Yet again, people fail to understand how Freedom of Speech works

Ryna Workman, who identifies as non-binary is a student at NYU Law school. Before writing about their situation, I want to go back in time for a moment. Back to a 2012 video that went viral.

That's Adam Smith behind the wheel of this drive thru trip. A trip that altered the course of his life. When he got back to his office at a medical device company, he learned that the backlash caused by the outrage generated by his video was immense. He was fired from his $200,000 CFO job and in the process lost stock options worth $1 million.

Some defended his video as protected free speech. 

Ryna Workman had been offered a job by a prestigious NYC law firm. That offer was withdrawn after Ryna had written a column in a school newsletter that was described by some as an "incendiary pro-Hamas" statement.

Some have defended their column as protected free speech.

The reality is that the First Amendment protects speech from government infringement. Not from consequence from private individuals and employers. Even when speaking/writing while not officially representing one's employer, there is no protection from a consequence being applied in response to one's statements/writings.

I bumped up against a similar issue a few months ago. A local television news operation wanted me to do an on-camera interview on a news story related to my primary career. I was willing to do it. However, I am well-aware of my employer's policies involving contacts with the media. I told the news producer I'd need to clear this with the media relations department of my employer. Clearance was not granted. I refused to do the interview. Not because I am a "goody-two-shoes" type. Because I was not going to put my employment at risk.

New York is an at-will employment state. Even if Ryna Workman's employment had already begun, under that legal doctrine, the law firm could fire them at any time for any reason that does not involve illegal discrimination. 

***

Bill Ackman is the CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management. A hedge fund that has $18.5 billion in assets under management.  He has...well, let's let his tweet speak for itself:

This is a tough one. Doxing is wrong. On the other hand, should the members of the organizations that signed onto the letter Mr. Ackman reference avoid responsibility for their choice to sign? Why should students who are members of groups that signed the letter who do not agree with their group's choice to sign?

If I am a member of a group that takes a position I do not support, I need to either shut up and remain a member of the group, or speak out in opposition to the support and ultimately choose whether or not to remain a member of said group.

On the other hand, I wholly support the choice of the Wexner Foundation to withdraw financial support from Harvard itself. They have every right to do so. Their decision is based on Harvard's response to the letter referenced above.

Other colleges and universities will also take hits for their responses to the actions/words of students who support the atrocities of Hamas.

***

It is easy to take a political position. To sign a document as a member of an organization.

Dealing with the fallout is nowhere near as easy.

Is the sky is falling?

 I am in shock. I actually agree with something Rep Lauren Boebert said.

She is right that our nation's system of budgeting is broken and has been for a long time. A 1990 law set the first Monday of February as the date by which the President must submit their budget proposal to the Congress. 

President Clinton's first budget proposal was 66 days late. President George W Bush's first budget was 63 days late. President Obama's first budget was 94 days late. President Trump managed to get his first budget in only 38 days late. President Biden set an all-time record for tardy submission of a budget with it having been 116 days late. This year, President Biden's budget was submitted on March 9th. That was 31 days late.

It is not entirely a president's fault that we've been governing by continuing resolutions since 1997. Nor it entirely the fault of the president that we have not had a balanced budget for over 20 years. The proposal submitted by the president is a blueprint that changes very much after its submission.  

Nonetheless, there are hard deadlines involved here. The budget of the United States runs from 10/1 to 9/30 each year. When a month or two or three is removed because the president's proposal is not submitted when it is due, it makes the process more strained.

***

How can we fix these problems? There are no consequences for a president who submits their budget late. What consequences could be imposed?  Loss of a day's pay? Something else? 

What consequences could be imposed on the members of Congress who do not enact the full budget (it is made up of 12 separate appropriations bills) on time? If it were my call, members of Congress would lose a full day's pay AND benefits for each day the budget is not passed by the deadline.

How much time does Congress waste on crafting continuing resolutions because they cannot pass a budget on time? Goodness knows that the propensity for a number of members of Congress focus much more time on social media than on the real issues. 

Fix this problem. Now!