Legal Reform
Republicans, Democrats, and Independents from all across the country understand that our society has become litigious to an extreme degree. Texas has been active for years at improving this problem behind Texans for Lawuit Reform. Since 1994, TLR has worked to pass lawsuit reforms that have made the Lone Star State a model for the nation. TLR describes the problem best on their website www.tortreform.com. "We are small business owners, homemakers, and community volunteers. We are lawyers who want our profession back, and plant managers who want our companies to expand facilities to create jobs for Texans. We are consumers who want to eliminate the wasteful "tort tax" from the products and services produced in Texas. We are ranchers and teachers who have anguished over needless lawsuits. We are doctors and nurses who have seen our colleagues abandon their chosen professions because of the emotional and financial toll imposed by legal assaults. We are the citizens of Texas who want a better future for ourselves and our children." The ability to bring suit for a grievance is an important right in America that must not be abused either from limitation to use or excessive use. Today it is excessive use. The Overcriminalization guide prepared by The Heritage Foundation is an eye opener.
Archive Related Items

How About Including Diversity of Thought?

11/25/19
from The Gray Area:
11/24/19:

Ruth Simmons, the former president of Brown University, was the first African American to serve in that role at an Ivy League university. Her op-ed in The Washington Post reflecting on her story and the Harvard Race Conscious Admissions policy recently found to be constitutional by a federal judge, is a worthwhile read. Ms Simmons gives a calm and thoughtful expression of her views on the positive outcomes from diversity in education. One you would expect from an educator of her stature.

University's should be able to admit whomever they wish, period. There admissions policies are their admissions policies. I believe that is what the federal judge in this case is saying. And, if so, he would be correct in my view.

In recent years, to satisfy our need for fairness and equality, we have gotten away from the personal freedoms we have all enjoyed in this country since our founding. Instituting laws and regulations to legislate fairness and equality do not create a more perfect society. Instead they limit those freedoms we hold most dear. Freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of religion, freedom from unlawful search and seizure, etc.

Our government has directed 'quota style systems' for universities to follow that create unnatural standards that limits diversity. As such, this, and other lawsuits like it, have been filed to bring awareness to such unintentional consequences.

For this decision to be a real victory for diversity, Harvard and other universities need to include greater diversity than just race. Thoughts, world views, and other life experiences should be sought out and included in Harvard's and others admission policies. If we want to return to the educational ideals of free expression and open debate while progressing forward toward our desire to include all peoples, then we will have made some progress from this judicial review.

I consider this to be Ms. Simmons view as well.

If we only consider race to be diversity, we will continue to fail.

More From The Washington Post (subscription required):



365 Days Page
Archive Related Items
Comment ( 0 )