It stops encroaching Sharia law and stuff

If you want an example of this “encroaching Sharia law” we’ve all been hearing so much about lately, I am pleased to present it to you: At Valley Park Middle School in Toronto, where the majority of the student body is Muslim, an imam comes in every Friday to lead prayers in the cafeteria. . . . OK, so it’s not encroaching Sharia law. But it’s probably as bad as anything supporters of a now-passed bill to ban the use of non-American law in the Kansas court system can come up with – if that was their argument, and, in practice, it’s not.

The true purpose of the bill, says State Rep. Peggy Mast (R-KS76), is to clarify to foreigners that only the law on American books will be used in judicial and agency decision-making. She pointed to 50 cases of courts or government agencies using foreign law, including Sharia, to come to a conclusion, often when the issue at hand concerned family law and/or women. Opponents of the bill insist that its sole purpose is “to hold Islam out for ridicule.”

The bill itself does not mention Sharia, nor do similar bills in other states. I suspect that it has come up because it is the most recognizable set of foreign laws to which Americans would object, and it’s pretty easy to get some political mileage out of that, especially in Kansas. If that’s all the “Sharia thing” is about, you can call the bill’s sponsors discriminatory or needlessly focused on Islam, but not the legislation itself.

As for the substance of the law: If it’s true that courts and/or agencies factor non-American law into their decisions, I would love to see them held accountable for it. Certainly some countries’ laws could have valuable lessons. But it is ultimately the makers of the law who determine that, meaning the legislative branch, not the interpreters or the enforcers. Although I am skeptical of the idea that there are enough examples of this to merit a new law.

If Mast and her supporters are worried about immigrants or foreign tourists thinking in terms of their own country’s law while they’re in the U.S., she might pursue changes to the citizenship process. Here in Canada, our own Immigration Minister Jason Kenney made changes to the citizenship guide that makes it clear that certain cultural practices, like genital mutilation and honor killing, are unacceptable on Canadian soil. It probably won’t completely stop those from happening, but it’s a good statement.

Of course, anyone who starts making a list of “barbaric” foreign practices to outlaw will probably exhibit an inordinate focus on Islam. But that’s what happens when they come from a theocracy and you don’t.

Disposal Day #111: Hail Minnesota!

STORY #1: Bridge to somewhere

As you see here, the St. Croix River forms a considerable expanse of the border between Minnesota and Wisconsin – 125 miles, to be exact. There are currently 14 bridge crossings over the river, more than one for every ten miles. The $700 million bridge at Stillwater, MN, will replace the 81-year-old lift bridge that already resides there. What’s one new, improved bridge when you already have 14? Enough to make Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) and other Democrats oppose it.

The actual legislation would exempt the bridge under then-Sen. Walter Mondale’s (D-MN) Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, requiring Congress to approve “certain types of construction” at rivers. It seems, indeed, that they have. That’s not good enough for McCollum, environmental groups and deficit hawks who fear excessive a) river pollution and b) costs. Considering this bridge’s dismal structural efficiency rating, I’d say the costs of not replacing it could end up being much higher. I would have voted for it.

STORY #2: Speaking of replacements

If $700 million sounds like a fair price to pay for a bridge, try $975 million for a stadium – $737 million of it public money. That’s the estimated cost of a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings where the Metrodome stands now. This isn’t the first stadium plan residents have seen, but it was agreed upon by Gov. Mark Dayton (D-MN), Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak and owners Mark and Zygi Wilf, which is a milestone. Deficit hawks aren’t too impressed with this one, either, despite promises of no new taxes.

Normally I would be skeptical myself, but considering the versatility of the Metrodome, the subsequent revenue from events other than Vikings games could be just as valuable to the state economy as it was when the Dome was fully inflated. I don’t think any Minnesotan would fail to cringe at the thought of another Big 4 team looking to California for a home. And if they’re worried about losing their own money on this deal, they could always try that racino.

STORY #3: B aggressive

This is from last week, but it’s awesome: State lawmakers in Minnesota are proposing a new corporate structure known as the public benefit corporation, or B-corp: a profit-making entity that would factor externalities like environmental and health risks into its bottom line. They wouldn’t be the first state to do it, but it’s baffling that all states don’t have this structure already. What better way to separate the assholes from the non-assholes? It’s an Occupy half-sympathizer’s wet dream.

Disposal Day #109: The party of big government

STORY #1: Don’t have sex in Oklahoma

In recent days, on the heels of a completely unnecessary divisive debate over something as simple as birth control, we have seen a number of Republican-controlled state legislatures descend into madness. We begin with Oklahoma, where the state Senate has just passed a bill that would define embryos as persons. Whether Gov. Mary Fallin (R-OK) will sign it remains to be seen, but given her track record, it’s not unlikely.

My thoughts: 1. The sperm cell is the ingredient of a fetus that carries the potential for life; by the logic of this bill, non-procreational sex and masturbation should also be off the table. 2. I’m not seeing an exemption for medically necessary abortions. I don’t care how few there are; they exist. 3. A provision giving women who miscarry legal immunity? Wow, that’s sad. 4. This is not the state’s business. It’s the business of the woman, her partner (if she consented) and her doctor. Everyone else has the obligation to remain silent.

STORY #2: Don’t read in Arizona

Not to be outdone, someone in the Arizona Senate actually put forward a bill that would subject teachers (K-12 and post-secondary) to the same profanity laws that would apply if they were broadcasting their lectures on TV and radio. This thing is so poorly written that it doesn’t even apply just to their lectures; it would apply to speech or conduct, period. Even if that were corrected, a book that has a swear word in it could conceivably be, for all intents and purposes, banned.

Thoughts: 1. I remember one prof who swore a lot. We thought it was funny. Anyone who doesn’t needs to put their genitals under their pillow and hope the Nut Fairy brings them some new ones. 2. This is from the same state senator that pulled a gun on a reporter and stopped short of saying Herman Cain should have harassed her because she was “not an unattractive woman.” (You know, if you’re blind and a moron.) 3. What exactly is the point of this thing?

STORY #3: Die in Jersey if you can

Finally, New Jersey, where Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) has decided to lower the flags at state buildings for . . . Whitney Houston. OK, I get it that she was a favorite daughter of the state and an inspirational figure, but so what? Are they going to lower the flags when The Situation finally meets his inevitable death? It’s not quite holding a state funeral for someone who only got as far as Opposition leader, but I always thought state flags were lowered for people who worked in the service of the state. Please, just stick to protocol. It’s there for a reason.

Welcome to the great state of East Illinois

If you’ve ever been skeptical that there really is such a thing as an urban-rural divide, look no further. Illinois State Rep. Bill Mitchell (R-Decatur) is tired of those damn Cook County residents, mostly Chicagoans, voting for different tax and firearm policies than they do. In fact, he’s so tired of it that he wants to jettison the area entirely. Let Cook County be a state unto itself, he recommends, in all seriousness.

Rural Illinois residents are not subject to Cook County taxes, of course, but those who want to pack heat in the Chicagoland area may have a hard time with it. And after all, they represent the largest voting bloc in the state, which greatly affects the results of gubernatorial and presidential primary elections. It all comes down to a question of values, Mitchell says, and the divergence of these values is simply irreconcilable. He wants all Illinoisans to vote in a referendum on statehood for Cook County.

Never mind that Mitchell represents a district within a county that doesn’t even border Cook, and as such has no say in their future. I would argue that every state needs a major urban area to be the epicenter of politics and certain economic sectors. For example, South Dakota doesn’t have a particular city around which to coalesce, which doesn’t draw in enough human capital for there to be a decent tax base, which would ultimately benefit the state as a whole.

At the same time, that city needs a surrounding rural area. Cities are not where you find natural resources or agriculture or a good deal of tourism. You can’t put large-scale manufacturing facilities in a major city, except on the outskirts. There are too many mutual economic benefits to be had for cities and rural areas to try living without one another. Where will the remaining part of Illinois center its business once Cook County is gone? Springfield?

Perhaps inadvertently, Mitchell has opened the door to a renewed need for consistent dialogue between urban and rural America. I recall a newspaper letter writer once scoffing at the idea of city papers covering rural news. This is one way city dwellers can stay up to date on the concerns of outlying parts of the state, and it has to be regular. The same goes for all forms of media. Further, each city could use one organization within its borders that addresses rural economic needs.

There’s no need for an urban-rural divide to take place anywhere. It starts with a willingness to organize consistent, reliable conversation. Mitchell would be of no help in such an effort. But if he would like a look at the future of separatism, he should make a trip up to Canada and see how those parties have turned out.

Check your “Minnesota nice” at the state house door

Put Gov. Mark Dayton (D-MN), who has never been shy about his desire for upper-income tax hikes, in the same state house as a bunch of cut-happy Republican legislators, and you had a recipe for the Minnesota government shutdown from the beginning. I knew there could be problems if Minnesotans didn’t rally around a gubernatorial candidate for whom bipartisanship would be a cornerstone of that office’s duties. I didn’t expect it to get this bad.

To read the first link, describing the frustration of Minnesotans desiring to access the state’s recreational services, you’d think it’s a minor hiccup that will ruin a weekend or two. In reality, there are some very important charitable and non-profit organizations who, like it or not, have depended on some measure of state funding. If the shutdown persists, they may have to make major operational cutbacks while searching for new funds. All because Dayton and the legislature can’t agree on a thing.

While I’m not happy about this, the shutdown carries political opportunities – just not for Dayton and the Minnesota GOP. First, with the nationwide coverage it has received, the shutdown could demonstrate to others that government spending has rewards. It would not negate the need to hold it steady, but it might prompt lawmakers to begin charity at home.

Second, it could demonstrate to certain people that Minnesotans, as well as most Americans, do want compromise when it comes to fiscal matters. They may have their own ideas about how to fix the budget; they may want their own ideas to prevail over others. But, ultimately, the majority of Americans are not such ideologues that they will give up if the ensuing solution happens to differ from their own.

Third, it could – and may already have – open the door for Horner’s Independence Party (IP), or similar groups, to become more politically influential. Despite racking up almost every major newspaper endorsement last year, the false Republican-Democratic dichotomy among voters contributed to his dismal showing. Certainly the IP is not a silver bullet to any political impasse in Minnesota, but at this point, they seem like the likeliest builders of consensus.

The stoppage of government in Minnesota on various levels, during and between elections, has revealed a near 50/50 ideological split in the state. It’s time someone brought those 50s together; neither Dayton nor the GOP can be trusted to do this.

Snyder’s strategy: Duh. MANAGING!

Who would have thought that a mere five months ago, Nick Goebel at The Pragmatic Center had this to say about Gov. Rick Snyder? He quoted him as saying, “It is time for a new form of government.  And what does that government look like?  It’s simple, it’s customer service government.  It’s to treat you the citizen as the customer.” What would the citizens launching a recall effort against Snyder have to say about that?

Let’s review what’s being cut, according to resident writer Marissa Kinney Sachteleben: higher education, retirement and disability benefits, state pensions and dependent benefits, first-time unemployment insurance, the Earned Income Credit, and funding for prisons, libraries, campgrounds, broadcasting and schools. Also, the Emergency Financial Manager bills, which are so centralist that they might as well have been drafted by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper – not a compliment.

The EFM bills would allow appointed “emergency managers” to take control of public entities, including city governments and school boards, to the point that they have the power to strip collective bargaining rights. You may recall that I’ve written in opposition to public unions in theory; however, the decision to get rid of them should not lie with a governor, but with the workers represented. Obviously that is not the case here. 

I regret that I didn’t pay much attention to what was happening in Michigan until a friend posted an inquiry about what Snyder’s deal was to my Facebook wall. The only explanation I could come up with was “he faked us all out during the election by running as a centrist and governing as a nut.” I should have been fairer. Snyder’s cuts to everyone’s favorite things are indicative of centrism, but his EFM bills are not in the least indicative of moderation.

Nick approves of the first one: “No longer will the state government blindly tax. And no longer will it spend without providing analysis on its performance. Snyder’s proposed budget provides clear goals and metrics of its performance.” This sort of approach to fiscal policy should be encouraged and duplicated. If it is followed up later with strategic investment, not just business tax cuts, I would approve fully.

But the EFMs suggest that Snyder and his appointees will automatically know more what is best for a city or a school board than the people running it. His role in their hard times should be advisory at best.

I’m never going to Arizona

It’s time once again for The Future American’s FAIL OF THE WEEK! Every Saturday, I name a person or group who has spent the past seven days behaving in a particularly idiotic way. Since it’s my belief that idiocy knows no politics, nobody is safe.

This week’s fail was brought to you by State Rep. Carl Seel (R-AZ6), the author of a bill that would require presidential citizens to prove their U.S. citizenship before they can appear on the ballot in Arizona. Did this bill pass in the state legislature? Yes. I am starting to know the entire state of Arizona as a place for snowbirding (a favorite of Winnipeggers), failing NHL teams and right-wing nuttery like this. No, I’ve never been there and I have no interest in going.

The bill left the Arizona House on a 40-16 vote and now awaits Gov. Jan Brewer’s (R-AZ) signature. According to Seel, responding pre-emptively to accusations of birtherism, the bill isn’t about President Obama; it’s about “the integrity of our elections.” Uh-huh. An opposing view comes from State Rep. Daniel Patterson (D-AZ29): “It’s a fringe issue in my view, and it’s going to cause people to look again at Arizona and say what’s all this craziness going on there.” Thank you for joining us.

Another interesting element is that “The names of candidates can be kept off the ballot if the secretary of state doesn’t believe the candidates met the citizenship requirement.” They would be “able” to set up a committee to study this, but there’s no indication that it’s incumbent upon them to do so. Putting this decision solely on the secretary of state is playing fast and loose, to say the least, especially if that person is someone like this.

I’m all for protecting electoral integrity, for those who think anti-birthers are not. But threats to electoral integrity should be proven real before they end up on a piece of legislation. Given the logical impotence of the birther movement, it has not been proven in this case. With such measures having been tested in 13 other states, we might end up contending with a patchwork of election law across the nation. States’ rights are an insufficient case for this, in my opinion.

Patterson is absolutely correct when he expresses concern over how Arizona will be perceived after this. It has already been ground zero for caring too much about illegal immigrants, dangerously weak gun laws, a constitutional definition of marriage and a county sheriff who takes his job way too seriously. How much farther can they take this sort of behavior before they’re branded “the right-wingnut state” for all eternity?

What kind of independent are you?

I currently permalink to the websites of six third parties across the United States, and half of them have some permutation of the word “independent” in their name, including my beloved Independence Party of Minnesota. That can be very confusing for people who don’t bother studying up on all the parties in their state before registering as a primary voter or casting a ballot – so confusing, in fact, that the state of Oregon wants to ban it altogether, to the detriment of the Independent Party of Oregon (IPO).

The above link is a summary of House Bill 2442, an act which would prevent any party from using the word “independent” in its name. If it did not change the name by the end of the year, it would be disbanded. Why, you ask? Because the above noted confusion poses a severe risk to “the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety.” Oh, the madness. It must be stopped. I can just imagine the anarchy in the streets that has gone on in Oregon for too long:

“What the SHIT?! I ain’t no member of no Independent Party! I’m an independent voter, goddammit! You change my registration right this fucking second or I’ll blow the Rose Garden to holy hell! See what kinda season you have after that, Blazers!”

With an acronym like IPO, I would think there’s a greater risk of someone mistakenly believing they’re registering for an initial public offering, rather than believing they’re not registering for a party. The last U.S. voter registration card I remember seeing, which was out of New York, had a box for “I do not wish to enroll in party.” That, along with “unaffiliated” and “not applicable,” are excellent ways to phrase this option.

I’ll admit that I always considered it funny that any party would use the word “Independent” in its name, considering that, politically speaking, the word “independent” implies no party affiliation at all. But to threaten a party with disbandment for that reason is heinous, to say the least. The IPO grew by 28.1% between this year and last, while the Democratic ranks shrunk by 1.9% and the GOP ranks grew by only 0.6%. It has a habit of cross-nominating, which helps them grow. Could there not be a slight element of fear in all this?

I will not be so bold as to suggest that Oregon’s GOP and Democratic Parties are that desperate to dispose of their competition. But if they don’t want people to suggest so, they’ll drop this or penalize the refusal to change the name in a way that doesn’t disenfranchise (i/I)ndependent voters.

A Walker on the wild side

It’s time once again for The Future American’s FAIL OF THE WEEK! Every Saturday, I name a person or group who has spent the past seven days behaving in a particularly idiotic way. Since it’s my belief that idiocy knows no politics, nobody is safe.

This week’s fail was brought to you by Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) and the 14 Democrats on the lam from the Wisconsin Senate. Yes, friends, it’s a double-barrel fail this week – let’s hope there aren’t many more. Flying in the face of everything movies ever taught you about Midwesterners, both the governor and the Gang of 14 (my name, not theirs) are displaying no interest in sitting down and making nice over a piece of highly contentious union-related legislation.

It’s one thing for governments to scale back on wages and benefits for their employees, but Walker has taken it an enormous step further by stripping unions representing state, county and Milwaukee employees of several of their collective bargaining rights, including the right to seek wage increases above inflation. I personally think doing so would be ill-advised in any case, but is the right to do it that much of a threat? He said he’d lay off up to 6,000 workers if the bill doesn’t pass, but promised not to lay off or furlough anyone if it does. (For now?)

In response, the Gang of 14 fled to northern Illinois, refusing to return to the Senate until they feel like it, thus forcing the Assembly to adjourn. They have made several entreaties to Walker to at least think about discussing a compromise. He has merely asked them to “come home.” He refuses to sit down, thus they refuse to come home. Each one is waiting for the other to make the first move.

As far as labor legislation goes, Walker’s bill could have been much, much worse. But unless they’re planning to rely on a massive social media campaign, the Gang of 14 can’t sway him if they’re not there, and their high-tailing makes them look afraid to deal with the natural consequences of politics. On the other hand, Walker’s “My way or the I-43 way” approach to this situation makes words like “draconian” and “dictatorial” sound reasonable when said in reference to him.

What both sides are letting show during this battle is that they are unconcerned with finding innovative ways to plug their budget hole. They instead see fit to play political games with up to 6,000 jobs and the people holding them. Yet another ample opportunity for independents to step in and set them straight. They should both start getting worried about that.

Disposal Day #42: Guided by the North Star (State)

STORY #1: The rule of 0.5

Once again, a Minnesota election is heading to the recount stage. This time, it’s the gubernatorial race, which has been narrowed down to former Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN) and State Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN). Under state law, a winning margin of 0.5 percent automatically triggers a recount. Various sources have reported a lead for Dayton ranging from 8,856 to over 9,000.

My prediction is that Dayton will emerge victorious after the recount. I didn’t trust him before, as his reputation as a senator has been less than flattering, but the broad strokes of his platform are fairly decent (his tax hike and his promise to give contract preference to minority-owned businesses are a bit suspect). Emmer? Like almost every other Tea Party-endorsed Republican in the country, tax and spending cuts are all he knows. I will support Dayton just so a lightweight like Emmer doesn’t get it.

STORY #2: No more Mr. Nice Guy

So why did Horner, my favorite, the most sensible candidate for the job, a role model for future centrist platforms, lose? It’s a combination of factors, the most vital of which being voters’ unwillingness to move out of the two-party mentality. Perhaps some were worried about him because of past memories of former Gov. Jesse Ventura (I-MN). As I see it, he is illustrative of a problem from which moderates regularly suffer, which fellow blogger Solomon Kleinsmith summed up here.

The trouble is that as good as your policy proposals may be, you need to be summed up in one word, and “moderate” isn’t a word that translates into a plurality of votes. Let’s try another one: “Kickass.” As in, not only do our ideas kick ass, but we know how to kick both parties’ asses at the same time, and we have a hell of a good time doing it. The goal now should be to make centrism not only smarter than all else, but more fun.

STORY #3: Onward and upward

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) was Tuesday’s only successful “crazy” candidate I can think of, but I attribute that to her incumbency. She’s aiming for the number-four position in the House GOP, but they don’t seem to be having it. See? The crazies never prosper! Meanwhile, defeated former Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-MN) may be in line for U.S. Transportation Secretary, should Ray LaHood resign that post. Why not? He’s considered an expert on the subject and his surname sounds like the name of a bus.