Repeal & Replace the 2nd Amendment

It's time for a serious bout of sanity on the issue of guns. I understand that sanity and thinking about guns do not often go together, but they should. The first order of business is to repeal and replace the 2nd Amendment, the  "right to bear arms" amendment. The amendment as written is unclear at best, and at worst--and Supreme Court rulings are making it worse--it harms the public good. Let's repeal it and start over. The Founders were human beings, not gods, and some things they didn't get right. Slavery in the land of the free?  So here's my suggestion, a first draft if you will, of a replacement for the 2nd Amendment:

Congress and the states may regulate and restrict firearms and other weapons. In adopting any regulations and restrictions, Congress and the states must consider and balance the public welfare and the interests of those who want to own and use firearms for sporting, recreational, and personsal safety. Any regulation or restriction reasonably related to a person's history of serious criminal conduct or serious mental illness is a lawful basis for regulation and restriction. The regulation and restriction of firearms and other weapons intended primarily for military purposes or for which potential uses exceed those of legitimate recreational, sporting, or personal safety purposes is deemed an an inherently reasonable and lawful basis for regulation and restriction.

There you have it. Now tell your elected officials that you've had enough, and stand-up to the NRA and those idolators who worship at the altar of guns.

Addendum 23 March 2021: I stand by the above. In fact, taking an action--drastic as it is--is more important than ever. Do I stand alone? I recently came across this interview given by former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Warren (appointed by Richard Nixon in 1969) where he calls the interpretation of the Second Amendment offered by "specials interests" a "fraud." Amen. 

 

A Great Book: Robert Caro's The Passage of Power

I don't think that I call a book "great" too often, although I usually find those that I am quite enthusiastic about (if I finish it, it's held me). But for this book, the combination of the author and the subject (LBJ) is a perfect storm of a biography. In this volume, the fourth in the "Years of Lyndon Johnson", Caro follows his subject  from 1958 to about mid-1964. During this time, Johnson went from serving as the dominant figure in the Senate as the Senate majority leader, to a failed presidential candidate (and a reluctant and belated one at that, despite his longing to reach the presidency). Then, out of nowhere seemingly--and much to the chagrin of his brother Bobby--John Kennedy chose Johnson as his veep. While John Kennedy seemed to respect Johnson, Bobby Kennedy hated and despised him. Johnson knew this, and he reciprocated the feeling. As Garry Wills noted in his review of the book, this hatred brought out the worst in both men.

As vice-president, Johnson languished, excluded from the Kennedy inner-circle and ignored even in congressional matters, where his knowledge and experience could not be matched. LBJ could only watch as Kennedy's legislative program went nowhere. By 1963, the Bobby Baker scandal was brewing, while former Johnson protege John Connelly was governor of Texas and feeling his own oats. Things looked bleak for Johnson, he'd even lost his clout in Texas. Then, as he rode through the streets of Dallas behind John Kennedy, shots cracked and Johnson was shoved the floor of his car. Not long after, Kennedy aide Ken O'Donnell came into a room where Johnson has been secluded by the Secret Service, and told him, "he's gone". With this Johnson became president, and a changed man.

Caro, from this point forward, details the steps that Johnson took to make his succession work. From the swearing in with the blood-stained Jackie Kennedy at this side to his wooing of Kennedy aides, Johnson orchestrated the passage. Through talks with governors, congressman, and others in government, Johnson worked to keep the power of the presidency in tack and working. While the nation grieved and watched the spectacle of the Kennedy last rites, Johnson worked.

After this immediate time of abrupt change, Johnson realized that he could now accomplish things, that he was no longer a bystander, no longer another Southern senator. As Caro describes it, Johnson's passions now matched his ambitions, and one of his passions was justice for the poor and downtrodden, including those black and brown. Johnson immediately began to work to get the Kennedy tax cut through Congress (by making a deal with Harry Byrd, the budget watchdog from Virginia), and Johnson, despite warnings to the contrary, pushed the civil rights bill--and got it passed. It was an amazing and under-appreciated display of political mastery that left the nation better off.

Caro foreshadows the fall that Lyndon Johnson would suffer after his election later in 1964. Many of the traits that marred him, which he'd suppressed during this transition, came back to the forefront. Vietnam, of course, lurks as a monster that we know comes to devour Johnson and the peace of the nation. But for now, we have this amazing portrait of redemption and success, one brief shining moment, if you will, when in the dark time of mourning, Lyndon Johnson did the right things. Happily, this extraordinary biographer, who maps the arc of Johnson's life, has proven equal to the task. Pray that Caro enjoys long life so that we can read the next chapter, the tragedy, that we know befalls our protagonist.

Happy Belated Fourth with Garry Wills

Per my custom, I picked some reading especially for the Independence Day holiday. I re-read Garry Wills book, Confessions of a Conservative (1979), parts 2 & 3 about "The Liberal System" and "Elites". I found that I've posted about this book before, but I am still astounded at how well Wills came to understand our system. While completing a Ph.D. in the Classics at Yale, he worked as a magazine & newspaper writer, most importantly at National Review (he eventually got the boot there) and Harpers. He developed a keen eye and an engaging writing style as a result of these associations, and this gift is on display in this book. It still impresses me 33 years after publication (and poor as we were, I bought a copy as soon as I could--freshly minted out of law school).

I won't go on too much more, just  to say that you won't likely find a more succinct, insightful, and well-written understanding and appreciation of the American political system than what Wills provides here. A Happy Fourth & beyond to all.

Sunday NYT Round-up

Here's what I found interesting in the paper today:

1. Ground meat. Okay, Devotay restaurant in Iowa City gets a shout-out for its lamb albondigas in the article, so that makes it fun. (Haven't had them yet, but might have to.) But the article gives some sound advice. Don't waste, and use good, appropriately raised product. Yea, yum. I luv Iowa Guru's delicious lamb burgers from the grill, and brats--oh, yea.

2. Gary Taubes on the "carbs make us fat" hypothesis. Taubes is a first-rate science writer, and this piece, in his modest way consistent with his respect for the discipline of science, furthers his argument that all calories are not created equal and that carbs (simple, mostly white), cause us to get fat.

3. The 'Busy Trap'. Point well-taken. I especially like the Arthur C. Clarke quote. However, to most Americans, this would seem immoral.

4. Tom Friedman on John Roberts's majority opinion. I remain agnostic about Roberts's motives. Perhaps civic virtue, perhaps a desire to preserve the standing of the Court, perhaps he responded to compelling legal arguments--or all (or none) of the above. It was good to see a decision that did not split along strictly ideological lines, that did not privilege the position of Justice Kennedy, and that did uphold Obama's health care plan. And while, I, too, oppose "hyper partisanship", compromise strictly for the sake of compromise or to "meet in the middle" isn't good enough. Sometimes you do have to stand your ground and fight (and risk losing). The Republican Party's main agenda seems to be to defeat Obama, not to move the country in a sensible direction. That's bad, very bad. Democrats, even with Bush, whom no real Democrat could have regarded well, didn't spend all of their time trying to undermine for electoral advantage, I don't think. I hope that voters this fall recognize that.

5. Jim Holt, "Is Philosophy Literature?" . Fun piece that attempts to show some literary merit by the analytic camp. A tough sell, I think, but he makes a case.

6. This review of America the Philosophical by Carlin Romano intrigues me, despite a luke warm review. America, this big, sprawling land of many cultures and traditions, does think, sometimes deeply, sometime quite shallowly, but if we spread our net widely, we find some thinkers worth considering. It seems that Mr. Romano tries to capture this great enterprise, and for this reason alone it seems a worthwhile endeavor.

7. One bummer: is Texas real?  Or to put it more accurately, and fairly to the (I hope) non-crazy majority there, are Texas Republicans crazy? Well, yes, but . . . My goodness, this is mind-bogglingly stupid and more than a bit alarming. Read this & think about it (I don't think that Texas Republicans did).