Constitution

Texas Redistricting

This entry was posted in Constitution Democracy Federalism Republicans on by

Stephen Green notes:

The reason the court didn’t rule on the wisdom of the Republican plan, is because the plan didn’t have any.

While it had no wisdom the plan’s gerrymandering goals were clear. But these goals have been shared by Democratic majorities in the past and James Joyner reminds us that the process is not inconsistent with current practice:

So, while unusual, the 2003 re-redistricting was the first legislatively created one ratified by the courts.

Steven Taylor has it right on redistricting:

Having said all of that, I am increasingly of the opinion that an entirely different system of districting needs to be developed that would do away with conscious partisan districtcraft, and would lead to more competitive elections.
There is no doubt that across the country whichever party is in charge has drawn the lines to their advantage to the detriment of seriously competitive electoral contests in many, many districts. The only good news is that voters don’t always cooperate with the best laid plans of mice and legislature, and vote the way they want.

Stephen Bainbridge also wants to see an end to redistricting partisanship:

My own hope is that eventually we will say “enough is enough” and get rid of all this partisan gerrymandering in favor of a nation-wide system of nonpartisan redistricting designed to maximize the number of competitive seats. But I’m not holding my breath.

We would probably pay much less attention to this type of thing if our representatives (at all levels) did not dabble in this kind of stuff (link via Zombyboy).

Drug Money

This entry was posted in Capitalism Constitution Democracy Domestic Terrorism Drug Laws Law Enforcement Libertarianism on by

In Calgary, drug money is at the heart of gang violence:

Greed and infighting between members of a large Asian street gang over drug money splintered the group, leading to a spate of Calgary shootings, stabbings and at least two murders in the past 13 months.

I wonder if these street gangs and their counterparts in the US have lobbyists working to stiffen existing drug laws?
Via The Media Awareness Project.

McCrackin Reassigned

This entry was posted in Constitution Domestic Terrorism Drug Laws Libertarianism on by

In November I called for the firing of Goose Creek principal George McCrackin. You may remember him as the man responsible for this.
Now, via Drug WarRant, I learn that he his no longer at Goose Creek:

Floyd has not decided to what position McCrackin will be reassigned, but he said McCrackin would probably spend time in the coming weeks preparing for two lawsuits filed by students stemming from the incident.

While this is a step in the right direction I still believe that this is a person that has no business being anywhere near or involved in education.

No They do Not

This entry was posted in Capitalism Constitution Democracy Libertarianism Religion on by

As many of you know the French government is dabbling with dress codes:

President Jacques Chirac of France has called for a law banning Islamic head scarves and other religious symbols in state schools, strengthening France’s commitment to secularism.

Sadly, at least one major Muslim cleric thinks that this is ok:

The grand sheik of Al Azhar, Muhammad Sayed Tantawi, told reporters that although wearing the head scarf, or hijab, was a religious duty, governments of non-Muslim countries had the right to pass any laws they liked.

He argues first that Muslims living in non-Muslim countries must follow the local laws even if they conflict with Islamic law. This is fine.
However his argument that governments have the right to pass any laws they like is false and we all need to speak up and say no when we hear arguments like this.
What folks wear as they go about their daily lives, even in tax funded schools, is not a legitimate interest of any government.
A French spokesperson says:

“You shouldn’t see in it a humiliation for anyone,” Mr. Sarkozy said. “You shouldn’t see in it a lack of respect for your religion. You must understand that secularism is our tradition, our choice.”

Sorry, it is a lack of respect for their religion and, more importantly, it is a lack of respect for the targeted individuals.