Abuse of Information Database Is Too Commonplace

Last week, the nation was jarred by the news that a couple searched "backpack" and "pressure cooker," then found armed police at their door soon thereafter.  While it turned out that their internet provider actually turned in the tip, other NSA scandals have enraged and frightened many.

Defenders of information collection argue that what is collected rarely gets used.  And then, only by professionals with good reason to use it.  Unfortunately, people being who they are, abuse can always happen.

The Washington Guardian recently reported that New York City Police Department detectives have routinely abused the privilege of accessing the FBI's National Crime Information Center database.  While only authorized to use it during car stops and investigations, some officers have used it to snoop on fellow officers and even tip off criminals.  Some of the most egregious cases involve officers identifying drug criminals so that they can rob them.

Safeguards exist, but experts claim that abusers can easily circumvent them. 

This adds to worries that the National Security Agency has distributed information to agencies that investigate domestic crime and not national security.  Reuters reports that the NSA sent information to the Drug Enforcement Agency's Special Operations Division.  Although the information shared cannot be used because of Constitutional restrictions, DEA investigators are trained to backtrack and build a conventional looking investigation that does not use illegal data.

Many fear that high level politicians will always face temptations to misuse information at their disposal. The administrations of Franklin Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, and Barack Obama all misused IRS information.  Eliot Spitzer, while governor of New York, misused police documents to smear a Republican opponent. 

Information gained for law enforcement and/or national security purposes can help to protect the nation, lives, and property.  Living without it means accepting complete vulnerability.  But like any other extension of government power, the intelligence and law enforcement fields need to have strong boundaries and competent oversight.  Rule of law and natural rights principles demand no less.

Is the EPA's War on Coal Distracting It From Real Public Safety Threats?

The Environmental Protection Agency has pushed hard against West Virginia coal companies and farmers. It has pushed miners out of work over the questionable and controversial "climate change" agenda.  Power plants are slated to shut down in many areas due to draconian new regulations.  At the same time, EPA bureaucrats have, with mixed success, launched regulatory broadsides against family farms. But in their zeal to promote certain agendas, have they neglected proven threats to the environment and public safety?

Most people do not consider what happens when they discard electronics.  E-waste, as it is often called, contains deadly materials such as mercury and cadmium that can leach into the water supply.  Because disposal can be difficult, 70 percent of the world's electronic trash has ended up in China.  There, many make a dangerous living washing off old parts in hydrochloric acid, and working directly with mercury coated components.

Press coverage has forced the United Nations and others to watch the illegal traffic more closely, meaning that growing piles of material remain in the United States for legal disposal.  A major snag, however, lies in the fact that the EPA has not established guidelines for disposal.

A Washington Guardian report shows that in 2009, the US handled 1.77 million tons of material.  It was incinerated, or otherwise disposed of.  The EPA's inspector general, however, claimed that "EPA does not have adequate information to ensure effective E-waste management and enforcement to protect public health and conserve valuable resources."

Furthermore, the EPA has very little data on how waste is stored, or what is done with it. Even the cathode ray tube guidelines implemented under the Bush Administration have not been enforced well, due to declining budgets.

The EPA does its best work when it responds capably to proven threats to public safety.  Therein, it justifies its existence and budget.  Unfortunately, it appears that its zeal to adhere to the unproven theory of climate change may be putting public health at risk.