It's been a long month and a lot of things have happened. I'm watching the Iran situation unfold just like a lot of you. The way I see it, if there is a moral need to promote anything it would be worldwide liberty. The people of Iran and China (to a lesser extent) need to know that America stands with them on the issue of increased personal liberties and the decrease of oppressive governments. It isn't left or right wing. It is right and wrong.
That doesn't mean we have to invade Iran. It does mean that the person sitting in the oval office needs to stop waffling and answering in sound bytes. He needs to place the entire state department on the task of applying pressure to exploit the cracks in the Iranian facade.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Is Freedom in Irans Future?
Thursday, June 04, 2009
States Rights Revisited
There is a growing movement afoot called the Patrick Henry Caucus. If you read my blog with any kind of regularity then you know I advocate a smaller fed and a more independent state. And, within my state of Texas I like our state government and it's general relationship with the local government. Nothings perfect, but it is a dang sight better than the Fed/State relationship.
A group of State Legislators appeared on Mike Church's talk radio show and advocated getting together and creating "Tenth Amendment Resolutions". One of his guests, a Dr. Kevin Gutzman, author of Who Killed the Constitution? suggested that ten or fifteen states band together and simultaneously introduce legislation to say "We are not taking any Federal funding related to the No Child Left Behind law."
I like the idea. But something was nagging at me. So, I double checked my own trusty Constitution. Look at Art I, Sec 10. I think that Dr. Gutzmans' idea would be invalidated by the courts. Check it out and tell me what you think.
The part I am concerned with is the "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress,...enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State".Section 10 - Powers prohibited of States
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
I'm a literal minded guy. So I read that exactly as written. No one can tell me that it is to be interpreted to apply to military actions either since the "lay any duty..." is in there. But since I am not (don't tell my wife) perfect all opinions would be welcomed.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
The Un-United States? Not Hardly
If you follow political blogs and listen to talk radio you are inundated constantly with the mantra that the country is divided. The Republican Party is known as Repugs. The Democratic Party has been called the Demonrats and worse. If you immerse yourself in the shouting match on the internet you must be convinced that civil war is only moments away.
Well folks, you would be both right and wrong. There's more after the jump.
The fact is that by measurable standards a large percentage of the American people simply don't care about politics any further than it affects them personally. I call this the WIIFM effect.
This table shows the voter turnout for the elections from 2000 to 20008. It is a subset of the voter turnout stats going back to 1960. Take a look at the numbers. Look at the years where voter turnout exceeded 50% and correlate that to the major events of the time.Year Voting-age
populationVoter
registrationVoter turnout Turnout of voting-age
population (percent) 2008* 231,229,580 NA 132,618,580* 56.8% 2006 220,600,000 135,889,600 80,588,000 37.1% 2004 221,256,931 174,800,000 122,294,978 55.3 2002 215,473,000 150,990,598 79,830,119 37.0 2000 205,815,000 156,421,311 105,586,274 51.3
But, remember that tables and stats can be misleading. Take 2006 for example. Of the 220,600,000 potential voters only 135,889,600 or 61% actually registered. The turnout was 80,588,000 or 36.5%. I don't know how the source came up with 37.1% but that illistrates that the measuring process can be corrupted as well. To continue, of the 135,889,600 registered voters, 80,588,000 actually got out and voted. That is 59% of the registered voters.
So, in '06, when the pendulum began to swing back to the left only 61% of the eligible population bothered to register to vote. And of that 61% only 59% of them actually voted. If that were congress they would not have been able to break a filibuster.
It boils down to sixty-three and a half percent of the voting age population simply didn't care enough to vote. And of the ones who at least cared enough to register, almost half of them decided on election day that it just wasn't worth it.
Voters need an incentive to get out there. In '08 there was a higher percentage of turnout. Using the candidates promises and the debates, the WIIFM principle pointed to bigger government and less personal initiative. It also pointed to a population grown weary of an ongoing war. And, just to historically accurate it validated the electoral trend of removing the war-leaders when the public decided they'd had enough.
So, don't despair. On any given day it's just the extremists on both sides being loud and everyone else simply doesn't care.
Your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to get involved and make a difference. If not you, then who?
Technorati Tags: Republican, Democrat, Voter Statistics, Voter Turnout, voter apathy, partisan politics
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
