I got this e-mail from a member of congress who I must have contacted at some point because I'm on his mailing list. Anyway, I think the point that he makes is valid. By the own words of the director of the FBI, if the CIA were torturing prisoners, the FBI would have a responsibility to investigate, but they didn't. Congressman Wexler pressured him to answer why and he evaded it.

Here's the email:

Could we get a little accountability over here?! Please?

Four people who had flown to DC to share their stories of credit woe with the congress members who are involved in the credit card bill of rights were deflected by a mandate by the committee that they must release their full financial history to the public (not just to the people involved in the committee, but the PUBLIC) before they could testify.

I'm not sure how members of congress could agree to such a move ("here congressman, here's a bag of money")… oh wait, now I think I know.

Congress sticks their noses into a lot of things they shouldn't and not where they should. They are corrupt, inept, and won't do much to protect Americans unless it will make a positive affect on their careers or bank accounts.

Now they're looking at cyberbullying and it's hard to say if that's a good thing or not. Given their history, chances are that it's not.

According to their annual report to congress, the Federal Trade Commission recieved over 69,000 complaints that debt collectors were violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the law that prevents them from harassing you or using dirty tactics to try and get you to pay a debt). In response, the FTC filed against 3 debt collectors.

Thanks FTC!

Well good.

Let's hear it for the bloggers!

Over 10 Million e-mails were deleted during historically important time periods (also periods where corruption and incompetence have been alleged). How convenient that they're "missing".

Either way, count another law broken by the Bush administration.

(H/T to Digg.com for the link)

Finally! Some guts!

Senator Chris Dodd will block the FISA renewal bill as long as it grants retroactive immunity for their involvement in the illegal spying. Of course, the FISA bill should have been blocked anyway. Not that I read it, but if Bush agreed with it, then it definitely didn't go far enough.

Now that Congress has officially started to investigate the role of major telcom companies in illegal spying, the question is, "will anything finally come of it?"

At this stage, they've only sent letters asking about their involvement and whether they knowingly broke the law under the promise of protection from litigation from the executive branch. If they actually answer truthfully, things should get interesting.

From the Consumerist:

Early Termination Fees: FCC regulations would require companies to prorate ETFs, with the penalty for escaping a 2-year contract cut in half at the end of the first year.
Service Maps: Cellphone companies would be required to provide detailed maps showing call quality down to the street level. The maps would be augmented by data on dropped calls and coverage gaps collected and publicized by the FCC.
Fee Disclosure: Overage charges would be displayed separately from taxes, and companies would be prohibited from levying any fees, apart from the basic service charge, not expressly authorized by federal, state, or local regulation.
Contract Disclosure: Depriving us of a source of many posts, companies would be prohibited from extending contracts without "point-of-sale notification," and customers would have 30 days to cancel any contract, new or extended. Any contract changes would need to be sent to consumers in writing, and could not take affect for 30 days.
Unlocked Phones: The bill would give the FCC a homework assignment: a single-spaced report to Congress on the harmful and anti-competitive practice of locking handsets.
Military Exemptions: Companies would be required to release military members awaiting deployment from their contracts.

Wow. I can't remember the last time I saw a consumer friendly bill that didn't have some horrible drawback attached. No custom fees? Prorated early termination fees? Street level service maps! So very cool… Let's hope for the best.

So he's finally gone. He didn't get prosecuted yet, but will he? That's the question.

Gonzales's resignation is the latest in a series of high-level departures that has reshaped the end of Bush's second term. Karl Rove, another of Bush's close circle of aides from Texas, stepped down two weeks ago.

On this, all I have to say is that the rats are leaving… hopefully that means we'll see a sinking ship soon.

Now that's justice! Bush avoids the courts with his illegal program, but he's eventually forced to follow the law. Even after convincing the brain dead members of congress to pass a law FURTHER expanding his powers in this area, the FISA court slaps him upside the head by ordering him to release information to the ACLU.

I wonder if he'll just ignore the order as he's done with the Congressional subpoenas?

I've been holding back on covernig this because it's just so damned depressing. But the story is that Bush managed to shove a "FISA modernization" bill down congress's throats and the witless saps passed it. Understandibly, this has a lot of privacy and consumer advocates in a tizzy.

I've heard some people say that this could legalize the illegal spying program. My question is, how many times do people have to openly agree that the program is and has been illegal before someone puts Bush in jail for this? So it's (allegedly) legal now, but "Sure I was speeding, but I'm going the speed limit NOW officer" has never been a defense.

This is really bad. Attempting to rob a store, I understand, but attempting Copyright Infringement? What if you plan to use someone's copyrighted work in a demonstration thinking that's covered under fair use and order some posters, but the shop reports you for "attempted copyright infringement" and has you thrown in jail.

Maybe it doesn't really work this way and someone who's read the bill in detail can add more data, but it seems to me that it would be too easy to qualify as an "attempted copyright infringer".

Because of the new presidential order allowing for the freeze of assets of anyone that "interferes with Iraq policies", some people are getting nervous and even predicting a police state.

Most importantly, here's a bit of logic I didn't have the political black heart to think of myself:

Roberts said that because of Bush's unpopularity, the Republicans face a total wipeout in 2008, and this may be why "the Democrats have not brought a halt to Bush's follies or the war, because they expect his unpopular policies to provide them with a landslide victory in next year's election."

That would explain a lot. And this one too:

"Americans think their danger is terrorists," said Roberts. "They don't understand the terrorists cannot take away habeas corpus, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution. … The terrorists are not anything like the threat that we face to the Bill of Rights and the Constitution from our own government in the name of fighting terrorism. Americans just aren't able to perceive that."

Wow. This guy really says it straight. Remember kids, your real enemy isn't the faceless terrorist, it's the big eared guy in the big white house.

(H/T to Digg.com for the link)

Public Citizen with it's ever-watchful eye on congress, brings us news of a bill to try and kill mandatory arbitration in clauses in employment, consumer, franchise, and civil disputes. Mandatory arbitration is used to preemptively prevent you from ever suing the company by forcing you to agree to let a "nuetral" third party decide and and all disputes between you and them.

Being that it completely prevents you from utilizing the court system for redress of wrongs, I'd say that this bill is a pretty good thing.

However, as the data shows, CAN-SPAM hasn't changed the United States' rank as the number one producer of spam e-mail. Despite a few high-profile arrests, CAN-SPAM is not getting the job done, much to the surprise of no one.

No kidding. This is what happens when Congress listens to businesses and lobbyists instead of people and people organizations.

The number one issue with the CAN-SPAM act is common in bad federal laws: it preempts stronger state laws which makes the federal law a maximum instead of providing a minimum bar of protection. Now that the act has been proven by time to be completely worthless, I wonder what congress will do.

Actually, no I don't, I think I know exactly what they'll do.

This shouldn't surprise anyone. Hopefully, this will go to a full showdown between him and congress. But considering any kind of proceedings to force the information from him will take longer than he has in office, chances are that it may not mean much.

I wonder what kind of repercussions there are for someone who has been proven to abuse the office after the fact?

President Bush has asserted that he is not necessarily bound by the bills he signs into law, and yesterday a congressional study found multiple examples in which the administration has not complied with the requirements of the new statutes.

Which paraphrased means he broke the law again.

Question: Is it just me or is something really wrong here? What is it that I don't understand about this equation? He breaks the law, he get's put in jail. That obviously hasn't happened so what's wrong? Why won't congress or the media actually say it like it is? Why do they dance around it?

Is it cowardice? Is it impotence? Is it pure politics? Why is a president like the one we have now allowed to not only stay out of prison, but to keep his job as the leader of our country?

(H/T to Privacy.org for the link)

According to Computer World, we could be getting some strong privacy protections similar to what the European Union has now.

From the EU's privacy directive:

Only the minimum personal data needed should be collected, and it should be retained for the minimum time necessary.

…

The subject has the right to know whom is keeping and accessing their personal data, and the right to examine the data and to have the data removed or changed.

Those would go a long way towards ending data rape issues.

The main point of the author is that self-regulation doesn't work which I agree with whole-heartedly.

(H/T to Slashdot for the link)

Today, I read an article that takes a look at the members of congress who are speaking loudly about copyright issues and noticing that most of them have had fairly significant campaign contributions from the RIAA and the MPAA (both well know organizations who attack individuals for alleged copyright infringement and supporters of the much hated DRM technology).

(H/T to Digg.com for the link)