When’s the first debate?

http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/07/parasitic-wasp-employs-zombie-ladybug-to-guard-cocoon

I encourage anyone who cares about American healthcare to do three things:

1. Sign the pledge.
2. Look up whether the incumbents in your House and Senate races have taken the pledge and then send an email or letter to them either urging them to sign the pledge or thanking them for having done so.
3. Check the list of signers on election day and don’t vote for any candidate who hasn’t signed.

Here is the message that I sent to Ms Hunt:

Councilmember Hunt,

I was distressed to learn that at Monday’s City Council meeting you joined with seven other councilmen in voting in favor of a 6.5% increase in your constituents’ property taxes in the depths of what is turning into the longest recession since the 1930s.  Your vote was the deciding vote to give the measure an 8 to 7 majority.

I understand that the reduction in City tax revenue in this recession makes providing city services more difficult and that increasing revenue alleviates this pain.  What you fail to appreciate fully is that your constituents are also facing tough times.  Many of us have lost jobs, seen work hours reduced, or seen a drop-off in patronage at our small businesses.  While every one of us affected by this recession is working hard to increase our own revenues, we do not have the power to do so by fiat.  Instead we have to prioritize our spending by taking a hard look at our family budgets and cutting back on our less important spending categories.

As voters we expect nothing less from our elected leaders at all levels of government.  Critical city services must, of course continue to be funded at some level.  But I find it impossible to believe that the City of Dallas can find no further spending to cut.

I also wish to emphasize to you that any tax increases that you impose on your constituents will come at the expense of spending or saving in our own family budgets.  Every dollar extracted from us comes at the expense of spending on local restaurants, shops, entertainment venues, contributions to local charities, or investments in our local or national economies.  Businesses here and around the country need our patronage and investment to create jobs and economic growth.  Tax increases have consequences.

Among the consequences of tax increases is how we vote when deciding who will represent us as leaders.  When the final vote on this proposed tax increase and the city budget  occurs on September 22nd we expect you to show leadership and the ability to prioritize.  Your vote will have consequences for how I vote at your next election.

The prickly pears were in bloom.

Prickly Pears In Bloom

We had lunch in Fredericksburg.

Mmmmmm Beer

Anti-aircraft Gun

We visited the Admiral Nimitz Museum.

Very Large Screw

The next morning we hiked up Enchanted Rock.

Atop Enchanted Rock Looking West

I Heart Enchanted Rock

We saw lots of wildlife over the weekend.

Fat Lizard on Enchanted Rock

Black and White Lizard

Hummingbird

Tiny Lizard

Buzzard

Praying Mantis

We also saw deer, bats, toads, turtles, fish, and two scorpions.  The scorpions were in our cabin.

Lessons Learned: the best way to kill a scorpion on the ceiling is to attach duct tape to the end of a long pole, such as a broom handle and stick the scorpion onto the tape.  No mess. No fuss. No searching for a scorpion for a half an hour because you swept him off the ceiling with a broom and he scampered behind furniture before you could squash him.

So for example, supporters of Arizona’s SB1070 generally bemoaned the Federal Court’s injunction preventing the enforcement of SB1070 pending the resolution of the Justice Department’s suit claiming Federal preemption invalidates the law; whereas opponents of SB1070 cheered the decision.   Very few commentators took the position that either 1) The AZ law is unconstitutional but it would be beneficial on policy grounds, or that 2) SB1070 is perfectly constitutional but it shouldn’t have been passed in the first place because it’s unwise.

Now perhaps the reason I seldom observe people taking nuanced positions (opposing the law but supporting its Constitutionality or vice-versa) is simply sample bias.  That is, many people might hold nuanced positions, but simply not comment on those issues as often as they do on court decision that they oppose on both policy and Constitutional grounds.

Nevertheless, I suspect that something more is going on.  I think people often decide what conclusion they want first, and then decide what legal arguments they agree with in light of how the desired outcome can be obtained.  I think everyone is tempted to think this way to some extent, but this kind of partisan thinking about legal questions should really be avoided to the greatest extent possible.  In our constitutional system partisanship belongs in the elected branches of government: in Congress and the Presidency.  The Courts ought to remain neutral.  In Justice Roberts’ confirmation hearing he compared the role of the courts to that of an umpire at a baseball game.  He ought to call ‘em like he sees ‘em without regard to which team the call favors.  Sometimes I’ll come across a sports fan who always disagrees with a close call if it goes against his team and always supports the ump if the call helps his team, but most sports fans have the integrity to acknowledge that some favorable calls are incorrect and some unfavorable calls are the right ones.  Politics seems different though.  People are even more partisan in politics than in sports.  Perhaps this is just because the stakes are so much higher, or perhaps the reason is that the Law is so much harder to understand than the rules of a sport.  If the Law seems incomprehensible, then the policy implications of a court decision are the easiest way to analyze the decision.

The decision that came out yesterday struck down a provision in the constitution of the state of California defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman (passed as Prop 8).  As far as I can tell, everyone who supports the decision opposes Prop 8 and vice-versa, myself included.  In my case, I think I have good reasons to oppose the court decision, naturally.

It’s an interesting exercise to try to think of a few cases where one’s preferred policies aren’t advanced by side one thinks should have won.  If you can’t think of any, that might be a sign that you look at legal news through a partisan lens.  I can only think of three off the top of my head.

Of course, the DVDs that don’t sell can always go to the Movie Trading Company.