A Trifling Matter

 A TRIFLING MATTER

Well, it appears that the Supreme Court and the President don't see eye-to-eye, or in other words, disagree.  This is on tariffs of all things.  Who would have thought that there could be such a disagreement on such a thing.  After all, most of us don't even know what a tariff is.  

The current level of constitutional knowledge in this country is pretty much limited to the idea that we all have a right to have a gun - - the constitution says so.  If you were to ask around, this would be the extent of what many of our fellow citizens would consider constitutionally allowed - - the right to bear arms.

Just as a matter of clarification, this "right" is contained in the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which applies to all fifty states by the way.  However, once we get past this particular  excerpt of knowledge, our understanding becomes somewhat clouded.  Yes, we have a President, and yes we have a Congress, and yes we have a Supreme Court; but what they can do and what they can't do is a mystery to most of us.  If we learned anything in high school's civics class, it didn't stay with us much longer than the final exam.

The matter of tariffs was just discussed by the Supreme Court in Learning Resources, Inc. et al. v. Trump decided on 20 February 2026.  One suggestion I would make is to read the decision.  I have heard the decision mentioned numerous times since the 20th by those who agree and by those who don't.  It is my understanding that not one of the people who were discussing it with me had read the Court's decision or even knew that it was available to read.  Folks, this is why we have Google!  In addition, one might actually peruse the Constitution, specifically Article 1, Section 7, a somewhat pertinent document when it comes to taxes.  These two items will explain why the President does not have the authority to create a tariff.  A tariff is a tax.

Some of us apparently think that the President can do whatever he wants. Our current President must think this.  After all he's the President and we elected him.  I know this is somewhat unusual, that I would suggest actually determining what he can and can not do  rather than simply ingesting what appears while scrolling on your iPhone; and hence, obtaining an  opinion  with no basis in fact. 

Folks, the President can not levy a tariff, only Congress can.  A tariff is a tax; only Congress can tax you.  A President can't simply decide one day that you have to pay an additional tax, but he did anyway.  Your Senators and Representatives know this, or they should, as should you.

Richard E H Phelps II
Mingo

Ah! It's the Books Again

 AH! IT'S THE BOOKS AGAIN

Books are on their mind.  It usually is this time of year when the legislature is nearing midterm finalizing various legislative proposals.  I will give credit when credit is due.  We once again are making renewed efforts to keep books from minors.  

Long ago our legislature understood the serious nature of minors knowing anything.  This is allegedly a  matter of sexual knowledge.  Unfortunately sex is necessary if you want to consider the continuation of the species.  And what's more, every life form on the planet engages in it - - or they wouldn't be here.

One can conclude from this that sex is the foundation of life as we know it.  However, our legislature is determined that children, their children and my children presumably, need not know about it; that there is such a thing; that such a thing is necessary for life; that they will one day engage in it in one form or another.  The idea is that if we talk about sex rather than what is really the issue, which are books, the public will support their efforts.

The main culprit in the dissemination of information regarding sex is the library - - any and all libraries i. e., books.   Libraries are the problem; libraries provide knowledge and knowledge is not required or desired.  We must limit the knowledge that our children possess - - knowledge just isn't good for them and without books, it would be so much better in keeping it from them.  Children  should not be reading books!  Our legislature does not approve.  

Since every child in America, which includes Iowa, has access to the internet, the idea that a library poses a special danger to sexual knowledge is ludicrous.  Consequently, what one must gather from the renewed efforts of the Iowa legislature is their distaste for books not their obsession with sex.  They must think about it all the time; probably nightmares and sleepless afternoons wondering what literature their children might come across at the library.

But again, it really isn't sex that is the issue. I can't imagine our legislators don't like sex since presumably they engage in it;  so it must be the books they don't care for. Clearly, they don't like books and don't approve of anyone who would read one. Sex is just the excuse to get rid of the books.  One can only assume that the public who elect these people are in agreement - - books are bad and the less access to them children have the better.  Banning books is as old as the first book; not only banning but burning and sometimes the author along with it. Knowing stuff is not good for you and clearly this should be addressed through legislative action.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

The Ayatollah Comes to Iowa

 THE AYATOLLAH COMES TO IOWA

And it is about time I would say; a theocracy is long over due.  It's time religion replaces parties - - parties have always been insufficient to demand obedience to certain beliefs.  And it's about time to jettison the nonsense in the constitution relegating religion to a subordinate position in the scheme of things.  

Iran has been in the news and gives us a good understanding on the benefits of a theocracy:  when your citizens protest and run amok in the streets, you don't coddle them like we do here, you shoot them.  Religions in charge have always done such.  A few history lessons would be enough for a correct understanding of how theocratic governments work.  If you don't kill them en masse, you do things such as burning them at the stake, or disemboweling them, or breaking them on the wheel - - those activities certainly get the public's  attention.

We're getting there slowly though.  We have got legislation now in the works to get rid of such things as discussing or identifying oneself as LGBTQ.  No one has the right to be anything other than male or female and access to books saying otherwise should be  deemed unacceptable and banned.  It has always amused me how fearful some people are that their children might learn something different.  The idea that a child of religious parents gets an idea that maybe the parents are missing something is not to be tolerated.  Public libraries will be next and should be.  After all, someone's kid might accidentally wander into a public library and pick up some reading material that does not comply with a parent's religious beliefs somehow  involving  self-identity.

Legislation is also being pushed forward eliminating the mandate for school vaccination. Clearly there are many people who continue to believe that your child's vaccination should be a parental decision.  You know, it's about freedom and such.  A person should be free to risk not only their own children but all other children they come in contact with.  It's a free country and nobody should be able to tell me to do the intelligent thing and get  vaccinated.  One caveat though, we need to exempt the failure to vaccinate from the child endangerment criminal statutes.  We can't have parents being prosecuted if their kids die of the flu or become disfigured by polio. You have to realize that there is a difference between driving while intoxicated with your kids in the car and not allowing your kids to be vaccinated for protection from diseases that will kill or maim them.  The risk is about the same, but that is irrelevant.  

Freedom, after all, is simply personal choice.  If I can't choose between vaccines and no vaccines my personal freedom has been reduced and that is not acceptable; this is America afterall.  And, when it comes to books, freedom to read what I want, when I want, about what I want doesn't apply to personal choice.  I can insist that  my kid doesn't read anything I don't want him or her to and I can also insist that your kid can't either.  Books are the same as vaccines in one respect:  there are way too many of them and they are not necessary.

So let's applaud the Iowa legislature and give them our support.  Once passed, such legislation is sure to be signed by the governor and it will ignite further efforts to return to theocracy - - long over due.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo