|
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Koch Operative Steered $55 Million To Front Groups Airing Ads Against Democrats; Ads Assailed Candidates Over Abortion, 9/11, Medicare
Charles and David Koch, the billionaire owners of of Koch Industries, are known as big spenders when it comes to 
Meet The Group Trying To Use Citizens United To Kill Montana’s Ban On Corporate Spending In Elections
Posted by Zaid Jilani on 21 May, 2012
Last week, Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) submitted an amicus brief “ urging the U.S. Supreme Court to let stand Montana’s century-old ban on corporate money in political campaigns despite the court’s Citizens United ruling two years ago declaring unconstitutional a similar federal law sponsored by McCain.”
The challenge to Montana’s ban on corporate money comes from a shadowy group called American Tradition Partnership (ATP).
ATP is a group based in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area that was launched in 2008 as a 501(c)4 lobbying group called Western Tradition Partnership. It was then renamed American Tradition Partnership. The policy agenda listed on its website runs the gamut of anti-environmental causes. It advocates for everything from curbing environmental lawsuits to winning tax holidays for energy producers.
Its Customers Are Decimated By Foreclosure, But Wells Fargo Lobbies Against Increased Oversight
|
Norman Rousseau, a Newbury Park, California resident, spent last Saturday trying to fix an old RV. His house was being foreclosed upon by Wells Fargo and he apparently wanted to make sure his family had somewhere to live. But Sunday mid-morning, he shot and killed himself, CBS Los Angeles Protesters: Deep Education Cuts Put Future of PA Public Schools at Stake
(05/21/12) PHILADELPHIA - Saying the future of public schools in Pennsylvania is at stake, thousands of protesters are expected in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg and Allentown this week, railing against education cuts proposed by Governor Tom Corbett.
Recently, the Philadelphia school system announced it would close 40 schools next year and expects to lose 40 percent of its current enrollment in the next five years.
Gabe Morgan is Pennsylvania State Director for 32BJ SEIU, which represents school employees ranging from aides to bus drivers to maintenance workers. He says they chose Philadelphia for the rally over concerns that what's happening there could become commonplace in the Commonwealth.
"In Philadelphia, what we're seeing is really the first attempt to privatize a major public school system, and turn it into essentially a pass-through for money that would then go to some affiliated collection of charter schools."
Morgan says he also has major concerns about legislation making its way through Harrisburg that would place distressed schools under state control. He says there, too, Philadelphia schools serve as an example.
"Philadelphia has been under state control for the past ten years, and that's how it's gotten to the situation that it's in."
Morgan says while Governor Corbett claims the state doesn't have enough money to write bigger checks for public schools, he's turning his back on a potential revenue source that could bring in billions of dollars to the state.
"In Pennsylvania, our governor and Legislature have chosen not to significantly tax the world's largest natural gas supply. Instead they'd rather balance the budget by dismantling the public school system."
Governor Corbett has defended the cuts, saying they reflect money the state doesn't have. Morgan says not only do kids suffer when education budgets are slashed, but so do school employees who end up pink-slipped because their positions can no longer be funded.
Recently, the Philadelphia school system announced it would close 40 schools next year and expects to lose 40 percent of its current enrollment in the next five years.
Gabe Morgan is Pennsylvania State Director for 32BJ SEIU, which represents school employees ranging from aides to bus drivers to maintenance workers. He says they chose Philadelphia for the rally over concerns that what's happening there could become commonplace in the Commonwealth.
"In Philadelphia, what we're seeing is really the first attempt to privatize a major public school system, and turn it into essentially a pass-through for money that would then go to some affiliated collection of charter schools."
Morgan says he also has major concerns about legislation making its way through Harrisburg that would place distressed schools under state control. He says there, too, Philadelphia schools serve as an example.
"Philadelphia has been under state control for the past ten years, and that's how it's gotten to the situation that it's in."
Morgan says while Governor Corbett claims the state doesn't have enough money to write bigger checks for public schools, he's turning his back on a potential revenue source that could bring in billions of dollars to the state.
"In Pennsylvania, our governor and Legislature have chosen not to significantly tax the world's largest natural gas supply. Instead they'd rather balance the budget by dismantling the public school system."
Governor Corbett has defended the cuts, saying they reflect money the state doesn't have. Morgan says not only do kids suffer when education budgets are slashed, but so do school employees who end up pink-slipped because their positions can no longer be funded.
Saturday, May 19, 2012
16th PA Legislator Quits ALEC
The latest- Republican State Senator Stewart Greenleaf (R, 12, Bucks, Montgomery). Greenleaf has served on ALEC's Criminal Justice Task Force ( http://elliottgreenleaf.com/
Greenleaf wrote to Keystone Progress, saying "I have a membership with ALEC but because of concerns that have raised by my constituents I will not be renewing it."
Greenleaf is the 7th PA Republican to quit ALEC. Overall, 60 legislators have told Keystone Progress that they are not members of ALEC. KP has letters, emails or voice messages from all 60 to verify their disaffiliation.
You can help us get more legislators to quit, or see the entire list at wwwJustSayNoToALEC.com
Friday, May 18, 2012
ALEC’s Legislative Agenda on Guns
ALEC’s Legislative Agenda on
Guns
On American Legislative Exchange Council
task forces, corporate lobbyists and special interests vote as equals with
elected representatives on templates to change our laws, behind closed doors
with no press or public allowed to see the votes or deliberations. Members of
ALEC’s Public Safety and Elections Task Force were in charge of writing,
adopting, or voting on all bills involving guns. Corporate members of the task
force have included the National Rifle Association (NRA), Wal-Mart, Reed
Elsevier, the American Bail Coalition, Koch Industries, the Heartland
Institute, and Corrections Corporation of America.
In 2012, in the wake of the controversy
over Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, an NRA bill ALEC ratified as a model to
push for states across the country to adopt, the Public Safety and Elections
Task Force was disbanded by ALEC. In addition to the “Stand Your Ground” bill,
other ALEC model legislation on guns includes proposals that oppose efforts to
restrict the sale of “cop killer” bullets and assault weapons, a bill opposing
waiting periods for gun sales, and a bill to force universities to allow students
to carry guns on campus.
Supporting
“Stand Your Ground,” “Shoot First,” or “Kill at Will” Laws
·
The
“Castle Doctrine
Act”
expands traditional self-defense rights to create a roving right to stand and
shoot if threatened in public places and creates a legal presumption that a shooter
acted lawfully, making it difficult to obtain a conviction for killing an
unarmed person. Florida's controversial law was crafted by the NRA, which took
the bill to a closed door ALEC meeting and urged that it become a national
model, which is why the bill, also known as the “Stand Your Ground” or “Kill at
Will” law, is an ALEC “model” that has been adopted in whole or in part in over
two dozen states.
Opposing
Restrictions on Assault Weapons and “Cop Killer” Guns and Bullets
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution
on Semi-Automatic Firearms” expresses opposition to proposals by local,
state, and federal governments to restrict the sale of semi-automatic weapons,
known as assault weapons.
·
The
“Defense of Free
Market and Public Safety Resolution” opposes efforts by law enforcement to use their
purchasing power to buy law enforcement weapons only from gun manufacturers
that improve gun safety to protect kids and whose dealers are not notorious for
selling crime guns.
·
At ALEC’s Public Safety and Elections
Task Force 2011
meeting in Arizona, the NRA obtained unanimous support from ALEC’s
corporate and lawmaker members for a proposal to expressly bar cities from
banning machine guns.
Infringing on Local Law Enforcement’s Public Safety
Efforts
·
The
“Consistency
in Firearms Regulation Act” would prohibit local city or county governments
from enacting firearm regulations designed to protect public safety and suing
gun manufacturers.
·
The
“Concealed
Carry True Reciprocity Act” allows two states to recognize each
other’s concealed carry permits and the “Concealed
Carry Outright Recognition Act” requires a state to recognize a concealed
carry permit or license from another state without requiring reciprocal action
by that state. Traditionally, law enforcement groups have opposed legislation
to allow permits or otherwise authorize the concealment of firearms and have
urged governors to veto such statutes as well.
o In 2012, legislators in Kansas,
Maine,
and Wyoming
have introduced bills which would make their states recognize concealed carry
permits from every other state and which share language with ALEC’s model
Concealed Carry Outright Recognition Act.
·
ALEC’s
“Emergency
Powers Firearm Owner Protection Act” amends emergency powers laws to
prohibit the seizure or confiscation of firearms during a declared state of
emergency. Under this act, a police officer who does so would be held
criminally and civilly liable. The Center for Media and Democracy reports
this bill was introduced in 2006, just a few months after stories arose that
some guns were seized by Hurricane Katrina emergency responders in order to
restore public order.
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution
on Firearms Purchase Waiting Periods” opposes any federal, state, or local
government body imposing waiting periods during a sale of a gun.
·
The
“Campus
Personal Protection Act” would force universities to allow students to
possess guns on campus. In 2011 alone, 23
states introduced some form of legislation that would have forced colleges to
allow students and/or faculty to carry guns on campus.
Pushing
Firearm Programs for Children
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution
on Child Firearms Safety” and “Youth
Firearm Safety Resolution” endorses NRA programs on gun safety, and
recommends that schools adopt the NRA programs to teach children how to handle
guns, using an Eagle puppet that makes the NRA seem warm and fuzzy.
ALEC’s Polluter Agenda
ALEC’s Polluter Agenda
On
American Legislative Exchange Council task forces, corporate lobbyists and
special interests vote as equals with elected representatives on templates to
change our laws, behind closed doors with no press or public allowed to see the
votes or deliberations. ALEC
legislation benefits corporate profits at the expense of our environment and
our health by making it easier for polluters to spoil our water and our air and
by pushing climate change denial. ALEC proposals would destroy environmental
regulations and health safeguards, eliminate clean energy competition, allow
drilling on protected lands, and curtail recycling.
Repealing
Pollution Protections
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution in Opposition to EPA’s
Regulation of Greenhouse Gases from Mobile Sources” opposes a Supreme Court decision
that allowed the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases as
pollutants. The resolution dismisses climate change concerns through misleading
rhetoric.
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution in Support of the
Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act” supports the REINS Act,
legislation that would give Congress the authority to block the enforcement of
numerous federal protections, including clean air and water laws, safeguards
for mine workers, rules that prohibit the sale of tobacco to children, and even
protection from discrimination.
·
ALEC’s
“State Withdrawal from Regional
Climate Initiatives”
would pull states out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative or the Western
Climate Initiative, programs to cut greenhouse gases and carbon-dioxide
emissions. It also uses language that
denies that climate change is occurring.
·
ALEC’s
“Climate Accountability Act” creates hurdles for state
agencies attempting to regulate carbon gases by imposing cost assessments on
carbon regulation, without any parallel accounting required of corporations
whose actions are contributing to the climate changes underway.
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution in Opposition of
Carbon Dioxide Emission Standards”
opposes environmental protections on carbon dioxide emissions.
·
ALEC’s
“Conditioning Regulation of
Non-Pollutant Emissions on Science Act”
would impose new burdens on state regulatory efforts by creating a complex
process the state must go through before passing new environmental protection
regulations. The act would keep a state from responding quickly to public
health issues.
·
ALEC’s
“Intrastate Coal and Use Act” would prevent the EPA from
overruling state permits for coal mining and prevent federal regulation of dirty
coal products, like coal ash, if all the coal operations are conducted within
the borders of a single state.
·
ALEC’s
“Electricity Freedom Act” is an attack on states with
plans requiring companies to get a certain percentage of their electricity from
renewable sources, undermining support for cleaner energy development.
Opposing
Public Health Safeguards
·
ALEC’s
“Voluntary Childhood Lead Exposure
Control Act”
gives legal protection to corporations against victims of lead poisoning.
·
ALEC’s
“Environmental Priorities Act” requires that state environmental
protections be approved by a corporate-backed panel where there is no
representative from a public interest environmental group.
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution Supporting the Private
Ownership of Property”
expresses opposition to public interest regulations that protect public health
or the environment such as pollution emission limits.
·
ALEC’s
“Environmental Services
Public-Private Partnership Act”
privatizes public water and sewage services and would prohibit local
governments from requiring contractors to meet labor standards.
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution on Packaging and the
Municipal Solid Waste Stream”
expresses opposition to waste reduction and mandated recycling laws.
·
ALEC’s
“Resolution to Retain State
Authority over Coal Ash as Non-Hazardous Waste” opposes federal regulation of
coal combustion waste (known as coal ash) as hazardous, although coal ash
contains large quantities of toxic metals, including mercury and arsenic, that
can get in our water.
Blocking
Conservation
·
ALEC’s
“Eminent Domain Authority for
Federal Lands Act”
would authorize state governments to open federal public land -- such as
national parks and protected wilderness areas -- for oil, gas, and coal
exploration. It would reverse the U.S.
Supreme Court’s constitutional interpretation that Congress has broader power
to enact laws to manage federal land than states in Kleppe v. New Mexico (1976).
·
ALEC’s
“Regulatory Costs Fairness Act” and “The Private Property Protection
Act” make
taxpayers liable to land owners, including corporations, that claim their
property value is diminished by government regulations, including laws that
protect neighbors from polluters.
Criminalizing
Environmental Protection
·
ALEC’s
“Environmental Corrupt
Organizations - Preventative Legislation and Neutralization (ECO-PLAN) Act” criminalizes environmental
activism and gives the government the power to defund and shut down alleged
“eco-terrorist” activities, but does not provide a definition of “animal and
ecological terrorism.” This bill potentially gives law enforcement broad
discretion to silence critics of environmentally hazardous corporate activities
and business practices.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Gas Price Bill Could Come With High Costs Away From The Pump
(05/17/12) HARRISBURG, Penn. - Supporters say it could save Pennsylvanians money at the pump, but health advocates are waving a red flag. They caution that a gas-price bill scheduled to be debated by a U.S. House committee today comes with a far higher price tag: human health.
The Gasoline Regulations Act(H.B. 4471) would put a panel in place that could reduce Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on greenhouse gas and sulfur emissions from refineries. Ultimately, it could lower air-quality standards for ozone.
Peter Iwanowicz, head of the American Lung Association Healthy Air Campaign, says his group surveyed likely voters in Pennsylvania about the issue.
"We specifically asked whether the EPA should tighten standards to provide cleaner-burning gasoline, and 60 percent of likely voters want stronger standards there."
Iwanowicz says oil producers see the legislation as another chance to increase production and record high profits.
"Big oil has been looking for over two decades to inject the feasibility and cost test into this process. They've been turned back by EPA; they've been turned back by Congress; they've been turned back, in fact, by a Supreme Court decision."
Factors to consider rise above a cheaper gallon of gas, he adds.
"Air pollution makes people sick; it cuts lives short. The last thing we need right now, particularly in Pennsylvania, is a roll-back in clean air protection or blocking of EPA setting new standards to protect public health."
Kentucky Congressman Ed Whitfield, a co-sponsor of the bill, calls it a reality check on the impact federal regulations can have at the pump. Iwanowicz says a more accurate description of the measure is "a wish list for Big Oil."
The Gasoline Regulations Act(H.B. 4471) would put a panel in place that could reduce Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on greenhouse gas and sulfur emissions from refineries. Ultimately, it could lower air-quality standards for ozone.
Peter Iwanowicz, head of the American Lung Association Healthy Air Campaign, says his group surveyed likely voters in Pennsylvania about the issue.
"We specifically asked whether the EPA should tighten standards to provide cleaner-burning gasoline, and 60 percent of likely voters want stronger standards there."
Iwanowicz says oil producers see the legislation as another chance to increase production and record high profits.
"Big oil has been looking for over two decades to inject the feasibility and cost test into this process. They've been turned back by EPA; they've been turned back by Congress; they've been turned back, in fact, by a Supreme Court decision."
Factors to consider rise above a cheaper gallon of gas, he adds.
"Air pollution makes people sick; it cuts lives short. The last thing we need right now, particularly in Pennsylvania, is a roll-back in clean air protection or blocking of EPA setting new standards to protect public health."
Kentucky Congressman Ed Whitfield, a co-sponsor of the bill, calls it a reality check on the impact federal regulations can have at the pump. Iwanowicz says a more accurate description of the measure is "a wish list for Big Oil."
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Report: States with Stronger Alcohol Controls Have Lower Alcohol-Related Traffic Death Rates
HARRISBURG,
PA (May 15, 2012) — States that more heavily control the sale and
distribution of alcohol have lower alcohol-related traffic deaths than
states that take a more hands off approach, according to a Keystone
Research Center policy brief.These findings differ from those of economists John Pulito and Antony Davies, PhD, whose research was published by two “free market think tanks”—Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Foundation and George Mason University’s Mercatus Center.
The reason that KRC’s brief reaches different conclusions is simple: The Pulito-Davies research omitted two variables that are critical to explaining differences in alcohol-related traffic fatality rates among the states — average vehicle miles traveled and average per capita income. When you include those factors, Pennsylvania has an estimated 58 fewer alcohol-related traffic deaths among adults each year than it would have if the state had no controls over the distribution of alcohol.
In The Road Less Traveled: States That More Tightly Control the Sale and Distribution of Alcohol Have Lower Alcohol-Related Fatalities, Keystone aims to set the record straight for policymakers and others who have cited the Pulito-Davies research.
“What impact will privatization have on the safety of our roads and highways? This is a critical question for policymakers to answer, and they should have the facts,” said Mark Price, PhD, Keystone labor economist and co-author of the policy brief.
The Keystone policy brief also reinforces the findings of a task force of public health experts appointed by the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In April, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services published a piece in the peer-reviewed American Journal of Preventive Medicine finding that alcohol privatization contributes to increases in alcohol consumption, creating a greater risk of alcohol abuse and its associated social costs.
“It is not surprising that the Keystone Research Center found that state control of alcohol distribution is associated with fewer alcohol-related fatalities,” said Task Force member Karen Glanz, PhD, MPH, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “This is in line with the Task Force's conclusion that retail alcohol privatization increases the risk of excess consumption of alcohol and associated risks. It is also in keeping with a larger body of research that has found negative social impacts from privatization of alcohol distribution.”
Dr. Glanz is the George A. Weiss University Professor, Professor of Epidemiology and Nursing, and Director of the Center for Health Behavior Research at Penn.
In the policy brief, Keystone researchers provide an overview of the Task Force’s findings, then reproduce the analysis done by Pulito and Davies except for adding in two omitted variables — vehicle miles traveled and per capita income. KRC found:
- Among adults (age 20 and older): Heavy control states (those that maintain control over the sale of at least two types of alcohol at the retail level and at least one type at the wholesale level — a group that includes Pennsylvania) have lower alcohol-related traffic fatality rates among adults each year than states that have no such controls. Pennsylvania has an estimated 58 fewer alcohol-related traffic deaths among adults each year than it would have if the state had no controls over the distribution of alcohol.
- Among youth (ages 15-19): There was no difference found in fatality rates for alcohol-related car accidents for youth ages 15 to 19 based on the degree of state control over the distribution and sale of alcohol.
- Among children (under age 15): There are lower fatality rates for alcohol-related car accidents for children under the age of 15 in states with heavy control over alcohol sales and distribution. (Pulito and Davies did not examine this group.)
“The Pulito-Davies research has been used repeatedly to muddy the waters regarding the negative social impacts of alcohol privatization,” said Stephen Herzenberg, PhD, economist and executive director of the Keystone Research Center. “It’s important that policymakers have accurate data on the significant impact of alcohol privatization.”
Read the full policy brief
The Keystone Research Center is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization that promotes a more prosperous and equitable Pennsylvania economy. Learn more: www.keystoneresearch.org.
Senator Mark Warner, Leading Democratic Critic of Volcker Rule, Invests With J.P. Morgan Unit Likely Affected By Volcker Rule
Read entire article at Republic Report
In March, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) led members from both parties in introducing legislation to delaythe implementation of the Volcker Rule, a new regulation to limit risky trading by big banks. He was joined by Pat Toomey (R-PA), one of the biggest proponents of financial deregulation in the Senate. The legislation may come back to haunt Warner, who has cultivated close financial ties with J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.
Until the news last week, revealing that J.P. Morgan lost at least $2 billion due to a synthetic credit securities trading scheme, the bank had been leading an impressive lobbying campaign to weaken financial reform. The bank’s CEO, Jamie Dimon, and his legions of K Street lobbyists (over 48 registeredlobbyists), had worked to chisel away at the Volcker Rule. The measure, scheduled for implementation this summer, would have applied to the type of trading that resulted in the loses for the bank.
An analyst with Guggenheim Securities recently observed that a delay in the Volcker Rule would be a very positive step for big banks like J.P. Morgan.
Just as J.P. Morgan’s lobbying now faces new scrutiny, Warner’s ties to the investment bank should be placed under the microscope. The Huffington Post noted that in the first three months of last year, the senator had received over a quarter of his donations from the bank, which had organized a fundraiser in his honor. But the ties between Warner and J.P. Morgan run deep. A Republic Report review of Warner’s personal finance disclosures reveal that the Virginia senator keeps a large amount of his money invested with Dimon’s bank. Most surprising is the fact that Warner is among the elite group of investors with money in Highbridge Capital, a J.P. Morgan-owned hedge fund that might be affected by the Volcker Rule.
Some highlights from the Warner disclosure:
Warner invests up to $5,015,000 in J.P. Morgan’s Strategic IncomeOpportunities Fund
Warner invests up to $5,015,000 in J.P. Morgan’s Asia Equity Fund
Warner invests up to $600,000 in J.P. Morgan’s Tax Free Bond Fund
Warner invests up to $250,000 in J.P. Morgan’s Tax Free Reserve Sweep Fund
Warner invests up to $1,000,000 in J.P. Morgan’s U.S. Equity Fund
Warner invests up to $5,000,000 in J.P. Morgan’s Highbridge Capital
Warner invests up to $5,000,000 in J.P. Morgan’s Highbridge Quantitative Commodities
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
14 PA Legislators flee from corporate front group ALEC
HARRISBURG, PA —
ALEC is behind the efforts to pass bills that strip away union rights, scale back child labor laws, attack the regulation power of environmental agencies, suppress voter rights with strict identification requirements, eliminate the social safety net, and privatize public services. ALEC is not just another public policy organization, it is a corporate front group supporting some of the most radical and dangerous legislation in the nation.
The fourteen legislators come from both major parties, with eight Democrats and six Republicans separating from ALEC. All legislators listed as being affiliated with ALEC have documented ties, either publicly stating their prior affiliation or from public documents (Right to Know Law documents, DOS campaign finance reports, or PA Ethics filings).2
“We are thrilled that so many Pennsylvania legislators have decided to quit ALEC,” said Keystone Progress executive director Michael Morrill. “They have courageously decided to stand with the people instead of the corporate lobbyists.”
This is the list of PA legislators with ties to ALEC who are now saying they are not members:
· Rep. Harhai, Ted (D) H58· Rep. Harper, Kate (R) H61 · Rep. Keller, William (D) H184 · Rep. Kotik, Nick (D) H45 · Rep. Markosek, Joseph (D) H25 · Rep. Major, Sandra (R) H111 · Rep. Micozzie, Nicholas (R) H163 · Rep. Mustio, Mark (R) H44 · Rep. Readshaw, Harry (D) H36 Rep. Petrarca, Joseph (D) H55 · Rep. Turzai, Mike (R) H28) · Sen. Boscola, Lisa (D) S18 · Sen. Pippy, John (R) S37 · Sen. Washington, Leanna (D) S4 · Sen. Williams, Anthony (D) S8
Sen. Anthony Williams, who has used state funding for ALEC3, vociferously protested being identified with ALEC. “As a staunch advocate for school choice, I’m often invited to attend and speak at myriad events, locally and nationally, held by those who share my beliefs and those who vigorously oppose them. I make no apologies for my views on choice, because a broad set of educational options is among the best hopes students have to attain the skills needed to be productive and competitive in a global, 21st century society. However, I’ve never sought membership in the American Legislative Exchange Council nor have I ever been a member,” said Williams. “Lastly, ALEC does not represent my values or beliefs.”
Sen. Williams’ inclusion is based on information obtained from Right to Know Law requests filed by Keystone Progress with both the House and Senate.3Thirty other legislators, with no prior ties to ALEC, have also publicly stated that they are not affiliated.1
Fifty-one legislators are known to be members of ALEC.2 There may be other PA members, but because ALEC does not publish its membership list it is impossible to know the entire list with certainty.(Members in bold rednewly listed from new RTKL information3)
· Rep. Adolph, William R 165· Rep. Baker, Matthew R 68 · Rep. Barrar, Stephen R 160 · Rep. John Bear (R, 97,Lancaster) · Rep. Boback, Karen R 117 · Rep. Boyd, Scott R 43 · Rep. Clymer, Paul R 145 · Rep. Cox, Jim R 129 · Rep. Day, Gary R 187 · Rep. Delozier, Sheryl R 88 · Rep. Evans, John R 5 · Rep. Gabler, Matt R 75 · Rep. Geist, Richard R 79 · Rep. Gingrich, Mauree R 101 · Rep. Godshall, Robert R 53 · Rep. Grell, Glen R 87 · Rep. Grove, Seth R 196 · Rep. Hahn, Marcia R 138 · Rep. Harhart, Julie (R, 183, Lehigh, Northampton) · Rep. Helm, Susan R 104 · Rep. Tim Hennessey (R, 26, Chester) · Rep. Hess, Dick R 78 · Rep. Hutchinson, Scott R 64 · Rep. Killion, Thomas R 168 · Rep. Knowles, Jerry R 124 · Rep. Marsico, Ron R 105 · Rep. Metcalfe, Daryl R 12 · Rep. Miller, Ron R 93 · Rep. Pickett, Tina R 110 · Rep. Rapp, Kathy R 65 · Rep. Saylor, Stan R 94 · Rep. Schroder, Curt R 155 · Rep. Smith, Sam (R, 66, Armstrong, Indiana, Jefferson) · Rep. Stephens, Todd R 151 · Rep. Stern, Jerry R 80 · Rep. Stevenson, Richard R 8 · Rep. Taylor, John R 177 · Rep. W. Curtis Thomas (D, 181, Philadelphia) · Rep. Toepel, Marcy R 147 · Rep. Toohil, Tarah R 116 · Sen. Argall, David (R, 29, Berks, Carbon, Lehigh, Monroe, Monroe, Schuylkill) · Sen. Lisa Baker (R, 20, Luzerne, Monroe, Pike, Susquehanna, Wayne, Wyoming) · Sen. Browne, Patrick (R, 16, Lehigh, Monroe, Northampton) · Sen. Corman, Jacob (R, 34, Centre, Juniata, Mifflin, Perry, Union) · Sen. Earll, Jane (R, 49, Erie) · Sen. Eichelberger, John (R, 30, Bedford, Blair, Fulton, Huntingdon, Mifflin) · Sen. Greenleaf, Stewart R 12 · Sen. McIlhinney,Charles R 10 · Sen. Piccola, Jeffrey R 15 · Sen. Robbins, Robert D. R 50
The
1www.justsaynotoalec.com Website maintained by Keystone Progress
2ALEC membership summarized here http://tinyurl.com/ 3Right to Know Law information obtained by Keystone Progress from PA Senate. http://www.scribd.com/ 4ALEC Exposed, http://sourcewatch.org/index. | |
Keystone Progress is Pennsylvania’s largest online progressive organization, with over 270,000 subscribers. KP uses the Internet and new media to organize online at the state and local level; and utilizes cutting-edge earned media strategies to promote a progressive agenda and counter right-wing misinformation.
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)