COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	%business letter outline to use with buslet.tex macros
C00007 ENDMK
C⊗;
%business letter outline to use with buslet.tex macros
\input buslet[1,ra]
\jmclet

\vskip 30pt
\address 
Ms. Lynn Scarlett, Research Director
Reason Foundation
2716 Ocean Park Blvd., Suite 1062
Santa Monica, CA 90405

\body
Dear Ms. Scarllett:

	Thanks for your letter of August 5.  If you had added
Computer Science Department to the address it would have arrived
here sooner.

	I am honored by your invitation to participate in the
Reason Forum, and I come to L.A. about once a month.  Also it's
not too far for a special trip.

	I have two topics that might be of interest.

1. The first is a bit out of my field, but I have studied the
matter, and no lawyers seem to have advanced this idea.  There have
been many complaints about the tendency of judges to legislate, and
some have appeared in {\it Reason}.  I believe that one remedy that
has a reasonable chance of working is
a constitutional amendment requiring judges not to go beyond the
explicit intent of the framers of laws or the constitution in
interpreting it.  There is a very large body of legal literature
explaining the different ways of interpreting the U.S. Constitution,
some of it by liberals advocating their way but explaining the others,
so the judges would have some guidance.  The teeth in the amendment
would be provided by making usurping the powers of the legislature
a specific grounds for impeachment.  Now it is vague what grounds
for impeachment there might be other than ordinary crime.  Anyway
I would be glad for the opportunity to talk about this.
While amending the U.S. Constitution in this direction would be
difficult, amending the California Constitution by initiative is
much easier and would put the national question before the public.
Tentative title: Can we make the judges behave with a constitutional
amendment?

\eject
2. The second is more closely related to my field.  I believe
that publishing will eventually be done entirely through computers
with readers calling up books and articles on the screens of their
computer terminals.  The effect will be a vast expansion of the 
freedom to publish and probably an improvement in the quality
of controversial discourse, because the writer of something
controversial would have to take into account the fact that
replies to what he writes will be immediately available to his
readers.  I enclose an article containing something about this.
My talk would skip the technical part and concentrate on the
social effects.  The title might be: Computers and the Free Market
in Ideas.

	I hope that one or both of these is of interest.

\closing
Sincerely,       

John McCarthy    
\annotations
\vskip 1in
JMC/ra 
%\smallskip
%Enclosure
%\smallskip
%cc: Matthew Kahn
%\smallskip
%\ps
%P.S.: whatever you wish to say here

\endletter

\makelabel
\end