“A lot of their candidates today, they make [Bush] look like a liberal. The Boston Tea Party was protesting abuse of power. This is now trading public power for the abuse of private power.” former President Clinton campaigning for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton, 9/14/2010.

One does not expect the former President to pay attention to history much and here is no exception.

Tax rates on tea at the time of the Boston Tea Party were approximately 8.3% and the colonists were protesting a government granted monopoly based on the tax on tea.  East India Company tea was not subject to the tax while others were resulting in an effective monopoly by the East India Company and its tea.  The colonists had no say in the matter and the effect of the monopoly was to reduce the influence of the colonies.

President Clinton misstates the issue here as what he refers to is an egregious abuse of power from Washington.  Former President Clinton:  in a free country there is no way to abuse private power.  Actions are voluntary through mutual agreement.  Only when the government gets involved is force and non-voluntary action the result.

There are two sides to the arguments in America: those who want liberty and those who want to deny it for their own power and control.

A note on the Boston Tea Party tax rate:
Boston Tea Party tax rate was 3 pennies per pound of imported tea. Tea sold for about 3 shillings per pound of tea in 1773.  In 1773 (until 1971) there were 20 shillings per pound sterling and 240 pennies per pound sterling, so 12 pennies per shilling.  So a pound of tea cost about 36 pennies per pound of tea, with a tax of 3 pennies meaning the tax rate was 3/36 or 8.3%.

“Every time we object to a thing being done by the government, the socialists conclude that we object to it being done at all.” ~ Frederic Bastiat, French economist, “The Law” 1850.

A Virginia Appeals Court upholds GPS tracking without a warrant.  Judge Randolph A Beales wrote “police used the GPS device to crack this case by tracking the appellant on the public roadways — which they could, of course, do in person any day of the week at any hour without obtaining a warrant.”  The GPS, he wrote in the opinion, “did not provide a substitute for police behavior that would have otherwise violated a recognized right to privacy.”

Judge Beales, please consider, the police might have been able to track a person for a limited time, but the police could not track everyone, everywhere for an entire year.  With an opinion like this, the police could track every single person in the United States (or world) continuously, forever at limited cost.

This is abuse of power plain and simple.