Senator Jim Lankford (R, OK) had some thoughts on this in Tuesday’s Wall Street Journal. In the main, he was pushing back against the desire of some to get rid of the filibuster, and he offered instead some other corrective actions that are worth considering. In the main, I agree with him on the filibuster; although I believe that the Progressive-Democrats, when (not if) they next become the majority party in the Senate, will get rid of the filibuster altogether, and for the same reason they got rid of the filibuster on judge nominations other than for the Supreme Court: to stop those uppity Republicans from getting in the way.
That’s what one of the signs held by a protestor says in the lead image of the Wall Street Journal piece on the soon-to-be-fatal plight of baby Charlie Gard. The baby suffers from a rare mitochondrial disorder that usually is fatal. The baby’s doctors insisted this case can only be fatal, and a British court (and a European Union court! Is there any stronger argument for the Brits taking themselves out of the EU?)—because in Great Britain Government gets the final word on babies, not parents—agreed and agreed with the doctors’ further demand that baby Charlie be taken off life support to die.
Or, Charlie Gard and sovereignty.
Charlie Gard is the baby with a rare genetic disease that has damaged his brain, probably fatally and soon. The baby’s parents want to be able to try alternative treatments, or in the alternative, be allowed to bring him home to die there with his parents who love him rather than encumbered by the state’s bureaucrats and representatives, his parents also by-the-way present, in an emptily sterile hospital room.
Is Robert Mueller running a legitimate investigation into allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign or officials in it and Russia?
It isn’t possible for the Mueller investigation to be legitimate with all of these leaks about his investigation and its status and findings that he’s permitting to occur. Or that, Comey-esque, he’s doing himself.
There is a move afoot in Congress to “overhaul” Dodd-Frank, at least to the point of adjusting the threshold size that banks would need to exceed in order to become subject to strict rules on “the capital, mergers, and other business” in which Government will permit these otherwise private enterprises to engage. Under the present threshold of $50 billion or more in assets, some 37 financial institutions are subject to such Government diktat.
The trick will be reaching a compromise on what should come next.
President Trump has promised to roll back the regulatory state, but he’ll need the help of a judiciary that has for decades deferred too eagerly to executive agencies.
Indeed. As the WSJ op-ed at the link says, that’ll require the judiciary to recognize its role in the Federal government and, in particular, its position in the hierarchy.
The proximate matter here is a DC Circuit ruling in US Telecom Association v Federal Communications Commission which used the Chevron Deference doctrine (which holds that the Court should be spring-loaded to uphold an Executive Branch agency rule rather than considering its constitutionality—its legitimacy—de novo on its merits) to find for the FCC. Judge Brett Kavanaugh dissented, and he based his dissent in large part on decrying that deference doctrine. The WSJ asked
Senator Ben Sasse (R, NE) opined in the Friday Wall Street Journal about economic disruptions and how we’re undergoing the largest one in human history. However, he exposed a number of misunderstandings about both disruptions and about proper policy responses the current one (stipulating that it’s the largest one in human history, but its size is irrelevant to the principle involved). For instance:
[W]e don’t have a national-security strategy for the age of cyberwarfare and jihad.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) is upset over his administration’s having been called soft on crime by that impertinent man, Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Sessions, after all, said that New York
continues to see gang murder after gang murder, the predictable consequence of the city’s “soft on crime” stance.
De Blasio’s response? He transferred the target of the remark to the police themselves, pretending to wonder why the AG has
insult[ed] the men and women who do this work every day, who put their lives on the line and who have achieved so much?
…is more than just reducing spending; although that’s a major component of the necessary shrinkage. Shrinking also must include reducing the physical size of the government, reducing its payroll. To that end, the moves by President Donald Trump and OMB Director Mick Mulvaney will prove valuable if Congress will cooperate.
If the advance word leaks about President Donald Trump’s upcoming budget proposal can be believed, it would appear that his swamp-draining and Government downsizing are about to get start. And “news” outlets like CNN are getting their panties bunched over the prospect. This is from this outlet’s piece, tellingly headlined Trump’s plan to dismember government:
It would codify an assault on regulatory regimes over the environment, business and education bequeathed by former President Barack Obama, and attempt to halt decades of steadily growing government reach.