Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Waking up to global reality
Being Challenged:
The REAL issue between the two billions of people doing fairly well in the global economy (per capita income over $7,300) $20.00 a day vs. those four billion people who live on resources closer to $2.00 a day or $730.00 a year. The countries of the middle east (unless they float on oil) are young (median age under 25) unemployed, and limited education and that education being mostly medieval. This creates a culture that is anti-liberal, anti-intellectual, anti-modern, and (as in the backwards parts of America and other "modern" countries) called populism or the tyranny of the masses led by demigods and despots:
Absolute, autocratic, tyrannical, dictatorial, totalitarian, authoritarian:
There are many forms of despotism, but they are all defined by force and violence. Domestic oppression, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, various gangs and war law lords, crooked cops, racism, all depend on threats and force.
The base of civil society is this basic idea that conflict is natural and dealt with in a civil non-violent manner and competition - competition is always a challenge - and people don't really like having to compete freely and are always looking for an edge or fix. Liberal capitalism is dynamic because of the constant need to respond to competition. People don't like free speech, civil rights (except their own) and having to put up with people different from themselves. It takes a strong culture to protect political and economic competition and accept global challenges from foreigners.
What is the meaning of citizenship and being patriot in the global economy? American has had an historic mission to the world. At this time of mass media, talking heads, and much noise and distraction it is important we remind ourselves of our traditions and highest ideals.
America is the only country founded on ideas. Other countries have been taken over by an ideology but remain tied to historic roots. Communist China was still China, Revolutionary France was still France, but The United States of America was created by an ideal. The core of the original radical idea is that government is the creation of the people. The people are the sovereign and the government serves the people not the other way around. The people are citizens not subjects. This comes down from British tradition from Magna Carta but had a whole new meaning in the new world. The idea of equality was quite new.
Our traditions are a drastic idea in a time of war, and are being tested on the limits of state power in the Constitution. The ideology of the Declaration of Independence is threatened. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” As Lincoln said “Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure” He asked all of us to see to it “that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth." Gettysburg Address
The American Ideal was an example to the world, we are, “The city on the hill” which is a message and mission to all humanity. John Winthrop's City upon a Hill, 1630
“Consider that we shall be as a City upon a Hill, the eyes of all people are upon us; so that if we shall deal falsely with our god in this work wee have undertaken and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us, and we shall be made a story and a byword through the world”
http://www.originofnations.org/books,%20papers/quotes%20etc/Reagan_The%20Shining%20City%20Upon%20A%20Hill%20speech.htm
"our nation is chosen by God and commissioned by history to be a model to the world"
(President George Bush, - statement during the 2000 election campaign)
The Shining City Upon A Hill
“I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.” President Reagan
http://www.presidentreagan.info/speeches/index.cfm
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/winthrop.htm
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html
Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, and even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, and every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Science, engineering, and business is going through the third great transformation (articulation point) in human history. The first was the renascence and enlightenment based on classical knowledge leading to the age of discovery based on national states and empires, the second on the industrial revolution based on industrial technology and multi-national corporation and the third based on globalization where individual and groups can work together – without limits over space – so India and China are our near neighbors.
B. I know what it takes be a success in the world (American needs people like me) and have shown I have what it takes I am very excited by the test of one's abilities and resources of character in a demanding but stimulating undertaking: a career that offers a challenge and opportunities in the present and future. Have to be aware of what is happening in the world – read the economist –
Use mathematical skills – creative – intuition -
Have traveled
Hard work and focus –
Work well in groups –
Quality jobs – competition is global -
Science, engineering, and business is going through the third great transformation (articulation point) in human history. The first was the renascence and enlightenment based on classical knowledge leading to the age of discovery based on national states and empires, the second on the industrial revolution based on industrial technology and multi-national corporation and the third based on globalization where individual and groups can work together – without limits over space – so India and China are our near neighbors.
D. Conclusion
So what do these great trends mean to me and my future in college, graduate school, and in a successful career – a rewarding life –
References:
Thomas L. Friedman is not so much a futurist, which he is sometimes called, as a presentist. His aim, in his new book, The World Is Flat,
http://mitworld.mit.edu/play/264
President Bush's State of the Union Address, as delivered to Congress
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/31/AR2006013101468.html
Academy of Sciences released its report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm.".
http://www.nationalacademies.org/morenews/
http://www.nap.edu/webcast/webcast_detail.php?webcast_id=313
Presidents' Statement
Rising Above the Gathering Storm
Listen to Academies' 10/12/05 report public briefing (requires free RealPlayer)
White House press release: "American Competitiveness Initiative"
http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html
little in advance of the news
What will in the news in a few days or weeks or months or years - the news media while fast in the short term but it lacks reflection - and the reality of events comes more slowly - The wiredbrain puts you ahead of the masses and tell what the news media will say in the future.
Sunday, August 07, 2005
Science, magic, superstition and finding answers:The natural human desire to find explanations underlies both science and magic. People like or need to find reasons for what is going on. Anthropologist found that tribes will use evidence and facts when they have them. They are very material and practical. They also have magical solutions to everyday problems when there are no better alternatives. Questions of weather, animal migration, disease and other natural phenomena are natters of life and death, so people want some control over these events. Magic gives them that sense of doing something and having an input into the process of lifer and death. All religions are based on faith and magic where performing certain ceremonies have powers of healing, rain making, even eternal salivation and the triumph over death. Gods and saints can give hope to the hopeless and direction, rules, order to civilizations. The claims are magical and hysterical calls to worship or patriotic emotions that underpin civic order. A spiritual and traditional sense of purpose, direction, order and meaning are required by humans to organize their societies.Everyday the news reports give explaining reasons why the “market” has gone up or down. They sound like the market has purpose and intention. In fact no one knows why markets have day to day variations beyond there are more buyers or more sellers at a moment of time. Thousands of individuals and computer programs make thousands of individual choices partly based on what all the other actors are doing and making assumptions about the reasons behind these decisions. Except when there are great events most of the time there is a random element that defies explanation. Never the less some magical words are used to explain the unexplainable.The desire to find purpose and intention in evolution and human existence is quite natural and also impossible. Disposing with the idea of an external, perhaps even supernatural, vitalizing force, describes how we have arrived at the picture of ourselves and all organisms as Self-Made Things. Our creations include governments, constitutions, institutions, magic, superstitions, ceremony, ritual, flag waving, songs, etc. Our gods are made by us not the other way around. They are made because we need them. They should not (but often do) become a Frankenstein.So we have to take things for what they are. Social conventions, religious ceremony, national character, are useful and even necessary. They are NOT science or material facts. There are very important ideas and beliefs beyond or outside science – arts and literature, song and dance, mystery and magic, wonder and dreams – Santa Claus and the tooth fairy the lands of wonder and magic – the problem arises when belief systems make material judgments (stem cell research) outside their competence. Science can be arrogant about people’s useful and practical beliefs. (Alternative medicine). Science must support the moral and useful desire to do good works, spread truth and justice, equality and fairness which have no material meaning (you can’t find the stuff of kindness and measure it) or do these beliefs have a scientific basis.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 8/07/2005 08:09:00 AM
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Our mission in Iraq is harder because the administration ignored the advice of others, went in largely alone, underestimated the likelihood and power of the insurgency, sent in too few troops to secure the country, destroyed the Iraqi army through de-Baathification, failed to secure ammunition dumps, refused to recognize the urgency of training Iraqi security forces and did no postwar planning. A little humility would go a long way - coupled with a strategy to succeed.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/28/2005 02:19:00 PM
Our mission in Iraq is harder because the administration ignored the advice of others, went in largely alone, underestimated the likelihood and power of the insurgency, sent in too few troops to secure the country, destroyed the Iraqi army through de-Baathification, failed to secure ammunition dumps, refused to recognize the urgency of training Iraqi security forces and did no postwar planning. A little humility would go a long way - coupled with a strategy to succeed.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/28/2005 02:18:00 PM
Stubborn:firm (fûrm) adjectivefirm·er, firm·est1. Resistant to externally applied pressure.2. Marked by or indicating the tone and resiliency3. Securely fixed in place4. Indicating or possessed of determination or resolution: a firm voice.5. Constant; steadfast: a firm ally.6. a. Not subject to change; fixed and definite: a firm bargain; a firm offer. b. Unfluctuating; steady:7. Strong and sure: a firm grasp.Vs. 1. a. Unreasonably, often perversely unyielding; bullheaded. b. Firmly resolved or determined; resolute. See synonyms at obstinate.2. Characterized by perseverance; persistent.3. Difficult to treat or deal with; resistant to treatment or effort.What is the difference?If there is a good chance of winning and your allies are with you!
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/28/2005 02:13:00 PM
Sunday, June 19, 2005
http://europa.eu.int/growthandjobs/index_en.htmA new start for the Lisbon StrategyJobs, growth, the environment and a proper social network. These, in a nutshell, are the main concerns of Europe's citizens. The current lack of economic growth affects all of us; our pensions, salaries and our standard of living considerably suffer from it.If we do not act immediately, our valued social and environmental model will become unaffordable. In the face of international competition and an ageing population, growth could soon decrease to 1% per year (more than half of today's growth ).To avoid this, Heads of State and Government of the European Union met in Lisbon in 2000 and launched a series of ambitious reforms at national and European level. By establishing an effective internal market, by boosting research and innovation and by improving education, to name only a few reform efforts, they aimed to make the European Union “the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy in the world” by 2010.We are now half-way through the process and the results are not very satisfactory. The implementation of reform in Member States has been quite scarce. The reform package consists of 28 main objectives and 120 sub-objectives, with 117 different indicators. The reporting system for 25 Member States adds up to no fewer than 300 annual reports. Nobody reads of all of them.To remedy this lack of commitment of Member States, the Commission proposed to establish a new kind of partnership with Member States. It also decided to focus efforts on two main areas: productivity and employment. To make things simpler and more coherent, there should be just one national growth programme and one EU growth plan.The European Union cannot boost productivity and employment if Member States do not do their part.Latest NewsTheLisbon strategy: a motor for market reforms of network industries - Jointconference at the EESC - Brussels, 1&2 June 200513/06/2005 - Looking small, thinking big – keeping Europe at the forefront of nanotechnology13/06/2005 - Europeans support more money for EU research13/06/2005 - A new face for SMEs: Estonian Maive Rute takes on the job as "SME Envoy"13/06/2005 - Why are one-person-enterprises not hiring?09/06/2005 - Why Europe needs research spending08/06/2005 - "Tell us where to cut red-tape", Commission asks business in online consultation08/06/2005 - Competitiveness Council of Ministers, Luxembourg, 6 June 2005 and Space Council 7 June07/06/2005 - State Aid: Commission outlines comprehensive five year reform of state aid policy to promote growth, jobs and cohesion07/06/2005 - State Aid Action Plan - frequently asked questions07/06/2005 - European space policy will take off before the end of 200507/06/2005 - Neelie Kroes, Member of the European Commission in charge of Competition Policy - The State Aid Action Plan - Introductory remarks at open meeting of coordinators of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee, European Parliament01/06/2005 - Viviane Reding, Member of the European Commission responsible for Information Society and Media - i2010: Europe Must Seize the Opportunities of the Digital Economy Press Conference on the occasion of the launch of the initiative European Information Society 201001/06/2005 - Commission launches five-year strategy to boost the digitaleconomy01/06/2005 - High-speed
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/19/2005 09:54:00 PM
Getting real;British officials are proclaiming that the summit fiasco creates an opportunity for Blair to lead Europe in a different, more ``modern,'' economically liberal (liberal in Europe maintains it’s 18th century meaning as market capitalism not neo-socialist as used by the American right) direction when he takes over the bloc's rotating presidency July 1.They relish the sharpening ideological clash between their free-market philosophy and what they see as an outdated Franco-German model of social and rural protection.``It's essentially a division between whether you want an EU that is able to cope with the future or whether you want an EU that is trapped in the past,'' British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said. ``It is not one Europe can dodge.'' …“Blair appears to be counting on a gradual change in the balance of power, with new, economically more liberal leaders in Germany and several central European states, to isolate Chirac - demonized in Britain as the embodiment of ``Old Europe'' and defender of fat subsidies for French farmers.”The central issue the whole industrial world is how to encourage economic growth and maintain a fancy life style in the face of rough global competition from China, India, Korea, Brazil, south eastern Asia, and elsewhere. Italian made shoes at $100 can’t compete with imports at $20. Maybe they have to out source manufacturing but keep design and marketing. German and French (and American) auto makers can’t compete with in many cases newer and lower wages factories in Eastern Europe or Mexico without huge pension and health costs, and many restrictive union or government regulations. Now Boeing or Airbus has an edge as do many high tech products but not for ever. So what is to be done?Progressives in North America and Europe (Clinton and Blair) look to a “knowledge society”. In this image the economic base are silicon valleys, big strong Universities training the world, research institutes churning out innovations in old and new technologies – genetic engineering, stem cells, information and communication systems, energy (including new forms of Atomic power such as pebbles) hydrogen systems, and the start up business in the new economy. By the way China, India, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Brazil are all thinking the same thing. They do not want to just be the low cost producers of OEM commodities and low value added products in textiles but are looking ahead.BUT as in any plan the people who benefit are in the future; the people that pay, suffer and hurt are here and now. Future beneficiaries can’t vote while French farmers sure can, and American Cotton growers, and protected industries, can make a big fuss. Modern capitalist societies can not afford the protections, the benefits, the privileges even with high taxes and growing deficits. Scandinavia is a special case where competition exists within a system of generous social benefits and high taxes of a welfare state. It worked for Germany and France in the past but no longer. They need to get real.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/19/2005 05:22:00 PM
To assert that I am on God's side and you are not, that I know God's will and you do not, and that I will use the power of government to advance my understanding of God's kingdom is certain to produce hostility.In the cultural wars, in the Middle East, in the clash of civilizations - In Iran -June 17, 2005 NYTOnward, Moderate Christian SoldiersBy JOHN C. DANFORTHSt. LouisIT would be an oversimplification to say that America's culture wars are now between people of faith and nonbelievers. People of faith are not of one mind, whether on specific issues like stem cell research and government intervention in the case of Terri Schiavo, or the more general issue of how religion relates to politics. In recent years, conservative Christians have presented themselves as representing the one authentic Christian perspective on politics. With due respect for our conservative friends, equally devout Christians come to very different conclusions.It is important for those of us who are sometimes called moderates to make the case that we, too, have strongly held Christian convictions, that we speak from the depths of our beliefs, and that our approach to politics is at least as faithful as that of those who are more conservative. Our difference concerns the extent to which government should, or even can, translate religious beliefs into the laws of the state.People of faith have the right, and perhaps the obligation, to bring their values to bear in politics. Many conservative Christians approach politics with a certainty that they know God's truth, and that they can advance the kingdom of God through governmental action. So they have developed a political agenda that they believe advances God's kingdom, one that includes efforts to "put God back" into the public square and to pass a constitutional amendment intended to protect marriage from the perceived threat of homosexuality.Moderate Christians are less certain about when and how our beliefs can be translated into statutory form, not because of a lack of faith in God but because of a healthy acknowledgement of the limitations of human beings. Like conservative Christians, we attend church, read the Bible and say our prayers.But for us, the only absolute standard of behavior is the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves. Repeatedly in the Gospels, we find that the Love Commandment takes precedence when it conflicts with laws. We struggle to follow that commandment as we face the realities of everyday living, and we do not agree that our responsibility to live as Christians can be codified by legislators.When, on television, we see a person in a persistent vegetative state, one who will never recover, we believe that allowing the natural and merciful end to her ordeal is more loving than imposing government power to keep her hooked up to a feeding tube.When we see an opportunity to save our neighbors' lives through stem cell research, we believe that it is our duty to pursue that research, and to oppose legislation that would impede us from doing so.We think that efforts to haul references of God into the public square, into schools and courthouses, are far more apt to divide Americans than to advance faith.Following a Lord who reached out in compassion to all human beings, we oppose amending the Constitution in a way that would humiliate homosexuals.For us, living the Love Commandment may be at odds with efforts to encapsulate Christianity in a political agenda. We strongly support the separation of church and state, both because that principle is essential to holding together a diverse country, and because the policies of the state always fall short of the demands of faith. Aware that even our most passionate ventures into politics are efforts to carry the treasure of religion in the earthen vessel of government, we proceed in a spirit of humility lacking in our conservative colleagues.In the decade since I left the Senate, American politics has been characterized by two phenomena: the increased activism of the Christian right, especially in the Republican Party, and the collapse of bipartisan collegiality. I do not think it is a stretch to suggest a relationship between the two. To assert that I am on God's side and you are not, that I know God's will and you do not, and that I will use the power of government to advance my understanding of God's kingdom is certain to produce hostility.By contrast, moderate Christians see ourselves, literally, as moderators. Far from claiming to possess God's truth, we claim only to be imperfect seekers of the truth. We reject the notion that religion should present a series of wedge issues useful at election time for energizing a political base. We believe it is God's work to practice humility, to wear tolerance on our sleeves, to reach out to those with whom we disagree, and to overcome the meanness we see in today's politics.For us, religion should be inclusive, and it should seek to bridge the differences that separate people. We do not exclude from worship those whose opinions differ from ours. Following a Lord who sat at the table with tax collectors and sinners, we welcome to the Lord's table all who would come. Following a Lord who cited love of God and love of neighbor as encompassing all the commandments, we reject a political agenda that displaces that love. Christians who hold these convictions ought to add their clear voice of moderation to the debate on religion in politics.John C. Danforth is an Episcopal minister and former Republican senator from Missouri.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/19/2005 08:32:00 AM
Thursday, June 02, 2005
A Constitution for Europe: (389 words)We the People of Europe, in Order to form a functional economic and customs Union, promote social Justice by our member states, insure peace and Tranquility, promote the Welfare and prosperity of our peoples, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do establish this Constitution for the confederation of sovereign nations that voluntarily make up the European Union. It takes effect upon the votes by the Legislatures or peoples of four fifth (20) of the member States.Article ILimited legislative Powers over objectives that cannot be achieved by the member states or individuals acting alone but can only be achieved at Union level, is granted to a European Parliament, which shall consist of a Council of Ministers (COM) acting as an intergovernmental upper house and the lower house (MEPs members = no more than 10 X COM) selected by proportional representation as determined by law. Each house shall determine their membership, rules and procedures.Article. II.The executive Power shall be vested in an elected President, by qualified majority in the COM for a term three years, renewable once. His/her duties shall be set by law. As chairman of the European Commission (EC) and head of the civil service he/she shall see that the laws are faithfully executed. He/she shall appoint Commissioners with the advice and consent of COM and the executive as a whole must be confirmed by the MEPs as determined by law.Article. III.The judicial Power of the European Union shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior Courts as the parliament may from time to time establish. The Judges shall be nominated by the President with the advice and consent of the COM and have security of tenure as set by law.Article IV The parliament, may by two thirds of both Houses propose amendments to this Constitution, to be approved by or on the Application of the Legislatures of three fourths of the member States.Article V all existing EU agencies, laws, institutions and treaties not in direct conflict continue under this constitution until amended by law, treaty or constitutional amendment. "The Constitution and law adopted by the Union institutions in exercising competence conferred upon it by the Constitution shall have primacy over the law of the member states."
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/02/2005 01:29:00 PM
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
A Constitution for Europe:We the People of Europe, in Order to form a working Union, establish Justice, insure peace and Tranquility, provide for prosperity, the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the European Union upon the majority vote of the peoples of Europe and Legislatures of three fourths of the member States.Article ILimited legislative Powers on matters that require European action and cannot be done by member states acting alone is granted to a European Parliament, which shall consist of a Council of Ministers acting as an intergovernmental upper house and the lower house selected by proportional representation as determined by law. Both houses shall determine their own rules and procedures.Article. II.The executive Power shall be vested in an elected President of the European community. His terms and duties shall be set by law. As chairman of the European Commission and head of the civil service he shall see that the laws are faithfully executed and appoint Commissioners with the advice and consent of parliament as determined by law.Article. III.The judicial Power of the European Union shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior Courts as the parliament may from time to time establish. The Judges shall have security of tenure as set by law.Article IV The parliament, may by two thirds of both Houses shall propose amendments to this Constitution, to be approved by or on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the member States.Article V all existing EU agencies, laws and treaties continue under this constitution until amended by law.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/01/2005 10:44:00 PM
Sunday, May 22, 2005
A constitutional compromise:http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Gold_Gupta_JLPP_article.pdfAnd Senate Rule V declares that these rules are perpetual: “The rules of the Senate shall continue from one Congress to the next Congress unless they are changed as provided in these rules.”A Senator could raise a point of order that a vote must be taken. A motion to table operates. The motion is non-debatable—the Senate must take an immediate vote on it—and it serves as a final disposition of the underlying question.The Presiding Officer could rule in favor of the point of order, and a majority could table any appeal from his ruling. This would establish a precedent limiting the length of time for debate that would bind all future Senates (until the precedent were overturned by majority vote or unanimous consent).Finally, the Senate could adopt a Standing Order altering the Senate’s procedures, including the procedures governing debate. The number of votes to close debate on circuit court judges nominations would be 4/7 or 57 (or 5/9 is 55) instead of 60 or 3/5. Standing Orders are not incorporated into the text of the Standing Rules, but nonetheless bind the Senate. For example, in December 2000, the Senate adopted a standing order limiting members’ ability to filibuster conference reports. The order provided that members could no longer demand the reading of conference reports that were available in writing. Similarly, a current Senate could adopt a Standing Order having the effect of limiting time for debate with fewer votes but more than 51 but less than 60.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 5/22/2005 02:57:00 PM
Friday, May 20, 2005
THE CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION TO CHANGESENATE RULES AND PROCEDURES:A MAJORITARIAN MEANS TO OVERCOME THE FILIBUSTER*MARTIN B. GOLD** & DIMPLE GUPTA***http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Gold_Gupta_JLPP_article.pdfThe forest and the trees:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/17/AR2005051701425.html?nav=hcmodulehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/16/AR2005051601307.htmlThe history of the filibusters involve some of the great conflicts of American History – the reserved rights of a minority to prevent majority action in the U.S. Senate involve President Jackson and the Bank, the issues of states rights and slavery, the American entry into WW I, the civil rights crisis and other major crisis in the society. I don’t think the confirmation of judges reaches this high standard. The members of the senate are quite clear that by being a continuing body where the rules can only be changed within the rules that require super majorities to curtail minority power. Clearly the Senate has the constitutional power to change its rules by majority vote and restore the “motion to proceed” used by other legislative bodies around the world. The distinctive character of the U.S. Senate is the power of minorities to prevent the will of the majority for decades as in the case of civil rights – from the 1890’s to the 1970’s.Tomorrow or Friday, Frist and other Republican senators are likely to file a motion seeking cloture, or an end to debate. One session day must pass before a vote to end debate, so a vote would be held and Republicans would expect to get fewer than 60 votes to confirm Owen.Frist aides say he has not decided exactly what would occur next. But the scenario most widely expected among senators in both parties is that he would seek a ruling from the chair -- Vice President Cheney, if it looked as if the vote was going to be close -- that filibustering judicial nominations is out of order. Assuming the chair agreed, Reid would then object and ask that the ruling of the chair be tabled. Most Republicans would then vote against the Democratic motion, upholding the ruling. Then the Senate would move to a vote on Owen, and a precedent will have been set that it takes 51 votes, not 60, to cut off debate on a judicial nomination.A virtual script for what could happen next is included in an article published last fall in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy by Martin B. Gold, a partner at Covington & Burling who is a former floor adviser to Frist, and Dimple Gupta, a former Justice Department lawyer who was hired in March by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).
The REAL issue between the two billions of people doing fairly well in the global economy (per capita income over $7,300) $20.00 a day vs. those four billion people who live on resources closer to $2.00 a day or $730.00 a year. The countries of the middle east (unless they float on oil) are young (median age under 25) unemployed, and limited education and that education being mostly medieval. This creates a culture that is anti-liberal, anti-intellectual, anti-modern, and (as in the backwards parts of America and other "modern" countries) called populism or the tyranny of the masses led by demigods and despots:
Absolute, autocratic, tyrannical, dictatorial, totalitarian, authoritarian:
There are many forms of despotism, but they are all defined by force and violence. Domestic oppression, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, various gangs and war law lords, crooked cops, racism, all depend on threats and force.
The base of civil society is this basic idea that conflict is natural and dealt with in a civil non-violent manner and competition - competition is always a challenge - and people don't really like having to compete freely and are always looking for an edge or fix. Liberal capitalism is dynamic because of the constant need to respond to competition. People don't like free speech, civil rights (except their own) and having to put up with people different from themselves. It takes a strong culture to protect political and economic competition and accept global challenges from foreigners.
What is the meaning of citizenship and being patriot in the global economy? American has had an historic mission to the world. At this time of mass media, talking heads, and much noise and distraction it is important we remind ourselves of our traditions and highest ideals.
America is the only country founded on ideas. Other countries have been taken over by an ideology but remain tied to historic roots. Communist China was still China, Revolutionary France was still France, but The United States of America was created by an ideal. The core of the original radical idea is that government is the creation of the people. The people are the sovereign and the government serves the people not the other way around. The people are citizens not subjects. This comes down from British tradition from Magna Carta but had a whole new meaning in the new world. The idea of equality was quite new.
Our traditions are a drastic idea in a time of war, and are being tested on the limits of state power in the Constitution. The ideology of the Declaration of Independence is threatened. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” As Lincoln said “Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure” He asked all of us to see to it “that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth." Gettysburg Address
The American Ideal was an example to the world, we are, “The city on the hill” which is a message and mission to all humanity. John Winthrop's City upon a Hill, 1630
“Consider that we shall be as a City upon a Hill, the eyes of all people are upon us; so that if we shall deal falsely with our god in this work wee have undertaken and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us, and we shall be made a story and a byword through the world”
http://www.originofnations.org/books,%20papers/quotes%20etc/Reagan_The%20Shining%20City%20Upon%20A%20Hill%20speech.htm
"our nation is chosen by God and commissioned by history to be a model to the world"
(President George Bush, - statement during the 2000 election campaign)
The Shining City Upon A Hill
“I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.” President Reagan
http://www.presidentreagan.info/speeches/index.cfm
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/winthrop.htm
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html
Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, and even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, and every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Science, engineering, and business is going through the third great transformation (articulation point) in human history. The first was the renascence and enlightenment based on classical knowledge leading to the age of discovery based on national states and empires, the second on the industrial revolution based on industrial technology and multi-national corporation and the third based on globalization where individual and groups can work together – without limits over space – so India and China are our near neighbors.
B. I know what it takes be a success in the world (American needs people like me) and have shown I have what it takes I am very excited by the test of one's abilities and resources of character in a demanding but stimulating undertaking: a career that offers a challenge and opportunities in the present and future. Have to be aware of what is happening in the world – read the economist –
Use mathematical skills – creative – intuition -
Have traveled
Hard work and focus –
Work well in groups –
Quality jobs – competition is global -
Science, engineering, and business is going through the third great transformation (articulation point) in human history. The first was the renascence and enlightenment based on classical knowledge leading to the age of discovery based on national states and empires, the second on the industrial revolution based on industrial technology and multi-national corporation and the third based on globalization where individual and groups can work together – without limits over space – so India and China are our near neighbors.
D. Conclusion
So what do these great trends mean to me and my future in college, graduate school, and in a successful career – a rewarding life –
References:
Thomas L. Friedman is not so much a futurist, which he is sometimes called, as a presentist. His aim, in his new book, The World Is Flat,
http://mitworld.mit.edu/play/264
President Bush's State of the Union Address, as delivered to Congress
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/31/AR2006013101468.html
Academy of Sciences released its report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm.".
http://www.nationalacademies.org/morenews/
http://www.nap.edu/webcast/webcast_detail.php?webcast_id=313
Presidents' Statement
Rising Above the Gathering Storm
Listen to Academies' 10/12/05 report public briefing (requires free RealPlayer)
White House press release: "American Competitiveness Initiative"
http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html
little in advance of the news
What will in the news in a few days or weeks or months or years - the news media while fast in the short term but it lacks reflection - and the reality of events comes more slowly - The wiredbrain puts you ahead of the masses and tell what the news media will say in the future.
Sunday, August 07, 2005
Science, magic, superstition and finding answers:The natural human desire to find explanations underlies both science and magic. People like or need to find reasons for what is going on. Anthropologist found that tribes will use evidence and facts when they have them. They are very material and practical. They also have magical solutions to everyday problems when there are no better alternatives. Questions of weather, animal migration, disease and other natural phenomena are natters of life and death, so people want some control over these events. Magic gives them that sense of doing something and having an input into the process of lifer and death. All religions are based on faith and magic where performing certain ceremonies have powers of healing, rain making, even eternal salivation and the triumph over death. Gods and saints can give hope to the hopeless and direction, rules, order to civilizations. The claims are magical and hysterical calls to worship or patriotic emotions that underpin civic order. A spiritual and traditional sense of purpose, direction, order and meaning are required by humans to organize their societies.Everyday the news reports give explaining reasons why the “market” has gone up or down. They sound like the market has purpose and intention. In fact no one knows why markets have day to day variations beyond there are more buyers or more sellers at a moment of time. Thousands of individuals and computer programs make thousands of individual choices partly based on what all the other actors are doing and making assumptions about the reasons behind these decisions. Except when there are great events most of the time there is a random element that defies explanation. Never the less some magical words are used to explain the unexplainable.The desire to find purpose and intention in evolution and human existence is quite natural and also impossible. Disposing with the idea of an external, perhaps even supernatural, vitalizing force, describes how we have arrived at the picture of ourselves and all organisms as Self-Made Things. Our creations include governments, constitutions, institutions, magic, superstitions, ceremony, ritual, flag waving, songs, etc. Our gods are made by us not the other way around. They are made because we need them. They should not (but often do) become a Frankenstein.So we have to take things for what they are. Social conventions, religious ceremony, national character, are useful and even necessary. They are NOT science or material facts. There are very important ideas and beliefs beyond or outside science – arts and literature, song and dance, mystery and magic, wonder and dreams – Santa Claus and the tooth fairy the lands of wonder and magic – the problem arises when belief systems make material judgments (stem cell research) outside their competence. Science can be arrogant about people’s useful and practical beliefs. (Alternative medicine). Science must support the moral and useful desire to do good works, spread truth and justice, equality and fairness which have no material meaning (you can’t find the stuff of kindness and measure it) or do these beliefs have a scientific basis.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 8/07/2005 08:09:00 AM
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Our mission in Iraq is harder because the administration ignored the advice of others, went in largely alone, underestimated the likelihood and power of the insurgency, sent in too few troops to secure the country, destroyed the Iraqi army through de-Baathification, failed to secure ammunition dumps, refused to recognize the urgency of training Iraqi security forces and did no postwar planning. A little humility would go a long way - coupled with a strategy to succeed.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/28/2005 02:19:00 PM
Our mission in Iraq is harder because the administration ignored the advice of others, went in largely alone, underestimated the likelihood and power of the insurgency, sent in too few troops to secure the country, destroyed the Iraqi army through de-Baathification, failed to secure ammunition dumps, refused to recognize the urgency of training Iraqi security forces and did no postwar planning. A little humility would go a long way - coupled with a strategy to succeed.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/28/2005 02:18:00 PM
Stubborn:firm (fûrm) adjectivefirm·er, firm·est1. Resistant to externally applied pressure.2. Marked by or indicating the tone and resiliency3. Securely fixed in place4. Indicating or possessed of determination or resolution: a firm voice.5. Constant; steadfast: a firm ally.6. a. Not subject to change; fixed and definite: a firm bargain; a firm offer. b. Unfluctuating; steady:7. Strong and sure: a firm grasp.Vs. 1. a. Unreasonably, often perversely unyielding; bullheaded. b. Firmly resolved or determined; resolute. See synonyms at obstinate.2. Characterized by perseverance; persistent.3. Difficult to treat or deal with; resistant to treatment or effort.What is the difference?If there is a good chance of winning and your allies are with you!
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/28/2005 02:13:00 PM
Sunday, June 19, 2005
http://europa.eu.int/growthandjobs/index_en.htmA new start for the Lisbon StrategyJobs, growth, the environment and a proper social network. These, in a nutshell, are the main concerns of Europe's citizens. The current lack of economic growth affects all of us; our pensions, salaries and our standard of living considerably suffer from it.If we do not act immediately, our valued social and environmental model will become unaffordable. In the face of international competition and an ageing population, growth could soon decrease to 1% per year (more than half of today's growth ).To avoid this, Heads of State and Government of the European Union met in Lisbon in 2000 and launched a series of ambitious reforms at national and European level. By establishing an effective internal market, by boosting research and innovation and by improving education, to name only a few reform efforts, they aimed to make the European Union “the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy in the world” by 2010.We are now half-way through the process and the results are not very satisfactory. The implementation of reform in Member States has been quite scarce. The reform package consists of 28 main objectives and 120 sub-objectives, with 117 different indicators. The reporting system for 25 Member States adds up to no fewer than 300 annual reports. Nobody reads of all of them.To remedy this lack of commitment of Member States, the Commission proposed to establish a new kind of partnership with Member States. It also decided to focus efforts on two main areas: productivity and employment. To make things simpler and more coherent, there should be just one national growth programme and one EU growth plan.The European Union cannot boost productivity and employment if Member States do not do their part.Latest NewsTheLisbon strategy: a motor for market reforms of network industries - Jointconference at the EESC - Brussels, 1&2 June 200513/06/2005 - Looking small, thinking big – keeping Europe at the forefront of nanotechnology13/06/2005 - Europeans support more money for EU research13/06/2005 - A new face for SMEs: Estonian Maive Rute takes on the job as "SME Envoy"13/06/2005 - Why are one-person-enterprises not hiring?09/06/2005 - Why Europe needs research spending08/06/2005 - "Tell us where to cut red-tape", Commission asks business in online consultation08/06/2005 - Competitiveness Council of Ministers, Luxembourg, 6 June 2005 and Space Council 7 June07/06/2005 - State Aid: Commission outlines comprehensive five year reform of state aid policy to promote growth, jobs and cohesion07/06/2005 - State Aid Action Plan - frequently asked questions07/06/2005 - European space policy will take off before the end of 200507/06/2005 - Neelie Kroes, Member of the European Commission in charge of Competition Policy - The State Aid Action Plan - Introductory remarks at open meeting of coordinators of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee, European Parliament01/06/2005 - Viviane Reding, Member of the European Commission responsible for Information Society and Media - i2010: Europe Must Seize the Opportunities of the Digital Economy Press Conference on the occasion of the launch of the initiative European Information Society 201001/06/2005 - Commission launches five-year strategy to boost the digitaleconomy01/06/2005 - High-speed
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/19/2005 09:54:00 PM
Getting real;British officials are proclaiming that the summit fiasco creates an opportunity for Blair to lead Europe in a different, more ``modern,'' economically liberal (liberal in Europe maintains it’s 18th century meaning as market capitalism not neo-socialist as used by the American right) direction when he takes over the bloc's rotating presidency July 1.They relish the sharpening ideological clash between their free-market philosophy and what they see as an outdated Franco-German model of social and rural protection.``It's essentially a division between whether you want an EU that is able to cope with the future or whether you want an EU that is trapped in the past,'' British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said. ``It is not one Europe can dodge.'' …“Blair appears to be counting on a gradual change in the balance of power, with new, economically more liberal leaders in Germany and several central European states, to isolate Chirac - demonized in Britain as the embodiment of ``Old Europe'' and defender of fat subsidies for French farmers.”The central issue the whole industrial world is how to encourage economic growth and maintain a fancy life style in the face of rough global competition from China, India, Korea, Brazil, south eastern Asia, and elsewhere. Italian made shoes at $100 can’t compete with imports at $20. Maybe they have to out source manufacturing but keep design and marketing. German and French (and American) auto makers can’t compete with in many cases newer and lower wages factories in Eastern Europe or Mexico without huge pension and health costs, and many restrictive union or government regulations. Now Boeing or Airbus has an edge as do many high tech products but not for ever. So what is to be done?Progressives in North America and Europe (Clinton and Blair) look to a “knowledge society”. In this image the economic base are silicon valleys, big strong Universities training the world, research institutes churning out innovations in old and new technologies – genetic engineering, stem cells, information and communication systems, energy (including new forms of Atomic power such as pebbles) hydrogen systems, and the start up business in the new economy. By the way China, India, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Brazil are all thinking the same thing. They do not want to just be the low cost producers of OEM commodities and low value added products in textiles but are looking ahead.BUT as in any plan the people who benefit are in the future; the people that pay, suffer and hurt are here and now. Future beneficiaries can’t vote while French farmers sure can, and American Cotton growers, and protected industries, can make a big fuss. Modern capitalist societies can not afford the protections, the benefits, the privileges even with high taxes and growing deficits. Scandinavia is a special case where competition exists within a system of generous social benefits and high taxes of a welfare state. It worked for Germany and France in the past but no longer. They need to get real.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/19/2005 05:22:00 PM
To assert that I am on God's side and you are not, that I know God's will and you do not, and that I will use the power of government to advance my understanding of God's kingdom is certain to produce hostility.In the cultural wars, in the Middle East, in the clash of civilizations - In Iran -June 17, 2005 NYTOnward, Moderate Christian SoldiersBy JOHN C. DANFORTHSt. LouisIT would be an oversimplification to say that America's culture wars are now between people of faith and nonbelievers. People of faith are not of one mind, whether on specific issues like stem cell research and government intervention in the case of Terri Schiavo, or the more general issue of how religion relates to politics. In recent years, conservative Christians have presented themselves as representing the one authentic Christian perspective on politics. With due respect for our conservative friends, equally devout Christians come to very different conclusions.It is important for those of us who are sometimes called moderates to make the case that we, too, have strongly held Christian convictions, that we speak from the depths of our beliefs, and that our approach to politics is at least as faithful as that of those who are more conservative. Our difference concerns the extent to which government should, or even can, translate religious beliefs into the laws of the state.People of faith have the right, and perhaps the obligation, to bring their values to bear in politics. Many conservative Christians approach politics with a certainty that they know God's truth, and that they can advance the kingdom of God through governmental action. So they have developed a political agenda that they believe advances God's kingdom, one that includes efforts to "put God back" into the public square and to pass a constitutional amendment intended to protect marriage from the perceived threat of homosexuality.Moderate Christians are less certain about when and how our beliefs can be translated into statutory form, not because of a lack of faith in God but because of a healthy acknowledgement of the limitations of human beings. Like conservative Christians, we attend church, read the Bible and say our prayers.But for us, the only absolute standard of behavior is the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves. Repeatedly in the Gospels, we find that the Love Commandment takes precedence when it conflicts with laws. We struggle to follow that commandment as we face the realities of everyday living, and we do not agree that our responsibility to live as Christians can be codified by legislators.When, on television, we see a person in a persistent vegetative state, one who will never recover, we believe that allowing the natural and merciful end to her ordeal is more loving than imposing government power to keep her hooked up to a feeding tube.When we see an opportunity to save our neighbors' lives through stem cell research, we believe that it is our duty to pursue that research, and to oppose legislation that would impede us from doing so.We think that efforts to haul references of God into the public square, into schools and courthouses, are far more apt to divide Americans than to advance faith.Following a Lord who reached out in compassion to all human beings, we oppose amending the Constitution in a way that would humiliate homosexuals.For us, living the Love Commandment may be at odds with efforts to encapsulate Christianity in a political agenda. We strongly support the separation of church and state, both because that principle is essential to holding together a diverse country, and because the policies of the state always fall short of the demands of faith. Aware that even our most passionate ventures into politics are efforts to carry the treasure of religion in the earthen vessel of government, we proceed in a spirit of humility lacking in our conservative colleagues.In the decade since I left the Senate, American politics has been characterized by two phenomena: the increased activism of the Christian right, especially in the Republican Party, and the collapse of bipartisan collegiality. I do not think it is a stretch to suggest a relationship between the two. To assert that I am on God's side and you are not, that I know God's will and you do not, and that I will use the power of government to advance my understanding of God's kingdom is certain to produce hostility.By contrast, moderate Christians see ourselves, literally, as moderators. Far from claiming to possess God's truth, we claim only to be imperfect seekers of the truth. We reject the notion that religion should present a series of wedge issues useful at election time for energizing a political base. We believe it is God's work to practice humility, to wear tolerance on our sleeves, to reach out to those with whom we disagree, and to overcome the meanness we see in today's politics.For us, religion should be inclusive, and it should seek to bridge the differences that separate people. We do not exclude from worship those whose opinions differ from ours. Following a Lord who sat at the table with tax collectors and sinners, we welcome to the Lord's table all who would come. Following a Lord who cited love of God and love of neighbor as encompassing all the commandments, we reject a political agenda that displaces that love. Christians who hold these convictions ought to add their clear voice of moderation to the debate on religion in politics.John C. Danforth is an Episcopal minister and former Republican senator from Missouri.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/19/2005 08:32:00 AM
Thursday, June 02, 2005
A Constitution for Europe: (389 words)We the People of Europe, in Order to form a functional economic and customs Union, promote social Justice by our member states, insure peace and Tranquility, promote the Welfare and prosperity of our peoples, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do establish this Constitution for the confederation of sovereign nations that voluntarily make up the European Union. It takes effect upon the votes by the Legislatures or peoples of four fifth (20) of the member States.Article ILimited legislative Powers over objectives that cannot be achieved by the member states or individuals acting alone but can only be achieved at Union level, is granted to a European Parliament, which shall consist of a Council of Ministers (COM) acting as an intergovernmental upper house and the lower house (MEPs members = no more than 10 X COM) selected by proportional representation as determined by law. Each house shall determine their membership, rules and procedures.Article. II.The executive Power shall be vested in an elected President, by qualified majority in the COM for a term three years, renewable once. His/her duties shall be set by law. As chairman of the European Commission (EC) and head of the civil service he/she shall see that the laws are faithfully executed. He/she shall appoint Commissioners with the advice and consent of COM and the executive as a whole must be confirmed by the MEPs as determined by law.Article. III.The judicial Power of the European Union shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior Courts as the parliament may from time to time establish. The Judges shall be nominated by the President with the advice and consent of the COM and have security of tenure as set by law.Article IV The parliament, may by two thirds of both Houses propose amendments to this Constitution, to be approved by or on the Application of the Legislatures of three fourths of the member States.Article V all existing EU agencies, laws, institutions and treaties not in direct conflict continue under this constitution until amended by law, treaty or constitutional amendment. "The Constitution and law adopted by the Union institutions in exercising competence conferred upon it by the Constitution shall have primacy over the law of the member states."
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/02/2005 01:29:00 PM
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
A Constitution for Europe:We the People of Europe, in Order to form a working Union, establish Justice, insure peace and Tranquility, provide for prosperity, the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the European Union upon the majority vote of the peoples of Europe and Legislatures of three fourths of the member States.Article ILimited legislative Powers on matters that require European action and cannot be done by member states acting alone is granted to a European Parliament, which shall consist of a Council of Ministers acting as an intergovernmental upper house and the lower house selected by proportional representation as determined by law. Both houses shall determine their own rules and procedures.Article. II.The executive Power shall be vested in an elected President of the European community. His terms and duties shall be set by law. As chairman of the European Commission and head of the civil service he shall see that the laws are faithfully executed and appoint Commissioners with the advice and consent of parliament as determined by law.Article. III.The judicial Power of the European Union shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior Courts as the parliament may from time to time establish. The Judges shall have security of tenure as set by law.Article IV The parliament, may by two thirds of both Houses shall propose amendments to this Constitution, to be approved by or on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the member States.Article V all existing EU agencies, laws and treaties continue under this constitution until amended by law.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 6/01/2005 10:44:00 PM
Sunday, May 22, 2005
A constitutional compromise:http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Gold_Gupta_JLPP_article.pdfAnd Senate Rule V declares that these rules are perpetual: “The rules of the Senate shall continue from one Congress to the next Congress unless they are changed as provided in these rules.”A Senator could raise a point of order that a vote must be taken. A motion to table operates. The motion is non-debatable—the Senate must take an immediate vote on it—and it serves as a final disposition of the underlying question.The Presiding Officer could rule in favor of the point of order, and a majority could table any appeal from his ruling. This would establish a precedent limiting the length of time for debate that would bind all future Senates (until the precedent were overturned by majority vote or unanimous consent).Finally, the Senate could adopt a Standing Order altering the Senate’s procedures, including the procedures governing debate. The number of votes to close debate on circuit court judges nominations would be 4/7 or 57 (or 5/9 is 55) instead of 60 or 3/5. Standing Orders are not incorporated into the text of the Standing Rules, but nonetheless bind the Senate. For example, in December 2000, the Senate adopted a standing order limiting members’ ability to filibuster conference reports. The order provided that members could no longer demand the reading of conference reports that were available in writing. Similarly, a current Senate could adopt a Standing Order having the effect of limiting time for debate with fewer votes but more than 51 but less than 60.
# posted by Wiredbrain : 5/22/2005 02:57:00 PM
Friday, May 20, 2005
THE CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION TO CHANGESENATE RULES AND PROCEDURES:A MAJORITARIAN MEANS TO OVERCOME THE FILIBUSTER*MARTIN B. GOLD** & DIMPLE GUPTA***http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Gold_Gupta_JLPP_article.pdfThe forest and the trees:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/17/AR2005051701425.html?nav=hcmodulehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/16/AR2005051601307.htmlThe history of the filibusters involve some of the great conflicts of American History – the reserved rights of a minority to prevent majority action in the U.S. Senate involve President Jackson and the Bank, the issues of states rights and slavery, the American entry into WW I, the civil rights crisis and other major crisis in the society. I don’t think the confirmation of judges reaches this high standard. The members of the senate are quite clear that by being a continuing body where the rules can only be changed within the rules that require super majorities to curtail minority power. Clearly the Senate has the constitutional power to change its rules by majority vote and restore the “motion to proceed” used by other legislative bodies around the world. The distinctive character of the U.S. Senate is the power of minorities to prevent the will of the majority for decades as in the case of civil rights – from the 1890’s to the 1970’s.Tomorrow or Friday, Frist and other Republican senators are likely to file a motion seeking cloture, or an end to debate. One session day must pass before a vote to end debate, so a vote would be held and Republicans would expect to get fewer than 60 votes to confirm Owen.Frist aides say he has not decided exactly what would occur next. But the scenario most widely expected among senators in both parties is that he would seek a ruling from the chair -- Vice President Cheney, if it looked as if the vote was going to be close -- that filibustering judicial nominations is out of order. Assuming the chair agreed, Reid would then object and ask that the ruling of the chair be tabled. Most Republicans would then vote against the Democratic motion, upholding the ruling. Then the Senate would move to a vote on Owen, and a precedent will have been set that it takes 51 votes, not 60, to cut off debate on a judicial nomination.A virtual script for what could happen next is included in an article published last fall in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy by Martin B. Gold, a partner at Covington & Burling who is a former floor adviser to Frist, and Dimple Gupta, a former Justice Department lawyer who was hired in March by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).
