The official blog of the Libertarian Party

« May 2006 | Main | July 2006 »

June 29, 2006

Convention Blogging

Despite flight delays caused by the heavy rains on the east coast, most of the national staff has arrived at the LP Convention in Portland. Delegates are starting to show, and the Bylaws and Platform committees are already meeting.

We managed to get Michael Dixon national television yesterday, where he discussed smoking bans on CNBC. Shane Cory went on Air America, where he covered the LP convention.

The convention also drew some pretty good local press, including this one from The Oregonian. Here's a clip:

The party is all about personal tolerance and fiscal responsibility, which is why it attracts a broad spectrum of political types, said Richard Burke, executive director of the Libertarian Party of Oregon.

The party chose Portland for this year's meeting because the Oregon chapter has become increasingly visible in state politics, Burke said.

"We're not dominant," he said, "but we've crossed the threshold of being relevant. They wanted to reward that."

Party officials will meet Thursday, and a number of committee and caucus meetings and workshops are scheduled for Friday. But the main action gets into gear Friday night with a reception at the Hilton hotel in downtown Portland, followed by floor sessions Saturday and Sunday to put together the party's national platform.

Oregon's Libertarian candidate for governor, Richard Morley, will talk at Friday night's reception. Burke said he invited Democratic Gov. Ted Kulongoski and Republican candidate Ron Saxton as well. Kulongoski won't make the event, a spokeswoman said. Saxton's campaign could not be reached on whether he will attend.

We'll try to cover as much as we can from the key convention activities on this blog, so stay tuned.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 02:30 PM | Comments (15)

MMJ Update

While the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment failed again, it picked up some new votes. Here's the take from MPP:

An amendment to stop the U.S. Justice Department from arresting medical marijuana patients in the 11 states where medical marijuana is legal received a record vote on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives today. Although the measure failed to pass, 163-259, medical marijuana advocates hailed the record vote as the result of a growing groundswell of support for medical marijuana from across the political spectrum. Last summer, the amendment received 161 votes, which was the previous record until today's vote.

The improvement was due to Republican "yes" votes, which increased from 15 last year to 18 this year.

"Support for medical marijuana has hit yet another high-water mark in Congress, 11 states have legalized medical marijuana in 11 years, and the latest national poll shows that an astounding 78 percent of voters want to see medical marijuana legal," said Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) in Washington, D.C. "It's hard to imagine a scenario where Congress will not pass our medical marijuana legislation by, say, 2009.

We're gaining votes each time the bill comes up for vote. We even gained some in the middle of the election season, which indicates we'll get even more next year. Let's continue keep up the pressure on this good piece of legislation.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 02:22 PM | Comments (2)

June 28, 2006

Medical Marijuana Amendment to Hit House Floor Today or Tomorrow

If passed, the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment to the Science-State-Justice-Commerce appropriations bill will bar federal funds from being used to the medical marijuana laws now in effect in Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

Everytime this amendment is offered, it seems to pick up a few more votes. To add fuel to the fire, the conservative Citizens Against Government Waste just came down strongly against the federal government on the medical marijuana issue.

This amendment will be probably offered on the House floor sometime this evening or tomorrow. This is one of those issues where a lot of last minutes calls and e-mails to your legislator can make a big difference. Here's one place you can go to contact your congressman today.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 01:39 PM | Comments (14)

Republicans Unveil Their 'Values' Agenda

Knowing that their reckless spending and mishandling of the Iraq War will not help them get reelected, Republicans came up with a distraction in the form of a policy agenda that will appeal to social conservatives, called the "American Values Agenda."

In their continuing plan to make the public forget that the Republican Party has turned into a party of big government conservatives, the American Values Agenda will include measures that cover abortion, cloning, flag burning, religious freedom and internet gambling.

House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) made the announcement about the American Values Agenda on Tuesday. Part of his statement made my head spin:

"The American Values Agenda is a collection of legislative initiatives that speak to the values many American citizens hold dear. Freedom to display the American flag...freedom of religious expression...the right to keep and bear arms...respect for the sanctity of marriage, and the dignity of all human life. These are values that have defined the American character, protected our families, and shaped our society."

Boehner and his fellow Republicans are going after non-existent problems. To the best of my knowledge, my right to display the American flag or express my religion was never in question. However, my right to privacy is being encroached upon under the Bush administration.

Republicans need to familiarize themselves with the entire Bill of Rights, not just a few.

Posted by at 01:17 PM | Comments (32)

June 27, 2006

Not Everyone in DC is a Wimp

In addition to updating us on the damage to Democratic headquarters, Wonkette is insinuating that some Washingtonians may be less than manly:

Anyway, continuing our coverage-by-proxy of the state of the Democratic Party, we've received what we're pretty sure is the definitive reports on the DNC flood'watch:

The Democratic Club, which is next door to Democratic HQ, is fine. The Democratic National Headquarters, which houses the DNC and the DCCC, is the damaged one. Somehow the 1st and 3rd floors were mostly spared, while the second floor is destroyed. Most of the power is out, there's one to two inches of water on the floor in places, and rumor has it Rahm Emanuel's office is soaked.

Has anyone seen G. Gordon Liddy hiring out a cloud seeder?

The Libertarian Party is pleased to report that other than some minor flooding in Shane Cory's office, we are running at 100%. As a matter of fact, with reports that the rain will be stopping in DC over the next couple of days, we're packing up the office to head off to Portland so perhaps we might enjoy a bit more of this liquid sunshine.

We haven't heard any reports about the state of GOP HQ, but if there's a power outage there, one can reasonably be assured they won't be burning flags for emergency fuel over there.

By the way, we understand that G. Gordon Liddy has already figured out how to access our building.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 10:56 AM | Comments (0)

Talent on Loan from Drugs

Once again, one of America's loudest supporters of the War on Drugs finds himself a victim of the very policies he supports. From the AP:

Rush Limbaugh was detained for more than three hours Monday at Palm Beach International Airport after authorities said they found a bottle of Viagra in his possession without a prescription.

Customs officials found a prescription bottle labeled as Viagra in his luggage that didn't have Limbaugh's name on it, but that of two doctors, said Paul Miller, spokesman for the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office.

A doctor had prescribed the drug, but it was "labeled as being issued to the physician rather than Mr. Limbaugh for privacy purposes," Roy Black, Limbaugh's attorney, said in a statement.

They didn't charge Limbaugh, but he may not be out of hot water, yet.

The sheriff's office plans to file a report with the state attorney's office. Miller said it could be a second-degree misdemeanor violation.

Limbaugh reached a deal last month with prosecutors who had accused the conservative talk-show host of illegally deceiving multiple doctors to receive overlapping painkiller prescriptions. Under the deal, the charge, commonly referred to as "doctor shopping," would be dismissed after 18 months if he continues to submit to random drug tests and treatment for his acknowledged addiction to painkillers.

While I certainly disagree with government policy on the issue, there's a certain sense of justice in watching Limbaugh squirm a bit more on this issue.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 10:52 AM | Comments (3)

June 26, 2006

Supreme Court Sides With Free Speech in Vermont Campaign Finance Case

The U.S. Supreme Court finally sided with free speech in a case that challenged Vermont's campaign finance law.

A majority of the Supreme Court justices felt the law went too far (via Washington Post):

"The Supreme Court ruled Monday that Vermont's limits on contributions and spending in political campaigns are too low and improperly hinder the ability of candidates to raise money and speak to voters."

The spending limits imposed by Vermont's campaign finance law were ridiculously low (via Washington Post):

"In 1997, Vermont passed its campaign finance law, placing a $300,000 spending cap on gubernatorial candidates and lesser limits for other state political contests. Contributions to state campaigns were limited to as little as $200 per election cycle for state House races."

Various groups were involved in challenging the constitutionality of Vermont's campaign finance law, including the Vermont Libertarian Party, the Vermont Right to Life Committee and the Vermont Republican State Committee.

Here is what the Vermont Libertarian Party Chair, Hardy Machia had to say about Monday's Supreme Court ruling:

"It's a huge win for the Libertarian Party of Vermont. The ruling will help Libertarians in Vermont by allowing them to raise enough money to compete with the two entrenched parties."

You can read the Vermont LP's press release about Monday's ruling here. You can also check out their original press releases regarding their fight against the state campaign finance law, here and here.

Posted by at 05:19 PM | Comments (2)

Is Congress Intending to Bring Back the Sedition Act?

Claiming it necessary for the War on Terror, "they" have already shredded most of the Bill of Rights, included the portions of the First Amendment dealing with freedom of speech and peaceable assembly.

Not we can go ahead and get rid of that pesky little freedom of the press clause, too. From CBS News:

Here we go again. Last week, the New York Times revealed the existence of a secret government program in which counterterrorism officials "examined banking transactions involving thousands of Americans and others in the United States." And Republican representative Peter King ain't happy about it.

"We're at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous," said King. He said yesterday that he is urging Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to "begin an investigation and prosecution of The New York Times - the reporters, the editors and the publisher."

Reporters, editors and publishers keep revealing the existence of all sorts of troublesome things about which the government doesn't want us to know: Guantanamo Bay, covert prison facilities, torture at Abu Ghraib. King's position makes me wonder if he's planning to introduce a new Sedition Act in Congress.

We might as well throw the entire Constitution in the waste bin; we weren't using it anyway.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 04:33 PM | Comments (8)

Today in History: June 26, 1945 -- U.N. Charter Signed

by Jason Lauritzen

In San Francisco, delegates from 50 nations signed the United Nations Charter. A successor to the failed League of Nations, the organization was established to save "generations from the scourge of war."

Obviously this has not been the case - the Vietnam War, the Korean War and the Gulf War come to mind - just to name a few. The United Nations is flawed by its very structure. Austrian economist Ludwig Von Mises understood this: "It is futile to place confidence in treaties, conferences, and such bureaucratic outfits as ... the United Nations. Plenipotentiaries, office clerks and experts make a poor show in fighting ideologies. The spirit of conquest cannot be smothered by red tape. What is needed is a radical change in ideologies and economic policies."

Another problem with the U.N.'s structure is accountability. For it is as Robert LeFevre wrote in The Nature of Man and His Government: "... the United Nations is a government of the governments, by the governments, and for the governments." How do you make a group of governments accountable? A government is abstract. It is not something you can touch. People do not belong to the United Nations. Only governments belong.

Former Libertarian Party presidential candidate and current United States Representative Ron Paul recognizes this and commented on it in the wake of the U.N. Oil-for-food scandal: "Centralized, faraway government is always less accountable than localized government. The average American has no say whatsoever over what happens at the UN, even though he's forced to pay taxes to support it."

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 04:23 PM | Comments (5)

June 25, 2006

George W. Bush Declared King of the Big Spenders

Here's Steve Chapman's take on federal spending:

Back in the 1960s, Alabama Gov. George Wallace insisted there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. But when it comes to federal spending, that always rang false. Democrats talk in terms of expanding government efforts to help people, which invariably costs money, while Republicans preach the need to limit Washington's role in our lives, which ought to be cheaper.

These days, it's clear that Wallace was wrong. There is a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. But a dime is about all.
Since 1994, the National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF) has added up every dollar that every member of Congress casts a vote to spend. Yesterday, it released its study of how Congress did in 2005. The results indicate that when it comes to federal outlays, there is only one party in Washington: the Spendthrifts.

He then provides some financial detail about how much our money the Republicans and Democrats waste. For those of you who aren't interested in accounting statistics, I've modified this Seabiscuit script as an overview to our national spending situation:

It's Squandering Pachyderm -- by a nose, now by a head.

He's leading Wasteful Donkey, pressing on him a neck behind.

They fly toward the clubhouse turn. Who will be into it first?

It's Squandering Pachyderm, and he was there first and driving for the backstretch!

Now, coming into the backstretch, it's Squandering Pachyderm.

Going down the backstretch.

Now on the backstretch, Squandering Pachyderm still with the lead.

It's now Wasteful Donkey! It's Wasteful Donkey!

It's Squandering Pachyderm and Wasteful Donkey, neck and neck as they go down the backstretch!

It's Squandering Pachyderm. Now Wasteful Donkey!

Now Squandering Pachyderm! Now Wasteful Donkey!

Here comes Squandering Pachyderm! They're neck and neck.

It's Squandering Pachyderm by a nose! And Squandering Pachyderm wins the 2006 Congressional Derby.

Chapman appropriately closed his article with, "Reversing this race to bankruptcy will require elected leaders to stop spending like there is no tomorrow. But when it comes to that sort of wisdom and courage, Washington is suffering another deficit."

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 12:46 PM | Comments (6)

June 24, 2006

...and They Wish to Emulate this Healthcare System in the US?

This one comes from the AP:

Anesthesiologist Christian Favoccia had no trouble deciding to ditch his job at the university hospital in Duesseldorf for a new one at a clinic in Amsterdam.

By leaving home, the 36-year-old specialist will make almost three times as much money, work shorter hours and have better chances at promotion.

"At this point I honestly can't tell you if I will ever come back to Germany," Favoccia said. "I am skeptical that they'll be able to offer me the same kind of incentives any time soon."

Germany's well-trained but frustrated young doctors are leaving the country for higher pay in ever greater numbers, leaving some hospitals struggling to fill positions.

Let's look at the specific reasons why their pay is higher in Holland than in Germany:

Low salaries are one of the main reasons. Favoccia is making $2,900 a month after taxes in Duesseldorf, but at the University Hospital in Amsterdam he will earn $8,150 after deductions - and work fewer hours.

Young clinic doctors never made a lot of money in Germany but knew that later in their career their tough beginnings at the hospital would pay off, said Favoccia. That was before changes to the government health insurance program aimed at limiting health costs - and restricting what doctors can charge.

There are very few private clinics in Germany, so most young doctors start their careers at university hospitals, state-run or municipal clinics.

"Today, it is not worth it anymore to struggle for years because after all the changes in the German health system you will never become rich, not even as a senior doctor or if you own a private practice," he said.

But it is not just about the money. Many express frustration with working conditions and career prospects.

Limiting costs and restricting what doctors can charge sounds very similar to U.S. policy. My question is how long it will be until we start seeing a greater amount American physicians performing this same exodus?

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 06:55 PM | Comments (12)

June 23, 2006

Today in History

by Jason Lauritzen

A year ago, the City of New London, Connecticut, was rocked by a liberal Supreme Court decision. In the case of Kelo v. City of New London, the court ruled that the city could seize private property to sell to private developers. The city argued the land could be used to create jobs and surprise, generate tax revenue. The property owners rightly argued that the confiscation of private property violated the Fifth Amendment's takings clause, which says that government can only take property for "public use."

The majority opinion of the court stretched the definition of "public use" to "public purpose" further widening the number of excuses government could manifest to confiscate property. The dissent in the case had to give the majority a basic lesson on the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments: "These two limitations serve to protect 'the security of Property,' which Alexander Hamilton described to the Philadelphia Convention as one of the 'great objects of Government.' Together they ensure stable property ownership by providing safeguards against excessive, unpredictable, or unfair use of the government's eminent domain power--particularly against those owners who, for whatever reasons, may be unable to protect themselves in the political process against the majority's will."

Editorial Note: It should come as no surprise that President Bush just published an Executive Order on eminent domain in order to make it appear that Republicans are tough on the issue. It's obviously just election year politics, as Bush has personally benefitted from corporate eminent domain abuse.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 06:32 PM | Comments (2)

Convention Update

We are pleased to announce that Aaron Russo's new documentary, "America: Freedom to Fascism", will be shown at the Libertarian National Convention in Portland, Oregon. Russo's latest movie will be shown at 8 PM on Saturday, July 1. The cost of admission will be $10.

Here's my favorite review of the movie (so far):

The scariest goddamn film you'll see this year. It will leave you staggering out of the theatre, slack-jawed and trembling. Makes 'Fahrenheit 9/11' look like 'Bambi.' After watching this movie, your comfy, secure notions about America -- and about what it means to be an American -- will be forever shattered. Producer/director Aaron Russo and the folks at Cinema Libre Studio deserve to be heralded as heroes of a post-modern New American Revolution. This is shocking stuff. You'll be angry, you'll be disgusted, but you may actually break out in a cold sweat and feel a sickness deep in your gut; I would advise movie theatre managers to hand out vomit bags. You may end up needing one." -- Todd David Schwartz, CBS

This special preview of the film is a special treat for convention attendees. The official opening night for the film is July 28th.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 05:33 PM | Comments (0)

The Government Now Wants To Take A Look At Your Bank Transfers

It was reported in the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times on Friday of the existence of a secret government program run by the Treasury Department that accesses a vast database of international bank transfers involving thousands of Americans in the United States.

The Bush administration provided the same response to the existence of the secret program to monitor international bank transfers as the secret warrantless wiretapping program.

They tell the American public not to worry because they have safeguards in place and besides, the program is vital in the war against terrorism. The American people are supposed to trust that the so-called safeguards are sufficient enough to prevent abuse.

Dr. Steven Taylor from Poliblog has a major concern when the federal government states that the latest secret government surveillance program is limited in nature:

"One would hope. However, I must confess: such protestations always strike me as odd: if we know exactly who and what we are looking for, why do we need all the other data? I know that they are looking for patterns and patterns and therefore need other information, yet they always make it sound like they know where the needle is and just happened to have taken the whole haystack with them just in case. Rather is seems to me that to find the needle that they are examining quite a bit of the haystack and not just the al Qaeda tainted portions."

Bush apologist Michelle Malkin is hopping mad on her blog when she learned that newspapers like the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times would dare to inform the public on what the federal government is doing.

Posted by at 02:17 PM | Comments (4)

June 22, 2006

Inquiring Minds Want to Know

Libertarian Party candidate Paul King recently ran against Republican Brian Bilbray and Democrat Francine Busby in the CA-50 special election for Duke Cunningham's recently vacated seat.

FogerRox at Democratic Underground wants to know why Libertarian Party candidate Paul King obtained a significantly higher vote total in the special election than he did in the primary. He also asks why King's primary votes were higher than Libertarian totals in neighboring districts.

Over at Huffington Post, Bob Cesca takes it a bit further:

The CA-50 special election came up and here's where everyone fell short. Here was an opportunity for Markos to bring up the highly dubious Diebold machines used in the election and how election volunteers were allowed to bring the machines home. In addition, where was the mention that, with Bilbray's margin of victory at round 6,000 votes, there are still, according to the San Diego County Registrar of Voters, more than 34,000 absentee and provisional ballots that haven't been counted yet? Why did Busby concede knowing this? Why did Libertarian candidate Paul King receive roughly 500 more votes (2201 votes so far) than any other Libertarian running (around 1700 each) in Tuesday's vote? Even if the additional ballots are counted and Bilbray still wins, there are some puzzling questions that need answers.

Hey guys, the answer to your question comes from the national office of the Libertarian Party. It was the test drive of a new secret project we're working on. John La Beaume provides the details:

Technology's hand was at work, but it wasn't Diebold deviousness. Rather, it was a successful trial run of a new LP GOTV (Get Out the Vote) project and the hard work of a handful of dedicated Libertarians who volunteered their time.

Developed by LPHQ and one great consultant, this new tool allows Libertarian volunteers to help boost LP vote totals, including gaining and maintaining ballot status.

Sorry folks, there's no devious government conspiracy at play, just a hot new GOTV tool we are implementing at LP headquarters.

We'll be releasing the details of this new project at the Libertarian Party National Convention. In the mean time, there are two things those of you who can't make it to the convention can do to help us get this off the ground. If you'd like to be on the ground floor of this exciting new GOTV project, we could use your volunteer time. Alternately, we could use a few more dollars to assist with the implementation of this program.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 05:46 PM | Comments (4)

June 21, 2006

The Death Tax Still Lives

The death tax, aka the estate tax, will continue to live for the foreseeable future.

As with every tax, the death tax is hard to kill.

Despite controlling both houses of Congress and the presidency for over four years now, the Republicans couldn't get rid of the death tax.

From the Washington Post:

"Republican leaders announced yesterday that the House will vote this week on estate tax legislation that falls short of full repeal, conceding defeat on a philosophical issue that has been central to the GOP economic plank for more than a decade."

The latest estate tax legislation would go after the super-rich (via NY Times):

"The latest proposal would eliminate the tax for all estates worth less than $5 million — up to $10 million for couples. That would cover more than 99.5 percent of estates, according to Congressional estimates. In addition, the compromise would reduce the tax rates on the few estates that would still be subject to a tax."

Those who have estates worth more than $5 million have just as much right as those with lesser-valued estates to distribute their wealth as they please after they die.

Posted by at 06:15 PM | Comments (10)

The Freedom Quiz

There's a new political quiz out there published by the Orange County Register. It's similar to the World's Smallest Political Quiz, but contains 20 questions instead of 10. As the questions are less generic (but immediately more relevant) than those offered with the WSPQ, I'd guess this test will probably be more accurate for the short term, but less accurate or effective in the long term. Here's their description of the Freedom Quiz:

Register editorial writers Alan Bock, John Seiler and Steven Greenhut developed these questions to highlight aspects of "small l" libertarianism, the freedom philosophy that animates our pages. We believe in limited government, respect for the individual, self-responsibility, free markets, free trade and property rights. Enough of that before we give away too much of our testing bias!

This quiz is the first feature in our "Summer of Freedom" series, where we'll introduce you to proponents of the freedom philosophy, examine areas of liberty that are in jeopardy and explore American history, too. So, take the challenge and find out your freedom IQ. The "freedom" answers are on page 5. (Students who fail are advised to read the Register's editorial pages more thoroughly!)

The questions (and choices for answers) are interesting and they asked two important foreign policy questions which the WSPQ doesn't address. Enjoy!

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 11:29 AM | Comments (9)

June 20, 2006

Food Police Now Going After Starbucks

The food police, after attacking Colonel Sanders, are going after lattes and cappuccinos.

The public advocacy group, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), is planning to launch a campaign against Starbucks because of its use of trans fats in some of the products it sells, FoxNews.com reported.

Despite its academic-sounding name, the Center for Science in the Public Interest uses sensationalist soundbites instead of science. The website of a pro-consumer group, CSPI Scam, came up with a tongue-in-cheek nutritional label for public health advocacy groups. Check it out here.

If Starbucks doesn't cave in to CSPI's demands, the public advocacy group can always file a frivolous lawsuit (via FoxNews.com):

"And the possibility of legal action against Starbucks, similar to the case it is taking against KFC owner Yum Brands Inc. has not been ruled out, said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson."

CSPI wants Starbucks to list nutrition information on its menu boards, even though the coffee retailer already has the information readily available in store brochures and on the company's website.

Customers can't be bothered with picking up a brochure on nutritional information at the same time they are buying a Starbucks coffee.

CSPI wants Starbucks to use healthier alternatives to trans fat and to publicize its smallest size, "short", which is available but does not appear on the menu, according to FoxNews.com.

Here's what CSPI director Michael Jacobson would rather have America drink than coffee (via Washingtonian magazine):

"They really should develop an alternative for people to socialize -- a real fun coffeehouse. Maybe a carrot-juice house."

Posted by at 02:36 PM | Comments (7)

DOD Calls Gays Mentally Ill

Once again, the Department of Defense doesn't get it -- and they have no desire to listen to those who do. Despite the fact that experts in the mental health field don't classify homosexuality as a mental illness, the military now does. From the AP:

A Pentagon document classifies homosexuality as a mental disorder, decades after mental health experts abandoned that position.

The document outlines retirement or other discharge policies for service members with physical disabilities, and in a section on defects lists homosexuality alongside mental retardation and personality disorders.

Critics said the reference underscores the Pentagon's failing policies on gays, and adds to a culture that has created uncertainty and insecurity around the treatment of homosexual service members, leading to anti-gay harassment.

Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Jeremy M. Martin said the policy document is under review.

With the current "don't ask, don't tell" policy, it's acceptable for actively GBLT people (as long as they're ready lie about their lifestyle) to serve in the military and even die for their country. For the government to establish policy that classifies this, or other consensual adult lifestyles, as a mental aberration is absolutely absurd.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 11:37 AM | Comments (4)

June 19, 2006

The Pork Barrel Project That Wouldn't Die

In Monday's Washington Post, Charles Babcock reports on how difficult it is to kill pork barrel projects, especially those involving defense contractors.

Babcock writes how one defense contractor was able to stay in business purely through congressional earmarks.

An excerpt from the Washington Post article:

"Over the past decade Vibration & Sound Solutions Ltd., a small Alexandria defense contractor, has received a steady flow of federal contracts to work on "Project M" -- $37 million in all from annual 'earmarks' by congressional supporters such as Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.)."

Even more incredulous, is the fact that the Pentagon didn't even want Project M.

VSSL has not received any earmarks from next year's budget and is scheduled to close its Alexandria headquarters and lab, according to the Washington Post.

Those who closely follow the practice of congressional earmarking explain the difficulty in killing unnecessary military contracts (via Washington Post):

"Once begun, promising but speculative programs like Project M are hard to kill, sustained by members of Congress who want to keep jobs in their districts, military officials who want to keep their options open and businesspeople who want to keep their companies afloat."

Former chief of Naval Research, Rear Admiral Jay M. Cohen thinks Project M is not a total loss (via Washington Post):

"Cohen, now retired from the Navy, said the good news about VSSL's technology 'is that the money invested in Project M is owned in large part by the taxpayer and when the time is right it will be utilized' by all the [armed] services."

Now the American taxpayer owns a technology that isn't economically viable and may never provide a return on investment. I feel better already.

Posted by at 02:47 PM | Comments (9)

Rep. McKinney Gets Away With Assaulting a Police Officer

After a prolonged investigation, a D.C. Superior Court grand jury declined to issue an indictment against Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D - Georgia) for her alleged March 29th assault on Capitol Police Officer Paul McKenna, Roll Call reported.

The Fraternal Order of Police was frustrated at the apparent foot-dragging by the federal prosecutor who was handling the case, United States Attorney Kenneth Wainstein. The police union referred the case to the U.S. Attorney's office a week after the incident occurred. Almost two months later, a decision was finally reached.

Back in May, Jim Pasco, executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police noted the double standard in the McKinney case:

"... the only thing that distinguishes this case from cases all over the country every single day of the year was that the alleged perpetrator was a Congresswoman."

What do you think would happen if you or I attempted to strike a Capitol police officer? I think the answer is obvious but one question would remain . . . would the Capitol Police have used a taser gun or a baton before, during, or after arresting me?

Posted by at 02:38 PM | Comments (14)

Fighting Authority (and Winning)

They like to get you in a compromising position
They like to get you there and smile in your face
They think, they're so cute when they got you in that condition
Well I think, its a total disgrace

I fight authority, authority always wins
I fight authority, authority always wins
I been doing it, since I was a young kid
I've come out grinnin'
I fight authority, authority always wins - "Authority Song", John Cougar Mellencamp

It's time for a new take on John Cougar Mellencamp's "Authority Song." What happens when the person fighting authority becomes that very same authority? 21-year-old Jacob Burns of Wisconsin is gaining some firsthand experience in this regard. Here's how the Oshkosh Northwestern describes the background of the story:

Burns, a University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh economics student, first earned headlines and buzz in August 2004 when he dared to hoist a flimsy, homemade sign criticizing the Democrat and Republican candidates for U.S. President. The sign stated "No Bush, No Kerry, Vote Badnarik," favoring 2004 Libertarian presidential hopeful Michael Badnarik.

It probably wouldn't have become a splash had Burns not chosen the County Trunk GG overpass of busy, four-lane U.S. Highway 41 as his one-man demonstration site.

A Winnebago County Sheriff's Department officer spotted him, rolled up and issued a fishy, and ultimately dismissed, $181 ticket for an "unauthorized sign" at the high-visibility site. The sheriff said there was a legitimate safety concern. Burns considered it a speech-stifling move.

They eventually dismissed the citation with support of the ACLU and a local attorney combined with popular media attention, which was pushed by the Badnarik website. Now Burns is an election official.

Arif Khan, chairman of the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin, nominated Burns for the state Elections Board post. The appointment was made official last month by Governor Jim Doyle.

State elections board staff confirmed Burns is the youngest-ever member to join the panel since it was created in 1973. There have been members in their late 20s, but none as young as 21.

Burns will serve a one-year term on the board, a nine-member panel tasked with overseeing statewide elections and campaign finance law. It is comprised of representatives of all parties for which candidates in the last gubernatorial election earned at least a 10-percent share of the statewide vote[.]

The Libertarian party earned a representative seat due to Ed Thompson's 2002 bid for governor. The brother of former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson earned 10.4 percent of the statewide gubernatorial vote.

Being young and inexperienced on the board hasn't stopped Burns from making a difference already.

Burns enters the Elections Board in revolutionary times, when voting identification issues and polling place technology are stirring debate. The board recently weighed in on controversial and partisan-charged polling place identification policies.

Lindgren credits one of Burns' first votes in May with derailing a digital ballot machine company's first bid for Wisconsin election use.

"Put it this way, Libertarians in general, and Jacob Burns in specific, believe for a fact that there has to be a paper trail at the ballot box," Lindgren said. "We don't believe there's anything wrong with an electronic machine. But if there's a recount, there has to be a paper trail."

What an awesome way to "come out grinnin'" after fighting authority!

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 07:39 AM | Comments (6)

June 16, 2006

Democrats Can't Decide On a Campaign Slogan

Not satisfied with their first attempt at coming up with a campaign slogan for this year's midterm elections, Congressional Democrats have come up with a new label, "New Direction For America," Roll Call reported.

Congressional Democrats found that the public was not embracing the vagueness of their first attempt at a campaign slogan, "Together, America Can do Better."

Rather than go and talk to ordinary Americans, Democrats, in typical fashion, turned to polls and focus groups for help (via Roll Call):

"Polling and focus groups helped Democrats come up with the 'New Direction for America' slogan, sources also said. And they note that while the first theme fell flat, this one seems to fit all of the major components of the party platform this cycle."

Congressional Democrats had the right slogan in their first attempt. America can do better than the two corrupt parties that are in power at the moment.

Posted by at 12:43 PM | Comments (34)

June 15, 2006

The Price of Being 'Indecent' On TV Just Went Up

Those "wardrobe malfunctions" on network television are going to be more costly from now on.

Here an excerpt from CNN.com:

"President Bush Thursday signed into law legislation that raises fines tenfold on radio and television broadcasters that violate U.S. decency standards by airing extensive profanity or sexual content."

Republicans pushed for the higher fines as a way to shore up support from social conservatives.

The imposing of higher fines for indecency violations was one of the Christian Coalition's pet issues:

"The Christian Coalition had placed legislation to increase the fines as the No. 5 item on its 2006 legislative agenda."

Social conservatives enjoy telling adults across America what is appropriate to watch. It's all in the name of "protecting the children."

Apparently, groups like the Christian Coalition have never heard about the cable industry's informational campaign called "Cable Puts You In Control." The campaign website shows parents how to block certain channels or programming they think is inappropriate for their children.

The site even has a helpful video on how to set up parental controls on your cable setup box.

For those who don't have cable, you can try Weemote, the V-Chip, or TVGuardian.

So simple, even a politician can figure it out.

Posted by at 05:04 PM | Comments (7)

Libertarian Tom Bagwell Will Run For City Council Seat in Ypsilanti, Michigan

There is an article in the Ypsilanti Courier about Libertarian Tom Bagwell's run for the Ypsilanti City Council Ward 2 seat.

Here's an excerpt:

"A new candidate has emerged in the City of Ypsilanti's elections this year.

Tom Bagwell, a recent EMU political science graduate, will be running for the city council's Ward 2 seat.

Bill Nickels, D-2nd Ward, currently holds that position, but he is up for election this year.

Bagwell, 22, will be running as a Libertarian for the seat. He is currently the only candidate not running as a Democrat."

You can check out the rest of the article here.

Posted by at 04:57 PM | Comments (1)

Federal Judge Rules That Federal Gov't Has Wide Latitude In Detaining Noncitizens

If you're a noncitizen living in the United States, you might want to be looking over your shoulder (via NY Times):

"A federal judge in Brooklyn ruled yesterday that the government has wide latitude under immigration law to detain noncitizens on the basis of religion, race or national origin, and to hold them indefinitely without explanation."

The federal judge ruled that the federal government can detain noncitizens indefinitely as long as it appears that they will eventually be released (via NY Times):

"In the judge's view, the government has the right to detain people indefinitely as long as their eventual removal is 'reasonably foreseeable.' If that interpretation stands, it could apply to millions of noncitizens, including tourists removable for visa violations, said Gerald L. Neuman, a law professor at Columbia who is an expert in human rights law and was not involved in the case."

The ruling was a result of a class-action lawsuit by Muslim immigrants detained after the September 11th attacks. Some civil rights experts believe the ruling will allow the federal government to detain groups of noncitizens based on their religion or ethnicity.

The ruling reopens the debate on the rights noncitizens have while living in the United States.

Posted by at 04:54 PM | Comments (2)

June 14, 2006

GAO Study Finds Massive Fraud In FEMA Hurricane Aid

The General Accounting Office (GAO) concluded an investigation into disaster aid that was doled out by FEMA to the victims of Hurricane Katrina and Rita.

What the GAO found was not good news (via CNN.com):

"The GAO found that at least $1 billion in disaster relief payments by the Federal Emergency Management Agency were improper and potentially fraudulent because the recipients provided incomplete or incorrect information when they registered for assistance."

The most astounding part of the story is the ease with which criminally-minded individuals were able to obtain disaster aid under false pretenses.

Here are a few examples of disaster aid fraud that the GAO study found (via CNN.com):

"People signed up for assistance using Social Security numbers that didn't exist or belonged to other people.

Aid applications contained bogus addresses for damaged property, or gave addresses for damaged property where the applicants did not live when the hurricanes struck. In one case, FEMA paid nearly $2,360 to a man whose allegedly damaged property was in a cemetery.

Payments were made to people who listed post office boxes as their damaged residences.

People submitted duplicate registrations, which FEMA did not detect.

More than 1,000 registrations used the names and Social Security numbers of prison inmates. According to the GAO, in one instance, FEMA paid $20,000 to a Louisiana prisoner who listed a post office box as his damaged property."

One of the worst examples of FEMA negligence that the GAO study found was that FEMA was providing rental assistance to hurricane victims that were already staying in hotels paid for by the federal disaster agency.

At this point, I can't think of a reason why FEMA should continue to exist.

Posted by at 01:03 PM | Comments (4)

June 13, 2006

Not on My Dime(s)

In a move destined to further erode popular support for House legislators, Congress more-or-less just voted itself another pay raise. From WaPo:

The 2 percent cost-of-living raise would be the seventh straight for members of the House and Senate.

Lawmakers easily squelched a bid by Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, to get a direct vote to block the COLA, which is automatically awarded unless lawmakers vote to block it.

At a time of skyrocketing gasoline (and other) prices, Congress made sure they spent your dime on their personal expenses. By the way, that's not just one dime, but 33,000 per congressman.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 06:18 PM | Comments (6)

Dept. of Homeland Security Not So Secure

The federal agency that is supposed to be securing America from foreign and domestic threats is apparently not so secure (via CNN.com):

"A man using a fake identification card was able to enter the Homeland Security Department headquarters in Washington, he said, even though the United States government considers the type of Mexican-issued card he used invalid."

The man, Bruce DeCell, a retired New York City policeman said he purposefully used a forged version of identification that Mexican consulates in the U.S. issue to nationals living here illegally, according to CNN.com. While undocumented Mexicans can use the cards at some banks and other institutions, they are not valid for entry into government buildings.

The lax security at Homeland Security headquarters has extra significance for DeCell:

"DeCell is a board member of a group called '9/11 Families for a Secure America,' which he formed with others after losing his son-in-law in the 2001 terrorist attacks...

'It's very frustrating,' he told CNN. 'I'm an unpaid citizen who had a loss on 9/11, and they're not doing what they need to do to prevent another 9/11. It's very discouraging for me.'"

Posted by at 04:50 PM | Comments (4)

June 12, 2006

A Key Campaign Consultant's View of Ed Thompson

Bill Christofferson is a political consultant who has managed political campaigns for many Wisconsin candidates over the years, including for Governor Jim Doyle and Senator Herb Kohl. As a matter of fact, he managed Doyle's race when Ed Thompson ran for governor in 2002 as a Libertarian. Here's what Christofferson has to say about that race now:

I was one of the many who dismissed Ed Thompson's candidacy for governor in 2002 as a joke, a sideshow at best. And it seemed he must be something of a buffoon to think he could run as a Libertarian and have any impact.

Ed surprised everyone except himself and people who knew him when he got 10 per cent of the statewide vote, about 10 times as much as most of us expected when he first got into the race.

Although he ran as a libertarian, polls consistently showed that he drew roughly equal numbers of votes from Democrats and Republicans, rather than just from the conservative side, as might have been expected. So he didn't swing the race one way or the other. But his 10% seemed to be a clear signal that voters weren't happy with the other choices they had.

If anyone would be in a position to know the impact Ed Thompson made in Wisconsin, it would be Christofferson. He hit the nail squarely on the head when he said that the people who know Thompson weren't surprised by his vote total. As Ed's recent city council election results indicate, those who know Ed Thompson vote for Ed Thompson.

Now everyone has a chance to get a great glimpse of the man they call Mr. Ed. The trailer for "A Remarkable Man," the documentary about Thompson, is available online. Alternately, you can read Christofferson's review. Here's a snippet of it:

In the movie, which is done documentary style with live footage interspersed with interviews, Thompson's charisma comes through. He comes across as a decent guy who can be glib and funny, who will fight back when he thinks he -- or someone else -- has been wronged, and as someone who's caring and compassionate.

He has a great story to tell, as a former boxer and Toughman contestant, a professional poker player, and finally as the owner of the Tee Pee restaurant in Tomah, where a run-in with the government launched his career in politics.

I know Ed Thompson, and find that the documentary accurately reflects my view of him. It's my thought that if the entire state of Wisconsin viewed the DVD, Ed Thompson would be the next Governor of Wisconsin.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 07:44 PM | Comments (2)

LP National Office Welcomes Stephen Gordon

There's a new face at the national headquarters of the Libertarian Party.

Stephen Gordon has been hired as the new Communications Director. Stephen is taking over the position left vacant by Sam New, who served as the acting Communications Director for several months.

Stephen is co-editor of the popular libertarian blog, Hammer of Truth. He also teaches the campaign management and advanced campaign management courses at the Libertarian Leadership School.

Stephen has a great deal of campaign experience. He was the Communications Director for Michael Badnarik's 2004 presidential campaign. Stephen was actively involved in various state political activities through the Libertarian Party of Alabama and served as their Vice-Chairman from 2004 to 2006.

To read more about Stephen's background, check out his Wikipedia entry here.

Please join me in welcoming Stephen to the national office!

Posted by at 04:53 PM | Comments (2)

June 09, 2006

Repeal of the Death Tax Dies In The Senate

The death tax staved off its demise this week in the Senate (via New York Times):

"Voting 57 to 41, with only a few lawmakers crossing party lines, the Senate was three votes short of the number needed to end debate on the bill, dooming it on procedural grounds. The vote all but killed hopes at the White House and among Republicans on Capitol Hill of eliminating the tax on large estates, which under current law would be phased out by 2010 but would return in 2011."

If Congress does not take further action on the death tax, owners of large estates will get a temporary reprieve from the death tax for one year in 2010, then in 2011, will be subject to a 55 percent tax rate.

Dr. James Joyner writes that the federal government would hardly miss the revenue from the estate tax (via Human Events):

"Even before its repeal, the estate tax made up only 1.2 percent of federal revenues; we're not talking about a massive windfall."

Many liberal commentators are dumbfounded to find that, according to various polls, the American public overwhelmingly supports the repeal of the estate tax.

Joyner's explanation for this support is that the majority of the American public has a basic understanding of free-market principles:

"Perhaps Americans simply understand a basic principle: Earnings belong to the earner, not the state. Microsoft pays corporate taxes and Bill Gates and Paul Allen pay hefty income taxes on their shares, in addition to various sales taxes and fees. The idea that the state has the right to take another huge chunk of their money when they die, rather than allowing them to pass it on to their children, simply strikes most of us as outrageous."

Posted by at 03:35 PM | Comments (24)

June 08, 2006

Terrorist al-Zarqawi Killed in Iraq

Here's some good news (via Washington Post):

"Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the mastermind behind hundreds of bombings, kidnappings and beheadings in Iraq, was killed early Wednesday by an air strike -north of Baghdad, U.S. and Iraqi officials said Thursday."

"U.S. warplanes dropped two 500-pound bombs on a house in which Zarqawi was meeting with other insurgent leaders. A U.S. military spokesman said coalition forces pinpointed Zarqawi's location after weeks of tracking the movements of his spiritual adviser, Sheik Abdul Rahman, who also was killed in the blast."

The Bush administration learned from its past mistakes, when they predicted the end of the insurgency after the capture of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and after the killing of Saddam's two sons, Uday and Qusay (via Washington Post):

"Bush echoed Iraqi and U.S. military leaders in cautioning that Zarqawi's death would not in itself halt the bloodshed in Iraq."

Junkyard Blog comments on Zarqawi's death:

"I guess that machine gun he was working so hard at firing didn't come in to handy, now, did it?"

Posted by at 01:48 PM | Comments (25)

June 07, 2006

Same-Sex Marriage Amendment Fails In the Senate

As expected, the proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage failed in the Senate on Wednesday.

The proposed amendment died a quiet death with a procedural vote (via Washington Post):

"The 49-48 vote on a motion to end debate on the proposal advanced by Republicans and President Bush was 11 short of the number required under Senate rules. It also was 18 votes short of the two-thirds majority in both houses required for proposed amendments to the Constitution."

Congress is not through wasting time with social conservatives' pet issues. House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters that the House is scheduling a vote on the proposed amendment next month.

If you are still not convinced that the proposed amendment to ban same-sex marriage is a bad idea, Dale Carpenter, an associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota Law School, spells out why it should not pass in a Cato Institute Policy Analysis:

"First, a constitutional amendment is unnecessary because federal and state laws, combined with the present state of the relevant constitutional doctrines, already make court-ordered nationwide same-sex marriage unlikely for the foreseeable future. An amendment banning same-sex marriage is a solution in search of a problem.

Second, a constitutional amendment defining marriage would be a radical intrusion on the nation's founding commitment to federalism in an area traditionally reserved for state regulation, family law. There has been no showing that federalism has been unworkable in the area of family law.

Third, a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage would be an unprecedented form of amendment, cutting short an ongoing national debate over what privileges and benefits, if any, ought to be conferred on same-sex couples and preventing democratic processes from recognizing more individual rights.

Fourth, the amendment as proposed is constitutional overkill that reaches well beyond the stated concerns of its proponents, foreclosing not just courts but also state legislatures from recognizing same-sex marriages and perhaps other forms of legal support for same-sex relationships. Whatever one thinks of same-sex marriage as a matter of policy, no person who cares about our Constitution and public policy should support this unnecessary, radical, unprecedented, and overly broad departure from the nation's traditions and history."

Posted by at 04:02 PM | Comments (16)

June 06, 2006

Those Free Trips Really Add Up On Capitol Hill

Some members of Congress have really taken advantage of one on-the-job perk - free trips.

The Center for Public Integrity released a study that found from January 2000 through June 2005, Republican and Democratic lawmakers accepted almost $50 million in free trips from corporations and private groups.

The Center for Public Integrity admits some of the trips could be classified as "legitimate fact-finding missions", while others would have to be put in a totally different category (via Washington Post):

"Lawmakers and their staffers were treated to $25,000 corporate-jet rides and $500-a-night hotel rooms, the study showed. Lawmakers accepted thousands of costly jaunts -- one worth more than $30,000 -- to some of the world's choicest destinations: at least 200 trips to Paris, 150 to Hawaii and 140 to Italy."

The Washington Post reported that one of the biggest corporate sponsors of lawmakers' travel was General Atomics, a small San Diego-based defense contractor that makes the Predator, an unmanned spy plane. Coincidentally, the Predator is widely used by the United States and other countries.

General Atomics brought along congressional staffers when it made its sales pitch to foreign governments (via Washington Post):

"On trips paid for by General Atomics to Turkey and Australia, congressional staffers attended meetings with foreign government officials that the company was soliciting to buy the Predator.

'[It's] useful and very helpful, in fact, when you go down and talk to the government officials, to have congressional people go along and discuss the capabilities of [the plane] with them,' Tom Cassidy, chief executive of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, the company's aircraft-manufacturing subsidiary, told the [Center for Public Integrity]."

Wendall Rawls, the acting executive director of the Center for Public Integrity, said the study found multiple ethics violations and that many of the trips were paid for by corporations that had business interests before Congress.

Posted by at 03:48 PM | Comments (4)

June 05, 2006

Army Manual Omits Geneva Convention Rules

The Los Angeles Times reported on Monday that when the Pentagon issues a new Army Field Manual on interrogation it will exclude Geneva Convention protections that explicitly bans "humiliating and degrading treatment."

This is not the time to omit Geneva Convention protections from the Army Field Manual on interrogation in the wake of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal. The Pentagon should be taking extra steps to show that their established interrogation policy does not encourage the abuse and torture of prisoners.

According to a senior defense official, it's not about encouraging torture, but making sure your questions get answered promptly by a detainee:

"The directive on interrogation, a senior defense official said, is being rewritten to create safeguards so that all detainees are treated humanely but can still be questioned effectively."

The Bush administration is pushing the envelope on how detainees are treated. This policy direction is very dangerous and could further endanger our stature around the world.

Top administration officials counter that the rules have changed since 9/11:

"But top administration officials contend that after the Sept. 11 attacks, old customs do not apply, especially to a fight against terrorists or insurgents who never play by the rules.

'The overall thinking', said the participant familiar with the defense debate, 'is that they need the flexibility to apply cruel techniques if military necessity requires it.'"

In our fight against terrorism, we have to be careful we don't go down a slippery slope and abandon our founding principles of due process and the rule of law.

Posted by at 04:23 PM | Comments (16)

June 02, 2006

Livestock Farms Are Industrial Waste Sites?

If some environmental groups had their way, livestock farms would be classified as Superfund sites.

Steven Milloy, an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, writes about this absurd development on FoxNews.com:

"Environmental activists are teaming up with state attorney generals and trial lawyers to bankrupt the nation’s livestock farmers – in the name of saving the environment.

The activists – including the Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists – are trying to convince Congress that the nation's farms should be treated as industrial waste sites and therefore subject to severe penalties under the federal Superfund law. Some state attorneys general, supported by trial lawyers, have filed lawsuits toward the same end."

Environmental activists are trying to equate cow manure with toxic waste that is produced during plastics and chemical manufacturing, even though cow manure is a natural fertilizer.

Milloy points out that environmental activists are using the Superfund law in a way it was never intended:

"Congress never intended the Superfund law to apply to the nation’s farms – it was designed to clean up industrial waste sites like Love Canal. But because it did not specifically exempt animal waste, activists are now seizing on this lack of clarity to haul farmers before the courts and apply the draconian penalties permissible under Superfund.

If the activists are successful, farmers could face penalties of many millions of dollars and thousands of small farmers could be forced off their land."

This is another instance of a federal law having unintended consequences, with America's livestock farmers paying the price.

Posted by at 05:41 PM | Comments (7)

Justice Depart. Wants Internet Companies to Keep Web-Surfing Records Longer

The Justice Department is looking to further encroach on our online privacy, all in the name of fighting terrorism and child pornography.

On May 26th, top federal law enforcement officials, including FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, met with Internet company executives to ask them to retain the Web-surfing records of its customers for up to two years, the New York Times reported. Usually Internet companies keep customer web-surfing histories for no more than a few weeks.

The Justice Department tried to frame its proposal as benign (via LA Times):

"The Justice Department said Thursday that it was not seeking to have e-mail content archived, just information about the websites people visit and those with whom they correspond."

According to privacy experts, the proposal is a major break from established policy and could extend far beyond just being used in terrorism and child pornography cases.

Here's what one privacy expert had to say (via LA Times):

"This is not simply limited to kiddie porn or terrorism. It's a real break with precedent," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the nonprofit Electronic Privacy Information Center. "Data retention is open-ended. The government is saying, 'Keep everything about everyone and we'll sort it out later.' "

The Justice Department is asking Internet companies to retain customers' web-surfing histories voluntarily first. If there is resistance from Internet companies, the Justice Department will push for legislation forcing them to comply.

Posted by at 03:22 PM | Comments (5)

June 01, 2006

Is the Time Right For a Third Party?

A great editorial column appeared in the June 1st edition of the Wall Street Journal about how America could be ready for a third party.

Peggy Noonan writes about the current political system:

"Something's happening. I have a feeling we're at some new beginning, that a big breakup's coming, and that though it isn't and will not be immediately apparent, we'll someday look back on this era as the time when a shift began."

She argues that the partisanship between Republicans and Democrats is the worse in recent memory and has gotten increasingly sour. Noonan argues that the partisanship has gotten worse "as less separates the governing parties in Washington."

According to Noonan, there is another kind of polarization happening:

"The problem is not that the two parties are polarized. In many ways they're closer than ever. The problem is that the parties in Washington, and the people on the ground in America, are polarized. There is an increasing and profound distance between the rulers of both parties and the people--between the elites and the grunts, between those in power and those who put them there."

She writes that both Republicans and Democrats have reached the point where they can not even run a government, using the Dept. of Homeland Security as an example:

"More to the point, people see the Republicans as incapable of managing the monster they've helped create--this big Homeland Security/Intelligence apparatus that is like some huge buffed guy at the gym who looks strong but can't even put on his T-shirt without help because he's so muscle-bound. As for the Democrats, who co-created Homeland Security, no one--no one--thinks they would be more managerially competent."

Noonan hopes that a third party will recognize the underlying problem:

"that sees the big divide not as something between the parties but between America's ruling elite and its people--would be making long strides in putting third party ideas in play in America again."

Posted by at 05:23 PM | Comments (38)