Voice For Liberty

Category: Economic freedom

  • New Data Show Migrants Were More Likely to Be Released by Trump Than Biden

    New Data Show Migrants Were More Likely to Be Released by Trump Than Biden

    This article from Cato Institute’s blog, written by David J. Bier on November 2, 2023, presents surprising data on migrant arrests and releases under the Trump and Biden administrations. It reveals that, contrary to common perception, the Trump administration released a higher percentage of migrants arrested at the border than the Biden administration. During Trump’s last two years, only 47% of the 1.4 million arrested migrants were removed, while under Biden, 51% of over 5 million arrested migrants were removed. The Biden administration, while dealing with higher overall numbers, has not significantly altered immigration enforcement policies. The article also highlights challenges in managing illegal immigration and suggests that creating more legal pathways for immigration could be a solution.

    Bier, David J. “New Data Show Migrants Were More Likely to Be Released by Trump Than Biden.” Cato at Liberty Blog, Cato Institute, 2 Nov. 2023, www.cato.org/blog/new-data-show-migrants-were-more-likely-be-released-trump-biden.

  • Support the Voice for Liberty: Become a Patron

    Support the Voice for Liberty: Become a Patron

    Bob Weeks

    There are several ways you can help support the Voice for Liberty (wichitaliberty.org).

    If you’d like to make a one-time contribution, you can click here to send money using PayPal.

    Another way is to send a check:

    Bob Weeks
    2451 Regency Lakes Ct.
    Wichita, KS 67226
    Telephone 316-708-1837

    Another method I hope you will consider is to make a recurring contribution using Patreon. This is a popular service that helps writers and creators generate income to keep their content flowing.

    Through Patreon, you choose a monthly contribution amount, and Patreon takes care of the rest. You can cancel your monthly contribution at any time. Click here to visit my Patreon page.

    Bob Weeks writes the Voice for Liberty, which presents news, data, and commentary about government and public affairs in Kansas and Wichita. Your support will offset the costs of running the site, and after that, provide income for myself. Contributions are not tax deductible.

    I thank you for your support.

    Bob Weeks

  • Derek Yonai: Teaching the Morality of Free Enterprise

    Derek K. Yonai, JD, Ph.D., Director of the Koch Center for Leadership & Ethics at Emporia State University, spoke to the Wichita Pachyderm Club January 11, 2019, on the topic of Teaching the Morality of Free Enterprise. View below, or click here to view at YouTube.

  • Government creates obstacles to progress

    Government creates obstacles to progress

    “Overcoming obstacles can be a difficult challenge even on a level playing field. We need to change the rigged system that favors the politically connected over the hardworking, honest citizen,” writes Charles Koch in a recent edition of Perspectives.

    Overcoming Obstacles

    By Charles Koch
    July 13, 2015

    America’s founding fathers had a unique vision for the United States. As the Declaration of Independence famously put it, this country was conceived as a place where people could enjoy “unalienable Rights,” including “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    These concepts are much more than just words to me. I believe the greatest gift we can receive or pass on is the opportunity to find and pursue our passion, and, in doing so, make a difference by helping others improve their lives.

    It seems to me we’re now losing much of the vision our founders fought so hard to establish. Time and time again, government policies have made it tougher for people to realize their potential.

    This change creates some serious consequences, especially for the least-advantaged Americans, who now face more obstacles than ever in their struggle to develop and apply their unique talents and abilities.

    To remove these obstacles, we need to revise poverty-creating regulations and abolish corporate welfare, reform our approach to education and enact criminal justice reform.

    OVERCOMING OBSTACLES

    Consider the challenges of starting a small business. Most would be entrepreneurs have very little capital. To raise money, many will pledge or mortgage whatever assets they have; others will ask for a small business loan.

    In the past, community banks usually made such loans. But the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, signed into law in 2010, put a particular burden on local lenders.

    Community banks now face higher compliance costs, more complicated regulations and some strong disincentives to make traditional loans. As Forbes bluntly put it: “Dodd-Frank is killing community banks.”

    When small borrowers have no local options, they are forced to turn to bigger banks for help, where they have even less of a chance of getting a loan.

    Regressive and anti-competitive regulations are also stalling progress. In particular, licensure requirements (especially at the state and local level) have become a huge obstacle.

    Millions are now denied jobs in more than 100 lower-income occupations because of unnecessary licensing requirements, months of mandated training and unaffordable fees.

    At the corporate level, excessive permitting requirements (such as a decade-long approval process for a new facility) are very anticompetitive. Such requirements not only prevent the creation of jobs, they protect existing businesses from competition and keep out new entrants, which is a form of corporate welfare.

    CORPORATE WELFARE

    Even as the little guy is getting stiff-armed, the government has opened its arms to corporate cronyism by subsidizing big banks and corporations through the tax code, mandates, protective tariffs and so on.

    I believe this corporate welfare has created a two-tier system with far more “have-nots” than “haves.”

    Too many CEOs owe their profits to government “gimmes” rather than the creation of real value by helping others improve their lives. This is the major cause of so much profit being bad rather than good (the subject of my upcoming book).

    Speaking of books, another troubling area is education, which should be a path for overcoming obstacles.

    Having an effective education that imparts the skills and values needed to make a contribution in society is essential for success.

    But that doesn’t mean we should try to push almost all high school graduates into a four-year liberal arts program where they may collect a lot of debt without getting any usable skills.

    Educational choices should reflect aptitude. Many kids with mechanical aptitudes will be much more successful by learning a skilled trade or craft.

    RENEWED VISION

    America should be a place that encourages and enables people to find opportunities to contribute and succeed, and have meaning and fulfillment in their lives.

    Instead, it appears that America has become a two-tiered system, in which those with political connections get favors while obstacles are placed in front of those who are left behind.

    A great nation does not treat people according to some group classification, whether it be race, religion, gender or age, instead of on their individual merits.

    We need to reform our legal and regulatory system so that it treats everyone equally and doesn’t discriminate against the least-advantaged in our society.

    Overcoming obstacles can be a difficult challenge even on a level playing field. We need to change the rigged system that favors the politically connected over the hardworking, honest citizen.

  • Soviet-style society seen as Wichita’s future

    Soviet-style society seen as Wichita’s future

    If local governments don’t fund arts, we risk a Soviet-style existence. This line of thought is precisely backwards.

    Facing the possible loss of funds from Sedgwick County, the Wichita Arts Council paints a bleak future for Wichita, as reported in the Wichita Eagle:

    The Wichita Arts Council receives approximately $14,000 from the county, which it uses to provide seed money for start-up art projects, president Arlen Hamilton said. It also receives about $6,000 from the city, he said.

    “Without us being there to provide that start, many of these things would never get off the ground, and we’d end up with more of a Soviet-style society than the bright, colorful and educational environment that we get to live in instead,” Hamilton said. (Sedgwick County to warn organizations of possible funding cuts)

    This line of reasoning is precisely backwards. When government taxes us and turns over the funds to a group of elitists to make decisions about which art is desirable and which is not, that is characteristic of totalitarian, socialist societies. In a civil society people don’t expect others to be forced to pay for things like this.

    Defenders of government spending on arts say it’s a small amount of money. It’s just seed money. This “seed money” effect is precisely why government should not be funding arts. David Boaz explains:

    Defenders of arts funding seem blithely unaware of this danger when they praise the role of the national endowments as an imprimatur or seal of approval on artists and arts groups. Jane Alexander says, “The Federal role is small but very vital. We are a stimulus for leveraging state, local and private money. We are a linchpin for the puzzle of arts funding, a remarkably efficient way of stimulating private money.” Drama critic Robert Brustein asks, “How could the [National Endowment for the Arts] be ‘privatized’ and still retain its purpose as a funding agency functioning as a stamp of approval for deserving art?” … I suggest that that is just the kind of power no government in a free society should have.

    The leveraging effect of seed money means that elitists like the members of the Wichita Arts Council have great power in deciding who will succeed in the arts in Wichita. We give up a lot when we turn over this power to government bureaucrats and arts commission cronies. Contrary to the argument of the Arts Council president, arts thrive in markets where people are free to choose, and stagnate under taxation and bureaucracy.

    If you don't like this statue, just don't go there, says Wichita City Council member Lavonta Williams. But, you must pay for it.
    The attitude of Wichita elected officials regarding art: If you don’t like this statue, just don’t go there, says Wichita City Council member Lavonta Williams. But, you still must pay for it.
  • For Tiahrt, economic freedom is not a good thing, it seems

    For Tiahrt, economic freedom is not a good thing, it seems

    Kansas congressional candidate Todd Tiahrt has criticized Charles Koch and Americans for Prosperity, leading us to wonder if Tiahrt understands or embraces the principles of economic freedom and free markets.

    In a recent speech, candidate for United States House of Representatives Todd Tiahrt criticized Americans for Prosperity and Charles Koch, telling an audience “in general, they try to fight programs that they think are not good for Koch Industries.”

    He also said that for Mike Pompeo, Tiahrt’s election opponent who is supported by Americans for Prosperity, they “think it’s all about the money.”

    These allegations are contrary to positions and actions that Charles and David Koch have taken throughout their lives. As an example, in April of this year Charles Koch penned an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal. In the article, Koch explains his involvement in public affairs:

    Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs — even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished.

    Koch Industries was the only major producer in the ethanol industry to argue for the demise of the ethanol tax credit in 2011. That government handout (which cost taxpayers billions) needlessly drove up food and fuel prices as well as other costs for consumers — many of whom were poor or otherwise disadvantaged. Now the mandate needs to go, so that consumers and the marketplace are the ones who decide the future of ethanol. (Charles Koch: I’m Fighting to Restore a Free Society)

    In an earlier Journal op-ed Koch wrote “Crony capitalism is much easier than competing in an open market. But it erodes our overall standard of living and stifles entrepreneurs by rewarding the politically favored rather than those who provide what consumers want.”

    If it was “all about the money” as Tiahrt contends, Koch Industries would join the majority of American business firms that seek to rig the system in their favor. But Charles and David Koch, along with Americans for Prosperity, do not do that. Instead, they advocate for reform.

    It’s not a recent conversion, either. Charles and David Koch have promoted free markets and economic freedom for many decades. Charles Koch and others founded what became the Cato Institute in 1977, almost four decades ago. Cato has been consistent in its advocacy of economic freedom.

    Even earlier that that: An issue of Koch Industries Discovery newsletter contains a story titled “Don’t subsidize me.” Here’s an excerpt describing an event that must have taken place about 50 years ago:

    When Charles Koch was in his 20s, he attended a business function hosted by his father. At that event, Fred Koch introduced Charles to a local oilman. When the independent oilman politely asked about the young man’s interests, Charles began talking about all he was doing to promote economic freedom. “Wow!” said the oilman, who was so impressed he wanted to introduce the young bachelor to his eligible daughter. But when Charles mentioned he was in favor of eliminating the government’s oil import quota, which subsidized domestic producers, the oilman exploded in rage. “Your father ought to lock you in a cell!” he yelled, jabbing his finger into Charles’ chest. “You’re worse than a Communist!”

    It seems the oilman was all for the concept of free markets — unless it meant he had to compete on equal terms.

    Under oath

    For more than 50 years, Charles Koch has consistently promoted economic freedom, even when it was not in the company’s immediate financial interest. In the 1960s, Koch was willing to testify before a powerful Congressional committee that he was against the oil import quota — a very popular political measure at the time. “I think it’s fair to say my audience was less than receptive,” recalls Koch.

    Years later, Koch warned an independent energy association about the dangers of subsidies and mandates. “We avoid the short-run temptation to impose regulatory burdens on competitors. We don’t lobby for subsidies that penalize taxpayers for our benefit. “This is our philosophy because we believe this will produce the most favorable conditions in the long run,” Koch said.

    It seems that candidate Tiahrt doesn’t share these principles.

    Following is a transcript provided to me of remarks by Todd Tiahrt on July 25, 2014.

    The Americans for Prosperity is an organization that is primarily funded by Koch Industries and, in general, they try to fight programs that they think are not good for Koch Industries. And now they’re trying to support President, excuse me, they’re trying to support Mr. Pompeo. So, I guess because Mr. Pompeo is a Harvard lawyer and President Obama is a Harvard lawyer, sometimes I accidentally slip when I say “President Obama” when I really meant to say “Mr. Pompeo,” because they’re both Harvard lawyers.

    Americans for Prosperity have done some good things in the past, but today they’re on the wrong side of the truth. … Mr. Pompeo and Koch Industries think it’s all about the money. You can out-vote Charles Koch if you get one other person to vote with you. Right here we have enough people to out-vote all of the billionaires in Kansas. Right here we have enough people to out-vote most of the millionaires, but they think that they can sway the outcome of this election by just putting more and more money into it. And forget about you! … They, in Washington, are all about the money, and it’s playing out right here in the Fourth District of Kansas.

  • Cronyism is welfare for rich and powerful, writes Charles G. Koch

    Cronyism is welfare for rich and powerful, writes Charles G. Koch

    “The central belief and fatal conceit of the current administration is that you are incapable of running your own life, but those in power are capable of running it for you. This is the essence of big government and collectivism.”

    That’s Charles G. Koch writing in the Wall Street Journal. The article is Charles Koch: I’m Fighting to Restore a Free Society, and is available to read without subscription or payment. In the article, Koch explains his involvement in public affairs:

    Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs — even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished.

    Koch Industries was the only major producer in the ethanol industry to argue for the demise of the ethanol tax credit in 2011. That government handout (which cost taxpayers billions) needlessly drove up food and fuel prices as well as other costs for consumers — many of whom were poor or otherwise disadvantaged. Now the mandate needs to go, so that consumers and the marketplace are the ones who decide the future of ethanol.

    There, Charles Koch explains a big problem with the insidious nature of government. Even those who are opposed to government interventions in markets find themselves forced to participate in government subsidy programs. When they do, they are often labeled as hypocrites for accepting benefits from the government programs they oppose. Koch Industries, as a manufacturer of gasoline, blends ethanol with the gasoline it produces. Federal law requires that. Even though Koch Industries opposed subsidies for ethanol, the company accepted the payments. A company newsletter explained: “Once a law is enacted, we are not going to place our company and our employees at a competitive disadvantage by not participating in programs that are available to our competitors.” (As Koch explains in the current article, the subsidy program for ethanol has ended, but there is still the mandate requiring its use in gasoline.)

    Learn how economic freedom creates prosperity and improves lives throughout the world.
    Learn how economic freedom creates prosperity and improves lives throughout the world.
    Walter Williams, as he often does, explains the core of the problem using his characteristically blunt imagery: “Once legalized theft begins, it pays for everybody to participate.” Williams says not only does it pay to participate, the reality is that it is often necessary to participate in order to stay in business. This is part of the treacherous nature of government interventionism: A business can be humming along, earning a profit by meeting the needs of its customers, when government radically alters the landscape. Perhaps government backs a competitor, or forces changes to business methods that have been working satisfactorily and harming no one. What is the existing business to do in response? Consent to be driven out of business, just to prove a point?

    Existing firms, then, are usually compelled to participate in the government program — accepting subsidies, conforming to mandates, letting government pull the strings. This creates an environment where government intervention spirals, growing by feeding on itself. It’s what we have today.

    It happens not only at the federal level, but at state and local levels. Referring to a City of Wichita incentive program for commercial real estate, Wichita developer Steve Clark said: “Once you condition the market to accept these incentives, there’s nothing someone else can do to remain competitive but accept them yourself. Like the things we’re working on with the city, now we have to accept incentives or we’re out of business.”

    In Kansas, there are state income tax credit programs that award credits (economically equivalent to cash payments) to companies that meet certain requirements that were established by the legislature and are administered by bureaucrats. These corporate welfare programs, which represent cronyism, are more valuable than lower tax rates, at least to influential Kansas businesses.

    All this leads to a country whose government stifles the potential of its people — or even worse, as Koch explains — causes actual and severe harm:

    Instead of fostering a system that enables people to help themselves, America is now saddled with a system that destroys value, raises costs, hinders innovation and relegates millions of citizens to a life of poverty, dependency and hopelessness. This is what happens when elected officials believe that people’s lives are better run by politicians and regulators than by the people themselves. Those in power fail to see that more government means less liberty, and liberty is the essence of what it means to be American. Love of liberty is the American ideal.

    Charles Koch: I’m Fighting to Restore a Free Society

    Instead of welcoming free debate, collectivists engage in character assassination.

    By Charles G. Koch

    I have devoted most of my life to understanding the principles that enable people to improve their lives. It is those principles — the principles of a free society — that have shaped my life, my family, our company and America itself.

    Unfortunately, the fundamental concepts of dignity, respect, equality before the law and personal freedom are under attack by the nation’s own government. That’s why, if we want to restore a free society and create greater well-being and opportunity for all Americans, we have no choice but to fight for those principles. I have been doing so for more than 50 years, primarily through educational efforts. It was only in the past decade that I realized the need to also engage in the political process.

    Continue reading at Wall Street Journal (subscription not required). More about Koch Industries, including an interview with Charles Koch that covers some of these topics, is available in a recent issue of Wichita Business Journal. Click here for free access.

  • Economic freedom, the key to improving lives

    Economic freedom, the key to improving lives

    chart-rising-audienceEconomic freedom, in countries where it is allowed to thrive, leads to better lives for people as measured in a variety of ways. This is true for everyone, especially for poor people.

    This is the message presented in a short video based on the work of the Economic Freedom of the World report, which is a project of Canada’s Fraser Institute. Four years ago Robert Lawson, one of the authors of the Economic Freedom of the World report, lectured in Wichita on this topic. The current video is made possible by the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation.

    One of the findings highlighted in the presentation is that while the average income in free countries is much higher than that in the least-free countries, the ratio is even higher for the poorest people in these countries. This is consistent with the findings that economic freedom is good for everyone, and even more so for those with low incomes.

    Civil rights, a clean environment, long life expectancy, low levels of corruption, less infant mortality, less child labor, and lower unemployment are all associated with greater levels of economic freedom.

    What are the components or properties of economic freedom? The presentation lists these:

    • Property rights are protected under an impartial rule of law.
    • People are free to trade with others, both within and outside the country.
    • There is a sound national currency, so that peoples’ money keeps its value.
    • Government stays small, relative to the size of the economy.

    Over the last eleven years, the United States’ ranking has fallen relative to other countries, and the presentation says our position is expected to keep falling. The question is asked: “Will our quality of life fall with it?”

    Economic freedom is not necessarily the platform of any single political party. It should be noted that for about eight of the past twelve years — a period in which our economic freedom has been falling — there was a Republican president, sometimes with a Republican Congress. The size of government rose. In 2005 the Cato Institute studied the numbers and found that “All presidents presided over net increases in spending overall, though some were bigger spenders than others. As it turns out, George W. Bush is one of the biggest spenders of them all. In fact, he is an even bigger spender than Lyndon B. Johnson in terms of discretionary spending.” This was before the spending on the prescription drug program had started.

    Critics of economic freedom

    The defining of what economic freedom means is important. Sometimes you’ll see people write things like “Bernie Madoff was only exercising his personal economic freedom while he ran his investment firm.” Madoff, we now know, was a thief. He stole his clients’ money. That’s contrary to property rights, and therefore contrary to economic freedom.

    Or, you’ll see people say if you don’t like government, go to Somalia. That country, one of the poorest in the world — but not the poorest — is used as an example of how bad anarchy is as a form of government. The evidence is, however, that Somalia’s former government was so bad that things improved after the fall of that government. See Peter T. Leeson, Better Off Stateless: Somalia Before and After Government Collapse and History of Somalia (1991–2006).

    You’ll also encounter people who argue that some countries are poor because they have no natural resources. But there are many countries with few natural resources that have economic freedom and a high standard of living. Most countries that are poor are that way because they are run by corrupt governments that have no respect for economic freedom, and follow policies that stifle it.

    Some will argue that economic freedom means the freedom to pollute the environment. But it is in wealthy countries that the environment is respected. Poor countries, where people are struggling just to find food for each day, don’t have the time or wealth to be concerned about the environment.

  • Charles G. Koch: Corporate cronyism harms America

    From September 2012, and even more relevant today.

    “The effects on government are equally distorting — and corrupting. Instead of protecting our liberty and property, government officials are determining where to send resources based on the political influence of their cronies. In the process, government gains even more power and the ranks of bureaucrats continue to swell.”

    The editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal by Charles G. Koch, chairman of the board and CEO of Wichita-based Koch Industries contains many powerful arguments against the rise of cronyism. The argument above is just one of many.

    In his article, Koch makes an important observation when he defines cronyism: “We have a term for this kind of collusion between business and government. It used to be known as rent-seeking. Now we call it cronyism. Rampant cronyism threatens the economic foundations that have made this the most prosperous country in the world.”

    “Rent-seeking” was always a difficult term to use and understand. It had meaning mostly to economists. But “cronyism” — everyone knows what that means. It is a harsh word, offensive to many elected officials. But we need a harsh term to accurately describe the harm caused, as Koch writes: “This growing partnership between business and government is a destructive force, undermining not just our economy and our political system, but the very foundations of our culture.”

    The entire article is available at the Wall Street Journal. Koch has also contributed other articles on this topic, see Charles G. Koch: Why Koch Industries is speaking out and Charles Koch: The importance of economic freedom.

    Charles G. Koch: Corporate Cronyism Harms America

    When businesses feed at the federal trough, they threaten public support for business and free markets.

    By Charles G. Koch

    “We didn’t build this business — somebody else did.”

    So reads a sign outside a small roadside craft store in Utah. The message is clearly tongue-in-cheek. But if it hung next to the corporate offices of some of our nation’s big financial institutions or auto makers, there would be no irony in the message at all.

    It shouldn’t surprise us that the role of American business is increasingly vilified or viewed with skepticism. In a Rasmussen poll conducted this year, 68% of voters said they “believe government and big business work together against the rest of us.”

    Businesses have failed to make the case that government policy — not business greed — has caused many of our current problems. To understand the dreadful condition of our economy, look no further than mandates such as the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac “affordable housing” quotas, directives such as the Community Reinvestment Act, and the Federal Reserve’s artificial, below-market interest-rate policy.

    Far too many businesses have been all too eager to lobby for maintaining and increasing subsidies and mandates paid by taxpayers and consumers. This growing partnership between business and government is a destructive force, undermining not just our economy and our political system, but the very foundations of our culture.

    With partisan rhetoric on the rise this election season, it’s important to remind ourselves of what the role of business in a free society really is — and even more important, what it is not.

    Continue reading at The Wall Street Journal