I could not believe my ears this morning while watching Brian Lamb handle the question of the day. For some reason, C-Span has chosen to weigh in on the Mark Foley scandal with the question: Are Dems or Republicans better at handling sex scandals. After only 15 minutes into the callers speaking out, one man calls and begins elaborating on the question by being very descriptive of the well, you know what.
Lamb listens and lets the person continue to the end, which anyone with any common sense, was aware was building to a point of no return.
Then, Lamb says, I'm sure our listeners were not too pleased with that last caller. from now on when you get too graphic, we're going to cut you off.
Mr. Lamb, you were taken advantage of and you had to know that while listening to the man speaking. Why did you let him go on? He was obviously prepared with his provocative speech in an effort to see how far he could go on C-span.
You let him offend.
Why aren't we asking why the damn FBI who wiretaps regular citizens didn't capture Foley in this scandal years and years ago!
Why even ask the question you are asking when the American public still does not have the full story of September 11, 2001 and how President Clinton mishandled Bin Laden and how President Bush mishandled Bin Laden who has not yet reportedly been captured.
Where is the FBI? That's what programming of the former caliber of C-Span should be asking.
Friday, October 06, 2006
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Where has E.D. Hill gone?
Depending on one's viewpoint, one of the original of the trio anchors of Fox 'n Friends has gone far, or not far.
Check out Fox News LIVE. (10 a.m.) That's where E.D. will be. Many who have watched Fox 'n Friends and E.D.'s cutting-edge interview style will be anxious to hear and view how she interviews without interruption from offhand 9rarely pertinent) remarks by Steve ok I'll refrain from the misspelling of his name using double doo's Doocy.
some believe the move by Fox was abrupt and consider this a demotion for Hill.
We are a laughin' at that. This change puts E.D. right alongside anchors who are actually "journalists," unlike Doocy and Kilmeade. We say E.D. should have her own several hour-long program called something like HILL-town! To of course replace the now reportedly gone, gone, gone DAYSIDE. (I thought of HILL-side, but why bring up potential memories of the horror of DAYSIDE.) Yes, HILL-town it should be.
Where I searched and found news about E.D. and what happened to her as I usually only watch Fox 'n Friends and stop there til the evening so I'd have missed completely E.D. is on LIVE, probably for weeks.
Hey E.D. wearing an eye-catching red outfit and carries this off so well. Now I'd have gone with black for the next week out of respect for the absolutely horrid Amish school-house murders.
I'd also be bringing on the founder of ablechild.com often to discuss the effects of anti-depressant drugs on patients, reportedly causing homicidal thoughts. (See previous post.)
Well now, I don't have time to be writing here all morning about E.D. Hill. If you agree with me though, that E.D. should have her own program called HILL-town, write or email Fox News - it couldn't be easier using their News Tips section.
http://www.foxnews.com/foxfriends/index.html
DOOCY and his gawdy-awful new book happymarriage or happycouples or whatever happy happy is plastered all over the Fox News site, even coming up in the search results for E.D. Hill.
I just put the title out of my mind because really I do not believe Doocy is truly happy in his marriage or as a person. Sorry, he is just too upbeat, happy, smiling - it's like he is hiding something behind his happy mask.
Maybe E.D. begged to be sent elsewhere on the network cause of the fake-happy doocy.
E.D.'s recent column
http://www.foxnews.com/column_archive/0,2976,161,00.html
http://www.newshounds.us/2006/09/24/e_d_hill_unceremoniously_booted_from_fox_friends.php
Thanks to a poster from newshounds.us for the link
Where is the outrage?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3vspqmjIVI
PS E.D. is right on oops almost said "target" don't want to do that after seeing the anti-J.D. Hayworth ad wherein J.D''s political opponent displays J.D. in the crosshairs of the scope of a gun - well she is outraged on the right side in her commentary.
George Soros should be E.D.'s first interview on her HILL-town program.
Ask him about voter fraud, E.D. We would!
Check out Fox News LIVE. (10 a.m.) That's where E.D. will be. Many who have watched Fox 'n Friends and E.D.'s cutting-edge interview style will be anxious to hear and view how she interviews without interruption from offhand 9rarely pertinent) remarks by Steve ok I'll refrain from the misspelling of his name using double doo's Doocy.
some believe the move by Fox was abrupt and consider this a demotion for Hill.
We are a laughin' at that. This change puts E.D. right alongside anchors who are actually "journalists," unlike Doocy and Kilmeade. We say E.D. should have her own several hour-long program called something like HILL-town! To of course replace the now reportedly gone, gone, gone DAYSIDE. (I thought of HILL-side, but why bring up potential memories of the horror of DAYSIDE.) Yes, HILL-town it should be.
Where I searched and found news about E.D. and what happened to her as I usually only watch Fox 'n Friends and stop there til the evening so I'd have missed completely E.D. is on LIVE, probably for weeks.
Hey E.D. wearing an eye-catching red outfit and carries this off so well. Now I'd have gone with black for the next week out of respect for the absolutely horrid Amish school-house murders.
I'd also be bringing on the founder of ablechild.com often to discuss the effects of anti-depressant drugs on patients, reportedly causing homicidal thoughts. (See previous post.)
Well now, I don't have time to be writing here all morning about E.D. Hill. If you agree with me though, that E.D. should have her own program called HILL-town, write or email Fox News - it couldn't be easier using their News Tips section.
http://www.foxnews.com/foxfriends/index.html
DOOCY and his gawdy-awful new book happymarriage or happycouples or whatever happy happy is plastered all over the Fox News site, even coming up in the search results for E.D. Hill.
I just put the title out of my mind because really I do not believe Doocy is truly happy in his marriage or as a person. Sorry, he is just too upbeat, happy, smiling - it's like he is hiding something behind his happy mask.
Maybe E.D. begged to be sent elsewhere on the network cause of the fake-happy doocy.
E.D.'s recent column
http://www.foxnews.com/column_archive/0,2976,161,00.html
http://www.newshounds.us/2006/09/24/e_d_hill_unceremoniously_booted_from_fox_friends.php
Thanks to a poster from newshounds.us for the link
Where is the outrage?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3vspqmjIVI
PS E.D. is right on oops almost said "target" don't want to do that after seeing the anti-J.D. Hayworth ad wherein J.D''s political opponent displays J.D. in the crosshairs of the scope of a gun - well she is outraged on the right side in her commentary.
George Soros should be E.D.'s first interview on her HILL-town program.
Ask him about voter fraud, E.D. We would!
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Anti-depressant drugs cause homicidal thoughts
Interview with founder of ablechild.com on Fox's The Big Story with Gibson. http://www.foxnews.com/bigstory/index.html
Information came out that anti-depressant drugs cause homicidal thoughts. The Lancaster County Amish school-children killer was using Prozac, according to the guest.
Studies Raise Questions About Antidepressant-Suicide Link
Monday, February 21, 2005
By Salynn Boyles
Studies continue to raise questions about the risk of suicide in patients treated with antidepressant drugs. The studies also show that different antidepressants have the same suicide risk (search).
In 2004, the FDA concluded that antidepressant medications (search) increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in children and adolescents with depression (search). Studies continue to show that this link exists even in adults treated for depression.
A new review bolsters claims of an increased risk of suicidal behavior in people taking the most popular antidepressants, but a second trial found no increase in such risk among depressed patients taking selective-serotonin reuptake inhibitors (search) (SSRIs).
A third study showed the risk of suicidal behavior to be no greater in patients taking SSRIs than in those taking an older class of antidepressants.
The three studies are published in the Feb. 19 issue of the BMJ.
(Story continues below)
They offer somewhat contradictory findings that seem to raise as many questions as they answer.
“I think there remains uncertainty about this question and there will continue to be uncertainty,” psychiatry research fellow Andrea Cipriani, tells WebMD.
Researchers Agree on Key Points
While the emerging evidence fails to give definitive answers about the risks of suicide in depressed people taking Prozac (search), Paxil (search), Zoloft (search), or the other SSRIs, the researchers contacted by WebMD agreed on several key points, including:
Untreated moderate-to-severe depression in adults appears to pose a bigger suicide risk than SSRI use. The benefits are less clear in children and adolescents, however. In an editorial accompanying the three studies, Cipriani wrote that the lack of long-term safety data “should discourage the routine prescribing of antidepressant drugs in children and adolescents.”
If there is an increased risk of suicidal behavior in people taking SSRIs, it seems to be greatest early in treatment. All agreed that patients should be closely monitored during this time.
Risk does not appear to be limited to this particular class of drugs.
In one of the newly published studies, researchers assessed the risk of self-harm and suicide among 146,000 patients taking either SSRIs or tricyclic antidepressants.
They found that the SSRIs and tricyclics, such as Elavil, Norpramin, or Pamelor, had similar risk profiles with regard to suicide and self-harm in adults. Children and adolescents who took SSRIs appeared to be at slightly greater risk for self-harm, but none of the children in the study actually committed suicide.
“Our finding that SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (search) have a similar risk profile with respect to self-harm and nonfatal self-harm is reassuring,” researcher Carlos Martinez, PhD, and colleagues from the United Kingdom’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency wrote.
“It is possible, however, that any adverse or protective effects are common to all classes of antidepressants.”
Largest Study Shows Twofold Increase in Risk
In the largest of the reviews, researchers reported a twofold increase in the rate of suicide attempts in patients taking SSRIs compared with those taking a placebo.
Researcher Dean Fergusson, PhD, and colleagues from Canada’s Ottawa Health Research Institute analyzed 700 studies involving more than 87,000 patients.
The large analysis also showed no difference in suicidal behavior among patients taking SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants.
Fergusson tells WebMD that while the overall rate of suicide attempts was low -- roughly four attempts for every 1,000 people treated -- the widespread use of SSRIs makes the issue a significant public health concern.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,148044,00.html
4 dead in Amish school shooting in Pa.
By MARK SCOLFORO, Associated Press Writer Mon Oct 2, 7:59 PM ET
NICKEL MINES, Pa. - A milk-truck driver carrying three guns and a childhood grudge stormed a one-room Amish schoolhouse Monday, sent the boys and adults outside, barricaded the doors with two-by-fours, and then opened fire on a dozen girls, killing three people before committing suicide.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061002/ap_on_re_us/amish_school_shooting
Information came out that anti-depressant drugs cause homicidal thoughts. The Lancaster County Amish school-children killer was using Prozac, according to the guest.
Studies Raise Questions About Antidepressant-Suicide Link
Monday, February 21, 2005
By Salynn Boyles
Studies continue to raise questions about the risk of suicide in patients treated with antidepressant drugs. The studies also show that different antidepressants have the same suicide risk (search).
In 2004, the FDA concluded that antidepressant medications (search) increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in children and adolescents with depression (search). Studies continue to show that this link exists even in adults treated for depression.
A new review bolsters claims of an increased risk of suicidal behavior in people taking the most popular antidepressants, but a second trial found no increase in such risk among depressed patients taking selective-serotonin reuptake inhibitors (search) (SSRIs).
A third study showed the risk of suicidal behavior to be no greater in patients taking SSRIs than in those taking an older class of antidepressants.
The three studies are published in the Feb. 19 issue of the BMJ.
(Story continues below)
They offer somewhat contradictory findings that seem to raise as many questions as they answer.
“I think there remains uncertainty about this question and there will continue to be uncertainty,” psychiatry research fellow Andrea Cipriani, tells WebMD.
Researchers Agree on Key Points
While the emerging evidence fails to give definitive answers about the risks of suicide in depressed people taking Prozac (search), Paxil (search), Zoloft (search), or the other SSRIs, the researchers contacted by WebMD agreed on several key points, including:
Untreated moderate-to-severe depression in adults appears to pose a bigger suicide risk than SSRI use. The benefits are less clear in children and adolescents, however. In an editorial accompanying the three studies, Cipriani wrote that the lack of long-term safety data “should discourage the routine prescribing of antidepressant drugs in children and adolescents.”
If there is an increased risk of suicidal behavior in people taking SSRIs, it seems to be greatest early in treatment. All agreed that patients should be closely monitored during this time.
Risk does not appear to be limited to this particular class of drugs.
In one of the newly published studies, researchers assessed the risk of self-harm and suicide among 146,000 patients taking either SSRIs or tricyclic antidepressants.
They found that the SSRIs and tricyclics, such as Elavil, Norpramin, or Pamelor, had similar risk profiles with regard to suicide and self-harm in adults. Children and adolescents who took SSRIs appeared to be at slightly greater risk for self-harm, but none of the children in the study actually committed suicide.
“Our finding that SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (search) have a similar risk profile with respect to self-harm and nonfatal self-harm is reassuring,” researcher Carlos Martinez, PhD, and colleagues from the United Kingdom’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency wrote.
“It is possible, however, that any adverse or protective effects are common to all classes of antidepressants.”
Largest Study Shows Twofold Increase in Risk
In the largest of the reviews, researchers reported a twofold increase in the rate of suicide attempts in patients taking SSRIs compared with those taking a placebo.
Researcher Dean Fergusson, PhD, and colleagues from Canada’s Ottawa Health Research Institute analyzed 700 studies involving more than 87,000 patients.
The large analysis also showed no difference in suicidal behavior among patients taking SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants.
Fergusson tells WebMD that while the overall rate of suicide attempts was low -- roughly four attempts for every 1,000 people treated -- the widespread use of SSRIs makes the issue a significant public health concern.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,148044,00.html
4 dead in Amish school shooting in Pa.
By MARK SCOLFORO, Associated Press Writer Mon Oct 2, 7:59 PM ET
NICKEL MINES, Pa. - A milk-truck driver carrying three guns and a childhood grudge stormed a one-room Amish schoolhouse Monday, sent the boys and adults outside, barricaded the doors with two-by-fours, and then opened fire on a dozen girls, killing three people before committing suicide.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061002/ap_on_re_us/amish_school_shooting
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Is global warming a media driven myth?
Hysteria... says James Inhofe on Fox News Saturday this morning.
CNN made 8 accusations against Inofe, all in error, he says. Talk about hurricanes, polar bear population being affected, simply not true...
Inofe makes some comment about Kyoto, too bad Fox doesn't provide the full transcript.
US did sign on to Kyoto Treaty? I didn't think we did, or if former President Clinton did, President George Bush rejected and reversed that.
Site don't believe...
Inhofe: Global-warming scientists, media "doomsayers" and tools of "hysterical Left"
Posted by Bob Geiger at 12:36 PM on September 27, 2006...
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/42224/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=97
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=74
Kyoto Treaty. Did US sign it? OK apparently, somebody "signed" the Treaty, maybe the United Nations US delegate? but Clinton didn't send it to the Senate to ratify it? Neither has President Bush...
http://ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/Climate/clim-3.cfm
Not quite the whole story?
The United States signed onto the Treaty under the Clinton administration, but the Bush Administration has refused to submit it to the Senate for ratification.
http://www.globalsolutions.org/programs/glob_engage/Treaties/kyoto.html
kyoto treaty united states
It's a Protocol, not a Treaty? It's an amendment to an already signed Treaty?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol
Kyoto Accords Take Effect
February 16, 2005 · An agreement to fight global warming goes into effect Wednesday in much of the world. The Kyoto treaty was ratified by 140 nations, with some notable exceptions -- the United States and Australia did not sign the treaty. Signatories are legally committed to meeting emissions targets by 2012...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4501636
For more information on this issue use the search feature on this site located at the top left corner
http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/search?q=global+warming
CNN made 8 accusations against Inofe, all in error, he says. Talk about hurricanes, polar bear population being affected, simply not true...
Inofe makes some comment about Kyoto, too bad Fox doesn't provide the full transcript.
US did sign on to Kyoto Treaty? I didn't think we did, or if former President Clinton did, President George Bush rejected and reversed that.
Site don't believe...
Inhofe: Global-warming scientists, media "doomsayers" and tools of "hysterical Left"
Posted by Bob Geiger at 12:36 PM on September 27, 2006...
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/42224/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=97
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=74
Kyoto Treaty. Did US sign it? OK apparently, somebody "signed" the Treaty, maybe the United Nations US delegate? but Clinton didn't send it to the Senate to ratify it? Neither has President Bush...
Ratification. For the United States to ratify the Protocol, the treaty must be
submitted to the U.S. Senate for advice and consent, with a two-thirds majority
vote in the Senate required for approval. If the United States does not ratify
the treaty, it is not subject to its terms and obligations. President Clinton
has voiced strong support for the Kyoto Protocol, though criticizing it for not
including commitments for developing countries. The United States signed it on
November 12, 1998. The U.S. signature was criticized by several Members of
Congress who oppose the treaty on a number of grounds, including questions about
the scientific justification for it and about the likely economic impacts that
might occur if the United States were to attempt to meet its emission reduction
commitments in the treaty. In recognition of the opposition expressed in the
Senate by S.Res. 98,
which passed 95-0, to a Protocol that does not include requirements for
emissions limitations by developing countries, the President has indicated that
he will not submit the treaty to the Senate for advice and consent until
meaningful developing country participation has been achieved...
http://ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/Climate/clim-3.cfm
Not quite the whole story?
The United States signed onto the Treaty under the Clinton administration, but the Bush Administration has refused to submit it to the Senate for ratification.
http://www.globalsolutions.org/programs/glob_engage/Treaties/kyoto.html
kyoto treaty united states
It's a Protocol, not a Treaty? It's an amendment to an already signed Treaty?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol
Kyoto Accords Take Effect
February 16, 2005 · An agreement to fight global warming goes into effect Wednesday in much of the world. The Kyoto treaty was ratified by 140 nations, with some notable exceptions -- the United States and Australia did not sign the treaty. Signatories are legally committed to meeting emissions targets by 2012...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4501636
For more information on this issue use the search feature on this site located at the top left corner
http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/search?q=global+warming
Election hijinks
Worse, because Foley's name cannot be reomoved from absentee paper ballots in time for the election, whomever is named as Foley's replacement for the unexpired term will receive any votes Foley receives in the Florida election!
OK everybody take a deep breath... not too deep as the stink is spreading nationwide.
http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voterreg/voting_info.shtml
OK everybody take a deep breath... not too deep as the stink is spreading nationwide.
http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voterreg/voting_info.shtml
Foley Scumbag
Not much more could be said about Tom Foley - what a scumbag. His entire congressional record should be reviewed to determine how long this scumbag has been "protected" and operating in secrecy. His name should go down in the history books as is. His only saving grace would be if he was on some kind of pharmaceutical drug that caused these kind of side effects.
Sept. 30, 2006 Foley Resigns Fox News
ABC Report
Sep 29, 2006 — WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Six-term Republican Rep. Mark Foley of Florida will resign from the U.S. Congress following allegations he sent inappropriate e-mails to a 16-year-old male congressional intern, Republican sources said on Friday.
Foley, who represents a district in southern Florida, has served as chairman of a House caucus on missing and exploited children and was a member of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees tax and trade policy.
Sept. 30, 2006 Foley Resigns Fox News
ABC Report
Sep 29, 2006 — WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Six-term Republican Rep. Mark Foley of Florida will resign from the U.S. Congress following allegations he sent inappropriate e-mails to a 16-year-old male congressional intern, Republican sources said on Friday.
Foley, who represents a district in southern Florida, has served as chairman of a House caucus on missing and exploited children and was a member of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees tax and trade policy.
Friday, September 29, 2006
County commissioners nay rezoning, yet maintain unequal tax exemptions
Two of three Fayette County, PA commissioners voted against a contentious rezoning request by land developers, yet maintain the tax exemptions known as Keystone Opportunity Zones on the property. The KOZ designations were applied to thousands of acres in the county back in 1999, and subsequently in expansion zones, known as KOEZ. A previous board of commissioners which included current sitting-commissioner Vincent Vicites, authorized the KOZ for so-called blighted properties in late 1998. When a rezoning request was made for the Springhill Township acreage, opposition arose because the land was already designated KOZ and would include plans for housing development. Many contended forgiving local property taxes (and other taxes) for residential property particularly would be unfair to other local taxpayers. At that time, two commissioners voted for the rezoning with Commissioner Vicites voting nay.
Faced with a new group of developers with an interest in expanding the original proposal for housing development, two current commissioners made the decision to deny the rezoning request.
When will the two commissioners revisit the KOZ designation for the property and remove the KOZ from the residential portions if they believe as others do it is unfair treatment?
Why don't commissioners look into original plans to develop this property?
2001 Annual Report Executive Summary
...Finally, Springhill Township contracted for a land use study of the KOZ-designated property located in their township. All of this economic development activity...
http://www.ezec.gov/01_Exec_Summaries/fayettepa.html
Related material
Zero Taxes (for some)
http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/stories/2002/10/14/story4.html
Residential rezoning application rejected
By Chris ForemanTRIBUNE-REVIEWFriday, September 29, 2006
Fayette County commissioners voted 2-1 Thursday to deny Crystal Springs Investors' application to rezone 229 acres within a Keystone Opportunity Zone to expand a residential development plan.
Commissioners Vince Vicites and Angela Zimmerlink opposed the application, which requested the rezoning of four Springhill Township parcels from agricultural-rural to medium-density residential. Commissioner Joe Hardy, the founder of the 84 Lumber building supply company, voted to approve the rezoning.
Crystal Springs, of Monroeville, has been negotiating with Fay-Penn Economic Development Council to purchase the properties. The existing zoning allows for single-family housing and duplexes, but Crystal Springs' representatives were hoping to include multifamily housing in their project.
A KOZ is a 10-year designation in which a property buyer receives forgiveness on state and local taxes for an economic development project.
In this case, those purchasing the homes also would receive an abatement on state and local income taxes until the KOZ expires on Dec. 31, 2013.
Vicites reiterated yesterday that he is against using a KOZ for residential development. Zimmerlink has said she believes it would create unfair competition between developers and residential homeowners. ...
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/fayette/s_472760.html
Fayette commissioners adopt zoning ordinance
By Amy Zalar, Herald-Standard
09/29/2006
Vicites and Zimmerlink voted to deny a rezoning application by Crystal Springs Investors to rezone 229 acres from agricultural to residential in Springhill Township. Hardy voted against the denial. In voting against the rezoning, Vicites said he has been consistently against residential development in a Keystone Opportunity Zone.Crystal Springs wanted the zoning change to allow for construction of multi-family homes at the site, where single-family homes are already allowed because the former board of commissioners changed the zoning from industrial to agricultural. Vicites voted against the prior zoning change as well, while former Commissioners Sean M. Cavanagh and Ron Nehls voted for it. Crystal Springs plans to construct 300 single-family homes that will cost upwards of $300,000 in a gated community. The property owners will not have to pay property or wage and income taxes until the expiration of the KOZ in 2013.
http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17260468&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6
Faced with a new group of developers with an interest in expanding the original proposal for housing development, two current commissioners made the decision to deny the rezoning request.
When will the two commissioners revisit the KOZ designation for the property and remove the KOZ from the residential portions if they believe as others do it is unfair treatment?
Why don't commissioners look into original plans to develop this property?
2001 Annual Report Executive Summary
...Finally, Springhill Township contracted for a land use study of the KOZ-designated property located in their township. All of this economic development activity...
http://www.ezec.gov/01_Exec_Summaries/fayettepa.html
Related material
Zero Taxes (for some)
http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/stories/2002/10/14/story4.html
Residential rezoning application rejected
By Chris ForemanTRIBUNE-REVIEWFriday, September 29, 2006
Fayette County commissioners voted 2-1 Thursday to deny Crystal Springs Investors' application to rezone 229 acres within a Keystone Opportunity Zone to expand a residential development plan.
Commissioners Vince Vicites and Angela Zimmerlink opposed the application, which requested the rezoning of four Springhill Township parcels from agricultural-rural to medium-density residential. Commissioner Joe Hardy, the founder of the 84 Lumber building supply company, voted to approve the rezoning.
Crystal Springs, of Monroeville, has been negotiating with Fay-Penn Economic Development Council to purchase the properties. The existing zoning allows for single-family housing and duplexes, but Crystal Springs' representatives were hoping to include multifamily housing in their project.
A KOZ is a 10-year designation in which a property buyer receives forgiveness on state and local taxes for an economic development project.
In this case, those purchasing the homes also would receive an abatement on state and local income taxes until the KOZ expires on Dec. 31, 2013.
Vicites reiterated yesterday that he is against using a KOZ for residential development. Zimmerlink has said she believes it would create unfair competition between developers and residential homeowners. ...
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/fayette/s_472760.html
Fayette commissioners adopt zoning ordinance
By Amy Zalar, Herald-Standard
09/29/2006
Vicites and Zimmerlink voted to deny a rezoning application by Crystal Springs Investors to rezone 229 acres from agricultural to residential in Springhill Township. Hardy voted against the denial. In voting against the rezoning, Vicites said he has been consistently against residential development in a Keystone Opportunity Zone.Crystal Springs wanted the zoning change to allow for construction of multi-family homes at the site, where single-family homes are already allowed because the former board of commissioners changed the zoning from industrial to agricultural. Vicites voted against the prior zoning change as well, while former Commissioners Sean M. Cavanagh and Ron Nehls voted for it. Crystal Springs plans to construct 300 single-family homes that will cost upwards of $300,000 in a gated community. The property owners will not have to pay property or wage and income taxes until the expiration of the KOZ in 2013.
http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17260468&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Glint in the "Party" Eye
MySpace Launches Voter-Registration Plan
By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer
NEW YORK (AP) -- The youth-heavy online hangout MySpace.com is launching a voter-registration drive to engage its members in civics. In partnership with the nonpartisan group Declare Yourself, MySpace is running ads on its highly trafficked Web site and giving members tools such as a "I Registered To Vote On MySpace" badge to place on their personal profile pages...
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MYSPACE_VOTER_REGISTRATION?SITE=PAGRE&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
By ANICK JESDANUN AP Internet Writer
NEW YORK (AP) -- The youth-heavy online hangout MySpace.com is launching a voter-registration drive to engage its members in civics. In partnership with the nonpartisan group Declare Yourself, MySpace is running ads on its highly trafficked Web site and giving members tools such as a "I Registered To Vote On MySpace" badge to place on their personal profile pages...
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MYSPACE_VOTER_REGISTRATION?SITE=PAGRE&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Monday, August 21, 2006
Electronic voting machines opposed in suit
Don't miss this article:
Electronic voting machines opposed in suit
By Alison Hawkes, For the Herald-Standard
08/16/2006
http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17057571&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6
HARRISBURG - A coalition of voting rights advocates filed a lawsuit in state court Tuesday asking that the new multimillion-dollar electronic voting machines purchased this spring by Pennsylvania counties be decertified before the November election and replaced with systems that ensure a paper record of ballots.
The 26 plaintiffs, a cross section of voters from the so-called voting integrity movement as well as members of the Philadelphia branches of the Black Clergy and NAACP, are suing Pennsylvania Department of State Secretary Pedro Cortes in Commonwealth Court.
They say he and his agency oversaw the certification of seven types of ATM-style electronic voting machines that do not adequately safeguard against hacking and are vulnerable to computer malfunctions.
Fayette County was listed as using such machines in the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs are calling for voting systems with a paper record of each vote cast for the purposes of an independent recount, a requirement they say is guaranteed in the state's election code in its mandate for a "permanent physical record of each vote cast."
"The machines certified in Pennsylvania are inherently unreliable," said Michael Churchill, a lawyer at the Public Interest Law Center in Philadelphia who is part of the law team handling the case. "They can be tampered with. They can malfunction and have a history of malfunctions which have disenfranchised voters all across the country.
"However, Department of State spokeswoman Leslie Amoros countered that electronic voting machines are safe to use and do have an ability to reconstruct an election through recording and later printing exact images of individual votes. Critics claim voters can't independently verify the accuracy of that backup as they cast their votes.
"The bottom line is these are systems that have been certified and thoroughly examined and that are certified in accordance with the law," Amoros said. "We have to certify them to ensure they provide accurate, secure and accessible elections."
If successful, the lawsuit could cost counties some of the millions of dollars they spent with federal aid to upgrade their voting systems. But Marian Schneider, a lawyer in the case, said counties may be able to recoup costs from vendors depending on the language of their contracts, or still use some of the components to their systems. Some counties also have not yet received their voting machines, she said.
"There's a bunch of options they could take," she said.
This is the latest lawsuit in what has been a rocky start for the Pennsylvania Department of State, which oversaw this year's federally mandated switch to newer machines amidst a persistent outcry from citizen groups.
In Westmoreland County earlier this year, a group of voters nearly threw the spring election into question with an ultimately unsuccessful lawsuit arguing that voters must first approve new voting systems. Other lawsuits attacking certification of electronic voting machines followed suit.
The voting machine change is an outgrowth of the federal Help America Vote Act and was a response to the problems of hanging cads and butterfly ballots in the 2000 Florida debacle.
New machines in Pennsylvania went through their first test in this spring's primary, largely considered unproblematic.
"It went well overall, particularly since it's the first time using systems that met the HAVA requirements," said Amoros. "Most of the incidents that we became aware of were really ... things that could be addressed with additional training."
But plaintiffs attributed some of those training issues to problems with the machines. In Allegheny and Centre counties this year, iVotronic machines failed to print "zero tapes" showing no votes recorded on the machines before the polls opened. And in Philadelphia, 1,242 Danaher machines failed to activate or were unable to record write-in votes, preventing some from voting.
Plaintiffs also point out the 10,000-vote undercount in the 2004 presidential elections in Beaver, Mercer, and Greene counties. That machine snafu led the state elections department to ultimately decertify the UniLect Patriot touch-screen machines.
"Whatever the initial promise may have been for electronic voting we know now based on the consensus of computer security experts and actual experiences they are simply not ready for prime time," said attorney Lowell Finley, co-director of Voter Action, a group that has been part of similar suits in Colorado, California, Arizona and New Mexico.
More than half the states now are requiring some form of voter verified paper ballots, according to the critics. Without such a requirement, the swing-state of Pennsylvania was recently listed by good government watchdog Common Cause as one of 17 states at "high risk" for compromised election results because of electronic voting machine problems.
As written, the lawsuit would impact the 57 Pennsylvania counties using direct-recording electronic voting machines, which do not have paper backup capabilities.
Lawyers said the remaining counties would be unaffected because they chose one of the state's five optical scan machines, which allow voters to fill bubbles on paper ballots and a machine scans in the answers, like a standardized test.
The paper ballot is left at the booth as a hard backup to the vote.
Doylestown Township voter and plaintiff Janis Hobbes-Pellechio said she doesn't understand why Bucks was one of the counties that chose to replace its decades-old lever machines with Danaher, a touchscreen.
"They've made the whole electoral system complex. It's counting," said Hobbs-Pellechio. "It's left so many more avenues for things to go wrong and it doesn't have to be that way."
But Bucks County Commissioner Jim Cawley said the county's new Danaher system seemed the best suited to what commissioners were looking for. They're starting to demonstrate the machines to the public today at the county Grange Fair.
"The Danaher system best met that criteria - most accurate, user-friendly and cost-efficient," he said.
In a related matter, Bucks County Sen. Joe Conti has filed a bill to give voters the option to submit a paper ballot if they don't trust the electronic machines. His previous bill to require a voter verified paper record has been tied up in the Senate State Government Committee without a hearing since December, a staffer said.
Alison Hawkes can be reached at 717-705-6330 or Hyperlink>ahawkes@calkins-media.com Hyperlink>.
Electronic voting machines opposed in suit
By Alison Hawkes, For the Herald-Standard
08/16/2006
http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17057571&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6
HARRISBURG - A coalition of voting rights advocates filed a lawsuit in state court Tuesday asking that the new multimillion-dollar electronic voting machines purchased this spring by Pennsylvania counties be decertified before the November election and replaced with systems that ensure a paper record of ballots.
The 26 plaintiffs, a cross section of voters from the so-called voting integrity movement as well as members of the Philadelphia branches of the Black Clergy and NAACP, are suing Pennsylvania Department of State Secretary Pedro Cortes in Commonwealth Court.
They say he and his agency oversaw the certification of seven types of ATM-style electronic voting machines that do not adequately safeguard against hacking and are vulnerable to computer malfunctions.
Fayette County was listed as using such machines in the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs are calling for voting systems with a paper record of each vote cast for the purposes of an independent recount, a requirement they say is guaranteed in the state's election code in its mandate for a "permanent physical record of each vote cast."
"The machines certified in Pennsylvania are inherently unreliable," said Michael Churchill, a lawyer at the Public Interest Law Center in Philadelphia who is part of the law team handling the case. "They can be tampered with. They can malfunction and have a history of malfunctions which have disenfranchised voters all across the country.
"However, Department of State spokeswoman Leslie Amoros countered that electronic voting machines are safe to use and do have an ability to reconstruct an election through recording and later printing exact images of individual votes. Critics claim voters can't independently verify the accuracy of that backup as they cast their votes.
"The bottom line is these are systems that have been certified and thoroughly examined and that are certified in accordance with the law," Amoros said. "We have to certify them to ensure they provide accurate, secure and accessible elections."
If successful, the lawsuit could cost counties some of the millions of dollars they spent with federal aid to upgrade their voting systems. But Marian Schneider, a lawyer in the case, said counties may be able to recoup costs from vendors depending on the language of their contracts, or still use some of the components to their systems. Some counties also have not yet received their voting machines, she said.
"There's a bunch of options they could take," she said.
This is the latest lawsuit in what has been a rocky start for the Pennsylvania Department of State, which oversaw this year's federally mandated switch to newer machines amidst a persistent outcry from citizen groups.
In Westmoreland County earlier this year, a group of voters nearly threw the spring election into question with an ultimately unsuccessful lawsuit arguing that voters must first approve new voting systems. Other lawsuits attacking certification of electronic voting machines followed suit.
The voting machine change is an outgrowth of the federal Help America Vote Act and was a response to the problems of hanging cads and butterfly ballots in the 2000 Florida debacle.
New machines in Pennsylvania went through their first test in this spring's primary, largely considered unproblematic.
"It went well overall, particularly since it's the first time using systems that met the HAVA requirements," said Amoros. "Most of the incidents that we became aware of were really ... things that could be addressed with additional training."
But plaintiffs attributed some of those training issues to problems with the machines. In Allegheny and Centre counties this year, iVotronic machines failed to print "zero tapes" showing no votes recorded on the machines before the polls opened. And in Philadelphia, 1,242 Danaher machines failed to activate or were unable to record write-in votes, preventing some from voting.
Plaintiffs also point out the 10,000-vote undercount in the 2004 presidential elections in Beaver, Mercer, and Greene counties. That machine snafu led the state elections department to ultimately decertify the UniLect Patriot touch-screen machines.
"Whatever the initial promise may have been for electronic voting we know now based on the consensus of computer security experts and actual experiences they are simply not ready for prime time," said attorney Lowell Finley, co-director of Voter Action, a group that has been part of similar suits in Colorado, California, Arizona and New Mexico.
More than half the states now are requiring some form of voter verified paper ballots, according to the critics. Without such a requirement, the swing-state of Pennsylvania was recently listed by good government watchdog Common Cause as one of 17 states at "high risk" for compromised election results because of electronic voting machine problems.
As written, the lawsuit would impact the 57 Pennsylvania counties using direct-recording electronic voting machines, which do not have paper backup capabilities.
Lawyers said the remaining counties would be unaffected because they chose one of the state's five optical scan machines, which allow voters to fill bubbles on paper ballots and a machine scans in the answers, like a standardized test.
The paper ballot is left at the booth as a hard backup to the vote.
Doylestown Township voter and plaintiff Janis Hobbes-Pellechio said she doesn't understand why Bucks was one of the counties that chose to replace its decades-old lever machines with Danaher, a touchscreen.
"They've made the whole electoral system complex. It's counting," said Hobbs-Pellechio. "It's left so many more avenues for things to go wrong and it doesn't have to be that way."
But Bucks County Commissioner Jim Cawley said the county's new Danaher system seemed the best suited to what commissioners were looking for. They're starting to demonstrate the machines to the public today at the county Grange Fair.
"The Danaher system best met that criteria - most accurate, user-friendly and cost-efficient," he said.
In a related matter, Bucks County Sen. Joe Conti has filed a bill to give voters the option to submit a paper ballot if they don't trust the electronic machines. His previous bill to require a voter verified paper record has been tied up in the Senate State Government Committee without a hearing since December, a staffer said.
Alison Hawkes can be reached at 717-705-6330 or Hyperlink>ahawkes@calkins-media.com Hyperlink>.
Monday, August 07, 2006
Vote Fix tackles danger of a PA Con-Con
More on the issue of a PA Constitutional Convention will be updated at Vote Fix where it will remain in the permanent archives (you never know with these blogs when someone will decide to close down the entire operation, or someone will cause your blog to be taken off for some reason or another.)
Don't miss the info provided here: http://dirtline.tripod.com/votefix/id96.html
Here's something for a start:
http://www.cusdi.org/statereferendums.htm
Notice there is no denying initiatives and referendums are "direct democracy" from the site with the draft amendment proposal.
Don't miss the info provided here: http://dirtline.tripod.com/votefix/id96.html
Here's something for a start:
http://www.cusdi.org/statereferendums.htm
Notice there is no denying initiatives and referendums are "direct democracy" from the site with the draft amendment proposal.
Real Federal Deficit and PCN shows PA government (PA Constitution) reform bias
C-Span interview with USA TODAY reporter Dennis Cauchon about his report: What's the Real Federal Deficit?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-02-deficit-usat_x.htm
C-Span continues to provide unparalled service to the people to make informed opinions with programming such as this interview with Cauchon.
It is too bad, in my opinion, the Pennsylvania Cable Network, has not totally approached its mission as C-Span has. I have come to believe PCN has a bit of an agenda by only having interviews with so-called (PA Constitution) reform movement spokesmen.
To date, I have not seen one segment of PCN wherein someone opposed to calling and convening a Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention (for whatever purpose/purposes has been a guest.
When PCN invited its first guest blogger (and a columnist, actually so is that really a blogger), I relayed info about my blog, Net the Truth Online, and my website, Vote Fix http://dirtline.tripod.com/votefix/ to PCN, noting I had compiled a wide range of information about the dangers of a PA Con-Con. At the very least, PCN could interview some well-known opponent to a PA Con-Con (seems like there may not be any willing to step forward because reform is the hot-hot topic.)
While this article is from a while back, http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/specialreports/capitalcash/s_419693.html
I found it odd and really let me say almost unconscionable, to quote only Jubelirer about potential reforms via a PA Con-Con.
What did they expect the PA Senator to say, we are not good people, the system we crafted is bad, bad, bad; we don't follow the PA Constitution but it, the PA Constitution is bad anyway?
OK sit down and hold onto your seat as I respond to this quote from the same article
Jubelirer also criticized a suggested constitutional convention, saying that proponent Tim Potts, founder of Democracy Rising PA, wants to "put the constitution up for grabs" after witnessing interest groups commandeering the ballot process in other states.
I agree with Jubelirer! Potts and others like Russ Diamond are putting the PA Constitution up for grabs after witnessing groups commandeering the ballot process in other states!
And it isn't ballot access that is the issue, it is "citizen initiatives and referendums."
Can't wait to determine how many political campaign contributions to Russ Diamond's run for Governor of PA came from just such organizations outside of PA.
Unfortunately, what is being missed is that it is the PA Constitution that is being held accountable for the actions - unconstitutional actions - of the people in the state legislature who are supposed to uphold the PA Constitution.
The PA Constitution is not at fault for the infractions of the elected public servants.
I'd also like to know where was the Tribune-Review when the state legislators passed the unconstitutional Keystone Opportunity Zones?
Guess where, right on the bandwagon of economic development boost via "tax-free" zones to attract "new" companies to "relocate" to Pennsylvania, that's where.
INFO OF USE
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/VC/visitor_info/creating/constitution.htm
Clarke Thomas: Constitutional Convention wisdom
Keep momentum growing to attack the core problems in Harrisburg
Wednesday, July 05, 2006Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Talk is in the air of mounting a Constitutional Convention to update the Pennsylvania Constitution. For one thing, the furor over the Legislature's secretive after-midnight vote last July to increase its pay has boiled over into talk of trimming its size...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06186/703344-108.stm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-02-deficit-usat_x.htm
C-Span continues to provide unparalled service to the people to make informed opinions with programming such as this interview with Cauchon.
It is too bad, in my opinion, the Pennsylvania Cable Network, has not totally approached its mission as C-Span has. I have come to believe PCN has a bit of an agenda by only having interviews with so-called (PA Constitution) reform movement spokesmen.
To date, I have not seen one segment of PCN wherein someone opposed to calling and convening a Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention (for whatever purpose/purposes has been a guest.
When PCN invited its first guest blogger (and a columnist, actually so is that really a blogger), I relayed info about my blog, Net the Truth Online, and my website, Vote Fix http://dirtline.tripod.com/votefix/ to PCN, noting I had compiled a wide range of information about the dangers of a PA Con-Con. At the very least, PCN could interview some well-known opponent to a PA Con-Con (seems like there may not be any willing to step forward because reform is the hot-hot topic.)
While this article is from a while back, http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/specialreports/capitalcash/s_419693.html
I found it odd and really let me say almost unconscionable, to quote only Jubelirer about potential reforms via a PA Con-Con.
The Senate's highest elected Republican on Wednesday opened fire on
reformers who opposed the pay raise and want to defeat incumbents, rewrite the
Pennsylvania Constitution, and cut lawmakers' perks.
Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Jubelirer, R-Altoona, is the first
legislative leader to defend the institution of the General Assembly by
responding directly to prominent reformers across the state.
"The system is not broken, elected officials are not as bad, and
Pennsylvania's situation is not as hopeless, as daily depicted," Jubelirer
said...
What did they expect the PA Senator to say, we are not good people, the system we crafted is bad, bad, bad; we don't follow the PA Constitution but it, the PA Constitution is bad anyway?
OK sit down and hold onto your seat as I respond to this quote from the same article
Jubelirer also criticized a suggested constitutional convention, saying that proponent Tim Potts, founder of Democracy Rising PA, wants to "put the constitution up for grabs" after witnessing interest groups commandeering the ballot process in other states.
I agree with Jubelirer! Potts and others like Russ Diamond are putting the PA Constitution up for grabs after witnessing groups commandeering the ballot process in other states!
And it isn't ballot access that is the issue, it is "citizen initiatives and referendums."
Can't wait to determine how many political campaign contributions to Russ Diamond's run for Governor of PA came from just such organizations outside of PA.
Unfortunately, what is being missed is that it is the PA Constitution that is being held accountable for the actions - unconstitutional actions - of the people in the state legislature who are supposed to uphold the PA Constitution.
The PA Constitution is not at fault for the infractions of the elected public servants.
I'd also like to know where was the Tribune-Review when the state legislators passed the unconstitutional Keystone Opportunity Zones?
Guess where, right on the bandwagon of economic development boost via "tax-free" zones to attract "new" companies to "relocate" to Pennsylvania, that's where.
INFO OF USE
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/VC/visitor_info/creating/constitution.htm
Clarke Thomas: Constitutional Convention wisdom
Keep momentum growing to attack the core problems in Harrisburg
Wednesday, July 05, 2006Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Talk is in the air of mounting a Constitutional Convention to update the Pennsylvania Constitution. For one thing, the furor over the Legislature's secretive after-midnight vote last July to increase its pay has boiled over into talk of trimming its size...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06186/703344-108.stm
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Look behind the "scream"
Watchdog group favors GOP as targets
BY BORYS KRAWCZENIUK
U.S. Rep. Don Sherwood shouldn’t feel singled out over flak from a nonprofit Washington watchdog group that recently questioned his ethics over federal money spent buying a pickup truck from his dealership.In the last three years, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has targeted dozens of elected congressmen, White House officials and political action committees in its news releases and requests for investigations by federal agencies.
The list includes former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, White House adviser Karl Rove, Vice President Dick Cheney and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez.
They, Mr. Sherwood and the vast majority of the group’s targets, share a common trait: They’re Republicans or have ties to Republican groups.CREW criticized Mr. Sherwood because about half the $21,000 the Wyoming County Conservation District spent on a new pickup truck at the congressman’s Tunkhannock Chevrolet dealership came from federal money he had obtained for them. District officials say Sherwood Chevrolet was the lower of two bidders.
The congressman says he didn’t know about the purchase until well after the fact and plans to ask the House Ethics Committee for advice on future transactions...
http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16958876&BRD=2185&PAG=461&dept_id=415898&rfi=6
BY BORYS KRAWCZENIUK
U.S. Rep. Don Sherwood shouldn’t feel singled out over flak from a nonprofit Washington watchdog group that recently questioned his ethics over federal money spent buying a pickup truck from his dealership.In the last three years, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has targeted dozens of elected congressmen, White House officials and political action committees in its news releases and requests for investigations by federal agencies.
The list includes former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, White House adviser Karl Rove, Vice President Dick Cheney and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez.
They, Mr. Sherwood and the vast majority of the group’s targets, share a common trait: They’re Republicans or have ties to Republican groups.CREW criticized Mr. Sherwood because about half the $21,000 the Wyoming County Conservation District spent on a new pickup truck at the congressman’s Tunkhannock Chevrolet dealership came from federal money he had obtained for them. District officials say Sherwood Chevrolet was the lower of two bidders.
The congressman says he didn’t know about the purchase until well after the fact and plans to ask the House Ethics Committee for advice on future transactions...
http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16958876&BRD=2185&PAG=461&dept_id=415898&rfi=6
Monday, July 24, 2006
We'll see
Russ Diamond:
Re: Diamond Write-in Campaign
--- In pacleansweep@yahoogroups.com, Jeni Ertmerwrote:>> Ok Russ - or "Monkey wrench" - it might be worth the try just tosee what> the heck WOULD happen, don't 'cha think?>> JeniOh, yeah, it'd be fun.
Here's another twist: Just called the local election folks and askedwhat is the maximum number of characters a voter can type with thewrite-in option on the ES&S systems they've just upgraded to. Off the top of their head answer: 25 (they'll be confirming for me inthe next day or so)How many characters on the current Indie ticket? Count 'em:Russ Diamond / Tom Lingenfelter
That's 26, without the spaces or slash.
Here's a bigger wrench: If you want to write in someone forPresident, you don't write their name - you must write the names of21 separate Presidential Electors to the electoral college.Now we're having fun!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/13447
Will check tomorrow with our election bureau to determine if both names have to appear together or can the write-in names appear separately?
Will check Electoral College...
http://ap.grolier.com/article?assetid=0140130-00&templatename=/article/artic
Re: Diamond Write-in Campaign
--- In pacleansweep@yahoogroups.com, Jeni Ertmer
Here's another twist: Just called the local election folks and askedwhat is the maximum number of characters a voter can type with thewrite-in option on the ES&S systems they've just upgraded to. Off the top of their head answer: 25 (they'll be confirming for me inthe next day or so)How many characters on the current Indie ticket? Count 'em:Russ Diamond / Tom Lingenfelter
That's 26, without the spaces or slash.
Here's a bigger wrench: If you want to write in someone forPresident, you don't write their name - you must write the names of21 separate Presidential Electors to the electoral college.Now we're having fun!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pacleansweep/message/13447
Will check tomorrow with our election bureau to determine if both names have to appear together or can the write-in names appear separately?
Will check Electoral College...
http://ap.grolier.com/article?assetid=0140130-00&templatename=/article/artic
Monday, July 03, 2006
Lobbyist disclosure act can't ever be Constitutional
It is the Pennsylvania incumbents who should disclose the monies/donations/contributions/in-kind services and so forth they receive from whomever to fund their election or re-election campaigns. Oh gee, let me check, but I believe there are already laws regarding political candidates disclosing their financial status before, during, and after an election.
Lobbyist disclosure as is not likely to pass PA Constitutional muster. Again. Or ever.
It didn't in the past.
http://www.pagr.org/news_0903.shtml
Well, we can all google on that to our heart's and obsessive-compulsive disorder's content. How can requiring a lobbyist, an individual engaged in a legal occupation, to disclose all kinds of particulars be something anybody who values privacy and freedom would want?
The key word is "lobbyist." Just insert any other occupation, how about journalist? How about teacher? How about baby-sitter?
Lobbyist disclosure is another issue for the populist agenda bandwagon.
Another issue state legislators can claim hey we're trying to rein "them" in - those nasty (Fortune 500, capitalist) lobbyists.
Another issue would-be legislators can claim they are not doing something about this, but I will, I promise.
Another issue for the media to write about in ha non-biased news articles and editorials.
Another subject for "good government" speakers to add to their reportoirre during press association luncheons.
Who cares about our basic INHERENT RIGHTS? Not a whole bunch, that's for certain.
Why target lobbyists? Easy game, that's why.
The Governor of PA knows how to satiate the drooling media, and foggy-brained public, though...
http://www.governor.state.pa.us/governor/cwp/view.asp?a=3&q=446015
Note the answers - that's right, this is all voluntary and without any meat or substance, people, as it would be unconstitutional to require such compliance or deny someone an inherent right to pursue a legal gainful employment activity!
Question 9What are the sanctions that will apply against lobbyists who fail to comply with these requirements?
AnswerAbsent legislation, the Governor does not have the authority to impose penalties or sanctions against lobbyists who do not comply with this Executive Order since they are not executive branch employees who fall directly within his jurisdiction. Therefore the Executive Order will depend on voluntary compliance by lobbyists, the due diligence of state employees and the increased public scrutiny that should occur by establishing the registration and reporting process. To correct this situation, the General Assembly could pass, and in fact has enacted in the past, comprehensive legislation to require direct registration and reporting by lobbyists and to provide for sanctions for non-compliance by those that lobby any branch of state government. If the Legislature were to enact a meaningful lobbyist registration and disclosure bill, it should require lobbyists to register and complete detailed expense reports on their activities, and enforce these provisions with civil and criminal sanctions. Such legislation should cover lobbying of all state officials, including the Executive Branch officials. The change to the Code of Conduct proposed by the Governor represents the best way to accomplish Executive Branch lobbying disclosure under existing law.
Question 10Can’t the Ethics Commission enforce registration and reporting requirements for lobbyists?
AnswerNo. The Ethics Commission has only as much power as the Legislature has given it. The Legislature has not passed legislation giving the Commission enforcement power against lobbyists who do not comply with Executive Branch rules about registration and disclosure. Indeed, the Legislature has not enacted lawful legislation requiring lobbyists to register in the first place.
http://www.governor.state.pa.us/governor/cwp/view.asp?a=3&q=446015
Lobbying disclosure left out of budget bill
By Brad BumstedSTATE CAPITOL REPORTERMonday, July 3, 2006
HARRISBURG - Pennsylvania still holds the distinction of being the only state without a lobbyist disclosure law.
Legislation to require uniform reporting of how much businesses, groups and associations spend to lobby elected officials was one of the casualties over the weekend in the scramble to pass a $26 billion state budget. Gov. Ed Rendell signed the budget into law early Sunday.
The House and Senate each passed versions of lobbyist disclosure rules but could not agree on what should go to the governor. The measure has changed repeatedly as legislators wrangled over how tough to make the requirements and how much to ask lobbyists to disclose. Leaders said they hoped to break the impasse by the time lawmakers return in mid-September.
Rep. John Maher, R-Upper St. Clair, who sponsored the House bill, said senators did not take enough time to resolve the differences between the two measures.
Sen. Robert C. Jubelirer, the chamber's president pro tempore who was the architect of the Senate bill, said a key point of dispute was what would trigger a requirement for lobbyists to report services they provide to lawmakers and officials of the executive branch.
Under both versions, lobbyists would have to register with the State Department once they receive more than $2,500 in a financial quarter for lobbying activities. Corporations, trade groups and others that employ lobbyists would have to register once they spend more than $2,500 in a financial quarter. Both would have to file reports categorizing how they spent the money.
Details
How they voted
Here's how Western Pennsylvania legislators voted Saturday on the $26 billion state budget bill, which passed 130-68 vote in the House and 28-21 in the Senate.
House
Allegheny County: Paul Costa (D), Yes; Anthony DeLuca (D), Yes; Frank Dermody (D), Yes; Michael Diven (R), Yes; Shawn Flaherty (D), Yes; Dan Frankel (D), Yes; Marc Gergely (D), Yes; Nick Kotik (D), Yes; David Levdansky (D), Not voting; John Maher (R), No; Joseph Markosek (D), Yes; Mark Mustio (R), No; Thomas Petrone (D), Yes; Frank Pistella (D), Yes; Joseph Preston (D), Yes; Harry Readshaw (D), Yes; Kenneth Ruffing (D), Yes; Thomas Stevenson (R), No; Mike Turzai (R), No; Don Walko (D), Yes; Jake Wheatley (D), Yes
Armstrong County: Jeffrey Pyle (R), No
Beaver County: Vincent Biancucci (D), Yes; Sean Ramaley (D), Yes; Michael Veon (D), Yes
Butler County: Brian Ellis (R), No; Daryl Metcalfe (R), No
Washington County: Peter Daley (D), Yes; Victor John Lescovitz (D), Yes; Timothy Solobay (D), Yes
Westmoreland County: R. Ted Harhai (D), Yes; John Pallone (D), Yes; Joseph Petrarca (D), Yes; Jess Stairs (R), No; Thomas Tangretti (D), Yes
Senate
Allegheny County: Jay Costa (D), Yes; Jim Ferlo (D), Yes; Wayne Fontana (D), Yes; Sean Logan (D), Yes; Jane Clare Orie (R), No; John Pippy (R), No
Beaver County: Gerald LaValle (D), Yes
Washington County: J. Barry Stout (D), Yes
By Brad Bumsted
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_460486.html
Items of Interest:
http://www.theadvocates.org/liberator/vol-11-num-3.html
Lobbyist disclosure as is not likely to pass PA Constitutional muster. Again. Or ever.
It didn't in the past.
http://www.pagr.org/news_0903.shtml
Well, we can all google on that to our heart's and obsessive-compulsive disorder's content. How can requiring a lobbyist, an individual engaged in a legal occupation, to disclose all kinds of particulars be something anybody who values privacy and freedom would want?
The key word is "lobbyist." Just insert any other occupation, how about journalist? How about teacher? How about baby-sitter?
Lobbyist disclosure is another issue for the populist agenda bandwagon.
Another issue state legislators can claim hey we're trying to rein "them" in - those nasty (Fortune 500, capitalist) lobbyists.
Another issue would-be legislators can claim they are not doing something about this, but I will, I promise.
Another issue for the media to write about in ha non-biased news articles and editorials.
Another subject for "good government" speakers to add to their reportoirre during press association luncheons.
Who cares about our basic INHERENT RIGHTS? Not a whole bunch, that's for certain.
Why target lobbyists? Easy game, that's why.
The Governor of PA knows how to satiate the drooling media, and foggy-brained public, though...
http://www.governor.state.pa.us/governor/cwp/view.asp?a=3&q=446015
Note the answers - that's right, this is all voluntary and without any meat or substance, people, as it would be unconstitutional to require such compliance or deny someone an inherent right to pursue a legal gainful employment activity!
Question 9What are the sanctions that will apply against lobbyists who fail to comply with these requirements?
AnswerAbsent legislation, the Governor does not have the authority to impose penalties or sanctions against lobbyists who do not comply with this Executive Order since they are not executive branch employees who fall directly within his jurisdiction. Therefore the Executive Order will depend on voluntary compliance by lobbyists, the due diligence of state employees and the increased public scrutiny that should occur by establishing the registration and reporting process. To correct this situation, the General Assembly could pass, and in fact has enacted in the past, comprehensive legislation to require direct registration and reporting by lobbyists and to provide for sanctions for non-compliance by those that lobby any branch of state government. If the Legislature were to enact a meaningful lobbyist registration and disclosure bill, it should require lobbyists to register and complete detailed expense reports on their activities, and enforce these provisions with civil and criminal sanctions. Such legislation should cover lobbying of all state officials, including the Executive Branch officials. The change to the Code of Conduct proposed by the Governor represents the best way to accomplish Executive Branch lobbying disclosure under existing law.
Question 10Can’t the Ethics Commission enforce registration and reporting requirements for lobbyists?
AnswerNo. The Ethics Commission has only as much power as the Legislature has given it. The Legislature has not passed legislation giving the Commission enforcement power against lobbyists who do not comply with Executive Branch rules about registration and disclosure. Indeed, the Legislature has not enacted lawful legislation requiring lobbyists to register in the first place.
http://www.governor.state.pa.us/governor/cwp/view.asp?a=3&q=446015
Lobbying disclosure left out of budget bill
By Brad BumstedSTATE CAPITOL REPORTERMonday, July 3, 2006
HARRISBURG - Pennsylvania still holds the distinction of being the only state without a lobbyist disclosure law.
Legislation to require uniform reporting of how much businesses, groups and associations spend to lobby elected officials was one of the casualties over the weekend in the scramble to pass a $26 billion state budget. Gov. Ed Rendell signed the budget into law early Sunday.
The House and Senate each passed versions of lobbyist disclosure rules but could not agree on what should go to the governor. The measure has changed repeatedly as legislators wrangled over how tough to make the requirements and how much to ask lobbyists to disclose. Leaders said they hoped to break the impasse by the time lawmakers return in mid-September.
Rep. John Maher, R-Upper St. Clair, who sponsored the House bill, said senators did not take enough time to resolve the differences between the two measures.
Sen. Robert C. Jubelirer, the chamber's president pro tempore who was the architect of the Senate bill, said a key point of dispute was what would trigger a requirement for lobbyists to report services they provide to lawmakers and officials of the executive branch.
Under both versions, lobbyists would have to register with the State Department once they receive more than $2,500 in a financial quarter for lobbying activities. Corporations, trade groups and others that employ lobbyists would have to register once they spend more than $2,500 in a financial quarter. Both would have to file reports categorizing how they spent the money.
Details
How they voted
Here's how Western Pennsylvania legislators voted Saturday on the $26 billion state budget bill, which passed 130-68 vote in the House and 28-21 in the Senate.
House
Allegheny County: Paul Costa (D), Yes; Anthony DeLuca (D), Yes; Frank Dermody (D), Yes; Michael Diven (R), Yes; Shawn Flaherty (D), Yes; Dan Frankel (D), Yes; Marc Gergely (D), Yes; Nick Kotik (D), Yes; David Levdansky (D), Not voting; John Maher (R), No; Joseph Markosek (D), Yes; Mark Mustio (R), No; Thomas Petrone (D), Yes; Frank Pistella (D), Yes; Joseph Preston (D), Yes; Harry Readshaw (D), Yes; Kenneth Ruffing (D), Yes; Thomas Stevenson (R), No; Mike Turzai (R), No; Don Walko (D), Yes; Jake Wheatley (D), Yes
Armstrong County: Jeffrey Pyle (R), No
Beaver County: Vincent Biancucci (D), Yes; Sean Ramaley (D), Yes; Michael Veon (D), Yes
Butler County: Brian Ellis (R), No; Daryl Metcalfe (R), No
Washington County: Peter Daley (D), Yes; Victor John Lescovitz (D), Yes; Timothy Solobay (D), Yes
Westmoreland County: R. Ted Harhai (D), Yes; John Pallone (D), Yes; Joseph Petrarca (D), Yes; Jess Stairs (R), No; Thomas Tangretti (D), Yes
Senate
Allegheny County: Jay Costa (D), Yes; Jim Ferlo (D), Yes; Wayne Fontana (D), Yes; Sean Logan (D), Yes; Jane Clare Orie (R), No; John Pippy (R), No
Beaver County: Gerald LaValle (D), Yes
Washington County: J. Barry Stout (D), Yes
By Brad Bumsted
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_460486.html
Items of Interest:
http://www.theadvocates.org/liberator/vol-11-num-3.html
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Flag Desecration Amendment Fails = Celebrate Liberty
Many people just don't get what the meaning of the Bill of Rights actually means. Do not touch these inalienable rights, government. that's why the flag desegration amendment should have gone down, and it did.
Flag amendment fails by single vote; more bills aimed at conservatives expected
By The Associated PressWednesday, June 28, 2006
WASHINGTON (AP) - The narrow defeat of a proposal to ban flag desecration marks the second time in a month Senate Republicans have lost bids to amend the Constitution in ways designed to inspire social conservatives to vote in the midterm elections.
The 66-34 tally on the flag amendment Tuesday was one less than the two-thirds, or 67 votes, required to send it to the states for ratification. The House cleared the two-thirds threshold last year, 286-130.
Sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, the amendment read: "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."
A proposed amendment earlier this month to ban gay marriage suffered a more decisive defeat, killed on a test vote. ...
The flag amendment's cliffhanger defeat a week before Independence Day represented Congress' response to Supreme Court rulings in 1989 and 1990 that burning and other desecration of the flag are protected as free speech by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Senate supporters said the flag amounts to a national monument in cloth that represents freedom and the sacrifice of American troops.
"Countless men and women have died defending that flag," said Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., closing two days of debate. "It is but a small humble act for us to defend it."
Opponents said the amendment would violate the First Amendment right to free speech. And some Democrats complained that majority Republicans were exploiting people's patriotism for political advantage.
"Our country's unique because our dissidents have a voice," said Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, a World War II veteran who lost an arm in the war and was decorated with the Medal of Honor.
"While I take offense at disrespect to the flag," he said, "I nonetheless believe it is my continued duty as a veteran, as an American citizen, and as a United States senator to defend the constitutional right of protesters to use the flag in nonviolent speech."
Among possible presidential contenders in 2008, six voted yes: Democrat Evan Bayh of Indiana and Republicans George Allen of Virginia, Sam Brownback of Kansas, Frist, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, and John McCain of Arizona. Five, all Democrats, voted no: Joseph Biden of Delaware, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, John Kerry of Massachusetts.
The Senate also rejected an alternative put forward by assistant Democratic leader Dick Durbin of Illinois. It would have made it against the law to damage the flag on federal land or with the intent of breaching the peace or intimidation. It also would have prohibited unapproved demonstrations at military funerals.
The House meanwhile passed by voice vote a measure that would bar condominium and homeowner associations from restricting how the flag can be displayed.
Sponsored by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., the resolution would prohibit those groups from preventing residents from displaying an American flag on their own property. The Senate is considering whether to bring up the measure this year. ...
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/election/s_459851.html
Flag amendment fails by single vote; more bills aimed at conservatives expected
By The Associated PressWednesday, June 28, 2006
WASHINGTON (AP) - The narrow defeat of a proposal to ban flag desecration marks the second time in a month Senate Republicans have lost bids to amend the Constitution in ways designed to inspire social conservatives to vote in the midterm elections.
The 66-34 tally on the flag amendment Tuesday was one less than the two-thirds, or 67 votes, required to send it to the states for ratification. The House cleared the two-thirds threshold last year, 286-130.
Sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, the amendment read: "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."
A proposed amendment earlier this month to ban gay marriage suffered a more decisive defeat, killed on a test vote. ...
The flag amendment's cliffhanger defeat a week before Independence Day represented Congress' response to Supreme Court rulings in 1989 and 1990 that burning and other desecration of the flag are protected as free speech by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Senate supporters said the flag amounts to a national monument in cloth that represents freedom and the sacrifice of American troops.
"Countless men and women have died defending that flag," said Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., closing two days of debate. "It is but a small humble act for us to defend it."
Opponents said the amendment would violate the First Amendment right to free speech. And some Democrats complained that majority Republicans were exploiting people's patriotism for political advantage.
"Our country's unique because our dissidents have a voice," said Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, a World War II veteran who lost an arm in the war and was decorated with the Medal of Honor.
"While I take offense at disrespect to the flag," he said, "I nonetheless believe it is my continued duty as a veteran, as an American citizen, and as a United States senator to defend the constitutional right of protesters to use the flag in nonviolent speech."
Among possible presidential contenders in 2008, six voted yes: Democrat Evan Bayh of Indiana and Republicans George Allen of Virginia, Sam Brownback of Kansas, Frist, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, and John McCain of Arizona. Five, all Democrats, voted no: Joseph Biden of Delaware, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, John Kerry of Massachusetts.
The Senate also rejected an alternative put forward by assistant Democratic leader Dick Durbin of Illinois. It would have made it against the law to damage the flag on federal land or with the intent of breaching the peace or intimidation. It also would have prohibited unapproved demonstrations at military funerals.
The House meanwhile passed by voice vote a measure that would bar condominium and homeowner associations from restricting how the flag can be displayed.
Sponsored by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., the resolution would prohibit those groups from preventing residents from displaying an American flag on their own property. The Senate is considering whether to bring up the measure this year. ...
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/election/s_459851.html
Sunday, June 25, 2006
Behind the coverage of Haditha
The My Lai Lie Behind the coverage of Haditha.
by Fred Barnes, for the Editors 07/03/2006, Volume 011, Issue 40 Weekly Standard
THE MEDIA COVERAGE of the killing of 24 Iraqis at Haditha has given rich new definition to the phrase "rush to judgment." The coverage, plus the reaction of antiwar politicians like Democratic representative John Murtha, amounts to a public verdict of guilty, rendered against a handful of Marines, before an investigation of the bloody incident is completed or a trial (if there is one) held.
An egregious example was MSNBC host Chris Matthews's interview with Murtha on May 17. Asked to "draw us a picture of what happened in Haditha," the congressman said he'd tell "exactly" what occurred. "One Marine was killed and the Marines just said we're going to take care. They don't know who the enemy is. The pressure was too much on them, so they went into houses and they actually killed civilians."
"Was this My Lai?" Matthews interjected, referring to the slaughter of more than 300 civilians by American soldiers in Vietnam in 1968. "Was this a case of--when you say cold blood, Congressman, a lot of people think you're basically saying you have got some civilians sitting in a room [or] out in a field and they're executed."
"That's exactly what happened," Murtha replied.
Murtha, of course, doesn't really know if the Haditha civilians were killed in cold blood. There's no way he could know. He's been briefed by Marine Commandant Michael Hagee, but so have other key members of Congress. Republican Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, talked to Hagee and did not conclude either
that the case was all but closed or that 24 Iraqis had indeed been executed. Murtha, an ex-Marine, claims to have other Marine sources, but it's doubtful any of them were in Haditha on November 19, 2005, the day of the killings. So Murtha is winging it--and in a particularly shameful way.
But Murtha's accusation is only the worst example of prejudicing the case against the Marines. There are others...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/362mlvrd.asp
by Fred Barnes, for the Editors 07/03/2006, Volume 011, Issue 40 Weekly Standard
THE MEDIA COVERAGE of the killing of 24 Iraqis at Haditha has given rich new definition to the phrase "rush to judgment." The coverage, plus the reaction of antiwar politicians like Democratic representative John Murtha, amounts to a public verdict of guilty, rendered against a handful of Marines, before an investigation of the bloody incident is completed or a trial (if there is one) held.
An egregious example was MSNBC host Chris Matthews's interview with Murtha on May 17. Asked to "draw us a picture of what happened in Haditha," the congressman said he'd tell "exactly" what occurred. "One Marine was killed and the Marines just said we're going to take care. They don't know who the enemy is. The pressure was too much on them, so they went into houses and they actually killed civilians."
"Was this My Lai?" Matthews interjected, referring to the slaughter of more than 300 civilians by American soldiers in Vietnam in 1968. "Was this a case of--when you say cold blood, Congressman, a lot of people think you're basically saying you have got some civilians sitting in a room [or] out in a field and they're executed."
"That's exactly what happened," Murtha replied.
Murtha, of course, doesn't really know if the Haditha civilians were killed in cold blood. There's no way he could know. He's been briefed by Marine Commandant Michael Hagee, but so have other key members of Congress. Republican Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, talked to Hagee and did not conclude either
that the case was all but closed or that 24 Iraqis had indeed been executed. Murtha, an ex-Marine, claims to have other Marine sources, but it's doubtful any of them were in Haditha on November 19, 2005, the day of the killings. So Murtha is winging it--and in a particularly shameful way.
But Murtha's accusation is only the worst example of prejudicing the case against the Marines. There are others...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/362mlvrd.asp
Saturday, June 24, 2006
PA evenly split whether to retain state legislators come November
The media continues to be amazingly slow - the results are split, people, split evenly.
The headline should have read: Pay raise issue shows voters equally engaged and apathetic.
The lead should've read: The legislative pay raise that ignited a political back-yard fire in PA nearly a year ago reveals voters evenly matched on whether to retain or dismiss their district lawmakers seeking support for their re-elections.
Pay raise still important to voters, poll shows
By The Associated PressThursday, June 22, 2006
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) - The legislative pay raise that ignited a political wildfire in Pennsylvania nearly a year ago remains important to many voters as lawmakers seek support for their re-election, a poll released Thursday shows.
The Quinnipiac University poll, which also reaffirmed Gov. Ed Rendell's huge lead over Republican challenger Lynn Swann, showed respondents were evenly divided on whether they would vote to oust lawmakers who voted for the raise.
The survey showed respondents evenly split — 46 percent on each side — when asked whether they would vote against their own legislators just because they voted for the pay raise. Democrats were slightly more inclined than Republicans to do so, the poll found.
In western and central Pennsylvania, home to 14 of the 17 incumbents who were defeated in a remarkable rout in the May primary, the poll showed the pay-raise votes to be more influential than in the eastern third of the state.
Those results had to be weighed against another finding: 57 percent of the respondents statewide did not remember how their representatives and senators had voted on the pay raise.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/election/s_459103.html
The headline should have read: Pay raise issue shows voters equally engaged and apathetic.
The lead should've read: The legislative pay raise that ignited a political back-yard fire in PA nearly a year ago reveals voters evenly matched on whether to retain or dismiss their district lawmakers seeking support for their re-elections.
Pay raise still important to voters, poll shows
By The Associated PressThursday, June 22, 2006
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) - The legislative pay raise that ignited a political wildfire in Pennsylvania nearly a year ago remains important to many voters as lawmakers seek support for their re-election, a poll released Thursday shows.
The Quinnipiac University poll, which also reaffirmed Gov. Ed Rendell's huge lead over Republican challenger Lynn Swann, showed respondents were evenly divided on whether they would vote to oust lawmakers who voted for the raise.
The survey showed respondents evenly split — 46 percent on each side — when asked whether they would vote against their own legislators just because they voted for the pay raise. Democrats were slightly more inclined than Republicans to do so, the poll found.
In western and central Pennsylvania, home to 14 of the 17 incumbents who were defeated in a remarkable rout in the May primary, the poll showed the pay-raise votes to be more influential than in the eastern third of the state.
Those results had to be weighed against another finding: 57 percent of the respondents statewide did not remember how their representatives and senators had voted on the pay raise.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/election/s_459103.html
What is wrong?
Yet again, another measure that does an end run around the PA Constitution's Article 8 Uniformity of Taxation clause. It all sounds good because the poor poorly performing schools are gonna get some of the pickings.
Meanwhile, tax credits nicely bypass:
Taxation of Corporations Section 6.The power to tax corporations and corporate property shall not be surrendered or suspended by any contract or grant to which the Commonwealth shall be a party.
Swann details his program for boosting education in Pa.
He would double the corporate tax credit and channel more money to poorly performing schools.
By Dan Hardy
Inquirer Staff Writer
Lynn Swann, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, yesterday laid out his education platform in the most detailed fashion so far, pledging to double funding for the state's Educational Improvement Tax Credit program and to earmark the additional money for low-achieving schools.
The popular program, which became law in 2001, allows companies to receive tax credits for most of their contributions to nonprofit Educational Improvement Organizations, scholarships and pre-kindergarten programs. Swann proposed increasing it from $49 million to $98 million.
Nearly 2,300 companies have given more than $200 million to the program, which funds scholarships to 30,000 children a year across Pennsylvania, according to state officials. Much of the money goes to religious and other private schools and their students.
The Educational Improvement Organizations that receive funds include both existing nonprofit educational groups and new ones set up specifically to funnel corporate contributions to school programs.
Swann described his education proposal in a speech at the Union League in Philadelphia and in a statement issued afterward.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/14881246.htm
More Items
Eliminate government-funded education!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26807
The Gilded Age of Home Schooling
How public school teachers and administrators are really paid
http://www.thechampion.org/
Lessons From Privately Managed Schools
Meanwhile, tax credits nicely bypass:
Taxation of Corporations Section 6.The power to tax corporations and corporate property shall not be surrendered or suspended by any contract or grant to which the Commonwealth shall be a party.
Swann details his program for boosting education in Pa.
He would double the corporate tax credit and channel more money to poorly performing schools.
By Dan Hardy
Inquirer Staff Writer
Lynn Swann, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, yesterday laid out his education platform in the most detailed fashion so far, pledging to double funding for the state's Educational Improvement Tax Credit program and to earmark the additional money for low-achieving schools.
The popular program, which became law in 2001, allows companies to receive tax credits for most of their contributions to nonprofit Educational Improvement Organizations, scholarships and pre-kindergarten programs. Swann proposed increasing it from $49 million to $98 million.
Nearly 2,300 companies have given more than $200 million to the program, which funds scholarships to 30,000 children a year across Pennsylvania, according to state officials. Much of the money goes to religious and other private schools and their students.
The Educational Improvement Organizations that receive funds include both existing nonprofit educational groups and new ones set up specifically to funnel corporate contributions to school programs.
Swann described his education proposal in a speech at the Union League in Philadelphia and in a statement issued afterward.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/14881246.htm
More Items
Eliminate government-funded education!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26807
The Gilded Age of Home Schooling
How public school teachers and administrators are really paid
http://www.thechampion.org/
Lessons From Privately Managed Schools
Saturday, June 10, 2006
Only 20 percent voter backlash turnout in Primary
OK already. There was backlash at the polls on May 16. Republican backlash over Republican incumbents who veered from Republican principles. Geesh. The media would love for that to be spun into some great widespread call for revolution across the state. Truth is, the Democrats weren't buying it, no matter how hard the media pressed.
There was also, despite the media fueling the furor over the payraise, only a 20 percent turnout across the state, according to some accounts.
Put it all in perspective. The media is bloodthirsty for change in Harrisburg. Come November, let's watch how many people turn out to vote, and how many new voters register to vote.
Media credited with fueling backlash over pay raises
By David M. BrownTRIBUNE-REVIEWThursday, May 18, 2006
When Jennifer Hill Ertmer, 61, of Grassflat, Clearfield County, first heard that the Legislature had voted itself a hefty pay raise last year, she was fuming mad.
"I stewed for a good month," Ertmer said, adding that not many of her neighbors in the tiny coal mining village seemed as perturbed at the time. She figured the issue would blow over without much of a public fuss.
But Ertmer -- an avid reader of on-line newspapers -- soon realized that many other Pennsylvanians also were upset over the late-night salary hike. A member of PACleanSweep, the anti-incumbent group, Ertmer says the media deserves "mega credit" for the voter backlash that toppled two top Senate leaders and 15 other incumbents in Tuesday's primary election, according to unofficial results.
"The media put it all into perspective," Ertmer said Wednesday.
Experts agree.
The news media had the most significant role it's played in modern state history, because, in both electronic and print, there was no let-up," said Jerry Shuster, a political communications professor at the University of Pittsburgh.
"The media provided an outlet for voters to get involved and stay informed," he said.
Al Neri, editor of The Insider, a statewide political newspaper, said the anti-pay raise movement also was fueled by activity on the Internet, which created "an outlet for people to vent themselves."
"It was a convergence of old media and new media, all focused on the one topic for a prolonged period," Neri said.
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has received a number of awards for reporting on the pay raise issue, including first place in the state Associated Press Managing Editors Awards for investigative reporting and public service, and the state Society of Professional Journalists' Spotlight Award.
The last time Pennsylvanians experienced such intense media scrutiny of state government centered on scandals during the second term of Gov. Milton Shapp in the late 1970s.
"That was another prolonged spotlight on Harrisburg that took a toll on incumbents," Neri said.
The high number of incumbent legislators defeated -- about a dozen in 1978 and 14 in 1980 -- wasn't tied to backlashes to pay raise votes per se. The races in 1978 did involve the issue of creating a compensation commission. But by and large, both cycles were a reaction by voters to widespread corruption in the Shapp administration, analysts say.
Indictments and convictions at the time mostly involved executive branch employees. But the perception that corruption was rampant in government spilled over to legislators.
There was also, despite the media fueling the furor over the payraise, only a 20 percent turnout across the state, according to some accounts.
Put it all in perspective. The media is bloodthirsty for change in Harrisburg. Come November, let's watch how many people turn out to vote, and how many new voters register to vote.
Media credited with fueling backlash over pay raises
By David M. BrownTRIBUNE-REVIEWThursday, May 18, 2006
When Jennifer Hill Ertmer, 61, of Grassflat, Clearfield County, first heard that the Legislature had voted itself a hefty pay raise last year, she was fuming mad.
"I stewed for a good month," Ertmer said, adding that not many of her neighbors in the tiny coal mining village seemed as perturbed at the time. She figured the issue would blow over without much of a public fuss.
But Ertmer -- an avid reader of on-line newspapers -- soon realized that many other Pennsylvanians also were upset over the late-night salary hike. A member of PACleanSweep, the anti-incumbent group, Ertmer says the media deserves "mega credit" for the voter backlash that toppled two top Senate leaders and 15 other incumbents in Tuesday's primary election, according to unofficial results.
"The media put it all into perspective," Ertmer said Wednesday.
Experts agree.
The news media had the most significant role it's played in modern state history, because, in both electronic and print, there was no let-up," said Jerry Shuster, a political communications professor at the University of Pittsburgh.
"The media provided an outlet for voters to get involved and stay informed," he said.
Al Neri, editor of The Insider, a statewide political newspaper, said the anti-pay raise movement also was fueled by activity on the Internet, which created "an outlet for people to vent themselves."
"It was a convergence of old media and new media, all focused on the one topic for a prolonged period," Neri said.
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has received a number of awards for reporting on the pay raise issue, including first place in the state Associated Press Managing Editors Awards for investigative reporting and public service, and the state Society of Professional Journalists' Spotlight Award.
The last time Pennsylvanians experienced such intense media scrutiny of state government centered on scandals during the second term of Gov. Milton Shapp in the late 1970s.
"That was another prolonged spotlight on Harrisburg that took a toll on incumbents," Neri said.
The high number of incumbent legislators defeated -- about a dozen in 1978 and 14 in 1980 -- wasn't tied to backlashes to pay raise votes per se. The races in 1978 did involve the issue of creating a compensation commission. But by and large, both cycles were a reaction by voters to widespread corruption in the Shapp administration, analysts say.
Indictments and convictions at the time mostly involved executive branch employees. But the perception that corruption was rampant in government spilled over to legislators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
