Is Rick Perry anti-Constitution and anti-Republican?

One of the two departments that Rick Perry could remember that he wanted to abolish was the Department of Commerce. He seems to forget that Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power "To regulate Commerce … among the several states…" He also forgets that the Department of Commerce and Labor was created in 1903 during the tenure of the second good Republican President, Theodore Roosevelt. He forgets also that TR was the trust-buster, but Perry wants to be the lackey of today's trusts.

The department whose name he forgot is the Department of Energy. He probably wants to abolish it because, among other activities, it seeks to find alternatives to oil, something that made Texas rich, and to coal, something that made his bosses, the Koch brothers, rich.

The agency that he named to eliminate rather than the Department of Energy was the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that was proposed by President Richard Nixon. Its charge was to protect human health and the environment. So, he wants to stop the regulation of commerce that prohibits polluters, using Texas oil and Koch brothers coal, from putting their pollution in states downwind or downstream of the polluting sites.

If Perry is a favorite of some in the Tea Party who want a strict interpretation of the Constitution, where is his civic virtue? Civic virtue and common good are something stressed in the Federalist Papers, written by three of the signers of the Constitution: James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay.

Founding optimists

"[The electors] will not be liable to be deceived by those brilliant appearances of genius and patriotism, which, like transient meteors, sometimes mislead as well as dazzle."

Federalist No. 64, "The Powers of the Senate", John Jay,New York Packet, 1788-03-07, on the age restrictions in the Constitution for the House of Representatives and for the Senate

Oh, how I wish that Jay had not deceived himself.

Mantra should be "Tax and Invest"

For at least thirty years Republicans have been accusing Democrats of "tax and spend" as if all the evils in the country were caused by taxation and government spending.  As too often is the case, the Democrats have been on the defensive rather than making strong arguments for taxation and spending as necessary to invest in a civil society.

E. J. Dionne, Jr. stated this counter-argument succinctly, "And it should be expanding public investments in the nation’s future, not cutting them."  - "Can America still lead?" Washington Post, 2011-08-07, republished in the Star Tribune, 2011-08-09

I scribbled a few notes on our copy of the Strib about how inconsistent "tax and spend" complainers can be:

Spend on nuclear power subsidies, but don't invest in medical care for its side effects.

Low taxes for mining companies but no investment in the health care and safety of their workers or in the repair of the destruction of the environment.

Spend on a mammoth war machine, but little investment in conflict resolution.

The antidote to apathy

An interesting seven-minute video on political/civic apathy is Dave Meslin's TED talk of the above title.  TED means Technology, Education, Design.  Every one that I have looked at has provided some new perspective on the problems of today.  One of his interesting points is that newspapers often don't provide as much when and where for civic events as they do for entertainment events.  Fortunately, the Duluth News Tribune is not one of these.