ASIC frustration

[dsam]

Lets get the law changed.

I agree.

 

I wonder whether a combined effort/submission to parliament from RA-Aus, SAAA, AOPA etc. might be more effective than random disobedience?

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Given the lack of enforcement of the requirement to carry an ASIC/AVID card at non-majors, there is no way that anyone will know who or how many are disobedient, anyway. So getting these organisations to lobby is the only route. Isn't there some over-arching organisation in Aus that binds most of the organisations together (I recall reading it in Aus Flying a few years ago)? A united front with many members will have more clout than fragmented numbers all biting at ankles...

 

 

[dsam]

Jerry, I think the only (currently existing) over-arching aviation body here would be CASA, and that would be the last place I'd go for help (or common sense)! Parliamentarians aren't much better, sadly...

 

You are right though, some broadly based "peak-body" should be formed to lobby for this (and other) things. Indeed, there are other posts on this forum advocating for such a body to be formed.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I had to larfff at CASA being an over-arching aviation body - doesn't it stand for Completely Against Sound Aviation or something like it.

 

Unf, bringing all of the organisations together tends to create more (internal political) problems than they solve.

 

No easy solution, and compared to some of the issues here and undoubtedly in Aus, the ASIC/AVID is a minor niggle (we are losing airfields faster than we can fly between them, for example, and I believe developers are trying to get their hands on prime GA airports in major towns/cities in Aus). However, what the regulators don't realise it is all piles up on the camel's back and makes the faffing about that much less attractive to all but the hard-core in what is an expensive sport/pastime (OK RAA is cheaper than CoA, but it is still costlier than a set of golf clubs and takes up as much, if not more time) - especially in a society where immediate gratification is becoming the norm, etc. So, I suppose the aviation bodies may say its a pain, but there are bigger fish to fry?

 

Trust me, the carp that EASA makes one go through (although it is now getting better since a huge drop in CoA pilot numbers - meaning airfields on the west coast of France were suffering financially through lack of Brits visiting them and started kicking up a stink). I am about to try and convert my now recently expired JAA license to an EASA one (long story as to how it became expired before I converted); if they say I no longer have a JAA license as it has expired, therefore have nothing to convert from and make me to the theory and a flight-test again, I will either finish the Aussie licence and get a piggy back FAA licence (plenty of N-Reg a/c, instructors/examiners and maintenance shops here - although EASA want to make that difficult, too) or go to LAA/Permit (similar to RAA) - the only problem with that is, it is OK if flying to France, Germany, Spain and I think Austria, but a pain if wanting to fly to other countries (ironically they have a EASA LAPL for harmonised LSA type licensing, but can't agree a common tech/engineering standarf for permit type a/c). The point I am making here is that unless the industry stand up and scream, "Hey, your carp regs are costing us money and jobs at the expense of the yanks or someone else", then the regulators will have bigger political fish to fry..

 

If I was in Aus, with the vast flying distance, I would be RAA - lots of flying space without crossing international borders...

 

 

[dsam]

Jerry, I'm glad you caught my ironic humour from over there in the U.K. regarding CASA.

 

I agree, bringing organisations together probably creates more troubles than it solves. Not a good plan...

 

The "Peak Body" that might work would be more of a small semi-voluntary committee, sourced from a myriad of aviation groups. The sole purpose of the committee would be to focus on 4-6 annoying regulatory issues common or agreeable to all (eg. ASIC, developers Vs. airfield spaces, etc.).

 

Their one task would be to persistently direct lobbying efforts to Parliamentarians, Councils, Regulators, media, etc. advocating for logical changes to the status-quo. As they would be seen to represent a broad range of the aviation community, their efforts might have more collective clout. ... well I am a self confessed idealist.... forever hopeful.

 

 

[Kununurra]

As alluded to in previous posts this subject has gone on and on for what seems like forever.

 

Whilst I don't agree with the card entirely it is law so I choose to obey it at a cost of around $200 every 2 years give or take a few dollars.

 

This subject seems to gather a lot of wind, to steal another's words " an activist is someone who cleans the river up, not says it is dirty"

 

So if it is a march or demonstration or petition that is required can someone who feels so strongly about the subject please kick it off.

 

If I was one of the people who was flouting the laws the last thing I would want is for people to tell everyone what they have been getting away with for so long, heaven help the forums if for some strange reason our cards were checked imagine the rhetoric we would hear then.

 

Ouch I know this is going to hurt but we are sounding like whinging poms,

 

Cheers

 

 

[skippydiesel]

From Little Things Big Things Grow

 

I am suggesting boycotting major aviation events - no pilots - no planes (flying). Not talking about your local fly-in's. The serious big industry events. Any risk that they might be negatively impacted would get a whole lot of attention.

 

It is just not good enough that anyone should have to pay a cent towards an unjustifiable law or feel guilty/uneasy about flouting it.

 

In truth our representatives, bureaucrats & lawmakers have let us down badly on the ASIC matter. Something so asinine should have been fixed as soon as it became apparent it was achieving so very little. Yet it remains. Why? I would suggest shear bloody minded inertia.

 

The polite within the system, (representation, lobbying, rational argument, etc) clearly has had no discernible impact.

 

Hell will freeze over before any of our pollies take up this matter with genuine interest.

 

Sometimes people power is the only alternative to a disinterested body politic.

 

Bad law must be removed or changed, not just ignored

 

 

[Bill]

From Little Things Big Things GrowI am suggesting boycotting major aviation events - no pilots - no planes (flying). Not talking about your local fly-in's. The serious big industry events. Any risk that they might be negatively impacted would get a whole lot of attention.

 

It is just not good enough that anyone should have to pay a cent towards an unjustifiable law or feel guilty/uneasy about flouting it.

 

In truth our representatives, bureaucrats & lawmakers have let us down badly on the ASIC matter. Something so asinine should have been fixed as soon as it became apparent it was achieving so very little. Yet it remains. Why? I would suggest shear bloody minded inertia.

 

The polite within the system, (representation, lobbying, rational argument, etc) clearly has had no discernible impact.

 

Hell will freeze over before any of our pollies take up this matter with genuine interest.

 

Sometimes people power is the only alternative to a disinterested body politic.

 

Bad law must be removed or changed, not just ignored

[Bill]

How the bureacracy works (or doesn't )

 

Nov 2013 The Aviation Safety Regulation Review (chaired by Forsyth) is commissioned

 

June 2014. Forsyth hands the report to the Governement.

 

Recommendation 36

 

The Australian Government amends regulations so that background checks and the requirement to hold an Aviation Security Identification Card are only required for unescorted access to Security Restricted Areas, not for general airside access. This approach would align with international practice.

 

The recommendations were handed to The Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development for review and implementation in July 2014.

 

As at 31 December 2015 (regarding Recommendation 36)

 

Action: In the first half of 2015 the Government will commence consultation with industry on any potential changes to the scope of the ASIC scheme.

 

Status: Industry was consulted during 2015 via a discussion paper, airport site visits and industry forums. The Department will provide advice, taking into account industry comments, on these issues, to the Government for its consideration in the first half of 2016.

 

As at 25 August 2016 (regarding Recommendation 36)

 

Action: In the first half of 2015 the Government will commence consultation with industry on any potential changes to the scope of the ASIC scheme.

 

Status: Completed. The Department has consulted industry and significant implementation issues have been identified. Further progress will be considered as part of a review of the current categorisation of security controlled airports.

 

So ....... The Department has consulted industry (would that have included RAA, AOPA, both of whom made submissions?)

 

...... significant implementation issues have been identified ( like what ?? )

 

 

[poteroo]

tatus: Completed. The Department has consulted industry and significant implementation issues have been identified. Further progress will be considered as part of a review of the current categorisation of security controlled airports.

Consultation is what bureaucrats do after the review has been completed. Sir Humphrys' legacy lives on in Canberra!

 

 

[skippydiesel]

This is called a "make work scheme" - all to common in that welfare agency called the government.

 

They call themselves public servants, suggesting they are all about the welfare/interest of the public. In reality they are public parasites (my apologies to those very few that take the title seriously and act accordingly).

 

They are only to happy to spin out an issue, consult here/there & wherever, appoint committees, advisers, consultants and travel oversea's, interstate (wherever there is a good restaurant and comfy accommodation?) ALL AT OUR EXPENSE to change what almost any class of 12 year old's could do as a morning exercise.

 

The way ASIC has been implemented & maintained is a case study in government ineptitude,verging criminal misappropriation of public funds - an all to common scenario.

 

When will the great Australian public start to hold our SERVANTS to a higher standard? (She'll be right mate, no worries)

 

 

[Yenn]

How can we hold the servants to a higher standard. It is impossible to get a response from my local Federal member to any query. Maybe that is not true, I did once get a response when he agreed with me that politicians were grubs. but that never made the least bit of difference.

 

My latest letter to him is unanswered and all I wanted to know is why the Fed Govt. is taking land off Australians so that the Govt. can lease it to Singapore to make a profit. Maybe I shall have to address my problems to Pauline and One Nation.

 

 

[facthunter]

Get hundreds to sign a petition and send it and copies everywhere you think it might be listened to. You can do it on line. Funny It has "access all areas" last time I had one and that's hard to get. Barnaby's fixed the Shoalwater Bay? area land "compulsory" acquisition Get enough voters angry and it gets their attention. It's not the public servant's fault . They don't formulate the legislation in the first place which is where the problem starts. Nev

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

My experience of the public service (Victorian) is actually not that much different to large corporations - there are those that are conscientious and want to do the best, and there are empire builders, etc. In my fledgling career, I worked in IT (then EDP) for a Vic Gov't office. Team was small, adept, conscientious and meritocratic with a good user rapport. Some head honcho in the department decides ha can monetise information we hold, sets up an empire and it fails monumentally complete with a damning auditors report mainly because the empire couldn't have been stuffed about what was right for its "clients".

 

About 1.5 years into its 2 year schedule , I had had enough and made the move to the large corp sector. Same thing; teams, usually on the ground, doing the hard yards and trying their level headed best to do everything in their power for the end user/client. Others, who are great at soap box politics, just doing stoopid stuff and making things difficult for their clients/users.. Difference is, somewhere in the corporate world, their performance/remuneration is tied to profit so they sometimes try and put the brakes on this sort of carp; often it is just passed on as higher prices to the consumer as much as possible given competition - government departments rarely have competition for their funds.

 

Rant over and back to topic....

 

Unf., private GA is seen as a rich-man's pursuit and we have the tall poppy syndrome. I know, esp, for RAA, it isn't the preserve of the rich - but it's a perception. That coupled with a relatively small participation rate relative to population, it is hardly going to be a vote winner for the government to protect private GA's interest. In fact, if anything, the government will use unnecessary burdens of GA to improve its perception to the public it is doing something - in this case protecting the public against terrorism threats - a few people that Joe public doesn't really care too much about jumping up and down complaining is not going to do much, by itself to force the requisite change.

 

There are two things one usually has to do to get governments to eat humble pie and reverse a decision, especially when the decision is trumpeted as necessary for protection of people, given the increasingly sensationalistic and sound-byte driven media these days: 1 Get wider public Support; 2 Get departmental/government support.

 

So how do we, as fat, rich bar-stewards, get wider public support? By wider, I mean not just aviation folk, but business people, workers, community heads,. Find areas where the local GA scene generates a bit of cash - both directly and indirectly and preferably where an ASIC would be very difficult to justify, but has sufficient population to make the local MP feel a little threatened if public opinion in that area would wane. Start the information campaign in these locations - declining aviation = declining revenues = declining wealth/jobs, etc - preferably quantified. Educate people that it is not just rich, fat poppies, but people from all walks of life that partake. Maybe the local GA facilities could throw open days, etc. Get locals thinking - "Hang on, the arguments don't add up and it is costing us as people don't fly as much, less people are taking up the pursuit as it is too much of a faff and for the same reason - more people are hanging up their headsets. Also, many overseas aviators just give up (as I have mentioned before). I am looking at spending AUD $4,400 - $6,000 on a/c rental alone this year in Aus - but if it becomes too much of a pain to be able to do, having a go of flying from the UK to Cyprus will be a pretty good alternative. For the "high risk" airfields, keep the ASIC backed up with effective enforcement; for the low risk airfields, bin it (life is full of risk, it's how we mitigate it effectively and what risk we are willing to accept). The point I am making is if we educate those that are not just in aviation to the real detriment this (and other unnecessarily burdensome regulation) is having on their wider community, we will get support.

 

Now, how do we get the government to support it. The Department that administers it is not going to support reversing their decision on a bunch of people moaning - and internal proponents will use every means available to them to preserve - lest they forgo their next promotion. Unless there is something we can offer up as an alternative that lets them save face, pushing against them will be very difficult, especially if pointing out the stupidity of their ways. There's two ways to do it. One, offer a real alternative and allow them to take the credit for thinking it up as continual improvement. It is easier for them to say something like "We absolutely need a system in place to mitigate the real threat of terrorism and other anti-social ills presented by a small minority of GA. The initial assessment didn't differentiate the threats as they were so wide, however, after successful operation of the ASIC/AVID scheme, and with the availability of better data and new intelligence, it is clear that our resources are better focussed on better security at major airports and more thorough checks of people who intend to fly into them." than "Yeah, we finally listened to a bunch of people who told us how dumb we are and, you know what, they are right". The head of a GA/private aviation lobby group here constantly bangs on about how bad/illogical this decision is or that decision is and how it is smarter doing it the lobby group's way. It's true, but people just get sick of the moaning and start to tune out.

 

Another prong to getting government support is to point out to other government departments that an initiative may be infringing on their turf and possibly making them look a little inadequate. In the case of the ASIC, ASIO already has counter-terrorism responsibilities with one would think at least the Federal police and probably state police as well. So, these organisations should be using various intelligence techniques to identify and where possible apprehend terror suspects, be they foreign visitors or locally radicalised. They will also have handles on drug smugglers and other nasties of society. So, is this ASIC requirement a vote of no confidence in our security organisations? What consultation did the Dept of whoever they are have with the intelligence organisations to properly assess the threat and the potential holes in the security organisations' techniques? And so on. The point is, again, educating other government departments may bring pressure to the department, if for nothing else than they don't want to be seen as not being able to do their job properly, or submitting someone who is bad to a security clearance may force them underground where it is not easy to provide surveillance - i.e. it could hamper efforts. They start talking to the department to see what the gubbins is going on...

 

Point is, moaning won' solve it; education over time will... Sounds a lot easier than it is, I know..

 

@Kunanurra, no pain here - I am a wining (as opposed to whining) PomAussie ;-) But you are right - there are more passivists than activists .

 

Now, where's the telly remote?

 

 

[skippydiesel]

A few things to respond to here - Hope I can make some sense of it all;

 

Yenn - "How can we hold the servants to a higher standard ?"

 

Well the first answer has got to be at the ballot box (all three ridiculous levels of government). Stop voting for the people you have been habitually voting for since ,"whenever". Do a bit of policy research, ask some awkward questions of those standing for election, vote for the person who will come closest to upholding YOUR values. DO NOT MINDLESSLY VOTE ALONG PARTY LINES just because you have always loyally done so. In other words make your vote count. Make the buggers work for you & your vote and if they don't, VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE NEXT TIME.

 

It is big party propaganda that a vote for an independent/or micro party is a lost vote - Independents have to work very hard, on "shoes string budgets" to win and keep your vote. They must listen and act or loose out . They are far more likely to vigorously pursue their electorate/electors concerns and once in power, keep their colleagues to some semblance of ethical conduct.

 

Start to discuss issues that concern you, with family, friends & colleagues (never mind the social embargo on polite conversation - no sex, politicos or religion) be VOCAL. This is how you get ideas, start groups of people with common cause(s).

 

Be prepared to take considered action - PROTEST !! when/where necessary. Do something mildly outrageous / discomforting to get public & media attention. In today's world, groups of like minded protesters get whats called MEDIA COVERAGE - absolutely essential in generating change in the political world. Above all be fearless and indefatigable (it will take time).

 

Use the internet. Forums like this one.

 

Jerry - "the public service (Victorian) is actually not that much different to large corporations" TRUE ! These groupings are collectively known as bureaucracy's (B). I would suggest a B is a, common, irrational, inefficient self serving, natural spontaneous phenomena of large human groupings (not confined to governments).

 

• Common - they happen everywhere in the world where large numbers of people group together under an administration (the dreaded ADMIN is essential in a B)
   
   
  
• Irrational - little real thought/ planning goes into their formation an structure
   
   
  
• Inefficient - inevitably
   
   
  
• Self serving - B's become organic, that is much like a living organism in they will defend their existence & sustenance ($$$$) against all comers and often at all cost with little concern as to the consequence(s).
   
   
  
• Natural - every group from a small club, through government bodies, to transnational corporations seem to "crystallise" into very similar formations and internal functionary's.
   
   
  
• Spontaneous - result of a sudden impulse or inclination and without premeditation
   
   
  
• Phenomena - an extraordinary naturally occurring event
   
   
  

 

 

I could blather on but in short B's are inevitable, a bit like death & taxes. Not good, just necessary & inevitable. Just like death & taxes, we as a society/individuals should strive to contain and minimise the growth and negative impacts of B's.

 

Unfortunate another naturally occurring set of social phenomena are: COMPLACENCY and INERTIA (She'll be right mate, no worries)

 

Good Rant - I feel so much better

 

 

[dsam]

....Well the first answer has got to be at the ballot box (all three ridiculous levels of government). Stop voting for the people you have been habitually voting for since ,"whenever". Do a bit of policy research, ask some awkward questions of those standing for election, vote for the person who will come closest to upholding YOUR values. DO NOT MINDLESSLY VOTE ALONG PARTY LINES just because you have always loyally done so. In other words make your vote count. Make the buggers work for you & your vote and if they don't, VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE NEXT TIME.It is big party propaganda that a vote for an independent/or micro party is a lost vote - Independents have to work very hard, on "shoes string budgets" to win and keep your vote. They must listen and act or loose out . They are far more likely to vigorously pursue their electorate/electors concerns and once in power, keep their colleagues to some semblance of ethical conduct.....

I'm inclined to agree with you, skippydiesel. I haven't voted for a major party for well over 15 years. Indeed, with our preferential voting system, I intentionally put major parties last on my ballot, to be strategic in preventing my preferences being distributed in any other way than the one I choose. I'm one of the few that regularly numbers all 80++ boxes below the line, on the senate ballot slip. Yes, I know.... I'm obsessive. I actually research candidates prior to casting my ballot.

 

Two-party democracy as it is now practiced in the western world is, in my opinion, a broken distortion of its former self - damaged by powerful & wealthy vested interests pulling strings behind the scenes. Political parties of all persuasions are overly focused on polls, spin, and "wedging" the other party. Only voters can change this.

 

Some independents are "just plain loopy", but quality independents tend to be more focused on policy that is in the best interests of their electorate - the core business of Parliament. Generally, the more that the big parties have to deal with quality independents, the better the legislation that eventually passes the senate.

 

As for protest marches and waving placards (yes, I've done this in my time too) I'm inclined to feel it is rather pointless and wasteful of human energy that could be better deployed elsewhere in a campaign. Perhaps it is only useful at kicking-off an effective media campaign. These days, newspapers and broadcast television/radio don't have the huge impact they once did. Social media must also be included, particularly for the younger generation.

 

Lastly, lets not forget going directly to the source. Perhaps I waste my energy, but I do send letters & e-mail to bureaucrats & parliamentarians at all three levels of government we have (yes, 3 is too many). Sometimes I get a form-letter response... sometimes better. Independents are always more responsive - and they give me the impression they've actually read my correspondence, even if they don't agree - fair enough IMHO. I certainly wrote to many officials regarding implementing all the Forsyth recommendations (incl. ASIC).

 

OK, that's my rant... sorry for bending your ears

 

 

[bunyips]

I'm one of the few that regularly numbers all 80++ boxes below the line, on the senate ballot slip.

Haha... I am also one of those that numbers the whole lot. At the last elections I had finished work and went to the voting booth late on a Saturday arvo... Proceeded to mark the long list of hopeful parasites and genuine humans down to the least wanted in any form of control. This took about 20 minutes... Just as the volunteers were about to start locking up I cried out... "I need another Ballot as I have made too many mistakes" ... The looks on their faces was priceless... As i folded my perfectly good Ballot paper and dropped it into the bin of Who really knows what goes on :)

[skippydiesel]

DSAM / bunyips -" I tips my lid" to you two gents but please lets not agree to much, takes all the fun out of having a good (truthful) rant. On that note;

 

I am a firm believer in attempting the conventional communication routes. When this has been done and done and done, with little to show for it ACTION is required. People must stand up and shout, go on a march, boycott an event or three. It must be public, in their faces and attention grabbing and all parties must be prepared to do IT as often as is strategically required. The media (including on line stuff) love nothing better, the polliess love/hate the media . They key is to attract media attention - then watch the pollies jump on the bandwagon

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Skippy - agree wholeheartedly with you (well, almost ). The point I was trying to make is that one of the things the government don't have a monopoly on is being in themselves a welfare agency..

 

The other point I am trying to make is that, at the moment, for the most part, we have our representative organisations all moan and groan at the parlous state of regulation directly to the regulator and through it's own media. And so they achieve putting the regulator into a defensive position and preaching to the converted.

 

The problem with protesting for the private GA fraternity is that it is not a pursuit nor, in the case of ASIC, a predicament that a lot of society has a natural affinity to. The worst thing could happen would be having a protest that is covered and after the protest leader had their 30 seconds of fame passing the message to the tv journo, they cut to members of the public that are at best. apathetic and say something like "Yeah - agree with what they say, but the gov't have bigger fish to fry", or worse, believe the over-dramatic hype and say, "Nah - there's a chance someone could pack TNT into a plane and if this will stop it I am all for it". Plays right into the pollies hands. Which is why broader public support is required first.. Again, it can be done locally and the protests then follow locally, etc. Put enough of shock in at the edges of the B, and the ripple waves will be enough to get change in the centre. It really is a concerted campaign, that starts with community education to drive support to push change through...

 

 

[skippydiesel]

Hi Jerry,

 

Glad you didn't agree with me completely, whee would be the fun if we all agreed.

 

In post war Australia, with its vast open spaces, poor roads and limited rail infrastructure, flying was seen as the natural & efficient way to get around the country. In short the public supported and even idolised aviation/aviators. Flying is now mainstream, mundane, no romance - A to B cheap & fast .( Oh! were we talking about little planes and amateur pilots - way to dangerous.) Unfortunately that is ancient history and i fear no amount of education is going to change it in our lifetimes. (We all know/speculate at the reasons for this 180 degree change - suffice to say they are multiple). Without significant community support, something more immediate & direct is the only way to get the attention of the pollies. Other single issues groups have stood up/closed the gates/ picketed the factory/chained themselves to the railings/etc/etc & achieved significant even complete change in policy/law - why cant we?

 

In this context I would see our group

 

Strengths as -

 

• An unusually wide range of talented persons from diverse backgrounds - much knowledge and ability to draw on
   
   
  
• The ability to make dramatic displays - massed aircraft movement
   
   
  
• Highly mobile - quickly move from location to location
   
   
  
• Goal oriented - can do attitude
   
   
  
• Logical - planners
   
   
  
• Age - largest segment near or in retirement time to devote to a cause
   
   
  

 

 

Weakness as -

 

• Independent movers & thinkers - hard to get consistent coordinated action
   
   
  
• Middle class conservative - complacent inertia
   
   
  
• Relatively small - numerically insignificant
   
   
  
• Dreamers - lot of talk, little action
   
   
  
• Conformists - a bit to much faith in the authorities/law to act appropriately
   
   
  
• Age - lacking in the mental energy to make a stand
   
   
  
• Thin on the ground - geographically widely dispersed making communication and coordinated action difficult
   
   
  

 

 

You can probably add more & subtract some

 

 

[facthunter]

What's the opposite of "thin on the ground". Thick in the Air? Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

If you want the low down on Independents and party politics, get hold of Tony Windsors book. He has several good stories to tell but the most telling to me was that Barnaby Joyce admitted th Tony Windsor that Tonys not standing against him caused the Nat, Lib parties to knock millions off the money they were going to promise that electorate.

 

 

[hihosland]

With you there Skippy

 

I also do the big numbering thing.

 

and am of the opinion that anyone who turns up to a polling booth needing a "how to vote card" should be disenfranchised on the spot and sent home.

 

Our shining political example, Cory, is only in the senate because thousands of people were too lazy to do anything other than tick the box above the line. Now he has resigned from the party on whose behalf he was elected and can roll in the trough of senatorial benefits for the next 6? years.

 

Convince me the system is not broken or at least seriously bent.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I keep going back to that old Frank and Ernest cartoon, where they're in Washington.

 

"In politics all you've got to do is stand for whatever people will fall for."

 

 

[facthunter]

It took me 20+ minutes to fill in the Senate sheet voting below the line. You need all the assistance you can get with that ponderous document.. Most took the easy way out and got what the lottery gave them. Some got in with a very low direct vote tally. Nev