ThinkProgress Logo

Yglesias

A Venture Capitalist Makes The Case Against Software Patents

Here’s a great little post from venture capitalist Fred Wilson venting his rage at America’s growing empire of software patents. Key sentence: “these ‘developers in a garage’ can’t afford lawyers to represent themselves in a fight with a patent troll.”

He also says “I can’t understand why our goverment allows this shit to go on,” but the earlier point makes it clear. The same firms that can afford lawyers to represent them in a fight with a patent troll can afford lobbyists and host fundraisers. Those firms have employees who want the firm to prosper. And the lawyers have lobbyists and host fundraisers and have employees of their own. Hypothetical future companies can’t go back in time and press for less incumbent-friendly policies.

Politics

Sarah Palin Slams The DREAM Act At Ellis Island

Today, Sarah Palin visited Ellis Island and the “Statute” of Liberty as part of her One Nation tour. “It’s one of the symbols of course of our country, and it’s a reminder too that immigrants built this country,” Palin stated at a press conference. “So we want to make sure that we’re highlighting that on our bus tour, maybe so that the present day immigrants know how much we appreciate them and their work ethic, and their love of country and freedom.”

Yet, Palin noted that there is a limit when it comes to her appreciation of immigrants. Exceptions include undocumented youth who were brought to the U.S. by their parents at a young age and who want nothing more than the ability to contribute to society after going to college or enrolling in the military:

PALIN: The immigrants of the past, they had to literally and figuratively stand in line and follow rules to become U.S. citizens. I’d like to see that continue. And unfortunately, the DREAM Act kind of usurps that-the system that is a legal system to make sure that immigrants who want to be here legally, working hard, producing and supplying revenue and resources for their families, that they’re able to do that right and legally. Unfortunately, the DREAM Act doesn’t accomplish that.

Watch footage of Palin’s remarks:

Sarah Palin In Jersey City: MyFoxNY.com

Actually, the DREAM Act aims to accomplish precisely what Palin described. Under the DREAM Act bill that Republicans killed last December, applicants would have had to go through a rigorous process of background checks, in addition to paying taxes, learning English, and either serving in the military or attending college. They would have then received a “conditional nonimmigrant” status and would be required to “stand in line” for ten years before being granted legal immigrant status. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the same bill would reduce the deficit by $1.4 billion over ten years.

Palin, who has not ruled out the possibility of running for president, set forth an incoherent immigration platform in 2010. When Fox News anchor Bill O’Reilly asked her what she would do about immigration if she ever became “President Palin,” she responded, “Let’s keep it simple and let’s say ‘no, if you were here illegally and if you don’t follow the steps that at some point through immigration reform we’re gonna be able to provide — and that is somehow to allow you to work — if you don’t do that, then you’re gonna be gone.’” Palin seemed to suggest that for those who follow the rules, “there has to be that expectation that they will work and that they will contribute.”

Health

Portland Mayor Sam Adams Proposes Including Transgender Health Benefits For City Employees

Yesterday, the mayor of Portland, Oregon, Sam Adams, told the City Council that he will submit a proposal in one week to increase health benefits to transgender employees of the city, including sexual reassignment surgery (SRS). Adams told the press he wants the city to offer the coverage in order to retain the “best and brightest employees“:

Mayor Sam Adams will ask the City Council to increase health care benefits for transgendered [sic] employees, including sexual reassignment surgery, through one of the plans offered to Portland employees. Adams plans to submit an ordinance expanding the benefits on June 8. It could be heard next week, at the earliest. [...]

“As mayor, it is important to me that we attract and retain the best and brightest employees to the city of Portland. Offering non-discriminatory health care benefits — as leading employers like Nike, Google, Microsoft and IBM do — is one way to accomplish that goal,” Adams said. “Covering basic, medically necessary care is a matter of fairness, and it’s the right thing to do.”

Local news station KATU covered the mayor’s announcement. Watch it:

The estimated cost of Adam’s proposal annually “is $32,302 — that’s a .08% increase out of the $41 million the city already spends on health care.” The city of Berkeley, California is also considering a similar proposal and a plan to offer SRS benefits in Seattle, Washington just failed. Interestingly enough, one unlikely foreign country does offer subsidized SRS benefits to citizens: Iran (but not for the same inclusive reasons).

Alyssa

Alien Invasions and Superpower Anxiety

District 9 is a model of uneasy coexistence.

Charlie Jane Anders’ post on the rising tide of alien invasion movies and asymmetric warfare is awesome great, and I encourage you to read the whole thing. But I want to quibble a bit with a couple of points she makes towards the end of what I think is an otherwise excellent argument:

We know, deep down, that we may one day be on the other side of this equation, that the United States won’t be the world’s main superpower forever. Past superpowers have often only realized their new status when they suddenly faced a sudden, damaging assault from a rising power. Plus, as the main power on the receiving end of asymmetric warfare, we can’t really understand it unless we see it from the other side.

Science fiction is also uniquely suited to talking about the realities of post-Cold War fighting, because so much of asymmetric warfare deals with a technological superiority on one side. The idea of how you cope with a technological strategic advantage is one that science fiction can easily dramatize, because alien technologies are automatically going to be awesome and incomprehensible. (And on the real side, any alien race with the ability to travel interstellar distances to visit Earth is going to be massively more powerful than we are.)

First, I think we’re more likely to end up in a bi- or multi-polar world than we are in a uni-polar world where the United States is not the dominant nation. That’s where movies like District 9, but on a much larger scale, would be interesting—there’s no question that an alien invasion that humanity successfully repulsed would fundamentally reshape our society, likely making the world both more unified across national lines, and more militaristic a la an Ender’s Game scenario. But it would also likely make us cling more fiercely to our humanness in the face of its potential annihilation. Humanity in general and the U.S. in particular would probably change more if we shifted into an uneasy coexistence with an alien society where technological and cultural exchange were possible, but potentially politically taboo.

Second, while the U.S. probably will be less geopolitically powerful in the future, isn’t there an extent to which taking on the underdog role in alien movies sort of absolves us of our role as an invader? Right now, we are fighting two actual asymmetric wars, using technological strategic advantages like predator drones. A movie about a human invasion or colonization of an alien planet might be a more accurate way to process American emotions about our military superiority and the kinds of things we do with it.

And finally, one thing that’s worth mentioning is that in asymmetric wars, the smaller, less conventionally powerful party to the conflict can still find powerful ways to fight back. Whether you’re flying planes into buildings or making very effective use of Improvised Explosive Devices, asymmetric warfare often spurs strategic and technological innovation on both sides of the conflict (see the valorization of hacking in Independence Day). One of the things that’s irritating about so many alien invasion movies is how quickly they’re resolved. Do we really think a society capable of interstellar travel and planet seizure is stupid enough to get beaten up by a bunch of council housing kids in the U.K., as awesome as that scenario is? Or to invade via Los Angeles rather than taking out command centers and nuclear weapons stockpiles first? No, if humanity doesn’t just surrender immediately, this is likely to be a protracted quagmire, the kind of thing that produces actual innovation and strategic shifts. It might involve less of Will Smith punching aliens in the face, or whatever, but it would probably make for better storytelling.

Climate Progress

Congregations Work with EPA’s Energy Star Program to Reduce Carbon Footprints and Energy Bills

Lakewood Church, an evangelical Christian megachurch in Houston, Texas, saved $360,000 on its annual utility costs through better energy management.  SOURCE: AP/Pat Sullivan

CAP’s Marta Cook has the story of how congregations are cutting pollution while saving money.

Can you imagine what a church might do with $360,000 in extra money—especially if it is saved without laying off staff, canceling programs, or increasing contributions from parishioners?

Lakewood Church in Texas, an evangelical Christian megachurch, has the pleasant task of deciding where to direct exactly that amount of money, which they were able to save from reducing their annual utility costs through better energy management. Lakewood Church is not alone, either. Across the country, churches large and small are working with the Environmental Protection Agency to reduce their energy bills and use the savings to live out their message of financial and environmental stewardship.

The EPA’s Energy Star program provides technical information and support to congregations interested in lowering their utility bills and being more environmentally responsible. They also provide public recognition to houses of worship that dramatically reduce energy usage relative to the square footage of the worship buildings. Energy Star has even developed energy management technical tools, such as their Portfolio Manager, to address the specific challenges a building faces in becoming less energy intensive, from a small business building to a church’s facilities.

Read more

Security

Jewish Donors Not Leaving Obama Over Israel After All

As soon as President Obama made his Middle East speech nearly two weeks ago, a single line stating that borders of an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal “should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps” drew the condemnation of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. While the “1967 lines” notion reflected the policies of the Bush and Clinton administrations (not to mention Israeli and Palestinian public opinion), the line brought harsh denunciations from Republicans trying to make Israel a partisan wedge issue. Mitt Romney accused Obama of “throwing Israel under the bus.” Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) said Obama “betrayed” Israel. Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus said of the “1967 lines” comment: “That’s what we’re gonna be singing from the mountaintops for the next 17 months.”

The partisan press — particularly neoconservatives who have long sought to peel away Jewish support from Democrats — attempted to turn the GOP talking point into a larger story by writing that Obama was losing a key bloc of Jewish financial support for his 2012 re-election campaign. As ThinkProgress reported, Alana Goodman at Commentary sought to make hay of Democratic donor Haim Saban’s “break” with the president — conveniently omitting the fact that Saban had never given to Obama in the first place. Nonetheless, the Republican Jewish Coalition, as Priebus promised, launched a campaign of robocalls to 20,000 American Jews, replete with leading questions misrepresenting Obama’s positions.

But has the ploy worked to peel away Obama’s Jewish supporters into the Republicans’ corner?

“I doubt it. Maybe a few people, but will it be substantial? Will it be a factor in the race? I doubt it,” one Jewish Republican operative — that’s right: a Republican – told the Washington Jewish Week’s Adam Kredo. The operative described a “fantasy of Republicans for decades that eventually the Jews will come around to them.”

Indeed, though the stories started to pile up, not a single major Jewish Obama supporter has gone on record saying he or she was backing away because of Israel. However, many of Obama’s Jewish fundraisers are going on record with their plans for continued support:

[Texas Obama donor Marc] Stanley, who serves as chair of the National Jewish Democratic Council, will mobilize the troops to counter the belief that the president has it in for Israel.

“[...T]his perception that Jews aren’t going to Obama is a falsehood,” said Stanley, who plans to hold the first of several large fundraisers for team Obama on June 20 in D.C. “He’s already raising a lot of money, and a lot of money from Jews.”

The New York Observer also gave a write up to the Jewish donors that aren’t leaving Obama:

[C]onversations with nearly a dozen of the top Jewish fund-raisers in New York reveal a much different reality, as rainmakers say they continue to back the president they overwhelmingly supported three years ago.

The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent added that “it’s important to recall that the claim that Jews are on the verge of breaking with Obama has been a frequent refrain for literally years now,” citing the whisper campaign during the 2008 race. “In the end, according to exit polls, Obama won around 78 percent of the Jewish vote,” Sargent wrote.

So, as Sargent asked, what exactly are those partisans doing pushing their “comically transparent effort to drive Jewish support away from the President?” It seems they’re trying to create a sort of snowball effect, albeit one with a hollow core. Kredo reports:

Negative media attention… could push nervous voters and donors over the edge.

“They write about it long enough, and yeah, people believe it,” said Ira Forman, a veteran Democratic political operative and former head of the NJDC.

Neocons playing fast and loose with the facts in order establish false narratives that suit their political agenda? Whodathunkit?

NEWS FLASH

HHS Rejects Indiana Plan Excluding Planned Parenthood From Medicaid | Shortly after Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN) signed a law prohibiting Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funds in that state, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says Indiana’s plan illegally prevents Medicaid beneficiaries from receiving services. Federal law “requires Medicaid beneficiaries to be able to obtain services from any provider qualified to provide services.”

NEWS FLASH

White House Dedicates New Website To LGBT Community | As part of its commemoration of LGBT Pride Month, the White House has rolled out a new website committed to the LGBT community. Though it is titled “Winning the Future,” almost the entire page is committed to detailing the Obama administration’s past accomplishments as opposed to any promises for new ones. Still, it is another groundbreaking step for a president to take in creating visibility for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans:

Yglesias

The Progressive Case For The Miami Heat

I’m rooting for the Miami Heat against the Dallas Mavericks in the NBA Finals and not just because my girlfriend is a die-hard San Antonio Spurs fan. As an old-time Knicks fans from the good old days of the nineties Knicks-Heat slugfests, it’s been tough for me to reconcile myself to the pro-Heat posture, but it’s the correct one. The entire construct in the press that’s gotten LeBron James labeled History’s Greatest Monster for his defection to Miami is fundamentally wrongheaded and anti-labor.

What we’re looking at, essentially, is the case of King James Versus The Cartel. The NBA’s maximum salary rules prevent stellar players like James from earning a market wage. Consequently, LeBron was underpaid in Cleveland, is underpaid in Miami, and would have been underpaid in New York or Chicago. What’s more, the NBA’s draft rules prevent stellar prospects like the 2003 version of LeBron James from choosing which firm they want to work for. If the Lakers wanted to pay him to play basketball and he wanted to play basketball in Los Angeles in exchange for money, he wasn’t allowed. Essentially the only market power a first-rate NBA player has is that (assuming he’s off his rookie deal) he’s allowed to choose which firm will underpay him. The construction of James (and to a lesser extent Chris Bosh) as a traitor to the people of Cleveland (and to a lesser extent Toronto) seeks to normatively stigmatize the exercise of even that freedom. A player should work, indefinitely, at a sub-market wage for whatever team happens to draft him? Why?

Was “The Decision” kind of tasteless? Yes. But we all have our lapses and LeBron’s lapse raised money for charity. Did the biggest social faux pas of your life raise money for charity? I’m guessing it didn’t. Nobody needs to cry for rich NBA stars, but the idea that the even-richer people who own the teams have a moral right to their labor is nuts.

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up