July 31, 2005

Where Taxi Cabs Can't Cruise the Streets

In It's a Wonderful Life, when George Bailey needed to get from one end of idyllic Bedford Falls to the other, he hailed Ernie's taxi cab as it cruised down Main Street. Apparently that exchange would be subversive - indeed illegal - in Nashville, Tennessee.

Nashville City Paper reports on the plight of local cab drivers.

Metro regulations say that cabbies cannot cruise the streets looking for patrons, but must instead stay in Metro-designated cabstands. Taxi drivers maintain there aren’t enough stands. Those who do cruise risk getting a ticket, but cab drivers say cruising is routine.

At the same time, limousines don’t have to follow the same rules and some limousine drivers basically run taxi services that cut into the cab companies’ business.

Brian McQuistion, director of Metro’s Transportation Licensing Commission, said passing a new anti-cruising ordinance would unnecessarily duplicate what is already on the books and won’t solve the problem of too few taxi stands.

McQuistion also said an anti-cruising ordinance would not address the fact that customers, indeed, want to be picked up at the spot where they have summoned a taxi rather than having to walk down the street to a stand.

McQuistion said he is drafting an ordinance that would regulate limousines and said he hopes it would be implemented by the next fiscal year. Funding would have to be found for a limousine inspector, however.

| Conor Friedersdorf | 11:23 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Greenhut's Car Talk

Steven Greenhut shifts into fifth, rhapsodizing about cars. (Toad from Wind in the Willows was not more lyrical.) The contrarian liberals he mentions who want to make cars affordable for the poor, so they have more job options, are at the Progressive Policy Institute. This study of theirs attacks subprime lenders, while urging congressional action to assure consumer awareness. The new progressives are heirs of the old Progressives.

Transportation | Ken Masugi | 05:34 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

SCOC Talk: Governor's Court Opportunity

With all the SCOTUS talk it's all too easy to forget the Supreme Court of California's vacancy, with Janice Brown finally safely on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, the next best place for her in the courts. Harold Johnson emphasizes the importance of the Governor's choice for her replacement: a property-rights vigilant jurist.

From my think-tank vantage point the people who come most readily to mind are from our better law schools: Gail Heriot of the University of San Diego and Doug Kmiec of Pepperdine, and of course John Eastman of Chapman and our own Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence. I would put forward the names of some appeals court justices, but I will spare them the embarassment.

And speaking of property rights, did you catch Howard Dean's denunciation of the "right-wing" Court for its Kelo decision? Patterico is typically astute on this. I have to concede however that three of the five Kelo majority were moderate or liberal Republican appointees, as were the three conservative dissenters, plus the retiring Justice O'Connor. All the more reason to focus on the intellectual, political, and jurisprudential qualities of nominees.

And I would dissent as well from Harold Johnson's notion that former Governor Pete Wilson "won a place of honor in history by putting Janice Brown on the high court." That would have required many more penances.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 02:04 PM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

July 30, 2005

Plannerese for Amateurs

We all know what NIMBY means-- Not In My Back Yard--but what about BANANA? That's extreme NIMBY: Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything. Ready for more planner talk, complete with a planner fairy tale? Here it is from the Planner's website, Planetizen. For some sample Ric Stephens vocabulary, see below:

Practitioners:

Blandscape architect: Minimalist landscaper.
Bungalow Bill: Tract house architect.
CAVEman: Citizen against virtually everything.
Designosaur: Designer with an enormous impact.
DUDE: Developer under delusions of entitlement.
Hippodamist: A city planner [from Hippodamus, a fifth-century Greek architect, who planned the first city].
Inferior desecrator: Interior designer.
Landscraper: Landscape architect.
Meisterplanner: An artistic or epic planner.

New Urbanism | Ken Masugi | 08:27 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 2

Chris Cox Leaves Congress

The OC conservative and Claremont Institute friend is eager to leave the partisan rancor of the House for the Chairmanship of the Securities and Exchange Commission (Dena Bunis, OCR). He doesn't sound up for a challenge Dianne Feinstein, if she in fact runs again. His most enduring single contribution may be his report on Chinese domestic espionage in the U.S., known as the Cox report.

Regulation | Ken Masugi | 03:32 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

One Ugly Zoning Dispute

Denied the right to rezone his property, an Atlanta suburb homeowner takes revenge on his neighbors--repainting his house, parading farm animals in the front yard.... Joe Knippenberg has the complete report at No Left Turns.

Property Rights | Ken Masugi | 03:21 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

HOV Lanes for Hybrids UPDATED

Congressional legislation will open carpool lanes to fuel-efficient hybrid cars (Dan Weikel and Amanda Covarrubias, LAT). Patterico provides extended commentary. Commenter and blogger Xrlq had the best idea for fastlanes: "open them to everybody."

UPDATE: As Lurk noted below, in the Comments, OC Blog has quite a list of commentary on HOV lanes.

Transportation | Ken Masugi | 02:25 PM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 2

Michael Ramirez on Illegal Immigration

See LA Times for July 30. Ramirez was a 2004 Lincoln Fellow of the Claremont Institute.

Immigration | Ken Masugi | 12:29 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 29, 2005

Gang War of Conservative Bloggers

With the fear of missing the joke, I note my presence on NRO, imagined as part of the tribal newsroom clash in Anchorman, a kind of homage to the one in Gangs of New York. (I reviewed it here.) I post the original Jonah Goldberg text below.
Here’s John Podhoretz’s response to the original.

ANCHORMASUGI: THE LEGEND OF HARRY JAFFA [John Podhoretz] A new film for all you fans of the Jonah throwdown to the brilliant Claremont scholar. Starring Vince Vaughan as Ken Masugi, and Will Ferrell as Jonah Goldberg. With a special appearance by Ben Stiller as Harry V. Jaffa, and Franklin Pangborn as the late Allan Bloom.

Me as a wedding crasher? On Channel HVJ? The only movies I've seen in months are the penguin ones.

On the original point about me versus John Derbyshire, I assume others might suppose it’s his defense of the Japanese relocation of WW II that would make me want to harpoon him. But in fact I take a kind of revisionist view (via a review of the movie Pearl Harbor) of the condemnation it has almost universally received after WW II, at least until Michelle Malkin’s book. But maybe I’m looking too closely. Readers: ideas?

RE HAYWARD [Jonah Goldberg] I guess the ultimate question is, if the gang from the Corner was walking through the back alleys of San Deeeago, like Ron Burgandy and his news team, and we ran into the gang from No Left Turns and it turned into a full blown battle royale, would Steve be throwing the trident into my chest or into Peter Schramm's?

Ken Masugi to John Derbyshire: "I'm gonna straight-up murder your a**!"
(Note: If you haven't seen Anchorman, this will make less than no sense).

Media | Ken Masugi | 04:55 PM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

The Rule of Lawsuits

(UPDATE: S. 397 passed at 5:11 EDT by a vote of 65 to 31. Here is the roll call, whose Democratic "yea" votes reveal much about the power of the much-feared gun lobby. Read it, liberals, and tremble.)

Today the full Senate is expected to vote on S. 397, The Protection of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act. This is the current version of last year's bill to protect gun makers from reckless and groundless lawsuits. That bill was killed by a swarm of hostile amendments.

What a difference an election makes. In November 2004 Tom Daschle lost his seat largely because of his Janus-faced sabotage of last year's bill. Seeing this, Senate Dems got their minds right. This year's Dem. supporters include Daschle's replacement as Senate Minority Leader, Harry Reid (D-NV) and Robert Byrd (D-WV). See today's Washington Times' report.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has skillfully fended off this year's hostile amendments, allowing only an insubstantial feel-good gesture from Wisconsin's Herb Kohl. The Kohl amendment would require each handgun to be sold with a safety device, which is generally required by current law.

In all, prospects look good for ending the 8-year blitz of strategic lawsuits brought by big-city mayors, antigun rights activists, and their plaintiff lawyer accomplices. This correction is a necessary and proper restraint on the judiciary that we hope will have beneficial effects in other sectors of American life.

Rights | Timothy Wheeler | 09:54 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

A Profile in Profiling for Terrorists

David Gelernter's sensible column on profiling distinguishes between rational and irrational profiling. He also reminds us, "Good citizenship — remember that phrase? — requires that we cooperate with the authorities as they work to head off the next terror attack." (One mistake is his labelling of John F. Kennedy as "the nation's first neoconservative president," but we'll let this pass for right now.)

The column recalls my own episode with profiling, over 30 years now. I had moved from my apartment in New York. I wore a raincoat (in June), stuffed with last-minute acquisitions. I wore a metal hard-hat I had forgotten to pack. As I raced into the jetway to board the flight, the door behind me closed and several men jumped out to demand I tell them about this or that carry-on item. But they wouldn't let me move my arms. Finally, they asked me to disclose the contents of my pockets. So out of my right coat pocket came a bottle of oregano. Finally reassuring themselves it was indeed oregano, they asked me what was in the left pocket, I told them: "cayenne pepper." This comical ending comes in the context of a tragedy: A few weeks earlier Japanese suicide terrorists had destroyed Israel's Lod Airport.

Media | Ken Masugi | 07:33 AM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

LAT's Reporting/Brief for Roberts Opponents

Joe Knippenberg at No Left Turns follows on Patterico's outstanding dissections of LAT partisanship. Joe notes David Savage's LAT's botched quotation of an appeals court case, eliminating the criminal prosecution portion of the opinion, to argue that the Bush Administration is obliged to surrender Roberts documents to the Judiciary Committee. There is no criminal investigation, though it appears many Democrats appear to echo Alice in Wonderland: "Off with his head, the jury said, this villain must be tried."

Joe's writing for us is here (on faith-based initiatives) and here (on Bush's faith).

Courts, Media | Ken Masugi | 07:09 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 28, 2005

How Did I Get This Cameo?

Jonah Goldberg gives me a bizarre mention on NRO. I think I might know what's going on, but maybe someone else has a better guess. I've never met John Derbyshire. Anyone? Full text below; thanks to Steve Hayward at Noleftturns. I post once every few months on Noleftturns, an indispensable blogsite, btw.

RE HAYWARD [Jonah Goldberg]

I guess the ultimate question is, if the gang from the Corner was walking through the back alleys of San Deeeago, like Ron Burgandy and his news team, and we ran into the gang from No Left Turns and it turned into a full blown battle royale, would Steve be throwing the trident into my chest or into Peter Schramm's?

Ken Masugi to John Derbyshire: "I'm gonna straight-up murder your a**!"

(Note: If you haven't seen Anchorman, this will make less than no sense).

Media | Ken Masugi | 08:51 PM | Comments: 3 | Trackbacks: 0

Soros Watch: The Anti-Progressives

From George Soros's website, a recognition of long-time Claremont Institute friend and fellow Steve Hayward's focus on Progressivism as the source of contemporary American ills (go 3/4 of the way down the page; excerpt below). Peter Schramm at Noleftturns notes the significance of Hayward's insight. (The Soros survey also fingers John Fonte, who wrote on immigration and assimilation for us here. This critic of leftist-supporting philanthropy, e.g., Ford, is named several paragraphs above Hayward.)

The Claremont Institute's just-published book on Progressivism explicates these and other themes, noting its contemporary effects in undermining constitutional government.

When I mentioned earlier that some on the right were determined to roll back the Progressive era, I had in mind, among others, Steven F Hayward of the American Enterprise Institute, who made such a call at the Bradley Center forum on vision and philanthropy. What he had to say about its relationship to “liberalism” and progressive values and institutions is worth quoting at greater length:

“Liberalism as a programmatic ideology derives much of its energy and legitimacy with the public by assuming to be the prime force of human progress. In practical terms ‘progress’ means the continual – and in principle unlimited – expansion of government. This is why more and more spheres of economic and social life end up being politicized despite our best efforts, and is also why today’s liberals slide naturally into calling themselves ‘progressives’ to avoid the unpopularity associated with the liberal label. Public opinion remains vulnerable to liberal/progressive appeals, which is why narrow cost/benefit analysis and similar approaches are not sufficient to turn back liberalism. Right now the conservative movement does not explicitly contest the left over how the terms of human progress are understood.

“As a historical matter, it was during the Progressive Era 100 years ago that both the intellectual foundations of modern liberalism, and the corruption of American constitutionalism, were set in place. The ideas spawned during the Progressive Era established the foundations of both the welfare state and the regulatory state. Progressive liberalism began as a broad-based intellectual movement, comprising economists, lawyers, political scientists, historians, journalists and practical politicians. In the space of a generation this movement reshaped our understanding of our political system. It requires an equally broad-based intellectual movement to reverse this.

“In other words, we should seek to roll back the Progressive Era. This is less daunting and far-fetched than it may seem on the surface. Liberals today are largely unreflective about their own premises. Therefore, what is necessary is a sustained program to force liberalism to engage in arguments they avoid, or to examine its unstated premises.”

This hits the mark, a little uncomfortably so.

Progressivism | Ken Masugi | 11:45 AM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

California Round-up:
Lockyer, Kelo, PETA, the NEA
and Dead Squirrels

Its a slow Thursday, so forgive us for the rambling medley. . .

Is it just me, or is Bill Lockyer's recent jump onto the post-Kelo property rights bandwagon a suspiciously political move? Aren't he and our education chief, Jack O'Connell, a little too busy filing lawsuits against the federal government so they can force religious hospitals to perform abortions? Aren't they working on protecting the rights of public schools to help underage girls have abortions without telling their parents—even as some are proposing that these same girls be forced to get parental permission before getting their ears pierced? How does Lockyer find time for this in addition to his active support of the fine arts? Anyone out there know if he has ever been a strong proponent of property rights in the past?

Regardless of whose fingers are in the air, conservatives ought to use the favorable winds of current outrage while they continue to blow. From the looks of Ken's latest post it seems like everyone's talking about the issue now. We've been helping drive this wagon before it got this crowded—see our property rights and redevelopment blog categories for your post-Kelo education.

Speaking of education, we were too busy to mention the usual antics at the National Education Association's annual backpat, which was held in downtown Los Angeles a few weeks ago. Captain's Quarters listed some their resolutions, soaked as usual in leftist agenda. One wonders how #4, "Adding "multiethnic" and "other" as options on ethnicity questions," will be received by all the kids who aren't able to read. The key issue, however, is how the NEA plans to prepare students for their degree in Indian Gaming.

Speaking of children, that partisan of partisans, Bob Mulholland, has a blog hosted and blessed by the California Democrats. He recently headlined this post "HATE CRIMES UP IN CALIFORNIA UNDER SCHWARZENEGGER." He goes on to lament that Republicans in the legislature aren't doing anything [passing even more meaningless laws] about it.

Speaking of hate crimes, apparently the former visiting Claremont McKenna College professor and convicted hate crime faker Kerri Dunn made it into Bernard Goldberg's The 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America book at #92.

Meanwhile, in the People's Republic of Santa Monica, the hate towards our four legged friends ain't faked. People are protesting the city for its downright genocidal program of squirrel extermination—the city is poisoning cute, fuzzy squirrels—causing "slow and agonizing" death. Sadly, I don't know if these concerned citizens can act quickly enough to stop the L.A. Museum of Natural History from murdering innocent rats
before.
its.
too.
late.

Redevelopment | Matthew J. Peterson | 10:31 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 3

Eminent Domain Watch: Oakland Shops and Yolo County Farmland UPDATED

Mayor Jerry Brown (running for Attorney General) regrets the city’s taking of an auto shop, one he had patronized, but it was for “the greater good.” SFC columnist Debra Saunders assesses the damage and expresses her contrition:

I plead guilty to gushing back in 1999 about Mayor Jerry Brown's plan to add 6,000 units of housing to the downtown area -- and with private money. I never dreamed, however, that Oakland would evict successful, blight-free businesses so that private developers could make more money.

Dan Weintraub reports Yolo County (Sacramento) Board of Supervisor’s greedy gaze on a 17,000 acre ranch and how they plan to finance the purchase through gambling.

The county, despite its desires, doesn't have the money to buy the ranch, even in a forced sale. So it is counting on a grant or loan of as much as $50 million from the Rumsey Band of Wintun Indians, who operate a casino up the road (approved by the county). So far, nobody has spelled out exactly what the tribe would get in exchange for its generosity. But the county is backing legislation that would permit the Rumsey Band to serve as one member on a new governing board that would manage the ranch's assets and could earn income off its resources.

See our post below on San Diego State University’s new B.A. in Indian Gaming.

UPDATE:

Much belatedly noted, but here is OC Blog on the OC Board's condemnation of Kelo and endorsement of Tom McClintock's proposed constitutional amendment prohibiting Kelo-style seizing of property.

Serious links and thoughts on post-Kelo property rights abuse in California, including Tom McClintock's proposed constitutional amendment, can be found here.

Property Rights, Redevelopment | Ken Masugi | 09:30 AM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 1

The LA Times' New Editor

Interview excerpts from incoming editor Dean Baquet, via LA Observed, which passes on further nastiness about Kinsley. See our Media File for our criticism and praise of the LAT.

As has often been said, Kinsley took his bearings for excellence by the NY Times, surely a flawed model of excellence. He opened the editorial and opinion pages to some thoughtful conservative viewpoints, but fundamental problems remained throughout the paper, more in the news pages.

Media | Ken Masugi | 08:32 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 2

July 27, 2005

A Planning Problem: Better Housing Versus Historic Preservation

In Southern California the tension among property rights, urban planning and environmental protection often produces heated political battles. As the region continues to urbanize - partly due to homebuyers' willingness to endure ever-longer commutes so that they can afford a larger house than would otherwise be possible - traffic planners and open space advocates decry the gridlock and environmental damage caused by a sprawling landscape of strip malls and tract homes.

Meanwhile the people populating newly built tracts insist that they have as much right to the American Dream as those who already own a nice home.

The middle ground: build new houses within existing cities by filling up the odd empty parcel, redeveloping property that has fallen into disuse and renovating or replacing older housing stock with new, more desireable structures. Such projects cannot meet the region's full housing demand, but can lessen the need for developments that pave over undeveloped land, or at least projects that aren't even contiguous to current developments.

Unfortunatley the Los Angeles City Council has thwarted that outcome in the Sunland-Tujunga area, unanimously passing an "anti-mansionization" ordinance that forbids property owners from tearing down small homes to erect large ones on the same lot.

Several dozen small homes in the Sunland-Tujunga area that once sat on 4,000-square-foot lots have been razed in recent years and replaced with residences ranging from 3,000 to 4,000 square feet, Greuel said.

While the motion specifically addresses the needs of the Sunland-Tujunga area, the issue of mansionization has spread throughout the city.

"It's becoming very evident that we have a serious problem around the city as we try to preserve certain unique old neighborhoods, with the pressure that's being put on us to create more housing and newer housing," Councilman Greig Smith said.

"There are neighbors who want to keep the uniqueness of certain kinds of communities intact, and I think that's important too," he said. "So while we have personal rights to property, we also have community rights to property."

Surely this is a difficult issue in some communities, as longtime residents are resistant to changes in the neighborhood that they don't like. We can all imagine a next door neighbor erecting a monstrosity that we abhor.

But given the region's housing shortage - not to mention the environmental and transportation consequences of suburban sprawl - policy makers ought to be hoping that Angelenos improve old housing stock rather than trying to preserve the character of older neighborhoods that, after all, only change when some property owners are dissatisfied with their surroundings.

Of course, any one preservation effort has a negligible effect on the region's housing stock. But if property owners seeking to improve the region's housing stock through "infill" development are consistently thwarted the negative consequences will far outweigh the unhappiness a few experience as their neighborhoods change.

Environmentalism | Conor Friedersdorf | 11:46 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 3

Multiculturalism Watch: B.A. in Indian Gambling

With a grant from an Indian tribe, San Diego State University will offer a degree in Indian gambling (Reuters).

The Sycuan tribe has donated $5.5 million to start the research institute and degree program focused on tribal gaming at San Diego State University.

The university's new program is expected to start in the fall of 2006 and enroll about 20 students. It will range from technical topics like slot machine operations to the policy complexities faced by the industry.

"Indian gaming is a relatively young industry, and so far it's been run mainly on intuition. I think it is time that we brought some rigor to the management of these facilities," said Steven Penhall, general manager of the Sycuan Resort & Casino, located about 22 miles (35 km) east of San Diego.

More on Indian gambling and its ties with redevelopment's violation of property rights can be found in our Ethnicity file. Hat tip to Adam Fuller.

Ethnicity, Higher Education, Moral Fiber | Ken Masugi | 09:52 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Lockyer Opposes Eminent Domain

The power of redevelopment as a bipartisan issue is seen in California Attorney General Bill Lockyer's opposition to an attempt to use eminent domain for private development purposes (Jim Herron Zakora, SFC). Kelo continues to reverberate.

California City, located in southeastern Kern County near Edwards Air Force Base, used the threat of eminent domain to get most of the owners of the desert land to sell so the property could be turned over to Hyundai Motor America for construction of a 4,340-acre test track facility.

But some holdouts among the owners have sued in Kern County Superior Court to stop the project, and their trial is scheduled in September.

[California Attorney General Bill] Lockyer, in a brief filed Tuesday, is seeking to join the suit on behalf of the landowners asserting that California City abused its powers under the state's redevelopment law to declare the land blighted and seize it under eminent domain. Under state law, a city may only take land for economic development purposes in blighted areas.

The "blight" standard has been in practice a highly subjective one. See our analysis of the situation in California now.

Redevelopment | Ken Masugi | 10:46 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Peter Schrag Misses One

In his thoughtful review of initiatives and the Governor's agenda, Peter Schrag overlooks the one requiring parental notification of a minor's impending abortion, Proposition 73. Here is the text. Schwarzenegger's opposition or even indifference to it could cause a major crisis among Republicans.

Direct Democracy, Governor, Moral Fiber | Ken Masugi | 10:33 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

SCOTUS Follies Updates UPDATED

Patterico takes an ax to the LA Times story (David Savage and Warren Vieth) on nominee John Roberts' work in the Justice Department. "Agenda journalism," as the story does not indicate that "The story does not mention that every living former Solicitor General, including four Democrats, has signed a letter opposing an identical request made by Democrats opposing the nomination of Miguel Estrada." This letter should be the starting-point of the coverage of the attempt to get information about Roberts' DOJ days.

Excerpt:

Our decisionmaking process required the unbridled, open exchange of ideas - an exchange that simply cannot take place if attorneys have reason to fear that their private recommendatlons are not private at all, but vulnerable to public disclosure. Attorneys inevitably will hesitate before giving their honest, independent analysis, iif their opinions are not safeguarded from future disclosure. High-level decisionmaking requires candor, and candor in turn requires confidentiality.

UPDATE:

Paul at Powerline notes Clinton Solicitor General Walter Dellinger's shift on Roberts, in his op-ed in today's Washington Post.

Incidentally, once more on Roberts' membership in the Federalist Society (see their updates on him). Stanley Fish, the literature prof (once assistant dean of Duke law school), used to boast of his membership in the Federalist Society in his presentations before them. I'm a member too. If I had any objection to the Federalist Society, it would be their acceptance of the law schools' regnant legal positivism. But they've been getting better on this point, in their conferences.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 08:13 AM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

July 26, 2005

UPDATED
Conservatives Debate Immigration:
Senate Hearing on McCain-Kennedy

[Thanks to Independent Sources, The Immigration Blog, and The Corner's Stanley Kurtz and Mark Krikorian for the links.]

Tamar Jacoby, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, gave her testimony today to the Senate Judiciary Committee's hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

She opened by saying:

I'm here today as a conservative to make the conservative case for immigration reform.

John Fonte of the Hudson Institute disagrees—in this open letter to Jacoby, soon to be published in our Local Liberty Newsletter, he critizes the McCain-Kennedy bill and says:

I am surprised that you are considered a "conservative."

This is a perfect example of an increasingly awkward division within the Republican party—meanwhile, as the likes of John & Ken make clear, there are lots of voters who are fed up with hand-wringing and compromised solutions.

At present, the topic is only a tad short of being a nightly news item—but there simply isn't enough pressure in the national public square to force the issue. Yet our illogical immigration policy and its dangerous effects continue to aggravate a steadily worsening situation. Although the Bush administration might be able to dodge any serious decision-making on the matter, over the next ten years the elephant is going to grow too large to be kept in a corner. Many would say this is already the case.

In any event, the two bills under discussion at the Senate hearing today reveal the current differences between the two sides of the debate. Chris Kelly over at The Immigration Blog says we ought to be suspicious of the McCain-Kennedy bill, if only because it is a solution offered by those who helped cause the problem—true enough. We argue that one simply cannot even begin to talk about the illegal immigration debate without an understanding of citizenship. The real problem, as Ken Masugi never tires of pointing out, is not one of too many immigrants, but too few Americans. Once again, as Fonte points out in his letter, some of those claiming to hold conservative views on the matter likely fail to grasp what citizenship means:

Significantly, however, you do not oppose dual allegiance for immigrants, a stance that surely undermines even the "minimalist rules of the game" that you advocate. After all, the Oath of Allegiance to the United States—in which new citizens "renounce" all "allegiance" to their birth countries—and the moral rejection of dual citizenship is at the heart of our successful "nation of immigrants" ethic. We are, to put it more accurately, a nation of assimilated immigrants: the transfer of allegiance from the old country to the United States that occurs when taking the oath is central to who we are.

This is central to American identity because unlike many other nations, America does not base citizenship on race, religion or ethnicity. Instead, citizenship is based on political loyalty to our constitutional democracy. If we accept the principle that it is legitimate for foreign-born citizens (and their American-born children) to maintain political allegiance to the foreign states from which they came, we have accepted an ethnic conception of citizenship that mocks our core values. In the War of 1812 we refused to accept the ethnicity-based concept of citizenship implicit in "once an Englishman always an Englishman." Today we should refuse to accept the ethnicity-based concept of "once a Mexican always a Mexican," or once a Pakistani always a Pakistani, or any other ethnic designation upon which dual citizenship is based.

***
Among other flaws McCain-Kennedy exacerbates the dual citizenship problem. If the bill becomes law, 10 to 12 million new citizens will also be able to retain Mexican, Central American or other foreign citizenship. Never has there been such a potential challenge to the integrity of citizenship naturalization . . .

From Jacoby's testimony today:

An effective temporary worker program will have to be large enough to provide the workers we need to keep our economy growing and flexible enough to accommodate a variety of immigrants, including those who ultimately chose to settle in the United States. Of the two proposals on the table, only the McCain-Kennedy bill meets the second requirement, and it is the only one that seems likely to work realistically to meet our future labor needs.

And:

Finally and most difficult, there is the question of the 11 million. Both pairs of reformers have plainly anguished over the issue, and both have spoken encouragingly about the need for a workable answer: one that would entice illegal immigrants to come forward and participate. But of the bills before us, only the McCain-Kennedy approach comes close to being practical. What we don’t know: can it pass muster with skeptical voters?

Regardless of those "skeptical voters," Jacoby says:

". . . on the matter of the 11 million, McCain-Kennedy is the best proposal on the table so far."

Immigration | Matthew J. Peterson | 02:47 PM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

Kinsley Out as Opinion Editor

What's this? He will still work within the editorial or opinion sections, but his commute from Seattle was hampering his work. Thanks to Patterico.

Under his brief tenure (just over a year), the op-ed page has improved, with the editorials smirky as ever but with the prospect of some useful experimentation. The announcement follows the resignation of the editor, John Carroll, and the naming of a new publisher, Jeffrey Johnson.

Media | Ken Masugi | 09:39 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

$41 Billion to Remove Illegals?

The illegal immigrant lobby has relied on a sense of inevitabilityand reductio ad absurdum in order to justify its arguments for amnesty and lax border controls (Darryl Fears, Washington Post). The Center for American Progress's report is the latest attempt in this strategy. By making the task appear daunting, the arguments about cost and mass deportation policies make significant reform seem impossible. This is a vivid illustration of historical inevitability arguments versus free government arguments.

Such a mass movement--possible only under despotic circumstances intolerable to most Americans--has never been the goal of thoughtful reformers, who emphasize law enforcement and changing the culture of lawlessness. Critics of the report, such as Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, estimate a much higher return rate for illegals, given the proper policies.

The next issue of Local Liberty newsletter focuses on illegal immigration, with three articles by John Fonte, Edward Erler, and E. Anderson. Subscriptions are, for now, free.

Immigration | Ken Masugi | 09:10 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 25, 2005

National Defense and Local Politics

The lax policies of cities, especially those carried away by "trendy multiculturalism," may undermine one fundamental purpose of the city--to provide protection. Joel Kotkin notes that cities characterized by sprawl may be less inviting terrorist targets than denser London and New York, with their greater dependence on public transportation.

National Security | Ken Masugi | 09:24 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

All Politics Is Local--Except When It's National: The Budget Initiative and Beyond

Will the special election be cancelled (via OC Blog)? Does the Governor want to eschew national political leadership on budget discipline, such as this initiative provides for? That would be the implication of Evan Halper's LAT analysis of the initiative as an example of nationwide trends, if he cancels the special election. All the groups that have invested their labors would turn against him. That would assure Schwarzenegger's demise into self-immolation. He still retains within his power the ability to transform California politics and save political liberty in the Golden State.

Schwarzenegger has a chance for national greatness on the immigration issue. See here for the emergence of a Bush strategy. John Fonte, on our home page, has his doubts. The two Republican senators from Arizona are fighting it out on employment provisions.

With an eye to principle and policy, John Tierney sees Secretary of the Interior Norton abandoning her libertarian roots, to protect Republican political interests. N.B.: The Bush Administration did not file a brief in favor of Ms. Kelo.

Budget, Direct Democracy, Governor | Ken Masugi | 08:58 PM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

Immigration and American Identity:
An Open Letter to Tamar Jacoby

The Senate's Judiciary Committee meets tomorrow to discuss the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, and Tamar Jacoby, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, is scheduled to testify in support of the guest-worker proposal. John Fonte, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, has written an open letter to Jacoby. This is one of three pieces dealing with illegal immigration that will appear in the upcoming issue of Local Liberty Newsletter.

Fonte takes a look at Jacoby's book and says:

I am surprised that you are considered a 'conservative.'

He also addresses the glaring flaws—or, we should say, dangers—of the McCain-Kennedy bill::

Among other flaws McCain-Kennedy exacerbates the dual citizenship problem. If the bill becomes law, 10 to 12 million new citizens will also be able to retain Mexican, Central American or other foreign citizenship. Never has there been such a potential challenge to the integrity of citizenship naturalization. After all, Mexico shares a contiguous border and sends us our largest number of immigrants. Moreover the Mexican government, through its vigorous promotion of dual allegiance, is actively working to retain the loyalty of its former citizens and even gain the loyalty of their American-born children.

At the same time McCain and Kennedy—and you and your allies—remain mute before an outspoken Mexican government that directly challenges our ability to patriotically assimilate our new citizens. Naturalized citizens of Mexican descent and their U.S. born children are not, as the Mexican government insists, “Mexicans living abroad,” anymore than my parents, brother, and myself are “Italians living abroad” or this journal’s editor, Ken Masugi, and his relatives are “Japanese living abroad.” American citizens of Mexican descent are Americans, pure and simple. If you and other McCain-Kennedy supporters are serious about the integrity of American citizenship, you ought to tell President Fox and his government exactly that, while joining others who insist upon cracking down on the growing phenomenon of dual allegiances.

Read more from our blog's immigration file. See also our "Introduction to Citizenship for New Americans."

Jacoby recently wrote an op-ed in our own LAla Times. You may also want to read this older NR online debate between Jacoby and Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. So far as blogs go, this blogger is always on Jacoby's case.

Immigration, National Security | Matthew J. Peterson | 02:56 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 24, 2005

Tyranny-by-the-Sea in Carmel

On a wine-tasting trip last week I passed through Carmel-by-the-Sea, California, a hyphenated municipality on the coast near Monterey where the tyranny of pendantic punctuation is the least of residents' worries.

The Carmel Pine Cone, a local weekly newspaper published since 1915, offered two troubling stories about elected officials threatening local liberty.

Example # 1: "Business learns not to try to change its name"

Carmel Plaza can't be renamed The Courtyard at Carmel, the planing commission voted 4-1 Wednesday, because Carmel has lots of courtyards and people already know the shopping center at Ocean and Junipero as the Plaza.

"They can change it to whatever name they want, except the one we don't like," commissioner Alan Hewer said.

"This name may be misleading, or perhaps even presumptuous, as there are many countyards throughout the city and these have existed far longer than the Plaza," he reported.

Example # 2 :"Where the Blame Lies"

This editorial focuses on the recent declaration that 300 Carmel-by-the-Sea homes are "historic," a designation that prevents affected homeowners from altering their house without prior approval from a special government body that decides whether the changes will be allowed. As comissioner Alan Hewer might say, they can make any changes except the ones local officials don't like. The paper comes out against the historic designations.

The city isn't even 100 years old. Except for the founding of the Mission, hardly anything happened here that you'll find it [sic] the state's history books. So it is just plain silly to pretend that 10 percent of the town's housing stock is already of such historic value - not to the people of the town, but to the whole state - that they must not be altered without strict review by a committee of historic preservation fans. Believe it or not, several of the homes on the historic list were built as recently as the 1960s. That's how far-fetched it is.

Of course, this battle isn't really about historic homes. It's about small homes. A handful of Carmel residents - and people from surrounding neighborhoods - prefer tiny cottages on the town's 4,000 square foot lots. They want it to be illegal to build bigger ones. But the fact that most people support the current, 1,800 square-foot maximum on Carmel's building sites prevents the small-house activists from having their way at city hall. So they look for ways to force the town to adhere to their wishes. And they easily found one: The California Environmental Quality Act which, for some bizarre reason, has been interpreted to require protection of homes that aren't even 50 years old as long as an "expert" can be found to opine that they're "historic."

California Republicans ought to make it their mission to stand up for local property rights, opposing big government initiatives from Kelo-style takings to Carmel-style historic preservation battles and overzealous planning commission edicts. These are righteous fights, politically popular and useful for showing California homeowners at the local level that conservative principles - notably property rights and limited government - really are essential to liberty.

Eventually local success would translate into electoral success for California Republicans at higher levels.

Local Governance | Conor Friedersdorf | 02:41 AM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

July 23, 2005

Greencard Bureaucracy

Legal immigration often means going the greencard route. Here is what applicants face--a bureaucracy that reflects the worst in government management (S. Mitra Kalita, Washington Post).

Immigration | Ken Masugi | 08:34 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Nihilism as a Judicial Principle UPDATED

It's the diversity of minds, stupid, U. of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein argues in this LA Times op-ed. Sunstein is author of the forthcoming Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Judges Are Wrong for America. First, one doubts that diversity in the sense of disputes between Scalia and Thomas is the main thing Sunstein has in mind. Moreover, how can there possibly be diversity on certain fundamental issues--whether slavery was an evil, for example?

What the nihilistic Sunstein approach reflects is the fragmentation of any consensus on constitutionalism--any point of view, foreign ones not excluded, is welcome. Since the Court does so much legislating, why not treat it like a legislature (an intellectual one, to be sure, an assembly full of Socrateses feared by Madsion) instead of a body devoted to interpreting constitutional principle as the founders understood it?

UPDATE: Sunstein NPR interview, one of several inaptly named "Fresh Air" interviews with him on this website.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 06:37 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 22, 2005

SCOTUS and Illegal Immigrant Students (Updates)

Updates from the Remedy on SCOTUS nominee Roberts. The judge in the illegal immigrant student case has now reversed himself, pulling his explusion order.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 07:42 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 21, 2005

Eminent Domain in California: Post-Kelo UPDATED

Four opinion pieces criticize the operation of eminent domain in California, by the SFC (yet begging off endorsing Tom McClintock’s proposal, as have some OC legislators) and Steven Malanga of the Manhattan Institute. Assailing sports venues, the latter puts it more bluntly: "But the fact is, the public benefit promised by urban economic development programs rarely materializes. In fact, such initiatives often become tax eaters — a public burden rather than a public benefit."

UPDATE: Dan Walters derides the "sophistry" of the California Redevelopment Association, which is arguing that the "blight" requirements of state law prevent Kelo from having major consequences. Anti-redevelopment and activist OC Supervisor Chris Norby notes some other California consequences of Kelo.

A summary of our take on Kelo's consequences and what the Claremont Institute contributed to the opinions is here and, C. Robert Ferguson's essay on Kelo California consequences here. OCBlog on another abuse.

Courts, Property Rights, Redevelopment | Ken Masugi | 10:08 PM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

Redistricting Off the Ballot, For Now

A California superior court judge threw Proposition 77, the redistricting initiative, off the November special election ballot, because of differences between the authorized text and the text of the circulated petitions. This is one of the perils of the privatized politics of initiatives. But leaving such things as politics to the professionals puts us in even greater peril, as long as politics is defined by Sacramento standards. Dan Weintraub provides links to Rick Hasen, who gives us the full text of the decision.

Time to consider our friendly "blow up the legislature" alternative to reapportionment.

Reapportionment | Ken Masugi | 09:08 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 20, 2005

Who Is Nominee Roberts?

Both Tom West and Richard Reeb make worthwhile points below; see especially Dennis’s comment, which is reproduced below. See Noleftturns for astute commentary and summaries of the latest. For all of Judge Roberts’ fine qualities, we conservatives must not settle for less than Clarence Thomas-level jurisprudence.

I would point out that Roberts differs markedly from the failed appointments Richard notes: None of these justices had a record of conservative political commitment. (Judge Souter, to the contrary, was a board member of a hospital where abortions were conducted.) They lacked the political courage to defend constitutional principle when it counted. On the contrary, Roberts has a record of such involvement as a member of the Reagan and Bush Justice Departments. His judicial record is slim (partly as befits the cases the DC Circuit reviews). The spectacle of leftist feminists assailing attorney Mrs. Roberts for her pro-life leadership would be amusing to behold, if it didn’t reveal the thrust of such assaults on the family.

This may be one source of my colleagues’ unease: The Republicans have advanced numerous circuit courts of appeal judges as prospective Supreme Court picks. This makes much sense in a system where the rule of law is still respected. The problem now is that many Supreme Court decisions undermine the rule of law, and so the best pick for a justice may well be someone who lacks what has been characterized as “judicial temperament.” (See the Washington Post’s comparison between the "affable" Roberts and the "edgier" Luttig, re West’s point and Ann Coulter’s [feigned?] exasperation.) This accusation has been hurled at my favorite, Judge Janice Brown. What made Justice Thomas and makes Judge Brown such defenders of constitutionalism arises in part from their personal experience. When they speak of “slavery” as a result of a conventionally accepted political program, one knows this is not mere hyperbole. Blacks have been cruelly cheated of the best benefits of American citizenship, and know the difference between cliché and reality. Hence, they are easily seduced by the ploys and tropes of the left and are all too ready to know only an America at its worst. Those who aren’t and can achieve independence of outlook are in the position to become the most perceptive and compelling defenders of America at its best. They received their education outside of the Beltway.

Hence, when then-EEOC Chairman Clarence Thomas hired me and John Marini, and subsequently met other Claremont Institute scholars, he brought a radically different type of conservatism into his thinking. That is the sort of corrective our judges, bureaucrats, and elected officials need. Clarence Thomas's probing mind made the difference.

"Dennis," commenting on Justice Thomas:

What it means to be like Thomas or as good as Thomas is not just a matter of voting on the same side as Thomas does. The Supreme Court's powerful effects on American society hardly come from the decisions the Court hands down. The effects come from the OPINIONS the Court writes in order to justify and explain its decisions. It is the arguments formulated in those opinions that are then applied and taught throughout the judicial system and the law schools and later applied by lawmakers that have the greatest impact.

I would say that Justice Thomas uniquely grasps the principles of the Declaration of Independence -- the equal rights of all men given by nature and nature's God -- and often brilliantly interprets Constitutional clauses and laws in the light of those principles. Any reading of Thomas opinions compared to those of any other current Justice will reveal his impressive depth of understanding. For Thomas the Constitution does not simply or usually speak for itself. He understands it as the form of government intended to secure the natural and God-given rights men have before government comes into being and not just a series of political rights and neutral government processes.

A good Thomas opinion amounts to a little lesson in constitutional self-government, and placed in the context of the moral order that forms its basis. We learn something from a Thomas opinion, unlike nearly all others written today.

The greatest task of the Supreme Court is not merely deciding cases correctly, though of course it must do that. The Court is a teaching institution, and the best Justices -- the John Marshalls, Joseph Storys, Felix Frankfurters, and Clarence Thomases -- have taken advantage of that in their opinions to instruct Americans on how we should govern ourselves by the ideas of equality and liberty. At any time there are few potential justices out there who can achieve that, but that is what Presidents must look to find.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 10:38 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 19, 2005

Mr. Justice Roberts

A clue to how the nomination may proceed may be found in liberal New Republic reporter Jeff Rosen's ecstatic reception, praising his intellect while noting his conservative beliefs. Rosen, incidentally, is on our annual American Political Science Association panes, in Washington, DC, Sept. 1-4, commenting (together with Powerline's Paul Mirrengoff) on papers by Jeremy Rabkin and Philip Munoz.

I'll be in DC the next few days, and try to blog back the logos. You might lookk up the Post's comparison betweeen Roberts and Judge Luttig, published the other day. I can't retrieve itand blog on this crude system at LAX.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 07:32 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Star Students, But Illegals

"What am I doing wrong to society that I should be punished by going to Mexico?" Corona said. "I did everything I was supposed to do as I was growing up. Don't break the law, go to school, learn new things."

Oscar Corona is one of four high-achieving science students who face deportation because they came with their parents illegally long before they were of school age (Nicholas Riccardi, LAT). As Mark Krikorian, director of the immigration restrictionist Center for Immigration Studies, concedes, "These are the hardest kind of cases and the consequence of a broken immigration policy….” In one respect, these are the sorts of people a good immigration policy should produce—superb students who can contribute to their country and benefit from its freedoms. Yet, in another, significant regard, they are the product of lawlessness, and allowing their entry would reward and encourage further abuses.

In effect, they are stateless people, and it is true that sending such people back to an alien country is as irrational as returning ex-slaves to Africa. And surely even a hefty fine would only be looked upon as a way of buying amnesty, in return for some sort of special visa status.

Krikorian is correct to say that “"These kids should have never been allowed to grow up in the United States because they and their parents should have been intercepted before things got this far." But now they are here. See our comments on Steve Lopez’s fundamentally sympathetic column on a highly successful illegal graduate student.

Immigration | Ken Masugi | 04:36 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

UPDATED Blogging The Bear Flag League Blogger's Conference:
The "Long Tail" Effect

Dan Weintraub's column talks about Sunday's Bear Flag League Conference, which Ken and I attended.

Weintraub emphasizes the "long tail" effect, meaning that the combined efforts of the smaller blogs of groups like the League often reach more numbers and have a greater impact than one post by a single titan such as Instapundit, Powerline, or Hugh Hewitt. Of the Bear Flag League, Weintraub says "[a] political story covered in all of these blogs would probably be read by more people than one of my columns published in The Bee." (I think all three of the "titans" would agree; the long tail is directly related to what Hewitt terms the "blog swarm.")

Don't believe it? If you had been there, the substance of what the speakers had to say might have made you a believer. But let's take the very blogging inspired by the conference itself as an example of the long tail effect in action.

Justene got the ball rolling...

The results?

Weintraub gave a nice link to the League's new group blog on the special election, and, of course, in his printed column he drew attention to the entire league as well as a few particular bloggers.

On the promising Big Ideas 4 LA website, Brian Hay offered a gracious thanks to the League for the invite. His boss, former assembly speaker Bob Hertzberg, spoke at length about the positive effect blogs had in his recent Los Angeles mayoral campaign. Another non-conservative, Kevin Drum—yes, THAT Kevin Drum—also attended, and by all accounts made it out alive. It was great to have Hertzberg (and Drum, although he wasn't a speaker) present—he offered a very real example of the political power of the internet.

A "smashing success," says Patterico. The LA Times wouldn't post the old version of Prop. 77 in order for the public to make its own judgement about the current controversy—but thanks to the BFL Conference Patterico got Ted Costa himself to promise to put it up on the Fair Districts website. Patterico also linked to Weintraub's column today, and I'm sure many more League members will soon follow. The Interociter reported one of the news items from the conference—during an extended Q & A session with BFL bloggers, Costa said that there will be another lawsuit against Prop. 77 coming soon.

A report on Allan Hoffenblum's speech by Greg Ransom of Prestopundit gives a good summary of his comments and promises more. Hoffenblum, the Publisher/Editor of the California Targetbook, emphasized both the power of blogs to influence opinion makers as well as the power of the internet to lessen the amount of money needed in political campaigns.

Michael Bowen of the Conservative Brotherhood has posts here, here, and here on the conference: "The Bear Flaggers get it. In fact, I suspect that they, like no other group of bloggers, are likely to be the source of the next set of innovations in the blogosphere." Another member of the Brotherhood—actor, writer, and one of our 2005 Lincoln Fellows—Joseph C. Phillips spoke about the sort of community the blogosphere provides. Both the BFL members and no less than Bob Hertzberg and Allan Hoffenblum encouraged him to run for an Assembly seat sooner rather than later.

LA Observed reported the event. A bit of conservative Gonzo journalism is available over at Captain's Quarters. Darleen's Place has an excellent summary of the various talks—see also Miller's Time.

Flap mentioned Weintraub's column this morning, and he has pictures and highlights of the conference here and here. The West Coast Bored of Exchange also has pictures and some amusing highlights. Right on the Left Beach has even more photos here and here. Baldilocks has pictures and more commentary: "Before I started blogging, I was just a citizen who felt politically insignificant, if not totally powerless. Two years into it, it’s a good surprise to find oneself listened to . . . "

Little Miss Attila put more than her share of work into the conference, as did Scott Schmidt. Say thanks by reading their excellent accounts of the event.

Body Parts initiates discussion: he suggests the League should avoid direct political activism and attempt to do more journalism as a group. Even those who regretfully weren't able to attend, like Mad Mikey, will be able to offer their opinions in the future as the BFL digests all manner of new ideas.

Of course, there will likely be more posts within the hour. All these people linked to each other in myriad ways, and I doubtless missed some (email me at "mpeterson@claremont.org" with updates). Yet here we have a prominent journalist, politicians both established and aspiring, and a wide group of other citizens—not to mention a conservative thinktank—all bringing attention to each others work, and co-mingling ideas. While the blogsphere continues to develop, and its power is slowly understood and unleashed, the traffic and general synergy generated by all of the above sites and connections is not to be scoffed at.

It is indeed a long tail.

UPDATE:
Democracy Market gives a great summary of the event here; Prestopundit has another post; Bloginators respects; Lex Communis shouts out to Weintraub's column, as does Pearly Gates; and, unrelated to the conference, So Cal Lawyer mentions that Aaron's rant blog got linked by the BBC.

Linkage, Media | Matthew J. Peterson | 10:39 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

California Border Patrol Petition

Citizens curious about the California Border Police Initiative can read it (and sign on if interested) here. Our background on the initiative. Thanks to OC Blog, which has been going on with great zest on the spirituality management sessions on the Orange County sewage department. See our earlier post, now updated.

This silliness reveals the general problem with the discipline of management, founded by Claremont Graduate University's Peter Drucker. Drucker is an extraordinary mind, whose writing ranges from novels and Japanese art to contemporary politics and Nazi theory to the management of non-profits. Those who now call themselves management gurus have come to think that whatever they touch, in however bizarre a way, is "management." Cf. Dilbert. I once had a short but inglorious career evaluating universities to see whether their courses could be given college credit. Anything seemed to qualify as management.

Immigration | Ken Masugi | 08:11 AM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

July 18, 2005

Wal-Mart Goes the Beltway Way

At NoleftTurns Steven Hayward provides a lesson about corporate giants: No matter how big you are, the forces of the Beltway are bigger, and will bring you to heel.

Regulation | Ken Masugi | 08:27 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Goodbye, Columbus

The city council of Columbus, Ohio passed a ban on semiautomatic firearms recently. This is substantially the same gun control law passed by Congress in 1994, which Congress allowed to expire last fall because of its utter uselessness.

The council must be very dedicated to make a symbolic statement for gun control that will cost $20 million. That's how much the local economy will lose when the National Rifle Association doesn't bring its annual convention to Columbus in 2007 as it had planned to do.

NRA EVP Wayne LaPierre laid the wood to the city council this morning at a press conference at the Greater Columbus Convention Center.

It seems the city council needs some reality therapy next election from the gun owners, hotel managers, restaurant owners, and others who will be paying the bill for the council's folly.

Rights | Timothy Wheeler | 08:27 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Kevin Starr on the Happiest Place on Earth

Distinguished California historian Kevin Starr makes a link between the pursuit of happiness and the Happiest Place on Earth. Is Disneyland a city planner's will to power? Note Starr on science fiction writer Ray Bradbury and Tomorrowland, below.

Thus when we look at Disneyland at the half-century mark, we can also see in it a utopian statement - a species of city planning, if you will - that set up a paradigm of value to Orange County. Disneyland suggested that complex urban environments can be deliberately created and orchestrated to incorporate regional and related cultural values.

In the case of Disneyland, this resort, this permanent exposition, assured a newly suburbanizing generation that the values of a more intimate America - small town America - need not be lost, as was being feared, in the creation of the suburban developments of the postwar era.

So that, New Urbanists, is why southern California lives so well with sprawl-- we have Disneyland! See Starr's conclusion, below.

For a less happy assessment of land-use see OC Supervisor Chris Norby on redevelopment.

Thus Disneyland, like the successful expositions of the 19th and early 20th centuries, was structured by present value and hope for the future. The themes and values of Disneyland, its utopian statement, mirrored the themes and values that an entire generation was bringing to California and the West. These values, argues urban theorist Constance Perin, were fundamental to American social practice as expressed in home ownership and the spatial organization of American cities.

Perin's research, published in the mid-1970s, revealed attitudes that are today perhaps disturbing, certainly politically incorrect, but reflect, despite a two-decade interval, the values and assumptions of the 1950s. American cities and towns, Perin argues - and her argument must be extended to include the new communities of California and the West - encoded and enacted a deeply embedded imposition of social value and order through the built environment; indeed, nothing less than a de facto philosophy of history and moral value can be seen - either positively or negatively, depending on one's point of view - in the way that Americans revered and protected home ownership in what by the 20th century had become zoned and protected enclaves.

It is no accident, finally, that one of the greatest science fiction writers to be produced by Southern California, Ray Bradbury, is also among the region's most astute city planners and urban theorists. Like Bradbury's "The Martian Chronicles" (1950), Tomorrowland at Disney, together with Frontierland, constituted a displaced narrative about values and social structures in transition in Orange County, California and postwar America.

To use the recent language of literary criticism, Disneyland is a text through which we can look back and re-experience the hopes and fears, the beliefs and illusions, of a postwar generation in the throes of creating a place called Orange County.

New Urbanism | Ken Masugi | 01:55 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 16, 2005

A Revolting Redevelopment: SW Washington, DC

In the Washington Post Charlotte Allen of the Inkwell reflects on her neighborhood, such as it is, the product of the precedent of the Supreme Court’s Kelo v. New London decision. Decided last month, Kelo told cities that the U.S. Constitution did not bar their seizing homes and transferring that property to a developer, provided they were working with an approved plan. Allen describes well the barrenness (and affordability) of the massive development sanctioned by Berman v. Parker. More such neighborhoods may come your way, in the wake of Kelo. I lived around the corner from her. Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote a ringing dissent in the case, once lived in the same area, several blocks away. His colleague Justice Souter also lives in SW Washington, where he was once mugged.

Charlotte Allen had tangled with Susan Estrich, in her nasty exchange with LA Times Opinion Editor Michael Kinsley. See our comment.

See Ms. Allen's conclusion to her Post article, below.

Government entities, for all their subsidies, bond issues and eminent domain powers, almost always fail badly at effective urban revitalization, and those failed attempts almost always exact an appalling human cost in the form of lost homes, neighborhoods, businesses and jobs. In the District, the most spectacular recoveries of moribund urban zones -- Capitol Hill over the decades, downtown and Columbia Heights almost overnight -- have occurred almost entirely by way of individual consensual transactions, building by building.

Indeed, Southwest, for all the near-mortal damage inflicted upon it in the name of progress, is slowly reviving, too, and without government help. Property values and sales have taken off, and just off Fourth Street, right behind the spot where Max Morris's department store once stood, a brand-new luxury condo complex -- built entirely by the private sector on private land -- recently sold out in a matter of weeks. The pity is that this is just a start, and it's taking more than half a century to restore the dense, rich urban life we lost when the Supreme Court gave a green light to governments to intervene in cities' natural processes of decline and rejuvenation.

Cities, Courts, Property Rights, Redevelopment | Ken Masugi | 09:30 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

A Local Little Terrorist List: Islamic Connection?

“Law enforcement authorities warned the Israeli Consulate and California National Guard their facilities were on a list of possible terror targets that [Los Angeles] police found recently while investigating string of robberies, officials said yesterday” (Ian Gregor, AP via SDUT)

The London bombings were carried out by British citizens, who were, however, guided by alien authorities. Lodi may be a center of such subversion here in California—contrast the Sacbee (Dorothy Korber, Stephen Magagnini and Denny Walsh) and LAT (Maria L. La Ganga and Rone Tempest) stories for details. Were the two suspects railroaded out of the country by embittered fellow immigrants or were they really Al-Qaeda agents? Maybe both. Is this a battle between Muslims loyal to America and those who look for an opportunity to harm it?

The Japanese relocation in WW II is rarely understood in those terms, but certainly that struggle among ethnic Japanese was there, as I have noted in my work and Michelle Malkin has in hers.

Might we have a similar situation here in Los Angeles? See below for some dot-connecting.

The warnings followed the July 5 arrests by Torrance police of Gregory Vernon Patterson, 21, of Gardena, and Levar Haney Washington, 25, of Los Angeles, on suspicion of robbery. Both men have pleaded not guilty to the charges in Torrance Superior Court….

Patterson's mother, Abbie Patterson, has described her son as an "idealistic young man" and Christian who recently converted to Islam. She said he met Washington about six months ago.

Earlier this year, Patterson worked for several months at a duty-free shop at Los Angeles International Airport, according to a man who answered the telephone at the business yesterday. The store is in the Tom Bradley International Terminal, near the El Al Israeli Airlines ticket counter, where an Egyptian immigrant shot and killed two people in a July 4, 2002, attack.

Immigration, National Security | Ken Masugi | 05:38 PM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

July 15, 2005

Your Own Budget Reform:
Weintraub Asks for Ideas

Your homework over the weekend:

If you haven't been reading California Insider this week, Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Weintraub has begun a noble experiment. He has set forth a list of the governor's reform goals, and he's asking for your ideas. He wants any and all suggestions for reform, but:

. . . as you make suggestions, try to stretch to make them acceptable to people who don’t see the world the same way you do. Think: what are the limits to how far I can go toward meeting the other side’s needs and still live with what I come up with?"

The first round of results are in, but he needs more. Click on the two links above and send him an email.

Weintraub is the keynote speaker this sunday at the Bear Flag League's first official event:

He will be joined by Ted Costa, Fair Districts; Allen Hoffenblum, California Targetbook; Bob Hertzberg; Joseph C. Phillips, Conservative Brotherhood; and others.

There are two panels: "Blogs as Part of a Political Campaign" and "How Blogs Impact Campaigns and Make Policy." Although many of those attending the event profoundly disagree on a variety of issues, it looks to be a promising event for California's "right of center" bloggers. The goal is to get bloggers together with policymakers and vice versa. Look for more such events in the future.

(The event is sold out—there is simply no room left—so if you're interested, your only hope is to try to bribe Justene.)

Budget, Events | Matthew J. Peterson | 04:10 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Property Rights: Tom McClintock's "Kelo Protection" Amendment

While bloggers were still swarming over the text of the now infamous Kelo decision, State Senator Tom McClintock promised to introduce a constitutional amendment to protect property rights in California. Wednesday he held a press conference to "announce the introduction of SCA 15 and ACA 22 to restore the original property rights protections of the American Bill of Rights that were ripped out of the Constitution by the Kelo decision of the U.S. Supreme Court two weeks ago."

The proposed amendment to the California constitution ought to be taken as a model for other states in the wake of the enormous wave of Kelo-inspired outrage still swirling throughout the nation. With or without Kelo, state law can still provide adequate protection against sloppy jurisprudence at the national level.

In California, as in many other states, a large and likely unnecessary bureaucracy exists in the name of "redevelopment"—the government's active involvement in planning and developing land. Citing the sort of loose definition of "public use" that Kelo legitimizes, local governments across the nation often run roughshod over citizen's property rights.

It should come as no surprise that redevelopment bureaucrats will likely be the major source of opposition to McClintock's "Homeowner and Property Protection Act:"

Redevelopment agencies are planning to fight the effort.

John Shirey, executive director of the California Redevelopment Association, said California already has laws carefully restricting the use of eminent domain. But sometimes redevelopment agencies need to seize property if it is particularly blighted, he said. (Harrison Sheppard, LA Daily News)

Now it is true that under California law, local governments are supposed to use eminent domain in "blighted" areas. Yet, as we will never tire of explaining, local governments habitually designate whatever they happen to want to seize as "blighted." As colleague Conor Friedersdorf posted yesterday, "everything is blighted" according to the currently elastic definitions promoted by redevelopment advocates. This case study from our newsletter explains how redevelopment works in practice—the city of Claremont simply labeled its wealthy downtown area "blighted" in spite of the obvious.

Executive Director Shirey also laments that McClintock's ". . . amendment eliminates the use of eminent domain for economic development purposes." Um, yes. That’s the point. As the amendment says:

It is the intent of the Legislature that private property shall not be taken or damaged for the use, exploitation, or management of any private party, including, but not limited to, the use, exploitation, or management of property taken or damaged by a corporation or other business entity for private profit, as is currently permitted under the United States Constitution under Kelo v. City of New London . . .

This solution to protect property rights in spite of the SCOTUS ought have widespread bipartisan support. It deserves a great deal more press than it has so received so far—bloggers take note and spread the word!

A Claremont Institute Property Rights/Kelo Primer:

Read a summary of the Claremont Institute at the Supreme Court this term.

Read our amicus brief in the case.

The effect of Kelo in California.

The Center for Local Government supported Eric Claeys with a grant to write this law review article, titled Public Use Limitations and Natural Property Rights, that reveals the true, natural rights understanding of property law.

Property rights, and how Justice John Paul Stevens has a bad history of decisions.

Property rights, and why even back in 1999 it was clear that Justice Janice Brown deserved to be nominated to the SCOTUS.

A review of an excellent book on eminent domain abuse.

Cicero's defense of property rights.

Property Rights, Redevelopment | Matthew J. Peterson | 10:36 AM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

New Urbanism's Virtues and Vices: Andres Duany Interview

The virtues and vices of New Urbanism are on display in this interview with Andres Duany, principal proponent of New Urbanism, an anti-sprawl and pro-traditional neighborhood movement. The interview can be accessed here, under the Features section (Cary Stemle). Excerpt below. Is Duany suggesting we would live better lives by, say, sacrificing a study for a share in a public library or a guest room for a share in a local bed-and-breakfast?

See our objections to New Urbanism, as well as some appreciation of it.

LEO: Every year the model homes at home shows seem to get bigger.

AD: There’s no public realm. Because there isn’t a decent walk, because there isn’t a decent cafe, because the movie-going experience is miserable, you have to internalize it. You say, I need a media room, double high space in the house because the square is so horrible. Sure, there’s Starbucks, but it’s so far away I need to have my own espresso machine. In the end, these very large houses are actually compensation for the lack of neighborhoods. But here, because the neighborhood’s within walking distance to the neighborhood center, where everything will be available, you don’t need to have it all inside your house.

New Urbanism | Ken Masugi | 10:19 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

LA Times Ethics Guide: The Big Omission

That is, the paper's ethics guide for their staff. We haven't had time to digest all of this, but keep in mind Peter Drucker's observation that "business ethics" is largely a means of enabling businesses to do with clear conscience what most people would regard as unethical. But there is this obsession with the appearance of impropriety as well that leads to absurdities. May LAT sportswriters no longer vote in contests for awards and honors (e.g., baseball's Hall of Fame)?

See the complete guide here. Excerpt below, annotated with abuses noted in our blogs. See our work in smoking out unethical behavior by a fired LAT reporter. See the NY Times self-criticism.

There is nothing in the ethics guide about reporters' responsibility to the country that guards the principle of free speech and press. The ethos that most promotes the arrogance of the media is the notion that they are somehow above the law, in protecting evidence of criminal activity.

CONTENT

Fairness

A fair-minded reader of Times news coverage should not be able to discern the
private opinions of those who contributed to that coverage, or to infer that the newspaper is promoting any agenda. A crucial goal of our news and feature reporting – apart from editorials, columns, criticism and other content that is expressly opinionated – is to be nonideological. This is a tall order. It requires us to recognize our own biases and stand apart from them. It also requires us to examine the ideological environment in which we work, for the biases of our sources, our colleagues and our communities can distort our sense of objectivity. [e.g., LAT coverage of illegal aliens]

In covering controversial issues – strikes, abortion, gun control and the like – we seek out intelligent, articulate views from all perspectives. Reporters should try genuinely to understand all points of view, rather than simply grab quick quotations to create a semblance of balance. People who will be shown in an adverse light in an article must be given a meaningful opportunity to defend themselves. This means making a good-faith effort to give the subject of allegations or criticism sufficient time and information to respond substantively. Whenever possible, the reporter should meet face-to-face with the subject in a sincere effort to understand his or her best arguments. [See the LAT's reporting on evangelical Christians at the Air Force Academy.]

Media | Ken Masugi | 09:41 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 14, 2005

Everything Is Blighted

What is blight?

California law says that land must be "blighted" to be included in a redevelopment area, within which localities have broad powers of eminent domain and more control over tax revenue. Yet localities skirt this provision fequently, a reality even critics of strict standards for redevelopment acknowledge.

How do localities interpret the law? Guidelines posted by the California Redevelopment Association on its Web site give us insight. Among the conditions that supposedly justify a finding of blight:

- Incompatible adjacent or nearby uses of land parcels that hinder economic activity.
- Adverse physical factors, such as susceptibility to flooding and earthquakes, that demand significant improvements to buildings in order that they be safe for occupancy. (This would seem to justify a finding of blight for the entire state.)
- Small and irregularly shaped lots under multiple ownership that are vacant or under-utilized.
- Outdated and inefficient building configuration and design that does not meet current business needs.
- Unsafe access into buildings or parking lots.
- Inadequate and obsolete infrastructure, (i.e. utilities, storm drainage, sewers, street lighting, and confusing and inefficient street systems).
- Depreciated or stagnant property values and other evidence of disinvestment.

Redevelopment | Conor Friedersdorf | 01:12 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Union U Revived--by the Governor

The Governor squirms out of a principled stand he took, vetoing Union U funding from the budget. Our previous blog explaining the importance of this line-item veto.

[A]dministration officials said Wednesday that Schwarzenegger would honor the agreement by directing the UC system to use other funds to keep the labor studies program going.

"We're pleased the governor has recognized the labor institute should be permanently funded," said Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez (D-Los Angeles). "The speaker is thankful."

Maybe they'll defund some ethnic studies program or the Ward Churchill speakers budget, but we're doubtful.

Full story below (Evan Halper, LAT:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will ask the University of California not to close a controversial labor studies program that he had targeted for elimination from the state budget, administration officials say.

The governor had used his veto authority Monday to block the $3.8-million program, which has been under attack by conservatives for years. The budget cut appeared to violate a backroom deal he made with Democratic legislative leaders.

But administration officials said Wednesday that Schwarzenegger would honor the agreement by directing the UC system to use other funds to keep the labor studies program going.

"We're pleased the governor has recognized the labor institute should be permanently funded," said Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez (D-Los Angeles). "The speaker is thankful."

Department of Finance spokesman H.D. Palmer said the program was not deleted from the budget in error. He said that the UC system would receive a funding increase of $76 million next year, and that it was appropriate to use that money to pay for the institute.

"It was not a mistake at all," Palmer said.

"It is wholly and totally consistent with other actions we took on the UC budget."

UC officials said Wednesday they had not yet heard from the governor.

Conservative groups have labeled the labor institute "Union U," a hotbed of antibusiness propaganda and leftist political organizing.

Angie Wei, a lobbyist for the California Federation of Labor, says the institute is detested by the right because it has produced what she characterized as indisputable, empirical research that validates such things as prevailing-wage laws.

Governor | Ken Masugi | 09:32 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Chinese Take-Out: Unocal UPDATED

Congressional support for blocking a Chinese oil company's bid to take over Unocal Corp. gathered steam Wednesday as the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said he would try to stop it if Unocal's shareholders or the Bush administration didn't.

"I think it would be a mistake to let this deal go through," Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-El Cajon) said after a hearing at which his committee's Republicans and some of its Democrats — and three of the four invited witnesses — said Chinese ownership of El Segundo-based Unocal would compromise U.S. national security. Hunter raised the possibility that China could use its ownership of Unocal's energy resources as a lever in the event of a showdown with the United States over a hypothetical effort to take over Taiwan.

Among the witnesses opposed was national security expert Frank Gaffney. Libertarian Jerry Taylor of Cato favored the arrangement. Congressman Chris Cox's report on Chinese subversion techniques remains essential reading.

UPDATE: See Sam Ryskind's cartoon, #2.

National Security | Ken Masugi | 08:22 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Would Churchill Have Used "Value Judgments"?

From Max Boot's regular LAT op-ed column:

When applied to the embodiment of pure evil, the usual liberal tropes about "understanding" not "condemnation" have an air of Monty Python about them. Yet there are uncomfortable echoes of ... sermonizing in the attitude of many modern-day intellectuals toward the Islamo-fascist threat.

The BBC now refuses to refer to the London terrorists as "terrorists." They are to be known by the more neutral term "bombers," lest the public be deceived by "the careless use of words which carry emotional or value judgments." Value judgments about blowing up innocent commuters? How gauche!

In Monty Pythonesque reply, "A BBC spokesman said last night: "The word terrorist is not banned from the BBC." See the Daily Telegraph's account.

Would the BBC in WW II have ceased using "Nazi" on the grounds that this acronym casts aspersions on "socialism"? (Nazi = National Socialist German Worker Party)

The battle over "value judgments" replacing natural rights and fundamental principles is the ignored but vital intellectual battle of our times. For values, shop at Sears; values are utterly subjective. Morality is not. The Declaration of Independence and all that flows from, constitutional government, our rights, and our moral fiber, is unintelligible if we speak in terms of value judgments rather than virtue and vice. For starters see here for Harry V. Jaffa on Churchill and here for Jaffa on value judgments in contemporary British conservative Roger Scruton and the Chief Justice.

Media, National Security | Ken Masugi | 08:12 AM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

Gehrification of LA: Skyscraper Neighbors Concert Hall

The architect of the shimmering Walt Disney Concert Hall strikes again (Jia-Rui Chong, LAT):

Architect Frank O. Gehry will design a 40- or 50-story skyscraper next to his iconic Walt Disney Concert Hall, as well as other elements of the $1.8-billion complex planned along Grand Avenue in downtown Los Angeles, officials said Wednesday.

The selection had been rumored for weeks but nonetheless was greeted with cheers from project planners as well as experts, who said it would make the tower one of the most anticipated architectural efforts in the nation.

If the skyscraper follows the exterior of the Disney Concert Hall, people will be blinded throughout LA County. Another thought from us on downtown LA, citing Joel Kotkin. For our file of blogs on new urbanism and public architecture see here.

New Urbanism | Ken Masugi | 07:43 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 13, 2005

The L.A. City Council: Passing Irrelevant Resolutions Just to Say They Did

The Los Angeles City Council is wasting time again.

In a Tuesday vote the body unanimously endorsed gay marriage, a matter over which it has precious little power. The resolution, subsequently signed by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and faxed to Sacramento, merely continues the legislative body's maddening proclivity for overstepping its bounds.

While some see such resolutions as harmless statements of support or opposition I'm convinced that they needlessly politicize local legislative bodies, undermining their ability to carry out municipal duties. When staff time is factored in the time and money wasted is itself inappropriate.

The only excuse for such resolutions: in rare cases they can communicate a constituency's judgement on a matter of public policy to higher-ups at the state level as they consider how to vote. Of course, 58.6 percent of California voters opposed gay marriage when the matter was put to them in a 2000 ballot initiative. The next time the L.A. City Council speaks for the city on a matter they weren't even elected to weigh in on they ought to at least reflect the stance taken by their constituency.

Local Governance | Conor Friedersdorf | 11:51 PM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

A Non-Judge for the Supreme Court?

Senators have boldly suggested elevating a non-judge to the Supreme Court. John Eastman, our Director of the Center for Contitutional Jurisprudence, demurs:

"Conservatives already are upset at what they call the federal judiciary's streak of "judicial activism," and some believe that putting a non-judge on the court would not help, said John Eastman, professor of constitutional law at Chapman University School of Law and the director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.

I would be surprised if the president would make that move, considering the history and what the fight's about: judicial activism versus constitutional interpretation and strict constitutionalism," Eastman said. With a non-judge, he said, "you don't have somebody who has proven themselves to adhering faithfully to the law on the bench."

I have some suggestions about non-judges who might make excellent Supreme Court Justices: William P. Barr, the former Attorney General under Bush 41;
Pepperdine law professor Douglas Kmiec (not to mention his Dean, Kenneth Starr); Atlanta attorney (and former deputy a.g.) Larry Thompson--just to mention a few who come to mind immediately.

See further thoughts on the Supreme Court on our motherblog, The Remedy.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 03:32 PM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

State's Democrats Target Marriage

Just as California Democrats seek to assist passage of assisted suicide, so they are married to the idea of decoupling marriage from sex--identities, that is. Using the increasingly familiar tactic of amending in committee a totally Senate unrelated bill with the gay marriage measure that previously failed passage in the Assembly, the bill's backers run athwart solid majorities in California and at least 11 other states that have affirmed marriage between a man and a woman. Few examples more clearly illustrate that the State's ruling party is more like a "surrogate" majority than a popular one, presuming to speak for a majority that has not yet formed, but which will support the end of real marriage when this is accomplished by law and no longer has the will or energy to reverse the action.

Here is a link to the most tireless foe of gay marriage.

Moral Fiber | Richard Reeb | 11:18 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Standing Up for the LAPD

In Watts tensions are rising over a police shooting that killed a crazed, gun-wielding father and his baby girl, the Los Angeles Times reports. The newspaper offers a complete account of events leading up to the shooting as related by Police Chief William Bratton.

At 3:47 p.m., police took a 911 call from the car dealership placed by Peña's stepdaughter, whose name was not released, Bratton said. The girl told police that her father was threatening her and asked for help. A patrol car was dispatched while an operator tried to call back. Someone answered the phone and did not speak, but a struggle was heard.

When police got there, Peña shot at them.

The stepdaughter, trapped, was able to escape about 5 p.m. as police returned Peña's gunfire in the direction of the girl and officers, police said. Once she was free, she told them he had ingested cocaine and alcohol, and related threats he allegedly made against the entire family.

"Her father had threatened to kill her, kill the baby, kill himself and the mother," Bratton said.

An LAPD sergeant got Peña on the phone and hostage negotiators spoke to him about 5:30 p.m. — the last time the department had any contact with him inside the building. Before abruptly ending talks, Peña told negotiators he was not going to go to prison, Bratton said.

About 6:20 p.m., SWAT team members fired at Peña again, then moved in, falsely believing he had been wounded and was down near the door to the store. They believed the child was alive. Once inside, they discovered Peña was mobile and shooting at them from behind the wall of a small office. After they set off a "flash bang" device, SWAT Officer Daniel Sanchez, 39, was hit by a bullet in the right shoulder and was pulled out of the line of fire by colleagues.

Officers returned fire — in the third and final exchange with the suspect that day. When the shooting was over, 60 rounds had been fired inside the small space. Susie was found dead near the office door with a wound to her head. Peña was found dead behind a desk.

"It may be confirmed the child was killed by the police but that doesn't change the circumstances," Bratton said. "It just compounds the tragedy."

"The police killed my daughter," said Lorena Lopez, who had lived with Peña for six years, in brief comments to reporters Tuesday. "I want justice."

At a nearby news conference, Luis Carrillo, an attorney representing the family, placed the police action in what he called "a long history of excessive force against minorities" and an equal history of covering it up by the LAPD and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

On Tuesday night, more than 100 protesters and neighbors gathered at the shooting scene for a candlelight vigil in memory of Susie Lopez.

Najee Ali, director of Project Islamic Hope, said the department's record of confrontation warrants a thorough look into this case.

Peña is "not going to win any father of the year award … but let's focus in on the investigation and not a smear campaign," Ali said.

The LAPD has been guilty of wrongdoing in the past. The Rampart scandal alone is enough to make me scrutinize events carefully prior to accepting the department's version as truth. But this criminal - an armed suspect threatening his family and shooting multiple times at officers - justified the use of deadly force against him if ever such force is appropriate.

If local police don't receive the community's support in such circumstances the whole enterprise of law enforcement and public safety in that community is a lost cause, due not to police misconduct, but rather to the public's inexcusable failure to rightly assign moral culpability. When a gunman takes innocents hostage and fires at police any resulting deaths are that gunman's fault, even if a SWAT officer acidentally hits the wrong target or a deputy rushes in too soon.

Watts residents ought to show the officers - no doubt traumatized by a death whose weight they wouldn't have to feel in a just world - that a silent majority supports them. After all, though we count on local government to ensure public safety, the rule of law ultimately relies upon a moral citizenry upholding basic notions of right and wrong, vocally when necessary.

UPDATE:

Mack Reed of LA Voice weighs in on the subject with a reasonable voice here.

Crime, Crime, Ethnicity | Conor Friedersdorf | 01:39 AM | Comments: 4 | Trackbacks: 0

July 12, 2005

Lawmakers Assist Suicide of Assisted Suicide Bill

No matter how often we hear the standard lecture about how liberal Californians are, events like this (Nancy Vogel, LAT) continue to call commonly held wisdom into question, even as such news passes by unnoticed:

The Death With Dignity Act cleared two committees but was never brought up for a vote on the Assembly floor. [Assemblymember Lloyd] Levine said 33 of the 80 lawmakers had committed to vote for the bill — short of the necessary 41.

Sure, some of the polls say that most Californians have favored assisted suicide for years—but if this is the case, why hasn't state law been changed yet?

'The supporters of this kept trying to say there was a ton of support behind this, that people were clamoring for this,' said Tim Rosales, spokesman for Californians Against Assisted Suicide. 'But at the end of the day, they couldn't muster enough votes to get it out of the Assembly.'

'When they bring it up in January,' he said, 'it's going to be as dead as it is today.'

The LAT article doesn't even make clear that the bill's sponsors in the Assembly also tried "taking the issue directly to the Senate by gutting and amending an existing bill . . . that already had been sent to the upper house," and failed miserably. (Jim Sanders, Sac Bee)

Now California conservatives have made their share of imprudent mistakes in the past, and this is abundantly clear to anyone who looks at the current state of the party. But the other extreme—the persistent notion that conservatism is dead in California—is no less a flawed, cartoonish vision of state politics than the often incompetent strategies of the right on the left coast.

This is the state of Nixon and Reagan as well as Jerry Brown, and even the governor formerly known as moonbeam, by all accounts, has grown more conservative as he's grown older—of course, the phrase "more conservative" is used here in a decidedly comparative sense. This is a state whose citizens outlawed racial preferences in their institutions of higher learning—even as said institutions remain some of the most liberal in the nation. This is a state that banned homosexual marriage, despite the fact that California is the home of some of the largest and most powerful gay and lesbian communities in the nation. This is a state that consistently seeks to come down hard on illegal immigration, despite the fact that it has an enormous Latino population. This is a state wherein some of the fastest population growth is occuring in areas that are strong bastions of conservatism (the Inland Empire). This is the home of the "ATM of the Republican Party," Orange County, whose residents voted for Bush by the largest numerical margin of any county in the nation.

Bill Simon, after all the miscalculations and faulty footing, only lost by 6 percentage points. Arnold Schwarzenegger won rather handily. Conventional wisdom said that this was because he is the perfect image of a moderate Republican. One wonders if conventional wisdom will ever recognize that he has been losing ground because of the weakness that "moderate" Republicanism commonly falls into: a lack of clear political principles and the unguided and erratic policy decisions that necessarily follow.

UPDATE
More on the newly deceased assisted suicide bill here—DeLuz is right that press reports don't generally mention that the California Medical Association is against assisted suicide. Huh.

California in the Union, Conservatism at the Local Level, Moral Fiber | Matthew J. Peterson | 10:46 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Pinguin Pride: That Mexican Cartoon Again UPDATE

Historian Enrique Krauze explains the offensive Memin Pinguin character again to El Norte. Young Mexicans "see the stamp not as a racist slur but as a highly pleasing image rooted in Mexican popular culture. If Memin Pinguin were a person of flesh and blood, I believe he could win the coming presidential election." As for race and ethnicity in Mexican society, Krauze notes the prominence of Indian and black leaders throughout Mexican history.

UPDATE: LAT (Richard Marosi) on Pinguin speculators and clashing opinions.

While this may be true within Mexico, it doesn't address our concern about the attitudes of Mexicans entering this country. See here and here. The problem goes all the way back to the earliest debates about immigration and who should be admitted to perpetuate the founding principles. These could not be people whose political education was anti-democratic. One result is seen here, in clashes between Mexican and black youth. Once again, our refrain: the problem is not too many immigrants, it's not enough Americans.

Ethnicity, Immigration | Ken Masugi | 10:32 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Sacramento Scramble: Governor Vetoes "Union U" Funding UPDATED

Dan Walters surveys the wreckage. Daniel Weintraub thinks there's a case to be made for Attorney General Bill Lockyer's denial of the reapportionment initiative, based on minor wording differences between the approved petition and the signed one, but the LA Times disagrees. Jackie Goldberg will confront textbook publishers on her own and has withdrawn her notorious bill limiting their size, thus, she concludes, forcing teachers to expose their students to the internet, where the real learning can occur. If she wants to privatize education, we have some better ideas for her and Sacramento. The papers say nothing about the Republicans who opposed the budget, but Chuck DeVore got an earful for his yes vote, as we noted the other day. Tom McClintock said phooey, we're still borrowing.

The most interesting veto (Lynda Gledhill, SFC) was that of state funding for "union U," the Labor Center programs at the University of California, Berkeley and UCLA. See below for the statement of purpose from the UCB Labor Center. They're not Ward Churchill but a lot more effective in promoting the programs of the left. If we took a closer look at public higher education in California, many more dubious programs would come to light, and we haven't even begun to talk about the anthropology departments.

UPDATE: Some backtracking, maybe total collapse on this.

ABOUT US

The Labor Center is an outreach arm of the University of California at Berkeley. Founded in 1964, our mission is to improve the lives of working people by linking the University's vast resources to labor and community efforts for social and economic equity. We provide educational, research, and other programs that increase the capacity of the state's labor movement to:

Organize and represent workers in new and traditional industries.

Reach out to immigrants, young workers, people of color, and women.

Identify and advance policies that improve low-wage jobs and narrow income gaps.

Develop a new and diverse generation of labor leaders.
During the past three years, the Labor Center has:

Provided academic research and expert testimony that contributed to the passage of living wage ordinances in California.

Convened a community and labor coalition that played a key role in reversing the AFL-CIO policy on immigration.

Placed UC students in two-month summer internships with 58 community and labor organizations.

Incubated innovative immigrant worker and young worker organizing projects.

Produced research, videos, and curricula on key topics including homecare, childcare, farm labor, young workers, and globalization.

Sacramento Shenanigans | Ken Masugi | 08:46 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

UPDATED: Bringing Dharma to OC Fire and Garbage

Orange County's sewer agency is seeking its "corporate soul" - with the help of a leadership guru who's paid $180,000 a year.

Dharma Consulting, known for bringing a spiritual dimension to business, has been working with the Orange County Sanitation District for several years. Dharma's $15,000-a-month contract was renewed in May; by next year, the company based in Leucadia in San Diego County will have made some $570,000 for its work with the district.

Others may see a first amendment violation here, but we wonder at how cash-strapped local governments really are. See Teri Sforza's enlightening story in the OCR. Ommmmmm.

UPDATE
The OC Blog has more here.

UPDATE #2

And here.

UPDATE #3

Another post on the matter from an OC blogger.

Counties | Ken Masugi | 07:20 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 11, 2005

Brownstein Debates Immigration

In his Monday LAT column Ronald Brownstein contrasts two immigration reform proposals, the get-tough argument of Mark Krikorian and the Cato libertarian argument of Douglas Massey. (At least the LAT website version should have included these links.) Krikorian urges disincentives to immigrate. Massey urges incentives toward a guest worker program that would “drastically reduce the flow of immigrants crossing the border for work.”

Brownstein repeats the oft-made argument that “enforcement alone will never end illegal immigration.” But the pro-enforcement side has never argued so narrowly.

More important, lost in this assessment, with its focus on economics, is the need for a commitment to American citizenship on the part of immigrants. Loyalties need to be ascertained. Moreover, establishing an ethnic class of agricultural and other workers is at odds with the American ideal of equality. The uncertainty only undermines our dealing with the legacy of slavery and reviving the meaning of government by consent and, therefore, limited government.

Immigration | Ken Masugi | 11:23 AM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

OC Blog on DeVore: "Neo-Con"!

Irvine freshman assembly member Chuck DeVore votes for the budget deal, and OC Blog denounces him. "Did anyone check to see if DeVore's family had been kidnapped? That is how shocking his vote was on this budget." Read the comments. DeVore's initial response (see below). Exchanges follow.

Dan Weintraub's arguments may influence Sacramento Republican thinking.

El Pistolero: Since you have all the answers, I guess you need to run for office.

Analyze the vote. Ask yourself, who's running for higher office and needs to beat their chest, claiming conservative credentials on the budget while voting with the Democrats the rest of the year while no one is looking, voting to expand government power again and again?

I'll say it once more, if we held out, what would have happened? We would have gotten even a bigger budget. Anyone who believes otherwise has not observed the ugly end game of budget "negotiations" where the Democrats buy off a few Republicans with pork in order to secure their vote.

In the meantime, I am completely at peace with my vote -- an unpressured, unlobbied, unasked-for vote at that.

Oh yes, and as for the smoking tent, never been there with the governor -- haven't asked, haven't been invited.

Posted by: Chuck DeVore | July 8, 2005 09:06 PM

Sacramento Shenanigans | Ken Masugi | 08:14 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Immigration Enforcement and Terrorism

Should local police enforce immigration laws, or should that task be left to INS officers? An op-ed in the Times of London, written in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks there, is relevant to the debate. The author argues that terrorist organizations are increasingly turning to attacks carried out by "homegrown" radicals attacking other residents of the city where they reside, demanding a local solution.

Local police have unique advantages over national assets (such as MI5) to help prevent acts of terrorism because they are part of the community. They “walk the beat,” communicate regularly with local residents, and are more likely to notice even subtle changes in the neighbourhoods they patrol daily. Common sense tells us — as does experience — that local law-enforcement personnel are uniquely situated to notice (or otherwise learn of) and investigate unusual or suspicious behaviour. Based on the numbers alone, we can assume that local law enforcement personnel are much more likely than national agents to cross paths with terrorists.

In California, local officers assigned to the illegal immigration beat would be well-positioned to recognize a sudden influx of radicalized Islamic immigrants into a community, and to detect behavior that might signal an impending terrorist attack on a local site or carried out elsewhere by locals. Critics might respond that allowing local police to enforce immigration laws will cause various other problems. Maybe. But as we weigh which policy to adopt it's clear the possibility of increasing local knowledge of radicalized immigrants is one powerful argument for allowing local police to enforce immigration laws.

Immigration | Conor Friedersdorf | 12:42 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 10, 2005

Hollywood's Blue-State Blues

In the new LA Times Current section (replacing Opinion), Govindini Murty, a rare Hollywood conservative, argues that self-interest (not to mention common sense) should lead to more films with conservative themes.

Moral Fiber | Ken Masugi | 09:42 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Athene's Redistricting Reforms

Heather Barbour pulls out the stops in her insistence that redistricting requires radical changes. See my competing proposal, with puns at least as dubious as Heather Barbour's.

Will Lockyer's political designs keep redistricting off the ballot (John Wildermuth, Lynda Gledhill, SFC)? The Governor should steal a Clint Eastwood line on this issue.

Reapportionment | Ken Masugi | 09:25 PM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

Jill Stewart Sees Kelo Evil for California UPDATED

Astute columnist Jill Stewart understands Kelo's implications for California.

Kelo doesn't change California law. As UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh explained to me via e-mail, Kelo "basically reaffirms what most lawyers understood the law to be in any event."

But we masochists who follow inept politicians at the city hall level know Kelo does something worse. It gives moral permission to pols to cook up ever more grotesque backroom deals. Their lust to generate taxes, even if no direct public use is provided by the redevelopment project, is now a higher calling than protecting private property in America.

She quotes me, but she should have also quoted Robert Ferguson, who wrote up this parade of horrors for us. UPDATE: In fact, in the full Stewart column (SFC) she does. For more on Kelo see here.

Related: Yale profs rally around an alum, Justice Clarence Thomas.

Courts, Property Rights, Redevelopment | Ken Masugi | 09:09 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Can Conservatives Handle the Truth About the Court?

John M. Broder of the NY Times reports:

Presidents also have a tendency to oversell their nominees, to the detriment of both. The first President Bush courted trouble when he announced Mr. Thomas as his nominee for the court in 1991, calling him the "best qualified" candidate in the nation.

"If you make such a preposterous statement as that," said Bruce Fein, a conservative legal commentator and former Justice Department official, "you're just asking for ridicule and trouble in the Senate." Justice Thomas was confirmed, but he and the nation bear the scars of his Senate hearings.

In fact, Bush was speaking the truth, but even his conservative allies couldn’t handle then, and not now. They were looking at the Court through conventional legal lenses, the same distorting factors that have allowed Republicans to err in their choices over several decades. Thomas was the best-qualified precisely because he understood as few did the depths of the constitutional crisis we are in. Few saw past race in the Thomas choice. Race was relevant to this extent: Being raised in segregation, he had to think clearly about the relationship (and deviance) between principle and practice, and what this has meant for constitutional government. When he spoke of government being tyrannical and out of control, that was not mere rhetoric. This seriousness is what made Thomas (whom I had worked for four years when he was Chairman of the EEOC) the “best qualified” then.

We need Bush 43 to think in these same terms of who is "best qualified." And the conclusion he’ll come up with is Judge Janice Brown. That is where his thinking should lead him. The President should also be prompted by the fact that she, not (with all due respect) the Latino candidates (of whom Garza, not Gonzalez, is most likely), is the most politically astute pick as well.

We pundits don't need to deal with Arlen Specter's shenanigans (David Kirkpatrick, NYT)

Courts | Ken Masugi | 08:54 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 08, 2005

Terrorists in California

1. The latest lowdown from Lodi: More suspects? (Stephen Magagnini and Dorothy Korber, Sacbee).

2. Interview with LA police chief William Bratton.

Q: You said it was a question of when, not if Los Angeles will be attacked?

Within law enforcement, you'll find that's a very constant refrain. We fully expect at some point in time it will happen here.

Is this "realism" or an admission of inevitable failure? What if we had fully expected nuclear destruction of a major city as a price of the Cold War. Of course the answer is not to adoptthe logic of airline security (Mary Curtius and Maura Reynolds).

See our posts on our motherblog, The Remedy.

Ethnicity | Ken Masugi | 05:03 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

That Offensive Mexican Cartoon

LA Times editorial writer and recent immigrant Sergio Munoz provides an explanation of the popular (in Mexico) Mexican caricature of a black boy. Jesse Jackson was predictably not amused to see it honored on a Mexican stamp. For background see our blog. Munoz's conclusion reinforces the views of those who see illegal immigration as a problem: "the two countries remain very different and culturally apart."

Ethnicity | Ken Masugi | 03:55 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

How To Debate Supreme Court Nominees: Religious Liberty UPDATED

In refuting a misunderstanding of Judge Michael McConnell (from the right, in this case) Powerline cites Claremont Institute Senior Fellow Thomas G. West's critique of McConnell's understanding of the free religious exercise clause of the first amendment. See West's essays here and here. West agrees with Philip Hamburger's critique of McConnell and has his own critique of Hamburger here.

See also Noleftturns' Joe Knippenberg, for his support of McConnell.

Thoughtful exchanges such as these should inform any debate over Supreme Court nominees. The distance between this and what we have been getting is the distance between the Founders and typical contemporary politics.

According to Chait, "The funny thing is that the memory of the campaign to demonize Bork as a right-wing nut has grown stronger even as the intervening years have shown quite clearly that Bork is, in fact, a right-wing nut."

Moreover,

The truth is that although the attacks on him were over-simplistic, his rejection was the right outcome.

In many ways, the Bork debacle resembles the case of Alger Hiss, a State Department official whom conservatives accused in 1948 of spying for the Soviet Union. Liberals and leftists made Hiss a cause celebre. They saw the Hiss case as a perfect morality tale, in which the left played the role of the persecuted innocent, and Hiss' accusers revealed their bottomless villainy. And though not every single charge against Hiss was perfectly fair, in time it was shown beyond all dispute that Hiss was a Soviet spy. You might say that the prosecution of Alger Hiss was the original Borking.

Whatever one thinks of the judge--and there are fundamental deficiencies with the way he and the Chief Justice take original intent jurisprudence--Chait's logic would in fact justify his murder--to complete the Soviet non-analogy.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 11:24 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 07, 2005

Quite a System

How does Rancho Cucamonga's Redevelopment Agency attempt to attract businesses to the city? Its Web site spells out numerous incentives that it offers. Among them:

- Accelerated Approval Process
- Permit Fast-Tracking
- Tax Increment Financing
- City Permit Fee Assistance
- Small Business Loan Application Service
- Assistance with National Electrical Code Compliance
- Assistance with AQMD (air quality) Permit Processing

It's quite a system: 1) government adopts regulations that discourage business; 2) regulations discourage business; 3) government makes special exceptions to regulations to encourage business.

Suddenly the government is in the position of deciding which businesses deserve to succeed. Those chosen businesses are then elevated above the law: unlike their competitors they no longer have to jump certain government hurdles to do business.

Local Governance, Redevelopment, Redevelopment, Regulation | Conor Friedersdorf | 11:27 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

The Governor and the President: Leadership Among the Ideologues

Bush generally gets it, the Governor doesn’t. Schwarzenegger has fallen in esteem for many of the same reasons Bush fell in popularity, yet the President won re-election. The criticism of Bush came (and continues to come) from both left and right. The left-wing criticism of Schwarzenegger has taken its toll, but for the right there has been too much talk of compromise, too little real reform of California’s spending problem and indifference if not contempt for the moral concerns of conservatives. Bush won the center by moving to the right. Schwarzenegger needs to support the parental consent for abortion initiative, restrictions on illegal immigration, and an anti-regulatory and anti-tax plan.

Message to Schwarzenegger: Don’t let the media or consultants fool you. That’s why conservative initiatives win. You are the initiative governor. You must run a conservative campaign.

Bush needs to reinforce the Schwarzenegger message. The left realizes what is afoot, hence they must rewrite history by portraying Justice O’Connor as a true conservative (see Cass Sunstein), remaking Souter (described by Bruce Ackerman in the LAT as “a moderate conservative”), and distorting nominee Clarence Thomas as having a “scant public record” (Ackerman). Of course O’Connor supported the most radical revisions of American society and bolstering the Court by, among other things, discovering homosexual rights, finding foreign sources for American constitutional law, denying parental consent requirements for their minor daughters’ abortions, and imposing a preposterous “reindeer test” on Christmas displays on public property.

If Bush wants to impose civility on a debate in which the left insists on lying (I heard Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter on radio this morning contend that Judge Bork supported racial segregation), he’ll need a dramatic change of heart in his enemies. It would be a good thing to have a lengthy discussion of the misunderstanding of Dred Scott by the Court. But this will likely need to occur at another occasion.

Governor | Ken Masugi | 04:06 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

To Shrink Corruption Shrink Government

How can a city stop corruption among its elected officials?

It's a question the City of Los Angeles is trying to answer: the Los Angeles Times reports:

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the Los Angeles City Council took steps Tuesday to tighten ethics standards to prevent city commissioners and other officials from misusing their power for political or financial gain.

The actions came as an ethics expert and others questioned the propriety of Villaraigosa's inaugural gala, which allowed firms that have business before city officials to spend up to $100,000 to attend. The money from Thursday's event went to a publicly funded charity that is run out of the mayor's office.

The solution?

L.A. officials think new ethical regulations will do the trick. City employees will attend ethics training sessions and sign an "ethics pledge." Lobbyists will have to file quarterly reports online. These may well be good changes. But they'll do little to fix the root problem.

As long as municipalities like Los Angeles have such expansive powers to make or break businesses - through granting major contracts, initiating eminent domain procedings, manipulating zoning laws, etc. - money will have undue influence on the political process, whether through campaign contributions, outright bribes or other arrangements.

Of course, government must do some things. Los Angeles needs its potholes fixed, its streets cleaned and its fires extinguished. Even such a limited government would see moneyed influences lobbying to supply the city with assphalt, soap suds and fire hoses. Unfortunately as a city increases its scope and power, so too does it increase the likelihood of corruption and the gravity of the resulting ills, particularly when it enters the realm of massive urban redevelopment projects.

Los Angeles residents worried about unfairly granted contracts and undue perks for special interests will be best served reining in their local government's power, thereby reducing the number of contracts handed out by City Hall and the number of entities that have any reason to interact with it. Lesser fixes, though perhaps welcome, are nevertheless superficial.

Cities, Crime, Local Governance | Conor Friedersdorf | 12:37 AM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

July 06, 2005

The Governor's Opportunities

Looks like Sacramento will pass a no-new taxes budget (Evan Halper, LAT). Arnold fights back. Daniel Weintraub’s ten failings still count (cf. #10); I’ve copied all ten below. Keep score through November and beyond. We would add another: “Public purpose, a distinctiveness about California public life, remains to be brought forth.” That’s related to Weintraub’s problem #3. What about the Governor calling for some post-Kelo property rights protections, as Article I of the California Constitution demands?

He will doubtless support next year's California Border Patrol initiative, now that the legislature has balked at the idea (Jim Sanders, Sacbee). Our previous thoughts.

Will the Governor support the initiative requiring parental notification of their child’s pending abortion? Even supporters of abortion should not object. Why should the Governor? His silence on this issue would be shameful. Peter Schrag reviews some of the politics involved.

And of course the Governor has a Supreme Court slot to fill (Maura Dolan, LAT). The politically obvious move is a conservative Latino jurist (see Weintraub failing #4), but he may take a more conventional course. To speak of him choosing an outstanding conservative jurist-- e.g., John Eastman, director of our Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence--because of his merits seems hardly worth the effort. And why would John take a demotion at this point in his career?

1. On the first day of his campaign, he gave voters the impression that he wasn't going to take money from private interests, then set about raising more money than any first-year governor in history, seriously eroding his credibility. He never should have said he didn't "need" that money, but if he was going to say it, he should have also made clear he was going to take the money even if he didn't need it. And once having made that mistake, he still could have cut his losses by establishing a very aggressive, very public campaign to raise money from small donors via the Internet. That not only would have raised a few bucks, it would have helped him connect and stay connected with a broader base of supporters.

2. He gave away too much in his first big confrontation with the Legislature, in late 2003. He needed the measure that eventually became Proposition 57 to restructure the debt he inherited and ease his way back to a balanced budget. But the Democrats wanted that too, and he should have stuck with his demand to couple the debt measure with a real spending limit and balanced budget requirement. Instead, he let the Democrats write his budget reform, and they gave him nothing more than a fig leaf. Now he is back at the table, asking for more.

3. He has failed to explain his ideas and plans in sophisticated terms. Relying on one-liners, insults and platitudes, he has time and again fallen back on his Hollywood persona. Had he gone against type and spoken to Californians as adults, people would have listened and might have even understood what he was trying to do.

4. He has ignored Mexico and Latino Californians. Schwarzenegger as an actor was hugely popular among Latinos and did pretty well with them in the recall. But he has appointed hardly any Latinos to his administration or to judgeships and has yet to make an official visit to Mexico. He could be an honest and civil opponent of illegal immigration while promoting legal immigration and close economic ties to Mexico. Failing to do so has not only degraded his position among Latino voters but has probably lost some moderate white voters who are turned off by his lack of sensitivity on this issue.

5. He made a disastrous budget deal with the teachers union in his first weeks in office. The concept was great, but the final deal was poorly drafted. It's clear he did not understand what he was getting himself into. There was almost no way he was ever going to be able to keep his end of that deal without either raising taxes or savaging the rest of the state budget. When he reneged, it was another massive blow to his credibility and gave his opponents the opening they needed to bring him down.

6. He lost his focus on reforming state government. Trying to do too much, too soon, he ended up doing almost nothing. Instead of commissioning a massive plan that was a mile wide and an inch deep, he should have declared his intention to go agency by agency and look for opportunities to modernize government one department at a time. He could have started with the Department of Motor Vehicles - an agency that deals with millions of citizens every year but still doesn't accept credit or bank debit cards in its offices. A highly visible success in that one department would have given him the public support he needed to move through the rest of state government.

7. He missed a golden opportunity to reform state and local finance. When the cities and counties came forward with an initiative last year to protect their tax sources from state raids, he should have seized the chance to bring about long-needed reforms in the distribution of property tax and sales tax revenue. Instead, he agreed to a deal that locked in tax-sharing formulas written in 1979, in a crisis atmosphere after the passage of Proposition 13. True reform would have been good government and good politics, winning plaudits from opinion leaders who were looking to him for real results on real problems.

8. He's suffered from attention deficit disorder on education reform. In his first year he pressed to cut many of the strings on the money that flows to the schools from Sacramento, a smart and serious reform. The Legislature gave him about a tenth of the loaf he was seeking. But rather than pressing for more, Schwarzenegger all but abandoned that policy initiative and changed his focus to the way teachers are hired and fired - a fringe issue that doesn't go to the heart of what ails the schools.

9. He declared 2005 his "Year of Reform" and then bungled the details because he rushed forward without carefully considering what he was doing. He endorsed a pension reform measure and later abandoned it because it left him open to charges that he was cutting death benefits for the families of fallen cops and firefighters. He switched from one budget reform to another and still doesn't have a proposal that is very saleable. And he has never explained how his puny education reform is going to make much difference in the schools. He picked the right topics but his execution has been terrible.

10. He did not make enough of a public effort to work with the Legislature this year. It's unlikely they would have given him anything. But for a man who has lived his life in drama, Schwarzenegger seems oblivious to political perception. Had he insisted on meeting with legislative leaders in marathon sessions for weeks in search of common ground, even if it yielded nothing, the public would have been more satisfied that he was using the ballot only as a last resort. Instead, people are convinced that he never really tried.

Governor | Ken Masugi | 10:18 AM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

Must-Read: LA School Violence

The war--it's not an exaggeration--between blacks and largely immigrant Mexicans at Jefferson high school reflects larger societal tensions. This LAT feature by Sandy Banks and Nicholas Shields deserves reading by anyone concerned with schools or immigration in the age of multiculturalism. Another Pulitzer for the LAT?

Again, the problem of immigration is not too many immigrants, it's not enough Americans. National pride needs to surpass racial or ethnic pride. See the excerpt below.

See an excerpt below.

In an essay for the independent teen publication "LA Youth," an anonymous Latino student described being drawn into the initial fight by friends' demands that he "stand up for my family, my Mexican ancestors, and the people who worked hard so I could be here — my heritage that I'm really proud of."

"I felt good defending my race," he wrote. "I was hitting anybody I could get my hands on…. Many of my friends who knew I was involved in the fight asked me, 'Aren't you proud that our people are at war with the blacks?' … Because of that fight, I lost many friends who are African American. The whole tension between Latinos and blacks is changing the way we all think about each other."

Immigration, Schools | Ken Masugi | 08:24 AM | Comments: 2 | Trackbacks: 0

July 05, 2005

Dallas' Wanna-Be Strong Mayor

A few months ago I blogged on the proposal to adopt a strong-mayor system of governance in Dallas. The proposal was rejected by voters in a May referendum, leaving Dallas with its council-manager system, with a mayor who is no more than a first among equals and a city manager who runs the city. I explained in my earlier blog the connection of this debate to the Progressive movement.

Today’s L.A. Times has a good article on the results of that referendum, and on the politics surrounding it and current mayor Laura Miller. Miller’s policies are, by and large, bad (I last blogged about her when she was in Austin begging the state legislature not to enact various property-rights protection laws that would restrict the takings power of cities), and I certainly would not vote for her if I were a Dallas resident. That having been said, her campaign for a strong-mayor system was basically on target: she argued that, having won an election, she should have the power to implement her agenda and to control the administration of city services, thus making the delivery of those services something about which voters can have a say at each mayoral election. As it stands, unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats are in charge of key city services, and they are in awful shape.

The Times article details how the fight over a strong-mayor system was joined by the African-American community, which saw the proposal as a threat to the power it had won when a 1990 court decision forced a district system of council elections. The result has been an utter lack of accountability in city government, with poor police protection affecting, of course, the poorest communities worst of all. The defeat of the strong-mayor proposal signals a perpetuation of this state of affairs for the foreseeable future

| R. J. Pestritto | 05:23 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

More Kelo Commentary

Just in case you can't get enough Kelo commentary, here is a Debra Saunders column on the subject that we missed last week.

Once again, if you read nothing else, see this must-read article by redevelopment lawyer Bob Ferguson on how Kelo will affect California. Then read his previous piece in our Local Liberty newsletter that provides an excellent example of the evils of redevelopment in California. (Subscriptions to the newsletter are free—simply send me an email at mpeterson@claremont.org with your mailing address.)

Property Rights, Redevelopment | Matthew J. Peterson | 03:32 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Victor Valley College Instructor Strikes Back

Not willing to let his "freedom" to censor God from college term papers die for lack of a defense, Victor Valley College adjunct English instructor Michael Shefchik is the subject of a front-page interview in the local Freedom newspaper. And he is ever angry!

"Why should she [Bethany Hauf] be excused (from following instructions) because she has some noisy lawyers? That is not fair," Shefchik said. "I'm sorry that I was unable to do my job — that I was unable to help her think critically. There is an apology here, but not the one that she wants."

Shefchik tries hard to parse the word "could" to distinguish between the permission he now says he did not give Bethany Hauf for the topic and the possibility that she could write the paper anyway despite his apparently unforceful objection. Read and determine if he makes his case.

I have previously suggested that there was an instructor failure here which Shefchik points out with his reference to critical thinking--long since a college course, by the way, which he is scheduled to teach, along with a literature course, in the fall semester, according to the VVC schedule of classes. But for Shefchik critical thinking seems to be the process by which students come to agree with the instructor, involving the censorship of thought where necessary; whereas the right thing to do is to encourage students to read as widely as possible and thereby make a strong case for a thesis--or, without such support, abandon it for another.

Why is this so hard? If an instructor believes a student is in error, he is certainly entitled to attempt persuasion, but should that fail he should back off in appreciation of the fact that, as the old maxim has it, "a drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall." Instead of making a fellow lover of truth out of this student, Shefchik has made a determined enemy. The fact that his department chair and at least one of his colleagues support him indicates the intellectual confusion is not limited to him alone.

Truth to tell, instructors can make enemies even if they attempt persuasion. I made a few during my 30 plus years of teaching, although more among the faculty and administration than among students. But persuasion is no violation of academic freedom. Shefchik seems to think that instructors have a monopoly on that precious right and the student's job is simply to follow instructions. But writing on controversial subjects is not like doing math problems or learning scientific formulas. The humanities and the social sciences are essentially controversial, not so much about the factual details, of course, but about the issues at stake. Only willful blindness can keep college instructors from acknowledging that there is a controversy about the foundations of the world among scientists, as well as philosophers and theologians. And certainly there is controversy about the philosophical and religous underpinnings of the American Republic. Only the bigoted would presume to end those controversies in the classroom by editorial fiat.

Higher Education | Richard Reeb | 03:12 PM | Comments: 5 | Trackbacks: 0

How Not to Argue for Multiculturalism

Over at our mother blog, The Remedy, guest blogger Fred Bills tells us how not to argue for multiculturalism and how to appreciate the American Founding principles. The NY Times op-ed's author responds, and Fred gives him a lesson.

America admits diversity of all sorts because it is steadfast in its commitment to the principles of freedom and quick to combat those who would weaken that principle. "Diversity" by itself is not a good; the freedom that yields diversity is.

Ethnicity | Ken Masugi | 02:12 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Further Kelo Ruminations: Powerline Dissents, We Respond UPDATE

John Hinderaker of Powerline gives the standard justification for takings and the “public use” doctrine that has prevailed over the past fifty years. He dissents from conservative criticism of the Kelo property-rights decision.

Dennis Teti speculates that this differences reflects the split among conservatives over whether Lochner v. New York (NY law regulating bakers' work hours) was correctly decided. Did the Lochner Court overreach, or was it defending limited government and individual rights?

Hinderaker argues that without the public powers affirmed in Kelo “assembling an adequate real estate package at a reasonable cost” would be difficult, as individual property owners armed with the facts “usually … simply want to extort an unreasonable sum from the corporate buyer.”

Today most significant development projects involve multiple uses and cooperation between public and private entities. While such projects can no doubt be subject to various abuses, they can also be enormously successful and of great public benefit--to take just one example, consider the spectacular renovation of Baltimore's inner harbor. Moreover, two factors minimize the danger that economic development projects pose to individual rights. First, they are carried out in the glare of publicity. Nothing in local government attracts more scrutiny or more criticism than such projects. Second, the Fifth Amendment requires that anyone whose property is taken for a public use be fairly compensated, and in practice, most takings are compensated generously. Thus, while condemnation can undoubtedly impose hardship on individuals, it is unlikely to result in gross injustice.

My own experience with local governments and redevelopment tells a different story, of bulldozer justice inflicted on ill-informed parties, who wind up settling on the city’s terms for fear of the financial and legal consequences of standing up for their rights. See our redevelopment file and read the story of Claremont for concrete examples.

The dangers of Kelo are difficult to exaggerate. Writing for our website, C. Robert Ferguson says California’s “blight” requirements will be irrelevant in the face of developer boldness. Hence Senator Tom McClintock thinks a constitutional amendment necessary to protect California property owners. Steven Greenhut rolls out a plan of action. I still say paying attention to local politics and electing the right officials is the first, necessary step. Sam Staley says it’s now the fox guarding the chicken coop: “The need for public vigilance in the planning process has been raised to new levels. Without judicial or statutory protections for property rights, planners may be the only ones in the redevelopment process either willing or able to protect the civil liberties of homeowners, businesses, and neighborhoods.” NY Times columnist John Tierney quotes the mayor of Pittsburgh approving of Kelo: "'eminent domain' is a great equalizer when you're having a conversation with people." That's conversation as in making an offer they can't refuse.

Richard Epstein puts it bluntly: “Courts that refuse to see no evil and hear no evil are blind to the endemic risk of factional politics at all levels of government. And being blind, this bare Supreme Court majority has sustained a scandalous and cruel act for no public purpose at all.” The Kelo majority changed the test from “public purpose” to “public benefit”—a utilitarian degradation of individual rights if there ever was one.

Thanks to the indispensable Noleftturns for noting some of the Kelo postings.

For more of our take, read our brief in the case here.

Courts, Property Rights, Redevelopment | Ken Masugi | 11:25 AM | Comments: 1 | Trackbacks: 0

Fourth of July Reflections on the American Character

Dan Walters finds contemporary Californians failing the tests of the Declaration of Independence. We demand too much dependence on government.

A distracted Bob Reilly, former director of the Voice of America, attends his wife's naturalization ceremony and rediscovers the meaning of being American. See excerpts below.

Frank Capra could not have choreographed it better. Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina,China, Ethiopia, France, Iraq, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, South Korea, on and on, and, of course, Spain. It takes one's breath away. I did not expect to be impressed, but the sheer breadth of it stuns me. All these people here from the far-flung corners of the earth ready to say, "So help me God." Is there another room like this anywhere else in the world where something like this could happen?
After the oath, each individual parades up front for pictures and stops by the Daughters of the American Revolution table to receive a little American flag very much like the kind I have brought. Elated, I walk out of the room down the hall, carrying one of my children's flags.
An older man, who appears to be South Asian from his dress, complexion and wispy beard, comes directly up to me, smiles and shakes my hand, as if he knows me. Somewhat confused, I say, "congratulations" to him. However, it is he who is congratulatingme.This stranger's eyes beam welcome. My wife catches up and asks, "Do you know this man? What's happening?" "No," I say, "but it's all right. We are all Americans now and he just welcomed me here"....
In what other place in the world, I wondered, could you, with the simple declaration of an oath, cross the threshold into a country to which you are not native and be told, "Welcome home?"
In the end, as much as it means to her, I think I am more affected by this ceremony than my wife is. I see in concrete action what I have always deeply believed -- "that all men are created equal." What other than that proposition could account for what I witness? What else could make it possible? Blase, was I? How dare I have not remembered? I am proud to have been mistaken for someone who has just pledged his allegiance to this country.

Immigration | Ken Masugi | 07:30 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 03, 2005

Cass Sunstein on O’Connor replacement: The absurdities mount

“O'Connor had no sympathy for the liberal activism of the Warren court. She refused to announce new rights lacking clear historical foundations.” Contra Sunstein, consider her record on, for openers: gay rights, expansion of abortion rights, a right to be part of a racially defined “critical mass,” rights to be free of religious establishment defined as displays of the Ten Commandments; “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life” (Planned Parenthood v. Casey).

See Shep Melnick on Sunstein's recent book, The Second Bill of Rights, here.

Sunstein goes on to claim “Caution, prudence and incrementalism were O’Connor’s watchwords.” He concludes by making O’Connor a follower of Edmund Burke, the spiritual godfather of many conservatives. That may be the most truthful thing Sunstein says in this egregious piece of propaganda: Burke relegated human reason to the confines of historical development, making it impossible to reason one’s way out of political challenges. In that sense Burke did not promote human experience as a basis for civilization but rather paved the way for the nihilism of Nietzsche and the “mystery of human life” pap quoted above. By following Burke to his core, modern conservatism can be as misguided as modern liberalism: both are rooted in historical development not the natural rights of the American Founding.

I'll put my three-justice winning streak on the line and predict the Bush Supreme Court pick: He will say that this is no time to play politics with the Court and will pick the best qualified judge. It will be Michael Luttig. If they filibuster him and O'Connor resigns her seat as the fall term begins, he will put up Justice Janice Brown. At least that's how I'd play this. He may open with Brown, if he wants to be more political.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 12:02 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

July 02, 2005

Yet another reason we hate the LAT

"5 Immigrants Killed in Crash Near Border" the headline says (Richard Marosi). The first sentence tells another story, readily inferred from the headline: "A suspected smuggler driving a minivan filled with undocumented immigrants caused a head-on collision late Thursday that killed five people, including a pregnant woman and two children, according to U.S. and Mexican authorities."

Although no chase was involved, Enrique Morones, president of the Border Angels, a pro-illegal immigrant group, declared, "I think it's tragic that people continue to die avoiding the Border Patrol."

Immigration, Media | Ken Masugi | 06:09 PM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Los Angeles Times' anti-filibuster principles: Except Thomas!

After calling for sobriety in the battle to replace retiring Justice O’Connor, the LAT reverts to type, with fatuous reasoning:

We do insist on one thing: Bush should not nominate Justice Clarence Thomas for chief justice. Thomas purposely misled the Senate at his original confirmation hearing 14 years ago, insisting he had no opinion on the hot-button Roe vs. Wade decision. Since then he has repeatedly shown his deep opposition to Roe. For the Senate to confirm him as chief justice now would say to the world that the contempt Thomas showed for that institution was fully justified.

Of course, had Thomas voted to affirm Roe the LAT would have hailed his open-mindedness. It is positively Orwellian to speak of Thomas’s “contempt” for the Senate, that site of the high-tech confirmation lynching.

Courts, Media | Ken Masugi | 04:59 PM | Comments: 7 | Trackbacks: 0

July 01, 2005

All Hail Antonio, Lord-Mayor of Los Angeles!

If you got the time, Mayor Sam and others are live blogging the L.A. Mayoral inauguration here. So far it looks like the good Cardinal Mahoney wouldn't stop talking (he almost put Al Gore to sleep), the Reinhardt family was atmospherically coerced by the Pledge of Allegiance, Governor Arnold was booed by the crowd and some of our fearless commentators are desperately seeking alcohol.

We don't attend events of a dubious constitutional nature—our thoughts are below.

UPDATE: K.J. Lopez asks why the powers that be in L.A.

. . . decided to inaugurate their mayor at the beginning of July 4th weekend? I guess it's the July 1 thing, but still. It's like a SCOTUS nomination today. It's just wrong. I was supposed to be in Frozen Margaritaville by now.

You would think that city government here would have better P.R. skills—unless you observed it close up for a while. "What's wrong with Los Angeles?," K. J. asks. Heh. Talk about a "loaded, involved" question. Read our books on the progressive California Constitution and then work your way on down to our essays, our newsletter and even this good ole blog for the sordid answers.

UPDATE #2: Some Catholics protested today's event, upset that the Cardinal allowed the new Mayor to receive communion given his stance against the teaching of the Catholic Church.

And by the by, I have heard from "objective observers" that Reinhardt "looked sick" when Antonio's kids recited the Pledge. Heh, heh, heh.

Cities | Matthew J. Peterson | 10:37 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Living on the "Dime" (I-10)

The building of the 1-10 Freeway (aka the world's largest parking lot in the afternoon) facilitated travel but also destroyed communities, as this LAT piece (Ann Japenga) reminds us. It features Robert Gonzales, an anti-redevelopment activist, among other things, who invited me speak to a Redlands community facing the redevelopment wrecking ball. Given enough energy, one man can make a difference. See my report on redevelopment in Redlands, which also has a City Seal problem.

Local Governance | Ken Masugi | 08:04 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

O'Connor Retires: The Damage Is Done UPDATE

AP story. Bring it on! Janice Brown alert! With popular outrage over the Kelo decision, in which O'Connor wrote a convincing dissent, a property-rights advocate such as Brown should prove a compelling choice. Judges McConnell and Luttig deserve scrutiny as well. The politics of the situation may push Bush toward Gonzalez, but I think he'll resist. His father chose Souter over Judge Edith Jones, who remains a possibility.

Just about the only political predictions I'm good at are Supreme Court picks--I got the last three right (Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer), but my crystal ball has fogged over on this one.

For a devastating indictment of O'Connor's career, see Jeremy Rabkin's review of her reflections, The Majesty of Law, excerpt below.

Jean Bodin, the 16th-century French jurist who popularized the concept of sovereignty, used ["majesty"] in the French version of his great treatise (souverainité) but in a Latin translation offered the term majestas. Soon every monarch in Europe wanted to be called "your majesty." To speak of "the majesty of law" was, at one time, to express the hope that law itself could exercise the ultimate authority once associated with absolute monarchs. Justice O'Connor seems to have a different idea.

It's hard to find any echo of "majesty" in O'Connor's rambling reflections. A more accurate title for this volume might have been The Triteness of Law or even, I'm OK, the Law's OK.

Courts | Ken Masugi | 07:42 AM | Comments: 0 | Trackbacks: 0

Subscriptions are free!
Email or call Matthew Peterson at (909) 621-6825

The Winter 2005/06 issue is now available, featuring Angelo M. Codevilla on Iraq's civil war, James Q. Wilson on Rudy Giuliani, Andrew E. Busch on Barry Goldwater, Jerry Weinberger on Benjamin Franklin, Harry V. Jaffa and Ralph A. Rossum on original intent jurisprudence, plus conservative media, Renaissance art, democratic architecture, and much more!
Subscribe today!

The mission of The Claremont Institute is to restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life. Learn More...

The Powers of War and Peace

By John Yoo

Publius Fellowship Applications Available

Each summer, the Claremont Institute brings together for a few weeks some of the best and brightest young conservatives in America. These Publius Fellows meet each day with Claremont Institute Senior Fellows and other distinguished visiting scholars to study American political thought and American politics. Applications for the 2006 Publius Fellows program are now available.

Internship Opportunities with the Claremont Institute

Each year, the Claremont Institute hosts a number of ambitious college students with summer internships at our main office in Claremont, California. Application materials for Summer 2006 are due to be received no later than April 1.

Help Wanted: Claremont Institute Fundraising and Administration Position

The Claremont Institute is accepting applications for work in the areas of fundraising and administration.

Wake Up With Bennett

Claremont Institute Washington Fellow Bill Bennett now hosts a nationally syndicated daily radio program. Visit Bill Bennett's Morning in America for more information.

Help Us, Help Yourself

Did you know you can support the Claremont Institute with gifts other than cash that will allow you to increase discretionary income, eliminate estate and capital gains taxes, and redirect tax dollars to the Claremont Institute? Click here to learn more.

The Writings of Harry V. Jaffa

Six books by Harry Jaffa have been reprinted by the Claremont Institute.

MissileThreat.com

Ballistic Missile Defense: Understanding the Nuclear Threat

Founding.com

A User's Guide to the Declaration of Independence

FoundingFather.com

Rediscovering George Washington

Vindicating The Founders

Race, Sex, Class and Justice in the Origins of America

Looking for something? Enter any text below to search our content.

Enter your email address below to join Precepts, our free weekly policy watch newsletter.

   Home    Projects    Writings    Events    Become a Member    About    Help
Copyright © 2002-2006 The Claremont Institute. Technical problems may be brought to the attention of webmaster@claremont.org.