Mischa Beitz

So, when/if Senator Klobuchar votes "aye" on the latest frontal attack on our civil liberties . . . who can we support as a Democratic challenger? Taking names now . . .

Here are a few things you can do this weekend to help stop the latest poorly crafted FISA bill from slipping through the Senate:

1. Give some cash to the Blue America PAC vs Retroactive Immunity. This is the strategy I prefer, putting money into campaigns against the legislators who've undermined the bedrock principles of our nation. Time to clean (the) House!
2. Sign Senator Dodd's "citizen co-sponsor" petition for his FISA amendment
3. Join the Vote Against FISA group at my.barackobama.com
4. The obvious, and likely futile, call your Senator and let 'em know how you feel.

Did I miss something? let me know and I'll add it to the list.

"Judas, Brutus, Quisling time has come to do / What's expected of you?" --The Hives

The "compromise" expectation . . . is that you and I will shut-up and watch the Fourth Amendment and the Constitutional basis of our democracy (continue to) erode, so that the outgoing administration won't have any unsavory lawsuits pursuing them on their way out of office - don't let that litigation smack ya' on the way out boys - and the Democratic nominee can appear tough on security issues; because that's the sort of trite, unprincipled, simple-minded synopsis of policy that dominates mass-media coverage in our age of media consolidation.

I mean, what's a little unprincipled, undermining of our Constitution if it gets the better candidate into office? Make no mistake, THAT'S OBAMA'S GAMBIT ; he's betting that an enraged public will stand by him despite his slick, unprincipled about-face on the most pressing civil liberties issue of our day. Moreover, and this is part that stinks the most, he's using THE EXACT SAME FEAR-MONGERING TACTICS employed by the Bush administration for the last 6 years to justify his actions. F--- him.

The "hang the collaborators" expectation . . . is that you and I will remember well which federal representatives undermined our rights and the rule of law in our land and throw the bums out of office in the next election cycle. It includes Pelosi, Hoyer, Reid, Rockefeller and 100 or so reps in the House (so far, I'll be watching Klobuchar on this one too). It will take organizing and money. We need to find democratic challengers in winnable districts, and we need to start NOW.

Anyone know a good third party candidate? I'm lookin'

HR 3773, the House version of a FISA bill, is nothing less than a reprimand to the Senate for it's repeated failures and capitulations on this issue. Not only has the House refused to include retroactive immunity, it's called for an investigatory commission with subpoena powers. The White House, unsurprisingly, whined and held fast to it's increasingly hollow-sounding fear mongering.

Now the Senate and House will have to reconcile the two bills and send it to President Bush.

We'll all be watching . . . as closely as possible.

I'm often frustrated by Lessig's tech policy, though (overall) he's only ever moved issues in the right direction.

When it comes to the presidential election however, he's given the most articulate argument for why I am supporting Barack Obama this election year. If you're undecided or even if you're convinced Clinton is the candidate to support, I implore you to listen to the arguments put forward in Lessig's video . . . I couldn't put it more plainly myself.

Lessig on Obama/Clinton (large MOV).

Google "network neutrality" and either of the major Democratic front-runners for Norm Coleman's Paul Wellstone's Senate seat (I mean Mike Ciresi and Al Franken) and see what you get . . . NADA. Zip. A big fat "0". Try "telecommunications" . . . similar result.

How are these candidates supposed to garner my support if they're unwilling to address national tech policy!? I honestly find it shocking. Just look at their respective lists of "issues":

Ciresi's list

1. Higher Education
2. Iraq
3. Healthcare
4. Renewable energy and rural development (gee, I wonder what he thinks about Ethanol or here or here)
5. Veterans
6. Immigration
7. Terrorism

Franken's list

1. Iraq
2. Healthcare
3. Education
4. Renewable energy (at least he doesn't lump this in with "rural development")
5. Immigration
6. Workers
7. Veterans
8. Accountability

Interesting lists. If you unbundle the rural dev and energy in Ciresi's list, that's 8 apiece. But what's most interesting is not what's IN their lists, but what's left OUT. Check out Obama's list:

Obama's list

1. Civil Rights
2. Disabilities
3. Economy
4. Education
5. Energy and Environment (that makes a LOT more sense to me than Ciresi's combo)
6. Ethics
7. Faith
8. Family
9. Fiscal
10. Foreign Policy
11. Healthcare
12. Homeland Security
13. Immigration
14. Iraq
15. Poverty
16. Rural (Hey MN contenders . . . look, Rural gets its own billing - WOW!)
17. Service
18. Seniors and Social Security
19. Technology
20. Veterans

Now . . . THAT'S A LIST!

Do the MN Democratic contenders think Minnesotans don't care about Poverty? about Foreign Policy? about TECHNOLOGY!?! What about Climate Change? Anyone? Anyone? . . . Buhler?

I understand that President and Senator are different offices, but the policy issues are essentially the same. C'mon guys, it doesn't cost any more to add some substantial policy positions on your friggin' websites. Pretend for just a second that people in Minnesota want to vote based on what policies you'll be supporting when and if you actually get to DC. Or - one has to ask - have you thought about these areas AT ALL? Do you even have policy positions? and if so, why aren't they available to your potential constituents on your websites?

Unbelievable.

So, Harry Reid is going to bring the unamended FISA bill before the Senate today which Senator Dodd is supposed to filibuster. What's the ploy here? Keep FISA in the news? The Judiciary Committee amended the bill (removing telecom immunity) and Reid is going to ignore them and bring the unamended bill forward for consideration . . . Dodd should filibuster.

Thrills and spills . . . should be an exciting day on the hill.

Write to your Senator supporting Dodd! I wrote to mine (fat lot of good it'll do).

No. I don't mean the lackluster Android announcement (I still think OpenMoko is a more intriguing option).

Google CEO Eric Schmidt confirmed recently that

GOOGLE WILL BID ON THE 700 MHz SPECTRUM (and here)

saying,

"We believe it's important to put our money where our principles are."

Halla-f'ing-lujah!

Finally the geeks are putting their deep pockets to work and, hopefully, cracking the telecom oligopoly just a wee bit. Best news in months . . . if not years.

That said, it's still sad that it takes an outrageously cash-rich, private, internet company to step in and do the right thing (or so we hope) where congress and the FCC have demonstrated (repeatedly) their complete ineptitude with respect to protecting the public's interest in our airwaves.

Good luck Jan. 24th Google . . . we'll all be watching.

If you want to catch a glimpse of what's wrong with telecommunications in this country, read the latest Wired magazine article, 10 Reasons To Hate Cellphone Carriers. The article makes a few nods to Senator Klobuchar's recent cell phone "empowerment" act (and the act does appear to address some bad telco practices). But take a moment to look at the gravity of the listed reasons and then compare Wired's list to what Klobuchar's act addresses . . . see a disparity?? I do.

Senator Klobuchar apparently thinks her bill is merely "some narrowly tailored rules that would even the playing field for consumers." (!?!) Yet, anyone who's paid even the slightest attention to the telco industry in the past . . . oh . . . century, can tell you that if she thinks her bill will "even the playing field," there's a bridge in Brooklyn she may be interested in buying.

Consider the second to last of Wired's reasons to hate cellphone carriers, "They Own Politicians." It does make one pause for a moment to reflect that Klobuchar's bill is co-sponsored by Senator Rockefeller (D-WV); the very same representative responsible for introducing the current Senate FISA bill granting these companies retroactive immunity for KNOWINGLY BREAKING THE LAW.

Hmmmmmmmmm . . .

Which leads to the inevitable question, "Is it possible these Senators (Rockefeller and Klobuchar) are actually pandering to the telcos and merely presenting the appearance of public scrutiny and oversight?" YOU THINK??!! It's either that or sheer naivety.

Put in terms ex-Hennepin County Attorney Klobuchar might understand:

If a mugger j-walks from the scene, you don't chase them on the j-walk charge and ignore the mugging.

The "Consumer Cell-Phone Empowerment Act" is a j-walking charge . . . when will Klobuchar start doing her job and prosecute the mugging?.

While I'm at it . . . what the hell happened to journalism in Minnesota? Can the STRIB only do idiotic puff pieces like this!? We're in a bad way folks.

UPDATE: Perhaps someone is reading my blog after all . . . they've changed the graphic! The text now reads. "do you favor telecom amnesty?" where it used to read "oppose telecom amnesty".

Read it and weep folks:

My original comments (for posterity):
I actually find this graphic confusing and poorly worded. "Oppose Telecom Amnesty" suggests that a "yea" vote would support OPPOSITION to telecom amnesty; as in, "yea, I 'oppose telecom amnesty'." However, the "yeas" and "nays" are how the committee members would vote on the Senate bill CONFERRING amnesty, so a "yea" vote is actually an indication of support FOR telecom amnesty.