And now, courtesy of Nebraska’s not-too-careful legislature, we have “dumpster teens” — near-adult youngsters left with the state of Nebraska by their parents, following last July’s loosening of the state’s child neglect statute.

The legislature, trying to prevent dumpster babies, weakened penalties to irresponsible parents who at least show the tiniest responsibility by not leaving infants in dumpsters, or the like, to die, but rather leaving them at hospitals for someone else to take up care.

Little did they expect parents to abandon growing children, including teenagers.

Though unintended, the effects were, well, ludicrously predictable. The legislators had used the word “child” rather than defining it more narrowly to “newborns.”

A special session has now been convened, and the law tidied up to include only infants 30 days or younger. But not before dozens of young people were abandoned. Some parents travelled across state lines to get rid of their kids.

Strange that the same legislature that outlawed non-residents from helping circulate petitions in Nebraska would allow non-residents to drop off their unwanted children in the state. But I digress.

Nebraska legislators may have meant well, but they ignored a basic principle: Some obligations should not be made too easy to break.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Back in the 1600s, John Lilburne worked as a pamphleteer and champion of individual or “freeborn” rights. He pioneered the use of petitioning for redress against government power and abuse.

Lilburne was a term limits guy, too, arguing that members of parliament should not be able to serve for longer than a year at a time. Unfortunately, he spent far too much time in jail; his support for individual rights bugged both the Crown and then Cromwell. Lilburne’s trials sparked the fire that led to our own Fifth Amendment.

The Citizens in Charge Foundation, a group I work with, has just launched The John Lilburne Award. This monthly honor will go to a citizen working to protect and expand our petition rights.

Eric Ehst is the award’s first winner, for November 2008.

Ehst, executive director of the Clean Elections Institute, formed a coalition that helped defeat Arizona’s Proposition 105. This measure would have severely hampered Arizona’s initiative process by requiring a virtually impossible majority of all registered voters — not just those voting — to pass any initiative that would raise a tax or fee or that mandated any spending at all, even a postage stamp.

Long ago, John Lilburne struggled to establish the peoples’ right to petition their government. This year in Arizona, Eric Ehst defended that same right.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Come to think of it, though, maybe there’s nothing so very new about this Obaminable economic school — after all, it just combines typical big-government redistribution with a few nominal nods in the direction of fiscal self-discipline.

You can get a concise idea of the Obaminable approach to economics from a headline that floated into my In Box the other day. I quote: “Obama Promotes Fiscal Restraint, Big Spending.” According to the reporter, the president-elect “wants to project fiscal restraint even as his economic team assembles a massive recovery package that could cost several hundred billion dollars.”

Huh?

Well, President-Elect Barack Obama thinks he erases the contradiction by contrasting his short-term plans with his long-term plans. Short-term, government must spend like there’s no tomorrow, because this is what we allegedly need to see happening if we are to regain confidence in our future. Yes, we absolutely must see an endless parade of babbling bureaucrats going hog-wild with taxpayer dollars on a wide array of ludicrous, unworkable schemes. Absolutely.

After that, though, will come the line-by-line budget review, the ruthless cutting out of bloat.

Well, any alcoholic will tell you that he can stop whenever he likes. Just so, our rulers keep putting off the restraint of fiscal restraint.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

The federal government’s profligate credit policies, which fueled the now-busted housing bubble, come to mind. The government’s “solution” here is to lard some failed companies with subsidies and nationalize others. Why? Oh, no time to think, just hurry up and do it before investors get even more jittery.

Sometimes, though, officials scrambling for a solution consider solutions that might actually help. Crumbling infrastructure is on the minds of many city and state politicians. But the tough economy is also on their minds. Many are therefore more open these days to the idea of private financing of roads
and bridges. As Norman Mineta, former transportation secretary, puts it, ”Budget gaps are starting to increase the viability of public-private partnerships.”

I don’t know about the “partnership” part of it. Too often such ”partnerships” mean that a business is prevented from making good decisions, or is protected from the costs of bad decisions.

If we’re going to delegate a train or road to a private company, let them take full responsibility for it. Companies that succeed will get us from here to there just fine. And taxpayers won’t have to cough up money for the ones that fail.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

See, cyberspace isn’t purpose-driven . . . yet. It only helps us access all the information in the world, communicate instantly at no cost with people on the other side of the globe, find true love, shop, download books and movies and lectures, elect presidents, refute environmentalist alarmism, save lives, and other such trivia.

A New York Times article reports that in Al Gore’s view, “we” haven’t done enough to spread his vision of the imminent doom of the earth.

Gore can’t be held accountable for anybody else’s understanding of his views, of course. So let’s find a direct quote from this article about how “we” must do more with the Web than just trade party photos on Facebook.

According to Gore, speaking at an Internet conference in San Francisco, “Web 2.0 has to have a purpose.”

What purpose?

Nothing less, he declares, than “bring[ing] about a higher level of consciousness about our planet and the imminent danger and opportunity we face because of the radical transformation in the relationship between human beings and the Earth.”

Sounds quite grand, as long you don’t try to divine what the words actually mean.

In my online world, individual lives and individual purposes matter quite a lot, despite a lack of overarching purpose. Offline too.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Chandra Bhan Prasad, an Indian writer and activist, was once the worst kind of socialist. According to a profile in the New York Times, he had been the kind of Maoist revolutionary who “carried a pistol and recruited his people to kill their upper-caste landlords.”

Now Prasad says the best way to lift low-caste members of society out of poverty is to increase economic freedom, let capitalism flourish. He accuses hardcore leftists of “hatred for those who are happy.”

Prasad is conducting a survey of India’s untouchables to learn about the impact of the economic liberalization that has been underway in India since the early ’90s. His survey finds that they are less likely to be confined to the traditional jobs of their caste, like skinning animals. And that they enjoy more social privileges than they once did.

The Times reporter advises that the results of greater economic freedom are uneven, that many untouchables are still mired in poverty while members of the upper caste still possess great advantage. Not very surprising, eh? You can’t expunge decades and centuries of bad policy and entrenched prejudice with a snap of the fingers.

On the other hand, if you want to bring millions out of grinding poverty, the abundant wealth created by capitalism sure comes in handy. Socialism will keep them poor just fine.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

He wants to stand for a third term, when New Yorkers have twice voted in support of a referendum limiting the mayor and city council members to two terms. Bloomberg’s second term ends November 2009.

Solution? Exploit a loophole that lets the city council revise the term limits law unilaterally. Council members had mumbled about doing this before, but Bloomberg always said he would veto any such attempt. We must, he said, respect the decision of the voters.

Once the mayor changed his mind, his task was simple. Just persuade a willing council to lengthen terms from two to three. Which they did. Problem solved.

Except . . . the uproar greeting Bloomberg’s betrayal of the voters has become enormous. And continues. Many voters showed up at the signing ceremony to berate him in person. So he had to squirm for a couple hours before scribbling his soiled John Hancock. There’s also a lawsuit under way to try to undo this undoing of lawful democracy.

And now a Brooklyn resident, Andre Calvert, has set up a Facebook page dedicated to the goal of defeating Bloomberg and the 29 city council members who voted to undermine the voters. Live in New York? Check it out. Maybe even if you don’t. The name of the profile is King Bloomberg III.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

I’m not speaking of autumn. I like autumn. A gradual cooling is nice; the swirl of falling leaves, brightly colored, wondrous. It’s good to have a gentle transition to winter’s cold.

It’s the presidential electoral season that’s tough, both the before part and the after part.

As I have argued many times, the best hope for our republic lies in the action of local activists and leaders, not only demanding limited government but also showing how it’s done. If there’s no political market for freedom at the local level, it won’t flourish at the federal level, let me tell you.

And yet politicians and media emphasize the doings and sayings of folks at the top of the heap.

Worse yet, there seems a budding epidemic of president worship.

Oh, Obama is a smart guy, a good orator. He might end up being a great president. But he hasn’t even begun that job.

I’m just not very good at adoring politicians, of putting them on a pedestal, of pretending they’re superhuman. So, let’s cool it. Hero worship is more than nonsense, it’s idolatrous nonsense.

And yet too many politicians encourage the wrong kind of support. And receive it.

We need a version of hope that’s bigger than one man, a version that rests some responsibility on our actions as something other than voters and sycophants.

I am hoping this is possible. Say it with me: Yes, we can.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

It was one of the most laborious and disgusting clean-up jobs that had to be done after Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast in 2005.

Finally the Second Amendment Foundation has achieved satisfaction in its “clean-up” lawsuit against the city of New Orleans for using the hurricane as an excuse to grab guns from law-abiding citizens.

In September of 2005, the Foundation teamed up with the National Rifle Association to sue the New Orleans government for violating the right of innocent residents to bear arms. In the wake of Katrina, guns were grabbed without warrants, without even any probable cause or reasonable suspicion of crimes.

Just when people and their homes were at their most vulnerable, the forces of alleged law enforcement made it even harder for them to protect themselves against looters and other criminals.

It has taken three long years for New Orleans to agree to return the stolen weapons to their rightful owners. Alan Gottlieb, the founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, says he is glad the suit is finally settled. But he adds that it should never have been necessary.

Gottlieb hopes the permanent injunction will “[send] a signal to mayors and police chiefs everywhere that we live in a nation of laws, and those laws are not subject to their whims.”

Natural disasters are no excuse to crumple the Constitution.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

What? Our omniscient congressmen failed to forecast the fate of their latest multifarious munificence?

You know, whenever I myself spend hundreds of billions on random questionable socialistic takeovers of the economy, I always demand an itemized account of exactly what I will get in return. Always.

It seems that the $700 billion just authorized by Congress is not only being spent on buying up troubled mortgages but is changing into a “broader bailout of all sorts of troubled businesses.” Some banks used the money to buy other banks instead of to “spur more lending.” And other recipients are paying dividends to stockholders.

Apparently, various central planners of our economy expected those receiving the money to use it in more publicly spirited fashion.

Such caviling ignores the real problem, which is more basic. You can’t cure the effects of gignormous debt creation and gignormous subsidizing of unwise enterprises with even more gignormous debt creation and gignormous subsidizing.

If massive intervention in markets caused the economy to curdle, roll back the massive intervention. Let investors take risks with their own money.

But don’t get drunk all over again, faster and harder, and expect that this time there won’t be any hangover.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

I have argued many times that Senator Stevens is a living, walking, snarling advertisement for term limits. In a Townhall column years ago, I emphasized that his indecent playing of interest upon interest has led to an obvious, big-as-the-nose-on-his-face “appearance of corruption.”

I also argued that, no matter what his below-the-table shenanigans may have been — may continue to be — his above-board porkmeistering is itself a form of corruption, one that our republic should repudiate.

And his party should repudiate.

And his constituents should repudiate.

During the campaign, John McCain and Sarah Palin, asked that Stevens resign. Lots of people have demanded it. Utterly defiant, Stevens insists on representing Alaska while his lawyers “pursue the appeals to clear” his name.

Yet if as many as five or six — or even all seven — of the counts against him are not upheld, his name will still appear dirty in my book, dirty from all the porkbarelling. Senator Ted Stevens is a horrifying example of much that is wrong in government.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Me? Not so much.

Oh, I like Obama’s talk about there not being red states and blue states, urging that we get past partisanship. I just don’t recall him ever bucking his own party.

I like that he talks about reviewing all government programs and ending those that don’t work, expanding those that do. But, after several years in Washington, he’s yet to name the first program he’d scrap. Don’t hold your breath now.

I like his bashing of the corrupt insider games in Washington. And then I see that those around him are insiders who have been running government for decades.

So, I’m still counting on you to save our country. Not Obama.

Yet, the election of a black man to the presidency does seem a fitting time to celebrate just how far we have come, and, moreover, to say thanks to those who risked so much to obtain equal rights and justice.

Let’s hear it for equal rights and justice!

Even in my short 48 years in this great country, I can recall a different day and time. Then, Americans lived in fear over the issue of race; then, black Americans could hardly be said to live in freedom.

We can rejoice in leaving that past far behind — whether we voted for the candidate who to some symbolizes it, or not.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

That may seem a little strange to regular readers. They know that Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson is prosecuting me, along with two other activists, for work on a 2005 petition drive to cap state spending. He’s trying to throw us in prison for ten years.

This legal assault is “unjust” and “politically-motivated.” Those words aren’t mine: An Oklahoma City University law professor argued that this prosecution is “unjust,” and a state senator charged the AG’s actions are “politically-motivated.”

Since Edmondson began his chilling attack on the right to petition one’s government, poor Oklahoma has been compared to some horribly tyrannical regimes. An editorial in Forbes asked, “Has Oklahoma Been Annexed by North Korea?” A Wall Street Journal editorial connected the Sooner State to the kind of repression practiced in Pakistan.

And now, columnist Paul Mulshine with the New Jersey Star Ledger condemns Edmondson, saying Russia’s Vladimir Putin “could learn a thing or two from the Oklahoma boys.”

But wait a second. There are great people in Oklahoma. They don’t support this outrageous abuse of power.

As those of us threatened in Oklahoma finally have our preliminary hearing, I’m confident that this vicious attack has awoken Oklahomans . . . and Americans. Eyes wide open, Americans in Oklahoma and elsewhere will fight to protect the initiative process.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Politicians tend to think unlimited terms in office is a good thing. I disagree, but forget that for a moment. What is the best way to settle the disagreement? Who should decide how long politicians serve?

The people, that’s who.

New York City’s mayor and City Council have opposed the term limits they live under, term limits voted into law by citizens.

So they got together and legislatively overturned the people’s decision, extending their own terms in office.

But not every politician who may like extended terms thinks that this was the way to obtain them. Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum went on record before the council vote that, if the council overturned the term limits rather than sending it back to the voters again, she would not seek re-election.

“I think it’s wrong,” she said. “It would be wrong for me, feeling as strongly as I do, to run for a third term if [term limits are] overturned in a way that I don’t think is right.”

Immediately her political competitors breathed a sigh of relief. But citizens should sigh in appreciation. It is mighty good to see personal principles trump re-election frenzy.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

It seems that the county clerk in the county I grew up in — Pulaski County, Arkansas — also likes the idea of sunshine or “transparency,” or some distorted notion of it. Apparently, he is the kind of person who thinks that if people have “nothing to hide,” it’s okay to go traipsing door to door ripping curtains off living-room windows.

According to the Sunshine Review, this troublemaker “posted [to the Web] tens of thousands of circuit court records containing Social Security numbers and other personal data including bank account numbers, birth dates and check images.”

An outraged resident of the county, Bill Phillips, used the Freedom of Information act to obtain email records from the county clerk’s office. Bill has posted them at his own website, PulaskiWatch.com. In one of the posted emails, county clerk employees are advised to make sure to synchronize their “docuclocks.” Okay. In another email, we learn that someone named Ben is late because of a doctor’s appointment.

PulaskiWatch.com announces that it will remove these silly emails from public view just as soon as the county clerk’s office removes all the personal information from the Internet that is placing so many persons at risk of identity theft.

Good luck, people of Pulaski County. When your public servants don’t see why the personal should be kept private and the public realm open, you’ve got an uphill battle.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

We’ve gone through another Baby Boom president, and now we — and I’m talkin’ ’bout my generation, here — have our very own economic bust. Call it the Boomers’ Bust.

John Kass, writing in the Chicago Tribune, notes how different things look for Boomers, now. “In the ’70s,” Kass writes, “the slogan was ‘Do your own thing.” But today’s slogan might be ‘Washington, please save us.’”

Kass attributes some of the difference merely to age. When we were young, we took risks. Now that we’re older, we simply want to keep our houses and our cars and our TV sets, and our retirement plans.

The ominous marker in all this is the transfer of power. In our desires, demands, for security, we’ve given up a lot. Kass says we are giving up “liberty for all” and exchanging it with “power in the hands of a few.”

We can see it is who gains most: people and corporations on the inside track. But, as Kass points out, look who loses: “The casualty will be the entrepreneurs, those on the outside. . . . Such men and women will be on the outside for decades now.”

Since it was entrepreneurs who accomplished the most enduring good during the last 40 years, this will be tragic.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

He called it the “Fix Washington Project.”

While the contest was still underway, I reported that 12-year term limits on Congress was one of the five options. Throwing caution to the wind, I predicted term limits would triumph. Was I right?

Before I answer, let me say how much I like the idea of voters getting involved in proposing legislation. In fact, I think voters should have a way to bypass legislators altogether and pass laws directly. Half the states of the union have a formal process for enabling this. It’s called “citizen initiative.”

Okay, enough suspense. Congressional term limits collected 43 percent of the vote in Kuhl’s contest, winning the greatest support of any of the five alternatives.

I’m no soothsayer. Term limits have always been popular with voters. A recent Rasmussen Reports poll shows 83 percent support for congressional term limits.

So hats off to Congressman Kuhl. But your term limits legislation is no doubt going to be more popular with your constituents than with your colleagues back in Washington.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Well, now the governors are going to Washington to beg for bailouts. New York Governor Paterson and New Jersey Governor Corzine have schlepped their way up to the Hill to explain that they are “cutting all [they] can” from their bloated budgets, and to demand some “relief.”

I don’t believe that the notoriously corrupt governments of New York and New Jersey have pared their budgets to the bone. Or that the only way to cut another dollar is to throw some little old lady out onto the street.

I also don’t believe that the federal government has some magical way of getting money that state governments don’t have. It all comes from the same group of us taxpayers. Unless these governors are talking about taking cash from other states, where else would the money come from? Where but out of thin air — borrowing plus the trusty old printing press?

The feds are wearing the same blinkers as these gubernatorial guys. For example, the wizards at the Federal Reserve are struggling to bring interest rates to zero — as if cheap credit in the past had nothing to do with all the misbegotten easy mortgage loans spawning the present crisis.

Now, I put it to you: If fiscal irresponsibility can be increased from mammoth to infinity, will that, at last, solve the problem? If the Fed were to drop-ship crates of cash and credit cards onto every neighborhood in America, will that, at last, solve the problem?

Unbefreakinlievable.

We need some Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

The Fairness Doctrine is a kind of assault on broadcast speech that has not been enforced since the 1980s. It compelled broadcasters to give so-called “equal time” to the so-called “opposing viewpoint” . . . as if there were only one. We may have a two-party system in this country, but we don’t have a two-opinion system.

Of course, the doctrine is nothing but a club for clobbering freedom of speech, not expanding it.

At National Review Online, Barbara Comstock and Lanny Davis note that all manner of absurdity erupts when equal time to somebody else’s podium is guaranteed by law. In 1978, NBC aired a program about the Holocaust, then spent three years in court dealing with a lawsuit brought by a group which believed the Holocaust is a myth and wanted NBC to give it “equal time.” Only “fair,” right?

Today, many believe that the Fairness Doctrine would be used against conservative talk radio, which happens to be a lot more popular than liberal talk radio, and that this is why some on the political left are talking about restoring the rule. But nobody who talks in public for a living, or even as just a hobby, would be safe from harassment if this monstrosity comes back to life. Comstock and Davis say Congress should bury the Fairness Doctrine for good.

Yes, with a stake through its evil heart.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Now, the election is over, and new causes will be celebrated and reviled. But Joe’s right to speak his mind remains a live issue, one that we should all worry about.

Yes, there’s more to this story than you may have heard.

Here’s the rest of the story: Soon after his newfound notoriety, the real Joe, Mr. Wurzelbacher, found himself under investigation by the local police.

It’s an old, ignoble tradition throughout much of the world: A person speaks up, out come the billy clubs.

Fortunately, the investigation into his private records was nipped in the bud. The records clerk who actually made the inquiry has found herself under investigation. She’s even been charged with “gross misconduct” for allegedly making an improper, politically-based inquiry.

We’ll see if the investigation goes further than just this one clerk. The higher-up who approved the probe, Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, has defended her move. Will her maximum contributions to Mr. Obama’s campaign be judged irrelevant?

We’ll see.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.