Category Archives: ethics

Federal Money for Local Communities?

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what Congressman Tim Ryan (D, OH) wants—and not just for States; he wants Federal dollars for local communities within the States.

I talk to my mayors every day, township trustees, they’re in a world of pain here. There’s no money coming in. There’s gonna be huge layoffs at the local level.
I think that [McConnell’s plan is] a strategy to let these states go bankrupt so that they can renegotiate the pensions and…renegotiate the contracts for the police and fire and get the wages down[.]

This is ignorant on a number of levels. On one level, Ryan obviously slept through his junior high school civics class. In our federal democracy structure, those mayors, township trustees, et al., lead the governments of communities of the State in which they’re resident, not communities under the jurisdiction of the Federal government. John Jay wanted the States to be nothing more than political bodies established for the purpose of enforcing Federal diktats, but fortunately, he lost that debate at our Constitutional Convention all those years ago.

It’s the State governments that are responsible for the communities within them.  Those mayors and trustees should be looking to their State governments for fiscal help, and it’s solely on those State governments to provide it, or to say “No, clean up your spending.”

On another level, Ryan slept deeply through those civics classes. States cannot go bankrupt, not as long as they have taxing authority. They have no need of Federal dollars.  Beyond that, the States that are in fiscal trouble need first to get their budgets in order, to cut their spending to fit within their revenues—to, among other things, fix their irresponsibly profligate public pension programs rather than demand money from the citizens of all the other States—which is what Federal monies are—to pay for their own foolishness.

On yet another level, there’s Ryan’s threat of huge layoffs at the local level. That would simply expose the government bloat that exists as much at the local level as it does at the State and Federal level. Most of those folks would be better off working in the private economy and so would those communities. The police and firemen about whom Ryan shed his crocodile tears would be better off, too: the payroll funds allocated to that bloated work force could be reallocated to the police and fire departments—and at no extra cost to the rest of the citizens of those local communities.

Judicial Abuse

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal has laid out the present abuse. DC Circuit nominee Justin Walker is up for confirmation hearings this week.  Now recall how the so-called watchdog of judicial ethics, the Codes of Conduct Committee tried to get potential judges disqualified from their nominations for the apostasy of belonging to the Federalist Society. There was considerable blowback over the Committee’s draft rule that would have affected the bar: 210 appellate and district judges signed a letter to the Committee demurring from the rule.

One of those letter signers was…Justin Walker. Now the Left, including particularly Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D, RI), who is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wants to use that letter as the reason to disqualify Walker from the DC Circuit confirmation.

Note, now, that the Committee’s draft rule remains in draft; it has not been withdrawn from consideration.  At this point, the WSJ exposed a surprising naivete.

Chief Justice John Roberts is the official head of the Judicial Conference, and he should call Judge [Codes of Conduct Committee Chairman Ralph] Erickson and tell him to kill this draft forthwith.

Roberts has shown himself too timid and too mindful of his image in the press to make such a call.

On the other hand, his call isn’t strictly necessary: the Codes of Conduct Committee is a committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States. The latter, in turn, is a creation of the Congress.

It would be straightforward for an honest Congress to rein in the Code of Conduct Committee, to disband it altogether, to alter the Judicial Conference, to disband that body altogether, or to otherwise reform the Judicial Conference so as to eliminate abuses like those of its subordinate committees.

On the third hand, reform is especially difficult with the present House.

Look for an especially vitriolic “hearing” by the Judiciary Committee’s Progressive-Democrat members.

Control of the Internet

Posted on by
Reply

ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the American manager of Internet domains and Domain Name Service under contract to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, the globally agreed agency responsible for the global Internet. It had been about to sell the Internet domain .org to a private enterprise.

The .org registry is a database of more than ten million websites managed since 2003 by the nonprofit Internet Society. The group decided .org could be better served by a company that could invest returns back into the service.

The sale would have been for $1.1 billion, which ICANN could have put to good use, too.

No more.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra instructed ICANN just two and a half weeks ago that it “must” refuse the sale. ICANN’s acceptance of Bacerra’s diktat was prompt.

As the WSJ put it,

Some readers may remember when Senator Ted Cruz [R, TX] in 2016 warned that ICANN would come under the influence of authoritarian countries once it became independent of the US government.

With its abject surrender, ICANN has placed itself under the influence of [the] authoritarian California Attorney General. The authority consciously ceded to this far left Attorney General sends an ugly message to other companies headquartered, or otherwise operating, in California. Look for further bullying of those companies whose business imperatives clash with Bacerra’s whims. Such businesses might want to think again about their locations.

Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton’s Emails

Posted on by
Reply

Progressive-Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez can see no daylight between Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden’s documents and ex-Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails.

This is like the Hillary emails because there was nothing there.

Perez is right that the two are alike. Clinton, with the help of her allies in and out of government, covered up her government-business emails that she had on her personal, unsecured server. Biden, with the help of his allies in and out of government, at Party headquarters, and at the University of Delaware, is covering up a significant fraction of his documents during the present Tara Reade case.

[W]hen you ask the University of Delaware to take a look at something, you’re asking them to look for something that doesn’t exist.

That’s easy enough to show. Allow those UD documents to be searched for materials related to Reade. Let those documents then be perused carefully for information related to her charge and Biden’s claim to the contrary.

This could be settled in a couple of days.  If there’s nothing there, there’ll be nothing found.

We know what frightens Clinton so much. Of what are Biden, Perez, and Party so afraid?

Another Clue

Posted on by
Reply

…into the machinations of the “liberal” wing of the Supreme Court.

The Court is going to hear oral arguments on 10 cases that the Wuhan Virus situation had previously forced the Court to postpone. The arguments will be done by teleconference. The structure of the oral arguments will be…structured…during the teleconferances.

The court is also jettisoning its unstructured process for questioning the lawyers before them. Instead of jumping in at will, the justices will speak in order by seniority, beginning with Chief Justice John Roberts, moving on to Justice Clarence Thomas—a moment that may hold some suspense, as he can go years without speaking at oral argument—and so on to the newest justice, Brett Kavanaugh.

Here’s the kicker from that more formalized structure:

The format could pose challenges for Justice Elena Kagan and other junior members who sometimes seek to shape the debate by posing questions early.

Shape the debate.  Because Kagan and her fellows aren’t interested in dispassionately hearing argument on the case before them and then, with equal dispassion, ruling on the matter before them. No, they’re at war with one or the other side and must shape the battlefield in order to achieve their…victory.

What a shameful thing for a Justice, who’s supposed to be objective and unbiased—sworn, in fact, to faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent—to do.