6/5/2010

4 Responses to “Clinton Library Releases Kagan Documents”

1. Before I accepted the assignment to wade through those boxes, I’d want a substantial life insurance policy, with my kids as beneficiaries, and with a double-indemnity bonus if my cause of death were to be “terminal boredom” and/or “terminal outrage.” My guess is that the materials in those boxes are split about 98%/2% between one or the other of those two categories.

   Beldar (75c3bc) — 6/5/2010 @ 2:06 pm

   
   

2. Heh. I’m sure it’s boring and I didn’t plan to read it either, but I started looking around and it’s funny the things you run into. From Boxes 21-30, there are 6860 pages that apparently relate to Education. I haven’t downloaded all the file but I couldn’t help but notice this Clinton response to a proposed 1998 Amendment by Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison to allow single-sex public school classrooms (at page 7):

   “A change in the long-standing civil rights standard governing the establishment of single-sex classes and programs should be the product of careful deliberation. It should not be addressed as a rider to an appropriations act.”

   Ten years later, Democrats have no problem with changing all of health care that way.

   DRJ (d43dcd) — 6/5/2010 @ 2:16 pm

   
   

3. From the same link at page 86, Elena Kagan added the following handwritten notes in response to a memo about the status of efforts to establish a single-sex boys school in New York City (a goal vigorously opposed by Democratic-leaning women’s groups and supporters, but something President and Mrs. Clinton were open to):

   Mike,

   One other thought. Whether the lawyers like it or not, the all-boys school approach will put us into real trouble with our women’s groups friends — at a time when we’re likely to need them. This is especially so if they know that we pushed NYC toward this approach. Tell your friends at education that finding a remedial justification would be much better — and that they shouldn’t press the all-boys school too hard.

   — Elena

   DRJ (d43dcd) — 6/5/2010 @ 2:40 pm

   
   

4. This doesn’t have much to do with Kagan but on page 96-97, the staff asks her to look at an interesting problem. A new Clinton proposal authorized an abatement of student loan interest if students took time off for service commitments. When he introduced the program, President Clinton referred to service projects sponsored by a religious group headed by Rev. Tony Compolo as an example of projects that would qualify. Subsequently, the Education Department decided that religious projects were not qualifying projects because they violated the church/state divide. The concern was that when Clinton announced the proposal, he “deviated from the prepared text in a way that made it sound like this new proposal applied ONLY to religious service.”

   I can see why they were worried. Clinton announced it as a religious only program and the Education Department rules that everyone but religious programs can participate.

   DRJ (d43dcd) — 6/5/2010 @ 2:50 pm