We have cute nicknames for our currency. The $1 bill is a single. The $5 bill is a fin. The $10 bill is known as a sawbuck. The Secretary of the Treasury announced this week that a new $10 bill will be issued featuring a woman. Senator Jeanne Shaheen says she’s pleased that “young girls all across this country will soon be able to see an inspiring woman on the $10 bill.” Forgive me, but that seems unlikely. Since we don’t teach history anymore, unless the woman is Beyonce, Lady Gaga or one of the Kardashians, young girls probably won’t even recognize her.
We do have some experience with women on our money. We had the Susan B. Anthony dollar.  Martha Washington has been on a $1 bill, Pocahontas once appeared on the back of a $20 bill, and Sacagawea has been on a dollar coin for 15 years. But we need to narrow it down … okay, how about we just say no more First Ladies or Native Americans. That would solve a lot of problems. I’m just not ready for the Obama buck. Those arms wouldn’t fit on the bill anyway, and we should save paper.       A Hillary Clinton buck? No. It would be printed overseas and then just wire transferred into her Foundation account, so that wouldn’t inspire anybody.
What to do? Let’s think – the sawbuck.  A saw is a tool.  So how about Carrie Nation with her hatchet – the chop buck. We could have Julia Child – the cook buck. How about Sandra Day O’Connor – the law buck.         Need I go on? Amelia Earhart (fly buck) Annie Oakley (shot buck)
Juliette Gordon Low (Scout buck) Betsy Ross (flag buck). Wait now, let’s think out of the box.  How about Bruce, uh Caitlyn Jenner on a $3 bill? Better not go there.  I know, how about we go Hollywood.  I’d like to see Marilyn Monroe on a $10 bill.  Not classy enough? How about Grace Kelly? She was a Monegasque you say? No problem.  There’s a precedent.            In 1893, Queen Isabella was the first woman to appear on a U.S. coin.
Whoever the government ultimately chooses, the one thing we can rely on is that it will have something to do with race or slavery, to remind us that America is a terrible country.  Inspiration right? If they choose Rosa Parks, I just pray they don’t put her on the back of the bill.
Okay, all joking aside.  I do have a serious proposal that actually might be inspirational.  My proposal for the new $10 bill is Marian Anderson on the front with the Lincoln Memorial on the back of the bill.  We could call it the Freedom Buck.  Marian Anderson was a better singer than Beyonce, and who knows, somebody actually might be inspired to read a book.

Who said Obama lacked experience?  Fresh from his decision that Congress is unnecessary,  permitting him to do whatever he wants without legislation, this week, Il Duce Obama decided he also has the power to control the docket of the Supreme Court.  Obama was in Europe, visiting with representatives of the failed socialist regimes he so much admires, a/k/a, the G7.  There, Il Duce weighed in on the upcoming Supreme Court decision in King v. Burwell, which he proclaimed, the Court should never have considered.  In that case, the issue is the interpretation of the laughably named, Affordable Care Act, a/k/a, Obamacare, specifically the provisions for federal subsidies to people in the various States.  Before your eyes glaze over,  unlike most of the thousands of pages of statutes and regulations that make up the Leviathan called Obamacare,  this particular issue is not that complicated.  In a nutshell, Obamacare created a system whereby the various States were to set up healthcare exchanges to provide coverage.  Federal exchanges were created in case a State did not set up its own exchange.  36 States chose not to do so.  Now, because the healthcare mandated by the Affordable Care Act is really not affordable, the statute made provision to provide lower income people “in State exchanges” with federal subsidies, i.e., tax money to pay the premiums for the unaffordable coverage.  Therein lies the rub.  The statute specifies that subsidies may be paid to those “in State exchanges.”  The law says nothing about subsidies to those in federal exchanges.  Il Duce, who fancies himself a law professor (he never actually was, but that’s another story), claims that it’s clear that, regardless of what the law says, it must mean that subsidies can be paid to those in federal exchanges too.  He then lectured the Supreme Court on statutory interpretation based on legislative intent.  Two things.  First, since he thinks Congress is unnecessary, who cares about legislative intent.  Secondly, Il Duce, a/k/a il professore, a/k/a community organizer, is wrong again.  A court doesn’t get to the intent of the legislature unless the language of the law is ambiguous.  The government claims the word “State” in the law means “the state,” in other words, any government.  Two problems there.  First, the law refers to “the States,” which even a community organizer should understand means those inconvenient little entities that created the federal government.  More importantly however, when the law itself defines a term, the Court does not resort to interpretation.  Obamacare defines “State” as “the 50 States and the District of Columbia.”  Seems pretty clear to me.   Let’s see if at least five Justices can figure it out.

Am I the only one who is sick and tired of department store “sales?”  Whatever happened to the good old days when they simply told you the price and you paid it?  We now have created a shopping culture featuring the perpetual sale.  When the jewelry is perpetually 50% + 10% off (not 60% ?), then the pertinent question is, off of what?  The sticker says the original price of the $75 sale priced earrings was $240.  Now, we know we would never pay $240 for this crap, and we understand that no one actually does pay the original price.  So, the point is, if everything is always on sale, then, in reality, nothing is ever on sale.  Macy’s is the worst offender.  Macy’s spends untold amounts of money mailing me red cardboard sale coupons.  The front of the card promises 20% off.  The reverse side is covered with microscopic printing detailing exclusions.  Try as I might, I have never found anything Macy’s sells that actually was covered by the coupons.  Certain brands – excluded.  “Specials,” although undefined even if you decipher the micro-printing – excluded.  Anything not already on “sale” – excluded.  Once, they even told me that if the sticker price ends in a “9” – excluded.  Now, Macy’s has gone computer happy.  Consider my last visit.  I pick up two shirts, stand in the line, present my red coupons – surprise!  We don’t use the paper anymore.  We don’t even use the cash register.  Instead, the saleswoman pokes at a cell phone sized device which we are assured will instantly determine our correct discount.  No discount appears.  She then asks the other saleswoman why it didn’t work.  She is told she didn’t poke the device correctly.  More poking, more asking, and 15 minutes later (in addition to the 15 minutes in the line) we are told there is no discount, the shirts are “special.”  What does that mean?  She doesn’t know why they are “special,” they just are.  So here are my suggestions for Macy’s.  Stop telling me you’re having a “One Day Sale” because I actually do remember that your last “One Day Sale” was two days ago.  Save the money you spend on printing coupons.  Take the coupons you already printed and shove them. (Send me an email and I will provide detailed instructions for this step).

Well, we are recently back from vacation in Europe, and all I can say is, God Bless America.  To any of you who are disenchanted with life in America, and have contemplated moving somewhere else … I think not.  It’s not bad, mind you, it’s a nice place to visit, but not as a steady diet.  We had access to CNN International for the news.  You will interested to know that from May 12 to May 24 the world heard about only 4 stories.  Ireland was voting on gay marriage.  The CNN reporter was pleased to find that even such a religious country “is finally evolving on social issues.”  Whew!  Second story – an oil spill in America that did not reach the water.  Damn industry!  Number Three – McDonald’s employees want $15 an hour.  “You want fries with your $10 Big Mac?  And finally, mass murder in Washington D.C.  Violence in America is always rampant.  To summarize, America – BAD.  Ireland – Improving.  Europe?  Well, they only picked my pocket once in Paris.

Frank on Friday – On Patriots and Their Balls

When the football deflating scandal came to light, I must confess I didn’t think much of it.  At first blush, it seemed unlikely that any quarterback would practice all week with an under-inflated ball, knowing full well that, come Sunday, the officials would be checking the pressure and making sure the balls were inflated to the standard set forth by the rule.  In other words, why get accustomed to a softer ball, and then be handed a harder ball on a cold Sunday when the championship was on the line?  That problem still bothers me.  Then we were told that some of the Patriot balls were under-inflated a pound or two.  Then we were assured that, at half-time, the balls were re-checked and re-inflated to the proper pressure.  That left us  with the reality that, with a soft ball, which we are told Tom Brady prefers, he scored 7 points, and with the harder ball that we are led to believe Brady doesn’t like to the point of breaking a rule, he scored 38 points.  Apparently, the Colts quarterback has no preference when it comes to his balls, because, putting his ball pressure completely aside, he only scored 7 points the whole day.  Pardon me, but I am left with the impression that there is not much to this whole thing.

And then we have the Wells report.  Now, I have only the highest regard for Ted Wells, who is a Jersey guy, and one of the finest lawyers you will find anywhere.  I am sure Ted Wells left no stone unturned, but the dirty little secret is, now matter how much you pay them, lawyers cannot make the facts.  What Wells determined is that a couple of Patriots’ employees took air out of the balls; and that it is more likely than not that Tom Brady knew about this.  Not what I would call a smoking gun.  In English, what this means is that Brady didn’t confess, and the employees didn’t claim that Brady ordered the deflation, but that it is hard to believe they would have done it if they weren’t sure Brady wanted it done.  That’s what we call in the law a reasonable suspicion.  Now, you can’t convict someone on that standard (for that matter, you can’t even arrest someone on that standard), yet I have endured a couple of days of sports reporters demanding that Brady be suspended, some say for up to a year.  Seriously?  Now the NFL has a rule, and if it was broken, and it looks like it was, there should be some sanction.  But suspend Brady a year?  There are several problems with that.  First, and foremost, it hasn’t been proven that Brady is guilty.  Secondly, even if he is, there is no precedent for this violation.  Knock out your girlfriend in the elevator – you get suspended for 6 games.  You take air out of a ball – you get a year?  Bottom line, this is much ado about nothing.  I tell you what, I have the perfect solution.  Let’s suspend Tom Brady for one game.  We’ll pick one at random … how about November 15, when the Patriots play the Giants.  Now that seems fair.

One more thing, Frank on Friday is going on sabbatical for two weeks while I am away.  See you May 29.