Kenneth Feingold was on the radio this morning and was discussing his role in several mass settlement deals where victims of various events attempted to receive compensation through large funds set aside for that purpose. Honestly, Feingold is one of those people who are so easy to dislike; but he executed his responsibilities with a certain level
(
Read more... )
Reply
I have seen nothing that established the Constitutionality of the fund under those terms. Can you provide that? (Not being snippy, I 'd really like to see something like that.)
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
( ... )
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
I get that you think that "for the general welfare" doesn't mean anything. What you don't seem to get is that a whole lotta people disagree.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
We've already talked about how the airlines can be viewed as providing a perception if security; I agree that a law wasn't necessary, but I wouldn't have prevented the lawsuits; rather I would have expected the airline to make their case, and be done with it.
It would have been great had the terrorists had financial resources to seize and distribute, but they didn't; and I think that since one of the specified responsibilities of the government IS to provide for the common defense, making the government pay the bill IS appropriate.
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Leave a comment