Barack Obama is finishing his fifth year as president, and continues to try to move America further in the direction of increased government paternalism with the implementation of ObamaCare, a push for a higher minimum wage, more intrusive business regulation, a drive for higher taxes to redistribute wealth, and a persistent insistence that individuals must sacrifice their own interests for that of “society.”
Why the concern over President Obama’s Executive Orders? It is human nature that desensitization will creep in as related to frequency, making felt outrage over each successive mandate seem less intense or serious. The result: executive orders are likely to become more frequent and increasingly more extreme in their content in the absence of any serious push back to reign them in.
Crain’s recently published“Pullman inching closer to national park status,” an article detailing plans by Illinois Sens. Dick Durbin and Mark Kirk and Rep. Robin Kelly of Chicago to introduce a bill to make Chicago’s Pullman neighborhood a national park. They and local supporters say a national park designation could “bring much-needed funds and development to the neighborhood.”
The EPA’s proposed rules will kill jobs, shut down factories, companies and industries – and devastate families and communities that depend on coal mining, factory jobs and affordable energy.
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is proposing to increase the city’s cigarette tax by $.75 a pack, which would raise the combined local and state tax rate to $7.42 a pack- the highest in the nation. The video above, by Fox 32, features the Heartland Institute’s John Nothdurft and his brief, yet powerful, opinion on the proposed tax increase.
No one’s liberty or property is safe when the legislature is in session, and freedom is lost one government program at a time. Yet some people will trade freedom for comfort, especially when they perceive that someone else is footing the bill.
Why should unduly burdensome regulations that place obstacles in the path of those looking to exercise one right be struck down while equally burdensome regulations that infringe on another right are upheld?