(Editor's note: This is a response to the guest commentary "Attack Tyranny at Its Weakest Link: Enforcement.")

In his 1849 essay "Civil Disobedience," Henry David Thoreau seemed disinterested in the systemic mechanisms available to battle injustice. "They take too much time, and a man's life will be gone," he wrote. "I have other affairs to attend to. I came into this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to live in, but to live in it, be it good or bad."

Thoreau's hatred of government was no secret. In the opening paragraph of that essay, he made this blanket statement: "That government is best which governs not at all."

Those sentiments are clearly the roots of "Attack Tyranny at Its Weakest Link - Enforcement," by Kevin Carson of the Center for a Stateless Society. The piece can be summarized by its conclusion: "Don't waste time trying to change the law. Just disobey it."

Within that guest commentary, there are trenchant observations, especially the argument that the current United States political system makes grassroots legislative reform difficult if not impossible. (This frustration with democratic niceties is hardly new; as Thoreau wrote: "Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail.")

Carson argues that in that context, it is far more efficient to simply disobey the law than to try to reform it: "Public agitation against a law may be very fruitful indeed - but not so much by creating pressure to change the law as by creating a climate of public opinion such that it becomes a dead letter."

The article obviously comes from an anarchist perspective, and it's true to the anti-state nature of that philosophy. But the commentary's arguments are problematic for those who believe in the necessity of the state - even those who distrust or hate government but see a role for it, no matter how limited. And Carson ignores the moral elements of Thoreau's essay, which specifically advocates disobedience of laws that would compel one to act unjustly toward others. Carson's piece is either woefully incomplete or shockingly immature.

Organized labor is engaged in a furious multi-front legislative war in Illinois, and more skirmishes may be on the horizon.

Trade and industrial unions are hoping to mitigate major damage from proposed workers' compensation reforms. Teachers unions are trying to fend off what it considers to be some egregious education reforms. And public-employee unions are warily eyeing a potential new battle against a well-known foe that their counterparts in other states have had to face in the recent past. Looking at the battlefield right now, you'd probably never know that the Democrats held onto power in last month's elections.

It's confirmed: New U.S. Census Bureau numbers show that Iowa will go from having five congressional seats to four.

Iowa is one of 10 states that will see a loss of congressional seats. Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania will also lose one seat apiece. Two states - New York and Ohio - will each lose two seats.

The big winner was Texas, which will gain four seats. Florida will gain two seats, while Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Utah, Washington, and South Carolina will all gain one.

Before Janet Napolitano, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, unleashed full-body-imaging scanners and "enhanced" pat-downs on American airline passengers, she subjected Arizona drivers to red-light cameras. In August 2008, Napolitano, then the governor of Arizona, instituted a statewide system of 200 fixed and mobile speed and red-light cameras, which were projected to bring in more than $120 million in annual revenue for the state. She was aided in this endeavor by the Australian corporation Redflex Traffic Systems.

Two years later, after widespread complaints that the cameras intrude on privacy and are primarily a money-making enterprise for the state (income actually fell short of the projections because people refused to pay their fines), Arizona put the brakes on the program. And while other states - including Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, West Virginia, and Wisconsin - have since followed suit, many more municipalities, suffering from budget crises, have succumbed to the promise of easy revenue and installed the cameras. (Davenport began using red-light cameras in 2004.) As the Washington Post notes: "A handful of cities used them a decade ago. Now they're in more than 400, spread across two dozen states. Montgomery County started out with 18 cameras in 2007. Now it has 119. Maryland just took the program statewide last month, and Prince George's is putting up 50. The District started out with a few red light cameras in 1999; now they send out as many automated tickets each year as they have residents, about 580,000."

Tim DavlinSpringfield mayors hold a unique position in Illinois. As the mayor of the state's capital city, they have access to more state leaders more often and more intimately than just about any other local leader except for maybe Chicago's mayor.

Tim Davlin took advantage of that position better than most mayors his city has had.

Iowa Republicans hope that a nationally broadcast GOP presidential debate they've scheduled for August 11, 2011, in Ames will up the stakes for the Iowa Straw Poll two days later.

"We wanted to make sure it's bigger and better and more prominent than it's ever been before," Republican Party of Iowa chair Matt Strawn said Thursday in a conference call with reporters, less than an hour after announcing the two events.

The Iowa Straw Poll has historically been considered the critical first test of grassroots support for Republican presidential candidates in the first-in-the-nation caucus state.

However, the future of the Ames Republican straw poll was cast into doubt in June 2007 after former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Arizona Senator John McCain decided to skip the key event leading up to the caucus.

That's something the Iowa GOP hopes to avoid this time around.

I've been saying for the past couple of years that Illinois government is one of the biggest drags on our state's economy. Now, a new survey shows just how true that is.

The survey was conducted in October and November of this year by Illinois Partners for Human Service (IPHS). It found that almost half - 49 percent - of private human-service providers have laid off staff. Why? Because the groups are at least partially funded by the state, and the state is a total deadbeat when it comes to paying its bills.

Governor-elect Terry Branstad says budget cuts in the upcoming year will include reductions in the Iowa governor's office staff and security detail, and he will ask other state agencies to make similar cuts.

Branstad did not specify the number of positions that will be eliminated in his office, but said that he would have only one legislative liaison instead of two. He also said he would likely not fill some deputy-chief-of-staff positions. He said reducing his security detail will allow the state to put more state troopers on the road. He also said he'll lead by example with a goal of cutting the cost of state government by 15 percent over five years to align state spending with ongoing revenues.

To understand what WikiLeaks has done, we must understand economic cause and effect. Let us begin with a comparable market: the market for gambling.

Governments have laws against gambling. Why? The justification is moral principles. This reason is less persuasive once the government sets up state lotteries and also licenses taxable gambling, such as horse racing. The real reason is the governments want to monopolize the vice. They expect greater tax revenues.

Governments arrest bookies. But bookies are merely providers of the service. The source of demand is the individual gambler, the guy who is placing the bets. The infrastructure that delivers the service is surely basic to the process, but it is the individual citizen who is the prime mover. Why? He is paying for it.

Want to understand the process? Follow the money. It ends with the customer.

Six Illinois House Republicans voted with 55 Democrats last week to approve a civil-unions bill. But a few of the Democratic "yes" votes were a bit more surprising.

All but one of the six Republicans were suburbanites. Bill Black, who is retiring later this month, was the only Downstater. Representatives Suzi Bassi and Beth Coulson were suburban "yes" votes who are not returning next year. Representatives Mark Beaubien, Rosemary Mulligan, and Skip Saviano were the other Republican "yes" votes, and all three are suburban legislators. None of those was a particularly huge surprise. Black has been a more traditionally liberal Republican for years, endorsed by labor unions and backed by many Democrats in his district. Black quoted late U.S. Senator Everett Dirksen during the debate, citing Dirksen's crucial vote for civil-rights legislation in 1964 as the basis for his own position.

Pages