More lies about John Edwards

This caught my attention today:

Club for Growth: John Edwards Changes Campaign Theme from “Two Americas” to “War on Prosperity”
7/26/2007

Nachama Soloveichik • 202.887.7039 • 646.528.1029

Washington – If there is any lingering doubt about John Edwards’ bristling hostility towards economic growth in this country, all doubts should be laid to rest with John Edwards’ announcement of yet another tax hike today. In a desperate attempt to drive home his lefty bona-fides and revive his faltering campaign, John Edwards is promising to raise the capital gains tax from 15% to 28% if elected president.

As John Edwards continues to wage a political war against prosperity, his campaign platform is looking more and more like Karl Marx’s wish list:

· Terminate the Bush tax cuts

· Raise taxes at least to Clinton-era levels

· Impose socialized medicine in America, to the tune of $120 billion

· Punish the private equity industry with new taxes

· Support anti-trade protectionist policies, including opposition to the pending trade treaty with South Korea

· Choke off entry-level job growth by raising the federal minimum wage

· Diminish the prospect for worker productivity gains by raising capital gains taxes to 28%

“Perhaps John Edwards was too busy learning how hedge funds work to recognize the economic prosperity caused by the 2003 tax cuts over the past four years,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. “Since 2003, unemployment in this country has tumbled from a high of 6.1% to a low of 4.5%, while the economy has gained 8 million jobs since its low point in August 2003. At the same time, revenue from capital gains taxes has shot up over the past three years and continues to flow into the federal coffers at an astonishing rate, bringing us to the threshold of a balanced budget today. One would think Edwards would be interested in keeping the economy strong, unemployment down, and balancing the budget, but maybe he cares more about pandering to his far-left base.”

This press release, along with most of the unthinking and history denying conservative lies about the economic situation in our country, deserves an answer, point by point. Here it is.

Karl Marx would get about as much attention in this country now as Eugene Debbs did in the 1912 election. Give me a break. Let's go through this "wishlist".

Terminate the Bush tax cuts

These tax cuts drove up the stock market, and helped the rich get richer. But I'm convinced, as is a strong majority of the country, that these tax cuts didn't do anything to help build our infrastructure or provide services to people who need them.

Raise taxes at least to Clinton-era levels

This causes the reader to believe that high tax rates cause low economic growth numbers. That's a flat out lie. Let's look at the history of our tax rates:

In 1913 the tax rate was 1% on taxable net income above $3,000 ($4,000 for married couples), less deductions and exemptions. It rose to a rate of 7% on incomes above $500,000. During World War I the top rate rose to 77%; after the war, the top rate was scaled down to a low of 25%. During the Great Depression and World War II, the top income tax rate rose again. In the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, the top rate was 75%. The top rate reached 94% during the war and remained at 91% until 1964. In 1964 the top rate was decreased to 70% (1964 Revenue Act), then to 50% in 1981 (Economic Recovery Tax Act or ERTA). The Tax Reform Act of 1986 reduced the top rate to 28%, at the same time raising the bottom rate from 11% to 15% (in fact 15% and 28% became the only two tax brackets). During the 1990s the top rate rose again, standing at 39.6% by the end of the decade. The top rate was cut to 35% and the bottom rate was cut to 10% by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA). - Soure: Wikipedia

Impose socialized medicine in America, to the tune of $120 billion

Providing health coverage to everyone in the United States wouldn't cost any more than we are paying now, but the difference is that the money would go to doctors and hospitals instead of insurance companies and drug companies who spend several billion dollars a year on lobbying when they should be paying out claims.

Punish the private equity industry with new taxes

Any private equity firm that puts their profits ahead of the needs of the country deserves to be punished. I don't object to collections of capital, I object to the abuse of that power. Private equity firms are draining the capital out of our communities, and draining the lifeblood of our country. They can stop this abuse and damage without losing any money, they just don't want to.

Support anti-trade protectionist policies, including opposition to the pending trade treaty with South Korea

Oh, you mean the US - Korea Free Trade Agreement that would put workers in the United States making $20 per hour on even footing with workers in South Korea making $2 per day? Oh, and thanks for using the word protectionist. We all know that conservatives have no interest in anything that would protect American Jobs or the American infrastructure.

Choke off entry-level job growth by raising the federal minimum wage

So people who are just entering the workforce don't deserve to make a wage that allows them to live and seek the American Dream? $5.15 per hour won't even pay rent on studio apartments in most of this country. Neither will $5.85, but at least it's a start. Our minimum wage had its highest purchasing value ever in 1968, when it was $1.60/hour ($9.12 in 2005 dollars). This doesn't even come close to that. Why don't you want people to be able to live in this country?

Diminish the prospect for worker productivity gains by raising capital gains taxes to 28%

When did "worker productivity" depend on the money raised by people who do nothing but wait for their dividend checks to arrive? Why does Warren Buffett pay 3 percent, while his office secretary pays a tax rate of about 30 percent? It's because under conservatives, workers get no respect.

The Club for Growth is insane. If the Dow reaches record territory on the backs of the people building our infrastructure, they like it.

America hates it. It's time for a change.

Facinating change in attitudes

Saw this article in the Financial Times thanks to Thom Hartmann mentioning it on his program. The conclusions are consistent with the rise of a global progressive movement that I've been seeing and feeling for several years. I honestly believe that only by electing a progressive president in 2008 will the US be able to capitalize on these changes and work together with the international community in order to make the changes necessary to save our world.

Let's hope.

What the founders missed

I think there are two things that were missed during the founding of this country that we now have the experience and opportunity to fix.

Thomas Jefferson:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

Not quite right. Governments derive their just powers from the participation of the governed.

Initiative 24, King County, Washington

Alexander Hamilton:

A secure fiscal and financial capital foundation comes from having money in local banks available to help build the community, not through budget deficits. Balanced Budgets are not enough. Continuous budget surpluses are required at every level of government in order to secure our future.

The 11th Hour

The 11th Hour

It's time for this generation to TAKE CONTROL AND FIX THIS. It's now or never, people. Stand up and do what you have to do.

911 Truth: Please give us the facts

http://911truth.org/

Ed Schultz doesn't believe that there are firefighters from New York who are afraid to speak up and speak out. I agree.

I don't think there are firefighters who are too scared of threats from the Men in Black or something, and are unwilling to sacrifice themselves in order to SAVE THE COUNTRY!

So, give us the names. Give us the name of someone who wanted to testify, but wasn't allowed to. Give us the name of someone who DID testify and is willing to tell the American People what they told the 911 Commission.

I've watched the movies. I know the questions. But I'm just as tired of speculation as everyone else is. Give us sworn testimony, from someone who is there, who saw "the bombs" or whatever. Either that or help us win in 2008 so a Democratic President can do a real investigation and get to the bottom of what happened and throw the guilty into jail.

Hans Rosling is just amazing

2006



2007



http://roslingsblogger.blogspot.com/

Battery for the entire power grid

I found this article to be a wonderful vision of the future.

And here's another one.

What do we really know about AIDS?

Internet Radio Grassroots Action needed!!

http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=438691

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Radio_Equality_Act

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h2060/show

You know what to do.

John Kennedy's Inaugural Address

Part 1

Part 2

Eisenhower's Farewell

I found these on Youtube, and had to share.

Part 1

Part 2

Transcript

Information Clearinghouse

I'm in favor of Impeachment

Impeach Dick Cheney .org

Impeach, Indict, Imprison. The United States does not tolerate lawbreakers.

Information about Depleated Uranium

Democrats stand for the Red, White and Blue

Howard Dean came to Seattle on Tuesday night, and gave a great speech about what the Democrats have done, are doing, and what we're going to do in 2007, 2008 and beyond.

Gov. Dean gave the core values that he is recommending the Democrats run on in 2008. Those values are Strength and Toughness, Fairness and .. oh, yeah, Fiscal Discipline. Strength and Toughness because we need to fix the impression that Democrats are weak on security. Fairness because it's an good way to frame the cultural issues that drive our country apart. And Fiscal Discipline because, well, the Republican's haven't shown any.

It was a good speech, but it was the speech of a party chair, not a Presidential Candidate. So, I'm going to do my duty as a citizen of this country and a member of this party who wants something more to vote on than STFFD. I'm going to reframe and articulate these values my way.

The Democratic Party is the oldest political party on the planet. We've been fighting for progressive values since 1792. We've slipped a few times, but in 2008 we're going to return to our roots as the party of Thomas Jefferson. The Democratic Party defines our values in terms of the colors on the American Flag. Red, White and Blue.

Red is the color of SACRIFICE. Shared sacrifice is how our country came to be. "We must all hang together or we will certainly hang separately." - Benjamin Franklin. We are all in this together, and we must never lose sight of that. Red is the color of blood on the battlefield, and it doesn't matter who you are or where you come from. Red is the color our eyes get when we honor our losses. We recognize that there will be sacrifices made to uphold our principles, and we are willing to share those sacrifices as a united country. Our fighting men and women come from every state, every race, every creed, every kind of background, and they deserve the best from us whether we are talking about the training that they go through, the equipment they have or the treatment and support they get when they come home. We support our military by giving them missions that they can be proud of, and by giving them all of the resources necessary to accomplish those missions. We also need the sacrifice of time, money, and energy offered by patriotic citizens every day of the year, whether we're at war or not. As JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."

White is the color of FAIRNESS. It is the color of the white paper ballots that we vote on. It is the color of the paper that our laws are written on. With the rainbow of diversity in ideas, races, religions, and other things that define our country, it is critically important to write our laws in black and white to be fair to everyone. This is where Civil Rights comes from. This is where our position on the LGBT community comes from. We understand that if laws are written or enforced to discriminate against any part of our society, the rest of that society is just as vulnerable. We pledge to be fair, and to push that idea of fairness to every aspect of our country, from fair treatment for mental health to fair trade deals in a fair market environment that lifts everyone up instead of giving anyone an advatage over anyone else.

Blue is the color of OPPORTUNITY. It is the color of the blue sky on the horizon that we all strive for, whether by wagon train in the 1800's to today's airline flights towards a new city of adventure. The blue field on the flag has 50 stars, and we recognize that in order to be able to reach for the stars, we need to be standing on a solid foundation. We need a fiscal policy that helps to build that foundation. We need our physical infrastructure of roads, power lines, water and sewer pipes and communications networks to be able to stand up to the challenges of our needs now and into the future. We are focused on building that foundation and making it strong underneath all of our feet so that everyone in our country has what they need to reach for the stars and reach for their potential. We are the enemy of anything that would damage that foundation. As Rev. Ian Paisley of Ireland said, "If the Foundation be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"

This is my framing for the 2008 election. Throw out any issue, and it fits into this frame. If you want to improve the health care situation, the Democratic Party will work with you because it is part of a solid foundation. Without Health Care, people lose hope, and can't reach their potential. If you want to protect Net Neutrality, the Democratic Party will work with you because it is a question of fairness. The Bill of Rights is sacred, especially the right of free speech and a free press. Education is a critical part of our foundation, because if we don't help our children, they will not be able to continue to build and maintain our infrastructure, nor will they be able to reach for their own potential.

We are the Democratic Party. We stand for the Red, White and Blue. Help us return America to our moral foundation by letting us write the laws of our land in Congress and at all levels of government to be fair to everyone, and help us with shared sacrifice to make sure that everyone has a solid foundation under our feet so we can reach for the stars together.

Some charities deserve it.

Back in January I did some research on charities, and got really frustrated by the way charities were focused on getting donations, but such a low percentage of those donations actually went to their programs. So I set some standards.

If a charity calls me and the Programs to Donations ratio from the Secretary of State's website is higher than 50% for an out of state charity, I'll donate. If the charity is from within the state, I'll lower that to 25%, because I know that the people making the phone call are also within Washington State and need to earn a paycheck.

I had Operation Lookout National Center for Missing Youth call me today, and their ratio is 28%. Bravo!

So I thought I'd share.

Spiritual Fitness

The ego is always full of excuses. But in the end, they all boil down to a big “No.” So the reason we have to give up all these excuses is because they will always give us a reason not to be ready to fight on the front lines of the evolution of consciousness and culture. We have to be ready and able to fight the good fight, to create the future together now, men and women, standing side by side at the leading edge, without excuses. So this is why we have to transcend the ego, in order to achieve a high level of spiritual fitness. Only fit spiritual warriors can create a truly enlightened future.

Andrew Cohen
Washington, DC, May 2007

There is no box

http://isbn.nu/0896087662

This is a book that I'm in the process of reading that is a real eye opener for the paradigm that we are working within. It's specifically talking about the "Non Profit Industrial Complex", but many of the same co-opting of change movements by structured and limited thinking can be applied to political organizing as well. It's confirming what I've discovered over the last few years, that we are living and working within boxes that are nearly invisible until we try to move beyond them. From Campaign Finance laws to the very construct of bylaws, endorsement rules, etc., the political parties have created tiny little wheels and then spend all their time running as fast as they can while the world collapses around them. It's time for a major change. As I am fond of saying, it's not enough to "think outside of the box". There is no damn box.

Kentridge High School, 20 year reunion

I just tossed into the recycle bin the invitation to my 20 year Kentridge High School Reunion. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, I haven't heard from more than a handful of people in my graduating class of nearly 500 people since June of 1987. I guess I never made really good friends. I wasn't involved in any sports, I didn't join any serious clubs or clics, and kept to myself other than Choir, most of whom probably didn't give me much attention anyway. After High School, I tried a year at Washington State University, then joined the Navy for 6 years. When I came out of the Navy, I was a completely different person, and never looked back. So, I have low motivation to attend it in the first place.

My 10 year reunion, in 1997, was skipped because I was busy trying to keep my business afloat and starting a new family. My wife at the time thought it would be good to attend, but I wasn't really excited. See above. So we didn't go.

This 20 year invitation was from "Reunions with Class", and will be held at the Muckleshoot Casino. No thanks. If anyone should profit from something like this, it should be the Kentridge Alumni Association, which doesn't exist to my knowledge, and be held at the High School itself. And I still don't have motivation to revisit with people I didn't know 20 years ago.

If someone can give me some good motivating reasons to attend this thing, I'll reconsider.

Update on my cancer

The CAT Scans on Monday were so clean, they didn't even ask for a blood test on Wednesday when I went to my followup. I'm now 4 years out from diagnosis, with one year to go before they can officially say that the cancer will not return.

Toast: To life and struggle!

A poem about space

We all should be able to explore our dreams,

before we as a race run out of steam.

For those who disagree with space,

I ask how we will keep up our growth pace.

Rutan and SpaceShipOne want to fly,

Should we tell them no or ask them why?

I think our government has a purpose in this enterprise,

To build the infrastructure, open the gate and reveal the prize.

And speaking of Enterprise and our generation’s goal,

Tell William Shatner that he must not forget his role.

For nobody over the last 30 years of public relations work,

Has shown us our future better than Captain Kirk.

Response to Luke Esser

The article in the PI about Obama's visit last night was great. Wish I could have made it, but I can't be everywhere. One particular set of paragraphs caught my attention, and it opens a door of opportunity.

Obama's health care reform plan, which he announced earlier this week and which would largely be financed by tax increases on the wealthy, drew a jab before his speech from state Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser.

"Barack Obama used his first big policy speech to call for a massive tax increase and a brand new tax on small businesses," Esser said. "It's nothing but the same old tax-and-spend politics we've seen from liberal presidential candidates for decades."

Taxes. What an evil word. How terrible that Democrats are calling on people
to pay their dues to society. How awful that we are calling for a foundation
under everyone's feet, one that supports people as much as they have a need,
paid for by those whose needs are taken care of.

Tell me, Luke. How would you pay for a Health Care system that provides coverage
and treatment for everyone, putting the needs of the sick over the desires of
the wealthy? Oh, that's right! "We oppose a universal government-run health
care system. We support a free-market solution to keep costs down through increasing
consumer choice and information. Health care is a personal issue and informed
individuals can make better decisions about their own health care than government
bureaucracies." "Health care is a personal issue, and informed individuals can
make better decisions about their own care than government. Republicans believe
in free market solutions that reduce health care costs by offering more information
for additional and better choices for consumers." In other words, the Washington
State Republican Party believes that Adam Smith will keep costs under control
for them, while letting the pharmaceutical companies, private and for-profit
hospitals and insurance companies, and our "well-educated population" take care
of our own problems, which will work itself out over time. And while it works
itself out, people will get sick, will lose time on the job forcing them to
choose between feeding their family or paying medical bills that just keep coming.
And at the same time we're all supposed to keep up with the Billions of (tax)
dollars of research and development that is happening at the National Institutes
of Health and around the world, so we can help our doctor (who probably has
at least 10 years of high-level medical education) make the decisions about
whether we will live comfortably or die miserably. Nice, Luke. This really shows
the values of the Republican Party well. Primary value: We don't really care
about people, it's just politically expedient to say that we do.

Let's put into perspective the actual position of the Democratic Platform on Health Care. "Healthcare is a basic right, and our government must assure accessible and affordable health care for all." Health care is NOT a personal issue. It's an economics issue. It's an issue for our entire society. When someone is sick, they can't work, which puts extra burden on everyone else who has to do what the sick person cannot. When someone is sick, they can't take care of their children, which puts an extra burden on family members, teachers and our neighborhoods who must give the love and attention that those children deserve.

Establishment of a comprehensive national healthcare plan, (as in HR 676: universal single payer healthcare) similar to Medicare and available to all, regardless of age or employment;

The key words are "available to all". Just like "Leave No Child Behind", we must never leave behind anyone when it comes to health care coverage. Nobody has the right to point at another person and say "you don't deserve coverage".

Development of a state health plan, assuring access to affordable, equitable healthcare for everyone, beginning with children, until a national plan is realized;

The Republican Congress between 1994 and 2006 has done more to deny our basic
rights than any other congress in history. Even given the problems that would
have come out of the plan that was brought forward in 1993 by the Clinton Administration,
it would have started to fix the fundamental problem. The way that Democrats
define the problem is that people don't have health care coverage, and thus
are limited in how close they can get to their potential. The way that Republicans
seem to define the problem is that people want health care coverage in the first
place. So by sitting on their hands over the last 12 years, one sixth of our
population now has no coverage at all. One in six people. That's not good enough
for the Republicans. They want even more people to be denied a healthy body,
mind and spirit.

Coverage including affordable prescription drugs, dental care, physical therapy and medical technology, available according to healthcare needs;

Medical doctors are only part of the picture. Every aspect of what keeps our bodies working right needs to be part of the coverage plan. If not, you tell me which aspect of health can be ignored. How about our eyes? Do we need to be able to see well when we drive, or should only those people who can afford glasses without any help be allowed to get back and forth to work? The Republican Platform has this statement: "All prescription drug purchases and health insurance premiums being fully tax-deductible." What about the crazy idea that purchases and premiums like this shouldn't have to come out of pocket at all?

Patient freedom of choice, including the right to obtain legally prescribed medications from any licensed pharmacy;

My grandmother is 94 years old, and she is suffering from congestive heart problems. As I type, she is in the hospital. Not just any hospital will do, however. It must be a Group Health hospital, which gives her two choices; Redmond or Tacoma. She lives in Kent. It's a half-hour or more travel distance from her home to either of these locations, every minute of which is uncomfortable for her. I'd rather she have the local hospital available, but because we have such a limited system that's not a choice we have. If I'm sick, or I change jobs and move to a different part of town or a different city altogether, I don't want to have to hunt through lists and make a bunch of phone calls to find out how far I have to travel to see a doctor, dentist or vision specialist. I just want to get healthy. The insurance companies spend a lot of money on advertising trying to get doctors and care providers to take their plans. The goal of course is to have every doctor available to every patient, so that the patient has the choice based on word of mouth and reputation which doctor they should go to. With universal coverage, that's not a goal on the horizon, it's a starting assumption. And we wouldn't be paying 30% of our health care dollars paying for that advertising and for paper pushers whose job it is currently to limit the opportunities and choices we have instead of making sure that we have healthy bodies, minds and spirits.

Inclusion of long-term care, home care and hospice, and support for caregivers as benefits;

Our elders have spent their lives in service to their families and their community.
The least we can do near the end of their lives is to make them as comfortable
as possible, without draining every last penny from their hard earned savings.
Right now we all have to plan for the eventuality that we will be laid up in
a nursing home watching our families suffer financially while we suffer physically.
What a terrible future to look forward to. We need to change that future into
one where our family members are shown the respect they deserve for the work
that they have done, and one that supports families by not destroying their
foundation to pay for that kind of care.

Parity for mental and physical healthcare, including treatment and education for drug, alcohol and tobacco problems;

The most healthy mind, with brilliant ideas and dreams, is limited only by
the opportunities that they are given to express and explore those ideas. And
it goes the other way as well. Sickness of mind and heart due to mental illness
is just as debilitating to a person's potential as being in a wheelchair. We
all recognize the need for everyone to have a healthy body, mind and spirit.
We should provide the resources to provide for all of those needs.

Full funding of current veterans and military hospitals and clinics, with expansion of services as needed by our returning troops;

Support our Troops has become a phrase thrown around like a gauntlet in a political
debate. Whenever it is said by a politician, it comes with lots of extra meaning.
I can almost hear the extra words under their breath. "I 'Support
our Troops', while you don't." Supporting our troops means giving
them a mission that they can understand from beginning to end, top to bottom,
and empowering them to do their best to fulfill that mission with the best planning
and resource support available in the 21st century. Supporting our troops means
taking care of their families while they are away on those missions, making
sure that they are able to return to a healthy and loving home. Supporting our
troops means making sure they have the best training possible to let them avoid
injury while completing those missions. Supporting our troops means that if
they do get injured, they will be able to feel the secure foundation under their
feet. Our country needs to welcome them back with open arms, open hearts, and
open doors for whatever treatment, help and ongoing support they need in order
to feel proud of their service and the job they did serving our nation. Anything
that limits or denies that foundation under their feet should be examined, discussed
and eliminated from our cultural institutions. Full medical coverage for life
should be the least worrisome of that foundation.

Public health policy based on sound scientific guidelines, following the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control, and organized plans for an effective response to major epidemics;

We don't employ witch-doctors in the 21st century. Every minute of training
that doctors receive is based in centuries of scientific study of what makes
us sick and what can make us healthy again. Diseases can spread through water
systems, air systems and through our social networks faster than we think they
can, and we need to be ready for whatever comes. This isn't a call to give up
our personal lives and freedom. It's a call to arms against a microscopic enemy
that can kill millions of people unless we respond rapidly and intelligently.
Remember the Black Death, or the 1918 Spanish Flu. This is not Hollywood. It's
life and death.

Restoration of funding and support for medical research, including stem cell research, to be based on scientific merit;

Sitting outside of the House and Senate chambers while the debate rages about
when life begins, in offices, homes and doctors offices, are millions of people
who suffer every day from disease and injury who could be helped. Sanctity of
life either extends from birth to death, or from conception to death. The Republican
Party would want us to believe that the "real debate" is about those first nine
months rather than the entirety of the 90+ years that we are actually alive
on this earth. This is not the abortion issue. This is about
people who are already here who need our help.

Restoration of funding and support of international family planning agencies within the United Nations.

One of the first things that President Bush did, on his first day in office, was to block federal aid to any foreign group that offered counseling or any other assistance to women in obtaining abortions. This wasn't about saving lives, it was about taking control away from the women who live in poverty and want to control how many children they have. It was about taking choices away from societies and cultures whose leaders know that only by giving those choices to their people can those people raise their standard of living and reach their potential. If a family cannot afford more children, they must be free to choose not to have more children. And it wasn't just about abortion. It was about any form of birth control at all. Even talking about family planning became a "sin" in the eyes of our Federal Government. We need to restore the power that women have over their own lives all over the world. We need to eliminate the necessity for abortions, not just forbid women from seeking options and choices.

Health Care is not my primary issue. But it is what got me involved in trying to rout the Conservative Movement and shove them into the history books as the primary example of how not to run a country. In 2003, I was diagnosed with Cancer. It affected my job, it affected my family, and it changed my life.

Thank you, Cindy

Heroes get tired. That's the lesson I'm getting from Cindy Sheehan's withdrawal from the spotlight this weekend. After the last few years, she deserves to step back and let someone else be the lightning rod. Any volunteers? I didn't think so. Things like this don't happen because people volunteer. They happen because people don't see a choice.

I've been in a few rounds myself, especially after my New York Times quote. I even went a round with Cindy herself about my statement.

I don't think anyone understands things from Cindy's perspective. I know I don't want to lose a child, or a parent, or anyone I know to gain that perspective. But I don't need it to be able to say thank you to a hero. Cindy put her name forward, sacrificed nearly everything in her life, and got a Congress that voted to continue the war that killed her son. So she's stepping back. G-d bless, Cindy. Healing takes time, and time is something that I hope we will give you.

Tears in the House

I had to show this. House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) gave this speech on May 24th, and he's speaking with distinction from his point of view. I respect him for that. And I would like to thank his office for posting the entire speech that he gave, instead of the clips that are being used against him in the blogosphere. I wish they were as good at posting the text of his speeches on his official website.

However, I don't respect his point of view.

Surrender. What a wonderful political term. It's a term designed to get the hair to stand up on the backs of our necks, and it's a term designed to stop us from thinking.

He asks a very important question during this speech. "When are we going to stand up and take them on? When are we going to defeat them?!"

The answer is simple. When George Bush leaves office, and a Democrat takes over. I don't have a timetable. I'm not a prophet. But I will say that I want to see Osama bin Laden on trial at the Hague, with the entire trial and ALL OF THE EVIDENCE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE TRAIL available to the public for inspection and consideration.

George Bush wouldn't do that. A Democratic President probably wouldn't do that. But it's the only thing that will solve the issue. Let OBL have his day in court. Then lock him away from the rest of the world forever, and dismantle his organization from the schools to the training camps once and for all. Bush wouldn't do that either. He didn't even try.

Why I don't have Clearwire

My wife and I are still using Earthlink.net as our Internet Service Provider, in spite of some ongoing customer service issues, which haven't really gone away, and it's upwards of $50 dollars a month for 99% service. Not the best deal in the world.

We keep getting offers from Clearwire, and for something like $35 per month we could have something I could take with me around the city, with no hassles. So the question is why haven't we switched yet?

Because they're amazingly dumb. I'll get it eventually, just for the convenience, but the only person they ever send their offers to is Debi's first husband, Jason, who has been dead since 1998. Like I said; dumb.

I'm posting this on the off chance that a top of the line Internet company has someone keeping an eye on the blogs for posts about their name, so maybe they can take Jason's name off their mailing list and prove that they are not, well, dumb.

Nuff said.

Worse than War

By David Krieger



Worse than the war, the endless, senseless war

Worse than the lies leading to the war



Worse than the countless deaths and injuries

Worse than hiding the coffins and not attending funerals



Worse than the flouting of international law

Worse than the torture at Abu Ghraib prison



Worse than the corruption of young soldiers

Worse than undermining our collective sense of decency



Worse than the arrogance, smugness, and swagger

Worse than our loss of credibility in the world

Worse than the loss of our liberties



Worse than learning nothing from the past

Worse than destroying the future

Worse than the incredible stupidity of it all



Worse than all of these,

As if they were not enough for one war or country or lifetime,

Is the silence, the resounding silence, of good Americans.

The Edwards Energy Plan

John Edwards is my top choice for President in 2008, at least at the moment. And no, I don't care how much he is willing to pay for a haircut.

DFA has been doing a great job engaging with the entire Democratic lineup on various issues, and their latest was about Energy, Climate Change, and what the plan is. John Edwards was the first to respond, as usual.

I was at first disappointed. It didn't sound like he was setting himself apart. So I went to his website to see more details.

http://johnedwards.com/about/issues/energy/new-energy-economy/

I want to go over this in detail, because there are some great things in here. But they don't go far enough, and they don't capitalize on the most powerful force for change that exists. Federal investment into our economy is critical to make this work, but I'm not talking about Pork Barrel Projects where we would encourage states and local municipalities to brag about how much Federal money they have been able to get from their Congresscritters for local projects. I don't think that's the right approach. Anyway, before I get too high on this soapbox:

Create a new energy economy and 1 million new jobs by investing in clean, renewable energy, sparking innovation, a new era in American industry, and life in family farms. - "1 million jobs" harkens back to a speech that Bush gave in the 2000 campaign, and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I don't want the Government to create jobs, except as a last resort. I want the demand for products to be high enough to create those jobs in Industry and Commerce. What the government needs to do is increase that demand.

Halt global warming by capping and reducing greenhouse gas pollution and leading the world to a new global climate change treaty. - We're not going to be able to "halt" climate change. It took hundreds of years after the last ice age to stabilize the climate when humans began the Age of Agriculture, and we're not going to be able to halt the coming changes within a single generation. We do need to get the carbon out of the atmosphere, and we need to stop putting more in. But the coming sea level changes and climate shifts are going to hit us no matter how much money we spend. We have to hope for the best AND prepare for the worst.

Meet the demand for new electricity through efficiency for the next decade, instead of producing more power. - Efficiency can reduce our demand, but we still have a growing national population and a growing global population that is pushing that demand up, not down. Maybe we can reduce the rate of demand growth by some of these measures, but we can't delude ourselves into believing that we can invest some money and have all the electrical power that 8.9 Billion people will need by 2050. Sure, I'd love to try, but we have to be honest about it from day one. Underpromise, overperform. Not the other way around.

Cap and Reduce Global Warming Pollution - The description mentions the "most aggressive plans under consideration in Washington" without saying who those plans are coming from. He's talking about the Safe Climate Act of 2007 (H.R. 1590), introduced in June of last year, and reintroduced this year. You can find more information about the bill at OpenCongress.org and Thomas.loc.gov.

There he goes again, promoting his 1 million new jobs thing. Here's the reality. Every year, around 100,000 of our kids graduate from high school. Currently the number of unemployed persons in the US is 6.8 million or 4.5%. That sounds like a healthy percentage from my economics class, but do we really only want to help one seventh of the people who are currently unemployed? Either use real numbers, or drop real numbers. One of the two.

Lead the World toward a New Global Climate Change Treaty - The best example of such a treaty was the Montreal Protocol, which limited the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in order to try and stop the destruction of the Ozone layer. Getting something that big on an international level again will take a lot more work than the Kyoto Protocol, which is only scratching the surface of what we will need to do over the next few hundred years. It's a good start, and the cap and trade system described within Kyoto is something that Edwards already has in his plan elsewhere.

Creating the New Energy Economy and 1 Million Jobs

Invest in Renewable Sources of Electricity - Invest how? Here's the crux of the problem that I have, and the biggest thing that is missing from this plan. The first thing that Reagan did in 1981 was to remove the solar panels from the roof of the White House. They were reinstalled in 2003, with little fanfare. If Edwards wants to make an investment in renewable energy, it's really simple to get started. All he has to do is require that all of the Federal Administration Buildings, from the Pentagon to shacks in the middle of the Federal Forest lands, have solar panels installed, not just to help reduce the power consumption, but to BECOME the power generation core of 21st century America. Same with Wind, Geothermal, etc. If the Federal Government takes this on, demand will skyrocket, economies of scale will bring the prices for the equipment down, and more and more businesses and individuals will follow suit with their own investments. I don't think it will be enough, but it should be the biggest part of his "energy plan".

I'll post more later in part 2, because I need to get to work.

Chad

Liberty or Security?

It's really difficult for me to read things like this, because I see the language used as effective for no purpose other than driving the United States into a second civil war, with "Liberals" on one side and "Conservatives" on the other. It's insulting, and I don't deal well with it. The substance of the proposal is something I originally missed because my eyes started glazing over. I'll try to put that aside and read it again. (These types of commentaries REALLY piss me off.)

"These people", referring in the first paragraph to liberals, means exactly who? Give me names or drop the reference. He's complaining about people who point fingers by pointing fingers. How stupid is that?

What the hell is this 'political correctness' crap? Who doesn't deserve to be treated with respect? Name them. It sounds like this guy is saying that Violent inclinations should be dealt with by putting people in jail, or denying them lives because we are terrified that someday they may do something. Is he suggesting that we should have sent this kid back to South Korea, and kicked his parents and sister out of the country because he was dealing with stress? I know you advocate closing the border, but that's not going to happen as long as the United States remains part of the earth.

Treating people with respect and continuing to give people a chance to reach their potential through education does not mean that we are all hostages. That could be taken as a call to reenact what the Soviet Union created in Eastern Europe, where the police ask to see our papers every time we get on a bus to go somewhere, and they have gulags where people who are "politically incorrect" labor without hope forever. Is that what we want?

Terror, terror, terror, be afraid, be afraid be afraid. I don't have the time. Am I willing to lose some towers in order to protect the constitution and the future of my chidren? Yes. Sorry, but yes. I believe in the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That means I'm willing to sacrifice to maintain my ideals. If people die, it's because we didn't do a good enough job in prevention. I don't believe that closing the borders or throwing out people who have weird thoughts running through their heads is a positive solution. I do believe that Seung-Hui Cho should have been put into counseling and watched. I don't believe he should have been able to walk across the street from the school and purchase the weapons. But I also don't believe that the solution is to point fingers at people who are different from myself and deny them any rights whatsoever.

We can bitch, moan and complain about what should have happened forever, and I'm sure people like this author will. I'd rather repair the damage, and then look to the future changes that we should actually do to prevent something like this from happening again. First, we need to view violent tendencies as a mental illness, and completely fund mental illness treatment through a national health care system. A system like this would have known what to do with Cho, and would have given him the help he needed to get out of his downward spiral. Second, we need to all understand that people with mental illness might be dangerous to society, and have the communications infrastructure and legal framework in place to prevent people like this from being able to purchase weapons. That means that when Cho produced his ID for the gun dealer, the dealer's computer would have instantly told him that it was not safe to let him purchase guns, and would have alerted Cho's councilors that he tried to purchase them. Or is that too much "Big Brother", because it would have to be applied to US Citizens as well as foreign nationals and their children. Or do you think people like Timothy McVey should be ignored by such a system while Seung-Hui Cho should be singled out?

The Virginia Tech massacre was a tragedy, just like 9/11 was a tragedy. And the reaction of our country to being hit was immediately to hit back, and then get distracted by someone else. Instead of blaming Osama Bin Laden and going after him until he was put on trail in an International Court, we got distracted by someone that we used to supply weapons for. And now 3,000+ soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are dead. The reaction of this author to Virginia Tech sees to be "Blame the Teachers!", "Blame Rosie O'Donnell!", "Blame the lberal politicians!", "Blame those people over there, and anyone who lets those people come over here!"

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security - Ben Franklin

Give me liberty or give me death - Patrick Henry

To secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity - Preamble to the US Constitution

What are you willing to do to our liberty in order to gain a little security? I'm not interested in pointing fingers, or putting mentally ill people in jail. I am interested in preventing something like this by prosecuting the gun dealer for not doing a complete background check, and fix the government systems so that such a background check would have come up with a "do not sell" flag. But I'm not interested in closing our borders, and I'm not interested in denying our kids or anyone's kid an education and the opportunity to reach their potential.

Now do you understand why I find this article to be pure crap?

Chad

Nationalism

I heard something interesting today. French Presidential candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen was asking on a talk show how many French grandparents someone should have to be considered "truly French".

I wonder. How many German grandparents were required to be considered truly German in 1930?

I also heard that part of the "debate" in the Washington State Senate about Senator Oemig's Investigation & Impeachment bill was which political party was more patriotic. How many people have been killed in Iraq, and how many of our civil liberties have been torn to shreds, seems to have taken a back seat to the importance of which party would outdo the other by having American Flags on their desks, and the Democrats won by having theirs lowered to half-mast. Isn't that special...

Nationalism has it's place. It should be something that enhances pride in a nation's accomplishments, and it should help create an identity that helps enhance the positive view that people from other countries have of us. But it should not be a contest on who has the most Gravitas or who's flagpole is bigger. All of those kinds of contests are a way to avoid the real issues that are taking the lives of our young people and destroying our country.

So my message to politicans all over the world is this: Get over yourselves, and start paying attention to the real issues. Or you will be replaced. I don't care which party you hail from, or what country. The people are sovereign on this planet.

Framing gun control

I've heard a lot on the news today about the shooting at Virginia Tech. Here are some of my thoughts.

I've heard that John McCain is saying that Americans have the right to own guns, but that we should make sure that the bad people don't get them. What kind of drivel is this?! The Bad People is a reference to anyone different from us, or more importantly in the view of this frame different from ME. If I'm white, I should be aware and skittish around Black, Hisanic, Asian, etc. Reminds me of the movie Bowling for Columbine, which examined the gun culture in America. If I'm Christian, I should be afraid of non-Christians. If I'm not Christian, I should be afraid of Christian Fundamentalists.

This is called deterrence through fear. We are pushed away from our sense of security by igniting the fight or flight instinct. It's easy, cheap and quick. It gets ratings, and it ignites passions beyond logic. It's up to us as individuals to learn how to live with those passions and fears, and let them burn themselves out without causing any harm.

One news program had guests that were either pro- or anti- gun control, and one guest had the perspective that in a situation such as that faced by the students and teachers in that school who were cowering behind doors, desks and book cases, that some of them were likely thinking "I wish I had a gun". I really wonder about the effectivness of that kind of wish, because it seems to be somewhat of a death wish. Wouldn't it be better to be thinking "I wish that the person losing control of their passions did not have a gun?"

It's in the US Constitution that we have the right to keep and bear arms. The context of the 2nd Amendment has been up for debate since it passed Congress, and each person has their own interpretation of what it means. To me, just because I have the right to own something that can kill others, I'd rather not exercise that right. I don't own a gun because I don't feel like I need one.

I don't think the issue is whether we have the right to own firearms. That's not up for questioning, unless we want to take it out of the Constitution. And that would open a major can of worms. I think a better way is focusing our attention on the manufacturing of firearms. Why do we have so many companies making weapons of war? And it's not just in the United States, but all over the world.

The American Way needs to change.

What it's going to take for someone to win the Oval Office is popularity. Fundamentally, that's what the election is, a popularity contest. Candidates can earn that popular vote within each state by having the best ideas, having a worthy history in government service, or being able to pay for the best advertising. Whatever works, the campaigns will do. We can try to put all the higher ideals on it that we wish, but in the end, whoever gets the most votes wins, both at a caucus, a primary or the general election.

Bill Richardson would be fantastic as President. I really appreciate his foreign policy experience, and I like what he's done in New Mexico with Energy policy. He would certainly be a good person to go to the Middle East to talk and listen to the leaders and the people over there. But I'm thinking that it might take a lot of work to broker those deals, and we need someone dedicated to making it work who won't have to also work on other issues. I believe that Gov. Richardson needs to be the person to focus on the issues that we have with our neighbors in the global community.

My top three candidates right now are Edwards, Obama and Richardson. But I'm looking beyond the Oval Office and into the Cabinet room. I want to know who is going to be picked for Secretary of Health and Human Services. I want to know who will be picked to fill the Secretary of Labor position. I want the best minds and the best hearts around the table listening to each other and gathering ideas on how to fix the problems that we are facing. I don't want one person saddled with the responsibility of coming up with all the ideas.

At the Denver convention, we need to know without a doubt who will be looking at and solving the problems that we face as a nation and how we will help our neighbors solve the problems that we face around the world. I want to know who will sit around the round table in collaboration and cooperation with each other, with the American People and with the world community.

We need to stop crushing the American Dream with the American Way. The way we live needs to change at a deep fundamental level.

Quotes for the week

From Nicole Brodeur:

Because it's the American Way -- which can sometimes crush the American Dream.

And one that came to my mind the other day as I was riding my bike home from work:

This bike is powered by sweat and ingenuity, not blood and brain injuries.

From KUOW on Weekday: Dark Matter & Energy

Listening to a scientist on KUOW is great. Today they had a String Theory guy on. They talked a little bit about Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Made me come up with these thoughts. Don't know if they're accurate, and I don't know if they constitute a theory, but I thought I would record them.

Dark Matter - this is matter that has been accellerated above the speed of light, causing the mass of that matter to increase. I heard him say that 95% of the matter in the universe is this type of Dark Matter, and if they were going fast enough, it wouldn't take much.

We can't percieve Dark Matter because we are dependent on light to percieve things.

Dark Energy - When matter crosses the threashold of the speed of light, gravity reverses and repels instead of attracts. We can see the effects of Dark Energy because this is the force that is pushing the galaxies apart faster and faster.

So there we go. Crazy ideas, but they take in what I know and they're pushing the envelope.

When to cry at a concert

Let them in, Peter
For they are very tired
Give them couches where the angels sleep
And light those fires
Let them wake whole again
To brand new dawns
Fired by the sun
Not war-times bloody guns
May their peace be deep
Remember where the broken bodies lie
God knows how young they were
To have to die

You know God knows how young they were
To have to die

Give them things they like
Let them make some noise
Give roadhouse bands not golden harps
To these our boys
Let them love Peter
For they've had no time
They should have bird songs and trees
And hills to climb
The taste of summer
And a ripened pear
And girls as sweet as meadow wind
And flowing hair
And tell them how they are missed
But say not to fear
It's gonna be all right
With us down here

Let them in, Peter
For they are very tired
Give them couches where the angels sleep
And light those fires
Let them wake whole again
To brand new dawns
Fired by the sun
Not war-times bloody guns
May their peace be deep
Remember where the broken bodies lie
God knows how young they were
To have to die

You know God knows how young they were
To have to die

And tell them how they are missed
But say not to fear
It's gonna be all right
With us down here

It's gonna be all right
With us down here

Poem converted to a song by John Gorka.

Dear Governor Gregoire,

Dear Governor Gregoire,

I just heard on the radio that you oppose the rule of law. That you
oppose holding people accountable. I heard that you don't have enough
confidence in the grassroots of our party, nor in the elected
representatives of our party, to believe that we can do more than one
thing at a time.

I heard that you oppose the resolution introduced by Senator Eric
Oemig, SJM8016.

I'm on fire because of what this administration has done over the last
6 years. Aren't you? I'm furious to the point of losing my mind
about the carnage that we are waging in Iraq and around the world on
the order of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
I'm incensed that they were allow to steal not one, not two but three
election cycles without any accountability.

The NICEST thing that I can say about how I feel is that I want Dick
Cheney and George Bush impeached. Their actions over the past 6 years
are the reason that I am active in the Democratic Party, because the
party is the last, best hope for the US Constitution, the Rule of Law,
and the future of the world my children and grandchildren will be
living in.

That's why I'm insulted and ashamed when I hear that someone I respect
so much, who has been doing a fantastic job over the last 2 years as
governor of the greatest state in the United States, claims that
defending our values and our country against a domestic enemy is
nothing but a "distraction" from the real priorities that we should be
focused on.

I ask you, Governor. Can't you handle complexity?


Chad Lupkes
Seattle, Washington

What are we forgetting?

The PI had an article today about General Petraeus' Iraq staff, and while I'm impressed by the credentials, I couldn't help but notice the very first paragraph.

Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, who takes over today as U.S. commander in Iraq, is assembling a band of warrior-intellectuals in a crucial effort to reverse the downward trend in the Iraq war.

To win, or not to win, that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the IED's and RPG's of the insurgency, or to take up armor in a sea of opposition, and by opposing end them? To die: to sleep; No more; and by sleep we say we wish to end the hate and the thousand looks on the street that our soldiers are heir to, 'tis a consummation devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep; To sleep: perchance to dream of being home: ay, there's the rub for our troops;

What we are missing in the occupation of Iraq is a way to end the occupation. What we need is a path towards an exit. It doesn't matter how many people with lots of training in how to win a war are collected in the Green Zone. What matters is their intent. If what they want to do is "win the war", then nothing will change. Nothing can change. Because the United States has already won the war. The war was the invasion, and what army could stand against 130,000 of the best trained troops in the world? What we have now is an occupation of a foreign land, where 80-85% of the population wants us gone even if that means a full-on civil war. They don't care, they just want us gone.

When our intent changes, maybe someone will start thinking about what really needs to be done in Iraq. When we decide that we don't want to stay inside the country being shot at, maybe someone with a heart will start asking questions. Questions like "What do the Iraqi people want?", or "How can the Iraqi people take charge of their own country?" We must stop doing the thinking for them. We must encourage their Parliament to pass resolutions and bills, and then help enforce those bills, even if they say "The United States is no longer welcome on Iraqi soil, and must leave." If that is their will, so mote it be.

Our intent should be peace. Our wish should be for an end to all violence. Our desires for the people of Iraq should be for full sovereignty. We must pull our troops out of that country, and be ready to do the bidding of the Iraqi government when they request it, how they request it, or not. Until that happens, we've already lost this "war".

Rhyme about the Precinct Caucuses

Election year falls across the land
The caucus hour is close at hand
Volunteers walk in search of votes
To canvas y'awl's neighborhood.

And whosoever shall be found
Without the votes for getting crowned
Must stand and face the Republican crowd
And watch our country wither.

The foulest language is in our ears
The funk of 6 memorable years
And frantic candidates from every state
Are reaching in to mark your slate.

And though you fight to keep your resolve
The room is in a raucous!
For no mere voter can resist
The importance of the caucus.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

(With respect to Vincent Price & Michael Jackson.)

Second Life

Ok, I downloaded Second Life, because I see more and more people using it for political activism. Not just online, but meeting for conferences from around the country. The event that I'm trying to collect money to attend, which is the Beyond Broadcast 2007 event sponsored by M.I.T., is holding something on their Second Life campus. So, what the hell.

I had to upgrade my video driver to the latest version. That was ok. I know I have one of the slowest machines out there, only 750MHz. It works for text editing. It doesn't seem to work well in VR.

Time to start saving money for a new system. Oh, Joy.

More commentary about bills in Olympia

There's still a lot going on in Olympia. Here are some comments on the bills that caught my eye on Friday, January 26th. Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, I haven't read the text of each of these bills, and I only do this when I have time. Take my comments as coming from one person in the grassroots.

House Bill 1510 (Providing for the community reinvestment of oil windfall profits.):

Introduced by Rep. Bob Hasegawa on January 22, 2007, to create a state windfall profits tax. Tax rates would range from 10% for gasoline selling for $1.75 per gallon to 30% for gasoline selling for $2.75 or more. Oil companies would not be subject to a windfall profits tax for gasoline priced below $1.75 per gallon. The tax is designed to force oil companies to set gasoline prices at historically reasonable levels. Revenues generated from a windfall profits tax would be used to partially offset the adverse effects of high gasoline prices. The revenue would provide additional funding for public goods and services that are linked to the current costs of energy and the development of renewable in-state energy resources.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49645

This bill caught my eye because it opens the door to something like the Alaska Permanent Fund, which is something that I would like to encourage. Maybe not from oil taxes, since the oil doesn't come from Washington State resources, but the financial infrastructure should be established for something like this.

House Bill 1511 (Modifying the business and occupation taxation of investment income received by corporations.):

Introduced by Rep. Bob Hasegawa on January 22, 2007, to modify the business and occupation tax on investment income received by corporations. The bill repeals the B&O tax credit for moneys derived as dividends or distributions from the capital account by a parent from its subsidiary entities, and moneys derived from interest on loans between subsidiary entities and a parent entity or between subsidiaries of a common parent entity. The exemption would only apply if the total investment and loan income is less than 5% of gross receipts of the business annually.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49646

This is in the "step in the right direction" department. Washington is the only state to have a B&O tax, and it should be eliminated entirely. But with all of our major party leaders in the House (read Frank) running as fast and as far away from the political nuke of real tax reform, we'll have to see what we can get to work.

House Bill 1516 (Providing business and occupation tax exemptions for new small businesses.):

Introduced by Rep. Dan Roach on January 22, 2007, to create a business and occupation (B&O) tax exemption for new businesses. All new businesses would be exempt from B&O taxation for the first year of operation. Small businesses with 25 or less employees would be exempt from 100% B&O taxation for the first 2 years, 75% for year 3, 50% for year 4, and 25% for year 5. After five years of operation, the small business would be required to pay full B&O taxes.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49651

Hmmm. B&O taxes are really small for retail, and I know it varies from industry to industry. I wonder if it would be effective to identify specific types of businesses that we want to encourage, and give them a larger exemption or rebate. If someone starts a new oil refinery, do we really want them exempt from B&O taxes for two years? I wouldn't. But if someone wants to start a business tutoring kids to improve their ability to reach their potential, I wouldn't ever want to charge them B&O taxes.

House Bill 1523 (Modifying voluntary green power program provisions.):

Introduced by Rep. Maralyn Chase on January 22, 2007, to modify provisions regarding green power programs. The bill would require electric utilities to provide their customers the option of purchasing energy from alternative energy resources owned or produced in the state of Washington. The bill would also add energy produced from biogas, manure digesters, or landfills as a “qualified alternative energy resource”.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49658

Interesting language in this summary. I'd love to know if some utilities actually deny people permission to generate their own power to feed into the grid. It's a slightly different topic, I know, but it reaches the same goal of increased independence. I would support this one.

House Bill 1629 (Increasing the qualifying income thresholds for property tax exemptions for senior citizens, persons retired because of physical disability, and veterans.):

Introduced by Rep. John Ahern on January 24, 2007, to amend property tax exemptions for seniors, retired citizens due to disability and veterans by expanding certain income qualifications. The bill changes the tax exemption for qualifying citizens from thirty-five to forty thousand dollars of income a year. The bill also discusses other income and property valuation conditions necessary to receive the exemption.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49969

A couple of questions on this one. When was the 35K exemption established, and has it kept up with the rising housing prices and property taxes? Obviously not, because we are looking to raise it, However, sticking pins in a graph seems inefficient to me. I'd like to see something in the bill that either requires a review of the tax rates every few years, or sets the exemption to an income or property tax level. I think we already have the periodic review happening, but if we can pin Minimum Wage to inflation, why can't we pin a property taxe exemption to the overall rise and fall of the housing market?

House Bill 1632 (Changing the number of seats in the state legislature.):

Introduced by Rep. Dan Roach on January 24, 2007, to amend the current number of seats in the legislature based on the federal decennial census from forty-nine legislative districts to thirty-three senate districts. The bill would also provide for three house districts within each senate district. The bill also states each house district would comprise one-third of the population of the
senate district for a total of ninety-nine house districts.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49972

This is in the "It Takes Guts" department. I'm glad he's presenting the idea, as we should be having a good debate about our electoral world, but this will never fly. If we're going to do this, why not just do proportional representation like Krist Novoselic would like to see us do.

House Bill 1634 (Expanding high school mathematics instruction and instructional capacity.):

Introduced by Rep. Dan Roach on January 24, 2007, to enhance math instruction and capacities by increasing the requirements for graduation. The bill amends the law for high school classes in fall 2007. The bill requires three years of math, including a minimum of one year of math curriculum that exceeds the Washington assessment of student learning for graduation.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49974

More tests, higher requirements, and another unfunded mandate. I haven't read the bill, so maybe he has some source for the money this would take, but I doubt it.

House Bill 1638 (Providing tax incentives for employer provided health care.):

Introduced by Rep. Bill Hinkle on January 24, 2007, to amend current law by allowing small employers a tax incentive if they provide health care. The bill allows employers to deduct taxes when health care services are provided to their employees. The bill also states that payments made by employees are not eligible for deduction.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49978

This is almost a step in the right direction, but Single Payer would be so much easier, cheaper and better for the society. This bill isn't as bad and some out there, but it's still missing the big picture.

House Bill 1644 (Modifying health care eligibility provisions for part-time academic employees of community and technical colleges.):

Introduced by Rep. Phyllis Kenney on January 24, 2007, to amend current health care eligibility requirements for part-time technical college employees. The bill shortens the eligibility requirements in health care coverage for part-time technical college employees, from four to three quarters or three to two quarters, depending on certain related qualifications.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=49984

If we're not going to create Universal, this is a step in the right direction. I'd rathe go Universal and stop excluding anyone.

House Bill 1686 (Concerning parent and child health services provided by the department of health.):

Introduced by Rep. Lynn Kessler on January 25, 2007, to promote healthy birth outcomes and reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, by reaffirming the state’s commitment to encourage health plan coverage of family planning as an essential component of the health care system and to provide public health funding for preventive family planning services for women and men with family incomes up to 200% of the federal poverty level. See companion SB 5585.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50108

This looks like it should be part of the regular budget. Why isn't it?

House Bill 1695 (Restoring the business and occupation tax credit for high technology research and development spending.):

Introduced by Rep. Jim Dunn on January 25, 2007, to restore the business and occupation (B&O) tax credit for high technology research and development spending.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50117

More spending on high tech research and development, using state universities. Yup, yup!! Let's keep more of our R&D work within the state.

House Bill 1696 (Facilitating the statewide initiative and referendum processes under Article II, section 1 of the state Constitution.):

Introduced by Rep. Joe McDermott on January 25, 2007, to create the Citizen Initiative Review Commission. The 12-member commission would convene panels of voters, demographically representative of the state as a whole, who would study and evaluate ballot measures through a quasi-legislative hearing process. The findings of the panel would be included in the voters' pamphlet.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50118

Looks like someone read Tao of Democracy! There is a Senate bill as well, introduced by Sen. Eric Oemig

House Bill 1708 (Modifying the definition of criminal act.):

Introduced by Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson on January 25, 2007, to modify the definition of a “criminal act.” The bill would remove language from the definition pertaining to terrorist acts, as defined in federal law, committed against Washington residents outside the U.S. See companion SB 5526.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50130

This bill, which I had to read to get a clear picture of, removes the duplication of the Department of Redundancy Department. Terrorism is a crime. It's a special kind of crime, but it's still a crime and should be treated as such. Bravo, Mary Lou! Stick this in your pipe and smoke it, Gonzales!

House Bill 1711 (Creating an energy road map.):

Introduced by Rep. Maralyn Chase on January 25, 2007, to require the Washington State University energy program to conduct a study to create a Washington state energy efficiency program road map. The study must: (a) Evaluate the state's current efforts with respect to energy efficiency and conservation; (b) Evaluate the state's role in regional efforts to improve energy efficiency and conservation; (c) Evaluate the effectiveness of other jurisdictions with 6 established programs for funding energy efficiency and conservation; (d) Evaluate methods for funding energy efficiency and 8 conservation; (e) Evaluate funding sources for municipalities to promote energy efficiency, conservation, and renewable energy projects; (f) Identify areas where the state needs to increase energy efficiency and conservation; (g) Identify areas where the state could establish, expand, or fund efforts related to energy efficiency and conservation; (h) Identify methods and create recommended strategies to fund energy efficiency and conservation in areas where increased efforts are needed; and (i) Create the Washington state energy efficiency program road map containing recommended steps to be taken by the state, local governments, the Washington State University energy program, and other interested parties to establish, fund, and expand energy efficiency and conservation.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50133

What, you mean actually figure out where we are, where we want to be, and the steps to get there? Hasn't the energy advocacy community already done this work? In Section 2.2, I would add the following potential participant: j. The general public. Otherwise, it's good. I wish they would have to report earlier than the end of 2008, however. As important as this study process is, we don't have time to waste on talking without action.

House Bill 1714 (Changing campaign contribution provisions.):

Introduced by Rep. Maralyn Chase on January 25, 2007, to modify campaign contributions laws. The bill would remove certain restrictions on contributions to candidates from political caucus committees. The bill would also increase the amount of money a county central committee could give to a political candidate.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50136

I can't find the definition of a "political caucus committee". If anyone can find that in the RCW, please point me to the right page.

House Bill 1720 (Providing property tax relief for veterans of the armed forces.):

Introduced by Rep. Jim McCune on January 25, 2007, to amend tax exemptions for military veterans. A veteran with a combined disposable income of $70,000 per year or less would be exempt from some regular property taxes and all excess property taxes. See companion HB 1102.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50142

Supporting our veterans is a basic tenant of citizenship in this country. I support this, and I'd like to hear arguments against it.

House Bill 1721 (Creating certified capital companies to promote economic development through investment in start-up and emerging businesses.):

Introduced by Rep. Pat Sullivan on January 25, 2007, to create certified capital companies. This bill is intended to assist small start-up enterprises to succeed in their business and to contribute to the future of Washington. See companion SB 5621.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50143

I need to look at this more!

House Bill 1730 (Regarding the use of the life sciences discovery fund for human stem cell research.):

Introduced by Rep. Brian Sullivan on January 25, 2007, to allow the donation of human stem cells from any source for research purposes if the donor has provided written consent. The donor may not receive valuable consideration for the donation. The bill would also prohibit money from the Life Sciences Discovery Fund to be used for human embryonic stem cell research unless the stem cells were donated. However, such funding could not be used for donated stem cells for human cloning or to injure an embryo implanted in a uterus.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50152

On the heels of California.

House Bill 1731 (Regarding reporting by lobbyists and lobbyists' employers.):

Introduced by Rep. Glenn Anderson on January 25, 2007, to require lobbyists and employers of lobbyists to electronically file mandatory political contribution reports. Currently, only political candidates or committees spending $10,000 or more per year are required to file reports electronically.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50153

More information about lobbyist reporting can be found here: RCW 42.17.150 - 42.17.230

Senate Bill 5611 (Providing for a location endorsement to certain licenses for microbreweries and domestic breweries.):

Introduced by Sen. Ken Jacobsen on January 25, 2007, to allow a microbrewery holding either a spirits, beer, and wine restaurant license or a beer and/or wine license to apply to the Liquor Control Board for a location endorsement to either of these licenses to allow the microbrewery to open a second location. Each location endorsement would cost $1,000 per year.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50176

Party on, Dude! With local brew, even!

Senate Bill 5614 (Creating incentives for community-based solar energy projects.):

Introduced by Sen. Phil Rockefeller on January 25, 2007, to provide that, for the purpose of calculating the annual incentive limit, community-based solar projects that are located on separate parcels of property, are not to be combined, as each project is individually eligible for incentives of up to $2,000 per year per project.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50179

Anything with solar energy in the title gets my attention. However, can someone with realtor or similar experience explain this to me?

Senate Bill 5625 (Authorizing counties and cities to contract for jail services with counties and cities in adjacent states.):

Introduced by Sen. Jim Hargrove on January 25, 2007, to allow cities and counties to contract for jail services with adjacent cities or counties or adjacent states.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50190

Adjacent cities or counties, maybe. I think that the community that produces criminals should be required to house those criminals regardless of where the crime was committed. If someone here in Seattle does something unacceptable, Seattle should bear at least part of the costs of their jail sentance. This would create incentives to encourage our kids NOT to become criminals in the first place.

Senate Bill 5626 (Requiring training for school directors.):

Introduced by Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe on January 25, 2007, to require certain training for school district board of directors. The legislature finds that school board directors are responsible for setting the vision for the school district, creating successful board and superintendent relations, understanding school law and finance, accounting for school and school district improvement, using data to make decisions, and advocating for public education in the community, regionally, and at the state level. Each member of a school district board of directors would be required to complete a minimum of 7 hours of training annually. The hours of training obtained by each member must be posted on the school district's web site.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50191

Seattle is having a great deal of trouble, and everyone was watching what happened in Federal Way. Maybe it's time that School Board members got some training on how to do their job.

Senate Bill 5628 (Adopting the interstate agreement for the election of the president of the United States by national popular vote.):

Introduced by Sen. Eric Oemig on January 25, 2007, to create an interstate agreement regarding the election of the U.S. President. Currently, Presidents are elected by the Electoral College made up of electors from each state. Candidates need 270 of the 538 electoral votes to win the presidency. SB 5628 would pledge Washington’s 11 electoral votes to the winner of the nation-wide popular vote. However, this measure would only take effect if enough states possessing a majority of electoral votes adopt the same measure. The interstate agreement would guarantee the winner of the popular vote to be the next president effectively bypassing the Electoral College. See companion HB 1750.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50193

Go Eric!!! Damn, I'm proud of that guy!!!

Senate Joint Resolution 8217 (Repealing a conflicting residency requirement for voting in a presidential election.):

Introduced by Sen. Michael Carrell on January 25, 2007, to remove Article VI, Section 1A from the Washington State Constitution. The article states, “In consideration of those citizens of the United States who become residents of the state of Washington during the year of a presidential election with the intention of making this state their permanent residence, this section is for the purpose of authorizing such persons who can meet all qualifications for voting as set forth in section 1 of this article, except for residence, to vote for presidential electors or for the office of President and Vice-President of the United States, as the case may be, but no other: Provided, That such persons have resided in the state at least sixty days immediately preceding the presidential election concerned. The legislature shall establish the time, manner and place for such persons to cast such presidential ballots.” This resolution would amend the state Constitution if approved by two-thirds of the Legislature and a majority of the voters in the next general election.

Details and Comments: http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=50195

This is in the WTF department. Can someone tell me some background on what this is actually changing? If someone moves to the state in time for the residency requirements defined by the Secretary of State and the County Auditor, why are we limiting them to Presidential elections instead of helping to decide who their school board members are so their kids get an education, who their city and county council members are so they have a voice in how their property and sales tax dollars are spent, etc. I don't support this right now, based on the summary text. Somebody correct my misconceptions. Please.

I can say NO to charities and not feel bad about it!

Over the Christmas holidays, I got call after call from this or that charity
asking for my support.  Every one of them had a good story and a good
pitch, and most of them I had given to before.  I hate saying no, but I had
to wait for a full paycheck before I could actually send out any money. 
Then I had a crazy idea.  Everyone knows that charities are totally honest,
right?  Yeah, sure.

Here's an interesting table of facts, with links.  And this is just the
charities that I got contacted by the Secretary of State's office has
information on every charity allowed to call people in Washington.

Name of Charity	Fed EIN	% to Programs	Last year filed with SOS	Amount I saved by not sending them a check
Law Enforcement Education Program	38-3385175	9%	June 30, 2005	$10.00
Children's Charitable Foundation	30-0193229	6%	December 31, 2004	$20.00
Cancer Fund of America Support Services	42-1568866	7%	December 31, 2004	$25.00
Firefighters Assistance Fund	20-0484684	5%	Jun 30, 2005	$10.00

Here's a blog post with a
similar bend. 

If you're thinking "what about the programs" let me say that my
wife and I saved up the money to attend the Farestart
Grand Opening on February 1st.  According to the Secretary of State
website, they put 75% of their donations to programs. 
How much?  You don't want to know.

So, now I feel better about saying NO on the phone when charities call. 
All I have to do is ask for their Federal EIN, look them up while they are on
the phone, and if they are not based in Washington and send at least 50% of
their donations to programs, I don't ever want to hear from them again.

Update, got another note in the mail from this one:

CHILDRENS CANCER FUND OF AMERICA INC

7435 E MAIN STREET BLDG 1

MESA AZ 85207

480 218-6062

Reports submitted to Washington Secretary of State end Dec 31, 2005.

Federal EIN: 20-1226416

They only send 15% to programs. So I wrote them a note asking them to take my name off their contact list.