A Republican Liberty Caucus of Florida-supported bill to repeal the red light cameras enacted last year will be considered by the Florida House of Representatives. The legislation, HB 4087, will be considered by the House, while its companion version in the Senate, SB 672, is stalled.

Melissa Wandall, whose husband, Mark, from Bradenton, was killed by a red-light camera runner in 2003. At the time, Wandall was nine months pregnant. Wandall vowed after her husband’s death to do something about drivers who run red lights. She pushed for the law former Gov. Charlie Crist signed last year, known as the “Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act.”

However, Rep. Richard Corcoran, R-Trinity, cited a slew of examples from cities and states across the country where he said the cameras were not preventing accidents.

Courts have thrown out many red-light camera tickets, he added, saying the problems with implementing last year’s bill are “overwhelming.” Corcoran argued intersections could be made safer using other measures, such as changing the timing of traffic lights and improving signage and road painting. “Let’s step back and figure out a way from scratch where we can make these intersections safer for our families.”

A portion of the $158 fine issued to drivers caught by the cameras goes to the state. Since July, the state has received the most money from Orlando ($1.1 million), Miami Gardens ($928,000), Aventura ($911,000) and Hillsborough County ($907,000).

The bill now heads to the House floor.

One of the pieces of the Florida RLC’s 2011 Agenda includes “banning red light cameras” because, “Our Constitution says citizens have a right to face their accuser, yet their accuser in this case is a machine.”

Last week, Tea Party and libertarian groups including the RLC held protests throughout the state to support Richard Corcoran’s bill to repeal the red light cameras.

What the heck is going on in Montana?

Montana Republicans have a huge majority in the State House and a small majority in the State Senate, so they should be moving productive legislation along without trouble. Unfortunately, two recent examples show that they are not committed to common sense government at all, but are instead beholden to special interests, corporate socialism, and the nanny state.

You’re not even going to believe the legislation being courted by Montana Republicans! Check it out:

Montana Republicans Try to Gut Medical Marijuana Law

With the exception of Republican Liberty Caucus-endorsed State Representatives Jerry O’Neill and Mike Miller and several moderate Republicans, the rest of the Republican elected officials in Montana voted to gut the voter-approved medical marijuana law last week.

Because Governor Brian Schweitzer (Democrat) vetoed the Republican attempts to kill the law, BusinessWeek reports that “Many lawmakers from both parties say something needs to be done to rein in medical marijuana in Montana now that it has reached beyond those with severe illnesses for whom voters in 2004 meant the law to apply.”

According to the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services, there are 29,948 registered users in the state. As we reported earlier, last month the federal government decided they needed to step in by raiding medical marijuana businesses in the state under the guise of investigating “drug trafficking and tax evasion.” This despite a promise from the Obama Administration claimed it would not override state law.

According to BusinessWeek,

“Three lawmakers from each chamber will begin meeting this week in a conference committee to figure out the final form of the overhaul measure, Senate Bill 423, before it lands on the governor’s desk. Since the beginning of the session House Bill 161, a repeal of the voter-approved marijuana law, has been the favored measure of Republican leadership. House Speaker Mike Milburn, R-Cascade, carried the bill through the Legislature but the possibility of a governor veto forced Republicans to work up a contingency plan.

Last month, Republican lawmakers made a last-minute introduction of a bill to overhaul of Montana’s medical marijuana industry. After Republican fears of a governor veto became a reality Wednesday, the overhaul measure carried by Senate Majority Leader Jeff Essmann, R-Billings, has become what is likely the last chance the Legislature has to restrict medical marijuana. But the measure has not had an easy passage and it still has key hurdles left to clear with just a few days left in the session to do it.”

The only common sense on this issue, aside from Governor Brian Schweitzer, is from RLC-endorsed legislators like Jerry O’Neill and Mike Miller. According to Representative Miller, “If the federal laws (related to the Montana state medical marijuana law) were gone, it could be just another prescription filled by a pharmacist. The bottom line is that the legislature did not do its job and put the appropriate rules/laws in place once the initiative passed in 2004. I believe it is up to the legislature to fix the mess it created. And it is a huge mess and it is being grossly abused by some,” Miller said.

Miller took what apparently is an unpopular position, concluding at his website, “While many people disagree with my vote to not repeal, I hope this helps them to understand it a little better.”

RLC-endorsed Reps. Jerry O’Neill and Mike Miller voted to protect the Montana medical marijuana law.

Renewable Energy, Curbing Property Rights via “Corporate Socialism”

According to LibertarianRepublican.net, “Sounding like something straight out of an Ayn Rand novel, a renewable energy corporation out of Canada is pushing legislation to allow for seizure of private property rights in Eastern Montana. The Bill pits small landowners such as ranchers in Eastern Montana, against government-backed corporate interests and many environmental groups in support of renewable energy.”

From the Great Falls Tribune, “Montana Senate revives eminent domain bill”:

“HB 198 would grant private developers — including Canadian developer Tonbridge Power — the ability to use eminent domain authority to condemn private property so that transmission lines can be built.

The company wants to build a 214-mile international Tie Line through Montana and Alberta. The bill would [give] Tonbridge the authority it needs to condemn private property along the proposed MATL route in Montana.”

After nearly three hours of debate, 16 Democrats sided with 12 Republicans to pass the measure.

Republican proponents of the measure said if the legislature failed to enact HB 198, it could doom the state’s economy.

“We need an export economy in this state,” Senator Alan Olson said. “We make money to fund our education system, and we make money to fund our senior services on an export economy. If a minority interest is going to shut down an export economy, if we continue to circulate that same stale dollar around the state, we’re done.”

Opponents of the measure, including Sen. Art Wittich, R-Bozeman, said the bill would give private corporations unprecedented power, while sacrificing the rights of private property owners.

“It’s corporate socialism at its best,” Wittich said.

“To me, good government is limited government that respects everyone’s rights and properties,” Wittich says. “I support accountability in government spending and promoting private sector prosperity by adding value to our resources.”

The bill goes for a final vote on Thursday. Then, it heads to Democrat Governor Brian Schweitzer for his signature.

It is not known if Schweizter would sign the legislation, but it appears likely that he would.

RLC member Eric Dondero worked to get a property rights initiative on the ballot in Montana in 2006. Here, he is collecting a signature from a resident.

by David Badash

A new study released by Gallup finds that only 17% of Americans who vote or lean Republican say social issues and moral values are important, and rank them third of four major categories, after government spending and power (38%), and business and the economy (32%), in stark contrast to the focus of over a dozen current Republican presidential candidates and aspirants.

Despite an overwhelming focus by over a dozen possible GOP presidential candidates who claim that social and moral issues are tied together, their own constituents believe they are not. Moreover, other studies show the American people want their political representatives to focus on jobs and the economy, not social issues like marriage equality, abortion, or religion.

That said, the study notes that “Republicans who care the most about social and moral issues are most likely to support Huckabee and Palin. All other candidates gain only single-digit support among these voters. Romney, who is in first or second place among all other groups, does no better than tie Gingrich and Ron Paul among social issues voters.”

“Despite some observers’ claims that Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum have a special following among social conservatives, these two politicians do not have an unusual appeal among Republicans who care most about social and moral issues.”

The Gallup study found national security and foreign policy were the least important of the four categories, with just 12% of respondents giving it weight.

What is striking is how many GOP presidential aspirants are not only willing to associate with radical religious extremists — but are actively seeking them out — to been seen as rubbing elbows with America’s religious conservatives in hopes of gaining credibility on social issues.

Last week, Republican hopeful Michele Bachmann (R-MN) announced, “Social conservatism is fiscal conservatism.” Bachmann teamed up with Republican presidential aspirants Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, and Haley Barbour to headline a fundraiser for Tony Perkins, president of the certified hate group the Family Research Council (FRC), and other hate preachers, such as Lou Engle and David Barton to create the fundraiser, which was broadcast to churches Sunday.

Mike Huckabee, an ordained Baptist Minister, also spoke at Perkins’ fundraiser, titled, “Rediscover God in America,” saying, “I pray that God will raise up spiritual warriors who will say America will not fall – that we will not let this nation fall to the hands of those that will enslave us. This battle is one that pits good against evil. There are things that are right and there are things that are wrong and the great battle that we will live or die by to preserve this nation is one in which we identify and then we fight for until the last breath – that there are some things that are holy and pure and that are just.”

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee also spoke about what he sees as the need to stand up for traditional marriage, and against same-sex marriage, even at the risk of job loss.

Newt Gingrich, despite two divorces, three marriages, numerous adulterous affairs, and House ethics violations, has also made a career of focusing on social issues, religion, and so-called morality. On Sunday, Gingrich gave a speech at a San Antonio, Texas megachurch, Cornerstone Church, and stated “I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America,” he fears America will become “a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists.”

Cornerstone Church is led by Rev. John Hagee, who had close ties to John McCain’s 2008 Republican presidential campaign. Hagee was criticized for comments he had made, like saying Hurricane Katrina was “the judgment of God on the city of New Orleans” for its “level of sin,” relating to a gay pride parade.

Hagee also was criticized for suggesting Hitler was God’s “hunter,” and hastened the Jews’ return to Israel in accordance with what he suggested was God’s will.

The question is, why, in stark contrast to what the American people have said repeatedly they want their political leaders to focus on, namely the economy and jobs, are Republicans politicians focusing on anything but?

__________________________________________________

This article was posted with the permission of its author. The original article appeared at The New Civil Rights Movement website.

In February, Congress (including most Republicans) voted to extend certain provisions of the Patriot Act for 90 days.

Your vigilance kept them from extending it for three more years.

Senator Rand Paul advises us that the Patriot Act is soon to be debated in the U.S. Senate, and urges us to contact our Senators and demand that they vote against any extension of the Patriot Act.

To reach your Senator or Representative:

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121; Ask for your Congressman or Senator
Tips on what to say; and background information on the Patriot Act

The patently unconstitutional “REAL ID” implementation has been delayed for the third time. Passed in 2005, the Department of Homeland Security has extended state implementation of the law to January 2013.

Homeland Security officials said the deadline was extended because most states would not be able to meet all the federal requirements of the so-called Real ID Act by May 11, 2011.

Twenty-four states are refusing to comply with the regulations, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Sixteen of them — including Arizona, Georgia, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Utah — have passed laws prohibiting compliance with Real ID, citing privacy and funding issues. The other eight — including Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois and Nevada — have passed resolutions opposing the law.

Republican Reps. Darrell Issa, Jim Sensenbrenner, and Lamar Smith were outraged at the delay on implementation. “The administration should not prolong Real ID implementation. By doing so, they disregard the law of the land. Delaying Real ID unnecessarily places Americans’ lives at risk and threatens national security,” said Smith, of Texas.

There is no evidence that REAL ID — a national ID card — is constitutional. If implemented, it would prohibit freedom of movement and violate individual privacy like no other law in American history.

The Republican Liberty Caucus of Florida has developed a 2011 legislative agenda for its members to pursue.

The agenda, based on the RLC Statement of Principles, will be put into action as Florida RLC’ers attend the annual Lobby Days at the Capitol in Tallahassee today.

The Florida RLC’s legislative agenda is an excellent model for other state RLC chapters to follow and implement.

1. Restore Our Constitutional Rights
_______________________________________

• “Sovereignty of the State”: Joint resolution proposing the creation of Section 28 of Article I of the State Constitution, to assert the sovereignty of the state and refuse to comply with unconstitutional federal mandates. Support SJR1438/HJR1103
• “Intrastate Commerce Act”: A statute which provides that all goods grown, made or manufactured in Florida and sold within Florida shall not be subject to the authority of the Federal government. Support SB1478
• Scope and Exercise of Federal Power to Regulate Commerce: Urge Congress to honor provisions of U.S. Constitution that limit scope & exercise of federal power to regulate commerce. Support HM577
• Exercise of Federal Power: Urge the Congress of the United States to honor the provisions of the Constitution of the United States and United States Supreme Court case law which limit the scope and exercise of federal power. Support SM358
• Health Care Freedom Act: Creation of S. 28, Art. I of State Constitution to prohibit laws or rules from compelling any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in any health care system. Support SJR2/HJR1
• Ban Red Light Cameras: Many studies show how unsafe intersections become after installation of red light cameras, with a dramatic increase in the number of crashes and serious injury. These studies also show cities have been found guilty of shortening the yellow light to increase violations in order to generate revenue. Outside the safety issues raised by installation of these cameras is the constitutionality of the systems. Our Constitution says citizens have a right to face their accuser, yet their accuser in this case is a machine. Support SB672/HB4087
• Repeal REAL ID Act: In 2008, the Florida Legislature enacted the REAL ID Act as 4 of 47 sections in a DMV bill. The law required citizens to produce an enormous amount of personal papers to either obtain or renew a Florida driver’s license. This personal information are then seized by the state and scanned into an accessible database. The REAL ID law was forced on the states by the Congress in violation of the US Constitution’s 10th Amendment and violates the Florida Constitution’s 4th Amendment “Right to Privacy”.
• Open Carry: Allow concealed-weapons-licensed gun owners to openly carry their weapons. Support SB234/HB517
• State Jurisdiction: Limit gun regulation to the state and prohibit all local governments from passing or enforcing gun rules and regulations. Support CS/SB402/CS/HB45
• Doctor Prohibition: Prohibit physicians from asking patients about gun ownership. Support SB432/HB155

2. Repeal Unnecessary and Burdensome Regulations
_______________________________________

• Online Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems: Eliminates provisions directing DOH to create & administer statewide septic tank evaluation program. Support SB168/HB13
• Florida Climate Protection Act: Repeal provisions for Cap & Trade regulatory program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from electric utilities. Support SB762/HB4117

3. Cut Spending and Protect the Taxpayer
_______________________________________

• Smart Cap: Amend Florida’s constitution to limit revenues collected by state government to the amount collected the previous year, plus an annual adjustment based on a combination of population growth and the rate of inflation. Any funds in excess of the limits will be placed in the state’s “rainy day fund” until that fund reaches 10 percent of the prior year’s total budget – at that point, the Legislature must vote to either provide tax relief or reduce property taxes.
• Stop High Speed Rail/Sun-Rail: The total cost of these rail projects will be devastating to our economy and the tax increases needed to operate the rail projects will take more money from the taxpayers. Spending billions on 1800’s rail technology such as Sun-Rail is a big mistake at a time when the Florida Legislature has to make cuts to essential services. We oppose state funding of rail projects.
• Pension Reform: Generous public pension benefits promised a decade or more are now placing significant burdens on many local budgets and although the state pension system isn’t in as bad shape as some other states, it is time to address it now before it does become a problem in the near future. The Florida Legislature should enact common sense reforms such as moving employees into a 401K style defined “contribution” plan. It is reasonable for the state of Florida to require government employees to contribute a portion of their salary into a retirement plan. Florida is currently the only state that does not have this requirement. Support SB1128/SB1130/HB1405
• Medicaid Reform: Our current Medicaid program is estimated to cost $20.2 billion this year, approximately 30 percent of our states budget. Sustaining a program that has been over-expanded, combined with new and expensive mandates from Washington from threatens to throw our state into further deficits and requiring more cuts to essential services. Support SB1972
• Property Insurance-Reduce Risk to Taxpayers: With Citizens Property Insurance becoming the primary insurer of property in Florida, the Florida taxpayer could be on the hook for billions of dollars if a hurricane of any significance hits Florida. Insuring Florida properties with state dollars will lead to huge debts, and all taxpayers will bear responsibility for that debt. Consumers in Florida would be served best by laws that attract new capital into the state; competition serves consumers better than regulation. Support SB1714/HB1243

4. Term Limits
_______________________________________

• Congressional Term Limits: Urge Congress to propose to states amendment to U.S. Constitution to limit terms of office of members of Congress. Support HM685.
• Do not extend Florida legislators’ term limits: We believe term limits are the only way to prevent elected officials from becoming entrenched and beholden to special interest groups. We implore you to leave the current term limit for legislators in place. Oppose SJR 300/HJR 207

Learn more about the Florida RLC at www.rlcfl.org.

There’s a lot of murmuring in the right-wing grassroots that the reform-minded Congressional freshmen elected by the Tea Party movement are not turning out to be nearly as principled or effective as many had hoped they would be. There’s a serious concern that they are selling out to establishment interests or were never really sincere in their beliefs and were just pandering to the activists in order to get elected.

The problem here is exemplified by the newly formed Tea Party Caucus in the House. A look at their membership list reveals many long-time incumbents, some of them with terrible voting records on fiscal issues and on reducing the size and intrusiveness of government. I need only point to two of the worst from my own state of Texas, Lamar Smith and Joe Barton, two of the worst pro-establishment, big-spenders in the House and ones who have been there a long time. In fact, both of them are likely to face Tea Party primary challengers in 2012. There are some good legislators and serious reformers on the list like Roscoe Bartlett, Louie Gohmert and Joe Wilson, but they’re all established incumbents. The problem is that nobody owns the Tea Party brand, so anyone can claim to represent them, no matter how ridiculous that claim is.

Some of the biggest names associated with the Tea Party have been among the most disappointing, particularly Allen West and Marco Rubio from FLorida, while a small number have stuck to their guns like Justin Amash, Rand Paul and Mike Lee. Rubio remains one of the darlings of the more mainstream Republican wing of the Tea Party, but he’s a long-time political insider in Florida politics and it’s clear from his latest press release that he really doesn’t get it.

In this press release Rubio talks about the obstructionism of Demcorats in the Senate in blocking passage of the proposed budget bill, while he acts as if what he and other House Republicans sent to the Senate  was actually a good bill full of meaningful cuts, which is far from the truth. Rubio writes:

“Democrats’ unwillingness to engage on this issue is leading us closer to a catastrophic debt spiral that will irreversibly damage our government, our economy and ultimately our country.”

Which makes a valid point about the utter irresponsibility of Senate Democrats in trying to pass a budget with only $4.7 billion in cuts, which Rubio points out is just the amount the government spends in 30 hours.   I also have to give Rubio a nod for great political rhetoric when he says “I did not come to the U.S. Senate to be part of some absurd political theatre.” The problem is that he is himself engaging in the most twisted act of political theatre on the national stage, the attempt to present the budget passed in the House as a meaningful cut in spending.

What Rubio does not mention here in his otherwise very positive sounding press release is that the Republican-authored budget bill which he was supporting only cuts $57 billion in spending, enormously less than is necessary — by his metric less than 2 weeks of government spending. He also fails to mention that he is as unwilling to touch war and defense spending as the Democrats are to touch entitlement spending. If he’s serious about being the fiscal conservative he promised to be then he should be just as angry with Congressional Republicans who failed to make more meaningful cuts or to make cuts which could get bipartisan support.

What Rubio demonstrates here is that he is willing to talk big and bash the Democrats but he and other Tea Party endorsees are unwilling to follow their big talk with meaningful action or creative solutions. Where are all those members of the Tea Party Caucus? Most of them voted for the bloated budget they sent on to the Senate and few of them made any effort to propose more substantive cuts, Rubio among them. They have left us no better off than we were before, because they have not offered substantial cuts which could also pass with bipartisan support in the Senate, and the only way to do that would have been to end the wars and cut military spending substantially in addition to more of the small cuts they did propose.

This problem goes beyond just the budget fiasco. During the last couple of weeks most of those Tea Party representatives also voted for the renewal of three key provisions of the Patriot Act which are widely opposed by the people who voted them into office. They are also doing nothing to block the implementation of the REAL ID bill which is also strongly opposed by the grassroots political right. Some of these failures can be dismissed as the result of inexperience, but surely the many seasoned legislators in the Tea Party Caucus are giving the newer members wise advice and guidance? I’m sure they are, and that advice is to not rock the boat, line their pockets and do nothing substantive.

Many in the Tea Party and many grassroots Republicans are feeling some buyer’s remorse right now and with 2012 coming around the corner this may lead to a renewed push for change and a movement which becomes more hostile to Republican incumbents as it pushes a second generation of insurgent candidates.

There is something about the federalization of police authority that causes discomfort among those who adore America’s traditions. Whether it is from the perspective of such Hollywood films as “The Good Shepherd” and “Syriana” or the sort of critiques emanating from organizations like the John Birch Society, both ends of the ideological spectrum are wary to one degree or another of secretive federal organizations.

Unfortunately, the ultimate outcome of a threat like terrorism is, without fail, the enhancing of police powers wielded by central governments. Though the devastation caused by loss of human life as a result of terrorist acts is without equal, its second undesirable contribution to society is the mind set of surrendered liberty engendered among the broader population. Most of us recognize that we are far more likely to fork over freedoms to the government during times of crisis than times of tranquility.

All one needs to do is look at what happened to Russia after the 2004 Beslan School Crisis in North Ossetia. Although freedoms in the country were nothing to write home about beforehand, skirmishes with Chechen separatists have given birth to the sort of police state mentality terrorism fosters and men like Vladimir Putin have little ideological disposition to limit.

Looking at the United States after September 11th demonstrates the aftershocks destructive acts of terrorism generate. Since that day, such massive intrusions as the Patriot Act, invasive TSA pat downs, the introduction of pricey bureaucracies such as the Department of Homeland Security (a $40 billion plus annual budget and north of 200,000 employees), and the floating of such ideas as the Orwellian 2005 REAL ID Act have alarmed those who take personal privacy seriously.

Many senators and congressman have been puzzled as to why any citizen might balk at the notion of a national ID card. “It is disappointing to me that the Obama administration has chosen to put Americans at risk by having another delay in implementing Real ID,” Republican congressman Jim Sensenbrenner noted. Apparently forgetting to update his circa-2004 Republican National Convention talking points, Mr. Sensenbrenner appears intent on emerging victorious on “Survivor: Police State Conservative.” Surely he must recognize such fear based rhetoric, post-Tea Party, no longer works like a charm at getting conservatives to fall into line.

This act, which would have amounted to a federalization of national identification cards and storage of personal information, has been met with vigorous opposition in many states. States as politically diverse as South Carolina and Oregon have rejected it, and my home state of Louisiana became the 11th state to pass anti-REAL ID legislation in 2008. Americans feel something is a little off about even more centralization of power by an institution not immune from abusing it.

But one of the few good things about REAL ID has been this opposition shown by state legislatures and governors. Additionally, the revulsion toward it by groups on the left and right has been encouraging; some strange bedfellows were made during the course of advocating against its passage. We see the wisdom of our Constitution and Founding Fathers demonstrated when such steps are taken; citizens of an entirely consolidated nation (which we are not quite as of this writing) would have had little recourse to turn back what the central planners were bent on getting through. But, by utilizing de facto nullification of federal laws, enough resistance has been generated to throw a wrench in the implementation of this act.

The most recent extension of its compliance date to 2013 is an example of the government kicking the can down the road. Unwilling to tackle this issue now, they will simply delay the fight for a later date. Surely it is no coincidence that 2013 is just after a presidential election and happens to be the off year for congressional elections. Maybe we can hear more promises from allegedly civil libertarian Democrats to fight invasions of privacy, only to watch them fall into statist line afterward (see Obama-Guantanamo as well as Obama-Patriot Act. Case settled.)

Up to this point, this specific measure of statism has proven a bridge to far. Sadly, it likely would now be in effect had the states rolled over and refused to push back (this same willingness to fight is now producing hope for those of us who want to see Obama’s health plan overturned). Apparently Washington will do whatever it can get away with in the absence of sufficient protest; not exactly a glaring endorsement of our public officials’ integrity. Apparently they can produce a million regulations for us while simultaneously having zero regulation on their own appetites.

A reasonable person cannot help but ask if 95% of those in Washington are even familiar with the notion of state sovereignty or Jeffersonian republicanism. Watching CSPAN, it appears they might not be. Fortunately, at least a few in state legislatures and governorships still are.

(Editor’s Note: The RLC is helping you fight back against REAL ID; see this post.)

By a vote of 37-1, the Alaska House of Representatives passed a resolution urging the Transportation Security Administration to reconsider its use of full-body pat-downs and calling on Congress to exercise greater oversight over the agency.

The resolution comes after left-wing State Rep. Sharon Cissna was singled out for a pat-down in Seattle last month when a full-body scan showed scars from breast cancer surgery. Cissna said she had submitted to such a search before but considered it invasive and vowed not to endure it again.

To return to Juneau, she opted for a four-day journey by rental car, small plane, taxicab and ferry. Cissna is scheduled to testify before a congressional subcommittee in Washington, D.C., next week.

The Alaska House consists of 40 total members and just 16 Democrats. Just one Republican Representative voted against the resolution. The vote follows legislation in New Hampshire and Texas that would criminalize certain actions of TSA agents. That legislation is still pending.