Ideapublica

Why not ... just enforce the law.

Mon, 02 Feb 2026 15:48:49 +0000

The modern debate over illegal immigration is often framed as a simple moral divide — one party permissive, the other restrictive — but this polarization is relatively new.

For much of American history, immigration enforcement was understood primarily as a working-class issue. Protecting wages, labor standards, and lawful employment aligned naturally with the coalition that became the Democratic Party, while business interests — often aligned with the Republican Party — favored expanded labor supply.

Truth be told…

Tue, 27 Jan 2026 07:25:32 +0000

Today, every citizen, executive official, and judge is subject to an obligation of truthfulness when exercising public authority. Members of Congress, however, retain absolute immunity when communicating official factual claims to their constituents, even when those statements are knowingly false. That asymmetry undermines public trust and weakens representative government.

The proposal is narrow by design. It would authorize Congress, within strict constitutional bounds, to require Members to be truthful when they use official authority to communicate with constituents. It would also clarify that the Speech or Debate Clause does not protect knowing falsehoods made under that obligation. Opinion, advocacy, political belief, and campaign activity remain outside its reach.

Regulation FD – The Failed Disclosure Act

Mon, 26 Jan 2026 21:14:26 +0000

What Regulation FD Fixed

Regulation Fair Disclosure was adopted in 2000 for an understandable reason. Companies were privately briefing favored analysts and institutional investors before telling the rest of the market. Selective disclosure was unfair and ripe for abuse.

The SEC addressed that abuse by making the conversational channel itself dangerous. If a company shares material information with one analyst, it must disclose that information publicly at the same time. Faced with that obligation, companies have learned to say only what their lawyers and communications departments are prepared to broadcast to everyone.

Demosclerosis

Mon, 26 Jan 2026 19:41:27 +0000

Congress Abdicated

Our legal system is in crisis. The present crisis is not primarily one of judicial activism, but of legislative abdication.

Under the Constitution, the federal judiciary is created, structured, funded, and defined by Congress. The Supreme Court decides cases; it does not manage the judiciary. Responsibility for judicial organization, discipline, and administration has always rested with the legislative branch.

Over time—particularly in the late twentieth century—Congress effectively delegated the governance of the judiciary back to judges themselves. In the name of protecting decisional independence, Congress allowed internal judicial bodies to define misconduct, oversee ethics, and address systemic abuse, largely outside meaningful democratic oversight.

Let’s Make Unions Great Again!

Tue, 14 Oct 2025 02:58:28 +0000

In all seriousness—unions have never been “great,” but they should be.

A union is a corporation that sells labor as a product. In a competitive market, it should succeed like any other enterprise: by delivering value to its owners and allocating capital and resources efficiently.

Unions were not created as ordinary corporations, though, but as collectivist organizations “by the people for the people.” The union was supposed to represent workers and look out for their interests, drawing on a fantastical model of benevolent leadership while fighting capital and empowering the masses.

About this site

Mon, 13 Oct 2025 20:12:08 +0000

Ideapublica exists to separate the ideas it publishes from identities.

We live in a time when expressing an unpopular view can threaten a career, a reputation, personal relationships, or even personal safety long before anyone considers whether the view is true. Social media rewards exposure and punishment. Political and cultural conformity turn an author’s identity into a substitute for engaging with the argument.

Work appearing here may therefore be published anonymously or under pseudonyms. The point is not secrecy for its own sake, nor immunity from criticism. It is to let an argument be tested on its reasoning, evidence, and consequences without making personal reprisal the price of publication.