From The Dish: The Disagreement Gap

The Dish flags a story that attempts to measure which pieces of major legislation over the past 100 years have been most controversial. The author looks at the difference between the Republican and Democratic vote in both the House and Senate and calls this the disagreement gap.

Here's is how it looks graphically - you can see the stimulus bill and the Affordable Care Act have been the most divisive in the past century.



And a chart with greater detail.

New Texas Laws

Yesterday, hundred of new laws took effect in Texas. Grits for Beakfast breaks them down.

The American Legislative Exchange Council

Attention is being focused on a recently established interest group, the American Legislative Exchange Council, which is helping coordinate policies - primarily conservative policies - across the states. It has helped drive tort reform, opposition to health care reform and environmental regulations, and the balanced budget amendment.

Obviously with that agenda, people are polarized about it's influence on the states, but it has emerged as a leading source for much of the legislation that has been promoted through the states.

Here are a handful of links related to the group. Some of my 2301s will see a written assignment based on these, something that ties the subjects of federalism, elections and interest groups together. My 2302s might want to read through some of these stories to get an idea about the origins of legislation.

- ALEC Exposed: The Koch Connection.
- ALEC: Democracy's Arch-Nemesis.
- Koch, Exxon Mobil Among Corporations Helping Write State Laws Across U.S.
- Who's Really Writing States' Legislation?
- Right-wing group brings together pols & corps to write 'model bills'
- ALEC’s influence in West Virginia

Why is creating new felonies the solution to every social problem?

Grits for Breakfast asks a very interesting question:

Talk about cognitive dissonance: AP reports, "Bill would make hiring illegal workers a felony," while the Texas Tribune adds, "But maids are OK."

As if for a second there's remotely enough extra space in Texas prisons or jails to create a new class of "criminal" businesses and entrepreneurs! It's absurd to even imagine. But still, this and other similarly draconian measures are being debated seriously at the same time as $584-$786 million cuts are being demanded at TDCJ.

Are there better remedies available? Or is there something uniquely Texan about throwing everyone in jail?

Major Votes of the 111th Congress

For a future discussion in 2302 about Congress: NYT has a list of the major legislation passed by the 111th Congress.

Does the Public Always Gets What it Wants?

Some of you are diving into public opinion at the moment, and one of the simplistic points made in the lectures is that in a democracy, shifts in public opinion tend to drive public policy. But we are a republic, not a democracy, and certain institutions (including the Senate) are designed to allow a minority to halt the majority. That seems to be the case with climate change legislation:

Despite polling showing public support for climate and energy policies, the Senate is unable to pass even a vastly scaled-back bill that only addresses the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. And that's because a perfect storm of a sharply partisan Senate, ailing economy and the polarizing and complex issue of climate change has made it impossible to pass any type of energy and climate bill, no matter how much the public supports it.


"There has just not been the debate and consideration of energy legislation that would lead to a successful result," Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said. "Essentially, one group of senators believes that any energy bill had to have a cap-and-trade or a carbon pricing mechanism. That was the red line. Without that, it was not a valid bill."

The more than two dozen Democrats Lugar is referring to aren't alone in supporting a limit on carbon emissions. Almost two-thirds of Americans also support limiting greenhouse gas emissions, according to the latest Society for Human Resource Management/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, conducted with the Pew Research Center.

Defense of Marriage Act Overturned by U.S. District Court Judge

Story in the NYT.

Background.

Honest Services Law Overturned Due to Vagueness

My 2302s will start discussing the judiciary soon, and this will among the recent decisions we will cover:

From Slatest:

Supreme Court Deals Blow to "Honest Services" Law

The Supreme Court sided with former Enron CEO and smartest-guy-in-the-room Jeffrey Skilling and media mogul Conrad Black on Thursday by ruling against a fraud law commonly used to go after white-collar criminals. The "honest services" law, which the Court determined to be excessively vague, allows prosecutors to file suit against executives who don't act in companies' best interests. The law was critical in targeting former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (whose own trial has been keeping Chicagoans entertained since June 3), lobbyist Jack Abramoff (now employed at a kosher Baltimore pizzeria) and former New York State Senate majority leader, Joseph Bruno, who was indicted last January. Now, there's concern that today's ruling could overturn convictions and make it harder to file fraud cases. Writing for the majority, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ruled that Skilling's "honest services" conviction was flawed (he's serving a 24-year sentence for duping investors about Enron's financial health) and that the law should only be limited to "schemes involving bribery and kickbacks." The Court also challenged the conviction of Conrad Black, who was sentenced to 6 ½ years in prison in 2007 for allegedly stealing millions from the Hollinger International Inc. media company through insider dealings. Both cases will be sent back to appeals court, but the ruling won't necessarily overturn their convictions. Despite the victory over "honest services," the Supreme Court disagreed with the second part of Skilling's argument—that bad media coverage had prevented him from getting a fair trial in Enron's home city of Houston.

The Wall Street Journal Thursday, June 24, 2010

As with the decision to overrule the drilling ban, the key seems to be an overly broad, excessively vague law which allows for too much arbitrary and capricious activity by prosecutors.

- SCOTUSblog » “Honest services” law pared down
- Honest services fraud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Finance Reform

Financial regulatory reform passes the Senate.

Andrew Sullivan has links that break the bill down.

Graphics from the NYT.

Executive and Legislative Attention to Auto Safety

In response to Toyota's troubles, the executive and legislative branches have placed automobile safety on their relative agendas.

In the executive, the Secretary of Transportation said that Toyota's response to the crisis would be monitored more carefully, the effective agency is the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

In the legislature, bills are being crafted in the House Energy and Commerce and Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committees. The bill is called the The Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010. The car lobby has come out against the bill: "seizing on a provision that would empower the top U.S. car regulator to order a recall when an "imminent hazard" is present."

Their efforts is being spearheaded by "top car-industry lobbyist (and former member of Congress - think "revolving door") Dave McCurdy, president of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers."

For more information on the legislation:
- S.3302: Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010 - U.S. Congress ...
- WashingtonWatch.com - S. 3302, The Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010
- Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010, Section by Section
- Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010 Unveiled The Truth About Cars

A Window of Opportunity for Non-Carbon Energy?

We've had two tragedies in rapid succession involving standard carbon based energy industries, the coal mining disaster and the Off shore oil well explosion followed by the spill. Might this create an opportunity for proponents of wind/solar and other non-carbon energy sources to generate support for their efforts to develop them? David Brooks argues that governments have always played a role in jump-starting new technologies and should do the same for clean energy.

In 2302 we discuss agenda setting, and the role events can play determining what governments do. Here's a current example.

5/3/10: Paul Krugman agrees with me.

Scott Brown Votes Against Filibuster

In 2302, when we discuss the behavior of individual legislators, we point out the tension that can exist between the needs of the constituents and the party caucus. Scott Brown's election to the U.S. Senate empowered the Senate Republican Conference by giving them enough vote to fight off attempts to stop a filibuster, but that doesn't mean that all their members will join. Brown might be a Republican but he represents a liberal state, so his constituents wont support him if he votes with the conservatives.

Perhaps this bests explains his decision to vote against a filibuster on a jobs bill that eventually passed the Senate (it will now head to a conference committee in order for it to be reconciled with a House bill passed previously). He faces re-election in 2012, which is not that far away.

This points out an irony when party's grown in size, they may actually lose strength because they may become less cohesive. As long as the Republicans in the Senate were small in number and mostly conservative, it was more likely that they could stay together. But once you add a moderate -- and possibly a tad liberal -- voice to the mix, this cohesion becomes compromised. In fact, if he chooses to be vocal in his positions, he might choose to be a thorn in the side of Senate Republican leadership. I wouldn't be surprised if he teams up with fellow northeastern Republican Senators Snowe and Collins, and perhaps others, to force their way on issues important to them and their constituents. Remember that they hold the key to a successful filibuster. They are in a position to force a great many concessions if they choose to do so.

Health Care Reform and the Art of The Possible

Critics argue that the health care bill passed by the house will not accomplish some of its goals, like cutting the cost of health care, but changes might cost the support of critical groups like doctors and hospitals who stand to lose funding if those changes are made.

Story in the NYT.

Will the perfect become the enemy of the good? Reminds me of the definition of politics as being the art of the possible.

No Comprehensive Reforms

Michael Lind thinks Congress should not enact comprehensive reforms of anything, including health care. The piecemeal approach works better.

His main points:
1 - Comprehensive reform tries to address too many problems at the same time, instead of addressing particular problems by particular pieces of legislation.
2 - Comprehensive reform tries to assemble a single majority for a multipurpose bill, instead of assembling different majorities for different bills.
3 - Comprehensive reform by its very nature shuts out the public.
4 - Comprehensive reform kills the appetite for subsequent reform.

Comments:
- Patrick Appel wants to keep it simple.
- Publius is worried about agency capture.

Texas Legislature Wrap Ups

Here are a few links summarizing the 81st Leg's regular session:

- The Waco Tribune bemoans lost opportunities: Editorial: Legislature's sorry conclusion; or is it over?

- The Dallas Morning News reports that key departments will stay open despite the fact that sunset legislation was not passed: GOP leaders vow to keep key agencies open

- The Chronicle tells us that Governor Perry considers the session a success: Perry declares session victory

- The Austin American Statesman reports that Perry is not anxious to call a special session to deal with unfinished business: Perry not calling an immediate special session, if any, but the Forth Worth Star Telegram tells u she might have to: Perry blasts senators who let bill die, says a special session may ...

- Burnt Orange Report Lists what it considers hits and misses: A Session of Missed Opportunities

- The Tribune blames failures to act on Voter ID: Voter ID a Long, Slow Burn for Legislature

- The Dallas Morning News speculates that Kay Bailey Hutchison may be '09 session's big winner

Running out of time in the Texas Leg

Any bill not debated on the floor in the Texas House is now unlikely to be placed on the House calendar and will not be considered this term. The Chron reports that this includes some controversial items, like casino gambling:

Casino gambling: All bets are off. Texas hold ’em had to fold ’em. Hands-free cell phones in cars has crashed. And guns on campus bit the bullet as the first major legislative deadline started killing bills.

All were pieces of House legislation that had to be debated by midnight Thursday or lose hope of passage in this year’s legislative session under House rules. They were among dozens of bills that the House would never reach before the witching hour in a 28-page calendar.

The campus gun bill was among some of the most controversial measures this year, a move that would have allowed licensed handgun owners to tote their weapons at universities and colleges. Seventeen states have tried it. All have failed. Only 11 U.S. universities allow handguns on campus.

“What do you get when you put bread in an oven? Toast,” said Rep. Joe Driver, R-Garland, sponsor of the handgun bill.

Some of the bills, like a ban on trans fats in restaurants, might get a second life since they have passed the Senate and could still be heard in the House But for the gambling bills, cell phones and handguns, the 81st Legislature is all but over.

Justifying Hate Crimes Law Circa 2001

I'm not sure what the precise differences are between the current legislation and the one debated in 2001, but here's the Senate Committee report justifying the bill, plus background from one of the staffers who helped draft the bill.

Pointing the Finger: The Community Reinvestment Act

I'll put up a few posts featuring the various arguments being made about who or what is responsible for the current financial crisis.

First up: The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977 which was designed to address discriminatory lending practices where certain populations were prevented from obtaining home loans. Special attention was paid to a practice called redlining.

Here's an outline of the argument from Slate:

The thesis is laid out almost daily on the Wall Street Journal editorial page, in the National Review, and on the campaign trail. John McCain said yesterday, "Bad mortgages were being backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and it was only a matter of time before a contagion of unsustainable debt began to spread." Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer provides an excellent example, writing that "much of this crisis was brought upon us by the good intentions of good people." He continues: "For decades, starting with Jimmy Carter's Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, there has been bipartisan agreement to use government power to expand homeownership to people who had been shut out for economic reasons or, sometimes, because of racial and ethnic discrimination. What could be a more worthy cause? But it led to tremendous pressure on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—which in turn pressured banks and other lenders—to extend mortgages to people who were borrowing over their heads. That's called subprime lending. It lies at the root of our current calamity." The subtext: If only Congress didn't force banks to lend money to poor minorities, the Dow would be well on its way to 36,000. Or, as Fox Business Channel's Neil Cavuto put it, "I don't remember a clarion call that said: Fannie and Freddie are a disaster. Loaning to minorities and risky folks is a disaster."

The rest of the article argues against this point.

For more information check out these sites:
- PolicyLink.org.
- Businessweek.
- The Cato Institute.

Strictly Interpreting Smoking Bans

A little creativity goes a long way.