Tuesday, December 05, 2017

Guest Post: John Whitehead on 'What Went Wrong in Charlottesville"

“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government IS the problem.”—Ronald Reagan
Corruption. Graft. Intolerance. Greed. Incompetence. Ineptitude. Militarism. Lawlessness. Ignorance. Brutality. Deceit. Collusion. Corpulence. Bureaucracy. Immorality. Depravity. Censorship. Cruelty. Violence. Mediocrity. Tyranny.
These are the hallmarks of an institution that is rotten through and through.
What you smell is the stench of a dying republic. Our dying republic.
The American experiment in freedom is failing fast.
John Whitehead Rutherford Institute
John Whitehead (c) 2013 Rick Sincere
Through every fault of our own—our apathy, our ignorance, our intolerance, our disinclination to do the hard work of holding government leaders accountable to the rule of law, our inclination to let politics trump longstanding constitutional principles—we have been reduced to this sorry state in which we are little more than shackled inmates in a prison operated for the profit of a corporate elite.
We have been saddled with the wreckage of a government at all levels that no longer represents the citizenry, serves the citizenry, or is accountable to the citizenry.
We’re not the masters anymore.
It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about the federal government, state governments, or local governing bodies: at all ends of the spectrum and every point in between, a shift has taken place.
“We the people” are not being seen, heard or valued.
We no longer count for much of anything beyond an occasional electoral vote and as a source of income for the government’s ever-burgeoning financial needs.
Everything happening at the national level is playing out at the local level, as well: the violence, the militarization, the intolerance, the lopsided governance, and an uneasy awareness that the citizenry have no say in how their communities are being governed.
Take my own hometown of Charlottesville, Virginia, for instance.
In recent years, Charlottesville has been plagued by government leaders who are tone-deaf, focused on their own aggrandizement, and incapable of prioritizing the needs of their constituents over their own personal and political agendas; law enforcement officials for whom personal safety, heavy-handed militarized tactics, and power plays trump their duty to serve and protect; polarized citizens incapable of finding common ground, respecting each other’s rights, or agreeing to disagree; and a community held hostage by political correctness, divisive rhetoric and a growing intolerance for any views that may be unpopular or at odds with the mainstream.
It was a perfect storm just waiting for the right conditions to wreak havoc.
Unfortunately, the maelstrom hit in the summer of 2017, when Charlottesville, regularly cited as being one of the happiest cities in America, became ground zero for a heated war of words—and actions—over racism, “sanitizing history,” extremism (both right and left), political correctness, hate speech, partisan politics, and a growing fear that violent words will end in violent actions.
In Charlottesville, as in so many parts of the country right now, the conflict was over how to reconcile the nation’s checkered past, particularly as it relates to slavery, with the present need to sanitize the environment of anything—words and images—that might cause offense, especially if it’s a Confederate flag or monument.
That fear of offense prompted the Charlottesville City Council to get rid of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Leethat has graced one of its public parks for 82 years.
That’s when everything went haywire.
In attempting to pacify one particularly vocal and righteously offended group while railroading over the concerns of those with alternate viewpoints, Charlottesville attracted the unwanted attention of the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis and the alt-Right, all of whom descended on the little college town with the intention of exercising their First Amendment right to be disagreeable, to assemble, and to protest.
When put to the test, Charlottesville did not handle things well at all.
No one—not the armed, violent, militant protesters nor the police—gave peace a chance, not on July 8 when the KKK descended, nor on August 12, when what should have been an exercise in free speech quickly became a brawl that left one dead and dozens more injured.
As the New York Times reported, “Protesters began to mace one another, throwing water bottles and urine-filled balloons— some of which hit reporters — and beating each other with flagpoles, clubs and makeshift weapons. Before long, the downtown area was a melee. People were ducking and covering with a constant stream of projectiles whizzing by our faces, and the air was filled with the sounds of fists and sticks against flesh.”
And then there was the police, who were supposed to uphold the law and prevent violence.
They failed to do either.
Indeed, a 220-page post-mortem of the protests and the Charlottesville government’s response by former U.S. attorney Timothy J. Heaphy merely corroborates our worst fears about what drives the government at all levels: power, money, ego, politics and ambition.
When presented with a situation in which the government and its agents were tasked with protecting free speech and safety, Heaphy concluded that “the City of Charlottesville protected neither free expression nor public safety.”
Heaphy continues: “The City was unable to protect the right of free expression and facilitate the permit holder’s offensive speech. This represents a failure of one of government’s core functions—the protection of fundamental rights. Law enforcement also failed to maintain order and protect citizens from harm, injury, and death. Charlottesville preserved neither of those principles on August 12, which has led to deep distrust of government within this community.”
In other words, the government failed to uphold its constitutional mandates. The police failed to carry out their duties as peace officers. And the citizens found themselves unable to trust either the police or the government to do its job in respecting their rights and ensuring their safety.
Despite the fact that 1,000 first responders (including 300 state police troopers and members of the National Guard)—many of whom had been preparing for the downtown rally for months—had been called on to work the event, despite the fact that police in riot gear surrounded Emancipation Park on three sides, and despite the fact that Charlottesville had had what reporter David Graham referred to as “a dress rehearsal of sorts” a month earlier when 30 members of the Ku Klux Klan were confronted by 1000 counterprotesters, police failed to do their jobs.
In fact, as the Washington Post reports, police “seemed to watch as groups beat each other with sticks and bludgeoned one another with shields… At one point, police appeared to retreat and then watch the beatings before eventually moving in to end the free-for-all, make arrests and tend to the injured.”
Instead of establishing clear boundaries—buffer zones—between the warring groups and protecting the First Amendment rights of the protesters, police established two entrances into the permit areas of the park and created barriers “guiding rallygoers single-file into the park” past lines of white nationalists and antifa counterprotesters.
Incredibly, when the first signs of open violence broke out, Heaphy reports that the police chief allegedly instructed his staff to “let them fight, it will make it easier to declare an unlawful assembly.”
Read Heaphy’s report for yourself.
It’s full of drama and intrigue, plots and dueling egos, petty tyrants and ambitious politicians. (There’s even mention of a personal email account and deleted text messages.)
Not much different from what is happening on the national scene.
Commissioned by the City of Charlottesville, this Heaphy report was intended to be an independent investigation of what went right and what went wrong in the government’s handling of the protests.
Heaphy found very little to commend.
What went right on Aug. 12 according to Heaphy: 1) Despite the presence of firearms, including members of the militia, and angry confrontations between protesters and counterprotesters, no person was shot and no significant property damage occurred; 2) Emergency personnel did their jobs effectively and treated a large number of people in a short period of time; and 3) Police intelligence gathering was thorough (that’s the best he had to say about police).
Now for what went wrong, according to the report:
1. Police failed to get input from other law enforcement agencies experienced in handling large protests.
2. Police failed to adequately train their officers in advance of the protest.
3. City officials failed to request assistance from outside agencies.
4. The City Council unduly interfered by ignoring legal advice, attempting to move the protesters elsewhere, and ignoring the concerns of law enforcement.
5. The city government failed to inform the public about their plans.
6. City officials were misguided in allowing weapons at the protest.
7. The police implemented a flawed operational plan that failed to protect public safety.
8. While police were provided with riot gear, they were never trained in how to use it, nor were they provided with any meaningful field training in how to deal with or de-escalate anticipated violence on the part of protesters.
9. Despite the input and advice of outside counsel, including The Rutherford Institute, the police failed to employ de-escalation tactics or establish clear barriers between warring factions of protesters.
10. Government officials and police leadership opted to advance their own agendas at the expense of constitutional rights and public safety.
11. For all intents and purposes, police abided by a stand down order that endangered the community and paved the way for civil unrest.
12. In failing to protect public safety, police and government officials undermined public faith in the government.
The Heaphy report focused on the events that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia, but it applies to almost every branch of government that fails to serve “we the people.”
As the Pew Research Center revealed, public trust in the government remains near historic lows and with good reason, too.
This isn’t America, land of the free, where the government is “of the people, by the people [and] for the people.”
Battlefield America John WhiteheadRather, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this is Amerika, where fascism, totalitarianism and militarism work hand in hand.
So what’s the answer?
As always, it must start with “we the people.”
I’ve always advised people to think nationally, but act locally. Yet as Charlottesville makes clear, it’s hard to make a difference locally when the local government is as deaf, dumb and blind to the needs of its constituents as the national government.
Still, it’s time to clean house at all levels of government.
You’ve got a better chance of making your displeasure seen and felt and heard within your own community. But it will take perseverance and unity and a commitment to finding common ground with your fellow citizens.
Stop tolerating corruption, graft, intolerance, greed, incompetence, ineptitude, militarism, lawlessness, ignorance, brutality, deceit, collusion, corpulence, bureaucracy, immorality, depravity, censorship, cruelty, violence, mediocrity, and tyranny.
Stop holding your nose in order to block out the stench of a rotting institution.
Stop letting the government and its agents treat you like a servant or a slave.
You’ve got rights. We’ve all got rights. This is our country. This is our government. No one can take it away from us unless we make it easy for them.
Right now, we’re making it way too easy for the police state to take over.
Stop being an accessory to the murder of the American republic.
WC: 1882
ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.








Reprinted by permission of The Rutherford Institute.






Monday, December 04, 2017

From the Archives: Will 2011 state election voters feel enough pain to solve state budget crises?

Will 2011 state election voters feel enough pain to solve state budget crises?
December 4, 2010 1:22 PM MST

Eileen Norcross GMU Mercatus Center economist
At the annual holiday dinner hosted by the Mercatus Center on December 1, economist Eileen Norcross spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner about the impending crisis in state budgets. Norcross is a senior research fellow at Mercatus and co-founder of the web site StimulusWatch.org.

Norcross answered questions about state budget shortfalls and the “fiscal evasion” tricks that state governments play to create the appearance of balanced budgets. Most states, she explained, are facing serious consequences as a result of distended pension obligations and growing expenditures.

Some better than others
Still, she said, “there are a few states that are not in terrible shape,” such as South Dakota and Wyoming.

Some states are doing better because they “are simply smaller” and “don’t have as big of a public sector workforce. They don’t have the same pension obligations that some of the mismanaged states like Illinois and California do.”

Even so, Norcross warned, “all states are facing one crisis, and that is in Medicaid and rising health care costs. That is a feature of all state budgets.” Another universal feature, she added, is education spending, which “has been baked into the cake.”


Stimulus problems
Referring to research that shows that the federal stimulus money of the past couple of years may lead to budget problems for state governments in the future, Norcross cited research conducted for the Mercatus Center by Russell Sobel and George Crowley on the effects of intergovernmental transfers.

Sobel and Crowley “found that for every dollar of federal money that’s transferred to the state government, that raises future taxes by 40 cents,” Norcross reported.

Why is that?

“Once you undertake a public works project and the stimulus money goes away, you still have to finish that project. You have to pay for those workers [and] you might have to issue bonds to complete the project. In other words, they may have expanded commitments that they now have to fund themselves.”

2011 state elections
Eileen Norcross economist GMU Mercatus Center
Eileen Norcross
In 2011, Kentucky, Louisiana, New Jersey, and Virginia will be holding state legislative elections, and these budgetary issues may have an effect on their outcomes but, Norcross cautioned, “that’s going to depend on the pain that the electorate feels.”

She said the case of New Jersey is “interesting,” because recently “when property taxes got so onerous on the average homeowner, [voters] actually turned out in force during the school budget election and they voted down a lot of school budgets in New Jersey.”

The number of school budgets rejected was “the greatest number since 1976,” she said, “because they were really voting against a tax hike.”

The results of next year’s elections, Norcross concluded, is “really going to depend on the extent to which the electorate is feeling the pain today or whether legislators are engaging in that kind of fiscal evasion, trying to buy more time, [and] pushing that debt onto future taxpayers.”


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on December 4, 2010. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.


From the Archives: Balanced-budget gimmickry hides states' fiscal crises, says Eileen Norcross

Balanced-budget gimmickry hides states' fiscal crises, says Eileen Norcross
December 4, 2010 12:58 PM MST

Eileen Norcross Mercatus Center GMU
Economist Eileen Norcross, who specializes in state and local budgetary policy at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Northern Virginia, spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner on December 1 about the impending crisis in state budgets.

She explained that states are experiencing persistent budget deficits, often as the result of ballooning pension obligations.

She noted that these budgetary shortfalls are taking place even though most states have a constitutional requirement to balance their budgets.

Balanced-budget 'gimmickry'
This happens, Norcross explained, because “it’s possible to have a balanced budget yet to grow spending every year.” There are different answers to the question, “What does budgetary balance mean?”

Norcross pointed out that “while on the books they can claim budgetary balance, they also engage in a lot of gimmickry, what I call ‘fiscal evasion.’”

Eileen Norcross economist Mercatus Center GMU
Eileen Norcross
She explained:

“For years, states have been finding ways to balance their books without having to raise taxes directly, so they take on more debt, they dump trust funds into the general fund, they defer their pension obligations: That’s how some of these states have been balancing their books. It gives them the temporary illusion that they’ve met their commitments yet they really haven’t. That’s revealing a structural instability in these revenue streams.”

Noting that “Virginia is doing relatively well compared to the other states,” Norcross added that “there are a few things that concern me.”

For one thing, the Virginia state government “deferred [its] pension payment this year. It’s not a good practice.”

This is not unique, she said.

Pension obligations
“All the states have undervalued the size of the obligation that they owe to their public sector employees by an order of magnitude. What they claim on their books looks bad, but what they actually owe is far greater.”

In Virginia and other states, Norcross continued, “what concerns me is when [they] defer their pension obligations, they’re basically passing the buck [or] kicking the can down the road, but that’s not going anywhere. They’re going to owe those public sector workers” eventually.

In the third part of this interview, Norcross looks at which states are doing a better job, and whether fiscal matters will affect the behavior of voters in 2011 state legislative elections.

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on December 4, 2010. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.


From the Archives: Mercatus Center economist Eileen Norcross notes state budget ‘fiscal evasion’

Mercatus Center economist Eileen Norcross notes state budget ‘fiscal evasion’
December 4, 2010 12:43 PM MST

On December 1, the Mercatus Center at George Mason University hosted its annual holiday dinner, this year featuring novelist Christopher Buckley as after-dinner speaker. About 300 people attended, also hearing pre-dinner remarks from GMU economics professor Russell Roberts, co-creator of the viral video, “Fear the Boom and Bust” with rapping versions of F.A. Hayek and J.M. Keynes.

Eileen Norcross Mercatus Center fiscal evasion
Economist Eileen Norcross is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center who closely follows state and local budgetary policy. Two of her recently published working papers are “Fiscal Evasion in State Budgeting” and “The Crisis in Public Sector Pension Plans.”

At the cocktail reception preceding the dinner, Norcross spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner about the crisis in state budgets across the country.

‘Persistent budget deficits’

State and local budgets are an important research topic, she said, “because so many state and municipal governments are experiencing persistent budget deficits. They’re finding it difficult to balance their books and it’s projected that states are not likely to find fiscal balance until 2013.”

There are common reasons for this situation that cross state lines, Norcross explained.

“States have growing pension obligations that they have not funded. These bills are coming due. They’re going to have to contribute more to their pension systems to pay public sector workers. This is going to crowd out their ability to meet their growing Medicaid obligations.”

Workforce cutbacks

Eileen Norcross Mercatus Center GMU
Eileen Norcross
Moreover, with state revenues falling, their spending grew “in the decade leading up to the recession,” she said. “They’ve built commitments into their budgets that they’re now finding it very difficult to cut. That means cutting back on the public sector workforce and other things have become very challenging for states.”

Even with money from the federal government, the situation is still serious.

“With the stimulus drying up they don’t have much to go on here,” Norcross said. “They’ve either got to raise taxes or find other places to cut.”

In the second part of this interview, Norcross answers questions about constitutional requirements for balanced budgets, deferred pension obligations, and the negative effect of stimulus money on state budgets.


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on December 4, 2010. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

Sunday, December 03, 2017

Guest Post: In-store shopping still matters this holiday season


Kelli Hollinger, Texas A&M University

It surprises most millennials to learn that only about 10 percent of all retail purchases are actually made online. Each semester, when I ask hundreds of undergraduate business students to estimate, they consistently guess that between a quarter and half of all retail spending happens on the internet. But this holiday shopping season, as ever in the past, the overwhelming majority of purchases will still happen within four physical walls of a store.

This should encourage the thousands of retailers anchored in strip malls, lifestyle centers and mixed use developments. The National Retail Federation expects holiday retail sales – not counting car, gas and restaurant purchases – in November and December this year to increase up to 4 percent over last year, to as much as US$682 billion.

Stores will need the money in order to avoid being added to 2017’s record-breaking roster of retail bankruptcies, store closures and layoffs, which included landmark brands like Toys R Us and RadioShack.



A reason to visit


Traditional retailers must give consumers good reasons to visit their stores, beyond product selection and good value. Joe Pine and James Gilmore’s 1999 book “The Experience Economy” foretold how savvy companies, like Apple and American Girl, excel by staging compelling experiences that teach, entertain or inspire customers.

The main asset of a physical store in a digital world is human staffing. Even if a shopper doesn’t want help, a smile acknowledging his or her presence encourages connection. Front-line employees can ask customers about their kids, in-laws or Thanksgiving meal planning. That can lead to an authentic personal connection through which employees can discover a shopper’s unique wants and respond with products on the shelves, or ordered and shipped for free to the customer’s home. An in-person encounter can become a seamless blend of the online and physical worlds.

Even Walmart, America’s largest retailer, is moving to a more experiential model. In hopes of boosting sales, its 4,700 stores will host 20,000 parties with Santa before the New Year. Customers will be able to take pictures, test out toys and get tots excited.

The company has another advantage over online sellers, too: nine in 10 Americans live within 15 minutes of a Walmart store. A thousand Walmarts now let customers drive up to the storefront to pick up online grocery orders the same day they’re purchased, at no additional charge. That rivals Amazon’s Fresh grocery service, which comes at an extra cost and often doesn’t deliver until the next day.

Emotional connection in a digital age


Holiday Christmas shoppers Black Friday 2013
Holiday shoppers (c) Rick Sincere 2013
Beyond face-to-face service, successful companies today must develop a deeper connection with their customers, whether online or off. Store-based retailers can show their values in ways that at times can take on a very personal meaning for shoppers and store owners alike. I have been a loyal customer of Gallery Furniture in Houston for years. Owner Jim McIngvale, known as “Mattress Mack,” is a marketing maverick known for his decades of zany TV commercials pledging to “Save you money!

After the devastation of Hurricane Harvey, he opened his stores to anyone in need of a place to stay. Some came by boat, with only the clothes they were wearing. McIngvale welcomed thousands of Houstonians to sleep on his inventory of mattresses. He sheltered, fed and prayed for flood victims.

On Halloween, McIngvale flew 50 first responders to Game 6 of the World Series in Los Angeles, giving those lucky Astros fans a once-in-a-lifetime experience and emotional lift in the wake of natural disaster.

Like other retailers gearing up for the holidays, Gallery Furniture is promoting “monster sales.” But with the floodwaters gone and the Astros crowned as baseball’s world champions, McIngvale’s community spirit seems to have positioned his chain as more than a brand, destination or store. Beyond capturing market share, Gallery Furniture may have an advantage in customer sentiment.

Best Buy is buzzing again


Community involvement isn’t the only way retailers can regain strength. National electronics chain Best Buy has ridden a roller coaster over the last 20 years: In 2004 it was recognized by Forbes magazine as “Company of the Year.” By 2012 it was dismissed as a real-world showroom for cheaper online retailers. In August 2017, though, its stock price hit an all-time high.

As Amazon grew, Best Buy defended itself, becoming a top 10 retailer in sales by matching competitors’ prices and investing in personal services like Geek Squad. The company also trained workers to help customers understand technology: Product descriptions can list a camera’s functions, but a knowledgeable employee can explain how it works with lenses, editing software or with other devices. That allows the company to take advantage of the ever-increasing number of tech-connected items in smart homes, from Nest thermostats to 4K TVs – which require more instruction to set up and operate than their analog predecessors.

The ConversationIn the face of online competition, brick-and-mortar retailers must give consumers unique in-store experiences that build emotional connections with shoppers. Black Friday promos on toasters or iPads won’t cut it. They have to provide heartfelt feelings like surprise, delight and excitement – and actual help and useful advice. Shopping on a couch via a mobile app is efficient, but a store can be magical and memory-making.

Kelli Hollinger, Director, Center for Retailing Studies; Lecturer of Marketing, Texas A&M University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Saturday, December 02, 2017

Guest Post: These Special Interests Oppose Marijuana Law Reform

Americans overwhelmingly agree that marijuana should be legal, so why isn't it? So glad you asked...

by Laura Williams

In this era of political polarization, when Americans seem to agree on absolutely nothing, let me reassure you. We overwhelmingly agree that cannabis should be legal.

1 in 5 Americans have (state) legal access, 1 in 2 have experimented with it, and more than 1 in 10 smoke regularly. Southern California yuppies are publicly winning prizes for growing the same plant that landed Georgia teenagers in prison.

Half of states allow at least limited use, and a few attract elite cannabis tourism . Federally, the drug remains fiercely criminalized, despite irrefutable evidence of its medical value.

So what’s the hold-up?

Being in the anti-marijuana business is astonishingly lucrative for bureaucrats and campaign donors. Here are just a few of the heavy hitters addicted to federal prohibition:

Big Booze:
National Beer Wholesalers Association
Anheuser-Busch InBev
Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America

The makers and distributors of America’s top-selling beers, wines, and liquors are already facing stiff competition from newly deregulated microbrewers and craft distilleries.

Cannabis prohibition shuts out a zero-calorie competitor with far fewer short- and long-term health risks. The industry donated (read: invested) $19 million to re-election campaigns in 2016, and another $4 million to soft money groups like “Public Safety First” which specifically oppose cannabis legalization efforts.

Cannabis legalization does reduce alcohol sales, and its regular use reduces alcoholism and alcohol-related deaths. Each year 37,000 deaths in the US are attributed to alcohol, compared to zero deaths from cannabis use, ever. Brewers and distillers are eager to point “public health and safety” attention in another direction.

The Boys in Blue:
National Fraternal Order of Police
National Association of Police Organizations
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

Local law enforcement has become highly dependent on federal and state money devoted to the War on Drugs. Civil asset forfeiture – a legacy of the 1984 drug war omnibus crime bill – allows local police departments to keep 80 percent of property seized in suspected (not proven) drug activity. Local cops regularly auction off homes and cars connected with small marijuana sales, pocketing the proceeds without convicting anyone of any crime. Drug raids “were no longer just about putting on a good show and terrorizing the counterculture. Now the raids could generate revenue for all of the police agencies involved.” (Randy Balko, Rise Of The Warrior Cop).

Property stolen from innocent Americans (the Washington Post found 80 percent of victims of asset forfeiture were never even charged) has paid for military-grade equipment and SWAT teams used in still-more-terrifying drug raids for profit.

National Fraternal Order of Police, National Association of Police Organizations, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, and literally dozens of smaller interest groups and political action committees represent the interests of law enforcement officers. Drug testing laboratories, prosecutors, drug court lawyers and judges, rehab centers, counselors, and other unionized social services also depend on marijuana arrests to keep numbers up.

For them, the nation’s outdated marijuana policy means guaranteed revenue, low-risk, peaceful “offenders” to fill arrest quotas, and easy excuses to search or detain citizens.

Big Brother: The Prison Industrial Complex
Association Of Administrative Law Judges
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
GEO Group, Inc.
CoreCivic (formerly Corrections Corporation of America)

Private prison companies and state institutions alike lobby for longer mandatory sentences; stricter enforcement; younger, healthier, and less violent prisoners. Corrections jobs are a major source of rural employment.

Prisons contract for an occupancy rate, charging taxpayers for unmet quotas. More Americans are arrested for marijuana annually than for all violent crimes combined. More Americans are in prison than ever before, and since 1985 at least half the increase is drug offenders alone.

Increasingly, lobbyists for drug testing centers and addiction treatment providers have sought to have marijuana dependence (for which there is limited medical evidence) perceived – and insured – as a medical condition. Compulsory and court-ordered treatment for this “addiction” is a reliable source of revenue for unscrupulous operators.

What violent crime remains is largely a product of drugs prohibition. Cash-oriented transactions between known lawbreakers (drug deals) don’t make for peaceful business practices.

All smuggled goods and illegal sales share the same vulnerability to violence. Now, Budweiser and Coors might sue to resolve a contract dispute; in 1929, criminal rum runners settled scores with Molotov cocktails and Tommy guns. Violent deaths of police officers peaked during prohibition and fell rapidly after its repeal; the number of officers wouldn’t approach that level again until the year Nixon declared the War on Drugs.

The violence of black markets still unnecessarily mars American neighborhoods, and unprecedented mass incarceration plagues the conscience of the Land of the Free.

Big Pharma:
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA)
Pfizer Inc
Eli Lilly & Co
Express Scripts
Merck & Co
AstraZeneca PLC

Pharmaceutical industry products are expensive, and many have life-altering side effects. Cannabis can be grown by the patient and has far fewer and less severe side effects.

Before President Ford shut down cannabis research at universities, scientists had noticed cannabis’s effectiveness in reducing seizures, relieving pain, even shrinking tumors. Specialized strains are bred to treat depression, anxiety, nausea, Parkinson’s, and dozens of other common conditions for which patients currently take patented pills.

Despite continued denials by the federal government that marijuana has any accepted medical uses, the government’s own researchers have patented a synthetic cannabinoid called Marinol. Patent No. 6,630,507 credits “The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services” and lists federal researcher as “inventors” of “cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants.” The patent reads “cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia.” A dozen other derived chemicals are in development to treat nerve pain, memory loss, traumatic brain injury, arthritis, hypertension, and obesity.

Since this patent was granted in 1999, The Drug Enforcement Administration has twice renewed its stance that cannabis has “no currently accepted medical use.”

Big Government:
American Federation of Government Employees
National Active & Retired Federal Employees Assn
American Federation of Government Employees

Marijuana prohibition is a $20 Billion annual federal jobs project. Departments and agencies will not give up power or budgets voluntarily. The DEA seized $27 Billion in assets in 2014 through its cannabis enforcement program, in excess of its $3 Billion annual budget. 10,000 DEA employees, 63,000 Federal Prison System employees, border guards, and thousands more “interagency” positions funded by the expansive, failed War on Drugs don’t want to see their budget downsized or authority curtailed.

Similarly, the CIA, NSA, State Department, and Department of Defense also rely heavily on public acceptance of the War on Drugs as a pretense for overriding national sovereignty< around the world. In their bullying of Latin American leaders and control of opiate fields in the Levant, drug suppression money is often both carrot and stick.

Liberty vs. Lobbyists
Doing battle against big government and corporate cronies like the criminals above is more satisfying than punching Nazis and more practical than protesting. The American people are fed up with prohibition and the failed War on Drugs.

Ending prohibition has something for everyone:


What can possibly unite an impossibly divided America? A serious push to end prohibition.

Laura Williams marijuana

Dr. Laura Williams teaches communication strategy to undergraduates and executives. She is a passionate advocate for critical thinking, individual liberties, and the Oxford Comma.



This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.



Friday, December 01, 2017

From the Archives - 'Cosmic Voyage': Ride of the New Millennium

This movie review appeared in The Metro Herald in August 1996:

Cosmic Voyage: Ride of the New Millennium
Rick Sincere
Metro Herald Entertainment Editor

A new film in the tradition of To Fly and The Blue Planet has opened at the Langley Theatre at the National Air and Space Museum. Called Cosmic Voyage, this IMAX film will give you the ride of your life.

Morgan Freeman Virginia Film Festival 2006 Cosmic Voyage Rick Sincere
Morgan Freeman (c) 2006 Rick Sincere
Narrated by award-winning actor Morgan Freeman, Cosmic Voyage takes its audience from inside the smallest atom in a drop of water to the outer reaches of the known universe. Using the latest scientific calculations and most current computer animation technologies, Cosmic Voyage offers a seamless blend of live-action and animation.

Cosmic Voyage premiered on August 8 as part of the Smithsonian Institution's 150th anniversary celebrations. As Dennis O'Connor, the Smithsonian's provost, put it, Cosmic Voyage is the Air and Space Museum's "candle for the Smithsonian's 150th birthday cake."

Last month, the Air and Space Museum marked the 20th anniversary of To Fly, one of the most popular IMAX offerings. According to Don Engen, director of the museum, To Fly has been seen by 13 million people in the Langley Theatre. Like Destiny in Space, its predecessor film that opened two years ago, Cosmic Voyage is what astronauts like to call "the next best thing to doing it."

Engen added that Cosmic Voyage was made with an audience of middle- and high-school students in mind, a view echoed by Gary Tooker, president of the Motorola Foundation (which financed the making of the film). Tooker told the opening night audience that "our future depends on nurturing the young minds interested in science and engineering, because that's the future of our company." He said that he and his colleagues at Motorola hope "people will be stimulated to think about the universe and the role we play in it."

Anyone seeing this film will, in fact, be struck by our tininess in comparison to the vastness of the universe -- and how big we humans are in comparison to protozoa and the atoms, electrons, and quarks that are the building blocks of all matter. Bayley Silleck, director of Cosmic Voyage, noted that the film's creative process was a "two-year adventure" that instilled "a sense of humility about our place in the universe."

It may be difficult, during the summer tourist season, to see Cosmic Voyage. Lines will no doubt be very long. If you want to experience the adventure, however, clip this article and pull it out sometime in January or February. I can't imagine a better antidote to mid-winter blues than participating in Cosmic Voyage's 35-minute roller-coaster ride. (Actually, I can: George Lucas has announced that his Star Wars trilogy will be re-released over President's Day weekend -- all three films to be screened in one day, with added special effects and new scenes. But until then, Cosmic Voyage deserves a visit.)

Cosmic Voyage
is that rare blend of short films -- both educational and entertaining. This is a family movie, appropriate for children and adults of all ages.

The complete Cosmic Voyage, directed by Bayley Silleck and narrated by Morgan Freeman, has been uploaded to YouTube: