Note: alana (African Latino Asian Native American) community [add m for Mixed -bloods] alanams

The Fire This Time

By Kelly Hearn, AlterNet
Posted on December 10, 2004, Printed on December 14, 2004
http://www.alternet.org/story/20708/

From his office in New Mexico, the soft-spoken Puerto Rican American and award-winning environmental justice activist measures his words carefully when talking about the state of the Hispanic EJ movement, its health, its relationship with mainstream conservation groups and its potential to catalyze Latino political power in 21st century America.

He rewinds a decade to the seeds of the EJ movement, when minority groups first pressed predominantly white enviro groups to open their doors to diversity. Then he fields questions about a recent National Resources Defense Council report showing Latinos bear disproportionately heavy environmental costs in the United States.

Good work? Yes. Needed? Always.

But, in the end, says the founder and director of Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice, the nation's largest network of Hispanic environmental justice groups, the report is more confirmation than revelation. Go to http://www.sneej.org/

To the uninitiated, the report, issued in October and entitled Hidden Danger: Environmental Health Threats in the Latino Community, offers up alarming statistics: see http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/latino/contents.asp

• 
  Of nearly 38 million Latinos in the U.S., some 26 million reside in areas that violate federal air quality standards.
  
• 
  Nearly 90 percent of U.S. farm workers are Latino, and many of these laborers and their families are routinely exposed to toxic pesticides.
  
• 
  Non-Hispanic white children are half as likely as Latinos to have unsafe levels of lead in their blood.
  

Because membership information is hard to track, it's difficult to draw a bead on exact numbers. Clark Atlanta University professor Robert Bullard, a pioneering scholar in the EJ movement, produces a directory that in 2004 counted 400 people of color groups from 45 states and Puerto Rico. A third of those are Hispanic organizations, most in the Southwest and West. Moore's group has nearly 60 affiliate member groups in the U.S. and northern Mexico, counting, he says, thousands of individual members.

From opposing toxic dump sites and zoning ordinances to protesting conditions in north Mexican maquiladores, Latinos are perfecting the art of activism. A Latina group, Esperanza Peace and Justice Center in San Antonio, Texas scuttled PGA plans to build a golf course atop a major water aquifer. A group called the Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation sided with Arab-Americans to confront a polluting auto manufacturer in Michigan. And in Florida, claiming them ecologically wrongheaded and culturally insensitive, African American and Hispanic sugar cane workers blocked measures intended to restore the Everglades.

"The Hispanic environmental justice is alive and doing very well, at least in California," says Manuel Pastor, a professor at the University of California-Santa Cruz, adding that because of its demographic profile, California is a bellwether of future national trends.

Activists like Moore and U.S. Congresswoman Hilda Solis (D-CA), widely praised for her environmental work, say the environment is an all-inclusive hot-button issue for Latinos. And, they say, the increasingly interconnected and seasoned movement is producing street level power brokers and networks that could have wider spillover effects for political power.

"The main challenge is to gain and garnish power through training and collective strategies," says Moore, who teaches community organizing, power structure analysis, fundraising and leadership development to help disenfranchised groups sit at tables of power, whatever the issue.

Few hopes are pinned on the federal government. Though the EPA has an environmental justice program, observers say the payoffs have been sparse and will dwindle further in Bush's second term.

"If we gauged the successes of the environmental justice movement only by what the EPA was doing, then it would not be good," says Rep. Solis in a telephone interview from Washington. "We are going to see things get worse under Bush, things like the dismantling of superfund sites which oftentimes are in high minority communities."

Hispanic groups often find themselves at odds with Caucasian-led mainstream green groups seen as exclusivist and, at times, patronizing. Caesar Chavez and John Muir may have sung in the same key, but they've come to symbolize vastly different choirs. Observers say class and race are constant undercurrents in well-intentioned conservation groups, and minority activists – often adopting an in-your-face and into-the-streets kind of activism – often fall at odds with the conservation brand of tax-break activism.

Public ruptures began a decade ago when poor groups called mainstream green to the carpet, says Moore.

"A coalition of indigenous leaders, mostly in South America, first challenged U.S. groups saying, 'Who gave you the authority to represent our interest in things like debt for nature swaps?'" he says.

Shortly after, a group of African Americans calling themselves the Gulf Coast Tenants Leadership Development Project asked the groups to diversify their boards and staff. It also called for grassroots leaders throughout the country to meet with leaders of the environmental movement. Hispanic activists, including groups Moore represented, followed suit, approaching mainstream groups with their own concerns.

Years later, in 2002, class and racial differences boiled over when anti-immigration activists tried to wrest control of the Sierra Club's board of directors. Though the group's members soundly rejected the slate of candidates, relations with Hispanic groups were damaged. And wounds remain.

"My problem is when these big groups come in and say we are going to do what we want but we need your face," says Rep. Solis. "That doesn't do it for it for us."

However, she praised the Sierra Club for working to expose the conservative elements.

"What we need are mainstream groups that come to us not just when there's an election or ballot initiative," says Solis. "That's insulting. We need investments in our community. We need funding, grants and long-term programs that have a bilingual and cultural component. I have yet to see one mainstream organization that is doing this."

Adrianna Quintero, an author of the NRDC report, says shifting demographics means mainstreams groups should work to include ethnic groups. She said she hopes the report will help bridge gaps.

"One hope is that reports like this can help heal wounds and bring Latinos in the mainstream environment movement," she says.

Moore, however, says that while NRDC is well-intentioned and produces quality work, there is still a class divide. "Like the other mainstream groups, the NRDC is still primarily a white organization. ... And in the end, people need to remember that we speak for ourselves and decide who our leadership is," said Moore.

Camilla Feibelman of the Sierra Club's environmental justice program ticks off a list of Hispanic outreach programs, including Spanish language reports and a nationally syndicated environmental column published in Spanish-language newspapers.

"Since the minority groups wrote letters to us we have tried to broaden our focus," she says. "We have done things slowly because we wanted to make sure our work was what the people wanted us to be doing."

A spokesperson for the World Wildlife Fund, however, says her organization does not have an environmental justice section and does not typically monitor what Hispanic grassroots groups are doing.

In many ways, Latino EJ groups, thanks to language barriers, cultural disorientation and historical experience, are running uphill. New immigrants can't vote and a large chunk of the Latino-American population is under voting age. Many immigrants, having come from nations where political systems are corrupt, are distrustful of politics in the U.S.

They also face misconceptions, mainly that poor Latinos are not concerned with more "global" conservation issues.

Not true, say experts.

"There is tremendous polling information that says Latinos tend to vote for bonds for open space, tend to be more supportive of protecting mountains and coastal areas," says Pastor. "There is a lot of sympathy and recognition that this is important common ground."

There are examples of grassroots activism being parlayed into institutionalized political responses. Pastor points out that in California, a bevy of Latino leaders are pushing through major environmental legislation. And Solis, for her part, has sponsored federal environmental legislation and is pushing the idea of creating environmental enterprise zones.

And given demographic trends, Pastor says mainstream groups should wake up.

"Some ask what the mainstream environmental movement needs to do to incorporate these folks," he says. "But at least in California, the question is how does the mainstream movement make itself relevant to the changing political calculus?"

As for Moore, the fire that drives him seems to be sparked by a deep sense of urgency.

"For our community, environmentalism deals with things like cancer clusters and lupus clusters," he says. "So for us, environmental issues are life or death matters."

© 2004 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/20708/

D. G. Van Clief Jr., commissioner of the National Thoroughbred Association, said the NTRA will move forward with three goals: to make racing a Top 10 sport in America, grow handle to specific target levels, and to act as a convening authority.

In the closing panel discussion at the Symposium on Racing in Tucson, Ariz. Van Clief, along with NTRA president Greg Avioli and Keith Chamblin, senior vice president of marketing, discussed new developments and changes within the organization.

Van Clief spelled out the 2005 NTRA action plan, which will include moving ahead with their federal legislative agenda and increasing political action committee fundraising to $1 million per election cycle. In the 2003-2004 election cycle, the NTRA PAC raised $800,000 and disbursed $465,000 to candidates.

Other priorities in the action plan are setting television scheduling, securing future Breeders' Cup host sites and television contracts, and renewing sponsorship contracts.

Chamblin said the NTRA has extended its John Deere sponsorship through 2007 and a new sponsor will be announced next week.

Avioli said the legislative agenda for 2005 included protecting racing's unique form of wagering--the only legal form of Internet wagering-- and seeking tax relief measures.

"Protection of account wagering and simulcasting is top priority," Avioli said.

Avioli said the NTRA hopes to work as a convening authority through the Wagering System Task Force to address the "handle up, purses down" problem.

"We cant do things in terms of legislation and convening authority without the support of you," he told audience members. "We do not want to propose things we can not follow through on."

Van Clief made it clear that although promoting account wagering as a unique element of the sport to attract fans will play a vital role in their strategic plan of action, "account wagering alone won't do the trick," he said. "It's not the silver bullet."

Chamblin said the NTRA will move forward with a marketing plan with enhanced television coverage and an expanded focus on handicapping and fan education -- a mix of education and entertainment he coined "edutainment." The plan also includes a goal of securing one new seven-figure sponsor each year through 2010, and a focus on creating advertising and public service announcements to grow fan base.

Van Clief also called on audience members to renew their support through NTRA membership. Current membership contracts are set to expire in 2005.

Although he said the day-to-day challenges NTRA faces are "daunting," Van Clief added "we have a great deal of positive momentum to move us forward."

Copyright © 2004 The Blood-Horse, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

United States: Shelley Should Face Recall, But Not Yet Resignation

09 December 2004

This is a stock mkt press release but concentrate on the ‘brain trust’

SAN DIEGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 8, 2004--

Serial entrepreneur and Kintera CEO Harry Gruber -- who has founded and successfully taken public four biotech and two technology companies -- has created a unique environment featuring some of the most innovative minds serving the nonprofit sector. These executives comprise what Gruber calls the "Kintera Brain Trust."

"Kintera is a mission-focused organization, helping nonprofits reach and develop relationships with their donors and volunteers," said Gruber. "Just as Kintera builds community for our clients, we've built an environment within Kintera that has fostered a community of its own -- Kintera's Brain Trust. The members of our Brain Trust are among some of the most innovative and driven professionals in our sector. We boast a high retention rate of key executives because they are able to work with the same sense of purpose and with the same goals that they had when their companies were independent."

David Lawson, former president of Prospect Information Network (P!N(TM)) and now part of Kintera's Brain Trust, noted, "At Kintera, there's still an entrepreneurial climate where I can work alongside some of the brightest and most forward-thinking people in the industry. I'm able to continue the mission of P!N, while contributing to Kintera's overall growth objectives." P!N was acquired by Kintera in early 2004.

"I was so impressed with Harry Gruber and his vision for Kintera that after our company was acquired by Kintera in 2003, I helped to recruit the Carol/Trevelyan Strategy Group into the Kintera family," added Dean Hollander, founder of Involve, a web development firm.

Some of the members of the Kintera Brain Trust include:

David Lawson, Founder of Prospect Information Network (P!N)

David Lawson, a nationally recognized speaker at nonprofit seminars and conferences, founded Prospect Information Network (P!N) in 1997 to provide prospect identification services and software to the nonprofit community. He began his fundraising career as editor of The Foundation 500, and then established The Information Prospector that employed over 30 researchers and writers producing 300 in-depth financial and biographical profiles monthly. He created CDA/Investnet's (now Thomson Financial) Securities MATCH product, its real estate MATCH product and designed its FACT$ Viewer database. Lawson is a CASE Steuben Apple Award recipient and co-founder of the WOW! Institute, a training organization for fundraisers and philanthropists. Today Lawson is senior vice president of P!N.

Stuart Trevelyan and Dan Carol, Co-Founders of Carol/Trevelyan Strategy Group (CTSG)

CTSG, a service of Kintera since it was acquired in early 2004, is an Internet technology company specializing in melding offline and online strategies and tools to build membership, affinity and impact for hundreds of nonprofit organizations, political campaigns and unions, including the Natural Resources Defense Council, Amnesty International and the World Wildlife Fund. Stuart Trevelyan, who now serves as Kintera's senior vice president for client services, is a veteran of the 1992 Clinton-Gore "War Room" and provided research, analysis and whip counts to the President as a member of the White House Office of Legislative Affairs in 1993-1994.

Dan Carol served as research director for the Democratic National Committee during the 1992 presidential cycle, and built the first website for a U.S. Senator in 1994. He has served as a campaign consultant to a number of candidates and communications campaigns for clients that include MoveOn.org, the House Democratic Caucus, U.S. Senator Jon Corzine, The Turner Foundation and the National Education Association. Today, Carol is vice president of strategy at Kintera.

Julie Schwartz, Founder of Give Power

As founder of Give Power, Julie Schwartz invented and developed online solicitation technology that now serves as the basis for Kintera's signature Friends Asking Friends(R) software. Her background also includes vice president of the Arthritis Foundation, San Diego Chapter, as well as leadership roles in various national nonprofit health organizations including the American Heart Association and the March of Dimes. Schwartz sold her company to Kintera in 2000, and now serves as vice president, product management.

Lance and Dean Hollander, Founders of Involve Inc.

Dubbed the "other brothers" by Gruber, Lance and Dean Hollander co-founded Involve Inc. four years ago as a web development firm that specialized in providing Internet services that enhanced a brand's ability to build affinity with its audience. When Kintera acquired Involve Inc. in 2003, Dean Hollander joined Kintera as vice president, strategic partnerships; Lance Hollander was named vice president of creative services.

Previously, Lance Hollander was the executive producer and director of operations at U.S. Interactive, overseeing projects for AT&T, Comedy Central, Martha Stewart and Royal Caribbean, among others. Earlier, he served as senior producer for Modem Media, launching websites for Compaq and Hasbro. Dean Hollander -- an award-winning independent producer, writer and director -- brings to Kintera extensive entrepreneurial experience in forging and managing strategic partnerships.

Spencer Hayman, Founder of Little Tornadoes

Spencer Hayman founded Little Tornadoes in 1999, a web development and consulting firm whose clients included the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, American Association of Advertising Agencies and the March of Dimes. Prior to Little Tornadoes, he was the general manager of Grybauskas Beatrice, a New York advertising agency whose client roster included Cuervo Tequila, A&E Television Networks and the US Tennis Association. While at Grybauskas Beatrice, Hayman founded Blue Dingo Digital, the interactive arm of the agency that introduced clients such as Outback Steakhouse and Chef Boyardee to the Internet. After his company was acquired in 2003, Hayman was named vice president, northeast sales at Kintera.

Brandon Fix, Founder of Donation Depot

In 1999, Brandon Fix founded Donation Depot to provide high quality, cost-effective solutions to manage and receive online donations. The company, which was acquired by Kintera in 2003, has received numerous awards for its technology. Previously, Fix served as a technical consultant with the Boys and Girls Clubs, helping to raise millions of dollars, coordinating a multi-million dollar media campaign, and establishing the organization's web presence. A noted expert in the areas of online and workplace giving, Fix speaks at education and United Way conferences throughout North America. Today, Fix is Kintera's director of sales.

Tom Yeatts and Laura Kittleman, Co-Founders of VirtualSprockets

While at VirtualSprockets, this husband and wife team partnered with Gruber -- when he was running his firm INTERVU -- to help pioneer online political fundraising during John McCain's groundbreaking 2000 presidential campaign. After the election, VirtualSprockets' focus turned to nonprofits, prompting the duo to enhance their software platform and add marquee clients that included the Defenders of Wildlife, International Campaign for Tibet and the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation. At Kintera, Tom Yeatts and Laura Kittleman now serve as vice president of client services and director of engineering, respectively.

Elisabeth Familian, Founder of Masterplanner Media

Ask most individuals involved in the social scene of Los Angeles, New York and other major cities, and they will know Masterplanner -- a daily updated calendar of benefits, openings and special events for the upcoming year founded by Elisabeth Familian in 1986. Prior to joining Kintera in 2002 through its acquisition of Masterplanner Media, Familian was active in Los Angeles and New York as a member of numerous nonprofit and civic boards and committees, director of a family foundation, as well as involvement in fundraising activities for nonprofit organizations, including the Los Angeles Children's Museum, Music Center of Los Angeles, Phoenix House and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Familian, who serves as Kintera's vice president of Masterplanner publications, also founded giveadonation.com, developer of software for processing and fulfilling tribute and memorial donations online, which was also purchased by Kintera.

John Wang, Co-Founder of iPhenom Corporation

As co-founder and chief technology officer of iPhenom -- which Kintera purchased in 2002 -- John Wang built a company specializing in web software to manage and operate distributed enterprises. Prior to establishing iPhenom in 1999, Wang was an engineering manager and founding team member of Flashpoint Technology (a spin-off from Apple Computer), which developed and shipped cross-platform digital camera software used by Kodak, Hewlett Packard and Minolta. While at Apple Computer, Wang helped to architect QuickTime Image Capture, and was an original team member of Apple QuickTime Technology. Today, he is director of content management system (CMS) and architecture at Kintera.

About Kintera Inc.

Kintera(R) Inc. (Nasdaq:KNTA) is an innovative provider of software as a service that helps nonprofit organizations foster a powerful sense of community to achieve their mission. Kintera's Knowledge Interaction(TM) technology strengthens an organization's community by providing volunteers, members, donors and staff web-based tools to efficiently fulfill their tasks and share real-time data and information. The company's Internet innovations include its Friends Asking Friends(R) solicitation program and Kintera Sphere(TM), an enterprise-grade software system that provides content management, contact management, communication tools, commerce applications, community-building features and reporting functions. Kintera's technology is built on a unified database and payment processing engine. A web browser is all that is needed to use Kintera Sphere to help increase donations, reduce fundraising costs and build awareness and affinity for a cause. For more information, visit Kintera at www.kintera.com.

Kintera, Kintera Sphere, Friends Asking Friends and Knowledge Interaction are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Kintera, Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries.

Gaining political influence requires three main steps: fundraising, recruiting candidates and voting.

Muslims now realize that the United States' politics are about numbers: dollars you donate to your favorite candidates, or votes you can generate for them. Although the community's campaign fundraising efforts produced meager results, were able to mobilize the community to get out and vote.

Abdus Sattar Ghazali is the executive editor of American Muslim Perspective online magazine: amperspective.com.)

Article published Dec 5, 2004
No taxes paid on donations 'Friends committee' has raised money for Griffin

By MEG HECKMAN
Monitor staff http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20041205&Category=REPOSITORY&ArtNo=412050351&SectionCat=NEWS01&Template=printart
Executive Councilor Ruth Griffin says she hasn't paid taxes on the $80,000 she's raised over the last four years through the Friends of Ruth Griffin, a group that collects money she uses for personal expenses linked to her public life.

"That money is not considered mine for income," Griffin, a Republican from Portsmouth, said in a phone interview last week. "The special account is in my name . . . and I also have another account that's in the campaign."

Since 2000, lobbyists, family members, friends and elected officials have been giving Griffin $100 to $1,000 apiece to attend biannual receptions. Griffin says the proceeds are in an account bearing her name and that of her son. She makes withdrawals for lodging, clothing and meals.

Internal Revenue Service officials did not return phone calls Friday, and it's unknown if the federal government is investigating Griffin. But this kind of bookkeeping raises tax questions, according to one expert. Political campaigns and personal gifts are tax-exempt, but so-called friends committees such as Griffin's probably don't fall into either category, said Steve Black, a lawyer who teaches tax law at the Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord.

"If it's going through some type of committee . . . or group, then that doesn't look like my birthday gift," Black said. "If the money is not used for those exempt purposes, then it has to be income to somebody."

Griffin and other New Hampshire elected officials are already under local scrutiny for their fundraising habits. Just last week, former House speaker Gene Chandler gave up his leadership post after he was charged with violating legislative ethics codes by not reporting $64,000 raised through his own friends committee.

For four years, Chandler, a Republican from Bartlett, has thrown annual "corn roast galas" for friends, lobbyists, political operatives and elected officials who cut him checks for hundreds of dollars. A New Hampshire Public Radio report about the parties launched dual investigations this summer: one from the attorney general's office and one from the Legislative Ethics Committee.

The ethics committee wants to know whether Chandler violated three parts of the Legislature's ethics code. One charge accuses him of taking more than $250 from groups that might have House business; another alleges he used his public office to solicit the money. The third claims he failed to report gifts worth more than $50. Chandler has also consulted with accountants to determine whether he owes back taxes on the gifts.

Griffin must follow the same reporting laws as Chandler and the Legislature, but the Executive Council is outside the ethics committee's jurisdiction. Still, Griffin has been criticized for accepting money from individuals and groups who have business before the five-member council, which approves government appointments, contracts and highway projects.

Griffin, who has served 20 years on the Executive Council and was unopposed in her successful bid for re-election last month, maintains that her benefactors receive no special treatment. She says that, unlike Chandler's corn roasts, her events were not fundraisers.

"Those people that are making those accusations don't know me very well," she said. "People can't buy me for anything. I was not raised that way. I didn't have fundraisers. The Friends of Ruth Griffin had a reception for me."

Long history

Griffin's three receptions were held at the recently shut down Yoken's restaurant, the home of the giant neon whale that's become a Portsmouth landmark. In exchange for food and entertainment by a Scottish pipe band, guests wrote checks for as much as $1,000. Many were from neighbors and family members, but some of the biggest donations came from people doing - or trying to do - business with the state.

In 2000, 2002 and 2004, Griffin reported the total income of the receptions but didn't name individual donors. Shortly after Chandler's fundraising habits were publicized, Griffin filed a handwritten list of 144 donors who attended an April 22, 2004, fundraiser.

Some of the largest donations came from officials from New Hampshire dog tracks, which have been lobbying to legalize video gambling in the state. Thomas Carney, a Florida resident and co-owner of the Seabrook Dog Track, Rockingham Park and the Belmont Raceway, gave Griffin $1,000. Al Hart, president of the Belmont track, gave her $500. A lobbyist from New Hampshire Verizon gave $150. The president of C&J Trailways, which has a contract to use state-owned buses, gave $500.

According to state law, it's a felony to give or except a gift that might influence "action, decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, nomination or other exercise of discretion as a public servant."

Many around the State House say this makes them uncomfortable with some of Griffin's fundraising.

"Her constituents are asking, 'Is there a conflict of interest?'" said Rep. John DeJoie, a Concord Democrat and spokesman for House Democratic Leader Jim Craig. "Whenever someone has to ask themselves that, the public trust it lost."

Griffin said last week that these were her only testimonial receptions, but state records show she's participated in personal fundraisers since 1988. That year, she reported $4,350 from a testimonial the Republican State Committee held on behalf on the Executive Council in September 1987. The $21,750 profits were divided among the councilors. In 1992, she reported $7,500 - her share from two testimonials held for the entire Executive Council.

Why, then, has Chandler's fundraising resulted in ethics charges while Griffin's has not?

The two officeholders belong to separate branches of government. Chandler is part of the legislative branch, which polices itself through an ethics committee and ethics code that covers everything from financial disclosure to sexual harassment. But Griffin is part of the executive branch - and it has no similar policing policy.

A new ethics law takes effect Jan. 1, establishing a similar code for executive branch employees, but it doesn't pertain to the governor or the Executive Council. Sen. Sylvia Larsen, a Concord Democrat who sponsored the law, thinks that should change.

"We were taking things step by step," she said.

"It was so difficult to get a code of ethics into law, we felt that we needed to take a step towards including the state commissioners and executive branch employees. Then we can look at including all the elected officials."

Gov.-elect John Lynch, a Democrat who ran on a campaign promise of integrity, plans to craft an independent ethics commission for the executive branch. It might not be identical to the legislative ethics committee, he said, but it would have the same role of enforcing internal rules.

Lynch said he and his transition team are still sifting through the existing laws, so he wasn't sure yet whether the commission would have jurisdiction over the Executive Council. But he does expect all members of the executive branch to be ethically vigilant.

"I would certainly expect that all of our public officials, including the governor, including the Executive Council, be held to the highest standards of ethics and integrity," he said.

Griffin has no plans to change her fundraising habits, despite Chandler's troubles, Lynch's standards and lawmakers' plans.

"I just think this witch hunt has gone on long enough," she said. "I have done nothing wrong. . . . I reported my money."

(Senior editor Mark Travis contributed to this report.)

December 05, 2004 Pro-Euro campaign asks for foreign cash

CAMPAIGNERS for a “yes” vote in the forthcoming European Union referendum are seeking funds from a host of leading foreign and defence companies, an internal memorandum reveals, writes David Cracknell. The Britain in Europe (BiE) group is targeting a range of American, French and German firms to finance its campaign to sign up to the new EU constitution. Its “potential targets” include Telecom Italia, French defence companies Thales and EADS, American defence firms Boeing and Lockheed Martin, the Swiss bank UBS and the German Deutsche Bank. Other American or US-owned firms listed include management consultants Accenture, the pharmaceutical company Merck, and Merrill Lynch, the investment bank.

The disclosure suggests that BiE is struggling to raise financial support from British businesses. The memo reveals that the group has an income target of £600,000 next year — the last full year before the planned referendum in March 2006.

Under anti-sleaze legislation political parties or campaigners cannot take donations from foreign companies, but the practice is allowed if the firms have an operational base in Britain.

The memo from BiE, circulated to members of its board, urges them to help in the fundraising efforts, saying they “will play a vital role”. It adds: “A fundraising strategy for the campaign war chest will be launched in early 2005.”

Members of the group’s advisory board include former EU commissioners Neil Kinnock and Chris Patten, and John Monks, the former TUC leader.

Eurosceptic MPs last night expressed anger at the move even if it is perfectly legitimate. Kate Hoey, Labour MP for Vauxhall, said: “If the ‘yes’ campaign are taking cash from foreign corporations Labour voters will be outraged. It is simply not acceptable for supporters of the EU constitution to raise money in this way.”

Ian Davidson, Labour MP for Glasgow Pollok, said: “The idea that the ‘yes’ campaign will be funded by arms companies in this way seems unbelievable. Surely they don’t think they can get away with it? Having the debate manipulated won’t go down well with voters in my constituency. It calls into question the fairness of the whole referendum.”

But Lucy Powell, director of BiE, said: “The companies listed have given money to pro-European think tanks and that is why they have appeared on the list. I think you will find all of them employ British people. We haven’t pursued any of them yet.”

Yesterday Denis MacShane, the minister for Europe, sought to row back on comments that the government’s five economic tests for adopting the euro were “a bit of a red herring”.

His remarks last month to a group of university students had been interpreted as bringing him into conflict with Gordon Brown, the chancellor, but MacShane said any suggestion that he meant to question or criticise government policy was “barmy”.

Although the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law removed hundreds of millions of dollars of “soft money” from presidential and congressional campaigns, it raised individual contribution limits from $1,000 to $2,000 per election, effectively doubling the influence of wealthy donors and accelerating the use of “bundling” – the practice of pooling a large number of contributions from individuals and political action committees (PACs).

In the Bush campaign, bundlers were dubbed Pioneers if they raised at least $100,000 for the campaign and Rangers if they raised at least $200,000. Bush benefited from 327 Pioneers and 221 Rangers, records show.

Super Rangers were those who raised at least $300,000 for the Republican National Committee; 75 of the 105 Super Rangers had first been Rangers, meaning they each raised at least $500,000 in this election, for a total of at least $37.5 million for the Bush presidential bid.

Kerry benefited from bundlers, too, calling those who raised at least $50,000 “Co-Chairs” and those who raised at least $100,000 “Vice Chairs.” Kerry had 266 Vice Chairs and 298 Co-Chairs, records show. Seventeen “trustees” raised at least $250,000 each for the Democratic National Committee.

Nine of 10 Bush bundlers are associated with corporate interests, and many have a stake in decisions made by the federal government – appointments, regulatory actions, contracts and legislative proposals. These bundlers seek to elect like-minded candidates and like to receive credit from the candidates for their fundraising efforts. Seventy-four of Bush Rangers, Pioneers and Super Rangers were lobbyists – representing 13 percent of all his bundlers. Collectively, they raised at least $11 million.

Bush bundlers came disproportionately from Texas (66), Florida (55), New York (46), California (44), Virginia (33) and Ohio (30), while Kerry bundlers came disproportionately from California (158), New York (105), Massachusetts (57) and Washington, D.C. (49).

Bush’s leading bundlers came from the following industries: finance, insurance and real estate; lawyers and lobbyists; and energy and natural resources. Kerry’s leading bundlers came from the following industries: lawyers and lobbyists; finance, insurance and real estate; and communications and electronics.

“I fear that Bush’s exceptional reliance on about 550 money raisers makes him more accountable to his donors than average Americans,” said Frank Clemente, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch.

The strength of the bundling operations of Bush and Kerry show that new contribution limits and a strong bundling operation make private money look more attractive than the public funding system. And because candidates have not been provided with additional public funds to offset the higher contribution limit from private sources, this significantly reduces the attractiveness of the presidential public financing system and enhances the influence of private special interests in selecting our next president. Further, candidates who opt out of the public financing system can spend a lot more than candidates who play by the rules, giving a leg up to candidates who are best connected and limiting voter choices.

Two steps are needed, Public Citizen said. First, there should be more mandatory disclosure of the names, sources and amounts of all bundled fundraising above a minimum threshold. Second, sufficient public funds should be provided to offset the fundraising advantage that only a few candidates can achieve through bundling.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 2 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Republican Governors Association Executive Director Edward T. Tobin announced today he is leaving the RGA at the end of the year to return to the private sector. Tobin came to the RGA from the Microsoft Corporation in May of 2002. During his tenure, the RGA separated from the Republican National Committee (RNC) and established itself as an independent 527 committee.

"Ed Tobin led the transformation of the RGA from an arm of the RNC to one of the largest, most successful 527 committees in the nation," outgoing Chairman Bob Taft (Ohio.) said. "I have greatly enjoyed working with Ed and wish him continued success in his future endeavors." Taft also noted the successful launch and operation of the Republican Governors Public Policy Committee, an affiliated 501(c)4 organization, during Tobin's tenure.

"We were very fortunate to have Ed Tobin's leadership during a critical time in the RGA's history," said past Chairman Bill Owens (Colo.). "Ed's corporate experience, smarts and political acumen helped make the RGA a major political player on the national scene and increase our Republican gubernatorial majority. Ed is a good friend and I thank him for his tireless dedication to all of us Republican governors."

The RGA separated from the Republican National Committee in October of 2002 and has since become the largest non-federal 527 committee in the nation. During Tobin's three year tenure the RGA raised a record $51 million, establishing new fundraising records each year. In 2004, the RGA set a new one-year fundraising mark, raising over $18.3 million, more than $1 million over its previous one-year high. In the last three years, Republican candidates have won 31-of-51 gubernatorial contests and six of the nine Democratic incumbents who sought re-election were defeated.

After surprising pundits by retaining their majority in 2002, Republican candidates won three of four seats in 2003 -- winning California, Kentucky, and Mississippi -- for a net gain of two. In 2004, Republicans captured six of 11 contests, netting one additional seat. With RGA's strong support, Republicans won all three of the "battleground" contests in Missouri, Indiana and Washington. Republicans now hold a 29 to 21 advantage in governorships and 65 percent of the nation's population is governed by Republican Governors.

"Ed Tobin built the RGA into a strong, self-standing organization which provides indispensable support for Republican candidates for governor. We'll miss him, but he has left a tremendous legacy," said Governor Haley Barbour (Miss.).

"Ed Tobin will be missed but the legacy of his hard work continues. Today, Republicans occupy 29 governor's mansions thanks to Ed's hard work, leadership and commitment," said Ken Mehlman, campaign manager for Bush-Cheney 04.

Prior to joining the RGA, Tobin was deputy general counsel for corporate affairs at Microsoft Corporation, responsible for directing the company's federal, state and local government affairs, industry affairs, corporate philanthropy and community affairs activities. He joined Microsoft in March 2000 and was based at company headquarters in Redmond, Washington.

He was previously Vice President-Public Policy at US WEST, Inc., the former Baby Bell telecommunication company, responsible for coordinating its legislative, political and regulatory activities in its 14 state region and Washington, D.C.

Tobin also served for four years on the senior staff of former Republican Governor Bill Weld (Mass.), including two years as Chief Secretary. Tobin is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Duke University and graduated cum laude from the Harvard Law School.

"It has been a privilege to work with the Governors, the talented staff here and in the states, and with our diverse membership these past three years as RGA has grown and evolved and I'm proud of what we have accomplished together," said Tobin. "As I return to the private sector, I intend to remain an active, committed member of the RGA extended family."

The Daily Texan - State & Local
Issue: 10/22/04




PAC ordered to stop fundraising
By Nikki Buskey

A Republican fund-raising committee was forbidden from soliciting, accepting or spending any corporate funds until a hearing scheduled for just after the Nov. 2 election, according to a ruling made Wednesday by State District Judge Paul Davis Jr.

The lawsuit filed against the Associated Republicans of Texas, a political action committee, is the latest in a series of assaults on corporate money in Texas politics, including the indictment of three associates of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in September.

The issue at hand is the difference between federal and state campaign finance regulations and whether they apply to the PAC.

"The judge gave a decision that said we take corporate prohibition seriously," said Fred Lewis, president of the nonpartisan Campaigns for People, "And we're stopping it with [the PAC]."

The lawsuit, filed Oct. 18 by two Democratic candidates for the Texas Legislature against their opponents, argues that the soft money Republicans have received from the PACs taints the election process, because they are better able to subsidize legal expenses of their candidates.

Under dispute is a provision contained in federal election laws which states that a corporation or a trade advisory of corporations can give money for the administration financing of a PAC, but that it is illegal for unconnected PACs to give money to each other.

Misuse of corporate money in an election is a third-degree felony.

The PAC has extensively accounted for their corporate dollars and have only given candidates money from private donations, said Hector DeLeon, a lawyer for the Associated Republicans of Texas.

The case against the 30-year-old PAC was filed only two weeks before the election said Pat Robbins, a spokeswoman for the PAC.

"This is another frivolous lawsuit with no basis in fact," Robbins said. "What they can't do at the ballot box, they want to do in a court of law."

Democrats think PACs should have to adhere to federal law, which states that outside, or un-connected corporations that have not been involved in the creation of a PAC, cannot finance its administrations, Lewis said.

DeLeon said the Texas Election Code was updated in 1975 to allow corporations to "finance the establishment or administration of a general purpose political action committee." He said un-connected PACs are not mentioned anywhere in the Texas code.

Normally when different interpretations of law are challenged, judges turn to legislative history to make their decisions, said Cris Feldman, the lawyer representing the two Democrats.

"Every election lawyer knows that Texas law follows federal law," said Lewis. "Everyone should have known this issue was out there."

Robbins said Republicans were not the only ones who have used corporate money for administration, but Feldman insisted that this was not a partisan issue.

"This case is quickly closing the loophole that allows corporate financing in Texas," he said. http://www.dailytexanonline.com/news/2004/10/22/StateLocal/Pac-Ordered.To.Stop.Fundraising-777439.shtml

Opinion piece Stolen Honor: When Turnabout Isn't Fair Play

The word equity has been removed from the American political lexicon. What is good for the Democratic goose is not good for the Republican gander. While this issue plays out in nearly every aspect of the political game - 527s, FEC rulings, fundraising and ethics - it is best exhibited by the inequity in the mainstream media.

Recently, the Democratic National Committee filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission over the proposed airing of a news documentary titled "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal." The Sinclair Broadcasting Group, which has 62 television stations - some in important swing states - plans to air the news documentary in prime time before the November election. The film revolves around John Kerry and the events that took place in his life after his return from Vietnam. SBG has asked Kerry to join in a panel discussion about the content of the documentary but the Kerry campaign has responded negatively.

The DNC complaint contends that because the documentary's content deals exclusively with John Kerry's post-service anti-war actions it should be considered an "illegal in-kind contribution" to the Bush campaign. Of course this would mean one of two things. Either Kerry is embarrassed by the actions he took after his return from Vietnam and now recognizes that lying about his "Band of Brothers" before Congress was "a bad thing" or he is admitting that his anti-war protest days are a detriment to his current political ambitions. This is the quintessential definition of oxymoron. If John Kerry was proud of his anti-war protest participation why would a documentary spotlighting that very period of his life be so outrageous? If he isn't a political opportunist why would he be afraid of the truth about his past? To that end, why hasn't the good senator signed his Form 180? To say the least, the concocted transparency of candidate Kerry has been shattered by his protest of this issue. This further exposes the disingenuous political charlatan that lurks in this man's soul.

The story doesn't end there. 18 liberal US Senators have sent a letter to the FCC asking it to investigate whether or not SBG's plan is an improper use of public airwaves. I suppose it's more appropriate for the Liberals in Congress to champion Janet Jackson's breast than it is for them to champion the right of at least one honest media outlet to bring the facts to the American public. FCC Chairman Michael Powell has declined to take action because, by FCC rules, a program must first be aired before a complaint can be entertained.

Meanwhile, DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe said the company was acting as "a mouthpiece for the Republican Party" rather than a legitimate news outlet. "In this election cycle, [SBG] have put their money where their right-wing mouths are," he said. "Sinclair's owners aren't interested in news. They're interested in pro-Bush propaganda."

It continues to be incredible that McAuliffe and his gaggle of operatives persist on alleging there is a conservative bias in the media. One only has to look at the multitude of recent ethical encroachments by the mainstream media to invalidate his ridiculous contention. The admitted bias at The New York Times, the admitted opinion poll manipulation at The Los Angeles Times, the memo scandal at CBS News and now, ABC News being exposed for scrutinizing President Bush more harshly than candidate Kerry all point to a cadre of media liberalism. But then McAuliffe could stand in the middle of a hurricane at midnight and tell you it's high noon and sunny, and do so with a smile on his face. Such is his disregard for the truth.

Irony isn't far away. Michael Moore is feverishly working to have his crock-u-mentary, Fahrenheit 911, aired nationally on October 31st of this year, just two days before the election. Funny how we don't hear the charge "illegal in-kind contribution" coming from the Conservative side of the aisle even though 91 "facts" in Monsieur Moore's film have been discredited. Moore will probably succeed in getting his Goebbels inspired propaganda aired, albeit as a pay-per-view offering (wouldn't want to lose the profits on that now would you, Michael?).

It will be interesting to see if the FEC decides to rule on this issue now or whether they will wait until after the November elections as they saw fit to do on the matter of the 527s. If they choose to wait it can be assumed they either enjoy having their heads firmly planted in the sand or have absolutely no spine whatsoever. If they choose to act and strike out against the right of the American public to be informed of the truth then I guess we have our answer about the existence of the double standard in today's political arena. Either way, their decision will be telling.

----------

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and the managing editor for TheRant.us. His pieces are regularly featured in Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The O'Reilly Factor and numerous radio shows. His pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are periodically featured in The Washington Times as well as other national and international publications. He can be contacted at oped@therant.us

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.

October 26, 2004

Attorney General's PATRIOT Act campaign violated no anti-lobbying laws

By Daniel Pulliam
dpulliam@govexec.com

Attorney General John Ashcroft's $210,000 educational campaign on the merits of the 2001 PATRIOT Act did not violate federal anti-lobbying laws, Justice Department auditors concluded.

An investigation by Justice Inspector General Glenn A. Fine found that Ashcroft is immune from federal laws prohibiting political activity and that the department's efforts to educate the public about the law did not meet the "narrow category of agency communication," required to violate the Anti-Lobbying Act. The 1919 law generally prohibits federal employees from lobbying for or against legislation.

The PATRIOT Act, passed soon after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks with the intention of broadening crime fighters' ability to investigate terrorist activities, has received heavy criticism from civil rights groups, which say the law infringes on privacy rights. Justice officials, however, maintain that it is necessary to prevent another terrorist attack.

Ashcroft mounted a campaign in August 2003 to educate the public on the merits of the controversial law. His public relations campaign included making two tours spanning 27 states, setting up a Web site and issuing an order requiring U.S. Attorneys to contact congressional representatives and hold community meetings discussing the law. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO-05-95R), the promotional effort cost more than $210,000.

In response, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, D-Mich., accused Ashcroft of violating a federal law banning propaganda efforts by the executive branch and called for an investigation by the inspector general.

Conyers cited the Aug. 13, 2003 order requiring U.S. Attorneys to contact congressional representatives and conduct community meetings to discuss the law. The memo stated that the attorneys were to educate and influence any vote on the PATRIOT Act, which Conyers said violated federal law.

The inspector general found that Ashcroft did not violate anti-lobbying laws because as a political appointee, the attorney general is exempt from them. Fine, in an Oct. 22, 2004 letter to Conyers, said the national tours were not "purely partisan," and Ashcroft did not urge members of the public to contact their legislative representatives.

This document is located at http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1004/102604p1.htm

September 9, 2004

Panel criticizes insurance sales to military personnel

By Amy Klamper, CongressDaily

House Financial Services Committee members on Thursday criticized the continued sale of contractual mutual insurance policies to soldiers on military bases, noting those products have largely disappeared from the civilian market because of their costly fees and low value.

"It is an outrage that financial products that were found so disreputable that they disappeared from the civilian market 20 years ago have continued to survive on-post, by being pawned off on unsuspecting young service people as part of 'approved' savings and insurance plans," Rep. Max Burns, R-Ga., said in a statement. "In addition, we have far too many unscrupulous insurance companies using federal military property to dodge state insurance commissioners and sell overpriced policies with virtually no oversight."

Financial Services Chairman Michael Oxley, R-Ohio, said he does not support a complete ban on financial product sales on bases.

"But Republicans and Democrats in Congress can no longer pretend this is about a few bad apples," he told a panel of witnesses comprised of representatives of the life insurance industry, financial planners and experts, as well as an Army soldier who said he was a victim of an insurance scam.

Burns introduced legislation Thursday that would prevent the sale of questionable financial products on U.S. military installations, unveiling his bill during the hearing chaired by House Financial Services Capital Markets Subcommittee Chairman Richard Baker, R-La.

The proposal, one of a handful under the subcommittee's consideration, is aimed at protecting young and financially inexperienced military personnel from unethical sales tactics employed by some life insurance agents. His bill, dubbed the "Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act," would ban the sale of mutual fund contractual plans on military installations and ensure full regulation of life insurance and other financial products sold on military bases.

Frank Keating, president and chief executive officer of the American Council of Life Insurers, told the subcommittee that while he supports the spirit of Burns' legislation, the bill's description of contractual mutual funds is too broad and would prohibit "all kinds of insurance and annuities that have a variable element in them."

Keating also took issue with language in the bill that asks 50 state insurance regulators to implement new standards to protect military personnel from insurance sales misconduct, asserting the mandate is unnecessary and probably unwanted by regulators. He also said existing regulations have not been enforced well, leading to "cracks through which misbehavior has reportedly taken root." And, Keating said, it is important to remember that members of the military are mature enough to make their own decisions, and that while the environment in which those decisions are made differs from that of consumers in the civilian market, "an 18-year-old in this country is an adult."

This document is located at http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0904/090904cdpm2.htm

Download 0.55 Mb.

Share with your friends: