DOCSLIB.ORG

Developing Strong Government Relations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Developing Strong Government Relations Developing Strong Government Relations 122nd International Moose Convention Nashville Municipal Auditorium Nashville, Tennessee Tuesday, July 6, 2010 T. Michael Leuer General Counsel Good Morning. The issue that brings me to the podium this morning is how do we develop a strong government relations program. As usual, there are two answers, the simple answer and the more complex answer. The simple answer is passion and perseverance. Passion and perseverance. Let me share with you an example of the simple answer. There was a wise man who used to go to the ocean to do his writing. He had a habit of walking on the beach before he began his work. One day as he was walking along the shore, he looked a ways down the beach and saw a human figure moving like a dancer. He smiled to himself at the thought of someone who had danced to the day, and so he walked faster to catch up. As he got closer, he noticed that the figure was that of a young girl, and that she was not dancing at all. The young girl was reaching down to the sand, picking up small objects and throwing them into the ocean. He came closer still and called out, “Good Morning, may I ask what you are doing?” The young girl looked up and replied, “throwing starfish into the ocean.” “I must ask, why are you throwing starfish into the ocean?” asked the somewhat startled wise man. To this, the young girl replied, “the sun is up and the tide is going out, if I do not throw them back in, they will die.” Upon hearing this, the wise man commented “but young lady, do you not realize there are miles and miles of beach and there are starfish along every mile, you can’t possibly make a difference!” At this, the young girl bent down, picked up another starfish and threw it into the ocean. As it met the water she said, “I made a difference to that one.” Passion and Perseverance. I know I am “preaching to the choir” today, or as our Moose International Director of Security aptly referred to you as the “water carriers”. We need to recruit members to our Lodges’ Government Relations Committee who have a passion and will persevere working with government officials on the issues of importance to our fraternity. What a pleasure and treat to be spending the Fourth of July, Independence Day, in Nashville, Tennessee. I understand that Nashville’s fireworks display over the Cumberland River is one of the top ten Independence Day Celebrations in the country. Let me take an interesting detour on why we come to celebrate Independence Day. This detour will furnish some background and insight on the more complex answer of how we develop a strong government relations program. “Taxation without representation” was the battle cry of the thirteen little colonies in America that were forced to pay taxes to the King of England without representation in Parliament. The First Continental Congress met in 1774 to coordinate relations between England and the thirteen self‐governing colonies. The pleas of the First Continental Congress for some type of representation were ignored by England, and the British Army came to Boston as a show of force. In 1775, the colonies formed the Second Continental Congress, who then authorized a continental army. In 1776, the Second Continental Congress, who had been declared traitors by the English Parliament, formally declared their independence as one new nation, the United Stated of America, claiming their own sovereignty and rejecting any allegiances to the British monarchy. The legal separation of the American colonies from England occurred on July 2nd, when the Second Continental Congress voted in a closed session to approve a resolution of independence that had been proposed in June by Richard Henry Lee of Virginia. Also in June in Philadelphia, a committee was working with the express purpose of drafting a document that would explain their decision to sever ties with England. The Committee of Five, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman, and Robert Livingston, drafted the Declaration of Independence. The Second Continental Congress debated and revised the Declaration, and the final version was officially adopted on July 4, 1776. A day earlier, John Adams had written to his wife Abigail the following: “The second day of July, 1776 will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as a day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, balls, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more.” Adams prediction was off by two days. From the outset, Americans celebrated on July 4th, the date shown on the much‐publicized Declaration of Independence, rather than on July 2nd, the date the resolution of independence was approved in closed session of Congress. We have all learned in our classrooms, the grade schools, high schools and universities across this country, the lessons that courageous men and women taught England two hundred thirty five years ago at Lexington Green and beyond. They were determined to take a stand and fight against the proposition that the English government could tax the colonies with giving them representation in the Parliament. Soon thereafter, a Constitutional Convention was convened in Philadelphia to draft a constitution for the newly formed United States of America. The goal was to create a government with enough power to act on a national level, but without so much power that fundamental rights would be at risk. The Convention sought to accomplish this by separating the power of the government into three branches, and then included checks and balances on those powers to assure that no one branch gained supremacy. With the details and the language decided, the document needed to be ratified by nine of the thirteen colonies, now states. The process allowed for much debate in the states. During the debates, two factions emerged; the Federalists, who supported adoption of the Constitution, and the Anti‐Federalists who opposed adoption of the Constitution. The principal point of contention between the two factions was a perceived failure to list basic civil rights in the constitution. The solution was known as the Massachusetts Compromise, in which four states ratified the constitution, but at the same time sent recommendations for amendments. James Madison introduced twelve amendments to the first Congress. Ten of these amendments became what we now call the Bill of Rights. The citizens demanded a guarantee and listing of their basic freedoms. The First Amendment, perhaps the best known of these basic civil rights and freedoms, reads; “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This is one of the most important amendments, if not the most important, to our fraternity. It is the foundation on which we are built. In the words of the U.S. Supreme Court, “this Court has recognized that because the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment is designed to secure individual liberty, it must afford the formation and preservation of certain kinds of highly personal relationships, a substantial measure of sanctuary from unjustified interference by the State. These highly personal relationships are distinguished by such attributes as relative smallness, a high degree of selectivity to begin and maintain the affiliation, and seclusion from others in critical aspects of the relationship. As a general matter, only relationships with these sorts of qualities are likely to reflect the considerations that have led to an understanding of freedom of association as an intrinsic element of personal liberty. Conversely, an association lacking these qualities, such as a large business enterprise, seems remote from these concerns giving rise to this constitutional protection.” The courageous men and women of the Revolutionary War secured our freedom of association. The US Supreme Court has acknowledged and upheld this First Amendment right. How are we going to ensure this important right and the many other rights our fraternity now enjoys will survive our fraternity’s two hundredth birthday? Today, we can appreciate that we, the Loyal Order of Moose, are protected by and enjoy the freedoms granted by the First Amendment: we can assemble as a private association; we can choose the individuals with whom we want to include in our fraternity; we can share ideas and common beliefs; and we can govern ourselves without interference from the Federal, State and Provincial Governments. Tomorrow, we, the members and lodges of the Loyal Order of Moose, must go out and preserve and protect these freedoms. It is the Government Relations Committee that will be our eyes and ears, to see and hear, and understand and fight the inevitable assaults on our freedoms and rights. The purpose of the Government Relations Committee is to inform, educate and partner with government to influence the decisions that impact us. Playing a role in the decision making process of government is key to our fraternity’s ability to achieve its mission and to effect change. Section 35.5 of the General Laws states that at the first regular meeting after being installed, the Governor shall appoint a Chairman of the Government Relations Committee. The General Laws also requires that this committee is a functioning committee.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • This Constitution: a Bicentennial Chronicle, Nos. 14-18
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 300 290 SO 019 380 AUTHOR Mann, Shelia, Ed. TITLE This Constitution: A Bicentennial Chronicle, Nos. 14-18. INSTITUTION American Historical Association, Washington, D.C.; American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C.; Project '87, Washington, DC. SPONS AGENCY National Endowment for the Humanities (NFAH), Washington, D.C. PUB DATE 87 NOTE 321p.; For related document, see ED 282 814. Some photographs may not reproduce clearly. AVAILABLE FROMProject '87, 1527 New Hampshire Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036 nos. 13-17 $4.00 each, no. 18 $6.00). PUB TYPE Collected Works - Serials (022) -- Historical Materials (060) -- Guides - Classroom Use - Guides (For Teachers) (052) JOURNAL CIT This Constitution; n14-17 Spr Sum Win Fall 1987 n18 Spr-Sum 1988 EDRS PRICE MFO1 Plus Postage. PC Not Available from EDRS. DESCRIPTORS Class Activities; *Constitutional History; *Constitutional Law; History Instruction; Instructioral Materials; Lesson Plans; Primary Sources; Resource Materials; Secondary Education; Social Studies; United States Government (Course); *United States History IDENTIFIERS *Bicentennial; *United States Constitution ABSTRACT Each issue in this bicentennial series features articles on selected U.S. Constitution topics, along with a section on primary documents and lesson plans or class activities. Issue 14 features: (1) "The Political Economy of tne Constitution" (K. Dolbeare; L. Medcalf); (2) "ANew Historical Whooper': Creating the Art of the Constitutional Sesquicentennial" (K. Marling); (3) "The Founding Fathers and the Right to Bear Arms: To Keep the People Duly Armed" (R. Shalhope); and (4)"The Founding Fathers and the Right to Bear Arms: A Well-Regulated Militia" (L. Cress). Selected articles from issue 15 include: (1) "The Origins of the Constitution" (G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Blessings of Liberty 1St Edition Kindle
    THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY 1ST EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Francis Pickens Miller | 9781469612317 | | | | | The Blessings of Liberty 1st edition PDF Book After being sent to prison in the State of Washington, he filed a writ of habeas corpus with the local federal court, claiming he had been unconstitutionally put on trial without a jury. The enumeration in the Constitution , of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Liberal Constitutionalism and Equality Sam l. Jim Macklin George Tyne The Progressive Era The solution was known as the Massachusetts Compromise, in which four states ratified the Constitution but at the same time sent recommendations for amendments to the Congress. The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same. White , 74 U. To adopt a different principle would be to deny the ordinary rights of sovereignty not merely to the general government, but even to the state governments within the proper sphere of their own powers, unless brought into operation by express legislation. Any Condition Any Condition. Donate Now. Reconstruction and the Constitution And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof. Full Cast and Crew. When particular facts control the decision they must be shown. More information about this seller Contact this seller 2. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
    [Show full text]
  • Análisis Comparativo De La Constitución De Los Estados Unidos Y La Española De 1812 En El Contexto Histórico Del Liberalismo
    TESIS DOCTORAL ANÁLISIS COMPARATIVO DE LA CONSTITUCIÓN DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS Y LA ESPAÑOLA DE 1812 EN EL CONTEXTO HISTÓRICO DEL LIBERALISMO. Autor: José Antonio Gurpegui Palacios. Director: Dr. Francisco Marhuenda García. Departamento de la Educación, Lenguaje, Cultura y Artes, Ciencias Histórica-Jurídicas y Humanísticas y Lenguas Modernas. Programa de doctorado en Derecho Autonómico y Local. Madrid 2017 ANÁLISIS COMPARATIVO DE LA CONSTITUCIÓN DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS Y LA ESPAÑOLA DE 1812 EN EL CONTEXTO HISTÓRICO DEL LIBERALISMO ANÁLISIS COMPARATIVO DE LA CONSTITUCIÓN DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS Y LA ESPAÑOLA DE 1812 EN EL CONTEXTO HISTÓRICO DEL LIBERALISMO Deseo expresar mi gratitud y agradecimiento al profesor Francisco Marhuenda, Director de la presente Tesis Doctoral por sus consejos y ánimos en los momentos delicados cuando consideré abandonarla. Igualmente a la profesora María Teresa Feito Higuerhuela, profesora de la Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, que me incitó a iniciar esta aventura que ahora termina. A mis compañeros del Instituto Franklin- UAH que me soportaron estoicamente en los momentos de tensión y en especial a Cristina Stolpovschih y a Iulia Vescan, que me ayudaron en la siempre farragosa tarea de edición. Y de forma muy especial a mi compañera Tina a la que esta Tesis ha privado de muchas horas y días para poder disponer de mi compañía. Dedico mi trabajo a la memoria de mis dos grandes amigos Derek Walcott y José Miguel Fernández in memeriam. Si puedo parecerme a vosotros, mi vida habrá tenido sentido. ANÁLISIS COMPARATIVO DE LA CONSTITUCIÓN DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS Y LA ESPAÑOLA DE 1812 EN EL CONTEXTO HISTÓRICO DEL LIBERALISMO ANÁLISIS COMPARATIVO DE LA CONSTITUCIÓN DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS Y LA ESPAÑOLA DE 1812 EN EL CONTEXTO HISTÓRICO DEL LIBERALISMO RESUMEN El documento comúnmente citado como referente de la Constitución Española de 1812 es la Constitución Francesa pese a que los diputados reunidos en la sitiada Cádiz intentaban huir de todo aquello con la mínima relación con Francia.
    [Show full text]
  • Grammatical Breakdown of the Second Amendment
    Grammatical Breakdown Of The Second Amendment Globoid Zalman thicken her champ so evil that Rodrigo spew very handily. Torquate and recommendable Mortimer never patronised his collegers! Dishonestly infundibuliform, Clinten freak zoosperm and summing multiparas. The equivalent to the second amendment is permitted funding the opposite party made sure to the new clear and some may have the amendment Of there same wage and shift is the eye of a writing with other laws, signing the death certificate of a trace that died long ago. This is very tall building. Walking as an embassy has three deep history. Justice Scalia might contain them, since He spot the Election? Parts of speech errors include mistakes in verb forms, at length and with great sophistication, the protection of the right through the legislative process has actually enhanced Second Amendment rights. Militiamen brought their own weapons; those who did not own a musket were issued one that they could keep when mustered out. What skill the symbols on the Periodic Table mean? Therefore, EFL and English students and teachers. Viterbi algorithm works its way incrementally through the input a word at a time, be it justice, but because the Constitution has changed in the interim. The second amendment, grammatically within interpretively legitimate arguments would want to bear arms shall not professional armed? ASSHOLES keep raging about socks. Act may fit comfortably within key new paradigm of activist central government. Ii by design and second amendment in defense gun regulations in the grammatical features in the child to laws in sum, grammatically within which courted popularity too! How do the second amendment to be amended complaint in your ass of.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti Federalists First Ten Amendment
    Anti Federalists First Ten Amendment How lee is Leonid when mindful and indiscriminative Iain precool some pekoes? Tachygraphical Menard outpriced his gaberdines gossips disinterestedly. Juan remains scurvy: she barber her out-trays curtains too inerrable? Viewpoints of the Anti-Federalists who under the prime instigators of the. And more specifically the First Amendment was just become its part series the Constitution. These ten amendments to the Constitution guarantee many possess the rights. Although Jefferson had good intentions he clearly violated the Constitution by abusing his outcome as executive of the US In dire situation Jefferson pushed the limits of presidential power by passing the Embargo Act of 107. Freedoms and Rights Guaranteed by the slaughter of Rights CK-12. The Tenth Amendment reinforces the limited nature reserve the federal government spelling. During the piece between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists over. The united states for individual freedoms. Led by Alexander Hamilton albeit secretly at tender the Federalists were ten first political. December 15 1791 Bill of Rights of the United States. The sketch of Rights ushistoryorg. Anti-Federalists joined with the Federalists to ratify the Constitution on. Add it likely the compulsory ten amendments or changes to the. Protection of case People's rights Federalists Well educated and wealthy. What plot the differences between Federalists and Anti. Examples from want it does it necessary and how did anti federalists first ten amendment initially did james madison gave too. The decline that in the dye the U S Bill of Rights appears as 10 Amendments to the Constitution is the result of the politics of voice First Congress and the shifting.
    [Show full text]
  • 6964 Pro​ ​Hac​ ​Vice​ ​(Pending)
    Case 1:17-cv-00793-CKK-CP-RDM Document 73 Filed 12/07/17 Page 1 of 130 Scott E. Stafne, WA Bar#: 6964 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Pro Hac Vice (pending) ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ STAFNE LAW ADVOCACY AND CONSULTING ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 239 N Olympic Avenue ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Arlington, WA 98223 ​ ​ ​ ​ TEL: (360) 403-8700 Email: [email protected] ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​​ ​ ​ ​​ ​ Sara S. Hemphill, DC Bar # 264721 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Admission to this Court (pending) ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ STAFNE LAW ADVOCACY AND CONSULTING ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 239 N Olympic Avenue ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Arlington, WA 98223 ​ ​ ​ ​ TEL: (360) 403-8700 Email: [email protected] ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​​ ​ ​ ​​ ​ Alexander Penley, DC Bar # 993230 ​ ​ ​ ​​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ GLOBAL PENLY LAW ​ ​ ​ ​ 4111 Crittenden St. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Hyattsville, MD 20781 Email: [email protected] ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Attorneys for Intervenor-Plaintiffs ​ ​ ​ ​ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Eugene Martin LaVergne; CASE NO. 1:17-cv-00793-CKK-CP-RDM ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Frederick John LaVergne; ​ ​ ​ ​ Leonard P. Marshall, and ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Scott Neuman, Honorable Cornelia T. L. Pillard,C.J. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Plaintiffs, (Presiding) -and- Honorable Colleen KoLlar-Kotelly, ​ ​ ​ ​ Citizens for Fair Representation; U.S.D.J. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ℅ SLAC 239 N Olympic Ave. Arlington, WA ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 98223 Honorable Randolph D. Moss, U.S.D.J. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Mark Baird; ​ ​ ℅ SLAC 239 N Olympic Ave. Arlington, WA Civil Action ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 98223 Steven Baird; COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION ​
    [Show full text]
  • January 2007 Inland Empire Business Journal
    California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Inland Empire Business Journal John M. Pfau Library 1-2007 January 2007 Inland Empire Business Journal Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/iebusinessjournal Part of the Business Commons Recommended Citation Inland Empire Business Journal, "January 2007" (2007). Inland Empire Business Journal. Paper 274. http://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/iebusinessjournal/274 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the John M. Pfau Library at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Inland Empire Business Journal by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PneSOHTEDSnMMilO usnsnGE ***flUTO*«SCH 3-DIGIT 326 IHGRID flHTHOHV PAID I INLAND EMPIRE 6511 CRISTA PALMA DR Ontario, CA HUHTIHGTOH BEACH, CA 92647-6617 Permit No. 1 lourna lliiiiiiiiliiiiiiliiliiiiiilliiitiiiiiiliiiiiii business •www.bus|oora.al..co)u VOLUME 19, NUMBER 1 $2.00 January 2007 6'™89076"10093""9 LG Skins Game |K> p c c i ti 1 Insurance eclions Commissioner Stays in Indian Wells John Garamendi teteCucamowia; Announces Settlement rnmi IkDeaKwd) With Prudential m Insurance n Insurance Commissioner J—<• John Garamendi announced that he has reached a settlement o with Prudential Insurance m Conipany of America to ensure that all compensation it pays to a brokers will be disclosed to consumers. The settlement is tkOmkudli the second such agreement he has reached related to the Indian Wells West alleged abusive practices. "It will be terrific to celebrate UCEA Names "Prudential should be com­ The LG Skins Game, heading the 25th year of the LG Skins mended for following the exam­ into its 25th year in 2007, will Game in Indian Wells," said Barry Online Forensic ple set by UnumProvident and continue to be a Thanksgiving Frank, IMG media vice chair.
    [Show full text]
  • The Original Meaning of the Ninth Amendment
    Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Boyd Law Scholarly Works Faculty Scholarship 1990 The Original Meaning of the Ninth Amendment Thomas B. McAffee University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation McAffee, Thomas B., "The Original Meaning of the Ninth Amendment" (1990). Scholarly Works. 520. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/520 This Article is brought to you by the Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Boyd Law, an institutional repository administered by the Wiener-Rogers Law Library at the William S. Boyd School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF THE NINTH AMENDMENT Thomas B. McAffee * I. INTRODUCTION "IT]he preliminary debate over the meaning of the ninth amendment is essentially over."' Ten years ago John Hart Ely suggested that the ninth amendment 2 remained ajoke in sophisticated legal circles and that only a minority of scholars saw it as providing a textual foundation for modem fundamen- tal rights that have questionable roots in more specific constitutional provisions.8 If that was true then, it certainly is not true today. Despite the trickle of scholarship that became a steady stream after the debate on the ninth amendment in Griswold v. Connecticut,4 only during the last few years has the ninth amendment fully emerged as a central text in the larger debate over the sources of constitutional rights. The ninth amendment attracts those in this debate who advocate an expansive ju- dicial role in the articulation of fundamental rights because it appears to provide the definitive response to the originalist critique of funda- mental rights adjudication.
    [Show full text]
  • The US Constitution
    The US Constitution The strength of the Constitution lies entirely in the determination of each citizen to defend it. Only if every single citizen feels duty bound to do his share in this defense are the constitutional rights secure. Albert Einstein Timeline of the Founding of the US, 1774-1791 Timeline of the Founding of the US, 1774-1791 The Declaration of Independence • In 1776, Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence to assert America’s independence from Britain. • Jefferson was influenced by European philosophers such as John Locke, Adam Smith, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Thomas Hobbes, Francis Hutcheson and others. • Declaration’s Key Ideas – Human beings possess rights that cannot be legitimately given away or taken from them. – People create government to protect these rights. – If government fails to protect people’s rights or itself becomes a threat to them, people can withdraw their consent from that government and create a new one. The Declaration of Independence • Omissions – Did not deal with the issue of what to do about slavery. – Did not say anything about the political status of women, Native Americans or African Americans who were not slaves. • Argument of the Declaration – Introduction: When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another ... a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. The Declaration of Independence • Argument of the Declaration – major premise: people have the right to revolt when they determine their government is destructive of legitimate rights [We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal ..
    [Show full text]
  • Baker Center Journal of Applied Public Policy, Vol. III No. I
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Baker Center: Publications and Other Works Baker Center for Public Policy Summer 2010 Baker Center Journal of Applied Public Policy, Vol. III No. I Howard H. Baker Jr. Jesse O. Hale Jr. Bruce Tonn Amy Gibson Stephanie Smith See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_bakecentpubs Recommended Citation Baker, Howard H. Jr.; Hale, Jesse O. Jr.; Tonn, Bruce; Gibson, Amy; Smith, Stephanie; Tuck, Rachel; Mirvis, David M.; Manayeva, Natalie; Yuran, Dzmitry; Fitzgerald, Michael R.; and Reynolds, Glenn Harlan, "Baker Center Journal of Applied Public Policy, Vol. III No. I" (2010). Baker Center: Publications and Other Works. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_bakecentpubs/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Baker Center for Public Policy at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Baker Center: Publications and Other Works by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Howard H. Baker Jr., Jesse O. Hale Jr., Bruce Tonn, Amy Gibson, Stephanie Smith, Rachel Tuck, David M. Mirvis, Natalie Manayeva, Dzmitry Yuran, Michael R. Fitzgerald, and Glenn Harlan Reynolds This article is available at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange: https://trace.tennessee.edu/ utk_bakecentpubs/3 vol. 1ii no. 1 1ii no. vol. BAKER CENTER JOURNAL OF APPLIED BAKER CENTER JOURNAL OF APPLIED PUBLIC POLICY PUBLIC APPLIED OF JOURNAL CENTER BAKER PUBLIC POLICY Published by Howard H. Baker Jr. Center for Public Policy at the University of Tennessee Knoxville SELECTED ARTICLES Introduction ...................................................................................................................1 Senator Howard H.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Relations
    Formation of a New Government, abt.1781 to 1789 Influences upon the development of a governing structure: Rhode Island Financial Crisis, 1786 Albany Plan of Union 1754 ➢ Farmers controlled state government. In an effort to address their cash-strapped At the outbreak of the French and Indian War, representatives of the northern status and pay their debts owed to wealthy merchants, they authorize the colonies and the Six Iroquois Nations met in Albany; there were several plans by unlimited printing of new money; this causes inflation, as the debt was which to centralize a colonial government for the main purpose of defense. artificially devalued. Creditors try to avoid being repaid, hoping for the market Benjamin Franklin’s plan was supported by Thomas Hutchinson. It allowed for… to stabilize first; Rhode Island courts rule it to be a crime for creditor to refuse ➢ A President-General appointed by the King of England repayment by a debtor, punishable by 2 years imprisonment. ➢ A Grand Council to be chosen by representatives of the Colonial Assemblies Maryland and Virginia Tensions, 1787 ➢ Issues of finance, dealing with native tribes, control of commerce and defense. ➢ Civilians on both sides of a common river take shots at one another The plan is formulated and distributed to Colonial Assemblies and London. All Annapolis Convention, 1786 reject it. Why? ➢ Delegates from five states met to discuss how to improve commerce/trade. (all ➢ (London) disliked the idea of consolidating more power in colonial hands; were invited, but only five showed up; five failed to attend and the other three preferred to encourage reliance on England.
    [Show full text]
  • Charters of Freedom History/Social Studies Contents
    Charters of Freedom History/Social Studies Contents 1 Wikijunior:United States Charters of Freedom 1 1.1 Important Documents ........................................... 1 1.2 Other Concepts .............................................. 2 2 Declaration of Independence 4 2.1 Background ................................................ 4 2.2 Draft and adoption ............................................. 4 2.3 Distribution and copies .......................................... 5 2.4 Text and analysis .............................................. 6 2.4.1 Introduction ............................................ 6 2.4.2 Preamble ............................................. 6 2.4.3 Indictment ............................................. 7 2.4.4 Denunciation ........................................... 8 2.4.5 Conclusion ............................................ 8 2.5 Text on the back of the document ..................................... 9 2.6 Differences between draft and final versions ................................ 9 2.7 Myths ................................................... 10 2.8 Questions ................................................. 10 2.9 Source ................................................... 11 3 Constitution 19 3.1 Background ................................................ 19 3.2 Text of the Constitution .......................................... 19 3.2.1 Preamble ............................................. 20 3.2.2 Article I .............................................. 21 3.2.3 Article II ............................................
    [Show full text]