- Global intelligence leaders warn against China's technology theft.

- Industrial espionage.

- United States Intelligence Community.

- Five Eyes.

🇺🇸 The History of the United States: Every Year

Media Impact on Child Labor Policy

 https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/hine-photos

FULL: Hennepin County judge rejects plea deal in deadly Mpls carjacking

Is the "deep state" the same as the "bureaucracy?"

- Wikipedia: Deep State. 

A deep state is a type of governance made up of potentially secret and unauthorized networks of power operating independently of a state's political leadership in pursuit of their own agenda and goals. In popular usage, the term carries overwhelmingly negative connotations.[2] The range of possible uses of the term is similar to that for the shadow government conspiracy theory. The expression state within a state is an older and similar concept. Historically, it designated a well-defined organization that seeks to function independently, whereas the deep state refers more to a hidden organization seeking to manipulate the public state.

Potential sources for deep state organization include rogue elements among organs of state, such as the armed forces, or public authorities such as intelligence agencies, police, secret police, administrative agencies, and government bureaucracy.

Plans for an emergency government that takes over in the event of a disaster,

- see continuity of government

- An unelected bureaucracy or branch of the security services –

- A state within a state or deep state – Deep state in the United States.

- A 'shadow government', a conspiracy theory of a secret government.

__________

- Deconstructing the Deep State.

- The “Deep State” Myth and the Real Executive Branch Bureaucracy.

- Bureaucratic Resistance and the Deep State Myth.

- The Real Deep State.

The Limits of Acceptable Discourse: The Overton Window

- From Wikipedia: The Overton Window. 


Overton described a spectrum from "more free" to "less free" with regard to government intervention, oriented vertically on an axis, to avoid comparison with the left/right political spectrum. As the spectrum moves or expands, an idea at a given location may become more or less politically acceptable. After Overton's death, his Mackinac Center for Public Policy colleague Joseph Lehman further developed the idea and named it after Overton.

Political commentator Joshua Treviño has postulated that the six degrees of acceptance of public ideas are roughly:

- Unthinkable
- Radical
- Acceptable
- Sensible
- Popular
- Policy

The Overton window is an approach to identifying the ideas that define the spectrum of acceptability of governmental policies. It says politicians can act only within the acceptable range. Shifting the Overton window involves proponents of policies outside the window persuading the public to expand the window. Proponents of current policies, or similar ones within the window, seek to convince people that policies outside it should be deemed unacceptable. According to Lehman, who coined the term, "The most common misconception is that lawmakers themselves are in the business of shifting the Overton window. That is absolutely false. Lawmakers are actually in the business of detecting where the window is, and then moving to be in accordance with it."

According to Lehman, the concept is just a description of how ideas work, not advocacy of extreme policy proposals. In an interview with The New York Times, he said, "It just explains how ideas come in and out of fashion, the same way that gravity explains why something falls to the earth. I can use gravity to drop an anvil on your head, but that would be wrong. I could also use gravity to throw you a life preserver; that would be good."

Normalize

How to sway Public Opinion: Political Campaigns, Propaganda, and Public Relations

- Political Campaign: 

A political campaign is an organized effort which seeks to influence the decision making progress within a specific group. In democracies, political campaigns often refer to electoral campaigns, by which representatives are chosen or referendums are decided. In modern politics, the most high-profile political campaigns are focused on general elections and candidates for head of state or head of government, often a president or prime minister.


- Propaganda: 

Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence or persuade an audience to further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented. Propaganda can be found in a wide variety of different contexts.

In the 20th century, the English term propaganda was often associated with a manipulative approach, but historically, propaganda has been a neutral descriptive term of any material that promotes certain opinions or ideologies. Equivalent non-English terms have also largely retained the original neutral connotation.


- Public Relations: 

Public relations (PR) is the practice of managing and disseminating information from an individual or an organization (such as a business, government agency, or a nonprofit organization) to the public in order to influence their perception. Public relations and publicity differ in that PR is controlled internally, whereas publicity is not controlled and contributed by external parties. Public relations may include an organization or individual gaining exposure to their audiences using topics of public interest and news items that do not require direct payment.   The exposure is mostly media-based, and this differentiates it from advertising as a form of marketing communications. Public relations aims to create or obtain coverage for clients for free, also known as earned media, rather than paying for marketing or advertising also known as paid media. But in the early 21st century, advertising is also a part of broader PR activities.

What is the source of the judiciary's power?

Assuming it has any tangible power.

- Legislature: Power of the Purse.
- Executive: Power of the Sword.
- Judiciary: ?

Federalist 78

- Avalon Project: 


Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power1; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks. It equally proves, that though individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive.

- Wikipedia: 

Federalist No. 78 was published May 28, 1788, and first appeared in a newspaper on June 14 of the same year. It was written to explicate and justify the structure of the judiciary under the proposed Constitution of the United States; it is the first of six essays by Hamilton on this issue. In particular, it addresses concerns by the Anti-Federalists over the scope and power of the federal judiciary, which would have comprised unelected, politically insulated judges that would be appointed for life.


Worcester v Georgia: 

- Oyez:  

Facts of the case: In September 1831, Samuel A. Worcester and others, all non-Native Americans, were indicted in the supreme court for the county of Gwinnett in the state of Georgia for "residing within the limits of the Cherokee nation without a license" and "without having taken the oath to support and defend the constitution and laws of the state of Georgia."

Question: Does the state of Georgia have the authority to regulate the intercourse between citizens of its state and members of the Cherokee Nation?

Conclusion: No. In an opinion delivered by Chief Justice John Marshall, the Court held that the Georgia act, under which Worcester was prosecuted, violated the Constitution, treaties, and laws of the United States. Noting that the "treaties and laws of the United States contemplate the Indian territory as completely separated from that of the states; and provide that all intercourse with them shall be carried on exclusively by the government of the union," Chief Justice Marshall argued, "The Cherokee nation, then, is a distinct community occupying its own territory in which the laws of Georgia can have no force.

- Wikipedia: 

. . . a landmark case in which the United States Supreme Court vacated the conviction of Samuel Worcester and held that the Georgia criminal statute that prohibited non-Native Americans from being present on Native American lands without a license from the state was unconstitutional. The opinion is most famous for its dicta, which laid out the relationship between tribes and the state and federal governments. It is considered to have built the foundations of the doctrine of tribal sovereignty in the United States.

. . . In a popular quotation that is believed to be apocryphal, President Andrew Jackson reportedly responded: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" This quotation first appeared twenty years after Jackson had died, in newspaper publisher Horace Greeley's 1865 history of the U.S. Civil War, The American Conflict. It was, however, reported in the press in March 1832 that Jackson was unlikely to aid in carrying out the court's decision if his assistance were to be requested. In an April 1832 letter to John Coffee, Jackson wrote that "the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate."[6][9] In a letter in March 1832, Virginia politician David Campbell reported a private conversation in which Jackson had "sportively" suggested calling on the Massachusetts state militia to enforce the order if the Supreme Court requested he intervene, because Jackson believed Northern partisans had brought about the court's ruling.

Characteristics of a Bureaucracy

It is distinguished from informal and collegial organizations.

- complexity

- division of labor

- permanence

- professional management

- hierarchical coordination and control

- strict chain of command, and legal authority. 

Civil Service, Public Administration, Public Sector

- Civil Service.

. . . a collective term for a sector of government composed mainly of career civil servants hired rather than appointed or elected, whose institutional tenure typically survives transitions of political leadership. A civil servant, also known as a public servant or public employee, is a person employed in the public sector by a government department or agency for public sector undertakings. Civil servants work for central and state governments, and answer to the government, not a political party.

- Public Administration.

. . . the implementation of public policy, administration of government establishment (public governance), management of non-profit establishment (nonprofit governance), and also a subfield of political science taught in public policy schools that studies this implementation and prepares people, especially civil servants in administrative positions for working in the public sector, voluntary sector, some industries in the private sector dealing with government relations, regulatory affairs, legislative assistance, corporate social responsibility (CSR), environmental, social, governance (ESG), public procurement (PP), public-private partnerships (P3), and business-to-government marketing/sales (B2G) as well as those working at think tanks, non-profit organizations, consulting firms, trade associations, or in other positions that uses similar skills found in public administration.

- Public Sector.

. . . the part of the economy composed of both public services and public enterprises. Public sectors include the public goods and governmental services such as the military, law enforcement, infrastructure, public transit, public education, along with health care and those working for the government itself, such as elected officials. The public sector might provide services that a non-payer cannot be excluded from (such as street lighting), services which benefit all of society rather than just the individual who uses the service.[1] Public enterprises, or state-owned enterprises, are self-financing commercial enterprises that are under public ownership which provide various private goods and services for sale and usually operate on a commercial basis.

From Wikipedia: Gag rule (United States)

A restriction on congressional speech in the mid 19th Century.

- Click here for the entry.

In United States history, the gag rule was a series of rules that forbade the raising, consideration, or discussion of slavery in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1836 to 1844.

Congress regularly received petitions asking for various types of relief or action. Before the gag rules, House rules required that the first thirty days of each session of Congress be devoted to the reading of petitions from constituents. Each petition was read aloud, printed, and assigned to an appropriate committee, which could choose to address or ignore it. After those thirty days, petitions were read in the House every other Monday.

This procedure became unworkable in 1835, when, at the instigation of the new American Anti-Slavery Society, petitions arrived in Congress in quantities never before seen. Over the gag rule period, well over 1,000 petitions, with 130,000 signatures, poured into the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate praying for the abolition or the restriction of that allegedly beneficial "peculiar institution", as it was called in the South. There was a special focus on slavery in the District of Columbia, where policy was a federal, rather than state, matter. The petitions also asked Congress to use its Constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce to end the interstate slave trade, The petitions were usually presented by former president John Quincy Adams, who as a member of the House of Representatives from strongly anti-slavery Massachusetts, identified himself particularly with the struggle against any Congressional abridgement of the right of citizens to petition the government.

The pro-slavery forces controlled Congress. The faction responded with a series of gag rules that, much to the disgust of Northerners, automatically "tabled" all such petitions, prohibiting them from being printed, read, discussed, or voted on. "The effect of these petitions was to create much irritation and ill feeling between different parts of the Union."

  

From Politico: ACLU: Trump’s gag order in federal case is unconstitutional

Interesting.

- What is a gag order? 

- What are the constitutional arguments for and against them?

- How have they been applied in this case?

- Click here for the article.  

For four years during former President Donald Trump’s presidency, the American Civil Liberties Union was one of his biggest courtroom adversaries. Now, the group is taking his side in a high-profile fight over what Trump can say as a criminal defendant.

The ACLU on Wednesday stepped into the battle over Trump’s federal gag order, arguing that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan violated Trump’s First Amendment rights as well as the public’s right to hear him when she issued the order earlier this month. Chutkan is presiding over the criminal case special counsel Jack Smith is pursuing against Trump for trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.

“The obvious and unprecedented public interest in this prosecution, as well as the widespread political speech that it has generated and will continue to generate, only underscores the need to apply the most stringent First Amendment standard to a restraint on Defendant’s speech rights,” ACLU attorneys wrote in a friend-of-the-court brief.

The group urged Chutkan to reevaluate her order, calling it both vague and overbroad, with aspects of its meaning “unknown and perhaps unknowable.” One particular uncertainty the ACLU seized on was the meaning of Chutkan’s prohibition on statements that “target” Smith, his prosecutors, court personnel, defense attorneys or witnesses.

“Reading the order, Defendant cannot possibly know what he is permitted to say, and what he is not,” the group wrote.

Trump’s lawyers opposed the gag and have appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Chutkan has temporarily lifted the gag order while she mulls a request to keep it on ice during that appeal.

Trump has also run into trouble in connection with a separate gag order issued by a judge in New York overseeing a civil case involving Trump’s business empire. After Trump used his social media platform to attack the judge’s law clerk, the New York judge ordered Trump not to make comments about court staff. Last week, Trump was fined $5,000 for violating that order, and he racked up another $10,000 fine Wednesday.

From the Houston Chronicle: Texas Medical Center's multibillion-dollar research campus opens, ushering in a new era

The Texas Governor and the city of Houston continue to work together the economic interests of the local area by enhancing the Texas Medical Center. 

- Click here for the article.

The first piece in a long-anticipated multibillion-dollar biomedical research campus opened Thursday in the Texas Medical Center, setting the stage for what could become a game-changing life sciences hub generating $5.4 billion in annual economic impact and tens of thousands jobs in Houston.

Houston has struggled to compete with larger life sciences magnets in San Francisco, Boston, San Diego and Raleigh-Durham, and the 37-acre Helix Park campus along Old Spanish Trail, a project nearly a decade in the making, represents a major milestone in helping the city gain momentum.

“When you looked at the incredible business and economic platform the state of Texas has, there was one glaring deficiency, and that is to have a massive hub for life sciences,” Gov. Greg Abbott said at the event.

Economic development officials think Helix Park will help to fill that gap, becoming a launch pad for a more mature life science industry in Texas.

The project is also the first time TMC, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Texas A&M University Health Science Center and UTHealth Houston have collaborated to build and finance a shared space to house their researchers under one roof.

“We've never really had a place where all of us felt like it was ours,” Bill McKeon, president of TMC, said in an interview. Shared laboratory spaces, plus a plethora of communal areas and coworking/office spaces, are meant to encourage researchers to mingle and collaborate.

Is there a constitutional right to be annoying?

We discussed this in a class today.

The answer might be yes.




- Asserting a Constitutional Right to Annoy.

- Coates v. City of Cincinnati.

- New York's Highest Court Upholds the Right to Be Annoying.

A key phrase IMO: "intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm"

Annoyance is included in this broader list of behaviors. Does it belong?

From the Texas Tribune: Texas House passes three immigration bills after contentious night of debate

The bills in questions are: 

HB 4: Relating to prohibitions on the illegal entry into or illegal presence in this state by a person who is an alien, the enforcement of those prohibitions, and authorizing under certain circumstances the removal of persons who violate certain of those prohibitions; creating criminal offenses.

HB 6: Relating to making an appropriation for the construction, operation, and maintenance of border barrier infrastructure.

SB 4: Relating to the punishment for certain criminal conduct involving the smuggling of persons or the operation of a stash house; increasing criminal penalties.

- Click here for the article.

The Texas House in the early morning hours Thursday approved three bills aimed at beefing up border security, one that would appropriate more than $1 billion for additional border barriers, one that would allow police officers to send back migrants to who cross the border illegally and another that would increase penalties for human smugglers.

Lawmakers spent hours debating the measures Wednesday and into Thursday morning. All three bills drew Democratic opposition, but the most contentious debate was House Bill 4, which would empower police officers to apprehend, arrest or send back migrants who cross the border illegally. Tempers flared when state Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palestine, made a motion to block new amendments, a rare move used to end a debate sooner.

After that motion passed, House Speaker Dade Phelan called a break as members posed parliamentary inquiries about the motion and the House stood at ease for hours. When they returned, Phelan called for the dozens of pending amendments to be heard.

From the ACLU: How Officials in Georgia are Suppressing Political Protest as ‘Domestic Terrorism’

Political commentary from an influential advocacy group.

Again note the strategic use of terminology.

- Click here for the article.

Over the past few months, 42 activists have been charged with “domestic terrorism” under Georgia state law. Their acts of “terrorism”? Alleged property damage and trespassing while protesting. These prosecutions exemplify a highly problematic trend of both the federal and state government: using domestic terrorism powers to punish dissent.

In Georgia, the arrested activists are part of a movement seeking to stop the construction of a $90 million police training facility located in a forest in Southeast Atlanta. Since late 2021, protesters under the banners of “Stop Cop City” and “Protect the Weelaunee Forest” have raised concerns over climate justice, displacement of Black communities, and increasing militarization of police forces. Protesters have camped out in the forest, staged marches, and hosted community events. At times, a small minority of protesters have allegedly damaged property.

Georgia police have responded with overwhelming and disproportionate force. Police killed one protester in January. They have arrested dozens more, including a legal observer associated with the Southern Poverty Law Center and the National Lawyers Guild. And prosecutors have levied severe charges under Georgia’s rarely-used domestic terrorism statute.

Until 2017, Georgia’s domestic terrorism statute criminalized acts intended to or reasonably likely to kill or injure at least 10 people. In the wake of the massacre of nine Black parishioners by a white supremacist gunman in Charleston, South Carolina, the Georgia legislature amended the statute to vastly expand its reach. The new law broadened the state’s definition of “domestic terrorism” to include certain property crimes committed with the intent to “alter, change, or coerce the policy of the government” by “intimidation or coercion.”

Congressional Maps in Georgia and North Carolina . . .

The one in Georgia has been overturned by a federal district judge.


- NYT: Georgia’s Voting Maps Are Struck Down.

Republicans in Georgia violated a landmark civil rights law in drawing voting maps that diluted the power of Black voters, a federal judge in Atlanta ruled on Thursday, ordering that new maps must be drawn in time for the 2024 elections.


- Politico: North Carolina’s new GOP gerrymander could flip four House seats.

Republicans have pushed through an aggressive gerrymander of North Carolina’s congressional map that will help them flip several seats in Congress. Those looming GOP pickups will bolster the party’s chances of defending their narrow House majority next year by erasing or even surpassing Republican losses elsewhere in the South, where courts have begun tossing out congressional lines for diluting the power of Black voters.


- Democracy Docket: Federal Judge Orders New Congressional and Legislative Maps in Georgia.

This major voting rights victory stems from three lawsuits challenging the Peach State’s congressional and legislative maps: Pendergrass v. Raffensperger (congressional), Grant v. Raffensperger (legislative) and Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc. v. Raffensperger (legislative). After the legislature enacted new maps in 2021, Black voters in Georgia filed lawsuits challenging the state’s congressional and state legislative maps for diluting the voting strength of Black voters and therefore violating Section 2 of the VRA. A trial was held from Sept. 5-14.

Today, a federal judge struck down the maps finding that “In light of this fact and in conjunction with all of the evidence and testimony in this case, the Court determines that Georgia’s congressional and legislative maps violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and enjoins their use in any future elections.”

To remedy the VRA violations, Georgia must adopt the following districts by Dec. 8:

- One additional majority-Black congressional district in west-metro Atlanta;
- Two additional majority-Black Senate districts in south-metro Atlanta;
- Two additional majority-Black House districts in south-metro Atlanta;
- One additional majority-Black House district in west-metro Atlanta and
- Two additional majority-Black House districts in and around Macon-Bibb.

- National Archives: Comparing Gerrymandered Districts in Georgia and North Carolina.


__________

For background: 

- NYT: Supreme Court Rejects Voting Map That Diluted Black Voters’ Power.

- Scotusblog: Allen v. Milligan.

- Allen v Milligan.

Immunity

Im·mune
/iˈmyo͞on/

adjective
1. totally or partially resistant to a particular infectious disease or pathogen.
"they were naturally immune to hepatitis B"

2. protected or exempt, especially from an obligation or the effects of something.
"they are immune from legal action"

Sometimes the law does not apply.

Definition

- Legal Immunity: 

Legal immunity, or immunity from prosecution, is a legal status wherein an individual or entity cannot be held liable for a violation of the law, in order to facilitate societal aims that outweigh the value of imposing liability in such cases. Such legal immunity may be from criminal prosecution, or from civil liability (being subject of lawsuit), or both. The most notable forms of legal immunity are parliamentary immunity and witness immunity.

- Immunity: 

Immunity refers to legal protection that exempts a person from liability, punishment, or legal action that would otherwise apply. Immunity can be granted in various contexts, including criminal and civil cases, administrative proceedings, and legislative inquiries. For example, see "immunity from prosecution"

The concept of immunity has its roots in the common law, but it has been codified in various statutes and legal codes. For example, the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause grants immunity to federal officials performing their official duties.

See also: Diplomatic immunity; Qualified Immunity; Sovereign immunity

Types: 

Absolute immunity, a type of immunity for government officials that confers total immunity when acting in the course of their duties

Amnesty law, a law that provides immunity for past crimes

Charitable immunity, immunity from liability granted to charities in many countries from the 19th century to the mid-20th century

Diplomatic immunity, agreement between sovereign governments to exclude diplomats from local laws

Immunity from prosecution (international law), exclusion of governments or their officials from prosecution under international law

Judicial immunity, immunity of a judge or magistrate in the course of their official duties

Parliamentary immunity, immunity granted to elected officials during their tenure and in the course of their duties

Qualified immunity, in the United States, immunity of individuals performing tasks as part of the government's actions

Sovereign immunity, the prevention of lawsuits or prosecution against rulers or governments without their given consent

Sovereign immunity in the United States, the legal privilege by which the American federal, state, and tribal governments cannot be sued

Spousal privilege, also called spousal immunity, protects a spouse from testifying against the defendant

State immunity, principle of international law that the government of a state is not amenable before the courts of another state

Witness immunity, immunity granted to a witness in exchange for testimony



________

ArtII.S3.5 Presidential Immunity

ArtII.S3.5.1 Presidential Immunity to Suits and Official Conduct

ArtII.S3.5.2 Presidential Immunity to Suits and Unofficial Conduct

ArtII.S3.5.3 Qualified Immunity Doctrine

Random Links related to the Federal, State, and Local Workforce

- Protecting the Federal Workforce.

- Federal Workforce Statistics Sources: OPM and OMB.

- The Early Federal Workforce.

- Standards of Ethical Conduct.

- Annual Report on the Federal Workforce.

- https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.651.htm.

- https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/LG/htm/LG.146.htm.

- Can I Take It?

- Where do state and local government employees work?

- State and Local Governments Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

- FRED: Government: Local Government in Texas.

- CBPP: Some Basic Facts on State and Local Government Workers.

- USA.gov: Local governments.

title IX and gender identity and sexual orientation

I'll clean this up soon.

- Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation.

- Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance: Sex-Related Eligibility Criteria For Male and Female Athletic Teams.

Equal Treatment v Religious Freedom

An ongoing situation in Texas has put these in conflict. 

There have been many such cases nationally.

The case is DIANNE HENSLEY v. STATE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT; ET AL.

- Click here for the case documents.
- Click here for video of the hearing before the Texas Supreme Court.

For media coverage: 

- Texas judge’s refusal to marry gay couples goes before state supreme court.

Texas Supreme Court justices Wednesday questioned whether a Waco justice of the peace should remain under threat of a judicial oversight body’s sanctions if she continues refusing to marry gay couples.

The State Commission on Judicial Conduct gave Judge Dianne Hensley a public warning in 2019 for performing opposite-sex weddings for couples, but declining to perform same-sex wedding ceremonies on religious grounds — a move that casted doubt on her capacity to act impartially, according to the notice. Her refusal occurred in the wake of a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling that required all states to license same-sex marriages.

Hensley serves as a justice of the peace in McLennan County, an elected official whose role includes hearing traffic and misdemeanor cases; presiding over landlord and tenant disputes; and, among other duties, can include conducting weddings.

Following the 2019 warning, Hensley filed a lawsuit alleging that the judicial commission violated her rights under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The 1999 act was designed to ensure the government cannot “substantially burden” free exercise of religious beliefs.

The state’s highest civil court heard oral arguments Wednesday after an appeals court affirmed a lower court’s decision to toss her legal challenge last year on grounds that the commission acted within its powers and is protected from lawsuits due to sovereign immunity.

The case is believed to be among several that will attempt to expand the reach of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that let a Colorado web designer refuse same-sex couples. However, most of Wednesday’s proceedings revolved around what Hensley had already done and what could happen to her in the future.

Waco judge sues state agency after receiving public warning for refusing to officiate same-sex marriages.

A Waco judge who received a public warning last month for refusing to officiate same-sex marriages filed a lawsuit against the state agency that issued the warning, claiming the governmental body violated state law by punishing her for actions taken in accordance with her faith.

The First Liberty Institute, a high-profile Plano-based religious liberty law firm closely aligned with the Texas Attorney General’s Office, will represent the judge, Dianne Hensley, in the lawsuit filed Tuesday in McLennan County District Court.

Shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court asserted the constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry in the landmark 2015 Obergefell decision, Hensley refused to officiate any weddings. But in August 2016, she decided to resume officiating weddings between men and women, and said she would “politely refer” same-sex couples who sought her services to others in the area.

“For providing a solution to meet a need in my community while remaining faithful to my religious beliefs, I received a ‘Public Warning.’ No one should be punished for that,” Hensley said in a statement.

Hensley, who claims the state violated the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act, is seeking a declaratory judgment from the court decreeing that any justice of the peace may refuse to officiate a same-sex wedding “if the commands of their religious faith forbid them to participate in same-sex marriage ceremonies.”

The public warning issued by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct Nov. 12 did not carry a fine. But Hensley claims the investigation and warning “substantially burdened the free exercise of her religion, with no compelling justification.” She seeks damages of $10,000.

Her attorney on the case, Jonathan Mitchell, is a former solicitor general of Texas. 

For more: 

- State Religious Freedom Restoration Acts.
- Click here for the relevant law in Texas.
- TLO: SB 138 - 76(R).

SPEED RACER 1967 Cartoon Intro

This just popped in class. I was responsible.

From the Houston Chronicle: Harris County election judges say they're ready for November, despite host of challenges

Early election is underway, Election day is November 7.

- Click here for the article. 

Many veteran election judges said they're returning for duty despite recent changes and challenges to election administration. This comes as welcome news, given that Harris County will need 1,400 election judges to run its estimated 700 polling locations in the upcoming November election.

Earlier this month, a state law abolishing the county's Elections Administrator's Office went into effect, handing over duties for running elections and voter registration to Harris County Clerk Teneshia Hudspeth and Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Ann Harris Bennett. The two offices previously were in charge of elections until 2020, when Commissioners Court voted to create an appointed elections administrator position.

Another law went into effect that creates a provision for the state to remove those elected officials if a “recurring pattern of problems” is not rectified.

But the county's elections have been under increased scrutiny for years, dramatically escalating this year with state legislation eliminating its elections office, pending litigation challenging the results of last year's November election and an ongoing investigation by the Texas Rangers and the Harris County District Attorney's Office into a ballot paper shortage last year that had workers scrambling at a small percentage of the county's polling sites.

In addition to those developments, election judges have had to contend with several leadership changes — Hudspeth is the sixth person in six years to run Harris County elections — and new voting equipment, which debuted in 2021 but still presents some difficulties with processing a lengthy two-page ballot.

Despite the title, an election judge isn't a judicial position. Ordinary citizens — such as retirees, teachers and lawyers — are trained to run Harris County's polling locations while voting is underway. During a general election, like the one coming up in November, each polling place needs one judge from each party, in addition to a small staff of paid election workers supporting them.

For More: 

- Harris County’s voter roll errors — if left unexplained — could fuel claims of voter fraud.

UH - terminology module 3

- Fed Chapter 5: Civil Rights.

discrimination
civil rights
equal protection clause
civil rights movement
civil rights amendments
Jim Crow laws
separate but equal rule
NAACP
NAWSA
Brown v Board
de facto segregation
de jure segregation
Civil Rights Act of 1964
public accommodations.
- Know  Your  Rights: Title  II  of  the  Civil  Rights  Act  of  1964.
employment.
- employment discrimination.
housing 
- housing discrimination.
- Fair Housing Act.
- 
marriage.
mass incarceration.
rational basis test
intermediate scrutiny
suspect classifications
strict scrutiny
affirmative action
valid government purpose

- Fed Chapter 6: Public Opinion

public opinion 
values
beliefs
liberty
equality of opportunity
political ideology
attitudes
opinion
liberal 
conservative
libertarian
socialist
political socialization
agents of socialization
gender gap
political leaders
marketplace of ideas
responsiveness
polls
random sample
social desirability effect
selection bias
push polls
bandwagon effect

- Fed Chapter 7: The Media

media
journalism
the profit motive
public media
political news
mass media
media conglomerates
online news
social media
digital media
digital divide
newspapers
advertising revenue
television
broadcast media
narrowcasting
radio
partisan press
penny press
citizen journalism
quality
fake news
misinformation
disinformation
propaganda
impact
trust
agenda setting
gatekeeping
framing
priming
leaks
adversarial journalism
regulations
FCC
Telecommunications Act
equal time rule
right of rebuttal

- Fed Chapter 8: Political Participation and Voting

protest
voting
suffrage
turnout
traditional political participation
digital political participation
expressive politics
who votes?
socioeconomic status
age
race and ethnicity
African Americans
Whites
Latinos / Latinas
Asian Americans
Gender
Religion
mobilization
electoral competition
ballot measures
registration
felony convictions
absentee ballots
early voting

Links - 10/23/23

- Day of the Dead.

- CIGARETTE TAX.

- TOBACCO TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES.

- Educ. Code Section 51.9315: Protected Expression on Campus.

- Protected Expression on Campus Compliance Report.

- Texas College: Mission & History.

- Campus Crime Statistics for Alvin Community College.

- ACC Crime Statistics2014-2017. 

- UH: Jeanne Clery Act Compliance.

- Clery Center.

- With 22 portable classrooms on one campus, a Texas school district is asking voters for $2 billion.

- Texas Reps. Jodey Arrington, Pete Sessions and Roger Williams are making moves to become U.S. House speaker.

- - Jodey Arrington.
- - Pete Sessions.
- - Roger Williams.

CAP: Investments in the State and Local Government Workforce Will Deliver Crucial Services and Create Economic Security

- Click here for the article.

State and local government employees deliver critical services to constituents every day. They operate the nation’s buses and trains; deliver essential safety net services, such as housing, cash assistance, and health and unemployment insurance; teach and care for children; and contain infectious diseases and protect the safety of the nation’s water, food, and air. Yet the state and local government workforce has struggled to regain pandemic-related job losses, with 695,000 fewer people employed compared with pre-pandemic numbers. Its labor market recovery has been notably slower than that of the private sector, despite infusions of federal funds. A slower recovery in state and local government jobs not only affects constituents who directly rely upon their services but also has devastating impacts on the economic security of those most likely to work in these jobs, disproportionately women and workers of color.

This report provides an overview of why investing in the local and state government workforce is critical for direct service provision and economic security. It includes new analysis showing that the occupations that experienced the largest job losses in 2021 compared with pre-pandemic levels facilitate direct service delivery to constituents. It also includes recommendations for how state and local governments can create a sustainable workforce in the long term through investments in hiring, recruitment, training, and compensation. It is imperative that governments work to address these job losses and strengthen this critical workforce.

State and local governments deliver the services that most Americans interact with every day. These sectors have significant control and impact in many areas:

- Public health infrastructure
- State universities
- Community colleges
- Workforce development systems
- K-12 education
- Public benefit programs, such as TANF and unemployment insurance

They license hundreds of critical occupations; provide law enforcement services; provide housing; oversee elections; and operate highways, parks, libraries, recreation centers, playgrounds, and museums. State and local governments are woven into the very fabric and functioning of our daily lives. For these services to be accessible to constituents, state and local governments need to be at full staffing and operational capacity.

From the New York Tines: F.C.C. Moves Toward Restoring Net Neutrality Rules, Igniting Regulatory Fight

Rulemaking . . . 

- Click here for the article. 

The Federal Communications Commission voted on Thursday to move forward on a proposal to restore open internet rules, which were repealed during the Trump administration, with a final vote likely to come next year.

The commissioners at the Democratic-led agency voted 3 to 2 along party lines to kick off a monthslong process to bring back so-called net neutrality regulations that prohibit broadband providers from blocking or slowing down services like Google and Netflix on their networks.

Telecommunications companies that provide broadband and Republicans have vowed to fight the proposal, saying it will be too much of a burden on broadband providers.

By voting to move ahead with a proposal to restore net neutrality, the F.C.C. is broadening its reach.

The move will ultimately enable the agency to categorize high-speed internet as a utility, like water or electricity. That is a major step toward modernizing the agency’s objectives, especially as consumers increasingly depend on the internet as their main source for communications. The agency will then be able to police broadband providers for net neutrality violations, consumer harm and security lapses.

“Now is the time for our rules of the road for internet service providers to reflect the reality that internet access is a necessity for daily life,” Jessica Rosenworcel, the chair of the F.C.C., said in a statement.

Street-level bureaucracy

People like me. :)

- Wikipedia.

Street-level bureaucracy is the subset of a public agency or government institution where the civil servants work who have direct contact with members of the general public. Street-level civil servants carry out and/or enforce the actions required by a government's laws and public policies, in areas ranging from safety and security to education and social services. A few examples include police officers, border guards, social workers and public school teachers. These civil servants have direct contact with members of the general public, in contrast with civil servants who do policy analysis or economic analysis, who do not meet the public. Street-level bureaucrats act as liaisons between government policy-makers and citizens and these civil servants implement policy decisions made by senior officials in the public service and/or by elected officials.

Street-level bureaucrats interact and communicate with the general public, either in person (as with a police officer doing a random checkpoint to check for drunk driving or a civil servant in a department of transportation who helps people to register a newly purchased car and provide them with licence plates); over the phone (as with a government call center, where civil servants answer phone calls from people who are applying for or receiving unemployment insurance); or, in jurisdictions which have implemented electronic government technologies, via the Internet (e.g., a person finding out about the government's taxation laws by going onto the taxation department's official website and asking questions to a civil servant via email).

Street-level bureaucrats often have some degree of discretion on how they enforce the rules, laws and policies which they are assigned to uphold. For example, a police officer who catches a speeding motorist typically can decide whether to give the driver a warning or apply a penalty such as a fine or criminal charge; a border guard who finds undeclared rum in a border-crossing motorist's car trunk can either give the person a warning, confiscate and destroy the contraband item, or levy a fine or other penalty; a government social worker who meets with an unemployed person can decide whether or not to provide social assistance or unemployment insurance benefits; and a high school principal who finds that a student is skipping school can decide whether or not to suspend the person, taking into account the student's unique circumstances and situation. Even though front-line bureaucrats have this degree of discretion, they typically must operate within the rule of law, the system of government regulations, laws and administrative procedural rules. These regulations, laws and rules help to ensure that the street-level bureaucracy operates fairly and ethically, and that each citizen is treated fairly.

From the Houston Chronicle: Houston mayoral questionnaire: Where candidates say they stand on the issues

A good way to look at the dominant issues in the current Houston mayoral election - at least according to the HC's editorial board - and where the candidates stand on them.

- Click here for the article. 

Here is a rundown of the issues. It provides a good at what a city does.  

- Crime and safety.
- Police hiring.
- Police response times.
- Police reform.
- Firefighters.
- Budget.
- Financial sustainability.
- Procurement and contracting.
- Tax Increment Reinvestment Zones.
- Bike lanes.
- Transportation expansion.
- Affordable housing.
- Permitting.
- Flood-control projects.
- Drainage.
- Solid Waste challenges.
- Garbage fees.
- Illegal dumping.
- Water and sewage rates.
- Leaky pipes.
- Street and drainage fees.

Recent Online Trainings

I have to do these every year. You might also, in some manner. 

They are required in order to ensure that ACC is in compliance with federal and/or state law. They've contracted out with Vector Solutions to implement them. 

So you can file these under
- federalism
- supremacy clause
- unfunded mandates (I think)
- privatization

In addition to the subject matter of each training.

Cheers: 

Mandatory Trainings

1 - Americans with Disabilities Act Overview.

- - major life activities: Major life activities are those functions that are important to most people’s daily lives. Examples of major life activities are breathing, walking, talking, hearing, seeing, sleeping, caring for one’s self, performing manual tasks, and working. Major life activities also include major bodily functions such as immune system functions, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions.

- - Americans with Disabilities Act.
- - reasonable accommodation.
- - qualified individuals
- - undue hardship / undue burden / fundamental alteration in program
- - fundamental alteration.
- - animals fair housing act.
- - direct threat to themselves or others.

2 - Child Abuse: Mandatory Reporting.
- - Federal Child Abuse and Treatment Act.
- - neglect 
- - physical abuse
- - sexual abuse
- - psychological, maltreatment, or emotional abuse
- - mandatory reporting / liability / mandated reporter
- - poverty

3 - Drug Free Workplace
- - Drug Free Workplace Act.
- - costly burden
- - economic / insurance / medical
- - use / abuse / addiction
- - stress relief
- - enabling
- - inform supervisor
- - reporting of drug convictions
- - crisis situations

4 - Employee Acknowledgement of Student Rights and Responsibilities
- - Texas Education Code 51.9315(d)
- - free speech rights and limitations

5 - FERPA
- - Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.
- - education records
- - confidentiality / privacy
- - privacy / inspections / corrections
- - information about students - what is public? what is private?
- - sole possession
- - disclosure
- - is information personally identifiable?
- - directory / non directory information
- - parental info / dependent students
- - student consent 

6 - Sexual Harassment: Staff-to-Staff
- - Educational Amendments of 1972, Title 9.
- - harassments free work environment
- - definition
- - consequences
- - CRA 1964, Titles 6 and 7
- - CRA 1991
- - employer liability
- - quid pro quo / hostile environment
- - process for filing complaints
- - EEOC

7 - Title IX and Sexual Harassment Prevention for Employees.
- - Educational Amendments of 1972, Title 9.
- - Clery Act.
- - Title IX coordinator
- - Grants - federal funding received - must comply
- - definitions
- - sex discrimination

8 - Title IX: Regulations and Roles Overview.
- - Educational Amendments of 1972, Title 9
- - Title IX coordinator
- - final rule - roles and responsibilities of coordinator.
- - grievance procedures.
- - OCR

what is a common carrier?

LII: common carrier.

Wikipedia: common carrier.

- What Makes a Common Carrier, and What Doesn’t.

- Investopedia: What Is a Common Carrier? Definition, How They Work, and Examples.

 

From ACC: STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES FLA STUDENT EXPRESSION AND USE OF COLLEGE FACILITIES

Here is the legal framework for expression on the campus of ACC.

- ALVIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE’S REPORT REGARDING ITS IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FREEDOMOF EXPRESSION REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED IN TEX. EDUCATION CODE § 51.9315.

- Student Rights and Responsibilities: Student Expression and Use of College Facilities.

- Texas Education Code.

- TEX. EDUCATION CODE § 51.9315.

From the Washington Post: Russia, shifting tactics, fans doubt in election integrity, U.S. says

There seems to be a reason why people have become more suspicious of elections, and it seems to have little to do with the actual performance of elections across the nation.

- Click here for the article. 

Russia’s long-running efforts to weaken the world’s democracies have expanded in recent years to sow public doubt in election integrity, according to a declassified State Department cable disclosed Friday, which says the U.S. intelligence community found evidence that Russian actors made a concerted effort to undermine faith in the voting process in at least nine countries, including the United States, between 2020 and 2022.

During that period, the intelligence community also found that, in 17 additional countries, there was “a less pronounced level” of Russian social media activity and other “messaging” aimed at amplifying preexisting domestic narratives questioning election integrity.

The U.S. intelligence community has routinely highlighted what it portrays as Moscow’s ongoing scheme to subvert elections and destabilize democratic countries, but the State Department cable said that such tactics appear to be evolving with a specific goal of eroding trust in the basic administration of elections.

A Plea Bargain Presented to a judge

For our look at the judiciary and criminal justice.

From You Tube: Watch Kenneth Chesebro plead guilty in the Fulton Co. elections interfer...

From the Houston Chronicle: DOE awards $3.5 billion to strengthen grid, with 4 projects in Texas

Another example of fiscal federalism

- Click here for the article. 

Texas is set to receive tens of millions of dollars in funding toward expanding and hardening its power grid, as the Biden administration seeks to rapidly shift the U.S. economy away from fossil fuels. The administration announced Tuesday up to $3.5 billion in funding for 58 projects across 44 states, with four projects at least in some part in Texas. 

“There is a tidal wave of clean energy investment coming,” Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said. “The grid as it currently sits is not equipped to handle all the new demand.”

Among the projects in Texas are San Antonio utility CPS Energy’s $32 million planned construction of microgrids based around solar and battery energy. And Minnesota-based Xcel Energy, which operates across eight states and has power plants, wind farms and transmission lines in Texas, was awarded $142 million to strengthen its system against extreme weather and wildfire.

The funding stems from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which Congress passed in 2021 for the construction of everything from bridges to broadband service. The Department of Energy received approximately 700 letters of interest for the funding, with the largest project selected, worth $1.3 billion, to build five transmission projects across seven Midwestern states.

“This was a very popular program,” said one senior administration official. “There will be future (funding) rounds, and we’re looking forward to having more conversations with utilities, technology firms and states.”

The resilience of the U.S. power grid has fallen into increasing question in recent years, with large scale blackouts like that which swept Texas in 2021 during Winter Storm Uri.

Earlier this year, Jim Robb, president of the regulatory body North American Electric Reliability Corp., said the combination of extreme weather and the retirement of coal and gas plants pushed out by low cost wind and solar energy represented a growing threat to the power grid.

 https://dsl.richmond.edu/historicalatlas/

From NBCnews: Pro-Hamas extremists and neo-Nazis flood social media with calls for violence

a drawback of social media

- Click here for the article.

. . . the most common threat now comes from disconnected individuals radicalized online.

“They could stay in their mother’s basement and be on the internet all day and get themselves worked up and listen to the propaganda and be that person who would be influenced to do something in a small group or as a lone actor,” he said.

Extremist content has been growing online since Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7. An Oct. 12 bulletin from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue called the platform X “an epicenter for content praising the attacks perpetrated by the Hamas-linked al-Qassem Brigades, as well as Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and Hezbollah.”

The analysis counted more than 16 million views of 120 pieces of branded terrorist content put out by the groups on the X platform. The content included GoPro footage of fighters desecrating the bodies of Israeli serviceman. Hashtags associated with the content had 1.98 million mentions, the bulletin said.

The Institute for Strategic Dialogue also found that U.S.-based neo-Nazis had appropriated the language of Hamas and have been using the conflict in an effort to inspire attacks in the U.S. and on Jewish communities globally. The neo-Nazi accounts are spreading official terrorist content linked to the Qassem Brigades on Telegram, while also linking to "Resistance Axis" groups on the platform.

Several members of extremist groups in the U.S. and Canada — including members of the Proud Boys — have posted on Telegram expressing a desire to kill or harm Jewish people, according to Advance Democracy, which studies far-right rhetoric online.

The European Union tries to fight back 

- E.U. demands Meta and TikTok detail efforts to curb disinformation from Israel-Hamas war.

The European Union ratcheted up its scrutiny of Big Tech companies on Thursday with demands for Meta and TikTok to detail their efforts to curb illegal content and disinformation during the Israel-Hamas war.

The European Commission, the 27-nation bloc’s executive branch, formally requested that the social media companies provide information on how they’re complying with sweeping new digital rules aimed at cleaning up online platforms.

The commission asked Meta and TikTok to explain the measures they have taken to reduce the risk of spreading and amplifying terrorist and violent content, hate speech and disinformation.

Under the E.U.’s new rules, which took effect in August, the biggest tech companies face extra obligations to stop a wide range of illegal content from flourishing on their platforms or face the threat of hefty fines.

The new rules, known as the Digital Services Act, are being put to the test by the Israel-Hamas war. Photos and videos have flooded social media of the carnage alongside posts from users pushing false claims and misrepresenting videos from other events.

Brussels issued its first formal request under the DSA last week to Elon Musk’s social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter.

- Click here for the Digital Services Act.

The DSA is meant to "govern the content moderation practices of social media platforms" and address illegal content. It is organized in five chapters, with the most important chapters regulating the liability exemption of intermediaries (Chapter 2), the obligations on intermediaries (Chapter 3), and the cooperation and enforcement framework between the commission and national authorities (Chapter 4).

The DSA proposal maintains the current rule according to which companies that host others' data become liable when informed that this data is illegal. This so-called "conditional liability exemption" is fundamentally different from the broad immunities given to intermediaries under the equivalent rule ("Section 230 CDA") in the United States.

In addition to the liability exemptions, the DSA would introduce a wide-ranging set of new obligations on platforms, including some that aim to disclose to regulators how their algorithms work, while other obligations would create transparency on how decisions to remove content are taken and on the way advertisers target users. The European Centre for Algorithmic Transparency was created to aid the enforcement of this.

Texas Monthly: What’s Behind the Fact-Challenged Freak-out Over Colony Ridge?

A candidate for our look at political information.

- Click here for the article.

Colony Ridge is a vast and booming unincorporated subdivision carved out of what was once a soggy, forested patch of Liberty County. Home to some 40,000 souls, the area is a tight-knit community of primarily Hispanic families, many of whom work in construction, landscaping, and housecleaning. Local law enforcement and the developers believe that the majority of residents are undocumented immigrants from Latin America; most of the remainder are American-born Latinos. Colony Ridge is one of the fastest-growing parts of Texas for a reason: land here is relatively cheap, and the developers offer financing even for immigrants who lack Social Security numbers and credit scores. There are few of the onerous restrictions imposed by the typical homeowner association. In much of Colony Ridge, you can live in a trailer on your property while you gradually build your home—an appealing DIY approach for cash-poor buyers who work with their hands.

That’s the Colony Ridge as it actually exists. But there is a second Colony Ridge, the one depicted in right-wing media. In this alternate reality, the area is a crime-ridden, poverty-stricken settlement of illegal aliens that, in the words of the Daily Wire, “could become a strategic asset for [drug] cartels.” It’s a Brazilian-style favela of shanties and trash and feral dogs that has somehow been hidden from the world for more than a decade. It’s a “magnet” for all the “invaders” streaming across Joe Biden’s open borders.

Over the past two months, this second Colony Ridge has rapidly expanded from the far-right fringe of American politics into the GOP mainstream—like an out-of-control wildfire spreading from treetop to treetop. Republican congressman Ronny Jackson, who represents a district hundreds of miles away in the Panhandle and recently threatened law enforcement officers at a rodeo, complained that “this haven for criminal cartels is terrorizing the state.” Republican officials, including Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, have flown over the area as if they were generals inspecting Helmand Province. Attorney General Ken Paxton is investigating the development, including by asking the developers for a list of their customers.

The Texas Republican Party passed a resolution in late September calling on the Legislature to take action “to prevent further settlement of illegal aliens in Colony Ridge and any other areas of Texas.” Four far-right state legislators went even further. In a letter, they called on their colleagues to seize control of Liberty County as part of an effort to “clean up and clean out” Colony Ridge. Governor Abbott is apparently listening. He directed the Legislature to take up legislation concerning public safety and home ownership in Colony Ridge during an October special session focused on private school vouchers, an Abbott priority.

quotable quotes

“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”


Whereas it appeareth that however certain forms of government are better calculated than others to protect individuals in the free exercise of their natural rights, and are at the same time themselves better guarded against degeneracy, yet experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms, those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny; and it is believed that the most effectual means of preventing this would be, to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts, which history exhibiteth, that, possessed thereby of the experience of other ages and countries, they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes; And whereas it is generally true that that people will be happiest whose laws are best, and are best administered, and that laws will be wisely formed, and honestly administered, in proportion as those who form and administer them are wise and honest; whence it becomes expedient for promoting the publick happiness that those persons, whom nature hath endowed with genius and virtue, should be rendered by liberal education worthy to receive, and able to guard the sacred deposit of the rights and liberties of their fellow citizens, and that they should be called to that charge without regard to wealth, birth or other accidental condition or circumstance . . . 


The people are the only censors of their governors: and even their errors will tend to keep these to the true principles of their institution. To punish these errors too severely would be to suppress the only safeguard of the public liberty. The way to prevent these irregular interpositions of the people is to give them full information of their affairs thro’ the channel of the public papers, & to contrive that those papers should penetrate the whole mass of the people. The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers & be capable of reading them.

Setting the agenda

- America's zombie "crime wave"

- Texas needs water workers. Will high school students answer the call?

- Texas strings concertina wire along New Mexico border to deter migrants.

Elections and the Separated Powers

Texas

United States

 

Recent news about SB1 (88-3)

Here's the latest on the governor's priority for this session of the legislature.



- Texas Senate unveils its priority school voucher bill.

The Texas Senate unveiled Monday its main bill to establish an education savings account program, a priority for Gov. Greg Abbott this special session.

Senate Bill 1, authored by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, would allow families access $8,000 of taxpayer money to pay for private schools and other educational expenses such as uniforms, textbooks, tutoring or transportation among other things.

. . . The state comptroller’s office would establish and administer these education savings accounts. The bill seeks to allocate $500 million from the general revenue fund for the next two years to pay for the program. The comptroller’s office would also be in charge of preventing fraud and misuse of funds — a major area of concern for many lawmakers — as well as approving an organization to help process applications and approve vendors and participating private schools.

Creighton says that the program will not siphon money away from public schools as the funding comes from general revenue, not the Foundation School Program, which is the main source of funding for the state’s K-12 public schools.

The bill does not require private school students to take a state-administered academic achievement exam, something that school voucher critics in the Texas Legislature have said an education savings account proposal should have to even consider it.

If passed into law, almost any student who was enrolled in a public school last year would be eligible to apply for the program, as well as any student ready to enroll in Pre-K or kindergarten.

The bill includes a formula to prioritize entry to the program if there are more applicants than funds available. Forty percent of open spots would go to students who receive free or reduced lunch; 30% to families who earn between 185% and 500% of the federal poverty line; 20% to those with disabilities; and 10% to those who attended public, private or home-school in the last school year.

- School voucher bill gets initial approval in the Texas Senate, heads over to a more skeptical House.

A bill that would create a school voucher program to let parents use state funds to pay for private schools — a longtime conservative goal and a big concern for public education advocates — was approved in the Texas Senate on Thursday.

It now heads to the more skeptical lawmakers in the Texas House, many of whom have opposed vouchers for years but will be under intense scrutiny from Gov. Greg Abbott, who has made the proposal one of his top legislative priorities and promised to campaign against those who get in the way.

Senate Bill 1, authored by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, would create education savings accounts, a voucher-like program that would allow families access $8,000 of taxpayer money to pay for private schools and other educational expenses such as uniforms, textbooks, tutoring or transportation among other things. SB 1 is nearly identical to Senate Bill 8, which passed the Senate during the regular session but died in the House.

The Senate gave final approval to the proposal Thursday with a 18-13 vote.

The Senate also gave final passage to Senate Bill 2, also authored by Creighton, which would infuse $5.2 billion into school districts to help them with teacher raises and rising costs. The bill would raise the basic allotment — the base amount of money schools get per student — from $6,160 to $6,235. This money is used to pay for the day-to-day operations of a district and can be used to increase teacher salaries. It also includes more money for schools to spend of security upgrades.



- Texas’ main voucher bill seeks to avoid other states’ mistakes but keeps ideas that attracted criticism.

The Texas Senate’s main school voucher proposal this special session, which was given approval in the Texas Senate on Thursday, closely resembles two of the biggest such programs in the country.

Like in Arizona and Florida, Senate Bill 1 would create a voucher-like program known as education savings accounts. It would give families access to taxpayer money to pay for their children’s private schooling, be open to most students in the state and prioritize disabled and poor students if there are more applicants than funds available.

In some aspects, the bill’s architects took notes from those programs’ mistakes. In an effort to prevent fraud and misuse of funds, which has been a problem in Arizona, the Texas proposal doesn’t give parents direct access to the cash and requires the comptroller’s office to audit participants’ accounts.

In other areas, Texas repeated ideas that garnered criticism in other states. Critics across the country point out that private schools receiving state funds through existing voucher programs aren’t required to show that students are succeeding academically, like public schools are. And like in other states, voucher supporters in Texas say that’s by design. Sen. Brandon Creighton, a Republican from Conroe and SB 1’s author, has argued that the market will weed out underperforming private schools.