Sunday, January 28, 2018

Joint town hall script

This lays out a script for a joint town hall of Rep. Gary Palmer and Rep. Terri Sewell, which script concerns the immigration issue.

The motivation of the script is to create conversational engagement of Rep. Palmer and Rep. Sewell in a way that overcomes barriers to their talking about and agreeing on a compromise between the extremes of stopping all immigration and having "open borders."  The script involves saying things that are usually not said, in order to achieve clarity that the immigration impasse is not what is wanted by the large majority of the citizens. With such clarity, the will of the large majority of the people to have something in the middle may prevail.

On the matter of immigration, below is a suggested list of things that Rep. Palmer and Rep. Sewell need to say, including things which are usually not said.

1. Demographic trends are such that whites will cease to be a majority in the country, probably within the next 25 to 35 years. There are whites for whom this is a very bothersome thought.

2. Different people have different preferences, including the degrees to which they will choose to associate with persons of the same religion, race, ethnicity, and/or social and economic class.

3. There are some people who adamantly want to stop all immigration, and there are other people who adamantly want "open borders."

4. Of the people who are "adamant" there needs to be separated out the politicians who are "adamant" for the strictly political reasons to get votes (or prevent the opponent from getting votes), be in elected office, and gain the power of elected office. In the immigration context, there are potentially votes to be gotten from the Hispanic community by favoring increased immigration and paths to citizenship and the creation of new voters.

5. Putting aside the politicians, the people who adamantly want to stop all immigration are expressing that they have a high degree of preference to be with and associate with persons of the same religion, race, ethnicity, and/or social and economic class. Put in other terms, some people desire to delay the time when whites will cease to be a majority in the United States, and stopping all immigration can help with that.

6. Putting aside the politicians, the motivation of those who adamantly want open borders is an expression of strong "one world" beliefs that the world will be a better place if there are open borders.

7. With all the things affecting people's lives and their goals and desires, a large majority of people, in thinking about immigration and thinking about all the other things important to them, likely think they are not very adamant one way or the other on immigration and can fairly tolerate almost any compromise in the middle between stopping all immigration and having open borders. The problem for this large majority of the people is that the politicians and the small minority of the people who are adamant on the two sides have control of the politics and the political decision making. The politicians and the "adamant" people foment much "sturm and drang" about immigration, create Congressional impasse, and prevent the large majority of the people from getting a compromise that they prefer to the impasse that currently exists on immigration.  The small minority who are adamant, plus the politicians and the news media, should not be allowed to prevent compromise from happening.

8. The large majority understand there are possible consequences and trade offs in how immigration (including illegal immigration) is worked out. The large majority understand that immigrants (including illegal immigrants) may be a source of cheap labor and make some goods and services cheaper, may take away jobs from other citizens, may provide skill benefits for the American economy and also impose burdens, and may commit crimes. The large majority do not believe the possible consequences and trade offs justify Congressional impasse and inability to reach a comprehensive immigration reform law.

9. The large majority of the people need "politicians" to lead them who are not the above "politicians" on the two sides who use immigration for their own political purposes and who foment sturm and drang for their respective political advantages. The large majority need to reject such politicians and have a way to show they reject such politicians.

For those in the 6th and 7th Congressional districts, the foregoing should be sought to be done by  getting Rep. Gary Palmer and Rep. Terri Sewell to hold a joint town hall in which they are called on to affirm, or not affirm, the matters listed above about immigration, and Rep. Palmer and Rep. Sewell need to declare themselves either (i) that they use immigration for political purposes and they are for the "sturm and drang" that fulfills what the small minority of people want, or (ii) that they eschew using immigration to get votes from the extreme elements, they oppose "sturm and drang" on immigration, and they will get to compromise as is desired by the large majority, which compromise they will jointly recommend to the large majority.

Thursday, January 25, 2018

Larry Nassar and AAG election

[N.B. 12/8/18 update added below re Mobile Archdiocese sex abuse allegations]

The Larry Nassar case prompts important questions for the candidates for Alabama Attorney General to answer.

I. General
The questions are in the context of the mechanisms that society has to try to protect its members from wrongdoings of others in the society.

The mechanisms include the law for punishing the wrongdoer with incarceration and monetary fines and also making the wrongdoer liable to the victim for loss caused. Such punishments and liabilities provide justice that, if there is a loss to the victim, the wrongdoer should pay for it, and also retributive justice. The punishments and liabilities further serve a deterrence purpose to deter future wrongdoing by others. Outside of the law, society uses religious and moral instruction and social condemnation and shaming of wrongdoing to prevent wrongdoing from happening and to fulfill retribution.

The Alabama Attorney General has an important role in shaping and implementing the societal mechanisms aimed against wrongdoing.

There are differing ideas about what is "just" in particular cases and will work best for deterrence purposes.

It is appropriate for candidates for Alabama Attorney General to spell out their views for consideration by the voters.

Several aspects of the mechanisms aimed against wrongdoing are especially deserving of comment by the candidates and educating voters. These include that:

1. There are degrees of intentional, negligent and "innocent" wrongdoing.

2. Some harms are susceptible of objective monetary quantification; other harms are not.

3. There are varying degrees of societal/moral outrage as to particular cases of wrongdoing and these affect the quantum of punishments and liabilities that get imposed on the wrongdoer under the law.

4. Sometimes the wrongdoer receives a benefit from the wrongdoing; sometimes not. Sometimes the victim has been a contributing factor in the harm received by the victim.

5. Where corporate wrongdoing is involved, there are officers and employees who plan and implement the wrongful corporate acts, and also there are stockholders and other officers and employees who don't know about and are not involved in the wrongful corporate acts. Fines and liabilities imposed on corporations are ultimately borne by stockholders, employees and customers in the form of reduced dividends, reduced wages and/or increased prices.

5. Citizens may be victims and also may be on the "wrongdoer" side, and citizens have an interest that the mechanisms have a "fair and balanced" structure.

6. Wrongdoing may also get punished by social condemnation, shaming, and job termination, which happen outside the law.

7. The concept of deterrence calls for consideration of how the threat of fines and liabilities will deter the doing of wrongful acts, and particularly whether corporate officers and employees who plan and carry out corporate wrongful acts will be deterred by fines and liabilities imposed on the corporation that are not borne at all by such officers and employees.

Putting all the foregoing together is complicated.

II. Basic questions
While it is complicated, there are some basic questions that can be posed, and the Larry Nassar case is an excellent example for using to pose the questions.

Nassar is an intentional wrongdoer. He received benefits from his wrongdoing The harms to his victims are not susceptible of objective monetary quantification. Nassar's wrongdoing has provoked a very high level of societal/moral outrage. Nassar has been criminally prosecuted. The societal/moral outrage has been reflected in Nassar's sentencing punishment. Nassar's victims may bring a civil lawsuit against him to get monetary damages for the harms Nassar did to them. Nassar may have very little in the way of personal assets to pay his victims, and a civil lawsuit against Nassar for monetary damages may not be worthwhile.

Beyond Nassar, the gymnastics association and its officers, Michigan State University and its officials, and independent coaching programs and facilities are being looked at for applying society's mechanism for protecting its citizens from wrongdoing.

The high level of societal/moral outrage is resulting in significant "punishments" being received. Officers of the gymnastics association have resigned, and the President of MSU has resigned. This has not been pursuant to criminal or civil actions brought against them, but as a result of the extremely high level of social/moral outrage at Nassar's wrongdoing. How much knowledge and culpability these persons actually had has not been subjected to the rigors of judicial application of the law, and may never get subjected to that. While there may not be judicial application of the law, MSU has its own internal administrative processes and standards for investigating and passing judgment about knowledge and culpability.

Ultimately one or more of the persons who have resigned may have a great deal of "innocence" and be collateral victims of Nassar's intentional wrongdoing.

Civil lawsuits seeking large monetary damages against the officers of the association and University may or may not happen. Likely those officers don't have assets that would much satisfy large monetary damages the victims would seek.

To satisfy a large monetary liability, MSU is a good candidate for a civil lawsuit. The gymnastics association may have a sizable bank account, or may not.

Financial benefits that MSU received from Nassar are appropriate for consideration of what fines and liabilities should be imposed on MSU. Liabilities and fines in excess of the financial benefits received by MSU are legitimately viewed as being imposed on "innocent" parties, such as students, faculty and funders of MSU.

Here are three significant questions for candidates for Alabama Attorney General:

1. Should an Attorney General advocate that punishments be pursuant to law and should an Attorney General endeavor to damp down societal/moral outrage because unfair punishments may result outside the law?

2. Should an Attorney General advocate for the law to have legal standards for culpability for officials, officers and employees in situations where there is wrongdoing by a corporation or other entity such as MSU and the gymnastics organization, and advocate the bringing of legal cases as appropriate against those persons, with attendant punishments of them such as fines?

3. Should an Attorney General advocate that a prerequisite for holding a corporation or other entity liable for wrongdoing be that officers and employees who planned and carried out the wrongful corporate acts be held individually liable under the law for their participation in the wrongful corporate acts, with the caveat that such prerequisite should not apply to the extent the entity received benefits from the wrongdoing and that benefit passed through to the parties who will bear the burden of the liability?  This is on the theory that deterrence is mainly effective when punishments are imposed on the individuals who intentionally (or negligently) participated in the wrongful corporate acts.

Update 12/8/18
Michigan State University has paid a $500,000,000 settlement payment in the Larry Nassar case. https://www.mlive.com/news/2018/12/michigan-state-makes-500-million-payment-for-nassar-victims.html 
USA Gymnastics has filed for bankruptcy. https://www.newsweek.com/usa-gymnastics-bankruptcy-filed-larry-nassar-usag-1246014
Former President of Michigan State University Lou Anna Simon has been charged with two felony and two misdemeanor counts for allegedly lying to police during their investigation into how the school handled sexual abuse allegations against Larry Nassar. https://www.wuft.org/nation-world/2018/11/21/michigan-state-university-ex-president-charged-with-lying-in-larry-nassar-case/

The University of Southern California had allegations made against it concerning sexual harassment and abuse by a gynecologist who had worked at its student health center. USC reached a tentative class action settlement agreement worth $215 million regarding the allegations. https://www.npr.org/2018/10/19/658909013/usc-reaches-215-million-settlement-over-gynecologist-abuse-allegations
USC President resigned as a result of the gynecologist scandal and a second scandal of hard core drug use by a medical dean. https://laist.com/2018/08/02/usc_scandal_on_scandal_on_scandal_heres_what_happened_and_what_you_need_to_know.php.

During the past 25 years there have been numerous settlements and bankruptcies in Catholic Church sex abuse cases in the United States. For a list, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Settlements_and_bankruptcies_in_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases.
This week, 29 priests and deacons in the Catholic Archdiocese of Mobile, Alabama have been "credibly accused" of sexual misconduct with a child since 1950. https://www.wkrg.com/news/mobile-county/breaking-mobile-archdiocese-releases-names-of-priests-involved-in-sexual-misconduct/1642835146

Update 2/26/21

Saturday, January 13, 2018

"Fixing" Alabama legislature

My focus is on "fixing" Congress.

I don't follow the Alabama legislature.

I don't what people's views are about whether the Alabama legislature needs "fixing," or, if so, what should be done to fix it.

The Alabama House of Representatives has passed a bill calling for an Article V convention of states for proposing a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on Congress. This evidences that the Alabama House thinks Congress needs "fixing."

Does the Alabama House think anything needs fixing about itself?

It seems appropriate to inquire of incumbents and candidates running for the Alabama House and the Alabama Senate this year what they think about whether Alabama legislature needs "fixing."