- Sing-Along: Fighting And Dying So the TSA Can Touch Your Junk
- The Federal Government's Rosy Fiscal Scenarios
- Will Sen. Rand Paul Run for President?
Reason magazine's Jacob Sullum writes: "Even if Obama had bothered to obey the Constitution by seeking congressional approval, intervening in Libya's civil war would take the U.S. military in the wrong direction at a time when fiscal realities dictate that America retire from its job as global policeman. As Obama conceded on Monday, 'our military is already very stretched and carries large burdens all around the world' — precisely because it is required to do much more than defend the United States. The U.S., with 5 percent of Earth's population and no enemies on its borders, spends about as much on 'defense' as the rest of the world combined. If you want to know why, consider how casually our commanders in chief order American servicemen to risk their lives for purposes that have nothing to do with national security. Obama claims 'we cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people that there will be no mercy.' Yes, we can, and we often do. There is no moral consistency, and little rhyme or reason, to the U.S. government's decisions about which brutal dictators to challenge, which to leave alone, and which to support as allies. The regimes that endorsed the war with Libya—supposedly justified by outrage over 'gross and systematic violation of human rights' —include quite a few, such as Gabon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia, that are guilty of the same crimes. In any case, American taxpayers have a right to expect that the money they are compelled to contribute to this nation's defense will be used for that purpose. American military personnel have a right to expect that their missions will have something to do with protecting U.S. security, the function they have agreed to serve."
President Obama's Attraction to War
Obama Follows Bush's Lead on Government Power
Fact 1: It isn’t.
Myth 2: Risk is the main problem with nuclear power.
Fact 2: Cost is the main problem, not risk.
Myth 3: The spread of nuclear power has stalled in the U.S. due to a hostile regulatory environment.
Fact 3: Nuclear power has stalled because it is simply not profitable.
Myth 4: Nuclear power is the key to energy independence.
Fact 4: More nuclear doesn’t mean less oil.
Reason magazine's Peter Suderman: "Even under the rosy scenarios cooked up by the White House economic team, the national debt is projected to rise by more than $7 trillion over the next decade—hardly a model of fiscal responsibility. But should we actually believe the president's projections? Just as it’s worth checking into a manufacturer’s product claims before swiping your credit card, it’s worth verifying what the administration claims about its own budget. That’s where the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) comes in. Think of it as Consumer Reports for economic policy. And according to a report released by the office last week, the president’s proposal doesn’t even meet the measly goals the president claimed. For example, the president’s economic team argues that the White House budget proposal would put the federal government into 'primary balance.' It’s a weasely term to begin with: It means that tax revenues are high enough to cover the current year’s spending on things like staff and programs. But as always, there’s a loophole. A budget that’s in 'primary balance' ignores the money spent paying interest on the ever-rising national debt.That’s sort of like saying that a car is in “primary working order” because all the parts are in good shape aside from the engine. America will spend $207 billion simply paying interest on the federal government’s debt this year alone. By 2021, that figure is projected to rise to $844 billion. At the same time, the CBO projects we'll add almost $9.5 trillion in new debt. Yet somehow this is what passes the president’s test for 'living within our means.' Worse, according to the CBO, the president’s budget fails even that pathetic standard. In 2018, when the government comes closest to achieving balance, the CBO still predicts a budget that’s $177 billion short of the president’s stated goal of 'primary balance.'"
John Stossel: End Corporate Welfare
The Endless Expansion of Government
Reason.tv Gov. Kasich's Ohio Budget Is a Fiscal Failure
With speculation mounting that Sen. Rand Paul might run for president, Reason magazine's Brian Doherty says Rand's father is still a better presidential candidate for now: "Ron Paul, as one of the few people ever to win election to Congress as a non-incumbent three different times (I don't know of any others but haven't checked every congressional record on that), is obviously a very good politician indeed. He has gotten very far since 2007 in creating a national movement of donors and activists, skewing young on at least the latter, for a very outre brand of politics. I see no evidence whatever, despite him perhaps looking more conventionally like a 'slick professional politician,' that Rand is a better politician than his dad. (And I think Ron's stumbling earnestness and lack of polish makes him a more successful politician for those very reasons.) In my experience, Ron inspires far more wide-ranging actual admiration and affection from people who don't agree with his whole message than does his son. Ron's ability to stress that military spending should be first on the budget chopping block before government spending that fills the pockets of the less well off should also help him escape the 'evil Republican' trap if he's reaching out beyond GOP faithful for support. Rand, for whatever reason, has not shown any crossover appeal that I've seen."
Reason.tv Interviews Rand Paul