Florida Legislators want more time to screw you over

As if one day in the halls of the Florida Capital is not enough time to cause irreparable damage to the citizens of the state of Florida, it seems that the legislators want loner term limits.   Whatttttttt????????????????????????

My God, they can not make enough money in the time they are there?

Just how much time do they need to Rape, Pillage and Plunder the citizens of the state?

Regardless of party, because once they are elected there is but one party, the party of "let me turn my head while you put money in my pocket".

Apparently they think they may be successful this time because they are now including
City and county electees also????????

Remember now, these lower level bureaucrats are the ones that have been enacting red light camera laws all around the state in violation of state law.  These are the jerk offs who place unconstitutional language in these local ordinances wanting to seize your personal property should you fail to pay for a ticket the state says you are not suppose to get in the first place (of course that will change this year if the state "rulers" succumb to the same "possible" green backs the "local RULERS" have been bending over for) ?

circa 2005

Bureaucracy in Russia

Russian officials are multiplying at a record-breaking rate. According to the Federal Service of State Statistics data, over the last year [2005] alone, the legion of bureaucrats grew by nearly 150,000, that is by over 10 per cent.
Almost 1.5m people work in the federal bodies of the executive branch of power. This means there is one official per 100 Russians. This is an absolute record for Russia.
The rate at which the Federal Service for Veterinary and Plant Control has been expanding is simply fantastic - the number of its employees increased by 17,000 per cent over the year, from 116 people to 20,000. Source: Centre TV, Moscow, in Russian 0745 gmt 12 Apr 06

Circa
November 18, 2009
Bennett will try again for longer term limits

Sen. Mike Bennett will try again this legislative session to get a bill through that allows lawmakers to serve longer -- but this time he wants to target local elected officials, too.

SB 598 would allow state senators to serve two 6-year terms, and House reps to serve 3 four-year terms. City and county electees also would get up to 12 years in office.

He thinks it has a better shot at passing this year since he is addressing all elected officials, not just the Legislature.

"And I think it'll cut down on the campaigning and fundraising," said Bennett, who is termed out in 2012. "Maybe people will actually stay and do their jobs instead of running home and everywhere for money as soon as they're elected."
Posted by Shannon Colavecchio at 06:50:25 PM on November 18, 2009
in Elections , Florida Senate | Permalink


"And I think it'll cut down on the campaigning and fundraising," said Bennett, who is termed out in 2012. "Maybe people will actually stay and do their jobs instead of running home and everywhere for money as soon as they're elected."
I welcome all who are reading the above statement by  Senator Bennett to join me in a group puke.

The scary thing is however, I suspect there are a large number of Floridians that either,

A. Could care less, or
B. Believe him.Add to Technorati Favorites

Florida legislators, Stupid or on the take

This is a test


THIS PICTURE DEPICTS,

A. The leader of a Mexican Marijuana drug cartel counting his illegally gained profits from the  sale of a drug that does not kill anybody.

B. A Florida legislator counting his illegally gained profits taken from the wireless industry to look the other way while cell phones continue to kill our loved ones on the killing fields we refer to as Florida's highways.


If you chose "B" we would have to guess you are correct.  We say guess because we can not without evidence accuse our legislators of taking money from the telecommunications industry to be stupid. Despite the fact that last session a Senators aide told us (in the Senators office) that wireless dollars were flooding the capital.

We can however state unequivocally that if the states legislators are not on the take and still supporting bills that ban everything having to do with a cellphone except talking on one, despite the evidence that it is the "conversation" that is the danger then they are in fact stupid.

Maybe stupid is to strong a word. Maybe we should give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe instead of stupid they are just gutless, selfish, individuals afraid of doing the right thing due to their desire to:

A. Get re-elected
B. Refrain from hanging up and driving themselves.

After all, the evidence is no longer "theory" or "suspicion" or "maybe's".  The evidence, that every politician in the state of Florida has to be aware of unless they have had their head up their collective asses (which we must assume is the case), is that driving while talking on a cell phone is equal to driving while at DUI level of impairment. Which is almost as dangerous as driving while impaired by a Florida legislators brain.

Now of course, far be it from us to be politically incorrect at the expense of alienating legislators that could be of help in saving lives on Florida's highways.  However judging from the past years of ineptitude, deal making, loop hole creating, posturing, nauseating disregard for the lives of their constituents we see no need to treat them any different than what they are, Scum Bags!

Who of course will be falling all over themselves crying and deal making to get a bill passed banning cell phone conversations only after one of their own children are killed by one of Florida's many drivers, who also aware of the evidence against cell phone conversations while driving, think they are above the science and that they have a right to use their 3000 pound vehicle to maim and kill anybody that gets in their way if they are interfered with discussing Oprah's recent decision to end her show.

And as much as I would like to put the total blame on these poor excuses of humanity that slither through out the halls of the legislature on there bellies like crack whores trying to suck up another dollar bill before their term limits are up, I can't.

The blame of course lies on us, who would place our own selfish interest over the lives of others!

Click here, to find the evidence that says the legislators are full of............Add to Technorati Favorites




 

FLorida HB 333 ANother worthless cell phone bill

HB 333 - Use of Cellular Telephones
GENERAL BILL by Garcia
Use of Cellular Telephones: Prohibits use of cellular telephone while operating motor vehicle except when using headset or hands-free device; provides exemptions; provides penalty; provides for enforcement only as secondary offense.
Effective Date: July 1, 2010
Last Event: Now in Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee on Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM
Referred Committees and Committee Actions:
- Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
- Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy Committee
- Economic Development & Community Affairs Policy Council
Related Bills:
Bill # Subject Relationship
SB 608 Use of Cellular Telephones Identical
HB 221 Driving Safety Compare
SB 244 Heather's Law/Cellular Telephone Use in Vehicles Compare
SB 418 Cell Phones/Motor Vehicle Operators/School Zones Compare
SB 522 Electronic Wireless Communications Device/Driving Compare
SB 592 Motor Vehicle Operators/Electronic Handheld Device Compare
Bill Text:
Original Filed Version
Staff Analysis:
(None Available)
Vote History:
(no votes recorded)
Bill History:
Event Time Member Committee
Now in Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
Referred to Economic Development & Community Affairs Policy Council Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM Economic Development & Community Affairs Policy Council
Referred to Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy Committee Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy Committee
Referred to Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
Filed Monday, November 09, 2009 3:29 PM GarciaAdd to Technorati Favorites

In Florida when a municipalities violate the law, the state tries to legalize it.

Up until now the state of Florida has been consistent in stating that the use of Red Light cameras in Florida are against the law. Municipalities however have been violating the spirit of the law by creating local ordinances allowing their use to include seizure of personal property as a means to enforce the ordinance.


Apparently the state has given up trying to enforce it's own laws and is now giving into the municipalities that have in fact told the state, "Screw you we will do what we want".


Legislation to legalize the previously illegal activity has been introduced in a 18 page bill that can be read here.
GENERAL BILL   by Reagan
Uniform Traffic Control: Creates Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Program to be administered by DOT; provides for counties & municipalities to enforce traffic control signals using traffic infraction detectors; requires reports from counties & municipalities to department on use of traffic infraction detectors; provides for preexisting equipment; provides for allocation of portion of fine proceeds to trauma centers, certain hospitals, certain nursing homes, & certain health units & programs; requires summary report from department to Governor & Legislature; provides for existing detectors & prior actions.
Effective Date: upon becoming a law

Last Event: Now in Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee on Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM
 
 
Referred Committees and Committee Actions:
-  Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
-  Health Care Regulation Policy Committee
-  Finance & Tax Council
Related Bills:
Bill #SubjectRelationship
SB 294Mark Wandall Traffic Safety ActSimilar
Bill Text:
Staff Analysis:
(None Available)
Vote History:
(no votes recorded)
Bill History:
EventTimeMemberCommittee
Now in Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM  Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
Referred to Finance & Tax Council Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM  Finance & Tax Council
Referred to Health Care Regulation Policy Committee Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM  Health Care Regulation Policy Committee
Referred to Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM  Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
Filed Friday, November 06, 2009 4:35 PM Reagan 
Statutes Referenced by this Bill
316.003
316.0083
316.0745
316.07456
316.0776
316.1967
395.4036Add to Technorati Favorites
 

FLorida Legislative update November-HB323 Electronic communications while driving

HB 323 - Use of an Electronic Communications Device While Driving
GENERAL BILL   by Long
Use of an Electronic Communications Device While Driving: Prohibits composing, sending, reading, or viewing text message on electronic communications device while operating motor vehicle; provides exceptions; provides for construction; provides penalties.
Effective Date: July 1, 2010

Last Event: Now in Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee on Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM

 Referred Committees and Committee Actions:
-  Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
-  Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy Committee
-  Economic Development & Community Affairs Policy Counci




























Related Bills:
Bill #
Subject
Relationship
SB 328
State Uniform Traffic Control/Texting Prohibited
Similar
HB 41
Use of an Electronic Wireless Communications Device While Driving
Compare
HB 221
Driving Safety
Compare
SB 168
State Uniform Traffic Control/Electronic Devices
Compare
SB 244
Heather's Law/Cellular Telephone Use in Vehicles
Compare
SB 324
Motor Vehicle Operators/Text Messaging
Compare
SB 326
Public Transportation Operators/Text Messaging
Compare
SB 374
State Uniform Traffic Control/Prohibits Texting
Compare
SB 448
Electronic Wireless Comunications Device/Driving
Compare
SB 522
Electronic Wireless Communications Device/Driving
Compare
SB 592
Motor Vehicle Operators/Electronic Handheld Device
Compare
Bill History:
Event
Time
Member
Committee
Now in Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM

Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
Referred to Economic Development & Community Affairs Policy Council
Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM

Economic Development & Community Affairs Policy Council
Referred to Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy Committee
Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM

Public Safety & Domestic Security Policy Committee
Referred to Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
Friday, November 20, 2009 4:28 PM

Roads, Bridges & Ports Policy Committee
Filed
Friday, November 06, 2009 4:16Add to Technorati Favorites PM
Long


Statutes Referenced by this Bill
316.3035




they ask us to conserve energy and now want to charge us for it while tracking us

Folks, this is on the way. We have posted on it in the past as to the inequities that will have us subsidizing gas guzzlers while being tracked at the same time.  And this is what they refer to as Intelligent Transportation Design Systems. 


From: http://rip.trb.org/browse/dproject.asp?n=24339
(In red will be our comments and concerns)

 

Aggregating VMT Within Predefined Geographic Zones Using a Cellular Network
Record Type: DOT

The current push for vehicles to become more fuel efficient, although good for the environment, poses a significant problem with the way we pay for our roads. Currently, most of the costs associated with roadway infrastructure are paid for by revenue collected from the motor fuel use tax.

Which, if one is going to have a tax, this is probably one of the more equitable systems in existence. In other words you are taxed by what you use. If you choose to drive a gas guzzler then you will pay more than somebody who chooses to drive a more efficient vehicle.  The price you pay for fuel will in some part be impacted by your decision as to what sort of vehicle you choose to operate.

 With new cars expected to use significantly less fuel, or none at all, a new method for assessing road user fees must be considered. One method that would address this issue would be to charge road users for the vehicle miles traveled (VMT). By using this approach, fees can be assessed based on how much each vehicle uses the roads, as opposed to basing fees on an approximation of road use determined by fuel consumption.

Fuel consumption in regards to road vehicles is not the only concern. One must keep in mind that generally vehicles that consume more fuel per mile also cause more wear and tear on the road than vehicles that consume less fuel per mile.

There are multiple systems that attempt to achieve this with varying success. This project focuses on the development and evaluation of a system in which vehicles' miles can be logged and aggregated by the geographic zone in which a vehicle travels. What is unique about the system is that it combines data from the vehicle's data bus accessed via the on board diagnostic port (OBD-II port) with travel zones from a table that relates identified cell base station codes with geographic zones or their boundaries.

Keep in mind that new vehicles will be, and many already are, equipped w/ black boxes. Ostensibly to aid in crash scene investigation.  It is not a stretch that these devices can be used to monitor the movements of individuals. That is precisely what is being relied upon to move to a new pricing structure. 

The same cellular device that wirelessly communicates data to the administrative office that handles VMT fee transactions is thus also used to determine the zone of travel. This system must provide sufficient resolution to fairly attribute revenue to those jurisdictions in which the vehicle is traveling, while at the same time registering the same VMT for identical trips. The device must be accurate enough to properly determine when the vehicle is in a given zone, and the user must be able to make informed decisions about when and where they choose to drive to minimize the VMT fees they are assessed. However, the system should not associate any user with an area so small that their privacy is breached.

"and the user must be able to make informed decisions about when and where they choose to drive to minimize the VMT fees they are assessed. "


The above statement is double speak straight  out of 1984.  Vehicles have odometers. Many people now use GPS systems. We also have maps and other mileage indicators. Just what other "DEVICE" is needed to assist the individual in determining hohw many miles they are traveling?.  They can only be referring to a "government tracking device"!


"However, the system should not associate any user with an area so small that their privacy is breached."

Is this not an oxymoron? That fact that  my mileage is being monitored dictates that my privacy is being breached.


Obviously the question now becomes, how can this be determined?  How can they accurately pin point how many miles you are driving without knowing where it is that you are driving?  Especially when they use words such as breaking it down to specific geographical locations?

The statement:

The question of course from the perspective of the driver is: At what locating resolution will users feel that their privacy is infringed?

From the perspective of this driver, any monitoring of my location is an unconstitutional breach of my privacy and a threat to my "Freedom" of movement.


The system must find a balance between correctly allocating VMT to geographic zones (thus maintaining system accuracy and auditability) and maintaining privacy. There are multiple ways to determine the location of a vehicle, however many of these methods identify specific road segments or capture map coordinates, unnecessary for this application. The VMT recorded only needs to be linked to a geographic zone. Locating users in "larger" geographic zones should provide for a solution that is fair to both the jurisdictions collecting revenue as well as to the road users. The objective of this project is to develop and test the concepts described above. The scope is to focus on three types of zones: (1) a congested commercial business district (CBD) usually associated with a "downtown" and skyscraper canyons, (2) a large contiguous urban/suburban zone surrounding the CBD core, and (3) a rural zone that would only identify the state in which rural VMT is aggregated.

It sounds awfully vague and somewhat beyond the range of doable.  I will Refer to Wendy Moons example used in a different scenario of the jar of different colored marbles.


When all the marbles are safely contained within the jar it is possible, taking into account a plus or minus factor, to estimate the number of marbles in the jar and possibly the numbers of different colored marbles in the jar.  Especially if you have data from the marble manufacturer indicating how many marbles of various colors were sold and/or shipped to specific geographic locations.


However once the jar breaks and the marbles hit a level floor there is no possible way to determine how many of what color marbles will travel any particular distance in any particular direction. This could only be accurately determined if each marble was equipped with an individual sensor monitoring direction and distance. When the marble stops, you have location.

Start date: 2009/8/1
End date: 2010/5/31
Status: Active
Secondary Number: CTS-2010053
Total Dollars: 31502
Source Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
Date Added: 11/23/2009
Index Terms: Cellular telephones, Vehicle miles of travel, Onboard diagnostics, Onboard navigational aids, Traffic congestion, Wireless communication systems, Fuel taxes, Traffic zones, Central business districts, Research projects,


This is coming, we listened to a congressional subcommittee discussing this problem awhile back and they admitted then that there would be a time frame during which the public would have to be "persuaded" re the idea.   Certain proposal were declaring "congestion zones" along interstates iin heavily congested areas to encourage people to take alternative routes.  Part of the solution would be to seek permission from congress to allow for the establishment of "toll zones" on Interstate Highways.

It would seem that much of the money printed to bail out banks could have been directed towards improving "infrastructure"  thus creating jobs and eliminating the need for  government monitoring of individual movement. But then. That would defeat the goal wouldn't it?

See:

Will the rising price of oil impact Bikers rights?

Which we posted on 5/30/08 

Keep in mind that neither the Federal or state governments have yet to be able to accurately determine Vehicle Miles Traveled using current methods.Add to Technorati Favorites