Some stupid questions - GOVT 2306-04

Responses to come

1 - How is Texas so diverse but yet still a RED state?

2 - My main concern is the parties, how they work and what each party does. I’ve never been into politics, so I don’t know much about them, but what makes each party unique, and what is each political parties purpose?

3 - Is Texas still considered a republic?
4 - Why is a caucus and a convention classified as a temporary party convention?

5 - What all goes into making it so hard for incumbent representatives to lose their incumbency in Texas?

6 - Is it too far-fetched of an idea to abolish the party system, and have politicians' campaign independently?

7 - Why does the local and state government have to be so complicated and detailed as compared to the federal government?

Stupid Questions - GOVT 2305 GHD2

Responses to follow

They'll help review the material for the final

1 - My question kind of does and kind of doesn't relate to anything that we've learned so far. It mostly has to do with the current situation (COVID-19). It's 2020, meaning this is our general election year. This virus is going to get worse before it gets better. So, how do you think elections would work? Would we most likely transition to some heavily regulated online system? They can't cancel an election, can they, especially with his being the general election? Would that be unconstitutional?

2 - How much of an effect do us young people (Gen Y and Z) have on this upcoming election? Can we make a significant effect on the outcome?

3 - Actually, the most confusing thing for me right now is memorizing all the terminology, but that's just because I have a bad memory. Do you have any tips or tricks to help me with that? Also I am struggling with how the levels of local levels of government relates to or affects the national government because right now with Covid-19 going around the two seem very separated. For example, states like California are going into a state of emergency while others are just going by the specific county. While the national government just seems to be promoting social distancing and released the symptoms of Covid-19 to be weary of, and have yet to decide whether or not it will be necessary to go into a state of emergency or something else that might help the country.

4 - Question: What is your favorite sport?The Federalist papers and the Articles of Confederation are a bit hard to keep track of.

5 - What is the basic difference between Democrats and Republicans?

6 - Isn't it crazy we were just joking about China being infected with coronavirus a couple of weeks ago? Now the Earth is infected and the government is handling this situation fairly well. The most confusing stuff we covered is our bill of rights and how the federal power is seperated. For example in this coronavirus situation, I'm suspicious if the federal government steps in to quarantine contaminated areas. I know it would be to lower infection rates but i would prefer to not see the government controlling our liberty to go out and interact with one another.

Some Stupid Questions - GOVT 2306-GDH1

I'll add responses soon

1 - i feel like what confused me the most is know which branch does what.

2 - The parties, like how many are there? I have only ever heard of the democrates and republicans up until this year. Also, how do the lesser parties get into the polls again?

3 - The most confusing part to me so far has been the judicial system. For the most part, I understand how the executive and legislative branches work and who is within the branch. However, the judicial system is just unclear.

4 - The most confusing part to me so far has been the judicial system. For the most part, I understand how the executive and legislative branches work and who is within the branch. However, the judicial system is just unclear.

5 - I am still trying to grasp each lesson as best as i can but sometimes i don't know what it is exactly we are being taught. I don't have an actual question but i am worried about taking the final for the class the test and quizzes are okay though.

6 - How will the corona virus affect the election?

7 - How does the federal reserve plan on combating inflation if they give money away to everyone, what would stop our nation to turn into post ww1 Germany. Not sure if that qualifies as stupid question so I will ask another question, why is the world round.

8 - Aren’t politics and government powers a waste of time? The most confusing thing that we have covered in this course in my opinion has to do with the depth and intensity of both the US and Texas constitutions and why they are both fairly different. This confuses me because I do not understand why the Texas government leaders feel the need to create a country for Texas itself and why we cannot just use the national constitution.

9 - The thing that confuses me most is the separation of state and national level powers. I’m confused of what applies to what and when it applies

10 - What are the main differences between open and closed primaries? And what are the pros and cons of each? Also, is there any specific reason why Texas and specifically Houston lacks mass transit systems even though Houston is a large, urban city?

11 - How are people supposed to vote if we are supposed to stay inside, or is voting postponed?

12 - why is the texas constitution so large?

13 - Do you think Texas will ever ratify its constitution to resemble the beliefs and values of people of today? I personally think that Texas will not while still remaining a republican state.

14 - What’s confusing is why if everyone hates Donald trump so much why did he become president? Why did people vote for him?

15 - What is confusing me the most is why the constitution may be very specific in some areas, but doesn't go into details in other areas. Or is it already as detailed as can be?

16 - Why are there so many political debates pout there?

Some Stupid Question GOVT 2306 - 03

I'll start responding to these one by one.

1 - Is it possible for an election to be rigged? Could it be possible that elections aren't online in order to prevent the tech nerds from hacking the elections and rigging the election? For those states that do offer online voting, have they ever been hacked?

2 - the plural executive and bureaucracy in Texas. If you could explain and review again how it works?

3 - how does Texas court system work?

4 - There are more than five thousands local government in Texas. All of them are elected by the people and each member of these local governments have to seek for election and reelection every 2- 4 or six years. Why commissioners, judges etc have to be elected instead of appointed by the Texas governor. Wouldn't it be easy and cheaper for those member of the government to be appointed by the Texas governor?

5 - Why do a bunch of flawed people (politicians) get to to control a system (made by flawed people) that control a bunch of people (citizens) who are also flawed?

6 - Why is the patronage system not restricted or frowned upon since it is only about connections rather than qualifications? I am aware that Texas uses both the merit-based civil service system and patronage, but why do something that disregards other people's qualifications and focuses solely on who they voted for? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of working hard in a career that is involved in politics because at the end of the day the patronage system is still there?

7 - Why is the judicial branch the strongest and how?

8 - This isn’t really related just a personal question. So, I would like to be more politically involved and do my part as a citizen. So my question is, what’s a good website to learn which party i side with and how I would chose my vote?

9 - I read in the textbook that Texas prisons can have prisoners produce items, but only for government organizations. So, does that mean things like the desks at the college were also produced in prisons?

U.S. Quarantine Stations

From the CDC.

- Click here for the source.

The History of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention

From Wikipedia:

- click here for it.

The Communicable Disease Center was founded July 1, 1946, as the successor to the World War II Malaria Control in War Areas program  of the Office of National Defense Malaria Control Activities.

Preceding its founding, organizations with global influence in malaria control were the Malaria Commission of the League of Nations and the Rockefeller Foundation. The Rockefeller Foundation greatly supported malaria control sought to have the governments take over some of its efforts, and collaborated with the agency.

The new agency was a branch of the U.S. Public Health Service and Atlanta was chosen as the location because malaria was endemic in the Southern United States. The agency changed names before adopting the name Communicable Disease Center in 1946. Offices were located on the sixth floor of the Volunteer Building on Peachtree Street.

With a budget at the time of about $1 million, 59 percent of its personnel were engaged in mosquito abatement and habitat control with the objective of control and eradication of malaria in the United States (see National Malaria Eradication Program).

- Click here for a timeline of its activities.

CDC’s Quarantine Legacy

Some stupid questions

I'll address these later:

1 - I dont fully understand the difference between the state and national government. Also with the local governments. Who is in charge of what? I see signs on the road to vote for people that I don't even know what they would have the power to do. And how much power does the president really have when there's so many other people behind governmental decisions

I'd suggest rereading the chapters on federalism and separated powers. I'll post some online videos which can help as well, but here is just a bit on the topic:

Your first question asks about federalism - the split authority between the national, state, and local branches. This content also includes - to some degree - descriptions of the offices created on each level. Note that 2306 includes more content on state and local offices, since that is the subject matter of 2306. The basic difference between each level is their function, and who they are responsible to.

As far as what the president does, please review the chapter on the Constitution, as well as the chapter on the presidency. In brief, the president oversees the implementation of the law.

I'll post something related to the functions of the presidency as well.

2 - is a hotdog a sandwich? You told me to ask a stupid question that is indeed a stupid question; so I don’t know if you want me to ask a stupid question about the material this class or just a stupid question in general. So I’m going to stick with my question being: is hotdog a sandwich I feel it could spark an argument. This whole coronavirus thing this year has completely thrown me off but since most of your classe is online anyways besides, the in class lectures, I feel like I could still learn and benefit from this class even though we have a little hiccup in the year.

3 - Is cereal a soup? why or why not? The most confusing thing for me was the public opinion chapter just because there was a lot of information.

4 - What's the importance of government and what would our life be like without it?

5 - Why is the constitution up for so much interpretation and why do people have so many different ideas of what it means?

6 - Why do we have to necessarily learn about certain topics that have to do with economics if it's supposed to be based off of government? Whats confusing me the most about the topic is some of it contains information that you would learn about in economics and are based off of how the government controls the community as a whole. Then throughout the subject we start talking about different politics that sometimes are confusing, because it can either have something to do with whats going on in the world or it could be based off of something totally different.

From Vox: 23 maps that explain how Democrats went from the party of racism to the party of Obama

- Click here for the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_and_Pacific_Railway

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Pacific_Transportation_Company

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcontinental_railroad

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_railroads_in_North_America

https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/eqr01

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Mexican_Railway

https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/dft01

https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/eqb11

From the TSHA: Land Grants

For our look at fiscal policy.

- Click here for it.

Wikipedia: Land grants in the U.S.

June Medical Services LLC v. Russo

- Click here fro the case.

From the Washington Monthly: The Youth Vote Emerges as a Problem for the Democrats

Same old problem.

- Click here for the article.

Super Tuesday voting concluded only a few hours ago, but political archeologists are already turning over the rubble. An early narrative focuses on the failure of young voters to turn out. According to the exit polls, youth turnout did not increase in a single Super Tuesday state. In fact, the profile of the electorate skewed much older than in recent primary elections. German Lopez of Vox explains:

Consider Texas: According to NBC News’s exit polls, the Democratic electorate actually skewed older in Tuesday’s primary compared to past primaries. In 2008 and 2016, 13 and 18 percent of the electorate, respectively, was 65 and older. In 2020, it was 24 percent.

Texas is getting older, but not at a rapid enough rate for that increase to be tied solely to state demographic trends. In fact, the share of the population that’s 65 and older is just 12.6 percent. Given Biden’s strength with this group of Texas voters — 46 percent support Biden, while just 16 percent support Sanders — that surge in older voters helps explain Biden’s narrow victory in the state.

Many commentators are questioning how Bernie Sanders expects to sell people on his revolution if he can’t even mobilize the kids to cast their votes. It’s a reasonable question, but Sanders did at least accomplish half of his goal. For example, among California voters age 18-29, Sanders beat Biden by a staggering 72 percent to 5 percent. In Texas, the margin was 65 percent to 11 percent.

So, Sanders really does have the overwhelming support of young voters and it’s undeniable that he’s produced some excitement among them, but somewhere this formula broke down.

From Vox: The Democratic voter surge was very real on Super Tuesday

More on turnout.

- Click here for the article.

The first two states in the Democratic primary elections cast some doubts as to whether voter turnout would increase much in 2020. But after Super Tuesday’s races, Democrats can likely put those doubts behind them.

In most states, voter turnout was significantly higher this year than it was in 2016:

In Alabama, turnout increased from more than 398,000 in 2016 to more than 451,000 in 2020.

In Arkansas, turnout increased from more than 218,000 with all votes counted to over 228,000 with more than 99 percent of precincts reporting.

In North Carolina, turnout increased from more than 1.1 million with all votes counted to more than 1.3 million with 99 percent of precincts reporting.

In Tennessee, turnout went from more than 371,000 to more than 513,000.

In Texas, turnout rose from more than 1.4 million with all votes counted to more than 2.1 million with more than 99 percent of precincts reporting.

In Vermont, turnout increased from nearly 135,000 with all votes counted to more than 157,000 with roughly 89 percent of precincts reporting.

In Virginia, turnout grew from nearly 783,000 to more than 1.3 million.

From 538: What We Know About The Voters Who Swung Super Tuesday For Biden

For our look at the composition of the electorate, and voter behavior.

- Click here for the article.

A key part of former Vice President Joe Biden’s success on Super Tuesday was his strong performance among voters who had only made up their minds in the last few days. According to exit poll data, Biden won at least 40 percent — if not more — of the late-deciding vote in every state except Sanders’s home state of Vermont.

But who exactly were these voters? And why did they so overwhelmingly back Biden at the last minute? If we look at the exit poll data we have, there is a lot of variation from state to state, but there are a few key trends from Tuesday:

1. Late deciders, on average, were more moderate.

2. Voters in the Northeast (Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont) and the Midwest (Minnesota) were especially likely to decide late (nearly half did) while voters in some parts of the South and California were more likely to have cast their ballot early (in California, mail-in voting played a huge role in boosting early voting numbers).

3. Biden picked up a lot of support among white voters who decided late.

From the Texas Tribune: Just a quarter of registered voters in Texas participated in the 2020 presidential primary

For our look at turnout.

- Click here for the article.

For the first time since 2008, more Texans voted in the Democratic presidential primary than in the Republican primary — but just barely.

With all polling places tallied Thursday, Democrats had cast 2,076,046 votes in the pitched contest to take on President Donald Trump in November. Meanwhile, Republicans cast 2,008,385 votes in the presidential contest. Overall, a small majority of votes — 2,071,745 — came during early voting, and 2,012,686 were cast on election day, according to the Texas secretary of state’s office.

More than anything, turnout in presidential primary elections has historically served as a measure of the competitiveness of the race and the heightened enthusiasm that comes with that. That was particularly true this year when the Democratic field narrowed significantly just before Super Tuesday, when Texas’ massive haul of delegates came up for grabs.

Republicans voting in the presidential primary had outpaced Democrats during the state’s early voting period. The opposite was true on election day.

The increased election day turnout was felt on the ground. In Bexar County, election officials said they averaged 6,000 voters an hour in the first three hours of voting.

To no one’s surprise given the state’s depressing turnout history, a small slice of Texas’ total electorate participated in Tuesday’s presidential primary. With 16.2 million Texans registered to vote, just 25.2% cast a ballot in the primary election.

https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2019/01/17/generation-z-looks-a-lot-like-millennials-on-key-social-and-political-issues/

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/09/the-politics-of-american-generations-how-age-affects-attitudes-and-voting-behavior/

The Prison Industrial Complex

- Click here for it.

From the Texas Department of Public Safety: Texas Crime Analysis (2018)

It seems that crime - property crime anyway - is going down in the state.

- Click here for the analysis.

- Click here for the full report.

Crime affects every Texan in some fashion. Togain a measurement of crime trends, Texas participates in the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. UCR makes possible the analysis of crime trends primarily through the Crime Index.

The Crime Index To track the variations in crime, the UCR data collection program uses a statistical summary tool referred to as the Crime Index. Rather than collecting reports of all crimes that were committed in a particular year, UCR collects the reports of seven index crimes. The crimes in this group are all serious, either by their very nature or because of the frequency with which they occur, and present a common enforcement problem to police agencies.

Crimes within this index can be further categorized as violent crimes, which include murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault, or as property crimes, which consist of burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. Although arson and human trafficking are index crimes in that the number of reported offenses is collected, neither is a part of the Crime Index.

During calendar year 2018, there was a reported total of 796,924 index offenses in Texas. The crime volume decreased by 5.4% when compared to 2017. In addition to the above offenses, there were 2,446 cases of arson. There were also 332 human trafficking offenses reported in 2018.

From the Prison Policy Initiative: Grading the parole release systems of all 50 states

For our look at both criminal justice and interest groups.

- Click here for the article.

From arrest to sentencing, the process of sending someone to prison in America is full of rules and standards meant to guarantee fairness and predictability. An incredible amount of attention is given to the process, and rightly so. But in sharp contrast, the processes for releasing people from prison are relatively ignored by the public and by the law. State paroling systems vary so much that it is almost impossible to compare them.

Sixteen states have abolished or severely curtailed discretionary parole, and the remaining states range from having a system of presumptive parole — where when certain conditions are met, release on parole is guaranteed — to having policies and practices that make earning release almost impossible.

Parole systems should give every incarcerated person ample opportunity to earn release and have a fair, transparent process for deciding whether to grant it. A growing number of organizations and academics have called for states to adopt policies that would ensure consistency and fairness in how they identify who should receive parole, when those individuals should be reviewed and released, and what parole conditions should be attached to those individuals. In this report, I take the best of those suggestions, assign them point values, and grade the parole systems of each state.

Sadly, most states show lots of room for improvement. Only one state gets a B, five states get Cs, eight states get Ds, and the rest either get an F or an F-.



How we graded and what distinguishes a fair and equitable parole system.

To assess the fairness and equity of each state’s parole system, we looked at five general factors:
Whether a state’s legislature allows the parole board to offer discretionary parole to most people sentenced today; (20 pts.)

The opportunity for the person seeking parole to meet face-to-face with the board members and other factors about witnesses and testimony; (30 pts.)

The principles by which the parole board makes its decisions; (30 pts.)

The degree to which staff help every incarcerated person prepare for their parole hearing; (20 pts.)

The degree to which the parole board is transparent in the way it incorporates evidence-based tools. (20 pts.)

From the Sentencing Project: Private Prisons in the United States

For out look at criminal justice

- Click here for the article.

Private prisons in the United States incarcerated 121,718 people in 2017, representing 8.2% of the total state and federal prison population. Since 2000, the number of people housed in private prisons has increased 39%.

However, the private prison population reached its peak in 2012 with 137,220 people. Declines in private prisons’ use make these latest overall population numbers the lowest since 2006 when the population was 113,791.

States show significant variation in their use of private correctional facilities. Indeed, the New Mexico Department of Corrections reports that 53% of its prison population is housed in private facilities, while 22 states do not employ any for-profit prisons. Data compiled by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and interviews with corrections officials find that in 2017, 28 states and the federal government incarcerated people in private facilities run by corporations including GEO Group, Core Civic (formerly Corrections Corporation of America), and Management and Training Corporation.

Eighteen states with private prison contracts incarcerate more than 500 people in for-profit prisons. Texas, the first state to adopt private prisons in 1985, incarcerated the largest number of people under state jurisdiction, 12,728.

Since 2000, the number of people in private prisons has increased 39.3%, compared to an overall rise in the prison population of 7.8%. In six states the private prison population has more than doubled during this time period: Arizona (479%), Indiana (310%), Ohio (277%), Florida (199%), Tennessee (117%), and Georgia (110%).

From the Texas Tribune: As the Texas prison population shrinks, the state is closing two more lockups

A consequence of lighter jail sentences?

- Click here for the article.

Following a declining inmate population and dangerous understaffing in Texas prisons, the state is closing two of its more than 100 lockups.

State Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, announced Thursday that the Garza East prison in Beeville and the Jester I Unit in Sugar Land would be closing soon. He said in a statement that all employees at the closing prisons would be offered jobs at nearby facilities, “preventing the loss of any jobs while also addressing understaffing at other units.” A prison spokesperson said the Beeville unit would close in mid-May, and the Sugar Land prison would close this summer.

The Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s executive director, Bryan Collier, said diversion, treatment and education programs, as well as a low rate of people getting sent back to prison, led to the decision.

“This decreasing demand for secure housing and projected stability in the offender population makes possible the decision to reduce state spending through the closure of excess correctional capacity,” Collier said in a statement. “The agency can close these facilities without negatively affecting public safety or causing any loss of jobs.”

Who Will Control the Texas House?

U.S. Supreme Court cases mentioned in the first five chapters of the Mora - Ruger textbook

This may be incomplete

- Bond v United States
- McCullough v. Maryland
- Wickard v Filburn
- U.S. v Windsor
- Perry v Schwarzenner
- Obergefell v Hodges
- Baker v Carr
- Reynolds v Sims
- Evenwel v. Abbott
- Bush v Vera
- Hunt v. Cromartie
- LULAC v. Perry
- Perry v. Perez
- Shelby County v. Holder
- Hopwood v Texas

Patterson - 2305

- Gideon v Wainwright
- McCullough v Maryland
- Gibbons v Ogden
- Scott v Sanford
- Plessy v Ferguson
- Hammer v Dagenhart
- Lochner v New York
- Schechter Poultry Corp. v United States
- United States v Butler

Company Towns

Looking far ahead to our look at local governments.

- Cheapism: 25 Towns Devastated by Losing a Single Company.
- Oxford: Company Towns in the United States.
- Smithsonian Mag: America's Company Towns, Then and Now.
- VCU: Company Towns: 1880s to 1935.
- Wikipedia: Company Town.
- Wikipedia: Company Town #United States.
- Wikipedia: Lists of Company towns in the United States.

From the U.S. Census: Apportionment

For a look at how apportionment works:

- Click here.

Machiavelli: The Prince -- The Common Sense of Politics

Executive Power in the various Texas Constitutions

1845: SEC. 1. The supreme executive power of this State shall be vested in a chief magistrate, who shall be styled the governor of the State of Texas

1861: SECTION 1. The supreme executive power of this State shall be vested in the Chief Magistrate, who shall be styled the Governor of the State of Texas.

1866: SECTION 1. The supreme executive power of this State shall be vested in the Chief Magistrate, who shall be styled the Governor of the State of Texas.

1869: SECTION I. The executive department of the State shall consist of a Chief Magistrate, who shall be styled the Governor, a Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Comptroller of Public Accounts, Treasurer, Commissioner of the General Land Office, Attorney General and Superintendent of Public Instruction.

1876: SECTION 1. The executive department of the State shall consist of a governor, who shall be the chief executive officer of the State, a lieutenant-governor, secretary of State, comptroller of public accounts, treasurer, commissioner of the general land office and attorney general.

As amended in 1995: SECTION 1. The executive department of the State shall consist of a governor, who shall be the chief executive officer of the State, a lieutenant-governor, secretary of State, comptroller of public accounts, treasurer, commissioner of the general land office and attorney general.

Links - 2/23/20

https://capitol.texas.gov/help/findvoteinfo.aspx

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Avery

https://lrl.texas.gov/legis/ConstAmends/results.cfm?electionDate=Nov%203,%201936

https://www.sunset.texas.gov/reviews-and-reports/agencies

https://www.sunset.texas.gov/impact-sunset-reviews

https://www.tdcj.texas.gov/bpp/index.htm

http://www.harriscountytx.gov/

https://liberationist.org/dividing-people-is-the-best-way-to-lead/

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Meglomaniac

From the Texas Tribune 2/13/20

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/02/12/texas-hhs-director-courtney-phillips-leaving-louisiana-job/

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/02/13/houston-mayor-sylvester-turner-endorses-michael-bloomberg-president/

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/02/13/royce-west-democrat-us-senate-flip-texas-coalition/

https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2020/us-senate-primary-voter-guide/?_ga=2.201082734.1104880686.1581607492-736982957.1547583176

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/247us251

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fica.asp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour

https://www.infoplease.com/primary-sources/government/anti-federalist-papers/president-military-king

https://slideplayer.com/slide/10796572/

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/2018/09/18/304541/growing-diversity-in-fort-bend-county-may-make-for-tight-contest-in-tx-22/

https://www.harrisvotes.com/SampleBallot/VoterBallot/R/E/0501-REP.pdf

https://www.harrisvotes.com/SampleBallot/VoterBallot/D/E/0501-DEM.pdf

https://frontloading.blogspot.com/

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P20/

For HCC quiz 4

The test will cover both Chapters 4 and 5 in each textbook.

Focus especially in these terms.

2305

due process
establishment
exclusionary rule
imminent lawless action
good faith exemption
prior restraint
right of privacy
selective incorporation
symbolic speech
de-jure discrimination
equal protection clause
reasonable basis test
strict scrutiny

2306

attorney general
board and commissions
budgetary powers
comptroller
impeachment
judicial powers
land commissioner
legislative power
line-item veto
plural executive
secretary of state
Sunset Advisory Commission
appellate courts
grand juries
magistrate functions
onjectivity
partisan election
petit juries
stare decisis
trial courts
 

Regarding Racial Gerrymandering

- Shaw v. Reno.

. . . a landmark United States Supreme Court case argued on April 20, 1993. The ruling was significant in the area of redistricting and racial gerrymandering. The court ruled in a 5-4 decision that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause. On the other hand, bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The redistricting that occurred after the 2000 census, as required to reflect the population’s changes, was the first nationwide redistricting to apply the results of Shaw v. Reno.

- Hunt v. Cromartie.

. . . a United States Supreme Court case regarding North Carolina's 12th congressional district.[1] In an earlier case, Shaw v. Reno, 517 U.S. 899 (1995), the Supreme Court ruled that the 12th district of North Carolina as drawn was unconstitutional because it was created for the purpose of placing African Americans in one district, thereby constituting illegal racial gerrymandering. The Court ordered the state of North Carolina to redraw the boundaries of the district.

Regarding Partisan Gerrymandering

From Ballotpedia:

The phrase partisan gerrymandering refers to the practice of drawing electoral district maps with the intention of favoring one political party over another. On June 27, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a joint ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek, finding that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions that fall beyond the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary.

Notable cases:

- Rucho v. Common Cause
- Lamone v. Benisek
- Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission
- Davis v. Bandemer

From the OMB: A Budget for America’s Future – President’s Budget FY 2021

- Click here for it.

The Medieval Court Of Richard II | How To Get Ahead | Absolute History

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_II_of_England

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lords_Appellant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_prerogative

James II : The End of The Stuarts | Game of Kings | Absolute History

From the Texas Secretary of State's Office: Starting a Party and Nominating Candidates

Just in case you wanna

- Click here for the article.

The City of Angleton and Brazoria County

From the New York Post: South Carolina GOP boosting Bernie Sanders in open primary to help Trump in general election

- Click here for the article.

Except as otherwise provided by this code, a political party's nominees in the general election for offices of state and county government and the United States Congress must be nominated by primary election, held as provided by this code, if the party's nominee for governor in the most recent gubernatorial general election received 20 percent or more of the total number of votes received by all candidates for governor in the election.

A political party is entitled to have the names of its nominees placed on the ballot, without qualifying under Subsection (a), in each subsequent general election following a general election in which the party had a nominee for a statewide office who received a number of votes equal to at least five percent of the total number of votes received by all candidates for that office.

From the Texas Tribune: Analysis: The politics of paying one Texan’s local sales taxes to another Texan’s city

For 2306 - a look at fiscal policy, the sales tax, local government, and the Comptroller.

- Click here for the story.

Sometimes, the best way to challenge something is to notice it.

Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar has proposed a change in the state’s tax rules that could scramble how online sales taxes are collected across the state. Under current law, local taxes on the things Texans buy online go to cities where the sellers are — or say they are. And those tax proceeds are often split by the cities and the companies. In other words, some companies are collecting sales taxes and then getting a portion of them back because they have a deal with a particular city.

If that sounds like a mutation of “Buy Local,” you’re thinking like Hegar.

“Nobody knows about this,” Hegar says. “This is taxation without representation.”

He has proposed sending the tax money from online sales to the buyer’s location, booting up a discussion that might eventually blossom into a reconsideration of how sales taxes work in Texas.

Right now, it’s stirred confusion. It’s also brought some light to a longstanding practice that doesn’t sit right with some voters — especially if you tag it with slogans like “taxation without representation.”

For more: Analysis: A Texas sales tax rule hinges on a question: What’s local?

From the U.S. Census Bureau: My Congressional Districts

For updated populations estimates of the districts drawn in 2011.

- Click here for it.

Links today - 2/10/2020

https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2019/2020-primary-election-ballot/

http://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2018_texas

https://apps.texastribune.org/elections/2018/primary-election-results/

https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/voter/current.shtml

https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/index.shtml

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/EL/htm/EL.141.htm

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/EL/htm/EL.192.htm

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/art6.asp

From the Brazoria County Clerk: Elections Division

They are responsible for the actual running of elections in the state, according to state laws.

- Click here for it.

From the Texas Secretary of State: Important 2020 Election Dates

For our look at this year's elections.

- Click here for the calendar.

From the Texas Tribune: El Paso shooting suspect faces nearly 100 federal charges, including hate crimes

An example of how a criminal activity can involve a high number of offenses, this doesn't even take into consideration state charges.

- Click here for the article.

The man accused of killing 22 people during a mass shooting at a Walmart store in the border city last summer has been charged with nearly 100 federal crimes, John Bash, the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, announced Thursday.

Patrick Crusius, the alleged gunman in the Aug. 3 massacre, already faces state capital murder charges for the racially motivated shooting spree that also wounded dozens.

He is charged federally with 22 counts of hate crimes resulting in death, 23 involving an attempt to kill and 45 charges of firing a weapon in relation to the hate crimes, according to an indictment of Crusius. The U.S. attorney’s office said that upon conviction, prosecutors will seek either the death penalty or life in prison.

Crusius allegedly published a manifesto in which he indicated the crime was motivated by hatred toward Hispanic Americans and immigrants. He also told authorities after he was arrested that he drove 10 hours from his home in Allen to kill Mexicans and ward off what he said was an invasion. Eight of the victims were Mexican nationals.

Upcoming Local Elections

- ACC Board of Trustees.
- AISD Board of Trustees.
- PISD Board of Trustees.

Carter G. Woodson - The man who brought you Black History Month

- From Wikipedia:

Carter Godwin Woodson (December 19, 1875 – April 3, 1950) was an American historian, author, journalist, and the founder of the Association for the Study of African American Life and History. He was one of the first scholars to study African-American history. A founder of The Journal of Negro History in 1916, Woodson has been called the "father of black history". In February 1926 he launched the celebration of "Negro History Week", the precursor of Black History Month.

Born in Virginia, the son of former slaves, Woodson had to put off schooling while he worked in the coal mines of West Virginia. He made it to Berea College, becoming a teacher and school administrator. He gained graduate degrees at the University of Chicago and in 1912 was the second African American, after W. E. B. Du Bois, to obtain a PhD degree from Harvard University. Most of Woodson's academic career was spent at Howard University, a historically black university in Washington, D.C., where he eventually served as the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences.
Also:

https://time.com/4197928/history-black-history-month/
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/commemorative-observations/african-american.php
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/01/us/history-of-black-history-month-trnd/index.html

The Federal Register

For future use.

- Click here for the page.

Examples of recent proposed rules:

- National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Petroleum Refinery Sector.
- Pipeline Safety: Valve Installation and Minimum Rupture Detection Standards.
- Rules Regarding the Frequency and Notice of Continuing Disability Reviews.

Texas Constitution, Article 3, Sec. 56. PROHIBITED LOCAL AND SPECIAL LAWS.

(a) The Legislature shall not, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution, pass any local or special law, authorizing:

(1) the creation, extension or impairing of liens;
(2) regulating the affairs of counties, cities, towns, wards or school districts;
(3) changing the names of persons or places;
(4) changing the venue in civil or criminal cases;
(5) authorizing the laying out, opening, altering or maintaining of roads, highways, streets or alleys;
(6) relating to ferries or bridges, or incorporating ferry or bridge companies, except for the erection of bridges crossing streams which form boundaries between this and any other State;
(7) vacating roads, town plats, streets or alleys;
(8) relating to cemeteries, grave-yards or public grounds not of the State;
(9) authorizing the adoption or legitimation of children;
(10) locating or changing county seats;
(11) incorporating cities, towns or villages, or changing their charters;
(12) for the opening and conducting of elections, or fixing or changing the places of voting;
(13) granting divorces;
(14) creating offices, or prescribing the powers and duties of officers, in counties, cities, towns, election or school districts;
(15) changing the law of descent or succession;
(16) regulating the practice or jurisdiction of, or changing the rules of evidence in any judicial proceeding or inquiry before courts, justices of the peace, sheriffs, commissioners, arbitrators or other tribunals, or providing or changing methods for the collection of debts, or the enforcing of judgments, or prescribing the effect of judicial sales of real estate;
(17) regulating the fees, or extending the powers and duties of aldermen, justices of the peace, magistrates or constables;
(18) regulating the management of public schools, the building or repairing of school houses, and the raising of money for such purposes;
(19) fixing the rate of interest;
(20) affecting the estates of minors, or persons under disability;
(21) remitting fines, penalties and forfeitures, and refunding moneys legally paid into the treasury;
(22) exempting property from taxation;
(23) regulating labor, trade, mining and manufacturing;
(24) declaring any named person of age;
(25) extending the time for the assessment or collection of taxes, or otherwise relieving any assessor or collector of taxes from the due performance of his official duties, or his securities from liability;
(26) giving effect to informal or invalid wills or deeds;
(27) summoning or empanelling grand or petit juries;
(28) for limitation of civil or criminal actions;
(29) for incorporating railroads or other works of internal improvements; or
(30) relieving or discharging any person or set of persons from the performance of any public duty or service imposed by general law.
(b) In addition to those laws described by Subsection (a) of this section in all other cases where a general law can be made applicable, no local or special law shall be enacted; provided, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to prohibit the Legislature from passing:
(1) special laws for the preservation of the game and fish of this State in certain localities; and
(2) fence laws applicable to any subdivision of this State or counties as may be needed to meet the wants of the people.

Viewed in class 2/6/20

https://www.rrc.state.tx.us/

https://tarltonapps.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/texas1876/a3

https://tmd.texas.gov/office-of-the-adjutant-general

https://www.texasagriculture.gov/Home.aspx

https://www.tcjs.state.tx.us/current-members/

http://www.txrc.texas.gov/agency/commission/former_commissioners.php

https://www.sunset.texas.gov/reviews-and-reports

https://ballotpedia.org/Texas_elections,_2019

https://ballotpedia.org/Texas_elections,_2018

The 86th regular session of the Texas Legislature

https://www.texastribune.org/topics/86th-legislative-session/

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/12/27/2019-86th-texas-legislature/

https://lrl.texas.gov/sessions/sessionSummaries.cfm#86th

https://lrl.texas.gov/sessions/sessionYears.cfm

From Wikipedia: White-Slave Traffic Act of 1910 (AKA - the Mann Act)

The national government starts to become involved in criminal activity.

- Click here for the entry.

The White-Slave Traffic Act, or the Mann Act, is a United States federal law, passed June 25, 1910 (ch. 395, 36 Stat. 825; codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. §§ 2421–2424). It is named after Congressman James Robert Mann of Illinois.

In its original form the act made it a felony to engage in interstate or foreign commerce transport of "any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose". Its primary stated intent was to address prostitution, immorality, and human trafficking, particularly where trafficking was for the purposes of prostitution. It was one of several acts of protective legislation aimed at moral reform during the Progressive Era. In practice, its ambiguous language about "immorality" resulted in it being used to criminalize even consensual sexual behavior between adults. It was amended by Congress in 1978 and again in 1986 to limit its application to transport for the purpose of prostitution or other illegal sexual acts.

For more:

- Congress passes the White Slave Traffic Act, June 25, 1910.

- The ‘White Slavery’ Law That Brought Down Jack Johnson is Still in Effect.

- What is the Mann Act?

- Classification 31: White Slave Traffic Act.

From 270 to win: 2020 Presidential Election Calendar

- Click here for it.

From VoteSmart: Government 101: United States Presidential Primary

A primer:

- Click here for it.

The Caucus

Caucuses were the original method for selecting candidates but have decreased in number since the primary was introduced in the early 1900's. In states that hold caucuses a political party announces the date, time, and location of the meeting. Generally any voter registered with the party may attend. At the caucus, delegates are chosen to represent the state's interests at the national party convention. Prospective delegates are identified as favorable to a specific candidate or uncommitted. After discussion and debate an informal vote is taken to determine which delegates should be chosen.

From Vox: Technical difficulties in Iowa caucuses lead to widespread confusion, delayed results

For 2305 and 2306, a story related to parties and elections.

- Click here for the article.

The Iowa caucuses melted down on Monday night after technical difficulties caused significant delays in reporting the results, which have not, as of Tuesday morning, been declared.

A smartphone app, which was reportedly made by a firm called Shadow, appears to be at the center of the confusion. The app was designed to help precinct chairs send the results to the Iowa Democratic Party headquarters, but reports that volunteers were unable to download or properly use the app suggest that this new way of doing things did not go smoothly. A number of volunteers resorted to calling the state party to report results, and many reported being left on hold indefinitely due to busy phone lines.

Why the Iowa Caucuses Matter | NYT News

What is Iowa?

It is the 29th state.

- Click here for the Wikipedia entry.

For our look at cooperative federalism: Federal involvement in housing

http://www.ghatx.org/

http://www.housingforhouston.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_Act_of_1937

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_8_(housing)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidized_housing_in_the_United_States

The City of Las Vegas: The Early Years

From Vox: How the US became the center of global kleptocracy

The reason - according to the author - is federalism.

- Click here for the article.

How US states became masters of the shell game

The biggest single provider of anonymous shell corporations in the world isn’t Panama or the Cayman Islands. It’s not the financial secrecy stalwart Switzerland, or a traditional offshore haven like the Bahamas.

It’s Delaware. And the main reason is federalism.

Thanks to the US’s federal structure, company formation remains overseen at the state level, rather than in Washington.

So if you’re a budding autocrat interested in a bit of easy money laundering, you don’t turn to federal officials in Washington. Instead, you look to state officials in Dover, Cheyenne, or Reno to help construct anonymous shell companies to funnel and clean your illegitimate money.

And these states have taken full advantage. Since there are no regulations in the US requiring that shell companies identify their true owners — known as “beneficial owners” – American states have been under no compunction to try to peel back who may be behind the anonymous shell companies mushrooming across the country.

These states and their constituents are raking in fees — at last check, Delaware made some $1.3 billion annually from its company formation industry — so whenever, say, a human trafficker or extremist network sets up an anonymous company in Wilmington or Laramie or Carson City, they have little incentive to try to figure out who may be behind the companies.

From Lawfare: The Mexican-American War and Constitutional War Powers

Very appropriate for both 2305 - presidential powers - and 2306 - Texas history.

- Click here for the article.



On this day in 1848, the United States and Mexico signed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, ending a two-year war. The treaty set the southern Texas border at the Rio Grande and ceded Mexico’s northern provinces (which now include California and large parts of New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and Colorado) to the United States in return for $15 million. In July of that year, the Senate approved the treaty’s ratification.

In discussions of constitutional war powers, it’s the start of the Mexican-American War that gets most of the attention. Congress’s move in 1845 to annex and grant statehood to Texas probably set the countries on a path toward eventual war. Nevertheless, the main constitutional controversy in most accounts of the war is that President James Polk pretextually manufactured a border crisis to pull Congress into declaring war over American blood spilled in the disputed region between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande (which the United States and Mexico, respectively, regarded as the proper national boundary). Polk had sent Army units into the contested territory, essentially baiting Mexican forces into firing the first shot. Polk had also already drafted a war declaration for Congress before word of the skirmish reached Washington in May 1846. When Polk told Congress that Mexico had killed American troops, his allies rushed the declaration through Congress.

The start of the Mexican-American War is only one of many important constitutional dimensions of the conflict, though, and I don’t think it’s the most interesting. I’m writing about this conflict on the anniversary of its end because its outcome—and the means necessary to achieve it—led to the war’s most noteworthy constitutional precedents.

Block Grants and Medicaid

Coverage of Trump's recent propsals:

- Everything You Need To Know About Block Grants — The Heart Of GOP’s Medicaid Plans.

- The Problematic Law And Policy Of Medicaid Block Grants.

- ‘Block grants’ no more: Trump's Medicaid overhaul has new name, same goals.

- Trump’s audacious new plan to cut Medicaid, explained.

From Wikipedia: Andrew Wheeler

A great look at the revolving door and the iron triangle.

- Click here for the entry.

Career

EPA

Wheeler's first job between 1991 and 1995 was as special assistant to the Information Management Division Director in the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics working on toxic chemical, pollution prevention, and right-to-know issues. Wheeler received the Agency's Bronze Medal in 1993 and twice in 1994.

Senate staff

From January 1995 until January 1997, Wheeler worked as Chief Counsel of Senator Jim Inhofe. In 1997, Wheeler entered his first work in Congress as majority staff director at the US Senate Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, Wetlands, and Nuclear Safety, which Inhofe chaired until 2001; thereafter he was minority staff director under Chairman George Voinovich from 2001 to 2003. From 2003 to 2009, he was chief counsel at the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. During this time, Wheeler generally sought to reduce government regulations on industries that generate greenhouse gases. Senator James Inhofe was prominent for his rejection of climate change, and famously brought a snowball to the Senate as alleged proof that climate change was not real.

During his time at the Senate, Wheeler was named by the National Journal as one of the Top Congressional Staff Leaders in 2005 and was a John C. Stennis Congressional Staff Fellow in the 106th Congress.

Lobbyist

From 2009 until 2017, Wheeler was a lobbyist in the law firm Faegre Baker Daniels' energy and natural resources practice. Since 2009, he represented the coal producer Murray Energy, privately owned by Robert E. Murray, a supporter of President Trump.[21] Murray Energy was Wheeler's best-paying client, paying at least $300,000, and possibly as much as $3,300,000 during the period 2009-2017. Wheeler lobbied against the Obama administration's climate regulations for power plants and also sought to persuade the Energy Department to subsidize coal plants. Wheeler set up a meeting between Murray and Energy Secretary Rick Perry in March 2017; at the meeting, Murray advocated for the rollback of environmental regulations and for protections for the coal industry.

EPA Deputy Administrator

In October 2017, Wheeler was nominated by President Trump to become Deputy Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency. His nomination was returned to the White House on January 3, 2018 as the Senate had adjourned at the end of 2017 without taking up the nomination (Senate Rule XXXI, paragraph 6). His nomination was resubmitted and he was confirmed as Deputy Administrator of the EPA on April 12, 2018, by a mostly party-line vote of 53–45, which included three Democratic Senators: Joe Manchin, Heidi Heitkamp, and Joe Donnelly.

Since being sworn in, Wheeler has had at least three meetings with former lobbying clients of his in a potential violation of the Trump administration's ethics pledge and the promises that Wheeler made during his confirmation hearing Justina Fugh, an EPA ethics official, said that Wheeler's meetings with former lobbying clients did not violate the Trump administration's ethics pledge, because Wheeler had not worked on their behalf in the two years prior to joining the EPA. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said he was "vigorously opposed" to Wheeler replacing Pruitt.

From the Texas Tribune: Analysis: Testing the Texas political waters by breaking the rules

For our look at primaries and campaign funding.

- Click here for the article.

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is skipping the Democratic presidential primaries and caucuses in early states. Instead, he is concentrating his efforts on Texas and the other 13 Super Tuesday states, throwing money around like the billionaire that he is, advertising his name and trying to build an organization to wrest the presidential nomination away from the contenders in those earlier contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

Those other Democrats are focused mainly on those four states. That’s the standard operating procedure in presidential campaigns, and it has been since Georgia’s Jimmy Carter surprised other Democrats in 1976, focusing on Iowa while they were focused on the standard operating procedure of the time — campaigning in big states with more electoral juice.

. . . Texas election history is littered with names of wealthy folks who burned wads of their own money on their way to defeat: Clayton Williams Jr., Tony Sanchez Jr. and Ross Perot, to name a Republican, a Democrat and an independent.

Nearly everyone in politics puts his or her own twist on things, but most candidates stick with conventional strategies. Perot, who had to file boxes of petitions to get on the ballot and who advertised his campaign with half-hour infomercials, was an exception. He influenced the outcome of the 1992 presidential race, winning almost 19% of the popular vote. But nobody has turned to his race in the search for best practices, the way they did after Carter won Iowa, the nomination and then a general election against incumbent President Gerald Ford.

Bloomberg is the latest well-financed candidate to really mess with the formula.

Malarious Areas of the US

From Wikipedia: The Center for Disease Control

Another example of cooperative federalism - seemingly built up from an agency established during WW2.
- Click here for the entry.

The Communicable Disease Center was founded July 1, 1946, as the successor to the World War II Malaria Control in War Areas program of the Office of National Defense Malaria Control Activities.

Preceding its founding, organizations with global influence in malaria control were the Malaria Commission of the League of Nations and the Rockefeller Foundation. The Rockefeller Foundation greatly supported malaria control, sought to have the governments take over some of its efforts, and collaborated with the agency.

The new agency was a branch of the U.S. Public Health Service and Atlanta was chosen as the location because malaria was endemic in the Southern United States. The agency changed names (see infobox on top) before adopting the name Communicable Disease Center in 1946. Offices were located on the sixth floor of the Volunteer Building on Peachtree Street.

. . . The mission of CDC expanded beyond its original focus on malaria to include sexually transmitted diseases when the Venereal Disease Division of the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) was transferred to the CDC in 1957. Shortly thereafter, Tuberculosis Control was transferred (in 1960) to the CDC from PHS, and then in 1963 the Immunization program was established.

It became the National Communicable Disease Center (NCDC) effective July 1, 1967. The organization was renamed the Center for Disease Control (CDC) on June 24, 1970, and Centers for Disease Control effective October 14, 1980. An act of the United States Congress appended the words "and Prevention" to the name effective October 27, 1992. However, Congress directed that the initialism CDC be retained because of its name recognition.

Currently, the CDC focus has broadened to include chronic diseases, disabilities, injury control, workplace hazards, environmental health threats, and terrorism preparedness. CDC combats emerging diseases and other health risks, including birth defects, West Nile virus, obesity, avian, swine, and pandemic flu, E. coli, and bioterrorism, to name a few. The organization would also prove to be an important factor in preventing the abuse of penicillin. In May 1994 the CDC admitted having sent several biological warfare agents to the Iraqi government from 1984 through 1989, including Botulinum toxin, West Nile virus, Yersinia pestis and Dengue fever virus.

From Wikipedia: Red Shirts

A look at the use of political violence in the South.

- Click here for the entry.

The Red Shirts or Redshirts of the Southern United States were white supremacist paramilitary terrorist groups that were active in the late 19th century in the last years of, and after the end of, the Reconstruction era of the United States. Red Shirt groups originated in Mississippi in 1875, when Democratic Party private terror units adopted red shirts to make themselves more visible and threatening to Southern Republicans, both whites and freedmen. Similar groups in the Carolinas also adopted red shirts.

Among the most prominent Red Shirts were the supporters of Democratic Party candidate Wade Hampton during the campaigns for the South Carolina gubernatorial elections of 1876 and 1878. The Red Shirts were one of several paramilitary organizations, such as the White League in Louisiana, arising from the continuing efforts of white Democrats to regain political power in the South in the 1870s. These groups acted as "the military arm of the Democratic Party."

While sometimes engaging in violent acts of terrorism, the Red Shirts, the White League, rifle clubs, and similar groups in the late nineteenth century worked openly and were better organized than the secret vigilante groups such as the Ku Klux Klan. They used organization, intimidation and force to achieve political purposes of restoring the Democrats to power, overturning Republicans, and repressing civil and voting rights of freedmen. During the 1876, 1898 and 1900 campaigns in North Carolina, the Red Shirts played prominent roles in intimidating non-Democratic Party voters.

What are "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

There's debate on the subject.

- Just Security: Justice Joseph Story on “High Crimes and Misdemeanors”.
- AEI: What Does “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” Mean?
- CRS: High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
- The Atlantic: The Common Misconception About ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’

Mora and Ruger - Chapters 1 and 2 - Key Terms

Chapter One

Anglo
empresario
Adelsverein Society
land-based economy
economic regions
political action committees
majority-minority
political culture
moralistic
individualistic
traditionalistic

Chapter Two

ballot wording
bill of rights
block grants
categorical grants
checks and balances
confederal systems
constitution
constitutional convention
due process clause
earmarked
equal protection clause
federal system
full faith and credit
initiative
interstate commerce clause
necessary and proper clause
ordinances
plural executive
popular sovereignty
privileges and immunities
separation of powers
social contract theory
statute
supremacy clause
10th amendment
unitary systems

Patterson - Chapters 1 and 2 - Key Terms

Chapter One

authoritarian government
authority
confirmation bias
constitutionalism
corporate power
critical thinking
democracy
elitism
equality
free-market system
individualism
legal action
liberty
majoritarianism
party polarization
pluralism
political culture
political science
politics
power
public policies
self-government

Chapter Two

anti-federalists
bill of rights
checks and balances
constitution
constitutional democratic republican
democracy (according to the framers)
denials of powers
electoral college
electoral votes
federalists
grants of power
great compromise
inalienable rights
judicial review
liberty
limited government
new jersey plan
primary election
representative government
republic
separated institutions sharing powers
separation of powers
social contract
3/5ths compromise
tyranny of the majority
virginia plan

From the Texas Tribune: Attorney general tells Galveston City Council it can't stop gun shops from locating near schools and churches

More on the conflict between the state and cities in Texas.

- Click here for the article.

After Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton threatened a lawsuit, the Galveston City Council repealed a local rule this week that aimed to put some space between gun shops and schools.

Galveston previously had on its books some regulations that required a minimum of 200 feet of distance between gun stores and a school, place of worship or public park, reported The Houston Chronicle.

But in a unanimous decision, the city council voted to repeal the regulations on Thursday.

On Dec. 17, Assistant Attorney General Cleve Doty wrote a letter to the city of Galveston stating that the land use regulation violated state law. Doty requested the city rule to be overturned or else face legal retaliation, The Chronicle reports.

“The Office of the Attorney General demands that the City repeal these regulations and any like them immediately,” Doty wrote in the letter. “Rather than file litigation now, we are confident that the City of Galveston intends to comply with Texas law and will rescind regulations that are in violation of Texas law.”

This wouldn’t have been the first time Paxton sued a local government over gun regulations. In 2016 he sued Waller County over its ban on guns at its courthouse. In the same year, he sued the city of Austin for restricting residents from bringing firearms into city hall.

City Council members admitted prior to the vote that they couldn’t do anything about the state law, but some said they were not fond of Paxton’s approach and interference with local rule, reported The Chronicle.

John Paul Listowski, a city council member, told The Chronicle that he doesn’t think a lot of gun stores are going to start popping up, but he doesn’t, “like being forced to do something that we might not want here.”

From the Texas Tribune: Austin police chief: We will still ticket, arrest for marijuana - The day after the Austin City Council unanimously approved stopping arrests and tickets for low-level marijuana cases, police Chief Brian Manley said he will continue to enforce such laws

Conflict between a city council and law enforcement.

- Click here for the article.

The day after the Austin City Council approved a resolution to stop arresting or ticketing people for most low-level marijuana possession offenses, the police chief made clear he had no plans to do so.

“[Marijuana] is still illegal, and we will still enforce marijuana law if we come across people smoking in the community,” Chief Brian Manley said during a news conference Friday afternoon.

Although cracking down on those in possession of small amounts of marijuana has never been a priority for the department, he said, police will continue to either issue tickets under the city’s “cite-and-release” policy or arrest people if officers “come across it.”

The difference, according to City Council member and resolution sponsor Greg Casar, is that the council's move now guarantees those actions will come with no penalty. Tickets will be meaningless pieces of paper, and any arrests will result in a quick release with no charges accepted from prosecutors, he told The Texas Tribune after the news conference.

“What has changed since yesterday is that enforcement, almost in virtually all cases, is now handing someone a piece of paper with no penalty or no court date,” Casar said.

The move by the City Council came as a direct result of Texas’ new hemp law, which complicated marijuana prosecution across the state. Last summer, when lawmakers legalized hemp, they also changed the definition of marijuana from cannabis to cannabis that contains more than 0.3% THC, the psychoactive ingredient in the plant.

Many prosecutors, including those in Austin’s Travis County, now won’t accept pot cases based on look and smell alone, requiring lab testing to determine THC levels before accepting a case. Such testing is not yet available in public crime labs, though some counties and cities have spent money to obtain test results from private labs.

The council’s resolution prohibited using city funds or personnel to conduct such testing in non-felony marijuana cases. It also directed the elimination, to the furthest extent possible, of arrests or citations for cannabis possession. As Manley also noted, the resolution clarifies it can’t technically decriminalize marijuana, since that is state law.