Wednesday, June 15, 2005
Behavior Standards for Elected Representatives
I googled, with as many key words as I could muster, to determine if there were standards of behavior for elected representatives. I found only two. An elected representative should (1)serve the common or public good, and (2)not use public office for a private purpose. If an elected representative attempts to further his or her religious beliefs, i.e. downplay evolution, stifle sex education, ban stem cell research, etc. does he or she serve the greater common or public good. This is a question of ethics. Does legislation or policies that further religious beliefs serve the greater good? Our national and state constitutions guarantee religious freedom, making religion a private matter for each individual. Does legislation or policies that promote a private purpose, i.e., furtherance of an individual's religious beliefs, constitute unacceptable behavior? The answers for both questions are obvious. Elected representatives from the Christian right should be evaluated by standards of behavior. If they are found lacking, they should be impeached or recalled.
Reading the KC Star
Headline - Kansas catches a revenue windfall
"Kansas lawmakers Tuesday found an additional $172 million that could solve - at least for this year - a Kansas Supreme Court mandate to add money to K-12 education." Lead sentence by Jim Sullinger, KC Star Reporter.
Legislative leaders said the new revenue projection would take the pressure off finding an additional $143 million to satisfy the Supreme Court's requirement for suitable financing of education. Well, now we know that the legislator's aversion isn't to spending money, just to raising taxes to collect more of it.
Reporter Sullinger continues, "The effort to address the court mandate could stall, however, if a large group of Republicans who want to defy the court order prevail." The house Speaker, Doug Mays, says a majority of the 83 Republicans do not want to appropriate any more money for schools. A "Take Back Our Constitution" rally is scheduled for 1 P.M. Saturday at the Capitol to protest "Judicial activism that threatens our democracy." The protesters, mostly Christian Right activists, apparently haven't read the Kansas Constitution, particularly, these provisions:
"The judicial power of this state shall be vested exclusively in one court of justice, which shall be divided into one supreme court, district courts, and such other courts as are provided by law…"
"The supreme court shall have original jurisdiction in proceedings in quo warranto, mandamus, and habeas corpus; and such appellate jurisdiction as may be provided by law.
"The legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state."
"The people have the right to assemble, in a peaceable manner, to consult for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to petition the government, or any department thereof, for the redress of grievances."
or the provisions of state law, i.e.,
K.S.A. 60-2101. The supreme court shall have jurisdiction to correct, modify, vacate or reverse any act, order or judgment of a district court or court of appeals in order to assure that any such act, order or judgment is just, legal and free of abuse. An appeal from a final judgment of a district court in any civil action in which a statute of this state or of the United States has been held unconstitutional shall be taken directly to the supreme court.
Could the state constitution and state law be any clearer?
The Supreme Court is the agency of the state that decides questions of the constitutionality of legislative enactments. The Legislature is responsible for providing "suitable finance of the educational interests of the state". If people have a grievance (i.e. unsuitable finance of the educational interests of the state), and they establish to the satisfaction of a court that the grievance is valid (i.e., schools are inadequately or inappropriately funded), then the Legislature's job is to redress the grievance as directed by the courts. It is not up to a legislator to complain that the Supreme Court is over-stepping its bounds, when clearly, it is not. It is within the province of the courts to determine what is suitable and what is not. The legislature is not the final authority in determining suitability. If, to preserve a given tax structure, a legislator wishes schools would spend less or that other state functions receive less so schools can have more, then it is the legislator's job to propose ways to achieve his or her policy preferences, not to ignore the rule of law. If a legislator can't do his or her job within the legal framework provided, then they should resign from office. A legislature beholden only to itself, in between elections, is the real threat to our democracy.
Headline - Move would boost parents' say in sex classes
"Some state Board of Education members want to make it easier for parents to keep their children out of sex education class."
Lead sentence by David Klepper, KC Star reporter.
Board member John Bacon (Olathe Republican) proposed an "opt-in" system where parents give permission for their children to attend sex education classes. Bacon's self-stated goal is maximum parental control and avoidance of sex issues and activities objectionable to some parents.
Cynthia Akagi, KU health education professor and chair of the health education curriculum panel, said students who need sex education the most might be least likely to get a signed permission slip from their parents.
Although Bacon would not unequivocally deny exposure of his children to sex education ("I may not want my child to be exposed to that.", he appears quite willing to create a burden for parents who have no qualms about sex education.
The KC Star also reported that board members asked if schools could send parents a list of sex education topics. Is the board elected to micro-manage local school districts?
(See my previous entry of May 28, 2005, regarding sex education. It appears this may be the next hot topic for the KSBE. Gee, what does the bible have to say about sex education?)
"Kansas lawmakers Tuesday found an additional $172 million that could solve - at least for this year - a Kansas Supreme Court mandate to add money to K-12 education." Lead sentence by Jim Sullinger, KC Star Reporter.
Legislative leaders said the new revenue projection would take the pressure off finding an additional $143 million to satisfy the Supreme Court's requirement for suitable financing of education. Well, now we know that the legislator's aversion isn't to spending money, just to raising taxes to collect more of it.
Reporter Sullinger continues, "The effort to address the court mandate could stall, however, if a large group of Republicans who want to defy the court order prevail." The house Speaker, Doug Mays, says a majority of the 83 Republicans do not want to appropriate any more money for schools. A "Take Back Our Constitution" rally is scheduled for 1 P.M. Saturday at the Capitol to protest "Judicial activism that threatens our democracy." The protesters, mostly Christian Right activists, apparently haven't read the Kansas Constitution, particularly, these provisions:
"The judicial power of this state shall be vested exclusively in one court of justice, which shall be divided into one supreme court, district courts, and such other courts as are provided by law…"
"The supreme court shall have original jurisdiction in proceedings in quo warranto, mandamus, and habeas corpus; and such appellate jurisdiction as may be provided by law.
"The legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state."
"The people have the right to assemble, in a peaceable manner, to consult for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to petition the government, or any department thereof, for the redress of grievances."
or the provisions of state law, i.e.,
K.S.A. 60-2101. The supreme court shall have jurisdiction to correct, modify, vacate or reverse any act, order or judgment of a district court or court of appeals in order to assure that any such act, order or judgment is just, legal and free of abuse. An appeal from a final judgment of a district court in any civil action in which a statute of this state or of the United States has been held unconstitutional shall be taken directly to the supreme court.
Could the state constitution and state law be any clearer?
The Supreme Court is the agency of the state that decides questions of the constitutionality of legislative enactments. The Legislature is responsible for providing "suitable finance of the educational interests of the state". If people have a grievance (i.e. unsuitable finance of the educational interests of the state), and they establish to the satisfaction of a court that the grievance is valid (i.e., schools are inadequately or inappropriately funded), then the Legislature's job is to redress the grievance as directed by the courts. It is not up to a legislator to complain that the Supreme Court is over-stepping its bounds, when clearly, it is not. It is within the province of the courts to determine what is suitable and what is not. The legislature is not the final authority in determining suitability. If, to preserve a given tax structure, a legislator wishes schools would spend less or that other state functions receive less so schools can have more, then it is the legislator's job to propose ways to achieve his or her policy preferences, not to ignore the rule of law. If a legislator can't do his or her job within the legal framework provided, then they should resign from office. A legislature beholden only to itself, in between elections, is the real threat to our democracy.
Headline - Move would boost parents' say in sex classes
"Some state Board of Education members want to make it easier for parents to keep their children out of sex education class."
Lead sentence by David Klepper, KC Star reporter.
Board member John Bacon (Olathe Republican) proposed an "opt-in" system where parents give permission for their children to attend sex education classes. Bacon's self-stated goal is maximum parental control and avoidance of sex issues and activities objectionable to some parents.
Cynthia Akagi, KU health education professor and chair of the health education curriculum panel, said students who need sex education the most might be least likely to get a signed permission slip from their parents.
Although Bacon would not unequivocally deny exposure of his children to sex education ("I may not want my child to be exposed to that.", he appears quite willing to create a burden for parents who have no qualms about sex education.
The KC Star also reported that board members asked if schools could send parents a list of sex education topics. Is the board elected to micro-manage local school districts?
(See my previous entry of May 28, 2005, regarding sex education. It appears this may be the next hot topic for the KSBE. Gee, what does the bible have to say about sex education?)
Monday, June 06, 2005
Is their life in an atom?
An atom has a nucleus of protons surrounded by electrons. Energy is present. To quote from Louis J. Halle's book, Out of Chaos, P.144:
Atoms combine to form molecules, molecules combine to form cells, and cells combine in ever more elaborate associations to form apple trees or porpoises, apes or orchids. After 3,500 million years of a continuing evolution, they combine to form even such a pitiful phenomenom as the poor scholar who, sitting in his study like Faust, tries to comprehend it all.
Where did life begin? Since life is a manifestation of energy, perhaps life has been around as long as energy has, which I guess is always. Could it be that the question, when did life begin is not relevant? If the cosmos has existed forever, in one form before the "Big Bang" and in another after, how is it that we postulate a creator? When was creation in eternity? Ah, the mystery of it all. Thanks be for scientists.
Atoms combine to form molecules, molecules combine to form cells, and cells combine in ever more elaborate associations to form apple trees or porpoises, apes or orchids. After 3,500 million years of a continuing evolution, they combine to form even such a pitiful phenomenom as the poor scholar who, sitting in his study like Faust, tries to comprehend it all.
Where did life begin? Since life is a manifestation of energy, perhaps life has been around as long as energy has, which I guess is always. Could it be that the question, when did life begin is not relevant? If the cosmos has existed forever, in one form before the "Big Bang" and in another after, how is it that we postulate a creator? When was creation in eternity? Ah, the mystery of it all. Thanks be for scientists.
Louis J. Halle
Louis J. Halle (1910–1998) was a professor at the Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva, besides holding other academic posts. He was a member of the Policy Planning Staff in the U.S. Department of State from 1952 to 1954. He is the author of Men and Nations, The Cold War as History, The Ideological Imagination, Out of Chaos, and other works. He is a naturalist, an historian, a philosopher, and a foreign policy specialist. He is a Renaissance man of the 20th Century. He has been quoted extensively. Below is one of his most renowned quotes.
It is the nature of slavery to render its victims so abject that at last, fearing to be free, they multiply their own chains. You can liberate a freeman, but you cannot liberate a slave.
One of Halle's interest was the colonization of space, which he says has a precedent: the colonization of land. A quote:
Up to 350 million years ago, after 3 billion years of evolution, life was still entirely confined to the waters of the earth, which constituted its only natural habitat. But those waters were becoming increasingly crowded. Looking back from our present vantage point we can see that the spreading life of this time was destined to emerge into the "unnatural" environment of what was, for it, the equivalent of outer space, the dry land and aerial atmosphere that stretched above them.
Halle contends that humankind owes its existence to the colonization of land, and future generations will owe their existence to the colonization of space. Another quote:
One can imagine an intelligent fish of the time revolting at the thought of abandoning its familiar water for the "unnatural" and hostile environment of outer space. But it would have been wrong; for the emergence of life from the water, which we may now regard as destined, added immeasurably to its potentiality for further expansion and development. Indeed, as hindsight now enables us to see, all the hopefulness of life turned on this emergence from a traditional confinement. I surmise that all the hopefulness of life now turns on its emergence from its earthly envelope.
Evolution continues.
It is the nature of slavery to render its victims so abject that at last, fearing to be free, they multiply their own chains. You can liberate a freeman, but you cannot liberate a slave.
One of Halle's interest was the colonization of space, which he says has a precedent: the colonization of land. A quote:
Up to 350 million years ago, after 3 billion years of evolution, life was still entirely confined to the waters of the earth, which constituted its only natural habitat. But those waters were becoming increasingly crowded. Looking back from our present vantage point we can see that the spreading life of this time was destined to emerge into the "unnatural" environment of what was, for it, the equivalent of outer space, the dry land and aerial atmosphere that stretched above them.
Halle contends that humankind owes its existence to the colonization of land, and future generations will owe their existence to the colonization of space. Another quote:
One can imagine an intelligent fish of the time revolting at the thought of abandoning its familiar water for the "unnatural" and hostile environment of outer space. But it would have been wrong; for the emergence of life from the water, which we may now regard as destined, added immeasurably to its potentiality for further expansion and development. Indeed, as hindsight now enables us to see, all the hopefulness of life turned on this emergence from a traditional confinement. I surmise that all the hopefulness of life now turns on its emergence from its earthly envelope.
Evolution continues.
Friday, June 03, 2005
Reading the KC Star - June 3, 2005
Headline - Stay fit, not fat, CDC insists. April report flawed, Director concedes.
"Weighing a little too much might not kill you, but there's nothing healthy about it, the head of the nation's health agency said Thursday."
Lead sentence by Marilynn Marchione, AP Reporter.
The article professed that, "Julie Gerberding, chief of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, distanced herself from an April report that being overweight wasn't so bad." Is this not the same person who distanced herself from the flu vaccine debacle of last year? Are we beginning to see a pattern? One would expect proactive, rather than reactive, oversight from the CDC chief.
By the way, the definitive article ahead of "nation's health agency" should have been caught by the article's editor and changed to the indefinite 'a'. CDC is merely one of several national government health agencies.
Headline - Precious Doe Case: Lessons Learned
"The tipster who provided key information in the Precious Doe murder investigation called police 50 times starting last year, Kansas City police acknowledged Thursday."
- Lead sentence by Christine Vendel, Reporter.
The Precious Doe case was a four year police effort to identify a girl's headless body left in a wooded area near houses. The child's identity was key to solving the crime. The tipster was the murdered girl's great-grandfather who started calling police in July, 2004, after he became suspicious about the girl's whereabouts.
The homicide detective who led the investigation claimed, despite the fact that only three of the tipster's 50 calls were logged and only 1 returned, "Yes, we dropped the ball, but we picked it up and ran it in for the game-winning touchdown." Sounds to me like they fell on their own fumble in their end zone. Final score: Tipster 2, Police 0. Let's give credit where credit is due.
The detective is quoted further: "Is there a way to do it better in the future? That's what I want to look at. I have some ideas in mind." Well, well, well, what a wonderful place for an idea.
A deputy chief suggests having two different detectives talk to tipsters who call multiple times for a "second opinion". Sounds to me like a different mind-set is needed. How often are kids or the elderly dismissed as incompetent solely because of their age?
In defending the police's incompetence, the detective is quoted, in regard to the fact that the tipster's 50 calls were among 1,100 tips policed received in the case, " When you have the number of tips we had, detectives need to prioritize and use their judgement." Sounds good, but how many of those 1,100 tips came in the last 10 months before the case was solved? More than 50? Judgement without intelligence is like soap without water. Sounds to me like selection criteria for police detective should include critical thinking skill and analytical ability. Do you want to bet the latter traits get short shrift when picking who moves up from beat officer to detective? Indeed, let's hope lessons are learned from Precious Doe.
"Weighing a little too much might not kill you, but there's nothing healthy about it, the head of the nation's health agency said Thursday."
Lead sentence by Marilynn Marchione, AP Reporter.
The article professed that, "Julie Gerberding, chief of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, distanced herself from an April report that being overweight wasn't so bad." Is this not the same person who distanced herself from the flu vaccine debacle of last year? Are we beginning to see a pattern? One would expect proactive, rather than reactive, oversight from the CDC chief.
By the way, the definitive article ahead of "nation's health agency" should have been caught by the article's editor and changed to the indefinite 'a'. CDC is merely one of several national government health agencies.
Headline - Precious Doe Case: Lessons Learned
"The tipster who provided key information in the Precious Doe murder investigation called police 50 times starting last year, Kansas City police acknowledged Thursday."
- Lead sentence by Christine Vendel, Reporter.
The Precious Doe case was a four year police effort to identify a girl's headless body left in a wooded area near houses. The child's identity was key to solving the crime. The tipster was the murdered girl's great-grandfather who started calling police in July, 2004, after he became suspicious about the girl's whereabouts.
The homicide detective who led the investigation claimed, despite the fact that only three of the tipster's 50 calls were logged and only 1 returned, "Yes, we dropped the ball, but we picked it up and ran it in for the game-winning touchdown." Sounds to me like they fell on their own fumble in their end zone. Final score: Tipster 2, Police 0. Let's give credit where credit is due.
The detective is quoted further: "Is there a way to do it better in the future? That's what I want to look at. I have some ideas in mind." Well, well, well, what a wonderful place for an idea.
A deputy chief suggests having two different detectives talk to tipsters who call multiple times for a "second opinion". Sounds to me like a different mind-set is needed. How often are kids or the elderly dismissed as incompetent solely because of their age?
In defending the police's incompetence, the detective is quoted, in regard to the fact that the tipster's 50 calls were among 1,100 tips policed received in the case, " When you have the number of tips we had, detectives need to prioritize and use their judgement." Sounds good, but how many of those 1,100 tips came in the last 10 months before the case was solved? More than 50? Judgement without intelligence is like soap without water. Sounds to me like selection criteria for police detective should include critical thinking skill and analytical ability. Do you want to bet the latter traits get short shrift when picking who moves up from beat officer to detective? Indeed, let's hope lessons are learned from Precious Doe.
Hot Button Issues - Not
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) issued a Briefing Paper (June, 2005) titled "Things That Will Happen Before Social Security Faces a Shortfall" The full report is available on the Internet. Use Google to find it.
Because of the verbosity of the report's Executive Summary, rather than quote it, I will restate it:
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that Social Security (SS) will face a shortfall in 2052. Until then, SS is projected to pay all benefits and, after that, 80% of benefits, which will be 30% larger than those received by current retirees. Social Security trustees, of whom 4 of 6 are Bush appointees, say 2042 is the shortfall date.
Many argue that the projected SS shortfall poses a serious problem, or even a crisis. Although defining a 'crisis' is subjective, it is worth noting other issues, receiving less attention than SS, the country will face in the next 47 years. Those who argue the importance of addressing the projected SS shortfall must implicitly believe it is more pressing than other largely neglected issues. Based on current trends, we can expect that, by 2052:
Health care and prescription drug spending measured at the 2005 level of GDP will increase by almost $6,000 per person.
The dollar's value will decline 30% against its trading partners' currencies, adding 2% to the annual rate of inflation and reducing annual consumption by $2,000 per person.
Jail population will reach almost 7,000,000, increasing costs by $310 billion measured at the 2005 level of GDP or $1,000 per person.
The housing bubble will burst destroying more than $5 trillion in wealth created by the run-up in home prices, a loss of $17,000 per person.
China's economy will be twice the size of the U.S. economy and China's defense spending will be four to six times that projected for the U.S. by the CBO.
India's economy will be 1.5 times the size of the U.S. economy and India's defense spending will be three times that projected for the U.S. by the CBO.
Extinction of animal and plant species in the tens of thousands will occur due to resource extraction, pollution and deforestation.
The earth's temperature will rise 1.0 to 4.0 degrees, causing rising sea levels, melting glaciers and advancing tropical diseases into temperate zones.
For the most part, the above trends receive almost no attention from either political leaders or the media. Presumably, they see soaring health care costs or plunging home prices as less consequential than the projected shortfall in SS. Others may assess the importance of these issues relative to SS differently.
The points raised in the CEPR report by Co-Director Dean Baker bring several obvious questions to mind. Should a country destined to be a third-place world power start rethinking its foreign policy sooner rather than later? Should the environment be given more protection, rather than continuing its rapacious exploitation? Should our society find a better solution to its problem members other than sweeping them into a discard bin? Should we continue to amass huge foreign trade imbalances? Good questions all for us to ponder.
Special thanks to CRW for apprising me of the CEPR Briefing Paper.
Because of the verbosity of the report's Executive Summary, rather than quote it, I will restate it:
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that Social Security (SS) will face a shortfall in 2052. Until then, SS is projected to pay all benefits and, after that, 80% of benefits, which will be 30% larger than those received by current retirees. Social Security trustees, of whom 4 of 6 are Bush appointees, say 2042 is the shortfall date.
Many argue that the projected SS shortfall poses a serious problem, or even a crisis. Although defining a 'crisis' is subjective, it is worth noting other issues, receiving less attention than SS, the country will face in the next 47 years. Those who argue the importance of addressing the projected SS shortfall must implicitly believe it is more pressing than other largely neglected issues. Based on current trends, we can expect that, by 2052:
Health care and prescription drug spending measured at the 2005 level of GDP will increase by almost $6,000 per person.
The dollar's value will decline 30% against its trading partners' currencies, adding 2% to the annual rate of inflation and reducing annual consumption by $2,000 per person.
Jail population will reach almost 7,000,000, increasing costs by $310 billion measured at the 2005 level of GDP or $1,000 per person.
The housing bubble will burst destroying more than $5 trillion in wealth created by the run-up in home prices, a loss of $17,000 per person.
China's economy will be twice the size of the U.S. economy and China's defense spending will be four to six times that projected for the U.S. by the CBO.
India's economy will be 1.5 times the size of the U.S. economy and India's defense spending will be three times that projected for the U.S. by the CBO.
Extinction of animal and plant species in the tens of thousands will occur due to resource extraction, pollution and deforestation.
The earth's temperature will rise 1.0 to 4.0 degrees, causing rising sea levels, melting glaciers and advancing tropical diseases into temperate zones.
For the most part, the above trends receive almost no attention from either political leaders or the media. Presumably, they see soaring health care costs or plunging home prices as less consequential than the projected shortfall in SS. Others may assess the importance of these issues relative to SS differently.
The points raised in the CEPR report by Co-Director Dean Baker bring several obvious questions to mind. Should a country destined to be a third-place world power start rethinking its foreign policy sooner rather than later? Should the environment be given more protection, rather than continuing its rapacious exploitation? Should our society find a better solution to its problem members other than sweeping them into a discard bin? Should we continue to amass huge foreign trade imbalances? Good questions all for us to ponder.
Special thanks to CRW for apprising me of the CEPR Briefing Paper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
