WASHINGTON - UPDATED - Monday July 16, 2007 11:01 am

The D.C. government will appeal to the Supreme Court to defend its 30-year-old ban on most handguns.

Mayor Adrian Fenty's office says the city's ban on most handguns can and should be defended.

In March, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals sided with six district residents who sued to be able to keep their guns for self defense. The decision repealed much of the city's handgun ban, but the ban stays in place through the appeals process.

D.C. Attorney General Linda Singer plans to file a 30-day extension Monday so the request can get to the high court by September fifth.

What's in your wallet?

What's a paltry one million dollars to a member of Congress?

Well, apparently not enough to know if an organization about to receive that big block of cash actually exists.

Republican Rep. Jeff Flake of Arizona, the fiscal crusader who's never met an earmark he likes, questioned Democratic Rep. Peter J. Visclosky of Indiana on the House floor Tuesday about whether the Center for Instrumented Critical Infrastructure actually exists - since, hey, it's getting like a million bucks or something.

Visclosky, who chairs the spending subcommittee responsible for the project, had to admit that, well, he didn't have a clue.

After a lengthy back-and-forth, Flake, complaining that his staff couldn't find a website for the center, asked Visclosky, "Does the center currently exist?"

"At this time, I do not know," the Indiana Democrat replied. "But if it does not exist, the monies could not go to it."

And who could possibly be the sponsor of such an earmark? Yes, you guessed it, the man Republicans love to hate, Pennsylvania Democrat John P. Murtha.

Despite the money's uncertain destination, the House rejected Flake's measure to strike the funds, 326-98. And the Visclosky bill also sailed through, 312-112.

As I said, what's one million dollars to a member of Congress?

www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0707/Whats_in_your_wallet.html

July 25, 2007
Protester removed from Fred Thompson event

A protester questioned Thompson’s conservatism Wednesday.

HOUSTON, Texas (CNN) – A woman screaming “you’re not a real conservative, sir” was removed by police from a welcoming reception for likely GOP presidential candidate Fred Thompson Wednesday morning. A second protester was also taken from the room.

Houston police officers escorted the woman — as well as a man — from the hangar at Hobby Airport, where Thompson was shaking hands with a crowd of supporters. They were not arrested.

The woman questioned Thompson as he talked to reporters. She asked him why he was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and noted that the organization supported the North American Union with Canada and Mexico.

After the woman interrupted Thompson by questioning his conservative credentials, the likely candidate said, “Don’t fuss at me. You asked me a question. Let me answer it.” He told the woman, “I try to learn as much as I can from all viewpoints.”

Later, she shouted at Thompson as the news conference ended. Police officers took her outside a fenced area near the hangar, and stood with her until the former Tennessee senator departed.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/25/protester-removed-from-fred-thom...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070726/cm_csm/electricity;_ylt=AmG5UBdgHc4XxXJj0ZB...

Opinion
Juicing down for global warming

Thu Jul 26, 4:00 AM ET

Many power utilities are gearing up to install "smart" meters in kitchens or living rooms to show customers the cost of their electricity use – per minute and perhaps per appliance. During times of peak usage, utilities may even remotely adjust your home thermostat.

Having an instant electric bill on the wall, with dollar signs rolling like a gasoline pump, is designed to create sticker shock – and then, perhaps, a conservation ethic to help curb climate change. People might cut back their use of power-hungry devices, from clothes dryers to the TV "sleep mode." They might, for instance, turn on dishwashers only after 10 p.m.

Some utilities hope to install "intelligent sockets" that communicate between appliances and the electricity provider. On hot summer days, when electric rates would be raised through "dynamic pricing," those customers who voluntarily give up control of their usage – and it would have be voluntary – would be given rebates.

But can such watt-saving steps help save the planet? Yes, if they keep utilities from building more carbon-spewing power plants – especially the expensive kind that rev up only during peak hours. By many estimates, fossil-fuel power plants are likely to be the preferred source of electricity for years to come.

As it is, utilities can't keep up with rising demand. One projection shows a 19 percent rise in peak-time electricity usage over the next decade while only a 6 percent growth in power capacity.

Something's got to give. And it may be consumer lifestyles.

A three-year experiment in California with 2,500 customers showed they reduced their average electricity demand by 13 percent during peak summer hours when they had to pay five times the normal cost. Users with the kind of "smart" thermostats that adjust appliance use cut back by 27 percent.

Even if smart meters cut usage by only 5 percent nationwide with "time-of-day" pricing, that would save about 625 combustion turbines from being built and reduce overall industry costs by about $3 billion a year, according to a study by The Brattle Group, a consulting firm.

But such savings won't come cheap.

The cost of installing what's called advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) – with new meters alone priced up to $200 – may take years for utilities to recover. Many in the industry are balking at the up-front price tag, the technical challenges, and the uncertainty of consumer reaction to volatile prices and in-your-face meters.

Sensing resistance, Congress nudged utilities to adapt AMI in its 2005 energy law. Several states, especially California, are pushing it hard. At present, though, AMI is used in only about 6 percent of meters. State regulators need to be more aggressive in forcing utilities to give up the old practice of selling as much electricity as possible with flat-rate pricing and meters that consumers don't understand (and can't easily see). One idea is to "de-couple" a utility's profit from its electricity sales by guaranteeing a set rate of return.

Electricity providers need to become facilitators for their customers in achieving energy efficiency and reducing their carbon footprint.

Being "smart" isn't only for meters that alter electricity usage.

It's for the planet, too.