Skip to comments.The newspaper mandate (a federal law requiring every adult American to subscribe to a newspaper)
Posted on 04/03/2012 6:44:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Work with me here:
Newspapers have been an important part of the American political process since even before the Constitution was written. The First Amendment was inspired, in part, by the founders' recognition of the importance of newspapers to that process.
Newspapers have been referred to as the "Fourth Estate" (after Congress, the Presidency, and the Judiciary) because they monitored the government at all levels, federal and state and local, and kept voters up to date on what the government was doing. Without that information, voters would not be able to exercise their franchise properly.
But now newspapers face an existential crisis due to falling revenue. Most can no longer afford to maintain a large staff of reporters, and are reduced to filling their pages with stories from the major wire services. The future is dire; even with those cutbacks they're losing money and it's only going to get worse. How long before the first major city whose last daily paper goes belly up? If it hasn't happened already, it surely will soon.
Who shall keep the voters apprised of government activity, if not an organized press? And who will pay for it? A government subsidy is no answer; if you give government the purse strings, what newspaper would feel comfortable criticizing the government that pays them?
So how about a newspaper mandate? You pass a federal law requiring every adult American to subscribe to a daily newspaper. They can pick any newspaper they like, so there’s no problem with monopolies. (Yeah, in many areas now there’s only one local paper, but you can get USA Today or the Wall Street Journal nearly everywhere, just to take two examples. And once the newspaper mandate is in place, you will find new newspapers popping up, and existing ones broadening their distribution areas. Any monopolies will be short-lived.)
This then gives the press a guaranteed source of funding which isn't directly under government control, providing them with the resources to do the kind of aggressive reporting on government activities which is an essential part of running our Democracy.
Now I don't really think this is a good idea, and I'm not proposing it seriously. I also recognize that it contains several whoppers which probably inspired horselaughs while you were reading it.
But tell me this: if the health care individual mandate survives court challenge, why wouldn't this?
And Podunk Weekly News won't be on it.
Why not...afterall, everyone will need news one day....
Actually, since newspapers are dirty polluters, I suggest a TAX ON NEWSPRINT!
Given that health-care is a basic “need” - like food, I always thought - why not a “food” mandate.
Everyone MUST sign up with COSTCO, Sam’s Club, BJ’s, etc... and buy their food there. The Gov’t will establish what food items will be sold at these stores. Food will be extremely expensive - $50 for a loaf of bread. If you go out to a restaurant, you will be penalized.
You must have got those ideas from Cuba.
The main problem is that American “education” produces high school graduates (or dropouts) who CANNOT READ.
Of course, the traditional use of newpapers was in the out-house and lining bird cages.
That’s all they’re good for these days anyway.
Just print them on toilet paper and everyone would “use” them.
Unfortunately most newspapers today, with the exception of, perhaps the Wall Street Journal, are run by Democrats/lefties who are in the tank for the current administration. Thus all we read is the administration’s propaganda and we seldom see (if at all maybe a one-inch column at the bottom of page 9) a report of any unfavorable news, such as Solyndra, Obama’s top fund raisers’ corruption problems or exposure of the lies that Obama has been pushing about his energy programs.
No thanks, I plan to get my news from the internet, not from the local lefty-owned newspaper.
Already tried and ruled unconstitutional.
MINNEAPOLIS STAR v. MINNESOTA COMM'R OF REV., 460 U.S. 575 (1983)
A tax that burdens rights protected by the First Amendment cannot stand unless the burden is necessary to achieve an overriding governmental interest.Rhenquist dissented.
Apply this to your newspaper mandate and the government could easily compel us to not only buy a daily paper, but also tell us what kind of newspaper is "acceptable", that it contain a "balance" of news and opinion and of course be printed by union workers, be made of recycled paper and use soybean based ink, etc. These government mandates would boost the cost of that daily paper to levels most would find unaffordable so another mandate would create government subsidized and run newspaper exchanges to provide an alternative newspaper for those who could not afford regular newspaper. The whole program of course would be a failure so then there would be a push for a single government run newspaper.
I get the Investors Business Daily instead of the WSJ.
WSJ’s “news” pages are actually a bit left leaning, though their editorial page is conservative.
I dropped WSJ in 2008 when they were parroting 0bama election talking points on their news pages.
I get free newspaper care now. They throw it in the driveway and I have to toss it in the trash where it goes straight to the landfill. Free always causes waste, whether in free newspapers or free health care.
And they will require us to have special radios that can only pick up government propaganda.
What is the difference between a mandate and a dictate?
In the book Left Behind, a snake-oil salesman named Carpathian brings the World to ruin.
Dictator Baby-Doc Barack is our Carpathian as he tries to bring America to ruin.
"Brothers and sisters, the battle for production has been won. Completed returns show that the standard of living has risen by no less than 20% percent over the last year. All over Oceania there've been spontaneous demonstrations of Party workers voicing their gratitude and joy! In honor of this massive overfulfillment of the ninth three-year plan it's been announced that chocolate ration is to be increased to 25 grams per week!"
LOL - good one. Will Obama remind the justices that they’re not elected? That said, if newspapers reminded themselves every day that they’re ‘general circulation ‘ and not an in-house rag for young liberal elite journalism majors they might do better.
The God of “Diversity” has been promoted by the left, as an excuse for advancing the cause of blacks in areas such as admissions into prestigious bastions of higher education. Apparently, it is difficult to understand calculus unless a couple of students have more melanin than you do.
So, since diversity is such a worthy goal, why not force Americans to integrate? A thousand white people from Chappaqua (including Hillary) should get their marching orders and head to the South Bronx. Folks in the tony enclaves of Beverly Hills should be sent to Oakland. Those in Grosse Pointe are close enough to downtown Detroit to make the move painless, unless they take a bullet. Why not, Obama? What is the limiting factor???
The subscriber won't have all that trashy newsprint to recycle and the newspaper won't have to print as many copies, it's a green, win-win solution!
But wait! The imaginative juices are just beginning to flow....
And to go with that newspaper in the morning, I suggest the Feds enact a Rural Starbucks Act: At taxpayer expense, the taxes tacked onto our newspaper bills, people who have deliberately chosen to live in the middle of nowhere, will still have a Starbucks within a two block/200 yard(meter?) radius so as not to be deprived of their right to good coffee.