The Pennsylvania Newspaper Assn.'s announcement today it had named the Erie Times-News "Newspaper of the Year" was hailed by itself and its feckless sycophants in the local blogosphere with unbecoming exultation. As a reality check, here's a copy of the blog I wrote when the PNA's foundation announced the annual 2009 press awards last April.
____________________________________________________
In today’s edition, the Erie Times News announced that “thirteen Erie Times-News writers, photographers and page designers earned 18 top awards” in the Pennsylvania Newspaper Assn’s 2009 Keystone Press Awards statewide competition (By my count, it’s 17, but whose counting?).
In that context, Managing Editor Pat Howard boasted: "These awards reach into all corners of our newsroom to highlight excellence both in print and online. It's well-deserved recognition for the journalists being honored, and a reflection of the talent and commitment our entire staff brings to bear every day in serving our audiences in ways no other news organization in the region can.”
That seems curiously at odds with my longstanding contention that the Times-News’s press credentials are, with a few exceptions, by and large mediocre at best, its news and editorial coverage of issues, people and events important to its Erie readers usually inept, shallow, biased, unprofessional, irrelevant, mis and uninformed.
Unless I'm wrong, how could the Times-News seemingly have scored so lavishly in this year’s press awards competition?
Let’s put that into perspective. The article said that “The Times-News competes in Division II, for newspapers in the 50,000-to-99,999 circulation.” What the article didn’t do is put that distinction in context, which is needed to grasp its implications.
For purposes of the Keystone Awards, the commonwealth’s newspapers are divided into eight divisions. Division I includes Pennsylvania’s most prominent newspapers with the largest circulations. There are only seven of them: the largest, the Philadelphia Inquirer which also publishes the Philadelphia Daily News; the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, the Allentown Morning Call, the Pittsburgh Tribune, the Harrisburg Patriot-News and - although it’s technically a statewide cooperative news service, not a newspaper - the Associated Press.
Division Two consists of six newspapers: the Erie Times-News, the York Daily Record/Sunday News, the Scranton Times-Tribune, the Reading Eagle, the Bucks County Courier-Times, and the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal/Sunday News. In each division .there are about 40 award categories, with awards being given for first and second place winner, and in a few cases honorable mention. That means there are about 120 different award opportunities available to Division II newspapers, of which the Times-News received awards in 17.
However, less than half the categories deal with the principal news and editorial writing functions, which are the hallmark of any newspaper, and about half of those encompass sports writing, a lesser function in terms of the broad public interest.
In the most important news writing category, investigative reporting, the Times-News did not score, beat out by the York Daily Record/Sunday News and the Scranton Times-Tribune.
In another key function, editorial writing, the Times-News took a second place. In commentary/columns, the Times-News was outwritten by the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal and the York Sunday News. In the spot news category, the Times-News was bested by the York Daily Record and the Reading Eagle. In the ongoing news category, it tanked, losing out to the Bucks County and Scranton newspapers.
The Times-News took a first in the Special Projects category and second place in the “niche” category, whatever that is. It also took a second place in news series writing, firsts in feature and /feature beat writing, a first for a business/consumer story, a first in sports beat reporting, a second in feature photo, first in sports photo and second in online journalistic innovation (the internet). It lost out in News Beat reporting to the Reading and Lancaster papers. Photographer Jack Hanrahan distinguished himself with a top Specialty award in the visual category in competion with all of Pennsylvania’s newspapers, including the Big Seven.
Though the Times-News appears to have won its proportionate share of press awards, the most telling factor is that none of them was in the top most vital news and editorial reporting and writing categories
Another interesting point to note is that all of the Times-News’s A-list reporters, writers and columnists were skunked in the competition, like Howard, Ed Mead, Kevin Cuneo, Kevin Flowers, John Guerriero and Ed Palattella.
Also noteworthy is that most of the top news and editorial writing awards went to newspapers in the more densely populated eastern part of the state, where, unlike the Times-News, they face intense competition from other newspapers, including big metropolitan sheets.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Erie news media, bloggers, ignore Phil English's mad dash through the "revolving doors"
“Although the influence powerhouses that line Washington's K Street* are just a few miles from the U.S. Capitol building, the most direct path between the two doesn't necessarily involve public transportation. Instead, it's through a door—a revolving door that shuffles former federal employees into jobs as lobbyists, consultants and strategists just as the door pulls former hired guns into government careers. While members of the executive branch, Congress and senior congressional staffers spin in and out of the private and public sectors, so too does privilege, power, access and, of course, money.” *(K Street is the legendary lane in the nation’s capital where lobbying organizations are concentrated. From Open Secrets: The Center for Responsive Politics – Revolving Doors.
A comprehensive report several years ago done for the national public interest organization, Public Citizen, states unequivocally that “Lobbying is the top career choice for departing members of Congress. It also states that “Departing Republican members lead Democrats in the rush to K Street.”
Former Congressman Phil English of Erie, a Republican who represented Pennsylvania’s House District Three for 14 years until he was defeated last year by U.S. Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper, an Erie Democrat, fits the revolving door mold perfectly, joining the prominent lobbying and law firm Arent Fox in Washington D.C. following his loss last November to Ms. Dahlkemper.
Only a few months out of office, barely breaking stride, Mr. English dashed through the revolving doors separating his congressional role - where he dealt extensively with issues and institutions in the private commercial and government sectors - from the private sector, where he will now deal with Congress on their behalf.
Mr. English began writing a column recently for former Erie Times-News Reporter Peter Panepento’s blog, Global/Outside Erie. Although he alludes to his new position with Arent Fox LLP in his inaugural column, he never once mentions the words “lobby” or “lobbying,” even though Arent Fox is one of the most prestigious lobbying firms in the nation.
It’s not located on K Street, but it boasts a prominent venue on Connecticut Ave, NW, not too far from the White House and the U.S. Capitol Building with offices in New York City and Los Angeles. Besides lobbying Congress and government agencies on behalf of powerful clients, Arent Fox is a busy litigator in virtually every field of commerce, keeping its more than 300 lawyers busy representing clients in litigation.
In his first column for Outside/Global Erie, Mr. English identifies himself as Arent Fox’s Senior Government Relations Advisor, a supervisory position. Some of the more prominent lobbyists whom Mr. English joins in his new job are or have been Dale Bumpers, former Arkansas governor and U.S. Senator; John Culver, former U.S. Senator for Iowa, both of whom currently work with him at the firm's Washington, D.C. office; and Fred Thompson, former U.S. Senator for Tennessee, Actor and 2008 presidential candidate who once lobbied for the company.
Under the “cooling off period” prescribed by federal law, Mr. English may not directly lobby his former colleagues in the House of Representative until a year after he was voted out of office last year. But as Arent Fox’s Senior Government Relations Advisor, he may and does legally supervise and advise the firm’s lobbyists who do, a difference without much of a distinction. Whether he will retain that title and function after the cooling off period or proceed actively to lobby his former congressional colleagues is perhaps a question he can answer in an ensuing column.
In his first column several weeks ago, Mr. English characterized his day job with Arent Fox somewhat euphemistically, thusly: “My new professional home is Arent Fox LLP, a highly regarded Washington area law firm. As their Senior Government Relations Advisor, my practice involves developing strategies and solving problems in many of the areas I was active in as Congressman – healthcare, trade, taxes, and energy among others. The firm has given me a wonderful opportunity to continue my work as part of a world-class bipartisan team.”
The key phrase within that statement which gives one pause is “in many of the areas I was active in as Congressman.” While a member of Congress, Mr. English was endowed with secret status in dealing with sensitive classified government information. Though prohibited from using that insider information other than in his official capacity as congressman, there’s nothing to prevent him from surreptitiously utilizing it as an Arent Fox operative. Indeed, though he and they would probably deny it, that’s one of the main reasons why the firm hired him. Inside information and privileged access. It’s the fatal flaw in the government’s revolving door architecture.
Though Mr. English has every legal right to engage the revolving door syndrome –hundreds of congressmen before him have – and Arent Fox to hire him, it’s his ethical mores which are in serious question here. Mr. English says the job with Arent Fox has given him a “wonderful opportunity to continue my work (my emphasis) as part of a world-class bipartisan team.”
Is that a Freudian slip? Was he subliminally or consciously working for Arent Fox as a congressman?
More significantly, why wouldn’t Mr. English offer his post-congressional services to a recognized and respected non-profit public interest organization and use the skills, access and insider information he acquired at public expense while in Congress to advance a broad public agenda consistent with his work in Congress? After all, the taxpayers continue to pay him through the generous, indeed exhorbitant pension and retirement benefits package which Congress, with Mr. English’s collaboration, have bestowed upon themselves.
It's noteworthy that neither the mainstream Erie news media nor the local blogoshphere have noted, much less challenged Mr. English’s mad dash through the revolving door, nor his self-serving characterization as anything but the lobbyist/opportunist he really is. Did the sponsor of the blog to which Mr. English contributes, a former newspaper reporter, check his journalist credentials at the door when he launched his blog?
A comprehensive report several years ago done for the national public interest organization, Public Citizen, states unequivocally that “Lobbying is the top career choice for departing members of Congress. It also states that “Departing Republican members lead Democrats in the rush to K Street.”
Former Congressman Phil English of Erie, a Republican who represented Pennsylvania’s House District Three for 14 years until he was defeated last year by U.S. Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper, an Erie Democrat, fits the revolving door mold perfectly, joining the prominent lobbying and law firm Arent Fox in Washington D.C. following his loss last November to Ms. Dahlkemper.
Only a few months out of office, barely breaking stride, Mr. English dashed through the revolving doors separating his congressional role - where he dealt extensively with issues and institutions in the private commercial and government sectors - from the private sector, where he will now deal with Congress on their behalf.
Mr. English began writing a column recently for former Erie Times-News Reporter Peter Panepento’s blog, Global/Outside Erie. Although he alludes to his new position with Arent Fox LLP in his inaugural column, he never once mentions the words “lobby” or “lobbying,” even though Arent Fox is one of the most prestigious lobbying firms in the nation.
It’s not located on K Street, but it boasts a prominent venue on Connecticut Ave, NW, not too far from the White House and the U.S. Capitol Building with offices in New York City and Los Angeles. Besides lobbying Congress and government agencies on behalf of powerful clients, Arent Fox is a busy litigator in virtually every field of commerce, keeping its more than 300 lawyers busy representing clients in litigation.
In his first column for Outside/Global Erie, Mr. English identifies himself as Arent Fox’s Senior Government Relations Advisor, a supervisory position. Some of the more prominent lobbyists whom Mr. English joins in his new job are or have been Dale Bumpers, former Arkansas governor and U.S. Senator; John Culver, former U.S. Senator for Iowa, both of whom currently work with him at the firm's Washington, D.C. office; and Fred Thompson, former U.S. Senator for Tennessee, Actor and 2008 presidential candidate who once lobbied for the company.
Under the “cooling off period” prescribed by federal law, Mr. English may not directly lobby his former colleagues in the House of Representative until a year after he was voted out of office last year. But as Arent Fox’s Senior Government Relations Advisor, he may and does legally supervise and advise the firm’s lobbyists who do, a difference without much of a distinction. Whether he will retain that title and function after the cooling off period or proceed actively to lobby his former congressional colleagues is perhaps a question he can answer in an ensuing column.
In his first column several weeks ago, Mr. English characterized his day job with Arent Fox somewhat euphemistically, thusly: “My new professional home is Arent Fox LLP, a highly regarded Washington area law firm. As their Senior Government Relations Advisor, my practice involves developing strategies and solving problems in many of the areas I was active in as Congressman – healthcare, trade, taxes, and energy among others. The firm has given me a wonderful opportunity to continue my work as part of a world-class bipartisan team.”
The key phrase within that statement which gives one pause is “in many of the areas I was active in as Congressman.” While a member of Congress, Mr. English was endowed with secret status in dealing with sensitive classified government information. Though prohibited from using that insider information other than in his official capacity as congressman, there’s nothing to prevent him from surreptitiously utilizing it as an Arent Fox operative. Indeed, though he and they would probably deny it, that’s one of the main reasons why the firm hired him. Inside information and privileged access. It’s the fatal flaw in the government’s revolving door architecture.
Though Mr. English has every legal right to engage the revolving door syndrome –hundreds of congressmen before him have – and Arent Fox to hire him, it’s his ethical mores which are in serious question here. Mr. English says the job with Arent Fox has given him a “wonderful opportunity to continue my work (my emphasis) as part of a world-class bipartisan team.”
Is that a Freudian slip? Was he subliminally or consciously working for Arent Fox as a congressman?
More significantly, why wouldn’t Mr. English offer his post-congressional services to a recognized and respected non-profit public interest organization and use the skills, access and insider information he acquired at public expense while in Congress to advance a broad public agenda consistent with his work in Congress? After all, the taxpayers continue to pay him through the generous, indeed exhorbitant pension and retirement benefits package which Congress, with Mr. English’s collaboration, have bestowed upon themselves.
It's noteworthy that neither the mainstream Erie news media nor the local blogoshphere have noted, much less challenged Mr. English’s mad dash through the revolving door, nor his self-serving characterization as anything but the lobbyist/opportunist he really is. Did the sponsor of the blog to which Mr. English contributes, a former newspaper reporter, check his journalist credentials at the door when he launched his blog?
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Energy contradictions at the Erie Times-News
In its blind zeal to promote development at any cost in Erie, the Times-News breathlessly editorialized on behalf of Lake Erie Biofuels Tuesday which has been producing biofuels at the old Hammermill plant site for a year or so now.
Applauding the plant's planned production expansion from 40 million to 70 million gallons annually with the help of a $1.6 million state loan, the editorial ignored the internally inconsistent claim that the company's newly announced expansion will help the nation to achieve "energy independence" despite the fact that virtually all its heavily taxpayer-subsidized product(amounting to about $1 a gallon) will continue to be exported outside the U.S.
The Times-News hailed the fact that the company has changed its name to "Hero X," appropos to nothing in evidence except that "The name change is part of a branding campaign to reach a worldwide market," while boasting that its use, among other raw materials, of vegetable oils would promote environmentally benign goals. This further ignores the hard lessons of the recent ethanol craze which resulted in a 35 percent increase in the national average consumer cost of foods like bread, cereals, poultry, beef and other foodstuffs dependent primarily upon ethanol feedstocks such as corn and grains.
On one hand, the editorial quoted a company official as saying:"We believe in biodiesel and its role for our country in increasing our energy independence (my emphasis)and improving our environment." But on the other hand it quotes the same official as saying "the plant is strategically located to export(my emphasis)its products using rail, highways and Lake Erie."
Oblivious to the inherent contradiction, the Times-News editorial exulted: "It's exciting to realize that Erie can help lead the way as Americans make good on our decades-old pledge to achieve energy independence."
To date, Erie Biofuels has exported most if not all of its product across the oceans, where there are more lucrative markets. There's no reason to believe that will change anytime soon,if ever. How does that promote national energy independence? Exporting domestic biolfuels and U.S. energy independence are mutually exclusive conceits.
Applauding the plant's planned production expansion from 40 million to 70 million gallons annually with the help of a $1.6 million state loan, the editorial ignored the internally inconsistent claim that the company's newly announced expansion will help the nation to achieve "energy independence" despite the fact that virtually all its heavily taxpayer-subsidized product(amounting to about $1 a gallon) will continue to be exported outside the U.S.
The Times-News hailed the fact that the company has changed its name to "Hero X," appropos to nothing in evidence except that "The name change is part of a branding campaign to reach a worldwide market," while boasting that its use, among other raw materials, of vegetable oils would promote environmentally benign goals. This further ignores the hard lessons of the recent ethanol craze which resulted in a 35 percent increase in the national average consumer cost of foods like bread, cereals, poultry, beef and other foodstuffs dependent primarily upon ethanol feedstocks such as corn and grains.
On one hand, the editorial quoted a company official as saying:"We believe in biodiesel and its role for our country in increasing our energy independence (my emphasis)and improving our environment." But on the other hand it quotes the same official as saying "the plant is strategically located to export(my emphasis)its products using rail, highways and Lake Erie."
Oblivious to the inherent contradiction, the Times-News editorial exulted: "It's exciting to realize that Erie can help lead the way as Americans make good on our decades-old pledge to achieve energy independence."
To date, Erie Biofuels has exported most if not all of its product across the oceans, where there are more lucrative markets. There's no reason to believe that will change anytime soon,if ever. How does that promote national energy independence? Exporting domestic biolfuels and U.S. energy independence are mutually exclusive conceits.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Bar Assn. correctly disses Domitrovich
I rarely agree with lawyers, but the Erie County Bar Assn.'s
poll released yesterday evaluating county judges up for ten-year retention in the Nov. 3 election, got it exactly right when a pluralty recommended against the retention of Judge Stephanie Domitrovich. In my opinion Domitrovich is utterly unqualified to serve as dogcatcher in Erie County, much less as judge.
Unaccountably, the Erie Times-News article reporting on the bar association poll failed to flesh out the story, simply giving the rating scores of the three candidates up for retention, also including Judges Kelly and Dunlavey, who were rightly recommended. Covering a mere seven or eight column inches as published online, the sketchy story was co-reported by Lisa Thompson and Ed Pallatella, writer overkill if there ever was for such a meager epistle.
Domitrovich's service as a county judge since 1989, if one can call it that, followed by her ten-year retention by county voters in 1999, is testament to their collective ignorance when it comes to judging judges. Let's hope their collective IQ has been elevated sufficiently in time for the November election to heed the county bar association's enlightened recommendation against Domitrovich's retention, of which she is wholly unworthy.
In the interests of full disclosure, I have never been a party in litigation in Domitrovich's court. I was an observer in an orphan's court proceedings in 2007 involving a friend of mine - let's call him "Andy" - seeking to escape the legal clutches of an abusive son who controlled the substantial inheritance his slightly impaired father had received upon the death of his mother several years earlier, a son who forced him unjustly to reside in a substandard assisted living facility against his informed wishes.
In ruling against the father, Domitrovich trampled all over his due
process rights, among other things denying him the legal right to be present at the first hearing on his case in her court which was conducted without his knowledge and ended with his virtual incarceration, rendering any reversal against herself of Domitrovich's initial ruling a very steep, and as it turned out, impossible climb.
Why? Because the abusive son, striving to gain unquestioned control of his father's inheritance, was represented by an attorney who was a member of a law firm with a familiar name and high-powered political connections in Erie which need not be elaborated, David Ridge. Domitrovich, who received campaign money from at least one member of that firm, baldly acquiesced to the Thrasimicusian precept of realpoliticks that "might makes right." It was power politics in the guise of justice at its ugliest.
So disorganized were Domitrovich and her courtroom staff, that she did not see the father's brief seeking to unseat his son as his "guardian" until minutes before a second dispositive hearing was underway.
But just to make certain the impoverished father, denied his rightful inheritance by his abusive son, didn't prevail, Domitrovich appointed to represent him an incompetent sycophant whose represention more reflected the son's cupidity rather than the father's best interests. In addition, she exercised on the stand impermissible and undue influence on the father, craftily leading him in directions opposite to his wishes.
The father lost his case, his inheritance, his personal freedom and, denied the expert care his inheritance would have afforded him, in less than a year, his life. He died, the doctors said, of cancer. But in my untutored opinion, "Andy" succumbed to a broken heart. Soon thereafter his abusive son claimed a significant portion of his father's inheritance which might have been used, as intended by his mother, to enhance and extend his life.
This is not the first time Domitrovich has been found lacking by an official judicial evaluation panel. Following her retention as county judge in 1999, she presented herself as a candidate in 2001 for election to the State Superior Court. In that year's state judicary elections, she was the only candidate whom the Pennsylvania Judicial Evaluation Commission gave a "not recommended" rating.
In reaching that decision the Commission said it had "received numerous
and consistent reports concerning the Candidate’s shortcomings as a judge that were found credible and were neither acknowledged nor sufficiently refuted by the Candidate.
"Specifically, the Commission found that the Candidate lacks proper judicial temperament and decorum, often exhibiting a lack of proper respect for lawyers and litigants in her courtroom. There was a significant concern that she frequently adopts one side of an argument presented to her, failing to give proper weight and consideration to the opposite position.
"Reports also suggested," the Commission said, "that the Candidate can and does lose her temper in the courtroom. Most significantly, the Commission observed that the Candidate was a poor listener, a critical weakness in a prospective appellate court judge. Accordingly, the Commission concluded that the Candidate lacks the skills necessary to serve adequately as a Judge of the Superior Court."
These were the exact failings wich led to a gross instance of miscarried justice in the case I cite above.
One wonders how a judge with those articulated disqualifications is equipped to serve on any court, much less the state Superior Court. Do Erie Countians deserve a judge who, according to her peers, "lacks proper judicial temperament and decorum," or one who "lacks the skills necessary to serve adequately" on the appellate court level? I don't think so.
Her judicial disqualifications aside, Domitrovich's clownish antics in the courtroom are legend. She once recessed a hearing in mid-progress, inconveniencing all parties, some of whom had travelled miles to reach the courthouse, because she had a hair appointment.
Don't be deceived by Domitrovich's glitzy but shallow self-contrived resume, voluminusly padded with inconsequeantial but high-sounding attributes. Vote "NO" in November against the retention of Domitrovich!
poll released yesterday evaluating county judges up for ten-year retention in the Nov. 3 election, got it exactly right when a pluralty recommended against the retention of Judge Stephanie Domitrovich. In my opinion Domitrovich is utterly unqualified to serve as dogcatcher in Erie County, much less as judge.
Unaccountably, the Erie Times-News article reporting on the bar association poll failed to flesh out the story, simply giving the rating scores of the three candidates up for retention, also including Judges Kelly and Dunlavey, who were rightly recommended. Covering a mere seven or eight column inches as published online, the sketchy story was co-reported by Lisa Thompson and Ed Pallatella, writer overkill if there ever was for such a meager epistle.
Domitrovich's service as a county judge since 1989, if one can call it that, followed by her ten-year retention by county voters in 1999, is testament to their collective ignorance when it comes to judging judges. Let's hope their collective IQ has been elevated sufficiently in time for the November election to heed the county bar association's enlightened recommendation against Domitrovich's retention, of which she is wholly unworthy.
In the interests of full disclosure, I have never been a party in litigation in Domitrovich's court. I was an observer in an orphan's court proceedings in 2007 involving a friend of mine - let's call him "Andy" - seeking to escape the legal clutches of an abusive son who controlled the substantial inheritance his slightly impaired father had received upon the death of his mother several years earlier, a son who forced him unjustly to reside in a substandard assisted living facility against his informed wishes.
In ruling against the father, Domitrovich trampled all over his due
process rights, among other things denying him the legal right to be present at the first hearing on his case in her court which was conducted without his knowledge and ended with his virtual incarceration, rendering any reversal against herself of Domitrovich's initial ruling a very steep, and as it turned out, impossible climb.
Why? Because the abusive son, striving to gain unquestioned control of his father's inheritance, was represented by an attorney who was a member of a law firm with a familiar name and high-powered political connections in Erie which need not be elaborated, David Ridge. Domitrovich, who received campaign money from at least one member of that firm, baldly acquiesced to the Thrasimicusian precept of realpoliticks that "might makes right." It was power politics in the guise of justice at its ugliest.
So disorganized were Domitrovich and her courtroom staff, that she did not see the father's brief seeking to unseat his son as his "guardian" until minutes before a second dispositive hearing was underway.
But just to make certain the impoverished father, denied his rightful inheritance by his abusive son, didn't prevail, Domitrovich appointed to represent him an incompetent sycophant whose represention more reflected the son's cupidity rather than the father's best interests. In addition, she exercised on the stand impermissible and undue influence on the father, craftily leading him in directions opposite to his wishes.
The father lost his case, his inheritance, his personal freedom and, denied the expert care his inheritance would have afforded him, in less than a year, his life. He died, the doctors said, of cancer. But in my untutored opinion, "Andy" succumbed to a broken heart. Soon thereafter his abusive son claimed a significant portion of his father's inheritance which might have been used, as intended by his mother, to enhance and extend his life.
This is not the first time Domitrovich has been found lacking by an official judicial evaluation panel. Following her retention as county judge in 1999, she presented herself as a candidate in 2001 for election to the State Superior Court. In that year's state judicary elections, she was the only candidate whom the Pennsylvania Judicial Evaluation Commission gave a "not recommended" rating.
In reaching that decision the Commission said it had "received numerous
and consistent reports concerning the Candidate’s shortcomings as a judge that were found credible and were neither acknowledged nor sufficiently refuted by the Candidate.
"Specifically, the Commission found that the Candidate lacks proper judicial temperament and decorum, often exhibiting a lack of proper respect for lawyers and litigants in her courtroom. There was a significant concern that she frequently adopts one side of an argument presented to her, failing to give proper weight and consideration to the opposite position.
"Reports also suggested," the Commission said, "that the Candidate can and does lose her temper in the courtroom. Most significantly, the Commission observed that the Candidate was a poor listener, a critical weakness in a prospective appellate court judge. Accordingly, the Commission concluded that the Candidate lacks the skills necessary to serve adequately as a Judge of the Superior Court."
These were the exact failings wich led to a gross instance of miscarried justice in the case I cite above.
One wonders how a judge with those articulated disqualifications is equipped to serve on any court, much less the state Superior Court. Do Erie Countians deserve a judge who, according to her peers, "lacks proper judicial temperament and decorum," or one who "lacks the skills necessary to serve adequately" on the appellate court level? I don't think so.
Her judicial disqualifications aside, Domitrovich's clownish antics in the courtroom are legend. She once recessed a hearing in mid-progress, inconveniencing all parties, some of whom had travelled miles to reach the courthouse, because she had a hair appointment.
Don't be deceived by Domitrovich's glitzy but shallow self-contrived resume, voluminusly padded with inconsequeantial but high-sounding attributes. Vote "NO" in November against the retention of Domitrovich!
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
What happened to the Erie Times-News's online readers' comment forum?
ADDENDUM: This morning, after this blog was posted, I received a response to my query addressed to Managing Editor Pat Howard as to when the Erie Times-News plans to resume online readers' comments. It came from Jeffrey Hileman/Managing Editor/New Media. He replied: "Mr. LaRocca – Pat Howard asked me to respond to your questions. GoErie.com plans to reintroduce reader comments as part of its redesign, though we do not yet have a start date." ____________________________________________________
Until last Spring, the Erie Times-News followed the relatively new practice adopted by most newspapers here and abroad in recent years of enabling readers of their online editions to comment freely on articles, in writing, by appending a comment box at the bottom of each article.
Then, without warning, The Times-News dropped the highly popular feature, a move which was explained by Managing Editor Pat Howard as a temporary one while the Times-News’s website – know as GoErie.com – was being reprogrammed or redesigned.
Howard promised readers the feature would be resumed soon thereafter. As all regular readers of GoErie.com know, to date it has not been resumed. And since neither Howard nor any Times-News person has revealed in the prolonged interim why it has been discontinued, or whether it will ever be resumed, readers remain gagged and in the dark.
I e-mailed Howard yesterday to ask him why the Times-News has discontinued online readers’ comments, whether it plans to resume them and, if so, when? Not surprisingly, I’ve not received a response from Howard. If I do, I’ll post it later on this blog. (See ADDENDUM above.)
The Times-News is not the only newspaper to discontinue online readers’ comments, but there have been only a handful nationwide.
While not within the rationale provided by Howard at the time the Times-News discontinued readers’ comments, most of the other newspapers which have done so have cited widespread abuse of the feature, primarily by anonymous bloggers who persistently engaged in ad hominem attacks which, if identifiable as to source, could be actionable, obscene language, irrelevant posts and other uncivil practices.
This is a common complaint lodged by virtually every newspaper which allows online readers’ comments. It is mitigated to some extent by some newspapers which attempt to monitor the abusive posts and delete them.
But because they receive hundreds to thousands of readers’ posts each day, depending upon the size of the newspaper, it’s virtually impossible for small newspapers with limited intellectual staff like the Times-News to monitor the comments effectively.
Big metro or national newspapers like the New York Times, USA Today, the LA Times, the Washington Post and others affluent enough to afford them have created staff positions whose exclusive province is to monitor and manage online readers’ comments, because they recognize that in this new era of the worldwide web they must follow the crowd if they are to survive in the fast-changing cyber environment.
In some but not all smaller newspapers, the vast majority of comments which are abusive make it into print. While the newspapers provide standing guidelines demanding civility for readers’ comments, they are almost universally ignored, and the newspapers are in most cases helpless to enforce them.
This leaves them with only two options: Either maintain the status quo and continue to suffer the abusive behavior – an unpleasant option at best - or discontinue the highly popular online readers’ comments altogether, and alienate their spiraling online readership. The latter is the path the Times-News has apparently chosen.
There is, however another option which would almost certainly eliminate most if not all of the abuses pertinent to online readers’ comments: disallow anonymity or psuedonymity, an option which I personally support. (See, for example, New York Times Op-Ed Columnist Maureen Dowd’s recent column on anonymous blogging, “Stung by the Perfect Sting,” Aug. 26, perhaps the only time I’ve ever agreed with her hyperbolic rants).
That aside, there’s an unspoken dynamic at play within this context which I believe is primarily responsible for the Times-News’s discontinuance of online readers’ comments, as opposed to the rationales asserted above.
An inordinate number of the anonymous ad hominem attacks and abuses were directed at the newspaper staff, its erratic news coverage, editorial stances and its ownership, the longstanding Times Publishing Co., a newspaper monopoly which over the years has swallowed up all the competition, both daily and weekly, except for the Corry Journal, throughout its northwestern PA circulation area, as well as parts of surrounding counties in New York and Ohio.
Much of the commentary, mostly anonymous, was highly critical in unflattering, indeed embarrassing terms of the Times-News’s news and editorial policies and practices and personnel, which are, with good reason, widely seen as biased, shallow, inaccurate, self-serving, unprofessional and arrogant (I concur). Moreover, its Letters to the Editor section is routinely mismanaged.
I believe the thin-skinned operatives at the Times-News chose to discontinue the feature rather than suffer sustained embarrassment at the hands of merciless bloggers, most of them anonymous.
While I do not post or blog anonymously, but always identify myself by name, I was a frequent online critic of articles published in the Times-News, as well as its overall news and editorial practices. While I am often blunt in my criticism, I pride myself on my civility. I do not presume, however, that the Times-News discontinued online readers’ comments because of my feeble and captious criticism.
The last comment I posted before online readers’ comments were discontinued occurred on April 12 of this year. In response to Howard’s regular Sunday column boasting of the Times-News’s showing at the Pennsylvania Newspaper Assn’s. awards program, I posted a detailed factual analysis showing that The Times-News’s performance was greatly exaggerated by Howard.
For one thing, the Times-News is not in the same competitive category as the Commonwealth’s major newspapers in Pittsburgh, Harrisburg and Philadelphia. And several of the newspapers in towns smaller than Erie made a much better showing. (See my April 12, 2009 archive blog at http//.www.eriecounternewsmediablogspot.com.)
It should be noted that NO privately/corporately-owned newspaper is obliged to provide a forum for online readers and commenters. However, it ill-behooves any newspaper which persistently and piously preaches on behalf of First Amendment freedoms of press and speech, as the Times-News does, to be seen as a censor of populist expressions of opinion from the vast unwashed which the internet now makes readily and universally possible.
The Times-News is already criticized widely for crass rewriting and editing of Letters to the Editor which is tantamount to, if not actual censorship.
Until last Spring, the Erie Times-News followed the relatively new practice adopted by most newspapers here and abroad in recent years of enabling readers of their online editions to comment freely on articles, in writing, by appending a comment box at the bottom of each article.
Then, without warning, The Times-News dropped the highly popular feature, a move which was explained by Managing Editor Pat Howard as a temporary one while the Times-News’s website – know as GoErie.com – was being reprogrammed or redesigned.
Howard promised readers the feature would be resumed soon thereafter. As all regular readers of GoErie.com know, to date it has not been resumed. And since neither Howard nor any Times-News person has revealed in the prolonged interim why it has been discontinued, or whether it will ever be resumed, readers remain gagged and in the dark.
I e-mailed Howard yesterday to ask him why the Times-News has discontinued online readers’ comments, whether it plans to resume them and, if so, when? Not surprisingly, I’ve not received a response from Howard. If I do, I’ll post it later on this blog. (See ADDENDUM above.)
The Times-News is not the only newspaper to discontinue online readers’ comments, but there have been only a handful nationwide.
While not within the rationale provided by Howard at the time the Times-News discontinued readers’ comments, most of the other newspapers which have done so have cited widespread abuse of the feature, primarily by anonymous bloggers who persistently engaged in ad hominem attacks which, if identifiable as to source, could be actionable, obscene language, irrelevant posts and other uncivil practices.
This is a common complaint lodged by virtually every newspaper which allows online readers’ comments. It is mitigated to some extent by some newspapers which attempt to monitor the abusive posts and delete them.
But because they receive hundreds to thousands of readers’ posts each day, depending upon the size of the newspaper, it’s virtually impossible for small newspapers with limited intellectual staff like the Times-News to monitor the comments effectively.
Big metro or national newspapers like the New York Times, USA Today, the LA Times, the Washington Post and others affluent enough to afford them have created staff positions whose exclusive province is to monitor and manage online readers’ comments, because they recognize that in this new era of the worldwide web they must follow the crowd if they are to survive in the fast-changing cyber environment.
In some but not all smaller newspapers, the vast majority of comments which are abusive make it into print. While the newspapers provide standing guidelines demanding civility for readers’ comments, they are almost universally ignored, and the newspapers are in most cases helpless to enforce them.
This leaves them with only two options: Either maintain the status quo and continue to suffer the abusive behavior – an unpleasant option at best - or discontinue the highly popular online readers’ comments altogether, and alienate their spiraling online readership. The latter is the path the Times-News has apparently chosen.
There is, however another option which would almost certainly eliminate most if not all of the abuses pertinent to online readers’ comments: disallow anonymity or psuedonymity, an option which I personally support. (See, for example, New York Times Op-Ed Columnist Maureen Dowd’s recent column on anonymous blogging, “Stung by the Perfect Sting,” Aug. 26, perhaps the only time I’ve ever agreed with her hyperbolic rants).
That aside, there’s an unspoken dynamic at play within this context which I believe is primarily responsible for the Times-News’s discontinuance of online readers’ comments, as opposed to the rationales asserted above.
An inordinate number of the anonymous ad hominem attacks and abuses were directed at the newspaper staff, its erratic news coverage, editorial stances and its ownership, the longstanding Times Publishing Co., a newspaper monopoly which over the years has swallowed up all the competition, both daily and weekly, except for the Corry Journal, throughout its northwestern PA circulation area, as well as parts of surrounding counties in New York and Ohio.
Much of the commentary, mostly anonymous, was highly critical in unflattering, indeed embarrassing terms of the Times-News’s news and editorial policies and practices and personnel, which are, with good reason, widely seen as biased, shallow, inaccurate, self-serving, unprofessional and arrogant (I concur). Moreover, its Letters to the Editor section is routinely mismanaged.
I believe the thin-skinned operatives at the Times-News chose to discontinue the feature rather than suffer sustained embarrassment at the hands of merciless bloggers, most of them anonymous.
While I do not post or blog anonymously, but always identify myself by name, I was a frequent online critic of articles published in the Times-News, as well as its overall news and editorial practices. While I am often blunt in my criticism, I pride myself on my civility. I do not presume, however, that the Times-News discontinued online readers’ comments because of my feeble and captious criticism.
The last comment I posted before online readers’ comments were discontinued occurred on April 12 of this year. In response to Howard’s regular Sunday column boasting of the Times-News’s showing at the Pennsylvania Newspaper Assn’s. awards program, I posted a detailed factual analysis showing that The Times-News’s performance was greatly exaggerated by Howard.
For one thing, the Times-News is not in the same competitive category as the Commonwealth’s major newspapers in Pittsburgh, Harrisburg and Philadelphia. And several of the newspapers in towns smaller than Erie made a much better showing. (See my April 12, 2009 archive blog at http//.www.eriecounternewsmediablogspot.com.)
It should be noted that NO privately/corporately-owned newspaper is obliged to provide a forum for online readers and commenters. However, it ill-behooves any newspaper which persistently and piously preaches on behalf of First Amendment freedoms of press and speech, as the Times-News does, to be seen as a censor of populist expressions of opinion from the vast unwashed which the internet now makes readily and universally possible.
The Times-News is already criticized widely for crass rewriting and editing of Letters to the Editor which is tantamount to, if not actual censorship.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Erie Times-News Review of Tom Ridge's book: a new low for mediocrity
The Erie Times News's much bally-hooed treatment of Tom Ridge's new book in today's edition penned by Reporter John Guerriero sets a new standard for mediocrity.
It consists primarily of an interview of Ridge, the first and former secretary of the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security in the last Bush administration, Pennsylvania governor and Northwest PA congressman.
One wonders whether the reporter bothered to read the book, of which the Times-News boasted it had received an advance review copy, proclaiming it would present "the first print interview" based on the book, due for release Tuesday. An enterprising newspaper would have presented a package consisting of a full-blown critical review and a sidebar interview. But no one has ever accused the Times-News of being enterprising.
There is no independent critical analysis of the book or Ridge's comments on it, nor any quotes or comments from other political figures or prominent commentators in a position to present informed commentary either critical or supportive of the content of Ridge's memoirs.
There is only Ridge's self-serving self-analysis, a simulacrum of a playwright who writes a critique of his own play. Nothing in the "review" complements the book's bland title, "The Test of Our Times."
If there's anything "new" or original in the book, the reporter failed to ferret it out, possibly because he quickly scanned the index and selective passages, rather than reading it in toto, the Cliff Notes approach.
The Times-News had a rare opportunity for a national "scoop," but blew it on a pandering epistle predictably massaging the inflated Ridge ego.
Headlined "Ridge book offers Beltway insight," the article consists mostly of hindsight.
Much is made of the already exhausted "buzz" over whether Bush administration officials, including the president, pressured Ridge to raise the color code alarm just prior to the 2004 general election in order to boost his reelection prospects over the Democrat nominee John Kerry. Ridge denies there was any pressure, according to the article, although the issue was debated among administration officials, with the consensus, which included Ridge, prevailing against heightening the color code.
Lost in this contrived and politically inspired imbroglio raised by Democrats and liberal media to embarrass the Bush administration is the reality that terroristic threats are always more likely within the context of a national election, and proposals to raise the alarm appropos terrorism are fully justified. Check out the recent elections in Iraq and Afghanistan. Terroristic suicide bombings have plagued their electorates.
The reporter writes: "Despite his disagreement with the GOP over the Chambliss campaign commercial and some of his conflicts in the Bush administration, Ridge said he plans to stay involved with the Republican Party. 'I think I can still offer some advice and support and counsel and be a force within the party. Time will tell,' he said."
But Ridge, a faux Republican a la Arlen Specter is more likely to be viewed, at least within the GOP's conservative wing, as a prospective turncoat, the spy within, given his deprecating comments thereof. His "involvement" may be suspect and unwelcome. So far, he's been more of a "force" for the opposing party than for the one to which he putatively belongs.
It consists primarily of an interview of Ridge, the first and former secretary of the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security in the last Bush administration, Pennsylvania governor and Northwest PA congressman.
One wonders whether the reporter bothered to read the book, of which the Times-News boasted it had received an advance review copy, proclaiming it would present "the first print interview" based on the book, due for release Tuesday. An enterprising newspaper would have presented a package consisting of a full-blown critical review and a sidebar interview. But no one has ever accused the Times-News of being enterprising.
There is no independent critical analysis of the book or Ridge's comments on it, nor any quotes or comments from other political figures or prominent commentators in a position to present informed commentary either critical or supportive of the content of Ridge's memoirs.
There is only Ridge's self-serving self-analysis, a simulacrum of a playwright who writes a critique of his own play. Nothing in the "review" complements the book's bland title, "The Test of Our Times."
If there's anything "new" or original in the book, the reporter failed to ferret it out, possibly because he quickly scanned the index and selective passages, rather than reading it in toto, the Cliff Notes approach.
The Times-News had a rare opportunity for a national "scoop," but blew it on a pandering epistle predictably massaging the inflated Ridge ego.
Headlined "Ridge book offers Beltway insight," the article consists mostly of hindsight.
Much is made of the already exhausted "buzz" over whether Bush administration officials, including the president, pressured Ridge to raise the color code alarm just prior to the 2004 general election in order to boost his reelection prospects over the Democrat nominee John Kerry. Ridge denies there was any pressure, according to the article, although the issue was debated among administration officials, with the consensus, which included Ridge, prevailing against heightening the color code.
Lost in this contrived and politically inspired imbroglio raised by Democrats and liberal media to embarrass the Bush administration is the reality that terroristic threats are always more likely within the context of a national election, and proposals to raise the alarm appropos terrorism are fully justified. Check out the recent elections in Iraq and Afghanistan. Terroristic suicide bombings have plagued their electorates.
The reporter writes: "Despite his disagreement with the GOP over the Chambliss campaign commercial and some of his conflicts in the Bush administration, Ridge said he plans to stay involved with the Republican Party. 'I think I can still offer some advice and support and counsel and be a force within the party. Time will tell,' he said."
But Ridge, a faux Republican a la Arlen Specter is more likely to be viewed, at least within the GOP's conservative wing, as a prospective turncoat, the spy within, given his deprecating comments thereof. His "involvement" may be suspect and unwelcome. So far, he's been more of a "force" for the opposing party than for the one to which he putatively belongs.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Hubbert's "Peak Oil" theory debunked
Not too long ago I wrote in this blog a brief essay pooh-poohing the prevalent theory that both U.S. and global oil production had already or soon would "peak," as consumption outran remaining and diminishing petroleum reserves. One commenter took me to task for presuming to criticise Author Hubbert's "peak oil" theory. Here's what I wrote back in 2008:
For several years now, the conventional wisdom has subscribed to a theory called "peak oil," which stands for the proposition that at some point the availability of petroleum reserves reached a peak in the United States and began irreversibly dwindling.
The theory was first advanced by a book entitled Hubbert's Peak, whose central premise holds that U.S. domestic petroleum supplies peaked in 1970. But it's deeply flawed by a major factual error.
The author failed to take into account the fact that how much producible oil remains within domestic oil provinces depends entirely upon the going market price for oil. For example, at $100 per barrel, much more oil is producible than at $50. Pick your figures.
On Alaska's North Slope, both onshore and offshore, more than 14 billion barrels of oil have been produced since its inception in 1977, flowing at rates ranging between about 1 million and 2 million barrels per day. Nearby is a deposit of what is known as 'heavy oil,' not unlike the Athabasca tar sands in northwestern Canada, which exploratory drilling has shown contains an estimated 20 billion barrels of oil.
However, because of reservoir dynamics, these reserves are not economically producible at today's market prices for oil, but will eventually be producible at some higher figure depending upon demand.
There are scores of unexplored areas throughout the U.S. both onshore and offshore in state oceanic waters up to the three-mile limit and between three and 12 miles in federal waters overlying the outer continental shelf. Billions of barrels of oil may underlie the tundra in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), as well as the National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska.
Neither Mr. Hubbert, nor anyone, can know when or where more oil may be found until all these prospective areas are identified. In short, Mr. Hubbert has presumed to identify and quantify a natural resource, which is unidentifiable and unquantifiable without further exploration activities.
Thus, his central premise is nonsensical. Mr. Hubbert's research is formidable, but his mind set has led him to the wrong conclusions. This same rationale applies to his similarly erroneous thesis regarding global 'peak oil.'
Here's an analysis from today's New York Times which vindicates my view.
New York Times Op-Ed Contributor
‘Peak Oil’ Is a Waste of Energy
August 27. 2009
By Michael Lynch
(Michael Lynch, the former director for Asian energy and security at the Center for International Studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is an energy consultant.)
REMEMBER “peak oil”? It’s the theory that geological scarcity will at some point make it impossible for global petroleum production to avoid falling, heralding the end of the oil age and, potentially, economic catastrophe. Well, just when we thought that the collapse in oil prices since last summer had put an end to such talk, along comes Fatih Birol, the top economist at the International Energy Agency, to insist that we’ll reach the peak moment in 10 years, a decade sooner than most previous predictions (although a few ardent pessimists believe the moment of no return has already come and gone).
Like many Malthusian beliefs, peak oil theory has been promoted by a motivated group of scientists and laymen who base their conclusions on poor analyses of data and misinterpretations of technical material. But because the news media and prominent figures like James Schlesinger, a former secretary of energy, and the oilman T. Boone Pickens have taken peak oil seriously, the public is understandably alarmed.
A careful examination of the facts shows that most arguments about peak oil are based on anecdotal information, vague references and ignorance of how the oil industry goes about finding fields and extracting petroleum. And this has been demonstrated over and over again: the founder of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil first claimed in 1989 that the peak had already been reached, and Mr. Schlesinger argued a decade earlier that production was unlikely to ever go much higher.
Mr. Birol isn’t the only one still worrying. One leading proponent of peak oil, the writer Paul Roberts, recently expressed shock to discover that the liquid coming out of the Ghawar Field in Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest known deposit, is around 35 percent water and rising. But this is hardly a concern — the buildup is caused by the Saudis pumping seawater into the field to keep pressure up and make extraction easier. The global average for water in oil field yields is estimated to be as high as 75 percent.
Another critic, a prominent consultant and investor named Matthew Simmons, has raised concerns over oil engineers using “fuzzy logic” to estimate reservoir holdings. But fuzzy logic is a programming method that has been used since I was in graduate school in situations where the factors are hazy and variable — everything from physical science to international relations — and its track record in oil geology has been quite good.
But those are just the latest arguments — for the most part the peak-oil crowd rests its case on three major claims: that the world is discovering only one barrel for every three or four produced; that political instability in oil-producing countries puts us at an unprecedented risk of having the spigots turned off; and that we have already used half of the two trillion barrels of oil that the earth contained.
Let’s take the rate-of-discovery argument first: it is a statement that reflects ignorance of industry terminology. When a new field is found, it is given a size estimate that indicates how much is thought to be recoverable at that point in time. But as years pass, the estimate is almost always revised upward, either because more pockets of oil are found in the field or because new technology makes it possible to extract oil that was previously unreachable. Yet because petroleum geologists don’t report that additional recoverable oil as “newly discovered,” the peak oil advocates tend to ignore it. In truth, the combination of new discoveries and revisions to size estimates of older fields has been keeping pace with production for many years.
A related argument — that the “easy oil” is gone and that extraction can only become more difficult and cost-ineffective — should be recognized as vague and irrelevant. Drillers in Persia a century ago certainly didn’t consider their work easy, and the mechanized, computerized industry of today is a far sight from 19th-century mule-drawn rigs. Hundreds of fields that produce “easy oil” today were once thought technologically unreachable.
The latest acorn in the discovery debate is a recent increase in the overall estimated rate at which production is declining in large oil fields. This is assumed to be the result of the “superstraw” technologies that have become dominant over the past decade, which can drain fields faster than ever. True, because quicker extraction causes the fluid pressure in the field to drop rapidly, the wells become less and less productive over time. But this declining return on individual wells doesn’t necessarily mean that whole fields are being cleaned out. As the Saudis have proved in recent years at Ghawar, additional investment — to find new deposits and drill new wells — can keep a field’s overall production from falling.
When their shaky claims on geology are exposed, the peak-oil advocates tend to argue that today’s geopolitical instability needs to be taken into consideration. But political risk is hardly new: a leading Communist labor organizer in the Baku oil industry in the early 1900s would later be known to the world as Josef Stalin.
When the large supply disruptions of 1973 and 1979 led to skyrocketing prices, nearly all oil experts said the underlying cause was resource scarcity and that prices would go ever higher in the future. The oil companies diversified their investments — Mobil even started buying up department stores! — and President Jimmy Carter pushed for the development of synthetic fuels like shale oil, arguing that markets were too myopic to realize the imminent need for substitutes. All sorts of policy wonks, energy consultants and Nobel-prize-winning economists jumped on the bandwagon to explain that prices would only go up — even though they had never done so historically. Prices instead proceeded to slide for two decades, rather as the tide ignored King Canute.
Just as, in the 1970s, it was the Arab oil embargo and the Iranian Revolution, today it is the invasion of Iraq and instability in Venezuela and Nigeria. But the solution, as ever, is for the industry to shift investment into new regions, and that’s what it is doing. Yet peak-oil advocates take advantage of the inevitable delay in bringing this new production on line to claim that global production is on an irreversible decline.
In the end, perhaps the most misleading claim of the peak-oil advocates is that the earth was endowed with only 2 trillion barrels of “recoverable” oil. Actually, the consensus among geologists is that there are some 10 trillion barrels out there. A century ago, only 10 percent of it was considered recoverable, but improvements in technology should allow us to recover some 35 percent — another 2.5 trillion barrels — in an economically viable way. And this doesn’t even include such potential sources as tar sands, which in time we may be able to efficiently tap.
Oil remains abundant, and the price will likely come down closer to the historical level of $30 a barrel as new supplies come forward in the deep waters off West Africa and Latin America, in East Africa, and perhaps in the Bakken oil shale fields of Montana and North Dakota. But that may not keep the Chicken Littles from convincing policymakers in Washington and elsewhere that oil, being finite, must increase in price. (That’s the logic that led the Carter administration to create the Synthetic Fuels Corporation, a $3 billion boondoggle that never produced a gallon of useable fuel.)
This is not to say that we shouldn’t keep looking for other cost-effective, low-pollution energy sources — why not broaden our options? But we can’t let the false threat of disappearing oil lead the government to throw money away on harebrained renewable energy schemes or impose unnecessary and expensive conservation measures on a public already struggling through tough economic times.
For several years now, the conventional wisdom has subscribed to a theory called "peak oil," which stands for the proposition that at some point the availability of petroleum reserves reached a peak in the United States and began irreversibly dwindling.
The theory was first advanced by a book entitled Hubbert's Peak, whose central premise holds that U.S. domestic petroleum supplies peaked in 1970. But it's deeply flawed by a major factual error.
The author failed to take into account the fact that how much producible oil remains within domestic oil provinces depends entirely upon the going market price for oil. For example, at $100 per barrel, much more oil is producible than at $50. Pick your figures.
On Alaska's North Slope, both onshore and offshore, more than 14 billion barrels of oil have been produced since its inception in 1977, flowing at rates ranging between about 1 million and 2 million barrels per day. Nearby is a deposit of what is known as 'heavy oil,' not unlike the Athabasca tar sands in northwestern Canada, which exploratory drilling has shown contains an estimated 20 billion barrels of oil.
However, because of reservoir dynamics, these reserves are not economically producible at today's market prices for oil, but will eventually be producible at some higher figure depending upon demand.
There are scores of unexplored areas throughout the U.S. both onshore and offshore in state oceanic waters up to the three-mile limit and between three and 12 miles in federal waters overlying the outer continental shelf. Billions of barrels of oil may underlie the tundra in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), as well as the National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska.
Neither Mr. Hubbert, nor anyone, can know when or where more oil may be found until all these prospective areas are identified. In short, Mr. Hubbert has presumed to identify and quantify a natural resource, which is unidentifiable and unquantifiable without further exploration activities.
Thus, his central premise is nonsensical. Mr. Hubbert's research is formidable, but his mind set has led him to the wrong conclusions. This same rationale applies to his similarly erroneous thesis regarding global 'peak oil.'
Here's an analysis from today's New York Times which vindicates my view.
New York Times Op-Ed Contributor
‘Peak Oil’ Is a Waste of Energy
August 27. 2009
By Michael Lynch
(Michael Lynch, the former director for Asian energy and security at the Center for International Studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is an energy consultant.)
REMEMBER “peak oil”? It’s the theory that geological scarcity will at some point make it impossible for global petroleum production to avoid falling, heralding the end of the oil age and, potentially, economic catastrophe. Well, just when we thought that the collapse in oil prices since last summer had put an end to such talk, along comes Fatih Birol, the top economist at the International Energy Agency, to insist that we’ll reach the peak moment in 10 years, a decade sooner than most previous predictions (although a few ardent pessimists believe the moment of no return has already come and gone).
Like many Malthusian beliefs, peak oil theory has been promoted by a motivated group of scientists and laymen who base their conclusions on poor analyses of data and misinterpretations of technical material. But because the news media and prominent figures like James Schlesinger, a former secretary of energy, and the oilman T. Boone Pickens have taken peak oil seriously, the public is understandably alarmed.
A careful examination of the facts shows that most arguments about peak oil are based on anecdotal information, vague references and ignorance of how the oil industry goes about finding fields and extracting petroleum. And this has been demonstrated over and over again: the founder of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil first claimed in 1989 that the peak had already been reached, and Mr. Schlesinger argued a decade earlier that production was unlikely to ever go much higher.
Mr. Birol isn’t the only one still worrying. One leading proponent of peak oil, the writer Paul Roberts, recently expressed shock to discover that the liquid coming out of the Ghawar Field in Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest known deposit, is around 35 percent water and rising. But this is hardly a concern — the buildup is caused by the Saudis pumping seawater into the field to keep pressure up and make extraction easier. The global average for water in oil field yields is estimated to be as high as 75 percent.
Another critic, a prominent consultant and investor named Matthew Simmons, has raised concerns over oil engineers using “fuzzy logic” to estimate reservoir holdings. But fuzzy logic is a programming method that has been used since I was in graduate school in situations where the factors are hazy and variable — everything from physical science to international relations — and its track record in oil geology has been quite good.
But those are just the latest arguments — for the most part the peak-oil crowd rests its case on three major claims: that the world is discovering only one barrel for every three or four produced; that political instability in oil-producing countries puts us at an unprecedented risk of having the spigots turned off; and that we have already used half of the two trillion barrels of oil that the earth contained.
Let’s take the rate-of-discovery argument first: it is a statement that reflects ignorance of industry terminology. When a new field is found, it is given a size estimate that indicates how much is thought to be recoverable at that point in time. But as years pass, the estimate is almost always revised upward, either because more pockets of oil are found in the field or because new technology makes it possible to extract oil that was previously unreachable. Yet because petroleum geologists don’t report that additional recoverable oil as “newly discovered,” the peak oil advocates tend to ignore it. In truth, the combination of new discoveries and revisions to size estimates of older fields has been keeping pace with production for many years.
A related argument — that the “easy oil” is gone and that extraction can only become more difficult and cost-ineffective — should be recognized as vague and irrelevant. Drillers in Persia a century ago certainly didn’t consider their work easy, and the mechanized, computerized industry of today is a far sight from 19th-century mule-drawn rigs. Hundreds of fields that produce “easy oil” today were once thought technologically unreachable.
The latest acorn in the discovery debate is a recent increase in the overall estimated rate at which production is declining in large oil fields. This is assumed to be the result of the “superstraw” technologies that have become dominant over the past decade, which can drain fields faster than ever. True, because quicker extraction causes the fluid pressure in the field to drop rapidly, the wells become less and less productive over time. But this declining return on individual wells doesn’t necessarily mean that whole fields are being cleaned out. As the Saudis have proved in recent years at Ghawar, additional investment — to find new deposits and drill new wells — can keep a field’s overall production from falling.
When their shaky claims on geology are exposed, the peak-oil advocates tend to argue that today’s geopolitical instability needs to be taken into consideration. But political risk is hardly new: a leading Communist labor organizer in the Baku oil industry in the early 1900s would later be known to the world as Josef Stalin.
When the large supply disruptions of 1973 and 1979 led to skyrocketing prices, nearly all oil experts said the underlying cause was resource scarcity and that prices would go ever higher in the future. The oil companies diversified their investments — Mobil even started buying up department stores! — and President Jimmy Carter pushed for the development of synthetic fuels like shale oil, arguing that markets were too myopic to realize the imminent need for substitutes. All sorts of policy wonks, energy consultants and Nobel-prize-winning economists jumped on the bandwagon to explain that prices would only go up — even though they had never done so historically. Prices instead proceeded to slide for two decades, rather as the tide ignored King Canute.
Just as, in the 1970s, it was the Arab oil embargo and the Iranian Revolution, today it is the invasion of Iraq and instability in Venezuela and Nigeria. But the solution, as ever, is for the industry to shift investment into new regions, and that’s what it is doing. Yet peak-oil advocates take advantage of the inevitable delay in bringing this new production on line to claim that global production is on an irreversible decline.
In the end, perhaps the most misleading claim of the peak-oil advocates is that the earth was endowed with only 2 trillion barrels of “recoverable” oil. Actually, the consensus among geologists is that there are some 10 trillion barrels out there. A century ago, only 10 percent of it was considered recoverable, but improvements in technology should allow us to recover some 35 percent — another 2.5 trillion barrels — in an economically viable way. And this doesn’t even include such potential sources as tar sands, which in time we may be able to efficiently tap.
Oil remains abundant, and the price will likely come down closer to the historical level of $30 a barrel as new supplies come forward in the deep waters off West Africa and Latin America, in East Africa, and perhaps in the Bakken oil shale fields of Montana and North Dakota. But that may not keep the Chicken Littles from convincing policymakers in Washington and elsewhere that oil, being finite, must increase in price. (That’s the logic that led the Carter administration to create the Synthetic Fuels Corporation, a $3 billion boondoggle that never produced a gallon of useable fuel.)
This is not to say that we shouldn’t keep looking for other cost-effective, low-pollution energy sources — why not broaden our options? But we can’t let the false threat of disappearing oil lead the government to throw money away on harebrained renewable energy schemes or impose unnecessary and expensive conservation measures on a public already struggling through tough economic times.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Times-News neglects landmark First Amendment court decision in Erie federal court
The news room at the Erie Times-News has once again displayed its incompetence and egregious lack of journalistic ethics and professionalism by grossly underplaying a major story with profound First Amendment implications statewide and beyond because of petty local politics and animosity by Managing Editor Pat Howard, other top editors and reporters Kevin Flowers and Ed Pallatella towards the principal actor and local citizen hero, Dan Galena, in a law suit decided in federal district court last week.
Against all odds, bucking the local political establishment and the biased but influential monopoly daily newspaper in northwestern Pa., Galena stunningly prevailed in federal court last week after a jury trial upheld his contention that Erie County Council Chairman Leone Fiore and other council members violated the state’s open meetings, or “Sunshine” law, its own County Code and his civil rights by having him forcibly ejected from a council meeting by a sheriff’s deputy back in March of 2007 when he vocally protested the legality of council’s procedure in adopting ordinances.
The court ordered council to pay Galena $5,000 and all attorney and court costs. According to one estimate, the law suit will have cost Erie County taxpayers about $100,000 to defend.
Since the questionable procedure used for years by county council to move an ordinance from first to second reading on the same day at the same meeting is utilized by virtually every municipal legislative body in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the federal court verdict upholding Galena’s position is certain to have widespread repercussions throughout the state.
The procedure effectively denies the public a full hearing and opportunity to comment timely on council actions. Under law, ordinances must have two separate readings on two separate days before council can take final action adopting them. It’s a way of making sure that members of the public have ample time to consider the ramifications of proposed ordinances and comment on and favor or oppose them before council takes final action on them.
Although the Times-News carried a few sketchy stories on Galena’s law suit as it progressed through the court system, as well as minimal reporting of the jury verdict in his favor last week, the newspaper vastly underplayed the magnitude of the verdict’s implications throughout the commonwealth, and failed to give Galena due credit for perservering in the face of overwhelming odds, including callous attempts by Leone and other members of council to intimidate him brutally.
Ironically, it’s the kind of official wrongdoing involving freedom of the press and the public’s right to know which the local news media should take the lead in exposing, but failed miserably to do so. Instead The Times-News and the rest of the local news media largely ignored Galena’s public-spirited crusade against the errant council and its arrogant chairman’s attempt to hold themselves above the law, failing to give the issue the prominent coverage it deserves, or lauding him for pursuing his strongly-held convictions in court at considerable personal expense and sacrifice.
The Times-News frequently editorializes in favor of open meetings under the state’s Sunshine law, freedom of the press and public access to public information in the hands of government, but ignored this important First Amendment violation occurring right under its nose, and failing to take Galena’s lawsuit seriously because of internal hostility towards Galena for his frequent and sharp criticisim of its news and editorial coverage often expressed in his angry letters to the editor which the Times-News never publishes.
In his defense against Galena’s charges of violations of the Sunshine law and the County Code, Leone said he ordered Galena out of the courthouse during a council meeting on March 20 , 2007 because he was “disruptive” when he objected to council’s attempt to move an ordinance from first to second reading on the same day. Leone said council has set aside a public hearing period near the opening of council meeting to allow fpr public comment.
However, since council’s action on the ordinance came after the public hearing, there was no opportunity for Galena to comment on it prior to that action. Moreover, the state’s Sunshine law expressly allows anyone to raise an objection against council action at any time during a meeting if there is a perceived violation of the Sunshine law.
Against all odds, bucking the local political establishment and the biased but influential monopoly daily newspaper in northwestern Pa., Galena stunningly prevailed in federal court last week after a jury trial upheld his contention that Erie County Council Chairman Leone Fiore and other council members violated the state’s open meetings, or “Sunshine” law, its own County Code and his civil rights by having him forcibly ejected from a council meeting by a sheriff’s deputy back in March of 2007 when he vocally protested the legality of council’s procedure in adopting ordinances.
The court ordered council to pay Galena $5,000 and all attorney and court costs. According to one estimate, the law suit will have cost Erie County taxpayers about $100,000 to defend.
Since the questionable procedure used for years by county council to move an ordinance from first to second reading on the same day at the same meeting is utilized by virtually every municipal legislative body in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the federal court verdict upholding Galena’s position is certain to have widespread repercussions throughout the state.
The procedure effectively denies the public a full hearing and opportunity to comment timely on council actions. Under law, ordinances must have two separate readings on two separate days before council can take final action adopting them. It’s a way of making sure that members of the public have ample time to consider the ramifications of proposed ordinances and comment on and favor or oppose them before council takes final action on them.
Although the Times-News carried a few sketchy stories on Galena’s law suit as it progressed through the court system, as well as minimal reporting of the jury verdict in his favor last week, the newspaper vastly underplayed the magnitude of the verdict’s implications throughout the commonwealth, and failed to give Galena due credit for perservering in the face of overwhelming odds, including callous attempts by Leone and other members of council to intimidate him brutally.
Ironically, it’s the kind of official wrongdoing involving freedom of the press and the public’s right to know which the local news media should take the lead in exposing, but failed miserably to do so. Instead The Times-News and the rest of the local news media largely ignored Galena’s public-spirited crusade against the errant council and its arrogant chairman’s attempt to hold themselves above the law, failing to give the issue the prominent coverage it deserves, or lauding him for pursuing his strongly-held convictions in court at considerable personal expense and sacrifice.
The Times-News frequently editorializes in favor of open meetings under the state’s Sunshine law, freedom of the press and public access to public information in the hands of government, but ignored this important First Amendment violation occurring right under its nose, and failing to take Galena’s lawsuit seriously because of internal hostility towards Galena for his frequent and sharp criticisim of its news and editorial coverage often expressed in his angry letters to the editor which the Times-News never publishes.
In his defense against Galena’s charges of violations of the Sunshine law and the County Code, Leone said he ordered Galena out of the courthouse during a council meeting on March 20 , 2007 because he was “disruptive” when he objected to council’s attempt to move an ordinance from first to second reading on the same day. Leone said council has set aside a public hearing period near the opening of council meeting to allow fpr public comment.
However, since council’s action on the ordinance came after the public hearing, there was no opportunity for Galena to comment on it prior to that action. Moreover, the state’s Sunshine law expressly allows anyone to raise an objection against council action at any time during a meeting if there is a perceived violation of the Sunshine law.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
AP, Erie Times-News distort findings on Palin inquiry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The AP (Asinine Press) today published yet another distorted article, mauled further by the Erie Times-News's inaccurate headline over an article out of Alaska on the findings of a so-called "independent investigator" appointed to investigate an ethics claim against Alaska Governor Sarah Palin,
The headline states: "Investigator rules against Palin in ethics probe"
In fact, the investigator," Thomas Daniel, an Anchorage attorney who works for the law firm that represents President Barack Obama and other leading Congressional Democrats, Perkins Coie,did not rule against, nor implicate Palin, merely finding that "she may have violated" a state ethics law, an unsurprising finding from an attorney who works for the nation's top Democrats. Whether or not she did remains to be determined by the state Personnel Board which will consider the investigator's findings. This is a pro forma process.
The "investigator" released his findings to Palin 's political foes in violation of state law which requires all matters in an investigation to be held confidential until the Personnel Board issues its ruling.
The AP Story was initiated in Anchorage by its only daily newspaper, The Anchorage Daily News, the largest in Alaska, which is owned by McClatchy Newspapers in California, the second-largest newspaper chain in the U.S., a leftwing federation. Along with it stepchild, the Daily News, it has been critical of Palin since she was nominated for Republican vice president and has become an international celebrity.
The Associated Press says Palin "is securing unwarranted benefits and receiving improper gifts through the Alaska Fund Trust, set up by supporters."
These are false and unproven allegations, though presented as factual by the"independent investigator", and Palin and her attorney have denied them.
According to the AP, the investigator,the Obama hireling, said "there is probable cause to believe Palin used or attempted to use her official position for personal gain because she authorized the creation of the Alaska Fund Trust as the "official" legal defense fund."
In fact, Palin neither authorized nor controls the trust fund, which was established without her express consent by supporters based in Washington D.C. and has received no money from it. It was formed by her supporters to help her pay for her defense against a barrage of ethics complaints filed under Alaska law against her as governor by Obama supporters for which Alaska, unlike other states and the federal government, does not provide funding.
The complaints, so far 19 of them, which have all been dismissed or resolved without any finding of guilt, have incurred half a million dolars in legal costs for Palin.Most of them have been found to be trivial or without merit.
According to the AP, "The practical effect of the ruling on Palin will be more financial than anything else, although the fate of the tens of thousands of dollars in the fund is unclear, said Palin attorney Thomas Van Flein. The report recommends that the complaint be resolved without a formal hearing before the board. That allows her to resolve the issue without a formal ethics reprimand," another veiled but false implication.
There would be no "formal ethics reprimand" unless the Personnel Board finds that allegations filed by the "investigator," an Obama henchman, are true. Palin posted an entry on Twitter in which she said the "matter is still pending," a statement echoed by her attorney.
The fund aims to help Palin pay off debts stemming from multiple ethics complaints against her, most of which have been dismissed. Palin says she owes more than $500,000 in legal fees, and she cited the toll of the ethics probes as one of the reasons she is leaving office on Sunday.
Kristan Cole, the fund's trustee, said organizers have frozen the fund pending the personnel board's review. Many federal politicians, including Hillary Clinton, former U.S. Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens and others are routinely allowed to have such funds to pay off legal bills, but quirks in Alaska law can present ethics issues.
Van Flein said the potential loss of money from the fund had absolutely no bearing on Palin's decision to resign.
He said Palin received the report 11 days after her July 3 announcement that she was leaving office. He also noted that the investigator recommended the governor seek reimbursement from the state for the cost of fighting ethics complaints that have been dismissed.
"It's cheaper for the people of the state of Alaska to have the bills paid for through the trust fund," Van Flein said. "But if that can't be done, then it looks like the state of Alaska could pay."
The investigator, Thomas Daniel, suggested that Alaska lawmakers may need to create a law that reimburses public officials for legal expenses to defend complaints that end up being unfounded.
Palin's friends and supporters created the Alaska Fund Trust in April, limiting donations to $150 per person. Organizers declined to say how much it has raised, and had hoped to raise about $500,000. A Web-a-thon last month brought in about $130,000 in pledges.
The ethics complaint was filed by Alaska resident Kim Chatman, a longtime Palin critic and Obama supporter shortly after the fund was created, alleging Palin was "misusing her official position and accepting improper gifts," both untrue.
John Coale, a Washington lawyer who helped set up the fund, called the probable cause finding by the "independent investigator" "crazy," adding that if upheld, it would mean that no governors of Alaska could ever defend themselves against frivolous ethics complaints.
"Anybody can keep filing ethics complaints and drive someone out of office, even if you're a nut," Coale said.
Unlike other states, he said, Alaska has no legal counsel's office devoted to defending the governor from allegations brought against her in her official capacity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The AP (Asinine Press) today published yet another distorted article, mauled further by the Erie Times-News's inaccurate headline over an article out of Alaska on the findings of a so-called "independent investigator" appointed to investigate an ethics claim against Alaska Governor Sarah Palin,
The headline states: "Investigator rules against Palin in ethics probe"
In fact, the investigator," Thomas Daniel, an Anchorage attorney who works for the law firm that represents President Barack Obama and other leading Congressional Democrats, Perkins Coie,did not rule against, nor implicate Palin, merely finding that "she may have violated" a state ethics law, an unsurprising finding from an attorney who works for the nation's top Democrats. Whether or not she did remains to be determined by the state Personnel Board which will consider the investigator's findings. This is a pro forma process.
The "investigator" released his findings to Palin 's political foes in violation of state law which requires all matters in an investigation to be held confidential until the Personnel Board issues its ruling.
The AP Story was initiated in Anchorage by its only daily newspaper, The Anchorage Daily News, the largest in Alaska, which is owned by McClatchy Newspapers in California, the second-largest newspaper chain in the U.S., a leftwing federation. Along with it stepchild, the Daily News, it has been critical of Palin since she was nominated for Republican vice president and has become an international celebrity.
The Associated Press says Palin "is securing unwarranted benefits and receiving improper gifts through the Alaska Fund Trust, set up by supporters."
These are false and unproven allegations, though presented as factual by the"independent investigator", and Palin and her attorney have denied them.
According to the AP, the investigator,the Obama hireling, said "there is probable cause to believe Palin used or attempted to use her official position for personal gain because she authorized the creation of the Alaska Fund Trust as the "official" legal defense fund."
In fact, Palin neither authorized nor controls the trust fund, which was established without her express consent by supporters based in Washington D.C. and has received no money from it. It was formed by her supporters to help her pay for her defense against a barrage of ethics complaints filed under Alaska law against her as governor by Obama supporters for which Alaska, unlike other states and the federal government, does not provide funding.
The complaints, so far 19 of them, which have all been dismissed or resolved without any finding of guilt, have incurred half a million dolars in legal costs for Palin.Most of them have been found to be trivial or without merit.
According to the AP, "The practical effect of the ruling on Palin will be more financial than anything else, although the fate of the tens of thousands of dollars in the fund is unclear, said Palin attorney Thomas Van Flein. The report recommends that the complaint be resolved without a formal hearing before the board. That allows her to resolve the issue without a formal ethics reprimand," another veiled but false implication.
There would be no "formal ethics reprimand" unless the Personnel Board finds that allegations filed by the "investigator," an Obama henchman, are true. Palin posted an entry on Twitter in which she said the "matter is still pending," a statement echoed by her attorney.
The fund aims to help Palin pay off debts stemming from multiple ethics complaints against her, most of which have been dismissed. Palin says she owes more than $500,000 in legal fees, and she cited the toll of the ethics probes as one of the reasons she is leaving office on Sunday.
Kristan Cole, the fund's trustee, said organizers have frozen the fund pending the personnel board's review. Many federal politicians, including Hillary Clinton, former U.S. Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens and others are routinely allowed to have such funds to pay off legal bills, but quirks in Alaska law can present ethics issues.
Van Flein said the potential loss of money from the fund had absolutely no bearing on Palin's decision to resign.
He said Palin received the report 11 days after her July 3 announcement that she was leaving office. He also noted that the investigator recommended the governor seek reimbursement from the state for the cost of fighting ethics complaints that have been dismissed.
"It's cheaper for the people of the state of Alaska to have the bills paid for through the trust fund," Van Flein said. "But if that can't be done, then it looks like the state of Alaska could pay."
The investigator, Thomas Daniel, suggested that Alaska lawmakers may need to create a law that reimburses public officials for legal expenses to defend complaints that end up being unfounded.
Palin's friends and supporters created the Alaska Fund Trust in April, limiting donations to $150 per person. Organizers declined to say how much it has raised, and had hoped to raise about $500,000. A Web-a-thon last month brought in about $130,000 in pledges.
The ethics complaint was filed by Alaska resident Kim Chatman, a longtime Palin critic and Obama supporter shortly after the fund was created, alleging Palin was "misusing her official position and accepting improper gifts," both untrue.
John Coale, a Washington lawyer who helped set up the fund, called the probable cause finding by the "independent investigator" "crazy," adding that if upheld, it would mean that no governors of Alaska could ever defend themselves against frivolous ethics complaints.
"Anybody can keep filing ethics complaints and drive someone out of office, even if you're a nut," Coale said.
Unlike other states, he said, Alaska has no legal counsel's office devoted to defending the governor from allegations brought against her in her official capacity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday, July 20, 2009
Watch your language, Pat Howard
While I fully concur with the sentiments expressed in Sunday's column by Managing Editor Pat Howard in the Erie Times-News, I can't resist dinging him for his clumsy opening line syntax, which would earn grammar school students an F in sentence construction. He wrote:
"Despite HIM BEING one of the rare political figures to achieve statewide success from this corner of Pennsylvania, you could argue that BEING from Erie hurt former state Superior Court Judge Michael T. Joyce when it came time to pay for BEING a crook (my emphases)."
There are many more graceful ways of writing that sentence. Here's just one suggestion:
"Despite being one of the rare political figures to achieve statewide success from this corner of Pennsylvania, one could argue his Erie roots hurt former state Superior Court Judge Michael T. Joyce when it came time to pay for his crooked ways.
"Despite HIM BEING one of the rare political figures to achieve statewide success from this corner of Pennsylvania, you could argue that BEING from Erie hurt former state Superior Court Judge Michael T. Joyce when it came time to pay for BEING a crook (my emphases)."
There are many more graceful ways of writing that sentence. Here's just one suggestion:
"Despite being one of the rare political figures to achieve statewide success from this corner of Pennsylvania, one could argue his Erie roots hurt former state Superior Court Judge Michael T. Joyce when it came time to pay for his crooked ways.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Tabloid time at the Erie Times-News
Cementing its growing reputation as a broadsheet newspaper flaunting tabloid sensationalism of the National Inquirer ilk,the Erie Times-News ran a page one story Sunday above the fold at the right top of the page with a 42 point headline explicating a seedy sex triangle involving a low-level administrator at the North East Borough office.
In the meantime, the newspaper's editors and reporters ignore other far more important local governance stories in which top-level part-time, paid borough officials with roaring conflicts of interest routinely stiff North East, state and federal taxpayers of millions of dollars for gold-plated utility projects in order to pad their own professional fees.
Here is Times-News Sex Reporter Gerry Weiss's lead paragraph, straight out of STAR-type-tabloids:
"The North East Borough manager is being investigated by state police on allegations of criminal trespassing after his former girlfriend accused him of having sex with his estranged wife in the lover's apartment." It only gets worse
I ask you, could Weiss's lead have been more titillating? Or more irrelevant? While the subject of the piece is indeed the borough manager, in North East Borough's mercenary pecking order, his responsibilities and salary are barely above the level of a clerk typist.
With mind-numbing detail, Weiss quotes directly from a search warrant, ad infinitum and ad nauseum.
Putting out Sunday's newspaper on Saturday post meridian, the slowest news day of the week, is always a challenge for news editors. But the Weiss sex-fest represents a new low in Times-News annals where the norm usually scrapes the bottom of the barrel.
In the meantime, the newspaper's editors and reporters ignore other far more important local governance stories in which top-level part-time, paid borough officials with roaring conflicts of interest routinely stiff North East, state and federal taxpayers of millions of dollars for gold-plated utility projects in order to pad their own professional fees.
Here is Times-News Sex Reporter Gerry Weiss's lead paragraph, straight out of STAR-type-tabloids:
"The North East Borough manager is being investigated by state police on allegations of criminal trespassing after his former girlfriend accused him of having sex with his estranged wife in the lover's apartment." It only gets worse
I ask you, could Weiss's lead have been more titillating? Or more irrelevant? While the subject of the piece is indeed the borough manager, in North East Borough's mercenary pecking order, his responsibilities and salary are barely above the level of a clerk typist.
With mind-numbing detail, Weiss quotes directly from a search warrant, ad infinitum and ad nauseum.
Putting out Sunday's newspaper on Saturday post meridian, the slowest news day of the week, is always a challenge for news editors. But the Weiss sex-fest represents a new low in Times-News annals where the norm usually scrapes the bottom of the barrel.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
AP distorts Gov. Palin's decision to resign as Alaska governor
Once again, the AP, acronym for Asinine Press, distorted Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's decision to resign as governor, fabricating a "possible 2012 Presidential run" in an article carried in the Erie Times-News today.
Palin has neither said nor in any way indicated she plans to run for president in 2012. She has given many reasons why she decided to resign, which the AP ignored, while publishing one she did not give, nor for which there is any objective evidence, once again substituting opinion for fact.
Palin has neither said nor in any way indicated she plans to run for president in 2012. She has given many reasons why she decided to resign, which the AP ignored, while publishing one she did not give, nor for which there is any objective evidence, once again substituting opinion for fact.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Read Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's reasons for resigning, not the news media's fictional creations
Don't expect the mainstream news media, including the AP story in today's Erie Times-News, to give Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's unfiltered version of the reasons why she decided to resign as governor effective July 26.
They have all concocted fictional and speculative scenarios which place her decision in a bad light based on comments from her natural enemies both inside and outside Alaska, such as Democrats who fear her national popularity and crooked Republicans whom she has bested in ethical jousts.
For Palin's own words, go to http://www.adn.com., the website for the Anchorage Daily News, which is owned by the left-wing McClatchy chain based in Calfornia, the second largest-newspaper chain in the country, a strident critic of Palin.
They have all concocted fictional and speculative scenarios which place her decision in a bad light based on comments from her natural enemies both inside and outside Alaska, such as Democrats who fear her national popularity and crooked Republicans whom she has bested in ethical jousts.
For Palin's own words, go to http://www.adn.com., the website for the Anchorage Daily News, which is owned by the left-wing McClatchy chain based in Calfornia, the second largest-newspaper chain in the country, a strident critic of Palin.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Biden, Obama & Broadband
Dan Galena astutely observes that the Erie Times-News and the Pittsburgh Tribune differ on the number of folks who attended VP Joe Biden's chat at Seneca High School in Wattsburg. The Times-Snooze said 500 attended. Here's the Trib's report:
Biden fails to draw crowd in Erie
Wattsburg, Pa. — "Vice President Joe Biden visited a small town on the outskirts of Erie today to talk to rural folks about federal stimulus money that can be used to expand broadband access to the Internet for rural areas that typically have poor connections.
"Apparently stimulus money and broadband are not all that interesting to the local folk here: Only around 100 or so people have showed up so far to hear Biden talk at noon at Seneca High School off Route 8 in Wattsburg.
"The room looked so sparse that about 30 or so chairs were removed by volunteers to give the illusion of a full house.
"The effect didn't exactly work.
"Pittsburgh native and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper are also on hand to talk about access to high speed internet as an essential tool for success in business and in school in our struggling economy."
It's ironic that Biden should address school kids, and be lavishly praised in the local media by his old school chum Jim Lanahan of Mercyhurst North East in light of the fact that Biden was publicly disgraced for cheating at law school.
Does anyone really believe the Obama administration's push for universal broadband in the boondocks is altruisticly motivated when one considers that the president raised most of his election campaign funds via the internet in mostly urban centers, but did poorly in rural areas. This may be the first signal for his reelection aspirations.
Biden fails to draw crowd in Erie
Wattsburg, Pa. — "Vice President Joe Biden visited a small town on the outskirts of Erie today to talk to rural folks about federal stimulus money that can be used to expand broadband access to the Internet for rural areas that typically have poor connections.
"Apparently stimulus money and broadband are not all that interesting to the local folk here: Only around 100 or so people have showed up so far to hear Biden talk at noon at Seneca High School off Route 8 in Wattsburg.
"The room looked so sparse that about 30 or so chairs were removed by volunteers to give the illusion of a full house.
"The effect didn't exactly work.
"Pittsburgh native and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper are also on hand to talk about access to high speed internet as an essential tool for success in business and in school in our struggling economy."
It's ironic that Biden should address school kids, and be lavishly praised in the local media by his old school chum Jim Lanahan of Mercyhurst North East in light of the fact that Biden was publicly disgraced for cheating at law school.
Does anyone really believe the Obama administration's push for universal broadband in the boondocks is altruisticly motivated when one considers that the president raised most of his election campaign funds via the internet in mostly urban centers, but did poorly in rural areas. This may be the first signal for his reelection aspirations.
The Erie Times-News and Open Records filings
In an editorial published today, the Erie Times-News celebrated the new transparency in the commonwealth's operations fostered by the recently-enacted open records law which went into effect last January.
According to the editorial, some 500 requests for public records have been filed with the state's Open Records office during the six months since it's been in business. Guess how many requests have been filed by the Times-News's inquiring "investigative journalists."
Zip. Zero. Nada. None.
According to the editorial, some 500 requests for public records have been filed with the state's Open Records office during the six months since it's been in business. Guess how many requests have been filed by the Times-News's inquiring "investigative journalists."
Zip. Zero. Nada. None.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Harrisburg corruption you won't find in the Erie Times-News
The following is from Tim Potts, founder and head of Democracy Rising PA, whose goal is to reform government in Pennsylvania, unarguably the most corrupt state in the nation.
WAMs - The Highest Cost of Corruption
Last week's back-and-forth between Gov. Ed Rendell and legislative leaders somehow walked around Walking Around Money, or WAMs. This was especially curious because Associated Press Capitol reporter Marc Levy's three-part series put the matter front and center. Yet high-profile interviews never touched on spending that, according to Capitol insiders, amounts to $750 million in the current year's budget.
A few reporters questioned the $201 million surplus in legislative accounts, but none pressed the case to find out why lawmakers think it's fair to keep a 67% percent surplus while telling school districts that they should use their capped 8% reserve to balance the budget. Or why the executive and judicial branches must shut down or endure payless paydays while lawmakers and their staff roll merrily along.
Add the surplus and WAMs, and you get close to $1 billion in dubious spending and possible savings that could help to resolve this year's budget dilemma.
What to expect. Don't expect either the governor or lawmakers to give up their pork while their constituents eat beans. Until there's a deal, leaders will meet privately with each other, the governor and the gambling interests, who have the access ensured by $4.4 million in campaign contributions.
This reduces many rank-and-file lawmakers to expensive eye candy. When not being wined and dined by lobbyists and cajoled by leaders, lawmakers clog golf courses, restaurants and phone banks where they busily dial for dollars. Legislators also debate a few important issues to kill time in between relatively inconsequential lawmaking and feel-good resolutions. Looking to make sandals PA's official summer footwear? Your time has come.
Meanwhile, with budget and tax votes looming, lawmakers hold out for election insurance, i.e. WAMs. Because leaders need 102 House votes and 26 Senate votes to pass a budget, WAMs are a carrot leaders use to extort votes, just as lawmakers use their votes to extort WAMs.
What's corrupt about WAMs? Secret programs invite abuse and illegality. Just ask the jurors who convicted former Sen. Vince Fumo, D-Phila.
Some say that WAMs let lawmakers get their fair share of state taxes. However, Levy's report illustrates that WAMs are a way for legislative leaders to give money to themselves at the expense of everyone else. For example, former Majority Leader Bill DeWeese, D-Greene, directed $82 per constituent to Greene County at the expense of citizens in Bedford County, who received only 20 cents per constituent during the last half of 2008.
Some point to worthwhile projects that WAMs support, such as libraries, senior centers and fire companies. But while funding for WAMs grows, lawmakers do not fund adequately the established programs that serve citizens statewide. Instead of allowing professionals with a statewide perspective to allocate funds on the basis of need, lawmakers siphon off money for WAMs that take from the weak and give to the well-connected.
WAMs are unconstitutional. This is why lawmakers and governors are so determined to keep secret how WAMs are allocated, where they are in the budget, how organizations apply for them and which organizations apply for WAMs but don't get them.
WAMs violate the separation of powers. The money for WAMs is appropriated to executive agencies. Once that happens, it is unconstitutional for members of the legislative branch to decide how the money is spent. This distinguishes WAMs from federal "earmarks," where the law appropriating the money states the project being funded and the lawmaker who got the earmark. Once the law is enacted, federal lawmakers have no further decision-making authority, a practice that maintains the separation of powers.
Second, some WAMs circumvent constitutional requirements for giving tax dollars to private parties. For example the Constitution says that appropriations to private schools must be in a separate bill from general appropriations. These are called "non-preferred" appropriations. There are dozens of them each year, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, to private colleges and universities. Yet DeWeese got a $1 million WAM for private Waynesburg University to renovate a science hall without a bill and a vote, as the Constitution requires.
The reason for the constitutional requirement is simple when you realize that the state's own public universities have science halls, dormitories and other facilities in serious need of repair.
Question:
How high will the cost of corruption have to go before we decide to stop it?
WAMs - The Highest Cost of Corruption
Last week's back-and-forth between Gov. Ed Rendell and legislative leaders somehow walked around Walking Around Money, or WAMs. This was especially curious because Associated Press Capitol reporter Marc Levy's three-part series put the matter front and center. Yet high-profile interviews never touched on spending that, according to Capitol insiders, amounts to $750 million in the current year's budget.
A few reporters questioned the $201 million surplus in legislative accounts, but none pressed the case to find out why lawmakers think it's fair to keep a 67% percent surplus while telling school districts that they should use their capped 8% reserve to balance the budget. Or why the executive and judicial branches must shut down or endure payless paydays while lawmakers and their staff roll merrily along.
Add the surplus and WAMs, and you get close to $1 billion in dubious spending and possible savings that could help to resolve this year's budget dilemma.
What to expect. Don't expect either the governor or lawmakers to give up their pork while their constituents eat beans. Until there's a deal, leaders will meet privately with each other, the governor and the gambling interests, who have the access ensured by $4.4 million in campaign contributions.
This reduces many rank-and-file lawmakers to expensive eye candy. When not being wined and dined by lobbyists and cajoled by leaders, lawmakers clog golf courses, restaurants and phone banks where they busily dial for dollars. Legislators also debate a few important issues to kill time in between relatively inconsequential lawmaking and feel-good resolutions. Looking to make sandals PA's official summer footwear? Your time has come.
Meanwhile, with budget and tax votes looming, lawmakers hold out for election insurance, i.e. WAMs. Because leaders need 102 House votes and 26 Senate votes to pass a budget, WAMs are a carrot leaders use to extort votes, just as lawmakers use their votes to extort WAMs.
What's corrupt about WAMs? Secret programs invite abuse and illegality. Just ask the jurors who convicted former Sen. Vince Fumo, D-Phila.
Some say that WAMs let lawmakers get their fair share of state taxes. However, Levy's report illustrates that WAMs are a way for legislative leaders to give money to themselves at the expense of everyone else. For example, former Majority Leader Bill DeWeese, D-Greene, directed $82 per constituent to Greene County at the expense of citizens in Bedford County, who received only 20 cents per constituent during the last half of 2008.
Some point to worthwhile projects that WAMs support, such as libraries, senior centers and fire companies. But while funding for WAMs grows, lawmakers do not fund adequately the established programs that serve citizens statewide. Instead of allowing professionals with a statewide perspective to allocate funds on the basis of need, lawmakers siphon off money for WAMs that take from the weak and give to the well-connected.
WAMs are unconstitutional. This is why lawmakers and governors are so determined to keep secret how WAMs are allocated, where they are in the budget, how organizations apply for them and which organizations apply for WAMs but don't get them.
WAMs violate the separation of powers. The money for WAMs is appropriated to executive agencies. Once that happens, it is unconstitutional for members of the legislative branch to decide how the money is spent. This distinguishes WAMs from federal "earmarks," where the law appropriating the money states the project being funded and the lawmaker who got the earmark. Once the law is enacted, federal lawmakers have no further decision-making authority, a practice that maintains the separation of powers.
Second, some WAMs circumvent constitutional requirements for giving tax dollars to private parties. For example the Constitution says that appropriations to private schools must be in a separate bill from general appropriations. These are called "non-preferred" appropriations. There are dozens of them each year, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, to private colleges and universities. Yet DeWeese got a $1 million WAM for private Waynesburg University to renovate a science hall without a bill and a vote, as the Constitution requires.
The reason for the constitutional requirement is simple when you realize that the state's own public universities have science halls, dormitories and other facilities in serious need of repair.
Question:
How high will the cost of corruption have to go before we decide to stop it?
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Tax hikes? How about paring the Legislature? Guest Column
By Brian O'Neill, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Gov. Ed Rendell's campaign to raise the state income tax should be no more popular or successful than Walter Mondale's pledge to raise federal taxes in 1984.
Mr. Mondale got creamed in his bid to unseat President Ronald Reagan (who continued to blithely run up the national credit card). Mr. Rendell is going to lose this argument, too, as he should.
Because there is no way America's Largest Full-Time State Legislature can justify even a small increase in taxes until it pares its own budget.
Senate Republicans will prevail in blocking this tax increase (which would run about $5 a week for a person earning $50,000 a year). But before they impose the only alternative, massive cuts in education and elsewhere, legislators need to share more of the pain they're about to dish out.
The Republican-dominated state Senate passed a bill last month that would cut legislative appropriations by more than 10 percent from current levels (from $332.2 million to $293 million), but that isn't nearly enough. With 253 legislators, that still works out to $1.16 million per legislator. That's an unfathomable expense just to keep the chambers running.
Senate Republican spokesman Erik Arneson pointed to the proposed 10 percent cut and also to a 9 percent cut in number of staffers in the Republican caucus since January 2006 -- about 40 positions. But when 40 jobs represent just 9 percent of the total, that only reminds us that our Legislature has the most staffers of any statehouse in the republic. There were roughly 3,000 helpers at last count.
Legislative expenses should be cut by at least 20 percent, as some area lawmakers from both parties have suggested.
"I understand your point," Mr. Arneson wrote at the end of our e-mail exchange. "Given the way revenues have continued to plummet, it is absolutely fair to expect us to look at cutting the legislature further if we reach agreement to adopt a no-tax-increase budget that makes the other cuts included in Senate Bill 850 [which proposes the 10 percent cut]."
That would be wisdom were it not for the "if." There should be no ''if." Slashing the legislative budget should be dependent on nothing else. It's imperative.
Every few years, the Pennsylvania citizenry wakes up to what is happening in Harrisburg. The unconstitutional mid-term pay grab in the summer of 2005 was one such moment, and this idea of raising taxes during a recession is another.
It's true that the Legislature cannot balance the budget simply by lopping itself. The savings would be in the tens of millions of dollars, and the budget deficit is estimated at $3.2 billion. That doesn't matter. This is about sharing the pain.
There would be any number of places to begin. Lawmaking is not a physically demanding job like, say, firefighting or mining. Its demands are mental. Trying to justify yet another day in Harrisburg to snarf up the $158 per diem can tax the brain. So here's one quick savings idea: Let's call one $158 meeting to discuss eliminating the right of retired lawmakers to begin receiving a full pension at age 50.
That's at least 10 years too young, and we'd have more healthy turnover in the statehouse if there were no legislative pension. Put the lawmakers on a 401(k). One day soon they will have to deal with ticking pension time bomb for state workers, and they'll need to make their own sacrifices first.
Then there is, of course, the size of the Legislature itself. We have 253 lawmakers. Comparable states, Ohio and Illinois, get by with 132 and 177.
The Pennsylvania Constitution allows no voters' initiative to get a referendum on the ballot, and reducing the Legislature's size requires a constitutional change. But all downsizing proposals have sputtered in Harrisburg largely because the lawmakers have no reason to believe they'll be voted out if they don't reform now.
This "temporary" tax increase, which Gov. Rendell says would last three years, provides the opening for the tedious process of changing the constitution. Call your state senator and representative and offer this simple advice: "Tax me? Cut you."
That probably won't work, but it would be good for one's soul.
Gov. Ed Rendell's campaign to raise the state income tax should be no more popular or successful than Walter Mondale's pledge to raise federal taxes in 1984.
Mr. Mondale got creamed in his bid to unseat President Ronald Reagan (who continued to blithely run up the national credit card). Mr. Rendell is going to lose this argument, too, as he should.
Because there is no way America's Largest Full-Time State Legislature can justify even a small increase in taxes until it pares its own budget.
Senate Republicans will prevail in blocking this tax increase (which would run about $5 a week for a person earning $50,000 a year). But before they impose the only alternative, massive cuts in education and elsewhere, legislators need to share more of the pain they're about to dish out.
The Republican-dominated state Senate passed a bill last month that would cut legislative appropriations by more than 10 percent from current levels (from $332.2 million to $293 million), but that isn't nearly enough. With 253 legislators, that still works out to $1.16 million per legislator. That's an unfathomable expense just to keep the chambers running.
Senate Republican spokesman Erik Arneson pointed to the proposed 10 percent cut and also to a 9 percent cut in number of staffers in the Republican caucus since January 2006 -- about 40 positions. But when 40 jobs represent just 9 percent of the total, that only reminds us that our Legislature has the most staffers of any statehouse in the republic. There were roughly 3,000 helpers at last count.
Legislative expenses should be cut by at least 20 percent, as some area lawmakers from both parties have suggested.
"I understand your point," Mr. Arneson wrote at the end of our e-mail exchange. "Given the way revenues have continued to plummet, it is absolutely fair to expect us to look at cutting the legislature further if we reach agreement to adopt a no-tax-increase budget that makes the other cuts included in Senate Bill 850 [which proposes the 10 percent cut]."
That would be wisdom were it not for the "if." There should be no ''if." Slashing the legislative budget should be dependent on nothing else. It's imperative.
Every few years, the Pennsylvania citizenry wakes up to what is happening in Harrisburg. The unconstitutional mid-term pay grab in the summer of 2005 was one such moment, and this idea of raising taxes during a recession is another.
It's true that the Legislature cannot balance the budget simply by lopping itself. The savings would be in the tens of millions of dollars, and the budget deficit is estimated at $3.2 billion. That doesn't matter. This is about sharing the pain.
There would be any number of places to begin. Lawmaking is not a physically demanding job like, say, firefighting or mining. Its demands are mental. Trying to justify yet another day in Harrisburg to snarf up the $158 per diem can tax the brain. So here's one quick savings idea: Let's call one $158 meeting to discuss eliminating the right of retired lawmakers to begin receiving a full pension at age 50.
That's at least 10 years too young, and we'd have more healthy turnover in the statehouse if there were no legislative pension. Put the lawmakers on a 401(k). One day soon they will have to deal with ticking pension time bomb for state workers, and they'll need to make their own sacrifices first.
Then there is, of course, the size of the Legislature itself. We have 253 lawmakers. Comparable states, Ohio and Illinois, get by with 132 and 177.
The Pennsylvania Constitution allows no voters' initiative to get a referendum on the ballot, and reducing the Legislature's size requires a constitutional change. But all downsizing proposals have sputtered in Harrisburg largely because the lawmakers have no reason to believe they'll be voted out if they don't reform now.
This "temporary" tax increase, which Gov. Rendell says would last three years, provides the opening for the tedious process of changing the constitution. Call your state senator and representative and offer this simple advice: "Tax me? Cut you."
That probably won't work, but it would be good for one's soul.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Erie Times-News drops the ball again
The Erie Times-News carried an AP story today (State grants grow as criticism persists, Practice said to be unfair election tool) which exposes the longstanding practice of state legislative leaders to corral tens of millions of taxpayer dollars illegally every year and dole them out as special community grants to favored legislators outside the constitutionally prescribed budgetary process, using it primarily as a reelection campaign tool for select incumbents.
It's standard newspaper practice in such matters to localize a story like this by contacting local legislators and grilling them on what role,if any, they have played or are playing in such unsavory practices, and expose their malfeasance to local citizens, if any.
This story gives the Times-Snooze a perfect opportunity to play a role in ongoing and so far unsuccessful efforts by some legislators and citizen activists and groups to reform the legislature and curb rampant abuses like this one by bringing to the attention of local voters how legislators they have elected have and are performing on this issue so they can decide whether to retain them at the next elections.
For example, local State Senator Jane Earll, a Republican, as chair of the Senate Community, Recreational Development and member of the Gaming committees is one of those hallowed "legislative leaders." Does she condone and persist in this practice, or is she one of the reformers? How about the other half dozen area state legislators? Have they participated in this annual boondoggle?
Holding local legislators accountable for their actions in office is standard newspaper practice except at the Times-Snooze, which consistently prattles on in its editorials on how important freedom of the press protections under the First Amendment enable the press to function, but ignores the concommitant responsibility to exercise that freedom to expose legislative wrongdoers on behalf of the broad public interest.
It's standard newspaper practice in such matters to localize a story like this by contacting local legislators and grilling them on what role,if any, they have played or are playing in such unsavory practices, and expose their malfeasance to local citizens, if any.
This story gives the Times-Snooze a perfect opportunity to play a role in ongoing and so far unsuccessful efforts by some legislators and citizen activists and groups to reform the legislature and curb rampant abuses like this one by bringing to the attention of local voters how legislators they have elected have and are performing on this issue so they can decide whether to retain them at the next elections.
For example, local State Senator Jane Earll, a Republican, as chair of the Senate Community, Recreational Development and member of the Gaming committees is one of those hallowed "legislative leaders." Does she condone and persist in this practice, or is she one of the reformers? How about the other half dozen area state legislators? Have they participated in this annual boondoggle?
Holding local legislators accountable for their actions in office is standard newspaper practice except at the Times-Snooze, which consistently prattles on in its editorials on how important freedom of the press protections under the First Amendment enable the press to function, but ignores the concommitant responsibility to exercise that freedom to expose legislative wrongdoers on behalf of the broad public interest.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
More Rendell Pay-to-Play from Democracy Rising PA
This is from Tim Potts's blog. He's the founder and head of the citizen advocacy group, Democracy Rising Pennslvania, which advocates government reform in the Commonwealth. It's the kind of gutty investigative reporting you'll never find in the Erie news media.
Last week the Harrisburg Patriot reported that Gov. Ed Rendell's administration has signed a seven-year, $201.1 million contract with a Minnesota testing company. Data Recognition Corp. (DRC), which provides tests for the state's current standardized testing program, got the contract to create a new, statewide graduation exam even though the General Assembly has not authorized the testing program.
Where might pay-to-play come in? According to state records, DRC executives made these contributions to Rendell's gubernatorial campaign:
February 24, 2006 - $5,000 from Russell Hagen (chair of DRC's board)
September 21, 2006 - $1,000 from Hagen
September 23, 2006 - $1,000 from Susan Engeleiter (DRC's CEO & President)
January 18, 2007 - $10,000 from Hagen
Two weeks later on February 1, 2007, Rendell expressed support for "a single standard for high school graduation" based on recommendations from the Commission on College and Career Success, which Rendell convened in August 2005.
Questions:
Why would a Minnesota corporation pay so much attention to an election that was a foregone conclusion in PA? (Rendell won 60%-40%.)
If the object of a campaign contribution is to influence the outcome of an election, why did Hagen's largest contribution occur after the election when Rendell still had $1.7 million in campaign funds and no debt to retire?
Why is Rendell accepting contributions for a gubernatorial campaign when he can't run for governor again?
Implications for the budget. This is not a new trick for Rendell. In 2007 he held up the budget, demanding increased funding for motion picture production. Unknown to lawmakers was that Rendell had secretly signed a letter committing $3.5 million to Lionsgate, a film production company in California. Lionsgate was represented by former Rep. Mike Veon, D-Beaver, who had lost re-election in 2006 following his vote not to repeal the Pay raise of 2005 and who is now awaiting trial for his alleged role in the Bonus Scandal.
Question: Will Rendell delay this year's budget until he has retroactive authority for the DRC contract?
That other notorious coincidence. The DRC contract is reminiscent of another coincidence between contributions to Rendell's political fortunes and a contract for the contributor. See theApril 9 edition of DR News presenting the Wall Street Journal's report on Rendell and a Houston, TX law firm.
Rendell's not alone. Although he got the lion's share of campaign contributions from DRC executives, Rendell was not the only PA political figure to benefit. Here are other contributions:
October 5, 2007 - $500 from Hagen to Friends of Jess Stairs (Stairs, R-Westmoreland, was then chair of the House Education Committee)
May 14, 2007 - $1,000 from Hagen to Dominic Pileggi for Senate Committee (Pileggi, R-Delaware, was and is majority leader)
May 9, 2007 - $500 from Hagen to Friends of Jim Rhoades Committee (Rhoades was then chair of the Senate Education Committee)
November 17, 2006 - $1,000 from Hagen to Friends of Jim Rhoades Committee
November 13, 2006 - $600 from Hagen to Friends of Jess Stairs
November 6, 2006 - $500 from Hagen to Raphael Musto for Senate Committee (Musto was then minority chair of the Senate Education Committee)
November 3, 2006 - $500 from Hagen to Friends of James Roebuck Committee (Roebuck was then minority chair of the House Education Committee)
November 2, 2006 - $1,000 from Hagen to Friends of John Perzel (Perzel, R-Phila., was then Speaker of the House)
September 20, 2006 - $400 from Hagen to Friends of Jess Stairs
May 11, 2006 - $1,500 from Sandra Wiese (DRC's VP of Governmental Affairs) to Friends of Senator Jubelirer Committee (Jubelirer was then president pro tempore of the Senate)
May 9, 2006 - $1,000 from Hagen to Friends of Sen. Dave Brightbill Committee (Brightbill was then majority leader)
January 18, 2006 - $1,000 from Wiese to the Committee to Elect Mike Veon (Veon was then minority whip)
Question:
Why have there been no contributions since October 2007?
Last week the Harrisburg Patriot reported that Gov. Ed Rendell's administration has signed a seven-year, $201.1 million contract with a Minnesota testing company. Data Recognition Corp. (DRC), which provides tests for the state's current standardized testing program, got the contract to create a new, statewide graduation exam even though the General Assembly has not authorized the testing program.
Where might pay-to-play come in? According to state records, DRC executives made these contributions to Rendell's gubernatorial campaign:
February 24, 2006 - $5,000 from Russell Hagen (chair of DRC's board)
September 21, 2006 - $1,000 from Hagen
September 23, 2006 - $1,000 from Susan Engeleiter (DRC's CEO & President)
January 18, 2007 - $10,000 from Hagen
Two weeks later on February 1, 2007, Rendell expressed support for "a single standard for high school graduation" based on recommendations from the Commission on College and Career Success, which Rendell convened in August 2005.
Questions:
Why would a Minnesota corporation pay so much attention to an election that was a foregone conclusion in PA? (Rendell won 60%-40%.)
If the object of a campaign contribution is to influence the outcome of an election, why did Hagen's largest contribution occur after the election when Rendell still had $1.7 million in campaign funds and no debt to retire?
Why is Rendell accepting contributions for a gubernatorial campaign when he can't run for governor again?
Implications for the budget. This is not a new trick for Rendell. In 2007 he held up the budget, demanding increased funding for motion picture production. Unknown to lawmakers was that Rendell had secretly signed a letter committing $3.5 million to Lionsgate, a film production company in California. Lionsgate was represented by former Rep. Mike Veon, D-Beaver, who had lost re-election in 2006 following his vote not to repeal the Pay raise of 2005 and who is now awaiting trial for his alleged role in the Bonus Scandal.
Question: Will Rendell delay this year's budget until he has retroactive authority for the DRC contract?
That other notorious coincidence. The DRC contract is reminiscent of another coincidence between contributions to Rendell's political fortunes and a contract for the contributor. See theApril 9 edition of DR News presenting the Wall Street Journal's report on Rendell and a Houston, TX law firm.
Rendell's not alone. Although he got the lion's share of campaign contributions from DRC executives, Rendell was not the only PA political figure to benefit. Here are other contributions:
October 5, 2007 - $500 from Hagen to Friends of Jess Stairs (Stairs, R-Westmoreland, was then chair of the House Education Committee)
May 14, 2007 - $1,000 from Hagen to Dominic Pileggi for Senate Committee (Pileggi, R-Delaware, was and is majority leader)
May 9, 2007 - $500 from Hagen to Friends of Jim Rhoades Committee (Rhoades was then chair of the Senate Education Committee)
November 17, 2006 - $1,000 from Hagen to Friends of Jim Rhoades Committee
November 13, 2006 - $600 from Hagen to Friends of Jess Stairs
November 6, 2006 - $500 from Hagen to Raphael Musto for Senate Committee (Musto was then minority chair of the Senate Education Committee)
November 3, 2006 - $500 from Hagen to Friends of James Roebuck Committee (Roebuck was then minority chair of the House Education Committee)
November 2, 2006 - $1,000 from Hagen to Friends of John Perzel (Perzel, R-Phila., was then Speaker of the House)
September 20, 2006 - $400 from Hagen to Friends of Jess Stairs
May 11, 2006 - $1,500 from Sandra Wiese (DRC's VP of Governmental Affairs) to Friends of Senator Jubelirer Committee (Jubelirer was then president pro tempore of the Senate)
May 9, 2006 - $1,000 from Hagen to Friends of Sen. Dave Brightbill Committee (Brightbill was then majority leader)
January 18, 2006 - $1,000 from Wiese to the Committee to Elect Mike Veon (Veon was then minority whip)
Question:
Why have there been no contributions since October 2007?
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Did Phil English game Kevin Cuneo?
Back in February, Kevin Cuneo wrote in his gossip column the following:
"Former U.S. Rep. Phil English will keep busy with his work on the National Commission for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. English was recently appointed to a three-year term on the commission. He'll serve on the task force on cultural issues."
In response, I wrote here, addressing Cuneo:
"Kevin, where's the rest of the story? By whom was he appointed? Is this yet another example of Congress feathering its own nest and looking after its own defeated members? Is this a salaried position, with travel, per diem and expenses perks? Does it extend and enhance the former congressman's lavish retirement, per diem, health and pension benefits"?
Needless to say, Cuneo, who publicly boasts of dialoguing with readers but in reality engages mostly in drawn-out soliloquies, never answered those key questions.
Then, on April 15, this article appeared in PM in the Legal Business, a beltway publication;
Former Rep. Phil English Joins Arent Fox
Arent Fox has added former Rep. Phil English (R-Pa.) to its Washington office as a senior government relations adviser, the firm announced today. English’s first day at the firm is today.
English lost his bid for an eighth term in November to Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D-Pa.) after representing Western Pennsylvania’s 3rd District from 1995 to 2009. In the 110th Congress, he served as the ranking member on the House Subcommittee of Select Revenue Measures.
At Arent Fox, English will be advising clients and generating business in areas similar to those he focused on in Congress, including health, energy, tax and trade legislation. He will not be lobbying during his first year at the firm in keeping with federal guidelines, a firm spokesman says.
English currently serves on the U.S. National Commission for the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, which advises the State Department on educational, scientific, cultural and communications issues pending before the international organization.
English could not be reached immediately for comment.
Posted by Jeff Jeffrey on April 15, 2009
How is it that English will, as Kevin put it, "keep busy with his work" on the National Commission, when he's working fulltime for Arent Fox? And why would Cuneo, who purports to be a newsman, write about English's appointment to the National Commission, but ignore his hiring by Arent Fox?
My guess is English, or a surrogate, wanted to publicize his appointment to the Commission, and fed Cuneo a blurb on it, but for his own reasons wanted to keep his job with Arent Fox quiet (which raises all kinds of conflict of interest issues), so he kept his own counsel.
It's a classic example of how crafty politicians game unwitting newsmen. And it makes a mockery of so-called "revolving door" laws which are designed to keep former lawakers like Engish, who have been privy to mountains of classified secret information, from using information they gained as "public servants" to compromise the public's interests while working for lobbying firms representing special interests.
"Former U.S. Rep. Phil English will keep busy with his work on the National Commission for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. English was recently appointed to a three-year term on the commission. He'll serve on the task force on cultural issues."
In response, I wrote here, addressing Cuneo:
"Kevin, where's the rest of the story? By whom was he appointed? Is this yet another example of Congress feathering its own nest and looking after its own defeated members? Is this a salaried position, with travel, per diem and expenses perks? Does it extend and enhance the former congressman's lavish retirement, per diem, health and pension benefits"?
Needless to say, Cuneo, who publicly boasts of dialoguing with readers but in reality engages mostly in drawn-out soliloquies, never answered those key questions.
Then, on April 15, this article appeared in PM in the Legal Business, a beltway publication;
Former Rep. Phil English Joins Arent Fox
Arent Fox has added former Rep. Phil English (R-Pa.) to its Washington office as a senior government relations adviser, the firm announced today. English’s first day at the firm is today.
English lost his bid for an eighth term in November to Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D-Pa.) after representing Western Pennsylvania’s 3rd District from 1995 to 2009. In the 110th Congress, he served as the ranking member on the House Subcommittee of Select Revenue Measures.
At Arent Fox, English will be advising clients and generating business in areas similar to those he focused on in Congress, including health, energy, tax and trade legislation. He will not be lobbying during his first year at the firm in keeping with federal guidelines, a firm spokesman says.
English currently serves on the U.S. National Commission for the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, which advises the State Department on educational, scientific, cultural and communications issues pending before the international organization.
English could not be reached immediately for comment.
Posted by Jeff Jeffrey on April 15, 2009
How is it that English will, as Kevin put it, "keep busy with his work" on the National Commission, when he's working fulltime for Arent Fox? And why would Cuneo, who purports to be a newsman, write about English's appointment to the National Commission, but ignore his hiring by Arent Fox?
My guess is English, or a surrogate, wanted to publicize his appointment to the Commission, and fed Cuneo a blurb on it, but for his own reasons wanted to keep his job with Arent Fox quiet (which raises all kinds of conflict of interest issues), so he kept his own counsel.
It's a classic example of how crafty politicians game unwitting newsmen. And it makes a mockery of so-called "revolving door" laws which are designed to keep former lawakers like Engish, who have been privy to mountains of classified secret information, from using information they gained as "public servants" to compromise the public's interests while working for lobbying firms representing special interests.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Social engineering at the Erie Times News
Sunday, May 10, 2008
In his weekly column today, Pat Howard, managing editor of the Erie Times-News, writes glowingly of the public forum held last week engineered by him and his colleagues at the paper.It was called "Times-News...,"uh sorry, "Erie Agenda '09." It was like reading a review written by the playwright of his own play. All raves, naturally.
According to Howard, about 150 people attended the forum, the discussion of which was "guided" by himself and three other of his newsroom colleagues, Liz Allen, Kevin Cuneo and Kevin Flowers whose qualifications are suspect, to put it kindly. And, by the way, aren't newsfolk supposed to report the news, rather than make it?
In the interests of full disclosure, I neither attended the forum nor watched the streaming video of the hyper-hyped event on my computer, so I can't evaluate the performance. But Howard's words speak volumes. Headlined "Erie's agenda comes into focus amid spirit of realism, optimism," his column extols and sums up the forum's ambiance. "It was very cool," he writes, with sophomoric eclat.
Those who happen to disagree with Howard's and the Times-News editorial board's myopic vision of what they see as Erie's future are portrayed as "loudmouths at the end of the bar" evincing "a strain of sour defeatism...that generates a hollow whine." Wow. And this is the guy who says "We're all in this together."
Howard's pet topic, on which he preaches incessantly but cluelessly, is "regionalism," once known as "metro government," which seeks at the furthest extreme advocated by Howard to lump most or all of the county's municipalities and functions under a single government umbrella.
Can you imagine an Erie city or county council, with their petty politics and relentless penchant for self-agrandizement infecting every other municipality within the county, big or small, writ large? It boggles the mind.
Apparently some regionalism advocates at the forum weren't prepared to go as far as Howard and the Times-News would lead them, and "came at the question from a different angle," with more limited visions of Big Brotherism.
While Howard prefers that big government be foisted on home rule venues wholesale by the corrupt gang in Harrisburg, he grudgingly concedes "that's not going to happen, so the incremental regionalism" described by others "is probably the best path available."
Most alarming of all was Howard's punch line: "...the dialogue on Wednesday night should be only the beginning. Here at the Erie Times-News and GoErie.com, it's our job to see to that." Shallow cliches aside, with the Times-News, it's never a dialogue. Think, rather, a monologue.
In his weekly column today, Pat Howard, managing editor of the Erie Times-News, writes glowingly of the public forum held last week engineered by him and his colleagues at the paper.It was called "Times-News...,"uh sorry, "Erie Agenda '09." It was like reading a review written by the playwright of his own play. All raves, naturally.
According to Howard, about 150 people attended the forum, the discussion of which was "guided" by himself and three other of his newsroom colleagues, Liz Allen, Kevin Cuneo and Kevin Flowers whose qualifications are suspect, to put it kindly. And, by the way, aren't newsfolk supposed to report the news, rather than make it?
In the interests of full disclosure, I neither attended the forum nor watched the streaming video of the hyper-hyped event on my computer, so I can't evaluate the performance. But Howard's words speak volumes. Headlined "Erie's agenda comes into focus amid spirit of realism, optimism," his column extols and sums up the forum's ambiance. "It was very cool," he writes, with sophomoric eclat.
Those who happen to disagree with Howard's and the Times-News editorial board's myopic vision of what they see as Erie's future are portrayed as "loudmouths at the end of the bar" evincing "a strain of sour defeatism...that generates a hollow whine." Wow. And this is the guy who says "We're all in this together."
Howard's pet topic, on which he preaches incessantly but cluelessly, is "regionalism," once known as "metro government," which seeks at the furthest extreme advocated by Howard to lump most or all of the county's municipalities and functions under a single government umbrella.
Can you imagine an Erie city or county council, with their petty politics and relentless penchant for self-agrandizement infecting every other municipality within the county, big or small, writ large? It boggles the mind.
Apparently some regionalism advocates at the forum weren't prepared to go as far as Howard and the Times-News would lead them, and "came at the question from a different angle," with more limited visions of Big Brotherism.
While Howard prefers that big government be foisted on home rule venues wholesale by the corrupt gang in Harrisburg, he grudgingly concedes "that's not going to happen, so the incremental regionalism" described by others "is probably the best path available."
Most alarming of all was Howard's punch line: "...the dialogue on Wednesday night should be only the beginning. Here at the Erie Times-News and GoErie.com, it's our job to see to that." Shallow cliches aside, with the Times-News, it's never a dialogue. Think, rather, a monologue.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Half-baked concoctions guide Times-News '09 agenda
Why would any thinking and intelligent folks care what the Erie Times-News and its hand-picked assemblage of bureaucrats, ivy-towered academicians and pompous third rate editorialists have to say about shaping the future of the Erie area?
The failing newspaper, which has had to unload a bunch of staff persons and cut the salaries of the rest while shrinking its news coverage to an irreducible minimum, should focus its dwindling energies on its own broken publishing infrastructure.
If the Times-News would do the job its supposed to of adequately informing its readership of the state of public affairs rather than trying to manipulate them in its own selfish interests, the community would be better served.
The community doesn't need the half-baked concoctions of an arrogant and power-hungry editorial board to tell it what it should or shouldn't do, especially a publishing monopoly which can't competently manage its own business and professional affairs, awash in a tsunami of demoralized staff.
In a feeble attempt to bolster its waning relevance within the community, the Times-News cobbled together what it fatuosly labelled "Erie Agenda 09," a time warp reference it would seem from the worn-out rhetoric surrounding it, to 1909 A.D., pitching it as a catalyst for change, but inadvertently invoking the ageless truism that the more things change, the more they are the same.
Scarcely reassuring was the assertion in the Times-News and Goerie.com Wednesday that the discussion during last night's "forum" would be "guided" by such ineffectual luminaries and psuedo-journalists as Managing Editor Pat Howard, Public Editor (so-called) Liz Allen, Assistant Managing Editor Kevin Cuneo, and Reporter Kevin Flowers, all of whom many of us see as part of the problem rather than part of a solution.
The failing newspaper, which has had to unload a bunch of staff persons and cut the salaries of the rest while shrinking its news coverage to an irreducible minimum, should focus its dwindling energies on its own broken publishing infrastructure.
If the Times-News would do the job its supposed to of adequately informing its readership of the state of public affairs rather than trying to manipulate them in its own selfish interests, the community would be better served.
The community doesn't need the half-baked concoctions of an arrogant and power-hungry editorial board to tell it what it should or shouldn't do, especially a publishing monopoly which can't competently manage its own business and professional affairs, awash in a tsunami of demoralized staff.
In a feeble attempt to bolster its waning relevance within the community, the Times-News cobbled together what it fatuosly labelled "Erie Agenda 09," a time warp reference it would seem from the worn-out rhetoric surrounding it, to 1909 A.D., pitching it as a catalyst for change, but inadvertently invoking the ageless truism that the more things change, the more they are the same.
Scarcely reassuring was the assertion in the Times-News and Goerie.com Wednesday that the discussion during last night's "forum" would be "guided" by such ineffectual luminaries and psuedo-journalists as Managing Editor Pat Howard, Public Editor (so-called) Liz Allen, Assistant Managing Editor Kevin Cuneo, and Reporter Kevin Flowers, all of whom many of us see as part of the problem rather than part of a solution.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
FAVORITISM AT GOERIE.COM
It seems the headline on my last post on the Erie Yacht Club's "gift" membership to State Rep. John Hornaman should have read "Favoritism at Goerie.com," The Times-News's online edition. Kara Rhodes at the Times-News tells me the story ran in the print edition of the Times-News on Tuesday.
However, there was no sign of it in the Tuesday online edition, or thereafter, which is the only version of the Times-News I read. And in the "Stories Most Read" section of Goerie, there was no mention of the Hornaman story, even though it would certainly have been that day's most read story had it appeared in the online edition.
Nevertheless, the taint of favoritism at the Times-News still applies because the print version treated Rep. Hornman's conflict of interest, and the elitest Erie Yacht Club's obvious attempt to influence public policy in its favor with kid gloves, by minimizing their ill-conceived actions. Don't expect an outraged editorial condemning them.
I tried to retrieve the print version of the story from the newspaper's online Archives, but could only get the first few lines of the story without shelling out $2.95 to the Archives service. Many newspapers which archive their print editions online enable readers to retrieve the current week's or month's published material free of charge, only assessing a fee for earlier published articles. As usual, the Erie Times-News has taken the low road, requiring a retrieval fee after the first day of publication.
However, there was no sign of it in the Tuesday online edition, or thereafter, which is the only version of the Times-News I read. And in the "Stories Most Read" section of Goerie, there was no mention of the Hornaman story, even though it would certainly have been that day's most read story had it appeared in the online edition.
Nevertheless, the taint of favoritism at the Times-News still applies because the print version treated Rep. Hornman's conflict of interest, and the elitest Erie Yacht Club's obvious attempt to influence public policy in its favor with kid gloves, by minimizing their ill-conceived actions. Don't expect an outraged editorial condemning them.
I tried to retrieve the print version of the story from the newspaper's online Archives, but could only get the first few lines of the story without shelling out $2.95 to the Archives service. Many newspapers which archive their print editions online enable readers to retrieve the current week's or month's published material free of charge, only assessing a fee for earlier published articles. As usual, the Erie Times-News has taken the low road, requiring a retrieval fee after the first day of publication.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Sue Weber and the courthouse flood
Erie County Controller and gadfly Sue Weber has commented on my earlier post pertaining to the malfunctioning water filter at the Erie County Courthouse which so far has cost an estimated $600,000 in repairs, although some estimates rise to $1 million or more.Her comments are shown below, with her consent:
On April 29, Weber commented:
Good blog. I have been keeping my eye on this. In fact, I called Kevin Flowers a few days ago with the new total of damages, which I am keeping my eye on, and then he wrote the article. I have inspected the filter in question, called the manufacturer, etc. I was my dad's tomboy and love fixing things. Anything mechanical or construction related is interesting. You will recall after the original article came out I commented that this fiasco was going to cost the County hundreds of thousands of dollars. Then in the media, the Divecchio Administration basically said I did not know what I was talking about, blah blah blah. THERE IS A CAUSE TO THIS and the taxpayers shouldn't just take it lying down. We have the huge deductible and now the loss has gone beyond the limits of our CCAP insurance coverage. Our future premiums will go up because of this claim.
If this were your home or mine, we'd be climbing all over the individual who installed this unit and/or the manufacturer. THE UNIT WAS BRAND NEW AND WAS JUST INSTALLED. I think you should come to the courthouse and I will show you the unit, explaining how it works. You will then find it bizarre that they "can't find the cause" of this disastrous flood.
Sue Weber, County Controller-451-6367
A couple days later, Weber added:
Erie County is in the insurance pool with the County Commissioners Assn. of PA. It gives the County better rates. As I understand it that limit is $500,000 and then Luigi Pasquale says another carrier's coverage begins. I need to discuss this with him further but I would guess that is similar to stop loss insurance for health care. Hope you can pay a visit so I can show you this device. Incidentally, they did not need this filter. It was put in for the fifth floor grand renovation. The rest of us just drink the unfiltered stuff and it's fine. I have a copy of one of the change orders for the fifth floor renovation. It's $76,000 for solid cherry paneling. Just for fun, I measured the baseboard in Mark D's office and have a stick sitting on my desk with that measurement of his wonderful cherry molding.
The amount of new furniture coming into the courthouse daily as they keep moving offices around is astounding. The total value of all the furniture in my office is probably less than $1,000. I bought my small conference table myself. Our desk chairs are so old it's hilarious. Our carpet is a zillion years old and is ripped and beyond cleaning. We are there to do a job, not look chic.
I could write a book on why the County is broke.
Sue
On April 29, Weber commented:
Good blog. I have been keeping my eye on this. In fact, I called Kevin Flowers a few days ago with the new total of damages, which I am keeping my eye on, and then he wrote the article. I have inspected the filter in question, called the manufacturer, etc. I was my dad's tomboy and love fixing things. Anything mechanical or construction related is interesting. You will recall after the original article came out I commented that this fiasco was going to cost the County hundreds of thousands of dollars. Then in the media, the Divecchio Administration basically said I did not know what I was talking about, blah blah blah. THERE IS A CAUSE TO THIS and the taxpayers shouldn't just take it lying down. We have the huge deductible and now the loss has gone beyond the limits of our CCAP insurance coverage. Our future premiums will go up because of this claim.
If this were your home or mine, we'd be climbing all over the individual who installed this unit and/or the manufacturer. THE UNIT WAS BRAND NEW AND WAS JUST INSTALLED. I think you should come to the courthouse and I will show you the unit, explaining how it works. You will then find it bizarre that they "can't find the cause" of this disastrous flood.
Sue Weber, County Controller-451-6367
A couple days later, Weber added:
Erie County is in the insurance pool with the County Commissioners Assn. of PA. It gives the County better rates. As I understand it that limit is $500,000 and then Luigi Pasquale says another carrier's coverage begins. I need to discuss this with him further but I would guess that is similar to stop loss insurance for health care. Hope you can pay a visit so I can show you this device. Incidentally, they did not need this filter. It was put in for the fifth floor grand renovation. The rest of us just drink the unfiltered stuff and it's fine. I have a copy of one of the change orders for the fifth floor renovation. It's $76,000 for solid cherry paneling. Just for fun, I measured the baseboard in Mark D's office and have a stick sitting on my desk with that measurement of his wonderful cherry molding.
The amount of new furniture coming into the courthouse daily as they keep moving offices around is astounding. The total value of all the furniture in my office is probably less than $1,000. I bought my small conference table myself. Our desk chairs are so old it's hilarious. Our carpet is a zillion years old and is ripped and beyond cleaning. We are there to do a job, not look chic.
I could write a book on why the County is broke.
Sue
Monday, May 4, 2009
Rep. Hornaman took $700 Erie Yacht Club membership
State Rep. John Hornaman of Erie County was one of about 60 Pennsylvania lawmakers who accepted a total of $60,000 in travel, meals and other freebies last year, according to mandatory statements of financial interest newly filed with the State Ethics Commission, the Associate Press has reported.
According to the AP story filed today, Rep. Hornaman,a Democrat, collected a membership in the Erie Yacht club worth more than $700. He has attended tourism and fishing events at the club, and had dinner with his wife at its restaurant.
"When they offered it to me, quite frankly" Hornaman told the AP,the cost factor didn't enter into my mind" It didn't even come to me, I thought it was a nice gesture."
According to the AP, About three dozen of the 253 state representatives and senators disclosed gifts or free "transportation, lodging, hospitality" in the reports that were due in Harrisburg on Friday.
They let others pay for their football and baseball tickets; golf fees; travel to Japan, Australia, Turkey and Switzerland; and legislative or political conferences at various locations within the United States. They also accepted donations for senior expos and similar events worth an additional $15,000.
According to the AP story filed today, Rep. Hornaman,a Democrat, collected a membership in the Erie Yacht club worth more than $700. He has attended tourism and fishing events at the club, and had dinner with his wife at its restaurant.
"When they offered it to me, quite frankly" Hornaman told the AP,the cost factor didn't enter into my mind" It didn't even come to me, I thought it was a nice gesture."
According to the AP, About three dozen of the 253 state representatives and senators disclosed gifts or free "transportation, lodging, hospitality" in the reports that were due in Harrisburg on Friday.
They let others pay for their football and baseball tickets; golf fees; travel to Japan, Australia, Turkey and Switzerland; and legislative or political conferences at various locations within the United States. They also accepted donations for senior expos and similar events worth an additional $15,000.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Who's Guilty? The county's million dollar (?) water damage costs
In a follow-up to his intermittent serial saga of stories on the malfunctioning water filter at the Erie Courthouse back in November of last year, Erie Times-News Reporter(?) Kevin Flowers reported today that the bill for the repairs has reached $600,000 and is still climbing.
Flowers further reported today that: "The Nov. 21 incident was caused by a malfunctioning water filter in an equipment room on the courthouse's sixth floor. (Luigi)Pasqual (procurement and maintenance supervisor) said county officials and insurance adjusters are still trying to determine why the water filter malfunctioned."
It's not credible that county officials have not yet determined who or what caused the malfunction. Their failure or reticence to do so suggests that certain county "leaders" from Executive Mark DiVecchio on down are avoiding accountability to cover up wrongdoing on someone's (s') part, with Flowers's witting or unwitting concurrence.
Nor has Flowers, as a presumed "investigative journalist" (see Managing Editor Pat Howards self-serving column recently on press awards), made any apparent attempt to get to the bottom of the mystery, which has cost the county far,far more than the mere repair costs cited above in terms of lost county work hours and other residual expenses.
Neither Flowers nor any responsible county official has even acknowledged additional collateral costs, much less ventured a guesstimate of them, which almost certainly will approach or exceed $1 million.
By injecting the role of "insurance adjusters" into his story, Flowers implies that whatever or whoever caused the malfunction (factory defect, incompetent installation, operator/human error, etc.),county taxpayers are protected. But even if the insurer or insurers pay the repair bill cited above (though not the collateral costs), there is still the hefty $25,000 upfront insurance deductible county taxpayers will have to pay, if they haven't already.
This isn't the first time I've blogged on his matter. Back in November of last year, I wrote:
According to an article in the Erie Times-News today written by Reporter Kevin Flowers, around 3 am. Thursday, a stainless steel water filter on the sixth floor of the Erie County Court House failed during extensive renovations there.
"The breakdown sent as many as 900 gallons of water cascading downward through the courthouse’s east wing, soaking ceiling tiles, saturating carpets and splashing computers, telephones and other office equipment", Flowers wrote. " It also set off a chain of events that postponed scheduled hearings and shut down business at the courthouse, 140 W. Sixth St., for the entire day.
"Among the areas damaged was the fifth floor, where a $3.9 million renovation project is nearing completion. Although courthouse rumors Thursday put the damage at as much as $1 million, DiVecchio and other county officials said it could take a day or two to determine that," according to Flowers.
Flowers said "Luigi Pasquale, the courthouse’s manager of procurement and the supervisor of county facilities, said insurance is expected to cover most of the loss.
'I think it’s under control now,'’ said DiVecchio, who consulted with President Judge Elizabeth K. Kelly, Sheriff Bob Merski and other county officials before deciding around 8 a.m. Thursday to shut the building down and send roughly 600 courthouse employees home for the day.
According to Flowers,Pasquale said the water filter was installed about four months ago. The county has a $25,000 deductible for such damage, Pasquale said, which means that county dollars would cover the first $25,000 of repair and insurance would cover of the rest."
The above is yet another example of poor, partial and superficial reporting by the Erie Times News.
The article answers the fundamental questions of what, where and when, but neglects the crucial question of "why." Why did the filter fail? Was it factory defective, or was there human error in installing it?
In either case, taxpayers should not have to pay for the damages and repairs, or for the costs of sending home 600 county employees while repairs are effected..
Basic investigation could and should determine where the blame for the failure lies, and the accountable party or parties should be assessed accordingly.
Do your job, Kevin and quit glossing over and covering up the failures of your buddies at the courthouse.
Tody's article demonstrates that neither County Executive DiVecchio nor Flowers has stepped up to do his job. Maybe it's time for feisty County Controller Sue Weber to step into the breach.
Flowers further reported today that: "The Nov. 21 incident was caused by a malfunctioning water filter in an equipment room on the courthouse's sixth floor. (Luigi)Pasqual (procurement and maintenance supervisor) said county officials and insurance adjusters are still trying to determine why the water filter malfunctioned."
It's not credible that county officials have not yet determined who or what caused the malfunction. Their failure or reticence to do so suggests that certain county "leaders" from Executive Mark DiVecchio on down are avoiding accountability to cover up wrongdoing on someone's (s') part, with Flowers's witting or unwitting concurrence.
Nor has Flowers, as a presumed "investigative journalist" (see Managing Editor Pat Howards self-serving column recently on press awards), made any apparent attempt to get to the bottom of the mystery, which has cost the county far,far more than the mere repair costs cited above in terms of lost county work hours and other residual expenses.
Neither Flowers nor any responsible county official has even acknowledged additional collateral costs, much less ventured a guesstimate of them, which almost certainly will approach or exceed $1 million.
By injecting the role of "insurance adjusters" into his story, Flowers implies that whatever or whoever caused the malfunction (factory defect, incompetent installation, operator/human error, etc.),county taxpayers are protected. But even if the insurer or insurers pay the repair bill cited above (though not the collateral costs), there is still the hefty $25,000 upfront insurance deductible county taxpayers will have to pay, if they haven't already.
This isn't the first time I've blogged on his matter. Back in November of last year, I wrote:
According to an article in the Erie Times-News today written by Reporter Kevin Flowers, around 3 am. Thursday, a stainless steel water filter on the sixth floor of the Erie County Court House failed during extensive renovations there.
"The breakdown sent as many as 900 gallons of water cascading downward through the courthouse’s east wing, soaking ceiling tiles, saturating carpets and splashing computers, telephones and other office equipment", Flowers wrote. " It also set off a chain of events that postponed scheduled hearings and shut down business at the courthouse, 140 W. Sixth St., for the entire day.
"Among the areas damaged was the fifth floor, where a $3.9 million renovation project is nearing completion. Although courthouse rumors Thursday put the damage at as much as $1 million, DiVecchio and other county officials said it could take a day or two to determine that," according to Flowers.
Flowers said "Luigi Pasquale, the courthouse’s manager of procurement and the supervisor of county facilities, said insurance is expected to cover most of the loss.
'I think it’s under control now,'’ said DiVecchio, who consulted with President Judge Elizabeth K. Kelly, Sheriff Bob Merski and other county officials before deciding around 8 a.m. Thursday to shut the building down and send roughly 600 courthouse employees home for the day.
According to Flowers,Pasquale said the water filter was installed about four months ago. The county has a $25,000 deductible for such damage, Pasquale said, which means that county dollars would cover the first $25,000 of repair and insurance would cover of the rest."
The above is yet another example of poor, partial and superficial reporting by the Erie Times News.
The article answers the fundamental questions of what, where and when, but neglects the crucial question of "why." Why did the filter fail? Was it factory defective, or was there human error in installing it?
In either case, taxpayers should not have to pay for the damages and repairs, or for the costs of sending home 600 county employees while repairs are effected..
Basic investigation could and should determine where the blame for the failure lies, and the accountable party or parties should be assessed accordingly.
Do your job, Kevin and quit glossing over and covering up the failures of your buddies at the courthouse.
Tody's article demonstrates that neither County Executive DiVecchio nor Flowers has stepped up to do his job. Maybe it's time for feisty County Controller Sue Weber to step into the breach.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Erie Times-News Press Awards - The Rest of the Story
In today’s edition, the Erie Times News announced that “thirteen Erie Times-News writers, photographers and page designers earned 18 top awards” in the Pennsylvania Newspaper Assn’s 2009 Keystone Press Awards statewide competition (By my count, it’s 17, but whose counting?).
In that context, Managing Editor Pat Howard boasted: "These awards reach into all corners of our newsroom to highlight excellence both in print and online. It's well-deserved recognition for the journalists being honored, and a reflection of the talent and commitment our entire staff brings to bear every day in serving our audiences in ways no other news organization in the region can.”
That seems curiously at odds with my longstanding contention that the Times-News’s press credentials are, with a few exceptions, by and large mediocre at best, its news and editorial coverage of issues, people and events important to its Erie readers usually inept, shallow, biased, unprofessional, irrelevant, mis and uninformed.
Unless I'm wrong, how could the Times-News seemingly have scored so lavishly in this year’s press awards competition?
Let’s put that into perspective. The article said that “The Times-News competes in Division II, for newspapers in the 50,000-to-99,999 circulation.” What the article didn’t do is put that distinction in context, which is needed to grasp its implications.
For purposes of the Keystone Awards, the commonwealth’s newspapers are divided into eight divisions. Division I includes Pennsylvania’s most prominent newspapers with the largest circulations. There are only seven of them: the largest, the Philadelphia Inquirer which also publishes the Philadelphia Daily News; the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, the Allentown Morning Call, the Pittsburgh Tribune, the Harrisburg Patriot-News and - although it’s technically a statewide cooperative news service, not a newspaper - the Associated Press.
Division Two consists of six newspapers: the Erie Times-News, the York Daily Record/Sunday News, the Scranton Times-Tribune, the Reading Eagle, the Bucks County Courier-Times, and the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal/Sunday News. In each division .there are about 40 award categories, with awards being given for first and second place winner, and in a few cases honorable mention. That means there are about 120 different award opportunities available to Division II newspapers, of which the Times-News received awards in 17.
However, less than half the categories deal with the principal news and editorial writing functions, which are the hallmark of any newspaper, and about half of those encompass sports writing, a lesser function in terms of the broad public interest.
In the most important news writing category, investigative reporting, the Times-News did not score, beat out by the York Daily Record/Sunday News and the Scranton Times-Tribune.
In another key function, editorial writing, the Times-News took a second place. In commentary/columns, the Times-News was outwritten by the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal and the York Sunday News. In the spot news category, the Times-News was bested by the York Daily Record and the Reading Eagle. In the ongoing news category, it tanked, losing out to the Bucks County and Scranton newspapers.
The Times-News took a first in the Special Projects category and second place in the “niche” category, whatever that is. It also took a second place in news series writing, firsts in feature and /feature beat writing, a first for a business/consumer story, a first in sports beat reporting, a second in feature photo, first in sports photo and second in online journalistic innovation (the internet). It lost out in News Beat reporting to the Reading and Lancaster papers. Photographer Jack Hanrahan distinguished himself with a top Specialty award in the visual category in competion with all of Pennsylvania’s newspapers, including the Big Seven.
Though the Times-News appears to have won its proportionate share of press awards, the most telling factor is that none of them was in the top most vital news and editorial reporting and writing categories
Another interesting point to note is that all of the Times-News’s A-list reporters, writers and columnists were skunked in the competition, like Howard, Ed Mead, Kevin Cuneo, Kevin Flowers, John Guerriero and Ed Palattella.
Also noteworthy is that most of the top news and editorial writing awards went to newspapers in the more densely populated eastern part of the state, where, unlike the Times-News, they face intense competition from other newspapers, including big metropolitan sheets.
In that context, Managing Editor Pat Howard boasted: "These awards reach into all corners of our newsroom to highlight excellence both in print and online. It's well-deserved recognition for the journalists being honored, and a reflection of the talent and commitment our entire staff brings to bear every day in serving our audiences in ways no other news organization in the region can.”
That seems curiously at odds with my longstanding contention that the Times-News’s press credentials are, with a few exceptions, by and large mediocre at best, its news and editorial coverage of issues, people and events important to its Erie readers usually inept, shallow, biased, unprofessional, irrelevant, mis and uninformed.
Unless I'm wrong, how could the Times-News seemingly have scored so lavishly in this year’s press awards competition?
Let’s put that into perspective. The article said that “The Times-News competes in Division II, for newspapers in the 50,000-to-99,999 circulation.” What the article didn’t do is put that distinction in context, which is needed to grasp its implications.
For purposes of the Keystone Awards, the commonwealth’s newspapers are divided into eight divisions. Division I includes Pennsylvania’s most prominent newspapers with the largest circulations. There are only seven of them: the largest, the Philadelphia Inquirer which also publishes the Philadelphia Daily News; the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, the Allentown Morning Call, the Pittsburgh Tribune, the Harrisburg Patriot-News and - although it’s technically a statewide cooperative news service, not a newspaper - the Associated Press.
Division Two consists of six newspapers: the Erie Times-News, the York Daily Record/Sunday News, the Scranton Times-Tribune, the Reading Eagle, the Bucks County Courier-Times, and the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal/Sunday News. In each division .there are about 40 award categories, with awards being given for first and second place winner, and in a few cases honorable mention. That means there are about 120 different award opportunities available to Division II newspapers, of which the Times-News received awards in 17.
However, less than half the categories deal with the principal news and editorial writing functions, which are the hallmark of any newspaper, and about half of those encompass sports writing, a lesser function in terms of the broad public interest.
In the most important news writing category, investigative reporting, the Times-News did not score, beat out by the York Daily Record/Sunday News and the Scranton Times-Tribune.
In another key function, editorial writing, the Times-News took a second place. In commentary/columns, the Times-News was outwritten by the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal and the York Sunday News. In the spot news category, the Times-News was bested by the York Daily Record and the Reading Eagle. In the ongoing news category, it tanked, losing out to the Bucks County and Scranton newspapers.
The Times-News took a first in the Special Projects category and second place in the “niche” category, whatever that is. It also took a second place in news series writing, firsts in feature and /feature beat writing, a first for a business/consumer story, a first in sports beat reporting, a second in feature photo, first in sports photo and second in online journalistic innovation (the internet). It lost out in News Beat reporting to the Reading and Lancaster papers. Photographer Jack Hanrahan distinguished himself with a top Specialty award in the visual category in competion with all of Pennsylvania’s newspapers, including the Big Seven.
Though the Times-News appears to have won its proportionate share of press awards, the most telling factor is that none of them was in the top most vital news and editorial reporting and writing categories
Another interesting point to note is that all of the Times-News’s A-list reporters, writers and columnists were skunked in the competition, like Howard, Ed Mead, Kevin Cuneo, Kevin Flowers, John Guerriero and Ed Palattella.
Also noteworthy is that most of the top news and editorial writing awards went to newspapers in the more densely populated eastern part of the state, where, unlike the Times-News, they face intense competition from other newspapers, including big metropolitan sheets.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Legislative pay raise payback is self serving
A staff-written article in today's Erie Ties-News reports that nine of ten state legislators from northwestern PA. say they are returning, or will return to the state or donate to charity the automatic 2.8 cost of living pay increases they received effective the beginning of this year, about $2,200 for rank and file legislators. Those in leadership positions voted themselves more.
One online commentor wrote: "Let's remember our legislators, all 253 of them, are the second hoghest paid in the US. Only Calif. are paid more. With 67 counties PA could do with 100 legislators not the 253 we have. That alone will save 200 million."
I don't know whether "hoghest" was a Freudian slip, a pun, or a typo, but it's highly appropos. While PA legislators have the second-highest salaries, their total compensation packages including, per diem, travel allowance, staff allowance, health and pension benefits, etc., are the highest in the land, making the PA legislature the costliest in the nation. By most reckonings, it's also the most corrupt.
If those legislators who say they are contributing their pay raises to charity think they are off the hook, they must think that charity begins at home, because they are the beneficiaries nevertheless of the pay hike by virtue of the fact that they are using it to buy votes, in effect, a bribe.
Whether they return or donate the increment, it still goes towards their eventual retirement benefits.
The article doesn't tell us how long these legislators intend to return or donate the increment. Is it just until the end of the fiscal or calendar year, or the end of the legislative biennium, or beyond? Or just until the next middle-of-the-night/no-public-hearing pay raise comes along?
The article also does not report whether these legislators will support legislation now pending which would reduce the size of the legislature by half. Like most Erie Times-News articles, it filters self-serving legislative pronouncements through rose-colored glasses.
One online commentor wrote: "Let's remember our legislators, all 253 of them, are the second hoghest paid in the US. Only Calif. are paid more. With 67 counties PA could do with 100 legislators not the 253 we have. That alone will save 200 million."
I don't know whether "hoghest" was a Freudian slip, a pun, or a typo, but it's highly appropos. While PA legislators have the second-highest salaries, their total compensation packages including, per diem, travel allowance, staff allowance, health and pension benefits, etc., are the highest in the land, making the PA legislature the costliest in the nation. By most reckonings, it's also the most corrupt.
If those legislators who say they are contributing their pay raises to charity think they are off the hook, they must think that charity begins at home, because they are the beneficiaries nevertheless of the pay hike by virtue of the fact that they are using it to buy votes, in effect, a bribe.
Whether they return or donate the increment, it still goes towards their eventual retirement benefits.
The article doesn't tell us how long these legislators intend to return or donate the increment. Is it just until the end of the fiscal or calendar year, or the end of the legislative biennium, or beyond? Or just until the next middle-of-the-night/no-public-hearing pay raise comes along?
The article also does not report whether these legislators will support legislation now pending which would reduce the size of the legislature by half. Like most Erie Times-News articles, it filters self-serving legislative pronouncements through rose-colored glasses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
