SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: D. Long who wrote (20572)12/20/2003 6:00:40 AM
From: Ish  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793717
 
<< but I definately like that they have decided on "build it tall." Just what I hoped.>>

My feeling is that before any building is built anywhere a fire hose should be hooked up and turned on. 5' below where the water reaches should be the roof.



To: D. Long who wrote (20572)12/20/2003 6:53:04 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793717
 
Surprise, surprise! You knew this would clear Justice. Now the Court battle starts.





Justice Dept. Clears Texas Redistricting
Democrats' Lawsuit Is Still Pending

By Edward Walsh
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 20, 2003; Page A04

The Justice Department announced last night that a controversial congressional redistricting plan enacted by the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature does not violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and can be used in next year's congressional elections.

The decision cleared a major hurdle for the plan, under which Republicans could pick up as many as seven House seats next year. But the plan could still be overturned depending on the outcome of a legal challenge to it in federal court by Texas Democrats.

In a letter to Texas Secretary of State Geoffrey S. Connor (R) that was made public last night, Sheldon T. Bradshaw, principal deputy assistant attorney general in the department's Civil Rights Division, said Attorney General John D. Ashcroft "does not interpose any objection to the specified changes" in the state's congressional district lines that were enacted in October. Under the Voting Rights Act, any changes to congressional districts in several states, most of them in the South, must be approved by the Justice Department before they can take effect.

Texas Democrats, who had predicted that the Bush administration would approve the plan, said it would disenfranchise as many as 3.6 million black and Hispanic voters in the state.

"Until today, no Justice Department had ever approved a plan eliminating a majority-minority congressional district," Rep. Martin Frost (D-Tex.) said in a statement. "But the Bush Justice Department has made itself infamous by approving a plan to eliminate two majority-minority districts."

Frost added that the Texas plan "is the single greatest setback for minority voting rights in the 38-year history of the Voting Rights Act. It would have been laughed out of any other Justice Department -- Republican or Democratic."

Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said the Justice Department approval "shows that the map is legal and fair, and will be upheld. We look forward to contesting next year's elections under the new map."

The GOP redistricting plan was the source of high political drama in Texas during much of the year. Democratic state lawmakers twice fled the capital of Austin to deprive the legislature of a quorum, blocking passage of the measure. Republican Gov. Rick Perry called three special sessions of the legislature before the plan was finally approved.

States are required to redraw their congressional and legislative district lines every 10 years following the census. In 2001, Texas Democrats and Republicans could not agree on a plan, throwing the issue into federal court, where a three-judge panel crafted the existing congressional districts that were used in the 2002 elections.

Democrats emerged from the 2002 elections with a 17-to-15 advantage in the state's delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives. But the same year Republicans took complete control of the state legislature, allowing them to enact new district lines that favor the GOP.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was the driving force behind the new redistricting plan that, if not overturned in court, would virtually ensure Republicans continued control of the U.S. House through at least this decade.

In their lawsuit, Texas Democrats maintain that it is unconstitutional to redraw congressional district lines more than once in a decade. The Colorado Supreme Court recently overturned a GOP-inspired redistricting plan in that state on those grounds, but its decision was based on the Colorado constitution. The Texas constitution does not explicitly prohibit redistricting more than once in a decade.

washingtonpost.com



To: D. Long who wrote (20572)12/20/2003 8:15:25 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793717
 
Is your wife's car parked at the "No Tell Motel?" Do you really want to know? :>)

December 21, 2003
Lost? Hiding? Your Cellphone Is Keeping Tabs
By AMY HARMON

In the train returning to Armonk, N.Y., from a recent shopping trip in Manhattan with her friends, Britney Lutz, 15, had the odd sensation that her father was watching her.

He very well could have been. Ms. Lutz's father, Kerry, recently equipped his daughters with cellular phones that let him see where they are on a computer map at any given moment. Earlier that day, he had tracked Britney as she arrived in Grand Central Terminal. Later, calling up the map on his own cellphone screen, he noticed she was in SoHo.

Mr. Lutz did not happen to be checking when Britney developed pangs of guilt for taking a train home later than she was supposed to, but the system worked just as he had hoped: she volunteered the information that evening.

"Before, they might not have told me the truth, but now I know they're going to," said Mr. Lutz, 46, a lawyer who has been particularly protective of Britney and her sister, Chelsea, 17, since his wife died several years ago. "They know I care. And they know I'm watching."

Driven by worries about safety, the need for accountability, and perhaps a certain "I Spy" impulse, families and employers are adopting surveillance technology once used mostly to track soldiers and prisoners. New electronic services with names like uLocate and Wherify Wireless make a very personal piece of information for cellphone users — physical location — harder to mask.

But privacy advocates say the lack of legal clarity about who can gain access to location information poses a serious risk. And some users say the technology threatens an everyday autonomy that is largely taken for granted. The devices, they say, promote the scrutiny of small decisions — where to have lunch, when to take a break, how fast to drive — rather than general accountability.

"It's like a weird thought I get sometimes, like `he definitely knows where I am right now, and he's looking to see if I'm somewhere he might not approve of,' " said Britney Lutz. "I wonder what it will be like when I start to drive."

Still, personal location devices are beginning to catch on, largely because cellular phones are increasingly coming with a built-in tether. A federal mandate that wireless carriers be able to locate callers who dial 911 automatically by late 2005 means that millions of phones already keep track of their owners' whereabouts. Analysts predict that as many as 42 million Americans will be using some form of "location-aware" technology in 2005.

Wireless companies and start-up firms are weaving the satellite system known as G.P.S., or Global Positioning System, which was begun by the United States military in the 1970's, into the cellular phone network and the Internet to sell products and services that provide location information.

After fixing an individual's location relative to a network of G.P.S. satellites orbiting 12,000 miles above the earth — or, more crudely, by the time it takes signals to bounce off nearby cell towers — personal locator services transmit the constantly updated information to a central database, where customers can retrieve it through the Internet, telephone or pager.

Until recently, one of the main civilian uses of G.P.S. was in devices issued by the criminal justice system to track offenders as a condition of their parole or probation. The new generation of tracking devices has moved well beyond that population and now takes many forms, from plastic bracelets that can be locked onto children to small boxes with tiny antennae that can be placed unobtrusively in cars.

"We are moving into a world where your location is going to be known at all times by some electronic device," said Larry Smarr, director of the California Institute for Telecommunications and Information Technology. "It's inevitable. So we should be talking about its consequences before it's too late."

Some of those consequences have not been spelled out. Will federal investigators be allowed to retrieve information on your recent whereabouts from a private service like uLocate, or your cellular carrier? Can the local Starbucks store send advertisements to your phone when it knows you are nearby, without your explicit permission?

Because the new electronic surveillance services are still in their infancy, there are few answers, but the debate over the boundaries of privacy in a more transparent world is already taking shape. Teenagers in particular tend to be skeptical of the new technology's value.

"Cellphones would lose their appeal if they became tracking devices," said Nate Bingham, 16, of Seattle. "I think if your parents really care that much they should just put a leash on you."

Mr. Bingham's parents use an AT&T service called Find Friend that lets them see his general location when his cellphone is on, based on the company's nearest cellular tower. He said his mother had at times asked him where he was and then used the service to see if he was telling the truth. He admits to turning the phone off occasionally when he doesn't want to be found.

That won't work in the Pratt household, in Garden City, N.Y., where Jason, 13, and Ashley, 11, were given new Nextel cellphones on the condition that they be kept on at all times. With uLocate, Tom Pratt set up his account on the company's Web site to establish a "geofence" around his home and his children's school. Every time the kids leave a 400-foot radius of either place, he gets an automatic e-mail alert: "Ashley has exited Home at 08:18 AM," read a typical message last week.

Jason Pratt said there were advantages to being watched. He no longer has to call his mother to let her know where he is. Instead, she can press a "locate" button on her phone and see for herself. So long as Jason's phone is running the uLocate software, it transmits his location information every two minutes. Jason's 17-year-old brother, Matthew, however, kept his older cellphone — even though it had poor reception — rather than submit to the new deal.

Howard Boyle, president of a fire sprinkler installation company in Woodside, N.Y., presented his employees with no such choice. The five workers who have been given company phones with the G.P.S. feature have not been told that Mr. Boyle can find out if they have arrived at a work site, and whether they are walking around in it or sitting still.

"They don't need to know," said Mr. Boyle, who hopes the service will help him determine the truth when clients claim they are being overbilled for the time his employees spent at their location. "I can call them and say, `Where are you now?' while I'm looking at the screen and knowing exactly where they are, just to make sure they're not telling me they're somewhere else."

But it is not just the unnerving effect of uncovering small lies that has some users of the technology worried. Like caller I.D., location devices lift the curtain on a zone of privacy that many Americans value, even if they rarely have anything serious to hide.

"Think back to when you were a teenager and your mom or dad said, `I don't want you do to this,' and you said, `yeah, yeah, yeah,' because you knew you could do it and they wouldn't know," said Graham Clarke, president of National Scientific, which makes several G.P.S. tracking devices. "Those days are gone now, because they actually can know."

Mr. Clarke recently installed a tracking device called Followit in the Jeep Wrangler of his 17-year-old son, Gordon. It alerts him if Gordon has exceeded 60 m.p.h. or traveled beyond preset boundaries.

Advocates of location-aware technology insist that its safety benefits — like locating a 911 caller or a stolen car — outweigh the privacy issues.

And for Donna Phillips, 66, whose husband, Hubie, has Alzheimer's disease, the ability to lock a G.P.S.-enabled bracelet from Wherify Wireless around Mr. Phillips's fanny pack when he goes out has meant an end to panicked searches when he fails to come home. Now her granddaughter can help her find her husband on the Wherify Wireless Web site, which displays the location information transmitted from the bracelet when an authorized user logs on.

About two weeks ago, Mr. Phillips, 90, boarded a bus near his home in Rancho Park, Calif., and traveled several miles before switching to another bus. Because he was moving too fast for his wife to catch up, she called the police, who were able to pinpoint his location through the Wherify Wireless service to pick him up.

Critics of the new technology do not dispute its usefulness, but worry that it will become ubiquitous before legal guidelines are established.

Last year, the Federal Communications Commission turned down a request from the cellular phone industry's association and privacy groups for guidance on such matters. For the moment, the questions of trust and tracking are being raised largely in the sphere of family and personal relationships, rather than in the public arenas of government and business.

Jerold Surdahl, 40, an administrator in a building management office in Centerville, Ohio, said he started using the uLocate service to communicate with colleagues. Now, he is intrigued by the possibility of stashing a location-tracking phone in the trunk of his wife's car.

"I'm not expecting or hoping or wanting to find something, but I would just like to explore the possibilities," Mr. Surdahl said. "I'd tell her about it later."

nytimes.com



To: D. Long who wrote (20572)12/20/2003 8:41:58 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793717
 
THE DEAN CAMPAIGN
Political Challenge 2.0: Make a Virtual Army a Reality
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL - New York Times

NASHVILLE — On a night this month at the Mellow Mushroom, Zephyr Teachout was having pizza and beer with several dozen real-life Deaniacs, the kind of people whom she had previously encountered only virtually — on the Web.

Ms. Teachout, 32, a former lawyer and one of Howard Dean's chief Vermont-based Internet strategists, had gone low-tech: criss-crossing the country for two months in an old car to meet small groups of Dr. Dean's online supporters, from Lubbock to Chattanooga, in the hopes of understanding and influencing their off-line election activities, which become increasingly important as next month's Iowa caucuses approach.

As in much of the country, the official Dean campaign in Tennessee has been so virtual that — even as rivals like Senator John Kerry and Gen. Wesley K. Clark have opened offices — it does not even have a telephone. The move is a bold departure from politics as usual, but also a colossal gamble.

For now that the Internet has helped transform Dr. Dean, the former governor of Vermont, from outsider to the man at the front of the Democratic pack, according to the polls, Ms. Teachout has a new challenge: to redirect the energy of her candidate's bubbling, decentralized band of enthusiastic "netizens" into a disciplined army of campaign workers, who stay in step and on message.

The magnitude of the transformation that is needed was evident at pizza night here. One by one, the grandmothers, stockbrokers and students rose excitedly before this official emissary to describe the largely improvised political activities that have helped make Dr. Dean feel like the only candidate in town: leafleting, composing songs, holding parties, donating to the campaign in lieu of holiday gifts.

"You guys are seizing political power back and are doing it in a really beautiful way," Ms. Teachout said, delivering a dose of grass-roots cheerleading — just do it, however you please.

But these days that message is tempered by the need to win the early contests in Iowa and New Hampshire and the requests are increasingly specific: "What you can do now is go to Iowa," Ms. Teachout told her audience. "Our goal is to bring 5,000 people to Iowa to canvas door-to-door to influence the caucuses."

The Dean interactive Web site, Blog for America, where visitors can post any message they want, gets more than 40,000 hits a day. His campaign drew in about $15 million in the financial quarter that ended in September, the vast majority in small online contributions. But the question is whether these numbers add up to a successful campaign on the ground.

So far, Dr. Dean's Internet-based supporters seem inclined to answer the call to conventional arms. On the national Web site, about 2,000 people have signed up to go to Iowa. In October, when the Dean campaign headquarters posted a request asking supporters to send hand-written letters to a list of officials, 2,500 wrote to former Vice President Al Gore.

Six weeks later, Mr. Gore endorsed Dr. Dean.

"The whole point of the Internet is that it is decentralized and not hierarchical," said Darrell West, a political science professor at Brown University. "Blogs are perfectly democratic. So it could be a challenge to get the troops moving in the same direction."

The Internet seemed tailor-made for the Dean campaign, especially in states like Tennessee that do not hold an important primary. Here, the Web provided the Dean campaign with a vehicle for the growth of a galloping home-grown political movement that requires almost no outside supervision or financing.

"When you don't have money for mailings and fund-raisers and you're outside the democratic power structure, the net is just a wonderful tool to get things rolling," said Mark Naccarato, a documentary filmmaker who is co-chairman in Nashville for Dr. Dean.

"The Internet is just a very efficient way to connect people, replacing the inefficient tool of a phone call," he continued. "What it changes is the ability to organize quickly and efficiently. But you still need old-school shoe-leather campaigning to take it from there."

And so the directives coming to local net-based groups from campaign headquarters in Burlington, Vt., have become increasingly strategic: In September, supporters were urged to practice talking about why they supported Dr. Dean. In October, they were urged to write letters to officials. In November, Dean supporters in various states were assigned sister counties in Iowa and urged to write to individuals there. In December, they were linked by conference calls to the people they had contacted.

In a mere eight months, the Dean campaign in Nashville has evolved from a handful of lonely antiwar, anti-Bush Democrats surfing the Web, to what Ms. Teachout called one of the campaign's most "dynamic" grass-roots organizations.

"The first meet-ups were just three or four people who'd met on the Web," recalled Deb McCarver, a public relations specialist who has become co-chairwoman of Nashville for Dean. "People came, but we really didn't have an agenda. We said, what do people do in a political campaign? No one really had a clue."

It was about this time that the Dean campaign headquarters in Vermont started receiving calls from fledgling groups nationwide, seeking guidance and approval.

"In April, everyone became obsessed with becoming official," Ms. Teachout said. "They would say, `Can we print this flier?' We would say we don't vet things."

Even on the official interactive Web site, there were only the vaguest of suggestions from campaign headquarters, like a request to do "some sort of event to increase Dean's visibility."

So instead of turning to Burlington, the Dean supporters turned to the Internet and each other for inspiration, posting their ideas for leaflets on the Internet, for example.

"The blog is the first place I click every morning," said Donald Byrd, 34, a music teacher. "It is a very obvious tool for political organizing and it's brilliant, and it's funny that no one figured it out until now."

Howard Rheingold, author of the book "Smart Mobs" and an expert on the use of new technology in political movements, said that the Bush campaign was like Microsoft, a highly efficient, top-down structure. The Dean movement, in contrast, he said, was more like the upstart Linux: created and perfected by tiny inputs from millions of individuals.

In its early days the national grass-roots Dean organization was something of a hydra, with active arms in cities all across the country, but little sense of central direction. And so this fall, Ms. Teachout embarked on her tour to "find out who all these people really are," and, she said, "to see if they know who Howard Dean really is."

She has made hundreds of stops, some in unlikely backwaters. In Lubbock, Tex., she arrived to find a room full of liberals listening to Lyle Lovett music and playing bongo drums. About half the people were long-time Texas Democrats, and half said they had never thought much about politics.

But this is not just a feel-good tour any more.

Now that the primaries are fast approaching, the Dean campaign is feeling a bit less grass-roots and suggestions from Burlington are increasing. At each stop in Tennessee, for example, Ms. Teachout has encouraged supporters to write letters to voters in states that are holding the early primaries — samples of which can be downloaded from the Web. She said that 100,000 letters have gone to Iowa.

"The goal of all our online activity is to move it off-line," Ms. Teachout said.

Sitting on the sidelines at a Vanderbilt student forum for the Democratic candidates, she jumped in to explain Dr. Dean's positions on Iraq, when the student representative hesitated.

Here at least the Dean supporters seemed receptive to the intervention, and some were planning to head north to Iowa for the caucuses in January.

Gary Cobb, a Dean supporter who was a Gore campaign official in 2000, said, "The grass-roots movement that started on the Internet is a tiger we are holding by the tail."

nytimes.com