Hawaii Senators this week passed a resolution for a “Traveler’s Bill of Rights”, aimed at making the TSA more accountable and putting a stop to over reach and abuses.

Minority Leader Sam Slom, R-Hawaii, authored the legislation based on Congressman Ron Paul’sAmerican Traveler Dignity Act, at the federal level.

Much like Paul’s bill, the resolution declares that no employee of the federal agency is immune from the law when it comes to pat-downs and the use of potentially harmful radiation scanners on Americans.

Other specific issues include constitutional rights, invasion of privacy and civil rights, child protection and fiscal issues.

Senators on the Hawaii Transportation and Public Safety/Military Affairs committees, unanimously passed the legislation, states the Hawaii Reporter.

Senator Slom is a member of a national, bipartisan legislative caucus, known as the “United States for Travel Freedom” caucus, formed one year ago specifically to oppose TSA intrusions. Slom has also introduced legislation to altogether prohibit the use of non-consensual body scanners.

CONTINUED at Prison Planet. Written by Steve Watson.

‘Council of Governors’ member McDonnell could try to sabotage anti-NDAA law.

The Virginia Senate has passed a law that forbids authorities in the state from using the ‘indefinite detention’ provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act against Americans, but whether or not Governor Bob McDonnell will sign it remains to be seen given the fact that he is a member of Barack Obama’s infamous ‘Council of Governors’, whose role it is to increase military involvement in domestic affairs.

“Today, the Virginia State Senate nearly unanimously passed my bill, HB 1160, to prevent Virginia’s state and local government agencies from cooperating with the federal government in the indefinite detention of Virginians under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (“NDAA”). I am grateful that the vote in the Senate to accede to the bill as passed by the House of Delegates was 37-1,” said a statement by Delegate Bob Marshall, who was the driving force behind the bill.

“Congress, by including this provision in a must pass bill affecting our Armed Forces, made a terrible mistake in empowering this or any future President and the military to arrest and detain American citizens indefinitely, without charges, without the chance to confront their accusers, without legal counsel, and without a trial.”

Having already passed the Virginia House by a vote of 96-4 last month, the final bill will be sent to Governor Bob McDonnell. However, McDonnell has already attempted to sabotage the legislation using “secretive, backdoor” tactics, according to Marshall, so whether he agrees to sign the bill without trying to weaken its language remains to be seen.

The fact that McDonnell was included on President Obama’s infamous ‘Council of Governors’ probably explains why he has been so reticent to support the bill.

The executive order which established the Council of Governors (PDF), created a body of ten state governors directly appointed by Obama to work with the federal government to help advance the “synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States”.

CONTINUED at Prison Planet. Written by Paul Joseph Watson.

Today, the Virginia Senate took a firm stand in support of liberty, the Constitution for the United States, and the Constitution of Virginia by voting in favor of House Bill 1160 (HB1160), the “NDAA Nullification Act.”

The final vote was 39-1.

After a motion to recommit (delay until next year) went down to the wire before being rejected yesterday (report here), groups across the political spectrum activated in support of the legislation, which codifies in law that no agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia – including defense forces and national guard troops, will comply with or assist the federal government in any way under it’s newly claimed powers to arrest and detain without due process.

INTERNMENT: NEVER AGAIN

The bill’s primary sponsor, Delegate Bob Marshall, had this to say in support:

“During World War II, the federal government incarcerated tens of thousands of loyal Japanese Americans in the name of national security. By this bill, Virginia declares that it will not participate in similar modern-day efforts.

Even President Obama had questions about the bill, when he promised the American people that he would not use the unrestrained powers it granted him — but why should we trust any President with such powers?

There are moments in our history when our liberties hang in the balance. This is one of those moments. I urge the Senate…to lead the way in the nation to ensure that Virginia will not cooperate when the Federal Government strays off the reservation with laws that take away the civil liberties of our citizens.”

CONTINUED at the Tenth Amendment Center.

Florida’s delegates to the Republican National Convention are getting snubbed in their own house, after the national GOP decided Wednesday to ramp up penalties on the state for holding an early primary in violation of party rules.

Though Florida is hosting the party’s national convention in Tampa later this year, a Republican National Committee panel voted unanimously to give the state’s representatives second-class access to the whole affair.

Under the resolution, the national party will make sure Florida’s delegates have poor seating and poor hotel options — as in, hotels that are not close to the Tampa Bay Times Forum, the convention venue. According to an RNC official, the delegates will also be limited in the number of guest passes they can hand out.

The Rules Committee voted for the sanctions Wednesday, and the RNC official said no further action is needed to carry out the punishment.

“They will be penalized with reduced guest passes, reduced priority seating on the floor and hotels further away,” the official told Fox News.

A Florida Republican official claimed the national party still has to take one more step to finalize the penalties, but suggested there would be no hard feelings going into November. The official said the state party will “do nothing but (commit) ourselves to making sure that a Republican wins the state of Florida.”

The latest penalties would come on top of the hit the Sunshine State already took to its delegate count.

The state is expected to lose half its 99 delegates as a result of its decision to hold the Republican presidential primary on Jan. 31.

Under RNC rules, Florida was not supposed to hold what’s known as a “winner-take-all” primary before April. That’s a primary in which all the state’s delegates are awarded to the winner, as opposed to one in which the delegates are awarded proportionally.

The very beginning of the 2012 primary calendar is also supposed to be reserved for Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. Florida’s decision to get in on the early primary action follows a similar move in 2008, and a similar punishment by the RNC.

Leonard Curry, chairman of the Florida GOP, said in a statement that he’s hoping to move forward despite the new penalties.

“I understand why today’s vote took place and we will continue to work to protect Florida Republicans’ interest at the national convention,” Curry said. “With today’s action, I hope that all Republicans can move together, unified and committed to the most important goal we have — the election of a Republican president in 2012.”

When the state party first announced the date in September, Curry said the early vote “properly reflects the importance Florida will play on the national stage.”

A true swing state, Florida, with its 29 delegates to the Electoral College, is considered essential to win the general election. Barack Obama won the state in 2008.

Source: Fox News.

Obama Wants to Veto the Indefinite Detention Bill Because It Would Hold the U.S. to the Geneva Convention

I – like everyone else – am horrified by the Senate’s passage of legislation that would allow forindefinite detention of Americans.

And at first, I – like many others – assumed that Obama’s threat to veto the bill might be a good thing. But the truth is much more disturbing.

As former Wall Street Street editor and columnist Paul Craig Roberts correctly notes:

The Obama regime’s objection to military detention is not rooted in concern for the constitutional rights of American citizens. The regime objects to military detention because the implication of military detention is that detainees are prisoners of war. As Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin put it: Should somebody determined “to be a member of an enemy force who has come to this nation or is in this nation to attack us as a member of a foreign enemy, should that person be treated according to the laws of war? The answer is yes.”

Detainees treated according to the laws of war have the protections of the Geneva Conventions. They cannot be tortured. The Obama regime opposes military detention, because detainees would have some rights. These rights would interfere with the regime’s ability to send detainees to CIA torture prisons overseas. [Yes, Obama is still apparently allowing "extraordinary renditions" to torture people abroad.] This is what the Obama regime means when it says that the requirement of military detention denies the regime “flexibility.”

CONTINUED at Washington’s Blog.

The Senate last night codified into law the power of the U.S. military to indefinitely detain an American citizen with no charge, no trial and no oversight whatsoever with the passage of S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act.

One amendment that would have specifically blocked the measures from being used against U.S. citizens was voted down and the final bill was passed 93-7.

Another amendment introduced by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein that attempted to bar the provision from being used on American soil, an effort to ensure “the military won’t be roaming our streets looking for suspected terrorists,” also failed, although Feinstein voted in favor of the bill anyway.

Feinstein was able to include a largely symbolic amendment which states that “nothing in the bill changes current law relating to the detention of U.S. citizens and legal aliens,” but this measure is meaningless according to Republican Congressman Justin Amash, a fierce critic of the bill.

“Some have asserted that Sen. Feinstein’s amendment, S Amdt 1456, protects the rights of American citizens and preserves constitutional due process. Unfortunately, it does not. It’s just more cleverly worded nonsense,” Amash wrote on his Facebook page.

CONTINUED on Prison Planet.

*Taken from AP.

The price of gold surpassed $1,800 an ounce Wednesday for the first time as investors pulled their money out of stocks and snapped up precious metals contracts.

Gold is fast becoming a favorite port in a storm of uncertainty. Investors are clinging to what they see as a hedge against volatile stock and currency markets.

December gold contracts backed off their highs, and traded around $1,785 an ounce during midday trading after reaching a record $1,801 an ounce earlier in the day on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Gold prices have shot past a series of milestones over the past two years on an uninterrupted climb. Gold was trading at about $900 in the summer of 2008, before the financial crisis unfolded that year.

Resulting turmoil in currency and stock markets has burnished gold’s luster.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

*This will be broken into five parts with each being released a few days apart. This is due to the size of the article.

1. Introduction:

Progressivism is a political philosophy for fucking losers, much like socialism. If you don’t believe me, look at presidents Timmy Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delanus Roosevelt, Lyndon Buttplug Johnson and Barack Hoe-train Obama: all fucking losers. Oh, you think some of them were great leaders and awesome POTUSes? Well, that is because the propaganda mill that educated you wanted you to leave with that impression. There is a lot that those shitty ass “education” factories left out of their pseudohistory lessons. Contrary to what they want you to believe, these White House douchenuts were the worst presidents in history (after Lincoln of course). Although, Obama isn’t finished yet. Then again, there is absolutely no way in Hades that he can turn this shit around. His progressive train left the station long ago and he’s still chucking logs into the furnace like a fiend for hellish speed.

These presidents were so bad, that they should put all four of their heads on a mountain in the Dakota Territory and call it “Mount Suckmore”. I find it to be ridiculous that three of the four are continually rated in several top ten lists. Then again, Lincoln usually takes the number one spot and he was the worst tyrant we ever knew. This is what happens though. To steal an old adage, “History is written by the winners.” In this case, those winners were tyrants. It should be no surprise really, that they have all been the heroes pimped out by leftist propaganda. Obama is just the newest “hero” in a long line of liberty smashers. Unfortunately for him though, he’s pissing off the lefties and the propagandists may not paint history in his favor when it is all said and done. Then again Obamacare is so tyrannical and evil that it is a massive win for the Progressive Movement.

Just like Obamacare, FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society were both horrendous monsters that allowed the progressive beast to grow to a size not easily defeatable or even manageable. However, just like their architects, these legislative leviathans have been misrepresented as high points throughout American history. In reality, they bind the wrists of freedom and asphyxiate liberty.

2. Stage One – Theodore Roosevelt and the Roots of Progressivism:

“Of all forms of tyranny the least attractive and the most vulgar is the tyranny of mere wealth, the tyranny of plutocracy.” -Theodore Roosevelt

I didn’t mention him in the introduction because I do have some respect for him but one can’t dissect the history of the Progressive Movement without first taking note of Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt was a Republican, which is interesting as the Progressive Movement is typically related to the Democratic Party. Then again, Teddy did break away from the Republicans and formed the Progressive Party a.k.a. the Bull Moose Party after his presidency. His third party was instrumental in inadvertently getting one of the United States’ biggest tyrants elected. That tyrant was progressive beast Thomas Woodrow Wilson. More on Wilson in the next part of this article.

In 1900, progressivism was the political ideology of the day. Big Ted believed that he needed to build a bridge between big business and the labor force. He called this project the “Square Deal”. Whether it was intended to or not, the Square Deal kick-started class warfare like never before. You see, the Square Deal had three objectives: conservation of natural resources, control of corporations and consumer protection. While all seem like they were created with good intentions, each of these objectives created regulations and chains that forced freedom down a path of governmental restraint.

While the Square Deal was intended to help the middle class, it, like every other meddling piece of progressive legislation, created a bigger rift between the classes and gave birth to the blame game. The “haves” versus the “have nots ” was the war now being fought by the citizens of the freest nation on Earth. This philosophy of rich versus poor would carry on to modern times and provide just the right type of justification for progressives to continually meddle in our lives. In fact, the blame game has evolved into one of their sharpest weapons.

Big Ted declared that the Square Deal would treat both sides fairly. He promised that his baby would help the middle class, combat plutocracy and bad trusts while simultaneously protecting businesses from the extreme demands of labor unions. Teddy, as intelligent and well-versed in just about everything, must have never heard the English idiomatic proverb that states: “To have one’s cake and eat it too.” Also, George Orwell hadn’t yet published “1984″ so the concept of “doublethink” was probably unknown to Teddy.

The roots of progressivism came from the Roosevelt administration. The Square Deal as well as the Elkins Act and other policies of the day created a new government mentality that led to politicians overstepping their bounds in an effort to micromanage every facet of American society. Even the most trivial issues became the federal government’s business. What was once a power reserved for the states, that being anything not covered in the Constitution, became the federal government’s business. Tyranny was running wild but most people were on board with it because they did not heed the warnings of the Founding Fathers and they had not yet experienced a severe loss of liberty. Government regulation in America was nil before 1900, therefore Americans had no way to know where all this would lead. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, or so they say.

Teddy, like the progressive leaders after him, was critical of many of the Founding Fathers and thought it was his place to force Americans into a sort of evolution away from the Constitution. He believed that in his modern age, it was time to change with the times. Apparently the basic simple outlines in the Bill of Rights were too hard for the super genius to understand. Truth is, the way that the Constitution is written is so simple and so straight forward, at least the first Ten Amendments. It can be easily applied to life and the evolution of our world, our society and our culture at any time.

The Square Deal was an attack against the ideals of the Founding Fathers. I don’t feel that Big Ted did this in a malicious way or to undermine the Constitution. I think he just believed that a century old document was too outdated and that the Industrial Revolution and American Exceptionalism changed the country so drastically that the prophetic messages and warning of the Founding Fathers had become nothing more than ancient words from a dead age. I think Theodore Roosevelt had the best of intentions. Unfortunately, his style of government would evolve into an even larger movement that would cause liberty to decay and whither.

Roosevelt’s biggest accomplishments according to historians, apart from the Square Deal, were the Meat Inspection Act, the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Hepburn Act. All three of these achievements also came with pretty heinous consequences.

The Meat Inspection Act was a huge milestone in United States food and drug law. The act forced companies to have to comply with new standards on how meat was supposed to be handled. In theory this sounds fantastic but in practice it has a negative impact on liberty. I am not saying that there shouldn’t be standards, there should be, but why do they have to be regulated by the government? Private agencies could easily do the job and most likely, they could do it much better. We as customers have a right to know what we are buying but it is not the government’s job to force the provider of those goods to comply with the threats of fines, shutdown or prison. People are educated enough to make these decisions themselves and the private sector is perfectly capable of finding a non-governmental solution. The same goes for Big Ted’s Pure Food and Drug Act.

Now the Hepburn Act is something else entirely. Essentially what the act did was give the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) the power to set maximum railroad rates. If this isn’t an attack on liberty, I don’t know what is. This act also ended the free passes and special discounts that railroad companies could give to their largest and most loyal shippers. The ICC was also granted the power to look at the financial records of any railroad company they saw fit. The Hepburn Act also extended the ICC’s authority to unprecedented levels. Not only did they oversee the railroad industry’s finances but they also had power over railroad sleeping cars, bridges, terminals, ferries, express companies and oil pipelines. The Hepburn Act created a budding police state that had a negative impact on the free market and thwarted the possibility of having a true capitalist system.

In regards to the Meat Inspection Act, the Pure Food and Drug Act and the Hepburn Act conservative Republican writer Lewis L. Gould stated that Teddy was “consciously, or unconsciously … trying to concentrate all power in Washington, to practically wipe out state lines, and to govern the people by commissions and bureaus.”

Thomas E. Woods, Jr. of the Ludwig von Mises Institute wrote about these issues in the article “Theodore Roosevelt and the Modern Presidency“. In that article he writes about award-winning writer Albro Martin’s take on the Hepburn Act:

The results were devastating. In a book that earned the Columbia University Prize in American Economic History in 1971, Albro Martin described the situation in detail. His thesis, stated simply, is that Roosevelt’s Hepburn Act, combined with subsequent regulatory enactments — in particular William Howard Taft’s Mann–Elkins Act of 1910 — deprived the railroads of the rate increases they needed, an especially debilitating handicap in an inflationary atmosphere. The railroads needed investment capital following the reorganizations of the 1890s if they were to preserve their capital stock, to rebuild, and to modernize. In other words, they needed to be left alone. Instead they got policies that both increased labor costs and refused the rate increases they needed. The result was that by 1911 profits had vanished, and the collapse of the system of private management of the railroads followed soon afterwards.

You see, these methods of Big Ted’s were catastrophic. Yet, people latched on to these progressive ideas. I’d like to think that it was because of the fact that these tactics were never tried in America at that time and that the people just didn’t know better. However, people still support these types of methods and our country is in a sinkhole of shit because of it. These policies fail again and again but for whatever reason, they are deemed successes and the Beltway Suits just continue down the treacherous path of tyranny.

There are many other issues of note about Roosevelt and his progressive insanity but I cannot even begin to cover them all in this article. With that said, it is time to move a bit forward in time and examine the second stage of the progressive beast’s development.

3. Stage Two – Woodrow Wilson and the Rise of Wilsonian Tyranny:

“You are not here merely to prepare to make a living. You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world, and you impoverish yourself if you forget this errand.” - Woodrow Wilson

This article is continued in PART II

Thank you for participating in the YouCut program.  With your support, we are changing Washington’s culture of spending into a culture of savings.

I am proud to report to you that last week’s winning YouCut item, H.R. 359, passed the House in a 239 – 160 vote.  This important spending reduction bill will save taxpayers $617 million by eliminating the Presidential Election Fund, including taxpayer financing of political party conventions - click here to see how your Member of Congress cast their vote.

It was a memorable moment to watch your House of Representatives vote in support of legislation directly backed by the YouCut community.  Each week, your votes on the YouCut website will bring legislation to the House floor for a vote.  Your support of the YouCut program will serve as a reminder to all those representing you in Washington that we need to get spending under control, so that we can grow the economy, create jobs and get people back to work.

The next three YouCut proposals are now on the website, click here to cast your vote on which item we should bring to the House floor for a vote the week of February 7.

We have only begun to carry out this important work – your involvement is crucial, so that together we will reform Washington.

Regards,

Rep. Eric Cantor
Majority Leader

STORY 1: House Passes Obamacare Repeal

*Taken from Politico.

House Republicans passed a bill to repeal President Barack Obama’s health care plan Wednesday, taking their first major step toward rolling back the massive overhaul that has dominated the American political landscape for almost two years.

The vote was 245 to 189, and unanimous GOP support gave the vote the same partisan feel of the March vote to pass the law, underscoring once again the hardened political lines of the health care debate. Only three Democrats backed the repeal, a smaller number than Republicans had once predicted.

The bill will head next to the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has promised to block it. If it did receive a vote, the repeal bill would be unlikely to draw support from even a majority of senators. Even so, House Republican leaders have challenged Reid to give the bill a vote since Democrats, who control the chamber, have little to fear.

Republicans rejected a procedural maneuver by the Democratic minority to make repeal ineffective unless a majority of the House and Senate withdraw from the federal health benefits program within 30 days after passage by each chamber.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said the effort was “an attempt to derail an appeal of the Obamacare bill.”

House members flooded the floor throughout the day, delivering short but occasionally impassioned speeches that echoed their party’s talking points.

Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) called the law “a trillion-dollar tragedy.”

Rep. John Duncan (R-Tenn.) described it as “job-killing” and “socialistic.”

Rep. Kevin Duncan (R-Texas) said “health care is too important to get it wrong, and Obamacare got it wrong.”

But Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) took the debate to a new level late Tuesday night, suggesting to an empty House floor that Republican rhetoric around health care reform is akin to Nazi propaganda that fed anti-Semitism during World War II.

“They say it’s a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels,” Cohen said, referring to a Nazi propagandist. “You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That’s the same kind of thing.”

Reps. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) agreed Wednesday afternoon that the health reform law creates jobs, but sparred on their merits.

Pallone said it’s a good thing that the new law creates jobs in the health care sector. He also said he was glad to hear Stearns say that the law will create jobs, a point, he says, Republicans won’t concede.

But Stearns fired back, saying the measure creates the wrong kind of jobs.

“Perhaps the gentleman of New Jersey didn’t listen to me when I just spoke,” Stearns said. “It’s creating 150 new government agencies. And these are all government jobs. When we talk about job creation here, that’s government jobs.”

The House will vote Thursday to instruct four committees to draft alternative health care proposals that reflect Republican priorities, such as reducing medical malpractice lawsuits, prohibiting the denial of coverage to people with preexisting conditions and barring the use of taxpayer money for abortions.

But House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Republicans won’t put a deadline on drafting an alternative to the Democrats’ health care reform law.

“I don’t know that we need artificial deadlines set up for the committees to act,” Boehner said. “We expect them to act in an efficient way, allowing all of their members on their committees to be heard, both Democrats and Republicans.”

Republicans introduced alternatives to the health reform legislation in the last Congress but have said they want to start those conversations anew in the several House committees with jurisdiction over health care.

Democrats tried to score some late political points amid the repeal vote by calling on members to give up their health benefits — the very kind of government-run health care Republicans rail against.

“It’s time for those who support repeal to give up the federal health benefits they currently enjoy as Members of Congress – the same benefits and protections they are voting to take away from millions of Americans,” a House Democratic leadership aide said. “Americans have a right to know that those who support repeal are willing to live without the same benefits they are denying their constituents.”

STORY 2: 26 States Join Suit Against Obamacare

*Taken from Fox News.

PENSACOLA, Fla. — Six more states joined a lawsuit in Florida against President Obama’s health care overhaul on Tuesday, meaning more than half of the country is challenging the law.

The announcement was made as House members in Washington, led by Republicans, debated whether to repeal the law.

The six additional states, all with Republican attorneys general, joined Florida and 19 others in the legal action, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi said.

“It sends a strong message that more than half of the states consider the health care law unconstitutional and are willing to fight it in court,” she said in a statement.

The states claim the health care law is unconstitutional and violates people’s rights by forcing them to buy health insurance by 2014 or face penalties.

Government attorneys have said the states do not have standing to challenge the law and want the case dismissed.

Lawsuits have been filed elsewhere. A federal judge in Virginia ruled in December that the insurance-purchase mandate was unconstitutional, though two other federal judges have upheld the requirement. It’s expected the Supreme Court will ultimately have to resolve the issue.

“It is important to note that two of the three courts that have reviewed this law on the merits have found it constitutional, and those decisions –as well as two others the government prevailed on — are pending in courts of appeal. At the same time, trial courts in additional cases have dismissed numerous challenges on jurisdictional and other grounds that have not been appealed,” Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said.

Meanwhile, the White House dismissed an expected vote on repealing the law, saying the Republicans’ push was not a serious legislative effort. Democrats have a majority in the Senate and they have said they will block repeal in that chamber.

In the Florida case, the states also argue the federal government is violating the Constitution by forcing a mandate on the states without providing money to pay for it. They say the new law gives the state’s the impossible choice of accepting the new costs or forfeiting federal Medicaid funding.

Florida U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson could rule later this month whether he will grant a summary judgment in favor of the states or the Obama administration without a trial.

Florida’s former Republican Attorney General Bill McCollum filed the lawsuit just minutes after President Obama signed the 10-year, $938 billion health care bill into law in March. He chose a court in Pensacola, one of Florida’s most conservative cities. The nation’s most influential small business lobby, the National Federation of Independent Business, also joined the suit.

Joining the coalition in the Florida case were: Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Ohio, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

The other states that are suing are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington.