Month: June 2015

Everybody bitches about Obama and Carter, but if you want the two worst Presidents of the 20th Century you go to Wilson and FDR.  They “won” wars we should not have had to fight.  And they were contemptuous of the Constitution.

I could be off on this, but I believe no two term Presidency has ever been as thoroughly repudiated as Wilson’s.  Harding’s 1920 landslide, and the return to normalcy, were great moments in 20th Century American history.  The Harding-Coolidge years were some of the best we’ve ever had.

96 years later we’re going to do it again  — Obama is really another Wilson, in some ways.  Who’s our Harding?  We don’t know yet, but the good news is that Harding, and later Coolidge, were in no way remarkable men.  They weren’t Reagan, or JFK, but normal, mainstream conservative Republicans.  Looking at this field of ours, I look in vain  — as I have for 27 years  — for another Gipper.  None to be seen.  But we can get by with another Harding, so no worries, mate.

I’d be ready, right now,  to predict a win, except for events.  Shit happens.  As I look ahead to what is likely to happen I see a lot of things that will, on net, help the cause.  I don’t see anything coming that would hurt it.

America is exceptional.  Looking back on our history, the whole thing is so improbable, and awesome, that you’re tempted to ascribe some of our good fortune to divine intervention.  That’s a mistake.  We are not God’s chosen people.

We are a self chosen people.

Some recent polls show we’re becoming more liberal on social issues, and this has made some liberal political columnists happy.  Youth will be served, and young Americans are not social conservatives.  Santorum, Huckabee  and other traditionalists who appeal principally to the Christian right turn most young voters off.  So is this a problem for Republicans?

Nope.  The essence of federalism is tolerance.  The people of South Dakota are strongly against abortion.  California is the reverse opposite.  Colorado and other states want legalized marijuana.  Most states probably don’t.  Gay marriage flies in some parts of the country, not in others.  True American conservatives  — those faithful to the federalist impulse at the heart of the Constitution  — don’t have a problem with any of this.  Let the states decide.  It’s that simple, and it appeals to the young, whose attitude is a combination of “Care about it”, “Do your own thing”, and “Stay out of my life and I’ll stay out of yours.”

This is anathema to so-called progressives, who have succumbed to the flip side of federalism  — fascism, intolerance, and demands for uniformity.  So let the election next year be, in part, between the tolerance of federalism and the rigidity of the hard left.

The public seems to be going the other way on abortion.  Even the young don’t really approve, but almost everyone is conflicted on it.  But the political answer on abortion is the same as on every other social issue  — let the states, and the people within each of them, decide. .

The Supreme Court may be set to rule soon on gay marriage.  If Justice Kennedy wants to keep getting invited to fancy cocktail parties he’ll rule that gays have a constitutional right to marriage.  That’s complete bullshit.  Another Roe v. Wade, the worst decision since Dred Scott.  If that’s what happens there might be a place for Article V.  Use it to amend the Constitution to return the power to decide social issues to the states.  Abortion, gay marriage and marijuana would no longer be within the domain of the federal courts or Congress.  The people of each state will decide these matters for themselves.

There may not be the kind of consensus on this idea that is required for a successful Article V movement.  But it is a solution that most Republicans and moderates could live with.  It’s the best political answer to some vexing political questions.

I’m totally convinced that if we have an Amendment Convention on the BBA it will be followed by Conventions on other topics.  If the Reagan Initiative is included in the BBA it’s possible the Second Convention could be on social issues.  Time will tell.

Since the idea of the Reagan Initiative surfaced three months ago no one has argued that it is outside the scope of a BBA.  Some people haven’t embraced it, but no one has tried to say that it couldn’t be done, legitimately.  When I explained it to Kelly Mader in Savannah he didn’t immediately buy in.  He wanted somebody’s legal opinion  — maybe the corporate counsel at Peabody, presumably some kind of big time lawyer.  When he joined our San Diego cc yesterday it meant that he’d been given the green light by whomever he consulted with.  You may not like the idea of transferring federal lands to the states, or constitutional regulatory reform, but you’re not going to be able to say that the Amendment Convention cannot address these issues if it chooses to do so.

Mader said something else that rang a bell. The EPA is running amok.  Their proposed regulations will kill the coal industry, but they’ve got a whole lot more coming down the pike.  They want EPA jurisdiction and control over every mud puddle in the country.  They’ve gone berserk.  It’s as though Obama has decided that fighting climate change is going to be his legacy, and he doesn’t care too much if he pisses the whole country off while he’s at it.  The coal industry may be ready to roll over and play dead, but a lot of people are going to want to fight.  What can they do, with Obama and his veto pen?

Constitutional regulatory reform, as part of the Balanced Budget Amendment.

As we say in Cali, por que no?

California, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts  — who else won’t agree to One State, One Vote, One Amendment?  We should get every red state, 31 in all.  Eight states are split, and we should get the Republican presiding officer, which is good enough.  If you’re a Republican Speaker paired with a Democrat Senate President you can make a commitment that your chamber will refuse to vote for any delegate that does not fully support the Three Ones.  That is a commitment that could, and would, be kept.  So if you’re worried about a runaway you’re looking at a minimum of 39 states you don’t have to worry about  — unless your Republican peers from at least fifteen of those 39 are lying.  How the hell could you believe that, unless you’re a truly paranoid whack job?   If Bart Davis tells the Idaho Republican Senate Caucus that, in spite of solid commitments from 39 states, there still could be a runaway, who’s going to take him seriously?

Wyoming and Idaho are states I accepted responsibility for when assigned them by the Task Force.  Davis lives and practices law in Idaho Falls, which my wife and I be driving through on our way to Montana.  I hope Davis agrees to see me for a few minutes.  I want to tell him exactly what we’re up to in San Diego, and personally guarantee his and his wife’s travel expenses.

I tried to see Davis when I was in Boise, but he wasn’t seeing anyone that late in the session.  I eyeballed him from the Senate gallery, to see if I could pick up on what kind of a guy he is.  He’s a big, heavy set, jovial guy.  He doesn’t look like a jerk or a buffoon.  I could see that his colleagues liked him.  He looks like an O.K. guy.  He noticed me watching him, and checked me out for a second.  I can deal with Davis.  I know how to handle this guy.  He’s the only thing standing between us and Idaho, and we’ll get Idaho.

Kelly Mader, formerly of Peabody Energy, was on today’s San Diego cc.  He wanted to know if we were still working on the Reagan Initiative.  I said we were, and he’ll be at the meeting.  He’s a former Wyoming legislator, and knows Senate President Nicholas well.  Nicholas said he could probably get to Seattle.  I haven’t talked to him about San Diego.  If he’s there Kelly may be able to bring him around.  Peabody’s got juice in Wyoming.

Loren Enns looks to be coming to San Diego to handle the technical stuff.  This is very good news.  We want no snafus.  We may have 25 Presiding Officers participating remotely, and we’ve got to do it right.  No screw ups.

The invites should be in the mail tomorrow.  Game on.

The communications revolution is just getting underway, and it’s changing politics, as it changes everything it touches.  The Tea Party is an internet phenomenon.  So is the Article V movement.  Organizing a 34 state coalition of state legislative leaders, most of whom have never met one another, is tough.  I don’t think you could do it without the internet.

Congress should adapt to this new world by allowing remote voting.  If a Congressman is in his home district, he should be able to fully participate in committee meetings and floor votes.  The technology is available, and it would have a huge impact.  As far as I’m concerned  Congressmen should spend as little time in D.C. as possible.  Show up, swear in, and go home should be the norm.  If you’re chairing a committee you need to be present, otherwise the less time you spend in the corrupting halls of power the better.  If a lobbyist wants to make his case to a member, go to that member’s district for an appointment.

This idea is not original, and I’m sure others have thought about how it would work in practice. When I was practicing law in Alaska I actually conducted trials remotely.  I was a plaintiff’s attorney, and I sued people all over the state.  Occasionally I would do an entire trial in Kenai from my office in Anchorage.  It worked well enough.

This all comes to mind as we try to figure out exactly how remote participation in the San Diego Summit will work.  Speaker X from state Y calls in and is recognized by Faber.  They can do remotely what everyone present can do  — make and second motions, make objections, vote, and debate.  Someone other than Faber will have to keep track of which remote participant wants to speak, and pass that along to Faber, who at some point would recognize them and give them the floor.  So let’s say a motion to adopt the One State, One Vote, One Amendment is made and seconded.  Everyone who wishes to speak to the motion will seek to be recognized by the Chair, who will control the sequence of speakers, just as is done in legislative debate.  No distinction would be made between those physically present and those who are not.

I’ve never Skyped and am an internet Neanderthal.  Loren Enns is our IT guy, and he’s going to have to figure out how all this would work.  It’s a problem he can handle.  Ideally when a remote participant speaks his or her image would appear on a big screen in the meeting room, and would be broadcast by C-Span.  Maybe those C-Span guys will know how to do all this.

C-Span is a great thing.  Around twenty years ago they brought a bus to Anchorage and broadcast their morning show from it.  They had me on as the local conservative.  I started talking about cutting back on the federal government and letting states figure out their own problems.  Some whiny old guy from Cleveland called in and said they had a lot of problems and they needed help from the federal government.  I told him he needed to figure out how to solve his own problems.  He didn’t like that.

Angelo Codevilla is a very bright guy.  I’ve read one or two of his books.   He had a piece out on the internet a few days ago that was spot on.  He basically said we don’t care who wins all these bullshit wars in the Middle East.  What we care about are these crazy bastards who kill Americans.  We are at war with these sons of bitches and want to kill as many of them as we can, as fast as we can.  Other than securing Israel it’s our only policy objective in the Middle East.  Every Presidential candidate should read Codevilla, and, if he’s wrong, explain how he’s wrong.

The American people have never wanted to send their sons overseas to fight wars.  Ever.  It’s a constant in American history.  People feel that way today as strongly as they ever have.  We mind our own damn business.   If a bunch of crazy people in some part of the world are raising hell it’s not our job to go in and straighten everything out.

I never cared much for John Warner.  He was a pretty boy who became Elizabeth Taylor’s seventh husband.  He’s switched parties and is now a Democrat.  But he was an Admiral, and Navy Secretary, Senator and Chairman of the Armed Services Committee.  Fifteen years ago he told the Pentagon brass, in a committee meeting, “…this country will never again permit the armed forces to be engaged in conflicts which inflict the level of casualties we have seen historically.”   I am completely convinced Warner was right.  9-11 didn’t change that.  And if he’s right, what does that mean for our “trip wire” troop deployments in Europe and Asia?  It means it’s all bullshit.  Take your trip wire and send it where the sun doesn’t shine.

No more war.

Right now they’re covering Beau Biden’s funeral.  Why wouldn’t they cover the San Diego Summit?  Just the first business session, from 9:00 a.m. PDT to 11:30.  This is the session devoted to discussion, adoption, and signing of the One State, One Vote, One Amendment Resolution.  They’ll cover it, and that will encourage attendance.

Let’s say you’re Mike Thibodeau, President of the Maine Senate.  You don’t feel like flying to San Diego for a meeting.  But would you be willing to participate telephonically, or by Skype, in a two and a half hour Saturday meeting of your peers from around the country?  A meeting dealing with the procedures to be followed at the 2016 Amendment Convention, which you do plan to attend?

I would argue forcefully that any presiding officer who does not participate, in one way or another, in this meeting is derelict in their duty.  Article V gives Thibodeau, and the Senators who elected him their leader, a critical function in our constitutional system.  By refusing to participate Thibodeau is turning his back on the legislative leaders who are trying to do their duty.

What if you’re the Speaker of the California Assembly, a hard core, partisan, very liberal Democrat?  You voted for, and the California legislature adopted, an Article V Resolution to overturn Citizens United.  You’re not afraid of Article V.  Ryan Clayton of Wolf-pac has educated you.  You understand that the BBA has 27, and might get to 34, and you’re adamantly opposed to it.  You don’t want to do anything which will promote it.  But if there is to be a BBA Convention, you want it to be limited to one subject.  And you feel you have an obligation to speak out against One State, One Vote.  You represent 10% of the people in this country.  Why should Wyoming, which has 1/6 of 1% of the population, have a vote equal to yours?  You want to make that case, even if you know you’ll be voted down.  So you book an early flight from Sacramento to San Diego, or you participate remotely.  You have an obligation to do so.

Precedents will be set in San Diego.  One of them should be that physical presence is not required for full participation.  Rep. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois wanted to vote on a leadership election in the Democratic Caucus, but she was about to give birth, and could not attend the session.  Her colleagues voted to deny her that right.  That’s bullshit.  There’s no reason in the world she shouldn’t have been allowed to vote.  Everybody who wants to will vote in San Diego, whether they’re present or not.  This, in my opinion, is a very significant precedent.  It can apply to future meetings of the Convention Majority Caucus, and perhaps to the proceedings of the Convention itself.  Let’s say you’re the President of the Michigan Senate.  You’re the leader of Michigan’s delegation to the Convention.  The Michigan legislature is in session virtually year round, and you commute between Ann Arbor ad Richmond.  For some reason you have to be in Michigan when a vote is taking place at the Convention.  You should be able to vote remotely.

Actually, come to think of it, this should be among the first orders of business in San Diego.  A rule should be adopted allowing full remote participation.  This is the 21st Century.  There has been a communications revolution.

As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew.  We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.