A loud clap of thunder sent half the office to the windows about 20 minutes ago, and prompted cries of “Save now!” That got me thinking. In theory, we’re supposed to have e-voting in today’s election. Are the voting machines on UPSes? If the polling place loses power, is there any kind of backup to (a) let people vote during the blackout, and (b) make sure none of the already-collected votes are lost?
Assuming the polling place does have power when I get there, I’ll have to ask.
Round 1: A judge rules that the FTC does not have the authority to enforce the Do-Not-Call list, so Congress (who has the power to give the FTC that authority) passes a law explicitly granting it to the FTC. So far so good. Checks and balances are working as they’re supposed to.
Round 2: Another judge rules that the list is unconstitutional because it discriminates against commercial calls. Never mind that that traditionally, commercial speech does not have the same protections as personal, political, and other forms of speech. (Consider truth-in-advertising laws.)
The way I see it, there are two obvious solutions: Either appeal the ruling (which is inevitable) or comply with it by removing the loopholes for charities and political campaigns. Which would probably get them in more first amendment trouble.
So today, the FCC has said they will enforce the list right on schedule. OK, it’s something I wouldn’t have thought of… mainly because it doesn’t seem like it would solve the problem.
Now, I hate getting calls from telemarketers, but I just don’t see how shuffling the list to another agency resolves the problem of constitutionality. I’ve only skimmed the ruling [previously available from the court’s website] (it’s 34 pages and I’m at work, it’s not as if I can read the whole thing right now!), but it seems pretty clear on the point that (as the judge sees it) it’s the federal government that can’t enforce the list in its present form, not the FTC specifically.
1. You can disagree with or dislike people in your government, from your city council up through the President, and still love your country. (Conservatives disliked the President for 8 years; denying that privilege to the rest of us is hypocrisy at best.)
2. You can oppose war – or a particular war – without being anti-American. Speaking out against your nation’s policies and actions is not treason, it is necessary for a free society. If no one disagrees with the official policy, and that policy turns out to be a mistake – say, slavery, for instance – the mistake will never be corrected.
3. No, being a movie star does not make you an expert on politics. Neither does being a country singer. But neither job makes your opinion matter any less than anyone else’s.
4. America is not and should not be a theocracy. Freedom of religion does not exist without freedom from religion. If you are free to attend a Lutheran service only if you also attend a Catholic mass, you don’t have freedom of religion. If you can practice Christianity at home but your children are expected to recite Allah Akbar daily in school, you don’t have freedom of religion. This doesn’t mean that you can’t pray the way you want to. It does mean you cannot coerce me into praying the way you want me to.
5. Remember, the first amendment is there to protect unpopular speech. The popular speech doesn’t need protecting. And not everyone is offended by the same things.
6. The right to speak freely does not compel others to listen. You always have the right to turn the radio to another station, hang up the phone, or walk away. If I don’t want you to call or email me, I have the right to block you, and as long as the choice is mine, there is no reason I can’t let someone else handle the administrative details – whether it’s a restraining order against a stalker, a spam blacklist, or a do-not-call list.
….because right now, they’re more fun than handmaidens. This took place in the car on the way home today.
Kelson: “I’ve heard 193, 195, and 196. Where’d those numbers come from?”
Katie: “Two minutes, five minutes, and ten minutes later.”
Kelson: “I mean, the deadline was Saturday!”
Katie: “‘Uh-oh, it was stuck to somebody else’s. ….It was stapled to the chicken.'”
Kelson: (smirking) “Peer pressure.”
Katie: “So we have one stapled to the chicken, one peer pressure, and two stuck to other people’s. So who turned in the chicken?”
Kelson: (laughter)
Katie: “I know, it was filling out the forms as it went.”
Kelson: “No wonder they’re so hard to read!”
…..kind of like my notes on this conversation…..
193 people have filed candidacy papers for the upcoming recall election. Just think about it: if every application is verified, we could have almost two hundred names on the ballot, just for one office. And they’re going to be listed randomly.
Imagine how long the ballot will be. Heck, imagine how long the info pamphlet will be. Nearly 200 candidate statements.
Only a plurality is required. In theory, it would be possible to win the election with less than one percent of the vote. Of course, we’ll probably end up with only about 5-10 people who are seriously campaigning, so it’ll be more like 10% required to win, and some polls are already giving Arnold Schwarzenegger 40%. Come to think of it, the sheer number of names may be enough by itself to get him into office: he’s got greater name recognition than anyone else on the list.
Assuming people can find him in 15 pages of unsorted names.
OK, most people are focusing on Terminator jokes when it comes to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s candidacy, but I’m reminded of the “Conan the Librarian” sketch from UHF.
“Uh, this budget is a little overdue.”
“Ovah-doo? HYAAARGH!” (Cleaves the hapless legislator in half with his sword.)
Yes, the American Teleservices Association is suing over the do-not-call list.
The ATA estimates that the do-not-call list will cost as many as 2 million U.S. telemarketing jobs, wiping out almost a third of its industry.
Sounds like a good start.
Maybe they can get jobs that don’t involve annoying the hell out of people in their own homes.
Spam is a problem because it’s pervasive. There are no limits on how many messages one business can send, and very little in the way of entry barriers. If outside controls (societal, legal, or technological) leave it unchecked, it really can destroy email as a useful means of communication. (Consider getting 500 spams with one order confirmation somewhere in the middle.)
Telemarketing does have limits. Even with recorded messages, it takes time to make the call. There’s usually a limited number of outgoing phone lines. And if they’ve got live people making the calls, they can only make as many calls as they have people – and people need paychecks and space to work.
No, the problem with telemarketing is that it’s invasive. The phone just screams for attention, interrupting whatever you’re doing. You can choose when to check your email, or your postal mailbox, but the telephone wants you to answer it now, and even if you choose not to, it keeps ringing until your answering machine takes the call or the caller gives up.
Telemarketers don’t just try to reach you at your mailbox, front door, or living room. They are the only form of advertising I know of that reaches into the bedroom – even when you’re asleep.
And yet these scumbags are defending their “right” to interrupt you while you’re eating dinner, or reading a book, or watching TV. They want to be able to wake you up when you’re sleeping in on Saturday. If you have a cell phone, they can get you at the grocery store. They can get you on your lunch break. Someone can start jabbering about resort condos while you’re in line for Space Mountain.
That’s not protected speech. It’s harassment.
