There are two things in the world I despise more than surcharges and speeding tickets. If you have increased costs to provide goods or services, raise your prices, don't surcharge me. And Police Departments, please spend more time fighting crime and ticketing reckless drivers rather than creating a wall of fear and antagonism between you and the masses of citizens by handing out ticky-tack speeding tickets in such an arbitrary manner.

So a story in USA Today has enraged me double. The City Council in an Atlanta suburb approved a surcharge on speeding tickets to cover the increased fuel costs incurred by the Police Department. Financial penalties attached to speeding tickets should have only one purpose - to create a financial disincentive for people to drive above the speed limit. They should not be used to generate municipal revenue. With this decision, the suburb of Holly Springs, GA admits that the tickets are used to cover costs.

In an interview, the Police Chief said he expects the fee increase to be dropped if gasoline falls below $3 per gallon. Notice to Chief Ken Ball - that may never happen again in our lifetimes. The "surcharge" is here to stay. One thing this tell me is that next time I take a vacation, in which I pay my surcharge to check my luggage at the airport, I won't be taking that vacation in Holly Springs, GA.

Gasoline prices continue to rise, pinching American consumers. It's becoming a major political issue, and could soon become an economic crisis. What is the Bush/McCain solution? Offshore oil drilling in the United States. Even if you think this makes sense, it's the latest example of implementing a policy for the wrong reasons.

This week the President of Mexico, Felipe Calderon, signed legislation revamping the Mexican justice system with the establishment of the "presumption of innocence" in criminal proceedings. Hello, Mexico! Where have you been all this time? The history of the presumption of innocence is not crystal clear, as legal matters are often murky, but it goes back at least centuries in English and Western law and may even have roots in Ancient Greece, over two thousand years ago. Now sure, Mexico may be far more advanced than some Middle Eastern countries, for example, that find rape victims to be guilty of the crime of being raped, but this is not the standard to which you want to be compared. Mexico has been trying to modernize and join the advanced world for decades now. It would have helped if they had thought of this basic principle of enlightenment and reason a long time ago. But OK, congratulations, modern justice is finally arriving to the southern neighbor of the United States. Progress in human affairs is slow. If you accept that fact, it's easier to celebrate this advance. And it will be easier to wait the estimated TEN MORE YEARS expected to pass before the presumption of innocence is actually put into widespread practice in Mexico.

The US Open Golf Championship wasn't the only recent major competition to finish in a tie after the regulation rounds. But it certainly has a more sensible format for breaking the tie.

The people of Eastern Iowa are experiencing what may be the worst flooding in state history. You'd expect that in times of distress like these, people would rally to help each other. But not in the new America, the land where money is everything and emergency response requires a contract.

In the November election, 35 US Senate seats will be contested. In five states, the incumbent Senator is retiring (all five are Republican) guaranteeing a new, first-time US Senator in Colorado, Virginia, New Mexico, Idaho and Nebraska. Let's meet the potential new Senators to see what we can look forward to.

On Tuesday, May 20th the state of Kentucky has its turn in the 2008 Primary Circus. Yes, Hillary Clinton is still officially challenging Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination, but nobody cares anymore - Obama is going to win the nomination. So is there anything left of interest in the Kentucky Primary? As it turns out, there are plenty of fun political sideshows in the Bluegrass State.

I am usually not one to pay much attention to the news media manufactured controversies over a remark made by a politician and exploited by opponents. But I feel compelled to comment on the latest episode because the issue at the center of the controversial remarks can be construed, in some ways, as the most important issue in the entire campaign (as unbelievable as that sounds.)

The Iowa Caucuses finally arrive tomorrow, January 3rd. While political junkies are excited for the results of the first significant votes in the Democratic and Republican Presidential primary seasons, and everybody is planning to watch online coverage by The Young Turks (starting at 7pm ET / 4pm PT), I would like to remind everybody why I have so much disdain for the Iowa Caucuses:

On the PBS NewsHour from Friday, December 28, the political round table discussion touched on the reaction of the Presidential candidates to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan. David Brooks, New York Times columnist and conservative political pundit, stated that four candidates "addressed" the difficult issue: Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Fred Thompson and John McCain. He then listed the candidates who handled the subject poorly, or "sidestepped" the issue: John Edwards and Hillary Clinton. "Most of the candidates," he said, "and most notably Clinton, have punted on [it]."

So what happened between Friday and Sunday?

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, one of the highest profile environmental issues was the need to protect the Spotted Owl in Pacific Northwest forests - "owls vs. jobs" as the simpleton news media characterized the debate. Environmentalists rallied to defend the species in the face of destruction of old growth forests, while the logging industry and brainwashed Republicans claimed that jobs for people were more important than a few owls. If I had had a platform at the time, I would have screamed at the top of my lungs, "It's not about the owls!"

Environmental protection is a supremely important issue to me. At the same time, I prefer my environmental movement to be based on sound reason and judgment. In the case of the the Spotted Owl controversy, clearly for me the issue was about protecting old growth forests. In the grand scheme of things, I didn't really care that much about one particular owl subspecies. The overall value of protecting the old growth forest was far more important, and the Spotted Owl was merely an indicator of the forest health, and protection under the Endangered Species Act should have been little more than a legal tactic to reduce or prevent logging in these forests. If the issue were just the Spotted Owls, the logging industry shills and ignorant Republican supporters would have been right.

Why do I insist so much on focusing on the real issue rather than a tangential issue?

But what are we doing to ourselves today?

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon opened the Bali Climate Change Conference this week with a dire warning about global warming:

"The science is clear. Climate change is happening. The impact is real. The time to act is now. ...unless we act, there will be serious consequences: rising sea levels; more frequent and less predictable floods and severe droughts; famine around the world, particularly in Africa and Central Asia; and the loss of up to a third of our plant and animal species."

Several days have passed since Republican Mitt Romney delivered his much-anticipated speech explaining how his religious faith would influence him as President. Many commentators have been justifiably upset by Romney's disdain for the secular tradition of government in the United States, and by his suspect interpretation of the separation of Church and State. I share that disgust. But with time to analyze the speech, I have found another reason to dismiss Romney - he might be the world's dumbest tourist.

In this excerpt from the speech he describes his travels: