Categories
General

Federalist Nos. 52 – 53


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

Federalist No. 52 and Federalist No. 53 begin an exploration of the individual branches of government as defined in the Constitution by considering the purpose, composition, and structure of the House of Representatives. While they were trying to rectify the weaknesses of existing legislative bodies, sometimes it can feel like we still live under a system where:

The only dependence of the representatives on the people consisted in the right of the latter to supply occasional vacancies by the election of new members

The final paragraph of Federalist 52 contained this sentence:

It is a received and well-founded maxim, that where no other circumstances affect the case, the greater the power is, the shorter ought to be its duration; and, conversely, the smaller the power, the more safely may its duration be protracted.

This got me thinking because that would suggest that the Senate has the less power than the House of Representatives. I had always believed that the Senate had comparatively more power than the House. I’d be curious to know what others think about their relative power.

Federalist 53 makes passing reference to:

a Constitution established by the people and unalterable by the government, and a law established by the government and alterable by the government.

I stopped for a minute to think about that. With the way our Constitution today is almost invisible within the laws passed by Congress I almost believed that our government was busy changing the Constitution. I soon realized that I was wrong. They may ignore the Constitution, but they cannot change it. In order to change the Constitution both houses of Congress must pass a bill for the change by supermajorities, but even if they were unanimous the change cannot go into effect until majorities in three quarters of the states also ratify the amending bill. It’s no wonder they ignore the Constitution so much, they can’t change their minds about it with every administration if they were to try making a change to our legal foundation. And yet our Congress acts very much like the British Parliament that they were designed to improve upon:

Even in Great Britain, where the principles of political and civil liberty have been most discussed, and where we hear most of the rights of the Constitution, it is maintained that the authority of the Parliament is transcendent and uncontrollable, as well with regard to the Constitution, as the ordinary objects of legislative provision. They have accordingly, in several instances, actually changed, by legislative acts, some of the most fundamental articles of the government.

I particularly liked the description of the challenging task that representatives in the federal government would have to undertake. Even before we allowed the federal government to reach into every aspect of our daily lives the citizens were supposed to select someone who could tackle this:

The laws are so far from being uniform, that they vary in every State; whilst the public affairs of the Union are spread throughout a very extensive region, and are extremely diversified . . . A branch of knowledge which belongs to the acquirements of a federal representative, and which has not been mentioned is that of foreign affairs. In regulating our own commerce he ought to be not only acquainted with the treaties between the United States and other nations, but also with the commercial policy and laws of other nations.

Finally there is another instance of the federalist authors making an assumption that turns out to be less than accurate:

A few of the members, as happens in all such assemblies, will possess superior talents; will, by frequent reelections, become members of long standing; will be thoroughly masters of the public business, and perhaps not unwilling to avail themselves of those advantages.

Sadly, it is not a few who become members of long standing by frequent reelections. Instead it has become almost universal, and they almost universally avail themselves of the advantages of their office.

Categories
National

Accountability Now


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

MoveOn.org has proven that they can be a political force, so has The Daily Kos, and long before either of them existed labor unions were already very influential in politics. That made me very interested to read that those three were teaming up to form a new political action committee called Accountability Now.

Their stated goal is to help recruit and promote move liberal democratic candidates in areas where moderate democrats are currently in office. So how soon until they decide to target Jim Matheson? (And who would they get to challenge him in Utah?) One of their founders also raised the possibility of taking action in Republican primaries as well. (I can just imagine if they had been supporting Chris Cannon against Jason Chaffetz.)

So I’m curious about what other people think about this. It’s obviously a part of the internal debate that Reach talked about in comments earlier this week. Do we think that this approach to the internal debate is healthy, or destructive? Is it better news for Democrats or better news for Republicans – or is it simply bad news for proponents of a civil political process?

Categories
culture National State

Federalist No. 51


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

Of course the importance of checks and balances in our government is a well known concept as discussed in Federalist No. 51. What I had not previously realized was that splitting the Congress into two houses was a part of the effort on checks and balances. I had always understood that choice to simply be a compromise between the power of large state and small states.

In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy for this inconveniency (sic) is to divide the legislature into different branches; and to render them, by different modes of election and different principles of action, as little connected with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence on the society will admit.

Today some may argue that the legislative authority does not predominate in our government. Closer inspection of our government shows that it does still dominate which is why the concentration of interest in the executive branch by individuals and news organizations is so effective at confusing the electorate and allowing a Congress with 10% approval rating to have a 90% success rate among incumbents. (At a state level the same results can come by focusing on the governor over the legislature.)

Those who would argue that Congress does not dominate the actions of our government can only have an argument if they claim that the parties have come to dominate the government rather than arguing that another branch of government has come to dominate.

Categories
General

Federalist No. 50


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

Federalist No. 50 brings forth the distinction between occasional appeals to the people and periodical appeals to the people. While I am not sure that this paper really satisfies the question it does force consideration of the question of what the difference is and how it plays out. The founders clearly settled on periodical appeals as proven by pre-set term lengths for various offices. They chose not to provide a limit to individual service, but they set the length of terms for the Representatives, Senators and the President. These set term length guarantee that we will go to the polls as a nation every two years, whether we like the way our government is functioning or not, and cast our votes to determine our representation for the next 2, 4 or 6 years (depending on the office in question).

If we want to consider the effect of occasional appeals we can look to other governments around the world such as Israel.

Another issue that was illustrated in this Federalist Paper is the effect parties can have of manipulating the thinking of otherwise intelligent people.

When men exercise their reason coolly and freely on a variety of distinct questions, they inevitably fall into different opinions on some of them.

It has always disturbed me to see those Republicans who will always praise the actions of Republican leaders and always denounce the actions of Democratic leaders. Likewise I am unimpressed by those Democrats who always praise Democrats and always oppose the actions of any Republican.

Of course the different parties have legitimate differences of opinion and the people who join the parties do so for a reason, but to refuse to see any good across the aisle is a recipe for poor policy. Real leaders know how to recognize the value being offered by the opposition and will not oppose the other party simply on the principle that it is the other party.

Categories
State

Public Transportation


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I have just changed my commuting from riding the bus to driving. This was not due to my own choice – my office moved and I was unwilling to take an extra 2 to 3 hours per day to get to and from this highly underserviced area. Coincidentally I had to buy gas on my way to work on my first driving day. It threw some real perspective on the price of riding the bus

At my old building the bus took 30 to 45 minutes each way while driving took 20 to 30. At my new location the bus would take at least 90 minutes each way but more likely 2 hours while driving takes 25 – 35 minutes. Of course the bus has never been portrayed as the fastest method of commuting so lets look at cost. The bus cost me about $6 a month because my employer paid the other $70 for my pass. I no longer have that option so a bus pass costs me almost as much as my gas ($60) plus my insurance while taking 3 or  4 times as long to make the trip. Imagine if I were paying on a per trip basis for my bus riding – that would be $99 a month to ride the bus – not counting the taxpayer money that supports UTA. Notice that all the prices I am quoting for the bus are not the express passes or the trains, just the regular bus system.

As I started to put all that together I realized that despite the fact that I believe that good public transportation is a good idea, it is notanywhere near economically competitive with private vehicle ownership. Whatever money we spend as a society to prop up our public transit system we need to realize that we are not making any significant economic benefit to those who use the system – they come out a little bit ahead of simply hiring a taxi every time they need to go somewhere.

I still favor the idea of public transportation in theory, but in practice I’m not sure that our taxes should be used simply to hide the fact that the system is not economically competitive. If we are unwilling to pay enough to make it beneficial then our tax support is wasted.

Categories
life Local

Running for Treasurer


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I have decided to run for the position of Treasurer for the Davis County Republican Party. Those those who are interested can visit my campaign website although any regular readers here will not find any surprises there.

The vote is 8 weeks away, but call this an early invitation. Anyone in Davis County who is a registered republican is encouraged to support me at the party organizing convention. I see this as an opportunity to put my beliefs and principles into action to help make the Republican party the best it can be here in Davis County.

Categories
General State

Public Office and Freedom of Expression


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I could not begin to cover the latest situation with Chris Buttars but there is an important issue there. Everyone has a responsibility to refrain from yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater, but public officials have even more reason to be judicious in what they choose to say. As far as I’m concerned that’s a choice you make when you run for office. I have not read what he said (nor do I intend to). I have not paid attention to the particulars of the reprimand that he received but I have read a variety of opinions on what should have happened. I thought I would throw in my two bits about these kinds of situations.

I consider it perfectly reasonable that the state senate should have the power to discipline and reprimand its members when they act in a way that detracts from the office they hold. Obviously in criminal cases they should be free to remove the offending senator. This is not a criminal case. Public officials have as much right to fre expression as any other citizen even if they bear a heavier responsibility for their use of that right. Because this is not a criminal case I believe it is up to the voters in the 10th district to decide if they want him to represent them in the senate. Personally, even if I agreed with his politics all the time (which I don’t) I would not want him serving as my representative because of the distraction he brings all too regularly.

Categories
General

Two Forms of Government


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I really appreciated the video that Scott shared yesterday. (You can see the full video below.) It reminded me that there are only two distinct forms of government. One is transient as it depends on the life of the ruler(s) while the other is stable because it is based on a foundation of written law. Of course we can make changes to that foundation, but the core is rarely changed, if ever.

Our nation was founded upon the rule of law. That was the whole purpose of most of our founding documents (Magna Carta, Mayflower Compact, Articles of Confederation, Constitution, Bill of Rights). The scariest thing in our modern political system is not the goals and ideals of any of the political parties, it is the almost universal attitude within every party that their ideals supercede the law of the land. A perfect example of that attitude was posted as a comment last month stating:

principles . . . must transcend and over-ride individual provisions of the Constitution

Good government depends on that statement being universally rejected. As I responded then:

principles . . . must not transcend or over-ride individual provisions of the Constitution . . . instead those bedrock principles must be used to guide the amendment of the Constitution

Categories
National

Senators Seeing the Future (Clearly)


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

There are obviously a few things that I don’t understand about the Senate. Yesterday I reported that according to Senator Bennett the most important (he said it was most important, it was not simply the first thing on his list) part of the job of a senator is to try to see the future clearly. Little did I know that later in the day I would find an example of that prescience in action. Becky Edwards shares from the State Legislature:

There was discussion and explanation of the federal stimulus package and how it will affect Utah. We will receive $1,536,834,051 of stimulus funds. This is one time money only. Of that $86M is to be used at the Governor’s discretion. Much of this money is targeted, cannot be moved around, has strings attached (we’re still waiting to find out what they are), some cannot be spent for 1 or 2 years . . .

(emphasis added)

Apparently our representatives at the federal level (Not Utah’s delegation specifically) can already see the future clearly enough to know that the economy will need continued stimulus next year and the year after that. And here I thought that the stimulus bill was intended to get the economy back on its own two feet sooner rather than later. If I wanted it to take 3 years (it’s already been more than 1) we could have achieved that by sitting back and watching. Now we run the risk of nursing it along for years to come.

Categories
Local

Community Activism


Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

I have not said anything about this before (mostly because I have not put much energy towards the cause) but today brought great news that the proposed cogeneration plant in West Bountiful has been put on hold. The thing that interested me is that there has been no government obstruction so far to the plans proposed by Consolidated Energy Utah. The thing that got the plans put on hold was the activism of citizens in the community. Most prominently, the Davis County Community Coalition (DC3).

This to me is a perfect example of a free society. Government is not necessary for every problem. The decisions and actions of DC3 are not binding on other communities. There have been no new government regulations created to drive up the cost of business in the future, but the community got what they wanted – no cogeneration plant. The real role of government is to ensure that citizens are free to make their own standards and enforce them without total disregard for the rights of the minority.