Where are the Independents in Local council race?

Republican nominee for Uniontown council seat appeals judge's order
By The Tribune-Review
Wednesday, September 30, 2009

The Fayette County Democratic Committee on Tuesday nominated a candidate for Uniontown City Council, but the Republican nominee is appealing a judge's order that allowed the Democrats to file their nomination paperwork late.

Democrats yesterday nominated Philip J. Michael of West Berkely Street to run in the November election for the council seat vacated by the resignation of Councilman Marlin Sprouts.

Democrats had missed a Sept. 14 filing deadline, but Judge Ralph Warman extended the deadline to today after determining they did so based on erroneous information provided by the Election Bureau.

The Republican candidate for the seat, Gary N. Altman, yesterday filed notice he is appealing Warman's ruling to Commonwealth Court. Altman, a Uniontown attorney, was nominated before the Sept. 14 deadline by the Fayette County Republican Committee.

Sprouts resigned after he entered a guilty plea in federal court to charges involving a mortgage scam.

Council appointed Michael to fill Sprouts' unexpired term. But because Michael had lived in the city only since October, some residents questioned whether he met legal requirements to serve on council. Michael resigned in April after council candidate Gary Geary filed a lawsuit alleging Michael did not meet a one-year residency requirement of individuals who are elected to serve on council.

In April, council appointed Curtis Sproul to fill Michael's vacated seat. Sproul was to serve until the November election.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/fayette/s_645685.html

Altman files appeal of decision to allow Democratic nomination
September 30, 2009 09:43 AM TEXT SIZE By: STEVE FERRIS
Herald Standard
The Republican Party candidate in the special election for a disputed seat on Uniontown City Council has appealed a Fayette County Court decision that gave the county Democratic Party extra time to nominate a candidate for the seat.

GOP candidate Gary Altman, a Uniontown attorney who also represents the party, filed a notice of appeal Tuesday, the day after the Democrats nominated former council appointee Philip J. Michael as their candidate.

The appeal will be forwarded to Commonwealth Court from the Fayette County Prothonotary's office where Altman filed the appeal. Altman said he requested that Commonwealth Court expedite the appeal.

Altman said county court was not authorized under state law to consider the Democrats' petition to extend the nomination deadline for the council seat.

"The court had no jurisdiction in entertaining this petition," Altman said.

After a hearing Thursday, county Judge Ralph C. Warman issued a ruling Friday granting the Democratic Party's request to extend the deadline in which to nominate a candidate for the Nov. 3 special election.

The statutory deadline to nominate candidates for the seat was Sept. 14, but Warman extended the deadline to today.

The Democratic Party's executive committee nominated Michael at a meeting Monday. Michael was appointed to fill the seat in March, but he resigned after a candidate for a different council seat sued him over the appointment.

The council seat at the center of the dispute is that of former councilman Marlin Sprouts. He won the seat in 2007 and took office in January 2008.

About a month later, he was indicted in a federal mortgage fraud case and resigned on March 17 after he was sentenced to probation and ordered to pay restitution.

Council appointed Michael to serve the remainder of Sprouts' term at the March 17 council meeting.

His term would have expired at the end of 2011.

Michael resigned in April after Democratic council candidate Gary Gearing sued him, arguing he was not qualified to hold the office because he lived in the city for less than a year before he was appointed and council should have appointed him to serve only until the November election.

Advertisement Council then appointed Republican council candidate Curtis Sproul to fill the vacancy until the November election.

In letters dated March 26, the county election bureau instructed both parties to submit nominations for the seat by Sept. 14 so the nominees could appear on the Nov. 3 ballot. The Republican Party nominated Altman by that deadline.

In a Sept. 10 newspaper article, bureau director Laurie Lint said the department checked with the Pennsylvania Department of State and was told the office would have to be filled by an appointment until the 2011 election because it was vacated after the March 10 deadline to file petitions in the primary.

Lint and bureau solicitor Sheryl Heid reviewed the matter the following week and determined that the March 26 letter contained the correct procedure to fill the council seat, but the Sept. 14 deadline had passed by then.

That prompted the Democratic Party to ask the court to extend the deadline.

Democratic Party Chairman Fred L. Lebder said he went to the bureau some time between March 26 and September, and again after the newspaper article was published and was told on both occasions that the seat would have to be filled through an appointment.

After his first visit to the bureau and reading the article, Lebder said the party didn't submit a nomination because he believed the seat would not appear on the ballot.

State law requires nomination petitions to be filed at least 50 days prior to an election and Sept. 14 was the deadline for the Nov. 3 election, according to court documents submitted by the Democratic Party.

Altman said the Legislature established that deadline and courts do not have the authority to change it.

There are two years left in the term of the council seat in question.

The candidates for the seat will appear on the Nov. 3 ballot along with two Republican and two Democratic candidates running for two four-year terms on council.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/news_detail/article/1631/2009/september/30/altman-files-appeal-of-decision-to-allow-democratic-nomination.html

Democrats nominate council hopeful
September 29, 2009 04:08 AM TEXT SIZE By: STEVE FERRIS

The Fayette County Democratic Party's executive committee on Monday nominated Philip J. Michael to run in a special election for a Uniontown City Council seat that only recently was secured a place on the Nov. 3 ballot.

However, Republican candidate Gary Altman, a Uniontown attorney who unsuccessfully tried to block the Democrats from making a nomination in a court hearing last week, said he would appeal a nomination made by the Democrats.

Altman maintains that courts do have the authority to extend or waive the Sept. 14 nomination deadline, which was established by the Legislature. That was one of arguments he made against extending the deadline in last week's hearing.

State law says nomination petitions have to be filed at least 50 days prior to an election and the deadline was Sept. 14 in this case, according to the Democrats' petition for the deadline extension.

Fayette County Judge Ralph C. Warman extended the deadline to Wednesday. Objections to the nomination are due within seven days of the deadline.

The two-year seat in dispute is what's left of the four-year term that former councilman Marlin Sprouts won in the 2007 municipal election.

He took office in January 2008, but was indicted in a federal mortgage fraud case about a month later. He resigned on March 17 this year after he was sentenced to probation and ordered to pay restitution.

At the March 17 council meeting, Michael was appointed to serve the remainder of Sprouts' term, which would have expired at the end of 2011.

Michael resigned in April after Democratic council candidate Gary Gearing sued him, arguing he was not qualified to hold the office because he lived in the city for less than a year before he was appointed and council should have appointed him to serve only until the November election.

Council then appointed Republican council candidate Curtis Sproul to fill the vacancy until the November election.

In a March 26 letter, the election bureau instructed the Republican and Democratic parties to submit that day by the deadline.

Fayette County Democratic Party Chairman Fred L. Lebder, in the hearing last week, testified that he went to the Fayette County election bureau some time after the letter was mailed out, but bureau director Laurie Lint wasn't there that day.

Advertisement A bureau employee called Harrisburg and was told the position had to be filled through an appointment, according to Lebder's testimony.

Lint, said, in an interview published Sept. 10, the bureau checked with the Pennsylvania Department of State and was told the council seat would have to be filled by an appointment until the 2011 election because it was vacated after the March 10 deadline to file petitions for the primary.

Lebder testified that after he returned to the bureau after reading the article and a bureau employee told him the seat had to be filled through an appointment so the party did not nominate a candidate for the seat.

Lint testified in the hearing that questions arose about the process to fill the council seat between the time the March 26 letter was sent to the parties and September.

She said another bureau staff member called the Department of State and was told the seat should not be on the Nov. 3 ballot because it became vacant after the deadline to file nominating petitions for the primary and it should be filled by an appointment until the 2011 election.

Election bureau solicitor Sheryl Heid said in a Fayette County election board meeting last week, that she met with Lint to review the matter after receiving phone calls about the information about the seat in the newspaper article and they concluded that the March 26 letter was correct, and the information in the newspaper article was incorrect.

But, by that time, the Sept. 14 nomination deadline had passed.

In his decision granting the extension, Warman said the confusion around the election for the council seat and incorrect statements from the election bureau resulted in the Democratic Party not nominating a candidate by the statutory deadline.

Also Monday, the part nominated Norman Gordon to run for a seat on Dunbar Borough Council.

Gordon will replace Bill Watson, a candidate who died, on the Nov. 3 ballot.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/news_detail/article/1631/2009/september/29/democrats-nominate-council-hopeful.html

Fayette County Democratic Committee gest extension for nominationBy Liz Zemba
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Last updated: 11:13 am

The Fayette County Democratic Committee has been granted additional time to file nomination papers for a Uniontown City Council candidate.

Fayette County Judge Ralph Warman on Friday granted the request. The judge on Thursday had convened a hearing on the request after the filing of an emergency motion by the committee.

A vacancy was created for the council seat in March by the resignation of Councilman Marlin Sprouts. Sprouts was forced to quit council after he entered a guilty plea in federal court to charges involving a mortgage scam.

Council appointed Philip Michael to fill Sprouts' unexpired term. But because Michael had lived in the city only since October, some residents questioned whether he met legal requirements to serve on council. Michael resigned in April after council candidate Gary Geary filed a lawsuit alleging Michael did not meet a one-year residency requirement of individuals who are elected to serve on council.

In April, council appointed Curtis Sproul to fill Michael's vacated seat. Sproul was to serve until the November election.

Election Bureau Director Laurie Lint testified last week that in a letter dated March 26, she informed the chairmen of both political parties of the vacancy on council and that they could submit nominations until Sept. 14.

The Democratic Committee missed the deadline after an election bureau employee subsequently advised them the vacancy would not appear on the November ballot, according to an opinion attached to Warman's order. In addition, Warman indicated Lint was quoted in a Sept. 10 published report as making a similar statement.

After the Sept. 14 deadline had passed, the Election Bureau determined "that the vacancy would in fact be on the November 3, 2009, ballot," Warman wrote in the opinion.

Warman noted in his opinion that "confusion and misrepresentations made by the Fayette County Election Bureau" resulted in the Democratic Committee missing the Sept. 14 deadline. Under those circumstances, Warman said, "it would be unjust to prohibit" the committee from filing a nomination certificate for the vacant seat.

Warman gave the committee until Wednesday to file a nomination certificate.

The county's Republican Committee filed its nominating papers on Sept. 14, naming Gary Altman as its candidate.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/fayette/s_645503.html

Judge allows extension for Dems' nomination
September 27, 2009 04:25 AM TEXT SIZE By: STEVE FERRIS
Herald Standard

A Fayette County judge gave the county Democratic Party until Sept. 30 to nominate a candidate to run in a special election for a seat on Uniontown City Council.

Judge Ralph C. Warman issued the ruling Friday, a day after he held a hearing on the party's petition to extend the nomination deadline and the county election board held a meeting to clear up confusion about how the council seat should be filled.

Whoever the Democrats nominate will run against Uniontown attorney Gary Altman, who the Republican Party nominated on the statutory deadline of Sept. 14.

At Thursday's court hearing, Altman presented several arguments to dismiss the Democratic Party's petition. Attorney Douglas Sepic, who represents the Democratic Party, argued for the deadline extension.

The seat at the center of the arguments is that of former councilman Marlin Sprouts.

Sprouts won the office in the 2007 election and took office in January 2008. He was indicted in a federal mortgage fraud case about a month after he took office and resigned on March 17 after he was sentenced to probation and ordered to pay restitution.

During the same March 17 meeting, council appointed Philip J. Michael to serve the remainder of Spouts' term, which would have expired at the end of 2011.

Originally Laurie Lint, director of the election bureau, said Michaels could serve until the end of 2011 but then said the state had determined that he could only serve until the end of 2009 and there would be a special election in November for someone to fill out the remainder of the term.

On March 26, the election bureau sent both parties letters saying they had until 4:30 p.m. Sept. 14 to nominate candidates for the seat. Nomination certificates were enclosed with the letters.

Michael resigned in April after Democratic council candidate Gary Gearing sued him, claiming he was not qualified for the office because he didn't live in the city for a year prior to his appointment. Council appointed Curtis Sproul to fill the vacancy.

Lint then told the Herald-Standard in a Sept. 9 interview that the bureau rechecked with the Pennsylvania Department of State and was told the seat would have to be filled by an appointment until the 2011 election because the seat was vacated after the March 10 deadline to file nomination petitions for the primary.

Advertisement County Democratic Party Chairman Fred L. Lebder testified at the hearing Thursday that he went to the bureau some time after the article was published, but Lint wasn't there that day.

Another office employee called someone in Harrisburg and was told the seat had to be filled through an appointment. Thinking it wasn't necessary, Lebder said the party then declined to nominate a candidate for the seat.

Bureau solicitor Sheryl Heid told the election board that she received several phone calls about the council seat after the Sept. 10 article and met with Lint the following week.

They reviewed the matter and determined that the March 26 letter contained the correct procedure for filling the council seat and the information in the newspaper article was incorrect, but the Sept. 14 nomination deadline had already passed, Heid said.

State law requires nomination petitions and papers to be filed at least 50 days prior to an election and Sept. 14 was the deadline for the Nov. 3 election.

One of Altman's arguments was that the court was not empowered to change the nomination deadline that was established by the legislature.

While there is no general principle that authorizes courts to waive time limits set by the Legislature, courts have done so when fraud or a breakdown in official operations have been proven, Warman wrote in his ruling.

No one at the hearing disputed that the Democratic Party did not to file a nomination certificate by the deadline due to the "confusion and misrepresentation made the Fayette County Election Bureau," according to judge's ruling.

"The court must consider the longstanding and overriding policy of our commonwealth to protect the elective franchise and the Election Code must be liberally construed to protect a candidate's right to run for office and voters' right to elect the candidate of their choice," Warman wrote, citing previous court cases involving elections.

The ruling also says objections to the Democrats' nomination have to be filed no more than seven days after the Sept. 30 deadline.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/news_detail/article/1631/2009/september/27/judge-allows-extension-for-dems-nomination.html

Previously

Fayette County Democrat Committee looks for more time for nomination papers
By Mary Pickels
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, September 25, 2009

Fayette County Judge Ralph Warman convened a hearing Thursday following the filing of an emergency motion by the county Democrat Committee, requesting additional time to file nomination papers for a Uniontown City Council candidate.

Douglas S. Sepic, attorney for the committee, filed the motion prior to a meeting by the Fayette County Election Board.

Sepic stated in his motion that a vacancy was created for the seat in March upon the resignation of Councilman Marlin Sprouts. Sprouts was forced to quit council after he entered a guilty plea in federal court to charges involving a mortgage scam.

Council appointed Philip Michael to fill Sprouts' unexpired term. But because Michael had lived in the city only since October, some residents questioned whether he met legal requirements to serve on council. Michael resigned in April after council candidate Gary Geary filed a lawsuit alleging Michael did not meet a one-year residence requirement of individuals who are elected to serve on council.

In April, council appointed Curtis Sproul to fill Michael's vacated seat. Sproul was to serve until the November election.

Yesterday, county Election Bureau Director Laurie Lint testified before Warman that in a letter dated March 26, she informed the chairmen of both political parties of the vacancy on council and that they could submit nominations until Sept. 14.

Lint said in a published report earlier this month that the seat would not appear on the November ballot and would have to be filled by appointment by the city council for an individual to serve through the 2011 election because the vacancy was created after the March 10 deadline to file primary nomination petitions.

"My understanding at the time was that it was not going to be on the ballot," Lint said.

Several weeks later, Sepic wrote, Lint said she learned that the vacancy legally had to be filled by accepting nomination petitions from the political parties.

"While presumably done inadvertently, the director of the Fayette County Election Bureau, nevertheless, set in motion a chain of events which have led to contradictory statements by or on behalf of the election bureau and/or the Fayette County Board of Elections, a change in electoral procedure, legal obscurity and confusion as to when and how the said Uniontown city council seat would be filled," Sepic wrote in his motion.

The Democrat Committee, he said, relied upon Lint's statements as to how the seat would be filled and did not appoint a candidate or file a nomination certificate.

Under Sepic's questioning, Lint acknowledged that she did not notify the public or either committee that her earlier comments were inaccurate.

The county Republican Committee filed on the last day possible, Sept. 14, submitting the name of Gary Altman. Altman is the committee's attorney and was permitted to participate in yesterday's hearing.

Also testifying was Fred Lebder, Democrat Committee chairman. He said he visited the election bureau and, because Lint was not there at the time, asked a staff member to call the Department of State to confirm the March letter.

He did not recall the date of the visit, but said his understanding following the phone call was that the seat was going to be filled by appointment. He later saw Lint's published comments regarding nominations and was told they were accurate.

Altman requested a dismissal of Sepic's motion, claiming it was filed too late, stating that no provision exists in election law for late filing and questioning whether the Democrat Committee would have had time to file nomination papers before the Sept. 14 deadline.

Warman said he would take the matter under advisement and rule at a later date.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/fayette/s_644902.html

Swine flu shot: Intense tracking for side effects
Sep 27, 10:09 AM EDT
By LAURAN NEERGAARD
AP Medical

...So the CDC is racing to compile a list of what's normal: 25,000 heart attacks every week; 14,000 to 19,000 miscarriages every week; 300 severe allergic reactions called anaphylaxis every week.

Any spike would mean fast checking to see if the vaccine really seems to increase risk and by how much, so health officials could issue appropriate warnings.

Very rare side effects by definition could come to light only after large-scale inoculations begin - making this the year scientists may finally learn if flu vaccine truly is linked to Guillain-Barre, an often reversible but sometimes fatal paralysis. It's believed to strike between 1 and 2 of every 100,000 people. It often occurs right after another infection, such as food poisoning or even influenza.

But the vaccine concern stems from 1976, when 500 cases were reported among the 45 million people vaccinated against that year's swine flu. Scientists never could prove if the vaccine really caused the extra risk. The CDC maintains that if the regular winter flu vaccine is related, the risk is no more than a single case per million vaccinated.

So the question becomes, Is the risk of disease greater than that?

Mayo's Poland cites a study in Chicago that found the rate of preschoolers being hospitalized for the new H1N1 flu last spring was 2 1/2 times higher than that possible Guillain-Barre risk.

However the flu season turns out, the extra vaccine tracking promises a lasting impact.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MED_SWINE_FLU_SIDE_EFFECTS?SITE=PAGRE&SECTION=POLITICS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-09-27-10-09-35

Fox Host/Guest Dismiss Concerns Flu Vaccines Autism Controversy

Fox News morning host interview of guest discussing the controversy over the swine flu vaccine stated it's unproven there is any relationship between flu vaccines given to children and autism...

The guest didn't challenge and said parents have to weigh the "risks" of a vaccine and the potential benefits of the vaccine.

Host then cited many celebrity parents who warn about dangers of flu vaccines and autism. Are they to be believed, or listened to regarding flu vaccines

Guest replied listen to your doctor not celebrities...

Unfortuately, the pair made it seem as though celebrities who raise concerns about flu vaccines for children are to be taken with a grain of salt, just because they are celebrities.

Last time we checked, celebrities have as many rights as anyone else and in particular have the right to want all of the facts and information about medical products as the rest of us.

Unfortunately, Fox News did not do the public a service by having guests on who might have included any celebrity parents or doctors who might have supported claims of potential connection regarding autism and a preservative known as "thimerosal" contained in children vaccines of the past.

Our site only wants the truth, and Fox News didn't provide a balance on the controversy surrounding flu vaccines containing "thimerosal" for children and pregnant women.

Of course, medical decisions are best made by the consumers and parents should have all of the factual information they can acquire and make decisions based on as much information as possible.

Fox News hasn't given us a balance of information, hopefully that will be corrected in follow-up segments...

the following are all for informational purposes only

Net the Truth Online

Allegheny General physician to work on study of swine flu vaccine
By Allison M. Heinrichs
Publication: Pittsburgh Tribune Review
Date: Friday, September 11 2009
You are viewing page 2
An Allegheny General Hospital physician will weigh in on a national clinical trial that began Thursday to determine the safety and potency of H1N1 swine flu vaccine for pregnant women.

Dr. Sharon Kiely, medical director of quality and patient safety at Allegheny General, will help analyze the rush results of the clinical trial, meant to protect pregnant women and unborn babies, both of whom are among the most vulnerable to the novel flu strain. The vaccine is expected to be released to all pregnant women and other priority groups by mid-October.

"Pregnant women do have a higher incidence of hospitalization with the flu," said Kiely, a member of the advisory council to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. "If you get into the hospital, then you must be very sick, and obviously pregnancy is a vulnerable time in a woman's life. You want to do everything you can to protect the woman and her unborn child."

Though pregnant women make up 1 percent of the population, they account for 6 percent of swine flu hospitalizations. Their compromised immune systems make them more susceptible to any disease, and their lungs and hearts are under added stress from pregnancy, said Dr. Tony Fauci, director of the institute.

"It's very important for pregnant women to take very seriously any illness they get during this flu season," Fauci said.

Other groups who will get first access to the swine flu shot include health care workers, people 6 months to 24 years old, caretakers of babies younger than 6 months, and adults ages 25 through 64 with underlying medical conditions, such as diabetes.

The vaccine is made with a dead, inactive virus, so people cannot get swine flu from the shot, Kiely said. It doesn't include thimerosal, a preservative that can cause an allergic reaction and that some believe is associated with autism, though no convincing scientific evidence exists of such a link. The vaccine manufacturing process and the formulation is similar to that of the seasonal flu shot.

A total of 120 healthy women who are 14 to 34 weeks pregnant and 18 to 39 years old will enroll in the clinical trial at six medical centers nationwide: St. Louis University; Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C.; Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville; Baylor College of Medicine in Houston; Scott and White Memorial Hospital in Temple, Texas, and Group Health Cooperative Center for Health Studies in Seattle.

http://www.allbusiness.com/medicine-health/diseases-disorders-infectious/12912230-1.html

Autism activists question H1N1 vaccine
By Ben Wermund

Daily Texan Staff

Print this article
Share this article Published: Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Updated: Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Health experts are warning about the serious long term effects of a vaccine expected to become available within the next few months that would combat Swine Flu, a virus associated with more than 430 deaths this year.

Doses of the vaccine could contain two controversial compounds: thimerosal and squalene, said Peter McCarthy, chair of the Texas Health Freedom Coalition, a natural health lobbyist organization.

A growing number of scientists and researchers believe that a relationship between the increase in cases of autism, attention deficit hyperactive disorder, and speech or language delay and the increased use of mercury-containing thimerosal in vaccines is plausible and deserves more scrutiny, according to the National Autism Association.

According to the association, the U.S. Department of Education data from 1992-1993 in comparison to 2000-2001 indicates that there has been an a 644 percent increase in autism cases among all U.S. children.

McCarthy said thimerosal has been included in the H1N1 vaccine despite protests by public health officials.

“It’s the same path that’s been trod multiple times before,” McCarthy said. “Why are we including a compound that includes mercury?”

But the risks associated with Swine Flu far surpass those associated with the vaccine, making the vaccination a necessity, said Dr. Pat Crocker, emergency medicine chief at Dell Children’s Hospital.

“All in all, even if the severity of the illness doesn’t get any worse than it is now, and it’s still a relatively mild illness, you’re still better off getting the vaccine than not,” Crocker said. “Even when you consider the side effects, you’re several times safer getting the vaccine, particular if you’re 24 years and younger.”

McCarthy said squalene, another compound included in the vaccine, contains aluminum.

Overexposure to squalene, which already exists in the human body, could potentially lead to autoimmune disorders, said Matt Baral, an associate professor at the Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine.

http://www.dailytexanonline.com/top-stories/autism-activists-question-h1n1-vaccine-1.1815379#5

Some swine flu vaccinations contain thimerosal many link to Autism
September 27, 11:50 AMBirmingham Autism & Parenting ExaminerJennifer Terry

http://www.examiner.com/x-21398-Birmingham-Autism--Parenting-Examiner~y2009m9d27-Some-swine-flu-vaccinations-contain-thimerosal-many-link-to-Autism

The Trouble with Vaccinations
Debating Thimerosal, Mercury, Viral Mutations


Read more: http://naturalmedicine.suite101.com/article.cfm/trouble_with_vaccinations#ixzz0SRkrhrrk

http://naturalmedicine.suite101.com/article.cfm/trouble_with_vaccinations



Why Does the Vaccine/Autism Controversy Live On?
Research has soundly disproved the alleged connection, yet fears about vaccines continue to be a major risk to public health.

by Chris Mooney
From the June 2009 issue, published online May 6, 2009

http://discovermagazine.com/2009/jun/06-why-does-vaccine-autism-controversy-live-on

Swine Flu Thimerosal Timeline

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18179558/Swine-Flu-Thimerosal-Timeline

I WANT HEALTHY KIDS AUTHOR OPINION ON FLU VACCINE

Swine flu vaccines - the case against them By Alia Almoayed, Posted on Tuesday, September 29, 2009


http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/NewsDetails.aspx?storyid=260781

clip

The Great Vaccine Debate: Why Some Parents Just Say No
The arguments on both sides
The arguments on both sides
Stepping up research efforts; parents' rights
Vaccination precautions

Vaccine additives include a number of potentially toxic substances, including formaldehyde and 2-phenoxyethanol (both known carcinogens), aluminum (associated with asthma, seizure disorders, and cognitive dysfunction), and monosodium glutamate (associated with neurological effects). Thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative, was removed from most childhood vaccines in 2001. For many years, parents of autistic children have believed that it was thimerosal in vaccines (particularly the MMR vaccine) that precipitated autism in their children. While the CDC maintains that there is no convincing scientific evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines, Public Health Service agencies, the AAP, and vaccine manufacturers agreed in 1999 that thimerosal should be reduced or eliminated in vaccines as a precautionary measure. However, it is still used in flu shots, tetanus boosters, the hepatitis B vaccine, and the meningitis vaccine, to name a few...

http://life.familyeducation.com/health-and-safety/disease-prevention/58766.html

clip

Neurology Today:
3 July 2007 - Volume 7 - Issue 13 - pp 1,10
doi: 10.1097/01.NT.0000281158.49315.1f
Article
Federal Vaccine Court Opens Controversial Autism Proceedings
Samson, Kurt

Back to Top | Article Outline
ARTICLE IN BRIEF
✓ A current legal challenge by parents alleging that the thimerosal in the MMR vaccine caused autism in their children is compared to an earlier case involving the 1976 swine flu vaccine and Guillain-Barré syndrome.

After more than a decade of controversy, parents of autistic children who blame mandatory vaccines for causing or exacerbating pre-existing neurological symptoms are finally getting their day in court.
On June 11, the US Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C., began three weeks of proceedings to hear arguments on both sides of the issue - whether parents should be awarded compensation for their autistic symptoms they charge were caused by the mumps, measles, and rubella (MMR) vaccine - part of the standard immunization package required for school admission.

http://journals.lww.com/neurotodayonline/Fulltext/2007/07030/Federal_Vaccine_Court_Opens_Controversial_Autism.1.aspx

clip

updated 8:24 a.m. EST, Sat February 14, 2009
Autism ruling fails to convince many vaccine-link believers

By Madison Park
CNN

A special court's Thursday ruling that no proven link exists between autism and certain early childhood vaccines seems to have done little to change the sometimes-passionate opinion fueling the debate.

Thousands of parents have sought compensation saying, early childhood vaccinations triggered their children's autism.

Amanda Guyton, a mother of a 6-year-old boy with autism, was "incredibly happy" with the decision and said it reaffirmed her belief that her son's autism has nothing to do with vaccines.

"We're ready for them to get on real research like educational strategies and help for kids," she said. "An awful lot of money and effort and time were spent on vaccines when three or four studies said no, there isn't a link."

Meanwhile, John Best, the father of a 12-year-old boy with autism, said: "The whole thing stinks."

Guyton and Best were not involved in the cases, but were following the news because of their interest in autism.

Three families -- the Cedillos, the Hazlehursts and the Snyders -- had sought damage awards from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for their children who have autism, a disorder that the parents contend was triggered by the vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella combined with vaccines containing thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative. Watch Campbell Brown's take on the controversy »

The panel of "special masters" ruled that these petitioners had not presented sufficient evidence to prove that the childhood vaccines caused autism in their children.

A vocal segment of autism parents has contended that childhood vaccinations recommended by the government cause the disorder. Health agencies and the scientific community have disputed that notion. In defending its conclusion that no link exists, the Institute of Medicine cited five large studies that have failed to prove any connection between autism and thimerosal and 14 large studies finding no link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/12/court.autism.reactions/index.html

Swine Flu Vaccine Controversy

Being aware of all sides... and differing info...

Net the Truth Online

Disturbing: Read comments closely see excerpt

Should Parents Fear Giving Kids Swine Flu Vaccine?By Opposing Views Editorial Staff , To Protect and Serve Opposing Views - September 18, 2009


Related ArticlesFive Delicious Foods You Can Actually Eat Does "Save the Boobs" Breast Cancer PSA Go Too Far? Successful Dieters Show Unique Brain Patterns You Can Either Have Sex or Immortality; It's Your Choice Earlier this week, the Food and Drug Administration approved the long awaited vaccine for H1N1 swine flu. The government has ordered 195 million doses of it, with the first supplies expected to arrive in early October. It's recommended that the elderly, pregnant women and children get the shot because they have higher death rates from swine flu. But some parents may be hesitant to vaccinate their children due to fears of a rare but very serious side effect.

One of the ingredients in the vaccine is thimerosal, which is a preservative commonly used in vaccines. But thimerosal is a form of mercury, which can be toxic, especially for pregnant women and young children, Baylor College of Medicine vaccine expert Carol Baker told USA Today. But Baker, a member of the government’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, was quick to point out in a Q & A with the paper:

...thimerosal, made of ethyl mercury, is different from the methyl mercury found in fish. Methyl mercury can cause congenital problems in fetuses. The ethyl mercury used in vaccine isn’t thought to pose a problem, especially because it’s used in trace amounts.

Indeed, most studies have found that thimerosal is harmless. "We have yet to find any evidence that thimerosal ever hurt anyone," said Dr. Andrew Pavia, chief of Pediatric Infectious Diseases at the University of Utah told ABC News.

But there is still serious concern. This fear mostly stems from the the 1976-77 flu season when a vaccine developed to prevent the spread of a strain of the swine flu was linked to a still-unexplained increase in cases of a rare neurological condition known as Guillain-Barre syndrome in those who received immunizations.

Many groups opposed to current vaccination practices continue to condemn thimerosal as a toxin responsible for the development of autism and related ailments in children. "We don't have adequate safety studies on this vaccine before we are moving forward to market," said Lyn Redwood, president and co-founder of the group SafeMinds. "I'm really not convinced that we know for sure that the risk of the disease outweighs the risk of the vaccine, especially since this is a brand new additive that we have never used before in combination with thimerosal."

But medical experts say the fear is unfounded, pointing out that that is the reason why we have the FDA.

"I see no reason to anticipate major safety concerns with this vaccine," said Dr. Peter Hotez, a professor and chair of the Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Tropical Medicine at George Washington University. "The vaccine will be tested and licensed, and the FDA will not allow it to go forward unless the vaccine is shown to be safe and elicit an effective immune response."

The maker of the vaccine, Sanofi-Aventis, insists it is safe. Even still, spokeswoman Donna Cary says the company is anticipating making two versions -- one with thimerosal, and one without. So parents who still have concerns about thimerosal should have an option.

http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/news-should-parents-fear-giving-kids-swine-flu-vaccine

Excerpt Post Comment

If you like results in smaller bites, consider this. In 2003, Bayer petitioned California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to take thimerosal off the list of reproductive toxins. The OEHHA responded

"The scientific evidence that PMA and Thimerosal cause reproductive toxicity is CLEAR and VOLUMINOUS."

"The evidence for its reproductive toxicity includes severe mental retardation or malformations in human offspring who were poisoned when their mothers were exposed to ethylmercury or thimerosal while pregnant."

It's online at http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/CRNR_notices/pdf_zip/hgbayer1.pdf

Thimerosal in swine flu vaccines stirs fresh controversy

Read more: http://www.fiercevaccines.com/also-noted/thimerosal-swine-flu-vaccines-stirs-fresh-controversy-transplant-vaccine-combo-may-be-best-bet#ixzz0SFN7iySL

http://www.fiercevaccines.com/also-noted/thimerosal-swine-flu-vaccines-stirs-fresh-controversy-transplant-vaccine-combo-may-be-best-bet

Prepare for a Vaccine Controversy

...Public health officials had already stockpiled millions of doses of antiviral drugs, created diagnostic kits that detected the virus as soon as it appeared in California in April and enrolled five companies to make vaccine. By mid-October we may have as many as 80 million doses ready for a mass immunization program.

But if there’s a weak link in this chain of preparedness, it is the federal bureaucracy’s torpor in explaining the risks of the vaccination program to the public. There is a chance, for example, that the H1N1 flu will sweep through cities before the vaccine is ready, causing serious illness and many deaths. (By the same token, H1N1 may turn out to be so mild as to seem harmless.)

And there is a possibility that the vaccine itself might provoke side effects; for example, about one in 100,000 people who received the 1976 swine flu vaccine developed Guillain-Barré syndrome, a crippling nerve disorder.
Public health officials have grown more vigilant since then. In 1999, for instance, doctors reported cases of intussusception, a sometimes deadly intestinal disorder, in a few infants given a new vaccine against rotavirus. After a causal link was confirmed, the vaccine was withdrawn.

Six years later, there were more reports of Guillain-Barré, in patients who had received a new vaccine against meningococcal bacteria. This time, vaccine safety sleuths found that the association was rare or even coincidental, and the Food and Drug Administration kept the vaccine on the market...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/02/opinion/02allen.html

Why is the swine flu vaccine creating controversy?

Flu season is approaching, and fear is riding along. Many people are aware that the H1N1 virus could re-emerge with a vengeance once the time for seasonal flu is upon us. Thankfully, a vaccine is currently being tested for potential release before “traditional” flu and the H1N1 virus or “swine flu” have a chance to hit us with a double whammy.

However, there are still other people who are afraid of the vaccine itself. In fact, fears surrounding the swine flu vaccine are growing by the day. First we heard from groups concerned that there may not be enough of the vaccine to go around (some estimates put the total number of ready vaccines at the start of flue season somewhere around 60 million doses, a far cry from what is needed) — now, people are pointing to the 1976 swine flu epidemic, also treated with a vaccine. The problem then? After receving vaccinations, hundreds of people came down with Guillain-Barre syndrome allegedly related to that vaccine.

I say allegedly because nothing has ever been proven. Sure, the illnesses lent bad publicity to the creators of that vaccine, and the program was halted only after an estimated 40 million Americans received the vaccine, but no scientific proof exists to link the 70s era swine flu vaccine and Guillain-Barré syndrome.

Regardless of any medical “proof”, many people are remembering what happened over 30 years ago and voicing their concerns about what might happen with the current round of planned vaccinations. Also, there’s a new buzz word in the game of vaccine fear — “adjuvant”. What is “adjuvant”, and why are people angry about its addition to the proposed swine flu vaccine?

An adjuvant is “something that allows the immune system to respond with higher levels of effectiveness,” according to the pharmaceutical company Aventis Pasteur. Basically, an adjuvant is an additive that could eventually lower the amount of vaccine needed per person, opening up the door for more individual doses to be available.

Consumers are most likely concerned about adjuvants because they haven’t heard of them before. However, adjuvants (which are mostly made of different forms of aluminum) are already in use in the United States, and if you’ve had a vaccine in the past twenty years, you’ve already been in contact with them. Adjuvants are currently used in vaccinations for everything from hepatitis A and B, to diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccines...

http://www.askdeb.com/blog/health/why-is-the-swine-flu-vaccine-creating-controversy/

Pittsburgh G-20 Unlawful

Civil liberties groups: Police overreacted at G-20
Sep 25, 5:30 PM (ET)

By MICHAEL RUBINKAM
Google sponsored links
Semantic Integration - Structured and unstructured 360° view of an entity
www.metatomix.com

PITTSBURGH (AP) - Police used all the nonlethal tools at their disposal to thwart protesters at the Group of 20 summit this week, firing bean bags, hurling canisters of smoke and pepper spray, using flash-bang grenades and batons and deploying a high-tech sound-blasting device meant to push back crowds.

It was all a bit much for civil liberties groups and protesters.

They decried what they called a heavy-handed and unwarranted police response, saying riot officers focused on largely peaceful, if unsanctioned, demonstrations when they should have been paying more attention to small groups of vandals that smashed windows of city businesses.

"It's not just intimidation, it's disruption and in some cases outright prevention of peaceful protesters being able to get their message out," said Witold "Vic" Walczak, legal director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania. "In a week when we need freedom of speech more than ever, free speech died in Pittsburgh this week."

He added that "the deployment of police seems to be more geared toward suppressing lawful demonstrations than actually preventing crime."

Hundreds of riot police broke up an impromptu gathering Thursday night in Schenley Plaza near the University of Pittsburgh campus, where large numbers of university students mingled with smaller groups of protesters, including anarchists.

The plaza is a quarter-mile from the building where world leaders were assembled, but the dignitaries were gone by the time police declared the gathering illegal and fired canisters of pepper spray and smoke.

Legal observers at the gathering saw police surrounding, chasing and arresting students who weren't involved in the protest, said Paige Cram, spokeswoman for the National Lawyers Guild, a liberal legal-aid group. She called the show of force "an ominous spectacle."

Franklyn Smith, 58, a mental health case manager who was protesting at Schenley Plaza, said police tackled him.

"He threw me to the ground. He kept smashing my face into the ground. Then about two or three other cops came over. They jumped on me," said Smith, who was released from the city jail around 7 a.m. Friday and went straight to the ER for treatment of a badly bruised face.

A video posted Friday on YouTube shows a group of Pitt students briefly trapped on the outdoor stairwell of a campus building, evidently exposed to gaseous pepper spray and unable to move because riot police were blocking the bottom and top of the stairs. The students had been standing on a second-floor balcony, observing the clash between police and protesters on the street below.

Around the same time, a few blocks away, windows were smashed at some 10 businesses. Police made 42 arrests near the university, but it wasn't clear if they caught any of the vandals.

Experts say that anarchists successfully deployed a tactic in Pittsburgh that they have often used at other protests, leading a large group of people toward police, then slipping out of the crowd to commit mayhem elsewhere.

University of Pittsburgh spokesman John Fedele said police had a difficult task Thursday night because a small group of people bent on causing destruction sought cover in the larger crowd of Pitt students.

"It is regrettable if any innocent bystanders - including any Pitt students, in particular - were harmed in any way. It is fortunate, however, that no one appears to have been seriously injured," he said in a statement.

Pittsburgh Sgt. Lavonnie Bickerstaff would not answer questions about police deployment or use of force, but Mayor Luke Ravenstahl has praised officers for their work to minimize property damage...

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090925/D9AUJCS01.html

Police: "We could not have what happened last night"
Here is the Pitt News account of last night's arrests and protest in Oakland, in which police say they were determined to avoid the Forbes Avenue rioting of Thursday:

But the people gathered in Schenley Plaza appeared to be doing little more than playing games or standing around talking.

Police began to surround the park about a half hour into the protest. The police encircled the plazas in lines that were about two or three officers deep.

Police vehicles and school buses delivered more officers to the area.

The police brought in a Long Range Acoustic Device, which sends piercing noises or spoken messages in aimed directions.

By that point, around 200 people had gathered in the plaza and surrounding area.

Some people were heard saying, "Let's get out of here." Others started to scream, "This is what a photo-op looks like."

By 11 p.m., a helicopter was hovering over Forbes Avenue near the William Pitt Union.

Officers declared the gathering an "unlawful assembly" and told people to disperse or risk going to jail.

The problem, Delaney said, was that Schenley Park closes at 11 p.m.

"We could not have what happened last night," he said, referring to a demonstration-turned-riot Thursday that resulted in damage to at least 10 Oakland businesses.

Police announced nine times that people should disperse from Schenley Plaza and the surrounding area. One time, they played their pre-recording warning message in Spanish.

Crowds began to gather as students watched from the Cathedral lawn.

Many of the people gathered in the plaza exited onto Forbes Avenue, eventually turning up Bellefield Avenue. Police outnumbered them at least 2-to-1.

Police used riot gas near the William Pitt Union panther statue and on Towers patio at different times throughout the night.

At one point, what sounded like rubber bullets being shot from a gun were heard on Forbes...

http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/bigstory/default.aspx

Police say Californian did most of damage at G-20
From Dan Majors

10:20 p.m.

Police have charged a 21-year-old California man with causing most of the damage during the two-day G-20 summit in Pittsburgh.

Pittsburgh police Chief Nate Harper tonight said David Japenga was taken into custody shortly after 11 p.m. Thursday after police witnessed him breaking businesses' windows during a protest along Forbes Avenue in Oakland.

Chief Harper said Mr. Japenga, who at first refused to give his name, then gave the false name of Eric Blair, broke more than 20 storefront windows and glass doors, including $20,000 worth of windows at Citizens Bank on Craig Street in Oakland. He was single-handedly responsible, Chief Harper said, for most of the $50,000 in damage done during summit protests.

Mr. Japenga was charged with felony criminal mischief, instruments of a crime, and providing false identification. Chief Harper said Mr. Japenga was not living in Pittsburgh and had come into the city for the summit.

http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/bigstory/default.aspx

http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/bigstory/archive/2009/09/26/police-say-californian-did-most-of-damage-at-g-20.aspx

Ron Paul End the Fed

Free reading online of Ron Paul's End the Fed

Campaign for Liberty

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/

PDF Books

http://www.pdfbook-s.com/End-the-Fed-by-Ron-Paul/1/

New American article/review

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/congress/1842

Mises Forum Discussion of Refutation Video

http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/10822.aspx

Marc Lamont Hill: Capitalism Needs Regulated

Still going on about government as the solution, Marc Lamont Hill just left no doubt about his leanings - far far left - during the discussion of the G-20 Protests on Fox News Saturday Bulls and Bears hosted by Brenda Buttner.

Reports have noted among the protesters were those opposed to capitalism.

Guests Pat Dorsey, Gary Smith, and the third guest Tobin Smith, tried their best to show it's actually capitalism that works, not eliminating capitalism, but Hill went on to actually say the reason capitalism supporters claim capitalism works is because communism works!

In other words, Hill's belief is out: Communism is the system that works, not capitalism.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=marc+lamont+hill+capitalism+communism&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

Pat Dorsey The Little Book That Builds Wealth

http://books.google.com/books?id=iJdT8aHbDUQC&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=pat+dorsey+capitalism&source=bl&ots=CbSgSPIx6i&sig=fMJj3BXta6r0dT_0CzXP30DoDyM&hl=en&ei=Aie-SvfZE4fU8Ab5wYGiAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Tobin Smith changewave

http://www.changewave.com/freecontent/viewwrapup.html?source=/freecontent/tobysfiles/2006/08/bullsandbears09182006.html

Gary B. Smith thechartman.com

Previous segment featuring the capitalism-supportive trio

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,550040,00.html

State Health Care Example: Rationing, Increase Taxes

Better to look at state examples to determine how health care overhaul would work on national scale.

Gary thechartman Smith... look to Massachusetts, the citizens don't like it now. There's rationing, increase in taxes...

http://www.thechartman.com/

On Fox News Saturday with a couple other similar-minded guests, with the exception of Lamont Hill... who continued to promote the concept the federal government not only can fix the broken health care system but does it best.

The other guests tried to get through the reality the federal government has failed with the Postal System, etc. but nobody brought out the fact unfortunately the Congress actually raided the Social Security Trust Fund which Hill cited as one of the government programs that "works."

And Hill didn't mention the Medicare system (also used in examples of how the federal government fixes and works) is close to bankrupt.

Hill also began to comment on how the government option desired would be the only way to obtain "competition..."

but as soon as he mentioned how the new system would be paid for by eliminating the fraud, waste and abuse in the Medicare system, and by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1 percent and 5 percent of taxpayers, the guffaws drowned out his proffer the public option would provide competition...

Net the Truth Online

Town Council Vacant Seat Update

Fayette County Democrat Committee looks for more time for nomination papers
By Mary Pickels
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, September 25, 2009

Fayette County Judge Ralph Warman convened a hearing Thursday following the filing of an emergency motion by the county Democrat Committee, requesting additional time to file nomination papers for a Uniontown City Council candidate.

Douglas S. Sepic, attorney for the committee, filed the motion prior to a meeting by the Fayette County Election Board.

Sepic stated in his motion that a vacancy was created for the seat in March upon the resignation of Councilman Marlin Sprouts. Sprouts was forced to quit council after he entered a guilty plea in federal court to charges involving a mortgage scam.

Council appointed Philip Michael to fill Sprouts' unexpired term. But because Michael had lived in the city only since October, some residents questioned whether he met legal requirements to serve on council. Michael resigned in April after council candidate Gary Geary filed a lawsuit alleging Michael did not meet a one-year residence requirement of individuals who are elected to serve on council.

In April, council appointed Curtis Sproul to fill Michael's vacated seat. Sproul was to serve until the November election.

Yesterday, county Election Bureau Director Laurie Lint testified before Warman that in a letter dated March 26, she informed the chairmen of both political parties of the vacancy on council and that they could submit nominations until Sept. 14.

Lint said in a published report earlier this month that the seat would not appear on the November ballot and would have to be filled by appointment by the city council for an individual to serve through the 2011 election because the vacancy was created after the March 10 deadline to file primary nomination petitions.

"My understanding at the time was that it was not going to be on the ballot," Lint said.

Several weeks later, Sepic wrote, Lint said she learned that the vacancy legally had to be filled by accepting nomination petitions from the political parties.

"While presumably done inadvertently, the director of the Fayette County Election Bureau, nevertheless, set in motion a chain of events which have led to contradictory statements by or on behalf of the election bureau and/or the Fayette County Board of Elections, a change in electoral procedure, legal obscurity and confusion as to when and how the said Uniontown city council seat would be filled," Sepic wrote in his motion.

The Democrat Committee, he said, relied upon Lint's statements as to how the seat would be filled and did not appoint a candidate or file a nomination certificate.

Under Sepic's questioning, Lint acknowledged that she did not notify the public or either committee that her earlier comments were inaccurate.

The county Republican Committee filed on the last day possible, Sept. 14, submitting the name of Gary Altman. Altman is the committee's attorney and was permitted to participate in yesterday's hearing.

Also testifying was Fred Lebder, Democrat Committee chairman. He said he visited the election bureau and, because Lint was not there at the time, asked a staff member to call the Department of State to confirm the March letter.

He did not recall the date of the visit, but said his understanding following the phone call was that the seat was going to be filled by appointment. He later saw Lint's published comments regarding nominations and was told they were accurate.

Altman requested a dismissal of Sepic's motion, claiming it was filed too late, stating that no provision exists in election law for late filing and questioning whether the Democrat Committee would have had time to file nomination papers before the Sept. 14 deadline.

Warman said he would take the matter under advisement and rule at a later date.


http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/fayette/s_644902.html

Dems seek deadline extension
September 25, 2009 04:39 AM TEXT SIZE By: STEVE FERRIS
Herald Standard

Print E-mail this
Related News:
Uniontown residents accused in burglary waive charges to court
Council faces another Uniontown appointment
County studies austerity programs
County studies austerity programs A Fayette County judge is considering whether to grant the county Democratic Party's request to extend the deadline to nominate a candidate for special election to fill a seat on Uniontown City Council.

Judge Ralph C. Warman convened the hearing late Thursday afternoon to hear arguments about the party's petition. The Fayette County Election Board held a meeting in the morning to discuss the county election bureau's handling of the election for the seat.

Warman didn't issue a ruling, saying he would take the arguments and petition under advisement.

At stake is whether Republican Party nominee Gary Altman, a Uniontown attorney, will be uncontested or face a Democratic challenger in a special election on Nov. 3 for the council seat that ex-councilman Marlin Sprouts once held.

Sprouts won the office in the 2007 election, but was indicted in a federal mortgage fraud case about a month after he took office in January 2008. He resigned on March 17 after he was sentenced to probation and ordered to pay restitution.

During the same March 17 meeting, council appointed Philip J. Michael to serve the remainder of Spouts' term, which would have expired at the end of 2011.

Michael resigned in April after Democratic council candidate Gary Gearing sued him, claiming he was not qualified for the office because he didn't live in the city for a year prior to his appointment and council should have appointed him to serve only until the November election.

Council then appointed Republican council candidate Curtis Sproul to fill the vacancy until the November election.

Attorney Douglas Sepic, who represents the county Democratic Party, argued in the petition that the Sept. 14 deadline to nominate candidates should be extended because the party was led to believe the seat would not appear on the Nov. 3 municipal election ballot and didn't learn it should be on the ballot until after the deadline passed.

Altman, who also represents the county Republican Party, made several arguments for dismissing the Democratic Party petition.

Altman said Sepic's petition was filed more than seven days after the Sept. 14 statutory filing deadline and state law requires such a petition to be filed no more than seven days after that deadline.

Secondly, Altman argued that there are no provisions in state law that would allow the court to override the Sept. 14 deadline, which was set by the state legislature.

However, an e-mail a Pennsylvania Department of State attorney sent the bureau last week stated the parties could petition the court to extend the deadline.

Fayette County Democratic Party Chairman Fred Lebder testified that he received a letter in March from the bureau saying the party had until Sept. 14 to nominate a candidate, but bureau director Laurie Lint said in a Sept. 10 article in the Herald-Standard that the seat would have to be filled through an appointment until the 2011 election.

He said he then went to the bureau office on a day Lint was not there and an office employee called someone in Harrisburg who confirmed that the seat should be filled through an appointment.

The election board discussed the confusion surrounding the seat, but didn't take any action because Sepic's petition was pending court action.

Board Chairman Vincent Zapotosky said the meeting was needed to restore public trust in the county election bureau, which he described as a "sacred institution."

Advertisement The court's decision will be binding, bureau solicitor Sheryl Heid Heid said, so the board did not have to take any action.

Heid said she and Lint originally reviewed applicable laws and determined that the council seat should appear on the November election ballot and council's appointment should expire on Jan. 1, 2010.

The bureau sent letters and nomination certificates to both parties on March 26.

The letters said nominations were due by Sept. 14, Heid said.

Sepic's petition requesting a hearing to extend the nomination deadline says state law requires nomination petitions and papers to be filed at least 50 days before the election and Sept. 14 was the deadline.

The Department of State e-mail advised the bureau that the seat should be on the November ballot because the vacancy existed at least 30 days before the election, but the election is a local matter and the department had no jurisdiction over the matter.

The bureau is not required to notify political parties about office vacancies, Heid said.

It is up to the parties to be aware of vacancies and nominate candidates to fill those offices, but the bureau tries to be helpful, Heid said.

State law requires a special election in November for the council seat, Heid said.

Heid said she began receiving phone calls about the seat the day after an article was published in the Herald-Standard on Sept. 10.

In the article, Lint said the bureau contacted state officials and was told council would have to fill the seat through an appointment until the 2011 election because the seat became vacant after the March 10 deadline to submit nominations for the primary election.

That information was not correct, Heid said.

She and Lint reviewed the matter the following week and determined that the March 26 letter to the parties contained the proper procedure for filling the seat, but, by that time, the Sept. 14 deadline had passed, Heid said.

The Democratic Party didn't nominate a candidate because of Lint's statement in the newspaper article, Sepic said in the petition seeking the nomination extension.

Altman's nomination came in a letter submitted on Sept. 14. The certificate that was enclosed with the March 26 letter was not used, but Lint said she accepted the nomination because no one objected to it.

At that time, Lint didn't believe the nomination was a major concern because she didn't think the seat would be on the November ballot, Heid said, adding that challenges to the nomination had to be filed within three days.

Zapotosky said he believes the bureau erred by accepting the Republican nomination because the party did not use the nomination certificate.

After the meeting, Zapotosky said he still had concerns about the mistakes the bureau made with the election for the council seat, calling it a breach of public trust.

Commissioner and board member Angela Zimmerlink said any matters concerning election bureau personnel and the solicitor would be addressed during a commissioners' meeting and not during an election board meeting.

Two city council seats will be on the ballot for the regular municipal election.

Democratic candidates Francis "Joby" Palumbo and Gearing and Republican candidates Sproul and Rhodes are running.

Council appointed Palumbo in January 2008 to replace former councilman Joseph Giachetti who won the election for the city treasurer's office.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/news_detail/article/1631/2009/september/25/bdems-seek-deadline-extension-b.html

PREVIOUS COVERAGE

Council faces another Uniontown appointment
September 10, 2009 04:21 AM TEXT SIZE By: STEVE FERRIS
Herald Standard

Uniontown City Council will have to make another appointment to fill the seat that former Councilman Marlin Sprouts held.

Fayette County Election Bureau Director Laurie Lint said Wednesday the bureau checked with the Pennsylvania Department of State and was told the seat will have to be filled through an appointment until the 2011 elections because Sprouts resigned after the March 10 deadline to file primary election petitions.

Sprouts resigned March 17 after he was sentenced to probation and ordered to pay restitution in a federal mortgage fraud case. He was indicted about a month after he took office in January 2007.

At its March 17 meeting, council appointed Philip J. Michael to serve the remainder of Sprouts' term, which would have ended in 2011.

Michael resigned on April 14 after Democratic City Council candidate Gary Gearing sued him, claiming he was not qualified to hold the office because he lived in the city for less than a year before he was appointed and council should have appointed him to serve only until the November election.

Council then appointed Republican council candidate Curtis Sproul to fill the vacancy until the general election on Nov. 3.

Advertisement If Sproul wins in November, council would have to appoint someone else to fill the vacant office until the 2011 elections.

Previously, Lint said the appointment would last until the November election when a special election would be held to fill the office and the Democratic and Republican parties had until Sept. 5 to submit nominations.

"It will not be on the (November) ballot," Lint said Wednesday.

Sproul, Republic candidate Russ Rhodes and Democratic candidates Francis "Joby" Palumbo and Gearing will run for two four-year terms in the November election.

A similar appointment situation is facing Fairchance Borough Council.

Council appointed council candidate Neal Christopher to fill a seat vacated by former council vice president Dora Miller's resignation in June. Lint said council would have to appoint someone to hold the office until the 2011 elections.

Christopher is one of four Democrats who won nominations in the primary and will run unopposed in November.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/news_detail/article/1220/2009/september/10/council-faces-another-uniontown-appointment.html

PA Libertarian Party Lawsuit Challenging Election Code

As they should do, the Libertarian Party of PA has filed a lawsuit challenging PA Election Code. Wish they'd get more involved in challenging bloated local voter registration lists, but they have quite a bit on their plate as it is.

As for Mark R. his points are well-said. (Just wish he'd see the light on support for a Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention and change his position for it.

The danger of a PA Con-Con is well-documented on our site, and elsewhere.

Net the Truth Online

Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Libertarian Party joins lawsuit challenging PA Election Code
Posted by Mark Rauterkus at 1:23 PM

Lawsuit filed to protect electoral process and secure voters’ rights

Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania
3915 Union Deposit Road #223
Harrisburg, PA 17109
www.lppa.org

For Immediate Release: May 5, 2009

Contact: Doug Leard (Media Relations) at Media-Relations@lppa.org or
Michael Robertson (Chair) at 1-800-R-RIGHTS / chair@lppa.org

Harrisburg, PA – On behalf of the Libertarian, Constitution and Green Parties of Pennsylvania, the Center for Competitive Democracy (CCD), a non-partisan,
non-profit 501(c)(3) legal advocacy group(http://www.competitivedemocracy.org/) has filed suit in federal District Court challenging the constitutionality of the Pennsylvania Election Code.

The lawsuit specifically challenges provisions that authorize courts to order candidates to pay litigation costs and fees to private parties who challenge their nomination papers. The lawsuit also seeks to require elections officials to count and certify write-in votes as required by the election code.

“Making minor party candidates pay the costs of validating their nomination papers while using public funds to subsidize the major party nomination process makes a mockery of the constitutional guarantee of equal protection,” said Mik Robertson, Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. “The interest of the government is to secure voters’ rights to choose their elected representatives, not limit those choices.”

The lawsuit, Constitution Party of Pennsylvania, et al. v. Cortes, et al., No. 09-1961, was filed in response to a judgment ordering a 2006 Green Party candidate to pay more than $80,000 in litigation costs to private parties who challenged his nomination papers, and by Pennsylvania elections officials’ routine failure to count write-in votes.

The lawsuit asks the court to hold Sections 2872.2 and 2937 of the Pennsylvania Election Code unconstitutional. Section 2872.2 requires minor party candidates to submit nomination papers to gain ballot access, no matter how many votes the minor party won in the previous election. Section 2937 authorizes private parties to challenge those nomination papers, and authorizes courts to order the candidates to pay their challengers’ litigation costs and fees. The lawsuit also seeks enforcement of Section 3155, which requires elections officials to compute and certify valid write-in votes.

In 1972, the Supreme Court declared in Bullock v. Carter that states may not require candidates “to shoulder the costs” of conducting elections by charging filing fees without providing a non-monetary means of gaining ballot access. In Pennsylvania, however, these candidates cannot gain ballot access unless they submit nomination papers..

Constitution Party of Pennsylvania, et al. v. Cortes, et al. has been assigned to Judge Thomas Golden. CCD is expected to file a motion this week for preliminary injunction to suspend the fees already assessed pending the outcome of the action.

http://rauterkus.blogspot.com/2009/05/libertarian-party-joins-lawsuit.html

H1N1 Flu Vaccine: Emergency Declaration Force

Massachussets Emergency Law, if enact4ed would enable non-emergency officials such as the police to quarantine, remove children from home of parents who refuse to vaccinate. So reports Judge Napolitano on Fox 'n Friends this morning.

Unfortunately, instead of dedicating the remainder of Fox 'n Friends programming to this potential for "martial law" as the Judge maintained, the trio introduced yet another celebrity on the program.

Fact-checking is in order on this local item in Fayette County. Isn't it odd, only the Republican Party locally made a 'selection' for a candidate for the special election? And the name of the individual was not released. Why not? Why weren't both political parties interviewed for this article? And what about the so-called form that was the wrong form? Who gave out the form? From where was the form obtained?

Article

Council seat requires special election
September 20, 2009 04:22 AM TEXT SIZE By: STEVE FERRIS
Herald Standard
The Department of State has informed the Fayette County Election Bureau that state law requires a special election to fill a position on Uniontown City Council.

Bureau director Laurie Lint sent letters in March to the county Democratic and Republican parties, saying they should submit nominations for the council seat by 4:30 p.m. Sept. 14.

Last week, Lint said the position would not appear on the Nov. 3 election ballot because she contacted the State Department and was told the seat would have to be filled through an appointment until the 2011 elections because the seat was vacated after the March 10 deadline for candidates to submit petitions to enter the primary.

Fayette County Commissioner Angela M. Zimmerlink said she contacted a Department of State attorney after she received many calls about the council seat last week and was told the seat should appear on the November ballot.

She said

Louis Lawrence Boyle, deputy chief counsel for the Department of State, informed the county that Sept. 14, which was 50 days before the election, is set in state law 25 P.S. section 1953(b) as the deadline for nomination certificates.

Boyle said it appears that the City Council vacancy should be filled in the municipal election in November because the vacancy existed on March 17, which was at least 30 days before the election and he cited state law 53 P.S. section 35801 as the source of that information, Zimmerlink said.

The attorney also said that in similar cases in the past, the department has advised counties that political parties seeking an extension of the deadline should request one from Common Pleas Court because the Department of State secretary can not and the department can't authorize a county election board to do so, she said.

Boyle added that the City Council seat is not under the jurisdiction of the Department of State and the department has no authority over the county's handling of the election, Zimmerlink said.

Advertisement

"It is strictly a local matter," she said, referring to the information from Boyle.

The Republican Party reportedly submitted a nomination on Sept. 14.

Zimmerlink said she was told the nomination didn't meet statutory guidelines because the wrong form was used.

She said she wants to convene a meeting of the county election board, which all three commissioners serve on, to air the matter in public and inform voters about what took place. The board would not render a decision on the election if a hearing were held, she said.

However, Vincent Zapotosky, chairman of the board of commissioners, said he is not prepared to hold a hearing and the state did not direct the county to have one. He said the election for the council seat should be corrected administratively, Zimmerlink said.

She said the election bureau will notify the parties about the Department of State's position on the election.

The seat in question initially was that of former councilman Marlin Spouts. He won the position in the 2007 election and took office in January 2008.

He was indicted in a federal mortgage fraud case about a month after taking office and resigned March 17 this year after he was sentenced to probation and ordered to pay restitution.

At its March 17 meeting, council appointed Philip J. Michael to serve the remainder of Sprouts' term, which would have ended in 2011.

Michael resigned on April 14 after Democratic council candidate Gary Gearing sued him, claiming he was not qualified to hold the office because he lived in the city for less than a year before he was appointed and council should have appointed him to serve only until the November election.

Council then appointed Republican candidate Curtis Sproul to fill the vacancy until the November election.

Republican candidates Russ Rhodes and Sproul, and Democratic candidates Francis "Joby" Palumbo and Gearing are running for two four-year seats on council.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/news_detail/article/1252/2009/september/20/council-seat-requires-special-election.html

Real Americans Don't Need Wheelchairs

Don't miss Fox News commentary by Peter Johnson Jr.

Johnson calls the plan for so-called Health Care reform Father Government in his commentary this morning. He ends by suggesting:

Keep on doing the math. Next time someone says you don't need to be concerned about the proposal to overhaul Health Care, Johnson says, tell them you've done the math.

And the math doesn't add up.

http://twitter.com/peterjohnsonjr

Johnson's commentary can be googled for factuality. And it all - adds up.

Net the Truth Online

Waste Fraud Abuse Evident in Medicare Program

Radio America WND TV interview of 'Grace Marie Turner Pres. of Galen Institute RaMedicare funds going to fund bingo... what are chances Congress will cut half-billion to pay for another entitlement program... going bankrupt to tune of millions... not a model... fed govt going to require everyone have coverage... people are stunned that govt is going to require them to have this coverage...

WND TV Discussion Health Care legislation

http://live.radioamerica.org/loudwater/player.pl?name=wnd&url=http://feeds.radioamerica.org/podcast/DWP/audio/000007_012811.mp3

OPINION SEPTEMBER 11, 2009, 3:37 P.M. ET Medicare Is No Model for Health Reform

...5) Medicare is rife with fraud. According to the FBI, between 3% and 10% of all health spending is lost to health-care fraud. Despite the president's promise this money could be recaptured to pay for his reform agenda, Congress has shown itself to be remarkably incapable of curtailing fraud and abuse in government health programs...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204884404574362543878647858.html

The GOP's Health-Care Alternative
Health Care > Politics

Email a Friend
Written By: Grace-Marie Turner & Joseph R. Antos
Published In: Wall Street Journal
Publication date: 05/20/2009
Publisher: Wall Street Journal

http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/25361/The_GOPs_HealthCare_Alternative.html

$600 billion annually lost to medicare fraud

Jim Frogue interviewed by Greta Susteran On the Record... $600 billion a year is lost to Medicare Fraud...

Center for Health Transformation

plugged book Stop Paying the Crooks

http://www.healthtransformation.net/cs/stop_paying_the_crooks

Forum

http://www.healthtransformation.net/cs/Sept09_Medicaid_Conference

testimony

http://aspe.hhs.gov/medicaid/jan/Frogue.pdf

Ron Paul: Coercion is not Health Care Act

H.R.2629 - Coercion is Not Health Care Act
To protect the American people's ability to make their own health care decisions by ensuring the Federal Government shall not force any American to purchase health insurance.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2629/show

Ron Paul Introduces Free Choice in Health Care Bill
By tmartin • May 25, 2009

Statement of Congressman Ron Paul
United States House of Representatives

Statement Introducing the
Coercion is Not Health Care Act (HR 2629)
May 21, 2009

http://www.ronpaul.com/2009-05-25/ron-paul-introduces-free-choice-in-health-care-bill/

Daily Paul

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/95119

Commentary on Bills

http://www.forhealthfreedom.org/Newsletter/June2009.html

Open Congress and Gov Track

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2629/show

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2629

(Congressional Switchboard- 202-224-3121) and ask him to cosponsor H.R. 2629 “`Coercion is Not Health Care Act’

H.R. 2629 does not allow for any federal requirements for health insurance coverage as a condition to receive any benefit under Federal law

It also does not allow for any individual or agency of the Federal Government to require any individual to purchase health insurance coverage.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=22166

Toll-free numbers to Congress switchboard are usually provided by an organization. By providing such to our readers, we do not necessarily endorse comments or statements about positions on issues.

This one seems OK

TOLL FREE SWITCHBOARD NUMBERS FOR THE SENATE OR HOUSE OF REPS, JUST ASK TO BE TRANSFERED TO WHOMEVERS OFFICE YOU WISH TO SPEAK

1-877-210-5351
1-800-828-0498

1-877-210-5351
1-800-828-0498

http://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/us-legislation-activity/

Defeat Any Fed Health Care Bill Requiring Anything

Interview with Megyn Kelly on the Health Care legislation HR 3200 CAPPS Amendment) reported out of House Energy and Commerce committee, Bart Stupak, emphatically highlights the CAPPS Amendment to the original bill makes public funding for abortions first time ever!

Not since 1976, says the legislator has Congress authorized such IN THE WAY OF federal funding of abortions.

While apparently the Congressman's bill (with Pitts) was voted down, and the CAPPS Amendment passed, the wording in the Congressman's own amendment is troubling...

Read it closely... pay attention to

"except in the case where

"a woman suffers from a physical..."

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090731/hr3200_stupak_1.pdf

In Stupak's bill, read closely, abortion would have been covered and paid for by taxpayers' monies and who doubts clever use of the 'exception' clause' by so-called abortion rights supporters and enablers?

Also while the Stupak and Pitts Amendment was defeated in committee, even had it passed, other language in the original bill may still enable the federal funding of abortion.

That Congress is considering any measure to mandate health care coverage/insurance be purchased or obtained by individuals, and as reported, if not the individual would actually be fined some several thousands of dollars should raise the concern of all "individuals."

Each and every one of YOU. Yes, you.

Sadly, and unfortunately, there is a lack of education about our Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

This health care 'reform' effort is nothing less than a power grab by both political parties and what came before this proves without a doubt Republicans are no more to be trusted to refrain from trampling the U.S. Constitution than Democrats.

Just look up SChip. Just look up the Hyde Amendment. Just look up Social Security Act.

This all is not only socialistic, it is anathema to the very foundation of our nation.

One that was founded upon the idea of freedom of the individual and possession of unalienable and inseparable from the individual - rights. Guaranteed rights.

The Federal Government was not founded to impose its will on individuals but to secure our unalienable and individual rights.

Secure. Protect. Defend.

The Federal Government was not founded to "give" us rights, nor was it founded to "find" what rights we individually possess.

It was founded to "secure" individual rights.

How far have we moved from that concept.

So far it is not a concept that is on the tip of the tongue of all individuals who are indeed citizens of the United States.

See the World Magazine article Killer Bill, August 15, 2009.

We're just getting into dangerous territory when the federal government intrudes further and further into matters which are supposed to be in the domain of the "states" and "the people" according to the Constitution of the United States Bill of Rights Tenth Amendment.

What's not to understand about the Constitution's intent that the federal government be a government with defined and limited "powers?"

Any true individualist who believes that status is what the Constitution guarantees should thwart any attempt to bring any health care reform to the United States which mandates or requires anything of anyone or of any insurance company, etc. Anything the federal government requires in this way is simply unconstitutional. Period.

Below find a variety of info pertaining to the issue of so-called Health Care 'reform.'

Be aware any talk, any talk of applying this legislation to an 'individual' is simply unconstitutional and I'd dare say, traitorous.

This situation highlights dramatically what is afoot at this time in our nation's history.

And Republicans are not to be trusted on this either even though many mouth how they don't want legislation that mandates individuals be insured and if not they'll face fines.

In the past, look at what they've voted FOR. Even one vote for one measure that does not pertain to the defined and enumerated powers of the federal government shows the hypocricy. One single vote.

Net the Truth Online

Fact Check President Barack Obama's Denial Abortion Funding nonexistent in Health Care Reform legislation

Abortion foes quickly denounced Obama’s statement as untrue. The NRLC’s Johnson said "the bill backed by the White House (H.R. 3200) explicitly authorizes the government plan to cover all elective abortions." And our analysis shows that Johnson’s statement is correct. Though we of course take no position on whether the legislation should allow or not allow coverage for abortions, the House bill does just that.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/abortion-which-side-is-fabricating/

excerpt

Congressional Committees Rejected Pro-Life Amendments
Finally, the health care reform bills mandate abortion services as evidenced by the Energy and Commerce and HELP Committees’ rejection of amendments which would have prohibited mandatory abortion coverage, ensured that taxpayer money did not fund abortion, and prevented preemption of state laws on abortion. The Senate HELP Committee rejected each of these amendments, offered by four different Senators (Enzi, Hatch, Roberts and Coburn) by a vote of 12-11.

Similarly, the House Energy and Commerce Committee rejected an amendment offered by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Penn.) and Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) that would have excluded abortion from the required basic benefits that any government or private plan must offer, but included an exception for cases involving a danger to the mother’s life, rape, or incest. On the initial vote, the amendment passed by a vote of 31-27, but upon revote, Democrat from Tennessee, Rep. Bart Gordon changed his vote to No, sinking the amendment by a vote of 30-29.

In place of the Pitts/Stupak amendment, the Committee approved an amendment offered by Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.) by a vote of 30-28. The Capps amendment allows for immediate federal funding of elective abortion coverage through the public plan pursuant to a determination by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, requires that all areas of the country contain one private plan that covers abortion, and permits taxpayer subsidies of private plans that cover elective abortion.

http://blog.aul.org/2009/09/08/status-of-conscience-protection-in-the-pending-health-care-reform-bills/

"New faces of New Orleans" August 15, 2009
Killer bill
Healthcare: Pro-life lawmakers raise alarm: Absent amendment, healthcare bill will subsidize and mandate abortion coverage | Edward Lee Pitts



Illustration by Krieg Barrie
WASHINGTON—On July 17, House lawmakers rode to the rescue of the nation's wild horse population, passing a bill to prevent their slaughter by adding millions of acres to their roaming lands.

But while lawmakers devoted tightly doled out floor time to debating the welfare of the West's estimated 36,000 wild horses, another life-and-death debate has been relegated to committee rooms: the fate of unborn children in the pending transformation of the nation's healthcare system.

A growing number of lawmakers from both parties are fearful that passage of the current healthcare proposal as written would lead to taxpayer--supported abortions.

Just days after the wild horse vote, concerned House members decided to kick-start the abortion debate. Gathering together inside the new Capitol Visitor's Center, the bipartisan grouped warned in a press conference that a "stealth abortion mandate" is real and would require insurance companies to include abortions as part of a basic coverage plan.

ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW

Already two amendments in the House and one in the Senate specifically to ban publicly funded abortions have been defeated. Meanwhile Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag responded, "I'm not prepared to" when asked if he would rule out abortion funding in the legislation.

"Obamacare is the greatest threat to the lives and well-being of unborn children and their mothers since Roe v. Wade," says Rep. Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican.

This is not just a Republican concern. Recently 20 House Democrats sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warning that "we cannot support any healthcare reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion."

Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., now puts the number of pro-life House Democrats opposed to the proposal at 39. That's a number that, combined with House Republicans and fiscally conservative Democrats, could hold back party leaders' plans to push a healthcare bill through Congress in the fall. The timeline has already been altered once after the proposal's $1 trillion price tag and its creation of a controversial government-run insurance plan forced congressional leaders to abandon an August deadline.


Among the biggest red flags for pro-life legislators is the bill's creation of a Health Benefits Advisory Committee that would determine what procedures are covered under a public plan. The bill requires every American to have insurance that meets certain standards. "According to the president, in his own words, central to the idea of healthcare is the idea of reproductive health or abortion," said Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa. "That will be considered a minimum benefit."

Unless the legislation explicitly excludes abortion procedures, pro-life lawmakers predict that abortions will soon become part of the required insurance package. The stakes are high, Stupak argues, because buried in the 1,017-page health bill is language making it clear that federal standards would preempt any state law. That could put 200 state laws aimed at protecting life in jeopardy, Stupak says.

But requiring abortion coverage is not the only potential change. Healthcare legislation could also lead to taxpayers footing the abortion bill. The measure authorizes subsidies to purchase healthcare premiums for individuals and families who do not qualify for Medicaid. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that provision alone would cost taxpayers $773 billion over the next decade. "Without such restrictions this legislation would certainly result in the federal funding of abortion on an unprecedented scale," Stupak says.

Supporters of current legislation say the bill doesn't specifically include abortion. But pro-life lawmakers say they have heard that before. Indeed, this current fight has echoes of the effort that resulted in the Hyde Amendment, passed in 1976, that bars the federal government from using tax dollars to pay for abortions through Medicaid. Medicaid didn't mention the word abortion, but courts ruled that the procedure fit under many of the broad categories outlined and had to be covered. Until the Hyde Amendment passed, Medicaid paid for hundreds of thousands of abortions.

Today pro-life advocates fear this could happen again as the reach of the Hyde Amendment may not extend to provisions in the current healthcare bill.

http://www.worldmag.com/articles/15729

Investigate This Type of Activity Despite Political Bent

New York ACORN Front Group Based in New Orleans Gets Taxpayer Money
Submitted by Carl Horowitz on Wed, 09/09/2009 - 14:42

Email to friendPrinter-friendlyOne of the defining hallmarks of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, is its propensity for using front organizations to advance its goals. The New Orleans-based nonprofit organization has fully 360 subsidiary and adjunct groups. Lately, one of its affiliates, a misleadingly-named nonprofit entity called New York Agency for Community Affairs, Inc. (NYACA), has been at the center of attention. A recent probe by a consortium of New York City newspapers shows NYACA thus far in this year alone has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from New York state and local taxpayers for political campaign services. In many cases, the lawmakers who earmarked the funds had been locked in close re-election campaigns that used NYACA volunteers. It's no small wonder that NYACA and ACORN overlap to the point of being nearly indistinguishable.

According to its mission statement, NYACA was founded "to provide a vehicle for grassroots community organizations to increase their capacity to meet the needs of low- and moderate-income communities." The group's avowed purpose is assisting homeowners facing foreclosure and renters seeking to buy a home. But in practice it is a cleverly-disguised conduit for ACORN to contribute money to left-of-center New York politicians in tight re-election races. "There seems to be some sort of relationship between these different organizations," said Jill Manny, a New York University law professor and executive director of the National Center on Philanthropy and the Law, after reviewing NYACA tax records. That would be an understatement.

The New York Agency for Community Affairs has received more than small change. A recent investigation by Manhattan Media, a consortium of New York City neighborhood-based newspapers, reveals that NYACA and its ACORN alter ego have made out well. Examining tax forms, lobbying records, campaign finance reports, and contracts, researchers found that in 2009, NYACA has received $175,000 from eight state senators, $240,500 from 10 state assemblymen, and $85,000 from four New York City Council members. For 2006, NYACA reported a little over $1.3 million in revenues, almost all from government. That same year, the group paid out nearly $1.2 million for "contractual services" to ACORN and another $67,000 in direct grants. And in 2007, NYACA received more than $730,000 in government support, sending $711,152 of that to ACORN.

How closely are the two groups linked? For one thing, there's the Internet. Clicking on www.nyaca.org routes the viewer to the website of ACORN Housing Corp., www.acornhousing.org. Even more curiously, the New York Agency for Community Affairs isn't based in New York at all, but at 2609 Canal Street, New Orleans, LA 70119, the same address as ACORN's local affiliate there. What's more, NYACA's chief organizer is Jon Kest, younger brother of ACORN National Executive Director Steven Kest. Jon Kest also serves as chief organizer for the local ACORN chapter in New Orleans. As ACORN has its national headquarters in New Orleans (1024 Elysian Fields Avenue), it doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to realize NYACA is an ACORN front. But NYACA isn't entirely devoid of a New York connection: One of its employees is Bertha Lewis, head of ACORN's New York City affiliate. And the Kests until a decade ago ran the New York City operation. That's when Ms. Lewis assumed the reins. Even sports teams change their name if they move to another city. Apparently, ACORN affiliates don't.

Creative bookkeeping explains why ACORN saw fit to add an organizational layer in the form of New York Agency for Community Affairs. NYACA is registered as a "public charity," which exempts it from paying certain state and local taxes, and equally importantly, prohibits it from engaging in or supporting political activity. ACORN, on the other hand, is a "social welfare organization" - that is, authorized to conduct certain political campaign operations using public as well as private funds. ACORN in fact has received large sums of money from the Working Families Party (WFP), an entity founded by none other than Steven Kest in 1998 to move the Democratic Party leftward (Note: Under New York State election law, a party may "cross-endorse" candidates of other parties). The WFP describes itself as a coalition founded by ACORN, the Communications Workers of America and the United Auto Workers.

NYACA clearly wants it both ways. On one hand, the group wants to influence the outcome of elections, with organized labor playing a central role. On the other hand, it doesn't want to pay taxes connected with this activity. In other words, ACORN set up the New York Agency for Community Affairs as a legalized money-laundering operation - and possibly with some illegal misrepresentation of facts. According to records filed with the IRS and the New York State Attorney General's Office, NYACA declared no relationships with any outside organizations through common employees or officers. To believe that would require defining "relationships" in ways not found in Webster's Dictionary.

NYACA Executive Director Mariana Davenport thinks the group's critics are manufacturing something out of nothing. Through an e-mail she noted: "The organizations share staff and space. Although many of the NYACA board members are also members of ACORN, ACORN has no authority to direct NYACA." NYACA, she emphasized, is merely a "fiscal sponsor" for taxpayer funding for ACORN's foreclosure prevention and homebuyers' assistance programs, among other initiatives. But why would ACORN need such a "sponsor?" And why would ACORN employees, of whom Ms. Davenport is one, have a need to list themselves at a separate organization that does the same things?

http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2009/09/09/new-york-acorn-front-group-based-new-orleans-gets-taxpayer-money