Recently, on June 9, Representative Chip Roy (Liberty Score 100%), with 15 bipartisan cosponsors, and Senator Mike Lee (Liberty Score 94%), with 5 bipartisan cosponsors, introduced companion bills H.R.3988 and S.1912 “to provide for congressional approval of national emergency declarations.”
A president would still be allowed to first unconstitutionally declare an emergency for 30 days.
Then while the legislators would still be at least somewhat in the fog of war of the supposed emergency, the legislators would be faced with deciding whether to extend the emergency. They would find it easy to rationalize unconstitutionally continuing the emergency a full year (and later, another, and another).
Freedom works best
When anything changes, Progressive government people try to increase government power. Progressives hype many changes as emergencies that call for using force.
Force usually is harmful. The only exceptions are in war, or when harmful criminal action is in progress¾when an aggressing force can be limited by a defending force. (Even here, such forces work best when they are decentralized and locally have relative freedom.)
In all other situations, there’s no aggressing force, and the way to limit harm is to not apply force.
Left free, people use information, intuition, and wisdom to choose the action that’s best for them moment-by-moment. People consider how their actions will affect others. People’s individual actions collectively produce the overall results that are best.
Chip Roy, Mike Lee, and some cosponsors are among our best representatives. They almost certainly view these bills as what economist Murray Rothbard would have called “an initial demand.” But allowing emergency declarations and incentivizing extensions would be failing to always uphold Rothbard’s “ultimate goal of total liberty.”
Freedom is required by charters
If force is independently interpreted by a given government person to be constitutional and possibly helpful, his jurisdiction’s charter requires him to follow specific processes.
Most everywhere, these processes clearly promise residents the constitutionally-guaranteed republican form of government, since they closely resemble the Constitution’s processes.
Executives may convene legislatures and shall recommend measures they judge necessary and expedient. Legislators can pass and executives can sign bills. On any resulting laws, judges can hear cases and controversies.
These actions by representatives who are accountable would have dramatically improved outcomes from covid.
Freedom would have helped with covid
Every action that would have helped with covid would have removed added force.
Every government official was required to act constitutionally to protect his residents’ freedom. Every official could have helped remove his government’s own added force, other jurisdictions’ unconstitutional added force, and businesses’ and nonprofits’ unconstitutional restrictions on freedom.
Charters already formally disallowed these restrictions. Clear, specific further laws would have been simple to add.
Each law would have independently helped. Each would have also interrupted the cascade of harmful actions. Each could have been expedited by making it only apply for covid.
Click for Full Text!