Dave Chandler

Why I Run

This must end.

Politics as usual has failed us ... It is time to vote for principle -- and peace.

No more posturing and double-talk from the tired, old, money-soiled Democrats and Republicans.

This election you can make a difference ... because this must end.

The toll of U.S. troops killed in Iraq because of the lies of George W. Bush, now stands at: 2,400.

17,469 U.S. troops have been wounded in Iraq; 8,137 of whom were not able to return to duty.

Countless thousands of innocent Iraqis have been killed and maimed as a consequences of the unprovoked attack on Iraq ordered by Bush and approved by the Republican and Democrat controlled U.S. Congress.

You Don't Have to Vote for the "Lesser of Two Evils"

If you vote for a Democrat, you might as well elect a Republican.

A few folks try and tell me that if the Democrats take the House of Representatives in November, somehow that is going to make a big difference in how this country is governed.

But then another vote on war a peace comes up and you see results like this: Colorado's entire Congressional delegation -- all the Republicans (except for the AWOL Beauprez) and ALL the Democrats -- voted for this justification for an attack on Iran if Bush decides that is what it is going to take to save GOP control of the House and Senate in 2006.

Remember, remember in November.

Consider this possiblity instead of yet again doing the same old thing and voting for the "lesser of two evils" ... if I'm elected to Congress, I'll join the House Democratic Caucus to give them a majority if that is the nationwide results. But, I will be a firm, definite voice and vote for peace and justice and equality. From the votes and statements of the incumbent Democrats and the two leading Democrats in the 7th CD nomination race, re-electing and electing them will not get you a positive, principled advocate for renewing our Republic.

Vote for principle before politics ... this time, vote Green.

Final Results Roll Call Vote

DeGette - YES
Salazar - YES
Udall - YES

Link: "Speaker Hastert Applauds House Passage of Iran Freedom Support Act" | U.S. Newswire

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) released the following statement regarding today's passage of H.R. 282, The Iran Freedom Support Act. The bill passed by a vote of 397-21.

"We are fighting the War on Terror on all fronts, and we understand that protecting American citizens from terrorism means keeping a watchful eye on nations like Iran. The United States and the international community should hold the Iranian government accountable for its behavior.

"This legislation sends the message that the United States stands firmly opposed to Iran's ambitions to acquire and develop nuclear weapons, and we urge them to stop participating in, planning, and pursuing international turmoil. It is our hope that the people of Iran can participate in a peaceful and stable Democracy."

Link: US House Moves to Impose New Sanctions Against Iran | VOA News

Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich, an opponent of the legislation, is among those arguing it is a step in the direction of military action.

"While this bill makes a point of so-called not authorizing the use of force against Iran, be assured this is a stepping stone to the use of force, the same way that the Iraq Liberation Act was used as a stepping stone," he said.

Save the Internet -- From Republicans and Democrats

If you are reading this ... you need to take action.

The first two links are provided to inform you of this important issue -- the freedom of the world wide web is under threat.

Then there are links to what you can do to help protect your access to content on the internet.

Finally, some information about the politics of this deal. Sadly, once again, we see too many Democrats lining up with the transnational corporations and against the interests of most Americans.

The 'ACTION' link below will allow you to send a message to your Colorado member of Congress regarding this important legislation.

Link: Here's Hoping Congress Keeps the Pipes Open | Andrew Kantor/USA Today

The idea of network neutrality is simple: Whoever carries data to your house shouldn't care what's in that signal. If it's e-mail from Aunt Shirley or a phone call from the White House, it's all handled as efficiently as possible. The network is neutral. But some companies don't see it that way.

Imagine you make a phone call to a friend, but instead of hearing it ring, you get a recording: "We're sorry, but the person you are calling has not paid Verizon to carry his or her conversations. We apologize for any inconvenience."

Couldn't happen, of course. Your phone company will connect you to whomever you call, period. You pay the bills, after all, so it remains neutral. A carrier can't discriminate based on who you're calling.

Now imagine this: You have a DSL connection from your local phone company. You try to go to, say, www.usatoday.com but instead see a message, "USATODAY.com does not currently have a transport agreement with AT&T to have its content carried to AT&T subscribers. We apologize for any inconvenience."

In other words, imagine that Internet providers started refusing to carry content from websites that didn't pay for their service.

The scary thing is, it's something they're not only discussing, but some are pushing for it.

Link: The Corporate Toll on the Internet | Farhad Manjoo/Salon.com

Telecom giant AT&T plans to charge online businesses to speed their services through its DSL lines. Critics say the scheme violates every principle of the Internet, favors deep-pocketed companies, and is bound to limit what we see and hear online.

Simply click on the "Sponor Logo" - no registration is necessary and the article is free just for taking a look at the ad.

---

Link: House Panel OKs Measure Favored by Phone Companies | San Francisco Chronicle - April 6, 2006

A House subcommittee handed phone companies a victory Wednesday by voting 27-4 to advance a bill that would make it easier for them to deliver television service over the Internet and clearing the way for all Internet carriers to charge more for speedier delivery.

The lopsided vote was a defeat for Internet and technology firms like Google and Microsoft, which had hoped to amend the bill to enforce a principle called network neutrality and preserve the status quo under which all Internet traffic is treated equally.

Earlier in the day, the subcommittee voted 23-8 to reject an amendment by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., that would have inserted specific language designed to enforce network neutrality and prevent the feared creation of fast and slow lanes on the Internet. ...

Supporters painted defeat of Markey's net neutrality amendment in bleak terms.

"Members from both sides of the aisle endorsed a plan which will permit cable and phone companies to construct 'pay as you surf, pay as you post' toll booths for the Internet," said Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy in Washington.

Link: A Very Dispiriting Day | Public Knowledge - April 6, 2006

The vote on the Subcommittee to defeat an amendment setting out a new, strong Net Neutrality policy was 23-8, with the Net losing badly. Some of the reporting about the vote characterized it as a partisan battle. Not so. The fact is, the Democrats deserted the Net Neutrality cause.

The eight “yes” votes were seven Democrats — Ed Markey, Rick Boucher, Anna Eshoo, Jay Inslee, John Dingell, Mike Doyle and Frank Pallone. The eighth vote was Republican Heather Wilson. Markey, Boucher, Eshoo and Inslee were the sponsors of the amendment, which means only three Democrats who weren’t sponsors voted for it.

On the other hand, six Democrats voted against it: Eliot Engel, Bart Stupak, Ed Towns, Al Wynn, Charlie Gonzales and Bobby Rush. Inexplicably, two D’s weren’t around for the pivotal vote, Sherrod Brown and Bart Gordon (not that their vote would have mattered in the end, but it would have been nice to have.) There are 33 members on the Subcommittee — 18 Republicans and 15 Democrats.

Here are the members of the House Subcommittee onTelecommunications and the Internet. Included are links to their Congressional web sites.

---

SaveTheInternet.com

ACTION

Local Global Warming News

The seriousness of the global warming issue can hardly be overstated. The reality of this event is self-evident. It took hundreds of millions of years for fossil fuels to accumulate in the Earth, yet humans have burned massive amounts of those resources in just the past 150 years. Common sense tells you that this kind of 'sudden' release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere will have significant consequences.

There have indeed been many, many good things for humanity that have come about because we have been able to utilize this energy source, but there is clearly also a problem side. We are seeing that side manifest itself now in pollution and global warming.

If I am elected to the Congress, one of my top priorities will be to deal positively with energy and global warming issues. One of the first things we can do is mandate greater fuel efficiency from automobiles -- that should help with gasoline prices as well.

Then, of course, we must immediately start a crash program to create and use alternative non-carbon-based energy sources.

As a Green member of Congress, I will be uniquely positioned to advocate for needed cultural, governmental and technological changes to help us survive global warming -- because I will not be obligated to any special interest group. Greens do not take corporate PAC money and we limit the size of the contributions we do take. My only duty, therefore, if elected, will be to do what is in the best interests of ALL the people.

Link: Record Levels of Carbon Dioxide | Rocky Mountain News

Atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, the gas largely blamed for global warming, have hit record highs and appear to be rising at an accelerating rate, a Boulder scientist said Thursday.

Each year the burning of fossil fuels pumps more than 7 billion tons of carbon into the air in the form of heat-trapping carbon dioxide gas, or CO2 .

The preindustrial carbon dioxide level was 278 parts per million. The current concentration just hit a record 381 ppm, said Pieter Tans, an atmospheric scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Boulder. That's a 37 percent increase. ...

"It appears to be accelerating," Tans said of the atmospheric CO2 buildup.

He will present his findings Wednesday at a meeting of atmospheric scientists in Boulder.

"What we're seeing in the atmosphere reflects the fact that we're burning more fossil fuel and we're burning it faster," said NOAA atmospheric scientist Russell Schnell.

Chandler and CSAP Focus of Newspaper Feature

This week, Mile High Newspapers (Jefferson County) feature a front page article on my effort to reform the ineffective and inefficient CSAP testing program in Colorado.

I think you will find the following article balanced and quite informative.

Link: The CSAP Divide | Emily Hois/Mile High Newspapers

Excerpt:

Her sixth-grade peers endure their second hour of proficiency testing while Hannah Chandler tours Stephany's Chocolates, sampling truffles and observing the handcraft of candy making.

The educational field trip was one of several Hannah and her father, Dave, embarked on while the first week of Colorado Student Assessment Program tests began at Thomson Elementary School in Arvada. The two learn how Stephany's Chocolates must import truffles from Switzerland where the altitude is comparable because the candies "explode" when shipped from sea level.

"Even if you're not learning things that are academic, there's other things you can learn about," said Dave, who first opted Hannah out of CSAPs last year.

The parent of two has taken a rare but symbolic stand against the test that debuted in 1997. While some parents may disagree with CSAPs, few defy school policy. Others feel the test is a necessary tool to measure student achievement and whether schools and its teachers are accomplishing their educational goals. ...

A stay-at-home father, Dave said his situation is unique because it lets him spend time with Hannah while her peers are testing. Students whose working parents might opt them out would likely remain on campus, busying themselves with other activities and risk feeling exiled.

The most common reaction Hannah experiences from peers is jealously and disbelief.

"All the kids think I'm amazing," she said. "The think I'm so lucky. I tell them they can opt out too but they don't believe me." ...

The first year Dave opted Hannah out of CSAPs, he said Thomson Elementary Principal Paula Lindenberger requested a conference to discuss his opposition.

"She said, 'Funding is tied to this. Children need to be a team and do this and you may not like it, but it's for the good of the school,'" Dave recalled.

The conversation hasn't swayed the Dave's viewpoint or prevented him from distributing anti-CSAP fliers.

Angela Engel, a former Douglas County teacher who is writing a book on the CSAP controversy said the test is misused to measure schools while it's designed to evaluate students. "The thing that people don't understand about CSAP is that the schools pay for it. It negatively impacts the school and can jeopardize funding," Engel said.

The state legislature last week killed a bill that would have ended the practice of docking a school's score if a student opts out of the test.

"This really means parents don't have a choice when it comes to the Colorado Student Assessment," Engel said.

Read the entire article.