83 billion more, soon we’ll be talking about some real money here

by Mr. Bob | 8:53 am, April 13, 2009

The latest spending on Capital Hill to come out the President and of Pelosi’s office is more of the International variety than domestic. It is touted as money to end the war in Iraq and for “regional stabilization” but it is of course more than that.

The Lion’s Share is for the war I’ll give them that but they of course sneak in some other goodies, that is their nature and they obviously feel that is their job;

$38.0 billion to fund the incremental costs of ongoing military operations in Iraq andAfghanistan during Fiscal Year 2009. This includes the cost of combat and stabilizationoperations, pre-deployment training, inter- and intra-theater transportation, aircraft flyinghours, ship steaming days, and vehicle miles at a wartime operational tempo.

$11.6 billion to refurbish or replace equipment that is worn out or damaged fromoperating in harsh conditions in Iraq and Afghanistan, including $0.6 billion to procurefour F-22 Raptor fighter aircraft to replace four fighter aircraft lost in the theater ofoperations.$9.8 billion to improve the protection of our forces with lightweight body armor, armoredvehicles, safe and secure operating bases, identity management for access control, persistent surveillance capabilities.$1.5 billion to confront the evolving threat from Improvised Explosive Devices.

This is good to know that we (military personnel) will not be left high and dry and that they won’t be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory but lets look closer at some additional items.

$0.8 billion to support the Palestinian people, strengthen the Palestinian Authority, andprovide humanitarian assistance for the crisis in Gaza.

•$0.8 billion to sustain current United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operations, fund anexpanded mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and a new mission in Chadand the Central African Republic. A portion of these funds may be used to pay UNassessments attributable to a logistics and support package for the African Union Missionto Somalia called for by the UN Security Council.

$0.5 billion for other priorities such as economic and development assistance for thepeople of Kenya, Zimbabwe, and Burma; security assistance for Lebanon; funding forheavy fuel oil assistance and to support nuclear dismantlement in North Korea;counterdrug/anti-crime assistance for Mexico;

•$0.4 billion to address the impact of the global financial crisis in developing countries,including additional support for vulnerable populations through social safety netprograms, targeted technical assistance to strengthen crisis response, and loans and loanguarantees for small and medium enterprises

$30.0 million is to implement executive orders for the shut down of theGuantanamo Bay prison and review of the U.S. detention and interrogationprocedures;

$5.0 million is for U.S. Attorneys for extraordinary litigation expenses associatedwith terrorism prosecutions of national importance;$5.0 million is for the Federal Prison System to support counter-terrorismactivities

$1.4 million is for the National Security Division to continue supporting MilitaryCommission prosecutions.

I am not saying that I don’t think some of these things should be funded, but there are a few suspect items there…the Palesinian Authority? Getting terrorists into the criminal justice system of the US?

The request says that these things aren’t being met ouf the standard budget and must be requested or they won’t be able to do it….sure just turn on the faucet my great great grandchildren still aren’t paying their fair share.

Democrats Gamble State Finances, Majority Status, on Pinnacol “Gimmick”

by Ben DeGrow | 8:14 am, April 13, 2009

The budget debate at Colorado’s State Capitol heads into full throttle this week. In a tough year, the linchpin to the Democrats’ plan is a raid on the privately-funded Pinnacol Assurance Company. Even the Denver Post recognizes this as a bad idea:

If lawmakers can’t get money from Pinnacol, higher education could be cut by more [...]

Perlmutter Earmarks Ahoy!

by Ryan | 7:12 am, April 13, 2009

Unfortunately, Congressman Ed Perlmutter is on the earmark bandwagon.  His requests for my hometown of Arvada were:

$6,000,000 – Garrison St flood control
$600,000 – Wadsworth Trail
$1,400,000 – 56th Avenue bypass
$2,600,000 – Clear Creek Overflow project

These sound like fine projects that need funding, but they aren’t a federal concern.  Instead of using federal funds in this way [...]

Penn State’s “The Veteran” Training Video Brings Back Ironic Memories

by Ben DeGrow | 6:56 am, April 13, 2009

I couldn’t resist commenting on this one – from the Wall Street Journal’s Best of the Web:

“What if it was ‘Oh, the gay one,’ or ‘Oh, the Asian kid?’ ” asks Maggie Kwok, head of the Penn State Veterans Organization in an interview with the Daily Collegian, PSU’s student newspaper. She is referring to a [...]

“Animal Rights”: What is wrong with this country?

by Rossputin | 3:00 am, April 13, 2009

In a remarkable story, the breeder who sold Joe Biden a German Shepherd puppy describes receiving death threats and being harassed by government officials once the public learned of Biden’s purchase. (Apparently Biden has received threats too.)

The people who sent threats should be jailed, as should the petty bureaucrat(s) who sent “dog wardens”, whom I presume to be the “pro-animal” gestapo, to the kennel if there is any evidence that the breeder, Linda Brown, is getting more regulatory “attention” than she otherwise would be simply because of her one famous customer. To be clear, it does seem that the breeder has not had a spotless record with the government or the AKC in the past, and I don’t presume that she’s doing everything perfectly.

Still, what is wrong with this country? Have we gotten so fat and happy, with so much leisure time, that the greatest thing we worry about is whether Barack Obama’s new dog comes from a shelter or a breeder? I mean, really, can you believe CNN ran a poll on that question?

Now that Obama did get a dog (not from a shelter, but not from a breeder either), isn’t it ridiculous that the article needs to tell us that they had “hoped to get a rescue dog?”

Listen… My brother was a passionate advocate of “animal welfare”. But he clearly understood that people are not second-class citizens in the food chain or any other chain, and he never would have been involved with threats of any sort of violence. I have had a chance, when my brother was still with us and through some of the work we’ve done through the foundation we set up in his memory, to meet quite a few “animal rights” enthusiasts and have yet to meet one who would think it’s OK to threaten violence (or death) against someone…much less to do so for something as harmless as selling a puppy. (Yes, I know PETA says it’s not harmless and expresses those views in extremely distasteful ways…which is why PETA will hopefully meet its own end one day soon.)

What a pathetic, self-indulgent, micro-managing bunch of nannies this nation’s “idealists” have become, particularly the left-wing youth who view anything done for profit or by a large company as inherently evil, and then wonder how it is they have food on their plates and shoes on their feet.

It’s time to stop giving them a pass just because they cloak their hatred with images of puppies and kittens. If we’re going to have (unconstitutional) hate crimes laws, let’s charge PETA and even more radical “animal defense” groups with them.

Yes, it’s a minor tragedy that there are so many nice cats and dogs that end up being killed because they’re unwanted or because humans didn’t neuter or spay those animals’ parents. But it is a minor tragedy. I wouldn’t trade one human life…or one human limb…for any number of thousands of those animals. And anyone who would should be severely and publicly punished.

I have two words for Joe Biden, and his perfectly acceptable decision to buy a puppy from a breeder: “Nice dog.”

The “Public” insurance plan’s huge market share

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, April 13, 2009

Talk about unhealthy competition.  From Heritage:
A new study released today by the Lewin Group, one of the most well-respected health care consultancies in Washington, gives new estimates on “The Cost and Coverage Impacts of a Public Plan” like the one being considered by President Obama and the congressional leadership. The Lewin Group says that “If [...]

Jane Hamsher: The Tea Parties Are “Financed By Fox News”

by T.L. James | 10:52 pm, April 12, 2009

Jane Hamsher of firedoglake.com single-handedly ups the attendance figures for the DC “New Way Forward” rally by several percentage points: The tea parties are just “phony populism.” I wonder now if she’s kicking herself for the inartful comment that the right is only angry because “they’re not the ones stealing right now”, seeing as how, logically, [...]

US Navy Snipers Shoot Pirates, Save Skipper of Maersk-Alabama

by Mr. Bob | 8:44 pm, April 12, 2009

Off the Somali coast, U.S. special operations snipers held positions at the rear of the USS Bainbridge, which was towing an 18-foot lifeboat that held Phillips and three pirates some 25-30 meters away.

“The snipers positioned on the fantail of the Bainbridge observed one of the pirates in the pilot house — and two pirates with their head and shoulders exposed — and one of the pirates had the AK47 (assault rifle) leveled at the captain’s back,” Gortney said.

Gortney said the White House had given military operators “very clear guidance and authority” if Phillips’ life was in danger.

“The on-scene commander took it as the captain was in imminent danger and then made that decision (to shoot), and he had the authorities to make that decision, and he had seconds to make that decision,” he said.

On the marksmanship of the snipers Gortney said, “We pay a lot for their training and we got a good return on our investment.”

Naval forces rescued Phillips on a rigid-inflatable boat and transferred him to the USS Bainbridge before being flown to the amphibious assault ship USS Boxer, where he contacted his family, received a routine medical evaluation, and is resting comfortably, ccording to a U.S. Navy statement.

Gortney said Phillips was in good health and suffered no apparent injuries, despite being “tied up inside the lifeboat” for at least part of his five days as a hostage. He noted that a fourth pirate surrendered and is being held in U.S. forces’ custody. SOURCE DefenseLink

The news that Captain Richard Phillips has escaped unharmed from Somali pirates provoked jubilant celebrations in Mombasa port Sunday.

The thundering horn of Phillips’ ship, the Maersk Alabama, sounded three times and flares were fired into the night sky.

“He’s a national hero,” shouted one of his crewmen from the Maersk Alabama to journalists gathered by the ship at the Mombasa docks. “We’re all excited about the captain being freed.”

The 19 crew whooped with joy at the news that their captain was free after a tense, five-day standoff.

U.S. Navy SEALs shot three armed pirates who were holding Phillips hostage on the lifeboat where he had been held captive since Wednesday, according to CNN. This report from the Navy states that Navy special forces believed Phillips was in “imminent danger” and they shot the pirates. This changes the initial report that said Phillips jumped into the water from the lifeboat and then the Navy SEALs shot the pirates dead to protect him.

Read HERO CAPTAIN FREE at Global News International

Tea Party Reporting: Intimidated Progressives Observing “Incognito”

by T.L. James | 8:33 pm, April 12, 2009

Self-described Progressive blogger ”CVille Dem” over at TPM is planning to go to her local Tea Party rally this week.  And not just go, but go to the Tea Party INCOGNITO (yes, all caps).  Apparently what spawned this cautious bit of spycraft was seeing that ridiculous ‘burn the books’ clip that’s been making the rounds. I [...]

Clear The Bench Colorado Director on Face The State radio 4/11

by CTBC Director | 4:12 pm, April 12, 2009

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold gave an interview to Face The State’s Brad Jones on the grassroots movement to oust 4 current Colorado Supreme Court justices who must receive voter approval in 2010 to retain their position on the bench.
DON’T GIVE IT TO THEM!  Vote NO on retaining these rogue justices on the Supreme Court!
(Listen [...]

Colorado HB 1293: Prepare For More Expensive Medical Insurance

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, April 12, 2009

The Daily Camera published my thoughts on Colorado HB 1293:
Prepare For More Expensive Medical Insurance: the Senate Finance Committee has approved Colorado House Bill 1293. The Denver Post claims that this bill would reduce your insurance premiums. Not so. They will increase.
The Post claims HB 1293 would “increase the number of those covered by government [...]

In-state tuition for illegal aliens: Let them put their money where their mouth is

by Rossputin | 12:44 am, April 12, 2009

The Denver Post published my letter to the editor (4th letter down):
http://blogs.denverpost.com/eletters/2009/04/09/state-senate%E2%80%99s-vote-on-immigrant-tuition-bill-4-letters/

Here’s the text:

If supporters of Senate Bill 170 truly believe that illegal aliens should get in-state tuition rates, why don’t they start a fund to offer scholarships for illegal aliens to subsidize them down from out-of-state tuition levels to in-state levels? This is especially true if you believe, as the Denver Post editorial says, that the law only “would have cost $165,300 to $661,200 through 2011.” It could be set up to be tax-deductible, lowering the cost by one-third.

I’m sure that hundreds or thousands of people would contribute, including some people who opposed the legislation. Indeed, it would be very interesting to see whether those legislators who voted for SB 170 would support those would-be students with their own money or only with yours.

Anti-Bank, Anti-Capitalism “New Way Forward” Rally Fizzles

by T.L. James | 9:42 pm, April 11, 2009

In answer to (or as an attempt to steal the thunder of) this Wednesday’s nationwide Tea Party rallies, the left threw together their own rallies against banks, which were held today across the country.  PPC attended the rally in Denver on the west steps of the capitol building – and was pretty unimpressed.  (There was also a [...]

Colorado 2010 US Senate Race: Ryan Frazier An “Untraditional” Candidate

by elpresidente | 2:56 pm, April 11, 2009

The local media (InDenver Times) has picked up on the increasing profile of Ryan Frazier in an update on the looming GOP primary for the opportunity to unseat the appointed Michael Bennet:

Republican Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier said Wednesday he is “seriously considering” running for U.S. Senate in 2010, though he acknowledged his toughest fight may come from the more conservative wing of his own party.

Frazier stopped short of saying he will definitely run. But the 31-year-old Navy veteran has been making the rounds, meeting with potential supporters and attending county party gatherings. At a dinner in Douglas County – one of the state’s most conservative areas – Frazier got about 60 percent of the vote in a straw poll, besting more conservative Republicans such as radio host and attorney Dan Caplis, former Congressman Bob Beauprez and Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck.
. . .
A native of North Carolina who has lived in Colorado for 12 years, Frazier describes himself as “not a typical Republican” and “very independent.” He knows his stance on certain issues, such as benefits for same-sex partners, may rankle the far right. But he believes he is better positioned to win statewide, much as Democrats have dominated recent elections with more centrist candidates such as former Sen. Ken Salazar.

“It’s going to be a real question for the Republican Party: ‘Are they ready for someone like me?’ ” Frazier said. “It shouldn’t be a question of surviving a primary. It should be, ‘Are you ready to win? Or do you want to continue down the road of a string of losses?’”

That’s up to the Colorado GOP–establishment vs. activists, and the mythical “base” of social conservatives vs. center-right, fiscally conservative voters statewide. The GOP primary, depending on who actually jumps in, should give us a clearer picture of where the party insiders stand, as well as where the rank-and-file Republicans are leaning. Expect more libertarian-minded folks and those “unaffiliateds” to take a good look at Frazier’s “live-and-let-live,” limited government, and economically-minded positions over other potential GOP competitors.

That won’t stop the criticism, however:

Most recently, Frazier was one of the driving forces behind the “right-to-work” initiative known as Amendment 47. Voters rejected the measure, which would have banned agreements that require workers to pay union dues if they fall under a collective bargaining contract.

But Frazier also supported benefits for same-sex partners of city of Aurora employees. And in 2006, he joined with Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper – a Democrat – to publicly endorse Referendum I, which would have given domestic-partner benefits to same-sex couples statewide.

Frazier said he’s been told by many people – inside and outside his own party – that his support for those measures will be “the arrow on my back” in a primary battle.

“They will come at me hard on that,” he said.

Based on the somewhat coordinated comments seen so far, they sure will.

But Frazier’s initial strength lies in being outside the traditional party structure that ultimately alleviates any associated baggage from a recently weak Colorado GOP, and is more concerned with moving forward than looking back a decade:

“These are untraditional times that call for untraditional people to step forward,” he said.

Frazier said his top issues would be the same issues he believes are most important to voters: the economy, energy, education, defense and government reform.

Frazier also said he isn’t dissuaded by Bennet’s stellar fundraising in the most recent quarter, in which the former Denver Public Schools chief and businessman raked in nearly $1.4 million.

It’s a good start, Frazier said, but added that whichever Republican takes Bennet on, “the money will come.” And he said he has had Democrats and unaffiliated voters encourage him to run.

Regardless of the candidate, the GOP will push hard for this Senate seat–the question of degree of broader support will ultimately depend on what kind of candidate the GOP settles upon, both for Senate and for Governor.

Real grassroots support will play an extremely large role in this primary–although there will be the temptation to coordinate astroturfing campaigns in order to “demonstrate” real support among GOP voters, however far-fetched.

Incidentally (via RockyMountainRight), at the most recent Denver County GOP First Thursday Breakfast (April 2), Frazier and State Sen. Josh Penry won informal straw polls for Senate and Governor, respectively. Penry spoke at the breakfast, and Frazier is scheduled for the May meeting. While the results are unscientific and very, very early, it looks more and more likely that many Republicans are at least prepared to take a look at younger, next-generation, not-as-established candidates. Much will depend, as indicated earlier, on who eventually runs and who can create the necessary ground game for primary victory. Fundraising and messaging will be important as each candidate seeks to establish his own “base” within the party.

If the party truly wants to create a 64-county, all district, renew-the-bench strategy to reinvigorate GOP voters, increase registration, and re-connect with unaffiliateds, then it will need a fresh vision for the state. Relying on late ’90s electoral messaging, final-weekend get-out-the-vote campaigning, and retread candidates will not be the way to electoral victory in the critical 2010 election. With redistricting looming and five state-wide offices up for grabs, the top of the ticket–the U.S. Senate and Governor–should be viewed as the vehicles for electoral coat-tails. Mediocre and uninspiring candidates will be shunned by activists, won’t attract much national attention or fundraising, and will depress voter turnout if they can’t engage on a meaningful level, especially on economic issues. Elections have consequences, and Colorado can’t afford a repeat of the 2004, 2006, and 2008 elections.

Frazier, Penry dominate Denver GOP breakfast straw poll

by RMR | 2:37 pm, April 11, 2009

The Denver County Republicans held a straw poll at their First Thursday Breakfast this month. While participation wasn’t anywhere near as high as the straw poll at the Douglas County Lincoln Day Dinner (that one was won by Ryan Frazier with ~60% of votes cast), this one does seem to show some definite favorites emerging.

The results:

For Colorado Governor:

1. Josh Penry – 47.6%
2. Scott McInnis – 14.3%
3. Tom Tancredo – 9.5%
4. Bob Beauprez – 4.8%
4. Mark Hillman – 4.8%
4. Dan Caplis – 4.8%
4. Ryan Call – 4.8%
4. Undecided – 4.8%

For U.S. Senator:

1. Ryan Frazier – 42.9%
2. Undecided – 19.0%
3. John Suthers – 4.8%
3. Hank Brown – 4.8%
3. Mark Hillman – 4.8%
3. Bill Owens – 4.8%
3. Tom Tancredo – 4.8%
3. Cleve Tidwell – 4.8%
3. David Balmer – 4.8%
3. Dick Wadhams – 4.8%

Not enough votes were cast for this to be meaningful, but if you’re a Senate candidate you can’t be too happy about not registering any support or tying with a joke entry. This straw poll is notably one of the first I’ve seen on the gubernatorial nomination, it will be interesting to see how Penry v. McInnis plays out in future polls.

Don’t assume “universal pre-kindergarten” is a good idea

by Rossputin | 12:24 am, April 11, 2009

A New York Times article entitled “Recession Stalls State-Financed Pre-Kindergarten, but Federal Money May Help” laments that “the recession appears to have stalled the expansion of state-financed pre-kindergarten programs”. However, the closest the reporter gets to a discussion of whether pre-K programs are a good use of taxpayer money is to suggest that a 92% increase in funding from 2002 to 2008 “came partly because governors and legislatures (were) convinced of the value of early childhood education.” Is that enough justification for spending billions of dollars on another Nanny State boondoggle?

There is much more to the discussion of whether pre-K programs make sense, including a growing body of evidence that benefits of pre-K, when found at all, disappear by fourth grade if not sooner.

For example, a 2008 report on Tennessee’s Pre-K program (reputed to be one of the highest quality in the country) finds that “although Pre-K students initially demonstrated an advantage on these assessments over peers who did not participate in Pre-K, by the Second Grade there was no statistically significant difference in these groups attributable to Pre-K participation.”

Reason Foundation researchers note that Oklahoma’s fourth and eighth grade scores have fallen from above the national average to below the national average since the program was started in 1980.

There are other reasons to be skeptical about “universal pre-K”:
• Currently, many excellent and experienced day-care workers do not have teaching credentials. Government proposals generally include requiring those credentials, thereby excluding from their chosen careers workers who can not afford the time or expense of getting an education degree. Many of those people are low-income earners for whom working in pre-K is a dream job.

• Along with the push to require credentials comes the drive toward adding pre-K to existing public schools, thereby forcing pre-K teachers and employees into teachers’ unions. It is therefore no surprise that the National Education Association, one of the leading supporters of Democratic politicians, supports “publicly funded, universal preschool for all three- and four-year-olds” and that Democratic politicians support the NEA in return.

• Finally, if there is one thing we know about education, it’s that it needs more competition rather than less. If pre-K becomes part of our current public education system, there is no reason to expect anything but higher costs and lower quality. (Indeed, the 92% increase in spending noted earlier came with only a 57% increase in pre-K enrollment.) And there is good reason to believe that private preschools will go out of business as citizens get their “free lunch”, eliminating opportunities for parents who are willing to pay for preschool themselves.

Universal pre-kindergarten is high on the wish list of the liberal elite. It is an issue of too great importance to our children (and our state budgets) to allow the media simply to assume that it has any important benefits, much less that its benefits outweigh its costs.

“Little Ditty ’bout Dan & Diane – 2 Dems play to the heart, man” Sorry, D&D, but Healthcare is NOT a “Right”

by The Peripatetic Pundit | 2:13 pm, April 10, 2009

Well, you have to give the Democrats plaudits for consistency in their talking points. In separate appearances this week, both freshly appointed Rep. Daniel (“I’m not a carpetbagging limousine liberal”) Kagan, D-Cherry Hills Village, and Congresswoman-for-Life Diana DeGette, D-Denver (1st Congressional District) made nearly-identical statements while advocating for universal-coverage government-run health care: “I think it [...]

The Crimson Permanent Assurance

by RMR | 11:32 am, April 10, 2009

As the Colorado Senate moves closer to raiding the assets of Pinnacol Assurance to fill the budget shortfall, this surreal short film produced by Terry Gilliam in the 1980′s about an insurance firm rising up against their oppressive overlords suddenly seems oddly relevant.

Yes, it is kind of a slow news day.

Denver News – Rockies Home Opener and RTD Money

by Mr. Bob | 8:32 am, April 10, 2009

Just a bit of local Denver observational news for today Friday 10APR2009.

#redco #colorado #denver #rockies
Colorado Rockies home opener has Lodo and the city buzzing with activity this morning. Several news outlets including, 850KOA and FSM (Fox Sports Rocky Mountain) have large banners, talent and camera crews wandering the streets of Lodo.
The local news channels also are doing their proverbial “today is the Rockies Home opener” stories from the corners in Lodo.

Parking lots that normally are $5 and $10 are $50 and $60 this morning. I am a capitalist, I believe in the free market…and my hope is those lot owners have empty spaces. This will force them to lower their prices or else only rich people will be able to attend baseball games. I don’t want to see the working stiff stiffed again…just like they (we) are for other sports. I haven’t been to a pro football game in years, who can afford to spend that many hundreds of dollars for 2 hours of fun?

The Rockies rise to fame in 2007 probably brings back different memories for me than for most of you. I was on board the USS Enterprise doing a 5 month deployment in the Persian Gulf and I think I was the only Rockies fan on board.

I have been to probably a hundred Rockies games and it was killing me to watch them do this from so far away….at 3:00 am in a berthing compartment with 35 snoring shipmates, but I was there with you in spirit and I woke up many of my shipmates hootin’ and hollerin’ for the most miraculous winning streak I have seen since Elway’s drive….yes I was annoying, especially to Padres fans, you would have been proud of me.
—————

Dear RTD,
If it ain’t broke please don’t spend our money to fix it.

On a totally unrelated note except that it’s downtown Denver; RTD spends who knows how many 10′s of thousands of dollars on new signage in Market Street Station (probably Broadway station too) that can’t be read from a distance.

In this economy one takes note of when tax dollars are being wasted on items that are only for comfort and asthetics…especially if they suck.

First let me tell you a bit about the signs they have used for years…and worked FINE. They were big, readable electronic signs that could be read from a far distance from any angle.

They’ve been replaced with LCD’s 1/10th the size that can’t be read unless you are standing directly in front of them…oh but they are probably connected to the internet so that’s an improvement.

I could see if the new signs provided more readable information, but the one thing they need to do well they don’t do. I can’t tell if I have the right bus until I walk to that end of the station and stand in front of a TV screen…I might as well just walk outside, the sign on the bus is easier to read. A quick glance at the board was all I needed prior to the “improvement”.

Whoever decided to go ahead with this project at this time should be fired….and if they originally had bigger signs in mind but someone cut back on size due to budget concerns…should be fired.

urrgh.

Debating Claire Levy about hands-free cell phone requirement in cars

by Rossputin | 1:31 am, April 10, 2009

Before I post the following note, I’d like to say that I truly appreciate Representative Claire Levy’s willingness to occasionally respond to me even though she knows that she and I aren’t likely to agree on much. Also, please vote in my poll on this issue over in the right-hand column of my blog page.

I e-mailed Representative Levy regarding my view on her proposed measure which would require than cell phone use in a car be with hands-free technology. I won’t post the text of that note since it’s essentially a shorter version of my blog posting from yesterday.

Here is her brief response to me, and then my re-response to her:

Dear Ross,

I take it from your comments that you would support a bill that prohibited
ALL use of cell phones while driving since you seem to believe my bill
doesn’t go far enough.

I don’t understand your reference to “changing the current law” given that
there isn’t any law about it now.

And as far as being a busy body, would you consider a speed limit to be a
nanny state provision? I don’t really care what you do in your car as long
as you don’t put my life and the lives of other people with whom you share
the road.

Claire Levy
State Representative
House District 13

And now my response:

Dear Claire,

Of course I realized that you would suggest the complete ban, because that’s the common reaction from people with your views when hearing that studies show that hands-free is likely not safer than holding the phone. And of course, I do not support a ban. I didn’t say your bill doesn’t go far enough. I said it’s irrelevant and overly intrusive. It was remarkable that you essentially said that it’s up to you to decide whether some aspect of our lives is too convenient.

When you drive, you take a risk. And in life there are tradeoffs. The value of being able to communicate and get things done while driving is worth more (to me) than a marginal increased risk of an accident. If you wanted to address safety, you should ban car stereos. Your current bill simply panders to the uninformed fears of people who make assumptions without any basis in fact.

The current law, which your bill modifies (if I read it correctly) simply addresses that people with learners’ permits can’t use a cell phone. Your bill adds to that existing section of the Colorado Revised Statutes. And the current text that relates to cell phone usage makes it a secondary, not a primary offense. Your bill changes that so someone can be pulled over just for a violation of the cell phone rules.

I would also note that while I try to drive hands-free (because it’s more comfortable, not because it’s safer), the most dangerous part of my using a cell phone in the car is when I have to try to find and then put on the ear piece. That causes me more distraction than any other part of the process.

To answer your question: Yes, a HIGHWAY speed limit is a nanny state provision. I don’t have much objection to speed limits in residential areas, crowded urban areas, etc. But particularly on a highway, there’s a difference between driving fast and driving recklessly. Fast does not have to be reckless. For example, one study I found about the German Autobahn shows that on those roads with no speed limit, “the traffic fatality rate is lower than the fatality rate for US interstate highways” and “Speed limits were found to have minimal effect on traffic accidents”. Also, “The evidence also indicates that separate speed limits for daytime and nighttime as well as for dry road and wet road would enhance safety much more significantly than the enforcement of speed limits that are set too low.”

Here’s another quote from a different web site (about “Getting Around Germany“):
Despite the prevailing high speeds, the accident, injury and death rates on the Autobahn are remarkably low. The Autobahn carries about a third of all Germany’s traffic, but injury accidents on the Autobahn account for only 6% of such accidents nationwide and less than 12% of all traffic fatalities were the result of Autobahn crashes (2004). In fact, the annual fatality rate (3.2 per billion km in 2004) is consistently lower than that of most other superhighway systems, including the US Interstates (5.0 in 2003).

People drive differently (more carefully) when they’re driving faster, when there are no speed limits, etc. There’s also evidence from America that low highway speed limits are not helpful:

In Montana, traffic fatalities ROSE after speed limits were imposed:
http://www.motorists.org/pressreleases/home/montana-no-speed-limit-safety-paradox/

And when the federal government repealed the national 55 MPH law, the number of speeding-related deaths dropped:
http://www.mrc.org/medianomics/1997/mn19971001.asp

The problem with almost every “nanny state” provision is that it assumes people are stupid and unadaptable.

I understand limits on minors behind the wheel, whether with speeds or cell phone usage. But for adults, I believe that most traffic laws are counter-productive and are little more than a way to increase government revenue.

Thanks for writing back,
Ross

Supreme Court Ruling Opens Door to Millions in New Taxes

by CTBC Director | 11:57 pm, April 9, 2009

The Colorado Supreme Court’s recent ruling to sanction Governor Bill Ritter’s backdoor tax increase on the people of Colorado (the so-called Mill Levy Tax “Freeze”) – overturning both the trial court who had found the tax increase unconstitutional and the will of the people, as previously expressed by rejecting a nearly-identical measure to freeze Colorado’s [...]

Denver Tea Party: Tax Day Protests Gear Up For April 15 Rally

by elpresidente | 11:12 pm, April 9, 2009

**Update (April 13): Rallies scheduled all over Colorado (in at least 16 cities); Leftist smear tactics continue

“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds”–Samuel Adams

From the folks at FreedomWorks.

Get started with a roundup of links at Gateway Pundit and Michelle Malkin. Denver’s Tax Day Tea Party can be found on Facebook (also here)–with a tentative schedule (plan on arriving by 11:30am, with conclusion by 1:30pm):

10:00 Volunteers arrive, Setup
11:00 Speaker Meet & Greet
11:00 Tea Bag Sign Up Begins, Send a pink slip to your officials, Join Hear US Now! sign up!
12:00 Greeting by MC Brian T Campbell, Sr.
12:05 Pledge of Alegiance – Led by Brian T Campbell, Sr.
Castle Capella’s Patriotic Singing
Guest Speaker – Gunny Bob
Guest Speaker – Tom Lucero
Guest Speaker – Jon Caldara, The Independence Institute
Guest Speaker – Mike Kopp, CO State Senator
Guest Speaker – Rob McNealy
Guest Speaker – Josh Penry, CO State Senate Minority Leader
Guest Speaker – Keith Peterson
Guest Speaker – Ken Buck, Weld County District Attorney

More speakers will be announced as April 15 approaches. If you want to bring your own signs, here are over 175 great suggestions for slogans.

There are at least 300 confirmed cities hosting a Tax Day Tea Party rally–even a low-ball, extremely conservative estimate of 1000 participants at each rally means that there could very well likely be somewhere in the neighborhood of five hundred thousand passionate Americans fighting for liberty on April 15.

The grassroots element of these loosely affiliated and locally organized actions has been clearly demonstrated–johnny-come-latelies like RNC Chair Michael Steele have been politely turned down when offering their speaking services.

The Left has also recognized the true scope of this upsurge in pro-liberty activity from libertarians, Republicans, and conservatives. Their solution?

Hijack.

Sabotage.

Infiltrate.

Smear.

Discredit.

Roger Simon offers some pointers on dealing with lefty agents provacateurs.

Instapundit Glenn Reynolds has a video update from PJTV on the Tea Parties across the country.

There are more important questions in the days that come after the fervor of April 15 has passed–what next?

Not all are convinced of the constructive nature of the rallies, but it looks like this is turning out to be a very small minority.

Marostica Meltdown: Part Deux!

by RMR | 9:49 pm, April 9, 2009

Don Marostica must either be planning to retire from his office in 2010 or has resigned himself to the fact he will face a primary challenge for his legislative seat. In response to a reasonable request by Sen. Josh Penry that the JBC come up with a budget that includes things such as pay cuts for state employees and spending decreases across all departments instead of the planned $300 million cut to higher education, Marostica offered this charming dignified quote to the Denver Post:

"Nuts to them," an angry Marostica said. "Tell them to go jump in a lake. Josh Penry first, and then all the lemmings will follow.

"We did look hard enough."

Way to go Don. There might have been a few conservatives in your district not annoyed with you after your swipes at Mark Hillman a while back, but going after Josh Penry is sure to get them off your side too.

Dress Down: Bill Ritter’s Big Idea

by Ben DeGrow | 9:25 pm, April 9, 2009

Let it never be said that Governor Bill Ritter is not a man of big ideas:

In a recent letter to state employees in the state publication Stateline, Ritter talks about the hard economic times and thanks employees for their hard work.
He then applauds a stress-reducing move by the Department for Health Care Policy and Financing [...]

Which Party Will Miss Peter Groff as Senate President More: GOP or Dems?

by Ben DeGrow | 8:51 pm, April 9, 2009

It seems almost certain that Democrat Senate President Peter Groff has tried to remain mum about the news of his impending departure to join the Obama administration in Washington to avoid distraction from an especially difficult budget process in the state legislature this year. But the cat’s out of the bag now.
Kind, classy words in [...]

The more things change….

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 3:02 pm, April 9, 2009

This is from a 1934 edition of the Chicago Tribune. Apparently the hirsute fellow on the left making the sign is Leon Trotsky. If you click on the cartoon you’ll get a bigger version that’s easier to read.

TABOR On Life Support

by CTBC Director | 10:29 am, April 9, 2009

By Mark Hillman, April 3 2009
Seventeen years ago, Colorado voters frustrated by the excesses of an unresponsive government passed the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR), a constitutional amendment designed to limit government spending and give voters to final word on tax hikes.
Initially, government officials largely adhered to TABOR’s strictures, ever mindful that the voters had [...]

Still a Winning Issue for Republicans

by Mr. Bob | 7:49 am, April 9, 2009

#tcot #gop #stimulus Americans need to learn this timeline about the financial crisis, who warned about it, and who poo poo’ed it and said it was no big deal. Republicans need to know this by heart, when, where and who. The media and the Democrats have succesfully blamed Bush and non-regulation for this crisis in the media. While Bush may have been no spendthrift, he certainly did warn about the impending doom if something wasn’t done..and he did it in time to save the system and perhaps avoid this recession.

My favorite line by Barney Frank in this video is “even if Freddie Mack and Fanny Mae were to have problems we wouldn’t bail them out”.

Nanny State says using cell phone in your car is too convenient

by Rossputin | 1:11 am, April 9, 2009

My state Representative, Claire Levy, she of the “unfounded notion of federalism” fame, is hard at work with a proposal that you just knew would come from someone who represents my district:

A requirement that people use hands-free technology when using a cell phone in a car. In typical “I know what’s good for you style”, Levy defends her measure by saying “I think there’s a real pent-up feeling that this convenience has gotten out of control.”

How nice that she has appointed herself the arbiter of when our lives become too convenient.

Ms. Levy represents the worst possible combination of do-gooder and attorney, always looking for a way to tell people what to do and cost them money if they don’t obey. Not surprisingly, Governor Bill “Tax” Ritter has said he’d sign the measure.

The measure, HB1094 (click for text), completely prohibits drivers of “motor vehicle carriers regulated by the public utilities commission” from using a cell phone while the vehicle is moving.

For the rest of us, if we’re caught using our cell phones without some hands-free technology, it’s a $50 fine for the first offense and $100 for the second offense. The current text of state law regarding cell phone use (which prohibits people driving with learners’ permits from using a cell phone while driving, except in case of emergency) also said that nobody would be cited for a violation of the rule unless pulled over by a policeman for another violation. In Levy’s version, a driver can be pulled over for a violation of the new cell phone rules.

Although I hesitate to mention it because nanny-staters like Levy use it to argue for a complete ban on cell phone use in cars, at least one recent study suggests that driving while using a speakerphone or earpiece is no less dangerous than driving while holding a phone. This is because the problem isn’t that one’s hands are busy while talking; it’s because you’re distracted. If anything, one could argue that hands-free technology will make people stay on the phone longer and decrease overall traffic safety.

It’s absolutely typical of Democrats to “think with their hearts” (as Rep. Joyce Foster suggested legislators do regarding in-state tuition for illegal aliens). Studies suggest that Levy’s measure will do nothing to increase traffic safety, but it will make the lawyer-liberal-legislator feel as if she’s done something to protect us from ourselves. And of course, it will be a nice new revenue source for Colorado law enforcement agencies, distracting them further from doing things that are actually important and turning them into little more than tax collectors with guns.

In Which the Coffee Addicted Washington Bureau Chief Switches to Tea Parties

by Eileen McGuire-Mahony | 12:50 am, April 9, 2009

Alright, kids.  We are at Tax-Day + 96 hours.   Which means that if you don’t yet know which tea party you’re going to, it’s time to get on it. What else are you doing next Wednesday? Working? Please.  You aren’t keeping a penny of it until after Tax Freedom Day.  So, speak up. This fine [...]

« go back — keep looking »

Featured Posts

• Judge Rules Americans Can Be Forced to Testify Against Themselves

  In order to protect our rights, our security must be protected. In order to protect our security, our rights must be invaded. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

• World Economic Forum in Switzerland: Global Elites Celebrating Hypocrisy
• SCOTUS decision on warrantless GPS surveillance produces an expected friend of privacy
• You didn’t want your Fifth Amendment rights, anyway, did you?
• Keynesian Economists Finally Catch Up and Agree: China to Have Hard Landing
• The Beauty of Private Property—from China?
• Regime Uncertainty, Regulatory Surge, and Unemployment Numbers