I refuse to participate

November 13, 2010 8:30 pm

I was going to wait to write this post until I'd written the letters I intend to send, but I want to write this now while there is some media attention on the matter.

I refuse to participate in the TSA's X-ray backscatter devices. I refuse to participate in the TSA's "enhanced" (read: extra-invasive) pat-downs.

Given that we purchased our plane tickets for Christmas many weeks ago before the TSA changed its pat-down procedure, December will be the last time I fly on a plane until some semblance of rationality is restored to the screening process.

I put up with the normal pat-down; it was an inconvenience but no worse than being frisked at a concert. However, I won't put up with the new pat-downs.

I don't consider a full-body scan a reasonable condition for boarding a plane. I don't consider a full-body pat-down a reasonable condition for boarding a plane. I will travel by means that have sane security checks or I will not travel.

I plan to write a letter explaining my position and sending it to all the major airlines, the FAA, the TSA, and my congressional representatives. It will be sad if the only way to get this to change is to destroy the air travel industry. But apparently we need to convince some large corporations that the TSA is hurting their business.

Yes, not traveling by air will be inconvenient. But there are options. I've been looking into long-distance travel with Amtrak. You can book private bedrooms. They're not amazingly cheap, but I'm willing to travel less often and spend more if it means maintaining some semblance of my civil rights. I've already written to Amtrak explaining why they have a perfect opportunity to make me happy to travel again. I really hope they don't disappoint me.

I hope more people will join me in refusing to participate in the TSA's invasive and demeaning security checks. We are law-abiding citizens. We shouldn't be treated like criminals just to travel within our own country.

I felt completely safe boarding planes with an X-ray scan of luggage and a simple metal detector. I will feel perfectly safe returning to that level of security.

Sorry if the facts contradict your propaganda

November 4, 2010 9:44 pm

Apparently a lot of people believe that everything wrong with the economy right now is the fault of the Democrats. In particular many people believe that the economic stimulus plan was entirely the Democrats' (and President Obama's) idea. And that if we could just get all the Democrats out of office things would be better. And if Republicans had been in control the bailout would never have happened.

As much as I enjoy bashing politicians, unfortunately this issue needs some factual correction. I now refer you to H.R. 1424, better known as the law that created the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), the main body of the economic stimulus plan, a.k.a. the bailout. Most importantly I'd like to draw your attention to the votes in both the House and the Senate, as well as the signature of the president who signed the bill into law.

Senate Vote On Passage: H.R. 1424 [110th]: Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008:
Democrats: 40 Y - 9 N
Republicans: 33 Y - 15 N

On Motion to Concur in Senate Amendments: H R 1424 Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008:
Democrats: 172 Y - 63 N
Republicans: 91 Y - 108 N

President Signs H.R. 1424 into law:
George H. W. Bush

Also important to note to those that believe the Democrats are to blame is that the Democrats didn't have even a chance of overriding a presidential veto. You need 2/3 in both the House and Senate. In the House Democrats had 172 yes votes of 435 seats (less than 40%). In the Senate Democrats had 40 yes votes of 100 (exactly 40%). President Bush could have vetoed the bill and then it would have simply died.

Now, to be clear. The idea of bailing out the major financial institutions that created the housing mess didn't sit well with me either. But I'm under no delusion that it was the Democrats' fault.

(I promise I'll try to be done with political posts for awhile.)

We throw big parties and write bills for them, but we swear it's not lobbying

October 29, 2010 8:35 am

NPR has an exclusive article about the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and how it shapes legislation across the nation. ALEC is a membership organization. Legislators pay $50 per year, corporations pay upwards of $20,000 per year (totaling ~$6 billion a year). They hold all-expenses-paid conferences where corporations and legislators get together and "discuss" laws. While ALEC is paying for the conferences you can see from the membership fee distribution that it's really corporations footing the bill.

Part 1 talks about how the text of the AZ immigration law was essentially identical to a bill written during an ALEC conference in association with private prison industry representatives.

Part 2 goes more in-depth about ALEC itself.

You may be thinking, okay it's a lobbying group, nothing particularly unusual about that. But that's exactly the catch. ALEC and its members are incredibly careful to make sure you don't call it a lobbying group. Because lobbyists have all sorts of regulations they have to follow.

Here are some priceless quotes:

From Part 1:

[Michael] Hough works for ALEC, but he's also running for state delegate in Maryland, and if elected says he plans to support a similar bill to Arizona's law.

Asked if the private companies usually get to write model bills for the legislators, Hough said, "Yeah, that's the way it's set up. It's a public-private partnership. We believe both sides, businesses and lawmakers should be at the same table, together."

From Part 2:

Is it lobbying when private corporations pay money to sit in a room with state lawmakers to draft legislation that they then introduce back home? [Michael] Bowman, a former lobbyist, says, "No, because we're not advocating any positions. We don't tell members to take these bills. We just expose best practices. All we're really doing is developing policies that are in model bill form."

So, one representative from ALEC, Hough, says it's normal for corporations to write the bills. But another ALEC rep, Bowman, says they don't advocate any particular position. The corporations just present their viewpoints in the form of bills that could be passed.

These corporations, out of the goodness of their hearts, are willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars a year to get together with legislators just to have neutral discussions of policy. Surely they wouldn't dare push for a particular position or law that might benefit their company.

ALEC holds conferences which include baseball games, golf tournaments, parties, and entertainment for children. None of which has to be reported by the legislators as corporate gifts. And indeed, not a single participating legislator in Arizona reported any of these as corporate gifts, they reported receiving benefits in excess of $500 from ALEC.

Why not? Well, they're not being paid for by corporations, they're being paid for by ALEC. And, ALEC isn't really paying for it, the legislators are being charged, but they all, conveniently, receive so-called "scholarships" to cover their costs.

The whole thing stinks.

"It's not lobbying, it's education!" is the claim from ALEC. Well guess what. In computer science we have educational conferences too. Who pays for them? All the people that want to attend and learn. We pay for our own lodging, food, transportation, and registration fees. And if Microsoft were to come along and say "we're holding a conference, all expenses paid, here's your plane ticket, see you next week" I could only assume that what I was about to attend was an advertising platform for Microsoft.

Traveling is so fun

September 21, 2010 12:17 pm

We're on our way to Utah. I get to recruit at BYU again and with the addition of a plane ticket for Jess we get to have a brief partial vacation for very little cost to us.

At the moment we're sitting in the airport. Today I had the privilege of refusing to go through the back-scatter machine and instead receive an unceremonious pat down. What a waste of time and money. I wish everyone would refuse to use the back-scatter machines so that they would be forced to get rid of them (or make them mandatory, which is probably more likely I suppose).

The pat down was as much of a joke for security as any other process currently in place. As far as I can tell it's simply designed to be more awkward than the back-scatter machines so that people will just put up with the machines. It's a normal pat down (actually I'm fairly certain I've received more thorough pat downs going in to concerts) with the addition of touching the bottoms of your feet and swabbing your hands with chemical detector swabs.

It certainly wouldn't be remotely difficult to conceal something past the pat down I received. When will sanity and cost-benefit studies again be used to guide our decisions as a country?

A day off.... sort of

April 5, 2010 2:48 pm

For whatever reason, today is a Lab holiday. So, what did I get to spend the day doing on my day off? Waiting around at the DMV of course. Trying to finally get the title change done for my car I went and waited for 2 hours. 2 hours so that I could hand the form to a person who looked at it, printed out something, stapled it together and said, "Your new title will be mailed to you." Awesome. Well, at least they didn't tell me I had to get some other random form signed.

I did manage to get some additional problems taken care of during that time though. Remember how I thought I had actually won when I called AT&T to complain about raising the price of our DSL? and then ended up with phone service which magically would lower our overall monthly bill? Well apparently the CSR I spoke to was 'mistaken' when she told me there was no activation fees. We got our first new bill last week which had an awesome $40 activation fee. Also, got a bill for our previous account which said "Final Bill", but wasn't pro-rating the DSL price for the partial month. So, based on the bills I had in hand, we were getting double-charged for the DSL service for 2 weeks.

So I called the customer support number listed on my bill. After waiting on hold the person I talked to asked me what state I was in and then said she'd have to transfer me to some other department that has access to California accounts. [Really? well, why don't you list this magic other office on my California bill?]

Then I get to wait on hold for another 10 minutes. This person answers and says she'll have to transfer me to the department that handles California Billing. [COME ON!]

Then I get to wait on hold again! So when Brandon picks up I ask what number this office is so I can avoid getting transferred in the future. He says he's just at the regular nationwide customer service center at the number I originally called and has no idea why I was transferred twice. [Holy Crap AT&T! Get your act together!]

Brandon tells me that the CSR who made my accounts changes shouldn't have told me there'd be no activation fee, but agrees to reverse the charge. He then tells me that the other bill I received that said "Final Bill" was really an "Initial Final Bill" and that I'd received a "Final Final Bill" with the pro-rated charge on it. And that even though the bill says my automatic payment will be debited on April 12, that it actually won't. So we'll see how that goes.

Then I got to call our insurance agent to change the policy to reflect the new title information. But Amica is quite good and I didn't wait on hold and our agent had it taken care of very quickly.

So that's been my day.

Jess got to go to U.S. Bank to try and determine why she keeps getting charged monthly fees for a free checking account. However, neither the people here nor the people at the branch that 'owns' her account in Utah had ever seen these charges or knew why she was getting them. So, how do you solve such a problem? Close the account and open a new one at the branch here in CA! Which will supposedly solve the problem.

Wooo. Fun times all around.