This post, which originally appeared at 1:46 p.m., will stay
at the top for the rest of the day.
______________________________

I have just been officially informed by fax that the probable cause hearing has been scheduled for this complaint for Wednesday, March 29 at 3:00 p.m. at the Ohio Elections Commission.

This complaint is about what I believe are violations of Ohio election law that have taken place during Mr. McEwen’s candidacy for Congress in Ohio’s 2006 Second District Congressional Primary:

• The Complaint (PDF; except for signature and notarization) is here.
• The Affidavit (PDF; except for signature, notarization, and exhibits) is here.

The complaint contains these four claims:

1. Mr. McEwen is violating Ohio Election Law by referring to himself as “Congressman McEwen” in various items that are present on his campaign web site, and in other venues.Two examples are the first two words in the text at his web site’s Endorsements Page (still there as of 12:30 PM today), and the continued presence of his (as of yesterday) law-violating 2005 radio and TV ads at his 2006 campaign web site. There are others. (Update: The Endorsements page now begins with “Former Congressman McEwen.” Here are links to pictures of the top of the Endorsements page as it existed on January 20 and March 16.
2. His biography at his campaign’s web site misrepresents his experience in appearing on various television news and discussion programs, and as such represents a false statement that violates Ohio Election Law.The site’s Biography page says “Mr. McEwen appears frequently on such network programming as CNN’s Crossfire, The Today Show, Good Morning America, and Larry King Live.”

   I believe that Mr. McEwen has not appeared on any of these programs as a guest since 1993, and that if he has appeared, despite search efforts at three of the four programs indicated above that have turned up nothing, those appearances cannot fairly be said to be “frequent” or “recent.”

3. His web site makes false statements in violation of Ohio Election Law by referring to “The Democratic Bank Scandal” and the “Democrat Bank Scandal”, in an attempt to mischaracterize what is known to historians, reference books, and journalists as “The House Bank Scandal” or the “House Banking Scandal.”Mr. McEwen, remember, is a Republican who was a participant in that scandal. Readers might want to look at the results of Googling the relevant terms noted in the Complaint and Affidavit (put the terms in quotes when you do) and see for themselves what the only historically correct terms for the scandal are.
4. He has erronously, and in violation of Ohio Election Law, claimed eight endorsements at various times during the campaign thus far when, in some cases, he had not yet secured them, and in other cases, he never had them.One endorsement has been secured by his incumbent opponent. Four were present during the first four-plus weeks after Mr. McEwen declared his candidacy and dropped off. One was present for 5-plus weeks after his declaration and dropped off. Three were present for four-plus weeks, dropped off for about a week, and then reappeared.

Other notes:

• No one except family and a couple of select others knew that I was going to file this complaint, and no candidate or potential candidate influenced me in any way to file it.
• I am not going to blog on or approve comments (other than trackbacks) relating in any way to the Second District Primary race until at least the conclusion of the Probable Cause Hearing on March 29, nor will I express opinions on this race at other blogs until that occurs (though I may, as I have previously, address matters relating to the quality, quantity, and accuracy of media coverage).

Following up on this post (”What’s French for ‘Legalized Piracy’”) from a few days ago, from the International Herald Tribune (HT hiatused EU Rota), spoken by Olivia Regnier:

“It should be the responsibility of the companies to make sure their digital music players work with music from all platforms,” Regnier said.

Ms. Regnier “represents record companies as European regional counsel for the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry.” No conflict of interest there, eh?

Last time I checked it wasn’t Ford’s job to make sure that all of its parts would work in Toyotas.

(Don’t give them any ideas.)

From Isaac Post’s column today at TCS Daily:

Walking around a corner, one never knows what will appear. Yet in order to move forward, it’s often necessary to turn corners anyway, despite some small degree of uncertainty.

At Canada’s Lakehead University, however, that uncertainty has become the basis for some troubling reasoning regarding wi-fi, a technology that allows Internet connectivity without the hassle of wires. Frozen stiff by a little known but influential idea known as the Precautionary Principle, the university has decided against implementing wi-fi for health reasons — despite no serious evidence of risk. Lakehead’s net remains strictly landlocked.

Lakehead’s president, Dr. Fred Gilbert, defended his decision by saying that “While the jury’s out on this one, I’m not going to put in place what is potential chronic exposure for our students.” In other words, his safety fears aren’t based on any documented threat, but instead are a reflection of his aversion to the nebulous possibility of risk.

Students and parents at this university need to employ an adapted version of the Precautionary Principle, which states: “Any number of other bad things could happen while Dr. Gilbert is in charge, so rather than take any chances, let’s get rid of him.”

Free Links:

• The “Premium Internet” Controversy Is Growing. This is also known as the “net neutrality” debate. “Net neutrals” believe that once you’ve decided what level of service you want and have paid your monthly fee for the service, that’s it. The telcos, and the cable companies (though they are much quieter about it), want to be able to charge for specialized higher bandwidth services. This is going to be a tough one to sort out, based on two articles I read about a week ago that got lost in the “my browser froze and purged history” ether. One supported the free-marketeer in me, and said that allocating more bandwith to people willing to pay more is will encourage network expansion and speed. But my fairness alter ego spoke up after a column writer noted that the telcos promised $200 billion of network improvements (i.e., roughly $2,000 per household) and universal network access in the negotiations that led to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and didn’t deliver. Now, having welched on that deal, they want the benefits of differential services. Some might say that’s the broken promises are history and we should only look forward, but it still grates.
• Unfortunately, As Every Skeptic Predicted — The Underground Railroad National Freedom Center in Cincinnati, seen by some as an artificial palliative to reduce racial tensions after the Spring 2001 inner-city riots, says it needs $2 million to $3 million a year of public funding to stay open.
• Right Angle Blog notes that the NASDAQ has been on a quiet roll:

  

  This monthly NASDAQ interactive Table , set up to go back to 2000 is even more interesting. Some points I didn’t realize from that table:
  – The NASDAQ has almost doubled from its low point in September-October 2002.
  – It lost 1778 points, a 40% hit from September 2000 to December 2000, the last four full months of the previous administration.
  – It is within striking distance of where it was when Bush took office.
  – It is up about 50% from when the first Bush budget took effect in the beginning of October 2001.

A man left a tip that was quite a bit larger than what Emily Post or Miss Manners would say is necessary for satisfactory service (HT S.O.B. Alliane member Weapons of Mass Discussion in an e-mail - saying this came in handy in light of other goings-on is an understatement). It seems especially appropriate to post on St. Patrick’s Day, as the beneficiary’s surname is Irish:

Waitress Tipped $1,000
March 8, 2006

A restaurant customer in Roanoke, Virginia gives new meaning to the phrase “big tipper.”

That’s because they left one-thousand dollars, to cover a 26-dollar check.

Nineteen-year-old waitress Amanda Newkirk found the tip yesterday and at first thought it was a joke.

Then, a local bank confirmed the money was real. Newkirk says she doesn’t know the customer, but is so grateful for the money.

She’s due to give birth in May, and says the money will be put to good use.