Friday, April 28, 2023
From the Washington Post: Biden grants clemency to 31 drug offenders, rolls out rehabilitation plan
Checks and Balances
Criminal Justice Policy
Redemption
Rehabilitation
- Click here for the article.
President Biden commuted the sentences of 31 nonviolent drug offenders Friday as the White House rolled out a broad initiative that aims to bolster the “redemption and rehabilitation” of people previously incarcerated through greater access to housing, jobs, food and other assistance. The actions came during what Biden has proclaimed as Second Chance Month, an attempt to put a greater focus on helping those with criminal records rebuild their lives.
The 31 commutations were for people convicted of nonviolent drug crimes, who were serving time in home confinement and taking advantage of education and employment opportunities, the White House said. Many would have received a lower sentence if they were charged with the same offense today due to changes in the law, including the First Step Act, a bipartisan criminal justice bill signed into law by President Donald Trump in December 2018.
At a briefing for reporters, Susan Rice, director of the Domestic Policy Council, described the series of measures as prudent steps to improve public safety while safeguarding taxpayer dollars by increasing the chances that people released from prison will have opportunities to live rehabilitated lives.
Public Policy and the Enumerated Powers
I want to tie in the specific powers granted to Congress with the major legislation and agencies designed to implement them.
- Click here for the text in Avalon.
- Click here for the text in the Annotated Constitution.
The Congress shall have the power
1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States:
- Tax Policy
- Trade Policy
- Defense Policy
- Welfare Policy
- Broad interpretations of "general welfare"
2. To borrow money on the credit of the United States:
- Fiscal Policy
- The Debt Ceiling
3. To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes:
- Regulatory Power.
- Trade Policy.
- Bretton Woods system.
- Land Policy.
- Interstate Commerce Clause.
- Broad interpretations of 'commerce"
- Indian Treaties
4. To establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States:
- Citizenship Laws and Policy.
- Immigration Policy.
- Bankruptcy Policy.
5. To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures:
- Monetary Policy
- United States Mint.
- Monetary Policy.
- Federal Reserve.
- Weights and Measures.
6. To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States:
- Counterfeiting Policy
7. To establish post-offices and post-roads:
- Postal Service Act.
- United States Post Office Department.
- United States Postal Service.
8. To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries:
- Patent Act.
- Copyright Act.
- United States Patent and Trademark Office.
9. To constitute tribunals inferior to the supreme court:
- Judiciary Acts
- United States Courts.
- Business and Corporate Law
- Civil and Criminal Law
10. To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations:
- The Law of Piracy.
- Maritime Crimes.
- The Law of Nations.
11. To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water:
- Military Policy
12. To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years:
- Conscription
- Volunteer Forces
13. To provide and maintain a navy:
- Naval Policy
- Maritime Policy
- Sea Lanes
14. To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces:
- Military Regulations.
15. To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions:
- State Militias
16. To provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress:
- Military Organization
17. To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings: And,
- Residence Act / national capital
- Federal Land
- Indian Wars
- Interior Department
- Bureau of Land Management
18. To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
- Broad interpretations of "necessary and proper"
Catching up with the Culture Wars
For past info, click here.
- From UH Public Policy Institute: Texas Legislature, Culture Wars Issues.
- Texas Tribune: A Star-Spangled culture war in Texas.
- Texas Tribune: Young conservatives, politicians and media stars convene near Houston to “win the culture war”
- Texas Monthly: The Culture Wars Come Roaring Back in the Closing Days of the Texas Legislature.
From the New York Times: Judge Cites 1849 Slavery Law in Ruling Embryos Can Be Considered Property
This seems odd.
- Click here for the article.
A Virginia judge relied in part on a 19th century law that defined enslaved people as property in a recent decision to allow a divorced woman to pursue using embryos that she shared with her former husband — a ruling that has drawn criticism.
The request by the woman, Honeyhline Heidemann, 45, represented an issue that had not been previously addressed by the court, Richard E. Gardiner, a Fairfax County Circuit Court judge, wrote in an opinion last month.
While previous cases asking for the division of frozen embryos have been considered within the legal context of splitting up marital property, the judge wrote in February, Ms. Heidemann was already divorced from her former husband, Jason Heidemann. So Judge Gardiner took a different approach, delving into earlier versions of Virginia’s current property law on “goods or chattels” to see whether embryos could be divided as property between people who are no longer spouses.
One version, an 1849 code, categorized “slaves” as property that could be divided and sold. The judge cited it to draw a parallel to the human embryo case, saying the code used “language almost identical” to current law.
“As there is no prohibition on the sale of human embryos, they may be valued and sold, and thus may be considered ‘goods or chattels,’” he wrote.
One of Ms. Heidemann’s lawyers, Adam T. Kronfeld, said on Wednesday that the judge’s ruling meant that the case could now proceed to trial. “As of yet, all that has happened is the court is allowing the case to go forward,” he said.
But some criticized the judge’s use of an old law governing “slaves” in reaching his decision, which The Associated Press wrote about this month.
. . . The Heidemann case goes to the heart of how courts are struggling to interpret laws that can address custody of stored embryos when a couple separates. Some judges have awarded frozen embryos to one partner against another’s wishes, such as in a case in Chicago, or ordered them destroyed, as with a case in California.
State laws can be lacking in addressing the nuances of parental relationships and the right to procreate, as the Heidemann case appears to suggest.
Related material:
- Code of Virginia: § 8.01-93. Partition of goods, etc., by sale, if necessary.
- Click here for the judges' decision.
-
Thursday, April 27, 2023
Links 4/27/23
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_debt_ceiling
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Springer
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mayors_of_Cincinnati
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabloid_talk_show
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabloid_television
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_by_age
- https://www.jstor.org/stable/4532102
Cabinet of the United States - Relationship with Congressional Committees
Provides a good look at the institutional relationships around different areas of public policy on the national level.
This also helps us understand the networks that surround these areas.
- Click here for it.
Is the Debt Ceiling Constitutional?
It may not be due to language in Section 4 of the 14th Amendment.
- Section 4 Public Debt.
- Overview of Public Debt Clause.
For analysis:
- The Debt Limit and the Constitution: How the Fourteenth Amendment Forbids Fiscal Obstructionism.
- Is debt limit unconstitutional? Answer is yes, some argue, based on the 14th Amendment's public debt clause.
- The Constitution Has a 155-Year-Old Answer to the Debt Ceiling.
From Axios: House passes McCarthy's debt ceiling proposal
Something to catch up on:
- Click here for it.
House Republicans on Wednesday narrowly voted to pass House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) legislation to raise the debt ceiling through 2024 and slash government spending.
Why it matters: The bill is going nowhere with Senate Democrats and the White House firmly opposed, but it serves as a demonstration that Republicans can get votes behind a debt limit proposal.
McCarthy aims to jump-start negotiations with President Biden, who has been firm in his demands for a "clean" debt ceiling increase.
What is the Debt Ceiling?
The 2022 United States Federal Budget.
More on Cleveland and the Indigenous People in that Area
Both links take you to Wikipedia:
- Cleveland.
Cleveland was established on July 22, 1796, by surveyors of the Connecticut Land Company when they laid out Connecticut's Western Reserve into townships and a capital city. They named the new settlement "Cleaveland" after their leader, General Moses Cleaveland, a veteran of the American Revolutionary War. Cleaveland oversaw the New England-style design of the plan for what would become the modern downtown area, centered on Public Square, before returning to Connecticut, never again to visit Ohio.
. . . In spite of the nearby swampy lowlands and harsh winters, the town's waterfront location proved to be an advantage, giving it access to Great Lakes trade. It grew rapidly after the 1832 completion of the Ohio and Erie Canal. This key link between the Ohio River and the Great Lakes connected it to the Atlantic Ocean via the Erie Canal and Hudson River, and later via the Saint Lawrence Seaway. Its products could reach markets on the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi River. The town's growth continued with added railroad links.
. . . In 1836, Cleveland, then only on the eastern banks of the Cuyahoga River, was officially incorporated as a city, and John W. Willey was elected its first mayor. That same year, it nearly erupted into open warfare with neighboring Ohio City over a bridge connecting the two communities. Ohio City remained an independent municipality until its annexation by Cleveland in 1854.
Home to a vocal group of abolitionists, Cleveland (code-named "Station Hope") was a major stop on the Underground Railroad for escaped African American slaves en route to Canada. The city also served as an important center for the Union during the American Civil War.
- History of Indigenous people in Cleveland.
One of the first Indigenous peoples to live in what is now known as Cleveland were the Erie people. The Erie inhabited most of the southern shore of Lake Erie, and they were wiped out by a war with the Iroquois Confederacy in 1656. Erie survivors assimilated into neighboring tribes, especially the Seneca. After the Erie people, northeastern Ohio remained sparsely populated until Lenape from Delaware migrated into the area in the mid 1700s. The first settlement in present-day Cleveland was Pilgerruh or Pilgrim's Run, founded in 1786 by Moravian missionaries and Christian Lenape on the bank of the Cuyahoga River.
The Northwest Indian War between the newly formed United States military and the Native American tribes living in the Northwest Territory resulted in the first of many official land cessions. The Treaty of Greenville in 1795 formally ceded any Native American claims to land east of the Cuyahoga River and all of southern Ohio. A series of treaties continued to cede land to the United States until the Treaty of St. Mary's signed away the last Native American land claims in the state of Ohio. Further treaties forcibly removed Indigenous tribes from their reservations within Ohio to new land in the West. The 1842 Treaty with the Wyandot moved the last Indigenous peoples in Ohio, the Wyandot, from their land in the Upper Sandusky Reservation to land west of the Mississippi River. It is documented by Bill Moose Crowfoot that 12 Wyandot families chose to stay behind.[citation needed] Crowfoot was the last full blood Wyandot to die in Ohio, in Upper Arlington in 1937, and according to the Draper manuscripts there were a few Lenape, Shawnee, and Mingo who did as well.
After forced removal of Native people from their traditional lands, there were not many Indigenous people living in Cleveland. In 1900 there were only 2 Native American residents in Cuyahoga County, and in 1940 the population only increased to 47. The Indian Relocation Act of 1956 changed federal policy toward American Indians from reservations toward relocations. The Bureau of Indian Affairs chose Cleveland as one of 8 destination cities, dramatically increasing the Native population in following decades. By 1990, the population of American Indians in Cleveland reached 2,706.
From Wikipedia: The Cuyahoga River
More on the river discussed in the article below.
- Click here for the entry.
The Cuyahoga River is a river located in Northeast Ohio that bisects the City of Cleveland and feeds into Lake Erie.
As Cleveland emerged as a major manufacturing center, the river became heavily affected by industrial pollution, so much so that it caught fire at least 14 times, most famously on June 22, 1969, helping to spur the American environmental movement. Since then, the river has been extensively cleaned up through the efforts of Cleveland's city government and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
. . . The name Cuyahoga is believed to mean "crooked river" from the Mohawk name Cayagaga, although the Mohawk were never in the region alongside European settlers, so this explanation is questionable. Some think that it comes from the Seneca word for "jawbone".
. . . Early maps from the era of French control of the region, when the Wyandot were the only tribe there, mark the river as "Cuyahoga",
. . . The river was one of the features along which the "Greenville Treaty Line" ran beginning in 1795, per the Treaty of Greenville that ended the Northwest Indian War in the Ohio Country, effectively becoming the western boundary of the United States and remaining so briefly. On July 22, 1796, Moses Cleaveland, a surveyor charged with exploring the Connecticut Western Reserve, arrived at the mouth of the Cuyahoga and subsequently located a settlement there, which became the city of Cleveland.
From the Smithsonian: The Cuyahoga River Caught Fire at Least a Dozen Times, but No One Cared Until 1969
The public policy process has five stages, depending on who you listen to. Here they are:
- agenda setting
- policy formation
- policy adoption
- policy implementation
- policy evaluation
All begins with an item on the governments' agenda. This involves defining a condition as a problem that actually has a solution that can be addressed by governmental policy. Sometimes this takes time, as was the case of environmental policy. Here is a story regarding an event that led to the passage of the:
- National Environmental Policy Act.
And the creation of the
- Environmental Protection Agency.
by an executive order passed by Richard Nixon.
The event described below - a river catching fire - had happened many times before. Why did this particular event lead to governmental action while the previous ones did not? Its a good question, the article attempts to answer it.
Keep in mind that the growing influence of the environmental movement - which helped spur the creation of the EPA - was part of what the Powell Memo complained about.
Related concepts:
- Window of Opportunity.
- Independent Executive Agency.
- Negative Externalities.
For the article: The Cuyahoga River Caught Fire at Least a Dozen Times, but No One Cared Until 1969.
Everyone knew the river was polluted, but nobody much cared. If anything, it was a badge of honor. As David Newton writes in Chemistry of the Environment, “Fundamentally this level of environmental degradation was accepted as a sign of success.”
In 1868, 1883, 1887, 1912, 1922, 1936, 1941, 1948 and 1952 the river caught fire, writes Laura La Bella in Not Enough to Drink: Pollution, Drought, and Tainted Water Supplies. Those are some of the incidents we’re aware of; it’s hard to say how many other times oil slicks may have ignited, as press coverage and fire department records were both inconsistent. But not all the fires were as innocuous as that of 1969. Some caused millions of dollars’ worth of damage and killed people. But even with the obvious toll on the landscape, regulation of industry was limited at best. It seemed more important to keep the economy booming, the city growing and people working. This attitude was reflected in cities around the country. The Cuyahoga was far from the only river to catch fire during the period. Baltimore, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Buffalo and Galveston all used different methods to disperse oil on their waters in order to prevent fires.
But the tide began to turn in the 1950s, according to the Stradlings. Between 1952 and 1969, Cleveland lost about 60,000 manufacturing jobs. Deindustrialization took hold alongside the Civil Rights movement and protests against the Vietnam War. “Over the years, Clevelanders were hardly complacent about the burning river, but not until the 1970s did they begin to think of its meaning in anything other than economic turns,” the Stradlings write. “That the Cuyahoga fire evolved into one of the great disasters of the environmental crisis tells us something about Americans’ growing suspicion of industrial landscapes, a suspicion encouraged by the decreasing benefits they derived from such places.”
Wednesday, April 26, 2023
4/24/23
- https://texascountiesdeliver.org/
- https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/toc.html
- https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/preamble.html
- https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5372&context=etd
- https://www.walmart.com/ip/Abstract-Proceedings-Virginia-Company-London-1619-1624-Vol-1-Prepared-Records-Library-Congress-Classic-Reprint-9781331552840/164973518
- https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/publications/cjm/article/market-revolution-criminal-justice
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spice_trade
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_fur_trade
- https://fee.org/articles/stability-and-the-free-market/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions
-
Did the confederacy declare war against the United States? Did the United States declear war on the confederacy.
As to the first question, the answer is yes, but it seems to have been largely a state by state decision.
- The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States.
- Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.
- Maryland, My Maryland.
- Congress declares Civil War’s aims July 25, 1861.
- Message of Jefferson Davis to the Provisional Congress of the Confederate States of America.
- The Decision to Secede and Establish the Confederacy: A Selection of Primary Sources
As to the second, the answer is no, but Lincoln did issue, the following proclamation creating the militias thought necessary to fight the war. More would eventually be needed.
- Abraham Lincoln, Monday, April 15, 1861 (Proclamation on State Militia).
Tuesday, April 25, 2023
From the Brooking Institution: Is Israel a democracy? Here’s what Americans think
Good question.
- Click here for the article.
The unprecedented and sustained Israeli protests against the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s proposed judicial overhaul that threatened to substantially weaken the judiciary have captured news headlines worldwide. They have also coincided with a spike in violence in the occupied Palestinian territories. Although the protests have largely ignored Israel’s military rule over millions of Palestinians, they drew attention to threats to democracy even within Israel’s pre-1967 borders. It is hard to know if these protests have had any impact on the way Americans perceive Israel, and if they did, in what direction. While these protests may have drawn attention to the right-wing government’s autocratic ambitions, they may have also highlighted the existence of a free environment, at least for hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens, to protest freely and reject the government’s plans. Do Americans see Israel as a vibrant democracy or as something far less?
To find out, we fielded a few questions in our University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll with Ipsos, which I direct with my colleague Stella Rouse. The poll was conducted March 27-April 5, 2023, among 1,203 respondents by Ipsos probabilistic KnowledgePanel (margin of error 3.2%).
We asked: “You may have been following recent developments in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. In your opinion which of the following is closer to describing the way Israel looks to you.” We provided the following four options: a vibrant democracy; a flawed democracy; a state with restricted minority rights; a state with segregation similar to apartheid. The results were surprising on many levels.
Why have there been no declared wars since 1941?
This is despite the fact that we have continued be involved - almost without stop - in military engagements. A good question to ponder is: Why aren't these not considered "wars?"
Here are few thoughts on the subject:
- Why America Won’t Declare War.
- The U.S. Doesn't Declare War Anymore.
- When Congress last used its powers to declare war.
- Why bother declaring war?
Early American Wars - Post Revolutionary War / Pre War of 1812
- The Northwest Indian War (1785–1795).
- Quasi-War (1798 - 1800).
- Barbary Wars
- - First (1801 - 1805)
- - Second (1815)
- Tecumseh's War (1811 - 1813)
- Creek War (1813 - 1815).
- Quasi-War (1798 - 1800).
- Barbary Wars
- - First (1801 - 1805)
- - Second (1815)
- Tecumseh's War (1811 - 1813)
- Creek War (1813 - 1815).
Monday, April 24, 2023
What were the purposes of the United States' five declared wars?
- About Declarations of War by Congress.
The War of 1812:
- From Wikipedia:
The War of 1812:
- The text of the declaration of war with Great Britain.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That war be and is hereby declared to exist between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the dependencies thereof, and the United States of America and their territories; and that the President of the United States is hereby authorized to use the whole land and naval force of the United States to carry the same into effect, and to issue to private armed vessels of the United States commissions or letters of marque and general reprisal, in such form as he shall think proper, and under the seal of the United States, against the vessels, goods, and effects of the government of the said United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the subjects thereof.
- From Wikipedia:
Tensions originated in long-standing differences over territorial expansion in North America and British support for Native American tribes who opposed U.S. colonial settlement in the Northwest Territory. These escalated in 1807 after the Royal Navy began enforcing tighter restrictions on American trade with France and press-ganged men they claimed as British subjects, even those with American citizenship certificates.
The Mexican American War.
- The text of the declaration of war with Mexico.
Whereas, by the act of the Republic of Mexico, a state of war exists between that Government and the United States:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, for the purpose of enabling the government of the United States to prosecute said war to a speedy and successful termination, the President be, and he is hereby, authorized to employ the militia, naval, and military forces of the United States, and to call for and accept the services of any number of volunteers, not exceeding fifty thousand, who may offer their services, either as cavalry, artillery, infantry, or riflemen, to serve twelve months after they shall have arrived at the place of rendezvous, or to the end of the war, unless sooner discharged, according to the time for which they shall have been mustered into service; and that the sum of ten millions of dollars, out of any moneys in the treasury, or to come into the treasury, not otherwise appropriated, be, and the same is hereby, appropriated for the purpose of carrying the provisions of this act into effect.
SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That the militia, when called into the service of the United States by virtue of this act, or any other act, may, if in the opinion of the President of the United States the public interest requires it, be compelled to serve for a term not exceeding six months after their arrival at the place of rendezvous, in any one year, unless sooner discharged.
SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That the said volunteers shall furnish their own clothes, and if cavalry, their own horses and horse equipments; and when mustered into service shall be armed at the expense of the United States.
SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That said volunteers shall, when called into actual service, and while remaining therein, be subject to the rules and articles of war, and shall be, in all respects except as to clothing and pay, placed on the same footing with similar corps of the United States army; and in lieu of clothing every non-commissioned officer and private in any company, who may thus offer himself, shall be entitled, when called into actual service, to receive in money a sum equal to the cost of clothing of a non-commissioned officer or private (as the case may be) in the regular troops of the United States.
SEC 5. And be it further enacted, That the said volunteers so offering their services shall be accepted by the President in companies, battalions, squadrons, and regiments, whose officers shall be appointed in the manner prescribed by law in the several States and Territories to which such companies, battalions, squadrons, and regiments, shall respectively belong.
SEC. 6. And be it further enacted, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized to organize companies so tendering their service into battalions or squadrons, battalions and squadrons into regiments, regiments into brigades, and brigades into divisions, as soon as the number of volunteers shall render such organization, in his judgment, expedient; and the President shall, if necessary, apportion the staff, field, and general officers among the respective States and Territories from which the volunteers shall tender their services as he may deem proper.
SEC 7. And be it further enacted, That the volunteers who may be received into the service of the United States by virtue of the provisions of this act, and who shall be wounded or otherwise disabled in the service, shall be entitled to all the benefit which may be conferred on persons wounded in the service of the United States.
SEC 8. And be it further enacted, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized forthwith to complete all the public armed vessels now authorized by law, and to purchase or charter, arm, equip, and man, such merchant vessels and steam boats as, upon examination, may be found fit, or easily converted into armed vessels fit for the public service, and in such number as he may deem necessary for the protection of the seaboard, lake coast, and the general defense of the country.
SEC. 9. And be it further enacted, That whenever the militia or volunteers are called and received into the service of the United States, under the provisions of this act, they shall have the organization of the army of the United States, and shall have the same pay and allowances; and all mounted privates, non-commissioned officers, musicians, and artificers, shall be allowed 40 cents per day for the use and risk of their horses, except of horses actually killed in action; and if any mounted volunteer, private, non-commissioned officer, musician, or artificer, shall not keep himself provided with a serviceable horse, the said volunteer shall serve on foot.
APPROVED, May 13, 1846.
- The Mexican American War.
The Spanish American War.
- The text of the declaration of war with the Kingdom of Spain.
A bill declaring that war exists between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Spain.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, First. That war be, and the same is hereby, declared to exist, and has existed since the twenty-first day of April, A.D. 1898, including said day, between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Spain.
Second. That the President of the United States be, and he hereby is, directed and empowered to use the entire land and naval forces of the United States and to call into the actual service of the United States the militia of the several States, to such extent as may be necessary to carry this act into effect.
Approved, April 25, 1898.
- The Spanish American War
World War 1
- The text of the declaration of war on Germany.
WHEREAS, The Imperial German Government has committed repeated acts of war against the people of the United States of America; therefore, be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Imperial German Government, which has thus been thrust upon the United States, is hereby formally declared; and that the President be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial German Government; and to bring the conflict to a successful termination all the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.
And Austria - Hungary.
- World War 1
World War 2
- The text of the declaration of war on Germany.
Seventy-Seventh Congress of the United States of America; At the First Session Begun and held at the City of Washington, on Friday, the third day of January, 1941.
JOINT RESOLUTION Declaring That a State of War Exists Between The Government of Germany and the Government and the People of the United States and Making Provisions To Prosecute The Same
Whereas the Government of Germany has formally declared war against the Government and the people of the United States of America:
Therefore be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Government of Germany; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.
(Signed) Sam Rayburn, Speaker of the House of Representatives
(Signed) H. A. Wallace, Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate
Approved December 11, 1941 3:05 PM E.S.T.
(Signed) Franklin D. Roosevelt
- The text of the declaration of war on Japan.
- The text of the declaration of war on Italy.
- The text of the declaration of war on Bulgaria.
From Wikipedia: The Law of War
Kinda weird that there is such a thing.
- Click here for the entry.
The law of war is the component of international law that regulates the conditions for initiating war (jus ad bellum) and the conduct of warring parties (jus in bello). Laws of war define sovereignty and nationhood, states and territories, occupation, and other critical terms of law.
Among other issues, modern laws of war address the declarations of war, acceptance of surrender and the treatment of prisoners of war; military necessity, along with distinction and proportionality; and the prohibition of certain weapons that may cause unnecessary suffering.[1][2]
The law of war is considered distinct from other bodies of law—such as the domestic law of a particular belligerent to a conflict—which may provide additional legal limits to the conduct or justification of war.
. . . It has often been commented that creating laws for something as inherently lawless as war seems like a lesson in absurdity. But based on the adherence to what amounted to customary international law by warring parties through the ages, it was believed[by whom?] that codifying laws of war would be beneficial.[citation needed]
Some of the central principles underlying laws of war are:[citation needed]Wars should be limited to achieving the political goals that started the war (e.g., territorial control) and should not include unnecessary destruction.
Wars should be brought to an end as quickly as possible.
People and property that do not contribute to the war effort should be protected against unnecessary destruction and hardship.
To this end, laws of war are intended to mitigate the hardships of war by:Protecting both combatants and non-combatants from unnecessary suffering.
Safeguarding certain fundamental human rights of persons who fall into the hands of the enemy, particularly prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, children, and civilians.
Facilitating the restoration of peace.
The idea that there is a right to war concerns, on the one hand, the jus ad bellum, the right to make war or to enter war, assuming a motive such as to defend oneself from a threat or danger, presupposes a declaration of war that warns the adversary: war is a loyal act, and on the other hand, jus in bello, the law of war, the way of making war, which involves behaving as soldiers invested with a mission for which all violence is not allowed. In any case, the very idea of a right to war is based on an idea of war that can be defined as an armed conflict, limited in space, limited in time, and by its objectives. War begins with a declaration (of war), ends with a treaty (of peace) or surrender agreement, an act of sharing, etc.
Sunday, April 23, 2023
Trends in opinions related to civil rights
- Polls Showed Many Americans Opposed to Civil Rights Protests in the 1960s. But That Changed.
- From the archives: 50 years ago: Mixed views about civil rights but support for Selma demonstrators.
- Trends in While Attitudes Toward Negroes.
- How Public Opinion Has Moved on Black Lives Matter.
- From the archives: 50 years ago: Mixed views about civil rights but support for Selma demonstrators.
- Trends in While Attitudes Toward Negroes.
- How Public Opinion Has Moved on Black Lives Matter.
How are property ownership rights limited?
From the Business Professor: Click here for the full article.
The US Constitution protects individual ownership rights in property. The concept of property allows the owner to exclude others from possessing or using that property. Nonetheless, laws may limit property by regulating when and how a person can use her property. In general, owners are prohibited from using their resources in ways that harm or injure others. The Federal Government limits the use of property through its power to regulate interstate commerce. State and local governments regulate the use of property pursuant to their police power to protect the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of its citizens.
__________
Saturday, April 22, 2023
Texas Mineral Rights
Are mineral rights the same as property rights?
- A BRIEF HISTORY OF TEXAS MINERAL RIGHTS.
- Texas State Historical Association: Mineral Rights and Royalties.
- 1866 Texas Constitution.
- Texas Mineral Rights Law.
- Exploration & Surface Ownership.
- Report of the Unclaimed Mineral Proceeds Commission.
- A BRIEF HISTORY OF TEXAS MINERAL RIGHTS.
- Texas State Historical Association: Mineral Rights and Royalties.
Private title to all land in Texas emanates from a grant by the sovereign of the soil (successively, Spain, Mexico, the Republic of Texas, and the state of Texas). Under the laws of Spain and Mexico, mines and their metals or minerals did not pass by the ordinary grant of the land without express words of designation. In one of the earliest acts of the Congress of the Republic of Texas, this rule was adopted, and it was continued in force after Texas had become a state. A grantee of land before 1866 therefore had no interest in the minerals in the land unless that interest was expressly granted. By a provision of the state Constitution of 1866, which was carried over in substantially the same language into the constitutions of 1869 and 1876, the state released to the owner of the soil all mines and mineral substances therein. This constitutional provision had retrospective effect; the landowner was given complete ownership of the minerals in all lands that passed from the sovereign before the effective date of the Constitution of 1876. A similar relinquishment to the landowner of the sovereign's retained interest in minerals was made in the revision of the Texas Civil Statutes in 1895, though it has not been litigated in the courts. Since 1876, it has been assumed that a grantee of land from the sovereign has received all minerals unless they are expressly reserved. Since 1895 substantial acreage of the public domain has been conveyed by the sovereign with a retention of rights to the minerals. Under the Relinquishment Act of 1919, as subsequently amended, the surface owner is made the agent of the state for the leasing of such lands, and both the surface owner and the state receive a fractional interest in the proceeds of the leasing and production of minerals. A considerable portion of the land of the state has been allocated to various educational and eleemosynary institutions, some of which has not been sold but merely leased for mineral development.
- 1866 Texas Constitution.
Article 7, SEC. 39. That the State of Texas hereby releases to the owner of the soil all mines and mineral substances, that may be on the same, subject to such uniform rate of taxation, as the Legislature may impose. All islands along the Gulf coast of the State, not now patented, or appropriated by locations under valid fund certificates, are reserved from location or appropriated (appropriation) in any other manner by private individuals than as the Legislature may direct.
- Texas Mineral Rights Law.
- Exploration & Surface Ownership.
- Report of the Unclaimed Mineral Proceeds Commission.
The 1866 Amendment to the Texas Constitution released all mines and minerals previously claimed or owned by the State to the owner of the soil, subject to taxation, and reserved to the State Coastal lands not in the hands of other individuals or entities, unless the Legislature might direct. Debate ensued over the question of the “retrospective” nature of the 1866 Amendment, that is, whether the owners of land granted by the successive sovereigns (Spain, Mexico, Republic of Texas and the State of Texas) before the adoption of the amendment would be given complete ownership of the minerals on their land. Relying upon the definition of “retrospective” in the case of Cox v. Robison (Tex. Sup. Crt, 1912) and Cowan v. Hardeman (26 Tex. 217: Tex. 1862): 12
The Commission finds: There is no authority that the 1866 Amendment released minerals to all previous owners of the soil or to anyone other than the owner of the soil as of the date of the 1866 Amendment. Further, the result is that the State of Texas can enact laws that reserve minerals from any conveyance of public lands, provided nothing will impair vested rights from the reservation.
Friday, April 21, 2023
For 4/21/23
- Texas Senate approves bill that would end faculty tenure at public universities.
- Texas Senate moves to end countywide voting on Election Day.
- Public schools would have to display Ten Commandments under bill passed by Texas Senate.
- Texas Senate approves bill that would ban diversity programs in public universities.
- Texas Senate moves to end countywide voting on Election Day.
- Public schools would have to display Ten Commandments under bill passed by Texas Senate.
- Texas Senate approves bill that would ban diversity programs in public universities.
Thursday, April 20, 2023
The Right of Discovery / The Right of Conquest
How did the English divide up property after arrival in 1607?
- From Virginia Places: How Colonists Acquired Title to Land in Virginia.
The English who settled in Virginia starting in 1607 asserted that they owned the land. During the colonial period, individual colonist acquired real property primarily through grants from the Virginia Company, headrights, treasury rights, and military warrants.
The pre-existing ownership rights of the Native Americans, the current occupants, were dismissed. At various times the English stated simply that they owned the land through "right of discovery" and "right of conquest." Treaties were negotiated with different tribes in the 1600's and 1700's to extinguish Native American claims, but land was seized rather than purchased from the original inhabitants. The chain of title for parcels in Virginia starts with colonial records created by the English.
Charters issued by James I did acknowledge the land claims of the Spanish in the New World, based on prior settlement. The first charter issued to the Virginia Company in 1606 authorized the investors "to make Habitation, Plantation, and to deduce a colony of sundry of our People into that part of America commonly called VIRGINIA, but settlement was allowed only on territory "not now actually possessed by any Christian Prince or People."
The Europeans who settled first at Jamestown were employees of the Virginia Company. The investors in that company controlled all the initial English land claims in the colony. That lasted less than a decade, after which land titles for individuals were established by company land grants to individuals and "particular plantations." After King James I revoked the Virginia Company's charter in 1624, land was privatized by treasury rights, headrights, militia rights, and land grants awarded by the governor and his Council of State.
The Virginia Company was not a successful business before it expired in 1624. The Spanish had found gold in the Caribbean, then seized vast wealth from organized Native American societies in Mexico and Peru - but there was no gold on the Coastal Plain of Virginia, and the paramount chiefdom led by Powhatan offered no stores of mineral wealth to exploit.
After John Rolfe made a profit from shipping Nicotiana tabacum tobacco in 1614, the Virginia Company recognized that it might generate a positive return on investment from agriculture. If farming was the answer, then the company certainly had one of the key requirements: land. The Third Charter in 1612 had granted the company all lands between 34-41 degrees, and in the Second Charter issued in 1609 it obtained all the land "from Sea to Sea West and North-west."2
Tobacco farming required large amounts of land because the plant exhausted key nutrients in the soil, parrticularly nitrogen, in just 2-3 years. New fields had to be cleared and planted regularly, so growing tobacco required owning large tracts of land.
Farming requires people to do the actual farming. At the same time as tobacco revealed a basis for profit in Virginia, the company was struggling to find new workers willing to be transported across the Atlantic Ocean. Negative reports from returning colonists discouraged even the poor in England from choosing to go to Virginia. After the Starving Time of 1609-1610, Lord de la Warre (as governor) and Sir Thomas Gates (as first marshal) had turned Jamestown into an armed camp with military discipline. They issued Laws Divine, Moral, and Martiall to control the behavior of the company's employees and soldiers.
Growing tobacco was a labor-intensive operation; large numbers of workers were needed to plant, weed, and harvest the crop. Owning a massive block of land in Virginia generated no profit for the investors unless there were farmers growing tobacco on that land. The Virginia Company needed to increase immigration to Virginia, and to decrease emigration of servants who had completed their time of required service.
The company adapted. Investors retained dreams of finding valuable minerals or generating profits from manufacturing items in Virginia such as glass, but the revised business plan took advantage of the company's greatest asset - its ownership of a vast amount of fertile land.
Related Concepts:
- Wikipedia: Headrights.
A headright refers to a legal grant of land given to settlers during the period of European colonization in the Americas. Headrights are most notable for their role in the expansion of the Thirteen Colonies; the Virginia Company gave headrights to settlers, and the Plymouth Company followed suit. The headright system was used in several colonies, including Maryland, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Most headrights were for 1 to 1,000 acres (4.0 km2) of land, and were granted to those who were willing to cross the Atlantic and help populate the colonies. Headrights were granted to anyone who would pay for the transportation costs of an indentured laborer. These land grants consisted of 50 acres (0.20 km2) for someone newly moving to the area and 100 acres (0.40 km2) for people previously living in the area. By ensuring the landowning masters had legal ownership of all land acquired, the indentured laborers after their indenture period had passed had little opportunity to procure their own land. This kept a large portion of the citizens of the Thirteen Colonies poor and led to tensions between the laborers and the landowners.
- Treasury Rights.
- Land Patents.
- Military Warrants.
- Wikipedia: Discovery doctrine.
The discovery doctrine, or doctrine of discovery, is a disputed interpretation of international law during the Age of Discovery, introduced into United States municipal law by the US Supreme Court Justice John Marshall in Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823). In Marshall's formulation of the doctrine, discovery of territory previously unknown to Europeans gave the discovering nation title to that territory against all other European nations, and this title could be perfected by possession. A number of legal scholars have criticized Marshall's interpretation of the relevant international law. In recent decades, advocates for Indigenous rights have campaigned against the doctrine. In 2023, the Vatican formally repudiated the doctrine.
- LII: doctrine of discovery.
The doctrine of discovery refers to a principle in public international law under which, when a nation “discovers” land, it directly acquires rights on that land. This doctrine arose when the European nations discovered non-European lands, and therefore acquired special rights, such as property and sovereignty rights, on those lands. This principle disregards the fact that the land oftentimes is already inhabited by another nation. In fact, this doctrine was used in order to legitimize the colonization of lands outside of Europe.
More broadly, the doctrine of discovery can be described as an international law doctrine giving authorization to explorers to claim terra nullius – i.e. said inhabited land – in the name of their sovereign when the land was not populated by Christians.
Nowadays, the world as viewed by international law is considered to be a finite world, because no land is open to state occupation (no terra nullius left), so this question no longer arises today. However, in 1792 Thomas Jefferson asserted that the doctrine of discovery was international, and therefore was applicable to the U.S. government. Today, the doctrine of discovery is still mentioned in American Imperialism and in regards to the treatment of indigenous people.
- Right of Conquest.
The right of conquest is a right of ownership to land after immediate possession via force of arms. It was recognized as a principle of international law that gradually deteriorated in significance until its proscription in the aftermath of World War II following the concept of crimes against peace introduced in the Nuremberg Principles. The interdiction of territorial conquests was confirmed and broadened by the UN Charter, which provides in article 2, paragraph 4, that "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations." Although civil wars continued, wars between established states have been rare since 1945. Nations that have resorted to the use of force since the Charter came into effect have typically invoked self-defense or the right of collective defense.
The requirements for a free market
There doesn't seem to be a consensus on this, but the themes seems similar.
Here are some opinions
From the Students for Liberty:
Free markets usually encompass the principles of
- private property
- capitalism
- individual rights.
From the U.S. Department of Agriculture:
Our business system is based upon four basic principles:
(1) freedom of choice
(2) private property rights
(3) profit motive of owners
(4) owner control.
From Investopedia:
The U.S. economic system of free enterprise has five main principles:
- the freedom for individuals to choose businesses,
- the right to private property,
- profits as an incentive,
- competition,
- consumer sovereignty.
From Wikipedia:
Central characteristics of capitalism include
- capital accumulation
- competitive markets
- a price system
- private property and the recognition of property rights
- voluntary exchange
- wage labor.
Here are some opinions
From the Students for Liberty:
Free markets usually encompass the principles of
- private property
- capitalism
- individual rights.
From the U.S. Department of Agriculture:
Our business system is based upon four basic principles:
(1) freedom of choice
(2) private property rights
(3) profit motive of owners
(4) owner control.
From Investopedia:
The U.S. economic system of free enterprise has five main principles:
- the freedom for individuals to choose businesses,
- the right to private property,
- profits as an incentive,
- competition,
- consumer sovereignty.
From Wikipedia:
Central characteristics of capitalism include
- capital accumulation
- competitive markets
- a price system
- private property and the recognition of property rights
- voluntary exchange
- wage labor.
Market Failure and the Texas Sunset Commission
I'm thinking about where these agencies, which are under review for 2022-23, fit.
What aspect of market failure does each purport to address?
- Negative Externalities
- Uneven Information
- Monopolies
- Public Goods
- - and what type of public good?
- - - social
- - - common pool
- - - toll goods
- - - pure public good
Anatomical Board of the State of Texas
Bandera County River Authority and Groundwater District
Texas Economic Development and Tourism Office
Electric Reliability Council of Texas
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Office of the Independent Ombudsman
Texas Invasive Species Coordinating Committee
Texas Juvenile Justice Department
Lavaca-Navidad River Authority
Texas Commission on Law Enforcement
Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Commission
Public Utility Commission of Texas
Office of Public Utility Counsel
San Antonio River Authority
San Jacinto River Authority
Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board
Office of State-Federal Relations
Upper Guadalupe River Authority
State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners
Texas Water Development Board
State Water Implementation Fund for Texas Advisory Committee
What aspect of market failure does each purport to address?
- Negative Externalities
- Uneven Information
- Monopolies
- Public Goods
- - and what type of public good?
- - - social
- - - common pool
- - - toll goods
- - - pure public good
Anatomical Board of the State of Texas
Bandera County River Authority and Groundwater District
Texas Economic Development and Tourism Office
Electric Reliability Council of Texas
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Office of the Independent Ombudsman
Texas Invasive Species Coordinating Committee
Texas Juvenile Justice Department
Lavaca-Navidad River Authority
Texas Commission on Law Enforcement
Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Commission
Public Utility Commission of Texas
Office of Public Utility Counsel
San Antonio River Authority
San Jacinto River Authority
Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board
Office of State-Federal Relations
Upper Guadalupe River Authority
State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners
Texas Water Development Board
State Water Implementation Fund for Texas Advisory Committee
Why is 35 a state highway and FM 521 not?
Let's find out:
- https://www.txdot.gov/projects/hearings-meetings/houston/archive/061721.html
- https://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/houston/fm-521-bw-8-fm-2234.html
What is Space X anyway?
For our look at privatization.
From Wikipedia:
an American spacecraft manufacturer, launcher, and a satellite communications corporation headquartered in Hawthorne, California. It was founded in 2002 by Elon Musk with the stated goal of reducing space transportation costs to enable the colonization of Mars. The company manufactures the Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, and Starship launch vehicles, several rocket engines, Cargo Dragon and Crew Dragon spacecraft, and Starlink communications satellites.
From History of Space X, Goals, Funding:
SpaceX is privately funded.[78] SpaceX developed its first launch vehicle—Falcon 1—and three rocket engines—Merlin, Kestrel, and Draco—completely with private capital. SpaceX contracted with the US government for a portion of the development funding for the Falcon 9 launch vehicle, which uses a modified version of the Merlin rocket engine.[78] SpaceX is developing the Falcon Heavy launch vehicle,[79] the Raptor methane-fueled rocket engine,[80] and a set of reusable launch vehicle technologies with private capital.[81]
As of May 2012, SpaceX had operated on total funding of approximately $1 billion in its first ten years of operation. Of this, private equity provided about $200M, with Musk investing approximately $100M and other investors having put in about $100M (Founders Fund, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, ...).[82] The remainder has come from progress payments on long-term launch contracts and development contracts. As of April 2012, NASA had put in about $400–500M of this amount, with most of that as progress payments on launch contracts.[83] By May 2012, SpaceX had contracts for 40 launch missions, and each of those contracts provide down payments at contract signing, plus many are paying progress payments as launch vehicle components are built in advance of mission launch, driven in part by US accounting rules for recognizing long-term revenue.[83]
In August 2012, SpaceX signed a large development contract with NASA to design and develop a crew-carrying space capsule for the "next generation of U.S. human spaceflight capabilities", in order to re-enable the launch of astronauts from U.S. soil by 2017. Two other companies, Boeing and Sierra Nevada Corporation, received similar development contracts. Advances made by all three companies under Space Act Agreements through NASA's Commercial Crew Integrated Capability (CCiCap) initiative are intended to ultimately lead to the availability of commercial human spaceflight services for both government and commercial customers. As part of this agreement, SpaceX was awarded a contract worth up to $440 million for contract deliverables between 2012 and May 2014.[84][85]
At the end of 2012 SpaceX had over 40 launches on its manifest, representing about $4 billion in contract revenue. Many of those contracts were already making progress payments to SpaceX, with both commercial and government (NASA/DOD) customers.[86]As of December 2013, SpaceX has a total of 50 future launches under contract, two-thirds of them are for commercial customers.[87][88] In late 2013, space industry media began to comment on the phenomenon that SpaceX prices are undercutting the major competitors in the commercial commsat launch market—the Ariane 5 and Proton-M[89]—at which time SpaceX had at least 10 further geostationary orbit flights on its books.
U.S. Constitution: The Enumerated Powers - Article 1, Section 8
- Avalon: Article One, Section 8.
- Constitution Annotated: Article One, Section 8.
Wednesday, April 19, 2023
From the Texas Sunset Commission: Agencies Under Review for the 2022-23 Review Cycle
A good way to look at public policy arenas in the state of Texas.
- Click here for it.
For GOVT 2306 4/19/23
From the Texas Tribune:
- Texas House approves sweeping limits on local regulations in GOP’s latest jab at blue cities.
- - The bill in question is House Bill 2127.
In a major escalation of Republicans’ efforts to weaken the state’s bluer cities and counties, lawmakers in the Texas Legislature are advancing a pair of bills that would seize control of local regulations that could range from worker protections to water restrictions during droughts.
A bill backed by Gov. Greg Abbott and business lobbying groups, House Bill 2127, would bar cities and counties from passing regulations — and overturn existing ones — that go further than state law in a broad swath of areas including labor, agriculture, natural resources and finance. It received initial approval Tuesday in the Texas House by a 92-55 vote but must come back before the chamber for a final vote.
The bill’s backers argue it’s needed to combat what they call a growing patchwork of local regulations that make it difficult for business owners to operate and harm the state’s economy. Texas’ economic growth and jobs are overwhelmingly concentrated in the state’s urban areas.
- In late-night testimonies, relatives of Uvalde victims call on Texas lawmakers to advance gun bill.
- - The bill in question is House Bill 2744.
With emotional testimony about their own experiences, parents of children who were killed in the Uvalde school shooting urged a Texas House committee late Tuesday to pass on to the full chamber a bill that would raise the minimum age to purchase certain semi-automatic rifles. Families waited more than 12 hours after the House Select Committee on Community Safety first convened about 9 a.m. to testify about their final memories with some of the 19 children and two teachers who were killed in the May 24 mass shooting at Robb Elementary and how their lives have changed since.
. . . This is the first Texas legislative session since the state’s worst school shooting in history. For more than 13 years, lawmakers have loosened gun regulations and made accessing firearms easier, despite eight mass shootings in the same period.
Any bill creating new regulations on gun access is sure to face an uphill battle in the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature.
The testimony was during a hearing for House Bill 2744, from Democratic state Rep. Tracy King, who represents Uvalde. The bill would prohibit selling, renting, leasing or giving a semi-automatic rifle with a caliber greater than .22 that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine to a person younger than 21 years old.
- Texas Senate passes $308 billion budget plan, kicking off high-stakes negotiations with the House.
- - The bill in question is HB 1.
The Texas Senate on Monday gave final approval to a $308 billion spending plan for the next two years, sending budget leaders into high-stakes negotiations with their counterparts in the House over property taxes and other divisive issues — with just weeks to go before the legislative session ends.
Senators voted 31-0 to spend $141.2 billion in general revenue on major investments in property tax cuts, juvenile justice, mental health, higher education, state parks, historical sites and pay raises for teachers and state employees.
State Rep. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, which oversaw the budget-writing process for the chamber, said “smart fiscal policy” over the last several sessions allowed budget writers to make historic investments thanks to an unprecedented surplus in state coffers. Comptroller Glenn Hegar has said the surplus is from a record amount of sales tax and oil and gas taxes collected from Texans for the past two years.
What is Fintech?
I stumbled across a story claiming that Starbucks has effectively turned into a bank. The author builds the argument up from an analysis of how it uses its gift cards, a technology they innovated around 2008.
- How Starbucks secretly operates like a bank.
- Is Starbucks Actually a Bank?
It led me down a rabbit hole.
FinTech is short for Financial technology.
So what's that all about?
- Click here for the Wikipedia entry.
Fintech, a portmanteau of "financial technology", refers to firms using new technology to compete with traditional financial methods in the delivery of financial services. Artificial intelligence, blockchain, cloud computing, and big data are regarded as the "ABCD" (four key areas) of fintech. The use of smartphones for mobile banking, investing, borrowing services, and cryptocurrency are examples of technologies designed to make financial services more accessible to the general public. Fintech companies consist of both startups and established financial institutions and technology companies trying to replace or enhance the usage of financial services provided by existing financial companies.
It all falls under the heading of financial services.
What are financial services?
Financial services are economic services provided by the finance industry, which together encompass a broad range of service sector firms that provide financial management, including credit unions, banks, credit-card companies, insurance companies, accountancy companies, consumer-finance companies, stock brokerages, investment funds, individual asset managers, and some government-sponsored enterprises.
As we discuss in GOVT 2305, the U.S. Constitution contains implied powers that allow for the creation and regulations of banks and other financial institutions. The field is very dynamic however, which leads to calls for new regulations, as well as resistance to those calls.
What are financial regulations?
Financial regulation is a form of regulation or supervision, which subjects financial institutions to certain requirements, restrictions and guidelines, aiming to maintain the stability and integrity of the financial system. This may be handled by either a government or non-government organization. Financial regulation has also influenced the structure of banking sectors by increasing the variety of financial products available. Financial regulation forms one of three legal categories which constitutes the content of financial law, the other two being market practices and case law.
Wikipedia lists the following as the major financial regulatory institutions in the United States (at the national level)
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)
Federal Reserve System ("Fed")
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)
National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) (a State-based regulatory standards organization, the McCarran–Ferguson Act exempts the "business of insurance" from most regulation at the Federal level)
National Credit Union Administration (NCUA)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)