<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: constitution</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'constitution'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22constitution%22&t=%22constitution%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:09:51 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Requiring Consensus in Congress</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5050522&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FxdqfWo5Zzkw%2F</link>
            <description>Yesterday Cato hosted a book forum on Joe Gibson&amp;#8217;s new book, A Better Congress: Change the Rules, Change the Results. The author had a lot of thoughtful ideas, and the event is worth watching (its also a short book, easy read). Several of the book&amp;#8217;s proposals move toward getting greater consensus in Congress and more agreement across the parties. Which got me thinking, if you want consensus, why don&amp;#8217;t you start by just requiring it. Something like a 300 vote requirement in the House with a 80 vote requirement in the Senate. There&amp;#8217;s nothing in our Constitution that requires simple majorities (or 60 for that matter), at least for routine business (yes there are rare exceptions). This would not stop every bad law, far from it, but it would require laws to have...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5050522</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:18:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5050522</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Doctors Should Participate In The Debt Ceiling Debate</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5050583&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fwhy-doctors-should-participate-in-the-debt-ceiling-debate%2F2011.07.20</link>
            <description>Joe Scarborough reminds us that the divisions in American government are hardly new, paraphrasing Benjamin Franklin’s observation that “When you assemble a number of men, to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble . . . all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected?” (This comes from a September 17, 1787 speech by Mr. Franklin to urge ratification of the U.S. Constitution, read on his behalf because he was too ill to deliver it in person. The Constitution was ratified the same day.)
I suppose we should be encouraged that Congress’s prejudices, passions, errors of opinion, local interests and selfish views are as American as apple pie,...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5050583</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5050583</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Quote Heard Round the World</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4953242&amp;cid=t_113105_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2011%2F06%2Fquote-heard-round-world.html</link>
            <description>&amp;nbsp;Gay marriage now just one vote shy of becoming law in New York despite Archbishop Dolan's objections[NY] Sen. Roy McDonald (R-Saratoga) - in a dramatic reversal from his earlier opposition - became the second GOPer in as many days to give his blessing to same-sex nuptials, bringing Senate support to 31 votes.&quot;I'm tired of Republican-Democrat politics. They can take the job and shove it. I come from a blue-collar background. I'm trying to do the right thing, and that's where I'm going with this.&quot;and in the same story, here's the quote that probably pissed him off enough to take such a stand.McDonald's change of heart came hours after Archbishop Timothy Dolan led a band of religious groups hustling to halt the momentum.&quot;The stampede is on,&quot; Dolan wrote in a blog post. &quot;Our elected sena...</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4953242</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 06:06:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4953242</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Is Virginia Gov. Robert McDonnell Implementing ObamaCare?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934118&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMYEXRd0k45I%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonI ask this question in today&amp;#8217;s Richmond Times-Dispatch:
Virginia Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell&amp;#8230;says Obamacare is unconstitutional and therefore illegitimate. Yet he has created a state commission to study whether Virginia should implement an illegitimate law. Since the answer does not appear self-evident to commonwealth officials, let&amp;#8217;s walk through the reasons Richmond should refuse to create any new health-care bureaucracies.
Didn&amp;#8217;t this guy take an oath to support the U.S. Constitution?
Why Is Virginia Gov. Robert McDonnell Implementing ObamaCare? is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934118</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:30:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934118</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Time Running Out in Libya?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921394&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgVc8IeTIlco%2F</link>
            <description>The objective has changed from protecting civilians to regime change. The war itself has gone on now for as long as the unauthorized war in Kosovo in 1999. Jack Goldsmith concludes: &amp;#8220;as the days drag on, and as our deep involvement persists, it becomes harder and harder to represent that this mission is limited in nature, duration, and scope.&amp;#8221;
Time Running Out in Libya? is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921394</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:41:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921394</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thursday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893412&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FhYNofFwwjrM%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Few GOP presidential candidates have proposed specific budget cuts.
&amp;#8220;Peace is in the interest of Taiwan, China, and the U.S. &amp;#8230; But the U.S. should view continuing arms sales to Taipei as perhaps the best means to maintain stability and peace across the Taiwan Strait.&amp;#8221;
Market liberalization has transformed newly independent states that formerly comprised Yugoslavia.
President Obama is simply the new standard-bearer for the bipartisan contempt for constitutional limits on power.
Cato chairman Robert A. Levy makes the libertarian case for marriage equality:



Thursday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893412</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:08:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893412</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Presidents Should Obey the Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4883560&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fab1C-zrG_-0%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazIn Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith, when Chancellor Palpatine transforms the republic into an empire, Senator Amidala remarks:
So this is how liberty dies . . . with thunderous applause.
But it can also happen in silent acquiescence. For decades now, successive Congresses have evaded their responsibility to make decisions about the deployment of U.S. armed forces abroad. I write about the latest instance of this, in Libya, in today&amp;#8217;s Britannica column:
Presidents have an obligation to obey the Constitution and the law. But one of the ways that separation of powers works is that each branch of government is supposed to jealously guard its prerogatives from usurpation by the other branches. Too often Congress ducks that responsibility, preferring to let presidents make ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4883560</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 14:30:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4883560</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“If He Approve, He Shall Sign It…”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4872059&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FWnb5aAt27lM%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperThe Patriot Act extension passed by Congress this week did not become the law of the land. It is void and without effect.
So may argue some future defendant whose conviction rests on evidence gotten under Patriot Act powers during the extended period Congress sought to establish in the bill it passed this week.
President Obama is at a meeting in Europe, so he had the bill signed by auto-pen. Representative Tom Graves (R-GA) has written a letter inquiring of the president whether he was presented the bill and truly intended to sign it.
Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution says:
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4872059</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 19:50:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4872059</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federalism and Med-Mal Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4862513&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FmGTytT7-JcU%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonThanks to star libertarian lawprof and Cato senior fellow Randy Barnett for pointing out something that has needed saying for a while: most proposals in the U.S. Congress to address medical malpractice law run into serious federalism problems.
Most medical malpractice suits go forward in state courts under state law. If the U.S. Congress wishes to impose a nationwide rule on these suits, such as by limiting damages for pain and suffering, it first needs to answer the question: under which of the federal government&amp;#8217;s constitutionally prescribed powers is it acting? Even if it can identify such authority, it should also ask: is it a wise idea—consistent with what one might call a prudential federalism—to gather yet more power in Washington at the expense of the state...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4862513</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 19:43:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4862513</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4852843&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F-miUoPAPrsM%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Please join us this Wednesday, May 25 at 2:00 p.m. Eastern for a Policy Forum with former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, &amp;#8220;Limiting Government: What Washington Can Learn from Minnesota,&amp;#8221; with opening remarks from Cato founder and president Edward H. Crane. Governor Pawlenty received an &amp;#8220;A&amp;#8221; grade on Cato&amp;#8217;s biennial &amp;#8220;Fiscal Policy Report Card on America&amp;#8217;s Governors: 2010,&amp;#8221; by Cato director of tax policy studies Chris Edwards. Complimentary registration is required of all attendees by noon Eastern tomorrow, Tuesday, May 24&amp;#8211;seating is limited and not guaranteed. If you cannot join us in person, please join us on the web for a live video stream of the event.
Washington&amp;#8217;s use of tax dollars to strong-arm states into ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4852843</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 14:23:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4852843</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Friday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4847943&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FP-3JYByf26g%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
How to identify as a leftist totalitarian.
How to reinforce the status quo in the Middle East peace process.
How to learn and understand the Founders&amp;#8217; intent for the United States.
How to save billions of dollars annually and reduce the deficit:



Friday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4847943</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 17:02:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4847943</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Will Obama Comply with the War Powers Resolution?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4841427&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fku2dMnrIqz8%2F</link>
            <description>By Christopher PrebleSix Republican senators are challenging President Obama&amp;#8217;s authority to conduct an open-ended war in Libya without congressional authorization. The six conservative lawmakers (Rand Paul (R-KY), Jim DeMint (R-SC), Mike Lee (R-UT), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Tom Coburn (R-OK), and John Cornyn (R-TX)) sent a letter to the president on May 18th asking if he intends to comply with the War Powers Resolution. The full text of the letter can be found here.
The law stipulates that the president must terminate military operations within 60 days, unless Congress explicitly authorizes the action, or grants an extension. The clock on the Libya operation started ticking on March 19, 2011. Congress has neither formally approved of the mission, nor has it granted an extension. The...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4841427</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 20:49:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4841427</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ron Paul on the General Welfare Clause</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4828849&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqX-jd6IVntY%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonNow that Rep. Ron Paul is again a presidential candidate, his constitutional views will come under increasing scrutiny, as happened yesterday when he was interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. Not surprisingly, critics immediately leapt on Paul’s “crankish view” that Social Security, Medicare, and other such programs are unconstitutional. Even Wallace seemed taken aback, citing the document’s General Welfare Clause:
The Congress shall have the Power to lay and collect Taxes … to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United  States.
“Doesn’t Social Security come under promoting the general welfare of the United States?” Wallace asked, incredulously.
One does not have to agree with everything Paul has said or stood...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4828849</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 20:06:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4828849</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Righting the Balance</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820820&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSjfmZ01Qsro%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperIn 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment cut an important tie in the Constitution between state legislatures and the Congress. In the original Constitution, states were empowered to choose the senators who would represent them in Congress. The result? Senators had an allegiance to the state government as much as the people of the state they represented.
Why does this matter? Well, today&amp;#8212;with direct, popular election of senators&amp;#8212;there isn&amp;#8217;t much of anyone looking after state legislatures in Congress. Accordingly, the federal government continually tries to turn states into administrative outposts of the federal government rather than respecting them as the independent political powers they&amp;#8217;re supposed to be.
In program after program, remote federal officials s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820820</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 14:40:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820820</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Support for the Eternal Federal Welfare State Is Bipartisan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820823&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F80UGSK8Bg5Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenGeorge Will makes a good point in his latest column: Democrats maintain a peculiar “conviction that whatever government programs exist should forever exist because they always have existed.” Will’s observation centers around the shameless Democratic attacks on Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposal to reform Medicare and Medicaid.
According to Will, “Ryan’s plan would alter Medicare. But Medicare has existed in its current configuration for only 46 of the nation’s 235 years.” Actually, “current configuration” isn’t quite accurate. For example, Medicare&amp;#8217;s prescription drug component added by Republicans, which Ryan voted for, went into effect only five years ago.
Regardless, I agree with Will that so-called “progressives” have a “constricted notion ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820823</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 20:33:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820823</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tight on Standards, Loose Grip on Reality</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4753663&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FpXmPkYP_95k%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyAs promised (actually, a week later than promised) I have read the Fordham Institute &amp;#8220;Briefing Book&amp;#8221; for reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act. As expected, it&amp;#8217;s big on trumpeting national standards, and squishy on almost everything else. Perhaps most aggravating, though, is how loose it is in characterizing the views of those of us at the Cato Institute, who apparently are part of the big group of education analysts who love the idea of Washington lavishing money on education but are, presumably, too blinkered to want to get results for it:
 
The local controllers. These folks, led by conservative and libertarian think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute, want Uncle Sam, for the most part, to butt out of education polic...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4753663</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 21:19:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4753663</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4734063&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FOJ5BsPWZczg%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Please join us this Thursday, April 21 at 4:00 p.m. Eastern for a book forum and debate on &amp;#8220;green energy&amp;#8221; policy, following the recent release of the Cato book The False Promise of Green Energy. On Thursday, University of Alabama Professor of Law and Business Andrew P. Morriss (one of the book&amp;#8217;s authors) and Center for American Progress Vice President for Energy Policy Kate Gordon will debate the merits of the &amp;#8220;green&amp;#8221; economic agenda, moderated by Cato Institute Senior Fellow Jerry Taylor. Complimentary registration is required of all attendees by noon TOMORROW, Wednesday, April 20. We hope you can join us in person and for the reception following the event&amp;#8211;if you cannot attend in person, we hope you&amp;#8217;ll tune in online or on Faceb...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4734063</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:29:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4734063</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4723790&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fqe59_xBEk1A%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Regulatory privilege is not consistent with competitive markets&amp;#8211;that&amp;#8217;s why Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac need reform.
Thank goodness the U.S. Supreme Court found that education tax credits are not consistent with the fictitious notion of a &amp;#8220;tax expenditure.&amp;#8221;
President Obama&amp;#8217;s budget plan is not consistent with either his own deficit commission&amp;#8217;s plan or the Constitution.
The modern &amp;#8220;Executive State&amp;#8221; is not consistent with Article II of the Constitution.
Cyberbullying laws are not consistent with the First Amendment and our concept of free speech:



Monday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4723790</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:12:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4723790</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4709192&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1d48imqwYoY%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
&amp;#8220;Whatever your views on climate change, you ought to find it unsettling that, here and elsewhere, most of the actual &amp;#8216;law&amp;#8217; in this country is crafted by unelected executive-branch bureaucrats.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;The Framers&amp;#8217; Constitution freed us, to make our own individual choices.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;The world&amp;#8217;s dictators are fleeing for their lives, all because of Secretary Clinton&amp;#8217;s efforts.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;Total spending jumped by almost $2 trillion during the Bush-Obama spending binge, so a $39 billion cut is almost too small to mention.&amp;#8221;
The Founders would agree with the idea that &amp;#8220;it should be hard to get into wars and easy to leave them&amp;#8220;:



Wednesday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4709192</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:48:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4709192</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>It’s Bigger Than the Budget</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4704626&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FCDMCl8OnIqI%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday POLITICO Arena asks:
Do the cuts (and increases) contained in the six-month spending bill House Republicans posted overnight make sense, and do they go far enough in attacking the deficit and national debt?
My response:
Today’s Arena question captures perfectly what’s missing from our current budget debate. In listing a few of the compromises contained in the six-month spending bill House Republicans posted overnight, and asking whether those cuts (and increases) go far enough in attacking the deficit and national debt, it invites us to imagine that America is one big family, arguing over how “we” should spend “our” money.
We’re not. As I wrote in last Thursday’s Wall Street Journal, we&amp;#8217;re a constitutional republic, populated by discrete individual...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4704626</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:33:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4704626</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Legitimacy of the Libyan War</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4653310&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FySEgFjmU-Kg%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesPresident Obama’s speech last evening offers a chance to assess the implications of the war in Libya.
President Obama is not the first president to order attacks on another nation without the authorization of Congress.  This case, however, seems different. Prior to the intervention, the President’s national security advisors had determined that the nation had no vital interest at stake in the Libyan civil war. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has repeated that conclusion after the intervention began. For his part, President Obama emphasized in last night’s speech and before, that the war would preclude a “humanitarian catastrophe.” Why did that rationale win out over the realism of his advisors?
President Obama tends to see our nation and the world as divided bet...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4653310</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:21:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4653310</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4642573&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FXIXBF963LZE%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
A year later, Obamacare makes Pennsylvanians say &quot;no thank you.&quot;
In a peculiar set of responses to inquiries about Libya, the Obama administration makes &quot;kinetic military action&quot; against the English language.
Full or substantial government health insurance makes for an inefficient and expensive health care system.
Emotionalism as democratic waves spread across the Middle East makes incoherent foreign policy.
As long as big ticket items continue to make the cut, our fiscal house will remain in disarray.
If you didn't get a chance to celebrate Earth Hour Cato-style over the weekend, check out this clip of senior fellow Jerry Taylor making the case against &quot;green&quot; subsidies:



Monday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4642573</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:26:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4642573</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“To Declare [Kinetic Military Action]“</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4636413&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1dImHb3owjo%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyRecently, I've been blogging over at the Washington Examiner's lively &quot;Beltway Confidential&quot; site, mostly on the subject of congressional war powers and President Obama's Libyan adventure. Today's post, &quot;Obama Makes 'Kinetic Military Action' on the English Language&quot; has a little fun with the administration's wordgames and the legal rationales behind them. Other posts and a column on the subject are here, here, and here.
Today also brings a pair of columns--in the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, respectively--from conservative luminaries defending the notion that Obama has the constitutional power to bomb Libya without congressional authorization. Yoo, the legal architect of George W. Bush's Terror Presidency, chides Tea Party Republicans like Jason Chaffetz of Uta...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4636413</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 00:31:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4636413</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>End Federal Welfare – Don’t Mend It</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4631461&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FxO-WpFvB8qo%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenRep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the chairman of the conservative House Republican Study Committee, recently introduced “The Welfare Reform Act of 2011.” The legislation’s two key components are the imposition of work requirements on food stamps recipients and the capping of total spending for 77 welfare programs at 2007 levels (adjusted for inflation going forward) when unemployment drops below 6.5 percent.
From the RSC press release:
Congressional Republicans and President Bill Clinton enacted reforms in 1996 that required beneficiaries of a new welfare program (TANF) to either work or prepare for a job. President Clinton triumphantly declared these reforms would “end welfare as we know it,” and in fact millions of families have since moved off the TANF rolls and begun to ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4631461</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 03:04:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4631461</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thursday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4631466&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FslZ7eoyDMdE%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
There is a growing gap between Washington policymakers, and the taxpayers and troops who fund and carry out those policies.
Why do budget and deficit hawks keep sidestepping growing entitlements?
Don't forget to join us on Monday, March 28 at 1pm ET for a live video chat with Julian Sanchez on the growing surveillance state.
The individual mandate in Obamacare is another example of the growing congressional power under the Commerce Clause:

Thursday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4631466</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Mar 2011 15:05:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4631466</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4622228&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBYJDNP1o0dQ%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
America's involvement in the war in Libya can't be justified on either security or humanitarian grounds.
Obamacare can't be fixed, and now is the time to dismantle it.
The no-fly zone over Libya can't mean good things for American politics or policy.
Bureaucrats can't allocate goods more efficiently than market actors.
President Obama can't blame former President Bush for Guantanamo Bay anymore:


Tuesday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4622228</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:19:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4622228</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Celebrating James Madison</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4600515&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3H5iD5cOzT4%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesTwo hundred and sixty years ago, James Madison was born in Virginia. His life was long and eventful, comprising the American Revolution, the writing and ratification of the U.S. Constitution, the founding of political parties, the War of 1812, and the rise of Andrew Jackson. The struggles that would culminate in the Civil War were evident in the last years of his life.
Along with his political career, Madison proved to be one of this nation's most insightful and certainly its most influential political theorist. He is often accorded the twin titles of Father of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. No doubt those titles claim too much for him or any other mortal. But according him those titles is not far from the truth.
What would surprise Madison about our current consti...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4600515</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 19:46:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4600515</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>No to No-Fly Zones</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560237&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fe7ht4-A8HVI%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyMy Washington Examiner column this week is on the growing drumbeat for military action in Libya.  That allegedly serious people are proposing, as Defense Secretary Gates puts it, “the use of the US military in another country in the Middle East,” ought to be appalling.  If the last ten years haven’t convinced you that a little prudence and caution might serve us well in foreign policy, what would?
Recently Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT), the Bobbsey Twins of knee-jerk interventionism, chastised Obama for dragging his feet on the path toward war.  They called for arming the rebels and implementing a no-fly zone, for starters.
“I love the military,” Sen. McCain complained “but they always seem to find reasons why you can’t do something rath...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560237</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 19:15:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560237</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Arrested for Pamphlets</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560242&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fnz1Cwthm9Uc%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThe feds are seeking to jail 78-year old Julian Heicklen for distributing pamphlets.  Heicklen knows that jurors are supposed to be able to vote their conscience in criminal cases -- so he distributes pamphlets on that subject near the federal courthouse.  The feds are evidently worried about the contents of those pamphlets and assert that Heicklen's conduct amounts to &quot;jury tampering.&quot;  But if Heicklen just gave the pamphlets to anyone and everyone, as he claims, without attempting to sway the outcome of any particular case, his conduct is free speech, plain and simple.   Heicklen should get a jury trial to fight the free speech violation -- since our Constitution says, &quot;In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560242</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 19:27:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560242</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Non-Defense of DOMA</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4517156&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F4s9Nn8lvb68%2F</link>
            <description>By Jason KuznickiThe Obama Administration's decision to stop defending DOMA in the courts has provoked some widespread commentary. Jim Burroway hints that Obama's strategy here is both deep and cynical. Obama's locked in a losing fight with Republicans over the budget, because Americans really do want to cut federal spending. This remains true even if, notoriously, nearly the only specific program they want to cut is our negligible foreign aid.
The mood is anti-spending, and it's just possible that a government shutdown scares Obama even more than it scares the Republicans. The remedy? Change the subject. Make Republicans in Congress defend their stance on gay marriage, which is so not the discussion they'd like to be having.
It could be one of the first instances in which gay marriage cou...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4517156</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:43:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4517156</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>My Favorite Constitutional Right</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4507260&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FlCuAYwIjR0c%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazBoth the Washington Post and NPR refer to the Tenth Amendment as a &quot;tea party favorite.&quot; I would have thought that tea partiers -- and most of the rest of us -- liked all 10 of the Bill of Rights, and indeed the rest of the Constitution as well. Now, sure, I guess if the ACLU could publish (in the 1970s or 1980s) the poster below, an &quot;illustrated guide to the Bill of Rights&quot; featuring only the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth amendments (and only parts of those), along with the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Nineteenth amendments, which are not part of the Bill of Rights -- well, then, I guess the Tea Party is entitled to have its own favorite parts of the Bill of Rights. But then, it was NPR and the Washington Post, not tea partiers, who suggested that the Tenth Amendment was ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4507260</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 15:33:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4507260</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Sen. Paul and the Writs of Assistance</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4482743&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsSzbK8YDm8U%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesSenator Rand Paul is moving beyond economic issues. His critique of the Patriot Act may be found here.
Sen. Paul lauds James Otis, Jr, the most important opponent of the writs of assistance imposed by the British prior to the American Revolution.  By invoking the name of this great patriot, Sen. Paul is trying to recall for Americans the original meaning of our Revolution and Constitution. He is practicing a politics of the original public meaning of America.
An astonishing performance.
Sen. Paul and the Writs of Assistance is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4482743</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:46:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4482743</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Four Reasons Why Big Government Is Bad Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4445777&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FF-J4qTLWp2Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellA new video from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity gives four reasons why big government is bad fiscal policy.

I particularly like the explanation of how government spending undermines growth by diverting labor and capital from the productive sector of the economy.
Some cynics, though, say that it is futile to make arguments for good policy. They claim that politicians make bad fiscal decisions because of short-term considerations such as vote buying and raising campaign cash and that they don't care about the consequences. There's a lot of truth to this &quot;public choice&quot; analysis, but I don't think it explains everything. Maybe I'm an optimist, but I think we would have better fiscal policy if more lawmakers, journalists, academics, and others grasped the common-se...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4445777</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 20:44:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4445777</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obamacare Ruling Expected, Correct</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4419109&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FoNQ89pOnlxQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonJudge Vinson&amp;#8217;s ruling today that Obamacare&amp;#8217;s individual mandate is unconstitutional, following on the heels of Judge Hudson&amp;#8217;s similar ruling in the Fourth Circuit, should give the new Congress all the confidence it needs to rescind this provision and more. Indeed, the idea that government could order a person to buy a product from a private vendor, or be fined for failing to do so, is so foreign to our Constitution for limited government that it&amp;#8217;s a wonder that Congress ever imagined it had such a power to begin with.
The Congress that passed Obamacare is now gone. It will be an early test for members of the new Congress, including those many Senate Democrats up for reelection in 2012, whether they will study these well-reasoned opinions and come to a ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4419109</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2011 20:15:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4419109</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Government Health Care in 1798</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4382750&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FZYaCaaqDGo4%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsThe 1798 &amp;#8221;Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seaman&amp;#8221;  is getting attention in the Washington Post and Forbes. The stories suggest that this act in the early republic was a precedent for socialized federal medicine today.
I offered this brief description of the law as  part of a timeline on the evolution of the federal Department of Health and Human Services over at www.downsizinggovernment.org:
1798: Congress passes the Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen. It provides health services to members of the merchant marine and funds a loose network of hospitals through the Marine Hospital Fund. The MHF is plagued by cost overruns, administrative mismanagement, and rationing of care. Some leaders oppose the new federal subsidies as an abuse of sta...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4382750</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 17:31:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4382750</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cite the Constitutional Authority or the Lack Thereof!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4377554&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FTJzTFPdiFrM%2F</link>
            <description>By William A. NiskanenA new House rule requires that every new bill or joint resolution introduced in the House include a statement citing the specific powers in the Constitution granted to Congress to enact the proposed law.  In the absence of such a statement, the clerk of the House will not accept the bill and it will be returned to the sponsor.
This new rule may have two potentially valuable effects:

For some time, this rule may have a valuable educational effect, reminding new House members, returning members, and the public that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution authorizes only 18 federal powers – far fewer than the powers that the federal government has assumed, especially during the past 75 years.
The constitutional citations for House bills that are approved would be pa...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4377554</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:12:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4377554</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Majority of States for Repeal Too</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4377557&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FM6ZRGjdMFXQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroIt&amp;#8217;s now official: 28 states are challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare in the courts. For those of you keeping score, the following six joined the Florida-led lawsuit: Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, Wyoming and Maine. Then of course Virginia is pursuing its own suit, and now Oklahoma is about to file its own separate lawsuit based on its voters&amp;#8217; approval in November of a Health Care Freedom Act similar to Virginia&amp;#8217;s.
Sadly &amp;#8212; if I&amp;#8217;m allowed to stop being hard-headed and just shake my head in an &amp;#8220;o tempore o mores&amp;#8221; sort of way &amp;#8212; the government opposed Florida&amp;#8217;s motion to add the six states to its lawsuit. There was no basis for this opposition: the newcomers are for these purposes similarly situated to the existing...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4377557</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:29:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4377557</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Constitutional Vision of The New York Times, Again</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4322493&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fu9dPDt49V8Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonWhat is it about the editorialists at The New York Times? Again today they’re ridiculing the decision by the new House to begin its business yesterday by reading the Constitution aloud. On Tuesday, with great pomposity themselves, the editors called the anticipated reading “a theatrical production of unusual pomposity.” Then in a nasty little editorial today entitled “The United States Consti …tion” — that’s not a typo; that’s their headline — they criticize House leaders for deciding not to read the “obsolete or offensive” parts of the document that are no longer law due to subsequent amendment. The Constitution was read, that is, as it exists today, which hardly seems surprising.
But it’s far more than surprising to the Times, apparently, because...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4322493</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:49:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4322493</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Toward Restoring Constitutional Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4318316&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fv3Wt14owxPE%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday POLITICO Arena asks:
In light of today&amp;#8217;s reading of the Constitution in the new House, what misinterpretations of the Constitution do you regularly see in American politics? And are House Republicans implying that the previous Democratic majority did not have a firm grasp of the government&amp;#8217;s founding document?
My response:
Thanks to the Tea Party, as I wrote in Tuesday&amp;#8217;s Wall Street Journal, Congress seems to be rediscovering the Constitution &amp;#8212; or at least many House Republicans seem to be. When members read the document aloud today, apparently for the first time in the nation&amp;#8217;s history, they&amp;#8217;ll be throwing down a marker: &amp;#8220;We take the Constitution seriously, and intend to abide by its principles.&amp;#8221; If true, how refreshing....</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4318316</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 15:14:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4318316</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Citing the Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4313992&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FV2VVba4E5A0%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroA few responses to my mention yesterday of the new House rule requiring each introduced bill to cite a specific constitutional provision for Congress&amp;#8217;s authority to pass it asked me to elaborate on what this would mean in practice. Well, this is apparently a new thing so nobody knows exactly, but the Republican leadership has provided a fascinating memo providing guidance to all (not just GOP) lawmakers.
First of all, the Constitution has to be cited &amp;#8220;as specifically as practicable.&amp;#8221;  For example: &amp;#8221;The constitutional authority on which this bill rests is the power of Congress to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces, as enumerated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 of the United States Constitution.&amp;#8221; ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4313992</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:21:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4313992</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Congress Rediscovers the Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4309587&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fpg2M72Smo0Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonIf the new Congress to be sworn in on Wednesday is the Tea Party’s cardinal achievement so far, its most symbolic achievement will unfold the next day, when the first order of business in the House will be a reading, aloud, of the Constitution – by all accounts, for the first time in the nation’s history. I discuss this issue more fully in this morning’s Wall Street Journal. Let me add simply this:
Symbols are important. When the House votes next week to rescind ObamaCare, as it is expected to do, that vote will be symbolic, because no one expects the Senate to uphold the vote, nor the president, if it did, to do anything but veto it. But the new House, responding to the voters who sent them to Washington, will have thrown down the gauntlet, and the real work will the...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4309587</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:56:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4309587</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>2011: Year of the Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4309589&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fr9FrkBpvCqM%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroCongress&amp;#8217;s first public act after getting sworn in tomorrow will be a reading of the Constitution on the floor of the House &amp;#8212; apparently the first time this has been done in the history of the Republic.  This symbolic closely parallels a new rule the Republican House majority is implementing: members will now have to cite specific constitutional authority for any bill they introduce.
As Roger Pilon explains in this morning&amp;#8217;s Wall Street Journal, this focus on the Constitution &amp;#8212; while nowhere near a public policy panacea or even a return to limited government &amp;#8212; is a terrific first step.  One example of the challenges the new Congress faces is rampant encroachment into legislative authority of the vast administrative state, in cases ranging from...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4309589</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:12:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4309589</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On Federal Education, Think Progress Should Think Harder</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4241706&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FS8Y9lgcbXxs%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyOver on the Think Progress blog, Ian Millhiser accuses Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) of never having read the Constitution. His grounds for the accusation? Coburn, citing Jefferson, doesn&amp;#8217;t think that the Constitution gives the federal government authority to provide such things as Pell Grants and student loans.
Writes Millhiser:
Sen. Coburn might want to try actually read the Constitution before he pretends to know what it allows. Article I provides that “[t]he Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” a grant of power that unambiguously empowers Congress to raise funds and spend them on programs that are broadly beneficial to America...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4241706</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 17:58:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4241706</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA Expansion and the ‘Arcane’ U.S. Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4233167&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjT_21hU9b7o%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonLast Tuesday, despite warnings of regulatory overreach, the Senate voted 73-25 in favor of S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, which would greatly expand the powers of the federal Food and Drug Administration and impose extensive new testing and paperwork requirements on farmers and food producers. Almost at once, however, the bill was derailed &amp;#8212; whether temporarily or otherwise remains to be seen &amp;#8212; by what the New York Times called an &amp;#8220;arcane parliamentary mistake&amp;#8221; and the L.A. Times considered a purely &amp;#8220;technical flaw&amp;#8220;. Roll Call put it more bluntly: &amp;#8220;[Senate] Democrats violated a constitutional provision requiring that tax provisions originate in the House.&amp;#8221; While the New York Times weirdly cast Senate Republicans as ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4233167</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 15:33:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4233167</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Moral Equivalent of Monarchy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4175681&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F5b-DlTACbng%2F</link>
            <description>By Jason KuznickiMatt Yglesias plumps for monarchy, based on &amp;#8212; what else? &amp;#8212; human nature:
[I]t seems inevitable in any country for some individual to end up serving the functional role of the king. Humans are hierarchical primates by nature and have a kind of fascination with power and dignity. This is somewhat inevitable, but it also cuts against the grain of a democracy. And under constitutional monarchy, you can mitigate the harm posed by displacing the mystique of power onto the powerless monarch. We follow the royal family with fascination, they participate in weird ceremonies, they have dignity, they symbolize the nation, we all talk about them respectfully, etc. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister gets to be just another politician. Admittedly the one who’s most important at...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4175681</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:43:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4175681</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Harlan Institute’s Innovative Approach to Constitutional Education</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4139216&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHGPPXQekxjA%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroWith the Constitution &amp;#8212; and its limits on government &amp;#8211; playing such an outsized role in Tuesday&amp;#8217;s elections and American political discourse generally, this would be a good time to mention a new program that teaches high school students about our founding document. 
My sometime co-author Josh Blackman, who is the founder of the Harlan Institute (a constitutional education non-profit for which, full disclosure, I serve on the board of directors) recently launched this year&amp;#8217;s version of FantasySCOTUS.org, a Supreme Court fantasy league that was featured (along with Harlan) in yesterday&amp;#8217;s Washington Post.  In FantasySCOTUS, students learn about and make predictions for pending Supreme Court cases, including recent headliners Snyder v. ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4139216</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Nov 2010 16:03:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4139216</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Primary Purpose of McCain-Feingold Revealed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4065345&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FzTZRl0bFuCA%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesKenneth Vogel offers an unexpected insight into the nature of campaign finance regulation:
&amp;#8220;[Wisconsin Senator Russell] Feingold faces an uphill battle against a novice opponent, who, perhaps ironically, has been the beneficiary of hundreds of thousands of dollars in ads attacking Feingold that would have been prohibited had McCain-Feingold remained intact.&amp;#8221;
In other words, if Feingold&amp;#8217;s campaign finance law had not proven to be contrary to the U.S. Constitution, he might well not be facing &amp;#8220;an uphill battle&amp;#8221; to serve a fourth term in Washington. The political speech that is causing Feingold problems would have been prohibited in that situation. But the First Amendment favors speech and not the re-election needs of senators.
Oddly, Vogel writes ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4065345</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:41:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4065345</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>IJ’s Steve Simpson on Doe v. Reed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4031213&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FzgwhmI7gqYQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. Brown
If the government can force us to disclose the source of our funds when we speak publicly, what can&amp;#8217;t they require of us? Steve Simpson from the Institute for Justice discussed disclosure laws in light of the Doe v. Reed Supreme Court decision at Cato&amp;#8217;s Constitution Day. You can get a copy of the latest Cato Supreme Court Review at our bookstore.
IJ&amp;#8217;s Steve Simpson on Doe v. Reed is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4031213</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2010 15:36:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4031213</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Can We Take the Truth?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4031216&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FxQVbYtkWPzk%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday POLITICO Arena asks:
Is Alaska Republican Senate nominee Joe Miller correct to suggest that the federal minimum wage is unconstitutional? And beyond that constitutional question, is this a wise political strategy?
My response:
Joe Miller is absolutely right: The federal government has no authority under the Constitution to set a minimum wage &amp;#8212; or to do so many of the countless other things it does today. When Nancy Pelosi was asked where in the Constitution Congress was authorized to order Americans to buy health insurance, she responded, &amp;#8220;Are you serious?&amp;#8221; That&amp;#8217;s a mark of how little America&amp;#8217;s political elites today understand the document they take an oath to uphold.
James Madison, the principal author of the Constitution, wrote in Fede...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4031216</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2010 12:35:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4031216</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Here’s How to Balance the Budget</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4031220&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FcnNZY-c7_eA%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellOur fiscal policy goal should be smaller government, but here&amp;#8217;s a video for folks who think that balancing the budget should be the main objective.

The main message is that restraining the growth of government is the right way to get rid of red ink, so there is no conflict between advocates of limited government and serious supporters of fiscal balance.
More specifically, the video shows that it is possible to quickly balance the budget while also making all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent and protecting taxpayers from the alternative minimum tax. All these good things can happen if politicians simply limit annual spending growth to 2 percent each year. And they&amp;#8217;ll happen even faster if spending grows at an even slower rate.
This debunks the statist a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4031220</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 18:29:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4031220</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Government Should Not Give Nutrition Advice</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4027152&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fa8T7DzAyVVE%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThere are plenty of reasons why politicians and government bureaucrats have no business telling you what you should eat.  The Constitution grants the federal government no authority to do so, for one thing.  Even if it did, it is simply wrong to force people to pay taxes so that other people can hand down nutritional advice or &amp;#8212; God forbid &amp;#8211; mandates.
A terrific article by Jane Black in The Washington Post illustrates why, furthermore, the government&amp;#8217;s advice isn&amp;#8217;t likely to be very good:
[H]istorically, the government has shied away from offering controversial advice. And with food, everything is controversial: A boost for one type of food in the guidelines can be viewed as a threat by providers of competing products. The result, critics say...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4027152</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 11:03:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4027152</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is It ‘Weird’ for Congress to Consider the Constitutionality of Legislation Before Voting on It?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4003245&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fz8e8Do_ZKow%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroSlate columnist Dahlia Lithwick seems to think so (h/t David Bernstein).  So I&amp;#8217;m not accused of taking Lithwick&amp;#8217;s words out of context, here&amp;#8217;s the relevant passage, discussing Senate nominee Christine O&amp;#8217;Donnell (R-DE):
O&amp;#8217;Donnell explained that &amp;#8220;when I go to Washington, D.C., the litmus test by which I cast my vote for every piece of legislation that comes across my desk will be whether or not it is constitutional.&amp;#8221; How weird is that, I thought. Isn&amp;#8217;t it a court&amp;#8217;s job to determine whether or not something is, in fact, constitutional? And isn&amp;#8217;t that sort of provided for in, well, the Constitution? In 2003, O&amp;#8217;Donnell said of the Supreme Court that &amp;#8220;it&amp;#8217;s kind of like we have the nine people sitting th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4003245</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 11:11:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4003245</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Constitution Day</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3980812&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F2fQuOVJ_9zE%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonOn September 17, 1787, the Framers of the Constitution of the United States of America, having completed their work over that long hot summer, sent the document out to the states with the hope that conventions in the states, pursuant to Article VII, would see fit to ratify it. Nine months later, on June 21, 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to do so, making the Constitution effective between those states. Shortly thereafter, three more states ratified the document; and Rhode Island, the last, did so on May 29, 1790.
The Constitution was not perfect – what human creation is? – not least in its oblique recognition of slavery, believed necessary to ensure union. But it provided for amendment, as with the addition of the Bill of Rights in 1791 and the Civil War Amend...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3980812</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 16:26:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3980812</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cato’s Eternal Vigilance</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3980815&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMHnrv5xlfDM%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday is Constitution Day, when all educational institutions are supposed to teach something about our founding document and when all citizens should think about the liberty that is so precious, but that requires, as Jefferson said, eternal vigilance.  We at Cato celebrate Constitution Day with our annual symposium – this year held yesterday so as to accommodate Yom Kippur, which begins tonight – and by releasing the Cato Supreme Court Review, the nation’s first in-depth review of the Supreme Court term just ended.
We’ve now had nine such conferences – which take place about two and a half months after the previous term concludes and two weeks before the next one begins – and published nine such volumes.  We are proud of the speed with which we publish the Revi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3980815</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 15:34:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3980815</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>In Memory of 9/11 2010</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3959967&amp;cid=t_113105_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F09%2F11%2Fin-memory-of-911-2010%2F</link>
            <description>Today was the 9th anniversary of 9/11 and I have little to say, other than to commemorate the people who lost their lives in that tragedy. Such random acts of violence seem senseless because they are. We try and make sense of them by putting them into some sort of context or definition (e.g., &amp;#8220;terrorism&amp;#8221;), but at the end of the day, there&amp;#8217;s little sense to killing thousands of innocent lives. 
Although anger is still prevalent when we think of the lives lost that day, 9 years ago, we shouldn&amp;#8217;t allow such anger cloud rationality and adherence to the principles that make us Americans. The ridiculous assertions against a mosque and community center, built somewhere in the vicinity of the footprints of the World Trade center, suggests that somehow the Constitution could...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3959967</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 11 Sep 2010 23:10:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3959967</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>And Then There Were None</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3914974&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FlO_fs_bGRr8%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazThe Washington Post, December 21, 2005:
The four Republican rebels &amp;#8212; Larry E. Craig (Idaho), Chuck Hagel (Neb.), John E. Sununu (N.H.) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) &amp;#8212; have joined all but two Senate Democrats in arguing that more civil liberties safeguards need to be added to the proposed renewal of the Patriot Act.
Let&amp;#8217;s hope that some of the prospective new senators who consider themselves constitutionalists will raise their voices on issues like this. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3914974</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 18:33:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3914974</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On the Wisdom Not to Do Wrong</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3895873&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fm_OkTvWpp9k%2F</link>
            <description> Jim Harper may be “put off by the domestic political ramifications” of the continuing Ground Zero mosque debate &amp;#8212; linking to my three POLITICO Arena posts over the weekend, when the story broke, and Chris Preble’s very different Cato@Liberty post on Monday &amp;#8212; but that’s what this debate is all about. It’s not about the law or the Constitution, at bottom, because the law is clear: we respect the right to build that mosque there, even if it would not be prudent or wise to do so.
Thus, he misses the point when he cites “conservative icon Ted Olson” who, Jim says, “expresses well how standing by our constitutional values is good counterterrorism signaling.” That may or may not be good counterterrorism signaling, but those of us who oppose this mosque being situ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3895873</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:30:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3895873</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Libertarian Politics in the Media</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3862001&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FTymTSt3LUaY%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazPeter Wallsten of the Wall Street Journal writes, &amp;#8220;Libertarianism is enjoying a recent renaissance in the Republican Party.&amp;#8221; He cites Ron Paul&amp;#8217;s winning the presidential straw poll earlier this year at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Rand Paul&amp;#8217;s upset victory in the Kentucky senatorial primary, and former governor Gary Johnson&amp;#8217;s evident interest in a libertarian-leaning presidential campaign. Johnson tells Wallsten in an interview that he&amp;#8217;ll campaign on spending cuts &amp;#8212; including military spending, on entitlements reform, and on a rational approach to drug policy.
Meanwhile, on the same day, Rand Paul had a major op-ed in USA Today discussing whether he&amp;#8217;s a libertarian. Not quite, he says. But sort of:
In my mind, th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3862001</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:53:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3862001</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is the Senate Broken?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3822910&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fs1Lliv2E-oU%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazDrawing on a New Yorker article by George Packer, Politico Arena today asks:
Is the Senate broken?
Should the upper chamber operate more like the House, where majority rules?
My response:
Some people believe that the Senate is &amp;#8220;broken&amp;#8221; when it doesn&amp;#8217;t pass new government programs promptly and without extended debate. But we have two houses of Congress for a reason. The Founders expected the House to be subject to momentary passions, and they intended the Senate to be more cautious, prudent, and resistant to &amp;#8220;rushing to judgment.&amp;#8221; As George Washington supposedly said, &amp;#8220;we pour legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it.&amp;#8221; When the Senate deliberates at length, when it resists the pressure of the White House, the House, and even p...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3822910</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 15:38:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3822910</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Kagan the Tight-Lipped, Fair-Weather Originalist</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3710547&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVkb0Y47ekDQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroHere’s what you have missed if you don’t have the luxury of watching C-SPAN all day:

Senator Sessions went after Kagan hard on the Military-Recruiting-at-Harvard imbroglio.  I don’t think he did any damage—which I’ll define as convincing someone on the fence to go against her—but the thing to keep in mind here is that the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy that so enraged then-Dean Kagan was federal law, not military policy.  Punishing the military for an act of Congress you disagree with—one on which you advised President Clinton—is disingenuous at best.  And I say this even though Cato supports ending DADT and filed a brief against the Defense Department in the Rumsfeld v. FAIR case involving denial of federal funds to schools who hamper military recruit...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3710547</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:02:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3710547</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Robert Byrd and the Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3706659&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FZhuNkK7P9Ks%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazSenator Robert C. Byrd, who died today at age 92, had a long and varied career. Unlike most senators, Senator Byrd remembered that the Constitution delegates the power to make law and the power to make war to Congress, not the president. He often held up the Cato Institute&amp;#8217;s pocket edition of the Constitution as he made that vital point in Senate debate. I have several emails from colleagues over the years reading &amp;#8220;Senator Byrd is waving the Cato Constitution on the Senate floor right now.&amp;#8221; Alas, if he really took the Constitution seriously, he would have realized that the limited powers it gives the federal government wouldn&amp;#8217;t include many of the New Deal and Great Society programs that opened up whole new vistas for pork in West Virginia.
Justin...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3706659</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:20:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3706659</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Supreme Court’s Decision in Skilling</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3695544&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQtxXg4gVeks%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThis morning the Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in the case of Jeffrey Skilling.  The most important aspect of the case concerned the so-called &amp;#8220;honest services&amp;#8221; statute.  That law has been an amorphous blob that federal prosecutors could suddenly invoke against almost anyone.  All nine justices acknowledged the law had problems, but only three&amp;#8211;Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy&amp;#8211;said the law was unconstitutionally vague.  The other six justices bent over backwards to &amp;#8220;save&amp;#8221; the law from invalidation&amp;#8211;they ruled that the law should be narrowly interpreted.  Here is, I think, the most telling passage from the majority&amp;#8217;s ruling:
&amp;#8220;As to arbitrary prosecutions, we perceive no significant risk that the honest servic...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3695544</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:03:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3695544</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Unbearable Vagueness of “Honest Services Fraud”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3695548&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FeEpnU-EHhcc%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroCato adjunct scholar Tim Sandefur, who authored an amicus brief in the case of Skilling v. U.S., writes on his home blog:
Today, the Supreme Court decided the case of Jeffrey Skilling, the CEO of Enron, who had been convicted of the crime of “honest services fraud.” The statute, however, is so vague, that nobody knows what the term “honest services fraud” actually means. Pacific Legal Foundation (joined by our friends at the Cato Institute) filed a brief in the case arguing that statutes that are so vague violate the constitutional guarantee of due process of law—and that the constitutional protection against vague laws should apply in the business realm the same as anywhere else. Vague laws are dangerous because you cannot know what they prohibit and cannot ther...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3695548</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:30:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3695548</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FLASH: Liberal White House Nominates Liberal Judge!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3641008&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3JIuoBWqLOU%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroFrom the first round of Clinton Library documents regarding Elena Kagan’s White House service, we can now all be shocked – shocked! – that President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee is a liberal.  It’s a mystery why the punditocracy thought someone who despaired at Ronald Reagan’s election, staffed the Michael Dukakis campaign, clerked for Thurgood Marshall, and advised Bill Clinton would be anything else.  But this is what passes for news in Washington these days.
We already knew that the solicitor general was a genial but cautious careerist, rarely expressing her own opinions but forever strategizing over the next rung on the ladder that would take her to her high school dream of sitting on the Supreme Court.  And we knew that she was a moderate legal academic ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3641008</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 16:22:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3641008</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>You Don’t Need to Waste More Money to Shrink Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3633443&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F_oIAG9JbdRY%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellIt&amp;#8217;s rather symbolic of what&amp;#8217;s wrong with Washington that a commission ostensibly created to promote deficit reduction is seeking a bigger budget, as noted in the Tax Notes story excerpted below. Rather than impose a bigger burden on taxpayers, though, I will generously suggest that they could easily fulfill their mandate by perusing Cato&amp;#8217;s Downsizing Government website. And if they really want to do the right thing, they can always just look at Article I, Section VIII, of the Constitution and get rid of existing programs and activities that are not enumerated powers of the federal government.
Saddled with a tight deadline and great expectations, members of President Obama&amp;#8217;s deficit reduction commission say they may not have the resources necess...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3633443</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:47:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3633443</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Immigration Law — Up Close</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3610323&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FF5GAbpFP0FY%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchKirk Adams, speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives, has an article in today&amp;#8217;s Washington Post on the controversial Arizona immigration law.  Here&amp;#8217;s an excerpt:
Under the law, officers can only attempt to determine a person&amp;#8217;s immigration status during &amp;#8220;lawful contact,&amp;#8221; which is defined as a lawful stop, detention or arrest. Any &amp;#8220;reasonable suspicion&amp;#8221; can be derived only through the investigation of another violation or crime. Those who are concerned that law enforcement can simply walk up to a person and say, &amp;#8220;Can I see your papers?&amp;#8221; should keep this in mind.
The police are going to ask questions and request to see papers in a variety of circumstances &amp;#8212; whether they have reasonable suspicion or not.  From a ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3610323</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 18:08:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3610323</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Teachers Suspended for Class about Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3607482&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHCQMwCn3jHE%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThis can&amp;#8217;t be happening.  Teachers suspended from their posts for showing students a film about the Constitution!  I can understand the initial parental inquiry&amp;#8211;if a student did say &amp;#8220;I was taught how to hide drugs.&amp;#8221;  There are such films on the market and those would certainly not be appropriate for school.  But instead of gathering the facts, the school authorities seem to have made a terrible and unjust decision to suspend these teachers.  The Busted film is about constitutional law and police encounters&amp;#8211;showing people that they can lawfully stand up to the police and decline to approve a search of their home and belongings, and decline to answer police questions.  Hopefully, the ACLU or FIRE will come to the defense of these teachers and ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3607482</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 16:21:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3607482</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ground-Breaking Constitutional Theories</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3595566&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FX52WaVptCyY%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroAs Larry Solum notes and Randy Barnett seconds, Georgetown law professor and friend-of-Cato Nick Rosenkranz has just published a tremendous article in the Stanford Law Review.  I saw an earlier version of it and can tell you that it offers one of those singular re-thinks of accepted learning.  As Randy puts it, &amp;#8220;It is one of those rare pieces that hits you between the eyes and causes you to reconsider how you think about the Constitution.&amp;#8221;  The article, entitled &amp;#8220;The Subjects of the Constitution,&amp;#8221; argues that all of us are going about our constitutional theorizing, at least with respect to judicial review, the wrong way.  Here&amp;#8217;s the first paragraph of the abstract:
Two centuries after Marbury v. Madison, there remains a deep confusion about...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3595566</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 12:35:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3595566</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federal Aid: 45 Years of Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3581588&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgqqswmxuieU%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsYesterday, the Washington Post reviewed the life of Phyllis McClure, who was an advocate for federal education spending in low-income neighborhoods.
Once an aspiring journalist, Ms. McClure joined the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund in 1969. She immediately used her penchant for muckraking to illuminate the widespread misuse of federal funds meant to boost educational opportunities for the country&amp;#8217;s neediest students.
The money was part of the new Title I program, created under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The slim volume that Ms. McClure wrote in 1969 with Ruby Martin &amp;#8212; &amp;#8216;Title I of ESEA: Is It Helping Poor Children?&amp;#8217; &amp;#8212; showed how millions of dollars across the country were being used by school districts to make ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3581588</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 14:55:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3581588</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>George W. Bush Is Not Missed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3577385&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FZTW5FqSefH4%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchAn atrocious ruling from the Supreme Court yesterday in United States v. Comstock, as has been noted.  It is no real surprise that the liberals on the Court ruled the way they did.  They believe in big government and need a way to get around a Constitution that set up a federal government of limited and enumerated powers.  Thus, we are told a &amp;#8220;living&amp;#8221; Constitution &amp;#8220;evolves&amp;#8221; in such a way as to accomodate the administrative state that is all around us.  But the law at issue in the Comstock case did not arise during the Clinton years.  The Adam Walsh Child Protection Act was championed by conservative legislators  in the Congress and signed by Bush.

Until the Comstock ruling was issued, court watchers were unsure of how committed Bush&amp;#8217;s Sup...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3577385</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 21:01:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3577385</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NYT: Attorneys General Advance “a Credible Theory for Eviscerating” ObamaCare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3556076&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFPICtrnihH4%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThe New York Times&amp;#8216; Kevin Sack reports on the legal challenge to ObamaCare&amp;#8217;s individual mandate launched by 20 state attorneys general:
Some legal scholars, including some who normally lean to the left, believe the states have identified the law’s weak spot and devised a credible theory for eviscerating it&amp;#8230;
Jonathan Turley, who teaches at George Washington University Law School, said that if forced to bet, he would predict that the courts would uphold the health care law. But Mr. Turley said that the federal government’s case was far from open-and-shut, and that he found the arguments against the mandate compelling.
“There are few cases in the history of the court system that have a more significant assertion of authority by the government,” s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3556076</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2010 20:55:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3556076</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Warning Label — on the U.S. Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3542583&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F49FzSld61U0%2F</link>
            <description>By Walter OlsonKnowing of my interest in oddball warning labels, reader Clark S. alerts me to this $4.95 paperback copy of the U.S. Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and Articles of Confederation, which contains the following advisory (readers may need to scroll to the &amp;#8220;Copyright&amp;#8221; section, depending on how the page displays)
&amp;copy; Wilder Publications 2008
This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work.
A bit of Googling revealed that the same publisher slaps the same boilerplate language on othe...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3542583</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 19:35:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3542583</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The NHS Constitution for England, 2010 Edition</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3533774&amp;cid=t_113105_86_f&amp;fid=36669&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffadelibrary.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F05%2F05%2Fthe-nhs-constitution-for-england-2010-edition%2F</link>
            <description>Title: The NHS Constitution for England, 2010 edition
Skinny: Revised NHS Constitution detailing:

patients’ rights and pledges
responsibilities of patients and the public and staff
staff rights and NHS pledges to its staff.

It also provides the legal source for both the patient and staff rights in the NHS Constitution.
Publisher: DH
Size of Publication: 12p.
Published: 08/03/2010
Filed under: Acute Services, Grey Literature, Hospitals, NHS, Primary Care, Quality, Waiting Times Tagged: Cancer, Commissioning, Consultations, Grey Literature, NHS, NHS Constitution, Non-Urgent Waiting, Quality, Referral, Responsibilities, Rights, Waiting Times (Source: Fade Library)</description>
            <author>Fade Library</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3533774</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 07:13:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3533774</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Handbook to the NHS Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3533775&amp;cid=t_113105_86_f&amp;fid=36669&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffadelibrary.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F05%2F05%2Fthe-handbook-to-the-nhs-constitution%2F</link>
            <description>Title: The Handbook to the NHS Constitution
Skinny: Revised handbook to give NHS staff and patients all the information they need about the NHS Constitution for England. It outlines the roles we all have to play in protecting and developing the NHS and will help you understand our rights, pledges, values and responsibilities.
Publisher: DH
Size of Publication: 148p.
Published: 08/03/2010
Filed under: Acute Services, Hospitals, NHS, Primary Care, Quality, Waiting Times Tagged: Cancer, Commissioning, Consultations, Grey Literature, NHS, NHS Constitution, Non-Urgent Waiting, Quality, Referral, Responsibilities, Rights, Waiting Times (Source: Fade Library)</description>
            <author>Fade Library</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3533775</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 07:09:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3533775</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Changes to the NHS Constitution: Government response to the consultation on new patient rights</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3533776&amp;cid=t_113105_86_f&amp;fid=36669&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffadelibrary.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F05%2F05%2Fchanges-to-the-nhs-constitution-government-response-to-the-consultation-on-new-patient-rights%2F</link>
            <description>Title: The NHS Constitution: Government response to consultation on new patient rights
Skinny: Response from the government on the consultation on changes to the NHS Constitution that have led to the new rights to start non-urgent treatment within 18 weeks, and to see a specialist where cancer is suspected within 2 weeks of referral and for the NHS to take all reasonable steps to offer a range of alternative providers where this is not possible.
Publisher: DH
Size of Publication: 27p.
Published: 08/03/2010
Filed under: Acute Services, Commissioning, Grey Literature, Hospitals, NHS, Primary Care, Quality, Waiting Times Tagged: Cancer, Commissioning, Consultations, Grey Literature, NHS, NHS Constitution, Non-Urgent Waiting, Referral, Responsibilities, Rights, Waiting Times (Source: Fade Libr...</description>
            <author>Fade Library</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3533776</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 07:05:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3533776</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Constitution Offers No Haven to ObamaCare’s Individual Mandate</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3522623&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0acngJJvFJ4%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonWith multiple lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of ObamaCare&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;individual mandate,&amp;#8221; the law&amp;#8217;s backers have proffered two principal arguments in its defense.  First, they claim that Congress has the power to require U.S. residents to purchase health insurance under the Constitution&amp;#8217;s grant of power &amp;#8220;to regulate Commerce&amp;#8230;among the several States.&amp;#8221;  Second, they claim the measure is authorized by the taxing power.
Regarding the commerce power, Cato senior fellow Randy Barnett explains in yesterday&amp;#8217;s Wall Street Journal:
[T]he Court has never upheld a requirement that individuals who are doing nothing must engage in economic activity by entering into a contractual relationship with a private company. Such a ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3522623</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 20:17:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3522623</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ed Morrissey on The Struggle to Limit Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3515337&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqIPxW_7tQLc%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesEd Morrissey kindly mentioned The Struggle to Limit Government and responds to the advice for Tea Partiers in my video.
Morrissey says:
I don’t think it’s accurate to say that some Tea Partiers &amp;#8220;like&amp;#8221; big government; it’s more like some aren’t enthusiastic about dismantling as much of the federal government as others, especially the more doctrinaire libertarians.
In the video I noted that polls showed a majority of the people who identify with the Tea Party movement also thought the entitlement programs were worth their cost. My colleague, Jagadeesh Gokhale, has estimated that paying for current entitlements would require 9 percent of GNP in perpetuity. This is unlikely. Entitlements will have to be changed since too much has been promised. People who thi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3515337</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:58:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3515337</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Salt Lust</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3508306&amp;cid=t_113105_117_f&amp;fid=38856&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.timemastermd.com%2F%3Fp%3D932</link>
            <description>FDA!  No Lick, Just Sip &amp; Suck?
For thousands of years, salt&amp;#8217;s high value has made it the foundation of a society, a currency of trade, and cause for wars.  Now suddenly salt is the bad girl.  An organized push by the FDA to ban salty foods and have manufacturers reduce salt in their products, is fueled by idiots who know nothing about health and those who ignore the US Constitution!   So if the FDA get&amp;#8217;s it way, and outlaws salt &amp;#8211; what happens to #1?  I guess we tequila drinkers will just have to make do with number 2 and 3! 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Consumers love the taste of salt in food and, in fact, their bodies crave it. With the trend toward low-fat foods, food producers must rely on salt to provide the desired taste.   So, what do you think will hap...</description>
            <author>Timemaster MD</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3508306</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:24:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3508306</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Romantic Relationships: Touch Me, Please</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3475771&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=34872&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fblisstree.com%2Ffeel%2Fromantic-relationships-touch-me-please%2F</link>
            <description>Ah, affection. In my five-week experience of working through the self-help book, How to Be an Adult in Relationship: The Five Keys to Mindful Loving by David Richo with my BF, we&amp;#8217;ve reached the fourth “A” – my fave – “Affection.”
I was mostly celibate during my 20s for spiritual (cleansing the palate at the behest of an odd yogi), emotional (had some collegiate trauma-drama), and practical (where did all the hot guys go?) reasons. Though I missed the sex – I’ve always been a fan, with a bigger libido than almost any man I’ve ever dated – I really, really, really missed the affection. Petting, cuddling, massaging, hand-holding – all of it.
Without sex, I was perpetually low-grade cranky – even though I was living in Hawaii. The ocean helped (kind of like a full...</description>
            <author>Healthbolt</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3475771</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:50:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3475771</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Waking Up at Last</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3471772&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMnaO7gg739U%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazTony Blankley, former press secretary to Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, exults in the Washington Times that Americans are waking up &amp;#8220;to our heritage of freedom&amp;#8221; and to the abuse of the Constitution:
All the following acts have suddenly awakened Americans to their Constitution: (1) The nationalization of car companies and banks; (2) the subordination of the car companies&amp;#8217; legal bondholders to union bosses; (3) the creation of trillion-dollar slush funds (the stimulus package) used for, among other purposes, the corrupt purchase of congressional votes; (4) the mandating of individual health insurance purchase against the will of Americans; (5) the attempt to have Obamacare &amp;#8220;deemed&amp;#8221; to have been enacted, rather than actually publicly voted on by...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3471772</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:20:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3471772</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>John Paul Stevens, Defender of High-Tech Freedom</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3456669&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FnkONjUE--qc%2F</link>
            <description>By Timothy B. LeeI&amp;#8217;m saddened to hear of the retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens. Whatever you might say about his jurisprudence in other areas, one place where Justice Stevens really shined was in his defense of high-tech freedom.
Justice Stevens wrote the majority opinion in some of the most important high-tech cases of the last four decades. In other cases, he wrote important (and in some cases prescient) dissents. Through it all, he was a consistent voice for freedom of expression and the freedom to innovate. His accomplishments include:

Free speech: Justice Stevens wrote the majority decision in ACLU v. Reno, the decision that struck down the infamous Communications Decency Act and clearly established that the First Amendment applies to the Internet. In the 13 years since t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3456669</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 20:57:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3456669</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Constitution, Schmonstitution — The Law Is What I Say It Is</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3435044&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F9vQz55xKdxo%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThe health care debate has illuminated how little regard many members of Congress have for the U.S. Constitution.
First, Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) said, &amp;#8220;There ain’t no rules here… When the deal goes down … we make &amp;#8216;em up as we go along.&amp;#8221;
Then, House Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers (D-MI) claimed that the Constitution&amp;#8217;s non-existent &amp;#8220;Good and Welfare clause&amp;#8221; grants Congress the power to compel Americans to purchase health insurance.
Now, Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL) admits he doesn&amp;#8217;t really care whether the Constitution grants Congress that power:
Off-camera: Where in the Constitution&amp;#8230;
Rep. Hare: I don&amp;#8217;t worry about the Constitution on this, to be honest.
Off-camera: [Laughter.] Jackpot, brother.
Rep. Hare:...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3435044</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2010 16:47:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3435044</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On ObamaCare, Don’t Put Your Faith in the Courts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3429165&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVwRcRtyn0yk%2F</link>
            <description>By Randy E. BarnettNow that the Obama health plan is law, more than a dozen states are asserting that Congress has exceeded its Commerce Clause power in imposing a mandate on individuals to purchase health insurance from private companies. No doubt, individual citizens will challenge the individual mandate on their own behalf.
States are also asserting that the threat to withhold all Medicaid payments if the states do not set up health insurance exchanges and enact other regulations amounts to coercion and unconstitutional commandeering of states by the federal government.
No one who opposes ObamaCare should put their faith in the Supreme Court to strike down an act of Congress, no matter how unprecedented and unconstitutional it may be. Nor should those who support ObamaCare be confident ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3429165</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2010 20:40:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3429165</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3424826&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FAnyLYO3C5J0%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
John McCain channels Dick Cheney: On March 4, McCain introduced a bill that  &amp;#8220;would require that anyone anywhere in the world, including American citizens, suspected of involvement in terrorism &amp;#8212; including &amp;#8216;material support&amp;#8217; (otherwise undefined) &amp;#8212; can be imprisoned by the military on the authority of the president as commander in chief.&amp;#8221;


President Obama declared passage of a major student-aid reform law yesterday. Will it help? Cato education expert Neal McCluskey calls it a mixed bag. 


Thought experiment: Let&amp;#8217;s say for a moment that Congress could actually repeal the health care overhaul. What should they put in its place?


Should Congress pursue a constitutional amendment that would limit federal spending to one-fifth of the...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3424826</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:09:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3424826</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Dealing with Police</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3403861&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FLl-zruO-5nA%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim Lynch

Yesterday Cato hosted the premiere screening of the new film, 10 Rules for Dealing with Police, produced by our friends at Flex Your Rights.  The Washington Post has a nice piece about the film and event here.
10 Rules is a gold mine of useful information (both legal and practical) for handling police encounters.  Legal books are too often impenetrable and just too time-consuming for laypersons. 10 Rules is a media-savvy vehicle that can alleviate the problem of constitutional illiteracy in America.
In less than 45 minutes, you acquire the information you need to know.  Get the dvds and encourage others to show them at high schools, colleges, and other venues.
Catch the trailer below: (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3403861</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 16:00:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3403861</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3403867&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3rgqfOGlbdM%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
Idea of the day: Repeal the 16th Amendment, which  gives Congress the power to lay and collect taxes. Replace it with an amendment that requires each state to remit to the federal government a certain percent of its tax revenue.


Economist Richard Rahn on the necessity of failure in the market: &amp;#8220;When government becomes a player and tries to prevent the failure of market participants, its decisions are almost invariably corrupted by the political process.&amp;#8221;


Read up on Goodwin Liu, Obama&amp;#8217;s nominee for a seat on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: &amp;#8220;Liu’s confirmation would compromise the judiciary’s check on legislative overreach and push the courts not only to ratify such constitutional abominations as the individual health insurance mandate but to...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3403867</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:16:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3403867</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The States Respond to ObamaCare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3398886&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fv1kB49EVIb0%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday Politico Arena asks:
Do the 13 state attorneys general have a case against ObamaCare?
My response:
Absolutely.  It will be an uphill battle, because modern &amp;#8220;constitutional law&amp;#8221; is so far removed from the Constitution itself, but a win is not impossible.  There are three main arguments.  (1) Under the Constitution, as properly interpreted, Congress has no power to enact such a plan.  (2) The plan conscripts state governments into carrying out and paying for federal mandates.  And (3) the individual mandate amounts to an unlawful capitation or direct tax.
The first argument will almost certainly lose, because under post-1937 readings of the Commerce Clause, Congress can regulate anything that &amp;#8220;affects&amp;#8221; interstate commerce, which at some level ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3398886</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:44:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3398886</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is it Unconstitutional to Mandate Health Insurance?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3398857&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=34470&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thehealthcareblog.com%2Fthe_health_care_blog%2F2010%2F03%2Fis-it-unconstitutional-to-mandate-health-insurance.html</link>
            <description>By MARK HALL Is it unconstitutional to mandate health insurance? It seems unprecedented to require citizens to purchase insurance simply because they live in the U.S. (rather than as a condition of driving a car or owning a business, for... (Source: The Health Care Blog)</description>
            <author>The Health Care Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3398857</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3398857</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Lawrence Lessig’s Constitutional Amendment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3382801&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F9982If77svc%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesLawrence Lessig has proposed a constitutional amendment in response to the U.S. Supreme Court&amp;#8217;s decision in Citizens United.  It reads:
&amp;#8220;Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to restrict the power to limit, though not to ban, campaign expenditures of non-citizens of the United States during the last 60 days before an election.&amp;#8221;
﻿﻿In Citizens United, the Court said that the First Amendment concerns speech rather than speakers. Congress has no power to discriminate against speakers; hence, a source of speech &amp;#8211; people organized as a corporation &amp;#8211; could not be prohibited from speaking (or funding speech).
Professor Lessig hopes to introduce a discrimination among speakers into the First Amendment. His proposed discrimination will not ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3382801</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:31:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3382801</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who I’m Not Voting For</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3382803&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgyutLzFlzco%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazIt&amp;#8217;s that time of year again, when friends start telling me about this or that candidate I should support because he or she is a dedicated defender of liberty and limited government. I&amp;#8217;m a political junkie, so I love getting these recommendations. But I don&amp;#8217;t end up supporting or contributing to many candidates. In my view, it&amp;#8217;s not enough for a candidate to say that he&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8221;committed to slashing wasteful spending, providing tax relief, and eliminating red tape.&amp;#8221; What&amp;#8217;s your actual tax plan? What spending do you propose to cut or eliminate? Not many of them offer clear answers to that.
And liberty involves more than just economics. Often I&amp;#8217;m told, &amp;#8220;Congressman X is a libertarian.&amp;#8221; I always check, and then I say, ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3382803</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 19:16:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3382803</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Deem and Pass” and TARP</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3378448&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMNi1Fk2h2x8%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesThe leaders of the House of Representatives plan to address health care through a &amp;#8220;deem and pass&amp;#8221; strategy.  Professor Michael McConnell believes this strategy violates the Constitution.  But put that aside for now. Ms. Pelosi has chosen &amp;#8220;deem and pass&amp;#8221; because, as she said, &amp;#8220;people don&amp;#8217;t have to vote on the Senate bill.&amp;#8221; The &amp;#8220;people&amp;#8221; in question are House Democrats whose votes are essential to passing the bill.  These members fear voters would penalize them for voting for the Senate bill. As the Washington Post put it, &amp;#8220;deem and pass&amp;#8221; would &amp;#8220;enable House Democrats not to be on record directly as supporting the Senate measure.&amp;#8221;  A House Democrat running in a tough election will be able to deny ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3378448</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:29:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3378448</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>To Kill ACORN, Kill the Programs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3378450&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fv1Dzs1stHts%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenLast year, when the issue of defunding ACORN was a hot-button issue, I told countless radio talk show audiences that the focus should be on eliminating the underlying fuel that created the organization—the flow of federal subsidies.
Chris Edwards pointed this out in September. If Congress simply stops subsidizing ACORN, its activists will reincorporate under new names and again become eligible for funds. Alas, that’s precisely what ACORN is currently doing.
From FoxNews.com:
One of the latest groups to adopt a new name is ACORN Housing, long one of the best-funded affiliates. Now, the group is calling itself the Affordable Housing Centers of America.
Others changing their names include what were among the largest affiliates: California ACORN is now Alliance of Californian...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3378450</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:08:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3378450</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Census Asks Too Much</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3374107&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBYj8y6F3eFY%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazEveryone in America, I presume, has just received a letter from the U.S. Census Bureau urging us to fill out our Census forms. Seems like a very expensive way to tell us to watch for the form to arrive in the mail. But I&amp;#8217;m particularly interested in why they say we should promptly fill out the form:
Your response is important. Results from the 2010 Census will be used to help each community get its fair share of [federal] government funds for highways, schools, health facilities, and many other programs you and your neighbors need. Without a complete, accurate census, your community may not receive its fair share.
Obviously this is a zero-sum game. If my neighbors and I all fill out the form, then you and your neighbors will get less from the common federal trough. But ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3374107</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:33:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3374107</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Bill Is Deemed Passed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3374109&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMK_fLiXDCMY%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazToday&amp;#8217;s question at Politico Arena is:
Should Democrats be worried that health care could be subject to a successful court challenge?
My response is:
I&amp;#8217;m the first in my family not to be a lawyer. But Mike McConnell&amp;#8217;s article seems compelling to me. As he notes, Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution requires that a bill must pass both houses of Congress to become a law. Duh. And for those who have trouble with that concept, he goes on: &amp;#8220;As the Supreme Court wrote in Clinton v. City of New York (1998), a bill containing the &amp;#8216;exact text&amp;#8217; must be approved by one house; the other house must approve &amp;#8216;precisely the same text.&amp;#8217;&amp;#8221;
So the &amp;#8220;deemed passed&amp;#8221; rule doesn&amp;#8217;t seem to be constitutional. Then the interes...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3374109</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:04:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3374109</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The NHS Constitution for England</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3366148&amp;cid=t_113105_86_f&amp;fid=36669&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffadelibrary.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F03%2F15%2Fthe-nhs-constitution-for-england-2%2F</link>
            <description>Title: The NHS Constitution for England
Skinny: Provides details of the rights and responsibilities of patients to receive care from the NHS and towards the NHS.
Publisher: DH
Size of Publication: 12p.
Published: 08/03/2010
Filed under: Grey Literature, NHS, Quality Tagged: Grey Literature, NHS Constitution, Quality, Responsibilities, Rights (Source: Fade Library)</description>
            <author>Fade Library</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3366148</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 00:30:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3366148</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Six Reasons to Downsize the Federal Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3331275&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fu3lFBBg7i2M%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Edwards1. Additional federal spending transfers resources from the more productive private sector to the less productive public sector of the economy. The bulk of federal spending goes toward subsidies and benefit payments, which generally do not enhance economic productivity. With lower productivity, average American incomes will fall.
2. As federal spending rises, it creates pressure to raise taxes now and in the future. Higher taxes reduce incentives for productive activities such as working, saving, investing, and starting businesses. Higher taxes also increase incentives to engage in unproductive activities such as tax avoidance.
3. Much federal spending is wasteful and many federal programs are mismanaged. Cost overruns, fraud and abuse, and other bureaucratic failures are e...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3331275</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 19:34:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3331275</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Gun Rights Secure, Liberty Less So</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3326968&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fpu6A47dw764%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThis morning the Court heard argument in McDonald v. Chicago, the case asking whether the right to keep and bear arms extends to protecting against actions by state and local governments.  Just as importantly, it asked whether the best way to extend that right would be through the Due Process Clause of Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (because the Second Amendment doesn&amp;#8217;t apply directly to the states).
From the initial questioning through the end, it was quite clear that those living in Chicago &amp;#8212; and, by extension, New York, San Francisco, and other places with extreme gun restrictions &amp;#8212; will soon be able to rest easy, knowing that they will be able to have guns with which to protect themselves.  Unfortunately, the Court did not...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3326968</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 18:21:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3326968</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Democracy against Free Speech?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3283520&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FyKk76th22OY%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesA new poll from Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that most respondents oppose the recent Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. Just over 70 percent of those polled want to reinstate the unconstitutional restrictions. The questions asked may be found here.
Sean Parnell asks whether the wording of the questions in this poll drove the results. William McGinley shares Parnell’s concerns and suggests some alternative questions for future polling.
I was not surprised by the result. Polls have long found that substantial majorities support something called “campaign finance reform.” Over two years ago, a poll found that 71 percent of Americans wanted to limit corporate and union spending on campaigns. 62 percent also supported limiting the amount of money a p...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3283520</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:15:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3283520</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3279961&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F2_4pez2nMmg%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
How the Tea Party movement can prove its authenticity.


Why Americans&amp;#8217; first loyalty must be to the Constitution


&amp;#8220;Snowmageddon!&amp;#8221; If you&amp;#8217;ve been watching the news, recent snow storms both prove and disprove global warming, depending on who you talk to. According to Pat Michaels, both sides are wrong: &amp;#8220;The fact of the matter is that global warming simply hasn&amp;#8217;t done a darned thing to Washington&amp;#8217;s snow. The planet was nearly a degree (Celsius) cooler in 1899, when the previous record was set. If you plot out year-to-year snow around here, you&amp;#8217;ll see no trend whatsoever through the entire history.&amp;#8221;


Did last week&amp;#8217;s government shutdown actually save American&amp;#8217;s billions of dollars?


Podcast:&amp;#8221;Scrap &amp;#8216;...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3279961</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 22:40:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3279961</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Evan Bayh and Congressional Comity</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3279964&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBzJWdwppBd8%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday Politico Arena asks:
Is Bayh&amp;#8217;s lament on target?
My response:
The heart of Evan Bayh&amp;#8217;s surprising announcement yesterday that he would not be seeking another term in the Senate was captured in three short sentences:
For some time, I have had a growing conviction that Congress is not operating as it should.  There is too much partisanship and not enough progress &amp;#8212; too much narrow ideology and not enough practical problem-solving.  Even at a time of enormous challenge, the peoples’ business is not being done.
Beguilingly attractive as those sentiments may be, suggesting that some Golden Age of congressional comity has been lost, a candid look at our history shows that comity has been the exception, not the rule.  And it&amp;#8217;s occurred mainly w...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3279964</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 19:50:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3279964</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Focus on Georgia’s Mental Health Crisis</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3275847&amp;cid=t_113105_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F02%2F16%2Ffocus-on-georgias-mental-health-crisis%2F</link>
            <description>Former First Lady Rosalynn Carter will provide opening remarks for a discussion on the mental health crisis in Georgia tonight, Feb. 16, from 7-8:30 p.m. at The Carter Center. This Conversations at The Carter Center event is sold out but will be webcast live at www.cartercenter.org
More than 130 patients have died under suspicious circumstances in Georgia&amp;#8217;s public psychiatric hospitals over the past seven years, according to an exposé by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The Carter Center has been a leading voice for change in Georgia&amp;#8217;s mental health system since this crisis came to light, and has worked to identify strategies to transform Georgia&amp;#8217;s shame into a model for the nation.
Carter Center Mental Health Program Director Dr. Thom Bornemann will moderate a panel of...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3275847</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 12:57:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3275847</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Congress Goes After Citizens United</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3269682&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FLD7c7mX6C8Y%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesSnowstorm notwithstanding, Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Chris Van Hollen introduced legislation in response to the Citizens United decision. A summary of their effort can be found here.
Some parts of the proposal are simply pandering to anti-foreign bias (corporations with shareholding by foreigners are prohibited from funding speech) and anger about bailouts (firms receiving TARP money are banned from funding speech). Government contractors are also prohibited from independent spending to support speech. We shall see whether these prohibitions hold up in court. The censorship of government contractors and TARP recipients will likely prove to be an unconstitutional condition upon receiving government benefits.
Despite Citizens United, Congress will try to suppress speech by...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3269682</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:43:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3269682</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama Small Business Lending Fund Likely A Bust</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3235817&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fwiz5gkUe4N0%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaPresident Obama has announced his intention to use $30 billion in TARP funds to create a new small business lending fund.  In all likelihood, this is $30 billion the taxpayers will never see returned.
First of all, the problem facing small business, outside of the massive uncertainty being created by Washington, is one of credit availability, not cost.  For those who can get credit, its quite cheap, arguably too cheap.  So if the president doesn’t intend to lower the cost of credit, the plan must be to lower the quality; using the $30 billion to cover expected credit losses.  Of course, we tried throwing lots of taxpayer money at unsustainable homeownership, is there any reason to believe throwing taxpayer money at unsustainable businesses is going to work any bett...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3235817</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:45:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3235817</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3235832&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FRjT19raMdZk%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
Obama&amp;#8217;s budget and the $1 trillion mistake.


Interesting: Would John Maynard Keynes  be a &amp;#8220;Keynesian&amp;#8221; if he were alive today?


Justin Logan on the rise of government and central control: &amp;#8220;The factor that explains the largest  share of the centralism and growth of the American state is war.&amp;#8220;


What we can learn from Hugo Chavez: &amp;#8220;The lesson for all of us, north and south of the border, is watch our presidents closely, and check them when they try to slip their constitutional bonds.&amp;#8221;


&amp;#8220;Stimulus Means More Meddling in Education&amp;#8221; featuring Adam B. Schaeffer. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3235832</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:58:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3235832</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Can Scott Brown’s Election Stop the Federal Takeover…of Education?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3189124&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fa5cqYbJxWzM%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyYesterday, I wrote about President Obama&amp;#8217;s proposal to extend the Race to the Top program, this time letting school districts completely bypass state governments and apply directly to the feds for funding. I pointed out that the proposal was one among several troubling signs that Obama intends to put Washington fully &amp;#8212; and, of course, unconstitutionally &amp;#8212; in charge of American education.  At the time, I didn&amp;#8217;t realize how right I was.
When I was writing yesterday I was basing my comments on documents from the White House&amp;#8217;s website and hadn&amp;#8217;t yet read the details of what went on at the President&amp;#8217;s photo-op announcing the proposed extension. I sure wish I had: At the dog-and-pony show, the President just came right out an...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3189124</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:22:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3189124</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3189126&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FaxTtFN283XA%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
Gene Healy on today&amp;#8217;s election in Massachusetts: &amp;#8220;If Republican Scott Brown wins the Massachusetts special election Tuesday, the Bay State will have its first GOP senator since the era when disco was king. And Brown will have the much-derided Tea Party legions to thank.&amp;#8221;


Why opportunistic politicians need to stop using times of crisis for their own ends and let the next one go to waste.


George W. Obama? &amp;#8220;Bush&amp;#8217;s successor—who actually taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago—is continuing much of the Bush-Cheney parallel government and, in some cases, is going much further in disregarding our laws and the international treaties we&amp;#8217;ve signed.&amp;#8221;


Can Google beat China? Cato&amp;#8217;s Timothy B. Lee tackles the questi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3189126</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:02:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3189126</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Weekend Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3178759&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FlYS1FwDCNGc%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
Jeffrey Miron on Obama&amp;#8217;s bank fees: &amp;#8220;Bailing out the banks was wrong, but a new tax won&amp;#8217;t make it right.&amp;#8221;


What Constitution? If Congress can order you to buy health insurance, why stop there?


Don&amp;#8217;t poke the bear: There is a proposal in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to rearm the country of Georgia.


Why the tragedy in Haiti cries out for swift action from private donors and yes, governments.


Podcast: &amp;#8220;Obama and Immigration in 2010&amp;#8221; featuring Daniel Griswold. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3178759</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:08:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3178759</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thursday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3149029&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6sJIosoLgDU%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
The moral and constitutional case for gay marriage. 


The populists have it wrong. Why free trade and globalization are great blessings to  Americans and poor families around the world.


How Obama&amp;#8217;s plan for health care will affect medical innovation in America: &amp;#8220;Imposing price controls on drugs and treatments&amp;#8211;or indirectly forcing their prices down by means of a &amp;#8216;public option&amp;#8217; or expanded public insurance programs&amp;#8211;would reduce the incentive for innovators to develop new treatments.&amp;#8221;


Register now for the upcoming Cato forum featuring author Tim Carney and his new book, Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses. Buy the book, here.


Podcast: &amp;#8...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3149029</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:24:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3149029</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Census Paves the Way for Subsidies</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3142514&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDVMBZvjcGTY%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenOur bloated government does a lot of things it shouldn’t, but the decennial census is one of the handful of federal activities the Constitution approves of. The census was intended simply to determine the number of seats each state would have in the House of Representatives. Today, census data is plugged into government formulas to determine how more than $400 billion in subsidies from the federal welfare state are allocated to state and local governments.
The impetus to grab federal dollars caused controversy back in December when the National Association of Latino Elected Officials distributed a census promo that read, &amp;#8220;This is how Jesus was born…Joseph and Mary participated in the Census.&amp;#8221; The group’s website says that, “For each uncounted Latino, more ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3142514</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 15:10:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3142514</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Weekend Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3104994&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F2M-FiGahb1g%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
How to manufacture a climate consensus: &amp;#8220;The East Anglia emails are just the tip of the iceberg.&amp;#8221;


Forecast for Copenhagen: &amp;#8220;Cloudy with a chance of nothing.&amp;#8221;


A tale of how far modern “constitutional law” has taken us toward the executive state.


How the president&amp;#8217;s policies are holding back the economy: &amp;#8220;Right now, the best thing Washington can do for our economy is to simply stop what it has been doing.&amp;#8221;


Podcast: &amp;#8220;Liberty, Tradition and Values&amp;#8220; (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3104994</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:22:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3104994</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama’s Copenhagen Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3104996&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSSVKuxXsqbI%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonPolitico asks, &amp;#8220;Was he convincing?&amp;#8221;
My response:
In Copenhagen this morning, President Obama convinced only those who want to believe — of which, regrettably, there is no shortage.  Notice how he began, utterly without doubt:  &amp;#8220;You would not be here unless you, like me, were convinced that this danger is real.  This is not fiction, this is science.&amp;#8221;  The implicit certitude is no part of real science, of course.  But then the president, like the environmental zealots cheering him in Copenhagen, are not really interested in real science.  Theirs, ultimately, is a political agenda.  How else to explain the corruption of science that the East Anglia Climate Research email scandal has brought to light, and the efforts, presently, to dismiss the s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3104996</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:49:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3104996</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3089255&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEL7rZ51xm9Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
Whether you&amp;#8217;re insured, uninsured, get health insurance on your own or through an employer, own a small business or work for someone else,  this is what the health care bill means for you.


An update on the hidden taxes in the health care bill.


Why Obama should order the DEA to make more pot available for medical research.


The U.S. Constitution mentions only three federal crimes (treason, piracy, and counterfeiting). Today, there are more than 4,000.


Podcast: &amp;#8220;Myths of Health Care Reform.&amp;#8221; (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3089255</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:05:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3089255</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The NHS Constitution: a consultation on new patient rights</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3089220&amp;cid=t_113105_86_f&amp;fid=36669&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffadelibrary.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F12%2F15%2Fthe-nhs-constitution-a-consultation-on-new-patient-rights%2F</link>
            <description>Title: The NHS Constitution: a consultation on new patient rights
The Skinny: The NHS Confederation is seeking views from members to inform our submission to the consultation.

The DH is proposing two new legally binding rights for patients to be included in the NHS Constitution and is seeking views on other rights that may be included in the future, so that empowered patients can hold their health services to account.
The proposed rights are: to access services within maximum waiting times, and for those aged between 40 and 74 to be offered a NHS health check every 5 years.
Where rights are not met the NHS must offer a ‘meaningful form of redress’, which is to focus on putting the matter right as soon as possible rather than compensation.

Publisher: NHS Confederation
Size of Publicat...</description>
            <author>Fade Library</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3089220</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:30:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3089220</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Weekend Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3082390&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FetlyVD0kA70%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
Health care insurance mandates: Why it is unconstitutional for the government to force you to purchase a product you don&amp;#8217;t want to buy.


Should malpractice reform be included in the pending health care bill?


The end of globalization? Cato&amp;#8217;s trade policy expert Daniel Griswold debates.


Doug Bandow on the minaret ban in Switzerland: &amp;#8220;Swiss voters underestimated the impact on religious liberty when they voted to ban minaret construction. But Muslims whose nations persecute Christians, Jews, and other religious minorities have no standing to complain. The Islamic world needs to respect religious liberty at home before lecturing the West about intolerance, racism, hatred and Islamophobia.&amp;#8221;


More debate over Hayek and spontaneous order at Cato Unbound...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3082390</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:03:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3082390</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Keeping Pandora’s Box Sealed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3082392&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSbBHybuqw1E%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroIn today&amp;#8217;s Washington Times, Ken Klukowski and Ken Blackwell co-authored an op-ed about McDonald v. Chicago and the Privileges or Immunities Clause titled, &amp;#8220;A gun case or Pandora’s box?&amp;#8221;
If that title sounds familiar, it should. Josh Blackman and I have co-authored a forthcoming article called &amp;#8220;Opening Pandora’s Box? Privileges or Immunities, The Constitution in 2020, and Properly Incorporating the Second Amendment.&amp;#8220;  As Josh put it in his reply to the Kens, &amp;#8220;imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.&amp;#8221;
Going beyond the title, there are several errors in the piece,  which I will briefly recap:
First, the Kens argue that the Supreme Court should uphold the Slaughter-House Cases, out of a fear that reversal &amp;#8212; and thereb...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3082392</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:29:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3082392</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Care Mandate Is Unconstitutional — and Don’t Leave Home Without the Cato Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3079324&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F9Wm7DUG7tSI%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroYesterday the Heritage Foundation released a new paper on the unconstitutionality of the proposed health care mandate.  Think tanks aren&amp;#8217;t normally in the habit of promoting their peer institutions&amp;#8217; work, but this paper is incredibly timely and its lead author is Cato senior fellow Randy Barnett.  You really should go read it.
Interestingly, at the event unveiling the paper, Eugene Volokh (of UCLA Law School and the Volokh Conspiracy blog) at one point wanted to quote the Constitution and realized he wasn’t carrying one! Eugene asked if anyone had a Heritage Constitution.  Former Attorney General Ed Meese, now chairman of Heritage&amp;#8217;s Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, saved the day by passing Eugene his&amp;#8230; handy, dandy, Washington Post-bestsel...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3079324</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:16:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3079324</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>10 Rules for Dealing With the Police</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3075481&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQJ01U7Zu34A%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchOur friends at Flex Your Rights have a new film that is about to be released.  It&amp;#8217;s called 10 Rules for Dealing with Police. Trailer for the film here.  I have seen the entire film and it is an outstanding work&amp;#8211;accurate and useful information, great screenplay, and great acting.

Believe it or not, the police can lie to you and can try to trick you into giving up your constitutional rights.  Happens every day.  In less than 45 minutes, this film teaches you what you need to know about police encounters.  Every citizen should take an interest in learning about constitutional rights.  And experienced lawyers will tell you that you can save thousands of bucks in legal fees by avoiding common mistakes.  But you need to know the traps.   If you have teenagers in...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3075481</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:19:56 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3075481</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Are You a Criminal?  Maybe You Are and Don’t Know It</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3075485&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVt8wKpaQGQs%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchYesterday, Michael Dreeben, the attorney representing the U.S. government, tried to defend the controversial &amp;#8220;honest services&amp;#8221; statute from a constitutional challenge in front of the Supreme Court.  When Dreeben informed the Court that the feds have essentially criminalized any ethical lapse in the workplace, Justice Breyer exclaimed,
[T]here are 150 million workers in the United States.  I think possibly 140 [million] of them flunk your test.
There it is.  Some of us have been trying to draw more attention to the dangerous trend of overcriminalization.  Judge Alex Kozinski co-authored an article in my book entitled &amp;#8220;You&amp;#8217;re (Probably) a Federal Criminal.&amp;#8221;  And Cato adjunct scholar, Harvey Silverglate, calls his new book, Three Felonies a Da...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3075485</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:28:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3075485</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Likely Supreme Court Tie Would Be a Loss to Property Owners</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3052125&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fl4ZoHP54eaE%2F</link>
            <description>Today, the Supreme Court heard argument in Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, which is a Fifth Amendment Takings Clause challenge involving beachfront property (that I previously discussed here).
Essentially, Florida&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8221;beach renourishment&amp;#8221; program created more beach but deprived property owners of the rights they previously had &amp;#8212; exclusive access to the water, unobstructed view, full ownership of land up to the &amp;#8220;mean high water mark,&amp;#8221; etc. That is, the court turned beachfront property into &amp;#8220;beachview&amp;#8221; property.  After the property owners successfully challenged this action, the Florida Supreme Court &amp;#8211; &amp;#8220;SCOFLA&amp;#8221; for those who remember the Bush v. Gore imbroglio &amp;#8211; reve...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3052125</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 19:49:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3052125</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Free Press Only Counts if It’s on Dead Trees</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3052127&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYBvsqTfHpCo%2F</link>
            <description>The Associated Press reports:
The federal government is wading into deliberations over the future of journalism as printed newspapers, television stations and other traditional media outlets suffer from Americans&amp;#8217; growing reliance on the Internet.
With the media business in a state of economic distress as audiences and advertisers migrate online, the Federal Trade Commission began a two-day workshop Tuesday to examine the profound challenges facing media companies and explore ways the government can help them survive.
Media executives taking part are looking for a new business model for an industry that is watching traditional advertising revenue dry up, without online revenue growing quickly enough to replace it. Government officials want to protect a critical pillar of democracy—...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3052127</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 19:43:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3052127</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Swiss Minaret Ban:  Some Things Never Change</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3044735&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FRCpTMzq_Z94%2F</link>
            <description>In the Letter Concerning Toleration, John Locke wrote,
Nobody&amp;#8230; neither single persons, nor Churches, nay, nor even commonwealths, have any just title to invade the civil rights and worldly goods of each other, upon pretence of religion. Those that are of another opinion would do well to consider with themselves how pernicious a seed of discord and war, how powerful a provocation to endless hatreds, rapines, and slaughters they thereby furnish unto mankind. No peace and security, no, not so much as common friendship, can ever be established or preserved amongst men, so long as this opinion prevails, that dominion is founded in grace, and that religion is to be propagated by force of arms.
A lot has changed since 1685, of course, but some things never will. Even today, the only way tha...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3044735</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:43:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3044735</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Complaint for Wednesday</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3026656&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FKRsAi7bs33A%2F</link>
            <description>Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) has introduced H.Con.Res.155, &amp;#8220;Supporting the goals and ideals of &amp;#8216;Complaint Free Wednesday.&amp;#8217;&amp;#8221; The bill description says:
Expresses support for the goals and ideals of Complaint Free Wednesday. Encourages each person in the United States to remember that having a positive life begins with having a positive attitude. Recognizes and reaffirms the meaning of Thanksgiving by asking each person in the United States to use Complaint Free Wednesday to refrain from complaining and prepare for a day of gratitude.
So what&amp;#8217;s my complaint? My complaint is that people get elected to office and they think their every passing thought should be a law. Eat less, exercise more, play classical music to unborn children, have a college football playoff...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3026656</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:53:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3026656</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cato Files Brief to Extend Second Amendment Rights, Provide Protections for Privileges or Immunities</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3018980&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDEAth9FtwTQ%2F</link>
            <description>Last year, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court confirmed what most scholars and a substantial majority of Americans long believed: that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. Heller led to the current challenge to Chicago&amp;#8217;s handgun ban, which raises the question of whether the Fourteenth Amendment protects that right against infringement by state and local governments. The Seventh Circuit answered the question in the negative, finding itself foreclosed by 19th-century Supreme Court decisions. The Supreme Court agreed to review the case &amp;#8212; after Cato filed an amicus brief supporting the cert petition &amp;#8212; and specifically consider whether the Fourteenth Amendment&amp;#8217;s Due Process Clause or its Privileges or Immunities Claus...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3018980</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:51:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3018980</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Glenn Greenwald brings the Cranky.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3019185&amp;cid=t_113105_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2009%2F11%2Fglenn-grenwald-brings-cranky.html</link>
            <description>Glenn Greenwald is suffering the effects of a very severe moral wedgie. Like many, and I include myself, he suffers from deep, impotent outrage toward the moral failure of the Obama Administration; it's abandonment of it's clear, legal duty to prosecute war crimes committed under the aegis of the Bushistas.He waxes sarcastic and wroth, no doubt in part due to the fact that he is being studiously ignored by those who have the manifest duty to act.&quot;Criminals&quot;?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&quot;Prosecutions&quot;?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&quot;Obliged to open a case&quot;?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&quot;Violations of human rights&quot;?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;Just because they maintained a few secret prisons in violation of domestic and international law?&amp;nbsp; What kind of crazy, purist, Far Leftist utopians are running that place?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;They need a heavy dose of pragmat...</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3019185</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:36:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3019185</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Oh, Texas. Now What Have You Done?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3012566&amp;cid=t_113105_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2009%2F11%2Foh-texas-now-what-have-you-done.html</link>
            <description>I'm on my usual winter hiatus, but I still watch Stewart and Colbert. Colbert pointed this out last night and The Daily Beast gave me the specifics.Did Texas Outlaw Marriage?Texas may have become the largest singles meet in the nation—without anyone realizing it. Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Democratic candidate for attorney general, says that a clause in the 2005 constitutional amendment banning gay marriage may have, in fact, banned all marriage. Subsection of B of the amendment reads, &quot;this state or political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage,&quot; the wording of which, Radnofsky argues, &quot;eliminates marriage in Texas.&quot; Current Attorney General Greg Abbott's spokesman said that the amendment is &quot;entirely constitutional,&quot; and...</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3012566</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:47:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3012566</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Rarity: Newspaper Argues Against Techno-panic, Cites Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2999498&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FbNwXdWXuqRY%2F</link>
            <description>Progress &amp; Freedom Foundation president and Cato alumnus Adam Thierer has done yeoman&amp;#8217;s work for years pointing out, and arguing against, the phenomenon of techno-panic as it relates to children. That&amp;#8217;s not the only area in which techno-panic can tighten its grip on the neck of common sense and the constitution, of course.
But here&amp;#8217;s a delight I ran across this morning: the Los Angeles Times arguing against techno-panic despite the use of Web sites to research and case potential burglary victims (by the &amp;#8220;bling ring,&amp;#8221; soon to be the subject of a major motion picture).
The Times editorializes:
[T]hieves [did not] have to wait for the invention of Google maps to reconnoiter neighborhoods in search of easily accessible homes. That&amp;#8217;s worth remembering if,...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2999498</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:48:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2999498</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Georgian Constitution of Economic Liberty</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2989133&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSlqjRATSOyI%2F</link>
            <description>The former Soviet Republic of Georgia is a late economic reformer, having started such liberalization after the Rose Revolution in 2004. But it is one of the most successful post-Soviet reformers, and it may be the country that has implemented the largest range of serious market reforms in the shortest period of time. Its growth rate from 2004 through 2008 averaged 7.6 percent per year (which includes the comparatively low 2.1 percent rate of 2008 that resulted from the global financial crisis and the war with Russia).
Last month, the government submitted a draft act to Parliament that calls for amending the country’s constitution so that it would safeguard various elements of economic freedom. The amendments would put caps on public debt, spending and deficits; and ban any kind of price...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2989133</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:49:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2989133</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who Reads the Readers?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2981055&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fjvs9fA_dSUc%2F</link>
            <description>This is a reminder, citizen: Only cranks worry about vastly increased governmental power to gather transactional data about Americans&amp;#8217; online behavior. Why, just last week, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) informed us that there has not been any &amp;#8220;demonstrated or recent abuse&amp;#8221; of such authority by means of National Security Letters, which permit the FBI to obtain many telecommunications records without court order. I mean, the last Inspector General report finding widespread and systemic abuse of those came out, like, over a year ago! And as defenders of expanded NSL powers often remind us, similar records can often be obtained by grand jury subpoena.
Subpoenas like, for instance, the one issued last year seeking the complete traffic logs of the left-wing site Indymedia for a parti...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2981055</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:51:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2981055</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tea Party Conservatism and the GOP</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2963074&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgXyYR2TDT8w%2F</link>
            <description>This morning, Politico&amp;#8217;s Arena asks:
Is Tea Party conservatism a help or a hazard for Republicans seeking a return to power?
My response:
Let&amp;#8217;s start with some clarity:  &amp;#8220;Tea Party conservatism&amp;#8221; stands for several things, but it is not the caricature one often finds in the mainstream media, to say nothing of the left wing blogs.  It is a movement with deep historical roots, drawing its name and inspiration from the Boston Tea Party of 1773.  As with that event, taxes brought it to the fore &amp;#8212; on Tax Day, April 15.  But taxes are simply the most obvious manifestation of modern government run amok, insinuating itself into every corner of life.  Trillions of dollars of debt for our children, out-of-control government budgets, massive interventions in priv...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2963074</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:49:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2963074</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wisdom of the Anti-Federalists</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2946894&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FC_VLTl-IxaA%2F</link>
            <description>Everybody reads the Federalist Papers. (I hope!) Written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, they are generally regarded as the most profound collection of political theory ever written in America. And since they deeply inform our understanding of our fundamental law, they are essential to understanding the American version of limited, constitutional government. But the ratification of the Constitution was a close thing in 1787–89, and the Anti-Federalists (who said that actually they were the federalists, while their opponents were nationalists) also had some insightful things to say about liberty and limited government.
Now the invaluable Liberty Fund has made available a collection of anti-federalist writings, The Anti-Federalist Writings of the Melancton Smith Circle...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2946894</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:38:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2946894</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Federal Education Results Prove the Framers Right</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2939276&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fw2gvp0KAmyY%2F</link>
            <description>Yesterday, I offered the Fordham Foundation&amp;#8217;s Andy Smarick an answer to a burning question: What is the proper federal role in education? It was a question prompted by repeatedly mixed signals coming from U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan about whether Washington will be a tough guy, coddler, or something in between when it comes to dealing with states and school districts.  And what was my answer? The proper federal role is no role, because the Constitution gives the feds no authority over American education.
Not surprisingly, Smarick isn&amp;#8217;t going for that. Unfortunately, his reasoning confirms my suspicions: Rather than offering a defense based even slightly on what the Constitution says, Smarick essentially asserts that the supreme law of the land is irrele...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2939276</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:35:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2939276</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2934656&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fd_bzqlCCZZ8%2F</link>
            <description>Dear members of Congress: If you’re not going to read the bills you pass,  at least read the Constitution. Don’t fret; it’s short and written in plain English.


Richard Rahn: Pay members of Congress more. (Or less, depending on their performance.)


 NYC: &amp;#8220;The city that never smokes.&amp;#8221; A proposal to ban lighting up in New York’s parks has exposed the puritanical agenda behind the crusade against smoking.


Tyler Cowen: With health care costs high and rising, government mandates to buy insurance would make many people worse off.


Podcast: &amp;#8220;Pay Czar Cuts Checks&amp;#8220; (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2934656</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:31:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2934656</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>PATRIOT Powers: Roving Wiretaps</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2898921&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FaLvOQkVlIs0%2F</link>
            <description>Last week, I wrote a piece for Reason in which I took a close look at the USA PATRIOT Act&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;lone wolf&amp;#8221; provision—set to expire at the end of the year, though almost certain to be renewed—and argued that it should be allowed to lapse. Originally, I&amp;#8217;d planned to survey the whole array of authorities that are either sunsetting or candidates for reform, but ultimately decided it made more sense to give a thorough treatment to one than trying to squeeze an inevitably shallow gloss on four or five complex areas of law into the same space. But the Internets are infinite, so I&amp;#8217;ve decided I&amp;#8217;d turn the Reason piece into Part I of a continuing series on PATRIOT powers.  In this edition: Section 206, roving wiretap authority.
The idea behind a roving wiretap s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2898921</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:58:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2898921</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Think Tanks Should Be Able to Opine on Public Policy Without Running Afoul of Campaign Finance Regulations</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2865639&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FLpb_NiJ7P3o%2F</link>
            <description>In 2005, political opponents filed a complaint against the Independence Institute for not complying with the Colorado constitution and other campaign finance regulations when it spoke against a state ballot initiative. These regulations require, among other things, disclosure of the identity of anyone who has donated more than $20 to a cause and imposes registration and contribution limits on groups who have major interests in ballot issues.
The Independence Institute challenged the constitutionality of Colorado’s state ballot issue requirements and the issue is petitioning the Supreme Court for certiorari in Independence Institute v. Buescher. Cato has filed an amicus brief, in cooperation with Wyoming Liberty Group, the Center for Competitive Politics, the Sam Adams Alliance, the Monta...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2865639</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:40:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2865639</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A New Court Term: Big Cases, Questions About the New Justice</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2862467&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FRj9LnW-2nBo%2F</link>
            <description>Today is the first Monday in October, and so is First Monday, the traditional start of the Supreme Court term.  The Court already heard one argument &amp;#8211; in the Citizens United campaign finance case &amp;#8212; but it had been carried over from last year, so it doesn&amp;#8217;t really count.
In any event, continuing its trend from last term, the Court has further front-loaded its caseload &amp;#8212; with nearly 60 arguments on its docket already.  Fortunately, unlike last year, we’ll see many blockbuster cases, including:

the application of the Second Amendment to state gun regulations;
First Amendment challenges to national park monuments and a statute criminalizing the depiction of animal cruelty;
an Eighth Amendment challenge to life sentences for juveniles; a potential revisiting of ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2862467</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:59:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2862467</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NYT: We Don’t Deserve First Amendment Protection!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2828182&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjJGQste2RS8%2F</link>
            <description>I assume others have pointed this out already, but there&amp;#8217;s something very odd about a Tuesday editorial in The New York Times arguing that campaign finance regulations that stifle the political speech of corporations must be upheld in the Citizens United case currently under consideration before the Supreme Court:
The question at the heart of one of the biggest Supreme Court cases this year is simple: What constitutional rights should corporations have? To us, as well as many legal scholars, former justices and, indeed, drafters of the Constitution, the answer is that their rights should be quite limited — far less than those of people.
In that case, surely it&amp;#8217;s time to revisit some of the 20th century&amp;#8217;s seminal free speech rulings. The idea that public figures cannot u...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2828182</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:42:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2828182</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cato Supreme Court Review on the Road</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2823957&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBbrYToFyqrk%2F</link>
            <description>With last week&amp;#8217;s Constitution Day conference behind us (watch it here) &amp;#8212; and the release of the 2008-2009 Cato Supreme Court Review &amp;#8212; I can finally escape the office where I&amp;#8217;ve been holed up all summer.  Yes, it&amp;#8217;s time to go on the road and talk about all these wonderful legal issues we&amp;#8217;ve learned about over the past year, as well as previewing the new Supreme Court term.
To that end, below the jump is my fall speaking schedule so far.  All these events are sponsored by the Federalist Society (and in some cases co-sponsored by other organizations) and all are open to the public.
If you decide to attend one of the presentations after learning of it from this blog post, please feel free to drop me a line beforehand, and do introduce yourself after the e...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2823957</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:23:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2823957</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What You Don’t Know Won’t Hurt You (Surveillance State Edition)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2823966&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FmOxA_hWb6k4%2F</link>
            <description>While there are many choice tidbits to relate from Tuesday&amp;#8217;s hearings on PATRIOT Act reform at the House Judiciary Committee&amp;#8217;s Subcommittee on the Constitution—not least the fellow who had to be wrestled from the room, literally kicking and screaming, after he tried to stand and interrupt with a complaint about alleged FBI violations of his civil rights—I&amp;#8217;ll just relate a novel theory of the Fourth Amendment advanced by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).
The ACLU&amp;#8217;s Mike German, a former FBI agent turned surveillance policy expert, was explaining that it&amp;#8217;s hard to know whether expansive surveillance powers are being abused, they&amp;#8217;re mostly used in secret and deployed via third-parties like financial institutions and telecoms, who have little incentive to raise ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2823966</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:46:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2823966</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>And to Think: Senators Once Worked For Legislatures</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2809665&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fe7U0w9qx3R4%2F</link>
            <description>S. 1536, the &amp;#8220;ALERT Drivers&amp;#8221; Act (&amp;#8221;Avoiding Life-Endangering and Reckless Texting by Drivers&amp;#8221; &amp;#8212; get it?) would reduce federal highway funds available to states if they don&amp;#8217;t pass laws prohibiting people from writing, sending, or reading text messages while driving.
The circle is complete. Senators, who were once chosen by state legislatures, now believe it is their role to tell state legislatures what to do. 
Federal command over our lives, in ever more intricate detail. It&amp;#8217;s the product of exalting democracy &amp;#8212; in this case, direct election of senators &amp;#8212; over liberty and over the governmental structure originally established in the constitution.
Texting while driving is dangerous to your health and others&amp;#8217;. Letting governments ama...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2809665</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:50:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2809665</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Chile Is More Economically Free Than the United States</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2807574&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FmYnfZsuC1Nc%2F</link>
            <description>In the 2009 Economic Freedom of the World Report, Chile is now #5, one place ahead of the United States.
In 1975, of 72 countries, Chile was No 71. How did this happen? The explanation lies in what I call the “Chilean Revolution”, because it was as important and transformative to my country as the celebrated American Revolution that gave birth to the United States.
The exceptional political circumstances of this period have obscured the fact that from 1975 to 1989 a true revolution took place in Chile, involving a radical, comprehensive, and sustained move toward economic and political freedom (from a starting point where there was neither one nor the other). This revolution not only doubled Chile&amp;#8217;s historic rate of economic growth (to an average of 7% a year, 84-98),  drastica...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2807574</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 20:52:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2807574</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Response to Matthew Yglesias re: Uncle Sam’s $4 Million Bike Rack</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2803876&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F9BHDxSa1Hq8%2F</link>
            <description>In response to my criticism of the new federally-financed $4 million bike center set to open at Union Station in Washington, DC, Think Progress blogger Matthew Yglesias says:
I look forward to the day when the Cato Institute does a blog post denouncing each and every publicly financed parking lot or garage in the United States of America.
I&amp;#8217;ll take that bait&amp;#8230;sort of&amp;#8230;
I denounce each and every federally financed parking lot or garage in the United States of America on non-federal property.  I&amp;#8217;m one of those quaint individuals who recognizes that the Constitution grants the federal government specific enumerated powers.  Using federal tax dollars to finance local parking garages, lots, bike centers and racks is not one of the powers granted to the federal government...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2803876</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 18:07:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2803876</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bagram, Habeas, and the Rule of Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2803893&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FOcSb6u6tsWM%2F</link>
            <description>Andrew C. McCarthy has an article up  at National Review criticizing a recent decision by Obama administration officials to improve the detention procedures in Bagram, Afghanistan.
McCarthy calls the decision an example of pandering to a “despotic” judiciary that is imposing its will on a war that should be run by the political branches. McCarthy’s essay is factually misleading, ignores the history of wartime detention in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency, and encourages the President to ignore national security decisions coming out of the federal courts.
More details after the jump.

McCarthy is Factually Misleading
McCarthy begins by criticizing a decision by District Judge John Bates to allow three detainees in Bagram, Afghanistan, to file habeas corpus petitions testing the...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2803893</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 19:42:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2803893</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Government Pays $4 Million for a Bike Rack</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2800366&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FF9_W2dQSGQM%2F</link>
            <description>The $4 million Union Station Bike Transit Center is scheduled to open in Washington, DC on October 2nd.  According to an August Washington Post story, 80 percent of the cost of this opulent bike center is being borne by federal taxpayers via the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Look, I harbor no animosity against bike riders, but under what authority &amp;#8212; legal or moral &amp;#8212; does the federal government tax me in order to build bike centers for parochial, special interests?  The Constitution?
But let&amp;#8217;s pretend &amp;#8212; and I mean pretend &amp;#8211; that such federal expenditures are legitimate.  The Post article say the center will have 150 indoor bike racks and 20 outdoors.  A recent NPR article says it will hold 130 bikes.  Whatever the figure, at a cost of $4 million, it c...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2800366</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:24:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2800366</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama: I Want Those Patriot Act Powers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2800370&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJFzVq5na4N4%2F</link>
            <description>Yesterday, President Obama&amp;#8217;s lawyers informed members of Congress that the president does not want any provision of the  Patriot Act to expire.  Turns out that  Obama wants to have the sweeping powers.  This is just the latest example of the cacophony that pervades Washington.  When Bush was in the White House, the Dems postured against his runaway spending, his military quagmires, and his constitutional violations.  With Obama in the White House, Bush&amp;#8217;s most misguided policies either continue or worsen.
Obama is in the news today for his &amp;#8220;off-the-record&amp;#8221; comment about Kanye West.  It would have been better had a reporter overheard Obama saying something like, &amp;#8220;John Ashcroft was a terrific Attorney General, but  I&amp;#8217;ll never admit tha...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2800370</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:44:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2800370</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Preventive Detention:  What Would Thomas Jefferson Do?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2785908&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FOPpzDfWArzk%2F</link>
            <description>Glenn Greenwald writes,
By all accounts, the White House is going to unveil its proposal for indefinite detention within the next four to eight weeks, and it has begun dispatching proponents of that scheme to lay the rhetorical groundwork. In The Washington Post today, one of the proposal&amp;#8217;s architects &amp;#8212; Law Professor Robert Chesney, a member of Obama&amp;#8217;s Detention Policy Task Force &amp;#8212; showcased the trite and manipulative tactics that will be used by advocates of indefinite detention to win support for their radical program [anyone doubting that detention without trials is radical should recall that Obama's own White House counsel Greg Craig told Jane Mayer back in February that it's &quot;hard to imagine Barack Obama as the first President of the United States to introduce ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2785908</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:19:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2785908</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘We Don’t Put Our First Amendment Rights In the Hands of FEC Bureaucrats’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2782012&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FH6_9KADeCQ4%2F</link>
            <description>I (and several colleagues) have blogged before about Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the latest campaign finance case, which was argued this morning at the Supreme Court.  The case is about much more than whether a corporation can release a movie about a political candidate during an election campaign.  Indeed, it goes to the very heart of the First Amendment, which was specifically created to protect political speech—the kind most in danger of being censored by politicians looking to limit the appeal of threatening candidates and ideas.
After all, hard-hitting political speech is something the First Amendment&amp;#8217;s authors experienced firsthand.  They knew very well what they were doing in choosing free and vigorous debate over government-filtered pablum.  Moreove...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2782012</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 21:15:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2782012</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2774606&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FfD54PAnN51o%2F</link>
            <description>How unions are becoming irrelevant to the average American worker in the private sector.


Is the president&amp;#8217;s speech part of a sinister plan to create a socialist Obama Youth movement? Hardly. However, let us not forget that our Constitution&amp;#8217;s framers thought schooling was too important to be left to a federal government.


The case for engaging Iran.


The Supreme Court will rule Wednesday on whether the government can ban political speech during election time. Here&amp;#8217;s the back story. 


The 10-year budget deficit is now projected to be nine trillion dollars. Paul Krugman says it&amp;#8217;s no big deal. James Dorn thinks otherwise and explains why Krugman is mistaken.


Podcast: The real problem with Obama&amp;#8217;s speech to schoolchildren. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2774606</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:34:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2774606</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Presidential Cults</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2766003&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F-zYKRXFN79Q%2F</link>
            <description>Glenn Greenwald, author of Cato&amp;#8217;s much-discussed paper on the success of drug decriminalization in Portugal, writes about cults of presidential personality. He notes that Jay Nordlinger of National Review and other conservatives &amp;#8212; not to mention a few libertarians &amp;#8212; have criticized the Obama administration&amp;#8217;s plan to broadcast a presidential speech into American schools and push teachers to post Obama quotes in their classrooms and encourage students to talk about how President Obama inspires them.
Greenwald never actually defends the Obama plan. But he does argue that conservatives have short memories when they say that this is something unique. In particular, he reminds us of the notorious Monica Goodling&amp;#8217;s questions to job candidates at the George W. Bush D...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2766003</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:01:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2766003</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Hillary: The Movie</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2751885&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDwgvnW8m64Y%2F</link>
            <description>The Supreme Court is soon to hear a case that may drastically roll back campaign finance regulation in the United States:
The case involves “Hillary: The Movie,” a mix of advocacy journalism and political commentary that is a relentlessly negative look at Mrs. Clinton’s character and career. The documentary was made by a conservative advocacy group called Citizens United, which lost a lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission seeking permission to distribute it on a video-on-demand service. The film is available on the Internet and on DVD. The issue was that the McCain-Feingold law bans corporate money being used for electioneering.
The right position for the Court is that McCain-Feingold, and all other campaign finance regulation, constitutes unconstitutional limitation on fre...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2751885</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:24:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2751885</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Transparent Inquiry: The Only Way Forward</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2734016&amp;cid=t_113105_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Frz6chjF1HnE%2F</link>
            <description>How could a country that claims to abide by principles like constitutional government and the rule of law do anything other than investigate credible claims of official abuse?
News that Attorney General Holder will appoint a prosecutor to investigate such claims will only surprise or upset people who have lost track of our national values.
CIA Director Leon Panetta doesn&amp;#8217;t help the cause by issuing a statement to the CIA staff saying, &amp;#8220;America is a nation at war.&amp;#8221; Whether we are or not, that lullaby-in-reverse &amp;#8212; reassuring CIA staff with a poke at the panic button &amp;#8212; would seem to ratify expediency over professionalism. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2734016</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:39:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2734016</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

