Cspan2. And live today at 4 p. M. Eastern here on cspan2, chilean president michelle [inaudible] will be at the brookings institution. Shes meeting with president obama this morning. You had broadcast tv and then cable came along, and then satellite. What if satellite had said, you know, were different than cable. We have a slightly Different Technology, so were going to take that and not consider ourselves to be what is in law called an nvpd. So we dont have to negotiate. But satellite didnt do that, and so why should aereo be able to come up with a Different Technology and say we dont have to negotiate for copyrighted material . Weve said from the beginning this isnt about being a opposed to technology. Theres still a technology there in aereo, and maybe theres a Business Model for it. But that doesnt mean you can evade the law to run a business. More about the Supreme Court decision against aereo with the head of the National Association of broadcasters, gordon smith. Tonight at 8 e
Many times america will hear the Unemployment Rate go from seven percent to 6. 7 and would view as the country going in the right direction in regard to job creation and Economic Growth. But would you agree that actually the reduction in the Unemployment Rate is not an indicator of strong job growth like many of americans may think . I will unpack things a little bit. The decline in the unemployment , is somewhere around two thirds due to the decline in labor force participation. And about one third to job creation. Speaking, the employment and population ratio has essentially stayed about the same since late 2009. So that is problematic. But we have two different forces working on employment population. One is the demographic changes that would tend to depress participation just as baby boomers like myself age, the population genuinely getting older. We are getting into times we are more heavily weighted to parts of the parts of the occupation that participate less. Compensate for thi
Hearing senator ted cruz wrap up moments ago he talked about the issues he would like to see senators and people on the hill and people at the state level deal with. Mentioned the Affordable Care act and a few other things. Whats the significance of him making that point . Youve heard judge barrett say thats how this should work. If you are going to legislate do it here in the senate or across the street in the house. Thats done there is a totally different job for the judicial branch. Shes hammered on that repeatedly in these three days of hearings harris one more thing having to do with what we know is looming ahead of us. We would think that maybe the u. S. Supreme court would weigh in on Something Like this. The asking of would you recuse yourself if it came down to an election decision, her answer was really interesting. It hasnt happened. What was your take on it . Shannon to me its very interesting this call that started with senator cory booker, once we had the nominee, talking
Imposing their policy preferences is because its inconsistent with democracy. No one wants to live in accord with the law of amy. My children dont want to do that. As a judge i cant say im going to live with my policy preferences because i have life tenure and you have to live with them. Constitutionally, even if the Supreme Court strikes down a statute, congress can come back and revisit that topic and do so in a way that doesnt violate the constitution as determined by the court. Ultimately, it doesnt happen very often, but ultimately we can amend the constitution itself, correct . That is correct. So the basis of legitimacy of governmental power is concerned of the governed. Do you agree with that . I do agree with that. Not what nine people in black robes, the high nine on the potomac, i think theyre sometimes called, the decisions they make. Thats not the final word in our government, correct . We are a government of laws, not of men. Judge barrett, im almost through, but i cant p
What this gets at or what this requires courts to do is to decide who is a minister. On the one hand, there may be some which you could plainly it might be more obvious questions like someone who teaches religion, religion teachers. What the court has said is those were follow more in the heartland. It gets a little more difficult if you have a Religious School like the Jewish School or the Catholic School in our lady of guadalupe who has a teacher who, lets say, is teaching math. The courts have to come up with a test to decide whether such a person is a minister or not. What the cases said is its a multifactor test where no one factor is determinative. It cant be determinative just that the teacher teaches math rather than religion. For example in grescott the teacher spent time teaching jewish prayers and saying prayers with the class and the school considered it part of the teachers duty to inform the student, to teach them about jewish prayers and perform them in that tradition. E