Judge Rules Vermont's Legislature has Overreached ...Yet Again

The decision yesterday by U.S. District Judge Murtha in the case brought by Entergy against the State of Vermont is a clear victory for the plaintiff and one more rebuff of Vermont's Legislature for making laws that are unconstitutional. Vermont Attorney General Sorrell sits in an even darker shadow for apparently failing to provide proper legal guidance to the Legislature at the time these laws are considered.  Even to a layman the outcome of this case was obvious long before it was filed. The Commerce clause of the Constitution would prevail and Judge Murtha has ruled correctly.

Whether a Vermonter is for or against nuclear power generated in Vermont, one cannot fail to recognize that in this case and in prior cases dealing with election laws and prescription drug information, Vermont continues to step beyond the U.S. Constitution and has a losing record when challenged in Federal court. Let's hope that wisdom will prevail and that Vermont will not appeal this case to waste yet more money.

Vermonters deserve better from their Governor, their Legislature and their Attorney General. This and prior litigation at the Supreme Court has unnecessarily wasted millions of taxpayer dollars. More form the national media on the the Vermont Attorney General's court performances here from Dave Gram, a Vermont AP reporter, in the San Jose Mercury News.

Voters should pay heed to these events and elect people who have greater respect for the Constitution and who will resist their ideology-driven law-making.

Finally, kudos to those in the Vermont Senate who voted against these laws that have been found unconstitutional.

The Thing Itself - NYTimes.com

Oh for leaders with practical solutions that could cut through the ideological shields that are thrown up by the adherents and reinforced by the various media talking heads and writing fingers.

"Many issues that were once concrete and practical are distorted because they have become symbolic and spiritual. Tax policy isn’t just about how to raise revenue anymore. Liberals see it as a way to punish the greedy and redress the iniquities of capitalism. Conservatives see tax increases as an assault on the enterprising class perpetrated by arrogant central planners. A tax rate could be seen as just a number signifying an expense, but now it’s a marker in a culture war."

'via Blog this'

Response to an Email from a Friend

Our government exists on this basic premise: ".. in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..."

Inherent in this ideal is the expectation that people will be reasonably free to conduct commerce, business and trade to enrich themselves in order to participate in and benefit from the framework of government created under the Constitution.

Certainly much has changed with respect to commerce and government in the intervening centuries, but one thing has not changed. That constant is the nature of Man.

While Man is capable of noble thoughts and deeds, our basic nature is inherently sinful, selfish, and greedy. Else why do we need laws to regulate and punish errant behavior and protect us from each other?  Laws are necessary to control the limits of greed and other destructive behaviors carried to extremes by some.
As long as we expect men and women to provide for their personal and family well-being and to create wages and wealth to be taxed for the 'general welfare and 'common defense,' the inherent traits of 'selfishness and greed' are a far more effective stimulus for individuals than any government decree or general prohibition.

I don't want my government prescribing how I should earn my living, regulating how much money I should earn, how much or how little wealth I can own or what business I can engage in. A framework of laws and sensible regulation for the common good, yes, but our Founders wisely recognized the inherent nature of man and intended that it flourish within a system of necessary  laws and common sense. This is the essence of freedom and an appeal to, but no guarantee of, nobler motives.

Yet because the interconnected systems of banking, finance and commerce have become so entwined and interconnected in this digital age, we are in uncharted territory. This calamitous complexity certainly could not have been envisioned by our Founders, perhaps not even by Mr. Friedman.

To avoid collapse, intervention by government is necessary, but we should recognize they are only human, too, and none of them have been down this road before. To some degree, they are winging it.

I'm not particularly an Obama fan, primarily because of his inexperience and understandable lack of wisdom. Perhaps he will mature in office. I am deeply concerned that 'team Obama' intends to implant an ideological agenda in our country disguised as an economic recovery plan and likely to spend ourselves into servitude to crushing debt and rampant inflation resulting in the country's rapid economic demise.

Venezuelans Approve Chavez's Bid to Scrap Term Limits - WSJ.com

Venezuelans Approve Chavez's Bid to Scrap Term Limits - WSJ.com

Does the term 'socialist dictatorship' include a means to solve this problem...

"...Economists at several investment banks are predicting that the oil-price declines will force Mr. Chavez to raise taxes and devalue the "strong bolivar" -- a currency Mr. Chavez introduced as part of a bid to boost confidence. Both of the measures will hurt his mainly poor constituents more than the middle and upper classes that fill the ranks of the opposition.

Devaluation would exacerbate the nation's soaring inflation rate, already the fastest in the Americas at around 35%. Venezuela imports most of the food and other goods that it consumes. Devaluation would make these goods far more expensive in local currency terms."

...without an unpleasant clampdown on the citizens of Venezuela? A self-inflated demagogue presiding over a collapsing economy may be in for a rough ride!

Life at the Bottom - Worldview that Makes an Underclass

Theodore Dalrymple believes that poverty as demonstrated in the 'underclass' is caused in great part by the world view and policies of uninformed liberal thinking and actions. He ably describes poverty in spiritual, emotional, rational and financial terms as seen through the lens of his profession. As a doctor who has worked for many years in hospitals serving the underclass and in prisons in a large English city and, earlier in life, in Africa, he describes what he has observed in a series of essays comprising this book.

Many readers will not agree with his conclusions because they (erroneously) believe that having too little money is the root cause of poverty. Dalrymple thinks that the modern liberal thinking is the root cause of the mess that poor people experience. He makes a strong case against the common belief that lack of money is the root cause of poverty.

Dalrymple believes that 'values neutrality,' and multi-culturalism, among other beliefs and ideologies espoused by liberal academics and policy makers, have created a kind of nihilism in people. He posits this thinking has resulted in the general debasement of culture. This replacement of more positive values such as education, family, hard work, sacrifice, deferred gratification, etc., in the culture, he believes, is the prime cause of poverty in all its forms. It produces bad choices and actions by people and fosters their continued poverty.

Worth a read for those who care about culture, and the gradual erosion of positive values.