Occupiers To Retake Peoples Park
Occupy action alert from Ed Fallon
Dear Friends,
I have important, breaking news to share with you:
In response to the decision by City of Des Moines officials to no longer allow Occupy Des Moines to remain at Stewart Square, we will re-occupy Peoples Park (E 7th and Locust) on Sunday, January 29. We’ll meet at Stewart Square Park (E 14th and Grand) at 2:00 pm and march to Peoples Park. Then we’ll hold a General Assembly at our indoor headquarters on the third floor at 504 E Locust.
If you were among the 500 people at the first Occupy Des Moines General Assembly at Peoples Park on October 9, please come. If you weren’t, please come. To reclaim our country from corporate and political corruption, this movement must grow. There have been disagreements, as there are within any movement for social and political reform. Let’s put those behind us as we march back to where things started and plan the next steps.
The City of Des Moines has been reasonable to work with. I wish all public officials took the Occupy Wall Street movement seriously. Unfortunately, as Governor Branstad demonstrated on October 9, he not only chose to ignore the legitimate grievances we raised, he even denied us our right to air those grievances in a public space. We’re willing to give Governor Branstad a second chance, exactly 15 weeks after 35 of us were arrested at Peoples Park.
As a next possible step in redeploying the “occupation” and maintaining pressure on national banks that have acted both unethically and illegally, Occupy Des Moines members are engaged in ongoing discussions about how best to assist individuals who are at risk of losing their homes to foreclosure. Stay tuned for more on that.
Spread the word! And PLEASE GO TO THE FACEBOOK PAGE we’ve created to promote this event. Sign up to attend. Share it with others. Let’s speak with one voice that we expect the grievances of the Occupy Wall Street movement be taken seriously. Thank you.
Ed
Are You Eligible For Earned Income Tax Credit?
BFIA readers, according to Rep. Dave Loebsack, there were many Iowa families who were eligible, but did not receive the EITC last year. Let’s help our congressman spread the word to our fellow Iowans about this savings. Please pass this on.
January 27, 2012
Dear Friend,
I know family budgets are tight right now, and, having been raised by a single mom, I know what it’s like to worry about paying the bills, especially this time of year. I wanted to send you this short message on Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) awareness day to make sure you’re aware of this tax credit that could save Iowa families money.
The EITC can put up to $5,751 in the pockets of eligible taxpayers (for example, those with earnings under $40,964 for a married couple with two children) with the simple check of a box. In 2011, over 200,000 Iowans claimed the EITC, receiving an average of about $2,000 each. Despite this, 20 percent of eligible taxpayers did not receive their EITC in 2011. That is why I have attended EITC events in Cedar Rapids and Iowa City to raise awareness. I volunteered at these events to help local residents fill out and file their federal income tax returns. If you believe you may be eligible for the EITC, click here to find out more or click here to find a free file site near you.
I hope you will join me in getting the word out about this important tax credit.
Sincerely,
Dave Loebsack
Iowa’s Second District
Everything You Need To Know About How To Start Your Own Community Radio Station
In December of 2010 the House and Senate passed the Local Community Radio Act by voice vote in both chambers. Reps. Dave Loebsack (D) and Tom Latham (R) were co-sponsors of this important legislation. President Obama signed the LPFM act into law on January 5, 2011.
For everything you need to know about how to apply for a LPFM station in your community, here are some links.
Start a Radio Station – Prometheus Radio Project
Pacifica – How to Start a Community Radio Station
FCC Report Vindicates Community Radio, Again
Prometheus Radio Project prometheusradio.org/fcc-report
On January 5, the FCC released a long-awaited report on the economic impact of low power FM (LPFM) stations on their full-power commercial neighbors. The FCC’s report was required by the Local Community Radio Act, in a provision that had long been requested by commercial broadcasters fighting against the expansion of community radio. As expected, the 100+ page study revealed that LPFM stations do not cause harm to other stations.
In the words of the report, “the presenceof LPFM stations has no measurable effect on the economic performance of the average full-service commercial FM station.”
What does this say about the broader impact of LPFM stations? Although they have a neutral effect on other stations, the report includes several conclusions about the positive impact stations have in their communities. The authors note that “LPFM stations appear to be much more likely to carry a variety of programming genres than full-service commercial FM stations.” Instead of subscribing to a single common format, most community radio stations include one or sometimes many genres of music and talk that are otherwise unavailable.
Measuring listenership is difficult because most LPFM stations are located outside the markets rated by Arbitron (though this will change with the passage of the Local Community Radio Act). However, for the LPFM stations that are rated, the report found that many achieved high values of what’s called Time Spent Listening (“TSL”). This rating “suggests that the popular LPFM stations tend to attract a small but loyal fan base, which tunes in for long periods of time and/or switches stations less frequently than the average full-service station listener.”
For community radio producers and supporters, these conclusions will be no surprise. But it’s helpful that the FCC’s own research supports the common-sense notion that community radio serves a greater diversity of listeners and needs than do commercial stations.
To inform the report, Prometheus submitted the results of our LPFM survey data on stations financials as well as earlier formal comments to the FCC. The authors extensively cite both our filings, even referencing what we think is the main point: “Prometheus argues that the premise for the study is flawed because the Commission’s goals would be well served if LPFM stations are providing competition to the radio industry and because incumbents do not have a right to be protected from competition.”
After all, even if LPFM stations did present an economic threat to their neighbors, wouldn’t this be cause for celebration, as commercial stations would be forced to better serve their communities in order to retain listeners? As we noted in our comments, the FCC should not be in the business of protecting incumbent broadcasters from new ones.
The study also mentions our argument that many LPFM stations are reaching new listeners who are otherwise unserved by local media, meaning that stations don’t necessarily draw listeners away from other stations, but rather increase radio listenership in general. For many of us, commercial radio isn’t worth listening to, because it doesn’t reflect our local communities, our language, our politics, or our culture. Expanding community radio may actually increase the viability of FM radio as more people find a reason to tune in.
Tags: community radio, FCC, LPFM, media reform | 
No Comments »
Iowa Legislators Need To Hear From Public
G** advocate groups and the NR* are pushing a new law in the Iowa legislature. HF *** would make it even more ok than it already is for someone to kill someone as long as they feel threatened (even if it turns out later that they weren’t actually threatened).
The law is opposed by law enforcement who argue it will increase rather than decrease crime.
According to Lonny Pulkrabek, Johnson County Sheriff:
“The goal for shall issue was more law abiding citizens getting permits to carry. Mission accomplished. The unintended results were more non-law abiding citizens carrying weapons. Mission accomplished. Many people with criminal records are flocking in to Sheriff’s Offices to get permits. Now the NRA and [g**] advocates are going to give the criminals a new tool. It is called “stand your ground.” A great way to get by with murder. Kill someone, no witnesses, therefore report to the police you felt threatened, that makes it justified now and no criminal or civil sanctions.
The legislators need to hear from people on this. The NRA will continue to put an enormous amount of pressure and $$$ into Iowa on this issue.
Tell them vote NO on stand your ground legislation. The law already gives you protection.”
According to the Des Moines Register/reasonable force opposed by law enforcement:
House File 573 is being supported by the subcommittee’s chair, Rep. Matt Windschitl, R-Missouri Valley, (whose family also happens to own a g** store). Siding with Windschitl were fellow subcommittee member Clel Baudler, R-Greenfield, and National Rifle Association lobbyist Christopher Rager.
Polk County Attorney John Sarcone argued that domestic abusers, gang members and others, could find cover in the new law. “Unfortunately … it’s going to increase the level of crimes,” said Steven Foritano, a bureau chief for the Polk County attorney’s office. “It’s a bill that asks for the escalation of violence and not the de-escalation of violence.”
Siding with the Polk County prosecutors in opposition to the law were police and sheriffs’ representatives, the trial attorneys’ lobby and Des Moines Rep. Rick Olson, the lone Democrat on the subcommittee.
Legislators need to hear from the public on this.
Click here to find your legislator
Click here to contact your legislator
Himaliowa Haiku
Himaliowa haiku
by jonshu
In Butterfly Morning
we Rise UP
and
FLY
AHO!
Happy Chinese New Year
In this Year of the Dragon
2012
Jonshu
This Week On The Fallon Forum: Should Democrats Count The GOP Votes?
Monday – Thursday from 7:00-800 pm, join us for the fusion of politics and civility at 98.3 WOW-FM and on-line at 983wowfm.com. Call (515) 312-0983 or (866) 908-TALK to participate in the conversation. If you miss the show, you can hear it as a podcast and please help support local progressive talk radio with an online donation or by check to PO Box 13421, Des Moines, IA 50310.
Dear Friends,
If Iowa is to retain its first-in-the-nation status in the presidential nominating process, this year’s caucus debacle demands dramatic action. An edgy, decisive plan is needed, and I’m happy to announce that I have it. Here’s a step-by-step guide to the impeccable logic behind my thinking:
1. Ballots were unable to be counted in 8 of 1,774 Republican precinct caucuses. That’s a failure rate of .045% — unacceptable when dealing with something as important as voting, or caucusing, or electing delegates . . . or whatever it is we do here in Iowa to help pick the leader of what used to be called, charmingly, “the free world.”
2. Presumably, precinct chairs and/or secretaries counted the ballots in each precinct, with interested (often suspicious) rank-and-file caucus goers looking on.
3. The chair and secretary were presumably Republicans at all precinct caucuses. All but one, that is . . .
4. That’s right. As previously reported, Republicans in Des Moines 66 elected this former Democratic legislator as caucus secretary. I was a registered Republican for all of 60 minutes before I got to count ballots (and money!). There were no errors in the vote tally in Precinct 66 (and every red Republican cent was accounted for too, in case you’re wondering).
5. Therefore, since the error rate among Republicans counting votes is an unacceptable .045% vs a spotless performance among Democrats counting votes, I call upon Matt Strawn, chair of the Iowa Republican Party, to immediately announce to the world that, beginning in 2016, only Democrats will be allowed to count ballots at Republican precinct caucuses.
And given the extent to which Presidents Reagan, Bush I and Bush II ran-up the federal debt, it might not be a bad idea to keep Democrats in charge of managing the federal till as well.
That said, we have some great conversation brewing for you this week. And I hope you’ll not only tune-in, but call-in — everyone but Frank, that is.
Monday, Charles Goldman and I read tea leaves as we attempt to find meaning in the craziness of the recent South Carolina primary. We’ll also talk about SOPA and PIPA. And no, SOPA and PIPA aren’t characters in a new Disney film.
Tuesday, we talk with Debi Durham, director of the Iowa Department of Economic Development, about the $809 million in state money that has gone to just 50 companies over the past seven years. Debi and I are unlikely to agree on whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, which should make for some provocative conversation.
Speaking of being unlikely to agree, also on Tuesday, Dave Williams, President of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, will gab with me about the State of the Union address, which airs live at 8:00 pm central time.
Wednesday, we talk nuclear power, and Sonia Ashe of the Iowa Public Interest Research Group joins us. Apparently, even the Iowa Utilities Board is raising concerns about MidAmerican Energy’s proposal to soak rate-payers with the cost of building a new nuclear power plant.
Thursday, Speaker of the Iowa House, Kraig Paulsen, is our guest for the opening segment of the show, which will focus on matters before the Iowa Legislature this session, obviously.
So, tune in at 98.3 WOW-FM and online. You can download the Fallon Forum as a podcast, too. And don’t forget to visit The Fallon Forum website at fallonforum.com. Thanks!
Ed
Traffic Cameras, Politics, And Civil Liberties
Rod Sullivan, Johnson County Supervisor
by Rod Sullivan
[Reprinted with permission from Rod Sullivan's weekly newsletter, Sullivan's Salvos. Sullivan is a thoughtful, outspoken, progressive Democrat who can be counted on to let everyone know exactly where he stands and to not go along with the usual groupthink. You may not always agree with him, but he tends to do his homework on the issues. Last week Governor Branstad (sensing a political wedge issue in the making we suspect) said he would go along with a statewide ban on traffic cameras, so it seemed like a good idea to present another viewpoint to add to the conversation, along with some statistical information from someone who has actually looked into the matter.]
I recently asked my fellow Board members if there was any interest in a discussion of traffic cameras. There was none.
This is unfortunate on a couple of levels: first, just about anything deserves at least a short public discussion, particularly when one Board member requests it. Secondly, I think this should be discussed because traffic cameras used correctly are proving to be a great tool for public safety.
Let me be clear; I am referring to speed cameras. There are also red light cameras, and while very similar, the justifications are somewhat different. For the purposes of this discussion, I am referring to speed cameras.
It actually pisses me off when I hear some elected officials say that this raises civil liberties concerns for them. There are about three elected officials in Johnson County who are legit when they say this. The rest are full of it.
I would love to see elected officials who REALLY cared about civil liberties. If more really cared about civil liberties, there would be many more tough votes taken. REALLY care about civil liberties? Take a look at our disproportionate minority contact numbers. They are abysmal. But the “civil liberties” champions who criticize cameras won’t touch a REAL civil liberties issue with a ten-foot pole.
Opposition to cameras is mainly pandering. The public gets upset about them, so the politicians automatically cave. But that we actually had a roster full of elected officials who cared about civil liberties!
I am literally a card-carrying member of the ACLU. I fully understand the civil liberties concerns to which cameras give rise. And I think there are some precautions that can be taken to protect our privacy. I will get to those later. First, here is why we need traffic cameras:
1. Cameras reduce speed-related accidents. This has been statistically proven. A federal study found a small but measurable reduction in injuries nationwide in accidents in areas monitored by cameras. Local studies nationwide show largely similar data. Crashes on 380 in CR are down 76%! Fatal crashes on 380 are down 80%!
(There is some data that shows a slight increase in rear end collisions at red light cameras –though the same studies demonstrate a reduction in more serious “t-bone” collisions at the same intersections. But that is for our cities to figure out. I am not talking about cameras at intersections – I’m talking speed cameras.)
2. Cameras raise revenues. I hear opponents say, “this isn’t about safety – it is about money.” First, safety statistics prove that statement untrue. But just for kicks, let’s pretend it is true. The cameras are only to raise money. Why is that bad thing? Money raised from cameras is money that property tax payers do not need to pay. I would suggest using any revenues 50% for additional patrol deputies, 50% for offsetting the use of property taxes in public safety.
Is there a need? Have you driven I-380 between Iowa City and CR? I have a bit of a lead foot; I’ll set my cruise at 75 in the 70mph zone. Cars pass me as though I were standing still. In a single commute you will witness a half dozen risky behaviors.
3. The only people who pay are people whose vehicles broke the law. No one is forced to pay these fines. Don’t break the law, and you don’t pay. (In CR, no drivers were ticketed unless they were at least 10mph over the limit.)
Cameras are in use just to our north in Cedar Rapids. The cameras added up to big money and significantly fewer crashes, according to police statistics. Through 11 months, the city has made $2.3 million from the camera system, according to data from camera vendor Gatso USA.
Cedar Rapids Police Chief Greg Graham said crashes citywide dropped by 8 percent from 2009 to 2010, and injury crashes fell 16 percent. Instead of working crashes, officers went to neighborhoods. Graham said the extra officers in neighborhoods helped reduce violent crime by 2 percent and property crime by 12 percent last year.
That backs up my own experience. I travel to CR fairly frequently, and since the advent of traffic cameras, my behavior has changed dramatically. I drive MUCH slower through CR!
Those results are REAL. And they happened just 25 miles north of us! They occurred on the same stretch of road (I-380) for which I would recommend cameras.
As mentioned earlier, there are several things that can be done to mitigate civil liberties concerns.
First, violations must be treated as civil infractions rather than moving violations. That means fines are similar to parking tickets, and do not impact the vehicle owner’s driving record. This is important, because the owner of the car was not necessarily the driver when the infraction occurred. This also protects the privacy of the drivers, because there is no need to use cameras to attempt to determine who was driving. The camera is focused on the plate, not the driver.
Secondly, there must be a strict plan for the data. Files must be deleted frequently, and data must be strictly protected. The data must remain the property of the municipality and not the vendor. Neither Cedar Rapids nor Des Moines has experienced any problems with this. I would encourage civil libertarians be actively involved in the writing of whatever contract is created with the company that maintains the data.
Finally, there must be an easy appeals process. This has been achieved in Cedar Rapids and Des Moines.
Now Governor Branstad is getting into the act. He says he will sign a bill banning traffic cameras; according to Branstad, the cameras are “unfair”. How ridiculous! The cameras are EXACTLY the opposite – they are the MOST fair way to determine who broke the law! No giving breaks, no racial profiling, no room for human error. (And this is one more way for Branstad to take power away from local governments.)
Traffic cameras make sense. They prevent accidents, raise revenues, and create a safer environment. I think this AT LEAST deserves a discussion. What do you think?
*Government Does It Better!
So – who handles elections better? Elected County Auditors (the government) or local volunteers (the Iowa GOP Caucuses)? Chalk up another one for government!
Tags: civil liberties, Governor Branstad, public safety, traffic cameras | No Comments »
Weekly Observations – Money Matters
Keeping An Eye Out For ALEC
With the start of the legislative session here in Iowa, citizens and journalists need to keep an eye out for ALEC legislation trying to get its foot in the door. Last year Republicans offered a bill which cut commercial property taxes, but also had many a poison pill for cities and towns in Iowa. I think we can expect those kind of shenanigans again. This is why the Liz Mathis election was so important. Without a majority in the senate, Dems would be unable to stop ALEC type legislation. Thus in a short peiod of time we would be Wisconsin or Michigan.
Anybody else feel Mitt has contempt for us little people?
After seeing the confrontation with a citizen on the ropeline in South Carolina I get the impression that Romney has little but contempt for those among us who do not have a few million laying around. Guess to be a full citizen under Romney I will need to find a few more zeroes to put behind the family fortune.
Under Gingrich, will State Dinners be swingers parties?
Why can’t I get this idea out of my mind? Just imagine Mr. Openmarriage as President. He is hosting a state dinner for let us say Sarkozy. Suddenly he decides he has taken a fancy to Mrs. Sarkozy and asks the first lady (aka the third wife) and the President of France if he and the French first lady could be excused for an hour or two. Think there would be any fallout?
When was the last time you said?
“I earned just a little bit of money” about $372,000? Looks like a big bit of money to me. A really big bit of money.
Payday Lenders finally going to be controlled?
When Richard Cordray was appointed to his job as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau he let it be known that Payday Lenders were in his sights. After immediately taking on the mortgage market, he has now focused on the Payday Lenders. With interest rates that can top an annual 500%, these lenders are certainly in need of some supervision. Thank you Mr. Cordray! Please read all about it here.
Are they caricatures?
I can’t help but think that if any creative person were trying to come up with a comic book character to represent on the 1%, that person would end up drawing Mitt Romney. We hear stories that he is really nice, yet the persona he shows in public is one of arrogance, disdain for the poor and middle class, who has so much money he considers a $10,000 bet a ‘friendly wager.’
Yet Gingrich and Santorum are not far behind as caricatures. Gingrich as the old southern white gentleman who treats women like objects and still echoes strains of the south’s racial past.
Santorum appears to want to be Pope of the United States. He is condescending to anyone who does not fit into his very narrow view of what humans should be.
How’s that austerity doing?
While we spend much of our time being distracted by the glittery object of the primaries and their circus like atmosphere, Europe continues to perform a great experiment in economics. Can austerity really grow an economy? Well, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other monetary groups issued warnings that austerity may not be the way to go after all.
Europe looks to have a very slow growth if any at all in the near future. It looks as though much of the expected slow growth can be attributed to the austerity.
Almost forgot our friends in Wisconsin
Congratulations on turning in the recall petitions not only on Walker, but on Kleefisch and the senators. I am sure there will be many here who will want to help make calls or whatever is needed in your fight for good government.
- Schultz Raises Dead Voter Scare Again
- Repubs Stage Crime at NH Polls
- Wondering About GOP Caucus Count
- Judge Fires Voting Machine Investigators
- Globe-Gazette Decries “Cheap Shot” from SoS Schultz
- Voting By Email Is Foolish
- Congratulations, Iowa
- Auditors Study Photo ID
- Iowa’s Best Criminals
- Voter ID Violated by Indiana SoS
