Carroll Andrew Morse has a terrific, focused posting entitled First They Came for the Radio Talk Show Hosts… that gets to the heart of the latest fallout from campaign finance reform here in Rhode Island. Once again, we have an example of how legislation has unintended consequences that, in this case, affect our freedom of speech.
Dating back to the post-Watergate reforms in the 1970’s, I continue to be amazed at how people think it is possible to construct ways to limit the flow of money into politics. And so we have concepts such as hard money, soft money, donation limits by individuals, donation limits by corporate entities, political action committees, 527’s, etc.
Like water flowing downhill, money simply finds new ways to flow into politics after each such “reform.” Does any rational person really think all these limitations have reduced the influence of money on politics? Surely not. Have all these limitations changed behavioral incentives for people or organizations with money? Quite clearly, as the 527’s showed in the 2004 elections. But all we have done is made the flow of money more convoluted and frequently more difficult to trace. Are we better off for all the changes? Hardly. And, the adverse and unintended consequences will only continue into the future.
A new report by Rudy Giuliani has found some flaws in importing drugs from other countries for use in the U.S. I note that the report was commissioned by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association, so that must be weighed. But I would also stress that Giuliani has certainly shown his integrity in the past. The key findings:
[Open full post]Unapproved drugs have already compromised the system. According to the report, nearly 90 percent of the suspected drug parcels randomly examined by airport mail facilities contained non-FDA approved medicines from Pakistan, Brazil, the Netherlands and Canada. Drugs are already coming from foreign sources. Several of the large Canadian Internet pharmacies have stated publicly that they are already filling prescriptions with drugs from other countries. Patients cannot assume these medications are identical to what they would get in the United States.
I will be the first to admit that I haven’t been as convinced as other conservatives, here and there, that Cranston Mayor Steven Laffey’s politics or personality will translate well on the statewide stage. This is not because of his political views, many (if not most) of which I agree with, but rather my perception of the degree (or lack thereof) that the typical Rhode Island voter can accept such a rabble-rousin’ conservative (I mean that in a good way). Thus, with all of that as a caveat, I must admit that I am quite perplexed as to what exactly the mayor is doing by inserting Cranston into the middle international immigration policy. On the one hand, it could be an attempt to add a “kinder, gentler” side to his conservativism in an attempt to preempt [predictable] charges of being cold-hearted, etc. On the other hand, it could be raw political opportunism at the expense of intellectual, or at least ideological, honesty. The following blurb from the “aforelinked” story sums up my concerns [and it starts with a laugh-out-loud, tongue-in-cheek sentence, at least I thought]
Of all Cranston’s mayors over the past 100 years, Laffey has, without question, the best relations with the nation of Guatemala. In the past few years, Laffey has given seven Cranston vehicles to Guatemala in the last two years for use as ambulances. Last year he visited Guatemala, and he has played host to the president of the City Council of Guatemala City and the mayor of the town of Chici.
Earlier this year, he also went on a fact-finding expedition to Mexico’s border with Arizona, and spent a Saturday riding along with the border patrol.
Cranston joins Pawtucket, Central Falls, and Providence as Rhode Island communities accepting Mexico’s Matricula Consular identification card. Providence also accepts Guatemala’s ID card.
The card itself is not proof of legal immigration status or eligibility to work in the United States. But it is accepted often by American banks from foreigners opening bank accounts.
Julio Aragon, president of the Mexican American Association of Rhode Island, said that the cards offer little benefits for foreigners when dealing with city government. But he said they are invaluable when Mexicans come into contact with the police department. If they commit a crime and have no valid identification, they may be deported rather than enter into the court system.
“If the police stop me with no license, nothing, the police can kick me out of America. But if you have the Mexican card, if the officer stops you, he knows right away you’re registered with the Mexican embassy,” Aragon said.
“It’s better than being deported,” Aragon said, adding that it is much easier to carry around the small ID card than the bulkier Mexican passport.
Mexico has been distributing the card since 1871. Guatemala issued its first cards in 2002.
Critics argue that the cards legitimize the presence of illegal immigrants, and provide an avenue for terrorists to transfer money and to enter the United States.
In 2003, officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and at the Homeland Security Department have testified before Congress that the cards, if fraudently obtained, can be used to gain access to other documentation — such as U.S. drivers’ licenses. There have been several failed attempts in Congress to enact a nationwide ban on the cards.
More than 1.7 million Mexicans carry the Matricula Consular.
To receive a card, applicants must present either a passport, or a combination of an original birth certificate to prove their nationality, a government-issued photo ID to prove identity, proof of address under the same name, a telephone number, and next of kin information.
Laffey said that the cards offer all immigrants “the fair chance to live the American dream.” He closed his remarks with his favorite Spanish phrase, directed to Vice President Stein: “Su lucha es mi lucha” — your struggle is my struggle.
I’m just not sure what is to be gained. What if Cranston becomes an illegal immigrant haven? Will Cranston’s taxpayers be willing, or ready, to foot the social welfare bills of a large non- or illegally- working sub-population? I doubt it. It would seem Mayor Laffey’s usually good political ear has turned to tin. Average folks don’t like the idea of illegal immigrants crossing the border, taking jobs and leeching off of our welfare system. And God forbid if the police actually wanted to deport an illegal alien criminal.
[Open full post]Providence Journal editor Don Sockol ends with a question a piece that laments his daughter’s fear of losing healthcare if she returns to Rhode Island, loses whatever job allowed her to move back, and loses her health insurance:
There’s been talk about school systems banding into larger purchasing groups to cut health-insurance costs. What if everybody joined one huge group, and wherever you went you belonged?
The short answer: because groups need administrators, and the bigger the group, the huger the administrator’s power. There are very few people whom I’d entrust with my healthcare, and none whom I’d entrust with everybody’s healthcare.
[Open full post]Patrick Ruffini is asking Republicans to make an honest assessment of some potential Republican primary two-man races to determine the “conventional wisdom.” It seems prompted by recent reports that Rudy Giuliani, who would presumably fare well in the general election, has been losing ground among the generally more conservative Republican primary voters. As such, he has pitted Rudy against three other candidates: the more conservative George Allen and Bill Frist and the “maverick” John McCain (current results are here). After voting, read some of the comments, where a consensus seems to be that Ruffini has selected some pretty weak candidates to oppose Giuliani. I would have to concur.
[Open full post]While I (and others) have written of the bias on campus and the liberal tendencies therein, it also behooves us to point out examples where it is obvious that open debate is encouraged. Such an example is Providence College. (Full disclosure: I’m currently attending grad school at PC). One can correctly assume that a college founded by a Catholic order (the Dominicans) would probably be more conservative than other schools, but that is not always necessarily true. In my experience, the student body and professors at PC are generally good about allowing open debate and don’t stray into non-related polemics during lectures. (And I have my antennae up). With all of that being said, here are some PC student reaction to the election of the new Pope. I think you’ll find a diversity of opnion, which is exactly what should be ocurring on a college campus.
[Open full post]Today’s news reports:
[Open full post]Jordanian rebel Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — Iraq’s most wanted fugitive — recently eluded capture by American troops, but left behind a treasure trove of information, a senior military official told ABC News.
On Feb. 20, the alleged terror mastermind was heading to a secret meeting in Ramadi, just west of Fallujah, where he used to base his operations, the official said.
Task Force 626 — the covert American military unit charged with finding Zarqawi — had troops in place to grab the fugitive, and mobile vehicle checkpoints had been established around the city’s perimeter. Another U.S. official said predator drones were also in flight, tracking movements in and around the city…
What the task force did find in the vehicle confirmed suspicions that Zarqawi had just escaped. The official said Zarqawi’s computer and 80,000 euros (about $104,000 U.S.) were discovered in the truck.
Finding the computer, said the official, “was a seminal event.” It had “a very big hard drive,” the official said, and recent pictures of Zarqawi. The official said Zarqawi’s driver and a bodyguard were taken into custody…
As a non-native Rhode Islander, I continue to learn of the little traditions of which I have never heard, here or anywhere else. Coffee milk, “cabinets”, hot weiners, etc. Now I read in today’s ProJo of the “tradition” of handing out “Rhode Island Official” stickers. At first, it just seems like yet another case of Rhode Island political patronage.
You don’t need to be in state or local government to get one. You don’t need to be a former official. You don’t even need to have considered running for office.
Each state representative and senator is given 25 windshield decals that they can hand out at their “discretion” to friends, family and political supporters.
The practice has been going on for decades; longer than any current lawmaker has been serving.
The decals — about the size of an inspection sticker — include the state seal and say “Rhode Island Official” and the two years of the current legislative term.
The latest batch was handed out recently.
House Speaker William J. Murphy, D-West Warwick, and Majority Leader Gordon D. Fox, D-Providence, sent a letter with them saying: “Dear Colleague: Enclosed please find your 2005-2006 Rhode Island Official Stickers. Since the supply is limited, please use your discretion when you distribute the stickers.”
Freshman Rep. James F. Davey, R-Cranston, got his supply and said he was shocked.
“I don’t think it’s appropriate unless you’re a Rhode Island official and in which case you don’t need to get one from me,” Davey said. “Use your discretion only because the supply is limited not because it might be inappropriate.”
Davey called The Journal about the stickers and said he will return his allotment.
“Unbelievable. Unbelievable,” was the response from H. Philip West Jr., executive director of Common Cause of Rhode Island, when he learned about them.
“I would doubt it’s illegal, but it’s certainly wrong,” West said. “It clearly is meant to create a privilege for a group of favored individuals. I would say there’s probably already too much of that in state government.”
The state’s other prominent government watchdog, Robert Arruda, chairman of Operation Clean Government, however, finds nothing wrong.
“Other than status, I can’t think of what else it’s going to gain the individuals that have it,” Arruda said. “I’m more concerned about the jobs [legislators] hand out.”
Others echo Arruda’s claim.
Freshman Rep. John J. Loughlin II, R-Tiverton, first heard about the decals while going door-to-door campaigning last year when a man asked him for one, if he got elected.
“It’s a Rhode Island thing. It’s like low-numbered license plates. It’s like Del’s Lemonade,” Loughlin said. “It’s a visible symbol, that ‘Hey, I know somebody who knows somebody who knows somebody,’ which is the Rhode Island way.”
“I don’t think the sticker necessarily purports them to be a state official,” Loughlin added. “It’s a nice little gesture; it’s a nice little thing to have.”
Sen. Leonidas P. Raptakis, D-Coventry, likened the stickers to the medallions given out by the Fraternal Order of Police.
Others just chalked them up to tradition.
“They’ve been around since I’ve got here,” said Bruce J. Long, R-Middletown, the longest current serving member of the House. “They go back to at least the mid-70s.”
So why give the decal to someone who is not an official?
“Because it makes them feel special,” said Long, who was first elected in 1980. “I think they’re given out to impress people. In my early years, I did plenty of that.”
And why would someone want one?
“It’s one of the great mysteries of life and a quintessential Rhode Island political dynamic,” said House Minority Leader Robert A. Watson, R-East Greenwich. “I still don’t think anybody takes those things very seriously, certainly not the police in Rhode Island. Nor do I expect many people believe that [they] would.”
Peter T. Brousseau, president of the Rhode Island Police Chiefs Association and West Warwick police chief, said the stickers are not some type of “get out of jail free pass” from parking or speeding tickets.
Like the legislators, Brousseau said: “I don’t know what special privilege you get from those.”
Well, if they aren’t worth anything other than making people feel good, why do they need them? If they’re not worth the money that is spent to print and send them, then STOP DOING IT! It’s a waste of money.
[Open full post]In my last post, I began the process of trying to seperate fact from hyperbole in an attempt to begin to understand the real issues surrounding building or expanding an LNG storage facility in Rhode Island or somewhere on Narragansett Bay. From that post I concluded that the central issue was safety and that it was a real concern. I took a few steps down the path of assuming that there would be no palatable on-shore solution. As such, I considered the efficacy of off-shore facilities, though these are not without their own issues. With that being said, I think it worthwhile to go back and consider the safety history of LNG.
[Open full post]