Nearly two decades before he gave us our favorite breakfast recipe in “Green Eggs and Ham,” (1960) Dr. Seuss used his sharp wit and even sharper pen to draw political cartoons.
On this day, Dr. Seuss was born Theodor Seuss Geisel in 1904, and while children across the nation put on their red-and-white striped top hats to read "Cat in the Hat" or "Fox in Socks," political junkies might flip through the digital archives at UC San Diego Library to survey the good doctor's work from the 1940s.
Dr. Seuss drew more than 400 satirical cartoons for the now defunct New York daily newspaper PM between 1941-1943.
Under existing law, vast discretion isn’t unconstitutional provided there’s an intelligible principle to guide it. The laws that delegate authority for regulation to the Environmental Protection Agency or the Food and Drug Administration confer that authority in extremely general terms — but express the goals of a cleaner environment and safer food and drugs
Yet Gorsuch argued that the very doctrine of the intelligible principle makes no sense, and “has no basis in the original meaning of the Constitution.” In his view, Congress can assign “essentially fact-finding responsibility” to the executive branch. But it can’t delegate “legislative power,” understood very roughly to mean the exercise of central policy-making judgment characterized by “unfettered discretion.”
I think this is a interesting court case to watch, as sometimes administrative agencies do abuse their power making public policy when that's the job of the congress.
It is the universal custom to display the American flag only from sunrise to sunset on buildings and on stationary flagstaffs in the open. However, when a patriotic effect is desired, the flag may be displayed twenty-four hours a day if properly illuminated during the hours of darkness.
The problem had been brewing for nearly a decade, intelligence sources had warned, as the National Security Agency vacuumed up more and more surveillance information into computer systems at its Fort Meade, Maryland, headquarters: There just wasn’t enough power coming through the local electric grid to support the rate at which the agency was hoarding other people’s communications.
“If there’s a major power failure out there, any backup systems would be inadequate to power the whole facility,” a former NSA manager told the Baltimore Sun in August 2006.
“It’s obviously worrisome, particularly on days like today.”
It turns out that manager, and other sources quoted in the Sun piece, were even more correct than was publicly known at the time: The NSA had, just the prior month, already experienced a major power outage and been forced for the first time to switch over its most critical monitoring — its nerve center, the National Security Operations Center — to a backup facility in Augusta, Georgia, according to an internal report classified “secret.” The culprit: hot weather and electric company problems generating sufficient power, according to an article posted on the internal agency news site known as SIDtoday.
While I don’t support laws that ban abortion, I do see laws like Alabama’s abortion restrictions becoming more common as bigotry and intolerance of minority groups are on the rise in America. Abortion bans and severe punishment for abortion are the future in many parts of the country, even while other states make abortion cheaper and easier to access.
A lot of abortion advocates don’t understand how a law like abortion bans would work. State police and the news media would inform couples, especially the unwed about the serious risks of engaging in sexual behavior and how sexual relationships for any purpose outside of child bearing have serious risks and consequences. States banning abortion would likely buy television ads, billboards and ads on buses warning people of the grave consequences of their actions.
With abortion a serious criminal offense, couples who chose to have sex for purposes besides reproduction have two choices should contraception fail or not be used would have to make to a tough decision. They are to have a child or have an illegal abortion and risk a lengthy prison sentence.
Having a child could cost a mother and father upwards of 18-21 years of their life, and raising the child could cost the family roughly $250,000 over twenty years or roughly $12,500 a year in health care, education, food and shelter. Raising a child isn’t cheap.
The alternative would be to have an illegal abortion with all the dangerous health consequences it involves, especially in an unsanitary environment without the presence of a doctor or other medical professional to ensure that safe procedures are followed. Should police discover, a woman and maybe the husband could be subject to incarceration up to 99 years along with $250,000 in fines.
Neither is a good choice for a family not wishing to have a child – especially when safe and legal abortions do exist in many nearby states. But so is the difficult choice families would have to make after ignoring the warnings given out by public officials and the news media about the costs of choosing to have a sexual intercourse for purposes besides child bearing.
Democracy is increasingly allowing largest and most powerful groups to impose their will on minorities out of power. As states become more polarized, minorities out of power will only become more oppressed – be it gun owners and rural residents in blue states or women and persons of color in red states.
Powerful majority groups in government will look with glee as minorities are oppressed and punished, as a personal victory to their group. In many ways, abortion bans are not about protecting life but brandishing power to hurt minorities out of power.