Op/Ed - Real ID, real problem

Real ID, real problem

The costly, burdensome federal mandate does little to stop illegal immigration and actually leaves us more vulnerable to identify theft; Maryland should join other states in rejecting it

By Cynthia Boersma
June 17, 2008

"No. Nope. No way."

So exclaimed Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana when asked whether his state would participate in the federal Real ID program.

Frustration with this misguided, expensive and unworkable federal mandate also compelled another governor, Republican Mark Sanford of South Carolina, to call Real ID "the worst piece of legislation I have seen during the 15 years I have been engaged in the political process." If Real ID has any friends in the states, they're not speaking up.

This sentiment is now percolating through the halls of Congress. In recent hearings before the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, senators from both sides of the aisle were blistering in their criticism of Real ID. "The massive amounts of personal information that would be stored in state databases that are to be shared electronically with all other states, as well as the unencrypted data on the Real ID card itself, could provide one-stop shopping for identity thieves," said Sen. Daniel K. Akaka, a Hawaii Democrat, at the hearing over which he presided with Republican Sen. George V. Voinovich of Ohio.

Unfortunately, some folks in Maryland have not yet gotten the message. Opponents of illegal immigration recently staged protests outside Motor Vehicle Administration offices, demonstrating a misunderstanding of Real ID. The erroneous impression that participation in Real ID will prevent illegal immigration or require Maryland to issue driver's licenses only to documented U.S. citizens is also shared by the O'Malley administration.

Before Maryland sinks hundreds of millions of its precious transportation dollars into the Real ID sinkhole, leaders should understand what participation in Real ID will and will not do.

Under the Real ID Act, the federal government requires states to issue uniform driver's licenses - essentially a national ID card - with insecure, unecrypted personal information on machine-readable strips. That means three bad things: huge costs of time and money for Marylanders, an easier task for identity thieves, and less, not more, security for our state.

Real ID will vastly increase the time, travel and expense involved in obtaining a Maryland driver's license. It will require every driver to re-enroll at the MVA. It will require every applicant for a state driver's license to submit original birth certificates and other original source documents in person to obtain or renew a license.

Real ID then requires these documents to be electronically stored in a database accessible to the federal government and every MVA in the country with no established restrictions on access, data sharing or data mining. It will render every Marylander highly vulnerable to identity theft and will subject personal information to misuse and fraud.

Real ID will increase our vulnerability to security threats and fraud at a cost of $4 billion nationwide and over $121.5 million to Maryland. And though it may seem incredible to those who believe Real ID is intended to improve the security of our borders, the one thing it does not mandate is that Maryland require proof of citizenship to obtain a driver's license.

The contradictory and unreal nature of Real ID is driving a rebellion against it by the states. Nine states have enacted laws prohibiting state participation in the program. Ten other states have passed resolutions opposing the program. States refusing to implement Real ID include states with a lawful-presence requirement for their driver's licenses as well as states with no such requirement.

Thankfully, there is a far better alternative. Recently, the National Conference of State Legislatures issued a call to support repeal of Real ID and passage of replacement legislation. The Identification Security Enhancement Act was introduced this year in the U.S. Senate with bipartisan support. That bill would protect privacy, would achieve effective driver's license security, could be implemented more quickly than Real ID and would not cost billions of dollars to be shouldered by the states.

A congressional subcommittee is considering this year's budget for the Department of Homeland Security, which contains $50 million for Real ID implementation. This is a tiny fraction of Real ID's real cost.

Maryland should join other states in saying no to Real ID. Marylanders should urge Gov. Martin O'Malley to end our state's participation in this wasteful and dangerous program and Sens. Benjamin L. Cardin and Barbara A. Mikulski to support the federal reform bill. This failed program should not be allowed to limp along to the next administration.

Real ID may be a real nightmare, but it is one from which we can still wake up.

Cynthia Boersma is legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland. Her e-mail at boersma@aclu-md.org.

American Minute - Jun. 17 - Battle of Bunker Hill

American Minute
with Bill Federer

"Don't Shoot Until You See the Whites of Their Eyes!" was the order given JUNE 17, 1775, by Colonel William Prescott to troops on Breed's Hill, adjacent Bunker Hill, guarding the north entrance to Boston Harbor.

They were aiming at 2,300 British soldiers, under General Howe, marching at them with bayonets fixed.

Twice the Americans repelled them until they ran out of gunpowder.

The British then burned the nearby town of Charlestown.

This first action of the Continental Army saw over 1,000 British killed, and nearly 500 Americans.

This same day, 300 miles away in Philadelphia, the Continental Congress drafted George Washington's commission as commander-in-chief, for which he refused a salary.

Washington wrote to his wife, Martha:

"Dearest...It has been determined in Congress, that the whole army raised for the defense of the American Cause shall be put under my care, and that it is necessary for me to proceed immediately to Boston to take...command...

I shall rely therefore, confidently, on that Providence which has heretofore preserved, and been bountiful to me."

Washington ended:

"I...got Colonel Pendleton to Draft a Will...the Provision made for you, in case of my death, will, I hope, be agreeable."

Cities welcome law making gang-related graffiti a crime

To see what Oklahoma is doing see Senate Approves Sykes’ Measure to Stiffen Penalties for ‘Tagging’ and see The Sykes Update for March 13, 2008

Cities welcome law making
gang-related graffiti a crime
By Christine Clarridge
Seattle Times staff reporter

The owners of a small Rainier Valley auto-glass shop keep four shelves stocked with the paint they use to cover the graffiti that frequently appears outside the store.

The building gets tagged all the time, complained Annie Zhang and Gordon Situ of Golden Auto Glass. They go out and paint over the symbols to keep up the neighborhood's appearance, only to get hit again.

"Sometimes next day," Situ said. "Sometimes next week."

Faced with an increasing wave of graffiti, much of it gang-related, many Seattle-area cities are welcoming a new law that specifically makes gang-related graffiti a crime and allows property owners to recover civil penalties and costs. Police and other officials said they have seen an increase in gang-related violence and graffiti over the past year.

"We do have a problem with graffiti," said Seattle City Councilman Tim Burgess. "In the first quarter of 2008, it was up 33 percent in Seattle parks compared to the first quarter of '07."

The graffiti measure is a small part of a larger anti-street-gang state law, House Bill 2712, signed in March, which goes into effect today.

Police and prosecutors said the larger law's primary purpose is to officially define "street gangs" and their members and create a statewide database for information on gangs.

The new law also provides funding to the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs which will be allocated to local police to combat street-gang activity and deal with gang-related graffiti.

"Gang graffiti is of a much different thing than just tagging." said Lt. Ronald Wilson, commander of the Seattle Police Department's gang and robbery units.

"It's used to mark territory, intimidate, make threats and send messages to rival gangs. It's much more destructive than just property damage."

While tagging has been prosecutable as malicious mischief under the old law, the new law means those convicted of gang graffiti could be forced to pay a penalty in addition to damages.

Tom McBride, the executive secretary for the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, said he doesn't expect the new measure to alter much in the criminal courts in terms of graffiti prosecution.

The new law, however, will allow prosecutors to seek longer prison sentences for people convicted of gang-related felonies.

The new law defines a "criminal street gang" as "any ongoing organization, association or group of three or more persons, whether formal or informal, having a common name or common identifying sign or symbol, having as one of its primary activities the commission of criminal acts, and whose members or associates individually or collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal street-gang activity."

Annie Zhang said she doesn't really expect to reap any benefits from the new law. She doesn't know if the graffiti her husband paints over is gang-related or not. And she doesn't think the government is going to end up paying for it.

All she knows is that she's already lost time, effort and gas money to the fight.

"We don't want the money, we just want them to stop. It's a waste," she said.

Christine Clarridge: 206-464-8983 or cclarridge@seattletimes.com

Millions of contract employees to be vetted for legal employment status

Millions of contract employees to be
vetted for legal employment status

By Robert Brodsky rbrodsky@govexec.com

Federal contractors will be required to vet nearly 4 million current and future employees through an online government database to verify their legal working status, under a proposed rule published last week in the Federal Register.

The Federal Acquisition Regulation notice, however, does not resolve questions about how the government will oversee the system or punish companies that fail to fire illegal immigrants.

President Bush issued an executive order on June 9 requiring that, as a condition of all future federal contracts, companies must agree to use E-Verify, an electronic employment eligibility verification system. The program currently is voluntary for private sector companies but mandatory for federal agencies.

The rule would apply to all future contract employees and existing employees once they begin working on new contracts. Current indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts would be amended so the rule applies to all future task orders.

The rule also applies to federal subcontractors.

In its initial year, the government expects nearly 170,000 contractors and subcontractors will enroll in the system, verifying the status of roughly 3.8 million employees. The program is expected to cost contractors more than $100 million in the first year and between $550 million and nearly $670 million during the next 10 years. The cost to the government would be significantly less, an estimated $8.2 million during the next decade.

The rule exempts employees working on contracts performed outside of the United States, those hired before Nov. 6, 1986, contracts valued at less than $3,000, and subcontracts for materials only for commercially available products.

"E-Verify, working with these other agencies, is going to give these contractors the tools they need to make sure that workers who were hired to work on federal contracts are legal workers," said Michael Chertoff, secretary of the Homeland Security Department, which administers the system, at a press conference last week. "It is always embarrassing, frankly, when we have these periodic operations in which we discover illegal workers working on federal projects paid for by federal money that is ultimately paid for by the taxpayer."

The proposed rule inserts a clause into all future government contracts requiring companies to verify the status of their new and existing hires through E-Verify within 30 days of the contract award.

"Contractors that use E-Verify to confirm the employment eligibility of their workforce are much less likely to face immigration enforcement actions, and are generally more efficient and dependable procurement sources than contractors that do not use that system to verify the work eligibility of their workforce," the notice stated.

In an attempt to reduce potential identity theft, workers will be required to supply their employers with both a Social Security number and photo identification. The contractor will put that information into the E-Verify system, which will tell the employer immediately if the worker is legally allowed to work in the country.

If the database is unable to confirm the employee's status, the worker will receive a "tentative nonconfirmation" notice and have eight days to settle the issue at a Social Security Administration office. If the worker fails to contest the finding or is unable to furnish proof of legal status, the employee must be fired, the rule states.

About 6 percent of employees vetted through E-Verify receive a tentative nonconfirmation letter requiring further action, said DHS spokeswoman Amy Kudwa. The majority choose not to contest the findings.

Companies that do not terminate the employment of nonverified workers face a fine of $500 to $1,000, the rule states. Contractors that break the rule, however, would not necessarily lose their contracts or face suspension or debarment.

"Suspension and debarment are really serious matters," Kudwa said. "These sanctions will occur only when it's in the public's interest."

The Federal Acquisition Regulation already provides federal officials with the authority to terminate a contract or to recommend suspension or debarment proceedings for companies that knowingly hire illegal workers.

And while contractors must agree to participate in E-Verify, there does not appear to be a system in place to confirm after the fact that they have done so.

Alan Chvotkin, vice-president of the Professional Services Council, a contractor trade group, suspects that federal watchdogs will conduct spot checks and perform periodic system reviews to verify that companies are complying with the rule. But he admits that it would be virtually impossible to audit every company's compliance.

"There's an element of truthfulness to it," Chvotkin said. "But we don't audit contractors' tax compliance. We don't presume that they have violated the rules."

Critics also have raised concerns about the reliability of E-Verify data. In December 2006, SSA's inspector general found that the database had an error rate of 4.1 percent.

Chertoff indicated last week that glitches in the system had been fixed, noting that the current error rate was down to 0.5 percent.

More than 69,000 companies currently use E-Verify, and the number of registered employers is growing by an average of more than 1,000 per week, DHS officials said.

Hoo-ah: The 50-State Strategy to Sell Cyber Command

The 50-State Strategy
to Sell Cyber Command
BY BOB BREWN, BBREWIN@GOVEXEC.COM

One way to secure the Hill's backing -- and bucks -- for any new program is to spread it over as many states and congressional districts as possible. The new Air Force Cyber Command takes this approach to its ultimate limit: The service plans a cyber unit in every state, according to a briefing given in April by Maj. Gen. William Lord, the Cyber Command chief. The briefing was sent to me by a source who chooses to remain anonymous.

The very crowded slide of the 50 states that Lord presented at the Scope Warrior Spring Symposium, a gathering of top Air Force communications and information technology folks, looks like a bit of cyber-rebranding of the service's existing IT functions.

The majority of the sites, which will come under the Cyber Command umbrella, are designated as so-called network operations, a fancy way to describe the circuits and connections that already exist to serve those bases. While this is just putting a new name on old operations, it helps to include all 50 states in the count, which then bolsters the sales job.

The real centers of power, in what Lord called in his slides “AF Distributed Cyber Enterprise,” are eight bases located in the East, Midwest and South:

Networked Computer Operations:
Bolling Air Force Base, Washington

Theater Operations Integration:
Langley Air Force Base, Va.

Information Systems:
Rome Laboratory, N.Y.

Cyber Operations Integration:
Barksdale Air Force, La.

Information Operations:
Lackland Air Force Base, Texas

Space Operations Integration:
Peterson Air Force Base, Colo.

Global Operations Integration:
Offutt Air Force Base, Neb.

Global Networks:
Scott Air Force Base, Ill.

Then there’s the command's new headquarters, which has sparked a sweepstakes that at least 18 states have entered. The Air Force plans to announce in September 2009 its decision on where to locate the headquarters.

I guess the consolation prize will be one of the smaller, rebranded cyber units the command has decided to sprinkle around the country.

It’s About Network Attack

During the past year, the Air Force has made it clear that the primary focus of the new Cyber Command will be the ability to attack an enemy’s networks, and Lord’s presentation reinforces this point.

In a slide under the heading of "Global Power," network and electronic attack capabilities take precedence over cyber deterrence. Lord emphasized that the command’s mission is to “provide robust, survivable access to cyberspace, with offensive and defensive capabilities.”

I'm hopeful that the Cyber Command can work out a way to conduct these attack missions without knocking out the 6 million Web pages linked to Paris Hilton and the 2 million or so Web pages dedicated to tracking the ups and downs of Britney Spears.

New Jobs, New Slogan, New Badge

It’s hard to have a cyber command without cyber warriors. To that end, Lord disclosed that the Air Force plans to develop a cyber career field for officer, enlisted and civilian personnel that will subsume venerable specialties in the communications and electronics field under the new cyber brand.

Lord also floated what could be a new slogan for the Cyber Command: "Transforming Warfare . . . Byte By Byte." I love it. It's punchy, to the point and better than a mission statement.

But you can’t set up a new command without a new badge, and Lord unveiled the cyber operator badge, which has what looks like four satellite orbits spaced evenly around the globe on what is the original Air Force badge.

Blogs4Borders! June 16, 2008

Hat Tip to MJ and Jake @ Freedom Folks
Assimilation blues: why are la Raza and several other Hispanic groups so afraid of scrutiny toward the Hispanic community? We investigate.

100% Preventable! Americans continue to pay the bloody price for open borders! When will the madness end?

And, Who are the people in your neighborhood? Globalists, open border freaks and diversophiles insist that we are enriched by other cultures. But is this always true? We take a look.

American Minute - Jun. 16 - Father of the American Space Program

American Minute
with Bill Federer

The father of the American space program died JUNE 16, 1977.

He developed the V-2 rocket for Germany before emigrating to the US, where in 1958, he launched America's first satellite.

He was director of NASA and the U.S. guided missile program.

His name was Wernher von Braun.

Founder of the National Space Institute, Wernher von Braun stated:

"The laws of nature that enable us to fly to the Moon also enable us to destroy our home planet with the atom bomb. Science itself does not address the question whether we should use the power at our disposal for good or for evil.

The guidelines of what we ought to do are furnished in the moral law of God."

Wernher von Braun continued:

"It is no longer enough that we pray that God may be with us on our side. We must learn to pray that we may be on God's side."

To the California State Board of Education, September 14, 1972, Wernher von Braun wrote:

"Some...challenge science to prove the existence of God. But must we light a candle to see the sun?"

In American Weekly, February 10, 1963, Wernher von Braun wrote:

"It is difficult for me to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe...

Viewing the awesome reaches of space...should only confirm our belief in the certainty of its Creator."

(Nashville) Effort to make English official language revived

Effort to make English official language revived
Petition drive is under way to get issue on ballot
BY JANELL ROSS • STAFF WRITER

The movement to make English Nashville's official language is alive again, 14 months after a mayoral veto ended the last effort.

This time, a group identified only as NashvilleEnglishFirst.com has begun to circulate a postcard-based petition drive to place an "English only" measure on the Nov. 4 ballot. The measure would alter the Metro charter, make English Metro's official language and limit all government business, publications and meetings to the English language unless such measures would violate federal or state law.

Its proponents must collect the signatures of 10,103 registered voters by Aug. 16 to make the November ballot.

Councilman Eric Crafton, who represents District 22, is a driving force behind the new petition drive, said Ray Barrett, Davidson County's elections administrator.

Crafton sponsored a bill, approved in February 2007, that called for the English language to be used exclusively on all Metro government voice mail systems, publications and "communications," unless required by federal law or a matter of public health or safety. The latest version doesn't include a health and safety exception.

Six days after the Metro council voted in favor of the bill, Metro's legal department said courts probably would find that the measure violated the Tennessee and U.S. constitutions. That day, Mayor Bill Purcell took the rare step of vetoing the bill and declared, "This is not who we are."

"I, along with a lot of citizens, felt their voice was thwarted" when Purcell vetoed the bill, Crafton said Thursday. "We've had a lot of people asking what we can do. This seems like the best solution."

Should the proposed Metro charter amendment make it onto the ballot and then become law, it could represent a violation of the First and 14th Amendments — the ones guaranteeing free speech and equal protection under the law — said Hedy Weinberg, American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee's executive director.

"Does this mean you can't dial 911 and tell the operator in some other language about a crime that you fear is taking place next door, or in your own home?" said Weinberg, "These policies don't celebrate the cultural pluralism that makes this city so special. They try to crush it."

Mayor Is Concerned

Mayor Karl Dean, Purcell's successor, said in a statement Thursday the city has an obligation to protect and serve residents without regard to the language they speak.

Dean plans to ask Metro's legal department to review the proposed charter amendment but said he saw no substantial differences between it and last year's bill. Dean expressed concern about what the proposed charter amendment would do to the city's image.

"We live in a global economy, and the image we want to project of Nashville to the rest of the world is that we're a welcoming and open city," he said.

Advocates of last year's measure described it as an attempt to en courage immigrants to learn and use English. If it weren't possible to conduct official business in another language, they argued, people would improve and use their English language skills.

But Renata Soto, co-founder of Conexion Americas, a Nashville nonprofit that works with Latino families, said demand for English language courses already far outstrips the supply.

Last year, the debate about making English the official language in Nashville drew worldwide attention. Several news stories marveled that a city where 11.4 percent of the population is foreign-born, according to 2006 U.S. Census figures, would consider such a measure and described it as an outgrowth of anti- immigrant fervor.

Contact Janell Ross at 726-5982 or jross1@tennessean.com.

Ireland delivers stunning blow to Europe's Master

Irish voters reject EU treat
By Sarah Lyall and Stephen Castle

Europe was thrown into political chaos Friday by Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, a painstakingly negotiated blueprint for consolidating the European Union's power and streamlining its increasingly unwieldy bureaucracy.

The defeat of the treaty, by a vote of 53.4 percent to 46.6 percent, was the result of a highly organized campaign that played to Irish voters' deepest fears about the EU. For all its benefits, many people feel, the Union is remote, undemocratic and ever more inclined to strip its smaller members of the right to make their own laws and decide their own futures.

Although the Irish are less than 1 percent of the EU population of almost 500 million, the repercussions of the vote Thursday - whose results were announced Friday - are enormous. To take effect, the treaty must be ratified by all 27 members of the EU. So the defeat by a single country, even one as tiny as Ireland, has the potential effect of stopping the whole thing cold.

Reacting with frustration Friday, other European countries said they would try to press ahead for a plan to make the Lisbon Treaty work after all and would discuss the matter when EU leaders gathered for a summit meeting in Brussels next week.

But if they fail, the Union will have to find some other way of adjusting institutionally to the addition of 12 new members since 2004, a rapid growth that the treaty was designed to address.

It will also have to come to terms with the unpleasant reality that, as important as the Union is to their daily lives, many ordinary Europeans still feel alienated from it and confused by how it works.

"Europe as an idea does not provoke passionate support among ordinary citizens," said Denis MacShane, a Labour member of the British Parliament and a former minister for Europe.

"They see a bossy Brussels, and when they have the chance of a referendum in France, the Netherlands or Ireland to give their government and Europe a kick, they put the boot in," he added in an interview, referring to the French and Dutch rejections of a proposed European constitution in similar referendums three years ago.

The Lisbon Treaty, dense and complex, was the response to those French and Dutch defeats. If enacted, it would give Europe its first full-time president and create a new foreign policy chief who, among other things, would control EU development aid.

The treaty would also reduce the number of members on the European Commission, the EU's executive body, rotating the seats so that each member country would sit on the commission 10 out of every 15 years. It would change the voting procedures so that fewer decisions would require majority votes.

Ireland is the only country voting on the treaty in a referendum, as it is required by law to do; the other 26 countries are considering it through their legislatures and executives.

In Ireland, the failure of the referendum was a crushing blow to most of the Irish establishment, including the major political parties and most business groups, which had worked for a yes vote.

But campaigners for a no vote mobilized under the efficient leadership of Declan Ganley, a businessman who argued that the treaty took power away from Ireland.

Ganley, who formed the group Libertas to campaign against the treaty, said that the vote would force the Irish prime minister, Brian Cowen, to renegotiate the treaty and secure a "better deal."

"We want a Europe that is more democratic, and that if there is to be a president and a foreign affairs minister, they should be elected," he said in an interview.

Libertas and other opponents of the treaty capitalized on voters' confusion, their disillusionment with the government and their feelings of alienation from the institutions of Europe, which is the source of about 85 percent of the new laws passed in Europe every year, said Michael Bruter, a senior lecturer in political science at the London School of Economics.

"It's a pro-European country, but they didn't understand the treaty - why it was needed, what it was going to change," Bruter said, speaking of the Irish voters. "They just don't want to give Europe a blank check anymore."

Kick-started by Europe, which poured in billions of dollars beginning in the late 1980s, Ireland was able to transform itself from an insular, impoverished agrarian society to a European powerhouse with an enticingly low corporate tax rate and some of the world's largest pharmaceutical plants. But, having been the beneficiary of European money for years, Ireland now finds itself having to help finance the newer, and poorer, countries that have recently joined the Union.

Time Warner Cable, Comcast and ATT to Curb Internet Traffic

NYTimes.com

Charging by the Byte to Curb Internet Traffic

Some people use the Internet simply to check e-mail and look up phone numbers. Others are online all day, downloading big video and music files.

For years, both kinds of Web surfers have paid the same price for access. But now three of the country’s largest Internet service providers are threatening to clamp down on their most active subscribers by placing monthly limits on their online activity.

One of them, Time Warner Cable, began a trial of “Internet metering” in one Texas city early this month, asking customers to select a monthly plan and pay surcharges when they exceed their bandwidth limit. The idea is that people who use the network more heavily should pay more, the way they do for water, electricity, or, in many cases, cellphone minutes.

That same week, Comcast said that it would expand on a strategy it uses to manage Internet traffic: slowing down the connections of the heaviest users, so-called bandwidth hogs, at peak times.

AT&T also said Thursday that limits on heavy use were inevitable and that it was considering pricing based on data volume. “Based on current trends, total bandwidth in the AT&T network will increase by four times over the next three years,” the company said in a statement.

All three companies say that placing caps on broadband use will ensure fair access for all users.

Internet metering is a throwback to the days of dial-up service, but at a time when video and interactive games are becoming popular, the experiments could have huge implications for the future of the Web.

Millions of people are moving online to watch movies and television shows, play multiplayer video games and talk over videoconference with family and friends. And media companies are trying to get people to spend more time online: the Disneys and NBCs of the world keep adding television shows and movies to their Web sites, giving consumers convenient entertainment that soaks up a lot of bandwidth.

Moreover, companies with physical storefronts, like Blockbuster, are moving toward digital delivery of entertainment. And new distributors of online content — think YouTube — are relying on an open data spigot to make their business plans work.

Critics of the bandwidth limits say that metering and capping network use could hold back the inevitable convergence of television, computers and the Internet.

The Internet “is how we deliver our shows,” said Jim Louderback, chief executive of Revision3, a three-year-old media company that runs what it calls a television network on the Web. “If all of a sudden our viewers are worried about some sort of a broadband cap, they may think twice about downloading or watching our shows.”

Even if the caps are far above the average users’ consumption, their mere existence could cause users to reduce their time online. Just ask people who carefully monitor their monthly allotments of cellphone minutes and text messages.

“As soon as you put serious uncertainty as to cost on the table, people’s feeling of freedom to predict cost dries up and so does innovation and trying new applications,” Vint Cerf, the chief Internet evangelist for Google who is often called the “father of the Internet,” said in an e-mail message.

But the companies imposing the caps say that their actions are only fair. People who use more network capacity should pay more, Time Warner argues. And Comcast says that people who use too much — like those who engage in file-sharing — should be forced to slow down.

Time Warner also frames the issue in financial terms: the broadband infrastructure needs to be improved, it says, and maybe metering could pay for the upgrades. So far its trial is limited to new subscribers in Beaumont, Tex., a city of roughly 110,000.

In that trial, new customers can buy plans with a 5-gigabyte cap, a 20-gigabyte cap or a 40-gigabyte cap. Prices for those plans range from $30 to $50. Above the cap, customers pay $1 a gigabyte. Plans with higher caps come with faster service.

“Average customers are way below the caps,” said Kevin Leddy, executive vice president for advanced technology at Time Warner Cable. “These caps give them years’ worth of growth before they’d ever pay any surcharges.”

Casual Internet users who merely send e-mail messages, check movie times and read the news are not likely to exceed the caps. But people who watch television shows on Hulu.com, rent movies on iTunes or play the multiplayer game Halo on Xbox may start to exceed the limits — and millions of people are already doing those things.

Streaming an hour of video on Hulu, which shows programs like “Saturday Night Live,” “Family Guy” and “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart,” consumes about 200 megabytes, or one-fifth of a gigabyte. A higher-quality hour of the same content bought through Apple’s iTunes store can use about 500 megabytes, or half a gigabyte.

A high-definition episode of “Survivor” on CBS.com can use up to a gigabyte, and a DVD-quality movie through Netflix’s new online service can eat up about five gigabytes. One Netflix download alone, in fact, could bring a user to the limit on the cheapest plan in Time Warner’s trial in Beaumont.

Even services like Skype and Vonage that use the Internet to transmit phone calls could help put users over the monthly limits.

Time Warner would not reveal how many gigabytes an average customer uses, saying only that 95 percent of customers use under 40 gigabytes each in a month.

That means that 5 percent of customers use more than 50 percent of the network’s overall capacity, the company said, and many of those people are assumed to be sharing copyrighted video and music files illegally.

The Time Warner plan has the potential to bring Internet use full circle, back to the days when pay-as-you-go pricing held back the Web’s popularity. In the early days of dial-up access, America Online and other providers offered tiered pricing, in part because audio and video were barely viable online. Consumers feared going over their allotted time and bristled at the idea that access to cyberspace was billed by the hour.

In 1996, when AOL started offering unlimited access plans, Internet use took off and the online world started moving to the center of people’s daily lives. Today most Internet packages provide a seemingly unlimited amount of capacity, at least from the consumer’s perspective.

But like water and electricity, even digital resources are finite. Last year Comcast disclosed that it was temporarily turning off the connections of customers who used file-sharing services like BitTorrent, arguing that they were slowing things down for everyone else. The people who got cut off complained and asked how much broadband use was too much; the company did not have a ready answer.

Thus, like Time Warner, Comcast is considering a form of Internet metering that would apply to all online activity.

The goal, says Mitch Bowling, a senior vice president at Comcast, is “ensuring that a small number of users don’t impact the experience for everyone else.”

Last year Comcast was sued when it was disclosed that the company had singled out BitTorrent users.

In February, Comcast departed from that approach and started collaborating with the company that runs BitTorrent. Now it has shifted to what it calls a “platform agnostic” approach to managing its network, meaning that it slows down the connection of any customer who uses too much bandwidth at congested times.

Mr. Bowling said that “typical Internet usage” would not be affected. But on the Internet, “typical” use is constantly being redefined.

“The definitions of low and high usage today are meaningless, because the Internet’s going to grow, and nothing’s going to stop that,” said Eric Klinker, the chief technology officer of BitTorrent.

As the technology company Cisco put it in a recent report, “today’s ‘bandwidth hog’ is tomorrow’s average user.”

One result of these experiments is a tug-of-war between the Internet providers and media companies, which are monitoring the Time Warner experiment with trepidation.

“We hate it,” said a senior executive at a major media company, who requested anonymity because his company, like all broadcasters, must play nice with the same cable operators that are imposing the limits. Now that some television shows are viewed millions of times online, the executive said, any impediment would hurt the advertising model for online video streaming.

Mr. Leddy of Time Warner said that the media companies’ fears were overblown. If the company were to try to stop Web video, “we would not succeed,” he said. “We know how much capacity they’re going to need in the future, and we know what it’s going to cost. And today’s business model doesn’t pay for it very well.”

Cyberattack Gets Worse

Many U.S. legislators have complained that their computers were infected by eavesdropping software inserted by hackers traced back to China.

There was a similar flap over two years ago. Back then, there was enough proof to know that China was behind the increasing number of Internet based attacks, but not enough to call China out on it.

This all began about eight years ago, with an increasing number of very well executed Internet attacks hitting U.S. government (especially Department of Defense) computers. Analysis of these attacks indicated that the hackers appeared to be coming from China. At first, it was thought to be adventurous computer science students, or criminals out to steal something they could sell.

Then, in 2003, came the "Titan Rain" incident. This was a massive and well organized attack on American military networks. The people carrying out the attack really knew what they were doing, and thousands of military and industrial documents were sent back to China. The attackers were not able to cover their trail completely, and some of the attackers were traced back to a Chinese government facility in southern China. The Chinese government denied all, and the vast amounts of technical data American researchers had as proof was not considered compelling enough for the event to be turned into a major media or diplomatic episode.

In the wake of Titan Rain, governments around the world began to improve their Internet security. But not enough. The attacks kept coming. Out of China. And the attackers were getting better. In 2005, a well organized attack was made on the networks of the British parliament. This time, the defense won the battle. Mostly. The carefully prepared emails (with virus attached), would have fooled many recipients, because they were personalized, and this helped prevent network defenses from detecting the true nature of these messages. These targeted emails from hackers were very successful. If the recipient tried to open the attached file, their computer who have hacking software secretly installed. This software would basically give the hacker control of that PC, making it possible to monitor what the user does on the computer, and have access to whatever is on that machine.

While many recipients sense that the "spear fishing" (or "phishing") attack is just that, some don't, and it only takes a few compromised PCs to give someone access to a lot of secret information. This would be the case even if it is home PCs that are being infected. The recent complaints from American legislators is all about that, as they have discovered office and personal PCs of themselves and their staffers infected.

But many other attacks are only discovered when they are over, or nearly so. The attackers are very well prepared, and usually first make probes and trial run attacks on target systems. When the attackers come in force, they don't want to be interrupted. And usually they aren't. The Chinese attackers use techniques similar to those employed by criminal gangs trying to get into banks, brokerages and big businesses in general. Thus it is believed that the Chinese hackers try, as much as possible, to appear like just another gang of cyber criminals. But the Chinese have certain traits that appear more military than gangster.

The Chinese cyber army keeps getting better, and that includes covering their tracks. It may take a defector or three to make it definite that China is waging a stealthy war over the Internet. Meanwhile, the Chinese reap enormous economic and political benefits from their raids on economic and technical secrets in the West.

American Minute - Jun. 15 - Richard the Lionheart, King John & The Magna Carta

American Minute
with Bill Federer

The Legend of Robin Hood speaks of Richard the Lionheart, so named for his courage in leading the Third Crusade in 1190AD to win back Jerusalem from the Muslims.

Jerusalem had been taken from Byzantine Christian and Jewish inhabitants by Caliph Umar's bloody siege in 638AD.

Though he did not retake Jerusalem, Richard made a truce with Saladin in 1192 AD for safe passage religious pilgrims.

When approximately 15,000 inhabitants of Jerusalem could not afford ransome, Saladin sold them into slavery.

On Richard's return trip to England, he was captured by rival Duke Leopold of Austria, and spent three years in prison.

Legend has it Richard's loyal minstrel, Blondel, traveled from kingdom to kingdom, singing Richard's favorite song and heard Richard sing the second verse from the prison tower.

Freed by an enormous "king's ransom," Richard returned to England and took back the throne from his brother John.

Five years later Richard died in battle and John ruled oppressively in England.

The angry barons captured London and, on JUNE 15, 1215, surrounded King John on the plains of Runnymeade, forcing him to sign the Magna Carta.

This was the first time in history the arbitrary powers of a king were limited.

The Magna Carta ends: "for the salvation of our souls, and the souls of all our...heirs, and unto the honor of God."

HILLARYHILLARY SUPPORTER DEMOCRATS STOLE NOMINATION FROM HILLARY

Hat Tip to my buddy Michael aka ConservativeVoiceUSA ConservativeVoiceUSA was at the John McCain Town Hall Meeting at Burlington County College in Pemberton, NJ. June 13th 2008. The place was packed and the croud was fired up.

ConservativeVoiceUSA have not seen a NJ croud like this for a republican presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan. Something is cooking folks.

ConservativeVoiceUSA personally know about 2 dozen democrats here in NJ that will not vote for Obama. Half of them are also going to vote for the repulican candidate Dick Zimmer in the NJ senate race. We can pick up a seat here in NJ. There is alot of hate for Obama. I also am seeing the same in Pa.

ConservativeVoiceUSA will be post more footage I got of the town hall.

American Minute - Jun. 14 - Flag Day

American Minute
with Bill Federer

Thirteen Stars and Thirteen Stripes.

It was on JUNE 14, 1777, that the Second Continental Congress selected the Flag of the United States.

In 1916, Woodrow Wilson signed the Proclamation making JUNE 14 "National Flag Day."

On Flag Day, 1942, Franklin D. Roosevelt stated:

"The belief in man, created free, in the image of God-is the crucial difference between ourselves and the enemies we face...God of the free...grant us victory over the tyrants who would enslave all free men."

On JUNE 14, 1954, Dwight Eisenhower signed Joint Resolution (Public Law 396) adding the phrase "One Nation Under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

Eisenhower stated:

"From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural school house, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty.

To anyone who truly loves America, nothing could be more inspiring than...this rededication of our youth, on each school morning, to our country's true meaning."

President Eisenhower ended:

"In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource, in peace or in war."

Arizona Legislature Says No to Real ID

Arizona Legislature
Says No to Real ID

6/13/2008

Arizona legislature votes by overwhelming margin to oppose federal efforts to turn driving licenses into a national ID card.

The Arizona state legislature has made it quite clear that it wants nothing to do with the federal Real ID drivers' license plan. Lawmakers on Wednesday sent a bill to the governor prohibiting the state from implementing the proposed national ID card program. The legislation had sailed through the state House on a 51-1 vote after clearing the state Senate last month by a 21-7 vote.

The federal Real ID Act was designed to force states to use their drivers' licenses to create a form of national identity card. The Department of Homeland Security has threatened to deny access to airline travel to residents from states that fail to adopt the national ID standards. Arizona lawmakers took issue with this and included a provision that requires state officials to report any attempts at coercion by DHS employees over Real ID.

It is uncertain whether Governor Janet Napolitano (D) will sign the bill. Last year, Napolitano moved to create a driver's license that complies with Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative standards as a precursor to compliance with Real ID.

"Arizona has been a leader among the states on issues related to border security and immigration," Napolitano said in a 2007 statement. "My hope is that this project will lead to an effective permanent program that can be implemented nationwide."

DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff praised Napolitano's initiative.

"I applaud the leadership of the state of Arizona who came forward to join us in our effort to bolster security through secure identification," Chertoff said. "This partnership helps us strike the right balance between security and facilitation, incorporating 21st century technology and innovation."

The legislature passed the Real ID ban by a margin sufficient to override a veto attempt by the governor.


Text of legislation --

State of Arizona
House of Representatives
Forty-eighth Legislature
Second Regular Session 2008

HOUSE BILL 2677

AN ACT amending title 28, chapter 2, article 2, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding section 28-336; relating to the REAL ID Act of 2005.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Title 28, chapter 2, article 2, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 28-336, to read:

28-336. REAL ID act; implementation prohibited

This state shall not participate in the implementation of the REAL ID act of 2005 (P.L. 109-13, Division B; 119 Stat. 302). The department shall not implement the REAL ID act of 2005 and shall report to the governor and the legislature any attempt by agencies or agents of the United States DEPARTMENT of homeland security to secure the implementation of the REAL ID act of 2005 through the operations of the United States department of homeland security.

Deadline Approaching to Enroll Students in State's College Tuition Assistance Program

The deadline for parents to enroll their children into the state's college tuition assistance program is fast approaching, prompting state

The deadline for eighth, ninth and tenth-grade students to enroll in Oklahoma's Promise, formerly known as the Oklahoma Higher Access Learning Program (OHLAP), is June 30.

The program will pay for a student's education in any state college or university provided the student meets certain financial, educational and character requirements.

To be eligible, a student's family income must be less than $50,000 at the time of enrollment. In addition, each student must enroll in and maintain a 2.5 cumulative GPA in certain courses in high school, maintain a 2.5 cumulative GPA throughout college, attend class regularly and avoid legal trouble.

Students who commit crimes or are suspended from school or college could lose their eligibility.

Families interested in learning more about the eligibility requirements of Oklahoma's Promise or downloading an application can visit www.okhighered.org/okpromise/ online or call the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education at 1-800-858-1848.

Murphy Candidacy Challenge Delayed To Monday

Hat Tip to Mike @ The McCarville Report Online

Chaos At The Election Board; Murphy Candidacy Challenge Delayed To Monday
The Election Board today postponed hearing a challenge to Republican Corporation Commission candidate Dana Murphy after two members of the three-member board recused themselves.

Board members Tom Prince of Edmond and Ramon Watkins of Tulsa each stepped aside Friday from hearing the challenge against Corporation Commission candidate Dana Murphy. They did not give a reason for recusing themselves from the case.

Election Board Secretary Mike Clingman said Governor Henry will appoint two interim members to hear the case with the remaining board member, Susan Turpen of Oklahoma City.

The hearing now is scheduled for Monday morning. The challenge was filed by Rep. Rob Johnson of Kingfisher, who opposes Murphy for the Republican nomination for the two-year, unexpired term on the Corporation Commission now held by Democrat Jim Roth.
Johnson claims that Murphy altered a notarized document by signing her name differently than it appeared on her filing declaration of candidacy form. A video of the filing shows Election Board Secretary Mike Clingman advising Murphy to do so, and marking through one signature after she added a second signature.

Do You know this Guy ?

Hat Tip to Mike @ The McCarville Report Online
Authorities on Friday released a sketch of a “person of interest” in the slayings of two Weleetka girls.

Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation spokeswoman Jessica Brown said that several witnesses had come forward to report they had heard shots in the area and one reporting seeing a man standing outside a pickup truck at the time of the slayings.

The person of interest was described as an American Indian or mixed race male, who is about 35 years old and stands about 6 feet tall. He was driving a white pickup that was either a Ford or Chevrolet.

(Arizona) Opinion - Napolitano should oppose Real IDs, keep government out of residents' lives

Napolitano should oppose Real IDs, keep government out of residents' lives
June 12, 2008

The Arizona House of Representatives has joined the State Senate in making it clear it wants nothing to do with the federal government Real ID program.

It is a decision that is welcomed by privacy advocates and those of us concerned about the continuing power grabs by the federal government in the name of security.

The near unanimous vote Tuesday to approve HB 2677 was essentially a rejection of the idea of a national identification card that would be achieved by co-opting state driver's licenses.

The law would prevent Gov. Janet Napolitano from fulfilling an agreement she reached with the Department of Homeland Security to provide an alternative to the Real ID. The federal government wants state to produce tamperproof driver's licenses. The governor agreed to create a "3-in-1" license for Arizona residents that could be used for driving, as proof of citizenship and for border crossing instead of a passport. However, that requires legislative approval.

Lawmakers say the "3-in-1" license is just a temporary delay to the Real ID requirement, which Homeland officials said all states would eventually have to meet. Instead of an alternative, they want the state to say no to the Real ID, as nine other states have done.

The hope is that if enough states resist, the federal government will back down. Homeland Security has already delayed implementation of Real IDs - which would include links to individual private information in a federal database - from last month until the end of 2009.

Americans have long viewed the ability to travel within our borders without government interference or monitoring as a basic right. Driver's licenses were intended only to offer proof of driving ability, not as an identification.

Unfortunately, the misuse of driver's licenses for ID purposes has grown over the years. But that does not justify even further and more extensive violation of Americans' privacy by transforming it into a national ID card.

That is especially true because the licenses, if embedded with electronic chips, could be used to monitor and track the activities of Americans without their knowledge. Their private information would also be stored in a national database, putting it at the fingertips of federal officials and others who might breach security.

Whether the governor will go along with the Legislature's opposition to the IDs is not yet known. She should sign the law so the federal government will get the message that Arizona won't accept this intrusion into our private lives.

Hoo-ah: Air Force concedes mistakes in tanker cost estimates

The Air Force has conceded that Boeing Co.'s proposed KC-767 aerial refueling tanker would cost less over time than the winning plane offered by Northrop Grumman Corp and its European subcontractor EADS, Boeing told auditors reviewing its protest against the Air Force decision, Reuters reported.

News of Air Force errors in calculating the life cycle costs of the competing bids, which were also confirmed by Northrop, comes as the GAO prepares to rule by June 19 on the Boeing protest.

In a 191-page document filed with the GAO, Boeing said mistakes in calculating the life cycle costs of the airplanes raised questions about the thoroughness and credibility of the Air Force's overall evaluation.

But Northrop downplayed the impact of the Air Force error, saying life cycle costs were just one part of the Air Force evaluation. The final decision was based on the capabilities of its KC-30 tanker, not cost alone, Northrop officials said.

The Air Force declined comment.

American Minute - Jun. 13 - Marquis de Lafayette

American Minute
with Bill Federer

19-year-old Marquis de Lafayette purchased a ship and sailed to America, arriving JUNE 13, 1777.

Trained in the French Military, he was appointed a major general.

Lafayette endured the freezing winter at Valley Forge, and fought at Brandywine, Barren Hill and Monmouth.

Lafayette led troops against the traitor Benedict Arnold and commanded at Yorktown, pressuring Cornwallis to surrender.

On May 10, 1786, George Washington wrote from Mount Vernon to Marquis de Lafayette:

"Your late purchase of an estate in the colony of Cayenne, with a view of emancipating the slaves on it, is a generous and noble proof of your humanity.

Would to God a like spirit would diffuse itself generally into the minds of the people of this country."

On August 15, 1787, in a letter from Philadelphia to the Marquis de Lafayette, George Washington wrote:

"I am not less ardent in my wish that you may succeed in your plan of toleration in religious matters.

Being no bigot myself to any mode of worship, I am disposed to indulge the professors of Christianity in the church with that road to Heaven which to them shall seem the most direct, plainest and easiest, and the least liable to exception.

Sunset On The Clinton Era

Sunset On The Clinton Era
By Christopher Adamo

Momentarily setting aside the tragic impact on America, should Barack Obama be elected president, it is nonetheless worthwhile to ponder the significance of Hillary Clinton’s announcement last Saturday that she is dropping out of the presidential race. To be precise, she is “suspending” her campaign which, considering the history of the Clinton dynasty, could indicate that in her mind, this contest is not yet settled.

Nevertheless, her announcement highlights an awareness on her part that, at least for the moment, she cannot succeed in a toe-to-toe contest against Obama. So despite the many ominous circumstances facing this country, heartland America can heave a collective sigh of relief. The nightmare of the Clinton epoch appears to be over. Indeed, Obama’s empty rhetoric about “change and hope” belies his intellectually vacant political philosophy. But in light of past experience with the Clintons and their reputation of promoting themselves at everyone else’s expense, almost any “change” would seem to portend an improvement.

From the moment she burst upon the national scene in 1992, Hillary Clinton displayed an understanding of the qualities necessary for political dominance in an environment where the law represents a mere obstacle to the aspirations and methods of the blindly ambitious. On more than one occasion during her Congressional testimonies, she all but challenged her inquisitors with her audacious “I do not recall” responses, mocking them and essentially daring them to resort to increase the heat in efforts to make her confess to wrongdoing.

As this facet of the Clinton scheme played out, the truth became completely irrelevant. Instead of matters being determined on the basis of facts, things degenerated into a battle of nerves which she knew she would win.

Clearly, she was the driving force behind the Clintonian strategy of flouting the law not only as a means of ensuring a particular end, but as a challenge to any who might take exception. In essence her actions announced “This is my plan. Interfere at your own risk.” Time and again, her method paid off handsomely. Few on the Republican side of the aisle had the resolve to stand against her. And as the impeachment debacle proved, those who attempted to do so were all too often undermined by fellow “Republicans.”

The most unfortunate aspect of the situation as it currently stands is that it took a Democrat to shatter Hillary’s concocted aura of invincibility. Midway through Bill Clinton’s second term, it became obvious that Hillary had her sights on the White House, and would stop at nothing to get there. Reacting to her telegraphed ambitions, much of the Republican Party has been running terrified ever since, essentially accepting the notion of her “invincibility,” and politicking on that basis, often at the expense of its own governing philosophies.

Throughout the final term of George W. Bush’s presidency, and particularly after the dismal 2006 midterm elections, much of the leadership of the GOP has been fixated only on one thing, how to prevail against the presumably unstoppable Hillary juggernaut. Had Republicans shown a bit more collective spine, and not let themselves be so intimidated by her now thoroughly discredited persona of political prowess, they might well have pursued a proactive agenda touting traditional conservative principles to much greater benefit for the nation as well as to their own political fortunes.

Even the field of Republican presidential candidates who ended up running, along with some whose names were floated for several years prior to the race, often reflected a myopic strategy of prevailing over Hillary’s “super candidate” persona instead of establishing a rallying point for real conservatives.

Among others, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was suggested, not for her leadership qualities or a conservative political philosophy that could resonate with the Republican grassroots, but merely on the basis that being a woman, she might somehow neutralize Hillary’s strongest (we were told) suit. In the process, Republicans forgot to formulate campaigns that truly embodied the winning Republican/conservative principles of smaller government, and support for the moral fabric of a healthy society that enables it to flourish and prosper without the intrusions of the nanny state.

Ironically, the entire air of Clintonian political radiance was, from the beginning, merely a media fabrication. Bill won his two presidential elections with less than half of the smallest voter turnout in nearly a century. And Hillary vaulted into the United States Senate merely as a result of Rudy Giuliani’s untimely bout with prostate cancer. Only a cowardly opposition would grant them political dominance under such circumstances. But, being the opportunists that they are, the Clintons recognized that such was precisely the nature of their Republican adversaries.

Many politicians lie, but the Clintons raised the behavior to an overt level previously unseen, even in Washington. Many politicians engage in shady dealings, but the Clintons flagrantly consorted with the Communist Chinese and their Indonesian surrogates, simply ignoring cries of outrage as literal bags of dirty money passed into their hands. And many politicians attempt to intimidate their opposition, but the Clintons did so by brazenly involving the FBI, IRS, and other federal agencies as they attempted to destroy any who stood in their way.

Washington, and indeed the nation, have been irreparably changed by the Clintons. The “hardball” politics of the past has given way to Congressional “debates” in which facts and truth are irrelevant. Conventions that recognized the need to stand unified against the threats of foreign adversaries have putrefied and degenerated to a level where in their quest for power the Democrats now voice overt sympathies towards America’s mortal enemies while castigating the U.S. military on specious and often totally contrived grounds.

So, despite the myriad of perils that the nation faces, it is nonetheless fitting that at this precipitous time, the Clintons are being unceremoniously expelled by the pitiless political monster they worked so feverishly to create.

About the author
Christopher Adamo is a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance

Legislature votes to opt Arizona out of Real ID program

Legislature votes to opt Arizona
out of Real ID program
The Associated Press

PHOENIX - Legislators on Wednesday sent Gov. Janet Napolitano a bill to make Arizona the latest state to refuse to implement new "Real ID" security standards mandated by the federal government for driver's licenses.

House approval of the bill (HB2677) on a 51-1 vote with no debate Wednesday completed legislative action on the bill. It was approved, 21-7, by the Senate on May 6.

What happens next with the bill is unclear because Napolitano hasn't indicated whether she'll sign or veto it.

The bill would have no immediate impact even if it becomes law because Arizona has already received a federal extension on Real ID compliance to 2009.

However, its passage is clearly trouble for Napolitano's own proposal for an enhanced "3-in-1" driver's license. She needs legislative authorization for that. A bill to provide that approval was introduced but not heard during the current session.

At least eight other states have enacted legislation refusing to implement the Real ID law, which was enacted in 2005 military spending legislation and proposed in response to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

It requires all states to bring their driver's licenses under a national standard and to link their record-keeping systems.

Implementation of the law would require the public to show Real ID-compliant driver's licenses or other identification in order to enter federal buildings or board airplanes.

While the Bush administration says the law will hinder terrorists, illegal immigrants and other wrongdoers, Real ID faces criticism from states and others because of the federal mandate, costs to states and privacy concerns.

The Arizona bill's sponsor, Republican Rep. Judy Burgess of Skull Valley, said it represents "a Real ID tea party at the statehouse."

Burges said she's particularly concerned that database connections could ease identity theft.

"What happens is the database would be shared clear across the United States and we would be subject to the weakest link in other states," she said.

States that have rejected the Real ID act, some with conditions, include Idaho, New Hampshire, Montana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Washington, Oklahoma and Maine. Minnesota's governor vetoed a prohibition bill on April 25.

The National Conference of State Legislatures' president, state Rep. Donna Stone of Delaware, told a U.S. Senate subcommittee in April that the Real ID law should be repealed and replaced with a negotiated rulemaking process that would include state lawmakers.

Napolitano on Dec. 6 signed an agreement with U.S. Homeland Security Michael Chertoff on development of an alternative 3-in-1 driver's license with enhanced security features that could also be used to cross borders and verify employment eligibility.

Key Arizona legislators vowed to fight the proposal, calling it a step toward compliance with Real ID and an infringement on the Legislature's policy-making role.

Napolitano calls the deal with Chertoff a realistic and appropriate means to do employment eligibility checks and meet tough new federal ID requirements to enter the United States from Canada and Mexico.

As described by Napolitano, Arizonans could either get the 3-in-1 license or the current license.

Rep. Bill Konopnicki, R-Safford, cast the only Arizona House vote against the bill on Wednesday, saying later that he favored authorization for the 3-in-1 license instead.

Real ID "could change dramatically next year - it has to," Konopnicki said. "But we have to be able to board airplanes."

Rep. Boren Copes With Red-State Blues

June 11, 2008
Rep. Boren Copes With Red-State Blues

Katherine Rizzo is the “Inside Congress” editor for Congressional Quarterly and CQPolitics.com, supervising coverage of congressional leaders; she’s also a former writer for the Associated Press. Click here for Rizzo’s full bio.

Oklahoma Congressman Dan Boren is like a gazelle in lion country.

Survival depends on knowing when to be nimble, when to be fast, and when to be invisible.

At the moment, Rep. Boren would like to be all three.

He is the lone Democrat in the state’s congressional delegation. His district voted for President Bush over Sen. John Kerry four years ago, and gave Sen. Hillary Clinton two-thirds of its votes in the presidential primary in February.

Up to now, he’s been pretty safe, winning his elections by wide margins. Mr. Boren has an effective fund-raising operation and more than $800,000 in campaign cash.

Just as important, Boren is a big name in Oklahoma. His dad, David L. Boren, was the state’s governor, served in the U.S. Senate for 16 years and now is the Head Sooner, the president of the University of Oklahoma.

But the father caused the son some discomfort when he signed up as an early supporter of Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential bid. Boren the elder doesn’t have to stand for election, so he can back anyone he wants without fear of retribution. Not so the son, whose job is on the line in a July 29 primary and then again in November.

Avoiding a Presidential Endorsement

The congressman is so skittish about how the voters in his district will view him that he never made a presidential endorsement. Even after Sen. Clinton carried his district, Mr. Boren remained officially uncommitted. And now that it’s clear who the Democratic Party’s nominee is going to be, Mr. Boren is still trying to stay as uncommitted as he can.

It’s red-state paranoia. And it’s not crazy.

To stay in step with his conservative district, Mr. Boren cannot be a party-line Democrat.

But to be effective in Washington, Mr. Boren cannot go out in the field and bash the presumptive nominee, either. And so we saw him this week doing an Oklahoma two-step: He says he will be voting for Sen. Obama and other Democrats because he wants to see the direction of the country change, but he’s not endorsing Sen. Obama because the Illinois senator is too liberal for his liking.

He’s not alone.

Rep. Nancy Boyda, whose district includes Leavenworth, Kan., says she might not even go to the convention that nominates Sen. Obama for president. “I’m going to stay focused on doing my job. The good people of Kansas are fine with that,’’ she says.

Rep. Charlie Melancon of Louisiana says that “none of the presidential candidates for either party is doing real well in my district. It’s not a good idea to get close to any of them.” Focused on his own re-election, Mr. Melancon isn’t endorsing Sen. Obama either.

Reps. Boyda, Melancon and Boren are part of a faction in Congress that calls itself the Blue Dog Coalition.

They’re Democrats who push fellow Democrats to act more like Ronald Reagan Republicans.

For instance, they try to vote as a bloc against new spending unless there’s an equal amount of money cut out of the federal budget someplace else. They’re largely from places where “gun” isn’t a scary word and “gun control” is a threat to hunting and target practice, not a way to combat street crime.

Pelosi’s Winning Formula

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California has proven she understands that keeping her party in power means making sure her party keeps the centrists who brought them to power. (“Our majority makers,” she calls them.)

It’s been a winning formula.

The Blue Dogs get re-elected, and the Democrats stay in power, in part by not even scheduling votes on the kind of topics that are popular only among the party’s most left-leaning members. The party’s top leaders may wish they could enact everything on every liberal’s wish list, but so far they’ve been careful to avoid doing that.

If either Mr. Boren’s primary opponent, political unknown Kevin Coleman, or the Republican running for the seat, Raymond Wickson, want to put out a flier showing Mr. Boren and Ms. Pelosi as two peas in a pod, there won’t be any gun control, abortion or gay rights votes for the foes to point to.

That may be the best boost Ms. Pelosi can give to Mr. Boren and the other Blue Dogs.

Republicans have so many open seats to defend (27 compared with eight for the Democrats) that if Mr. Boren and his pack hoard their cash and play it safe on such touchy subjects as the Obama campaign, their attackers may try to pick off weaker, slower political animals elsewhere.

Write to Katherine Rizzo at KRizzo@cq.com

Terrill: Bush decree undermines ruling

Terrill:

Bush decree undermines ruling
Marie Price
The Journal Record June 12, 2008

OKLAHOMA CITY – The principal author of Oklahoma’s immigration law thinks a new executive order issued by President Bush undermines last week’s federal court order temporarily blocking enforcement of parts of the law.

An official with the National Chamber Litigation Center, representing one of the plaintiff groups challenging the law, disagrees.

State Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore, issued a statement Tuesday saying that Bush’s order requires anyone contracting with the federal government to use the E-Verify system to check on the work status of employees.

“Judge (Robin) Cauthron claimed federal law does not allow the use of E-Verify to ensure an employee is a legal citizen or resident of the United States, but now President Bush has ordered federal officials to use the system for that explicit purpose,” Terrill said. “It’s clear the judge’s decision was based on an incorrect reading of the law.”

Not so, says Robin Conrad, executive vice president of the Washington, D.C.-based chamber litigation center.

The executive order in no way undermines the court order, “which properly recognized the ‘substantial likelihood’ that HB 1804 is pre-empted by federal law,” Conrad said Wednesday in an e-mailed reply to Terrill’s contention.

“As the court correctly held, federal law expressly prevents states from acting in this domain,” Conrad said.

The president’s order relates only to the ability of the federal government to mandate use of the Basic Pilot program by its own contractors, “but says nothing whatsoever to suggest that states may do so,” she added.

Conrad also said that the executive order is only the first step in a lengthy administrative process.

“There are serious doubts about its legality,” she said, “and, at the end of the day, it is for the federal courts to interpret federal law, not the executive branch.”

Last week, U.S. District Judge Robin Cauthron issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of certain portions of the state immigration law that are scheduled to take effect July 1.

The Chamber of Commerce of the United States and several Oklahoma chamber and business groups are challenging those sections’ legality.

Some challenged language requires businesses to verify the work-authorization status of independent contractors or be required to withhold state income taxes at the top marginal rate.

Another section under challenge requires contractors who want to do business with the state to participate in a status-verification system for new hires.

Other parts of the law have been in effect since November of last year.
Terrill said that Cauthron’s ruling is inconsistent with decisions from other jurisdictions.

“Now President Bush’s executive order makes it obvious the judge’s ruling was wrong and should be overturned,” the lawmaker said.

American Minute - Jun. 12 - 41st U.S. President

American Minute
with Bill Federer

He received the Distinguished Flying Cross for his WWII service in the Pacific.

He studied at Yale, was a Congressman, Ambassador to the U.N., CIA director and Vice-President under Ronald Reagan before becoming the 41st U.S. President.

His name was George H.W. Bush, born JUNE 12, 1924.

In his Inaugural Address, January 20, 1989, President Bush said:

"I have just repeated word for word the oath taken by George Washington 200 years ago, and the Bible on which I place my hand is the Bible on which he placed his...

And my first act as President is a prayer. I ask you to bow your heads."

In his Christmas Message, December 8, 1992, President George H.W. Bush stated:

"As we celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, whose life offers us a model of dignity, compassion, and justice, we renew our commitment to peace...Christ made clear the redemptive value of giving of oneself for others."

President Bush continued:

"The heroic actions of our veterans, the lifesaving work of our scientists and physicians, and generosity of countless individuals who voluntarily give of their time, talents, and energy to help others-all have enriched humankind and affirmed the importance of our Judeo-Christian heritage in shaping our government and values."

American Minute - Jun. 11 - Dr. Joseph Warren, Massachusetts Patriot

American Minute
with Bill Federer

He sent Paul Revere on his midnight ride to warn Lexington the British were coming.

A Harvard graduate, he was a successful doctor in Boston, but left his career when the British passed the hated Stamp Act.

With Samuel Adams, he organized the Provincial Congress to protest.

His name was Dr. Joseph Warren, born JUNE 11, 1741.

Following the Boston Tea Party, King George III enacted the Intolerable Acts of 1774: blocking Boston harbor until citizens reimbursed the East India Tea Company; quartering British soldiers in private homes; allowing British officials to be unaccountable for their crimes; and replacing Massachusetts' elected officials with royal appointees.

In response, Dr. Joseph Warren wrote the Suffolk Resolves, urging Massachusetts to establish a free state, boycott British goods, form militias and no longer be loyal to a king who violates their rights.

Fighting in the Battle of Bunker Hill, a monument marks where Warren died.

Three years earlier Dr. Joseph Warren stated on the anniversary of the Boston Massacre:

"If you perform your part, you must have the strongest confidence that the same Almighty Being who protected your pious and venerable forefathers...will still be mindful of you.