Annoyed, antagonistic, time-traveling Canadian goose population: Considering how successfully a flock of geese were in downing a US Airways commercial airliner, I might attempt to hire the Hamas-like charter members of the flying species to attack and rent asunder* the original version of the Constitution. I would have them travel back in time, whisper into Madison's ear that he should include several more clauses within said documents hallowed textual passages, or at least have him conclude by indicating that it might prove useful, from time to time, to amend the document by either expanding or limiting upon the powers as formerly directed. The potentially rueful act of temporarily hijacking the Constitution would ultimately be appreciated by the American people who will have it returned to them in a few weeks after I can hire an asp to improve upon its contents.
STRANGE CONSTITUTIONAL TEXT WHICH AMBIGUOUSLY THWARTS THE CITIZEN’S RIGHT TO HOLD GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ACCOUNTABLE- PRIMARILY AS IT CONCERNS THE PRIVATE BUSINESS MARKET
This is far from a complete list of the issues I have with the Constitution, often enough on that most common of legal grounds . . . ambiguity. If the supreme court can decide (act) on the true intention of what the founders meant concerning the second amendment in 2008’s landmark gun control law and use the 14th amendment to allow abortions (again, neither of which I have a problem with), then why can’t they prey upon the ambiguously worded clauses below to begin to regulate private businesses and markets to the benefit of the citizen-consumer?
My problem with the Constitution I : Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3- As above: “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” This is a clause, that reads to me, which institutes a congressional regulating authority, either as appointed or provided for by the congress or is the congress itself. If this is not what the text of this clause means then it should be rewritten so we might actually understand it. I was told I was a good reader and not a good Connect Four player, so I decided to spend my free time reading classics and have branched out into reading some of our founding documents. Yeah, yeah, yeah, the spirit of this clause concerns the interaction of commerce between the various states and among the Indian nations. But by “commerce” clearly business dealings are meant and rights conferred upon the states that the founders never decided to enumerate or restrict, such as those types of things I identified in the second half of part 42. Clearly Hamilton was so busy being precise in his contributions to the Federalist Papers that he had no specificity left for the Constitution, which clearly benefits those who are never asked for specifics- which is exactly just what happened with the first portion of the TARP** bailout money- the major financial industry banks and lending institutions were not asked to provide evidence of how they spent the money. That is the worst 'don’t ask, don’t tell' policy since president Clinton signed the aforementioned bill in 1993, providing those interested in being forthright, and not ambiguous, about their sexual proclivities, a reason to be silent. This is roughly 220 years after the revolutionary war, where sodomy would get one dishonorably discharged from the army. No wonder Hamilton, a former aide to General Washington, went into politics.
My problem with the Constitution II: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4- “To establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization, and Uniform Laws on the Subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States.” This should, after the financial industries TARP bailout money was distributed and after the auto bailout money was distributed, be renamed the TBTF Clause (Too Big to Fail Clause). It has been 220 years and apparently we still do not have a uniform Law on the Subject of Bankruptcy. Perhaps it is time to empower an agency that should have been established long ago in Clause 3 above, to develop a Uniform Bankruptcy Law. Citibank is included in the list of beneficiaries of the TARP money and spent $50 million on a corporate jet. (See- Jennifer Gould Keil and Chuck Bennett, newyorkpost.com, January 26, 2008; http://www.nypost.com/seven/01262009/news/nationalnews/just_plane_despicable_152033.htm.) I am glad to see that the money I could have saved or spent on my daughter’s two days a week pre-school in the fall is going to a good cause. Any chance we can have this plane intersect with the flight plans of some geese scheduled to leave Canada anytime soon?
My problem with the Constitution III: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8- “To promote the progress of Science and Useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” How long does the script writer of the “Notorious” (B.I.G.) movie get to claim exclusive rights to his powerful message; I can think of at least six manatees, who are right wing ideologues with learning disabilities, still recovering from the anesthetic used preceding their gastric bypass surgery, smart enough to have written a script about a land-bound sea-cow of B.I.G.’s “talents.” One manatee among them, tired of his kind being crippled economically because of the racist attitudes of those responsible for ensuring that a species among the slowest sea-bound animals do not appear in a claymation or Disney-Pixar movie. Hell, a manatee didn’t even appear in “Finding Nemo” for cripes sake and was beaten out for the role of East Australian Current-sage by that coolest of customers- the sea-turtle, with the accent of a skateboarder. The manatee is so dumb it thinks it can release some of its BMI*** by burping.
My problem with the Constitution IV: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 9- “To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court.” First, what is with the random capitalization in the Constitution? Was Madison really a German? Those ambiguous Germans; you never know where you stand with them until they knock on your door with an artillery shell. Second, if “Congress shall have Power to . . . constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court” why can’t they sanction a regulatory agency with teeth and force the Supreme Court to hear a case that is bound to arise that pits two state governments going at it over the right to whore themselves out to the highest bidding corporation to promise them an ever lessening number of jobs? Corporations seem to me to be like contractors, the more you deal with them, the less satisfied you become. I imagine the state governments as little Lando Calrissians (think “Empire Strikes Back”) when Darth Vader keeps imposing on the CEO of Cloud City, asking for more provisions than Lando had originally included in the agreement, which is not unlike what the taxpayers desired congress would have requested of the financial institutions that were awarded the TARP money. The bailout deal (in the eyes of the citizen-consumer) got worse all the time . . . or it never started out all that great- I forget which.
My problem with the Constitution V: Obviously, over the course of this blog saga, I have demonstrated that I have more than five problems with the Constitution, (see part 19 specifically on campaign finance). I also have a problem with the Constitution protectionists who choose to treat that beloved document like their childhood blanky, justifying a reason to not grow up and embrace the reality that things have changed since 1789. Specifically, and not very substantially, I have addressed term limits in parts 38 and 39, but moreover- Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2, and Article 1, Section 3, Clause 2 are either far too short, or there should be a Clause 2A in each case. It is bad enough that someone can be a life-long politician, considering the amount of damage one person, or a group of them, might do while in office. What is worse is what they might do once they leave, either of their own accord or because the people did not decide in their favor. I don’t have facts or figures to illustrate my point, but read Dobbs’ “War on the Middle Class,” do an internet search, or two, on former politicians as lobbyists**** and be disgusted by the continued lack of a stipulation in the pristine Constitution that would address how long a politician must wait to be employed in what should be that most dreaded of trades, from the standpoint of a member of the middle class, the lobbyist. It is said that the novice criminal becomes a more extreme version of the kind if it socializes with the experienced recidivists while incarcerated. It stands to reason that the politician learns to be a very good lobbyist while in office, preparing himself for life after representation.
Action: Obviously, I am no expert on Constitutional law- seriously- and am perhaps applying abilities to a congress not endowed with them by the founders by a misreading of these old clauses. Many times during the course of my almost two year complaint I have indicated that politicians most fail us, it is a proven fact, when they decide to do nothing rather than when they enact something that is harmful to the citizens who bestow on them the privilege to do good. Yes, congress was given all of these powers (often capitalized “Power” within that founding document), but nowhere do they most overstep their bounds as when they Fail To Act. I may retract this point if the economic "stimulus" bill fails, considering some of its more notorious provisions.
Selected CapitaLiZatiON: It would benefit the Jobless, the Homeless, the state governments and the Consumer, the latter- who actually has money to spend on frivolous things, and on Necessary Costs, to Amend some of the Language found in our rhetorical relic of a Constitution, which has been said to be still breathing, but has been on a political respirator, its ambiguity serving the evils of one party or side more than another, depending on the topic (Roe v. Wade- the 14th Amendment = liberals and 2008 gun control verdict- the 2nd Amendment = conservatives). The Constitution has less life in it, at present, than the Infant Benjamin Button, who was hideous at birth, but grew lively as he un-aged. The reverse is true of our Constitution. It was born glorious (because of its inexplicit language) and the crippling, though necessary separation of powers approach; the fact that it existed at all, its collective simplicity ignored, ushered in a new age of government, so it seemed. Madison never wrote a thing within it that proclaimed we should not second guess its foundation or arrangement. It was a basis, that at the time could not have been more crucial to our country’s origin. Equally necessary at this time, a few alterations; the prom dress does not fit the beauty until her death.
Madison’s Constitution I: In the Federalist No. 46, Madison writes about the advantages the state and federal governments will have in connection with each other. I have often wondered that they don’t each have the advantage over the people who elect the officials who facilitate governmental business on behalf of either or both (legislators, presidents, etc.) Specifically, the end of Madison’s first sentence of this number is: “I proceed to enquire whether the Federal Government or the State Governments will have the advantage with regard to the predilection and support of the people.” Madison anticipates my argument by answering the detractors of the idea of the Constitutional government in his own time: “The adversaries of the Constitution seem to have lost sight of the people altogether in their reasonings on this subject; and to have viewed these different establishments, not only as mutual rivals and enemies, but as uncontrouled by any common superiors in their efforts to usurp the authorities of each other.” Now, I wonder why Madison’s contemporaries, and his country’s own descendants would be concerned about the rights of the people being subjected to the battle waged between the federal and state governments.
Madison’s Constitution II: Further, Madison writes that the detractors “must be told that the ultimate authority . . . resides in the people alone.” So, mindful of part 42’s subtopic of business, which has carried into part 43 above and what I write below about the peculiar inclusion of clauses in bills wherein they have no rightful place, can we have a referendum on clauses that are not homogeneous to the rest of the bill’s contents or stated, or generally understood purpose? If the vast majority of Americans (the people) think that the compromising (I might say compromised) aspects of government, which many will say is the way bills get passed and things get done, is ultimately what is most harmful to the masses, why wouldn’t we want to put a stop to it, if what Madison writes is true? Yeah, there goes my naïveté gene kicking in again. I haven’t felt so ignorant since I watched five minutes of Pet Star the other morning. In those bills I understand that one side’s state, or community, gets its $1.2 million for the renovation of some old historical landmark while the other side gets $1.8 million for a roundabout down their major street, but neither should appear in a bill about health insurance or credit card fraud. Say that the legislators enjoy the taste of a spicy lasagna dish; should the people be the entity handed the responsibility of digesting it?
Madison’s Constitution III: In The Federalist No. 51 Madison writes: “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to controul the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to controul itself.” Go look up the definition of the word oblige, the word denotes a more formal contractual obligation than a beautiful lady’s curtsy of appreciation to a gentleman who has just helped her negotiate a puddle of water.*****
THE FAILURE TO ACT, STIMULUS PLAN AND HOUSE NEGRO(S)
Economic Stimulus Bill: Obama’s fourth major move behind trying to play the heavy in requesting a college football playoff format, giving the death warrant to the Guantanamo Bay detention camp and associated business practices, and waterboarding Joe Biden to consent to not act so drunk all the time, given his embarrassing misstep critical of chief justice Robert’s swearing in mistakes, was to lay before the house of representatives an economic stimulus bill of epic proportions, both in terms of financing ($819 billion, $544 in spending, $275 in tax breaks) and total page count (647 pages). This bill passed the house by a margin of 244-188, without a republican vote in favor of it- talk about house negroes.****** They serve their party and not their country, something the heretofore very noble president Obama has not yet been guilty of. While I have heard and read some particulars about a few of the bill’s major provisions (see below), I find it a little strange that not one republican would objectively find enough merit to vote for it. This type of message sending looks like republican political collusion, some decided upon group expenditure of Obama’s political capital, which he has openly admitted he has. If it is one thing the average politician knows how to do, it is- spend other people’s resources. At a "War and Peace"-like whopping 647 pages, the bill likely suffered the same fate as the famous blog text you are currently reading, in that it was read in its entirety and completely digested by virtually no one excepting its author.
Small steps I: Obama does fancy himself the next in a long line of American messiahs- Washington, Lincoln, John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Notorious B.I.G., and has certainly studied his MLK. In King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, King included two very raw and effective polar opposite approaches to how one might be an advocate of change where the topic of the nation's racial tension was concerned, whether diligently pursued- “the fierce urgency of now,” which King preferred or the other which he dismissed- the “tranquilizing drug of gradualism.” Need the country fall victim to the unrealistic ambitions of someone who thinks like Henry Ford?- “I am looking for a lot of men who have an infinite capacity to not know what can’t be done.”
Small steps II: I had a boss who used to micromanage her underlings, who used to expect that I could have more than one top priority. The connotation of the word “top” indicates that one thing is preferable, is more important, is more valued than any of the others up for consideration. The eye cannot focus on more than one object at a time, and I do not have faith in a president who thinks he can roll up more than two of his sleeves and adequately resolve all of our problems. Obama has many more issues to contend with than did Dr. King- I hope that he learns quickly to lower his expectations a bit. Hopefully his policies will be at least moderate successes in the world and staggeringly successful at home. I do not believe that with such divided attention, both domestic and foreign agendas can be considered overwhelming successes- president Obama must focus.
Small steps III: As intelligent as Obama has been to this point, it is strange that he would choose to express his confidence with a bill of that size with that number of earmarks, and they are earmarks whether democrats wish to call them that or not. For every spending measure which may have been carefully considered is a bizzaro opposite which seems forced into a bill in which it has no rightful place, like some women's love handles into stretch pants that have lost their elasticity. I’m sure getting democrats to believe this would be more difficult than opening a car door while in an automobile that is completely submerged under water. Why not strip the stimulus bill of its social agenda items (STD prevention, global warming research, etc.), and focus on job creation, job loss prevention, money lending agencies, unemployment benefit extension, etc?
Property virgin’s happy day: For every effort made to create jobs or extend unemployment benefits is a lazy far-flung attempt to cost someone more money than necessary or not entirely think through certain measures. There is a provision in the bill which provides a $7,500 tax credit for first-time home homebuyers but nothing for people who otherwise would move excepting two very important reasons- they cannot sell their existing home for any reasonable amount considering the buyer’s market and the state of the economy, and also because their own job is in peril and they are not guaranteed an income to throw at a higher mortgage payment. The existing homeowner cannot risk moving into a bigger house, something that used to happen all the time during periods of economic health, or cannot afford to take out a loan to add onto their existing home, again, for fear that they’ll lose their job and have no way to repay the loan.
Intercourse for homebuyers: On the one hand, I consider how far property values have fallen in the last year and wonder at how easy potential first-time buyers have it already, considering the abundance of affordable houses to choose from, without the concern of having to sell an existing home that will cause them a great financial loss. On the other hand, there is no guarantee that a first time homebuyer’s job is any more safe that an existing homeowner’s. I simply don’t understand how the democrats could think that a provision giving a tax credit to first-time homebuyers and leaving those who already own a home out of the loop is sound economic policy. Where might first-time homebuyers move if existing homeowners are stuck in their current house? . . . Into a foreclosed house, that’s price has already been significantly reduced? For every portion of the bill that could aid our country’s economic condition is another which may weaken it, both in terms of a now popular president’s political capital and in actual capital- $335 million in Sexually Transmitted Disease money? Now, that is diseased.
You can’t please all of the people some of the time: Word is that there are some dissatisfied lawmakers and businesses because of some of the provisions included in the stimulus bill. “The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants more tax relief for businesses; the National Federation of Independent Business wants more help for small businesses; the National Association of Home Builders wants more help for the troubled housing industry. The republicans think that some illegal immigrants will somehow obtain tax rebate money. That scares the ever living hell out of me- (see parts 22-27). Planned Parenthood advocates aren’t pleased, NASA wanted more money, even the Canadian goose population wanted more money to euthenize members of their flock struck by commercial airliners or private jets. I heard the liposuctioned manatee community was complaining about their quick ambulatory release from clinics and wanted gowns that didn’t reveal so much of their back 40. I am going to petition the senate for more pop money so that I might study the effects of a .50 blood to Mt. Dew level.
“The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009” I: Obama had said that he would ban all earmarks from the stimulus bill- (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/06/obama.stimulus/). Considering some of the outlays within the bill, that would seem to have little to do with directly stimulating the economy, that desire apparently has not been adhered to. There clearly are pieces to that bill that don’t fit the puzzle of providing America with a healthy recovery from the present recession. The bill’s introduction reads like this: “Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes." (The red portions should not be included in the bill's introduction.) In short, if you want to stimulate the economy, you do not put provisions in a bill that include money for STD and global warming research unless you are going to provide the jobless 7.2% of the country with a job or pay those with a job that are not getting raises that meet the cost of inflation with wage increases.
ARRA (the name of the bill abbreviated): One of my favorite sections of the bill is Sec. 1107 “Appropriations for Inspectors General.” This is that auditing, and regulating aspect I’ve been calling for (since the first paragraph of part 1 of this topic) that hopefully brings the reality of tracking the uses of the money distributed by the bill into focus. Obama's administration will offer more governmental transparency to the people, even offering a website where people can track expenditures. I would have no idea what is fair market value for those empowered with the duties of the position of inspector general for overseeing any of the various governmental departments to ensure legitimacy and transparency- (Department of Commerce- $10 million, Department of Defense- $15 million, etc.) for a total of $208.5 million. Additionally, Sec. 1108 “ Government Accountability Office—Salaries and Expenses $25,000,000, for oversight activities relating to this Act.” Damn- that oversight better be good.******* Hopefully those people appointed to oversee the departments are trustworthy and will be good at tracking the combined $544 billion that is to be distributed which might be more difficult than herding cats, or gathering up small children when it is time to leave their grandmother’s house, after they have had their snack, and have calories to burn.
The good: “SEC. 1110. USE OF AMERICAN IRON AND STEEL. (a) IN GENERAL.—None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used for a project for the construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair of a public building or public work unless all of the iron and steel used in the project is produced in the United States.” Smart, very, very smart- no more Chinese steel that goes uninspected when it comes into the country. I saw this report on Lou Dobbs in the summer of 2008 and have no citing reference. There are a couple of fine details which also appear in section 1110, but I’ll move on.
The potentially bad: “Sec. 1111. WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS . . . all laborers and mechanics employed by contractors and sub-contractors on projects funded directly by or assisted in whole or in part by and through the Federal Government pursuant to this Act shall be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on projects of a character similar in the locality as determined by the Secretary of Labor . . .” Let’s just make sure that the secretary of labor doesn’t have a brother spearheading a particular project or is not a former contractor with a chip on his shoulder, fudging those prevailing wage numbers- (see part 33). All shall have a fair wage, but not a wage they have not earned above their qualifications, abilities, or performance. This is not socialism, but rather- capitalism-light. We don’t want a guy just delivering a truckload of PVC to get a master plumber’s wage. And we don’t want a guy just looking into the insufficient amount of delivered PVC for a given project to earn what a doctor would earn who specializes in Premature Ventricular Contractions (the most common form of arrhythmia). Neither would surprise me . . . have you read part 33?
More good: Look, everyone who does not stand to benefit by having drastic amounts of money spent on their business sector, could read the bill and find how needless certain provisions included in the stimulus bill might be, and people have been doing so for about a week already, so I’ll stop after this paragraph. Many people could agree that there are needed provisions such as “SEC. 9202. INVESTMENT IN HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY”******** but that are not needed in an “improve the economy bill,” unless you do not want it to get through both legislative branches. Government must simply come to find that if the topic/bill up for discussion has to do with interstate commerce, you cannot include provisions on education, health and human services, defense spending, or goose carcass removal procedures etc. That is obvious. My son just told me how when he touches his hair after having waffle syrup all over his hands, his hands stick to his hair. Very obvious and very cute. An economic stimulus bill not passing through both the house and senate because of a “Sec. 7005 Renewable Electricity Transmission Study” is not obvious, and is definitely not cute. A fairly significant portion of $445 billion is allocated to non economy-building activities, even so judged by a novice like me and experts all over talk radio, and television news programs. And I didn't need to consult their opinion to think so.
Metaphor: I think it is best, if one is to begin an aviary messenger service, to not ask a one-winged carrier pigeon to deliver a directive with one wing in its inaugural flight. That way the political capital it is charged with keeping would be safe and not all spent (i.e. gone) on a law, that if passed, is straightaway despised. I would be concerned that we have no unemployment turnaround, no enhanced economic health, no investment account improvements, no housing industry corrections . . . all we’ll have left is a bill.
Warning: It is possible********* that I will include more quotes from the Constitution in my next offering.
________________________________________
* See part 28, the When Animals Attack equivalent offering of this blog series. In order to get some elements of government to improve I may have to hire the sky rats.
**Troubled Assets Relief Program
*** Body Mass Index.
**** Or re-read parts 19-21, 31, 34, 38 and 39 where at least small mentions have been made about lobbyists.
***** I could go onto Madison’s The Federalist No. 55 and continue along this same argument about the subjection of the people to the desires of the various branches of state and federal governments but I will move along- just consider that the people’s undesirable servitude is possible, at least as possible as a black comedian making it through a set without commenting on any of a number of things for which they despise whitey.
****** A slur that has been hurled in Obama’s direction a few times, including the fairly recent instance by the leader of Al-Qaeda.
******* In fact- much more of that should be covered in- “Subtitle B —Accountability in Recovery Act Spending PART 1—TRANSPARENCY AND OVERSIGHT REQUIREMENTS SEC. 1201. TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS. (a) REQUIREMENTS FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES.” And again I ask, why would you have the foresight to include such specific clauses about accountability and transparency and then decide to include $5.35 billion earmarked to the “Prevention and Wellness Fund” for things like the prevention of Sexually Transmitted Diseases like AIDS/HIV and hepatitis ($335 million)? That is about as counterproductive to the viability of an economic stimulus bill as a pacific walrus who has snacked on bivalve mollusks all its life without ever flossing attending a dental hygienist’s convention and expecting not to get brow-beaten over its lax approach to tusk care.
******** And believe me, I am sickened by how much money is wasted on useless tests, duplication of tests, a pathetic facilitation of the health care services for all who are insured or uninsured. But unless the government wants to go to the next level to ask health care providers and insurers to tone down the amount of money charged for their services, you cannot include those types of provisions in an economic stimulus bill, no matter how much merit they have in their own right. It cheapens how important the need for electronic medical record keeping really is. Wouldn’t Obama have a better chance to get an electronic medical records bill pushed through both houses of the legislature if he could get a well-structured, streamlined bill through which creates or ensures millions of Americans a job? Imagine the soaring approval rating and political capital he would have then. Imagine how confidently he could explain to the people the benefit of having a standardized method for ensuring their safer and less expensive passage through the health care industry.
********* By possible, I mean likely.
No comments:
Post a Comment