text:
The President's State of the Union Address, Wednesdaym February 2, 2005.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, fellow citizens:
As a new Congress gathers, all of us in the elected branches of government share a great privilege: We've been placed in office by the votes of the people we serve. And tonight that is a privilege we share with newly-elected leaders of Afghanistan, the Palestinian Territories, Ukraine, and a free and sovereign Iraq.
Two weeks ago, I stood on the steps of this Capitol and renewed the commitment of our nation to the guiding ideal of liberty for all. This evening I will set forth policies to advance that ideal at home and around the world.
Tonight, with a healthy, growing economy, with more Americans going back to work, with our nation an active force for good in the world — the state of our union is confident and strong.
Our generation has been blessed — by the expansion of opportunity, by advances in medicine, by the security purchased by our parents' sacrifice. Now, as we see a little gray in the mirror — or a lot of gray — and we watch our children moving into adulthood, we ask the question: What will be the state of their union? Members of Congress, the choices we make together will answer that question. Over the next several months, on issue after issue, let us do what Americans have always done, and build a better world for our children and our grandchildren.
First, we must be good stewards of this economy, and renew the great institutions on which millions of our fellow citizens rely. America's economy is the fastest growing of any major industrialized nation. In the past four years, we provided tax relief to every person who pays income taxes, overcome a recession, opened up new markets abroad, prosecuted corporate criminals, raised homeownership to its highest level in history, and in the last year alone, the United States has added 2.3 million new jobs. When action was needed, the Congress delivered — and the nation is grateful.
Now we must add to these achievements. By making our economy more flexible, more innovative, and more competitive, we will keep America the economic leader of the world.
America's prosperity requires restraining the spending appetite of the federal government. I welcome the bipartisan enthusiasm for spending discipline. I will send you a budget that holds the growth of discretionary spending below inflation, makes tax relief permanent, and stays on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009. My budget substantially reduces or eliminates more than 150 government programs that are not getting results, or duplicate current efforts, or do not fulfill essential priorities. The principle here is clear: Taxpayer dollars must be spent wisely, or not at all.
To make our economy stronger and more dynamic, we must prepare a rising generation to fill the jobs of the 21st century. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, standards are higher, test scores are on the rise, and we're closing the achievement gap for minority students. Now we must demand better results from our high schools, so every high school diploma is a ticket to success. We will help an additional 200,000 workers to get training for a better career, by reforming our job training system and strengthening America's community colleges. And we'll make it easier for Americans to afford a college education, by increasing the size of Pell Grants.
To make our economy stronger and more competitive, America must reward, not punish, the efforts and dreams of entrepreneurs. Small business is the path of advancement, especially for women and minorities, so we must free small businesses from needless regulation and protect honest job-creators from junk lawsuits. Justice is distorted, and our economy is held back by irresponsible class-actions and frivolous asbestos claims — and I urge Congress to pass legal reforms this year.
To make our economy stronger and more productive, we must make health care more affordable, and give families greater access to good coverage — — and more control over their health decisions. I ask Congress to move forward on a comprehensive health care agenda with tax credits to help low-income workers buy insurance, a community health center in every poor country, improved information technology to prevent medical error and needless costs, association health plans for small businesses and their employees — — expanded health savings accounts — — and medical liability reform that will reduce health care costs and make sure patients have the doctors and care they need.
To keep our economy growing, we also need reliable supplies of affordable, environmentally responsible energy. Nearly four years ago, I submitted a comprehensive energy strategy that encourages conservation, alternative sources, a modernized electricity grid, and more production here at home — including safe, clean nuclear energy. My Clear Skies legislation will cut power plant pollution and improve the health of our citizens. And my budget provides strong funding for leading-edge technology — from hydrogen-fueled cars, to clean coal, to renewable sources such as ethanol. Four years of debate is enough: I urge Congress to pass legislation that makes America more secure and less dependent on foreign energy.
All these proposals are essential to expand this economy and add new jobs — but they are just the beginning of our duty. To build the prosperity of future generations, we must update institutions that were created to meet the needs of an earlier time. Year after year, Americans are burdened by an archaic, incoherent federal tax code. I've appointed a bipartisan panel to examine the tax code from top to bottom. And when their recommendations are delivered, you and I will work together to give this nation a tax code that is pro-growth, easy to understand, and fair to all.
America's immigration system is also outdated — unsuited to the needs of our economy and to the values of our country. We should not be content with laws that punish hardworking people who want only to provide for their families, and deny businesses willing workers, and invite chaos at our border. It is time for an immigration policy that permits temporary guest workers to fill jobs Americans will not take, that rejects amnesty, that tells us who is entering and leaving our country, and that closes the border to drug dealers and terrorists.
One of America's most important institutions — a symbol of the trust between generations — is also in need of wise and effective reform. Social Security was a great moral success of the 20th century, and we must honor its great purposes in this new century. The system, however, on its current path, is headed toward bankruptcy. And so we must join together to strengthen and save Social Security.
Today, more than 45 million Americans receive Social Security benefits, and millions more are nearing retirement — and for them the system is sound and fiscally strong. I have a message for every American who is 55 or older: Do not let anyone mislead you; for you, the Social Security system will not change in any way. For younger workers, the Social Security system has serious problems that will grow worse with time. Social Security was created decades ago, for a very different era. In those days, people did not live as long. Benefits were much lower than they are today. And a half-century ago, about sixteen workers paid into the system for each person drawing benefits.
Our society has changed in ways the founders of Social Security could not have foreseen. In today's world, people are living longer and, therefore, drawing benefits longer. And those benefits are scheduled to rise dramatically over the next few decades. And instead of sixteen workers paying in for every beneficiary, right now it's only about three workers. And over the next few decades that number will fall to just two workers per beneficiary. With each passing year, fewer workers are paying ever-higher benefits to an ever-larger number of retirees.
So here is the result: Thirteen years from now, in 2018, Social Security will be paying out more than it takes in. And every year afterward will bring a new shortfall, bigger than the year before. For example, in the year 2027, the government will somehow have to come up with an extra $200 billion to keep the system afloat — and by 2033, the annual shortfall would be more than $300 billion. By the year 2042, the entire system would be exhausted and bankrupt. If steps are not taken to avert that outcome, the only solutions would be dramatically higher taxes, massive new borrowing, or sudden and severe cuts in Social Security benefits or other government programs.
I recognize that 2018 and 2042 may seem a long way off. But those dates are not so distant, as any parent will tell you. If you have a five-year-old, you're already concerned about how you'll pay for college tuition 13 years down the road. If you've got children in their 20s, as some of us do, the idea of Social Security collapsing before they retire does not seem like a small matter. And it should not be a small matter to the United States Congress. You and I share a responsibility. We must pass reforms that solve the financial problems of Social Security once and for all.
Fixing Social Security permanently will require an open, candid review of the options. Some have suggested limiting benefits for wealthy retirees. Former Congressman Tim Penny has raised the possibility of indexing benefits to prices rather than wages. During the 1990s, my predecessor, President Clinton, spoke of increasing the retirement age. Former Senator John Breaux suggested discouraging early collection of Social Security benefits. The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan recommended changing the way benefits are calculated. All these ideas are on the table.
I know that none of these reforms would be easy. But we have to move ahead with courage and honesty, because our children's retirement security is more important than partisan politics. I will work with members of Congress to find the most effective combination of reforms. I will listen to anyone who has a good idea to offer. We must, however, be guided by some basic principles. We must make Social Security permanently sound, not leave that task for another day. We must not jeopardize our economic strength by increasing payroll taxes. We must ensure that lower-income Americans get the help they need to have dignity and peace of mind in their retirement. We must guarantee there is no change for those now retired or nearing retirement. And we must take care that any changes in the system are gradual, so younger workers have years to prepare and plan for their future.
As we fix Social Security, we also have the responsibility to make the system a better deal for younger workers. And the best way to reach that goal is through voluntary personal retirement accounts. Here is how the idea works. Right now, a set portion of the money you earn is taken out of your paycheck to pay for the Social Security benefits of today's retirees. If you're a younger worker, I believe you should be able to set aside part of that money in your own retirement account, so you can build a nest egg for your own future.
Here's why the personal accounts are a better deal. Your money will grow, over time, at a greater rate than anything the current system can deliver — and your account will provide money for retirement over and above the check you will receive from Social Security. In addition, you'll be able to pass along the money that accumulates in your personal account, if you wish, to your children and — or grandchildren. And best of all, the money in the account is yours, and the government can never take it away.
The goal here is greater security in retirement, so we will set careful guidelines for personal accounts. We'll make sure the money can only go into a conservative mix of bonds and stock funds. We'll make sure that your earnings are not eaten up by hidden Wall Street fees. We'll make sure there are good options to protect your investments from sudden market swings on the eve of your retirement. We'll make sure a personal account cannot be emptied out all at once, but rather paid out over time, as an addition to traditional Social Security benefits. And we'll make sure this plan is fiscally responsible, by starting personal retirement accounts gradually, and raising the yearly limits on contributions over time, eventually permitting all workers to set aside four percentage points of their payroll taxes in their accounts.
Personal retirement accounts should be familiar to federal employees, because you already have something similar, called the Thrift Savings Plan, which lets workers deposit a portion of their paychecks into any of five different broadly-based investment funds. It's time to extend the same security, and choice, and ownership to young Americans.
Our second great responsibility to our children and grandchildren is to honor and to pass along the values that sustain a free society. So many of my generation, after a long journey, have come home to family and faith, and are determined to bring up responsible, moral children. Government is not the source of these values, but government should never undermine them.
Because marriage is a sacred institution and the foundation of society, it should not be re-defined by activist judges. For the good of families, children, and society, I support a constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage.
Because a society is measured by how it treats the weak and vulnerable, we must strive to build a culture of life. Medical research can help us reach that goal, by developing treatments and cures that save lives and help people overcome disabilities — and I thank the Congress for doubling the funding of the National Institutes of Health. To build a culture of life, we must also ensure that scientific advances always serve human dignity, not take advantage of some lives for the benefit of others. We should all be able to agree — — we should all be able to agree on some clear standards. I will work with Congress to ensure that human embryos are not created for experimentation or grown for body parts, and that human life is never bought and sold as a commodity. America will continue to lead the world in medical research that is ambitious, aggressive, and always ethical.
Because courts must always deliver impartial justice, judges have a duty to faithfully interpret the law, not legislate from the bench. As President, I have a constitutional responsibility to nominate men and women who understand the role of courts in our democracy, and are well-qualified to serve on the bench — and I have done so. The Constitution also gives the Senate a responsibility: Every judicial nominee deserves an up or down vote.
Because one of the deepest values of our country is compassion, we must never turn away from any citizen who feels isolated from the opportunities of America. Our government will continue to support faith-based and community groups that bring hope to harsh places. Now we need to focus on giving young people, especially young men in our cities, better options than apathy, or gangs, or jail. Tonight I propose a three-year initiative to help organizations keep young people out of gangs, and show young men an ideal of manhood that respects women and rejects violence. Taking on gang life will be one part of a broader outreach to at-risk youth, which involves parents and pastors, coaches and community leaders, in programs ranging from literacy to sports. And I am proud that the leader of this nationwide effort will be our First Lady, Laura Bush.
Because HIV/AIDS brings suffering and fear into so many lives, I ask you to reauthorize the Ryan White Act to encourage prevention, and provide care and treatment to the victims of that disease. And as we update this important law, we must focus our efforts on fellow citizens with the highest rates of new cases, African American men and women.
Because one of the main sources of our national unity is our belief in equal justice, we need to make sure Americans of all races and backgrounds have confidence in the system that provides justice. In America we must make doubly sure no person is held to account for a crime he or she did not commit — so we are dramatically expanding the use of DNA evidence to prevent wrongful conviction. Soon I will send to Congress a proposal to fund special training for defense counsel in capital cases, because people on trial for their lives must have competent lawyers by their side.
Our third responsibility to future generations is to leave them an America that is safe from danger, and protected by peace. We will pass along to our children all the freedoms we enjoy — and chief among them is freedom from fear.
In the three and a half years since September the 11th, 2001, we have taken unprecedented actions to protect Americans. We've created a new department of government to defend our homeland, focused the FBI on preventing terrorism, begun to reform our intelligence agencies, broken up terror cells across the country, expanded research on defenses against biological and chemical attack, improved border security, and trained more than a half-million first responders. Police and firefighters, air marshals, researchers, and so many others are working every day to make our homeland safer, and we thank them all.
Our nation, working with allies and friends, has also confronted the enemy abroad, with measures that are determined, successful, and continuing. The al Qaeda terror network that attacked our country still has leaders — but many of its top commanders have been removed. There are still governments that sponsor and harbor terrorists — but their number has declined. There are still regimes seeking weapons of mass destruction — but no longer without attention and without consequence. Our country is still the target of terrorists who want to kill many, and intimidate us all — and we will stay on the offensive against them, until the fight is won.
Pursuing our enemies is a vital commitment of the war on terror — and I thank the Congress for providing our servicemen and women with the resources they have needed. During this time of war, we must continue to support our military and give them the tools for victory.
Other nations around the globe have stood with us. In Afghanistan, an international force is helping provide security. In Iraq, 28 countries have troops on the ground, the United Nations and the European Union provided technical assistance for the elections, and NATO is leading a mission to help train Iraqi officers. We're cooperating with 60 governments in the Proliferation Security Initiative, to detect and stop the transit of dangerous materials. We're working closely with the governments in Asia to convince North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and nine other countries have captured or detained al Qaeda terrorists. In the next four years, my administration will continue to build the coalitions that will defeat the dangers of our time.
In the long-term, the peace we seek will only be achieved by eliminating the conditions that feed radicalism and ideologies of murder. If whole regions of the world remain in despair and grow in hatred, they will be the recruiting grounds for terror, and that terror will stalk America and other free nations for decades. The only force powerful enough to stop the rise of tyranny and terror, and replace hatred with hope, is the force of human freedom. Our enemies know this, and that is why the terrorist Zarqawi recently declared war on what he called the "evil principle" of democracy. And we've declared our own intention: America will stand with the allies of freedom to support democratic movements in the Middle East and beyond, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.
The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens, and reflect their own cultures. And because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace.
That advance has great momentum in our time — shown by women voting in Afghanistan, and Palestinians choosing a new direction, and the people of Ukraine asserting their democratic rights and electing a president. We are witnessing landmark events in the history of liberty. And in the coming years, we will add to that story.
The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent, democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for $350 million to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace, is within reach — and America will help them achieve that goal.
To promote peace and stability in the broader Middle East, the United States will work with our friends in the region to fight the common threat of terror, while we encourage a higher standard of freedom. Hopeful reform is already taking hold in an arc from Morocco to Jordan to Bahrain. The government of Saudi Arabia can demonstrate its leadership in the region by expanding the role of its people in determining their future. And the great and proud nation of Egypt, which showed the way toward peace in the Middle East, can now show the way toward democracy in the Middle East.
To promote peace in the broader Middle East, we must confront regimes that continue to harbor terrorists and pursue weapons of mass murder. Syria still allows its territory, and parts of Lebanon, to be used by terrorists who seek to destroy every chance of peace in the region. You have passed, and we are applying, the Syrian Accountability Act — and we expect the Syrian government to end all support for terror and open the door to freedom. Today, Iran remains the world's primary state sponsor of terror — pursuing nuclear weapons while depriving its people of the freedom they seek and deserve. We are working with European allies to make clear to the Iranian regime that it must give up its uranium enrichment program and any plutonium reprocessing, and end its support for terror. And to the Iranian people, I say tonight: As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you.
Our generational commitment to the advance of freedom, especially in the Middle East, is now being tested and honored in Iraq. That country is a vital front in the war on terror, which is why the terrorists have chosen to make a stand there. Our men and women in uniform are fighting terrorists in Iraq, so we do not have to face them here at home. And the victory of freedom in Iraq will strengthen a new ally in the war on terror, inspire democratic reformers from Damascus to Tehran, bring more hope and progress to a troubled region, and thereby lift a terrible threat from the lives of our children and grandchildren.
We will succeed because the Iraqi people value their own liberty — as they showed the world last Sunday. Across Iraq, often at great risk, millions of citizens went to the polls and elected 275 men and women to represent them in a new Transitional National Assembly. A young woman in Baghdad told of waking to the sound of mortar fire on election day, and wondering if it might be too dangerous to vote. She said, "Hearing those explosions, it occurred to me — the insurgents are weak, they are afraid of democracy, they are losing. So I got my husband, and I got my parents, and we all came out and voted together."
Americans recognize that spirit of liberty, because we share it. In any nation, casting your vote is an act of civic responsibility; for millions of Iraqis, it was also an act of personal courage, and they have earned the respect of us all.
One of Iraq's leading democracy and human rights advocates is Safia Taleb al-Suhail. She says of her country, "We were occupied for 35 years by Saddam Hussein. That was the real occupation. Thank you to the American people who paid the cost, but most of all, to the soldiers." Eleven years ago, Safia's father was assassinated by Saddam's intelligence service. Three days ago in Baghdad, Safia was finally able to vote for the leaders of her country — and we are honored that she is with us tonight.
The terrorists and insurgents are violently opposed to democracy, and will continue to attack it. Yet, the terrorists' most powerful myth is being destroyed. The whole world is seeing that the car bombers and assassins are not only fighting coalition forces, they are trying to destroy the hopes of Iraqis, expressed in free elections. And the whole world now knows that a small group of extremists will not overturn the will of the Iraqi people.
We will succeed in Iraq because Iraqis are determined to fight for their own freedom, and to write their own history. As Prime Minister Allawi said in his speech to Congress last September, "Ordinary Iraqis are anxious to shoulder all the security burdens of our country as quickly as possible." That is the natural desire of an independent nation, and it is also the stated mission of our coalition in Iraq. The new political situation in Iraq opens a new phase of our work in that country.
At the recommendation of our commanders on the ground, and in consultation with the Iraqi government, we will increasingly focus our efforts on helping prepare more capable Iraqi security forces — forces with skilled officers and an effective command structure. As those forces become more self-reliant and take on greater security responsibilities, America and its coalition partners will increasingly be in a supporting role. In the end, Iraqis must be able to defend their own country — and we will help that proud, new nation secure its liberty.
Recently an Iraqi interpreter said to a reporter, "Tell America not to abandon us." He and all Iraqis can be certain: While our military strategy is adapting to circumstances, our commitment remains firm and unchanging. We are standing for the freedom of our Iraqi friends, and freedom in Iraq will make America safer for generations to come. We will not set an artificial timetable for leaving Iraq, because that would embolden the terrorists and make them believe they can wait us out. We are in Iraq to achieve a result: A country that is democratic, representative of all its people, at peace with its neighbors, and able to defend itself. And when that result is achieved, our men and women serving in Iraq will return home with the honor they have earned.
Right now, Americans in uniform are serving at posts across the world, often taking great risks on my orders. We have given them training and equipment; and they have given us an example of idealism and character that makes every American proud. The volunteers of our military are unrelenting in battle, unwavering in loyalty, unmatched in honor and decency, and every day they're making our nation more secure. Some of our servicemen and women have survived terrible injuries, and this grateful country will do everything we can to help them recover. And we have said farewell to some very good men and women, who died for our freedom, and whose memory this nation will honor forever.
One name we honor is Marine Corps Sergeant Byron Norwood of Pflugerville, Texas, who was killed during the assault on Fallujah. His mom, Janet, sent me a letter and told me how much Byron loved being a Marine, and how proud he was to be on the front line against terror. She wrote, "When Byron was home the last time, I said that I wanted to protect him like I had since he was born. He just hugged me and said, 'You've done your job, Mom. Now it is my turn to protect you.'" Ladies and gentlemen, with grateful hearts, we honor freedom's defenders, and our military families, represented here this evening by Sergeant Norwood's mom and dad, Janet and Bill Norwood.
In these four years, Americans have seen the unfolding of large events. We have known times of sorrow, and hours of uncertainty, and days of victory. In all this history, even when we have disagreed, we have seen threads of purpose that unite us. The attack on freedom in our world has reaffirmed our confidence in freedom's power to change the world. We are all part of a great venture: To extend the promise of freedom in our country, to renew the values that sustain our liberty, and to spread the peace that freedom brings.
As Franklin Roosevelt once reminded Americans, "Each age is a dream that is dying, or one that is coming to birth." And we live in the country where the biggest dreams are born. The abolition of slavery was only a dream — until it was fulfilled. The liberation of Europe from fascism was only a dream — until it was achieved. The fall of imperial communism was only a dream — until, one day, it was accomplished. Our generation has dreams of its own, and we also go forward with confidence. The road of Providence is uneven and unpredictable — yet we know where it leads: It leads to freedom.
Thank you, and may God bless America.


text:
Wondering if you should continue renting or if you should buy a home this year? If so, consider this. Rental affordability is still a challenge and has been for years. That's because, historically, rents trend up over time. Data from the Census shows rents have been climbing pretty steadily since 1988.
And, data from the latest rental report from Realtor.com shows rents continue to grow today, even though it's at a slower pace than we saw at the height of the pandemic:
"In March 2023, the U.S. rental market experienced single-digit growth for the eighth month in a row . . . The median asking rent was $1,732, up by $15 from last month and down by $32 from the peak but is still$354 (25.7%) higher than the same time in 2019 (pre-pandemic)."
With rents much higher now than they were in more normal, pre-pandemic years, owning your home may be a better option, especially if the long-term trend of rents increasing each year continues. In contrast, homeowners with a fixed-rate mortgage can lock in a monthly mortgage payment for the duration of their loan (typically 15-30 years).
Owning a Home Could Be More Affordable if You Need More Space
The graph below uses national data on the median rental payment from Realtor.com and median mortgage paymentfrom the National Association of Realtors (NAR) to compare the two options. As the graph shows, depending on how much space you need, it's typically more affordable to own than to rent if you need two or more bedrooms:
So, if you're looking to live somewhere where you have two or more bedrooms to accommodate your household, give you more breathing room to spread out your belongings, or dedicate the extra space to practice your hobbies, it might make sense to consider homeownership.
Homeownership Allows You To Start Building Equity
In addition to shielding you from rising rents and being more affordable when you need more space, owning your home also allows you to start building your own equity, which in turn grows your net worth.
And, as home values typically rise over time and you pay off your mortgage, you build equity. That equity can set you up for success later on because you can use it to help fuel a move to an even bigger space down the line. That's why, according to Zonda, the top reason millennial homeowners bought their home over the past year was to build their own equity instead of someone else's.
Bottom Line
If you're trying to decide whether to buy a home or continue renting, let's connect to explore your options. With rents rising, it may make more sense to pursue your dream of homeownership.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Chrysalis Surface Design respects your privacy.
Any personal information you provide to us including and similar to your name, address, telephone number and e-mail address will not be released, sold, or rented to any entities or individuals outside of Chrysalis Surface Design. Our newsletter is only sent to users who opt in to the service. You will receive emails regarding any order you place with us.
External Sites.
Chrysalis Surface Design is not responsible for the content of external internet sites. You are advised to read the privacy policy of external sites before disclosing any personal information.
A "cookie" is a small data text file that is placed in your browser and allows P Burtle Creative to recognise you each time you visit this site(customisation etc). Cookies themselves do not contain any personal information, and P Burtle Creative does not use cookies to collect personal information. Cookies may also be used by 3rd party content providers such as newsfeeds.
Remember The Risks Whenever You Use The Internet
While we do our best to protect your personal information, we cannot guarantee the security of any information that you transmit to Chrysalis Surface Design and you are solely responsible for maintaining the secrecy of any passwords or other account information. In addition other Internet sites or services that may be accessible through Chrysalis Surface Design have separate data and privacy practices independent of us, and therefore we disclaim any responsibility or liability for their policies or actions.
Please contact those vendors and others directly if you have any questions about their privacy policies.
For any other information Contact Us


text:
Immortalized Mouse Proximal Caput Epididymal Epithelial Cell Line (PC1)
Worried about losing your cells due to contamination issues, thawing or growth difficulties or even a random freezer breakdown?
Enjoy peace of mind knowing that you can be covered under abm's Cell Line Insurance
Sale of this item is subjected to the completion of a Material Transfer Agreement (MTA) by the purchasing individual/institution for each order. If you have any questions regarding this, please contact us at [email protected].
Cat. No. | T0598 |
Name | Immortalized Mouse Proximal Caput Epididymal Epithelial Cell Line (PC1) |
Description |
PC1 is a conditionally immortalized mouse epididymal epithelial cell line isolated from the proximal caput of the mouse harbouring a temperature-sensitive simian virus 40 large T antigen. The epididymal epithelium plays an important role in male fertility by supporting sperm motility, maturation and viability. Owing to the changing microenvironment created by different sections of the epididymis, the spermatozoa matures as they passage through the convoluted tubule. The functional expression of the SV40 large T antigen is induced by culturing the cells in vitro at permissive temperature (33°C). At non-permissive temperatures (37°C-39°C), the cells cease to proliferate. PC1 expresses androgen receptor as well as markers of the murine epididymal epithelium, PEB-like protein (i.e. phosphatidylethanolamine binding protein), E-RABP (i.e. epididymal retinoic acid-binding protein), and EP17 (i.e. epididymal protein of 17 kd). Together with the Immortalized Mouse Distal Caput Epididymal Epithelial Cell Line (DC2) (Cat. No. T0599), these cells are useful in studying the regulation of tissue-specific gene expression and epididymal specific proteins in the epididymis. Immunocytochemistry, western blot and RT-PCR were used to confirm expression of markers. Additional cell lines from this panel: Cat. T0599 - Immortalized Mouse Distal Caput Epididymal Epithelial Cell Line (DC2) Note: both cell lines are from the caput of the epididymis but differ in their region of isolation within the caput (proximal vs distal). |
Organism | Mouse (M. musculus) |
Tissue | Testes |
Donor History | 10-12 weeks old tsSV40 transgenic mouse, Caput epididymis |
Growth Properties | Adherent, polygonal |
Cell Type | Immortalized Cells |
Storage Condition | Vapor phase of liquid nitrogen, or below -130°C. |
Shipping Conditions | Ship with dry ice. |
Product Format | Frozen |
Intended Use | This product is intended for laboratory research use only. It is not intended for any animal or human therapeutic use, any human or animal consumption, or any diagnostic use. |
BioSafety | II |
Certificate of Analysis | For batch-specific test results, refer to the applicable certificate of analysis that can be found at www.abmgood.com. |
Growth Conditions |
PriCoat™ T25 Flasks (G299) or Applied Cell Extracellular Matrix (G422) are recommended for optimal cell culture. PriGrow V (TM015) + 10% FBS + 1% Penicillin/Streptomycin Solution (G255), 33.0°C, 5% CO₂. |
Unpacking and Storage Instructions |
1. Visually examine the packaging containers for signs of leakage or breakage. 2. Immediately transfer frozen cells from dry ice packaging to a temperature below -130°C, preferably in liquid nitrogen vapor phase storage, until ready for use. To ensure the highest level of viability, thaw the vial and initiate culture as soon as possible upon receipt. If continued storage is desired, the vial should only be stored below -130°C or in liquid nitrogen vapor phase. Do not store at -70°C, as it will result in loss of viability. |
Thawing Protocol |
1. Thaw cells quickly in a 37°C water bath while agitating gently (maximum 2 minutes). The vial cap should be kept above the water level to minimize the risk of contamination. 2. Decontaminate the vial by spraying and wiping the exterior of the vial with 70% ethanol. From this point onwards, all operations should be strictly carried out inside a biological safety cabinet using aseptic conditions. 3. Transfer the cell suspension into a 15ml sterile conical tube containing 5ml of pre-warmed, complete growth media. Centrifuge cells at 125xg for 5-7 minutes. 4. Aspirate the supernatant without disturbing the cell pellet. Re-suspend the cell pellet in the recommended pre-warmed, complete growth media and dispense into a T25 culture flask. 5. Incubate the cells at the recommended conditions. |
Subculture Protocol |
Volumes given below are for a T75 flask; proportionally increase or decrease the volume as required per culture vessel size. Subculture cells once the culture vessel is 80% confluent. 1. Aspirate the culture media, and add 2-3ml of pre-warmed 0.25% Trypsin-EDTA to the culture vessel. 2. Observe the cells under a microscope to confirm detachment (typically within 2-10 minutes). Cells that are difficult to detach can be put in 37°C, for several minutes to facilitate detachment. 3. Neutralize Trypsin-EDTA by adding an equal volume of the complete growth media into the culture vessel. 4. Transfer the culture suspension into a sterile centrifuge tube, and centrifuge at 125xg for 5 minutes. The actual centrifuge duration and speed may vary depending on the cell type. 5. Aspirate the supernatant, and re-suspend the pellet with pre-warmed fresh complete growth media. Add appropriate aliquots of the cell suspension to new culture vessels, as desired. 6. Incubate the cells at the recommended conditions. |
Cryopreservation |
Cryopreservation Medium (TM024), or complete growth media with 10% DMSO. |
Seeding Density (cells/cm2) | 30,000 - 50,000 |
Immortalization Method |
Isolated from a transgenic mouse carrying a temperature-sensitive simian virus 40 large T tumor antigen. |
Expression |
Androgen receptor (AR), PEB-like protein, E-RABP, mEP17, cytokeratin |
Warranty | abm warrants that cell lines shall be viable upon initiation of culture for a period of thirty (30) days after shipment and that they shall meet the specifications on the applicable abm Material Product Information sheet, certificate of analysis, and/or catalog description. Such thirty (30) day period is referred to herein as the "Warranty Period". |
Disclaimer |
1. All test parameters provided in the CoA are conducted using abm's
standardized culture system and procedures. The stated values may vary
under the end-user's culture conditions. Please verify that the product
is suitable for your studies by referencing published papers or ordering
RNA (0.5 μg, Cat.# C207, $450.00) or cell lysate (100 μg, Cat.# C206,
$600.00) to perform preliminary experiments, or alternatively use our
Gene Expression Assay Service (Cat# C138). All sales are final. 2. We recommend live cell shipments for ease of cell transfer and this
option can be requested at the time of ordering. Please note that the
end-user will need to evaluate the feasibility of live cell shipment by
taking into account the final destination's temperature variation and
its geographical location. In addition, we thoroughly test our cell
lines for freeze-thaw recovery. If frozen cells were received and not
recovered in your lab under the exact, specified conditions (using
recommended culture vessel, media, additional supplements, and
atmospheric conditions), a live cell replacement is possible at a cost
(plus shipping). 3. All of abm's cell biology products are for research use ONLY and NOT for therapeutic/diagnostic applications. abm
is not liable for any repercussions arising from the use of its cell
biology product(s) in therapeutic/diagnostic application(s). Please
contact a technical service representative for more information. 4. abm makes no warranties or representations as to
the accuracy of the information on this site. Citations from literature
and provided for informational purposes only. abm does not warrant that such information has been shown to be accurate. 5. abm warrants that cell lines shall be viable upon
initiation of culture for a period of thirty (30) days after shipment
and that they shall meet the specifications on the applicable abm
Material Product Information sheet, certificate of analysis, and/or
catalog description. Such thirty (30) day period is referred to herein
as the "Warranty Period."
Depositor | Vanderbilt University |
Application | Research Use Only. |
Material Citation | If use of this material results in a scientific publication, please cite the material in the following manner: Applied Biological Materials Inc, Cat. No. T0598 |
I want to make sure these cells express my gene of interest before I decide to buy the cell line. Can you provide a sample so this can be tested? | |
We do not perform extensive downstream characterization, or gene expression profiling of our cell lines. However, you can check the 'References' tab to see if a publication is available, or you can contact us to see if RNA or cell lysates are available for your cell line of interest. Please directly contact us for further information at [email protected].
Does abm's PriGrow series medium contain antibiotics? | |
No, the medium does not contain antibiotics and needs to be supplemented by the end-user as desired.
Do I need to use abm's media and Applied Cell Extracellular Matrix (G422) to culture my cells? | |
We strongly encourage using the recommended media and culture conditions described in the "Growth Conditions" section as they have been optimized for cell growth. Other supplier's media and coating conditions have not been tested.
What is the difference between Applied Cell Extracellular Matrix (G422) and Collagen Coating? | |
The main component of our Applied Cell Extracellular Matrix (G422) is type I collagen specifically. For more information on abm's Applied Cell Extracellular Matrix please visit: http://www.abmgood.com/Applied-Cell-Extracellular-Matrix-G422.html.
Do I have to use T25 ECM-coated flasks for growing the cells? | |
We strongly recommend thawing cells in the T25 flasks specified on the cell-specific product page to ensure optimal post-thaw recovery of the frozen cells before testing other culture vessels.
If I want to plate these cells to multi-well plates (e.g. 96 well plates) or dishes, how should I prepare the plates? | |
What percentage of Trypsin-EDTA should be used to subculture cells? Can I use Trypsin-EDTA containing phenol red? | |
The standard concentration used for subculturing is 0.25% Trypsin-EDTA, available at abm (Cat. No. TM050). Yes, Trypsin-EDTA containing phenol red can be used as it does not interfere with trypsinization.
How often do I need to change the media? | |
Media should be changed every 2-3 days or as specified within the recommended growth conditions.
Why are these cells classified as biosafety level II? | |
We follow the CDC-NIH recommendations that all mammalian sourced products should be handled at the Biological Safety Level 2 to minimize exposure of potentially infectious products. This information can be found in 'Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories' (1999). Your institution's Safety Officer or Technical Services will be able to make the call as to whether BioSafety Level I is possible with these cells at your site, if desired.
How long can I store frozen vials? | |
Cells that are properly frozen using an effective cryoprotective agent can be stored in liquid nitrogen vapor phase (or below -130°C) indefinitely without affecting viability.
What is the recommended storage temperature for cells? | |
In general, if you received:
Can I substitute heat-inactivated FBS with FBS or vice versa? | |
FBS and heat-inactivated FBS are different in their composition; they cannot be substituted for one another.
My cells are not detaching, what method do you recommend to trypsinize the cells? | |
How are live cells shipped? | |
Live cells are shipped as a live culture in a T12.5 flask. Cells are seeded at an optimal confluency to avoid metabolic waste build up during transport. In addition, we thoroughly test our cell lines for functional freeze-thaw recovery. For more information on how to handle live cells, please view our detailed instructions here (https://www.abmgood.com/uploads/document/Cell_Handling_Instructions_Upon_Arrival_150623.pdf).
Why are cells not attaching and forming clumps after subculturing with trypsin? | |
Cells form clumps and display attachment issues when the trypsinization agent is not effectively neutralized. To completely neutralize the trypsin agent, add an equal amount of complete growth media prior to centrifugation. Subtle changes in culture conditions, particularly in pH and the quality of serum used in the growth medium, may also affect the amount of clumping exhibited by the cells.
Why are my cells forming clumps after plating? | |
It is important to ensure cell clumps are broken up through gentle re-suspension by pipetting up and down several times after pelleting cells by centrifugation. This will ensure a homogenous single cell suspension for even plating.
Do I need to add the selection drug to the complete growth medium? | |
We recommend maintaining selection pressure using the drug concentration specified in the Growth Conditions section.
Where can I find the CoA for my product? | |
Certificates of analysis can be found here (https://www.abmgood.com/CoA-Library.html).
Araki, Y., Suzuki, K., Matusik, R. J., Obinata, M., & Orgebin-Crist, M. C. (2002). Immortalized epididymal cell lines from transgenic mice overexpressing temperature-sensitive simian virus 40 large T-antigen gene. Journal of andrology, 23(6), 854–869.


text:
Need help?
Enter your e-mail and password:
New customer? Create your account
Lost password? Recover password
Enter your email:
Remembered your password? Back to login
Please fill in the information below:
Already have an account? Login here
Free delivery over £100 ex VAT
Quantity discounts available
Rated excellent
Request a free quote
The K-Mat by COBA used to be known as the Kitchen Mat and is ideal for food based environments, such as kitchens, hospitality and catering. They...
In stock
The K-Mat by COBA used to be known as the Kitchen Mat and is ideal for food based environments, such as kitchens, hospitality and catering. They can also be used in workshops prone to swarf. This is due to its resistance to chemicals, oils, grease, fats and detergents. As well as this it is a comfortable place to stand for workers who are on their feet for extended periods.
Call us on 01724 281044 if you would like any more information on this product.
Browse our full collection of Workplace Matting or take a look at our wider Workplace Safety Equipment catalogue.
Our standard delivery charge is £4.95 plus VAT for basket values below £100 plus VAT.
For basket values of £100 plus VAT and above, our delivery is FREE.
This applies to deliveries to UK mainland areas. Where your postcode is deemed to be in a non-mainland UK area then a delivery surcharge will apply. You will be notified of the price of this surcharge at checkout and full details on relevant postcodes can be obtained by calling our sales team on 01724 281044.
In addition, there will be some areas where it is not possible to calculate the surcharge through the website, an example is Northern Ireland. In these cases, you will be notified of this at checkout and you should call our sales team on 01724 281044 for a bespoke shipping quote.
EU and international deliveries are possible but will be assessed on a case-by-case basis and orders cannot be placed through the website. Please contact our sales team on the number above in order to discuss your specific requirements.
Delivery will normally be made at any time between 08:00am and 06:00pm, Monday to Friday. It is important to ensure that an authorised person is available to receive the goods. If we are unable to deliver as arranged, then we reserve the right to levy an additional charge for the re-delivery of the items. Special delivery instructions can be provided to us at checkout in order to minimise the possibility of this happening.
Some of the items that we deliver are large and bulky. Unless otherwise stated, the item will only be delivered 'door-to-door' rather than being taken inside your premises. Therefore, it is your responsibility to ensure that you have suitable apparatus to handle and move any item that is ordered and delivered to you. If you have concerns about this, please call our sales team as upgraded delivery solutions for larger items can be made available at additional cost.
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter, where we will share exclusive offers and details of new product launches. We will also keep you updated with the latest safety news and articles from our Help Centre. You can unsubscribe from our mailing list at any time, and we agree never to sell your personal information on to third parties.


text:
News 09 Apr. 2024
Curtis Announces New Partners and Counsels Across Offices in Spring 2024
News 25 Jan. 2024
Counsel Mohannad A. El Murtadi Suleiman Addresses "Africanization" of International Investment Law
Event 18 Aug. 2023
Partner Borzu Sabahi Speaks at FDI Moot Shenzhen
News 25 Jul. 2023
Partner Eric Gilioli Ranked in Top 10 Influential Energy & Natural Resources Lawyers in Kazakhstan in Business Today
Client Alert 28 Dec. 2023
U.S. to Impose Secondary Sanctions on Non-U.S. Banks For Financing Russia's Defense Industry
Event 22 Aug. 2023
Partner Dr. Claudia Frutos-Peterson to Speak at Arbitration and ADR Commission of the ICC Mexico
Event 11 Jul. 2023
Partner Elisa Botero Speaks on the Role of the ICC in Investment Disputes
News 15 Aug. 2023
Legal Reader Publishes Article on Dr. Majed Alotaibi's Arrival as Senior Counsel in Curtis' Riyadh Office
News 31 Jul. 2023
Curtis Welcomes Senior Saudi Advisor, Dr. Majed Alotaibi, to its Riyadh Office
News 24 Aug. 2023
Curtis Attorneys Quoted in CoinDesk on FTX Founder Sam Bankman-Fried's Strategy Ahead of His Criminal Trial
Client Alert 10 Jul. 2024
EU Adopts New Restrictive Measures Against Belarus
Client Alert 26 Jun. 2024
The EU Adopts its 14th Sanctions Package Against Russia
Chairman George Kahale III Writes Commentary on Proposals For Damages Reform in UNCITRAL Working Group III
client alert
Antidumping And Countervailing Duty (AD/CVD) Petitions Filed Against Certain Tungsten Shot From China
Publications 03 Aug. 2018
Arbitration in Switzerland - The Practitioner's Guide: Commentary, 2nd edition,. Kluwer Law International, 2018
Sebastiano Nessi authored Part X: "Insolvency and Arbitration," in: Arbitration in Switzerland - The Practitioner's Guide: Commentary, 2nd edition,. Manuel Arroyo (ed.), Kluwer Law International, 2018, pp. 2687-2705
International Arbitration
Commercial Disputes - Arbitration
Sebastiano Nessi
+41 22 718 3500
Curtis Attorneys Featured at Inaugural ASIL Abroad Meeting in Geneva
Supreme Court Overturns Chevron Deference, Potentially Limiting Deference Granted to OFAC in Sanctions Enforcement
We use cookies on our website to enhance your browsing experience, match your interests and assess our website performance. We do not share information with any third-party for marketing purposes. Please view our privacy policy to learn more about the use of cookies on our website. By continuing to browse our website, you consent to our use of cookies.


text:
Catch my interview on Fox 2 Now!
Catch my interview on Fox 2 Now!
#1 New York Times bestselling thriller writer Kathy Reichs returns with her twenty-first novel of suspense … Read more
#1 New York Times bestselling author Kathy Reichs returns with her twentieth gripping novel featuring forensic … Read more
#1 New York Times bestselling author Kathy Reichs returns with a new riveting novel featuring her … Read more
The incredible follow-up to FaceOff features twenty-two of the world's bestselling and critically acclaimed thriller writers … Read more
Good News for Temperance Brennan Fans! The Bone Collection is coming to you this November.
Fans of the Virals series will be thrilled with this companion volume that includes three short … Read more
Featuring a preview of the highly anticipated new thriller Speaking in Bones, this eBook original novella … Read more
No one speaks the language of suspense more brilliantly than Kathy Reichs, #1 New York Times … Read more
Just in time for the release of the final book in the Virals quintet comes a … Read more
Having Temperance Brennan for a great-aunt comes with a few perks—including an invite to the famous … Read more
Tory's great aunt, Temperance Brennan, visits just in time to investigate a robbery at the Loggerhead … Read more
The Virals are back—but they're not the only pack in town anymore. Terminal finds Tory Brennan … Read more
Forensic anthropologist Temperance Brennan returns in a chilling eBook original novella from #1 New York Times … Read more
The evidence is irrefutable: In sixteen New York Times bestsellers over the course of as many … Read more
Dr. Tempe Brennan has seen it all. Human bones. Animal bones. Old bones. Young bones. Male … Read more
When twin classmates are abducted from Bolton Prep, Tory and the Virals decide there's no one … Read more
Tory Brennan, the great-niece of Dr. Tempe Brennan, and the Virals return for a third thrilling … Read more
Ever since Tory Brennan and her friends rescued Cooper, a kidnapped wolf pup with a rare … Read more
Tory Brennan, niece of acclaimed forensic anthropologist Temperance Brennan (of the Bones novels and hit TV … Read more
When Charlotte police discover the body of a teenage girl along a desolate stretch of two-lane … Read more
A newborn baby is found wedged in a vanity cabinet in a rundown apartment near Montreal.… Read more
Just as 200,000 fans are pouring into town for Race Week, a body is found in … Read more
John Lowery was declared dead in 1968—the victim of a Huey crash in Vietnam, his body … Read more
There are 206 bones in the human body. Forensic anthropologists know them intimately, can read in … Read more
In a house under renovation, a plumber uncovers a cellar no one knew about, and makes … Read more
As a child, she was told to forget about the missing girl. But some memories don't … Read more
To some, the dead are a commodity. For Tempe Brennan, they hold the key to cracking … Read more
When an Orthodox Jew is found shot to death in Montreal, Temperance Brennan is called in … Read more
The secrets of the dead are in her hands.
The bones of three young women are … Read more
She works with the dead, but she works for the living.
"Down time" is not a … Read more
A harrowing excavation unearths a chilling tragedy never laid to rest.
They are "the disappeared," twenty-three … Read more
She has a passion for the truth . . . and this time, it's taking her … Read more
When innocent blood is spilled, she deciphers the shattering truth it holds.
Nine-year-old Emily Anne Toussaint … Read more
In the bitter cold of a Montreal winter, Tempe Brennan is digging for a corpse buried … Read more
Her life is devoted to justice — for those she never even knew.
In the year … Read more
In No Rest for the Dead, betrayal, vengeance, redemption, greed, and love, are tied together … Read more
On the banks of the Truxton River lies Gryphon's Gate, a gated community built by Henry … Read more


text:
Divide ague into syllables: a-gue
Stressed syllable in ague: a-gue
How to pronounce ague: ey-gyoo
How to say ague:
Cite This Source
1. What is a syllable?
2. How to count syllables.
3. How to divide into syllables.
Parents, Teachers, StudentsDo you have a grammar question?
Need help finding a syllable count?
Want to say thank you?


text:
A letter to God
Ther was a man who worked for the Post Office whose job was to process all the mail that had illegible addresses. One day, a letter came addressed in a shaky handwriting to God with no actual address. He thought he should open it to see what it was about. The letter read: Dear God, I am an 83 year old widow, living on a very small pension. Yesterday someone stole my purse. It had $100 in it, which was all the money I had until my next pension payment. Next Sunday is Christmas, and I had invited two of my friends over for dinner. Without that money, I have nothing to buy food with, have no family to turn to, and you are my only hope. Can you please help me? Sincerely, Edna The postal worker was touched. He showed the letter to all the other workers. Each one dug into his or her wallet and came up with a few dollars. By the time he made the rounds, he had collected $96, which they put into an envelope and sent to the woman. The rest of the day, all the workers felt a warm glow thinking of Edna and the dinner she would be able to share with her friends. Christmas came and went. A few days later, another letter came from the same old lady to God. All the workers gathered around while the letter was opened. It read: Dear God, How can I ever thank you enough for what you did for me? Because of your gift of love, I was able to fix a glorious dinner for my friends. We had a very nice day and I told my friends of your wonderful gift. By the way, there was $4 missing. I think it might have been those bastards at the post office.!!


text:
pAAV-hSyn-Chronos-mT-Sapphire Sequences (2)
Full Sequences from Addgene (1)
Based on next-generation sequencing (NGS) results where indicated (Addgene NGS Result), or assembled from reference sequences and/or Sanger results (Addgene Assembled Sequence).
Full Sequences from Depositor (1)
Sequence provided by depositing laboratory may be theoretical/predicted or based on Sanger/NGS sequencing results. Discrepancies between sequencing results obtained by Addgene and the original sequence provided by the depositor may be present.


text:
Discover our comprehensive list of the top vape and e-cigarette shops in Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin.
Whether you're a vaping enthusiast or just curious about the latest e-cigarette trends, our guide showcases the best shops in town.
From the widest selection of flavors to top-quality vaping devices, these shops have it all. Dive in to explore the top 2 vape and e-cigarette shops in Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin, and find your new favorite spot today!


text:
Croton (Croton dichogamus)
IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This datasheet is pending revision and updating; its contents are currently derived from FAO's Animal Feed Resources Information System (1991-2002) and from Bo Göhl's Tropical Feeds (1976-1982). |
Datasheet citation
DATASHEET UNDER CONSTRUCTION. DO NOT QUOTE. https://feedipedia.org/node/161 Last updated on March 16, 2010, 17:13
Image credits


text:
Looking for that perfect musical instrument but don't want to pay a fortune for it? We carry instruments from some of the best known names in the music industry.
We offer quality instruments that have the quality and playability that even the most demanding professional is looking for, in a price range even the beginning player can afford.


text:
Balkinization   |
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu David Luban david.luban at gmail.com Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic) Recent Posts Need Barack Obama be an "outlaw" (and would that necessarily be the worst thing in the world)?
Monday, September 30, 2013
Need Barack Obama be an "outlaw" (and would that necessarily be the worst thing in the world)? Sandy Levinson
Henry Aaron has an op-ed flamboyantly titled, I assume by the Times, "Our Outlaw President," suggesting that Obama simply ignore the debt ceiling in order to avoid a genuine world-wide economic and domestic constitutional crisis. He apparently prefers that to the trillion-dollar coin. The point is that a President who proudly proclaims unilateral authority to use American firepower abroad, whether in Libya or Syria--or, for that matter, Iran--should be able to summon up a plausible argument, provided by Aaron, who cites an article by Michael Dorf and Neil Buchanan, that he can, to cite John Marshall, be able to "adapt to the various crises of human affairs." There is literally no reason in the world to be fearing that the US will be unable to pay its debts, unless Obama suddenly decides that James Buchanan was right, after all, and that he is wholly without power to prevent the US from going over a cliff.
Of course he has power to keep America from going over a cliff. Trivially, he could phone Reid and tell him to stop messing around, and let one of the House CRs pass the Senate, so that he can sign it. Rather than engage in these hissy fits about how he's not going to permit a default, and will veto any bill that would prevent one which isn't precisely to his liking. (Followed by announcing his desire for serious debate of the matter, so long as the outcome is predetermined to his favor.)
No, I suppose Obama being an outlaw, (No sneer quotes needed, many of the proposed actions really are criminal.) is not the worst thing. I suppose he could start a nuclear war, or order his political opponents executed, or something of that nature. It's bad enough in a man whose oath of office is that he "see the law faithfully executed", not that he "achieve is own policy ends even if illegally".
If the debt ceiling isn't raised, then Obama has no choice but to violate one law: he can refuse to spend the money authorized (in violation of the 1974 Budget Act and Train v NYC); or he can pay the debts (as he's required by the 14th A) or he can seize property (which he's forbidden to do by the 5th A). Minting a platinum coin is not obviously illegal; it appears to be perfectly legal, in fact. Nonetheless, I expect the GOP to argue that this is illegal too.
My guess is that Ted Cruz knows all this. I think, all along, he plans for Obama to react as Prof. Levinson suggests and then have the House impeach him. Of course, it's a Catch-22 for Obama because he violates the law no matter what he does, so maybe they'll impeach him either way. Still, I'd prefer him to let the consequences fall on the economy and blame the Republicans. Not pretty in the short run, but maybe better in the long term. Then he can prepare for Klayman's coup on Nov. 19 (it was thoughtful of him to announce the date in advance; Diem would have appreciated that kind of warning).
Shutting down the government implies the potential for bringing the end of the United States of America. Without a government there is no such country. It should be more than obvious that the Constitution was not intended to let a political faction in Congress do that. To the extent the debt ceiling or failure to pass continuing resolutions are construed to force the President to do that -- to try to prevent the President from performing executive duties under the executive power granted by Article II solely to the President -- it is clear they are unconstitutional. Therefore, there is no need for the President to perform as an outlaw.
It's great to see this kind of Constitutional analysis sounding in the separation of powers on a prominent legal website.
Henry Aaron in the NYT says, accurately, that the debt ceiling law "is a law without a discoverable purpose." Hint, hint: can such a law in conflict with a million laws each with clearly stated purposes be Constitutional?
Let's see, it's impossible for two laws in direct conflict with each both to be Constitutional. Hmm, the million laws with clearly identifiable purposes operate the nation-state called the United States of America. The other one would require the executive branch of the government to bring an end to the United States of America, after making decisions not authorized in the Constitution giving priority to some of the million laws over others. Decisions, decisions. Only a Solomon could make this one, I guess.
Good heavens, Sandy, do you understand what you are suggesting?
Currently, we have a Caesarist president who legislates through the bureaucracy and ignores any laws of Congress which get in his way - even his own. Now, you are suggesting that the president also seize the appropriations power and simply coin any money he wishes that the House declines to give him. The House will impeach him and the Democrat Senate will ratify their president's unconstitutional seizure of congressional power by refusing to convict him. At that point, we will have fully transitioned to a dictatorship and the only remedy will be revolution. Great plan there.
"Henry Aaron in the NYT says, accurately, that the debt ceiling law "is a law without a discoverable purpose."
Henry Aaron is an ignorant moron, then. Only Congress is constitutionally permitted to authorize borrowing. Prior to the institution of "debt ceilings", every time the executive found it needed to borrow money, it had to come to Congress, which would then pass a bill authorizing that particular instance of borrowing. This was not particularly troublesome because the government mostly ran in the black, such instances were not frequent. Then along comes the 20th century, and the government decides to run in the red, increasingly in the red. The executive is coming to Congress more and more often, it's starting to eat up the legislature's time. So, as a conveience for Congress, they start pre-authorizing borrowing. Instead of just authorizing the amount of borrowing needed at that particular moment, they anticipate the need, and say, "You can now borrow up to $500 million dollars, but don't need to borrow it all immediately." And so, until the executive has borrowed that full amount, he's not pestering Congress for authorization to borrow. That "up to" is the debt ceiling. Without legislation, the executive can not borrow AT ALL. The debt ceiling is like a line of credit extended to the Executive branch, where you only have to go back to the bank when you reach your credit limit. No debt ceiling, no line of credit, and no borrowing. You don't want rid of the debt ceiling, you want an INFINITE debt ceiling. You want the power to borrow, constitutionally reserved to Congress, to be given the the President. To which I can only say, not only no, but HELL NO.
If Congress refuses to increase the limit on the national credit card, government has enough tax revenues to pay for 2/3 of current spending - about what we spent under Clinton and more than enough to service the debt, pay SS and Medicare, a reasonable national defense and core services. The fact that we are currently spending 50% more than under Clinton by borrowing is fiscal insanity.
Brett is, of course, wrong about the debt ceiling (he's wrong about the history too, but we can leave that aside). Abolishing the debt ceiling does NOT create an "infinite" line of credit. What it would do is authorize the President to borrow *up to the amount of spending already authorized by Congress*. It would allow the country to pay the bills Congress already incurred, but no more.
Failing to raise the debt ceiling is nothing more than a default on the debt, trashing a credit reputation built up over 225 years. It will make future borrowing more expensive, and likely have very serious effects on the world economy (which depends on new-issue US debt for many things). As I pointed out above, if Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, it will place Obama in a situation in which, no matter what he does, he must violate one law or another. I'm sure that's the plan.
Mark, without a law, the President can't borrow ANYTHING. Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 2: The power to borrow is delegated to Congress, not the President.
Yes, I know there's a line of argument that Congress has implicitly authorized the borrowing by authorizing the spending. There are lines of argument to render any part of the Constitution void, but I don't give that particular argument much hope of prevailing in court.
Gov. Christie is now saying it's Daddy Obama's job to save us again. This sounds like "constitutional dictator" material again.
We have to stop entrusting so much in the President, including by asking them to use phony solutions like coins or putting them in the position Mark Field cites. Congress passed a law here and a budget. Sound government requires them to raise the debt ceiling to uphold the "validity of the debt" which should "not be questioned" after all. The power of the purse is in their hands for a reason though the House is not using it very well. They should be put to the test here to force them to do their damn jobs. Needing to explain all of this sounds right. Can we have some fireside chats? Shag will feel all nostalgic. No, seriously, it's important to have the basics explained repeatedly.
Joe, I'll bring the marshmallows but we'll need glare guard if Brett joins us. Here in the Boston area no sweaters are required as today will be in the 70s and the next two in the 80s, the upside of global warming. And the fireside is a reminder of FDR's proposed New Bill of Rights when elected to a 4th term that included the need for healthcare for all. With proper - and affordable - healthcare "We have nothing to fear but living too long." Log on.
"Sound government requires them to raise the debt ceiling to uphold the "validity of the debt" which should "not be questioned" after all."
It's not debt until they spend it. This is like claiming I'm welshing on a debt when I take my grocery list, scratch out steak, and write "chicken". Sound government requires that the government stop living beyond it's means.
It's not debt until they spend it. This is like claiming I'm welshing on a debt when I take my grocery list, scratch out steak, and write "chicken".
Various things that has to be paid for were already authorized and guaranteed. If they aren't funded, the government is in breach. Sound government requires that the government stop living beyond it's means. There's various ways to reduce government spending, though from the time of Hamilton living with some sort of debt was seen as "sound government," but that isn't what this fight is about. Postponing some aspect of ACA* for a year, a law in place to reduce costs in the long run, isn't going to do that. A serious way to deal with spending is not continual posturing and games like this. It is the normal process of legislating. For instance, a significant reduction in military spending. But, there is no demand for that. So, this whole thing is a sham. --- * Reminder: chunks of it is popular, why a serious effort in repealing it won't go anywhere.
Brett with this:
"It's not debt until they spend it." enters his Bizarro World of EEK-o-nomics. If there is a commitment as a result of legislation duly enacted under the Constitution obliging payment, that is debt and when it is spent/paid, it ceases to be debt. Brett's example with his grocery list is not in any way analogous to such legislation. Brett's obligation to pay for his subscription to 'GUNS R US" is a debt until he pays it. Instead of beef, Brett plays chicken.
"Various things that has to be paid for were already authorized and guaranteed. If they aren't funded, the government is in breach." In breach of what?
Brett, you're right that only Congress is authorized to borrow. The dilemma is that both a law (Budget Act of 1974) and a Supreme Court decision (Train v NY) *require* the President to spend what Congress has budgeted. Thus, the President is in a situation where he MUST spend the money but can't borrow to do it. One of those must give; it's only a question of which one.
"Various things that has to be paid for were already authorized and guaranteed. If they aren't funded, the government is in breach." This is, of course, another basic problem, one which means the President (or Congress) would be violating the 14th A.
Mark, the thing being that the Court has yet to rule that the President has to spend money budgeted when he doesn't have it to spend.
Legislation creating departments can and is changed continuously and funding for those departments is up to the discretion of the House. There is not duty to maintain either.
Brett, the plain terms of the Impoundment Act are mandatory: shall. I find it odd that you would take the position that Obama has discretion, which will, of course, include discretion about what to spend the money on. That's as arbitrary a power as any president has ever claimed.
Congress could pass a law requiring the President to balance the Washington monument on his pinky, too, and I wouldn't complain if he demured. If he doesn't have the money to spend, he doesn't have it. I don't demand Presidents do the impossible.
In Train v. New York, the President was refusing to spend money he had available to spend. He was not being asked to do the impossible, he was refusing to execute the law when executing it was perfectly possible. Mind, this particular President has become notorious for his practice of failing to enforce laws he finds inconvenient. Which makes the idea he feels legally bound to spend any money Congress appropriates, no matter what lengths he has to go to, particularly hilarious.
Congress could pass a law requiring the President to balance the Washington monument on his pinky, too, and I wouldn't complain if he demurred. If he doesn't have the money to spend, he doesn't have it. I don't demand Presidents do the impossible.
There is money to do some things. So, as has been discussed by some people, what this does is require Daddy Obama to become Super Congress and determine what to use the money for. Mind, this particular President has become notorious for his practice of failing to enforce laws he finds inconvenient. The examples Brett tends to cite have been shown to be fallacious. But, the reality of the situation is the usual suspects who becry dictator Obama are hypocrites, since they want Obama to all by himself make the hard budgetary choices, while they play chicken. Being an adult among children gets to be tiresome at times.
Wasn't the Affordable Care Act's death panel provision supposed to take care of the Bretts, Bart DePalmas, Louise Gohmerts and Rush Limbaughs of the world? Then again, Limbaugh's own artery clogged diet relieves the need to march him to the death panel.
I guess I'll just have to be happy for the millions of Americans (7.5 million hits on the New York exchange as of 2 PM today) who are now able to purchase previously unobtainable health insurance.
Perhaps, the Republicans can just declare victory.
I'm no lawyer, so forgive my ignorance, but I'm puzzled by comments such as, "It's not debt until they spend it." That sounds rather circular to me.
When one of my customers (let's call that customer Congress) places an order on credit, I consider that a debt. I would not be sympathetic to, "It's not debt until I spend it." Nor would I be sympathetic to a customer (again, let's call him Congress) who places an order on credit, then says he has not yet authorized payment when the debt comes due. In both instances, I would call my customer (Congress) a deadbeat, then go to collections. I also struggle with the idea that working within the executive's administrative authority somehow makes the president a dictator, then telling him to ignore congressional appropriations as he tries to figure out who will (not) be paid. This is all really quite simple from my layman's perspective: Congress has instructed the president on what to spend, and Congress is obliged to pay its bills on time, whether via direct revenues, taking out a loan or minting more money. Anyone who can't grasp that should resign, because he is too stupid to be in Congress.
To address your point, the federal government routinely 'commits' to purchasing things, and then changes it's 'mind' about the purchase. It's one of the perks of being a sovereign state.
One Congress cannot bind another, save in the constitutionally specified case of having borrowed money. People who want lots of spending, and never, ever, want spending reduced, have taken the position that, once the government commits to spending some money, the debt is already incurred, and the decision can not be undone. No, this has never been the case.
Brett, with this:
"One Congress cannot bind another, save in the constitutionally specified case of having borrowed money." reaffirms G.D.' observation in a recent thread at this Blog that Brett is "beyond his depth," a polite way of pointing out our Bwana's (GWH*) shallowness. There are many laws on the books enacted by prior Congresses that remain in effect to bind the current Congress and the Executive as well until the current Congress and President take the steps to change such laws in the manner prescribed by the Constitution. Under the Constitution, the Executive has the responsibility to execute duly enacted laws. Bwana Brett's back of the envelope grocery list example of scratching out steak and substituting chicken is not the way government works. Bwana Brett needs a cad/cam. *Great White Hunter
"until the current Congress and President take the steps to change such laws in the manner prescribed by the Constitution."
I'm not sure why you imagine that the above wasn't exactly what I meant by saying one Congress couldn't bind another: That any subsequent Congress could simple amend the law the previous Congress had enacted. By, say, passing a continuing resolution which didn't fund the program the previous Congress had created.
Under law, the government must pay contracts for products provided or services rendered and its debt. Statutory promises to give away taxpayer money are not contractual obligations and can be withdrawn both by repealing the statute or defunding the program.
"One Congress cannot bind another, save in the constitutionally specified case of having borrowed money."
This is could be relevant to the ACA repeal argument (which is no longer at issue, I guess), but it's irrelevant to the debt ceiling issue. The spending there was authorized by THIS Congress.
Bwana Brett (GWH*) could have explicitly said what he now says he meant. Since the Senate did not act on the House's shutdown vote, nothing got to the President. And what Mark said. I though engineers were precise, except for the pointy-haired Dilbert variety.
*Great White Hunter
Larry Solum's Legal Theory Blog provides the abstract and a link to Adam H. Rosenzweig's "The Article III Fiscal Power" that addresses the role of the Court in resolving fiscal crises resulting from the failure of Congress and the President like what is happening presently. I have downloaded this paper and plan to start reading it today. It runs 39 pages. While the current crises may soon be resolved before I finish, similar crises may occur periodically. Perhaps the Court can play a role.
A budget impasse between the chambers of Congress and the President is the ultimate non-judiciable political question. What would the Court decide under what authority?
Read the paper. I'm a third of the way through despite my eyesight problem. It reads well. At least check the paper's table of contents that raises standing, justiciability, political, etc, aspects.
I readily concede the right to cancel an order. My customers certainly have the right to cancel an order that has not been received, though certain penalties may be applied. But failure to pay after goods or services have been delivered is a serious issue that will at the very least impact the customer's credit rating (I might note that "promises to give taxpayer money away" strikes me as a bit unfair to employees and suppliers, but that's another matter).
Default is damaging in the extreme, more so when it is not necessary. Laying off employees who have acted in good faith is little better. Whatever the legal argument, these things are quite destructive in the real world. Does the federal government spend too much? That's a great topic for discussion, and I would argue it does, though my list of wasteful spending does not necessarily coincide with yours. But shutting down the government and defaulting on debt is not the responsible solution. The correct course is to honor your debts, then hash the rest out through budgeting and appropriations. The Senate Democrats were at fault for not producing a proper budget until this year; the Republicans are at fault for having repeatedly refused to go to conference now that both houses have finally approved budgets. Shame on them all. But the greatest shame goes to those who would use shutdown and default as a weapon when neither is necessary. It demonstrates great arrogance and a disregard for others. Not much of a legal argument, I know. But I think it qualifies as common sense.
For several years I have patiently read Sandy Levinson's articles averring that the Constitution as written is fatally flawed, and unusable as the basis of the well-functioning government of a modern nation-state.
I used to nod and scoff. I am reconsidering. I wish I thought I saw a path to a better Constitution in a nation that contains many Bretts and Barts.
I meant to agree with the idea that one Congress cannot impose decisions on subsequent Congresses. Or to put it another way: What Congress does, Congress can undo. That is entirely fair and quite essential if government is to adjust to changing times.
I might not like a later Congress undoing some program, but that's OK. Even that can be undone, so I'm content. But I'm not so understanding when change is being forced by bomb-throwers. Do what I want, or I'll crash it all? That inspires nothing other than retaliation: Live by the sword, die by the sword. Not good for democracy, not good for the republic. Again, not terribly legalistic. Just what I regard as common sense.
The Rosenzweig paper is a perfect example of the sophistries in which progressives engage to strip powers from the elected branches of the government and grant them to the unelected bureaucracy or courts. This effort to empower the courts to impose taxes and debt to finance the progressive welfare state when Congress refuses to do so is particularly breathtaking example of this anti-democracy. Rosenzweig offers the following syllogism: 1) A past progressive Congress enacted a statute promising to spend money or provide a good or service; 2) A present conservative Congress refuses to tax, borrow or appropriate enough money to enable the President to fulfill the promises to spend made by the preceding statute; 3) Because the President cannot faithfully execute the preceding statute by spending as much as promised, the present Congress's refusal to tax, borrow or spend is actually a violation of the Constitution rather than a perfectly legal exercise of Congress's plenary Article I power of the purse. 4) Thus, to enforce the Constitution, a progressive court may seize the Congress' plenary power of the purse and impose new taxes, borrowing or appropriations to maintain the progressive welfare state. I cannot think of a clearer illustration of why progressivism and socialism are simply incompatible with democracy in general and our constitutional Republic in general.
Our SALADISTA ignores the bases Prof. Rosenaweig provides for what our SALADISTA describes as a syllogism. I'm two-thirds through the paper, hoping to finish it before the Thursday Lunch. Perhaps our SALADISTA will challenge the SCOTUS cases Prof. Rosenzweig relies upon. Our SALADISTA's:
"I cannot think of a clearer illustration of why progressivism and socialism are simply incompatible with democracy in general and our constitutional Republic in general." is a reminder that he yearns for the Gilded Age that he could not enjoy in person. Maybe our SALADISTA has busied himself in CO building an Ark atop his mountain community awaiting the Second Gilded Age.
"I wish I thought I saw a path to a better Constitution in a nation that contains many Bretts and Barts." suggests how our SALADISTA might stock his Ark.
I finished Prof. Rosenzweig's article and recommend it as it touches a lot of constitutional bases, rounding third and heading home - with the Roberts Court awaiting as umpire. Fans of Joseph Heller, as am I, should enjoy this quite readable article. After all, Constitutional Crises are Catch-22s.
Adam Liptak's NYTimes column "Experts See Potential Ways Out for Obama in Debt Ceiling Maze" poo-poos the judicial route. The column refers to a 2012 Columbia Law Review Article by Buchanan and Dorf that Prof. Rosenzweig frequently referred to in his his paper. Eric Posner has a view that Obama can act based upon emergency powers of a president. It seems that Obama does not plan some esoteric means to address this Constitutional Crisis, only the "Bully Pulpit" (shades of Republican President Teddy Roosevelt). That's okay as Obama "borrowed" the earlier GOP healthcare proposal from Heritage that Romney as Governor of MA had enacted in that state.
What would happen if, in response to an announcement by President Obama that he was going to issue debt on the basis suggested here, several potential Republican presidential candidates announced that if elected, they would not honor any debt issued without Congressional authorization? Do you think that might put a damper on the market for such debt?
Conservatives no longer go back to Nixon/Agnew with their Watergate and whatever for support of their "principles." And conservatives have even abandoned the more recent Bush/Cheney for their messes that ended with the Great Recession of 2007-8. So who's left? Why conservatives go back to the days of the Gipper with his Reaganomics, but forget the baggage and garbage his eight (8) years produced that included foreign policy intrigues requiring presidential pardons. Ronald Reagan is still exalted by conservatives, who have had faulty memories for a long time with Nixon/Agnew before abandoning them.
Well, the NYTimes has an obituary on Arnold Burns that includes the Reagan Administration blemish on AG Ed Meese, the "father" of originalism, to remind non-conservatives of the flaws of the Reagan Administration. So perhaps conservatives will have to drop Reagan as well, leaving Ike as their hero, despite Ike's farewell warning of the military-industrial complex that long fueled conservative candidates, including Bush/Cheney. [Note: It was Ike who put the military foot in the Vietnam door.]
Congress could pass a law requiring the President to balance the Washington monument on his pinky, too, and I wouldn't complain if he demurred. If he doesn't have the money to spend, he doesn't have it. I don't demand Presidents do the impossible.
If the President decided to resolve the conflict by borrowing the required amount of money to pay for spending mandated by law, why wouldn't you similarly not complain? After all, Congress asked the President to do the impossible. Why should Congress get to decide how the President resolves that? If Congress wanted a say, shouldn't it have thought about that before passing inconsistent laws?
that the Constitution was not intended to let a political faction in Congress do that. To the extent the debt ceiling or failure to pass continuing resolutions are construed to force the President to do that -- to try to prevent the President from performing LOL代练 lol boosting Cheap Fifa 15 Coins Cheap lol elo boost
Post a Comment
Books by Balkinization Bloggers Linda C. McClain and Aziza Ahmed, The Routledge Companion to Gender and COVID-19 (Routledge, 2024) David Pozen, The Constitution of the War on Drugs (Oxford University Press, 2024) Jack M. Balkin, Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation (Yale University Press, 2024) Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023) Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023) Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin's Press, 2022) Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022) Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021). Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021). Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020) Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020) Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020) Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020). Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020) Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020) Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020) Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019) Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018) Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018) Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018) Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017) Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016) Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015) Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015) Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015) Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014) Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014) Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013) John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013) Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013) Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013) Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013) James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012) Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012) Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012) Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012) Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011) Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011) Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011) Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011) Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011) Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010) Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010) Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010) Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010) Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009) Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009) Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009) Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009) Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007) Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007) Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006) Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006) Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006) Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006) Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006) Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005) Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |