Travis Seitler: Web Designer

I just sent off this message to my Representative:

The Homeland Security Appropriations Act (H.R. 2892) is a perfect example of why we need to limits bills to “one subject at a time”: the prisoner abuse cover-up legislation it contained had absolutely NOTHING to do with the funding or activities of the Department of Homeland Security.

What makes it worse is that there was no urgency to even pass this bill. Congress could have simply approved DHS funding at current levels with a continuing resolution. That’s why I think a vote for H.R. 2892 was really a vote for the prisoner abuse cover-up.

Representative Tiberi, by voting for this bill, you failed in your duty to uphold the law; you have instead chosen to side with those who wish to legislate the obstruction of justice. Have you forgotten whose interests you were elected to represent out there in D.C.?

Such behavior is completely unbecoming of a representative of the citizens of Ohio.

Neither Congress nor the Inspector General knows anything about what the Fed has done with $9 trillion in off-balance sheet transactions, or anything about the profit or loss from $2 trillion in on-balance sheet transactions. Check this out:

In the clip above, Rep. Alan Grayson (FL-8) asks the Federal Reserve Inspector General about the trillions of dollars lent or spent by the Federal Reserve and where it went, and the trillions of off balance sheet obligations. Inspector General Elizabeth Coleman responds that her office does not know and is not tracking where this money is.

The Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009 (HR 1207) would require an audit of the Federal Reserve. The map below shows which Representatives (by District) have cosponsored the bill as of June 16, 2009:

(Map created using a public domain image available at Wikimedia Commons and the Library of Congress’ list of cosponsors.)

So now I learn that the Federal Reserve is actually seeking to hire a lobbyist to fight against this (and similar) legislation. And I’m left wondering, “if you don’t have anything to hide, then what’s the problem with an impartial audit?” Our children, grandchildren and now great-grandchildren are going to be saddled with enormous debts as a result of this massive inflation (that is, an increase in the money supply). If such spending is truly justified, then it’s a painful hardship we’ll have to deal with. But if it’s not justified, then it needs to stop!

If your Congressional District isn’t lit up yet, send a message to your Representative and Senators telling them you want them to support the Audit the Fed bill (HR 1207 in the House, S 604 in the Senate). Then show your neighbors the YouTube clip above and get them to write your Representative and Senators, too.

Seth Godin has been writing about polls and surveys recently, and he’s got me thinking. I shot these questions to him in an e-mail, but I’m going to post them here for your pondering pleasure:

1. Since all American citizens are not required to vote, are our elections really that much different from web polling (where the passionate have a disproportionate turnout)?
2. Along those lines, would you say it’s good for elections to be decided by the more passionate (ie. the apathetic would make the results unreliable), or bad (ie., fewer voters means a decreased likelihood that the “right” candidate is elected to represent the people)?
3. If you think this aspect of the electoral process is bad, then do you have ideas to improve the system?
4. If, however, you think it’s good, then why are “gimmicky polls” not to be trusted?

I’ll share my own thoughts later, but I’d like to hear what you think, too.

Yup, that’s my name on the board. Just made my first-ever political contribution. Certainly wouldn’t give my money to any of the other candidates!

the Robot War has begun.