The bill, sponsored by the Aurora Republican, gives police the authority to use state employment records to verify where sex offenders might have moved.

Convicted sex offenders at present are required to register their current address with police. With the bill signed into law last Friday, if police discover a person is not living at the address they reported, police will have access to records businesses are required to file.

"The whole point of this bill is to keep our neighborhoods safer," Lauzen said. "This is crucially important for neighbors who are concerned with their children playing out in the summer time."

Every 90 days, all businesses have to file employment records with the state, including an employee's Social Security number and address the paycheck is sent to. The files are kept as part of the unemployment insurance files and they have previously been considered confidential.

But now police will have access to the files of convicted offenders who are still on the registered sex offender list.

Recently, the Illinois attorney general's office has taken aggressive steps to reduce the number of sexual offenders who fail to register their address. Only 7.8 percent of Illinois offenders — or 1,372 of them — were unregistered at the end of 2005, according to Attorney General Lisa Madigan's office. Two years ago, the rate was 14 percent.

Aurora police estimate there are approximately 175 registered sex offenders living in Aurora. The state database lists just three of those offenders as unknown address or non-compliant.

According to police, there are 50 registered sex offenders living in Kendall County jurisdiction.

BATAVIA — More than 20 days of walking landed Kathy Kelly in Batavia on Tuesday.

A former Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Kelly took a break from her journey across the state to stop outside of the downtown Batavia office of Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert.

There, along with almost 40 other peace advocates, Kelly organized a rally in an attempt to speak with the GOP leader about the war in Iraq.

"Hastert has a unique opportunity to distinguish himself and take a political chance," Kelly said.

Kelly, along with those around her, told stories, read poems and sang an occasional song – all trying to get their point across to Hastert, who was presiding over the House in Washington on Tuesday.

The stop in Batavia was one of many on Kelly's journey, "Walk for Justice," which started June 6 in Springfield and has taken her more than 250 miles.

The walk will end at the North Chicago U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command on July 5.

While many show up to walk on a day-to-day basis, only Kelly and two other core members of the peace group Voices for Creative Nonviolence will walk the entire way.

Timothy Keough, an intern at Voices for Creative Nonviolence, has walked alongside Kelly since the journey started back on the steps of the state Capitol.

While walking is one of the obligations he has for being an intern, Keough says he is proud to be making the trip.

"It is a grand opportunity to display patriotism," he said.

Having walked across a good portion of Illinois, Kelly uses the state's history as a lesson for peace.

She spoke of Illinois as the land of Abraham Lincoln, and how, at the time of the U.S. war against Mexico, Lincoln came out against the war.

"Congressman Hastert, we challenge you, your co-workers and your colleagues to listen to Abraham Lincoln," Kelly said, "... to have a vision of security and to avoid an unnecessary war."

Protestors to target Biggert and 'Big Oil' contributions today - Tim Waldorf

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/sunpub/naper/news/6_1_na28_protest_s10628.htm

With gas prices on the rise, MoveOn.org is campaigning for U.S. Congress to be "oil free," and members of a local chapter of the liberal-leaning political action committee are rallying in support of the idea this evening in Naperville.

As part of MoveOn.org's "National Day of Action," Four Lakes residents, who have joined to form one of MoveOn.org's "Operation Democracy Teams," are staging the rally from 5 to 7 p.m. at 75th Street and Plainfield-Naperville Road. The intersection is home to Mobil, Amoco and Shell gas stations. According to MoveOn.org, this is one of about 300 similar rallies to be staged at gas stations all over the country today. Their purpose is to encourage Congress to stop taking money from the oil industry and to start making progress toward clean, renewable sources of energy. According to MoveOn.org, "Big Oil" has given more than $190 million to members of Congress since 1990, and 75 percent of those donations have gone to Republicans.

"Those donations guarantee an energy policy that serves the oil industry's interests over the public interest. Until we stop politicians from taking oil money, it'll be hard to move into a clean-energy future," states MoveOn.org.

The Four Lakes group – which is registering rally participants at the MoveOn.org Web site – will direct its criticism at local Republican officials, namely U.S. Rep. Judy Biggert, R-Hinsdale.

"Big oil companies have spent millions in campaign contributions to get Rep. Biggert and other Republicans to hand over billions in taxpayer subsidies," Jennifer Paine, an organizer of the rally, stated in the group's press release. "Republicans have consistently rejected Democratic attempts to move toward energy independence and a national clean energy policy – instead voting to keep America dependent on oil and subsidize big oil at a time of record profits."

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Biggert has accepted $5,500 in donations from PACs associated with the oil and gas industry. For comparison, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Yorkville, has accepted $116,000 in donations from such PACs, and U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Chicago, accepted $4,000.

A Biggert spokesman declined comment on the protest.

Lawmakers not sold on tollway lease  Potential pitfalls raise concern among DuPage officials - Kathy Cichon

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/sunpub/naper/top/6_1_NA28_COUNTY_S10628.htm

WHEATON — Just because the governor said there are no plans to lease the tollway system doesn't mean it won't ever happen, DuPage County Board members said.

"This is certainly something that can be revisited," said board member Pam Rion, R-Bloomingdale.

On Tuesday the county's Transportation Committee, which Rion chairs, listened to a presentation by Linda Wheeler, a consultant for the Transportation for Illinois Coalition. Chaired by the Illinois Chamber of Commerce and the Illinois AFL-CIO, the group has been referred to as "transportation boosters," Wheeler said.

While Gov. Rod Blagojevich said last week he doesn't plan to sell or lease the tollway, county officials expressed concerns that the suggestion could come back into play later. The result could be a quick fix with long-term repercussions, board members said.

"We are simply going to be solving the problem on the backs of the suburbs if something like this takes place, in my opinion," Rion said.

County Board member Jim Healy, R-Naperville, said he was originally in favor of the idea, but in various discussions with government leaders it seemed like the potential pitfalls of the proposal outweighed any benefits. Essentially all that is being done is supplanting the government, leaving residents with no voice, he said.

"It is nothing but a finance trick," Healy said. "It's hiding the ball. It's going to hurt the people. You're doing nothing more than replacing the highway authority and replacing it with a private entity."

Wheeler said such an agreement could have a lot of impact, and several issues must be studied before any action is taken.

"The Transportation for Illinois Coalition believes that careful review is necessary for several reasons," Wheeler said. "They're relatively new here; not all of them have been a success."

In addition, many of the lease programs have been in place a short time, so there is no benchmark for success, she said. However, some are long term, such as Indiana's 75-year tollway lease agreement and the Chicago Skyway's 99-year lease. Should any troubles occur in a long-term public-private partnership, it could be difficult to make changes to the contract.

"We would just suggest that if you do an agreement, you might want to put in milestones where you take a look to modify (the agreement) or opt out," Wheeler said.

Board members raised concerns about whether the estimated $2 billion from the lease of the tollway be used to support transportation projects in the state.

"If there's no restrictions as to where they send the dollars, they're going to go somewhere else and we all deal with the road issues," said County Board member Linda Kurzawa, R-Winfield.

The private entity leasing the tollway would make its money through an increase in tolls, Wheeler said. Any contract likely would include a provision for an annual increase in the tolls because that's how the contractor recoups money it has invested, she said.

Not only will that affect motorists' pocketbooks, but some leaders fear it will create more congestion and maintenance needs on the local roads – something already experienced with the most recent toll hike.

"When they raised the rate on trucks, the truck rate on (Route) 38 tripled," Kurzawa said.

The increased costs of traveling on the tollway, Healy said, will be passed on to those who can least afford it: those purchasing the transported goods.

"They're not getting a grant from Bill Gates," Healy said. "They're going to pass this along to the consumers."

The committee will discuss the issue next month and is expected to develop a statement of fact, Rion said. The group also might consider a resolution on the matter, she said.

Board members Tuesday postponed a vote that would have ended years of legal wrangling with an Elmhurst watchdog group.

The Citizen Advocacy Center is seeking reimbursement for expenses it incurred from the lawsuit that DuPage leaders now are trying to settle.

That lawsuit claims the county board violated the Illinois Open Meetings Act when it approved a resolution favoring O’Hare expansion.

Several county board members said it would be in the best interest of the county to bring the legal fight to a close. But some said they didn’t want to vote until after the issue with the legal fees has been resolved.

Sarah Klaper, a lawyer for the Citizen Advocacy Center, said the purpose of the lawsuit was to ensure residents are made aware of what’s happening at the county.

“This case reinforces citizens’ rights to be involved and know what their government is doing when the government is conducting the people’s business,” she said.

The controversy started in January 2003 when county board Chairman Robert Schillerstrom called on the board to reverse years of opposition to airport expansion. But his resolution, which passed 15-2, wasn’t on the meeting agenda.

The advocacy center responded by filing the lawsuit, which DuPage Circuit Judge Bonnie Wheaton originally dismissed — in part because the vote wasn’t a binding contract and occurred in a public place.

However, an appellate court reversed the judge’s decision in September 2004. It found a public body may discuss items not posted on the meeting agenda but cannot act or vote upon them.

Wheaton again dismissed the lawsuit in April 2005. In that ruling, she found the center’s argument moot since the county board in late 2004 passed a series of agreements with Chicago reiterating its position regarding O’Hare expansion and western access. That vote was listed in advance on the board’s meeting agenda.

But earlier this year, the appellate court again overturned Wheaton’s dismissal. That ruling supported the center’s argument that the two county board resolutions aren’t identical.

County board member Robert Heap said the board never intended to violate the Open Meetings Act. “We are going to comply in every respect from here on out,” he added.

Wheaton voters can expect a race  Third candidate Todd Scalzo gives residents choice for two open city council spots - James Fuller

http://www.dailyherald.com/news/dupagestory.asp?id=203299&cc=d&tc=&t=

Wheaton voters can expect to have a choice to make in next year’s city council race.

Todd Scalzo, a 27-year-old attorney, announced his candidacy for one of the two at-large city council spots up for grabs next April.

Scalzo’s entry brings to three the number of candidates for the two spots. If two more come forward, that will trigger a February primary to narrow the field.

So far, the other candidates are incumbent Liz Corry and attorney John Prendiville.

Scalzo offered his views on numerous city issues in his announcement Monday, including tax increment financing, which has been a hot topic.

Scalzo said he favors its use in moderation, saying its past use has been “very good for the downtown.”

“At the same time, TIFs are becoming more the rule than the exception, so we have to be vigilant,” he said. “I do have a concern that TIFs can be used and abused.”

Scalzo said he generally opposes the creation of any TIF districts. However, he wouldn’t rule out a new one for redevelopment of the Hubble Middle School property.

“The property must be developed into something that is absolutely first rate and absolutely beautiful,” Scalzo said.

Traffic was cited as one of Scalzo’s big concerns. He favors the creation of more underpasses to address long delays at railroad crossings. Once shoppers come downtown, Scalzo wants more information on a possible new parking garage. Until then, he said, the city should require all developers to provide the parking spaces necessary for their projects.

That goes against the council’s recent vote on the downtown Dusek development, which is moving forward so far despite being more than 50 parking spaces short.

Corry defended her vote in favor of that project despite the parking shortage.

Wheaton police just received an electronic device to allow for the details of each parking violation to be recorded into a database, she said. That database will help the council see where parking problems exist. Corry has said there is plenty of parking downtown for people who know where to look.

“The program will allow us to make decisions based on facts, not perceptions. I don’t believe that the (Dusek project) is going to create a critical breakdown in our parking,” she said.

Scalzo has served on Wheaton’s historic commission since 2004. He favors keeping the north-side overlay in place as an incentive to new developers but not as a restriction on current homeowners. He does not favor expanding the overlay into the rest of the city.

“Properties in Wheaton don’t face the same issues as those in the overlay district,” he said. “If it becomes a citywide issue, there might be a citywide solution.”

Scalzo said he hopes to find a citywide solution to a general lack of affordable housing, saying the answer isn’t government-subsided housing but price points that retirees and young families can afford.

“When you say ‘affordable housing,’ people fear the Mongolian hordes invading and descending on Wheaton, and there goes their property values,” Scalzo said. “That’s not what I’m talking about. We need to look at it more from the developer’s point of view.”

U-S-A! Study finds Americans most patriotic - AP
http://www.dailyherald.com/news/illinoisstory.asp?id=203293

U-S-A! U-S-A! When it comes to national pride, Americans are No. 1 in the world, according to a survey of 34 countries released Tuesday.

Venezuela came in a close second for having the most patriotism, according to the report from the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. People rated how proud they were of their countries in areas such as political influence, economic success, sports and history.

“The two things we (Americans) rank high on are what we think of as the political or power dimension,” said Tom W. Smith, who wrote the report and directs the General Social Survey at the university’s research center. “Given that we’re the one world superpower, it’s not that surprising.”

Patriotism is mostly a “New World” concept, the survey said. Ex-colonies and newer nations were more likely to rank high on the list, while Western European, East Asian and former Socialist countries usually ranked near the middle or bottom.

The report was based on a survey in 34 countries conducted by the International Social Survey Program. People rated how proud they were of their countries in 10 areas: political influence, social security, the way their democracy works, economic success, science and technology, sports, arts and literature, military, history, and fair treatment of all groups in society.

The U.S. ranked highest overall and in five categories: pride in its democracy, political influence, economy, science and military. Venezuela came in second by ranking highest in sports, arts and literature, history, and fair treatment of all groups in society.

Eric Wingerter, a Washington D.C.-based spokesman for the Venezuelan government, said the country previously imported much of its television programming, movies and pop music from the U.S., but that has changed under President Hugo Chavez’s leadership.

Many Venezuelans say Chavez has helped create a new sense of national pride, he said.

“There’s been a real emphasis on rediscovering what it means to be Venezuelan,” he said.

The debate in Venezuela over Chavez, who makes headlines for nationalistic, anti-U.S. rhetoric, might account for the country’s No. 2 ranking, Smith said.

“We looked at, ‘Well, is it just the Chavez support, or is it the image of the country?’ and they’re actually both high,” Smith said.

Ireland came in at No. 3, followed by South Africa and Australia.

Cultural differences might explain lower rankings for the three Asian countries on the list — Japan (18th), Taiwan (29th), and Korea (31), Smith said.

“It is both bad luck and poor manners to be boastful about things there,” Smith said.

Countries that were part of the former Soviet Union or in the former Eastern Bloc ranked lower because they’re still struggling to find new national identities, Smith said. Hungary was the highest Eastern European country on the list at 21.

Iraq war: The only problem is a lack of support - John Belluomini 

http://www.dailyherald.com/opinion/fencepost.asp

In regard to letter writer Rosemary Colbert (Fence Post, June 23) and her diatribe on how long the Iraq war has been waged as compared to World War II.

The major difference here is Roosevelt had the support of everyone in this nation regardless of political stripe because we were at war. He also had the full support of the press.

If President Bush were afforded the same courtesy, this war would have been over two years ago. We lost the Vietnam war for the exact same reason. The left can accept full blame for that loss, and if we win this war, it will be despite them.

Can you imagine how World War II might have turned out if Roosevelt had to deal with the same anti-America crowd?

DIERSEN HEADLINE: Anne Krick of Wheaton blasts Bush and promotes homosexual activity

http://www.dailyherald.com/opinion/fencepost.asp

(DIERSEN: I would not be surprised to learn that Krick disapproves of Republican elected officials, candidates, and their supporters participating in Wheaton's Independence Day parades.) 

The pessimist says the moral struggle is over and we’ve lost, and that down the road there will be a similar parade in every suburb and small town in Illinois.  Don’t bet on it.  There are too many other examples from history of things that looked un-winnable but turned out to be otherwise.

In Part 1 of this series I referenced the pro-life progress in the polls.  Of course that battle isn’t over – most of these battles are never really over.

It wasn’t that long ago that gun control was a winning issue for Democrats.  Not any more.  Now, the National Rifle Association is turning its momentum towards rolling back big city gun laws and has time to target the United Nations and the global gun-grab.  Those aren’t the activities of a group in retreat.

Anyone remember welfare reform?  It’s been ten years since people were saying the world would end if the welfare system was radically changed.  Ten years later many of the critics have come around due to the overwhelming success of the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996."

Abortion, guns and welfare were supposed to be settled issues by those shouting in the left-wing echo chamber.  But they weren’t.  And neither is the “gay rights” issue of today.

As the Internet and the alternative media expands its reach, the old left wing echo chamber has become increasingly less effective.  And as more Americans join in the discussion, clearer arguments are offered and the rhetoric of the left is shown for what it is – extremist.

The “unbiased” and “impartial” news media sponsored floats in the “gay pride” parade.  WGN, NBC and others jumped on the float bandwagon like junior high school kids trying to be cool.

If there had been a gun control parade, or a pro-abortion parade, or a pro-welfare system parade ten years ago, those media outlets would have been right there wanting to show that they’re enlightened too.

Today, some polls report that the younger generation is more accepting of homosexuality.  I’d argue that it’s growing tolerance, not acceptance, and tolerance rightly defined is not a bad thing.

However, polling America’s younger people is problematic for many reasons.

Writer and researcher Michael Barone has observed that from ages six to eighteen most American kids are reared in an environment where there is little competition and accountability.  As a result, they’re among the worst prepared eighteen-year-olds in the industrialized world.

But then from age eighteen to thirty the coddling ends and they enter the private sector America that plays for keeps.  Barone believes that by the time they’re thirty, America’s young adults make up some of the world’s most competent and competitive people.

Just as people mature in their thinking, societies can as well.

A couple years ago the Chicago Tribune’s Don Wycliff interviewed the Illinois Family Institute’s Peter LaBarbera and Concerned Women for America’s Kathy Valente about the subject of “gay rights.”  He wrote:

"…I was surprised to discover that their arguments are not essentially religious. That is, they do not require that one accept their faith in order to believe their argument. That is a big step forward for those arguing their position. It may not, ultimately, be a convincing step, but it at least represents recognition that in a political debate they need to speak in terms that all citizens can understand and, potentially, be convinced by."

The side that understands the role of traditional morality in this “civilization thing” is getting its act together.  Just as bread needs a leavening agent for the dough to rise, societies need a group able to influence the whole towards the good.

In that regard, we have what we need, and I am convinced our arguments are stronger than the ones being made by those parading their “pride” down the streets of Chicago.

Rich Whitney, Carbondale civil rights attorney and Green Party gubernatorial candidate, was in Springfield Monday to turn in the more than 25,000 petition signatures.

While the Greens did not disclose the exact number of signatures they collected - previous estimates hinted at more than 35,000 - they say they have surpassed the legal requirement imposed by the state for a third party to be placed on the ballot and have garnered thousands more to cushion any potential challenges of legitimacy.

"We should know by July 3 whether or not we have to defend against objections," Whitney said. "There is nothing certain in this world, but I do feel fairly confident that we can survive any type of challenge."

Whitney has wasted no time trying to get into the gubernatorial mix as he has sent letters to the campaigns of Rod Blagojevich and Judy Baar Topinka requesting he be included in upcoming debates.

"It's not actually a request - it's a formal insistence," said Jennifer Rose, Whitney campaign manager. "We're working hard on building a grassroots democracy and getting the word out. Now we want to reach out to the people we weren't able to reach in the past."

Whitney said he fully expects to be included in the debates based on his ability to get on the ballot. He said the notion of earning a spot in the debates based on public opinion polls is "ludicrous."

"Tens of thousands of Illinois voters have said they want to see us on the ballot," Whitney said. "I don't think it's a stretch to deduce that there are a large percentage of Illinois voters who want to hear what we have to say in a debate. We're saying some things that no one else is saying - like an actual plan for the budget, for example. I think we've earned our place in the debates."

The Southern Illinoisan and WSIU Public Television have asked Democratic incumbent Blagojevich and Republican challenger Topinka to participate in a debate Sept. 5 at the Marion Civic Center.

Mike Lawrence, director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute, which is hosting the upcoming debate, said there may need to be a threshold of support established before the debate guest list is compiled.

"Typically candidates have to be at a certain percentage in the polls. I don't think that necessarily has to be a high percentage," Lawrence said. "But, I have to say, if Mr. Whitney can show some support, he ought to be included."

If Whitney can withstand challenges and keep his foothold on the ballot, he could pose a spoiler threat - pulling environmentalists, young people and other voters who tend to vote Democratic away from Blagojevich.

More importantly, Whitney could establish the Greens as a viable party in Illinois if he is able to pull 5 percent of the General Election vote. Whitney has already had some success in this arena as his 2002 candidacy for state representative of the 115th district gave the Greens equal footing in that district - at least in regard to ballot access.

Whitney is running on a four-tier platform of keeping the Illinois National Guard in the state and out of the Iraq War, creating a "New Deal" to push sustainable energy sources like solar, wind, and biomass, as well as energy-efficient transportation.

Whitney also wants to fight for fair and equitable state taxes, with responsible budgeting that will provide quality education, improve public services, and meet state pension obligations. Lastly, he wants universal health care through a single-payer system.

John Cox, a 50 year old businessman and from Chicago, wants to make America the 'shining city on the hill' just like Ronald Reagan once proclaimed, but he isn't going to sit idly and wait for someone else to show the kind of leadership that he feels America needs. He wants to be guy that provides it.

Cox was in Le Mars at the Family Table on Wednesday, June 14, to greet a handful of curious Republican activists for lunch and to talk about his vision for America.

Cox grew up in inner city Chicago with his mother who raised him by herself. Cox said he never knew his father.

"My father took one look at me and decided he didn't want the responsibility so he exited stage left. I grew up without very much and we were very poor," said Cox, who has tremendous admiration for his mother.

Cox said his mother taught him the incredible value of education and so he worked hard to put himself through college and law school.

After graduation, he worked in an accounting firm and eventually started his own office which was a combination of an accounting and law firm. Shortly after, he opened an investment advisory firm, a real-estate business, and a venture capitalist firm.

He also has written several books, including his current book, 'Politics Inc.', which he has been showing off on the campaign trail.

Cox, now independently wealthy, remembers first getting started.

"I didn't even have enough money for a secretary," said Cox who has since purchased over 1,000 apartments in the Chicago area and successfully turned around a major potato chip company that was running millions of dollars in debt.

Cox said he has lived his life by taking just one step at a time. He believes that running for President is just the next step in his personal life journey.

"I just didn't roll out of bed one morning and decide to run for President. I've got four daughters and a wife and I gave a lot of consideration to this. My wife was sick of me yelling at the tv and being frustrated by the way the government was behaving so she told me to do something about it." Cox, who would pattern his governing style based on his political idol Ronald Reagan, says he will also follow the eleventh commandment that Reagan also followed: Never talk badly about a fellow Republican.

Though Cox says he is concerned about the current group of Republicans looking to jump into the race to replace George W. Bush.

"The people running in 2008 for the GOP nomination are all good men, but I don't see the next Ronald Reagan in that bunch. I see gentlemen who see this as the next rung in the political ladder," explained Cox.

He continued, "It requires leadership and we need another Ronald Reagan but I just do not see that on the horizon."

Though Cox was ripe with references to the late President, he also was very interested in sharing his own vision for America.

Billing himself as a 'progressive conservative', Cox is completely pro-life on the abortion issue without any exceptions and he is opposed to gay marriage and civil unions.

Cox also believes that the federal tax code should be scrapped and be replaced by what is dubbed, 'the fair tax'. Cox would replace the current progressive tax code with a national consumption tax that would not only help out consumers but also companies.

"The trouble with our current tax system is everything is taxed multiple times. It's not fair and it's not healthy for our economy," said Cox. He criticized Democrats for playing 'class warfare'.

"You don't make people rich by making others poor and Democrats don't seem to understand that. They are more interested in pitting the rich against the poor," said a frustrated Cox.

On health care, Cox said the current government elites are only concerned about appeasing a few political constituencies instead of actually fixing the problems.

"We aren't doing anything with principle. Washington keeps shifting the costs to the government just to take some issues off the table. They aren't doing anything but growing government and the problems still remain," explained Cox.

The Republican was not silent on two of the hottest issues in America right now: immigration and the war in Iraq. Though Cox considers himself to be an ardent supporter of President Bush, he differs a little with the man he wants to replace.

Cox says he welcomes new immigrants to America but strongly disagrees with a 'guest worker program' that the President has suggested. He claims that the migrant workers will just come to America, earn some money, and then go back and spend it in a corrupt Mexican economy.

"I'm not anti-immigration. In fact, I get really upset if someone calls me that. I don't want guest workers, I want people to be Americans who will invest in our communities and business, in our churches, synagogues, and mosques," said Cox.

On Iraq, Cox believes it was a smart move to go into Iraq and take out Saddam Hussein, but believes that there has been a lot of mismanagement since the invasion. Cox believes that the United States should be focusing more on getting the economy in Iraq flourishing rather than the government there.

"We need to divide up the oil into five independent oil companies and then sell shares to the Iraqi people. I believe whole-heartedly that if the Iraqis have more of a stake in their future, they will eliminate the terrorists faster," relayed Cox. "If I could take a page from Bill Clinton, 'It's the economy stupid.' If we turned Iraq into a vibrant capitalistic country, terrorism will erode away."

Though Cox has a long journey to travel before he takes his oath of office, he is putting in the time and effort early before many other candidates officially declare their candidacies.

Cox has been in all of Iowa's 99 counties and a vast majority of New Hampshire and South Carolina's counties, the two other states which follow the Iowa caucuses and help kick off the nominating process for the two major parties.

"I'm an outsider so I don't have any experience raising your taxes or creating gigantic budgets," joked the presidential wannabe. "I represent something different, a breath of fresh air. We need to be governed by principle," said Cox. "We have too much corruption, a lack of principle, and too many people in Washington that just want to do and say whatever just to stay in Washington. We need statesmen and not career politicians."

"I'm not a career politician."

The Bush administration might have supported a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, but it has not blocked pressure on federal employees to attend homosexual and lesbian events.

The Environmental Protection Agency has been celebrating Gay and Lesbian Pride Month in offices throughout the country. A May 31 memo from Karen Higginbotham, director of the EPA's civil rights office, said the agency was celebrating and sponsoring events in support of gay and lesbian pride.

"During the month of June, we recognize the diversity of our workforce by celebrating and observing Gay and Lesbian Pride Month," Ms. Higginbotham said in a memo to all EPA employees. "This year's international theme is 'Pride, not Prejudice.' As members of the EPA workforce and community, it is important that we treat each other with dignity and respect."

The memo urged EPA employees to attend gay pride events sponsored by the agency. One event sponsored by the EPA's Diversity Program for Sexual Orientation was a June 14 concert held in cooperation with "EPA-approved Chapter of Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual Employees."

"There will be other activities sponsored at regional offices and laboratories during the month," the EPA memo said. "Please join us at these events and encourage all employees to attend."

Conservative critics have been pressing the White House to block the taxpayer-funded campaign. The American Family Association (AFA) has organized an e-mail campaign to President Bush and EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson.

"I thought you might like to know that the EPA, funded by your tax dollars, has joined the push for the homosexual agenda," AFA Chairman Donald Wildmon said. “Our children's future is at stake."

The AFA said the federal government, including the EPA, does not have a mandate to celebrate "this destructive and unhealthy lifestyle" at taxpayers’ expense. The EPA began celebrating Gay and Lesbian Pride Month under the Clinton administration.

VDARE

Immigration: Socializing Costs, Privatizing Profits—Why America’s Rulers Don’t Want Hearings On The Senate Sellout - Steve Sailer

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/060625_good_news.htm

Speaker of the House Denny Hastert announced last Wednesday that, rather than send House negotiators into the proverbial smoke-filled room with Senators to come up with a “compromise” immigration bill, the House would hold hearings around the country to find out what the public actually thinks about the legislation that will decide the future of America.

Hastert's declaration is perhaps the closest the American political system can come to the most stirring sentence in the lexicon of parliamentary politics: "We will go to the country"—which is what a party says when it calls a general election to decide a great issue of state.

But the immediate howls of pain showed once again that the last thing America’s elites want on immigration is citizen input and reasoned deliberation.

Instead, the national newspapers demanded a rush to judgment—because haste and heedlessness are the most likely ways they can get what they want.

A New York Times editorial scornfully denounced the House because "they want to take a closer look at the Senate bill"—which is 118,227 words long! The Newspaper of Record raged, "Like the baffled hominids of '2001: A Space Odyssey,' they are poking at the Senate's big-picture approach with a leg bone."

The Los Angeles Times editorial board sputtered, "These meetings are nonsense."

The Wall Street Journal editorialistas hissed, "This is the equivalent of snake-handling." (By the way, the most honest staffer at the WSJ editorial page is the anonymous person who selects the online reader responses to their editorials. All eleven comments he picked excoriate the WSJ's open borders dogma. I hope my mentioning his fairness doesn't cost him his job!)

In the Washington Post, Ruben Navarette Jr. was in a snit that we weren't going to see business as usual.

"Congress … is more broken than the U.S.-Mexican border… It's unusual, to say the least, for one chamber to hold public hearings on the work of another. Besides, if you want to hold town hall-style meetings, why not hold them before bills are passed in the first place? Maybe because August is close enough to November so that hearings could affect the midterm elections." [Congressional Immigration Stunts, June 25, 2006]

Imagine that—Members of the House trying to win votes by doing what the voters want!

The horror, the horror…!

Why has it become so rare for the majority party in the House to “go to the country” like this?

Over the decades, the technology behind partisan gerrymandering has improved so much that election to the House has become close to a lifetime sinecure—if the Congressman doesn't blow it by taking the wrong stand on one of the rare issues that voters notice.

For example, that's why Congress hasn't carried out its Constitutional duty to declare war since 1942. It prefers to let the President take responsibility for deciding war or peace—because, otherwise, citizens might remember how their Representatives voted and throw them out.

Thus this year's unusual show of backbone by House Republicans demonstrates just how exceptionally strong is public sentiment against the Senate immigration bill—despite those rigged polls constantly cited in the Establishment media.

The New York Times, in fact, just reported in Bush's Immigration Plan Stalled as House G.O.P. Grew More Anxious that:

"Representative Thomas M. Reynolds of New York, the head of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee, went to Mr. Boehner and Mr. Hastert and, using polling data and pointing to what he described as politically implausible sections of the bill, warned of the consequences of enactment of the Senate legislation… Mr. Reynolds had told House leaders that supporting the [Senate] bill would be 'suicide for some of our members.'" [By Adam Nagourney, Carl Hulse and Jim Rutenberg, June 25, 2006]

Meanwhile, the Senate will try to strike back against the House. It plans to hold pro-illegal immigration hearings in some of the few states left, such as Pennsylvania, where there aren't yet enough illegal immigrants to annoy the citizenry.

The San Francisco Chronicle says:

"Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he came up with the idea for Senate hearings in the shower Thursday morning. 'They have hearings on border security and employment verification,' Specter said. 'OK, that's fine ... I'm going to have a hearing in Pennsylvania on July 5 ... bring in farmers and landscapers and people in the Northeast region as to the necessity of a guest worker program.'"[ Dueling immigration hearings split GOP, Carolyn Lochhead, June 23, 2006]

(This may be another misjudgment—the town Hazleton, PA is one of the national leaders in the use of local ordinances to repel illegals and Senator Rick Santorum has begun to campaign on the issue.)

The reality is that, as the distinguished economics analyst Robert Samuelson has pointed out, the prestige press was criminally negligent in failing to report that the Senate bill would vastly increase legal immigration.  

Samuelson wrote in What You Don't Know About the Immigration Bill back on May 31:

"One job of journalism is to inform the public about what our political leaders are doing. In this case, we failed. The Senate bill's sponsors didn't publicize its full impact on legal immigration, and we didn't fill the void. It's safe to say that few Americans know what the bill would do because no one has told them. Indeed, I suspect that many senators who voted for the legislation don't have a clue as to the potential overall increase in immigration."

As last week's editorial reactions indicate, that irresponsibility wasn't an accident. It was a key component of the Main Stream Media's strategy for covering immigration.

Yet, what you aren't supposed to know can hurt you … badly.

Let's step back to put the immigration controversy in a new and broader historical perspective.

At the end of the Cold War, Francis Fukuyama announced that we had reached "The End of History." Obviously, somebody forgot to send History the memo.

Yet, in the narrow Hegelian/Marxist sense in which Fukuyama used the term "History," he was correct. The big controversy of the 20th Century—socialism vs. capitalism—was effectively over. Pure socialism was dead. Capitalism had survived, but not laissez-faire. From now on there would be markets, but with government interference.

Unfortunately, many commentators are still living in the past. They think basic ideology is still the big issue—the free market vs. socialism. Well, history hasn't ended, but it has moved into a new stage. Regulated capitalism has won, so most of the political struggles in the future are not going to be about the old boldface big ideas like nationalizing the means of production, but about the fine print.

The politics of the present and future will revolve around various organized interests trying to put one over on the disorganized rest of us in the particulars of legislation.

Contra Fukuyama, there will never be a ceasefire in this struggle between the clever and the clueless. The Age of Ideology is over but the Age of the Fine Print is upon us.

For instance, back in 1996 when the California legislature unanimously deregulated the state's electricity market, few in public life bothered to read the fine print because the ideological principle of deregulation seemed so historically inevitable at the time. Well, it turned out the devil was definitely in the details. The only people who mastered the minutiae were the traders at Enron and other such firms, who raped California out of billions.

A basic strategy for the crafty to make money is privatizing profits and socializing costs. To do this, they use tame politicians and journalists to help them hand their costs of doing business off to the public. (Economists, when they aren't blinded by ideology, call these costs "externalities.")

By importing “cheap labor,” employers shift major costs—such as medical care and policing—to you and me.

The Senate Sellout would further increase the burdens imposed on us.

And that's why its supporters in the press don't want us to worry our pretty little heads about what's in those 118,227 words.