Are Florida legislators guilty of willful and wanton negligence resulting in death?
James Madison (1751–1836) was a Virginia delegate to the Constitutional Convention who later became the fourth president of the United States. Writing in The Poverty of American Politics, Mark Roelofs said Madison believed the Founding Fathers faced the question of developing a government for humans, who are "prone absolutely to selfishness, competition and, no matter how disguised, a war of all against all." In other words, Madison saw government as an arrangement between the members of society, who are selfish and always competing against each other.
John Adams defined a constitutional republic as "a government of laws, and not of men."[1] Constitutional republics are a deliberate attempt to diminish the perceived threat of majoritarianism, thereby protecting dissenting individuals and minority groups from the "tyranny of the majority" by placing checks on the power of the majority of the population.[2] The power of the majority of the people is checked by limiting that power to electing representatives who are required to legislate with limits of overarching constitutional law which a simple majority cannot modify.
Therefor we can only conclude that their continued (The Florida legislature) resistance to doing the "right thing" is based on their preference to continue doing the "wrong thing". And in our minds that means they are engaging in wanton and willing negligence leading to the death of innocent individuals are culpable and should be held accountable to answer the charges. rc
It is suspicion-ed that our esteemed legislators legislators may have forgotten a few things. Most importantly that the rights of the "Individual" always trumps, not just the rights of the "Majority," but also the cash of "Corporations". That in so doing they have denied a major premise of the "Declaration of Independence" that
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
Note the words, "the consent of the governed" in reference to "all men." We are inclined to believe that reference was not meant to be superseded by the consent of the corporation, the lobbyist or the greedy.
If you read our previous post then you know that we, and a number of other "we the people," the first words of the U.S. Constitution, have wondered why it is that Florida legislators have abdicated their primary duty, to secure our "unalienable rights", foremost among them our right to live!
In fact our contention would be that they have abandoned true representation of the "citizens" of Florida to assist Corporations in enriching corporations at the expense of our lives. And in doing so are complicit in senseless death of many Floridians. We further contend that this condition is being repeated in state after state in this Republic of America.
A prime example (though there are many) where this is easily evidenced is the legislatures refusal to pass laws that would that would reduce the carnage on our highways (a primary cause of death in the state) and embrace laws that will only insure the deaths will increase. The question then becomes, is the Florida legislature complicit in Manslaughter and how far would one have to go to make a case for accomplice to murder.
Two illustrative examples of failing state policies that result in death and the legislatures refusal to amend them:
Red light Cameras. Despite current Florida law, municipalities all over the state have been adopting "red light" ordinance's. Even though other than enriching the coffers of the municipality and by extension and the state and insurance company's they cause crashes an fatalities.
From a study done by the University of South Florida:
Tampa, FL (March 11, 2008) -- Rather than improving motorist safety, red-light cameras significantly increase crashes and are a ticket to higher auto insurance premiums, researchers at the University of South Florida College of Public Health conclude. The effective remedy to red-light running uses engineering solutions to improve intersection safety, which is particularly important to Florida’s elderly drivers, the researchers recommend.The report was published this month in the Florida Public Health Review, the online journal of the college and the Florida Public Health Association.
"The rigorous studies clearly show red-light cameras don’t work,” said lead author Barbara Langland-Orban, professor and chair of health policy and management at the USF College of Public Health.“Instead, they increase crashes and injuries as drivers attempt to abruptly stop at camera intersections. If used in Florida, cameras could potentially create even worse outcomes due to the state’s high percent of elderly who are more likely to be injured or killed when a crash occurs.”
Red-light cameras photograph violators who are then sent tickets in the mail. Hillsborough County Commissioners unanimously agreed earlier this month to install the cameras at several major intersections in the county. The devices could be adopted by more cities and counties if Florida legislators pave the way by changing a state law this spring.
Some studies that conclude cameras reduced crashes or injuries contained major “research design flaws,” such as incomplete data or inadequate analyses, and were conducted by researchers with links to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The IIHS, funded by automobile insurance companies, is the leading advocate for red-light cameras. Insurers can profit from red-light cameras, since their revenues will increase when higher premiums are charged due to the crash and citation increase, the researchers say.This is not news to us. We have reported on it before. The insurance industry is ruled by math and probabilities in order to profit. Profit they do or they would be out of business. Consider this from the LA TIMES :
Langland-Orban said the findings have been known for some time. She cites a 2001 paper by the Office of the Majority Leader, U.S. House of Representatives, reporting that red-light cameras are “a hidden tax levied on motorists.” The report concluded cameras are associated with increased crashes, the timings at yellow lights are often set too short to increase tickets for red-light running, and most research concluding cameras are effective was conducted by one researcher from the IIHS. Since then, studies independent of the automobile insurance industry continue to find cameras are associated with large increases in crashes.
The companies that provide Americans with their homeowners and auto insurance made a record $44.8-billion profit last year even after accounting for the claims of policyholders wiped out by Hurricane Katrina and the other big storms of 2005, according to the firms' filings with state regulators.AND:
In fact, the property casualty insurance industry, which provides homeowners and auto coverage, made a considerable sum despite paying tens of billions of dollars to policyholders as a result of Katrina, which is widely described as the largest insured disaster in U.S. history, and a string of other storms.
Besides boosting profits, the industry raised its surplus by more than 7% to nearly $427 billion, according to an analysis of company filings by the National Assn. of Insurance Commissioners, which represents regulators from the 50 states. The surplus is intended to provide a financial cushion in times of high claims.
The industry covered virtually all of its claims and expenses with premiums earned during the year rather than with surplus funds, according to the organization's analysis. The ratio of claims and expenses to premiums was among the lowest in three decades.
Our answer would be simple. Unless they can get government approved rate hikes and/or the government to insurance pools to cover what they do not choose to cover, they move out. Good business decisions for them. Terrible for you when the government transfers the insurance companies risk of loss to you.
The question is: How, in a year that produced an estimated $56.8 billion in disaster losses, nearly twice the previous record and more than twice what insurers paid after the Sept. 11 attacks, is this possible?
Then what about Cell phone use while driving and other driver distractions? Study after study has shown that even hands free use of cell phones increases chance of being in a crash by x's4. We have posted on this issue and sent the legislators the information on this issue so many times over the years, as have others, we have to wonder why this issue is consistently roadblocked at the legislative level despite it's increasing role as a cause of death? Approximately 9 cell phone bills have been introduced in the the Florida legislature this year. Only one has a hands free ban, and that only in school zones? Why?
Is it because the majority of citizens do not support cell phone legislation. If so then the legislature has abdicated it's constitutional role to protect the rights of the "minority" who have the right to use public highways without becoming a target or a statistic.
Or is it because the telecommunications makes a very large sum off money of minutes used while driving. Which as technology advances becomes just a part of the problem. As one Senator's aide told me;
Money from the telecommunications companies is flowing like water around here (the capital)!But wait, didn't the Florida legislature pass a law that restricts accepting money from lobbyists. And you really believed they would cut off their supply of funds when "term limits" apply? See:
Special interests funnel $6 million to Florida lawmakers dated March 14, after the tighter lobbying restrictions! (a must read)
TALLAHASSEE — In the latest election cycle, dozens of Florida legislators raked in $6 million in special-interest campaign money and spent a good deal of it on themselves for meals, rental cars, plane trips and hotels.
Some lawmakers are feeding at the trough of contributors, enjoying expensive dinners at upscale restaurants with donors' money at a time when one of every 10 Floridians is on food stamps. Others are churning cash from one political committee to another, using it to finance direct contributions and attack ads for other candidates, thereby strengthening their own clout in a virtually untraceable shell game.
All of this is legal. Florida law bans legislators from accepting so much as a cup of coffee from a lobbyist, and individual campaign contributions are limited to $500.
But there is no limit on the amount of cash lawmakers can collect from all manner of special interests in separate fundraising committees the lawmakers create to advance broadly defined public purposes, such as getting one another re-elected.
And look who has learned to profit most through the loopholes. Ou old friend "lopey Lopez" who wanted to seize motorcycles through the "wheelie bill" (HB 167) as part of his personal vendetta against sport bikers.
"If I do it over coffee, I have to pay for my own coffee, but I can accept a $10,000 check,'' said Sen. Dave Aronberg, a Democrat from Greenacres who has used political committees to recruit candidates and steer money to several Democratic legislative campaigns.
The committees operate under noble-sounding names such as Senate President Jeff Atwater's "Preserve the American Dream," Sen. Mike Fasano's "Floridians for Principled Government" and Sen. Dan Gelber's "A Better Way for Florida."
The one controlled by Haridopolos, the Committee for Florida's Fiscal Future, which is also connected with Rep. Carlos Lopez-Cantera, R-Miami, spent the most on food in the past two years, $12,495. The biggest dinner tab, for $530, was at Ruth's Chris Steak House in Coral Gables.And who is it throwing all that cash around????
The state's lobbyist registration office reported that companies, governments and industry groups spent $111million to lobby the Legislature in 2007 — and $116million in 2008.
Florida lobbyists made roughly the same amount in 2006. But pinpointing exactly how much was spent is impossible. By law, the figures are mostly reported in ranges. So if a contract is $10,000 to $19,999, then $15,000 is reported.
The report is also incomplete because, under state law, only contracted lobbyist fees are reported. Organizations that employ inhouse lobbyists do not have to report fees.
The Times settled on the $200-million number by drawing from the two ways the data is collected: The average compensation reported by lobbying firms ($208-million) and the average amount those same firms reported per client ($187-million).
In Florida as pointed out above, it's hard to determine who spends how much on what due to reporting procedures and front groups. In othermay in fact have made it easier to corrupt them. We do know that in 2007 the Insureance Industry spent 11 million in Florida. In other words the law passed to insure that politicians are not corrupted
Their committee also used donations to buy flowers and gasoline, and to pay cell phone bills, and Haridopolos reimbursed himself for thousands of dollars in expenses.
TALLAHASSEE - The insurance industry has long been one of the most generous campaign contributors in Florida politics, spreading its largesse among Republicans and Democrats alike. In the last election alone it doled out more than $11-million.and
It's the kind of generosity that gets positive results for a multi-billion dollar industry.
"Of course they have influence and I'm very worried about that," said state Sen. Nancy Argenziano, R-Dunnellon, who did not face re-election last year but has received insurance money in the past. "They don't give millions to campaigns to be kicked to the curb."And most Ironically of all :
Insurance Industry Behind Push for Florida Red Light Camerasand where does the wireless industry stand? Apparently behind the times as indicated by these comments with on the National Safety Councils website and apparently they have been able to buy, excuse me, educate the Florida legislators into regressive thinking despite the facts as evidenced by their lack of action:
Potential for millions in profit drives insurance to bankroll Florida legislation to authorize red light cameras.
The graduate of an insurance industry "boot camp" is behind efforts to legalize the use of red light cameras in Florida. State Representative Ron Reagan (R-Bradenton) twice attended the Insurance Campaign Institute, a special program designed to place insurance agents in positions of political power that is bankrolled by twenty insurance companies.
"Essentially a political boot camp, the comprehensive political training program covers all facets of the campaign trail, from organization to grassroots strategies, fundraising, direct mail, advertising, media relations, public speaking, debate preparation, campaign research, and use of insurance community strength," the Independent Insurance Agents of America explained in a 2001 press release.
Reagan credits his 2002 Florida House victory to the Insurance Campaign Institute. To repay his industry backers, Reagan introduced the Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act, a measure giving cities the green light to install red light cameras. Although the bill is portrayed as a response to the tragic death of a constituent in 2003, Reagan's legislation is designed to create millions in new revenue for the insurance industry.
In Arizona, California, Colorado and Illinois certain types of photo tickets carry license points. Insurance companies in turn raise the annual rates of drivers who have these points on their license. In effect, the photo tickets generate free money because the extra premium is charged without the insurance company providing any additional services in return. Nothing in Florida law prevents insurance companies from raising the rates on the recipients of photo tickets in the dozens of unauthorized red light camera programs that have recently popped up around the state.
Reagan, 54, must give up his state House seat at the end of the next session due to term limits. Reagan has made passage of the Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act a top priority for his last term in office.
Posted Feb 18, 2009 :Joe Farren, a spokesman for CTIA-The Wireless Association, which is a trade group that represents the wireless industry, says the Association agrees that text messaging while driving is a deadly mistake, and they would not oppose any law making such activity illegal.Of course they won't oppose the text messaging bill as long as the holy grail of cell phone use while driving remains intact. Our legislators are not dumb enough not to understand this misdirection. After all they have been smart enough to devise ways to keep the money flowing. Therefor we can only conclude that their continued resistance to doing the "right thing" is based on their preference to continue doing the "wrong thing". And in our minds that means they are engaging in wanton and willing negligence leading to the death of innocent individuals are culpable and should be held accountable to answer the charges.
According to the Association, anyone texting while driving is already breaking the law by driving in a careless or reckless manner.
Sprint Nextel Corp. is not opposed to this bill and is not planning on lobbying in Tallahassee. The larger problem is driver education, said the public affairs manager for the company, John Taylor. He added that the legislation is seeking to change driver behavior.
Verizon did not specifically address the bill, but spokesman Chuck Hamby said the company has a history of supporting hands-free driving legislation. "We support keeping people from text messaging while driving ... it is clearly not safe," Hamby said.
Mark Jamison, director of the Public Utility Research Center at UF, said the bill's language sounds reasonable. He hopes the bill will be adaptable enough to allow new technology to evolve, such as verbal reading of text messages by a cell phone or other related device.
Following the money with the telecommunications and wireless industries is a bit more difficult as
Evidenced in these links:
http://www.commonblog.com/
and down load the pdf entitled: Wolves in Sheep's Clothing: Telecom Industry Front Groups and Astroturf
Or check out:
SBC is No. 1 in both lobbying and contributions
This, we are not inclined to believe, that these industries are spending this kind of money to improve the quality of our lives. This we believe, they are spending this kind of money to put our lives at risk!By John DunbarWASHINGTON, September 29, 2005 — Telecommunications companies spent $60.3 million* on political contributions over six years and a minimum of $83.4 million* on lobbying over two years in an attempt to curry favor with elected officials in the states, according to a new Center for Public Integrity analysis.................
Project Manager, Well Connected
So where does that leave good, honest and effective legislation aimed towards reducing the carnage on the killing fields referred as "Florida's highways"? Well to date, meaningless and/or dead.
See if you don't have the money, then like Britain, you need to have a very large number of motorcyclists and others willing to hit the streets and take action. It would appear we have neither.
And in Tallahassee money not only buys lives, it buys death!!!!
Other posts relating to Red like cameras can be found here.
Other posts on cell phones can be found here.
Other posts on Representative Lopez-Cantera are here.
Posts on lobbyists can be found here.
Posts on the Florida legislature can be found here
Ride Free while you still canAdd to Technorati Favorites
The dishonest games they play at the capital, thoughts on Fridays Criminal Justice Committee meeting and SB 968
It's an often strange game the folk at the Florida capital play. Kind of like chess w/ no rules. Or rules that can be changed at a moments notice. Where no promises will be given in writing because few promises will be kept and the public will never know who is doing what as they all cover theirs and each others asses.However as an entertaining educational experience, attending these committee meetings is often as entertaining and fantasy filled as say, going to see the "Matrix" for the first time. And then when ya watch it again you always see something you didn't catch the first time.
Motorcycle/Biker issues and those that advocate for them are obviously not high on anybody's list. Lord knows how many years of attempting to get stiffer penalty laws passed for those who would negligently seriously injure and/or Kill Bikers have amounted to pissing in the wind. Or at least getting pissed on by which ever lobbyists are running it now days. Even when
you advocate that the stiffer penalties be applicable to bicyclist and pedestrian victims to insure that all are protected from the cell phone yacking, burrito munching, Cadillac Escalades out on the huntAdd to Technorati Favorites.
When the case becomes, that not only is it bikers that they do not care to insure are treated as targets, but they disregard bicyclists, pedestrians and everybody else. Do not get me wrong. There is enough hot air lip service paid to these issues as to put a crack whore out of business. Substantive addressment of the issues are avoided if not feared however.
So the question arises, whose ass is it that they are trying to protect? And if they (we were informed that if any jail time or license revocations were in this bill it would be immediately killed) are unable to see the connection as to how their own loved ones are in as much danger as the rest of us, just what is it that is blinding them?
Since we can not get a honesty from the ones that are supposed to give it,
(For instance at one committee meeting a particular Senator promised that he would make changes to the bill we requested for the next meeting. He did give a caveat as to why he may not be able to do so. We then receive word from this senators office prior to the next committee meeting that there is not time left to make bill changes. Then we get in the committee meeting and not only is he not there, but bills are being late filed and amended left and right??? Hello, were we lied too?
Not only are bills being late filed and amended left and right but they are being done, not by the legislators themselves, but by there "aides". Just who is running the insane asylum???)
we can only guess.
One of the reasons this "we" does not spend a lot of time running from legislator to legislator is because:
A. This "we" can't afford it, and
B. There is no accountability for what a legislator says that is not on record.
C. It is the committee meetings where the deed is done. Discounting the backroom deals.
I say that, because when you get before the committee it becomes readily apparent that a number of the members have little knowledge of the subject matter before them. Almost proportionate to those who either have little knowledge of, or total disdain for, the U.S. Constitution. But then that's a whole other post.
So again we are left guessing, what is their motivation, as it is obviously not to serve the rank and file citizens of the state, except when to do so might insure their re-election.
So lets see why is it that politicians resist "crash reducing" tactics and embrace "crash reducing" tactics? Could this be a clue as reported by the University of South Florida?
significantly increase crashes and are a ticket to higher auto insurance premiums, researchers at the University of South Florida College of Public Health conclude.Which we will address in the next post. But for our purpose here, this is a disturbing clue as to why politicians resist life saving policies. Insurance companies actually profit from crashes. And who has a major lobbying presence at the Capital? Yepper?
It has nothing to do with right or wrong and everything to do with the cash that floats around the capital. You can track the puke that is spewed in a committee meeting as truth. Cash is a bit more difficult to track.
So I listened as a Senator advised us, we need to play the game til the last minute. And will take this words into consideration.
I hope that the committee will take my last words, as they were ready to shut me down,
In the old days we did have to worry about people running us over because we had ways to deal with it. It may be time to return to the old ways.under consideration!Add to Technorati Favorites
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)