State Level Divorce

For John, BLUF:  As geographic areas seem to be more locked into alignment with one political party or another, people are looking for new ways to break the logjam.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Conservatives Want to Secede From Oregon, and Leftists Are ENRAGED

From PJ Media, by Mr Robert Spencer, 5 March 2023, 11:42.

Here is the lede plus one:

The people in eastern Oregon are generally patriotic and sane, and they’re tired of being subjected to the misrule of the far-Left kleptocrats in Salem, who care about them only as a cash cow to fund their socialist pipe dreams.  Accordingly, some have formed the Greater Idaho movement, which actually hopes to detach Oregon’s rural eastern counties from the state and attach them to Idaho.  This movement, as fanciful as it seems, is gathering steam, and that has Democrats enraged.  Whatever else it may be, their rage is revealing.

Idaho Senate Minority Leader Melissa Wintrow, a Democrat, said:  “I’m very pleased this measure has virtually no chance of advancing into reality.  It would be bad for all involved and bad for the country, and I am opposed to it at all levels.”  Bad for the country!  When Leftists who have nothing but contempt for the America-First movement and seem to put America last in all their policy considerations, start declaring that something is “bad for the country,” it must be very good indeed.

While the three Pacific Coast States, Washington, Oregon and California are known for their Progressive views and actions, for being the "Left Coast", it isn't the whole truth.  In fact, the Eastern part of each of the States is actually a much more conservative enclave.

Perhaps the solution to our differences is to allow voters with different political views to band together in their own political entities.  On the other hand, this might benefit the conservatives.  No wonder the left in Oregon are enraged.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Right to Food?

For John, BLUF:  Meanwhile, up in Maine, they are voting on adding a "right" to their constitution.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Residents of this state will vote on constitutional ‘right to food’

From The New York Post, by the Associated Press, 25 October 2021, 3:38pm .

Here is the lede plus two:

Depending on whom you ask, Maine’s proposed “right to food” constitutional amendment would simply put people in charge of how and what they eat — or would endanger animals and food supplies, and turn urban neighborhoods into cattle pastures.

For supporters, the language is short and to the point, ensuring the right to grow vegetables and raise livestock in an era when corporatization threatens local ownership of the food supply, a constitutional experiment that has never been tried in any state.

For opponents and skeptics, it’s deceptively vague, representing a threat to food safety and animal welfare, and could embolden residents to raise cows in their backyards in cities like Portland and Bangor.

This is food for thought.  .

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

If We Don't Believe the Witnesses, Then it is All Good, Right?

For John, BLUF:  There is no proof of Voter Fraud because local State Legislators are claiming the witnessess are all lying.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Michigan Hearing Witnesses Hammer Unhinged Democrats Who Were Accusing Them Of Lying (Video)

Here is the sub-headline:

I signed something saying that if I’m wrong I can go to prison.  Did you?

From The Lid Blog, by Writer Rusty Weiss, 6 Dec 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

Hima Kolanagireddy, one of the testifying witnesses to alleged election fraud before a Michigan House Oversight Committee hearing, dropped the hammer on an unhinged Democrat lawmaker who accused her and other witnesses of being liars.  Other witnesses joined in on the fun with their own smack-down of unhinged Democrats.

Democrat State Rep. Cynthia Johnson, the Minority Vice-Chair on the committee, interrupted proceedings during Kolanagireddy’s testimony to call into question the entire hearing and demand the witnesses be placed under oath.

“You’re allowing people to come in here and lie!” Johnson shouted at Committee Chair, Republican Matt Hall.  “And I know they’re lying!”

Chairman Hall responded, “You’re out of order. I’ve indulged you, and we’re going to move on.”

The Democrats are saying that witnesses to fraud are lying.  I guess that works.  If the witnesses are lying, then there is no fraud.  On the other hand, why would they lie?  What is the record, over the years, of people lying to State Legislators about voter fraud?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Alternative Explanations

For John, BLUF:  Yes, I worry about vote fraud and I especially worry about voting machines with proprietary software.  But there are also other explanations.♠  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Real Kraken: What Really Happened to Donald Trump in the 2020 Election

From PJ Mediaby, Mr J Christian Adams, 2 December 2020.

Here is the lede plus ten:

Eric Holder was a big loser on election night.  He was the guy raising tens of millions of dollars to make America safe for Democratic redistricting.  A red wave turned Holder’s dreams into dust in state legislative races.  State legislatures are where the redistricting action is, and the GOP flipped three chambers red, gaining 192 state house seats and 40 state senate seats nationwide.

Republicans now control both House and Senate chambers in 31 states.  The country is a huge swath of red legislative control with Democrats largely confined to the cultural monoliths on the Pacific coast and urban Northeast.

The red wave extended to the United States House of Representatives, where for now, Republicans have gained nine seats.

But this wasn’t supposed to happen.  The president isn’t supposed to lose when all the Republicans are winning.

Something’s fishy.

Indeed, something profoundly fishy happened in the 2020 election, but it wasn’t the Kraken or Venezuelan communists running remote software when they can’t even make the red lights work in their own country.  Those shiny objects will play out with time and examination of evidence.

What happened in 2020 is something more fundamental and profound.  What happened in 2020 is cultural and systemic, and sadly, generally legal.  Until Republicans, and more importantly Trump supporters, understand what happened to them this year, it will happen again.

Two things happened in 2020.  First, COVID led to a dismantling of state election integrity laws by everyone except the one body with the constitutional prerogative to change the rules of electing the president – the state legislatures.

Second, the Center for Technology and Civic Life happened.

If you are focused on goblins in the voting machines but don’t know anything about the CTCL and what they did to defeat Donald Trump, it’s time to up your game.

The Center for Technology and Civic Life and allied groups are responsible for building an urban get-out-the-vote-machine of the sort that Democrats could only dream up on a bender fueled by jugs of Merlot and all the legalized pot they could smoke.

Then he explains it.

And a very convincing argument it is.  With enough money local election efforts in Democratic strongholds became powerful get out the vote machines and then got out the vote.

Election Offices in cities like Philadelphia, Detroit, Minniapolist and Atlanta are basically part of the Democratic machine.  They just made sure all the citizen who could did indeed vote.  Mail out ballots and ballot harvesting.  Not designed to ensure the integrity of the vote, but, backed by activist judges, designed to create as many ballots as possible.

I just hope that over the next two years state and national legislators turn to and give us a renewed voting system which the vast majority of us can have faith in, one that enfranchises all those eligible and does not disenfranchise or diminish the vote of all legitimate voters.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  The very idea that voting software would be "proprietary" and thus not subject to examination and qualification by local government agencies (Verification and Validation, followed by Accreditation) is disgusting and anti-American.

Will 2020 Resemble 1876?

For John, BLUF:  Democrats cry voter suppression and voter fraud while trying to rig the system to allow subversion of the Constitution and voter fraud.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

How Donald Trump Could Steal the Election

Here is the sub-headline:

The president can’t simply cancel the fall balloting, but his state-level allies could still deliver him a second term.

MARCH 29, 2020 Jeffrey Davis Professor of political science at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County.

Here is the lede plus two:

Even under a normal president, the coronavirus pandemic would present real challenges to the 2020 American election.  Everything about in-person voting could be dangerous.  Waiting in line, touching a voting machine, and working in polling stations all run afoul of social-distancing mandates.  Already, Maryland, Kentucky, Georgia, and Louisiana have postponed their presidential primaries, while Wyoming, New York, and Ohio have altered their voting procedures.  Of course, other democracies face similar problems; the United Kingdom has postponed local elections for one year.

But under President Donald Trump, the possibilities for how the coronavirus could wreak havoc on the election are all the more concerning.  This is not a president who cares about the sanctity of the electoral process.  After all, he has never seemed particularly concerned about Russia’s efforts to manipulate the 2016 outcome (presumably because they were on his behalf), and he was impeached for demanding Ukrainian help in his reelection efforts.

Moreover, this is a president who has repeatedly joked about staying in office past the end of his second term and has frequently embraced authoritarian leaders and policies.  Making matters even worse, the Republican Party more broadly has displayed a willingness to bend the rules for its own political gain, frequently trying to suppress the vote (especially minority votes), purging voter rolls, and implementing aggressive racially based gerrymanders. Americans simply cannot trust that his administration will preserve the integrity of the 2020 election.

The author is Jeff Davis.  Do you think there is any relationship?

Much of this is about the Electoral College and the author manages to paint a number of scenarios without ever mentioning the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.  Is this a joke?  The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact has been designed to circumvent the US Constitution by changing the way Electoral College members vote.  Under the Compact it doesn't matter how your state voted, the Electoral College members are directed to vote based upon who won the majority, or more likely, the plurality of the national popular vote.  The author gives us a lot of background information with little impact, except to stir concern about elections.  For example, the Hayes-Tilden Contest of 1876.♠

Then there is Russiagate, with any Ukraine involvement being denied.  Not mentioned was Chinese playing with the election.  But then the Chinese are the friends of Progressive Democrats.  Just ask the Chinese.  Or maybe Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy.  Or Massachusetts House Representative Seth Moulton.

And, I am not impressed by the idea of massive vote by mail.  I voted by mail for 30 years straight.  It took planning and it took effort on my part, like remembering to punch out the chads and making sure they were gone on my punch ballot, but it was worth it to vote.  However, I worry about relaxing the strict rules to make it happen nation wide.  The recent law suit in Nevada by Mrs Clinton's Lawyer, Marc Elias, a partner at Perkins Coie law firm, suing Nevada over ballot harvesting sets a bad example. 

• "We ask that your office and the office of the Nevada Attorney General immediately announce a suspension of prosecutions under this statute for all elections for which mail-in balloting will be the primary means of voting in the state," Elias said.
• At the same time, Elias called for Nevada to stop throwing out ballots when signatures on voters' ballots appear different from those on voters' registrations, saying "lay election officials have never had the necessary expertise" to make an accurate determination.

No rules on ballot harvesting and no checking of signatures.  All I see is voter fraud.  Thanks, Jeff Davis.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  There was apparently a lot of fraud in the voting, including one of the Carolinas, where 101% of registered voters voted.  Those would be Democrats,  And there was the threat of violence to keep some from voting.  That would be Democrats threatening.

Driving Dangers

For John, BLUF:  Since we are dealing with humans we should not make easy assumptions about how they will react in various situations.  Apparently Winnie the Flu doesn't make them safer drivers.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Fatal crashes on the rise amid pandemic

From CNHI News, by Reporter Christian M. Wade, 4 May 2020.

Here is the lede plus six:

With fewer cars on the road during a state of emergency, one might assume traffic crashes and fatalities would fall dramatically.

Not so, according to the state Department of Transportation, which says fatal auto crashes spiked last month despite substantially less traffic.

At least 28 people died in crashes in April, according to MassDOT's preliminary data.  That's only one more fatality than was reported in April 2019, but transportation officials say the data is "disturbing" considering that traffic is reduced by more than half amid the pandemic.

Highway Administrator Jonathan Gulliver said the data suggests people are speeding and taking unnecessary risks.

"It's a disturbing trend," he said Monday.  "We want people to slow down, pay attention to their surroundings, and drive more cautiously."

Gulliver said the preliminary data shows the fatalities occurred on both state highways and local roads, and they appear to be evenly spread across the state.

At least three pedestrians and one bicyclist were among those killed.

I once saw something that suggested humans have a certain degree of risk acceptance, and as we make autos safer drivers will increase their degree of risk taking.  That seems to be the case here.

The thing is, not only do they make it more dangerous for themselves, but they also make it more dangerous for you.

Hat tip to MASSterList.

Regards  —  Cliff

A Problem Long Time Building

For John, BLUF:  But, at the end of the day, as Mr George Anthes says (on the City Life Show), the responsibility falls mostly on the individual States.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

FLASHBACK:  The Obama-Biden Administration Repeatedly Sought Millions in CDC Cuts

From PJ Media, by Mr Matt Margolis, 30 March 202.

Here is the lede plus three:

Joe Biden has made pandemic preparedness a theme of his attacks on President Trump in recent weeks.

But, according to analysis from Gregg Re at Fox News, the Obama-Biden administration repeatedly sought to cut hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), "seemingly undercutting former Vice President Joe Biden's repeated attacks on the Trump White House for its pandemic preparedness."

The budget requests are available online via the CDC website.

On many occasions, Democrats, including Biden, have falsely accused President Trump of slashing the CDC's budget.  Biden has used these false claims to suggest that he would never even propose similar cuts, let alone make them.  Fact checks from the Associated Press and FactCheck.org both proved the claims made by Biden and others to be wrong, because CDC funding actually increased during the Trump administration.

But, that isn't the whole of the story.  From the Just the News webpage we have an article by Ms Christine Dolan, from 31 March 2020, headlined "How Obama’s failure to resupply respirators in federal stockpile created a 2020 crisis".

The sub-headline is "The stockpile's 100 million supply of N95 respirator masks was never fully replenished after 2009 swine flu pandemic, experts say."

Yes, the current Administration is behind and playing catchup.  Yes, the current Administration should have refilled the national stockpiles immediately.  But, there is only so much that can be done at any one time.  They guessed wrong about the biggest threat, or by actions deterred the biggest threat and thus this came to the fore.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Longe Term Impact of COVIS-19 on Public Education

For John, BLUF:  Because this is the United States and not some other nation, like China or Germany, we have a fair amount of flexibility with regard to schooling our children.  The Coronavirus may wake parents to new possibilities, with ripples in some school systems.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

We Are All Homeschoolers Now

Here is the sub-headline:

COVID-19 will bring about an education reevaluation, if not revolution.

From The American Spectator, by Mr Jeremy Lott, 1 April 2020.

Here is the lede plus five:

What does education look like in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic?

At the K-12 level, you’ve got problems.  At the collegiate level, you’ve got existential problems.

School is out for the year in most locales.  More innovative districts are retooling like crazy and trying to do online classes.  Parents are looking for cheap or free resources to do the job and keep their kids occupied during our enforced isolation.

Now that we’re out the money and have to take care of the kids, reassessment is going to happen.

In short, we are all homeschoolers now.  Expect that to be much more the case next school year, as enough parents who were forced to try it either a) like it and decide to keep this knowledge train rolling or b) don’t believe the schools are safe enough to send their kids back into and so suck it up.

This will create knock-on problems for public schools certainly, and also for private schools.

This is an article that articulates the issues/problems I see coming the end of Summer.  It may be that the economy forces everyone back to work, and thus back to school as babysitter, but it may not work out that way, in which case home schooling may rake off 5 or 10% of the current school student population.  That means reduced budgets, I am guessing, unless school systems become creative in becoming support systems for home schoolers.  And, of course, home schooling isn’t for everyone.

Where I don’t see decreases is in the Technical High Schools.

On the other hand, I had this input from a home schooling parent this AM"

On the local front, the Virginia public schools get money for each child in the county regardless of whether they attend private school, homeschool, or go to public school.  It will be a hard push to get that reformed.  However, the schools in Tennessee, Nashville in particular, may point to how the change happens when parents don't like what is happening.  Prior to the desegregation, there were very few private schools in Nashville.  Between desegregation and forced integration (bussing), lots of parents pulled their kids out of public schools.  In fact, pretty much anyone with the financial ability to do so did so.  After that, those parents never voted for a school bond referendum again.  No new schools were built at least as late as the late 80s (I don't have more recent information) and the schools fell into disrepair, causing even more people to try to flee.

If the current unpleasantness results in more parents teleworking, I could see an increase in on-line and homeschooling education.  The question is would it be enough to force legislative change?  I doubt it, but there is more reason to hope for that today.

Higher education is in a different fix.  Since they collect tuition, every kid that decides to go a different route is a direct hit to their bottom line.  I predict carnage in higher education.  It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Local Responsibility

For John, BLUF:  We have federalism, to split up governmental power.  But, to work everyone must be willing to take responsibility for area.  Federalism means local folks taking responsibility.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

New York Health Commissioner Tells People Not To Follow White House Coronavirus Guidance

From The Daily Caller, Correspondent Anders Hagstrom, 25 March 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

A New York’s health commissioner contradicted coronavirus guidance from the White House on Wendesday, telling people who have been to New York City recently that they should not, in fact, quarantine.

Coronavirus task force member Dr. Deborah Birx on Tuesday urged anyone who had been to New York City recently to self-quarantine, as there was a significant chance they contracted the virus.  NY commissioner Dr. Howard Zucker, however, said that part of the White House’s guidance wasn’t necessary.

“I would not follow that. I believe you should follow the guidance in general, you should social distance,” he said, according to Wall St. Journal reporter Jimmy Vielkind.

So, now we have a city health commissioner showing independence.  Up to now the local authorities have been saying that because the Federal was not out front, breaking trail in this pandemic, they couldn’t go forward.  See, for example, this item from WWL-TV.

New Orleans would have canceled Mardi Gras if feds had taken coronavirus more seriously, Mayor says.

This is about leadership.  This is about being a leader with vision.  This is about looking ahead and having the courage to act upon what you see.  This is about being willing and able to look ahead and around the corner.

While President Trump will take some hits for not being more forceful earlier, that is not an excuse for, cover for, state and local officials not jumping on the situation early on.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Congress, Do Your Job

For John, BLUF:  Part of our problem with immigration is that the Congress is not doing its job of coming up with an immigration policy that they are willing to support and which State and local governments can live with.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Ninth Circuit Judge to Congress:  'Don't leave the table and expect us to clean up.'

Here is the sub-headline:

Public charge rule goes into effect today.

From Center for Immigration Studies, by Mr John Miano, 24 February 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

I previously posted a summary of the Public Charge Rule’s legal saga.  In City & Cnty. of S.F. v. United States Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 944 F.3d 773 (9th Cir. 2019), the Ninth Circuit held that the Public Charge Rule was within the authority of the Department of Homeland Security.

Contrary to the disinformation published in the elite media, the Supreme Court did not affirm this decision -- it merely lifted the injunction against the administration's public charge rule, allowing it to go into effect today while the case continues to proceed through the courts.

Judge Jay Bybee wrote both the court’s opinion and a separate concurring opinion.  The lack of attention the nation’s elite media has paid to the latter should not surprise anyone acquainted with the generally poor quality of reporting.  However, the opinion is worth reading in full (citations omitted):

BYBEE, Circuit Judge, concurring, perplexed and perturbed:

I join the majority opinion in full.  I write separately to emphasize two points — points that I feel must be made, but are better said in a separate opinion.

We as a nation are engaged in titanic struggles over the future of immigration in the United States.  These are difficult conversations.  As a court, the Ninth Circuit in particular has felt the effects of the recent surge in immigration.  As we observed last year with respect to the asylum problem:

We have experienced a staggering increase in asylum applications.  Ten years ago we received about 5,000 applications for asylum.  In fiscal year 2018 we received about 97,000 — nearly a twenty-fold increase.  Our obligation to process these applications in a timely manner, consistent with our statutes and regulations, is overburdened.  The current backlog of asylum cases exceeds 200,000 — about 26% of the immigration courts' total backlog of nearly 800,000 removal cases.  In the meantime, while applications are processed, thousands of applicants who had been detained by immigration authorities have been released into the United States.

Because of our proximity to Mexico, Central America, and East Asia, the brunt of these cases will find their way into our court.  And we are well aware that we are only seeing the matters that find their way into federal court, and that the burdens of the increase in immigration are borne not only by our judges, but by the men and women in the executive branch charged with enforcing the immigration laws.

Our court has faced an unprecedented increase in emergency petitions arising out of the administration's efforts to administer the immigration laws and secure our borders.  These controversial efforts have met with mixed success in our court and the Supreme Court.

My first point is that even as we are embroiled in these controversies, no one should mistake our judgments for our policy preferences.  Whether "the iron fist [or an extended velvet glove] would be the preferable policy.  ... our thoughts on the efficacy of the one approach versus the other are beside the point, since our business is not to judge the wisdom of the National Government's policy."

So, where is the Congress on this?  I hear a lot of whinging about the policy, but I don't see new legislation coming out that compromises Democrat and Republican Party views to give us a consensus position we can all reasonably support.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Reconfiguring the States (or the Senate)

For John, BLUF:  There are various plans out there for reforming how we organize the Legislative Branch (Article I) of the Federal Government.  The Supreme Court has applied one-man-one-vote to the States, but cannot apply the rule to the US Senate.  The items below could give more power to rural states, while concentrating the power of urban area states.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Secession fever spikes in five states as conservatives seek to escape blue rule

From The Washington Times, by Ms Valerie Richardson, 19 February 2020.

Here is the lede plus four:

You’ve got Oregonians seeking to cascade into Idaho, Virginians who identify as West Virginians, Illinoians fighting to escape Chicago, Californians dreaming of starting a 51st state, and New Yorkers who think three states are better than one.

Separation fever is sweeping the nation as quixotic but tenacious bands of frustrated rural dwellers, suburbanites and conservatives seek to break free from states with legislatures increasingly controlled by liberal big cities and metropolitan strongholds.

“Oregon is controlled by the northwest portion of the state, Portland to Eugene.  That’s urban land, and their decisions are not really representing rural Oregon,” said Mike McCarter, president of Move Oregon’s Border for a Greater Idaho.  “They have their agenda and they’re moving forward with it, and they’re not listening to us.”

In Virginia, the newly elected Democratic majority’s progressive legislation on issues such as gun rights has spurred “Vexit,” or “Virginia exit,” a campaign to merge right-tilting rural counties into neighboring West Virginia that organizers say has the potential to catch fire nationwide.

“To be honest, if this works — you’ve got a lot of red areas in this country that are totally dominated by a blue metropolis,” said Vexit2020 leader Rick Boyer, a former member of the Campbell County Board of Supervisors.  “If it works in Virginia, there’s no reason it can’t reshape the political map.”

Change is good, but we need to think out the long term implications.  The future is not a straight line from here to there.  Rather it is about the futurable.  What are all the ways this could likely play out?  Fate does not promise just one way, but various ways.  Various branches and sequels must be considered.  You can plan one thing, but new circumstances, perhaps created by your idea, may cause it to veer off course.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

ICE Goes Looking

For John, BLUF:  Sanctuary Cities are a growing phenomenon across the fruited plain, although mainly on the coasts.  Now the Federal Government is deploying more ICE Agents to metropolitan areas to round up suspected illegal immigrants.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

BOOM:  ICE Throws Down the Gauntlet, Arresting Two Illegal Aliens in a California Courthouse

From PJ Media, by Mr Rick Moran, 20 February 2020.

Here is the lede plus seven:

ICE agents arrested two illegal aliens in a courthouse in Northern California, defying a state law that says they needed a warrant from a judge to do so.

ICE flouted a new state law that requires the warrant before arresting an illegal on courthouse grounds.  After the predictable outcry from courthouse officials and others, ICE calmly gave their rationale.

Los Angeles Times:

ICE said in a statement that California’s law doesn’t supersede federal law and “will not govern the conduct of federal officers acting pursuant to duly enacted laws passed by Congress that provide the authority to make administrative arrests of removable aliens inside the United States.”

“Our officers will not have their hands tied by sanctuary rules when enforcing immigration laws to remove criminal aliens from our communities,” David Jennings, ICE’s field office director in San Francisco, said in the statement.

In other words, ICE is telling critics to go climb a tree.

ICE's actions follow the deployment of Customs and Border Patrol agents to sanctuary cities and states.  The state government of California bitterly criticized that move, but find themselves unable to do anything to prevent it.  The Department of Homeland Security, the agency under which ICE and CBP operate, can send its personnel anywhere they see fit to send them.

There is a definite tug of war between the Federal Government and some of the States and some of the cities.  It represents the lack of consensus across the country.♠  Per haps the November elections will help to resolve these differences.

To move forward, we are going to have to find a compromise with regard to our immigration policy.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  This raises the issue of providing more Federal political power to the more populous states, perhaps by giving them more US Senators.  This would change the balance of power and would reduce most of the States, as a group, to to a minority position.  Ten States are half the population (167,707,819, out of 331,875,705, per the 2010 Census).  The nation would be run by California, Texas, Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina and Michigan, when they were in agreement.  Picture that on the map.  A change in how we distribute Senators would probably require a new Constitutional Convention, with the danger that many states would drop out at the Convention.  This last Wednesday, The Washington Times had this article:  "Secession fever spikes in five states as conservatives seek to escape blue rule".

The Church Speaks Up

For John, BLUF:  Does the church have the right, does it have the responsibility, to call out members who are advocating for sin?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Bishop Paprocki bars pro-abortion Illinois lawmakers from Holy Communion

From The Boston Pilot! by the CNA Staff, 6 June 2019.

Here is the lede plus six:

Springfield, Ill., Jun 6, 2019 CNA.- The Bishop of Springfield, Illinois, has decreed that state legislative leaders may not be admitted to Holy Communion within his diocese, because of their work to pass the state Reproductive Health Act.  The bishop also directed the Catholic legislators who have voted legislation promoting abortion should not present themselves to receive Holy Communion until they have first gone to confession.

“In accord with canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law...Illinois Senate President John Cullerton and Speaker of the House Michael J. Madigan, who facilitated the passage of the Act Concerning Abortion of 2017 (House Bill 40) as well as the Reproductive Health Act of 2019 (Senate Bill 25), are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois because they have obstinately persisted in promoting the abominable crime and very grave sin of abortion as evidenced by the influence they exerted in their leadership roles and their repeated votes and obdurate public support for abortion rights over an extended period of time,” Bishop Thomas Paprocki wrote in a June 2 decree.

“These persons may be readmitted to Holy Communion only after they have truly repented these grave sins and furthermore have made suitable reparation for damages and scandal, or at least have seriously promised to do so, as determined in my judgment or in the judgment of their diocesan bishop in consultation with me or my successor,” the bishop added.

Illinois’ Reproductive Health Act was passed by the state’s House and Senate just days ago, and observers credited the advocacy of Cullerton and Madigan with helping to secure passage.  It is expected to be signed by Illinois’ Gov. J.B. Pritzker.

The bill declares abortion to be a “fundamental right” in the state and would remove regulations on abortion clinics and doctors.

Among the provisions that the bill would remove are regulations for abortion clinics, required waiting periods to obtain an abortion, and a ban on partial-birth abortion.  In addition, it would lift criminal penalties for performing abortions and would prevent any further state regulation of abortion.

The legislation would require all private health insurance plans to cover elective abortions, and eliminate reporting requirements as well as regulations requiring the investigation of maternal deaths due to abortio.

How tough is too tough?  My Middle Brother gave me a lot of verbiage to say this was too much, but, he didn't cough up a way for Holy Mother the Church to respond to people, people in civil authority, who trashed Church Teachings, thus leading Church Members to believe that what is wrong is OK.  Or, worse, giving cover to people who know what is right but want to do what is wrong, because they are weak.

I am not advocating for Congress to abolish the right to abortion.  Given the plurality of our nation, Roe v Wade seems reasonable.  I do think those who wish for abortion up to, or even past the point of birth should be asked to acknowledge that the rights of one human being are being sacrifice for the rights of another (the right to life of one sacrificed for the right to happiness for another).

Regards  —  Cliff

Wyoming Statehood Remembered

For John, BLUF:  If you believe in something you have to take a stand.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

This is a post, at The InstaPundit, by Law Professor Gail Heriot, 10 July 2018.

Here is the Post:

ON THIS DAY IN 1890, WYOMING BECAME A STATE:&Nbsp; There’s an interesting backstory here:  The Wyoming Territory’s constitution had been the first to guarantee women the right to vote.  But when Wyoming initially applied for statehood, this created controversy.  Fearing that women in long-established states would be emboldened by Wyoming’s example, some Members of Congress initially insisted that Wyoming withdraw women’s right to vote.  But the Wyoming legislature stood its ground and cabled back to Congressional leaders, “We will remain out of the Union one hundred years rather than come in without the women.”

Congress eventually relented, and before the turn of the century, there were four women’s suffrage states–Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and Idaho.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

State Government and the Recent Federal Tax Cut

For John, BLUF:  You change the tax structure and you change incentives.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Which State Will Be the First to Suffer Fiscal Collapse?

From the Blog of Mr Dan Mitchell, billed as International Liberty:  Restraining Government in America and Around the World, from 5 April 2018.

Partly this is about the recent Federal Tax Bill and the tendency of high earning people to move to escape state taxes, which are now not deductible.  On the other hand, many people can't move to Florida and do their work out of their Living Room.

Here is the author's informal pole on state fiscal collapse, results from just before 1300 on Thursday, EST:

Illinois — 61.56%

California — 17.58%

Connecticut — 9.59%

New Jersey — 7.06%

New York — 1.77%

Oregon — 0.67%

Alaska — 0.5%

Vermont — 0.5%

Kentucky — 0.42%

Massachusetts — 0.34%

Illinois at the top is no surprise, and I can see why folks might pick California next.  Connecticut, New Jersey and Kentucky make sense.  Our Commonwealth, Massachusetts is voted least likely, but still garners some votes.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Follow the Law

For John, BLUF:  Less laws and more clarity.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Here's a novel idea: If you don't like Jeff Session's marijuana decision, change the law

This is basic civics stuff, but it seems to have eluded a lot of legislators who decided to fire off tweets instead of make real change.

From USA Today, by Law Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds (The InstaPundit, 8 January 2018.

Here is the lede plus three:

Article I, Section 1 of the United States Constitution provides that:  “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

Legislative powers are the power to make and repeal laws.  Those powers are not vested in the executive branch, which includes the president and, more relevant to this discussion, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who recently announced that he will no longer follow an Obama-era policy of not enforcing federal laws against marijuana.  Some states have repealed their own laws against marijuana, but marijuana remains illegal under federal law, and will stay that way unless Congress legislates otherwise.

This is basic civics stuff, but it seems to have eluded a lot of people.  People such as Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., who exploded in response to Sessions’ announcement, saying that marijuana laws should be left to the states, and who vowed to “take all steps necessary” to secure a reversal of Sessions’ announcement, including holding up nominees to the Department of Justice.

Many other members of Congress — from Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., were also critical.  But if you want to leave marijuana decisions up to the states, there’s an easy way to do that:  Repeal the federal marijuana law.  Legislate, which is supposed to be the job of ... legislators. Like Gardner, Sanders or Lieu.

Yes, this is what happens when public schools don't teach civics.  When the students grow up and get elected to Congress those civics deprived students don't know their responsibilities as legislators.

And, by the way, the same goes for the treatment of illegal immigrants.  Rather than having state-level Democrats acting like the second coming of Vice President John C Calhoun, Federal Legislators should take up the issue of immigration, should legislate and should then hold hearings on what the Executive Branch is doing to enforce the laws just passed by the Congress.

At this point it seems rather hit or miss.  How Federal Laws against marijuana are enforced depends on the Federal Attorney in the area, in our case, US Attorney for Massachusetts Andrew E. Lelling. Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

UPDATE:  And this just in from The Boston Clobe, US attorney throws future of legal pot in Mass. into doubt

Regards  —  Cliff

The South Will Rise Again

For John, BLUF:  In Democrat run cities.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Judge says Sessions can’t deny grant money for sanctuary cities

From The Boston Globe and the Associated Press, today, 15 September 2017.

The lede;

CHICAGO — Attorney General Jeff Sessions can’t follow through — at least for now — with his threat to withhold public safety grant money to Chicago and other so-called sanctuary cities for refusing to impose new tough immigration policies, a judge ruled Friday in a legal defeat for the Trump administration.

Remember, back in your history lessons in school, how all those Democratic Party controlled Southern States used to defy the Federal Government?♠  It is the same old game, except it has shifted from Democratic Politician controlled states to Democratic Party controlled cities and now they are suing in Federal Courts where they hope to get favorable rulings.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  One time President Eisenhower Federalized the Arkansas National Guard to turn them from defying the order of a Federal Judge to enforcing it.

Gun Free Zones and Risk

For John, BLUF:  So, if you infringe my rights it is at your risk if anything goes wrong.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

"Real Gun Sense: Tennessee Makes Proprietors Of Gun-Free Zones Responsible For Injury While Disarmed"

This is a Red State post from late last month, by Mr Brandon Morse

My note is that it is only if you are a licensed gun owner.  Free riders don't qualify.

This will be interesting to look at in five years.

Regards  —  Cliff

A State Government for the Population

For John, BLUF:  New programs cost more money, unless old ones are ended.♠  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

This is from 3 Feb 2016 and is a lot of graphs of numbers (population and State Government Budgets), but it suggests that there is some rational relationship between those two sets of numbers, with some exceptions.

The article, from the blog of Mr Mischa Fisher, is "State Budgets and Populations (a.k.a Why Illinois is in the shape it's in)".

From the various presentations of the data in the Blog Post I would say that we in Massachusetts are in pretty good shape.

On the other hand, one wonders if there is the same relationship if we talk income vs state budget?  That is to say, on average residents of Massachusetts have a median household income of $65,401 (2008), while for those in Illinois it is $54,124 and those in Arkansas it is $40,531.  So, even accounting for the higher standard of living in Massachusetts, are we taxing less than we should?♥

And, there is the belief that above a certain total of taxation an economy begins to flag.  And people go to the information market, which can't be taxed.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Like, if we got a handle on homelessness it would not cost us millions to put the homeless in motels.
♥  Taxachusetts is a misnomer.  Tax wise we are in the middle of the pack.

Those Refugees

For John, BLUF:  It is about helping those being threatened with death.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

This whole refugee issue has the nation talking.♠  At the Blog Duck of Minerva Mr Josh Busby of Texas takes one approach—"Get a Grip America:  Stop the Anti-Refugee Hysteria".

On the other hand, at The Washington Post their writer for "The Fix", Mr Chris Cillizza, says "You might not like Republicans calling for a ban on refugees. But it’s smart politics."

Then there is the President employing ridicule to deal with Republican reluctance regarding refugees.  From The Daily Caller:

President Barack Obama said Tuesday in Manila that those who want to halt the acceptance of Syrian refugees are feeding “the ISIL narrative,” “fearful of widows” and “worried about three-year-old orphans.”

Of course the problem is that the vast majority of refugees, at least those going to Europe, are unaccompanied young men.  If you were doing some crude profile of Daesh terrorists wouldn't you think first of unaccompanied young men?  I would.  The President's comments were just sarcasm in the place of intellectual argument.

Also the President was dismissive of those who said we should give priority to Christians in Syria.  Rhetoric that misses the situation on the ground in Syria.♥.

So, my position is that:

1. Someone (The President?) needs to talk to us seriously about the whole displaced person issue, all 60 million of them.
2. The President, or people within his Administration, need to give us a true understanding of how Daesh is able to move terrorists into the US regardless of refugees and how there is ongoing recruitment of fighters already in the United States, including US Citizens.
3. The US Congress needs to hold hearings on this, with the goal of providing the funds needed to help refugees stay in or near their tribal areas.
4. The President needs to join US military forces with those of other nations to provide protection for those who are being displaced.
5. The Department of State needs to privately and publicly make distinctions between refugees♦ and economic migrants.  Not everyone with a desire to leave their nation is a refugee fleeing oppression and chaos.
6. The President needs to make clear that the view of the United States is that those who elect to come to the United States are doing so with the understanding that we expect them to become Americans and not to build a replica of their homeland.  While we can allow these kinds of isolated communities on a limited basis, are are a melting pot nation, and while we value our diversity, we expect all to be committed to the principles of our Declaration of Independence and adherence to our Constitution.
7. The Federal Government needs to ensure that State and local Governments know what is happening with refugees and to be open and transparent about it.
8. State Governors need to step up take responsibility for settling refugees and encouraging their People to make this settling work.
9. We, the People, need to keep our hearts open and welcome refugees from oppression.  We need to be helping these new people become part of America.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Which I discussed here.
♥  The President misses the point that at this point Daesh is particularly going after religious minorities in their areas, Christians and Druze and the Yazidis.
♦  Per Wikipedia.  A refugee, according to the Geneva Convention on Refugees[1][2] is a person who is outside their country of citizenship because they have well-founded grounds for fear of persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, and is unable to obtain sanctuary from their home country or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country;[1][2] or in the case of not having a nationality and being outside their country of former habitual residence as a result of such event, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to their country of former habitual residence.