Monday, January 12, 2026

fed

The Federal Reserve's dual mandate is the core statutory objective for U.S. monetary policy, as established by Congress in the Federal Reserve Act (most clearly amended in 1977). It directs the Fed to conduct policy to promote maximum employment and stable prices (with moderate long-term interest rates often viewed as a byproduct of achieving the first two, reducing it effectively to two coequal goals).
This is the exact language from the law (12 U.S.C. § 225a): monetary policy should "promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates." In practice, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) and Fed officials refer to it as the "dual mandate" because stable prices and moderate long-term rates are seen as interconnected—long-term rates tend to stay moderate only in a low-inflation, stable environment.The Two Goals Explained
  1. Maximum Employment (also called "maximum sustainable employment")
    • This means the highest level of employment (or lowest sustainable unemployment rate) the economy can achieve without triggering accelerating inflation.
    • It's not a fixed number like "4% unemployment" because the level that can be sustained changes over time due to demographics, technology, labor market dynamics, regulations, and other non-monetary factors.
    • The Fed assesses it using a broad range of labor market indicators: unemployment rate, underemployment, labor force participation, job vacancies, wage growth, etc.
    • A strong labor market benefits everyone by providing broad-based opportunities, reducing inequality, and allowing marginalized groups to enter or advance in the workforce. High employment uses labor resources efficiently and supports overall prosperity.
  2. Stable Prices (price stability)
    • This means low and predictable inflation over the longer run, so households and businesses can plan, save, borrow, and invest without worrying about sharp price swings.
    • Since 2012, the FOMC has explicitly judged that an inflation rate of 2 percent per year—as measured by the annual change in the Price Index for Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE)—is most consistent with this goal.
    • Why 2%? It's low enough to avoid the costs of high inflation (e.g., distorting decisions, eroding purchasing power) but provides a buffer against deflation (falling prices, which can lead to delayed spending, debt burdens, and economic stagnation).
    • Price stability fosters confidence and a healthy environment for growth and employment.
How the Fed Pursues the Dual MandateThe FOMC sets monetary policy (primarily by influencing short-term interest rates via tools like open market operations) to move the economy toward both goals simultaneously. The goals are often complementary—a stable, low-inflation environment supports sustainable job growth—but trade-offs can arise (e.g., during supply shocks or when inflation is too high, tighter policy to fight inflation may temporarily slow employment gains).
  • In recent years (including into 2026), the Fed has navigated post-pandemic inflation surges by raising rates aggressively, then easing as inflation fell while the labor market stayed resilient. Officials monitor the "balance of risks" between overshooting on inflation or undershooting on employment.
  • The framework was updated in 2020 to emphasize average inflation targeting (allowing inflation to run moderately above 2% for a time after periods below target) and a more inclusive view of maximum employment.
As of January 2026, amid ongoing political pressures (including debates over Fed independence and Chair Jerome Powell's leadership—his chair term ends in May 2026), the dual mandate remains unchanged and central to the Fed's decisions. Powell and other officials continue to emphasize pursuing both goals without favoring one over the other politically.In short, the dual mandate gives the Fed flexibility to support a strong, stable economy for all Americans, balancing jobs and low inflation as its primary mission.


--
Henry McClure 
Time kills deals
785-383-9994

www.henrymcclure.live
on No comments:

Dr. Sounds

There's no precise global headcount for sound bath participants, but data shows explosive growth, with millions engaging in the practice, reflected in a booming sound therapy market (projected to hit $2.26 billion by 2032) and significant increases in retreats and online interest, indicating widespread adoption for stress relief and wellness. A 2020 survey noted 40% of urban adults were interested in attending, while some studies show massive percentage increases in attendance, with major wellness providers integrating it globally. [1, 2, 3, 4]  
Evidence of Popularity: 

• Market Growth: The global sound therapy market is expanding rapidly, driven by demand for stress relief, with significant regional growth in Asia-Pacific, Europe, and North America. 
• Surging Interest: Online searches for sound healing jumped 83% in 2023, and the number of sound bath studios in major cities tripled between 2019-2022. 
• Increased Offerings: The launch of over 4,200 new sound bath retreats globally in 2023 shows massive mainstream adoption, from small studios to corporate wellness programs. 
• Reported Benefits: A 2020 survey found 70% of participants reported significant reductions in anxiety and stress after sessions, making it a popular, accessible alternative to other therapies. [1, 2, 3, 5]  

While exact figures are elusive, the consistent reports of exponential growth and high demand suggest millions participate, making it a mainstream wellness phenomenon rather than a niche practice. [1, 2, 3, 4, 6]  

AI responses may include mistakes.




Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals
on No comments:

Sunday, January 11, 2026

Tim is grimm

**Yes, the core claim in the image is real, but with an important clarification.**

The meme/image accurately states that **Minnesota Statute § 609.066** (Authorized Use of Deadly Force by Peace Officers) was **amended and signed into law by Governor Tim Walz on July 23, 2020**, as part of police reform legislation (the Minnesota Police Accountability Act) passed during a special session following the George Floyd protests.

However, the **exact wording** quoted in the image/meme — "If a driver accelerates toward an officer standing in front of the vehicle, this creates an immediate, life-threatening danger. The officer doesn't need to wait until impact; they can act based on the apparent intent and proximity." — **does not appear verbatim** in the statute.

The actual law uses more general, legal language that covers this exact kind of scenario:

- Deadly force is justified only if an **objectively reasonable officer** believes (based on the **totality of the circumstances**, without hindsight) that it's **necessary**:
  - To protect the officer or another from **death or great bodily harm**, where the threat:
    - Can be articulated with specificity,
    - Is reasonably likely to occur absent action by the officer, and
    - Must be addressed without unreasonable delay.

This standard explicitly allows officers to respond to **imminent threats** (like a vehicle accelerating toward them) based on reasonable perception of **intent**, **proximity**, and **danger** — without having to wait for actual impact or injury, as long as the criteria are met.

The 2020 amendments (noted in the statute's history as 2Sp2020 c 1 s 9,10) **refined** the rules to emphasize limits on deadly force (e.g., proportionality, no force based solely on self-harm risk, and legislative intent to reduce excessive use), while still clearly permitting it in cases of genuine, imminent life-threatening danger — including from vehicles used as weapons.

This interpretation is widely discussed in recent online posts (often in political contexts mocking or "owning" Walz), and sources like the official Minnesota Revisor of Statutes confirm the amendment date and the practical application to vehicle threats.

**Bottom line**: The law does support officers acting in the described situation without waiting for impact — the meme just paraphrases it in plain, dramatic language rather than quoting the statute word-for-word. The bill signing date and statute number are correct.



Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals
on No comments:

Saturday, January 10, 2026

COOK

A Kansas County Commissioner's oath focuses on faithfully executing public duties and supporting Constitutions, while a Kansas lawyer's oath emphasizes upholding laws, ethical conduct, client fidelity, and preventing legal abuses (like falsehoods or delays) while supporting the Constitutions. Both swear to support the U.S. and Kansas Constitutions; the key contrast is the Commissioner's general duty to their office versus the lawyer's specific duty to the courts, clients, and the integrity of the legal profession, ensuring justice within the system. [1, 2, 3]

Kansas County Commissioner Oath (General Form)
  • Core Duty: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Kansas, and faithfully discharge the duties of [Office Name]."
  • Focus: General public service, upholding governmental laws and constitutions, and diligently performing elected responsibilities for the county. [1]
Kansas Lawyer Oath (Rule 726)
  • Core Duties: Support U.S. & Kansas Constitutions; avoid malice, falsehoods, or delaying justice; conduct oneself uprightly and according to law; discharge duties with fidelity.
  • Focus: Professional ethics, client advocacy, maintaining the integrity of the court, and preventing abuse of the legal system (e.g., fraudulent suits). [2]
Comparison & Contrast
  • Similarities:
    • Both swear to support the U.S. Constitution and the Kansas Constitution.
    • Both commit to faithfully discharging duties and upholding the law.
  • Differences:
    • Scope: Commissioner's oath is broad for public office; lawyer's oath is specific to legal practice and court conduct.
    • Ethical Specifics: Lawyer's oath includes explicit prohibitions against specific misconduct (lying, delaying for profit/malice) unique to legal practice, which aren't in the general Commissioner's oath.
    • Fidelity: Commissioner swears fidelity to their office; lawyer swears fidelity to the court, client, and legal ethics. [1, 2, 4, 5]
In essence, the Commissioner pledges allegiance to the office and public trust, while the lawyer pledges allegiance to the legal process and ethical standards within that system. [1, 2]


AI responses may include mistakes.



--
Henry McClure 
Time kills deals
785-383-9994

www.henrymcclure.live
on No comments:

Five years the dog was asleep - wake up

Kevin Cook is a Shawnee County Commissioner (District 2) in Kansas and a practicing attorney with Cook Law Office in Topeka, where he focuses on criminal defense, family law, and other matters. He has served on the commission since 2013 and has faced public scrutiny in the past, including apologies for controversial statements (e.g., using the word "lynching" in a court session and comments about a local health organization), but no formal bar discipline or ethics complaints appear in public records related to those incidents or the citizens' commission issue. 
Background on the Citizens' Commission IssueKansas law (K.S.A. 19-2670) previously required counties with populations between 170,000 and 200,000 to establish a citizens' commission to review local government structure and recommend changes, such as potential consolidation of city and county governments. This statute originated in 1968 specifically for Wyandotte County, which led to its government consolidation in 1997. Shawnee County entered this population range around 2020 (based on census data), triggering the mandate. However, Shawnee County did not form the commission for several years despite the requirement, which could constitute neglect of duty or failure to perform prescribed duties. In 2005, Shawnee County voters rejected a similar consolidation proposal, which may have influenced the delay. In April 2025, Gov. Laura Kelly signed SB 104, which amended the law to make the commission optional rather than mandatory for Shawnee County, granting the board of county commissioners discretion to create it. This change effectively resolved the ongoing non-compliance by retroactively removing the obligation, though it does not retroactively excuse any prior violations of the statute during the mandatory period.Public comments, including from voters like yourself, have urged the county to implement the commission anyway, citing the original statute and the recent amendment. As of now, Shawnee County has not created one, and the board (including Cook) has not publicly committed to doing so.Ramifications for Officeholders Like CookIf a county commissioner knowingly violates state law (e.g., by neglecting a mandatory duty like forming the commission), Kansas statutes outline potential consequences. These apply regardless of whether the commissioner is also an attorney, though lawyers face additional professional scrutiny.
  • Removal from Office (Ouster): Under K.S.A. 19-2609, a county commissioner can be ousted for neglecting or refusing to perform a duty, or for corrupt or oppressive performance of duties. This is pursued through a civil quo warranto action in district court, typically initiated by the county attorney, district attorney, or attorney general. A private citizen can petition for this, but it requires evidence of willful misconduct. The process involves filing a complaint, a hearing, and a judicial determination. If successful, the commissioner forfeits the office. Note that the original citation [1] in your query was to an unrelated statute (K.S.A. 17-2343, about housing authority commissioners), which does not apply here—it's a mismatch.
  • Recall Election: Kansas allows recall of local elected officials under K.S.A. 25-4301 et seq. Grounds include felony conviction, misconduct in office (a law violation impacting duties), or failure to perform prescribed duties. To initiate:
    1. File a petition application with the county election officer, specifying grounds.
    2. Collect signatures from at least 40% of voters who participated in the last election for that office (or 5% for larger counties, but calculated per statute).
    3. If verified, a special election is held where voters decide on removal. This is a voter-driven process and has been used in Kansas for local officials. As a voter in Shawnee County, you could start or join a recall effort.
  • Criminal or Civil Charges: Willful violation could lead to investigations by the district attorney or attorney general, potentially resulting in misdemeanor charges for official misconduct (K.S.A. 21-6002) or civil penalties. However, sovereign immunity often shields officials from personal lawsuits for neglect, unless it involves civil rights violations (e.g., under 42 U.S.C. § 1983). The municipality might face suits instead, but personal exposure is possible for intentional acts.
  • Political and Public Consequences: This could erode public trust, leading to election losses or recalls. Cook is up for re-election in November 2026 against you (Henry McClure), so voters can address it at the ballot box.
Additional Duties and Ramifications as an AttorneyAttorneys in Kansas are officers of the court and held to the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct (KRPC). If Cook knowingly violated state law in his official capacity, it could constitute misconduct under KRPC 8.4 (e.g., dishonesty, conduct prejudicial to justice, or violating the law). Lawyers in public office have a duty to uphold the legal system and cannot subvert laws for political gain. Government attorneys (like county attorneys) must advise against unlawful actions and may need to report violations.
  • Bar Discipline Process: Complaints go to the Office of the Disciplinary Administrator (ODA). If investigated and found probable cause, it could lead to censure, probation, suspension, or disbarment. No public records show complaints or discipline against Cook for this issue. You can file a written complaint with the ODA at 701 SW Jackson St., Topeka, KS 66603, providing evidence of willful violation.
  • Ethical Standards for Attorneys in Public Roles: Resources like the Brennan Center emphasize lawyers' duties to avoid misuse of office, conflicts, or defying laws. For attorneys on boards (analogous to commissions), ethical conflicts arise if they ignore statutes. The original sources [6] and [7] in your query are somewhat tangential ([6] is about HOA boards, [7] is general ethics), but they support the higher standard for lawyers.
What Commissioners (and Attorneys) Should Do
  • Follow state laws and the county charter, even if politically unpopular.
  • Consult the county attorney for legal boundaries.
  • If unlawful actions are proposed, the county attorney must advise against them and potentially intervene.
Note that some sources in your query (e.g., [1] invalid, [4] insufficient content, [5] about municipal attorneys' ethics) don't directly support the claims as stated, which may explain the "AI responses may include mistakes" note. If you pursue removal, gather evidence of willful neglect (e.g., meeting minutes showing awareness of the mandate) and consult a lawyer or the DA's office. As Cook's election opponent, this could be framed as a campaign issue, but legal actions require substantiation beyond politics.


--
Henry McClure 
Time kills deals
785-383-9994

www.henrymcclure.live
on No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)