“The immigration bill (SB 744) co-sponsored by Florida Senator Rubio will affect you and your children if it passes- it does not just apply to non-citizens. You’ll all need a micro chipped national ID to get a job. I have read the bill, and that is what it says- the text is linked in the blog piece. This is a seriously bad bill.”-Paul Henry

There is a good bit of attention lately on the “Gang of 8″ (which includes Florida Senator Marco Rubio) Immigration Bill. I have been focused on other issues, but my friend Kaye Beach posted about it recently, so I read through the bill (SB744, sponsored by Sen. Schumer, D-NY). Sure enough, there is a section in it about REAL ID, and it’s not just any plain-Jane gold star REAL ID, it’s “enhanced” REAL ID. First, the relevant bill language is found in SEC. 274A.(c)(1)(C)(iii)(I)- yes, it is REALLY buried in the bill:

There is a good bit of attention lately on the “Gang of 8″ (which includes Florida Senator Marco Rubio) Immigration Bill. I have been focused on other issues, but my friend Kaye Beach posted about it recently, so I read through the bill (SB744, sponsored by Sen. Schumer, D-NY). Sure enough, there is a section in it about REAL ID, and it’s not just any plain-Jane gold star REAL ID, it’s “enhanced” REAL ID. First, the relevant bill language is found in SEC. 274A.(c)(1)(C)(iii)(I)- yes, it is REALly buried in the bill:

‘SEC. 274A. UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS.

‘(1) IN GENERAL- It is unlawful for an employer–

‘(A) to hire, recruit, or refer for a fee an alien for employment in the United States knowing that the alien is an unauthorized alien with respect to such employment; or

‘(B) to hire, recruit, or refer for a fee for employment in the United States an individual without complying with the requirements under subsections (c) and (d).
‘(c) Document Verification Requirements- Any employer hiring an individual for employment in the United States shall comply with the following requirements and the requirements under subsection (d) to verify that the individual has employment authorized status:
‘(1) ATTESTATION AFTER EXAMINATION OF DOCUMENTATION-
‘(C) DOCUMENTS ESTABLISHING IDENTITY AND EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED STATUS- A document is specified in this subparagraph if the document is unexpired (unless the validity of the document is extended by law) and is 1 of the following:

‘(iii) An enhanced driver’s license or identification card issued to a national of the United States by a State or a federally recognized Indian tribe that–

‘(I) meets the requirements under section 202 of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (division B of Public Law 109-13; 49 U.S.C. 30301 note); and

‘(II) the Secretary has certified by notice published in the Federal Register and through appropriate notice directly to employers registered in the System 3 months prior to publication that such enhanced license or card is suitable for use under this subparagraph based upon the accuracy and security of the issuance process, security features on the document, and such other factors as the Secretary may prescribe.

The title sounds good, it would lead one to believe it only applies to aliens, and then it specifies “nationals”. Right? Well all nationals are not citizens, but ALL CITIZENS ARE NATIONALS. Look at what happens when we READ THE BILL: (c) Clearly says ANY employer hiring AN individual for employment in these United States shall comply with these requirements. So much for it just applying to aliens.

Next, what is an enhanced REAL ID? One that has an RFID chip. Read about the dangers of the insecure RFID here. I was able to defeat this measure in Florida in 2012. I had no doubt it would be back. If the Congress passes this bill, then it will be license for the big-government folks in Tallahassee to say once again just as they did with REAL ID: “It’s federal law, so we have to do it.”

Hey “conservatives”- Marco Rubio and his gang thinks the federal government must now control all employment. He tried to fool us with the language in the NDAA a while back. A lesser of two evils vote hits home.

Time for Michael Badnarik again.

Where will you draw the line?

*********************************************************************
About :
Our lobbying team consists of John Hallman and Paul Henry. It is essential to have a voice in our legislature 12 months a year, as the legislative process starts NOW. If you wait too long on an issue, it will pass you by.
About John
John Hallman is an active, longtime voice in all levels of Florida politics and is a veteran of advocating issues of liberty in the Florida legislature. John also has served as the State Director for FreedomWorks; the pro-free market organization as well as Deputy Director of Florida Stop Lawsuit Abuse. While in Tallahassee, John has represented such groups as Florida Taxpayers Union, Cut Property Taxes Now, The Second Amendment Coalition of Florida and The Florida Campaign for Liberty. Besides his work in Tallahassee, John also serves on the Leadership Team of the Liberty Empowerment Institute. John teaches activists training schools, is a frequent guest on radio talk shows and has written numerous articles promoting the cause of individual liberty.
About Paul
Paul is a retired Florida trooper, having worked not only as a trooper but also traffic homicide investigator, line supervisor, and investigative Lieutenant prior to his retirement. Paul is the founder of the citizen group Floridians Against REAL ID and has been an outspoken advocate of constitutional government at the local, state, and federal level. Paul has the ability to read and understand legislative terms and language and perform in-depth analysis on issues such as red light cameras. Paul was the author of two bills for the 2012 Florida Legislature, a REAL ID repeal and the Florida Motorist Rights Restoration Act. As the Deputy Director for Legislative Affairs with the Florida Campaign for Liberty, Paul was responsible for finding RFID chip enabling language in a 2012 highway safety bill and getting the bill’s sponsor to remove all of the language. In 2013 with just a part-time effort, Paul’s efforts prevented Floridians from being saddled with automated school bus enforcement cameras.
**************************************************************

Paul Henry

Paul Henry & Associates was launched to fill the need for liberty lobbying that has existed in Florida’s Capital for many years. We’ve seen law after law passed that directly or indirectly impacts our freedom and liberty.

http://www.liberty2010.com

Here is Sgt. Joe Friday again. Joe worked when lawmen wanted just the facts, not just the dollars. Contrast Joe’s famous line (that he apparently never said in so many words) with that of another former lawman at the end of this posting. Click the links for the documentation of my allegations and decide for yourself.

Yesterday, automated for-profit device vendor ATS via their front group the NationalCoalition for Safe Roads (which is really more accurately described as Need Cash for Selfish Reasons) sent out a news release mentioned in this news story that talked of myths and facts for automated for-profit law enforcement. Seeing as how I have some experience and knowledge on the subject, I thought I’d weigh in with some facts based on my law enforcement, research, and legislative experience.

The below facts are from my 25 years of Florida police experience, to include time spent as a trooper, traffic homicide investigator, and line supervisor as well as personal research using government and published data, and my experience opposing the devices in the Florida legislature.

FACT:
The NCSR is a front group for the for-profit device vendor ATS. All references herein to ATS apply to their front group NCSR.

FACT:
The recent Tampa Bay story is not mentioned in the ATS response, one from some time ago in Orlando is. The reporter in Tampa, Noah Pransky, found shortened timesto be due to DOT guidelines. That is not addressed in the ATS response.

Speaking of the DOT:
FACT:
In several cities where I pulled state DOT traffic crash data, there was no significant reduction in actual red light violation (RLV, not “related”) crashes- these are crashes caused by red light running. Some intersections saw a slight decrease, some saw a slight increase, and some stayed the same. The automated for-profit devices are installed to reduce red light running. They are not installed to reduce rear end or failure to yield (angle or “T-bone”) crashes. Judging their effectiveness using rear end and angle crashes is an invalid means. The devices are ineffective for safety.Pay attention, you’ll see this again.

FACT:
In the 2012 State undocumented survey of local governments using automated for-profit enforcement, between 20 and 30 percent of them failed to furnish any crash data at all, even though the same device law that generates revenue for them requires them to do so. What are these local governments hiding? Could it be that the devices are ineffective for safety?

FACT:
In this same undocumented survey, the RLV crashes were not mentioned. What is being hidden? Could it be that the devices are ineffective for safety? (more…)

Written by Joel Poindexter

Joel Poindexter

If there were no government police, protection services would be provided like any other. Yesterday, Tom Woods posted this video on the LRC blog. Decades of corruption and ineptitude in the Detroit Police Department, along with the failures endemic to a government-monopolized service, meant residents were desperate for protection services. So in 1995 Dale Brown founded the Threat Management Center.

Some of the highlights from the video are:

• They emphasize non-violent dispute resolution when called to a scene. To this end they rarely hire veterans, who have been trained to respond with violence. Contrast this with your local police department, who’s members frequently employ excessive force. That government police agencies routinely hire returning veterans partly explains this.
• Brown boasts that in the firm’s 18-year history not a single client has died at the hands of one of his agents. Again, contrast this with the record of most government police agencies. All too often, calling the police can be a deadly experience, even for those meant to be protected by the call.
• The company serves approximately one thousand clients from affluent Detroit suburbs, along with nearly five hundred from within the city’s impoverished neighborhoods. Brown explains that he’s able to provide his service free of charge to those who cannot afford to pay him because he earns enough from those who can.

This last point is particularly insightful because it may be applied to so many other issues. Consider health care services, private highways, or any other function now co-opted by the State. Issues of cost, particularly among progressives, are one reason many are skeptical that society could function without a coercive government. But as Brown has shown, cost isn’t really a factor, given the right environment.

CONTINUE READING at http://economicharmonies.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/who-would-protect-us/?blogsub=confirming#blog_subscription-3

I need a civics lesson.

This according to the keepers of acceptable opinion at two divergent publications.

Both The Economist and the Montgomery Advertiser recently ran opinion pieces skewering nullification, specifically state efforts to block unconstitutional federal gun laws in Kansas and Alabama. Interestingly, both the author of  The Economist piece and the editorial bored over at the Alabama newspaper used the same strategy. They both try to make their readers believe anybody who actually views nullification as legitimate must not be too bright. Their implication? “The federal government enjoys absolute supremacy and  a bunch of dumb racist, rednecks who don’t know anything about the U.S. government want states to ignore laws they don’t happen to like.”

From the Economist: “It is remarkable that a civics lesson like this is necessary.”

The Montgomery Advertiser editorial board gets even snarkier.

“That body (the Alabama Senate) has taken a plunge into the past by revisiting and embracing the long-discredited practice of nullification, the notion — abandoned decades ago by most people who passed sixth-grade civics.”

Talk about groupthink. (more…)

Published on May 7, 2013
In conjunction with the upcoming release of his new book, A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, John W. Whitehead sits down to discuss several “pressure points” that are threatening the Bill of Rights and undermining our essential freedoms. In part one of this special series, Whitehead examines the increased presence of militarized police.