Lisa Murkowski – Today I voted against the Student Loan Bill which would solve one problem by making another worse. Raising taxes on employers will only decrease the chances that they’ll be able to add jobs and hire college graduates. I’m hopeful we’ll find a better, bipartisan way.
Press Releases – Press Office – United States Senator Lisa Murkowski
www.murkowski.senate.gov

Senator with all due respect I’m so tired of that nonsense. It’s clear there is no connection between taxes and jobs. What creates jobs is demand for goods and services. With people saddled with high student loan costs they have less to spend in the economy. Your vote just made the banksters happy. Who do you represent? What is your solution that isn’t more welfare for corporate America and Millionaires?

This is a slap in the face of working class families. The children of the rich don’t have to worry about student loans. They don’t have to work their way through college. They don’t need to be concerned about getting a job when they graduate, they can afford to buy a car, buy a home, get married, start a family all without the burden of hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loan debt. Shame on you Senator.

Keith Hartley It amazes me that anyone can think that the “rich” dont pay taxes when the top 10% provide more than 70% of it, and taking all of their money each year would fix even the deficit let alone the problems in the american school system.

We currently have the lowest tax rates since the 1950′s. We give away billions in subsidies to large corporations, many of the largest pay zero federal income taxes like Exxon and GE. The rich benefit most from preferential tax treatment of dividends and interest. They pay as little as 15% like the billionaire hedge fund managers. Even Romney only paid 17%, about half that of a typical working class family. Increasing the marginal rate by 2% over a million and another 2% over a billion is not too much to ask. Closing loopholes that allow large multi-national corporations to avoid taxes is not too much to ask. US businesses benefit the most from a well educated work force. Our economy is in desperate need of Math and Science majors, as well as the many fields in Medicine. We are falling behind world wide because other countries are more committed to higher education. If cutting taxes created jobs we wouldn’t have the unemployment problem we have today. Our economy was much stronger in the 50′s when the top marginal rate was 91%.Top Marginal Tax Rate History

Small business owners need customers and clients, not tax breaks. They only pay taxes when they make a profit. If you don’t understand that, then you’ve never operated a small business.

We’re not going to cut our way out of this mess conservatives got us in. We have to invest in America and Americans.

Keith Hartley…no comparison to be made between a corporation and a self employed small business owner. Small business owners employ a high ratio of people to a given amount of profit, corporations do the opposite of that. self employed business owners pay a far greater tax rate then either individuals or corporations do. ALL of the tax plans that have come around from this admin have been to pit the so called “poor” individuals against the so called “wealthy” individuals and let the corporations off easy.”

So we agree, we need to increase taxes on the 1% and multi-national corporations. We can do this by closing loopholes. Taxing all income the same. Remove the cap on income subject to social security and medicare. (Cut the social security and medicare tax by half. Every business or individual earning less than $103k would receive an instant pay raise). Raise the marginal rate over a million by 2% raise it another 2% over a billion. Institute a minimum tax on income over a million dollars.

Keith Hartley“…are you seriously on about oil subsidies? they amount to literally pennies when compared to the size of the deficit. What about hybrid car subsides? what about ethanol subsides? what about so called “green energy” subsidies? they line the pockets of corporation at the cost of the individual citizens of this country.”

I’m talking about subsidies for all kinds of industries from oil to pharmaceutical. But oil is a good example. They make a record profit, some not paying a penny in federal income tax. Instead of creating jobs with the windfall they buy back stock. They are sitting record amount of cash. We would have been better off collecting the tax and investing it in America. If we are going to subsidize industries it should be those that are sustainable and less damaging to our environment. Oil doesn’t need the subsidies, alternatives do at this point.

Keith Hartley“You think that increasing spending on education will help the quality of education in America? how about getting the government out of education all together. The abysmal quagmire that is the united states lernin’ standards started during the carter admin when he started the department of education. Pretty soon schools realized that they could get more money by making school less difficult.”

If spending more money doesn’t make a difference then why is the cost per student higher for private schools than public schools. They are able to hire the best teachers. They have the lowest teacher to student ratio. They produce the best results. But this particurlar issue isn’t about cost of education. It’s about cutting the interest rate on student loans. Not writing off the debt. Not bailing them out. Just extending the interest rate cap for a year. Is that so unreasonable of a proposition considering the billions that we spend in other areas?

Keith Hartley“Those proposed tax increases do NOTHING to do anything to help anyone. Taxation is the problem. If it was, raising taxes could fix the problem whether or not anyone likes it. Whether the idea sounds good to you or not, there isnt enough money in the economy to close the deficit without destroying something along the lines of 50% of the economy.”

Are you a Ron Paul supporter? I already showed you the fact that the economy was better when the top marginal rate was 91%. I’m not suggesting we go anywhere near that amount, just modest increases and changes to the tax code.

Keith Hartley“I absolutely AM not someone that advocates tax breaks are the answer to our problems. the fix will be several hundred billion in spending cuts and a few hundred billion in revenue increases. these revenue increases could be achieved by – as you referenced above, eliminating the tax breaks for Democrat favoring General Electric, which hasn’t paid taxes since it was bailed out a few years ago.”

So you would be ok with allowing the Bush tax cuts expire for Millionaires? How about eliminating corporate loopholes and subsidies? I’m not a Democrat and I don’t care if it’s GE or BP not paying taxes on record profits. Bottom line is the top 1% are starving the country.

Keith Hartley“This is a very important difference between corporations and the wealthy…I will be one of the “wealthy” one day. I will have achieved that by doing a better job, working harder, paying for my own school and paying the debt off early that so many dems cant seem to do. It will piss me off when I am paying more taxes to support companies like solyndra and general electric so that they can be exempt of taxes or be paid to keep their doors open when I could instead be spending it on food, wine, vehicles etc. and be putting money into the pockets of others.”

“I’m going to be wealthy one day” Yes, that’s the American Dream alright. Do you have any idea home many American’s dream turned into a nightmare because of the Banksters on Wall Street? Through no fault of their own they lost their jobs, life savings, homes and businesses. Do you know the only thing that many of them have left? Social Security and Medicare. The things that conservatives want to turn over to private industry. These were good people who did everything like you said. Worked hard and produce better and faster. The company profits soared and their purchasing power declined. When the dust settled all they had left was the Government safety net. Yes there is a difference between corporations and the wealthy. Corporations get subsidies and the wealthy get preferential tax treatment on certain kinds of income. You think having money in your own hands instead of paying it in taxes is a good thing, But you don’t think people paying less interest on student loans, putting more money in their hands, is a good thing. How do you resolve that contridiction?

Keith Hartley“You really think that small business owners only pay taxes on profits? unless you can afford to pay someone to provide you with warren buffet tax evasion techniques you pay a larger minimum amount of taxes than anyone else does, FAR more than someone who makes the same amount of money in a year and works less than you.”

Have you ever owned or managed a company? I don’t think so. What drives hiring and firing of employees is demand. Taxes typically affect prices as it’s rolled into the overhead cost, like insurance. It’s not tax evasion, it’s taking advantage of tax loopholes and getting preferential treatment on certain types of income. I’m all for closing the loopholes and taxing all income from any source the same. That won’t be enough. We need to raise taxes on the richest of this country. We have always had a progressive income tax. We’ve allowed it to become less progressive and the country’s economy has suffered for it.

We also have an income problem. We have the lowest federal tax rates since 1950. Tax cuts made the rich richer, the poor poorer, and the middle class in insurmountable debt. Lower taxes didn’t create jobs or strengthen the economy, at least not in the U.S. We need new tax brackets for each millionaires and billionaires.

The rabid right is willing to destroy the economy, push us into default on our debt in order to further their political goal of preventing election of Obama to a second term. That has been their sole goal from day one, at any cost to America or Americans.

Cutting government spending now will be disastrous for the private sector. “Why cutting government spending now would be disastrous.” http://bit.ly/bvTEuS

There are other alternatives as well: Budget of the Congressional Progressive Caucus: Fiscal Year 2012: Read the People’s Budget http://bit.ly/g7aep8 and my own 2 cents Nobody asked me, but here’s my solutions. http://bit.ly/bvTEuS

The best way to solve our debit and deficit problems is to revitalize the economy and create good living wage jobs. What has this congress done to improve the economy or create private sector jobs? Nothing, because that’s not in GOP’s best political interest. Our unemployment is high because the rabid right wants it that way.

Some people talk about government being too big, we have too many regulations, government is the problem – not the solution, they say. They are willing to risk throwing out the baby with the bathwater so to speak. They see government as corrupt, evil and fundamentally flawed. While very few will offer specific examples.

Others, like myself, recognize that there are serious problems with our government, as there is with any government. But there is a proper place and role that government is necessary for a functioning society based on the rule of law and compassion for our fellow man.

Our country is divided in so many other ways; right vs left, urban vs rural, haves vs have nots, old vs young, religious vs secular, and many more less obvious and stark. But we are all Americans and we’re in this thing together. We can either rip this country apart because of our differences, or we can come together to make this country greater than ever.

We’re facing a lot of problems, unemployment, the deficit, the economy as a whole, immigration, the war against terrorism, the war on drugs, crisis in education and healthcare – it’s easy to get overwhelmed by them all. I think many people are scared, angry, confused, frustrated, they are looking for someone to blame, looking for quick and easy solutions. There are those that are capitalizing on that to benefit and enrich themselves. Others are using it to attack and destroy others.

There is a saying that “Money is the root of all evil”. When we look at our most pressing problems we can see that money is certainly a major component of them all in one way or another. So it would make sense that if money is the problem, money is also the solution.

Right now the problems are being approached independently of one another. The solutions offered are limited. Raise or lower taxes. Cut or increase government spending. Basically its fighting over a finite amount of pie. We need to change our focus, we need to bake a bigger pie.

In a previous post I asked the question: “What Kind Of Country Do We Want?“. Much of it was written based on the finite pie scenario. However, no matter how large the pie, we’re going to need to have priorities, certain values that are non-negotiable. For me, and for the purposes of this discussion that means we take care of our elderly, disabled, sick, unemployed and veterans. We value eduction, equal opportunity, self reliance, entrepreneurship, personal liberty, independence and freedom.

Each of my proposals will, save money or increase revenue and adhere to the values and priorities above.

1. Remove the cap on income subject to Social Security tax. It may be possible to lower the rate, which would lessen the impact on upper income earners, and provide some relief for lower incomer earners and the self employed who have to pay both the employer and employee portions of the tax.
2. Add a Public Option for health care that will allow anyone to buy into a health insurance plan on a sliding scale. This would virtually eliminate society cost of the uninsured using the most expensive health care, emergency rooms, for routine health care that could have been averted with preventative care, or taking care of at a less expensive medical provider, such as a doctor’s office or clinic.
3. Remove most restrictions to enter the country legally for the purpose of work. Would have to pass criminal background check. Would not be eligible for public assistance. Required to buy into public option health insurance, if not covered by employer. Would be required to pay all taxes. Persons already in the country would be eligible if they clear criminal background check.
4. Employers to be held strictly accountable to ensure all of their employees were eligible to work legally in the country. Requirement would include having picture ID issued by the State or Federal Government on file at all times. Immigrant employees must be paid the same, have same benefits, same working conditions and hours as citizen employees. Violations would result in heavy fines and jail time for employers.
5. End all corporate and farm subsidies for products or services to be sold overseas. Subsidies may still provided on in country sales to value added companies. Also end all subsidies and incentives for outsourcing jobs.
6. Remove Hemp from the list of controlled substances. Ban the export of non-value added Hemp. Then get out of the way and let American entrepreneurial spirit take hold to create new products from this natural renewable resource.
7. Transfer the federal regulation of Marijuana to the ATF to be renamed MATF. License, regulate and tax similar to existing Tobacco and Alcohol operations. States would have the same rights to license, regulate and tax in their jurisdictions.
8. Pardon and release all persons currently being held for simple marijuana possession.
9. Expand Job Corps with funds saved from not arresting, prosecuting and incarcerating marijuana users. Add training needed in the manufacturing of the 1000′s of products being made from Hemp.
10. Make child support payments tax deductible. The more non-custodial parents pay the less dependent single parents will be on State benefits.
11. End the Bush tax cuts for the top 2% income earners. Tax all income the same regardless of the source. End the Hedge Fund “carried interest” windfall loophole

So there you go. Have at it. Rip up my ideas, but come with your own. I’m prepared to defend my ideas, so be prepared to defend your criticisms and your ideas.

1) Lower taxes encourage private sector investment and economic growth.
2) Government spending are resources that are taking what would otherwise be left to the private economy.

First let me address the obvious; both of these beliefs definitely favor the rich over the poor. The rich benefit more from lower taxes and they rely less on government spending in general. Particularly when it comes to retirement and health care.

Taxes have been cut to the lowest level since 1950 which has failed to stimulate the economy for the last decade. In addition a plethora of tax incentives have been offered to encourage private investment, job creation and economic growth. As near as I can tell, that worked only to ship American jobs off shore.

So now we are told that tax cuts aren’t enough, we need to cut government spending too. That’s why the tax cuts didn’t work they say, because we didn’t cut spending at the same time. Perhaps I’m just too dense to grasp complicated math, but I don’t see how the government not spending a dollar makes that dollar suddenly and magically appear in the private sector where it will be spent better.

But we’ll leave that alone for now and tackle the task at hand, cutting government spending and it’s affect on the economy in general.

Government cuts in spending come in three areas, jobs, purchases and benefits. That’s it, now it’s just a decision about what jobs, purchases or benefits should be cut. For the purposes of this discussion it really doesn’t matter what is going to be cut as far as the budget is concerned.

When the government pays an employee, that employee takes the money and spends it in the private sector economy. They make house and car payments. They buy groceries, perhaps eat out, go to the movie or donate to the local little league. When that job is cut, we’ve added to the number of unemployed. Perhaps they lose their house in foreclosure, driving prices down further. Maybe they can’t afford their car anymore, so it goes back to the dealer or maybe sell it themselves if they can get what they owe on it. The little league and local restaurant will have to do without their support.

Maybe this is a job we could really do without, working in a department that shouldn’t even exist, getting paid more than they would in the private sector and with better benefits. There’s approximately 2.15 million federal employees, so to make any kind of significant spending cuts we’d have to get rid of 200,000 jobs to make any kind of serious impact on spending. What is the effect of losing 200,000 jobs on the economy? 200,000 more people competing for jobs where there are five applicants for every job opening. How many more foreclosures, bankruptcies, repossessions would there be? Not just those whose jobs got cut, but the small businesses they help support with their government payroll checks. But hey,they’re just government employees right. They don’t actually add anything to the economy, so they won’t be missed.

The government doesn’t actually build, produce or create anything. They do however buy a lot of things though. From paper clips to Aircraft Carriers. They pay for new roads, bridges, airports, ports and all kinds of other products and services. Billions of dollars paid to private companies and contractors, who employ hundreds of thousands of people. So how many private sector jobs will be loss when we cut government spending on any of these products and services? When a company like Boeing has to lay people off because a government contract was cut or cancelled, what are the down river consequences of that? How many small businesses are put at risk of closing, foreclosures, and bankruptcies. Then you have the impacts on the local, county and state governments who are also receiving less income because of the cutbacks and employee layoffs. They have to layoff public safety employees and teachers. Perhaps cut back on services like libraries and health clinics.

Then there is the target du jour – Entitlements. Yes, those horrible socialistic entitlements. As an aside, the reason they are called entitlements is because people have EARNED them. They worked for them, they contributed financially to them. These aren’t freebies given away to everyone. But I digress, what happens when we cut benefits and entitlements? Again, this is money that is put back into the economy purchasing goods and services, paying local taxes, supporting the community.

With the exception of foreign aid those are our choices for making government spending cuts. There are other factors to be considered with foreign aid other than the economic impact here at home. We may need to consider trade agreements that depend on providing aid.

At this point I’m sure there are many that think I’m just a big government liberal that never saw a government program I didn’t like. That’s not the case at all. I want the least amount of government we can have, with the lowest possible tax rates from top to bottom of the economic totem pole. I know people are concerned about the deficit, but I think it’s important to understand where these deficits came from. The largest amount is due to tax cuts, the next largest part are the waging of two wars. The Health Care Reform bill will help cut the deficit over time, but not nearly enough, fast enough. We can make additional progress by continuing to find and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse. But the best and surest way is by expanding our economy. Get more people back to work building things. Promote new industries, new technologies and new products. Do what America does best, innovate.

What we can’t do is anything that will increase unemployment, foreclosures, bankruptcies or business closures, which is exactly what cutting government spending would do. It would be disastrous.

Do we want a country that turns it’s back on the elderly, disabled, sick, poor, unemployed and our Veterans?

Do we want a country where the top 2% of Americans have record increases in their wealth while the middle class disappears and the poor are getting poorer?

Do we want a country where we give tax incentives for American companies to outsource jobs?

Do we want a country led by people who are more concerned about winning the 2012 election than they are concerned about fixing what’s wrong with our country today?

Do we want a country that is governed by hate, fear, anger, distrust and intolerance of others based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin and/or sexual orientation?

Do we want a country where groups fight against one another over slices of an ever decreasing economic pie?

Do we want a country with leaders that would turn back civil rights and dodge questions from the media?

Do we want a country that believes deficit spending is ok to fight wars but not ok to help our own?

Do we want a country where our government protects and defends multi-national corporations despoiling our air and water? Even going so far as to apologize to them when we try to hold them responsible?

Do we want a country that believes health care should be rationed to those that can afford it?

Do we want a country that would make children born in the US criminals?

Do we want a country that would require everyone to carry and present papers on demand of law enforcement officers to prove our legal right be here?

Do we want a country where financial institutions can act with impunity, gambling with other peoples money?

Do we want a country where unlimited amounts of corporate and foreign money flow into elections undisclosed?

Do we want a country that won’t invest in education?

Do we want a country that won’t provide funding for teachers, police and fire fighters.

Do we want a country that legislation is held hostage by minority representation for simple partisan reasons.

Do we want a country that will cut spending and jobs at a time when we are already experiencing high unemployment.

If we want that kind of country then all we have to do is vote for Republicans (or not vote), because that’s what they have promised to deliver if elected.

If that’s not the kind of country we want then we better show up to vote. We better talk to our friends and family and make sure they go vote. This is about what kind of country we want to have and it’s up to us to decide.

Make no mistake about it, nothing but radical and sweeping changes at all levels of government will be sufficient to fix what is wrong and return the power to the people.

Whats wrong.

* The current practice of using seniority as the method for making committee and leadership assignments effectively shut out new ideas and new perspectives.
* Incumbents have an unfair advantage over their challengers. There is no way that a challenger can compete with an incumbents ability to raise campaign funds. An office holder has the ability to help now whereas a challenger may only help in the future.
* Campaign contributions from businesses, groups and political parties dwarf those of individuals. Whether they admit it or not, politicians are influenced by those that support their campaigns. Businesses, groups, and political parties don’t donate huge amounts of cash out of any sense of civic duty, they do it because they want something from the politician, namely their support in return.
* Political Parties have usurped power by restricting ballot access making it much more difficult for third party or independent candidates with their new ideas to get elected.
* Campaigns have become so expensive that candidates (particularly challengers) must spend a good amount of time and effort into obtaining contributions from those with the deepest pockets. This eliminates many potential candidates that find this practice distasteful.
* Too often voters are presented with choosing between the lesser of two evils.

The Fixes. Ten points of change.

* If the President of the United States is limited to two consecutive terms, every office holder at any level should have the same term limits.
* Campaign contributions restricted to individuals eligible to vote for the candidate. No cash or in kind contributions from ineligible to vote individuals or any entity including businesses, organizations, political action committees or political parties.
* Remove political party designations from ballots, registrations and voter information pamphlets.
* Make ballot access the same for every candidate for office. Nomination by petition with 1% of the registered voters in the election district the candidate is running for.
* Replace primary elections with instant runoff.
* Prohibit candidates from accepting campaign donations prior to one year of the date of their election.
* Campaign contributions left over from a campaign must be converted to personal income or donated to charity, not held over to the next campaign.
* Add “None Of The Above” as a ballot option.
* Change election cycles so that 25% of every legislative body is up for election each year.
* Bar politicians from working as a lobbyist for two years after they leave office.

There is no chance of these changes being made as long as we keep electing candidates that benefit from the current system. You can bet the political parties and political action committees will fight till their last dying breath anyone that would dare propose such sweeping changes that would eliminate their ability to buy elections and politicians. Any organization that was created to further these ideas by supporting candidates would run afoul of the very idea of returning the power to the individuals, not groups.

So what to do? We act as individuals and ask candidates to check off yes or no on each of the ten points of change. For myself, I’ll simply write in “none of the above” if there isn’t a candidate that supports all ten points of change. Others may choose to decide to vote for whichever candidate supports the most, or perhaps there are some “must have” points for others.

The bottom line is that each of us can be a catalyst for change, but we have to be willing to turn our backs on the existing power structure. That will take real courage of conviction to vote against short term benefits that status quo offers.

That being said, it’s time to bring them home. ALL of them.

We have armed forces personnel deployed to over 130 countries world wide. The US spends 54% of the total world wide military spending, six times the amount of the next most China. Who are we defending ourselves from? What country is capable, never mind willing to attack the US militarily? Seriously, we can reach out and strike anywhere at any time, and we can do it from the US. Our enemies aren’t what our military is built for. That should be obvious from Afghanistan and to a somewhat lesser degree Iraq. Even our friends are getting tired of our “help”. How much of our peace keeping efforts are making matters worse rather than better? Suicide, PTSD, divorce and abuse rates are up across the board in our military families. What are we getting for the cost both financially and in human terms? Are we really that much safer to justify the cost? I don’t think so.

The problem is we can’t just pull everyone out and bring them home. We have long term strategic relationships with friends around the world that count on our military presence, like Israel for example. They need time to adjust to the fact we are drawing down our forces for their support. In places like Iraq and Afghanistan we have people that have been our friends that would be in danger if we simply abandoned them, so time will be needed to remove them from potential danger. As unlikely as it may seem, if there is any chance for some kind of democratic self rule in these countries, then we should conduct our pull out in such a way that it allows for that possibility. Regardless what we think is best for a country, we have to respect their choice, even if it’s not democracy. If they want our help, they can ask for it.

We have to change our mindset about our culture of war. We need to examine EVERY deployed unit outside of the United States and specifically identify EXACTLY what that deployment means in terms of security for the American people. Some can remain deployed as part of a United Nations or North Atlantic Treaty Organization, but those deployments should be greatly reduced to no more than 20% of the total deployed. We have to reject the normalcy of overseas deployments and the permanent state of war.

Three babies were born, and two deaths had occurred-about the statistical average for a city of half a million. But a city of that size also would have had a predictable number of violent crimes in a three-day period, and this simply didn’t happen.

Also consider the amount of drugs used and it’s even more remarkable. It stands in stark contrast to people that contend that drugs are the cause of violence in our society. It’s not drugs that cause violence, it’s our war on drugs that cause violence.

In many ways Woodstock represents the very best of America. A standing testimony to true individual freedom and liberty. Not the faux freedom and liberty of Conservatives and Tea Party, who can only equate those values as it applies to their pocketbook. Woodstock also serves as an example of people reaching out to help one another, generosity of spirit and acceptance. Something I would like to see much more of not only from individuals, and groups of individuals, but from our Government as well.

It would be disingenuous of me not to acknowledge that during this time protesters against the war in Viet Nam treated our military men and women with a great deal of disrespect and hostility – undeservedly so. They were right about the war, but very wrong about their misguided anger at individual returning Viet Nam veterans. Thankfully, since that time, we as a country have honored those veterans and expressed our gratitude for their service.

Once again, we find ourselves deeply divided as a country about wars without end, civil rights and economic justice. A schism deeper and wider than anytime perhaps since 1969. But at the end of the day, we are all still Americans. It’s OUR country. It’s nobody’s country to “take back”, despite the rhetoric of those that wish to advance an agenda of hate, bigotry and greed.

Here is my salute to fellow Americans. Also a thank you to our veterans and those that are serving in the military here at home and abroad.

First of all, something everyone needs to be aware of is that SB1070 doesn’t apply to just illegal immigrants. It empowers law enforcement officers with “reasonable suspicion” to demand identification or proof of legal immigration from ANYONE. Even if they have done nothing wrong. They don’t have to place them under arrest.

This is almost identical to the arguments over the US Patriot Act with warrant-less wiretaps. Those in favor of giving the government unlimited power to spy on citizens in violation of the Fourth Amendment said “If you don’t have anything to hide then it shouldn’t matter if they are listening.” Yes it does matter. Because every time we give up one of our rights, whether it’s to protect us from terrorists, illegal immigrants or drug dealers, it just makes it that much easier for more to be taken.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~ Benjamin Franklin

In addition to many people not knowing their rights, how to apply them and why they are important there are some that think we should not be taught or learned. Teachers Suspended for Showing Flex Your Rights Video

The guys at FlexYourRights.Org have done a great job putting together video’s not only explaining our rights but how to exercise them properly. I’ve included their “10 Rules For Dealing with Police” video below in four parts. Also, a couple of additional links from the Washington Post and Cato Institute.

Washington Post: ’10 Rules for Dealing with Police’ seeks to teach constitutional rights

Cato @ Liberty: Immigration Law — Up Close

Cato Institute: 10 Rules for Dealing with Police – A film produced by Flex Your Rights With comments from William “Billy” Murphy, Attorney and 10 Rules Narrator and Neill Franklin, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. Moderated by Tim Lynch, Director, Project on Criminal Justice, Cato Institute.

Part One

Click here to view the embedded video.

Part Two

Click here to view the embedded video.

Part Three

Click here to view the embedded video.

Part Four

Click here to view the embedded video.

Out of nowhere our beautiful Sunday was interrupted by the unmistakable sound of small arms fire. I looked up to see a man running straight at us about thirty yards away as several shots hit the ground around him, then a couple of more and the man was down, bleeding from his torso, shot in the back. Then I heard the screams, saw people running away and running to the action. Tires squealing in the parking lot as the assailants sped away in two vehicles.

What I missed before the gunshots was that it started with a confrontation out in the parking lot between two groups that moved our way, until someone decided to escalate the conflict pulling a weapon. It was apparent that this was gang related, which since has been confirmed.

At this point you may think I’m going to launch into a rant about the evils of guns in society. I’m not. In fact, I wish I had been armed because if the conflict had moved closer to endanger myself and others I would have taken out the assailant myself.

You may think this is going to be a rant about needing to crack down on “Gang Bangers” with draconian solutions like “stop and frisk”, mandatory sentencing or military style boot camps. It’s not. In fact, I think those types of things just exasperate the problem by further alienating a whole generation.

No, this is about the interaction between people and the police. We watched the police systematically take care of the victim, secure the crime scene, and begin interviewing witnesses. They moved quickly, but thoroughly and with professionalism. When they came to me they asked for my name, address, birth date and phone number which I gave them (even though there is no legal requirement for me to do so). Everyone in my group did. Then asked me what I saw, which wasn’t very helpful since I only saw the end and not the shooter. What they didn’t do is ask me for any kind of identification. In fact, they didn’t ask to see anyone’s ID that I’m aware of, certainly no one among my group.

This made me wonder what would have happened had this event occurred in Arizona with the new Immigration law. Would police be required to ask for everyone’s ID? Would everyone be required to prove they are legally in the US. Certainly this would qualify as a “lawful contact”. Perhaps witnesses that could positively identify the assailant would leave without speaking to the police in fear of being asked for their papers. This is one of the reasons law enforcement officials in Arizona and around the United States are speaking out against this atrocious law.