Snowstorms

The last several weeks living in North Georgia have made me long for the warm weather of New Smyrna. Snow has fallen across the mountains and into the Mid-Atlantic States. Mentioned in the news, but not garnering huge attention, has been the concern over budget shortfalls to handle snow removal and storm effects. The next economic storm brewing is more significant than this winter’s snowstorms though, it is the budget shortfalls at city, county, and state levels. Unlike the Federal government the other levels of government cannot run deficit budgets, leaving IOUs, payment vouchers, and possible insolvency as their only options.

Currently, California’s state budget is $40 billion, and assumes $9.6 billion in revenue will come from the Federal government, although it is rumored unlikely. Watching the news, the “Governator” remains firm on passing budgets, leaving programs intact, and not raising taxes. Sadly, Arnold has been at the front of the line grabbing monies for his state, in sharp contrast to what most Republican governors tend to do. Along with California; Illinois, Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin are also on the verge of fiscal disaster. Each of these states shares in common an increase in spending to fund public pension plans and support social programs that outpaced revenues. Coupled with the economic downturn, and housing crisis, revenues have fallen sharply. States like Arizona and Florida saw legislators enjoy spending due to property tax growth and found themselves like giddy children with an unlimited budget in a toy store full of opportunity.

Compounding the state problems are unfunded pension liabilities. Teachers, firefighters, policemen, and other public service employees enjoy an opportunity that allows productive members of society to work a limited number of years and then retire. In California the projected teacher pension shortfall is currently $43 billion, a huge number that can only be made up through taxes, additional contributions, or reduced benefits.

At the municipal level, foreclosures have created property tax deficits and reduced spending has cut sales tax revenues. Adding to revenue problems, and wiping out reserves, is increased expense for snowstorms, ice storms, and potential hurricanes this summer. “USA Today” ran an article on February 3rd, 2010 examining road maintenance under the caption, “Tight times put gravel on the road.” The article noted gravel roads are emerging as a sign of financial struggle in rural towns. In this case, budgets are so constrained that regular maintenance can no longer be performed on asphalt roads, something we all take for granted. Additionally, we have seen the fantastic examples of bridge failures, and can expect more infrastructure failures of roads, sewer, and water.

Listening to a podcast during the last week the discussion turned to the economy and the participants talked about local insolvencies, and mortgage resets, making an observation, “if it were really that bad wouldn’t someone tell us?” In hindsight, no warnings were given leading to the housing bust, or the market crash in March 2009. Looking back further, the headlines of the 1930’s are hilarious with weekly pontifications of better times coming and I believe our economic recovery is going to echo a similar path. I realize that comment contradicts the optimistic news presented daily. However too many factors remain: unemployment, reduced tax revenues, drains on local spending, excessive quantitative easing, Chinese currency manipulation, and increased spending. It seems like Americans have become the proverbial frog in a pot of hot water, slowly being boiled to death, oblivious to the impending doom.

February 19, 2010 by Big Government

Sheep

Sheep

This past weekend was the Superbowl, a time honored tradition of getting together with friends, watching the game, cheering for fantastic football plays and watching commercials at halftime. I scoff at this as a continued hilarious process of entertaining the sheep, or the “sheeple” if you prefer. Sadly, I assert more people know the names of the quarterbacks of each team and not the names of their two Senators. Most people will know which team won the game, but cannot name which party has a majority in Congress. Lastly, the commercials will be recounted with detailed attention, but the average person cannot describe the details of the largest federal budget passed in history this last week.

I find myself an outcast because I don’t watch the Superbowl, or follow professional football obsessively. I admit I don’t follow any professional sports religiously, although I may know names, teams, or who leads a league at times. And of course, if I were invited to a game or race, I would joyfully attend. Preparing this week’s column I had realized I had no idea who was playing, and did not care. I realized a long time ago I had no interest in watching millionaires who made no contribution to society run around on a field or court. When the players make the news it is usually due to beating their wife or girlfriend, an affair, drugs, or shooting. But yet, our society idolizes these players that have near superhuman strength.

With President Obama’s populist push against the CEOs and executives of major corporations I must wonder why sports and Hollywood celebrities are exempt. The American people readily hand their money over to large entertainment corporations that provide obscene riches to a very few in an environment where nepotism is more likely to drive success than any type of skill. On the other hand, a successful businessman who risked his home, personal family life, and employed others is now demonized if he rises to a successful level. No one questioned the use of private aircraft and limousines by Paris Hilton, but the automotive executives that employ hundreds of thousands and whose company’s stock is owned by the masses were chastised by Congress for wisely using their time to travel via an efficient means. Ironically, Nancy Pelosi travels every week via private aircraft from Washington, D.C. to California at taxpayer expense but that is not questioned.

President Obama has made it clear that to succeed in America by hard work, rising through the ranks, managing people, and running billion dollar corporations is bad. However, it is acceptable to sign a hundred million dollar contract to play games for a few years, and even get paid if hurt. Or, like Conan O’Brien to get $30 million to peacefully leave a contract at NBC. As much as his populist agenda is being promoted, it scares me to think about a lottery society where success is measured by luck rather than a society that favors hard work, risk, and rewards success. Life is not fair, everyone is not a winner, but America has led the world by everyone having the opportunity to succeed regardless of gender, race, or economics. The Romans distracted the people with entertainment, ran lotteries, and controlled the people to take taxes, and control the people. Governments know when the people are entertained they will turn their backs on the important issues and trust others to care for them, just like sheep. Sadly, it seems like the American people have become sheep who do not care. Now, I must ask, “Who won the game?”

February 19, 2010 by Depression Great Recession Mainstream Media Obama Stupid People

Not True

Middle ground is often hard to find, regardless of whether you try to get there from the left or the right. President Obama made the news three times last week, with each appearance being overshadowed more by politics than the substance behind his comments. His presidency has taken the appearance of a rudderless ship, using the press and public opinion to drive short term goals with no strategic plan to maintain direction. Weekly the administration’s cast of characters marches onto the Sunday morning talk shows and Emanuel, Axelrod, Gibbs, and even Clinton pontificate this week’s new agenda. Like the Clinton years, weekly trial balloons are floated and the Chicago political machine drives the weekly agenda. Sadly, the theme of the week does not deliver substance, but instead takes our country on “Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride”.

A historic opportunity was in front of President Obama last week with the State of the Union Address. However, he again shifted blame for the economy back to the prior eight years before he was elected; offering a repeated argument, he “inherited a failing economy after eight years of bad decisions.” I have previously offered that leaders need to own situations, plans, and provide concrete strategies, but Obama prefers to savor projecting blame. Worsening his image, his speech was overshadowed by his gaffe against the Supreme Court’s recent first amendment ruling. He erred in stating foreign corporations would be allowed to spend in our elections, although 2 U.S.C. 441e(b)(3) prevents this and Justice Alito responded, forever tainting the tone of the speech.

On Friday Obama went to Baltimore to dialogue directly with the Republican Caucus. News reports showed sparring, and the “Huffington Post” reported he mauled the lions in the lion’s den. A frequent video clip of the networks is Obama stating, “I am not an ideologue.” However, my check of the dictionary shows an ideologue to be “an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology.” My recollection of the last twelve months is locking the minority party out of discussions on health care, mocking the passionate citizens of the minority, and demonizing anyone who disagrees with the majority’s agenda. Regardless, I am impressed he engaged, and more importantly did so without a teleprompter.

Saturday was much more in line with the sound bites this President enjoys. His appearance on the sidelines and participating in the commentary at the Georgetown vs. Duke basketball game drove home his likeability. Comfortable in the celebrity style spotlight and ravishing the attention, Obama delivered his typical one-liner partisan dig when asked about being left-handed and responded, “I went to the Republican House caucus just yesterday to prove that I could go to my right once in a while.” Once again though, he received significant coverage of an insignificant event, managing his image and failing to deliver substance.

This last week shined light on the tissue paper thin qualifications of our President and peeled the onion back to show a man that continues to operate in campaign mode, not a strong leader with the strength he promised. The State of the Union a year later was the platform to recount “Hope and Change”. However, promises were broken – Guantanamo, Afghanistan, reducing unemployment – all of which don’t require opposition party support. Even ramming the largest healthcare bill in history into the economy was not accomplished because he cannot lead his own party. Last week’s State of the Union speech could have enticed all Americans, but the populist platform rang hollow with disappointment.

February 6, 2010 by Obama

Haiti and New Orleans

Haiti and New Orleans

When I was 10 years old my family moved from Minnesota to California. The move was huge, but it caused me anxiety because I had watched television shows predicting the next big earthquake and California falling into the Pacific Ocean. Of course, that was more than 30 years ago, and California remains part of the continental United States. However, the residents of California live with the threat of earthquakes every day. Unlike any other natural disaster phenomena, I would conjecture an earthquake is the worst threat to face. Contrastingly, in Florida we have days, up to a week, to prepare for a hurricane. Tornadoes come with minutes of warning, or hours if paying attention to conditions. Even mudslides, floods, and fires provide a reasonable warning. An earthquake, on the other hand, comes any time and with no warning. If you live in California though, you know the threat exists. Living in Haiti on the other hand is a place with minimal earthquake risk.

Facing disaster is reasonable when you know what threat exists, or more importantly have time to prepare. When Katrina struck New Orleans warnings were issued ahead of time, the citizens had a choice to stay or leave. Of course, a weather forecast is never perfect, but with Katrina the severity of potential of the storm obviously loomed. In contrast, Haiti was struck by the worst earthquake in 200 years with no warning, and unlike California, no predisposition for the expectation of earthquakes. It appears Haiti’s government and communications infrastructure collapsed, not unlike the local resources of New Orleans and Louisiana. Immediately, Haiti reached out to its neighbors to seek help, and so did New Orleans. In both instances, massive federal aid packages were mobilized to assist.

News coverage of the events in Haiti has been compassionate and focused on the successes of rescue. In South Florida the media is providing local stories of airports launching relief, medical teams departing, and families reuniting. It is nearly impossible to turn on the television without a reference to the current situation in Haiti and how the citizens of the world are reaching out to their neighbors. Unfortunately, last week there was troubling coverage of gangs, violence, and looting. I found the similarities to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans striking in this regard. Sadly, there are people who disregard the brotherhood of man and instead take advantage of disaster and troubling times. Amplifying this situation is sensationalism by the press of the minority doing so. Bothersome as these situations are though, we should not be left with images of theft and violence, but focus on the success of rescue and efforts to help those in need.

However, the real story remains at the ground level, not from the massive organized efforts. The individual rescues, and thousands of examples of neighbor helping neighbor. The real survivors in Haiti are those helping, not seeking assistance or depending on a foreign nation to save the day. The real survivors understand their fate is up to them and do not blame anyone for the earthquake that struck. In contrast, the residents of New Orleans shunned personal responsibility, looked to blame others, and waited for someone to save them. Haiti’s earthquake is going to forever change the look of neighboring nations as its own people realize it will take decades to recover. As we watch from afar, I challenge you to examine your own preparedness for unforeseen disasters, and remind you to believe in the goodness of people helping people.

January 31, 2010 by Health care preparedness Stupid People

Terrorism

Lately the news has focused on the Christmas Day underwear bomber and his attempt to destroy Northwest Flight 253 landing at Detroit. Fortunately, no lives were lost. However, I believe Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab succeeded as he has returned our focus to terrorism when considering the definition as “a state of fear and submission.” Sadly though, I would offer that citizens in America are not fearful, but instead subject to fear-mongering by the media and the government.

On September 12, 2001 I believe we were all stunned and wondered, “how could this happen?” President Bush moved to create a huge new government spending program with the formation of the Department of Homeland Security and the expansion of the Transportation Security Administration. The first DHS Secretary, Tom Ridge, created the threat level designations to identify the probability of attack, but it remains the same color, “Orange”, with no quantitative definition. In the post September 11th world we dutiful gave up civil rights in the name of safety, subjecting ourselves to demeaning searches at airports like removing our shoes, forcing little old ladies to forfeit knitting needles, and watching our children cry as they pass through the process. The ultimate idiocracy came with the subjection of infant formula and breast milk to potential disposal.

From there, the paranoia spread to other parts of our lives, all under the guise of the “state of fear.” We now attend sporting events and pass through metal detectors and have bags searched. Regardless of all the post September 11th expansion of technologies and counter-terrorism intelligence agencies, President Obama admitted there was a system failure; exemplifying the quote, “insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.” But, like predecessors, President Obama and DHS Secretary Napolitano have proposed further expansion of security; spending monies on new high-tech imaging machines, explosive sniffers, more databases for comparing intelligence, and increasing TSA. Somehow they expect this will bring a different outcome, but yet they are repeating the same things.

In the new 2010 environment I have noted a radical shift in public opinion, there is no confidence in the government’s plans this time. Thus, we the people have caught on to the charade, doing the same thing repeatedly will not bring a different outcome. Even media sources supporting this Administration have had a plethora of critical columnists and articles examining these new security proposals. Furthermore, citizens are finally showing outrage over the proposed invasiveness of new search techniques and enhanced screening.

Handling terrorism is difficult, but it is war. Unfortunately it is not like wars of the past where the enemy wore a different color or fought along geographical boundaries. In this politically correct world it has been made incorrect to reference a “war on terror” for fear of inflaming those who attack us. I prefer to look at the problem from an economic and statistical standpoint and question why certain terrorists are unsuccessful. I recognize there are two contrasting views regarding how security and safety is delivered. One opinion is to willingly submit to any search in the name of safety and the other is to minimize the invasiveness to the average person and instead profile certain groups. I think we also have to use quantitative values and look at cost versus benefit of different methods. Lastly, if real terrorism were to occur I do not think any amount of effort could be done to stop it.

January 23, 2010 by Uncategorized

Happy New Year


Many of us are taking a look at the last year and reflecting on what we did right and wrong and how to improve for 2010. I hope our government is doing the same, taking this time to reflect and improve its performance. Annually I make goals, not resolutions, but goals. After making a list of goals I prioritize and determine the actionable items needed to succeed. Unfortunately, I feel our government and country fall short similarly because there is no long-term vision, no goal. In contrast, President Kennedy did an excellent job of creating direction for the country when he set a goal of putting a man on the moon before 1970. Since then our Presidents have spoken in grandiose prose with no answerability thus allowing them to avoid political failure.

The past year, with a new administration, and significantly reshaped Congress offers an excellent opportunity for reflection. One year ago today we had no stimulus plan, no healthcare plan, no Copenhagen Agreement, and less troops committed to Afghanistan. At the same time, the U-6 unemployment rate was 13.5% versus 17% today, the new Whitehouse forecast unemployment to increase if stimulus was not passed, we were promised the automotive companies would not file bankruptcy if we bailed them out, and housing markets were forecasted to improve along with foreclosures dropping. Sadly, America has become sicker as unemployment skyrocketed, housing foreclosures hit historic highs, credit stopped flowing to consumers, commercial real estate markets teeter on collapse, the dollar is losing favor as the currency standard, and consumers curtailed their retail spending more than expected.

As individuals when our goals and plans do not work we have to reassess and change course. The most successful people consider this not a failure, but an opportunity. Watching and listening to pundits from political and financial news shows brings a plethora of analysts willing to pontificate blame. What we need is a leader; a year ago President Obama promised “Hope and Change”, but today’s polls show his approval rating at the lowest ever recorded for a first year president, disappointing even his most avowed supporters. I think the President’s single biggest failure has not been his desires for Hope and Change, but his insistent rearview perspective of placing blame on his predecessors. Leaders do not focus on blame, instead they own their circumstances, develop responsible goals and plans, and move forward.

Our government needs to change focus now and save our society before we fall like the empires of the past. Our Founding Fathers had a radical vision for a new republic and famously changed the world with the Constitution. President Roosevelt navigated the waters of the depression with specific actionable programs. President Kennedy motivated an entire generation to put public service first and a man on the moon. Mayor Giuliani cleaned up New York City and gave its residents hope after 9/11. The consistent leadership trait among these leaders is vision and accountability.

With a new year upon us I hope our leaders in government, Obama, Reid, and Pelosi, will focus less on their political future and stop blaming those who have been gone from power for more than a year. The minority leadership can help craft a vision side by side too and the majority must understand that dissent means debate and not continue to plow forward over unanimous objection. A new year brings new opportunity and can erase thoughts of the past; I hope our government leadership, looks forward and stops looking backward.

January 10, 2010 by Big Government

Protected Speech

I sit in the middle on this page with an objective to raise points of interest to anyone, regardless of political view. Writing on this page brings scrutiny to my opinions and exposes myself to debate and argument. I have learned it takes courage to stand in front of the crowd for what I believe, and I always work to ensure there are no personal attacks in my writing, but often I see columnists and bloggers using personal attacks in an effort to drive home their point. Fueling these attacks is the veil of anonymity; no longer signing a letter or a blog response with your name and address creating an inflammatory environment. Furthermore, I do not believe the First Amendment was intended to protect anonymous speech, but the Supreme Court has taken a different view.

I absolutely believe our democracy thrives on protected speech; it differentiates us from the oppression found around the world when ideas and opinions are given. Appropriately, libel and slander laws are also in place to prevent abuse of protected speech.

A few recent examples of my concern over whether anonymous speech is protected are important as I feel the cowardice of anonymity fuels defamatory personal attacks. For example, Tiger Woods is fighting in the Court of public opinion. Legitimate writers are identifiable and must “source” their comments. Sadly though, I have read news articles on various web sites where anonymous bloggers attack Tiger’s character and make crude comments about him personally. These anonymous people don’t know him and have no basis for those comments, but behind the veil of anonymity these people weakly assert defamatory opinions.

Similarly, people either love or hate Sarah Palin. As a country we are as divided on feelings about her as we are on college football in Florida. We all know the story of Palin and her rise to the highest position of leadership in Alaska, but yet people attack her personally. Opinions focus not on Palin’s accomplishments as a politician, but instead follow David Letterman’s method of crude, personal attacks. A quick look at the Huffington Post article regarding the Newsweek cover featuring Palin’s “legs” showed over 1,000 commentators and I must wonder how the tone of those comments would change had real names and addresses been used.

Personally, I feel the problem with the protection of anonymous speech is it allows for cowardice and unfounded statements. But, the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled anonymous speech is protected. The much cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre vs. Ohio Elections Commission reads: “Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.”

Although protected, sadly anonymous speech typically leaves the door open to defamation and the burden to prove otherwise is on the victim. Thus, this empowers questionable publications and writings and can sway public opinion on unfounded claims. I will continue to sign my name and always write with the understanding that I stand by my opinions and am not ashamed to hide behind anonymity. I encourage you to consider what you want to say and whether it is anonymity or your beliefs that give you the strength to share your opinion.

December 31, 2009 by Civil Rights

Merry Christmas from Congress

As the Christmas holiday comes upon us this week I feel compelled to take a look at our government and what has happened in the past year. Driving this is speculation over whether Senator Harry Reid will force a vote on healthcare Christmas Eve. Personally, I hope the vote is squashed, not because of my feelings on government run health care, but because of the actions and methods of this new Democratic Party run government.

I am concerned by the cloak of secrecy and selling votes to force healthcare to fruition. In contrast to Congress’ actions right now, I have had the opportunity to sit on several government boards in Florida and the “Sunshine Laws” have been drilled into me. On one hand they are frustrating as these laws regarding open, transparent government make it difficult to negotiate contracts, bid on projects, and protect the tax payer in some instances. But, this smaller issue is far outweighed by eliminating secrecy in government. Florida is renowned for putting a high priority on the public’s right of access to governmental meetings and records. In fact, the principles of open government are not only embodied in Florida statutes, but also are guaranteed in the state Constitution.

Similar to the Sunshine Laws, President Obama proposed “Sunlight Before Signing” stating “Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, I will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” However, this has been done far less than 50% of the time since taking office. Additionally, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously declared on September 24th she would make the healthcare bills available for review at least 72-hours prior to any votes, but as we know that was not the case. The American people learned how this new majority party government would work when the stimulus bill passed last spring was voted on without accommodation for members of Congress to read it, rushed through for signature, and even President Obama did not follow his own directive for “Sunlight Before Signing”.

Open government protects us, the citizens from potential tyranny by our elected officials. I am dismayed at closed-door meetings in Washington, the President calling members of a single party to the Whitehouse, or caucus meetings to promise hundreds of millions of dollars to a single congressional district or state. Sadly, at the national level straw polls are taken, potential votes counted, and strategies are determined to allow some members of congress to even vote “Nay” in an effort to protect them from political backlash over certain legislation. Thus, a bill may pass by the slimmest majority, but a majority nonetheless when a single party controls Congress; all in sharp contrast to Florida’s open government laws.

This week much political maneuvering regarding procedures will take place while most of us are distracted with holiday events. One must wonder why if the proposed healthcare bill is critical to one-sixth of our economy, our well-being, and best for the country then why must negotiation be done secretly. Like Santa Claus, the Senate will come together Christmas Eve to deliver the “gift” of healthcare over the objection of the majority of Americans.

December 24, 2009 by Big Government Health care

Civil Rights

Civil rights are a class of rights and freedoms protecting individuals from unwarranted government action and ensuring one’s ability to participate in the civil and political life of the state without discrimination or repression. I believe most of us take these rights for granted and have no appreciation for these freedoms conveyed upon us. Furthermore, we turn a blind eye to the litigation by brave citizens taking place everyday across the country, as there generally is no publicity, but yet these court cases effect all of us in ways we cannot imagine.

Protection of civil rights is not an issue of political values, whether you are on the Right or the Left. These are rights neutral to politics, but often the court cases surrounding an issue become the source of political argument instead of the issue at hand. For example, my wife and I recently watched the movie, “The People vs. Larry Flynt” covering the landmark Supreme Court Case about first amendment rights and protection of speech. When the arguments were made the Moral Majority dominated public opinion and the Right was blind to the larger concern of speech versus Larry Flynt’s association with the porn industry. Ironically, this case provides Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck with the freedom they need to criticize and satirize the current president.

In Georgia a current case is before the Federal Court of Appeals regarding gun rights and carrying guns on MARTA (the public transit system) when properly licensed with a firearm’s permit. Anti-gun groups from the Left argue these rights should not persist in the name of safety or terrorist concerns. From a civil rights standpoint though, the interesting fact in this case is the 4th Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizure. The Georgia Carry Organization (GCO) has argues stopping a citizen, who is committing no crime, to check ID and firearms licensure is the same as the Supreme Court’s previously affirmed position that police cannot stop a motorist, who is committing no crime, just to check for a valid driver’s license. A loss in a case like this will permit law enforcement to stop anyone regardless of circumstances.

Similar to the case above, every American has willfully given up civil rights since the terrorist acts of September 11th, 2001. To cross the borders between states every traveler is subject to verification of identity and search including scanning, pat-down, and removal of shoes. Of course, this takes place at airports and applies to millions of daily passengers. With no clear directive, TSA has taken wide sweeping liberties to extend authority to include screening for crimes which may or may not be in progress. For instance, in 2008 an aide, Steve Bierfeldt, to Congressman Ron Paul was detained by TSA at St. Louis-Lambert International Airport and questioned although no crime was committed. In this case, he refused to answer questions regarding why he was carrying $4,700 in cash and had no reason to comply because no crime was in process and it was a violation of his 4th Amendment rights. Fortunately for all travelers, he prevailed and TSA is slowly issuing new policies limiting screenings to searches for “terrorist related” items.

It is easy to criticize Larry Flynt if you are offended by pornography. It is easy to criticize the actions of the GCO if you do not support gun rights. It is easy to defend the actions of TSA in the name of protection. However, it is hard to stand up to the government, fight battles in court, and protect civil rights. These are the unsung heroes of the Left and the Right, fighting battles for all of us each day.

Copyright (C) 2009 John R. Nelson. All Rights Reserved.

December 20, 2009 by Big Government Civil Rights

Big Brother IS Watching

The next time you enter Wal-Mart look up and smile while walking into the store. It is stunning, but you will see a dozen cameras scanning the parking lot. Do the same at a major intersection while waiting for the light to change; note the cameras at the top of the traffic lights and count cameras watching the intersection. Willfully, the public has submitted to the pervasiveness of closed circuit television in the name of perceived safety. Ben Franklin wrote, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

For years we have not been able to go in a store without “Theft TV” watching our actions in the name of crime prevention. Municipalities are adding cameras throughout their cities to prevent crimes. Currently, no one has more than the British; in 2001 the country had over one million cameras, by 2005 that number had quadrupled. One measure used is the number of cameras per thousand people. In England, the borough of Wandsworth has the highest number of CCTV cameras in London, with just under four cameras per 1,000 people. Its total number of cameras – 1,113 – is more than the police departments of Boston, Johannesburg and Dublin City Council combined.

The web site, “patrolcctv.com” advertises the latest camera proposals, are vehicles equipped with CCTV. The site advertizes it “stabilizes images, reads license plates at 250FT.” These always on systems analyze license plate numbers to search for a relationship between vehicles, names, and criminals. Furthermore, the date, time, and GPS location of the vehicle may be stored for future reference in a database. Just like software scanning state databases of driver’s license photos for “probable hits” the same will be done for vehicles. Ultimately, all of us now stand in a police line-up every day by virtue of having a driver’s license and are under constant stake-out by driving vehicles.

The saturation of cameras in Britain and the United States has soared due to successes when major crimes are caught on film. Of course, the camera makes police work much easier and the public tends to feel a sense of safety. I on the other hand am bothered by the pervasiveness of CCTV and the potential for misuse by authorities or private agencies. I believe government, when given the opportunity, will ultimately use data-mining, facial recognition software, and other surveillance means to identify potential criminals. At the same time, I believe such use suffers from a high probability of potential error. Sadly, the burden of proof will shift from one of guilt made by prosecutors to one of innocence argued by citizens.

On one side the claim for cameras is obvious: increased public safety and crime prevention. On the other hand, there appears to be no conclusive evidence cameras are a crime deterrent. We believe George Orwell’s “1984” would never happen, but we are now living with Big Brother watching everything we do. Willfully, we submitted in the belief of safety and instead, like Franklin warned, have lost our liberties. Look up and smile the next time you think you are alone.

December 10, 2009 by Big Government Civil Rights