THE CENTRIST

Monday, June 12, 2006

90: "We Took a Hit Today"

Unfortunately, Federal Judge Yvette Kane ruled that a suit filed against the principals of Pennsylvania State government (legislative leadership, the Governor, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) seeking relief from the unconstitutional actions of the principals in passing legislation, notably Acts 71 and 72 and last summer's Midnight Pay Raise, belong to the "political and electoral process” and not the courts, according to an Associate Press report just flashed over the wires.

We say unfortunate as such a ruling would seem to indicate that the Constitution of the United States and the Pennsylvania Constitution, both of which were violated by the actions indicated, have no bearing with the Federal Court.

It remains to be seen if the coalition of groups backing the suit filed by Common Cause of Pennsylvania will file an appeal. This blogger expects that to happen quickly.

We believe Judge Kane erred greatly in her judgment that the case had no merits on which the Federal Court could or should rule. The suit was indeed about Constitutionally defined issues, and therefore, while a remedy may be sought within the “political and electoral process”, it will be neither timely, nor will there be a guarantee that any remedy at all will be accomplished. Clearly this is a case requiring the Federal Courts to act on Constitutional grounds.

Gentlemen, please be speedy in your appeal of Judge Kane’s ruling.

THE CENTRIST

“Kick the hubris out of Harrisburg!” -- THE CENTRIST

"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs." -- Albert Einstein

Remember in November! Before you vote, GettysBLOG!

Copyright © 2006: “THE CENTRIST”. All Rights Reserved.

89: “Jack Murtha Unmasked”

They say there is no such thing as an “ex-Marine”, that “once a Marine, always a Marine”. The exception that proves the rule is Lee Harvey Oswald, and even he is sometimes used (darkly) to illustrate one of the finer points of Marine training: marksmanship.

Jack Murtha is a certified Marine Corps Hero in the traditional sense of the word. Unlike a certain recent Presidential Candidate who was a Navy Vet, Jack Murtha did not receive medals without legitimately earning them, even Purple Hearts. He fought in Korea, and in Vietnam. His Vietnam service saw him receive the Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts.

Accordingly, John Murtha should be due some respect.

John Kerry returned from the Vietnam War with a fistful of medals of questionable integrity, which he promptly threw away to show his disdain for American involvement in Vietnam. While still a U.S. Navy officer on active duty, Kerry went to Paris and involved himself in the peace negotiations there by meeting with the North Vietnamese delegation. Kerry’s actions there, and at home, particularly in his fraudulent testimony against the war in front of Congress, and his involvement in the now discredited Winter Soldier movement, showed him to be a traitor to the United State of America.

No such actions taint the background of John Murtha. For decades, Murtha, even though a Democrat, has supported our actions overseas, and was a solid voice behind the military.

However, in 2005 he suddenly became a strident opponent of the War in Iraq.

We look into his background for a sign that would point to this shift. We can find little. He was an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1980 ABSCAM investigation, but was eventually cleared by the Democratically controlled House Ethics Committee.

Based on his recent announcement that if the Democrats were to gain the seats required for a majority in the fall elections, he would take over leadership in the House, perhaps he has seen a ticking clock and begun maneuvering himself into position for a run at Speaker of the House. In so doing, he would have to become one of the braying liberals that constantly harp at the Bush administration. This he did in 2005. He continues today, though he cleverly limits his public scorn to the War in Iraq since his background is strongly military. Supposedly, this gives him more credibility, especially with the ultra liberal “Gang of Nine” (Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, Feingold, Kennedy, Clinton, Schumer, Biden, and Specter).

Recently, Murtha backed his hand by shouting the news from the rooftops that his own US Marines committed a war atrocity at a place called Haditha in Iraq. Murtha had them tried, convicted and condemned before the news really hit the newsstands. But the MSM (Main Stream Media) could not move fast enough to latch onto the Murtha condemnations.

Murtha was apparently tipped to the Haditha story by Time Magazine which has since backed off on the validity of their source (see Setting the record straight on Haditha by Mary Katherine Ham at Townhall.com). In fact, as more and more is revealed about what happened at Haditha, there is no certainty that a massacre happened at all. Indeed, it may turn out to have been a regrettable tragic, understandable mistake. Perhaps. But the important part is: the investigation is not over, and charges have not been filed!.

But we all know that the MSM does not ascribe to the American principle of law that all are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Apparently Jack Murtha has forgotten that as well. In particular, however, he has also forgotten his loyalty to the Corps.

As a Vietnam veteran, it pains me to see another Vietnam veteran take a wrong turn. Just as it sickened me to watch a young John Kerry in action in the 1970s, it sickens me even more to see a real live U.S. Marine Corps hero lose himself in his own ambition.

In the end, sadly, perhaps Lee Harvey Oswald may have company in his historical niche as an ex-Marine.

What an utter shame.

Sunday, June 11, 2006

88: "Perzel Sinking Deeper and Deeper"

Well, now we know why John Perzel chose to go to Florida to attend a director’s meeting of GEO Group, Inc. Perzel, you may recall, absented himself at the end of the session just before the primary. Crucial during that period was the Republican floor uprising which stopped the Democratic/RINO cooperative effort to repackage Act 72 of 2004 in new clothes, thus infuriating a zoot-suit wearing Mike Veon.

It seems that in May, GEO Group, Inc. was the recipient of a $58 million Delaware County contract to continue to run a privately run prison in Delaware County.

Of course, Perzel claims he had no knowledge of the actions taken by the Board of Prison Inspectors.

Here are Perzel’s own words, from his website:

Reporter's [Philadelphia Inquirer] telephone query: -- The contract between Geo Group, Inc., and the Board of Prison Inspectors was renewed this week. Did you have any knowledge of this action? Were you involved in the decision? Could you clarify your responsibilities on the Geo Group, Inc. board of directors.

A -- "This pertains to my private business affairs and not as my function as Speaker. However, let say I had no knowledge of the actions taken by the Board of Prison Inspectors until I read about it in the newspapers today. I had no role in the negotiations or selection process. There has been no communication between me and the operational management of Geo Group, Inc. on this or any subject. There has been no communication between me and the Board of Prison Inspectors on this or any subject. "As to my role on the Board of Directors: As is public knowledge, I serve as a compensated administrative member of the board of directors. My compensation is no different than any other board member. I have no operational role within the corporation. I am not involved in the operations or management of the firm, nor am I privy to any sales, marketing or management decisions. "I serve in an administration function on the Audit Committee, with financial oversight and reporting responsibilities, reporting to the full board. I am not qualified to comment on the operations or management of the corporation. I refer all further questions on this matter to the company's corporate communications department."

Let(‘s) say…? Let’s say…? Mr. Speaker, you must you mean “Let’s pretend…”

In other words, your reply is totally fallacious.

Let’s lay this out in plain English. There is the appearance of graft here, raising the following questions:

· When did Pennsylvania pass legislation authorizing privatization of prisons?
· When was GEO Group, Inc. formed?
· When was John Perzel added to the Board of Directors?
· In what manner did Perzel obtain his stock holdings in GEO Groups, Inc.?

· Does no one understand what 'conflict of interest' means?

GEO Groups, Inc. just announced an agreement with the union representing the personnel who staff their Delaware County Prison, hence the Inquirer’s question. It should be noted that Perzel put this gem out as part of his answer:

"I serve in an administration function on the Audit Committee, with financial oversight and reporting responsibilities, reporting to the full board. I am not qualified to comment on the operations or management of the corporation. I refer all further questions on this matter to the company's corporate communications department."

Gosh, I’m no business major, but ‘financial oversight and reporting responsibilities?” Don’t they require close attention to the “operations” of the corporation?

Perzel has built a record of tripping over his own tongue, which is why he has decided to answer all press questions in writing. In fact, he has, at your expense, hired a $5,000/month PR firm for himself.

Obviously none of his efforts have helped.

I live half a state away, and I can smell it from here. Something's rotten in the 172nd District!

Perzel has to go, and he has to go now.

Saturday, June 10, 2006

87: A Happy Endorsement: Raj Bhakta for US Congress

Once in a great while they seem to appear out of nowhere. In baseball, he would be called a natural. [See the Robert Redford movie The Natural for a refresher.] In politics they are sometimes called "can't miss".

Thus, this morning we have come to know a political "Natural". We were quite taken with this young man's presence, confidence, and message. Raj Peter Bhakta calls himself a Teddy Roosevelt Republican. He is running for the US House of Representatives from the 13th Congressional District (Montgomery/NE Philadelphia County), a seat currently held by Democrat Allyson Schwartz. I encourage you to visit his website and get to know this young man. He will undoubtedly be a figure on the political scene for quite a while to come.

I am not a resident of his district, but if I were, this is a man I would vote for. Read his issues, listen to the Flash presentation on his first page. This is a no-nonsense, reform-minded candidate. He is more than worth the look, he is worth the vote!

Here is a press release from his campaign, dated today. This will give you an idea of what Raj is about:

Allyson Schwartz’s “Indefensible” Action

Republican congressional candidate Raj Bhakta is describing as "indefensible" the cut in funding Pennsylvania received from the federal government to address terrorism threats.

The state’s share dropped from $81.9 million last year to $49 million this year. Philadelphia’s portion went from $22.8 million to $19.5 million.
Bhakta, who is challenging Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-13th dist.), noted that the Philadelphia area is large and has a busy port, military installations and a nuclear power plant. "If Philadelphia is not at risk, I don’t know who is," he said.
Bhakta wants more money to hire police officers and upgrade technology for cops, firefighters and other emergency responders. "Philadelphia is essentially being ignored by the federal government," he said.
The candidate said the Department of Homeland Security isn’t prioritizing its resources, pointing out that places like Kentucky, North Carolina and Nebraska have received funding increases. "Philadelphia certainly faces a greater terrorist threat than Omaha," he said.

Raj Peter Bhakta, Republican for US Congress in Pennsylvania's 13th Congressional District. A solid candidate with a plan, and an agenda to accomplish that plan. He strikes resonating tones on integrity, and reform. Vote Raj in November in the 13th District!

Friday, June 09, 2006

86: "Why is Perzel Still Speaker?"

We would like very much to reproduce Tony Phyrillas’ latest blog, which zeroes in on a much needed action if our state is to survive and reform. We must first remove any roadblocks to reform. Starting with this one, as outlined by Tony:

Perzel May Take GOP Down With Him
by Tony Phyrillas
When the only major conservative newspaper in Pennsylvania (the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review) and the most liberal newspaper in the state (The Philadelphia Inquirer) run editorials the same day agreeing on something, it's worth a closer look.

Both newspapers focused their attention on the scandalous waste of taxpayer money by Republican Speaker of the House John Perzel.

John Perzel, the modern-day version of Gen. Custer, led a bunch of fellow House Republicans into the Little Big Horn last year by telling them to vote for the July 7 pay raise. Perzel told the House lemmings (aka Republicans) that the Indians (aka voters) were friendly.

Perzel's miscalculation so far has led to the ouster of a Supreme Court justice and the defeat of at least 11 House Republicans and the two most powerful members of the state Senate, Republicans Robert Jubilirer and Chip Brightbill.

Perzel's continuing arrogance and unwillingness to permit any meaningful reforms in the worst state legislature in the country will lead to disastrous results for Republicans in November.

Perzel is the Tom Delay of Pennsylvania politics. He is an embarrassment to the Republican Party. Perzel's top political ally in Harrisburg is none other than Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell, a fellow Philadelphian. Perzel, as well as Brightbill and Jubilirer, have worked closely with Rendell to push through massive tax hikes and huge spending increases in Harrisburg. Perzel and Rendell are birds of a feather who care more about Philadelphia patronage than doing anything good for the state.

Here's part of what the Tribune-Review had to say about Perzel in a June 7 editorial:

"Pennsylvania House Speaker John Perzel — whose amoral justification rationalizing the scandalous misuse of his campaign contributions was offered with stupefying indifference — is a prohibitively costly civics lesson about state government.

The Trib discovered Mr. Perzel spent $9,000 in campaign dollars for trips to Super Bowls, $34,000 for trips to Las Vegas, almost $1,350 on liquor for a state Supreme Court committee meeting, $1,800 for staying at an Atlantic City luxury hotel casino, $41,109 for food in Philadelphia even though Perzel and staff members live there, including $1,900 in home deliveries for Chinese food and pizza on 52 occasions and on and on and on.

And $700,000 in reimbursements to legislative staffers — including $56,000 in salary in 2005 and $264,000 in reimbursements in two years for Perzel's chief of staff, who also is paid $160,000 by taxpayers."

Here's what The Inquirer said about Perzel in its June 7 editorial:

"John Perzel had a bad case of foot-in-mouth disease. So he took an expensive cure. On the taxpayer's dime. Well, a lot more than a dime.

Last year, the speaker of the Pennsylvania House started paying a Harrisburg-area firm $5,000 a month — in taxpayer money — to advise him on public relations.

The advice boiled down to: Stop talking so much … The $60,000-a-year PR contract with Hershey-Philbin Associates came on top of another $60,000 the GOP caucus pays to a Philly-based consultant to handle local media relations for Perzel and two other lawmakers.

That all comes on top of the 46 staff flacks paid for by the House GOP — or, more properly, by taxpayers. Taxpayers surely get scant value for this PR spending, since its effect is to reduce candid talk by a key legislative leader. Perzel now responds to most press queries in writing. Anyone who believes Perzel personally types heartfelt responses, then hits the Send key, needs to take a cure for extreme naivete.

It's bad enough when this nonsense gets bankrolled with campaign cash, which gets raised by handing out political IOUs to the connected. It's beyond the pale when voters' own money is used to drown them in partisan distortion and fluff."

The two editorials came out the same week Perzel trumpeted his long-delayed lobbyist reform package. Pennsylvania is the only state in the United States where lobbyists don't have to say how much money the spend to influence politicians or which politicians get the lion’s share of the contributions. That's the way Perzel likes it. But his solders keep showing up with arrows in their back, so he felt compelled to make a token gesture at lobbying reform. What we've got is the typical Perzel shell game.

Are we to believe that Perzel is going to push through meaningful lobbyist reform for the House despite his abysmal track record so far? Talk about the fox guarding the chicken coop. Perzel and reform are incompatible. According to Rep. Greg Vitali, one of the few decent legislators in Harrisburg, Perzel's lobbying bill is so watered down, it's already sprung leaks.

Perzel's bill does not require lobbyists to disclose or companies to report how much they spent on specific lawmakers. It does not mandate the lobbyists disclose the specific issues or bills they are pushing. A meaningful lobbyist bill must disclose what lobbyist is giving what legislator how much to move what piece of legislation.

If his fellow Republican House members don't rise up and take Perzel out before the November election, be prepared to see the House fall into Democratic control.

Perzel is the poster child of everything wrong with modern politics. At least Tom Delay had the decency to resign from Congress rather cause any further damage to the Republican Party. Perzel, the personification of arrogance, doesn't care about the party. He cares only about Perzel. He is willing to take down as many GOP legislators with him as necessary in the vain hope of holding on to his position of power.

by Tony Phyrillas

Tony says it all. Folks should read and heed.

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Chuck Muth on Peggy Noonan - Mean It

Friends,
There is a critical message to candidates, especially Republican candidates, in the following column by former Reagan speech-writer Peggy Noonan. She nails it...big time. It articulates what much of the attraction was to Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura in the early stages of their initial campaigns. Take this message to heart if you want to win the hearts and minds of this year's voters...
Prof. Chuck Muth
Doctor of Psephology
Home-Schooled
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Mean It

Voters want sincerity. If they can't get it, they'll settle for simplicity.

Thursday, June 8, 2006 12:01 a.m.

A thought today about complexity and politics.
The American people right now are not in a mood to trust any political plan, proposal or policy that seems complicated--highly involved, technical, full of phased-in elements and glide paths and Part C's.

They are against complexity not because they don't think life is complex. They know it's complex. They know it because they live it every day. They assume public policy issues are also complicated. They know there are facts they don't know, which probably have to be factored in as policy is developed. But more and more they recoil from complicated, lengthy, abstruse proposals.

Why?

Because they think--they assume, at this point, reflexively--that slithery, slippery professional politicians are using and inventing complications to obfuscate and confuse. They think politicians are using complexity to creat e great clouds in which they can make their escape, like a cartoon character, like Road Runner.

They think modern politicians hide in complexity. They think politicians evade responsibility with it. We can't do the right thing, it's too complicated! Americans don't trust "comprehensive plans," because they don't trust the comprehensive planners.T

his, I think, is the essential problem with Congress's immigration proposals. All the phased-in-partial-assimilation-glide-paths-to-guest-worker-status stuff seems like a big 500-page con. It's all too complicated to be understood by anyone who's not a tenured political science professor with a second degree in accounting.What people will trust, and understand, is this: We will close the border tomorrow, and then figure it out from there.

People resist complicated proposals for realistic reasons.
First, they have a natural and healthy skepticism toward the political class. They think the Senate and House are in effect using public anxiety about our collapsed borders to sneak in--I use that term deliberately--their own party-favoring addendums and amendments. People sense Washington is using public concern as a plaything to get what will serve the political class.

Second, people know that while much of life is complicated, some of it is simple, such as what you can see with your eyes. They would believe a bill that closed the borders worked when they saw that it worked. They will know when the border has been closed. No one will be coming across it. It will be adequately patrolled. Those seeking illegal entry will be turned away.

No one, on the other hand, believes he will be able to know with certainty w hether a phased-in guest-worker plan is working in the short term, or the long term either. They'll only know if it was a disaster after the disaster is done. And they will have to rely for some of their data on government figures--about which they will be dubious, for one of the great modern American understandings is that statistics don't lie but liars use statistics.

And the third reason is they know everyone in Washington is not trustworthy in terms of basic normal human commitment on the immigration issue. They're not reliable.

The other day Rep. Tom Tancredo won a straw vote. A small vote, but, as Tom Tancredo is not exactly a longtime famous Republican party leader, it was interesting. Why would Republican voters choose Mr. Tancredo? Because they know where his heart is on immigration: Stop it, now. It's where he's been for years. He was out there alone on the issue. Now some have joined him. But you know where his heart is and his position is clear.
The irony is that this makes Mr. Tancredo one of the few among Republicans who would be given some leeway by his voters in fashioning an ultimate immigration plan. Why? Because they know he'd be doing his best. Because he means it. They know this because of his past: He was doing his best when there was nothing in it. He's committed to getting as much progress as possible. Which means his supporters would give him flexibility. They'd even allow him to get complicated. "If he gets complex, you must have to."

Democrats have the same problem on the same issue--who believes a word Hillary Clinton says when she speaks of immigration?--and on more.

Democrats use complexity as a thing to hide behind when they talk about taxes. Republicans can say, and can mean, "I hate taxes and will cut them." Democrats can't say that , because they don't hate taxes and in fact will raise them. Though they will not say it. They will say, "Tax cuts on the top 10% of income earners are nonprogressive and unhelpful, and I will cut their tax cut, or hike their taxes, and in turn make commensurate cuts on the taxes of the most deserving lower income taxpayers, though not in a way that will negatively impact the deficit."

When voters hear this they know exactly what it means: We will raise taxes.What is the answer to the public's skepticism about complexity, and a modern leader's need to look at complicated problems in a way that sometimes involves complicated solutions?
Mr. Tancredo knows. Ronald Reagan knew. Mean it.

Reagan's overhaul of the tax system in 1986 was rather complicated. It wasn't complicated for tax policy, but it was complicated for normal humans trying to figure out what they owe. Why did Reagan's base support a complicated plan? Because they knew Reagan meant it. They knew Reagan hated taxes, built his career in part on opposing high taxes, pushed for lower taxes, had cut them in his career. They trusted Reagan to get the best deal he could. The base did not doubt his sincerity. They didn't think he was using the tax issue to finagle advantages for his party. Because he wasn't.

It has been said in politics that sincerity is everything, and once you can fake it you can do anything. But people can tell when you're faking sincerity--on immigration, o n taxes, on our very safety as a nation. Faking it isn't working anymore.Message to political leaders: You better mean it, or they'll never let you do your phased-in multitiered comprehensive plan anymore.

Absent sincerity, the future is simplicity.

PennLiberty

85: “Do You Want True Lobbying Reform?”

Harrisburg Online (this morning):

Speaker of the State House John Perzel yesterday rolled-out his proposed lobbying reform legislation that differs with requirements imposed by Senate rules or by the Governor's fiat...Perzel's proposal requires that any organization or company spending more than $10,000 a year to influence state government decisions to reveal what issue was lobbied and how much was spent...unless the House, Senate and Governor's ideas can be merged into one workable law, lobbyists will be burdened with more paperwork than the ridiculous demands of the Sarbanes-Oxley federal corporate accounting law...

Maybe it’s just me. Maybe I am out of step with the times, but I just do not believe that to be the case. In fact, although it seems a bit arrogant, I believe the times are out of step with me.

Obviously, Harrisburg Online does not like this move because it is published by one of the larger lobbying firms in the state (Greenlee Partners, LLC). Lobbying firms would love to have any requirements for reporting, and limits on their spending removed, giving them unfettered access, and unfettered spending amounts to influence government decision making, particularly in the General Assembly.

There is the arrogance in this issue.

The People’s Business
We send elected legislators to Harrisburg to do the people’s business. But since the advent of professional lobbying, it has become evident that it is not the people’s business that is conducted in our legislature, it is the business of the lobbyists. In fact, it has been increasingly difficult for an individual to meet with their representative at all.

When the lobbying industry (and that is exactly what it is – an industry) is the main force for legislation (witness the gambling bill of 2004) in our state, and the people no longer have direct access to their State Senators and State Representatives, and no longer wield influence with them except that based on the amount contributed to their reelection campaign funds, then the General Assembly is no longer doing the people’s business.

When the lobbying industry spends more than $10,000 per year on one issue, then there is no such thing as a level playing field. Few people can afford to match that kind of influence on their legislators. Those that can will hire lobbying firms like Greenlee Partners, LLC.

This is very important for you to understand: it was lobbying by the gambling industry that got Act 71, the State Gambling Act, enacted in the dark of a July night in 2004. It was millions of dollars of money from Las Vegas, Atlantic City, and Indian Tribes that got paid out in “entertainment” of Pennsylvania’s legislative leadership, and senior General Assembly members.

You weren’t asked. You weren’t consulted. You were not allowed to know the bill was under consideration. You were not allowed to comment on the bill How could you if you did not know it had even been proposed? All of this violates not only the letter, but the spirit of the Constitution of Pennsylvania.

What could possibly make supposedly good men and women, sent to the General Assembly to do the people’s business, go so far into “the dark side” in order to pass such a law?

The answer lies completely in the millions of dollars of lobbyist’s money rained on the leadership of the General Assembly.

To put it another way, leadership was bought. And for their 30 pieces of silver, leadership then forced their caucuses across the line into “the dark side” with them.

What is Lobbyist Reform?
Lobbyist reform is talking about disclosure. That’s pretty slick. John Perzel wants you to believe he is talking Reform! So lobbyists will continue to have unfettered access to the legislature with unfettered checkbooks. The only thing that changes is that lobbying firms will be required to report on any issues that required them to spend more than $10,000.

So, outfits like Greenlee Partners, LLC, which has as part of its clientele, gambling interests, would be able to break down their issues into such categories as slots suppliers, zoning boards for proposed slots parlors, modifying Act 71 to allow for table games, getting the tourism board to include the casinos in their national advertising campaigns, etc. There are four “issues” that might be better combined under “gambling”. So, we have identified a loophole in Perzel’s proposal.

It is that easy. Most lobbying firms are also law firms. Lawyers love to play word games, parsing the meaning of words down to the nth degree in order to win a point.

So, what do you do to fix the lobbying issue? Can you make it much more complex than Perzel is trying to do? Can you put limits on lobbyist’s spending?

Again, you run into loopholes.

Logic demands that there is one answer: Occam’s Razor. William of Occam (also Ockham) was a 14th century monk and philosopher from South East England. He developed a logical principle (called Occam’s Razor) that in essence says that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. In Latin, it reads: entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, which means: entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.

The simplest answer to lobbying reform is to do away with lobbying altogether. Level the playing field, and put the people back into the professional lives of the members of the General Assembly.

How will it work?
No matter how you cut it, lobbying, as it is practiced now, is simply bribery. Buying influence. Outlawing professional lobbying is relatively simple, but calls for strict measures. For example, we recommend this:

Make illegal any approach to legislatures by a person representing someone else’s interests. (Exception: non profit organizations, and community organizations.)
Make illegal the transfer of any item of value, including money, by any person seeking to influence government. (Not even a pencil!). Make it a felony.
Any person or entity doing so would be subject to a $5,000 fine and mandatory $3 years in prison.
The legislator, or legislator’s staff member who accepts such compensation would be subject to a $5,000 fine, and a mandatory 3 years in prison, and loss of all benefits and retirement from the state. Acceptance of such compensation by any member of the legislator’s family would be covered under this.

Hard and cold. But if you truly want to end the corruption and graft in Harrisburg, these are the major steps you MUST take to do so.

So, the result is that if you want your legislator to support a bill, you make an appointment and go see him or her, or you call them on the phone, and make your case. If you are the CEO of a large corporation you call your Representative or you make an appointment and go see him or her in his or her office. No entertaining. No junkets. No freebies. No tickets to movies, sports events, concerts, etc. Not even a pencil. If you are that CEO, you are on an equal footing with Joe Sixpack when it comes to access to your legislator.

Current legislative leadership, and the Governor himself lack the necessary anatomical parts required to take such a step. It will take a large body of Reformers on the floor of both chambers, driven by a grassroots movement to accomplish this task.

Law firm lobbyists will fight this to the death…giving them an opportunity to actually practice law for a change instead of buying influence with legislative leadership.

Corporations will not like this because they feel they influence the economy far more than you do.

Well, perhaps a very few of them do, but most of them do not influence the economy as much as the ten thousand constituents in each of the Legislative or Senatorial Districts do.

The largest amounts of money expended in lobbying as recorded in the Pennsylvania Senate is done by the Health Care industry. That certainly bears some looking into, but perhaps another day.

Don’t you think it is time to stop this? Don’t you think there has been enough graft and corruption in Harrisburg?

If you don’t, then you believe in business as usual, and Reform is just a meaningless term to you.

If you do, then you will climb on board the Reform bandwagon (which embraces much more than just lobbying reform). Get active. Get political. And always, always, always remember that true Reform transcends partisan politics, but will make partisan politics better in the future.

THE CENTRIST

Support Russ Diamond for Governor!

“Kick the hubris out of Harrisburg!” -- THE CENTRIST

"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs." -- Albert Einstein

Remember in November! Before you vote, GettysBLOG!

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

84: "Signature Time"

This may seem like political dead time, but let me assure you it is not. This is a very important time in the political schedule as it is when campaigns are defined and set into motion. We are approaching the 30 day mark after the recent Primary. There are folks who need your help. You have all done magnificently in your first step in seizing back the power that has been usurped by others. But there remains much work to be done.

Russ Diamond is campaigning for Governor as an Independent. The Republicans and the Democrats have placed an unfair burden on him in terms of gathering an enormous number of signatures on his nominating petition to get on the ballot in November. Diamond is required to obtain slightly over 67,000 signatures. In order to assure that he has enough valid signatures, he is shooting for 100,000, as his opponents, Lynn Swann and Ed Rendell will likely challenge as many signatures as they can.

Pennsylvania deserves a third choice. Both parties have abandoned their base and become parties of monied interests, and political graft and corruption. They no longer represent you. Now they represent the lobbies, and the powerful and rich.

If you do nothing else political this summer, please sign one of Russ Diamond’s nominating petitions. There are three ways to do this:

Visit one of Russ Diamond’s campaign stops (see latest schedule below) and sign there, or
Visit his website signature page and follow the instructions for downloading and printing the petition, then follow instructions for mailing it in to his campaign.
Gather signatures for Russ Diamond’s campaign. Again, visit his website’s Signature Central page and follow the instructions. It is not a difficult task, and is an exercise in civics that should leave you feeling proud of your contribution.

We have added several links for Russ Diamond’s various web pages on his site so you can get information anytime by clicking on one. The links are under the Endorsed Candidates section on the sidebar to the right.

Russ Diamond has the following campaign stops on his schedule.

----------
Cedar Lodge Tri-County Town Meeting
6/7/2006 6:30 p.m.
Cedar Lodge (formerly known as Greyhorse Tavern)
844 Fishing Creek Road
New Cumberland, PA 17070
Come meet Russ Diamond, Independent Candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania at a tri-county town meeting!
Contact:
Kathy Clark, (717) 938-4089, KCBSP@aol.com
----------
Ballot Access Coalition Fundraiser
6/16/2006 7:00 p.m.
Shady Maple Farm Market
129 Toddy Drive
East Earl, PA 17519
Doors open at 7:00 pm; Russ Diamond to speak.
Contact:
Ken Krawchuk, (800) 842-8477, KenKrawchuk@Enter.Net
-----------

Try to make at least one of these events. Sign his nominating petition and give yourself a real choice in November.

And that is free advice from one Republican who will not be voting for Swann, or Rendell. I’ll be voting for Russ Diamond.

We desperately need reform. We desperately need clean, transparent, government. Russ Diamond will give us that.

Monday, June 05, 2006

82: Russ Diamond's Tax Plan (Part 1)

We are presenting this straight from Russ Diamond's website, which you should all be scouring daily for news and updates.

---------------------------------------

Diamond: Abolish Property Taxes
Calling property taxes "unfair, punitive and unconstitutional," Russ Diamond, Independent for Governor, today published his proposal for abolishing all property taxes in Pennsylvania on his campaign website in both written and audio formats.

Diamond set himself apart from other gubernatorial candidates by pointing out that property taxes run counter to the Pennsylvania Constitution, which provides for the protection of every citizen's right of "acquiring, possessing and protecting property."

"By taxing and threatening to take our property if we can't pay, government is violating a right it is specifically charged with protecting," Diamond said today. "Property rights are clearly spelled out in Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution and are included among the most important rights we have.

"Ed Rendell and Lynn Swann both plan to continue to chase people out of their homes to fund out-of-control government. Ed wants to keep playing his broken record of campaign promises from 2002, and Lynn thinks we can wait until he can change the Constitution - a three year process at minimum."

Diamond's outline includes a combination of a broad-based sales tax, the personal income tax and an overhaul of Pennsylvania's corporate tax system to replace the $11 billion currently collected through property taxes. It also recommends that a portion of the collection of those taxes could remain at the local level, retaining maximum control over local budgetary issues.

The outline also states that "true reform is not accomplished through revenue replacement alone. Controlling government spending is the other half of the solution. If we do not get government spending under control, we'll just end up with runaway increases in whichever taxes we modify to replace property taxes."

Rendell's proposed budget, if approved by the legislature, would represent a 23 percent increase in spending at the state level during his tenure, more than twice the rate of inflation during the same period.

"The clear victim of government growth is the standard of living of Pennsylvania's citizens. In addition to abolishing property taxes, we must decide whether we will continue to grow government or grow the economy. We can't do both," the outline stated.

"Even after we abolish property taxes, government will still have the ability to eat us out of house and home if we don't limit spending," Diamond concluded. He intends to come forward with his plan to control spending in the coming weeks.

Diamond's campaign is currently collecting the 67,070 signatures required to place his name on the ballot at the November general election, using an updated 'Signature Central' page on its website.

---------------------------------------

Stay tuned for Part 2: How will Russ Diamond approach the Tax Reforms?

In the meantime, we urge you to visit the Russ Diamond for Governor website and find out how you can help this principled man get elected.

And please, while you are there, check into how you can sign his petition.

Click here for Part 2.

THE CENTRIST

“Kick the hubris out of Harrisburg!” -- THE CENTRIST

"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs." -- Albert Einstein

Remember in November! Before you vote, GettysBLOG!

83: Russ Diamond's Tax Plan (Part 2)

continued from Part 1 (posted in reverse order for continuity)

Here is how Russ Diamond will approach tax reform as Governor:

Let's talk about abolishing property taxes in Pennsylvania and reaffirming our constitutionally guaranteed right to acquire, possess and protect our property. Before we start, though, let's get a couple things out of the way.

First, let's look at the goals taxation should meet. I believe any tax plan must pursue three very simple objectives:

Adequately funding the functions of government set forth in the Constitution for the common good.
Assessing that tax burden fairly, directly and equitably to all citizens of the Commonwealth and others who benefit from those governmental functions.
Developing a system which minimizes the impact to our state's economy and does not cause any undue hardship to any citizen, especially those in the humblest of economic circumstances.

Second, true reform is not accomplished through revenue replacement alone. Let me repeat that: true reform is not accomplished through revenue replacement alone.

Controlling government spending is the other half of the solution. I have some fantastic ideas on how to control spending - and I will come forward with them at a later date - but today we're only going to talk about my plan to abolish property taxes - without changing anything else.

The Nature of Property Taxes
The revenue generated by property tax in Pennsylvania is used to fund three different things: public education, county governments and municipal governments. By all available accounts, property taxes generate $11 billion annually to fund these things, with the lion's share going to public education.

It is important to understand how property taxes are collected to understand how unfair they are.

Each county in Pennsylvania assesses the value of individual properties and charges a portion of that value - or millage - in annual taxes to the property owner. In addition, school districts, cities, boroughs and townships use the same assessed value and charge their own millage rate.
The assessment process is extremely labor intensive and therefore a very expensive job for counties to undertake. As a result, counties are reluctant to update their assessment records with a regular countywide reassessment.

Also, newer homes are assessed on a completely different basis than existing homes, which may not have had their assessed value updated for years or even decades. This has created an extremely unbalanced and unfair system of taxation. By abolishing property taxes, we would also eliminate this arcane system of assessing the value of properties. It is important to note that the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania has requested that the state legislature allow them to use methods other than property tax to pay for county government. They have a keen understanding of how unfair and expensive the property tax system is to maintain.

One of the most popular arguments against abolishing property taxes is that property taxes are a reliable and stable form of taxation. In my book, this line of thinking is backwards.

I believe the stability of any government entity should not take priority over the ability of citizens to enjoy the God-given - and constitutionally protected - right to acquire, possess and protect their property. Government should be responsive to the ability of its citizens to thrive economically, not the other way around.

Replacing the Revenue
So what does state government have to do to abolish unfair, punitive and unconstitutional property taxes?

In short, we have to find a way to replace $11 billion dollars every year. To get an idea of how much that means in Pennsylvania, consider that the Commonwealth's entire General Fund budget will total around $25 billion dollars this year.

To replace the $11 billion collected annually through property taxes, state government must shift that burden to some other form of tax.

Let me make one thing crystal clear - there is no free ride. If we are to abolish property taxes, the revenue must be replaced somehow. Of all the various taxes the state collects, there are three major sources of revenue.

The biggest is the Personal Income Tax (PIT), which is expected to generate $9.8 billion this year. At a tax rate of 3.07%, every 1 percentage point of PIT generates $3.2 billion. This tax is pretty straight-forward, as everyone pays the same rate - although there are some reductions for low income Pennsylvanians.

Next comes the Sales and Use Tax (SUT), which is expected to generate $8.3 billion this year. At a tax rate of 6%, every 1 percentage point of SUT generates $1.4 billion. This tax is a bit more complicated, as not every sale is taxable, and trying to figure out what is and what isn't taxed can sometimes be a bit confusing.

Then comes the Corporate Net Income Tax (CNIT), which is expected to generate $2.1 billion this year. At a tax rate of 9.99%, this means that every 1 percentage point of CNIT generates $213 million. Although this is the least of the top three sources of revenue for the Commonwealth, it is important to note that less than 30% of all corporations in the Commonwealth pay this tax at all.

If we're simply looking to replace the $11 billion that property tax generates, we can just start doing some math to see which tax rates we want to modify to get the money from somewhere else.

Without changing the way any of these taxes are charged, you could do it - at least mathematically - with any one of them alone:

We could generate $11 billion by raising the PIT to 6.5%, but most Pennsylvanians would balk at more than doubling their income tax.
We could generate $11 billion by raising the SUT to 13.65%, but that would cause merchants to lose business to other states.
Or we could generate $11 billion by raising the CNIT to 61.6%, but I'm sure you'll agree this is certainly not the way to go.

Realistically, it will take a combination of modifications to these tax rates - and the method by which they are assessed - if we're serious about replacing that $11 billion dollars.

Sharing the Burden
Let's mention again the three things that property taxes pay for: public schools, county government and municipal government. In general, we all benefit from these things, so it's only natural that we all share the burden - fairly and equally.

Once upon a time, citizens were only allowed to vote if they owned property. It quickly became apparent that this wasn't logical, so Americans abolished that practice. Likewise, it doesn't make any sense that only people who own property should be directly taxed for schools and other local government functions.

Since we all benefit from these things, then it's only logical that we all chip in - in a direct manner.

Sales and Use Tax
Of all types of taxation, I believe consumption taxes are the most fair and direct, and the Sales and Use Tax (SUT) is a consumption tax, so let's start there.

Realistically, the SUT rate could be raised to 7% without losing too much business to other states, but it wouldn't generate the kind of revenue we need.

The solution here is to broaden the base by making more items taxable. If we broaden the base sufficiently enough, we may actually be able to lower the rate and still meet our goal.

My starting point would be to apply the SUT to all goods and services - no exceptions. As soon as we grant even one exception, we'll see a parade of special interests demanding their own exceptions, and that's why the current SUT is such a puzzling patchwork quilt.

Frankly, I see no reason whatsoever why services and tangible products should be treated differently. For businesses which provide both goods and services, it would simplify their bookkeeping.

Of course, there are those who would argue that taxing food, clothing and prescription drugs would be regressive and would be an unfair burden on the most needy of Pennsylvanians.

But if the SUT base is sufficiently broad, the tax rate could be low enough that this burden is minimal. On top of that, we already subsidize food and prescription drugs for the most needy of Pennsylvanians. Additionally, Pennsylvania provides for income tax forgiveness for the poorest of the poor, and additional considerations could be made in this area if necessary.

Again, no system of taxation should cause any undue hardship to any citizen, especially those in the humblest of economic circumstances.

Personal Income Tax
After modifying the SUT, then we need to look at the Personal Income Tax (PIT). Frankly, increasing the tax on personal income by a point or two will not necessarily make Pennsylvania uncompetitive with other states.

In fact, there are states whose income tax rates are in excess of six, seven, and even nine percent. Admittedly, some of those states have a graduated income tax, but in Pennsylvania our Constitution forbids that, and I firmly believe it should remain that way.

Because the PIT provides $3.2 billion for every percentage point assessed, there's plenty of room to adjust it and get great positive results in the pursuit of abolishing property taxes.

Corporate Income Tax

We must also look at the Corporate Net Income Tax (CNIT), because one of the big worries about abolishing property taxes altogether is that we'd be giving big business a free ride.
But first, let me say this about all business and corporate taxes:

Businesses and corporations do not pay tax. Really, they don't. Any tax applied to a business is eventually paid by individuals. Business owners are individuals. If the business is a corporation, that corporation is owned by a group of individuals. In general, most of these individuals are already paying taxes.

Sometimes, business and corporate taxes are absorbed by these owners, but usually, those taxes are simply passed on to consumers through higher prices. This is indirect taxation. In a perfect world, there would be no indirect taxation, but we don't live in a perfect world. We live in a world with borders and sometimes, the people on the other side of those borders play by different rules than we do - and we have no control over that.

The problem - as I see it - is that eliminating property taxes and shifting that revenue burden to the SUT and PIT leaves the door open for people from outside Pennsylvania to set up shop here, take advantage of the infrastructure and education system that we're paying for, and then take their profits back out of Pennsylvania to spend elsewhere.

I am not opposed to non-Pennsylvanians coming here to do business - in fact I encourage it - but I am opposed to them being able to place undue burdens upon the communities where they situate themselves.

The CNIT is part of a cornucopia of corporate taxes the state levies against businesses. Because the corporate tax system is so complicated, businesses can waste a lot of productivity simply trying to figure out the most profitable way to play the system.

I believe we should completely scrap the current corporate tax structure in Pennsylvania in favor of a CNIT which can be reduced through credits based on a corporation's ownership, employment and reinvestment within the Commonwealth.

This is how it would work: If a corporation is wholly owned by Pennsylvanians, employs only Pennsylvanians and reinvests only in Pennsylvania, that corporation would pay the lowest amount of tax on the profits they generate within the Commonwealth.

On the other hand, if a corporation is wholly owned by individuals from elsewhere, employs only people from elsewhere and only reinvests elsewhere, that corporation would pay the highest amount of tax on the profits they generate within the Commonwealth.

Most corporations, who fall somewhere in between these two examples, would pay a pro-rated tax, based on their proportion of native ownership, native employees and their reinvestment in Pennsylvania.

Our goals in overhauling the corporate tax structure must be to foster Pennsylvania's economy while encouraging businesses to be good neighbors and participate in planning for the future.

This should only be considered as an interim solution. I believe that ultimately, the fairest way to deal with businesses who want to locate in our communities is to assign a fair impact fee which would cover a proportional amount of any expanded infrastructural needs required in the future to serve that business location.

The Big Picture
The ability to work with these three tax systems - the SUT, the PIT and the CNIT - to abolish property taxes in Pennsylvania forever is real and tangible. All we need is the collective will to do it and the realization that we're all in this together.

There are a few things we should discuss that go beyond just the task of abolishing property taxes.

First, abolishing property taxes would give an opportunity for rental property owners to take a huge windfall at the expense of their tenants. It would be my hope that all rental property owners would reduce their rents dollar for dollar in an amount equal to their annual savings in property taxes on those properties. But I realize that not every property owner will do that, so it remains a detail which needs to be discussed and worked out.

Should we mandate one-time rent reductions or should we let the free market decide? Or should we do something in between?

Second, we need to consider the idea of local control. We all know the golden rule: He who controls the gold, makes the rules. Should we send all our tax dollars to Harrisburg first, or should we keep them at the local level?

I believe we can do a little of both. Many states have mixed collection systems. Colorado has a statewide sales tax rate and allows local governments to stack their own sales tax rate on top of it - up to a certain limit. We could do the same thing with income and corporate taxes as well.

Third, because public education is both critical and constitutionally mandated, it must be funded in a stable manner, so as not to threaten the future of our children by subjecting educational budgets to widely fluctuating revenue streams. The stability of constitutionally mandated public education must take priority over state programs not mandated by the supreme law of the land.

Controlling Spending
Finally - and I know I'm repeating myself - true reform is not accomplished through revenue replacement alone. Controlling government spending is the other half of the solution. If we do not get government spending under control, we'll just end up with runaway increases in the taxes we modify to replace property taxes.

Again, I will be addressing spending at later date. At the state level alone - if Ed Rendell's budget is approved as proposed - spending will have increased by almost 23 percent during his tenure over the last four years - almost double the rate of inflation. The clear victim of state government growth is the standard of living of Pennsylvania's citizens.

In addition to abolishing property taxes, we must decide whether we will continue to grow government or grow the economy. We can't do both.

It's time to abolish property taxes in our Commonwealth - because I believe Pennsylvanians deserve better.

-----------------------------

Thanks Russ! This is about as clear and concise a plan as I have ever heard. It is absent GovSpeak, which is what you will hear from Rendell and Swann.

Russ Diamond is a people's candidate.

81: “Ubi Sunt”

Medieval poets wrote works that extolled the virtues of ancient heroes while lamenting the fact that there were no heroes anymore. The theme, mostly found in Anglo-Saxon and Norse poetry, was a dark one, and referred to the heroes that kept mankind alive and moving forward during the near apocalyptic pestilence and wars of the Dark Ages. The theme is called ‘ubi sunt’, which is Latin for where are…? [The full phrase is Ubi sunt qui ante nos fuerent?, meaning Where are those who were before us?]

Ubi sunt...

We might well ask the same of the Reformers who were heroes last November, and again this past May. Obviously, since Swann and Santorum appointed (anointed?) Rob Gleason as the new chairman, and he was installed without a proper vote, it becomes clear that the heroes of the past seven months are to be shunned, and told to sit in their corners like good little puppy dogs. There will be no more talk of reform in the Republican Party, thank you very much!

Lynn Swann is not a voice for reform. Lynn Swann is a ‘business as usual’ candidate, in debt to his eyeballs to the big monied interests, particularly gambling money.

Tom Ridge, who saved Sandra Schultz Newman’s seat on the State Supreme Court for her last November, has been brought in to brace up Lynn Swann’s campaign. Ridge is free to exhaust his personal political capital on Swann in a vain effort to get him elected. We’re not sure he even lives in Pennsylvania any more!

Ubi sunt…where are the reformers of last November who tossed Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro from the bench?

Ubi sunt…where are the reformers who voted 17 incumbents from office last month by denying them their party endorsement? Most were Republicans, but a few were Democrats.

Ubi sunt…the reform Democrats? They unloaded a few incumbents last month which proves they exist! But where were they in Bill DeWeese and Mike Veon’s district? Veon was the only person to vote against the pay raise repeal! Ubi sunt!

Do not look for reform from the State Democratic Committee. Their only interest now is to reelect as many of their incumbents as possible, including Rendell, Fumo, Veon, and

DeWeese. But they want more. They are determined to ride the coattails of Republican discontent all the way back to the top, in full control of state government in the Governor’s mansion, the General Assembly, and of course, with their friends in the state courts, and to do it with their legislative leadership people already in place. Vince Fumo as President Pro Tempore of the Senate. Bill DeWeese as the Speaker of the House. I shudder at the thought – not because they are Democrats, but because they are a large part of the graft and corruption that caused the turmoil in which we now find ourselves. It was not Democrats alone. The Republicans of the business as usual state party were probably more responsible than anyone, and as is well known, we Republicans eat our dead.

Ubi sunt …the Reform Democrats?

Contact us, use the mail link on the right sidebar, and let us know that you are alive, and still reform minded. Let us know if there are any liberal bloggers out there pushing the reform movement. Perhaps we can work side by side to save our state.

Business as usual is simply unacceptable.

THE CENTRIST

“Kick the hubris out of Harrisburg!” -- THE CENTRIST

"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs." -- Albert Einstein

Remember in November! Before you vote, GettysBLOG!

Copyright © 2006: “THE CENTRIST”. All Rights Reserved.

Sunday, June 04, 2006

80: “The Shape of Things to Come”

We have been abandoned. The Republican State Committee of Pennsylvania has abandoned it’s principles, and its people, forsaking them in favor of big money and business as usual. We are, for all intents and purposes, CWOPs – Conservatives Without a Party.

The replacement of Eileen Melvin, who’s tenure as Chair of the Republican State Committee simply funneled money to the likes of Jubelirer, Brightbill, Perzel, Sam Smith and other RINOs, and to candidates such as Steve Fisher, who scared the living Hell out of enough Republicans they crossed over and voted for Rendell, was long overdue. Melvin was a disaster. Under her leadership Pennsylvania was saddled with the old cronies in the General Assembly and allowed them to slide to the left far enough they became Republicans in Name Only.

But today, the party abandoned the people. They abandoned Reform. They shrugged off the message sent by voter revolts in last November’s election, and the Great Cleansing of last month’s Primary.

Today the party chose Rob Gleason as the new Chair. Oh, Gleason’s credentials are impeccable…if you like the elites to run things. Gleason is second generation in this situation. But more importantly, Gleason supported Bob Jubelirer with a $10,000 donation in the Primary election, and despite it, Jubelirer got tossed by his constituents – handily. Why? Because Harrisburg is so filled with graft and corruption that Jubelirer represented “business as usual.”

The people are tired of stealth legislation, unconstitutional legislation, and money grabs for those in power while the people continue to suffer under a growing tax burden. But primarily, the people were tired of the leadership’s aura of hubris, which they learned from such Democratic luminaries as Fast Eddie Rendell, King Vince Fumo, Prince William DeWeese, and Duke Mike Veon.

In short, the Republican voters do not like getting screwed by their own party and are in the process of doing something about it. Many of them, anyway.

Meanwhile, the Republican State Committee sails merrily along with an attitude last seen in the Royal Family of France in 1793. Swish – clunk. The French Royals, their Queen once uttered the dismissive words, “Let them eat cake!” referring to the Revolutionaries who were about to behead her, were totally ignorant of the will, wants and needs of the people. Their ignorance led to their downfall. So too will the hubris of the Republican State Committee lead to the downfall of the Republican Party in Pennsylvania.

Our fear is this: while the State Committee members mouthed platitudes about unifying the party, and healing wounds, they said not a word about reform. Maybe they think the reformers will just climb on board and ride their train to a new General Assembly that will be simply more of the same business as usual.

But the messages of last November and this past May say otherwise. There now exists in Pennsylvania, two Republican parties, the establishment one headed by Rob Gleason, and the CWOPs, led by a collection of activists.

For example, the CWOPs in Adams County handily defeated a long-time incumbent Representative by a wide margin in the May Primary, and in November those same CWOPs will defeat his Republican replacement because he is tied to the gambling industry. This scenario will be replayed all over the state, except in Philadelphia, where the dozen existing Republicans will still vote for Perzel.

We have a gubernatorial candidate who is in bed with the gambling industry and his name is not Ed Rendell. Lynn Swann took money from the Vegas crowd early on in his run for Governor. CWOPs do not like casinos in Pennsylvania. CWOPs will abandon the party that has abandoned them and support Reform minded, Independent Russ Diamond as their choice for Governor. Diamond is the one man running for that office not connected to the gambling crowd, and not connected to the big money that controls both the Republican and the Democratic Party.

You can understand how this will affect the Republican candidates across the state. There is a split in the Republican Party a mile wide. Either the State Committee acts to induce reform into their candidates, and does so immediately, or they will go down in November in a Wagnerian demise the likes of which have not been seen since Hitler’s bunker fell in May of 1945.

So, as a CWOP, I throw down this gauntlet, this challenge:

Where are the Reform Democrats? Won’t you join us in restoring sanity to our state Government? Certainly there are LWOPs out there. Certainly there are Democrats who have integrity and principle and would like to see government delivered back into the hands of the people again?

Let’s get together and back the reform ticket!

THE CENTRIST

“Kick the hubris out of Harrisburg!” -- THE CENTRIST

"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs." -- Albert Einstein

Remember in November! Before you vote, GettysBLOG!

Copyright © 2006: “THE CENTRIST”. All Rights Reserved.

Friday, June 02, 2006

79: "A Vote of No Confidence"

We the undersigned PA bloggers openly object to the selection of Mr. Robert Gleason as the next GOP State Committee Chairman. We ask that the elected members of State Committee to consider an alternative candidate. We believe that Mr. Gleason would be detrimental to the GOP. His recent comments in support of Rep. Murtha, a Democrat Congressman in his own district, and his financial support of the losing campaign of Sen. Jubelirer, show that Mr. Gleason is out of touch with the mainstream of the rest of the Republican Party.

It has become clear that Mr. Gleason represents the establishment which Republican voters of this state have rejected. The rejected establishment represents big government, arrogance, cronyism, higher taxes, gambling, back-room deals, unconstitutional votes, politics as usual, and a willingness to pass Mr. Rendell’s agenda.

Republicans came out in force on Primary Day to proclaim that they want change. They proclaimed that they have had enough of Republicans who are more concerned with obtaining and keeping power than in making changes and implementing true Republican policies based on core Republican principles of smaller government, less taxes, and obeying the law of the land.

Republicans want to restore the integrity of our Party, not continue to let it be violated. Republicans want to clean up our government. It has to start from within our Party.

So to you State Republican Committee Members, we plead - Please take note of what happened on Primary Day. Learn the lessons of that day. Reform is in the air, Reform is what the people of this party want, and reform of this party and this state government is exactly what the people of this party will get.

The question becomes whose side are you one? Are you going to do the easy thing and vote to install a chairman who represents the status quo and the past. Or are you going to do your duty, represent Republican Party member interests’, and elect a new chairman that will be the face of the future and the face of reform? The choice is yours. Just be prepared for the people’s response.

PennLiberty - Matthew Best of PennPatriot Online

PennPatriot - Randy Potter of PennPatriot Online

Gettysblog

Centrist

[Thank you to Matt Best and Randy Potter for their excellent collaboration and huge effort to get this issue out in front of the people of Pennsylvania. We heartily endorse this effort. The Pennsylvania Republican State Committee is about to signal a "business as usual" approach to state politics. Apparently, they have not been paying attention. They will pay the price in November if they do not soon wake up and start representing the people, rather than the monied interests and themselves.]

THE CENTRIST

“Kick the hubris out of Harrisburg!” -- THE CENTRIST

"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs." -- Albert Einstein

Remember in November! Before you vote, GettysBLOG!

Copyright © 2006: “THE CENTRIST”. All Rights Reserved.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

78: "Russ Diamond, Leading the Way for Reform"

When I heard Russ was running, my first thought was that finally, Pennsylvanians will have someone to vote for, rather than against. My second thought was that finally, Pennsylvanians will have someone to vote for that has ethics, and is not tied to either the political machines, or the monied interests. Bingo! Instant candidate, and one I have to endorse!

I first came across Russ Diamond last summer when two of my cousins hit me with the link to the Operation PACleanSweep website. I was immediately struck by a number of things, starting with the head-on approach to the matter of the Midnight Pay Raise of Last July. I was then caught by the scope of what this guy wanted to accomplish…sweep all the incumbents out of office. I thought, “Great idea! Should happen…uh…how are we going to do that?”

I suspect Russ had it all figured out all along. He had a plan. And that plan worke

d. Russ was able to channel an awful lot of voter anger and direct it where it needed to go. After the astonishing ouster of Supreme Court Justice Russell Nigro, and the near ouster of another Supreme Court Justice, voters began to believe. The voters not only retained their anger (thanks in large part to Russ Diamond’s organized “Pink Pig Rallies” across the state), they began to get directly involved in the process.

Russ Diamond’s Operation PACleanSweep then began to build momentum for the spring Primary elections and the fall General Elections. Clean Sweep folks recruited, interviewed and vetted hundreds of candidates for the General Assembly. In the recent primary, many incumbents were defeated, and many PACleanSweep candidates won their party endorsements against non-incumbents.

But wait! Russ Diamond stepped down from his position as Founder and Chairman of PACleanSweep. And he did so before the Primary. Why? Because he is a man of high ethics. Operation PACleanSweep was founded to be an apolitical organization that acted as a clearing house for new faces to run for the General Assembly in November. And Russ wanted to give the voters another choice, a third choice for Governor. Russ decided to run for Governor as an Independent.

I was reminded the other day of an incident that occurred in the early 1980s at the Army War College in Carlisle. There was an uprising, I’ve heard it referred to as the “Night of the Colonels”, that resulted in the Army switching to an all-volunteer service, the crowning achievement of which was the first Gulf War, and certainly the current all-volunteer Army’s service in the War on Terror is a credit to the results of that uprising. It made me think of the political situation in Pennsylvania…hoping it was happening here, that people were rising up to fix something that was broken…and who better to lead the way than the man who first organized the people behind a cause, Russ Diamond.

Essentiall

y, Russ Diamond is right on all the important issues, but his edge on Swann and Rendell stems from the fact that Pennsylvania Government is broken and needs to be fixed. Corruption and graft are rampant in Harrisburg, and it transcends party lines. Russ knows this, and knows how to fix it. Rendell can’t do that because he is part of the problem. Swann can’t do it for two reasons: he doesn’t have the acumen to take on the political fights and be decisive; and he has already tapped into the “big” money of the special interests. Both Swann and Rendell have accepted money from the gambling industry, which, in large part, is responsible for much of the mess the state government is in right now.

In contrast, Diamond’s campaign is a grass roots, no nonsense, shoe-leather express that gets face to face with the citizens of this state. Russ is in touch with the people. Swann and Rendell are in touch with the money.

Before the General Assembly can enact a property tax bill that is fair, the General Assembly must, itself be fair. It has not been these past four years. As the Independent candidate for Governor, the first item on Russ Diamond’s agenda is to restore integrity and accountability to Harrisburg. That starts in the Governor’s Mansion. If there is no integrity or accountability there, then there will be none in the General Assembly. As Governor, Russ Diamond will work to provide the leadership that is required of good government, will lead with integrity, and candor, work toward making State and Local government transparent, and restore the faith and trust of the people in the office of Governor.

Ed Rendell signed at least two pieces of legislation into law that were unconstitutionally (State and Federal Constitutions) passed, in secret and without benefit of a full public hearing. Indeed, the bills were shielded from public scrutiny on their way to passage in the wee hours of the morning. Thanks to Russ Diamond and many others, the latter of the two bills, last year’s Midnight Pay Raise was repealed after the November Election convinced the legislators that the voters were steamed and that they had gone too far over the line. Russ promises to repeal the first of the unconstitutionally passed bills, the Gambling law, Act 71 of 2004. Russ is neutral on gambling, but not neutral at all on violations of the State and Federal Constitutions.

The ethical leadership of the Governor can prevent such things from happening again. Changes in the way the General Assembly is structured, reducing its size, and greatly reducing its cost, can only come about with strong leadership in the Governor’s Mansion. Obviously Rendell doesn’t have it. He can schmooze, and he can wheel and deal, but he can’t lead, and he can’t govern. Swann can’t do any of those things. Russ Diamond has the strength of character to see this through.

From where I sit, Russ Diamond is the only man for the job, the only one who can put the “people” back into that “government, of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

THE CENTRIST

“Kick the hubris out of Harrisburg!” -- THE CENTRIST

"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs." -- Albert Einstein

Remember in November! Before you vote, GettysBLOG!