Nicholas Katers's Blog
Posted by Nicholas Katers
This past week, a three judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court decided that the Bush Administration could continue its eavesdropping program undeterred while it appeals the ruling of Judge Anna Diggs Taylor that the program is unconstitutional. While civil libertarian groups continue their challenge to the program, President Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez have argued that it is one of the most effective tools against domestic terrorism. While there is little doubt that this matter will eventually reach the Supreme Court, this ruling by the Sixth Circuit certainly strikes a blow for groups like the ACLU who want the program stopped permanently.
Indeed, the road to ending the NSA surveillance program seems bumpy even in the Supreme Court where conservatives dominate. If the Supreme Court does give way to the continuance of the domestic surveillance program, it may be with a stern warning as to the burden of proving their targets are tied to domestic or international terrorist groups. If this provision is placed in a potential Supreme Court ruling and if Congress can finagle increased oversight over the program (last blog entry), then I would feel comfortable with its use against suspected terror suspects. However, I don’t have a lot of confidence that either of these things will come true much less both of them.
Posted by Nicholas Katers
As an addendum to an earlier article I wrote, the House passed a bill 232-191 on Friday, September 29, that would allow warrantless eavesdropping of terror suspects. The House version of this bill would allow the Bush Administration to conduct eavesdropping and wiretapping on the grounds that administration officials contact congressional leaders ahead of time, that proof of an imminent threat be given ahead of time, and that the president renew certification every 90 days. While Bush and company did not receive everything they wanted in this bill, they certainly have to be excited that the House condones their efforts in the war on terror. The Senate may deal with this issue on its last day (Saturday, September 30) in session before the midterm elections, though they have a busy docket.
While the provisions in the House bill give a nod toward congressional oversight, the Senate still has to pass the bill or send its own version to conference committee. Further compromises could weaken the bill's current form and give more leeway to the Bush Administration and the NSA in determining targets for wiretapping. Judge Anna Diggs Taylor has already ruled against the administration and put a hold on the NSA surveillance program but this new law is meant to soften the legal blow against the program. One can only imagine that this issue, like the detainee issue, will reach the Supreme Court for clarification.
Posted by Nicholas Katers
In December 2006, approximately 15,000 former employees of the now defunct Pan American World Airways will receive partial repayment for lost wages, vacation days, and pensions from their former employers. Pan American, commonly referred to as Pan Am, went out of business in 1991 due to financial problems and the memory of Flight 103, which was hijacked and brought down over Scotland. The settlement is based on money received from the Libyan government, who claimed responsibility for the attack in 2003. The meaning of this move by Pan Am, aside from former employees receiving a slight piece of the larger pie for which they earned, is significant to faltering legacy airlines like Southwest.
Pan Am's failures began before the tragedy in Scotland, though the event was significant as a last nail in the airline's coffin. The problems of the former industry leader involved too much overhead, struggles with ticket costs, and poor marketing. These failings are all too familiar at present, with the legacy airlines declaring bankruptcy, embroiled in labor disputes with pilots and flight staff, and generally losing out to smaller carriers like Midwest Express and JetBlue. It is not inconceivable to see Northwest, Southwest, or Delta airlines going under like Pan Am in the next two decades. More so than anywhere else in the American market, customers aren't loyal to a particular airline but a particular price.
Because legacy airlines have had their share of legal and financial problems, they should view the growth of competitive airlines as a God send. It seems that a confederation of sorts could be built between smaller carriers like Midwest and legacy airlines like Southwest. There is no reason, with the increase in air traffic after the September 11th, attacks, that the larger airlines can't still profit from cross-county and international flights while smaller airlines deal with regional flights. It seems no one is coming up with solutions for the airline industry's problems. If legacy airlines keep heading down their current path of getting into trouble and looking for government bailouts, they will all end up like Pan Am by 2020.
Posted by Nicholas Katers
The new president of Mexico, conservative Felipe Calderon, is beginning to settle into his role as leader of a divided country. Calderon is working on filling his cabinet-level positions, directing national policy and trying to heal the rift that was created during the heated presidential campaign against fiery liberal candidate Andre Manuel Lopez Obrador. However, Calderon's first steps toward bridging Mexican political divides have been aided by the persistent Obrador's decision to stop blockading the capital and start using democratic processes to bring about change. This move alone proves that the much-maligned Mexican political system is capable of putting aside its reputation of graft and corruption for genuine democratic institutions.
Obrador is still insistent that the election was stolen from him, with a sliver of a percentage point standing between himself and the new president. However, he has encouraged his supporters to leave their picket around the capital building and to start developing a grassroots movement to take back the Mexican government in the next presidential election. While the similarity between the Mexican election of 2006 and the American election of 2000 has been highlighted due to an important recount of presidential votes, the similarity ends when one realizes the scale of change that Obrador is proposing. Al Gore and the Democratic Party went back to utilizing the traditional means of acquiring power in America, mainly developing local and state parties that would act as important points of contact for independent and undecided voters. However, Obrador proposes that the Mexican constitution be ripped up with a new, more populist constitution in its place.
While the Mexican democratic processes seen in the recent presidential election pale in comparison to American institutions, the approach of the opposition seems to be on a track that shows mature political thought. Obrador had the numbers to create real problems, especially if any violent confrontations came about. However, the realization that the last fight was lost has led to the desire to begin fighting a new battle. It will be interesting to see how Calderon's presidency is influenced by such a large, albeit vague, opposition and how international policy will be influenced by Calderon's thin mandate.
Posted by Nicholas Katers
On Thursday, September 7th, Tracy Costin, the owner of polling firm DataUSA Inc., pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to conspiracy to commit wire fraud in a case that has further exposed the questionable reliability of exit polling and opinion polls in general. Costin has to repay over $80,000 to 11 clients from 2002 to 2004 and has worked for clients like President Bush and Senator Joe Lieberman. This story got a small AP writeup and I am not certain how widespread it has been in the media, but I think it is no small incident and anytime such a fraud is perpetrated on the public it should be front page news.
Costin and staff instructed people to doctor polling numbers and generate fake gender, ethnicity, and other statistics when deadlines were looming. If DataUSA Inc. doesn't demonstrate the tendency in politics to cut corners and frame messages, then America will never realize that they are being tricked by politicians and consultants into buying a false bill of goods. The fact that Costin's actions were exposed is admirable and does show the ability of the justice system to function correctly.
However, it is disheartening to ponder the possibility that the thousands of polling companies and consultants involved in American politics are also involved in poll tampering. The one good thing that may come out of this case, however, is that the American people may wise up, ignore polling numbers, and go out to vote their conscience no matter what is being told to them from on high. However, that leads to the question of fraud at the ballot box and that is for another day.
Posted by Nicholas Katers
The basis of law, as with most other social structures, is the idea that when more than one person is in a certain amount of space that they will search for a common understanding of what is right and what is wrong. Some legal institutions, like the American Constitution, have weathered major attacks on the power of law initiated by rebels seeking to gain more political strength. However, some institutions are bound to fail because they do not carry sufficient legal weight in the minds of individuals and groups within their orbit. One such group is the United Nations and the challenger to its international power is Iran.
The United Nations' members have threatened economic sanctions and embargo against Iran if it continues its nuclear program. However, Iran has been defiant of the U.N.'s threats and feels that it has no realistic standing in telling it to shut down its developing nuclear program. The United Nations has had mixed results in their various humanitarian and diplomatic missions throughout the world over its six decades of existence. However, the United Nations is only as good as it component parts and nations like the United States and Great Britain have performed poorly at placing trust in the process that the United Nations employs to deal with international crises. Instead, with the Iraq War as a glaring example, these nations have circumvented an institution they have created to deal with these problems and gone their own way.
Imagine every retailer and store owner in the United States simply refusing to put their trust in the dollar (which is the basis of the use of currency). The financial system would quickly fall apart and, like in the 18th and 19th century economies of the U.S. and Western Europe, the economy would swing wildly from depression to overabundance. The legal solution to the Iran-U.N. showdown is for everyone to put trust in diplomatic negotiations and use international relations, not wars of dubious origination, to solve misunderstandings and miscommunications. With such a trust, the United Nations would begin to fulfill its promise of sixty years ago to act as an arbiter for the world's problems.
Posted by Nicholas Katers
I don't want to get too far into discussing the JonBenet Ramsey case because a) I think the media is fixated on it to the point of perverse obsession and b) there is not a ton to talk about. However, I do think it is a great example of how cable news and reactionary public opinion has combined to defeat the reasoned discourse of legal proceedings.
Remember ten years ago when JonBenet died and the media blitz attacked her parents as perpetrators before any evidence or proof was made available? The media was never apologetic in its premature (and incorrect) indictment of the Ramseys for killing their daughter. In fact, the media has become more bellowing and crass in the last ten years to the point that all is forgotten from those earlier accusations. A new perpetrator has been found and the media, instead of reporting on important issues, has chosen to turn John Mark Karr into a quasi-celebrity solely based on his murder of a little girl.
The only reason the media can do this, however, is because of a willing public. So, the next time someone complains about never seeing real news on television, blame the people you see walking down the street everyday for watching the mutated American press.
Posted by Nicholas Katers
A lawsuit has been brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and a group of Hispanic American activists against the city of Hazelton, Pennsylvania, over a recent ordinance aimed at stopping illegal immigrants from living and working in the city. The lawsuit claims that illegal immigration is within the bounds of federal, not state, jurisdiction, on top of the general argument that many such laws are already on the books throughout America and are simple unenforceable.
The Hazelton provision allows the city to fine landlords for housing illegal immigrants and makes English the city's official language.
The lawsuit is a first, but the tensions are not original and are increasing as the illegal immigration debate rages on.
The ACLU certainly has a valid argument in saying that state and local governments do not have the authority to control the federal borders and deal with illegal immigrant (the INS, among other departments, takes care of that). However, the lack of enforcement on the border and the inability to come up with a solution by the federal government has forced state officials into a corner where they have to act in order to protect their perceived economic interests.
In my view, the ACLU will probably not win this argument given the prevailing trend towards conservatism in America and the fact that while English as the official language provisions may not be the best approach to dealing with illegal immigrants, the voter and the citizen in America always look for strong leaders in spite of their politics. Legally, the ACLU case is stronger because the federal government should be taking care of this but courts are not insulated and their is a trend toward state activism on issues like illegal immigration.