CLOSED!!Political Discussion - A Place to "duke it out" (7400+)
- Lawhawk
- Lawhawk
- Fred2000
- Fred2000
- Fred2000
- Fred2000
- Lawhawk
- mitelo
- Fred2000
- Laughman
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 Next »
» Lawhawk - Dean Wants To Repeal 2001 and 2003 Tax Cuts
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/... -I'm sorry, but repealing those tax cuts will hurt my pocketbook and I doubt that his policies will help my economic situation more than if I were to use the money for its current purpose (paying down my student loan debt).
I'm surprised that there hasn't been a stronger push to reform the consolidated loan program to permit students to renegotiate their interest rates. For many who had no choice but to consolidate their loans out of college just a few years ago, they're paying interest that are 2-3% higher than someone consolidating today. That difference is significant and could make the difference between someone defaulting on their loans or enduring economic hardship to repay or successfully paying them off.
-- posted by Lawhawk
» Fred2000 - Strongest financial privacy protections in the nation
.SACRAMENTO -- With bipartisan support in both the Assembly and Senate, the California state legislature has passed the strongest financial privacy protections in the nation, a move the American Civil Liberties Union hailed as a milestone in the reform of financial privacy laws.
“Most people are very particular about disclosing personal financial information to others, and yet current federal law allows banks, insurance companies and other financial institutions to trade and sell their customer's information with very little restriction,” said Valerie Small Navarro, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California. “This bill gives consumers significant new control so they can limit who has access to their private financial information.”
Tuesday’s approval of SB 1 by the California Senate on a 31-6 vote sends the measure to Governor Gray Davis for his signature. Governor Davis is expected to quickly sign the landmark consumer protection bill into law.
Under the financial privacy bill, California consumers will have the right to stop the sharing of information by financial institutions with affiliates unless they meet very stringent criteria. The bill requires financial institutions to obtain a consumer's affirmative consent before sharing information with third parties. It also establishes standards that financial institutions would be required to follow to inform consumers of their privacy rights. The current weak federal law gives consumers very little control over how their personal information is used by financial institutions and leaves consumers vulnerable to identity theft, aggressive marketing practices and fraud.
The new law requires financial institutions to explain in plain language how consumers can exercise their expanded rights and imposes stiff penalties for businesses that fail to comply.
“Consumers will no longer receive confusing and incomprehensible privacy statements they receive from their banks and insurance companies that give them virtually no ability to stop the flow of their private financial information to others," said Beth Givens, Director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.
Californians for Privacy Now had pledged to take the issue directly to the voters with a March 2004 ballot measure if lawmakers failed to act by the end of the day on August 19. Now that the legislature has enacted strong privacy reform legislation and the governor has agreed to sign it into law, the coalition announced that it will not proceed with its initiative campaign. Californians for Privacy Now had collected over 600,000 signatures from registered California voters in support of the measure.
The new financial privacy law adopted by California comes at a time when Congress is debating amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Financial industry lobbyists have argued that a section of the FCRA prevents states from enacting restrictions on information sharing by financial institutions with affiliates. This section of the FCRA is due to expire at the end of the year.
In addition, privacy advocates point out that when Congress passed the Gramm Leach Bliley Act in 1999, it specifically invited the states to enact stronger financial privacy protections than those contained in the federal law. Nonetheless, the debate over the FCRA is expected to be intense.
“Californians have sent a loud and powerful message that they want their privacy protected." “Lawmakers in Washington should hear that message and enact legislation that gives the same rights to the rest of America.”
-- posted by Fred2000
» Fred2000 - Privacy Rights....American Myth?
In response to message posted by Lawhawk:In the past, we discussed medical malpractice, a topic that is important to all Americans. Another topic that should be on the front burner is the confidentiallity of the publics private information.
My prior post on the matter indicates that a more serious law concerning privacy rights has now been passed in California.
The current laws that govern privacy rights seem to be a farce and assure the average citizen little if any privacy. In fact, even if a citizen opts-out, he really assures himself of no additional rights. The current laws concerning privacy seem to say that one has little or no right to privacy.
What is your view of the subject?
-- posted by Fred2000
» Fred2000 - Re: Privacy Rights....American Myth?
In response to message posted by Fred2000:Welcome to the Home of the California Financial Privacy Initiative
We are dedicated to helping defeat the financial services industry’s full-throttle attack on our financial privacy.
To this day, we cannot stop our financial institutions from selling, sharing or profiling our most sensitive information with companies we may know nothing about. This results in more than just annoying telemarketing calls, unsolicited emails and junk mail. It has contributed to an explosion in identity theft, which is our fastest growing crime – up 500% in the last few years! More troubling is the threat to consumer confidence in what should be America’s strongest competitive weapon – information technology.
Numerous polls have proven that Californians want to be asked for their explicit permission before their information is shared with third parties. Yet all attempts to pass stronger privacy legislation in California have failed, despite overwhelming public support. This was the result of the powerful financial services industry and their determination to defeat proposed legislation by contributing millions of dollars to our elected officials, who ultimately decided that business needs are more important than consumer needs.
-- posted by Fred2000
» Fred2000 - So Much for Accountability
.GAO: Cheney Denied Papers on Energy Panel
By SIOBHAN McDONOUGH
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) - Congressional investigators say they were unable to determine how much the White House's energy policy was influenced by the oil industry because they were denied documents by Vice President Dick Cheney about his energy task force.
Investigators also came up short trying to find out how much money various agencies spent on creating the national energy policy, a General Accounting Office report released Monday said.
The unwillingness of Cheney's office to turn over records and other information "precluded us from fully achieving our objectives" and limited its analysis, the GAO said.
-- posted by Fred2000
» Lawhawk - Re: Privacy Rights....American Myth?
In response to message posted by Fred2000:I haven't had the time to read the actual statute, nor have I had the time to read summations of the recently passed statute. However, I do know that privacy rights vary greatly from state to state and those rights also depend on the kind of information being discussed. Financial/credit information has one set of rules while medical information has another set.
Figuring out how to balance the need for that information and privacy is an important issue, but other than the electronic frontier foundation (eff.org) and a few others that deal with online privacy issues, I haven't figured out what an appropriate level is.
-- posted by Lawhawk
» Fred2000 - Re: Howard Dean
In response to message posted by mitelo:.
Dean said he believes that U.S. oil policy is directly linked to the terrorism and anti-American and anti-Israel sentiment in much of the Arab world.
He also said oil-rich countries such as Saudi Arabia are supporting terrorist groups like Hamas and preaching hate in the classroom, but the United States is turning a blind eye.
"I think those who teach hate are enemies of America, and I am deeply concerned that the Saudis are funding fundamentalist Islamic schools, teaching small children to hate Christians, Jews and Americans.
"As long as we are dependent on Middle East oil, American presidents will often lack the spine to stand up to the Saudis and those who supply us oil."
-- posted by Fred2000
» Laughman - A Must-Have this Christmas...
.It's a perfect replica in every detail, folks - right down to the hollow head...
BBC - Bush doll has waiting list
A US toymaker's latest Elite Force action figure is attracting interest and derision in equal measure.
An ardent virtual queue of patriots is stretching around the cyberspace block, waiting to get their hands on their very own pint-sized model of Elite Force Aviator: George W Bush.
The action figure is a 1:6 scale replica of the commander-in-chief's appearance during his visit to the USS Abraham Lincoln on 1 May to announce the end of the war in Iraq.
Manufacturer Blue Box Toys says the $39.99 (£25.45) figure is "a fitting addition to the collection of those interested in US military memorabilia," but enthusiasts will have to wait until 31 October because of high advance orders.
According to manufacturers, the fully-poseable figure features:
a realistic head sculpt
fully detailed cloth flight suit
helmet with oxygen mask
survival vest
g-pants
parachute harness
But not everyone has welcomed the doll.
Mark Morford, a columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle, last week wrote: "There he is, all faux manly and squinty and artificially buffed up, his gull-wing ears toned down and the thin-lipped brow-furrowed monkey confusion so common to his scrunched little face apparently erased by expert doll craftsmen and/or a drunken 50-cents-an-hour sweatshop employee somewhere in China."
President Bush's appearance in full US pilot regalia was justified because he partly flew the S-3B Viking aircraft that took him to the aircraft carrier.
But the flight and visit were denounced by some commentators as a political stunt.
Mr Bush never saw combat during the Vietnam war, because he remained in the US as a pilot with the national guard.
In December 2002 a President Bush doll celebrating his best-loved gaffes sold out in a week.
The foot-tall figures featured clips, including: "We're working hard to put food on your family," and "I will not hold this nation hostile".
-- posted by Laughman
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.