Dave Chandler

Soft Tyranny in America

The quotation below from Alexis de Tocqueville expresses one of my great concerns about what is going on in our nation -- and my belief that we are not nearly as free as we (or others) would like us to think we are.

It has been my notion that tyranny in the U.S. will not have the look of uniformed, armed police on every corner, with a 'big brother' character overtly watching over your shoulder and then telling you what to do ... and you doing it out of fear of being suddenly hauled away to a re-education camp.

Tyranny in this country will (and already has in many respects) be in a form that is seemingly benign, utilitarian, just a "good business" practice, or something that must be done for 'the children' or for 'national security'.

Those who have read my opinions know that I identify corporatization and consumerism as the number one culprit in the tyranny that already oppresses us. When I talk about corporatization I don't just mean the mega-transnational corporations all by themselves, but the control they exert over governments to acquire more power and markets and money for themselves -- and more importantly -- the mindset, the 'group think' that perpetuates the corporate idea everywhere.

In schools, in churches, in local governments, at the state legislature, among Republicans and Dimocrats, everywhere in America these days is seen the philosophy of the corporation as the guiding force -- that is what de Tocqueville is describing in the quotation below ... it is the practice that is indeed making us less free all the time.

Government, of course, is ideally suited to be the enforcer of laws, rules and regulations that benefit the private corporation, especially in a country where we still cling to the idea that we are a functioning democracy. What could be truer to our concept of ourselves than that it is the "government of the people" that is enacting the very rules that oppress us. The past eight years of the Bush-Cheney regime are the prime example of how government is the tool of corporate power.

Sadly, we see the mindset of corporatization extending itself in the Obama administration particularly in the economic 'rescue' arena. (That's why it is so amusing to see 'conservatives' throwing the term socialist at Obama and the Dimocrat Congress these days -- it wasn't so long ago that 'conservative' Bush could virtually do no wrong and that anything and everything was justified because "we are at war".)

I call this use of government by big business corporations to impose more rules and regulations on us as 'soft' tyranny because it isn't so obvious and because liberals and conservatives can find certain oppressive measures that they like ... it isn't the iron glove smashing us, it is the fuzzy hand of "guidance" and "stability" and "tradition". Liberals like proposing cat-dog equality and conservatives like mandating 'patriotism'.

For corporations, all this micromanagement of our lives ultimately renders most folks as compliant and reinforces the idea that they and government is just doing what has to be done for us to live in a well-ordered society. (I also strongly maintain that overpopulation makes this task much easier for the corporations to justify, a prime reason I want strong immigration control and why I support family planning.)

Tocqueville in the words here describes the situation -- what we do about it is the point of most of my posts and commentaries.

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the government then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence: it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

Alexis de Tocqueville - Democracy in America, Volume II (1840); Book Four, Chapter VI

Chandler on Kennedy

On the occasion of the fortieth anniversary of Robert Kennedy's death ... this book had a profound impact on my conception of life, government and politics.

RFK, a great man of hope, heart and soul.

Robert Kennedy: A Memoir
Jack Newfield



Robert Francis Kennedy
November 20, 1925 – June 6, 1968

$100 Per Car? No Way!

Let me put it this way: stick this idea up a tail pipe. Colorado's governor needs to go back to the drawing board on this regressive funding scheme.

Or, I could put it this way: Pete Coors and John Elway wouldn't even notice two or three hundred dollars to register their Mercedes and Land Rover and Cadillac -- but two or three hundred dollars on my family's income is a big deal.

What we need in this state is a progressive income tax -- until the elite, wealthy start paying their fair share to run the state government and build/repair infrastructure -- the rest of us should just say NO! to any new fees and taxes for anything. Period.

Link: Ritter Proposal: $100 Hike in Car Registration Fee | Denver Post

Gov. Bill Ritter is working on legislation that would increase car registration fees an average of $100, raising $500 million for road and bridge repairs.

The governor said Wednesday that he was "involved in conversations" to launch the recommendation from his transportation commission — one of two revenue-generating proposals that would not require a vote of the people. ...

... Raising fees on the 5 million vehicles registered in Colorado is a step lawmakers can take this year, Ritter said.

"We need to do something now," he told the legislature's transportation caucus.

The annual vehicle registration fee, including county taxes, now averages $142, according to the state Department of Revenue. A car's age, size and weight help determine the fee.

Link: Ritter Backs Car Fee Hikes | Rocky Mountain News

Gov. Bill Ritter called on the legislature Wednesday to look at increasing auto registration fees to pay for a $500 million-a-year catch-up effort on Colorado's highway maintenance backlog.

But that "Fix It Now" proposal is only a third of the package his blue-ribbon panel on transportation funding recommended. Fees can be hiked by the legislature, but voters would have to approve a tax increase to cover the rest of the package, and Ritter said now is not the time to ask them. ...

... Ritter released the panel's report, which recommended boosting state and local spending on transportation by $1.5 billion a year to catch up on maintenance and begin whittling down languishing lists of highway-safety and road-widening projects.

The panel packaged its recommendation with four annual funding thresholds from which to pick but concentrated on $1.5 billion as the most practical.

But the governor stopped short of submitting a specific proposal. His panel had determined that an average $100 annual increase in the auto registration fee, scaled lower or higher depending on vehicle weight, would generate $500 million a year.

Martin Luther King, Jr. Day - 2008

Time for Colorado to Say "No New Taxes!"

Where I live you must get permission from the municipal government to have hot water in your home.

That is probably the case wherever you reside in Colorado.

A 'permit' costing $40 is required in order to replace a water heater in Arvada, Colorado. Of course, city officials have told me that this is for 'safety' reasons. But state law already mandates that a 'certified' plumber install the water heating tank -- so, in effect, my family has to pay twice for a redundant service.

Take a moment and reflect on all the government imposed fees, permits and taxes that you have to pay to local, county, special district, state and federal levels of government -- everyone of those is 'permission' from central authority -- because just try and stay out of legal trouble by NOT paying.

Yet for all these fees and taxes, all we hear constantly from government 'leaders' and 'representatives' is that there is not enough money to provide 'necessary' services. So, every level of government is scheming to get you to approve more taxes and more fees ... all the time!

Something is wrong. Now a big part of the problem is that we have reached an overpopulation level where there is diminishing substantive ability for any amount of infrastructure to provide adequate services to so many people. But the other problem is that since the supply-side ideology of Pres. Reagan has held sway in this country, the wealthy elite have been playing on the 'compassion' of liberals to get working and middle class Americans to pay all the bills. Yes, you hear from Democrats and liberals all the time that we must tax ourselves 'for the children' or that must should tax ourselves to build mass transit 'for clean air' or that we must tax ourselves 'for the arts' and on and on and on.

You get what is going on here, don't you? The governing class and the elite transnational corporatists have shills in the liberal 'leadership' that will always try and convince you that YOU must pay more. Meanwhile, as the gap between rich and poor demonstrates, the millionaires and billionaires pay less as a percentage of income every year.

So, I'm joining the tax revolt. And until there is bottom-to-top tax and fee and permit reform in this state and country, I urge you to join, too. NO! NO! NO! To any new taxes. No! to anymore regressive property or sales tax increases for schools or mass transit or new highways or new museums. No! to even the idea of a new $100 increase per car registration fee. No! to any state income tax increases until real progressivity is finally made a part of that system.

We can expect to be punished by government, like we were children, if new tax rates or fees are not approved -- they'll take away sports from the high schools, they won't water the grass in the parks, they will threaten to fire firefighters, so on and so forth. But resisting tyranny always comes at some cost; in the short term we might suffer some, however the benefit in the longer term is greater freedom and equality. Therefore, as a matter of principle working and middle class folks must stop feeding the corporatized government that perpetuates the rule of the two corrupt political parties and subsidizes the richest five percent of American and 'international' citizens.

A senior citizen living on a fixed income should not have to pay $40 to the government to get permission to have hot water in their home. Nor anyone else for that matter. This unquenchable thirst for revenue has invaded too many places in our daily lives. It needs to stop.

'Principle Before Politics' in Mile High Newspapers

In Colorado's 7th Congressional District, candidate for U.S. House, Dave Chandler, explains why a vote for him is a courageous choice for real, genuine change. Here is the guest column Dave wrote and that has been published this week in the local newspapers of Lakewood, Golden, Wheat Ridge and Arvada.

Also today, in a 'top-of-the-page' editorial (excerpt and link below), the Denver Post highlights a significant problem with the Perlmutter candidacy. Conflict of interest, the influence of lobbyists, the culture of corruption in the Congress -- will not be remedied by voting for 'politics as usual'. The best way to ensure that Perlmutter's personal conflict of interest does not create ethical problems is simply to vote for Dave Chandler ... just as Dave discusses in his guest column.

We can do better than what the Democrats and Republicans are offering. It is time to vote for 'Principle Before Politcs' and elect Dave Chandler to the U.S. House.

Mile High Newspapers

Principle Before Politics

Lou Dobbs, CNN news anchor, in a recent commentary wrote of Republicans and Democrats that “... neither party takes you and me seriously; in part because both are bought and paid for by corporate America and special interests. And neither party gives a damn about the middle class.”

“Change” is a popular slogan in this election. But the truth is that neither of the two big party candidates will effect much change if elected because their campaigns have shown that they are eager, willing participants in a corrupt process. They raise hundreds of thousands of dollars from special interests to spend on negative advertising -- they will hardly turn and bite the hand that feeds them should they gain office.

The consequences of this system is that representatives give preferential consideration to the wishes of big donors, at the expense of working and middle class Americans. If they want big money for their campaigns, they have to listen to the corporate and special interest lobbyists first.

Yes, we need fundamental change.

“Change” is also a challenge for voters. Many citizens lament the current campaign finance system that amounts to “legalized bribery”. But voters feel compelled by party loyalty or a sense of powerlessness to pick ‘politics as usual’. The challenge is to take a courageous stand and vote for a candidate who is truly independent and does not take any special interest money.

I only take contributions of $500 or less from individuals.

Imagine if a candidate like me who “walks the talk” on contributions is elected to the U.S. Congress? A political earthquake would rattle through Washington that might finally motivate some real, genuine reform.

Where candidates stand on the Iraq war illustrates how special interest money influences positions.

I advocate for what I believe is right, I am not concerned about money with party loyalty strings attached or favors from defense contractors, nor must I spin my words so as not to offend certain special interests.

In my opinion, U.S. troops in Iraq should be quickly withdrawn and brought home; we should close all permanent bases in Iraq; and there should be an international conference convened -- with all parties at the table -- to negotiate a plan for peace.

My position is clear -- no theoretical strategies or weasel words. If the war in Iraq is an important issue for you, these are your choices: Rick O’Donnell’s plan for sending more troops; Ed Perlmutter’s ambiguous “redeployment”; or Dave Chandler’s commitment to getting American troops home where they belong.

Please go to my campaign web site, www.DaveChandler.us and see how I stand on the issues of the day. Agree or disagree with my positions, you can know this: they were arrived at based on principle and what I have heard from residents of the 7th district -- big money from campaign contributors will not have had any influence.

What a difference from what we have become accustomed, uh?

---

Link: EDITORIAL: Perlmutter Must Build a D.C. Firewall | Denver Post

... Let us raise in advance a flag of caution for 7th Congressional District candidate Ed Perlmutter. His wife is the Denver manager for a top Washington lobbying firm, making it incumbent upon Perlmutter to erect a fearsome firewall should he win election.

The risks of conflict are hardly theoretical. In 2005, Congress approved $750 million for projects favored by lobbyists whose relatives were involved with the bills, according to USA Today. The newspaper reported that registered lobbying groups employed 30 family members last year to influence spending bills that their relatives with ties to House and Senate appropriations committees oversaw or helped write. ...

"Out of sight, out of mind" Not Progressive Environmental Policy

Congressional candidate for Colorado's 7th district, Dave Chandler, says Democrat Perlmutter is pandering and Republican O'Donnell is irresolute on a local environmental issue.

It is a curious thing.

Apparently Ed Perlmutter and Rick O'Donnell believe that other communities can not do enough for the Denver metro area -- they should take all of the radioactive hazardous waste that we want to ship to them. We don't want to live with it -- so the New Mexicans and Idahoans can live with it.

Perlmutter is trying to make an issue out of the Deer Trail hazard waste storage facility in Adams County being permitted to accept tailings from a Denver radium mill that operated between 1915 to 1927. In the 1920s this radium 'dirt' was used to pave streets in the Capitol Hill area.

According to the Commerce City Beacon:

"For several years now, Denver street crews have systematically attacked the 350,000 tons, approximately 100,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil at 44 different sites throughout the city. In an agreement with the Army Corps of Engineers, the radium laced soils, asphalt and rock has been shipped via gondola rail car to the U.S. Ecology dump in Grand View, Idaho.

With 86,823 cubic yards of waste remaining, the 2006-2007 streets projects have been postponed because the Rocky Mountain Low Level Radioactive Waste Board denied Denver’s request for a permit to export the waste to Idaho."

So, even though 15,000 cubic yards of contaminated Denver dirt has already been sent to Idaho, Perlmutter thinks that our Rocky Mountain neighbor to the northwest needs to do a whole lot more. “There is no reason for Deer Trail to become a regional radioactive waste dump for waste from out of state because there are already places outside of Colorado that can take it," says Perlmutter.

And Rick O'Donnell now apparently agrees with Perlmutter. The Denver Post reports:

"We're not talking about materials from Energy Department defense-grade weapons - there's no nuclear material, uranium or plutonium," O'Donnell was quoted as telling Environment and Energy Daily, an online publication based in Washington, D.C., that tracks energy and environmental policies.

O'Donnell's campaign said he hadn't been fully aware of the issue when he spoke with the reporter. It said O'Donnell now opposes the dumping of low-level radioactive waste at the 250-acre Clean Harbors Deer Trail Facility near Last Chance.

(There's your dynamic two-party system for ya ... they agree to agree.)

But let's be clear -- a tremendous amount of high level and low level radioactive waste has been sent out of Colorado in recent years.

From the Shattuck superfund site, according to the EPA: In the course of the work to complete the remediation of the monolith, perimeter soils, and Bannock Street ROW, a total of 2244 railcars containing approximately 243,101 tons of soil and monolith materials were shipped to U.S. Ecology" in Grand View, Idaho.

According to the Department of Energy from the Rocky Flats clean up, "over 15,000 cubic meters of transuranic/transuranic mixed waste to WIPP" (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) in New Mexico.

So, I agree with the Thursday, September 14, editorial of the Rocky Mountain News:

"Denver has put its effort to get rid of radium-bearing pavement on hold because it's no longer willing to ship the material all the way to Idaho.

And it shouldn't have to. A site near the town of Last Chance in Adams County has been cleared by the state health department to take the low-level radioactive waste.

But the county stubbornly refuses to let it go there, even though other landfills in its jurisdiction take more dangerous materials. ...

... The squabble has been going on for more than a year, and now Democrat Ed Perlmutter is trying to exploit the issue in the 7th District congressional race. ...

... The pavement isn't the kind of stuff that should be going, say, to Yucca Mountain in Nevada. The low-level waste emits less radioactivity than someone would be exposed to in a year from being outdoors.

The Last Chance facility was licensed by the state late last year but Adams County continues to refuse to let in the waste on grounds that it might also have to take similar, perhaps more dangerous, waste from other sources. But if any waste were more dangerous, the state could revoke the permit. ...

... The facility is cleared to accept materials that fall below the state threshold for radioactive waste: 0.002 microcuries per gram. This covers naturally occurring radioactive materials that are so low-level that they're technically exempted from the state's definition of radioactive waste.

It's time for Adams County to relent so Denver can resume its pavement-clearing program. Denver saves a little money, the county earns a little money and no harm is done to the local environment or residents. "

Part of human existence is that we have to live with the consequences of our actions. It is part of the trade-offs that we make every single day in our society. We drive cars, we have to accept some level of accidents and pollution; we buy packaged food at the grocery store, we have to hire someone to cart away our trash into a nearby landfill; we benefit from modern medicine, we must figure out ways of disposing of medical waste safely.

In this case, for instance, we want to be able to buy lumber and rose bushes at the Home Depot built on the decontaminated radium mill site, we may just have to find a place to put the detritus of the clean up.

What is wrong and unfair about that?

"Out of sight, out of mind" is not a progressive environmental policy. But you hope it sounds good if you're a traditional, establishment politican trying to pander to 'green' voters.

Like global warming, we cannot take steps to mitigate negative impacts and work on solutions if we refuse to recognize that the problem exists, or we ignore it, or we just try and shove the 'inconvenient truth' under the carpet.

If we want to live with less toxic waste there are things we can do, as this Greenpeace fact sheet points out:

SOLUTION:
• Dangerous chemicals should be replaced by safer substitutes.
• Manufacturers must take responsibility for the disposal of their products.
• All chemicals should be fully tested before they are allowed on the market

WHAT YOU CAN DO:
• Tell Congress to pass legislation that requires the substitution of dangerous chemicals with safer alternatives.
• Buy only from companies that make clean products; for example, many companies have eliminated vinyl (PVC) from their products and packaging.
• Contact companies and demand to know what chemicals are used in their products.

Strict monitoring of waste sites like Deer Trail is part of the license and the law. Demanding that public health officials be diligent in supervising this site is critical -- we should always be requiring accountablility for the safe operation of this site from its owners and the government. I also support as part of any monitoring process -- oversight from a citizen board which includes both independent scientists and members of effected communities.

If I am elected to Congress, I will be an advocate for no-nonsense action to protect our environment and the health of the residents of the 7th district. But, since I do not take special interest campaign contributions and will not involve myself with Washington, D.C. lobbyists, I will be a free, independent voice for doing the right thing.

We can do more to keep ourselves safer from unpleasant side effects of our modern lives, but not by waffling or by making ridiculous statements like Perlmutter's: "We have to ensure that the 7th District does not become a radioactive sacrifice zone."

'Pandering' Perlmutter and 'Irresolute' Rick are not demonstrating the kind of thoughtful representation that common sense thinking people in the 7th Congressional District deserve.

A vote for Dave Chandler for Congress will be a ballot cast for a fresh, new way of representing the people of Colorado.

Republicans, Democrats Love Military Pork

Colorado politicians in the nation's capital are smiling pigs when it comes to spending your tax money -- regardless of party.

Now, considering the mess of foreign policy made by Bush and Cheney and Rice and Rumsfeld, the genuine strength and preparedness of our military may be more important than at anytime since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Nevertheless, what we see from the elite, establishment politicians is this old nostrum that we have to increase federal spending on the military every single year ... and if you don't support that prescription then you are "soft" on defense.

Well, throwing money at something just for the sake of showing concern is kind of irresponsible, even kind of stupid. But that is exactly what we have seen for years from the radical Republicans -- and now the wimpish Democrats have bought into this fiscal recklessness.

As the following analysis points out (emphasis is mine), there is just as much pork and wasteful spending coming out of Washington, D.C. these days as ever. In some ways it is worse because if the label "military spending" is put on the pork, then all the politicians are afraid to vote against it. Like pigs they just never can get enough ... they want more and more money so that they can redistribute your tax dollars to their campaign contributors.

For instance, we have gotten NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING from the boondoggle "missile defense" (Star Wars) project. The radical Republican cronies of Bush who are contractors for this technological lemon have made billion of dollars -- that's it. Period.

For what has been spent on "missile defense" we could have built a quadruple-layered fence for the entire length of the Mexican-U.S. border and staffed thousands and thousands of border patrol agents. Agree or disagree with the idea of a fence, at least something would have been accomplished for the money spent. And that is going to be my approach if I'm elected to Congress. Nothing is off the table when it comes to appropriating taxpayer dollars. Budget items under the Pentagon label need as much scrutiny as items in the Health and Human Services Department requests.

It is clear that the Democrats are not willing to be rigorous with the federal budget anymore than Bush and the radical Republicans have shown themselves to be.

It is time for a change.

Link: Pentagon's Budget Has Too Many Dollars and Not Enough Sense | Winslow Wheeler/The Forward

All the conditions are ripe for a major debate on America's defense budget. A Republican White House and Congress have produced, at increased cost, a military establishment that is shrinking, aging and less ready to fight. The ruinous effects have shown up again and again, in the form of over-stretched, poorly supported forces in Iraq.

There is, however, no debate. The Democratic Party, while happy to take easy potshots, is advocating more of the same.

On track to exceed $530 billion this year, Pentagon spending is now higher than at any time since World War II, even though our military is smaller today than at anytime since 1946. America's huge defense budget now exceeds the rest of the world combined. ...

... Perhaps worst of all is how we pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Protesting it can't predict what the wars are costing, the Pentagon submits to Congress late "emergency supplementals" to finance combat operations — along with several other things it can't wedge into its gigantic "baseline" budget. Congress, again with the Democrats as willful conspirators, proceeds to use the supplementals as a budget gimmick to enable still more pork while also failing to redress the inadequacies in the war funding accounts, such as insufficient payments for equipment repair and replacement. ...

... Indeed, the Democrats have made their bid. They recently released a document titled "Real Security." It accurately notes "inadequate planning and incompetent policies have failed to make Americans as safe as we should be."

"Real Security" pledges to "rebuild a state-of-the-art military by making the needed investments in equipment and manpower." The fine print in the 123-page white paper making the case for "Real Security" goes on to implicitly endorse the entire Bush defense acquisition plan, except for promising to accelerate and expand some programs.

To pay for it all, not even the usual Democratic piñata, national missile defense, is suggested as an offset. Instead, the Democrats suggest the supplemental funding that now pays upwards of $100 billion per year for the wars should continue when the wars are finished. ...

... In today's political environment, it requires real moral spine on the part of civilians in the Pentagon or Congress to stand up to the military services' procurement bureaucracies. But with weapon systems being served up that have little to do with real world combat and a lot more to do with technological and careerist agendas, that is exactly what the situation calls for.

Real political courage is needed, not dollar transfers to favored constituencies, to force Congress to stop junking up defense bills with pork and raiding the Defense Department's personnel and operating budgets to pay for it. ...

... The Democrats want us to ignore how they helped to create the mess and their current intention to do nothing about it. In fact, they are not even thinking about solutions — and the Republicans appreciate that.

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

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.