Throwing all into confusion

Considering the mischief caused by Tea-Party Republican representatives, and the resulting confusion about how to end the shutdown, here is Rawlins Lowndes’s realistic view of the proposed US  constitution of 1787, as collected in the Anti-Federalist Papers (54):

Great stress was laid on the admirable checks which guarded us, under the new Constitution, from the encroachments of tyranny; but too many checks in a political machine must produce the same mischief as in a mechanical one – that of throwing all into confusion. [1]

Lowndes was trying to protect slavery in South Carolina against those in the Northern States, those who would try to do away with that peculiar institution: affirming that “whilst there remained one acre of swampland in South Carolina, he should raise his voice against restricting the importation of Negroes.” He was a pragmatist.

Dwelt a miner, forty-niner

Actually, the California Gold Rush started, not in 1849, but in January 1848 when gold was found in Coloma, California. Though it is difficult to be precise, it is thought that gold worth many billions of dollars in current values was extracted, a great deal of money and a great contribution to the USA economy. For example, San Francisco grew from a few hundred residents before the discovery of gold to almost 40000 residents in a very short time. This was growth through exploitation of US natural resources (and miners) and not through exploitation of US ingenuity (though, no doubt, many miners were ingenious), which had a multiplier affect throughout the US economy, thus increasing federal government income.

 

Single-parent families, in black and white

When talking of children living without mothers or without fathers things are not simple. There are many varying reasons for single-parent families from death of a spouse/partner to no spouse/partner in the first place. The consequences for individual families are also varied, and poorer finances are generally are an important consequence – though there is a world of difference between a divorced affluent woman in her late 30s and a never-married adolescent living alone with her baby.

Based on US Census Bureau figures for 2011 from the Annie E. Casey Foundation National Kids Count Program, 16,356,000 white children and 6,509,000 black/African-American children live in single-parent families. The total of single-parent children for all ethnicities is 24,718,000; and so about 66% of single-parent children are white and 26% black (of white children, 38% are non-Hispanic white and 28% are Hispanic/Latino).

Insanity we trust

In the aftermath of the killings in Newtown there have been many calls on the Republican side for control not of guns but of people who might be shooters: people with mental health problems, bad guys with guns; and particularly bad people with mental health problems who are guys with guns. People with mental health problems are not well-treated, we are told, and should never been allowed the freedom they had. Not “well-treated”? – welcome to the US health care morass, encouraged by Republicans.
How do we know who has mental problems? – it all depends upon where you start. In the US public theatre, the same behaviour might be considered quirky, eccentric, around the bend, crazy, deranged, insane, or socialist – or perfectly acceptable and normal.

Economic faith, economic reason

It is far more difficult to combat faith than it is to combat reason and knowledge. A faith that there can be such a thing as a “free” market, or unambiguously “private” property, is difficult to shake.

Take the notion of a free market: there is no exact definition, but try “An economic system where prices, wages and trade are unregulated and prices are determined by competition between businesses”.  There has never been a truly free market because a “free market” is an ideal and interesting idea but, unfortunately, it is an ideal lodged in faith. The free market article of faith cannot cope with a complex society, because regulations exist at all levels of society protecting private property and public speech, enforcing contracts, plus a myriad of other things.

The rites of job creators

In June 1993, shortly after Bill Clinton became US President, the US unemployment rate was 7.0%. Under Clinton the unemployment rate dropped dramatically to 3.9% in December 2000, and the top rate of taxation had increased from 31% when he entered office to 39.6%. 

In June 2001, shortly after George W Bush became US President, the US unemployment rate was 4.5% and the first of the Bush tax cuts were enacted (to create jobs). One year after the tax cuts became the law of the land, June 2002, the unemployment rate had already increased to 5.8%, and at the end of the Bush administration (and another set of income tax cuts) the unemployment rate was 2.8% higher at 7.3% together with many other problems. (BLS figures.)  Unemployment might have increased because of the tax cuts, or there might be other reasons, but there does not seem to be any support for the Republican rite that tax increases suppress job creation or – the reverse – tax cuts create jobs.

Majorities mandate miasmas

Miasma
1. An unwholesome atmosphere
2. Unhealthy vapours rising from the ground or other sources

After elections the unwholesome atmospheres usually come from ideologues who always know better (but are no better). One commentator saw the 2008 US general elections as “I've read that Obama doesn't have a mandate, but I don't know what planet you have to come from to draw that conclusion” – personally, I come from the planet Earth. Votes in elections may decide winning candidates, but votes in elections do not decide which were the winning ideas. The only tangible consequences of elections are the persons who were elected. The elected then act according to their intangible ideas of what should happen (their own personal mandates). These actions also have consequences, and certain self-confirming superior individuals have always feared the unintended consequences of actions resulting from misguided votes in majoritarian elections – miasmic assertions such as Mitt Romney’s remarks that Obama administration actions “were very generous in what they gave to those groups”, or James Madison’s worry that some groups would not act in the “permanent and aggregate interests of the community”.

Declaring independence from the governed

In the 2012 presidential election only about 17.7% of the population of Louisiana voted Obama, but then only 25.2% voted Romney. In fact, less than half of the Louisiana populace (the Louisiana governed) voted in the 2012 presidential election, which means that less than half of the governed gave any consent to anybody. Louisiana is the home of “WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:  Peacefully grant the State of Louisiana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government” – the first secession petition on the White House web site, dated 7 November 2012. Quoting from the US Declaration of Independence, the petition says government should derive its “just powers from the consent of the governed”. The petition was started by “Michael E” about whom little is known. Who gave consent to the Louisiana petition by signing-up? – the Louisiana governed? Looking at the last twenty electronic signatures at this moment (36,825-36,844) five are from the Louisiana governed and the rest are from outside the state.

Abortion and godlings

The desire to favour ideology over compassion for women has surfaced in Ireland in very distressing way. A pregnant woman (Savita Halappanavar) was admitted to University Hospital Galway (UHG), where she was found to be miscarrying and soon was in severe pain. Savita died of septicaemia a week later. Why did Savita die? According to an article in The Irish Times a request for a medical termination was refused because the foetal heartbeat was still present, and “this is a Catholic country”. Perhaps the doctors (godlings?) would also claim that even after rape any pregnancy is “something that God intended to happen” (believed by some in the USA)?

A necessary medical treatment to save the life of the mother because of foetal termination. We have a case where the perceived “rights” of a foetus (who had not been born) superseded the rights of a woman (who had been born) – this unfortunate position appears throughout many conservative political ideologies. Often “abortion” is a political issue dressed in religious clothes.

Hearts of stone

Sometimes ideology overcomes humanity. Sometimes an abstract idea becomes more important than reality. Some human beings forget they exist in world populated by other human beings without whom their existence would be solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. Not wishing to bear one another's burdens, some humans seem devoid of any spiritual or communal feeling – espousing a morality of materialism.

They are statues with their hearts of stone.

The rights of the born woman

Given the many arguments about abortion, conclusions about embryos and foetuses are neither self-evident nor unambiguous truths – what is self-evident (and a truth) is that a woman has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If  you believe that life is a gift from a god and all fertilized eggs should be allowed to come to term then, logically, no matter the circumstances of fertilization, nobody should stop any embryo coming to term. Of course, this means any woman has a life that is a gift from a god, because she was once an embryo and then a foetus.

Guns don’t kill people, shooters kill people

It was dark, there were noises and then gunfire:

Friendly fire probably killed a U.S. Border Patrol agent in Arizona near the Mexican border this week, the FBI said on Friday … a "tragic accident, the result of friendly fire."
— David Schwartz, “Probe points to friendly fire in Arizona Border Patrol death”, Reuters, 6 October 2012

In the dark, it seems as if an agent heard a noise, saw a shadow, and other agents thought they were being fired on by an assailant – and agents shoot to kill when under attack. Border Patrol agents are intensively trained in the use of guns, and they are experts.

More Republican constitutional bupkis

The US constitution seems very clear that taxes should be used to benefit the United States: pay the debts; provide for the common defence and the general welfare. But it’s never that clear: whose debts? which defence? what welfare?

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
— Article I (Section 8), US Constitution, 1787

Almost as soon as the constitution was confirmed there were arguments about debts from the war years, and what debts should be honoured. Taxes were used to pay for an invasion of Canada in the War of 1812, a war that was opposed by states near the Canada border who did not see it as part of any common defence. There was comparatively little discussion of the general welfare.

Blasphemy in veneration

I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.
— Susan B. Anthony, Bible Resolution speech, National American Woman Suffrage Association, 23-28 January 1896.

I was astounded to find a silly assertion that “the Constitution of the United States, the greatest political document ever written” was actually a religious tract, because “That sacred document shows us the path forward” (“We Believe in America”, Republican Platform 2012). It is perfectly acceptable to venerate those who were there at the founding of USA, and those helping frame the constitution, without turning them into saints.

The bad history boys

When Rick Santorum makes assertions based on a conservative political stance about the place of Christianity in US history, the relationship between the State and religion, and religious freedom, it is often bad history but history that needs more checking than cheap jibes at Barack Obama.  Was the USA always “a moral enterprise” as Santorum thinks?

The emergency room as the safety net

Commoners in need should obtain help and support at the caprice of those affluent enough to get a tax deduction for money given to legally-recognized charities, and the commoners should be thankful.
— What conservatives really mean by “charities should be responsible for providing health care to those who can’t afford it”.

US laws, those who lead, and those who wish to lead, often reinforce the widespread belief in other countries that US society is exceptional in multiple ways for being thoughtless and uncaring.

The government in Washington is not broken

I think Congressmen should wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers so we could identify their corporate sponsors
— a quote of the day

Previous and present legislative stalemates in Congress regarding the US debt limit and extension of revenues through taxation do not mean the US government is broken, it means the US government is working exactly as designed, exactly as socially engineered. The social engineers’ plan was made explicit in the Constitution of the United States of America, and, unfortunately, the design was always flawed – it is the US constitution that is broken.

Pleased with hurting others, inhuman

The 8th amendment to the US constitution seems fairly explicit, until we look at the words in more detail:

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

For example, what was “excessive” in the 1780s in monetary terms is minor now (a dollar then was worth far more than a dollar now), and thus what is excessive now has to seen in relative terms. What did the common people who voted for and against the amendments think the words meant?

A Republican’s moondoggle

Boondoggle: Work of little or no value done merely to look busy.
Moondoggle: Establishing a Moon colony – work of little or no value done merely to look busy (and appear inspirational).

When a government introduces financing into the economy, John Maynard Keynes terms it “loan expenditure” – for example, public unemployment benefit is partly financed out of government loans. Keynes noted that the reasoning behind types of loan expenditure often seem unclear:

It is curious how common sense, wriggling for an escape from absurd conclusions, has been apt to reach a preference for wholly “wasteful” forms of loan expenditure rather than for partly wasteful forms, which, because they are not wholly wasteful, tend to be judged on strict “business” principles.
— J M Keynes “Chapter 10. The Marginal Propensity to Consume and the Multiplier (VI)”, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, 1936 [Keynes’s emphasis]

Free speech, free agents, and societal agencies

In 2010, in a case concerning political speech (Citizens United v Federal Election Commission) the US Supreme Court decided by a large majority of 8-1 that “disclaimer and disclosure requirements are valid” for political communications. Clarence Thomas dissented in this portion of the opinion – he worried

I cannot endorse a view of the  First Amendment that subjects citizens of this Nation to death threats, ruined careers, damaged or defaced property, or pre-emptive and threatening warning letters as the price for engaging  in “core political speech, the ‘primary object of First Amend­ment protection.’” [Thomas is quoting from other opinions.]

Tea Party: noisy but careless

The USA’s so-called “founding fathers” are the subject of much reverence, often uncritical, and often confused supporters of the US Constitution in 1787. These founding fathers are an amorphous, undefined large group, and let us concentrate on just two: Samuel Adams, and Thomas Jefferson – all of whom are quoted repeatedly in many a Tea Party publication. The quotations are often less sagacious sayings and more convenient concoctions, shown by the fact that apart from the supposed author, citations are usually missing.

The libertarian regulation of free enterprise

Free enterprise: An economic system of business governed by the laws of supply and demand with minimal government interference, regulation, or subsidy.
Enterprises range from, for example, Lehman Brothers to a soup kitchen to Occupy Wall Street. Some enterprises are highly structured and highly organized; most enterprises have some structure and some organization; other enterprises are little more than collections of individuals, having no structure and no organization. It is worth noting that realist anarchist enterprises have some structure and some organization even though there are those who believe that idealist anarchist enterprises have no structure and no organization.

Monuments of deficient wisdom

James Madison in Federalist 62 (http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa62.htm) thought the House of Representatives was likely to be composed of people who were too fickle, too ignorant, and who needed to be counterbalanced by the sensible Senate:

Using tax revenues to lobby for more tax revenues (and other things)

US taxpayers are going to pay the Boeing Company at least $30B to supply the US military with air tankers, after extensive lobbying by the company. In 2010, US taxpayers paid Boeing $19.5B (3.7% of total US vendor expenditures) for many different things, the same year that Boeing paid lobbyists almost $18M to influence US lawmakers, plus $2.8M in direct contributions to political candidates and PACs.

Conservative movements defend established privilege by government power

The push to take away the common people’s ability to bargain collectively by some temporary conservative majorities in state governments – by any means possible, the use of power for the sake of power – is reminiscent of other excesses.