that perhaps have no connection with one another except that they are all rattling around inside my brain.
1. We do not have a constitutional right to vote. Yes, there are amendments that attempt to increase the ability of people to vote, but they are all phrased in the sense of that one cannot be denied the right to vote because of race, gender, age, or failure to pay a poll tax. But except for the provision of the 14th Amendment that says whatever proportion of male voters over 12 denied the right to vote for certain offices that state loses an equivalent proportion of its House representation (for how long not defined, nor has this ever been enforced), there is nothing constitutional that applies a penalty for denying someone the right to vote. This is one problem with addressing the recent voter id laws. It would be easier to push back were there a clear constitutional right to vote for any citizen over the age of 18 who has not explicitly lost the right to vote as the result of a felony conviction
2. We do not have a federal Constitutional right to a free public education. We have some federal statutes which entitle one to be educated in the least restrictive environment, but that presumes that there is a public education. Nor is there even in most states a clear definition of what a free public education should consist of.
3. We do not have a constitutional right to access to clean air or clean water, nor is there a clear responsibility to impose sufficient penalties or even application of costs for destruction of environment. If there were, how would mountaintop removal even be possible?
I have some more thoughts below the squiggle.
4. Corporations now in many cases have greater rights than do individuals. Similarly, we have allowed governments at all levels far too much latitude in suppressing the rights of individuals that in theory are protected in the name of public safety and public order.
5. I think one should be able, by constitutional amendment if necessary, to limit the influence of money in politics, but some people would not like my proposal, which is this: if you are not eligible to vote for a political office or on a ballot issue, you should not be able to contribute to such a political campaign. This would kill corporate contributions - which in many states (including my own of Virginia) are allowed as direct contribution. I would be willing to modify this slightly - if I can vote for any candidate for such an office I should be able to contribute to candidates for such an office elsewhere. Thus I am eligible to vote for US House and Senate, and thus can contribute to House and Senate candidates for whom I cannot vote - that is because the actions they take do affect me.
6. We need to in some way make clear that money is not speech. I think the likes of George Mason and James Madison would be horrified by such thinking, so why do not the conservatives on SCOTUS see what they have done as a violation of the original intent upon which some of them so often rely?
7. We are allowing America to become resegregated. This can clearly be seen in what is happening in public schools, in part as a result of SCOTUS decisions which have effectively banned even voluntary desegregation programs. This is damaging to American society, and perpetuates inequality.
None of these, or the other thoughts I could offer this morning, are unique to me.
I look at them together, and I worry about the future, short and long term.
I see the loss of basic ideas of popular sovereignty upon which this nation is supposed to be based. It is no longer we the people but rather we the corporations or we the very wealthy.
We have allowed the development of "free trade" and international economics to outweigh the ability of any government to regulate on behalf of its ordinary citizens.
We see a deliberate approach to undercut the protections that were painfully developed over decades and even centuries, and the unleashing of forces that become ever more abusive as their wealth and power continue to grow at the expense of anyone else.
For all our complaints about Democrats, including the last two Democratic Presidents, who do not seem to stand up as forcefully on some issues as we might like, consider the alternative, first starting with the last three Republican Presidents, and then looking at the rhetoric and the actions of the Republican candidates for President, Republican governors, and Republicans on Capitol Hill.
We may each have our own particular issues. Education is key for me. So is the environment. So are civil liberties.
I may be unhappy about some policies.
But I have to think beyond my own concern.
So let me end with some words I believe are appropriate. They are more than 2 millenia old. They appear in the Pirkei Avot, and were offered by Hillel, one of the great thinkers of Jewish history. Consider these words:
If I am not for myself who will be for me?
And if I'm for myself alone, what am I?
And if not now, when?
Peace?