reports detailing the amount of taxpayer money that he spent attacking MPP’s 2002 initiative — even in response to a written request from the Nevada secretary of state to do so.

:::This is all the more reason we should Depose the Drug Czar.::::::

Just what are the Porkers up to?

Today’s Downsizer-Dispatch…:::We have an URGENT ACTION ITEM today that includes “egg on a Senator’s face.” But first, two quick housekeeping matters . . .

Today’s Downsizer-Dispatch…:::Yesterday we extolled the virtues of radical ideas versus controversial subjects. This should have raised a question in the mind’s of thoughtful Downsizers, and so we’ll respond to that question today.::::::If radical ideas are superior and controversial subjects inferior, why are there so many seemingly controversial subjects on the DownsizeDC.org homepage? More specifically, why have we weighed-in on U.S. foreign policy when it’s so controversial? ::::::It must be stressed that the following answers are merely the guidelines we use. This is an art, not a science. We recognize that our judgments are subject to error. So having said, we’ll begin with two simple answers . . .

Today’s Downsizer-Dispatch…:::Yesterday we answered the question of why government continues to grow even though most people think it should shrink. We established that everyone is responding rationally to the incentives of the system. We asserted that we must change the incentives so that . . .::::::The cost politicians pay to increase government is unbearably high, while the cost the taxpayers pay to stop government growth is very low. ::::::We established that there are certain facts about Congressional power that make it possible to change the incentives in just this way. Using the low-cost organizing power of the Internet, combined with a host of other low-cost tactics, we can inflict extreme pain on Congress and force them to Downsize DC. ::::::Today we’ll look at another aspect of the problem, and another part of the solution. ::::::Nearly everyone believes government in too large in general, but nearly everyone is willing for government to grow in some specific area. Politicians use these exceptions to the Downsizing Consensus to Divide & Conquer the populace. There are many examples of these exceptions, but most of them share two things in common . . .

Downsize DC Conference Call – August 27, 2006

Today’s Downsizer-Dispatch…:::This year, as last year, August is strategy-and-tactics month — a time when we explain what we’re doing and why. In this installment we’ll solve a big problem . . .::::::Ask 10 people at random, “Do you believe the federal government is too big, too small, or just about the right size?” Nearly everyone will say, “Too big.” We’ve tested this repeatedly. The results are consistent. Nearly everyone is a DC Downsizer, in principle. Yet few people vote this way. We consistently elect people who increase the size of government. Why? ::::::There’s a branch of economics devoted to this problem. It’s called

Today’s Downsizer-Dispatch . . . :::

Our recent decision to oppose a pre-emptive attack on Iran, which we titled “Stop the War FOR Terror,” provoked more emails to our office than anything we’ve done this year. For all of you who voiced support, thank you. :::

But many of you had questions and concerns. As we reported on August 16th, we were quite impressed with the overall quality of the questions we received. We decided we must address them. :::

On today’s Downsize DC Conference Call (a radio show sponsored by DownsizeDC.org, Gun Owners of America, and the Marijuana Policy Project), I’ll be joined by Perry Willis, Communications Director for DownsizeDC.org. We’ll address some of the emails we received and answer your questions. Those questions fall into two broad categories . . .:::

1) The campaign itself… Is another war a bad idea? :::2) Downsize DC strategy… Was this consistent with our mission, our goals, and our methods? :::

Perhaps, during the course of the show, you’ll have a different question. I call my show the Conference Call because I want to hear from you. 1-800-259-9231 is the number to call-in. Emails can be sent to CALL AT DownsizeDC DOT ORG. :::

This hour-long program starts at 5:06 PM Eastern (4:06 PM Central, 3:06 PM Mountain, 2:06 PM Pacific, 1:06 PM Alaska). :::

To listen on the Net, go to www.GCNLive.com and click on channels one or two for the free feed. You can sample the higher quality, subscription feed on channels three or four for 25 minutes.:::

Thank you for being a DC Downsizer.:::

Jim Babka:::President:::DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

No to “Reform,” Yes to Downsizing

What am I reading today?