1925 February
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
A General Model of Illicit Market Suppression A
ALL THE SHIPS THAT NEVER SAILED: A GENERAL MODEL OF ILLICIT MARKET SUPPRESSION A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Government. By David Joseph Blair, M.P.P. Washington, DC September 15, 2014 Copyright 2014 by David Joseph Blair. All Rights Reserved. The views expressed in this dissertation do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. ii ALL THE SHIPS THAT NEVER SAILED: A GENERAL MODEL OF TRANSNATIONAL ILLICIT MARKET SUPPRESSION David Joseph Blair, M.P.P. Thesis Advisor: Daniel L. Byman, Ph.D. ABSTRACT This model predicts progress in transnational illicit market suppression campaigns by comparing the relative efficiency and support of the suppression regime vis-à-vis the targeted illicit market. Focusing on competitive adaptive processes, this ‘Boxer’ model theorizes that these campaigns proceed cyclically, with the illicit market expressing itself through a clandestine business model, and the suppression regime attempting to identify and disrupt this model. Success in disruption causes the illicit network to ‘reboot’ and repeat the cycle. If the suppression network is quick enough to continually impose these ‘rebooting’ costs on the illicit network, and robust enough to endure long enough to reshape the path dependencies that underwrite the illicit market, it will prevail. Two scripts put this model into practice. The organizational script uses two variables, efficiency and support, to predict organizational evolution in response to competitive pressures. -
1981 First a Prize Barnum Competition Essay a CASE of NONCOMPLIANCE the PROHIBITION PERIOD in HUMBOLDT COUNTY 1919-1933 Stephan
1981 First A Prize Barnum Competition Essay A CASE OF NONCOMPLIANCE THE PROHIBITION PERIOD IN HUMBOLDT COUNTY 1919-1933 by Stephan Seely A Case of Noncompliance The Prohibition Period in Humboldt County, 1919-1933 Stephan Seely At midnight January 16, 1920, millions of Americans said goodbye to legalized liquor. A new era of clean living, family harmony, full employment, and prosperity was envisioned in the not too distant future. "John is dead. Thank God"1 applauded B.B. Conner, pastor of the Arcata Methodist church, in reference to the death of one John Barleycorn, otherwise knows as corn whiskey. Conner's jubulation over the dry victory could hardly be contained: Virtue has conquered over vice: Truth has triumphed over error: righteousness has been lifted up above sin: justice has defeated wrong: liberty is exalted above tyranny and freedom has driven out oppression. A glad new day has come in the history of a great land and a Stainless Flag will float over a Saloonless Nation. Long may she wave!2 The temperance movement had certainly achieved a remarkable triumph. According to the Eighteenth Amendment, John Barleycorn's death seemed assured. If John ever really did die, even for a brief instant, his astounding recov- ery from that dreadful state is deserving of a place in the annals of medical history. It was, however, to take much more than legislative majorities, constitutional amendments, and idealistic dreams of a liquorless utopia to destroy the traffic in alcoholic beverages. Prohibition prophets, like Conner, were guilty of a fundamental misconception. The Eighteenth Amendment, they assumed, was a final peace treaty with the liquor traffic. -
Filibusters All Have in Common? Warm Up: November 11, 2017 TX History
What do Pirates, Buccaneers, El Chapo, Bank Robbers and Filibusters all have in common? Warm Up: November 11, 2017 TX History FILIBUSTER .A person who wages an unofficial war on a country. They act on their own benefit. They don’t carry out the plan of any government. (FORTUNE SEEKERS-CRIMINALS) OTHER NAMES FOR FILIBUSTERS: •IN OTHER COUNTRIES, FILIBUSTERS ARE KNOWN BY OTHER NAMES: •BUCCANEER-----FRENCH •PIRATES----------SPANISH •FREE-BOOTERS--BRITISH Philip Nolan . Horse trader from the U.S. Claimed he was in Texas to buy and sell horses for Spain . Spain thought he was working for U.S. as a spy . Nolan explored and made maps of Texas . The Spanish ambushed him and killed him near Waco Double-Agent .A person who is hired to spy on one country but is secretly spying on the country that hired him. General James Wilkinson .U.S. General hired by Spain as a double- agent .Hired to take Louisiana and Kentucky from U.S. .Plotted with former U.S. VP Aaron Burr to take those lands for themselves General James Wilkinson . Double crosses Burr and testifies against him . Orders Zebulon Pike to explore Spanish New Mexico . Helped settle a border dispute between Texas and Louisiana . The Neutral Ground Agreement Augustus Magee . U.S. Army Lieutenant sent to Neutral Zone to catch criminals . Angry that he did not get a promised promotion . Joins up with a rebel named Bernardo Gutierrez to free Mexico from Spanish rule . Both men decide to wage war against Spanish rule Gutierrez-Magee Expedition . Gutierrez-Magee attack and capture Nacogdoches in 1812 . -
Popular Impressions of Antebellum Filibusters: Support and Opposition
POPULAR IMPRESSIONS OF ANTEBELLUM FILIBUSTERS: SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION IN THE MEDIA _____________________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University Dominguez Hills ______________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in The Humanities _______________________ by Robert H. Zorn Summer 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TITLE PAGE ……………………………………………………………………………...i TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………………………...ii LIST OF FIGURES ……………………………………………………………………...iii ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………………..iv CHAPTER 1. THE FILIBUSTER IDEOLOGY …………………………….......................................1 2. WILLIAM WALKER AND HENRY CRABB, EXCEPTIONAL AMERICANS …...12 3. THE IMPACT OF THE PRESS ON PUBLIC PERCEPTION ………………………26 4. NON-FICTION’S ROLE IN SUPPORTING THE FILIBUSTER IDENTITY ……...39 5. DEPICTIONS OF FILIBUSTERS IN FICTION AND ART ………...….………….. 47 6. AN AMBIGUOUS LEGACY ……………………………………….……...……….. 56 WORKS CITED ………………………………………………………………………... 64 ii LIST OF FIGURES PAGE 1. National Monument in San Jose Costa Rica Depicting the Defeat of William Walker................................................................53 2. Playbill of 1857 Featuring an Original Musical Theatre Production Based on William Walker .......................................................55 iii ABSTRACT The term “filibuster” in the 1800s was nearly synonymous with, and a variation of, the word “freebooter;” pirate to some, liberator to others. Prompted by the belief in Manifest Destiny, increased tensions regarding slavery, -
("DSCC") Files This Complaint Seeking an Immediate Investigation by the 7
COMPLAINT BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION CBHMISSIOAl INTRODUCTXON - 1 The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee ("DSCC") 7-_. J _j. c files this complaint seeking an immediate investigation by the 7 c; a > Federal Election Commission into the illegal spending A* practices of the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee (WRSCIt). As the public record shows, and an investigation will confirm, the NRSC and a series of ostensibly nonprofit, nonpartisan groups have undertaken a significant and sustained effort to funnel "soft money101 into federal elections in violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended or "the Act"), 2 U.S.C. 5s 431 et seq., and the Federal Election Commission (peFECt)Regulations, 11 C.F.R. 85 100.1 & sea. 'The term "aoft money" as ueed in this Complaint means funds,that would not be lawful for use in connection with any federal election (e.g., corporate or labor organization treasury funds, contributions in excess of the relevant contribution limit for federal elections). THE FACTS IN TBIS CABE On November 24, 1992, the state of Georgia held a unique runoff election for the office of United States Senator. Georgia law provided for a runoff if no candidate in the regularly scheduled November 3 general election received in excess of 50 percent of the vote. The 1992 runoff in Georg a was a hotly contested race between the Democratic incumbent Wyche Fowler, and his Republican opponent, Paul Coverdell. The Republicans presented this election as a %ust-win81 election. Exhibit 1. The Republicans were so intent on victory that Senator Dole announced he was willing to give up his seat on the Senate Agriculture Committee for Coverdell, if necessary. -
What's New in Washington: 10 Things You Need to Know
Having trouble reading this email? View it in your browser Share This Page March 31, 2017 As the Trump presidency completes its first 10 weeks, the administration is celebrating big wins on the regulatory reform front while nursing some wounds from a major defeat on efforts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA). While health care reform is on pause for the moment, Republicans are turning to tax reform as the next major policy priority and continuing to use executive orders (EO) and the Congressional Review Act to roll back Obamaera regulations. Funding for the government expires on April 28, 2017, so Republicans and Democrats will face the first test of bipartisanship in the next few weeks as they seek to fund government agencies, including the Department of Defense, through the end of September. All eyes will be on the Senate next week as the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch takes center stage. Here are 10 things that we believe are worth focusing on from the last two weeks: 1. Gorsuch Nomination 2. Possible Repeal of ISP Security Rules 3. TSA’s New Restrictions on Electronic Devices 4. “Energy Independence” Executive Order 5. Secretary Tillerson in Asia 6. Bilateral Trade and NAFTA Renegotiations 7. FDA User Fees Reauthorization 8. Fiduciary Rule 9. USTR Reports 10. Congressional Appropriations Preview Gorsuch Nomination Amid pressure from his leftleaning base, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (DNY) stepped up his opposition to the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to fill the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court. -
The Senate in Transition Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Nuclear Option1
\\jciprod01\productn\N\NYL\19-4\NYL402.txt unknown Seq: 1 3-JAN-17 6:55 THE SENATE IN TRANSITION OR HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE THE NUCLEAR OPTION1 William G. Dauster* The right of United States Senators to debate without limit—and thus to filibuster—has characterized much of the Senate’s history. The Reid Pre- cedent, Majority Leader Harry Reid’s November 21, 2013, change to a sim- ple majority to confirm nominations—sometimes called the “nuclear option”—dramatically altered that right. This article considers the Senate’s right to debate, Senators’ increasing abuse of the filibuster, how Senator Reid executed his change, and possible expansions of the Reid Precedent. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 632 R I. THE NATURE OF THE SENATE ........................ 633 R II. THE FOUNDERS’ SENATE ............................. 637 R III. THE CLOTURE RULE ................................. 639 R IV. FILIBUSTER ABUSE .................................. 641 R V. THE REID PRECEDENT ............................... 645 R VI. CHANGING PROCEDURE THROUGH PRECEDENT ......... 649 R VII. THE CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION ........................ 656 R VIII. POSSIBLE REACTIONS TO THE REID PRECEDENT ........ 658 R A. Republican Reaction ............................ 659 R B. Legislation ...................................... 661 R C. Supreme Court Nominations ..................... 670 R D. Discharging Committees of Nominations ......... 672 R E. Overruling Home-State Senators ................. 674 R F. Overruling the Minority Leader .................. 677 R G. Time To Debate ................................ 680 R CONCLUSION................................................ 680 R * Former Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy for U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid. The author has worked on U.S. Senate and White House staffs since 1986, including as Staff Director or Deputy Staff Director for the Committees on the Budget, Labor and Human Resources, and Finance. -
The Filibuster and Reconciliation: the Future of Majoritarian Lawmaking in the U.S
The Filibuster and Reconciliation: The Future of Majoritarian Lawmaking in the U.S. Senate Tonja Jacobi†* & Jeff VanDam** “If this precedent is pushed to its logical conclusion, I suspect there will come a day when all legislation will be done through reconciliation.” — Senator Tom Daschle, on the prospect of using budget reconciliation procedures to pass tax cuts in 19961 Passing legislation in the United States Senate has become a de facto super-majoritarian undertaking, due to the gradual institutionalization of the filibuster — the practice of unending debate in the Senate. The filibuster is responsible for stymieing many legislative policies, and was the cause of decades of delay in the development of civil rights protection. Attempts at reforming the filibuster have only exacerbated the problem. However, reconciliation, a once obscure budgetary procedure, has created a mechanism of avoiding filibusters. Consequently, reconciliation is one of the primary means by which significant controversial legislation has been passed in recent years — including the Bush tax cuts and much of Obamacare. This has led to minoritarian attempts to reform reconciliation, particularly through the Byrd Rule, as well as constitutional challenges to proposed filibuster reforms. We argue that the success of the various mechanisms of constraining either the filibuster or reconciliation will rest not with interpretation by † Copyright © 2013 Tonja Jacobi and Jeff VanDam. * Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law, t-jacobi@ law.northwestern.edu. Our thanks to John McGinnis, Nancy Harper, Adrienne Stone, and participants of the University of Melbourne School of Law’s Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies speaker series. ** J.D., Northwestern University School of Law (2013), [email protected]. -
Listening to the RUMRUNNERS: Radio Intelligence During Prohibition This Publication Is a Product of the National Security Agency History Program
Listening to the RUMRUNNERS: Radio Intelligence during Prohibition This publication is a product of the National Security Agency history program. It presents a historical perspective for informational and educational purposes, is the result of independent research, and does not necessarily reflect a position of NSA/CSS or any other U.S. government entity. This publication is distributed free by the National Security Agency. If you would like additional copies, please email your request to [email protected] or write to: Center for Cryptologic History National Security Agency 9800 Savage Road, Suite 6886 Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6886 David Mowry served as a historian, researching and writing histories in the Cryptologic History Series. He began his Agency career as a linguist in 1957 and later (1964-1969) held positions as a linguist and cryptanalyst. From 1969 through 1981 he served in various technical and managerial positions. In the latter part of his career, he was a historian in the Center for Cryptologic History. Mr. Mowry held a BA with regional group major in Germany and Central Europe from the University of California at Berkeley. He passed away in 2005. Cover: The U.S. Coast Guard 75-ft. patrol boat CG-262 towing into San Francisco Harbor her prizes, the tug ELCISCO and barge Redwood City, seized for violation of U.S. Customs laws, in 1927. From Rum War: The U.S. Coast Guard and Prohibition. Listening to the Rumrunners: Radio Intelligence during Prohibition David P. Mowry Center for Cryptologic History Second edition 2014 A motorboat makes contact with the liquor-smuggling British schooner Katherine off the New Jersey coast, 1923. -
Nolita Drinks Menu 2018
For more than 100 years, waves of Italians emigrated from COCKTAILS their homeland to capitalize on their own version of the NOLITA ROSE 13.00 American dream. New York’s Italian Americans settled Belsazar Rose Vermouth, Tanqueray 10 Gin, Tonic Water, Dehydrated Orange Wheel into an area of Lower Manhattan that became known as APEROL SPRITZ PART 2 11.00 Tanqueray Gin, Cointreau Orange, Aperol, Prosecco NoLIta. The city’s Little Italy became a densely packed, MOB MISTRESS 11.50 lively neighbourhood creating a haven for family, tradition, Chambord Black Raspberry Liquor, Tanqueray Gin, Fresh Lemon Juice, Sugar Syrup, Prosecco community and celebration, populated by thousands of new BOSS OF BOSSES 12.00 immigrants in dilapidated old tenements. Roe & Co Irish Whiskey, Hennessy Cognac, Benedictine Liqueur, Antica Formula Carpano Vermouth, Orange Twist NEW YORK PORN STAR 11.50 By the early 1920s, nearly 10,000 Italians lived in the Vanilla Infused Ketel One Vodka, Elderflower Liquor, Homemade Passion Fruit Cordial, Fresh Lime Juice, Prosecco neighbourhood where many of the local residents MULBERRY STREET ART 11.50 controlled New York’s bootlegging rackets to supply the Cucumber Tanqueray, Lillet Blanc, St. Germain Elderflower Liqueur, Fresh Lime Juice, Egg Whites, Cucumber Syrup town with illegal booze. During this time Little Italy was RUM ROW 11.00 home to some of America’s most infamous historic figures Malibu Rum, Captain Morgan Spiced Rum, Fresh Lime Juice, Fresh Pineapple like Lucky Luciano, Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel. Their Juice, Coconut Syrup, Orgeat, Orange Bitters & Angostura Bitters neighbourhood was a place where mobsters wined and HUDSON MULE 11.00 dined their mistresses through the secret speakeasy bars Don Julio Blanco Tequila, Fresh Limes, Sugar, Fresh Mint & Ginger Beer along Mulberry Street. -
1 Failed Filibusters: the Kemper Rebellion, the Burr Conspiracy And
Failed Filibusters: The Kemper Rebellion, the Burr Conspiracy and Early American Expansion Francis D. Cogliano In January 1803 the Congressional committee which considered the appropriation for the Louisiana Purchase observed baldly, “it must be seen that the possession of New Orleans and the Floridas will not only be required for the convenience of the United States, but will be demanded by their most imperious necessities.”1 The United States claimed that West Florida, which stretched south of the 31st parallel from the Mississippi River in the west to the Apalachicola River in the east (roughly the modern state of Louisiana east of the Mississippi, and the Gulf coasts of Mississippi and Alabama, and the western portion of the Florida panhandle) was included in the Louisiana Purchase, a claim denied by the Spanish. The American claim was spurious but the intent behind it was clear. The United States desired control of West Florida so that the residents of the Mississippi Territory could have access to the Gulf of Mexico. Since the American Revolution the region had been settled by Spaniards, French creoles and Anglo-American loyalists. Beginning in the 1790s thousands of emigrants from the United States migrated to the territory, attracted by a generous system of Spanish land grants. An 1803 American government report described the population around Baton Rouge as “composed partly of Acadians, a very few French, and great majority of Americans.” During the first decade of the nineteenth century West Florida became increasingly unstable. In addition to lawful migrants, the region attracted lawless adventurers, including deserters from the United States army and navy, many of whom fled from the nearby territories of Louisiana and Mississippi.2 1 Annals of Congress, 7th Cong. -
Filibusters, Cloture, and the “Nuclear Option”: the Current Debate Over Changing Senate Rules for Approving Judicial Nominations
Filibusters, Cloture, and the “Nuclear Option”: The Current Debate Over Changing Senate Rules for Approving Judicial Nominations March, 2005 Paul E. Stinson Janelle M. Smith Nixon Peabody, LLP © 2005. All Rights Reserved. Filibusters, Cloture, and the “Nuclear Option”: The Current Debate Over Changing Senate Rules for Approving Judicial Nominations March, 2005 © 2005, Nixon Peabody, LLP. All Rights Reserved. Abstract This background research paper examines the possible use of a simple majority vote rule to end filibusters of federal judicial nominees in the United States Senate. Recently, political controversy surrounding filibusters of presidential judicial nominations has prompted some Senators to suggest the use of a Senate procedure for ending filibusters by simple majority vote. Currently, Senate Standing Rule XXII requires a 60-Senator majority for ending debate upon a nomination, and a 67-Senator vote for ending debate on a motion to alter the Senate Rules themselves. This procedure, deemed the “constitutional” option by its supporters and the “nuclear” option by its detractors, is essentially a means for bypassing the Standing Rules through alternate Senate procedures such as rulings from the Chair, motions to table, modifications of Senate precedents, and Standing Orders. The debates over both the use of the filibuster and the use of the nuclear option raise significant questions of constitutional interpretation, the historical record, and the nature of the Senate itself. This paper presents an outline of the major issues surrounding both debates, as well as a description of the option and how it might be implemented. Part I presents a brief introduction. Part II explores the history of the filibuster.