<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>U.S. Constitution .org</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.usconstitution.org/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.usconstitution.org</link>
	<description>Putting Freedom on the Offensive - Where It Belongs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 19:19:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Brilliant Simplicity of the United States Constitution</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/all/the-brilliant-simplicity-of-the-united-states-constitution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/all/the-brilliant-simplicity-of-the-united-states-constitution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:42:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[negative rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new democracies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[positive rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6571</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ryan Young of the Competitive Enterprise Institute today had this to say about the U.S. Constitution, in an article entitled &#8220;Simplicity is Beautiful: How to build a democracy&#8220;: The U.S. Constitution is a model of simplicity. That’s the secret of its success. You can read the whole thing in under a half hour. It’s only about [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/all/the-brilliant-simplicity-of-the-united-states-constitution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Let&#8217;s Boil This Down: Is Government Employment a Right or a Privilege?</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/administrative-process/lets-boil-this-down-is-government-employment-a-right-or-a-privilege/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/administrative-process/lets-boil-this-down-is-government-employment-a-right-or-a-privilege/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:45:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Administrative Process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Service Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Service Reform Act of 1978]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elgin v. Dep’t of the Treasury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[merit system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Merit Systems Protection Board]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[removal power]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6559</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First, let me say: the title of this article is an oversimplification of the legal issues in this case.  Still, the question of whether government employment is a right or a privilege pervades the facts of this case, which the Supreme Court will hear soon.  From SCOTUSblog: Plain English Issue: Under a federal law known [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/administrative-process/lets-boil-this-down-is-government-employment-a-right-or-a-privilege/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Congressional Review Act as Legislative Veto Redux?  Not Quite</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/legislative-process/congressional-review-act-as-legislative-veto-redux-not-quite/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/legislative-process/congressional-review-act-as-legislative-veto-redux-not-quite/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 23:56:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislative Process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congressional Review Act of 1996]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INS v Chadha]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legislative veto]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulatory process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rulemaking authority]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6538</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ This is interesting news.  We&#8217;ll see how far it gets: Republicans in Congress launched bids Thursday to nullify Obama administration rules that would speed up union elections and set the first national air pollution standards for toxic mercury pollution from the nation&#8217;s power plants. The rarely used tactic, known as a resolution of disapproval, requires a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/legislative-process/congressional-review-act-as-legislative-veto-redux-not-quite/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What the Extreme Unpopularity of Congress Says About Our Political Process</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/general/what-the-extreme-unpopularity-of-congress-says-about-our-political-process/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/general/what-the-extreme-unpopularity-of-congress-says-about-our-political-process/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:41:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congressional unpopularity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[direct primaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[incumbency advantage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political polarization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistricting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6527</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is scary: How much do Americans hate Congress? A new poll shows that 56 percent of Americans would vote to defeat and replace every member in Congress, including their own. And 76 percent say most members do not deserve to be reelected. It is important to note, given the percentages cited, that it is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/general/what-the-extreme-unpopularity-of-congress-says-about-our-political-process/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Serving the Public or Lording Over the People?</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/administrative-process/serving-the-public-or-lording-over-the-people/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/administrative-process/serving-the-public-or-lording-over-the-people/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 16:54:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Administrative Process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civil service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deficit spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal pay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pay freeze]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6518</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chris Edward of Cato Institute has an article today about the response to the payroll tax bill: As part of the payroll tax bill on Friday, Congress voted to tweak federal worker benefits. New federal hires will be required to make an additional contribution to their pension plans. While just a small change, federal worker unions railed against the bill as [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/administrative-process/serving-the-public-or-lording-over-the-people/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>As Rome Burns, Social Issues Predominate the Presidential Race</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/nominating-process/as-rome-burns-social-issues-predominate-the-presidential-race/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/nominating-process/as-rome-burns-social-issues-predominate-the-presidential-race/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:33:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects of Direct Primaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nominating Process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[direct primaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fiscal conservatism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social conservatism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Constitution]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6482</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Have you ever wondered why issues like gay marriage and abortion remain in the background until election season?  James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal interviewed Jeffrey Bell on the subject: Social conservatism, Mr. Bell argues in his forthcoming book, &#8220;The Case for Polarized Politics,&#8221; has a winning track record for the GOP. &#8220;Social issues [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/nominating-process/as-rome-burns-social-issues-predominate-the-presidential-race/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Today in History: &#8220;Washington&#8217;s Birthday&#8221; or &#8220;Presidents&#8217; Day&#8221;?</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/political-theory/today-in-history-washingtons-birthday-or-presidents-day/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/political-theory/today-in-history-washingtons-birthday-or-presidents-day/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:09:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Form of Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Presidential Power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President's Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Constitution]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6464</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some of you who have been reading previous posts may already know where I am going with this.  By way of introduction, let me include a few words from David Boaz of the Cato Institute: In an era of brilliant men, Washington was not the deepest thinker. He never wrote a book or even a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/political-theory/today-in-history-washingtons-birthday-or-presidents-day/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s That Sound?  The Approach of an Another Lopsided Presidential Election?</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/nominating-process/whats-that-sound-the-approach-of-another-lopsided-presidential-election/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/nominating-process/whats-that-sound-the-approach-of-another-lopsided-presidential-election/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:23:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects of Direct Primaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nominating Process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Presidential Nominations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Constitution]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6432</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today Politico reports continuing concerns over the viability of a Romney candidacy for the presidency: There are growing calls for an alternative to Mitt Romney as the Republican standard-bearer, with the names of Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie again being seen as the most likely saviors. With concerns over Romney rising after [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/nominating-process/whats-that-sound-the-approach-of-another-lopsided-presidential-election/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Today In History: Japanese Internment Executive Order 9066 Signed by FDR</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/civil-liberties/today-in-history-japanese-internment-executive-order-9066-signed-by-fdr/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/civil-liberties/today-in-history-japanese-internment-executive-order-9066-signed-by-fdr/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:42:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Due Process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fifth Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Habeas Corpus]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6460</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let today be a reminder to those who say that &#8220;It Can&#8217;t Happen Here&#8221; and that freedom is only of concern to extremist cranks.  From Executive Order 9066: By virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States, and Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy, I hereby authorize and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/civil-liberties/today-in-history-japanese-internment-executive-order-9066-signed-by-fdr/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Change That Would Matter: Reforming the Congressional Budget Process</title>
		<link>http://www.usconstitution.org/congressional-organization/congressional-budget-process/change-that-would-matter-reforming-the-congressional-budget-process/</link>
		<comments>http://www.usconstitution.org/congressional-organization/congressional-budget-process/change-that-would-matter-reforming-the-congressional-budget-process/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 12:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Walter Bagehot</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congressional Budget Process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congressional Organization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Constitution]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.usconstitution.org/?p=6420</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A couple of days ago I received a notice that this bill had been introduced in the House by Rep. Bill Johnson of Ohio: H.R.4036 To amend the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 to impose a daily reduction in the rates of pay for Members of Congress if Congress fails to agree to a concurrent resolution [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.usconstitution.org/congressional-organization/congressional-budget-process/change-that-would-matter-reforming-the-congressional-budget-process/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

