blog archives

War & current event blogs
getdonkey
cursor
thismodernworld
very very happy
calpundit
xoverboard
Oliver Willis
cyrenity
tom paine
Raed
Dailykos
ibidem

free speech blogs
Garoos

blogs to stare at
heroes and donkeys
Idleworm

favorite links
FCC
Ski & Skinner WLS Sundays 12-3
Center for Democracy & Technology
Internet legislation
Internet Free Expression Alliance

What is Clear Channel?
ACLU VS Patriot
What is the Patriot Act?
Patriot I has already passed, but here comes Patriot II

NEWS
Washington Post
Christian Science Monitor
Reuters
New York Times
News is Free
See the front pages for today... Newseum BuzzFlash
Kurdistan Observer
Yellow Times

contact...

Add your comment Read comments Free counters provided by Andale.

LOSS OF DIVERSITY, LOCALISM AND INDEPENDENT VOICES HARMS THE PUBLIC INTEREST:
SOME RECENT EXAMPLES
posted 10:23 AM

WHO OWNS THE MEDIA

The FCC is considering whether to relax the rules for owning American news media. If the FCC weakens the rules, a stampede of mergers would give a handful of large corporations greater influence over what is -- and is not -- reported in the news

Tell Congress to urge the FCC to preserve its media ownership rules for the sake of competition and diversity.
posted 10:15 AM

I found a great place called congress.org off a link on cspan's website. I think everyone should go there and post letters to their congressmen and the president and be involved in knowing what is going on. I read all the letters I saw about the overtime ruling coming up and noone I saw agreed with it. If they pass this, it will be most assuredly against the people's wishes and at a time when the war is on all of our minds and not in the press.

Again as I said earlier. Accept the war is going on but don't forget to watch them now...especially now.

congress.org
Letters To Leaders
Subject:
overtime overhaul law change

To:
President George Bush

March 31, 2003

Mr. President,
I am a 30 year old man living in the great State of Michigan, a licensed pharmacist that works at the largest hospital in Michigan, William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak. I am married with one 2 year old child an another on the way. My wife and I have voted Republican across the board in every election that I have had the opportunity to be a part of, including the election that made you our current president. I have been a supporter of your administration, as I feel you have done a great job during these trying times. However, I need to let you know of a potential problem that will affect my life and potentially millions of other Americans.
Currently, there is a law change pending in Congress that would overhaul the overtime law. It looks complicated to me, but what it boils down to is that if this law is passed, my colleagues and I will no longer receive 1.5X our base pay for hours worked over 40. Let me take a moment to tell you how this will have an adverse effect on the health care industry.
As you may or may not know, there is a nation wide shortage of pharmacists. In the State of Michigan, this shortage is being felt across the board. My hospital, for example, is short >8 full time equivalents. This has been a trend since I have entered this great profession since 1998, and will continue to occur as academic changes at pharmacy schools will result in less and less new pharmacists entering the profession. As a result of this problem, our department is forced to post overtime shifts to keep enough pharmacists online to manage the workload. On any given 24 hour period, more than five full time equivalents will be on an overtime pay scale. Basically, our operations rely on overtime shifts to keep it afloat. My colleagues and I often would talk about what would happen if nobody ever picked up overtime, and it would be scary to envision what would happen to our operations if that occurred. Well, this may now become a reality! Please, Mr. President, before approving such a change in our labor laws, think about what would happen to the many services and professions that have the same problem as my institution does. In the end, money would be saved, but at what cost? In my field, the patients would pay the price. Our "turnaround" time for dispensing life saving medications would increase, as less pharmacists will be online since nobody will work overtime, since the financial incentive has been removed. In addition, since there will be an increase in the stress level and workload level, the number of errors will most certainly increase, which leads to increased costs on the health care system. Errors are one of the biggest cost burdens on the health care system today, and it would be ironic that a law changed to save money would actually cost more in the end!
In conclusion, as a Republican supporter and a registered voter, I would plea for you to think about the ramifications of this law change. In my opinion, the cost savings would not justify the labor shortage that would be placed on the health care system.




Rochester Hills , MI
Subject:overtime
To:President George Bush

April 16, 2003

I WORK AT A AUTO SUPPLIER PLANT, I AM WORRIED ABOUT THIS NEW RULING THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT PASSING,
WHEN I WORK OVERTIME, I MAKE 1.5 TIMES THE AMOUNT I MAKE IN ONE HOURS TIME,
I WORK FOR THE MONEY, IF I WANT TIME OFF ,I HAVE VACATION AND SICK DAYS I CAN USE, I DONT'MISS MUCH WORK, I WORK VERY HARD FOR MY MONEY ,WHAT MAKES YOU THINK I WANT TO WORK OVERTIME AND THEN HAVE THEM GIVE ME TIME OFF FOR IT, AND AT THEIR CHOOSING
IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE AS A WORKFORCE WANTED WE WOULD TRY AND NEGOTIATE IT IN OUR CONTRACT.
PLEASE JUST CONCENTRATE ON GETTING OUR TROOPS HOME FROM IRAQ, AND LEAVE MY OVERTIME ALONE. THANK YOU
P.S. I SUPPORT YOU ON THE WAR(RIGHT OR WRONG)


THREE RIVERS , MI

To:
Rep. John Tanner

April 11, 2003



Please do not let the evil republicans do away with overtime. This would be a huge blow to already overworked, underpaid workers in most jobs. Most places of employment already offer a trade for comp time vs overtime (at my work we have the option, however when we take the comp time it is still at time and a half just like ot pay. It is very dangerous espececially for a business bought administration to be allowed to mess with overtime laws.
The way I look at it, if a company does not appreciate my work enough, or does not care enough about me to compensate me with real overtime beneifts then they really do not care enough about me for me to work for them. The only good thing that will come of that law would be that more folks would finally wake up and realize how much they need a union, unfortunately, by then it may be too late.
Thank you.

white bluff , TN

Overtime Rules Proposed by Dept of Labor

To:
Sen. Christopher Dodd

April 10, 2003



According to 2 articles in the Hartford Courant, the labor department is proposing new rules for overtime pay. As I read them, the rules would harm just about everyone except the lowest paid employee.

For the past 10 years companies have been doing everything possible to reduce the work force and employee salaries. The result has been more work imposed on fewer people at lower wages. In my experience, those same companies will use any excuse to make an employee exempt to avoid paying overtime. I have seen administrative employees promoted to “supervisor” without an increase in pay and then forced to work whatever overtime was necessary “to get the job done.” I was personally reorganized into a non-supervisory position, but I was denied the overtime paid to everyone else doing the very same work because I had once been in a supervisory position. It took 3 years and the threat of a lawsuit to force a resolution of the situation. The lowliest programmer, fresh off the street, with no supervisory responsibility is forced to work whatever overtime is needed to “get the job done.” I have watched my wife’s department declare “no overtime” for non-exempt employees, but then put them in a position where they had to work overtime. Of course, the department promised to make up the time, but that doesn’t happen or the makeup period is totally at the department’s convenience. Relax the overtime rules and the same companies who are reducing the work force and doing everything possible to lower wages and reduce benefits will now be able to reduce the work force even further and force the remaining employees to work whatever overtime it takes “to get the job done.”

In today’s economy, the proposed cutoff salary of $22,100 provides a person with just barely enough to survive. It certainly is not a professional/managerial salary. Nobody should be declared exempt unless they are paid a true managerial salary, at least $45,000 - $50,000, and have true managerial rights and responsibilities. Instead of relaxing the overtime rules, Congress should be strengthening them and making it harder for companies to abuse employees. Congress should make all workers subject to overtime rules. In addition, Congress should make it more difficult not less difficult for an employer to declare an employee exempt. Congress should eliminate the vague language used to describe exemption criteria and make it very clear exactly what is required to declare an employee exempt. Congress should be protecting the people, all the people.

I hope your vote on this issue will be a vote for the people.

Higganum , CT

To:
Sen. Sam Brownback

April 7, 2003



Dear Senator Brownback:

Please do not allow the revised Overtime bill to pass. With the economy the way it is today, enough people are having trouble making ends meet already. If this bill passes, the everyday common person will get the shaft from employers, with empty promises for days off that will never have a chance to be taken. There are too many options for this to turn the country into business run like sweatshops.

If a person is required to work over 40 hours in a week, that is above and beyond, and they deserve the extra pay they get. Paid time off does not mean extra money, therefore many people will be required to search for a second job to supplement income, and jobs just aren't there.

De Soto , KS

Rep. Sander Levin

April 5, 2003



I got an email that they are considering cutting overtime for any hours worked over 40 in a work week. Why is this? What is president bush trying to do? Please try to not let this pass.

Clinton Twp , MI

Working Families Count On Overtime Pay

To:
Rep. Tom Cole
Sen. Don Nickles
Sen. James Inhofe

April 4, 2003



I am writing to express my disappointment and outrage with proposals to change federal overtime pay rules. Overtime checks help working families, like mine, pay for the things we need to support our families. Families already are squeezed by widespread joblessness, stagnant or declining wages, increasing health care and prescription drug costs, child care and everyday expenses like food, clothing and more. Cutting overtime pay would really hurt America's working families.

The overtime laws guarantee my extra work effort will be rewarded with more pay. In addition, employers have a disincentive to impose mandatory overtime work because of the higher overtime pay rates. This gives workers predictable schedules and allows working moms and dads to spend more time with their families. These job protections were won after decades of struggle to make jobs safe and protect workers from abuse. Please don't take this step backward.

I urge you to not support parts of any proposal that would cut the paycheck of any worker and instead work to create jobs and increase wages.

Midwest City , OK

To:
Sen. Ben Nelson

April 4, 2003



Honorable Ben Nelson;
I sincerely hope that if the Bill in the house passes eliminating overtime pay. You will find it in your Heart to vote against it. In Nebraska the eliminatation of overtime pay would only return Nebraska to the Sweat Shops of the 20s and 30s. The employees would be at the mercy of the money hungry rich who now do not like to pay overtime for work done by their employees.

THANK YOU

Omaha , NE

no overtime pay for NYPD and FireFighters

To:
Sen. Ted Stevens

April 3, 2003



Sen. Stevens:

Perhaps your advocacy of the elimination of overtime pay for the police and firemen of New York City would be better received if you would first donate your entire salary and the cash value of your job perks to the widows and orphans of American servicemen in the Iraq War.



Kansas City , MO

No Overtime for Police and Firemen

To:
Sen. Ted Stevens

April 4, 2003



You are an idiot. The comments you made about policemen and firemen working without getting paid for overtime is outrageous. Why don't you give up some of your cozy benefits you disgusting piece of humanity.
]
Just in case you didn't know:

"Sixty of the 343 firefighters who died on 9/11 were off duty, volunteering to put their lives on the line. We've already done our share," said Uniformed Firefighters Association President Steve Cassidy. "New York City police officers are among the hardest-working and lowest-paid in the nation. We are on duty 24 hours a day and we are not compensated for 24 hours. In many respects we are already volunteering our services for the safety of New York," said Al O'Leary, spokesman for the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association.

Los Angeles , CA

posted 5:34 AM

Bye Bye Overtime
A measure would overhaul the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act by allowing eligible workers to take time off instead of cash when they work more than 40 hours a week
Backers in the House Education and Workforce Committee said they expect the full Republican-controlled House of Representatives to pass the bill within the next month.
Opinions of the measure, which the Republican-led panel passed 27-22 on a straight party line vote, are sharply split.
Under the bill, management can deny for up to a year a worker's request for time off if it would "unduly disrupt the operations" of the business. At the end of the year, the accrued comp time must be paid in cash.

Opponents say that by allowing businesses to defer their overtime payments, they get free use of their workers' money for up to a year.

They also say workers may feel forced into accepting time off instead of cash, despite safeguards in the bill, and those who are owed so-called comp time could be left empty-handed if a company closes.
posted 11:47 AM

I haven't been adding many comments to my blogs of news articles I've been reading but that should be changing soon. Things have been hectic in my life lately. A very good friend died in a car accident 12 days ago. For a while it made me think that this blog and what it stands for is meaningless, who cares if all our freedoms go away with the patriot act, who cares if a right wing Clear Channel ends up controlling all the media with the elimination of FCC regulations, who cares if the republicans eliminate overtime pay for workers who actually want to get ahead to raise up their stature in this life - to have the American Dream, why bother saying anything, just go along to get along, what does it really mean to me anyway, but then I got to thinking about my friends little girl and the fact that he would have wanted her to grow up with all the freedoms & opportunities that he & I grew up with and so many in this country take for granted. So I decided it is worth fighting for, but I've been a little bit of a mute still on everything lately anyway.
posted 11:20 AM

Advisors caution against junk bond funds

Investors are pouring record amounts of cash into high-yield junk bond funds
posted 11:02 AM

Is there hope?
Breyer Discusses Terror War, Civil Rights
Lawyers and judges must ensure that civil liberties are protected in the government's efforts to prevent terrorist attacks, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer said Monday.
"The Constitution always matters, perhaps particularly so in times of emergency," Breyer told the Association of the Bar of the City of New York.

Breyer said that while the administration may claim that courts do not have jurisdiction in some of the terror cases, judges will have to make that determination.

"I think you have a government that's antagonistic to the Bill of Rights, and we need a bench and bar that's prepared to rein them in,"
posted 10:56 AM

Is there hope?
Key Republican Not Sure on Patriot Act
The Bush administration's plans to expand a post-Sept. 11 anti-terrorism law face resistance from a powerful House Republican who says he's not even sure he wants the government to keep its new powers.
James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, the House Judiciary Committee chairman, complains that the Justice Department isn't sharing enough information for lawmakers to make a judgment on how well or poorly the USA Patriot Act is working.
Sensenbrenner maintains that because the department refuses to be forthcoming, it is losing the public relation battle needed to extend the law beyond its October 2005 expiration, much less expand it.
This week used newspaper ads attacked one provision that allows the government to enter homes, conduct searches, download computer contents and Internet viewing histories without informing the occupant that such a search was conducted.
An early draft leaked to reporters in November suggested creating a DNA database of "suspected terrorists;" forcing suspects to prove why they should be released on bail, rather than have the prosecution prove why they should be held; and deporting U.S. citizens who become members of or help terrorist groups.

Among the advocates is Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, who isn't waiting on 2005 to craft legislation to extend the life of the law.

Last week, Hatch sought to extend the act through an amendment to a bill that would further expand government wiretapping authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.



posted 10:52 AM

Clear Channel Alert FCC Head Won't Delay Media Ownership Vote


Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell told lawmakers Wednesday there is no reason to delay the agency's upcoming vote on changes to rules governing ownership of newspapers and television and radio stations.

Many lawmakers have bombarded the FCC with letters in recent weeks asking Powell to disclose the FCC's plans for overhauling media ownership restrictions before approving any changes. Others have urged Powell to complete the review on June 2 as planned.

"Further and more specific notice is unwarranted in light of the full record before us, and weighed against the pitfalls of further delay," Powell wrote in a letter to lawmakers.

The FCC is studying whether decades-old ownership restrictions belong in a market altered by satellite broadcasts, cable television and the Internet.

A 1996 law requires the FCC to review ownership rules in light of industry changes every two years.

Powell said the FCC must finish the current review on schedule to have time to begin the next one.

The ownership rules include a ban on mergers between major television networks and a restriction preventing a company from owning a newspaper and a radio or television station in the same city. The rules also prohibit a company from owning TV stations that reach more than 35 percent of U.S. households.

Powell repeatedly has said the rules should be changed. Two other Republicans on the five-member commission also are widely expected to seek looser regulations, an outcome sought by many large media companies who say the rules hurt business.

Critics warn that mergers resulting from looser rules could leave a few huge companies in control of what people watch, hear and read.
posted 10:44 AM

Misguided patriotism
Mr. Petroskey, who worked under Ronald Reagan as a White House assistant press secretary, apparently sees Robbins and Sarandon as unworthy of an appearance in Cooperstown, a place that, over the years, has enshrined drunks, racists, drug addicts and adulterers.

"We believe your very public criticism . . . " he wrote in a letter released to news agencies last week, "helps undermine the U.S. position, which ultimately could put our troops in even more danger."

Oh boy. Where do you begin with such misguided patriotism? First of all, it's the Baseball Hall of Fame, not the Pentagon. Petroskey's political views are no more appropriate there than Sarandon's and Robbins'. Who is this guy? Who decided the Hall of Fame's position on the Middle East?

You know what you get when you cross patriotism with censorship? McCarthyism. We lived through that once. We're supposed to be smarter.

We're on dangerous ground here, folks. Rather than let hate-mongers divide us into right and left, pro-war vs. antiwar, we ought to celebrate the things that bring us together: things like freedom, the right to speak our minds, and baseball.

Petroskey is not being smart. He is being smug. Perhaps he is swept up in this notion that the more you hug the flag, the more popular you become.

I say hugging a flag is simple. Hugging what it stands for is harder.

posted 10:39 AM

Madonna speaks

On the VH1 special Madonna Speaks, premiering tonight, the pop star says the controversy surrounding the video got out of hand. It was being bashed by people who hadn't even seen it, she said.

"And at that point no one had seen it at all and it just took on a life of its own," Madonna told the music video channel. "So suddenly I was making the video that was horrible, and full of horrible things, and you know it was terribly irresponsible. Meanwhile nobody saw it and nobody knew what they were talking about."

A newly edited version of the video with most of the war imagery removed is set to air soon. But Madonna says she is disappointed with what she sees as a breakdown of free speech in the United States.

"You know, it's ironic that we were fighting for democracy in Iraq because we ultimately aren't celebrating democracy here," she told VH1. "Anybody who has anything to say against the war or against the president or whatever is punished, and that's not democracy, it's people being intolerant. And everyone is entitled to their opinion for or against. That's what our constitutional rights are supposed to be, that we all have freedoms to express ourselves and to voice our dissent if we have that."

Right now, people are so volatile and upset that they're not seeing irony or subtlety, and many are afraid to make waves, she said.

"Everything is taken literally and it's like this lynch-mob mentality has kind of risen up," she said.
posted 10:30 AM

Baseball...Republican sport?

Dale Petroskey, president of the Baseball Hall of Fame, and assistant press secretary in the Reagan White House, cancelled the weekend celebration of the 15th anniversary of "Bull Durham" was scheduled at the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, N.Y., for April 26 and 27.

He sent a letter to Tim Robbins stating in part "Public figures, such as you, have platforms much larger than the average American's, which provides you an extraordinary opportunity to have your views heard - and an equally large obligation to act and speak responsibly. "

Robbins, who is a longtime political activist, as is Sarandon, sent a letter back to Petroskey. Robbins said he was dismayed that the "Bull Durham" celebration was cancelled because of criticism of President Bush. "I had been unaware that baseball was a Republican sport," he said. And he added, "I am sorry that you have chosen to use baseball and your position at the Hall of Fame to make a political statement."

In a phone interview yesterday, Robbins said that Petroskey was sending "a message to the rest of America, 'Don't you dare disagree with us.'

I guess you can disagree so long as you do it in private with noone listening. I need to find a picture of those 3 monkeys. I think they encompass the perfect American to Mr Petroskey. Don't listen, Don't speak and Don't watch...stay stupid and don't ever let an alternate opinion be heard.


Eh, Frogs work for me too.

We should all wear pins of these little guys lest we forget....
posted 8:31 AM

home