Biden v. Nebraska.
- Oyez.
- Scotusblog.
- Wikipedia.
- Oyez.
- Scotusblog.
- Wikipedia.
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
The Supreme Court holds oral arguments in two cases challenging Biden's student loan forgiveness plan.
- Oyez.
- Scotusblog.
- Wikipedia.
Is this an example of local majority tyranny?
I’m tempted to say that this is what Madison was referring to in Federalist 10.
In Odessa, as in many other Texas cities, elections for municipal positions such as mayor and city council member are nonpartisan; candidates do not run as Republicans or Democrats. In recent years, though, Odessa politics have become increasingly divisive and ideological, mirroring national trends. Joven and his allies say they are simply representing the values of their conservative constituents. Ector County is overwhelmingly red; Donald Trump won about 73 percent of its 44,591 votes cast in the 2020 presidential election. “We were elected, and the citizens wanted change,” said council member Swanner. Council member Mark Matta, an account manager at an oil and gas supply company who was elected in 2020, also voted to fire Brooks and Marrero. “We weren’t getting anywhere with [Marrero], so we just had to make the decision that we thought was best for the city of Odessa,” he told me. Matta declined to go into greater detail, citing unspecified “pending litigation.”
Several current and former Odessa City Council members told me that while the city is certainly conservative, Joven’s faction, which aligns itself with the MAGA wing of the Republican Party, has introduced a new atmosphere of extreme partisanship, distracting the council from its traditional emphasis on infrastructure and business development. At its first meeting, in November, the newly reconstituted city council voted to declare Odessa a sanctuary city for the unborn, joining more than forty other Texas cities that have outlawed abortion. Odessa’s ordinance is even more restrictive than the state’s abortion ban, providing exceptions only for ectopic pregnancies.
Thompson was alone in voting against the ordinance, arguing that reproductive rights were beyond the scope of the city council. “Why do we need to get involved?” he asked me. “Let’s go build a sports complex. Let’s pave roads.” Since November, though, those typical functions of city government seem to have taken a back seat to Team Joven’s ideological agenda. “It’s very difficult to entice new businesses to come into a city where the local government is so nonfunctional,” said Gene Collins, who served from 2016 to 2020 on the board of the Odessa Development Corporation, which provides financial incentives to spur economic activity. “City employees that we’ve had for a long time have resigned. Others are unsure of their future. Nothing is really getting done in the city.”
Links - 2/28/23
- Supreme Court declines to revisit landmark First Amendment decision, leaving higher bar for libel in place.
- Two Justices Say Supreme Court Should Reconsider Landmark Libel Decision.
- Cognizable.
- Legal history of cannabis in the United States.
- Introducing ChatGPT.
- Unborn Child vs. Reyes.
The Actual Malice Standard
This is the standard that must be met by Dominion Voting Systems if they are to succeed in their defamation lawsuit against Fox News.
- Actual Malice.
- Proving Fault: Actual Malice and Negligence.
- What is Actual Malice? Definition & Examples.
From the Guardian: Florida court denies habeas corpus petition for fetus of jailed woman
Renewed laws against abortion have had unusual consequences. Here is one.
Background:
- Habeas Corpus.
- Habeas corpus in the United States.
A Florida appeals court denied an attorney’s attempt to have a woman released from jail ahead of trial by arguing that her fetus was being illegally detained without charge – but the attorney says he plans to continue the legal battle.
Florida’s third district court of appeal dismissed without prejudice a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by attorney William M Norris on behalf of the “unborn child” of Natalia Harrell.
The petition argued that the fetus is “a person under the Florida constitution and the United States constitution” and that it therefore should not effectively be detained without charge.
The petition argued that the fetus is “a person under the Florida constitution and the United States constitution” and that it therefore should not effectively be detained without charge.
The ruling, written by judge Thomas Logue last Friday, contains “no opinion on whether such filing is being brought by a party with standing, whether the claims are legally cognizable, whether they have merit, or what remedies, if any, are available”.
Instead, it argued on a technicality that the petition failed to include a factual record of the case – which includes disputed allegations that Harrell has received inadequate prenatal care while in jail – and should be pursued in a lower court.
However, another judge from the panel in the case, Monica Gordo, published a partially dissenting opinion arguing that the court should reject the claim of “unlawful incarceration by the government and find habeas corpus does not lie under these limited and specific circumstances”.
While Gordo agreed that factual disputes about Harrell’s prenatal care needed to be hashed out in a lower court, she argued that the appeals court should rule on the habeas corpus claim, habeas corpus being the common law right for a person being detained to appear before a judge.
Gordo noted that there was agreement that the fetus had not been charged with a crime, and wrote: “To send this part of the petition back for a determination of facts which are undisputed seems odd … I see a significant difference between exercising judicial restraint and punting a legal issue placed squarely before the Court.”
She added: “No more could the government be accused of unlawfully detaining the unborn child in this case than could the mother be guilty of kidnapping over interstate lines if she chose to visit her grandmother in Georgia while eight months pregnant.”
Gordo charged that the case was a “badly-disguised Trojan horse”.
“The argument is nothing more than an attempt for the mother to leverage her unborn child as a basis to be released from lawful detention,” she wrote.
Monday, February 27, 2023
Written Assignment Week 7
Spring 2024:
This is for both 2305 and 2306
- Click on the following blog post:
- - Was the Founding Undemocratic? The Property Requirement for Voting.
Review what Hamilton, Adams, and Madison had to say about why property requirements for voting are beneficial. Try to figure out what they mean by the phrase "a will of one's own." Apparently people who work for a living do not have it, and this is a bad thing.
I want you to figure what the terms means, then figure out whether you have a will of your own. Are your decisions influenced by external actors and events? Or are you completely independent?
The normal requirements apply.
____________
Fall 2023:
Both of these assignments encourage you to explore political conflict on the national and state level.
GOVT 2305
Whose interests were served - or not served - in the recent temporary solution to the "government shutdown."
What seem to have been the major areas of conflict? How much can you find our about them?
- What is a government shutdown?
- US Congress passes stopgap measure to avert government shutdown.
- Shutdown averted: Political winners and losers.
GOVT 2306
The Texas Governor has called a special session of the legislature. He wants then to pass legislation allowing for school vouchers. The issue proposal has passionate supporters and opponents.
Who are they and what is the nature of their disagreement? How are their interests impacted by the proposal? What is the proposal?
- Gov. Greg Abbott says special lawmaking session will begin on Oct. 9, likely on school vouchers.
- Texas House committee report outlines possible path forward for school vouchers.
- Here’s everything you need to know about school vouchers in Texas.
You should have this memorized by now:
- It is due for full credit on midnight the following Monday.
- It will be subject to a penalty if turned in late.
- Is can be turned in for partial credit until the end of the semester.
- The grade is commensurate to the quality of the work.
- There is a 150 word minimum requirement.
- You may write as much as you wish.
From Wikipedia: Corruption in local government
Like tyrannical majorities, these are much more likely in smaller than larger governments.
- Corruption in Local Government
For Monday 2/27/23
Federalist 10.
- Factions
Interest Group Formation.
- Cohesion
The Free Rider Problem.
- Political Free Riding.
- Collective Action and Interest Group Formation.
- Incentives.
Party Systems.
- Party Systems.
The Two Party System.
- Duverger's Law.
Winner Take All Elections.
- Single Member Districts.
Proportional Representation
- Proportional Representation.
- Multi-party system.
- Elections for the Knesset.
Coalition Formation.
- Factions in the Democratic Party.
- Factions in the Republican Party.
Party Eras.
- First Party System.
- Second Party System.
- Third Party System.
- Fourth Party System.
- Fifth Party System.
- Sixth Party System.
Party Polarization
- George Washington's Farewell Address.
Sunday, February 26, 2023
Theories of Power and Authority
- Elite Theory.
- Pluralist Theory.
- Polyarchy.
- Bureaucratic Power.
- Max Weber: There types of authority.
Friday, February 24, 2023
Wednesday, February 22, 2023
https://www.delawareinc.com/blog/why-delaware-corporate-law-matters-so-much/
https://delcode.delaware.gov/title8/c001/index.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware_General_Corporation_Law
https://vaperanger.com/collections/top-10-capn-crunch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Prelogar
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2022/21-1333
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/02/22/texas-delta-8-marijuana-hemp-arrests/
Tuesday, February 21, 2023
Do durational residency requirements violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
According to the U.S. Supreme Court in Dunn v Blumstein, yes.
- What is a durational residency requirement?
It includes an acknowledgement of a right to interstate travel.
From Oyez:
Facts of the case:
Question:
Did Tennessee's durational residency requirements violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusion:
In a 6-to-1 decision, the Court held that the law was an unconstitutional infringement upon the right to vote and the right to travel. Applying a strict equal protection test, the Court found that the law did not necessarily promote a compelling state interest. Justice Marshall argued in the majority opinion that the durational residency requirements were neither the least restrictive means available to prevent electoral fraud nor an appropriate method of guaranteeing the existence of "knowledgeable voters" within the state.
Links 2/21/23
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-sponsored_enterprise
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/conscience-rights
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conscience
https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
https://www.eff.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Frontier_Foundation
. . . A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project . . .
Political Topics highlighted in Federalist 10
A rage for paper money
- Wikipedia: Early American currency.
An abolition of debts
- Wikipedia: Early History of Public Debt.
An equal division of property
- America’s lost egalitarian tradition.
Any other improper or wicked project,
Monday, February 20, 2023
Sunday, February 19, 2023
From the Houston Chronicle: Editorial: Thank you, Mattress Mack, for suing Harris County over election records
Governments have become reluctant to share information.
Which can be a problem.
Before we go further, what is an editorial?
- Click here for it.
Whether Harris County disenfranchised voters and skewed election results by running out of paper in November is debatable. So is the merit of mushrooming election challenges by losing Republicans.
What’s not debatable?
Texas open records laws, once heralded among the strongest in the nation, have been shamefully eroded over the years by lawmakers who seem to fear sunshine as much as they do a primary challenge.
That’s why we applaud Jim “Mattress Mack” McIngvale for bringing some attention to the public records scandal in this state, regardless of whether the election scandal he’s hoping for pans out or not.
. . . McIngvale accuses the agency of refusing to turn over records he requested relating to November’s midterm election problems. Hidalgo was quick to dismiss McIngvale’s lawsuit this week as politically motivated, which it may very well be, but pure intentions aren’t a qualification to access public information.
. . . his concerns over ballot paper shortages and delays during the 2022 November election in Harris County are widely shared, including by this editorial board.
A report by the election office that was supposed to provide answers on how widespread the paper outages were and how many voters were turned away wasn’t a smoking gun, as we wrote, just smoky. It’s troubling that the county’s online tool measuring estimated wait times at polling places didn’t work and there seems to be no reliable system to keep track of problems and how they’re resolved. It’s unacceptable that the biggest county in Texas is adding fuel to mostly baseless claims on the right that our elections can’t be trusted. Democrats should be as frustrated about that as Republicans.
Mattress Mack’s request, submitted on his behalf by former sleuthing TV journalist-turned-media consultant Wayne Dolcefino, included texts, phone messages and emails for Elections Administrator Clifford Tatum, including correspondence with Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis’ office, along with voting machine maintenance records, information about ballot paper, and communications between officials and judges overseeing polling locations.
The county says it turned over some information. The rest of the request? It met the familiar fate that Texas journalists know all too well when we try to access even benign information maintained by government entities – from the state to the local police department.
Harris County referred it to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office, seeking an opinion on whether it can claim “ongoing litigation” as an excuse to withhold the information from the prying eyes of the public.
Going to the AG used to be largely reserved for cases when requests raised security or privacy concerns. The presumption of the Texas Public Information Act has long been that public records are public property and most should be accessible to the owners.
Today, government agencies seem to consider it almost perfunctory to seek safe harbor from AG to hide information, using a “competitive harm” excuse to withhold public contract information or a “policymaking” exception to shroud even routine personnel and administrative decisions. Exceptions for police and investigative information are even used to keep grieving parents from obtaining autopsies and other records on their children’s deaths.
A 2019 investigative report by the Chronicle’s Jeremy Blackman and ABC13 found that the number of requests to the AG from state and local agencies seeking to withhold public information nearly doubled in the past decade, reaching 32,000 in 2018. Nearly all are granted.
. . . Harris County is just one of many agencies engaging in cover-your-butt behavior enabled by the Texas Legislature. Lawmakers, with the help of the Texas Supreme Court, have riddled the Texas Public Information Act with so many holes and escape hatches that the thing barely resembles the strong open government statutes that emerged after the Sharpstown stock fraud scandal in the 1970s.
Texans have a right to know what their government is doing, how their tax dollars are being spent, and yes, how their elections are being run. That right is under assault by lawmakers, an enabling AG, and by local officials happily exploiting the TPIA’s weakness.
No public information means no public accountability. That is a true threat to our democracy.
Dominion v Fox
Dominion Voting Systems has sued Fox News for defamation over claims that its machines changed vites from Trump to Biden in the 2020 presidential election.
Here's background:
- US Dominion, Inc., et al. v. Fox Corporation, et al.
- Fox knew vote rigging claims were false, Dominion says, as network defends coverage.
- Fox stars privately bashed election fraud claims the network pushed.
- Dominion Voting Systems: Defamation Lawsuits.
What is defamation?
- LII: defamation.
- Wikipedia: Defamation.
- Britannica: Defamation.
How has the Supreme Court handled defamation cases?
- Oyez: Cases - Libel, defamation.
- Actual Malice.
- Will the Supreme Court reconsider a landmark defamation case?
From the Houston Chronicle: The deadliest road in Houston is getting a $28 million makeover
More on fiscal federalism.
- Click here for the article.
Houston is about to give one of its most dangerous stretches of road a multi-million dollar makeover.
The City of Houston announced at a city council meeting Wednesday that the federal government is chipping in $28.7 million to enhance safety measures on a stretch of Bissonnet Street between S. Dairy Ashford Road and Hillcroft Avenue.
The seven-mile section of Bissonnet runs from Bissonnet and S. Dairy Ashford near the Alief area, to Bissonnet and Hillcroft, located between Sharpstown and Bellaire in west Houston. It's one of the deadliest roadways in the Bayou City: data from the city of Houston shows that more people die in fatal car accidents on Bissonnet than on any other street in Houston.
The city secured the funds to improve safety on Bissonnet through a federal grant program called Safe Streets and Roads for All. Houston is one of 510 communities to receive funding for safety improvements through the program, which doled out $800 million in grant awards that were announced by U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg on Wednesday.
"It's a competitive grant from the Department of Transportation," Mayor Sylvester Turner told ABC 13. "It's the largest grant anybody received in the State of Texas," Turner added.
"The project will help reduce traffic deaths and serious injuries along the corridor, which travels directly through the underserved communities of Alief-Westwood, Gulfton, and Braeburn, significantly impacting people of color and families of low income," U.S. Department of Transportation officials wrote in the project's description.
The advocacy group LINK Houston, which pushes for "a robust and equitable transportation network so that all people can reach opportunity," said improvements to this stretch of road have been a long time coming. The organization has named one of the intersections included in the improvement plan amongst the most dangerous intersections in Houston.
Saturday, February 18, 2023
Written Assignment #6
For both GOVT 2305 and 2306
So you might want to run for public office? (you never know)
For 2305, answer in terms of national office, for 2306 answer in terms of state or local office.
A few things to consider:
- What office do you want to run for?
- Are you qualified?
- How do you get on the ballot?
- What are the rules regarding campaign funding?
- etc...
Right now I'm only interested in the nuts and bolts of getting the right paperwork done.
A few places to look:
Federal Election Commission:
- Registering a candidate.
Texas Secretary of State:
- Qualifications for All Public Offices.
- Running For a Local Office (City, School District, Other Districts).
Texas Ethics Commission:
- First Steps for Candidates Running for a City Office.
General Advice:
- NPR: How to run for office.
You know the basics:
- It is due for full credit on midnight the following Monday.
- It will be subject to a penalty if turned in late.
- Is can be turned in for partial credit until the end of the semester.
- The grade is commensurate to the quality of the work.
- There is a 150 word minimum requirement.
- You may write as much as you wish.
The Powell Memo
According to many, this is the memo that kick started the conservative, pro business movement in the early 70s. It was written by a future member of the Supreme Court at the request of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, largely under the radar. Many of the themes and tactics were used by conservatives to become more forceful in national and state politics. They continue to be.
- Click here for a pdf of the original version.
Here is background on the some of the major players, institutions, and ideas involved or mentioned in the memo.
- Free Enterprise System
- state socialism
- Eugene B. Sydnor, Jr
- U.S. Chamber of Commerce
- Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
- William Kunstler
- Stewart Alsop
- Milton Friedman
- Ralph Nader
- consumer rights movement
- The Greening of America
- environmental movement
- Barron’s Weekly,
- the campus
- Graduate Schools of Business
- labor movement
- national television networks
- Scholarly Journals
- Eldridge Cleaver
- civil rights movement
- confrontation politics.
___________
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM: Attack on American Free Enterprise System
DATE: August 23, 1971
TO: Mr. Eugene B. Sydnor, Jr., Chairman, Education Committee, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
FROM: Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
This memorandum is submitted at your request as a basis for the discussion on August 24 with Mr. Booth (executive vice president) and others at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The purpose is to identify the problem, and suggest possible avenues of action for further consideration.
Dimensions of the Attack
No thoughtful person can question that the American economic system is under broad attack. This varies in scope, intensity, in the techniques employed, and in the level of visibility.
There always have been some who opposed the American system, and preferred socialism or some form of statism (communism or fascism). Also, there always have been critics of the system, whose criticism has been wholesome and constructive so long as the objective was to improve rather than to subvert or destroy.
But what now concerns us is quite new in the history of America. We are not dealing with sporadic or isolated attacks from a relatively few extremists or even from the minority socialist cadre. Rather, the assault on the enterprise system is broadly based and consistently pursued. It is gaining momentum and converts.
Sources of the Attack
The sources are varied and diffused. They include, not unexpectedly, the Communists, New Leftists and other revolutionaries who would destroy the entire system, both political and economic. These extremists of the left are far more numerous, better financed, and increasingly are more welcomed and encouraged by other elements of society, than ever before in our history. But they remain a small minority, and are not yet the principal cause for concern.
The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism come from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians. In most of these groups the movement against the system is participated in only by minorities. Yet, these often are the most articulate, the most vocal, the most prolific in their writing and speaking.
Moreover, much of the media — for varying motives and in varying degrees — either voluntarily accords unique publicity to these “attackers,” or at least allows them to exploit the media for their purposes. This is especially true of television, which now plays such a predominant role in shaping the thinking, attitudes and emotions of our people.
One of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to which the enterprise system tolerates, if not participates in, its own destruction.
The campuses from which much of the criticism emanates are supported by (i) tax funds generated largely from American business, and (ii) contributions from capital funds controlled or generated by American business. The boards of trustees of our universities overwhelmingly are composed of men and women who are leaders in the system.
Most of the media, including the national TV systems, are owned and theoretically controlled by corporations which depend upon profits, and the enterprise system to survive.
Tone of the Attack
This memorandum is not the place to document in detail the tone, character, or intensity of the attack. The following quotations will suffice to give one a general idea:
William Kunstler, warmly welcomed on campuses and listed in a recent student poll as the “American lawyer most admired,” incites audiences as follows:
“You must learn to fight in the streets, to revolt, to shoot guns. We will learn to do all of the things that property owners fear.” The New Leftists who heed Kunstler’s advice increasingly are beginning to act — not just against military recruiting offices and manufacturers of munitions, but against a variety of businesses: “Since February, 1970, branches (of Bank of America) have been attacked 39 times, 22 times with explosive devices and 17 times with fire bombs or by arsonists.” Although New Leftist spokesmen are succeeding in radicalizing thousands of the young, the greater cause for concern is the hostility of respectable liberals and social reformers. It is the sum total of their views and influence which could indeed fatally weaken or destroy the system.
A chilling description of what is being taught on many of our campuses was written by Stewart Alsop:
“Yale, like every other major college, is graduating scores of bright young men who are practitioners of ‘the politics of despair.’ These young men despise the American political and economic system . . . (their) minds seem to be wholly closed. They live, not by rational discussion, but by mindless slogans.”A recent poll of students on 12 representative campuses reported that: “Almost half the students favored socialization of basic U.S. industries.”
A visiting professor from England at Rockford College gave a series of lectures entitled “The Ideological War Against Western Society,” in which he documents the extent to which members of the intellectual community are waging ideological warfare against the enterprise system and the values of western society. In a foreword to these lectures, famed Dr. Milton Friedman of Chicago warned: “It (is) crystal clear that the foundations of our free society are under wide-ranging and powerful attack — not by Communist or any other conspiracy but by misguided individuals parroting one another and unwittingly serving ends they would never intentionally promote.”
Perhaps the single most effective antagonist of American business is Ralph Nader, who — thanks largely to the media — has become a legend in his own time and an idol of millions of Americans. A recent article in Fortune speaks of Nader as follows:
“The passion that rules in him — and he is a passionate man — is aimed at smashing utterly the target of his hatred, which is corporate power. He thinks, and says quite bluntly, that a great many corporate executives belong in prison — for defrauding the consumer with shoddy merchandise, poisoning the food supply with chemical additives, and willfully manufacturing unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer. He emphasizes that he is not talking just about ‘fly-by-night hucksters’ but the top management of blue chip business.”
A frontal assault was made on our government, our system of justice, and the free enterprise system by Yale Professor Charles Reich in his widely publicized book: “The Greening of America,” published last winter.
The foregoing references illustrate the broad, shotgun attack on the system itself. There are countless examples of rifle shots which undermine confidence and confuse the public. Favorite current targets are proposals for tax incentives through changes in depreciation rates and investment credits. These are usually described in the media as “tax breaks,” “loop holes” or “tax benefits” for the benefit of business. * As viewed by a columnist in the Post, such tax measures would benefit “only the rich, the owners of big companies.”
It is dismaying that many politicians make the same argument that tax measures of this kind benefit only “business,” without benefit to “the poor.” The fact that this is either political demagoguery or economic illiteracy is of slight comfort. This setting of the “rich” against the “poor,” of business against the people, is the cheapest and most dangerous kind of politics.
The Apathy and Default of Business
What has been the response of business to this massive assault upon its fundamental economics, upon its philosophy, upon its right to continue to manage its own affairs, and indeed upon its integrity?
The painfully sad truth is that business, including the boards of directors’ and the top executives of corporations great and small and business organizations at all levels, often have responded — if at all — by appeasement, ineptitude and ignoring the problem. There are, of course, many exceptions to this sweeping generalization. But the net effect of such response as has been made is scarcely visible.
In all fairness, it must be recognized that businessmen have not been trained or equipped to conduct guerrilla warfare with those who propagandize against the system, seeking insidiously and constantly to sabotage it. The traditional role of business executives has been to manage, to produce, to sell, to create jobs, to make profits, to improve the standard of living, to be community leaders, to serve on charitable and educational boards, and generally to be good citizens. They have performed these tasks very well indeed.
But they have shown little stomach for hard-nose contest with their critics, and little skill in effective intellectual and philosophical debate.
A column recently carried by the Wall Street Journal was entitled: “Memo to GM: Why Not Fight Back?” Although addressed to GM by name, the article was a warning to all American business. Columnist St. John said:
“General Motors, like American business in general, is ‘plainly in trouble’ because intellectual bromides have been substituted for a sound intellectual exposition of its point of view.” Mr. St. John then commented on the tendency of business leaders to compromise with and appease critics. He cited the concessions which Nader wins from management, and spoke of “the fallacious view many businessmen take toward their critics.” He drew a parallel to the mistaken tactics of many college administrators: “College administrators learned too late that such appeasement serves to destroy free speech, academic freedom and genuine scholarship. One campus radical demand was conceded by university heads only to be followed by a fresh crop which soon escalated to what amounted to a demand for outright surrender.”
One need not agree entirely with Mr. St. John’s analysis. But most observers of the American scene will agree that the essence of his message is sound. American business “plainly in trouble”; the response to the wide range of critics has been ineffective, and has included appeasement; the time has come — indeed, it is long overdue — for the wisdom, ingenuity and resources of American business to be marshalled against those who would destroy it.
Responsibility of Business Executives
What specifically should be done? The first essential — a prerequisite to any effective action — is for businessmen to confront this problem as a primary responsibility of corporate management.
The overriding first need is for businessmen to recognize that the ultimate issue may be survival — survival of what we call the free enterprise system, and all that this means for the strength and prosperity of America and the freedom of our people.
The day is long past when the chief executive officer of a major corporation discharges his responsibility by maintaining a satisfactory growth of profits, with due regard to the corporation’s public and social responsibilities. If our system is to survive, top management must be equally concerned with protecting and preserving the system itself. This involves far more than an increased emphasis on “public relations” or “governmental affairs” — two areas in which corporations long have invested substantial sums.
A significant first step by individual corporations could well be the designation of an executive vice president (ranking with other executive VP’s) whose responsibility is to counter-on the broadest front-the attack on the enterprise system. The public relations department could be one of the foundations assigned to this executive, but his responsibilities should encompass some of the types of activities referred to subsequently in this memorandum. His budget and staff should be adequate to the task.
Possible Role of the Chamber of Commerce
But independent and uncoordinated activity by individual corporations, as important as this is, will not be sufficient. Strength lies in organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and national organizations.
Moreover, there is the quite understandable reluctance on the part of any one corporation to get too far out in front and to make itself too visible a target.
The role of the National Chamber of Commerce is therefore vital. Other national organizations (especially those of various industrial and commercial groups) should join in the effort, but no other organizations appear to be as well situated as the Chamber. It enjoys a strategic position, with a fine reputation and a broad base of support. Also — and this is of immeasurable merit — there are hundreds of local Chambers of Commerce which can play a vital supportive role.
It hardly need be said that before embarking upon any program, the Chamber should study and analyze possible courses of action and activities, weighing risks against probable effectiveness and feasibility of each. Considerations of cost, the assurance of financial and other support from members, adequacy of staffing and similar problems will all require the most thoughtful consideration.
The Campus
The assault on the enterprise system was not mounted in a few months. It has gradually evolved over the past two decades, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting (sic) from a gradualism that provoked little awareness much less any real reaction.
Although origins, sources and causes are complex and interrelated, and obviously difficult to identify without careful qualification, there is reason to believe that the campus is the single most dynamic source. The social science faculties usually include members who are unsympathetic to the enterprise system. They may range from a Herbert Marcuse, Marxist faculty member at the University of California at San Diego, and convinced socialists, to the ambivalent liberal critic who finds more to condemn than to commend. Such faculty members need not be in a majority. They are often personally attractive and magnetic; they are stimulating teachers, and their controversy attracts student following; they are prolific writers and lecturers; they author many of the textbooks, and they exert enormous influence — far out of proportion to their numbers — on their colleagues and in the academic world.
Social science faculties (the political scientist, economist, sociologist and many of the historians) tend to be liberally oriented, even when leftists are not present. This is not a criticism per se, as the need for liberal thought is essential to a balanced viewpoint. The difficulty is that “balance” is conspicuous by its absence on many campuses, with relatively few members being of conservatives or moderate persuasion and even the relatively few often being less articulate and aggressive than their crusading colleagues.
This situation extending back many years and with the imbalance gradually worsening, has had an enormous impact on millions of young American students. In an article in Barron’s Weekly, seeking an answer to why so many young people are disaffected even to the point of being revolutionaries, it was said: “Because they were taught that way.” Or, as noted by columnist Stewart Alsop, writing about his alma mater: “Yale, like every other major college, is graduating scores’ of bright young men … who despise the American political and economic system.”
As these “bright young men,” from campuses across the country, seek opportunities to change a system which they have been taught to distrust — if not, indeed “despise” — they seek employment in the centers of the real power and influence in our country, namely: (i) with the news media, especially television; (ii) in government, as “staffers” and consultants at various levels; (iii) in elective politics; (iv) as lecturers and writers, and (v) on the faculties at various levels of education.
Many do enter the enterprise system — in business and the professions — and for the most part they quickly discover the fallacies of what they have been taught. But those who eschew the mainstream of the system often remain in key positions of influence where they mold public opinion and often shape governmental action. In many instances, these “intellectuals” end up in regulatory agencies or governmental departments with large authority over the business system they do not believe in.
If the foregoing analysis is approximately sound, a priority task of business — and organizations such as the Chamber — is to address the campus origin of this hostility. Few things are more sanctified in American life than academic freedom. It would be fatal to attack this as a principle. But if academic freedom is to retain the qualities of “openness,” “fairness” and “balance” — which are essential to its intellectual significance — there is a great opportunity for constructive action. The thrust of such action must be to restore the qualities just mentioned to the academic communities.
What Can Be Done About the Campus
The ultimate responsibility for intellectual integrity on the campus must remain on the administrations and faculties of our colleges and universities. But organizations such as the Chamber can assist and activate constructive change in many ways, including the following:
- Staff of Scholars
The Chamber should consider establishing a staff of highly qualified scholars in the social sciences who do believe in the system. It should include several of national reputation whose authorship would be widely respected — even when disagreed with.
- Staff of Speakers
There also should be a staff of speakers of the highest competency. These might include the scholars, and certainly those who speak for the Chamber would have to articulate the product of the scholars.
- Speaker’s Bureau
In addition to full-time staff personnel, the Chamber should have a Speaker’s Bureau which should include the ablest and most effective advocates from the top echelons of American business.
- Evaluation of Textbooks
The staff of scholars (or preferably a panel of independent scholars) should evaluate social science textbooks, especially in economics, political science and sociology. This should be a continuing program.
The objective of such evaluation should be oriented toward restoring the balance essential to genuine academic freedom. This would include assurance of fair and factual treatment of our system of government and our enterprise system, its accomplishments, its basic relationship to individual rights and freedoms, and comparisons with the systems of socialism, fascism and communism. Most of the existing textbooks have some sort of comparisons, but many are superficial, biased and unfair.
We have seen the civil rights movement insist on re-writing many of the textbooks in our universities and schools. The labor unions likewise insist that textbooks be fair to the viewpoints of organized labor. Other interested citizens groups have not hesitated to review, analyze and criticize textbooks and teaching materials. In a democratic society, this can be a constructive process and should be regarded as an aid to genuine academic freedom and not as an intrusion upon it.
If the authors, publishers and users of textbooks know that they will be subjected — honestly, fairly and thoroughly — to review and critique by eminent scholars who believe in the American system, a return to a more rational balance can be expected.
- Equal Time on the Campus
The Chamber should insist upon equal time on the college speaking circuit. The FBI publishes each year a list of speeches made on college campuses by avowed Communists. The number in 1970 exceeded 100. There were, of course, many hundreds of appearances by leftists and ultra liberals who urge the types of viewpoints indicated earlier in this memorandum. There was no corresponding representation of American business, or indeed by individuals or organizations who appeared in support of the American system of government and business.
Every campus has its formal and informal groups which invite speakers. Each law school does the same thing. Many universities and colleges officially sponsor lecture and speaking programs. We all know the inadequacy of the representation of business in the programs.
It will be said that few invitations would be extended to Chamber speakers. This undoubtedly would be true unless the Chamber aggressively insisted upon the right to be heard — in effect, insisted upon “equal time.” University administrators and the great majority of student groups and committees would not welcome being put in the position publicly of refusing a forum to diverse views, indeed, this is the classic excuse for allowing Communists to speak.
The two essential ingredients are (i) to have attractive, articulate and well-informed speakers; and (ii) to exert whatever degree of pressure — publicly and privately — may be necessary to assure opportunities to speak. The objective always must be to inform and enlighten, and not merely to propagandize.
- Balancing of Faculties
Perhaps the most fundamental problem is the imbalance of many faculties. Correcting this is indeed a long-range and difficult project. Yet, it should be undertaken as a part of an overall program. This would mean the urging of the need for faculty balance upon university administrators and boards of trustees.
The methods to be employed require careful thought, and the obvious pitfalls must be avoided. Improper pressure would be counterproductive. But the basic concepts of balance, fairness and truth are difficult to resist, if properly presented to boards of trustees, by writing and speaking, and by appeals to alumni associations and groups.
This is a long road and not one for the fainthearted. But if pursued with integrity and conviction it could lead to a strengthening of both academic freedom on the campus and of the values which have made America the most productive of all societies.
- Graduate Schools of Business
The Chamber should enjoy a particular rapport with the increasingly influential graduate schools of business. Much that has been suggested above applies to such schools.
Should not the Chamber also request specific courses in such schools dealing with the entire scope of the problem addressed by this memorandum? This is now essential training for the executives of the future.
- Secondary Education
While the first priority should be at the college level, the trends mentioned above are increasingly evidenced in the high schools. Action programs, tailored to the high schools and similar to those mentioned, should be considered. The implementation thereof could become a major program for local chambers of commerce, although the control and direction — especially the quality control — should be retained by the National Chamber.
- What Can Be Done About the Public?
Reaching the campus and the secondary schools is vital for the long-term. Reaching the public generally may be more important for the shorter term. The first essential is to establish the staffs of eminent scholars, writers and speakers, who will do the thinking, the analysis, the writing and the speaking. It will also be essential to have staff personnel who are thoroughly familiar with the media, and how most effectively to communicate with the public. Among the more obvious means are the following:
Television
The national television networks should be monitored in the same way that textbooks should be kept under constant surveillance. This applies not merely to so-called educational programs (such as “Selling of the Pentagon”), but to the daily “news analysis” which so often includes the most insidious type of criticism of the enterprise system. Whether this criticism results from hostility or economic ignorance, the result is the gradual erosion of confidence in “business” and free enterprise.
This monitoring, to be effective, would require constant examination of the texts of adequate samples of programs. Complaints — to the media and to the Federal Communications Commission — should be made promptly and strongly when programs are unfair or inaccurate.
Equal time should be demanded when appropriate. Effort should be made to see that the forum-type programs (the Today Show, Meet the Press, etc.) afford at least as much opportunity for supporters of the American system to participate as these programs do for those who attack it.
Other Media
Radio and the press are also important, and every available means should be employed to challenge and refute unfair attacks, as well as to present the affirmative case through these media.
The Scholarly Journals
It is especially important for the Chamber’s “faculty of scholars” to publish. One of the keys to the success of the liberal and leftist faculty members has been their passion for “publication” and “lecturing.” A similar passion must exist among the Chamber’s scholars.
Incentives might be devised to induce more “publishing” by independent scholars who do believe in the system.
There should be a fairly steady flow of scholarly articles presented to a broad spectrum of magazines and periodicals — ranging from the popular magazines (Life, Look, Reader’s Digest, etc.) to the more intellectual ones (Atlantic, Harper’s, Saturday Review, New York, etc.) and to the various professional journals.
Books, Paperbacks and Pamphlets
The news stands — at airports, drugstores, and elsewhere — are filled with paperbacks and pamphlets advocating everything from revolution to erotic free love. One finds almost no attractive, well-written paperbacks or pamphlets on “our side.” It will be difficult to compete with an Eldridge Cleaver or even a Charles Reich for reader attention, but unless the effort is made — on a large enough scale and with appropriate imagination to assure some success — this opportunity for educating the public will be irretrievably lost.
Paid Advertisements
Business pays hundreds of millions of dollars to the media for advertisements. Most of this supports specific products; much of it supports institutional image making; and some fraction of it does support the system. But the latter has been more or less tangential, and rarely part of a sustained, major effort to inform and enlighten the American people.
If American business devoted only 10% of its total annual advertising budget to this overall purpose, it would be a statesman-like expenditure.
The Neglected Political Arena
In the final analysis, the payoff — short-of revolution — is what government does. Business has been the favorite whipping-boy of many politicians for many years. But the measure of how far this has gone is perhaps best found in the anti-business views now being expressed by several leading candidates for President of the United States.
It is still Marxist doctrine that the “capitalist” countries are controlled by big business. This doctrine, consistently a part of leftist propaganda all over the world, has a wide public following among Americans.
Yet, as every business executive knows, few elements of American society today have as little influence in government as the American businessman, the corporation, or even the millions of corporate stockholders. If one doubts this, let him undertake the role of “lobbyist” for the business point of view before Congressional committees. The same situation obtains in the legislative halls of most states and major cities. One does not exaggerate to say that, in terms of political influence with respect to the course of legislation and government action, the American business executive is truly the “forgotten man.”
Current examples of the impotency of business, and of the near-contempt with which businessmen’s views are held, are the stampedes by politicians to support almost any legislation related to “consumerism” or to the “environment.”
Politicians reflect what they believe to be majority views of their constituents. It is thus evident that most politicians are making the judgment that the public has little sympathy for the businessman or his viewpoint.
The educational programs suggested above would be designed to enlighten public thinking — not so much about the businessman and his individual role as about the system which he administers, and which provides the goods, services and jobs on which our country depends.
But one should not postpone more direct political action, while awaiting the gradual change in public opinion to be effected through education and information. Business must learn the lesson, long ago learned by labor and other self-interest groups. This is the lesson that political power is necessary; that such power must be assidously (sic) cultivated; and that when necessary, it must be used aggressively and with determination — without embarrassment and without the reluctance which has been so characteristic of American business.
As unwelcome as it may be to the Chamber, it should consider assuming a broader and more vigorous role in the political arena.
Neglected Opportunity in the Courts
American business and the enterprise system have been affected as much by the courts as by the executive and legislative branches of government. Under our constitutional system, especially with an activist-minded Supreme Court, the judiciary may be the most important instrument for social, economic and political change.
Other organizations and groups, recognizing this, have been far more astute in exploiting judicial action than American business. Perhaps the most active exploiters of the judicial system have been groups ranging in political orientation from “liberal” to the far left.
The American Civil Liberties Union is one example. It initiates or intervenes in scores of cases each year, and it files briefs amicus curiae in the Supreme Court in a number of cases during each term of that court. Labor unions, civil rights groups and now the public interest law firms are extremely active in the judicial arena. Their success, often at business’ expense, has not been inconsequential.
This is a vast area of opportunity for the Chamber, if it is willing to undertake the role of spokesman for American business and if, in turn, business is willing to provide the funds.
As with respect to scholars and speakers, the Chamber would need a highly competent staff of lawyers. In special situations it should be authorized to engage, to appear as counsel amicus in the Supreme Court, lawyers of national standing and reputation. The greatest care should be exercised in selecting the cases in which to participate, or the suits to institute. But the opportunity merits the necessary effort.
Neglected Stockholder Power
The average member of the public thinks of “business” as an impersonal corporate entity, owned by the very rich and managed by over-paid executives. There is an almost total failure to appreciate that “business” actually embraces — in one way or another — most Americans. Those for whom business provides jobs, constitute a fairly obvious class. But the 20 million stockholders — most of whom are of modest means — are the real owners, the real entrepreneurs, the real capitalists under our system. They provide the capital which fuels the economic system which has produced the highest standard of living in all history. Yet, stockholders have been as ineffectual as business executives in promoting a genuine understanding of our system or in exercising political influence.
The question which merits the most thorough examination is how can the weight and influence of stockholders — 20 million voters — be mobilized to support (i) an educational program and (ii) a political action program.
Individual corporations are now required to make numerous reports to shareholders. Many corporations also have expensive “news” magazines which go to employees and stockholders. These opportunities to communicate can be used far more effectively as educational media.
The corporation itself must exercise restraint in undertaking political action and must, of course, comply with applicable laws. But is it not feasible — through an affiliate of the Chamber or otherwise — to establish a national organization of American stockholders and give it enough muscle to be influential?
A More Aggressive Attitude
Business interests — especially big business and their national trade organizations — have tried to maintain low profiles, especially with respect to political action.
As suggested in the Wall Street Journal article, it has been fairly characteristic of the average business executive to be tolerant — at least in public — of those who attack his corporation and the system. Very few businessmen or business organizations respond in kind. There has been a disposition to appease; to regard the opposition as willing to compromise, or as likely to fade away in due time.
Business has shunted confrontation politics. Business, quite understandably, has been repelled by the multiplicity of non-negotiable “demands” made constantly by self-interest groups of all kinds.
While neither responsible business interests, nor the United States Chamber of Commerce, would engage in the irresponsible tactics of some pressure groups, it is essential that spokesmen for the enterprise system — at all levels and at every opportunity — be far more aggressive than in the past.
There should be no hesitation to attack the Naders, the Marcuses and others who openly seek destruction of the system. There should not be the slightest hesitation to press vigorously in all political arenas for support of the enterprise system. Nor should there be reluctance to penalize politically those who oppose it.
Lessons can be learned from organized labor in this respect. The head of the AFL-CIO may not appeal to businessmen as the most endearing or public-minded of citizens. Yet, over many years the heads of national labor organizations have done what they were paid to do very effectively. They may not have been beloved, but they have been respected — where it counts the most — by politicians, on the campus, and among the media.
It is time for American business — which has demonstrated the greatest capacity in all history to produce and to influence consumer decisions — to apply their great talents vigorously to the preservation of the system itself.
The Cost
The type of program described above (which includes a broadly based combination of education and political action), if undertaken long term and adequately staffed, would require far more generous financial support from American corporations than the Chamber has ever received in the past. High level management participation in Chamber affairs also would be required.
The staff of the Chamber would have to be significantly increased, with the highest quality established and maintained. Salaries would have to be at levels fully comparable to those paid key business executives and the most prestigious faculty members. Professionals of the great skill in advertising and in working with the media, speakers, lawyers and other specialists would have to be recruited.
It is possible that the organization of the Chamber itself would benefit from restructuring. For example, as suggested by union experience, the office of President of the Chamber might well be a full-time career position. To assure maximum effectiveness and continuity, the chief executive officer of the Chamber should not be changed each year. The functions now largely performed by the President could be transferred to a Chairman of the Board, annually elected by the membership. The Board, of course, would continue to exercise policy control.
Quality Control is Essential
Essential ingredients of the entire program must be responsibility and “quality control.” The publications, the articles, the speeches, the media programs, the advertising, the briefs filed in courts, and the appearances before legislative committees — all must meet the most exacting standards of accuracy and professional excellence. They must merit respect for their level of public responsibility and scholarship, whether one agrees with the viewpoints expressed or not.
Relationship to Freedom
The threat to the enterprise system is not merely a matter of economics. It also is a threat to individual freedom.
It is this great truth — now so submerged by the rhetoric of the New Left and of many liberals — that must be re-affirmed if this program is to be meaningful.
There seems to be little awareness that the only alternatives to free enterprise are varying degrees of bureaucratic regulation of individual freedom — ranging from that under moderate socialism to the iron heel of the leftist or rightist dictatorship.
We in America already have moved very far indeed toward some aspects of state socialism, as the needs and complexities of a vast urban society require types of regulation and control that were quite unnecessary in earlier times. In some areas, such regulation and control already have seriously impaired the freedom of both business and labor, and indeed of the public generally. But most of the essential freedoms remain: private ownership, private profit, labor unions, collective bargaining, consumer choice, and a market economy in which competition largely determines price, quality and variety of the goods and services provided the consumer.
In addition to the ideological attack on the system itself (discussed in this memorandum), its essentials also are threatened by inequitable taxation, and — more recently — by an inflation which has seemed uncontrollable. But whatever the causes of diminishing economic freedom may be, the truth is that freedom as a concept is indivisible. As the experience of the socialist and totalitarian states demonstrates, the contraction and denial of economic freedom is followed inevitably by governmental restrictions on other cherished rights. It is this message, above all others, that must be carried home to the American people.
Conclusion
It hardly need be said that the views expressed above are tentative and suggestive. The first step should be a thorough study. But this would be an exercise in futility unless the Board of Directors of the Chamber accepts the fundamental premise of this paper, namely, that business and the enterprise system are in deep trouble, and the hour is late.
__________
More:
Sheldon Whitehouse: THE SCHEME 1: THE POWELL MEMO.
- Click here for a pdf of the original version.
Here is background on the some of the major players, institutions, and ideas involved or mentioned in the memo.
- Free Enterprise System
- state socialism
- Eugene B. Sydnor, Jr
- U.S. Chamber of Commerce
- Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
- William Kunstler
- Stewart Alsop
- Milton Friedman
- Ralph Nader
- consumer rights movement
- The Greening of America
- environmental movement
- Barron’s Weekly,
- the campus
- Graduate Schools of Business
- labor movement
- national television networks
- Scholarly Journals
- Eldridge Cleaver
- civil rights movement
- confrontation politics.
___________
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM: Attack on American Free Enterprise System
DATE: August 23, 1971
TO: Mr. Eugene B. Sydnor, Jr., Chairman, Education Committee, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
FROM: Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
This memorandum is submitted at your request as a basis for the discussion on August 24 with Mr. Booth (executive vice president) and others at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The purpose is to identify the problem, and suggest possible avenues of action for further consideration.
Dimensions of the Attack
No thoughtful person can question that the American economic system is under broad attack. This varies in scope, intensity, in the techniques employed, and in the level of visibility.
There always have been some who opposed the American system, and preferred socialism or some form of statism (communism or fascism). Also, there always have been critics of the system, whose criticism has been wholesome and constructive so long as the objective was to improve rather than to subvert or destroy.
But what now concerns us is quite new in the history of America. We are not dealing with sporadic or isolated attacks from a relatively few extremists or even from the minority socialist cadre. Rather, the assault on the enterprise system is broadly based and consistently pursued. It is gaining momentum and converts.
Sources of the Attack
The sources are varied and diffused. They include, not unexpectedly, the Communists, New Leftists and other revolutionaries who would destroy the entire system, both political and economic. These extremists of the left are far more numerous, better financed, and increasingly are more welcomed and encouraged by other elements of society, than ever before in our history. But they remain a small minority, and are not yet the principal cause for concern.
The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism come from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians. In most of these groups the movement against the system is participated in only by minorities. Yet, these often are the most articulate, the most vocal, the most prolific in their writing and speaking.
Moreover, much of the media — for varying motives and in varying degrees — either voluntarily accords unique publicity to these “attackers,” or at least allows them to exploit the media for their purposes. This is especially true of television, which now plays such a predominant role in shaping the thinking, attitudes and emotions of our people.
One of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to which the enterprise system tolerates, if not participates in, its own destruction.
The campuses from which much of the criticism emanates are supported by (i) tax funds generated largely from American business, and (ii) contributions from capital funds controlled or generated by American business. The boards of trustees of our universities overwhelmingly are composed of men and women who are leaders in the system.
Most of the media, including the national TV systems, are owned and theoretically controlled by corporations which depend upon profits, and the enterprise system to survive.
Tone of the Attack
This memorandum is not the place to document in detail the tone, character, or intensity of the attack. The following quotations will suffice to give one a general idea:
William Kunstler, warmly welcomed on campuses and listed in a recent student poll as the “American lawyer most admired,” incites audiences as follows:
“You must learn to fight in the streets, to revolt, to shoot guns. We will learn to do all of the things that property owners fear.” The New Leftists who heed Kunstler’s advice increasingly are beginning to act — not just against military recruiting offices and manufacturers of munitions, but against a variety of businesses: “Since February, 1970, branches (of Bank of America) have been attacked 39 times, 22 times with explosive devices and 17 times with fire bombs or by arsonists.” Although New Leftist spokesmen are succeeding in radicalizing thousands of the young, the greater cause for concern is the hostility of respectable liberals and social reformers. It is the sum total of their views and influence which could indeed fatally weaken or destroy the system.
A chilling description of what is being taught on many of our campuses was written by Stewart Alsop:
“Yale, like every other major college, is graduating scores of bright young men who are practitioners of ‘the politics of despair.’ These young men despise the American political and economic system . . . (their) minds seem to be wholly closed. They live, not by rational discussion, but by mindless slogans.”A recent poll of students on 12 representative campuses reported that: “Almost half the students favored socialization of basic U.S. industries.”
A visiting professor from England at Rockford College gave a series of lectures entitled “The Ideological War Against Western Society,” in which he documents the extent to which members of the intellectual community are waging ideological warfare against the enterprise system and the values of western society. In a foreword to these lectures, famed Dr. Milton Friedman of Chicago warned: “It (is) crystal clear that the foundations of our free society are under wide-ranging and powerful attack — not by Communist or any other conspiracy but by misguided individuals parroting one another and unwittingly serving ends they would never intentionally promote.”
Perhaps the single most effective antagonist of American business is Ralph Nader, who — thanks largely to the media — has become a legend in his own time and an idol of millions of Americans. A recent article in Fortune speaks of Nader as follows:
“The passion that rules in him — and he is a passionate man — is aimed at smashing utterly the target of his hatred, which is corporate power. He thinks, and says quite bluntly, that a great many corporate executives belong in prison — for defrauding the consumer with shoddy merchandise, poisoning the food supply with chemical additives, and willfully manufacturing unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer. He emphasizes that he is not talking just about ‘fly-by-night hucksters’ but the top management of blue chip business.”
A frontal assault was made on our government, our system of justice, and the free enterprise system by Yale Professor Charles Reich in his widely publicized book: “The Greening of America,” published last winter.
The foregoing references illustrate the broad, shotgun attack on the system itself. There are countless examples of rifle shots which undermine confidence and confuse the public. Favorite current targets are proposals for tax incentives through changes in depreciation rates and investment credits. These are usually described in the media as “tax breaks,” “loop holes” or “tax benefits” for the benefit of business. * As viewed by a columnist in the Post, such tax measures would benefit “only the rich, the owners of big companies.”
It is dismaying that many politicians make the same argument that tax measures of this kind benefit only “business,” without benefit to “the poor.” The fact that this is either political demagoguery or economic illiteracy is of slight comfort. This setting of the “rich” against the “poor,” of business against the people, is the cheapest and most dangerous kind of politics.
The Apathy and Default of Business
What has been the response of business to this massive assault upon its fundamental economics, upon its philosophy, upon its right to continue to manage its own affairs, and indeed upon its integrity?
The painfully sad truth is that business, including the boards of directors’ and the top executives of corporations great and small and business organizations at all levels, often have responded — if at all — by appeasement, ineptitude and ignoring the problem. There are, of course, many exceptions to this sweeping generalization. But the net effect of such response as has been made is scarcely visible.
In all fairness, it must be recognized that businessmen have not been trained or equipped to conduct guerrilla warfare with those who propagandize against the system, seeking insidiously and constantly to sabotage it. The traditional role of business executives has been to manage, to produce, to sell, to create jobs, to make profits, to improve the standard of living, to be community leaders, to serve on charitable and educational boards, and generally to be good citizens. They have performed these tasks very well indeed.
But they have shown little stomach for hard-nose contest with their critics, and little skill in effective intellectual and philosophical debate.
A column recently carried by the Wall Street Journal was entitled: “Memo to GM: Why Not Fight Back?” Although addressed to GM by name, the article was a warning to all American business. Columnist St. John said:
“General Motors, like American business in general, is ‘plainly in trouble’ because intellectual bromides have been substituted for a sound intellectual exposition of its point of view.” Mr. St. John then commented on the tendency of business leaders to compromise with and appease critics. He cited the concessions which Nader wins from management, and spoke of “the fallacious view many businessmen take toward their critics.” He drew a parallel to the mistaken tactics of many college administrators: “College administrators learned too late that such appeasement serves to destroy free speech, academic freedom and genuine scholarship. One campus radical demand was conceded by university heads only to be followed by a fresh crop which soon escalated to what amounted to a demand for outright surrender.”
One need not agree entirely with Mr. St. John’s analysis. But most observers of the American scene will agree that the essence of his message is sound. American business “plainly in trouble”; the response to the wide range of critics has been ineffective, and has included appeasement; the time has come — indeed, it is long overdue — for the wisdom, ingenuity and resources of American business to be marshalled against those who would destroy it.
Responsibility of Business Executives
What specifically should be done? The first essential — a prerequisite to any effective action — is for businessmen to confront this problem as a primary responsibility of corporate management.
The overriding first need is for businessmen to recognize that the ultimate issue may be survival — survival of what we call the free enterprise system, and all that this means for the strength and prosperity of America and the freedom of our people.
The day is long past when the chief executive officer of a major corporation discharges his responsibility by maintaining a satisfactory growth of profits, with due regard to the corporation’s public and social responsibilities. If our system is to survive, top management must be equally concerned with protecting and preserving the system itself. This involves far more than an increased emphasis on “public relations” or “governmental affairs” — two areas in which corporations long have invested substantial sums.
A significant first step by individual corporations could well be the designation of an executive vice president (ranking with other executive VP’s) whose responsibility is to counter-on the broadest front-the attack on the enterprise system. The public relations department could be one of the foundations assigned to this executive, but his responsibilities should encompass some of the types of activities referred to subsequently in this memorandum. His budget and staff should be adequate to the task.
Possible Role of the Chamber of Commerce
But independent and uncoordinated activity by individual corporations, as important as this is, will not be sufficient. Strength lies in organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and national organizations.
Moreover, there is the quite understandable reluctance on the part of any one corporation to get too far out in front and to make itself too visible a target.
The role of the National Chamber of Commerce is therefore vital. Other national organizations (especially those of various industrial and commercial groups) should join in the effort, but no other organizations appear to be as well situated as the Chamber. It enjoys a strategic position, with a fine reputation and a broad base of support. Also — and this is of immeasurable merit — there are hundreds of local Chambers of Commerce which can play a vital supportive role.
It hardly need be said that before embarking upon any program, the Chamber should study and analyze possible courses of action and activities, weighing risks against probable effectiveness and feasibility of each. Considerations of cost, the assurance of financial and other support from members, adequacy of staffing and similar problems will all require the most thoughtful consideration.
The Campus
The assault on the enterprise system was not mounted in a few months. It has gradually evolved over the past two decades, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting (sic) from a gradualism that provoked little awareness much less any real reaction.
Although origins, sources and causes are complex and interrelated, and obviously difficult to identify without careful qualification, there is reason to believe that the campus is the single most dynamic source. The social science faculties usually include members who are unsympathetic to the enterprise system. They may range from a Herbert Marcuse, Marxist faculty member at the University of California at San Diego, and convinced socialists, to the ambivalent liberal critic who finds more to condemn than to commend. Such faculty members need not be in a majority. They are often personally attractive and magnetic; they are stimulating teachers, and their controversy attracts student following; they are prolific writers and lecturers; they author many of the textbooks, and they exert enormous influence — far out of proportion to their numbers — on their colleagues and in the academic world.
Social science faculties (the political scientist, economist, sociologist and many of the historians) tend to be liberally oriented, even when leftists are not present. This is not a criticism per se, as the need for liberal thought is essential to a balanced viewpoint. The difficulty is that “balance” is conspicuous by its absence on many campuses, with relatively few members being of conservatives or moderate persuasion and even the relatively few often being less articulate and aggressive than their crusading colleagues.
This situation extending back many years and with the imbalance gradually worsening, has had an enormous impact on millions of young American students. In an article in Barron’s Weekly, seeking an answer to why so many young people are disaffected even to the point of being revolutionaries, it was said: “Because they were taught that way.” Or, as noted by columnist Stewart Alsop, writing about his alma mater: “Yale, like every other major college, is graduating scores’ of bright young men … who despise the American political and economic system.”
As these “bright young men,” from campuses across the country, seek opportunities to change a system which they have been taught to distrust — if not, indeed “despise” — they seek employment in the centers of the real power and influence in our country, namely: (i) with the news media, especially television; (ii) in government, as “staffers” and consultants at various levels; (iii) in elective politics; (iv) as lecturers and writers, and (v) on the faculties at various levels of education.
Many do enter the enterprise system — in business and the professions — and for the most part they quickly discover the fallacies of what they have been taught. But those who eschew the mainstream of the system often remain in key positions of influence where they mold public opinion and often shape governmental action. In many instances, these “intellectuals” end up in regulatory agencies or governmental departments with large authority over the business system they do not believe in.
If the foregoing analysis is approximately sound, a priority task of business — and organizations such as the Chamber — is to address the campus origin of this hostility. Few things are more sanctified in American life than academic freedom. It would be fatal to attack this as a principle. But if academic freedom is to retain the qualities of “openness,” “fairness” and “balance” — which are essential to its intellectual significance — there is a great opportunity for constructive action. The thrust of such action must be to restore the qualities just mentioned to the academic communities.
What Can Be Done About the Campus
The ultimate responsibility for intellectual integrity on the campus must remain on the administrations and faculties of our colleges and universities. But organizations such as the Chamber can assist and activate constructive change in many ways, including the following:
- Staff of Scholars
The Chamber should consider establishing a staff of highly qualified scholars in the social sciences who do believe in the system. It should include several of national reputation whose authorship would be widely respected — even when disagreed with.
- Staff of Speakers
There also should be a staff of speakers of the highest competency. These might include the scholars, and certainly those who speak for the Chamber would have to articulate the product of the scholars.
- Speaker’s Bureau
In addition to full-time staff personnel, the Chamber should have a Speaker’s Bureau which should include the ablest and most effective advocates from the top echelons of American business.
- Evaluation of Textbooks
The staff of scholars (or preferably a panel of independent scholars) should evaluate social science textbooks, especially in economics, political science and sociology. This should be a continuing program.
The objective of such evaluation should be oriented toward restoring the balance essential to genuine academic freedom. This would include assurance of fair and factual treatment of our system of government and our enterprise system, its accomplishments, its basic relationship to individual rights and freedoms, and comparisons with the systems of socialism, fascism and communism. Most of the existing textbooks have some sort of comparisons, but many are superficial, biased and unfair.
We have seen the civil rights movement insist on re-writing many of the textbooks in our universities and schools. The labor unions likewise insist that textbooks be fair to the viewpoints of organized labor. Other interested citizens groups have not hesitated to review, analyze and criticize textbooks and teaching materials. In a democratic society, this can be a constructive process and should be regarded as an aid to genuine academic freedom and not as an intrusion upon it.
If the authors, publishers and users of textbooks know that they will be subjected — honestly, fairly and thoroughly — to review and critique by eminent scholars who believe in the American system, a return to a more rational balance can be expected.
- Equal Time on the Campus
The Chamber should insist upon equal time on the college speaking circuit. The FBI publishes each year a list of speeches made on college campuses by avowed Communists. The number in 1970 exceeded 100. There were, of course, many hundreds of appearances by leftists and ultra liberals who urge the types of viewpoints indicated earlier in this memorandum. There was no corresponding representation of American business, or indeed by individuals or organizations who appeared in support of the American system of government and business.
Every campus has its formal and informal groups which invite speakers. Each law school does the same thing. Many universities and colleges officially sponsor lecture and speaking programs. We all know the inadequacy of the representation of business in the programs.
It will be said that few invitations would be extended to Chamber speakers. This undoubtedly would be true unless the Chamber aggressively insisted upon the right to be heard — in effect, insisted upon “equal time.” University administrators and the great majority of student groups and committees would not welcome being put in the position publicly of refusing a forum to diverse views, indeed, this is the classic excuse for allowing Communists to speak.
The two essential ingredients are (i) to have attractive, articulate and well-informed speakers; and (ii) to exert whatever degree of pressure — publicly and privately — may be necessary to assure opportunities to speak. The objective always must be to inform and enlighten, and not merely to propagandize.
- Balancing of Faculties
Perhaps the most fundamental problem is the imbalance of many faculties. Correcting this is indeed a long-range and difficult project. Yet, it should be undertaken as a part of an overall program. This would mean the urging of the need for faculty balance upon university administrators and boards of trustees.
The methods to be employed require careful thought, and the obvious pitfalls must be avoided. Improper pressure would be counterproductive. But the basic concepts of balance, fairness and truth are difficult to resist, if properly presented to boards of trustees, by writing and speaking, and by appeals to alumni associations and groups.
This is a long road and not one for the fainthearted. But if pursued with integrity and conviction it could lead to a strengthening of both academic freedom on the campus and of the values which have made America the most productive of all societies.
- Graduate Schools of Business
The Chamber should enjoy a particular rapport with the increasingly influential graduate schools of business. Much that has been suggested above applies to such schools.
Should not the Chamber also request specific courses in such schools dealing with the entire scope of the problem addressed by this memorandum? This is now essential training for the executives of the future.
- Secondary Education
While the first priority should be at the college level, the trends mentioned above are increasingly evidenced in the high schools. Action programs, tailored to the high schools and similar to those mentioned, should be considered. The implementation thereof could become a major program for local chambers of commerce, although the control and direction — especially the quality control — should be retained by the National Chamber.
- What Can Be Done About the Public?
Reaching the campus and the secondary schools is vital for the long-term. Reaching the public generally may be more important for the shorter term. The first essential is to establish the staffs of eminent scholars, writers and speakers, who will do the thinking, the analysis, the writing and the speaking. It will also be essential to have staff personnel who are thoroughly familiar with the media, and how most effectively to communicate with the public. Among the more obvious means are the following:
Television
The national television networks should be monitored in the same way that textbooks should be kept under constant surveillance. This applies not merely to so-called educational programs (such as “Selling of the Pentagon”), but to the daily “news analysis” which so often includes the most insidious type of criticism of the enterprise system. Whether this criticism results from hostility or economic ignorance, the result is the gradual erosion of confidence in “business” and free enterprise.
This monitoring, to be effective, would require constant examination of the texts of adequate samples of programs. Complaints — to the media and to the Federal Communications Commission — should be made promptly and strongly when programs are unfair or inaccurate.
Equal time should be demanded when appropriate. Effort should be made to see that the forum-type programs (the Today Show, Meet the Press, etc.) afford at least as much opportunity for supporters of the American system to participate as these programs do for those who attack it.
Other Media
Radio and the press are also important, and every available means should be employed to challenge and refute unfair attacks, as well as to present the affirmative case through these media.
The Scholarly Journals
It is especially important for the Chamber’s “faculty of scholars” to publish. One of the keys to the success of the liberal and leftist faculty members has been their passion for “publication” and “lecturing.” A similar passion must exist among the Chamber’s scholars.
Incentives might be devised to induce more “publishing” by independent scholars who do believe in the system.
There should be a fairly steady flow of scholarly articles presented to a broad spectrum of magazines and periodicals — ranging from the popular magazines (Life, Look, Reader’s Digest, etc.) to the more intellectual ones (Atlantic, Harper’s, Saturday Review, New York, etc.) and to the various professional journals.
Books, Paperbacks and Pamphlets
The news stands — at airports, drugstores, and elsewhere — are filled with paperbacks and pamphlets advocating everything from revolution to erotic free love. One finds almost no attractive, well-written paperbacks or pamphlets on “our side.” It will be difficult to compete with an Eldridge Cleaver or even a Charles Reich for reader attention, but unless the effort is made — on a large enough scale and with appropriate imagination to assure some success — this opportunity for educating the public will be irretrievably lost.
Paid Advertisements
Business pays hundreds of millions of dollars to the media for advertisements. Most of this supports specific products; much of it supports institutional image making; and some fraction of it does support the system. But the latter has been more or less tangential, and rarely part of a sustained, major effort to inform and enlighten the American people.
If American business devoted only 10% of its total annual advertising budget to this overall purpose, it would be a statesman-like expenditure.
The Neglected Political Arena
In the final analysis, the payoff — short-of revolution — is what government does. Business has been the favorite whipping-boy of many politicians for many years. But the measure of how far this has gone is perhaps best found in the anti-business views now being expressed by several leading candidates for President of the United States.
It is still Marxist doctrine that the “capitalist” countries are controlled by big business. This doctrine, consistently a part of leftist propaganda all over the world, has a wide public following among Americans.
Yet, as every business executive knows, few elements of American society today have as little influence in government as the American businessman, the corporation, or even the millions of corporate stockholders. If one doubts this, let him undertake the role of “lobbyist” for the business point of view before Congressional committees. The same situation obtains in the legislative halls of most states and major cities. One does not exaggerate to say that, in terms of political influence with respect to the course of legislation and government action, the American business executive is truly the “forgotten man.”
Current examples of the impotency of business, and of the near-contempt with which businessmen’s views are held, are the stampedes by politicians to support almost any legislation related to “consumerism” or to the “environment.”
Politicians reflect what they believe to be majority views of their constituents. It is thus evident that most politicians are making the judgment that the public has little sympathy for the businessman or his viewpoint.
The educational programs suggested above would be designed to enlighten public thinking — not so much about the businessman and his individual role as about the system which he administers, and which provides the goods, services and jobs on which our country depends.
But one should not postpone more direct political action, while awaiting the gradual change in public opinion to be effected through education and information. Business must learn the lesson, long ago learned by labor and other self-interest groups. This is the lesson that political power is necessary; that such power must be assidously (sic) cultivated; and that when necessary, it must be used aggressively and with determination — without embarrassment and without the reluctance which has been so characteristic of American business.
As unwelcome as it may be to the Chamber, it should consider assuming a broader and more vigorous role in the political arena.
Neglected Opportunity in the Courts
American business and the enterprise system have been affected as much by the courts as by the executive and legislative branches of government. Under our constitutional system, especially with an activist-minded Supreme Court, the judiciary may be the most important instrument for social, economic and political change.
Other organizations and groups, recognizing this, have been far more astute in exploiting judicial action than American business. Perhaps the most active exploiters of the judicial system have been groups ranging in political orientation from “liberal” to the far left.
The American Civil Liberties Union is one example. It initiates or intervenes in scores of cases each year, and it files briefs amicus curiae in the Supreme Court in a number of cases during each term of that court. Labor unions, civil rights groups and now the public interest law firms are extremely active in the judicial arena. Their success, often at business’ expense, has not been inconsequential.
This is a vast area of opportunity for the Chamber, if it is willing to undertake the role of spokesman for American business and if, in turn, business is willing to provide the funds.
As with respect to scholars and speakers, the Chamber would need a highly competent staff of lawyers. In special situations it should be authorized to engage, to appear as counsel amicus in the Supreme Court, lawyers of national standing and reputation. The greatest care should be exercised in selecting the cases in which to participate, or the suits to institute. But the opportunity merits the necessary effort.
Neglected Stockholder Power
The average member of the public thinks of “business” as an impersonal corporate entity, owned by the very rich and managed by over-paid executives. There is an almost total failure to appreciate that “business” actually embraces — in one way or another — most Americans. Those for whom business provides jobs, constitute a fairly obvious class. But the 20 million stockholders — most of whom are of modest means — are the real owners, the real entrepreneurs, the real capitalists under our system. They provide the capital which fuels the economic system which has produced the highest standard of living in all history. Yet, stockholders have been as ineffectual as business executives in promoting a genuine understanding of our system or in exercising political influence.
The question which merits the most thorough examination is how can the weight and influence of stockholders — 20 million voters — be mobilized to support (i) an educational program and (ii) a political action program.
Individual corporations are now required to make numerous reports to shareholders. Many corporations also have expensive “news” magazines which go to employees and stockholders. These opportunities to communicate can be used far more effectively as educational media.
The corporation itself must exercise restraint in undertaking political action and must, of course, comply with applicable laws. But is it not feasible — through an affiliate of the Chamber or otherwise — to establish a national organization of American stockholders and give it enough muscle to be influential?
A More Aggressive Attitude
Business interests — especially big business and their national trade organizations — have tried to maintain low profiles, especially with respect to political action.
As suggested in the Wall Street Journal article, it has been fairly characteristic of the average business executive to be tolerant — at least in public — of those who attack his corporation and the system. Very few businessmen or business organizations respond in kind. There has been a disposition to appease; to regard the opposition as willing to compromise, or as likely to fade away in due time.
Business has shunted confrontation politics. Business, quite understandably, has been repelled by the multiplicity of non-negotiable “demands” made constantly by self-interest groups of all kinds.
While neither responsible business interests, nor the United States Chamber of Commerce, would engage in the irresponsible tactics of some pressure groups, it is essential that spokesmen for the enterprise system — at all levels and at every opportunity — be far more aggressive than in the past.
There should be no hesitation to attack the Naders, the Marcuses and others who openly seek destruction of the system. There should not be the slightest hesitation to press vigorously in all political arenas for support of the enterprise system. Nor should there be reluctance to penalize politically those who oppose it.
Lessons can be learned from organized labor in this respect. The head of the AFL-CIO may not appeal to businessmen as the most endearing or public-minded of citizens. Yet, over many years the heads of national labor organizations have done what they were paid to do very effectively. They may not have been beloved, but they have been respected — where it counts the most — by politicians, on the campus, and among the media.
It is time for American business — which has demonstrated the greatest capacity in all history to produce and to influence consumer decisions — to apply their great talents vigorously to the preservation of the system itself.
The Cost
The type of program described above (which includes a broadly based combination of education and political action), if undertaken long term and adequately staffed, would require far more generous financial support from American corporations than the Chamber has ever received in the past. High level management participation in Chamber affairs also would be required.
The staff of the Chamber would have to be significantly increased, with the highest quality established and maintained. Salaries would have to be at levels fully comparable to those paid key business executives and the most prestigious faculty members. Professionals of the great skill in advertising and in working with the media, speakers, lawyers and other specialists would have to be recruited.
It is possible that the organization of the Chamber itself would benefit from restructuring. For example, as suggested by union experience, the office of President of the Chamber might well be a full-time career position. To assure maximum effectiveness and continuity, the chief executive officer of the Chamber should not be changed each year. The functions now largely performed by the President could be transferred to a Chairman of the Board, annually elected by the membership. The Board, of course, would continue to exercise policy control.
Quality Control is Essential
Essential ingredients of the entire program must be responsibility and “quality control.” The publications, the articles, the speeches, the media programs, the advertising, the briefs filed in courts, and the appearances before legislative committees — all must meet the most exacting standards of accuracy and professional excellence. They must merit respect for their level of public responsibility and scholarship, whether one agrees with the viewpoints expressed or not.
Relationship to Freedom
The threat to the enterprise system is not merely a matter of economics. It also is a threat to individual freedom.
It is this great truth — now so submerged by the rhetoric of the New Left and of many liberals — that must be re-affirmed if this program is to be meaningful.
There seems to be little awareness that the only alternatives to free enterprise are varying degrees of bureaucratic regulation of individual freedom — ranging from that under moderate socialism to the iron heel of the leftist or rightist dictatorship.
We in America already have moved very far indeed toward some aspects of state socialism, as the needs and complexities of a vast urban society require types of regulation and control that were quite unnecessary in earlier times. In some areas, such regulation and control already have seriously impaired the freedom of both business and labor, and indeed of the public generally. But most of the essential freedoms remain: private ownership, private profit, labor unions, collective bargaining, consumer choice, and a market economy in which competition largely determines price, quality and variety of the goods and services provided the consumer.
In addition to the ideological attack on the system itself (discussed in this memorandum), its essentials also are threatened by inequitable taxation, and — more recently — by an inflation which has seemed uncontrollable. But whatever the causes of diminishing economic freedom may be, the truth is that freedom as a concept is indivisible. As the experience of the socialist and totalitarian states demonstrates, the contraction and denial of economic freedom is followed inevitably by governmental restrictions on other cherished rights. It is this message, above all others, that must be carried home to the American people.
Conclusion
It hardly need be said that the views expressed above are tentative and suggestive. The first step should be a thorough study. But this would be an exercise in futility unless the Board of Directors of the Chamber accepts the fundamental premise of this paper, namely, that business and the enterprise system are in deep trouble, and the hour is late.
__________
More:
Sheldon Whitehouse: THE SCHEME 1: THE POWELL MEMO.
Thursday, February 16, 2023
From Quorum Report: Hoping to bring a fresh perspective to school choice debate, GOP megadonor Doug Deason launches effort with former Republican lawmakers
Money in politics.
- Click here for the story.
Deason is using his nonprofit Texans for Free Enterprise and joining up with former Chairman Larry Taylor, former Rep. Simmons, and others
Saying he wants to bring every idea to the table, Dallas GOP megadonor Doug Deason shared with Quorum Report on Tuesday that he’s entering the “school choice” debate with an eye toward giving parents “a much stronger voice and say in the educational choices for their children.”
Using his 501(c)4 Texans for Free Enterprise, which was first launched when Deason and megadonor Bob Rowling wanted to push the legislature toward reforms in title insurance, Deason is now bringing in former GOP lawmakers and other experts to tackle the school choice debate.
Following the release of committees last week and the State of the State Address this week, Gov. Greg Abbott and Texas House leadership are perhaps on a collision course over Education Savings Accounts/school vouchers, which Deason supports.
Who is Doug Deason?
- Lone Star Justice Alliance.
- Deason Capital Services.
- Transparency USA.
- Fortunate Son.
From The Corpus Christi Caller Times: State of the State attendees were asked to sign nondisclosure agreement; request was rescinded
The State of the State address doesn't seem to be especially open these days.
- Click here for the article.
Lawmakers and other guests invited to attend Gov. Greg Abbott's State of the State address at a corporate site in San Marcos on Thursday were told they must sign a nondisclosure agreement and leave their cellphones outside of the venue, according to a memo distributed last week and obtained Tuesday by the USA TODAY Network.
The 7 p.m. speech is scheduled to be delivered at the Noveon Magnetics Corp. manufacturing facility about 6 miles south of downtown San Marcos. Abbott will lay out his priorities for the 140-day legislative session that began last month.
The location had not been publicly disclosed and no reporters will be allowed inside the venue, except a crew from the television news stations that will air and livestream the governor's speech.
"Because Noveon has national security and corporate espionage concerns, they will require attendees to sign a non-disclosure agreement," the governor's office said in its memo that instructed those invited to respond by Feb. 12. "Noveon has also requested that all attendees either not bring cell phones or, alternatively, have those phones bagged onsite until after the attendees leave the facility."
Renae Eze, Abbott's spokeswoman, told the USA TODAY Network that the NDA requirement was later rescinded but the cellphone prohibition will stand.
Abbott, a Republican who began his third term last month, is again departing from the traditional State of the State format in which the governor gives the speech in the daytime during a joint session of the Legislature every other year inside the chamber of the Texas House. The speech was moved away from the Capitol in 2021 when activity inside the building was restricted to minimize the spread of COVID-19.
According to the company's website, Noveon's magnets are used in the generation of electricity.
"Magnets are at the heart of electrification," the company says in its homepage. "Our powerful, next-generation EcoFlux magnets are changing the way we electrify the world, ushering in a new era of mobility and high-efficiency, low-carbon energy production."
Rights, Liberties, and Felonies
- What Rights Does a Felon Lose in Texas?
Felons are stripped of their right to vote. Texas state law does not allow a convicted felon to regain voting rights until they have completed their sentence, parole, or probation. Upon completion, Texas automatically restores the right to vote, but you will have to register to vote again and you may be asked to provide evidence that your sentence has been completed.
In Texas, felons also lose their right to bear arms. Once convicted of a felony, you cannot legally carry a firearm. The tricky part comes in the way that Texas law permits a felon to possess a firearm if he or she has gone five years without a felony conviction, but federal law makes it illegal for a convicted felon to possess a firearm unless the felon has been pardoned. While there is this tension between state and federal law, federal law is given priority which means that it is almost impossible for a convicted felon to legally purchase a firearm.
If you are convicted of a felony, you also lose the right to serve on a jury panel. This right may be restored if you receive a pardon. The same is also true of losing your right to hold public office after a felony conviction. Furthermore, a felony conviction will disqualify you from holding certain professions. The conviction will stay on your record for life and will come up anytime someone performs a background check.
- Can Convicted Felons Have Guns in Texas? A Guide to Firearms Laws.
Under Texas law, a person who’s been convicted of a felony can be charged with unlawful possession of a firearm. Prosecutors must prove the following elements to convict a defendant of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon:
- The defendant’s release from prison or community supervision, mandatory supervision, or parole, or
- The defendant possessed a firearm after being convicted of a felony but before the fifth anniversary of the defendant’s release from confinement following the conviction of a felony, or
- After the same period at any location other than the premises at which the defendant lives
For a full list: Restrictions After a Felony Conviction.
Public Relations Campaigns
Campaigns aren't just for winning elections:
- 10 of the Best PR Campaigns of 2022.
- Top Social Media Campaigns of 2022.
1. Twitter’s If You Can Dream It, Tweet It Campaign
2. KFC’s #UnboringMornings
3. Firehouse Subs Rewards Week
4. Reddit’s Super Bowl Awareness Campaign
5. #Barbiecore
6. McDonald’s Menu Hacks Campaign
7. Oscar Meyer Bologna Face Masks
8. Spotify Wrapped Campaign
9. _Folk_lor Weekly Product Drops
10. Scent & Fire’s Twosday Campaign
- 11 Killer Public Relations Examples to Inspire Your Next PR Campaign.
Edward Bernays and Group Psychology: Manipulating the Masses
"Politics is the first big business in America."
Worth a look as we dive into politics - especially campaigning.
What tactics are used to ensure that certain policies are passed, and others defeated. This is especially tricky when the few want to control the many.
The ideas here are very similar to what we cover in Federalist 10.
For background:
- Propaganda.
- Edward Bernays.
- Crystallizing Public Opinion.
- Public Relations.
Worth a look as we dive into politics - especially campaigning.
What tactics are used to ensure that certain policies are passed, and others defeated. This is especially tricky when the few want to control the many.
The ideas here are very similar to what we cover in Federalist 10.
For background:
- Propaganda.
- Edward Bernays.
- Crystallizing Public Opinion.
- Public Relations.
Wednesday, February 15, 2023
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/02/15/supreme-court-sports-betting-ruling-fallout/
https://newrepublic.com/article/170586/counterman-colorado-stalking-first-amendment
https://txrising.org/about/
https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=88R&Bill=HB1176
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/counterman-v-colorado/
From the Washington Post: Youngkin opposes effort to shield menstrual data from law enforcement
Pushing the boundaries of searches and seizures.
- Click here for the article.
The administration of Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) helped defeat a bill this week to put menstrual data stored on period-tracking apps beyond the reach of law enforcement, blocking what supporters pitched as a basic privacy measure.
Millions of women use mobile apps to track their cycles, a practice that has occasionally raised data-security worries because the apps are not bound by HIPAA, the federal health privacy law. New concerns arose after the Supreme Court gave states the right to ban abortion in June, with some abortion rights groups warning that the information could be used to prosecute women or doctors who violate a state’s restrictions on the procedure.
S.B. 852, proposed by Sen. Barbara A. Favola (D-Arlington), would have prohibited search warrants from being issued for menstrual data stored on computers or other electronic devices. The measure sailed out of the Democratic-led Senate last week on a 31-9 vote, with every Democrat and half of the chamber’s 18 Republicans in support.
But a Republican-led House subcommittee voted along party lines Monday to “table” the bill — essentially killing it — after Maggie Cleary, Youngkin’s deputy secretary of public safety and homeland security, detailed the administration’s concerns that the measure could restrict subpoena powers.
“While the administration understands the importance of individuals’ privacy, we do oppose this bill,” she began. “This bill would be the very first of its kind that I’m aware of — in Virginia or anywhere — that would set a limit on what search warrants can do. … Currently any health information or any app information is available via search warrant. And we believe that should continue be the case.”
If approved, Cleary said, the bill would “ultimately open the door to put further limits on search warrants down the road, and that would be incredibly problematic.”
From Ballotpedia: San Antonio, Texas, Law Enforcement on Abortion, Marijuana, and Police Actions Charter Amendment
A good look at local government in Texas
But recall that the state has the ability to prevent these from being implemented.
- Click here for it.
The measure is designed to provide for the City Council to appoint a Justice Director. The measure provides that the roles of the Justice Director are to reduce incarceration and mitigate law enforcement practices. The Justice Director cannot have worked in law enforcement or have significant financial investments in the law enforcement industry. Under this measure, the Justice Director reports to City Council and will provide a justice impact statement to prior to any City Council vote affecting the city justice policy.[1]
Under this measure, the San Antonio police department is prohibited from investigating, making arrests, or enforcing any state law that criminalizes abortion.[1]
Under this measure, San Antonio police officers cannot obtain a no-knock search warrant, and cannot gain forcible entry into a premises unless there is a credible threat to human life. All officers must be equipped with video and recording devices. Law enforcement officers executing a search warrant cannot use explosive devices, such as grenades or firearms, unless the use of these devices is necessary to protect human life. Under this measure, law enforcement officers must avoid destruction of property and utilize the least intrusive tactics possible. Property or money cannot be seized during the course of the search unless an arrest is made and these assets will be returned immediately to the arrestee if they are not convicted.[1]
The measure is designed to ban the use of a chokehold or neck restraint by San Antonio police officers.
U.S. Code - Title 52—Voting And Elections
Subtitle I—Voting Rights (§§ 10101 – 10702)
- CHAPTER 101—GENERALLY (§§ 10101 – 10102)
- CHAPTER 103—ENFORCEMENT OF VOTING RIGHTS (§§ 10301 – 10314)
- CHAPTER 105—SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS (§§ 10501 – 10508)
- CHAPTER 107—RIGHT TO VOTE AT AGE EIGHTEEN (§§ 10701 – 10702)
Subtitle II—Voting Assistance and Election Administration (§§ 20101 – 21145)
- CHAPTER 201—VOTING ACCESSIBILITY FOR THE ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED (§§ 20101 – 20107)
- CHAPTER 203—REGISTRATION AND VOTING BY ABSENT UNIFORMED SERVICES VOTERS AND OVERSEAS VOTERS IN ELECTIONS FOR FEDERAL OFFICE (§§ 20301 – 20311)
- CHAPTER 205—NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION (§§ 20501 – 20511)
- CHAPTER 207—FEDERAL ELECTION RECORDS (§§ 20701 – 20706)
- CHAPTER 209—ELECTION ADMINISTRATION IMPROVEMENT (§§ 20901 – 21145)
Subtitle III—Federal Campaign Finance (§§ 30101 – 30146)
- CHAPTER 101—GENERALLY (§§ 10101 – 10102)
- CHAPTER 103—ENFORCEMENT OF VOTING RIGHTS (§§ 10301 – 10314)
- CHAPTER 105—SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS (§§ 10501 – 10508)
- CHAPTER 107—RIGHT TO VOTE AT AGE EIGHTEEN (§§ 10701 – 10702)
Subtitle II—Voting Assistance and Election Administration (§§ 20101 – 21145)
- CHAPTER 201—VOTING ACCESSIBILITY FOR THE ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED (§§ 20101 – 20107)
- CHAPTER 203—REGISTRATION AND VOTING BY ABSENT UNIFORMED SERVICES VOTERS AND OVERSEAS VOTERS IN ELECTIONS FOR FEDERAL OFFICE (§§ 20301 – 20311)
- CHAPTER 205—NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION (§§ 20501 – 20511)
- CHAPTER 207—FEDERAL ELECTION RECORDS (§§ 20701 – 20706)
- CHAPTER 209—ELECTION ADMINISTRATION IMPROVEMENT (§§ 20901 – 21145)
Subtitle III—Federal Campaign Finance (§§ 30101 – 30146)
Tuesday, February 14, 2023
Texas Election Code
For our look at elections:
- Click here for the full thing.
TITLE 1. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 2. VOTE REQUIRED FOR ELECTION TO OFFICE
- CHAPTER 3. ORDERING ELECTION
- CHAPTER 4. NOTICE OF ELECTION
TITLE 2. VOTER QUALIFICATIONS AND REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 11. QUALIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR VOTING
- CHAPTER 12. VOTER REGISTRAR
- CHAPTER 13. APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION; INITIAL REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 14. RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 15. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION OF REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 16. CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 17. JUDICIAL REVIEW
- CHAPTER 18. PROCEDURES FOR IDENTIFYING REGISTERED VOTERS
- CHAPTER 19. FINANCING VOTER REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 20. VOTER REGISTRATION AGENCIES
TITLE 3. ELECTION OFFICERS AND OBSERVERS
- CHAPTER 31. OFFICERS TO ADMINISTER ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 32. ELECTION JUDGES AND CLERKS
- CHAPTER 33. WATCHERS
- CHAPTER 34. STATE INSPECTORS
TITLE 4. TIME AND PLACE OF ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 41. ELECTION DATES AND HOURS FOR VOTING
- CHAPTER 42. ELECTION PRECINCTS
- CHAPTER 43. POLLING PLACES
TITLE 5. ELECTION SUPPLIES
- CHAPTER 51. ELECTION SUPPLIES
- CHAPTER 52. BALLOT FORM, CONTENT, AND PREPARATION
TITLE 6. CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS
- Click here for the full thing.
TITLE 1. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 2. VOTE REQUIRED FOR ELECTION TO OFFICE
- CHAPTER 3. ORDERING ELECTION
- CHAPTER 4. NOTICE OF ELECTION
TITLE 2. VOTER QUALIFICATIONS AND REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 11. QUALIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR VOTING
- CHAPTER 12. VOTER REGISTRAR
- CHAPTER 13. APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION; INITIAL REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 14. RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 15. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION OF REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 16. CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 17. JUDICIAL REVIEW
- CHAPTER 18. PROCEDURES FOR IDENTIFYING REGISTERED VOTERS
- CHAPTER 19. FINANCING VOTER REGISTRATION
- CHAPTER 20. VOTER REGISTRATION AGENCIES
TITLE 3. ELECTION OFFICERS AND OBSERVERS
- CHAPTER 31. OFFICERS TO ADMINISTER ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 32. ELECTION JUDGES AND CLERKS
- CHAPTER 33. WATCHERS
- CHAPTER 34. STATE INSPECTORS
TITLE 4. TIME AND PLACE OF ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 41. ELECTION DATES AND HOURS FOR VOTING
- CHAPTER 42. ELECTION PRECINCTS
- CHAPTER 43. POLLING PLACES
TITLE 5. ELECTION SUPPLIES
- CHAPTER 51. ELECTION SUPPLIES
- CHAPTER 52. BALLOT FORM, CONTENT, AND PREPARATION
TITLE 6. CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 61. CONDUCT OF VOTING GENERALLY
- CHAPTER 62. PRELIMINARY ARRANGEMENTS
- CHAPTER 63. ACCEPTING VOTER
- CHAPTER 64. VOTING PROCEDURES
- CHAPTER 65. COUNTING VOTES AND PREPARING RETURNS
- CHAPTER 66. DISPOSITION OF RECORDS AND SUPPLIES AFTER ELECTION
- CHAPTER 67. CANVASSING ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 68. TABULATION OF UNOFFICIAL RESULTS OF CERTAIN RACES BY SECRETARY OF STATE
TITLE 7. EARLY VOTING
- SUBTITLE A. EARLY VOTING
- - CHAPTER 81. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 82. ELIGIBILITY FOR EARLY VOTING
- - CHAPTER 83. OFFICER CONDUCTING EARLY VOTING
- - CHAPTER 84. APPLICATION FOR BALLOT
- - CHAPTER 85. CONDUCT OF VOTING BY PERSONAL APPEARANCE
- - CHAPTER 86. CONDUCT OF VOTING BY MAIL
- - CHAPTER 87. PROCESSING EARLY VOTING RESULTS
- SUBTITLE B. SPECIAL FORMS OF EARLY VOTING
- - CHAPTER 101. VOTING BY RESIDENT FEDERAL POSTCARD APPLICANT
- - CHAPTER 102. LATE VOTING BY DISABLED VOTER
- - CHAPTER 103. LATE VOTING BECAUSE OF DEATH IN IMMEDIATE FAMILY
- - CHAPTER 104. VOTING ON ELECTION DAY BY DISABLED VOTER FROM VOTING SYSTEM PRECINCT
- - CHAPTER 105. VOTING BY MILITARY PERSONNEL OR OTHER PERSONS OVERSEAS
- - CHAPTER 106. VOTING ON ELECTION DAY BY PERSON ON SPACE FLIGHT
- SUBTITLE C. RESTRICTED BALLOT
- - CHAPTER 111. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 112. VOTING LIMITED BALLOT AFTER CHANGING COUNTY OF RESIDENCE
- - CHAPTER 113. VOTING PRESIDENTIAL BALLOT BY FORMER RESIDENT
- - CHAPTER 114. VOTING FEDERAL BALLOT BY OVERSEAS CITIZEN
TITLE 8. VOTING SYSTEMS
- CHAPTER 121. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 122. STATE SUPERVISION OVER VOTING SYSTEMS
- CHAPTER 123. ADOPTION AND ACQUISITION OF VOTING SYSTEM
- CHAPTER 124. VOTING SYSTEM BALLOT
- CHAPTER 125. CONDUCT OF VOTING WITH VOTING SYSTEM
- CHAPTER 127. PROCESSING ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEM RESULTS
- CHAPTER 128. COMPUTERIZED VOTING SYSTEMS
- CHAPTER 129. DIRECT RECORDING ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES
TITLE 9. CANDIDATES
- CHAPTER 141. CANDIDACY FOR PUBLIC OFFICE GENERALLY
- CHAPTER 142. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE IN GENERAL ELECTION FOR STATE AND COUNTY OFFICERS
- CHAPTER 143. CANDIDATE FOR CITY OFFICE
- CHAPTER 144. CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OTHER THAN COUNTY OR CITY
- CHAPTER 145. WITHDRAWAL, DEATH AND INELIGIBILITY OF CANDIDATE
- CHAPTER 146. WRITE-IN CANDIDATE
TITLE 10. POLITICAL PARTIES
- SUBTITLE A. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 161. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 162. REGULATING PARTICIPATION IN PARTY AFFAIRS
- - CHAPTER 163. PARTY RULES
- SUBTITLE B. PARTIES NOMINATING BY PRIMARY ELECTION
- - CHAPTER 171. ORGANIZATION
- - CHAPTER 172. PRIMARY ELECTIONS
- - CHAPTER 173. PRIMARY ELECTION FINANCING
- - CHAPTER 174. CONVENTIONS
- SUBTITLE C. PARTIES NOMINATING BY CONVENTION
- - CHAPTER 181. PARTY WITH STATE ORGANIZATION
- - CHAPTER 182. PARTY WITHOUT STATE ORGANIZATION
- CHAPTER 62. PRELIMINARY ARRANGEMENTS
- CHAPTER 63. ACCEPTING VOTER
- CHAPTER 64. VOTING PROCEDURES
- CHAPTER 65. COUNTING VOTES AND PREPARING RETURNS
- CHAPTER 66. DISPOSITION OF RECORDS AND SUPPLIES AFTER ELECTION
- CHAPTER 67. CANVASSING ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 68. TABULATION OF UNOFFICIAL RESULTS OF CERTAIN RACES BY SECRETARY OF STATE
TITLE 7. EARLY VOTING
- SUBTITLE A. EARLY VOTING
- - CHAPTER 81. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 82. ELIGIBILITY FOR EARLY VOTING
- - CHAPTER 83. OFFICER CONDUCTING EARLY VOTING
- - CHAPTER 84. APPLICATION FOR BALLOT
- - CHAPTER 85. CONDUCT OF VOTING BY PERSONAL APPEARANCE
- - CHAPTER 86. CONDUCT OF VOTING BY MAIL
- - CHAPTER 87. PROCESSING EARLY VOTING RESULTS
- SUBTITLE B. SPECIAL FORMS OF EARLY VOTING
- - CHAPTER 101. VOTING BY RESIDENT FEDERAL POSTCARD APPLICANT
- - CHAPTER 102. LATE VOTING BY DISABLED VOTER
- - CHAPTER 103. LATE VOTING BECAUSE OF DEATH IN IMMEDIATE FAMILY
- - CHAPTER 104. VOTING ON ELECTION DAY BY DISABLED VOTER FROM VOTING SYSTEM PRECINCT
- - CHAPTER 105. VOTING BY MILITARY PERSONNEL OR OTHER PERSONS OVERSEAS
- - CHAPTER 106. VOTING ON ELECTION DAY BY PERSON ON SPACE FLIGHT
- SUBTITLE C. RESTRICTED BALLOT
- - CHAPTER 111. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 112. VOTING LIMITED BALLOT AFTER CHANGING COUNTY OF RESIDENCE
- - CHAPTER 113. VOTING PRESIDENTIAL BALLOT BY FORMER RESIDENT
- - CHAPTER 114. VOTING FEDERAL BALLOT BY OVERSEAS CITIZEN
TITLE 8. VOTING SYSTEMS
- CHAPTER 121. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 122. STATE SUPERVISION OVER VOTING SYSTEMS
- CHAPTER 123. ADOPTION AND ACQUISITION OF VOTING SYSTEM
- CHAPTER 124. VOTING SYSTEM BALLOT
- CHAPTER 125. CONDUCT OF VOTING WITH VOTING SYSTEM
- CHAPTER 127. PROCESSING ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEM RESULTS
- CHAPTER 128. COMPUTERIZED VOTING SYSTEMS
- CHAPTER 129. DIRECT RECORDING ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES
TITLE 9. CANDIDATES
- CHAPTER 141. CANDIDACY FOR PUBLIC OFFICE GENERALLY
- CHAPTER 142. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE IN GENERAL ELECTION FOR STATE AND COUNTY OFFICERS
- CHAPTER 143. CANDIDATE FOR CITY OFFICE
- CHAPTER 144. CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OTHER THAN COUNTY OR CITY
- CHAPTER 145. WITHDRAWAL, DEATH AND INELIGIBILITY OF CANDIDATE
- CHAPTER 146. WRITE-IN CANDIDATE
TITLE 10. POLITICAL PARTIES
- SUBTITLE A. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 161. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 162. REGULATING PARTICIPATION IN PARTY AFFAIRS
- - CHAPTER 163. PARTY RULES
- SUBTITLE B. PARTIES NOMINATING BY PRIMARY ELECTION
- - CHAPTER 171. ORGANIZATION
- - CHAPTER 172. PRIMARY ELECTIONS
- - CHAPTER 173. PRIMARY ELECTION FINANCING
- - CHAPTER 174. CONVENTIONS
- SUBTITLE C. PARTIES NOMINATING BY CONVENTION
- - CHAPTER 181. PARTY WITH STATE ORGANIZATION
- - CHAPTER 182. PARTY WITHOUT STATE ORGANIZATION
TITLE 11. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 191. SELECTION OF DELEGATES TO NATIONAL NOMINATING CONVENTION
- CHAPTER 192. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS AND CANDIDATES
- CHAPTER 191. SELECTION OF DELEGATES TO NATIONAL NOMINATING CONVENTION
- CHAPTER 192. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS AND CANDIDATES
TITLE 12. ELECTIONS TO FILL VACANCY IN OFFICE
- CHAPTER 201. DETERMINATION OF AND ELECTION TO FILL VACANCY
- CHAPTER 202. VACANCY IN OFFICE OF STATE OR COUNTY GOVERNMENT
- CHAPTER 203. VACANCY IN LEGISLATURE
- CHAPTER 204. VACANCY IN CONGRESS
TITLE 13. RECOUNTS
- CHAPTER 211. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 212. REQUESTING RECOUNT
- CHAPTER 213. CONDUCT OF RECOUNT
- CHAPTER 214. COUNTING PROCEDURES
- CHAPTER 215. COSTS OF RECOUNT
- CHAPTER 216. AUTOMATIC RECOUNT
TITLE 14. ELECTION CONTESTS
- CHAPTER 202. VACANCY IN OFFICE OF STATE OR COUNTY GOVERNMENT
- CHAPTER 203. VACANCY IN LEGISLATURE
- CHAPTER 204. VACANCY IN CONGRESS
TITLE 13. RECOUNTS
- CHAPTER 211. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 212. REQUESTING RECOUNT
- CHAPTER 213. CONDUCT OF RECOUNT
- CHAPTER 214. COUNTING PROCEDURES
- CHAPTER 215. COSTS OF RECOUNT
- CHAPTER 216. AUTOMATIC RECOUNT
TITLE 14. ELECTION CONTESTS
- SUBTITLE A. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
- - CHAPTER 221. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- SUBTITLE B. CONTESTS IN DISTRICT COURT
- - CHAPTER 231. CONTEST IN DISTRICT COURT GENERALLY
- - CHAPTER 232. CONTESTS FOR OFFICE
- - CHAPTER 233. CONTEST ON MEASURE
- SUBTITLE C. CONTESTS IN OTHER TRIBUNALS
- - CHAPTER 241. CONTEST FOR STATE SENATOR OR REPRESENTATIVE
- - CHAPTER 242. CONTEST FOR CONSTITUTIONAL EXECUTIVE OFFICE
- - CHAPTER 243. CONTEST FOR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS
- SUBTITLE D. OTHER ELECTION LAWSUITS
- - CHAPTER 247. LAWSUIT ALLEGING IMPROPER ELECTION ACTIVITIES
TITLE 15. REGULATING POLITICAL FUNDS AND CAMPAIGNS
- CHAPTER 251. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 252. CAMPAIGN TREASURER
- CHAPTER 253. RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES
- CHAPTER 254. POLITICAL REPORTING
- CHAPTER 255. REGULATING POLITICAL ADVERTISING AND CAMPAIGN COMMUNICATIONS
- CHAPTER 257. POLITICAL PARTIES
- CHAPTER 258. FAIR CAMPAIGN PRACTICES
- CHAPTER 259. POLITICAL SIGNS
TITLE 16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 271. JOINT ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 272. BILINGUAL REQUIREMENTS
- CHAPTER 273. CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS
- CHAPTER 274. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
- CHAPTER 275. ELECTION FOR OFFICERS OF CITY WITH 200,000 POPULATION
- CHAPTER 276. MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES AND OTHER PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 277. PETITION PRESCRIBED BY LAW OUTSIDE CODE
- CHAPTER 278. VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE FOR JUDICIAL ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 279. CYBERSECURITY OF ELECTION SYSTEMS
TITLE 17. LOCAL OPTION ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 501. LOCAL OPTION ELECTIONS ON SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
- - CHAPTER 221. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- SUBTITLE B. CONTESTS IN DISTRICT COURT
- - CHAPTER 231. CONTEST IN DISTRICT COURT GENERALLY
- - CHAPTER 232. CONTESTS FOR OFFICE
- - CHAPTER 233. CONTEST ON MEASURE
- SUBTITLE C. CONTESTS IN OTHER TRIBUNALS
- - CHAPTER 241. CONTEST FOR STATE SENATOR OR REPRESENTATIVE
- - CHAPTER 242. CONTEST FOR CONSTITUTIONAL EXECUTIVE OFFICE
- - CHAPTER 243. CONTEST FOR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS
- SUBTITLE D. OTHER ELECTION LAWSUITS
- - CHAPTER 247. LAWSUIT ALLEGING IMPROPER ELECTION ACTIVITIES
TITLE 15. REGULATING POLITICAL FUNDS AND CAMPAIGNS
- CHAPTER 251. GENERAL PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 252. CAMPAIGN TREASURER
- CHAPTER 253. RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES
- CHAPTER 254. POLITICAL REPORTING
- CHAPTER 255. REGULATING POLITICAL ADVERTISING AND CAMPAIGN COMMUNICATIONS
- CHAPTER 257. POLITICAL PARTIES
- CHAPTER 258. FAIR CAMPAIGN PRACTICES
- CHAPTER 259. POLITICAL SIGNS
TITLE 16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 271. JOINT ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 272. BILINGUAL REQUIREMENTS
- CHAPTER 273. CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS
- CHAPTER 274. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
- CHAPTER 275. ELECTION FOR OFFICERS OF CITY WITH 200,000 POPULATION
- CHAPTER 276. MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES AND OTHER PROVISIONS
- CHAPTER 277. PETITION PRESCRIBED BY LAW OUTSIDE CODE
- CHAPTER 278. VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE FOR JUDICIAL ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 279. CYBERSECURITY OF ELECTION SYSTEMS
TITLE 17. LOCAL OPTION ELECTIONS
- CHAPTER 501. LOCAL OPTION ELECTIONS ON SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)