Crime Research (Lott)

Brad Smith and I have an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on the harm created by campaign finance laws. Since campaign finance laws carry criminal penalties, they are something that interests the Crime Prevention Research Center. The laws create a very uneven playing field, with a very wealthy person such as Michael Bloomberg particularly advantaged. But Bloomberg is also benefited and able to influence the election in other ways because he owns a large media company.Here is their article:House Democrats held a panicked hearing this month about how to respond to the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which upheld the right of corporations to spend in elections. Their concern was the undue influence corporate spending might have on the coming elections. In the entire 2016 campaign cycle, corporations spent less than $300 million on federal races, less than 5% of total spending. Meanwhile, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has already spent more than $360 million on cable, broadcast and radio advertisements since declaring his candidacy in mid-November. That doesn’t include Mr. Bloomberg’s spending on staff, office space, logistics and internet advertising. Overturning Citizens United wouldn’t touch that money.“It’s a shame Mike Bloomberg can buy his way into the debate,” tweeted Sen. Elizabeth Warren. The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent typifies liberal angst with the claim that Mr. Bloomberg’s spending “threatens to constitute a moral and political disaster.”Whether Mr. Bloomberg’s ad barrage translates to more than a brief blip in the polls remains to be seen—he was savaged by his rivals in his first debate.But Mr. Bloomberg’s ad campaign is likely to help the eventual Democratic nominee, whether it is Mr. Bloomberg or someone else. Many of his ads directly attack President Trump. Since Mr. Bloomberg is a candidate, federal law mandates that he get the lowest unit ad rate. If Mr. Bloomberg used the same money to fund a super PAC, it would have to pay market rates. Thus being a candidate wins Mr. Bloomberg an advantage in softening up Mr. Trump for the Democratic nominee. At the same time, super PACs backing other candidates have to pay far more for their ads than Mr. Bloomberg does, while their campaigns are subject to strict limits on the size of contributions they can receive. The former mayor doesn’t need contributions.But all this misses an even bigger elephant in the room: Bloomberg Media, which Mr. Bloomberg owns. Federal law exempts the institutional press from campaign finance restrictions, allowing media corporations to coordinate their spending with campaigns—which is illegal for other corporations—and to avoid burdensome reporting requirements, all the while spending what they want to elect their favored candidates. Favorable media coverage—or hostile coverage of an opponent—is invaluable.A media corporation owned or controlled by a candidate is excluded from the exemption unless its coverage is part of “a general pattern of campaign-related news” that gives “reasonably equal coverage to all opposing candidates.” But unless and until they are formally nominated, Mr. Bloomberg and President Trump are not, under the law, considered “opposing candidates.” The law holds that until then, Mr. Bloomberg is competing only with other Democrats for the nomination. So for now, Bloomberg News is free to trash the president and his policies all it wants.Thus, attacking the president and sparing his Democratic rivals is the official policy of Bloomberg News and its 2,700 reporters. Bloomberg’s editor in chief has written, “We will continue our tradition of not investigating Mike . . . and we will extend the same policy to his [Democratic] rivals.” But it “will continue to investigate the Trump administration.”Even if Mr. Bloomberg becomes the Democratic nominee, there is no way to prevent Bloomberg News from shaping its coverage of the economy and current events to help its owner’s candidacy or harm the president’s. For example, despite the strong economy, on a recent weekend Bloomberg News headlines included: “In Hot U.S. Jobs Market, Half of College Grads Are Missing Out,” “All the Ways Stock Market Bulls Have Gone Off the Rails. Again,” and “China Trade War Walloped More Than Half of U.S. States in 2019.”Wage growth has been strong, and those with lower incomes have seen the largest percentage increases. But this decline in income inequality is no reason to celebrate at Bloomberg News, which frets, “In recent years, while high-school graduates have seen a sharp pickup in earnings, the lower-earning half of college graduates haven’t—and the gap between them is now the smallest in 15 years.” Bloomberg News also runs regular over-the-top opinion pieces criticizing Mr. Trump, with headlines such as: “An Unrestrained Trump May End Up Trapping Himself,” “Trump Is Already Making Stuff Up About Voter Fraud,” and “Trump’s Tariffs Haven’t Rescued American Steel.” Again, all from a single weekend.The value of these stories to Democrats in general, and to Mr. Bloomberg in particular, almost certainly exceeds Mr. Bloomberg’s advertising expenditures. But there is no way that the government could or should police Bloomberg News’s content for political bias.Further, Bloomberg News’s headlines and stories are not substantially different from those one finds in the Washington Post (owned by the world’s richest man, Jeff Bezos), the New York Times(which is controlled by the Sulzberger family and for several years counted Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim as its largest shareholder), or most other traditional news outlets. Meanwhile, candidates operate under strict limits on contributions, making it difficult to counteract the influence of magnates with newspapers.The whole saga illustrates the impossibility of putting government in control of campaign speech, and the unfairness that results from trying. Campaign finance laws don’t equalize political influence—they give an advantage to some of the richest and most powerful men in America. Congressional Democrats have busied themselves with proposing constitutional amendments to overturn Citizens United. That’s small beer. If Democrats want to make campaigns “equal,” they’ll have to repeal the First Amendment’s guarantee of press freedom. I doubt they want to go that far. Mr. Smith served as chairman of the Federal Election Commission, 2001-05, and is chairman of the Institute for Free Speech. Mr. Lott is president of the Crime Prevention Research Center.

CNS News has put together a list of 32 bans imposed by Michael Bloomberg when he was mayor.

1. Smoking in commercial establishments like bars and restaurants (2003)
2. Smoking in public spaces (2011)
3. Cigarette sales to those under 21 (2013)
4. Sales of "flavored" tobacco products (2009)
5. Smoking e-cigarettes in public spaces (2013) ***
6. Cigarette in-store displays (2013)
7. Cars in Times Square (2009)
8. Cars from driving in newly created bike lanes (2007-2013)
9. Cars causing congestion below 60th Street in Manhattan (2007)*
10. Speeding on residential "slow zones" (2013)
11. Illegal guns (2006-2013) **
12. Sodium levels in processed foods (2010) **
13. Trans-fats in restaurants (2006)
14. Loud headphones (2013) **
15. Styrofoam packaging in single-service food items(2013)
16. Sodas larger than 16 ounces (2012) *
17. Collection of yard waste and grass clippings during certain times of year (2003-2013)
18. Organic food waste from landfills (2013) **
19. Commercial music over 45 decibels (2013)
20. Chain restaurant menus without calorie counts(2008)
21. The posting of signs in "city-owned grassy areas"(2013)
22. Non-fuel-efficient cabs (2007)
23. New cabs that aren't Nissan NV200s (2013) *
24. Greenhouse gas emissions (2007)
25. Government buildings that aren't LEED-certified(2005)
26. Non-hurricane-proof buildings in coastal areas(2013)
27. Black roofs (2009) **
28. Construction cranes over 25 years old (2013)
29. No. 6 and No. 4 "heavy" heating oils (2011)
30. Less than a 2-1 ratio of female and male restrooms in new public buildings (2005)
31. Cell phones in schools (2006)
32. Two-term limits for city elected officials (2008) *

* Overruled/appealed ban
** Suggested/voluntary ban
*** Proposed/pending ban

We will add more cases as we have time to find them. With comments such as this by Debbie Wasserman Schultz last October, it isn't too surprising that there is violence against Republicans.
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ to KEN CUCCINELLI: "you want to block all immigration and made life harder for immigrants and you have demonstrated that you will pursue this heinous white supremacist ideology at all costs even if it means making critically ill children your collateral damage in the process."
1) Chicago Tribune, February 21, 2020: "Hobart couple accused of driving boys off the road for having Trump flags on their bikes: court documents"
A Hobart couple has been charged with intimidation and criminal recklessness after being accused of driving a set of twins off the road in July for having pro-Trump flags on their bikes.   Kyren G. Perry-Jones, 23, and Cailyn M. Smith, 18, have each been charged with two counts of intimidation and criminal recklessness, both felony charges, as well as one count each of misdemeanor theft and criminal mischief in the July 22 incident, according to a probable cause affidavit. Charges were filed Feb. 20 because detectives were waiting information from Snapchat, a social media platform.2) Union Leader (NH), February 21, 2020 
A man has been arrested in Windham, New Hampshire, after slapping a 15-year-old boy across the face and attacking two others on the day of the state primary for supporting our president, leaving one victim with a fractured jaw. The disgusting man did so, shouting “F- — you,” as he passed their pro-Trump tent outside a local polling place. According to the boy’s mother, he remains traumatized by the attack. . . .3) News 4 Jacksonville, Florida, February 8, 2020: Man accused of driving through Republican voter registration tent arrested
Hours after a van plowed through a Republican Party tent where volunteers were registering voters, Jacksonville police arrested a 27-year-old man on two counts of aggravated assault on a person over 65 years old, criminal mischief and driving without a license.  The Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office identified Gregory William Loel Timm as the person behind the wheel of the van that struck the tent set up the parking lot of a Walmart Superstore at the corner of Atlantic and Kernan boulevards about 3:50 p.m. Saturday.4) AP, October 15, 2018: Suspicious envelope causes ricin scare at Sen. Collins’ home
A hazardous materials team was dispatched to the home of Republican Sen. Susan Collins on Monday after her husband received a letter with a note saying the envelope contained ricin.  The FBI said preliminary tests on the letter and its contents indicated that there was no threat to the public, and the senator and her husband were allowed to stay in the home Monday night.  It was unclear who sent the letter and why. But critics have hurled threats at Collins and her staff over her vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court.5) KMSP, October 16, 2018: Two Minnesota GOP candidates say they were attacked, punched
In a sign of how heated the fall campaign has become, two Minnesota Republicans say they were attacked and punched in separate incidents over the weekend.  State Representative Sarah Anderson of Plymouth said she had confronted a man for kicking her campaign sign when he charged at her. First-time candidate Shane Mekeland of Becker said he suffered a concussion after a man punched him in the face at a Benton County restaurant.  
6) Wyoming Tribune Eagle, October 25, 2018: Man charged with Republican headquarters fire in Laramie
LARAMIE – A man was charged by federal prosecutors Tuesday for the apparent act of arson at Laramie’s downtown Republican headquarters in September.  Keller Sorber was charge after an investigation that hinged on DNA testing and an undercover operation. . . .7) Of course, there are uncomfortable cases against Sarah Sanders and Ted Cruz.


Other cases available here.

From the Wall Street Journal:
Michael Bloomberg’s presidential campaign is hiring hundreds of workers in California to post regularly on their personal social-media accounts in support of the candidate and send text messages to their friends about him. . . . To staff the effort, the campaign is hiring more than 500 “deputy digital organizers” to work 20 to 30 hours a week and receive $2,500 a month, the documents show. Those workers are expected to promote Mr. Bloomberg weekly to everyone in their phones’ contacts by text message and make daily social-media posts supporting him, the documents show. . . .The whole Payola scandal was that radio stations played songs without letting people know that they were being paid to run those songs. The irony is that the Democrats who pushed for banning Payola and yet they haven't attacked Bloomberg.

While people are focusing on Michael Bloomberg's changing positions on "Stop & Frisk," there are actually a lot of other issues and as I have time, I will add to this list.

Marijuana -- 
Then: "Three-term New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg harped on the importance of vocational education and blasted Colorado’s decision to legalize marijuana as stupid Friday evening before a sold-out crowd at the Aspen Institute.When an audience member asked the 72-year-old Bloomberg about Colorado marijuana, he responded that it was a terrible idea, one that is hurting the developing minds of children. Though he admitted to smoking a joint in the 1960s, he said the drug is more accessible and more damaging today." Now: “Mike believes that further scientific study is required to assess the health effects of marijuana. In the meantime, he believes that no one should go to jail for smoking or possessing it,” the Bloomberg campaign said in a 13-page policy brief.Minimum wage -- 
Then: "I, for example, am not in favor, have never been in favor of raising the minimum wage." Now: "If you work full-time, you should earn enough to live on a living wage. There is dignity in every job and there should be dignity in every paycheck as well," he said at a news conference.Bloomberg released new proposals to create economic opportunity for all Americans. Among the ideas: raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025."To fight poverty, we need to do something even more basic, and that is raise incomes. And we should start with the most straightforward change: raising the minimum wage," Bloomberg said.Financial Transaction Tax --Then: "When Washington attacked Wall Street, Bloomberg “stood up for the financial-services industry,” without any prodding from the business community" Now: "Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg on Tuesday proposed a financial transaction tax (FTT) as part of a wide-ranging financial reform plan the billionaire former New York City mayor unveiled ahead of Wednesday's debate.Bloomberg is proposing to work with Congress to implement a 0.1 percent tax on transactions for stocks, bonds and derivatives. He is calling for the tax to be phased in over time, starting at 0.02 percent, to limit any unintended consequences, according to a document from his campaign.
Any additional examples are appreciated.

Bloomberg's quote on Farming
"I could teach anybody, even people in this room, no offense intended, to be a farmer. It's a process. You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, add water, up comes the corn. You could learn that. Then we had 300 years of the industrial society. You put the piece of metal on the lathe, you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow and you can have a job. And we created a lot of jobs. At one point, 98 percent of the world worked in agriculture, now it's 2 percent in the United States. Now comes the information economy and the information economy is fundamentally different because it's built around replacing people with technology and the skill sets that you have to learn are how to think and analyze, and that is a whole degree level different. You have to have a different skill set, you have to have a lot more gray matter."I have some news for Bloomberg: The notion of replacing people with technology is something that has been true with farming from the beginning. When someone learned to harness animals to help plow the field that was a technological advance that made it so you didn't need as many people to plant the crops. Bloomberg cavalierly says "you dig a hole," but there is technology behind that. How exactly do you do that? The first seed drill for planting seeds was patented in 1566 in Italy. It was refined by Jethro Tull in 1701 in England.

There are also other issues in harvesting a crop. In 1793, Eli Whitney had the invention of the cotton gin, which allowed one to remove the seeds from the cotton fibers and revolutionized cotton farming. No longer did you have to employ armies of people to remove the seeds from the fiber by hand.

When Cyrus Hall McCormick invented the mechanical reaper in 1831 he revolutionized harvesting grain, which became much faster and easier. Even for these inventions, it wasn't like there was just a one time change as people were constantly figuring out ways of improving on them. People went from using sickles to reapers to harvesters, which is a machine that heads, threshes, and cleans grains all while continuously moving across the field.

Despite what Bloomberg might think, these inventions replaced people with technology.

Whether one is talking about farming today or a hundred years ago, farmers have to have many skills and a great deal of analysis is involved. Adding water is itself a complicated process that many involve irrigation, which in turn involves engineering skills. Farmers had to be able to fix their machinery, manage books, and essentially run a business.

Stephen Willeford who stopped the 2017 church shooting in Sutherland Springs Church shooting.
Pastor Frank Pomeroy, who lost his teenage daughter, in the Sutherland Springs Church shooting.
Jack Wilson who stopped the West Freeway Church of Christ shooting near Fort Worth.

All three are Republicans. They are following in the footsteps of Suzanna Hupp, who served in the Texas state House.
In Colorado, the state House minority leader, Patrick Neville, was a student at the Columbine High School attack.

Here is a Wall Street Journal article on the top three and a long list of Democrats who have run for public office after these types of attacks.

From Fox News:
Is your child's favorite TV show propaganda? Kings College professor Liam Kennedy says his 2-year-old son isn't allowed to watch the popular show "Paw Patrol" because of what he sees as the show's harmful underlying messages. Created in 2013, "Paw Patrol" is an animated series about a group of do-good dogs and a 10-year-old boy named Ryder who rescue various people in tricky situations. But when the Canadian educator watched hours of the show during research for the journal "Crime Media Culture," that's not all he saw. Kennedy published a paper on the subject titled "'Whenever there's trouble. Just yelp for help': Crime, Conservation and Corporatization in Paw Patrol." In an interviewwith London Morning's Rebecca Zandbergen, Kennedy said the depiction of the state and local government officials like Mayor Humdinger and Mayor Goodway are "portrayed negatively." . . . In addition, Kennedy takes issue with the "Paw Patrol" organization as a "private corporation" acting as a stand-in for a government-funded police force. . . .

From Fox News:
Three female high school athletes in Connecticut, along with their families, filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday to prevent transgender athletes from competing in girls track and field meets, arguing that biologically male athletes have a physical advantage. Selina Soule, a senior at Glastonbury High School; Chelsea Mitchell, a senior at Canton High School; and Alanna Smith, a sophomore at Danbury High School, announced the lawsuit in a press conference on the steps of the state capitol in Hartford, the Washington Post reported.  “Our dream is not to come in second or third place, but to win, fair and square,” Mitchell said. “All we’re asking for is a fair chance.” The three are arguing that competing against biologically male athletes has denied them the chance to win medals and achieve scholarship opportunities. . . .

The Coronavirus has surpassed SARS in terms of the total number of deaths, and it is spreading much more rapidly than SARS. This graph is out of date, as there are now over 34,800 cases of the Coronavirus as of February 8th, 2020. The Coronavirus seems to still be accelerating.

Among the allegations in the 2007 Washington Post story about Michael Bloomberg:
_Bloomberg asked the woman who sued if she was giving her boyfriend "good" oral sex.
_He said "I'd like to do that" and "That's a great piece of a--" to describe women in the office.
_When he found out the woman was pregnant, he told her "Kill it!" and said "Great! Number 16!" _ an apparent reference to the number of women in the company who were pregnant or had maternity-related status. . . .
The individual also said Garrison had a tape of Bloomberg leaving a message on her home answering machine, saying he had heard she was upset about the pregnancy and maternity comment and adding: "I didn't say it, but if I said it I didn't mean it." . . .
A less-restrained Bloomberg was also portrayed in a book of quips, quotes and anecdotes attributed to him and put together by employees for a birthday present in 1990. It contains such statements as: "If women wanted to be appreciated for their brains, they'd go to the library instead of to Bloomingdale's." . . .
A former longtime Bloomberg employee who was familiar with the book confirmed the authenticity of the quotes to the AP and said Bloomberg regularly made similar offensive remarks. The person spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear that Bloomberg would retaliate. . . . .Will Democrats demand that Bloomberg release his employees from their confidentiality agreements?

Here is the view of Bloomberg from a liberal perspective in the Atlantic. 

Higher taxes on individuals and corporations are the highlights of Michael Bloomberg's tax plan. It is pretty clear that his tax proposals won't generate the tax revenue that Bloomberg claims for the simple reason that the proposals assume that as tax rates go up they won't alter people's behavior. The one part of the Trump tax reform that Bloomberg won't reverse is the $10,000 cap on state and local deductions because reversing that would lower tax burdens for some people.

From the Wall Street Journal, here are the main points:
-- raise the top tax rate to 44.6% for income, the next highest rate would be 39.6% up from 37%.-- Corporations would pay a 28% tax rate, up from the current 21% rate -- would tax capital gains and ordinary income at that same rate for the top taxpayers-- his top income-tax rates on individuals would be higher than those proposed by former Vice President Joe Biden-- Unlike Mr. Biden, he would not repeal the $10,000 cap on state and local deductions because the benefits of that change would flow mostly to high-income people, according to the campaign.-- The plan released Saturday doesn’t address changes to Social Security taxes or the carbon taxes that Mr. Bloomberg favors.

Here are the latest estimated odds of which Democrat will win the New York Presidential primary from Predictit.



But despite massive campaign expenditures, Bloomberg is still not ahead in any of the states.

In an op-ed, George Soros claims that Facebook got Trump elected in 2016 because it didn't censor what he claims was incorrect news. He also claims that FB is trying to help out out Trump again.
More recently, direct contact between the two men has raised serious questions. Mr. Zuckerberg met with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office on Sept. 19, 2019. We don’t know what was said. But from an interview on the sidelines at the World Economic Forum on Jan. 22, we do know what Mr. Trump said about the meeting: Mr. Zuckerberg “told me that I’m No. 1 in the world in Facebook.” Mr. Trump apparently had no problem with Facebook’s decision not to fact-check political ads. “I’d rather have him just do whatever he is going to do,” Mr. Trump said of Mr. Zuckerberg. “He’s done a hell of a job, when you think of it.” The president’s 2016 campaign mounted a robust data-centric communications effort and has continued to build on that program over the past few years, using Facebook as a key part of their strategy. Facebook’s decision not to require fact-checking for political candidates’ advertising in 2020 has flung open the door for false, manipulated, extreme and incendiary statements. Such content is rewarded with prime placement and promotion if it meets Facebook-designed algorithmic standards for popularity and engagement. . . .  I expressed my fear that with Facebook’s help, Mr. Trump will win the 2020 election. The recent hiring of a right-wing figure to help manage its news tab has reinforced those fears. . . . 

How come the DNC has changed the rules to help Bloomberg but not to help other candidates? Not everyone is pleased by the double standard. From Politico:
“Now, suddenly because Mr. Bloomberg couldn’t satisfy one of the prongs, we see it get changed?” Weaver said. “That’s the definition of a rigged system where the rich can buy their way in.” . . . Steyer — like Bloomberg, a billionaire — has also been accused of buying his spot on the debate stage, having spent well over $150 million of his own money to fuel his bid, including spending eight figures to solicit donations from enough individuals to qualify. But Steyer and Bloomberg are taking two very different paths to trying to secure the nomination: Steyer is competing extensively in the four early states, while Bloomberg is skipping them entirely to focus on Super Tuesday and beyond. Steyer, like Weaver, the Sanders' adviser, accused the DNC of changing the criteria to benefit Bloomberg. "Back in December, I called on the DNC to open up the debate requirements so that more candidates, including candidates of color, would be able to participate, he said. “Instead, they are changing the rules for a candidate who is ignoring early states voters and grassroots donors.” . . .Michael Moore has gotten quite vexed about this.
"They removed it so that [Bloomberg] could be in the next debate," Moore said about the donor requirement. "...He can just buy his way onto the debate stage!" Billionaire Tom Steyer had to spend dollars convincing ppl to donate to his campaign, but not Bloomberg.

From Politico:
Michael Bloomberg’s big-spending, shock-and-awe TV ad campaign has made politicking more expensive for everyone from his 2020 rivals to Senate, House and state legislative candidates around the country. Eight weeks into his presidential campaign, Bloomberg has already spent more money on advertising — $248 million — than most candidates could spend in years. That amount has squeezed TV ad inventory in nearly every state, lowering supply and causing stations to raise ad prices at a time of high demand, as candidates around the country gear up for their primaries. . . . Bloomberg’s ad onslaught comes with benefits to Democrats around the country, too: His ads have pushed issues that are critical to the party, like health care and climate change, and he has attacked President Donald Trump relentlessly in key swing states where Democrats might not have aired ads for months, softening up the Republican incumbent before the 2020 election. . . .And $100 million has been spent just on attack ads against Trump. Of course, with all of Drudge's attacks on Trump, this shows how close Drudge is to the Bloomberg campaign.
Former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg has already dropped a fortune in support of his 2020 presidential bid — including, reportedly, $10 million for ad time during Sunday’s Super Bowl. Now, the exact figures are coming to light. And they are staggering. . . . Drudge, reporting through a Bloomberg campaign source, says the campaign has spent in excess of $25 million on digital ads, and has topped $85 million in TV buys. The Bloomberg source called the massive spending a “down payment” on the former mayor’s effort to take down Trump in November. . . . All this is on top of the $60 million that Bloomberg's Everytown will spend pushing gun control issues. It is nearly double the $36 million that the NRA spent in 2016, but it ignores the fact that Bloomberg funneled even much more money through other liberal groups (environmental, abortion, and other similar groups).