A few weeks ago, House Republicans griped about not being allowed to use their Congressional office budgets to purchase flights to the Louisiana to “survey the damage” (of the BP incident). At the time, I wondered about the potentially self-serving motive for these trips.

What expertise do these relatively inexperienced legislators bring to Louisiana, Afghanistan, and other crisis areas? Should taxpayers foot the bill for these thinly-veiled photo ops, especially when they tilt the scales in favor of incumbents?

First, some baseless speculation:

1. Why does it cost $100,000 to inform the public of a simple and widely-publicized change in traffic law?
2. Does the fact that the state is placing ads on outdoor billboards along Metro Detroit’s busiest motorways at all defeat the principle of reducing driver distraction?

The Outdoor Advertising Association of America “is dedicated to promoting, protecting and advancing outdoor advertising interests in the US,”  and they maintain a list of top spenders on outdoor advertising (available on their website only to logged-in members). I would wager that government entities and lobbyists who represent them are well-represented in that list.

And now, some practical considerations:

1. To an observer, punching buttons to dial a number looks like texting. Can officers deliver accurate and consistent judgment calls on the spot?
2. Can we expect officers who are at a distance and moving at speeds up to 70 miles per hour to determine whether the device “in the person’s lap” is a cell phone or merely a non-prohibited device such as an iPod, hand-held computer, or GPS unit?
3. How does an officer verify that the driver was texting without confiscating the phone and checking its message history (a likely violation of the driver’s privacy)?
4. Lacking digital evidence, which party will be given the benefit of the doubt if the citation is challenged?
5. Why ban text messaging, but not the use of iPods, GPS units (specifically exempted by the act), hand-held computers, and similar devices?
6. Did members of the Legislature ask these questions?

“And don’t be trying to hide your phone, because that’ll give some police officer a reason to think you’re hiding a weapon.” — Southfield Police Chief Joseph Thomas

Only four representatives dared to say no:

• Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D, OH-10)
• Rep. Fortney Stark (D, CA-13)
• Rep. John Conyers (D, MI-14)
• Rep. Ronald Paul (R, TX-14)

“I doubt very seriously if [Geoffrey Fieger] knows much about facts. As an attorney, that’s in this to make money … I think he’s setting that up right now. It’s unfortunate that you would use a tragedy like this to incite the community,” Bing said.

As the saying goes, never let a serious crisis go to waste:

“Why aren’t we enraged about a 15-year-old kid getting killed, a 17-year-old kid … a 69-year woman, a grandmother getting killed,” said Bing. “We’ve got to really take a hard look at gun control.”

Bing is right that we should despise all violence, not just violence by public servants. But shame on him for changing the subject, which is that the Detroit police contributed to the death of a child and probably tried to cover it up. I welcome Bing to explain how gun control will keep police from shooting seven-year-old girls.

Yesterday, Representatives Henry Waxman (CA) and Frank Pallone (NJ) pressured Major League Baseball leaders to ban the use of smokeless tobacco by players.

Robert Manfred, MLB executive VP, made no promises but sycophantically agreed that smokeless tobacco is harmful and said that a ban is a “laudable goal”.

MLB Players Association chief labor counsel David Prouty expects players to capitulate now that the writing on the wall:

“We can go back to the players and say, ‘Congress feels strongly about this. You ought to think about it. Look what’s happened on other issues Congress felt strongly about,’” Prouty said.

Representative Anna Eshoo (CA), in an apparent “let them eat cake” moment, added to the discussion:

“Why don’t they just chew gum if they feel the need to chew something?”

Major League Baseball should not grant an audience to such imbecility, but with a federal antitrust exemption on the line, their obedience is understandable. So much for enjoying sports and other forms of mass entertainment without having to worry about puritanical do-gooders influencing social attitudes and behavior.

via Jack.

Tyler Horning/Collegian

Earlier this week, H​i​l​l​s​ d​a​l​e C​o​l​l​e​g​e administrators stopped College Republicans from holding a rally in protest of the health care bill, citing a 50-year old unwritten policy dating from the days of college president J. Donald Phillips, who opposed student activism in the 1960s.

“We just simply have a policy: no rallies on campus”

This policy didn’t stop the College Republicans from holding a rally in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom back in 2004. Hardly a under-the-radar event, the rally took place in front of the Central Hall, was attended by Michigan legislator Bruce Caswell, and was patrolled by campus security personnel.

Not only did this demonstration (which was accompanied by an anti-war counter-rally) fail to “arouse the passions” or “get out of control”, but the event was ridiculed by Collegian editors as one of “the most pathetic displays of political activism” they had ever seen, adding that if nothing else, “it proved that this sort of thing should never be attempted at Hillsdale again.”

Last fall, Snyder, an Ann Arbor businessman and former Gateway CEO, called on his Republican primary opponents to refuse campaign funding from PACs and lobbyists. Snyder, who has made significant personal contributions to his own campaign, said in a 2009 editorial that he would reject PAC and lobbyist money.

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox issued a terse response. “We’re not about to take a lecture from a millionaire who lives in a gated community,” a spokesman said.

This is a surprisingly populist remark coming from a Republican whose household earned $195,030 last year (2-3 times the median income in the state) and who shares at least $581,499 in assets with his wife Laura, a Wayne County Commissioner. This is according to voluntary financial disclosures Cox submitted for public review this week, when he challenged Hoekstra, Snyder, and Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard to do the same.

What is most striking about Cox’s “millionaire” quip is that while Rick Snyder earned his fortune entirely in the private sector, taxpayers have paid the salaries of Cox and Hoekstra since they both took office—in 2003 and 1993, respectively.

What does Mike Cox find so dishonorable about earning a living in private enterprise? We can’t all be career politicians.

Perhaps the only valid concern he has raised is Moon’s vote against rezoning the hospital, which Moon said was done to protest the way that Sessions prematurely ended discussion of the issue and forced it to a vote.

Sessions has also argued that candidate Doug Moon’s employment in Coldwater will make him unavailable to respond to emergencies in Hillsdale.

If Sessions truly believes that Moon will be unable to give his personal and immediate attention to such crises, it is only fair to ask Sessions what specific crises have required this type of response in his four years as mayor. Specifically, what mayoral crises have required a response time of 30 minutes or less?

In comparing the candidates, Sessions has suggested that the value of Moon’s city council work pales in comparison to Tony Vear’s work on the planning commission.

In order to take this seriously, we must ignore the irony of quibbling over which candidate’s city government experience is more applicable to mayoral duties that were previously carried out by a high school student.

Sessions is free to endorse any candidate he pleases, but it seems vindictive to endorse one candidate so forcefully and attack the other without a severe reason for favoring one over the other.

If there is a serious reason why Doug Moon is unfit to be mayor, then let us hear it. The petty grievances Sessions has raised do not explain the excessive zeal that he has shown in his attempts to undermine Moon’s campaign.

(Published in the Hillsdale Daily News on October 30, 2010)

State Representative Bert Johnson (D-Highland Park) pushed for an exemption for Detroit’s casinos in the House version of the bill. The Detroit casinos argue that without an exemption, they will lose customers to gaming facilities on Native American reservations, which are exempt from compliance.

It is clear that this is a rent-seeking victory, and not a victory for individual freedom and enterprise. There are few voices in Lansing crying over the revenue our state’s hundreds of restaurants and bars will lose when their smoking customers are forced outside. But Johnson is happy to have saved three casinos while the legislature throws other business owners under the bus.