Caterpillar Seeks Steep Concessions from Its Workers Even When Business is Booming

In January 2009, Caterpillar announced that it would slash 22,000 people from its 112,000-person workforce. The new round of job cuts spanned five plants in Illinois, Indiana and Georgia. Caterpillar Inc. is the bulldozer manufacturer that President Barack Obama used to help push his $787 billion stimulus plan. At a Caterpillar Inc. plant in Peoria, Ill., President Obama said that his proposed economic stimulus would allow the company's CEO to rehire some of the 20,000 recently laid-off employees. But when asked on February 12, 2009, if the stimulus could do that, Caterpillar CEO James Owens said, "I think, realistically, no. The honest reality is we're probably going to have more layoffs before we start hiring again." More than half of the 15,000 people that Caterpillar Inc. hired in 2010 were outside the U.S. Also in 2010, Caterpillar made plans to build its second factory in China. Legislators have been bleeding the next two generations of Americans dry by pouring money into corporations that are building in overseas locations to avoid paying taxes. On January 26, 2012, Caterpillar reported a 58 percent rise in quarterly earnings; the results capped a record 2011 in terms of sales and profits. The company is enjoying solid growth in its resource-equipment sector due to solid demand and favorable prices in the commodities markets. [Source]

At Caterpillar, Pressing Labor for Concessions

July 23, 2012

New York Times - When it comes to dealing with labor unions, Caterpillar has long taken a stance as tough as the bulldozers and backhoes that have burnished its global reputation. Be it two-tier wage scales or higher worker contributions for health insurance, the company has been a leader in devising new ways to cut labor costs, with other manufacturers often imitating its strategies.

Now, in what has become a test case in American labor relations, Caterpillar is trying to pioneer new territory, seeking steep concessions from its workers even when business is booming.

Despite earning a record $4.9 billion profit last year and projecting even better results for 2012, the company is insisting on a six-year wage freeze and a pension freeze for most of the 780 production workers at its factory here. Caterpillar says it needs to keep its labor costs down to ensure its future competitiveness.

The company’s stance has angered the workers, who went on strike 12 weeks ago.

“Considering the offer they gave us, it’s a strike we had to have,” said Albert Williams, a 19-year Caterpillar employee, as he picketed in 99-degree heat outside the plant, which makes hydraulic parts and systems essential for much of the company’s earth-moving machinery.

Caterpillar, which has significantly raised its executives’ compensation because of its strong profits, defended its demands, saying many unionized workers were paid well above market rates. To run the factory during the strike, the company is using replacement workers, managers and a few union members who have crossed the picket line.

The showdown, which has no end in sight, is being closely watched by corporations and unions across the country because it involves two often uncompromising antagonists — Caterpillar and the International Association of Machinists — that have figured in many high-stakes labor battles.

“Caterpillar has been a leader in the past 20 years in taking a hard line,” said Richard Hurd, a professor of industrial relations at Cornell.

Last winter, Caterpillar locked out about 450 workers at its locomotive plant in London, Ontario, and then closed the factory after the union rejected its demand to cut wages by 55 percent. In the mid-1990s, the company vanquished the United Automobile Workers after a 17-month strike by 9,000 workers at eight factories; the union surrendered and accepted the company’s concession-filled offer.

The machinists have carried out largely successful strikes at Boeing and Lockheed Martin, ultimately winning better raises and benefits for thousands of members.

Robert Bruno, a labor relations professor at the University of Illinois, said Caterpillar was trying to drive compensation down to a new floor.

“Caterpillar sees this as ‘the new normal,’ while this union local feels you have to draw a line in the sand to hold on,” he said. “Some people are saying the union should be more deferential, more compliant, that it’s a bad time to strike. How can you counter a powerful multinational in this economy?”

The current showdown is playing out on a flat stretch along Channahon Road here, 40 miles southwest of Chicago, where 15 strikers stand at the plant entrance during each four-hour picketing shift, with signs saying, “Fighting for Our Children’s Future” and “I Am Solidarity.” The strikers often shout “scab” as replacement workers drive into the factory.

Ever since negotiations began in March, Caterpillar has insisted on a wage freeze for its top-tier workers, those employed seven years or more; they average $26 an hour, or $55,000 a year before overtime. For the junior third of the workers who typically earn $12 to $19 an hour, Caterpillar has made no promises but has suggested it might raise their wages based on local market conditions.

Caterpillar has offered workers several modest, one-time payments, but is also demanding far higher health care contributions from its workers, up to $1,900 a year more, according to the union.   The company had profit of $39,000 per employee last year.

Carlos Revilla, the plant’s operations manager, defended the push for a pay freeze, saying the top-tier workers were paid 34 percent above market level.

“A competitive and fair wage package is a must,” he said in a statement. “Paying wages well above market levels makes Joliet uncompetitive.”

But the union says Caterpillar, the world’s largest producer of earth-moving equipment, is in no way uncompetitive and should be sharing its prosperity with its workers.

“A company that earned a record $4.9 billion in 2011 and $1.586 billion in the first quarter of this year should be willing to help the workers who made those profits for them,” said Timothy O’Brien, president of Machinists Local Lodge 851, which represents the strikers. “Caterpillar believes in helping the very rich, but what they’re doing would help eliminate the middle class.”

He said the company wants a pay and pension freeze for longtime workers to push them into retirement and replace them with $13-an-hour workers.

Michael LeRoy, another labor relations professor at the University of Illinois, said Caterpillar has served as a model in legitimizing tough labor strategies, like take-it-or-leave-it contract offers.

Detroit’s automakers, for example, followed Caterpillar’s lead in adopting a two-tier wage system, lengthy contracts and a special health care trust fund for retirees, although “it took a bankruptcy to do it,” said Sean McAlinden, chief economist at the Center for Automotive Research.

Rusty Dunn, a Caterpillar spokesman, said the philosophy of paying market-based wages would help Caterpillar “keep competitive when times are bad.”

“We think the overall approach will preserve job growth in Illinois and the U.S.,” he said.

Caterpillar has added about 6,500 jobs in the United States over the past year.

The strikers here exude an unusual defiance and pride, boasting that the hydraulic parts they produce require some of the most exacting specifications in heavy manufacturing.

“We make an excellent product here, a product that Caterpillar uses in all its vehicles,” said Mr. Williams, a machinery repairman. “That gives us a leverage that the other plants don’t have.”

Yet he admits to feeling financial pain. He receives $150 a week in strike benefits, and he said he did not have the $40 needed for his 11-year-old son to play Little League.

The Joliet strikers hope Caterpillar will soon sweeten its offer after concluding that it needs the strikers back to produce vital components.

Caterpillar says that is unlikely.

“We believe we have exhausted the negotiating process,” Mr. Dunn said. “The primary strategy, going forward, is to run the plant with the contingent work force as long as the work stoppage continues.”

He added that Caterpillar’s offer was “competitive, reasonable and fair.”

Rose Bain, a striker, grows impatient with such arguments. Earning $15 an hour after two years, she said she could not afford a six-year freeze and did not trust Caterpillar to follow through with the hinted raise for lower-paid workers.

“We’re the people who busted our butts to help them make record profits,” she said. “We shouldn’t be treated like this.”

Read More...

Greece is in a 'Great Depression' Similar to the American One in the 1930s

Greece Now in 'Great Depression', PM Says

July 22, 2012

Reuters - Greece is in a "Great Depression" similar to the American one in the 1930s, the country's Prime Minister Antonis Samaras told former U.S. President Bill Clinton on Sunday.

Samaras was speaking two days before a team of Greece's international lenders arrive in Athens to push for further cuts needed for the debt-laden country to qualify for further rescue payments and avoid a chaotic default.

Athens wants to soften the terms of a 130-billion euro bailout agreed last March with the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, to soften their impact on an economy going through its worst post-war recession.

By the end of this year Greek GDP is expected to have shrunk by about a fifth in five consecutive years of recession since 2008, hammered by tax hikes, spending cuts and wage reductions required by two EU/IMF bailouts. Unemployment climbed to a record 22.6 percent in the first quarter.

"You had the Great Depression in the United States," Samaras told Clinton, who was visiting Greece as part of a delegation of Greek-American businessmen. "This is exactly what we're going through in Greece - it's our version of the Great Depression."

Athens must reduce its budget deficit below 3 percent of GDP by the end of 2014, from 9.3 percent of GDP in 2011 - requiring almost another 12 billion euros in cuts and higher taxes on top of the 17 billion successive governments have cut from the budget shortfall.

Greece wants its lenders to give it two more years to achieve the budget goal to avoid an even deeper economic slump but its lenders have opposed the idea because it would imply even more financial aid.

Highlighting growing frustration with Athens, German magazine "Der Spiegel" reported on Sunday, citing high-ranking representatives in Brussels, that the IMF may not take part in any additional financing for Greece.

The German and Greek finance ministries declined to comment on the report, which suggested additional support required for Athens could range from 10-50 billion euros.

NO MORE

Officials have already indicated there would be a shortfall on the current bailout. How much is likely to depend on the extent by much Greece continues to miss its fiscal targets and the extent of support needed to keep its major banks afloat.

German economy minister Philipp Roesler told ARD public television he did not expect Greece could fulfill its requirements and that that would mean no more money to Athens.

"I am more than sceptical," Roesler, who is the head of the junior party in Germany's ruling coalition and often outspoken on euro zone issues, said in an interview.

"If Greece does not fulfill its requirements, there cannot be any more payments to Greece," added Roesler, whose views often do not reflect those of Chancellor Angela Merkel or Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble.

The inspection team of the international "troika" of the EU Commission, the IMF and the ECB will focus on the 11.7 billion euros of spending cuts Athens needs to take in 2013 and 2014.

Clinton criticized Greece's lenders for focusing excessively on austerity, saying Athens will be more likely to repay its debt if its manages economic recovery first.

"(It) is self-defeating... if every day people are saying this may or may not work to give us back 100 cents on the dollar, so give us more austerity today," he told Samaras.

"People need something to look forward to when they get up in the morning - young Greeks need something to believe in so they can stake their future out here," Clinton said.

Greece: Microcosm of What's Coming to America?

Iran Can Produce Nuclear Fuel for Ships; No Immediate Plans to Upgrade the Level of Its Uranium Enrichment Says Nuclear Chief

Official: Iran Can Produce Nuclear Fuel for Ships

July 22, 2012

AP - Iran is capable of producing nuclear fuel for ships but has no immediate plans to upgrade the level of its uranium enrichment, the nation's nuclear chief was quoted as saying in Sunday.

Fereidoun Abbasi said if it decides to, Iran would first declare its need for higher grade enriched nuclear fuel to the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran is currently enriching uranium to 20 percent.

Abbasi's comments were reported by the semi-official Mehr news agency.

An Iranian parliamentary committee has approved a bill requiring the government to design nuclear-powered merchant ships and provide them with nuclear fuel.

Some lawmakers say Iran should enrich uranium to levels close to weapons grade to produce fuel for proposed nuclear-powered oil tankers.

The U.S. and its allies suspect Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons. Iran denies that.

Also Sunday, Iran's intelligence chief was quoted as saying about 30 suspects have been arrested in connection with the assassination last year of a nuclear electronics expert.

Heidar Moslehi also accused Western intelligence agencies — including the CIA, Israel's Mossad and MI6 in Britain — of working together to kill Iranian nuclear scientists, part of efforts to derail Iran's nuclear program. Britain and the U.S. have dismissed Iran's claims. Israel has remained silent.

Moslehi's comments, reported by the official IRNA news agency Sunday, gave no other details on the arrests, including whether they are new or among those previously announced.

At least five Iranian nuclear experts have been killed since 2010. In May, Iran hanged a man convicted in the killing of a nuclear physicist in early 2010.

Legal Workforce Act: E-Verify is the De Facto National ID

E-Verify is the De Facto National ID

"In the future, whether it's entering your home, opening your car, entering your workspace, getting a pharmacy prescription refilled, or having your medical records pulled up, everything will come off that unique key that is your iris. Every person, place, and thing on this planet will be connected [to the iris system] within the next 10 years." - Jeff Carter, CDO of Global Rainmakers

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has proposed a rule under Obamacare that would centralize everyone's patient and hospital records ... Mistakes haven't slowed down the government's desire for more information and power. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) pushed to mandate E-Verify for every U.S. employee and business through the Legal Workforce Act (H.R. 2885). E-Verify is an electronic employment eligibility verification system designed to check an employee's immigration status and identity information against a government database before approving him for work. Whatever you think about immigration, that Americans have to ask government permission to be employed is outrageous. E-Verify takes us one step closer to a "papers please" state. [Source]

E-Verify: De Facto National ID and the End of Privacy

Legal Workforce Act: To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make mandatory and permanent requirements relating to use of an electronic employment eligibility verification system, and for other purposes, as introduced.

September 16, 2011

Rutherford Institute - As technology grows more sophisticated and the American government and its corporate allies further refine their methods of keeping tabs on citizens, those of us who treasure privacy increasingly find ourselves engaged in a struggle to maintain our freedoms in the midst of the modern surveillance state.

The latest attack on our right to anonymity and privacy comes stealthily packaged in the form of so-called job protection legislation. Introduced by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) in June 2011, H.R. 2885 (formerly H.R. 2164), the "Legal Workforce Act," is being marketed as a way to fight illegal immigration and "open up millions of jobs for unemployed Americans and legal immigrants."

However, this proposed federal law is really little more than a Trojan horse, a backdoor attempt by the powers-that-be to inflict a de facto National ID card on the American people.

Created under the auspices of securing the borders and preventing illegal immigrants from being hired for "American" jobs, E-Verify challenges the rights of the individual, the rights of labor and the rights of industry. As such, this is not a left or right issue. Anyone who values civil liberties should be alarmed. In fact, E-Verify is being opposed by various civil liberties groups such as the ACLU, American Library Association, The Rutherford Institute, Liberty Coalition and others.

If approved by Congress, this legislation would make the federal government the final authority on who gets hired by American businesses and in the process create a bureaucratic nightmare for already over-burdened and over-regulated small business owners.

In a nutshell, H.R. 2885 requires all employers to submit potential employees' names, Social Security numbers and other data to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for authorization before the employees can start work. The data would then be run through E-Verify, a government-run database and employment identification verification system.

In other words, the E-Verify system would require all those wanting to be employed by American companies to register the credentials of their citizenship in a government database. What this means, of course, is that in order to be able to verify an applicant's legitimacy, the government would first have to build a massive database to store the biographical information of the entire working population in the United States--a huge undertaking with numerous pitfalls and security flaws, as we have seen with many other government databases.

If you think unemployment is a problem now, just wait until your employment hinges on getting government clearance. Under this legislation, if a worker's information is incorrect in E-Verify, he or she can't work until the problem is resolved.

Furthermore, due to the sensitive information contained in the database, it would be a huge target for hackers and identity thieves, while doing little to curb the flow of illegal immigration or illegal immigrants getting jobs. Indeed, with a stolen or faked identity, anyone could bypass the system and secure employment.

This legislation poses even greater threats to privacy, free speech and free association and potentially hinders Americans' ability to travel freely. Because the E-Verify system would apply to everyone eligible to work in the United States and will grow to include biometrics such as fingerprints, DNA and iris scans, it will be used for a host of other purposes by the intelligence community, law enforcement and corporate America.

Private employers will become extensions of the government in that they will eventually be required to verify whether employees are delinquent in the payment of federal, state or local taxes, in compliance with child support or alimony decrees, on a terrorist watch list or convicted or even accused of a crime. Employers, thus, would be enlisted as de facto law enforcement officers for the federal government. Furthermore, errors in the verification process would be practically immune from timely legal redress in violation of constitutional tenets of due process.

Recently, the prohibition in H.R. 2885 on using the E-Verify database for purposes other than employment verification was replaced with a new section that allows the system to be used to "protect critical infrastructure." That term is broadly defined and it's not clear what this would mean in practice--whether screening air travelers or controlling access to federal facilities--but it clearly signals a huge expansion of the program.

In one paragraph in the legislation the government states that E-Verify will not be used just for employment but also can be used for verifying identify for national security. What this means is that American citizens would have to have their information correct in E-Verify not just to get a job but also potentially if they need to access "critical infrastructure"--i.e., any kind of public transportation. Ironically, this language comes right after the paragraph saying there will be no National ID card.

Despite assurances to the contrary, E-Verify will become a de facto National ID system. Such a database with vast pools of personal information directly tied to individuals shared across a multitude of government agencies would give the government an alarming amount of control over the average citizen. If government officials so chose, they could easily track any person who had registered in the E-Verify system for whatever reason.

Not only will government agencies know everything about American citizens, but private corporations will become policemen for this system. The E-Verify system--part of a broader trend in American politics, namely, the collusion of government and corporate interests--will allow government and corporate officials to repress dissidents and suspects simply by restricting their access to basic services.

Once all of your information is tied together and placed in one grand database, any government or corporate agency can wreak havoc on your life.

• You might try to buy groceries only to find that your credit card has been denied.


• You might apply for a job, at ten, twenty, fifty corporations only to find that, despite your being very qualified, there just isn't any room for you at the company. Without a job, you might be forced to tap into the welfare system, only to find that your application was denied.


• Your property might be confiscated.


• When you try to move somewhere else and start anew, you might find you can't board the plane because you're on a no-fly list.

Make no mistake, these are the tactics of a totalitarian society.

However, the idea of singling out and "identifying" individuals for the sake of national security is nothing new. National identity cards also carry with them a historic risk of oppression and persecution, as they have been used to identify and track ethnic, racial and religious groups and have facilitated oppression and persecution against these groups. And as recently as the 1990s, identity cards played an instrumental role in one of the worst genocides of the twentieth century, second only perhaps to the Holocaust.

With the introduction of an identity card that contains information such as ethnic origin, government agencies will be able to identify people on the basis of race or religion with considerable ease. For example, in the months following the 9/11 attacks, Muslim men from Arab or South Asian countries were rounded up on the basis of religion and ethnicity and detained indefinitely in the United States, often without access to an attorney or a judge.

Imagine how much more far-reaching that government detention program might have been with a National ID in place.

Various laws have been enacted over time to guard against unreasonable intrusions by the government into our private lives. One such law is the Privacy Act, which was passed by Congress in 1974 and prohibits the government from forming a database. However, although the fear was that such a database could constitute an invasion of privacy, the law only prevents the government from creating a database, not accessing an already existing database.

At the time the Privacy Act was passed, Congress had no reason to suspect that private corporations would ever have the desire or means to create such databases. The emergence of data collection corporations, however, has enabled government intelligence and police agencies to circumvent the law and gain information on private citizens with the click of a button. Although such tactics clearly contradict the spirit of privacy laws intended to guard against government abuse, it is technically legal for the government to gain access to these databases.

Government officials have taken full advantage of this loophole. Due to the fact that these databases are owned and operated by private corporations, they are relatively unregulated and fall outside the scrutiny of privacy watchdog groups. Reports of security breaches at numerous data brokerage companies only serve to fan concerns about the lack of oversight and regulation.

Rest assured that were Congress to approve this E-Verify legislation, it would constitute the ultimate end-run around the Privacy Act and open the door to a National ID. Thus, we have reached a crossroads. Either we limit the reach and power of the government (often in collusion with corporate power) or privacy as we have known it will become extinct.



Read More...

White House Rural Council — Is This Agenda 21?

WHITE HOUSE RURAL COUNCIL... Is This Agenda 21? And Why Haven't We Been Informed About This? Who Is Actually Watching Out for Us, Anyone?

February 11, 2012

SodaHead - On June 9, 2011, President Obama signed his 86th Executive Order, and almost nobody noticed.

(For the record, Obama is on par to match President Bush’s 291 orders executed during his two terms in office. The National Archives defines an Executive Order this way; Executive orders are official documents, numbered consecutively, through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government.)

President Obama’s E.O. 13575 is designed to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16% of the American people. Why didn’t we notice it? Weinergate. In the middle of the Anthony Weiner scandal, as the press and most of the American people were distracted, President Obama created something called “The White House Rural Council” (WHRC).

Section One of 13575 states the following:

Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

Warning bells should have been sounding all across rural America when the phrase “sustainable rural communities” came up. As we know from researching the UN plan for Sustainable Development known as Agenda 21, these are code words for the true fundamental transformation America.

The third sentence also makes it quite clear that the government intends to take greater control over “food, fiber, and energy.”

The last sentence in Section 1 further clarifies the intent of the order by tying together “access to the capital necessary for economic growth, health care and education.”

The new White House Rural Council will probably be populated by experts in the various fields that might prove helpful to the folks who live and work outside of large urban areas, right? Well, Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture, will chair the group, but let us review the list of members appointed to serve on this new council – according to the order, the heads of the following groups have been appointed:

• (1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner
• (2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates
• (3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder
• (4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar
• (5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke
• (6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis
• (7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius
• (8) the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan
• (9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood
• (10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu
• (11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan
• (12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki
• (13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano
• (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson
• (15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps
• (16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag
• (17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren
• (18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske
• (19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee
• (20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress)
• (21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling
• (22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills
• (23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley
• (24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett
• (25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above).

It appears that not a single department in the federal government was excluded from the new White House Rural Council, and the wild card option in number 25 gives the president and the agriculture secretary the option to designate anyone to serve on this powerful council.

Within the twenty-five designated members of the council are some curious ties to Agenda 21 and the structure being built to implement it:

Valerie Jarrett from the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs served on the board of something called Local Initiatives Support Corportation (LISC). LISC uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI as their web page details their work to build “Sustainable Communities.”

Melody Barnes head of the Domestic Policy Council – Former VP at George Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

Hilda Solis from the Labor Dept – in 2000 received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.”

Nancy Sutley head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality – Served on the board of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and was one of the biggest supporters of low-flow toilets that are now credited with costing more money than expected while causing some nasty problems.

Is it possible that concerns about 13575 are just typical anti-government paranoia? Let us review the mission and function of WHRC:

Sec. 4. Mission and Function of the Council. The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities.

“Economic prosperity” and a better “quality of life,” that all sounds fairly innocent and well-intentioned. But continuing deeper into the order we find the council is charged with four directives:

(a) make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America;

The vague language here sounds non-threatening. But, is there a hint here that a “rural stimulus plan” might be in the making? Will the Federal government start pumping money into farmlands under the guise of creating “economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America?” It is difficult to discern as the language is so broad.

We continue with the functions of the WHRC:

(b) coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America;

Virtually every aspect of rural life seems to now be part of the government’s mission. And while all of the items in (b) sound like typical government speak, you should be alarmed when you read the words “nongovernmental organizations” (NGOs). NGOs are unelected, but typically government-funded groups that act like embedded community organizers. And NGOs are key to Agenda 21′s plans.
Continuing:

(c) coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas;

That one sounds very similar to the language found in the United Nations plan for sustainable cities known as Agenda 21. Managing the population in both rural and urban areas, with a focus on controlling “open spaces.”

(d) and identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation related activities.

This function of Executive Order 13575 ties energy development with outdoor recreation and “other conservation related activities.” When did outdoor recreation become a conservation related activity?

Aside from the content of this order and some its vague intentions, the timing of the signing should also be considered. Later this month, Washington DC is hosting a meeting of the Agenda 21 operatives who are members of ICLEI:

Washington, D.C. – ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI USA) and U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today announced the launch of the National Press Club Leadership Speaker Series to be held on June 28. The event’s inaugural keynote speaker will be the Honorable Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), whose keynote address, The Road to Rio+20, will explain the role of key global and national stakeholders, and the impact and vision of this historic conference.

As Secretary-General of Rio+20, Ambassador Sha Zukang will convene high-ranking leaders from government, the private sector and civil society to chart a pathway to accelerate the implementation of sustainable development decisions and the green economy through the creation of an institutional framework and inclusive participation.

The United Nations has pushed their sustainable development program for almost twenty years. The UN’s “social justice” blueprint called Agenda 21 requires governments to control almost all aspects of an individual’s life, but has recently met with substantial resistance in America. Since The Blaze covered this topic and the story appeared on Glenn Beck’s Fox TV program, we have been inundated with reports from around the country about efforts to remove ICLEI and Agenda 21 from local governments.

Carroll County, Maryland: Starting in February, 2011, all five newly elected county commissioners, led by Richard Rothschild, voted to become the first county in the nation to end the ICLEI contract.

Amador County, California: The Mother Lode Tea Party lead the successful effort to remove ICLEI form Amador County.

Montgomery County, Pennsylvania: Activists Ruth Miller and Maggie Roddin have raised awareness that lead to the removal of ICLEI.

Edmond, Oklahoma: Molly Jenkins motivated 200 people to attend the city council meeting and demand action against ICLEI.

Las Cruces, New Mexico: continues to debate the issue, but rational voices are gaining momentum in the community.

Spartanburg, South Carolina: City Councilman Roger Nutt successfully directed the effort against the program and Spartanburg became the 6th community to kick out ICLEI in a vote of 6-0 by City Council (with one abstention).

There have also been anti-ICLEI rallies held in several cities this week, with more planned in the near future:

• June 27, 11:30am-3:00pm
  Exeter, NH, Exeter High School
• June 27, 5:00pm-8:30pm
  Galveston, TX, Galveston Convention Center
• June 27, 8:30am-5:00pm
  Ocean Shores, WA, Quinault Beach Resort and Casino
• June 30, 1:00pm-5:00pm
  San Francisco Bay Area, CA, TBD
• June 30, 10:00am-5:00pm
  West Long Branch, NJ, Monmouth University

There appears to be a developing, grass-roots movement to reject programs like Agenda 21. It remains to be seen if these groups might also reject a Washington-based control over rural lands, like the council created by Executive Order 13575.

As long as there’s not another Weinergate, maybe they’ll notice.

What is Agenda 21? If you do not know about it, you should.

Agenda 21 is a two-decade old, grand plan for global ’Sustainable Development,’ brought to you from the United Nations. George H.W. Bush (and 177 other world leaders) agreed to it back in 1992, and in 1995, Bill Clinton signed Executive Order #12858, creating a Presidential Council on ‘Sustainable Development.’ This effectively pushed the UN plan into America’s large, churning government machine without the need for any review or discussion by Congress or the American people.

‘Sustainable Development’ sounds like a nice idea, right? It sounds nice, until you scratch the surface and find that Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development are really cloaked plans to impose the tenets of Social Justice/Socialism on the world.

At risk from Agenda 21:

• Private Property ownership
• Single-Family homes
• Private car ownership and individual travel choices
• Privately owned farms

The Agenda 21 plan openly targets private property. For over thirty-five years the UN has made their stance very clear on the issue of individuals owning land;

Land… cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole.

Read More...

Drones That May Fly ‘Indefinitely’ Can Be Recharged By Lasers; Scientists Design Insect-like Drones for U.S. Government

And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power. And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads. And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man. And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them. - Revelation 9:3-6

Drones That May Fly ‘Indefinitely’ Can Be Recharged By Lasers

July 18, 2012

KNX 1070 - A recently demonstrated breakthrough in technology may help Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), better known as drones, stay airborne for very long periods of time before having to return to Earth.

This development comes at a time when the U.S. government is actively encouraging the domestic use of drones, first by law enforcement, and later, by private concerns.

Lockheed Martin and a company called LaserMotive have been able to keep a drone flying for some 49 hours non-stop, using a ground-based laser to recharge the drone’s on board battery, says Tom Koonce, the project manager for Lockheed Martin, in an interview with KNX1070 Newsradio.

The test, says Koonce, was conducted in a wind tunnel in Palmdale. The system will very soon be tested in actual airspace in the desert, requiring coordination with both the FAA and NASA to keep the ground-based laser from interfering with either commercial aircraft or Earth-orbiting space vehicles.

“Maybe it’s police, maybe it’s fire, maybe it’s emergency services. If they need to be up overhead for a long period of time, that makes a lot of sense to put a system like this in place,” says Koonce, who also told KNX1070′s Charles Feldman that “it aligns very well with the president’s directive to the FAA to prepare unmanned aerial systems into the national airspace to integrate them seamlessly by 2015.”

And, when the airborne drone senses it is low on “fuel,” its internal GPS would automatically guide it back to circle the ground-based laser system in order to get a re-charge.

How long could a drone be kept in the air using this laser recharging system? Koonce says, in theory, indefinitely.

Most people think of drones as weapons used to combat terrorists in far off places, but that is likely to soon change now that the FAA has streamlined the application process for law enforcement agencies in the U.S. to fly drones.

As previously reported by KNX1070 in our series “The Age of Drones,” both the LAPD and the Los Angeles County Sheriff have been looking into buying drones but neither agency has yet to actually purchase one, they say.

The notion of drones flying around snapping pictures of people below has raised the concern of critics who worry that the devices might be abused by police agencies and usher in a new age of aerial Big Brother. The idea of drones that may be kept flying for indefinite periods of time will likely fuel that concern.

Yet, as Koonce points out, being able to keep a drone airborne for a protracted period has its advantages for such things as sporting events and political conventions.

Flashback: Dragonfly or Insect Spy? Scientists at Work on Robobugs

October 9, 2007

Washington Post - Vanessa Alarcon saw them while working at an antiwar rally in Lafayette Square last month.

"I heard someone say, 'Oh my god, look at those,' " the college senior from New York recalled. "I look up and I'm like, 'What the hell is that?' They looked kind of like dragonflies or little helicopters. But I mean, those are not insects."

Out in the crowd, Bernard Crane saw them, too.

"I'd never seen anything like it in my life," the Washington lawyer said. "They were large for dragonflies. I thought, 'Is that mechanical, or is that alive?' "

That is just one of the questions hovering over a handful of similar sightings at political events in Washington and New York. Some suspect the insectlike drones are high-tech surveillance tools, perhaps deployed by the Department of Homeland Security.

Others think they are, well, dragonflies -- an ancient order of insects that even biologists concede look about as robotic as a living creature can look.

No agency admits to having deployed insect-size spy drones. But a number of U.S. government and private entities acknowledge they are trying. Some federally funded teams are even growing live insects with computer chips in them, with the goal of mounting spyware on their bodies and controlling their flight muscles remotely.

The robobugs could follow suspects, guide missiles to targets or navigate the crannies of collapsed buildings to find survivors.

The technical challenges of creating robotic insects are daunting, and most experts doubt that fully working models exist yet.

"If you find something, let me know," said Gary Anderson of the Defense Department's Rapid Reaction Technology Office.

But the CIA secretly developed a simple dragonfly snooper as long ago as the 1970s. And given recent advances, even skeptics say there is always a chance that some agency has quietly managed to make something operational.

"America can be pretty sneaky," said Tom Ehrhard, a retired Air Force colonel and expert in unmanned aerial vehicles who is now at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a nonprofit Washington-based research institute.

Robotic fliers have been used by the military since World War II, but in the past decade their numbers and level of sophistication have increased enormously. Defense Department documents describe nearly 100 different models in use today, some as tiny as birds, and some the size of small planes.

All told, the nation's fleet of flying robots logged more than 160,000 flight hours last year -- a more than fourfold increase since 2003. A recent report by the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College warned that if traffic rules are not clarified soon, the glut of unmanned vehicles "could render military airspace chaotic and potentially dangerous."

But getting from bird size to bug size is not a simple matter of making everything smaller.

"You can't make a conventional robot of metal and ball bearings and just shrink the design down," said Ronald Fearing, a roboticist at the University of California at Berkeley. For one thing, the rules of aerodynamics change at very tiny scales and require wings that flap in precise ways -- a huge engineering challenge.

Only recently have scientists come to understand how insects fly -- a biomechanical feat that, despite the evidence before scientists' eyes, was for decades deemed "theoretically impossible." Just last month, researchers at Cornell University published a physics paper clarifying how dragonflies adjust the relative motions of their front and rear wings to save energy while hovering.

That kind of finding is important to roboticists because flapping fliers tend to be energy hogs, and batteries are heavy.

The CIA was among the earliest to tackle the problem. The "insectothopter," developed by the agency's Office of Research and Development 30 years ago, looked just like a dragonfly and contained a tiny gasoline engine to make the four wings flap. It flew but was ultimately declared a failure because it could not handle crosswinds.

Agency spokesman George Little said he could not talk about what the CIA may have done since then. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Homeland Security and the Secret Service also declined to discuss the topic.

Only the FBI offered a declarative denial.

"We don't have anything like that," a spokesman said.

The Defense Department is trying, though.

In one approach, researchers funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) are inserting computer chips into moth pupae -- the intermediate stage between a caterpillar and a flying adult -- and hatching them into healthy "cyborg moths."

The Hybrid Insect Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems project aims to create literal shutterbugs -- camera-toting insects whose nerves have grown into their internal silicon chip so that wranglers can control their activities. DARPA researchers are also raising cyborg beetles with power for various instruments to be generated by their muscles.

"You might recall that Gandalf the friendly wizard in the recent classic 'Lord of the Rings' used a moth to call in air support," DARPA program manager Amit Lal said at a symposium in August. Today, he said, "this science fiction vision is within the realm of reality."

A DARPA spokeswoman denied a reporter's request to interview Lal or others on the project.

The cyborg insect project has its share of doubters.

"I'll be seriously dead before that program deploys," said vice admiral Joe Dyer, former commander of the Naval Air Systems Command, now at iRobot in Burlington, Mass., which makes household and military robots.

By contrast, fully mechanical micro-fliers are advancing quickly.

Researchers at the California Institute of Technology have made a "microbat ornithopter" that flies freely and fits in the palm of one's hand. A Vanderbilt University team has made a similar device.

With their sail-like wings, neither of those would be mistaken for insects. In July, however, a Harvard University team got a truly fly-like robot airborne, its synthetic wings buzzing at 120 beats per second.

"It showed that we can manufacture the articulated, high-speed structures that you need to re-create the complex wing motions that insects produce," said team leader Robert Wood.

The fly's vanishingly thin materials were machined with lasers, then folded into three-dimensional form "like a micro-origami," he said. Alternating electric fields make the wings flap. The whole thing weighs just 65 milligrams, or a little more than the plastic head of a push pin.

Still, it can fly only while attached to a threadlike tether that supplies power, evidence that significant hurdles remain.

In August, at the International Symposium on Flying Insects and Robots, held in Switzerland, Japanese researchers introduced radio-controlled fliers with four-inch wingspans that resemble hawk moths. Those who watch them fly, its creator wrote in the program, "feel something of 'living souls.' "

Others, taking a tip from the CIA, are making fliers that run on chemical fuels instead of batteries. The "entomopter," in early stages of development at the Georgia Institute of Technology and resembling a toy plane more than a bug, converts liquid fuel into a hot gas, which powers four flapping wings and ancillary equipment.

"You can get more energy out of a drop of gasoline than out of a battery the size of a drop of gasoline," said team leader Robert Michelson.

Even if the technical hurdles are overcome, insect-size fliers will always be risky investments.

"They can get eaten by a bird, they can get caught in a spider web," said Fearing of Berkeley. "No matter how smart you are -- you can put a Pentium in there -- if a bird comes at you at 30 miles per hour there's nothing you can do about it."

Protesters might even nab one with a net -- one of many reasons why Ehrhard, the former Air Force colonel, and other experts said they doubted that the hovering bugs spotted in Washington were spies.

So what was seen by Crane, Alarcon and a handful of others at the D.C. march -- and as far back as 2004, during the Republican National Convention in New York, when one observant but perhaps paranoid peace-march participant described on the Web "a jet-black dragonfly hovering about 10 feet off the ground, precisely in the middle of 7th avenue . . . watching us"?

They probably saw dragonflies, said Jerry Louton, an entomologist at the National Museum of Natural History. Washington is home to some large, spectacularly adorned dragonflies that "can knock your socks off," he said.

At the same time, he added, some details do not make sense. Three people at the D.C. event independently described a row of spheres, the size of small berries, attached along the tails of the big dragonflies -- an accoutrement that Louton could not explain. And all reported seeing at least three maneuvering in unison.

"Dragonflies never fly in a pack," he said.

Mara Verheyden-Hilliard of the Partnership for Civil Justice said her group is investigating witness reports and has filed Freedom of Information Act requests with several federal agencies.

If such devices are being used to spy on political activists, she said, "it would be a significant violation of people's civil rights."

For many roboticists still struggling to get off the ground, however, that concern -- and their technology's potential role -- seems superfluous.

"I don't want people to get paranoid, but what can I say?" Fearing said. "Cellphone cameras are already everywhere. It's not that much different."

Read More...

Ron Paul Questions Federal Reserve Chairmen Ben Bernanke on the Fed's Culpability in Encouraging Reckless Banking and Investment Practices, as Well as Government Largesse; the Fed Underwrites Government’s Military Expenditures (Government Accumulates Debt to Pay for 'Defense')

Ron Paul: The Fed Encourages Never-ending War

July 20, 2012

Death and Taxes - It’s been rather quiet on the Ron Paul front, but the presidential candidate recently questioned Federal Reserve Chairmen Ben Bernanke on monetary policy, one of the Libertarian’s favorite themes.

While Paul’s quest to end the Fed, or to at least increase its transparency, may seem to be a losing battle to many observers, he’s certainly educated the public on the Fed’s culpability in encouraging reckless banking and investment practices, as well as government largesse.

One of the best exchanges between Paul and Bernanke was as follows:

Paul: Under the Constitution, who has the authority to manage monetary policy?

Bernanke: The Congress has the authority and it’s delegated it to the Feder Reserve. That’s a policy decision that you’ve made.

Paul: But they can’t transfer authority. You can’t amend the Constitution by just saying ‘Ee’re gonna create some secret of individuals and banks.” That’s amending the Constitution. You can’t do that! … Which branch of government has the right of oversight [of the Federal Reserve]?

Bernanke: The Congress… We fully accept that, and fully accept the need for transparency and accountability. But it is a well-established fact that an independent central bank will provide better outcomes… There’s no constitutional reason why Congress couldn’t just take over monetary policy. If you want to do that, I guess that’s your right to do it, but I’m advising you that it wouldn’t be very good from an economy policy point of view.

Paul: If it’s allowed to be done in secret, this is the reason why I want to work within the system… Congress out to get a backbone… We have an obligation to defend our currency… If you destroy the value of currency through inflation, you transfer the wealth of the middle class and it gravitates to the very wealthy—the bankers, the government, the politicians, they all love this…

The Federal Reserve is the facilitator… If everybody loves big government, love the Fed: they can finance the wars and all the welfare you want. But it doesn’t work and it eventually ends in a crisis…. I think the very first step is transparency…

Bernanke: All of the actions we took during the crisis—the swaps, all of those things—are fully disclosed. It’s not a question of information, it’s a question of whether or not you want to give the Fed those powers. If you don’t want to, of course, Congress has the right to take them back.

Bernanke is distorting reality here. The Federal Reserve has never been concerned with full, self-imposed disclosure. Any disclosures come about through court orders and congressional initiatives. And his challenge to Paul that “Congress has the right to take [the monetary policy powers] back” illustrates how powerful the system truly is. Bernanke realizes that the system is so entrenched that it will likely never be dismantled. Too much money and power is at stake.

And Bernanke is wrong to claim so affirmatively that the question is simply one of Constitutional power. Monetary policy is a matter of information. If the goings-on were transparent, then the system could be changed. Resistance to that change keeps the Fed’s real-time actions before and during crises secret. It’s only after events have transpired that the Fed discloses its information—when they are forced to, of course.

Despite what one might think of Ron Paul and some of his more conspiratorial impulses, the man must be admired for admonishing the Fed by saying “government keeps spending the money… wars never end.” It cuts straight to the prime dilemma of our time: That we bail out those who make reckless financial decisions, spending money on their mistakes, and operate in a continuous state of warfare. Lift the veil of everyday hallucinatory existence and this is what appears.

Bernanke may seem the unlikely target of Paul’s anti-war rhetoric, but since the Fed underwrites government’s military expenditures (government accumulates debt to pay for “defense”), Paul’s point was more salient than many Americans could possibly imagine.

Americans need to understand the role the Federal Reserve plays in American economic hegemony and war-making abroad. That it simultaneously encourages psychopathic lending and investment practices on Wall Street with its bailouts and America’s bloated empire, which is one of the great causes of American deficits and debt.

“I have over the years obviously been critical about what goes on in monetary policy, but it hasn’t been so much the chairman of the Federal Reserve, whether it was Paul Volcker or Alan Greenspan or the current chairman, it’s always been the system,” Paul said. “I think they have a job that they can’t do because it’s an unmanageable job, it’s a fallacy, it’s a flawed system, and therefore we shouldn’t expect good results, and generally we are not getting results.”

“This system is biased against the middle class and the poor,” added Paul.

One isn’t likely to hear this from a Democrat let alone a Republican, but this is where Ron Paul is different. His personal war against the Fed may seem to be that of a fringe-dwelling true believer, but his campaign has certainly opened more eyes to the corporate-government complex that is destroying America in its lust for power and money.

Next week, the House is set to take up and likely pass Paul’s Federal Reserve Transparency Act to create more transparency in the monetary decisions of the Federal Reserve. A full victory? No, but Paul’s efforts were certainly worth something.

Cell Phone Payments Offer Alternative to Cash; Twitter Co-Founder Jack Dorsey Promotes 'Square'

A number of big and small companies — including eBay’s PayPal unit, Intuit, VeriFone and Square — are creating innovative ways for individuals to avoid cash and checks and settle all debts, public and private, using their cellphones. Several of the companies have developed small credit card scanners that plug into a cellphone and, for a small fee, enable any individual or small business to turn a phone into a credit card processing terminal. PayPal’s cellphone app calls for only a simple bump of two cellphones to transfer money. Apple has submitted a patent application for a cellphone payment system.

There is evidence that paper money is being used less often, according to the Federal Reserve. Though cash payments are difficult to track, the number of noncash transactions in the United States grew from fewer than 250 a person in 1995 to more than 300 in 2006. When debit cards were introduced in the early ’90s, that was the beginning of the slow and gradual decline of paper checks and cash. Still, cash has remained essential in certain instances, like paying back a colleague for lunch, buying fruit at a farmers’ market or buying a beer at a cash-only bar. These new mobile payment technologies could finally change that.

“The problem with cash is that it is tangible, it’s inconvenient, you have to carry around a bunch of bills and you have to continually go to the A.T.M.,” said Jack Dorsey, a Twitter co-founder who is now the co-founder and chief executive of Square, which makes a dime-size device that anyone can plug into the earplug jack of an iPhone or iPad to instantly accept credit card payments. “If we can make cards more convenient and faster, it can replace a lot of the experiences around cash.”

The death of cash has been predicted since the 1970s, when electronic transactions like direct deposit of checks were introduced. But most digital payment experiments, like one in 2006 by Visa, have focused on swiping cellphones, as is popular in countries like Japan, instead of credit cards. Mobile payments have not taken off in the United States because Americans are just as happy to reach into their pockets for a plastic card as for a cellphone.

Instead of replacing credit cards, technologies like Square and GoPayment rely on them. Credit card companies stay in the middle, extracting a fee with each swipe or bump. GoPayment costs $12.95 a month on top of a per-transaction fee of 30 cents plus 1.7 percent to 3.7 percent of the payment, depending on the credit card companies’ rates. Square is free and users pay 15 cents plus 2.75 percent to 3.5 percent of each transaction. It will be available for iPhones and iPod Touches in May and for other phones and laptops later. Exchanging money with friends using PayPal’s iPhone app is free if payers use a bank or PayPal account, and costs 30 cents plus 2.9 percent of the transaction for credit cards.

Though people will use cash less, it is not nearly extinct, but a cashless society could become a reality as the younger generation, accustomed to buying music on iTunes and virtual gifts on Facebook, grows up.

Flashback: Twitter Founder Jack Dorsey Debuts Square Mobile Payment Device in D.C.

June 9, 2010

On Tuesday evening Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey attended a fundraising reception for Missouri Congressional Candidate Tommy Sowers to officially debut his latest invention, Square which currently allows anyone with an i-phone, Android or laptop to send or accept payments for just about anything. Mobile credit card readers are not new.

However what sets Square apart from the competition is:

1. Compact size- About the size of your thumb, or 1.5” long, 1” deep and 3.5” tall
2. Electronic Receipts with Location. After a purchase you immediately get an email receipt for what you bought and where you bought it.
3. Square is free. No additional hardware, applications or monthly service fees.
4. Low transaction cost. Square charges 2.75% + 15¢ for swiped transactions. (Paypal is 2.9% +.30 cents for transactions under $3,000.)

In terms of Jack’s inspiration for Square, (as well as Twitter) I highly recommend watching his June 2nd speech to the 99% Conference. A few highlights:

• “Payments, and the exchange of money is inherently social, it is another form of communication - so why isn’t it designed and treated as such. That was one of the reasons we started Square.”
• The financial crisis created the opening for Square: “The situation allowed us to quickly seek out all the people we needed to talk to, at the banks, at the government, the card brands. Everyone in the financial world was suddenly in survival mode, looking for innovation, looking for new things, looking for new business models.”
• “90% of the country paying with plastic card of some sort, but only 2% of the country can accept payments with those cards. So what if we turn on the other side, what happens and what does that interface look like”
• For Twitter: The @ symbol, ‘RT’ for re-tweets, # for hash tags and even the word ‘tweet’ were developed by the Twitter community, and initially resisted by Twitter.

In terms of the politics of the event, although announcing and presenting Square at last week’s Personal Democracy Forum would have been a larger, bi-partisan audience, when I asked Jack why he chose the Sowers event, his reply was essentially that while the Sowers fundraiser was a partisan event, that Square as a device and Twitter as a platform are available to the same degree to all sides equally. Secondly and more importantly though, he was impressed with the Sower’s campaign utilization of social media tools and that they were the first ones to reach out and ask for his help on the event. Also, being from St. Louis, he has a personal interest in Missouri’s representation. Furthermore, not only does just about every senior staffer on the Sowers campaign maintain and use Twitter accounts, as far as I can recall I have never seen a political email written in Twitter speak that explicitly asks the reader:

Even if you can't make it, can you help make noise about this on twitter? We want all of DC talking about this for weeks to come.

If you could tweet something like: "Please RT: @sowers and @jack at #sqdc TONIGHT, this is not an event to miss!

Flashback: Cell Phone Payments Offer Alternative to Cash

April 28, 2010

New York Times - You win a bet, but the loser does not have enough cash on him to settle it. If he has a credit card, and most people usually do, there is finally a solution. A number of big and small companies — including eBay’s PayPal unit, Intuit, VeriFone and Square — are creating innovative ways for individuals to avoid cash and checks and settle all debts, public and private, using their cellphones.

Several of the companies have developed small credit card scanners that plug into a cellphone and, for a small fee, enable any individual or small business to turn a phone into a credit card processing terminal. PayPal’s cellphone app calls for only a simple bump of two cellphones to transfer money. Apple has submitted a patent application for a cellphone payment system.

Brian Kusler, 40, a software engineer, is already helping dollar bills join Susan B. Anthony coins as collector’s items. After he polished off grilled lamb and zinfandel at a San Francisco restaurant recently, his dining companion paid the bill and asked him for his share. Instead of hunting down an A.T.M., the two bumped their iPhones together, and Mr. Kusler wirelessly transferred his part of the bill, about $100.

Joe Mangrum, a sidewalk artist in Manhattan, with a device attached to his iPhone to scan credit cards and take donations.

“I don’t carry a lot of cash; I don’t think anyone does these days,” Mr. Kusler said. “We go out, and I oftentimes have to remember to pay my friends back when we get home, and I want to be able to just do it right there.”

There is evidence that paper money is being used less often, according to the Federal Reserve. Though cash payments are difficult to track, the number of noncash transactions in the United States grew from fewer than 250 a person in 1995 to more than 300 in 2006. Data on the stock of small-denomination bills and destroyed bills indicates that the use of cash peaked in the mid-1990s and has been declining since, two economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland found.

“When debit cards were introduced in the early ’90s, that was the beginning of the slow and gradual decline of paper checks and cash,” said Red Gillen, a senior analyst at Celent, a research and consulting firm on technology and financial services, based in Boston.

Still, cash has remained essential in certain instances, like paying back a colleague for lunch, buying fruit at a farmers’ market or buying a beer at a cash-only bar. These new mobile payment technologies could finally change that.

“The problem with cash is that it is tangible, it’s inconvenient, you have to carry around a bunch of bills and you have to continually go to the A.T.M.,” said Jack Dorsey, a Twitter co-founder who is now the co-founder and chief executive of Square, which makes a dime-size device that anyone can plug into the earplug jack of an iPhone or iPad to instantly accept credit card payments. “If we can make cards more convenient and faster, it can replace a lot of the experiences around cash.”

Light wallets are not a problem for Joe Mangrum, a sidewalk sand painter in New York, who has been using Square to take donations from passers-by and sell copies of his book. Sales have increased sharply since he started accepting credit cards on his iPhone, he said.

“I’ve made the sale as opposed to twiddling my thumbs because they don’t have the cash.”

The new services could have the biggest impact on the smallest businesses, like farm stands or house cleaners, that accept only cash and checks because they do not have stores to house credit card terminals and do not want to enter into complicated, long-term relationships with credit card companies.

Rachel Ancliffe, a clothing designer in Portland, Ore., sells her dresses and blouses at sample sales and from her home, and uses Intuit GoPayment to process credit card payments.

“You can’t accept checks because then you’re just kissing your product goodbye” because of fraud and bounced checks, Ms. Ancliffe said. “I sell 10 times more because I take credit cards.”

Fraud protection offered by the credit card companies is the same as when the card is used at a cash register. Some of the new companies say security against fraud might even be improved because they provide e-mail receipts, and those from Square include photos and a map of where the transactions were made.

The death of cash has been predicted since the 1970s, when electronic transactions like direct deposit of checks were introduced. But most digital payment experiments, like one in 2006 by Visa, have focused on swiping cellphones, as is popular in countries like Japan, instead of credit cards. Mobile payments have not taken off in the United States because Americans are just as happy to reach into their pockets for a plastic card as for a cellphone.

Instead of replacing credit cards, technologies like Square and GoPayment rely on them. Credit card companies stay in the middle, extracting a fee with each swipe or bump.

GoPayment costs $12.95 a month on top of a per-transaction fee of 30 cents plus 1.7 percent to 3.7 percent of the payment, depending on the credit card companies’ rates. Square is free and users pay 15 cents plus 2.75 percent to 3.5 percent of each transaction. It will be available for iPhones and iPod Touches in May and for other phones and laptops later.

Exchanging money with friends using PayPal’s iPhone app is free if payers use a bank or PayPal account, and costs 30 cents plus 2.9 percent of the transaction for credit cards.

Though people will use cash less, it is not nearly extinct, said Wayne Abernathy, executive vice president for financial institutions policy at the American Bankers Association.

“Historically, we have seen more failed innovations in payments than we’ve seen successful ones, because you have to convince people that it’s secure, more efficient and reliable,” Mr. Abernathy said.

But a cashless society could become a reality as the younger generation, accustomed to buying music on iTunes and virtual gifts on Facebook, grows up.

“Older people still tend to like to use cash or checks,” Mr. Abernathy said. “Younger people don’t want to touch a piece of paper. They want to do it all electronically.”

Flashback: Sheriffs Acknowledge the Federal Government's Assault Against the People

Saying No: Sheriffs Fed Up with Worsening Federal Interference, Bureaucracy

November 20, 2011

Natural News - Adding a new wrinkle to the phrase, “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not taking it anymore,” several California sheriffs, as well as one from Oregon, say they aren’t cow-towing to the federal leviathan anymore.

Last month, at the Yreka fairgrounds in northern California, the sheriffs – who, of course, are elected by the people – gathered with a large group to discuss what to do about Big Brother and his consistent meddling in state and local affairs.

Speaking of the federal bureaucracy, Plumas County (California) Sheriff Greg Hagwood declared,

“A giant has been awakened, and they didn’t count on that.”

One by one the sheriffs recounted their experiences with an ever-encroaching federal government, whether from the aspect of emergency management, the foisting upon local jurisdictions of federal mandates, or the passage of federal statutes which many now feel run roughshod over state and local governments, inhibiting their ability to mold their own laws and policies around the needs of their respective populations.

“I had spent a good part of my life enforcing the penal code, but not understanding my oath of office,” Sheriff Dean Wilson of Del Norte (Sacramento) County told the group.

“I was ignorant and naive, but now I know of the assault against our people by the federal government,” he said, receiving some of the loudest and longest applause of the gathering.

Event host Sheriff John Lopey of Siskiyou (California) County said one of his biggest pet peeves was the federal government’s ever-increasing environmental regulations.

“I have told federal and state officials over and over that, yes, we want to preserve the environment, but you care more about the fish, frogs, trees and birds than you do about the human race. When will you start to balance your decisions to the needs of the people? We are right now in a fight for our survival,” he said.

No one makes the case better that the county sheriff is the real supreme law of the land than former Arizona sheriff Richard Mack. Speaking at the event, Mack says the word is beginning to get around.

“It’s becoming a national movement now,” Mack said, noting he planned to announce in January a national education movement that he anticipates will draw about 200 sheriffs from around the country.

“The county sheriff is the last line of defense guarding our people’s liberty,” he said.