From over at http://adventuresofcitizenx.com
A Question Answered:
I often wonder if the folks in Congress are just corrupt, well-meaning but misguided, part of a conspiracy to subjugate humanity, or simply blooming idiots.
I finally have my answer.
In my inbox today:
Dear ACLU Supporter,
Negotiations on the final health care bill pick up speed this week. As you may know, anti-choice forces in Congress have used this legislation as a vehicle for advancing their agenda.We must make sure that the final bill will protect reproductive freedom, not put it in peril.
Tell Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg and Sen. Robert ‘Bob’ Menendez and Rep. Steven ‘Steve’ R. Rothman to protect women’s access to abortion in health care reform.
Health care reform should improve people’s lives. That’s why we have to make the most of our last opportunity to insist that health care reform should improve women’s health and lives — not interfere in their ability to get the health care they need.
Representative Bart Stupak and other architects of the severe restrictions on women’s health in both the House and Senate bills are campaigning hard, threatening to derail health care legislation altogether if anyone tampers with the severe restrictions they forced into both bills. Even our allies in Congress are feeling pressure. That’s why it’s so urgent that you take action today.
Both bills stigmatize abortion coverage and ignore the reality that abortion services are basic health care for women.
Tell your members of Congress that Stupak-style restrictions must not be part of any final legislation that goes to President Obama’s desk.
Anti-choice forces are working round-the-clock to keep severe abortion restrictions in the health care bill. We have to work just as hard to get those restrictions out.
Negotiations on a final bill are happening now.
Please act immediately to insist on health reforms that will protect reproductive freedom, not put it in peril.
Thank you for standing with us.
Sincerely,
Vania Leveille
ACLU Legislative Counsel
I appreciate some of the actions taken by the ACLU, including the NYCLU helping me with my arrest and upcoming court date, but things like this are completely contrary to any form of liberty I’m a subscriber of. The government has no role, morally or constitutionally, in health care or insurance.
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/
I just received word that the President of the 2009 Continental Congress and 2004 Presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party, Michael Badnarik had a Heart Attack this morning and [is] in an unconscious state. His condition is serious.
His Mother, Elaine, reported to me that Michael was in Madison, Wisconsin attending a hearing regarding a raw milk case. After the hearing he got in a car to go to lunch with friends, He then slumped over. His friends attempted CPR and contacted the paramedics. They attempted to revive him 3 times with no success. Upon the 4th attempt his heart was revived yet with erratic behavior.
He was taken by helicopter to Gunderson Lutheran Hospital CCU in Lacrosse, WI. Please do no call or visit the hospital, only family is allowed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
In an unprecedented defeat for the Federal Reserve, an amendment to audit the multi-trillion dollar institution was approved by the House Finance Committee with an overwhelming and bipartisan 43-26 vote on Thursday afternoon despite harried last-minute lobbying from top Fed officials and the surprise opposition of Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who had previously been a supporter.
The measure, cosponsored by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), authorizes the Government Accountability Office to conduct a wide-ranging audit of the Fed’s opaque deals with foreign central banks and major U.S. financial institutions. The Fed has never had a real audit in its history and little is known of what it does with the trillions of dollars at its disposal.
“The Watt amendment will fully obliterate everything 1207″ — Paul’s measure — “is intended to do,” said Paul during Thursday’s debate.
For anyone remaining confused, the debate was further clarified by the central bank itself: Federal Reserve Vice Chair Don Cohn and General Counsel Scott Alvarez spent much of the day calling committee members, urging them to oppose the Paul-Grayson amendment in favor of Watt’s, a member of Congress who asked for confidentiality told HuffPost.
Paul’s opponents also placed a letter from former Fed chairmen Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker on the seats of every committee member. Such a move is in violation of House rules and Grayson was able to have the letters removed.
As the day wore on and support held for the Paul-Grayson side, the Fed still could hope that both would pass. Watt’s amendment, which included additional restriction, would then trump Paul’s.
To counter that possibility, the Paul-Grayson side moved to fully replace Watt’s amendment with theirs, leaving only one amendment to vote on. The motion carried and the amendment passed in a landslide.
The GOP broadly backed the amendment, though Frank chided them for finding their love of Fed transparency only after they lost power, noting that Paul has been introducing some version of the measure since 1983.
Frank said he was opposing the Paul amendment because it could be perceived as influencing monetary policy, which can have inflationary pressure. “Perception is very important in monetary policy,” said Frank.
Great to see out of committee without Watt’s neutering. Too bad Frank either entirely ignorant of the fact that the market already knows that the monetary policy is influenced by Congress and government, too blind to see the immense harm the FED does therefore justifying such an action, or is just another shrill for the banking cartel.
Morgan Stanley Chief Executive Officer John Mack, who struggled to return the bank to profitability amid the financial crisis, said a single regulator should oversee financial institutions worldwide.
“A better system would be one uber-regulator,” Mack said in an interview in New York for Bloomberg Television’s “Conversations with Judy Woodruff,” parts of which will air today. “We do need an overall systemic-risk management that everyone buys into. It’s not a U.S. systemic boundary — it’s a global systemic risk manager.”
A global regulator would ensure that U.S. banks aren’t subject to tighter regulations than the rest of the world, Mack said. A push for regulation during the financial crisis has weakened as the administration of President Barack Obama pursues other tasks, he said.
It should be unsurprising that Mack is looking for further centralization and regulation. Throughout time corporations and those who benefit by such regulations push for government enforced cartels and monopoly privileges in order to remove competition and push up prices under the guise of protecting the consumer.
The reason for the recent economic downfall was and continues to be intervention in the market by government. From the CRA to the Federal Reserve. They are all ways to take control and power from the consumer and give the bank cartel the upper hand. It’s corporatism, not capitalism, that lead to this situation.
Mack was the slickest of the big bank CEOs during the congressional interviews and the greatest movements of the crisis. He continues to say the “right” things and push the “right” policies both within and without government to further cement the bank’s power and privilege. I am very interested in seeing where he goes when James Gorman takes over as CEO in January.
Instead of a single, global regulator… why not 6.5 billion, globally distributed regulators?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…
The Obama administration has for the first time set out its views on the controversial USA Patriot Act, telling lawmakers this week that legal approval of government surveillance methods scheduled to expire in December should be renewed, but leaving room to tweak the law to protect Americans’ privacy.
In a letter from Justice Department officials to key members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the administration recommended that Congress move swiftly with legislation that would protect the government’s ability to collect a variety of business and credit card records and to monitor terrorism suspects with roving wiretaps.
Three cheers for change! Three jeers for privacy!
The article does go on to talk about how Durbin and Feingold want to put some slight restrictions on the ability to do these types of things but I have no reason to believe even with such legal barriers that the government agencies won’t just ignore them.
Twitter feed Thinking Liberty
|
|
