themarketswork

a common sense approach to a liberal world

Illegal Voting – Some Uncomfortable Facts and Findings

by

A while back, in A Voter-Fraud Friendly Environment, I documented the laughably lax voting requirements in my home state of California. Now we have a new report by Just Facts that concludes that “as many as 5.7 million noncitizens may have voted in the 2008 election“. The Washington Times reported on the study yesterday.

I don’t know if the headline number is correct – although the methodology looks sound. I am far more interested in showing that illegal voting took place on some sort of significant scale than I am in determining the actual number. You can examine the Just Facts findings I highlight later in this piece and decide for yourself.

But first, a quick summary of the California voting situation:

  • No ID of any kind is required to actually vote at the ballot box
  • Illegal immigrants are legally allowed and encouraged to obtain CA drivers licenses
  • State officials chose not to make non-citizen license holders searchable in the DMV database
  • Eligible holders of CA driver licenses are automatically registered to vote
  • The California NVRA manual dictates a process of voter registration that makes it difficult not to be registered

Continue Reading

The Timely Death of the DOJ Slush Fund

by

Lots of news this week with the Senate Intelligence Committee Hearing underway and the breathless anticipation of former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony slated for tomorrow. Which is why this action by Attorney General Jeff Sessions has largely slipped under the radar.

A couple months back I wrote about The Department of Justice’s Slush Fund.

The Working Group was created within the Justice Department in 2012 as a means of prosecution and punishment for those perceived to be responsible for the financial crisis of 2008. With the full weight of the Department of Justice behind it, the Working Group reached multi-billion settlements with virtually every major bank in America.

According to a Congressional Committee Report – Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act of 2016:Continue Reading

The Injustices of Obama’s Department of Justice

by

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is comprised of 60 Agencies. The organizational view is presented here. There are 93 U.S District Attorneys and 94 Districts (Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands share a District Attorney). The DOJ employs approximately 115,000 individuals with about 35,000 of these contained within the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). In 2015, the DOJ had an operating budget of $31 billion.

And the DOJ is a swamp.

Under Obama, the DOJ was fundamentally pushed to the left by Attorney General Eric Holder and then by his successor, Loretta Lynch. Sally Yates rounded out the Obama appointed DOJ leadership with her famously short stint before being fired by President Trump.

J. Christian Adams—who served in the Department of Justice under President George W. Bush – points to the DOJ’s notoriously left-leaning  Civil Rights Division, saying that “it touches more parts of American’s lives than any federal agency and impacts issues like police, voting, schools, transgender, hiring practices, education. It’s not just voting rights, it’s everything.”Continue Reading

The Blue Slip Rule – A Senatorial Roadblock to Judicial Appointments

by

Yesterday I wrote about President Trump’s many court vacancies – and the vast promise they hold for our courts.

Democrats previously invoked the Nuclear Option – a process that allows a simple majority vote in place of a three-fifths vote on presidential nominations for federal court judgeships. That rule has since been expanded by Republicans to include Supreme Court Justices. And Republicans hold a slight majority at 52 to 48 in the Senate.

All good, right?

Well, there is one hitch to the process – and it has to do with an archaic Senate process – really a tradition – and two small slips of blue paper. Allow me to explain.Continue Reading

Trump’s Judicial Vacancies – A Hope for Our Courts

by

One of the most powerful and influential duties of any President is the appointment of Judges. Supreme Court appointments always take precedent – a little legal humor – but in their sheer number, appointments to the lower, lesser courts can be almost equally as important – and highly influential on our nation’s direction.

“There are 13 appellate courts that sit below the U.S. Supreme Court, and they are called the U.S. Courts of Appeals. The 94 federal judicial districts are organized into 12 regional circuits, each of which has a court of appeals. In addition, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has nationwide jurisdiction to hear appeals in specialized cases.”

A total of 13 Appeal Courts sitting just below the Supreme Court.

A primary reason for the legal – and social & cultural – influence of our lesser courts is that the Supreme Court hears so few cases – perhaps 80 per year are chosen to be argued before the court plus another 50 in which they hear no arguments. Judicial activism – and judicial errors – at the lower court levels are simply too numerous to be addressed at the highest legal level of the Supreme Court.Continue Reading

Judge Bork’s Olympians & the Danger of Judicial Activism

by

“Liberals attempt through Judicial Activism what they cannot win at the ballot box” – Rush Limbaugh

“A Constitution is not meant to facilitate change. It is meant to impede change, to make it difficult to change.” – Justice Antonin Scalia

“The role assigned to judges in our system was to interpret the Constitution and lesser laws, not to make them. It was to protect the integrity of the Constitution, not to add to it or subtract from it – certainly not to rewrite it.” – Ronald Reagan

What is Judicial Activism?

Elizabeth Slattery of the Heritage Foundation offers the following from her article, How to Spot Judicial Activism:

“A simple working definition is that judicial activism occurs when judges fail to apply the Constitution or laws impartially according to their original public meaning, regardless of the outcome, or do not follow binding precedent of a higher court and instead decide the case based on personal preference.Continue Reading

Reversing the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

by

“Unless judges are bound by the text of the Constitution, we will, in fact, no longer have a government of laws, but of men and women who are judges.” – President Ronald Reagan

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is not actually the most overturned court at present. That award currently goes to the 6th Circuit Court which serves Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee, with an 87% rate. The 9th Circuit Court comes in at third place with a 79% overturn rate. This is according to an examination of data from 2010-2015.

The Ninth Circuit’s overturn rate is somewhat overblown – but not by much. It’s true the Supreme Court actually reviews very few cases and the ones it selects are likely to be contentious. But that does not change the fact that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals consistently ranks near the top for overturn rates. During the period of 1999-2008, a study by the ABA found the 9th Circuit ranked 2nd at 80.0% – placing behind the Federal Circuit Court which came in at 83.3%. The long-run average rate of reversal was 68% by comparison.

And the 9th Circuit is often reversed by a unanimous Supreme Court vote.Continue Reading

Judge Orrick’s Judicial Activism

by

“The role assigned to judges in our system was to interpret the Constitution and lesser laws, not to make them.” – President Ronald Reagan

Federal Judge William Orrick recently issued an injunction against President Trump’s proposed termination of certain types of federal funding for Sanctuary Cities through Executive Order 13768:

“The Counties’ motions for a nationwide preliminary injunction, enjoining enforcement of Section 9(a), are GRANTED. The defendants (other than the President) are enjoined from enforcing Section 9(a) of the Executive Order against jurisdictions they deem as sanctuary jurisdictions. This injunction does not impact the Government’s ability to use lawful means to enforce existing conditions of federal grants or 8 U.S.C. 1373, nor does it restrict the Secretary from developing regulations or preparing guidance on designating a jurisdiction as a “sanctuary jurisdiction.” IT IS SO ORDERED.”Continue Reading

The March for Science & the Reality of Dr. Lucy Jones

by

“Scientists begin from the assumption that there is an objective reality, independent of our hopes and desires.” – Dr. Lucy Jones

The March for Science took place on Saturday. Although billed as a non-partisan event, it was not. The movement was forced to update their website by changing multiple sections, including their statement on diversity. Here is the current statement:

“Inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility are integral to this mission and to our overall goals and principles. People have rightly pointed out that some of our own public communications, including social media posts, have not affirmed this stance. We hear your feedback and have been working to align our communications with our values. We are actively partnering with and seeking advice from organizations and individuals with expertise in this area. We cannot ignore issues of racism, sexism, homophobia, ableism, xenophobia, or any other form of discrimination in the discussion and implementation of science. Nor can we ignore the ways in which science has been misused to harm marginalized communities. The lack of inclusivity and diversity in STEM [Science, Technology, Engineering and Math] thwarts scientific advancements not only by limiting who conducts the research, but also by influencing what topics are studied, who participates in the research, and who will benefit from or be harmed by it.”

Bear in mind, the above reflects the March for Science’s adjusted and “de-politicized” statement.  Now, here are direct quotes – really, I’m serious – from the original statement:Continue Reading

Your Taxes – How They’re Spent, Some Budget Problems & Spending Gone Crazy

by

”Think of the federal government as a gigantic insurance company – with a sideline business in national defense and homeland security, which does its accounting on a cash basis. And an insurance company with cash accounting . . . is an accident waiting to happen.” – Peter Fisher – former U.S. Treasury Under-Secretary – Head of Domestic Finance

In advance of Tax Day I thought it an appropriate time to revisit how our federal taxes are utilized. How your tax payments are actually spent by the federal government, some very real problems we are facing and some examples of government spending gone awry.

But first, where do our federal tax revenues come from? Ultimately, they come from you and me. Individual income taxes account for 47% federal revenues. Payroll taxes account for another 34% of federal revenues. Corporate income taxes account for about 10% of federal revenues – a figure that often surprises many with its small percentage relative to income and payroll taxes. As discussed in Abolish the Corporate Tax, corporations are actually tax collectors – legal entities that serve to collect taxes on behalf of the corporation’s owners. Therefore, the true corporate taxpayers are the company’s shareholders – and perhaps, to some degree, labor and customers – not corporations. The remaining 9% comes from customs duties and excise taxes.

In fiscal year 2016 the federal government spent $3.95 trillion. About $2.7 trillion – more than two-thirds of total spending – went for social “insurance” (Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, unemployment compensation, veterans benefits). National defense spending equaled $600 billion or 15% of federal spending. Interest on our national debt equaled 6% of federal spending.Continue Reading