Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Courts’ Category

John White’s misleading explanation of outcome of litigation against 2 private citizens over records is pure gooneybabble

Posted in BESE, Corruption, Courts, Education, Ethics, Judges, Lawsuits, Media, Public Records, State Agencies, Transparency on October 9, 2016| 7 Comments »

“Just because a cat has kittens in the oven doesn’t make them biscuits.”

It’s a quote attributed to Malcolm X, reprised by Kelsey Grammer in an episode of the number one sitcom Frasier, but actually has its origins in New England. It means, “Just because you were born here, it doesn’t make you one of us.”

It could just as easily be updated to apply to State Superintendent of Education John White’s lame explanation of a settlement of a lawsuit by the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) against citizens James Finney, a technical college math instructor and Mike Deshotels, a former educator and past executive director of the Louisiana Association of Educators.

White was quoted in the Baton Rouge Advocate as saying the ruling by 19th Judicial District Judge Janice Clark “merely resolved what had been a conflict between two laws” because federal law instructed the department not to release data that could be used to personally identify a child while state law mandated the disclosure of all public records.

http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/courts/article_76e860ca-8bd9-11e6-9963-cf5829bedcf3.html?sr_source=lift_amplify

Bull feathers.

Department legal counsel Joan Hunt said in a Wednesday email to members of the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) that a declaratory judgment was sought to resolve “tension” between free disclosure of public records and protection of student information according to federal law.

Balderdash.

Neither Deshotels nor Finney ever requested information that would identify a single student.

Period.

And John White knew that. Period.

Since becoming Superintendent of Education in January 2012, White has made a career of stalling on compliance with public records requests if not denying them outright.

LouisianaVoice was once forced to sue white over public records and won an award of $2800 ($100 per day for each day delayed per request), plus court costs. The only downside of that judgment was that White was not held personally liable, meaning the $2800 and court costs were picked up by Louisiana taxpayers.

But in suing two Louisiana activist citizens (who admittedly had been something of a nuisance to White with their monitoring of the department), White reached a new low in attempting to avoid being held accountable for the manner in which he runs the department.

His lawsuit, in terms of disgraceful acts, ranks right down there with those judges in Monroe who sued the Ouachita Citizen, a newspaper in West Monroe. The newspaper’s sin? It made public records requests of the court.

Do we detect a disturbing trend here? You bet we do. The Louisiana Department of Education, district courts, and other public bodies have virtually unlimited financial resources at their disposal and most, like the Department of Education, have in-house legal counsel like Joan Hunt. They can initiate lengthy—and costly—legal action against any citizen and people like John White and district judges don’t have to pay a penny of the costs of litigation, courtesy of Louisiana taxpayers.

Private citizens do not enjoy that same advantage. It’s not a level playing field. And even if the public body does not sue, it can drag its heels on compliance, forcing the citizen making the request to either give up or enter into expensive legal action with no guarantee the court will uphold the public’s right to know.

At last Monday’s hearing, Judge Clark let it be known that her patience was wearing thin with public officials who attempt to hide behind legal maneuvers in an attempt to avoid compliance with the law.

The LDOE attorney opened by saying the department had “informal guidance” from the federal government that “we do not have to comply with FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests.”

Perhaps sensing the mood of the court, the state withdrew its demands for attorney fees from Deshotels and Finney, adding that “only two people are interested in the data.”

Judge Clark said it was an “improper purpose” to deny information to the public as a retaliatory action.

“Counsel should meet and work this out,” she said. “The public (meaning the court) takes a dim view of public officials using public resources to delay compliance with public records laws.”

Deshotels attorneys J. Arthur Smith and Chris Shows met outside chambers for more than two hours with LDOE attorneys but were unable to arrive at an agreement on the release of the requested documents.

When informed of the continued impasse, Judge Clark, visibly angry, said, “I am issuing a subpoena for John White to be in court at 9:30 tomorrow (Wednesday) morning for cross examination.”

When White got word of that, it was something akin to Moses coming down from the mountain with the 10 Commandments. Suddenly minds came together and miraculously, there was accord and LDOE agreed to three stipulations which settled the suit filed in April by White and the department against Deshotels and Finney. http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/education/article_536e2fac-b5e2-575c-87f6-1a991bf0f455.html?sr_source=lift_amplify

The first stipulation mandates that the suppression of data in the economically disadvantaged and English language learner or English proficiency sub-groups of the Education Department’s multi-stat reports is not in compliance with the Louisiana Public Records Act.

The department agreed not to suppress student enrollment data in responding to requests made under the act in the second stipulation.

The final stipulation says requested data will be made available to the public dating back to 2006.

Deshotels said the declaratory judgment filed against him and Finney was never about clarifying the legal issues relative to certain public records and student privacy as claimed by White.

Instead, he said White’s action was “purely an attempt to discourage citizens from seeking to independently research the claims and conclusions made by White and his staff.” “If citizens are forced to face legal challenges and high legal fees for seeking public records, the Department can continue to manipulate and spin what should be factual information about the operation of our schools.”

Sadly, Judge Clark’s ruling will do little to expedite timely compliance with future public records requests to other state agencies.

Even as this is being written, former commissioner of administration Kristy Nichols has already cost the state more than the original judgment against her in another lawsuit by LouisianaVoice.

LouisianaVoice received a pittance in a lawsuit in which the Division of Administration (DOA) under Nichols had dragged its heels for more than three months on several separate public records requests.

LouisianaVoice calculated DOA owed some $40,000 in penalties for non-compliance but was awarded less than $2,000, plus costs and legal fees, by the court. Even then Nichols appealed the decision. And although the court held Nichols personally liable, meaning she alone was responsible for the penalty, the state is picking up the tab for that appeal, which partially upheld the district court ruling.

Nichols, still not satisfied, and still not paying a cent of the legal costs (though LouisianaVoice is paying its legal costs, applied for writs to the Louisiana Supreme Court.

As of this date, the state has spent far, far more than the penalty imposed on it in trying to avoid paying the penalty and LouisianaVoice has spent more than it will ever be awarded, provided the Supreme Court even upholds the lower court.

And while the obvious question is: Is throwing good money after bad a wise way to spend state funds? An original penalty of less than $2000 has now cost the state several times that in defense costs and the tab is still running.

And John White’s obfuscating dribble notwithstanding, that’s what Louisiana citizens are faced with in trying to hold its state government accountable.

 

 

Read Full Post »

Why did Judge Tim Kelley take case involving program his wife oversaw as Jindal’s Commissioner of Administration?

Posted in Contract, Contracts, Corruption, Courts, DOA, Ethics, Fraud, Governor's Office, Grant, Grants, Judges, Lawsuits, Public Records on October 7, 2016| 7 Comments »

When 19th Judicial District Court Judge Tim Kelley presided over a hearing earlier this week involving the state’s Small Rental Property Program, did he violate Louisiana’s so-called “gold standard of ethics” instituted by former Gov. Bobby Jindal or worse, the Code of Judicial Conduct?

Kelley, over the objections of defendant Tony Pelicano, Monday ruled in favor of the state’s motion to dismiss “without prejudice” its foreclosure proceedings on Pelicano’s Metairie rental property. https://www.road2la.org/SRPP/Default.aspx

Dismissing without prejudice means the state may renew its foreclosure efforts at any time. Pelicano attorney Jill Craft wanted the case dismissed “with prejudice,” which would mean the matter would have been over and done.

With Kelley’s ruling, the state continues to hold the potential forfeiture of his property over Pelicano’s head for years—all because Pelicano, himself a contractor, had no say in which contractor rebuilt his rent home after Hurricane Katrina. Pelicano refused to accept the work which was done with what he says were inferior materials that did not meet specifications and which is now rotting and molding.

https://louisianavoice.com/2016/10/03/victim-of-post-katrina-road-home-program-comes-to-baton-rouge-seeking-justice-departs-defeated-disillusioned-angry/

Even though cases in the 19th JDC are assigned to judges by lot, perhaps it would have been prudent for Kelley to have handed Pelicano’s case off to another of the seven judges who preside over civil cases.

Kelley’s wife is Angele Davis.

Angele Davis was Commissioner of Administration which oversaw the Small Rental Program through the Louisiana Office of Community Development (OCD).

https://app.lla.state.la.us/PublicReports.nsf/BD68D20624D06F8A862574A400526ACC/$FILE/00003E7C.pdf

Davis served as Commissioner of Administration under Bobby Jindal from January 2007 until August 2010. The Division of Administration (DOA) was responsible for the Road Home Program through OCD. Paul Rainwater was Jindal’s first OCD Executive Director until he succeeded Davis as Commissioner of Administration in 2010. http://www.doa.la.gov/comm/PressReleases/CommAnnounce.htm

Even though Davis no longer serves in state government, the fact that the Small Rent Program was administered by her office through OCD, the propriety of Kelley’s presiding over legal disputes involving the program could be brought into question.

http://www.doa.la.gov/OCDDRU/Action%20Plan%20Amendments/Katrina-Rita%20First/APA25_Approved.pdf

Craft argued passionately against the dismissal without prejudice, saying, “I don’t file lawsuits just to come back and say, ‘Just kidding.’ The state shouldn’t be given the opportunity to come back at some later date for another bite.”

Kelley did throw Pelicano a bone of sorts when he ruled against the state and allowed a trial by jury—before agreeing to the dismissal without prejudice. The jury trial ruling was basically meaningless in light of the subsequent dismissal without prejudice, however.

Following Kelley’s ruling and after he had left the courtroom, Pelicano had a brief emotional outburst, yelling to DOA attorney Lesia Batiste that the state could take the property. “I’ve had it!” he shouted. “Just take it!”

It’s not as if Kelley had no way of knowing of his wife’s involvement with the program; her name is all over official documents dealing with all the Road Home programs set up to help the state recover from Hurricanes, Katrina, Rita, Gustav and Ike.

http://lra.louisiana.gov/assets/docs/searchable/meetings/2010/Board%20Meeting%201-28-10/APA4PublicComment.pdf

All this is not to say Kelley allowed his position to be used to favor the state because of his wife’s involvement with the programs. He did, after all, rule against the state in other cases that came before him, notably the infamous CNSI debacle. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/louisiana-court-give-contractor-records-about-cancellation/article/2546170/comments

But he also inexplicably ruled in favor of the Jindal administration against the public’s right to know in a major public records lawsuit in 2013 involving applications for the LSU presidency. http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_f69f910d-0f80-5ddd-8d9d-06316e5ffa43.html

In a political atmosphere where perception is everything and in a state with as sordid a reputation for corruption as Louisiana, Kelley should have punted as soon as this case landed on his desk.

Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct says, in part:

A judge shall not allow family, social, political, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment. 

https://www.lasc.org/rules/supreme/cjc.asp

Read Full Post »

Victim of post-Katrina Road Home program comes to Baton Rouge seeking justice; departs defeated, disillusioned, angry

Posted in Contract, Contracts, Corruption, Courts, DOA, Ethics, Fraud, Judges, Lawsuits on October 3, 2016| 4 Comments »

Tony Pelicano won a skirmish but may have lost the war in his years-long battle with the Louisiana Office of Community Development (OCD) over poor workmanship and claims of fraud in connection with the reconstruction of a rent house in Metairie destroyed by Hurricane Katrina.

Because inferior materials were used in the work, Pelicano, himself a contractor, refused to accept the work and he filed suit against the contractor and the state filed suit against him to foreclose on the property.

The trial for his suit against Woodrow Wilson Contractors of Baton Rouge is scheduled for trial in January. The state’s foreclosure suit was scheduled for jury trial on Monday but the state threw a curve ball at Pelicano who apparently had not suffered quite enough in the eyes of OCD and the Division of Administration (DOA).

To make matters worse, the state’s attorney, Lesia Batiste, laughed at an emotional Pelicano after court adjourned.

Pelicano, represented by Baton Rouge attorney Jill Craft, entered Monday’s proceedings in 19th Judicial District Court fighting the state’s motion to deny Pelicano a jury trial but less than two hours before jury selection was slated to begin, Batiste filed a motion to dismiss its case without prejudice, meaning the state would be free to renew its foreclosure efforts at any time in the future.

Craft argued vehemently in favor of dismissal with prejudice, meaning the case would be over and done.

In September 2009, Pelicano was personally solicited by the State of Louisiana through OCD to submit an application to become the first test applicant for the Small Rental Program through the agency. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/09/23/state-ocd-figure-partnered-with-firm-that-blocked-repairs-to-road-home-project-shelter-at-home-follows-same-formula/

Specifications called for pressure treated lumber for the house but upon inspecting the work, Pelicano discovered pressure treated lumber was not used, leading almost immediately to termite infestation. Moreover, leaks in the roof resulted in rust of the top of the hot water heater and kitchen stove and the hot water heater was located in the wrong place, resulting in workers having to cut a hole in the door in order to close it. Joints and window sills have separated since the work was done, all of which have left the house uninhabitable despite Batiste’s contention that “I would live in the house.”

An independent engineer was retained by Pelicano to inspect the house. His photos-and-report are included here in order that you, the reader, can determine if you would pay rent to live in the house.

“I don’t file a suit and then come in here on the day of jury selection and say, ‘Hey, just kidding. They don’t get a do-over,” she said.

“The home owner (Pelicano) must approve a contractor’s punch list. All corrections in construction must be made before the contractor can be paid. These people (Pelicano and his wife) have gone through enough,” Craft said. “Dismissing without prejudice means the state may want to sue them again.”

She said the Pelicanos and the state “reached a settlement in 2013 and the state backed out. That cost my clients an extra $10,000 and now the state wants to allow itself another bite.”

Batiste argued that she did not believe a dismissal without prejudice would create any hardship on the Pelicanos.

District Judge Tim Kelley ruled that the Pelicanos were entitled to a jury trial but then upheld the state’s motion for dismissal without prejudice.

After Kelley adjourned court and exited the courtroom, Pelicano shouted to Batiste, “Take the house! Just take it! I’ve had it! I’m Through!”

Batiste, watching Pelicano’s emotional outburst, laughed.

“It’s not funny,” Craft said to Batiste.

LouisianaVoice asked Batiste why the state would not dismiss with prejudice and her answer left no doubt that the state still has the Pelicanos in its crosshairs.

“They’re under foreclosure,” she said. Not were, but are. Left unsaid was the unmistakable intent that the state would be back for more retribution against the Pelicanos at some future date.

“Have you seen that house?” we asked.

“Yes, I’ve been in it. There’s nothing wrong with it. I would live in it.”

No, she would not. Not without raising holy hell over the condition of the structure.

And neither would you. The mold and mildew in the house, fostered by what Pelicano says was the use of substandard materials,  presents a clear health hazard.

And now the state is asking August flood victims to trust its Shelter at Home program, the illegitimate child of its precursor, the Road Home program.

Pelicano came to Baton Rouge Monday hoping for some measure of justice but the state lived down to its customary expectations of disillusionment and disappointment which in turn only nurtures a climate of manipulation and corruption.

He deserves better.

Read Full Post »

State OCD figure partnered with firm that blocked repairs to Road Home project; Shelter at Home follows same formula

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Contract, Contracts, Corruption, Courts, Crime, Ethics, Fraud, GOHSEP, Governor's Office, Judges, Lawsuits on September 23, 2016| 5 Comments »

Before you accept the state’s Shelter at Home program, you may want to consider the quality of workmanship—or lack thereof—that some 2016 flood victims who have participated are experiencing. http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/article_3116e8b6-7abb-11e6-91c5-d3139b79d965.html?sr_source=lift_amplify

While you should beware of shoddy work by contractors, you should also consider that all work done will likely need to be re-done and makeshift (inferior) plumbing will have to be replaced at your cost.

If that is not enough to convince you, you may wish to follow an important trial scheduled to begin in the 19th Judicial District courtroom of District Judge Tim Kelly on October 3.

The upcoming trial is over the foreclosure on rental property owned by Metairie resident Tony Pelicano and his company, L&T Development. Pelicano also has legal action pending against defendants the State of Louisiana through the Office of Community Development, The Shaw Group, Inc., Woodrow Wilson Construction Co., both of Baton Rouge, and Western Surety Co. of Sioux Falls, S.D.

Pelicano purchased a rental house on Turnbull Street in Metairie on April 28, 2005, just in time for it to be heavily damaged four months and one day later when Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans on Aug. 29.

Pelicano, like victims of the flood almost exactly 11 years later (Aug. 11-14), was solicited by the state to take part in a state-sponsored recovery program.

In the case of Katrina, it was the Office of Community Development (OCD) that oversaw the Post-Katrina Disaster Housing Assistance and Household Transition Program. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr_edge_research_041913.html

With the floods of 2016, it is the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (GOHSEP) that took over the Shelter at Home Program.

http://gov.louisiana.gov/page/shelter-at-home-program

The Shelter at Home Program provides up to $15,000 to make a flood-damaged home habitable while the dwelling is being repaired. But the homeowner has no say in the choosing of a contractor to do the work. Nor does the homeowner receive any of that $15,000; all monies paid out go to the contractor.

Sound familiar? It should. It’s déjà vu all over again.

Despite the fact that Tony Pelicano is himself a contractor, he was told that not only could he not select his contractor for the Rental Assistance Program, but he could not even do the work himself. Nor did he receive funds to pay the contractor; that was paid by the State Office of Community Development directly to the contractor.

In both cases, the homeowner has no say about the quality of work, is unable to withhold payment should the contractor, who was not of his choosing, should do substandard work. http://www.wafb.com/story/33133888/video-raises-questions-about-shelter-at-home-program

http://www.wbrz.com/news/shelter-at-home-program-leaves-mess-in-st-amant-home/

And that is precisely why Pelicano is headed for trial the first week in October.

At the outset, a community block grant was awarded in the amount of $75,000 with the additional $14,595 in costs to be paid by Pelicano at closing.

OCD then selected Woodrow Wilson Construction Co. to serve as contractor. When Pelicano requested the ability to select his own contractor, “OCD advised him he was not entitled to have any say nor (sic) input with respect to the employment of Woodrow Wilson for the rehabilitation and reconstruction project,” one of Pelicano’s court filings says.

In September, 2009, Pelicano was personally solicited by the State of Louisiana, through Mark Maier, Program Director of the Small Rental Property Program for OCD and a principal of Maier Consulting, to submit an application to become the first test applicant with the Small Rental Program through the State Office of Community Development, Pelicano says in a sworn affidavit.

“This Program administers federal funds to small rental property owners in order to facilitate the reconstruction of small rental properties in order to return them to commerce, post-Katrina, and provide affordable housing for Katrina victims,” he said. “This is accomplished through a forgivable loan of $75,000.00 and we personally put up the additional sum of $14,595.00 from our own personal funds.

In May 2012, Pelicano said he attended a meeting in Baton Rouge attended by Maier, OCD Supervisor for the Small Rental Program Brad Swayze and Dan Rees, also of OCD. When Pelicano protested that construction change orders were made without his knowledge or consent, he says he was threatened and told he had no rights to his own property. Pelicano claims he was told if he contacted the media, his bank note would be accelerated and that a lawsuit would be filed against him—“threats that OCD fulfilled,” he says.

Those change orders included, among others:

  • Substituting non-pressure treated lumber instead of the pressure treated lumber called for in the building specifications;
  • Sloppy fittings of windows which allowed moisture to invade the structure;
  • Relocating the hot water heater to a location that could pose a threat of fire, and
  • Cutting a hole in the door in order to make the hot water tank fit.

Pelicano subsequently hired a professional engineering and inspection firm, Gurtler Brothers of New Orleans, to evaluate the reconstruction efforts. He presented copies of the firm’s photos-and-report and asked that immediate action be taken to remedy the conditions of the property.

“OCD refused,” he says, “and instead, contacted another construction company, Lago Construction Co. (which is not an engineering nor a qualified inspection firm) to conduct an ‘impartial’ inspection.”

Lago then issued a report passing off defects “as either minor or simply not in need of fixing,” Pelicano says.

Incredibly, Pelicano later learned that Lago was a business partner with Maier Consulting, headed by that same Mark Maier who simultaneously served as Program Director of the Small Rental Property Program for OCD. http://images.bimedia.net/documents/Lago+-+SRPP+Labor+Analysis+10-25-12.pdf

No conflict of interest there, right?

Oh, wait. It gets better.

The head of Lago, Praveen Kailas, whose family poured more than $23,000 into Bobby Jindal’s campaigns in 2003, 2007 and 2011, pleaded guilty in 2013 to federal charges of fraudulent billing in the…(wait for it)….Louisiana Road Home’s Small Rental Property Program. http://www.claimsjournal.com/news/southcentral/2013/08/22/235416.htm

Jindal’s office said it launched an internal investigation but dropped the probe when Mark Maier, the consultant (and, did we mention, coincidentally, Program Director of the Small Rental Property Program for OCD?) wrote a note absolving Lago of any wrongdoing.

He wrote a note, folks, clearing his business partner of wrongdoing but relied on that same business partner to block recovery by a man ripped off by the very program he headed.

Perhaps someone should have written a note for Richard Nixon, or John Wayne Gacy, or Mark David Chapman, or John Hinckley, Jr., or former U.S. Rep. William Jefferson, or former Federal Judge Thomas Porteous.

We could go on but you get the idea: He wrote a damned note to clear his partner but that same tainted relationship played a major role in events that today see the state trying to foreclose on Tony Pelicano.

What could possibly be wrong with this picture?

What could possibly go wrong with the Shelter at Home Program?

And did Jindal return any of that $23,000 from the third (at a minimum) convicted felon who contributed big bucks to his campaigns?

Or did he write a note on their behalf?

Read Full Post »

$5 billion Presidential election? Thank ‘Citizen United’ for mentality that forgets how money could be better spent

Posted in Congress, Corruption, Courts, Economy, Elections, Ethics, Finances, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, PACs, Politicians on September 18, 2016| 13 Comments »

You may have seen one or more of a series of http://www.vote-4-energy.org/ television ads by the American Petroleum Institute (API) that have been running on a more regular basis than lawyer commercials recently.

Intended to give us a warm fuzzy feeling about Big Oil, it’s no coincidence they’re airing in an election year.

The primary trade association of the oil and gas industry, API boasts nearly 400 members. http://www.polluterwatch.com/american-petroleum-institute

Though it spent only about $200,000 on the 2012 election, it literally pours money into other programs—$33 million on lobbying between 2008 and 2012—and was instrumental in funding a $27 million anti-science “scientific” study to refute research linking benzene to cancer.

API was also not above embellishing job creation claims, touting 20,000 new jobs as opposed to the 6,000 estimated by the U.S. State Department and Cornell University.

API also donated money to the National Science Teachers Association for distributing a short film promoting the petroleum industry. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Petroleum_Institute#Concerns_about_API-funded_research

If there remains any doubt to the underlying intent of the recent glut of ads, a leaked memo written by API CEO Jack Gerard in August 2009 revealed that a number of trade groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, coordinated “Energy Citizens’ rallies in key Congressional districts in an effort to ramp up political opposition to climate and energy legislation.

Directly funded and organized by API and member companies, the “rallies” were coordinated by oil lobbyists and API member Chevron even bused it employees to events.

API also contributed $25,000 to Americans for Prosperity, the Tea Party organization founded and chaired by billionaire oilman David Koch. http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/03/energy-industry-trade-groups/

Which brings up Koch Industries, headed by David and brother Charles, both major players in the American political arena.

In just one state for example, Texas, the Kochs are proving our repeated position that money has supplanted the importance of voters in influencing election outcomes by dumping money into the campaigns of 66 candidates—15 for the U.S. House of Representatives, three for the Texas Supreme Court, 31 for the Texas House of Representatives, 16 for the State Senate and one for the State Railroad Commission (the Texas equivalent to the Louisiana Public Service Commission).

Here is a complete state-by-state listing of Koch-supported candidates (Note: only legally-required reported contributions are listed but Koch, in addition to monetary contributions has been known to exert pressure on its employees as to which candidates they should support.

And it’s not as if the Kochs are alone, nor is this an effort to say that only Republicans are beneficiaries of the avalanche of campaign funds that has occurred since the 2010 Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court opened the spigot of campaign cash.

Politics has become a game played by any billionaire with an agenda—to the overall detriment of the average citizen, whose numbers comprise 99.9 percent of the nation’s population. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/superpac-donors-2016/

So just how much Super PAC money, so-called outside spending (which does not include individual contributions to thousands of candidates in federal, state and local elections), was lavished on behalf of or in opposition to candidates in the 2012 elections?

The 1,310 super PACs raised $828.2 million for the 2012 election cycle, which was just two years after Citizens United, and spent $609.4 million. https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/summ.php?cycle=2012&chrt=V&type=S

This year, in the Presidential, and Congressional elections alone, spending has already surpassed $1.8 billion. Of that amount, more than $248 million has come from PACs. http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/03/daily-chart-1

Before all is said and done, it is expected that more than $5 billion will be spent on the Presidential election. That figure includes money to be spent by candidates, political parties and outside groups (PACs), and includes money spent on presidential primaries—more than double the cost of the 2012 campaign.

All of which raises a moral question: if political donors are so civic-minded (as most insist they are) as opposed to an eagerness to promote a personal agenda (as most will go to great lengths to deny), why don’t they put their money to use for an even greater good?

Has it ever crossed the minds of the Kochs or any of the other members of the mega-rich influence-purchasers what even a small portion of that kind of money would mean to St. Jude or other children’s hospitals?

Have they ever considered underwriting cancer research on such a scale? What about feeding the hungry or even helping restore the country’s crumbling infrastructure? After all, they use the same highways, rely on the same water and sewer services, depend on the same police and fire protection.

So much good could be accomplished with the billions of dollars that are wasted on the campaigns whose promises are as empty and meaningless as the hopes and dreams of the poorest of our poor?

Yes, the Kochs give millions to charities but then spearhead coalitions of businesses and industries that pour hundreds of millions into efforts to pass anti-environmental legislation or they endow chairs at schools like Florida State University on condition that they get the final say in the hiring of faculty members who will teach their political and economic philosophy.

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/10/spreading-the-free-market-gospel/413239/

But we as a nation have somehow seen a trend away from using our wealth to accomplish the greater good for all our citizens. Instead, we’re seeing the wealthiest using their monetary buying power to purchase influence so they can accumulate even more wealth.

And we wonder why there is an ever-widening disconnect from the American political process.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »