December 31st, 2007
On December 28, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court construed one particular state law favorably to ballot access, in the case titled In re: Nomination Petition of Paulmier, no. 172 EAL 2007.
The issue was a provision in the Pennsylvania Ethics Act that requires candidates for state and local office to reveal the sources of their income. The act does not apply to federal candidates. The Court ruled that if a candidate files the financial disclosure on time, and the form has an omission or error, the candidate may correct the error later. By contrast, the lower court had tried to keep the candidate off the ballot (the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had ordered him back on to the ballot, but until December 28, had not explained its reasoning).
The particular candidate in this case was Greg Paulmier, a Democrat who was running for Philadelphia city council.
The Court also ruled that in the case of a self-employed candidate, the law doesn’t require him or her to list all the people whom he does business with. It is sufficient for the candidate to reveal the name of his or her business, without trying to list all the customers of that business.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Allegheny county meeting Tuesday
We will be meeting on Tuesday the 18th at Panera Bread on McKnight rd. The meeting runs from 7p-9p. This will be our last meeting of the year and if you have any suggestions for the new year please come to the meeting. We are trying to make it easy for everyone. I hope to see you there. If you have any questions please call me at 412-826-0516 or email me at jmurphpitt@hotmail.com.
Joe Murphy
Chairman
Joe Murphy
Chairman
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Ron Paul leading in Alaska
ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- In a poll conducted Monday, Dec. 10, Channel 2 News asked which GOP presidential candidate Alaskan Republicans plan to support in the Super Tuesday caucus.
Ron Paul - 29%
Mike Huckabee - 22%
Rudy Giuliani - 14%
Fred Thompson - 12%
John McCain - 9%
Mitt Romney - 9%
Other - 6%
Ron Paul - 29%
Mike Huckabee - 22%
Rudy Giuliani - 14%
Fred Thompson - 12%
John McCain - 9%
Mitt Romney - 9%
Other - 6%
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Fawcett: Assessment flaws forced drink tax
Thursday, December 06, 2007
By Karamagi Rujumba, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
In his eight years as a member of County Council, Dave Fawcett, R-Oakmont, considered himself a champion of small and efficient government.
So Allegheny County political observers and restaurateurs opposed to the 10 percent drink tax -- one of two new levies approved by council on Tuesday -- were stunned when Mr. Fawcett cast a decisive vote for the tax, which is part of a new dedicated funding stream for the Port Authority.
Mr. Fawcett, whose fights against the base year property assessment system and for the consolidation of county row offices established his credentials as one of council's fiscal conservatives, said he cast a vote for a new tax because of stark reality.
"We have come to a point in time when we're going to need more revenue as a county," he said. "There was no other option [to the drink tax]. I had proposed a compromise but it was not supported. And the thing that was extremely frustrating was that people have been ignoring the reality."
Mr. Fawcett's vote was critical for Mr. Onorato, who proposed the two new taxes, including a $2-a-day tax on car rentals, as a way of raising the $30 million county subsidy of the Port Authority.
Mr. Onorato had said a failure to enact the new taxes would force him to lay off up to 800 county employees.
Both taxes, and approval of the county's $727.5 million budget for next year, needed 10 votes of the 15-member council. Mr. Fawcett was the only Republican who voted with nine Democrats to approve the drink tax. He voted against the rental car tax.
Citing a lack of revenue for the county since the current base year plan for property assessments was implemented, Mr. Fawcett floated the idea of a 5 percent drink tax and a 0.29- mill property tax increase to balance the budget.
"The issue of the assessment is critical to understanding everything that occurred. I fought hard against that base assessment because I think it locks in inequities," he said yesterday.
"These restaurateurs are carrying the burden, but I don't think they are carrying the burden for Port Authority. They are carrying the load for those people who have gotten a free pass on their property taxes in the last few years," he added.
When his compromise was voted down, Mr. Fawcett said he was left with no option but to vote for the drink tax, even if it contradicted his principles as a fiscal conservative, because "you need revenue to run a government."
Karamagi Rujumba can be reached at krujumba@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1719.
First published on December 6, 2007 at 12:00 am
By Karamagi Rujumba, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
In his eight years as a member of County Council, Dave Fawcett, R-Oakmont, considered himself a champion of small and efficient government.
So Allegheny County political observers and restaurateurs opposed to the 10 percent drink tax -- one of two new levies approved by council on Tuesday -- were stunned when Mr. Fawcett cast a decisive vote for the tax, which is part of a new dedicated funding stream for the Port Authority.
Mr. Fawcett, whose fights against the base year property assessment system and for the consolidation of county row offices established his credentials as one of council's fiscal conservatives, said he cast a vote for a new tax because of stark reality.
"We have come to a point in time when we're going to need more revenue as a county," he said. "There was no other option [to the drink tax]. I had proposed a compromise but it was not supported. And the thing that was extremely frustrating was that people have been ignoring the reality."
Mr. Fawcett's vote was critical for Mr. Onorato, who proposed the two new taxes, including a $2-a-day tax on car rentals, as a way of raising the $30 million county subsidy of the Port Authority.
Mr. Onorato had said a failure to enact the new taxes would force him to lay off up to 800 county employees.
Both taxes, and approval of the county's $727.5 million budget for next year, needed 10 votes of the 15-member council. Mr. Fawcett was the only Republican who voted with nine Democrats to approve the drink tax. He voted against the rental car tax.
Citing a lack of revenue for the county since the current base year plan for property assessments was implemented, Mr. Fawcett floated the idea of a 5 percent drink tax and a 0.29- mill property tax increase to balance the budget.
"The issue of the assessment is critical to understanding everything that occurred. I fought hard against that base assessment because I think it locks in inequities," he said yesterday.
"These restaurateurs are carrying the burden, but I don't think they are carrying the burden for Port Authority. They are carrying the load for those people who have gotten a free pass on their property taxes in the last few years," he added.
When his compromise was voted down, Mr. Fawcett said he was left with no option but to vote for the drink tax, even if it contradicted his principles as a fiscal conservative, because "you need revenue to run a government."
Karamagi Rujumba can be reached at krujumba@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1719.
First published on December 6, 2007 at 12:00 am
Ron Paul national events in coming week
Dec 08 215 E Main Street Rock Hill South Carolina
Event 1. Rock Hill Rally 11:00 AM ET
Farmer'’s Market Pavilion (Outdoors), 402 N Murray Ave, Anderson SC
Event 2. Anderson Rally 3:30 PM ET
300 Main Street, Greenville, SC
Event 3. Peace Center Rally (Outdoors) 7:30 PM ET
Dec 09 Univision, Miami, FL
Univision Debate
Dec 11 DeYager Student Activities Center, Dordt College, 498 – 4 Av NE, Sioux Center, IA
Event 1. Dordt College Speech 12:00 PM CT
Sioux City Convention Center, Upper Level, 801 – 4 St, Sioux City, IA
Event 2. Ron Paul Rally 2:45 PM CT
Mid America Center (Convention Center), Room A, 1 Arena Way, Council Bluffs, IA
Event 3. Ron Paul Rally 7:30 PM CT
Dec 12 PBS, C-SPAN, CNN, FoxNews
Des Moines Register's Republican Presidential Candidate Debate 1:00 PM (check local TV listings)
Iowa State Fairgrounds, Elwell Family Food Center, Des Moines, IA
Ron Paul Speaks to Rural & Middle America 6:00 PM CT
Dec 13 Eagles Hall (Fraternal Order of Eagles), 7977 Reno Hwy, Fallon, NV
Meeting with Churchill County Republicans 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM PT
Dec 14 PBS
Interview on NOW Check local listings
Red Lion Hotel and Casino, 2065 Idaho Street, Elko, NV 89801
Meeting with Elko County Republicans 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM
Event 1. Rock Hill Rally 11:00 AM ET
Farmer'’s Market Pavilion (Outdoors), 402 N Murray Ave, Anderson SC
Event 2. Anderson Rally 3:30 PM ET
300 Main Street, Greenville, SC
Event 3. Peace Center Rally (Outdoors) 7:30 PM ET
Dec 09 Univision, Miami, FL
Univision Debate
Dec 11 DeYager Student Activities Center, Dordt College, 498 – 4 Av NE, Sioux Center, IA
Event 1. Dordt College Speech 12:00 PM CT
Sioux City Convention Center, Upper Level, 801 – 4 St, Sioux City, IA
Event 2. Ron Paul Rally 2:45 PM CT
Mid America Center (Convention Center), Room A, 1 Arena Way, Council Bluffs, IA
Event 3. Ron Paul Rally 7:30 PM CT
Dec 12 PBS, C-SPAN, CNN, FoxNews
Des Moines Register's Republican Presidential Candidate Debate 1:00 PM (check local TV listings)
Iowa State Fairgrounds, Elwell Family Food Center, Des Moines, IA
Ron Paul Speaks to Rural & Middle America 6:00 PM CT
Dec 13 Eagles Hall (Fraternal Order of Eagles), 7977 Reno Hwy, Fallon, NV
Meeting with Churchill County Republicans 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM PT
Dec 14 PBS
Interview on NOW Check local listings
Red Lion Hotel and Casino, 2065 Idaho Street, Elko, NV 89801
Meeting with Elko County Republicans 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM
Friday, November 30, 2007
Blawnox man in court over right to hang campaign sign
By Michael Aubele
VALLEY NEWS DISPATCH
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Wes Thompson wants Ron Paul for president and isn't afraid to show it.
Thompson arrived here at district court on Tuesday wearing a blue T-shirt with gold lettering that read, "Freedom loving Pennsylvanians support Ron Paul for president in 2008."
Partially hidden under Thompson's jacket, the shirt wasn't overly noticeable -- unlike the large campaign sign Thompson has attached to the fence in front of his home and business along Freeport Road in Blawnox.
It was the sign that forced Thompson to show up at District Judge Elissa Lang's courtroom for a civil hearing.
Blawnox Borough filed a suit against Thompson claiming he violated a zoning ordinance by displaying a campaign sign more than 30 days before an election.
Pennsylvania's presidential primary will be April 22.
Thompson hung the sign in August, near a sign that's been on his fence for years advocating a United States withdrawal from the United Nations.
According to the civil complaint, Blawnox officials twice called Thompson to tell him to remove the sign. The complaint also states that police delivered a letter to Thompson instructing him to remove the sign.
The borough, according to the complaint, is seeking the maximum fine of $500 plus a $49 fee.
Thompson, meantime, said he has no plans to remove the sign. He believes his right to keep it there is protected by the Constitution under the First Amendment.
"This (ordinance) obviously is not constitutional," he said.
He also argued that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld residents' right to place signs on their own property, citing the 1994 decision, City of Ladue v. Gilleo.
In that case, the court struck down a Missouri city law prohibiting signs at private residences.
"I've never had trouble with the borough before," Thompson said. "For whatever reason, they don't like the sign."
He added, "I'm keeping the sign up."
Thompson said he's always been politically active. He supports Paul, a Green Tree native and former Libertarian who's running as a Republican, because the candidate holds true to the Constitution.
"I don't care about party as long as the candidate is correct on the issues," said Thompson, local chapter leader of the John Birch Society and state vice chairman of the Pennsylvania Constitution Party. "What's important is the Constitution."
Thompson said he hung the sign because "Somebody like Ron Paul needs name recognition. He doesn't have the name recognition of someone like Hillary Clinton."
About a dozen Paul supporters arrived at Lang's courtroom on Tuesday with Thompson. Some also wore T-shirts supporting the candidate, and at least one carried a sign.
"This is a true grassroots campaign," Thompson said.
"I'm thrilled that (Paul) is a candidate," he added. "At the very least, he'll educate the American people and a lot of the candidates."
A spokesman for Paul's campaign could not be reached for comment.
Whether or not Thompson will have to remove his Ron Paul sign wasn't decided Tuesday because Lang continued the hearing on a date to be scheduled.
Lang said the case wasn't meant for a civil suit. She said she advised Blawnox's solictor that the proper way to file the charge would be as a non-traffic summary violation.
Lang said the civil charge would be withdrawn.
John Rushford, attorney representing Blawnox, said the borough would "review the matter before taking further action."
"Typically," he said, "a zoning violation is not a criminal case."
Rushford said that no one from his firm, Dodaro Cambest & Associates, could attend Tuesday's hearing and that the firm requested it be continued.
Michael Aubele can be reached at maubele@tribweb.com or 724-226-4673.
VALLEY NEWS DISPATCH
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Wes Thompson wants Ron Paul for president and isn't afraid to show it.
Thompson arrived here at district court on Tuesday wearing a blue T-shirt with gold lettering that read, "Freedom loving Pennsylvanians support Ron Paul for president in 2008."
Partially hidden under Thompson's jacket, the shirt wasn't overly noticeable -- unlike the large campaign sign Thompson has attached to the fence in front of his home and business along Freeport Road in Blawnox.
It was the sign that forced Thompson to show up at District Judge Elissa Lang's courtroom for a civil hearing.
Blawnox Borough filed a suit against Thompson claiming he violated a zoning ordinance by displaying a campaign sign more than 30 days before an election.
Pennsylvania's presidential primary will be April 22.
Thompson hung the sign in August, near a sign that's been on his fence for years advocating a United States withdrawal from the United Nations.
According to the civil complaint, Blawnox officials twice called Thompson to tell him to remove the sign. The complaint also states that police delivered a letter to Thompson instructing him to remove the sign.
The borough, according to the complaint, is seeking the maximum fine of $500 plus a $49 fee.
Thompson, meantime, said he has no plans to remove the sign. He believes his right to keep it there is protected by the Constitution under the First Amendment.
"This (ordinance) obviously is not constitutional," he said.
He also argued that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld residents' right to place signs on their own property, citing the 1994 decision, City of Ladue v. Gilleo.
In that case, the court struck down a Missouri city law prohibiting signs at private residences.
"I've never had trouble with the borough before," Thompson said. "For whatever reason, they don't like the sign."
He added, "I'm keeping the sign up."
Thompson said he's always been politically active. He supports Paul, a Green Tree native and former Libertarian who's running as a Republican, because the candidate holds true to the Constitution.
"I don't care about party as long as the candidate is correct on the issues," said Thompson, local chapter leader of the John Birch Society and state vice chairman of the Pennsylvania Constitution Party. "What's important is the Constitution."
Thompson said he hung the sign because "Somebody like Ron Paul needs name recognition. He doesn't have the name recognition of someone like Hillary Clinton."
About a dozen Paul supporters arrived at Lang's courtroom on Tuesday with Thompson. Some also wore T-shirts supporting the candidate, and at least one carried a sign.
"This is a true grassroots campaign," Thompson said.
"I'm thrilled that (Paul) is a candidate," he added. "At the very least, he'll educate the American people and a lot of the candidates."
A spokesman for Paul's campaign could not be reached for comment.
Whether or not Thompson will have to remove his Ron Paul sign wasn't decided Tuesday because Lang continued the hearing on a date to be scheduled.
Lang said the case wasn't meant for a civil suit. She said she advised Blawnox's solictor that the proper way to file the charge would be as a non-traffic summary violation.
Lang said the civil charge would be withdrawn.
John Rushford, attorney representing Blawnox, said the borough would "review the matter before taking further action."
"Typically," he said, "a zoning violation is not a criminal case."
Rushford said that no one from his firm, Dodaro Cambest & Associates, could attend Tuesday's hearing and that the firm requested it be continued.
Michael Aubele can be reached at maubele@tribweb.com or 724-226-4673.
Pennsylvania Legislator Interested in Replacing Petitions with Filing Fees
November 30th, 2007
Pennsylvania Representative Kerry Benninghoff has been seriously considering introducing a bill to let candidates get on ballots by paying a filing fee, instead of submitting a mandatory petition. The Pennsylvania legislature is still in session and will keep working during the first part of December 2007. Benninghoff is a Republican from Bellefonte and has served in the House since 1996.
www.ballot-access.org
Pennsylvania Representative Kerry Benninghoff has been seriously considering introducing a bill to let candidates get on ballots by paying a filing fee, instead of submitting a mandatory petition. The Pennsylvania legislature is still in session and will keep working during the first part of December 2007. Benninghoff is a Republican from Bellefonte and has served in the House since 1996.
www.ballot-access.org
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Pain at the Pump
This past week Americans traveled approximately 2 billion miles to celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday with family and loved ones. While you cannot put a price on time with family, Americans sure felt the pain of higher fuel prices at the gas pump. It is time to take an honest look at the government's direct and indirect role in inflating those prices.
Taxation is the most direct way government increases Americans' cost at the pump. The national average price of gas now is well over $3.00 per gallon now, $4 in some areas. Federal taxes take 18.4 cents, while state and local taxes average another 28.5 cents per gallon. That's an average of 47 cents per gallon Americans are paying just for government, but that is just the tip of the iceberg. Less directly, our loose monetary policy gives taxpayers double jeopardy at the pump, simultaneously increasing prices and undermining purchasing power. Wages always lag behind price increases, making average Americans feel as though they can never quite keep up, never quite get out of debt. Not to mention the ripple effect of higher diesel costs on the trucking industry. When trucking and shipping is more expensive, everything is more expensive.
The indirect costs government imposes on gas prices are much more serious. A major bottleneck that causes gas prices to surge is our very meagre and vulnerable refinery capacity due mostly to regulatory red tape. Environmental regulations and litigation have kept our existing refinery capacity barely adequate. In fact, no new refineries have been built since the 70's and these are operating at capacity, which makes our gasoline market especially vulnerable as demonstrated by skyrocketing gas prices in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina when many coastal oil facilities were brought to a halt. In addition, many foreign refineries don't have the ability to produce the specialized blends of gasoline mandated by our government, and therefore 90% of our gasoline is refined in the United States under extreme regulatory burden. When our domestic refineries are damaged or jeopardized, there are few options other than soaring prices or long lines.
I've introduced The Affordable Gas Price Act (HR 2415) to deal with some of these issues. My bill would suspend Federal fuel taxes when prices rise above $3.00 a gallon, giving some immediate relief at the pump. It would also repeal misguided legislation that causes more investment in attorneys and nuisance litigation than in actually producing affordable gasoline and strengthening our refining capacity. Also, it would open up ANWR for oil exploration and repeal the federal moratorium on off-shore drilling.
Much of government intervention in the oil industry in the past has been counter-productive and has resulted in disastrous unintended consequences. This Thanksgiving, I am grateful for every mile Americans can still afford to travel to be with family. I am working hard in Congress to reverse the costly trend of government interference and return markets, including oil markets, to true economic freedom.
www.ronpaul2008.com
Taxation is the most direct way government increases Americans' cost at the pump. The national average price of gas now is well over $3.00 per gallon now, $4 in some areas. Federal taxes take 18.4 cents, while state and local taxes average another 28.5 cents per gallon. That's an average of 47 cents per gallon Americans are paying just for government, but that is just the tip of the iceberg. Less directly, our loose monetary policy gives taxpayers double jeopardy at the pump, simultaneously increasing prices and undermining purchasing power. Wages always lag behind price increases, making average Americans feel as though they can never quite keep up, never quite get out of debt. Not to mention the ripple effect of higher diesel costs on the trucking industry. When trucking and shipping is more expensive, everything is more expensive.
The indirect costs government imposes on gas prices are much more serious. A major bottleneck that causes gas prices to surge is our very meagre and vulnerable refinery capacity due mostly to regulatory red tape. Environmental regulations and litigation have kept our existing refinery capacity barely adequate. In fact, no new refineries have been built since the 70's and these are operating at capacity, which makes our gasoline market especially vulnerable as demonstrated by skyrocketing gas prices in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina when many coastal oil facilities were brought to a halt. In addition, many foreign refineries don't have the ability to produce the specialized blends of gasoline mandated by our government, and therefore 90% of our gasoline is refined in the United States under extreme regulatory burden. When our domestic refineries are damaged or jeopardized, there are few options other than soaring prices or long lines.
I've introduced The Affordable Gas Price Act (HR 2415) to deal with some of these issues. My bill would suspend Federal fuel taxes when prices rise above $3.00 a gallon, giving some immediate relief at the pump. It would also repeal misguided legislation that causes more investment in attorneys and nuisance litigation than in actually producing affordable gasoline and strengthening our refining capacity. Also, it would open up ANWR for oil exploration and repeal the federal moratorium on off-shore drilling.
Much of government intervention in the oil industry in the past has been counter-productive and has resulted in disastrous unintended consequences. This Thanksgiving, I am grateful for every mile Americans can still afford to travel to be with family. I am working hard in Congress to reverse the costly trend of government interference and return markets, including oil markets, to true economic freedom.
www.ronpaul2008.com
Monday, November 19, 2007
Ron Paul Running Fourth in New Hampshire
Posted by Austin Cassidy --- November 19th, 2007
A new CNN/WMUR poll shows that Mitt Romney has a solid lead in the state of New Hampshire, with 33% of the vote. He’s followed by Senator John McCain, who has back to second place, with 18%.
Then Rudy Giuliani with 16%, Ron Paul with 8%, and Mike Huckabee with the support of 5% of those surveyed.
Fred Thompson’s campaign has collapsed to sixth place with a miserable 4% of the vote.
Ron Paul has been running television ads in Iowa and NH and this looks like a solid sign that he’s gaining some traction.
www.thirdpartywatch.com
A new CNN/WMUR poll shows that Mitt Romney has a solid lead in the state of New Hampshire, with 33% of the vote. He’s followed by Senator John McCain, who has back to second place, with 18%.
Then Rudy Giuliani with 16%, Ron Paul with 8%, and Mike Huckabee with the support of 5% of those surveyed.
Fred Thompson’s campaign has collapsed to sixth place with a miserable 4% of the vote.
Ron Paul has been running television ads in Iowa and NH and this looks like a solid sign that he’s gaining some traction.
www.thirdpartywatch.com
Sunday, November 11, 2007
West View council results
Our candidates Jim Barr and Dave Urban put up a valiant effort in a one party town. They did very well considering the grip the democrat party has on West View. Jim and Dave should be encouraged by the support they did get, especially from the younger residents and those who have not lived in West View for very long. Here are the results:
JOSEPH J NOWARK (DEM) . . . . . . 788 25.39%
BARRY G SCHELL (DEM). . . . . . . 788 25.39%
DONALD E MIKEC (DEM). . . . . . . 799 25.74%
JIM BARR (CON). . . . . . . . . 446 14.37%
DAVE URBAN (CON) . . . . . . . . 279 8.99%
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 4 .13%
JOSEPH J NOWARK (DEM) . . . . . . 788 25.39%
BARRY G SCHELL (DEM). . . . . . . 788 25.39%
DONALD E MIKEC (DEM). . . . . . . 799 25.74%
JIM BARR (CON). . . . . . . . . 446 14.37%
DAVE URBAN (CON) . . . . . . . . 279 8.99%
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 4 .13%
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Encouraging election result for the Constitution Party
The following results were reported in the race for 1st Ward Councilman in Scottdale, a community in Westmoreland County, in western Pennsylvania:
Joan Brown (Dem)... 49%
Phillip Haddad (Cst).. 36%
Jeff Keller (Rep)..15%
Congratulations go out to Phillip Haddad for achieving a great result and for trouncing his Republican opponent, but he is not satisfied. Phil, who is an active member of the Constitution Party of Pennsylvania, knows that it is important for the Constitution Party to win elections and he plans to win the next time he runs! He made a very serious effort this time even though his resources were very limited. He plans to improve his fundraising and his Get Out The Vote effort next time around.
Joan Brown (Dem)... 49%
Phillip Haddad (Cst).. 36%
Jeff Keller (Rep)..15%
Congratulations go out to Phillip Haddad for achieving a great result and for trouncing his Republican opponent, but he is not satisfied. Phil, who is an active member of the Constitution Party of Pennsylvania, knows that it is important for the Constitution Party to win elections and he plans to win the next time he runs! He made a very serious effort this time even though his resources were very limited. He plans to improve his fundraising and his Get Out The Vote effort next time around.
Monday, November 5, 2007
A day for the record books!
What an incredible day to be a supporter of Ron Paul!
You have raised over $2 million so far today, putting us closer to our $12 million fourth quarter goal. This is more than any Republican has ever raised online in one day!
So far in the 2008 election cycle, the biggest day belongs to Mitt Romney. On January 8th, he raised just over $3.1 million. Will you help us beat Mitt Romney and raise more in one day than anyone has this year?
Please ensure Ron Paul's place in the record books with your most generous donation: https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate. Tell your friends to donate today, too!
Jonathan Bydlak
Fundraising Director
You have raised over $2 million so far today, putting us closer to our $12 million fourth quarter goal. This is more than any Republican has ever raised online in one day!
So far in the 2008 election cycle, the biggest day belongs to Mitt Romney. On January 8th, he raised just over $3.1 million. Will you help us beat Mitt Romney and raise more in one day than anyone has this year?
Please ensure Ron Paul's place in the record books with your most generous donation: https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate. Tell your friends to donate today, too!
Jonathan Bydlak
Fundraising Director
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Election Nears
This Tuesday the polls will be open from 7am - 8pm. This election is more local in nature plus all the judicial races. I hope that there are people in your community whom you feel comfortable voting for. Please if you are in West View vote for our candidates for council Jim Barr and Dave Urban. If you do no not like a candidate in a particular race write in a name, yours if you want. Personally I do not know enough about the judges in this race but I plan on voting for Mike Krancer and voting NO retention for Judge Saylor other than those two I will probably not vote for a judicial candidate. Good Luck to Jim and Dave, also to Phil Haddad who is running for council in Scotdale twp. in Westmoreland County.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Krancer only PA Supreme Court Candidate who did not take Trial Lawyer Money: Legal Intelligencer
Page printed from: http://www.thelegalintelligencer.com
The Money Keeps Rolling In as Candidates Disclose Contributions
Gina Passarella, Peter Hall and Amaris Elliott-Engel
09-26-2007
The money is flowing in this year's race for two open Supreme Court seats, and a large portion of it is coming from a 527 group headed up by Philadelphia trial lawyers.
The Committee for a Better Tomorrow, whose treasurer, Mark Tanner, is the current president of the Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Association, donated $632,000 to Supreme Court candidates, including the retention campaign of Justice Thomas G. Saylor.
The committee gave a total of $707,000 when Superior Court candidates are included in the mix. These donations were for the latest reporting cycle, which is from June 5 to Sept. 17. Candidates had to file contribution data with the State Department by 6 p.m. yesterday.
According to campaign contribution records on the Pennsylvania Department of State's Web site, this was the first cycle in which the committee donated to any of the candidates. A 527 group has to file its own disclosure reports, according to the Web site www.opensecrets.com, but it is not limited by certain contribution caps. These groups are often issue-based advocates that support a cause without supporting individual candidates, the site said.
Supreme Court candidates Seamus P. McCaffery and Debra Todd, Superior Court judges running on the Democratic ticket, each received $225,000 from the committee. Republican candidate and Superior Court Judge Maureen Lally-Green received $107,000. The committee did not donate to Republican candidate Michael L. Krancer, according to the Department of State's site.
Saylor received $75,000 from the committee this cycle. The committee donated $75,000 in total to the Superior Court campaigns of Democrats Christine Donohue and Ron Folino, an attorney and judge from Allegheny County, respectively.
Tanner, of Feldman Shepherd Wohlgelernter Tanner & Weinstock, said the committee is the PAC of the Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Association, which he said has been around for a long time but isn't always as active as it was this cycle.
He said the group is bipartisan and feels that judicial elections are important. The group talks with its members and the committee reads through prior opinions of some of the candidates and makes its decisions from there, he said. The committee looks for candidates that are in support of fair and meaningful access to the courts and who support the rights of victims at trial.
"We avoid that appearance of impropriety when single lawyers or judges write [individual] checks," Tanner said.
In terms of Krancer, Tanner said the group just didn't know enough about where he stood on certain positions because there weren't as many opinions for them to read.
Tanner said the PAC waited until after the primary to make any donations for this election cycle.
G. Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics & Public Affairs at Franklin & Marshall College, said that while that is a "huge amount of money" for one PAC, trial lawyers have historically donated to judicial campaigns.
Madonna said he doesn't get the sense that there is some sort of conspiracy that is benefiting trial lawyers once the judges are on the bench.
While the group has done nothing illegal or unethical under the current rules, he said, "that's a poster child case for why there ought to be limits."
Madonna said Tanner's argument that the PAC avoids the appearance of impropriety does hold some merit.
"That's far better than individual law firms giving large sums of money," he said.
Maureen Lally-Green
Lally-Green raised more than $458,000 in the latest reporting cycle. In total, Lally-Green has brought in just under $830,000 for the year.
The party-endorsed candidate took about $166,000 of this cycle's donations from lawyers, law firms or political action committees related to the legal industry.
The biggest contributor was the Committee for a Better Tomorrow. It donated $70,000 at the end of August and $37,000 in September for a total of $107,000.
Other large donors to Lally-Green included former K&L Gates Management Committee Chairman Charles J. Queenan Jr., who donated $10,000. Pittsburgh-based law firms DeForest Koscelnik Yokitis & Kaplan and Cohen & Grigsby PAC donated $5,000 each, and McErlane & Frank donated $6,000. The PA Future Fund PAC, led by Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young Chairman William R. Sasso, gave $5,000.
Debra Todd
Todd raised $370,871 through her campaign committee during the June 5 to Sept. 17 reporting period. Todd brought in a total of $710,511 over the course of the year.
In the latest cycle, Todd collected $48,200 from organized labor groups or union-affiliated PACs including a $25,000 contribution from the Pennsylvania Federation of Teachers Committee to Support Public Education.
In addition to the contribution from the Committee for a Better Tomorrow, which was by far her largest, lawyers, law firms and law-related PACs also contributed at least $69,500 to Todd's campaign committee.
Notably, Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel in Philadelphia contributed $5,000, Cohen & Grigsby in Pittsburgh contributed $2,500, Eckert Seamans contributed $2,500 and Swartz Campbell in Philadelphia contributed $2,000.
Edwin H. Beachler III, of Caroselli Beachler McTiornan & Conboy in Pittsburgh, gave $10,000; Daniel Berger of Berger & Montague in Philadelphia gave $5,000; Nancy H. Fullham, of McEldrew & Fullham in Newtown Square, Pa., gave $5,000.
Todd also received contributions from state legislators. Sen. Constance Williams, D-Montgomery, and Rep. Babette Josephs, D-Philadelphia, each gave $1,000.
As of publication time, Saylor, McCaffery and Krancer had not filed their reports.
Other Big Donors
John M. Templeton Jr., president of the John Templeton Foundation, was a big donor to the Republican Party across both the Supreme and Superior Court races. He gave $30,000 to Lally-Green. He gave Dauphin County Common Pleas Court Judge Bruce Bratton and Allegheny Common Pleas Court Judge Cheryl Allen, both Republican candidates for Superior Court, $40,000 and $35,000 respectively. His donation to Allen made up almost all of her $41,785.
The Templeton Foundation focuses on donating to groups that share its scientific and philosophical background.
Superior Court Candidates
Bratton received $86,005 in contributions and receipts.
Besides the $20,000 donation from Templeton, Bratton also received $5,000 - $1,000 Aug. 9 and $4,000 Sept. 14 - from the Pittsburgh-based law firm Eckert Seamans PA Government PAC; and $5,000 from the PA Future Fund PAC.
Allen received $41,785 in contributions. Besides the $35,000 Templeton donation, most notably she received $1,000 from the PA Future Fund PAC and $1,000 from Robert Gleason Jr., chairman of the state Republican Party.
No other Superior Court candidates had filed their reports at the time of publication.
The Money Keeps Rolling In as Candidates Disclose Contributions
Gina Passarella, Peter Hall and Amaris Elliott-Engel
09-26-2007
The money is flowing in this year's race for two open Supreme Court seats, and a large portion of it is coming from a 527 group headed up by Philadelphia trial lawyers.
The Committee for a Better Tomorrow, whose treasurer, Mark Tanner, is the current president of the Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Association, donated $632,000 to Supreme Court candidates, including the retention campaign of Justice Thomas G. Saylor.
The committee gave a total of $707,000 when Superior Court candidates are included in the mix. These donations were for the latest reporting cycle, which is from June 5 to Sept. 17. Candidates had to file contribution data with the State Department by 6 p.m. yesterday.
According to campaign contribution records on the Pennsylvania Department of State's Web site, this was the first cycle in which the committee donated to any of the candidates. A 527 group has to file its own disclosure reports, according to the Web site www.opensecrets.com, but it is not limited by certain contribution caps. These groups are often issue-based advocates that support a cause without supporting individual candidates, the site said.
Supreme Court candidates Seamus P. McCaffery and Debra Todd, Superior Court judges running on the Democratic ticket, each received $225,000 from the committee. Republican candidate and Superior Court Judge Maureen Lally-Green received $107,000. The committee did not donate to Republican candidate Michael L. Krancer, according to the Department of State's site.
Saylor received $75,000 from the committee this cycle. The committee donated $75,000 in total to the Superior Court campaigns of Democrats Christine Donohue and Ron Folino, an attorney and judge from Allegheny County, respectively.
Tanner, of Feldman Shepherd Wohlgelernter Tanner & Weinstock, said the committee is the PAC of the Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Association, which he said has been around for a long time but isn't always as active as it was this cycle.
He said the group is bipartisan and feels that judicial elections are important. The group talks with its members and the committee reads through prior opinions of some of the candidates and makes its decisions from there, he said. The committee looks for candidates that are in support of fair and meaningful access to the courts and who support the rights of victims at trial.
"We avoid that appearance of impropriety when single lawyers or judges write [individual] checks," Tanner said.
In terms of Krancer, Tanner said the group just didn't know enough about where he stood on certain positions because there weren't as many opinions for them to read.
Tanner said the PAC waited until after the primary to make any donations for this election cycle.
G. Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics & Public Affairs at Franklin & Marshall College, said that while that is a "huge amount of money" for one PAC, trial lawyers have historically donated to judicial campaigns.
Madonna said he doesn't get the sense that there is some sort of conspiracy that is benefiting trial lawyers once the judges are on the bench.
While the group has done nothing illegal or unethical under the current rules, he said, "that's a poster child case for why there ought to be limits."
Madonna said Tanner's argument that the PAC avoids the appearance of impropriety does hold some merit.
"That's far better than individual law firms giving large sums of money," he said.
Maureen Lally-Green
Lally-Green raised more than $458,000 in the latest reporting cycle. In total, Lally-Green has brought in just under $830,000 for the year.
The party-endorsed candidate took about $166,000 of this cycle's donations from lawyers, law firms or political action committees related to the legal industry.
The biggest contributor was the Committee for a Better Tomorrow. It donated $70,000 at the end of August and $37,000 in September for a total of $107,000.
Other large donors to Lally-Green included former K&L Gates Management Committee Chairman Charles J. Queenan Jr., who donated $10,000. Pittsburgh-based law firms DeForest Koscelnik Yokitis & Kaplan and Cohen & Grigsby PAC donated $5,000 each, and McErlane & Frank donated $6,000. The PA Future Fund PAC, led by Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young Chairman William R. Sasso, gave $5,000.
Debra Todd
Todd raised $370,871 through her campaign committee during the June 5 to Sept. 17 reporting period. Todd brought in a total of $710,511 over the course of the year.
In the latest cycle, Todd collected $48,200 from organized labor groups or union-affiliated PACs including a $25,000 contribution from the Pennsylvania Federation of Teachers Committee to Support Public Education.
In addition to the contribution from the Committee for a Better Tomorrow, which was by far her largest, lawyers, law firms and law-related PACs also contributed at least $69,500 to Todd's campaign committee.
Notably, Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel in Philadelphia contributed $5,000, Cohen & Grigsby in Pittsburgh contributed $2,500, Eckert Seamans contributed $2,500 and Swartz Campbell in Philadelphia contributed $2,000.
Edwin H. Beachler III, of Caroselli Beachler McTiornan & Conboy in Pittsburgh, gave $10,000; Daniel Berger of Berger & Montague in Philadelphia gave $5,000; Nancy H. Fullham, of McEldrew & Fullham in Newtown Square, Pa., gave $5,000.
Todd also received contributions from state legislators. Sen. Constance Williams, D-Montgomery, and Rep. Babette Josephs, D-Philadelphia, each gave $1,000.
As of publication time, Saylor, McCaffery and Krancer had not filed their reports.
Other Big Donors
John M. Templeton Jr., president of the John Templeton Foundation, was a big donor to the Republican Party across both the Supreme and Superior Court races. He gave $30,000 to Lally-Green. He gave Dauphin County Common Pleas Court Judge Bruce Bratton and Allegheny Common Pleas Court Judge Cheryl Allen, both Republican candidates for Superior Court, $40,000 and $35,000 respectively. His donation to Allen made up almost all of her $41,785.
The Templeton Foundation focuses on donating to groups that share its scientific and philosophical background.
Superior Court Candidates
Bratton received $86,005 in contributions and receipts.
Besides the $20,000 donation from Templeton, Bratton also received $5,000 - $1,000 Aug. 9 and $4,000 Sept. 14 - from the Pittsburgh-based law firm Eckert Seamans PA Government PAC; and $5,000 from the PA Future Fund PAC.
Allen received $41,785 in contributions. Besides the $35,000 Templeton donation, most notably she received $1,000 from the PA Future Fund PAC and $1,000 from Robert Gleason Jr., chairman of the state Republican Party.
No other Superior Court candidates had filed their reports at the time of publication.
FOP fights retention bid by Nauhaus for judge
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
By Ann Belser, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
The city's police union has come out against a sitting judge, saying he is too soft on criminals and anti-police.
Members of the Fraternal Order of Police Fort Pitt Lodge No. 1, have taken up a collection among themselves to pay for yard signs calling for Common Pleas Judge Lester G. Nauhaus' ouster.
Normally, retention elections overwhelmingly return sitting judges to the bench. But a statewide campaign against retention, growing out of the legislative pay raise fiasco two years ago, has led Judge Nauhaus and others for the first time to raise money to support their retention.
The anti-Nauhaus signs went up over the weekend and police Lt. Bill Mathias said there are more that will be posted before election day along the major roadways around the city.
"It's always been the belief among police officers that he was anti-police," Lt. Mathias said.
Judge Nauhaus, who was elected in 1997, is the former public defender for the county. He said he was surprised the police are working against his retention because he said they have rarely filed appeals when he has ruled against them.
He argued that every decision he makes, other than guilt or innocence, is subject to appeal. In the last 10 years he has never had a sentence overturned and in the same time he has only had appeals on about five suppression motions where he ruled against the police. Of those, he noted, the rulings from the higher courts have been fairly evenly split.
Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. would not make a comment regarding a sitting judge.
"This is part of the public process," he said about the issues surrounding the retention election.
Lt. Mathias said he was the designated spokesman for the campaign because unlike detectives he doesn't have to appear in court very often.
He said his opinion of Judge Nauhaus was formed in the police academy when the judge, who was then a defense attorney, started a class for the officers-to-be by saying "Good Morning, how are my little piglets doing?"
He found that offensive.
The FOP as an organization did not take the initiative to go after Judge Nauhaus. Instead, FOP President Jim Malloy said, it was individual members, particularly detectives, who came to him asking to use the FOP's name on the signs.
"I didn't print the signs. The signs were printed by the policemen out in the zones," Mr. Malloy said. He said it was the members that took up the collection for the signs and had them produced.
The signs, which along four lines read "Support your police/ Vote no/ Judge Nauhaus/ Paid for by FOP Lodge #1" went up over the weekend mainly along Route 51 and in the North Hills.
Judge Nauhaus already was worried about retention before the police decided to take him on.
PA Clean Sweep, which two years ago led the fight against pay raises for legislators and judges, has targeted 66 of the 67 candidates up for retention statewide. Judge Nauhaus said the threat posed by the statewide campaign didn't worry him as much as the new voting machines which, unlike the old machines where retentions were hidden at the top, have a screen in which voters are asked to vote on retention.
The confluence of the new machines and the statewide anti-judicial campaign led Judge Nauhaus to raise $42,000 for a retention campaign. He is not the only local judge raising money. Common Pleas President Judge Joseph M. James has raised $118,000 for his own retention bid, according to the campaign finance report his committee filed on Friday.
Judge James said the bar association, which has endorsed the retention of all three Common Pleas judges running, is handing out slate cards at the polls for them. Judge W. Terrence O'Brien is the third Common Pleas judge running. He has not raised money for his retention bid.
The two judges started raising money because of the retention election two years ago in which, amid the furor over the legislative pay raise, voters threw out Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro.
This is the first time that a group has taken on members of the Court of Common Pleas.
Even eight years ago, when Judge Jeffrey Manning's retention was not endorsed by the Allegheny County Bar Association, Judge Manning did not mount a campaign to save his job but still won retention.
First published on October 30, 2007 at 12:00 am
Ann Belser can be reached at abelser@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1699.
By Ann Belser, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
The city's police union has come out against a sitting judge, saying he is too soft on criminals and anti-police.
Members of the Fraternal Order of Police Fort Pitt Lodge No. 1, have taken up a collection among themselves to pay for yard signs calling for Common Pleas Judge Lester G. Nauhaus' ouster.
Normally, retention elections overwhelmingly return sitting judges to the bench. But a statewide campaign against retention, growing out of the legislative pay raise fiasco two years ago, has led Judge Nauhaus and others for the first time to raise money to support their retention.
The anti-Nauhaus signs went up over the weekend and police Lt. Bill Mathias said there are more that will be posted before election day along the major roadways around the city.
"It's always been the belief among police officers that he was anti-police," Lt. Mathias said.
Judge Nauhaus, who was elected in 1997, is the former public defender for the county. He said he was surprised the police are working against his retention because he said they have rarely filed appeals when he has ruled against them.
He argued that every decision he makes, other than guilt or innocence, is subject to appeal. In the last 10 years he has never had a sentence overturned and in the same time he has only had appeals on about five suppression motions where he ruled against the police. Of those, he noted, the rulings from the higher courts have been fairly evenly split.
Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. would not make a comment regarding a sitting judge.
"This is part of the public process," he said about the issues surrounding the retention election.
Lt. Mathias said he was the designated spokesman for the campaign because unlike detectives he doesn't have to appear in court very often.
He said his opinion of Judge Nauhaus was formed in the police academy when the judge, who was then a defense attorney, started a class for the officers-to-be by saying "Good Morning, how are my little piglets doing?"
He found that offensive.
The FOP as an organization did not take the initiative to go after Judge Nauhaus. Instead, FOP President Jim Malloy said, it was individual members, particularly detectives, who came to him asking to use the FOP's name on the signs.
"I didn't print the signs. The signs were printed by the policemen out in the zones," Mr. Malloy said. He said it was the members that took up the collection for the signs and had them produced.
The signs, which along four lines read "Support your police/ Vote no/ Judge Nauhaus/ Paid for by FOP Lodge #1" went up over the weekend mainly along Route 51 and in the North Hills.
Judge Nauhaus already was worried about retention before the police decided to take him on.
PA Clean Sweep, which two years ago led the fight against pay raises for legislators and judges, has targeted 66 of the 67 candidates up for retention statewide. Judge Nauhaus said the threat posed by the statewide campaign didn't worry him as much as the new voting machines which, unlike the old machines where retentions were hidden at the top, have a screen in which voters are asked to vote on retention.
The confluence of the new machines and the statewide anti-judicial campaign led Judge Nauhaus to raise $42,000 for a retention campaign. He is not the only local judge raising money. Common Pleas President Judge Joseph M. James has raised $118,000 for his own retention bid, according to the campaign finance report his committee filed on Friday.
Judge James said the bar association, which has endorsed the retention of all three Common Pleas judges running, is handing out slate cards at the polls for them. Judge W. Terrence O'Brien is the third Common Pleas judge running. He has not raised money for his retention bid.
The two judges started raising money because of the retention election two years ago in which, amid the furor over the legislative pay raise, voters threw out Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro.
This is the first time that a group has taken on members of the Court of Common Pleas.
Even eight years ago, when Judge Jeffrey Manning's retention was not endorsed by the Allegheny County Bar Association, Judge Manning did not mount a campaign to save his job but still won retention.
First published on October 30, 2007 at 12:00 am
Ann Belser can be reached at abelser@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1699.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
FOX News Poll: Third Party Conservative Damages Republican Chances
NEW YORK — When a third party Christian Conservative is considered in the race for the White House, the candidate captures one of four Republican votes and a small minority of the overall vote. That significantly decreases support for Republican Rudy Giuliani and increases Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton’s lead to double digits, according to a FOX News poll released Wednesday.
In a head-to-head contest, Clinton has a 4 percentage point edge over Giuliani -- 47 percent to 43 percent. Clinton has maintained a slim advantage over Giuliani for the last few months.
In a hypothetical three-way race, an unnamed Christian Conservative third party candidate receives the support of 14 percent of voters, and Clinton tops Giuliani by 10 points (44 percent to 34 percent).
Of recent third party candidates, Ross Perot received the highest percentage of the vote by garnering 19 percent in the 1992 presidential election.
Giuliani’s support among Republicans drops from 79 percent in the two-way race to 60 percent when the third party Christian Conservative is included.
By a 56 percent to 35 percent margin, self-identified Born Again Christians back Giuliani over Clinton. When given the option, about a quarter of this group says they would vote for a Christian Conservative candidate -- reducing Giuliani’s support by 20 points: Giuliani 36 percent, Clinton 30 percent and the Christian Conservative 26 percent.
Among conservatives, Giuliani’s support falls from 57 percent in the head-to-head race against Clinton to 42 percent when a third-party conservative is included.
"While some of the conservative Christian leaders are sounding more positive about Mitt Romney despite his Mormonism, by and large they are still very negative about Giuliani," said John Gorman, chairman of Opinion Dynamics. "A significant fraction of voters who might otherwise support the Republican are also clearly not fans of the former mayor. If given a chance, they say they’ll vote for someone else. This might diminish somewhat if the election of Clinton becomes more threatening to them, but given the narrowness of recent elections, even a few points could be decisive."
The results are essentially the same whether the three-way match up includes an unnamed third party Christian Conservative candidate or asks about "Conservative third party candidate Mike Huckabee."
In other two-way matchups, the poll finds that Clinton tops McCain by 3 points, and bests both Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney by 12 points.
The national telephone poll was conducted for FOX News by Opinion Dynamics Corp. among 900 registered voters from Oct. 9-10. The poll has a 3-point error margin.
www.foxnews.com
In a head-to-head contest, Clinton has a 4 percentage point edge over Giuliani -- 47 percent to 43 percent. Clinton has maintained a slim advantage over Giuliani for the last few months.
In a hypothetical three-way race, an unnamed Christian Conservative third party candidate receives the support of 14 percent of voters, and Clinton tops Giuliani by 10 points (44 percent to 34 percent).
Of recent third party candidates, Ross Perot received the highest percentage of the vote by garnering 19 percent in the 1992 presidential election.
Giuliani’s support among Republicans drops from 79 percent in the two-way race to 60 percent when the third party Christian Conservative is included.
By a 56 percent to 35 percent margin, self-identified Born Again Christians back Giuliani over Clinton. When given the option, about a quarter of this group says they would vote for a Christian Conservative candidate -- reducing Giuliani’s support by 20 points: Giuliani 36 percent, Clinton 30 percent and the Christian Conservative 26 percent.
Among conservatives, Giuliani’s support falls from 57 percent in the head-to-head race against Clinton to 42 percent when a third-party conservative is included.
"While some of the conservative Christian leaders are sounding more positive about Mitt Romney despite his Mormonism, by and large they are still very negative about Giuliani," said John Gorman, chairman of Opinion Dynamics. "A significant fraction of voters who might otherwise support the Republican are also clearly not fans of the former mayor. If given a chance, they say they’ll vote for someone else. This might diminish somewhat if the election of Clinton becomes more threatening to them, but given the narrowness of recent elections, even a few points could be decisive."
The results are essentially the same whether the three-way match up includes an unnamed third party Christian Conservative candidate or asks about "Conservative third party candidate Mike Huckabee."
In other two-way matchups, the poll finds that Clinton tops McCain by 3 points, and bests both Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney by 12 points.
The national telephone poll was conducted for FOX News by Opinion Dynamics Corp. among 900 registered voters from Oct. 9-10. The poll has a 3-point error margin.
www.foxnews.com
Friday, October 19, 2007
New Court Challenge to Pennsylvania Being Planned
October 19th, 2007
The Pennsylvania parties that were considered by the state to be “qualified” political parties until November 2006 (the Constitution, Green and Libertarian Parties) are planning a new election law challenge to several Pennsylvania election policies. Other parties may join as well.
One part of the case will charge that many Pennsylvania counties are illegally refusing to tally any write-in votes. The parties are likely to unite behind a single write-in candidate in the partisan State Supreme Court Judicial race being held on November 6, 2007. Counties that fail to tally any write-ins will be confronted by affidavits from voters who will swear that they cast such a write-in. In November 2006, 22 counties (including Philadelphia) did not tally any write-in votes for any office, and that pattern is likely to repeat in November 2007.
Another part of the case may challenge Pennsylvania’s refusal to provide the parties with a list of their registered members. Lawsuits from Colorado, Oklahoma, New York, New Jersey and Iowa have won on this issue.
Still another part of the case may challenge the unique Pennsylvania practice of charging candidates for the large administrative costs of determining if their petitions are valid.
Finally, the case is likely to challenge the law that requires unqualified parties to circulate petitions to get their candidates on the ballot. Specifically, the wording on such petitions will be challenged. The petition forms say that the signers “hereby nominate” the listed candidates. During the 2006 ballot access litigation, the state hotly denied that petition signers are really nominating the listed candidates. The court agreed that petition signers are not really nominating those candidates. Therefore, the lawsuit will probably argue that the petition forms themselves are improperly worded and should be replaced with “I hereby request that the listed party should be placed on the ballot”, or something similar. Similar lawsuits against misleading petition wording have been successful in 6 other states (Kentucky, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, South Dakota, and West Virginia) in the past.
www.ballot-access.org
The Pennsylvania parties that were considered by the state to be “qualified” political parties until November 2006 (the Constitution, Green and Libertarian Parties) are planning a new election law challenge to several Pennsylvania election policies. Other parties may join as well.
One part of the case will charge that many Pennsylvania counties are illegally refusing to tally any write-in votes. The parties are likely to unite behind a single write-in candidate in the partisan State Supreme Court Judicial race being held on November 6, 2007. Counties that fail to tally any write-ins will be confronted by affidavits from voters who will swear that they cast such a write-in. In November 2006, 22 counties (including Philadelphia) did not tally any write-in votes for any office, and that pattern is likely to repeat in November 2007.
Another part of the case may challenge Pennsylvania’s refusal to provide the parties with a list of their registered members. Lawsuits from Colorado, Oklahoma, New York, New Jersey and Iowa have won on this issue.
Still another part of the case may challenge the unique Pennsylvania practice of charging candidates for the large administrative costs of determining if their petitions are valid.
Finally, the case is likely to challenge the law that requires unqualified parties to circulate petitions to get their candidates on the ballot. Specifically, the wording on such petitions will be challenged. The petition forms say that the signers “hereby nominate” the listed candidates. During the 2006 ballot access litigation, the state hotly denied that petition signers are really nominating the listed candidates. The court agreed that petition signers are not really nominating those candidates. Therefore, the lawsuit will probably argue that the petition forms themselves are improperly worded and should be replaced with “I hereby request that the listed party should be placed on the ballot”, or something similar. Similar lawsuits against misleading petition wording have been successful in 6 other states (Kentucky, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, South Dakota, and West Virginia) in the past.
www.ballot-access.org
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Protect and Defend the Constitution
I was wondering if anyone would be interested in doing an outreach which would be mulit-faceted and have many beneficial effects. Please think of this and read on.
How many professions out there take an oath to "Protect and Defend the Constitution"?
How many of these people do you think have even the slightest education of what is in the Constitution?
I would think that those who join the US Military (Reserve and Active) would take such an oath. What about other "rank & file" people? We know about politicians who take this oath, most of whom will make the Constitution into thier own image. But what about the rank & file? Could we affect these people?
Could we fill up Hagan Smith's classes teaching the Constitution to brim so that he'd have to form many other classes throughout the Pittsburgh region, and maybe throughout more of Pennsylvania? Could this influx of people each contribute a modest amount for the classes so that Hagan doesn't continue losing money on promoting such a good cause for the participants and for our country?
Imagine if something like this hits the news, what affect it would have. Imagine them interviewing soldiers, them telling the citizens through the mass media how much they've learned about what their oath asks them to protect and defend? Imagine soldiers requesting that high schools teach the Constitution to students so that they'd know about what they're protecting and defending prior to taking such an oath? Imagine the neo-conservatives running for the hills with their tails between their legs when more and more military come out endorsing Ron Paul for president? Imagine, am I starting to sound like John Lennon?
Anyways, I would like to somehow get thousands of Constitutions, and then go to US Military bases and other areas where people have sworn to "defend and protect" the Constitution, and hand them out. Along with this would be an invitation to join a class to learn about the US and PA Constitutions, asking them how aware they are of the documents which they took an oath on to defend and protect.
How about using this for starters?
http://yp.yahoo.com/py/ypResults.py?city=Pittsburgh&state=PA&stx=8104721&stp=y&doprox=1
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I AM GETTING TIRED OF ATTENDING MEETING AFTER MEETING (BE THEM CP, JBS, AND OTHER LIKE-MINDED GROUPS) JUST SO THAT WE CAN LEARN A LITTLE MORE AND PAT EACH OTHER ON THE BACK. WE NEED TO SAVE THIS NATION, AND THE ONLY WAY OF DOING THIS IS TO BRING OTHERS INTO THE FOLD, TO EDUCATE OTHERS ABOUT THE MOVEMENTS TO DESTROY OUR NATION, OUR SOVERGNTY, OUR CONSTITUTION.
WHO'S WITH ME???
Andy Maul
Respond to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cppaofficialforum/
How many professions out there take an oath to "Protect and Defend the Constitution"?
How many of these people do you think have even the slightest education of what is in the Constitution?
I would think that those who join the US Military (Reserve and Active) would take such an oath. What about other "rank & file" people? We know about politicians who take this oath, most of whom will make the Constitution into thier own image. But what about the rank & file? Could we affect these people?
Could we fill up Hagan Smith's classes teaching the Constitution to brim so that he'd have to form many other classes throughout the Pittsburgh region, and maybe throughout more of Pennsylvania? Could this influx of people each contribute a modest amount for the classes so that Hagan doesn't continue losing money on promoting such a good cause for the participants and for our country?
Imagine if something like this hits the news, what affect it would have. Imagine them interviewing soldiers, them telling the citizens through the mass media how much they've learned about what their oath asks them to protect and defend? Imagine soldiers requesting that high schools teach the Constitution to students so that they'd know about what they're protecting and defending prior to taking such an oath? Imagine the neo-conservatives running for the hills with their tails between their legs when more and more military come out endorsing Ron Paul for president? Imagine, am I starting to sound like John Lennon?
Anyways, I would like to somehow get thousands of Constitutions, and then go to US Military bases and other areas where people have sworn to "defend and protect" the Constitution, and hand them out. Along with this would be an invitation to join a class to learn about the US and PA Constitutions, asking them how aware they are of the documents which they took an oath on to defend and protect.
How about using this for starters?
http://yp.yahoo.com/py/ypResults.py?city=Pittsburgh&state=PA&stx=8104721&stp=y&doprox=1
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I AM GETTING TIRED OF ATTENDING MEETING AFTER MEETING (BE THEM CP, JBS, AND OTHER LIKE-MINDED GROUPS) JUST SO THAT WE CAN LEARN A LITTLE MORE AND PAT EACH OTHER ON THE BACK. WE NEED TO SAVE THIS NATION, AND THE ONLY WAY OF DOING THIS IS TO BRING OTHERS INTO THE FOLD, TO EDUCATE OTHERS ABOUT THE MOVEMENTS TO DESTROY OUR NATION, OUR SOVERGNTY, OUR CONSTITUTION.
WHO'S WITH ME???
Andy Maul
Respond to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cppaofficialforum/
Monday, October 8, 2007
Grand Old U.S.A. are socialists
I know every one of them personally and they are only for exempting the homes and Farms, including 5 acres! This is socialism, to punish one who works to prosper by investing in property other than just your home, as well as taxing your labor!
The Pennsylvania Constitution is clear on your right to acquire, possess and protect your property, at Article 1, Section 1!
It is clear that property can only be taken for public use after making just compensation (fair market value) at Article 10, Section 4.
Your rights come from God and cannot be taken away by our servants, (Government Servants, “Officials”) We are the masters over the Government Officials! It is time for the people to again reinstate the posse Comitatus. The Courts will not uphold the Law and protect the rights of the people because they are not operating within the lawful authority of the Constitution. This admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction is exactly what King George was doing to the Colonies in the 1700’s. We have the power at Article 1 Section 2 to act to enforce the Law when the Public Servants refuse to obey their oath and expedite their duty as promised.
Our Government is established as a republic where Law rules! The Government is restricted and limited in their powers! The power to tax your property is “not” a delegated power and they cannot assume it is. That is usurpation and must not be allowed to stand.
Will you serve on the Council of Sensors, to restore our State back to the #1 Rule of Law? Contact me and I will set the date for the first meeting to begin this process! Read the 1776 Constitution at Section 47th of the Plan and Frame of Government!
cppachair@zoominternet.net
724-586-9739 Home
Hagan Smith
545 Pgh. Rd.
Butler, Penna.
16002
The Pennsylvania Constitution is clear on your right to acquire, possess and protect your property, at Article 1, Section 1!
It is clear that property can only be taken for public use after making just compensation (fair market value) at Article 10, Section 4.
Your rights come from God and cannot be taken away by our servants, (Government Servants, “Officials”) We are the masters over the Government Officials! It is time for the people to again reinstate the posse Comitatus. The Courts will not uphold the Law and protect the rights of the people because they are not operating within the lawful authority of the Constitution. This admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction is exactly what King George was doing to the Colonies in the 1700’s. We have the power at Article 1 Section 2 to act to enforce the Law when the Public Servants refuse to obey their oath and expedite their duty as promised.
Our Government is established as a republic where Law rules! The Government is restricted and limited in their powers! The power to tax your property is “not” a delegated power and they cannot assume it is. That is usurpation and must not be allowed to stand.
Will you serve on the Council of Sensors, to restore our State back to the #1 Rule of Law? Contact me and I will set the date for the first meeting to begin this process! Read the 1776 Constitution at Section 47th of the Plan and Frame of Government!
cppachair@zoominternet.net
724-586-9739 Home
Hagan Smith
545 Pgh. Rd.
Butler, Penna.
16002
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Barletta says he's considering a run for Congress, governor
BY L.A. TARONE
STAFF WRITER
09/29/2007
"My name has been thrown around for a few statewide offices," Mr. Barletta said. "There are some who are encouraging me to run for governor in 2010 and others would like to see me in Washington working on immigration.
"I'm giving it consideration, as to what my future may be."
Speculation about his seeking higher-office has mounted recently because of his extensive speaking engagement itinerary.
Over the last few months, Mr. Barletta has spoken to Republican committees in Lancaster, Gettysburg and Johnstown. He also is slated to appear in front of Republican committees in Lackawanna, Carbon, Columbia, Berks, Snyder, Monroe, Mifflin and Union counties in the coming weeks.
Those appearances have garnered statewide attention and a few have stirred up controversy.
His appearance in front of the Lancaster County Republican Committee at a $500 per plate invitation-only luncheon, drew the ire of Robert S. Nix, chairman of the Pennsylvania Hispanic Republicans, and Luis Mendoza, chairman of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly's Pennsylvania chapter. Both were angry because of the Illegal Immigration Relief Act, which they view as targeting Hispanics and driving them away from the GOP.
Mr. Mendoza called Mr. Barletta's appearance a "slap in the face" to Latinos in Lancaster County.
"Personally, being of Mexican descent, I find a lot of (immigration) rhetoric really offensive, and I feel increasingly backed into a corner in my own party," Mr. Nix told the Lancaster Intelligencer-Journal.
Mr. Nix told the Philadelphia Bulletin, "Hazleton Mayor Republican Lou Barletta gained national attention with his misguided attempts to take clearly pre-empted federal immigration matters into his own hands in what amounts to a form of municipal vigilantism."
Mr. Barletta acknowledges his extensive appearances raise his statewide and national profile - as do appearances on Lou Dobbs' CNN show and Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor."
But that's not the main reason he's accepted so many invitations.
"I've been accepting speaking engagements because it raises money for Hazleton's legal defense fund," Mr. Barletta said. "I get to take Hazleton's case around the state."
Contact the writer: ltarone@citizensvoice.com
©The Times-Tribune 2007
STAFF WRITER
09/29/2007
"My name has been thrown around for a few statewide offices," Mr. Barletta said. "There are some who are encouraging me to run for governor in 2010 and others would like to see me in Washington working on immigration.
"I'm giving it consideration, as to what my future may be."
Speculation about his seeking higher-office has mounted recently because of his extensive speaking engagement itinerary.
Over the last few months, Mr. Barletta has spoken to Republican committees in Lancaster, Gettysburg and Johnstown. He also is slated to appear in front of Republican committees in Lackawanna, Carbon, Columbia, Berks, Snyder, Monroe, Mifflin and Union counties in the coming weeks.
Those appearances have garnered statewide attention and a few have stirred up controversy.
His appearance in front of the Lancaster County Republican Committee at a $500 per plate invitation-only luncheon, drew the ire of Robert S. Nix, chairman of the Pennsylvania Hispanic Republicans, and Luis Mendoza, chairman of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly's Pennsylvania chapter. Both were angry because of the Illegal Immigration Relief Act, which they view as targeting Hispanics and driving them away from the GOP.
Mr. Mendoza called Mr. Barletta's appearance a "slap in the face" to Latinos in Lancaster County.
"Personally, being of Mexican descent, I find a lot of (immigration) rhetoric really offensive, and I feel increasingly backed into a corner in my own party," Mr. Nix told the Lancaster Intelligencer-Journal.
Mr. Nix told the Philadelphia Bulletin, "Hazleton Mayor Republican Lou Barletta gained national attention with his misguided attempts to take clearly pre-empted federal immigration matters into his own hands in what amounts to a form of municipal vigilantism."
Mr. Barletta acknowledges his extensive appearances raise his statewide and national profile - as do appearances on Lou Dobbs' CNN show and Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor."
But that's not the main reason he's accepted so many invitations.
"I've been accepting speaking engagements because it raises money for Hazleton's legal defense fund," Mr. Barletta said. "I get to take Hazleton's case around the state."
Contact the writer: ltarone@citizensvoice.com
©The Times-Tribune 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
County treasurer Weinstein may seek the state post
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Allegheny County Treasurer John Weinstein hopes to change jobs -- but not his title.
Mr. Weinstein, who is unopposed for re-election to his county office, plans to seek the Democratic nomination for state treasurer next year. So far, he is the only Western Pennsylvanian seen as a potential candidate for the post.
The incumbent, Robin L. Wiessmann, was appointed by Gov. Ed Rendell to fill the balance of the term of U.S. Sen. Bob Casey. The Republican-controlled Senate confirmed Ms. Weissmann with the understanding that she would not seek a full term.
At least two other Democrats are reported to be seeking the nomination. They are, according to The Associated Press, John Cordiso, a former state legislator from Bucks County, and Rob McCord, a Montgomery County businessman. On the Republican side, The Allentown Morning Call reported this week that Hazelton Mayor Lou Barletta, who attracted national attention as the architect of a tough anti-immigrant measure since struck down in the courts, might consider a run for treasurer among other statewide offices. Mr. Barletta is also considering a campaign for Congress.
Also mentioned as a GOP hopeful for treasurer is Montgomery County Commissioner Thomas Jay Ellis.
Mr. Weinstein, of Kennedy, was elected to his Allegheny County office in 1999.
First published on September 26, 2007 at 10:55 pm
www.post-gazette.com
Allegheny County Treasurer John Weinstein hopes to change jobs -- but not his title.
Mr. Weinstein, who is unopposed for re-election to his county office, plans to seek the Democratic nomination for state treasurer next year. So far, he is the only Western Pennsylvanian seen as a potential candidate for the post.
The incumbent, Robin L. Wiessmann, was appointed by Gov. Ed Rendell to fill the balance of the term of U.S. Sen. Bob Casey. The Republican-controlled Senate confirmed Ms. Weissmann with the understanding that she would not seek a full term.
At least two other Democrats are reported to be seeking the nomination. They are, according to The Associated Press, John Cordiso, a former state legislator from Bucks County, and Rob McCord, a Montgomery County businessman. On the Republican side, The Allentown Morning Call reported this week that Hazelton Mayor Lou Barletta, who attracted national attention as the architect of a tough anti-immigrant measure since struck down in the courts, might consider a run for treasurer among other statewide offices. Mr. Barletta is also considering a campaign for Congress.
Also mentioned as a GOP hopeful for treasurer is Montgomery County Commissioner Thomas Jay Ellis.
Mr. Weinstein, of Kennedy, was elected to his Allegheny County office in 1999.
First published on September 26, 2007 at 10:55 pm
www.post-gazette.com
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Allegheny County Meeting ------ NEW TIME and DAY
The constitution party of Allegheny county will meet on the 3rd tuesday of every month at 7pm. We will meet at Panera Bread at 7217 Mcknight rd. The next meeting is on October 16th. We will continue to meet here for the rest of 2007, if any other changes are needed we will do so in the new year.
Greenspan Admits the Federal Reserve is Communism
Friday, September 21st 2007 — Christopher Hansen
John Stewart had Alan Greenspan, former Czar of the Federal Reserve Bank, on his show on Wednesday night and asked the following question: “So, why do we have a Fed?” Stewart asked. “Wouldn’t the market take care of interest rates and all that? Why would we have someone adjusting the rates if we are a free market society?”
Greenspan’s answer: “You didn’t need a central bank when you were on a gold standard.”
There you go folks! The 5th plank of the Communist Manifesto is: Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
And what is the 2nd plank?
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
And what is the 10th plank?
10. Free education for all children in public schools.
And so in what “Civic Religion” are you forced to worship?
Drum roll please!
Communism!
Let’s stop lying to ourselves folks. The USA is a Communists Country that calls itself free. China calls itself free too! REMEMBERER THAT!
Here is the Communist manifesto written in 1848 and financed by the Rothschilds banking family:
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. Can you say property taxes?
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Got this one.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. Can you say inheritance taxes?
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. Can you say Drug laws, IRS levies and the USA PATRIOT ACT?
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. HELLO AMERICA! It is called the Federal Reserve Bank and they print all the NOTES (not dollars) they want to.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state. Can you say FCC and Driver’s licenses and FAA?*
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. Can you say multi-national corporations like Haliburton and Wal-mart
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Can you say Graduated income and Social Security taxes?
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country. Can you say multi-national corporations that steal the family farm.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. BUT IT’S FOR THE CHILDREN!
WAKE UP AMERICA!
John Stewart had Alan Greenspan, former Czar of the Federal Reserve Bank, on his show on Wednesday night and asked the following question: “So, why do we have a Fed?” Stewart asked. “Wouldn’t the market take care of interest rates and all that? Why would we have someone adjusting the rates if we are a free market society?”
Greenspan’s answer: “You didn’t need a central bank when you were on a gold standard.”
There you go folks! The 5th plank of the Communist Manifesto is: Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
And what is the 2nd plank?
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
And what is the 10th plank?
10. Free education for all children in public schools.
And so in what “Civic Religion” are you forced to worship?
Drum roll please!
Communism!
Let’s stop lying to ourselves folks. The USA is a Communists Country that calls itself free. China calls itself free too! REMEMBERER THAT!
Here is the Communist manifesto written in 1848 and financed by the Rothschilds banking family:
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. Can you say property taxes?
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Got this one.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. Can you say inheritance taxes?
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. Can you say Drug laws, IRS levies and the USA PATRIOT ACT?
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. HELLO AMERICA! It is called the Federal Reserve Bank and they print all the NOTES (not dollars) they want to.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state. Can you say FCC and Driver’s licenses and FAA?*
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. Can you say multi-national corporations like Haliburton and Wal-mart
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Can you say Graduated income and Social Security taxes?
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country. Can you say multi-national corporations that steal the family farm.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. BUT IT’S FOR THE CHILDREN!
WAKE UP AMERICA!
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Ron Paul Re-Introduces Ballot Access Bill in Congress
September 19th, 2007
On September 19, Congressman Ron Paul introduced a bill, outlawing restrictive ballot access laws for minor party and independent candidates for the U.S. House. He had previously introduced this bill in past sessions of Congress. Before he had done so, a somewhat more comprehensive bill had been introduced by Congressman John Conyers (D-Michigan), in 1985, 1987 and 1989. Also during the early 1990’s, the bill had been introduced by Congressman Tim Penny (D-Minnesota, no longer in Congress).
Article One of the U.S. Constitution explicitly gives Congress the authority to override state election laws pertaining to Congressional elections. Ron Paul’s bill does not yet have a bill number.
www.ballot-access.org
On September 19, Congressman Ron Paul introduced a bill, outlawing restrictive ballot access laws for minor party and independent candidates for the U.S. House. He had previously introduced this bill in past sessions of Congress. Before he had done so, a somewhat more comprehensive bill had been introduced by Congressman John Conyers (D-Michigan), in 1985, 1987 and 1989. Also during the early 1990’s, the bill had been introduced by Congressman Tim Penny (D-Minnesota, no longer in Congress).
Article One of the U.S. Constitution explicitly gives Congress the authority to override state election laws pertaining to Congressional elections. Ron Paul’s bill does not yet have a bill number.
www.ballot-access.org
Passions run high in raw-milk debate
By Amy Worden
Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau
Suzanne Mossetto adds yogurt culture to heated raw milk in the process of making yogurt. Mossetto, who lives in Cherry Hill, purchases the raw milk from a group of farms in Pa.
BONNIE WELLER / Inquirer Staff Photographer
Suzanne Mossetto adds yogurt culture to heated raw milk in the process of making yogurt. Mossetto, who lives in Cherry Hill, purchases the raw milk from a group of farms in Pa.
HARRISBURG - The forces of consumer choice and health safety collided in a Senate hearing on raw milk yesterday.
More than a hundred people, including a cluster of Amish farmers, packed a Senate hearing room to support the production and retail selling of raw milk in Pennsylvania.
Equally passionate are health officials and food-safety researchers who say they firmly believe that unpasteurized milk, with its high levels of food-borne pathogens, is unsafe.
Senate Agricultural Committee Chairman Michael Brubaker (R., Lancaster) said he convened the hearing to consider both sides of the highly charged issue before deciding whether to seek legislation to either expand the range of raw-milk products allowed in the state or to toughen existing regulations.
The hearing comes at a time when, with the growing popularity of raw milk, increased attention has been brought on what is still considered a niche sector of state agriculture. "Life is full of risks," testified Peggy Wolf of Carlisle, a confirmed raw-milk drinker who credits it with maintaining her children's good health. "People are killed every day in cars, but we don't pass laws to eliminate them."
Raw-milk devotees say they are part of a growing trend of Americans turning toward local farm products out of concern for the safety of food shipped long distances.
"People are clamoring for these products," said Brian Snyder, executive director of Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture, drawing several rounds of applause during his testimony. "This is about access to healthy food and consumer choice."
But Michael Huff, a deputy secretary for the Department of Health, while not calling for its ban, testified that raw milk is an "inherently unsafe product," linked to outbreaks of salmonella, listeria and E. coli. Health officials estimate that between 30 and 35 people in Pennsylvania have been sickened this year.
Still, in the Philadelphia area, raw-milk consumers have emerged as true believers in the cause. They bypass the supermarkets and travel long distances to farms in south-central Pennsylvania.
Many consumers appear to delight in being part of what they regard as a quasi-underground movement that exists largely on word of mouth; sales are legal here but not in 25 other states, including Maryland, Delaware and New Jersey. In a reverse of the liquor sales phenomenon, many raw-milk imbibers cross state lines into Pennsylvania to buy their products.
"My personal belief is that there is no interest in making legal milk illegal," said Brubaker. "But I do think that the question of whether regulations are adequate or whether they need modification is worthy of debate."
There are currently 75 raw-milk permit holders, which is almost double the number that were issued in 2005. Permits require periodic inspection of the dairy herd and milking equipment and testing against disease. Some at the hearing said they wanted to expand the sale of raw-milk products, which now include only aged cheese, to allow the production of yogurt and ice cream. Other are asking the state to eliminate the permitting process altogether.
But Huff said there was a greater likelihood for an increase in human illnesses as the number of permits issued by the Department of Agriculture grew. "We are not contesting the sale of raw milk, but we are contesting the expansion of the sale of products from raw milk," Huff said.
Others say, at a time of increasing government restrictions, it boils down to a basic fight over the right to choose what one wants to eat and drink.
"We're grown-ups. We want the ability to make our own decisions," said William Stawitz, who lives near Harrisburg and travels 30 miles to a farm to buy his raw milk and eggs from free-range chickens. "Like everything else, it should be 'buyer beware.' "
Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau
Suzanne Mossetto adds yogurt culture to heated raw milk in the process of making yogurt. Mossetto, who lives in Cherry Hill, purchases the raw milk from a group of farms in Pa.
BONNIE WELLER / Inquirer Staff Photographer
Suzanne Mossetto adds yogurt culture to heated raw milk in the process of making yogurt. Mossetto, who lives in Cherry Hill, purchases the raw milk from a group of farms in Pa.
HARRISBURG - The forces of consumer choice and health safety collided in a Senate hearing on raw milk yesterday.
More than a hundred people, including a cluster of Amish farmers, packed a Senate hearing room to support the production and retail selling of raw milk in Pennsylvania.
Equally passionate are health officials and food-safety researchers who say they firmly believe that unpasteurized milk, with its high levels of food-borne pathogens, is unsafe.
Senate Agricultural Committee Chairman Michael Brubaker (R., Lancaster) said he convened the hearing to consider both sides of the highly charged issue before deciding whether to seek legislation to either expand the range of raw-milk products allowed in the state or to toughen existing regulations.
The hearing comes at a time when, with the growing popularity of raw milk, increased attention has been brought on what is still considered a niche sector of state agriculture. "Life is full of risks," testified Peggy Wolf of Carlisle, a confirmed raw-milk drinker who credits it with maintaining her children's good health. "People are killed every day in cars, but we don't pass laws to eliminate them."
Raw-milk devotees say they are part of a growing trend of Americans turning toward local farm products out of concern for the safety of food shipped long distances.
"People are clamoring for these products," said Brian Snyder, executive director of Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture, drawing several rounds of applause during his testimony. "This is about access to healthy food and consumer choice."
But Michael Huff, a deputy secretary for the Department of Health, while not calling for its ban, testified that raw milk is an "inherently unsafe product," linked to outbreaks of salmonella, listeria and E. coli. Health officials estimate that between 30 and 35 people in Pennsylvania have been sickened this year.
Still, in the Philadelphia area, raw-milk consumers have emerged as true believers in the cause. They bypass the supermarkets and travel long distances to farms in south-central Pennsylvania.
Many consumers appear to delight in being part of what they regard as a quasi-underground movement that exists largely on word of mouth; sales are legal here but not in 25 other states, including Maryland, Delaware and New Jersey. In a reverse of the liquor sales phenomenon, many raw-milk imbibers cross state lines into Pennsylvania to buy their products.
"My personal belief is that there is no interest in making legal milk illegal," said Brubaker. "But I do think that the question of whether regulations are adequate or whether they need modification is worthy of debate."
There are currently 75 raw-milk permit holders, which is almost double the number that were issued in 2005. Permits require periodic inspection of the dairy herd and milking equipment and testing against disease. Some at the hearing said they wanted to expand the sale of raw-milk products, which now include only aged cheese, to allow the production of yogurt and ice cream. Other are asking the state to eliminate the permitting process altogether.
But Huff said there was a greater likelihood for an increase in human illnesses as the number of permits issued by the Department of Agriculture grew. "We are not contesting the sale of raw milk, but we are contesting the expansion of the sale of products from raw milk," Huff said.
Others say, at a time of increasing government restrictions, it boils down to a basic fight over the right to choose what one wants to eat and drink.
"We're grown-ups. We want the ability to make our own decisions," said William Stawitz, who lives near Harrisburg and travels 30 miles to a farm to buy his raw milk and eggs from free-range chickens. "Like everything else, it should be 'buyer beware.' "
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Constitution Party state committee meeting and banquet
SEPT. 22 2008 the PA state committee meeting and banquet will be held at the Chadwick meeting and banquet facility. The address is 1 Wexford square Wexford PA 15090. The cost of the banquet is $35. The state committee meeting is free unless you are a voting member. If you are a voting member the cost is $35 per year. If you paid at the spring meeting you do not need to pay again.
The speakers will be National chairman Jim Clymer, state chairman Hagan Smith and others to be announced later. Please come check out the Constitution Party and be a part of history. We are the third largest party in the U.S. and growing.
If you have any questions or are interested in attending please call 724-586-9739.
The meeting is from 2pm-5pm and the banquet is from 5:30p- 8pm.
Also check out state website for ongoing information at www.cpofpa.org.
Posted by Joe Murphy at 11:25 AM 0 comments Links to this post
The speakers will be National chairman Jim Clymer, state chairman Hagan Smith and others to be announced later. Please come check out the Constitution Party and be a part of history. We are the third largest party in the U.S. and growing.
If you have any questions or are interested in attending please call 724-586-9739.
The meeting is from 2pm-5pm and the banquet is from 5:30p- 8pm.
Also check out state website for ongoing information at www.cpofpa.org.
Posted by Joe Murphy at 11:25 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Saturday, September 1, 2007
Metcalfe Stifles Free Speech
Representative Daryl Metcalfe (R) of District 12 in Butler County denied a constituent Mr. Hagan Smith Chairman of the Constitution Party of PA his Right of Free Speech at a Rally in Harrisburg. Mr. Smith and Rep. Metcalfe were scheduled to speak at the Rally held by the group Voice of the People USA on September 1, 2007.
On the evening before the Rally Mr. Frank Scavo, Chairman of the group Voice of the People USA called Mr. Smith to inform him that Rep. Metcalfe had told him that if Mr. Smith was going to speak at the rally that he would not come to the Rally. Mr. Scavo made the decision to remove Mr. Smith from the Rally because of Rep. Metcalfe’s official capacity.
Mr. Smith had spoken at many other Rallies held by the Voice of the People USA and always was complimented by the crowd and the organization for his speeches on the Constitution and how government is operating outside the scope of their duties. There had not been a request to remove Mr. Smith before at these Rallies by any other politician or speaker. This leads to the Question, why did Rep. Metcalfe discourage Mr. Scavo from allowing Mr. Smith to speak at the Rally? The only rational explanation could be that Rep. Metcalfe is violating the Constitution and usurping his power or Rep. Metcalfe’s stance on Illegal Immigration is only lip service and he is pandering to the People for votes. Either way, what Rep. Metcalfe did was unconscionable and unbecoming of a public official and shows he has no respect for the Constitution which he swore to uphold, protect and defend.
NO PUBLIC OFFICIAL SHOULD EVER MAKE A REQUEST LIKE REP. METCALFE MADE, EVEN IF THE PERSON HAS A DIFFERING OPINION OR BELIEF THAN THEIRS! WE HAVE A RIGHT AND DUTY TO QUESTION GOVERNMENT.
What makes this so unmistakably wrong is that Rep. Metcalfe violated Mr. Smith’s Rights enumerated and protected by the Constitution for the United States of America and the Constitution for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania which are listed below.
Constitution for the United States of America (Bill of Rights)
1. 1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Constitution for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Declaration of Rights)
2. Article 1 Section 1: All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.
3. Article 1 Section 2: All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.
4. Article 1 Section 7: The printing press shall be free to every person who may undertake to examine the proceedings of the Legislature or any branch of government, and no law shall ever by made to restrain the right thereof. The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the invaluable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, write and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty. No conviction shall be had in any prosecution for the publication of papers relating to the official conduct of officers or men in public capacity, or to any other matter proper for public investigation or information, where the fact that such publication was not maliciously or negligently made shall be established to the satisfaction of the jury; and in all indictments for libels the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.
5. Article 1 Section 20: The citizens have a right in a peaceable manner to assemble together for their common good, and to apply to those invested with the powers of government for redress of grievances or other proper purposes by petition, address or remonstrance.
6. Article 1 Section 25: To guard against the transgressions of the high powers which we have delegated, we declare that everything in this article is excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate.
7. Article 1 Section 26: Neither the Commonwealth nor any political subdivision thereof shall deny to any person the enjoyment of any civil right, nor discriminate against any person in the exercise of any civil right.
8. Article 6 Section 3: Senators, Representatives and all judicial, State and county officers shall, before entering on the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation before a person authorized to administer oaths. "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity." The oath or affirmation shall be administered to a member of the Senate or to a member of the House of Representatives in the hall of the House to which he shall have been elected. Any person refusing to take the oath or affirmation shall forfeit his office.
I am asking everyone who reads this, if you believe in the Constitution, if you believe that it is the Supreme Law of the Land and you believe that people absolutely have Rights and government should never interfere with them then please call or e-mail Rep. Metcalfe and Voice of the People.
Ronald E. Smith
www.cpofpa.org
E-mail Voice of the People:
voice_of_thepeople@hotmail.com
Phone Voice of the People:
Daniel Smeriglio - 570 578 1370 Andrew Woodring - 570 578 3172
Phone Rep. Metcalfe:
Cranberry Township Municipal Building
Phone: (724) 772-3110
Fax: (724) 772-2922
Hours: Monday - Friday 9am - 4:30pm
Middlesex Township
Phone: 724-898-1500
Fax: 724-898-1606
Hours: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday & Friday 9am to 4:30pm
Thursday 10am to 4:30pm
Capitol Address, Phone Numbers
Telephone: (717) 783-1707
Fax: (717) 787-4771
On the evening before the Rally Mr. Frank Scavo, Chairman of the group Voice of the People USA called Mr. Smith to inform him that Rep. Metcalfe had told him that if Mr. Smith was going to speak at the rally that he would not come to the Rally. Mr. Scavo made the decision to remove Mr. Smith from the Rally because of Rep. Metcalfe’s official capacity.
Mr. Smith had spoken at many other Rallies held by the Voice of the People USA and always was complimented by the crowd and the organization for his speeches on the Constitution and how government is operating outside the scope of their duties. There had not been a request to remove Mr. Smith before at these Rallies by any other politician or speaker. This leads to the Question, why did Rep. Metcalfe discourage Mr. Scavo from allowing Mr. Smith to speak at the Rally? The only rational explanation could be that Rep. Metcalfe is violating the Constitution and usurping his power or Rep. Metcalfe’s stance on Illegal Immigration is only lip service and he is pandering to the People for votes. Either way, what Rep. Metcalfe did was unconscionable and unbecoming of a public official and shows he has no respect for the Constitution which he swore to uphold, protect and defend.
NO PUBLIC OFFICIAL SHOULD EVER MAKE A REQUEST LIKE REP. METCALFE MADE, EVEN IF THE PERSON HAS A DIFFERING OPINION OR BELIEF THAN THEIRS! WE HAVE A RIGHT AND DUTY TO QUESTION GOVERNMENT.
What makes this so unmistakably wrong is that Rep. Metcalfe violated Mr. Smith’s Rights enumerated and protected by the Constitution for the United States of America and the Constitution for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania which are listed below.
Constitution for the United States of America (Bill of Rights)
1. 1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Constitution for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Declaration of Rights)
2. Article 1 Section 1: All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.
3. Article 1 Section 2: All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.
4. Article 1 Section 7: The printing press shall be free to every person who may undertake to examine the proceedings of the Legislature or any branch of government, and no law shall ever by made to restrain the right thereof. The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the invaluable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, write and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty. No conviction shall be had in any prosecution for the publication of papers relating to the official conduct of officers or men in public capacity, or to any other matter proper for public investigation or information, where the fact that such publication was not maliciously or negligently made shall be established to the satisfaction of the jury; and in all indictments for libels the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.
5. Article 1 Section 20: The citizens have a right in a peaceable manner to assemble together for their common good, and to apply to those invested with the powers of government for redress of grievances or other proper purposes by petition, address or remonstrance.
6. Article 1 Section 25: To guard against the transgressions of the high powers which we have delegated, we declare that everything in this article is excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate.
7. Article 1 Section 26: Neither the Commonwealth nor any political subdivision thereof shall deny to any person the enjoyment of any civil right, nor discriminate against any person in the exercise of any civil right.
8. Article 6 Section 3: Senators, Representatives and all judicial, State and county officers shall, before entering on the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation before a person authorized to administer oaths. "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity." The oath or affirmation shall be administered to a member of the Senate or to a member of the House of Representatives in the hall of the House to which he shall have been elected. Any person refusing to take the oath or affirmation shall forfeit his office.
I am asking everyone who reads this, if you believe in the Constitution, if you believe that it is the Supreme Law of the Land and you believe that people absolutely have Rights and government should never interfere with them then please call or e-mail Rep. Metcalfe and Voice of the People.
Ronald E. Smith
www.cpofpa.org
E-mail Voice of the People:
voice_of_thepeople@hotmail.com
Phone Voice of the People:
Daniel Smeriglio - 570 578 1370 Andrew Woodring - 570 578 3172
Phone Rep. Metcalfe:
Cranberry Township Municipal Building
Phone: (724) 772-3110
Fax: (724) 772-2922
Hours: Monday - Friday 9am - 4:30pm
Middlesex Township
Phone: 724-898-1500
Fax: 724-898-1606
Hours: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday & Friday 9am to 4:30pm
Thursday 10am to 4:30pm
Capitol Address, Phone Numbers
Telephone: (717) 783-1707
Fax: (717) 787-4771
Thursday, August 30, 2007
The People Must Demand The Fair Tax
By Doug Patton
August 28, 2007
Last year, during the United States Senate race in Nebraska, Republican challenger Pete Ricketts suggested that every option must be considered when looking at ways to reform our federal tax system. Among the list of alternatives Ricketts said should be on the table was a national sales tax known simply as the "Fair Tax."
The Democrat incumbent, U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson, launched an attack on his opponent that was, at best, distorted and condescending, at worst, irrational demagoguery. One would have thought that Ricketts had suggested stealing all the assets of the poor and handing them over to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.
Recently, the panel of pundits on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," discussing the apparent rise in popularity of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign message, scoffed at Huckabee's unabashed promotion of the Fair Tax.
George Will, the token "conservative" on the panel, brushed it aside with the disbelief of an elitist who cannot understand the burden of the average worker who would love to take home his or her entire paycheck, as the Fair Tax would allow him or her to do. Will opined that Huckabee's second place showing in the Iowa straw poll was even more amazing given the fact that "he supported a national sales tax of thirty percent, which means that if you buy a one million dollar house, you'll be writing a check to the government for three hundred thousand dollars." Of course, the others on the panel readily agreed.
The elites of this country, who buy those million-dollar homes, are not enamored with the Fair Tax. They would be if they took the time to understand its appeal.
The Fair Tax would replace all federal income taxes. No more federal withholding. No more Social Security withholding. No more Medicare withholding. No more stealing from the paychecks of American workers before they even see it and then pretending to give them a refund, without interest, at the end of the year. No more saving receipts for tax deductions. No more IRS audits. No more April 15th.
Instead, the Fair Tax would put us in control. All consumer items would be taxed. Business purchases would not. By allowing us to make the determination about what we buy and when we buy it, the ability of our legislators to manipulate our behavior is eliminated. That is why the elites don't like it. They can't control the public's spending habits under such a system.
The current federal tax system is broken. It cannot be fixed. Since the inception of the federal income tax with the passage of the 16th Amendment in 1913, federal corruption and control have turned it into a Frankenstein monster that torments the people and serves the special interests. A tax on a person's income is a tax on production, and as Ronald Reagan once said, "Whatever you tax, you get less of."
Because the poor are forced to spend a disproportionate percentage of their resources to cover the tax on necessities, the Fair Tax hits them the hardest. That issue can be addressed by simply issuing a "prebate" check each month to every household in the country. Unlike disingenuous tax credits, deductions, exemptions and other loopholes in the current income tax code, a prebate check is a clean, honest method of covering the sales tax on food, clothing and shelter - up to the poverty level.
Of course, removing the income tax on corporations will reduce the cost of everything we buy, since corporations don't pay taxes. They simply pass them along to consumers. The Fair Tax plan calculates that removing the corporate income tax will result in a reduction in the cost of virtually every consumer item on the market. In fact, it will just about offset the tax on those products. Imagine paying the same price for something but having your entire paycheck to buy it.
And then there are the billions of dollars that flow untaxed through our economy today: drug dealers, prostitutes, pornographers, foreign tourists. Imagine how much revenue could be raised simply by taxing the things those people consume.
There would be no more audits, no more justifying deductions, and April 15th would become just another spring day. But only if the people stand up to the elites and demand it.
August 28, 2007
Last year, during the United States Senate race in Nebraska, Republican challenger Pete Ricketts suggested that every option must be considered when looking at ways to reform our federal tax system. Among the list of alternatives Ricketts said should be on the table was a national sales tax known simply as the "Fair Tax."
The Democrat incumbent, U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson, launched an attack on his opponent that was, at best, distorted and condescending, at worst, irrational demagoguery. One would have thought that Ricketts had suggested stealing all the assets of the poor and handing them over to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.
Recently, the panel of pundits on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," discussing the apparent rise in popularity of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign message, scoffed at Huckabee's unabashed promotion of the Fair Tax.
George Will, the token "conservative" on the panel, brushed it aside with the disbelief of an elitist who cannot understand the burden of the average worker who would love to take home his or her entire paycheck, as the Fair Tax would allow him or her to do. Will opined that Huckabee's second place showing in the Iowa straw poll was even more amazing given the fact that "he supported a national sales tax of thirty percent, which means that if you buy a one million dollar house, you'll be writing a check to the government for three hundred thousand dollars." Of course, the others on the panel readily agreed.
The elites of this country, who buy those million-dollar homes, are not enamored with the Fair Tax. They would be if they took the time to understand its appeal.
The Fair Tax would replace all federal income taxes. No more federal withholding. No more Social Security withholding. No more Medicare withholding. No more stealing from the paychecks of American workers before they even see it and then pretending to give them a refund, without interest, at the end of the year. No more saving receipts for tax deductions. No more IRS audits. No more April 15th.
Instead, the Fair Tax would put us in control. All consumer items would be taxed. Business purchases would not. By allowing us to make the determination about what we buy and when we buy it, the ability of our legislators to manipulate our behavior is eliminated. That is why the elites don't like it. They can't control the public's spending habits under such a system.
The current federal tax system is broken. It cannot be fixed. Since the inception of the federal income tax with the passage of the 16th Amendment in 1913, federal corruption and control have turned it into a Frankenstein monster that torments the people and serves the special interests. A tax on a person's income is a tax on production, and as Ronald Reagan once said, "Whatever you tax, you get less of."
Because the poor are forced to spend a disproportionate percentage of their resources to cover the tax on necessities, the Fair Tax hits them the hardest. That issue can be addressed by simply issuing a "prebate" check each month to every household in the country. Unlike disingenuous tax credits, deductions, exemptions and other loopholes in the current income tax code, a prebate check is a clean, honest method of covering the sales tax on food, clothing and shelter - up to the poverty level.
Of course, removing the income tax on corporations will reduce the cost of everything we buy, since corporations don't pay taxes. They simply pass them along to consumers. The Fair Tax plan calculates that removing the corporate income tax will result in a reduction in the cost of virtually every consumer item on the market. In fact, it will just about offset the tax on those products. Imagine paying the same price for something but having your entire paycheck to buy it.
And then there are the billions of dollars that flow untaxed through our economy today: drug dealers, prostitutes, pornographers, foreign tourists. Imagine how much revenue could be raised simply by taxing the things those people consume.
There would be no more audits, no more justifying deductions, and April 15th would become just another spring day. But only if the people stand up to the elites and demand it.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
WOW Jim Roddey joins Desantis team
Maybe Mr. Desantis does'nt have any new ideas after all. I was really looking for him to tap into some new people to bring real solutions to the mess we call Pittsburgh. It looks like we will get republican government solutions instead of democrat government solutions. What we need is private money in the city not more govt. grants, loans and old ideas. I am afraid that is what we will get with Mr. Roddey leading the charge. I have nothing personal agaist either man, I just wish candidates would just listen to the people and obey their oath of office. The city needs what it has always needed lower taxes, better schools and safer communities. You get this by returning to local control of schools and more home ownership. When you have to many renters or HUD homes you have high taxes, bad schools and unstable communities. People need to take pride in their neighborhood and they do when they own a stake in it. Any other solutions will just be a band aid on a very large wound. Good luck Mr. Desantis and Mayor Raventstall may the real solutions win.
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Constitution Party state committee meeting and banquet
SEPT. 22 2008 the PA state committee meeting and banquet will be held at the Chadwick meeting and banquet facility. The address is 1 Wexford square Wexford PA 15090. The cost of the banquet is $35. The state committee meeting is free unless you are a voting member. If you are a voting member the cost is $35 per year. If you paid at the spring meeting you do not need to pay again.
The speakers will be National chairman Jim Clymer, state chairman Hagan Smith and others to be announced later. Please come check out the Constitution Party and be a part of history. We are the third largest party in the U.S. and growing.
If you have any questions or are interested in attending please call 724-586-9739.
The meeting is from 2pm-5pm and the banquet is from 5:30p- 8pm.
Also check out state website for ongoing information at www.cpofpa.org.
The speakers will be National chairman Jim Clymer, state chairman Hagan Smith and others to be announced later. Please come check out the Constitution Party and be a part of history. We are the third largest party in the U.S. and growing.
If you have any questions or are interested in attending please call 724-586-9739.
The meeting is from 2pm-5pm and the banquet is from 5:30p- 8pm.
Also check out state website for ongoing information at www.cpofpa.org.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Ron Paul Also Wins Big in New Hampshire
August 18, 2007
Ron Paul won big earlier today in Alabama. He also won big in New Hampshire this afternoon.
Dr. Paul received 208 votes (73%) for a landslide victory against Mitt Romney today at the Strattford County, New Hampshire straw poll. Romney received 26 votes. Mike Huckabee came in third with 20 votes.
Tancredo (8 votes), McCain (7 votes), Cox (5 votes), Hunter (5 votes), Thompson (5 votes), Giuliani (3 votes) and Brownback (1 vote) finished the field.
As noted earlier, Ron Paul received 216 votes for a commanding first-place finish in a straw poll today sponsored by the West Alabama Republican Assembly. Mitt Romney came in second with 14 votes.
The poll was open to Alabama residents.
Ron Paul won big earlier today in Alabama. He also won big in New Hampshire this afternoon.
Dr. Paul received 208 votes (73%) for a landslide victory against Mitt Romney today at the Strattford County, New Hampshire straw poll. Romney received 26 votes. Mike Huckabee came in third with 20 votes.
Tancredo (8 votes), McCain (7 votes), Cox (5 votes), Hunter (5 votes), Thompson (5 votes), Giuliani (3 votes) and Brownback (1 vote) finished the field.
As noted earlier, Ron Paul received 216 votes for a commanding first-place finish in a straw poll today sponsored by the West Alabama Republican Assembly. Mitt Romney came in second with 14 votes.
The poll was open to Alabama residents.
Friday, August 17, 2007
Ron Paul takes 3rd in Illinois straw poll
August 17, 2007
Illinois Straw Poll
Heavy rain did not dampen the enthusiasm of Ron Paul supporters yesterday at the Illinois State Fair. Those supporters canvassed the fairgrounds introducing people to Ron Paul and asking them to vote in the straw poll held by the Illinois Republican Party. Voting started at 11:00 am and ended at 4:00 pm.
Their work paid off! Dr. Paul (18.87%) came in third behind Mitt Romney (40.35%) and Fred Thompson (19.96%). Giuliani (11.61%), McCain (4.12%), Huckabee (3.04%), Brownback (1.08%), Hunter (.65%), and Tancredo (.33%) rounded out the field.
A big "thank you" to the Ron Paul supporters who braved the rain and made yesterday's straw poll a success.
Kent Snyder
Illinois Straw Poll
Heavy rain did not dampen the enthusiasm of Ron Paul supporters yesterday at the Illinois State Fair. Those supporters canvassed the fairgrounds introducing people to Ron Paul and asking them to vote in the straw poll held by the Illinois Republican Party. Voting started at 11:00 am and ended at 4:00 pm.
Their work paid off! Dr. Paul (18.87%) came in third behind Mitt Romney (40.35%) and Fred Thompson (19.96%). Giuliani (11.61%), McCain (4.12%), Huckabee (3.04%), Brownback (1.08%), Hunter (.65%), and Tancredo (.33%) rounded out the field.
A big "thank you" to the Ron Paul supporters who braved the rain and made yesterday's straw poll a success.
Kent Snyder
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
NEW MEETING TIME AND DAY
The Constitution Party of Allegheny County will be changing its meeting date effective immediately. Our next meeting will be August Saturday August 18th at 9am. The location will still be 200 Frankfort Ave. West View 15229. From now until further notice our meetings will be the 3rd Saturday of the month at 9am. Thank you and I hope to see you there.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
West View council president to resign
By Daveen Rae Kurutz
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, August 10, 2007
After 34 years, West View is looking for a new council president.
Council President Dan M. Daugherty said Thursday he intends to resign by the end of October.
The move comes after residents filed a state ethics complaint last month when Daugherty, the paid executive director of West View Water Authority, was appointed to fill a vacancy on the water authority board.
Daugherty said his impending resignation is not related to the complaint.
"It's time to move on and make room for others, who I'm sure have great ideas, too," Daugherty said. "I could stay on council -- there's nothing wrong with holding all three seats -- but it's my choice to go.
"After nearly 40 years, don't you think it's about time?"
The ethics complaint was filed by resident Jim Barr, who believes it is a conflict of interest for Daugherty to sit on the board and be employed as its executive director.
"He's being his own boss, and that's not right," Barr said. "It's just not good for the people -- but it's good for him and his political allies."
Daugherty has been president of West View council for 34 years and a member of council for 38 years. He was most recently re-elected to council in 2005.
His appointment to the water authority board was not a conflict of interest under borough code, according to borough and water authority solicitor Fred E. Baxter Jr.
Daugherty said the ethics complaint was dismissed without investigation -- but the State Ethics Commission would not confirm or deny its dismissal.
Daugherty's announced resignation is the second in two months. In July, Councilman Ralph Burshell stepped down. Don Mikec was appointed to replace him Wednesday.
Daveen Rae Kurutz can be reached at dkurutz@tribweb.com or 412-380-5627.
www.pittsburghlive.com
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, August 10, 2007
After 34 years, West View is looking for a new council president.
Council President Dan M. Daugherty said Thursday he intends to resign by the end of October.
The move comes after residents filed a state ethics complaint last month when Daugherty, the paid executive director of West View Water Authority, was appointed to fill a vacancy on the water authority board.
Daugherty said his impending resignation is not related to the complaint.
"It's time to move on and make room for others, who I'm sure have great ideas, too," Daugherty said. "I could stay on council -- there's nothing wrong with holding all three seats -- but it's my choice to go.
"After nearly 40 years, don't you think it's about time?"
The ethics complaint was filed by resident Jim Barr, who believes it is a conflict of interest for Daugherty to sit on the board and be employed as its executive director.
"He's being his own boss, and that's not right," Barr said. "It's just not good for the people -- but it's good for him and his political allies."
Daugherty has been president of West View council for 34 years and a member of council for 38 years. He was most recently re-elected to council in 2005.
His appointment to the water authority board was not a conflict of interest under borough code, according to borough and water authority solicitor Fred E. Baxter Jr.
Daugherty said the ethics complaint was dismissed without investigation -- but the State Ethics Commission would not confirm or deny its dismissal.
Daugherty's announced resignation is the second in two months. In July, Councilman Ralph Burshell stepped down. Don Mikec was appointed to replace him Wednesday.
Daveen Rae Kurutz can be reached at dkurutz@tribweb.com or 412-380-5627.
www.pittsburghlive.com
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Clymer's party seeks spot on ballot
Commissioner race could be crowded
By DAVE PIDGEON, Staff
Intelligencer Journal
Published: Jul 31, 2007 1:23 AM EST
LANCASTER COUNTY, Pa. - Make room for one more candidate in this year's race for Lancaster County commissioner.
Attorney Jim Clymer, the 59-year-old national chairman of the conservative Constitution Party, confirmed Monday he plans to add his name to the November ballot. He said he plans to turn in his nominating petitions to the county Board of Elections on Wednesday.
Clymer, however, said he intends only to keep the spot warm as he hopes to find someone else to represent the Constitution Party in the election.
"I'm going to be running initially as a placeholder," he said Monday.
Clymer ran a losing campaign for county commissioner in 2003 and said he does not plan to run again, though he would not entirely rule it out.
"I never say never, but it's not my desire or my intention to at this present time," he said. "I would probably not. I probably would withdraw."
Adding a Constitution Party candidate — someone who is for limited government and fiscal restraint, Clymer said — means a field of six would vie for three county commissioner seats on Nov. 6.
The Republican nominees are former Youth Intervention Center director Scott Martin and County Controller Dennis Stuckey. Democrats nominated Lancaster city Treasurer Craig Lehman and incumbent Commissioner Molly Henderson.
Independent candidate Jere Swarr, a Rapho Township supervisor, who turned in his nominating petitions Friday, also is running for the post.
Bruce Beardsley, chairman of the Lancaster County Democratic Committee, said Clymer's entrance into the race is advantageous for Henderson and Lehman.
"The more (conservative candidates) who are in the race, the more the Republican voters are divided, the more opportunity for Democrats," Beardsley said. "If you have a certain amount of Republican votes, and it's split four ways, each of them gets a smaller vote."
Lancaster County Republican chairman Dave Dumeyer and Andrew Heath, the local GOP's executive director, were not immediately available for comment Monday night.
Clymer finished fifth in the 2003 contest with 13 percent of the vote, just behind Democrat Bill Saylor.
"The right candidate would have a good shot at winning, and probably a better shot than in 2003," Clymer said. "I say that in part because national polls show that there's more receptiveness now to a third party than there has been in many years.
"More and more people are seeing the light, seeing the truth: There (is) very little difference between the two (major) parties."
To appear on the ballot, Clymer will have to turn in 888 signatures from registered voters to the county Board of Elections by 5 p.m. Wednesday. The number is equal to 2 percent of the total votes for the winner of the last countywide election — U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts in 2006.
Clymer's nominating petitions also include G. Friedrich Schrom of Lititz, chairman of the Constitution Party's Lancaster County chapter, who plans to run for register of wills against GOP nominee Mary Ann Gerber.
Voters who have signed either Clymer's or Schrom's petitions are nominating both to appear on the ballot.
According to the Pennsylvania Department of State, this is permissible as long as the person signing the petition is eligible to vote for both candidates.
For example, a person running for Lancaster County treasurer can't add a candidate to his or her petition who is seeking a commissioner's post in Bradford County. Voters can't participate in both elections.
Should a Constitution Party candidate appear on the ballot this year, it will mark the third consecutive election for the post in which the party has fielded a nominee. Clymer ran in 2003 and Casey McDonald in 1999.
E-mail: dpidgeon@lnpnews.com
By DAVE PIDGEON, Staff
Intelligencer Journal
Published: Jul 31, 2007 1:23 AM EST
LANCASTER COUNTY, Pa. - Make room for one more candidate in this year's race for Lancaster County commissioner.
Attorney Jim Clymer, the 59-year-old national chairman of the conservative Constitution Party, confirmed Monday he plans to add his name to the November ballot. He said he plans to turn in his nominating petitions to the county Board of Elections on Wednesday.
Clymer, however, said he intends only to keep the spot warm as he hopes to find someone else to represent the Constitution Party in the election.
"I'm going to be running initially as a placeholder," he said Monday.
Clymer ran a losing campaign for county commissioner in 2003 and said he does not plan to run again, though he would not entirely rule it out.
"I never say never, but it's not my desire or my intention to at this present time," he said. "I would probably not. I probably would withdraw."
Adding a Constitution Party candidate — someone who is for limited government and fiscal restraint, Clymer said — means a field of six would vie for three county commissioner seats on Nov. 6.
The Republican nominees are former Youth Intervention Center director Scott Martin and County Controller Dennis Stuckey. Democrats nominated Lancaster city Treasurer Craig Lehman and incumbent Commissioner Molly Henderson.
Independent candidate Jere Swarr, a Rapho Township supervisor, who turned in his nominating petitions Friday, also is running for the post.
Bruce Beardsley, chairman of the Lancaster County Democratic Committee, said Clymer's entrance into the race is advantageous for Henderson and Lehman.
"The more (conservative candidates) who are in the race, the more the Republican voters are divided, the more opportunity for Democrats," Beardsley said. "If you have a certain amount of Republican votes, and it's split four ways, each of them gets a smaller vote."
Lancaster County Republican chairman Dave Dumeyer and Andrew Heath, the local GOP's executive director, were not immediately available for comment Monday night.
Clymer finished fifth in the 2003 contest with 13 percent of the vote, just behind Democrat Bill Saylor.
"The right candidate would have a good shot at winning, and probably a better shot than in 2003," Clymer said. "I say that in part because national polls show that there's more receptiveness now to a third party than there has been in many years.
"More and more people are seeing the light, seeing the truth: There (is) very little difference between the two (major) parties."
To appear on the ballot, Clymer will have to turn in 888 signatures from registered voters to the county Board of Elections by 5 p.m. Wednesday. The number is equal to 2 percent of the total votes for the winner of the last countywide election — U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts in 2006.
Clymer's nominating petitions also include G. Friedrich Schrom of Lititz, chairman of the Constitution Party's Lancaster County chapter, who plans to run for register of wills against GOP nominee Mary Ann Gerber.
Voters who have signed either Clymer's or Schrom's petitions are nominating both to appear on the ballot.
According to the Pennsylvania Department of State, this is permissible as long as the person signing the petition is eligible to vote for both candidates.
For example, a person running for Lancaster County treasurer can't add a candidate to his or her petition who is seeking a commissioner's post in Bradford County. Voters can't participate in both elections.
Should a Constitution Party candidate appear on the ballot this year, it will mark the third consecutive election for the post in which the party has fielded a nominee. Clymer ran in 2003 and Casey McDonald in 1999.
E-mail: dpidgeon@lnpnews.com
Monday, July 23, 2007
Pa. House Dems put property tax atop agenda
Monday, July 23, 2007
By Tom Barnes, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau
HARRISBURG -- Of all the thorny political issues that have bedeviled state legislators during the past 30 years, property tax relief is probably Numero Uno.
But two top House Democratic officials, Majority Leader Bill DeWeese of Waynesburg and Majority Whip Keith McCall of Carbon, say they're going to give it another shot when the Legislature returns to work Sept. 17.
"We are committed to making property tax reform the pre-eminent issue come this fall," Mr. McCall said in an interview last week. "We want to show the Senate we are serious about this issue."
"We want to pass a bill and send it to the Senate," said Mr. DeWeese.
They said a wide range of possible property tax relief options will be considered. One is Mr. DeWeese's idea for a 0.5 percent increase in the state sales tax. That would generate about $700 million, with all of it going to lower property taxes. Gov. Ed Rendell has talked about going Mr. DeWeese one better -- raising the sales tax a full percentage point, with all $1.4 billion going to lower property taxes.
Then there is Rep. Samuel Rohrer's idea. Mr. Rohrer, R-Berks, and some other conservative Republicans have pushed for four years to reduce the sales tax to 5 percent statewide but greatly broaden the base by taxing food and clothing, which are now exempt.
Mr. McCall said that even the most wide-ranging plan, called "Stop Taxing Our Properties," will be discussed. The STOP plan, championed by former KDKA radio talk show host Bob Logue, would combine a higher sales tax, a higher state income tax and new slots revenues to raise about $8 billion, which advocates say would be enough to completely eliminate property taxes on primary residences.
"We're taking them all [under consideration]," Mr. McCall said. "We want to bring all the minds together and make this a bipartisan effort. We're going to look to see how we can do this (property tax relief) with the least amount of pain. You have to spread this to broad-based taxes to make it work."
Mr. Rendell fought to legalize slot machines in 2004, claiming they would raise up to $1 billion a year for property tax reduction once all 14 casinos were up and fully running. But legal challenges have slowed the process, and so far only five racetrack casinos are operating. The other nine facilities probably won't be fully functional for another two years.
The Democratic leaders said two other ideas also will be priorities this fall: expanding the state's open records law, to make it easier for citizens to learn what's going on in state government, and campaign finance' reform, such as whether to put limits on donations to political candidates. Senate Republican leader Dominic Pileggi of Chester said he'll also push for making it easier for citizens to obtain government records.
The legislators' priorities will be joined to an ambitious agenda Mr. Rendell already is talking about for the fall session. He is insisting that the Legislature resume efforts to enact a tough ban on smoking in public places and workplaces, continue work on his energy initiatives and find new funding to pay for cleaning up hazardous waste sites.
Republican legislators this past spring shot down Mr. Rendell's plan to increase residential electric bills by $5.40 a year to finance an $850 million fund that would provide incentives for people to buy energy-efficient appliances. He now wants them to figure out an alternative.
Many legislators disliked another bill, which would have shifted $40 million from the Keystone Recreation Fund to bail out the nearly empty Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund. The recreation fund pays for parks, libraries and other items. So Mr. Rendell wants them to come up with a funding solution for hazardous waste sites.
House and Senate members passed different versions of the smoking ban legislation, and the governor wants them to agree on one version that he can sign.
Tom Barnes can be reached at tbarnes@post-gazette.com or 1=717-787-4254.
By Tom Barnes, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau
HARRISBURG -- Of all the thorny political issues that have bedeviled state legislators during the past 30 years, property tax relief is probably Numero Uno.
But two top House Democratic officials, Majority Leader Bill DeWeese of Waynesburg and Majority Whip Keith McCall of Carbon, say they're going to give it another shot when the Legislature returns to work Sept. 17.
"We are committed to making property tax reform the pre-eminent issue come this fall," Mr. McCall said in an interview last week. "We want to show the Senate we are serious about this issue."
"We want to pass a bill and send it to the Senate," said Mr. DeWeese.
They said a wide range of possible property tax relief options will be considered. One is Mr. DeWeese's idea for a 0.5 percent increase in the state sales tax. That would generate about $700 million, with all of it going to lower property taxes. Gov. Ed Rendell has talked about going Mr. DeWeese one better -- raising the sales tax a full percentage point, with all $1.4 billion going to lower property taxes.
Then there is Rep. Samuel Rohrer's idea. Mr. Rohrer, R-Berks, and some other conservative Republicans have pushed for four years to reduce the sales tax to 5 percent statewide but greatly broaden the base by taxing food and clothing, which are now exempt.
Mr. McCall said that even the most wide-ranging plan, called "Stop Taxing Our Properties," will be discussed. The STOP plan, championed by former KDKA radio talk show host Bob Logue, would combine a higher sales tax, a higher state income tax and new slots revenues to raise about $8 billion, which advocates say would be enough to completely eliminate property taxes on primary residences.
"We're taking them all [under consideration]," Mr. McCall said. "We want to bring all the minds together and make this a bipartisan effort. We're going to look to see how we can do this (property tax relief) with the least amount of pain. You have to spread this to broad-based taxes to make it work."
Mr. Rendell fought to legalize slot machines in 2004, claiming they would raise up to $1 billion a year for property tax reduction once all 14 casinos were up and fully running. But legal challenges have slowed the process, and so far only five racetrack casinos are operating. The other nine facilities probably won't be fully functional for another two years.
The Democratic leaders said two other ideas also will be priorities this fall: expanding the state's open records law, to make it easier for citizens to learn what's going on in state government, and campaign finance' reform, such as whether to put limits on donations to political candidates. Senate Republican leader Dominic Pileggi of Chester said he'll also push for making it easier for citizens to obtain government records.
The legislators' priorities will be joined to an ambitious agenda Mr. Rendell already is talking about for the fall session. He is insisting that the Legislature resume efforts to enact a tough ban on smoking in public places and workplaces, continue work on his energy initiatives and find new funding to pay for cleaning up hazardous waste sites.
Republican legislators this past spring shot down Mr. Rendell's plan to increase residential electric bills by $5.40 a year to finance an $850 million fund that would provide incentives for people to buy energy-efficient appliances. He now wants them to figure out an alternative.
Many legislators disliked another bill, which would have shifted $40 million from the Keystone Recreation Fund to bail out the nearly empty Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund. The recreation fund pays for parks, libraries and other items. So Mr. Rendell wants them to come up with a funding solution for hazardous waste sites.
House and Senate members passed different versions of the smoking ban legislation, and the governor wants them to agree on one version that he can sign.
Tom Barnes can be reached at tbarnes@post-gazette.com or 1=717-787-4254.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
CP southwest chairman stands up to water authority
West View Water Authority post brings ethics filing
Water authority chief is named to authority board
Thursday, July 19, 2007
By Len Barcousky, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
The president of West View council, who is employed as executive director of West View Water Authority, has begun wearing a third municipal hat -- prompting a conflict of interest charge.
West View council July 11 appointed Daniel M. Daugherty to one of two vacancies on the West View Water Authority board.
The next day, borough resident James W. Barr filed a complaint with the State Ethics Commission.
Mr. Barr's complaint charges that Mr. Daugherty already faced potential conflicts of interest by simultaneously serving as council president and as the Water Authority's paid executive director.
Those conflicts can arise because borough council, which Mr. Daugherty leads, appoints members to the authority board, which oversees Mr. Daugherty's work as executive director.
By appointing Mr. Daugherty to the authority board, West View council has made the potential for conflicts even greater, Mr. Barr charged.
"Isn't there another person in the borough who could serve on the authority?" Mr. Barr asked.
A 25-year resident, Mr. Barr is a perennially unsuccessful candidate for West View council. In the fall his name will appear for the eighth time on the ballot, this time on the Constitution Party line.
Mr. Daugherty abstained in the 5-0 vote council took July 11 selecting him to complete the term of the late Harry Gruener, who died June 24 at age 86. Mr. Gruener previously had served as a West View council member and borough manager.
Another vacancy on the five-member Water Authority board opened July 3, when David R. Glavin died. Mr. Glavin, 81, a former president of the Allegheny County Labor Council, had been a member of the authority board for 19 years.
Mr. Daugherty said his decision to serve on the Water Authority board had been reviewed by lawyer Fred Baxter, who serves as solicitor to council and to the Water Authority.
Mr. Daugherty pledged to abstain from any votes on council or on the Water Authority board in which he would have a personal interest. None of the other members of the board is an employee or a member of council.
Mr. Daugherty earns about $113,000 as executive director of the authority. Members of council and of the Water Authority both receive small stipends, but Mr. Daugherty said he is not eligible for either because he already gets a salary from the authority.
Mr. Barr predicted Mr. Daugherty would not be able to be an active and effective member of the authority. "He is going to have to abstain from most of the votes," he said.
The Water Authority and its work force both need broader representation, he said. "There is too much nepotism involved," he said. In his complaint, Mr. Barr wrote that four of the current six members of West View council have children who work for the authority. Council is made up of seven members but has a vacancy.
Councilman Barry G. Schell defended the decision to name Mr. Daugherty to one of the two vacant slots. Other municipal agencies and businesses have their top executives also serve on their governing boards, he said.
The loss of two authority board members in little more than a week made it critical that at least one of the empty positions be filled quickly, he said. "The board couldn't really conduct its business with two vacancies," he said. "And we didn't have any other candidates in mind."
Mr. Schell invited any West View resident interested in serving on the authority to send a resume and letter of application to West View Borough Council, in care of Manager Kenneth J. Wolf, 441 Perry Highway, Pittsburgh 15229.
The fifth seat could be filled as soon as council's next meeting at 7 p.m. Aug. 8, Mr. Schell said.
The State Ethics Commission has a policy that it will neither confirm nor deny even the existence of a complaint while it is being investigated or studied by a hearing officer, according to an agency spokeswoman.
Only if the allegations in a complaint are found to be credible would the commission issue a public order. The quasi-judicial process usually takes several months.
While West View is a small community of about 7,300 surrounded by Ross, the West View Water Authority is a regional giant.
The authority supplies drinking water to about 200,000 customers in 31 municipalities in Allegheny, Beaver and Butler counties. Its treatment plant on Neville Island can purify and pump up to 40 million gallons of water per day.
Water authority chief is named to authority board
Thursday, July 19, 2007
By Len Barcousky, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
The president of West View council, who is employed as executive director of West View Water Authority, has begun wearing a third municipal hat -- prompting a conflict of interest charge.
West View council July 11 appointed Daniel M. Daugherty to one of two vacancies on the West View Water Authority board.
The next day, borough resident James W. Barr filed a complaint with the State Ethics Commission.
Mr. Barr's complaint charges that Mr. Daugherty already faced potential conflicts of interest by simultaneously serving as council president and as the Water Authority's paid executive director.
Those conflicts can arise because borough council, which Mr. Daugherty leads, appoints members to the authority board, which oversees Mr. Daugherty's work as executive director.
By appointing Mr. Daugherty to the authority board, West View council has made the potential for conflicts even greater, Mr. Barr charged.
"Isn't there another person in the borough who could serve on the authority?" Mr. Barr asked.
A 25-year resident, Mr. Barr is a perennially unsuccessful candidate for West View council. In the fall his name will appear for the eighth time on the ballot, this time on the Constitution Party line.
Mr. Daugherty abstained in the 5-0 vote council took July 11 selecting him to complete the term of the late Harry Gruener, who died June 24 at age 86. Mr. Gruener previously had served as a West View council member and borough manager.
Another vacancy on the five-member Water Authority board opened July 3, when David R. Glavin died. Mr. Glavin, 81, a former president of the Allegheny County Labor Council, had been a member of the authority board for 19 years.
Mr. Daugherty said his decision to serve on the Water Authority board had been reviewed by lawyer Fred Baxter, who serves as solicitor to council and to the Water Authority.
Mr. Daugherty pledged to abstain from any votes on council or on the Water Authority board in which he would have a personal interest. None of the other members of the board is an employee or a member of council.
Mr. Daugherty earns about $113,000 as executive director of the authority. Members of council and of the Water Authority both receive small stipends, but Mr. Daugherty said he is not eligible for either because he already gets a salary from the authority.
Mr. Barr predicted Mr. Daugherty would not be able to be an active and effective member of the authority. "He is going to have to abstain from most of the votes," he said.
The Water Authority and its work force both need broader representation, he said. "There is too much nepotism involved," he said. In his complaint, Mr. Barr wrote that four of the current six members of West View council have children who work for the authority. Council is made up of seven members but has a vacancy.
Councilman Barry G. Schell defended the decision to name Mr. Daugherty to one of the two vacant slots. Other municipal agencies and businesses have their top executives also serve on their governing boards, he said.
The loss of two authority board members in little more than a week made it critical that at least one of the empty positions be filled quickly, he said. "The board couldn't really conduct its business with two vacancies," he said. "And we didn't have any other candidates in mind."
Mr. Schell invited any West View resident interested in serving on the authority to send a resume and letter of application to West View Borough Council, in care of Manager Kenneth J. Wolf, 441 Perry Highway, Pittsburgh 15229.
The fifth seat could be filled as soon as council's next meeting at 7 p.m. Aug. 8, Mr. Schell said.
The State Ethics Commission has a policy that it will neither confirm nor deny even the existence of a complaint while it is being investigated or studied by a hearing officer, according to an agency spokeswoman.
Only if the allegations in a complaint are found to be credible would the commission issue a public order. The quasi-judicial process usually takes several months.
While West View is a small community of about 7,300 surrounded by Ross, the West View Water Authority is a regional giant.
The authority supplies drinking water to about 200,000 customers in 31 municipalities in Allegheny, Beaver and Butler counties. Its treatment plant on Neville Island can purify and pump up to 40 million gallons of water per day.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
CP Allegheny Picnic
The Constitution Party of Allegheny County will be hosting a picnic on Friday August 3rd. The picnic will run from 1pm until dusk. It will be at the Harmar grove in North Park. If you are interested in attending and want to help in some way(we need help with the food) please email me at jmurphpitt@hotmail.com or call at 412-826-0516, even if you can only stop by for a short time please let us know. Bring the whole family and friends and enjoy a beautiful day at the park.
Senate rejects House-passed smoking ban
Posted by Jan Murphy/The Patriot-News July 16, 2007 23:19PM
Categories: Breaking News, Midstate, Politics, State government
The state House made it clear last night that it wants a mostly smoke-free Pennsylvania.
Minutes later, the Senate rejected the House version of a statewide indoor smoking ban, sending it to a House-Senate conference committee to hash out the differences.
Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, R-Montgomery, said that action could delay the implementation of a smoking ban for months.
By a 141-62 vote, the House approved a ban that would order most indoor public places, including casinos, restaurants and taverns, to go smoke-free 90 days after the bill becomes law.
The House bill would exempt from the ban private homes, private clubs such as American Legions and sportsmen's clubs, tobacco-related businesses and a quarter of the rooms in hotels. It also would allow smoking in private residences within nursing homes or assisted living facilities and at cigar exhibitions.
Municipalities could enact stricter smoking bans. And the bill ordered county health departments or, in absence of one of those, another county department to serve as the smoking police.
The Senate rejected this version of the ban by a 13-36 vote
www.pennlive.com
Categories: Breaking News, Midstate, Politics, State government
The state House made it clear last night that it wants a mostly smoke-free Pennsylvania.
Minutes later, the Senate rejected the House version of a statewide indoor smoking ban, sending it to a House-Senate conference committee to hash out the differences.
Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, R-Montgomery, said that action could delay the implementation of a smoking ban for months.
By a 141-62 vote, the House approved a ban that would order most indoor public places, including casinos, restaurants and taverns, to go smoke-free 90 days after the bill becomes law.
The House bill would exempt from the ban private homes, private clubs such as American Legions and sportsmen's clubs, tobacco-related businesses and a quarter of the rooms in hotels. It also would allow smoking in private residences within nursing homes or assisted living facilities and at cigar exhibitions.
Municipalities could enact stricter smoking bans. And the bill ordered county health departments or, in absence of one of those, another county department to serve as the smoking police.
The Senate rejected this version of the ban by a 13-36 vote
www.pennlive.com
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Allegheny County meeting still on
I am so very sorry I got a couple of dates and times confused and thought we had two conflicting meetings, we do not. We WILL be meeting at 200 Frankfort ave. West View 15227 at 2pm.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Allegheny's Onorato to hold drink tax hostage
By Jim Ritchie
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, July 13, 2007
The Port Authority will not get any money from proposed taxes on alcoholic drinks and rental cars until it cuts labor costs further, Allegheny County Chief Executive Dan Onorato said Thursday.
Onorato might hold revenue generated by the proposed taxes until after the transit agency reaches a labor contract that satisfies terms he intends to propose to County Council.
"We can put any strings on them we want," said Onorato, who declined to specify his conditions. "We're not required to give them the money."
The contract for nearly 5,000 current and retired Port Authority drivers and mechanics represented by the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 85 expires in June 2008.
"If I send this bill to council, the bill will include language that Port Authority does not get a penny more of revenue until they fix the cost structure over there," Onorato said. "I mean, fixing the benefit cost structure of the unions and for nonunion employees."
Labor costs, which include rising health care expenses, represent 75 percent of Port Authority's $325.1 million budget. Onorato's assault on those benefits has the agency's largest union preparing for a fight.
Negotiations have to be give-and-take, said union President Pat McMahon. The union is not willing to give up health care benefits it fought for years to win, he said.
"If it means us paying more in health care, there's things I'd like in return for that," McMahon said.
For example, the union wants a change in holiday staffing in which fewer employees work but are paid more money.
The battle will start after state lawmakers pass legislation, expected within days, that would increase state subsidies for mass transit, sending about $55 million more to Port Authority this year. The agency receives about $135 million from the state.
The state's plan would require the county to pay more of Port Authority's annual budget in exchange for receiving the higher state subsidy. The county pays up to $25 million. Onorato anticipates the proposal would increase the amount to between $30 million and $35 million.
Onorato wants to pay the county's entire transit payment from the new taxes. He plans to send a proposal to county council in mid- to late-August and anticipates public hearings on the tax proposals. A final vote likely would happen in the fall.
The tax revenue would come from a 10 percent tax on poured alcoholic drinks and a $2-per-vehicle tax on rental cars.
Kevin Joyce, who owns The Carlton, Downtown, and chairs the Pennsylvania Restaurant Association, led a successful fight four years ago against then-Mayor Tom Murphy's plan to enact a drink tax in Pittsburgh.
"The rationale that public transit should be wholly funded on the backs of the hospitality community is ludicrous," Joyce said. "Everybody takes public transit. Why wouldn't all businesses be taxed equally?"
Port Authority overcame an $80 million deficit by slashing service and jobs, scaling back managers' benefits and exhausting a reserve fund meant for purchasing vehicles. Authority CEO Steve Bland supports Onorato's call to cut more costs but said talks would have to occur to ensure enough cash flowed to the agency to keep it running during labor negotiations.
"I have no issue with the conditions," Bland said. "If everyone's going to hold their money, at some point we won't be able to pay employees and vendors and everything's going to shut down. So, I think we need to have a three-way conversation with the county and state."
Jim Ritchie can be reached at jritchie@tribweb.com or (412) 320-7933.
www.pittsburghlive.com
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, July 13, 2007
The Port Authority will not get any money from proposed taxes on alcoholic drinks and rental cars until it cuts labor costs further, Allegheny County Chief Executive Dan Onorato said Thursday.
Onorato might hold revenue generated by the proposed taxes until after the transit agency reaches a labor contract that satisfies terms he intends to propose to County Council.
"We can put any strings on them we want," said Onorato, who declined to specify his conditions. "We're not required to give them the money."
The contract for nearly 5,000 current and retired Port Authority drivers and mechanics represented by the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 85 expires in June 2008.
"If I send this bill to council, the bill will include language that Port Authority does not get a penny more of revenue until they fix the cost structure over there," Onorato said. "I mean, fixing the benefit cost structure of the unions and for nonunion employees."
Labor costs, which include rising health care expenses, represent 75 percent of Port Authority's $325.1 million budget. Onorato's assault on those benefits has the agency's largest union preparing for a fight.
Negotiations have to be give-and-take, said union President Pat McMahon. The union is not willing to give up health care benefits it fought for years to win, he said.
"If it means us paying more in health care, there's things I'd like in return for that," McMahon said.
For example, the union wants a change in holiday staffing in which fewer employees work but are paid more money.
The battle will start after state lawmakers pass legislation, expected within days, that would increase state subsidies for mass transit, sending about $55 million more to Port Authority this year. The agency receives about $135 million from the state.
The state's plan would require the county to pay more of Port Authority's annual budget in exchange for receiving the higher state subsidy. The county pays up to $25 million. Onorato anticipates the proposal would increase the amount to between $30 million and $35 million.
Onorato wants to pay the county's entire transit payment from the new taxes. He plans to send a proposal to county council in mid- to late-August and anticipates public hearings on the tax proposals. A final vote likely would happen in the fall.
The tax revenue would come from a 10 percent tax on poured alcoholic drinks and a $2-per-vehicle tax on rental cars.
Kevin Joyce, who owns The Carlton, Downtown, and chairs the Pennsylvania Restaurant Association, led a successful fight four years ago against then-Mayor Tom Murphy's plan to enact a drink tax in Pittsburgh.
"The rationale that public transit should be wholly funded on the backs of the hospitality community is ludicrous," Joyce said. "Everybody takes public transit. Why wouldn't all businesses be taxed equally?"
Port Authority overcame an $80 million deficit by slashing service and jobs, scaling back managers' benefits and exhausting a reserve fund meant for purchasing vehicles. Authority CEO Steve Bland supports Onorato's call to cut more costs but said talks would have to occur to ensure enough cash flowed to the agency to keep it running during labor negotiations.
"I have no issue with the conditions," Bland said. "If everyone's going to hold their money, at some point we won't be able to pay employees and vendors and everything's going to shut down. So, I think we need to have a three-way conversation with the county and state."
Jim Ritchie can be reached at jritchie@tribweb.com or (412) 320-7933.
www.pittsburghlive.com
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Message from Ron Paul
July 03, 2007
After an airport rally in Arizona recently, a tall black man in an Obama shirt came up to shake my hand. He said he had stopped to listen, stayed to learn, and now wanted a Ron Paul shirt. And sure enough, when I saw him again, he was wearing one.
Diversity is much talked about these days, for purposes of government enhancement, but its reality is rare. However, I've seen it—everyday, in our campaign.
Young people, middle-aged people, seniors, whites, blacks, Hispanics, new citizens, old-line families, Republicans in suits and ties, hippies, home-schoolers, high-schoolers, homemakers, small business people, workers and capitalists, all united in their love for country and Constitution.
As my great mentor Ludwig von Mises showed, government meddling in the economy creates conflict, as special-interest groups seek to rip us off through big government. The voluntarism of the free market, on the other hand, brings social cooperation and peace. That's why this campaign is a showcase for the real unity-in-diversity that is freedom.
Of course, the number of young people continues to thrill me. When I ask them how they got interested, they usually mention the Constitution. Old-style permissive parenting held that kids should do as they wanted, but kids want and need rules, and they know that government needs them too. Thus our Constitution—the few, good rules for a society of liberty, and for the social and international peace that we all want.
Two other notes: conservative talkshow host Michael Smerconish told me he has changed his mind on the war, and now agrees with us. And a Republican county chairman in South Carolina said I am unwelcome in his county because of my position on the war. He will help all other candidates, but not me.
But just as the Iowa exclusion didn't work—we had more people, and far more enthusiastic people, than the official event--so this man will not be successful.
You can help make sure of that, with your generous donation (https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/) to this campaign. We run on a comparative shoestring, and that has its advantages against the lumbering dinosaur operations of our opponents. We can be nimble and quick. But not without your help. I'd be so grateful for your contribution.
Warmest regards,
Ron Paul
www.ronpaul2008.com
After an airport rally in Arizona recently, a tall black man in an Obama shirt came up to shake my hand. He said he had stopped to listen, stayed to learn, and now wanted a Ron Paul shirt. And sure enough, when I saw him again, he was wearing one.
Diversity is much talked about these days, for purposes of government enhancement, but its reality is rare. However, I've seen it—everyday, in our campaign.
Young people, middle-aged people, seniors, whites, blacks, Hispanics, new citizens, old-line families, Republicans in suits and ties, hippies, home-schoolers, high-schoolers, homemakers, small business people, workers and capitalists, all united in their love for country and Constitution.
As my great mentor Ludwig von Mises showed, government meddling in the economy creates conflict, as special-interest groups seek to rip us off through big government. The voluntarism of the free market, on the other hand, brings social cooperation and peace. That's why this campaign is a showcase for the real unity-in-diversity that is freedom.
Of course, the number of young people continues to thrill me. When I ask them how they got interested, they usually mention the Constitution. Old-style permissive parenting held that kids should do as they wanted, but kids want and need rules, and they know that government needs them too. Thus our Constitution—the few, good rules for a society of liberty, and for the social and international peace that we all want.
Two other notes: conservative talkshow host Michael Smerconish told me he has changed his mind on the war, and now agrees with us. And a Republican county chairman in South Carolina said I am unwelcome in his county because of my position on the war. He will help all other candidates, but not me.
But just as the Iowa exclusion didn't work—we had more people, and far more enthusiastic people, than the official event--so this man will not be successful.
You can help make sure of that, with your generous donation (https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/) to this campaign. We run on a comparative shoestring, and that has its advantages against the lumbering dinosaur operations of our opponents. We can be nimble and quick. But not without your help. I'd be so grateful for your contribution.
Warmest regards,
Ron Paul
www.ronpaul2008.com
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Good use of taxpayers money?
Federal Government Sends Check to Each Major Party for $16,356,000 to Pay for National Conventions
July 2nd, 2007
On June 26, the Federal Election Commission authorized the U.S. Treasury to send a check for $16,356,000 to the Democratic Party, and another such check in the same amount to the Republican Party. This money is to be used for each major party’s national convention next year. Thanks to Tom Jones for this news.
www.ballot-access.org
July 2nd, 2007
On June 26, the Federal Election Commission authorized the U.S. Treasury to send a check for $16,356,000 to the Democratic Party, and another such check in the same amount to the Republican Party. This money is to be used for each major party’s national convention next year. Thanks to Tom Jones for this news.
www.ballot-access.org
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Ron Paul Speaks to 1,000 in Iowa
June 30, 2007
DES MOINES, IOWA – Presidential candidate Ron Paul held a rally today celebrating life and liberty at the Hy-Vee Hall in Des Moines, Iowa. The event was held immediately after and next door to a Republican candidates forum sponsored by the Iowa Christian Alliance and Iowans for Tax Relief.
Dr. Paul was the only GOP candidate excluded from the forum, so his campaign organized an event of its own. Despite being planned in less than a week, Dr. Paul's event singlehandedly outdrew the other forum and its six participating candidates by several hundred attendees.
"Today, Ron Paul demonstrated how deeply his message of freedom and limited government is resonating across the nation," said campaign manager Lew Moore.
Dr. Paul, addressing a packed room, received thunderous applause many times and as well as several standing ovations. Observers believe that this event was the biggest rally for a Republican candidate in Iowa during this campaign cycle.
"Ron Paul has generated more grassroots excitement and support than any other candidate in the race," continued Moore. "The campaign is building on this momentum around the country as we drive toward the nomination."
www.ronpaul2008.com
DES MOINES, IOWA – Presidential candidate Ron Paul held a rally today celebrating life and liberty at the Hy-Vee Hall in Des Moines, Iowa. The event was held immediately after and next door to a Republican candidates forum sponsored by the Iowa Christian Alliance and Iowans for Tax Relief.
Dr. Paul was the only GOP candidate excluded from the forum, so his campaign organized an event of its own. Despite being planned in less than a week, Dr. Paul's event singlehandedly outdrew the other forum and its six participating candidates by several hundred attendees.
"Today, Ron Paul demonstrated how deeply his message of freedom and limited government is resonating across the nation," said campaign manager Lew Moore.
Dr. Paul, addressing a packed room, received thunderous applause many times and as well as several standing ovations. Observers believe that this event was the biggest rally for a Republican candidate in Iowa during this campaign cycle.
"Ron Paul has generated more grassroots excitement and support than any other candidate in the race," continued Moore. "The campaign is building on this momentum around the country as we drive toward the nomination."
www.ronpaul2008.com
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Campaign finance ruling: Liberty wins one
Good editorial report t=by the Pittsburgh Tribune Review
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
What is our condition of liberty when the chief justice of the United States is impelled to say this in defense of free speech?
"Discussion of issues cannot be suppressed simply because the issues also may be pertinent in an election. Where the First Amendment is implicated, the tie goes to the speaker, not the censor," wrote John Roberts.
The U.S. Supreme Court, 5-4, Monday struck down application of a portion of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. The court ruled Wisconsin Right to Life should have been permitted to run TV and radio issue ads paid with corporate dollars within 60 days of the general election.
In 2004, the group asked voters to contact Wisconsin U.S. Sens. Russ Feingold, running for re-election, and Herb Kohl, who was not, and urge them to refrain from filibustering President Bush's judicial nominees.
The court was right -- but incompletely.
How elected officials treat issues has a direct impact on voters; issues ads and electioneering ads are not constitutionally different. Justice Antonin Scalia could not condone trying to draw impossible distinctions; he found it ironic that a law to muzzle big corporations and unions hurt a small advocacy group.
In sum, the supposed "corrupting" influence of big money resulted in a law that directly undermined the people's right to speak collectively.
The censor lost this case. But he never rests.
www.pittsburghlive.com
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
What is our condition of liberty when the chief justice of the United States is impelled to say this in defense of free speech?
"Discussion of issues cannot be suppressed simply because the issues also may be pertinent in an election. Where the First Amendment is implicated, the tie goes to the speaker, not the censor," wrote John Roberts.
The U.S. Supreme Court, 5-4, Monday struck down application of a portion of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. The court ruled Wisconsin Right to Life should have been permitted to run TV and radio issue ads paid with corporate dollars within 60 days of the general election.
In 2004, the group asked voters to contact Wisconsin U.S. Sens. Russ Feingold, running for re-election, and Herb Kohl, who was not, and urge them to refrain from filibustering President Bush's judicial nominees.
The court was right -- but incompletely.
How elected officials treat issues has a direct impact on voters; issues ads and electioneering ads are not constitutionally different. Justice Antonin Scalia could not condone trying to draw impossible distinctions; he found it ironic that a law to muzzle big corporations and unions hurt a small advocacy group.
In sum, the supposed "corrupting" influence of big money resulted in a law that directly undermined the people's right to speak collectively.
The censor lost this case. But he never rests.
www.pittsburghlive.com
Monday, June 18, 2007
Money system meeting CANCELED!!!
THIS HAS BEEN CANCELED.
Come and learn from a seasoned researcher on the subject
June 19th at 6:15 PM
At the VFW Sharon Post 439 East State Street Sharon PA 16146
Come learn the truth about our money system from Mickey Paoletta
www.mickeyonbanking.org
Come and learn from a seasoned researcher on the subject
June 19th at 6:15 PM
At the VFW Sharon Post 439 East State Street Sharon PA 16146
Come learn the truth about our money system from Mickey Paoletta
www.mickeyonbanking.org
Senate puts off smoking ban bill amid disagreements
6/18/2007, 5:31 p.m. EDT
The Associated Press
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — The state Senate delayed consideration of a broad ban on smoking in public and nearly every workplace until next week after Republicans were unable to agree on a set of exemptions, a top GOP senator said Monday.
Republicans, who control the Senate 29-21, have worked behind closed doors to secure majority support for a single amendment that would create multiple exemptions in the smoking ban legislation.
As currently drafted, that legislation would ban smoking in just about every public space and workplace in Pennsylvania, including casinos, restaurants, bars, sports arenas and private clubs. Senators have been pressed by owners of casinos, clubs and bars for exemptions.
But Republicans have been unable to achieve broad support for any of the exemptions, said Sen. Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson, the chamber's president pro tempore.
The smoking-ban bill has advanced farther than any other legislation of its kind in Pennsylvania. Twenty-seven other states have approved a ban of some sort.
Any bill must also pass the House, where several similar bills have been introduced. Gov. Ed Rendell has said he supports the broadest ban.
www.pennlive.com
www.grassrootspa.com
The Associated Press
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — The state Senate delayed consideration of a broad ban on smoking in public and nearly every workplace until next week after Republicans were unable to agree on a set of exemptions, a top GOP senator said Monday.
Republicans, who control the Senate 29-21, have worked behind closed doors to secure majority support for a single amendment that would create multiple exemptions in the smoking ban legislation.
As currently drafted, that legislation would ban smoking in just about every public space and workplace in Pennsylvania, including casinos, restaurants, bars, sports arenas and private clubs. Senators have been pressed by owners of casinos, clubs and bars for exemptions.
But Republicans have been unable to achieve broad support for any of the exemptions, said Sen. Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson, the chamber's president pro tempore.
The smoking-ban bill has advanced farther than any other legislation of its kind in Pennsylvania. Twenty-seven other states have approved a ban of some sort.
Any bill must also pass the House, where several similar bills have been introduced. Gov. Ed Rendell has said he supports the broadest ban.
www.pennlive.com
www.grassrootspa.com
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Presidential candidate Ron Paul drawing diverse crowds
By Mike Wereschagin
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, June 17, 2007
The size of the crowd wasn't remarkable, especially in terms of a presidential campaign.
What struck the candidate, though, as he faced the 300 or so people packed into a small New Hampshire restaurant last month, was the diversity of the crowd.
"Young and old, hippie types and business types, Republicans and Democrats and independents, anarchists, people who hate the IRS and the Federal Reserve," said Ron Paul, a Green Tree native, Dormont High School alumnus and Republican congressman from Texas' Gulf coast.
"Here I am, defending medical marijuana, and I've never even seen anyone smoke marijuana."
Paul's candidacy is as unlikely as the coalition it attracts. Just about everyone can find something to agree with in his platform, but few agree with it all. He supports an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, as well as dismantling much of the federal government -- from the U.S. Department of Education to the Internal Revenue Service. He wants to end corporate welfare and farm subsidies, and sever all U.S. ties with the United Nations.
"Government is supposed to be there to protect property and protect privacy," said Paul, 71. As he begins expounding on the central tenet of his political life, his words tumble out faster, but his voice stays even and friendly. "We have done almost everything wrong, and that has to be reversed."
If it's not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it ought not to be federal law, Paul said. That's what drove him into politics in the first place -- what he saw as congressional abandonment of constitutional principles, he said.
"Everybody knows he's not going to be the nominee, or even make a decent showing," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. "But politics is partly about the power of ideas."
Loyal supporters
Paul's statements have earned him a passionate following. When a Michigan GOP official tried to keep Paul out of the party's debates, he received so many angry phone calls, he had to change his home phone number, said Robert Bluey, director of the Heritage Foundation's Center for Media and Politics.
Despite polling below 2 percent in scientific polls -- if the polls even register his candidacy at all -- Paul is among the most-watched candidates on Web sites such as YouTube. He routinely wins unscientific, online polls.
Videos featuring Paul on the Web site YouTube.com have had 1.1 million hits. Overall, Paul is second only to U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., whose videos have been seen about 3 million times, according to the Web site Techpresident.com, which tracks candidates' online presence.
"There's this very loyal following, but I just wonder ... can you count on them to vote in the New Hampshire primary? Do they even know how to organize in the Iowa caucuses?" Bluey said.
Green Tree beginnings
Paul formed most of his ideas after he left Green Tree, in 1953, for Gettysburg College. One of five brothers, Paul grew up on his family's dairy farm and excelled academically and athletically at Dormont High School, which since has been folded into the Keystone Oaks School District. During his senior year, Paul lettered in track and was a National Honor Society member.
"He was a marvelous sprinter," said former teammate Paul Laughlin, 70, of Mt. Lebanon. But for a bad knee injury his sophomore year, Paul likely would have been a star football player, too, Laughlin said. Still, Paul won a state track championship -- the 220-yard dash -- during his junior year, said Laughlin, who graduated a year after Paul, in the same class as Paul's future wife, Carol Wells.
"I don't know that he ever had a cross word with anybody," Laughlin said. Paul was elected student council president his senior year, and the class voted him Friendliest and Best All-Around, according to The Torch, the school's yearbook. "I always thought that was quite a thing, for someone from Dormont to run for president of the United States."
Laughlin said he has plenty of political differences with his old classmate.
"His position on the war is my position, totally," Laughlin said, but the two disagree on things like Social Security -- Laughlin likes it, Paul does not. "Like it or not, there's a lot of good things that the government does."
During Paul's senior year at Gettysburg College, in 1957, he and Wells married. After graduating with a bachelor's degree in biology, Paul enrolled in Duke University School of Medicine, graduating in 1961. He served for three years as a flight surgeon in the Air Force, then moved to Texas in 1968 and began practicing as an obstetrician/gynecologist.
'Dr. No' takes office
After President Nixon abandoned the gold standard -- the economic model that backs the value of dollars with an equal worth of gold -- and Paul grew frustrated with what he saw as a disparity between the Constitution and federal laws being passed, he ran for Congress.
He first filled the unexpired term of another congressman in 1976 and lost re-election, but regained the seat in 1979. He held it until 1985, when he decided to return to medicine. But in 1996 -- again becoming fed up with the state of the union -- he regained his seat, and his district abutted the one represented by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.
DeLay earned the nickname "The Hammer" for his enforcement of party discipline. Paul, by contrast, was dubbed "Dr. No" for his opposition to any bill he deemed unconstitutional.
"At times, it was frustrating that he wouldn't vote with us. At the time, though, you always understand where he's coming from," DeLay said.
The practice of using earmarks -- federal grants for projects in congressional districts -- to secure support on certain bills never worked for Paul. His opposition to most federal funding was so uniform that he refused to use federal grants to help pay for the college educations of his five children. Despite representing one of the most hurricane-prone areas in the nation, Paul opposes the National Flood Insurance Program.
"It's amazing to me" that voters keep re-electing Paul, said Dude Payne, a Democratic county commissioner in Brazoria County, where Paul lives. Paul's biggest asset -- besides his slogan, "The Taxpayer's Best Friend" -- probably is his consistency, said Payne, who pointed out that even after the controversial 2003 Texas redistricting added more Democratic voters to Paul's district, he beat a Democrat with about 60 percent of the vote.
"I don't think anybody can beat him," Payne said. "He pretty much votes no on any kind of pork."
Presidential ambitions
Paul ran for president in 1988, on the Libertarian ticket, and attracted about 432,000 votes -- less than 0.5 percent.
"It was worthwhile, but it wasn't all that productive, compared to what you can do in a major party," Paul said.
He's running this year on a platform that includes military nonintervention and withdrawing from the U.N. Paul said the nation's foreign relations should be based on trade, but he has opposed trade treaties such as the North American Free Trade Agreement because he said they help select corporations at the expense of free trade.
"We're building a lot of enemies around the world," Paul said.
His comments on the Iraq War and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks have attracted the most attention.
During the second Republican debate, in South Carolina in May, Paul paraphrased al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, saying terrorists attacked the United States because of the U.S. military presence in the Middle East. Fellow candidate and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani sharply rebuked him and demanded an apology, drawing applause from the crowd.
When asked how he'd handle the war if he won the election, Paul said: "I'd come home. I'd just get out of there. The war's about to spread into Iran, and I don't want that to happen."
Paul admits to being a long shot. "I don't deceive myself," he said. His hope is that once people hear him and let his statements sink in, they'll come around to his way of thinking.
After hearing about Paul's spat with Giuliani during the debate, Laughlin at first thought, "Oh, you really put your foot in your mouth there."
"But then, as you get to think about it -- not that there's any justification for what they did -- but that's what (al-Qaida members) think," he said. "That's why they attacked us and didn't attack Sweden."
Laughlin said he's enjoyed watching Paul run this race, just as he and his classmates used to enjoy watching him sprint in their youth.
"I wish him well," Laughlin said. "But I don't think I'd vote for him."
About Ronald Ernest Paul
Age: 71
Born: Green Tree
Residence: Lake Jackson, Texas, about 50 miles south of Houston
Family: Married to Carol; children Ronald, Lori, Rand, Robert and Joy.
Education: Graduated from Dormont High School in 1953; earned bachelor's degree in biology in 1957 at Gettysburg College; graduated from Duke University School of Medicine in 1961.
Political career: Filled a congressman's unexpired term in 1976; won 1978 election and served from 1979 to 1985; returned to medicine; then elected in 1996 to the seat he holds today.
Notable: Nicknamed "Dr. No" by his colleagues in the House of Representatives, Paul said he has never voted for higher taxes, an unbalanced budget, increased congressional pay, Internet regulations or gun control, and he has declined to participate in the Congressional pension program.
In his own words
On the two-party system: "I think it's anti-democratic in that it's hard (for third parties) to get on the ballot. It's hard to compete. Then when the two parties blend together on policies, there's really monopoly control on issues."
On America's place in the world: "We have accepted this international/nationalistic type of foreign policy. I think if we set a good standard, we set an example where people would want to follow us and emulate us."
On the United Nations: "It usually serves the interests of supporting factions in different countries, so I don't see it as really facilitating things. Besides, it's done by force. We take taxes from poor people here and give it to rich people in poor countries."
On the 16th Amendment, which legalized income taxes: "I just want to get rid of it."
On government's role: "I want government to do a lot less."
On cutting domestic spending: "I'd cut everything from corporate welfare. That's a lot easier than going after poor people's welfare. Besides, corporate welfare is bigger than food stamps for people."
On education: "We have an educational problem, and yet we, as Republicans, go in and double the size of it with No Child Left Behind. And it doesn't improve education."
Mike Wereschagin can be reached at mwereschagin@tribweb.com or (412) 391-0927.
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, June 17, 2007
The size of the crowd wasn't remarkable, especially in terms of a presidential campaign.
What struck the candidate, though, as he faced the 300 or so people packed into a small New Hampshire restaurant last month, was the diversity of the crowd.
"Young and old, hippie types and business types, Republicans and Democrats and independents, anarchists, people who hate the IRS and the Federal Reserve," said Ron Paul, a Green Tree native, Dormont High School alumnus and Republican congressman from Texas' Gulf coast.
"Here I am, defending medical marijuana, and I've never even seen anyone smoke marijuana."
Paul's candidacy is as unlikely as the coalition it attracts. Just about everyone can find something to agree with in his platform, but few agree with it all. He supports an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, as well as dismantling much of the federal government -- from the U.S. Department of Education to the Internal Revenue Service. He wants to end corporate welfare and farm subsidies, and sever all U.S. ties with the United Nations.
"Government is supposed to be there to protect property and protect privacy," said Paul, 71. As he begins expounding on the central tenet of his political life, his words tumble out faster, but his voice stays even and friendly. "We have done almost everything wrong, and that has to be reversed."
If it's not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it ought not to be federal law, Paul said. That's what drove him into politics in the first place -- what he saw as congressional abandonment of constitutional principles, he said.
"Everybody knows he's not going to be the nominee, or even make a decent showing," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. "But politics is partly about the power of ideas."
Loyal supporters
Paul's statements have earned him a passionate following. When a Michigan GOP official tried to keep Paul out of the party's debates, he received so many angry phone calls, he had to change his home phone number, said Robert Bluey, director of the Heritage Foundation's Center for Media and Politics.
Despite polling below 2 percent in scientific polls -- if the polls even register his candidacy at all -- Paul is among the most-watched candidates on Web sites such as YouTube. He routinely wins unscientific, online polls.
Videos featuring Paul on the Web site YouTube.com have had 1.1 million hits. Overall, Paul is second only to U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., whose videos have been seen about 3 million times, according to the Web site Techpresident.com, which tracks candidates' online presence.
"There's this very loyal following, but I just wonder ... can you count on them to vote in the New Hampshire primary? Do they even know how to organize in the Iowa caucuses?" Bluey said.
Green Tree beginnings
Paul formed most of his ideas after he left Green Tree, in 1953, for Gettysburg College. One of five brothers, Paul grew up on his family's dairy farm and excelled academically and athletically at Dormont High School, which since has been folded into the Keystone Oaks School District. During his senior year, Paul lettered in track and was a National Honor Society member.
"He was a marvelous sprinter," said former teammate Paul Laughlin, 70, of Mt. Lebanon. But for a bad knee injury his sophomore year, Paul likely would have been a star football player, too, Laughlin said. Still, Paul won a state track championship -- the 220-yard dash -- during his junior year, said Laughlin, who graduated a year after Paul, in the same class as Paul's future wife, Carol Wells.
"I don't know that he ever had a cross word with anybody," Laughlin said. Paul was elected student council president his senior year, and the class voted him Friendliest and Best All-Around, according to The Torch, the school's yearbook. "I always thought that was quite a thing, for someone from Dormont to run for president of the United States."
Laughlin said he has plenty of political differences with his old classmate.
"His position on the war is my position, totally," Laughlin said, but the two disagree on things like Social Security -- Laughlin likes it, Paul does not. "Like it or not, there's a lot of good things that the government does."
During Paul's senior year at Gettysburg College, in 1957, he and Wells married. After graduating with a bachelor's degree in biology, Paul enrolled in Duke University School of Medicine, graduating in 1961. He served for three years as a flight surgeon in the Air Force, then moved to Texas in 1968 and began practicing as an obstetrician/gynecologist.
'Dr. No' takes office
After President Nixon abandoned the gold standard -- the economic model that backs the value of dollars with an equal worth of gold -- and Paul grew frustrated with what he saw as a disparity between the Constitution and federal laws being passed, he ran for Congress.
He first filled the unexpired term of another congressman in 1976 and lost re-election, but regained the seat in 1979. He held it until 1985, when he decided to return to medicine. But in 1996 -- again becoming fed up with the state of the union -- he regained his seat, and his district abutted the one represented by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.
DeLay earned the nickname "The Hammer" for his enforcement of party discipline. Paul, by contrast, was dubbed "Dr. No" for his opposition to any bill he deemed unconstitutional.
"At times, it was frustrating that he wouldn't vote with us. At the time, though, you always understand where he's coming from," DeLay said.
The practice of using earmarks -- federal grants for projects in congressional districts -- to secure support on certain bills never worked for Paul. His opposition to most federal funding was so uniform that he refused to use federal grants to help pay for the college educations of his five children. Despite representing one of the most hurricane-prone areas in the nation, Paul opposes the National Flood Insurance Program.
"It's amazing to me" that voters keep re-electing Paul, said Dude Payne, a Democratic county commissioner in Brazoria County, where Paul lives. Paul's biggest asset -- besides his slogan, "The Taxpayer's Best Friend" -- probably is his consistency, said Payne, who pointed out that even after the controversial 2003 Texas redistricting added more Democratic voters to Paul's district, he beat a Democrat with about 60 percent of the vote.
"I don't think anybody can beat him," Payne said. "He pretty much votes no on any kind of pork."
Presidential ambitions
Paul ran for president in 1988, on the Libertarian ticket, and attracted about 432,000 votes -- less than 0.5 percent.
"It was worthwhile, but it wasn't all that productive, compared to what you can do in a major party," Paul said.
He's running this year on a platform that includes military nonintervention and withdrawing from the U.N. Paul said the nation's foreign relations should be based on trade, but he has opposed trade treaties such as the North American Free Trade Agreement because he said they help select corporations at the expense of free trade.
"We're building a lot of enemies around the world," Paul said.
His comments on the Iraq War and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks have attracted the most attention.
During the second Republican debate, in South Carolina in May, Paul paraphrased al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, saying terrorists attacked the United States because of the U.S. military presence in the Middle East. Fellow candidate and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani sharply rebuked him and demanded an apology, drawing applause from the crowd.
When asked how he'd handle the war if he won the election, Paul said: "I'd come home. I'd just get out of there. The war's about to spread into Iran, and I don't want that to happen."
Paul admits to being a long shot. "I don't deceive myself," he said. His hope is that once people hear him and let his statements sink in, they'll come around to his way of thinking.
After hearing about Paul's spat with Giuliani during the debate, Laughlin at first thought, "Oh, you really put your foot in your mouth there."
"But then, as you get to think about it -- not that there's any justification for what they did -- but that's what (al-Qaida members) think," he said. "That's why they attacked us and didn't attack Sweden."
Laughlin said he's enjoyed watching Paul run this race, just as he and his classmates used to enjoy watching him sprint in their youth.
"I wish him well," Laughlin said. "But I don't think I'd vote for him."
About Ronald Ernest Paul
Age: 71
Born: Green Tree
Residence: Lake Jackson, Texas, about 50 miles south of Houston
Family: Married to Carol; children Ronald, Lori, Rand, Robert and Joy.
Education: Graduated from Dormont High School in 1953; earned bachelor's degree in biology in 1957 at Gettysburg College; graduated from Duke University School of Medicine in 1961.
Political career: Filled a congressman's unexpired term in 1976; won 1978 election and served from 1979 to 1985; returned to medicine; then elected in 1996 to the seat he holds today.
Notable: Nicknamed "Dr. No" by his colleagues in the House of Representatives, Paul said he has never voted for higher taxes, an unbalanced budget, increased congressional pay, Internet regulations or gun control, and he has declined to participate in the Congressional pension program.
In his own words
On the two-party system: "I think it's anti-democratic in that it's hard (for third parties) to get on the ballot. It's hard to compete. Then when the two parties blend together on policies, there's really monopoly control on issues."
On America's place in the world: "We have accepted this international/nationalistic type of foreign policy. I think if we set a good standard, we set an example where people would want to follow us and emulate us."
On the United Nations: "It usually serves the interests of supporting factions in different countries, so I don't see it as really facilitating things. Besides, it's done by force. We take taxes from poor people here and give it to rich people in poor countries."
On the 16th Amendment, which legalized income taxes: "I just want to get rid of it."
On government's role: "I want government to do a lot less."
On cutting domestic spending: "I'd cut everything from corporate welfare. That's a lot easier than going after poor people's welfare. Besides, corporate welfare is bigger than food stamps for people."
On education: "We have an educational problem, and yet we, as Republicans, go in and double the size of it with No Child Left Behind. And it doesn't improve education."
Mike Wereschagin can be reached at mwereschagin@tribweb.com or (412) 391-0927.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)