Monthly Archives: December 2016

Foolish Jimmy Carter

“It appears former president Jimmy Carter, now 92 years old, has yet to meet a tyrant he doesn’t admire.” Fay Voshell

Jimmy Carter’s Anti-Semitism

Fay Voshell, American Thinker, December 1, 2016

carter_cartoonIt appears former president Jimmy Carter, now 92 years old, has yet to meet a tyrant he doesn’t admire.

His continuing embrace of terrorist regimes makes some wonder when we will see the cessation of his continual self-exhumations from political burial in order to once again resume his prophetic declamations on behalf of odious regimes, past and present. Carter’s latest declamation on the demise of the pitiless tyrant Fidel Castro reveals once again his lifelong empathy for totalitarian regimes:

“Rosalynn and I share our sympathies with the Castro family and the Cuban people on the death of Fidel Castro. We remember fondly our visits with him in Cuba and his love of his country. We wish the Cuban citizens peace and prosperity in the years ahead.”

Just as bad, if not worse, Carter wants Obama to recognize a Palestinian state before Barack Obama leaves office. His love for brutal despotism does not end with his affection for Castro, but extends to leaders who wish to exterminate Israel and the Jews.

Newsweek’s Eddie Mullholland reports: Continue reading

Meet Betsy DeVos

“Charter schools in Detroit have given parents at least one viable alternative to failing public schools. That’s thanks in large part to Betsy DeVos. Now, with the coming official title of education secretary, she has the opportunity to give parents all across the country the same kind of say in their children’s education.” Ingrid Jacques

How Trump’s Schools Chief Helped Turn Around Detroit

There’s still work to do, but thanks to Betsy DeVos more than half the city’s students attend charters.

Ingrid Jacques, The Wall Street Journal, December 10-11, 2016, p. A 11

The nominee at a visit to the U.S. Capitol, Dec. 1.

To the dismay of teachers unions nationwide, President-elect Donald Trump has picked Betsy DeVos, a Michigan school reformer, to be the next education secretary. The day Ms. DeVos’s selection was announced, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, called her “the most ideological, anti-public-education nominee put forward since President Carter created a Cabinet-level Department of Education.” But as it often goes, what is bad for the teachers unions is good for the school kids. Ms. DeVos has a strong record of fighting for the latter here in her home state.

Her history of promoting charter schools goes back to 1994, when she worked closely with former Republican Gov. John Engler to pass Michigan’s charter law. These alternative public schools, free from union constraints, have flourished—especially in Detroit, where more than half of students attend charters. Only New Orleans has a higher percentage of students in charter schools.

But time and again, Michigan has resisted comprehensive reform. In 2000, Ms. DeVos and her husband funded a ballot initiative that would have created vouchers for students to use state funding at private schools. But the measure was defeated 69-31.

In 2003, a retired industrialist named Bob Thompson tried to give Detroit $200 million to establish a network of high-quality charter schools. His generous offer was originally accepted by then-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick and Gov. Jennifer Granholm.But the Detroit teachers union protested and the politicians withdrew their support. In frustration, Mr. Thompson also changed his mind.  Continue reading

Meet Mr. Pruitt

“Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt…is the worst nomination in the history of the planet: He’s an untrained anti-environmentalist. He’s a polluter. He’s a fossil-fuel fanatic, a lobbyist-lover, a climate crazy.” Kimberley A. Strassel

“Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt…is a constitutional scholar, a federalist (and a lawyer) …a sublime choice to knock down the biggest conceit of the Obama era—arrogant, overweening (and illegal) Washington rule.” Ibid

Trump’s Federalist Revival

The president-elect’s EPA pick will restore balance to the federal-state relationship.

Scott Pruitt at Trump Tower in New York, Nov. 28.

Kimberley A. Strassel, The Wall Street Journal, December 9, 2016, p. A 15

Donald Trump had barely finished announcing his pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency before the left started listing its million reasons why Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt was the worst nomination in the history of the planet: He’s an untrained anti-environmentalist. He’s a polluter. He’s a fossil-fuel fanatic, a lobbyist-lover, a climate crazy.

Mr. Pruitt is not any of those things. Here’s what he in fact is, and the real reason the left is frustrated: He’s a constitutional scholar, a federalist (and a lawyer). And for those reasons he is a sublime choice to knock down the biggest conceit of the Obama era—arrogant, overweening (and illegal) Washington rule.

We’ve lived so many years under the Obama reign that many Americans forget we are a federal republic, composed of 50 states. There isn’t a major statute on the books that doesn’t recognize this reality and acknowledge that the states are partners with—and often superior to—the federal government. That is absolutely the case with major environmental statues, from the Clean Air Act to the Clean Water Act to the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Competitive Enterprise Institute President and CEO Kent Lassman on Donald Trump’s latest cabinet pick and a broader agenda for regulatory reform. Photo: Bloomberg

Congress specifically understood in crafting each of these laws that one-size-fits all solutions were detrimental to the environment. Federal bodies like the Environmental Protection Agency traditionally and properly existed to set minimum standards, provide technical support, and engage in occasional enforcement. States, with their unique knowledge of local problems, economies and concerns, were free to innovate their own solutions.

But President Obama never held much with laws, because he failed at making them. After his first two years in office, he never could convince the Congress to pass another signature initiative. His response—and the enduring theme of his presidency—was therefore to ignore Congress and statutes, go around the partnership framework, and give his agencies authority to dictate policy from Washington. The states were demoted from partners to indentured servants. So too were any rival federal agencies that got in the EPA’s way. Example: The EPA’s pre-emptive veto of Alaska’s proposed Pebble Mine, in which it usurped Army Corps of Engineers authority.

One revealing illustration from EPA world. Under the Clean Air Act, states are allowed to craft their own implementation plans. If the EPA disapproves of a state plan, it is empowered to impose a federal one—one of the most aggressive actions the agency can take against a state, since it is the equivalent of a seizure of authority. In the entirety of the presidencies of George H.W. Bush,Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, the EPA imposed five federal implementation plans on states. By last count, the Obama administration has imposed at least 56.

Much of Mr. Pruitt’s tenure as Oklahoma’s AG was about trying to stuff federal agencies back into their legal boxes. Most of the press either never understood this, or never wanted to. When the media wrote about state lawsuits against ObamaCare or the Clean Power Plan or the Water of the United States rule, the suggestion usually was that this litigation was ideologically motivated, and a naked attempt to do what a Republican Congress could not—tank the president’s agenda.

The basis of nearly every one of these lawsuits was in fact violations of states’ constitutional and statutory rights—and it is why so many of the cases were successful. It was all a valiant attempt to force the federal government to follow the law. And it has been a singular Pruitt pursuit.

Almost immediately after his 2010 election in Oklahoma, the new attorney general set up a “federalism unit” within his department to more effectively combat federal overreach. His expertise in this subject was one reason why, early in the Republican primary, Jeb Bush tapped him for a national role in his campaign, serving as the lead on a “Restoring Federalism Task Force.”

And it is clear that this is the back-to-basics pitch Mr. Pruitt made to Mr. Trump in his interview, and that Mr. Trump absolutely understood the importance. In announcing his nomination, the president-elect took care to note that Mr. Pruitt was an “expert in constitutional law” and that his job would be to restore the “EPA’s essential mission.”

Which is exactly the reform the EPA needs. The agency doesn’t need a technically trained environmentalist at its head, since it is already bubbling over with green regulations. It doesn’t need a climate warrior, as Congress has never passed a climate law, and so the EPA has no mandate to meddle there. What it needs is a lawyer, one with the knowledge of how to cut the agency back to its proper role—restoring not just an appropriate legal partnership with the states, but also with other federal bodies. One who reminds agency staff that the EPA was not created to oppose growth and development.

If Mr. Pruitt does this successfully, and on the way crushes the current president’s legacy, Mr. Obama will have only himself to blame. His abuse of federal power helped elect a new generation of state attorneys general and Washington Republicans passionately devoted to a states’ rights agenda. They’ll be advising Mr. Trump not just on environmental policy, but on health care, labor policy, entitlement reform. Say hello to the federalist revival.

Write to kim@wsj.com.