Best political coverage yet
Posted by Marc Hodak on September 14, 2008 under Politics | 
Be the First to Comment
If Fey is voting her pocketbook, there’s no question who she’s gotta be rooting for. Very funny.
The Inimitable Boudreaux
Posted by Marc Hodak on September 3, 2008 under Politics | Read the First Comment
While catching a glimpse of the conventions, I came across this wonderful exchange between Don Boudreaux and a plaintive writer:
Dr. Boudreaux,Why are you so bitter about politics? Why so cynical? Why don’t you give candidates and office holders the benefit of the doubt when they say they want to help others?
Sara
Don’s magnificent response is below the fold.
What did I miss in ConLaw?
Posted by Marc Hodak on August 31, 2008 under Politics | 2 Comments to Read
Regarding Hurricane Gustav, Obama said:
I’ve instructed my Senate staff to monitor the situation closely, make sure we’ve contacted both FEMA but also private relief organizations just to make sure that whatever happens people are prepared.
The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, says:
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
So, what is a U.S. Senator doing interfering with an executive agency? During an emergency?
Obama’s speech
Posted by Marc Hodak on August 28, 2008 under Politics | Be the First to Comment
“I am my brother’s keeper and my sister’s keeper.”
Me, too, Barack. But I’m not your brother. We don’t know each other. I’d rather that you choose who to help with your resources than with mine.
Unfortunately, I’ll probably be making the same plaint to McCain.
Biden’s speech
Posted by Marc Hodak on August 27, 2008 under Politics | Read the First Comment
For those of you who couldn’t listen to the whole thing because you were looking for nickels in your sofa cushions, here’s a summary:
“I was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania. It doesn’t get more blue collar than that. My parents believed in the American dream. My dad fell on hard times, but we bounced back. He said to me, “Champ, when you get knocked down, get up. Get up.” My mother told me, “Joey, God sends no cross you cannot bear.” She taught us to have faith and be tough, and to face down every challenge. Our family has seen more than it’s share of adversity. We did what we had to do, and I am so proud of what we achieved.So, now that I see so many people struggling, I have to ask, “Why isn’t the government helping all these people?”
He then proceeded to bash “my dear, good friend, and I mean it,” John McCain.
Do legislators read the Constitution?
Posted by Marc Hodak on August 16, 2008 under Politics | 5 Comments to Read
U.S. Constitution:
nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
Pennsylvania state Sen. Jeffrey Piccola has said
he plans to introduce legislation that would allow authorities to keep potentially dangerous sex offenders in prison after they have finished serving their sentences.
Thomas Frank spanked by Colbert
Posted by Marc Hodak on August 9, 2008 under Politics | Comments are off for this article
Thomas Frank can’t even argue well against a faux conservative.
What chance would he have against a real one?
Turkish delight
Posted by Marc Hodak on July 30, 2008 under Politics | Comments are off for this article
OK, I know I said I would lay off the purely political comments, but I actually have a more-than-academic interest in Turkey.
The Turkish High Court has been deliberating the banning of the Justice and Development Party party currently in power. The ruling party is pro-Islamic, though they are nominally willing to abide by Turkey’s constitutional secularism. The flash point of the instant controversy was Justice and Development desire to lift the ban on women wearing head scarves at the universities. They saw this as a matter of personal freedom. This secularists went ballistic, seeing this as the camel’s nose under the tent, so to speak, i.e., the first step toward overthrowing the secular foundations of modern Turkey.
The Court decided against banning the J&D party, but instead cut off half their funding. I have no idea what their laws are–this ruling would seem quite arbitrary by American standards–but the outcome seems right. I think secularism is great, and countries with a populist instinct to the contrary need to be wary of encroachments on secular freedoms. On the other hand, I like a strict separation of church and state and freedom of speech, both of which seem in line with allowing women to wear head scarves if they wish. Furthermore, I would be wary of overthrowing an elected government. Democracy is not my highest ideal–if one could have expansive personal freedom without a democracy, I’d be fine with that. However, democracy serves as a safety valve for the majority when they’re feeling oppressed. If the majority feels it has lost its voice via the ballots, they will eventually, invariably resort to bullets.
This ruling seems to cut the baby in half. It allows the elected government to remain in power, thus validating the will of the people, while putting J&D on notice to watch itself. My assent, however, is based entirely on the premise that the court–clearly dominated by secularists– defended the law as it’s written. Both expansive personal freedom and democracy rely upon the rule of law.
I’m not sure that My Turkish partner, and one of my best friends in this life, would agree. He’s a pretty hard line secularist, and may claim that I am not well attuned to the slippery slope represented by the head scarves issue, and he may be right. Politics always seems easier from five thousand miles away. My friend, a somewhat conservative soul (in the American sense), loves Obama.
Quiz for my readers
Posted by Marc Hodak on July 6, 2008 under Politics | Read the First Comment
We have family visiting New York this long weekend. Yesterday they visited the World Trade Center site, just day after an interesting editorial in yesterday’s New York Sun.
Across New York City, there is a visible divide between development projects built by the private sector and those built by the public sector.
The article notes how large-scale, privately managed projects such as Yankee and Mets stadiums, and various commercial and residential projects that have transformed various areas of the city are on their way to completion, or up and running.
In stark contrast, public projects being managed by various governmental agencies are, so to speak, stuck in the mud. Ground zero has become a symbol of political paralysis. A picture of the original design for the Fulton Street station should be in the dictionary under “boondogle.”
Liberal New Yorkers (redundant, I know) look upon these differences with a curious mixture of cynicism and hopefulness. So, here is a little quiz to separate the liberals from the deluded liberals.
The reason that public projects are typically so much more costly and delayed than equivalent private projects is:
a) Because the private projects are run by smarter people. If only we could get better people in the public sector to run those projects, they could be managed just as well.
b) Because the public projects are hampered by funds. If they had more money, they could get more done more quickly.
c) Because the public sector operates under a very different set of incentives and constraints than the private sector. No one should expect better of public management than what they’ve done in the past.
Most liberals choose (a); it’s just a matter of getting the right people in place. They totally buy into the idea that the past public officials dropped the ball and are to blame for the delays. We just need to get better people in office.
Some liberals choose (b), but that’s plain nonsense. Many public projects waste more money than private projects use. And they often do so, by the way, with fewer environmental and other constraints, and far fewer liability concerns, than those faced by private developers.
Naturally, I would choose (c), but would be open to additional possibilities not encountered in this list of choices.
The point here is that there is no reason to blame public officials for incompetence. True, they are an easy target of ridicule, which may be a subtle reason why the media seems to have a strong bias toward public management. The point is that competence shouldn’t be expected to begin with. It would be far more productive to question the credulity of the people who, against all evidence to the contrary, expect public officials to effectively manage big projects.
McCaskill shows what it takes to be a Senator
Posted by Marc Hodak on June 19, 2008 under Politics | 11 Comments to Read
In coming out against the Anheuser-Busch takeover by Belgian-based InBev, Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) clearly illustrated certain lessons about what it takes to be a Senator:
1) Homework is unnecessary:
Asked what specifically she could do to stop the sale, McCaskill said she wasn’t sure yet.
Taken at face value, this statement represents a shocking lack of preparation. McCaskill has been in law for about 30 years. She and her staff have had over a week to study the situation around the bid, and the bid itself has been brewing longer than a full-bodied Bud–since February.
2) Don’t worry about giving shareholders the finger: