ThinkProgress Logo

Yglesias

Alexander Hamilton vs The Bill Of Rights

The Bill of Rights wasn’t a part of the original draft of the constitution and proponents of its ratification faced criticism on this grounds. Alexander Hamilton shot back in Federalist 84 that a Bill of Rights would be a terrible idea:

I go further, and affirm, that Bills of Rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretence for claiming that power. They might urge with a semblance of reason, that the Constitution ought not to be charged with the absurdity of providing against the abuse of an authority, which was not given, and that the provision against restraining the liberty of the press afforded a clear implication, that a power to prescribe proper regulations concerning it was intended to be vested in the National Government. This may serve as a specimen of the numerous handles which would be given to the doctrine of constructive powers, by the indulgence of an injudicious zeal for Bills of Rights.

Then of course a few years later a Bill of Rights was adopted. The Federalist is often used for its insights into what the Founders had in mind with their constitution, so what is one to make of this?

— Perhaps since Hamilton specifically warned that a Bill of Rights would imply that everything not forbidden is permitted, and then such a bill was adopted, we ought to infer that everything not forbidden is now prohibited.

— Or perhaps since Hamilton specifically warned against this we should flag this as a particularly wrongheaded form of inference.

— Or perhaps since Hamilton was a practical politician trying to get people to vote his way on a particular issue, we should regard him as just making the best case possible for a deeply flawed Bill Of Rights-less constitution and ignore his rhetorical flourishes.

To me it all seems like a good argument that relying on history and exegesis of centuries-old documents (as opposed to more recent precedents) as the basis of our legal system is a deeply problematic concept.

Politics

GOP Response To Town Hall Backlash: Ban Recording Devices And Censor Citizen Journalists

The premier political story of the past few months has been the Republican plan to dismantle Medicare and the resulting voter backlash. In town halls across the country, voters are expressing their anger at the GOP priorities of ending Medicare, extending tax breaks for the wealthy, and protecting subsidies for oil companies.

ThinkProgress has reported extensively from town halls in Florida, Wisconsin, Arizona, and elsewhere. In addition, citizen journalists have attended town halls and reported about them online, allowing others who couldn’t attend in person to see the event.

However, some congressmen are concerned about what could happen if citizen journalists repost their town halls on the Internet. At least two members of Congress have taken extraordinary measures to shut down the spread of information.

ThinkProgress readers passed along the following photos, taken outside town halls held by Rep. Lou Barletta (R-PA) and Rep. Joe Heck (R-NV). Barletta specifically barred citizen journalists and other non-credentialed media from recording the event, while Heck took a more encompassing approach of “no recording devices” at all:

When Republicans won back the House in 2010, one of their central promises was “to make Congress more transparent.” However, when it comes to their own congressional events, the same standard apparently does not apply.

Indeed, with members like Lou Barletta and Joe Heck barring citizens from recording the events and preventing those who couldn’t attend from seeing what the congressmen had to say, one has to ask: what are they trying to hide?

Update

At his town hall, Heck reportedly faced a rowdy crowd upset about his vote for the Medicare-ending House Republican budget. When pressed, he backed away from the plan a bit, saying, “I’m not saying it’s the best idea, but it’s the only one and the best being proposed now.”

Climate Progress

GOP Cut Crucial Weather Satellites with Fierce Hurricane Season Looming

Our guest blogger is Kiley Kroh, Associate Director for Ocean Communications at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

HurricaneEarlier this year, Congressional Republicans decided accurate weather forecasting and hurricane tracking were services the American people could live without. The GOP-sponsored 2011 spending bill slashed the budget for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, slashing $700 million targeted for an overhaul of the nation’s aging environmental satellite system. NOAA scientists have stated unequivocally the existing satellites will fail and if they aren’t replaced, the agency’s ability to provide life-saving information to the American people will be compromised. Jane Lubchenco, NOAA administrator, told reporters yesterday that the agency’s hurricane outlook last year was “spot-on” and cautioned that “not having satellites and applying their latest capabilities could spell disaster“:

Satellites are a must-have when it comes to detecting and tracking dangerous tropical weather. Not having satellites and their capabilities could spell disaster. NOAA’s satellites underpin hurricane forecasts by providing meteorological data over vast areas where we don’t have other means of information.

Highlighting the critical need for accurate forecasting, yesterday NOAA released their annual hurricane forecast predicting yet another “above-normal” hurricane season. This year, Americans can expect up to 18 named storms and as many as six that could become category five hurricanes. Last year’s hurricane season was one of the busiest on record and that is a trend we can expect to continue. Rising ocean temperatures have been found to increase the frequency and intensity of hurricanes – and this year, ocean temperatures are four degrees higher than normal. These alarming trends aren’t limited to hurricanes – scientists have found that as a result of climate change, killer weather is now the “new normal.”

“Because we have insufficient funds in the ’11 budget, we are likely looking at a period of time a few years down the road where we will not be able to do the severe storm warnings and long-term weather forecasts that people have come to expect today,” Lubchenco said.

Though the GOP got their way this year, the battle over NOAA’s budget is far from over – if funding isn’t restored, the federal government will be limited in its ability to anticipate devastating storms and warn the citizens in harm’s way. Will the GOP be so dismissive of American lives the second time around?

Alyssa

If I’m Getting Left Behind, At Least I’ve Seen The Movie

It’s entirely beside the point to say that the Left Behind movies are not very good, but on a Friday afternoon before the theoretical Rapture, there is room for movies that are so bad they’re kind of delightful. I must say, if the goal is getting the message out, it’s not very strategic to have only Tribulation Force on Netflix Instant, since it means I had to pick up with the story already started, though I guess it makes sense to try to lock in at least some of your DVD sales up until the last minute at the end of days?

All that said, Left Behind: Tribulation Force is not actually the worst movie I’ve watched this year—that would be Catherine Hardwicke’s Red Riding Hood. It’s got its plot holes, for sure. If the Antichrist is going to pull together a united world government, starting at the United Nations is going to be a bad bet, especially since taking over the assets of American financiers doesn’t buy you control the way it used to. The folks behind the Tribulation Force could probably use some training in how to run a counterinsurgency. And I need to check in with my generous host here and the other rising young journodudes to make sure they’re prepared to run a large global news network should Buck Williams not be available for any reason. The revolution will apparently be lead by a young, fast-rising writer who turns 30 right around the Rapture, works for a big media conglomorate, and then jumps to an independent outlet to bring the truth to the people. You do the math.

But really, what strikes me most about the movie is that everyone, no matter their perspective on religion, deserves better movies than this about faith, depictions that go beyond scratchy fake beards on prophets and badly-written professions of belief. One of the things that’s great about Kings is that it has an actual artistic sense of the majesty of the divine, the terror of what it would be like to live without deity you believed in profoundly. If you want to use art to debunk organized religions or faith in general? Well, there are creative stories to tell about the damages and disappointments of religion, or about the power of human experience unmediated by a higher power. This isn’t it.

Politics

16-Year-Old Girl Who Challenged Bachmann To Debate Receiving Threats Of Violence, Rape

Last week, ThinkProgress reported on high school sophomore Amy Myers, who challenged history-challenged Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) to a public debate on the basic facts of the U.S. Constitution. “Rep. Bachmann, the frequent inability you have shown to accurately and factually present even the most basic information about the United States led me” to the challenge, she wrote in an open letter to the tea party doyenne. Unfortunately, it seems some Bachmann fans haven’t taken Myers’ challenge kindly and are now threatening the teenage girl with violence:

After it started getting media attention last weekend, commenters on tea party websites have threatened to publish her home address and some have threatened violence.

The 16-year-old from Cherry Hill says several commenters have called her a “whore.”

Her father, Wayne, says he’s concerned for his daughter’s safety.

The Cherry Hill Courier Press reports that others “threatened violence, including rape” and that “several commenters threatened to publish the Myers’ home address.” Amy’s school has reportedly also received “threatening mail.” The newspaper had planned to do a video interview with the girl, who is running for a student government position, but “a somewhat panicked-sounding Wayne Myers phoned to cancel, citing the alleged threats.” “They’re targeting me just because I’m challenging Bachmann,” Amy said. A Facebook group called “Ask Rep. Michele Bachmann to Debate Amy Myers” already has over 7,000 supporters.

LGBT

Tennessee Lawmakers: Don’t Say ‘Gay’ And Don’t Expect A Job If You Are

(Photo: Jason Pence McBroom)

The state of Tennessee has undertaken a series of actions this week that amount to declaring war on its LGBT citizens. With rollbacks of employment protections and an intent to erase the existence of LGBT people in schools, Tennessee has made some sweeping attacks against people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender.

When Nashville passed a non-discrimination ordinance earlier this year inclusive of sexual orientation and gender identity, the city celebrated the fact it would be a more competitive because many businesses have similar policies. The Tennessee Chamber of Commerce — which includes leadership from Nissan, FedEx, AT&T, Comcast, DuPont, Pfizer, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Caterpillar, KPMG, Whirlpool, Embraer, Alcoa, and United HealthCare — conspired with religious right groups to advocate for a bill invalidating Nashville’s ordinance. Proponents called the bill the “Equal Access to Intrastate Commerce Act,” but opponents more accurately called it the “Special Access to Discriminate” (SAD) Act.

The SAD Act, which has now passed both chambers, dictates that no municipality can extend non-discrimination protections beyond what the state offers. Because Tennessee has no such protections for sexual orientation and gender identity, ordinances like Nashville’s would be nullified by the bill. Passed by a Republican majority in the legislature, the bill verily violates the “Tenther” philosophy popular among conservatives by having the state limit the powers of local government. With Gov. Bill Haslam’s (R) signature, Tennessee will officially deny the right of employment to members of the LGBT community.

Further, the Tennessee Senate today passed the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill. Luckily, the bill did not make it through the necessary House committee in time to be considered during this legislative session. Still, the Senate has sent the message that all young people should be prohibited from learning about the concepts of sexual orientation and gender identity in grades K-8. Awareness of sexual orientation can begin as early as age 11, but it would seem the bill would deny those young people access to any resources. It would also deny teachers any leeway to explain (or perhaps even recognize) same-sex families, even if they are part of the classroom community!

A third anti-gay education bill we reported on yesterday might also be approved before the day is over.

These intentions to stigmatize and discriminate are what contribute to a culture of bullying and disparities in health and economic well-being for LGBT people. Tennessee conservatives can pretend that a “see no gay” approach is “neutral,” but it’s clear these actions will have very real consequences for the very real LGBT people who live there.

(HT: John Aravosis and Joe Sudbay at AMERICAblog Gay for their reporting on the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce.)

Yglesias

Bus Drivers Should Be Paid What It Costs To Hire Competent Bus Drivers

I understand where Duncan Black is coming from in voicing frustration at the idea that bus drivers are the real lucky duckies of the American economy, but I ultimately think this is a deeply wrongheaded way of looking at an issue:

Given all the austerity that’s floating around I get that it’s perhaps not the right moment, but whenever I hear about how good municipal workers have it I want to tell people to go apply for those goddamn jobs. When my local transit authority went on strike all the local yahoos were bitching about the fact that bus drivers, after some seniority, were paid FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. As I pointed out at the time, there were lovely bus driver job listings on the web page and if anybody thinks they have an awesome deal they can go apply for the jobs. Now apparently THIRTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS is too much.

But that’s just the point. If $50,000 is too little to pay to hire a bus driver, then nobody will apply for the jobs and you’ll have to raise pay. And the same goes for $38,000. Federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour which at 40 hours a week and 50 weeks a year comes to I believe $14,500 and there are people doing minimum wage jobs. Maybe they’d like to drive a bus for $30,000 a year and maybe a transit agency near you would like to give them a shot. If it turns out that they can hire cheaper bus drivers, that means some combination of three things. It could mean plowing the money into better bus service, which is good for the bus system’s primarily poor clients. It could mean using the money to reduce fares, which is good for the bus system’s primarily poor clients. Or it could mean lower taxes, which at the state and local level are generally quite regressive.

Now personally I’m not a fan of that last option. I believe in public services, and I certainly believe in mass transit, and I want my city’s transit to be excellent. But it’s extremely difficult to have excellent public services if the debate is polarized between people who want to reduce spending in order to cut taxes, and people who want to view the bus system as a jobs program for bus drivers. When a city is having trouble attracting qualified applicants for bus driver jobs, that’s a sign that the wage is too damn low.

Politics

While Cutting Social Services, Kentucky Gives $43 Million Tax Break To Bible-Themed Amusement Park

A group of private investors and religious organizations is hoping to build a Bible-themed amusement park in Kentucky, complete with a full-size 500-foot-by-75-foot reproduction of Noah’s Ark, a Tower of Babel, and other biblical exhibits on a 800-acre campus outside of Williamstown, KY. Their effort got a shot in the arm yesterday when the state approved $43 million in tax breaks for the project. In addition to the tax incentives, approved unanimously by the state’s tourism board, taxpayers may have to pony up another $11 million to improve a highway interchange near the site.

Naturally, this raises serious questions about the separation of church and state. Americans United for the Separation of Church and State has threatened to sue the state over its promotion of the religious project:

“The state of Kentucky should not be promoting the spread of fundamentalist Christianity or any other religious viewpoint,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Let these folks build their fundamentalist Disneyland without government help.”

Gov. Steve Beshear (D) has been a strong proponent of the $150 million project, even holding a press conference at the Capitol yesterday to tout the state’s involvement. Saying there’s nothing “remotely unconstitutional” about taxpayers incentivizing the Ark park, Beshear said, “The people of Kentucky didn’t elect me governor to debate religion. They elected me governor to create jobs.” Daniel Phelps, a geologist and president of the Kentucky Paleontological Society, called the governor’s support of the proposal “embarrassing for the state.”

Beyond constitutional issues, the tax breaks for an amusement park come at a time when state leaders are asking residents to sacrifice as they cut important social programs. “The state has gone through eight rounds of budget cuts over the past three years,” including cuts to “education at all levels” and a pay freeze for all teachers and state workers. Meanwhile, the state cut funding for Medicaid by shifting enrollees to managed care plans, which often make it more difficult for enrollees to access care while increasing administrative costs by up to 20 percent by adding a new “layer of bureaucracy between the Medicaid Department and providers.”

And while developers say the economic benefits of the Ark park will make up for the cost of the tax breaks — pointing to Kentucky’s recently opened Creation Museumnot all are convinced. Indeed, after lengthy consideration, Tennessee declined to give tax breaks to a similar proposed project, Bible Park USA, concerned that it was not a sound investment of taxpayer dollars.

Perhaps proponents of taxpayers subsidizing Bible theme parks forgot the gospel of Matthew, who wrote, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.”

Alyssa

The U.S.-U.K. Rivalry on Science Fiction

I’ve been meaning to dive into this GeekDad post arguing that British science fiction is superior to its American counterpart for a bit, but it wasn’t until after starting Torchwood this week that I figured out exactly what I meant to say. I want to separate out sci-fi and fantasy, which Donahoo conflates here, because I think there’s actually a difference between British sci-fi and British fantasy, and some of the things Donahoo singles out as strengths, like a tendency towards localism, are much more present in the fantasy shows he names than the science fiction ones. Being Human is phenomenal, but it’s not science fiction. And fantasy and science fiction do similar, but different work.

British science-fiction is very good at using the tropes of the genre to take on issues ranging from the rise of the security state in response to crisis, national control of nuclear weapons, torture, the impact of reality television on society, nuclear power, and cloned organs. It’s an issue-of-the-week approach to procedurals instead of a body-of-the-week one. But I wonder if the reason shows like Doctor Who and Torchwood, even Red Dwarf, are able to do this is because they’re less committed to consistent world-building. That’s not to say that there aren’t long-running and well-developed concepts behind all these series, but the point of Doctor Who isn’t to get to be fully absorbed into Galifrey, but to jump around and explore different worlds and times, just as the institutional culture of Torchwood establishes the parameters for alien investigations. And there’s no real effort to integrate all the phenomena and aliens and technology into a set of coherent rules about how science works, however nebulous.

There are a lot of American shows that operate on these terms, of course, Star Trek chief among them. But a crop of American shows like Battlestar Galactica, the Sarah Connor Chronicles, and Fringe explore smaller numbers of issues through longer arcs. Even The X-Files is centered around one main question, though it’s more procedural. The rules may be loose, but the real work is in figuring out the parameters of the universe you’re watching, how science works, and how humanity and human institutions change in response.

I think it’s more a matter of preference than anything else. I love world-building (particularly if there’s a good juicy fictional religion for me to think about), so I like some of the work American shows do, and I get irritated by things like the lack of clarity about Torchwood’s relationship with the British security agencies and the metropolitan police. But I love the rhythms of procedural as well. And with shows like Doctor Who starting to air simultaneously in the U.S., there’s more opportunity for trans-Atlantic cross-pollination.

Security

Arizona Seeking $50 Million In Public Donations To Build A Border Fence On Its Own

Earlier this year, I reported that a bill was moving around the Arizona legislature what would allow Arizona to build its own border fence without the help of the federal government. Last last month, Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) signed the bill into law. Now, it’s sponsor “is counting on the generosity of Americans” to pay for it. Reuters reports:

“Unfortunately, the state is broke and quite frankly we can’t take on this massive project by ourselves,” says the senator who sponsored the legislation. His initial goal is to raise $50 million in donations. “That would be a good, healthy start.”

If the federal government won’t finish its fence along Arizona’s roughly 370 miles of border then the state will, the Republican says. He and his allies are still trying to figure out the cost of the fence and what it might look like.The senator’s goal is to build a contiguous, solid fence “and have the entire border completely and properly secured.”

Federal estimates put the cost of building a mile of solid border fence at $3 million but Smith says the state will rely on inmate labor and donated supplies to keep costs down

Yet, there’s a reason why the federal government hasn’t finished the border wall. A 2009 GAO report found that the U.S. spent $2.4 billion since 2005 to erect the unfinished 600 miles of new fence along the US-Mexico border. It’ll cost $6.5 billion to maintain over the next 20 years and push most border crossers to more remote and dangerous areas which makes the human smuggling business even more lucrative. Meanwhile, the border wall has served more as a speed bump than a roadblock as migrants and smugglers have always found new and creative ways to get over, through, and around it.

At a Senate hearing on border security in April, El Paso County Judge Veronica Escobar warned that “vilifying immigrants, building expensive, ugly walls, and encouraging hysteria and xenophobia only hurts our border communities, our commerce and the economy of the nation.” Rather than spending money on what Escobar describes as “a rusting monument that makes my community look like a junkyard,” she is hoping for money from the Merida Initiative, comprehensive immigration reform, and better technology and equipment for the international ports of entry.

People are free to waste their money on whatever they want, but Arizona probably won’t be able to turn around and use those donations to build its own fence. The Constitution gives the federal government supreme authority “in the general field of foreign affairs, including power over immigration, naturalization and deportation.”

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up