Emergency Act Requires Emergency Might or All is an Act

House to recess; no vote on intel bill
Published: Feb. 15, 2008 at 8:38 AM

The House adjourned pursuant to H. Con. Res. 293. The next meeting is scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on February 19, 2008...

So what else languishes in the House of Representatives during this recess?

H.R.5036 Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008
To direct the Administrator of General Services to reimburse certain jurisdictions for the costs of obtaining paper ballot voting systems for the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, to reimburse jurisdictions for the costs incurred in conducting audits or hand counting of the results of the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, and for other purposes...

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h5036/show

I believe the Discharge Petitition route will be the only way one to hold the representatives accountable - the sponsor, Rush Holt, and co-sponsors - 47 of them to date - who obviously believe the Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008 is an emergency.

If it's such an emergency, why are they going along with a recess?

House to recess; no vote on intel bill Published: Feb. 15, 2008 at 8:38 AM
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/02/15/house_to_recess_no_vote_on_intel_bill/2180/

So now they're back home, they can face us and claim they are doing all they can to ensure secure elections this time around. Holt's bill isn't out of the two committees yet. They'll leave it at that.

In the House, if a committee does not report a bill within 30 days after the measure is referred to it, any member may file a discharge motion. Once offered, the motion is treated as a petition needing the signatures of a majority of members (218 if there are no vacancies).

http://www.votescount.com/books/fedlaw.htm

This emergency legislation has a deadline fast approaching or it is moot, and if that deadline approaches without the localities having any hope of opting in then whose fault is it. It's the fault of the same people who introduced and co-sponsored the emergency measure because they would not have done all they could possibly do. And that includes any avenue necessary to get the measure to a vote in front of the entire House.

As the emergency bill was introduced Jan. 17, and the gang's all back in their home districts for 2 weeks, what are they saying when asked about the "emergency" they will still face when they return to DC? They're doing all they can do? They're leaving it up to the people in other districts to pressure their representatives to add names to the co-sponsorship list?

In a couple of days, the 30 days since the bill's introduction will have passed. How much longer should things linger if this is an emergency piece of legislation to meet a date-certain deadline?

What is the primary sponsor going to do and what are the co-sponsors going to do in the event this doesn't get out of the two committees by Monday? Continue to let the bill languish there another two weeks and counting? They can claim it's all out of their hands and they've done all they can do?

Well, it's absolutely not out of their hands. It's an "emergency" measure, requiring quick and decisive action. Its application is to one of the most fundamental rights we have in this nation, the right to vote.

All it really takes is one Representative. Just one, to put forth the discharge petition. Rush Holt himself, or any one of the co-sponsors could present the discharge petition if it's still not out one of the two committees.

I'm feeling that to try to get more co-sponsors is wasted effort at this point. It's not as if they don't know what the issue is about. They read about the importance of these presidential primaries every single day, and a single vote in a single district may be the one that puts delegates in one candidate's column over another.

The discharge petition is no longer "done in secret" and it's not only just the number of signatures acquired that's public - signers become public information immediately.

Under a Rules change in the 103rd Congress, signatures on a discharge petition must be made available to the public on a daily basis by the Clerk. The names of new signatories are printed in the Congressional Record on the last legislative day of each week.

http://www.rules.house.gov/Archives/discharge_pet.htm

Originally, signatories to a discharge petition were secret. Only once the petition acquired a majority would the clerk announce who signed. In 1993, the procedure was changed to make it public at every step of the process, with signers published in the Congressional Record. This change was spearheaded by Jim Inhofe (R-OK).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_petition

So when no other representative than Rush Holt steps forth to sign the petition, it'll be like the shot heard round the nation.

This measure is supposed to be an "emergency" measure to be opted in long before the end of this 2008 presidential election of such importance.

What is the rep going to say to constituents who don't see his/her name on the discharge petition?

Sorry, I don't want to step on anybody else's toes. Such action would be an affront to the committee process? Let's just let this run its course, wink wink.

According to Congressman Holt:

While the House has not acted on our legislation to require paper ballots and audits for all votes in all states in time for 2008, there is still time to take action to protect the accuracy, integrity, and security of the 2008 general elections. This plan provides an incentive for state or localities that want to do the right thing.
How about letting this emergency situation - which you propose a measure you say is a way to protect the accuracy, integrity and security of the 2008 general election - continue one more day beyond February 17, 2008 and onward during this crucial presidential election is an affront to those who elected you to office.

Upon your return to duty, how about you present a discharge petition, immediately, if no action has been taken by the committee process.

(Net the Truth Online)

Related

Sunday, February 10, 2008
Change We Can Believe In: But What If Your Vote Doesn't Count?
Right now, the Holt Bill has been referred to the Subcomittee on Technology and Innovation. This is not good enough: We need to Call and Petition Congress beginning today and continuing every day to demand passage of the Holt Bill. And that's just for starters.

http://soundingbalance.blogspot.com/2008/02/change-we-can-believe-in-but-what-if.html

NIU gunman stopped taking medication
Feb. 15, 2008

By CARYN ROUSSEAU and DEANNA BELLANDI Associated Press Writers
© 2008 The Associated Press

DEKALB, Ill. — Police say the gunman in the Northern Illinois University shooting rampage had stopped taking his medication recently and had become erratic before he killed five people and committed suicide.

DeKalb County coroner Rusty Miller says there had been confusion over the death toll. He is now correcting himself, saying that five people were killed, not six.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/5544901.html

Gunman, 5 others dead at NIU; shooter identified as Steve Kazmierczak
Feb 15, 2008 11:18 -0500
Updated: 14 minutes ago

UPDATE: Police say NIU gunman Steve Kazmierczak had stopped taking his medication recently and had "become erratic." The DeKalb County coroner says five students, not six, were killed in the shooting rampage in which Kazmierczak took his own life...

It was the worst campus shooting since April 16, 2007, when 32 people were shot to death on the campus of Virginia Tech University by a student who later killed himself. Virginia Tech officials have called NIU offering help and advice, Peters said...


http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/chi-niu-shooting_webfeb16,0,4794927.story

Why so many Americans today are 'mentally ill'
Posted: August 14, 2007
WorldNetDaily.com
Columbine mass-killer Eric Harris was taking Luvox ? like Paxil and Zoloft (and trendsetter Prozac), a modern and widely prescribed type of antidepressant called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or SSRIs. Harris and fellow student Dylan Klebold went on a hellish school shooting rampage in 1999 during which they killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 24 others before turning their guns on themselves.

Luvox manufacturer Solvay Pharmaceuticals concedes that during short-term controlled clinical trials 4 percent of children and youth taking Luvox ? that's 1 in 25 ? developed mania, a dangerous and violence-prone mental derangement characterized by extreme excitement and delusion.

The inescapable truth is, perpetrators of many of the nation's most horrendous murder rampages in recent years were taking, or just coming off of, prescribed psychiatric drugs.

Most recently, authorities investigating Cho Seung-Hui, who murdered 32 at Virginia Tech in April, reportedly found "prescription drugs" for the treatment of psychological problems among his possessions. While the coroner reported no drugs were found in Cho's bloodstream on the day of the crime, April 16, the killer's roommate Joseph Aust told the Richmond Times-Dispatch Cho's routine each morning had included taking prescription drugs.

So what kind of meds might Cho have been taking? Strangely, his medical records have yet to be released to the public ? authorities claiming it's because an investigation is still ongoing, although critics suggest the purpose may be to protect the drug companies from liability claims.

Illinois University Shooting Suspect Identity Revealed

The name has just been released publicly, Steven Kazmierczak.

Six students reported dead from late teens to early 30s. That was just altered to 5, shot by the gunman, and not including him.

"He had stopped taking his medication," said the official spokesman.

According to MSNBC Breaking News

(Net the Truth Online)

Northern Illinois Killer Identified
Shooter Kills 6 Before Turning Gun On Himself
Last Edited: Friday, 15 Feb 2008, 9:12 AM CST
Created: Friday, 15 Feb 2008, 6:32 AM CST

http://www.myfoxhouston.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=5783939&version=14&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.3.1

Gunman kills 6 at N. Illinois U

By Stephanie Simon, Ralph Vartabedian and P.J. Huffstutter, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers 4:29 AM PST, February 15, 2008

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-na-shoot15feb15,1,2089436.story

What happened? Was the man on any type of prescribed psychotropic drugs? Will the public ever find out the entire truth?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=violence+psychotropic+drugs&spell=1

Authorities today identified the gunman who killed 6 and wounded 15 at Northern Illinois University as Steven P. Kazmierczak, 27, formerly of Elk Grove Village, the Associated Press reported.

He was apparently a bright student with a clear interest in social justice and criminal law before he turned the gun on himself Thursday afternoon.

He was most recently registered as a graduate student pursuing a masters degree in sociology at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana. He apparently had transferred there after being enrolled for the same courses at NIU from at least 2006 up until the spring of 2007...

... But before leaving NIU, Kazmierczak was active in the sociology department. He co- author a published study on prison policy, entitled "Self-injury in Correctional Settings: 'Pathology' of Prisoners or of Prisons?"

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=135599

School Shootings Linked to

Psychotropic Drugs Such as Prozac, Ritalin, Luvox, and Paxil

http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/2000-05-16-School-Shootings-Psychotropic-Drugs.htm

Congress on Break: In Limbo: Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act 2008

H.R.5036 Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008

Click sponsors to reveal representatives who signed on to the Act before taking a so much needed Winter break

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/1/110-h5036/show

The choice is yours. This site has not yet taken a position in support of H.R. 5036, nor has the site objected to the legislation as it so far remains "opt in."

The bill does direct monies to again flow from the federal government to districts should those districts convert to paper-based voting system or conduct manual audits, and other details.

We would question the aspect of the federal government seeming to want its cake and eat it to, and using our taxpayer monies to do so. If the feds want the counties to adopt whatever, the feds should pay for it.

This appears to be the position NACo has taken.

See our y'day posting

Thursday, February 14, 2008
Federal Power Grab or Solution? U.S. Electronic Voting Systems

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2008/02/federal-power-grab-or-solution-us.html

The JOhn Birch Society raises salient points concerning unconstitutionality which are worth considering.

The larger question is should there be a national body such as the EAC which will ultimately issue directives, requirements, and mandates not on states, but on county jurisdictions to further comply with whatever federal election measures arise in the future?

At any rate, the following is for your review and decision-making

(Net the Truth Online)

Discharge Petition How a Bill Becomes Law

http://www.votescount.com/books/fedlaw.htm

Tell Congress: Pass HR 5036 Emergency Bill for Secure Elections in 2008

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/199/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=22334

To direct the Administrator of General Services to reimburse certain jurisdictions for the costs of obtaining paper ballot voting systems for the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, to reimburse jurisdictions for the costs incurred in conducting audits or hand counting of the results of the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, and for other purposes.
Other Bill Titles

Official: To direct the Administrator of General Services to reimburse certain jurisdictions for the costs of obtaining paper ballot voting systems for the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, to reimburse jurisdictions for the costs incurred in conducting audits or hand counting of the results of the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, and for other purposes. as introduced.

Short: Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008 as introduced.


http://www.opencongress.org/bill/1/110-h5036/show

Democrat Super Delegates Breaking Go with District Voice

Update: Obama supported in Japan town!

The super delegates in the Democratic Party are beginning to show their mettle. Other than Bill Clinton and PA Governor Ed Rendell, who will never waver from committment to Hillary Clinton, other super delegates may begin to do the right thing if Barack Obama wins in their individual local jurisdictions.

Obama 1116

Clinton 985


AP Two superdelegates drop Clinton endorsements. Going with the popular vote winner in their specific district!

Chuck Todd Texas Democratic race: Clinton leads Obama by 7-8 points

McCain 45 percent to Mike Huckabee 41 percent

Update: John Lewis did not switch committed to Clinton...

(Net the Truth Online)

Superdelegate storm likely to be short-lived
If 2004 is any guide, Democratic officials will migrate to front-runner
By Tom Curry
National affairs writer MSNBC
updated 7:54 p.m. ET, Fri., Feb. 15, 2008

WASHINGTON - Here’s a news flash: superdelegates do change their minds.

On Thursday Rep. John Lewis of Georgia, a Democratic superdelegate, seemed to rescind his pledge to cast his vote at the convention for Sen. Hillary Clinton, switching instead to Sen. Barack Obama.

Democratic voters in his district supported Obama in the Feb. 5 primary, and, Lewis indicated to the New York Times that he would too...

Free to choose
Dubbed “superdelegates,” they’re free to endorse whomever they want, to switch back and forth between contenders, or to wait until the convention to make their choices.

Delegates elected in primaries are pledged to cast their vote at the convention for a particular candidate, but party rules don't require them to do so. The party rules ask such delegates to “in good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.”

While Lewis has been heard from, no word yet from the superdelegates who have endorsed Obama but whose states’ Democratic primaries were won by Clinton. Some examples: Sen. Edward Kennedy of Mass., Rep. Steve Rothman of New Jersey and Rep. Adam Schiff of California.

Superdelegates are not chosen by means of primaries or caucuses, but are delegates by virtue of the elected offices they hold.

In the last few days, Democrat-allied groups Moveon.org (which is backing Obama) and Democracy for America, founded by Howard Dean and now headed by his brother Jim, have raised a ruckus about the superdelegate system.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23184492

Hillary Clinton: Maggie Williams Billing Records

Anybody out there remember the name Maggie Williams in connection with Vincent Foster's office, and Rose Law Firm's missing billing records???

The Whitewater Paper Chase
Published: February 17, 1996

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A01E1D61239F934A25751C0A960958260

About Hillary’s ‘35 years of change’
By Hill Truth | The Hillary Project

http://www.hillaryproject.com/index.php?/en/story-details/about_hillarys_35_years_of_change/

Honesty: Hillary’s Glass House
By Hill Truth | The Hillary Project
Cattle futures. The New York Times revealed in March 1994 that in 1978, just before her husband became governor, Hillary had made a $100,000 profit on a $1,000 investment in highly speculative cattle-futures contracts in only nine months. Hillary's first explanation (through aides) of this extraordinary windfall was that she had made the investment after "reading The Wall Street Journal" and placed all the trades herself after seeking advice from "numerous people." It was so preposterous that she soon had to abandon it. Eventually, she had to admit that longtime Clinton friend James Blair had executed 30 of her 32 trades directly with an Arkansas broker.

In an April 1994 press conference, Hillary denied knowing of "any favorable treatment" by Blair. But the astronomical odds against any financial novice making a 10,000 percent profit without the game being rigged led many to believe that Blair, the outside counsel to Arkansas-based poultry giant Tyson Foods, must have put only profitable trades in Hillary's account and absorbed her losses. The heavily regulated Tyson needed friends in high places, and Bill Clinton helped it pass a 1983 state law raising weight limits on chicken trucks.

Removal of Vince Foster documents. During the same press conference, Hillary was asked why her then-chief of staff, Maggie Williams, had been involved in removing documents from the office of Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster after his suicide. Foster had been a partner of Hillary's at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Ark. "I don't know that she did remove any documents," Hillary said. But it was reported three months later that Hillary had instructed Williams to remove the Foster documents to the White House residence. Then they were turned over to Clinton attorney Bob Barnett.

http://www.hillaryproject.com/index.php?/en/story-details/honesty_hillarys_glass_house/

Once Upon a Time in Arkansas

Peter Boyer: But, Professor, what possible motivation, why would these papers, these billing records, be kept away from the authorities that were seeking them?

Viet Dinh: We really do not know the motive for concealment, which we can only guess as to why were they concealed by what they reveal. And what they reveal is the extent and nature of Mrs. Clinton's involvement and work in the Castle Grande transaction. Without the billing records, we would not have the full picture of the Castle Grande transaction as we now know.

As a matter of fact, the FDIC and the RTC inspector generals had concluded their investigation into the Rose Law Firm's representation of Madison Guaranty in August, 1995, at around the same time the billing records were discovered in the book room by Carolyn Huber. And they had concluded that investigation. They reopened that investigation in 1996, after the billing record surfaced, and now they have access to it. And it's only after this subsequent investigation, the reopened investigation, do we know the full extent and nature of, one, the fraudulent transaction underlying this whole land deal, and also Mrs. Clinton's involvement in facilitating, or drafting up documents, that facilitated the concealment of this fraudulent scheme.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/arkansas/interviews/vietdinh2.html

Tom Fitton
Clinton Gang Rides Again
July 02, 2007 02:00 PM EST

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/26386.html

Public Dramas, Private Toll for First Lady
By Bob Woodward
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 14, 1999; Page A1

This is the second of three excerpts from "Shadow: Five Presidents and the Legacy of Watergate." Copyright © 1999 by Bob Woodward, Simon & Schuster.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/shadow061499.htm

Kessler Charge: Media Ignore Saddam's WMD Intent

What more can be said? Did Saddam have a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction in the year/s preceding the Congressional Resolution? What did everybody at the time believe? We'll all keep revisiting the issue, but it is unlikely we will ever know the entire truth about Saddam Hussein... ever...

Media Ignore Saddam's WMD Intent
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:33 AM
By: Ronald Kessler Article Font Size

When FBI agent George Piro recently described debriefing Saddam Hussein for seven months after his capture, he disclosed that the Iraqi dictator admitted his intention to re-start his weapons of mass destruction program within a year.

That plan included developing nuclear weapons capability, according to Saddam.

The revelation should have hit Page One of every newspaper.

It would have further justified President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, a key issue in the coming presidential election. But many in the mainstream media could not bear to hear that Bush may have done something right.

When Piro’s interview came out in my book, "The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack," NBC Nightly News, Fox News, and Newsmax ran the news of Saddam’s admission, but few newspapers published a story.

CNN ran a story on the debriefing of Saddam but made no mention of Saddam’s plans to resume his weapons of mass destruction program, including developing nuclear capability. Instead, CNN said that what Saddam told Piro “throws more cold water on the justification for war” because Saddam admitted he was bluffing about having weapons of mass destruction.

Two and a half months later, "60 Minutes" ran the first television interview with Piro. The interview buried the reference to Saddam’s WMD and nuclear plans, as did the press release on the CBS Web site. Likewise, an AP story on the interview mentioned Saddam’s plans in the 11th paragraph. Only four U.S. newspapers ran a story referring to Saddam’s WMD and nuclear plans.


The Washington Post ran a 542-word story on the interview leaving out any mention of Saddam’s avowed intentions. The New York Times ran no story at all.


Today, we have press censorship similar to what existed in the old Soviet Union, except the censors are journalists themselves, and it’s in reverse: News favorable to the government is suppressed...


http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/saddam_wmd_/2008/02/13/72345.html

PA Governor Ed Rendell: State of Deflection

PA Governor Ed Rendell defended his comments made during an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Governor Rendell recently announced very publicly his support for Hillary Clinton for President.

The Governor's comments are excerpted from Tony Norman's Gov. 'Blunt Talk' Rendell (and other topics) Tuesday, February 12, 2008 (among those who attended the Pittsburgh Post Gazette interview of Gov. Rendell)

If this commentary is true, Rendell is totally exposed for the fraud he is.

Some Democrats, he said, would pass along reports of voters refusing to back Mr. Swann because of his color.



Rendell has even more explaining to do, because if he said "conservative whites" in the interview, then who was he speaking of when referring to voters who reported back to some Democrats? The same conservative whites?

To Nora O'Donnell, he continued to defend what he'd said in the Post-Gazette interview, and added: there are a few whites who won't vote for Obama... in the Primaries, contests are often won by a few votes.

Well, if Rendell is now speaking about a Primary, the Primary in Pennsylvania is a two-Party thing. Independents cannot vote in the Primary for the Democrat or the Republican candidate.

Republicans cannot vote in the Democrat Primary, although Republicans have the same choice as voters in the Democrat Primary and can write-in a name which could be a name of anybody or someone on the ballot of the opposing major Party.

So is Rendell referring to Democrat Primary voters?

Even if Rendell is referring to conservative white voters, he's still wrong - prior to the 2006 Primary Election wherein Lynn Swann's name was floated as a candidate for Governor of PA on the Republican ticket, of course there was controversy among Republicans as to whom should be the Republican candidate.

Why would any Republicans in their right mind inform any Democrat that they would not vote for Lynn Swann because of his color? That would be the last thing any would do. Seriously, the Republican is perceived a certain way from the get-go, why confirm the perception.

Some may have said they wouldn't support Lynn Swann as Governor, but there were splits in the Republican camp because other Republicans candidates were initially in the mix. Those Republicans may have favored other than Swann for whatever their political preferences - his positions on some issues were at variance with some conservatives.

Guess who all voted for Lynn Swann in the Primary of 2006, though? Swann was the only Republican candidate on the ballot because others bowed out after the Republican State Committee endorsed Swann.

Last time anybody checked voting patterns, Republicans in the Primary who are registered as such vote for Republican candidates, with a few exceptions for write-ins which could be anybody, even a Democrat or Green.

It wasn't like Swann only got ten votes in the Primary. In fact, there was an increase in voter registration among Republicans because of Swann's candidacy for Governor! Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

As we noted yesterday, even if Rendell were speaking of conservative whites, he'd be incorrect using Lynn Swann as an example. Swann was the choice over white candidates in the Republican state committee's meeting, and everybody knows statewide there are fewer African Americans registered as Republicans than registered as Democrats in the state of PA. So those who supported and voted for Republican African American Lynn Swann were conservative and white.

Rendell now tries to retreat from his own words. What he doesn't understand is he is so far gone in his own ego and support for Hillary Clinton, he is in a state of deflection. Basically he's following the same pattern the Clinton's have followed since Bill Clinton was elected to any political position, including Attorney General of the state of Arkansas

Would anybody be surprised if Rendell's stumping is designed to gain him a place in a Hillary Clinton Administration?

We questioned yesterday when election integrity activists would rise up in the state and demand Rendell put his attention toward the fallible electronic touch screen voting systems which have been slammed for "flipping" votes during the 2006 Senate race between Rick Santorum and Robert Casey, Jr.

Should Hillary Clinton win by a slim margin in PA, there should be an automatic recount. Say what, there'd be little to recount (other than a print-out of a digital image stored on a memory card) since the DREs are paper-less?

(Net the Truth Online)

Rendell offers his defense on Obama race remark
Thursday, February 14, 2008
By Dennis B. Roddy, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

A clearly rattled Mr. Rendell yesterday took to the airwaves -- he made a point of appearing on MSNBC to explain himself -- and to other media to make clear that he was not attempting to invoke race to the detriment of Mr. Obama.

In an interview with the Post-Gazette, Mr. Rendell cited his own experience in 2006. Some Democrats, he said, would pass along reports of voters refusing to back Mr. Swann because of his color. Sometimes, he said, voters told him as much to his face.

"It made me feel so uncomfortable," he said. "I felt like strangling those people. If I weren't running for office, I probably would have..."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08045/857368-85.stm

"You've got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate..."I believe, looking at the returns in my election, that had Lynn Swann [2006 Republican gubernatorial candidate] been the identical candidate that he was --well-spoken [note: Mr. Rendell did not call the brother "articulate"], charismatic, good-looking -- but white instead of black, instead of winning by 22 points, I would have won by 17 or so..."


We caught part of the interview by Chris Matthews on MSNBC's Hardball last night.

Transcript

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007220&docId=l:744580148&start=1

Story

Rendell offers his defense on Obama race remark
Thursday, February 14, 2008
By Dennis B. Roddy, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
After dancing across the tripwires of race and politics, Gov. Ed Rendell yesterday defended remarks about whether some Pennsylvania voters would reject Illinois Sen. Barack Obama as a presidential candidate because he is black.

"I regret saying it because of the way it was interpreted," the governor said yesterday. "Remember -- I always tell the truth. Maybe I'm wrong, but I tell what my experience has taught me."

What the latest experience has taught him, Mr. Rendell said, is that a blunt answer on a touchy subject doesn't always work.

"What's so frustrating about this is that in this business, if you give an honest answer, you get skewered for it," Mr. Rendell said. "If you give the politically correct answer, the press says, 'Aw, that guy, he's just a shucker and jiver and never gives a straight answer.' I get in trouble for telling the truth."

Race first surfaced as a divisive point in the Democratic nominating contest when former President Bill Clinton suggested that it had been a factor in the South Carolina primary vote for Mr. Obama, who is black.

Last week, in remarks during a meeting with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editorial board, Mr. Rendell, who has endorsed Mr. Obama's rival, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, triggered the latest round when assessing Pennsylvania's electorate. Saying some Pennsylvanians likely would not vote for a black candidate, he also suggested that race might have accounted for as much as 5 percent of his winning re-election margin over Republican nominee Lynn Swann, who is black.

The governor said: "You've got conservative whites here ... who are not ready to vote for an African American candidate. I believe, looking at the returns in my election, that had Lynn Swann been the identical candidate that he was -- well-spoken, charismatic, good-looking but white instead of black -- that instead of winning by 22 points, I would have won by 17 or so. I think there was that factor there. And that exists, but on the other hand, that's counterbalanced by Obama's ability to bring new voters into the electoral pool."

The comments, which the governor says were more a lamentation than a calculation, sparked a political squall in cyberspace and on cable news channels. Internet posters accused Mr. Rendell of everything from naivete to outright racism.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08045/857368-85.stm

Rendell: Gender, Race, Part of Politics
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 6:30 PM

HARRISBURG, Pa. -- Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's gender could be as much of an obstacle for her presidential campaign as Sen. Barack Obama's race may be for his, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said Wednesday.

In an interview on MSNBC, Rendell defended his recent comments to a newspaper editorial board in which he said some white Pennsylvanians are likely to vote against Obama because he is black.

"Senator Clinton has the same handicap," said Rendell, who has endorsed the former first lady. "There are some men who have said, 'Look I have nothing against Senator Clinton but I don't want to see a woman ... in charge of the United States military as commander in chief.'"

"We're talking about a very small percentage of voters, but some of these primaries are decided by a very small percentage of voters," he said.

http://www.newsmax.com/politics/rendell_racial_politics/2008/02/13/72495.html

What Rendell says one day and the next

Hardball interview Feb. 13, 2008 clip

...And I have a habit that`s plagued me for my 31 years in politics, I answer the questions and I answer it honestly. And they asked me, and I answered it honestly. But for this to be a big brouhaha and for somehow thinking I was trying to help Senator Clinton -- neither she nor I would want anything like this. And I went through a whole year running against Lynn Swann, and not once did anybody suggest that either Lynn or I or our running mates injected race into the campaign.

MATTHEWS: Well, I think it`s an acute analysis -- it`s a very acute analysis about a 17-point spread instead of a 22-point spread because of an ethnic difference is to me a very surgical statement. And by the way, you offset it by saying Barack is a hell of a lot more charismatic than Lynn Swann, certainly a better speaker, I mean, with a big message, a really big message.

RENDELL: He`s got a better message. He`s got a better message.

MATTHEWS: That Swann didn`t have. Swann didn`t have a rationale...

RENDELL: Absolutely.

MATTHEWS: ... like this guy. Right?

RENDELL: Right. I mean, look...

MATTHEWS: Well, say so!

(LAUGHTER)

RENDELL: ... Barack has a great -- well, Senator Obama has a great rationale for bringing the country together. And I think that is good.

And I think it`s everyone. Whether it is Senator Clinton or Senator McCain, they have to bring us together, because we are sick and tired of the partisan politics as usual in D.C. But once you get us together, where are you going to take us?

And that is why I am for Hillary Clinton...

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007220&docId=l:744580148&start=1

But no, now Ed Rendell, saying Obama won't win Pennsylvania because they're all racist there, echos Andrew:
"What's so frustrating about this is that in this business, if you give an honest answer, you get skewered for it," Mr. Rendell said. "If you give the politically correct answer, the press says, 'Aw, that guy, he's just a shucker and jiver and never gives a straight answer.' I get in trouble for telling the truth."

The really funny thing in all of this is Rendell using a racially tinged phrase as part of saying that, in fact, white Pennsylvanians are racist -- him too apparently. He has, after all, chosen to go with Hillary Clinton instead of standing athwart the racist voters of Pennsylvania yelling, "Turn from your racism and follow me to hope and change."

Rendell: Shucker and Jiver
By Erick Posted

http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/rendell_shucker_and_jiver

http://www.confirmthem.com/aggregator

Federal Power Grab or Solution? U.S. Electronic Voting Systems

Another round of a federal "fix" for what many have asserted are fallible paper-less voting machine systems is being met with support and opposition.

Just search the internet to determine the growing numbers of organizations welcoming the introduction of the Rush Holt bill in Congress - HR 5036. Called the Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008, the measure is supported for a variety of reasons. Of particular note is the support by the National Association of Counties

National NACo

NACo also takes care to point out:

NACo takes no position on any voting system or method of counting or auditing ballots. In his letter to Holt, Naake stated...

And:

Regardless of how the legislative process unfolds, it is unlikely that Congress will appropriate funds for any new incentive grant prior to the presidential election this year. NACo would support funding for any incentive grant to counties should the opportunity arise in an emergency spending bill, but funds for new programs are rarely appropriated until after the next fiscal year begins in October.

As a result, counties cannot rely on any promises of funding in pending legislation as they make their budget decisions this year. However, the shift in approach represented by H.R. 5036 — from imposing federal mandates to offering incentive grants — offers promise for restoring the partnership between the federal government and counties on election reform legislation.


http://www.naco.org/Template.cfm?Section=Publications&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=26272

See sidebar link to the legislation's details and current status. Search our site for more on the issue.

On the other end, there are those who believe the bill's requirements cement the federal government's power and oversight of elections. Unconstitutionally so.

The NACo site includes reference to:

Rep. Susan Davis (D-Calif.), a member of the panel, has proposed similar incentive grants for counties that adopt vote-by-mail (H.R. 1667).

http://www.naco.org/Template.cfm?Section=Publications&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=26272

(Net the Truth Online)

(Updated) A Dangerous Fix for Election Security
The John Birch Society News Feed - Wed, 2008-02-06

We strongly object to the unconstitutional means by which H.R.5036 would use the people's desire for voter-verified paper ballots as bait for establishing centralized, federal control over elections. To take immediate action on this issue, please click here.

http://www.jbs.org/node/7020

John Birch Society Action Alert

Oppose H.R. 5036, Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008

...Our Position:
The John Birch Society opposes the unconstitutional federal usurpation of the rights of states to control elections. We strongly object to the unconstitutional means by which H.R. 5036 would use the people's desire for voter-verified paper ballots as bait for establishing centralized control over elections. The constitutionally established balance of powers must be restored to prevent an over centralization of federal power leading to a dictatorship...

http://capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=10932736

VerifiedVoting.org Statement in Support of HR5036: “Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act”
By VerifiedVoting.org
January 26, 2008
As 2008 begins, over 30 million voters face the prospect of depending upon unverifiable and insecure electronic voting equipment in the November elections. Millions more will vote on paper ballot systems without the reassurance of a routine hand counted audit of the vote tallies. Already we have seen voters turned away from the polls in South Carolina as a result of machine malfunction and insufficient emergency paper ballots.

There is an excellent way that Congress can improve confidence in the 2008 elections: by quickly passing HR 5036, the Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act. HR 5036 would reimburse counties, states, and other jurisdictions for the cost of replacing paperless voting equipment with paper ballot systems purchased in time for the November elections, the cost of emergency paper ballots in locations that use electronic machines, the cost of hand counted audits of the 2008 federal elections, and even for the cost of hand-counting the ballots on election night if a jurisdiction chooses to do so.

Responding to reports from a series of voting system reviews undertaken in undertaken over the past year, many states and counties are ready to make a change in their voting systems. The question for many jurisdictions across the country is not whether to purchase voting equipment that secures both voter confidence and electoral integrity, but how to pay for it.

HR 5036 would enable these jurisdictions to move away from equipment that has been demonstrated to be unacceptably insecure and manifestly unverifiable by a large body of governmental, academic, and private sector studies: the 2003 Security Application International report,1 Government Accountability Office report of 2005,2 the 2006 report of the Task Force on Voting System Security at the Brennan Center for Justice,3 and most recently, the reviews of voting systems commissioned by a number of states, including California,4 Ohio,5 and Kentucky.6

Many local and state governments have recognized the advantages of a well-established and cost-effective voting system that offers security, accessibility, and reliability: a system of voter-marked paper ballots together with ballot-marking devices to serve voters with disabilities. HR 5036 would provide a strong incentive to purchase precinct count optical scanners and ballot-marking device systems.

Paper ballot optical scan systems together with ballot marking devices offer all voters the same individual paper ballot, protect the secrecy of the vote, and, unlike continuous paper rolls, offer a dependable, reliable record of the intent of the voter. They are also less expensive and burdensome for county election officials. The solution has been praised by voters with disabilities,7 and by some of the most respected professionals in the field of accessible technology.8 Like New Mexico did in 2006, most states that are now considering voting system changes, including Florida, Maryland, and Colorado, have expressed a preference for voter-marked paper ballots read by optical scanners, with ballot-marking devices.

No less important than paper ballots are random manual audits of electronic vote tallies. All computer systems are vulnerable to malfunction and tampering. Hand counted audits are a powerful way to identify systemic problems and mitigate many of security concerns, reassuring voters of the integrity of the election process. Routine manual audits will be done in approximately one fourth of the states this year. HR 5036 would make such audits possible in still more areas...

Hillary Clinton: NAFTA supporter when First Lady

Hillary Clinton supported the North American Free Trade Agreement

CNN Report including speech by Barack Obama wherein Obama noted Clinton's early support for NAFTA. One thing is really clear as you read that Clinton says in Time, NAFTA was inherited in her husband's administration, Obama isn't falling for it...

Clinton challenges Obama in Texas

...While campaigning in Wisconsin, Obama took his own shots at Clinton, criticizing he for supporting the North America Free Trade Act while former President Clinton was president.

"You know, in the years after her husband signed NAFTA, Sen. Clinton would go around talking about how great it was and how many benefits it would bring," Obama said in Janesville, Wisconsin. "Now that she's running for president, she says we need a time-out on trade. No one knows when this time-out will end -- maybe after the election."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/13/2008.hopefuls/

Hillary: "I Have to Earn Every Vote"
Thursday, Feb. 01, 2007 By KAREN TUMULTY/WASHINGTON

TIME: Do you think NAFTA [the North American Free Trade Agreement, signed by Bill Clinton] was the right thing to do?

CLINTON: I think NAFTA was, in principle, a good idea to try to create a better trading market between Canada and the United States and Mexico. But I think the terms that it contained, and how it was negotiated under the Bush Administration and the failure to have any tough enforcement mechanism, like pollution on our border with Mexico, for example—

TIME: That was your husband's Adminstration, wasn't it? Because I recall a lot of debate about it not having labor standards and environmental standards.

CLINTON: But it was inherited. NAFTA was inherited by the Clinton Administration. I believe in the general principles it represented, but what we have learned is that we have to drive a tougher bargain. Our market is the market that everybody wants to be in. We should quit giving it away so willy-nilly. I believe we need tougher enforcement of the trade agreements we already have. You look at the trade enforcement record between the Clinton Administration and the Bush Administration, the Clinton Administration brought more trade enforcement actions in one year than the Bush Administration brought in six years.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1584649,00.html

Clinton Breaks With Husband's Legacy on Nafta Pact, China Trade

By Kristin Jensen and Mark Drajem
March 30 (2007)

One of President Bill Clinton's enduring legacies was his hard-fought push for trade deals with Mexico and China. His wife is heading in another direction.

Senator Hillary Clinton, the front-runner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, wonders why the North American Free Trade Agreement is ``continuing to drive hundreds of thousands, even millions, of people from Mexico into our country,'' she said in an interview. ``We just can't keep doing what we did in the 20th century.''

Somewhere along the Clintons' ``bridge to the 21st century'' -- their 1996 campaign mantra -- they parted ways on trade. Bill was a champion of the global economy and prodded Congress to approve Nafta in 1993 and China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. Hillary, 59, says new deals may need to be put on hold pending a review -- an idea she calls ``a little timeout.''

Last Updated: March 30, 2007 00:26 EDT

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=atUKcP4eSEvY&refer=politics

The Nation Magazine Endorses: Barack Obama

According to Katrina Vanden Heuvel on Hardball with Chris Matthews

VANDEN HEUVEL: ... we have endorsed Obama. We have endorsed Obama.

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007220&docId=l:743441328&start=3

posted January 31, 2008 (February 18, 2008 issue)
The Choice
Christopher Hayes

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080218/hayes

The Nation (Sort Of?) Endorses Obama
by John Koblin | January 31, 2008
The Nation very rarely does endorsements, but in their upcoming issue that hits newstands tomorrow, Barack Obama is on the cover and it amounts to, well, something very close to an endorsement.

"The magazine felt that the campaign was down to Obama versus Clinton and we felt that with the primary coming up that we would make the strongest stand for Barack Obama," said Ben Wyskida, the publicity director at the Nation. "It's not an endorsement in that it's a consensus of all the editors, or the editorial board. But in this case we felt there were enough poeple who felt strongly enough about him that we would make the biggest deal out of it that we could."

The semi-endorsement is featured in their cover story written by D.C. Bureau Chief Christopher Hayes and titled, rather forcefully, "The Choice." Interestingly, the last time The Nation endorsed a candidate? In 1988, when the magazine endorsed Jesse Jackson.

According to Mr. Wyskida, they aren't describing it as an endorsement because there was some disagreement within editorial ranks...

http://www.observer.com/2008/nation-sort-endorses-obama?observer_most_read_tabs_tab=2

MoveOn Endorses Obama
by MissLaura
Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 11:54:16 AM PST

MoveOn isn't the only progressive endorsement Obama has picked up since Edwards left the race; in a rare move, The Nation magazine devoted its cover to a piece supporting Obama. Christopher Hayes' article gives significant attention to concerns about Obama, but ultimately argues for him based on his movement-building potential:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/1/141740/0118

Russ Diamond Wants the Seat the Better to...

you remember Little Red Riding Hood?

Diamond after a PA Constitutional Convention - still...

Diamond said during the campaign he will continue to hammer home the Republican message of smaller government and reduced spending while advocating for a citizens’ constitutional convention. He also pledged not to accept any legislative perks including a pension, health plan or mid-term pay increases...

http://www.ldnews.com/news/ci_8250335

Beware, beware, beware, beware. See our previous posts on this issue listed in the sidebar under Posts About Limited vs Unlimited PA Con-Con. He ran an unsuccessful bid for Governor of the state as an independent, ignoring his own advice to challenge the incumbent in the Primary, if the incumbent faced no opposition there. He gave some excuse somebody else had planned to run as a Democrat, then bowed out.

Instead of facing the incumbent head-on in the Democrat Primary, he travelled around the state between the time before the Primary, and after the Primary back then, until sometime in March, when he announced his run for that office.

Along the way, he continued to present the idea of a so-called "citizens" Constitutional Convention as one that could be limited.

All the while, he neglected to tell people of information showing such a convention could follow the precedent of a previous PA Convention which was a runaway convention.

See our lengthy response to Diamond Wednesday, June 13, 2007 Response pacleansweep: A reflection upon a Pa. convention which cites Mr. Robert Williams testimony before Senator Piccola's State Government Committee on Calling a PA Constitutional Convention. Williams testimony included a supplementary report, inclusive of footnotes.

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2007/06/response-pacleansweep-reflection-upon.html

Read the pertinent footnote to determine that Williams allows for the potential of a limited convention having the ability to produce a "new" document, a new PA Constitution.

Maybe it all depends what some say the meaning of "new" is.

Last time we checked, when you leave out info pertinent to decision-making, you are nothing short of like the big wolf in Little Red Riding Hood.

If a person can withhold information in an attempt to convince people to support a PA Constitutional Convention, (it can be limited and remain so, it really really can, trust me) what else will the person withhold to mount a campaign for a political office in Pennsylvania.

Indications from the Lebanon Daily News article are he's already skewing the record of Republican opponent Gingrich.

Activist to take shot at 101st
By JOHN LATIMER
Staff Writer
Lebanon Daily News

The seat is currently occupied by Rep. Mauree Gingrich of Palmyra, who is running for a fourth two-year...

When it comes to reforming how things are done in Harrisburg, Diamond said he is the real deal, while Gingrich just talks the talk.

“I saw in her release (announcing her candidacy) that she said she is an advocate of reform,” he said. “Well, it is easy to say she is an advocate. But I think to be an advocate you have to come up with some ideas of your own. I haven’t seen her leading the pack or shepherding these new reform-minded representatives into an organized, major reform coalition.”

Gingrich dismissed Diamond’s claim this morning, adding that she was not part of the pay grab that led to the reform movement and raised Diamond’s political stature. She noted her past involvement in the Jefferson Reform Initiative — a bipartisan legislative reform group — and her current work on a welfare-reform task force as just two examples of her commitment to improving government. “I’ve always been involved in reform issues,” she said. “That’s part of my life and part of bringing efficiencies to government. .... I’m surprised anyone would make a statement like that. It’s categorically untrue. You only have to look at my voting record to know that. It’s that simple.”

http://www.ldnews.com/news/ci_8250335

(Net the Truth Online)

Activist to take shot at 101st
By JOHN LATIMER
Staff Writer
Lebanon Daily News

The leader of an anti-incumbency reform group that helped oust dozens of state legislators in the wake of the 2005 legislative pay grab is now hoping to become an incumbent himself.

Russ Diamond of Annville, founder of PACleanSweep, announced yesterday that he is running for the Republican nomination to represent the 101st District in the state House. The district represents Leb-anon; the boroughs of Cleona, Mt. Gretna and Palmyra; and the townships of Annville, North Annville, South Annville, North Cornwall, North Londonderry and South Londonderry...

Diamond said during the campaign he will continue to hammer home the Republican message of smaller government and reduced spending while advocating for a citizens’ constitutional convention. He also pledged not to accept any legislative perks including a pension, health plan or mid-term pay increases...

http://www.ldnews.com/news/ci_8250335

Who Says There's No ...
... second, third, no, wait ... fourth? ... acts in American life?
Professional gadfly Russ Diamond writes this morning to let us know he's filed the paperwork for a Republican primary run for state House in Lebanon County's 101st District. The incumbent in that district is state Rep. Mauree Gingrich.
If he's elected, Diamond swears he won't accept a pay raise, pension, perks, office, pens, papers, books or anything else funded by the taxpayers...

http://blogs.mcall.com/capitol_ideas/2008/02/snow-day-wednes.html

See the testimony of Robert Williams before the State Government Committee (Senator Piccola) Contact Senator Piccola for the testimony.

Weekly Column: Calling a Constitutional Convention in Pennsylvania
3/2/2007

http://www.piccola.org/newsreleases/default.asp?NewsReleaseID=1493&SubjectID=

Also see

New Jersey Constitutional Reform
The Law of Limited State Constitutional Conventions
Robert Williams

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:G8nhpg74kQkJ:camlaw.rutgers.edu/statecon/njtaxconvpapers/report7.doc+robert+williams+limited+pennsylvania+constitutional+convention&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

See

Pennsylvania Constitution

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/VC/visitor_info/creating/constitution.htm

PA Open Records Senate Approved Concurred with House

Open records overhaul sent to Rendell
State Senate unanimously approves bill
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
By Tracie Mauriello, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau
HARRISBURG -- New open-records legislation is on its way to the governor's desk with the unanimous support of both chambers of the Legislature.

The Senate yesterday passed the bill, which is designed to let the public know more about state and local government spending and operations.

The sweeping rewrite of the Right-to-Know law was a key part of a wider reform agenda aimed at garnering public trust that was lost over the middle-of-the-night pay raises lawmakers approved for themselves in 2005.

Under the changes, all government records will be considered public unless their custodian can show there is an exemption in the law precluding disclosure.

The bill does not prevent the disclosure of any records, but does allow agencies to withhold certain documents, said the bill's sponsor, Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Chester.

One example, Mr. Pileggi said, will be school districts that choose to publicize honor rolls even though the law provides for the withholding of ages, addresses and birth dates of minors.

The law includes a catch-all allowing records to be withheld if there is a high chance disclosure would harm an individual or threaten public safety.

It also protects Social Security numbers, criminal investigative materials, personal bank information and medical records from disclosure.

The new law would provide greater access to 911 tapes, mandate access to many of the Legislature's records and expand the law to include Pennsylvania's state-related universities, including the University of Pittsburgh, Penn State, Lincoln and Temple.

The bill calls for establishment of a state Office of Open Records to assist agencies in determining their obligation to release records. The bill also requires state contracts to be posted online and that agencies respond to information requests within five days, and it sets penalties for those willfully denying access to records that are public under state law.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08044/856949-178.stm

Election Integrity Activists Needed to Admonish PA Rendell Clinton Support

Where are the election integrity activists in the state of Pennsylvania over Governor Ed Rendell's recently announced committment to enable Hillary Clinton to capture the White House and his comments about PA white voters?

Pennsylvania lucks into leading role
THE ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE
Sunday, February 10, 2008
By James O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08041/856368-176.stm

With Pennsylvania's newfound, lucky, position for the upcoming Democrat and Republican presidential Primaries, it seems the state's chief top executive, elected Governor, Ed Rendell, is stopping at nothing to gain his Democrat candidate for President more notoriety, and more votes in PA's Primary, and possibly more committed delegates for Clinton.

There is a lawsuit regarding the electronic voting machines known as paper-less direct recording electronic which remains pending.

The state decertified the WinVote in three counties. In those three counties, Lackawanna, Northampton, and Wayne, other systems will be employed in the crucial PA Primary Election.

According to the Morning Call report here's what was at stake

Judge nixes stop on voting machine funds
Northampton County one of three seeking new equipment.
By Joe Nixon | Of The Morning Call
February 9, 2008

A group of voters from across the state, already plaintiffs in a 2006 suit against the Pennsylvania Department of State over the reliability and accuracy of direct recording electronic voting machines, sought the injunction late last month. The injunction request, essentially an extension of the original pending suit, sought to prevent Northampton, Lackawanna and Wayne counties from spending state money on new machines already being questioned.

The plaintiffs had argued that if they won in court in the original suit, the machines would have to be scrapped. The injunction request didn't seek to prevent the use of machines already certified and purchased. Senior Judge Keith B. Quigley Friday granted a motion from the state to quash the injunction petition.

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-b4_3vote-2.6266214feb09%2C0%2C7450291.story

You'd think the fact many counties continue to purchase the paperless DREs even after noted problems with touchscreens "flipping votes" in the crucial past U.S. Senate race (Santorum/Casey) would prompt Governor Rendell to issue his own injunction on use of all paperless voting machines.

Meanwhile, while taking no action or having any input on the potential for fallibility of the paperless voting systems overwhelmingly used in the Commonwealth, Governor Rendell put his thinking cap on and basically declared a bitty of a snowstorm across the state as an emergency to issue an executive order which extended the deadline for candidates to file nomination petitions.

Candidates catch a break from snow closings
Posted by BRETT LIEBERMAN, Of The Patriot-News February 13, 2008

http://blog.pennlive.com/pennsyltucky/2008/02/candidates_catch_a_break_from.html

The action may be illegal as there was no statewide emergency as uhm we normally get snow this time of year. It's not like we're Texas when a mere snow dusting and there's an emergency declaration.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Governor Rendell Illegally Extends Petition Deadline
Yesterday, Governor Edward G. Rendell illegally extended the nomination petition deadline for the April 22 primary from Tuesday, February 12 at 5PM EST to Thursday, Febrary 14 at 12 Noon EST.

The Governor completely lacks any authority to extend this deadline...

http://kurtspeak.blogspot.com/2008/02/governor-rendell-illegally-extends.html

Kurt Speak: Rendell's Stated Precedent Shaky As Hell
The Pennsylvania Department of State is citing Tom Ridge's decision to extend the nominating petition deadline on January 25, 2000 to January 26 as justification for Rendell's illegal decision to extend this year's deadline.

There is no comparison. The storm of January 24-26, 2000 was truly a major weather event. This week's precipitation is a big wet kiss by comparison. The January 2000 storm caused government shutdowns all over the northeast.

http://kurtspeak.blogspot.com/2008/02/rendells-stated-precedent-shaky-as-hell.html

Why can't these be filed electronically anyway by now is beyond comprehension. There's always the original paper backup to review in case of any irregularities.

Snows uh shows where the Governor's priorities are, doesn't it?

Worse, the Governor of Pennsylvania put the state's voters in a bad light regarding racial matters. Where does the Governor get the idea his Republican challenger for the Governorship, Lynn Swann, would have come closer in final vote tallies, if he were a white man?

No, had Lynn Swann run against Rendell as a Democrat, he might have come closer in final tallies, and may have even won. As a Republican, he had no chance, no matter the color of skin.

A Republican who is also African American lost the PA Governorship. Statistics across the state bear this out.

In fact, if one thinks further, the state's so-called "elite" Republicans in their own committee action backed Lynn Swann, over and above other candidates who then pulled out of the Primary. Swann was then clear to challenge incumbent Rendell.

So white conservatives backed Swann.

Now why wouldn't white liberals vote for Barack Obama in Pennsylvania's Primary?

(Net the Truth Online)

Excellent opinion

Gov. 'Blunt Talk' Rendell (and other topics)
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
By Tony Norman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
So many topics, so little space:

Gov. Ed "Don't Call Me 'Fast Eddie' " Rendell met with the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last week to talk about his latest budget. But before turning the meeting over to his number-crunchers, our voluble governor weighed in on the primary fight between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama and what the Illinois senator could expect from the good people of Pennsylvania at the polls:

"You've got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate," he said bluntly. Our eyes only met briefly, perhaps because the governor wanted to spare the only black guy in the room

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08043/856727-153.stm?cmpid=MOSTEMAILEDBOX

Another well-put opinion

Ed Rendell proves a little too colorful
Posted by BRETT LIEBERMAN, Of The Patriot-News February 13, 2008 07:02AM
Categories: Election 2008, Federal government, Government, President, Rendell, State government, White House

Posted by boxertwin on 02/13/08 at 12:23PM
Just a minute, Eddie.....just to get it right...you are actually calling WHITE CONSERVATIVES racist...is that right? And the corollary to that is that LIBERAL WHITEs are NOT racist.

Well, I am a White, Conservative, Pennsylvanian...and, first of all, why would a conservative vote for a liberal ANYWAY? White OR Black. I , for one, WOULD vote for a Black conservative for president, not because he was black, but because he WAS CONSERVATIVE.

I think what you are REALLY saying is that White LIBERALS may not vote for a black liberal candidate....isn't that right? You see, us conservatives can't be called racists, because we have no Black candidate....but...hmmmmm....you DO! So, why don't you really say what you mean, Fast Eddie?

http://blog.pennlive.com/pennsyltucky/2008/02/ed_rendells_color_problem.html#more

And the lead is priceless here open mouth insert foot...

Providing fresh evidence of why Ed Rendell may not be on anyone's shortlist for vice president or cabinet posts, the governor has opened his mouth and inserted his foot.

"You've got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate," Rendell told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's editorial board as he explained why Barack Obama may have trouble winning the white vote. "I believe, looking at the returns in my election, that had Lynn Swann [2006 Republican gubernatorial candidate] been the identical candidate that he was -- well-spoken, charismatic, good-looking -- but white instead of black, instead of winning by 22 points, I would have won by 17 or so."..

http://blog.pennlive.com/pennsyltucky/2008/02/ed_rendells_color_problem.html#more

Rendell extends deadline for nominating petitions
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Because of yesterday's snowy weather in many parts of the state, Gov. Ed Rendell has extended the deadline for political candidates to turn in their nominating petitions until noon tomorrow.

The deadline for candidates to submit their petitions to get on the April 22 primary ballot had been 5 p.m. yesterday, but the snowstorms that hampered travel in many parts of the state could have made it difficult for some candidates to file, said Rendell spokesman Chuck Ardo.

However, Mr. Ardo added an important point: The deadline for candidates to collect signatures on their petitions has not been extended. It remains at 5 p.m. yesterday, meaning candidates cannot collect additional petition signatures today or tomorrow.

The extension for submitting petitions will shift the last day for filing objections to a petition to Feb. 21, two days later than it had been. To view the current list of candidates go to www.dos.state.pa.us and look under What's Hot.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08044/856933-100.stm

Case Moves Forward Against Pennsylvania Voting Machines
Apr 16, 2007, News Report

Last August, the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was served with a legal action that seeks to prevent the use by 57 counties of direct recording electronic voting machines that allegedly do not create a permanent record of each vote. The action specifically asks the court to direct the secretary to decertify seven systems and to "declare that the use of various auditable and non-auditable voting systems in Pennsylvania violates the uniformity provisions of the Pennsylvania Constitution." The lawsuit claims the certification of the systems violates the Pennsylvania Election Code, as well as the Pennsylvania Constitution.

http://www.govtech.com/tt/articles/104978

Rendell: Race Factor Could Hurt Obama
15 hours ago

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Gov. Ed Rendell, one of Hillary Rodham Clinton's most visible supporters, said some white Pennsylvanians are likely to vote against her rival Barack Obama because he is black.

"You've got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate," Rendell told the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in remarks that appeared in Tuesday's paper.

To buttress his point, Rendell cited his 2006 re-election campaign, in which he defeated Republican challenger Lynn Swann, the former Pittsburgh Steelers star, by a margin of more than 60 percent to less than 40 percent.

"I believe, looking at the returns in my election, that had Lynn Swann been the identical candidate that he was — well-spoken, charismatic, good-looking — but white instead of black, instead of winning by 22 points, I would have won by 17 or so," he said. "And that (attitude) exists. But on the other hand, that is counterbalanced by Obama's ability to bring new voters into the electoral pool."

Rendell, chairman of the Democratic National Committee in 2000 and previously Philadelphia's mayor, endorsed Clinton on Jan. 23.

Pennsylvania holds its primary April 22.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gIjYa42R0UUEGs0_AyNg506-z8FgD8UP1VUG0

More

Pa. Sued Over Electronic Voting Machines
By PATRICK WALTERS
The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 15, 2006; 10:04 PM

PHILADELPHIA -- Voter advocates filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to stop Pennsylvania counties from using "paperless" electronic voting machines, saying that such systems leave no paper record that could be used in the event of a recount, audit or other problem.

The suit asks the state's Commonwealth Court to decertify machines used in 58 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties. The other counties use optical scanning systems, in which voters fill in bubbles on paper forms that are counted in scanning machines; the plaintiffs say such systems should be in use statewide.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/15/AR2006081501202.html

Candidates get more time to file petitions
By Kori Walter, For the Herald-Standard
02/13/2008

Candidates who want to get on the ballot for Pennsylvania's April 22 primary election will have until Thursday at noon to file their nominating petitions.

Gov. Ed Rendell announced late Tuesday afternoon that he was extending the deadline because of the winter storm that hit the capital and other sections of the state. The original deadline was 5 p.m. Tuesday.

Throughout the day, winter weather has caused accidents and forced the closure of interstates at various times," Rendell said in a prepared statement explaining his executive order. "I moved the date until Thursday because the weather forecast tomorrow (Wednesday) could also cause problems.

The governor stressed that the order does not extend the deadline for collecting signatures on the petitions.

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19289188&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

Obama Count Climbing in Delegates

Update 2/14/08

Obama Extends Delegate Lead
Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:00 PM

Sen. Barack Obama extended his lead in the delegate race Wednesday, thanks to a few new endorsements and more complete results from Tuesday's primaries.

With about 2,500 delegates awarded, Obama's lead over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton stood at 55 _ 1,275 to 1,220.

Obama took the lead for the first time Tuesday, benefiting from victories in eight straight contests. He holds a 134-delegate lead among pledged delegates, those won in primaries and caucuses.

http://www.newsmax.com/politics/campaign_delegates/2008/02/13/72511.html

Unsure whether the super-delegates included in the figures will later be altered depending on the "popular" vote outcome down the road.

Another factor of course are the Florida and Michigan delegates.

How will they be counted if they are. Will there be a new way to designate them. It will be up to the eventual nominee how to do that, says Todd.

MSNBC 2/13/08 Report Democrat Delegates includes Super-delegates

1306 Clinton

1270 Obama

CNN Counts Democrat Delegates
Includes Super-delegates

1170 Obama

1168 Clinton

http://www.cnn.com/

Great Seal Mysteries Not So Mysterious?

Great Seal Of U.S. Mysteries Revealed
Government Debunks Myths Surrounding One Of America's Oldest Symbols
Conspiracy theorists take note: The myths surrounding one of America's oldest and most enduring national symbols are about to be debunked ... if you believe the government, that is.

The keepers of the Great Seal of the United States, the familiar emblem on the back of the $1 bill, want you to know what it is not. It is not a sign that Freemasons run the country, it has nothing to do with the occult, and it does not contain clues to a fabulous hidden treasure.

It is rather the nation's stamp of authority, sovereignty and power, gracing our cash and embossing the most important of documents from its home at the State Department, which has held it since the days of Thomas Jefferson, the first secretary of state.

Not that the Seal's symbols - the all-seeing eye, the unfinished pyramid, the Latin phrases, the bald eagle clutching an olive branch and arrows and the number 13 - aren't powerful.

They are, historians say. Yet their meanings have been misidentified, misunderstood and misrepresented almost since the Continental Congress first commissioned the Seal in 1776.

It would be another six years before the original design was approved and another 128 before it evolved into its current form. Along the way, a movement to decipher the Seal's meaning with ancient Egyptian, mystical and otherwise otherworldly explanations has gained currency.

The Internet age has seen an explosion in such conspiracy theories, many which have now been ingrained in public consciousness through the popular "National Treasure" movie franchise that serves up a combination of Masonic lore and historical myths in blockbuster Hollywood fashion.

Among them:


That the Seal proves the domination of the United States by a powerful, quasi-religious cult. The Ancient Scottish Rite of Freemasonry is a perennial favorite of conspiracy theorists as some Founding Fathers were Masons and the Seal uses several Masonic symbols.


That the Seal draws on Satanism or polytheistic ritual to promote a universal new world order under which Earth would be ruled by a single omnipotent government.


That repeated references to 13 - the number of steps in the unfinished pyramid, stars in the constellation over the eagle's head, arrows in the eagle's claw, stripes on the eagle's shield, letters in the phrase "Annuit Coeptis" - demonstrate the power of 13 American families.


That there are two seals: one in which the eagle's head faces the arrows for times of war and another in which the eagle's head faces the olive branch for times of peace.

All rubbish, according to historians, who say the Seal's symbolism is far less ominous or revelatory than many believe.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the Seal's 66th and current custodian, on Tuesday inaugurated a new exhibition to commemorate its 225th birthday and trace the history and evolution of the symbolism...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/12/national/main3823001.shtml

primer on Washington state primary and caucuses

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004148965_caucusprimary28m.html

Conditional Approval for Private Organization Probe White House emails

Note the Judge didn't yet authorize the organization to begin a probe, but considered the potential, contingent on whether the judge decides that the office's functions are limited to serving the president. Should the judge make that determination, the private organization would not be investigating the situation.

Shouldn't an independent public entity be doing the investigating? If emails are missing, or were destroyed, contrary to federal laws and acts, then shouldn't a public and independent and autonomous investigator be appointed, not a private organization who may have motivation to suppress anything which might exonerate the White House?

(Net the Truth Online)

See our previous post.

Saturday, January 19, 2008
Emails Really Missing?

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/2008/01/emails-really-missing.html

Judge OKs White House e-mail probe

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge agreed Monday to allow a private group to delve into the operations of an office at the White House as part of a controversy over whether large amounts of e-mail have disappeared.

Permitting any private organization to inquire into White House functions is an unusual step, a point U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly underscored in her six-page order.

The judge said she will allow Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to gather a "very limited" amount of information from the White House Office of Administration, which is in charge of preserving e-mail.

The issue for Kollar-Kotelly is whether the Office of Administration operates with substantial independent authority. If the judge finds that it does, the private group can pursue data about what went wrong with the White House e-mail system.

If the judge decides that the office's functions are limited to serving the president, she likely will dismiss the suit.

Kollar-Kotelly rejected a proposal by the Office of Administration to provide a written description of its functions, saying CREW should be allowed to conduct evidence-gathering over the next 45 days.

The White House is required to retain electronic messages under the President Records Act and the Federal Records Act.

The citizens group says more than 10 million e-mails were not properly retained and recently called for a criminal investigation. The White House says there is no evidence that e-mail is missing.

CREW sued the Office of Administration last year under the Freedom of Information Act, seeking records about White House e-mail problems. The White House says the Office of Administration is not subject to the public records law and that CREW's lawsuit should be dismissed...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-11-whitehouse-email_N.htm

John McCain Reform Institute non-conservative causes

don't know what to make of this information coming out at this time. Why not publish this months ago before the McCain campaign took hold? why not air all of this out between 2005 and now. Also have to be wary of WND as among columnists featured as commentators are Ann Coulter who apparently dispises McCain enough to have stated she'd vote for Hillary Clinton should McCain be the Republican nominee, and then there's Huckabee supporter Chuck Norris.

Finally, are there skeletons in Mike Huckabee's closet that are being ignored, suppressed, or going unnoticed?

we've posted how McCain is the Establishment candidate as is Hillary Clinton. The media apparently favors these two over other candidates. That's unfair. The process is supposed to be the Democrat and Republican voter's choices, not the media, not Establishment Insiders.

Meanwhile Norris current column Did Conan, Colbert or Stewart create Huckabee?brings to attention what went unnoticed by those who don't watch those three.

What also went unnoticed until now is Huckabee didn't answer correctly: Who "made" Mike Huckabee?

"Let's be clear: None of these guys made me. This great nation made me," declared Huckabee. "So vote for me. God bless America and forget these three idiots."

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Feb05/0,4670,TVConanStewartColbert,00.html

(Net the Truth Online)

John McCain funded by Soros since 2001
Candidate's Reform Institute also accepted funds from Teresa Kerry
Posted: February 12, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

As Sen. John McCain assumes the GOP front-runner mantle, his long-standing, but little-noticed association with left-wing donors such as George Soros and Teresa Heinz Kerry is receiving new attention among his Republican critics.

In 2001, McCain founded the Alexandria, Va.-based Reform Institute as a vehicle to receive funding from George Soros' Open Society Institute and Teresa Heinz Kerry's Tides Foundation and several other prominent non-profit organizations.

McCain used the institute to promote his political agenda and provide compensation to key campaign operatives between elections.

In 2006, the Arizona senator was forced to sever his formal ties with the Reform Institute after a controversial $200,000 contribution from Cablevision came to light. McCain solicited the donation for the Reform Institute using his membership on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. In a letter to the Federal Communications Commission, he supported Cablevision's push to introduce the more profitable al la carte pricing, rather than packages of TV programming...

...The Reform Institute regularly has supported McCain in various legislative efforts, including on campaign finance reform, global warming and "comprehensive immigration reform," all efforts widely opposed by many in the party's conservative base.

Arianna Huffington, syndicated columnist and creator of the HuffingtonPost.com, has served on the Reform Institute's advisory committee since the group's inception.

According to FrontPage Magazine, Teresa Heinz Kerry has provided more than $4 million to the Tides Foundation, a non-profit organization founded by anti-war activist Drummond Pike in 1976 with a history of funding causes such as abortion, homosexual-rights activism and open borders.

Financial contributors while McCain was chairman of the Reform Institute also have included the Educational Foundation of America, a group that supports abortion and opposes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve.

The Soros-Kerry funding connection with McCain was first exposed by Ed Morrissey at the Captains Quarters blog in 2005.

Subsequently, David Horowitz's DiscoverTheNetworks.org website and Michelle Malkin's blog gave renewed attention to the Reform Institute's funding ties.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56177

PA Taxpayers Paying for Primary Election Presidential Candidates That's Looney

One could say the process of nomination of a candidate for President of the United States by the two majority political parties is flawed, but "looney?"

Terry Madonna makes the charge in a quote in the Tribune Review's State delegate elections couldn't be 'loonier system'

What's wrong with the process is the taxpayers of Pennsylvania have to pay for selection process established by the two major political parties while the independent parties in the state must suffer their own costs in holding a nomination convention to select one choice to run in the General election in November.

That's what should be unacceptable.

Both major political parties include so-called Super delegates or committed delegates - who can weigh in the final outcome. And the taxpayers have to pay for the popular election which could in the end be nixed in a "contested" convention later on down the road. That's unconscionable.

But the PA taxpayers continue along their merry way, in fact, many registered voters in one major Party or the other simply sit out the Primary because they don't like the choices, or the selections have pretty much already been made in other states so there's really only one or two choices by the time PA's Primary rolls out.

That's not looney, that's just sickening. The localities have to haul out the voting machines for sometimes less than a 25 percent turnout. A turnout larger than that can happen in a Presidential Primary, but not likely if the candidates on either side have already been whittled down to a remaining one candidate.

It's time the Democrats and Republicans pay their own way all along the process to nominate a candidate for President of the US.

The Electoral College system should remain intact, however.

(Net the Truth Online)

State delegate elections couldn't be 'loonier system'
By Debra Erdley
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Monday, February 11, 2008


It's deadline time in Pennsylvania.
Presidential candidates and their would-be delegates must file by Tuesday in order to appear on Pennsylvania's April 22 primary ballot.

Delegates -- the party torchbearers who nominate candidates at national conventions this summer -- could be critical, especially for Democrats if Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama remain in a tight race.

But arcane rules that dominate delegate selection make it an insiders' game for both political parties.

Even political scientist Terry Madonna, who has written about Pennsylvania politics for three decades, said he consults rule books to sort out questions about delegate elections.
"You probably couldn't devise a loonier system," Madonna said.

Although each party reserves a portion of its delegate slots for elected officials and individuals chosen by party leaders, both elect most of their Pennsylvania delegates by congressional district. Democrats will elect 103 of their 188 delegates in the primary; Republicans, 61 of their 74 delegates.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/state/s_551791.html

Related

clip

State's primary may be important to candidates

Unlike some states, Pennsylvania did not move its primary to Tuesday and, for the first time in more than 30 years, the delegate choices Democratic voters make April 22 indeed might matter. Pennsylvania will have 188 Democratic delegates and 74 GOP delegates on the ballot.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/election/s_551173.html

State's primary may be important to candidates

Yet for Republicans, the primary here has minimal importance. GOP delegates remain uncommitted and appear on the ballot with no allegiance to candidates.

"We only really start to matter if the nomination goes to the convention," said Republican State Committee Chairman Rob Gleason, a McCain supporter.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/election/s_551173.html

PA Senate Action Expected on Final Version Open Records

According to the Tribune Review Senate OK expected on open recordsBy Brad Bumsted Tuesday, February 12, 2008


Watch everybody suddenly appear back in their home districts and tout how they were for opening everything all along. Well, everything isn't open, keep that in mind.

While the original House Bill applied the open records requirements to the three branches of government, that version did not apply to past records.

The Senate version initially didn't apply to all three branches, but was altered by Senator Pileggi before introduction. The Senate action applied the legislation retroactively to envelope past records. That legislation passed in the Senate unanimously.

Both versions had kept the original exemption for a certain category of emails called private communications.

However, that may have been altered it appears:

Senate OK expected on open records
By Brad Bumsted
STATE CAPITOL REPORTER
Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Nineteen categories of legislative records would be public -- from audits and staff manuals to public opinion polls.

The legislation also would create an online searchable database of state contracts.

There is "no blanket exception for e-mail" under the proposal, said Deputy Speaker Josh Shapiro, D-Montgomery County.

E-mail "is treated just like paper," Arneson said.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/state/s_551944.html

The action by House Republicans to "delay" the consideration of Senate Bill 1 was bashed by Democrats, but in the end, apparently, most of what the House Republicans slated to review further was necessary.

Vote on open records law delayed Wednesday, February 06, 2008

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=5940989

Pa. House passes open records legislation
Lawmakers say bill strikes balance of rights and privacy
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
By Tracie Mauriello, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau

...Yesterday's amendment also carves out an exemption in a provision restricting requesters of government information to use it for commercial purposes. Real estate agents had been concerned they would not be able to use information from titles and other records in property listings.

"There was a huge issue with Realtors, and that was a concern I had myself," state Rep. Paul Costa, D-Wilkins, said after the passage. "I'm glad we finally did work it out."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08043/856790-85.stm

Senator Pileggi's Open Records Bill Approved by Senate; Returns to House for Concurrence

http://www.pasenategop.com/news/archived/2008/0108/pileggi-013008.htm

How the Senate Action unfolded: Pennsylvania Senate Republican News

http://www.pasenategop.com/reform/reform.htm

Pennsylvania Newspaper Association supports Senate Bill 1

S.B. 1 significantly reforms weak open records law
By Tim Williams
February 5, 2008

http://www.mcall.com/news/opinion/anotherview/all-williams2-5.6256010feb05,0,5133715.story

Pa. House passes open records legislation
Lawmakers say bill strikes balance of rights and privacy
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
By Tracie Mauriello, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau
HARRISBURG -- The House last night unanimously passed a new state open records law, ending 13 months of wrangling that erupted last week in a spirited debate between Democrats and Republicans.

Yesterday, though, caucus leaders came together to reach an agreement to appease real estate agents, advocates for victims of domestic violence and other groups that had raised concerns about the provisions of the open records bill, which had already been passed unanimously in the Senate.

House Republicans said the new version of the legislation does a better job balancing the public's right to know with an individual's right to and expectation of privacy.

Senate leaders have indicated that they will support the changes when the bill is sent back to their chamber for concurrence today.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08043/856790-85.stm

House OKs open records bill
By Kori Walter, For the Herald-Standard
02/12/2008
HARRISBURG - The state House of Representatives trimmed a paragraph, added a few commas and agreed on a revised open records bill Monday night that lawmakers hope will be on Gov. Ed Rendell's desk by the end of the week.

House members voted 199-0 to pass open records legislation just five days after GOP members halted debate amid concerns that expanding access to government records would aid identity thieves, put domestic violence victims and senior citizens at risk and cripple the state's real-estate industry.

Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, a Delaware County Republican, has planned a full Senate vote on the bill today. If the bill passes the Senate, it then goes to the governor to be signed into law.

While the House inserted provisions to satisfy each of the concerns raised by Republican lawmakers last week, the foundation of the open records legislation was unchanged.

Documents at all levels of government would be presumed open, and government officials would have the burden of proving that documents should be kept private.

The current law, which has been on the books since 1957, puts that burden on the person seeking government information.

The Legislature also would for the first time fall under the open records law.

Some e-mail messages and other correspondence between lobbyists and lawmakers would be publicly available and all spending of taxpayers' spending would be open....

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19285245&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6

Report Recommendations on Voting Systems Accepted & Rejected

A risk of mishaps with Pa. voting?
Report: 'high risk' of malfunctions for Pa. voting machines
Jessica Bell
Pennsylvania is one of 17 states ranked as being at "high-risk" for voting-machine mishaps by the nonprofit organizations Common Cause and the Verified Voting Foundation.

However, state officials and students varied greatly over whether this recent report is cause for concern.

The report classified states' voting machine reliability based on two conditions: whether voting machines produce paper records and whether these records are randomly audited during the post-election period.

Pennsylvania voting machines are considered "high-risk" because they do not produce a separate paper record of the voter's ballot and, according to the report, recovery from voting machine malfunction or tampering would be nearly impossible.

However, some Pennsylvania elections officials said voting-machine malfunctions are unlikely.

"The voting system in the state has gone through rigorous testing," said Julio Pena, chief of the Pennsylvania Division of Help America Vote Act.

The Help America Vote Act was passed by the U.S. Congress in 2002 to require states to update their voting equipment in order to prevent mishaps similar to those that occurred in Florida during the 2000 presidential election.

Pena said he is "very confident" in Pennsylvania's current system, adding that the state does not use paper trails to protect voter privacy.

However, Michael Barley, spokesman for the Republican Party of Pennsylvania, said he was concerned about voter fraud and machine failure in the upcoming presidential primary, which will be held April 22. He said he agreed with the report's recommendations.

"I don't understand why it would be a bad thing to have a paper record," he said. There would be "more evidence about where the problem occurred and what happened."

Pennsylvania Democratic Party spokesman Abe Amoros, on the other hand, echoed Pena, saying that voters should not be concerned about the report.

"We are quite confident that the current systems in place are adequate and have performed well since they were instituted," Amoros wrote in an e-mail. ..

http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2008/02/11/News/A.Risk.Of.Mishaps.With.Pa.Voting-3200602.shtml