Ultimate Politics

Photobucket Ultimate Politics
Wade Norris is the Host of Ultimate Politics covering local and National politics and environmental issues.

Advertisers click here


Denver's Mayoral race - pay to play?

By
Wade Norris .
on April 20, 2011 8:18 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Denver's Mayoral race is coming down to the wire with 4 potential candidates still in the mix - Michael Hancock, Doug Linkhart, James Mejia, and Chris Romer. This race shines a spotlight on the direction of our political process. Does one become elected to higher office through public service or by means and connections to the wealthy? In the case of Hancock, Linkhart and Mejia, public service to Denver was accomplished either by serving on the City Council (Hancock and Linkhart) or in the administration of the Mayor (Mejia). Chris Romer took a different path to higher office. In our neighboring state of New Mexico, Bill Richardson started an ambitious program to expand the New Mexico highway - called Governor Richardson's Investment Partnership. This plan was funded by some creative investment plans - now known more widely as Credit Derivative or 'default' Swaps. There was an investigation into this swap investment because, coincidentally, JP Morgan hired Denver Politico Mike Stratton to secure interests in New Mexico to the tune of $269,000 - when he was also connected to Richardson's Political Action Committee.
JPMorgan paid Michael Stratton, president of Denver-based Stratton & Associates, $269,000 in 2003 and 2004 to help win public finance business relating to "state, county, and local government and corporate entities" in New Mexico, according to records filed with the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. Stratton's firm gave $2,000 to Richardson's first gubernatorial bid in 2002, and Stratton advised the governor on his 2008 presidential campaign, according to New Mexico records and the firm's Web site.
But wait, it gets murkier - Richardson actually had to withdraw his name from the Obama administration's cabinet nomination because of the investigation by the feds into the too close for comfort relationship between Richardson's swap funding plan to Democratic 'bundler' David Rubin and his group - CDR:
On Dec. 15, Bloomberg News reported that the grand jury in Albuquerque was meeting to review how the company, Beverly Hills, California-based CDR Financial Products Inc., received almost $1.5 million in fees from the New Mexico Finance Authority. CDR contributed $100,000 to Richardson-affiliated groups. New York-based JPMorgan, the second-largest U.S. bank by assets, helped underwrite the bonds sold by the authority.
And who was the principle investor who brokered the investment? Chris Romer.
JPMorgan's lead banker on the deals was Chris Romer, 49, whose father was governor of Colorado from 1987 until 1999. On Aug. 21, JPMorgan told regulators about an investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorney for New Mexico involving the municipal securities business, according to Romer's brokerage records with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. No one has been charged with wrongdoing. Stratton declined to comment on the investigation, as did Tasha Pelio, a spokeswoman for JPMorgan in New York. Gilbert Gallegos, a spokesman for the governor, didn't return calls seeking comment.
On this next point, let me be absolutely clear - I do not believe Chris Romer did anything illegal. What I do think is that this illustrates that Chris Romer made decisions to plot out his political career by aligning himself with political heavyweights who also happened to be in alliance with Wall Street Banks like JP Morgan. Perhaps in 2006 negotiating an investment swap through a credit default sounded reasonable - unfortunately we all know how those investments turned out and ruined our economy. It seemed Romer took the path that seemed the fastest and shrewdest - the old pay to play game - rather than the usual track of 'career politician' - a moniker that has earned a bad name in recent campaigns. In light of trying to distinguish true democrats from 'corporate democrats' maybe for this Denver Mayors race, the term 'career politician' is actually a good thing in the case of Hancock, Linkhart and Mejia - meaning we know where you have been working, and it has been in a public arena, not in private backroom deals.

US town in Virginia going underwater from Sea Level rise

By
Wade Norris .
on November 26, 2010 5:38 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
NORFOLK, Va. -- In this section of the Larchmont neighborhood, built in a sharp "u" around a bay off the Lafayette River, residents pay close attention to the lunar calendar, much as other suburbanites might attend to the daily flow of commuter traffic. Green A blog about energy and the environment. Go to Blog » Enlarge This Image Matthew Eich for The New York Times William Stiles, executive director of Wetlands Watch, believes such projects are futile in the face of rising sea levels. Readers' Comments Readers shared their thoughts on this article. * Read All Comments (162) » If the moon is going to be full the night before Hazel Peck needs her car, for example, she parks it on a parallel block, away from the river. The next morning, she walks through a neighbor's backyard to avoid the two-to-three-foot-deep puddle that routinely accumulates on her street after high tides. For Ms. Peck and her neighbors, it is the only way to live with the encroaching sea. As sea levels rise, tidal flooding is increasingly disrupting life here and all along the East Coast, a development many climate scientists link to global warming. But Norfolk is worse off. Situated just west of the mouth of Chesapeake Bay, it is bordered on three sides by water, including several rivers, like the Lafayette, that are actually long tidal streams that feed into the bay and eventually the ocean. Like many other cities, Norfolk was built on filled-in marsh. Now that fill is settling and compacting. In addition, the city is in an area where significant natural sinking of land is occurring. The result is that Norfolk has experienced the highest relative increase in sea level on the East Coast -- 14.5 inches since 1930, according to readings by the Sewells Point naval station here. Climate change is a subject of friction in Virginia. The state's attorney general, Ken T. Cuccinelli II, is trying to prove that a prominent climate scientist engaged in fraud when he was a researcher at the University of Virginia. But the residents of coastal neighborhoods here are less interested in the debate than in the real-time consequences of a rise in sea level. When Ms. Peck, now 75 and a caretaker to her husband, moved here 40 years ago, tidal flooding was an occasional hazard. "Last month," she said recently, "there were eight or nine days the tide was so doggone high it was difficult to drive."
Read the entire post in the New York Times

R.I.P to my dog Sassy - a Stephen Colbert Hater

By
Wade Norris .
on November 22, 2010 1:21 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
a brief aside from the world of politics... my dog Sassy died last night at the ripe old age of somewhere between 15 and 19. I am not sure because I found her freshly run over in Fayetteville, NC in 2007 (on a 6 lane road). Later, the vet could only say she was at least 2 but maybe as old as 4 or 5. Besides being incredibly lucky, she was also incredibly loyal to me, and incredibly angry with Stephen Colbert's 'humor' The night I found her, it was Spring 1997. I saw her as I was turning in next to the Rose Wedding chapel. I stopped traffic and got her out of lane 3, with cars driving right past her on both sides. When I picked her up, she bit me on the head and neck (foretelling start) She had no collar, and had never been bathed and was starved. When I saw this scene in the 25th Hour, it was like watching that night - without the large russian and cool car and being a badass like Ed Norton - but the dog - looks and sounds just like Sassy. After rescuing her, I was sitting beside the road with her in my lap with my friend Kent, and others who had gathered, who all had things to tell. The Taco Bell manager said a man in a nearby house saw her sniffing his garbage (for food) and kicked her, which caused her to run into traffic. Another man in a cowboy hat, who was deaf, indicated with limited words and gestures that he saw a sedan run right over her, just before I pulled up. After hearing from the Animal Control officer that they were underfunded and had no pain pills and that she would merely be kept 5 days and put down, Sassy, who was sitting in my lap, lifted her head and put her head on my chest, as if to plead for her life. I decided then to at least take her to the vet to be humanely put down. But the vet and I were shocked to discover that the X-rays revealed not a broken spine, but 2 broken hips, leg and a sprained tail - all injuries that mimicked paralysis. Also, her breaks were evenly lined up, so the only treatment was pain pills and letting her knit on her own. I let her knit outside - taking her food and water, and moving her place to place to use the potty. Every night she barked at passers by - already starting to guard the area (which is where she also got her name from) - I remember the Hale-Bopp being overhead every night. She started to mend, after a week she could wag her tail, 2 weeks - stand on one foot, 3 weeks - walk - a month - run. I eventually moved to Durham for School, and I would take her running on Duke's campus. She could run miles and miles after she mended. She even could catch squirrels. I found out from a country dude in NC that she was a 'rat terrier' who are natural squirrel hunters - and when I was shocked to hear that certain dogs are bred to catch squirrels, he said
"Boy, ain't you ever had any squirrel pastry?"
uh, no. She was the most loyal dog I have ever known. She wanted to be beside me at all times, bit other dogs who got too close, showing a fearlessness that is still hard to believe - she even whooped a pit bull once! She also had a knack for finding free food. Believe it or not, once while walking by a KFC she smelled chicken in the industrial dumpster. Before I could do anything, she jumped, put her front legs in the holster where the trash truck picks it up, and propelled herself into what must have been Sassy Chicken heaven. Needless to say, I could not get close to her until she had eaten to the point of contentment. You probably think she is a little off by now, well she was. But she wasn't full blown crazy, just a survivor with unique survival skills. this is crazy... When I moved to Denver in 2000 to work in politics, my Grandparents kept her for 6 months during the campaign. My grandfather was going blind and could not write any more, so they sent me a cassette recording to say hi and have a message from a barking Sassy. Turned out that was the only voice recording ever made by my grandfather - who died that year. Just another little reason why I was grateful to have found Sassy. As she got older - (remember 15 is 105 and 19 is 133 in human years), she got a little deaf, blind and her hips became arthritic - but she always wanted to bark at Stephen Colbert, 'go outside!', and eat cheese - her favorite treat. In fact she went out choking while eating a piece of cheese. I suppose that's fitting, she probably would have liked it that way. R.I.P Sassy, I know you'll be up in heaven waiting to bite friends and relatives who least expect it. I saw a bumper sticker recently, with a dog and a cat on it. It said "Who rescued who?" True. Wow-rec list... thanks for the gesture for Sassy... enjoy your next adventure ol' girl Photobucket

Breaking:"bipartisan investigation" for CO-Sen Michael Bennet's Derivative Swap

By
Wade Norris .
on August 7, 2010 8:43 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
This Friday's New York Times investigation: "Payback Time: Exotic Deals Put Denver Schools Deeper in Debt" casts a laser focus on Michael Bennet's investment into a 'risky' derivative swap by as Superintendent of Denver Public Schools. Pasts attempts by the Bennet campaign to deflect questions about this investigation are now laid bare and there are guilty parties involved. Now, Colorado Democratic Representative Mark Ferrandino, Chair of the State Budget committee is calling for a bi-partisan audit by both the Colorado State House and Senate of this investment that has already cost Denver Public Schools 25 million dollars and counting. Listen here on local Progressive Talk show host Mario Solis-Marich's Friday show at about 1/3rd through the podcast. http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/18227/podcast/DENVER-CO/KKZN-AM/mario%208-6-10%204pm.mp3 Representative Ferrandino is exactly the person to call for this investigation. In addition to his position on the Joint Budget Committee, he has served as a budget analyst for the Clinton and Bush Administrations - specifically working on the interest rate for the National Debt. Rep. Ferrandino:
We are going to ask members of both parties and both chambers to do an audit of the investment because this has bigger implications than just DPS (Denver Public Schools), because of the recent merger of DPS and PERA (Colorado's Public Employees Retirement Association, because if (the investment) was done wrong, this could have an impact not just on Denver, not just the kids in Denver, but the State as a whole.
One possible solution Rep. Ferrandino suggests is that Superintendent Boasberg should negotiate with JP Morgan to forgive the 81 million penalty fee for withdrawing from the investment - although that seems somewhat unlikely. And the story goes deeper than just this report. Aaron Harber, a local PBS affiliate reporter has just condemned the one sided nature of the coverage by the Denver Post, who has endorsed Senator Bennet. From PBS' Aaron Harber
There also is no question the state's most influential media entity, The Denver Post , not only has endorsed Bennet but has been hammering Romanoff unmercifully. The Post slammed Romanoff for appearing to waiver on his commitment to not take Political Action Committee money due to a statement by his campaign manager and then hit Romanoff even harder for his inappropriate use of the word "looting" when describing some of Bennet's business transactions, it had to hurt Romanoff. Simultaneously, it almost totally ignored Bennet's totally unfounded claims and television advertising attacks on Romanoff for allegedly supporting the privatization of Social Security (when, in fact, he actually opposed it). If Romanoff loses, it will demonstrate, in part, the power of The Post. If he wins, it will be one more success for Romanoff against a dominant establishment entity.
At the time of this story, and despite the overwhelming evidence from other news sources, the Denver Post's editorial board have only written "Jury still out on risky DPS loan" In league with the Denver Post is the local blog, Colorado Pols, which had initially criticized Governor Ritter's pick of the unelected and unknown Michael Bennet and of Michael Bennet himself: http://www.coloradopols.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=8821
(Bennet) demonstrated an almost total lack of charisma. And this is exactly why we thought Gov. Bill Ritter's selection of Bennet for U.S. Senate was such a disaster... And these are Democrats. Active Democrats. If they don't know who Bennet is, and if he doesn't have the natural charisma to carry a small room, then how is he going to win a statewide election in 2010?
But after initially praising Andrew Romanoff's entry into the race for one month - Colorado Pols turned on Andrew Romanoff and have negatively attacked the Romanoff campaign - even the board members calling for an investigation. (draw your own conclusions about why an objective site suddenly became partisan for Bennet) I wrote about this in "Colorado Pols caught spinning for Bennet"
Andrew Romanoff should win Tuesday and then will win the General with ease. If however, Michael Bennet wins Tuesday, he better win in November as well. Because if he doesn't win in November, then this site will be squarely to blame for helping at every turn to defeat a stronger candidate in Andrew Romanoff.
Colorado Pols generally supports democrats, so I am surprised by their railroading of Andrew Romanoff. But the bigger question remains - Is this a coordinated cover up or were they hoodwinked by Michael Bennet? Back to the story: Although the problems with the risky loan was relayed numerous times by 3 of the 7 school board members, those members were attacked by Senator Bennet's campaign, the Denver Post,by Colorado Pols, by the DPS school board President Theresa Pena, who is also Michael Bennet's campaign treasurer, and by the current Superintendent Thomas Boasberg - who is also the lifelong friend and political ally of Michael Bennet. These conflicts of interest do not end there:
JP Morgan Chase, the bank behind the DPS deal, has contributed to the Bennet campaign. According to information made available through the money-tracking Sunlight Foundation, Chase has donated $3,000 to the Bennet campaign. An innovative Sunlight Foundation tool called "Poligraft," for example, also turns up the fact that Level 3 Communications has aggregated $19,550 to the Bennet campaign, which means contributions to the campaign have come from the organization's employees, their family members, and the Level 3 political action committee. Thomas Boasberg, now head of DPS and Chief Operating Officer at the time of the controversial Chase deal, was a mergers and acquisitions executive at Level 3. According to the New York Times, it was Boasberg and Bennet who spearheaded the DPS-Chase deal, leveraging their financial experience to sway the DPS board.
Now JP Morgan is funding Bennet's campaign, and Boasberg has been blocking any investigation. This is what he said about the board member's claim in March of 2010.
"This attack is a regrettable action by a few disgruntled board members who are seeking to create a political controversy where no controversy exists," said Superintendent Tom Boasberg.
I'd imagine you'd say that, not only to protect Senator Bennet, but yourself as well. And with the School Board President Theresa Pena also serving as Bennet's campaign treasurer, dissenters on the School Board have been silenced by procedure. But the campaign can no longer deny these people's claims now that it is being covered by the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN and Markos of Daily Kos.
This "exotic deal", akin to a variable interest rate mortgage, has now cost the Denver school system $25 million more than originally planned, and getting out of the deal would cost the district another $81 million in termination fees. But no one could've predicted! (That's really Bennet's defense.)
The Denver Post routinely is conservative - even endorsing McCain over Obama. It is quite likely that the Denver Post will sit on this story until Tuesday's primary is over, and should Michael Bennet win, suddenly become interested in covering the derivative swap. (the Denver Post has an editorial that is now attacking Bennet) With an ongoing bi-partisan audit of this swap looming ahead, the Republican General Election candidate will have a hammer to wield against Michael Bennet. (the leading candidate being Ken Buck - who does not believe in abortion even in the case of incest and rape) Ken Buck as Senator will be a disaster for Colorado. Even worse, Colorado is one of the swing states that could decide the balance of power in the Senate. And the Republicans will most certainly take advantage of this issue and defeat Michael Bennet in the General. For the sake of holding on this seat for Democratic party, Democrats must call on Michael Bennet to step down from the primary. Supporting Andrew Romanoff is not just about liking or disliking a candidate, it's about the Democrats best chance to retain this Senate Seat.

Sen. Bennet will have plenty of time to think about China next week

By
Wade Norris .
on August 2, 2010 4:41 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Volunteers for Andrew Romanoff are busting their behinds day in and day out and Mr.Romanoff himself is crisscrossing the state connecting with voters and making his case for their vote. What's Bennet up to? From the latest edition of the New Yorker
Michael Bennet, a freshman Democrat from Colorado, said, "Sit and watch us for seven days--just watch the floor. You know what you'll see happening? Nothing. When I'm in the chair, I sit there thinking, I wonder what they're doing in China right now?"
uh, what? You have a primary - Guess your day dreaming is happening on the campaign trail too and Andrew Romanoff is taking advantage of it - and is surging in the polls. Local Progressive Talk Show Host Mario Solis Marich says it best today: (paraphrase)
"In my history of campaigns, I always said a candidate can't win without PAC money - I have never said you could win without it. Now that's not the case. Romanoff is doing it."
As you can see in this diary about Primary Candidate Andrew Romanoff (that was up on the rec list for the last 2 days) - Mr. Romanoff has come from behind from a double digit deficit to a lead in 4 weeks - and all without taking any PAC money against a conservadem. Wednesday August 4th is the Andrew Romanoff Moneybomb Day Help Andrew get not only past the primary but able to beat a Tea Party Republican (Ken Buck) in the General: Donate to Andrew Romanoff here
Andrew Romanoff MONEYBOMB FOR
ROMANOFF
AUGUST 4TH, 2010

Poll: Romanoff - Bennet now even

By
Wade Norris .
on August 1, 2010 2:05 AM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From the Denver Post:http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_15650614
Romanoff and Bennet are about even -- 48 percent to 45 percent, respectively -- in the poll of 536 Democrats who have voted or are likely to vote in the Aug. 10 primary. The question has a margin of error of 4.3 percentage points. Bennet "scrambling" "The fact that Bennet has Barack Obama ads on everyone's television screens multiple times a day right now shows that he's scrambling to win this primary," said Eric Sondermann, a Denver political consultant. "That is not an ad you'd run in the general election." Billie Young, 82, of Pueblo is voting for Romanoff because she didn't receive a response from Bennet's local office when she called for help. "If he can't take care of his locals, why would we want to vote for him to take care of the whole state?" Young said.
It seems the game is afoot. Andrew Romanoff has surged to within striking distance, and his ground campaign has paid more attention to the actual voters of Colorado.

Actions speak louder than words Senator Bennet

By
Wade Norris .
on May 15, 2010 8:35 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
This week on Huffington Post's Denver page, Michael Bennet posted an article - Close the Revolving Door, which talks about his efforts to reform the Lobbyist ways of Washington. It would seem the readers from Colorado did not take comfort in the Senator's words in light of his recent votes. I have a friendly tip for Senator Bennet's staff, next time your Candidate writes an article, remember to turn off the "Comments" section of his article - which Huffington Post allows diarists to do. The resulting comments in response to Bennet's post can only be summed up as 'devastating' for a candidate trailing his Republican opponents and facing a grassroots backed primary challenge from Andrew Romanoff. Shall we take a peak at why the respondents are so angry? (Crossposted at Square State and Huffington Post)
Senator Bennet: Speaking as one of your constituents, I must say that it is my philosophy that actions speak louder than words (more honestly as well). As others have pointed out in previous letters on this article, your name is conspicuous by being listed as one of those that voted against the Kaufman-Brown SAFE amendment. Would you care to explain your actions? It will determine what actions I will take in November.
.
Appointed never-been-elected Senator Bennet, I would also like to know why you voted no on the cramdown legislation. Will you continue to vote in favor of the banks and against tax payers? Why don't you stop taking contributions from the banks after all banking reform legislation is before you and it would be the right thing to do?
Talk about revolving door. Bennet just voted against downsizing the biggest banks. This guy is one of the greatest recipients of money from financial institutions. How corrupt can you get. He is on his way out come November. Good riddance to this corrupt senator from CO.
"Yeah, I agree with you, Senator Bennet!! The close of "the revolving door" should begin by voting you out in November. With this piece, are you trying to cover up your tracks----voting against the American people and for the banks?? If that's the reason of penning this piece, then I think you haven't succeeded. I used to like you as a senator, but yesterday's vote scuttle it all when I wasn't able to find your name among the "yeahs" to that amendment. I guess it's time for Coloradans to try Romanoff out by sending him to Washington in your place."
and the hits just keep coming... So what specifically did Bennet do that was so wrong? from a press release from the Romanoff campaign:
The battle between Main Street and Wall Street has emerged as a key dividing line in the Colorado Senate race: • Twice, Sen. Bennet voted against a full audit of the Federal Reserve. This morning, Sen. Bennet voted no on the Vitter Amendment (S. Amdt. 3760 to S. Amdt. 3739 to SB 3217) that would require a full audit of the FED. He did the same in April of last year. (S. Amdt. 875 to S.Con.Res.13) Andrew would have voted to fully audit the Federal Reserve. • On May 6th, 2010, Sen. Bennet voted against an amendment that would have imposed leverage and liability limits on bank holding companies and financial companies, to prevent them from becoming too big to fail. (S. Amdt. 3733 to S. Amdt. 3739 to SB 3217) Andrew supported this proposal. • On April 30th, 2009, Sen. Bennet voted against legislation that would have prevented mortgage foreclosures and preserved home values (S. Amdt. 1014 to SB 896). Andrew supported this proposal. Sen. Bennet's no vote was a victory for Wall Street and an insult to families across the country who are struggling to stay in their homes during this weak economic time.
Yikes. This is where raising the 5th highest amount of campaign money from Wall Street changes from being an advantage to a liability. It seems Mr. Bennet's votes certainly have a way of favoring those who have given him the most money. The real question though is why? Bennet had to have known that these votes were going to be fodder for either his primary or general opponent - so why do it? That's the real rub - he HAD to vote these terrible votes because of who is really representing - Wall Street and the banks. They have their Senator, but we have our opportunity to be heard in the Primary. For those who like Senator Bennet and can overlook his votes, consider the fact that in polling done vs his Republican rivals, he trails them by a larger margin than his Primary candidate, Andrew Romanoff. Most importantly, Bennet's poll of positive view vs. negative view is 45 positive vs 45 negative - which is worse than any other candidate running - while Andrew Romanoff's numbers of 46 positive to 34 negative and is better than all three Republicans in the field. If you need anything to know, it's that keeping Bennet past the Primary is the most certainly the best way to turn a Senate seat over to the Republicans - most likely a Tea Party candidate . For me, I agree that it is time to support someone who has pledge to take no Corporate PAC money - Andrew Romanoff. Stop by his fundraising page and toss him a buck or two.

Turning the Oil Spill into a Jobs Bill

By
Wade Norris .
on May 15, 2010 8:32 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Think about this, what if this Oil spill, as tragic as it is, provides us with the wake up call about how we power our world? My first thought when the spill happened was, what if we had not gotten rid of the electric car of the 1990's (from the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car?) and electric cars had grown in usage for the past decade? Would the drilling platform catastrophe still have happened? No one can be sure, but what we can be sure of, is that it will keep happening until we change our cars from gas/oil powered to electric powered. That's why this petition is so important - the Gulf Oil Spill Electric Car Credit. This petition asks for legislation to give a substantial credit for purchasing an electric car, and it has key provisions to put a lot of people to work, immediately - in a midterm election year. But we need to get support for this idea in the US House and Senate. That's where you can help... Here is what the petition says:
To: The US President and US Congress from Americans Concerned about the 2010 Gulf Oil Spill Gulf Oil Spill Electric Car Credit With oil prices expected to exceed $100 per barrel and millions of dollars of catastrophic damage occurring to U.S. coasts, wildlife, and coastal economies, all due to the 2010 Gulf Coast Oil Spill, it is time for a new direction for transportation in America. In response to the Gulf Coast Oil Spill, this petition asks the U.S. Congress and Senate to introduce legislation and for the President to sign into law a bill that will do the following: 1) Increase the electric car tax credit for any American made Electric cars to 70% of the purchase price. 2) Provide a tax credit for consumers equal to the cost of labor to convert their gas engine vehicle to an electric engine vehicle. 3) To require that all Federal Agencies must use American made Electric cars for 70% of their vehicle fleets beginning January of 2011 and thereafter. This will create instant demand for U.S. made electric cars, which will put Americans back to work, boost the American economy, reduce the demand for Oil, and will give the American people a choice to drive an affordable vehicle that is clean and does not pose a threat to our coastal economies or our wildlife. Sincerely, The Undersigned
It may seem impossible to ask for a 70% credit on a car - but, if credit rebate like that is offered,for a set period of time, in the same way the Cash for Clunkers program worked, it will cause a huge increase in production, and ultimately drive down the costs per vehicle long term. That means, you the consumer, could buy a $50,000 Tesla for $15,000 or a $40,000 Volt for $12,000. And with the Chevy Volt, the Government could likely negotiate a lowered cost for the Chevy Volt with GM, since the US now owns a majority share of 60% of GM's stock. Also, the mandate for government fleets to consist of 70% Electric cars will ensure a steady customer base for companies like Tesla or General Motors, also reducing costs. Cash for Clunkers program was very popular. That is because unlike the unpopular multi-Trillion dollar Bank Bailouts which give nothing to average citizens, this program would provide a tangible asset for American consumers. And this bill stipulates the cars be American made - thus employing more Americans. Heading into the mid-terms, the number one issue at this time is the job market. Imagine if GM announces they are re-hiring laid off workers or that a closed GM factory is re-opening? Also, Mechanics all across the country would suddenly have an increase in their work orders from people who want to take advantage of the tax credit to exchange their gas engine for an electric one. Imagine, you could exchange out your 1995 Impala gas engine for a 2010 Chevy Volt engine, and see your driving costs drop for transportation - for even less cost than purchasing a new electric car. We must act - especially since BP is already acting to make this oil spill become out of sight and out of mind, by dumping thousands of gallons of toxic dispersant chemicals on the Oil Spill, which is more harmful than the oil itself, but seemingly only so that the Oil Spill is not as visible on the surface of the Ocean. gulf oil spill (greenwashing at it's worst) Certainly fines and regulations will be useful as a lesson to industry, and stopping new drilling will reduce accidents, but we must get to the cause of our oil use. To prevent this type of accident we must get to the source problem, and changing our cars is one way to do that - so let's make electric cars and new engines affordable enough for the middle class and promote their purchase. Now, I am not just looking for signatures on a petition, I am looking for you to call your members of Congress and the Senate to support this kind of legislation - and for anyone who might know a supportive legislator who would carry this type of bill forward. Contact Congress Here and Contact the Senate Here or simply call the general phone number (202) 224-3121 and ask your representative to support the Gulf Oil Spill Electric Car Credit. Add in the comments section which Congress person or Senator would be a good candidate to carry this bill forward. Sign the petition and get our leaders to support it in Congress. It's time to take the oil stains off our hands forever.

The Gulf Oil Spill is our wake up call.
Sign the Petition for the Gulf Oil Spill Electric Car Credit


Chevy Volt


How NOT to hold on to a Dem US Senate seat (VIDEO)

By
Wade Norris .
on May 15, 2010 8:30 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
It's simple really, to hold on to a Senate seat, don't start out a re-election campaign without the support of base democratic voters. But here in Colorado, Senator Michael Bennet is starting out his re-election bid with that strategy. In addition to that some lifelong Democrats are saying
"they will vote Republican before they will vote for Michael Bennet"
Denver Teachers told me that was the sentiment among Denver Public School teachers about incumbent Democratic Senator Michael Bennet. (See video) That statement should give any democrat reason for pause, considering the Democrats need to hold on to every vulnerable Senate seat in what looks to be an anti-incumbent election year - and 'Colorado is in the Toss up category' - with Republicans seeking to take back the Senate. Senator Bennet was appointed Superintendent of Denver Public Schools, and a few years later was appointed to the Senate to replace Senator Salazar. However, the Teachers who worked under Michael Bennet's tenure as the Denver Public Schools Superintendent have some choice words about his re-election efforts to the Senate. (yikes!) Crossposted at Huffington Post and Square State
MS. BARBARA BENNETT: I was actually on the committee of teachers that participated in interviewing Michael Bennet, and at that time during his interviews he was committed to staying as superintendent in Denver Public Schools for five years. As we know, he did not stay five years. And when he began his career as superintendent in Denver, he really did make the effort to go out and start talking to teachers, something that was sort of unheard of. And I have to say that I noticed over the years that that dwindled significantly as soon as he started getting pushback from teachers; he didn't spend the time talking to teachers as much as he had when he first started. And I kind of feel like he used the superintendent's job to create a name for himself as a stepping stone to move on into politics, and that's exactly what happened. So, that's how I perceive Michael Bennet.
I included this quote because it comes from someone who was monitoring Mr. Bennet's term at the helm of Denver Public Schools from before day 1 through the time that he left, and who had given him the benefit of the doubt about his tenure. Even then, she noticed he became less and less approachable as his decisions as Superintendent became less and less popular. Next, Mr. Bennet's veracity on his policies and agenda as Superintendent. Mr. Bennet negotiated the removal of a popular pay system known as Pro-Comp which rewards career track teachers. After this was done, he stated to the press that the Denver teachers had just received the biggest pay raise in Colorado history - but it turns out it was only a raise in terms of retirement benefits.
(question) (ME) As Superintendent, Michael Bennet stated on camera that Denver Teachers had just received a pay raise - was it a raise? MS.UNDERWOOD-VERDEAL "Technically that is one way to talk about compensation, but that is certainly not the way we live, because I won't be able to use my retirement to go the grocery store now. It was not a raise teachers realized on their paychecks." So it was not true? "No, it was not true, in the practical sense."
This half-truth espoused by Superintendent Bennet was reviled by many school teachers, and Ms. Underwood-Verdeal was not the first teacher to talked to me about this issue. Lastly, while Superintendent Mr. Bennet recommended the Denver Public School board to invest 700 million dollars of the Retirement account into a 'sound investment strategy' - which they did, because after all, Mr. Bennet was appointed to the Superintendent position because of his finance and management expertise. It now turns out that the investment strategy for the retirement funds was none other than a banking derivative swap just like the kind that bankrupted Greece and several municipalities around the country.
MS.MELISSA UNDERWOOD-VERDEAL:"As we find out more about this (investment) we are finding out it was risky. The fact we lost millions of dollars is clear, and teachers are starting to worry about their retirement."
What do all of these decisions by Mr. Bennet as Superintendent add up to? Consider Michael Bennet's re-election bid to the Senate:
(ME): "Let's ask a hypothetical question, if Andrew Romanoff loses to Bennet, to Michael Bennet in the primary, what do you think of that? What have you heard?" MS.UNDERWOOD-VERDEAL"I have heard from many people that they will not vote in that race" MS.BENNETT"I have heard lifelong democrats, teachers, in Denver, say they will not vote for Michael Bennet, that they will vote Republican, before they will vote for Michael Bennet."
Why the opinions of these teachers are crucial to retaining this Senate seat for Democrats: Colorado's population is basically 1/3rd Democrat, 1/3rd Independent, and 1/3rd Republican. Democrat candidates in state wide contests usually win by this strategy: First the candidate must take up a centrist platform in the General election which appeals to at least half of the Independents and also might peel away a Republican vote or two. And secondly, the candidate must absolutely sew up every single Democratic vote of the base voters and energize the Democrats who are not consistent voters. Now consider this: Senator Bennet is starting his Re-election bid with the ire of the State's largest School system with 4,555 current teachers. Denver is a democratic stronghold, and many of these teachers are active in the Democratic party, and as you can see above, are not afraid to share their opinion with someone they just met with a camera. That means they are sharing their opinions with other teachers in the Colorado Education Association. That means they are sharing their opinions with their spouses and relatives. Think about this, 4,555 teachers in Denver, the state's largest city, with the most democratic votes, seem to judge Senator Bennet in three categories: 1)lukewarm in supporting Bennet's candidacy 2)will not vote in the Senate race 3)or are willing to switch their vote from Democrat to Republican, even as a lifelong democrat. In addition to this, the banking derivative swap that Bennet persuaded the DPS school board to invest in was a very poor decision. It is disappointing to the teachers, but in this election cycle, any association to Wall Street or banks or lost money in bad investments go over like a lead balloon. In addition with that poor decision, Senator Bennet was one of the few Democrats that stood up for Banks to oppose cramdown, which would have allowed millions of people to re-negotiate their mortgages. And you can certainly guarantee that whoever the Republican challenger is, that vote and those banking derivative investment decisions will be repeated in every attack ad, thus weakening Bennet's chances among independents. (and even though this will not be a big General election issue, in light of the recent Oil Spill and especially the deadly coal mine disasters, as an environmentalist, it is hard to get behind a person who joined with fellow conservadems to support millions in tax subsidies for natural gas as well as for coal, which is not surprising since Bennet was at the top of the list for receiving funds from Utility companies) No matter your opinion of Senator Bennet, it is clear that to allow Michael Bennet out of his primary will be giving the Republicans an easier path to victory this fall. And looking at the Tea-party loving candidates the Republican are putting up, it behooves the Democratic party to put up the best candidate for the general election. Democrats in Colorado and across the nation, need a tested political candidate who has actually run for office and won an election, something Bennet has never done. The moderator in the most recent debate summed up my sentiments about Senator Bennet's chances considering how he is running his re-election campaign. (At 14:41 in this video of the debate)
MODERATOR: "Despite your significant fundraising advantage, your performances in caucuses and county assemblies has been underwhelming. By all evidence, you have been out-organized. In fact, it appears, you, a sitting U.S. Senator, are pursuing a back-up plan to gather signatures in order to just qualify for the August 10, primary ballot. Given your lackluster performance so far, please outline why you would be the strongest democratic candidate to run against a tough Republican candidate this fall?"
Bennet's primary opponent, Andrew Romanoff, is a viable alternative who can win the general. Andrew Romanoff polls better vs the Republican challengers, has the support of the majority of the base as evidenced by consecutive caucus victories and perhaps most importantly has been part of the leadership in the Democratic party and has campaigned on statewide legislation. It is time to listen to our teachers and to common sense. Support Andrew Romanoff's primary challenge in order to send the strongest candidate into the General Election and to retain this Senate seat from Colorado.

Colorado Teachers fighting against another bad bill

By
Wade Norris .
on May 15, 2010 8:28 PM
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Florida teachers just won a victory over Senate Bill 6, which would base teacher pay solely on test scores. Now, teachers in Colorado are seeing a similar piece of legislation. Senate bill 191 creates a new system of bureaucracy to grade 'teacher effectiveness' without paying for it. Teachers wanted to talk, and you can hear their opinions on this bill. Senate Bill 191, may have good intentions for reform, but it makes 50% of Teacher's pay and job security based solely on student's standardized test scores. Two teachers, Melissa Underwood-Verdeal and Barbara Bennett weigh in on this bill:
"Senate Bill 191 addresses teacher effectiveness without defining what teacher effectiveness means. I believe I have a responsibility to the whole child, not just the part of the child that is going to put a pencil in their hand and take a test."
"50% of teachers effectiveness is based on student test scores. I currently have 28 students who are English language learners, and for me to have 50% of my effectiveness determined by student responses on a test they can't even read is of grave concern to me."
This quote seems to sum up the disparities this bill does not consider, in fact this bill seems likely to simply reward teachers who teach in affluent districts whose students are likely to do better on standardized tests, regardless of teacher 'effectiveness' and at the same time create a disincentive to those who would take on the task of teaching in schools who have higher numbers of students who don't speak English or are from poorer backgrounds.
"Senator Johnston's bill seeks to get 'Race to the Top' money, but they are failing to recognize that every Bill must have teacher union support or it will lose Race to the Top points, and teachers and the union are going to fight this bill, just as they did in Florida."
This last point is the most important - this bill seeks "Race to the Top" points, however, one of the qualifications of the Race to the Top program is that the Teacher's Union in each participating state must support legislation to meet the requirements. If Senate Bill 191 passes, it is apparent that the Teachers Union will not support it, thus nullifying any ability for Colorado to qualify for Race to the Top funds - so what is the end game? It appears that if Senator Johnston truly wanted the Race to the Top funds, he would have sought to craft a bill which Teachers would have supported. Additionally, Senator Johnston is proposing a bill that mandates more spending at a time that the State budget is already being slashed and the largest School district, Denver Public schools, is reeling from losses from investing in a banking derivative. Reform is a good thing, and is appreciated, but this approach seeks reform blindly in an attempt to get Federal funds, without considering the unintended consequences or how educators themselves view this bill. Please contact Colorado legislators and tell them to vote 'NO' on Senate Bill 191. (crossposted at Square State)
Archives

Categories

Monthly Archives

  • April 2011 (1)
  • November 2010 (2)
  • August 2010 (3)
  • May 2010 (7)
  • September 2009 (2)
  • August 2009 (1)
  • March 2009 (2)
  • February 2009 (2)
  • October 2008 (1)
  • September 2008 (29)

Pages

  • .Advertisers
  • Bank Swap Bennet
  • Daily Kos
  • HispanicTips
  • Huffington Post
  • PRAER
  • R.I.P to my dog Sassy - a Stephen Colbert Hater
  • Romanoff is more progressive on Gay rights
  • Square State
  • Steam Powered Opinions
  • Subscribe to feed Subscribe to this blog's feed
Powered by Movable Type 4.1

Search

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type Open Source
This blog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.