Archive for December, 2010
The Census Figures And The Republican Party: Not What It Seems!
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on December 29, 2010
When the census figures came out a week ago, Republicans were rejoicing as the Sunbelt gained seats in the House of Representatives and in the Electoral College vote for President, but the true tale is that the growth of population does NOT favor the GOP long term, particularly if the Republicans do not adjust to the reality of immigration.
It is true that Texas and Florida gained four and two seats in the House of Representatives, along with one seat for Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, South Carolina, Utah and Washington State.
But much of the growth in population was Hispanic or Latino, and with the GOP promoting a hard line on immigration, and preventing passage of the DREAM Act for immigrant children, there is a likelihood that Hispanics will NOT vote Republican in these states, and as the voting population grows in these areas, the Democrats have a very good chance of gaining power in many of the Sunbelt states over the next decade.
Additionally, the demographics shows the suburbs of major cities, which used to be reliably Republican, no longer are. The astounding statistic is that John McCain, who had more of an open mind on immigration when he ran for the Presidency in 2008, managed to lose all of the suburban counties surrounding New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Detroit and Boston, as well as the majority of suburban counties surrounding St. Louis and Cleveland. Additionally, except for Orange Country, McCain lost all suburban counties in southern California, and won Orange County by the smallest margin of any Republican in modern times!
Women have been historically Democratic, and independents have moved in that direction, except in 2010, which is likely a blip on the map, not a trend. And even rich people and counties are more than ever moving toward the Democrats, and contributing more to the Democrats.
Not all rich people vote their pocketbook, but also vote on social issues, and the reality is that the number of “have nots” will always outnumber the “haves”, so for the GOP to work against the interests of the struggling middle class, as well as the poor, is counter productive in the long run.
So while the GOP might control redistricting in many significant states and have Governors of their party in control, trying to project a long term Republican advantage electorally is far from guaranteed!
The Evolving Supreme Court: The Dynamics Of Nine Human Beings Working Together!
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on December 28, 2010
The Supreme Court has undergone a lot of change in the past five years, with four appointments to the Court.
George W. Bush appointed John Roberts as Chief Justice and Samuel Alito as an Associate Justice, while Barack Obama chose Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan as Associate Justices.
Roberts has certainly made his impact as Chief Justice, and has become controversial because of his activism, which contradicts his testimony that he believed in “stare decisis”, the role of precedent in deciding whether to accept past Court decisions. Instead, Roberts has become a confrontational Chief Justice, including criticizing President Obama for attacking the revolutionary Citizens United Case of January, 2010.
Alito seemed to be quieter, but this year, he openly objected to Obama’s criticism of the Citizens United Case, and is now regarded as an outspoken conservative firebrand in the same vein as Roberts, meaning that the four conservatives on the Court are very aggressive in their advocacy. No one would ever accuse Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas as being “wallflowers” in their activist views, even though Scalia claims to be an advocate of “originalism”, interpreting the Constitution based on the actions of the Constitutional Convention of 1787.
But the liberal side of the Court has also been much more outspoken. Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, now the oldest member of the Court, is certainly willing to express her views, and Justice Stephen Breyer is seen as the intellectual leader of the liberal wing of the Court.
But even the newest Justices are making clear their liberal tendencies. Justice Sotomayor is seen by the New York Times as “guiding” the liberal wing. Sotomayor spoke up for prisoner rights, with a challenge by Justice Alito.
And Justice Elena Kagan has joined Sotomayor in what is described as a subtle shift of the Court, with Sotomayor more passionate and Kagan as a “bridge builder”, but yet seen as strengthening the liberal wing. Kagan is seen as having the ability to draw Anthony Kennedy, the truly independent member of the Court, to consider her side of the issue, much like John Paul Stevens used to be able to do that in his latter years on the Court.
What this all means is that the Supreme Court is in constant readjustment of nine human beings, with evolution of the dynamics fascinating to watch and to evaluate on a regular basis! 
New Statistics On Economic Mobility And Income Distribution In America Shows “The American Dream” Is A Myth! :(
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on December 27, 2010
New statistics demonstrate that the concept of “The American Dream”, that anyone can come from poverty to wealth is a myth, now more than ever!
According to the Organization For Economic Cooperation And Development, the average earnings for the top ten percent of Americans are 16 times that of the lowest ten percent of Americans. In Great Britain, the multiple is 8, and in Sweden it is 5.
42 percent of those in the bottom twenty percent of the economic system will never escape it, while in Great Britain, the percentage is 30, and in Sweden it is 25.
Finally, the top one percent of the population, according to this study, has 36 percent of the income, up from 22 percent in 1980. Meanwhile, the average worker has seen income only go up three percent after inflation after these thirty years!
So the idea that somehow the average American can become rich is not facing reality, particularly with the long lasting effects of the Great Recession, which is supposedly over, but is really NOT over by any means! 
Possible Changes In Filibuster Rules And Committees In Senate, And A Proposal
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on December 27, 2010
The call by the Democrats in the Senate for filibuster reform makes it the center of attention for Wednesday, January 5, 2011, the only day that such reform is possible.
As the new Senate convenes, Vice President Joe Biden will preside, and the opportunity for change will be voted on.
Among the changes proposed are the following:
1. Senators could not initiate a filibuster of a bill before it reaches the floor unless they have 40 votes in favor of such action, and would have to remain on the floor to sustain the filibuster. Now an anonymous objection to a motion to proceed is enough to initiate such a filibuster.
2. Secret holds, which allow a Senator to block action on a bill or nomination anonymously, would be prevented. Any Senator who places holds would have to do so publicly.
3. Thirty hour waiting periods on motions to proceed would also be eliminated as a tactic.
4. A simple majority vote on changing Senate rules at the start of a session, rather than a two thirds majority, would be adopted.
Other Senate changes that might be voted on include:
1. Election of committee chairmen by secret ballot, instead of by affirmation unless a member objects, making committee chairmen more accountable to the other members of the committee.
2. Limitation of how many subcommittees one member can head.
Apparently, there is reluctance to make it harder to create a filibuster based on number of Senators required, with 60 Senators now needed to overcome a filibuster.
Before 1975, 67 Senators were needed to end a filibuster, and major reform was making it 60 Senators at that point.
It would seem to the author that while a minority should have the full rights to opposition, it is undemocratic to allow 41 Senators to stop action endlessly.
The author’s proposal would be to lower the threshold from 60 Senators to 55, realizing that if a candidate for public office, including the Presidency, wins 55 percent of the vote, it is considered a landslide win!
So why not lower the number for a filibuster to be overcome to 55, making it that 46 Senators would have to agree to keep a filibuster going? This still retains the right of the minority, but prevents abuse of the concept of endless debate and discussion, and prevents the kind of damage that the filibuster is now clearly seen as causing–the stoppage of often significant legislation desired by the House of Representatives and a clear cut majority of the US Senate!
The Abuse Of The Filibuster By The Senate Minority: Time For Reform!
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on December 25, 2010
As the political year ends, the record shows that the use of the filibuster tactic by the Republican minority in the US Senate has reached an all time high.
It used to be that the filibuster was utilized by Southern Democrats opposed to the passage of civil rights legislation.
Now it is used as a weapon to stop ALL action in the Senate, with simply the threat of a filibuster preventing progress on legislation, or presidential nominees for the federal courts and other offices.
The number of motions for cloture has doubled in the past few years, and has nearly quadrupled since the 1970s and 1980s, and was used in the single digits until the 1970s.
It used to be that mounting a filibuster meant a group of Senators taking turns in speaking on the floor for hours and hours, while now just the threat stops action.
Is this proper use of the filibuster, just to say a group will mount a filibuster, and all action is paralyzed as a result?
Of course, the answer is no, so the Democratic majority and Senate President and Vice President Joe Biden will have one chance to change the rules of the Senate, on opening day of the 112th Senate on January 5, 2011.
The move to reform the filibuster is being led by junior Democrats, including Senators Tom Udall of New Mexico, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Michael Bennet of Colorado, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, and Mark Warner of Virginia. But senior Democrats, including Tom Harkin of Iowa and Carl Levin of Michigan also back the idea of reforms.
The problem is to realize that the Democrats could be in the minority in the Senate in 2013, and the desire to retain influence if they are the minority, so tinkering with the Senate rules on the filibuster, as well as other tactics, such as the ability of one Senator to use the “hold” tactic on action, must be carefully considered, so as not to reverberate on the Democrats in the future times when, inevitably, they will NOT be the majority!
The Heroes And The Goats Of The “Lame Duck” Session Of Congress
Posted by Ronald in News and Politics on December 24, 2010
The recent “lame duck” session of Congress saw some real heroes and some real goats.
The heroes would include Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York; Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut; Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont; Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana; and Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.
Schumer and Gillibrand used their talents and persuasive abilities to accomplish the passage of the September 11 First Responders Medical legislation. Gillibrand, particularly, became noticed as a truly courageous figure, after much doubt about her after being appointed by Governor David Paterson over more well known and prominent candidates to succeed Hillary Clinton.
Joe Lieberman proved how useful he can be, pursuing the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the military with a fierceness and principle rarely seen in any Senator.
Bernie Sanders proved how wonderful a human being he is, fighting for the common people, and against the corporations and the wealthy, and his eight and a half hour filibuster was inspiring.
Richard Lugar gave evidence again that he is one of the best Senators of modern times, pushing for the START Treaty, supporting gays in the military, and being one of three Republicans to support the DREAM Act. Unfortunately, he will probably suffer a primary challenger as a result in 2012, but he is in so many ways, a Senator’s Senator, much like Ted Kennedy was in the recent past!
And Lisa Murkowksi found a new independence as a result of her tough re-election contest as an independent, and courageously supported gays in the military, the DREAM Act, and the START Treaty.
At the same time that the above Senators showed conviction and decency, the following demonstrated how disgraceful some political figures can be, and can be termed as “goats”: Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, Senator John McCain of Arizona, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina, and Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.
All of the above demonstrated bitterness, anger, pettiness, narrow mindedness, and extreme partisanship at a time when a group of Senators of their party actually displayed bipartisanship on the START Treaty, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ending in the military, and the September 11 First Responders Medical legislation.
So congratulations are in order for the first group of Senators above, and a chorus of boos for the second set above!