Thursday, April 6, 2017

The Senate-Full-of-Grown-ups and the House of Re-elect-Me-Kids

(Note-sorry this is a long one, but I had a lot to get off my chest)

The legislative branch of our government, as established in the U.S. Constitution, is bicameral; meaning it is composed of two bodies—the House of Representatives and the Senate.   The duties and responsibilities are much alike, excepting that all Court and Cabinet appointees must be approved by the Senate, and all tax revenue bills must originate in the House.  Of lesser importance, the Senate must conduct the impeachment trials of anyone first impeached by the House.  Otherwise, all aspects of their respective authorities seem to just overlap (making the overlapping authority serve as one giant playground to push each other around on—more about this later).  It is, in the words of many, "deliberately inefficient by design.”  This was done to prevent the majority from ruling with an iron fist (See the Eastern European fiascos of the 1990’s where majorities persecuted, exiled and even attacked and slaughtered members of minority religious groups). 

By forcing the various branches to be accountable to the others, no one branch can usurp enough power to become dominant.  Simple enough, right?  Things like executive vetoes, legislative overriding of vetoes, agreement between the bicameral parts of the legislative branch, judicial review and interpretation of laws passed by the legislative branch and signed by the Executive branch, Judicial presiding over any legislative impeachment trials; are all examples of checks and balances. 

When you count them up, the legislative branch has ten checks on the executive branch, seven on the judiciary, and four self-checks within itself due to its bicameral nature (e.g., both houses must agree on any legislation before it can be sent to the president).   That was twenty-one of anyone is counting along.

The executive branch has seven checks on the legislature, two checks on the judiciary, and one check on the executive branch itself—the Vice-President and members of the cabinet may vote that the President is unable to perform his duties.  That’s another ten, making thirty-one so far.

Finally, the judicial branch has three checks on the legislature and two on the executive.  Don’t get me started on the separation of powers between the state and federal governments.  Within the federal government alone that makes thirty-six checks (No wonder their checkbooks never balance!).  To make a long story a little shorter, it ain’t easy getting things done (on purpose). 

A glance at the antics in Washington will surely tell you that.  Within itself, there is often disagreement between the big kids (the Senate—they are, after all required to be at least thirty years of age and have been a citizen for nine years.  Further, they are elected to serve for six-year terms.  To serve in the House you need only be twenty-five years of age and have been a citizen for just seven years, and they are only elected for a two-year term.  In middle school/high school terms, the House members are seventh graders and the Senators are like seniors in high school.  The middle-schoolers  even have to reapply at the end of eighth grade to be readmitted as 7th graders.  (I guess they could apply for admission to high school after a few years by running for the Senate.  Usually, they have to be re-elected a time or two to gather the experience and support necessary to apply for high school (with the “minor exception” of one-time Senator Obama, and    Then there is the “take-it-off-the-wall-and-stomp-on-the-rule exception that is Donald Trump, who became college president without ever entering middle school, high school or college (Maybe he attended the electoral college, he seems to have been well thought of there).  But let’s get back to the seventh-graders and high school seniors—don’tthey both act like it!   

Those grown-ups in the Senate are playing tit for tat over judicial nominee Gorsuch and the previous administration’s last of term nominee I-forgot-his-name.  Because one clique (they call themselves “republicans”) refused to admit what’s-his-name, the other clique (they call themselves “democrats”) wants to take the ball and go over to Phil and Buster’s with it. 

With that the republican clique responds by changing the rules of the game, just because they have the majority (and, therefore, the legal right to do so) to let Gorsuch into the court without persuading eight or nine members of the democrat clique to join the republican clique for a few days.    Think back to middle school and high school—did kids ever change cliques, or did they outgrow them?  I can’t think of anyone who changed cliques, although I remember a few getting kicked out.  So, the big kids play on, and on, and on….

Now back to middle school—in the House, they are  elected for a two-year term, then they must run again.  Getting re-elected is critical for the House.  Put another way, if they don’t get re-admitted into junior high, they may never even get to high school.  Somewhere along the way, these days, one cannot be re-elected without campaign financing.  These are like brownie points in school, only way more important.  If they can win the hearts of contributors, readmission to junior high is assured.  The problem lies in calling them “Representatives.”  If every thing they do is aimed at collecting money, then something else is going on.  I’ve expressed it in verse this way:

                        Their behavior’s not meant to represent you and me,
                        But campaign contributors who provide the money
                        Kowtowing to contributors doesn’t really serve me
                        But absent reforms the norm this will be.


Now campaign contributors each have their own agenda (and each of the big ones probably owns a representative).  At the middle school level, we have so many representatives for sale that there are cliques within cliques.  The Republicans have their own conservative, moderate and tea party cliques.  The Democrats have a few conservatives from blue states, they have a Far Left clique and then a variety of other cliques, each with a single issue driving them—keep that money flowing and they can get re-admitted—I mean re-elected.  It’s all about getting re-elected.  I propose we rename them the House of Re-Elect-Me-Kids.  It fits a bit better from where I sit.

Thursday, March 30, 2017

A & W's 2017


Yes, the A and W's that day in 2017
They went to talk about life all those years they’d seen. 
Since they’d left high school back in Sixty-Eight
And see old friends, hearin’ tales, small and great

In Mesa Arizona they did congregate.
It wasn’t just the Cubs they came to celebrate,
But more likely the stories they would hear told
About lives filled with some new things, some old.

Like gray hairs on Crowls, Sheehan and Beans
Not looking much like themselves as teens.
And then just look at Dirk, Erik and Denny
Among those guys there were changes plenty,
It's just right now I can't think of any.
But, oh there were laughs and stories many.

First, Denny, whose efforts drew us all here,
To the Cubs’ training camp he made us all steer.
Persuasive as always, “we can do it” he insisted.
With that kind of effort, who could have resisted.

Erik wrote he’d handsomely matured
About handsome we’ll just have to take his word.
Maturity’s in question, he’s ridden that bike
Way longer, we’re sure than his wife would like.

We have one guy who loves to talk politics.
Sayin’ those right-wingers are up to their old tricks
Tellin’ us Socialists are the only wise owls
Yep, it sure is nice to see old Crowls.

 Way too long since we’ve seen Bob Sheehan
Up in Sioux City, a good grandpa he’s bein’
About those Cubs he cares not one iota
He’s probably closer to Minnesota.

We’ve all heard a lot about Ol‘ Durk
In Saratoga Springs, the summers he did work
Now retired, there he sits on his kiester,
Says he loves it ‘cept when there’s a Nor’Easter.

Bremner was there from the Eastern Shore,
You might be wondering, just what he wore.
Well, of course, he wore his L.L. Bean’s
What else would serve as good blue jeans
For a guy that they once nicknamed Beans?

Don’t forget Jim Kane and Old Ralph Scafuri,
Ralph worked in hospitals, and Jim before a jury.
Ralph became a doctor, specializing in joints. 
Jim, a lawyer, knows the law’s finer points.
Did you know today they both live in Arizona?
Don’t you think that’s too close to Terry Francona?

And here’s a toast to Tony, John and Eddie
Who left this earth before we were ready,
And to Erik, the Bag and Good Old Hags
We wish they could’ve packed their bags

To join us here in Mesa, hot and sweaty.

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Travel Bans, Big Plans, Eagles and Beagles

We’ve Got A Plan
It was at first the president’s grand plan,
It would start out as just a temporary ban

We’ll have the people who Enforce Immigration and Customs
 Just stop all the bad ones, but that’s where the rub comes.

‘Cause how can ICE decide who to welcome or to ban?
And the courts started sayin' "not just anybody can."

But Isn’t Immigration A Kind Of Two-Way Street?
Two ways, it turns out, humanity steadily flows.
So shutting off the current caused a great many woes

It seems you need to know more than one’s birth nation
Or else your choices can cause much consternation.

You see “vetting a process” is not just bein’ on your toes.
Alas, these are families, not just friends or foes.

And What About Those That Are Already Here?
Oh that’s just a simple thing, the costs are minimal
We’ll only send away those that did something criminal

Whoa, but what about “innocent ‘til proven guil-a-ty”
Only the courts have that responsibility

Now all kinds of people crowd ‘round the airport terminal
Not just friends but others whose bonds are familial. 

How Do We Know Who is A Criminal Now?
If crossing the border paperless is not strictly legal,
And a criminal’s one who’s done something illegal.

Then all illegals they find will now be deported
Is the President’s intent here being distorted?

Should our “strength and freedom” evoke the Bald Eagle,
Or is it more like Snoopy the Speechless Beagle?



Monday, March 6, 2017

Just a Couple of Suggestions from a Regular Newspaper Reader


Dear Mr. Editor:

I’d appreciate it very much if you would just hear me out on a couple of suggestions I just want to share with you.

Suggestion 1.  Provide Separate Coverage: 
If you could, Dear Editor, please offer a separate section to cover “Trump News.”  Therein, you might disclose the latest “scandal,” the late-night “Tweets” from the politicians and the other elites like actors, artists, celebrities-celebrated-for- something-we-no-longer-recall, and slanted editorials masquerading as journalism on the subject of Donald Trump.  

Suggestion 2.  Offer Some Traditional Journalism: 
Also, if you can, train some new hires as “journalists.”  Yes, reporters who uphold the principles of the American Society of Newspaper Editors (ASNE) as contained in the ASNE Statement of Principles. 

Interesting piece of work, this Statement of Principles is.  Among other things it includes the following:
In Article I Responsibility “The primary purpose of gathering and distributing news and opinion is to serve the general welfare by informing the people and enabling them to make judgments on the issues of the time.”

It goes on to state in Article IV, “Every effort must be made to assure that the news content is accurate, free from bias and in context, and that all sides are presented fairly.”  Hmmm, I like the sound of that.

Next, Article V Impartiality advises that, while there is nothing that requires “the press to be unquestioning or to refrain from editorial expression. Sound practice, however, demands a clear distinction for the reader between news reports and opinion. Articles that contain opinion or personal interpretation should be clearly identified.”

Lastly, Article V Fair Play requires that “Journalists should respect the rights of people involved in the news, observe the common standards of decency and stand accountable to the public for the fairness and accuracy of their news reports.”

If you could include the work of these “newly trained” new hires in a small section called “Traditional Journalism.” You know, the kind that allows the reader make up his own mind and is both accurate and unbiased.  And, if it’s not too much to ask, let it be impartial—clearly separating reporting of events from editorial opinion—and observe common decency.  And, while I understand just how difficult it would be (and this is why I ask for only a smallish section of your paper), stand accountable for the accuracy of what you say. 

Go ahead and devote the rest of your paper to “celebrity news,” and the latest foibles of Donald Trump and his friends and family.  One more thing, I like what you’ve done with sports—providing a “Scoreboard” that is separate from the latest scandal about sports endorsements, drug use, ridiculous monetary compensation practices, and “celebrity sports news.”  Now this may just be a personal preference, but if you could make the Scoreboard the first page of the sports section, followed by regular columns from a few knowledgeable sports commentators with a sense of humor—WOW! Would I ever like your paper!  (I know, I know, I promised to only offer two suggestions and this sports thing is probably a third one altogether.  Sorry.)   Thanks for listening, even though you probably felt the urge to edit the dickens out of this one from the start.  

Your Subscriber and Reader of Some Parts of Your Paper,

Me