Just a friendly reminder as you watch the Edward Snowden thing play out and decide where you come out on it:
The Fourth Amendment says -
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized."
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Monday, May 26, 2014
Memorial Day
Thanks to all who serve, and to all those who have served, to preserve and protect our freedom. And our deepest respect and gratitude to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice, and to those wounded and scarred in the process. Going forward, let's resolve that if a war is worth fighting, and we can afford to send our brave troops into harm's way, that when they return, we can afford to, and will without exception, take care of them with the highest and best quality of care and compassion. To do otherwise is unconscionable. Peace.
Friday, May 23, 2014
Comment on Fracking
Whether you're for or against hydraulic fracturing for the harvesting of natural gas, or even if you have no opinion on it, I think we can agree that disclosure of the chemicals going into the ground is a reasonable requirement as a condition precedent to going after the stuff. Finally, there are proposed rules to require such disclosures. Those proposed rules are open for public comment now, until August, 2014. You can comment by going to the link, below. It takes time, it's a pain in the ass, and it's not the highest thing on your priority list. But, you should do it.
Please take the time to let your government know what you think. Should companies that are sending chemicals and waste water into the earth's surface be required to let us all know what they're putting down there? Suggested answer: Yes.
The idea that disclosure should not be required because of trade secrets is preposterous in my view. Companies disclose confidential and proprietary information all the time in other legal and administrative proceedings, and there are a number of ways to protect legitimately confidential information: protective orders; confidentiality agreements; sealed disclosures, etc.
There is no reason that this industry should be exempt from disclosure requirements.
You'd have more red tape if you wanted to build a utility shed in your backyard. But you don't have a powerful utility shed lobby to spend millions to protect your interests.
Please, go to the link and make your voice heard.
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-1019-0001
Please take the time to let your government know what you think. Should companies that are sending chemicals and waste water into the earth's surface be required to let us all know what they're putting down there? Suggested answer: Yes.
The idea that disclosure should not be required because of trade secrets is preposterous in my view. Companies disclose confidential and proprietary information all the time in other legal and administrative proceedings, and there are a number of ways to protect legitimately confidential information: protective orders; confidentiality agreements; sealed disclosures, etc.
There is no reason that this industry should be exempt from disclosure requirements.
You'd have more red tape if you wanted to build a utility shed in your backyard. But you don't have a powerful utility shed lobby to spend millions to protect your interests.
Please, go to the link and make your voice heard.
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-1019-0001
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)