Month: December 2019

No comments

Trump’s Nihilism and How to Defeat It

  By Philosophy, Politics, Resisting Trump

I wrote the first four paragraphs on Facebook on August 3, 2016. Trump’s Nihilism The Trump campaign reminds me that a central element of fascism and its appeal is the embrace of nihilism. One way to understand nihilism is as the denial that there is any meaning or truth or purpose beyond our will. Nihilism both describes the “philosophy” of Trump’s political practice—it’s utter disregard for any norms of conduct and any standards of argument and evidence—and his appeal to the people in America who have seem to lost their sense of purpose and connection to one another or ideals beyond themselves.  Trump’s pursuit of power for its own sake answers to that loss of purpose as does his willingness to create chaos. As Nietzsche put it, “man would rather will nothingness than not will.” Trump’s readiness to break up NATO; his lack of concern about causing a collapse in… Continue reading

No comments

The 2019-20 Enacted Budget: How Did Education Fare?

  By Budget analysis

Originally published by KRC-PBPCP here. By Diana Polson and Marc Stier While this 2018-19 budget increase moves us in the right direction with increased funding for education, it still does not adequately and equitably fund our schools across the Commonwealth. In order to do that, Pennsylvania must find recurring revenue sources. Read the Overview of the 2019-20 enacted budget for education below. Continue reading

No comments

On Today’s Ruling on the Affordable Care Act Individual Health Insurance Mandate

  By Health Care, PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts

Originally published at KRC-PBPC here. Today’s 2-1 decision by a federal appeals court rules the ACA’s requirement that people have health insurance is unconstitutional because Congress has repealed the tax penalty for those who don’t have health insurance. But it steps back from the conclusion reached a year ago by Federal Judge Reed O’Connor that the entire ACA is unconstitutional. Both parts of the decision were expected by reasonable legal scholars. The individual mandate was upheld by the Court in NFIB v. Sibelius in 2012 on the grounds that it was an exercise of Congress’s power to tax individuals. The repeal of the tax undermined this rationale for the individual mandate put forward by Chief Justice Roberts in that case. Judge O’Connor went much further and argued that without the individual mandate, the entire ACA is unconstitutional, even though there was no explicit indication in the law that said the… Continue reading

No comments

Judicial Gerrymandering is Back

  By Constitutional Law and Civil Liberties, Courts, Judicial Gerrymandering, PA Constitutional Law

Originally published by KRC-PBPC here. Republicans who control the Pennsylvania House of Representatives couldn’t find time to raise the minimum wage this week. But they did find time to take revenge on Pennsylvania judges for protecting our rights to vote and to have Congressional districts that are not gerrymandered in their favor. They did this by passing a proposed amendment to the Pennsylvania Constitution that will change how we elect judges and justices to our appellate courts, including our Supreme Court. Instead of electing them statewide, if this amendment becomes part of our Constitution, we will elect them from districts that, of course, would be drawn by members of the General Assembly. As we explained in detail in this blog post, this proposed amendment will, in two ways, give the General Assembly far more influence over the courts than is appropriate in a government that respects the separation of powers. By… Continue reading

No comments

Yes, the U.S. Constitution could be improved. The process in this Pa. House resolution isn’t a path forward

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, Published Op-Eds, US Constitution

Originally published by the PA Capital-Star on December 18, 2019. On Monday, the House State Government Committee passed a resolution asking Congress to call a constitutional convention, pursuant to Article V of the U.S. Constitution. It’s not hard to understand the temptation to support this resolution. We live at a time of political division in Pennsylvania and in our country as a whole. We are all tempted to think about whether some change in our constitution might help us resolve our difficulties. It’s useful to start thinking about these issues. However, as a political scientist who has thought long and hard about our constitution, my own ideas on the matter are not terribly fixed, simply because the question is so difficult and the considerations that should weigh on us in examining changes in a constitution that has served us so well require the time for serious thought and substantial debate. But… Continue reading