THE BATTLE FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Just so you know, the congressional district in this special election is different than the one Flores and Gonzalez will seek come November. 

I am giving you the numbers, because you have come to expect them.  But nationally, I am compelled to ask, after Ulvalde what do these low numbers tell us about how the people really feel about gun control?  Prayers and vigils do nothing to bring back the dead or heal these families. But it becomes a distraction from the fact nothing will change.  I will go so far as to say we can have another mass shooting, and nothing, and I mean nothing will change on gun control, and it will not impact November's election. 

What will happen in November is anyone's guess.  Nationally the polling shows the people effectively have zero confidence in the economy.  I blame the people and Congress.

To get the Covid checks pass Congress the people had to agree to pay the people who did not need the money.  This helped to spur spending and thereby inflation.

We left it to the Corporatists to regulate themselves, and they built the factories for computer chips in countries will low wages and no worker's rights.  Now we are paying the price and it is more than cars.

A CPAP machine keeps you breathing at night.  Several years ago I was one of the first to get a new wifi CPAP which meant every morning I would get and email telling me how many times I stopped breathing and any adjustments I needed to make.  In time the doctors with the machine's serial number were able to get the same data on a daily basis.  If you had a warning in your email you could call your doctor and they could check the online system for doctors.

Well not for the new CPAP machines.  For now the new ones because of the computer chip shortage do not have the wifi function. But we left it up to the corporatist to decide where to manufacture the chips so essential to our economy, and now we are paying a price.  But instead of blaming the corporatists, we blame the President. 

But when the polling says the people have no confidence in the economy who does that benefit?  They could be saying they have no confidence in the government to fix the problem.

The Republicans will block any effort to stop price gauging by the oil and gas industry.  But unfortunately, the Biden Administration has no one in the administration who understand messaging, or is it Biden still believes some day the Republicans will play nice?

As Trump was leaving office and he proposed the last excessive stimulus package he knew it would increase spending.  He knew it would cause a sort of fake inflation.

THE PRESS LOVES IT HEADLINES, BUT NOT INSIGHTFUL REPORTING.

During the worst of the pandemic prices dropped dramatically.  This is why I call it false inflation.  If a pandemic causes prices to drop dramatically, and then during the recovery prices recover and go up do you really have inflation?  Well, yes, but what the Biden Administration is not doing is looking at prepandemic prices, calculating in normal inflation and then comparing it to what we are paying now. 

Wages are way up and unemployment is at records lows.  When you pay people more either the employer has to eat the loss, or they have to raise prices.

This is basic, but not being explained to the people.

The price of housing is up because of the cost of building supplies.  Congress has no control over this.  The logical result is the price of renting is going to go up. Yes you are earning more money, but the cost of living is eating it up.  So of course you are frustrated.

But you know what, the President controls none of this.  

Nixon through emergency powers issued a raise and price freeze.  The law has changed several times, so I am not sure if President Biden can freeze the price of oil and gas.  If he can, he needs to.  But then  the very people who are complaining about the price of gas will call him a socialist.

WHEN OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM FAILED, OUR REPUBLIC FAILED

When rote memorization replaced true critical thinking to measure a student's success, we lost the capacity to plan and see ahead.  I am not sure why we teach the social sciences at all, since it is all based on rote memorization and not critical thinking.  

I was asked to review a senior project for a young man who just graduated a very high priced NY university.  I was horrified.  Had I turned in the same project in middle school, I would have failed, but it was approved as a senior project at a well known NYC university. 

We have to end rote memorization as a measure of a student's intelligence.

 TEXAS LOSES COMPELLED SPEECH CASE BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT, WITH AN UNUSUAL MAJORITY

In simple terms if a newspaper printed a letter to the editor which defamed someone, then the newspaper was liable.  Everyone knew the rule.  But then came the internet, where libel came to have a life of its own.

This case is more interesting than Free Speech.  Here you had the Republican state of Texas telling corporations they had to allow everyone to speak even if it was defamation or disinformation.

The key here is you had Texas Republicans telling major corporations Texas would now decide their moderation policies.  What happened to small government?

This is a major shift in dogma for the Republicans and as we are seeing more and more corporations are pulling their PAC money from the most extreme Republicans.

YOU HAVE TO READ HOW THE OPINION CAME DOWN - 

"In an unusual alignment the five justices in the majority were Chief Justice John Roberts, Stephen Breyer, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Sonia Sotomayor.

Liberal Justice Elena Kagan was joined by conservative justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, who would have denied the request.

The Supreme Court order is a loss for Texas. The state argued that its law, HB 20, which prohibits large social media firms from blocking, banning or demoting posts or accounts, does not violate the First Amendment."

CNN: 

This decision is interesting for how liberal Justice Kagan joined the end abortion Justices, Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch.

It is also further evidence of the realignment of the  Republican Party to go from hands off to regulating how you can conduct your business. 

It has long been precedent you cannot compel speech.  Associate Justice Kagan's  decision to go against this long held precedent tells me she cares no more about precedent than those seeking to undo Roe v. Wade.

The great Trump has failed at every effort to start a new social media where defamation and disinformation would rule. He has failed.

So my question is, when the market place does not give these Republicans what they want, why are they turning to pass laws to compel the market place? 

As I noted last week Florida lost a similar case before their federal court of appeals.

Again it is not lost on me Florida is now seeking to ban speech it finds objectionable, while Texas is demanding objectionable speech not be banned on social media.

The Republicans have clearly lost all respect for Freedom of Speech.  Texas and Florida seek to ban objectionable books, while seeking to compel corporations to allow for the publication on their platforms objectionable discourse. 

 SUPREME COURT UPENDS REDISTRICTING LAWSUITS NATIONALLY BY ALLOWING THE DOJ TO SUBPOENA STATE LEGISLATORS FOR DEPOSITION AS IT RELATES TO THE ISSUE OF MOTIVATION

The underlying case involves the state legislative map of Texas and not the federal House map. But the case now opens the door to legislators being compelled to testify in the many redistricting lawsuits still pending ahead of the November election.

Source: CNN

 Before there were any free platforms for blogging I coded my own blog and ran nationally Balancing the Issues.  It cost money to maintain.  Any real blogger pays fees to several services for access to documents.  I still pay annually to maintain ownership of balancingtheissues.com  I do not publish under the .com, because unlike during the early days, you could buy a program which allowed you to code your own publication in a very user friendly format.  It is not a question of money, it is a question of bad programs.  No one has a program which matches my original program.  Archives are important.  The ability to search archives is important.  On my side what I saw were subtopics, under which each post was archived by subtopic.  It was easy to save the post and retrieve it.  I could edit the code to fix printing problems.  It is funny when it went free, the quality of  the programs went down hill.

SO WHERE AM I

Well after checking with the state and Cameron County Appraisal district, so long as I only have one homestead in one state, I can maintain my residency in Texas, while living at least half the year in another state. My time in Texas will be somewhat limited.  My home is a good investment.  In five years I will be able to sell it for a lot more.  When in Texas I will live in my home.  Nothing on that issue will change.

But to be clear, I have no interest in Brownsville or Texas, unless it touches upon a national issue.

The other home is owned by a trust which gives me a life interest to live in the home.  All bills are paid by the trust.  When I die the home will be sold and the money given to the final beneficiary.

AS A REPUBLIC THE U.S. IS NO MORE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE CHOSE TO END IT

 It is inconceivable to me the Founding Fathers ever imagined the type of deadly rifles we have today.  I do concede they were educated enough to know technology would change and the quality and effectiveness of guns would improve.

They saw fit to insure the People could change things by providing for the amending of the constitution.  They were very shortsighted on how divided the people really were.  The only thing many people had in common was a desire to sever ties with England.  And even on that issue, many people could not have cared less. 

During the second Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, when England tried to take back the colonies, the states were not even united on that issue.  In the beginning support for the war was soft.  The southern states were already regretting the Union.

THE GOVERNMENT BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE AND NOT THE INSTITUTIONS THE PEOPLE CREATED TO MANAGE THEIR AFFAIRS

The pollsters tell us the overwhelming number of people support Roe v. Wade.  We are fairly certain the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade.  True to form our press attacks those Justices who said Roe was settled law, but now seem poised to vote to overturn it.

The press is not focusing in on the key word.  Many of these Justices during their confirmation hearing made clear when precedent is egregious it is subject to change.  Some used words similar to egregious.  Well, in justifying the overruling of Roe, Justice Alito bases his majority opinion on use of the  word egregious. The problem is not one Senator bothered to ask the nominees what would make for egregious precedent. If you want to blame someone, blame the Democratic Senators for not asking what would make for egregious precedent. 

Where are the people?  Ever since abortion ended in Texas for all practical purposes, there has effectively been no meaningful protest.  Even when the draft opinion overruling Roe was leaked, we saw a few small protests, but nothing like the million man march, and any type rally Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. could produce.

The people seem indifferent.  Why?  Because they feel it is not their job to take back their government.  The Republic is dead.  In my lifetime I do believe some states will secede although the Supreme Court has  found it not permissible.  Texas v. White, which made the finding is probably the most common law treasonous opinion ever penned by the Supreme Court. Secession was the foundation of our Republic as written by Thomas Jefferson. 

The movement for secession has been around for centuries with Vermont leading the way, not Texas.  Growing up on Long Island, it was common to speak of Nassau and Suffolk counties becoming a new state, breaking away from NY in the same way Vermont did centuries earlier.  The movement is still there.

The California movement ranges remaking the state into 5 states, to outright secession. 

The federal government is powerless.  They are not going to send troops to suppress secession of any state if it happens.  There will come a point, a state either on the left or the right will say, they are done.

THE ONLY HOPE

This fracture has to end.  But the reality is the fracture has existed between the North and South since the beginning and  then the west after the Treaty of Guadalupe wherein Mexico lost the west to the U.S.  Only California and Texas were allowed to become Republics, to only later dissolve their Republics to join the union.

The Republic is dead and it is time you decide where you want to be, and where you want your children to be. 

A VOICE IS STRONGER THAN MONEY

On Tuesday Presidential candidate Rick Santorum with no money, but with a strong message for the evangelicals, won all three caucuses and primaries. Mitt Romney and his super PACs, with all of their money could not overcome the vox populi of the people who voted.

Last night was an important example of how the people can check the process of money in campaigns.  There has been so much made of the ads paid for by the PACs under the Citizens United Supreme Court decision that the people may be finally understanding the ads are to be ignored. 

As I noted in my original post on the issue, the solution to Citizens United is not to restrict speech, but the people.  The people must be willing to ignore the ads.  The people must learn to educate themselves about the candidates. 

It does not serve freedom if when the people are lazy we restrict the free speech of corporations and wealthy people.  It is theoretically possible Citizens United could force the people to become more attentive to the candidates who reflect their views.  This certainly has to be better than the people giving up on someone like Rick Santorum just because the talking heads claim he cannot win.

The talking heads and PAC money candidates can be ignored in favor of principle.  The power remains in the vox populi.  So long as we keep the power with the vox populi, We the People will effectively check our elected officials.

THE CHECKS AND BALANCES INHERENT IN FREE SPEECH, AND THE RIGHT OF ASSEMBLY

In the same way the press seems to have abandoned its check on government through a free and vox populi oriented press, so too have far too many Americans through their refusal to stand up and say - enough is enough. 

Former Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower foresaw the dangers of corporatism in our democracy.  He specifically spoke to the issue of the military industrial complex.

Here's an excerpt:

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist."

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/17/132942244/ikes-warning-of-military-expansion-50-years-later

You can also watch him speak on the issue in his farewell address.



In the 60's students and young adults raised up and spoke their minds on all sorts of issues from civil rights, to war, to drugs, to poverty.  The students took control of the universities and created student unions.  One area on campuses where students succeed was taking control of the bookstores and keeping prices down.  In time the student leaders voluntarily gave up that control to corporate interests who then paid a fee to the university for the privilege of bilking the students.

The 60's proved that if the people exercise their check on government and the courts they can effectuate policy changes.

It is true the people are making progress in small ways.   But the reality is, in terms of the corporate take over of our government, as warned by President Eisenhower, it is nearly complete.  One reason the corporatist have succeed is the radical right.  President Reagan promised them he would oppose all individual freedom for anyone they deem immoral in exchange for their vote.  This was the final major putsch in the corporate take over of our government.  It was also the first major modern step to the rise of anti-liberty voices in the name of God.

Occupy Wall Street is a voice against corporatism.  Unfortunately, as the key leaders sought comfort in the warmth of their homes, the more radical near anarchists elements have begun to turn the movement into a movement of destruction.  Unless the original leaders of Occupy Wall Street seize control soon, the movement could be lost.

The radical right seems to understand the function of the people as a check on government and courts. While I am not happy with what they are doing in the following example, the example is clear evidence of how the people can still check the actions of the government.

The legalization of gay marriage in Washington is now a  formality.  But because the radical right is unhappy with this result they intend to exercise their right of free speech and assembly to overturn the Washington legislature through a possible public ballot initiative. 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/03/us-gay-marriage-washington-idUSTRE81204O20120203

While I may not like how they intend to use the ballot initiative, it is nonetheless a good thing that as a group they seek to exercise their right of checks and balances as against the legislature.

Until the American people understand that the concept of checks and balances goes well beyond the three branches of government, corporatists will continue to take control of our government.  The people need to know through ballot initiatives and the ballot box they are the ultimate check on the courts and legislatures.

The funny thing about the radical religious right and their alignment with the corporatists is, it was the corporatists who changed the blue laws which had stores closed on Sunday.  But then I guess when you generally seek to do the work of injustice, you get  in bed with the devil himself.

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1164.html

Meaningful change will not come to our government until the people reassert their power of Checks and Balances on the government and the courts.

CHECKS AND BALANCES,

AND SEPARATION OF POWERS

I loved to teach this lesson because it would drive traditional government instructors nuts.  Most teach this as a simple one day lesson about the checks and balances each of the three branches of government have on one another.  It is so much more complex as defined in our Constitution.

Inherent in the US system of checks and balances is the press.  Inasmuch as there is no free and body politic oriented press in the US, the part played by the press in checks and balances is now officially dead.  The sad part about this is, with an investment I believe to be of about $100,000 a true free and body politic oriented press could be started on line and in a few years make the owners billionaires.  If just a handful of all the unemployed journalists understood ethics and capitalism, they would no longer be unemployed.  They would own the most successful online newspaper in the world.

A simple example - a big deal is being made about Romney stating he loves to fire people who work for him.  In a world where ethics matters in journalism, journalists would have added to the narrative that what he was saying in substance was - he likes to fire people who do not perform.  You know what - me too - and so too should the American people when it comes to our elected officials.  The comment was about accountability, not some deep seated psychotic need to fire people.  What real journalists do is get into the substance of the comment and not the isolated words.  That did not happen with Romney's comment

The other comment which got Romney in trouble is not worrying about the poor.  Real journalists would have gotten into the substance of this comment.  They did not.  Instead they simply used the shock value behind the statement rather than allow it to be a starting point  for policy discussion.

Romney's argument was the poor have a safety net.  As a true socialist, and as someone who actually knows what the ideology of socialism is all about, I have always despised the welfare state of President Johnson and as executed by the Democratic Party.  A civilized society must have a safety net, but not a built in addiction to that safety net.

Quick side note - I do taxes for free for a lot of people this time of year.  This year I have done several wherein the head of household is not only not paying one penny in taxes, but because last year they had a baby, they are getting back over $5,000.  No matter how you look at it, this is a welfare payment.  What really bothers me is, last year the taxpayer paid the bill for the prenatal care, birth, and post birth care of the baby.  These bizarre policies have us paying poor people to have babies.  There is no dignity in this.  Here is my deal.  If you have children on medicaid, then you should not be allowed the child tax credit.  That money should be used to pay back the cost of health care for your child.   Social policies which create an addiction to the safety net must be abolished.  Conservatives can argue budget policy  for the reason to stop these payments, socialists can argue human rights abuses.  In my view it is a human rights abuse to addict poor people to the safety net.  It encourages poverty and a lessor quality of life.

BACK TO THE ISSUE:

What the press failed to do in response to Romney's statement about the poor is look to the policy implications of his statement.  If the safety net means we do not have to worry about the poor, then in fact he is saying he sees no reason to cut the budget by removing parts of the safety net.  This should shock true fiscal conservatives.  He is also saying he is not worried about government institutionalized poverty.  This should shock everyone.  The true shock in his statement is not, not worrying about the poor, but in the policy implications of his statement.

This is what the American press is missing.  This is what the American people are looking for in their press.

The power of the press at one time had the ability to take down a presidency.  Today the press could not take down an ass wipe.  The reason for this is the decision by the press to keep news in soundbites.  The press no longer reports the entire narrative behind the story.  The press looks only for shock value, while dismissing the narrative behind the words.

Key to our freedom is a free and independent press.  Corporatism now directs our press.  In effect what the corporatist approach to journalism has done is remove an important check on our government.  The end result has been a government less accountable to the people.