Travis Kvapil's NASCAR Car Stolen From Hotel Before Race

HAMPTON, Ga. (AP) — When Travis Kvapil got the call Friday, he figured someone on his race team was playing a joke.

“They said there was trouble with the car,” Kvapil said. “I thought we could figure it out when we got in the garage area. They’re like, ‘No, the car is gone.'” The No. 44 NASCAR Sprint Cup car owned by small-budget Team XTREME was stolen from a hotel parking lot near Atlanta Motor Speedway, police said, forcing Kvapil to withdraw from this weekend’s race before he even got a chance to qualify.

The $250,000 race car was still missing late in the afternoon, and police were hoping the public could assist in the search. The owner of one NASCAR sponsor offered a pit pass to every race the rest of the year to anyone who helped located the high-powered Chevrolet.

“It’s insane,” said team owner John Cohen, who didn’t have a backup car to run in Atlanta.

For a few hours, the team held out hope of the car being found in time for qualifying Friday, but it was forced to withdraw when it missed NASCAR’s mandatory inspection.

The Sprint Cup race is Sunday.

“It’s really bizarre,” Kvapil said. “You can handle maybe getting a flat tire, or getting caught up in a wreck, or a blown engine, something that actually happens on the race track. Or you don’t qualify, because you don’t have enough speed. But to not even get a chance … that’s pretty disheartening.”

It was an especially tough blow for Team XTREME, which doesn’t have the funding of major multi-car operations such as Hendrick Motorsports and Joe Gibbs Racing. Despite a wreck in qualifying, the team managed to make the field for the season-opening Daytona 500 with Reed Sorenson behind the wheel. He finished 32nd in the race.

Sorenson switched to a different team for the Atlanta race, prompting Team XTREME to hire Kvapil, a one-time Sprint Cup regular who had only five starts in the top NASCAR series last season and was looking to make his first appearance of 2015.

“I was excited to be part of a small team and trying to build up with them,” Kvapil said. “Personally, it’s a big setback.”

A trailer with the red race car inside was hitched to a black 2004 Ford F-350 pickup truck parked outside a hotel in Morrow, Georgia, about 15 miles south of Atlanta and a short drive from the speedway, police said. Surveillance video showed the truck and trailer being driven out of the parking lot around 5:30 a.m., Morrow police Detective Sgt. Larry Oglesby said.

The team, which had been working 18-hour days to get the car ready for Atlanta, was scheduled to leave for the track at 5:45 a.m., and a crewman had been outside a few minutes before the theft, smoking a cigarette.

“I’ve been doing this since 1979,” crew chief Peter Sospenzo said. “I’ve probably been to 1,200 hotels and 1,200 race tracks. Never once has this happened. It’s crazy. But there’s a first for everything, I guess.”

The trailer is plain white with no markings. The person who stole it likely didn’t realize the race car was inside, and may have thought it was lawn equipment or something else he could easily sell, Oglesby said.

“Hopefully they’ll open this one up and say, ‘Oh no, this isn’t what we thought,’ and will drop it off at the nearest vacant lot or apartment complex or somewhere,” he said.

Normally, the car would have been transported using the team’s hauler, an 18-wheel tractor trailer. But, with a winter storm moving through the Southeast this week, Cohen sent the hauler to Atlanta earlier in the week. Back at the shop, the team was still working on the car, a different version than the one that ran under restrictor-plate rules in Daytona. It was sent separately to Atlanta late Thursday after the storm cleared out, accompanied by Sospenzo and six other crew members.

“My whole plan backfired,” said Cohen, who has been running a Sprint Cup car since 2012 and is one of the few African-Americans involved in NASCAR’s top series.

In addition to the race car, the trailer also contained a spare engine valued at $100,000 and racing equipment valued at $17,500, according to a police report. Even so, Cohen vowed the team would return for next weekend’s race in Las Vegas.

Kvapil said the thieves probably won’t be able to cash in on their surprising haul.

“There’s really no use for it out in the general public,” he said. “I hope they realize that and will leave it somewhere where the police can find it.”

The theft gave NASCAR star Jeff Gordon a new perspective.

When his crew chief was complaining about the way the No. 24 car was running before practice, Gordon told him, “It would be a lot worse. Our car could’ve been stolen.”

Then Gordon turned serous, saying: “I hate it for Travis and those guys. I hope they get to the bottom of it.”

___

Associated Press Writer Kate Brumback in Atlanta contributed to this report.

___

Follow Paul Newberry on Twitter at www.twitter.com/pnewberry1963

Education Department Terminates Contracts With Debt Collectors Accused Of Wrongdoing

The U.S. Department of Education, under fire for its lackluster oversight of student loan contractors, said Friday it will terminate its relationship with five debt collectors after accusing them of misleading distressed borrowers at “unacceptably high rates.”

The surprise announcement follows years of complaints about allegedly illegal debt-collection practices by Education Department contractors, the department’s seeming lack of interest in ensuring that borrowers are treated fairly, and the relative opacity of the entire operation.

The most prominent of the debt collectors, Pioneer Credit Recovery, is owned by Navient Corp., the student loan giant formerly known as Sallie Mae. Pioneer, under investigation by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, generated $127 million from the contract over the past two years, according to its annual report to investors on Friday. It has worked for the Education Department since 1997.

With the number of borrowers in default now more than 7 million as federal student debt surpasses $1.1 trillion, the contracts have become among the most lucrative Education Department offerings, generating hundreds of millions of dollars a year for debt collectors tasked with recouping cash from borrowers who have defaulted on their federal student loans. In November 2013, Dwight Vigna, the Education Department official who oversees the program, told the financial industry that debt collectors stood to reap nearly $5.8 billion in commissions over the four-year period ending in 2016.

But the department’s debt collection program has also become a headache for Education Secretary Arne Duncan, as plaintiffs’ lawyers, state and federal regulators and borrower advocates have demanded changes after discovering evidence that borrowers in distress were given false information or otherwise mistreated when they tried to make good on their debts.

The Education Department said Friday that its decision was prompted by what it described as “high incidences of materially inaccurate representations” to borrowers that it discovered in reviews spanning several months. The five debt collectors, according to the department, misled borrowers about their options to get out of default, the resulting benefits to their credit reports and collection fees. Misleading borrowers about their defaulted debts may violate federal fair debt collection laws.

“Every company that works for the department must keep consumers’ best interests at the heart of their business practices by giving borrowers clear and accurate guidance,” said Education Undersecretary Ted Mitchell. “It is our responsibility — and our commitment — to uphold the highest standards of service for America’s student borrowers and consumers.”

The admission that some of its contractors likely violated borrowers’ rights under fair debt collection laws will likely lead to increased scrutiny of the department’s debt collectors, oversight of them, and how borrowers may have been harmed.

The Education Department didn’t respond to queries beyond an emailed news release.

The Treasury Department is among federal agencies that have been concerned by the Education Department’s debt collection program. The Huffington Post reported in November that the Treasury would soon take some student borrowers’ accounts away from the Education Department’s contracted debt collectors and give them to federal workers in a pilot program that may cut out student loan middlemen.

The other companies to lose their contracts are: Coast Professional, Enterprise Recovery Systems, National Recoveries, and West Asset Management. The Federal Trade Commission in 2011 accused West Asset of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The two sides settled for $2.8 million, which at the time was the FTC’s largest civil penalty in a debt collection case.

“Student loan debt collectors that mislead and harm consumers must be held accountable,” said Rohit Chopra, the consumer bureau’s top official overseeing student loans. “Today, the Education Department took an important step by winding down contracts with five debt collectors for not playing by the rules. The CFPB will continue to work with our federal and state partners to root out bad actors and ensure that debt collectors are treating student borrowers fairly. Consumers need clarity, not confusion.”

The Education Department said it would transfer accounts from affected companies, including Pioneer, to its other debt collectors, and would officially terminate its relationship with the companies once all accounts have been moved over. The move is the department’s most forceful response in years to alleged misdeeds by its student loan contractors.

The National Consumer Law Center, which advocates on behalf of borrowers, has previously criticized the department’s debt collectors for routinely violating borrowers’ consumer rights under federal and state laws. Deanne Loonin has been among the borrower advocates most critical of the department’s relationship with allegedly-sloppy debt collectors, and has urged the department for years to terminate its contracts as a result.

Federal watchdogs at the Government Accountability Office and the Education Department’s inspector general have repeatedly criticized the department’s oversight of contractors. In a report last year, the GAO found that the Education Department documented apparent violations of federal debt collection laws by its contractors, yet did nothing about it. The Education Department’s inspector general has faulted the department for ignoring both borrowers’ complaints and its own debt collectors’ potential violations of federal consumer laws.

In its annual report to investors on Friday, Navient indicated it disagreed with the Education Department’s decision. “We are engaged with [the department] to learn more about their decision and address any questions or concerns they may have,” the company said.

The Education Department’s decision is likely to come as a shock to the debt collection industry and the financiers who bankroll the companies. Pioneer, Enterprise and Coast have been among the Education Department’s highest-ranking debt collectors, according to the department.

“After years of hearing complaints from borrowers of abusive treatment, we are relieved to hear that the Education Department has taken this first step to protect borrowers and hold the companies they contract accountable,” said Chris Hicks, an organizer who leads the Debt-Free Future campaign for Jobs With Justice, a Washington-based nonprofit.

Friday Talking Points — D.C. Smoke-In History

Before we get to anything else…

Mr. Spock is dead. Long live Mr. Spock!

That may be a rather illogical construct, but it just seemed the most appropriate thing to say. The fictional character the late Leonard Nimoy played often used “Live long and prosper” as his favored salutation, which is just a rephrasing of the basic sentiment, really. Nimoy will be missed by fans all over the world, who agree with President Obama’s simple statement: “I loved Spock.” We all did, which is why Spock will live on in many hearts. Long live Mr. Spock!

We’re only going to briefly touch upon the illogical world of politics this week, as we bring you a very special edition of our Friday Talking Points. Mostly this is due to the fact that I tried (twice) to write about the fiasco in Congress over the Department of Homeland Security budget, but both times had to delete what I had written because events were moving so fast and so unexpectedly while I was busy writing. So, instead, I am throwing up my hands in frustration and will be following the late-night developments tonight, along with everyone else.

The real reason the introductory parts of this column are going to be extremely short, though, is that the end of this column is so insanely long. You have been warned. I don’t think in all the years of diverging from this column’s primary purpose that I’ve ever written such a historical timeline, but that is what we’re offering up today, to mark the legalization of recreational marijuana in Washington D.C. this week. Because we felt honor needed to be given where it was due, in the midst of all the other celebrations.

If this attempt at telling a story bores you, or you otherwise would like to hear some rip-snortin’ Democratic talking points, we would instead direct your attention to Senator Elizabeth Warren’s most recent (and most excellent) viral video. That should satisfy any craving for hearing how to properly frame political issues, while tossing down a major gauntlet to the Republicans.

OK, let’s get on with things by quickly running through an award or two, before we get to the main event.

 

Most Impressive Democrat of the Week

Muriel Bowser, the mayor of Washington D.C., deserves at least an Honorable Mention, for standing strong in the face of threats of jail time from House Republicans, for allowing the will of the voters (70 percent of them) to become law this week. But we’ve got much more on marijuana in D.C. to come, so we’ll just mention it briefly here.

The winner of the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week is Chicago mayoral candidate Jesús “Chuy” Garcia, who forced Rahm Emanuel into a runoff despite being heavily outspent in a crowded field. Garcia got 34 percent of the vote to Emanuel’s 45 percent, so Rahm may win the runoff anyway, but we can’t help but wallow in a bit of schadenfreude over Rahm’s problems (since we’re still waiting for an apology for all the nasty things Rahm called lefty bloggers in years past).

In any case, Garcia’s story is an impressive one so far, and maybe he’s even got a shot at dethroning Rahm. For his success in embarrassing Emanuel alone, he is certainly worthy of this week’s MIDOTW award.

[Congratulate Commissioner Jesús “Chuy” Garcia on his contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat of the Week

We have no award for Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week, which is always a good sign.

If we’ve missed an obvious candidate, please let us know your thoughts, down in the comments.

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 337 (2/27/15)

The 1960s gave birth to the concept of the “sit-in,” as well as other related protest events such as “teach-ins” or even “die-ins.” But today we’re going to focus on one particular event which isn’t all that well known outside of the Washington Beltway: the “smoke-in.” Specifically, the annual D.C. Smoke-In held every year on July Fourth.

Nowadays, with three states and D.C. having legalized recreational marijuana (just this week, Alaska and D.C. joined Colorado and Washington state), the concept of a public smoke-in seems almost retro and quaint. But those who participated over the last four decades were risking arrest and drastic punishment for what they bravely did — breaking the law in protest of the unjust nature of the marijuana laws. So while many District residents celebrated in various ways this week (while some others cluelessly went in search of the “pot parties”), we instead would like to salute those who put their own freedom on the line each year in a dramatic display of civil disobedience.

This has included fights over who got to use the prime location for the rally, and (most memorably) James Watt shooting himself in the foot by attempting to ban the Beach Boys from the Independence Day celebrations. Every participant in the decades-long history of the Smoke-In has their own stories to tell, of course. What follows is just a few of them, in honor of all who stood up for what they believed in. They all helped usher in the new freedom D.C. residents now enjoy, which is why we’re dedicating today’s column to the history of the event. Sit back and enjoy.

 

An Incomplete History Of Washington’s July Fourth Smoke-In

What could be a better way to pass a summer’s afternoon than to sit across the street from the White House and smoke lots of pot?

This very simple idea birthed an annual tradition that continues to the present day. Now that Washington has legalized recreational use of marijuana, one can only imagine how festive this year’s gathering will be. The organizers even have a Facebook page, if you’re interested.

The dawn of the D.C. Smoke-In is, to coin a phrase, a bit hazy. It may have taken place in 1967. That Facebook page, however, seems to indicate that this year will be the 45th gathering, so either a few years were skipped or somebody is counting wrong.

I have to confess that I used only limited resources to research this article — searching a database (behind a paywall, sorry for the lack of links) for Washington Post articles from the past. Now, this is somewhat limiting, because counterculture happenings weren’t reported in the mainstream media much at the time. It wasn’t until the late 1970s that regular reports started appearing. So the first decade or so of the Smoke-In remains obscured by clouds.

There are stories of those brave first gatherings — one of which was that the cops had tried to make mass arrests, but when they transported people back to the local station, the protest just followed along. Mobs of people were openly smoking pot in the cops’ lobby, and marijuana plants were brought in and set up on the counters. This may be mythology, but it was the story circulating at the time.

The Smoke-In concept in a nutshell: safety in numbers. If there are thousands of people smoking pot in front of the White House, then there are simply too many to arrest. The cops realized this early on, and pretty much gave up (although they would occasionally pick off people leaving the park).

The first Smoke-In news report I could find was from 1977, the year after the big bicentennial bash. The last bicentennial ceremony took place in ’77, as a time capsule was buried to be opened in 2076, at the nation’s tricentennial. President Carter announced he was awarding a Presidential Medal of Freedom to Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Dr. Jonas Salk. The write-up of the Independence Day festivities in the Washington Post ended with:

The marijuana smoke-in at Lafayette Park across Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House was sponsored by a coalition supporting legalization of marijuana including the Youth International Party, known as the Yippies, and the national Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, called NORML. Though marijuana smoke at times filled the air and a few minor incidents occurred, police reported they had made no arrests.

“With the numbers they have, (estimated at upward of 3,000) the policy is to control the crowd,” said Deputy U.S. Park Police Chief Parker T. Hill, “We’re not concerned with minor infractions.” Arrests, he added might have led to further incidents.

The marijuana demonstrators listened to rock music, bathed in fountains, tossed Frisbees, occasionally taunted the police, displayed protest signs and climbed atop a park statue. Some also smoked marijuana.

You’ve got to love that rather staid “some also smoked marijuana” line at the end, there. The Yippies, for those unfamiliar with the group, were the brainchild of Abbie Hoffman and others in the 1960s, who were most famous for nominating a pig named “Pigasus” in the 1968 presidential election. But their greatest contribution to D.C. counterculture was, unquestionably, the Lafayette Park Smoke-In.

Due to differing permits and whatnot, the prime location of Lafayette Park (literally across the street from the White House) was not always used. In 1978 came the following report:

While CBs crackled and radiators boiled over on I-95, nearly 500 marijuana smokers gathered together at a smoke-in on the lawn between the Lincoln Memorial and the Reflecting Pool. The smoke-in was sponsored by the Youth International Party (Yippie) in an effort to repeal marijuana prohibition laws.

“We like to party and have political protests at the same time,” said Ben Masel, an organizer of the smoke-in as he looked at a nearby crowd of 50 pot smokers. The smokers shared a dozen joints beneath a giant oak and clapped their hands in beat with the bluegrass music of two guitarists.

“This our 11th District smoke-in” said Masel, whose long black hair was tied behind his back, “and we seem to have different issues to consider every year. This year we want to abolish the Drug Enforcement Administration.

“The political issues aren’t as clear as before.”

Yes, it was the age of the CB radio, good buddy. You’ll note that the claim is made that 1978 was the 11th gathering, which would put the first one in 1967.

By 1979, the event had gained enough stature that the Post included it in their pre-Independence Day tourist information, complete with handy phone number to call for info:

Those so inclined can participate in a Fourth of July smoke-in, a gathering of marijuana smokers sponsored by the 4th of July Coalition to protest the nation’s marijuana laws. The U.S. Park Police expect as many as 15,000 pot smokers at the event, which will be Tuesday and Wednesday at Franklin and Lafayette Parks. Smoke-in information is available at [old phone number redacted].

That year, however, things didn’t go quite as smoothly. The day afterward, this report was filed:

About 400 marijuana smoke-in demonstrators charged across Pennsylvania Avenue yesterday toward the White House grounds before D.C. and U.S. Park Police drove them back with motor scooters and billy clubs.

A small but angry faction of the nearly 5,000 participants hurled beer bottles, sticks and firecrackers at helmeted police, who formed a single line along Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House. One demonstrator was treated for cuts at George Washington University Hospital. Police made three arrests.

Shortly after the incident and after police reinforcements arrived, the group’s permit to rally at Lafayette Square across from the White House was revoked. Police surrounding the crowd on three sides, pushing them down 17th Street to the Mall and along the Reflecting Pool.

Smoking marijuana openly and drinking beer, thousands milled around the Mall, hungry for the excitement and, as one said, “the party” that never came.

A footnote to the ugliness, for those who enjoy “stupid stoner” stories, happened out in suburban Maryland:

William David Wilkinson says he and his friends just wanted to make sure they would have enough gas to get back and forth form Prince George’s Country to the Yippie Fourth of July smoke-in in Washington and the other Independence Day activities in the city yesterday. And at 3 a.m., their tank was already below the quarter mark. So when they saw a police cruiser parked on Donnell Drive in Forestville — with the cap off — it “caught our eye,” Wilkinson said.

Wilkinson and his friends also caught the eye of off-duty Police Officer Luther Watkins, who charged them for gas theft.

It wasn’t just the time of CB radios, the nation was also experiencing gasoline shortages, for historical context.

The year 1980 was a turning point for Independence Day on the National Mall. The crowd was treated to not only a great fireworks display, but also to a free concert by the Beach Boys. What’s not to love? Also, some marijuana was smoked:

In a larger gathering of dissenting voices, an estimated 2,000 people converged on Lafayette Square in front of the White House for the 13th-annual marijuana smoke-in and protest sponsored by the Coalition for the Abolition of Marijuana Prohibition.

In a free-swinging event led by Yippies and other dissidents, the whiff of protest in the air was as strong as the odor of marijuana.

Many came with flags — both to wave and to wear. A number of T-shirts in the crowd bore unflattering slogans directed at Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini.

In one of the day’s few unruly incidents, a brief melee broke out when about 100 pot smokers attempted to push out of the park several members of the Revolutionary Communist Party who were selling red flags and copies of the party newspaper.

One group chased out four in the Communist group, then set fire to a stack of their newspapers and a flag.

Most marijuana celebrants, however, chose simply to indulge themselves in the public disregard of the city’s drug laws. Police have traditionally winked at their defiance. Only one arrest was reported during the day — a man charged with urinating in public.

Yes, anti-Ayatollah T-shirts were a real thing. And even the hippies were anti-communist, it appears. Ah, the dawn of the 1980s! The cops had mellowed out appreciably, as one commented: “Other years I’ve been in helmets. Today, I’m wearing this,” pointing to his short blue cap.

In 1981, the Beach Boys returned. This year would set off a chain of events that many have since forgotten. Instead of a rally in a park, the 1981 Smoke-In was organized as a July 4th march. This march ended up in front of the Interior Department, complete with “a three-foot golden bong” and banners reading: “Free the heads, jail the Feds,” “Pot’s an herb, Reagan’s a dope,” and “Free the weed.” The news also referenced the new Secretary of the Interior, James Watt:

They chanted, “We smoke pot and we like it a lot” as they marched in front of the White House before turning south on 17th Street and then west on New York Avenue to the Interior Department, “the home of Watt, as in Watt’s up, doc?” someone in the crowd volunteered.

Marijuana was smoked openly and sometimes seemingly to taunt the D.C. police, who made no arrests. Beer, wine and homemade concoctions also were pulled from ice chests as rally organizer Dana Beal said, “Marijuana is about as dangerous as caffeine.”

Two years later, Watt struck back. However, he aimed at the wrong target, and famously shot himself in the foot.

It seems that Watt and his family enjoyed their own July 4th celebration on the top floor of the Interior building. Where they, doubtlessly, saw the end of the 1981 Yippie march. Watt then somehow mistakenly conflated the Smoke-In with the Beach Boys concert, and announced in April of 1983 that the Beach Boys and other “hard rock” bands would be banished from the July 4th celebration. In a Washington Post article titled “Ignorance,” Judy Mann snarkily called Watt a “celebrated music critic,” and helpfully explained what had happened:

Secretary Watt and his wife, it is significant to note, did not go down to the Monument grounds [where the Beach Boys played]. They entertained on the top floor of the Interior Department building and were spared the carryings-on of the hoi polloi. But somehow, Watt discovered that fireworks aren’t the only things that got blasted on the Fourth of July at the Mall. His wife, we are told, discovered this by talking to a friend who was on the grounds and Watt discovered it by reading the newspaper. He discovered that some people drank, used dope, and assaulted each other, and he concluded that it was all because of the rock music which attracted what he described as “the wrong element.”

Watt, typically, called it hard rock, which is presumably his musical analogue to ultraliberals and radical feminists and all the other bugaboos that stalk his life. In fact, as he later discovered to his chagrin, the rock groups he blamed for bringing in the “wrong element” are the kind of rock groups that parents listen to these days, not the kind that kids listen to.

This caused an immediate uproar. It turned out that Vice President Bush and Nancy Reagan were fans of the Beach Boys. Watt’s proposal to have Wayne Newton play instead was roundly criticized by all. The White House deputy chief of staff, Michael Deaver, said of Watt’s decision: “I think for a lot of people the Beach Boys are an American institution. Anyone who thinks they are hard rock would think Mantovani plays jazz.” Bob Dole got in a dig or two: “I’ll admit I am not a pop critic, but I know from the unsolicited comments of my staff that the Beach Boys are not hazardous to your health.” California Democrat George Miller stood up in the House of Representatives and gave an amusing shout-out: “Mr. Watt, do you remember those good vibrations from the Fourth of July when all we did was dance, dance, dance all summer long to the Beach Boys in the spirit of America… these California girls, they get around and they are not going to back down because they are true to their school and they are going to shut you down like a 409 on graduation day.” Yes, all of Washington joined in a little “fun, fun, fun,” right up to when Ronald Reagan took Watt’s T-Bird away.

Within one day, Reagan did what was called “taking Watt out to the woodshed” (yes, this was an actual political term used back then). From the followup story:

The White House yesterday countermanded Interior Secretary James Watt’s ban on rock music at Fourth of July festivities on the Mall, and President Reagan awarded Watt a plaster foot with a hole in it for what Watt called “shootin’ yourself in the foot.”

Watt appeared on the White House lawn carrying the foot and said, “I’ve learned about the Beach Boys in the last 12 hours. And we’ll look forward to having them in Washington to entertain us again.”

. . .

Yesterday on the White House lawn, Watt said, “The president is a fan of the Beach Boys… and I’m sure when I get to meet them I’ll like them… We need to express patriotism in America and the Beach Boys can — will — help bring us patriotism, I’m sure.”

The president summoned Watt to the Oval Office for the foot “award” yesterday morning after the first lady telephoned the Interior secretary to say her children grew up with the music of the Beach Boys and that “they are fine, outstanding people and that there should be no intention to indicate that they cause problems.”

The connection between the Smoke-In and Watt’s Beach Boys ban was mostly overlooked in all the news coverage, but it was a well-known fact at the time in Washington. One of the articles written about Watt’s blunder even quoted “Bruce Anderson of Citizens Against Marijuana Laws, which has held marijuana ‘smoke-ins’ across from the White House on past Fourths of July,” who threatened to sue Watt.

Within days, Watt was a national joke. His name began popping up even in sports metaphors. A story covering the Capitals quipped: “Maybe Bryan Murray ought to rush the Beach Boys in for tonight’s fourth game. Run ’em out there every time some smarty Islander draws a penalty and see if they can knock Denis Potvin as flat as they did James Watt.” Watt would later resign in disgrace after mocking affirmative action in a comment about a panel his department set up: “I have a black, a woman, two Jews and a cripple.”

But while the Watt controversy played out, something sneakier was afoot. These were the prime years of Nancy Reagan’s expansion of the Drug War (call it the “Just Say No” era), after all. The Washington Post ran a lament about what had happened:

Shed no tears, please, but a Fourth of July tradition in Lafayette Park has been snuffed out — at least officially — by the powers that be. Without reading too much into this turn of events, we note that for the first time in more than a decade, the park is not officially scheduled to be the scene of a marijuana smoke-in. The smoke-in, for those who somehow have missed it in the past (or passed it in the mist), was the main, and usually only, organized celebration sponsored by the Youth International Party, commonly called the Yippies. Its highlights have included the burning not only of marijuana, but also of hundreds of blank Selective Service registration cards.

The Yippies assure us that they themselves are not burned out, though — they just got burned this year, by a coalition of civic, church, family, school and anti-drug groups. These organizations beat the Yippies to the punch in getting a permit to reserve the park. Their celebration promises to be quite different, too: a “National Family Day” is being planned, sponsored by the National Federation of Parents for Drug-Free Youth, the D.C. Congress of Parents and Teachers, the local chapters of Toughlove and Straight, Inc., and dozens of other organizations.

D.C. Delegate Walter Fauntroy spoke out at the new gathering, channeling his inner Harold Hill (“Trouble with a capital T which rhymes with P…”):

“Down with Pot, Pornography and Promiscuity,” Fauntroy shouted into a microphone. “Those are the three P’s destroying the American family today.”

“Organizers of the smoke-ins have sent fliers into our schools urging children to join in their use of marijuana,” Fauntroy maintained in an interview later. “So we decided to apply for use of this park this year to make a statement against drug use.”

The Smoke-Ins did eventually return to Lafayette Park. By 1989, the culture wars had moved on to the threat of rampant American flag burning (that never seemed to materialize). From an article on that year’s Smoke-In:

Loey Glover, office manager for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, wore a tricorn hat and held a sign, “Burn Pot, Not Flags.”

By the 1990s, the Post was again listing the Smoke-In along with all the other Independence Day activities for tourists to enjoy:

The NORML smoke-in/rally in Lafayette Park has such a long tradition now — 24 years — that it’s almost an institution, which is a pretty scary thought.

This was in 1993, which would put the first Smoke-In at 1969, if true.

But whenever the first Smoke-In actually happened, and however many of them have happened, now that recreational use of marijuana is legal in Washington D.C., we felt it was time to honor those brave protesters who stood up for what they believed in for the past four or five decades (give or take a few years).

They were brave, even if they were basically just getting high. There was a very real possibility of paying an awfully steep price for smoking pot so blatantly, from the 1960s through the Just Say No 1980s, continuing to various degrees all the way through to last year. Smoking marijuana — openly, and across the street from the White House — was standing up for the civil right to be left alone. No, it wasn’t the same as the Civil Rights marches of an earlier era (I certainly wouldn’t compare the two on any sort of moral scale), but the brave Lafayette Park pot smokers were indeed standing up for their own civil rights. Whether it began 45 years ago, 46 years ago, or even 48 years ago, the tradition of civil disobedience continued — sometimes flirting with violence, but for the most part, merely making a political point. Smoking pot in full view of the president of the United States was one way of supporting the concept that the laws were wrong and needed to be changed.

It took a long time, but this week pot smokers finally reached the Promised Land in D.C. Oh, sure, it’s just a beginning — the Smoke-Ins themselves are still illegal in at least two major ways. Public consumption is still illegal, which would seem to cover standing in front of the White House smoking a joint. And Lafayette Park is one of many plots of land within the District which are federal property (where pot smoking is still illegal, by federal law). So if this year’s event does happen across Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House, it’ll still be a protest for further change.

But mostly it’ll be a celebration of victory. If you believe in an issue strongly enough to blatantly break the law in full view of the leader of the country, eventually at times you can convince enough of you fellow citizens to support your cause. So in the midst of all the other celebrations of D.C.’s new legalization law, I thought it’d be particularly appropriate to fully remember those who let their freak flag fly on our nation’s birthday. Right across the street from the White House, no less. Everyone who fires up a legal joint in Washington this week should thank those brave souls who protested without much hope of ever winning the political argument.

To the Yippies of Lafayette Park, and to all others who have publicly smoked pot in years past: Thank you for standing up, on the right side of history.

 

Chris Weigant blogs at:
ChrisWeigant.com

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Become a fan of Chris on Huffington Post
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank

 

This Unusually Short-Lived Fish Could Hold the Secrets to Getting Old

The turquoise killifish is largely unremarkable except for how fast it ages. In just three months, it goes from a spry, young fish (left) to a decrepit, old one (right). For scientists who study aging, the turquoise killifish could be the key to their future experiments.

Read more…



Esther and Mordechai's Week From Hell: The Meaning of Purim in the Winter of 2015

2015-02-27-purimpandapalsbnaitzedekpotomacmd1.jpg

Last week, an unusual headline ran on CNN’s homepage — “Religion’s Week from Hell.” This dramatic title graced the website’s lead story by religion editor Daniel Burke, which provided an analysis and overview of horrific events of the previous week that were committed in the name of God.

Beginning with the kidnappings in Cameroon and a car bomb in Niger by Boko Haram and concluding with the terror attacks in Copenhagen and the videotaped beheading of Egyptian Christians by members of ISIS, any reasonable reader would agree with Burke’s hellish assessment of the previous week, as viewed through the lens of religion.

In perilous times, people are often forced into forsake their more nuanced philosophy of humankind and the world. Certainly, the highly publicized campaign of terror initiated by ISIS has caused a global tremor of anxiety and has served to destabilize the notion of a civilized world.

A Good vs. Evil paradigm prevails during days such as ours, which is only aided and exacerbated by revelations that the leaders of ISIS justify their brutal actions by holding an absolutist belief in the evil of those whose faith differs from theirs.

For Jews, the multiple, mounting incidents of aggression and threats against our people, Israel and Jewish institutions around the world – but particularly in Europe — has evoked a dormant insecurity and worry that a return to the bad old days looms on the horizon. For some, pronouncements such as those by Israeli Prime Minster Netanyahu that it is time for European Jews to “come home” only increase the sense of imminent danger.

It is against the backdrop of this very troubled time that the holiday of Purim approaches…and with it, the important message: Do Not Lose Hope For You Have Been Here Before.

Next week, we will gather in our synagogues, schools and community centers to read an ancient story from a scroll whose headline might just as well be “Esther and Mordechai’s Week from Hell.” Some of us will come dressed in costume, as is the tradition, and many of us will bring noise makers so that we might drown out the sound of the name of the arch anti-Semite Haman, who had orchestrated a plan to destroy the Jews of Shushan, Persia, many centuries ago.

This year, as in every year since the Scroll of Esther was written, we will read how Haman, miffed that Mordechai the Jew did not show him the proper deference, concocted his plan for revenge — a complete destruction of the local Jewish community, in other words, a Holocaust.

Through teamwork, chutzpah and brilliant strategizing, Mordechai and his niece Esther — who moved into the royal court by charming the ditzy, besotted Persian king into marrying her — foil the evil plan and save their people from destruction.

The Scroll of Esther ends with Haman’s execution and communal celebration in the face of the redemption of the Persian Jewish community. The spirit of the holiday as passed down through the ages is joyous and characterized by parties – often no-holds barred affairs with dancing, drinking, feasts and gift-giving.

Though many contemporary Jews regard the festival of Purim as based on something other than history, Purim’s themes persist because fiction is often truer than fact. Though Mordechai, Esther, Haman and King Achashverosh might be the products of an author’s imagination, plots to exterminate the Jewish People are all-too-real and inextricable from history itself.

Indeed, it is from the Scroll of Esther that the shorthand, rabblerousing reference to Jews — a certain people — hails. Says Haman to King Ahashverosh, “There is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of your realm. Their laws are different from those of every other people’s, and they do not observe the king’s laws; therefore it is not befitting the king to tolerate them.” (Esther 3:8.)

But as I read the news of the day and take stock of the alarming headlines and articles, I ponder another passage from the Scroll of Esther, for it contains the key to survival during difficult times.

This other phrase is the antidote to fear and hopelessness. It might even be said to contain the secret to the survival of the Jewish People.

As Mordechai and Esther consulted on their options to overthrow Haman’s plan, the brave, beautiful (and secretly Jewish) Queen suffered a sudden loss of nerve. Sensing her hesitation, Mordechai shores her up by stating, in Chapter 4, “Who knows whether it is for this very moment that you arrived in the Kingdom?”

Overcome by her despair at the plot against her people and doubts as to whether her plan will work — coupled with the dreadful knowledge that her husband does not even know that she is a Jew — Esther is about to jump ship. However, with those powerfully inspiring words, “Who knows whether it is for this very moment that you arrived in the Kingdom?” Mordechai reminds Esther that she has the power to shape her destiny as well as that of her people. He talks her out of the terror one feels in the face of enormous adversity. He explains that she is not alone but in partnership with a higher power, imbued with a grand mission.

We are living in terrifying times but Purim is on the horizon and that means that we will gather to read and relive the story of Mordechai, Esther and the Jews of Shushan and their trajectory from ruin to redemption. We will drown out the name of Haman, he who sought to destroy us. We will celebrate our survival with music, dancing, merriment and delicious food.

In the spirit of the holiday, we will don costumes and masks, exploring other identities, hiding ourselves in order to discover ourselves.

This Purim, the most important mask we can wear is the likeness of Esther, she who put on a mask of bravery when she was afraid, who acted according to the belief that she was present at a particular moment in time in order to bring about redemption, who refused to let hate and destruction prevail.

Jessica Hernandez, Teen Killed By Denver Police, Had 4 Gunshot Wounds: Autopsy

DENVER (AP) — An autopsy shows a 17-year-old girl who was killed by Denver police officers while driving a stolen car suffered four gunshot wounds.

The Denver medical examiner’s office said Friday that Jessica Hernandez also had marijuana and a small amount of alcohol in her system during the Jan. 26 shooting that sparked protests and calls for an outside investigation. It came during a national debate about police use of force after killings in Missouri and New York.

Police say two Denver officers fired at Hernandez after she drove toward one of them. The case remains under investigation by the district attorney.

The autopsy shows Hernandez suffered gunshot wounds to the torso, pelvis and thigh.

Qusair Mohamedbhai, an attorney for her family, did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Will Forte's Wedding Toast To Seth Meyers Is Wonderfully Inappropriate

Oh, what we would give to have been a fly on the wall at the rehearsal dinner of Seth Meyers and his now-wife Alexi Ashe.

On Thursday, Will Forte stopped by “Late Night with Seth Meyers” to promote his new show “Last Man On Earth.” While there, the pair reminisced about the pre-wedding dinner in 2013 where Forte made an inappropriate and yet oh-so entertaining wedding toast as his creepy and racist “SNL” character Hamilton Whiteman.

“That was about a six-minute toast and those were about the only 30 seconds we could show on television,” Meyers said after playing the clip.

Here’s to hoping they release the other 5:30.

H/T Jezebel

Keep in touch! Check out HuffPost Weddings on Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest. Sign up for our newsletter here.

Why I Don't Regret Getting Married (But I Regret Having A Wedding)

A little over a year ago I had my very own white wedding cliché. After months of stressful planning and teeth grinding at my mother in law to be, I was finally slipping awkwardly out of an overpriced car, in an overpriced dress, ready to walk the aisle in front of a hundred of what I thought were my closest friends and family.

Why It's Hard To Predict Who Would Get Blamed For A DHS Shutdown

On Friday afternoon, House Republicans said no to a funding bill that would have kept the Department of Homeland Security in business for another three weeks. If DHS suffers a shutdown at midnight, does that mean Americans will blame Republicans?

Initial polling suggests they are a more likely target for public ire than President Barack Obama, whose recent immigration actions they are trying to spike. But the relatively low public profile of the controversy so far makes any such projections iffy at best.

Last week, CNN published a poll showing that 53 percent of Americans were ready to hold congressional Republicans responsible “if the Department of Homeland Security shuts down because a new spending bill has not been enacted.” Only 30 percent said they would hold the president to blame. Thirteen percent volunteered that they would hold both sides responsible, and 4 percent blamed neither or had no opinion.

A HuffPost/YouGov poll conducted over the weekend asked a similar question. It found more Americans poised to blame Republicans (37 percent) than to blame Obama (28 percent). Unlike the CNN poll, the HuffPost/YouGov survey also offered an explicit “unsure” option, which 34 percent chose.

The CNN finding of greater possible blame for the GOP provoked criticism from conservatives, who complained that the question “conveniently omitted the [Senate] Democrats as a possible answer,” as Accuracy in Media’s Dan Irvine put it. It was Democrats, the Free Beacon’s Elizabeth Harrington added, “who have blocked a House bill that would continue funding the agency but prohibit the government from enacting the president’s executive actions on immigration.”

Do the critics have a point? The evidence from past shutdown controversies is mixed, at best.

Consider a set of surveys conducted in October 2013 in the midst of the last government shutdown. The Pew Research Center and the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll asked questions similar to CNN’s queries earlier this month, with a two-way choice that found more blame for congressional Republicans than for President Obama.

2015-02-27-October2013BlameQuestions.png

A HuffPost/YouGov poll from 2013 took a very different approach, allowing respondents to “check all that apply” from this list: President Barack Obama, Republicans in Congress and Democrats in Congress. Slightly more respondents checked only Republicans (38 percent) than checked only Obama, only Democrats or both (34 percent). A follow-up question, which pushed those who initially blamed both sides, produced a 43 to 43 percent split between faulting the Republicans or faulting Obama and the Democrats. Yet either way, the HuffPost/YouGov poll produced a bigger percentage in the “don’t know” category, most likely because the poll offered “unsure” as an explicit option.

Finally, a CBS News survey offered a simple compromise format: a two-way choice between “the Republicans in Congress” or “Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress.” The result: 46 percent blamed the Republicans and 35 percent blamed Obama and the Democrats. That was a similar split to those found by Pew Research and the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll with questions that made no reference to congressional Democrats.

Unfortunately, the four 2013 surveys did not constitute a controlled experiment: They differed in timing, sampling methods, and how they were conducted (YouGov runs its polls online, while the others surveyed by telephone). Nevertheless, the differences among their results were not major, with much of the variation coming in the percentage of the undecided.

Two other factors represent a much more serious challenge to pollsters trying to predict how Americans might react to a DHS shutdown. First, and most important, relatively few people have been following the story closely. This week’s HuffPost/YouGov poll found a mere 12 percent who said they were following the story closely and just 40 percent combined who were following it closely or somewhat closely. Far more said they were following the story not very closely (26 percent) or not closely at all (34 percent).

Similarly, that poll found most Americans were unaware that immigration lies at the heart of the congressional dispute. Just 42 percent selected it from a list of four possible issues as the reason that Congress is holding up DHS funding, with almost as many (36 percent) unable to answer the question and 22 percent selecting one of the three other issues.

Put more plainly, the biggest problem with who-might-be-to-blame questions is not the omission of one possible answer. It’s that they pose a hypothetical query about something that most Americans are not thinking about. Results will vary depending on how hard the questions (or interviewers) push for an answer. And partisan references in the wording of the questions will guide many respondents, with Republicans and Democrats answering accordingly.

Equally important: People are not good at predicting their future attitudes. Former CBS polling director Kathy Frankovic has frequently pointed to surveys conducted during the 1998 impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Polls conducted before the House vote on impeachment found “a sizable majority” who said they would want Clinton to resign if he were impeached, according to Frankovic. A few weeks later, after the House had voted to impeach the president, “only about a third supported resignation.”

In other words, if the Department of Homeland Security is shut down, the reaction may not be what the early polls predict.

7 Sustainability Secrets That Will Save the World

In preparing to deliver the closing lecture to Hofstra University’s Model United Nations Conference, I realized that I knew seven sustainability secrets that could save the world that I wanted to share with attendees. I came up with these secrets after reading almost every national sustainability plan ever written over the last few years. Each of the seven secrets emerged after getting a global picture of the state of our planetary sustainability.

1. We have plenty of resources. In the sustainability field we tend to focus on the lack of things — food, energy, metals, etc. However, the lack is often caused by overconsumption, use of old technologies or poor distribution. For example, there are many renewable energy sources — and we are using more and more of them all the time. Many countries, regions and cities are moving away from investment in dirty energy and focusing more and more effort on promoting green energy technologies. We also have plenty of food — if we modify our diets. Certainly there are many in the world that go hungry and many regions of the world where there are food shortages. Predictions that we will will run out of food in the coming decades emerged because many developing countries are moving from mainly vegetarian diets to mainly meat-based diets. If we reverse this trend and increase the number of people eating plant based diets, we will have plenty of food for the world’s growing population. We also have plenty of other resources if we use them wisely and if we do not buy into consumerism. Don’t get me wrong. We have serious resource problems if we continue to use some of them at the present rate. However, if we are wise, we can thrive into the future.

2. Overconsumption is a disease. Societies that consume far more than their share have an illness of overconsumption. This is a sickness with symptoms that range from pollution to destruction of species. Unfortunately, in our globalized world the illness is contagious and can impact others. The way to heal a disease is by finding an appropriate treatment. Societies that overconsume need to go on a simplicity diet and find ways to lessen their impact on the planet. While it is important to focus financial resources on finding cures to diseases like Malaria and HIV, we also need to find ways to address problems of overconsumption and associated social and environmental problems.

3. War is the real enemy to sustainability. There are many countries of the world that have sustainability plans that cannot enact them because there is a perpetual conflict within their borders. Governments cannot consider working on sustainability issues when they have tanks rolling through parks. Only when we have peace can we all work toward a more sustainable future.

4. Human rights abuses lead to bad moral decisions on sustainability and the environment. One of the basic tenets of human morality is fair treatment of individuals. Around the world there are very bad examples of human rights abuses including incarceration of political prisoners, human trafficking and lack of a free judiciary. If governments do not have the basic ethics for the treatment of individuals they are unlikely to have an ethical framework for the treatment of the environment. Environmentalists must be human rights champions. The loss of life — human, animal, plant and animal — diminishes our ability for survival. Ecologists understand that resilient ecosystems are diverse places and that the extinction of one species limits the ability of the others to survive. The same is true in the human world. We need to embrace diversity in order for our own species to survive in a highly globalized world.

5. Educating girls is the key to prosperity and population reduction. One of the greatest indicators of national prosperity and population reduction is the education of girls. Educated women help to create prosperous and healthy societies. Educated women also choose to have fewer children — thereby reducing population numbers.

6. Governments are ill-prepared to address sustainability issues. Most government administrative structures predate our current emphasis on sustainability. In the United States, for example, most of our state, national and local transportation dollars are spent on car infrastructure — exactly the wrong place to invest in sustainability. At the same time, more nimble private enterprises like Wal-Mart and Unilever are infusing sustainability into day to day management. Reframing organizational decision making around issues of sustainability is key to managing public and private resources.

7. Per capita income is not a good sustainability indicator when used alone. For generations we evaluated development by economic indicators like per capita income. This is a flawed approach that leads to the idea that consumerist societies are a goal of development. We also know that happiness cannot be measured by income at the national level. Do we all need to spend our lives on a rat race of achieving more wealth without thinking about national or local sustainability? Can we find happiness and greater sustainability by slowing down and using less? Many countries that are lower on numerical per capita income or gross domestic product standards are quite happy and do very well with other development and sustainability indicators. A balanced approach to measuring sustainability includes not only economic and environment indicators, but also culturally appropriate social measures.

Around the world we have many problems confronting us on the sustainability front. But if we understand these seven secrets and use them to influence our decision making, we are well on our way to ensuring a more sustainable future.