Monday, October 31, 2011
From the NYT: Outside Groups Eclipsing G.O.P. as Hub of Campaigns
In 2301 (16 week) we are discussing parties. One of our topics is the relative health of the two parties and this NYT story about the increasing strength of outsider groups - or individuals not directly affiliated with the party. Their power may be eclipsing the party's:
About once a month, a dozen or so of the country’s most influential Republicans meet in a bare-walled conference room in Washington to discuss how to make further gains in the Congressional elections next year and defeat President Obama.
They share polling and opposition research, preview their plans for advertising and contacting voters in swing states, and look for ways to coordinate spending hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 12 months, drawing on years of experience laboring for the party.
But almost none of them hold office or a job with the Republican Party itself. Instead, they represent conservative groups that channeled tens of millions of dollars into last year’s Congressional campaign. And as 2012 approaches, the groups — among them the Karl Rove-founded American Crossroads, the Republican Governors Association, the American Action Network and Americans for Prosperity, which is backed by the billionaire Koch brothers — have gathered into a loosely organized political machine poised to rival, and in many ways supplant, the official Republican Party apparatus.
About once a month, a dozen or so of the country’s most influential Republicans meet in a bare-walled conference room in Washington to discuss how to make further gains in the Congressional elections next year and defeat President Obama.
They share polling and opposition research, preview their plans for advertising and contacting voters in swing states, and look for ways to coordinate spending hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 12 months, drawing on years of experience laboring for the party.
But almost none of them hold office or a job with the Republican Party itself. Instead, they represent conservative groups that channeled tens of millions of dollars into last year’s Congressional campaign. And as 2012 approaches, the groups — among them the Karl Rove-founded American Crossroads, the Republican Governors Association, the American Action Network and Americans for Prosperity, which is backed by the billionaire Koch brothers — have gathered into a loosely organized political machine poised to rival, and in many ways supplant, the official Republican Party apparatus.
From SCOTUSblog: Remedy for ineffective assistance of counsel during plea bargaining?
The Supreme Court will hear arguments today two cases involving assistance of counsel and what happens when that assistance is ineffective - or incompetent.
- SCOTUSblog.
- SCOTUSblog.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
This week's written assignment for 16 week 2301 class - Mormons and Republicans
This is a question that I hope bridges this week's discussion of political parties with our very brief discussion of religious liberties when we covered civil liberties.
As we already know from class discussions and the report you have been thinking about, the battle for the Republican nominations seems to be between Mitt Romney and Not-Mitt Romney. Romney's numbers are steady, but he is regularly and briefly eclipsed by a series of alternate candidates (Bachmann, Perry, Cain, etc...). One of the reasons why - some speculate - is that the Republican Party coalition (that is the collection of different groups that comprise the party) includes factions that will not vote for a Mormon.
This could be a potentially fatal division should Romney become the party's nominee. Not that anti-Mormon Republicans woudl vote for Obama, but they may well sit this election out hoping for a better candidate i 2016 (if he is elected in 2012, chances are he is the party's nominee in 2016, so they wont have a shot at a preferred candidate until 2020).
I want you to get to the heart of this division - and also weight in on whether you think the point is overblown. Are there divisions within the party along religious lines? Do these overlap other divisions such as education and income? Perhaps these divisions reinforce themselves. What impact might these have on the party in the 2012 election? You may want to consider how the topics we covered in Federalist #10 - when we discussed Republicanism - impact this as well.
Do your own research - let me know where you get your information. 150 words at a minomum, thanks.
As we already know from class discussions and the report you have been thinking about, the battle for the Republican nominations seems to be between Mitt Romney and Not-Mitt Romney. Romney's numbers are steady, but he is regularly and briefly eclipsed by a series of alternate candidates (Bachmann, Perry, Cain, etc...). One of the reasons why - some speculate - is that the Republican Party coalition (that is the collection of different groups that comprise the party) includes factions that will not vote for a Mormon.
This could be a potentially fatal division should Romney become the party's nominee. Not that anti-Mormon Republicans woudl vote for Obama, but they may well sit this election out hoping for a better candidate i 2016 (if he is elected in 2012, chances are he is the party's nominee in 2016, so they wont have a shot at a preferred candidate until 2020).
I want you to get to the heart of this division - and also weight in on whether you think the point is overblown. Are there divisions within the party along religious lines? Do these overlap other divisions such as education and income? Perhaps these divisions reinforce themselves. What impact might these have on the party in the 2012 election? You may want to consider how the topics we covered in Federalist #10 - when we discussed Republicanism - impact this as well.
Do your own research - let me know where you get your information. 150 words at a minomum, thanks.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
The House passes two minor parts of the Jobs bill
From the NYT:
On Thursday, the House passed a very modest measure to end a tax withholding program, one that had yet to affect a single American, but which President Obama has agreed should go. No word from the Senate yet — those members are back in their home states this week taking a breather from their legislative labors — but chances are the bill will clear that chamber, too.
. . . Outside of a few recent flashes of light — the passage of three trade bills this month, and an agreement on patent reform — there have been no big bipartisan jobs initiatives in this Congress.
Republicans have broadly rejected Mr. Obama’s sweeping proposal to cut some taxes, raise others and stimulate hiring through government spending, denouncing it as a stimulus measure doomed to harm the economy.
Senate Democrats have largely snubbed Republicans’ measures to repeal government regulations, saying such efforts will not create jobs. Further, the bipartisan Congressional committee charged with eliminating $1.2 trillion in federal debt has made little progress, for now, over how to get there.
On a related note, Congress' approval rating is 9%.
On Thursday, the House passed a very modest measure to end a tax withholding program, one that had yet to affect a single American, but which President Obama has agreed should go. No word from the Senate yet — those members are back in their home states this week taking a breather from their legislative labors — but chances are the bill will clear that chamber, too.
. . . Outside of a few recent flashes of light — the passage of three trade bills this month, and an agreement on patent reform — there have been no big bipartisan jobs initiatives in this Congress.
Republicans have broadly rejected Mr. Obama’s sweeping proposal to cut some taxes, raise others and stimulate hiring through government spending, denouncing it as a stimulus measure doomed to harm the economy.
Senate Democrats have largely snubbed Republicans’ measures to repeal government regulations, saying such efforts will not create jobs. Further, the bipartisan Congressional committee charged with eliminating $1.2 trillion in federal debt has made little progress, for now, over how to get there.
On a related note, Congress' approval rating is 9%.
The media is trying to figure what to make of OWS
From Slate:
The mainstream media thrives on simple solutions. It has no idea whatsoever of how to report on a story that isn’t about easy fixes so much as it is about anguished human frustration and fear. The media prides itself on its ability to tell you how to clear your clutter, regrout your shower, or purge your closet of anything that makes you look fat—in 24 minutes or less. It is bound to be flummoxed by a protest that offers up no happy endings
The mainstream media thrives on simple solutions. It has no idea whatsoever of how to report on a story that isn’t about easy fixes so much as it is about anguished human frustration and fear. The media prides itself on its ability to tell you how to clear your clutter, regrout your shower, or purge your closet of anything that makes you look fat—in 24 minutes or less. It is bound to be flummoxed by a protest that offers up no happy endings
Does consumer spending drive the economy, not private investment?
Here's an argument that it does - and it goes against recent economic theory (but one of the consequences of economic events like the Great Recession is a rethinking of economic theory):
AS an economic historian who has been studying American capitalism for 35 years, I’m going to let you in on the best-kept secret of the last century: private investment — that is, using business profits to increase productivity and output — doesn’t actually drive economic growth. Consumer debt and government spending do. Private investment isn’t even necessary to promote growth.
This is, to put it mildly, a controversial claim. Economists will tell you that private business investment causes growth because it pays for the new plant or equipment that creates jobs, improves labor productivity and increases workers’ incomes. As a result, you’ll hear politicians insisting that more incentives for private investors — lower taxes on corporate profits — will lead to faster and better-balanced growth.
The general public seems to agree. According to a New York Times/CBS News poll in May, a majority of Americans believe that increased corporate taxes “would discourage American companies from creating jobs.”
But history shows that this is wrong.
Read on, we will discuss this in 2302.
AS an economic historian who has been studying American capitalism for 35 years, I’m going to let you in on the best-kept secret of the last century: private investment — that is, using business profits to increase productivity and output — doesn’t actually drive economic growth. Consumer debt and government spending do. Private investment isn’t even necessary to promote growth.
This is, to put it mildly, a controversial claim. Economists will tell you that private business investment causes growth because it pays for the new plant or equipment that creates jobs, improves labor productivity and increases workers’ incomes. As a result, you’ll hear politicians insisting that more incentives for private investors — lower taxes on corporate profits — will lead to faster and better-balanced growth.
The general public seems to agree. According to a New York Times/CBS News poll in May, a majority of Americans believe that increased corporate taxes “would discourage American companies from creating jobs.”
But history shows that this is wrong.
Read on, we will discuss this in 2302.
Writing Assignment for 2302 16 Week Class - The Supreme Court and the 2012 Election
My 16 week 2302 students are going to begin looking at the judiciary this week and an editorial (which is admittedly biased and pointed, though still useful), reminds us of a reality of the upcoming election - one that is rarely at the centerpiece of elections. There are three judges over the age of 75, and the next president may get to replace them all. Of course some work until they are in their 90s, so this is no guarantee this will happen.
The greater point is that elections help determine what direction the federal courts take. Read the editorial, as well as any other items you find useful, describe and comment on this issue.
The greater point is that elections help determine what direction the federal courts take. Read the editorial, as well as any other items you find useful, describe and comment on this issue.
Are civil rights policies working?
This author says they are not, and we need to transform how discrimination is addressed.
CIVIL rights have transformed American society, and made it fairer and less divided, by outlawing overt racial discrimination and making bigotry socially unacceptable. That success has inspired a host of social groups to press for new civil rights.
But civil rights have barely made a dent in today’s most severe and persistent social injustices, such as the disproportionate incarceration of African-Americans, the glass ceiling that blocks career advancement for many women and high unemployment among the elderly; in fact, some of these problems have gotten worse despite civil rights laws intended to address them. Today’s most pressing injustices require comprehensive changes in the practices of the police, schools and employers — not simply responses to individual injuries.
The author questions the use of lawsuits as a vehicle for handling civil rights complaints (notice the discussion of Brown and the Seattle Supreme Court decisions). 2301 students should be aware of this policy after discussing civil rights in class. 2302 students should read this because it points out the role the Supreme Court has played in promoting civil rights at one point, and being more skeptical of them recently.
- In a related story: Female Wal-Mart Employees File New Bias Case.
CIVIL rights have transformed American society, and made it fairer and less divided, by outlawing overt racial discrimination and making bigotry socially unacceptable. That success has inspired a host of social groups to press for new civil rights.
But civil rights have barely made a dent in today’s most severe and persistent social injustices, such as the disproportionate incarceration of African-Americans, the glass ceiling that blocks career advancement for many women and high unemployment among the elderly; in fact, some of these problems have gotten worse despite civil rights laws intended to address them. Today’s most pressing injustices require comprehensive changes in the practices of the police, schools and employers — not simply responses to individual injuries.
The author questions the use of lawsuits as a vehicle for handling civil rights complaints (notice the discussion of Brown and the Seattle Supreme Court decisions). 2301 students should be aware of this policy after discussing civil rights in class. 2302 students should read this because it points out the role the Supreme Court has played in promoting civil rights at one point, and being more skeptical of them recently.
- In a related story: Female Wal-Mart Employees File New Bias Case.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Some thoughts on whether placing a GPS device oin a car (without a warrant) is an unreasonable search
More from Scotusblog (the author is Orin Kerr):
My bottom line is that I find this a surprisingly difficult and open question: Justices wishing to apply the Fourth Amendment in a way that is consistent with Fourth Amendment text, history, principles, and precedents could plausibly go either way. One implication of this uncertainty is that if the Justices decide to regulate GPS under the Fourth Amendment, focusing on the installation of the device is a much better option than trying to jump into the thicket of issues discussed in my first post about use of the device once installed. At the same time, it’s worth noting two additional wrinkles. The first is the uncertain standard of reasonableness that would follow from a conclusion that installing the device is a search or seizure. The second is the important role of statutory regulation, which may deal with some of the concerns raised by those who want the Supreme Court to construe the Fourth Amendment to sharply limit GPS monitoring.
This might be a bit thick, but its worth a read.
My bottom line is that I find this a surprisingly difficult and open question: Justices wishing to apply the Fourth Amendment in a way that is consistent with Fourth Amendment text, history, principles, and precedents could plausibly go either way. One implication of this uncertainty is that if the Justices decide to regulate GPS under the Fourth Amendment, focusing on the installation of the device is a much better option than trying to jump into the thicket of issues discussed in my first post about use of the device once installed. At the same time, it’s worth noting two additional wrinkles. The first is the uncertain standard of reasonableness that would follow from a conclusion that installing the device is a search or seizure. The second is the important role of statutory regulation, which may deal with some of the concerns raised by those who want the Supreme Court to construe the Fourth Amendment to sharply limit GPS monitoring.
This might be a bit thick, but its worth a read.
The Supreme Court is set to look at challenges to health care reform
From Scotusblog:
The Supreme Court will take its first look at the challenges to the new federal health care law at its Conference on Thursday, November 10. Five of the six pending petitions (the sixth is not ready yet) were distributed to the Justices’ chambers on Wednesday, for consideration at that private session. Although a grant of review is not assured, that is highly likely, since all sides agree that the Court should take on the controversy, and the constitutionality of a key provision of the new law has been decided differently by federal appeals courts.
The first decision the Court will face in this historic dispute is whether to grant any of the petitions or any of the issues. The Justices have the discretion to grant all, some, or none, since none reached the Court as a mandatory appeal. (The filings in the cases can be found on the Court’s website, here.)
2302 students should take note of this case since it will help you answer the report due at the end of the class.
The Supreme Court will take its first look at the challenges to the new federal health care law at its Conference on Thursday, November 10. Five of the six pending petitions (the sixth is not ready yet) were distributed to the Justices’ chambers on Wednesday, for consideration at that private session. Although a grant of review is not assured, that is highly likely, since all sides agree that the Court should take on the controversy, and the constitutionality of a key provision of the new law has been decided differently by federal appeals courts.
The first decision the Court will face in this historic dispute is whether to grant any of the petitions or any of the issues. The Justices have the discretion to grant all, some, or none, since none reached the Court as a mandatory appeal. (The filings in the cases can be found on the Court’s website, here.)
2302 students should take note of this case since it will help you answer the report due at the end of the class.
What's Your Number?
Put your date of birth here and you can find out where you fit among the now 7 billion people on earth.
The Republican Party in 2012 looks like the Republican Party in 2008
From the Gallup Poll:
The Republican Party in 2011 looks similar, demographically and ideologically, to the Republican Party that nominated John McCain in 2008. As a group, Republicans continue to be more likely than average to be male, white, married, and religious, and to describe their political views as "conservative."
Commentary from the National Journal:
An analysis of tens of thousands of nightly Gallup tracking-poll interviews shows that the Republican primary electorate that will choose the party’s 2012 presidential nominee may look very much like the GOP’s voter base in 2008—with some potentially important changes at the margin. In this cycle, the Gallup trends suggest, the primaries could see an increase in both the youngest and oldest participants and a rise in the share of conservative voters.
The Republican Party in 2011 looks similar, demographically and ideologically, to the Republican Party that nominated John McCain in 2008. As a group, Republicans continue to be more likely than average to be male, white, married, and religious, and to describe their political views as "conservative."
Commentary from the National Journal:
An analysis of tens of thousands of nightly Gallup tracking-poll interviews shows that the Republican primary electorate that will choose the party’s 2012 presidential nominee may look very much like the GOP’s voter base in 2008—with some potentially important changes at the margin. In this cycle, the Gallup trends suggest, the primaries could see an increase in both the youngest and oldest participants and a rise in the share of conservative voters.
Federalism and Gay Marriage
A few posts for my 2301 dual -credit class' assignment on federalism and the increasingly complex relationship between the national and state governments on gay marriage.
- A Federalist Case for Gay Marriage.
- The Federal Marriage Amendment: Unnecessary, Anti-Federalist, and Anti-Democratic.
- Marriage equality: religious freedom, federalism, and judicial ...
For additional info: click here for a graph showing changes in support for gays marriage.
- A Federalist Case for Gay Marriage.
- The Federal Marriage Amendment: Unnecessary, Anti-Federalist, and Anti-Democratic.
- Marriage equality: religious freedom, federalism, and judicial ...
For additional info: click here for a graph showing changes in support for gays marriage.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
No Double Dip?
The economy grew 2.5% in the third quarter. This is not enough to regain lost jobs, but its positive territory.
Andrew Sullivan links to useful commentary.
Andrew Sullivan links to useful commentary.
Are Patent Laws Stifling Innovation?
Some thoughts from Andrew Sullivan: Should some ideas be easy to borrow?
Income Inequality Is Hobbling the Middle Class
From the Fiscal Times, questions about income mobility in the United States. Its not what it once was, and this makes the concentrationof wealth at the top even more problemtic than it would otherwise be:
Income inequality in the U.S. has been rising for the last several decades, and with it concern about the consequences. For example, to what extent does the large flow of income into the hands of financial executives give them the power to influence Congress through campaign donations? How does this have an impact on the willingness of legislators to impose regulations that would stabilize the financial system but inhibit the ability of the financial industry to make the huge profits that fund political campaigns?
If economic mobility increased along with the increase in inequality, then this would at least partially offset the worries associated with the rising concentration of income. To see how, suppose there are two types of jobs in society. One type is desirable and well paying; the other is hard, miserable work with little compensation. Suppose also that one group in society always gets the good jobs while the other gets the bad even though most people within each group are equally qualified to do both types of work. Thus, this is a highly unequal outcome. However if there is mobility – if we prevent one group from keeping the good jobs through political power or other means and instead use a lottery at the beginning of each week to see which of the qualified workers does which job – then the random allocation of jobs over time helps to solve the inequality problem.
What has happened to mobility in the U.S.? Is it any easier to move up and down the ladder than it used to be? Unfortunately, the answer is no.
Income inequality in the U.S. has been rising for the last several decades, and with it concern about the consequences. For example, to what extent does the large flow of income into the hands of financial executives give them the power to influence Congress through campaign donations? How does this have an impact on the willingness of legislators to impose regulations that would stabilize the financial system but inhibit the ability of the financial industry to make the huge profits that fund political campaigns?
If economic mobility increased along with the increase in inequality, then this would at least partially offset the worries associated with the rising concentration of income. To see how, suppose there are two types of jobs in society. One type is desirable and well paying; the other is hard, miserable work with little compensation. Suppose also that one group in society always gets the good jobs while the other gets the bad even though most people within each group are equally qualified to do both types of work. Thus, this is a highly unequal outcome. However if there is mobility – if we prevent one group from keeping the good jobs through political power or other means and instead use a lottery at the beginning of each week to see which of the qualified workers does which job – then the random allocation of jobs over time helps to solve the inequality problem.
What has happened to mobility in the U.S.? Is it any easier to move up and down the ladder than it used to be? Unfortunately, the answer is no.
Elections in Tunisia
While Qadaffi's killing has raised questions about the political future of Libya, Tunisia - where the Arab Spring began - recently held elections.
- Democracy Wins in Tunisia.
- Trust Tunisia.
- Democracy Wins in Tunisia.
- Trust Tunisia.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Obama issues executive order to ease student loan burdens
More executive action circumventing Congress:
From the Washington Post.
President Obama on Wednesday announced a plan to allow college graduates to cap federal student loan repayments at 10 percent of discretionary income starting in January, two years before the cap was due to take effect under federal law.
A muted response from the Atlantic:
Of the many long-term problems the U.S. economy faces, student loans are a big one. Education costs are rising very quickly and incomes aren't. As a result, students will have to borrow more and more money to obtain university degrees and will have a tougher time paying their loans. President Obama seeks to respond to this question with an executive order in the next part of his "We Can't Wait" unilateral stimulus effort. While the president's heart may be in the right place, his effort isn't like to have much impact.
The National Journal puts the effort in context:
The Obama administration is set to announce relaxations in student loan repayments on Wednesday, a third in a series of executive orders issued as part of the “we can’t wait” campaign to boost the economy without the help of Congress.
- Some Q and A.
From the Washington Post.
President Obama on Wednesday announced a plan to allow college graduates to cap federal student loan repayments at 10 percent of discretionary income starting in January, two years before the cap was due to take effect under federal law.
A muted response from the Atlantic:
Of the many long-term problems the U.S. economy faces, student loans are a big one. Education costs are rising very quickly and incomes aren't. As a result, students will have to borrow more and more money to obtain university degrees and will have a tougher time paying their loans. President Obama seeks to respond to this question with an executive order in the next part of his "We Can't Wait" unilateral stimulus effort. While the president's heart may be in the right place, his effort isn't like to have much impact.
The National Journal puts the effort in context:
The Obama administration is set to announce relaxations in student loan repayments on Wednesday, a third in a series of executive orders issued as part of the “we can’t wait” campaign to boost the economy without the help of Congress.
- Some Q and A.
Should members of school boards not be elected?
This is useful for our current conversation about elections:
Local control and direct democracy are concepts that no doubt warm the hearts of all democracy-loving San Antonians.
They shouldn't — not when it comes to educating our children.
Local control and direct democracy are concepts that no doubt warm the hearts of all democracy-loving San Antonians.
They shouldn't — not when it comes to educating our children.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
The Top 1% has Doubled it's Income Since 1979
From the NYT:
The top 1 percent of earners more than doubled their share of the nation’s income over the last three decades, the Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday, in a new report likely to figure prominently in the escalating political fight over how to revive the economy, create jobs and lower the federal debt.
In addition, the report said, government policy has become less redistributive since the late 1970s, doing less to reduce the concentration of income.
“The equalizing effect of federal taxes was smaller” in 2007 than in 1979, as “the composition of federal revenues shifted away from progressive income taxes to less-progressive payroll taxes,” the budget office said.
Also, it said, federal benefit payments are doing less to even out the distribution of income, as a growing share of benefits, like Social Security, goes to older Americans, regardless of their income.
The top 1 percent of earners more than doubled their share of the nation’s income over the last three decades, the Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday, in a new report likely to figure prominently in the escalating political fight over how to revive the economy, create jobs and lower the federal debt.
In addition, the report said, government policy has become less redistributive since the late 1970s, doing less to reduce the concentration of income.
“The equalizing effect of federal taxes was smaller” in 2007 than in 1979, as “the composition of federal revenues shifted away from progressive income taxes to less-progressive payroll taxes,” the budget office said.
Also, it said, federal benefit payments are doing less to even out the distribution of income, as a growing share of benefits, like Social Security, goes to older Americans, regardless of their income.
What Is The Basis For Corporate Personhood?
An interview from NPR on how corporations came to be considered "persons" under the law.
A snippet - note that the idea comes from the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment:
WITT: Well, the law has treated corporations as what some lawyers call metaphysical persons. That is, they're persons for some purposes and they're not persons for others.
BLOCK: What sorts of purposes then would apply here?
WITT: Well, for example, a corporation can be prosecuted for a crime, which is something that usually only persons can be prosecuted for. But on the other hand, corporations get rights. They get rights to contract. They can't marry or run for office or vote, but they can speak. Things like that.
BLOCK: The legal doctrine, as I understand, it goes back to a Supreme Court case. It's in the late 19th century, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. What was that case about essentially?
WITT: So, this is a case where the Occupy Wall Street protestors have distorted the details, but they really have it right in spirit. That was a case in which the Southern Pacific Railroad was protesting taxes that had been placed on it by California and by counties in California. And in that case, the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, Morrison Waite, stood up in January of 1886 and said what pretty much everybody in the courthouse thought, which was that corporations were persons for the purposes of the 14th Amendment.
BLOCK: The 14th Amendment dating from right after the Civil War, the Equal Protection Clause is what we're talking about.
WITT: Yeah, the Equal Protection Clause applies to all persons. It provides that all persons have a right to equal protection under the laws. And that question wasn't controversial at the time. What mattered, really, was what happened later.
- More about the case in question: Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad.
- Corporate personhood.
A snippet - note that the idea comes from the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment:
WITT: Well, the law has treated corporations as what some lawyers call metaphysical persons. That is, they're persons for some purposes and they're not persons for others.
BLOCK: What sorts of purposes then would apply here?
WITT: Well, for example, a corporation can be prosecuted for a crime, which is something that usually only persons can be prosecuted for. But on the other hand, corporations get rights. They get rights to contract. They can't marry or run for office or vote, but they can speak. Things like that.
BLOCK: The legal doctrine, as I understand, it goes back to a Supreme Court case. It's in the late 19th century, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. What was that case about essentially?
WITT: So, this is a case where the Occupy Wall Street protestors have distorted the details, but they really have it right in spirit. That was a case in which the Southern Pacific Railroad was protesting taxes that had been placed on it by California and by counties in California. And in that case, the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, Morrison Waite, stood up in January of 1886 and said what pretty much everybody in the courthouse thought, which was that corporations were persons for the purposes of the 14th Amendment.
BLOCK: The 14th Amendment dating from right after the Civil War, the Equal Protection Clause is what we're talking about.
WITT: Yeah, the Equal Protection Clause applies to all persons. It provides that all persons have a right to equal protection under the laws. And that question wasn't controversial at the time. What mattered, really, was what happened later.
- More about the case in question: Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad.
- Corporate personhood.
So Just How Irresponsible Are Baby Boomers?
There's a generational war brewing, not only between the baby boomers, who have been responsible for building up the bulk of the debt that will be handed off to their kids, but between the generations since (the X's and Millenials) over who is suffering the worst from it.
This fits our discussion of political generations when we hit public opinion in 2301.
- The War to Be the Greatest Put-Upon Generation - National - The Atlantic Wire.
- Occupy Wall Street's Age Divide.
- 'Baby boomers are very privileged human beings'
- After the boomers, it’s Generation Squeeze.
- Blame the Baby Boomers.
This fits our discussion of political generations when we hit public opinion in 2301.
- The War to Be the Greatest Put-Upon Generation - National - The Atlantic Wire.
- Occupy Wall Street's Age Divide.
- 'Baby boomers are very privileged human beings'
- After the boomers, it’s Generation Squeeze.
- Blame the Baby Boomers.
Is the Individual Mandate a Conservative Idea?
The idea apparently came from the Heritage Foundation. It was a way to guarantee health insuance, but do so through the free market.
- History of the Individual Mandate.
- History of the Individual Mandate.
Coalition Building in Israel
In 2301 we've been discussing our two-party system - and its basis on our winner take all electoral system - and multi-party systems - and their basis on proportional representation. I use Israel as an example of proportional representation in large part because the process is described so well on the Knesett's website. I mentioned the political difficulty of forming coalition governments in parliamentary democracies without much detail, so if you would like to dig further into how Israel's prime minister has been able to do so successfully, I recommend reading the following.
Leading From Behind
President Obama's approach to foreign policy has been described as "leading from behind." Here are a few stories which attempt to determine what this means:
- The Obama Doctrine: Leading From Behind.
- Leading From Behind.
- Behind the Curtain.
- Libya: A Victory for Leading From Behind?
- The Obama Doctrine: Leading From Behind.
- Leading From Behind.
- Behind the Curtain.
- Libya: A Victory for Leading From Behind?
When the king dies ....
One of the advantages of a constitutional system is a peaceful - generally - predictable stable transitioin of power. The recent death of the head of the Saudi royal family reminds us about the consequences of the alternative.
Perry Brings in Reinforcements
Perry Brings in Reinforcements.
Our governor's campaign has been faltering so there have been shake-ups in personel. More detail from Paul Burka:
- Perry shuffles campaign team
- Perry shuffles campaign team [Update]
Updates:
- Perry announces his tax plan.
- Perry Calls His Flat Tax Proposal ‘Bold Reform’
Our governor's campaign has been faltering so there have been shake-ups in personel. More detail from Paul Burka:
- Perry shuffles campaign team
- Perry shuffles campaign team [Update]
Updates:
- Perry announces his tax plan.
- Perry Calls His Flat Tax Proposal ‘Bold Reform’
Monday, October 24, 2011
Does it matter how Qaddafi was killed?
Christopher Hitchens says that it does, and the fact that he seems to have been murdered does not bode well for the future of Libya, or the possibility that it may become a constitutional republic
At the close of an obscene regime, especially one that has shown it would rather destroy society and the state than surrender power, it is natural for people to hope for something like an exorcism. It is satisfying to see the cadaver of the monster and be sure that he can’t come back. It is also reassuring to know that there is no hateful figurehead on whom some kind of “werewolf” resistance could converge in order to prolong the misery and atrocity. But Qaddafi at the time of his death was wounded and out of action and at the head of a small group of terrified riff-raff. He was unable to offer any further resistance. And all the positive results that I cited above could have been achieved by the simple expedient of taking him first to a hospital, then to a jail, and thence to the airport. Indeed, a spell in the dock would probably hugely enhance the positive impact, since those poor lost souls who still put their trust in the man could scarcely have their illusions survive the exposure to even a few hours of the madman’s gibberings in court.
- The Lynching of Qaddafi.
Will Voters Punish Republicans for Killing the Jobs Bill?
Probably not. Presidents get the blame for the economy.
A few stories about the proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution
The Forth Worth Star-Telegram makes its recommendations. They oppose 6 and 9. Proposition 6 allows money from the General Land Office to be spent rather than be invested in the Permanent School Fund. Proposition 9 makes it easier for people to have their criminal records cleared. They also recommend voting for the two propositions related to water - 2 and 8.
Representative Scott Hochberg lists pros and cons for each amendment.
Eastex News has background on Proposition 3 - which provides for more funding for student loans (more opportunity for student debt!). Here's background on Proposition 10, which would adjust the rules related to when one has to resign in order to run for public office.
Representative Scott Hochberg lists pros and cons for each amendment.
Eastex News has background on Proposition 3 - which provides for more funding for student loans (more opportunity for student debt!). Here's background on Proposition 10, which would adjust the rules related to when one has to resign in order to run for public office.
Lobbyists Swarm the Super Committee
From Politico:
Groups that are worried that the super committee - which is charged with cutting over $1 trillion from the budget (over time) - will cut funds to their clients.
Groups that are worried that the super committee - which is charged with cutting over $1 trillion from the budget (over time) - will cut funds to their clients.
Jobs Plan Stalled, Obama to Try New Economic Drive
From the NYT:
With his jobs plan stymied in Congress by Republican opposition, President Obama on Monday will begin a series of executive-branch actions to confront housing, education and other economic problems over the coming months, heralded by a new mantra: “We can’t wait” for lawmakers to act.
From the Washington Post:
The federal government on Monday announced new rules that would
allow many more struggling borrowers to refinance their mortgages at
today’s ultra-low rates, reducing monthly payments for some homeowners
and potentially providing a modest boost to the economy.
The Federal Housing Finance Agency, working with the Obama administration, said that up to 1 million “underwater” borrowers might benefit from an expanded program that targets homeowners who owe more than their properties are worth.
These two stories, in addition to a few others related to Obama efforts to address the economy despite congressional resistance. Congress has already authorized through previously passed legislation activities that might allow the president the ability to act independent of Congress.
Update: The Daily Beast - We Can't Wait for Congress: With congressional Republicans having killed his job plan, President Obama is turning to actions that don’t require their approval: he will travel to Las Vegas Monday and Denver Wednesday in order to announce executive actions to revamp housing and student-loan regulations. His message will be “we can’t wait” for lawmakers to fix the economy. Obama’s housing plan will allow homeowners to refinance their mortgages no matter how much value they have lost; the current program, originally designed to aid 9 million homeowners, reached only about 1.7 million.
With his jobs plan stymied in Congress by Republican opposition, President Obama on Monday will begin a series of executive-branch actions to confront housing, education and other economic problems over the coming months, heralded by a new mantra: “We can’t wait” for lawmakers to act.
From the Washington Post:
The Federal Housing Finance Agency, working with the Obama administration, said that up to 1 million “underwater” borrowers might benefit from an expanded program that targets homeowners who owe more than their properties are worth.
These two stories, in addition to a few others related to Obama efforts to address the economy despite congressional resistance. Congress has already authorized through previously passed legislation activities that might allow the president the ability to act independent of Congress.
Update: The Daily Beast - We Can't Wait for Congress: With congressional Republicans having killed his job plan, President Obama is turning to actions that don’t require their approval: he will travel to Las Vegas Monday and Denver Wednesday in order to announce executive actions to revamp housing and student-loan regulations. His message will be “we can’t wait” for lawmakers to fix the economy. Obama’s housing plan will allow homeowners to refinance their mortgages no matter how much value they have lost; the current program, originally designed to aid 9 million homeowners, reached only about 1.7 million.
Tensions over immigration tear away at GOP candidates - TheHill.com
2301 students will soon be reading up on the two political parties, which are best understood as being composed of coalitions of groups that tend to see eye to eye on issues, but do not always. Parties are also difficult to control - sometimes it is difficult to determine who is actually in charge of a party at a particular point in time, and who determines what the party stands for.
This story in the Hill points out the difficulty the Republican Party is facing in expanding its coalition since parts of its membership - and most of its announced presidential candidates - are anti-immigration. This doesn't make the party attractive to the Latino community.
This story in the Hill points out the difficulty the Republican Party is facing in expanding its coalition since parts of its membership - and most of its announced presidential candidates - are anti-immigration. This doesn't make the party attractive to the Latino community.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Third Parties Don't Work
A relevant story - for this week's 2301 16 week students - from Jonathan Bernstein about the impact of third parties on elections.
Written assignment for 16 week 2302 students - Obama and the Two Presidencies Thesis
In last week's readings we briefly touched n the "two (or dual) presidencies thesis" which argues that "there are two versions of the American President: one who is concerned with domestic policy and one concerned with foreign policy." Presidents tend to have greater discretion in foreign policy than domestic policy because Congress has a greater role to play in domestic policy and can place limits on what presidents can do there than in foreign policy. The Constitution also seems to grant the president greater leeway in foreign affairs than domestic affairs.
Recent stories have hit on this issue regarding President Obama and his relative successes and failures in each domain. Some seem to confirm the idea that presidents have more success in foreign affairs than domestic affairs. Read through the following stories (feel free to look for more) and weigh in on this. How might this impact the election of 2012? Some of the stories below suggest that we might be seeing a change in the way voters look at each party. Republicans tend to have advantages on security matters and Democrats on well being issues - these might be changing.
- Governing with a Free Hand.
- The National Security Advantage.
- The Difference Between Foreign and Domestic Successes.
- Can Obama Win as a War President? - The Atlantic.
- Is Obama Still Weak?
Recent stories have hit on this issue regarding President Obama and his relative successes and failures in each domain. Some seem to confirm the idea that presidents have more success in foreign affairs than domestic affairs. Read through the following stories (feel free to look for more) and weigh in on this. How might this impact the election of 2012? Some of the stories below suggest that we might be seeing a change in the way voters look at each party. Republicans tend to have advantages on security matters and Democrats on well being issues - these might be changing.
- Governing with a Free Hand.
- The National Security Advantage.
- The Difference Between Foreign and Domestic Successes.
- Can Obama Win as a War President? - The Atlantic.
- Is Obama Still Weak?
Walmart Moms - Written Assignment for 16 Week 2301 Students
My 16 week 2301 students will be studying elections this week. As we will note, electoral rules - the winner take all system specifically - favors the development of two large political parties, and thought there is a degree of stability in the membership of each (at least in the short to mid term) certain groups can fluctuate between the two and prove to be factor that determines who wins a given election. Often these groups are given catchy names: "soccer moms" and "NASCAR dads" are two recent examples.
This year it seems to be the "Walmart moms."
Here are a few stories that describe this demographic group, explain what motivates them and how they might impact the election in 2012. I want you to read through them - and please do your own research as well - and tell me whether you think that this group may well end up determining who wins in 2012.
- Watch Out for Walmart Moms.
- Meet the New Swing Voters: Walmart Moms.
- Insight: Wal-Mart moms - The election pollsters' new favorites.
- Walmart Moms: Not giving up on Obama yet.
- Wikipedia: Swing Vote.
This year it seems to be the "Walmart moms."
Here are a few stories that describe this demographic group, explain what motivates them and how they might impact the election in 2012. I want you to read through them - and please do your own research as well - and tell me whether you think that this group may well end up determining who wins in 2012.
- Watch Out for Walmart Moms.
- Meet the New Swing Voters: Walmart Moms.
- Insight: Wal-Mart moms - The election pollsters' new favorites.
- Walmart Moms: Not giving up on Obama yet.
- Wikipedia: Swing Vote.
Saturday, October 22, 2011
The Latest on the Debt
A couple related stories:
- Believe it or not, we were on a trajectory as of 2000 to have the national debt paid paid off by 2012. But not having any debt raised its own interesting set of problems. The following link explains, click here for a once classified document detailing the concern. For example: what happens when there are no more treasury notes for the financial sectors to invest in? (commentary here, and here)
- A "seven decades long experiment" seems to be coming to an end. Do we have any idea what comes next? What will life after debt look like?
- Believe it or not, we were on a trajectory as of 2000 to have the national debt paid paid off by 2012. But not having any debt raised its own interesting set of problems. The following link explains, click here for a once classified document detailing the concern. For example: what happens when there are no more treasury notes for the financial sectors to invest in? (commentary here, and here)
- A "seven decades long experiment" seems to be coming to an end. Do we have any idea what comes next? What will life after debt look like?
Friday, October 21, 2011
Health care regulation passed
For 16 week 2302s: we discussed rulemaking this week, and here's a story about a recent rule proposed by the Obama Administration on health care:
It’s a big moment in health policy wonk land right now: the Obama administration has just published the final Accountable Care Organization rule. You can read all 694 pages of it here.
Sound dull? Let’s rephrase: The Obama administration has just released a regulation that could decide whether the American health-care system moves past the broken, expensive fee-for-service model. The idea is to encourage groups of providers to band together into “accountable care organizations” and accept a flat fee for all care related to a particular patient or condition. If they could deliver high-quality care in a cost-effective way, they could keep the money they saved. The hope is to do nothing less than change the basic business model of American medicine from making money by getting patients to spend more money to making money by saving patients money.
It’s a big moment in health policy wonk land right now: the Obama administration has just published the final Accountable Care Organization rule. You can read all 694 pages of it here.
Sound dull? Let’s rephrase: The Obama administration has just released a regulation that could decide whether the American health-care system moves past the broken, expensive fee-for-service model. The idea is to encourage groups of providers to band together into “accountable care organizations” and accept a flat fee for all care related to a particular patient or condition. If they could deliver high-quality care in a cost-effective way, they could keep the money they saved. The hope is to do nothing less than change the basic business model of American medicine from making money by getting patients to spend more money to making money by saving patients money.
What is a "natural born citizen?"
Now that birthers seem to be unable to pursue legitimate claims that President Obama was not born in the United States, they have turned their attention - ironically - to a Tea Party favorite - Florida Senator Marco Rubio. Here's the issue:
. . . the activists are not challenging whether Rubio was born in Miami. Rather, they say Rubio is ineligible under Article 2 of the Constitution, which says "no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the Office of President."
The rub is that "natural born citizen" was never defined.
The birthers rely on writings at the time of the formation of the republic and references in court cases since then to contend that "natural born" means a person born to U.S. citizens. Rubio was born in 1971 at Cedars of Lebanon Hospital, his office said, but his parents did not become citizens until 1975.
"Marco Rubio was born a Cuban citizen via his parents," screams a headline on a blog by birther Charles Kerchner, who obtained copies of the naturalization petitions by Rubio's parents in May, igniting talk that is spreading across the Internet.
Kerchner said Rubio is no different from Obama, who even if he was born in Hawaii (which he doubts) was not born to two U.S. citizens. Obama's father was a Kenyan national. The birthers say Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, whose parents are from India and were not citizens at the time of his birth, is also unqualified.
. . . the activists are not challenging whether Rubio was born in Miami. Rather, they say Rubio is ineligible under Article 2 of the Constitution, which says "no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the Office of President."
The rub is that "natural born citizen" was never defined.
The birthers rely on writings at the time of the formation of the republic and references in court cases since then to contend that "natural born" means a person born to U.S. citizens. Rubio was born in 1971 at Cedars of Lebanon Hospital, his office said, but his parents did not become citizens until 1975.
"Marco Rubio was born a Cuban citizen via his parents," screams a headline on a blog by birther Charles Kerchner, who obtained copies of the naturalization petitions by Rubio's parents in May, igniting talk that is spreading across the Internet.
Kerchner said Rubio is no different from Obama, who even if he was born in Hawaii (which he doubts) was not born to two U.S. citizens. Obama's father was a Kenyan national. The birthers say Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, whose parents are from India and were not citizens at the time of his birth, is also unqualified.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Why is the top 1% so powerful?
They are the ones who contribute to lobbyists:
If you want to understand how the top 1 percent have accumulated such power in American politics, look no further than Washington’s K Street lobbying corridor. Wall Street has long been the dominant player in the capital. “The banks,” Senator Dick Durbin said in 2009, “are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place.”
The financial sector has spent more money on campaign contributions and lobbying than any other sector of the economy—$4.6 billion on lobbying since 1998, according to Open Secrets. This year, commercial banks and securities and investment firms have spent over $82 million on lobbying, employing over 1,000 lobbyists.
If you want to understand how the top 1 percent have accumulated such power in American politics, look no further than Washington’s K Street lobbying corridor. Wall Street has long been the dominant player in the capital. “The banks,” Senator Dick Durbin said in 2009, “are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place.”
The financial sector has spent more money on campaign contributions and lobbying than any other sector of the economy—$4.6 billion on lobbying since 1998, according to Open Secrets. This year, commercial banks and securities and investment firms have spent over $82 million on lobbying, employing over 1,000 lobbyists.
NGDP targeting
Something the Fed is considering. It would focus their actions on ensuring a level of GDP growth that would lead to full(er) employment.
Texas Infrastructure Now wants you to vote for Proposition 2
Texas Infrastructure Now was established by the Associated General Contractors of Texas - an interest group - to promote infrastructure development. I'm they'd like the chance to build some of that infrastructure.
They are heavily promoting Proposition 2, which authorizes up to $6 billion for water development projects.
- Links from the Texas Water Development Board.
They are heavily promoting Proposition 2, which authorizes up to $6 billion for water development projects.
- Links from the Texas Water Development Board.
Cain 28% Romney 21% Paul 10%
Poll results are in from Iowa, where the first primary will be held. People are still trying to figure out Cain's support. Here's a graphical analysis of the impact of Cain's 999 tax plan, plus suggestions for improvement.
Election Matters: When Obama Should Start to Worry
From the Gallup Poll: Using past polls as a guide, February.
Still too early to make predictions, he still leads Romney and other Republicans in the polls - but he lags behind a "generic" Republican.
Still too early to make predictions, he still leads Romney and other Republicans in the polls - but he lags behind a "generic" Republican.
Why are the self employed largely ingnored in jobs bills?
From Democracy Journal. Perhaps it has to do with their political weakness. Its an unfortunate, but readily understood story. People do not get support because they do beneficial things, but because they connected:
As the National Bureau of Economic Research and the Kauffman Foundation have recently reported, businesses under one-year old—startups—have created an average of three million new jobs each year for 30 years, more than the net job creation of the whole economy. A big proportion of those jobs are by self-employed entrepreneurs who don’t have any employees. Each year some 22 million Americans file Schedule C to report self-employment income, two million of them for the first time. Half of these filers report family adjusted gross income of less than $50,000.
And yet, despite contributing millions of jobs to the U.S. economy, such businesses are all but ignored by policy-makers. They have no associations or lobbies. They are largely left out of the agenda of the President’s Start-up program, which focuses only on rapidly growing, often older firms, which can take venture capital investment and pay handsome returns. Small business groups focus on the agendas of small firms while the Chamber of Commerce and others focus largely on the perceived needs of big businesses. States still focus on luring large, established firms.
As the National Bureau of Economic Research and the Kauffman Foundation have recently reported, businesses under one-year old—startups—have created an average of three million new jobs each year for 30 years, more than the net job creation of the whole economy. A big proportion of those jobs are by self-employed entrepreneurs who don’t have any employees. Each year some 22 million Americans file Schedule C to report self-employment income, two million of them for the first time. Half of these filers report family adjusted gross income of less than $50,000.
And yet, despite contributing millions of jobs to the U.S. economy, such businesses are all but ignored by policy-makers. They have no associations or lobbies. They are largely left out of the agenda of the President’s Start-up program, which focuses only on rapidly growing, often older firms, which can take venture capital investment and pay handsome returns. Small business groups focus on the agendas of small firms while the Chamber of Commerce and others focus largely on the perceived needs of big businesses. States still focus on luring large, established firms.
Ezra Klein: Where Are the Republican Heavyweights?
Other than Romney - and he's a bit of a stretch - no big name Republican is running for the nomination. Why?
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Regarding the current state of the Republican Party
For 2301's upcoming discussion of elections and parties. The following stories try to come to terms with the division within the party of the conservative ideologues and the party "establishment."
- Does anyone have a grip on the GOP?
- Why Mitt Romney is not a moderate.
- Is Mitt Romney the New Nelson Rockefeller?
- Does anyone have a grip on the GOP?
- Why Mitt Romney is not a moderate.
- Is Mitt Romney the New Nelson Rockefeller?
A Geography Lesson
The author's purpose here is to question whether the Tea Party will have an ongoing influence across the U.S. but his article touches on cultural differences within the nation. I had some of my students write about what the nation might look like had the U.S. Constitution not been ratified, and I think the map he assembles is as good a guess as any about what North American might look like had it not.
Is gender segregation in schools a good idea? Is it legal?
An interesting debate in the NYT: Single Sex Schools: Separate but Equal?
The Supreme Court questions diversity
From the New York Times, a report on the Supreme Court's further skeptical attitude towards diversity as a goal for college entrance. 2301 students should consider this story in light of our dicusssion of civil rights, for 2302 students this is a look ahead of the judiciary:
Diversity is the last man standing, the sole remaining legal justification for racial preferences in deciding who can study at public universities. Should the Supreme Court disavow it, the student body at the University of Texas and many other public colleges and universities would almost instantly become whiter and more Asian, and less black and Hispanic.
A judicial retreat from diversity would be deeply symbolic, too. The term — a gauzy, unobjectionable way to talk about the combustible topic of race — has had a remarkable run. If the diversity rationale falls apart in university admissions, it could start to test the societal commitment to it in other arenas, notably private hiring and promotion.
Diversity is the last man standing, the sole remaining legal justification for racial preferences in deciding who can study at public universities. Should the Supreme Court disavow it, the student body at the University of Texas and many other public colleges and universities would almost instantly become whiter and more Asian, and less black and Hispanic.
A judicial retreat from diversity would be deeply symbolic, too. The term — a gauzy, unobjectionable way to talk about the combustible topic of race — has had a remarkable run. If the diversity rationale falls apart in university admissions, it could start to test the societal commitment to it in other arenas, notably private hiring and promotion.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Texas Constitutional Amendments 2011
We need to go over these soon. November 8 there will be an election for ten proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution. Click here for a link to the Texas Legislative Reference Library.
Also: - votexas.org.
Also: - votexas.org.
This Week's Written Assignments foir 16 Week Classes
If you haven't noticed already, I want you to give me a preliminary report on the paper due at the end of the semester. This also serves as a reminder that, yes, you have a small paper due at the end of the semester.
Does Rising Inequality Retard Economic Growth?
A recently published paper by the International Monetary Fund seems to suggest that it does.
- More from Andrew Sullivan.
- More from Andrew Sullivan.
Is the "Stolen Valor Act" constitutional?
Thanks to an intrepid student.
The Supreme Court will rule on whether lying about receiving medals for military medals is constitutionally protected free speech. The case is USA v. Xavier Alvarez:
The Supreme Court will decide whether a law making it a crime to lie about having received military medals is constitutional.
The Obama administration is arguing that the law is reasonable because it only applies to instances in which the speaker intends to portray himself as a medal recipient. Previous high court rulings also have limited First Amendment protection for false statements.
- Wikipedia: Stolen Valor Act.
- ScotusBlog: Another test of the First Amendment.
- Scotus Blog: United States v. Alvarez.
The Supreme Court will rule on whether lying about receiving medals for military medals is constitutionally protected free speech. The case is USA v. Xavier Alvarez:
The Supreme Court will decide whether a law making it a crime to lie about having received military medals is constitutional.
The justices said Monday they will consider
the validity of the Stolen Valor Act, which passed Congress with
overwhelming support in 2006. The federal appeals court in California
struck down the law on free speech grounds and another appeals court in
Colorado is considering a separate case.
The Obama administration is arguing that the law is reasonable because it only applies to instances in which the speaker intends to portray himself as a medal recipient. Previous high court rulings also have limited First Amendment protection for false statements.
- Wikipedia: Stolen Valor Act.
- ScotusBlog: Another test of the First Amendment.
- Scotus Blog: United States v. Alvarez.
Another War?
President Obama sends advisers to Central Africa:
President Obama said Friday that he had ordered the deployment of 100 armed military advisers to central Africa to help regional forces combat the Lord’s Resistance Army, a notorious renegade group that has terrorized villagers in at least four countries with marauding bands that kill, rape, maim and kidnap with impunity.
. . . Mr. Obama wrote that he had decided to act because it was “in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.” He also wrote that the deployment was justified by a law passed by Congress in May 2010, the Lord’s Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act, which favored “increased, comprehensive U.S. efforts to help mitigate and eliminate the threat posed by the LRA to civilians and regional stability.”
Times Topic: Lord's Resistance Army.
Wikipedia: Lord's Resistance Army.
Update: Michael Gerson (ex-Bush speechwriter) supports the action.
President Obama said Friday that he had ordered the deployment of 100 armed military advisers to central Africa to help regional forces combat the Lord’s Resistance Army, a notorious renegade group that has terrorized villagers in at least four countries with marauding bands that kill, rape, maim and kidnap with impunity.
. . . Mr. Obama wrote that he had decided to act because it was “in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.” He also wrote that the deployment was justified by a law passed by Congress in May 2010, the Lord’s Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act, which favored “increased, comprehensive U.S. efforts to help mitigate and eliminate the threat posed by the LRA to civilians and regional stability.”
Times Topic: Lord's Resistance Army.
Wikipedia: Lord's Resistance Army.
Update: Michael Gerson (ex-Bush speechwriter) supports the action.
Friday, October 14, 2011
Do Regulations Kill Jobs?
The term "regulations" means health care reform and financial re-regulation.
CNN says no.
Update: The head of the Consumer Products Safety Commission defends regulation.
CNN says no.
Update: The head of the Consumer Products Safety Commission defends regulation.
Deleveraging
Despite the fact that overwhelming debt is held across the board and paying it down - deleveraging - seems to be necessary, doing so quickly can create problems (like further stalling a recovering economy) since it involves not spending the money needed to keep the economy afloat.
Here's back and forth on the subject:
- Is Focusing on Deleveraging a Useless Distraction?
- Deleveraging and monetary policy.
- Delevering.
- Three Ways of Looking as Deleveraging and Monetary Policy.
- You ain't seen nothing yet.
Here's back and forth on the subject:
- Is Focusing on Deleveraging a Useless Distraction?
- Deleveraging and monetary policy.
- Delevering.
- Three Ways of Looking as Deleveraging and Monetary Policy.
- You ain't seen nothing yet.
Awesome background on the factors leading to the Wall Street Protesters
I highly recommend reading this story, if nothing else because of the charts detailing recent changes in the economy and how it contributes to current disruptions.
- Business Insider.
- Business Insider.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Are Workers Too Productive? - The Atlantic
Are Workers Too Productive? - The Atlantic.
This article stuck out to me. It hits one of the reasons why forces of technology may be impacting unemployment as much as anything else. Workers are more and more productive due to technological developments meaning that fewer and fewer are necessary to make products. Businesses, as a result, do not have to hire more workers.
This article stuck out to me. It hits one of the reasons why forces of technology may be impacting unemployment as much as anything else. Workers are more and more productive due to technological developments meaning that fewer and fewer are necessary to make products. Businesses, as a result, do not have to hire more workers.
Rove v Koch
Here's a useful article on an internal struggle within the Republican Party: Karl Rove vs. the Koch Brothers.
California court OKs searches of cell phones without warrant
From a star student, the California Supreme Court has authorized police to search cell phones without a warrant. Not sure if a similar allowance is made in Texas.
Will OWS be sustained
As with the Tea Party protests, the real test of the Occupy Wall Street movement will be its longevity, but both movements helped crystallize what had been loose, disjointed opinions. The Tea Partiers were able to convert theirs into an effective political movement - which had an impact on an election. The OWS hasn't yet, but this author thinks they've had an impact already:
It has already altered our political debate, changed the agenda, shifted the discussion in newspapers, on cable TV, and even around the water cooler. And that is wonderful.
It has already altered our political debate, changed the agenda, shifted the discussion in newspapers, on cable TV, and even around the water cooler. And that is wonderful.
Suddenly, the issues of equity, fairness, justice, income
distribution, and accountability for the economic cataclysm–issues all
but ignored for a generation—are front and center. We have moved beyond
the one-dimensional conversation about how much and where to cut the
deficit. Questions more central to the social fabric of our nation have
returned to the heart of the political debate. By forcing this new
discussion, OWS has made most of the other participants in our
politics—who either didn’t want to have this conversation or weren’t
able to make it happen—look pretty small.
. . . But until these protests, no political figure or movement had made Americans pay attention to these facts in a meaningful way. Indeed, over the long hot summer, as poverty rose and unemployment stagnated, the entire discussion was about cutting our deficit.
. . . But until these protests, no political figure or movement had made Americans pay attention to these facts in a meaningful way. Indeed, over the long hot summer, as poverty rose and unemployment stagnated, the entire discussion was about cutting our deficit.
And then OWS showed up. They brought something that had been in short
supply: passion—the necessary ingredient that powers citizen activism.
The tempered, carefully modulated, and finely nuanced statements of
Beltway politicians and policy wonks do not alter the debate.
What the New Deal Accomplished
Since we hit on the New Deal from time to time, this excerpt from a book defending it is worth a read. Some argue that the current economy could benefit from a similar jolt:
The New Deal physically reshaped the country. To this day, Americans still rely on its works for transportation, electricity, flood control, housing, and community amenities. The output of one agency alone, the Works Progress Administration, represents a magnificent bequest to later generations. The WPA produced, among many other projects, 1,000 miles of new and rebuilt airport runways, 651,000 miles of highway, 124,000 bridges, 8,000 parks, and 18,000 playgrounds and athletic fields; some 84,000 miles of drainage pipes, 69,000 highway light standards, and 125,000 public buildings built, rebuilt, or expanded. Among the latter were 41,300 schools.
The New Deal physically reshaped the country. To this day, Americans still rely on its works for transportation, electricity, flood control, housing, and community amenities. The output of one agency alone, the Works Progress Administration, represents a magnificent bequest to later generations. The WPA produced, among many other projects, 1,000 miles of new and rebuilt airport runways, 651,000 miles of highway, 124,000 bridges, 8,000 parks, and 18,000 playgrounds and athletic fields; some 84,000 miles of drainage pipes, 69,000 highway light standards, and 125,000 public buildings built, rebuilt, or expanded. Among the latter were 41,300 schools.
Free Trade Deal Passes Congress
From the NYT:
Congress passed three long-awaited free trade agreements on Wednesday, ending a political standoff that has stretched across two presidencies. The move offered a rare moment of bipartisan accord at a time when Republicans and Democrats are bitterly divided over the role that government ought to play in reviving the sputtering economy.
The approval of the deals with South Korea, Colombia and Panama is a victory for President Obama and proponents of the view that foreign trade can drive America’s economic growth in the face of rising protectionist sentiment in both political parties. They are the first trade agreements to pass Congress since Democrats broke a decade of Republican control in 2007.
Congress passed three long-awaited free trade agreements on Wednesday, ending a political standoff that has stretched across two presidencies. The move offered a rare moment of bipartisan accord at a time when Republicans and Democrats are bitterly divided over the role that government ought to play in reviving the sputtering economy.
The approval of the deals with South Korea, Colombia and Panama is a victory for President Obama and proponents of the view that foreign trade can drive America’s economic growth in the face of rising protectionist sentiment in both political parties. They are the first trade agreements to pass Congress since Democrats broke a decade of Republican control in 2007.
Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington
The Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday about the following, according to Scotusblog:
Does the Constitution permit the government to strip search every person admitted to a jail, even if there is no reasonable basis to suspect that the person has hidden weapons or contraband?
For more detail:
- ACLU
- The Volock Conspiracy.
- The NYT.
Update: Jeffrey Rosen wants the court to rule against strip searches for people arrested for trivial offenses. He points out that this has been the case up until recently:
For decades, federal courts had held that people arrested for minor offenses couldn’t be strip searched unless prison officials had reason to suspect them of concealing weapons or contraband. But over the past three years, some federal appellate courts have reached the opposite conclusion. By reaffirming the traditional prohibition on suspicionless strip searches, the Supreme Court can resurrect a basic constitutional principle that it has allowed to erode in recent years: namely, that the intrusiveness of a search should be proportional to the seriousness of the suspected crime.
Here's more:
At the time of the Framing, juries had the discretion to rule against the government in cases where the intrusiveness of a search outweighed the seriousness of a crime. In the case that inspired the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches, for example, a British jury awarded John Wilkes a thousand pounds after the King’s agents searched his desk drawers for evidence that identified him as the author of an anonymous pamphlet criticizing the King. In the jury’s view, the crime of which Wilkes was suspected—seditious libel—didn’t justify such an intrusive search of his most intimate papers and effects.
That bit is fascinating. Considering the attention given to original intent, is it worth considering how searches were conducted in colonial and early America?
And this:
During the early twentieth century, this proportionality principle was retained in criminal statutes: During Prohibition, for example, it was illegal to sell alcohol, but not to purchase or possess it. That sensible limitation was abandoned, however, during the war on drugs, when Congress and the states imposed ruinous penalties on drug possession and purchase. This effectively spelled the end of the proportionality principle: Suddenly the police could approach anyone whom they suspected of carrying a small amount of drugs and do a full body pat down or car search. The principle eroded further as the police began to use low-level traffic violations as a pretext for enforcing the drug laws: They could pull over virtually any motorist for speeding or turning without signaling, and use the encounter as a pretext to look for drugs.
I'm not paranoid by nature, but are we allowing the gradual development of a police state? I'm especially interested since so many students seem to support expansive police powers.
Does the Constitution permit the government to strip search every person admitted to a jail, even if there is no reasonable basis to suspect that the person has hidden weapons or contraband?
For more detail:
- ACLU
- The Volock Conspiracy.
- The NYT.
Update: Jeffrey Rosen wants the court to rule against strip searches for people arrested for trivial offenses. He points out that this has been the case up until recently:
For decades, federal courts had held that people arrested for minor offenses couldn’t be strip searched unless prison officials had reason to suspect them of concealing weapons or contraband. But over the past three years, some federal appellate courts have reached the opposite conclusion. By reaffirming the traditional prohibition on suspicionless strip searches, the Supreme Court can resurrect a basic constitutional principle that it has allowed to erode in recent years: namely, that the intrusiveness of a search should be proportional to the seriousness of the suspected crime.
Here's more:
At the time of the Framing, juries had the discretion to rule against the government in cases where the intrusiveness of a search outweighed the seriousness of a crime. In the case that inspired the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches, for example, a British jury awarded John Wilkes a thousand pounds after the King’s agents searched his desk drawers for evidence that identified him as the author of an anonymous pamphlet criticizing the King. In the jury’s view, the crime of which Wilkes was suspected—seditious libel—didn’t justify such an intrusive search of his most intimate papers and effects.
That bit is fascinating. Considering the attention given to original intent, is it worth considering how searches were conducted in colonial and early America?
And this:
During the early twentieth century, this proportionality principle was retained in criminal statutes: During Prohibition, for example, it was illegal to sell alcohol, but not to purchase or possess it. That sensible limitation was abandoned, however, during the war on drugs, when Congress and the states imposed ruinous penalties on drug possession and purchase. This effectively spelled the end of the proportionality principle: Suddenly the police could approach anyone whom they suspected of carrying a small amount of drugs and do a full body pat down or car search. The principle eroded further as the police began to use low-level traffic violations as a pretext for enforcing the drug laws: They could pull over virtually any motorist for speeding or turning without signaling, and use the encounter as a pretext to look for drugs.
I'm not paranoid by nature, but are we allowing the gradual development of a police state? I'm especially interested since so many students seem to support expansive police powers.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Jobs Bill Fails Procedural Vote
From the Hill:
President Obama received a slap from members of his own party Tuesday as the Senate voted 50-49 to block his $447 billion jobs package.
The jobs plan, which the president has spent much of the last month touting on a cross-country tour, fell well short of the 60 votes it needed to proceed.
Steve Bene explains motions to proceed.
President Obama received a slap from members of his own party Tuesday as the Senate voted 50-49 to block his $447 billion jobs package.
The jobs plan, which the president has spent much of the last month touting on a cross-country tour, fell well short of the 60 votes it needed to proceed.
Steve Bene explains motions to proceed.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Jobs Bill Unlikely to Pass Senate
From the Hill:
Bracing for the defeat of President Obama’s jobs bill, senior White
House officials said Tuesday they would work with Senate Democrats to
break the bill into smaller portions that might find support.
The officials emphasized their view that it is Republicans who are holding up the president’s $447 billion plan, and they downplayed Democratic defections.
Democratic unity, one official said, has “never been the test before.”
“It's not going to be now,” the official said.
The White House officials also said it is absurd to suggest Democrats don't support the bill because a handful of Senate Democrats are opposed to it.
The Senate is scheduled to vote on the president’s plan Tuesday evening, but it will not win the 60 votes required to move forward.
The White House sees this as an advantage though. They intend to use it as a way to paint Congress - Republicans specifically - as ineffective.
The officials emphasized their view that it is Republicans who are holding up the president’s $447 billion plan, and they downplayed Democratic defections.
Democratic unity, one official said, has “never been the test before.”
“It's not going to be now,” the official said.
The White House officials also said it is absurd to suggest Democrats don't support the bill because a handful of Senate Democrats are opposed to it.
The Senate is scheduled to vote on the president’s plan Tuesday evening, but it will not win the 60 votes required to move forward.
The White House sees this as an advantage though. They intend to use it as a way to paint Congress - Republicans specifically - as ineffective.
Frum's Advice to Romney
An ex-Bush advisor gives unsolicited economic policymaking advise to Romney. It's a good overview of what to do and not do when the economy is in a rough patch.
How Obama's Initial Economic Team Dealt with the Financial Crisis
Ezra Klein walks us through what happened in the early months of the Obama Administration and how they responded to the ongoing economic crisis.
The Social Contract in America
Andrew Sullivan points to a comment by Stephen Pinker who wonders if high homicide rates in the US are a consequence of a different type of implicit social contract here due to the peculiar nature of the nation;s establishment:
My own guess is that Americans (particularly in the south and west) never really signed on to a social contract that gave government a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, as Europe did. Americans not only retain the right to bear arms but believe it is their responsibility, not the government’s, to deter harm-doers. With private citizens, flush with self-serving biases, acting as judge, jury, and executioner, body counts can pile up as trigger-happy vigilantes mete out rough justice. This may be a legacy of the long periods of anarchy in the mountainous south and frontier west, and of the historical failure of the police and courts to serve African American communities.
This put a twist on our earlier discussion of the Declaration of Independence and Locke's arguments in general. Did the signers of the declaration speak for all Americans? As American moved west, there was no authority in place to consent to, this followed expansion.
My own guess is that Americans (particularly in the south and west) never really signed on to a social contract that gave government a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, as Europe did. Americans not only retain the right to bear arms but believe it is their responsibility, not the government’s, to deter harm-doers. With private citizens, flush with self-serving biases, acting as judge, jury, and executioner, body counts can pile up as trigger-happy vigilantes mete out rough justice. This may be a legacy of the long periods of anarchy in the mountainous south and frontier west, and of the historical failure of the police and courts to serve African American communities.
This put a twist on our earlier discussion of the Declaration of Independence and Locke's arguments in general. Did the signers of the declaration speak for all Americans? As American moved west, there was no authority in place to consent to, this followed expansion.
Monday, October 10, 2011
The Stephen and Nino Show Wows 'Em
This story is linked to in the article below. A couple Supreme Court justices testify before a congressional committee regarding the constitutional role of judges. It deserves its own post. I strongly recommend you read through it and maybe watch the video.
Does Newt Gingrich oppose an independent judiciary?
He seems to.
He wants Congress to subpoena federal judges whose decisions it disagrees with so that legislative committee members can hector those judges in public for "dictating" the law to the American people. This, Gingrich concludes, would "re-balance" the Constitution in a way that he thinks is appropriate.
He wants Congress to subpoena federal judges whose decisions it disagrees with so that legislative committee members can hector those judges in public for "dictating" the law to the American people. This, Gingrich concludes, would "re-balance" the Constitution in a way that he thinks is appropriate.
What can be done about long term unemployment?
The current unemployment crisis appears to be primarily about the long term unemployed - those out of work for 6 months or more. This accounts for 45% of all the unemployed. What can be done about this, if anything?
One author proposes three options: Pay them, train them, or hire them.
Another worries that nothing can be done and we will have to live with high unemployment from now on:
Is there anything the government can do to bring unemployment down? Or is it now too late? If we are indeed in the early months of a double-dip recession, than I think it is too late: unemployment is more likely to go up than it is down from here. And even if the economy’s still managing to eke out modest growth, I don’t see much hope that the unemployment rate will come down to a remotely acceptable level any time soon. Realistically, America’s unemployed are here to stay. And we’re only just beginning to understand how that’s going to affect the political economy of the nation.
As mentioned below in various posts, an increasing concern - and possibly an area where government mediation can be applied - is if the long term unemployed are being discriminated against.
One author proposes three options: Pay them, train them, or hire them.
Another worries that nothing can be done and we will have to live with high unemployment from now on:
Is there anything the government can do to bring unemployment down? Or is it now too late? If we are indeed in the early months of a double-dip recession, than I think it is too late: unemployment is more likely to go up than it is down from here. And even if the economy’s still managing to eke out modest growth, I don’t see much hope that the unemployment rate will come down to a remotely acceptable level any time soon. Realistically, America’s unemployed are here to stay. And we’re only just beginning to understand how that’s going to affect the political economy of the nation.
As mentioned below in various posts, an increasing concern - and possibly an area where government mediation can be applied - is if the long term unemployed are being discriminated against.
Written Assignments - Week 7
2301: Last week the Supreme Court heard arguments in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a case which pits the civil liberty claims of a religious institution against the civil rights claim of an individual, or in other words, religious liberty (the ministerial exception) v. the rights of the disabled.
As with last week's class I want you to outline the dispute, the arguments presented on either side, as well as the arguments made in the oral arguments made before the court last week (you can listen to them here).
2302: I want to build off last week's assignment regarding the president as military king by having you dig more deeply into the question about whether the recent killing of al Awlaki fit within the appropriate scope of presidential commander in chief powers? Below I linked to a recent New York Times article which pointed out that Obama Administration advisers outlined why the right did in fact exist, but of course many disagree.
So detail as well as you can what arguments justified the killing, and what other sorts of things might also fall within his power. Be sure to outline the arguments against it as well.
As with last week's class I want you to outline the dispute, the arguments presented on either side, as well as the arguments made in the oral arguments made before the court last week (you can listen to them here).
2302: I want to build off last week's assignment regarding the president as military king by having you dig more deeply into the question about whether the recent killing of al Awlaki fit within the appropriate scope of presidential commander in chief powers? Below I linked to a recent New York Times article which pointed out that Obama Administration advisers outlined why the right did in fact exist, but of course many disagree.
So detail as well as you can what arguments justified the killing, and what other sorts of things might also fall within his power. Be sure to outline the arguments against it as well.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
From the Hill: Frustrated lawmakers have few options with Europe debt crisis
The state of America's economy seems to depend on the state of Europe's. There seems little Congress can do to change that, even if they want to:
“One of the frustrations is that we don’t have any control over Europe’s decisions,” said Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.), voicing a typical complaint. “Is our financial system sufficiently protected?”
Lawmakers seem to be stymied in coming up with a way for a domestic legislative body to address a foreign crisis, even as it adversely impacts America’s economy.
No major bills have been introduced this Congress with the intent of addressing Europe’s debt crisis and its impact in America.
. . . Bernanke told frustrated lawmakers there’s not much the U.S. can do.
“Unfortunately…we’re kind of innocent bystanders here,” he said. “I don’t have any good suggestions other than to support [Europe’s] efforts and to continue to push them.”
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was probed by lawmakers Thursday for possible ways they could act. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) asked Geithner what policies Congress could pursue to limit Europe’s impact on America’s economy.
But again, direct solutions were hard to come by.
“We can’t want it more than they do. We can’t compel them to act,” said Geithner.
He echoed Bernanke in saying regulators were keeping a close eye on how financial institutions back home might be exposed to Europe. But other than that, the main thing Congress can do to avoid Europe’s economic problems is address its own, Geithner said.
“That’s our best protection, as always,” he said
“One of the frustrations is that we don’t have any control over Europe’s decisions,” said Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.), voicing a typical complaint. “Is our financial system sufficiently protected?”
Lawmakers seem to be stymied in coming up with a way for a domestic legislative body to address a foreign crisis, even as it adversely impacts America’s economy.
No major bills have been introduced this Congress with the intent of addressing Europe’s debt crisis and its impact in America.
. . . Bernanke told frustrated lawmakers there’s not much the U.S. can do.
“Unfortunately…we’re kind of innocent bystanders here,” he said. “I don’t have any good suggestions other than to support [Europe’s] efforts and to continue to push them.”
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was probed by lawmakers Thursday for possible ways they could act. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) asked Geithner what policies Congress could pursue to limit Europe’s impact on America’s economy.
But again, direct solutions were hard to come by.
“We can’t want it more than they do. We can’t compel them to act,” said Geithner.
He echoed Bernanke in saying regulators were keeping a close eye on how financial institutions back home might be exposed to Europe. But other than that, the main thing Congress can do to avoid Europe’s economic problems is address its own, Geithner said.
“That’s our best protection, as always,” he said
More on the stagnant middle class
Its quite the theme. Here's the latest from the Atlantic. They point to a study showing again that family incomes have dropped over the past 35 years and point out the impact this is likely to have on children:
"Think of lining up every single child in the country by their family's earnings and look at the 50th percentile. That child is being raised in family that has seen no income growth in the last 35 years. And every child behind him has seen income declines," said Michael Greenstone, director of the Hamilton Project.
That striking statement can be summed up in this graph that shows real family earnings falling by more than a fifth for families in the 15th percentile, even as family fortunes have nearly doubled for the 99th percentile since 1975.
This isn't just a story about parents' falling fortunes. It is, in fact, all about the kids. "Our parents' education levels and employment situation have implications that extend far into adulthood," Greenstone and Adam Looney write in a report shared exclusively with The Atlantic that will go live on the Hamilton Project site later today. For example, the best indicator for whether a teenager goes on to college is that his parents went to college.
"Think of lining up every single child in the country by their family's earnings and look at the 50th percentile. That child is being raised in family that has seen no income growth in the last 35 years. And every child behind him has seen income declines," said Michael Greenstone, director of the Hamilton Project.
That striking statement can be summed up in this graph that shows real family earnings falling by more than a fifth for families in the 15th percentile, even as family fortunes have nearly doubled for the 99th percentile since 1975.
This isn't just a story about parents' falling fortunes. It is, in fact, all about the kids. "Our parents' education levels and employment situation have implications that extend far into adulthood," Greenstone and Adam Looney write in a report shared exclusively with The Atlantic that will go live on the Hamilton Project site later today. For example, the best indicator for whether a teenager goes on to college is that his parents went to college.
G.O.P. Candidates Take an Anti-Federal Stance
From the NYT, federalism as an election issue:
For a generation, there has been loose bipartisan agreement in Washington that the federal government has a necessary role to play in the nation’s 13,600 school districts, primarily by using money to compel states to raise standards.
But the field of Republican presidential candidates has promised to unwind this legacy, arguing that education responsibilities should devolve to states and local districts, which will do a better job than Washington.
It can seem like an eon has passed since George W. Bush aspired to be the “education president.” Mr. Bush’s prized No Child Left Behind law used billions of dollars of federal aid to compel schools to raise student achievement on standardized tests.
President Obama’s own signature education initiative, Race to the Top, similarly used federal money to leverage change that many Republicans had long endorsed — charter schools and teacher evaluations that tied effectiveness in the classroom to tenure.
But now, the quest to sharply shrink government that all the Republican candidates embrace, driven by the fervor of the Tea Party, has brought a sweeping anti-federal government stance to the fore on education, as in many other areas.
For a generation, there has been loose bipartisan agreement in Washington that the federal government has a necessary role to play in the nation’s 13,600 school districts, primarily by using money to compel states to raise standards.
But the field of Republican presidential candidates has promised to unwind this legacy, arguing that education responsibilities should devolve to states and local districts, which will do a better job than Washington.
It can seem like an eon has passed since George W. Bush aspired to be the “education president.” Mr. Bush’s prized No Child Left Behind law used billions of dollars of federal aid to compel schools to raise student achievement on standardized tests.
President Obama’s own signature education initiative, Race to the Top, similarly used federal money to leverage change that many Republicans had long endorsed — charter schools and teacher evaluations that tied effectiveness in the classroom to tenure.
But now, the quest to sharply shrink government that all the Republican candidates embrace, driven by the fervor of the Tea Party, has brought a sweeping anti-federal government stance to the fore on education, as in many other areas.
Office of Legal Counsel wrote secret memo justifying killing Awlaki
As we continue discussing the executive branch in 2302, the NYT has a story about an important office within the Justice Department - the Office of Legal Counsel - that has apparently written an internal secret memo justifying not only the recent killing of Awlaki, but any other American citizen engaged in terrorist activities against the US:
The legal analysis, in essence, concluded that Mr. Awlaki could be legally killed, if it was not feasible to capture him, because intelligence agencies said he was taking part in the war between the United States and Al Qaeda and posed a significant threat to Americans, as well as because Yemeni authorities were unable or unwilling to stop him.
The memorandum, which was written more than a year before Mr. Awlaki was killed, does not independently analyze the quality of the evidence against him.
The administration did not respond to requests for comment on this article.
The deliberations to craft the memo included meetings in the White House Situation Room involving top lawyers for the Pentagon, State Department, National Security Council and intelligence agencies.
It was principally drafted by David Barron and Martin Lederman, who were both lawyers in the Office of Legal Counsel at the time, and was signed by Mr. Barron. The office may have given oral approval for an attack on Mr. Awlaki before completing its detailed memorandum. Several news reports before June 2010 quoted anonymous counterterrorism officials as saying that Mr. Awlaki had been placed on a kill-or-capture list around the time of the attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25, 2009. Mr. Awlaki was accused of helping to recruit the attacker for that operation.
Update: More claims that Obama has simply picked up where Bush left off.
The legal analysis, in essence, concluded that Mr. Awlaki could be legally killed, if it was not feasible to capture him, because intelligence agencies said he was taking part in the war between the United States and Al Qaeda and posed a significant threat to Americans, as well as because Yemeni authorities were unable or unwilling to stop him.
The memorandum, which was written more than a year before Mr. Awlaki was killed, does not independently analyze the quality of the evidence against him.
The administration did not respond to requests for comment on this article.
The deliberations to craft the memo included meetings in the White House Situation Room involving top lawyers for the Pentagon, State Department, National Security Council and intelligence agencies.
It was principally drafted by David Barron and Martin Lederman, who were both lawyers in the Office of Legal Counsel at the time, and was signed by Mr. Barron. The office may have given oral approval for an attack on Mr. Awlaki before completing its detailed memorandum. Several news reports before June 2010 quoted anonymous counterterrorism officials as saying that Mr. Awlaki had been placed on a kill-or-capture list around the time of the attempted bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25, 2009. Mr. Awlaki was accused of helping to recruit the attacker for that operation.
Update: More claims that Obama has simply picked up where Bush left off.
What impact will new voting rule shave on turnout in 2012?
The Brennan Center has released a study claiming the new rules on voting will make it more difficult for 5 million people to vote next year.
commentary:
- Get Ready Not to Vote: Why 2012 Just Got More Interesting.
- The new voting laws, and their effect.
- GOP, ALEC Could Make It Harder For 5 Million To Cast Ballots.
commentary:
- Get Ready Not to Vote: Why 2012 Just Got More Interesting.
- The new voting laws, and their effect.
- GOP, ALEC Could Make It Harder For 5 Million To Cast Ballots.
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Friday, October 7, 2011
Some facts regarding China impact on our economy
From Foreign Policy: The Top 10 Unicorns of China Policy
From the Brookings Institute: China's Currency Policy Explained
From the Brookings Institute: China's Currency Policy Explained
From The American Conservative: Flat-Lining the Middle Class
Cheery news:
. . . . the verdict couldn’t be more clear-cut. For the American middle class, long the pride of this country and the envy of the world, the past 10 years were a bust. A washout. A decade from hell.
Paychecks shrank. Household wealth melted away like so many sandcastles swept off by the incoming tide. Poverty spiked, swallowing an ever-greater share of the population, young and old. “This is truly a lost decade,” Harvard University economist Lawrence Katz said of these last years. “We think of America as a place where every generation is doing better, but we’re looking at a period when the median family is in worse shape than it was in the late 1990s.”
. . . . the verdict couldn’t be more clear-cut. For the American middle class, long the pride of this country and the envy of the world, the past 10 years were a bust. A washout. A decade from hell.
Paychecks shrank. Household wealth melted away like so many sandcastles swept off by the incoming tide. Poverty spiked, swallowing an ever-greater share of the population, young and old. “This is truly a lost decade,” Harvard University economist Lawrence Katz said of these last years. “We think of America as a place where every generation is doing better, but we’re looking at a period when the median family is in worse shape than it was in the late 1990s.”
Free Trade Bills Move Forward
The bill is H.R. 2832 - The Trade Adjustment Assistance Extension Act of 2011. It would extend free trade agreements with Columbia, South Korea and Panama.
Some related stories:
- Senate passes Trade Adjustment Assistance extension.
- Trade bills approved by House Ways and means Committee.
Some related stories:
- Senate passes Trade Adjustment Assistance extension.
- Trade bills approved by House Ways and means Committee.
The China Currency Bill
The Senate is locked up over S.1619 the Currency Exchange Rate Oversight Reform Act of 2011 (the China Currency Bill). Details on Senate floor action can be found here.
The bill is designed to punish China for devaluing its currency. Tariffs will be assessed on Chinese imports if they do not raise the value of the Yuan. but critics wonder if the bill might end up hurting more than helping American workers. Dispute over the bill seems to cuts across party lines. Democrats and Tea Party Republicans (driven by populism, protectionism and animosity towards the financial sector) seem to be united on this. The White house and Republican leaders seem to be opposed.
- Our China Currency Bill Will Defend America's Core Interests.
- The China Currency Bill Will Make Americans Poorer, not Richer.
- Geithner Reiterates White House Concern on China Currency Bill.
- On Currency Bill, Rank-and-File Republicans Buck GOP Leaders.
The bill is designed to punish China for devaluing its currency. Tariffs will be assessed on Chinese imports if they do not raise the value of the Yuan. but critics wonder if the bill might end up hurting more than helping American workers. Dispute over the bill seems to cuts across party lines. Democrats and Tea Party Republicans (driven by populism, protectionism and animosity towards the financial sector) seem to be united on this. The White house and Republican leaders seem to be opposed.
- Our China Currency Bill Will Defend America's Core Interests.
- The China Currency Bill Will Make Americans Poorer, not Richer.
- Geithner Reiterates White House Concern on China Currency Bill.
- On Currency Bill, Rank-and-File Republicans Buck GOP Leaders.
From Politico: Dems change rules; Senate in chaos
In response to Republican efforts to slow down consideration of legislation concerning China with filibusters on amendments, Senate Majority Leader Reid moved to limit the use of the filibuster:
The Senate descended into procedural chaos Thursday night as Democrats forced a change in Senate rules and shut down a GOP effort to bog down a Chinese currency bill with a series of unrelated amendments.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s move to suddenly overhaul a key Senate rule without warning infuriated Republicans and put an already bitterly divided chamber on edge as senators from both sides of the aisle traded angry accusations over whether the fight would fundamentally limit the rights of the minority party.
By a 51-48 vote, the Senate voted along party lines to change the precedent and limit how amendments can be considered once a filibuster is defeated. Under normal procedure, the Senate has 30 hours of debate after 60 senators agree to end a filibuster. Amendments can be considered during those 30 hours if each side agrees by unanimous consent to schedule a vote — or if a senator moves to waive the rules, which would then require the support of 67 senators in order to succeed.
But under the new procedure, senators can no longer move to waive the rules once a filibuster is defeated — a battle that threatens to further inflame partisan tensions and stymie legislative action at a time when frustration with Congress is at an all-time high.
The Senate descended into procedural chaos Thursday night as Democrats forced a change in Senate rules and shut down a GOP effort to bog down a Chinese currency bill with a series of unrelated amendments.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s move to suddenly overhaul a key Senate rule without warning infuriated Republicans and put an already bitterly divided chamber on edge as senators from both sides of the aisle traded angry accusations over whether the fight would fundamentally limit the rights of the minority party.
By a 51-48 vote, the Senate voted along party lines to change the precedent and limit how amendments can be considered once a filibuster is defeated. Under normal procedure, the Senate has 30 hours of debate after 60 senators agree to end a filibuster. Amendments can be considered during those 30 hours if each side agrees by unanimous consent to schedule a vote — or if a senator moves to waive the rules, which would then require the support of 67 senators in order to succeed.
But under the new procedure, senators can no longer move to waive the rules once a filibuster is defeated — a battle that threatens to further inflame partisan tensions and stymie legislative action at a time when frustration with Congress is at an all-time high.
Golan v. Holder
This applies to 2301 and 2302. The Supreme Court is called to determine the nature of the constitution's copyright clause.
On Wednesday the Supreme Court heard arguments on Golan v. Holder, a case involving copyright protection and specifically asking (according to Scotusblog) "Can Congress restore copyright protection to a work whose copyright protection had previously expired and was therefore in the public domain?" The case involves the consequences of a 1998 law extending copyright protection - which Congress can do under the delagated powers of the Constitution.
Artists tend to be protective of the ownership of their work - naturally enough - but how long is too long? An opinion piece in the NYT argues that excessive use of copyright can stifle the creative process. Innovation sometimes builds off the work of others.
On Wednesday the Supreme Court heard arguments on Golan v. Holder, a case involving copyright protection and specifically asking (according to Scotusblog) "Can Congress restore copyright protection to a work whose copyright protection had previously expired and was therefore in the public domain?" The case involves the consequences of a 1998 law extending copyright protection - which Congress can do under the delagated powers of the Constitution.
Artists tend to be protective of the ownership of their work - naturally enough - but how long is too long? An opinion piece in the NYT argues that excessive use of copyright can stifle the creative process. Innovation sometimes builds off the work of others.
Jobs added in September, but national unemployment rate still 9.1%
From NYT:
. . . the Labor Department said Friday that American employers added 103,000 jobs in September, staving off the bleakest forecasts for now.
The unemployment rate for September was unchanged from August, 9.1 percent. With President Obama continuing to press a balky Congress to pass his jobs bill, the Labor Department’s monthly snapshot highlighted the challenges for an administration faced with an economy that has struggled to deliver significant employment growth since the recovery started more than two years ago.
Here's the report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Its worth a read in order to fully understand the current nature of unemployment.
The data is collected for the bureau by the Census Bureau in what is called the Current Population Survey and by the BLS itself in the Current Employment Statistics survey.
Here's the description of the Current population survey:
The Current Population Survey (CPS) is a monthly survey of about 50,000 households conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The survey has been conducted for more than 50 years.
The CPS is the primary source of information on the labor force characteristics of the U.S. population. The sample is scientifically selected to represent the civilian noninstitutional population. Respondents are interviewed to obtain information about the employment status of each member of the household 15 years of age and older. However, published data focus on those ages 16 and over. The sample provides estimates for the nation as a whole and serves as part of model-based estimates for individual states and other geographic areas.
And here is a description of the CES:
Each month the Current Employment Statistics (CES) program surveys about 140,000 businesses and government agencies, representing approximately 440,000 individual worksites, in order to provide detailed industry data on employment, hours, and earnings of workers on nonfarm payrolls.
. . . the Labor Department said Friday that American employers added 103,000 jobs in September, staving off the bleakest forecasts for now.
The unemployment rate for September was unchanged from August, 9.1 percent. With President Obama continuing to press a balky Congress to pass his jobs bill, the Labor Department’s monthly snapshot highlighted the challenges for an administration faced with an economy that has struggled to deliver significant employment growth since the recovery started more than two years ago.
Here's the report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Its worth a read in order to fully understand the current nature of unemployment.
The data is collected for the bureau by the Census Bureau in what is called the Current Population Survey and by the BLS itself in the Current Employment Statistics survey.
Here's the description of the Current population survey:
The Current Population Survey (CPS) is a monthly survey of about 50,000 households conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The survey has been conducted for more than 50 years.
The CPS is the primary source of information on the labor force characteristics of the U.S. population. The sample is scientifically selected to represent the civilian noninstitutional population. Respondents are interviewed to obtain information about the employment status of each member of the household 15 years of age and older. However, published data focus on those ages 16 and over. The sample provides estimates for the nation as a whole and serves as part of model-based estimates for individual states and other geographic areas.
And here is a description of the CES:
Each month the Current Employment Statistics (CES) program surveys about 140,000 businesses and government agencies, representing approximately 440,000 individual worksites, in order to provide detailed industry data on employment, hours, and earnings of workers on nonfarm payrolls.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Can you be coerced into a confession?
It seems that you can:
SINCE 1992 the Innocence Project, an American legal charity, has used DNA evidence to help exonerate 271 people who were wrongly convicted of crimes, sometimes after they had served dozens of years in prison. But a mystery has emerged from the case reports. Despite being innocent, around a quarter of these people had confessed or pleaded guilty to the offences of which they were accused.
It seems hard to imagine that anyone of sound mind would take the blame for something he did not do. But several researchers have found it surprisingly easy to make people fess up to invented misdemeanours. Admittedly these confessions are taking place in a laboratory rather than an interrogation room, so the stakes might not appear that high to the confessor. On the other hand, the pressures that can be brought to bear in a police station are much stronger than those in a lab. The upshot is that it seems worryingly simple to extract a false confession from someone—which he might find hard subsequently to retract.
Something to ponder as 2301s dig into prodecural civil liberties.
SINCE 1992 the Innocence Project, an American legal charity, has used DNA evidence to help exonerate 271 people who were wrongly convicted of crimes, sometimes after they had served dozens of years in prison. But a mystery has emerged from the case reports. Despite being innocent, around a quarter of these people had confessed or pleaded guilty to the offences of which they were accused.
It seems hard to imagine that anyone of sound mind would take the blame for something he did not do. But several researchers have found it surprisingly easy to make people fess up to invented misdemeanours. Admittedly these confessions are taking place in a laboratory rather than an interrogation room, so the stakes might not appear that high to the confessor. On the other hand, the pressures that can be brought to bear in a police station are much stronger than those in a lab. The upshot is that it seems worryingly simple to extract a false confession from someone—which he might find hard subsequently to retract.
Something to ponder as 2301s dig into prodecural civil liberties.
The Myth of the Middle Class Mortgage Deduction
From Reason:
Conventional wisdom has it that without the ability to deduct mortgage interest from federal taxes, homeownership rates and housing prices would tumble. Worse, middle class families would be relegated a fate worse than foreclosure: renting. Two decades ago, these dire predictions may have had some relationship to reality. But in recent years, the middle class has seen its share of the mortgage interest deduction (MID) steadily erode, undermining the political case for retaining the subsidy.
For our continued discussion in 2302 regarding budgeting, revenue collection etc....
- Wikipedia: Home Mortgage Interest Deduction
Conventional wisdom has it that without the ability to deduct mortgage interest from federal taxes, homeownership rates and housing prices would tumble. Worse, middle class families would be relegated a fate worse than foreclosure: renting. Two decades ago, these dire predictions may have had some relationship to reality. But in recent years, the middle class has seen its share of the mortgage interest deduction (MID) steadily erode, undermining the political case for retaining the subsidy.
For our continued discussion in 2302 regarding budgeting, revenue collection etc....
- Wikipedia: Home Mortgage Interest Deduction
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Does regulatory uncertainty retard job growth?
Bruce Bartlett says no:
Republicans . . . embrace the idea that government regulation is the principal factor holding back employment. They assert that Barack Obama has unleashed a tidal wave of new regulations, which has created uncertainty among businesses and prevents them from investing and hiring.No hard evidence is offered for this claim; it is simply asserted as self-evident and repeated endlessly throughout the conservative echo chamber.
Republicans . . . embrace the idea that government regulation is the principal factor holding back employment. They assert that Barack Obama has unleashed a tidal wave of new regulations, which has created uncertainty among businesses and prevents them from investing and hiring.No hard evidence is offered for this claim; it is simply asserted as self-evident and repeated endlessly throughout the conservative echo chamber.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
How about taxing financial transactions?
From the NYT:
Governments, both rich and poor, urgently need a way to calm speculation in the financial markets and to raise revenue. On Wednesday, the European Commission president, José Manuel Barroso, proposed a tax on financial transactions. Such a measure, already supported by the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, is long overdue.
Indeed, a tax of just 0.05 percent levied on each stock, bond, derivative or currency transaction would be aimed at financial institutions’ casino-style trading, which helped precipitate the economic crisis. Because these markets are so vast, the tax could raise hundreds of billions of dollars a year globally for cash-strapped governments and could increase development aid.
It seems to be a kind of sin tax.
Governments, both rich and poor, urgently need a way to calm speculation in the financial markets and to raise revenue. On Wednesday, the European Commission president, José Manuel Barroso, proposed a tax on financial transactions. Such a measure, already supported by the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, is long overdue.
Indeed, a tax of just 0.05 percent levied on each stock, bond, derivative or currency transaction would be aimed at financial institutions’ casino-style trading, which helped precipitate the economic crisis. Because these markets are so vast, the tax could raise hundreds of billions of dollars a year globally for cash-strapped governments and could increase development aid.
It seems to be a kind of sin tax.
Will Occupy Wall Street become the Tea Party of the Left?
A few posts regarding the protest movement that has begun in New York but may be spreading elsewhere. Just like the original Tea Party protests, there is a lack of clarity about what the movement is about and how it intends to accomplish whatever goals it may decide on.
- What Occupy DC wants: Less corporate money in politics
- Who are the 99 percent?
- Stepping out, not sure where you're going yet
- This is what ineffective action looks like.
- The Importance of Activism for Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party.
- On Wall Street, a Protest Matures
- What Occupy DC wants: Less corporate money in politics
- Who are the 99 percent?
- Stepping out, not sure where you're going yet
- This is what ineffective action looks like.
- The Importance of Activism for Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party.
- On Wall Street, a Protest Matures
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)