The Onion bought Infowars. What to know about Alex Jones' bankruptcy case filed in Houston
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/trending/article/alex-jones-infowars-sale-bankruptcy-19915860.php
From Lawfare: Who Would Support Deploying the Military to Domestic Protests?
Timely
- Click here for the article.
If the president deploys the military for domestic policing, would public and military officers go along with the decision? Would the public—especially the president’s partisan supporters—embrace military action against progressive protesters or punish the president for violating norms? At the same time, would military officers consent to deploying into domestic protests, or would they oppose doing so?
The heart of our survey asked how respondents would respond to two hypothetical protest scenarios. The first, inspired by the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection, imagined a postelection rally by supporters of the losing candidate to stop the certification of state-level election returns. The second, inspired by the Black Lives Matter protests in Portland in summer 2020, imagines police-protester clashes escalating into rioting.
. . . The U.S. public was overwhelmingly supportive of deploying the military to contain protests that might turn violent. In our hypothetical scenarios, between 60 and 75 percent of the public approved of deploying the military, while just 15 to 25 percent disapproved. This support, moreover, was consistent across party—similarly large majorities of Democrats and Republicans supported deploying the military. This result is consistent with trends in institutional trust; while trust has declined in nearly every major social and political institution in the United States, bipartisan majorities still say they trust the U.S. military.
. . . Our surveys, however, show that military officers are overwhelmingly opposed to deploying military forces into domestic unrest. In our scenarios, just 25 percent of the military approved of military deployments while 72 percent disapproved. The majority of these officers favored aggressive responses to protests—for example, sending in riot police armed with assault rifles and body armor—but felt it was inappropriate to deploy the military.
The divide between civilian and military attitudes with regard to military deployment illustrates the strength of years of training in professional norms in the armed forces. Current and retired military personnel have been among the most vocal opponents of domestic military deployment, and service training frequently paints interference in partisan domestic affairs as anti-democratic. We found evidence for this socialization in our data—the longer the officer had served, the more opposed they were to domestic military deployments.
Ask ChatGPT: Can the president use the military against American citizens on American soil?
Yes, the U.S. president can use the military against American citizens on American soil in certain circumstances, but only under specific legal frameworks and constraints. The power to deploy the military domestically is not unlimited and is governed by a combination of laws, regulations, and constitutional protections. Here's a detailed explanation of when and how this could happen:
1. Posse Comitatus Act (1878)
The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the U.S. military for domestic law enforcement purposes in normal situations. It was enacted to prevent the federal military from being used as a tool of domestic policing.Key point: This law restricts the military from performing tasks typically handled by civilian law enforcement agencies, such as making arrests, conducting searches, or seizing property.
However, exceptions exist that allow military force to be used in exceptional situations.
2. The Insurrection Act (1807)
The Insurrection Act is the primary legal authority that allows the president to deploy the military within the United States to suppress insurrection, rebellion, or domestic violence.
Under the Insurrection Act, the president can send federal troops to states or localities to restore order, even without the consent of state governments, in cases such as:Civil unrest: For example, large-scale riots, rebellion, or violent protests that state or local governments are unable or unwilling to control.
Insurrection or rebellion: If there is a broad, organized effort to overthrow the government or disrupt the normal functioning of the U.S. political system.
The Insurrection Act has been invoked in history during times of extreme unrest, including:
- The Civil War (to suppress the Confederacy).
- The 1992 Los Angeles riots, when President George H.W. Bush sent federal troops to assist in quelling violence.
- The 1960s Civil Rights Movement, when federal troops were sent to enforce desegregation.
3. Martial Law
The president also has the theoretical ability to declare martial law, though this is extremely rare and controversial.
- Martial law essentially suspends regular civil governance and gives the military direct control over certain areas. It might happen in situations of national emergency, natural disaster, or widespread civil disorder, where the normal legal structures cannot function effectively.
However, the declaration of martial law would suspend civil liberties such as habeas corpus, free speech, and due process rights, and it is generally seen as a last resort.
4. National Guard and State Authority
The president has the authority to activate the National Guard for domestic purposes, including quelling civil disturbances. This can be done under both state authority (by the state governor) and federal authority (when the president federalizes the National Guard).Under state authority, governors can use the National Guard to deal with local emergencies without federal intervention.
If the president federalizes the National Guard, it places these forces under federal control, allowing them to be used for larger-scale national purposes, including handling unrest or emergencies that involve American citizens on American soil.
5. War Powers Resolution and Oversight
Even when the military is deployed domestically, the War Powers Resolution (1973) requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of military action and limits military operations to 60 days without congressional authorization. This serves as a check on the executive power to prevent overreach.
6. Legal and Constitutional Safeguards
Despite the president's power to deploy military force on American soil, this authority is not without limits:
- Due Process: Any actions taken by the military must still respect constitutional rights. The Fourth Amendment (protection against unreasonable searches and seizures) and Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (due process and equal protection) would still apply.
- Public Oversight and Accountability: Use of the military against citizens would likely provoke significant public scrutiny, legal challenges, and political consequences. In the past, military intervention in domestic issues (such as during the Civil Rights Movement) has been subject to judicial review and public debate.
Summary
The president can use the military against American citizens on American soil, but only under specific circumstances and legal frameworks, such as the Insurrection Act or in cases of martial law. These actions are constrained by laws like the Posse Comitatus Act, and any deployment must be in line with constitutional rights and subject to Congressional oversight. In practice, the use of military force domestically is reserved for extreme situations, such as widespread violence, rebellion, or national emergencies, and would be heavily scrutinized.
1. Posse Comitatus Act (1878)
The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the U.S. military for domestic law enforcement purposes in normal situations. It was enacted to prevent the federal military from being used as a tool of domestic policing.Key point: This law restricts the military from performing tasks typically handled by civilian law enforcement agencies, such as making arrests, conducting searches, or seizing property.
However, exceptions exist that allow military force to be used in exceptional situations.
2. The Insurrection Act (1807)
The Insurrection Act is the primary legal authority that allows the president to deploy the military within the United States to suppress insurrection, rebellion, or domestic violence.
Under the Insurrection Act, the president can send federal troops to states or localities to restore order, even without the consent of state governments, in cases such as:Civil unrest: For example, large-scale riots, rebellion, or violent protests that state or local governments are unable or unwilling to control.
Insurrection or rebellion: If there is a broad, organized effort to overthrow the government or disrupt the normal functioning of the U.S. political system.
The Insurrection Act has been invoked in history during times of extreme unrest, including:
- The Civil War (to suppress the Confederacy).
- The 1992 Los Angeles riots, when President George H.W. Bush sent federal troops to assist in quelling violence.
- The 1960s Civil Rights Movement, when federal troops were sent to enforce desegregation.
3. Martial Law
The president also has the theoretical ability to declare martial law, though this is extremely rare and controversial.
- Martial law essentially suspends regular civil governance and gives the military direct control over certain areas. It might happen in situations of national emergency, natural disaster, or widespread civil disorder, where the normal legal structures cannot function effectively.
However, the declaration of martial law would suspend civil liberties such as habeas corpus, free speech, and due process rights, and it is generally seen as a last resort.
4. National Guard and State Authority
The president has the authority to activate the National Guard for domestic purposes, including quelling civil disturbances. This can be done under both state authority (by the state governor) and federal authority (when the president federalizes the National Guard).Under state authority, governors can use the National Guard to deal with local emergencies without federal intervention.
If the president federalizes the National Guard, it places these forces under federal control, allowing them to be used for larger-scale national purposes, including handling unrest or emergencies that involve American citizens on American soil.
5. War Powers Resolution and Oversight
Even when the military is deployed domestically, the War Powers Resolution (1973) requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of military action and limits military operations to 60 days without congressional authorization. This serves as a check on the executive power to prevent overreach.
6. Legal and Constitutional Safeguards
Despite the president's power to deploy military force on American soil, this authority is not without limits:
- Due Process: Any actions taken by the military must still respect constitutional rights. The Fourth Amendment (protection against unreasonable searches and seizures) and Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (due process and equal protection) would still apply.
- Public Oversight and Accountability: Use of the military against citizens would likely provoke significant public scrutiny, legal challenges, and political consequences. In the past, military intervention in domestic issues (such as during the Civil Rights Movement) has been subject to judicial review and public debate.
Summary
The president can use the military against American citizens on American soil, but only under specific circumstances and legal frameworks, such as the Insurrection Act or in cases of martial law. These actions are constrained by laws like the Posse Comitatus Act, and any deployment must be in line with constitutional rights and subject to Congressional oversight. In practice, the use of military force domestically is reserved for extreme situations, such as widespread violence, rebellion, or national emergencies, and would be heavily scrutinized.
Laws regarding immigration:
- An Act to Encourage Immigration. (1864)
- Page Act of 1875.
- Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.
- Chinese Exclusion Repeal Act of 1943.
- Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.
- Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.
Executive Rules
- National Origins Formula (1921 - 1965).
- Bracero Program.
- Operation WB.
- Remain in Mexico.
Court Cases
- United States v. Wong Kim Ark.
Wednesday, November 13, 2024
From Ballotpedia: Arbitrary-or-capricious test
For our look at the judiciary
- Click here for it.
The arbitrary-or-capricious test is a legal standard of review used by judges to assess the actions of administrative agencies. It was originally defined in a provision of the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which instructs courts reviewing agency actions to invalidate any that they find to be "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law." The test is most frequently employed to assess the factual basis of an agency's rulemaking, especially informal rulemakings.
- For more on the Administrative Procedure Act click here.
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Pub. L. 79–404, 60 Stat. 237, enacted June 11, 1946, is the United States federal statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations, and it grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions. According to Hickman & Pierce, it is one of the most important pieces of United States administrative law, and serves as a sort of "constitution" for U.S. administrative law.
From the Texas Tribune: John Cornyn spent years preparing to run for Senate majority leader. Will it be enough?
Our senior U.S Senator wants to be the top Republican in the Senate.
- Click here for the article.
It’ll be the highest office Cornyn has ever run for, but no Texans will cast a ballot — save for himself and Texas’ junior senator, Ted Cruz. Leadership is decided by the 53 Republican members of the next Senate in a secret ballot vote. The stakes were raised last week when Republicans won a majority in the Senate, making the party leader the agenda setter for the whole chamber and a core legislative partner for the incoming Trump administration.
Cornyn, a McConnell protégé who previously served as Republican whip and chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, is up against the current Minority Whip John Thune of South Dakota and former NRSC Chair Rick Scott of Florida. Like Cornyn, Thune is a decorous lawmaker who spent years close to McConnell and is well regarded throughout the conference. Scott represents a newer, more right-wing generation of the Republican conference who has openly butt heads with McConnell and appeals to the MAGA wing of the party.
Cornyn has for years signaled his desire to succeed McConnell, the longest serving party leader in Senate history. As whip, Cornyn was McConnell’s No. 2 and kept the conference on board with the leadership’s agenda by addressing each senator’s individual needs and interests. He helped elect several current senators while leading the NRSC, the party’s Senate campaign arm. He has actively campaigned and fundraised on behalf of Republicans this election cycle, raising nearly $33 million and traveling the country to help incumbents and new candidates alike. Those ties have formed a key component in his bid for leader.
“One of the things that people do expect of the leadership is to raise money for the team. You see that with Speaker [Mike] Johnson in the House. You see that with Sen. McConnell in the Senate,” Cornyn said in September.
From Chat GPT: What is the Senate Majority Leader?
The Senate Majority Leader is the elected leader of the party that holds the most seats in the United States Senate. This person is the head of the majority party in the Senate and plays a key role in shaping the legislative agenda, managing Senate floor debate, and working with other members of the Senate and the House of Representatives to advance or block legislation.
Key duties of the Senate Majority Leader include:
- Setting the legislative agenda: The Majority Leader determines which bills and issues will be prioritized for debate and voting.
- Floor management: The Majority Leader coordinates debates and controls the flow of legislation on the Senate floor.
- Party leadership: The Majority Leader represents the majority party's interests in negotiations with the President, the House of Representatives, and within the Senate itself.
- Appointment powers: The Majority Leader has a significant role in determining committee assignments for Senators in their party.
In practice, the Majority Leader has considerable influence over the Senate's operations, but they must still work with Senators from both parties, especially in a closely divided Senate.
The current Senate Majority Leader (as of my knowledge cutoff in 2023) is Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York. However, the position can change depending on the results of Senate elections and shifts in party control.
From the Texas Tribune: How “wildly successful” anti-trans ads fired up Texas voters for Republicans
Let's start looking at what worked and what did not in the past campaign.
- Click here for the article.
In the final weeks of a heated reelection campaign, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz released a television ad with a simple message — “Boys and girls: They’re different.”
Even before the votes rolled in, the fact that Texas’ senate candidates were arguing about youth sports, rather than the economy, immigration or the future of democracy itself, was a Republican victory. For years, conservative political strategists had been pushing the party to hammer Democrats on what they see as “extreme” stances on gender.
Many of the ads focused on trans children playing on youth sports teams. But they also tried to pin Democrats for supporting policies that allow young people to medically transition, and narrow instances in which taxpayer dollars were used to pay for gender-affirming care for inmates or members of the military, all of which the Republicans would like to see banned.
The day after a red wave swept Texas and the nation, these strategists, as well as political scientists and advocates on both sides of the aisle, say focusing on these social issues seems to have mobilized the Republican base.
“This election was when the dam broke,” said Terry Schilling, president of the American Principles Project, a right-wing political advocacy group.
Tuesday, November 12, 2024
Dear AI Overview: What is the history of naturalization policy in the United States?
The history of naturalization policy in America began with the "Naturalization Act of 1790," which established the first uniform rules for citizenship, allowing only "free white persons" who had resided in the U.S. for at least two years to apply, requiring them to demonstrate good character and swear allegiance to the Constitution; over time, this policy evolved to include more groups through amendments, notably expanding to African Americans with the Naturalization Act of 1870, while also introducing restrictive quotas based on national origin in the early 20th century, which were later removed by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, creating a more inclusive system with preference categories for specific skills and family ties;.
Key points in the history of naturalization policy:
1790: The first Naturalization Act limited citizenship to "free white persons" residing in the U.S. for at least two years.
1795: The residency requirement was increased to five years, and applicants were required to declare their intention to become citizens three years prior.
1870: The Naturalization Act of 1870 extended citizenship to "aliens of African nativity and persons of African descent".
Early 20th Century: The "National Origins Quota System" was implemented, limiting immigration based on quotas assigned to different nationalities, heavily favoring Northern European immigrants.
1952: The Immigration and Nationality Act replaced the national origins system with a preference system based on skills, family ties, and other factors.
Important aspects of the evolution of naturalization policy:
Racial discrimination: Early naturalization laws explicitly excluded non-white individuals from citizenship.
Residency requirements: The time period required to reside in the U.S. before applying for citizenship has changed over time.
Declaration of intent: Applicants eventually needed to formally declare their intention to become citizens before applying.
Shift to preference system: The current system prioritizes certain categories of immigrants based on skills, family relationships, and refugee status.
Key points in the history of naturalization policy:
1790: The first Naturalization Act limited citizenship to "free white persons" residing in the U.S. for at least two years.
1795: The residency requirement was increased to five years, and applicants were required to declare their intention to become citizens three years prior.
1870: The Naturalization Act of 1870 extended citizenship to "aliens of African nativity and persons of African descent".
Early 20th Century: The "National Origins Quota System" was implemented, limiting immigration based on quotas assigned to different nationalities, heavily favoring Northern European immigrants.
1952: The Immigration and Nationality Act replaced the national origins system with a preference system based on skills, family ties, and other factors.
Important aspects of the evolution of naturalization policy:
Racial discrimination: Early naturalization laws explicitly excluded non-white individuals from citizenship.
Residency requirements: The time period required to reside in the U.S. before applying for citizenship has changed over time.
Declaration of intent: Applicants eventually needed to formally declare their intention to become citizens before applying.
Shift to preference system: The current system prioritizes certain categories of immigrants based on skills, family relationships, and refugee status.
Dear ChatGPT: what is the history of naturalization policy in the United States?
The history of naturalization policy in the United States is shaped by evolving attitudes toward citizenship, race, immigration, and national identity. Naturalization is the legal process by which a foreign-born individual becomes a U.S. citizen. The policies and laws that govern this process have changed considerably over time, often reflecting broader social, political, and economic trends. Below is an overview of key moments and developments in the history of naturalization in the U.S.:
1. Colonial Period and Early Republic (Pre-1790): Before the United States formally existed, the process of granting citizenship varied by colony. Most colonial governments allowed immigrants to become "freemen" with certain privileges, but these did not guarantee full political rights, like voting. Some colonies had provisions for the naturalization of foreigners, but there was no uniform process across the 13 colonies.
Once the U.S. gained independence, the question of naturalization arose as the nation sought to define its identity. The first laws governing naturalization were passed after the U.S. Constitution was ratified.
2. The Naturalization Act of 1790: The first federal naturalization law was passed in 1790. The Naturalization Act of 1790 set the groundwork for citizenship in the United States, establishing the following key provisions:
- Eligibility: Only "free white persons" who had lived in the U.S. for at least two years could become citizens.
- Exclusion of Non-Whites: This law explicitly excluded non-whites from citizenship. Native Americans, enslaved Africans, and free Black people were not considered eligible for naturalization.
- Gender and Marital Status: While white men could apply for citizenship, white women, even if married to U.S. citizens, were considered to have derivative citizenship. Their citizenship was tied to their husband's status.
This law was extremely restrictive and marked the beginning of racialized naturalization laws, which would persist throughout U.S. history.
3. The Expansion of Eligibility (1795-1850s)
The initial requirements for naturalization were quite restrictive. In the 1795 Naturalization Act, the residency requirement was increased to five years. However, naturalization remained limited to free white persons, and the status of African Americans and Indigenous people was not addressed in a meaningful way.
1795-1840s: Over the first half of the 19th century, several amendments were made to the naturalization process, including an increase in the required years of residency before naturalization (to 14 years in 1798), but these laws still did not allow for the naturalization of non-whites.
4. Naturalization and the Civil War Era
The question of citizenship became more contentious during and after the Civil War. In the context of the abolition of slavery and the nation's evolving understanding of racial identity, new legal principles were introduced:
The 14th Amendment (1868): After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment granted citizenship to all people born or naturalized in the U.S., regardless of race. This provision, however, was interpreted to exclude Native Americans, as they were not considered citizens under the terms of the law at that time.
Exclusion of Chinese Immigrants: The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 marked the first time the U.S. explicitly barred a specific ethnic group from becoming naturalized citizens. Chinese immigrants were excluded from naturalization under federal law, and this policy continued for decades.
5. The Immigration Act of 1906
The Immigration Act of 1906 established more formal processes for naturalization and required immigrants to demonstrate English-language proficiency. This law also created the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization to standardize the naturalization process and set new standards for the admission of immigrants.
Expanded Eligibility: While the act made it easier for certain immigrants to become citizens, many groups, particularly non-Europeans, still faced racial exclusion from naturalization.
6. The 1920s: Racial Restrictions and the Immigration Act of 1924
In the 1920s, immigration policy was heavily influenced by the ideology of racial hierarchy and eugenics. The Immigration Act of 1924 (also known as the Johnson-Reed Act) established national origin quotas that heavily favored immigrants from Northern and Western Europe while severely limiting immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, as well as excluding Asian immigrants entirely.
Citizenship for Native Americans: Despite the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of citizenship, many Native Americans were not granted citizenship until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, which granted full citizenship to all Native Americans born in the U.S. However, many states still restricted voting rights for Native Americans well into the 20th century.
7. Post-World War II Reforms and the Civil Rights Era
After World War II, U.S. naturalization laws began to evolve more rapidly, especially in response to the pressures of civil rights activism and the changing international landscape. The civil rights movement played a significant role in challenging racial exclusion policies.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter Act): This act was a significant reform, repealing many racial exclusions that had existed in previous laws. It allowed Asian immigrants to become naturalized citizens for the first time, though it still maintained a quota system that favored Europeans over others. The law also sought to establish a more uniform system for naturalization, though racial and ethnic preferences remained embedded in the system.
Civil Rights Act of 1964 & Immigration Act of 1965: The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (also called the Hart-Celler Act) abolished the racial quotas and was a major step forward in terms of racial equality. It emphasized family reunification and skills-based immigration rather than national origin, leading to increased immigration from Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This shifted the demographic makeup of the U.S. and reflected broader social changes.
8. Modern Naturalization (1970s-Present)
Since the 1970s, the U.S. has seen gradual reforms to its naturalization policies:
Expansion of Naturalization Eligibility: Laws have increasingly expanded eligibility, allowing for easier paths to citizenship for refugees, children of U.S. citizens, and people married to U.S. citizens. Policies like the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 granted amnesty to millions of undocumented immigrants who had been in the U.S. since before 1982, providing a path to citizenship.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS): The modern system is managed by the USCIS, which is responsible for overseeing naturalization applications. Requirements for naturalization generally include:A minimum period of continuous residence in the U.S. (usually 5 years, or 3 years for spouses of U.S. citizens) English language proficiency (with exceptions for older applicants or those with disabilities) Knowledge of U.S. history and government (civics test)
Naturalization Rate and Public Debate: There has been ongoing debate about immigration, border control, and citizenship, especially in the context of issues like undocumented immigration, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, and the status of "anchor babies." Public discourse often centers around questions of who should be allowed to become a citizen and the values that citizenship embodies.
Conclusion
U.S. naturalization policy has evolved from exclusionary laws based on race and ethnicity to a more inclusive, though still complex, system. The 19th and early 20th centuries were marked by racialized and restrictive policies, while the mid-to-late 20th century brought significant reforms toward inclusivity. Today, naturalization remains a key part of the immigration debate, reflecting ongoing questions of identity, belonging, and who is considered part of the American political community.
1. Colonial Period and Early Republic (Pre-1790): Before the United States formally existed, the process of granting citizenship varied by colony. Most colonial governments allowed immigrants to become "freemen" with certain privileges, but these did not guarantee full political rights, like voting. Some colonies had provisions for the naturalization of foreigners, but there was no uniform process across the 13 colonies.
Once the U.S. gained independence, the question of naturalization arose as the nation sought to define its identity. The first laws governing naturalization were passed after the U.S. Constitution was ratified.
2. The Naturalization Act of 1790: The first federal naturalization law was passed in 1790. The Naturalization Act of 1790 set the groundwork for citizenship in the United States, establishing the following key provisions:
- Eligibility: Only "free white persons" who had lived in the U.S. for at least two years could become citizens.
- Exclusion of Non-Whites: This law explicitly excluded non-whites from citizenship. Native Americans, enslaved Africans, and free Black people were not considered eligible for naturalization.
- Gender and Marital Status: While white men could apply for citizenship, white women, even if married to U.S. citizens, were considered to have derivative citizenship. Their citizenship was tied to their husband's status.
This law was extremely restrictive and marked the beginning of racialized naturalization laws, which would persist throughout U.S. history.
3. The Expansion of Eligibility (1795-1850s)
The initial requirements for naturalization were quite restrictive. In the 1795 Naturalization Act, the residency requirement was increased to five years. However, naturalization remained limited to free white persons, and the status of African Americans and Indigenous people was not addressed in a meaningful way.
1795-1840s: Over the first half of the 19th century, several amendments were made to the naturalization process, including an increase in the required years of residency before naturalization (to 14 years in 1798), but these laws still did not allow for the naturalization of non-whites.
4. Naturalization and the Civil War Era
The question of citizenship became more contentious during and after the Civil War. In the context of the abolition of slavery and the nation's evolving understanding of racial identity, new legal principles were introduced:
The 14th Amendment (1868): After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment granted citizenship to all people born or naturalized in the U.S., regardless of race. This provision, however, was interpreted to exclude Native Americans, as they were not considered citizens under the terms of the law at that time.
Exclusion of Chinese Immigrants: The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 marked the first time the U.S. explicitly barred a specific ethnic group from becoming naturalized citizens. Chinese immigrants were excluded from naturalization under federal law, and this policy continued for decades.
5. The Immigration Act of 1906
The Immigration Act of 1906 established more formal processes for naturalization and required immigrants to demonstrate English-language proficiency. This law also created the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization to standardize the naturalization process and set new standards for the admission of immigrants.
Expanded Eligibility: While the act made it easier for certain immigrants to become citizens, many groups, particularly non-Europeans, still faced racial exclusion from naturalization.
6. The 1920s: Racial Restrictions and the Immigration Act of 1924
In the 1920s, immigration policy was heavily influenced by the ideology of racial hierarchy and eugenics. The Immigration Act of 1924 (also known as the Johnson-Reed Act) established national origin quotas that heavily favored immigrants from Northern and Western Europe while severely limiting immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, as well as excluding Asian immigrants entirely.
Citizenship for Native Americans: Despite the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of citizenship, many Native Americans were not granted citizenship until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, which granted full citizenship to all Native Americans born in the U.S. However, many states still restricted voting rights for Native Americans well into the 20th century.
7. Post-World War II Reforms and the Civil Rights Era
After World War II, U.S. naturalization laws began to evolve more rapidly, especially in response to the pressures of civil rights activism and the changing international landscape. The civil rights movement played a significant role in challenging racial exclusion policies.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter Act): This act was a significant reform, repealing many racial exclusions that had existed in previous laws. It allowed Asian immigrants to become naturalized citizens for the first time, though it still maintained a quota system that favored Europeans over others. The law also sought to establish a more uniform system for naturalization, though racial and ethnic preferences remained embedded in the system.
Civil Rights Act of 1964 & Immigration Act of 1965: The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (also called the Hart-Celler Act) abolished the racial quotas and was a major step forward in terms of racial equality. It emphasized family reunification and skills-based immigration rather than national origin, leading to increased immigration from Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This shifted the demographic makeup of the U.S. and reflected broader social changes.
8. Modern Naturalization (1970s-Present)
Since the 1970s, the U.S. has seen gradual reforms to its naturalization policies:
Expansion of Naturalization Eligibility: Laws have increasingly expanded eligibility, allowing for easier paths to citizenship for refugees, children of U.S. citizens, and people married to U.S. citizens. Policies like the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 granted amnesty to millions of undocumented immigrants who had been in the U.S. since before 1982, providing a path to citizenship.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS): The modern system is managed by the USCIS, which is responsible for overseeing naturalization applications. Requirements for naturalization generally include:A minimum period of continuous residence in the U.S. (usually 5 years, or 3 years for spouses of U.S. citizens) English language proficiency (with exceptions for older applicants or those with disabilities) Knowledge of U.S. history and government (civics test)
Naturalization Rate and Public Debate: There has been ongoing debate about immigration, border control, and citizenship, especially in the context of issues like undocumented immigration, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, and the status of "anchor babies." Public discourse often centers around questions of who should be allowed to become a citizen and the values that citizenship embodies.
Conclusion
U.S. naturalization policy has evolved from exclusionary laws based on race and ethnicity to a more inclusive, though still complex, system. The 19th and early 20th centuries were marked by racialized and restrictive policies, while the mid-to-late 20th century brought significant reforms toward inclusivity. Today, naturalization remains a key part of the immigration debate, reflecting ongoing questions of identity, belonging, and who is considered part of the American political community.
Trump Campaign Promise #1
From ChatGPT (see below)
1. Secure the Border and End Illegal Immigration.
Trump has consistently vowed to complete the border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and implement stricter immigration policies. He has reiterated his commitment to building a physical wall (while also emphasizing technological and personnel enhancements) and has promised to use his administration's powers to prevent illegal immigration. Trump also supports reinstating the "Remain in Mexico" policy for asylum seekers and other policies designed to reduce illegal immigration.
Detailed Questions:
- What is the border wall?
- What are the presidents immigration powers?
- What are stricter immigration policies?
- What are the facts regarding illegal immigration?
- How can illegal immigration be reduced?
- What is the Remain in Mexico policy?
- What is asylum?
- What is American policy regarding asylum seekers?
Expect more . . .
1. Secure the Border and End Illegal Immigration.
Trump has consistently vowed to complete the border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and implement stricter immigration policies. He has reiterated his commitment to building a physical wall (while also emphasizing technological and personnel enhancements) and has promised to use his administration's powers to prevent illegal immigration. Trump also supports reinstating the "Remain in Mexico" policy for asylum seekers and other policies designed to reduce illegal immigration.
Detailed Questions:
- What is the border wall?
- What are the presidents immigration powers?
- What are stricter immigration policies?
- What are the facts regarding illegal immigration?
- How can illegal immigration be reduced?
- What is the Remain in Mexico policy?
- What is asylum?
- What is American policy regarding asylum seekers?
Expect more . . .
From the Washington Post: Fewer states than ever will have split-party Senate delegations
Partisan polarization continues.
- Click here for the article.
Voters in Montana, Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania — states that Donald Trump won on Nov. 5 — also voted for Republicans to take over Senate seats currently held by Democrats, helping Republicans secure control of the upper chamber.
To retain their Senate majority, Democrats hoped that voters in red-trending states would stick with Democrats down the ballot. The party faced a brutal 2024 map, and the split-ticket phenomenon has largely dissipated in recent election cycles as states become increasingly divided along party lines.
Voters in six of the seven swing states did split their tickets, backing Trump and a Democrat for Senate. Pennsylvania was the only swing state that elected a Republican for Senate.
The Unitary Executive
From Wikipedia:
In American law, the unitary executive theory is a Constitutional law theory according to which the President of the United States has sole authority over the executive branch. It is "an expansive interpretation of presidential power that aims to centralize greater control over the government in the White House". The theory often comes up in jurisprudential disagreements about the president's ability to remove employees within the executive branch; transparency and access to information; discretion over the implementation of new laws; and the ability to influence agencies' rule-making. There is disagreement about the doctrine's strength and scope, with more expansive versions of the theory becoming the focus of modern political debate. These expansive versions are controversial for both constitutional and practical reasons. Since the Reagan administration, the Supreme Court has embraced a stronger unitary executive, which has been championed primarily by its conservative justices, the Federalist Society, and the Heritage Foundation.
For our look at the federal bureaucracy: Flowcharts upon flowcharts
Department of Homeland Security: Click here.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection: Click here.
CBP Office of Field Operations: Click here.
From the Washington Post: Trump demanded senators allow recess appointments. Here’s what that means.
This would remove a check on presidential power.
- Click here for it.
President-elect Donald Trump is already moving ahead with creating a more powerful presidency than his first one. One of his first moves: Demanding that Republican senators let him decide who runs the government, rather than vote on it.
When a new president takes office, the Senate’s main job is to confirm — or oppose — people the president nominates to serve in key government roles. But Trump told Republican senators who want to be majority leader that they need to step aside when he gets into office so he can unilaterally select his leaders.
“Any Republican Senator seeking the coveted LEADERSHIP position in the United States Senate must agree to Recess Appointments,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, adding that he wants positions filled “IMMEDIATELY!”
What Trump’s asking is technically constitutional, experts say, but would be a stark abdication of powers on the part of the Senate. And it could be just the beginning of Trump’s effort to get what he wants out of a Republican Congress.
From Congress.gov: Overview of Recess Appointments Clause.
Recess Appointments and/in the Supreme Court.
From the Brennan Center: SCOTUS and the Future of the Recess Appointment Power.
From Oyez: National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning.
Monday, November 11, 2024
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Owens_(admiral)
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1998/january/network-centric-warfare-its-origin-and-future
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/09032023/inside-clean-energy-texas-renewables/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government
https://theonion.com/shirtless-biden-washes-trans-am-in-white-house-driveway-1819570732/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_chain
https://fdrfoundation.org/the-real-gentlemans-c/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtparSnQhFc
https://www.codastory.com/stayonthestory/the-age-of-broligarchy/
There are no red or blue states, but . . .
At least in terms of population. Many states are dominated - almost completely - by one of the two major parties.
Sunday, November 10, 2024
The First Government of the United States: The Second Continental Congress
It would last from May 10, 1775 to March 1, 1781 when it was replaced by the Articles of Confederation.
- Click here for it.
Dear ChatGPT: What is the federal civil service?
This is the bulk of government. These are the people who actually implement the laws - in this case the national laws.
The federal civil service refers to the body of government employees who work for federal agencies and departments in a country. These employees are responsible for implementing the laws, policies, and programs created by the elected government and are not typically involved in political campaigning or holding elected office themselves.
Some key features of the federal civil service include:
Merit-Based Hiring: Most federal jobs are filled based on merit through competitive exams, qualifications, or specialized selection processes.
Job Security: Civil servants generally enjoy protections against arbitrary dismissal, and their employment is often governed by specific rules and regulations.
Nonpartisan Role: Civil servants are expected to remain neutral, serving the current administration regardless of political party, and ensuring continuity and stability in government services.
Benefits: Federal employees often receive comprehensive benefits packages, including healthcare, retirement plans, and paid leave.
The civil service system is designed to ensure that the federal government operates efficiently and effectively, providing public services to citizens without undue political interference.
Examples of major federal agencies where civil service employees work in the U.S. include the Department of Defense, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Social Security Administration.
For more:
- United States federal civil service.
- United States Office of Personnel Management.
- Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act.
- Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.
To prepare for our look at public policy
The enumerated powers:
lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises
pay the debts
common defense
general welfare
borrow money on the credit of the United States
regulate commerce with foreign nations
among the several states
with the Indian tribes
uniform rule of naturalization
uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States
coin money
regulate the value
foreign coin
fix the standard of weights and measures
punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States
establish post-offices and post-roads
promote the progress of science and useful arts
securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries
constitute tribunals inferior to the supreme court
define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas
offences against the law of nations
declare war
grant letters of marque and reprisal
make rules concerning captures on land and water
raise and support armies
- but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years:
provide and maintain a navy:
make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces
provide for calling forth the militia to
- execute the laws of the union
- suppress insurrections
- repel invasions
provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia
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,
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
make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers,
enforce prohibition on slavery
enforce
- privileges and immunities
- due process
- equal protection
enforce right to vote race, color, previous condition of certitude
collect an income tax
[liquor prohibition]
enforce suffrage
- women
- presidential vote for DC
- no poll tax requirement
- 18 - 20
lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises
pay the debts
common defense
general welfare
borrow money on the credit of the United States
regulate commerce with foreign nations
among the several states
with the Indian tribes
uniform rule of naturalization
uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States
coin money
regulate the value
foreign coin
fix the standard of weights and measures
punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States
establish post-offices and post-roads
promote the progress of science and useful arts
securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries
constitute tribunals inferior to the supreme court
define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas
offences against the law of nations
declare war
grant letters of marque and reprisal
make rules concerning captures on land and water
raise and support armies
- but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years:
provide and maintain a navy:
make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces
provide for calling forth the militia to
- execute the laws of the union
- suppress insurrections
- repel invasions
provide for organizing, arming and disciplining the militia
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,
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
make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers,
enforce prohibition on slavery
enforce
- privileges and immunities
- due process
- equal protection
enforce right to vote race, color, previous condition of certitude
collect an income tax
[liquor prohibition]
enforce suffrage
- women
- presidential vote for DC
- no poll tax requirement
- 18 - 20
Saturday, November 9, 2024
From ChatGPT: What is the history of the Texas State Board of Dental Examiners?
After a student expressed an interest in class about dentistry, we explored what organization is in charge of regulating the profession, including determining who gets to practice it:
The Texas State Board of Dental Examiners (TSBDE) has a history of regulating dentistry in Texas that dates back to 1889:
1889: The first legislation to regulate dentistry in Texas allowed each judicial district to appoint a board of examiners made up of three practicing dentists.
1897: The district system was replaced by the TSBDE, with six dentists appointed by the governor for two-year terms.
1919: The number of dentists on the board was increased to nine.
1971: The term length for dentists on the board was increased to six years.
1981: Three public members were added to the board, increasing the total number of members to 12.
1991: Two dental hygienists and one additional dentist were added to the board, increasing the total number of members to 15.
The TSBDE is responsible for licensing and registering dentists, dental hygienists, dental assistants, dental laboratories, and mobile dental clinics. They also sanction violators of dentistry laws and rules.
The governor appoints all members of the TSBDE, who serve until they resign or are replaced. The Texas Constitution states that appointees with expired terms will continue to serve until they are reappointed or replaced.
The Texas State Board of Dental Examiners (TSBDE) has a history of regulating dentistry in Texas that dates back to 1889:
1889: The first legislation to regulate dentistry in Texas allowed each judicial district to appoint a board of examiners made up of three practicing dentists.
1897: The district system was replaced by the TSBDE, with six dentists appointed by the governor for two-year terms.
1919: The number of dentists on the board was increased to nine.
1971: The term length for dentists on the board was increased to six years.
1981: Three public members were added to the board, increasing the total number of members to 12.
1991: Two dental hygienists and one additional dentist were added to the board, increasing the total number of members to 15.
The TSBDE is responsible for licensing and registering dentists, dental hygienists, dental assistants, dental laboratories, and mobile dental clinics. They also sanction violators of dentistry laws and rules.
The governor appoints all members of the TSBDE, who serve until they resign or are replaced. The Texas Constitution states that appointees with expired terms will continue to serve until they are reappointed or replaced.
Friday, November 8, 2024
From Chat GPT: What were Trump's 2024 Campaign Promises?
As we begin to shift towards public policy, we're gonna look at how these promises might become policy.
As of 2024, Donald Trump's campaign promises for his bid to return to the presidency reflect his continued populist and nationalist agenda, while responding to current political, economic, and cultural concerns. Below are some of the major promises he has made during his 2024 campaign:
1. Secure the Border and End Illegal Immigration. Trump has consistently vowed to complete the border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and implement stricter immigration policies. He has reiterated his commitment to building a physical wall (while also emphasizing technological and personnel enhancements) and has promised to use his administration's powers to prevent illegal immigration. Trump also supports reinstating the "Remain in Mexico" policy for asylum seekers and other policies designed to reduce illegal immigration.
2. “America First” Economic Agenda. Trump promises to revive the U.S. economy by cutting taxes, reducing regulations, and bringing jobs back to America. He has reiterated his stance on trade, emphasizing the need for fairer trade deals that prioritize American workers. This includes focusing on industries like manufacturing and energy production, and imposing tariffs where necessary to protect U.S. jobs. Trump has also indicated plans to end dependence on China and reinvest in American industries.
3. Energy Independence and Energy Policy. Trump has promised to restore U.S. energy independence, which includes expanding domestic fossil fuel production, drilling, and fracking. He has vowed to reverse policies set by the Biden administration that hinder the energy sector and promote a more pro-business environment for oil, gas, coal, and nuclear energy.
4. Rollback on Biden Administration’s Policies. A major theme of Trump's 2024 campaign is to reverse much of President Joe Biden's agenda, including undoing regulations on the energy sector, rolling back climate change-related policies, and eliminating green energy subsidies that Trump believes are harmful to the U.S. economy. He has also pledged to address inflation and cut government spending, emphasizing that his approach would strengthen the dollar and improve the purchasing power of American families.
5. Law and Order, and Criminal Justice Reform. Trump has made a strong "law and order" stance a cornerstone of his 2024 platform, positioning himself as the candidate who will crack down on crime, particularly in Democrat-run cities. He promises to take a hard line on violent crime, defunding movements, and supporting police forces. Additionally, Trump has made it clear that he plans to continue to push for criminal justice reform, including addressing prison conditions, expanding sentencing reforms, and supporting more robust rehabilitation initiatives, similar to the First Step Act he championed in his first term.
6. Energy, Manufacturing, and Trade. Trump has focused on bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. by retooling trade policies to make outsourcing less attractive. He has also talked about bringing back key supply chains, such as pharmaceuticals and technology, to American soil.
He promises to end reliance on China for critical technologies and manufacturing, emphasizing an America-first trade policy to bolster U.S. industry and reduce dependency on foreign nations.
7. Reversing Woke Agenda and Protecting American Culture. Trump has strongly opposed what he describes as a "woke" culture that he believes is undermining American values. His campaign promises include taking action against woke indoctrination in schools and government, protecting free speech, and cracking down on critical race theory in education. He has positioned himself as a defender of traditional American values, vowing to protect parents' rights in the education system.
8. Veterans’ Care and Support. Trump has made continued commitments to improving veterans' services and care, promising to expand access to healthcare and benefits for veterans and ensuring they are treated with the respect they deserve.
9. Strengthen the Military. Trump has promised to increase defense spending, modernize the military, and ensure U.S. military readiness. This includes focusing on new technologies, improving the veteran care system, and ensuring the U.S. military can confront future challenges, such as those posed by China and Russia.
10. Anti-Globalist, “America First” Foreign Policy. Trump has pledged to end foreign entanglements and focus on America's interests first in the international arena. He has vowed to bring American troops home from overseas deployments, reduce involvement in international conflicts, and challenge the role of international organizations like the United Nations and NATO in U.S. affairs. He has also positioned himself as an advocate for energy independence, which he argues would strengthen U.S. global leverage.
11. Election Integrity. Trump has repeatedly called for election reforms that would ensure secure elections and address voter fraud. Although he has not provided a specific policy on how to ensure election integrity, he has consistently questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 election and advocated for tighter voter ID laws and other measures to make elections more secure. He has vowed to continue challenging what he perceives as fraudulent election practices.
12. Ending "Biden's Socialist Policies" Trump has promised to reverse what he describes as the "socialist agenda" of the Biden administration, which includes expanding government-run programs like Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, and free college tuition. He advocates for reducing the size and scope of the federal government, along with cutting taxes and regulations to allow businesses to thrive.
13. Strengthening the Supreme Court. Trump has pledged to continue appointing conservative judges to federal courts, particularly the Supreme Court, ensuring that it remains a conservative stronghold for years to come.
14. Second Amendment Rights. Trump has promised to continue defending Second Amendment rights and oppose any efforts to impose stricter gun control laws, positioning himself as a defender of gun ownership and individual rights.
These promises are largely designed to appeal to Trump's base of conservative, nationalist, and populist voters, while addressing concerns over immigration, the economy, crime, and government overreach. His rhetoric has also positioned him as an outsider who seeks to undo what he portrays as the failed policies of the establishment, which he blames for many of America's current struggles.
As of 2024, Donald Trump's campaign promises for his bid to return to the presidency reflect his continued populist and nationalist agenda, while responding to current political, economic, and cultural concerns. Below are some of the major promises he has made during his 2024 campaign:
1. Secure the Border and End Illegal Immigration. Trump has consistently vowed to complete the border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and implement stricter immigration policies. He has reiterated his commitment to building a physical wall (while also emphasizing technological and personnel enhancements) and has promised to use his administration's powers to prevent illegal immigration. Trump also supports reinstating the "Remain in Mexico" policy for asylum seekers and other policies designed to reduce illegal immigration.
2. “America First” Economic Agenda. Trump promises to revive the U.S. economy by cutting taxes, reducing regulations, and bringing jobs back to America. He has reiterated his stance on trade, emphasizing the need for fairer trade deals that prioritize American workers. This includes focusing on industries like manufacturing and energy production, and imposing tariffs where necessary to protect U.S. jobs. Trump has also indicated plans to end dependence on China and reinvest in American industries.
3. Energy Independence and Energy Policy. Trump has promised to restore U.S. energy independence, which includes expanding domestic fossil fuel production, drilling, and fracking. He has vowed to reverse policies set by the Biden administration that hinder the energy sector and promote a more pro-business environment for oil, gas, coal, and nuclear energy.
4. Rollback on Biden Administration’s Policies. A major theme of Trump's 2024 campaign is to reverse much of President Joe Biden's agenda, including undoing regulations on the energy sector, rolling back climate change-related policies, and eliminating green energy subsidies that Trump believes are harmful to the U.S. economy. He has also pledged to address inflation and cut government spending, emphasizing that his approach would strengthen the dollar and improve the purchasing power of American families.
5. Law and Order, and Criminal Justice Reform. Trump has made a strong "law and order" stance a cornerstone of his 2024 platform, positioning himself as the candidate who will crack down on crime, particularly in Democrat-run cities. He promises to take a hard line on violent crime, defunding movements, and supporting police forces. Additionally, Trump has made it clear that he plans to continue to push for criminal justice reform, including addressing prison conditions, expanding sentencing reforms, and supporting more robust rehabilitation initiatives, similar to the First Step Act he championed in his first term.
6. Energy, Manufacturing, and Trade. Trump has focused on bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. by retooling trade policies to make outsourcing less attractive. He has also talked about bringing back key supply chains, such as pharmaceuticals and technology, to American soil.
He promises to end reliance on China for critical technologies and manufacturing, emphasizing an America-first trade policy to bolster U.S. industry and reduce dependency on foreign nations.
7. Reversing Woke Agenda and Protecting American Culture. Trump has strongly opposed what he describes as a "woke" culture that he believes is undermining American values. His campaign promises include taking action against woke indoctrination in schools and government, protecting free speech, and cracking down on critical race theory in education. He has positioned himself as a defender of traditional American values, vowing to protect parents' rights in the education system.
8. Veterans’ Care and Support. Trump has made continued commitments to improving veterans' services and care, promising to expand access to healthcare and benefits for veterans and ensuring they are treated with the respect they deserve.
9. Strengthen the Military. Trump has promised to increase defense spending, modernize the military, and ensure U.S. military readiness. This includes focusing on new technologies, improving the veteran care system, and ensuring the U.S. military can confront future challenges, such as those posed by China and Russia.
10. Anti-Globalist, “America First” Foreign Policy. Trump has pledged to end foreign entanglements and focus on America's interests first in the international arena. He has vowed to bring American troops home from overseas deployments, reduce involvement in international conflicts, and challenge the role of international organizations like the United Nations and NATO in U.S. affairs. He has also positioned himself as an advocate for energy independence, which he argues would strengthen U.S. global leverage.
11. Election Integrity. Trump has repeatedly called for election reforms that would ensure secure elections and address voter fraud. Although he has not provided a specific policy on how to ensure election integrity, he has consistently questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 election and advocated for tighter voter ID laws and other measures to make elections more secure. He has vowed to continue challenging what he perceives as fraudulent election practices.
12. Ending "Biden's Socialist Policies" Trump has promised to reverse what he describes as the "socialist agenda" of the Biden administration, which includes expanding government-run programs like Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, and free college tuition. He advocates for reducing the size and scope of the federal government, along with cutting taxes and regulations to allow businesses to thrive.
13. Strengthening the Supreme Court. Trump has pledged to continue appointing conservative judges to federal courts, particularly the Supreme Court, ensuring that it remains a conservative stronghold for years to come.
14. Second Amendment Rights. Trump has promised to continue defending Second Amendment rights and oppose any efforts to impose stricter gun control laws, positioning himself as a defender of gun ownership and individual rights.
These promises are largely designed to appeal to Trump's base of conservative, nationalist, and populist voters, while addressing concerns over immigration, the economy, crime, and government overreach. His rhetoric has also positioned him as an outsider who seeks to undo what he portrays as the failed policies of the establishment, which he blames for many of America's current struggles.
Thursday, November 7, 2024
What lies forward for Trump's proposals?
Here's a look at two. I'll try to get through as many as possible by the end of the semester. These will be useful as we start looking at public policy.
- For Trump and Republicans in Congress, ‘everything is in play’ on tax cuts.
- For Trump and Republicans in Congress, ‘everything is in play’ on tax cuts.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2024/11/06/trump-immigration-policies/
Exit Poll Data from the election
These drawn from people who actually voted, which makes it more reliable than previous polls.
Trump voters were overwhelmingly male and non-college graduates across three racial categories.
I'll add more as I find it.
- Click here for the source.
United States federal executive departments - history
This list was pulled from here.
Compare this with the history of political realignments.
1789: State.
1789 - 1947: War.
1789: Treasury.
1792 - 1971: Post Office.
1849: Interior.
1862: Agriculture.
1870: Justice.
1903 - 1913: Commerce and Labor.
1913: Commerce.
1913: Labor.
1947: Defense.
1953 - 1979: Health, Education, and Welfare.
1966: Housing and Urban Development.
1967: Transportation.
1977: Energy.
1979: Education.
1979: Health and Human Services.
1989: Veterans' Affairs.
2002: Homeland Security.
For 11/6/2024
Election Results
- Brazoria County.
- Texas Secretary of State.
Party Eras / Realignment
- 2016 / 2020 / 2024
Exit Polls
- Anatomy of three Trump elections: How Americans shifted in 2024 vs. 2020 and 2016.
State Political Culture
Election Impact on Governing Institutions
Congressional Committees
Expansion of Executive Branch
Design of Courts
- https://www.oyez.org/cases/2024
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_executive_departments
- https://tamids.tamu.edu/ag-smart-data-lab/
- https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/index.shtml
- https://www.brazoriacountyclerktx.gov/departments/elections/election-results
- https://abc13.com/archive/7736817/
- https://tsbde.texas.gov/
What my 8 week GOVT students want to be when they grown up
software engineer
chemical engineer
mechanical engineer
agricultural economics
finance
pre-K to first grade teacher
dentist
EMS
law
nurse manager
artist
agricultural teacher
nurse anesthesiologist
art director for film
investment banker
financial analyst
biologist
biology teacher
construction sales
medical sales
athletic trainer
sports
Doctor
art teacher
professional disc golfer
live production
dental hygienist
registered nurse
drama
solar engineer
neuro surgeon
veterinarian
computer scientist
sports reporter
chemical engineer
mechanical engineer
agricultural economics
finance
pre-K to first grade teacher
dentist
EMS
law
nurse manager
artist
agricultural teacher
nurse anesthesiologist
art director for film
investment banker
financial analyst
biologist
biology teacher
construction sales
medical sales
athletic trainer
sports
Doctor
art teacher
professional disc golfer
live production
dental hygienist
registered nurse
drama
solar engineer
neuro surgeon
veterinarian
computer scientist
sports reporter
Tuesday, November 5, 2024
Monday, November 4, 2024
From the Houston Chronicle: Anxious about your ballot? Here's how to ensure your vote was counted in Texas
- Click here for it.
In an election filled with chatter alleging voter fraud and disenfranchisement, knowing if a ballot was officially counted or not can bring voters some much-needed peace of mind.
The Texas Secretary of State generally uploads early voting and election day turnout the day after polls close. The only information voters need to check the status of a ballot cast during the early voting period is the date and location where they voted.
On Texas’ early voting page, select the Nov. 5 General Election and navigate to the early voting turnout by date dropdown menu. Selecting a date will automatically download a list of all the voters who cast votes that day.
The Texas Secretary of State’s Ballot Tracker allows voters to track their mail-in ballots with just their name, date of birth, social security number and driver’s license number.
Sunday, November 3, 2024
For our look at the election
United States Constitution.
- Click Here.
United States Statutes.
- Title 52—Voting And Elections
Texas Statutes
- Texas Election Code.
Texas Secretary of State
- Welcome to Texas Elections.
Brazoria County
- Elections and Voter Registration.
Election related news from the Texas Tribune
- Texas tells U.S. Justice Department that federal election monitors aren’t allowed in polling places.
Texas’ top elections official told the U.S. Department of Justice on Friday its election monitors aren’t permitted in the state's polling places after the federal agency announced plans to dispatch monitors to eight counties on Election Day to ensure compliance with federal voting rights laws.
- Dan Patrick debunks claims about Texas voting machines switching votes.
Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick publicly debunked claims that voting machines in the state are changing the selections voters make.
But Patrick, who is also a Republican, quickly corrected the national party leader on social media. The lieutenant governor said fewer than 10 people out of the nearly 7 million Texans who had already cast ballots across the state claimed that their selections were changed, but officials could not confirm a single instance of that happening.
A community college could transform the Lockhart area. Will voters approve it?
This November, the college is coming to voters in the Lockhart Independent School District with a proposition to begin paying into the Austin Community College taxing district. In exchange, residents would qualify for in-district tuition and trigger a long-term plan to build out college facilities in this rural stretch of Texas, which is positioning itself to tap into the economic boom flowing into the smaller communities nestled between Austin and San Antonio.
Community colleges have long played a crucial role in recovering economies. But in Lockhart, ACC’s potential expansion could serve as a case study of the role colleges can play in emerging economies as local leaders and community members eye the economic growth on the horizon.
That is, if they can convince enough of their neighbors to help pay for it.
In Dallas, ballot propositions could drastically change police and city government.
Three Dallas city charter amendments, buried at the very end of the upcoming November ballot, could drastically affect the city’s police department — and change how local government operates.
If passed, those amendments could force the city to hire hundreds more police officers and dictate where some excess revenue is spent, tie the city manager’s compensation to a community survey — and allow residents to sue the city for violating the charter while forcing the city to waive its governmental immunity.
Advocates say the propositions would place the power of accountability back in Dallas resident’s hands — while also increasing police staffing.
“Propositions S, T and U are a suite of ballot propositions … that came together because of Dallas citizens’ refusal to accept a lot of the bad headlines that we were seeing,” Pete Marocco, the executive director of Dallas HERO, the group responsible for the amendments, told KERA.
When will Texas election results come in? Here’s how the process unfolds.
Soon after polls close at 7 p.m. on Election Day, election officials begin to post early voting totals that will give Texans their first glimpse of results. But knowing the actual outcome of the election could take much longer, as election officials follow a long list of procedures to ensure your vote is counted accurately.
In large counties such as Harris, Dallas, Tarrant and Collin, where election workers and officials will be coordinating the counting of Election Day ballots coming in from hundreds of voting locations, results are likely to be particularly slow. But it’s not for a lack of effort by election workers often working past midnight to meet the state’s 24-hour deadline.
A look at current court cases involving elections
These are pulled from Democracy Docket.
- Court Cases.
Typed of Cases:
- Election Administration.
- Felony Disenfranchisement.
- In-Person Voting.
- Post-Election Litigation.
- Redistricting Litigation.
- Registration.
- Vote by Mail.
Friday, November 1, 2024
More on Mussolini becoming dictator
As my 16 week classes know, this is the subject of their current written assignment.
How did Mussolini consolidate power in Italy?
Khan Academy does a great job explaining it.
Check these two videos out especially (there's more)
- Mussolini Becomes Prime Minister.
- Mussolini becomes absolute dictator (Il Duce).
The Acerbo Law and The Enabling Act of 1933
Two laws passed with threats of violence by the Fascists in Italy and the Nazis in Germany which gave them control over lawmaking in each nation, effectively eliminating checks and balances.
- The Acerbo Law.
The Acerbo Law was an Italian electoral law proposed by Baron Giacomo Acerbo and passed by the Italian Parliament in November 1923. The purpose of it was to give Mussolini's fascist party a majority of deputies. The law was used only in the 1924 general election, which was the last competitive election held in Italy until 1946.
. . . Following the transformation of Italy into a one-party State in 1926, the Acerbo Law became obsolete. In 1928, the Italian Parliament (now purged of any serious opposition) overwhelmingly passed a new electoral law, known as Rocco Law from his proponent Alfredo Rocco; the new Law turned Italian elections into a plebiscite on a single list of candidates selected by the Grand Council of Fascism among members of the National Fascist Party and affiliated organizations.
- The Enabling Act of 1933.
The Enabling Act of 1933 was a law that gave the German Cabinet – most importantly, the Chancellor – the power to make and enforce laws without the involvement of the Reichstag or Weimar President Paul von Hindenburg, leading to the rise of Nazi Germany. Critically, the Enabling Act allowed the Chancellor to bypass the system of checks and balances in the government.
. . . Under the Act, the government had acquired the authority to enact laws without either parliamentary consent or control. These laws could (with certain exceptions) even deviate from the Constitution. The Act effectively eliminated the Reichstag as an active player in German politics. While its existence was protected by the Enabling Act, for all intents and purposes it reduced the Reichstag to a mere stage for Hitler's speeches. It only met sporadically until the end of World War II, held no debates and enacted only a few laws. Within three months of the passage of the Enabling Act, all parties except the Nazi Party were banned or pressured into dissolving themselves, followed on 14 July by a law that made the Nazi Party the only legally permitted party in the country.
From the NYT: Supreme Court Declines to Remove R.F.K. Jr. From Ballot in Two Key States
For our look at the courts, among other things.
- Click here for the story.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to remove Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from the presidential ballots in two key battleground states, Wisconsin and Michigan.
The decisions by the justices were unsigned and gave no reasoning, which is typical in such cases. There were no noted dissents in the Wisconsin challenge. But Justice Neil M. Gorsuch dissented in the Michigan case, echoing the reasoning of a dissent from an appeals court earlier in the litigation.
Since throwing his support behind Mr. Trump, Mr. Kennedy has sought both to be removed from and to remain on various state ballots. In September, the Supreme Court rejected a separate request from Mr. Kennedy asking that his name appear on New York’s presidential ballot.
Although early voting is already underway in both Wisconsin and Michigan, Mr. Kennedy asserted that he had acted in a timely fashion to try to remove himself from the ballots. Keeping him on, his lawyers said in asking the Supreme Court to intervene, compromised his “message of support for former President Trump.”
That he still remained only showed a disparity between how major-party candidates are treated versus independent candidates, Mr. Kennedy’s lawyers wrote, adding that Wisconsin allowed major-party candidates an extra month to adjust whether they appeared on the presidential ballot.
“Forcing a person onto the ballot,” they added, amounted to compelled speech in violation of the First Amendment, and Wisconsin’s rules for independent candidates violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause.
Tuesday, October 29, 2024
What is foster care?
In our upcoming look at public policy, we will cover policies related to poverty. This includes how children who lack familial support are cared for.
One of these policies is foster care.
You'll see a variety of posts related to the policy. To start: here are two definitions generated by AI.
From Chat GPT:
Foster care is a system in which children who cannot live with their biological families due to various reasons—such as neglect, abuse, or family crises—are placed in temporary homes with foster families. These families provide care, support, and a stable environment for the children until they can be reunified with their families or find a permanent adoptive home. The goal of foster care is to ensure the safety and well-being of the child while working towards a solution that best meets their needs.
From AI Overview:
Foster care is a temporary court-ordered arrangement for children who are unable to live safely at home:
Placement: Children are placed in foster care by the government or a social service agency. The preferred option is kinship care, which is placement with a relative. When that's not possible, children may live with nonrelative caregivers.
Foster parents: Foster parents are state-certified caregivers who provide shelter, support, and care for children. To become a foster parent, you must meet certain requirements, including:
Being at least 21 years old
- Passing a background check
- Being financially stable
- Being in good physical health
- Completing orientation and training
Services for foster children: Foster children receive medical care, education, and counseling services.
Reunification: Whenever possible, the goal is to reunite children with their families through visitation.
Permanency: The goal is to place children in permanent homes as quickly as possible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publius_Valerius_Poplicola
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/docs/CN/htm/CN.5.htm#:~:text=The%20judicial%20power%20of%20this,may%20be%20provided%20by%20law.
https://news.gallup.com/home.aspx
https://www.texastribune.org/2024/10/28/texas-dallas-police-propositions-amendments/
From Wikipedia: The Bradley Effect
One reason polls might be wrong is that respondents are uncomfortable revealing who they intend to vote for. Even when talking to anonymous strangers, we fear judgment.
My hunch is that this was why Trump's support in 2016 was underestimated.
- Click here for the entry.
The Bradley effect, less commonly known as the Wilder effect, is a theory concerning observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some United States government elections where a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other. The theory proposes that some white voters who intend to vote for the white candidate would nonetheless tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for the non-white candidate. It was named after Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California gubernatorial election to California attorney general George Deukmejian, a white person, despite Bradley being ahead in voter polls going into the elections.
For 10/29/24
- First three articles
- Fed 51
- Types of law
- - statutory
- - administrative
- - case
- First Congress
Monday, October 28, 2024
Timeline of US Political Parties
If you are still confused about the development and evolution of the national political parties, check this out. It's worth your time.
From some polisci people at UCLA: United States Congressional District Shapefiles
This is sweet.
All U.S. House districts from 1789 to 2012.
- Click here for it.
A bit more help for my 8 week GOVT 2305 class
In case the site I gave you for assignment #2 is insufficient.
- Ballotpedia: Who Represents Me?
- Texas Tribune: Who Represents Me?
- 270 Top Win: Who Represents Me?
- Read this for hints on how to search for more: Harris County Law Library: Who Represents Me?
- Texas Tribune: Here’s your ballot for the Nov. 5 Texas elections.