CDC Urges Biden To Drop Palantir’s COVID Tracker

CDC Urges Biden To Drop Palantir’s COVID Tracker

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the Trump administration has relied on a powerful tool originally developed by Palantir, the data-mining firm created by Trump ally Peter Thiel, for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

According to the Daily Beast, however, officials working with Joe Biden’s transition team have recommended getting rid of the newly minted system after warning that it’s not accurate, according to an anonymously sourced report in the Daily Beast.

Palantir’s technology allows officials to track hospitals’ supplies, case count, and testing – a platform which Vice President Mike Pence has touted as ‘revolutionary’ – giving the government the ability to assess what hospitals need in real time. Detailed information allows the government to track any personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages, ICU bed availability, admissions, drugs and other medical supplies, along with testing capacity.

Three anonymous officials who work with the HHS Protect system, however, tell the Daily Beast that the system is unreliable ‘and lacks the ability to update critical information the federal government needs to better assist communities across the country.’

Officials at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and HHS have suggested in materials shared with the Biden transition and in briefings with transition officials that the new administration scrap HHS Protect and revert back to the prior CDC data collection system known as the National Healthcare Safety Network’s COVID-19 module, according to three individuals familiar with those conversations. HHS and the CDC did not respond to a request for comment.

The system had problems from the very beginning. It never functioned in the way we thought it was going to,” said one official who works with the data. “We should be doing more with the data that’s out there. But the system doesn’t allow us to do that because it isn’t accurate.” –Daily Beast

One of the main problems with the new system is that it bypasses standard communications channels which used to exist between the CDC and local health departments – instead, requiring hospitals to begin entering information manually through TeleTracking, a private contractor which helped develop the HHS Protect system. Unfortunately, some hospitals did a poor job of updating information, and there is no local oversight bodies to ensure the process was adhered to, according to officials.

One recent report in Science said that the HHS Protect data differed from health departments by up to 20%.

In July, the congressional Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus – the government’s main oversight body for handling the pandemic, launched an investigation into the discrepancies, sending a letter to HHS Secretary Alex Azar and CDC Director Robert Redfield which demanded that the Trump administration reverse course and run data through the CDC. According to a Democratic aide, that effort is ongoing.

If the recommendations are accepted, the change in data collection would come at a time when Biden is already in the midst of mapping out other drastic changes to how the federal government responds to COVID-19.

The president-elect has already said he would significantly speed up the vaccine distribution by widening the recommendations for who should get the shot and when. And on Thursday Biden released his $1.9 million COVID-19 plan, which calls for direct payments of $1,400 to most Americans, $350 billion in state and local aid, $50 billion toward COVID-19 testing and an additional $20 billion for a national vaccine program with state and local governments. –Daily Beast

Surely none of this has anything to do with Peter Thiel.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/15/2021 – 13:15

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2N871RI Tyler Durden

Remy: It Wasn’t Me (Shaggy Parody)

YT_image

Following in the footsteps of Gavin Newsom and other politicians, Mayor Remy finds it hard to obey his own COVID-19 restrictions.

Shaggy “It Wasn’t Me” parody written and performed by Remy; music tracks and mastering by Ben Karlstrom; video produced by Austin Bragg

LYRICS:

Yo, man (Yo)
Open up, man (Yeah, what you want, man?)
My constituents just caught me (You let them catch you?)
I don’t know how I let this happen (Wait, where?)
The place next door, ya know? (Wait, I thought you ordered the restaurants to close)
Man, I don’t know what to do (Say it wasn’t you)
Oh, right!

Voter came in and they caught me red-handed
Eating at the place next door (Were there a lot of people there?)
Picture this—it was not that vacant
Like a hundred peeps or more
How could I forget that I had
Banned all indoor gatherings?
Just a prime example of a really big hypocrisy

You don’t understand, we’re not like other creatures
Rules do not apply to us, we are the leaders
Voters can’t be trusted to be indoor-eaters
They are more contagious—after all, they’re mouth-breathers
Just tell them it’s important to follow all the law
How any violation might kill a grandma
While you do what you want, even pardon in-laws
Mr. Mayor, how would you prefer your foie gras?
Donated?

Sir, we saw you at a party
It wasn’t me
Eating at The French Laundry
It wasn’t me
You even had the clam chowder
It wasn’t me
Sir, we got you on camera
It wasn’t me
You said we can’t be super-spreading
It wasn’t me
So I missed my brother’s wedding
It wasn’t me
You jailed a barber for hair-dressing
Wait, I have a wedding…
This is getting upsetting…

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3bEVmnH
via IFTTT

One Of The Greatest Economic Blunders In History

One Of The Greatest Economic Blunders In History

Authored by James Rickards via The Daily Reckoning,

The U.S. economy lost 140,000 jobs in December. Only about 55% of the jobs lost in March and April have returned. That’s a significant number.

Americans and others around the world who make their living as bus drivers, bartenders, waiters, hair stylists and boutique store clerks, among thousands of other jobs, make up 50% of all jobs and 45% of U.S. gross domestic product.

This is the part of the economy affected by the lockdowns. They are being destroyed.

When the pandemic passes, and we are able to look back on the experience without fear or political bias, it will be clear that the lockdowns were one of the greatest economic blunders in history. Lockdowns do not stop the spread of the virus, but they do destroy the economy. This is not merely a matter of opinion or conjecture.

The pandemic has now lasted long enough that we have solid comparative data from all 50 U.S. states and many countries around the world. This data covers states and countries that tried extreme lockdowns, moderate lockdowns or completely voluntary methods that involved no mandatory lockdown at all.

The empirical results show that the experience of all of these jurisdictions was about the same and that lockdowns have not “contributed in any meaningful way” to saving lives. In fact, there is other evidence that shows lockdowns killed more people than they saved due to suicides, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, domestic violence and depression.

This study on the ineffectiveness of lockdowns was produced by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a Professor of Medicine at Stanford University, and his collaborators. One TV anchor who interviewed Dr. Bhattacharya said, “California has the strictest lockdowns in the country and cases there are absolutely exploding. What am I supposed to take from the usefulness of lockdowns?”

The fact is that lockdowns do not stop the spread of the virus, but they are very good at destroying the economy. I covered this all in my new book, The New Great Depression.

People are social beings and do not like lockdowns. No matter what the rules are, people will find their way around them. And, with or without strict compliance, the virus goes where it wants.

I’ve been to the White House on official business numerous times. It’s hard to think of a more locked-down place. It has multiple security perimeters, multiple entrances before one can reach the Oval Office, and numerous security guards.

Still, the President and First Lady contracted the COVID-19 virus last October, most likely in the White House itself. As I said, the virus goes where it wants. If lockdowns don’t work, why do public health officials and government officials keep insisting on them? There are two reasons.

The first is that academic epidemiologists are just as out of touch with everyday Americans as any other elite group. They sit in their labs and ivory tower offices and have had no difficulty working from home and avoiding routine exposure that other Americans face.

They have not lost their jobs or seen their businesses destroyed. It’s easy to order a lockdown when you’re not the one whose job or business is ruined. The other reason is that politicians have to be seen doing something, even if they don’t know what they’re doing.

Everyone agrees that washing hands, social distancing and masks in crowded venues make sense. But, that’s not enough for the politicians. They want to appear to be “saving the population” even if they’re just destroying the economy.

If you think the lockdowns have been an economic disaster (I do), then get ready for something worse…

Two of the top public health advisors in the new Biden administration are Ezekiel Emanuel of the Center for American Progress and Michael Osterholm of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.

Both Emmanuel and Osterholm have long histories of calling for lockdowns during pandemics. In June Ezekiel said, “You have to actually have people at home, close nonessential businesses, stop bars, stop indoor dining, have everyone wearing face masks. These are the things we need to do. … You need to do it nationwide.”

The evidence is clear that lockdowns don’t work. Biden’s health advisors are calling for them anyway.

Only an out of touch elite could support shutting down the economy and not realize you would destroy that economy and the jobs that go with it.

Meanwhile, the pandemic is giving the government justification to clamp down on civil liberties.

For example, Dr. Fauci is now promoting the idea that certain institutions may require individuals to get one of the new vaccines at the state level (though he isn’t sure the federal government will mandate vaccination).

Here’s how it could work: When you get the vaccine, you will receive some kind of certification that could be a QR code on your mobile phone or registration in a central government controlled database. If you want to fly, rent a car, send your children to school or do other everyday activities, you will be required to produce your vaccine registration credentials.

This method is similar to the “social credit” system used in Communist China to enforce compliance with Communist Party definitions of good behavior. Fauci also envisions “COVID-19 passports” that would be required before certain types of travel were allowed.

What Fauci does not mention is that the vaccines are still experimental. They have been approved by the FDA, but this was done on an emergency basis and some acute allergic reactions and even deaths have been reported among those who have received the vaccines.

Also, most Americans may not realize that the COVID-19 vaccines are not traditional vaccines that introduce one mild disease in order to build antibodies to a more deadly disease. Instead, these new vaccines work through genetically modified RNA sequences.

It’s not clear what the long-term effects of such genetic modification might be. But many elites and government bureaucrats seem perfectly fine with using unsuspecting Americans as guinea pigs. Would you like to be one?

New restrictions are one more reason why a new recession is upon us and why any economic recovery will be slow and weak.

Neither monetary nor fiscal policy will effectively stimulate the economy.

Monetary policy is not stimulus because the new money is going to the banks and the banks simply deposit it with the Fed as excess reserves on which they receive interest. If the money is not being loaned by banks and spent by consumers, it isn’t generating economic activity.

Fiscal policy isn’t stimulus because the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio is now over 130% and rising quickly. Extensive research shows that at debt-to-GDP ratios above 90%, the multiplier on new debt is less than one. This means we’re in a debt trap (in addition to a liquidity trap caused by the Fed).

We cannot print our way out of a liquidity trap. We cannot spend our way out of a debt trap. The Fed and Congress may try to stimulate the economy, but they will fail.

They’ll only dig the country a deeper hole to climb out of.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/15/2021 – 12:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/39yDOqw Tyler Durden

There is Still Time to Fix the House Impeachment Process

Some have complained that the sole article of impeachment adopted by the House lumps together the events of January 6 and Trump’s phone call to Georgia election officials. They think those should be separate charges, in part because the phone call is clear and direct by itself. It occurs to me that it is not too late for the House to split its article of impeachment, if it were inclined to do so. It is also not too late for the House to add additional articles of impeachment, either because Trump does new things or to address past behavior.

There is a broader question about when exactly the House has impeached someone and what actions are necessary for impeachment. I had a series of posts on this when the House slow-walked the articles during the first impeachment. The key moments of House impeachment are when the House adopts a resolution of impeachment and when the House informs the Senate of an impeachment. Neither of those moments requires actual articles of impeachment. The articles of impeachment can be drafted later and/or separately, and they have been in the past.

The articles of impeachment are needed for the Senate trial. They provide the basis for the Senate to evaluate a specific factual and legal allegation and the basis for the officer to mount a defense against a specific allegation. The Senate ultimately votes on whether to convict an officer on each separate article of impeachment (it is sufficient for conviction and removal that one article get a two-thirds vote in the participating senators). The articles are needed for trial, and the Senate will not proceed with a trial without articles of impeachment alleging specific impeachable offenses.

Moreover, current standing Senate rules direct the Senate process to start rolling when the House notifies the Senate that managers have been appointed and articles are ready to be exhibited. Everything else is just backdrop to triggering a Senate impeachment trial.

All of this suggests that it is not too late for the House to revise how it wants to proceed going into the impeachment trial. It could change the line-up of managers by adding a GOP member to the team—which it absolutely should. The House made a mistake by pursuing a highly partisan impeachment process the first time around. It should not repeat that mistake this time, especially when there are now Republicans open to impeachment and a more realistic prospect of securing Republican votes to convict in the Senate. An impeachment trial is, in part, a political process. In order to convict, the House needs to win over Republican senators. It will be harder to win votes to convict from Republican senators if the House leans into partisanship in presenting its impeachment case.

The House could draft new articles of impeachment and have a floor vote on them. It could redraft the existing article of impeachment and have a floor vote to adopt the new version. Trump has already been impeached regardless (probably), but that does not mean that the articles of impeachment are written in stone.

The House could hold impeachment hearings and start explaining to the public why some of the anticipated defenses to the impeachment are wrong or start laying out for the public the facts that support an impeachment.

But until the House formally presents the articles of impeachment to the Senate, the process of preparing for an impeachment trial is not done and there is room to make improvements in how it wants to present the case. Not that I expect the House to do any of this. The House has not yet demonstrated that it is very good at putting together a presidential impeachment.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3p0C3sV
via IFTTT

Remy: It Wasn’t Me (Shaggy Parody)

YT_image

Following in the footsteps of Gavin Newsom and other politicians, Mayor Remy finds it hard to obey his own COVID-19 restrictions.

Shaggy “It Wasn’t Me” parody written and performed by Remy; music tracks and mastering by Ben Karlstrom; video produced by Austin Bragg

LYRICS:

Yo, man (Yo)
Open up, man (Yeah, what you want, man?)
My constituents just caught me (You let them catch you?)
I don’t know how I let this happen (Wait, where?)
The place next door, ya know? (Wait, I thought you ordered the restaurants to close)
Man, I don’t know what to do (Say it wasn’t you)
Oh, right!

Voter came in and they caught me red-handed
Eating at the place next door (Were there a lot of people there?)
Picture this—it was not that vacant
Like a hundred peeps or more
How could I forget that I had
Banned all indoor gatherings?
Just a prime example of a really big hypocrisy

You don’t understand, we’re not like other creatures
Rules do not apply to us, we are the leaders
Voters can’t be trusted to be indoor-eaters
They are more contagious—after all, they’re mouth-breathers
Just tell them it’s important to follow all the law
How any violation might kill a grandma
While you do what you want, even pardon in-laws
Mr. Mayor, how would you prefer your foie gras?
Donated?

Sir, we saw you at a party
It wasn’t me
Eating at The French Laundry
It wasn’t me
You even had the clam chowder
It wasn’t me
Sir, we got you on camera
It wasn’t me
You said we can’t be super-spreading
It wasn’t me
So I missed my brother’s wedding
It wasn’t me
You jailed a barber for hair-dressing
Wait, I have a wedding…
This is getting upsetting…

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3bEVmnH
via IFTTT

Many Vaccine Sites Stop Checking ID, Flout State Guidelines, As Shots Not Reaching Public Fast Enough

Many Vaccine Sites Stop Checking ID, Flout State Guidelines, As Shots Not Reaching Public Fast Enough

Though some 30 million coronavirus vaccine doses have been distributed throughout the United States, there’s already a backlog in terms of administering the shots to the public, with just over 11 million of these making it into people’s arms as of Thursday, according to numbers cited in Reuters.

This has prompted questions over whether various state eligibility rules, which require identify checks, should be strictly enforced or if for the sake of speed and ease of getting the shots out faster, sites like pharmacies should forgo ID checks and rely on an honor system and common sense (i.e.: it’s easier to know who’s elderly and thus part of more vulnerable crowd of first recipients).

Getty Images

Currently, 22 states have set age guidelines to prioritize who should receive the shot, with more expected to follow. But increasingly locations are choosing not to follow the state guidelines at a moment US Health Secretary Alex Azar is urging states to speed up inoculation of the elderly and those with chronic health conditions.

It’s expected that teachers and other “essential” workers will be next, which will present further identification challenges. As it currently stands, many pharmacies are going by the age given when online appointments are set up, but not checking on site.

“We are not planning to ask for ID to receive a COVID-19 vaccination,” a CVS Health spokesman said, as cited in Reuters. “These vaccinations will be appointment-only in our stores and patients will have already gone through an eligibility screening when they register for an appointment on our website, through our app or via a 1-800 number.”

Kroger too, which has a pharmacies giving the shot, announced that “State and local guidelines vary across the 40 public health jurisdictions we serve, but in most cases, identification will not be required to receive the vaccine.”

Whether or not this leaves open the likelihood that many could jump in line earlier, the end result from health authorities’ perspective is that more would be inoculated regardless, and faster.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/15/2021 – 12:35

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3nMO4AD Tyler Durden

There is Still Time to Fix the House Impeachment Process

Some have complained that the sole article of impeachment adopted by the House lumps together the events of January 6 and Trump’s phone call to Georgia election officials. They think those should be separate charges, in part because the phone call is clear and direct by itself. It occurs to me that it is not too late for the House to split its article of impeachment, if it were inclined to do so. It is also not too late for the House to add additional articles of impeachment, either because Trump does new things or to address past behavior.

There is a broader question about when exactly the House has impeached someone and what actions are necessary for impeachment. I had a series of posts on this when the House slow-walked the articles during the first impeachment. The key moments of House impeachment are when the House adopts a resolution of impeachment and when the House informs the Senate of an impeachment. Neither of those moments requires actual articles of impeachment. The articles of impeachment can be drafted later and/or separately, and they have been in the past.

The articles of impeachment are needed for the Senate trial. They provide the basis for the Senate to evaluate a specific factual and legal allegation and the basis for the officer to mount a defense against a specific allegation. The Senate ultimately votes on whether to convict an officer on each separate article of impeachment (it is sufficient for conviction and removal that one article get a two-thirds vote in the participating senators). The articles are needed for trial, and the Senate will not proceed with a trial without articles of impeachment alleging specific impeachable offenses.

Moreover, current standing Senate rules direct the Senate process to start rolling when the House notifies the Senate that managers have been appointed and articles are ready to be exhibited. Everything else is just backdrop to triggering a Senate impeachment trial.

All of this suggests that it is not too late for the House to revise how it wants to proceed going into the impeachment trial. It could change the line-up of managers by adding a GOP member to the team—which it absolutely should. The House made a mistake by pursuing a highly partisan impeachment process the first time around. It should not repeat that mistake this time, especially when there are now Republicans open to impeachment and a more realistic prospect of securing Republican votes to convict in the Senate. An impeachment trial is, in part, a political process. In order to convict, the House needs to win over Republican senators. It will be harder to win votes to convict from Republican senators if the House leans into partisanship in presenting its impeachment case.

The House could draft new articles of impeachment and have a floor vote on them. It could redraft the existing article of impeachment and have a floor vote to adopt the new version. Trump has already been impeached regardless (probably), but that does not mean that the articles of impeachment are written in stone.

The House could hold impeachment hearings and start explaining to the public why some of the anticipated defenses to the impeachment are wrong or start laying out for the public the facts that support an impeachment.

But until the House formally presents the articles of impeachment to the Senate, the process of preparing for an impeachment trial is not done and there is room to make improvements in how it wants to present the case. Not that I expect the House to do any of this. The House has not yet demonstrated that it is very good at putting together a presidential impeachment.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3p0C3sV
via IFTTT

Missouri Troopers Thwart Ex-Swift Driver’s Armed “Ambush” Attempt At HQ

Missouri Troopers Thwart Ex-Swift Driver’s Armed “Ambush” Attempt At HQ

By Clarissa Hawes of FreightWaves,

A truck driver remains hospitalized more than a week after he was shot multiple times by two Missouri State Highway Patrol (MSHP) troopers.

Investigators claim Tayland Rahim, 27, of Gladstone, Missouri, drove to the agency’s local headquarters with an assault-style rifle and fired several rounds around 9:40 p.m. on Jan. 4 in the Troop A parking lot in Lee’s Summit. Sgt. Andy Bell, a spokesman for the Highway Patrol, said Rahim was shot after he disobeyed troopers’ commands to drop his weapon.

“The suspect started shooting randomly and into the ground in the parking lot, and that’s what prompted the two troopers to exit the building and the third trooper, who was in the parking lot, to warn and advise the radio dispatch personnel to seek shelter,” Bell told FreightWaves.

Bell said investigators are unsure of the truck driver’s motive since they have been unable to interview Rahim, who is listed in stable condition at a Kansas City-area hospital.

“He obviously wasn’t there to ask for directions,” Bell said.

Court documents show that Rahim’s only interaction with Missouri law enforcement was in October 2019, when he was ticketed by a Troop A officer in its Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Division at a weigh station for being 2,360 pounds overweight. The ticket, a misdemeanor, cost Rahim $135. 

At the time, Rahim was driving a 2020 International tractor for Swift Transportation, a unit of Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings Inc. according to court filings.

David Berry, vice president of Swift Transportation, told FreightWaves that Rahim quit Swift in September of 2020.

Attempted Ambush

Sgt. Bill Lowe, a spokesman for the Highway Patrol, called the shooting at Troop A headquarters an attempted “ambush” — the first of its kind in Missouri.

“I will say coming to the troop headquarters is a little different because this has never happened in the history of the Highway Patrol,” Lowe said in a recent press conference. “He was set to do some harm, set to do something bad.”

Prosecutors have not filed charges in the case since investigators haven’t been able to interview Rahim, Bell said.

“We will continue to analyze any and all evidence and if and when he is released, he will be immediately put under a 24-hour investigative hold, which allows us to submit the evidence we have to a judge for an arrest warrant,” Bell told FreightWaves.

Investigators seized a cell phone, a rifle magazine with 30 rounds and two live rounds from a black Ford F-150 pickup truck that was registered to one of Rahim’s relatives, according to a search warrant. 

Investigators also searched a house in Gladstone where Rahim lived and found three guns and ammunition, Bell said.

“This person drove to our facility, exited his vehicle with a multi-round rifle and pulled the trigger multiple times,” Bell told FreightWaves. “We just don’t know the motive at this point.”

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/15/2021 – 12:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2LUfh7j Tyler Durden

Online Dating App Bumble Files For IPO

Online Dating App Bumble Files For IPO

The unprecedented frenzy to sell stock now when markets remains elevated at all time highs on the back of helicopter money, went into overdrive today when online dating app Bumble – which “differentiates” itself from the hundreds of other dating sites because women “make the first move” – filed to go public today.

The Texas-based company listed in its Friday S-1 filing an offering size of $100 million, which however is a placeholder amount that will change before the actual numbers are finalized. According to Bloomberg, Bumble, which was started in 2014, will seek a valuation of $6 billion to $8 billion in the listing, and with the company expect to float between 5% and 10% of its common stock, we anticipate the final offering will be around $500 million.

The company, which plans to list its shares on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol BMBL, is using Goldman and Citigroup as lead managers on the offering. What is surprising is that Bumble has decided to pick a conventional route to court investors – a syndicate-led initial public offering – instead of taking advantage of the recent SPAC euphoria and reverse-merging with some already public shell.

The company, whose key investment highlight is that virtually everyone now meets online..

… disclosed that it had 2.4 million paying users as of Sept 2020, and the following financial results for the period from January 29, 2020 to September 30, 2020

  • Total Revenue of $376.6 million
  • Bumble App Revenue of $231.5 million
  • Badoo App and Other Revenue of $145.1 million
  • Net loss of $(84.1) million, respectively, with a net loss margin of 22.3%
  • Adjusted EBITDA of $98.9 million, representing Adjusted EBITDA Margin of 26.3%.
  • Net cash provided by operating activities of $1.0 million
  • Free Cash Flow of $(4.7) million

Surely all that is worth “at least” $8 billion.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/15/2021 – 12:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3bHFoJn Tyler Durden

How the National Constitution Center “Constitution Drafting” project Revealed Potential Areas of Consensus on Constitutional Reform

Constitution

The National Constitution Center recently published my article describing ways in which the NCC’s recent “Constitution Drafting Project” highlights some possible areas of cross-ideological agreement on constitutional reform. Here is an excerpt:

The National Constitution Center recently conducted a fascinating exercise in which it brought together three groups to produce their own revised versions of the Constitution: a conservative team, a libertarian team, and a progressive one. Each team included prominent scholars and legal commentators affiliated with their respective camps. The results revealed substantially more convergence on key issues than might have been expected in our highly polarized times….

All three teams agreed that the 1787 Constitution should be revised rather than totally superseded, that there should be tighter limits on presidential power, that the state and federal governments should be stripped of much, if not all, of their “sovereign immunity” from lawsuits, and that immigrants should be eligible for the presidency. It is also likely that the three teams agree on the need for term limits for Supreme Court justices, though the libertarians did not actually include this idea in their proposed constitution…

The major points of agreement between the teams could potentially be the basis for future constitutional amendments that have a real chance of enactment, because of the potentially broad support they attract…..

Even the ideas the three teams agree on would face an uphill struggle in the constitutional amendment process, by virtue of the fact that enactment usually requires an overwhelming supermajority of two-thirds of both houses of Congress and three-fourths of the states. The alternative mechanism of amendment by a convention of the states is comparably onerous. But it is clear that some aspects of the Constitution can use reform. The NCC constitution-drafting project could potentially be the first step in the admittedly difficult process of achieving it.

The article expands on my earlier Volokh Conspiracy blog post about the NCC Constitution Drafting project.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2KievjT
via IFTTT