Grassroots News U Can Use

State ethics board fines two office-seekers from Tarrant County

2010-10-13T15:19:00.002-05:00

Jan 06, 2010 (Fort Worth Star-Telegram - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) -- A STATE AGENCY HAS CRACKED -- or at least gently flung -- the ethics whip at a State Board of Education member representing part of Tarrant County and a Republican running for a state House seat in south Arlington.

The Texas Ethics Commission fined both late last month a modest $500 -- combined -- for failing to follow such basics as correct math and "What is your name?" The names of those who filed the complaints are confidential under state law, commission officials said.

Patricia Hardy, who represents Tarrant, Ellis, Johnson and Parker counties on the education board, has a master's degree in secondary education. So what's up with her adding skills? She was accused of filing a pre-election report in March 2008 that said she had $1,052.58 in political contributions maintained, according to a commission documents. After some pencil sharpening, Hardy agreed with a complaint that she really had $2,885.71 and filed a corrected report.

Second allegation: Her July 2008 semiannual report listed $8,518.07 in political contributions maintained. But that was wrong, too. She actually had $4,808.45.

According to the commission documents: In November 2008 she listed $5,018.07 in political contributions maintained; real total: $4,808.45.

The same month, she reported $5,118.07 in the coffers; real total: $4,908.

In January 2009, she reported $5,018.07; real total: still $4,908.

"You could say 'sloppy account,' but, hell's bells, everybody else has somebody else do their work for them," Hardy said. "I'm doing it myself at my office in my house, where I have 500,000 other things going on, too." In addition to her work on the board, Hardy works for the Weatherford school district.

"What's funny about this is that no one is more straight-laced as I am and as conservative," she said.

Hardy said the complaints were nit-picky. Aside from a $400 fine "because I had mathematical errors" she also had to hire an attorney, she said.

Also receiving a mild wrist slap was former state Rep. Bill Zedler, who is running against former Mansfield school board President Joy Keller for the Republican nomination for the District 96 seat. The winner will face Democrat Rep. Chris Turner.

Zedler was fined $100 after he sent out mailers that said they were political advertisements "paid for by Friends of Bill Zedler." The problem? Officially, there is no "Friends of Bill Zedler." Zedler's campaign paid for the mailers, not a "Friends of" political action committee.

"The disclosure statements that appeared on...[the] political advertising indicated that the communications were political advertising, but failed to identify...[Zedler] as the person who paid for the political advertising. Instead the disclosure statements...implicitly suggested that the communications emanated from persons other than" Zedler, commission documents stated.

Zedler's attorney, Trey Trainor of Austin, said the forms candidates file to establish a treasurer don't include a place to name the campaign.

"Are you going to call it the 'Bill Jones for State House Committee,' or are you going to call it 'Friends of Bill Jones?'aEURe" Trainor asked. "It's obvious that a yard sign that says 'Vote for Bill Zedler' probably was paid for by Bill Zedler. ...I think the commission recognized that and said 'No harm, no foul;' it's $100 and we'll do away with this."

DARREN BARBEE, 817-390-7126 Read more in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram,

Roy LaVerne Brooks

2010-10-10T22:46:00.001-05:00

Roy Laverne Brooks for Tarrant County Justice of the Peace Precinct 6 from George Wada on Vimeo.

Dedicated to Mayor Cluck and the City Council - Can't you See it's Acid Rainin'?

2010-07-31T21:37:00.008-05:00

Kim Feil - July 31, 2010

Can't You See It's Acid Raining
Added by Kim Triolo Feil (videos) Song by Jack Johnson with words "tweeked a little bit" by Kim Triolo Feil

Environmental plea for City Councils all across America to be patient until air and water studies are complete and unbiased regarding the safty of natural gas drilling using toxic chemicals in the hydraulic fracturing process. The loopholes on regulations that allow free emissions and exemptions on this fast growing industry needs to be overhauled in the oil and gas industry. We need a new TX governor sympathic to human lives and NOT big business. Also BP's dispersant activity also comes into question about acid rain - who knows how far pollution fall out travels? God help us all! Here are the lyrics...

Can't You See It's Acid Raining?

It's dangerous to go outside! It's so crazy!
You hardly even notice when I try to show ya.
This song is meant to keep ya from drilling up the town!
Methane gas extraction, maybe we'll explode?
Make us all die early, pretend like its so safe outside.
We could pretend it all the time.
Can't You See It's Acid Raining?
Ain't no healthy air outside. But just maybe
Hollering the ladies "drillings killing babies!"
Really don't want no spill by my Cowboy Stadium.
Greedy, greedy sell out; money buys the people.
We could close the loopholes
prevent pollution flowing now.
Then we could prevent it all the time.
Can't You See It's Acid Raining?
Don't let the children play outside.
And the telephone's singing ringing
City Council won't pick it up.
Pleas don't drill here we got everything we need right here
And everything we need is enough. Just so sleazy-
When the whole world watched BP's toxic harm
Do we really need to blindly drill without alarm?
Take it slow, take it slow. It's so crazy
You hardly even notice when I try to show ya
This song is meant to keep ya from fracking up the water,
Taking in the big bucks, breathing benzene SUCKS!
Making a water shortage pretend like its no problem now.
We could pretend it all the time.
Can't You See It's Acid Raining?
Toxic concoctions just outside.
Make me wheeze, lung disease
Dr Cluck you're in denial.

HELP GIVE KIM's PAL the gas masked life-size dummy a name. He's become very social lately. He's been at the TCEQ hearing in Arlington, the EPA Hydraulic Fracturing and Water Contamination Hearing in Fort Worth, was threatened by an Arlington Policeman for making a "political statement" at the so-called non-political Arlington Fourth of July Parade, to Old Town Neighborhood Association Watermelon in the Park and ha accompanied Kim numerous other places lately yet he has no name.

Submit suggestions for name to arlingtontexan@gmail.com.

We'll come up with some sort of prize. It will probably be a "cheap one" but it will be a prize!

NOTE BY FAITH CHATHAM:
The video showing on the screen behind Kim was shot by her in July on the fork of the Trinity that goes behind Elzie Odom Recreation Center. It is of the gung - grey brownish foam pollution flowing downstream. Kim brought it to my house immediately after she left the Trinity and we called every water regulatory agency and everyone told us someone else was responsible for testing or overseeing that part of the Trinity! There seems to be no easy quick way to report pollution and to get answers about the state of our waterways when they aren't in specific jurisdictions or if you don't get routed to the right person within responsible agencies. Pollution does however, make interesting backdrops for music videos.

This is in part a duet. Kim is almost upstaged by her bird!

Roy LaVerne Brooks stays on ballot in Tarrant County

2010-02-25T09:29:00.009-06:00

By Faith Chatham - Feb. 25, 2010
Former Texas State Democratic Vice Chair Roy LaVerne Brooks wins second round of strategic legal assault by financier Dick Abrams. Unable to get County Chair Steve Maxwell to remove Ms. Brooks from the Tarrant County Democratic Primary Ballot so that he could run unopposed for Justice of the Peace, Pct. 6, Democratic donor and bundler, Dick Abrams brought suit in District Court. Abrams' suit against Roy LaVerne Brooks and Tarrant County Democratic Chair Steve Maxwell was dismissed with prejudice Friday. ((aka - don't refile this case)

The contrast between the two candidates is stark. Abrams, former C.E.O. / C.O.B. of failed Surety Bank and Surety Holding, engendered support of Democratic incumbents and some Democratic "want-a-be's" by writing substantial checks to most incumbents and Democratic Clubs, creating a buzz about him being a "viable candidate." Simple Google searches bring up numerous Federal S.E.C. and Comptroller of the Currency documents chronicling Abrams less than stellar performance at the helm of Surety Bank and its holding company. Those touting how "viable" avoid mentioning that Abrams was barred from banking for failure to comply with Federal Banking laws! He settled with the Comptroller of the Currency by agreeing not to participate in any capacity in any federal funded housing, federal loans, banks, or savings and loans because of fiduciary irregularities, misrepresentation of fact on Federal Reports, and failure to follow Federal Law, and the use of bank premises for “for profit endeavors by board members and members of the family of board members.” However, because he can write max allowable checks to high profile candidates some think that he deserved to be the nominee.

In contrast, a Google search on Roy LaVerne Brooks profiles a Democratic Party activist, community servant and civic leader who was named the "Outstanding Woman Citizen of Fort Worth" and inducted into the "Texas Hall of Fame" for 30 years of civic leadership and consistent service to her hometown and the State of Texas. Brooks, a graduate of Prairie View A&M, with M.A. in Divinity from Southwestern, has chaired the handicap transportation authority (MI.T.S.A.C) in Fort Worth and served as Vice-Chair of the Fort Worth "T". Conservative with her finances, Ms. Brooks does not have as deep pockets as her opponent. The contrast between a social workers' salary and the check-writing resources of her opponent are substantial.
Abrams' lawsuit drained much of Brooks "Get out the Vote" resources. None of the newspapers or television stations are mentioning that Texas or Federal Law does not prohibit individuals who are barred from banking for violations of Federal Law from running for (and possibly winning) judicial seats in Texas, or election as State Representatives and State Senators.

Contributions to the Brooks Campaign can be made on-line at WWW.BROOKSFORJP6.ORG. $35.00 can reach half of the registered voters in the precinct by robocall. The primary is March 2nd. Act now if you want to support a qualified woman candidate for public office. The Court ruled that the people have the right to decide who their nominee should be. Money will determine whether the voters get to learn about the differences in the two candidates.

I am not pretending to be unbiased. I know Roy LaVerne Brooks and admire and respect her for her lifetime of service, incredible leadership skills, and understanding of the challenges facing individuals who come before the bench in that Justice of the Peace Precinct. If Mr. Abrams had chosen to campaign to win rather than to use the courts to remove his opponent, this race would probably have avoided my radar. As I examined the court documents, signatures on the petitions, candidate’s credentials, and the needs of the precinct, sharp contrast between the candidates convinced me that Roy LaVerne Brooks is the candidate who can truly best serve the people as Justice of the Peace. The way to build the party is to bring honor to it by fielding and electing people whose life reflects consistent integrity, service and honor. Roy LaVerne Brooks is a woman of integrity, and possesses a heart for the people and the intellect and discernment to do the job.

Candidate intimidation tactics in Fort Worth Texas JP Race

2010-02-09T05:24:00.004-06:00

By Faith Chatham - Feb. 12, 2010
The right to compete and let the voters decide has been skewed by influence money. Now in Tarrant County, an independently wealthy candidate is using his ability to out-sue, out litigate, out spend on attorney's fees to chase his opponents out of the primary and/or drain-dry the resources of opponents.

Richard (Dick) N. Abrams filed for Justice of the Peace, Pct.6 in South Fort Worth against two other Democratic opponents. He challenged the petitions of his opponents claiming that all spaces on the form were not filled in or were incorrect. Abrams threatened to sue his opponents and the County Chair if the county chair did not remove their names from the primary ballot. One opponent, John Williams, was disqualified for filing for more than one office. Tarrant County Democratic Chair Steve Maxwell reviewed the challenge and ruled that Ms. Brooks had sufficient valid signatures of registered voters in the precinct to remain on the ballot. Abrams filed a law suit in Tarrant County District Court against Maxwell and Brooks, seeking and injunction to keep her name off the Primary Ballot and all his court costs and legal fees. All judges in Fort Worth are Republicans.

"It is absurd," said Harriet Irby, Ms. Brooks' treasurer. "I don't understand why a Democratic candidate would do this. There are no Democratic judges in Tarrant County. This matter will be settled in a Republican judge's courtroom. He knew that when he filed this suit!" She added: "He seems to be someone who likes to file lawsuits and has plenty of money to easily pay the legal costs. There are a number of them filed by him in recent months. He seems to win about half of them."

There are court records to support Irby's impression of Abrams. He sued Unity Mutual Life Insurance Company over what he claimed was a hand-shake agreement for commissions. When the ruling was that hand-shake agreements ae unenforceable, he appealed it from the U.S. Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division No 99 C 3182 to the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. All rulings were that his alleged hand-shake agreement for commission on preneed funerals were non-enforceable.

Abrams' lawsuit against Tarrant County Democratic Chair Steve Maxwell and his opponent, Roy LaVerne Brooks, is worded to indicate intentions of appealing any decision which does not remove Ms. Brooks' name from the Democratic Primary Ballot all the way to the Texas Supreme Court (another all Republican body).

Mr. Abrams has established a pattern of using his financial prowess to threaten costly legal action in attempts to intimidate less affluent citizens from exercising their constitutional right to run for public office. At each stage, he threatens further legal battles. In the brief filed by his attorney in Tarrant County District Court further threats of lawsuits and costs if he does not win are included in # 4 on the last page: "Abrams' reasonable and necessary attorney's fees incurred through trial and through any appeal taken to the court of appeals and/or the Texas Supreme Court, as permitted by Chapter 37 of the Texas Uniform Declaratory Judgements Act, or as otherwise recoverable by contract, common law and/or statue;"
and "#5. Prejudgement and post-judgement interest, if any , as provided by law;"
and "#6. All cost of suit;"
and "#7. Such other and further relief, special or general, legal or equitable, to which Abrams may show himself to be justly entitled."

NEED TO STEP-UP LATE PRIMARY FUND-RAISING EFFORT

Roy LaVerne Brooks, former Vice Chair of the Texas Democratic Party, is a candidate for Justice of the Peace, Pct. 6 in Tarrant County. Roy's vision is to partner with the community to help prevent some of the situations which bring people into the JP Court. One of her opponents, a billionaire and C.E.O. of Surety Bank, filed a challenge on all of his opponents seeking to get their names removed from the ballot. Abrams alleges that they did not have enough valid signatures on their petitions. One candidate withdrew rather than to fight legal challenges.

The challenge against Roy LaVerne was reviewed by the Tarrant County Democratic Chair. The ruling was that she had sufficient names on her petition of registered voters in the precinct and her name remains on the ballot. Mr. Abrams was not satisfied with that ruling and threatened to sue the party chair and Roy LaVerne. He filed suit in District Court, asking for an injunction to keep Roy's name off the ballot and asking that she pay all his court costs should she lose. Since all judges in Tarrant County are Republicans, he knew that this Democratic Party election case would be tried in a Republican judge's courtroom. Due to snow on the original court date, Fri. Feb. 12th, the hearing has been rescheduled for Friday, Feb. 20, 12 noon in Room 236 of the Tim Curry Court Bldg. in Fort Worth.

In addition to Get Out the Vote and other campaign expense, she is now forced to hire an attorney to defend her right to run for office. Unlike her opponent, Roy LaVerne Brooks is not a woman of independent wealth. She is a hard-working Democratic activist, community organizer, who is employed as a hospice counselor.

Mr. Abrams has the right to pursue legal means, as do all citizens. He is not the only Tarrant County JP candidate to challenge his opponent this year. He is the JP candidate who has already filed lawsuits and refused to accept the ruling of the court this year. He is the one who said he'd sue instead of mediate and whose brief asks the court to have his opponent pay his cost up to and through appeals to the Texas Supreme Court if she loses. He is the candidate whose substantial wealth dwarfs that of his opponent. Just because he has the right to sue and the means to doesn't mean that suing is the right thing to do, or that it is fair for him to. Bigger, stronger "kids" can tell a weaker one what they can do and what they have done. It's intimidating when someone with a history of taking things to the mat has many more resources to arm and fight than you do. When you do something to show your strength to intimidate instead of seeking a fair resolution, that is bullying.

She has strong name recognition in the district and years of community service/activism. Many believe that Mr. Abrams knows that she will probably beat him if the election is fair and if she is given an equal opportunity to take it to the voters. He prefers to bully and sue his way, to attempt to keep his opponent enmeshed in court, attorney's offices and in last minute fundraising to pay court costs.

Mr. Abrams track-record in banking leaves questions about why he is pursuing election as Justice of the Peace. The Dallas Business Journal published an article about the sale of Surety Bank, a financial institution which Mr. Abrams served as C.E.O./C.O.B. from 2000-2007.

The former chairman of Surety Bank, Dick Abrams, remains one of the largest shareholders in Surety Capital Corp., Surety Bank's holding company.But he was barred in June by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency from engaging in banking and leading the holding company.
The number of shares owned by Abrams is in dispute, but Surety's bankruptcy filings describe Abrams as one of the corporation's largest shareholders and notes that his son, girlfriend and family trust are also significant shareholders. Abrams could not be reached for comment.
Abrams stepped down on Oct. 1 as Surety Capital Corp's chairman. Weiner, another shareholder in the bank, took that role on the condition that Abrams promise not to sue him, Weiner said.
Says Thompson: "He volunteered to do the job that nobody else wanted."
Since then, Weiner has focused on getting the institution sold and getting investors' money out of the institution.
Surety Capital Corp. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Dec. 21.

This Fund Raising Appeal in support of Roy LaVerne Brooks is an appeal to stand up for the right of ordinary Americans to run for public office.

It is an appeal to stand with her against a man who is trying to bully and harass his way onto the General Election ballot instead of campaigning and letting the voters decide.

This is an appeal to help her defend this case in court and defend the right of all citizens to exercise their civil right to participate in the democratic process which is the foundation of our American system.

This is an appeal to let the Voters' Decide who they want as the Democratic Nominee for Justice of the Peace, Pct. 6.

Contributions of ANY AMOUNT are welcome. We welcome contributions as small as your weekly coffee money or as large as you can afford. If you can join us Saturday and show Roy LaVerne that you stand with her, we welcome your presence at the tea.

Contributions can be made securely on-line at BROOKS FOR JP6

THIS IS A CASE OF "I'll Drain You Dry in Court If My Challenge Doesn't Result in You Being Thrown Off of The Ballot."
If Mr. Abrams had a pristine registered voters petition list, we might think he was fighting over principle. However, his petition has more incomplete boxes than Ms. Brooks and many more names of people who live outside the district. If he wins and gets her thrown off the ballot on the grounds he claims in his brief, a counter-suit on the same grounds should result in him being removed from the ballot.

His financial resources are greater than the two other candidates in the race. (John Williams withdrew rather than face the challenge by Richard Abrams.

In June 2000 Richard N. Abrams Richard N. Abrams, Northfield, Illinois filed with the F.D.I.C. to acquire additional voting shares of Surety Capital Corporation, Fort Worth, Texas, and thereby indirectly acquire additional voting shares of Surety Bank, National Association, Fort Worth, Texas.

Surety had problems with the S.E.C. In the Sept. 12, 2001 Share Holder's Report Richard N. Abrams, C.E.O. wrote:

We entered into a formal agreement with the Office of the Controller of Currency in November, 1998. This Formal Agreement still remains in place, although the bank is currently in compliance with all requirements. Hopefully, we will be operating without this Formal Agreement next time I address the shareholders. However, due to the Formal Agreement, the bank can not pay dividends to the holding company. Therefore, we are unable to meet the holding company's financial obligations, i.e., debenture interest and operating expenses. I have guaranteed these payments for 2001. All loans made for this purpose are evidenced by a note payable which is convertible into stock of the holding company at $0.36 per share.

In return for meeting the Holding Company's obligations, Mr. Abrams and the board granted him (them) generous stock options. Surety's 2001 Stock Holder's Report showed Richard N. Abrams, age 60, as a Chairman of the Board, Director and C.E.O. since 2000. His bio at that time was:

RICHARD N. ABRAMS has served as a director of Surety Capital since May 2000 and was named Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer in March 2001. He has served as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Funeral Financial Systems, Ltd. (a special purpose finance company that specializes in the funeral industry) since August 1985, and of Executive Offices, Ltd. (a shared office building) since October 1986. Mr. Abrams has also served as Chairman of the Board of FuneraLeasing, Ltd. (a leasing company that specializes in the funeral industry) since December 1998. Mr. Abrams is a certified public accountant. Mr. Abrams has served as a director of Surety Bank since March 2000.

It baffles many who are watching this race. Why would a man with Richard Abrams financial interest run for Justice of the Peace??? Few can envision him actually sitting in a Justice of the Peace courtroom five days a week listening to truancy and eviction cases? Why is he doing this?

Abrams grabs power in troubled by exercising stock options.
His relative, Rodney Abrams, also increased his bank stock.

Following an S.E.C. investigation on Surety Holding's insurance division, this notice was sent to Surety Bank Stock Holders (signed by Richard N. Abrams, C.E.O.):

We entered into a formal agreement with the Office of the Controller of Currency in November, 1998. This Formal Agreement still remains in place, although the bank is currently in compliance with all requirements. Hopefully, we will be operating without this Formal Agreement next time I address the shareholders. However, due to the Formal Agreement, the bank can not pay dividends to the holding company. Therefore, we are unable to meet the holding company's financial obligations, i.e., debenture interest and operating expenses. I have guaranteed these payments for 2001. All loans made for this purpose are evidenced by a note payable which is convertible into stock of the holding company at $0.36 per share.

Mr. Abrams acquired an option on stock at a fixed $0.36 per share which he could exercise after the price of the stock rose.

COMPENSATION OF DIRECTORS

Surety Capital's and Surety Bank's board of directors consist of the same members and both organizations hold meetings on the same dates. In 2000, the bank paid each director $500 for each bank meeting attended. In 2001, the cash compensation was stopped and each outside director now will receive 2,000 shares of unregistered common stock for each board meeting attended and 1,000 shares for each committee meeting attended.

We have adopted the 1996 Stock Option Plan for Directors and the 1997 Non-Qualified Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors. Under the 1996 and 1997 Directors Plans, an aggregate of 250,000 shares of our common stock were set aside for issuance pursuant to the exercise of options granted thereunder. The 1996 Directors Plan is a formula plan pursuant to which annual options are automatically granted to our directors who are not our employees at fair market value. All options under the 1996 Directors Plan are non-qualified stock options, and vest one year following the date of grant. On the first business day of each calendar year, each non-employee director is automatically granted an option to purchase 2,000 shares of our common stock at 100% of fair market value on the grant date.

2000, each non-employee director received an option to purchase 2,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.74 per share. The 1997 Directors Plan provided for the one time grant of 25,000 non-qualified stock options to directors who were not employees at fair market value. In 1997, each non-employee director received an option to purchase 25,000 shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging from $4.18 to $5.375 per share. These options vest over five years.

We also adopted the 2000 Non-Qualified Stock Option Plan for advisory directors. Under the provisions of the plan, 100,000 shares were allocated for non-qualified stock options to advisory directors. Grantees are awarded 10-year options to acquire shares at the market price on the date the option is granted. The options vest and become fully exercisable based on a vesting schedule as determined by the compensation committee on the date of grant. On November 6, 2000, grantees were awarded options to acquire 28,000 shares of our common stock at $0.55 per share, which vest and become fully exercisable on November 6, 2001.

Abrams capitalized on the bank's situation:

In addition, in consideration for the extraordinary time and effort the members of the board of directors have given to the company and the bank, various members of the board were awarded shares of unregistered common stock at the August, 2001 board meeting. The awards were as follows: Mr. Abrams received 400,000 shares, Mr. Chappell received 60,000 shares, Mr. Bley received 30,000 shares, Mr. Kwentus received 15,000 shares and Mr. Morris received 10,000 shares. Mr. Abrams also received shares of restricted stock which will vest upon certain events. Pursuant to the grant, Mr. Abrams will receive 300,000 shares of common stock when the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency terminates the formal agreement entered into by Surety Bank prior to Mr. Abrams' affiliation; 200,000 shares if he remains as the Chief Executive Officer until the end of the 2002 fiscal year; and he will receive one share of common stock for every $3.00 of net profit realized by Surety Bank, as determined on a quarterly basis with a maximum of 400,000 shares over any two year period.

The following table shows beneficial ownership of shares of our common stock by all current directors, nominees for director and named executive officers individually, and together with all current executive officers of the Company as a group, as of August 28, 2001:

Amount and
Name of Individual Nature of
or Number of Beneficial Percent
Persons In Group Ownership (1) of Class (2)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard N. Abrams 1,266,744(3) 16.2%

Charles M. Ireland 44,583(4) *

Garrett Morris 166,749(5) 2.2%

David F. Chappell 115,555(6) 1.5%

Thomas J. Kwentus 17,777 *

Guy J. Butts 0 --

Milton M. Bley 99,000(7) 1.1%

All directors and 1,710,408(8) 21.6%
executive officers as
a group (7 persons

-------------------- * Less than 1% of all the issued and outstanding shares of common stock.

(2) Based on 7,624,511 shares of common stock issued and outstanding at August 28, 2001, as adjusted for shares convertible or exercisable within sixty (60) days which are deemed outstanding for a specific stockholder pursuant to Rule 13d-3(d)(1) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

(3) Includes 184,444 shares of common stock which are convertible from notes and 2,000 shares which Mr. Abrams has the right to acquire within sixty (60) days from the date hereof. Also includes 65,100 shares owned by Funeral Financial Systems, Ltd., a company under the control of Mr. Abrams. Does not include the restricted stock described on page 5.

(4) Includes 33,333 shares of common stock which Mr. Ireland has the right to acquire within sixty (60) days from the date hereof.

(5) Includes 19,000 shares of common stock which Mr. Morris has the right to acquire within sixty (60) days from the date hereof.

(6) Includes 55,000 shares of common stock which Mr. Chappell has the right to acquire within sixty (60) days from the date hereof.

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to our stockholders who were known to be beneficial owners of more than five percent (5%) of the issued and outstanding shares of the common stock as of August 28, 2001, except for Richard N. Abrams, whose ownership interest is disclosed in the preceding table.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name and Address Amount and Nature Percent
of Beneficial Owner of Beneficial of Class(2)
Ownership(1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carlson Capital, L.P. (3) 519,300 6.8%
301 Commerce Street, Suite 3300
Fort Worth, Texas 76102

Pine Capital Management, Incorporated(4) 528,647 6.9%
353 Sacramento Street, 10th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111

Cullen W. Turner(5) 471,377 6.2%

Rodney A. Abrams(6) 575,055 7.5%

With his relative, Rodney Abrams' shares, Richard N. Abrams controlled more Surety stock than the rest of the board combined by August 2001

Questions about his employment status

In January and February 2007 he made Federal Campaign contributions and listed "retired" as his employment status on the donor cards. In March 2007 he lists CEO Mortuary Financial on another Federal Campaign donor card. On June 11, 2007 the Comptroller of the Currency issued a cease and desist order to Surety Bank, National Association, Fort Worth, Richard N. Abrams, C.E.O.

S.E.C. Investigations and Cease and Desist Orders
In 2001, Surety's S.E.C. difficulties were attributed to his predecessor. However, in 2007 when Surety was issued a Cease and Desist Order by the Comptroller of the Currency, Richard N. Abrams has been at the helm of Surety Bank of Fort Worth and Surety Holding for seven years. Difficulties could no longer be attributed to any failure of leadership other than his own. He was the major stockholder and controlled more voting shares than any other member of the Board.

Citizens Right to Run for Public Office Challenged by Bank C.E.O.'s Lawsuit

2010-02-08T17:16:00.005-06:00

Click on IMAGE for larger view.

Roy LaVerne Brooks, former Vice Chair of the Texas Democratic Party, is a candidate for Justice of the Peace, Pct. 6 in Tarrant County. Roy's vision is to partner with the community to help prevent some of the situations which bring people into the JP Court. One of her opponents, a billionaire and C.E.O. of Surety Bank, filed a challenge on all of his opponents seeking to get their names removed from the ballot. Abrams alleges that they did not have enough valid signatures on their petitions. One candidate withdrew rather than to fight legal challenges. Mr. Abrams describes himself as a "small business owner." For most of the past decade he was CEO/COB of Surety Bank of Fort Worth, until he was barred in June 2007 by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency from engaging in banking and leading the holding company.

The challenge against Roy LaVerne was reviewed by the Tarrant County Democratic Chair. The ruling was that she had sufficient names on her petition of registered voters in the precinct and her name remains on the ballot. Mr. Abrams was not satisfied with that ruling and threatened to sue the party chair and Roy LaVerne. He filed suit in District Court, asking for an injunction to keep Roy's name off the ballot and asking that she pay all his court costs should she lose. Since all judges in Tarrant County are Republicans, he knew that this Democratic Party election case would be tried in a Republican judge's courtroom.

In addition to Get Out the Vote and other campaign expense, she is now forced to hire an attorney to defend her right to run for office. Unlike her opponent, Roy LaVerne Brooks is not a woman of independent wealth. She is a hard-working Democratic activist, community organizer, who is employed as a hospice counselor.

She has strong name recognition in the district and years of community service/activism. Many believe that Mr. Abrams knows that she will probably beat him if the election is fair and if she is given an equal opportunity to take it to the voters. He prefers to bully and sue his way, to attempt to keep his opponent enmeshed in court, attorney's offices and in last minute fundraising to pay court costs.

This Tea and Fund Raising Appeal in support of Roy LaVerne Brooks is an appeal to stand up for the right of citizens to run for public office.

It is an appeal to stand with her against a man who is trying to bully and harass his way onto the General Election ballot instead of campaigning and letting the voters decide.

This is an appeal to help her defend this case in court and defend the right of all citizens to exercise their civil right to participate in the democratic process which is the foundation of our American system.

This is an appeal to let the Voters' Decide who they want as the Democratic Nominee for Justice of the Peace, Pct. 6.

Contributions of ANY AMOUNT are welcome. We welcome contributions as small as your weekly coffee money or as large as you can afford. If you can join us Saturday and show Roy LaVerne that you stand with her, we welcome your presence at the tea.

Contributions can be made securely on-line at BROOKS FOR JP6

Food Stamp Plight Highlights Perry’s Failure To Lead, Gilbert Says

2009-10-07T00:44:00.001-05:00

Food Stamp Plight Highlights Perry’s Failure To Lead, Gilbert Says

Posted using ShareThis

Parker County Rally features Senatorial and Governatorial Candidates

2009-10-02T12:42:00.006-05:00

By Deb Cascino - Oct. 2, 2009
Cooks Political Report has said Texas is a toss-up as to whether we will have a Democrat or Republican U.S. Senator after Kay Bay Hutchison finally resigns. You have the opportunity to listen to BOTH the Democratic US Senator hopefuls, among others, at our rally tomorrow, Sat. Oct. 3, from 11:30 - 4, Hall Middle School, 902 Charles Street, Weatherford, TX 76086. (see John Sharp: www.johnsharp.com and Bill White: http://www.billwhitefortexas.com/ John Sharp speaks at 12 noon "sharp", followed by Hank Gilbert at 12:30, then Bill White at 1:00.

We will also host two of the four Democratic gubernatorial candidates: Hank Gilbert (see http://hankgilbert.com/ ) and Felix Alvarado (see https://www.felixalvarado.com/Home_Page.html )

Railraod Commissioner Democratic candidate Jeff Weems http://jeffweemsforcommissioner.com/and Bill Burton Democrat for Land Commissioner http://www.billburton.net/ will also be speaking. Attoney General candidate Barbara Radnofsky http://www.radnofsky.com/and Tom Schieffer http://www.tomfortexas.com/will be sending representatives in their absence to speak.

We need a large turnout so please make special plans to drop by and have some BBQ, baked goodies, and bid on silent auction items. Visit with local organizations and Dems and Indies from Parker and counties contiguous. You can get registered to vote, or you can write a letter to soldiers overseas. You can meet other like-minded individuals. You can do your own research on the candidates and not depend on what others tell you about them.

Bring your questions and mingle with the candidates and local Democrats and Independents as we kick-off the 2010 Primary Election Season.

ALL HANDS ON DECK: We still need auction items and baked goods. If you have something of value you'd like to donate to the silent auction or baked goodies, please contact me immediately at 817-657-4578. The rally costs are nearly $3,000, and we appreciate any amount you can donate to help defray our expenses. (See the figures below). Please do not send corporate checks or cash. Mailing address: Parker County Democratic Party, 107 N. Alamo, Weatherford TX 76086.

Also don't forget to drop by Weatherford College's Alkek Fine Arts Center to join us for a 9:00 a.m. send-off for 203 area National Guard as they prepare to be deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Hope to see you at one of the biggest Democratic gatherings in Texas tomorrow!

Parker County Democratic Chair,
Deb Cascino

Natural Gas Development Brings "Amazing" Levels of Carcinogens to DISH, Texas

2009-09-25T21:35:00.001-05:00

The chemicals found in the DISH, Texas Study can be found in any area of the Barnett Shale were natural gas development occurs.

Natural Gas Development Brings "Amazing" Levels of Carcinogens to DISH, Texas

Evaluation of Town of DISH, Texas Ambient Air Monitoring Analysis

Slater: Matt Latimer recalls Kay Bailey Hutchison 'purse boys' in new book 'Speechless'

2009-09-19T12:28:00.002-05:00

By Slater, Dallas Morning News - Friday, September 18, 2009
AUSTIN — Former George W. Bush speechwriter Matt Latimer admits being enamored of Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison when he arrived as young staffer on Capitol Hill some years ago.

"I thought a tough-talking Texas woman would be an ideal Republican presidential candidate someday," he writes in his new book, Speechless, which goes on sale next week.
Then he met her.
In his book, Latimer gives an account of the day he suddenly found himself face to face with Texas’ senior senator and her two "purse boys" in an elevator at the Capitol. He writes that a friend got her shoe wedged in the door, delaying the elevator and visibly annoying Hutchison.
“As the elevator proceeded downward, the senator turned to her J. Crew aides. They were ‘the purse boys.’ That was the nickname staffers gave them because their job seemed to consist of carrying Sen. Hutchison’s purse around Capitol Hill. They also were known to drive her from her house to work — a distance of approximately two blocks. They were basically taxpayer-subsidized butlers.”
Latimer, who worked for Bush during his final two years in the White House, goes on write that as one of the aides quietly held her large purse, she started to fish through it. Then she issued a list of instructions.
“Now I want you to take my purse back to the office,” she said.
"Yes, senator,” the purse boy responded.
“Take the nail polish out and put it in the refrigerator.”
"Yes, senator.”
"Take the rest of the makeup out and put that in the refrigerator too."
"Yes, senator."
"Then put the purse by my desk."

The purse boy nodded dutifully, and Latimer and his friend, feeling uncomfortable, let Hutchison pass when the elevator door opened. “She did so regally, without a word to either of us, the purse boys following close behind. In those few minutes, my enthusiasm for KBH sunk to a previously unfathomable low,’’ he writes.

Hutchison plans to quit the Senate soon to run for governor against GOP incumbent Rick Perry. Her camp did not return a call Friday seeking comment.
But the book’s Devil-Wears-Prada moment is not exactly attention Hutchison needs as she combats Perry and his re-election role as Mr. Populist.
Read more in the Dallas Morning News

Gilbert announces Dem bid for governor

2009-08-26T17:37:00.002-05:00

By R.G. RATCLIFFE - Houston Chronicle AUSTIN BUREAU - Aug. 26, 2009
AUSTIN – The top vote-getting Democrat from the 2006 elections — agriculture commissioner nominee Hank Gilbert — said today he plans to join the fight for his party's gubernatorial nomination.

Gilbert, 49, a Tyler-area rancher, received 42 percent of the vote in his race against Republican Todd Staples for agriculture commissioner.

In the current governor's race, Gilbert said he can bridge the gap between Democrats and moderate Republicans who are “disgusted” with incumbent Rick Perry's service. Gilbert said he does not believe U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison can defeat Perry in the GOP primary.

Gilbert's entry into the race became another potential stumbling block for Fort Worth businessman Tom Schieffer, who received endorsements Wednesday from some of the top state House Democratic leaders.

They included Reps. Garnet Coleman and Jessica Farrar of Houston, Jim Dunnam of Waco and Pete Gallego of Alpine. The group said Schieffer will be able to govern the state by bringing Democrats and Republicans together.

Schieffer has been struggling to win over hard-core Democrats because he was business partners with former President George W. Bush and served him as ambassador to Japan and Australia, where he had to defend the administration policy of indefinite detention of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay.

Former party railroad commission nominee Mark Thompson also is in the race, and humorist Kinky Friedman is expected to join the fray.

Schieffer said he had hoped that Gilbert would run for agriculture commissioner again on a ticket with him.

“Ten days ago, Hank Gilbert talked to me about being part of the team and running the ag race. His exact words to me were: ‘You need to cover me in the urban areas and I'll cover your back in the rural areas,'” Schieffer said.

Gilbert said he had told Schieffer that at a Democratic summit in Tyler, but he said he changed his mind and decided to run for governor after listening to Schieffer speak.

“The man is very intelligent,” Gilbert said. “But he just didn't inspire me. I was looking for that spark.”

Draft Ronnie Earle for Governor of Texas

2009-07-03T13:00:00.003-05:00

Help encourage Ronnie Earle to run for Governor.
Take the poll on Capitol Inside
Read more about the Draft Ronnie Earle for Governor movement:
Reclaiming the Texas Turf

Jim Hightower | The Fourth of July Is a Celebration of Agitation

2009-07-02T20:01:00.001-05:00

Jim Hightower | The Fourth of July Is a Celebration of Agitation

Shared via AddThis

Gov. Perry Signs Eminent Domain Bil

2009-06-15T22:27:00.002-05:00

By KERA News & Wire Services (2009-06-15)

DALLAS, TX (KERA) - Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed a bill today that asks voters to amend the state constitution by limiting government's ability to take private property using eminent domain authority. If approved in November, the constitutional amendment would prohibit government officials from taking property and giving it to a private developer to boost the tax base

US Senate Votes to Restrict Abusive Credit Card Practices

2009-05-19T19:29:00.006-05:00

By DAVID STOUT - The New York Times - May 19, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Senate voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to put new restrictions on the credit card industry, passing a bill whose backers say will make card-issuers spell out their terms in fewer words, using plain English, and treat customers more fairly

The 90-to-5 vote, following a 357-to-70 vote in the House on April 30, made it likely that President Obama will have a measure on his desk before the Memorial Day recess. The differences between the House and Senate versions will have to be worked out, but given the political atmosphere it seems likely that the House-Senate negotiations will move quickly.

“We stood up for consumers and stood up to abusive credit card companies,” Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader, said after the vote. “We said that big banks can no longer take advantage of hardworking Americans. We demanded that when Americans use a credit card — as almost everyone does almost every day — they no longer have to fear that they’ll be abused.”

The industry has asserted that the legislation may backfire, forcing banks to issue fewer credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders and making credit harder to get at a time when many Americans need it.

Edward L. Yingling, president and chief executive of the American Bankers Association, said the bill passed on Tuesday contained provisions that were “tough, but workable.”

“It also, unfortunately, contains some provisions that will undermine the availability of credit,” Mr. Yingling said. “Credit cards are a strong economic driver and are relied upon by consumers and small businesses to make payments and to bridge short-term financial gaps.”

Most importantly, he said, “this bill fundamentally changes the entire business model of credit cards by restricting the ability to price credit for risk.”

But the tide has been running against the banking and credit card industry, with many consumers mired in debt and the public angered by the bailout of financial firms and by reports of large executive pay packages.

“Any effort to restore confidence in our economy must start not on Wall Street but in Main Street, and that’s what the credit card situation is all about,” Mr. Reid said before Tuesday’s vote.

Senator Christopher J. Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat who heads the Senate Banking Committee, said the bill became a reality because of cooperation from Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the panel’s ranking Republican, and many other lawmakers on both sides.

President Obama has spoken derisively of the multi-page, fine-print statements familiar to millions of credit card-users. Last week, he told a receptive crowd in New Mexico that

“you should not have to worry that when you sign up for a credit card, you’re signing away all your rights. You shouldn’t need a magnifying glass or a law degree to read the fine print that sometimes doesn’t even appear to be written in English.”

Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, a senior Democrat on the finance and commerce committees, said,

“We’ve got too many hard-working families in Massachusetts struggling to keep their heads above water, and the last thing they need is to get whacked with unfair credit card fees.”

Among other things, the Senate measure would prohibit companies from raising interest rates on existing balances unless a card holder was 60 days behind, and then it would require the rate to be restored to its previous level if payments were on time for six months. Consumers would have to be notified of rate increases 45 days in advance. And companies could not charge a late fee if they were late processing a payment.

Statements would have to be mailed 21 days before a payment was due. It would be harder for companies to issue cards to people under age 21. Rates could not be increased within the first year, and promotional rates would be in force for at least six months.

Credit card debt has increased by 25 percent in the last decade, with delinquency rates up by more than a third since 2006, according to statistics cited by the White House. Americans pay $15 billion in penalty fees a year, accounting for about 10 percent of the industry’s revenues. About a fifth of those carrying credit card debt pay more than 20 percent in interest.

One amendment attached to the Senate bill by Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, would restore a Bush administration policy allowing loaded guns in national parks. That provision is not in the House version, so there may be discussions between the two chambers over the issue.

Voting against the Senate measure on Tuesday were Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Robert Bennett of Utah, Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Thune of South Dakota, all Republicans, and one Democrat, Tim Johnson of South Dakota. (The credit card industry accounts for thousands of jobs in South Dakota.)

Before Tuesday’s vote, the senators applauded their colleague Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, who cast the 11,000th vote of his Senate career.

“I couldn’t think of a better bill to cast this 11,000th vote on,” Mr. Levin said.

Carl Hulse and Peter Baker contributed reporting.
Read more in the New York Times

Sen. West in homestretch on passage of his UNT Dallas Law School

2009-05-15T11:18:00.004-05:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - May 15, 2009
Senator West has been working for multiple legislative sessions to get passage of a bill to authorize and fund establishment of a Law School in his district. Last session it was voted down but this time it made it through the Senate and was passed by the house with one minor admendment (change of name). It has gone back to the Senate where it should see easy passage. Will be interesting to see if Gov. Perry signs it, vetoes it, or leaves it languishing on his desk.

Dallas law school opposed by some North Texas lawmakers
By DAVE MONTGOMERY - Fort Worth Star Telegram - Fri. May 15, 2009

AUSTIN — The bill creating a new law school in Dallas met with opposition from the other side of the Metroplex on Thursday with state Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, saying that the $40 million state-funded initiative is money that could be better spent on healthcare.
"Why are you prioritizing more lawyers over more doctors and nurses?" Burnam asserted before the House voted 108-35 to give final approval to legislation authorizing the University of North Texas College of Law in Dallas.

Three of the 10 Tarrant County House members voted against the bill — Burnam and Reps. Charlie Geren and Mark Shelton, both Republicans from Fort Worth. State Reps. Phil King, R-Weatherford, and Rob Orr, R-Burleson, also voted no.

SB956 had sailed through the House with no debate Wednesday when lawmakers gave it preliminary approval. But Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, the bill’s sponsor, faced spirited questioning — some of it friendly, some less so — as the bill came up for a final vote.

'Pork-barrel project’

Burnam pointed out that there are already two private law schools in the Metroplex — the Texas Wesleyan University School of Law in downtown Fort Worth and the Southern Methodist University Law School in Dallas.

"They’re a little concerned about having three law schools in the North Texas area," Burnam said.

A spokesman for Texas Wesleyan, however, said that the university does not oppose the additional law school about 30 miles to the east.

"We’re not at all against it," said Dan Brothers, director of marketing. "We feel that another entity of higher education has got to be beneficial for the state."

Burnam, whose district includes Wesleyan, said in an interview that university officials have said "nothing officially" in opposition to the new school. But, he said, "I don’t know anybody in the legal community in Fort Worth that is in favor of this pork-barrel project in Dallas."

Dallas support

Branch, chairman of the House Higher Education Committee, called the proposed law school a "very good value for the taxpayers" and pointed out that Texas hasn’t opened a new state-supported law school since 1967.

But Burnam, questioning Branch from the rear of the chamber, told the Dallas lawmaker that creation of a new law school undercuts efforts to construct a new medical school in South Texas.

"I just think that’s the wrong priority," Burnam said. "I don’t think I can support your bill."

Branch’s Dallas colleagues came to his support. Rep. Helen Giddings, D-Dallas, said a public institution would make an education in law more accessible to minorities and would be substantially cheaper than private schools.

Branch reiterated that Fort Worth-Dallas is the nation’s only major metropolitan area without a public law school.

The new law school would be part of the Denton-based University of North Texas System, with the first class projected to open in 2011.

At the outset, students would attend classes in a downtown academic center now shared by UNT, the University of Texas at Arlington and Texas A&M-Commerce. But the college would eventually move across the street into the Old Dallas Municipal Building.

Read nore in the Fort Worth Star Telegram

The Texas Legislature On-Line:

BILL ANALYSIS
C.S.S.B. 956 By: Sen. Royce West
Higher Education Committee Report (Substituted)

The Dallas-Fort Worth area is the fifth largest Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area in the United States and the only one that does not have a public law school. Texas' population has increased from 14.3 million to 22.5 million with no additional law schools being added, limiting the opportunities for Texans to attain an affordable legal education in Texas. With the continuing growth of the Dallas-Fort Worth region, the need for legal knowledge is increasing. Currently, Dallas must import 30 percent of its attorneys from out-of-state law schools.

C.S.S.B. 956 authorizes the University of North Texas System board of regents to establish and operate a school of law in the city of Dallas as a professional school of the University of North Texas System for five years and as a professional school of the University of North Texas at Dallas after that period. The bill grants the board of regents additional bonding authority to finance capital acquisitions, construction, and improvements for the law school, and entitles the law school, under certain conditions, to participate in the higher education fund provided by the Texas Constitution.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.

ANALYSIS

C.S.S.B. 956 amends the Education Code to authorize the University of North Texas System board of regents to establish and operate a school of law in the city of Dallas as a professional school of the University of North Texas System. The bill authorizes the board, in administering the law school, to prescribe courses leading to customary degrees offered at other leading American schools of law and to award those degrees. The bill requires the board to administer the law school as a professional school of the system until the University of North Texas at Dallas has been administered as a general academic teaching institution for five years and requires the law school to become a professional school of the University of North Texas at Dallas after that period. The bill establishes that the law school, until becoming a professional school of the university, is considered an institution of higher education and is entitled to formula funding as if the law school were a professional school of a general academic teaching institution. The bill requires the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, before The University of North Texas System board of regents establishes the law school, but not later than June 1, 2010, to prepare a feasibility study to determine the actions the system must take to obtain accreditation of the law school. The bill requires the coordinating board to deliver a copy of the study to the chair of each legislative standing committee or subcommittee with jurisdiction over higher education.

C.S.S.B. 956 grants the University of North Texas System board of regents up to $40 million in additional bonding authority to finance the acquisition, purchase, construction, improvement, renovation, enlargement, or equipping of property, buildings, structures, or other facilities, including roads and related infrastructure, for the law school established in the city of Dallas by the University of North Texas System. The bill authorizes the board of regents to pledge irrevocably to the payment of the bonds all or any part of the revenue funds of an institution, branch, or entity of the University of North Texas System, including student tuition charges, and prohibits any reduction or abrogation in the amount of such a pledge while the bonds for which the pledge is made, or bonds issued to refund those bonds, are outstanding. The bill authorizes the board, if sufficient funds are not available to the board of regents to meet its obligations, to transfer funds among institutions, branches, and entities of the University of North Texas System to ensure the most equitable and efficient allocation of available resources for each institution, branch, or entity to carry out its duty and purposes.

C.S.S.B. 956 adds the University of North Texas College of Law to the list of component institutions of the University of North Texas System.

C.S.S.B. 956 establishes that venue for a suit filed solely against the law school or against officers or employees of the law school is in Dallas County. The bill provides that in case of a conflict between the above provision and any other law, the above provision controls.

C.S.S.B. 956 entitles the college of law to participate in the higher education fund provided by the Texas Constitution for institutions of higher education if this bill receives a vote of at least two-thirds of the membership of each house of the legislature.

EFFECTIVE DATE

On passage, or, if the act does not receive the necessary vote, the act takes effect September 1, 2009.

COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE

C.S.S.B. 956 differs from the original by referring to the University of North Texas College of Law, whereas the original refers to the University of North Texas at Dallas College of Law. The substitute removes a provision authorizing the University of North Texas System board of regents to accept gifts, grants, and donations from any public or private source for the purposes of the law school. The substitute removes a provision in the original establishing that the bill does not make an appropriation and that the bill takes effect only if a specific appropriation is provided. The substitute adds provisions not in the original relating to the grant of additional bonding authority to the University of North Texas System board of regents to finance capital acquisitions, construction, and improvements of facilities and infrastructure for the law school.

News 33 Dallas on Local Option and Gas Tax

2009-05-14T14:18:00.003-05:00

TO PARTICIPATE IN POLL:

The gas tax has not been indexed for inflation in Texas since the 1960ies. Financing transportation with an increase in the gas tax will cost most taxpayers 1/10 of what it will cost them to travel on toll roads if they commute to work 5 days a week.

Council woman Lana Wolff's family finances and husband's indictment on insurance fraud are issues in Place 5 City Council Race.

2009-05-09T00:55:00.007-05:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - May 9, 2009
Arlington City Council Woman, Lana Wolff's family finances hit the news this year.
Despite her husband, Jimmy Wolff's multiple indictments for Insurance Fraud, racketeering, and filing false financial statements, the Arlington Police Association endorsed Council woman Wolff for re-election in today's election. The Arlington Police Association did not respond to our inquiries about the reasons for their endorsement.

Ms. Wolff stated on her League of Women Voters Survey that the only legal problems she has is "One frivilous lawsuit not followed up."
Records show that she is named as a party with husband Jimmy Wolf in a multi-million dollar lawsuit by a party who received a judgement in the couples previous bankruptcy. The judgement has not been paid so the lawsuit was filed attempting to get payment.

Ms Wolff has two opponents in today's City Council race. Attorney Terry Meza's campaign says that Ms. Meza is running on her own qualifications. The media and individuals who were burned in the melt-down of TriUnion Insurance and other business enterprises of the Wolff family are vocal about the business enterprises run out of the Wolff family residence on Norwood Dr. in Arlington. Ms. Meza prefers to discuss her vision for neighborhood revitalization, economic development and job creation in the historic original town, east Arlington and central business district around the University of Texas at Arlington. Experienced in neighborhood revitalization, Terry Meza headed non-profit community development organization which was instrumental in revitalization of historic neighborhoods in Fort Worth. Ms. Meza has been endorsed by DFW Regional Concerned Citizens in this race. In making the endorsement, Ms. Wolff's and Ms. Meza's many years of community service and governmental service were weighed. Meza has less financial and adverse legal baggage than Ms. Wolff and exceeds the incumbent city councilwoman in education and professional experience specific to the challenges facing the city council district which spans the entire width of Arlington from the Grand Prairie City Limits to Pantego City Limits. The northern boundary is Division and the southern boundary is Pioneer Parkway. Both candidates have lived in the district at least 20 years. A third candidate, Mr. Driscoll, has not shown up at debates and does not appear to be a serious contender for the seat.

Steve Goss of Frisco issued a press release this week in which he claims that the Wolff's children's trust was used to hide funds transferred from the TriUnion Insurance Company. Mr. Goss contends that "Ms. Wolff had to be knowledgable of some of Jimmy Wolff's insurance dealings. The family's residence was listed as business address and two of the Wolff's grown children are employed in the family trust."

Mr. Goss sent his press release to DFW Regional Concerned Citizens as a Letter to the Editor.
This letter is from Mr. Goss. It has not been fact-checked by DFW REGIONAL CONCERNED CITIZENS.
We have included articles from numerous publications and the Oklahoma Attorney General's website below Mr. Goss's article. We urge voters to use discernment and weigh the sources.

INSURANCE AGENT QUESTIONS ARLINGTON COUNCILWOMAN’S COMMENTS
FRISCO,TX. MAY 6, 2009: Multi-state licensed insurance agent Steven S. Goss is questioning the involvement of Arlington City Councilperson Lana Wolff and her family into the disappearance of millions of dollars which an attorney for the State of Oklahoma says were “looted” by Jimmy Warren Wolff of Arlington, Texas and partner Rodney Alfred Williams of Fort Worth, Texas. Goss says recent newspaper articles in the Fort Worth Star Telegram regarding the debate between District 5’s Lana Wolff and former Arlington councilman Dick Malec has raised some genuine if not additional criminal issues. While Goss believes Malec is right to question Wolff and her husband’s prior $97 Million bankruptcy with only about $300,000 in assets, he contends there is far more to this story than is being told about the Wolff family.

Goss believes Wolff’s husband’s involvement into mysterious Tarrant county real estate businesses may be benefiting from her position on the Arlington City Council. “As a person in the position to oversee real estate project developments, land swaps and the like, it would seem germane, even mandatory, to determine where her husband’s invisible real estate actually is and whose name the properties are owned under. Her husband signed documents, under oath, claiming their Children’s Trusts owned companies which had Tarrant county real estate, as investments, of over $4.3 million and even listed them by property address, purchase dates and amounts. We all know now these properties, specifically listed at non-existent Trinity Meadows street addresses, never existed.”

Goss also claims her family’s ties to the insolvent insurance company and its affiliate real estate development company, Triunion Financial Corporation, contain more involvement than just her husband. “Triunion issued checks for millions of dollars to the insurance company and deposited millions of dollars of checks from that company in order to facilitate their schemes” says Goss. “It is my understanding one daughter, a Patti Wolff, worked for the illegal insurance company’s very small staff and Triunion’s President is a Mark Wayland, Lana Wolff’s possible son in law.” Goss claims should Lana Wolff try and deny these allegations, he will gladly produce documents confirming both allegations. “Since Lana and Jimmy’s children are the beneficiaries of the companies involved in what appears to be many federal crimes, and one daughter worked for the company and one daughter’s husband was the President of the other company, this goes a lot deeper than has
been previously exposed”. Goss claims it is a violation of Federal law, specifically 18 U.S. 1344 (2), commonly referred to as bank fraud, to obtain funds from a financial institution by means of false or fraudulent pretenses and Wolff and other family members and employees have yet to be investigated or charged federally for their actions.

Goss also has written to Mr. Malec questioning some of Ms. Wolff’s campaign contributions from an attorney that filed many of the property deeds for Jimmy Wolff which he used to grossly inflate the assets of his company and contributions from a Fort Worth banker that loaned money based the deeds of trusts on properties illegally transferred from the insurance company which Wolff’s partner, Rodney Williams, used to obtain approximately $1.2 million in loan proceeds that were never paid back. “Mssr. Wolff and Williams have tens of millions of dollars of past unpaid judgments and liens by the IRS both personally and against many of their former and current businesses. They operate like viruses jumping from unsuspecting host to unsuspecting host. Goss says he was surprised the recent Swine Flu is now being called the H1N1 virus when a Wolff/Williams virus name would have been available. “Maybe if it was more deadly, they would have called it that.” Goss adds “I d
on’t know anything about the other candidates in this race but I don’t see why these people should be rewarded for engaging in criminal activities to further their and their children’s lives and lifestyles at our expense.”

Steven Goss currently owns and operates Stonebriar Insurance Group Inc. and One Stop Insurance Agency of Texas, Inc. located in Frisco, Texas. Steven served briefly as the Offensive Quality Control Coordinator at the University of Tulsa Golden Hurricane Football team in 2005. Steven was also an adjunct professor of Accounting for Richland Community College of Dallas. To reach Mr. Goss for further information or clarity, please contact him at (469) 362-5300 or at steven@stevengoss.com

COURTS
Texans charged in insurance fraud
By NEWSOK - October 19, 2007
Felony charges were filed Thursday against two Texans accused of insurance fraud in Oklahoma, Attorney General Drew Edmondson said.

The charges, including conspiracy, racketeering and filing a false financial statement, were filed in Oklahoma County District Court against Jimmy Warren Wolff, 61, of Arlington, Texas, and Rodney Alfred Williams, 73, of Fort Worth, Texas, the controlling owners of Oklahoma-based Top Flight Insurance.

Edmondson said Wolff and Williams are accused of transferring money from another company they controlled, TriUnion, to make Top Flight appear solvent in insurance reports.

The pair allegedly bolstered Top Flight's books by issuing a check from TriUnion prior to Top Flight's deadlines for filing paperwork with insurance regulators. The next day, the money would be transferred back to TriUnion, Edmondson said.

Each man is charged with one felony count of conspiracy against the state, nine felony counts of filing a false financial statement and one felony count of racketeering. Read more on NEWSOK

by W.A. Drew Edmondson, Oklahoma Attorney General - 10/18/2007
Two Charged in Insurance Scheme

Two Texas men accused of inflating their assets in an attempt to keep their insurance business open were charged in Oklahoma County District Court today by Attorney General Drew Edmondson’s Workers’ Compensation and Insurance Fraud Unit.

Jimmy Warren Wolff, 61, and Rodney Alfred Williams, 73, were each charged today with one felony count of conspiracy against the state, nine felony counts of filing a false financial statement and one felony count of racketeering.

Wolff and Williams, the controlling owners of Oklahoma-based Top Flight Insurance, are alleged to have regularly transferred money from a second company they controlled, TriUnion, in an attempt to make Top Flight Insurance appear to be a solvent company in annual and quarterly reports filed with the Oklahoma Insurance Department. The state alleges the two men filed false reports on nine occasions between December 2002 to December 2004.

“Because of the false paperwork filed by Williams and Wolff, a company that likely would have been declared insolvent by the Insurance Department continued to take in consumer premiums,” Edmondson said. “We allege Williams and Wolff took in almost $4 million in premiums during this time.”

According to the attorney general, the pair allegedly bolstered the Top Flight books by issuing a check from TriUnion on days immediately preceding Top Flight’s deadlines for filing paperwork with the Insurance Department. The next day, the money would be transferred back to TriUnion.

In addition to their money transfer scheme, Williams and Wolff are accused of falsely reporting their real estate holdings to further bolster their financial standing with the Insurance Department. The company allegedly purchased 66 properties valued at $614,395, but the recorded value listed in Top Flight’s ledger for these properties was $10,500,000.

“This company was shut down by the Insurance Department in 2005,” Edmondson said. “Prior to that, consumers who relied on Top Flight for insurance coverage were unknowingly working without a net. In the case of a large-scale disaster, this company would not have had the financial holdings to cover all the assets it insured.”

Williams and Wolff were charged after an investigation by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation.

Read more on Oklahoma Attorney General Website

Attorney general accuses two men of insurance fraud

By Associated Press - Denton Record Chronicle - 10/18/2007
Felony charges were filed Thursday against two Texans accused of insurance fraud in Oklahoma, Attorney General Drew Edmondson said.

The charges, including conspiracy, racketeering and filing a false financial statement, were filed in Oklahoma County against Jimmy Warren Wolff, 61, of Arlington, Texas, and Rodney Alfred Williams, 73, of Fort Worth, Texas, the controlling owners of Oklahoma-based Top Flight Insurance.

Edmondson said Wolff and Williams are accused of transferring money from a second company they controlled, TriUnion, to make Top Flight appear to be solvent in annual and quarterly reports filed with the Oklahoma Insurance Department.

The pair allegedly bolstered Top Flight's books by issuing a check from TriUnion prior to Top Flight's deadlines for filing paperwork with insurance regulators. The next day, the money would be transferred back to TriUnion, the attorney general said.

The company likely would have been declared insolvent by the Insurance Department but continued to take in consumer premiums due to the false paperwork, Edmondson said. He said Williams and Wolff took in almost $4 million in premiums due to the scheme.

In addition, Williams and Wolff are accused of falsely reporting their real estate holdings to bolster their financial standing with the Insurance Department.

The company allegedly purchased 66 properties valued at $614,395, but the recorded value listed in Top Flight's ledger was $10.5 million.

"This company was shut down by the Insurance Department in 2005," Edmondson said. "Prior to that, consumers who relied on Top Flight for insurance coverage were unknowingly working without a net. In the case of a large-scale disaster, this company would not have had the financial holdings to cover all the assets it insured."

Each man is charged with one felony count of conspiracy against the state, nine felony counts of filing a false financial statement and one felony count of racketeering. Read more in the Denton Record Chronicle

Attorney general accuses two men of insurance fraud

By the Associated Press - Dallas Morning News - 10/18/2007

Felony charges were filed Thursday against two Texans accused of insurance fraud in Oklahoma, Attorney General Drew Edmondson said.

The charges, including conspiracy, racketeering and filing a false financial statement, were filed in Oklahoma County against Jimmy Warren Wolff, 61, of Arlington, Texas, and Rodney Alfred Williams, 73, of Fort Worth, Texas, the controlling owners of Oklahoma-based Top Flight Insurance.

Edmondson said Wolff and Williams are accused of transferring money from a second company they controlled, TriUnion, to make Top Flight appear to be solvent in annual and quarterly reports filed with the Oklahoma Insurance Department.

The pair allegedly bolstered Top Flight's books by issuing a check from TriUnion prior to Top Flight's deadlines for filing paperwork with insurance regulators. The next day, the money would be transferred back to TriUnion, the attorney general said.

The company likely would have been declared insolvent by the Insurance Department but continued to take in consumer premiums due to the false paperwork, Edmondson said. He said Williams and Wolff took in almost $4 million in premiums due to the scheme.

In addition, Williams and Wolff are accused of falsely reporting their real estate holdings to bolster their financial standing with the Insurance Department.

The company allegedly purchased 66 properties valued at $614,395, but the recorded value listed in Top Flight's ledger was $10.5 million.

"This company was shut down by the Insurance Department in 2005," Edmondson said. "Prior to that, consumers who relied on Top Flight for insurance coverage were unknowingly working without a net. In the case of a large-scale disaster, this company would not have had the financial holdings to cover all the assets it insured."

Each man is charged with one felony count of conspiracy against the state, nine felony counts of filing a false financial statement and one felony count of racketeering. Read more in the Dallas Morning News

CRIME WATCH
Insurer The owners of Top Flight Insurance infl ated theircompany’s assets to keep it afloat, Oklahoma prosecutors charge. Jimmy Warren Wolff and Rodney Alfred Williams routinely transferred money from another insurer they owned called TriUnion, prosecutorssay. Twice they transferredthe funds the day before they filed financial reports required by the insurance department… Read more in Fraud Focus - The Coalition against Insurance Fraud

Keeping the Polls Open - Why a key part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act should survive.

2009-04-30T20:00:00.005-05:00

The Washington Post - Wednesday, April 29, 2009
WITH AN African American president, does the nation still need its decades-old voting rights laws?

This is one of the questions likely to animate oral arguments this morning in a Supreme Court case that could determine how far the federal government may go in policing states with histories of racial discrimination.

At issue is Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which mandates that 16 states, mostly Southern, obtain approval from the Justice Department or a federal judge before changing voting procedures; Section 5 also applies to individual jurisdictions within those states. The section was enacted after federal lawmakers became frustrated by some states' regular attempts to evade laws meant to correct voting discrimination. Congress set a five-year term for the law but has extended it three times, most recently in 2006, when overwhelming bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate approved a 25-year extension, signed by President George W. Bush.

Critics argue that Section 5 gives unprecedented and unconstitutional power to the federal government over election matters that should be the province of the states. They also argue that Section 5 is no longer needed, citing not only President Obama's election but the thousands of African Americans who serve in public office at all levels.

Section 5 is indeed a powerful and intrusive tool, and progress has been made on minority participation. Yet Section 5 is, sadly, still relevant and necessary today.

Republicans, including former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole and former attorney general Richard L. Thornburgh, filed a brief that makes a compelling case for upholding Section 5. It notes that between 1982 and 2006, often under Republican presidents, the Justice Department rejected 700 requests for voting changes from covered states after concluding that they were discriminatory. The officials also point to extensive findings by the House and Senate in 2006 that showed that "voting changes devised by covered jurisdictions resemble those techniques and methods" used decades ago, including discriminatory redistricting plans, switching offices from elected to appointed positions, relocating polling places and changing elections from single-member districts to at-large voting.

No state should be punished forever for the sins of the past, and Section 5 rightly allows covered states or their political subdivisions to get out from under pre-clearance requirements by proving to the Justice Department or the D.C. federal court their faithful adherence to the voting rights laws for the previous decade. Seventeen jurisdictions in Virginia have earned such a "bailout" within the past few years.

Yet the political leaders in this country decided a mere three years ago that this peculiar and powerful federal oversight must be retained to protect what some have called the right from which all others flow. That political judgment, supported by empirical evidence of lingering discrimination, deserves great deference.
Read more in the Washington Post

Glimmers through the darkness

2009-04-27T11:05:00.010-05:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - April 27, 2009
I find watching Austin antics and regional "planners" this legislative session is a continuing saga of self-serving depression of previous disastrous Texas legislative sessions. I wonder if we could improve government by forbidding elected officials from crossing into the city of Austin. Through the dark haze of this disenchanted political junkie, two glimmers of hope elate me. One is a tidbit from the Austin Statesman picked up by Capitol Annex The word on the street is that someone I'd actually love to see as Governor of Texas, a person of proven integrity, is actually considering running in 2010. Wow! Ronnie Earle is the nemesis of George and his college roomie and their cronyies' self-serving politics and practices.

Most Texans deserve a government diametrical different from the privatization, self-serving graft of the Bush/Perry years. Perry posed as the "more professional" harder working partner to George. Seeing that the citizens of Texas are increasingly disenchanted with his consentious dedication to preserving the fortunes of a few at the expense of "the many", Governor 38% Perry has changed his tactics. Seeing that George W. got elected despite being "Bubba", he's dressing similarly to George W. on the aircraft carrier declaring the war over ten minutes after he started it. Seeing that folks "smell" him despite his expensive suits, Perry chucked them and is now making the talk show PR circuit attempting to be "more Bubba than Bubba."

Gosh, what a change it would be to actually have a solid, decent, intelligent, consistent servant of the people actually serving the People of Texas in the Governor's office. Hearing that Ronnie Earle is seriously considering it lifts my spirits.

Another ray that sliced through my gloom is the introduction of two transportation bills in the U.S. Senate last week. They were announced on my birthday and I'll consider passage of “Transportation Access for All Americans Act,” (S. 885) and the “Transportation Equity for All Americans Act” (S. 884) as the brightest birthday gift I could receive this year. They are in the Senate Transportation Committee right now. U.S. Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) are the authors!

The legislation will eliminate expensive federal subsidies that now flow to privatized highways. When a state or city leases a highway, it receives significant compensation, but taxpayers always end up paying higher tolls to the private operator.
--ATA Truck Drivers News

Read more in DFW Regional Concerned Citizens

Hey, two decent Federal transportation bills and Ronnie Earle as potentially governor of Texas makes it an incredibly brighter week for this disillusioned political junkie.

Food for Thought - Food Safety

2009-03-23T09:37:00.004-05:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - March 23, 2009
In the 2006 Texas Agriculture Commissioner's race, Hank Gilbert warned eveyone who would listen that lax inspections (responsiblity of the Texas Agriculture Commission) endangered the nation's foodchain. The US has stricter rules regarding pesticides and food production than do other countries who import food through the US/Texas border.

Little has improved in the Texas Agriculture Commission since Todd Staples became Agriculture Commissioner in 2007. Instead, the international spotlight has watched as the peanut industry tanked following contamination of peanuts processed in Texas and sold to industrial clients who manufactured many of the nations grocery products containing peanuts!

In Washington, the Obama administration is attempting to address some food safety issues. A Federal approach, without effective efforts on the state level on border states will not solve the problem. Hopefully, the Federal Food Safety taskforce, is a much over-due start.

Washington Post Editorial - Monday, March 23, 2009

The president appoints a working group to improve food safety.
SINCE 2006, the concept of food safety, as practiced by the federal government, has seemed oxymoronic. The recent concern about contaminated peanuts is but the latest in a series of food scares that included salmonella outbreaks involving tomatoes, peppers and spinach. With each occurrence, Congress thundered about the need to fix the way the nation safeguards its food supply, but little was done. Maybe more will happen now that President Obama has formed a Food Safety Working Group and selected a top-notch team to lead the Food and Drug Administration.

A congressional hearing on tainted peanuts last week unearthed more reasons for queasiness. The private inspection company hired by Peanut Corporation of America (PCA) warned it of impending visits, giving the company plenty of time to tidy up what federal inspectors and others found during unannounced inspections: rat droppings, dead insects and rodents, and other unsanitary conditions. The troubles at PCA are symptoms of larger problems that need to be addressed.

Aside from increasing the number of federal inspectors and the frequency of visits they make to the country's nearly 150,000 food facilities, a number of good ideas are kicking around the Capitol. Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) would give the FDA authority to issue mandatory recalls for contaminated food -- no more relying on the goodwill of businesses that might be tempted to put the bottom line above the public health -- and would require it to devise a system to trace food and produce from the farm to the dinner table. Legislation from Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) would require companies to test for the hazards that are most likely to occur in their products and then have the federal government devise standards for what constitutes a hazard.

The Food Safety Working Group will include Margaret A. Hamburg and Joshua Sharfstein. Dr. Hamburg, a highly regarded former New York City health commissioner and assistant secretary for health and human services under President Bill Clinton, was tapped by Mr. Obama to be the next FDA commissioner. The president nominated Dr. Sharfstein, Baltimore's health commissioner, to be the FDA's principal deputy commissioner. Congress should move quickly to confirm them so they can get to work.

Federal Inspectors Often Difficult to Reach, Group Says

2009-03-23T09:30:00.001-05:00

By Ed O'Keefe - Washington Post Staff Writer - March 23, 2009

Federal inspectors general too often ignore or discount the complaints of whistleblowers, and concerned citizens attempting to report government waste or mismanagement may face difficulty making even basic contact with the offices via telephone or the Internet, according to a new report from a government watchdog group.

The report, released late last week by the independent Project on Government Oversight (POGO), revealed vast inconsistencies in the accessibility, design and ease of use of the Web sites of the inspector general offices. "Some of the largest departments have only the tiniest, faintest link to their IG's home page, while several very small and frankly obscure agencies have easily found links that jump off the agency home page," according to the report.

Many offices of the inspector general outsource their telephone hotlines, forfeiting a good deal of control over operators and the complaints they compile. When POGO staffers called the inspector general hotlines for the departments of Defense and Transportation, the same operator at a third-party call center answered the phone. "The hotline operators -- local college students, according to one IG who uses the service -- also simultaneously handle the hotlines for several private companies."

David Colapinto, general counsel with the National Whistleblowers Center, agreed with the report's findings and suggested lawmakers need to pay closer attention to the process.

"I think that when Congress appropriates more money and they hear these reports from the IGs, they think they're supporting whistleblowers and addressing the problem when they're really not," Colapinto said. "A lot more needs to be done in this area."

Many inspector general offices may have difficulty identifying serious hotline reports of waste, fraud and abuse because they are also alerted to minor complaints they cannot address. Kenneth Mead, who served as the Transportation Department inspector general from 1997 to 2006, recalled getting calls to his office about potholes in Maine.

"It's important that people have some place to vent, but you don't want real senior-level people handling calls like that," he said, adding that hotlines need better-trained staff members to effectively process legitimate, serious complaints.
ad_icon

The expanding workload of watchdogs at larger agencies may also be to blame for the short-shrifting of complaints. In addition to overseeing the work of tens of thousands of federal employees, some inspectors general are now responsible for tracking the distribution of billions of dollars in federal funding from the economic recovery package.

This is the second annual report on inspectors general from POGO, and it includes feedback from most of the federal government's 64 investigative offices. Despite its criticisms, POGO gives generally favorable reviews to their overall mission and culture.

"This is not a broken system, but we do think there are new ways of thinking about IGs," said POGO Executive Director Danielle Brian. "Everyone recognizes the importance of the job."
Read more in the Washington Post

Macquarie Public Infrastructure model bleeding red ink on US Toll projects

2009-03-02T19:42:00.004-06:00

Brisbane Times - Feb. 27, 2009
http://business.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/battered-n-bruised-20090227-8kbl.html

Battered 'n' bruised
While no one is game enough to predict Macquarie's demise, the global economic downturn is forcing the group to rethink its famed business model, writes Lisa Murray.
Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels basked in the applause as he entered a room full of state officials and reporters to officially announce the close of the state's $US3.8 billion toll road privatisation.

It was June 29, 2006, and Daniels had received the final payment from Macquarie Infrastructure Group and its Spanish partner, Cintra, which had taken over a 75-year lease on the Indiana Toll Road, the so-called "Main street of the Midwest".
Daniels was confident the deal would turn around the state's financial fortunes and he had big plans for the proceeds.

But he was not the only one celebrating.
In Sydney, Macquarie Group executives were riding high. Not only did its investment bankers just rake in $US32.6 million in fees but the group had also officially cracked the elusive US infrastructure market. The Indiana transaction followed deals to buy Virginia's Dulles Greenway and the Chicago Skyway, which was the first US road privatisation.

Together, the three infrastructure plays had netted Macquarie $US74.7 million in advisory and debt arrangement fees and had substantially boosted the assets under management of its biggest fund, MIG. That meant higher management and performance fees for Macquarie.
The stage was set for more deals to come. Despite a public backlash against selling off state assets, Daniels's counterparts, from New York to Alaska, were lining up to flog their roads and bridges to the highest bidder. What had started with a small motorway in north-western Sydney was working its way across the world's biggest economy. The "Macquarie Model" had arrived in the US.

It's a well-told story. Macquarie became a global brand buying up toll roads, ports, airports, car parks and water companies around the world, at times paying over a billion dollars more than the next bidder. The assets were piled with debt, often up to 85 per cent of the purchase price, and then rolled into listed and unlisted funds, which paid Macquarie advisory, management and performance fees. Yes, the group still had its traditional trading, funds management and banking businesses but it was the specialist infrastructure funds which put it on the map and drove earnings growth to dizzying levels.

However, the world changed in September last year, with the collapse of US investment bank Lehman Brothers, which ended any hopes that the subprime mortgage crisis would blow over.
Funding dried up, asset valuations started plummeting and debt became a dirty word, leaving the "Macquarie Model" all but dead and its management team scrambling to avoid disaster.
The US roads, a cause of so much celebration 2½ years ago, are struggling to repay their debts and Macquarie's share price, held hostage to a market awash with capital raising rumours, slumped this week to its lowest level since June 1999.

It is not just day traders and rumour mongers selling the stock; long-term investors, including its biggest US shareholder, Capital Group, have been abandoning ship. The shine has well and truly come off the silver doughnut.

"The strategy of buying an asset and gearing it up to generate returns - that game is clearly up," says Perpetual Investment's head of equities, John Sevior. Perpetual does not own any shares in Macquarie or its satellite funds. "It's an opaque business and it's very hard to understand the level of gearing. The gearing in the group is above our level of tolerance."
Copycats Babcock & Brown and Allco have already disappeared under a mountain of debts. While Macquarie's balance sheet is strong - thanks to a government guarantee on wholesale funding for banks, which has allowed it to raise a whopping $12 billion in offshore markets in just over two months - its satellite funds are struggling. Macquarie's Australian-listed infrastructure funds have had more than $12 billion wiped off
their market value since the start of last year. The local real estate funds have lost a further $5.6 billion.

Total losses for shareholders in the funds over the past 12 months range from 52 to 91 per cent, compared to a 37 per cent drop in the market's main index.
MIG's chairman, Mark Johnson, a former senior executive and deputy chairman of the group, says he "can't understand why prices have been marked down so savagely".
But he acknowledges the "Macquarie Model" will need to change. "Inevitably it must change quite radically because we are seeing the biggest crisis in credit markets since the 1930s," he told the Herald.

"Investors want certainty of survival. Anything that has high leverage is seen as risky and not what investors want. The flagship funds are under great pressure to adapt and to convince investors that their survival is assured and they are appropriate investments."

It was a bad news week for Macquarie. MIG announced that traffic had slumped on the Indiana Toll Road and Dulles Greenway in the US and they were using all available cash to pay back debt. It also wrote down its investment in the San Diego South Bay Expressway from $133 million to $11.6 million.

Macquarie Airports, meanwhile, was forced to dump a share buyback so that it could tip equity into Sydney Airport for the second time in three months to ease its debt burden and Macquarie's media fund, MMG, wrote down the value of its US community newspaper group, American Consolidated Media, by $127 million. Macquarie CountryWide and Macquarie Office Trust have sold US properties to pay down debts, MIG sold part of its stake in the M7 tollway to prove to the market how much it was worth and shore up its balance sheet and MMG slashed its dividend by more than three-quarters.

All of this means fewer fees for Macquarie and more write-downs on its stakes in the funds. The group has already announced an estimated $2 billion of total write-downs for the year to March 31 and it expects to report that profit has halved to $900 million. That is not a bad result given that almost no other investment bank in the world is in the black.
Even so, these debt issues hang over Macquarie as does the March 6 deadline for Australia's short-selling ban, which many believe kept the hedge fund managers at bay at a crucial time for the group. Those same hedge fund managers will no doubt be furiously running the numbers over Macquarie in the coming weeks, ready to pounce on any signs of weakness should the ban be lifted. Even with the ban in place, Macquarie was bruised and battered this week and forced to deny it had any plans for a capital raising.

But the problem for Macquarie is that varying degrees of disclosure among its many funds make it difficult for the market to understand the businesses and their debt positions and how they relate to the group.

That allows rumours to run wild. No one really knows how much debt is held across the group, but some analysts estimate it is more than $160 billion.

Jim Chanos, the president of the US hedge fund Kynikos Associates - who became famous for his early warnings on Enron - has been a vocal critic of the Macquarie Model. He says the model gave the group incentive to overpay for assets because the shareholders in the funds picked up the tab while Macquarie's fees were based on the size of assets under management. The higher the price, the bigger the assets under management, the more lucrative the fees.

Macquarie funds and their co-investors paid over $1 billion more than the next bidder for both Sydney Airport and the Chicago Skyway.

While assets in its funds are struggling with debt payments, there is no doubt Macquarie has always been very good at protecting the bank. Debt is held at the asset level. That means it is non-recourse to the funds, let alone to Macquarie, a clever strategy that essentially ring-fences any problems.

But it is not that simple. As one insider says, if an asset were to fail, while Macquarie may not be obligated to come to the rescue, the reputation risk would be "enormous". Taking action, on the other hand, could spook investors and affect its credit rating.

"At some stage, if a significant fund was in major strife, Macquarie might take the view that they need to protect the franchise," says Sharad Jain, a credit analyst at Standard & Poor's. "That would be a change in financial policy and we would need to consider that at the time as it is outside our expectations."

Macquarie says that will not need to happen as none of its funds is in "major strife". It has already managed $3 billion of refinancing since September. And in terms of its four main listed infrastructure funds, there is no outstanding refinancing for this year and only 12 per cent of debt needs to be refinanced over the next three years. But there are clearly some assets that are stretched.

MIG said at its results this week that the Indiana Toll Road had a debt service coverage ratio of just 1 times. That means that all of its operating income is being swallowed up by debt payments and is a concern given that traffic on the road, a mostly commercial toll road that runs 253 kilometres across northern Indiana, fell nearly 15 per cent in the last half. The ratio for Virginia's Dulles Greenway is 1.1 times.

Chicago Skyway's debt service coverage ratio was a more encouraging 2.1 times. However, a look at its 2007 full-year accounts, the latest available, shows the asset had total long-term debt of $US1.55 billion.

It reported revenues from its toll roads of $US53 million for the year, operating income of $US18 million, while its interest expense was $US95 million.

MIG argues that the US roads make up just 11 per cent of its portfolio by valuation. And it is important when looking at a single asset to keep it in perspective in terms of the size of the fund and the overall group.

"A number of these roads either have already, or will shortly, introduce scheduled toll increases which will see continued revenue grow and the debt service coverage position improve," an MIG spokeswoman said.

Andrew Chambers, from Austock Broking, is less optimistic. But he says the US roads are a small part of MIG's business.

"The US assets are clearly struggling and the outlook is not good but you don't own MIG for the US roads, you own it for its toll roads in Canada and France, which are very good assets."

In the past, sceptics of the "Macquarie Model" said higher interest rates would bring it undone. But the group argued that interest rates typically rose in line with inflation and higher inflation would mean increased tolls on its roads, airport charges and parking fees. As such, the higher revenue would be a natural hedge against rate increases.
But the current situation is different.

Debt is more expensive not because of interest rates, which are falling, but because people are placing a higher value on risk. So the margin that lenders are charging on top of the cash rate, to make it worthwhile for them to take on the risk, has increased.

At the same time, the slump in economic growth means it is harder for Macquarie to raise tolls, water rates and airport charges to offset the increased cost of its debt.

MIG's Johnson says there are no "life-threatening problems" in the funds or at group level.

"Macquarie's balance sheet is very, very sound," he says.
"The question mark is over the earnings trend for the next two or three years, but I think they are very well placed to benefit from the recovery."

Macquarie plays down the significance of the specialist funds business. But it still accounted for 20 per cent of Macquarie's income in the year to March 31, 2008, and just over a quarter of total advisory fee income came from work on the funds, according to its results presentation. Some analysts claim that number might be higher, depending on what you include.
The corporate governance group RiskMetrics calculated that in the three years to 2006, Macquarie's three biggest Australian-listed infrastructure funds - Macquarie Airports, Macquarie Communications Infrastructure Group and Macquarie Infrastructure Group - handed over more than $1.15 billion in fees to the group.
So there will clearly be earnings pressure as those fees drop and in some cases disappear. Despite these concerns, no one is game enough to predict Macquarie's demise. And in fact some even expect the group will thrive in a market where almost every company in the world will go through a restructure.

They've done it before.
Two of the group's business-transforming transactions took place after times of crisis. Macquarie bought its fiercest local competitor, BT Australia, in 1999 after the Russian debt crisis. And in 2004, as Asia was recovering from its financial crisis, it picked up the ING cash equities business in the region.

"Investors will make a fortune out of the recovery and Macquarie is best positioned to do that," one former executive says.
"They have lots of capital, they're smart and they still have a very diverse business. They will ride this out."

While Macquarie's business will change dramatically, Perpetual's Sevior says the bank is unlikely to go the way of its imitators. "They have shown an ability to remake themselves in different cycles in the past but it will be a very difficult environment this time around."
Rob Patterson, the managing director of Argo Investments, a top 20 shareholder in Macquarie, says the group has "done exceptionally well relative to all of their peers in a very difficult environment".
He dismissed any comparisons with Babcock & Brown, noting that Macquarie was a more diversified business, with well-established stockbroking, funds management and private banking arms.
Macquarie's debt is also less concentrated and longer dated (Babcock was mainly relying on one single $3.1 billion debt facility.) And it is widely regarded to have better risk management processes in place.
"B&B is a one-dimensional fund manager and a very different organisation," says one former executive director. "It's like comparing a pushbike to a Rolls-Royce."
Another important distinction between the two is that Macquarie owns a bank.
That means its banking arm is regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority and it has minimum capital requirements. It also means that the bank has access to funds that other investment houses never had because of the government guarantee scheme introduced in November.
Basically, the Government is handing out its AAA credit rating to Australian banks in return for a fee, allowing them to raise long-term money offshore. Macquarie has raised $12 billion since mid-December in Japan, the US, New Zealand and Australia.
"Macquarie has been one of the most active users of that scheme," said S&P's Jain, adding that the raisings had allayed some concerns the agency had about Macquarie, when it slapped a negative outlook on the group's rating last September.
Macquarie's retail deposits have also benefited from the government guarantee, rising to $18.1 billion at the end of last year, from $13.2 billion at the end of March.
Macquarie executives, including the chief executive, Nicholas Moore, declined to be interviewed.
In response to emailed questions, a spokeswoman for the group said it was "well-funded before the guarantee and has continued to improve its funding position".
She also denied speculation that the group was looking at selling its underperforming property business and talked up potential acquisition opportunities, noting Macquarie's recent acquisition of the US gas trading business Constellation Energy. On the infrastructure side, Macquarie sees more growth in unlisted funds and says governments are likely to turn to the private sector for infrastructure investment in the downturn.
If Macquarie wants to get retail investors interested in listed infrastructure funds again, they would have to be radically different to the funds of old, with reasonable fee structures and transparent corporate governance guidelines.
"It's a new era where investors are much more fee conscious and much more cost conscious," says Hugh Giddy, the managing director of the fund manager Cannae Capital Partners.
"There's a revulsion against greed. The social mood has changed. Investors are saying we need independent directors to say that Macquarie doesn't get to do all of the debt arranging and corporate advice.
"This is more than a cyclical change; it's a structural change in terms of their ability to run their model."

Immigration Priorities Questioned Report Says Focus on Deporting Criminals Apparently Shifted

2009-02-05T10:00:00.002-06:00

By Spencer S. Hsu - Washington Post Staff Writer - Thursday, February 5, 2009

As the Obama administration vows to re-engineer immigration policy to target criminals, a new report says that in recent years, a high-profile federal program shifted its focus away from catching the most dangerous illegal immigrants who were evading deportation orders.

Between 2003 and 2008, 27 percent of the more than 96,000 illegal immigrants arrested under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's National Fugitive Operations Program had criminal convictions. And in 2007, 9 percent of those arrested were fugitives from deportation orders who were criminals or were considered dangerous. That same year, the share of arrests of illegal immigrants not facing deportation orders grew to 40 percent.

The findings come as Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has ordered a review of which immigrants are targeted for arrest and as a Democratic Congress has shifted ICE money toward pursuing criminals.

Under President George W. Bush, immigrant advocates complained that armed ICE agents conducted harsh and indiscriminate raids at homes and in neighborhoods, and advocates accused the government of racial profiling, illegal searches, false arrests, family separations and other humanitarian abuses.

Authors of the report, issued by the Immigration Legal Clinic at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York City and the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, said that despite assurances to Congress, Bush administration officials changed course from trying to capture the most dangerous illegal immigrants to boosting arrest totals.

Peter L. Markowitz, a Cardozo law professor, said Bush officials approved such tactics because they were "facing political pressure to look tough on immigration enforcement." ICE, he said, "created tremendous bureaucratic incentives" for fugitive operations teams to adopt "a shotgun approach of undisciplined home raids."

In January 2006, ICE raised arrest quotas for each team in the program from 125 to 1,000 and ended a requirement that 75 percent of those arrested be criminals. Later, ICE let teams count non-fugitives toward their numerical goal. The Cardozo-MPI findings were first reported yesterday by the New York Times.

Rep. David E. Price (D-N.C.), chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee for homeland security, said he was "discouraged that ICE's previous leadership misrepresented the goals of the expanded Fugitive Operations Program and chose not to use its additional resources as Congress instructed."

Spending on the program grew from $9 million in 2003 to $219 million in 2008, and the number of fugitive operations teams grew from eight to 104.

Julie L. Myers, ICE director from 2006 until last year, called the report "a work of fiction with a thinly veiled agenda" that "unfairly maligns the work Congress asked the agency to do."

Congress has mandated "that all fugitives must be identified, arrested and removed," current ICE spokeswoman Kelly A. Nantel said, not just those with prior criminal convictions.

Nantel added that ICE arrested more than 250,000 other criminal illegal immigrants last year through different programs and that so far in fiscal 2009, it has picked up 179 percent more than in the same period a year earlier.

For the first time, she said, the number of immigrants evading deportation orders fell sharply, from 634,000 in 2007 to 554,000 currently, in part through a purge of outdated records.

"To give non-criminal fugitives a pass is to send the message that a judge's deportation order doesn't matter. It is a message of amnesty for lawbreakers," said Rep. Lamar Smith (Tex.), the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration.

Napolitano called that message a "false dichotomy," saying, "No, it's a matter of where you put your emphasis. . . . It doesn't mean that you give a blank check to everybody else."

For example, ICE estimates that as many as 450,000 criminals being held in federal, state and local U.S. detention are illegal immigrants. The agency deported about 113,000 criminals last year.
ad_icon

This year and last, congressional Democrats gave ICE $350 million and told the agency to redirect an additional $850 million to catch and deport criminals, leading to a rebound in arrests.
Read more in the Washington Post

How would you like to have this pipeline in your yard?

2009-02-04T08:40:00.002-06:00

A 10 inch pipeline ruptured in Franklin County, MO yesterday. The pipelines running through front yards in Fort Worth are 16 inch gas gathering lines carrying raw, wet natural gas at about 200 psi..

KTVI Fox
Part of Highway 100 reopened this morning after a propane pipeline breaks. Families evacuated can move back into their homes today The gas leak started yesterday afternoon along Highway 100 between Pacific and Washington.

Here is a list of a few pipeline explosions.

There are many, many examples of explosions and fires occurring in conjunction with natural gas pipeline ruptures. For example, the Pecos River explosion near Carlsbad, NM in 2000 created a large crater, killed 12 people, and blew a large section of the pipe 287 ft away from the crater.

An email from a resident of Missouri:

From what I have been able to gather, this is a 10 inch Conoco Propane Pipeline that was struck while workers were widening Highway 100. They did shut off the pipeline at the valves on each side of the line but it is expected that it will take all night for the broken section to empty. This is a heavy gas and settles near the ground so there is a chance of ignition if the gas comes in contact with an ignition source.
Please monitor the local news coverage of this rupture and when you watch the video of the propane spewing into the air PLEASE consider what this would do if it were in our backyards. Also keep in mind that the pipeline that sits 16 feet from my home is a 24 inch line. Just imagine!
There is more work to be done here in St. Peters. Those of us who are already within 16 to 50 feet from these pipelines need help.
Please help us! Get us out of here before an unimaginable grotesque tragedy occurs here in St. Peters.

Target of Immigrant Raids Shifted

2009-02-04T08:29:00.004-06:00

By NINA BERNSTEIN - New York Times - February 3, 2009

The raids on homes around the country were billed as carefully planned hunts for dangerous immigrant fugitives, and given catchy names like Operation Return to Sender.

And they garnered bigger increases in money and staff from Congress than any other program run by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, even as complaints grew that teams of armed agents were entering homes indiscriminately.

But in fact, beginning in 2006, the program was no longer what was being advertised. Federal immigration officials had repeatedly told Congress that among more than half a million immigrants with outstanding deportation orders, they would concentrate on rounding up the most threatening — criminals and terrorism suspects.

Instead, newly available documents show, the agency changed the rules, and the program increasingly went after easier targets. A vast majority of those arrested had no criminal record, and many had no deportation orders against them, either.

Internal directives by immigration officials in 2006 raised arrest quotas for each team in the National Fugitive Operations Program, eliminated a requirement that 75 percent of those arrested be criminals, and then allowed the teams to include nonfugitives in their count.

In the next year, fugitives with criminal records dropped to 9 percent of those arrested, and nonfugitives picked up by chance — without a deportation order — rose to 40 percent. Many were sent to detention centers far from their homes, and deported.

The impact of the internal directives, obtained by a professor and students at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law through a Freedom of Information lawsuit and shared with The New York Times, shows the power of administrative memos to significantly alter immigration enforcement policy without any legislative change.

The memos also help explain the pattern of arrests documented in a report, criticizing the fugitive operations program, to be released on Wednesday by the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research organization in Washington.

Analyzing more than five years of arrest data supplied to the institute last year by Julie Myers, who was then chief of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the report found that over all, as the program spent a total of $625 million, nearly three-quarters of the 96,000 people it apprehended had no criminal convictions.

Without consulting Congress, the report concluded, the program shifted to picking up “the easiest targets, not the most dangerous fugitives.”

It noted, however, that the most recent figures available indicate an increase in arrests of those with a criminal background last year, though it was unclear whether that resulted from a policy change.

The increased public attention comes as the new secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, has ordered a review of the fugitive teams operation, which was set up in 2002 to find and deport noncitizens with outstanding orders of deportation, then rapidly expanded after 2003 with the mission of focusing on the most dangerous criminals.

Peter L. Markowitz, who teaches immigration law at Cardozo and directs its immigration legal clinic, said the memos obtained in its lawsuit reflected the Bush administration’s effort to appear tough on immigration enforcement during the unsuccessful push to pass comprehensive immigration legislation in 2006, and amid rising anger over illegal immigration.

“It looks like what happened here is that the law enforcement strategy was hijacked by the political agenda of the administration,” he said.

Kelly A. Nantel, a spokeswoman for the immigration agency, defended the program. “For the first time in history, we continue to reduce the number of immigration fugitive cases,” she said, noting that the number of noncitizens at large with outstanding deportation orders, which peaked at 634,000 in the 2007 fiscal year, is now down to about 554,000. “These results speak for themselves and they are consistent with Congress’s mandate: locate and remove immigration absconders.”

Ms. Nantel said the number of fugitives with criminal backgrounds arrested in the 2008 fiscal year rose to 5,652, or 16 percent of 34,000 arrests, and nonfugitives fell to 8,062, or 23 percent.

Many Americans have welcomed roundups of what the agency calls “ordinary status violators” — noncitizens who have no outstanding order of deportation, but are suspected of being in the country unlawfully, either because they overstayed a visa or entered without one.

But Michael Wishnie, one of the authors of the report, who teaches law at Yale, said that random arrests of low-level violators in residential raids not only raised a new set of legal and humanitarian issues, including allegations of entering private homes without warrants or consent and separating children from their caretakers, but was “dramatically different from how ICE has sold this program to Congress.”

“If we just want to arrest undocumented people,” he said, “we can do it much more cheaply.”

Congressional financing for the fugitive operations program rose to $218 million in the 2008 fiscal year, from $9 million in 2003, as the number of seven-member teams multiplied to 104 from 8.

In Congressional briefings and public statements since 2003, agency officials have repeatedly said that given the vast number of immigrants with outstanding deportation orders, the program will focus its resources on the roughly 20 percent with a criminal background.

An Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo dated Jan. 22, 2004, underscored that commitment: “Effective immediately, no less than 75 percent of all fugitive operations targets will be those classified as criminal aliens” — noncitizens with a criminal record as well as an order of deportation. It added that “collateral apprehensions” — immigration violators encountered by chance during an operation — would not be counted in that percentage.

But on Jan. 31, 2006, a new memo changed the rules. The directive, from John P. Torres, acting director of the agency, raised each team’s “target goal” to 1,000 a year, from 125.

And it removed the requirement that at least 75 percent of those sought out for arrest be criminals. Instead, it told the teams to prioritize cases according to the threat posed by the fugitive, with noncriminals in the lowest of five categories. And it repeated that “collateral apprehensions will not count” toward the 1,000 arrest quota.

But that standard, too, was dropped nine months later. A new memo from Mr. Torres said “nonfugitive arrests may now be included” to reach the required 1,000 arrests. On average, however, it said at least half of those arrested by each team should be fugitives. It also promised to “ensure the maximum availability of detention space for fugitive arrest operations.”

One result was an increase in noncriminals held in immigration detention. Another, the Migration Policy Institute report concluded, was that the percentage of criminal fugitives arrested plummeted, to 9 percent in the year that ended Sept. 30, 2007, from 39 percent in the 2004 fiscal year.

That same year, 15,646, or 51 percent of those arrested, had an outstanding deportation order, but no criminal record, and 12,084, or 40 percent, were termed “ordinary status violators” who did not fit any of the program’s priority categories.

The report said the program relied on a database riddled with errors, and that many deportation orders were issued without the subject in court, sometimes because of faulty addresses.

The looser rules were reflected in sweeps like one conducted in New Haven in June 2007. During the raid, lawyers at Yale’s immigration law center said, agents who found no one home at an address specified in a deportation order simply knocked on other doors until one opened, pushed their way in, and arrested residents who acknowledged that they lacked legal status.

Of the 32 arrested and scattered to jails around New England, only 5 had outstanding deportation orders, and only 1 or 2 had criminal records.
Read More in the New York Times

A Warm and Fuzzy Day in Austin

2009-01-14T08:07:00.002-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - Jan. 14, 2009
Yesterday was a rare day in Texas History. The opening day of the 81st Texas Legislaturerare day of amiability in the Texas Legislature was exceptionally warm and fuzzy as Democrat after Democrat seconded the nomination of Rep. Joe Strauss of Bexar County for Speaker of the Texas House. Voted Speaker by Acclaimation, Strauss, a two-term representative (R) is heralded as the conciliator, listener, get things done for the people guy for the job. His election was greeted with a standing ovation with everyone in the house on their feet. There were more "hold outs" when the crowd was urged to thank outgoing Speaker Tom Craddick and his wife for their service to the State of Texas!

Today the real work begins. As the House and Senate begin debating what laws need to be repealed and what needs to be passes, much of the warmth will probably fade. The Trans Texas Corridor has merely been rebranded -- not killed. Years of special interest bought and paid for private public partnership toll road legislation needs to be wiped from the books. Statutes which allows TxDOT or contractors on the TTC who contaminate Texas property in planning or constructing the Trans Texas Corridor to 1. perform their own environmental studies 2. condemn contaminated property and adjacent property must be wiped from the books.

Texas needs to repeal Perry's substitute for the Texas Toll Road Moratorium which requires market pricing on Texas toll roads. Hopefully, the Obama administration will repeal George W. Bush's outgoing gift to the American people - requirements of market valuation aka congestion pricing on Federal toll roads and HOV lanes. Congestion pricing does not clean up the air. It merely fleeces the least able to pay of more dollars when they have to commute during rush hour while allowing those with discretionary income or able to pass along the cost to clients, employers or the american public through expense accounts to utilize the fast lane while the rest are left in their exhaust fumes in traffic gridlock. Local townships, cities and counties eat the fruit of so-called congestion pricing as they scramble to maintain and expand local roadways to accommodate the cars which seek other routes home and to work.

Another hot topic this session is education financing. School funding has not been indexed to meet inflation. Cuts in education funding in the prior session is resulting in cuts in programs, staffing.

Jim Mattox's last public remarks: "In Texas we did not win the election."

2008-11-22T14:21:00.003-06:00

Filmed by Scott Cobb -
Austin, Texas - West Caucus Advisory Committee Meeting - Nov. 2008

PART 1

PART 2 - History and purpose to restrict voter participation with specific directions on how to organize to win "the election".

Message from Tom Love

2008-11-04T11:23:00.000-06:00

Posted by Faith for Tom Love for U.S. Congress District 24 Campaign - Nov. 4, 2008
As we enter the final stretch of this incredible race, I want to take a minute to thank you.

This nation is built on the hard work and "elbow grease" of the American people. I have traveled District 24, meeting my neighbors. I've seen the dedication of North Texans. Despite personal struggles, I've witnessed neighborhoods and communities come together to help neighbors and strangers. You solve problems, care for your families, and work for a living, while serving others - like those who had to evacuate the Texas Gulf Coast. For some this would seem heroic, but for the "extraordinary people here in North Texas, "it's normal -- it's what we do."

It is my honor to be the Democratic nominee for U.S. Congress for the 24th District. I have grown as I've traveled and listened and learned from you.

I give each voter, encourager, volunteer, and donor my heartfelt thanks. If the voters decide to send me to Washington, I will continue listening to you. Our nation is especially challenged right now but I am confident that the spirit which exists here in North Texas and the ingenuity and dedication of the people will prevail.

The polls are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. today. If you have not voted yet, PLEASE GO VOTE TODAY.

If you send me to Washington, I promise that I'll be the working man on the hill fighting for the good of the folks here in North Texas.

Thomas P. Love
Democratic Candidate for U.S. Congress District 24

Democratic fundraiser and famed lawyer Fred Baron dies of cancer

2008-10-30T23:30:00.002-05:00

By JOE SIMNACHER - The Dallas Morning News - Thursday, October 30, 2008

Frederick M. “Fred” Baron, a plaintiff’s lawyer who amassed a fortune that he used to rejuvenate the Democratic Party in Texas, died Thursday afternoon of complications from cancer.

Mr. Baron, 61, catapulted into the national political limelight in August, when it was revealed he had paid to move a woman who had had an affair with former presidential hopeful Sen. John Edwards. Mr. Baron, who had been Mr. Edwards’ top fundraiser, said at the time that he did it only to help the woman.

In his last battle with a corporation, Mr. Baron got permission to use the drug Tysabri in an experimental treatment to try to save his life. His doctors at Mayo Clinic worked with the Federal Drug Administration to find a legal basis for using Tysabri to treat his final stage multiple myeloma, a cancer of the bone marrow.

The drug company, Biogen Idec Inc., argued that the experimental use of the drug — approved to treat multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease — might jeopardize it future use in chemotherapy.

Mr. Baron’s son, Andrew, detailed his father’s fight to get Tysabri in letters posted on his personal blog. That lobbying effort was joined by a host of prominent backers, including Lance Armstrong, the bicyclist and cancer survivor; Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton; Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass; and Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., who has brain cancer.

Mr. Baron was known in legal circles as the “King of the Toxic Torts” for his success in representing thousands of people injured by toxic substances, beginning with asbestos.

Selected as one of the nation’s 100 most influential lawyers in 2000 and 2006, Mr. Baron had become more widely known as a Democratic fundraiser and donor, having given nearly $3.5 million to the party.

Mr. Baron, who was born in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, moved to Smithville, Texas, with his mother, when he was 15. He was educated at the University of Texas at Austin, where he received a bachelor’s degree 1968, and a doctor of law degree in 1971.

Mr. Baron said a 1970 Ralph Nader speech in Austin influenced him to use the law to regulate business conduct in ways that government could not.

In 1977, after winning his first asbestos case, Mr. Baron founded his Dallas firm, Baron & Budd, with his wife, Lisa Blue.

He was highly successful litigating for plaintiffs injured by substances including asbestos, pesticides and lead. But he was criticized for operating a legal assembly line, and his detractors charged that he coached witnesses how to testify.

In 2002, he became president of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America. He sold his firm and moved to Washington D.C.

In 2003, Mr. Baron stopped practicing law and became the lead fundraiser for Sen. Edwards. The next year, he headed the Kerry-Edwards general election finance team.

In 2005, Mr. Baron established the Texas Democratic Trust, to booster the party on the verge of extinction as a state-wide political factor.

Mr. Baron’s political fundraising efforts are said to have been a major factor in the Democratic Party’s Dallas County sweep in the 2006 off-year election.

Mr. Baron lived in Dallas with his wife and three young children.

Read more in the Dallas Morning News

Middle-aged white women are this year's prized voting bloc

2008-10-19T17:33:00.004-05:00

By TREVOR TOMPSON and ALAN FRAM - The Associated Press - Sun, Oct. 19, 2008
WASHINGTON — In past presidential elections, Veronica Deveso could have told you by now who she was backing and why. Not this time.

All the former taxi dispatcher from Hamburg, N.Y., wants is a candidate "with a solid plan to do something, almost anything," to bolster the economy and end the Iraq war. Dissatisfied with the campaign rhetoric she’s heard so far, Deveso, 56, remains "right at the top of that wall and could fall either way."

The wall she’s perched on is crowded. White women age 45 to 64, like Deveso, are one of this year’s most hotly contested voting blocs. They’re evenly divided between Barack Obama and John McCain and wide open to being pulled either way, according to a recent Associated Press-GfK Poll.

There are plenty of them, too, prompting both presidential campaigns to woo them vigorously. About 1 in 6 voters in the 2004 presidential election was a white woman in that age range, exit polls showed.

These are the boomer women — middle-aged daughters of the post-World War II generation. Many have long balanced jobs with households, and often they’re acutely aware of their families’ economic pressures because they write the checks, buy the groceries and fill the gas tank.

Feisty, demanding

They’re women used to demanding answers and making choices. With a worldwide economy that’s lurching toward recession, they’re demanding that the presidential candidates show them concrete solutions to the financial crisis and other problems.

"There’s a sense of precariousness" among these women, said Frederick Lynch, a government professor at California’s Claremont McKenna College who is researching a book on baby boomers. Women of this generation "are a little more savvy: 'Hey, bad things can happen, people can get sick, people can get laid off, and it doesn’t hurt my macho to admit that.’ "

As a group, these middle-aged white women have not yet been swayed by either contender — in contrast to black and Hispanic women, who back Obama by the same heavy proportions that minority men do. The women are split between McCain and Obama, and identify themselves as Democrats or Republicans in about equal numbers, the AP-GfK poll showed.

"If they came up with something about the economy that really made me feel like they have a really good handle on it," it would help, said Rae Ann Priester, 52, of Fresno, Calif., who is leaning toward Obama but could switch. "They’re sort of dancing around the issue."

Still persuadable

Forty-four percent of them remain persuadable — that is, either completely undecided or favoring one candidate while conceding that they may change their minds. That’s bigger than the 33 percent of all voters who are still persuadable.

"If you’re aged right in the middle like me, it’s hard to decide," said Deborah Nance, 56, of Wilmington, Del. "Go with the seasoned guy who might get in there and die the next day, or go with the young guy who you really don’t know all that much about."

The evenly divided boomer women stand in contrast to voters overall, who polls show have leaned toward Obama since the financial crisis intensified in recent weeks. And while voters overall trust Obama more than McCain on the economy, boomer women in the AP-GfK poll are about equally split over which candidate they prefer on the issue. They narrowly say Obama better understands how the financial crisis affects them.

The poll was conducted late last month, before the candidates released economic plans.

Challenge for Obama

Persuadable boomer women have two characteristics that have made things tougher for Obama.

Most don’t have college degrees. Less-educated whites have long been a difficult group for Obama.

And, most persuadable white, middle-aged women who are Democrats supported Hillary Clinton during the primaries, according to AP-Yahoo News polls.

"A lot of them, like me, might be Hillary supporters and were shocked to find out she didn’t get the nomination," Deveso said of white, middle-aged women.

Still, there are signs Obama is faring relatively well with boomer women.

His neck-and-neck showing with McCain among them is better than the 2004 performance by John Kerry. White women age 45 to 64 favored President Bush that year by 12 percentage points.

In the recent AP-GfK survey, more boomer women said Obama understands people like them. On the other hand, more said McCain has the right experience to be president.

McCain targets women

With so much at stake, McCain has targeted middle-aged white women with TV ads, direct mail and phone calls, using a message that focuses on economic concerns, said Sarah Simmons, the campaign’s director of strategy. That message is reinforced by running mate Sarah Palin, who "speaks to them in a very profound way," Simmons said.

The Obama campaign has run roundtables, blogs and house parties for women, and it has broadcast ads on equal pay and other issues on television shows that attract female viewers. Campaign spokeswoman Moira Mack said women will play "a hugely important role in this year’s election."

The AP-GfK Poll was conducted Sept. 27-30 and included cell and landline telephone interviews with 808 likely voters, for whom the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3.4 percentage points. Included were interviews with 135 likely white female voters age 45-64, for whom the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 8.4 points.
Read more in the

Fort Worth Star Telegram

Obama's Voting Record

2008-10-06T06:23:00.003-05:00

By Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff - Sunday, August 31, 2008
His eloquent words alone cannot be allowed to define Barack Hussein Obama.

However thin the Democratic presidential nominee's resume, his record is worth exploring. It's the best way to know what he's likely to do if elected.

The conclusion of those who have researched his record: He's vastly more liberal than his image.

How liberal? He's ranked as the most liberal U.S. senator -- to the left, even, of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who calls himself a socialist.

In Citizens Against Government Waste's 100-point rating of senators and congressman on fiscal responsibility, Obama got a mere 10.

And a Washington Times investigation of Obama's eight-year record in the Illinois state Senate finds that Obama was so far to the left on many votes that he made his liberal Democratic colleagues look like Rush Limbaugh.

Some examples of Obama's extremism in the Illinois Senate, as provided by The Washington Times :

- Obama was the only senator not to support a bill "to report suspected child abuse while protecting the identity of the facility or person providing the information." The bill passed 54-0-1 -- the one being Obama, who voted "present." It passed the Illinois House 117-0.

- Obama voted present "on a bill in committee requiring criminals to serve consecutive sentences for separate crimes involving convictions for severe bodily harm or sexual assault, but didn't vote at all when the measure came to the floor." The bill passed the Senate 54-0 and the House 118-0.

- Obama voted present on a bill "making it harder for abusive and neglectful parents to regain custody of their children." The Senate vote was 57-0-1, with the lone wolf being Obama.

- Obama skipped a vote on a bill "to prohibit convicted sex offenders from serving on school boards." It passed without him, 58-0 in the Senate and 106-0 in the House.

Adds the Times : "The records also show Mr. Obama voted 'no' on a bill allowing police officers to execute warrants and enter buildings without knocking if there was a reasonable belief a weapon would be used against them;

voted "present" on legislation requiring that minors who commit gun crimes on or near a school be prosecuted as adults; and did not vote on a bill requiring fingerprint background checks on school bus drivers.

"Mr. Obama was the only member of the state Senate to vote against a bill to prohibit the early release of convicted criminal sexual abusers; and was among only four who voted against bills to toughen criminal sentences, increase penalties for criminals whose offenses were committed in the furtherance of gang activities, and increase penalties for the delivery of Ecstasy and other designer drugs."

Obama also voted "present" in 2001 on three bills that required medical help for babies accidentally born in botched abortions. In 2002 he had another chance -- and actually voted against helping the survivors of failed abortions.

In 2003, as chairman he helped kill a similar bill in committee.

Meanwhile, as stories come out about his having learned at the feet of socialists and even a communist, Obama has tried to downplay his connections to admitted domestic terrorist William Ayers ('a guy who lives in my neighborhood,' Obama said in a primary debate). But in papers from Ayers' "Chicago Annenberg Challenge" released just this past week after a long battle, it appears the association between Obama and Ayers was much deeper. Obama served on the organization's board for years, for a time as chairman. And Ayers hosted Obama's first campaign fund-raiser.

"They in fact were partners in various entities and regularly exchanged ideas," writes Investor's Business Daily , "including on how to turn Chicago schools into re-education camps to create a generation of social revolutionaries."

Obama isn't just ignoring or running from his past. He's actively trying to cover over it: His campaign has threatened TV stations with their broadcast licenses for running ads noting Obama's link to Ayers.

Obama's record and his associations, past and present, define him, much more so than his lofty rhetoric. And he is the definition of an extremist far out of step with mainstream American values.

By every expert's assessment, this presidential election was the Democrats' to lose. And they very well may do that. In their zeal for change, and in succumbing to the cult of celebrity without asking questions first, they have chosen a nominee who is extreme in the extreme. His record, and his views, are only now coming out.

The Democrats may have fallen in love with someone they barely knew.

That hardly ever ends well.
Read more in the

Augusta Chronicle

Campaign cash cows are put out to pasture

2008-09-19T10:46:00.003-05:00

By DENNIS CONRAD - Associated Press Writer - Sept. 19, 2008

WASHINGTON - This fall, many members of Congress will see a major source of campaign contributions disappear, possibly never to return.

Political action committees affiliated with mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are now banned from engaging in lobbying activities, including making donations. They were ordered to cease when the Bush administration engineered a government takeover of the quasi-governmental companies and put them under a conservatorship in an effort to help reverse a housing and credit crisis.

Whether the PACS come back in some form is likely to depend on the next Congress, says Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who, as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, says he will be open minded about it.

PACS, committees formed by business, labor, or other special-interest groups, raise money from their members or employees and make contributions to the campaigns of political candidates whom they support.

Both men seeking the presidency, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., agree on the need to monitor the federal takeover of the two mortgage concerns, but hold different views on what the PACS' ultimate fate should be.

Obama would make it more difficult for Freddie and Fannie to have PACS, saying he wants to reduce the influence of money over the political process. Obama's presidential campaign has raised more private money than any in history, but he doesn't accept PAC dollars. He opposes allowing Fannie and Freddie to be returned as profit-making enterprises whose possible losses are guaranteed by the government.

McCain favors taking both companies fully private and letting them determine whether they want PACS.

Ultimately, it may not matter what the next president thinks about the PACS. Neither McCain nor Obama is likely to veto a bill over whether it allows for PACS. And Congress will likely be under pressure to keep the campaign contribution spigot from those PACS turned off.

That pressure is likely to come from other parts of the finance industry, says Jonathan Koppell, a professor of political science at Yale University's School of Management. He noted that Fannie and Freddie's competitors have long believed the two had an unfair advantage that stemmed from cozy relations with Capitol Hill.

A spokesman for the American Bankers Association declined comment.

Since 2003, Democrats and Republicans have collected $2.3 million from the two PACs. That could sway some lawmakers to insist that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac be reshaped as purely private businesses, which would allow them to revive their PACs.

The contributions are part of a lobbying arsenal that has invested $80 million over the past five years to win hearts and minds in the capital. Fannie and Freddie have spent big on hiring former White House officials and lawmakers. Some members of Congress have received tens of thousands of dollars from the PACS, especially those on committees with jurisdiction over the companies, including Frank.

"They had huge armies of lobbyists that were tripping over each other, so they developed friends on both sides of the aisle over the years," said Peter Fitzgerald, a Virginia banker and former Republican senator from Illinois. "Republicans got very tight with them over the years and they got very powerful."

Stephen Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington-based watchdog group, said the PACs' campaign cash to Congress has helped insulate Fannie and Freddie from oversight.

"The fundamental lack of rigorous accounting and adult supervision is one of the major reasons that taxpayers have had to take over these companies that are drowning in red ink," Ellis said.

The companies hold or guarantee some $5 trillion in outstanding mortgages, more than half the nation's total. It is unclear, experts say, what the taxpayers' responsibility will become. The future of the PACs may depend on how Fannie and Freddie are changed and whether they continue the affordable housing component that Congress has been required.

"If taxpayers continue to have any degree of involvement with these companies they should not be allowed to lavish campaign cash on their elected representatives," Ellis said. "Fannie and Freddie benefited from their close association with the federal government. They can't have it both ways again."

Fully privatized, the companies could have PACS, because corporations have the right to have them as a matter of free speech. On the other hand, the creation of fully governmental replacements would eliminate the possibility of PACS, as government agencies cannot lobby.

"I hope next year we will have a long and serious set of very inclusive discussions" on the issue," said Frank. "I don't want to prejudge that."

DFW area receives Gustav Evacuees

2008-08-31T20:50:00.001-05:00

DISASTER RELIEF

The Volunteer Center of North Texas is working in collaboration with the American Red Cross, the North Texas Food Bank and The Salvation Army to prepare for a possible mass evacuation as a result of Hurricane Gustav.

As of Saturday, August 30, it has been announced that 4,100 individuals will be evacuated to our area. However, depending on where the hurricane makes landfall, it has been projected that 45,000 people, or more, could evacuate to the DFW Metroplex. Here's how the four organizations will coordinate the response:

• The American Red Cross will manage and oversee shelter operations.

• The Salvation Army will provide meals at all mass shelter locations.

• North Texas Food Bank will provide food for meal preparation.

If you wish to sign up to volunteer as needs arise, please download and fill out an application and email to volunteerme@volunteernorthtexas.org. You will be contacted and scheduled, as needed. For more information, call 1-866-797-8268.

URGENT NEED!

The Volunteer Center is in immediate need of volunteers to help serve meals at shelters that are already open for Hurricane Gustav evacuees. As the evacuation continues, volunteers will be needed for other roles as well. All volunteers must complete a volunteer application form. Volunteers SHOULD NOT go to a shelter expecting to volunteer without prior approval, as every volunteer must pass a criminal background check in order to serve. If you have any questions, please contact the Volunteer Center at 866-797-8268.

The Volunteers of North Texas web site for updates as they become available.

NOTE: The American Red Cross will hold volunteer training this weekend in Dallas and Fort Worth. The trainings will be offered 9:00 am - 5:00 pm at chapter headquarters in both cities. For more information, please visit http://www.redcrossdallas.org/ or call (214.678.4800) OR http://chisholmtrail.redcross.org/ or call (817) 336-8718).

By WFAA - Aug. 31, 2008

FORT WORTH — The City of Fort Worth is preparing to open three more shelters for guests leaving the Gulf Coast as Hurricane Gustav approaches, bringing the total to eight.

Ten buses with evacuees from the New Orleans area were expected to arrive at the Wilkerson-Greines Activity Center, 5201 C.A. Roberson Boulevard, by 7:30 p.m. From there, they will be dispatched to the following shelter sites:

• Worth Heights, 3551 New York Ave.
• Highland Hills, 1600 Glasgow Road
• Greenbriar, 5200 Hemphill St.
• Handley/Meadowbrook, 6201 Beaty St.
• Eugene McCray, 4932 Wilbarger St.
• Martin Luther King Community Center, 5565 Truman Drive
• North Tri-Ethnic Community Center, 2950 Roosevelt Ave.
• Fire Station Community Center, 1501 Lipscomb.

Pets will be housed at the Fort Worth Animal Care and Control Division, 4900 Martin St. Guests can call 817-392-3737 to make sheltering arrangements for their pets. All pets will be microchipped to ensure they are returned to their owners.

Want to help? Contact the Volunteer Center of North Texas at 817-335-9137.

The American Red Cross is welcoming cash donations at this time.

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - Aug. 31, 2008
In Arlington Davis Street Church of Christ and the Salvation Army expected the arrival of several hundred evacuees Sunday night. A few had arrived at the Salvation Army shelter in Arlington by mid day Sunday.

2008-08-27T11:30:00.004-05:00

Obama Needs More Than Change
By Philip Klein - The American Spectator - Aug. 27, 2008

DENVER -- Tuesday was a great night -- for Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately for the Democrats, the evening didn't do much to advance the candidacy of the man who will actually be their party's nominee.

It's true that Clinton helped to unify the party after a protracted primary by declaring herself "a proud supporter of Barack Obama" and saying, in as many ways as she could, that "he must be our President." But her speech was weak in explaining why Obama must be elected.

This was not an isolated example. Throughout the night, one after the other, Democratic speakers came on stage and made a case for Obama that could have been made for any generic Democrat

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer ... fired up the crowd with a rousing call for change, but when it came to pitching the man who will be the party's nominee, he couldn't do much better than, "Can we afford four more years? Is it time for a change? When do we need it? And who do we need as the next President of the United States of America? That's right. Barack Obama is the change we need!"

Mark Warner, former Virginia governor ....

His meandering speech talked about "the race to future" and declared that, "we need a president who understands the world today, the future we seek and the change we need. We need Barack Obama as the next President of the United States." The argument for why we specifically need Obama never got more substantive than that.

It's true that this is a change election and that an overwhelming majority of Americans disapprove of President Bush -- which is why Democrats went into this year as the favorites to win the White House.

Obama's challenge is not to convince Americans that they need change, but to overcome the public's reservations about whether he is the man to deliver it. The Democratic National Convention could have been a four-day infomercial to convince skeptics why Barack Obama is ready to be president. So far, other than a successful speech by Michelle Obama, the convention has largely failed to present a case that will sway undecided voters

...

The fact that Democrats are having such a difficult time making the case for Obama without attacking President Bush cuts to the underlying problem facing Obama's candidacy -- that he's a freshman Senator who hasn't accomplished anything of significance.

In the Democratic primaries, the tale of how Obama gave up a high-paying Wall Street job to become a community organizer in Chicago made liberal audiences swoon, but it doesn't resonate as deeply among the general electorate.

Next week, by contrast, Republicans in Minneapolis will have four days to highlight McCain's character, heroic war record, and decades of experience.

Read more in the American Spectator
Philip Klein is a reporter for The American Spectator.

Credentialing process amok. So what else is new?

2008-08-27T11:25:00.003-05:00

Chaos on the Convention Floor
By Paul Kane - Washington Post - Aug. 26, 2008
DENVER -- The convention floor has turned into an overstuffed pinata, as staff have told delegates the floor is essentially shut down.

Staff are informing delegates no one else is allowed on the floor, meaning no one will leave the floor and risk losing their place.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) had to beg to be allowed to cut across the floor to find the Maryland delegation. "Jesus Christ," Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) just yelled, denied access to finding the delegates from the first-in-the-nation caucus state.

Police yelled at delegates behind the New York section to move in one direction, only to have security on the other end send them back the way they came.

Hundreds of delegates are cordoned off under the stands, denied entry into the hall.

The confusion comes on the heels of a day's worth of complaints from delegates and party insiders about a credentialing process run amok.
Read more in the Washington Post

Democratic Convention Monday Night Links

2008-08-25T18:42:00.003-05:00

Democraitc Convention - LOGISTICS - SET AND PODIUM

CREDENTIALS COMMITTEE by Eliseo Roqaues=Arroyo, Co Chiar Credentials Committee, Former Executive Director, Democratic Party of Puerto Rico

CREDENTIALS COMMITTEE by James Roosevelt Jr. Co Chair Credentials Committee Announces full voting status for MI and FL delegates.

CREDENTIALS COMMITTEE by the Hon. Alexis Hermann, Credentials Committee Co-Chair and Former Secretary of Labor

RULES COMMITTEE by Sunita Leeds Announces appointment of Democratic Change Commission to address role of unpledged delegates in future nomination process.

RULES COMMITTEE by Mary Rose Oakar Salute to Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones and nomination of permanent officers of convention.

RULES COMMITTEE by David Walters

Today in Denver from Carol Alvarado

2008-08-25T14:47:00.001-05:00

Posted by Carl Whitmarsh for Carol Alvarado - Sun Aug 24, 2008 1:32 pm (PDT)
Convention Report from Carol Alvarado from the Democratic National Convention, a member of the Convention's Rules Committee:

Today the Rules Committee (one of one only 3 standing committees of the convention), approved a resolution establishing The Democratic Change Commission. In no later than 60 days after the November election, the DNC will establish the commission to review:

1. Timing of the Primaries and Caucuses (for 2012 presidential election)- possibly requiring that all caucuses/ primaries will be held prior to first Tuesday in March of the election year and that no caucus /primary will be held before Feb 1st of the calendar year. The commission will also review the sequence and scheduling of primaries/ caucuses. This year we had 22 primaries on the same day!

2. Delegates- possibly reducing the number of unpledged party leader and elected official delegates in order to enlarge the role and influence of primary and caucus voters in the presidential nominating process.

3. Caucuses- the use of caucus/convention system for any stage of the delegate selection process by any State Democratic Party shall be approved by the DNC Rules & Bylaws Cmte. The goal is to ensure that at each stage, any caucus or convention will be adequately planned, organized and staffed!

The commission will consist of 35 members and 2 co-chairs, Membership will be divided equally between men and women and shall be geographically and demographically diverse. Members will be appointed by the Chair of the DNC.

We approved the permanent officers of the convention:

Permanent Chair: Speaker Nancy Pelosi

Co-Chairs:
Governor Kathleen Sebelius
State Senator Leticia Van de Putte (a Tejana!)
Mayor Shirley Franklin

Vice Co-Chairs;
Governor Christine Gregoire
Congressman Robert Wexler
Mayor Michael Coleman
Maria Elena Durazo

Secretary:
Alice Travis Germond

We also approved the rules for the convention. No controversy, just a lot of unity.

Carol Alvarado, a former Houston City Council Member, the Democratic nominee for State Representative, District 145 in Harris County, and a National Delegate is one of 25 members that are appointed to the Rules Committee by the Chairman, Governor Dean. Each standing committee of the convention consists of 186 members. (25 appt by chair and the remainder come from states and Dems Abroad).

One of the most despicable alliances this election cycle: Obama defends Swift Boat financier

2008-08-18T15:36:00.006-05:00

Obama on Sunday met with and defended a primary financier of the group that helped sink Kerry’s 2004 bid.
Photo: AP

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12591.html

Update in a slightly related news - Obama met and praised an actual swiftboater

By KENNETH P. VOGEL Politico - 8/17/08
RENO, Nev. — Barack Obama on Sunday met with — and defended — one of the primary financers of the group that was perhaps most responsible for sinking Sen. John F. Kerry’s 2004 presidential bid.

Obama huddled privately with T. Boone Pickens in a small conference room in the bowels of a casino hotel to discuss the legendary Texas energy trader’s much-publicized energy policy proposal.

But while the two men posed for pictures before the meeting, Obama was asked how it felt to be meeting with the man “who tore down” Kerry’s campaign.

Pickens, who gave $3 million to the anti-Kerry 527 group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, smiled awkwardly as Obama fielded the question.

Obama was asked how it felt to be meeting with the man “who tore down” Kerry’s campaign.:

“Ah, you know, he’s got a lot longer track record than that,” Obama said. “He’s been doing, ah, he’s a legendary entrepreneur and you know, one of the things that I think we have to unify the country around is having an intelligent energy policy.”

But Pickens is more than just a Republican activist. He was among the most generous donors to the outside groups colloquially known as 527s that both Obama and McCain have decried as exploiting a major loophole in campaign finance laws.

In addition to his contributions to Swift Boat Veterans, Pickens gave $2.5 million to the Karl Rove-linked 527 group Progress for America and also has been a major bundler for Republican candidates.

Read AP Story story on Politico

All Votes Aren’t Equal: Texas Credentials Report Cites Evidence of Procedural Irregularities

2008-08-12T05:47:00.006-05:00

This is part of a multi-part series. See Daily Kos and Texas Campaign 2008 for the first part of the series.Crossposted on DAILY KOS
By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - August 12, 2008
I just received a copy of the 2008 Texas Democratic Convention Credentials Committee's report from TDP Staffer Jim Boyton. The summary is below:

STATEMENT ON RULES AND PROCEDURES
The Committee heard heart-felt, dispiriting testimony from witnesses representing hundreds of challengers about improprieties at many county/senatorial district conventions. Even though the Committee could not always ascertain the factual predicate necessary to divine a remedy that would deny the fruits of the wrongdoing to the violators without harming the effort of welcoming participation by tens of thousands of new Democrats and beginning the healing process, the Committee implores the Party to take stringent steps to prevent recurrence of the following types of infractions:
• Abandoning the convention leadership’s responsibility to ensure credentials go only to those properly elected at the precinct conventions below as properly reflected on the precinct convention minutes returned in a timely manner;

• Allowing participation by alternates or visitors in the voting in precinct caucuses or the voting on the floor of the convention;

• Not recognizing delegates on the floor to challenge the approval of the nominating committee’s nominees for4 delegate-at-large without allowing individual challenges;

• Having one person serving in multiple positions, e.g. Chair of the Tabulations Committee, Rules Committee and Credentials Committee simultaneously as well as adopting and enforcing special rules;

• Claiming to suspend the rules or adopting special rules under the rubric of Robert’s Rules of Order in order to operate in direct violation of the Rules of the Texas Democratic Party;

• Holding joint conventions of different senatorial districts within a county, including joint Nominations or other committees;

• Not appointing members of the Credentials or other committees at the time and in the manner prescribed in the rules, including not in open meetings or not properly balanced;

• Ordering precinct conventions to be ignored and to be reheld without proper factual basis found by the appropriate authorities and without opportunity for sufficient notice to all potential precinct voters;

• Not having the precinct convention minutes and all exhibits made available in a timely manner to anyone wanting to use those materials for supporting any Democratic candidates;

• Not addressing the time frame for the credential verification and challenge processes so that those matters can be resolved sufficiently in advance of the opening of the conventions to avoid long delays in the convention before conducting their other business.

The Preamble of the 2008 Credentials Committee Report to the SDEC and Texas Democratic State Convention addresses the expectations of the 2.8 million Texas primary voters:

PREAMBLE
On March 4, 2008, some 2.8 million Texans exuberantly turned out to select the leaders that they wanted to carry forward the Democratic banner in the fall election. These people cast their votes to restore the levers of government in our county and state to those dedicated to implementing policies and democratic values in the best interest of all Americans.

An unprecedented million or so of those voters also participated in their precinct conventions in hopes of helping the presidential candidate of their choice obtain the Democratic nomination to lead that campaign in the fall. Those Democrats rightfully expected the convention process at both the precinct and the county/senatorial district convention levels to be conducted fairly and openly in accordance with the rules and laws applicable to the most important of all rights – the right to vote.

Acknowleding that many of the conventions were conducted fairly, they stated:

For the most part, the conventions were able to conduct their important business with due respect for the rules and the rights for all involved. The conventions did so in spite of the unprecedented numbers of participants, the vast majority of whom had never participated in their conventions beforehand, and cumbersome or arcane rules and procedures. The amazing success of the conventions is due to the dedication, patience and good faith of the scores of thousands involved.

They attributed some of the problems to:

However, constraints of time or facilities, misunderstanding of the rules, miscommunication between the people involved, or occasionally excess zeal in trying to advance the cause of a particular presidential candidate, caused improprieties or mistakes to be made in the process.

The Preamble explains the importance of the Challenge Process:

The Democratic Party devised the rules after decades of experience where those in positions of power often overrode the rights of others, sometimes even of the majority. The rules are designed to give everyone a fair opportunity to participate and any transgression of those rights, regardless of how well intentioned or innocent the cause of the transgression, is a serious matter. For that reason the Party has established the challenge process over which this Committee has been deliberating these past three weeks.

The committee acknowledged that they did not remedy all the challenges they affirmed and they did not enforce the rules to the fullest extent:

This report contains the recommendations of the committee to the SDEC as how to resolve all of the challenges that came before the Committee. The Committee recognizes that these recommendations do not always enforce the letter of the rules to the fullest. This is done consciously and advisedly.

Apportioning presidential delegates at the convention creates disunity:

In the heat of the convention process, where those supporting competing candidates vie for delegates, passions run high and feelings are often injured.

This year the high turn-out of convention attendees further exacerbated the divisions among Texas Democrats:

The unique obstacles created by trying to accommodate such unprecedented participation in inadequate facilities in such a short time for planning often exacerbated the sense of injury.

The Challenge Process is designed to facilitate healing among Democratic Convention participants:

The Committee strongly believes that it is crucial to our common pursuit of success in the fall elections to use the resolution of these challenges to commence the healing of those bruised feelings and the coming-back together of the factions. For that reason, the Committee suggested that the local participants involved always try to reach a mutual accommodation amongst themselves before forcing the Committee to rule on certain challenges. The Committee appreciates and commends those challengers and respondents in many senate districts that did so. The Committee has recommended approval of those agreements.

The Committee stated that they decided in some instances not to require full compliance with the rules, attempting "to balance" opposing sides and hopefully create ways for participants to work together in the future:

In other instances, the Committee has recommended resolution of challenges that balance the competing interests of not discouraging participation by those new to the process and insisting on full compliance with rules. In these instances, the Committee chose not apply the harshest relief available for these violations. These decisions are not made lightly and do not reflect in any regard a derogation of the good faith and hard effort of those bringing those challenges, often in the face of powerful interests or community pressures not to do so. The balanced resolutions are recommended not only because the available data is sometimes insufficient to tie a particular remedy to the appropriate person or the remedy may harm the potential participation in the state convention of those not involved in the violation of the rules; but also because the Committee feels these resolutions are appropriate to encourage those involved to look beyond their arguments for or against the particular challenge to see how they can begin working in harmony again for our common purpose in the fall.

The Committee urges the Party to Reform and Modernize the Infrastructure of the Convention Process:

That said, the Committee .. encourages the Party as a whole to reform and modernize the infrastructure for the convention process at all levels. The specifics of those reforms are beyond the purview of this Committee but we have heard the testimony of so many people that believe the processes to be inadequate that we feel compelled to express that on their behalf.

The report contains summaries of challenges they reviewed. They did not accept for review all the challenges presented to them.

The Committee makes specific comment on certain egregious violations

In the Credentials Committee Report Summary of Challenges they frequently affirm the challenge and state that they have no appropriate remedy.

This report is released long after the deadline for filing National Challenges. Ironically, the report acknowledges the failure of precinct, county and senatorial district officials to provide records and minutes for review and utilization by those wishing to file challenges, yet the Credentials Committee of the 2008 Democratic State Convention missed the deadline themselves. The report was not "written" when presented to the Convention. Mr. Boyton had to compile the report from sources which included video tape and other convention/committee records. I am aware of several people who have been requesting this report repeatedly since the close of the 2008 Convention. I am thankful that it is now available. It is a tool for use in refining the process to ensure that future conventions are not as divisive and detrimental to the purposes most Democrats hold in common.

PUMAs want delegates to back Hillary

2008-08-08T15:17:00.002-05:00

By Lee McGuire - 11 News - Thursday, August 7, 2008HOUSTON -- Democratic Party delegate Roger Harris has heard the cheers for presumptive presidential nominee Barack Obama. He has also heard the silent message coming in his e-mail box.

“The first round I got 99 (e-mails). The second round I got 50 and the next round I got 60. All in the same day,” said Harris, who will be an Obama delegate to the party's national convention.

The messages are from the PUMA political action committee. A PAC that is urging delegates to stick by Hillary Clinton and cast their votes for her at the party's nominating convention.

“I think it would ratchet up the intensity of people who feel passionately about their particular candidate to see that one or the other makes the final cut,” said Harris.

The PUMA PAC is an independent group and is not associated with Hillary Clinton. In fact, on Thursday she said she hopes the party will be fully unified at the convention in Denver later this month.

Still, she has yet to resolve whether she is going to put her name in for a vote during the convention.

The PUMA PAC hopes she does. The group told 11 News that it's also urging Clinton to challenge Obama to a vote at the convention.

A vote the political group said would heal the party, not divide it.

“You can't achieve unity by telling one side to shut up,” the PAC said in a statement to 11 News. “You have to let the delegates vote for their candidate on the first ballot.

“The fact is, (the party is) extremely split.”

So, despite bowing out of the race and throwing her support behind Obama, does this mean the race is not over?

“I wouldn't call it mischief. I'd call it good intentions. Hillary Clinton not only ran a good race, but also like Barack Obama, was a first,” said 11 News political expert Bob Stein.

A competition many thought was over is now being waged one delegate at a time.

“There are people who would say, ‘well it's mudslinging,'” said Harris. “But you know competition is part of what this country is all about.”
Read more on KNOU HOUSTON

E-Mail Hacking Case Could Redefine Online Privacy

2008-08-06T11:25:00.003-05:00

By Ellen Nakashima - Washington Post Staff Writer - Wednesday, August 6, 2008
A federal appeals court in California is reviewing a lower court's definition of "interception" in the digital age, in a case that some legal experts say could weaken consumer privacy protections online.

The case, Bunnell v. Motion Picture Association of America, involves a hacker who in 2005 broke into a file-sharing company's server and obtained copies of company e-mails as they were being transmitted. He then e-mailed 34 pages of the documents to an MPAA executive, who paid the hacker $15,000 for the job, according to court documents.

The issue boils down to the judicial definition of an intercept in the electronic age, in which packets of data move from server to server, alighting for milliseconds before speeding onward. The ruling applies only to the 9th District, which includes California and other Western states, but could influence other courts around the country.

In August 2007, Judge Florence-Marie Cooper, in the Central District of California, ruled that the alleged hacker, Rob Anderson, had not intercepted the e-mails in violation of the 1968 Wiretap Act because they were technically in storage, if only for a few instants, instead of in transmission.

"Anderson did not stop or seize any of the messages that were forwarded to him," Cooper said in her decision, which was appealed by Valence Media, a company incorporated in the Caribbean island of Nevis but whose officers live in California. "Anderson's actions did not halt the transmission of the messages to their intended recipients. As such, under well-settled case law, as well as a reading of the statute and the ordinary meaning of the word 'intercept,' Anderson's acquisitions of the e-mails did not violate the Wiretap Act."

Anderson was a former business associate of an officer for Valence Media, which developed TorrentSpy, a search engine that helped users find "torrents," or special data files on the Internet that can be used to help download free audio, software, video and text. According to court documents, Anderson configured the "copy and forward" function of Valence Media's server so that he could receive copies of company e-mail in his Google mail account. He then forwarded a subset to an MPAA executive.

The documents sent to the MPAA included financial statements and spreadsheets, according to court papers. "The information was obtained in a legal manner from a confidential informant who we believe obtained the information legally," MPAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Kaltman said.

Valence Media alleged that the MPAA wanted those documents to gain an advantage in a copyright infringement lawsuit against the company and its officers.

"The case is alarming because its implications will reach far beyond a single civil case," wrote Kevin Bankston, a senior attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation in a friend-of-the-court brief filed Friday. If upheld, the foundation argued, "law enforcement officers could engage in the contemporaneous acquisition of e-mails just as Anderson did, without having to comply with the Wiretap Act's requirements."

Those requirements are strict, including a warrant based on probable cause as well as high-level government approvals and proof alternatives would not work.

Cooper's ruling also has implications for non-government access to e-mail, wrote Bankston and University of Colorado law professor Paul Ohm in EFF's brief. "Without the threat of liability under the Wiretap Act," they wrote, "Internet service providers could intercept and use the private communications of their customers, with no concern about liability" under the Stored Communications Act, which grants blanket immunity to communications service providers where they authorize the access.

Individuals could monitor others' e-mail for criminal or corporate espionage "without running afoul of the Wiretap Act," they wrote.

"It could really gut the wiretapping laws," said Orin S. Kerr, a George Washington University law professor and expert on surveillance law. "The government could go to your Internet service provider and say, 'Copy all of your e-mail, but make the copy a millisecond after the email arrives,' and it would not be a wiretap."

In August, 2007, Valence Media shut down TorrentSpy access to the United States due in part to concern that U.S. law was not sufficiently protective of people's privacy, according to its attorney, Ira Rothken.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center also filed a friend-of-the-court brief Friday, arguing that Congress intended to cover the sort of e-mail acquisition Anderson engaged in.
Read more in the Washington Post

Stevens Steps Down From Commerce Committee Post

2008-07-31T13:06:00.002-05:00

TeBy Radio Ink - July 30, 2008
WASHINGTON -- July 30, 2008: A day after he was indicted on federal corruption charges, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) has stepped down from his leadership posts, including the Vice Chairmanship of the powerful Commerce Committee.

Stevens released a statement declaring his innocence, saying, "In accordance with Senate Republican Conference rules, I have temporarily relinquished my vice-chairmanship and ranking positions until I am absolved of these charges."

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) will take over Stevens' position as Ranking Member of the Commerce Committee. Under a special waiver, she'll continue serving as Ranking Republican Member of the Aviation Committee.

Stevens, 84, is the first sitting member of the Senate to face criminal charges in 15 years. The indictment was related to Stevens' disclosure statements on gifts from a now-defunct oil company, including construction work on his house. His statement said, "I am innocent of these charges and intend to prove that."

The Commerce Committee oversees the FCC, and Stevens has been outspoken on broadcast issues, particularly recently on broadcast decency. He pushed unsuccessfully late last year to bring the Protecting Children From Indecent Programming Act, passed by the Commerce Committee in July, to a vote in the full Senate.

That bill would specifically allow the FCC to set a policy that single words or images can violate indecency regulations. If the Supreme Court decides against the FCC in the Fox TV case on fleeting indecency, that bill may be back in debate.

Read more in Radio Ink

Internal Justice Dept. Report Cites Illegal Hiring Practices

2008-07-29T11:01:00.004-05:00

By Carrie Johnson - Washington Post Staff Writer - Tuesday, July 29, 2008
For nearly two years, a young political aide sought to cultivate a "farm system" for Republicans at the Justice Department, hiring scores of prosecutors and immigration judges who espoused conservative priorities and Christian lifestyle choices.

That aide, Monica M. Goodling, exercised what amounted to veto power over a wide range of critical jobs, asking candidates for their views on abortion and same-sex marriage and maneuvering around senior officials who outranked her, including the department's second-in-command.

An extensive report by the department's Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility concluded yesterday that Goodling and others had broken civil service laws, run afoul of department policy and engaged in "misconduct," a finding that could expose them to further scrutiny and sanctions. The report depicted Goodling as a central figure in politicizing employment decisions at Justice during the Bush administration.

Goodling declined to cooperate with investigators, who instead interviewed 85 witnesses and scoured documents and computer hard drives to prepare their report. Last year, she trembled as she told the House Judiciary Committee that she "crossed the line" by asking improper questions of job seekers to gauge their political leanings.

But the report and accounts from lawyers who worked alongside Goodling, 34, at Justice provide a far more extensive examination of her dominance during her time as the department's White House liaison and counselor to the attorney general. One source said staff members called her "she who must be obeyed."

Thirty-four candidates told investigators that Goodling or one of her deputies raised the topic of abortion in job interviews and 21 said they discussed same-sex marriage, the report said. Another job applicant said he admired Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, only to watch Goodling "frown" and respond, "But she's pro-choice."

She and her aides regularly gave candidates for career civil service jobs a form designed for political appointees that sought information on party affiliation and financial contributions. When job seekers sometimes raised objections, Goodling replied that the form was a mistake, showing that she was "aware that it was improper," the report said.

John M. Dowd, an attorney for Goodling, said yesterday that she deserved praise, not scorn, for her "exceptional candor" with Congress last year. "Each and every one of the core conclusions of the OIG/OPR report . . . is consistent with and indeed derived from Ms. Goodling's testimony before the House Judiciary Committee," he said.

The 140-page report appeared to confirm the suspicions of congressional Democrats and raised fresh questions about the reputation of the Justice Department, which has been roiled since the resignations of more than a dozen top officials last year, including Goodling, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and Gonzales chief of staff D. Kyle Sampson. The report also found that Sampson had engaged in misconduct by systematically involving politics in the hiring of immigration judges.

Investigators cited discrepancies in information provided by Goodling, Sampson and former press aide John Nowacki, who, like Goodling, received his law degree from Regent University, founded by television evangelist Pat Robertson. But they stopped short of concluding that the conduct rose to the level of a criminal violation.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) said yesterday he had directed his staff to consider whether there are grounds to refer allegedly inconsistent statements for possible criminal prosecution. Attorneys for the former Justice Department officials scoffed at the idea, and independent lawyers following the case said it is likely that officials who had left the department will face only ethics inquiries in connection with breaking civil service laws.

Current and former department lawyers said they were appalled by the deep reach of the political hiring, which affected hundreds of rejected job seekers and as many as 40 immigration judges who were recruited under the political criteria. Those judges may remain on the bench because their career civil service jobs carry significant employment protections.

In several instances, candidates for immigration posts were solicited directly from the White House political affairs and personnel offices, as well as Republican congressmen, without ever being formally posted to the public, according to the report.

Then-White House adviser Karl Rove once recommended a childhood friend for a judgeship in Chicago, to which the lawyer was named in October 2005 after a months-long delay. "The finger was on the scale," a career lawyer in the immigration office wrote in an e-mail at the time, which was later cited by investigators.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) called on current Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey to review hiring and remove workers who were recruited based on the illegal criteria. "The taxpayers are entitled to have the best, most qualified candidates dealing with the most important federal responsibilities, including enforcing our immigration laws, protecting national security, and enforcing criminal and civil rights statutes," Nadler said.

In a statement, Mukasey said that he was "disturbed" by the findings and that he is reviewing the report to determine whether further action should be taken.

A report last month by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine and Office of Professional Responsibility chief H. Marshall Jarrett found that politics had permeated hiring for the elite honors and summer law intern programs. That revelation already has prompted unsuccessful candidates to bring lawsuits seeking monetary damages and access to internal department correspondence. Lawyers who scrutinized yesterday's report predicted fresh claims would flow from people who maintain that their employment prospects have been hindered.

Leslie Hagen, an assistant U.S. attorney who according to yesterday's report was denied at least two positions at the Justice Department because Goodling suspected she was a lesbian, is petitioning current leaders for a "mutually agreeable permanent position," according to Lisa J. Banks, Hagen's employment attorney.

In another instance that investigators called "particularly damaging," Goodling refused to hire an award-winning career prosecutor with nearly two decades of experience for a temporary counterterrorism job in Washington because his wife served as vice chairman of the local Democratic Party and ran local congressional campaigns.

The prosecutor is not named in the report, but sources identified him as William J. Hochul Jr., an assistant U.S. attorney in Buffalo. He won guilty pleas from a New York collective known as the Lackawanna Six, which was accused of providing support to terrorists. Hochul, who started his career as a prosecutor in the District, did not return calls seeking comment.

Instead, a registered Republican with three years of experience as a federal prosecutor and no background in counterterrorism was selected for the position, according to the report.

Gonzales told investigators he was unaware of the illegal hiring practices his aides were using. "It's simply not possible for any Cabinet officer to be completely aware of and micromanage the activities of staffers, particularly where they don't inform him of what's going on," said George J. Terwilliger III, Gonzales's attorney.

Gonzales's statements to Congress last year about the firings of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006 and other subjects remain under investigation by the inspector general.

Investigators said the most widespread politicization occurred in the hiring of immigration judges, where vacancies and case backlogs mounted while officials sought to find politically appealing candidates. Hiring policies there changed after Texas lawyer Guadalupe Gonzalez filed a discrimination lawsuit: That suit was settled last year, and now such jobs are awarded on merit. "It was very apparent the department was going off in a different direction and it was also very clandestine," Gonzalez said in an interview yesterday.

Bradford A. Berenson, an attorney for Sampson, who oversaw the hiring of immigration judges, said the trouble stemmed from a misunderstanding. "With respect to immigration judges, he believed in complete good faith that they were not career civil service positions and that political criteria could be taken into account," Berenson said.

Investigators said they could not find evidence to support an account by Sampson, now in private law practice in the District, that Justice lawyers agreed with his interpretation.

Read more in the Washington Post

Democratic Congresswomen Push Focus on Global Maternal Mortality

2008-07-11T19:31:00.002-05:00

By Feministe Wire Newsbriefs - June 27, 2008

Congresswoman Lois Capps (D-CA) and 35 other Democratic Congresswomen sent a letter to President Bush this week, urging him to address the global maternal mortality epidemic at the G-8 Summit in July. This letter follows the recent passing of H.Res.1022, which was sponsored by Capps in May and requires a greater US commitment to reducing maternal mortality globally. Capps chairs the Democratic Women’s Working Group.

The letter asks Bush to work to make "pregnancy and childbirth safe for women no matter where they happen to live." It also highlights the widely disparate maternal mortality rates worldwide. According to the letter, one in 7300 births in industrialized nations and one in 26 births in Sub-Saharan Africa result in maternal death.

The letter reminds Bush that "the G8 meeting next month will be a prime opportunity to remind the other members of the G8 of this pressing issue and to rededicate all members of the group to working towards this critical goal". For their part, the Congresswomen pledge to "stand ready to offer the assistance and support from the legislative branch in order to carry out this effort."

Media Resources: Congresswomen Lois Capps Press Release; H. Res. 1022; Feminist Daily Newswire; Democratic Women's Working Group
Read more in Feminist Wire Daily

Nice Spot to Eat After Golf, but Women Are Barred

2008-06-28T10:18:00.004-05:00

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER - Phoenix Journal - New York Times - June 28, 2008
PHOENIX — When the men of the Phoenix Country Club saw their feeding ways in peril, they did not tarry. Some sent nasty e-mail messages, hectored players on the fairway and, for good measure, urinated on a fellow club member’s pecan tree.

The targets of their ire were the women, and some men, who have dared to speak up against the club’s policy of forbidding women in the men’s grill room, a center of power dining in Phoenix.

Barbara Van Sittert, one of those women, said her husband, Logan, 73, has been heckled while playing golf and once found his locker defaced.

“They hooted and hollered at him and called his wife a whore,” said Mrs. Van Sittert, 72, a petite, quiet woman with an elegant white bob. “It was not warm and fuzzy.”

Charges of sexism against private golf clubs are not uncommon; the Augusta National Golf Club in Georgia, where the Masters is held each year, does not permit women to be members.

But here in Arizona, where the governor, secretary of state, chief justice and Senate minority leader are women, it has rankled more than a few women that nonmember men have more rights than paying female members at the Phoenix Country Club, a century-old fixture in the city’s social and business life where it costs tens of thousands of dollars a year to belong.

Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, is not a member of the club, but Dennis Burke, her chief of staff, is. Mr. Burke has publicly opposed the separated dining rooms, and in an interview called them “indefensible.” Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, does not belong to the club but has spoken there. (The McCain presidential campaign declined to comment on the separate dining rooms.) According to a 2007 club directory, Mr. McCain’s son, Andrew, is a member, along with scores of other notable Phoenix residents, including the rocker Alice Cooper. Women at the club are not permitted to have lunch in the men’s grill room with their husbands after a round of golf; they have been barred from trophy ceremonies after tournaments, even ones they have sponsored, and may not participate in one of the most sacred rituals of the men’s grill room — sealing a deal over a beer with a client.

“If at three in the afternoon I wanted to have a business cocktail, there wasn’t any place to go,” said Vicki King, whose husband recently resigned from the club. Ms. King had privileges at the club as the spouse of a member

.

As teenage boys saunter into the sumptuously appointed men’s grill room, their mothers are relegated to the ladies’ grill, down the hall with a hot plate, some card tables and no bar. The club also has a formal dining room, where men and women are welcome, but it is closed between meals and is not a spot to get a drink.

“The ladies’ grill is a very small room where a bunch of little old ladies gather to play cards,” said Wanda Diethelm, a health care executive. “And if you make any noise, they shush you.”

Grumbling about the disparity has gone on for years. But the casus belli was when the Van Sitterts, club members for 30 years, decided two years ago that they wanted to partake in some eggs together in the morning. They appealed to the board of the club to change its policies so they could eat together in the men’s grill room, but were rebuffed.

The couple filed a complaint with the civil rights division of the Arizona attorney general’s office, arguing that although the club is private and not inherently subject to the state’s antidiscrimination laws, it is the equivalent of a public accommodation because it receives much of its revenue from nonmembers, in speeches, tournaments, Rotary Club meetings and the like.

Earlier this month, the attorney general’s office agreed with the couple, issuing an advisory legal opinion that the club needed to comply with the state’s antidiscrimination laws.

The office’s investigation, according to a copy of its findings, noted the inadequacy of the women’s facility, while listing the lopsided benefits of the men’s: three high-definition televisions, a buffet and a bar, and gorgeous views of the course. (The office would not comment; parties in a civil rights determination have 30 days to work out their differences privately.)

Lawyers for the country club did not return calls. A reporter stopped by the club, which is under renovation and partially closed, and found the general manager, Pasquale J. LaRocca, riding around the property on a golf cart.

Mr. LaRocca said that the attorney general’s findings were “not binding” and that he hoped “it would not come” to a lawsuit. The renovated club will have the same formal dining room now used by men and women, and separate male and female grill rooms but with “equivalent accommodations,” he added.

The club’s board has not found the attention or legal proceedings enchanting. First, it amended its bylaws to state that any member who makes “derogatory or otherwise injurious comments in the media” is subject to suspension and legal fees, and ditto for those who sue. It also warned that spouses of dead members would no longer automatically maintain their privileges.

“You get into very difficult family issues,” said one woman who wanted to speak about the policy, but feared expulsion. “It becomes, ‘Mommy got Daddy kicked out of the club.’ “

Russell Brown, a member, said in remarks at the Arizona Women Lawyers Association luncheon this past winter that he thought the men’s grill “disadvantaged women professionals.” Mr. Brown said in an interview that he was subsequently called before the club’s governing board to “explain my actions.”

Next came anonymous e-mail messages, sent to some female members of the club, deriding Mr. Brown and the Van Sitterts, and suggesting, among other things, “you and your type needs to go,” and a Web site was set up with some members’ names and phone numbers under the title “Femi Nazis here in Phoenix,” according to a complaint filed by Mr. Brown in the matter.

At one point, Ms. Diethelm, who lives with her husband near the 18th tee, was surprised by a rash of men whom she recognized from the club hopping off their carts to “urinate on my pecan tree,” she said. When her complaints to the club went unheeded, she bought a security camera. (Mr. LaRocca acknowledged the bathroom breaks, but said the culprits could not be identified.)

“Most men are indifferent to the policy or are against it,” Mr. Brown said. “But you become a leader of the club by being visible and you become visible by being seen in the men’s grill and the way the men’s grill is set up suits those men.”

Mrs. Van Sittert said she still treasured her country club.

“We welcome the attorney general’s decision,” she said, “and look at it as a wonderful opportunity for the club we love to move forward.”

Read more in the New York Times

On the Hill: Disturbing votes by 105 Democrats on Domestic Wiretapping Bill

2008-06-23T10:19:00.009-05:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - June 23, 2008
Despite oaths of office which charge Congressmen and Congresswomen to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, examination of this past week's Congressional Record of Roll Call votes shows that most fail to keep that pledge.

In consideration of renewal of the Domestic Wiretapping Bill and extending immunity to GWB and the telecoms who violated the law prior to 911, 293 members of Congress voted to protect GWB and the telecoms rather than the Constitutional rights of the American people. See who voted to "Shred the 4th Amendment" and give immunity to GWB and telecoms for domestic wiretapping.

105 House Democrats and 188 Republicans voted in favor of Domestic Wiretapping.
See how each Congress person voted on Roll Call 437 June 20, 2008.

EARLIER THIS MONTH:
On June 9, 2008, Dennis Kucinich read 35 Artlicles of Impeachment on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Read Dennis Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush

Initially the first three co-sponsors were Robert Wexler (FL19), Lynn Woolsey (CA06), and Barbara Lee (CA09). Tammy Baldwin (WI02) and Maurice Hinchey (NY22) joined as co-sponsors.

By a vote of 251-166, the U.S. House of Representatives sent Dennis Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment to the Judiciary Committee.

Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has the power to decide whether to hold impeachment hearings - or not.

24 Republicans voted with 227 Democrats; 166 no votes came exclusively from Republicans.

Obama infuriates the Left - Obama Supports FISA Legislation, Angering Left

2008-06-22T10:21:00.002-05:00

By Paul Kane - The Washington Post -
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) today announced his support for a sweeping intelligence surveillance law that has been heavily denounced by the liberal activists who have fueled the financial engines of his presidential campaign.

In his most substantive break with the Democratic Party's base since becoming the presumptive nominee, Obama declared he will support the bill when it comes to a Senate vote, likely next week, despite misgivings about legal provisions for telecommunications corporations that cooperated with the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program of suspected terrorists.

In so doing, Obama sought to walk the fine political line between GOP accusations that he is weak on foreign policy — Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) called passing the legislation a "vital national security matter" — and alienating his base.

"Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program," Obama said in a statement hours after the House approved the legislation 293-129.

This marks something of a reversal of Obama's position from an earlier version of the bill, which was approved by the Senate Feb. 12, when Obama was locked in a fight for the Democratic nomination with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).
Obama missed the February vote on that FISA bill as he campaigned in the "Potomac Primaries," but issued a statement that day declaring "I am proud to stand with Senator Dodd, Senator Feingold and a grassroots movement of Americans who are refusing to let President Bush put protections for special interests ahead of our security and our liberty."

Sens. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) continue to oppose the new legislation, as does Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). All Obama backers in the primary, those senior lawmakers contend that the new version of the FISA law — crafted after four months of intense negotiations between White House aides and congressional leaders — provides insufficient court review of the pending 40 lawsuits against the telecommunications companies alleging privacy invasion for their participation in a warrantless wiretapping program after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"The immunity outcome is predetermined," Feingold wrote in a memo today.
Obama came down on the side of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who argued that a provision in the new law reaffirmed that FISA, and that act's courts, gives the final say over government spying. President Bush has argued that a war-time chief executive has powers that trump FISA.

"It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance — making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law," Obama said today.

Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the most prominent Republican opponent of the compromise bill, issued a statement today calling that exclusivity provision "meaningless because that specific provision is now in [the] 1978 act." Specter said Bush just ignored existing law in starting the warrantless surveillance program.
Read more in the Washington Post

Heal now, candidate tells CBC

2008-06-22T10:14:00.003-05:00

By Mike Soraghan - The Hil - June 6, 2008
Sen. Barack Obama's (D-Ill.) conciliatory tone turned sharp on Thursday when Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.) pressed him on how there needs to be healing in the Democratic Party.

"Look, Diane," Obama said, according to a participant who attended the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) meeting. "John McCain, if he's elected, is going to pick a Supreme Court that will roll back every gain women have made in the last 50 years."

Seeming frustrated, Obama started talking more bluntly about why women should be supporting him over Sen. McCain (R-Ariz.), whatever their feelings about the divisive Democratic primary campaign.

"He can be pretty direct," said the CBC source. "It was a pretty lively meeting."

The direct approach has its risks. As a woman and a former supporter of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Watson is one of the CBC members whom Obama needs to win over.

And her protests that the party still needs healing are a reminder of the lingering bitterness left over from a campaign that some say had sexist and racial overtones.

During the primary, Watson said she had received political threats for her support of the former first lady. And Watson had publicly criticized Obama for opposing the CBC's effort to cut off federal funds to the Cherokee Nation. The CBC is upset with the Cherokee for excluding Freedmen — descendants of slaves once owned by tribal members — from tribal membership.

Obama's meeting with the CBC represented an early test of his leadership as the Democratic nominee, especially because some in the Black Caucus were ardent backers of Clinton and want her to be Obama's running mate.

Obama started the meeting on an inclusive note, telling members who had supported Clinton "that was then, and this is now," according to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.).

"He said he understands how those of us in politics get involved in supporting people, through friendships or geography or relationships," said Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), a former John Edwards supporter who campaigned for Obama in the North Carolina primary. "He said he'd been involved in that himself."

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), a Clinton supporter who predicted Obama's victory long before he claimed it, said he felt the olive branch was appreciated.

"Several members expressed appreciation to him for saying that," Cleaver said. "There's still emotions connected to that campaign. He took a major step in being a magnet to these people."

What impressed Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) was when Obama told them, "If Hillary had won, the first thing he would have told his supporters is that [they] should support her."

Some participants also reportedly pressed him on whether the campaign would provide "street money," or "walking-around money" — the campaign cash dispensed to people to drive voters to the polls on Election Day. Obama said the campaign wouldn't provide it, because he's relying on his large network of volunteers to handle Election Day turnout.

Fence-mending was the point of Obama's stops in and around Capitol Hill this week. His campaign scheduled meetings with members of the Hispanic, Black and women's caucuses. Each represents a community with longstanding ties to the Clintons. Hispanic members have pointedly said that Obama needs to reach out more to their community.

It didn't always work. Some female members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus reportedly stayed away from the photo opportunity after the event.

The women's caucus meeting was canceled Thursday because it conflicted with House votes.

More than one-third of the 42 members of the CBC supported Clinton for president, even though black voters overwhelmingly supported Obama in the primaries. A few members, including Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Donald Payne (D-N.J.), initially backed Clinton and then switched to Obama.

Some members have reportedly feared that they might face primary challenges or other political retribution for not having supported their only Senate member.

The Illinois senator will need the CBC's full support as he faces McCain in the fall. Black voters are a key element of Obama's voter base, and he enjoys strong support among them. But he needs them to turn out at the polls, and that's where black elected officials, whether they were for Clinton or Obama, can help.

Republicans have cited getting 16 percent of the black vote in Ohio as a key factor in President Bush winning his second term.
Read more on the hill

Clinton's Ghost: Tense Moment in Obama's Meeting With Black Caucus

2008-06-22T10:09:00.003-05:00

Just What Was Said Between the Presumptive Democratic Nominee and Clinton-Supporting Congresswoman?
By JAKE TAPPER and KATE SNOW - - June 20, 2008
A Thursday afternoon meeting between Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus grew tense and emotional for a moment -- perhaps illustrating that weeks after Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., suspended her presidential campaign, some nerves remain frayed.

Most of the meeting was cordial, and after a presentation by Obama's pollster, many members of the CBC had nothing but pleasant exchanges with the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

But not everyone.
Sources at the meeting said that Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, a Clinton supporter, expressed the desire that Obama and his campaign would reach out the millions of women still aggrieved about what happened in the campaign and still disappointed that Clinton lost.

Obama agreed that a lot of work needs to be done to heal the Democratic Party, and that he hoped the Clinton supporters in the room would help as much as possible.
According to Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., Obama then said, "However, I need to make a decision in the next few months as to how I manage that since I'm running against John McCain, which takes a lot of time. If women take a moment to realize that on every issue important to women, John McCain is not in their corner, that would help them get over it."

Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., a longtime Clinton supporter, did not like those last three words -- "Get over it." She found them dismissive, off-putting.

"Don't use that terminology," Watson told Obama.

Clarke did not react the same way.
"I, personally, as a Hillary supporter, did not take that as something distasteful," Clarke said. "Nothing like that."

But, Clarke said, Watson "latched on to those three words."

In Clarke's view, Watson thought Obama had just told her to "get over it." She didn't appreciate that, and she told him so and emphasized that it was a heated campaign and lot of healing remains to be done.

"I agree," Obama said. "There's healing on both sides."

Obama then said two sources at the meeting said that he'd held his tongue many times during the campaign against Clinton in the interest of party unity and sensitivity. Clinton and her allies had suggested he was a Muslim, had said he wasn't qualified to be president.

According to the sources, Obama suggested he bit his tongue every time. He could be asking for an apology, he could be asking for the Clintons to reconcile with him, but he chose to rise above it.

Everyone involved agreed that most of the meeting was cordial, and that there is unanimity on the need to work hard to elect Obama.

But clearly tensions remain.

Clinton and Obama are scheduled to put on a good public show for the cameras next week, regardless of any beneath-the-surface Sturm and Drang. The former competitors will campaign together and appear at a fundraiser in Washington at the end of next week.
Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures

Read more on ABC NEWS

Beyond a Presidential Campaign, "Rise Hillary Rise" becomes embedded in the American Culture

2008-06-09T17:30:00.006-05:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - June 6, 2008The race wasn't about a black man and a woman running for president. Yet, in the process, people watched and noted more than just the "same old same old" campaign dance between political candidates. Now that she has written her supporters and told us that she will officially congratulate Senator Obama Saturday night in Washington, D.C., many of us realize that the real battle is truly just beginning.
It is no longer a struggle against Senator Barak Obama and those who support him. The black v.s. white thing recedes into the background where it should have remained anyway. The struggle is bigger than the Democratic Party or one race for political office, no matter how highly esteemed. As Dr. Martin Luther King led generations beyond the realities of prior generations, Hillary Clinton is leading generations beyond the boxes this nation continues to erect around girls and women.

It will be fought along side of the campaign between Senator McCain and Senator Obama for President. It will be fought in our homes, schools, and communities. It will be fought in the marketplace as women demand more from those we patronize and those who carry their advertising messages.
It was never about supporting her because she was a woman. I was a John Edwards supporter who switched to Hillary when he bit the dust. It wasn't a racial thing. I was a Jesse Jackson delegate years ago. This year, before delegates have actually signed into state conventions and elected those national delegates which have been reported as "done deals" long before they truly 'jelled', the race for nomination of this nation's Democratic candidate for President becomes a whimper.

Somewhere when I was too busy to notice, I aged and became a senior citizen. Like many of my generation, it doesn't fit the stereotype I have of myself. Yet because of that reality, I have a memory. I remember black and white water fountains and I remember words which were commonly used which with time and re-education had fallen out of this nation's vocabulary until the current generation resurrected them in rap and among themselves on the street. They use them because they know they really should not have a place in our society.

That is my point. With time, Americans came to realize that some things should not have voice in our society. Many think this presidential race was about achievements for a segment of our society who have never occupied the White House. Others of us know that it reaches much deeper than the office, the milestone, or the icon. It has drawn to the surface realities which are embedded within our culture.

When this nation was founded, neither people of color nor women were considered candidates for citizenship. Long after the emancipation of the slaves, women were restricted from owning property. In the 1800s in many parts of this nation, widows lost legal control of their minor children because only men were recognized by the courts as legal guardians! Black men got began to vote in the 1860ise. Women waited until 1926!

There have been some advances in the workplace, yet within the culture, the 2008 Presidential Race brings realities rising out of the pores of our culture like puss reaching for the air, rising from an internal, deep-seated infection. Support for Hillary wasn't about gender. In the process, problems with how many in our culture treat women, impacted the race for the White House. As the nomination process winds down, the realities behind the rhetoric and spinmasters, shifts.

If Hillary Clinton had been less competent, less articulate,less wise, the electoral math would put things to rest and this campaign would blurr in our nation's memory. Like Dr. Martin King, she ia incredibly compassionate. Running for President, for Hillary Clinton, wasn't ever about herself. In her run for President has emerged a movement which is greater than all of us.

It is not just about how women are treated in the media or by the Democratic or Republican Party. It is not about getting a woman elected president or bust! It is about everyone being allowed to rise as high and soar as surely as each of us is created to soar. I think feminism will have to be reincarnated in America for us to get to the next plateau in our national development.

Senator Obama said some things about race which needed to be said. We haven't said much in the last 3/4th of my lifetime about gender. Oh, we discuss how the number one cause of death among pregnant women is murder by her baby's father. We discuss domestic violence now. We discuss scandals, especially those involving politicans, priests and other ministers. Yet we rarely truly focus on the inherent inequities we impose on people who aren't male!

The feminist movement got hi-jacked by the gay/leisban movement. They made advances, and I do not fault them for the rest of us being left behind. This spring, for the first time in decades, I've actually regularly heard people (men and women) speak out against the distortation of facts and attempts to marginalize a woman of earned stature.

Hillary Clinton tee-shirts, especially those which read "We will not fall in line" and "Rise Hillary Rise!" are no longer about Barak Obama or the race for the White House. We'll wear them until they become rags because we know there is an infection of injustice deeply embedded within the soul of this nation which must be extracted. It has only begun to rise to the surface. It will take all of us to defeat the Republicans in November. It will take all of us to change the vernacular, to re-educate ourselves and those around us to recognize what really truly should not be given voice among us. Some of it will occur in the financial marketplace. Some in the classroom. Much at the kitchen table (and maybe even in the bedroom). The women of this nation, like Rosa Parks, are refusing to remain in the back of the bus!

Sexism might sell but we aren't buying it.

2008-06-03T23:38:00.002-05:00

This U-Tube video highlights some of the reasons women are outraged right now.
It is more than which candidate wins the nomination for President.
It is about the culture in which women are trivialized and marginalized.

Guest Opinion: Clinton strongest candidate in contest against McCain

2008-06-02T03:55:00.003-05:00

By TOM TOWE - The Billings Gazette - Sunday, June 01, 2008

Why vote for Hillary Clinton? Because she is a stronger candidate in November.

I really like Barack Obama. I am impressed with some of his stands and his forthright talk. I think he has a great future. But, because I want the Democrats to win this November, I support Hillary. We can't take a chance that the Democrats would lose.

Let's review the facts. First, Hillary has received more of the popular vote than Obama. Since March 1, she has received over half a million more votes than Obama. Obama has won caucus states where not all the people vote. In November it is the people that vote, not the caucuses. More people have voted for Hillary than for any other Democratic primary candidate in the history of the Democratic Party. She is the people's choice.

Second, Hillary has won all the big states important to the Democrats this fall. She has won states that have 308 electoral votes, enough to win in the fall. Obama's wins are largely in Republican and small states that are simply not as important as the large swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Florida and Michigan. Four years ago, we lost Ohio and Florida; a change in either would have changed the presidency. Let's send our strongest candidate for the November contest.

Third, Hillary won West Virginia by 41 percentage points and Kentucky by 35 percentage points. In April she raised $22 million, her second-highest fundraising month in the campaign. She is getting stronger every day.

Fourth, Hillary has proven she can get the working-class votes from Middle America that Democrats must have to win. The Reagan Democrats will vote for Hillary. She has proven that in West Virginia and Kentucky. I doubt if the Reagan Democrats will vote for Obama. Obama may earn the respect of Democrats and intellectual independents, but the huge number of ordinary independents, the Reagan Democrats, and the Republicans simply won't vote for him.

Fifth, Obama has not yet been subject to the huge barrage of criticism that will come when he finally becomes the nominee. Criticism he has received so far in a polite Democratic primary will be nothing compared to what he will receive from the right-wing "stop Obama" people and "Swift Boat" Republicans. Hillary has been tested with all the criticism that Republicans and right-wing politicos can throw at her. And she has survived. She is a fighter. She can handle it. John Kerry couldn't. Can Obama? Why take a chance?

Finally, Hillary won states even when she was outspent. She was outspent 3-1 in Pennsylvania, 2-1 in Texas, and even in West Virginia where she won by 41 points. This is the kind of candidate we need for the fall campaign.

Hillary Clinton can win in the fall. Maybe Obama can too. But why take a chance?

In addition, I think Hillary has shown more substance. Her health care plan, her commitment to rebuild the middle class and her plans to create millions of new, good jobs are indeed impressive. As her husband before her, she can be a great president. And we can all be proud to have the first woman president.

This has been the most exciting primary ever. It has been great for the Democratic Party. It has attracted more voters than ever in the history of this country. Look how it has invigorated our party and focused attention on Democrats. Montana, the last state to vote, really has a voice this time. It matters. Vote for Hillary Clinton on June 3.

Democrat Tom Towe is a Billings attorney and former state senator.

Copyright © The Billings Gazette, a division of Lee Enterprises.

Judge sides with Texas Democratic Party in flap over delegates

2008-06-01T07:03:00.001-05:00

Associated Press - Thursday, May 22, 2008

AUSTIN – A federal judge sided with the Texas Democratic Party on Thursday in a lawsuit filed by Latino voter advocates who claimed the party's method for apportioning presidential delegates is discriminatory.

U.S. District Judge Fred Biery in San Antonio ruled that the spirit and intent of the federal Voting Rights Act, which protects minority voters, was not violated, as the League of United Latin American Citizens and other plaintiffs alleged.

Biery dismissed the case. He ruled that the Voting Rights Act does not dictate to political parties how to decide on their presidential nominees as long as everyone has the right to participate.

The Latino voter advocates claimed the complicated Texas delegate system – which included a March 4 primary and caucus and senate district caucuses March 29 – unfairly dilutes Latino votes by allotting fewer presidential delegates to heavily Hispanic areas.

Nearly all the delegates are apportioned based on Democratic voter turnout numbers in state senate districts in previous elections. This year, that meant that some predominantly Hispanic districts, where turnout was low in 2004 and 2006, got fewer delegates than others, particularly urban, predominantly black districts where Democratic turnout was higher.

Latino districts favored Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in this spring's primary and caucuses; black districts favored Sen. Barack Obama.

Democratic leaders contend their state delegate system is fair and that it rewards those areas that strongly support the party.

"We are pleased with Judge Biery's ruling, but it is important to remember that both the Texas Democratic Party and LULAC respect the importance of the Voting Rights Act and encourage participation by Texans from all walks of life in the electoral process," Texas Democratic Party chairman Boyd Richie said.

Jose Garza, an attorney for the Latino voter advocates, said it's likely the plaintiffs will appeal the opinion to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, though a final decision hasn't been made.

He said there may be an appeal because of the important issues at stake in the case and the "fairly devastating scope of the decision." Garza declined to say anything further until discussing it with his clients.

The plaintiffs were not contesting to whom the delegates were awarded, but rather how the allotment is made.

The judge wrote that the plaintiffs never alleged that Latino voters were "intimidated, threatened or otherwise kept from voting." He said if they had gone to the polls in greater numbers in previous elections they would have benefited.

"The adage remains 'no vote, no voice,"' he wrote.

The case was filed earlier this month. Both sides were pushing for a ruling before the party's state convention in Austin on June 6-7, where the final decision on caucus delegates to the national convention for Clinton and Obama will be made.

Texas will send 228 delegates to the national convention. Of those, 126 were determined by primary results, while 67 others are pledged delegates distributed through a series of caucuses, culminating with the upcoming state convention. There are 32 superdelegates who can make their own decision on which candidate to support, and three others will be named by the state party chairman.

Democratic Party officials had noted that the general system for selecting Texas presidential delegates has been in place for 20 years.

Biery agreed, and said the reason it got such notice this year was because of the close presidential race. The judge also mentioned his own background as a Democrat and the fact that he was appointed by former President Bill Clinton in the 1990s.

He wrote: "Notes of full disclosure: Senator Clinton's husband nominated me to the federal bench, and I hope to shoot baskets some day with Senator Obama."

Read more in the Dallas Morning News

Radical Pique

2008-05-31T09:49:00.002-05:00

By Chris Suellentrop - New York Times Opinions - May 30, 2008

Michael Kinsley, writing in his column for Time magazine, reflects on a controversy that’s sure to revive this summer after Barack Obama secures the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party — Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, two former members of the Weather Underground.
Kinsley says it’s O.K. to think that it’s “absurd” to make an issue of Obama’s relationship with Ayers and Dohrn, while also thinking that “Ayers and Dohrn are despicable.”

“In America we believe in redemption and even self-reinvention. And we don’t usually require stagy Stalinesque recantations,” Kinsley writes. “But Dohrn and Ayers test the limits of that generosity.” The two of them “did real harm” to America, but not because they “posed any real threat to U.S. national security.”
“Their victims were liberals: the millions of people who were part of the mainstream antiwar movement and who later voted against Ronald Reagan,” Kinsley explains. He continues: These people opposed the Vietnam War but didn’t hate their country. They were horrified by violence and sincerely wanted the war to end. They believed in democracy, even when dismayed by the result. The slogan of the Underground, by contrast, was “Bring the war home.” For strategic and psychological reasons, the Underground wanted the Vietnam War to go on. They wanted the killing and dying to continue and spread, along with anarchy, dope and free sex.
The notion of doctrinal divisions among opponents of the Vietnam War must seem ridiculously arcane to most people today. But perhaps you can imagine how infuriating it was to the organizers of the big marches on Washington — struggling to keep them peaceful — that there were people of the left effectively in cahoots with the Nixon Administration, determined to undermine all those efforts.

DNC chooses venue for Rules Committee Meeting too small to accommodate party members

2008-05-27T10:58:00.002-05:00

Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - May 26, 2008
Despite Democratic Party Rules which stipulate that all committee meetings must be open to the public and that meetings are to be held in venues large enough to accommodate all interested party members, the DNC has selected a venue for the May 31st Rules Committee meeting which does not accommodate many of the people who have applied to attend.

The DNC Rules Committee is scheduled to decide whether to seat delegates from MI and FL who were elected in primaries held earlier than authorized by Democratic Party Rules. Thousands of Senator Obama's supporters and Senator Clinton's supporters are watching this committee hearing. The Obama czmpaign's position is that the delegates should either be excluded from the convention or split evenly between the two campaigns. Clinton supporters favor seating delegates according to the proportion of votes cast by the people in the MI and FL primaries. Both candidates appeared on the Florida ballot. Senator Obama had his name removed from the Michigan ballot. Party rules did not stipulate that the candidates could not appear on the ballot. Rules did prohibit candidates from campaigning in those primaries. Neither candidate campaigned in those states. Senator Clinton carried Florida by

Voters Demand All Votes Be Counted

2008-05-18T11:30:00.005-05:00

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) will meet May 31st to resolve the question of seating delegates from Florida and Michigan, two states which to date the DNC has refused to count delegates because the date of their primaries was earlier than the DNC voted for primaries. A national outcry against refusal to seat the delegates from these two states has prompted the DNC to reconsider the question. Some point out that with many caucus states having numerous problems in their precinct and senatorial convention, numerous party rules have been broken yet delegates elected in those conventions are have elected delegates despite broken party rules.

Demonstrators are flying and driving to DC the weekends of May 24 and May 31st to demonstrate in solidarity with the voters of Michigan and Florida, demanding that the DNC allow the delegates from those state's Democratic primaries be seated at the Democratic National Convention. Refusal to count Florida and Michigan delegates in the distribution of delegates for presidential preference at the Democratic National Convention is disenfranchises voters in two states from their vote being counted in the nominee of the Democratic candidate for president.

This announcement appears on websites in Florida. Marches will occur on the weekend of May 24th and May 31st.

Floridians Demand Representation
DELIVERING THE PETITIONS

Come with us to Washington!

Our goal is to deliver 1.5 Million petitions to the Democratic Nation Committee Headquarters in June.

Contact Jim at 888.599.1586 or by email at Hannagan@floridademandsrepresentation.org
to join us in presenting our petitions and demanding that our voices be heard, our
delegates be seated, and our votes be counted in this election.

Demonstrations outside the DNC are already in progress. Some of the newscoverage includes:

Florida Democrats protest in Washington, call for primary to be counted
Group demands party count Florida primary
By MARK K. MATTHEWS - Washington Bureau South Florida Sun-Sentinel - May 1, 2008
WASHINGTON - A group of Florida Democrats marched on party headquarters Wednesday demanding that Democratic leaders reverse a months-old decision to deny the state a say in the party's presidential nominating process.

Waving miniature Florida flags, the group called on Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, to speak and to count the results of the state's Jan. 29 primary. The party has ignored the results because the primary was too early under party rules.

Party spokesman Luis Miranda told the protesters that "there will be representation from Florida in Denver," site of the party's national convention in August. He did not elaborate.

Roxana Zender, a massage therapist from Boca Raton, was among the hundreds outside the party offices.

"I really wanted them to hear my voice," said Zender.

The national party stripped Florida of its 211 convention delegates for holding the primary election before Feb. 5. One Florida delegate has appealed the penalty, and the party has set a hearing for May 31. At the same time, the party will consider what to do about Michigan, which lost its delegates for the same reason.

But the demonstrators want their votes to count before a nominee is selected, not after the party settles on either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

Speakers on Wednesday brought back memories of the state's problems at the polls going back to the 2000 presidential election. The five weeks of recounts in Florida at that time made many Democrats fear their votes were not counted in the close election that brought George W. Bush to the White House.

"We've been through eight long years of trying to restore the voters' confidence in the state of Florida," U.S. Rep Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, told the crowd. "Our nerves are very raw from the Florida recount in 2000. We are not going to allow our voters to be disenfranchised again."

Yvonne Linsinbigler, 69, of Greenacres, said the past frustrations motivated her to make the 17 1/2-hour bus trip."Florida has had enough humiliation," Linsinbigler said. "We're not here to favor one candidate over another. It's just making sure Florida's votes are counted, this time as well as in the future."

Event organizers estimated more than 300 protesters attended. They came from Miami, West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale and other Florida cities aboard at least a half-dozen buses.

"It's unthinkable they wouldn't count our votes," said Jennifer Kirkpatrick, 62, a nurse from Apopka.

Clinton and Obama followed party rules and did not campaign in Florida and Michigan before the primaries. Obama also had his name removed from the Michigan ballot.

Clinton won both states handily and has pushed to count the results of both primaries. Obama opposes that, and his supporters have floated other plans, such splitting the delegates evenly.

Once a nominee is selected, he or she is expected to reinstate all Florida and Michigan delegates.

Washington Bureau Chief William E. Gibson contributed to this report.
Mark K. Matthews can be reached at 202-824-8222 or mmatthews@orlandosentinel.com.

Texas Group Sues to Stop Border Fence

2008-05-18T07:58:00.007-05:00

By Stewart M. Powell - The Houston Chronicle - May 16, 2008

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5785497.html

WASHINGTON — A drive by the Bush administration to build 70 miles of fencing along the Texas-Mexico border before leaving office could be sidetracked by a lawsuit filed by 19 border communities on Friday.

The Texas Border Coalition, citing what it called lawless conduct by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, asked a U.S. District Court judge here to force the federal government to halt construction of the barrier and land acquisition.

The lawsuit accused Chertoff and others of failing to notify landowners of their rights; failing to negotiate a reasonable price for access to their lands, and of exempting some wealthy owners from having the fence built across their properties.

Chertoff "has gone too far in his zeal to build this feel-good, yet ineffective Great Wall of Texas," said Eagle Pass Mayor Chad Foster, the chairman of the border coalition, which represents cities from Brownsville to El Paso.

Brownsville Mayor Patricio M. Ahumada Jr. charged that federal officials "are determined to build a wall to appease mid-America."

Peter Schey, lead counsel in the case and executive director of the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, said Friday's lawsuit would be followed within days by a request for a temporary restraining order to block land seizures and fence construction.

The case is handled by U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, named to the federal bench by President Bush in 2001.

The Bush administration is pressing to complete construction of 670 miles of physical barriers and high-tech virtual fencing along the 1,972-mile U.S.-Mexico border. But the legal wrangling could delay construction of the fence in Texas, pushing decisions on completion of the barriers into next year when a new president and a new Congress will take office.

Laura Keehner, a Homeland Security spokeswoman, called the lawsuit a delaying tactic and said construction will continue.

"There should be no uncertainty about our commitment to border security, and we've made no secret that fencing is a key part of our efforts at the border," Keehner said. "We're building 670 miles of fencing by the end of this year and are well on our way to meeting this goal."

The lawsuit was designed to force federal officials to restart a protracted survey process as a first step to federal purchase.

Chertoff has run "roughshod over the rights of property owners to build a border wall on a foundation of lawlessness," Schey said. "We hope that we are able to bring this lawless conduct to build this wall into conformity with federal statutes and the United States Constitution."

Federal officials intimidated some landowners along the border by sending Homeland Security officials and agents of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Border Patrol to try to arrange access to survey their properties, Schey contended.

The suit also noted that fence construction would bypass the River Bend Resort and golf course, in Brownsville, and border lands owned by Dallas billionaire Ray Hunt and his relatives.

Keehner, Chertoff's spokesman, rejected the lawsuit's allegations.

"We've nearly bent over backward to work with landowners," she said in a statement.

Keehner noted that yearlong discussions had taken place with landowners and state and local officials "about the placement of fencing."

Federal officials, she said, contacted more than 600 landowners, held dozens of town hall meetings and mailed hundreds of letters to property owners "requesting access to private property so that we could make operational and environmental assessments of the area prior to making any decisions."

Border fence construction has become increasingly contentious in Texas, with landowners' resistance forcing federal authorities to file lawsuits against nearly 100 owners in four states in an effort to gain court-ordered access to the land.

A family from Los Ebanos, Texas, awaits a hearing on July 7 before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans on its attempt to block access by federal authorities.

The Texas officials' legal challenge is the latest high-profile effort to prevent construction of the fence.

The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing a request by environmentalists and members of Congress to hear a case challenging Chertoff's constitutional authority to waive compliance with three dozen federal laws in order to speed construction of the barriers.
Read more in the Houston Chronicle

Hillary Scores Decisive Victory in West Virginia; Obama and McCain rejected by voters

2008-05-16T18:44:00.005-05:00

By Faith Chatham - May 14, 2008
Despite political pundits declaring Obama the presumptive nominee, West Virginia Democratic voters cast over three votes against Obama for every vote he received in Tuesday's West Virginia Democratic Primary. Voter turn-out was light for the Republican Primary. Of the 475,167 votes cast Tuesday (combined voters in all party primaries), Hillary Clinton was the resounding choice of West Virginia Voters.

Over four West Virginians voted against Barak Obama for every voter that selected him. John McCain trailed Barak Obama's numbers by 1,998 votes. No Democratic Presidential Candidate has won a general election since 1916 without carrying West Virginia.

West Virginia Primary May 13, 2008

U.S. President
Party Candidate Votes
DEM Hillary Rodham Clinton 239187
DEM Barack Hussein Obama 91663
DEM John Reid Edwards 26181
TOTAL VOTES CAST IN DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY 357,031

REP Willard Mitt Romney 5195
REP John Sidney McCain III 89654
REP Ronald Ernest Paul 6112
REP Rudolph William Giuliani 2839
REP Jerry Ralph Curry 728
REP Michael Dale Huckabee 12184
REP Alan L. Keyes 1424
TOTAL VOTES CAST IN REPUBLICAN PRIM 125,123

TOTAL VOTES CAST IN BOTH DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES 475,167

SOURCE: West Virginia Secretary of State Election Division 100% of counties reporting

Clinton's victory inspired CNN's headline: "ANALYSIS: Clinton crushes Obama across the board".
By Alan Silverleib - CNN

(CNN) -- After enduring a week of political obituaries, Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign proved Tuesday that it still has some life.

Clinton, as expected, trounced Democratic front-runner Sen. Barack Obama in the West Virginia primary. In the process, she underscored Obama's weakness with blue-collar, working-class white voters -- a segment of the electorate that may prove pivotal in November.

Buoyed by her landslide margin, Clinton vowed to continue what has become a longshot campaign, telling supporters at a Charleston rally that she is "more determined than ever to carry on this campaign until everyone has had a chance to make their voices heard."

Clinton's victory in West Virginia was decisive. She won men and women. She carried a majority of voters in every age group. She captured liberals, moderates, and conservatives. She took a majority in every income bracket.Clinton's largest margins, as expected, were registered among voters at the lower end of the socioeconomic ladder. Among white voters without a college degree, Clinton defeated Obama by 50 points. Among white voters making less than $30,000 a year, Clinton's margin of victory was more than 60 points.

Older voters and white women -- part of Clinton's core constituency -- also rallied strongly to her beleaguered campaign. Voters age 65 and older supported her by a 38-point margin. White women backed her by 51 points.

Clinton's proposal to suspend the 18.4-cent-per-gallon federal gasoline tax for the summer -- an idea belittled by most economists and rejected by Obama as a political gimmick -- proved to be a winner in West Virginia. Voters supported the gas tax suspension by an almost 2-to-1 margin. Those voters who supported suspending the gas tax broke for Clinton, 74 to 19 percent.
Read more on line at CNN

Evaluation: Obama's Lead in Delegates May Not Be a Good Thing
Obama campaign strategist identified weaknesses in the Democratic primary caucus system which discriminates against handicapped, the elderly and workers who cannot physically attend precinct caucuses. Many caucus states, such as Iowa and Texas, prohibit absentee or proxy voting in caucuses. No allowances are made for registered voters who are homebound, or frail, and unable to participate at nightime party caucuses. Some caucus states, such as Maine, allow certified by mail voters to register their presidential preference and their preference to be includes in the math to derive the distribution of delegates between presidential preferences. Most caucus states, unlike Maine, exclude all voters who cannot physically show up to their precinct party caucus from helping to select their party's nominee for President. Texas is the only state which has both a caucus and a primary. In Texas, significant differences emerged across the state in precincts between the percentages in the popular vote (primary voters) per candidate and causus registrants per candidate. Texas awards 25% of the delegates through party caucus's and 75% by primary voters (popular vote). The Texas system favors those who are healthier, able to drive after dark, not homebound, elderly or too frail to stay until late at night when the delegates were chosen in many precinct caucues. The presidential preference of workers who cannot get off work on caucus nights but in the primary, like their more frail elderly or handicapped neighbors, only count 75% of what their younger, healthier neighbors who were able to show up at the caucus after the polls closed on primary night. Chaos and non-compliance with Democratic Party Rules and Texas and Federal Election codes further pollulated the outcome of many precinct and senatorial Democratic Conventions.

Election Process Discriminates
Although the Help Americans Vote Act stipulates how Americans with disabilities are to be accommodated at polling places, guidelines for accommodations at party precinct and senatorial conventions are vague. Disabled supporters of both leading presidential candidates will join forces this year for the first time in Austin at State Convention in a new issues caucus. Democrats with Disabilities is the first disability caucus in the Texas Democratic Party. It will meet from 11 A.M. to 12:30 P.M. Friday, June 6th at the 2008 Texas Democratic Party State Convention. Founding members are split between presidential preferences but agree that the current process discriminates against persons with disabilities and needs to be corrected.

Non ADA Compliance in Senatorial District Conventions to be Reviewed by the Credentials Committee at State Convention

In Tarrant County, Harriet Varnum Irby, former SDEC Committee Woman from Senatorial 10, objected to the choice of the antiquated Will Rogers Colesium as the Senatorial 10 Convention site when it was chosen. Irby says she went to Tarrant County Party Headquarters when she learned that Will Rogers was the proposed site and told them that it was unsuitable because it is not ADA compliant. A landmark built before ADA laws were passed by Congress, the arena is exempt from having to eliminate many of the barriers required in newer buildings. Tarrant County Democratic Party Executive Director Keith Annis announced to the members of the Senatorial 10 Nominations Committee that "we got numerous calls from people who said they were delegates but could not attend if the convention was at Will Rogers because they were handicapped." Fort Worth attorney Jason Smith filed a challenge to the distribution of delegates per presidential preference at the Senatorial 10 Convention at Will Rogers to the State Democratic Party's Credentials Committee based on non-ADA compliance at the Senatorial Convention which discriminated against the elderly, frail and handicapped.

In neighboring East Tarrant County, at the Tarrant County Community College East Campus in Arlington, the Senatorial 9 Tarrant County Democratic Convention also failed to accommodate the handicapped. Although the college meets architecture requirements for ADA, campus security blockaded the drive restricting handicapped persons from utilizing parking near the entrance of the main building where the convention was held. Instead of being allowed to drive up to the building where handitran buses usually pick-up and discharge passengers, blockades were positioned at the entrance of the main drive, about the distance of a a city block from the main building. The Main ballrooom, where over half of the delegates were seated, was on one level and provided few barriers for the mobility challenged. However, many delegates and all alternates and guests were seated in the Theatre which has at least 8 steep steps at the entrance and 18 steps inside the theatre. The college accommodates persons in wheelchairs in the front row of the theatre and allows them entrance through a side door which has not steps. On Convention day, the side entrance was closed and all delegates and alternates were forced to enter and exit using the front steps. At County Senatorial 9 Convention at TCCC.

It is ironic that some view the nomination of Barak Obama, an African-American, as rectification of some of the discrimination in America, while others say that the campaign strategy of the Obama which has given him a lead in the delegate count (acquired mainly through his lead in caucus states) exploits flaws in the Democratic process which discriminates against registered voters who are handicapped, frail, elderly, transportation restricted or forced to work on the night of their party caucus. Even if Obama strategists did not purposely set out to discriminate against the handicapped, their emphasis on caucus states which do not allow absentee or proxy voting by certified mail registered voters, has resulted in greater discrimination against elderly and handicapped voters than occurs in states where delegates are awarded by popular vote in primaries or at caucuses which allow proxy or absentee/ by mail voting to distribute delegates between presidential preferences.

Examination of the profiles of each candidates voters this year shows that the average age of Obama's voter and caucus supporter is younger than that of Senator Clinton. Although she draws voters from all age groups, her strongest segment is among women over 50 years of age. Although both have drawn out first-time voters of all ages, a significant number of Senator Obama's supporters are young people who have registered to vote for the first time. Senator Clinton consistently surpasses Senator Obama in attracting voters who have voted in more than one Democratic Primary. Some precinct chairs were concerned to note than many of their double and triple D's (persons who have voted in 2 or 3 Democratic Primaries) were not participants at their Democratic Precinct Caucuses. Although they are faithful to vote, frequently at early voting during the day or by mail, their vote only counted 1/4 of first time voters who were able to attend the precinct caucuses.

If delegates awarded in caucues properly reflected the demographics of registered voters who participated in the primaries, the distribution of delegates at caucuses between candidates would mirror the popular vote in primary states. However, in Texas, (the only state which has both primary popular votes and percinct caucuses) the distribution of delegates between presidential preferences at precinct caucuses differed significantly from the percentages of votes per candidate at the same precinct primary elections. This discrepancy further highlights the difference between the distribution of delegates between candidates and the preferences of voters on election day.

Some Question if Obama's Lead in Delegates May Result in a Democratic Losses in November

Delegate counts which do not mirror the opinions of registered voters who habitually cast votes in Presidential elections can give a false reading. In West Virginia, despite Obama outspending Clinton by 3 to 1, she beat him in every county. He was stuck in the low 20's while she whopping 67% of the votes cast. Senator John Edwards, who has withdrawn from the race, received 26,181 votes (17%); Senator Barak Obama received 91,663 votes (26%). Senator Clinton got 269,187 votes (67%). She lead Obama by by a 41 points by defeating him by drawing more support from every age group, socio-economic level and category of voter.

West Virginia is an important state for Democratic Presidential candidates. No Democratic Presidential candidate has won a general election without winning West Virginia since 1916.

Super Delegate Delimma
As Obama swept through caucus states and surged ahead in the delegate count, Super Delegates who are supposed to be a party check and balance which helps the party select the strongest candidate to win against the Republicans in the General Election, added to his delegate total. Clinton continues to add key swing state victories. Crucial to any presidential win for any party, white working class voters continue to vote more heavily for Senator Hillary Clinton than for either McCain or Obama in most presidential primaries. Many question whether Senator Obama will be able to defeat McCain in the fall. Most feel that without Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party's surge in voter turn-out will be diminished by another Republican win.

On-line Petitions
The level of disgust expressed by thousands of citizens through on-line petitions shows that many Democratic voters will not fall in line and vote for the "other candidate" if their candidate is not the Presidential nominee or at least on the ticket as VP. Over 5000 citizens have signed and commented on a petition to the Super Delegates urging them to select Senator Clinton as the nominee. In a few days over 800 citizens signed the "Quiet Riot" petition which says that Clinton's supporters will not "fall in line" and support Barak Obama. These petitions can be read and signed at http://ipetitions.com/'petition/quietriot/ and at http:/www.ipetitions.com/petitions/supportinghillary/

Grassroots Rallies for Hillary Across the Nation
While Senator Clinton and Senator Obama campaign in Missouri, Kentucky, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota, Clinton supporters are rallying in states which have already voted to show solidarity with Hillary and to raise money for her campaign. From the grassroots rallies are being organized by supporters. In Pantego (between Arlington and Fort Worth) a rally called "STAND WTH HILLARY" Saturday, May 17th (1-4 p.m.) at Pantego Bi-Centennial Park (3200 Smith Barry Road, Pantego, TX 76013) will feature speeches by VIPs and grassroots activists such as Teresa Meza, President of the Lulac Council and Clinton Texas State Convention Delegate. There will be laptops with internet access where people can sign three on-line petitions urging superdelegates to vote for Hillary and the DNC to honor the vote of citizens in the Florida and Michigan primaries. A similar event will be hosted by grassroots Clinton supporters Saturday in Longview at Teague Park.

DELEGATE MATH
For months political reporters have reported the delegate count without clarifying for the public that until the national convention delegates are elected at state party conventions, and those electors show up at the Democratic National Convention and sign-in for their candidates, all so-called "pledged delegate counts" are speculative. Endorsements from superdelegates are even more speculative than pledged delegates. Superdelegates endorsments will not necessarily reflect the way they will actually vote at the National Democratic Convention. Superdelegates habitually switch sides as the prevailing wind blows. They are charged with deciding for the candidate who has the best chance of beating the Republican candidate for President in November. If Senator Obama continues to show that he cannot win key swing states or the vital block of white working class voters, it is probable that we will see some of his current super delegate endorsements shift to Senator Clinton before the National Convention.

Citizen outrage, expressed by registered Democratic voters from all states, expressed in petitions, against the exclusion of delegates from Florida and Michigan may result in a further erosion of Senator Obama's lead in the delegate count. If only half (142) of Obama's current Super Delegates (284) switched to Senator Clinton, she would lead him today without inclusion of Florida or Michigan delegates or delegates from the remaining primaries in Montana, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, Missouri or Oregon.

Stand With Hillary Rally in Pantego, Sat. May 17th

2008-05-13T20:12:00.001-05:00

Click to see larger image

Methodist Conference rejects Bush Presidential Library; Passes resolution to South Central Jurisdiction Conference

2008-05-01T20:33:00.004-05:00

United Methodist Conference - South Central Jurisdiction Conference - April 28, 2008
Methodist Conference votes against the Bush Presidential Library
A report on the Methodist Church General Conference web page shows the
Conference has voted to reject the Bush Presidential Library at SMU -
by vote of 855 to 20. The vote of 844 to 20 by the Methodist Church General Conference referred the resolution, below, to the "South Central Jurisdictional
Conference." This will be held July 16-19, 2008, at the Anatole Hotel
in Dallas. We understand there has NOT been a final decision on the
church's position on the Bush Library.

Here is a list of Delegates who will vote on the resolution:

From the General Conference

SMU Bush Presidential Library Rejection (80089-MH-NonDis)

I hereby petition the UMC General Conference to prevent leasing,
selling, or otherwise participating in or supporting the presidential
library for George W. Bush at Southern Methodist University.

Rationale

We should support separation of church and state and if the Bush
library goes on the SMU campus or property it will appear to the
country and the world as an endorsement of that president by the
United Methodist Church. Texas is a big state; surely there are
other venues...

Vote on Main Motion
This motion was Adopted, with 844 votes for and 20 votes against.http://www.calms.umc.org/2008/Menu.aspx?type=Petition&mode=Single&Number=80089

SMU Bush Presidential Library Rejection (80089-MH-NonDis)*
*Petition Status: Calendar Item
*Petition Text: Submitted Text ADCA p. 1493
*References: Non-disciplinary
*Committee: Ministry and Higher Education
Menu.aspx?type=Petition&mode=Committee&cc=MH
*Financial Implications: No
*Submitted by: Diane Smock, Greenville, SC, USA

SMU Bush Presidential Library Rejection (MH171-NonDis-R)
Calendar Item Status:
* Committee Voted (Printed in DCA p. 2260)
Calendar Item No: 1185
Menu.aspx?type=Calendar&mode=Single&number=1185
*Petitions on Calendar: 80089
Menu.aspx?type=Petition&mode=Single&Number=89
Consent Calendar: Calendar D04
Menu.aspx?type=Calendar&mode=Consent&calendar=D04
Committee Motion: Motion to Refer
Refer to: South Central Jurisdictional Conference
Committee Vote:
*For: 51
*Against: 5
*Not Voting: 1
NOTE: FOR VOTE REJECTS THE LIBRARY. AGAINST VOTE APPROVES OF LIBRARY
Vote Date and Time: 4/28/2008 1:30 PM

Last Vote Action: Vote on Main Motion
This motion was *Adopted*, with 844 votes for and 20 votes against.

*Plenary Motions: 4/30/2008 9:39 AM*
/Vote on Main Motion/ *ADOPTED* 844-20
Report by Tom Blackwell

Border Fencing - Congressmen debate merits of border fence in public hearing at UTB-TSC

2008-04-30T08:04:00.003-05:00

By Kevin Sieff - The Brownsville Herald - April 29, 2008
Construction of the U.S.-Mexico border fence might only be a few weeks away, but in Washington, D.C., the barrier continues to be a hot button issue.

The fence's significance - and its divisiveness - became clear on Monday, when eight congressmen and a number of local, state and national officials met at the University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College for a congressional field hearing.

U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., introduced the hearing, titled "Walls and Waivers," as a forum on the expedited construction of the border fence and its affect on the environment along the border. During the five-hour hearing, the conversation shifted to a more general evaluation of the barrier's merits.

"To examine the history, culture, economics of the border and then to decide the only solution is a 700-mile fence," Grijalva said in opening remarks, "is simply a failure of leadership."

U.S. Reps. Tom Tancredo, R-Col., and Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., both former 2008 presidential hopefuls, disagreed with Grijalva. Hunter referred to the success of a double fence in his district, on the border between San Diego and Tijuana.

"Our fence put the border gangs out of business because they lost their ability to move back and forth," said Hunter, who authored the Secure Fence Act of 2006.

Tancredo took issue with what he called "landowners' multi-culturalist views on the border."

"If you don't like the idea (of a fence), maybe you should consider building the fence around the northern part of your city," Tancredo said amid jeers from the audience.

The six other members of the congressional panel were outspoken in their opposition to the fence - and to the views of Hunter and Tancredo.

Perhaps the most substantial opposition to the barrier came from U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, a former Border Patrol chief, who called the fence a waste of the government's resources.

"For 10 percent of the border we need to consider the potential for fencing," he said. "I certainly don't think we need 700 miles of fencing."

Ronald Vitiello, chief Border Patrol agent in the Rio Grande Valley sector, said the barrier will decrease border crossings - but only if it is complemented with a boots-on-the-ground effort.

Reyes, who used to oversee the Valley's Border Patrol sector, said of Vitiello, "He's going to toe the party line - he's got to if he wants to maintain his job as chief of the sector."

To the dismay of the eight congressmen, the fence's architects at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security declined an invitation to the hearing. The absence of a DHS official left a number of questions unanswered.

"We'll seek out these answers in Washington," Grijalva said after the hearing.

The presence of 13 witnesses, many of whom live and work along the border, marked the convergence of a national political debate and a local dilemma.

"We need federal legislation that will protect borders in a humane and Christian way," said Bishop Raymundo J. Pena, of the Archdiocese of Brownsville.

"It isn't really a border to most of us who live down here," added Betty Perez, a local landowner and activist.

The articulation of local attitudes toward the fence was echoed by most of the congressmen in attendance, several of which were born along the U.S.-Mexico border. U.S. Rep. Grace Napolitano, D-California, is a native of Brownsville.

"Nothing is going to change until immigration policy is taken care of," Napolitano said on Monday. "The fence is ludicrous."
Read more in the Brownsville Herald Tribune

Art Hall Accepts Thousands From Valero PAC, Employees

2008-02-28T07:29:00.004-06:00

Hall Previously Claimed Valero Told Him His Wife's Position With The Firm Constituted No Conflict Of Interest
Vince Leibowitz - February 28, 2008

AUSTIN--Former San Antonio City Councilman Art Hall has accepted more than $5,000 in contributions from Valero Energy's political action committee and several of its employees, according to records from the Texas Ethics Commission.

On February 8, Hall received a $5,000 contribution from the Valero Political Action Committee, a PAC notorious for giving thousands of dollars to Texas' most conservative Republicans-- and Railroad Commissioner Michael L. Williams, the man Hall and Dale Henry (D-Lampasas) seek to replace in the November general election.

In addition to the $5,000 from Valero's PAC, Hall also took more than $2,000 from Valero employees and attorneys in late January and February. According to Hall's most recent filing with the Texas Ethics Commission, he received the following contributions from Valero employees and attorneys:

Robert Bower, Valero Attorney, $500 2/23
Theodore Guidry, Valero employee, $500, 1/26
Diane Hirsch, Valero Attorney, $300, 2/23
Martin Loeber, Valero Attorney, $500, 2/23
Rich Walsh, Valero Attorney, $1,500, 2/23
Parker Wilson, Valero Attorney, $500, 2/23

"The money that Art Hall has accepted from Valero's PAC and its employees is especially troubling given the fact that he is very connected to Valero through the fact that his wife is an attorney for Valero," said Vince Leibowitz, campaign director for Dale Henry, Hall's principal opponent.

According to Hall's Personal Financial Statement on file with the Texas Ethics Commission, Hall's wife owns between 5,000 and 9,999 shares of stock in Valero which, if sold, would represent a net gain of $10,000 to $24,999.

"All of this is especially disturbing given the fact that Art Hall is actually getting advice from Valero on what constitutes a conflict of interest for his campaign," said Leibowitz.

At a forum in Decatur on January 29, Hall was asked if he believed it constituted a conflict of interest that his wife, Stephanie Hall, is an attorney for Valero considering the Railroad Commission regulates the oil and gas industry. Hall told the audience that he had contacted Valero and that he was advised by the company that her work would not constitute a conflict of interest for him.

"Art Hall is getting ethics advice and money from Valero energy. What else is he getting from them? Are they advising him on energy policy as well? Art Hall represents no departure from the current rubber-stamp culture at the Texas Railroad Commission where Commissioners take thousands of dollars from oil company PACs and their employees and then give them whatever they want without regard for the best interest of Texas consumers or the environment," Leibowitz said.

"Valero's PAC is notorious for giving large sums of money to Republicans and pet conservative causes," Leibowitz said. "Valero has given Railroad Commissioner Michael L. Williams $20,000. Now Art Hall is taking Valero's money and telling Texans that he will bring 'balance' to the Texas Railroad Commission. What kind of 'balance' is that, exactly? The kind of 'balance' where Hall will simply be another hand out taking money from the oil industry? That's not 'balance,' that is merely more of the same," Leibowitz continued.

Valero has given incumbent Railroad Commissioner Michael L. Williams $10,000 on two occasions: once less than a year ago on June 28, 2007, and once on June 7, 2002. Valero has also contributed to some of Texans most anti-consumer, counter-progressive Republicans and Republican causes.

The company's PAC gave $15,000 to Tom Craddick's "Stars Over Texas" Leadership PAC ($10,000 on 10/11/06 and $5,000 on 10/25/04), and $30,000 to Speaker Craddick's personal campaign account since 2004 ($10,000 on 11/08/05 and $10,000 on 11/5/07, and $10,000 on 11/10/04). A small sampling of Valero's contributions to Republicans include:

Texas Conservative Coalition ($2,500 on 9/10/07)
Former State Rep. Joe Nixon ($1,000 on 3/5/04)
Lt. Governor David Dewhurst ($10,000 on 11/6/03)
Attorney General Greg Abbott ($10,000 on 7/11/03)
Railroad Commissioner Victor Carrillo ($5,000 on 1/29/04)
U.S. Senator John Cornyn ($2,500 while Cornyn was Texas' AG on 11/7/2000)
State Rep. Phil King ($2,500 on 10/23/07)
Texas Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples ($5,000 on 11/27/07)
Former State Rep. Talmadge Heflin ($1,000 on 11/9/04)

The Valero-tied contributions aren't the only suspect contributions Hall has received as a candidate. While on the San Antonio City Council, Hall accepted money from executives and employees of the HB Zachry company, a San Antonio-based company which has paired with Spanish company Cintra and, in March 2005, signed a comprehensive development agreement authorizing $3.5 million in planning for the first phase of the controversial Trans-Texas Corridor. Hall accepted a $500 contribution from HB Zachry on April 26, 2005 and a $250 contribution from J.P. Zachry on August 8, 2005. As a San Antonio City Councilman, Hall also took money from Valero's PAC on May 3, 2005 ($500).

At the January 29 forum in Decatur, Hall also failed to state a position on a question that asked whether or not he favored continued development of the Trans-Texas Corridor, which will include "designated utility zones" which will facilitate the transport of oil and natural gas and could have a significant negative impact on Texas' environment and groundwater.

Henry faces Art Hall of San Antonio and Mark Thompson of Hamilton in the March 4 Democratic Primary. The winner of the March 4 Democratic Primary will face Commissioner Michael L. Williams in the general election.

Tom Love for U.S. Congress

2008-02-26T17:58:00.000-06:00

By The Texas Liberal - Jan. 7, 2008

More Democrats turn out all of first five days of early voting in Arlington and Tarrant County

2008-02-24T08:29:00.002-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - Feb. 24, 2008

In Arlington, Democratic voters outnumbered Republican voters at all five polling places for each of the first five days of Early Voting. Countywide, over twice the number of Democrats voted early or by mail than Republicans.

In Arlington this year, larger numbers of Democrats are voting than Republicans. Democratic turnout at the five Arlington early voting sites exceeded Republican turnout for the first time in decades. In Arlington, known as a "Republican stronghold", 1033 votes were cast the first day of Early Voting in the Democratic primary while only 496 Republican votes were cast.
County wide, 5,733 Democrats voted early the first day; 2,606 Republicans voted early in Tarrant County on Tuesday.

On Wednesday Feb. 20, in Arlington, 1112 Democrats voted early; 463 Republicans voted early at the five early voting sites in Arlington.

On Thursday, Feb. 21, in Arlington, 846 Democrats voted early; 421 Republicans voted Thursday in Arlington.

On Friday, Feb. 22, in Arlington, 1,164 Democrats voted early; 557 Republicans voted early Friday in Arlington.

On Saturday, Feb. 23, in Arlington, 1,259 Democrats voted early; 431 Republicans voted early Friday in Arlington.

During the first five days of early voting in Arlington, 2,423 Democrats voted early and 988 Republicans voted early in Arlington during the first five days of early voting.

TARRANT COUNTY

County Wide on Tuesday Feb. 19, 5,732 Democrats voted and 2,607 Republicans voted.
County Wide on Wednedsay Feb. 20, 5,602 Democrats voted and 2,583 Republicans voted.
County Wide on Thursday, Feb. 21, 4,554 Democrats voted and 2,204 Republicans voted.
Wednesday. 5603 Democrats voted early and 2583 Republicans cast early ballots.
County Wide on Friday, Feb. 22, 5,992 Democrats voted and 2,985 Republicans voted early.
County Wide on Saturday, Feb. 23, 6,979 Democrats cast early ballots and 2,514 Republicans voted early.

During the first three days of Early Voting this year in Tarrant County 15,888 Democrats voted early and 7,394 Republicans voted early.

MAIL BALLOTS

By the second day of early voting, Tarrant County Elections reported a total of 2,146Democratic Primary mail ballots had been received and 1,982 Democratic Primary Vote by Mail ballots were still unvoted; 536 Republican Primary voters have returned Vote by Mail Ballots; 849 Republican Vote by Mail ballots remained to be voted at the close of the second day of Early Voting.
By Saturday, Feb. 23rd, 2,579 Democratic Vote by Mail Ballots had been returned and 893 Democratic Vote By Mail Ballots remained unvoted; 714 Republican Vote By Mail Ballots had been returned by Thursday and 888 Republican Vote By Mail Ballots remianed out and unvoted.

Democrats outpaced Republicans at the polls in Tarrant County on each of the first five days of Early Voting. Arlington, formerly thought of my many as a Red city, and discounted by most national Democratic campaigns as too expensive to work and too Republican to merit expenditure of resources, continues to turn out over two Democratic voters for every Republican. Democratic turnout has attracted the Presidential Campaigns. Chelsea Clinton appeared at UTA earlier this month. Her father, President Bill Clinton, will be 'stumpin'' for his wife at a rally this morning, (Sunday, Feb. 24) from 9:30-noon at Vandergriff Park. Arlington, noted as a city with a large number of Republican donors, has attracted Republican Presidential candidates in past years and some statewide Democratic candidates. This year, instead of fundraisers, the campaigns are holding rallies open to the public. Retail politics has arrived in Arlington

COMPARISON OF TARRANT COUNTY EARLY VOTERS BY DAY
FOR LAST THREE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

DAY 1 EARLY VOTING
Tarrant County - 2000:
Democratic Voters: 372 - Republican Voters: 1,558
Tarrant County - 2004:
Democratic Voters: 396 - Republican Voters: 286
Tarrant County - 2008:
Democratic Voters: 5,732 - Republican Voters: 2,607

DAY 2 EARLY VOTING
Tarrant County - 2000:
Democratic Voters: 558 - Republican Voters:2,518
Tarrant County - 2004:
Democratic Voters: 464 - Republican Voters: 387
Tarrant County - 2008:
Democratic Voters: 5,602 - Republican Voters: 2,583

DAY 3 EARLY VOTING
Tarrant County - 2000:
Democratic Voters: 713 - Republican Voters: 3,319
Tarrant County - 2004:
Democratic Voters: 591 - Republican Voters: 496
Tarrant County - 2008:
Democratic Voters: 4,554 - Republican Voters: 2,204

DAY 4 EARLY VOTING
Tarrant County - 2000:
Democratic Voters: 983 - Republican Voters: 4,665
Tarrant County - 2004:
Democratic Voters: 610 - Republican Voters: 538
Tarrant County - 2008:
Democratic Voters: 5,992 - Republican Voters: 2,985

DAY 5 EARLY VOTING
Tarrant County - 2000:
Democratic Voters: 1,205 - Republican Voters: 5,788
Tarrant County - 2004:
Democratic Voters: 542 - Republican Voters: 372
Tarrant County - 2008:
Democratic Voters: 6,979 - Republican Voters: 2,514

SOURCE: Tarrant County Election 3-4-2008 Primary Elections Combined Early Voting posted Sunday, Feb. 24, 2008

Tarrant County Democrats outnumber Republicans at Early Voting

2008-02-22T09:39:00.002-06:00

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - Feb. 22, 2008

On the third day of Early Voting, all Tarrant County voting sites except two reported more Democratic Voters than Republican Primary Voters.
At Benbrook City Hall 104 Republicans voted early on Thursday and 98 Democrats voted early. At Nance Elementary 16 Republicans voted early and 10 Democrats voted early. A significant number more Democrats than Republicans voted Thursday at all other Tarrant County Early Voting sites.

County wide, 5,733 Democrats voted early on Tuesday while only 2,605 Repubicans voted early. This year both parties in Tarrant County have exceeded the number of voters participating in their primaries during the first and second days of early voting in the 2000 and 2004 Primaries. On the third day, Republican turn-out was less than in 2000; Democratic turnout on the Third Day in Tarrant County this year is over 6 1/2 times greater than 2000 Day three turnout and over 7 1/2 times greater than in the 2004 Presidential Democratic Primary.

In Arlington this year, larger numbers of Democrats are voting than Republicans. Democratic turnout at the five Arlington early voting sites exceeded Republican turnout for the first time in decades. In Arlington, known as a "Republican stronghold", 1033 votes were cast the first day of Early Voting in the Democratic primary while only 496 Republican votes were cast.
County wide, 5,733 Democrats voted early the first day; 2,606 Republicans voted early in Tarrant County on Tuesday.

On Wednesday Feb. 20, in Arlington, 1112 Democrats voted early; 463 Republicans voted early at the five early voting sites in Arlington.

On Thursday, Feb. 21, in Arlington, 846 Democrats voted early; 421 Republicans voted Thursday in Arlington.

County Wide on Tuesday Feb. 19, 5,732 Democrats voted and 2,607 Republicans voted.
County Wide on Wednedsay Feb. 20, 5,602 Democrats voted and 2,583 Republicans voted.
County Wide on Thursday, Feb. 21, 4,554 Democrats voted and 2,204 Republicans voted.
Wednesday. 5603 Democrats voted early; 2583 Republicans cast early ballots.

During the first three days of Early Voting this year in Tarrant County 15,888 Democrats voted early and 7,394 Republicans voted early.

MAIL BALLOTS

By the second day of early voting, Tarrant County Elections reported a total of 2,146Democratic Primary mail ballots had been received and 1,982 Democratic Primary Vote by Mail ballots were still unvoted; 536 Republican Primary voters have returned Vote by Mail Ballots; 849 Republican Vote by Mail ballots remained to be voted at the close of the second day of Early Voting.
By Thursday, Feb. 21st, 2,324 Democratic Vote by Mail Ballots had been returned and 1,935 Democratic Vote By Mail Ballots remained unvoted; 584 Republican Vote By Mail Ballots had been returned by Thursday and 856 Republican Vote By Mail Ballots remianed out and unvoted.

At the close of the third day of early voting 15,888 Democrats had voted early (in person and by mail) and 7,394 Republicans had voted early. In Tarrant County on each of the first three days of early voting, over twice the number of Democrats cast early votes than Republicans.

In 2000 in Tarrant County more Republicans voted early than Democrats during the first three days of Early Voting; In 2004 more Democrats voted early during the first three days of early voting than Republicans. However, this year a much higher percentage of Democrats are voting early than in 2004.

DAY 1 EARLY VOTING
Tarrant County - 2000:
Democratic Voters: 372 - Republican Voters: 1,558
Tarrant County - 2004:
Democratic Voters: 396 - Republican Voters: 286
Tarrant County - 2008:
Democratic Voters: 5,732 - Republican Voters: 2,607

DAY 2 EARLY VOTING
Tarrant County - 2000:
Democratic Voters: 558 - Republican Voters:2,518
Tarrant County - 2004:
Democratic Voters: 464 - Republican Voters: 387
Tarrant County - 2008:
Democratic Voters: 5,602 - Republican Voters: 2,583

DAY 3 EARLY VOTING
Tarrant County - 2000:
Democratic Voters: 713 - Republican Voters: 3,319
Tarrant County - 2004:
Democratic Voters: 591 - Republican Voters: 496
Tarrant County - 2008:
Democratic Voters: 4,554 - Republican Voters: 2,204

SOURCE: Tarrant County Election 3-4-2008 Primary Elections Combined Early Voting posted Friday, Feb. 22, 2008

Senate limits CIA interrogation

2008-02-15T04:16:00.003-06:00

By BBC News - Thursday, 14 February 2008
The US Senate has voted to bar the CIA from using harsh interrogation techniques such as simulated drowning, widely known as water-boarding.
The ban was contained in a broader intelligence bill that passed 51-45.

The Senate vote follows a similar move by the House of Representatives in December, despite a threat by President George W Bush to veto such legislation.

A senior justice department official is set to testify later in the day that water-boarding is now not legal.

"The set of interrogation methods authorised for current use is narrower than before, and it does not today include water-boarding," says Steven Bradbury, the acting head of the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel.

His remarks, obtained by the Associated Press, were prepared for an appearance before the House Judiciary Constitution subcommittee later on Thursday.

He goes on: "There has been no determination by the justice department that the use of water-boarding, under any circumstances, would be lawful under the current law."

Water-boarding, condemned as torture by rights groups and many governments, is an interrogation method that puts the detainee in fear of drowning.

Army manual

In a vote that split largely along party lines, the Democratic-led Congress on Wednesday passed a bill that would restrict the CIA to using the 19 interrogation techniques outlined by the US Army field manual.

The legislation would ban the CIA from using not only water-boarding but sensory deprivation and other harsh coercive methods on prisoners.

"There must be no doubt in the world that this great nation does not torture," said Senator Chuck Hagel, one of the bill's main sponsors.

Senator John McCain, who is the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination and who has previously brought anti-torture legislation, voted against the overall bill.

"I made it very clear that I think that water-boarding is torture and illegal, but I will not restrict the CIA to only the Army field manual," he said.

Crucial information

Last week, the CIA publicly admitted for the first time using water-boarding on terror suspects.

The CIA director, General Michael Hayden, told the House Intelligence Committee the technique had only been used on three people, including high-profile al-Qaeda detainee Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and not for the past five years.

He said that water-boarding may no longer be legal given changes in US legislation and that the CIA would respect limits passed by Congress even if it meant failing to get crucial information.

Gen Hayden has argued that the CIA has different interrogation needs than the army and requires more latitude to be effective.

The Senate vote fell short of the two-thirds majority needed to override a presidential veto, which Mr Bush has threatened to use.

"Part of this bill are inconsistent with the effective conduct of intelligence gathering," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.

CIA 'ENHANCED INTERROGATION' TECHNIQUES
- Water boarding: prisoner bound to a board with feet raised, and cellophane wrapped round his head. Water is poured onto his face and is said to produce a fear of drowning
- Cold cell: prisoner made to stand naked in a cold, though not freezing, cell and doused with water
- Standing: Prisoners stand for 40 hours and more, shackled to the floor
- Belly slap: a hard slap to the stomach with an open hand. This is designed to be painful but not to cause injury
Source: Described to ABC News by un-named CIA agents in 2005

Read more on BBC News

US annual trade deficit narrows

2008-02-15T04:11:00.003-06:00

By BBC News - Thursday, 14 February 2008
The US trade deficit narrowed in 2007, official figures show, as a rise in exports offset the country's large growth in oil imports.
The deficit reached $711.6bn (£361.1bn) last year, down from $758.5bn in 2006, the Commerce Department said.

Strong demand for oil from overseas had seen the trade gap set records for five consecutive years.

December's trade deficit fell to $58.8bn from $63.1bn in November - a bigger decline than expected.

China gap widens

The decline in the dollar helped to spur exports, analysts said, as this made US products cheaper abroad and therefore more competitive.

President George W Bush's administration has said that its free trade policies have also bolstered sales overseas.

However, critics point to a deficit that is almost double the level of 2001 when President Bush came office.

As analysts had expected, the trade deficit with China grew in 2007 despite the string of recalls of Chinese-made products during the year.

The trade gap with China jumped by 10.2% to $256.3bn - the biggest the US has had with a single country.

The next largest deficits were with the European Union at $107.4bn, and Japan at $82.8bn.

Commerce Department figures showed that exports, which were helped by farm products and car and vehicle parts, totalled $1.62 trillion, while imports, led by oil, rose to $2.33 trillion.

Read more in BBC News

Sharp jump in China trade surplus

2008-02-15T04:07:00.002-06:00

By BBC News - Friday, 15 February 2008China's trade surplus soared 19.5% in January as the economy continued to boom despite efforts to cool the rate of growth, official figures have shown.
The surplus - the gap between what China exports and what it imports - grew to $22.7bn (£11.5bn) last month, compared with $15.9bn a year earlier.

China's exports in January increased 26.7% to $109.7bn, the biggest year-on-year rise in six months.

Imports rose 27.6% to $90.2bn, the biggest increase in almost two years.

Yuan dispute

The latest trade surplus figure was bigger than market estimates and is likely to renew criticism from the US and European Union, who have accused China of undervaluing the yuan to make its exports artificially cheap.

While Beijing still does not allow the yuan to float freely against other currencies, it counters that the currency's value has increased by 13% since 2005.

The Chinese government also argues that it cannot move any faster on liberalising the yuan for fear it could destabilise the country's export-led economic boom.

China has instead moved to cool both exports and its overall breakneck economic growth through policies such as increased taxation, interest rate rises and limits on how much money banks can lend to businesses.

Analysts said it would now be interesting to see how China's exports were affected by continuing recession fears in the US.

"The first point is that we haven't really seen any significant softening of the growth numbers in terms of both exports and imports," said Yiping Huang, chief China economist with Citigroup in Hong Kong.

"The trade surplus figure is a bit lower than in the previous months, but still very strong."

The International Monetary Fund said on Friday that the Chinese economy is likely to grow by 10% this year, down slightly from 11.4% in 2007.
Read more in BBC NEWS

Bush, House Democrats Face Off on Wiretapping Bill

2008-02-15T03:54:00.004-06:00

By David Welna and Melissa Block - NPR - All Things Considered, February 14, 2008

President Bush says the House needs to finish a bill governing U.S. eavesdropping on the phone calls and e-mails of suspected terrorists. The current law, the Protect America Act, expires this weekend, and the president says he won't approve another extension of it.

The president is insisting that Congress send him legislation expanding wiretapping powers before the temporary law expires Saturday.

The Senate passed such legislation this week that's at odds with what the House passed three months ago, and House Democrats now want three more weeks to settle those differences.

At the White House on Thursday, President Bush said no to that:

"I urge congressional leaders to let the will of the House and the American people prevail and vote on the Senate bill before adjourning for their recess. Failure to act would harm our ability to monitor new terrorist activities and could reopen dangerous gaps in our intelligence. Failure to act would also make the private sector less willing to help us protect the country, and this is unacceptable."

Bush, Congress in Spy Bill Standoff
By The Associated Press - WASHINGTON -February 15, 2008
With a deadline looming, President Bush and congressional Democrats are locked in a standoff over the government's authority to spy on foreign phone calls and e-mails that pass through the United States.

A temporary law that makes it easier to carry out that spying expires Saturday night at midnight, and Bush and his top intelligence officials say the consequences are dire. Al-Qaida, Bush says, is "thinking about hurting the American people again," and would be helped if U.S. eavesdropping is hampered.

The Democrats are equally adamant. Bush has all the authority he needs to intercept terrorist communications, even if the law expires, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday. The congressional majority is simply trying to balance concerns about civil liberties against the government's spy powers, and needs time to do it, she said.

So who's right?A quirk in the temporary eavesdropping law adopted by Congress last August complicates the answer. The law allows the government to initiate wiretaps for up to one year against a wide range of targets. It also explicitly compels telecommunications companies to comply with the orders, and protects them from civil lawsuits that may be filed against them for doing so.

But while the wiretap orders can go on for a year from the time they started, the compliance orders and the liability protections go away when the law expires, says Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell.

"There is no longer a way to compel the private sector to help us," he said Thursday in an Associated Press interview.

That is not exactly true. Even if the law expires, the government can get an order from the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to compel their cooperation. That court was created 30 years ago for just such a purpose.

But McConnell rejects that option. He says the process of getting a court order ties intelligence agents up in red tape.

The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act requires court permission to tap wires inside the United States. Changes in technology since then mean much of the world's computer and phone traffic passes through the United States, much of it on fiber-optic cable. Successive court cases say court orders are needed to listen in on any of them, McConnell said.

To get a court order, intelligence agents have to prove they have "probable cause" to believe a target is foreign agent or terrorist before being allowed to tap a line inside the United States, even if the communication originates and ends in a foreign country. "If it touches a wire in the U.S. you have to have a warrant," he said.

It is difficult for intelligence agents piecing together shreds of information to get enough to merit probable cause, he said. By the time they can amass enough information to do that, the phone number they wanted to track might already be obsolete, McConnell said.

"Terrorists change their name, change their means of communicating all the time. Every time that changes you've got to stay with it. We have to be very dynamic. More than likely we would miss the very information we need to prevent some horrendous act from taking place in the United States,"

he said.

The FISA law does make provisions for fleeting targets when there is not time to fill out the paperwork. Within a few days, though, the paperwork must be completed and probable cause proved to get an order approved.

The easy solution, say Democratic congressional leaders, is to extend the current law long enough to allow the House and Senate to work out the differences in their respective surveillance bills. The House finished its version in October, but the Senate did not finish until this week, pushing Congress hard up against the deadline.

The law had been set to expire on Feb. 1. The White House reluctantly agreed to a 15-day extension but refuses to approve any more, and has appealed to House leaders to simply approve the version approved by the Senate, which includes the legal immunity for telecom companies the president wants.

The immunity provision protects phone companies that helped the government in its warrantless wiretapping program conducted outside the authority of the FISA court, a feature the House intentionally left out.

Unable to muster the votes to extend the current law, House leaders say they'd rather let it lapse and operate under the old FISA rules than be pressured by the White House into accepting the Senate bill. House Republicans protested with a walkout Thursday.

House Democratic leaders say they're reluctant to grant legal immunity to the phone companies without knowing what they did, and have asked for more information, most of it classified. They say the administration is balking.

McConnell acknowledged that the White House's refusal to extend the current law is meant to force Congress to adopt the Senate bill. "If anybody agrees to 21-day extension, in 21 days we're going to have the same discussion again," he said.

However, Pelosi predicted the House and Senate versions could be reconciled in three weeks.

McConnell believes retroactive telecom immunity is critical to national security. Failure to provide it could result in telecommunications companies challenging FISA court orders as a way to further insulate themselves from future lawsuits, he argued.

Already, he says the roughly 40 lawsuits filed against telecom companies nationwide has chilled the private sector's willingness to help the intelligence agencies in ways unrelated to electronic surveillance. Exactly how is classified, and he won't elaborate.

"I'm talking about the things they've done to help us track terrorists," said McConnell. "They did lawful things at the request of the government under the conditions they've done it for 50 years."

But that help has waned over the last two years, he said.

"Your country is at risk if we can't get the private sector to help us, and that is atrophying all the time," he said.

House Republicans stage a walkout on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Feb. 14, 2008, as Democrats considered a resolution that would hold some of President Bush's former aides in contempt of Congress for refusing to answer questions before the House Judiciary Committee.

Read more in NPR

Nancy Pelosi Speaks On the Contempt Resolution of the Congress for Josh Bolton and Harriet Meirs

2008-02-14T15:12:00.003-06:00

DOJ Requires Clear Channel To Divest In Four Markets To Complete Buyout

2008-02-14T14:07:00.004-06:00

By Radio Ink - Feb. 13, 2008

WASHINGTON -- February 13, 2008: The Department of Justice says it will require Clear Channel to divest radio stations in Cincinnati, Houston, Las Vegas, and San Francisco in order for the company to proceed with a buyout led by private equity groups Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners.

Additionally, the DOJ's Antitrust Division has filed suit in Washington, DC, to block the acquisition, and at the same time has filed a proposed settlement that, if the U.S. District Court in Washington approves it, will resolve the lawsuit and the DOJ's competitive concerns.

The divestitures will be required, the DOJ said, because "the transaction, as originally proposed, likely would have resulted in higher prices to purchasers of radio advertising in Cincinnati, Houston, Las Vegas, and San Francisco because [buyers] Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners already have substantial ownership interests in two firms that compete with Clear Channel in those cities. Bain and THL have ownership interests in Cumulus Media Partners LLC (Cumulus), a large nationwide operator of radio stations, and THL also has an ownership interest in Univision Communications Inc. (Univision), a large nationwide operator of radio stations that broadcast primarily in Spanish."

According to the complaint filed by the Antitrust Division, radio stations owned by Clear Channel and Cumulus compete head-to-head in Cincinnati and Houston, while Clear Channel and Univision own competing Spanish-language radio stations in Houston, Las Vegas, and San Francisco. The division must approve the buyers of the divested Clear Channel stations.

"Without the divestitures obtained by the department, advertisers that rely on radio advertising in the affected cities likely would have faced higher prices," said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division. "The divestitures will ensure that advertisers will continue to receive the benefits of competition."

Read more on Radio Ink