Categories
General

Constitutional Amendment 11


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

The amendments in the Bill of Rights seem to be viewed by many people as part of the original constitution. It looks to me that later amendments can be categorized as either clarifications of the constitution or alterations to it. The Eleventh Amendment would fall under the category of clarification:

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

I don’t believe that the founders ever intended to infringe upon the sovereignty of states simply because a citizen of another state had a grievance against them. The initial intent was probably to have an impartial judge of such cases but they discovered that citizens could abuse that clause. Today we need to find ways to stop Congress from abusing some other clauses of the constitution.

Categories
National State

Second Amendment Victory


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

My appreciation for the second amendment just went up another notch. Opponents of gun ownership rights like to argue that guns kill people (for that matter so do hands, cars, T-bone steaks, and many other things) but they never mentioned that gun rights could also kill an illegal house seat for D.C.:

Fights over gun control in Washington, D.C., may have killed for the year a bill that would give Utah a fourth U.S. House seat and give D.C. a House seat with full voting rights.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., delivered that message in his weekly briefing for reporters on Tuesday

Apparently leaders in D.C. would rather keep very strict gun control laws than gain an unconstitutional voting seat in the House. If they want to now pursue a path to full House representation that does not sidestep the Constitution I’ll sign the petition at the first opportunity. Residents of D.C. deserve voting congressional representation as much as anyone else, but that does not justify ignoring the fundamental law of the land.

I still can’t believe that 80% of Utah’s congressional delegation fell for this Washington parlor trick. If the bill comes up again in 2010 I hope they will be smart enough to reject it since Utah would only have 1 possible year of representation before we would get another seat anyway (regardless of what Orrin Hatch would tell you about possibly missing it again).

Categories
National

Banks Giving Back


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

While it is good news that 10 banks will be allowed to repay billions in bailout funds I would be much more excited if I didn’t already know what was likely to happen as a result.

The banks were deemed strong enough to leave the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, after months of lobbying and strong performances on recent stress tests. The banks are expected to return about $68.3 billion to the Treasury Department, more than double the administration’s initial estimate of about $25 billion in funds to be returned this year. The timetable is also earlier than government officials originally intended.

. . .

The $68.3 billion represents about a quarter of the TARP money given to banks.

That last figure tells me that we still have over $200 billion illegally given by our government to our banking system.

My lack of enthusiasm for this news comes from two concerns. First, the administration will use this news as evidence that the bailouts are working better/faster than expected. The truth is that the banks have been working furiously to find a way to get rid of that money ever since they read the regulations that came with it. Second, having that money will be used as a way to help fund other illegal activities by the federal government such as propping up the UAW by buying GM (the money being returned covers everything we’ve put into GM so far) and even worse than that is the possibility that some smart government people might take the news as an excuse to say, “hey, we have $68 billion more than we expected,” and then go on to fund another $58 billion in projects that they did not dare to fund previously. That’s like buying a $500 LCD monitor when you can only afford $100 and then buying an $80 printer when the $100 rebate arrives early.

So the banks are giving back more and earlier – that’s good for them (and “good for them” is what they are paid to do) but that does not mean there’s a chance that the government will start giving back or being financially responsible in any way.

Update @1:20pm: Here are a few words from the president today confirming my claim that the administration would use this to show that the bailouts are working better than planned:

Several financial institutions are set to pay back $68 billion to taxpayers. And while we know that we will not escape the worst financial crisis in decades without some losses to taxpayers, it’s worth noting that in the first round of repayments from these companies the government has actually turned a profit.

. . . We’re restoring funds to the Treasury where they’ll be available to safeguard against continuing risks to financial stability. And as this money is returned, we’ll see our national debt lessened by $68 billion — billions of dollars that this generation will not have to borrow and future generations will not have to repay.

He says that the money is being returned to the treasury, but I’m confident it will find a way to sneak out again like a good rebellious teenager despite the president’s best efforts to keep it at home where it belongs. 😉

Categories
State

Online Conservative Desert


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 understand that it is a commonly held belief that the political left has more influence in online political activity than the political right. Now we have research by Richard Davis that sheds a bit of light on that.

Davis also queried more than 200 journalists to learn how they use blog content in their coverage of political news. Most journalists were aware of influential blogs on both sides of the political spectrum, such as Daily Kos and Talking Points on the left and Michelle Malkin and Instapundit on the right. Despite equal awareness, journalists spend more time reading posts in the liberal blogosphere.

For example, more journalists know about Michelle Malkin than Talking Points. Yet twice as many journalists actually read Talking Points than read Michelle Malkin.

I wish I could find the article that first alerted me to this research because it included another tidbit of information – in the research into political bloggers a much higher percentage of right-leaning bloggers read left-leaning blogs than the number of left-leaning bloggers reading right-leaning blogs.

From my own experience here in the conservative state of Utah I can say that we have at least as many left-leaning political blogs as we do right-leaning political blogs.

My question is, why is this? Why, even where the political right vastly outnumbers the political left on the ground does the political left still hold an edge over the political right online? My suspicion is that part of the answer lies in the fact that the political left was functionally irrelevant in national politics as the world of online commentary was becoming more powerful and widespread. Those who had less of a voice in running the governments might easily have been more anxious to use these new tools to communicate and respond. The result is that in some ways they have a six year head start in online organization and dialog over those who were content to be holding the reins of office. In those six years and without the luxury of turning away all who would challenge their thinking it is reasonable to expect that they might have a more vibrant and interesting dialog in general than their counterparts. It may not be that most members of the media natively prefer liberal positions, it may be that they and even some of those on the right are simply allergic to immature conversation that has not had time to develop as widely without that head start gained in the political wilderness.

I believe that this needs to be rectified. The online conversation should be a more accurate reflection of the various positions held by those on the ground. Perhaps some time in political irrelevance by the political right might serve as an incentive to create some oases online of fertile conservative conversation which could plant the seeds so that our online desert can blossom as a rose, just like the desert we live in has blossomed in the last 162 years.

Categories
General

Anti-Slavery Petition of 1790


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

In my study of our founding documents I found this Petition from the Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of Slavery, signed by Benjamin Franklin and published in 1790, to be rather interesting. In the Letter the society asks Congress:

that you will be pleased to countenance the Restoration of liberty to {slaves}, that you will devise means for removing this Inconsistency from the Character of the American People, that you will promote mercy and Justice towards this distressed Race, & that you will Step to the very verge of the Powers vested in you for discouraging every Species of Traffick in the Persons of our fellow men. (emphasis added, capitalization original)

I wondered what they expected Congress to do considering the prohibitions on Congress’ power regarding slavery prior to 1808 as stated at the beginning of Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution:

The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.

I assume that stepping to the very verge of the powers vested in Congress would mean that they wanted Congress to impose a tax of $10 per slave on the importation of new slaves.

Categories
State

Too Little Too Late


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 was not sure whether to gag or chuckle when I heard the news that Senator Bennett wants to prevent the use of TARP money for the auto industry. To me that just sounds like he’s shutting the barn doors after the cows have escaped while insisting that there’s nothing wrong with leaving the stalls open.

Bennett said he also adding wording that would ban using Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bailout money to help bankrupt car makers.

“The TARP money was sold to the Congress as acquiring assets, not as acquiring stock positions in various companies, particularly not in acquiring stock position in a bankrupt manufacturing company,” Bennett said.

“When we approved TARP the first time around, we did it with the understanding that it was dealing with the credit crisis,” he said. “Instead, the TARP money has gone into these bankrupt companies.”

It’s clear to see that Bennett is doing everything he can to show his opposition to federal overspending and government overreaching in the economy while maintaining his position that the original bailout was necessary. I don’t see any reason to even begin to pay attention until he has come out and directly stated that his vote on TARP was absolutely wrong from the beginning. Even if he does, he is wrong if he things that his TARP vote is the only thing dragging on his chances for re-election.

Categories
culture General National

Change Done Right


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

With the news yesterday that New Hampshire passed a law to allow gay marriage I sincerely hope that the proponents of gay marriage may begin to see the right way to bring the change they seek – especially when put in context next to Vermont’s legalization of gay marriage, Maine’s legalization, the setback in the California Supreme Court ruling on Prop. 8, and the reaction to Massachusetts’ Supreme Court decision in 2004. While there has been little if any reaction to those three states that legalized gay marriage through the legislative process there was a large push to overturn the Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts through a state constitutional amendment, and the same approach in California succeeded in rolling back the original Supreme Court decision in California that legalized gay marriage temporarily in 2008.

The point is that the right way to enact these changes is to take the time to educate and convince people so that the change may be made through the legislative process and be accepted rather than simply trying to ram “equality” down the throats of your fellow citizens based on an unwillingness to trudge the long path of education and debate.

Although it may seem quicker to use the courts, we should all remember that cutting off the debate through judicial action has not led to any resolution on the abortion issue even after more than 30 years. It may be that 30 years would be enough to take the “slower” route of education and persuasion to peacefully achieve your goals.

Categories
General

Constitutional Amendment X


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

Up until the last few months, when states have started to assert their rights through such actions as resolutions and the formation of the Patrick Henry Caucus, I am convinced that the Tenth Amendment has long been the most widely ignored of our Bill of Rights amendments.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Few people are even alive today who can remember a time when the Federal Government was not grossly trampling the rights of states. Although such overreaching has been going on to some degree for virtually our entire history it seems that especially since the passage of the 16th and 17th amendments the Federal government has been treating the states as vassals rather than sovereign territories.

Categories
General

Constitutional Amendment IX


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 being challenged in my positions related to the eighth amendment. I would love to have people continue to let me know when they think I’m off base. As I read the Ninth Amendment I see it as a great example of why Hamilton was concerned about the side effects of having a bill of rights. At first glance it sounds very good that:

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Indeed in some ways it would seem that this is the most important of the amendments in the Bill of Rights – how would it be if our rights were limited to those specifically enumerated. It is important that any assumption be that people retain rights not already enumerated.

Unfortunately I think that this amendment is the activists (and activist judges) best friend. Using the ninth amendment as a foundation they find it easy to argue in favor of such rights as the right to legal recognition of previously unheard-of family structures. Of course the right to form such attachments is a true right, but the right to legal recognition of those – not so much. How about the “right” to health care (or any other segment of a social safety net)? Definitely not.

I might not be so worried about such manufactured “rights” if it were not for the fact that these artificial rights are often used as a weapon to trample upon the true natural rights that are supposed to be protected by our Constitution.

Categories
National

GM Surprise (or not)


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

Back at the end of March David Brooks made a prediction for GM in the New York Times that came due today. I have been waiting to check in on that. He started with this background of the situation as it stood that day:

The Bush advisers decided in December that bankruptcy without preparation would be a disaster. They decided what all administrations decide — that the best time for a bankruptcy filing is a few months from now, and it always will be. In the meantime, restructuring would continue, federally subsidized.

Today, G.M. and Chrysler have once again come up with restructuring plans. By an amazing coincidence, the plans are again insufficient. In an extremely precedented move, the Obama administration has decided that the best time for possible bankruptcy is — a few months from now. The restructuring will continue.

But this, President Obama declares, is G.M.’s last chance. Honestly. Really.

No kidding.

With that background, Mr. Brooks’ reactions was this:

The most likely outcome, sad to say, is some semiserious restructuring plan, with or without court involvement, to be followed by long-term government intervention and backdoor subsidies forever.

Looking at the relevant news today (also from the New York Times) we find that the result is a restructuring plan with court involvement and long-term government intervention including continuing subsidies – initially at least the subsidies are anything but backdoor.

American taxpayers will invest an additional $30 billion in the company, atop $20 billion already spent just to keep it solvent as the company bled cash as quickly as Washington could inject it.

The imagery is all too apropos – like Fannie, Freddie, AIG, and the economy in general GM is and has been addicted to shooting up with public money to feel like a real free-market enterprise. Conveniently too many of our elected leaders are equally addicted to intervening in the markets in order to feel like they are performing a real job for the American tax payer.

Mr. Brooks called the President the “Car Dealer in Chief” in his predictive essay, and now that is more true than before:

Mr. Obama is taking several risks under the plan. None may be bigger than the decision that the United States government will take a 60 percent share of the stock in a new G.M., leaving taxpayers vulnerable if the overhaul is not successful. (Canada, for its part, is taking a 12 percent stake.)

“We don’t think that after this next $30 billion, they will need more money,” one senior administration official said. “But the fact is there are things you don’t know — like when the car market will come back, and how much Toyota and Honda and Volkswagen will benefit from the chaos.”

This is G.M.’s last chance. Honestly. Really. We hope.