Woman battling installation of smart meters tells her story on radio

February 14, 2013

Writer

Brenda Hawk has been in a long battle with her power company and her sheriffs department over the installation of smart meters. All Brenda wanted from the company was written assurance that these new smart meters are safe and not a hazard, but the company allegedly refused to do so. The story only gets more disturbing from there.

The transcript of the interview is below:

GLENN: Next I want to tell you kind of a, I don't know, a 1984 story, if you will, a story of Big Brother, and a story of the little person winning against the machine. At least a temporary battle. Brenda Hawk is a 9/12 project member and she's a woman that lives in Ohio and does not want the smart meter. And she's lived her life the right way. Last October she was told she's going to have to get a smart meter attached to her home, and she said no. She successfully managed to keep the old one until just last week. The CEO of American Electric Power sent her a letter saying, "Too bad, you're getting a smart meter." She has a pacemaker and people have reported problems with pacemakers after getting the smart meters installed. She said, "I don't want it." She is somebody that needs a breathing machine, she's ‑‑ I mean, she's not necessarily the picture of health.

Well, here in the middle of winter they shut her power off and her water. I've never seen anything like it. They shut her power and water off. The sheriff and the power company trucks arrive uninvited and she says to the sheriff, "Are you there to protect my rights?" And he says, "No, I'm here to protect them." She said, "I do not want a smart meter on my house." So they shut her power off. Well, because she's a 9/12 member, the phones at TheBlaze lit up and we found out about Brenda's story, and she spoke to Michael Opelka and she's on the phone with us now to give us the rest of the story. And the kind of happy, I was going to say ending, but middle. Brenda, how are you?

HAWK: Oh, I'm doing fine, Glenn. I ‑‑ it's a great honor to speak with you today.

GLENN: Well, I'm sorry. I wish it was on ‑‑ I wish it was on something else, but tell me about your experience of having the sheriff and the power company come out and put you in your place.

HAWK: Well, it was rather interesting since I had erased my easement with AEP, oh, about ten or twelve years ago due to some tree‑trimming problems and ‑‑

GLENN: Explain ‑‑ hang on just a second. Explain what that means, Brenda.

HAWK: Well, they always had these groups called Asplundh contract with AEP to come trim your trees and they don't trim them. They butcher them to where they ‑‑ they actually make them dangerous and they start dying and that's why they do it that way.

GLENN: Right. They are doing it to keep the power lines clear in case there's snow or wind or something.

HAWK: And unfortunately my trees weren't interfering with their pole. They were 30 feet off their easement even but they said they had a blanket easement to my property. So it made it right that they could even remove my house if they felt it was in the way.

GLENN: That's crazy.

HAWK: I was a little shocked at that. So we had some issues and I found out later on that, studying the law that I could erase my easement with a contract between two parties. So I thought I was safe on this because they haven't returned with the tree trimmers over twelve years and they usually do this every three. And so I informed AEP that, you know, they would need my permission on the land if they did come here. And the issue I had with the meter is that I just wanted a written guarantee. I called PUCO, the whole bit, did everything legally and said that all I wanted was a written guarantee that this meter is safe for my health, my health and my home and for the animals because I've read quite a few things and I wanted the information from them to prove that the meter was safe and to prove what I was reading on the Internet may not be right. They wouldn't give it to me. And so it's quite a shock to see them come last Friday.

GLENN: Did they notify you ‑‑ did they notify you in advance that they were coming?

HAWK: Yeah.

GLENN: But I thought we had cancelled the appointment when I talked to an AEP representative beforehand that I said, I had asked him to send me this information and I had written to the governor of Ohio and my congressman Jim Jordan and it was awaiting, you know, some information or answers from somebody as to whether they could do this or not when they had no easement to my property. And, of course, I hadn't received anything and that was within that week. So it was way too probably fast for anybody to answer me. Jim Jordan's office did contact me and said they were working on it at the local office. And then they called back later in the afternoon and said they found out there's nothing they can do because it's a state issue. So I went, okay. But when the sheriff's department came at 10:00 in the morning, they came with three AEP trucks and when the deputy came to my porch, and I knew to stay on the inside of my enclosed porch with the door locked. Let's just say I've had issues before because of this. And I spoke to the officer, and I'm always very polite to people and I just asked him, like you had stated that, "Are you here to protect my property rights as a citizen of Allen County, or are you here to protect AEP?" And he said, "No, ma'am, I'm not here for you. I'm here for AEP."

GLENN: Boy, I tell you I would do everything I can, and the 9/12 project should do everything they can to make sure that sheriff is voted out.

HAWK: Oh, well, this gets interesting. Let me update you real quick what happened Monday. They did restore my power. I guess they ‑‑

GLENN: Hang on just a second. It's my understanding that within three hours of this being posted on TheBlaze, they were inundated with e‑mails and phone calls and they restored your power. Is that your understanding?

HAWK: Yeah, not until ‑‑ not until 36 hours later, about ‑‑

GLENN: Oh, 36 hours?

HAWK: Yeah. About 5:30 on Friday evening ‑‑ I mean Saturday evening, I'm sorry. So I had to stay awake for 36 hours because if I fall asleep because of my brain injury, it stops my diaphragm from working and without the CPAP type of breathing machine ‑‑ I don't have sleep apnea. It's a brain condition. It's called central apnea. And my brain, if I do fall asleep, the brain just kind of slows down and won't let my diaphragm work.

GLENN: Right. It is a very ‑‑ it is an extraordinarily dangerous medical situation.

HAWK: Condition, yes.

GLENN: And you can die quickly from it. But I understand they laughed at you when you brought that up.

HAWK: Yeah. That was one issue I brought up that I said, you know, there's an Ohio law that states you cannot turn my power off between November 15th and April 15th. And I said, I've paid my bill. And they said, well, that law does not pertain to you, ma'am. And this Mr. Rocco was with this deputy that day. I didn't know who it was at the time, but he was the one pretty well telling me that the law doesn't pertain to me. And I said, oh, you're right. My bill has been paid up to date and I've never missed a payment. So I guess that makes a difference, huh? They were just kind of giggling at me at my expense and they said, well, I'll tell ya, lady, it's either the meter, you take the meter or we take your power. And I said, well, I'll tell you what. If it's about the meter, go ahead and take the analog meter off my house but until you give me a guarantee that the other one's safe, you cannot replace it with the RFM meter. And they said ‑‑ they kind of discussed each other between AEP and the deputy and they said, "Well, it's going to be the power then." They didn't really even want the meter. That was what really fascinated me.

GLENN: I will tell you that, I think there are a lot of people in the power companies that are doing it because it will save them money. And it will. It will save them money. They don't have to go and look at it. But I really, truly believe, and I don't know if you believe this, Brenda, but smart meters in the end are all about control.

HAWK: Right. Right. Yeah, from what I've studied, I understood that pretty well before they showed up.

GLENN: Sure.

HAWK: And yeah, because I ‑‑

GLENN: So what happened on Monday when ‑‑ with the sheriff?

HAWK: Yeah, Monday was very interesting. I just, some friends were kind of concerned about my safety and they said, why don't you call your Allen County sheriff's department and lodge a complaint or file charges against these people. I said, you know, that's probably a good idea. So first thing Monday morning around 8:30 in the morning, I did call the sheriff's department. And they took my report and said they would have a deputy ‑‑ or a sergeant call me back. Well, the sergeant called me back and was extremely rude and disrespectful to me. I mean, he yelled at me up one side and down the other and basically he said I was a criminal, I was shooting at people, I had no right to give anybody ‑‑

GLENN: What the hell kind of sheriff's department do you have?

HAWK: Pardon?

GLENN: What kind of sheriff's department do you have?

HAWK: It's scary. It's really scary.

GLENN: Let me tell you something. Now I sound like a broken record, but Brenda, move to Texas.

HAWK: I wish I could.

GLENN: Jeez.

HAWK: Land here is not selling very well.

GLENN: Yeah. Well, another reason to move to Texas.

HAWK: Tough to leave.

GLENN: Wow. I am sorry, Brenda. Okay. So what is this sheriff's name?

HAWK: The sheriff's name is Sheriff Crish, C‑r‑i‑s‑h.

GLENN: Crish.

HAWK: Yeah, Crish.

GLENN: When is he up for reelection?

HAWK: He was just elected I think a year or so ago. So it's going to be a while.

GLENN: Well, for anybody who is listening that wants to run against him and wants to protect the people of your area, if you're running, I will give you a commercial for free to run against him if you stand for the principles of liberty and the understanding that it is your land. If the sheriffs ‑‑ I will lend my voice to a group of sheriffs that decide that they are going to stand together across the country, and I will do everything I can to empower sheriffs and to make sure that people understand that your sheriff, your local sheriff is the best friend that you have. And any of these sheriffs that decide they are going to go the other way, I'll help ya. I'll help you. You just let me know.

So Brenda, how is this left now?

HAWK: Well, I don't know what happened, but after this sergeant ripped me up one side and down the other and just yelled at me and said, "Lady," never said my name or anything. Just was basically being very rude, he called back about five minutes later. I didn't even recognize the voice. And he said, "Gee, I..." kind of interesting. He said, "It appears that somebody has already filed a complaint and a case with the prosecuting attorney's office and if I wanted the number I could have it and call the prosecuting attorney's office. And he was very calm. I didn't ‑‑ like I said, I didn't recognize his voice. And he actually called me Ms. Hawk at that point. Total turnaround. So ‑‑

GLENN: Before it was "lady"?

HAWK: Yeah, so far as "hey lady" this and "hey lady" that. I don't even want to get into the conversation. It wasn't pleasant. I just sat there and took it. But yeah, so to date I don't know who has done this in my benefit, and I'm extremely grateful to whoever this person is because usually this is what they pull on me: Well, you don't have any rights, so you cannot do any ‑‑ and they definitely basically said he would not allow me to press charges or write up a complaint against anyone in this town. So I was ‑‑ or against AEP for that matter. So I was really shocked.

GLENN: Well, I tell you what, Brenda, we'll do everything we can at TheBlaze to follow the story and to make sure that this sheriff ‑‑ you know, I would like somebody at TheBlaze to do a profile on this sheriff and we'll also find out who filed that lawsuit for you unless they don't want to be exposed. If they don't mind being exposed, we'll let you know who the good‑doer was. Thank you very much. Brenda, you ‑‑

HAWK: Well, thank you, Glenn Beck.

GLENN: You stay in touch with us, all right? You stay in touch with Michael Opelka. These are his kinds of stories. Thank you so much.

HAWK: Thank you.

GLENN: God bless.

Rapper Kendrick Lamar brings white fan onstage to sing with him, but here’s the catch

Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images for American Express

Rapper Kendrick Lamar asked a fan to come onstage and sing with him, only to condemn her when she failed to censor all of the song's frequent mentions of the “n-word" while singing along.

“I am so sorry," she apologized when Lamar pointed out that she needed to “bleep" that word. “I'm used to singing it like you wrote it." She was booed at by the crowd of people, many screaming “f*** you" after her mistake.

On Tuesday's show, Pat and Jeffy watched the clip and talked about some of the Twitter reactions.

“This is ridiculous," Pat said. “The situation with this word has become so ludicrous."

BIAS ALERT: MSNBC’s Katy Tur pressures Texas AG to ‘promise’ school safety

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

What happened?

MSNBC's Katy Tur didn't bother to hide her pro-gun control bias in an interview with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in the wake of the Santa Fe High School killings.

What did she ask?

As Pat pointed out while sitting in for Glenn on today's show, Tur tried to “badger" Paxton into vowing that he would push for a magical fix that will make schools “100 percent safe." She found it “just wild" that the Texas attorney general couldn't promise that schools will ever be completely, totally safe.

“Can you promise kids in Texas today that they're safe to go to school?" Tur pressured Paxton.

“I don't think there's any way to say that we're ever 100 percent safe," the attorney general responded.

What solutions did the AG offer?

“We've got a long way to go," Paxton said. He listed potential solutions to improve school safety, including installing security officers and training administrators and teachers to carry a gun.

Pat's take:

“Unbelievable," Pat said on today's show. “Nobody can promise [100 percent safety]."

OVERREACH: These presidents are the worst ‘executive order offenders’ — here’s why

Every president from George Washington to Donald Trump has issued at least one executive order (with the exception of William Harrison who died just 31 days into his presidency) and yet the U.S. Constitution doesn't even mention executive orders. So how did the use of this legislative loophole become such an accepted part of the job? Well, we can thank Franklin Roosevelt for that.

Back at the chalkboard, Glenn Beck broke down the progression of the executive order over the years and discussed which US Presidents have been the “worst offenders."

“It's hard to judge our worst presidential overreachers on sheer numbers alone," said Glenn. “However, it's not a shock that FDR issued by far the most of any president."

Our first 15 presidents issued a combined total of 143. By comparison, Franklin D. Roosevelt issued 3721, more than twice the next runner up, Woodrow Wilson, at 1803.

“Next to FDR, no other president in our history attempted to reshape so much of American life by decree, until we get to this guy: President Obama," Glenn explained. “He didn't issue 3000, or even 1800; he did 276 executive orders, but it was the power of those orders. He instituted 560 major regulations classified by the Congressional Budget Office as having 'significant economic or social impacts.' That's 50 percent more regulations than George W. Bush's presidency — and remember, everybody thought he was a fascist."

President Obama blamed an obstructionist Congress for forcing him to bypass the legislative process. By executive order, President Obama decreed the U.S. join the Paris Climate Accord, DACA, the Clean Power Plan and transgender restrooms. He also authorized spying in US citizens through section 702 of FISA, used the IRS to target political opponents and ordered military action in Libya without Congressional permission.

All of these changes were accepted by the very people who now condemn President Trump for his use of executive orders — many of which were issued to annul President Obama's executive orders, just as President Obama annulled President Bush's executive orders when he took office … and therein lies the rub with executive orders.

“That's not the way it's supposed to work, nor would we ever want it to be," said Glenn. “We have to have the Constitution and laws need to originate in Congress."

Watch the video above to find out more.

Holding T-bills now pays 30x more than your bank savings account

Sharon McCutcheon/Unsplash

Six months ago, I alerted readers to the very attractive benefits that the TreasuryDirect program offers to investors who are defensively sitting on cash right now.

Since then, those benefits have continued to improve. Substantially.

Back in November, by holding extremely conservative short-term (i.e., 6-months or less) Treasury bills, TreasuryDirect participants were receiving over 16x more in interest payments vs keeping their cash in a standard bank savings account.

Today, they're now receiving over 30 times more. Without having to worry about the risk of a bank "bail-in" or failure.

So if you're holding cash right now and NOT participating in the TreasuryDirect program, do yourself a favor and read on. If you're going to pass on this opportunity, at least make it an 'eyes-wide-open' decision.

Holding Cash (In Treasurys) Now Beats The Market

There are many prudent reasons to hold cash in today's dangerously overvalued financial markets, as we've frequently touted here at PeakProsperity.com.

Well, there's now one more good reason to add to the list: holding cash in short-term Treasurys is now meeting/beating the dividend returns offered by the stock market:

"Cash Is King" Again - 3-Month Bills Yield More Than Stocks (Zero Hedge)

'Reaching for yield' just got a lot easier...
For the first time since February 2008, three-month Treasury bills now have a yield advantage over the S&P; 500 dividend yield (and dramatically lower risk).
Investors can earn a guaranteed 1.90% by holding the 3-month bills or a risky 1.89% holding the S&P; 500...

The longest period of financial repression in history is coming to an end...

And it would appear TINA is dead as there is now an alternative.

And when you look at the total return (dividends + appreciation) of the market since the start of 2018, stocks have returned only marginally better than 3-month Treasurys. Plus, those scant few extra S&P; points have come with a LOT more risk.

Why take it under such dangerously overvalued conditions?

If You Can't Beat 'Em, Join 'Em

In my June report Less Than Zero: How The Fed Killed Saving, I explained how the Federal Reserve's policy of holding interest rates at record lows has decimated savers. Those who simply want to park money somewhere "safe" can't do so without losing money in real terms.

To drive this point home: back in November, the average interest rate being offered in a US bank savings account was an insutling 0.06%. Six months later, nothing has changed:

(Source

That's virtually the same as getting paid 0%. But it's actually worse than that, because once you take inflation into account, the real return on your savings is markedly negative.

And to really get your blood boiling, note that the Federal Reserve has rasied the federal funds rate it pays banks from 1.16% in November to 1.69% in April. Banks are now making nearly 50% more money on the excess reserves they park at the Fed -- but are they passing any of that free profit along to their depositors? No....

This is why knowing about the TreasuryDirect program is so important. It's a way for individual investors savvy enough to understand the game being played to bend some of its rules to their favor and limit the damage they suffer.

Below is an updated version (using today's rates) of my recap of TreasuryDirect, which enables you to get over 30x more interest on your cash savings than your bank will pay you, with lower risk.

TreasuryDirect

For those not already familiar with it, TreasuryDirect is a service offered by the United States Department of the Treasury that allows individual investors to purchase Treasury securities such as T-Bills, notes and bonds directly from the U.S. government.

You purchase these Treasury securities by linking a TreasuryDirect account to your personal bank account. Once linked, you use your cash savings to purchase T-bills, etc from the US Treasury. When the Treasury securities you've purchased mature or are sold, the proceeds are deposited back into your bank account.

So why buy Treasuries rather than keep your cash savings in a bank? Two main reasons:

Much higher return: T-Bills are currently offering an annualized return rate between 1.66-2.04%. Notes and bonds, depending on their duration, are currently offering between 2.6% - 3.1%
Extremely low risk: Your bank can change the interest rate on your savings account at any time -- with Treasury bills, your rate of return is locked in at purchase. Funds in a bank are subject to risks such as a bank bail-in or the insolvency of the FDIC depositor protection program -- while at TreasuryDirect, your funds are being held with the US Treasury, the institution with the lowest default risk in the country for reasons I'll explain more in a moment.

Let's look at a quick example. If you parked $100,000 in the average bank savings account for a full year, you would earn $60 in interest. Let's compare this to the current lowest-yielding TreasuryDirect option: continuously rolling that same $100,000 into 4-week T-Bills for a year:

Day 1: Funds are transferred from your bank account to TreasuryDirect to purchase $100,000 face value of 4-week T-Bills at auction yielding 1.68%
Day 28: the T-Bills mature and the Treasury holds the full $100,000 proceeds in your TreasuryDirect account. Since you've set up the auto-reinvestment option, TreasuryDirect then purchases another $100,000 face value of 4-week T-Bills at the next auction.
Days 29-364: the process repeats every 4 weeks
Day 365: assuming the average yield for T-Bills remained at 1.68%, you will have received $1,680 in interest in total throughout the year from the US Treasury.

$1,680 vs $60. That's a 27x difference in return.

And the comparison only improves if you decide to purchase longer duration (13-week or 26-week) bills instead of the 4-week ones:

Repeating the above example for a year using 13-week bills would yield $1,925. Using 26-week bills would yield $2,085. A lot better (34x better!) than $60.

Opportunity Cost & Default Risk

So what are the downsides to using TreasuryDirect? There aren't many.

The biggest one is opportunity cost. While your money is being held in a T-Bill, it's tied up at the US Treasury. If you suddenly need access to those funds, you have to wait until the bill matures.

But T-Bill durations are short. 4 weeks is not a lot of time to have to wait. (If you think the probability is high you may to need to pull money out of savings sooner than that, you shouldn't be considering the TreasuryDirect program.)

Other than that, TreasuryDirect offers an appealing reduction in risk.

If your bank suddenly closes due to a failure, any funds invested in TreasuryDirect are not in your bank account, so are not subject to being confiscated in a bail-in.

Instead, your money is held as a T-Bill, note or bond, which is essentially an obligation of the US Treasury to pay you in full for the face amount. The US Treasury is the single last entity in the country (and quite possibly, the world) that will ever default on its obligations. Why? Because Treasurys are the mechanism by which money is created in the US. Chapter 8 from The Crash Course explains:

As a result, to preserve its ability to print the money it needs to function, the US government will bring its full force and backing to bear in order to ensure confidence in the market for Treasurys.

Meaning: the US government won't squelch on paying you back the money you lent it. If required, it will just print the money it needs to repay you.

So, How To Get Started?

Usage of TreasuryDirect is quite low among investors today. Many are unaware of the program. Others simply haven't tried it out.

And let's be real: it's crazy that we live in a world where a 1.68-2.09% return now qualifies as an exceptionally high yield on savings. A lot of folks just can't get motivated to take action by rates that low. But that doesn't mean that they shouldn't -- money left on the table is money forfeited.

So, if you're interested in learning more about the TreasuryDirect program, start by visiting their website. Like everything operated by the government, it's pretty 'no frills'; but their FAQ page addresses investors' most common questions.

Before you decide whether or not to fund an account there, be sure to discuss the decision with your professional financial advisor to make sure it fits well with your personal financial situation and goals. (If you're having difficulty finding a good one, consider scheduling a free discussion with PeakProsperity.com's endorsed financial advisor -- who has considerable experience managing TreasuryDirect purchases for many of its clients).

In Part 2: A Primer On How To Use TreasuryDirect, we lay out the step-by-step process for opening, funding and transacting within a TreasuryDirect account. We've created it to be a helpful resource for those self-directed individuals potentially interested in increasing their return on their cash savings in this manner.

Yes, we savers are getting completely abused by our government's policies. So there's some poetic justice in using the government's own financing instruments to slightly lessen the sting of the whip.

Click here to read Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)

NOTE: PeakProsperity.com does not have any business relationship with the TreasuryDirect program. Nor is anything in the article above to be taken as an offer of personal financial advice. As mentioned, discuss any decision to participate in TreasuryDirect with your professional financial advisor before taking action.

Glenn's Show Prep