Voir Dire

For those soccer fans out there (and you know who you are):

FDR opened the New York’s World Fair today in 1939 - the 150th anniversary of George Washington’s Inauguration.

From henceforth in our history the thirtieth day of April will have a dual significance: the Inauguration of the First President of the United States, which began the Executive Branch of the Federal Government, and the opening of the New York World’s Fair of 1939.

FDR saw the fair as symbolizing how the US was moving forward while Europe was stuck with old divisions and enmities (perhaps a little optimistically on both counts):

Often, I think, we Americans offer up a silent prayer that on the Continent of Europe, from which the American hemisphere was principally colonized, the years to come will break down many barriers to intercourse between nations—barriers which may be historic, but which so greatly, through the centuries, have led to strife and have hindered friendship and normal intercourse.

The United States stands today as a completely homogeneous nation, similar in its civilization from Coast to Coast and from North to South, united in a common purpose to work for the greatest good of the greatest number, united in the desire to move forward to better things in the use of its great resources of nature and its even greater resources of intelligent, educated manhood and womanhood, and united in its desire to encourage peace and good will among all the nations of the earth.

The high points of the Fair were undoubtedly Elektro the Smoking Robot and the Aquacade:

April 29, 1974: Nixon released additional Watergate tapes, first saying:

I have asked for this time tonight in order to announce my answer to the House Judiciary Committee’s subpoena for additional Watergate tapes, and to tell you something about the actions I shall be taking tomorrow–about what I hope they will mean to you and about the very difficult choices that were presented to me.

But admitting …

But the problem I confronted was this: Unless a President can protect the privacy of the advice he gets, he cannot get the advice he needs.

This principle is recognized in the constitutional doctrine of executive privilege, which has been defended and maintained by every President since Washington and which has been recognized by the courts, whenever tested, as inherent in the Presidency. I consider it to be my constitutional responsibility to defend this principle.

Three factors have now combined to persuade me that a major unprecedented exception to that principle is now necessary:

First, in the present circumstances, the House of Representatives must be able to reach an informed judgment about the President’s role in Watergate.

Second, I am making a major exception to the principle of confidentiality because I believe such action is now necessary in order to restore the principle itself, by clearing the air of the central question that has brought such pressures upon it–and also to provide the evidence which will allow this matter to be brought to a prompt conclusion.

Third, in the context of the current impeachment climate, I believe all the American people, as well as their representatives in Congress, are entitled to have not only the facts but also the evidence that demonstrates those facts.

But not admitting …

Incidentally, these transcripts–covering hours upon hours of conversations-should place in somewhat better perspective the controversy over the 18 1/2 minute gap in the tape of a conversation I had with Mr. Haldeman back in June of 1972.

Now, how it was caused is still a mystery to me and, I think, to many of the experts as well. But I am absolutely certain, however, of one thing: that it was not caused intentionally by my secretary, Rose Mary Woods, or any of my White House assistants. And certainly, if the theory were true that during those 18 1/2 minutes, Mr. Haldeman and I cooked up some sort of a Watergate coverup scheme, as so many have been quick to surmise, it hardly seems likely that in all of our subsequent conversations–many of them are here-which neither of us ever expected would see the light of day, there is nothing remotely indicating such a scheme; indeed, quite the contrary.

[I'm here to stay ...]

As for myself, I intend to go forward, to the best of my ability, with the work that you elected me to do. I shall do so in a spirit perhaps best summed up a century ago by another President when he was being subjected to unmerciful attack. Abraham Lincoln said:

“I do the very best I know how–the very best I can; and I mean to keep doing so until the end. If the end brings me out all right, what is said against me won’t amount to anything. If the end brings me out wrong, ten angels swearing I was right would make no difference.”

Retrospect is a wonderful thing. Lee Sigelman used this to full advantage in his 2001 Political Communication article on the “onstage” and “backstage” versions of Nixon and Johnson. What’s neat about the paper is how alike the two were onstage versus their backstage personas.

We’ve been doing a lot with “onstage” rhetoric (for good reasons, I might add), but “backstage” rhetoric has taken a well, backseat. Or should we just leave backstage rhetoric to the historians?

The New York Times’ Deborah Solomon hits Ted Sorenson with ten questions; some on presidential speeches. Here are some choice Q & As:

You served John F. Kennedy for 11 years, as his counselor, adviser and legendary speechwriter. Why did you choose to be so modest in your forthcoming memoir, “Counselor: A Life at the Edge of History,” in which you decline to take the least credit for anything he achieved? I’m glad to hear you say that becauseI’m afraid people will read this book and say, “Oh, Sorensen did it all, or he claims he did it all.”

As the so-called poet of Camelot, are there any lines or phrases even one you are willing to claim authorship of? I acknowledge that I played a large part in the American University commencement speech on peace on June 10, 1963. “What kind of a peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war.”

What do you make of Hillary’s comment that Obama’s promises and speeches are “just words”? Kennedy’s rhetoric when he was president turned out to be a key to his success. His mere words about Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba helped resolve the worst crisis the world has ever known without the U.S. having to fire a shot.

Nowadays, the words of politicians seem more about constructing images than resolving issues. We have a president now who doesn’t know the meaning of retreat. In fact he doesn’t know the meanings of lots of words.

What about Bill Clinton’s oratorical abilities? Bill’s not quite the persuasive communicator he used to be.

Today is James Monroe’s birthday.

One of Monroe’s greatest challenges was the Panic of 1819, the first major financial crisis in the U.S. Economists still debate the causes of the panic, but most agree that Monroe could do little in trying to manage the economy. Instead, people point to Langdon Cheves’ pivotal role as president of the Second Bank of the U.S. - although it may be that “the bank was saved and the people were ruined”.

Whatever the causes, the consequences were real: one was the rise of Andrew Jackson, who vetoed the re-charter of the Bank in 1832. One has to wonder what a “failure to produce” by the Fed these days would do for its vaunted reputation and independence.

No, I haven’t seen the movie yet, but today’s Edward R. Murrow’s birthday.

In 1954, Eisenhower was asked:

Q. Joseph Harsch, Christian Science Monitor and NBC: Mr. President, would you care to say anything to us about the loyalty and patriotism of Edward R. Murrow?

THE PRESIDENT. I am going to say nothing at all about that.

First of all, I don’t comment about people, I don’t comment about things of which I know nothing.

I will say this: I have known this man for many years; he has been one of the men I consider my friend among your profession. That is what I do know about him.

So far as indulging in philosophical discussion, I can’t remember any instance; but I do say that he has been one of those that over the years, in the war, when he was working in London, and so on, I always thought of him as a friend.

The New York Times has an interesting article on ghost writing in medical academia - here’s the lead in:

The drug maker Merck drafted dozens of research studies for a best-selling drug, then lined up prestigious doctors to put their names on the reports before publication, according to an article to be published Wednesday in a leading medical journal.  The article, based on documents unearthed in lawsuits over the pain drug Vioxx, provides a rare, detailed look in the industry practice of ghostwriting medical research studies that are then published in academic journals.

Read more from the NYT story here. The JAMA article can be found here. Hat tip to Science & Law Blog.

Flat World Knowledge has a new business model: free textbooks. They’re not the first (they won’t be the last), but they’re making a major investment in digital distribution.

So much for Texas campaign contributions.

In 1800, Congress passed the bill that created the Library of Congress. Clinton spoke a number of times about the power of the Internet - and often used the Library of Congress as an example of the Internet’s ability to spread information far and wide. (One reason for using that example was the 2000 celebration of the Bicentennial Library of Congress.)

In 1901, Teddy Roosevelt spoke about the Library:

In these efforts they naturally look for assistance to the Federal library, which, though still the Library of Congress, and so entitled, is the one national library of the United States. Already the largest single collection of books on the Western Hemisphere, and certain to increase more rapidly than any other through purchase, exchange, and the operation of the copyright law, this library has a unique opportunity to render to the libraries of this country–to American scholarship–service of the highest importance. It is housed in a building which is the largest and most magnificent yet erected for library uses. Resources are now being provided which will develop the collection properly, equip it with the apparatus and service necessary to its effective use, render its bibliographic work widely available, and enable it to become, not merely a center of research, but the chief factor in great co-operative efforts for the diffusion of knowledge and the advancement of learning.

My favorite Internet use of the Library is the American Memory collection. For example, here are early photos of the Library and its construction:

Finally has a holder: Joseph Haslag, who has been at Missouri since 2000.

Today is James Buchanan’s birthday.

Most remember him for overseeing the collapse of the Union, but in 1857 his most pressing concern was the rapid spread of financial panic that lead to many bank and business failures. The panic didn’t last long, but by the end of 1857 the impact on government finances was clear:

It is our duty to inquire what has produced such unfortunate results and whether their recurrence can be prevented. In all former revulsions the blame might have been fairly attributed to a variety of cooperating causes, but not so upon the present occasion. It is apparent that our existing misfortunes have proceeded solely from our extravagant and vicious system of paper currency and bank credits, exciting the people to wild speculations and gambling in stocks. These revulsions must continue to recur at successive intervals so long as the amount of the paper currency and bank loans and discounts of the country shall be left to the discretion of 1,400 irresponsible banking institutions, which from the very law of their nature will consult the interest of their stockholders rather than the public welfare.

The government was left short in covering its expenditures, but couldn’t print money to make up the difference. Its hands were tied because it had to back the dollar:

It is one of the highest and most responsible duties of Government to insure to the people a sound circulating medium, the amount of which ought to be adapted with the utmost possible wisdom and skill to the wants of internal trade and foreign exchanges. If this be either greatly above or greatly below the proper standard, the marketable value of every man’s property is increased or diminished in the same proportion, and injustice to individuals as well as incalculable evils to the community are the consequence.

Buchanan made these statements to Congress in December 1857. The Union was beginning to unravel, yet his main problem at that time was keeping financial peace. He devoted the first quarter of his annual message to the issues of specie and government finances.

Presidents don’t often focus on bank solvency, but Buchanan had to because he didn’t have a Bernanke to do it for him.

April 22, 1954 marked the start of television broadcasts of the Senate Army-McCarthy hearings. The upshot: it was the beginning of the end for McCarthy.

(more…)

Possibly, but unlikely according to Dan Drezner. See the story here and audio commentary is also provided on the website. Can the Oakland A’s keep moneyball working? Here’s a snippet.

But as sabermetric methods have become more accepted in the boardrooms of baseball, Beane and other innovators have fewer inefficiencies to exploit. Since the publication of “Moneyball,” almost every team in the major leagues has incorporated sabremetric thinking into their organization.

The Boston Red Sox won two World Series in the past four years while employing Bill James, the godfather of the sabermetrics community. Other franchises around the league have also hired young sabermetrics devotees to run their front offices. The result: The popularization of sabermetrics has left Beane with less of an advantage — it’s harder to find diamonds in the rough when everyone else is mining the same territory. The A’s are not struggling because of “Moneyball”’s failure — they are struggling because of its success.

Could it be that the same would be true for academic institutions - as Moneyball principles become more pervasive can schools no longer exploit inefficiencies of other institutions (because they are harder to find)?

To Max Weber, born in 1864.

Some light reading from Weber: Politics as a Vocation, and Science as a Vocation. I think sometimes we forget that Weber was a sociologist, not an organization theorist.

My favorite presidential quote of Weber:

In 1918, the famous German sociologist Max Weber said that politics is the long and slow boring of hard boards.

I’m sure there’s a joke in there somewhere.

In 1971, the Supreme Court:

upheld today the constitutionality of busing as a means to “dismantle the dual school systems” of the South.

Now, in 2007, we’re looking for alternatives to busing:

The end of busing of primary and secondary school students has been a major setback for integration of public schools in the USA. The purpose of this paper is not to offer an alternative to busing; regrettably, no obvious alternative stands out. Rather, it is to offer some social, legal and economic background to help the reader consider, and perhaps propose, realistic alternatives that would reduce both racial and economic segregation in our schools and society. The paper is divided into three sections. The first offers background information useful for better understanding and evaluating the end of busing and school resegregation. The second section focuses on an important parallel between racial and economic discrimination. The closing section introduces considerations important for anticipating reactions to, and the costs and benefits of, alternatives to busing for reintegrating schools, as well as several recommendations to which those considerations can be applied.

I am amazed how little has been written on busing since the mid-1970s.

The Brennan Center for Justice recounts a recent conference at Fordham Law School on state judicial elections which featured former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O’Connor and Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer.  At issue were the implications of state judicial elections for judicial independence and citizens’ views of courts. O’Connor kicked things off:

O’Connor said she remembered seeing  “Impeach Earl Warren” signs in New Mexico and Arizona when she was growing up, and said that in her final years on the Supreme Court, attacks on judges increased, including proposals for mass impeachments of judges involved in the Terri Schiavo case, or proposals to cut judicial terms short, or a particularly disconcerting movement towards “Jail4Judges,” a campaign to allow citizen panels to review rulings from the bench, with the ability to even imprison—as the name tantalizingly implies—those who made bad decisions. These developments were “very depressing,” she said, and so she decided to use her retirement to call attention to these attacks on judges.

“An independent judiciary is an essential bedrock principle, and we’re losing it.”  The reason was in part the fact that civics and government are not a requirement for high school graduation. “One third of Americans can’t name the three branches of government, but two thirds can name a judge on American Idol!” …..

She went on. “No other nation in the world elects judges.” She pointed to Georgina Woods, the chief justice of Ghana, sitting in the front row, as if to illustrate her point.

“Why are we tolerating this? What are we going to do about it?” Then, seeming to remember that the initial question posed to her several minutes before was “why did you convene this conference,” she added, “That’s why,” and sat back in her chair. The audience laughed and applauded.

Justice Breyer then provided some thoughts on the matter:

Breyer took the floor next. Keeping state courts impartial is a major issue, but try talking about it with people “and they’re asleep after five minutes.” He recounted a trip to Russia he had made when serving as an appellate judge for the First Circuit after he was appointed by Carter. Meeting with Russian judges from across the country, he was surprised to hear their accounts of “telephone justice,” when the party boss calls and tells judges which way to vote. “They asked me, ‘do you have telephone justice in the United States,’ and I had to explain to them that no, the President wouldn’t call you. He’d be crazy to do that.”

More and more people today think that judges make decisions based on politics rather than the law, he added. O’Connor began to interrupt, then changed her mind. “No, no,” she said, waving her hand at him, “you tell them.”

He continued. “It’s extraordinary that three hundred million people have agreed to settle disputes using the law, not sticks and stones on the street, like they do in some places.”

Hat tip to ACS Blog.

The US went off the gold standard:

THE PRESIDENT: What is the news?

Q. There has been some talk again about inflation. I don’t know . . .

THE PRESIDENT: How do you define inflation?

Q. I don’t know what it is. (Laughter)

THE PRESIDENT: Neither do I. I have gotten to the point where even a cigarette tastes bad.

Q. That is a sign of a cold?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, it certainly is.

Has the State Department given you the social program yet?

Q. Yes, it has.

THE PRESIDENT: That is the only news of any real importance that I know of.

I will tell you another thing there is today. If I were writing a story, here is the way I would put it: I don’t know whether you can hear me at the back of the room—my voice isn’t particularly strong this morning, since I have a cold. If I were going to write a story, I would write it along the lines of the decision that was actually taken last Saturday, but which really goes into effect today, by which the Government will not allow the exporting of gold, except earmarked gold for foreign Governments of course, and balances in commercial exchange. That is for straight movement.

The whole problem before us is to raise commodity prices. For the last year, the dollar has been shooting up and we decided to quit competition. The general effect probably will be an increase in commodity prices. It might well be called the next step in the general program.

But wait!

Q. Mr. President, is it still the desire of the United States to go back on the international gold standard?

THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely; one of the things we hope to do is to get the world as a whole back on some form of gold standard. . . .

The dollar over the last year (in Euros):

The New York Times has an intriguing article on how the city of New York was influenced by and how it reacted to the cholera epidemics of the 18th century. It is an interesting case study for students of public policy and perhaps topical given recent threats of epidemics.

Despite the epidemics of ’32 and ’49, people still flocked to New York and other teeming cities. But the first outbreak bolstered support for the Croton Aqueduct system to bring clean upstate water to the city, a project, completed in 1842, that led to the phasing out of private and neighborhood wells that were often polluted with human and animal waste. In 1849, the municipal government banished more than 20,000 pigs to the outer reaches of the city. A similar effort in previous years had provoked riots, but this time a public chastened by epidemic complied.

Finally, after the work of Dr. Snow in London and a lesser cholera outbreak in New York in 1866, the Metropolitan Board of Health was established with doctors in commanding roles and broad powers to clean up the city. Inspectors went to houses and burned clothing of people who had just died. They cleared the filth, spread lime and instructed survivors in proper sanitation.

Cities had learned, or should have, that epidemics as a consequence of urbanization were their responsibility to prevent and control.

Hat tip: Chris Blattman.

Says Nature. The Chronicle sums it up:

In an online survey of 1,400 readers, Nature found that 20 percent had taken pharmaceuticals for the nonmedical purpose of improving their concentration, focus, and memory. Most of the people who responded to the survey were involved in science, engineering, or education. “The numbers suggest a significant amount of drug-taking among academics,” the magazine said.

The survey focused on three drugs: Ritalin, the anti-sleep drug Provigil, and beta blockers (which are used to treat cardiac conditions but can also reduce anxiety). Over 60 percent of the people who admitted using the drugs for cognitive reasons said they used Ritalin, while 44 percent said they used Provigil, which is known generically as modafinil. Some 15 percent said they used beta blockers.

Respondents who said they used such drugs were evenly split between people who said they took them daily, weekly, monthly, and once a year. Nine out of 10 of those respondents said they used the medications to improve concentration and attention. Many said they took them to enhance memory, problem-solving, and planning.

Confessions welcome in the comments section.

… according to UC Irvine-Law founding Dean, Irwin Chemerinsky can be found on Madisonian.net. On the role of interdisciplinary instruction:

At the same time, law schools can do a much better job of providing interdisciplinary instruction to law students. The most important change in legal education since I was a law student has been the recognition of the importance of other disciplines to the understanding and shaping of law. Most law schools now have faculty who have advanced training in fields such as economics, philosophy, and psychology.
However, while faculty scholarship has become much more interdisciplinary, there has been little effort to integrate other disciplines into the legal curriculum. For most students, it is hit or miss depending on their instructors’ interests. Law schools should better ensure that all students receive some instruction in these other disciplines.
Interestingly, law school faculties have become interdisciplinary primarily by hiring within the law schools experts in these other areas. At most universities, faculty in the other disciplines have minimal involvement in the law schools. At the University of California, Irvine, there are already superb faculty working in areas such as criminology, law, and society, law and economics, law and psychology, law and sociology, and environmental law. It is crucial to integrate them into the law school from the outset and to have law faculty involved in these other disciplines.
Law schools also must do a better job of dealing with science and technology. The practice of law deals with these issues constantly, but law schools do not do nearly enough to prepare students to deal with legal matters involving science and technology.
As part of our interdisciplinary effort, the University of California, Irvine, School of Law will emphasize areas such as law and medicine, law and society, and law and humanities. We hope to hire key faculty in these areas and also establish dual degree programs. The presence of a significant number of students engaged in interdisciplinary work, by itself, will change the nature of law schools.

Hat tip to Leiter Reports