When Your College Advisor Runs for Congress
ArchPundit
Run, David, Run. And you out there donate.
2005
I Just Want to Thank
Ron Gidwitz for volunteering to be the punching bag of all Illinois bloggers and political pundits for the next year. I’d also like to suggest he find whomever did Oberweis’ commercials for the 2004 Senate race and hire them to a non-exclusive contract (one which allows them to make commercials for Oberweis too).
In addition, the campaign staff that will simply be able to say, “hey, look at the material he gave us to work with” should send him some flowers today just to get ahead of the rush when employment ends next March.
Back Later
Wow, was that a bad week to have limited internet access…
How Uncomfortable
Wash U hightlights the importance of stem cell research in the monthly e-mail to grads
All the while the St. Charles County Government is fighting over whether to support RCGA because RCGA lobbied to stop a ban on stem cell research involving SNTC The best part, the St. Chuck County Council is likely to override Ortwerth.
So the Republicans got almost their entire agenda through this session–what happens next session?
Abortion and stem cells all day and all night. That’s quite a strategery for appealing to moderate voters!
IL 8: McSweeney Against the Castle Bill
Just another mainstream conservative. Snort
IL: What are your thoughts on the current hot issue of stem cell research?
M: I am absolutely opposed to the bill that just passed the House of Representatives. I support the President 100 percent on that issue. There was a much better alternative that allowed stem cell research on umbilical cords – I support that. But I do oppose federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. I would have voted no on the Castle bill.
In more fun:
: Everyone’s concerned about the high gas prices. Have any ideas on how to handle that issue?
M: I strongly support the President?s energy policy. The U.S. House of Representatives voted for an energy bill which Melissa Bean opposed, that bill would have allowed a safe development of natural gas resources in the U.S., safe development of nuclear power, and I?m strongly in favor of trying to increase our domestic capabilities on energy production.
So what about drilling in Lake Michigan, Dave?
Heroin at the City Water Department?
Rich is saying it hurts Daley a lot.
My take is perhaps counterintuitive, but what I would argue is intuitive. The public always knew that Daley tolerated a lot of shenanigans and lately there were too many to forgive so his poll numbers dropped, but every case was one of the typical corruption you would expect.
I think this one hits as an abberation and has little effect on Daley. Sure, it’s not good news, but does anyone think he wouldn’t have come down like the Hand of God on anyone selling heroin in His City? Or that any underlings don’t understand that? It just doesn’t stick to him the way other problems do.
I can always be wrong, but I don’t think has any long term effects. Though I feel awfully sorry for the next Chicago city employee to get caught with any drugs on the job–he’ll probably be perp walked with the Super of Police personally escorting him whether it’s for a joint or a kilo of coke.
Blagojevich with 80% of the Public on the Emergency Rule
And that’s all states, not just a blue state like Illinois. NARAL released a report on the 40th Anniversary of Griswold v. Connecticut that points out overwhelming support of the public for pharmacists filling contraceptive prescriptions.
Should pharmacists who personally oppose birth control for religious reasons be
able to refuse to sell birth control pills to women who have a prescription for them, or should pharmacists not be able to refuse to sell birth control pills?Should be able to refuse ………………………..16
Should NOT be able to refuse……………….80
(Don?t know)………………………………………….4Pro-Choice and Anti-Choice Americans Oppose Refusals
Opposition to pharmacists refusing to fill women’s birth control prescriptions is strong across the ideological spectrum. For example, 74 percent of respondents who identified themselves as ?pro-life? opposed giving pharmacists this discretion; 87 percent of selfidentified pro-choice respondents and 79 percent of people with ‘mixed or muddled’ views on abortion, respectively, thought pharmacists should not be allowed to refuse to fill prescriptions.
Next Week
Like Tom I’ll be scoring AP tests. Unlike Tom, I’ll be doing Government and Politics.
Also unlike Tom, I have no illusions about the average AP test takers view of democracy and will just be amused instead of bemused.
I’ll also be slow most of the week for that reason.
The General Wants to Work for Albertson’s
It seems his reliance on faith healing was a limiting factor years ago, but no longer…
Giving the Con Law Lecture Where It’s Most Needed
I know it’s boring to talk about things like Lochner, but few legal cases matter more
For those who pay attention to legal argument, one of the things that is most troubling is Justice Brown’s approval of the Lochner era of the Supreme Court. In the Lochner case, and in a whole series of cases prior to Lochner being overturned, the Supreme Court consistently overturned basic measures like minimum wage laws, child labor safety laws, and rights to organize, deeming those laws as somehow violating a constitutional right to private property. The basic argument in Lochner was you can’t regulate the free market because it is going to constrain people’s use of their private property. Keep in mind that that same judicial philosophy was the underpinning of Dred Scott, the ruling that overturned the Missouri Compromise and said that it was unconstitutional to forbid slavery from being imported into the free States.
That same judicial philosophy essentially stopped every effort by Franklin Delano Roosevelt to overcome the enormous distress and suffering that occurred during the Great Depression. It was ultimately overturned because Justices, such as Oliver Wendell Holmes, realized that if Supreme Court Justices can overturn any economic regulation — Social Security, minimum wage, basic zoning laws, and so forth — then they would be usurping the rights of a democratically constituted legislature. Suddenly they would be elevated to the point where they were in charge as opposed to democracy being in charge.Justice Brown, from her speeches, at least, seems to think overturning Lochner was a mistake. She believes the Supreme Court should be able to overturn minimum wage laws. She thinks we should live in a country where the Federal Government cannot enforce the most basic regulations of transparency in our security markets, that we cannot maintain regulations that ensure our food is safe and the drugs that are sold to us have been tested. It means, according to Justice Brown, that local governments or municipalities cannot enforce basic zoning regulations that relieve traffic, no matter how much damage it may be doing a particular community.
What is most ironic about this is that what Justice Brown is calling for is precisely the type of judicial activism that conservatives have been railing against for the last 50 years.