Thursday, August 18, 2011

new bad taste releases out now

bad taste is back (again) with two new releases for free download, including a new AWIA EP and an album by an AWIA contributor:

bt#33: baconhanger – legion
it's been three years since the release of his debut, but baconhanger hasn't been slacking off—he's been sharpening his production skills! the beats and textures are as punishing as ever, but now they cut like a knife instead of bludgeoning you into submission. call him legion, for his breaks are massive!

bt#34: animals within animals – macho EP
a musical tribute to a longtime unofficial bad taste mascot, as only AWIA can deliver! we remember macho man randy savage, from his wrestling career to his rap album to his classic catchphrase… and who could forget his slim jim commercials? concludes with a moving eulogy delivered by macho man himself!

Tuesday, August 02, 2011

working the refs

the state of indiana (read: AG greg zoeller) wants to move the battle to defund planned parenthood out of the courts to where it belongs: some administrator's desk in washington:

Indiana asked a federal appeals court Monday to lift a judge's order blocking parts of a new abortion law that cuts some public Planned Parenthood funding, saying the issue should be decided by Medicaid officials and not the courts.

The 44-page brief asks the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago to reverse U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt's June 24 preliminary injunction, which barred the state from cutting Medicaid funds to the organization because it provides abortions.


In its brief filed Monday, Indiana says federal Medicaid officials, not the courts, should determine the law's legality.

that makes sense: let medicaid officials do their jobs! if you're wondering where medicaid officials will eventually come down on this issue, you only need to wait negative two months:

The state is appealing Medicaid Administrator Donald Berwick's June 1 decision rejecting changes to Indiana's Medicaid plan brought on by the new law. Berwick contended Medicaid recipients have the right to obtain treatment from any qualified provider, including those that provide abortions.

so the issue should be decided by medicaid officials, not the courts. except when medicaid officials make a decision you disagree with, in which case the issue should be decided by some other medicaid officials.

Monday, August 01, 2011

prostitution fine?

the indy star has the latest about a local prostitution sting where prostitutes are fined for code enforcement violations:

Arrest a hooker, and she will face a night in jail and, in some cases, a small fine. But write her a ticket, and she'll face a fine of up to $2,500 and a court order to find a new line of work.

City Prosecutor Helen Marchal said the fines are up to $7,500 for repeat offenders. The typical fine is about $500.

"With the civil case, you really hurt them by dipping into their pocketbooks," Marchal said. "If the arrest doesn't act as a deterrent, maybe the fine will."

A city ordinance requires escorts to get a license. An escort license is $103 for a person. Licensed escorts also must work for a city-approved escort agency, which needs a separate license that costs $319.

Because the city has no licensed escorts, Code Enforcement administrator Adam Collins said, any working in Indianapolis are violating the ordinance.

this makes no sense. the city budget is a wreck, with less revenue coming in every year. the mayor is desperately scouring the budget for "fluff" and selling off hunks of infrastructure just to get money to pave the streets and fix our overflowing sewers. so why we do have a law that allows the city to issue escort licenses if we're never going to issue any licenses? the city could be generating extra revenue just by following the laws that are already on the books.

if prostitution is truly such a terrible moral scourge on our community, then just increase the criminal penalties. don't fine people for not having a license that the city refuses to issue—that's hypocritical government.

update: paul ogden has more about why this is bad policy:

Unfortunately the reporter missed a critical part of the strategy involved in the City's treating this as a civil ordinance violation rather as a criminal offense - most of the constitutional protections that apply to protect someone charged with a crime, doesn't apply if the City treats the offenses as civil ordinance violation.

indeed, the star story even acknowledges that one person caught by the sting refused to participate in a sex act with the undercover officers but was still ticketed... despite committing no crime.