Blocking
Dear Blockers:
Jonathan Rees charged, in the last issue of themail, that the DC
government was blocking government employees’ access to his web site
on government computers. I asked whether anyone could confirm this, and
I want to thank the DC employees — whose identities I won’t reveal
in order to protect them from likely retribution — who tried it and
who indeed got a blocking message, “Access to this web page has been
restricted,” that they forwarded to me.
Dorothy and I decided to find out what the government’s
justification was for blocking this site. Dorothy called the Office of
the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO), to see whether the government had
any Internet usage policies aside from those listed on its web site, http://octo.dc.gov/cwp/view,a,1302,q,579925.asp.
She was told that OCTO would not accept a verbal question, and that the
question had to be submitted in writing. I submitted the question in an
E-mail to OCTO’s press office, and received a reply that the question
had been given to the office’s general counsel and Freedom of
Information officer. Soon afterwards, I received a second reply from the
FOIA officer, saying that she was treating the question as a FOIA
request and that it would take up to fifteen business days — three
weeks — to answer.
Because of several similar incidents recently, Dorothy and I were
just sick and tired of the Fenty administration’s policy of abusing
the FOIA law to delay and deny the release of information that should be
publicly released without any question or delay. So Dorothy called Thorn
Pozen, the District’s Ethics and FOIA counselor for the District, to
complain strongly. I wrote another E-mail to OCTO’s FOIA officer,
asking for her legal justification for requiring a FOIA request to
release a policy statement. Without much delay, I got an answer.
The government’s usage policy is fully stated on the web page that
I linked to above; there is no further or more detailed elaboration. DC
government allows its employees to use their work computers for a
moderate amount of personal use, as long as that use doesn’t interfere
with either their work duties or the government’s computer network.
Employees are restricted from sending E-mail messages or maintaining web
sites that violate any federal or local laws, that advertise or promote
private business enterprises, or that have religious or political
purposes outside the users’ governmental duties. But employees are not
forbidden to access web sites that have commercial, religious, or
political purposes. They can visit web sites run by stores, churches,
political parties, political candidates, or political commentators. The
government uses commercial WebSense software to censor the Internet, but
the only categories that it blocks, according to OCTO’s general
counsel, are two overlapping ones: “adult content” and “sex.”
Rees’ web site is deliberately rude and crude, highly critical of
the Fenty administration and of several members of the city council, but
it is politically oriented, not sexual, pornographic, or obscene. So
what justification does the government have to block it? As an employer,
the government would have the right to block its employees’ access to
all political web sites if it wished, but its blocking would have to be
viewpoint neutral. It can’t allow employees to see Democratic Party
political sites, but block Republican ones; it can’t allow sites that
it determines support the Fenty administration, but block anti-Fenty
ones. One correspondent, who wants to remain anonymous, wrote me that he
considers Rees’ web site to be pornographic. I wrote that I would
confirm that charge if he could substantiate it, but all he was able to
point to was a joking (bad joke, but joking, nevertheless) link to a
YouTube video. The still from the video on Rees’ site probably couldn’t
be published in The Washington Times, but it would pass the Washington
Post’s editorial standards. So there are two follow-up questions
that I’ll ask OCTO tomorrow: given the government’s policy as stated
on OCTO’s web site and restated by its general counsel, what
justification does the DC government have for blocking Rees’ web site;
and what other web sites does it block that are predominantly composed
of political content rather than “adult” or sexual content?
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
Would DC United Really Move to Prince Georges
County?
Pat Taylor, ptaylor.dc@verizon.net
Would the DC United soccer team really move to Prince Georges County
if the DC government’s subsidy for a new stadium isn’t large enough?
Should Mayor Fenty and the District Council be swayed by this threat
into spending DC taxpayer monies for the new soccer stadium?
Before deciding, they should ask how easily fans would be able to
reach a stadium located in Prince Georges County. Many, many soccer fans
come by Metro to the soccer games at RFK Stadium. What percent of the
fans who attend DC United’s games would have easy access to a stadium
in PG County? How easy would access be by auto to the many weekday
evening games for fans coming from the District and Virginia? Living as
I do on the east side of the District near the Anacostia River, I am
keenly aware that during the long weekday evening rush hours traffic is
routinely gridlocked on the Anacostia bridges and the commuter roads
into Prince Georges County.
If the difficulties of getting to a soccer stadium located in Prince
Georges County will cause attendance to decline, as seems likely, will
DC United’s owner really risk a decrease in attendance to get a big
public subsidy for his new stadium?
###############
A Brand-New Ballgame
Ed T Barron,edtb1@macdotcom
That’s the title of a fine, illustrated, article about the new
National’s ball park in the March issue of Washingtonian Magazine.
The opening game is an exhibition on Saturday evening, March 29, with
tickets only by invitation to season ticket holders and construction
workers. I’ll be there. I’m doing my part with a season ticket. For
only five bucks you can get a ticket, sold on the day of the game, with
location down the right and left field foul lines. Better views than the
outfield seats at RFK.
###############
Rescinding a Bad Decision
Dorothy Brizill, dorothy@dcwatch.com
In the last issue of themail, February 24, I wrote about Dan Seligson,
a DC pollworker who wrote a critical article on Electionline Weekly
about what happened at his Mt. Pleasant polling site during the February
12 presidential primary. I noted that, following the publication of his
article, Seligson was informed by the District’s Board of Elections
and Ethics (BOEE) that he could not serve as a pollworker in future
elections. I also noted that, since pollworkers are paid, Seligson would
be covered by the District’s whistleblower laws.
Subsequently, sources have reported to me that Seligson has been
contacted again by the BOEE, and he has been informed that not only
would he be welcome to work again as a pollworker, but that he also has
been offered a promotion to the position of a precinct captain.
###############
Gary asks about Jonathan Rees’ most recent missive [themail,
February 24], “I’d welcome any confirmation or contradiction of this
charge. If you are a government employee, can you access Rees’ blog
from your government office computer?” What I’d like is confirmation
of the preposterous assertion Mr. Rees keeps making that over two
hundred thousand people in the Metro region read his blog daily. I
stopped by there once, and quickly realized he’s way off the
reservation, though I do continue to be annoyed by his blog-traffic-trolling
on legitimate DC area blogs and discussion forums from which he has not
yet been banned.
But think about that number. Wonkette, one of the most popular DC
blogs, only claims an average daily readership of about thirty-five
thousand unique visitors. A Google link search of link:http://corruptones2008.blogspot.com
reveals zero links to his blog. Wonkette, somehow having only about 20
percent of his daily readers, has 98,000 links. Amazing how he generates
that much traffic with not a single off-site link to his site. On
Quantcast, Wonkette is ranked 2,833 compared to Mr. Rees’ blog’s
ranking of 1,924,860, and Quantcast says Rees’ US reach is less than
two thousand, the smallest number they report. Finally, the vast
majority of the posts on Mr. Rees’ blog have zero comments. Strange
that two hundred thousand people a day would read it, yet for days at a
time none of them have any reaction to all the juicy scandals.
Obviously, this is way beyond fiction and into the realm of
hysterically absurd. I am sure Mr. Rees will have an explanation for
this apparent paradox involving conspiracy at the highest levels of the
very operation of the Internet, but for the rest of us, it’s just
ridiculous. So if this guy is going to start his postings with a
bald-faced lie about the readership of his blog, I see no reason why
anyone should even bother wondering if his ravings are true or not. Mr.
Rees, simply, has no credibility.
###############
Residents Call for “Taxation Without
Representation” on DC Quarter Design
Kevin Kiger, kkiger@dcvote.org
With the fate of the District of Columbia’s commemorative quarter
now in the hands of the US Mint, speculation on its design is running
high. After a public comment period, the District government submitted
three design narratives yesterday, all containing the phrase “Taxation
Without Representation” or “No Taxation Without Representation.”
The US Mint criteria for the Quarters Program requests designs that
“promote the diffusion of knowledge among the youth of the United
States” about the history, geography, and diversity of “our national
heritage.” “Taxation Without Representation” is a daily fact of
life for District residents and accurately reflects the history of our
nation’s capital. Since 1801, residents of the capital have called for
an end to “Taxation Without Representation.” Centuries later, nearly
six hundred thousand Americans living in Washington, DC, pay the second
highest per capita federal income taxes in the country but are denied a
vote in Congress.
Yet, according to Stephanie Scott, Secretary of the District of
Columbia, the US Mint has already expressed its concern about the
controversial design ideas proposed. The real controversy is that in the
world’s greatest democracy more than half a million citizens are left
without congressional representation.
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
National Building Museum Events, February 28,
March 4
Jazmine Zick, jzick@nbm.org
Thursday, February 28, 6:30-8:00 p.m. DC Builds: What Makes Great
Streets? Panelists Petronella Muraya, professor of geography, Howard
University; Darrel Rippeteau, Rippeteau Architects PC; Emeka C. Moneme,
director, District Department of Transportation; and Joe Englert, DC
nightclub impresario, discuss the essential components necessary to
create vibrant, livable streets in Washington, DC. $12 members; $12
students; $20 public. Prepaid registration required. Walk-in
registration based on availability.
Tuesday, March 4, 6:30-8:00 p.m. Spotlight on Design: Emerging
Voices. Presented in partnership with the Architectural League of New
York, Emerging Voices turns the spotlight on architecture firms just
beginning to achieve prominence in the profession. This program will be
held at Howard University. For details please visit www.nbm.org. Free.
Registration required. Both events at the National Building Museum, 401
F Street, NW, Judiciary Square stop, Metro Red Line. Register for events
at http://www.nbm.org.
###############
Community Town Hall Meeting on the District
Budget, March 1
Martina Gillis, martina@legalclinic.org
Saturday, March 1, 10:30-12:30 p.m., at Lankford Auditorium, 1200 U
Street, NW. District leaders are developing the budget. Come tell them
what you need. We have invited DC city leaders to come to the community
to hear directly from you about the types of programs that should be
available to community members. RSVP for child care or a Spanish
interpreter. This event is sponsored by dozens of community
organizations. If you would like additional information, contact Martina
Gillis Massey, Fair Budget Coalition at 328-5513.
###############
College Admissions Together, March 2
Steven Roy Goodman, steve@topcolleges.com
Steven Roy Goodman and Andrea Leiman, authors of College
Admissions Together, published by Capital Books, $17.95, will give a
book talk at Politics and Prose, 5015 Connecticut Avenue, NW, on Sunday,
March 2, 1 p.m. Goodman, an educational consultant, and Leiman, a
licensed clinical psychologist specializing in children and families,
combine their expertise to advise parents about what to expect when
sending a child to college. Recognizing the impact of the experience on
the entire family, the authors discuss how to select the right college
and address questions of independence, changes in family power dynamics,
peer and social pressure, and moving on. For more information, go to http://www.politics-prose.com/calendar_files/march08.html.
###############
Historical Society of Washington Events, March
6, 8
Karen L Sallis, klsallis@historydc.org
Thursday, March 6, 12:00 p.m. Performance Series: The music of
Shirley Horn. Bring a brown bag lunch and meet friends and colleagues at
the Historical Society of Washington, DC, to listen to a live musical
performance by Yvonne Johnson featuring the music of Washington’s
legendary jazz artist, Shirley Horn. RSVP@historydc.org,
subject line: Shirley Horn.
Saturday, March 8, 2:00 p.m. Family Series, Dance and storytelling
with Mokihana. Come and experience a bit of Hawaiian culture. Learn a
little history, listen to a Hawaiian story, watch traditional hula, and
even try some chanting and a few motions yourself. RSVP@historydc.org,
subject line: Mokihana. Both events in the Carnegie Library, 801 K
Street, NW, Gallery Place and Mt. Vernon Metro stops. Both events are
free and open to the public. Please register as space is limited. RSVP@historydc.org
or 383-1850.
###############
themail@dcwatch is an E-mail discussion forum that is published every
Wednesday and Sunday. To change the E-mail address for your subscription
to themail, use the Update Profile/Email address link below in the
E-mail edition. To unsubscribe, use the Safe Unsubscribe link in the
E-mail edition. An archive of all past issues is available at http://www.dcwatch.com/themail.
All postings should be submitted to themail@dcwatch.com,
and should be about life, government, or politics in the District of
Columbia in one way or another. All postings must be signed in order to
be printed, and messages should be reasonably short — one or two brief
paragraphs would be ideal — so that as many messages as possible can
be put into each mailing.