Colbert on Congress

The Word - Out of the Closet

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Michael Moore

An Alternative to "The Case for Not Reading Legislation"

Re: Congressmen not reading legislation & the Slate Article to that effect

An August Op-Ed in the New York Times informed readers of impending regulation which required that any health insurance policy in Rhode Island be written at the eighth-grade level. The author insisted that such a change was going to "[address] the need for consumers to be able to read and understand the provisions of their own health insurance policies."

Perhaps a similar need exists for Congress and its legislation - and, if potential bills can be turned into legalese, why can't they also be made available in plain English? Though Congress does use more easily understood "conceptual language" on some occasions, requiring both a legalese and an easy-read version of any bill would 1) make legislation accessible to even those citizens with lesser educations and 2) ensure that the legal versions of bills are as their creators intended.

The Op-Ed provided examples (in a potential health care insurance policy) of the difference between difficult-to-decipher legal jargon and an easy-to-understand policy written at the eighth grade level. The results were stunning:

Original:

The plan covering the patient as a dependent child of a person whose date of birth occurs earlier in the calendar year shall be primary over the plan covering the patient as a dependent of a person whose date of birth occurs later in the calendar year provided. However, in the case of a dependent child of legally separated or divorced parents, the plan covering the patient as a dependent of the parent with legal custody, or as a dependent of the custodial parent’s spouse (i.e., stepparent), shall be primary over the plan covering the patient as a dependent of the parent without legal custody.

"Easy-read":

What happens if my spouse and I both have health coverage for our child?

If your child is covered under more than one insurance policy, the policy of the adult whose birthday is earlier in the year pays the claim first. For example: Your birthday is in March; your spouse’s birthday is in May. March comes earlier in the year than May, so your policy will pay for your child’s claim first.

What happens if I am legally separated or divorced?

If your child is covered by your policy and also by the policy of your separated or divorced spouse, the policy of the parent with legal custody pays first. In other words, if you have legal custody, your plan pays first. The same rule applies even if your child is covered by a health insurance policy of a stepparent. For example: Your former spouse has legal custody, and his/her new spouse’s policy covers your child. The new spouse’s policy will pay your child’s claim first.

"Plan English" bills would be especially helpful in encouraging genuine debate among citizens, while simultaneously discouraging frivolous fears. The distracting "death panel" scandal, for instance, relied heavily on semantics and implications drawn from the complications of legislation. To see an example of this, watch the debate on "end of life consultations" between Betsey McCaughey and Jon Stewart:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Betsy McCaughey Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Ron Paul Interview

Ron Paul on Daily Show

Ron Paul was interviewed last night on the Daily Show w/ Jon Stewart to discuss his new book End the Fed. According to Jon Stewart: "You seem to have put a lot of thought and effort into this book- and you call yourself a Congressman!"

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Ron Paul
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Ron Paul Interview

Ron Paul believes the Fed commits fraud by simply printing money to their liking and creating an "illusion" of an economy. It destroys the value of money.

Read Bills? "Fuhgeddaboudit"

The Case For Not Reading Legislation

John Dickerson argues that Congressmen do not have to read legislation to fully understand a bill's merits:

"Drafting and reading legislative language is an art form. Staffers who know how to read it and write it are hired to translate the language. They get down in the weeds so the legislators can stay focused on the big principles."

It is perfectly fine and acceptable for Congressmen to rely on experienced, knowledgeable policy aides to decipher complicated legislative language. He compares it to a homebuyer who does not read the contract, but depends upon his lawyer to do so and raise any red flags if necessary.

The Case for Congressional Skimming

From Nick, a Slate article:

Just because lawmakers read legislation doesn't mean they understand it. The reverse is also true: Just because they understand it doesn't mean they've read it. Drafting and reading legislative language is an art form. Staffers who know how to read it and write it are hired to translate the language. They get down in the weeds so the legislators can stay focused on the big principles.

Plus, members of Congress have a hard enough time knowing where they stand on the big things. That's why they're always accusing one another of flip-flopping. Let's not confuse them by making them puzzle over something like this: "For purposes of extension of an agreement with a qualifying ACO under subsection (g)(2), the Secretary shall treat receipt of an incentive payment for a year by an organization under the physician group practice demonstration pursuant to section 1866A as a year for which an incentive payment is made under such subsection, as long as such practice group practice organization meets the criteria under subsection (b)(2)."

Congress in Action (The Onion)

BREAKING NEWS: BAT LOOSE IN CONGRESS

How the Iran Nuclear Site Was Discovered...

This was brought up in class today and I stumbled upon an article that shows the answer to be less than amazing. Apparently if you ever try to dig a big hole, U.S. intelligence can find you:

"Analysts pinpointed the second site several years ago carved into a mountain near Qom, a Shiite holy city and a religious nerve center of the Iranian regime, according to U.S. officials.

There were multiple streams of intelligence that proved fruitful, but one clear sign produced by spy satellites was evidence of digging for underground facilities, said a senior U.S. intelligence official."

The Supreme Court & the Commerce Clause

Re: The acquiescence of the Supreme Court to the growth of "Federal" crimes under the Commerce Clause

Below are two modern Supreme Court rulings which limited the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause (they are considered to be the first limitations placed on the use of the Clause since the Great Depression):

In U.S. v. Lopez (1995), while the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990 made it a Federal offense "for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone," the Rehnquist Court ruled that the law was unconstitutional, as "the possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, substantially affect any sort of interstate commerce."

United States v. Morrison (2000), another Rehnquist Court decision, similarly limited the applicability of the Commerce Clause to the creation of Federal crimes. It ruled unconstitutional the provision in the Violence Against Women Act which gave "victims of gender-based violence the right to sue their attackers in Federal court," declaring that such a provision did not fall under the Commerce Clause as it relied on a "causal chain from the initial occurrence of violent crime to every attenuated effect upon interstate commerce." The Court indicated that "[such] reasoning would allow Congress to regulate any crime whose nationwide, aggregated impact has substantial effects on employment, production, transit, or consumption."

Both decisions were 5 to 4 rulings...

What Is the Pork Barrel?

From the Center on Congress at Indiana University:

Pork Barrel: The term began as a political reference in the post-Civil War era. It comes from the plantation practice of distributing rations of salt pork from wooden barrels. When used to describe a bill, it implies the legislation is loaded with special projects for Members of Congress to distribute to their constituents back home, courtesy of the federal taxpayer.

Justice Act vs. Patriot Act

Re: Our discussion of the laws being passed by Congress without being read, and divisions between the Legislative and Executive branches...

Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) and several others have introduced the Judicious Use of Surveillance Tools in Counterterrorism Efforts Act, also known as the JUSTICE Act, with the intention of reforming the Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (i.e. the PATRIOT Act).

This is partially in response to the three sections of the PATRIOT Act which will expire at the end of this year. On Tuesday, the Justice Department did send a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) in which it stated that the department was in favor of renewing the expiring sections, but was also "willing to consider" some modifications to the Act.

It looks like these Acts will be getting some attention this time. Especially since Obama's stance is at odds with his own party.

The Federalist Papers

Background items:

• An essay on anonymity.
• Drafts of the Constitution.
• A brief history of Blackstone and common law.

Ron Chernow's biography undercuts the notion that Alexander Hamilton was a well-born defender of privilege. Here is a passage summing up what the born-out-of-wedlock Hamilton and his brother faced in their youth:

Let us pause briefly to tally the grim catalog of disasters that had befallen these two boys between 1765 and 1769: their father had vanished, their mother had died, their cousin and supposed protector had committed bloody suicide, and their aunt, uncle, and grandmother had all died. James, 16, and Alexander, 14, were now left alone, largely friendless and penniless. At every step in their rootless, topsy-turvy existence, they had been surrounded by failed, broken, embittered people. Their short lives had been shadowed by a stupefying sequence of bankruptcies, marital separations, deaths, scandals, and disinheritance. Such repeated shocks must have
stripped Alexander Hamilton of any sense that life was fair, that he existed in a benign universe, or that he could ever count on help from anyone. That this abominable childhood produced such a strong, productive, self-reliant human being -- that this fatherless adolescent could have ended up a founding father of a country he had not yet even seen -- seems little short of miraculous.

Concerns of war, peace, and security

• Federalist 5
• Federalist 8
• Federalist 9
  

Controlling power

• Federalist 10
• Federalist 51
• Federalist 47
• Federalist 48
  
  Federalist v. Anti-Federalist
  
• Brutus
• Federal Farmer
• Federalist 1

Tom DeLay Dancing

Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) was on "Dancing with the Stars."

Really.

No kidding.

See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/21/tom-delay-dancing-with-th_n_294219.html

xkcd

I thought this was particularly timely given our reading two weeks ago.

The Constitution I

If you like Amar's book, you can watch him talk about it on video here.

The Articles of Confederation.

The map

The Constitution.

The Great Compromise:

• Virginia Plan
• New Jersey Plan
• Connecticut Compromise

Read these provisions from an actual constitution. How would you appraise them?

ARTICLE 118. Citizens have the right to work, that is, are guaranteed the right to employment and payment for their work in accordance with its quantity and quality. ...

ARTICLE 119. Citizens have the right to rest and leisure. The right to rest and leisure is ensured by the reduction of the working day to seven hours for the overwhelming majority of the workers, the institution of annual vacations with full pay for workers and employees and the provision of a wide network of sanatoria, rest homes and clubs for the accommodation of the working people.

ARTICLE 120. Citizens have the right to maintenance in old age and also in case of sickness or loss of capacity to work. This right is ensured by the extensive development of social insurance of workers and employees at state expense, free medical service for the working people and the provision of a wide network of health resorts for the use of the working people.

ARTICLE 121. Citizens have the right to education. This right is ensured by universal, compulsory elementary education; by education, including higher education, being free of charge; by the system of state stipends for the overwhelming majority of students in the universities and colleges; by instruction in schools being conducted in the native language...

ARTICLE 122. Women are accorded equal rights with men in all spheres of economic, state, cultural, social and political life. The possibility of exercising these rights is ensured to women by granting them an equal right with men to work, payment for work, rest and leisure, social insurance and education, and by state protection of the interests of mother and child, prematernity and maternity leave with full pay, and the provision of a wide network of maternity homes, nurseries and kindergartens.

ARTICLE 123. Equality of rights of citizens irrespective of their nationality or race, in all spheres of economic, state, cultural, social and political life, is an indefeasible law. Any direct or indirect restriction of the rights of, or, conversely, any establishment of direct or indirect privileges for, citizens on account of their race or
nationality, as well as any advocacy of racial or national exclusiveness or hatred and contempt, is punishable by law.

ARTICLE 124. In order to ensure to citizens freedom of conscience, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church. ...

ARTICLE 128. The inviolability of the homes of citizens and privacy of correspondence are protected by law.

Contrast the US Constitution with the Confederate Constitution.

A report from Jake Zimmerman

Jake Zimmerman, CMC `96, is a member of the Missouri House. He just sent out a legislative update that does not sound like political boilerplate. It sounds like ... Jake. Enjoy:

Dear friends and supporters,

I just returned from an annual ritual, the special legislative session to reconsider bills vetoed by the Governor. It's my great pleasure to report that we didn't override a single one. Normally this would be a routine affair, but this wasn't a normal year: Governor Nixon, to his great credit, vetoed dozens of bills. As you can imagine, there was a fair amount of grumbling by members (from both parties) whose prized children didn't make it past his desk. But in the end, while a few legislators took to the floor to make their grumbling public, nothing more came of it than that - a useful reminder to a few of my colleagues that there's a new sheriff in town.

This is all noteworthy because it would have been much easier, politically, for the Governor to just sign several of these bills and avoid the headache. But he didn't take the easy road. Instead, he did the right thing. If a bill created conflict, if it dove into Constitutional gray areas, or if it was just plain dumb, he vetoed it: period. The Governor and his staff deserve praise for these small acts of political courage, especially because the media has paid little attention.

Oh, and this should tell you something about the seriousness of the legislature: the House leadership only made one formal attempt at an override: on a bill to require that every legislator receive a key to the private area in the State Capitol rotunda. (Insert your own snide comment here.)

Anyway, especially after all the unpleasant news in local politics over the past month, it was a pleasure to be back in Jefferson City thinking substantive thoughts for a little while, and it's a pleasure to share the news with you. As always, please be in touch if I can be helpful in any way... or just to say hi.

All the best,
---Jake Zimmerman
State Representative
Missouri
House District 83

Alinsky Lives

From The Politico:

And the 1971 agitator’s handbook “Rules for Radicals” — written by Saul Alinsky, the Chicago community organizer who was the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis, and whose teachings helped shape Barack Obama’s work on Chicago’s South Side — has been among Amazon’s top 100 sellers for the past month, put there in part by people who “also bought” books by Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck,and South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint.

Yes, the same folks who brought you Obama the socialist have been appropriating the words and ways of leftists past — and generally letting their freak flags fly.

Click here to continue reading.

American Civic Culture II

• Comparative data on religion.
  
• Comparative data on evolution.
• A closer look at US attitudes on evolution.
• Faith-based community service.
• Philanthropy in the United States
• New data on individualism in the United States

American Civic Culture I

Who was Tocqueville?

• Short biography


• Reasons for coming to America


• Itinerary


• Map of his travels, along with journal entries

He wrote: "The religious atmosphere of the country was the first thing that struck me on arrival in the United States." (p. 295 of Lawrence-Mayer ed.) See here for relevant data.

In June 2006, Barack Obama gave an important speech on religion in politics. See prepared text here.

Covenant for a New America here.

First Assignment

Pick one of the following:

• Find a recent (since June 2009) article pointing to a problem that Publius or the Anti-Federalists anticipated. (You may search newspapers at news.google.com.) Explain how The Federalist or Anti-Federalist writing sheds light on the story. In this instance, is the political system working as the Founders hoped – or as the Anti-Federalists feared?
• Write a rebuttal to any of the readings that we are covering through next week.
• Read Peter Robinson’s article at http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/16/tea-party-taxes-king-george-opinions-columnists-obama.html. Do you agree or disagree? Explain.
• Do Tocqueville’s observations on majority tyranny apply to the United States in 2009? If not, why not? If so, explain how, with concrete examples.

----------------------------

• Whichever essay you choose, do research to document your claims. Do not write from the top of your head.
• Essays should be typed, stapled, double-spaced, and no more than three pages
  long. I will not read past the third page.
• Put your name on a cover sheet. Do not identify yourself on the text pages.
• Cite your sources with endnotes, which should be in a standard style (e.g., Turabian
  or Chicago Manual of Style). Endnote pages do not count against the page limit.
• Watch your spelling, grammar, diction, and punctuation. Errors will count against you.
• Return essays by the start of class, Wednesday, September 23. Late essays will drop a
  letter grade. I will grant no extensions except for illness or emergency.

.

When in the course of human events...

The Declaration (hyperlink versions)

Lincoln-Douglas Galesburg debate (forward to 1:01:30)

From the Cornerstone Speech by Alexander Stephens:

The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Thomas Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

Deleted Paragraph:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidels powers, is the warfare of the Christian king of Great Britain. He has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce determining to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and sold: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.

The Declaration shows up in current commentary.