Mediaboss Marketing

And what is there now? For The Mystery of Capital, de Soto took satellite photos of the slums of cities like Cairo, Lima, and Port-au-Prince. His research team then imposed a grid on the photos and counted the number of slum dwellings within each square of the grid. They inquired locally about the value of these dwellings, and found that it might be as little as $500. Then they multiplied: the dwellings value times the number of dwellings in the square; then times the number of squares in the entire slum. He concluded:

So what is the value of all the buildings that are owned extralegally, especially by the poor, in Egypt? The reply is $241 billion. What percentage of Egyptians own real estate outside the law? The reply is 92 percent

How much is $241 billion? It's fifty-five times bigger than all foreign direct investment in Egypt over the last 200 years, including the Suez Canal and the Aswan Dam, thirty times greater than the market value of all the companies recorded on the Cairo Stock Exchange, and roughly sixty-eight times the value of all foreign and bilateral aid received by Egypt, including World Bank loans. In other words, the group in Egypt with the largest accumulation of assets that could be converted into capital are the poor, but theyre not inside the legal system and you cant create a market economy out of them until they are governed by the rule of law.

(I should mention here that de Soto hired me to help him finish The Mystery of Capital.)

De Sotos remedy: Give these de facto owners legal title to their dwellings. Give them the ability to buy and sell their dwellings, to rent to tenants, to borrow against their homes to start businesses or educate their children. Follow that step with other reforms to bring factories and farms and jitney buses within the law, too. Then watch.

De Sotos two books made him an international intellectual celebrity who conferred with presidents and prime ministers. He became a large figure inside Peru, too, perhaps the most visible face of market-opening reform. But the reforms he urged were not quite the reforms that arrived.

In November 2000, Peru returned to democracy after the seven-year dictatorship of Alberto Fujimori. Along with his many abuses, Fujimori bequeathed a legacy of economic reform: controlled public spending, moderate public debt. (Pre-pandemic, Perus debt totaled about 25 percent of GDP, less than half the burden borne by neighboring Bolivia, and about two-fifths of that carried by neighboring Ecuador. But Fujimori did not accomplish the de Soto agenda of bringing the poor into the legal economy. To this day, two-thirds of Peruvians work in the nonlegalor informalsector of the economy, one of the highest rates on Earth.

Peruvians might hear on TV or radio about the benefits of sound finances. But they experience low-quality schools and clinics, rutted roads, inadequate electricity, undrinkable waterthe public goods that the government had skimped on to keep public spending low. The more tangible benefits urged by de Soto remain largely concepts for the international conference circuit.

Continued here:
Peru: The Collapse of a Once-Promising Democracy - The Atlantic

At first blush, the fight to recognize the District of Columbia as a state seems like a local, inside-the-beltway debate. But as I recently discussed in an interview with D.C.s shadow Sen. Paul Strauss (D), the question of D.C. statehood impacts every American who cares about the viability of our democracy, which is deeply in peril these days.

Its a matter of simple math. Adding two seats to the U.S. Senate could dislodge the gridlock that has national policy reform by the throat. Couple that with statehood for one or more of the five major U.S. territories Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands and entrenched politicians might have to hustle for votes based on policy platforms again. Expanding congressional representation to all Americans would also help blot the racist stain associated with U.S. colonialism. In the struggle against anti-democratic forces that threaten American democracy, the time has come for a national debate over adding states to the union.

America is scarcely four months away from its near-demise on Jan. 6, when 147 Republican members of Congress voted to overturn legitimate election results and a violent mob of then-President TrumpDonald TrumpGOP-led Maricopa County board decries election recount a 'sham' Analysis: Arpaio immigration patrol lawsuit to cost Arizona county at least 2 million Conservatives launch 'anti-cancel culture' advocacy organization MOREs supporters stormed the Capitol complex, killing five people in a professed bid to Hang Mike Pence. House members are close to reaching agreement on the terms of a bipartisan commission to investigate the Capitol insurrection, but the former president continues to spew lies about a stolen election, Republicans in the House just fired Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) from her party leadership post for publicly adhering to the truth and the rule of law, and conservative lawmakers across the country continue to successfully push laws to limit ballot access and criminally disincentivize folks from working the polls. Things are not looking good for democracy in the United States.

Much of the blame lies at the feet of the Senate which, partly due to the filibuster, is disproportionately controlled by Republicans whose 50 votes represent 41.5 million fewer people than the 50 votes of their Democratic counterparts. As a result, serious substantive legislation can hardly make its way to President Joe BidenJoe BidenBiden's quiet diplomacy under pressure as Israel-Hamas fighting intensifies Overnight Defense: Administration approves 5M arms sale to Israel | Biden backs ceasefire in call with Netanyahu | Military sexual assault reform push reaches turning point CDC mask update sparks confusion, opposition MOREs desk, including much-needed campaign finance, government ethics and voting rights reform, versions of which have been languishing in the Senate.

There are a number of legal obstacles to D.C. statehood, to be sure, which differ from those that encumber U.S. territories. For D.C., at least three provisions of the U.S. Constitution are implicated. As former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) wrote recently for The Hill, Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution provides that New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union, which has occurred 37 times in the nations history most recently in 1959, with the addition of Alaska and Hawaii. Article 1, Section 8, clause 17 authorizes Congress to exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over [the] District (not exceeding ten Miles square), and deems it the Seat of Government of the United States. Finally, the23rd Amendment gives D.C. a number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State.

Last month, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform voted to pass H.R. 51, which would grant statehood to the people of the District of Columbia. A similar bill is pending in the Senate. Although the legal questions are complex, there is nothing in the original Constitution that gives obvious textualist grounds for a conservative-leaning Supreme Court to strike down Congresss authority to legislate D.C. statehood in the event such legislation passed. Until 1801, D.C. residents had voting rights through Maryland and Virginia, and as the late D.C. District Court Judge Louis Oberdorfer explained in a dissenting opinion to a case denying D.C. statehood per se, nothing in the Constitution retracts that right expressly. If Congress were ever to make D.C. a state, the Supreme Court should be exceedingly circumspect about disenfranchising D.C. voters as a matter of judicial proclamation.

Arguably, the proper legal fate of territories like Puerto Rico is even clearer. In Downes v. Bidwell, thecourt in 1901 held that Congress has virtually unlimited power over Puerto Rico and other territories, which it characterized as inhabited by alien races. The court reasoned that these islands were foreign in a domestic sense and governing them according to Anglo-Saxon principles may for a time be impossible.

Scholars have criticized this line of cases known as the Insular cases as treating colonialism as compatible with democracy, a premise that is out-of-step with modern sensibilities (although arguably consistent with white supremacy). This is the same court that decided in Plessy v. Ferguson that state-mandated segregation was constitutional, an egregious misfire that was overruled in 1952 by Brown v. Board of Education. As the late Judge Juan R. Torruella, who sat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, wrote for the Yale Law Journal in 1998, that Puerto Rico has a representative in Congress without a vote is not only a pathetic parody of democracy within the halls of that most democratic of institutions, but also a poignant reminder that Puerto Rico is even more of a colony now than it was under Spain.

Given the Democratic tilt of D.C. residents, a majority of which are people of color, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin McCarthyTrump signals he's ready to get back in the game Manchin, Murkowski call for bipartisan Voting Rights Act reauthorization 8 in 10 Republicans who've heard of Cheney's removal agree with it: poll MORE (R-Calif.) has called D.C. statehood just Democrats latest attempt at a power grab. But its a mistake to stereotype expanding the union as a partisan question. Puerto Ricos voting record isnt dominated by a particular political party, so Republicans could pick up seats in Congress in a state of Puerto Rico. Moreover, a 2019 poll revealed two in three Americans as supporting statehood for Puerto Rico. An April 2021 survey showed 40 percent backing the idea of making D.C. a state; around three in 10 voters remain undecided.

Hopefully, a solid majority of Americans still favors government by We the People over the stealth version of authoritarianism that Republican leaders are now serving up under the guise of voter fraud. So spread the word: Statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico would be good for democracy itself.

Kimberly Wehle is a professor at University of Baltimore School of Law and author of the books "How to Read the Constitution and Why, and What You Need to Know About Voting and Why. Follow her on Twitter and Instagram @kimwehle.

See the article here:
Not granting DC and Puerto Rico statehood would be anti-democratic | TheHill - The Hill

Samoa has long been touted as a beacon of democracy and political stability in the Pacific, a region troubled by military coups and civil strife. The prime minister, Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi, is the worlds second longest serving prime minister, having held the office for more than 22 years.

But the latest election in the country, held last month, saw the most serious challenge to Malielegaois ruling Human Rights Protection party (HRPP), and has left the country without a clear result. In the weeks since, the government has used every method available to it and some that arguably are not to hold on to power. What the government is doing is effectively a bloodless coup.

While other Pacific nations have used military force to take or retain government, Samoas seemingly democratic system has been white-anted to similar effect; its apparent stability obscuring the gradual deconstruction of democracy over the last few decades.

During this time, frequent constitutional amendments and legislative rewrites have skewed electoral rules, politicised the public service and eroded the rule of law. Dissent has been discouraged through media regulation and criminal libel laws. The legislature and executive have become controlled by a dominated cabinet.

But the most significant structural reform the governments contentious 2020 restructuring of the judiciary, customary land and chiefly titles seeded unexpected political opposition.

Malielegaois deputy prime minister, Fiame Naomi Mataafa, one of the most senior female parliamentarians in the Pacific region, resigned to protest the undermining of the rule of law in Samoa. The resulting political momentum saw the founding of the FAST party which Fiame has led since March 2021.

Despite the prime ministers public confidence that HRPP would retain a strong majority, the stunning election results saw HRPP and FAST locked at 25 seats apiece with independent Tuala Iosefo Ponifasio holding the balance of power.

When results were officially confirmed, the electoral commissioner declared Samoas gender quota for 10% female MPs had been met, with the election of five women out of 51 MPs.

However, the commissioner then reversed his position and an additional woman MP representing HRPP was appointed. The following day, independent MP Tuala announced he was throwing his support behind FAST, meaning parliament was again deadlocked, this time at 26-26.

Ironically, the use of the quota aimed to increase womens parliamentary representation stopped the country from getting its first female prime minister.

Unsurprisingly, FAST has challenged the activation of the womens quota in the supreme court. On the eve of the court hearing that might break the deadlock, the head of state a separate position to the prime minister made the unprecedented decision to void the election results and call a fresh poll.

The calling of fresh elections is Samoas most significant test to date of the rule of law. FAST has filed a further legal challenge, questioning the head of states powers to send the country back to the polls.

While Samoa awaits the courts determination, election preparations are under way. No new candidates are permitted and many candidates have withdrawn, significantly reducing the number of seats in which HRRP fielded multiple candidacies, splitting their vote, and making it more likely they might see victory this time around.

Petitions alleging corrupt or illegal practices have been filed against a significant number of the successful candidates, but these candidates are free to stand again with those claims unresolved, sidestepping the courts role to address electoral corruption.

The government has attempted to block Facebook access, citing concerns about its impact on fair and peaceful elections.

Government leadership has consistently sought to delegitimise the court process through unsubstantiated allegations of judicial bias. Its public narrative lauds a rightful return to the polls for the people to decide the election outcome, not the courts. But the courts proper role to interpret the constitution and adjudicate disputes in accordance with law cannot be aborted because one side anticipates an outcome it does not like.

Make no mistake, what is happening in Samoa is a bloodless coup and ignores the results of an election that has revealed a deep desire for change in the country after 40 years of one-party rule.

It sets a dangerous precedent for developing countries and is a blow to democracy in the Pacific. It also sends a warning to international partners, who have praised Samoas stability and development gains, but perhaps because of these gains have overlooked the significant erosion of the rule of law in the country in the last 20 years.

Read this article:
Samoa is experiencing a bloodless coup. The Pacifics most stable democracy is in trouble - The Guardian

Vice President Kamala Harris listens as President Joe Biden speaks about distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, in the East Room of the White House, on Monday, May 17, 2021, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Since the Biden administration came to power in the United States, solidarity among democracies has been emphasized more than ever. Although he does not use the term "Cold War," President Joe Biden says that there is a competition between democracy and autocracy with China, which he considers "the only competitor." In this camp of "democracy" propelled by the Biden administration, Japan is naturally the most promising partner as the country has advocated a "quad" summit of Japan, the U.S., Australia, and India, and has been the world's foremost proponent of the concept of a "free and open Indo-Pacific."

On the other hand, democracy is said to be undergoing a crisis on a global scale. The coup d'etat in Myanmar and the ensuing chaos have been a setback for countries seeking democracy. The "one country, two systems" framework in Hong Kong has effectively been dismantled. Even among the European Union member states that make democracy an eligibility requirement for participation, there is a tendency toward autocracy, as in Poland and Hungary. To begin with, the U.S. itself was experiencing a crisis of democracy during the last months of the Trump administration. The Chinese Communist Party is boasting about the superiority of its own system in dealing with COVID-19.

Leading organizations that have been compiling data on democratic trends around the world are also becoming increasingly concerned. The title of the 2021 annual report of the U.S.-based Freedom House organization is "Democracy under Siege," and the title of the annual report of the V-DEM Institute headquartered at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden is "Autocratization Turns Viral."

According to V-DEM data, in 2010 there were 41 countries that were rated as liberal democracies, but by 2020 there were only 32. The number of countries rated as "democracies," which includes countries rated as "electoral democracies" that are not so liberal but still hold relatively fair elections, dropped from 98 in 2010 to 92 in 2020.

Freedom House categorizes countries into three levels: "free," "partly free," and "not free." Its data also shows that the number of free countries fell from 89 in 2010 to 84 in 2020. Both organizations use their own measurements to make these assessments, but I calculated the correlation coefficient between the two organizations' original data before classification to be about 0.95, which is extremely high, so it would not make much difference in the analysis.

The V-DEM report also points out that the population of autocratic countries accounts for 68% of the world's population, while the population of the 32 free democracies is only 14%. The reason the population of autocratic countries has reached 68% is that, under V-DEM's assessment, India has fallen from an electoral democracy to an "electoral autocracy" where elections are held, but people's rights are violated. The crisis facing democracy is evident in the fact that the "world's largest democracy" is now regarded as not democratic enough. (V-DEM classifies despotic countries that do not even hold elections as "closed autocracies," and refers to both "electoral autocracies" and "closed autocracies" together as "autocracies.")

Under these circumstances, can democracies compete with the rise of China? President Biden says, "We have to prove democracy still works," but is that really possible?

The challenges for democracies are great. Excessive optimism, as in the immediate aftermath of the end of the Cold War, was a mistake. But I think it is also a mistake to be overly pessimistic about democracy. First, I am sure that there are many people (perhaps more than a majority) around the world who want democracy. It is obviously the case if you look at the protests staged by people in places such as Hong Kong and Myanmar. People living in autocratic countries, 68% of the global population, do so not because they think autocracy is good. Some of them are actively resisting, while many others are putting up with it out of necessity.

Second, if we look at the long-term trend from the 20th century to the 21st century, it is clear that the number of autocratic countries has been decreasing. It is true that the situation in many countries is worse than it was in 2010, but if we include electoral democracies that hold fair elections, there will still be more democracies in 2020.

Third, if the specific challenge for democracies at this stage is to protect their freedom from the threat of autocratic countries, we must remember that democracies still have plenty of power. In the four categories of political systems defined by V-DEM, the gross domestic product in 2019 as a percentage of the world total was 17% for closed autocracies, 12% for electoral autocracies, 11% for electoral democracies, and 60% for liberal democracies. Most of the share of closed autocracies (13.6% of the total) comes from China. In other words, there are only 32 free democracies, but their economies still dominate the world. There is no reason to underestimate this market size and economic power.

In the end, the only external threat to democracies is China. Even against China, the economies of the liberal democracies as a whole are overwhelmingly large: the GDP of the G7 countries alone accounts for 45% of the world's GDP. Dazed by China's remarkable rapid growth since the beginning of the 21st century, the Chinese people and much of the world have been under the illusion that the future lies under autocracy. It is quite possible for liberal democracies to prove the superiority of democracy as a system of governance if they earnestly work together.

(By Akihiko Tanaka, President, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies)

Link:
Global Perspective: Democracies still have edge over autocracies like China - The Mainichi - The Mainichi

PHOTO VIA HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY OFFICE OF ELECTIONSAlleging discrimination against Black and Latino voters, a coalition of groups has filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new Florida elections law that includes additional restrictions on voting by mail.

The lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. district court in Tallahassee is at least the third challenge to the law, which was passed last month by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis during an appearance on Fox News.

The law (SB 90) was one of the most controversial issues of the 2021 legislative session and came after a relatively smooth 2020 election in Florida. Republican lawmakers contended the changes were needed to ensure election security and prevent fraud in future elections.

But the lawsuit filed Monday on behalf of the groups Florida Rising Together, Faith in Florida, UnidosUS, the Equal Ground Education Fund, the Hispanic Federation and Poder Latinx, contends that the changes dealing with issues such as voting by mail could curtail voting by Black and Latino residents.

While SB 90 imposes unjustified burdens on all voters, it places disproportionate burdens on Black voters, Latino voters, disabled voters, and voters who face greater challenges in exercising the right to vote, even in the best of circumstances, the 91-page lawsuit said. SB 90 imposes specific obstacles on voters ability to cast ballots through in-person voting, mail voting, and the use of secure drop-boxes for early voting.

The lawsuit alleges violations of the federal Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution. It names as defendants Secretary of State Laurel Lee, Highlands County Supervisor of Elections Penny Ogg, Gadsden County Supervisor of Elections Shirley Green Knight, Osceola County Supervisor of Elections Mary Jane Arrington and Hillsborough County Supervisor of Elections Craig Latimer. The four supervisors are named as representatives of the rest of Floridas county elections supervisors.

The challenge seeks an injunction and focuses on four parts of the new law:

--- Restrictions on the availability and use of drop boxes, where residents can drop off vote-by-mail ballots. The lawsuit contends, in part, that the additional restrictions will particularly affect people who work during the day and voters seeking to avoid long lines at polls.

--- Identification requirements for requesting vote-by-mail ballots. The lawsuit contends that the requirements could prevent many people from obtaining vote-by-mail ballots.

--- Restrictions on providing such things as food and water to people waiting in line to vote. The lawsuit contends that areas with large numbers of Black and Latino voters have traditionally had longer wait times for voting and that churches and other organizations have provided food, water and other aid to voters.

--- A requirement that third-party voter registration groups provide a disclaimer to people signing up to vote. The lawsuit contends that disclaimer is intended to and will have a chilling effect on third party voter registration organizations.

Floridas Republican-controlled Legislature and other GOP-led legislatures across the country moved quickly this year to change elections laws as former President Donald Trump has falsely blamed rigged and fraudulent elections for Democrat Joe Bidens victory in November. Courts rejected numerous lawsuits in which Trump and his supporters challenged the handling of the November elections. Trump defeated Biden handily in Florida.

During an appearance May 6 on the Fox News show Fox & Friends to sign the Florida bill, DeSantis called it the strongest election integrity measures in the country and said it keeps us ahead of the curve after the 2020 election.

Were not resting on our laurels, and me signing this bill here says, Florida, your vote counts, your vote is going to be cast with integrity and transparency, and this is a great place for democracy, DeSantis said.

But the law was immediately hit with two lawsuits from groups such as the League of Women Voters of Florida, the Florida State Conference of the NAACP, Disability Rights Florida and Common Cause. Those cases are pending.

The lawsuit Monday was filed on behalf of the other groups by attorneys from the Advancement Project National Office, Demos, LatinoJustice PRLDEF and the national law firm Arnold and Porter Kaye Scholer LLP.

It pointed to a history in Florida of efforts to discriminate against Black and Latino voters.

Floridas recent legislation attacking the voting rights of its Black and Latino residents is like a virus attacking the human heart, the lawsuit said. Without a remedy to undo the effects, our democracy will die.

Support local journalism in these crazy days. Our small but mighty team is working tirelessly to bring you up to the minute news on how Coronavirus is affecting Tampa and surrounding areas. Please considermaking a one time or monthly donationto help support our staff. Every little bit helps.

Follow@cl_tampabayon Twitter to get the most up-to-date news + views.Subscribeto our newsletter, too.

See the original post here:
'Democracy will die': Florida's recent law restricting voting by mail access faces yet another lawsuit - Creative Loafing Tampa