The eVote blog.
The eVote.CLOH.org site.
Deliberate.com.
As fit citizens, neighbors and running mates, we are tyranny fighters, water-game professionals, WPIAL and PIAA bound, wiki instigators, sports fans, liberty lovers, world travelers, non-credentialed Olympic photographers, UU netizens, church goers, open source boosters, school advocates, South Siders, retired and not, swim coaches, water polo players, ex-publishers and polar bear swimmers, N@.
THE PAY-JACKERS REPENT: But it's not enough - PittsburghLIVE.com
As expected, the Pennsylvania Senate followed the lead of the state House and Wednesday repealed its self-dealt and wholly unconstitutional summer pay raises. But the wound is not healed.
Folks like Majority Leader Chip Brightbill slobbered all over themselves yesterday trying to pick up the Oscar for Best Speech of Contrition in a Lead Pay-Jacking Role. 'We are here to correct a mistake,' the Lebanon County Republican said. 'As one of the people who exercised poor judgment, I would like to apologize.'
We hope there are some real and good Republicans out there who are ready to plug that 'poor judgment' line into campaign commercials and send the Chip Brightbills, Bob Jubelirers, Sam Smiths, John Perzels, Bill DeWeeses, Mike Veons and the rest of their ilk packing in the 2006 elections.
Republicans and Democrats, those who voted for the no-debate, middle-of-the-night pay-jacking -- and those who didn't but who then accepted the ill-gotten gains -- violated the public trust. No apology and no repeal can 'fix' things. All must go.
All must be driven from the positions of authority they abused.
The rejection of Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro and the pay-raise repeal are just the first of many, many battle victories in what will be a yearlong revolution to reclaim a Pennsylvania government that is of, by and for the people.
The fight is right. The fight is on. And the people will prevail.
1. Shea McKinney, Private CitizenBreak a leg folks.
2. Joan W. Stein, President & CEO – Accessibility Development Associates, Inc.
3. Dr. Robert Harper, Professor, Computer Science Department – Carnegie Mellon University
4. Tim Stevens, Chairman – Black Political Empowerment Project
5. Paul O’Hanlon, Esq., Disabilities Law Project
6. Audrey N. Glickman, Private Citizen
7. Suzanne Broughton, President, League of Women Voters of Greater Pittsburgh
8. Colleen Willison, Private Citizen
9. Richard King, Private Citizen
10. Dr. David Jefferson, Chair, California Secretary of State’s Voting Systems Technical Assessment and Advisory Board
11. Danny Sleator, Professor, Computer Science Department – Carnegie Mellon University
12. Mark Brentley, Sr., Member, Pittsburgh School Board; Host, Voter Education Program
13. Marybeth Kuznik Executive Director, Vote PA
14. Deborah Gouge, Private Citizen
15. Eugene Barton, President, PA Council of the Blind
16. Mark Rauterkus, Libertarian Party
17. Kathleen Paul, Private Citizen
18. Eugene Mariani, Private Citizen
19. Adrian Perrig, Private Citizen
20. Sam Gibson, Private Citizen
21. Gary S. Schermer, Private Citizen
22. Angela Yocham Private Citizen
23. Antoine Pearson, Private Citizen
24. Dan Taylor, Private Citizen
PoliticsPA Pay Raise Repealed Gov. Ed Rendell has signed the pay-raise repeal, ending a the legislature's four-month ordeal at the hands of outraged Pennsylvania voters. Earlier this afternoon, the state Senate voted 50-0, agreeing with the House to roll back the massively unpopular raises enacted in July for for lawmakers, judges and top state officials.
Subjected to intense public pressure to repeal the raises, which were enacted in the wee hours of July 7 without public hearings, the House and Senate had wrestled for more than a week over how to take back raises granted to state judges, who received them right away. The state Constitution bars cutting the salary of judges without cutting the pay “of all salaried officers of the commonwealth,” a provision designed to protect judicial independence.
Brightbill apology
Senate quotes
Representative Metcalfe spin
Scranton spin
Logan Spin
"Most debate about Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito has focused on his propensity to vote to overrule Roe v. Wade and the similarity between him and conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. But despite the superficial parallels between the two conservative, Italian-American Catholic jurists, it is important to recognize that Alito has a substantial libertarian dimension to his jurisprudence as well as a conservative one. In several key fields of law, he is more likely than Scalia and other conservatives to be skeptical of assertions of government power. More important, there is much in his record that should appeal to libertarians...
"While judges should not simply vote for whatever outcomes because they prefer them on policy grounds, a libertarian orientation helps sensitize jurists to the fact that the Constitution is meant to constrain government, not just empower electoral majorities, as some conservatives claim. Here Alito's libertarian streak and his differences with Scalia may have an impact.
"...Obviously, Alito is far from being an across-the-board libertarian. But there is much for libertarians to like in his record, more than in the case of Scalia. Liberals understandably have less reason to support Alito than libertarians do. But they should think seriously about whether they would rather have a conservative with a significant libertarian streak like Alito or a pro-government conservative who will be just as likely to overturn Roe, but less likely to vote to restrict government power over religious freedom, free speech, or immigration."
PennLive.com: NewsFlash - Panel sets stage for debate over lieutenant governor's selection Panel sets stage for debate over lieutenant governor's selection
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) A Senate panel Tuesday endorsed a bill that would allow gubernatorial candidates to pick their running mates rather than being paired with the choice of Republican and Democratic voters in the primary election.
The bill, forwarded 6-5 by the State Government Committee, could if approved change the political landscape in next year's gubernatorial election and focus new attention on gaffes by Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll.
In Beaver Falls, not everyone is angered by their legislator's lonely vote for a pay raiseOkay Republican Diven, then what's to say you won't switch back to being a D, if and when the state house leader, the Beaver Falls D, Veon, departs Harrisburg???
'He's one of the main reasons that I'm no longer a Democrat,' said Rep. Mike Diven, R-Brookline, who served four years as a House Democrat and then switched to the Republican Party this year.
'He's what's wrong with Harrisburg. The mentality he carries -- he's disconnected from people. It's his way or the highway on issues.'
AP Wire | 11/15/2005 | Opponents speak against Pittsburgh-area racetrack proposalsAmen.
'This site is so patently inappropriate for a variety of reasons that to approve this racetrack would be to destroy South Versailles Township,' said Joel Aaronson, an attorney hired by residents who don't want to see the Oak Park racetrack built near their homes.
Hay's hilltop (artist friend).Voter-verified paper ballots safeguard the integrity of elections. V-VPBs prevent inaccuracies and covert computer fraud while providing the secure basis for audits and recounts. Voters inspect and verify that the ballot accurately reflects their intention to vote, this is called 'verification'. Voters then place the paper ballots in the ballot box for counting. Audits of V-VPBs provide the best measure of accuracy for electronic voting in elections. In America, voting always occurs in privacy to prevent the historical problems of coercion and bribery in elections. Because we vote in the privacy of the voting booth, only the voter can verify that the official ballot is accurate. Because inaccuracies due to error or fraud in computer voting are covert, voter-verification of a permanent publicly observable official record (the paper ballot) is the essence of the intended safeguard of V-VPBs.Long term, the real solution is an OPEN SOURCE Software Solution.
A primer for a grass-roots campaign Kathryn Hens-Greco is not a candidate for the Pennsylvania Legislature, but she seems like many people I've encountered who are considering a run. A week ago, she received roughly 129,500 votes for the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, more than enough to become a judge.KHG ran in 2001 too. That was overlooked in the story, perhaps. They didn't start two years ago. They started six years ago, I imagine.
Ms. Hens-Greco hadn't been hand-picked by her party. She won a nomination through the Democratic primary without getting the party committee endorsement.
Penny-ante disagreement may hold up budget Tom Murphy deferred to the authority on other disputed budgetary issues. The authority wants 'to be the small dictators of this kingdom,' he said."This is a weird set of names to call as well. He mixes a "kingdom" mention with a "dictator" mention. I wonder who is going to own up to the facts that, we the people, want a democracy.
Friends,
The Pennsylvania state senate will vote soon, probably Mon., Nov. 21, on an eminent domain reform bill that could be a model for the nation. It's a good bill - an identical one already has passed the House - and needs all the support it can get. Now is the time to contact your state senator to express your support. Below is information on the bill. Of particular note, there currently are efforts afoot to exempt Philadelphia from the provisions in this bill, so contacting senators in that region is particularly important.
Background:
Senate Bill 881 is in the Senate Committee on Appropriations.
Opponents (such as Rep. Dan Frankle, D.) continue to try to defeat or weaken the bill.
This bill will not pass without your support. This legislation is the best chance Pennsylvanians have for real and significant eminent domain reform. If you want to protect your home or small business from eminent domain abuse, you must CALL OR EMAIL YOUR SENATORS TODAY and urge them to pass S.B. 881 without amendments that weaken its protections by creating loopholes that allow the abuse of eminent domain for private development to go unchecked.
An identical bill passed the PA House, H.B. 2054.
Members of the Pennsylvania Senate with email addresses
Phone numbers and contact information of those in the PA Senate.
Statement of the Institute for Justice in Support of Legislation To Protect Pennsylvania Home and Small Business Owners
The Institute for Justice is the nation’s leading advocate for home and business owners who are affected by the abuse of eminent domain for private development, and it represented Susette Kelo in the now infamous Supreme Court case Kelo v. City of New London. The Institute supports S.B. 881 and H.B. 2054 as written and opposes any amendments that will eliminate or weaken any of the protections they provide to home and small business owners.
In Kelo, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Constitution allows governments to take homes and businesses for potentially more profitable, higher-tax uses. In the aftermath of that decision, the defenders of eminent domain abuse in Pennsylvania have already begun desperate attempts to keep the power to take homes and businesses and turn them over to private developers. The beneficiaries of the virtually unrestricted use of eminent domain-local governments, developers, and planners-are frantically lobbying to prevent any attempt to diminish their power and have taken aim at SB 881 and HB 2054, two balanced bills that strike at the heart of eminent domain abuse.
The Bills Are a Thoughtful Response
Pennsylvania legislators have been holding hearings across the state regarding the abuse of eminent domain over the past several months. They’ve heard from people on both sides of the issue and the legislative responses are the result of these well-attended meetings. There’s a genuine consensus among many lawmakers -- that’s why so many have sponsored the bills.
The Bills Are Balanced and Appropriate
The bills are not radical -- they make certain that home and small business owners in this state know that they can keep what they’ve worked so hard to own.
Eminent domain will still be allowed for traditional public uses like roads, schools and post offices. Utilities and other public services will still be built. Urban communities remain able to clean up areas full of abandoned and dangerous properties, but under these bills blight designations are reserved for only those situations where there are real threats to public health and safety.
Economic Blight Amendments Must Be Defeated
Any attempt to include a concept of “economic blight” in the bills must be defeated. This will ultimately lead, as it does already, to the transfer of homes and businesses to developers who promise increased tax revenue and jobs. Communities would no longer be razed because some consultant considers them “economically undesirable.”
Economic blight cannot be a justification for eminent domain because that means no one’s home or business is safe -- any home can make more money as a luxury condominium and any small business can make more money as a big-box store. Under the bills, governments will no longer be able to take properties from private individuals and hand them over to wealthy, well-connected developers.
Pennsylvania Has a Horrible History of Eminent Domain Abuse
Between 1998 and 2002, the Institute for Justice found more than 10,000 abuses of eminent domain around the country and many of these were in Pennsylvania. Some continue, and new ones seem to be added every day:
Ardmore - City officials are trying to strip the historic downtown district of its unique character, in order to replace it with cookie-cutter mixed-use development. A charming, Main Line suburb along the old Pennsylvania Railroad, Ardmore’s quaint downtown business district is home to many locally owned small businesses passed through generation for over a century. A half-block of successful small businesses is slated to be demolished and replaced with mall stores, upscale apartments, and a large garage.
Pittsburgh - There are several horrible situations worth noting, but two stand out: H.J. Heinz used the Pittsburgh Urban Redevelopment Authority to bully the Kumer family and Pittsburgh Wool Company from its location, though three years later Heinz sold the property to a Cleveland developer for upscale apartments. Mayor Tom Murphy sought to take 64 buildings and 125 businesses for a movie theater and Nordstrom for his failed Fifth and Forbes project. In the end, all the project created was considerable disinvestment.
Coatesville - Dick and Nancy Saha waged a six-year battle to keep their family farm from becoming a golf course. Spending the bulk of their retirement savings on legal fees, the couple were finally successful when the city council agreed to drop the eminent domain taking in exchange for the right to purchase five acres of property that the Sahas had offered the city for free at the beginning of the dispute.
Washington - "The Crossroads" development calls for a new office building, hotel, retail, and residential space where popular local businesses like World West Galleries and Fine Art Printers, Shorty’s Lunch, and Jerry’s Shoe Repair currently exist and thrive.
Eminent Domain Is Not Necessary for Economic Development
City officials often claim that without the power of eminent domain, they will be unable to do worthwhile projects and their cities will fall into decline. They are wrong. There are many ways to encourage economic growth without taking someone else’s property. These include, for example, economic development districts, tax incentives, bonding, tax increment financing, Main Street programs, infrastructure improvements, relaxed or expedited permitting, and small grants and loans for façade improvements.
Development happens every day, all across the country, without the use of eminent domain. Defenders of eminent domain for private development present a false choice between protecting people’s rights and economic development. In fact, we can have both.
Eminent Domain Is Not a “Last Resort”
In most cases, the threat of eminent domain plays an important role from the very beginning of negotiations. Cities know that most home and business owners will be unable to afford to fight; this fact gives cities a strong incentive to threaten property owners with condemnation at the very start.
Procedural Changes Will Not Stop Eminent Domain Abuse
More process and public input and better planning are not the answer. These measures will do absolutely nothing to protect the rights of home and business owners. Despite overwhelming public opposition by citizens and Ardmore’s invited consultant, the Urban Land Institute, the Board of Commissioners still voted to destroy a third-generation office supply company, a popular Chinese restaurant and the local American Legion and VFW posts. Local legislators typically know the outcome they want and then follow the procedures necessary to get it. Indeed, all of the examples of abuse occurring here in Pennsylvania and across the country proceeded according to the current procedures, evidence alone that changes are necessary.
Better planning is also no solution and will do nothing to protect home and business owners from losing their property to private developers. Planners call for even more of the kind of planning that, if implemented, necessitates forcing some people out of their homes and businesses to make way for other, supposedly better-planned uses occupied by more economically desirable people. While all of this additional planning will no doubt bring lots of money to planners, it will not prevent the use of eminent domain for private commercial development and in practice will probably encourage more abuse.
In crafting these bills, everyone’s concerns have been considered and compromises have been made. The result of this thoughtful approach is that these bills stand as models for the rest of the country. We urge passage of these bills and oppose any attempt to weaken them. We also hope Governor Rendell will sign these necessary reforms into law. Pennsylvania deserves it.