Citings

From the December 2000 issue

(Page 4 of 4)

Post No Petitions

By Brian Doherty

Since 1998, the U.S. Postal Service has banned collecting signatures for "petitions, polls, or surveys" on its property, with violators subject to a $50 fine and up to 30 days in jail. Twenty-five plaintiffs are now challenging this policy in the U.S. District Court for Washington, D.C., arguing that it violates their First Amendment rights to assemble peaceably and petition the government for a redress of grievances.

On its face, the prohibition is overly restrictive. The postal service argues the ban is merely a way of avoiding disturbances on its property, but the policy outlaws even the most peaceful and nondisruptive petitioning. The ban isn't content-neutral either, since voter registration drives are explicitly allowed under the new regulations.

While postal spokespeople have refused to comment on the ongoing litigation, the service's motion for summary judgment argues that its operation is more a business than a government entity, a popular postal service trope when it's faced with angry citizens. The plaintiffs say that's nonsense, quoting in their suit the U.S. Code's definition of the post office as "a basic and fundamental service provided to the people by the Government of the United States, authorized by the Constitution, created by Act of Congress." All the Bugs Bunny collectible stamps in the world won't change the postal service's status as a branch of government subject to First Amendment requirements, they argue, and neither will the lack of direct congressional appropriations to support postal operations.

The plaintiffs also note that they filed a Freedom of Information Act request to find out the reasoning behind the postal service's abrupt change of policy in 1998. (Until then, post offices had been traditional petitioning spots.) The documents they received "contain absolutely no findings or information regarding any disruptions of postal business caused by signature gathering activities."

Video Surveillance

By Charles Paul Freund

Last June, a dozen Cuban cops burst into the Havana home of one Cecilia Caballero Menendez, looking for a cache of dangerous contraband. According to the neighbors, Fidel's finest weren't looking for weapons, explosives, or even a hidden printing press. They were looking for videotapes that Caballero Menendez might have been renting to people bored witless by Castro's treatment of the Elian Gonzalez case.

Cops throughout Cuba have been scouring the island for such private video hoards throughout the Gonzalez melodrama. During the months that the boy was in the United States, Castro filled the Cuban airwaves with a barrage of talk shows and other programming demanding his return. After the boy was sent back by Janet Reno, Castro maintained his anti-American media momentum, programming hour after hour of shows demanding, for example, that the longstanding U.S. trade embargo be lifted.

The result: an explosion of private video rentals, as Cubans desperately sought something else to watch. Entrepreneurial citizens have started renting whatever tapes they have been able to accumulate to their neighbors, charging 10 pesos (about 40 cents) or less per tape. One such operator told a reporter for a Spanish-language paper in Miami that his customers included officials from Cuba's army and the Ministry of the Interior.

Although Cuba criminalizes any form of self-employment not specifically recognized by the state, an estimated 100 or so such private rental sources are flourishing in Havana. The better-stocked locations offer up to 6,000 titles. Some even deliver. (Cuba has "official," state-controlled video stores, too, but they charge far higher rates and cater to well-connected party members and foreigners.) Interestingly, the private operators offer more than feature films. Also available are shows taped off Miami broadcasts, including compilations of TV news.

In this case of Caballero Menendez, police told her neighbors they were looking for videos dealing with-of all subjects-Elian Gonzalez, suggesting a niche audience for direct counter-programming of Castro's major prime-time show. In this case, however, police were unable to find any tapes.

Comments

nfl jerseys|11.14.10 @ 9:37PM|#

d46ytd

log in or register to reply