Local governments hungry for revenue are signing contracts with red-light camera companies that put profit over traffic safety, according to a new study by a national public interest advocacy group.
Some contracts restrict police from doing things like lengthening the yellow signal and leave taxpayers holding the bag if the contracts are terminated early, says the report from the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, the federation of state public interest research groups.
“The most problematic contracts require cities to share revenue with the camera vendor on a per-ticket basis or through other formulas as a percentage of revenue,” the group says. “In other words, the more tickets a camera system issues, the more profit the vendor collects.”
“It just creates this really broad incentive to fine as many people as you can,” says Phineas Baxandall, a co-author of the report. “That’s not a good safety model.”
OK-SAFE, Inc. – The third meeting of the joint legislative committee to examine the effects of the federal health care reform law (Affordable Care Act, aka “ObamaCare”, etc.) on Oklahoma will be held in the Senate Chambers at the Capitol on Wednesday, October 26, 2011.
The meeting will run from 9 am to approx. 4 pm and should be available for viewing online.
The third meeting features speakers addressing the impact on Indian Health; status of lawsuits, and the ballot question opposing the mandate; federal vs. state exchanges; constitutional issues; what other states are doing.
Every Oklahoman with concerns about the implementation of health insurance exchanges (now “marketplaces”), electronic health records (EHRs) being shared everywhere, or infringements on your medical privacy needs to attend these meetings.
Biometrics are the next big thing in government and homeland security. But the recent theft of the personal information of 9 million Israelis living and dead–including the birth parents of adoptees and sensitive health information–could have big ramifications for foreign governments.
Authorities in the Middle Eastern country announced the arrest on Monday of a suspect responsible for the massive data theft. He’s a contract worker at the Israeli Welfare Ministry who was allegedly engaged in small-scale white collar crimes after-hours and who is accused of stealing Israel’s primary national biometric database in 2006. He had access to the database, which is part of the country’s population registry, through his office
The stolen database contained the name, date of birth, national identification number, and family members of 9 million Israelis, living and dead. More alarmingly, the database contained information on the birth parents of hundreds of thousands of adopted Israelis–including children–and detailed health information on individual citizens.
Our special guest will be Jenni White President of R.O.P.E Restore Oklahoma Public Education. Oklahoma is undergoing some drastic changes in our public school system that everyone should know about. ROPE has been working diligently for some time to sound the warning about the problems with the Common Core State Standards. What happens when activists like the ladies at ROPE hit the mark? Well, sometimes the officials in the line of fire get a little perturbed.
That can be a little unnerving for the activists but I have learned that often it is a very good sign. We will explain why.
Oklahoma Smart Meter Rollout
As you can see from this sign located in Del City (not El Reno), some Oklahomans are getting agitated over the new “smart meters”
Citing concerns with the health effects, privacy, safety and accuracy, some residents are telling their utility company NO! They do not want the new meters installed and they say they are being told that unless they comply, they will lose service.
Howard and I will share what we know about the smart meters and smart grid with you Friday and take your calls.
Listen Live 6-8pm every Friday on Rule of Law Radio Network
512-646-1984 is the call in number.
____________________________________
Show Notes
Michael Badnarik is a Constitutional scholar, and the author of Good to be King, a beginner’s guide to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Michael travels across the country teaching his highly acclaimed class on the Constitution to growing numbers of people suddenly interested in “life, liberty, and property”
Michael was the 2004 Libertarian nominee for President of the United States, 2006 Libertarian congressional candidate in Texas, and was elected President of Continental Congress 2009, which met in St. Charles, Illinois to document government violations of the Constitution.
January 14, 2012 9AM – 6PM
at the Oklahoma State Capitol
150.00 per student (or 4 oz of .999 fine silver)
Each student receives an autographed copy of Good to be King, which is used as the text for the class.
Reserve your spot now- Contact Howard Houchen at 580-317-5058 or by email at houchen2010@gmail.com or Kaye Beach at 405-818-3224, email ladyaxiom@yahoo.com for tickets.
This is a new Facebook group for Oklahoman residents who want to share information about the Smart Grid or the new Smart Meters being installed in this state.
ROPE endorsed Republican Janet Barresi for State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Many of us actually campaigned for her.
White believed like many other Republicans that Barresi would be a better choice for conservatives dissatisfied with the decidedly leftist direction of public education than Democrat, Susan Paddock. That logic is straightforward enough but has it held up in reality.
Unfortunately, that answer is no.
ROPE lists just some of the items that evidence reason for conservative disappointment.
I took the time to watch the videos of the Oklahoma interim study on the Common Core State Standards held a couple of weeks ago and what I found most amazing is the behavior of Ms. Baressi herself.
If you did not know, the ladies from ROPE are ordinary Oklahomans who have invested a great deal of time, care and energy in serving as a watchdog for busy moms and dads. They have devoted no less than one year to the research that was presented at the interim study. They do all of this one reason. They care about this state and the children of this state. The ladies of ROPE do not get paid to lobby, study legislation or present their findings to the policy makers and the public. I feel safe in stating that these women do not expect any thanks for their advocacy but I am sure they do not deserve the disrespect demonstrated by Baressi.
An interim study is just that-a study. Ideally all sides of an issue should be aired and policy makers get the opportunity to ask questions. Barresi showed claws and precious little to refute any of the facts brought before the panel. It was poor form on her part to say the least. Barresi responded to the ROPE presentation and by extension, since she was presenting similar facts, the presentation of a Senior Policy Analyst with the Heritage Foundation, with a sweeping dismissal. “We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts”
Barresi did take the opportunity during her remarks to say that the Common Core State Standards are not mandated by the federal government.
“This is a state led, voluntary effort” says Baressi
State led? Two national, non-governmental organizations, The National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, developed the standards behind closed doors.
“State led”, especially when coupled with the word “standards” really means federally controlled. It’s just that the states are being good little troopers and doing Big Momma Gov’s work for her.
Barresi is simply mincing her words. The old ‘carrot and stick method’ is being employed with nationalizing education just as we have seen with every other sector of our society.
Utah’s Republic asks; “Still think the Common Core Standards are just a state initiative? Ask yourself these questions and think again.” And shares some valuable insight;
What do you call it when standards are adopted from a national body and a state isn’t allowed to modify anything they just adopted except to add up to 15%? De facto federal/national standards
What do you call it when national assessments funded by the federal government and led by a Marxist researcher will measure the effectiveness of common core standards? National assessments overseeing national standards
What do you call it when national tracking is done on both academic and non-academic factors to ensure that students are scoring well on these assessments? A massive violation of privacy and national assessments and standards
What do you call it when the federal government engages with textbook publishers to create curriculum based on common standards? A national curriculum and national standards
What do you call it when federal dollars for state education come from countries like China and states like California? Immoral because our grandchildren will pay for their parents education
What do you call it when the federal department of education rewrites the laws on the books to eliminate and redirect local and state control of education to the federal government? Tyranny and national control of education
What do you call it when state officials and agencies fail to connect the dots on these items? A tragic lack of foresight
Barresi offers nothing but her ire to refute the opposing presentations which is a sure sign that she is up against the wall and cannot form a rational argument to the facts that were presented.
The debate over federal coercion with the Common Core Standards is a lively one to put it mildly, but suffice it to say that with adopting the Common Core State Standards comes more federal control over our schools than any conservative ought to be comfortable with.
Everyone knows the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right. Instead, it establishes a collective right, which cannot be legally asserted by an individual. The only people who claim the Second Amendment protects an individual right are deluded “gun nuts” who are ignorant of the original intent of the Second Amendment, and of the Supreme Court’s past rulings.
If all you knew about the Second Amendment was what you learned from the national media, that’s what you would have believed during the latter decades of the 20th century.
Yet that view was entirely wrong, according to the unanimous Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). How did such a foolish and obviously incorrect view of a constitutional right become so popular among America’s opinion elite?
Officials say the tech would not be used in the US. Have they heard that the internet does not respect borders?
From the Gaurdian UK
The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda.
A Californian corporation has been awarded a contract with United States Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, to develop what is described as an “online persona management service” that will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world.
The project has been likened by web experts to China’s attempts to control and restrict free speech on the internet. Critics are likely to complain that it will allow the US military to create a false consensus in online conversations, crowd out unwelcome opinions and smother commentaries or reports that do not correspond with its own objectives.
The discovery that the US military is developing false online personalities – known to users of social media as “sock puppets” – could also encourage other governments, private companies and non-government organisations to do the same.
The Centcom contract stipulates that each fake online persona must have a convincing background, history and supporting details, and that up to 50 US-based controllers should be able to operate false identities from their workstations “without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries”.
Centcom spokesman Commander Bill Speaks said: “The technology supports classified blogging activities on foreign-language websites to enable Centcom to counter violent extremist and enemy propaganda outside the US.”
10-17-2011 • Future of Freedom Foundation/Wendy McElroy
Since September, a public-school district in Florida has been taking fingerprint scans at the entrance to schools as a way to monitor attendance. The scans are compared against a database of students to detect truants. As in most highly intrusive school policies, parents are thrown a bone of control by allowing them to request an “opt out” for their children. An opted-out student needs to pursue a teacher and go through a special sign-in every day. In terms of time, convenience, and avoidance of stigma, students have a strong incentive to comply quietly.
But the current scanner setup is not efficient enough; the location makes it “difficult to keep track of every student.” And so the district is experimenting with supplementary scanners on the school buses that almost every student uses.
The schools’ superintendent, Sandra Cook, acknowledges that the transition has not been easy. Why not? Have parents complained about the Orwellian violation of children’s privacy? Are they outraged by the state’s assumption that children’s fingerprints are state property unless objections are raised?
TV station WJHG explains, “One of the biggest challenges they’ve faced is where to put the devices on the buses. State safety codes require the aisles to be kept completely clear, so one of the ideas they’ve discussed is to put a laptop on one side of the steering wheel and the finger scan system on the other.” The discussion revolves, not around rights, but around technical issues.
By Paul Rincon
Science editor, BBC News website
Oct, 16, 2011
A major upgrade of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) DNA database system has come under fire from members of the forensic science community.
The Codis system is used to generate the genetic profiles stored in the US national DNA database.
The FBI wants to expand the number of genetic markers used by Codis to classify individual DNA profiles.
But a former science chief at the bureau says the plan is not being driven by scientists’ needs.
Dr Bruce Budowle, along with colleagues Arthur Eisenberg and Jianye Ge, outlined the objections at the Promega 22nd International Symposium on Human Identification (ISHI) in Maryland, US.
Another scientist told BBC News the changes were vitally important because they would set down how DNA profiles were recorded in the United States for perhaps “the next 20 years”.
While working at the FBI in the 1990s, Dr Budowle helped choose the genetic markers currently used by Codis.
Consultation gap
He says the review is a good idea, but that choosing the right markers for forensic casework is crucial.
He told BBC News the FBI did not sufficiently consult with the forensic science community before making its recommendations.
“The first time around we took a community-wide approach – 21 laboratories rolling up their sleeves and generating data we could analyse and [use to] make decisions,” explained Dr Budowle, from the University of North Texas Health Science Center in Fort Worth.
“This time around, they formed a working group of around five [scientists] and an FBI person to decide what the core set should be.
“Should the needs of Codis – our national database system – drive the casework processes, or should the needs of casework drive the Codis processes?
“I would hope the latter is obviously what should be done.”
High profile
The US national database – the largest in the world – currently contains about 10 million offender profiles and has assisted in more than 141,000 investigations.
Codis (which stands for COmbined DNA Index System ) uses a set of 13 genetic markers – known as the “core loci” – to generate individual DNA profiles.
In May 2010, the FBI established a six-strong working group to review the core loci used for database searches. It has now recommended the current set of 13 markers be increased to 24.
Great article on Electronic Health Records privacy concerns.
By: Robert Charette / ieee spectrum
September 26th, 2011
As I mentioned in a recent post, nearly half of Australians may end up boycotting the new voluntary electronic health record (EHR) system when it launches next year because they believe the government can’t provide guarantees that their private medical details will remain private. A new Harris survey sponsored by the identity management company Sailpoint highlights EHR privacy concerns not only in Australia, but also in the United Kingdom and the United States.
According to the survey findings, some 83 percent of Australians, 81 percent of Britons, and 80 percent of Americans express some level of concern about moving their personal medical information to an electronic form…
…For example, since September 2009, at least 9.8 million instances of improper disclosure of medical information have been recorded in the United States. Earlier this month, the renowned Stanford Hospital & Clinics in California added to the total when it announced that the electronic health records of 20 000 of its emergency room patients seen between March 1st and August 31st of 2009, including their names, diagnostic codes, medical record numbers, hospital account numbers, billing charges, and emergency room admission and discharge dates, had been posted for nearly a year (Sept. 9, 2010, to Aug. 23, 2011) on a commercial Web site called Student of Fortune.
Oct 27, 2011
