by Bob Barr | Mar 25, 2020 | Uncategorized |
Townhall.com The latest victim of the COVID-19 pandemic is not a health care worker, a first responder, or a cruise line traveler. The purveyor is not an invisible microbe. The perpetrators of the latest assault on men and women in cities and states across the country, are left-wing governors and mayors who have decided the pandemic provides a convenient excuse to deny law abiding citizens the freedom to exercise their Second Amendment rights. As I wrote last week, we already have seen examples of the COVID-19 pandemic being used as an excuse to do just this; and the trend is accelerating. Just last weekend, for example, the New Jersey State Police sent a message to all of the state’s Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL), telling them that Democrat Gov. Phil Murphy had decided to deactivate the Commonwealth’s ability to access the National Instant Criminal Background Check System that is required to be used during the purchases of all firearms in business transactions. According to Murphy, firearm purchases are not “essential” during the COVID-19 outbreak, and thus are within his “emergency” jurisdiction to slow the spread of the viral disease. The Bill of Rights be damned. Second Amendment advocates have long pointed to the background check system as a potential chokepoint in the gun purchase process; exploitable by anti-gun officials to cripple the Second Amendment without the need for congressional or even state legislative action. As a National Rifle Association alert points out, while a majority of states use the FBI directly to run NICS searches, New Jersey is one of twelve “full point of contact” (POC) states (a group that...
by Bob Barr | Mar 23, 2020 | Uncategorized |
Daily Caller Original copies of the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights remain on display at the National Archives in our nation’s capital. Many Americans consider that the system of government established by those documents is as strong as the pieces of parchment themselves. Quite the contrary. The system of government bequeathed to us more than 230 years ago – one of defined and limited powers designed above all else to protect individual liberty — is far more fragile than most citizens realize. At no time is the fragility of guaranteed individual liberty more at risk than in times of “emergency;” including, as we face today, one posed not by outside human forces, but by nature. Many in our country clamor for the federal government to control virtually every aspect of dealing with the COVID-19 virus, including use of the military and virtual suspension of civil liberties (as some cities and states are already doing). If the system of limiting government power and maximizing individual liberty as delineated in the Constitution is to continue in any meaningful degree, we need to remember that our Founders and their generation faced challenges far beyond those we face today. They knew the country they were establishing would face serious threats, including military threats from beyond our shores. They knew as well that Americans would be challenged by Mother Nature, whether by natural forces or by disease. Yet knowing all that, the system of government they created was one of deliberately limited and defined powers and premised on fundamental pre-existing individual liberties. Our Founders clearly understood that individual liberty...
by Bob Barr | Mar 16, 2020 | Uncategorized |
Daily Caller One of America’s least-revered Presidents happens to be one of the most gifted in his understanding of history and human nature. It was in 1776 that future President John Adams identified “fear” as “the foundation of most governments.” Adams might also have had in mind the words of a British contemporary, Edmund Burke, who in 1757 noted that “No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear.” Watching videos in recent days of adult women fighting over the last multi-pack of toilet paper to place in their already overflowing grocery carts illustrates that human behavior has not changed in the centuries since Burke’s observation. And considering the number of officials at the federal, state and municipal levels who are declaring states of “emergency” in the face of the Covid-19 virus, confirms that it remains as easy in 2020 to use fear as a tool with which to expand government power as it was in the 18th Century. This not to say that the Covid-19 virus is neither a serious threat to the health and well-being of Americans from coast to coast nor a legitimate reason for governments to take action to limit and reverse its spread. The virus remains a serious public health threat and it would be highly irresponsible for federal, state and local governments not to enact health-related measures to control the virus. Freeing up financial resources to improve delivery of medical services, loosening red tape on private business in the health care and pharmaceutical sectors, accelerating development of anti-virus inoculations, improving protective measures at senior citizen facilities and schools,...
by Bob Barr | Mar 9, 2020 | Uncategorized |
The Daily Caller Internet search engines have become the encyclopedias of the modern world, gathering and using vast amounts of information on billions of individuals for commercial and other purposes — and updating those databases continuously. With such technology to amass and disperse all manner of data being available, why then is it so difficult to obtain accurate information on just one category of information – crime data? It appears that some, perhaps many, law enforcement agencies may not want accurate and timely information on criminal activity within their jurisdictions available to the public. All of us – including the police — live in the age of the internet. People the world over query search engine behemoth Google constantly. Reliable estimates are that between seven and ten billion Google searches are made every day; trillions each year. Even with that unfathomable amount of information directed to and managed by Google, the company has the capability to disseminate amazingly detailed data on those many users to third parties willing to pay for it. In this, Google is not alone. Other, smaller competitors, along with social media giants like Facebook and YouTube, have developed their own ways of monetizing and reporting information they collect. But when it comes to crime data, we remain in the Dark Ages. Crime statistics are collected and distributed nationally according to a cataloging system developed when Herbert Hoover was our president. The basic tool used by the FBI since 1930 to gather and report statistical data on crimes in the United States is the Uniform Crime Reporting (“UCR”) system. The information made available publicly each year,...
by Bob Barr | Mar 6, 2020 | Uncategorized |
Daily Caller Editor’s note: We endeavor to bring you the top voices on current events representing a range of perspectives. Below is a column arguing that the possibility of Russian interference in the 2020 election is not a major concern. You can find a counterpoint here, where Charles Kolb argues that Russian interference is a real threat to American democracy. Long before modern Russia meddled in our 2016 presidential election, Winston Churchill – one of the 20th century’s preeminent statesmen – described the difficulty of deciphering Russian policies as “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.” Were Churchill with us today, he would know that the tools available to the Kremlin in this 21st century make that task far more difficult than in 1939 when he made his prescient declaration. Most important in this regard is the reality that agencies within the Russian government, including its still very effective intelligence services, are able to employ social media platforms and internet search engines, to both meddle in the affairs of other countries, including the United States, and to camouflage those efforts from detection. To evaluate what Russia has done, is doing, and will in the future attempt as part of its ongoing drive to interfere in electoral affairs of other countries, it is essential to understand one of the primary principles that drives Russia’s foreign policy – that forces outside its borders seek always to interfere in and weaken the country. Whether such a belief is founded on fact (which sometimes it has been) or fiction, it explains how its leaders – most notably the country’s current strongman,...
by Bob Barr | Mar 2, 2020 | Uncategorized |
Daily Caller The list of problems caused or made worse by Obamacare continues to lengthen; higher health insurance premiums and loss of options for consumers top many of the lists of such ills compiled by health care experts. One of the lesser known problematic consequences of the former president’s prime legacy, however, has been thrust into both public policy and budget debates in this election year: “Surprise Medical Billing.” A “Surprise Medical Billing” is a charge for a medical procedure performed on a patient by a physician or other health care provider who happens not to be a member of the provider network covered by the patient’s insurance policy (in other words, the doctor is “out of network”). These medical procedures often are related to emergencies, in which the patient requires care but in circumstances in which he or she has no control over who actually performs the medical services. Because the physician is not “in-network” with the patient’s insurance plan, the fees for services are not covered by the insurance company, and the patient receives a bill — sometimes a very hefty bill that was not anticipated (hence, “surprise”). At its core, the problem of surprise medical billings results from the manner by which insurance companies define the “network” of health care facilities and providers which they will cover for individuals who are members of their plans. This necessarily directs individuals covered by a company’s plan to use the facilities and providers that are “in network,” so that the insurer pays for such charges (at rates they negotiated), and not the individual consumer. Such insurance gerrymandering is not...
