In this Truthout interview (by Geoffry Millard), Phil Donahue exhorts: "Don't sanitize the war." Who are the perpetrators of this effort to sanitize the war? Politicians and the media, for starters. That effort to sanitize the bloody U.S. occupation of Iraq is the main message of the newly-released movie that…
On Feb. 28, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore. submitted House Congressional Resolution 305 for consideration to the House of Representatives: “Recognizing the importance of bicycling in transportation and recreation.” I assume that this resolution is a perfectly valid reaction to this boneheaded statement by one of Bush’s appointees.
I don’t think Blumenauer’s resolution has any chance of passing, because it suggests that some money now going for highways should actually be used to encourage people to use bicycles for their transportation needs. God forbid that we actually encourage such a perfectly sensible mode of transportation. You know the arguments, prevents obesity, uses no fossil fuel, cheap, is perfect for urban commutes. I’ve previously posted on some of the many reasons to use a bicycle for commuting. There are, indeed, many reasons for doing so, especially in an urban area where many commutes are fewer than five miles. BTW, what would a bicycle-friendly city look like? Here’s one version.
I learned of Bluemenauer’s resolution by reading Andrew Leonard’s article in Salon.com, “Life and death and bicycling.” Just because you use a bicycle doesn’t mean you are “green.” Leonard includes a Sierra Club test to see how “green” you are. I am a rather cool 92 out of 100, a very green cyclist!
I do want to publicly thank Representative Blumenauer for bringing some much-needed attention to bicycles as a serious mode of transportation. His resolution is chock full of statistics that should (but likely won’t) wake up those who don’t …
According to this article in Harpers, the Congressional elite include most of the members of Congress. Consider this, for example: Since 2005, at just ten of D.C.'s priciest restaurants, House membvers have spent more than $5.4 million of political funds. The title to the article is "Beltway bacchanal: Congress lives…
Whenever we take the time, we are better able to see that all issues are anchored by deep issues. That’s the kind of day it was for me today.
I’m in Washington D.C., attending the Consumer Rights Litigation Conference sponsored by the National Consumer Law Center. NCLC is an invaluable resource for those of us who advocate and litigate for consumer rights. At one of the afternoon sessions today, I had a chance to hear a panel of consumer advocates discuss recent developments in federal law regarding consumer rights.
It’s quite depressing, for the most part. You see, well-monied corporate financial interests own Congress. Consumer rights are on the ropes. Many industries are free to lie, cheat, steal and to impose onerous terms on consumers, thanks to the best federal laws money can buy. They do this through corporate immunity, preemption and the imposition of mandatory binding arbitration before biased arbitrators. All of these were gifts from Congress in return for huge amounts of money contributed by lobbyists.
I’ve been to Washington D.C. several times before, and I’ve always reveled in the history and the architecture.
Now, I can’t help but feel ambivalent. It’s a city awash in immense amounts of corrupt money.
We are a country that preaches that the People are the government, but that is less true than ever. If you don’t believe me, just try to call your Congressional representative, mentioning that you are a concerned citizen. See if you can get five minutes with him …
The topic of usury laws and payday loans arises frequently these days. Payday lenders commonly charge interest rates of 300%, 400% or more on their loans to desperate consumers. Why do I suggest these consumers are desperate? It’s because they are writing postdated checks to payday lenders, agreeing to give up a large chunks of their next paychecks, and paying exorbitant interest rates in the process. How many people who are not financially desperate would be willing to sign away the proceeds of a future paycheck and pay 450% interest for this “privilege”? With repeated real-life scenario as the backdrop, the question often arises: do usury laws exist anymore? This topic has been addressed by Christopher Peterson in a comprehensive law review article entitled “Usury Law, Payday Loans, and Statutory Sleight-Of-Hand: an Empirical Analysis of American Credit Pricing Limits.”
It’s not hard to determine what motivates Peterson’s work. He writes that the American consumer is now dealing with “a new, largely unregulated credit marketplace.” The center of the storm is the payday lending industry which, “despite spending millions on lobbying and public relations, is at the center of an inferno of rage and public controversy.” Peterson takes time to discuss the history of usury laws throughout the history of the American republic. Usury laws, according to Peterson, have “historically been the foremost bulwark shielding consumers from harsh credit practices.” At the time our country declared its independence, no state had an interest of greater than 8%. Benjamin Franklin warned of …