Courts

Lawyers

Lawyers (8/31/2011)

The problem in America with health care costs, insurance and even consumer costs is lawyers. I fly airplanes and recently was reading a placard in the aircraft, finding it idiotic because it states the obvious: “…failure to properly latch seat and heed all instructions can result in bodily injury or death.” That placard is there due to a widow successfully suing Cessna when he adjusted his seat while climbing out on take-off. The incident was certainly not Cessna’s fault but a jury ruled otherwise.

Some adventure sports like white water rafting and parachuting require a waiver before participating; again to head off lawsuits. Every amusement park in America has a warning to pregnant women and back pain sufferers at the front of each line to mitigate law suits. Similarly, my wife is pregnant and we were required to sign an 8-page disclaimer releasing the doctor of liability if the baby is harmed during birth due to law suits.

Recently I was in Mexico with my kids and took them to an attraction consisting of natural park area, snorkeling, tubing, and other experiences. Walking through the park there were no hand rails to protect against a fall, there were no cameras watching our every move, and there were no warning signs at each ride In fact, it was probably the nicest, cleanest, most cost-effective, freest park experience I have ever head; it existed without the oversight of lawyers fueling idiocracy.

Three weeks ago I traveled to Gulf Shores, Alabama and saw shocking “ambulance chaser” billboards. The law firms advertising were seeking clients who cleaned up the oil spill and “might” be exhibiting “any” symptoms of illness. Talk about fishing for monies and setting up for a class action lawsuit.

It is nearly impossible to turn on the evening news in Orlando, Florida without the advertising of a particular law firm shopping for clients to call regarding the latest disease, tragedy, or injury. The only justification for the persistent advertising is the successful income stream generated by settlements made just under the radar of large companies. These under $20,000 lawsuits filed frivolously but settled readily by insurance companies cut costs instead of risking larger expenses in court, a steady windfall for law firms.

Examples abound but now I must ask, is this the lawyers’ fault or the juries making it easy to win “life’s lottery” with a lawsuit. I don’t know that caps on lawsuits are the right answer but I would assert less monies to attorneys and more to victims would make lawyers less likely to shop for victims and more likely to pursue justice.

Changeling

Changeling

My family and I recently watched the moving “Changeling” with Angelina Jolie. The movie itself was entertaining and focused on the efforts of a 1920’s woman to recover her missing son. The issue at hand was the corruption of the Los Angeles Police Department after receiving bad press and their attempts to cover up shoddy police work. As we watched I found myself angered over the blatant misuse of authority. For example, when Jolie’s character challenged the police department they had her committed to an LA psychological hospital; a warrantless incarceration without trial. Once behind the walls of the hospital it was nearly impossible for her to plead her case.

Watching the movie caused me to challenge my kids to compare the situation to events of today and instantly they commented on perception of law enforcement corruption and intimidation. Of course, the most obvious example is TSA’s violation of the 4th Amendment at airport security check points and intimidation of people like Aaron Toney who was detained for 90 minutes, without arrest, by TSA on December 31 at Richmond, Virginia’s airport when he removed his shirt and displayed the 4th Amendment on his chest.

In Philadelphia gun owner Mark Fiornio was nearly shot, detained and harassed for lawfully openly carrying a gun. A new FBI Advisory circular, “Communities Against Terrorism: Potential Indicators of Terrorist Activities Related to Military Surplus Stores” advises store owners to keep records of customers making lawful purchases but fitting a profile of self-preparedness.

In London two weeks ago government officials required Amazon.com to stop selling self-defense weapons while authorities simultaneously allowed riots to “run their course.” Thus, the citizens lost the right to protect themselves in their own homes. Similarly, San Francisco authorities shut down cell-towers within the Bart system to prevent a possible riot from developing, but also leaving law abiding citizens with no mechanism for protection.

Regardless of examples I provide I must wonder when intimidation will stop and the rule of law will prevail. The movie “Changeling” highlighted corruption I could not believe existed. Ultimately, the 1930’s Courts found in favor of their “own”, but yet the corruption was known and documented. Like the Gestapo, TSA, police departments, and the National Guard will be asked to turn on citizens instead of protecting those, they are here “To Serve and Protect.”

Little Noticed News

Little Noticed News (6/1/2011)
Oprah, Republican presidential candidate implosions, and Obama’s Irish roots seem to dominate the news. On a national and international level none of these newsworthy events will impact most Americans. Instead, I argue there is an entire underlying level of news taking place nationwide, some of which gets a brief mention on one of the cable or broadcast networks, but most of the news disappears not to be heard from again. America is changing, and changing rapidly. Willfully civil rights and constitutional guarantees are being eroded, and yet a blind eye is turned. Below I have listed examples from the last three weeks.
On May 22, 2011 – a Santa Fe, NM high school announced TSA would pat-down students as part of security to enter Prom. From TSA’s own web site, the agency’s mission is, “The Transportation Security Administration protects the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.” Nowhere is a high school or sports event mentioned, and I cannot imagine being groped on my last night in high school.
May 21, 2011 – Mark Fiornio strolled through downtown Philadelphia lawfully, openly, carrying his permitted gun. The issue at hand is Mr. Fiornio was detained, nearly shot, and charges brought against him for disorderly conduct and reckless endangerment. He tried to explain to police offers he had a permit and cited the statutory laws allowing him to open carry. Local authorities are warning gun owners that they will be “inconvenienced” if they carry unconcealed handguns in the city.
May 15, 2011 – The Indiana Supreme Court, 3-2, ruled people have no right to resist officers who enter their homes under the premise it is in the greater public good and would minimize confrontation. Additionally, the Indiana Court ruled police do not need to knock to serve a search warrant.
May 17, 2011 – Historically police offers required probable cause and a search warrant before breaking into a home. That changed with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kentucky v. King. Ruling 8-1 the justices gave police more leeway to break into homes or apartments in search of illegal drugs when they suspect the evidence otherwise might be destroyed. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented, fearing the ruling gave police an easy way to ignore 4th Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
In each of the above cases I can easily see the argument for “greater good”, “public safety” and other pansy excuses. Sadly, “we the people” are continuing to allow our freedoms to incrementally erode away. In one week, four cases that have far reaching circumstances. As a reminder, blood was shed for The Fourth Amendment, which assures that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,”

Land of the Free

Land of the Free (4/27/2011)

Our national anthem brings pride unto ourselves when we quote the famous lines, “O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.” Sadly, since that fateful night at Fort McHenry I would offer the founding fathers fight against royal tyranny for liberty and our forefathers shedding blood for future generations has been usurped by complacency. Examples abound in our current society of both the loss of freedom and lack of bravery.

A December 4, 2006 column in the Russian paper, Pravda, makes reference to “A record 7 million people – or one in every 32 American adults – were behind bars, on probation or on parole by the end of last year’, and when these figures are added to the estimated 1 million prisoners of war held by the United States, all around the World, the once great American Nation has now become the greatest jailer of human beings the World has ever known.” Laws such as “Three Strikes” have increased our incarceration rate for even the pettiest of crimes. Even the truly law-abiding are not free. Consider random traffic stops to check your license and insurance, TSA airport searches, security screenings to enter a public event, and proof of identity requirements for job applications and opening bank accounts. Exacerbating the situation is claims these freedoms are taken in the name of liberty.

Ironically, even bravery has been eroded out of fear of consequences. Questioning TSA regarding the 4th amendment and basis for searching six-year olds will prevent you from flying. Publicly videotaping law enforcement creates a fast path to court with criminal charges. My favorite example occurred two weeks ago: Juror 799, an Asian woman in her 20s, when asked to name three people she least admired on her juror questionnaire, wrote: “African-Americans, Hispanics and Haitians.” In the land for the free and home of the brave the woman was sentenced to indefinite jury duty by Federal Judge Nicholas Garaufis – a unilateral decision with no crime committed.

I challenge you to listen carefully to political demagoguery and proposals to “make you safer.” Blood was shed September 3, 1814 to capture freedom and liberty for future generations whilst Francis Scott Key watched the fight and immortalized his feelings. Sadly, our former enemies in Russia watch our freedoms erode and write about it, but the timidity bred into our generations of children makes them blind to the blood given for their liberty and they will not stand bravely for themselves.

Homework

My daughter’s homework recently piqued my interest while she was studying for an exam. Currently, she’s taking an American Government class; learning about types of government like authoritarian, dictatorship, oligarchy, and democracy. During our studying though we came to a handout that forced me to question today’s teaching as it focused on explaining the role of government. It is this question that divides left and right, Democrat and Republican. Personally I have a strong libertarian view which believes in a very limited role of government.

Reviewing her handout I learned there are seven roles taught to today’s students: defense, taxation, judiciary, education, health care, transportation, and economy. I wondered how many Thomas Jefferson would include on the list and speculated three: defense, taxation, and judicial review. Seeking a more definitive answer I found only defense and judicial protection receive consensus and without taxation the rest of the list cannot exist. Sadly, I think our country has reached a crossroads in development: we can have freedom and independence to control our lives with no government involvement but risk personal loss and failure, or we can mutually combine all of our earnings and share the bounty regardless of productivity to protect our entire society against any calamity that may befall us.

I believe the second option has been tried repeatedly throughout history and most recently by the idealist Karl Marx in a quest to end class struggles; recognizing the needs of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. Modern communism expanded on the efforts of Marx’s writings with Lenin and then Stalin accelerating its spread; dictatorial regimes use communism to disguise their own human rights atrocities. Many would claim the U.S. has recently failed at the longest running experiment in capitalism and laissez faire economics allowing business to overrun the working class. However, a quick glance at American history confirms anyone, regardless of status, education, or connection can succeed to enormous wealth, unlike communist nations allow. Successes like Bill Gates, Larry Page, and Jeffrey Bezos abound and even Presidents Clinton and Obama come from the poorest of backgrounds and family struggles.

Ayn Rand concisely describes the role of government “as, the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others.” I believe the role of government is to allow me freedom of choice – to succeed or fail

Tort Reform

Tort Reform

A discussion about nationalized healthcare cannot take place without mentioning tort reform. In essence, the thought is ‘reducing litigation or damages’ will reduce costs to healthcare. Of course, we could assume that would translate to all industries. Everyone remembers the lawsuit against McDonalds for serving hot coffee, spilled by the consumer. The initial amount of damages awarded was almost $3 million… and was eventually settled out-of-court for $600,000.

Similarly, businesses face threats of lawsuits daily from falls in parking lots or stores, misuse of products, or frivolous acts. A rampant industry of “legal theft” has been created by the television and billboard lawyers fishing for clients who may have an ailment never before considered, but with marketing and awareness suddenly thousands can suffer from imaginary problems, become part of a class lawsuit, and make money. The real winner is the law firm making millions in fees and taking a significant portion of the award.

Movies like “Erin Brokovich” and the many John Grisham novels/films have reminded us of the sympathetic need for our ability to litigate. In these blockbuster films the destitute win against the big, bad corporation and remind us they are evil and must be punished. In other parts of the world citizens cannot sue for millions and must bear the cost of legal fees when initiating a lawsuit and the defendant’s costs – should they lose. Neither method is perfect and creates unintended consequences. Americans appear frivolous and greedy in seeking justice and other countries appear to favor the big company over the individual.

Unfortunately we all face other consequences of our system. Imagine driving your car down Flagler Avenue and having a bicycle run into you. Several weeks later you may find a television lawyer serving you with a lawsuit. Regardless of fault, your insurance company will pay, not even argue the case, as the lawyer pursues an endless income stream from legal extortion. Similarly, a professional license is jeopardized by frivolous complaints and legal fees; to defend proper decisions can cost tens of thousands. Imagine the numbers professionals in the financial industry accused of “losing money” during the collapse of 2008-2009. Of course, the likes of Bernie Madoff permanently tarnished the reputation of those exercising due diligence.

Regardless of fault, a system of arbitration to bypass the expense of discovery should be established, especially on an individual basis. Principles costs money and often settlement to find personal peace through dismissal is a better option, but a feeling of admission of guilt is created when no guilt is present. “I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.” – Thomas Jefferson

Free Speech

Free Speech

I argue the most important freedom we have under the Constitution is the right to Freedom of Speech. It is interpreted as the right to speak freely without censorship or limitation. As defined in our own First Amendment to the Constitution, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Sadly though, something happened over the last century, accelerating rapidly over the last two decades. I previously wrote freedom of speech must remain free of tests, and the most important speech is one making us uncomfortable, but yet allowed. It is free speech protecting news media, web sites, and our access to information. We take for granted the freedom of the Internet and our assumed rights to read, review, and see any content. Of course, we are aware countries like China and North Korea censor their citizens’ access to web sites and news, especially political discourse contradicting their governments. We assume this will not happen in America, but quite the opposite is true.

Last week Senator Lieberman proudly announced his success pressuring Amazon.com to remove Wikileaks from its servers. Bill O’Reilly called for the execution of Wikileaks’ Julian Assange on his television show and Sarah Palin similarly did the same. The narrow-mindedness of these pundits is more concerning than the actions of Assange. Our willingness to have “hate speech” protections in America caused a young man in Kentucky to find himself sentenced to prison for three years last week after writing a poem titled, “The Sniper,” a concerning poem narrating the assassination of President Obama, but one that should be protected by the First Amendment nonetheless.

Many would argue some speech is bad, but I assert you must accept all speech to truly enjoy freedom of speech. The writings of Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson granted our liberties and released us from tyranny. Using today’s standards their writings are treasonous and require “balance” and an investigation by Homeland Security would ensue with both men finding themselves on Domestic Terrorist watch lists; there would be no American Revolution. No matter how uncomfortable, the right to criticize and question our government leaders gave us our freedoms and we must continue to monitor and fight to keep this right to free speech. “Censorship reflects society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime,” Potter Stewart

Obama is Right

Obama is Right

This is probably the most concerning column I have written, not because I agree with the President but because the issue is sensitive, to both sides. Currently, whether to build Park51 (a.k.a. Ground Zero Mosque) is driving passionate public debates. Hesitantly, President Obama voiced his opinion two weeks ago when he said the right to build the project was constitutionally protected. The following day he made further comments stating while constitutionally protected, it may be in bad taste. I must agree with both of his comments. While it may be in bad taste, I do not believe it is a community center designed to protect, or possibly sympathize to Islamic terrorists as has been asserted by some in the media. Ultimately, the court of public opinion will either empower the developers and those funding the project, or send them packing.

I am disturbed by talk radio pundits flummoxing methods. Other than to inflame an ill-informed public there is no other purpose for the front-page debate. The fallacy of the current argument comes from the presumption if terrorists are Muslim then all Muslims are terrorists. I take issue because living in the south, as a white male; I am stereotyped as a racist redneck by the argument racist rednecks are southern white males. Similarly, a German born in the 1920’s is not automatically a Nazi. What has been lost in the argument propelled center stage is the right to build a place of worship, as protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. The same people who herald the constitution in arguments against healthcare, bailouts, and social programs are quick to stomp the same document when it does not meet their needs.

There are many aspects of the Constitution which may not conveniently fit our desires and likes. However, if we remain consistent in our application, trusting the truths set forth by the founding fathers we will not go wrong. In the case of Park51, it is clear there is no constitutional violation to build. The decision to build is purely local and is governed by the zoning laws, planning commissions, and local electorate. Does it feel good to support building the project? No, but the more important issue at hand is support of the Constitution in the face of our enemies, asserting what separates our country from those who attack us in the name of God.

The View

The View

It is amazing how two people can look at the same consideration and see two distinct things. Even a single feature can look different depending on the direction from which it is approached. I live next to a 3,200 foot mountain peak, Mt. Yonah, and admire its beauty every time I drive home. If I approach Mt. Yonah from the Northwest I see a gently rising tree covered mountain, rising majestically to the sky. However, approaching from the Southeast, to go home, the same mountain rises ominously with nearly vertical granite faces, stripped of any foliage and impossible to climb. Although this same peak is visible from miles around, the view and approach would change your perspective about climbing to the summit.

Politics, societal problems, and even relationships anecdotally reflect my mountain. Depending on the point of view taken to attack issues, problems can appear gradually solvable or insurmountable. For example, the oil spill in the Gulf can be viewed as an environmental tragedy or an engineering challenge. Chelsea Clinton’s wedding last weekend was hyped as the wedding of the century, but to the residents of Rhinebeck, New York it was a media frenzy and security nightmare. What has been lost in American debate today is the understanding that debate accommodates differing views; one is not necessarily right or wrong. I learned several years ago feelings cannot be argued, only facts. However, if you watch the news closely, and monitor political debate, arguments center on emotions, feelings, and perceptions, not facts.

Last week a federal judge issued an injunction against Arizona’s controversial immigration bill. This is a hot-button issue with differing views on how to solve a problem. I would argue what is missing is the discussion of the issue at hand. For example, Obama promised immigration reform, but after 19 months in office nothing has transpired leaving Arizona to deal with the issue and thus pushing a bill designed to move the issue to the spotlight. Armed with what I know, I could not possibly consider living in a border state due to the violence, costs, and breakdown in social order. However, I believe we should embrace people risking their lives to come to our country. What matters now is how we view the problem and work together to solve it; effective debate starts with understanding the view.

Liberty – Part I

Liberty – Part I

I am writing this week’s column on Independence Day, aka the 4th of July. I am in Washington, D.C. with my wife and children, having traveled here in our RV to show them our nation’s capital and watch the fireworks from the National Mall tonight. Our first stop yesterday, was the most important highlight of the trip to me, a visit to the National Archives Museum. I wanted to share with my children the three most important documents in the world, “The Freedom Charters”, or the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, and The Bill of Rights.

Like no other nation in history, our founding fathers saw a need to create a new form of government, one free from tyranny. Men like Thomas Paine, “Common Sense”, were opening the publics’ eyes by creating a tool for debate to separate from a Monarchy and move to Republicanism. On July 4th, 1776 fifty-six (56) men penned their signatures to this “experiment” and risked their lives to give to future generations the “Pursuit of Life, Liberty, and Happiness.” These mean, were young, idealistic, and working the land to survive and provide for their families.

Many today claim the writings and thoughts of these men are outdated and need to change with time. However, I would make another assertion; the simplicity of the singe handwritten page of the Declaration of Independence, or the four handwritten pages of the Constitution framed a government that was meant to first trust its people. As I walk around Washington, DC I now see a government that disdains its people, trusts itself, and honors itself. Our country is no longer our country, but one that belongs to a small group of elitists. This is obvious by the monuments, the size of buildings, security barriers along streets, thousands of police officers, and helicopters overflying. Ronald Reagan said, “Man is not free unless government is limited…As government expands, liberty contracts.”

Since our last Independence Day our country has changed dramatically, a huge socialist move has taken place under the guise of “Change and Hope.” Throughout history leaders have offered to care for their citizens, provide for them, but ultimately those experiments of evolved to dictatorships with tyrannical consequences: Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Castro, and Stalin for example. Walking through Washington, I am proud to be an American, but like the bumper sticker on my RV says, “I love my Country…but fear my Government.”