Reason.com
Most Popular Stories
- St. Louis Cops Worry That In-Car Cameras 'Are Being Used Against Them' (5.23)
- Here Are the 15 Senators Who Voted to Stop Armed FDA Agents From Conducting Warrantless Raids on America's Farmers (Not One of Them is a Democrat) (5.24)
- Reason "Hero of Freedom" Larry Flynt's Latest Stunt? Photoshopping a Penis into Mouth of Conservative Pundit S.E. Cupp (5.24)
- When Government Privileges Trump the Rights of Citizens (5.25)
- Plastic Bag Ban Will Put Los Angeles In Landfill (5.23)
Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey
- Reason-Rupe: Wisconsinites Favor Increasing Public Union Retirement Contributions to Address Budget Deficit (5.25)
- Reason-Rupe Poll Finds Support for Public Union Reforms (5.25)
- New Poll: Obama Leads Romney In Wisconsin, But Gary Johnson Could Impact the Race (5.24)
- Wisconsin Recall: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42 Among Likely Voters (5.24)
- Reason-Rupe Poll: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42, Obama Leads Romney 46-36 (5.24)
advertisements
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsSite comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
|1.7.05 @ 4:55PM|#
Even though it's obvious to some, nice piece Jacob.
|1.7.05 @ 4:56PM|#
" Bush should remember that part of his job is upholding the Constitution."
I'm not holding my breath. :)
Ron Paul ran afoul of the NRA and other gun rights groups when he voted against the gun lawsuit bill citing constitutional objections. It was strange to watch them trying to beat what is possibly the most pro-amndt2 rep. Nobody else in the Repuglicon party seems much interested in federalism nowadays.
|1.7.05 @ 5:04PM|#
"It assumes anything that affects health care costs...is a fitting subject for federal legislation."
With my tinfoil hat on, I can see that this is exactly what the deal is. "They" want to be able to regulate anything and everything.
When I take off my tinfoil hat to shower and whatnot, I think that Jacob's comment about Bush's current position is probably more correct.
|1.7.05 @ 5:21PM|#
Jacob,
Unfortunately, certain Supreme Court decisions have rendered your view of the Constitution "quaint and obsolete." The President need not comply.
|1.7.05 @ 8:56PM|#
The gun lawsuits are a completely different animal - a gun manufacturer can't "vote with his feet". Gun lawsuits have a direct and chilling effect on interstate commerce.
|1.8.05 @ 3:22AM|#
Doctors have families, friends, houses with mortgages, existing practices and so on and so on. The imperative is to have the best med negligence law possible, rather than a 'competitive market' in tort law (which is an impossible fantasy due to economic and other costs associated with changing forum). A 'competitive market' model wrongs those who lack the knowledge or resources to move as they are then constantly under threat of personal injustice and unfairness.
That said, it is an excellent piece and when combined with goodwill and commonsense from legislators (an unlikely prospect!) it seems likely that a decentralised pseudo-competitive system will result in the best policy long-term.
If only we lived in a perfect world both central planning and perfect markets would solve our problems...