It's the Hood not the Hoodie, But.......

Thursday, May 5th, 2012 New Orleans, Louisiana IS IT SAFE TO WEAR MY HOODIE? With summer approaching, I re-arranged my closet last week and put away winter clothes. In the mix was my hoodie. This garment has recently become one on of the most controversial pieces of outerwear in the nation. I wear mine when I exercise outdoors, or when skiing. And yes, depending on when and where it is worn, a hoodie can put you in harm’s way. Just ask the Trayvon Martin family. The death of this Florida teenager was apparently the result of a tragic convergence of events. The facts, at least those that are known, have been repeated continually by the news media and by others with various agendas. Martin, who is a black teenager, was walking in a gated community in the rain, wearing a hoodie. George Zimmerman, a community watcher, who was either on patrol or on his way back home, sighted Martin. Zimmerman felt that Martin looked suspicious and called the police. He was told by the dispatcher that a patrol unit was on the way, and that he should go back to his car and wait. But Zimmerman didn’t, and Trayvon Martin is dead. Four issues need some answers. Is deadly force justified outside the home? The “Castle Doctrine” is the law in most states allowing the use of deadly force to protect oneself inside his or her own home. But what about outside your home? Are you obligated to retreat from an attacker, or can you “stand your ground,” even if it’s safe to get away. In Florida, and in a growing number of states, if you are confronted and feel threatened, but are able to get away, you can go ahead and shoot anyway. Law enforcement officers and prosecutors nationwide, with few exceptions, strongly oppose “stand your ground” laws. They say these laws make it much harder to prosecute those who kill and claim self defense. Killings that are deemed legitimate have skyrocketed in Florida following the enactment of the “justifiable killing” law. But with the law enforcement community strongly opposed to this, should the deadly force rule outside one’s home continue? Should George Zimmerman have backed off? Of course he should have. He was specifically told to do so by the police dispatcher. These instructions, ignored by Zimmerman, would seem to shift the burden to him to prove that he was under attack and in “imminent danger.” He will need a lot of help from the experts analyzing the video that was taken, and by an analysis of the phone message that purports to hear one of the two, either Martin or Zimmerman, crying out for help in order to defend himself. Without some back up evidence in his favor, Zimmerman will face his current criminal charges and certainly a civil lawsuit. Why is there so much press coverage of this particular case? After all, there are killings of young black males every day. If you want to see the worst scenario, just monitor the local New Orleans newspaper down here, where I live in Louisiana. There were 200 killings last year, up 14% from the year before. Those being killed are often young black males. Why is this killing of such extraordinary interest? Is it because of the racial overtones? If the young man killed had been white, and the shooter black, would there be the same outcry? Would California Representative Maxine Waters still be hollering, “hate crime?” Would Reverend Jesse Jackson still be preaching that the young man killed had been “murdered and martyred?” Would Illinois Representative Bobby Rush still go to the microphone in the House chambers wearing a hoodie? Would Florida Congresswoman Federica Wilson still be charging that “this sweet young boy….was hunted down like a dog, shot on the street, and his killer is still at large?” Zimmerman is being vilified by the national news media on a regular basis. I’m not defending Zimmerman’s actions. But why this case? Where is the outrage for the thousands of other murder victims that are barely a blip in the back of the local paper where these killings take place? Is there a difference in the intensity of outrage depending on whether the victim is white, black or Hispanic? Is there a stigma that goes with wearing a hoodie? Read my own personal story and see how you would have reacted. I was in New Orleans last weekend for a birthday celebration at the Blue Room in Roosevelt Hotel in downtown New Orleans. I was by myself, and left the party around 9:00 pm for a return to Baton Rouge. I had left my car in a self park garage across from the hotel. I paid the charges, then headed towards the elevator to take me up to the fourth level where my car was parked. As I approached the elevator, a young black man, who was already on the elevator alone, held the door for me to get in. He was wearing jeans, tennis shoes and a hoodie pulled up on his head. The temperature outside was in the 60s. I hesitated. What to do? There was no one else around. Do I get on the elevator with him? Was I in any danger? They say we should not profile. Hogwash. Of course, I profiled. I weighed the odds and felt getting on that elevator was just not the safe thing to do to. I told him: “Just go ahead. I’m waiting for someone.” The elevator closed as he looked me square in the eye. Would I have had the same reaction if the young man had been white or Hispanic? Yes, most definitely. My main concern? It was the hoodie. I just didn’t have a safe feeling. I’m a big basketball fan and follow LeBron James, probably the best player in the NBA. I saw him recently pictured with sun glasses and a hoodie up over his head. If I saw him at night walking down a dark street and not recognizing who he was, my antenna would go up. I would profile and be cautious. Maybe even retreat. An overreaction? Probably. But what’s the saying? “Better safe than sorry.” Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg wears a hoodie. He’s white and a little guy. But if the hoodie were pulled up around his head, I would keep my guard up. People make assumptions. Yes, they profile. Would Trayvon Martin be alive today if he were wearing a suit? Who’s to say? It may be unfair, but the hoodie didn’t help. Both blacks and whites still have a great divide to cross over. ''There is nothing more painful for me at this stage in my life,'' Jesse Jackson said several years ago, ''than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery -- and then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.'' Does such a comment make Jesse Jackson a racist? The press and others with an agenda have turned this whole sordid mess into a black-white face-off. We still have a long, long way to go in reaching a consensus to just get along. So for the time being, I’m putting away my hoodie. ******* Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 AM till 11:00 AM, Central Time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.

Wasted Security at Airports?

Thursday, May 3rd, 2012 Baton Rouge, Louisiana SO THIS TERRORIST WALKS INTO A BAR! I was in the New Orleans airport this week waiting as a family member made her way through airport security with two small babies. Boy, were these guys with the Transportation Security Agency on the job and up to the task of stopping any terrorist threats. They all but strip searched her, opening every baby bottle and jars of baby food. Nothing gets by these guys. Well, except for Arabs loaded down with explosives. No profiling allowed even though terrorist after terrorist fits a similar description. We can’t do that for it would be politically incorrect. Why is it that we profile clothes, but not the person? One guy years ago tries to set off an explosive with his shoe, so every traveler from that time on has to take off the shoes. Two years ago on Christmas day, A Nigerian national boarded a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit with his underpants packed with explosives. His frighty whities came with a special pouch to hold the explosives, no doubt sewn by al Qaeda’s finest seamstresses. You can just hear Louisiana’s own Jerry Lee Lewis hollerin’ “Great Balls of Fire.” All to no avail as his crotch bomb failed to ignite, and alert passengers wrestled the terrorist thug to the ground. The Head of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, was quick to say that “the system worked.” Yeah, right. The attacker’s father, a Nigerian banker, had warned both U.S. and Nigerian authorities that his son had become a religious radical and was dangerous. Britain had refused to grant him a student visa this past May. But his U.S. visa was not revoked and no follow up investigation was undertaken. He almost set off the bomb, but it malfunctioned. And the head of U.S. air security says “the system worked?” So now every week is holiday chaos at airports all over the country. Everyone gets patted down, and detailed questions are asked: “What exactly did you have for lunch?” We live in a world of computer technology where your credit card company knows your shirt size and the brand of deodorant you use. Yet federal officials are not capable of maintaining an updated potential terrorist list. It would seem to be both efficient and prudent to run the passengers’ name though an updated database to flag guys like the crotch bomber. But that would mean we would have to rely on the FBI to do their job and maintain a current system of potential terrorists. Last year, the Inspector general for the Justice Department issued a scathing report highly critical of the FBI for being way to slow in adding terrorist suspects to a national watch list. According to the report: “We believe that the FBI’s failure to consistently nominate subjects of international and domestic terrorism investigations to the terrorist watch list could pose a risk to national security,” the report stated. “The failure to nominate terrorism subjects can also lead to missed opportunities in gathering important intelligence, and it can place front-line law enforcement and screening personnel at increased risk.” And then there is the bungling of the TSA itself. ABC News that: “In a massive security breach, the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) inadvertently posted online its airport screening procedures manual, including some of the most closely guarded secrets regarding special rules for diplomats and CIA and law enforcement officers.” Perhaps not the kind of “open government” the White House has in mind. The most sensitive parts of the document include details on how many bags are searched for explosives, which nationalities are subject to extra scrutiny, and other details of airport security that really should remain secret. All in all, a bad year for the TSA, the FBI, and millions of travelers all over the United States. But hey, you can be sure that when a mother travels with her babies, the baby food has been checked and no explosives have been mixed in. Don’t you feel a lot safer? ****** To paraphrase Trotsky in a manner even the most dense can understand: “You may not be interested in man-caused disasters, but man-caused disasters are most certainly interested in you.” Bruno Strozek Peace and Justice Jim Brown Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers and websites throughout the nation. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am, central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.

Irresponsible Laws Proposed by La. Legislators

Thursday, April 11th, 2012
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

LOUISIANA’S “GIVE THE CRIMINALS PLENTY OF NOTICE” LAW!

There’s a great new edict that’s about to become law in my home state of Louisiana. It’s called the GTCPTG statute. Short for, “Give the Criminals plenty of time to get away.” Louisiana legislators and the state’s insurance department are working overtime to assure that the Bayou State continues to hold the title of the country’s most expensive state in which to buy insurance.

Two noble goals have been set in the state’s capitol in Baton Rouge. First, pass new laws to be absolutely sure that automobile insurance rates keep going up. And second, pass other laws that stop property owners from asserting legal claims against the state run property insurance company. There is certainly a great deal at stake, and it looks like state legislators and insurance officials will stop at nothing in order to maintain the state’s number one position of having the highest auto and property rates in America. Way to go, guys.

There’s a saying has been around the Baton Rouge state capitol for years -- “Hold on to your wallets…the legislature’s in session, and they’re about to stick it to you.” There has never been a more appropriate time for such an admonition. In the 40 years plus that I have spent around the legislative and regulatory process in Louisiana, as a legislator, a statewide official, an insurance regulator, and as a political observer, I cannot recall a time when policy holders have been so maligned, and the interests of the public at large have been so disregarded.

First up is the “give the law breakers notice” legislation that is simply incredible. The proposed law, which has already passed the House of Representatives, requires police agencies to alert the public and give advance notice before they can set up check points to stop and apprehend drunk drivers, uninsured drivers, and cars with expired inspection stickers. Can you imagine how fast the word would spread by social media, like Twitter, when other drivers see a check point being set up?

Drunk drivers are the cause of more than half the serious injuries and deaths on Louisiana roadways. Drinking and driving uninsured are major reasons for Louisiana having the highest insurance rates in the country. Where is the logic of alerting law breakers that a traffic stop is close at hand? One can just picture the drunk driver both laughing and weaving down the road as he takes a side street to avoid the check point.

And why give notice to drunks who can kill you and uninsured drivers who can send your insurance rates through the roof? How about the drug dealers in high crime neighborhoods? Do we give them notice that a bust is close at hand? How about the state giving advance warning before any criminal arrest is about to be made. Breaking the law is, well, breaking the law. Why give those who willfully violate the law plenty of advanced warning?

The merciless suffering being piled on Louisiana policy holders does not stop at the, “Give the Criminals Notice” legislation. Some 18, 000 Louisiana property owners, who put their trust in both the legislature and insurance officials are being denied legitimate claims by the very officials who were elected to protect them. It’s the long running and very sad saga of the Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Company.

Citizens was supposed to be the insurer of last resort, the lifeline for homeowners living in high risk areas. Instead, it has become the most dysfunctional agency in state government. It was a disaster waiting to happen from its very inception. Created by the Louisiana Legislature at the behest of the Insurance Department, Citizens was one of the most poorly constructed business operations ever conceived by a state legislature. With no capital and no surplus available to get the company started on a sound financial footing, Citizens was broke from day one. Almost immediately it became obvious that no one at Citizens had the slightest idea of how to run an insurance company.

Just last week, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that Citizens will be stuck with a judgment approaching $125 million. Because state run Citizens is broke and well over one billion dollars in debt, every other property owner in the state is required, by Louisiana law to bail out the incompetent actions of this company, a company that never should have been formed in the first place. To add insult to injury, and rub more salt in the wounds of unpaid property owners, Citizens continues to drag out any settlement by filing a quixotic appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court that has absolutely no chance of even being granted a hearing. In the meantime, in pursuit of this totally futile appeal, there are lawyers to hire at a cost huge additional cost, that policy holders across the state will end up paying.

Instead of calling for a full investigation and coming to the aid of the abused policyholders, some legislators, at the bidding of Citizens, are offering legislation to prohibit any judgment against this contemptible company, and showing even more contempt for the public by making such a law retroactive. That’s right. Draft this proposed law so as to stop cold any effort by those who have been ripped off by Citizens from receiving one penny. If the legislature will not come to the defense of these abused policyholders, hopefully there will be a courageous prosecutor out there who will say, “enough is enough,” and begin a criminal investigation.

One of the major problems facing Louisiana insurance policy holders is that, unlike most states, there is no independent consumer protection office to challenge regulators or legislators. In many states, such a policy protector is allowed to go into court and challenge the actions of companies like Citizens, as well as challenge regulators and legislators that act irresponsibly. But in Louisiana, as in the case of Citizens, the policyholder is not only on his own, but is forced to fight insurance regulators in court.

The high cost of insurance in Louisiana is a major reason why competing states are drawing ahead in so many economic sectors. Louisiana just cannot compete because of the high cost of insurance. Louisiana homeowners and businesses are paying some $3 billion more in insurance premiums than the national per capita average -- more than twice the amount paid by citizens in any other southern state. THREE BILLION DOLLARS MORE! Think what an additional $3 billion saved and poured back into the Louisiana economy would mean to the economic vitality and quality of life in the state.

Hopefully, there will be some legislators with the backbone to stand up to these bureaucrats who would seem to have little concern for, and even contempt for the public interest. If not, the Bayou State will continue to languish at the bottom, and its citizens can wear the pin that says: “Louisiana: We know how to Stick it to us!

*******

“It’s not hurricanes that are causing high insurance rates, but bad government policy,”

Policy analyst Michelle Minton

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates by Clicking here. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am, central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.

Speak English or Else!

Thursday, April 5, 2012
Redneck Country, Louisiana

DON’T TELL ME TO SPEAK ENGLISH OR LEAVE!

I was at a book fair recently, hawking some of my Lisburn Press publications, and I was asked to comment on the nation’s immigration problem. One fellow apparently didn’t like my response. “Oh, I know all about you writers out there with your fancy English degrees. You think you have a lot more common sense then us rednecks.”

All right, I’ll admit it. I do live in a semi cosmopolitan city of Baton Rouge, received part of my education outside the U.S. and have traveled the world a good bit. But you can’t take the Ferriday redneck out of city folks like me. I have a pick up as well as an old SUV with 180,000 miles on it. They both have driven the back roads of north Louisiana on many occasions. I laugh at, and mostly agree with, all the “you must be a redneck” jokes. (You must be a redneck if you know instinctively that red wine goes with possum.) And by the way, I have a great possum recipe coming out in my updated version of “Jim Brown’s World Famous Squirrel Stew and other Country Recipes.”

Anyone like me who came from the same southern country town that raised Jerry Lee Lewis and Reverend Jimmy Swaggart certainly qualifies as a card-carrying redneck. So assuming you accept my credentials, you might be surprised at my reaction to a bumper sticker I saw while driving down a gravel road just past Frogmore, Louisiana. (That’s right. Frogmore -- about 15 minutes west of Ferriday, if you check your map.) On the rear window of a truck ahead of me, the driver had displayed his feelings in no uncertain terms: “You’re in America Now; Speak English or Get Out!”

Now I know it’s the political rage throughout the country to demand that English should be the official language. And quite frankly, I agree. That is, from the public perspective. I occasionally get a bit irritated when I’m told to “press one for English, two for Spanish” etc. If a U.S. governmental body insists on printing forms, giving tests, and processing governmental applications only in English, then that is how the process works. It’s the law.

But here’s where states’ rights come in. If any state feels the need to offer services in another language, that should be its prerogative. In some areas of my home state of Louisiana, French is the only language spoken by older Cajuns. Grocery stores in some small south Louisiana communities put up daily specials in French, and the southern part of the state has a number of radio stations that carry French Cajun music. In the southeast corner of the state, a number of publications appear in Vietnamese to service the growing Asian community of immigrating fisherman.

But a strong “English Only” backlash is growing. In the recent Alabama governor’s race, Republican candidate Tim James makes no bones about his pandering. His TV commercials cry out: “We speak English, so if you cannot speak English, or refuse to speak English, get out of Alabama and our country.”

Here’s what widely circulated blogger Michael Murphy has to say about our language. “I find myself becoming more and more indigent over how some neighborhoods in this country look more like neighborhoods in other countries. You want to go to a place that looks like China, I say go to China. This is America. Is it right that I can't go into a resturant on American soil without an encyclopedia? I mean, what the heck is rigatoni? I ordered it because their wasn’t spagetty on the menu and they said it was like spagetty, but it wasn’t. It was these strange tubes, so there liars too.

That’s right. This guy’s comments circulate the worldwide web. (The multiple spelling errors are his, not mine.) And hey, Michael, you don’t have to go to the orient to see what the world’s largest country looks like. Just check out the Chinatown sections of most major U.S. east and west coast cities.

So what’s up with this sudden assault on the multicultural speak in the U.S? Take a look at Washington. The American job market has been annihilated, with unemployment still hanging around 10%. We hear a lot about “trickle down.” The disastrous economic policies, put in place by the Washington gang of both Republicans and Democrats, bailed out Wall Street but dumped on Main Street, and now have trickled down to the average Joe, who is fighting to keep his head above water.

So it’s easy to understand why this same Joe blames his economic woes on the so-called “illegal” immigrants that he sees working all around him. As columnist Mark Crovelli writes: “He sees foreigners mowing lawns all over town, cooking meals in virtually every restaurant he patronizes, and installing every roof in the neighborhood, and he reasons that his current plight is due primarily to the fact that these foreigners “steal” jobs that otherwise would be his for the taking. However, the biggest insult of all, to his mind, is the fact that these foreigners don’t have the courtesy to speak his language, and yet they still manage to find and steal jobs from English-speaking Americans like him!”

This opens a whole new can of worms as to why so many “legals” cannot compete, or will not compete against half literate immigrants who don’t speak English. When I drive around my home town of Baton Rouge, I see Latinos on their way to work cleaning my neighborhood houses, installing new roofs all over town, mowing yards, busing at many local restaurants, and maintaining local golf courses. Employers say they would rather hire American workers, but just cannot find willing labor. Many of these same employers are taking Spanish lessons so as to better communicate with their growing workforce.

The problem is not in my neighborhood, or my city, but in the nation’s capitol. Both Republicans and Democrats have continually dodged the challenge to find a comprehensive solution to the whole immigration mess that these same lawmakers allowed in the first place. Congress (both parties) created a housing bubble that attracted millions of Latinos to enter the U.S. illegally, and go to work on the overheated and unsustainable housing market that was desperate for new workers. Paraphrasing Pogo, “We have found the problem, and the problem was created by those we sent to Washington.”

So, until congress finds the courage to have some backbone and face this immigration mess head on, the rest of the country has little choice but to stand by and wait, with the occasional quixotic jousting that we are observing in Arizona.

But what about “Speak English or Get Out?” Look, I’ll stay out of your face and you stay out of mine. Don’t tell me what language I can or cannot speak. I don’t need big brother telling me what to do. If I want to go around speaking any foreign language, that’s my right as an American. I will not voluntarily stand by and let my redneck friend or Big Brother set the parameters as to how I can or cannot communicate. When you tell me what language to speak, then you start down the path of telling me what I can speak, or whether I can even speak at all.

So to all my friends, redneck like me or otherwise, pick and choose your fights wisely. The problem is the overspending, money wasting, high taxing, and freedom limiting bureaucrats in Washington who lack the courage to set this country in the right direction with a little common sense. You up there! Take care of the economic chaos you created. And for goodness sake, leave me and poor Pedro alone.

*****

“English? Who needs that? I’m never going to England!” Homer Simpson

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers and websites throughout the nation. You can read all of his past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownla.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am until 11 am central time on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com

Healthcare Problems Continue to Mount in Supreme Court!

March 29th, 2010
New Orleans, Louisiana

THE DEBATE IS OVER A LOT MORE THAN HEALTHCARE!

For three days this week, the national news focus was on the U.S. Supreme Court’s hearing concerning the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. To most Republicans, the new law is a massive stretch of interpreting the Constitution’s commerce clause of allowing the federal government to require every individual to purchase health insurance. But to moderates and most Democrats, such a requirement is little more than another of a long line of government dictates on both the state and federal levels. So for folks like you and me, what do we know and what should we know about all the verbiage surrounding this technical and complicated law?

The simple question this week before the Supreme Court is whether, under the Commerce clause, Congress has the power to require Americans to obtain health insurance. If a majority of the Court’s member don’t like the law, that’s not a valid reason to hold the law unconstitutional. Supposedly, there has to be precedent. There has to be a clear extension of the law that goes beyond a federal issue, and one that does not violate a clearly defined state right. OK, OK. We will just forget about Bush v Gore for now.

Some will say the law has not even been put fully into effect yet. The mandate provisions do not kick in until 2014. And any mandatory penalty or tax for not complying is not collected until 2015. So how can there even be a court challenge? Good question. There is a law on the books called the Anti-Injunction Act that prohibits any court challenge by an individual unless a tax or penalty at issue at been both levied and paid. The court, under this law, has the right, even the obligation, to “punt” if you will on any decision until 2015. But will they? Or will they choose to just get the controversy out of the way?

Can government mandate what an individual is required to do? Certainly. They do it all the time. On the state level, residents are required to buy car insurance and get immunizations. On the national level, federal courts have supported efforts by Congress to make a number of demands on both the states as well as individuals. . Both Medicare and Social Security require an individual to pay into a federally created fund. No federal highway funds are given to each state unless the drinking age was raised to twenty one.

In California, medical use of marijuana is legal, and defendant Angel Reich had a doctor’s prescription to grow the plant for her own personal medical use only. Her case went to the Supreme Court (Ashcroft v. Raich), and the decision stated that the Commerce Clause applied and the federal government could regulate and prohibit her use. And how about Roscoe Filburn, a farmer from Minnesota, who raised wheat for his family’s own personal use? The Supreme Court upheld a 1938 federal law that told him how much wheat he could grow and made him pay a penalty for every extra bushel. (Wickard v. Filburn)

So there would seem to be ample case law and precedent for the Justices to uphold the idea of federal mandates. The law was passed by Congress and signed by the President. They made the rules. Chief Justice John Roberts has repeatedly said that judges are like umpires. Their job is to call balls and strikes, but not become rule makers. There is any number of examples where Congress has passed, and the Supreme Court has upheld, the regulation of individual activity.

But some would argue there is a big difference this time. In the case of this healthcare law, individuals are penalized for their inactivity. If you don’t buy healthcare, you get penalized. Can the failure to make a purchase be interpreted to be “commercial activity,” and thus be subjected to the new law? I think a strong argument can be made that individual inaction causes a domino effect, that makes those who comply with the law take additional action.

If you don’t comply with the law, then I have to pick up your slack. If you are not covered for health protection, then run to the emergency room to obtain care for free, those of us who do comply with the law have to pay for your failure to comply. Your inaction requires my additional action and forces me to assume additional cost. In this bigger picture, I would argue that there is ample room for the Commerce Clause to apply.

Here’s how David Brooks, the conservative columnist for the New York Times, sums it up: “The individual mandate is perfectly acceptable policy. We effectively have a national health care system. We all indirectly pay for ill, uninsured people who show up at emergency rooms. If all Americans are in the same interconnected health care system, I think it’s reasonable for government to insist that all Americans participate in the insurance network that is the payment method for that system.”

Many will argue that if the Supreme Court puts precedent aside and interjects their own personal feelings about the law by declaring ” Obamacare” unconstitutional, such a rejection will be perceived a s a major setback for the President. But who is going to lead the criticism of too much federal over reach? Mitt Romney is a cinch to be the Republican presidential nominee, and Democrats are already tagging him as the father of the Obama healthcare plan. As Governor of Massachusetts, he confected and strongly supported almost an additional plan for his home state. Can’t you just see the grin come across the President’s face in the first presidential debate when Romney or the moderator brings up Obamacare? “Now just where did the idea come from?”

And just where did the idea of an individual mandate originate before then Governor Romney instituted a similar plan in Massachusetts? The President can site as support for the an individual mandate just about every major Republican figure, starting with Newt Gingrich, and every conservative think tank, beginning with the Heritage Foundation ,going back to the early 1990s when such a mandate was offered as a Republican alternative to the Clinton healthcare proposals.

What we saw at the Supreme Court this week was the three Ps; precedent, politics and posturing. It could be Bush v. Gore all over again. And when all is said and done, Congress and the Supreme Court still have to deal the fact that 40 million Americans have no healthcare. The U.S is the only industrialized nation in the world that faces such a problem. Yet this political debate could continue for years to come.
*******

“There is hardly a political question in the United States which does not sooner or later turn into a judicial one.”
Alexis de Tocqueville

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the country and on websites worldwide. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am, central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com

Must Be a New Movie-Prosecutors Gone Wild!

Thursday, March 22nd, 2012
New Orleans, Louisiana

STOP THE PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT!

It seems to be spreading like a communicable disease. And apparently there is no cure. Week after week, there are new reports of prosecutors, on both the federal and state level, engaging in premeditated acts of prosecutorial misconduct. Coaching witnesses to lie. Hiding evidence from the defense counsel that would favor the accused. And even calculated cover-ups that put a falsely convicted person on death row. Has justice run amuck? Has Lady Justice lost her way?

Take a look at some of the recent stories about wayward prosecutors in major newspapers throughout the county. The Pittsburg Post-Gazette researched a 10 part story on this national problem. They summed up their findings by concluding: “Hundreds of times during the past 10 years, federal agents and prosecutors have pursued justice by breaking the law. They lied, hid evidence, distorted facts, engaged in cover-ups, paid for perjury and set up innocent people in a relentless effort to win indictments, guilty pleas and convictions, a two year Post-Gazette investigation found.”

Just a few months ago, the Houston Chronicle charged: “This year we have read story after story of egregious prosecutorial misconduct. Prosecutors have repeatedly robbed innocent men of their liberty. Prosecutors who willfully falsify evidence must be held to answer under the law. We dishonor the memory of those who paid the ultimate price for our liberty if we demand anything less to preserve that liberty.”

A court ordered study concerning the botched trial of former Alaska U.S. Senator Ted Stevens was released just last week. Prosecutors had withheld key evidence and statements from witnesses that contradicted the government’s case and that would have found Stevens innocent. A few weeks after his wrongful conviction, he was defeated for re election. Stevens died in a plane crash shortly thereafter. A report ordered by the trial judge concluded there was definitely “intentional misconduct,” and the present U.S. Senator from Alaska is calling for the prosecutors to be fired and strongly sanctioned. In my opinion they should be criminally prosecuted and lose their licenses to practice law.

A key part of the Stephens investigative report says: “Handwritten notes taken by an FBI agent “contained significant information that was never disclosed to Senator Stephens’ attorneys. “His own attorneys elaborated by saying that “Corrupt prosecutors obtained an illegal verdict… and the report “provides evidence of government corruption that is shocking in its boldness and its breadth.”


There are interesting analogies here. The Stephens investigative report, the trial judge and the lawyers all have concluded that withholding an FBI agent’s “hand written notes is “shocking,” and is a blatant example of prosecutorial misconduct. This reminds me of a Louisiana case some years ago where the FBI agent’s notes were withheld, and that led to the conviction of an innocent man. But prosecutors in the Bayou State have a habit of withholding evidence that would have cleared a defendant. In the past year alone, three New Orleans cases have made their way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices’ concluded that convicting the innocent by withholding key evidence seems to be a way of life in many Louisiana federal and state courts.

As quoted in the New York Times, a former U.S. Attorney from New Orleans said that the office policy was “keeping away as much information as possible from the defense attorney.” Defense lawyers in New Orleans confirm that there have been 28 convictions, many that put defendants on death row, where later it was determined that prosecutors had withheld key evidence that would have supported the innocence of the accused.

In the notorious case of Dan Bright, convicted and put on death row for a murder he did not commit, evidence came out years after his conviction that the FBI, thanks to a credible informant, had been in possession of the name of the actual killer all along. Luckily for Dan Bright, because of the unconstitutional withholding of key evidence by the prosecution and the FBI, his conviction was thrown out, and he now is a free man – after 8 years behind bars, much of that time on death row.

Another death row victim out of New Orleans was John Thompson, who spent 14 years on death row, even though the prosecutor who sent him to prison knew all along that he was innocent. On his death bed, dying of cancer, this rogue prosecutor confessed to a colleague that he had, in fact, withheld key evidence that would have cleared Thompson. The fellow prosecutor who had received this confession waited three years to let the prosecutor’s office know the real truth.

It just never seems to end in New Orleans. A longtime federal prosecutor, just this week resigned from the U.S. Attorney’s office after admitting that he used an alias to post defamatory and scurrilous commentary about cases he was handling on the website of the state’s largest newspaper. The Times Picayune reported that one of the prosecutor’s aliases was “campstblue.” The U.S. Attorney’s office in New Orleans is on Camp Street. The posting was about a former New Orleans Mayor who is under investigation by the prosecutor’s office. “Campstblue” wrote: "For all of you who have a penchant for firearms and how they work, Ray Nagin lives on Park Island." Does the posting urge someone with a gun to go after the controversial former Mayor? And if so, isn’t this a serious crime of inciting a felony? Another day in the continuing saga of blatant and corrupt prosecutorial misconduct in New Orleans.

The attitude of too many prosecutors is to do whatever it takes to get convictions. But that’s not the prosecutor’s job. As federal appeals courts have said repeatedly: “A prosecutor has a special duty commensurate with a prosecutor’s unique power, to assure that defendants receive fair trials. Prosecutors sometimes forget that the prosecutor’s special duty is not to convict, but to secure justice.”

Here’s how this week’s lead editorial in The Wall Street Journal summarized the problem. “Something is very rotten at the U.S. Department of Justice. Americans hand prosecutors an awesome power. We are seeing a pattern of abuse of this power, in order to win big cases. Prosecutors should remember that their job is to do justice and not simply to beat the defense team.”

As the poet said many years ago: “It is just as well that justice is blind; she might not like some of the things done in her name if she could see them.” There is much for Lady Justice to be concerned about today.

Peace and Justice.

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers and websites throughout the country. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am, central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.

Insurance Rates Skyrocket in Louisiana!

Thursday, March 15th, 2012
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

LOUISIANA -- WHERE BEING NUMBER ONE IS BAD NEWS!

My home state of Louisiana again has the distinction of having the most expensive auto insurance rates in the nation. Forbes magazine just released national figures indicating that not only do Louisiana’s drivers pay more than drivers in any other state in the country, but the costs are higher by a wide margin.

The figures that rank Louisiana number one show that the average cost to insure a car for a Louisiana driver is $2536. That’s almost $500 dollars more than Oklahoma, the next highest state, which comes in at $2047. In Alabama, drivers pay an average of $1345. In Arkansas, the figure is $1334. Our neighbors in Mississippi pay $1502. Texas comes in a little higher than the southern average at $1661, but it’s still considerably cheaper to drive a car there than in the Bayou State. Louisiana drivers pay double the average insurance cost throughout the south.

These rankings are nothing new. Louisiana has led the country in high rates for the past decade. And the root causes are the same. Too many drunk drivers, uninsured drives, unskilled drivers, poor roads and a lack of strong regulation. The Louisiana legislature kicked off its 2012 session just this week. One would think that with such an insurance cost drain on the state populace, there would be numerous proposals to address the long list of causation. But those paying the highest rates in the nation should not get their hopes up.

These rankings are nothing new. Louisiana has led the country in high rates for the past decade. And the root causes have not changed -- too many drunk drivers, uninsured drives, unskilled drivers, poor roads and a lack of strong regulation. The Louisiana legislature kicked off its 2012 session just this week. One would think that with such an insurance cost drain on the state populace, there would be numerous proposals to address the long list of causation. But Louisiana drivers should not get their hopes up.

Drunk driving seems to be at an all time high. Louisiana is known worldwide for partying and drinking at all hours of the day and night. The local chant is le ze la bon ton roulette -- let the good times roll. A friend was visiting from out west and was astounded to see drive through daiquiri shops open all night long. The results of this lax “drinking and driving” attitude shows up in the accident statistics. Over 50% of all serious injuries and deaths in auto accidents involve drunk drivers.

Just days ago in the New Orleans area, a fellow was arrested for his 8th DWI. No, that’s not make a mistake. The 8th. What happened at 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 when one would expect that someone would say, “Hey, something’s wrong here. Enough is enough. Get this guy off the road.” And what about the driver just north of New Orleans who was charged with his 4th DWI in the past five months, alone?

The state police, to their credit, maintain a statewide data base for all criminal charges and convictions. But the data is only as good as its maintenance, and a number of local law enforcement jurisdictions do not keep the information current. Charges slip through the cracks, and this is why a driver can get multiple DWIs and still get behind the wheel to drive drunk again, and be a menace to us all.

State laws mandate jail time, the loss of license, and mandatory sale of the driver’s vehicle in the case of the third offense DWI. Unfortunately, these provisions are rarely enforced in many local courts. When the information is there, and the driver is convicted, under the law he should pay the price, but all too often, he doesn’t. It comes down to inconsistent enforcement.

Another factor contributing to Louisiana’s highest in the nation insurance rates: Louisiana has a large number of uninsured drivers. But Louisiana Insurance officials will tell you that only 10 to 15% of Louisiana drivers are uninsured. But the actual percentage of uninsured drivers is much higher according to the insurance industry authorities. And State troopers readily acknowledge that the number of uninsured drivers is above 30%.

That means that it is a necessity to carry uninsured motorist coverage that often is more than one third of the total premium cost. The legislature in Louisiana compounded the problem last year by passing a law stopping the impoundment of vehicles that are not insured. So the numbers of the uninsured continue to increase and will likely cause the Louisiana driver’s premium to increase even more.

Here’s another list where Louisiana is number one. The National Car Insurance Comparison guide was just released, and surprise, surprise --The Bayou State leads the nation in lousy drivers. There is an insubstantial early driver training system in place, with few high schools even offering driver’s education. Kids tell me that many of the private courses are a joke, with plenty of texting and playing video games, little training, and no final exam. The same study listed Louisiana in a tie with Montana as the most dangerous place to drive in the United States.

Road conditions? Still, yet, another first place prize. Reader’s Digest recently listed Louisiana as having the worst roads in America. Where we gonna’ store all these trophies? What about the state capitol in Baton Rouge, the home of all the legislators who have played the major roles in earning such a stellar record?

Lobbyists and close observers of the legislative scene do not expect any significant insurance reforms to come out of this current legislative session. So, for the time being, Louisiana is secure in holding down the number one spot in virtually every category of bad news for those who were hoping for insurance rates to come down. At the state capitol, there is definitely a way. But for now, there is just no will.

******
“If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of car insurance payments.“ ~Earl Wilson

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers and websites throughout the country. You can read past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am, central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.