Daily Archives: June 29, 2009

Madoff should be just the beginning

Madoff ScandalGiven the loot stolen by investor Bernard Madoff and the lives he ruined, the maximum 150-year sentence imposed today seems just — if symbolic, given that he’s 71. But Madoff and one of his accountants, who also has been criminally charged, represent just a sliver of the global financial collapse. Texas billionaire R. Allen Stanford faces charges of bilking investors, too. But where are the other perp walks, prison sentences and accountability for what has cost so many investors so much?

Not sold on Sotomayor

Obama Supreme CourtTwo of the first three U.S. senators to commit to voting against the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor were Kansans: Sen. Pat Roberts on May 28 and Sen. Sam Brownback on June 24. The third is Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla. The three have more in common than geography and party: They all voted against Sotomayor’s nomination to the federal appeals bench in 1998. Her hearings don’t start until mid-July, but Brownback said last week: “In her writings, Judge Sotomayor has rejected the principle of impartiality and embraces the novel idea that a judge’s personal life story should come into play in the courtroom. I’m not sure why Judge Sotomayor believes the law is somehow different when interpreted by people of different backgrounds. I think Judge Sotomayor is absolutely wrong, and that we do a disservice to law and society when we don’t transcend our personal sympathies and prejudices.”

Open thread 6/29

thescream9

Craziness on Kellogg

speedingradar1Last spring the city of Wichita didn’t get far in Topeka with a legislative proposal to allow higher fines for speeders along Kellogg and other statistically deadly roadways in the state, despite Kellogg’s 2008 death toll of seven. But last week city officials got some more ammunition, as part of a radar blitz that resulted in 22 citations on 60 mph Kellogg — one driver going 107 mph and another (with a revoked license) going 85 mph. Such recklessness defies belief and justifies officers’ special attention to Kellogg. But the question remains: Would a driver willing to go 107 mph and risk a $291 minimum fine be fazed by the threat of a $592 fine?