Notre Dame ReSources
May 11-17, 1997
p. *Notre Dame faculty are available for additional comment on these people and events in the news:
- p. Supreme Court: The decision this week to narrow the power of the federal government to veto local election rules continues the Supreme Court’s efforts to ensure that “race is not deliberately employed in the drawing of voting districts, except where that is necessary for the remedy of past discrimination,” says Douglas Kmiec , professor of constitutional law at Notre Dame. “The Voting Rights Act was never conceived as a racial spoils system, but as a means to guard against improper procedures that disadvantage a voter on the basis of race or which gives minority voters less opportunity than other members of the electorate. The court properly held the Justice Department’s regulation, which in essence constituted voting rights affirmative action, to be an abuse of authority and inconsistent with the statute’s intent.” (219) 631-6981; email@example.com * .
p. *Mexico: President Clinton’s visit to Mexico last week – his first – was overdue and vital to the relationship between the United States and its southern neighbor, says Scott Mainwaring , chair and Conley Professor of Government and International Studies at Notre Dame. “This isn’t a criticism, but it’s astonishing to me that President Clinton hadn’t been there before, given the importance he has attached to Mexico,” says Mainwaring. “Mexico has become a very important partner to the United States for many reasons – drugs, immigration, the Mexican economy, trade, poverty, democratization. I’m not saying it’s right, but with some countries around the world, the United State can take a ‘who cares’ attitude to issues like these. But Mexico is right next door and so that simply isn’t possible. All these issues are of immense importance to both the United States and Mexico. We tend to see England, France, Germany, Japan and others as countries that are of primary importance to the United States. But, increasingly, Mexico is at the forefront.” (219) 631-8530
p. Mrs. Clinton: First lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s conversations with White House counsel regarding Vince Foster and Whitewater are not protected by attorney-client privilege, says Douglas Kmiec , professor of constitutional law at Notre Dame. “Mrs. Clinton claims attorney-client privilege, but the attorneys she talked with were lawyers not for her, but for the United States – they were White House lawyers,” says Kmiec, who advised Presidents Reagan and Bush on similar matters as a deputy attorney general in the Justice Department. "As the appellate court has so far properly held, there can be no attorney-client privilege in such circumstance because, quite simply, Mrs. Clinton is not their client – the people of the United States are. So too, the people of the United States have convened a grand jury and appointed an independent counsel to investigate possible government wrongdoing. Mrs. Clinton has no constitutional basis to turn the lawyers for the United States into her personal defense counsel. When she needs personal criminal defense counsel for her behavior, she – like everyone else working for the government – needs to hire her own criminal defense attorney, and speak to him or her only in confidence. Absent some national security interest, Mrs. Clinton’s claim of privilege was answered in 1974 when the U S Supreme Court unanimously held that President Nixon couldn’t keep his tapes. (219) 631-6981; firstname.lastname@example.org * .
p. *Chemical weapons treaty: Senate ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) gives the United States a “legitimate leadership role in this important area of arms control,” says Raimo Vayrynen , director of the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at Notre Dame. “The convention is the most comprehensive and binding agreement reached so far on the banning of the production, trade, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. While no arms-control agreement can be verified perfectly, the organization and technical secretariat of the CWC will create a detailed verification mechanism preventing the transfer of chemical agents for illegal uses.” (219) 631-5665; email@example.com * .
p. *Netanyahu: Even without an indictment against him, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is “still in trouble,” says Alan Dowty , professor of government and international studies at Notre Dame. “First of all, there will be an appeal of the attorney general’s decision not to indict, which will have to be settled in the Supreme Court. Then Netanyahu will have to hold his coalition together, despite the fact that officially there is ‘tangible suspicion’ of his involvement in the deal over appointment of a party hack to a supposedly nonpolitical post. The opposition parties will be pulling out all stops to get the Knesset to call new elections, which would include both the Knesset and the prime ministership, and this would require the defection of only one or two of the eight parties in the coalition. Failing this, there will be pressure to broaden the base of the government by forming a National Unity Government, in which Netanyahu’s dominant role would be weakened. The next few weeks will be lively.” (219) 631-5098; firstname.lastname@example.org * .
p. *At your service: Despite the fact that service providers are now creating the vast majority of jobs in the United States, most companies are still using business structures designed for manufacturing products rather than serving consumers. Michael Etzel , professor of marketing at Notre Dame and chair of the American Marketing Association, says these systems, which operate under assumptions that service jobs are menial and that technical skills are more important than people skills, must change. “Companies are going to have to create jobs that enrich the individual,” he says. “That includes allowing employees room for creativity and hiring employees who could be candidates for a management job down the road. Technical competency is important, but the right attitude and people skills are more important.” (219) 631-5925 p. Secrets: Psychologists have maintained that it is healthy to share traumatic personal secrets. But a new study by Anita Kelly , assistant professor of psychology at Notre Dame, runs counter to that long-held assumption. “Although there are physical and psychological symptoms associated with carrying the traumatic burden alone, revealing secrets involves risks, such as the possibility of being rejected by and alienated from the listener,” Kelly and her colleague, Kevin McKillop, write in their study. “Revealing a secret may cause increased discomfort for both the secret-keeper and the confidant.” Kelly suggests “judicious revelation.” (219) 631-7048