Suchergebnisse

Chronology of Machiavelli's times and life -- Emperors, kings, and popes in Machiavelli's time -- Introduction -- Part I: A way of thinking and some basic assumptions -- A compelling logic -- Either, or. Speech concerning Pisa, Provisions for retaking Pisa ; What Duke Valentino will do. II Mission to Duke Valentino ; Reason guides analysis. Letter to Francesco Vettori, 29 April 1513 -- On human nature -- If men were all good. Prince XV, XVII, and XVIII ; Some men desire, whilst others fear. Discourses I, 37 and 5 ; Nations preserve for a long time the same character. Discourses III, 43 -- On times and affairs -- The world remains very much in the same condition. Discourses I, Introduction, 39, Discourses II, Introduction ; Times, the conditions of things, wisdom, and fortune. Letter to Giovan Battista Soderini, 13-21 September 1506 ; What Can, and cannot, be done about fortune. Prince XXV, Discourses II, 29 -- Part II: The international context : fear and self-help -- Survival and security -- Only force makes states keep their word. Words to be spoken on the law for appropriating money, after giving a little introduction and excuse ; Security is more important than glory. Life of Castruccio Castracani of Lucca ; All means are acceptable when the survival of the state is at stake. Discourses III, 41-2 ; The antagonism of opposing forces. Letter to Francesco Vettori, 20 June 1513 -- 'Fear is the greatest master' -- The Popes. Discourses I, 12, Florentine histories II, 10 ; France. An account of the affairs of France ; Spain. Letter to Francesco Vettori, 16 April 1514 ; Florence. Florentine histories V, 12-13 ; Naples. Florentine histories VIII, 19-22 ; Venice. Florentine histories I, 29 ; Milan. Florentine histories V, 5 -- Good laws and good armies -- The foundations of all states. Prince XII, Discourses III, 31 ; External threats and military organizations. Art of war II ; Military force is at the service of security. Art of war, Introduction and VII -- Part III: Domestic orders, disorders, and foreign affairs -- The great powers compared -- France. An account of the affairs of France ; The empire. Report on the affairs of Germany -- Domestic affairs and foreign affairs -- Location, growth, security, and laws. Discourses I, 1 ; Domestic divisions, forms of government, and expansion. Discourses I, 6 ; Domestic divisions and external enemies. Florentine histories, Introduction V, 4, II, 26, Discourses II, 25 -- Leaders and strategies -- Cosimo rules over a divided city. Florentine histories VII, 5-6 ; Duke Valentino establishes a new state. Prince VII ; Julius II temporizes. I Mission to the Court of Rome ; Ferdinand II rises in power and prestige. Prince XXI -- Republics and principalities -- A republic's foreign policy is reckless. Discourses I, 53 ; And slow. Discourses I, 34, II, 15 ; Both republics and principalities resort to fraud. Discourses II, 13 -- And end up subjugating those who invoke their help. Discourses II, 20 ; Republics are somewhat better equipped to adapt to the times. Discourses III, 9 ; And are somewhat more reliable allies. Discourses I, 59 ; Yet, republics are more predisposed to grow and expand, and are harsher masters. Discourses II, 2 -- Part IV: Foreign policy and international politics -- Preferences, opportunities, and constraints -- When will one act? Letter to Giovanni Ridolfi, 12 June 1506 ; Revisionist powers and international stability. Letter to Francesco Vettori, 10 August 1513 ; Goals change and necessity overrules intentions. Letter to Francesco Vettori, 10 August 1513, and Letter to Francesco Vettori, 26 August 1513 ; On molesting and being molested. Discourses II, 19 -- Dealing with threats -- Balancing against a great power is not easy at all. Discourses I, 33, III, 11 ; Having achieved security, states aim at more. Florentine histories V, 9-10, V, 17-22 ; Deciding to resist. Florentine histories V, 11 -- Engaging in expansion -- The Roman example. Discourses II, 1 ; A war of aggression. Florentine histories IV, 18-20 ; Taking a city by force may be counterproductive. Florentine histories VII, 30 ; Louis XII's mistakes. Prince III -- Neutrality and alliances -- Why neutrality is to be avoided. Prince XXI ; Alliances and the rise of Rome. Discourses II, 4 ; No way out. I Mission to France ; The risks of asymmetrical alliances. II Mission to Duke Valentino ; Allied misgivings. Florentine histories IV, 3-5, 13, 15 ; Coalitions are unreliable. Florentine histories VIII, 24-6 ; And litigious. Mission to Mantua on business with the Emperor -- Part V: History and analysis -- The Italian state system, 1444-1454. Florentine histories VI, 11-14, 17-27, 31-2 -- Entrapping an ally : France and Florence. III Mission to France -- What the Pope should do now. Letter to Francesco Vettori, 10 December 1514 -- Towards the Sack of Rome. Mission to Francesco Guicciardini at the Camp of the League of Cognac.

Machine generated contents note: 0. How to start a meaningful relationship with your computer Introduction to R -- 0.1 What is R? -- 0.2 Why use R for this book? -- 0.3 Computing with a scientific package like R -- 0.4 Installing and interacting with R -- 0.5 Style conventions -- 0.6 Valuable R accessories -- 0.7 Getting help -- 0.8 Basic R usage -- 0.9 Importing data from a spreadsheet -- 0.10 Storing data in data frames -- 0.11 Exporting data from R -- 0.12 Further reading -- 0.13 References -- 1. How to make mathematical statements Numbers, equations and functions 1.1 Quantitative and qualitative scales? Habitat classifications -- 1.2 Numbers? Observations of spatial abundance -- 1.3 Symbols? Population size and carrying capacity -- 1.4 Logical operations -- 1.5 Algebraic operations? Size matters in garter snakes -- 1.6 Manipulating numbers -- 1.7 Manipulating units -- 1.8 Manipulating expressions? Energy acquisition in voles -- 1.9 Polynomials? The law of mass action in epidemiology -- 1.10 Equations -- 1.11 First order polynomial equations? Linking population size to population composition -- 1.12 Proportionality and scaling? Simple mark-recapture? Converting density to population size -- 1.13 Second and higher-order polynomial equations? Estimating the number of infected animals from the rate of infection -- 1.14 Systems of polynomial equations? Deriving population structure from data on population size -- 1.15 Inequalities? Minimum energetic requirements in voles -- 1.16 Coordinate systems? Non-cartesian map projections -- 1.17 Complex numbers -- 1.18 Relations and functions? Food webs? Mating systems in animals -- 1.19 The graph of a function? Two aspects of vole energetics -- 1.20 First order polynomial functions? Population stability in a time series? Population stability and population change? Visualising goodness-of-fit -- 1.21 Higher-order polynomial functions -- 1.22 The relationship between equations and functions? Extent of an epidemic when the transmission rate exceeds a critical value -- 1.23 Other useful functions? Modelling saturation -- 1.24 Inverse functions -- 1.25 Functions of more than one variables -- 1.26 Further reading -- 1.27 References -- 2. How to describe regular shapes and patterns Geometry and trigonometry -- 2.1 Primitive elements -- 2.2 Axioms of Euclidean geometry? Suicidal lemmings, parsimony, evidence and proof -- 2.3 Propositions? Radio-tracking of terrestrial animals -- 2.4 Distance between two points? Spatial autocorrelation in ecological variables -- 2.5 Areas and volumes? Hexagonal territories -- 2.6 Measuring angles? The bearing of a moving animal -- 2.7 The trigonometric circle? The position of a seed following dispersal -- 2.8 Trigonometric functions -- 2.9 Polar coordinates? Random walks -- 2.10 Graphs of trigonometric functions -- 2.11 Trigonometric identities? A two-step random walk -- 2.12 Inverses of trigonometric functions? Displacement during a random walk -- 2.13 Trigonometric equations? VHF tracking for terrestrial animals -- 2.14 Modifying the basic trigonometric graphs? Nocturnal flowering in dry climates -- 2.15 Superimposing trigonometric functions? More realistic model of nocturnal flowering in dry climates -- 2.16 Spectral analysis? Dominant frequencies in Norwegian lemming populations? Spectral analysis of oceanographic covariates -- 2.17 Fractal geometry? Availability of coastal habitat ? Fractal dimension of the Koch curve -- 2.18 Further reading -- 2.19 References -- 3. How to change things, one step at a time Sequences, difference equations and logarithms -- 3.1 Sequences? Reproductive output in social wasps? Unrestricted population growth -- 3.2 Difference equations? More realistic models of population growth -- 3.3 Higher-order difference equations? Delay-difference equations in a biennial herb -- 3.4 Initial conditions and parameters -- 3.5 Solutions of a difference equation -- 3.6 Equilibrium solutions? Unrestricted population growth with harvesting? Visualising the equilibria -- 3.7 Stable and unstable equilibria? Parameter sensitivity and ineffective fishing quotas? Stable and unstable equilibria in a density-dependent population -- 3.8 Investigating stability? Cobweb plot for unconstrained, harvested population? Conditions for stability under unrestricted growth -- 3.9 Chaos? Deterministic chaos in a model with density-dependence -- 3.10 Exponential function? Modelling bacterial loads in continuous time? A negative blue tit? Using exponential functions to constrain models -- 3.11 Logarithmic function? Log-transforming population time series -- 3.12 Logarithmic equations -- 3.13 Further reading -- 3.14 References -- 4. How to change things, continuously Derivatives and their applications -- 4.1 Average rate of change? Seasonal tree growth -- 4.2 Instantaneous rate of change -- 4.3 Limits ? Pheromone concentration around termite mounds -- 4.4 The derivative of a function? Plotting change in tree biomass? Linear tree growth -- 4.5 Differentiating polynomials? Spatial gradients -- 4.6 Differentiating other functions? Consumption rates of specialist predators -- 4.7 The chain rule? Diurnal rate of change in the attendance of insect pollinators -- 4.8 Higher-order derivatives? Spatial gradients and foraging in beaked whales -- 4.9 Derivatives for functions of many variables? The slope of the sea floor -- 4.10 Optimisation? Maximum rate of disease transmission? The marginal value theorem -- 4.11 Local stability for difference equations? Unconstrained population growth? Density dependence and proportional harvesting -- 4.12 Series expansions -- 4.13 Further reading -- 4.14 References -- 5. How to work with accumulated change Integrals and their applications -- 5.1 Antiderivatives? Invasion fronts? Diving in seals -- 5.2 Indefinite integrals? Allometry -- 5.3 Three analytical methods of integration? Stopping invasion fronts -- 5.4 Summation? Metapopulations -- 5.5 Area under a curve? Swimming speed in seals -- 5.6 Definite integrals? Swimming speed in seals --

1 An overview of pneumatic conveying systems and performance -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 Why pneumatic conveying? -- 1.3 What can be conveyed? -- 1.4 What constitutes a pneumatic conveying system? -- 1.5 Modes of pneumatic conveying -- 1.6 Basic pneumatic conveying systems -- 1.7 Further classification techniques -- 1.8 Description and operation of a pneumatic conveying system -- 1.9 Putting it all together -- 1.10 An overview -- 1.11 Some useful conversion factors and tables -- References -- 2 Single phase flow in pneumatic conveying systems -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Definitions -- 2.3 Perfect gas laws -- 2.4 Drying of compressed air -- 2.5 The compression process -- 2.6 Gas flow through pipes -- 2.7 Illustrative examples -- References -- 3 Fluid and particle dynamics -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 Law of continuity -- 3.3 Drag on a particle -- 3.4 Equations for calculation of relevant properties -- 3.5 Fluidization characteristics of powders -- References -- 4 Fundamentals -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Forces acting on a single particle in an air stream -- 4.3 Particle size -- 4.4 Shape -- 4.5 Dynamic equations -- 4.6 Terminal velocity -- 4.7 Single particle acceleration -- 4.8 Centrifugal flow -- 4.9 Slip velocity in a gravitational field -- 4.10 Multiple particle systems -- 4.11 Voidage and slip velocity -- 4.12 Frictional representations -- 4.13 Acceleration and development regions -- 4.14 Particle distribution in pneumatic conveying -- 4.15 Compressibility effect not negligible -- 4.16 Speed of sound in gas—solid transport -- 4.17 Gas—solid flow with varying cross-sectional area -- 4.18 Branching arrangements -- 4.19 Bend analysis -- 4.20 Downward sloping particle flow -- 4.21 Dense phase transport -- 4.22 Estimation of pressure drop in slugging dense phase conveying -- 4.23 Estimation of pressure drop in non-slugging dense phase conveying -- 4.24 Plug flows -- 4.25 Worked examples -- References -- 5 Flow regimes in vertical and horizontal conveying -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 Choking versus non-choking system in vertical flow -- 5.3 Choking system in vertical flow -- 5.4 Non-choking system in vertical flow -- 5.5 Particle segregation in vertical pneumatic transport -- 5.6 Saltation in horizontal conveying -- References -- 6 Principles of pneumatic conveying -- 6.1 Introduction—putting it all together -- 6.2 The state diagram revisited -- 6.3 Methods for scaling-up -- 6.4 Use of theoretical models and definitions -- 6.5 Additional pressure drop factoz (?z) -- 6.6 Pressure drop -- 6.7 Some important functional relationships -- 6.8 Sequence to be followed to obtain the system pressure loss (?p) -- References -- 7 Feeding of pneumatic conveying systems -- 7.1 Introduction and overall design philosophy -- 7.2 Classification of feeding systems -- 7.3 Feeder selection criteria -- 7.4 Low pressure feeding devices -- 7.5 Medium pressure feeding systems -- 7.6 High pressure feeding devices -- 7.7 Conclusions -- References -- 8 Flow in standpipes and gravity conveyors -- 8.1 Introduction—standpipes and gravity conveyors -- 8.2 Classification of standpipe systems -- 8.3 Classification of flow modes in a standpipe -- 8.4 Equations pertaining to each flow mode -- 8.5 Flow through a valve -- 8.6 Stability of standpipe flow -- 8.7 Analysis of industrial standpipes—case studies -- 8.8 Gravity conveyors -- References -- 9 An overview of high pressure systems including long distance and dense phase pneumatic conveying systems -- 9.1 Introduction -- 9.2 High pressure systems -- 9.3 Dense phase flow classification -- 9.4 A description of plug flow and the relationships between plug flow and material characteristics -- 9.5 System selection and product characteristics -- 9.6 Dense phase system design -- 9.7 Long distance pneumatic conveying and pressure loss minimization -- 9.8 Conclusions -- References -- 10 Gas—solids separation -- 10.1 Introduction -- 10.2 Selection criteria -- 10.3 Cyclone separators—theory of the separation of particles in the centrifugal field -- 10.4 Fabric filters -- 10.5 Cleaning by sound -- 10.6 Conclusions -- References -- 11 Some comments on: the flow behaviour of solids from silos; wear in pneumatic conveying systems; ancillary equipment -- 11.1 Introduction -- 11.2 The flow of solids from bins -- 11.3 Flow aid devices for silos and hoppers -- 11.4 Wear in pneumatic conveying systems -- 11.5 Ancillary equipment -- 11.6 Conclusions -- References -- 12 Control of pneumatic transport -- 12.1 Basic material flow and control theory -- 12.2 Transport lags -- 12.3 Analysis of gas—solid flow by transfer functions -- 12.4 Stability of pneumatic transfer systems -- 12.5 Stability analysis with Taylor series linearization -- 12.6 Linear stability analysis—Jackson approach -- 12.7 Stability via the Liapunov analysis -- References -- 13 Instrumentation -- 13.1 Standard instrumentation -- 13.2 Transducers -- 13.3 Cross-correlation procedures -- 13.4 A Coriolis force meter -- 13.5 Dielectric meter -- 13.6 Load cells -- 13.7 Particle tagging -- 13.8 Electrostatic based meters -- 13.9 Acoustic measurements -- 13.10 Screw conveyors -- 13.11 Light measuring devices -- 13.12 Other techniques for particle velocities -- 13.13 Instrumentation for industrial applications -- References -- 14 System design and worked examples -- 14.1 Introduction -- 14.2 Moisture content in air -- 14.3 The design of industrial vacuum systems -- 14.4 Dilute phase pneumatic conveying system design (method 1) -- 14.5 Dilute phase pneumatic conveying system design (method 2) -- 14.6 Dilute phase pneumatic conveying system design (method 3) -- 14.7 Dense phase pneumatic conveying system design -- 14.8 Test yourself—dilute phase calculations -- 14.9 Gas—solid flow examples -- 14.10 Conclusions -- References.

The recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling
to keep in place Louisiana's most recently-enacted congressional
reapportionment plan for now draws to a close the first phase of a struggle that
ultimately should define jurisprudence in this area for decades to come. Four
distinct winners and losers have emerged from this -- for now.

That map contains two majority-minority districts,
but was declared unconstitutional by a three- judge panel last month. Despite
that, the Court, citing the controversy as yet unresolved so close to the start
of the elections process, halted that injunction in order to provide adequate
administration of the 2024 elections. The timing was such that the trial's
remedial phase could have produced a constitutional alternative, likely a plan
very close to the 2022 single M/M version that was prevented from implementation
but never had a trial on its merits, but the Court majority decided not to let
that play out as a signal it will take up this case over the next year.

The map to be used this fall is highly unlikely to
survive that scrutiny, thus to understand who wins and who loses, the short and
long run must be analyzed for each, although one is pretty easy to figure out:
national Democrats win in the short run. Essentially, they pick up an extra
seat in the House of Representatives for 2025-26. As certainly they would lose
it in 2026 elections by which time the Court most likely will have ruled a
single M/M map can be drawn legally, but as the 2024 outcome could be close
between the two major parties, for this cycle every seat helps.

The biggest loser, in both the short and long
term, is GOP Rep. Garret Graves.
He resides in the Sixth District now M/M that clips Shreveport, takes a bite
out of Alexandria along the way to clipping portions of Lafayette and Baton
Rouge at its southern termini, although representatives may run in any district
in the state. As a white Republican, he would face little hope of reelection in
that district.

That noted, even as his chances could be better running
in the nearby districts of GOP Reps. Clay Higgins (Third) or Julia Letlow (Fifth), if not quite as
tough as staying in the Sixth these also would be heavy lifts. Failure to win
reelection in 2024 substantially reduces his chances of reentering Congress even
with a 2026 single M/M map, so this could finish his elective career.

In his place arrives the biggest short run winner,
black Democrat state Rep. Cleo Fields.
Having served two terms in severely gerrymandered districts declared unconstitutional,
he appears likely to complete the hat trick with yet another as a big favorite
in the Sixth. The almost certain junking of this map won't leave him a place running
in 2026, but he will be 64 by then and likely ready to call it a (checkered
political) career, with a nice parting gift of two last years in Washington
28 years after his previous stay.

Finally, the short-term loser but long-term winner
is Republican Gov. Jeff
Landry. He loses only in the sense that he backed a map that for one election
cycle harms his political party, hopefully not for him in a way that costs the
GOP the House. Perhaps he believed the timing would work out where the
judiciary would install a remedial single M/M map upon rejection of the obviously
flawed map to be used this cycle – one with a district not much different from
a map three decades ago supposed to fix Fields' unconstitutional district that
itself was declared unconstitutional – but it didn't work out.

Nonetheless, with a good chance the Court eventually
will declare unconstitutional giving race a preferred position among
reapportionment criteria using this case based on the map Landry preferred,
Landry will have a single M/M map later in his term that almost certainly will
flip the seat back into the GOP column. Additionally, along the way he reduced,
if not removed, an intra-party rival in the form of Graves who backed a Landry
opponent in last year's governor's race, as well as aided a quasi-ally in
Fields, an influential figure particularly among black political activists in
the Baton Rouge area who kept his distance from the governor's race even though
it featured a quality black Democrat candidate. A promotion also removes Fields
from a position of influence in the state Senate.

If Democrats end up winning the House by a single
seat, Landry will face heated criticism. Otherwise, given the political dynamics
involved and the chance to steer reapportionment law in a historical direction
to his party's liking, Landry comes off on the plus side in all of this.

The campus protests over the Israel-Gaza war and similar demonstrations throughout the United States are ongoing, with questions about free speech, law enforcement overreach, anti-semitism, and individual university responses dominating the headlines.While there have been some pro-Israel "counter-protesters," the overwhelming energy right now is in sympathy for the Palestinians and the thousands of innocent civilians whose lives were lost due to Israel bombardments and tank fire, not to mention the second hand effects of the siege and lack of healthcare. They demand that the U.S. government stop fueling the war with American weapons, and for a ceasefire to end the suffering. But at this point has the media — and therefore the American public — been more focused on the protests rather than the life and death issues the demonstrators ostensibly want raised? This seems particularly apparent given that most of the coverage tends to treat the civilians' plight and apparent Israeli atrocities — what students are actually protesting — as a kind of side point, if those topics are mentioned at all.In the midst of the protests last week, the United Nations revealed, "Disturbing reports continue to emerge about mass graves in Gaza in which Palestinian victims were reportedly found stripped naked with their hands tied, prompting renewed concerns about possible war crimes amid ongoing Israeli airstrikes, the UN human rights office, OHCHR, said on Tuesday."The story continued: "The development follows the recovery of hundreds of bodies 'buried deep in the ground and covered with waste' over the weekend at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, central Gaza, and at Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City in the north. A total of 283 bodies were recovered at Nasser Hospital, of which 42 were identified."Then the gruesome description from the U.N.: "Among the deceased were allegedly older people, women and wounded, while others were found tied with their hands…tied and stripped of their clothes." This news of the mass graves is known to some. Most major news outlets carried it, but below the proverbial fold. It was not a major topic of discussion, on cable news panels or at the top of any headlines in the United States. Meanwhile, children continued to be killed by airstrikes throughout Gaza, and in a grim turn of events, a premature infant who had been taken alive from the womb of her dead mother after a bombing died in the incubator last week.Ironically, a major media focus on stories like these in the first months of the war since Oct. 7 led in part to the protest movements, which have exploded in recent days on college campuses. So how does this bode for American public opinion today, when most of the news coverage is about campus protests and not on the ongoing airstrikes, the lack of food, clean water, healthcare or the pending Rafah invasion? The conditions on the ground have not changed, but media interest has, apparently.After Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently announced that he intended to push his country's forces into the westernmost provision of Rafah, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) asked the Biden administration on Tuesday about the potential for civilian casualties. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin responded that Israel's offensive has claimed "far too many civilian deaths already." "We certainly would want to see things done in a much different way" than operations across the rest of Gaza, Austin said.How many Americans saw this exchange in their social media feeds, as opposed to the saturation of protest footage and accompanying vitriol between both sides over the students' rights – or not – to be overtaking buildings, constructing tent cities, shutting down classes, and more? The media should have the ability to cover more than one story at a time, but so often, they refuse to. So, somewhat ironically, the protests have even been a distraction from the actual war in the Middle East. ABC News even acknowledged it, reporting Wednesday, "After weeks of nonstop coverage of destruction and death in the Gaza Strip, media across the wider Middle East have latched onto the demonstrations roiling American university campuses over the Israel-Hamas war."It is much easier for the protests to overshadow the actual misery in Gaza and that is clearly what is happening. While many protesters' intentions might be noble, is there a better distraction right now for Israel to do as it pleases?This is not an argument for or against the protests. Just an observation that probably deserves at least a minimum moment of thought by anyone genuinely concerned about the current plight of the Palestinians.

A
big victory in self-governance last week might result in ancillary gains for
citizens elsewhere in Louisiana, aided
by meritorious pending legislation.

The Louisiana Supreme Court ruled
that the city of St. George can come into existence. Almost a decade ago, residents
of the southern part of East Baton Rouge Parish, disgruntled with a city-parish
government that they saw taking too many tax dollars out and providing too few
meaningful services, began efforts to incorporate. The saga
had many twists and turns: an initial petitioning effort to put the matter on
the ballot failing by fewer than six dozen signatures after some questionable
vetting by the parish registrar of voters, a second successful petition despite
annexation gamesmanship leading to an election in favor of incorporation marked
by all sorts of distortions levied by parish government officials, a legal
challenge chock full of bogus claims that required a four-year judicial journey,
and then final vindication.

City-parish officials – the parish's now five cities
operate under a consolidated form of government with parish government save for
the four constitutional parish offices – fought tooth-and nail because
separation by a municipality of its size (around 86,000) significantly diminished
their political power, principally from the loss of tax revenues that acted as
a considerable net subsidy to principally Baton Rouge's operations. The suit against
St. George rested on a state law that essentially said the new city had to have
a realistic financial chance to operate and that it didn't have an "adverse"
impact on other governments as part of a larger investigation into the "reasonableness"
of the move.

St. George opponents relied upon a shoddy
financial analysis that the Supreme Court saw through easily that dispensed
with questions about whether the city could stand on its own. As for
determining reasonableness, the Court in part drew upon its conclusions concerning
the finances question and other factors to find it fit the bill. Specifically,
it determined that the remainder of city-parish government had adequate
resources to offset the net changes induced by forming St. George. To put it
another way, there would be no adverse impact to the consolidated government as
long as it made certain policy changes, leaving unsaid that the needed alterations
in spending priorities aren't favored by the current Democrat-majority government.

In the final analysis, a series of attempts to
thwart a desire for citizen self-rule born out of frustration that elites from other
parts of the parish consistently had imposed their preferences itself was thwarted
and the excuse of bad policy-making outcomes as a mitigating factor didn't wash.
Obviously, the win matters greatly for St. George but is of limited significance
elsewhere because of the atypical circumstances: a breakup of a consolidated
government of which few exist in Louisiana.

Where it might have an impact is in establishing momentum
for breakaway school districts. In the state, 61 of 64 school districts follow parish
lines, but EBR is the most fragmented with districts around the three smaller
municipalities of Baker, Central, and Zachary with Baton Rouge and the rest of
the parish comprising the other. Now, with St. George about to come into
existence, another attempt according to its boundaries willproceed according to its
boundaries as initial impetus for St. George's formation came in order to
bridge to a breakaway school district as parents had complaints about school
governance similar to those with parish governance.

The sentiment
isn't isolated to that parish. About the same time a school district was
talked up in southeastern East Baton Rouge, and actually created but unable to
some into fruition because the necessary constitutional change wasn't included,
in southern Caddo Parish parents talked of doing the same. However, it has no
municipality to organize around – the three smaller EBR cities were created with
districts following – but the success of St. George might kickstart efforts to create
a city in that area and have it unite with other small municipalities to form
a district of all Caddo outside of Shreveport, much like the separate Ouachita Parish
and City of Monroe school districts.

Facilitating this and the birth of a St. George-area
school district is HB 6 by
Republican state Rep. Emily Chenevert
that would amend the Constitution to remove case-by-case approval of new districts
statewide and with legislative supermajorities. While its prospects for passage
and statewide voter approval are uncertain, it would fulfill better the spirit
of the Court decision that within it affirmed the Constitution has a bias in
favor of citizen self-determination. Sustenance of that attitude merits the
bill's passage and subsequent voter approval.

The United States is waging an illegal war in Yemen, where major shipping routes along the country's coastlines have been disrupted by ongoing violence in the region.Despite widespread understanding in Washington that U.S. military operations in Yemen violate U.S. law, U.S. officials continue to insist that they must continue their military campaign, which they say is necessary to saving time and money on commercial shipping through the Middle East."The U.S. economy relies on open sea lanes," U.S. General Michael Kurilla, the commander of U.S. Central Command, said at a March 7 Senate hearing, after being asked about the growing U.S. military presence in the Red Sea. "By our national security strategy, we will not allow a state or non-state actor to affect the freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, the Bab al Mandeb, or the Suez Canal."Since January 11, the United States has been directing airstrikes and other military operations in Yemen. U.S. military forces have been targeting the Houthis, a militant group that has been launching missiles and other attacks against commercial vessels in the Red Sea, Bab al Mandeb, and Gulf of Aden.For months, the Houthis' attacks have disrupted commercial shipping. The Houthis have insisted that they will continue their attacks until Israel ends it military offensive in Gaza.Although some of the Houthis' attacks have caused casualties, the major concern in Washington has been the implications for the global economy. As U.S. officials have repeatedly noted, as much as 15 percent of global trade passes through the Red Sea, including 12 percent of the sea-based oil trade."The reason it's so important there is this," Secretary of State Antony Blinken explained earlier this year. "15 percent of commercial traffic is going through that strait every single day." That includes "30 percent of the world's container ships."Of particular concern to U.S. officials is the Bab al Mandeb, a narrow strait along the southwestern coast of Yemen that connects the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden. An estimated 8.8 million barrels of oil are shipped through the strait every day, making it one of the world's "strategic chokepoints," as Gen. Kurilla described it.Although the White House has insisted that President Biden has the legal authority to take military action against the Houthis, several members of Congress have refuted its claims. At a Senate hearing in February, several senators called attention to the War Powers Resolution, which establishes that the president cannot continue hostilities for longer than 60 days without approval from Congress.Regardless, Congress has failed to act, even now that the deadline has passed. March 12, the day that the White House was required to cease its military operations, "came, and went, in public silence," as the Associated Press reported.Even as the Biden administration and Congress move forward with an illegal war, there are alternatives to addressing the Houthi attacks on commercial shipping.As some U.S. officials have acknowledged, the ideal and perhaps most obvious alternative would be to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza. After all, the Houthis continue to insist that they will not end their attacks until Israel ends its siege of Gaza."I am very keen to see that there is a ceasefire in Gaza," U.S. Special Envoy to Yemen Timothy Lenderking said during a March 29 appearance on Washington Journal. "I do believe that we can use that moment to de-escalate some of these other crises, including the Red Sea. We must get to that moment."Absent a ceasefire, however, it remains possible for commercial ships to circumvent the Middle East. Data compiled by the International Monetary Fund indicates that maritime trade is being redirected around Africa. In other words, commercial ships are taking advantage of other options for reaching their destinations.The Biden administration has opposed both approaches, however. Not only has the administration continued to support Israel's military offensive in Gaza, despite its acknowledgment of the worsening "humanitarian catastrophe," as Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described it, but the administration remains unwilling to tolerate the longer shipping times that are associated with the route around Africa."If you're talking oil that comes through, we're seeing a diversion of that," Gen. Kurilla said at the March 7 Senate hearing. "It goes around the Cape of Good Hope. What that's going to do is bring products late to market and price increases as well."Indeed, the priority of U.S. officials is to keep the Red Sea open for shipping. Their determination to maintain faster shipping is leading them to move forward with a war in Yemen that they know is illegal, even as they come to recognize more sensible options.The first step in getting to a "just settlement" in Yemen "is the ceasefire in Gaza," Lenderking said. "I think we can use that diplomatically to de-escalate the situation in the Red Sea."This article has been republished with permission from Foreign Policy in Focus.

Political outsider Bassirou Diomaye Faye will officially be declared the next president of Senegal Friday after cruising to victory in this week's elections just 10 days after being released from prison.Faye won 54% of the vote, allowing him to avoid a second round matchup with former Prime Minister Amadou Ba, the Dakar Court of Appeals announced Wednesday. Ba has conceded defeat and congratulated Faye, as has current President Macky Sall.Experts say the peaceful transition of power is a welcome indication of stability in Senegal and a positive sign for West Africa as a whole amid a string of coups that have rocked the region's relations with Western countries.Senegal's democracy, analysts say, came under threat last month after Sall made a controversial decision to postpone elections, citing corruption allegations against the Constitutional Council that decides which candidates are eligible to run in the elections, a fact he said would question the integrity of the results. The decision drew public outrage, as well as concern from the United States, a historically close diplomatic partner with Senegal. The U.S. State Department said last month that it was "deeply concerned" about the postponement in a statement urging Senegal's government to "move forward with its presidential election in accordance with the Constitution and electoral laws."It was the first time an election has been postponed in Senegal's history, and Sall's actions were "a jolt and a shock to the system" due to Senegal's long-held position as a stable democracy in West Africa, said Dr. Joseph Siegle, director of research at the Africa Center for Strategic Studies. Senegal has historically promoted democratic norms, free speech, opposition party participation, and security in the region, Siegle said. It's a stark contrast to surrounding states in the region — military coups have destabilized the governments of neighboring Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Guinea in recent years. Siegle said the recent election reiterates Senegal's role as an exemplar of democratic leadership in the region."Senegal provides a very important counterpoint that this is how you realize change. You do it through legal means, through constitutional means, through transparent means," Siegle said. The election was also a significant indication of the strength of Senegal's democratic institutions, as the judiciary promptly interpreted the constitution and rescheduled the elections in response to the postponement, said Adele Ravidà, senior election systems advisor and country director for Senegal at the International Foundation for Electoral Systems. She added that, given that these events were unforeseen, the judiciary's actions created a precedent that increased its capabilities to respond to incidents of instability. "This was the strength of the judiciary in Senegal, the fact that even in a situation in which there is no law, that they can find a solution to the situation," Ravidà said.Faye's presidency could bring about further strengthening of Senegal's democratic institutions. Faye has campaigned on an anti-establishment platform, stating that he plans to reduce corruption in the government and strengthen checks on presidential power. Ravidà says it is still early to say what the potential of this new government is in fulfilling these claims. Siegle said Faye's policies may be cause for cautious optimism that democratic norms will be further bolstered. "That's encouraging, and given the strain to some of these norms we've seen in the last couple of years, that's welcome and would be much valued across Senegal," he said.Ravidà added that the election demonstrates the power of civil society in mobilizing to enact change."[The Senegalese people] are giving the chance now to this new generation of leaders to show if they can really rule the country well. But the population is mature enough to consider that if they are not doing well, in the next five years they give the opportunity to another party or a different leader." President Biden congratulated Faye for his victory in a statement on Wednesday. In a press conference on Monday, U.S. State Department Spokesperson Matthew Miller said "the commitment of the Senegalese people to the democratic process is part of the foundation of our deep friendship and strong bilateral ties."Faye has iterated his intention to continue to maintain Senegal's bilateral partnerships with its diplomatic partners. The U.S. currently maintains close military ties with Senegal, Siegle told RS. The countries' militaries are partners in peacekeeping operations in the region, with the U.S. supplying aid and deploying troops to Senegal to help counter crises in the region.Faye will be officially declared the next president of Senegal on Friday, in the event that no complaint against the electoral process is filed by Thursday night, an event Ravidà says is not anticipated. The official transfer of power will take place on April 2, the day Sall's presidential mandate ends.

The general silence around the progressive establishment as the current Democratic administration prepares to launch military strikes against more foreign targets risking a wider war in the Middle East is so depressing and disconcerting.As deeply disturbed I am about Rep. Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) recent bizarre and absurd attacks on peace advocates, I am even more distressed about the prospect of a casual stroll into an all out war against Iran in response to the militia attack on U.S. military personnel near the Jordan/Syria border over the weekend, which killed three Americans and wounded dozens more. Why U.S. troops are even there to begin with is a whole other matter.Since Hamas's brutal attack on Israel on October 7 and Israel's invasion of Gaza in response, Biden administration officials and the president himself have repeatedly said they do not want the conflict to spiral out of control in the region. But in response to the attack on U.S. troops at the Jordan/Syria border, President Biden is reportedly considering "striking Iranian personnel in Syria or Iraq or Iranian naval assets in the Persian Gulf" which, if he follows through, could carry with it a tit-for-tat path of escalation that risks spiraling out of control. Also, the Biden administration apparently does not see a link between U.S. support for Israel's carnage in Gaza and the violence in the Red Sea and elsewhere in the region. Instead, Politico reported this week that an unnamed U.S. official "poured cold water on a pair of alternative options the U.S. could take: Reassessing troop deployments in the region and pressuring Israel to end fighting in Gaza, since that's what has been angering the proxy groups."The same report, however, quoted former State Department official and international law expert Brian Finucane saying that "non-military options are likely to be more effective at bringing about an end to attacks on U.S. troops."Keep in mind President Biden is already on record saying that recent U.S. strikes targeting the Houthis haven't been working. Furthermore, Qatar has already reportedly warned that U.S. retaliation to strikes in Jordan could hurt the ongoing hostage negotiations.There have been some in the progressive foreign policy space offering sober, level-headed progressive approaches on how to diffuse the tension. For example, Matt Duss, former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders, has suggested better non-military options like negotiating a new Iran nuclear deal, pushing for a legitimate two-state solution, and conditioning U.S. military aid to Israel. "Ultimately, you need to get to some kind of modus vivendi of which Iran is a part," he said.Win Without War, a grassroots focused group that promotes progressive foreign policy, has been on point as usual with their messaging imploring President Biden to change his current course in the Middle East. But apart from that, there are not many people speaking out from the progressive mainstream and there are very few, if any calls to action.Meanwhile, many on the right wing are filling the void and talking the most sense about the situation at this moment. For example, Tucker Carlson called Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) "f*cking lunatics" for calling on Biden to attack Iran. Former GOP presidential candidate and now Trump surrogate Vivek Ramaswamy blasted Graham and Nikki Haley for "giddily calling" for war: "It's disgusting & says a lot about the kind of GOP they're trying to recreate," Ramaswamy tweeted. And Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) piled on, asking Graham, "Is there anyone you don't want to bomb?"This should be a four alarm fire. If I was at my old job running the political advocacy programs at CREDO Mobile today, emails would be going out lighting up the Capitol Hill switchboards trying to prevent a Democratic president from leaning even further into this maddening military conflict (which is exactly what we did a handful of times during the Obama administration).Where is the leadership from the Left — leaders at big organizations with outsized email programs and social media assets to deploy?What is happening? Is there anyone effectively organizing against Biden just casually leading us into another war? I fully support an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and an immediate release of all hostages. Those two outcomes are linked. And, I admire everyone pouring their heart and soul into their advocacy to make that a reality.But, right now, President Biden and his team are sleepwalking into a direct war in the Middle East, a course of action that will be beyond devastating and one that requires the Left's urgent attention.

Another joker popped out of the deck last
month concerning the increasingly-voluminous and complex litigation
surrounding Louisiana congressional reapportionment that likely makes the odds
even more certain that resolution won't come until the 2026 election cycle.North of the state in the Eighth Circuit Court of
Appeals, a three-judge panel agreed in an Arkansas case
that only the federal government can file judicial action against maps under
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The Louisiana case, which seeks to
invalidate the state's current map with one out of six majority-minority
districts in a state where residents claiming some black ancestry make up
almost a third of the population, was filed by a private group, not the federal
government.That case, which has ping-ponged between the
state's Middle District and the Fifth Circuit, as part of its deliberation by a
separate three-judge panel briefly
addressed this issue, known as a private right of action. It conceded that
as other jurisdictions had acknowledged the right exists that it would assume
the same in this instance.But that's no longer the case with the Eighth
Circuit panel ruling, and with that divergence now begs U.S. Supreme Court
intervention, pending what the entire circuit will do assuming the plaintiffs
appeal that way. The Court almost certainly would intervene if a party with an
active case, after two circuits with open cases have ruled differently on the
issue, asks for that.However, before that step, Republican Atty. Gen. Jeff Landry, now citing the Arkansas
case, has added this to a request
for the entire Fifth Circuit to hear the case that, at its last stop, went back
to district court to administer a deadline set by the panel of Jan. 15 for the
state to redraw the current map. Subsequently, the district
court extended the deadline for the state to act to Jan. 30.Yet even if the entire circuit refuses to hear the
case, leaving the private right of action in force, then Landry could appeal to
the U.S. Supreme Court and freeze the case. Presumably, the Fifth Circuit would
act on the request no later than the first of the year, just prior to the
change of administrations to Landry and seating of a new Legislature, which
then Landry if turned down then could launch an emergency appeal to the Court, and
because of the inconvenience involved to the state almost certainly would act
quickly to freeze the case and then potentially decide to hear it over the
issue of private right to action.Or, the Fifth Circuit could hear the case, which
in its present form is about how much opportunity and time the state would have
to draw a new map, pushing back any resolution. Or, a party to another active
case outside the Eight Circuit could ask for that Court to deal with the
private right to action issue, which would freeze the Louisiana case.You get the picture. Given that, practically
speaking, a map must be in place no later than the end of the regular
legislative session in early June for a fall election without harmful confusion
to occur, adding this issue to existing ambiguities in that no existing law or judicial
decision as of yet requires Louisiana to draw more than one M/M district
which is what the plaintiffs want as a solution and that the decision in the
Court case
earlier this year that opened the door to giving race preferential treatment in
reapportionment also contains the seeds
of a constitutional challenge to that means lengthy legal byplay making
meeting that deadline virtually impossible.This tussle is like an overtime professional
football game where a team (the defendants, the state) were driving to the
winning score but were thwarted on the goal line by the opposition (the
plaintiffs, the special interests, when the Court ruled in their favor). But,
instead of driving the length of the field to secure the win against a stout
defense, the other team wants the officials immediately to award them the win (the
two M/M districts) as soon as possible without further hiking of the ball.With now two serious constitutional questions in
play as well as uncertainty over just how preferential a role race can play if
that interpretation withstands the questions, you can't rush matters, which the
plaintiffs want so they can impose for them a politically-desirable solution
without proper scrutiny. Hopefully, the judiciary will allow for hashing out
these questions, which almost certainly would leave present district lines in
place for another election cycle.

Sergei Sivokho, Ukrainian peace activist, succumbed to chronic asthma and passed away on October 17. His name was not well known outside Ukraine, perhaps because, in these angry times, he sought to reconcile Ukrainians rather than drive them apart. One wonders if, in the end, this big bear of a man died of a broken heart.Sivokho rose to political prominence thanks to his close personal friendship with Volodymyr Zelensky. He was the creative producer of the comedy show Kvartal 95 and after Zelensky's unexpected victory, the newly minted president tried to get him to run for public office. Sivokho, originally a native of Donbass, asked instead to be appointed advisor to the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine with the remit of advising on humanitarian policies toward his native region. Very quickly, however, he came to the conclusion that peace in Ukraine had to be approached from a radically different perspective, namely by putting an end to what he termed "the war inside our own heads." According to Sivokho: "More terrible than the coronavirus is the virus of hatred. It is important to change not only the attitude of the state to its citizens, but the attitude of people to each other . . . What my team is doing is trying to incline people to mutual understanding . . . because the peace that we are all seeking begins in the hearts and minds of every Ukrainian "At first Sivokho's optimism was echoed by Zelensky himself. At the 2020 Munich Security Conference, and later at the Forum on Unity in Mariupol, Zelensky called for "a massive national dialogue," where people could discuss their common future face-to-face. To this end, he endorsed Sivokho's pet project — a National Platform for Reconciliation and Unity — which was formally presented to the public on March 12, 2020. That presentation, however, lasted just 20 minutes, because a gang of some 70 young people from the National Corps (the civilian wing of the Azov Battalion) stormed into the hall, and with shouts of "traitor," pushed Sivokho until he fell to the ground. Sivokho was fired from his advisory government position two weeks later.It may seem odd that even before Russia's invasion, merely mentioning reconciliation and dialogue could arouse so much anger, until one realizes that what Sivokho was actually asking for was a fundamental shift in Ukrainian political thinking. In his mind, Ukrainians had to recognize that they all bear some measure of responsibility for the conflict in Donbass, and specifically for dehumanizing the Other Ukrainians, those who do not think or talk the way they do. Such policies, he argued, began well before 2014. His words aroused intense anger among Ukrainian nationalists, who were further outraged by his assertion that, "the time has come to correct mistakes, to forgive and to ask for forgiveness . . . to talk to the people living in the uncontrolled territories." After being fired, and despite threats on his life, Sivokho persisted in his peace efforts until the very end. Over time, he became increasingly critical of government policy, though never of his longtime friend, Zelensky. He called for changes to the Ukrainian language laws that severely restrict the public use of Russian. He said that the government's refusal to implement the Minsk Accords had led Ukraine into a dark and isolated corner.He even revealed publicly that the rebels had made a formal proposal to return nationalized companies to their Ukrainian owners, and to have the contentious "special status" for Donbass end in 2050, and he rebuked the Ukrainian government for refusing to even talk to the rebels. Rather than prohibiting contacts between local officials across the contact line, Sivokho urged them to talk to each other. "Imagine," he says, "how they would rejoice and sorrow together. If they were only allowed to return there, they would restore their villages on their own, from both sides. What a fantastic example that would be!"His last public battle was to prevent passage of the draconian law "On the Basics of State Policy in the Transition Period," sponsored by then Minister for Reintegration of the Occupied Territories (later Minister of Defense), Oleksiy Reznikov. Sivokho complained bitterly that the Reznikov Plan, which was approved by the Cabinet of Ministers in August 2021, treated the Ukrainians in Donbass and Crimea as a conquered people.Rather than allowing animosities to subside, he said, this would ensure that they are passed on to future generations. The rebels themselves would be long gone, but like Banquo's Ghost, their spirit would still haunt Ukraine's future, an impertinent reminder of the Other, Russophone Ukraine, that Ukrainian nationalists would still be busily trying to erase.Some Ukrainian nationalists will rejoice at the demise of this inconvenient Ukrainian patriot who fought tirelessly to overcome the country's divisions by preaching mutual forgiveness. His personal quest for peace may now be over, but we should all hope, for Ukraine's sake, that his mission is taken up by others.

It's not too early to declare some winners
and losers in Louisiana's state elections this cycle, primarily because so
many contests already have been decided or wrote on the wall what will come in next
month's runoff elections.

WINNER: Jeff Landry. The Republican attorney
general wiped out all opposition in the gubernatorial race, in the most
impressive display of the 1974 Constitution era. He became the first first-time
candidate ever to win without a runoff and joining only Democrat Edwin Edwards
(1983), Republican Mike Foster (1999), and Republican Bobby Jindal (2007 and
2011) in pulling off the feat of a general election triumph. That he did so
bodes well for his powers of persuasion in herding the Legislature, which
almost certainly will deliver supermajorities for his party, towards delivering
on an agenda that looks to be the most transformative in a century.

WINNER: Billy Nungesser.
The chattering class (see Loser below) thought he could give Landry a run for
his money and were somewhat surprised when the Republican passed on that race
to win reelection as lieutenant governor. Perhaps he knew something that other
like GOP Treas. John Schroder
and GOP state Sen. Sharon Hewitt
didn't, that Landry would win. His big win keeps him in office while others
retire or hope to bag jobs in the Landry Administration.

WINNER: Jefferson Parish GOP legislators.
Too often, a majority of this group abandoned a conservative agenda in favor of
licking the boots of Democrat Gov. John Bel Edwards, which
made a few of them targets in their reelection campaigns of conservative insurgents.
Those challenged all survived, from narrowly to easily. Now they conveniently can
flip-flop to back Landry's agenda (with one exception: closed primaries that
threaten their continued service) since they know they can't stop it and thus
try to keep their political careers alive.

LOSER: Louisiana Democrats. The party's
ruling white powerbrokers ran a poor gubernatorial candidate in the form of former
cabinet member Shawn Wilson, knowing they had to have some black face to head
the ticket to stave off extremist left insurgent black competitors. The
inevitability of Landry also discouraged turnout, dooming any chance to prevent
Republicans from doing no worse in legislative contests that ensured retention
of a supermajority. Landry's win and separate Board of Elementary and Secondary
Education campaigns that also weren't close now gives the GOP a commanding 9-2
edge on that body. And Republicans after Nov. 18 will have swept all statewide
offices, after all but one of these contests put them within a few points of
winning outright in the general election, if not Landry and Nungesser winning
then.

Two other indicators demonstrate the reality of this
rout. A white Democrat minister named Danny Cole raised and spent no money in
running for governor, conducting his campaign solely through free social media
and personal appearances, yet grabbed 3 percent of the vote, such was the dissatisfaction
with Wilson. And in Caddo Parish, for sheriff former Shreveport city councilor
Republican John Nickelson racked up
45 percent of the vote against black Democrat former Shreveport chief
administrative officer Henry Whitehorn's 35 percent, even though Nickelson has
no law enforcement experience and Whitehorn has decades of it, in a parish
with a solid Democrat plurality and bare white plurality. Statewide Democrats
had zero coattails, and the results sends the strongest signal yet that unless
it abandons its far-left agenda it will have no impact on policy-making on
state issues.

LOSER: Legacy media. Whatever generally left-leaning
newspaper and television outlets did, in terms of story selections trying to
slow Landry or cajoling him to turn out for debates hoping to catch him off guard,
failed. Landry as well as a number of conservative candidates simply ignored
media requests and campaigned emphasizing cutting out intermediaries like the
media – Landry showed up for exactly one of several media-sponsored candidate
forums – by going directly to voters. As a result, the state's chattering class
had almost no influence on election outcomes and face increasing irrelevancy in
trying to shape policy outcomes going forward.

LOSER: Clay Schexnayder.
After four years of serving as House of Representative speaker kissing up to
Edwards on budget and several other major issues, although the dictates of the
GOP supermajority more often pushed policy in a conservative direction, Schexnayder
hoped that this triangulation legacy could retain enough conservatives and capture
enough non-conservatives in the electorate to attain the secretary of state's
office, aided by business-as-usual monied interests, to extend his political
career and set himself up for future advancement. Instead, he finished a dismal
fourth that extinguishes his hopes.

Democrat 19th Judicial District Attorney
Hillar Moore III did the right
thing in pursuing
legal action to clarify powers invested in the Louisiana
Pardon Board and Committee on Parole, subject to a power play by Democrat Gov.
John Bel Edwards reaching
from the political grave.

Earlier
this year, Edwards admitted to what had been long suspected that he opposed
capital punishment. This sent out a dog whistle to others of that ilk in the
legal profession, who then helped line up clemency requests from all but one Louisiana
inmate sentenced for execution in order to get an unprecedently-quick
resolution hopefully in favor of a positive recommendation, which then would
allow Edwards to issue the commutation prior to his leaving office earlier this
year.

The Board, comprised of Edwards appointees to the
coveted positions that are the only in state government where panel appointees
draw a salary (up to $50,000 annually, but at least changes in the last decade
now mandate that they have experience in areas related to criminal justice),
initially shot down the request after perusing an opinion issued by
Republican Atty. Gen. Jeff Landry's
office. Analyzing the Louisiana Administrative Code and the policy
statements
for the Board drawn from it, plus the relevant Administrative Procedure Act
procedures that brought these into force, it concluded that the Board could not
bypass the requirement that a year at least had to separate clemency appeals to
have a hearing. The one exception would be when an execution is imminent.

This made just about every such inmate ineligible to
have these heard, as they routinely request hearings only to have these denied
like clockwork. Only by having a hearing scheduled and then winning an
affirmative vote can commutation to life imprisonment occur upon assent by the governor.

But another part of those statements says that the
governor can force the Board to hold hearings at his request, creating a legal
impasse. After Edwards issued just such a request, the Board duly has queued
up 20 such hearings over its next four scheduled meetings, Oct. 13, Nov. 7,
Nov. 13, and Nov. 27. The Board stated this was the most it could handle given
the extraordinary amount of preparation that goes into capital cases that typically
takes around a year.

The first takes place one day before the gubernatorial
general election, of which Landry, a death penalty supporter, is the front
runner. Among the five are some of the most controversial capital cases in
Louisiana history. They include Daniel Irish, who killed in cold blood and
peripherally involved the son of Bossier City's then mayor, a bail bondsman,
when he fled to his residence before arrest; Winthrop Eaton, who murdered
beloved minister Rev. Lea Joyner; and perhaps the most notorious of all, the
only woman on death row Antionette Frank, a policewoman who abetted in the
murder of another policeman and killed restaurant owners/operators in a robbery
and potentially revenge scheme gone bad.

It seems highly doubtful the Board would recommend
clemency for any of them, given their histories and heretofore unwillingness for
it even to give them hearings. And it seems Edwards won't be able to apply much
pressure to them to bend to his will on this or the next three batches of five,
as after the first it likely will have become clear Landry will become the next
governor, with after the third the general election runoff will have finished with
signs pointing to a Landry victory there. Even if not Landry, it's almost
certain a Republican will win who doesn't share Edwards' infatuation with
getting rid of the death penalty.

Votes for clemency, which again would demonstrate
a remarkable turnaround for a Board that as recently as this year demonstrated
it schedules hearings and even approves
of commutations from capital to life sentences when
warranted and not for political reasons, would happen only if Edwards'
fading political power somehow sways the Board. And any reversal wouldn't be
for merit of the cases, but simply because of an ideology that disbelieves in
capital punishment.

Regardless, Moore's request to have the courts
cancel hearings for the three inmates sentenced to death under his jurisdiction
(other DAs intend to follow up with inmates under their jurisdictions) is
valuable because it would bring clarification to code that, on balance, gives
precedence to the year minimum delay, absent an upcoming execution, over a
governor's ability to force a hearing. A successful injunction would bring
clarity and a reaffirmation of the rule of law, rather than dispensing with it
when it clashes with a preferred ideologically-driven outcome. Let's hope the
Louisiana judiciary confirms that.

For the increasingly-desperate opponents of
Republican Atty. Gen. Jeff Landry
to keep him from triumphing in the governor's race, it's pinning their hopes on
making a thousand cuts – even if the "wounds" aren't real.

Just over a month prior to the general election,
Landry continues to have a commanding lead in the contest, much to the chagrin
of other candidates and their backers. Party regulars among Democrats behind Democrat
former cabinet member Shawn Wilson and
the party's white populist rump pinning their fading hopes on independent trial
lawyer Hunter Lundy see Landry
as the most dangerous to their agendas, while other Republicans and their
supporters see these candidates' chances of getting into a runoff with Wilson
and therefore an easy win going up the road.

So, to varying degrees, they have formed an unofficial
conspiracy to try to stop Landry. Their problem is his agenda is popular and
his background, often successfully through the powers of his office providing a
conservative foil to Democrats Pres. Joe Biden
and Gov. John Bel
Edwards, has inspired confidence among many voters that he best can start
the process of ejecting liberalism from Louisiana governance.

The strategy rests upon trying to dig up so many
little, if not microscopic, things that can make Landry look bad that his
candidacy dies from a thousand cuts. Within the past month, Landry found
himself subject to an ethics investigation over failure to file a document
about donated travel and struck by a negative
advertisement about a campaign donor in trouble for allegedly deceptive
legal practices.

The timing isn't coincidental. The trip, where
Landry hitched a ride with a longtime friend with no business with the state to
a conference, happened a couple of years ago, but only now came to the
attention of the state's Board of Ethics. That panel
populated with members with antipathy towards conservatives (Edwards
appointees from lists compiled by private college leaders, who as a whole don't
exactly lean to the right of the political spectrum) then voted to file charges
over failure to file the document – Landry essentially to himself – to be heard
in the near future.

It comes now because few would have known about
trip, and the person after not seeing a form filed held onto this until right
before the election – most likely somebody with connections to Republicans not
a fan of Landry's. Of course, the Edwards allies on the Board, given the
information, would run with it.

The ad by the GOP Treas. John Schroder campaign came from sharp
eyes culling the nearly 3,000 donors in the last quarter to Landry's campaign.
But it's no more than a wild attempt to create guilt by association where the campaign
can't control who gives to it and Landry's office has no role in determining
whether the donor violated legal ethics or the law.

The latest
involves a political
action committee of very shadowy origins, but which few records about it
points towards the Republican former gubernatorial appointee Stephen Waguespack, which ran the ad over
the weekend principally on the web. It accused Landry of giving an alleged
donor preferential treatment in prosecution.

Except that this accusation appears entirely fabricated.
So much, in fact, that a state court ordered cessation of its circulation.
Typically, the judiciary allows wide leeway in vetting the contents of campaign
ads over the very narrow grounds for injunctions, so to take this step
indicated a very blatant disregard for truth in the ad's contents.

But that wasn't the point of its creators, who
surely would have known the real facts of the case and that Landry's campaign never
received a penny from the accused given media coverage if it – also two years
ago – and transparency about donors. They likely knew it legally would get shot
down quickly because of its extreme departure from the truth, and they chose a
cheap path to thrust it into public view. Their end goal merely was to have it
discussed that could create an anti-Landry impression.

This all reeks of desperation, but also shows off
the competence behind the Landry team and Landry's campaigning skills. Over the
past two decades, all too often leading conservative candidates have been hit
with negative ads at best circumstantial, at worst ridiculous, where the
campaign belatedly if at all responded either with ads or other communications
countering the narrative or with legal action. The Landry campaign's swift
dismantling of this particular narrative means the incident will have close to
zero, if not zero, impact on the race.

Yet it doesn't mean further attempts won't be
made. That's to be expected as Landry's juggernaut to the state's highest
office seems to continue with few brakes.

Colin Grabow


After years of planning and preparation, the Vineyard Wind project is swinging into high gear. Wind turbine monopiles recently arrived from Spain have been loaded onto a specialized vessel that is now installing them off the coast of Massachusetts. When that job is complete it will return to port for another batch. But these back‐​and‐​forth trips don't involve a nearby Massachusetts port, or any U.S. port for that matter. Rather, thanks to the protectionist Jones Act the hub of this activity is Halifax, Nova Scotia over 400 miles away from the future wind farm.
Passed in 1920, the Jones Act restricts the waterborne transportation of "merchandise" between two U.S. "points" to vessels that are U.S.-registered, U.S.-built and mostly U.S.-crewed and owned. In the offshore wind context, U.S. points include both the port that vessels depart from as well as the installation site, while wind turbine components—including foundations (monopiles)—constitute merchandise. As no U.S.-flagged and built installation vessels currently exist to transport monopiles from a U.S. port to the Vineyard Wind site, the only viable option is the use of a foreign installation vessel operating out of a foreign port—in this case Halifax.
Operating out of more distant ports brings added complications. In 2020—again because of the Jones Act—Halifax was used as the staging ground for installing a pair of wind turbines 800 miles away off the coast of Virginia instead of a closer U.S. port. The New York Times described the 1920 law as the project manager's biggest problem, contributing to the installation effort lasting a full year rather than the matter of weeks it would have taken in Europe.
Three years later, the Vineyard Wind project finds itself in a similar position. Thankfully, the round‐​trip from Halifax to the installation site near Martha's Vineyard is significantly shorter. But the number of wind turbines involved is also far greater at 62, necessitating at least 11 round trips from Nova Scotia compared to six for the Virginia project.
Help—of sorts—is on the way. The first wind turbine installation vessel that fully complies with the Jones Act is slated to be delivered by a Texas shipyard later this year (although whether this happens as scheduled remains to be seen—of two ships ordered from the shipyard in 2017 for a 2020 delivery, one wasn't delivered until July 2022 while the other still has yet to be delivered). Once in operation, the vessel will allow for turbine components to be loaded in U.S. ports rather than using less efficient Jones Act workarounds.
The bad news is that the $500 million vessel—an amount that exceeds the international price for such vessels by approximately $170 million—appears set to see its price further balloon at least partly due to the shipyard's inexperience in building such vessels. Furthermore, no more such vessels are currently in the pipeline. And with prices estimated to have now climbed to $800 million, it's unclear whether any ever will be.
It's not just the installation vessels that feature eye‐​popping prices either. As a recent report from consulting firm Intelatus Global Partners points out, U.S.-built service operation vessels used to maintain offshore wind farms after they are built are estimated to have prices 40 to 140 percent greater than those constructed overseas. Given prices that exceed $50 million for such vessels overseas, that's potentially tens of millions of dollars in added cost per vessel. With some analysts projecting that up to 15 such vessels will be required to meet U.S. offshore wind needs, the toll exacted by U.S. protectionism will not be cheap.
Unfortunately, the problems may not end there.
Rather than seeking to relieve the burden posed by protectionist U.S. laws, some in Congress are advancing legislation that would impose further restrictions on the offshore energy sector's use of foreign vessels and mariners. Such legislation comes despite the fact that, beyond a lack of specialized vessels, the U.S. maritime industry is also suffering from a shortage of U.S. mariners—particularly those with offshore wind experience. Unsurprisingly, the offshore wind industry is fiercely opposed.
It's beyond the scope of this blog post to assess whether offshore wind energy is sensible or not. If the development of this industry is to be pursued, however, it should be done in the most efficient and cost‐​effective manner possible. U.S. maritime protectionism—like all protectionism—only guarantees inefficiency, higher costs, and waste. If President Biden truly believes that climate change is a "clear and present danger to the United States" and that offshore wind should play a key role in mitigating this threat, then he—and other policymakers who share such convictions—should urgently push for the removal or relaxation of Jones Act restrictions.