My name is Julianne Bukey. I'm a senior at Scripps College, and I'm working for the summer at NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin.  You may have seen this video of me asking John McCain a question about insurance coverage for birth control at a McCain Town Hall meeting in Racine, Wisconsin on Thursday, July 31, 2008.

Once again, Sen. McCain demonstrated how out of touch he is when it comes to insurance coverage for basic health care. Recently, a reporter had asked him about this subject, and he didn't have any policy other than supporting no action. In a news story on CNN that followed, his campaign is quoted as saying insurance coverage of contraception should be "up to the individual." I read that to mean that he believes that if an individual wants coverage, she should be able to choose it. Wait a minute - that's what we want! But McCain has voted against legislation to ensure insurance companies cover birth control the same way they coer other prescription medications.

Democrats in Congress who voted against immunity for the telecommunication companies in March, then flipped their votes this month and now do not support prosecution for illegally eavesdropping on Americans, received more money from AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon, than those who did not change their votes.

None of the 94 Democrats who changed their vote are from Wisconsin, thankfully - and a big shout out of support to Russ Feingold for attempts to lead a filibuster of the bill - but there are many fellow Midwesterners who did flip.

Were contributions to their coffers the reason? It looks like those who voted to give immunity received double the money from the telco PACs, than those who did not.

Here's the list, courtesy a great organization, MapLight.org.

Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold’s efforts to persuade his colleagues to reject expanded surveillance powers on Americans have gone down in defeat.  Fellow Dems Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer didn't compromise, as noted by Feingold, they capitulated.

The corporations that went along with the president’s illegal spying on Americans were granted amnesty from prosecution for breaking federal wiretapping laws, too.

Imagine if, under the next president, new allegations of corruption surface regarding this program and suddenly become impeachable offenses. And not just this program, but all the other ones that have expanded presidential powers under the Bush White House. The list is long.

That’ll be really funny, won’t it? <snark>

The Senate Housing Bill sponsored by Senator Dodd has a surprise buried deep within its recesses - a requirement that every financial transaction that is processed will be sent to the federal government. Yup - EVERY transaction.  You bought a book online - the government will know.  You donated to a cause with a credit card - the government will know.  You sent your daughter 100 bucks with Paypal to pay for books at college -- you get the idea.

Read it and weep - then start complaining to your senators, wherever you live. 

I can never resist an alliterative headline.

Russ is almost always right, and in this case he's right on the money.

This morning, the Senate starts debating legislation to expand the government's surveillance powers.

Unfortunately, the bill we are going to be considering is the one
reported out by the Senate Intelligence Committee in October, S. 2248.
It did not have to be this way. Thirteen Senators joined me last week
in asking the Majority Leader to instead bring up a bill that includes the changes approved by the Judiciary Committee
last month. That bill, while not perfect by any means, was the product
of an open process and heeded the advice of many experts and advocates
to provide greater protection for the international communications of
innocent Americans. And, unlike the Intelligence Committee bill, the
Judiciary bill does not provide automatic, retroactive immunity for
companies alleged to have cooperated with the administration's illegal
warrantless wiretapping program.

Read more at the TPM Cafe.

In a further attempt to invade our lives, the government is now arguing that you have no reasonable expectation that your email is private. 

On October 8, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit in Cincinnati granted the government's request for a full-panel
hearing in United States v. Warshak case centering on the right of
privacy for stored electronic communications. At issue is whether the
procedure whereby the government can subpoena stored copies of your
e-mail -- similar to the way they could simply subpoena any physical
mail sitting on your desk -- is unconstitutionally broad.

Essentially the government's argument is that since almost all ISP agreements (including my own) allow your ISP access to your files for diagnostic purposes and to prevent fraud, etc. you've already given away all reasonable expectations of privacy.  Therefore the government can simply request your email and any other hosted data without a warrant.

Update: Push for security camera policies in Madison (June 11, 2008)

Now, I feel safer.

Charles Savage at the Boston Globe online writes that the "US doles out millions for street cameras (and that) local efforts raise privacy alarms."

In the last month, cities that have moved forward on plans for surveillance networks financed by the Homeland Security Department include St. Paul, which got a $1.2 million grant for 60 cameras for downtown; Madison, Wis., which is buying a 32-camera network with a $388,000 grant; and Pittsburgh, which is adding 83 cameras to its downtown with a $2.58 million grant.

$388,000? And we want to make a downtown a surveillance zone.

Writes Savage:

The Department of Homeland Security is funneling millions of dollars to local governments nationwide for purchasing high-tech video camera networks, accelerating the rise of a "surveillance society" in which the sense of freedom that stems from being anonymous in public will be lost, privacy rights advocates warn.