The failure of the bill was made considerably more bitter by the underhanded tactics by which a tiny faction of the House leadership scuttled the bill against overwhelming support from both parties and the public. With all of the hard work put into promoting the bill by grassroots groups, its defeat under questionable circumstances has redirected anger originally aimed only at the TSA to political leaders in Texas, particularly House Speaker Joe Straus.

The story of how such a widely supported bill could end up not being passed is an object lesson of how easily the will of the people can be subverted by those who value power over principle.

During the regular legislative session Rep. Simpson’s anti-groping bill made it through the House of Representatives by unanimous acclamation . It was passed out of committee and onto to the floor of the Senate where it was set to pass when the TSA stepped in and lobbied against it and the Department of Justice issued a letter threatening to close Texas airports if it passed. This lead Lt. Governor David Dewhurst to apply his influence to get the bill which was minutes from passing pulled from the floor.

As the inevitable special session approached, Senator Dan Patrick and other supporters convinced the governor to come on board and support the bill and agree to sign it if they could get a pledge from a majority of the members of the House and Senate to support it. This would let them fast-track the bill through both houses and to the governor for his signature quickly without unduly delaying other legislation.

They got the votes. They notified the Governor’s office that they had the votes and they asked the Governor to call the bill for the special session. Governor Perry was out of town doing a pre-presidential tour and when confronted by a citizen journalist and asked about the bill he said that he was not aware that the necessary votes had been pledged, but when he returned to Austin on Sunday the 19th of June he did put the bill on the call for Monday the 20th.

Already a week had been wasted, but there was still time to pass the bill. Despite the Governor’s support, after the session began on the 20th the bill was not scheduled for consideration until the Friday the 24th, wasting more precious time. Then, when it was scheduled to be introduced on Friday, House Speaker Joe Straus made a public announcement that he thought the bill was a “publicity stunt” and not serious legislation, sending a clear message to his supporters to oppose it. This despite the fact that he had not voted against it in the regular session.

Nonetheless, a version of the bill was introduced in the House and another in the Senate with wording which had been edited by the Attorney General’s office to reduce the chances of the bill being contested in court and to satisfy complaints from Speaker Straus, but because of wrangling over the language any votes on the bill were delayed until Monday with the session scheduled to end on Wednesday.

With the Speaker apparently unwilling to advance the House version of the bill, desperate supporters in the Senate passed their version through committee and passed it on the floor in a matter of hours and sent it on to the House where the decision was made to use the Senate version as written to avoid the possibility that the Speaker would keep the House version off the floor.

The House session didn’t start until 2pm on Tuesday and when the messenger from the Senate arrived with the bill the Speaker’s office refused to accept the bill and it was kept waiting for several hours. This final delay guaranteed that passage of the bill would be extremely difficult because of Constitutional rules about how bills have to pass the House.

Under the Texas Constitution, for a bill to pass the House it has to be read and voted on three times, on three separate days and win each vote. At the point where the bill finally made it to the floor there was less than 24 hours left before the end of the session on Wednesday, so the only way to pass the bill was to hold a vote to suspend that constitutional rule to allow them to hold two of the three votes on the same day. Although there were plenty of votes in favor of the bill – enough to make up a supermajority – the vote to suspend the Constitutional rule required a 4/5 majority, and that was going to be very difficult.

The bill passed its first reading easily on Tuesday and then passed a second reading on Wednesday morning easily 106-27, but by the time the held a vote on the motion to suspend the constitutional rule some members had left and it passed with a 96-26 majority – an overwhelming vote in support of the bill, but not quite enough to meet the 4/5 requirement. Ironically the previous vote did meet that requirement, but it didn’t apply to that particular motion. At that point the bill which so many supported and which was enormously popular with the public, was dead.

Before adjourning the special session, the Speaker allowed Rep. Simpson to make a final speech about the bill and how the legislative process had failed so dismally. Simpson was not afraid to point fingers, saying:

“The people in support of this bill have succeeded in shining the light on those who collaborate with the growing tyranny of our federal government….Its’ defeat only propels the liberty movement in this state. The people now know that it is possible to fight back.”

His sentiments were echoed by a statement from the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas, one of the grassroots groups which had made calls to legislators in support of the bill, which said “We may not have won the final victory today, but we sure flushed out the enemies hiding in the brush.” Another grassroots group, Stop Austin Scanners thought that Governor Perry should share the blame, citing Perry’s “failure to call the bill in a timely manner despite numerous requests to do so, his total lack of stewardship in the process, and Speaker Joe Straus’ willful misconduct are the principal reasons why the legislation was derailed.”

At every step Rep. Simpson and his allies did what was requested by the leadership. They amended the bill. They watered down the language. They even ultimately changed “probable cause” to “reasonable suspicion” to give the Feds an easy out. Yet despite promises from Governor Perry, they were met with obstruction and delays from the Speaker at every step of the way. With two weeks to pass the bill they ended up having to try to pass it in two days with a special suspension of the rules requiting an outrageously large majority and creating the ironic outcome that a bill which passed easily with a 4/5 majority in the morning when it didn’t need it could not get that same majority in the afternoon when it did.

The defeat of the bill was not a complete loss.  It raised awareness of the issue substantially and drew attention to the forces opposing it and exposed the heavy-handed tactics of the TSA. There’s also some evidence that Simpson’s bill helped influence the TSA’s recent decision to reduce the intensity of their searches of children, though it did not stop them from carrying out a horrendous and highly publicized abuse of a 95 year old Leukemia patient.

This fight is not over. The issue still draws great public interest and anger at the TSA and its practices has never been higher. Supporters in Texas promise to continue to pursue the issue and legislators in a growing number of additonal states are introducing similar legislation. People don’t like having their privacy invaded and their persons violated in the service of excessive security procedures which have never been proven to be at all effective. The people may have lost this battle, but the war is far from over.

A version of this article appeared previously at Blogcritics Magazine.

Simpson’s HB 1937 (now SB29 and HB41) would make it a felony for TSA agents operating in Texas to engage in certain forms of intimate touching during the course of an “enhanced pat down” of an airlin

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.

A westside Chicago school, Little Village Academy, has banned schoolchildren from bringing their own lunches from home. They now require all students to purchase their meals from the school cafeteria. An age-old American tradition has fallen by the wayside in Illinois.

Libertarian Republican radio talk show host Neal Boortz comments,

“So there you go folks … government knows best. If you surrender your child to the government to be educated, they you surrender your right to determine what type of lunch that child will eat. While the government has physical possession of your child in their indoctrination centers your rights are essentially terminated.

“There are two messages at work here. One is that parents have to come to the understand that parents don’t know nearly as much about how to raise their children as the government does. The second message is delivered to the children — and that message is that now is as good a time as any for you to learn that the government is going to be involved in virtually every aspect of your life — even down to what you are allowed to eat for lunch.”

Michigan State Police Extracting Data from Driver Cell Phones

The Michigan State Police have a high-tech mobile forensics device that can be used to extract information from cell phones belonging to motorists stopped for minor traffic violations, according to TheNewspaper.com, a journal of the politics of driving.

If you’re pulled over by the Michigan State Police for anything — an improper turn, a partially obscured license plate, or an officer’s whim — they can search your cell phone using a device called the CelleBrite UFED. That means text messages, photos, videos, contacts, who you’ve called, what apps you’ve downloaded, GPS data that reveals where you’ve been, even deleted data.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) learned that the police had acquired the cell phone scanning devices and in August 2008 filed an official request for records on the program, including logs of how the devices were used. The state police responded by saying they would provide the information only in return for a payment of $544,680.

“The Michigan State Police should be willing to assuage concerns that these powerful extraction devices are being used illegally by honoring our requests for cooperation and disclosure,” said ACLU attorney Mark P. Fancher. The ACLU is concerned that these powerful capabilities are being quietly used to bypass Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches. We have that same concern.

A U.S. Department of Justice test of the CelleBrite UFED used by Michigan police found the device could grab all of the photos and video off of an iPhone within one-and-a-half minutes. The device works with 3000 different phone models and can even defeat password protections.

Nevada’s Libertarian Streak on Seatbelts and Helmet Laws

According to our friends at LibertarianRepublican.net:

“Two big victories against the Nanny-State in Nevada this week. The State Senate Transportation committee voted against tougher enforcement for seat belt non-usage, and for legalizing motorcycle use without a helmet. Predictably, all Republicans sided with the pro-freedom side. And virtually all Democrats voted against freedom.

From the Las Vegas Sun, “Senate committee says no to helmets, tougher seat belt law,” April 14:

“The seat belt bill would allow police to stop a motorist and issue a citation solely for not wearing a seat belt. The present law allows officers to issue a citation only if the driver is stopped for another traffic infraction. Sen. Elizabeth Halseth, R-Las Vegas, who opposed the bill, SB 235, said Nevadans use safety belts at a higher rate than neighboring states.

Sen. Mike Schneider, D-Las Vegas, in arguing for the bill, said the buckle-up rate is only 30 percent at night. The 93 percent figure cited is falsified to get federal funds, he charged. He said opponents of the bill argue not wearing a seat belt is a personal choice, but everyone ends up paying to treat those injured because they aren’t buckled up. Voting against the bill were Halseth, Dean Rhoads, R-Elko, Mike McGinness, R-Fallon, and John Lee, D-North Las Vegas.

On the helmet law:

“The helmet bill, SB 177, removes the helmet requirement for motorcycle drivers and passengers if they are at least 21 years old and the driver has held a license for a year or more and completed a safety course. Halseth said whether to wear a helmet should be a personal choice. She said figures from University Medical Center show riders injured while not wearing a helmet actually cost less to treat than those hurt while wearing helmets.

Schneider, however, said everyone bears the cost. “This is costing society millions of dollars. No way does this benefit the state of Nevada,” he said. Manendo, Schneider and committee Chairwoman Shirley Breeden, D-Las Vegas, voted against the bill.

Illinois Moves to Ban Trans Fats

The Pat Quinn/Rahm Emanuel/Dick Durbin/Rod Blagojevich/Barack Obama State strikes again.

Note the blatant editorializing in this “news report” by the Gate House New Service out of Springfield, Illinois (via GalvaNews.com): “Illinois House moves to ban trans fat in foods”:

“Illinois is poised to become the second state in the country (after California) to ban artery-clogging artificial trans fats. The Illinois House last week approved a bill to eliminate artificial trans fats from restaurant and bakery food and food sold in school vending machines by January 2013. Cafeterias operated by state and local governments and schools would not be included in the ban until January 2016.

“Trans fats are like bacon grease pouring down your sink clogging your pipes,” said Rep. La Shawn Ford, D-Chicago, sponsor of House Bill 1600. “That’s exactly what trans fats do to your arteries. You can still have fried foods and baked goods without trans fats.”

Republicans and one brave rural Democrat are the only ones standing against this nanny-state imposition on individual liberties: “It’s yet another nanny-state mandate on the public when the businesses and communities are perfectly capable of making these decisions themselves,” said Rep. David Leitch, R-Peoria.

“We don’t have to be a watchdog for everyone,” argued Rep. Frank Mautino, D-Spring Valley. “We tell people to do a lot of things, and it would probably be good if they did them, but maybe at some point they’d like to decide on their own if they should do them or not.”

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 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.

• Scott proposed spending $4.6 billion less than this year’s budget and wants to eliminate seven percent of the state’s government jobs, which would mean about 6,700 state-worker layoffs — significant cuts and hard choices at a tough economic time. In fact, RLC member Kristi Dunn was recently interviewed about her support for Governor Scott’s budget;

• Tony Fabrizio, Scott’s campaign guru and advisor, polled the issue of legalizing marijuana in Florida and found that nearly 6 in 10 people support the idea — almost enough to pass a state Constitutional amendment. Of the 800 voters surveyed, 456 would have voted yes on a constitutional amendment to legalize marijuana, but 344 would have voted against it;

• Governor Scott is working with the legislature to cut government waste. Legislators even asked the RLC’s input on what to cut;

• Governor Scott is a vocal opponent of the Obama health law and refuses to implement it in Florida unless it is found constitutional; and

• Governor Scott’s decision not to accept a $2.4 billion federal grant for a high speed rail project was a “courageous choice”, according to a congratulatory letter he received from the Republican Liberty Caucus of Florida Chairman Matthew D. Nye.

Governor Scott spoke at a Republican Liberty Caucus of Central East Florida meeting in September, 2010.

The Florida chapter of the RLC will host its Lobby Days at the Capitol on March 14 and 15. The top issue on the agenda is a Taxpayers Bill of Rights for Florida.

According to the New Hampshire Union-Leader newspaper, Dr. Darren Tapp of Concord has given up his dream of being a successful mathematician because he refuses to consent to airport security measures. Dr. Tapp testified before the New Hampshire House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee that the thought of an enhanced pat-down was enough to make him take the train home to visit his family instead of an airplane.

Backing up Dr. Tapp is a coalition of New Hampshire Republican Liberty Caucus legislators in the State House. The legislation being discussed, HB 628, would make the touching or viewing of a person’s breasts or genitals by a government security agent sexual assault. If passed, the law would require New Hampshire agents convicted of sexual assault to register for life as tier 3 sex offenders — the most serious classification.

RLC member and bill sponsor State Representative Andrew Manuse, R-Derry, called the new security procedures a slippery slope. “What’s next? Will they do body-cavity searches?” he asked, and noted he was told of a woman who lives with one of his constituents being strip-searched at Manchester-Boston Regional Airport.

Manuse (pictured, left) presented a petition to the committee with 145 signatures supporting the bill. The petition was up only one day on the Republican Liberty Caucus website, he said. Another bill sponsor and RLC legislator, Rep. Daniel Itse, R-Fremont, said, “Law enforcement officers should tell a citizen why the person is being searched. Randomly pulling someone out of line, or full-body screening everybody goes beyond the pale. That’s not what America is about. We’re surrendering our national character.”

Republican Liberty Caucus legislators in other states and in Congress have also fought the TSA regulations, without any success thus far.

There isn’t much current information about REAL ID despite that a major implementation benchmark for the law is scheduled occur in just two months.

The REAL ID Act requires state-issued driver’s licenses and identification cards to meet federal standards by a certain date in order to be accepted for federal purposes, according to the National Council of State Legislatures. The Department of Homeland Security sells REAL ID as a tool “to help prevent terrorism, reduce fraud, and improve the reliability and accuracy of personal identification documents.”

States must now be in full-compliance by May 11, 2011. The penalties for residents in non-compliant states are pretty tame …, or not.

Those innocent, law-abiding citizens will not be able to use their driver’s license to board commercial aircraft, gain access to federal facilities or enter nuclear power plants.

Some Republicans Are Pushing for A National ID Card
_____________________________________

Earlier this week House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX), Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King (R-NY) and Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) sent a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano encouraging her to fully implement the REAL ID Act of 2005.

According to FOX News, REAL ID has won support from many anti-immigration advocates because it requires driver’s licenses issued to immigrants to expire at the same time as their stay in the U.S. and therefore invalidates licenses of immigrants who overstay.

According to former Congressman Bob Barr, a privacy advocate, “A person not possessing a Real ID Act-compliant identification card could not enter any federal building, or an office of his or her congressman or senator or the U.S. Capitol. This effectively denies that person their fundamental rights to assembly and to petition the government as guaranteed in the First Amendment.”

Yet REAL ID is still being implemented. And it’s being implemented despite that half of the states in the country have opted out of REAL ID or have passed resolutions objecting to the national ID law. The Department of Homeland Security has repeatedly extended the deadline and reduced the compliance bar to suggest progress on the national ID effort, according to the Cato Institute’s Jim Harper.

What Can Be Done to Stop REAL ID?
_____________________________________

H.R. 1 is the budget bill Republicans are pushing in the House. If passed, it would would fund the government from March 4 through the September 30. Congressman David Price, a Democrat from North Carolina, proposed Amendment #277 to add the following language to the FY 2011 spending bill:

“None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services for the implementation of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-13).”

This Amendment may be the last opportunity to hit the REAL ID Act before it is thrust onto the American people. While many states have opted out, don’t be so sure that the federal government won’t ignore state opt-outs. It’s much easier for them to implement a national ID card if every state is forced into the plan.

Please ask your members of Congress to support Amendment 277 to H.R. 1. Once implemented, REAL ID will be required by employers to hire you and will restrict your ability to travel in “the land of the free”. It’s imperative that you contact Congress today on this important issue.

(A special thanks to Jim Harper for providing the details on this Amendment.)