Activist California Courts

The Citizens of California passed a ballot initiative defining marriage between man and woman. The California Supreme Court then ruled 4-3 that this law was unconstitutional. Just this November, the Citizens of California passed Proposition 8 amending the California Constitution declaring marriage between a man and a woman - thereby over ruling the Court. Now the Court will review the validity of this measure. This is a perfect case of Judicial Activism - the courts stepping in and clearly overriding the Will of the People - even after the people reasserted their position and over ruled the courts!

All this in a state whose domestic partnerships gives the rights of marriage, lacking only in name. Clearly, this is not a civil rights issue (in which case domestic partnerships would be enough) but rather an attempt to undermine marriage and the principles that underpin it.

Vatican as Defendant

Reported today in the WSJ is a ruling by the Cincinnati Circuit Court of Appeals allowing a lawsuit to move forward that may implicate the Vatican in the U.S. abuse scandal. My understanding is that the U.S. Bishops are fairly autonomous in matters of this detail, punishing or covering up for clerical abuse, and that the Vatican will not be liable. I see the latest step as simply a move to "go for the money" and I hope it fails.

Detroit in Washington

Today's Wall Street Journal features an article by Gerald F Seib relating the automakers' woes. Interestingly, he notes that UAW political power has been undercut by West coast environmentalism. He notes the number of Californians in power - Nancy Pelosi, Xavier Becerra, and Henry Waxman who ousted John Dingell from the chairmanship of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

I find it sad that the UAW, who consistently assist in sending Democratic Senators to Congress and have helped give Michigan to the Democratic Presidential nomine in the last three elections, has lost to the Greens of the Left. I only laughed at the overzealous envirnmental requirements of the DNC, but apparently they are impacting policy.

UAW

Many commentators are insisting that any money to the Big Three should require that the management be replaced. To cite just one example, a WSJ editorial by Paul Ingrassia on 10 November reasons that if GM, and by extension Ford and Chrysler, are deemed too big to fail then "it's also too big to be entrusted to the same people who have led tit to its current, perilous state and who are too tied to the past to create a different future." I agree that grand restructuring needs to occur and "that will mean tearing up existing contracts with unions" etc. It is not unreasonable to request management changes under such borad restructuring. But is too much attention being paid to senior executives?

All three autos are struggling. All three autos have lost ground to foreign companies. All three autos (and even some of the foreigns) focused on the "gas guzzling" truck market (Toyota Tundra). Yet the managers and executives of these companies are all different. In fact, for a number of years Chrysler was owned by the Germans. If the problem was Rick Wagner or the Ford family, then the companies would be facing different prospects. What is shared in common among the Big Three and none of the foriegns? The United Auto Workers.

To be fair, many commentators, Ingrassia included, are calling attention to the UAW. He notes, the "union stoutly defended gold-plated medical benefits" that consisted of "no deductibles, co-pays or other facts of life." Indeed, the union fought "to protect the 'right' of workers to smoke on the assembly line."

In my estimation, the UAW is much more at fault for the demise of the Big Three. It is the common factor to the auto companies - and the dead weight they are forced to carry. Ingrassia laments that "the current board of directors and management have stuck stubbornly to [an outdated] structure." But the UAW contract, which only in 2010 will equal the pay playing field, has largely limited the auto's ability to shed jobs and restructure in the changing global market. It is the Union, with their inch thick contracts, that has stuck stubbornly to an outdated structure.

I owe thanks to my wife for pointing out the universal nature of the UAW.

The Price of Gas

According to a piece of facebook flair (bad source, I know), the price of gas when President Bush took office was $1.46 a gallon. Gas is now 1.85 in Ypsilanti, Mi. While not back to the original level, a 39 cent increase over eight years is not too bad, approximately 3.3% per year - right near the average inflationary rate.

To me it's more proof that Presidents really don't have that much control over the economy. Remember that the Founding Fathers put the power of the Purse in the hands of the legislature, not the executive. (and even they have limited influence)

We will see if the prices stay depressed coming into January 20.

The Truth about Money

I'm currently enjoying the above book by Ric Edelman. I think it does a good job introducing and defining investment terms. It gives enough explanation without bogging down in details. At some times it seems rather slow, but makes up for it by being an easy and entertaining read.

Thanks to my in-laws for the gift.