Being liberal.org, seems to be a favorite facebook page of some people still on my friends list. A posting forwarded to me, poses this: "Food Stamp Cuts     A country that expects the elderly to eat on $15.00 per month to avoid taxing the wealthy is morally bankrupt and has no future."

This message is obviously aimed at low information voters. But, it really is only persuasive to the truly stupid. First, Social Security has significantly reduced elder poverty. Add in Medicare and you have a situation where the elderly are among America's most well off groups of people. Second, food stamps are "means tested."  That means, if an elderly person gets $15 per month in food stamps, that means they can otherwise afford food without specific government assistance.That is good for people who cannot afford food as there is money available for them and not being spent on people with more need. The message takes the lowest dollar amount of assistance, and implies it would be all the assistance available. That is patently false. Food stamp assistance can be quite substantial. If, and I emphasize, the IF, the need is there. Less need, less assistance. Food stamps are not a giveaway. They are meant to help those in need, not to feed everyone who is a certain age. Let me make this final point, FOOD STAMPS ARE NEED BASED ASSISTANCE, NOT AGE BASED ASSISTANCE.

Walt-in-Durham

Republican Optimism

Let me depart from my  usual NC centric blogging. I make no apologies for the fact that I am a Republican. (That's a member of the GOP, for those of you who don't understand the difference between a lower case "r" republican and a upper case "R" Republican. Members of the GOP are the upper case variety. Lower case "r" republicans tend to oppose monarchy. In the Commonwealth, they tend to want to cut ties to Queen Elizabeth II. For the record, I take no position on the issue of monarchy. I can see benefits to a constitutional monarchy, and I can see detriments.)

Larry Kudlow over at Real Clear Politics has an interesting article on what he thinks the GOP should be focusing on in the next congress. He wants us to pass, even if Obama vetoes it, legislation that approves Keystone XL, increases domestic oil and gas production and removes oil export limits. He says a bill or bills that do that will improve the economy, create jobs and make America stronger. I agree!

Further, he wants to cut business, especially corporate, taxes and stop the double taxation of corporate earnings. He's not proposing to do away with the dividend tax, just stopping the double taxation of foreign earnings. That happens because an American corporation normally pays a much lower rate on foreign earnings in the foreign country. Then, the American corporation, when it repatriates the earnings, pays the difference between the U.S. rate and the foreign rate. I agree, but would go one step farther.

I would eliminate the dividend tax. The British tried that in the early part of the Thatcher years and it lead to growth in the economy. Needing more revenue, the Blair government re-introduced dividend taxes. I would like to see us end dividend taxes. This would greatly simplify the tax code. It would make dividend paying stocks more attractive to investors and it would increase our savings rate in this country.

Will Obama sign any of those ideas into law? I doubt it. But, that makes those ideas the cornerstone of a campaign for President in 2016 and a reason for swing voters in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin and New Hampshire reasons to vote for their incumbent GOP Senator. It will give swing voters in Nevada, and Colorado reasons to switch to the GOP and replace incumbent anti-growth, anti-jobs obstructionists in those two states.

But, we're going to have to do more, especially in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin, Colorado and Nevada. We have to have both a jobs friendly platform like I have outlined above. We have to have a platform that endorses families, young people and immigrants. To that end, I say we propose real border controls coupled with a recognition that we have people here who are not documented and entered illegally. Get those people identified, get them on the tax rolls, get them drivers licenses and auto insurance so they stop harming us. Stop the gay marriage opposition. Gays are people deserving of respect. To quote George W. Bush, don't be so critical until you've walked a mile in his shoes. Obama has moved the Democratic Party well to the left by punishing any moderates who are running this year. Now is the time to capitalize on his mistakes.

Walt-in-Durham

If you like your plan, you can keep it.

President Obama and Senator Hagen promised if you like your plan you can keep it. Well, that didn't really work out under Obamacare regulations. So, the President begged insurance carriers to "extend" some existing plans. Those are called "transitional" plans. In NC, Blue Cross is the only insurer offering "transitional" plans. Those plans are going up on average 19% this year, according to BC/BS and Karen Restrepo at the John Lock Foundation. 

If you're locked into Obamacare, you do have some lower cost options, you can go into an ACA plan which has increased in cost an average of 13.5%. If you are so fortunate as to have a "grandfathered" plan, the cost increase will be 13.4%. OUCH! For the record, "grandfathered" plans are those few which met the Obamacare regulations but were in existence before 2010.

How's that hope and change working out for you?

Walt

Davidson College QB suspended

WSOC is reporting that the Davidson College football quarterback was suspended from the football team over an alleged assault with a deadly weapon. It is important to note that as of the posting of this message, the young man has not been suspended from the college. It is also important to note this is a college in North Carolina where the student handbook does not form the basis of a contract. So, Davidson is much more free to act than it would be elsewhere. There is no due process protection within the context of a private college and its students.

The facts are dribbling out. As this is a criminal case, once charges are formally filed, the police report will be available for all to see. Until then, I think it best to keep an open mind. Innocent until proven guilty is a doctrine that has served us well for centuries.

Condoms distributed in error?

According to Lady Liberty some students at Rowan Cabarras Early College High School received some condoms in their welcome bags! Oh the horror! Please, say it isn't so. Let's be serious folks, high school students are sexually active. According to the CDC 46.8% of high school students have had sexual activity and 34% of high school students have had sexual activity within the last three months. Stop distributing condoms in error and start doing so intentionally.

Walt-in-Durham

Ray Rice and spousal privilege

The NFL has suspended, indefinitely, Ray Rice for spousal abuse. First and foremost, the NFL and the NFL Players Association have bargained punishments and the collective bargaining agreement appears to give the Commissioner the discretion to impose penalties for violations of the good conduct clause. That is not what this post is about.

Further, the Baltimore Ravens Football Club, Inc. has cut Rice and cancelled his contract. That too, is not the subject of this post.

What I do want to discuss, briefly, is the question raised by a poster to the NY Times story referenced above. The poster asks why did the prosecution end up with such a weak case? Especially when they had video tape evidence. That is a very good question. In this day and age of surveillance everywhere, how did this case go so badly for the prosecution?

The simple answer is Rule 501 of the Uniform Rules of Evidence. Rule 501 says: Except as otherwise required by the Constitution of the United States, the privileges of a witness, person, government, state, or political subdivision thereof shall be determined in accordance with the common law. The United States Supreme Court has recognized two different forms of marital privilege: (1)Testimonial, and (2)Communications.

(1) The testimonial privilege extends to the witness spouse. The spouse may refuse to testify against his/her spouse in a criminal or civil case. The spouse party does not hold the privilege, only the witness. That means the witness can refuse and cannot be compelled, even by a waiver from the non-witness spouse. This is the privilege problem prosecutors ran up against in the Ray Rice case. They could not compel Mrs. Rice to testify as long as she refuses. (Now of course the state has gotten a minor conviction against Ray Rice so jeopardy has attached and no further criminal punishment is possible.)

(2) The communications privilege belongs to the non-witness spouse. That is, as to what one spouse said to the other, the non-witness holds the privilege and can stop the witness spouse from testifying. This part of the privilege is not the subject of the video at least.

The question then becomes, why can't some custodian of the records for the surveillance company authenticate the video? They can. The problem is the custodian of the records cannot positively identify Ray Rice (not HD quality, or not of sufficient resolution) and certainly cannot positively identify Mrs. Rice.

The final question, why can't CSI identify Rice and Mrs. Rice? The simple answer, CSI with their bag of tricks was not called to the scene.

Walt-in-Durham

Habeas Corpus

Well friends, Sid Harr is at it again. Now he has filed, so he says, a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on behalf of Crystal Gayle Mangum. Readers will recall that Crystal is the infamous false accuser of the lacrosse fiasco and more recently was convicted of killing the man she lived with, Reginal Daye.

North Carolina provides for the remedy of Habeas Corpus in our constitution (Const. art. 1 s. 21) and in statute NCGS §§ 17-1 and 17-2. § 17-3 provides: "Every person imprisoned or restrained of his liberty within this State, for any criminal or supposed criminal matter, or on any pretense whatsoever, except in cases specified in G.S. 17-4, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus, according to the provisions of this Chapter, to inquire into the cause of such imprisonment or restraint, and, if illegal, to be delivered therefrom."

There are a couple of problems for Sid and Crystal, NCGS § 17-4 provides: When application denied. Application to prosecute the writ shall be denied in the following cases:... (2) Where persons are committed or detained by virtue of the final order, judgment or decree of a competent tribunal of civil or criminal jurisdiction, or by virtue of an execution issued upon such final order, judgment or decree."

In other words, the North Carolina Writ of Habeas Corpus does not apply after a person is convicted. Oops. Again, Sid fails to do his legal research before he filed something.

Sid's next problem is, he is subject to an order from the Wake Superior Court to refrain from practicing law. Accroding to NCGS § 17-5, "Application for the writ may be made either by the party for whose relief it is intended or by any person in his behalf." According to the unsigned petition Sid posted at: Sid is making the application on behalf of Crystal. Under our law, that constitutes the practice of law and thus, a violation of the Wake Superior Court's previous order.

Once again, Sid does his best to show us why it pays to have a real lawyer do legal work. But, with friends like Sid, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham