Bits and Pieces to Ponder
Over this last weekend I attended the local Women’s March. We had several speakers with important messages on Amnesty, Women’s Health Issues, a local candidate for State Senator, and a lawyer there to talk about the Equal Rights Amendment.
The ERA, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment, first introduced to Congress in 1923, failed. In 1971 it was reintroduced and by March of 1972, was ratified by both houses of Congress. Let me put that into perspective. I was 17 years old the year congress ratified the amendment. Then it was up to the individual states to ratify the amendment. To be honest, I really thought this was a no brainer. Of course we want women to have equal rights under the Constitution. Right?
Apparently not. Arbitrarily, Congress set a ratification deadline on the amendment. Totally unnecessary as the Constitution has no provision for deadlines. However, the 1979 deadline seemed achievable. It moved right along to be honest. Through 1977 thirty-five states had ratified it. Only three more states were needed to ratify it and there were still two years to go on the deadline. Unfortunately, it didn’t happen.
Even with wide, bipartisan support in Congress and from Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter, opposition began to grow. Now here’s a blast from the past. The biggest opponent and major force behind the opposition was Phyllis Schafly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phyllis_Schlafly. The ultra-conservative lawyer argued that the ERA would disadvantage housewives, cause women to be drafted and would cause women to lose their children in divorce cases. On the other side, feminists feared that the ERA would eliminate protections for women in the workplace.
Since then, the amendment had lain dormant until 40 years after the last ratification and 38 years after the arbitrary deadline, Nevada ratified it 2017, Illinois in 2018, and on January 15, 2020, Virginia ratified it. A great thing had been accomplished but hardly a word has appeared in the media about it. There are a few reasons why.
First of all, immediately after the 38th state ratified it, a lawsuit was filed to dismiss the amendment because we were 38 years past the deadline. Our speaker noted that the filing was weak because there is no Constitutional requirement for a deadline. Additionally, at least five states want to revoke their ratification. That’s also murky legal ground as there is no Constitutional authority allowing a state to revoke their ratifications. Our speaker noted that several states over the years have tried to revoke approval for the 13th amendment, abolishing slavery, and the 19th amendment granting women the right to vote. They were all held to their ratifications.
So, we’ll see what happens. I’m now in my 60’s. This amendment has been too long coming. I encourage anyone reading this to call your state representatives in both houses to encourage them to make this constitutional amendment a reality.
In other news, we have to mention the impeachment of Donald Trump. Last week the articles of impeachment were delivered to the U.S. Senate. The house members serving as managers (the prosecution) of the Senate trial of the President, were named and required to have their brief to the Senate by 5pm on Saturday the 18th. By Monday noon, the Senate lawyers for the President are required to have their briefs to the Senate. I’m not sure what will happen after that. I would suppose there would be some sort of vote about the use of witnesses and documents in the trial. Some sort of vote on the procedures the trial will use may have to be taken. In the meantime, a great deal of documentation and an explosive witness have surfaced that damns the President, the Vice President, the U.S. Attorney General, and Senator Nunes as major players in this melodrama.
To add to the fun facts lining up against the Republican Administration, a watchdog group has declared that the President’s withholding of duly approved appropriations for the defense of Ukraine, was illegal. That certainly throws a monkey-wrench into Republican party claims that this impeachment is a waste of time because there was nothing criminal about the President’s actions. Now there is a crime. As an aside, will this open the door for more criminal liability for the President because he misappropriated Congressionally approved funding for military projects to use to build his over-promised wall on the southern border? I can personally hope so.
I’ve mentioned before that I write these posts a few days in advance, so I have time to reread them to correct errors. In that time I’ve seen a couple of posts about the President, first of all, considering eliminating the law that forbids U.S. businesses and the government from using bribes to conduct overseas business. https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-proposed-major-cut-state-department-program-corruption-2019-10 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Corrupt_Practices_Act I know it seems like that would be a good thing. It would even the playing field, so to speak, for U.S. businesses. Bribery is a way of life in many countries. Here’s where I have a problem. We’re supposed to be working from a higher place, ethically. The United States is supposed to be an example of fairness and freedom from corruption.
In the U.S. this law is known as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. It was enacted in December 1977. The United States was the world leader in this anti-corruption legislation until 2010 when the United Kingdom passed their own law known as the U.K. Bribery Act. Other nations have also passed similar legislation so that there is a world-wide effort to stem bribery, corruption, and other malfeasance, in an effort to create trust in the integrity of the international business community.
All of the laws internationally seek to curb both bribery and graft. One part of the FCPA stood out for me. “Because the Act concerns the intent of the bribery rather than the amount, there is no requirement of materiality. Offering anything of value as a bribe, whether cash or non-cash items, is prohibited.” Information on the word “Materiality” can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materiality_(law). Hold this thought.
A second small article noted that the President has been whining to his cronies at Mar-A-Lago, that he doesn’t understand why this is happening. By this, he means the impeachment. (Note: I’m sorry, I can’t find the post I’d read but there are plenty of searchable “complaint” posts from the President for you to choose from.) Anyway, if he’d take a look at his record, for example, the rolling back of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, he might understand. In his entire life he’s never played fair. None of his cronies and oligarch friends play fair so how could he understand that for the rest of us, playing by the rules, not cheating, avoiding corruption, graft, and greed, is the only way to go. The Presidency is a role of service and the Trump family has absolutely no idea what the word means.
It is my sincere hope that the Senate Republicans abide by their oaths for the impeachment trial and refer back to the ethics and morals that they’re supposed to be upholding. You, dear reader, can help by calling your Senators and reminding them of who they work for and just what behavior you find acceptable. Email if you don’t want to call. It’s not just in the Senate’s hands. It’s in your hands, too.
