Don Boots Jensen - In Perception is Reality

Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich and his Chief of Staff, John Harris, were arrested today by FBI agents on federal corruption charges alleging that they and others are engaging in ongoing criminal activity: conspiring to obtain personal financial benefits for Blagojevich by leveraging his sole authority to appoint a United States Senator; threatening to withhold substantial state assistance to the Tribune Company in connection with the sale of Wrigley Field to induce the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members sharply critical of Blagojevich; and to obtain campaign contributions in exchange for official actions – both historically and now in a push before a new state ethics law takes effect January 1, 2009.

Blagojevich, 51, and Harris, 46, both of Chicago, were each charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and solicitation of bribery. They were charged in a two-count criminal complaint that was sworn out on Sunday and unsealed today following their arrests, which occurred without incident, announced Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, and Robert D. Grant, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Both men were expected to appear later today before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nan Nolan in U.S. District Court in Chicago.

A 76-page FBI affidavit alleges that Blagojevich was intercepted on court-authorized wiretaps during the last month conspiring to sell or trade Illinois’ U.S. Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama for financial and other personal benefits for himself and his wife. At various times, in exchange for the Senate appointment, Blagojevich discussed obtaining:

• A substantial salary for himself at a either a non-profit foundation or an organization affiliated with labor unions;
• Placing his wife on paid corporate boards where he speculated she might garner as much as $150,000 a year;
• Promises of campaign funds – including cash up front; and
• A cabinet post or ambassadorship for himself.

Just last week, on December 4, Blagojevich allegedly told an advisor that he might “get some (money) up front, maybe” from Senate Candidate 5, if he named Senate Candidate 5 to the Senate seat, to insure that Senate Candidate 5 kept a promise about raising money for Blagojevich if he ran for re-election. In a recorded conversation on October 31, Blagojevich described an earlier approach by an associate of Senate Candidate 5 as follows: “We were approached ‘pay to play.’ That, you know, he’d raise 500 grand. An emissary came. Then the other guy would raise a million, if I made him (Senate Candidate 5) a Senator.”

On November 7, Blagojevich said he needed to consider his family and that he is “financially” hurting while talking on the phone about the Senate seat with Harris and an advisor, the affidavit states. Harris allegedly said that they were considering what would help the “financial security” of the Blagojevich family and what will keep Blagojevich “politically viable.” Blagojevich stated, “I want to make money,” adding later that he is interested in making $250,000 to $300,000 a year, the complaint alleges.

On November 10, in a lengthy telephone call with numerous advisors that included discussion about Blagojevich obtaining a lucrative job with a union-affiliated organization in exchange for appointing a particular Senate Candidate whom he believed was favored by the President-elect and which is described in more detail below, Blagojevich and others discussed various ways Blagojevich could “monetize” the relationships he has made as governor to make money after leaving that office.

“The breadth of corruption laid out in these charges is staggering,” Mr. Fitzgerald said. “They allege that Blagojevich put a ‘for sale’ sign on the naming of a United States Senator; involved himself personally in pay-to-play schemes with the urgency of a salesman meeting his annual sales target; and corruptly used his office in an effort to trample editorial voices of criticism. The citizens of Illinois deserve public officials who act solely in the public’s interest, without putting a price tag on government appointments, contracts and decisions,” he added.

Mr. Grant said: “Many, including myself, thought that the recent conviction of former governor would usher in a new era of honesty and reform in Illinois politics. Clearly, the charges announced today reveal that the office of the Governor has become nothing more than a vehicle for self-enrichment, unrestricted by party affiliation and taking Illinois politics to a new low.”

Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Grant thanked the Chicago offices of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Inspector General for assisting in the ongoing investigation. The probe is part of Operation Board Games, a five-year-old public corruption investigation of pay-to-play schemes, including insider-dealing, influence-peddling and kickbacks involving private interests and public duties.

Federal agents today also executed search warrants at the offices of Friends of Blagojevich located at 4147 North Ravenswood, Suite 300, and at the Thompson Center office of Deputy Governor A.

Pay-to-Play Schemes

The charges include historical allegations that Blagojevich and Harris schemed with others – including previously convicted defendants Antoin Rezko, Stuart Levine, Ali Ata and others – since becoming governor in 2002 to obtain and attempt to obtain financial benefits for himself, his family and third parties, including his campaign committee, Friends of Blagojevich, in exchange for appointments to state boards and commissions, state employment, state contracts and access to state funds. A portion of the affidavit recounts the testimony of various witnesses at Rezko’s trial earlier this year.

The charges focus, however, on events since October when the Government obtained information that Blagojevich and Fundraiser A, who is chairman of Friends of Blagojevich, were accelerating Blagojevich’s allegedly corrupt fund-raising activities to accumulate as much money as possible this year before a new state ethics law would severely curtail Blagojevich’s ability to raise money from individuals and entities that have existing contracts worth more than $50,000 with the State of Illinois. Agents learned that Blagojevich was seeking approximately $2.5 million in campaign contributions by the end of the year, principally from or through individuals or entities – many of which have received state contacts or appointments – identified on a list maintained by Friends of Blagojevich, which the FBI has obtained.

The affidavit details multiple incidents involving efforts by Blagojevich to obtain campaign contributions in connection with official actions as governor, including these three in early October:

• After an October 6 meeting with Harris and Individuals A and B, during which Individual B sought state help with a business venture, Blagojevich told Individual A to approach Individual B about raising $100,000 for Friends of Blagojevich this year. Individual A said he later learned that Blagojevich reached out directly to Individual B to ask about holding a fund-raiser;
• Also on October 6, Blagojevich told Individual A that he expected Highway Contractor 1 to raise $500,000 in contributions and that he was willing to commit additional state money to a Tollway project – beyond $1.8 billion that Blagojevich announced on October15 – but was waiting to see how much money the contractor raised for Friends of Blagojevich; and
• On October 8, Blagojevich told Individual A that he wanted to obtain a $50,000 contribution from Hospital Executive 1, the chief executive officer of Children’s Memorial Hospital in Chicago, which had recently received a commitment of $8 million in state funds. When the contribution was not forthcoming, Blagojevich discussed with Deputy Governor A the feasibility of rescinding the funding.

On October 21, the Government obtained a court order authorizing the interception of conversations in both a personal office and a conference room used by Blagojevich at the offices of Friends of Blagojevich. The FBI began intercepting conversations in those rooms on the morning of October 22. A second court order was obtained last month allowing those interceptions to continue. On October 29, a court order was signed authorizing the interception of conversations on a hardline telephone used by Blagojevich at his home. That wiretap was extended for 30 days on November 26, according to the affidavit.

Another alleged example of a pay-to-play scheme was captured in separate telephone conversations that Blagojevich had with Fundraiser A on November 13 and Lobbyist 1 on December 3. Lobbyist 1 was reporting to Blagojevich about his efforts to collect a contribution from Contributor 1 and related that he “got in his face” to make it clear to Contributor 1 that a commitment to make a campaign contribution had to be done now, before there could be some skittishness over the timing of the contribution and Blagojevich signing a bill that would benefit Contributor 1. Blagojevich commented to Lobbyist 1 “good” and “good job.” The bill in question, which is awaiting Blagojevich ’s signature, is believed to be legislation that directs a percentage of casino revenue to the horse racing industry.

Sale of U.S. Senate Appointment

Regarding the Senate seat, the charges allege that Blagojevich, Harris and others have engaged and are engaging in efforts to obtain personal gain, including financial gain, to benefit Blagojevich and his family through corruptly using Blagojevich’s sole authority to appoint a successor to the unexpired term of the President-elect’s former Senate seat, which he resigned effective November 16. The affidavit details numerous conversations about the Senate seat between November 3 and December 5. In these conversations, Blagojevich repeatedly discussed the attributes of potential candidates, including their abilities to benefit the people of Illinois, and the financial and political benefits he and his wife could receive if he appointed various of the possible candidates.

Throughout the intercepted conversations, Blagojevich also allegedly spent significant time weighing the option of appointing himself to the open Senate seat and expressed a variety of reasons for doing so, including: frustration at being “stuck” as governor; a belief that he will be able to obtain greater resources if he is indicted as a sitting Senator as opposed to a sitting governor; a desire to remake his image in consideration of a possible run for President in 2016; avoiding impeachment by the Illinois legislature; making corporate contacts that would be of value to him after leaving public office; facilitating his wife’s employment as a lobbyist; and generating speaking fees should he decide to leave public office.

In the earliest intercepted conversation about the Senate seat described in the affidavit, Blagojevich told Deputy Governor A on November 3 that if he is not going to get anything of value for the open seat, then he will take it for himself: “if . . . they’re not going to offer anything of any value, then I might just take it.” Later that day, speaking to Advisor A, Blagojevich said: “I’m going to keep this Senate option for me a real possibility, you know, and therefore I can drive a hard bargain.” He added later that the seat “is a [expletive] valuable thing, you just don’t give it away for nothing.”

Over the next couple of days – Election Day and the day after – Blagojevich was captured discussing with Deputy Governor A whether he could obtain a cabinet position, such as Secretary of Health and Human Services or the Department of Energy or various ambassadorships. In a conversation with Harris on November 4, Blagojevich analogized his situation to that of a sports agent shopping a potential free agent to the highest bidder. The day after the election, Harris allegedly suggested to Blagojevich that the President-elect could make him the head of a private foundation.

Later on November 5, Blagojevich said to Advisor A, “I’ve got this thing and it’s [expletive] golden, and, uh, uh, I’m just not giving it up for [expletive] nothing. I’m not gonna do it. And, and I can always use it. I can parachute me there,” the affidavit states.

Two days later, in a three-way call with Harris and Advisor B, a consultant in Washington, Blagojevich and the others allegedly discussed the prospect of a three-way deal for the Senate appointment involving an organization called “Change to Win,” which is affiliated with various unions including the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

On November 10, Blagojevich, his wife, Harris, Governor General Counsel, Advisor B and other Washington-based advisors participated at different times in a two-hour phone call in which they allegedly discussed, among other things, a deal involving the SEIU. Harris said they could work out a deal with the union and the President-elect where SEIU could help the President-elect with Blagojevich’s appointment of Senate Candidate 1, while Blagojevich would obtain a position as the National Director of the Change to Win campaign and SEIU would get something favorable from the President-elect in the future. Also during that call, Blagojevich agreed it was unlikely that the President-elect would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services or give him an ambassadorship because of all of the negative publicity surrounding him.

In a conversation with Harris on November 11, the charges state, Blagojevich said he knew that the President-elect wanted Senate Candidate 1 for the open seat but “they’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. [Expletive] them.” Earlier in that conversation, Blagojevich suggested starting a 501(c)(4) non-profit organization, which he could head and engage in political activity and lobbying. In that conversation with Harris and other discussions with him and others over the next couple of days, Blagojevich suggested by name several well-known, wealthy individuals who could be prevailed upon to seed such an organization with $10-$15 million, and suggesting that he could take the organization’s reins when he is no longer governor, according to the affidavit.

On November 12, Blagojevich spoke with SEIU Official who was in Washington. This conversation occurred about a week after Blagojevich had met with SEIU Official to discuss the Senate seat, with the understanding that the union official was an emissary to discuss Senate Candidate 1's interest in the Senate seat. During the November 12 conversation, Blagojevich allegedly explained the non-profit organization idea to SEIU Official and said that it could help Senate Candidate 1. The union official agreed to “put that flag up and see where it goes,” although the official also had said he wasn’t certain if Senate Candidate 1 wanted the official to keep pushing her candidacy. Senate Candidate 1 eventually removed herself from consideration for the open seat.

Also on November 12, in a conversation with Harris, the complaint affidavit states, Blagojevich said his decision about the open Senate seat will be based on three criteria in the following order of importance: “our legal situation, our personal situation, my political situation. This decision, like every other one, needs to be based upon that. Legal. Personal. Political.” Harris said: “legal is the hardest one to satisfy.” Blagojevich said that his legal problems could be solved by naming himself to the Senate seat.

As recently as December 4, in separate conversations with Advisor B and Fundraiser A, Blagojevich said that he was “elevating” Senate Candidate 5 on the list of candidates because, among other reasons, if Blagojevich ran for re-election, Senate Candidate 5 would “raise [] money” for him. Blagojevich said that he might be able to cut a deal with Senate Candidate 5 that provided Blagojevich with something “tangible up front.” Noting that he was going to meet with Senate Candidate 5 in the next few days, Blagojevich told Fundraiser A to reach out to an intermediary (Individual D), from whom Blagojevich is attempting to obtain campaign contributions and who Blagojevich believes is close to Senate Candidate 5. Blagojevich told Fundraiser A to tell Individual D that Senate Candidate 5 was a very realistic candidate but Blagojevich was getting a lot of pressure not to appoint Senate Candidate 5, according to the affidavit.

Blagojevich allegedly told Fundraiser A to tell Individual D that if Senate Candidate 5 is going to be chosen, “some of this stuff’s gotta start happening now . . . right now . . . and we gotta see it.” Blagojevich continued, “You gotta be careful how you express that and assume everybody’s listening, the whole world is listening. You hear me?” Blagojevich further directed Fundraiser A to talk to Individual D in person, not by phone, and to communicate the “urgency” of the situation.

Blagojevich spoke to Fundraiser A again the next day, December 5, and discussed that day’s Chicago Tribune front page article stating that Blagojevich had recently been surreptitiously recorded as part of the ongoing criminal investigation. Blagojevich instructed Fundraiser A to “undo your [Individual D] thing,” and Fundraiser A confirmed it would be undone, the complaint alleges.

Also on December 5, Blagojevich and three others allegedly discussed whether to move money out of the Friends of Blagojevich campaign fund to avoid having the money frozen by federal authorities and also considered the possibility of prepaying the money to Blagojevich’s criminal defense attorney with an understanding that the attorney would donate the money back at a later time if it was not needed. They also discussed opening a new fund raising account named Citizens for Blagojevich with new contributions.

Misuse of State Funding To Induce Firing of Chicago Tribune Editorial Writers

According to the affidavit, intercepted phone calls revealed that the Tribune Company, which owns the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Cubs, has explored the possibility of obtaining assistance from the Illinois Finance Authority (IFA) relating to the Tribune Company’s efforts to sell the Cubs and the financing or sale of Wrigley Field. In a November 6 phone call, Harris explained to Blagojevich that the deal the Tribune Company was trying to get through the IFA was basically a tax mitigation scheme in which the IFA would own title to Wrigley Field and the Tribune would not have to pay capital gains tax, which Harris estimated would save the company approximately $100 million.

Intercepted calls allegedly show that Blagojevich directed Harris to inform Tribune Owner and an associate, identified as Tribune Financial Advisor, that state financial assistance would be withheld unless members of the Chicago Tribune’s editorial board were fired, primarily because Blagojevich viewed them as driving discussion of his possible impeachment. In a November 4 phone call, Blagojevich allegedly told Harris that he should say to Tribune Financial Advisor, Cubs Chairman and Tribune Owner, “our recommendation is fire all those [expletive] people, get ‘em the [expletive] out of there and get us some editorial support.”

On November 6, the day of a Tribune editorial critical of Blagojevich, Harris told Blagojevich that he told Tribune Financial Advisor the previous day that things “look like they could move ahead fine but, you know, there is a risk that all of this is going to get derailed by your own editorial page.” Harris also told Blagojevich that he was meeting with Tribune Financial Advisor on November 10.

In a November 11 intercepted call, Harris allegedly told Blagojevich that Tribune Financial Advisor talked to Tribune Owner and Tribune Owner “got the message and is very sensitive to the issue.” Harris told Blagojevich that according to Tribune Financial Advisor, there would be “certain corporate reorganizations and budget cuts coming and, reading between the lines, he’s going after that section.” Blagojevich allegedly responded. “Oh. That’s fantastic.” After further discussion, Blagojevich said, “Wow. Okay, keep our fingers crossed. You’re the man. Good job, John.”

In a further conversation on November 21, Harris told Blagojevich that he had singled out to Tribune Financial Advisor the Tribune’s deputy editorial page editor, John McCormick, “as somebody who was the most biased and unfair.” After hearing that Tribune Financial Advisor had assured Harris that the Tribune would be making changes affecting the editorial board, Blagojevich allegedly had a series of conversations with Chicago Cubs representatives regarding efforts to provide state financing for Wrigley Field. On November 30, Blagojevich spoke with the president of a Chicago-area sports consulting firm, who indicated that he was working with the Cubs on matters involving Wrigley Field. Blagojevich and Sports Consultant discussed the importance of getting the IFA transaction approved at the agency’s December or January meeting because Blagojevich was contemplating leaving office in early January and his IFA appointees would still be in place to approve the deal, the charges allege.

The Government is being represented by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Reid Schar, Carrie Hamilton, and Christopher Niewoehner.

If convicted, conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, while solicitation of bribery carries a maximum of 10 years in prison, and each count carries a maximum fine of $250,000. The Court, however, would determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed under the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines.

The public is reminded that a complaint contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Info obtained from FBI web source

Colombian Terror Organization Leader Indicted for Two Separate Hostage Takings of U.S. Citizens in 1999 and 2003

WASHINGTON—A federal grand jury in the District of Colombia has indicted Carlos Marin Guarin, also known as "Pablo," also known as Gustavo Anibal Giraldo Quinchia, a high-ranking member of the terrorist group the National Liberation Army (in Spanish the "Ejercito De Liberacion Nacional," or "ELN" for short), in connection with two separate hostage takings of United States citizens which took place in Colombia in 1999 and 2003, U.S. Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor and Patrick Rowan, Assistant Attorney General, National Security Division, U.S. Department of Justice, announced today.

Carlos Marin Guarin, 40, is currently incarcerated in Colombia on other charges. The ELN has been designated a foreign terrorist organization by the Secretary of State of the United States since 1997.

The indictment in the first matter, which was returned on December 4, 2008 , alleges that on May 13, 1999 , armed members of the ELN kidnapped American citizen Matthew A. Burchell and held him hostage for fifteen months, until August 5, 2000 . The ELN told Burchell, and those negotiating for his release, that Burchell had been seized in the hope that a ransom would be paid to the group by a United States or British company.

During his fifteen months of confinement, Burchell was put through two mock executions, bound, taken on long journeys while blindfolded and given numerous death threats. Guarin, then the ELN's Eastern Front Commander, conspired with others to carry out the hostage taking of Burchell. In addition, Guarin acted as the primary negotiator for the ELN throughout the ransom negotiations.  The indictment charges Guarin with conspiracy to commit hostage taking and hostage taking (aiding and abetting and causing an act to be done).

The indictment in the second matter, which was returned on December 5, 2008, alleges that on January 21, 2003, Scott A. Dalton, a United States and citizen, and Alison Ruth Morris, a British citizen by birth and a United States permanent resident, were working as professional journalists on assignment for The Los Angeles Times in the Arauca province of Colombia, when they were taken hostage and held captive under armed guard for twelve days by the Eastern War Front of the ELN, under the command of Guarin.

During that time, Guarin forced the journalists to interview him. Guarin also caused a letter bearing his nom de guerre "Pablo" to be sent on behalf of the General Command of the ELN to the Reuters international news agency, demanding that the government of Colombia form a commission and undertake certain actions as a condition for the release of the hostages. The hostages were eventually released unharmed. The indictment charges Guarin with conspiracy to commit hostage taking and hostage taking (aiding and abetting and causing an act to be done) and carrying a firearm during a crime of violence. This indictment supersedes a previous indictment that was returned in 2003 and unsealed today.

In announcing the indictments, U.S. Attorney Taylor and Assistant Attorney General Rowan praised the hard work of the FBI’s Miami Extraterritorial Squad, in particular lead case agents Special Agent Christopher Carbonneau and Special Agent Manuel Ortega, as well as Special Agent M. Alexandra Montilla, Supervisory Special Agent Alex Barbeito, Intelligence Analyst Christopher Wright of FBI Miami, FBI Legal Attaché Joseph Jeziorski based in Bogotá, Colombia.

Furthermore, they acknowledged the efforts of Paralegal Nadia Arnett Snoddy of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and Trial Attorney Matthew F. Blue of the Counterterrorism Section of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Brenda J. Johnson and Jeanne M. Hauch, who are prosecuting the case.

The charges contained in these indictments are allegations only and the defendant is presumed innocent until convicted at trial.

This info was obtained from the FBI web page. 

Agree or disagree?

Barack Obama discovers a leak under his sink, so he calls Joe the Plumber to come and fix it.

Joe drives to Obama's house, which is located in a very nice neighborhood and where it's clear that all the residents make more than $250,000 per year.

Joe arrives and takes his tools into the house. Joe is led to the room that contains the leaky pipe under a sink. Joe assesses the problem and tells Obama, who is standing near the door, that it's an easy repair that will take less than 10 minutes.

Obama asks Joe how much it will cost.

Joe immediately says, "$9,500."

"$9,500?" Obama asks, stunned. "But you said it's an easy repair!"

"Yes, but what I do is charge a lot more to my clients who make more than $250,000 per year so I can fix the plumbing of everybody who makes less than that for free," explains Joe. "It's always been my philosophy. In fact, I lobbied government to pass this philosophy as law, and it did pass earlier this year, so now all plumbers have to do business this way. It's known as 'Joe's Fair Plumbing Act of 2008.' Surprised you haven't heard of it, senator."

In spite of that, Obama tells Joe there's no way he's paying that much for a small plumbing repair, so Joe leaves.

Obama spends the next hour flipping through the phone book looking for another plumber, but he finds that all other plumbing businesses listed have gone out of business. Not wanting to pay Joe's price, Obama does nothing.

 

The leak under Obama's sink goes unrepaired for the next several days.
A week later, the leak is so bad that Obama has had to put a bucket under the sink. The bucket fills up quickly and has to be emptied every hour, and there's a risk that the room will flood, so Obama calls Joe and pleads with him to return.

Joe goes back to Obama's house, looks at the leaky pipe, and says, "Let's see this will cost you about $21,000."

"A few days ago you told me it would cost $9,500!" Obama quickly fires back.

Joe explains the reason for the dramatic increase. "Well, because of the
'Joe's Fair Plumbing Act,' a lot of rich people are learning how to fix
their own plumbing, so there are fewer of you paying for all the free
plumbing I'm doing for the people who make less than $250,000. As a result, the rate I have to charge my wealthy paying customers rise every day.

 

"Not only that, but for some reason the demand for plumbing work from the group of people who get it for free has skyrocketed, and there's a long waiting list of those who need repairs. This has put many of my fellow plumbers out of business, and they are not being replaced nobody is going into the plumbing business because they know they will not make any money. I'm hurting now too all thanks to greedy rich people like you who won't pay their fair share."

Obama tries to straighten out the plumber: "Of course you're hurting, Joe! Don't you get it? If all the rich people learn how to fix their own plumbing and you refuse to charge the poor people for your services, you'll be broke, and then what will you do?"

Joe immediately replies, "Run for president, apparently."

The Milwaukee Common Council  approved a 2009 city budget that restored firefighter and police positions while coming in nearly a full percentage point below the tax levy in Mayor Tom Barrett’s proposed executive budget.

"But the hard work has paid off with a budget that is much improved over what we received from the Mayor’s Office," he said. "During public listening sessions we heard from residents who made it clear they want strong public safety and to keep their library services, and the Council managed to restore firefighters, police officers and libraries without raising taxes or the solid waste fee to the level originally proposed by the mayor."

Ald. Michael J. Murphy, chair of the Council’s Finance and Personnel Committee, said the economic downturn and other factors made this year’s budget the most challenging in his nearly 20 years of the Council. "The fact that we were able to craft a tax levy freeze budget that maintains essential services without burdening taxpayers is a credit to the discipline and ingenuity of the members of the Finance & Personnel Committee and of the Council as a whole," he said.

Iinnovation and leadership as it wrestled with the budget throughout long day," he said.

 

The 2009 tax rate approved by the Common Council is $8.044 per $1,000 of assessed value – a 0.487% increase from the $8.01 tax rate for 2008. The tax levy rose 3.91% – going from $227 million in 2008 to just more than $236 million for 2009. The mayor’s budget called for a levy increase of 4.8%. The new tax levy means that the owner of a $150,000 home will see a $4.05 increase in the city portion of the tax bill, from $1,202.55 to $1,206.60.

The budget – approved this evening at the end of an 11-hour meeting in the Council Chamber at City Hall – added full firefighter staffing on eight of nine ladder trucks – turning back the mayor’s proposal that would have cut firefighters on nine ladder trucks. The Council also restored cuts to the Milwaukee Public Library that would have meant closing some branches, cutting staff and reducing hours. The Council also restored cuts that would have meant 56 fewer sworn police officers in city neighborhoods.

The Council approved a 13.6% increase in the solid waste fee – less than half of the mayor’s proposed increase of 28%.

Common Council President Willie L. Hines, Jr. said the Council "demonstrated diligence and leadership under difficult circumstances with easily the worst budget situation in years."

By Steven Walters And Patrick Marley

Posted: Nov. 6, 2008

Madison - Capitol Democrats, you just got what you wished for. Are you still sure it's what you want?

For at least two years, you'll have to run state government - and it's in a deep financial hole.

Tuesday's victories by Democrats mean that Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle will have 70 partners - the 18 Democrats who will run the Senate and the 52 Assembly Democrats - in crafting the next two-year budget. That won't be easy because Doyle has said that budget faces a deficit of more than $3 billion.

The 2009-'10 budget that Doyle must recommend early next year will be his hardest, for several reasons. It's the last budget before he is expected to seek a third term in 2010. The current budget had $750 million in tax and fee increases, which raised taxes on cigarettes and license plate renewals. Accounting tricks used by both parties over the past eight years are no longer available. Long-term debt has risen dramatically, raising questions about how much more debt the state can handle.

"This is going to be a very difficult time," Doyle said.

Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Madison) said Democrats would quickly pass bills to increase job training, boost spending on green energy, require businesses to more publicly disclose their tax liabilities and bar the state from contracting with companies that ship jobs overseas.

"Our number one thing we want to do is get in there and work on the economy and jobs and the cost of living," Pocan said. "And when working on the (state) budget, we're going to do it with working families and the middle class first and foremost in mind, and not the special interests."

Republican Sen. Ted Kanavas of Brookfield said Thursday that Republicans know they won't be able to pass anything in the next legislative session, but they can be advocates for taxpayers.

"We can't lead, but we can point out" problems in the choices Democrats make, Kanavas said.

The issues ahead:

Smoking ban. Doyle has pushed for a smoking ban in public places but was thwarted by Republicans and members of his party. After Tuesday, he said: "We're in a lot better shape."

Health care reform. Doyle and legislative leaders must find changes that don't include the so-called Healthy Wisconsin universal coverage plan that Senate Democrats passed last year. Barack Obama's election as president "takes the pressure off" for Healthy Wisconsin, Doyle said. Instead, he may again push an expanded state pool for health care insurance.

Insurance for childhood autism. When Doyle finally signed the overdue state budget in October 2007, he said the most important change left out was mandating insurance coverage to treat childhood autism. Doyle said this is a top goal for 2009.

Health insurance for domestic partners. For years, Republicans blocked changes that would allow domestic partners of state workers to get health care through state-provided plans. There will be a new push for that benefit, especially since the University of Wisconsin System is the only Big Ten school that does not offer it.

Drunken driving. Lawmakers will consider whether to toughen penalties for drunken drivers, including granting prosecutors the power to charge third offenses as felonies. Current law says a fifth violation can be prosecuted as a felony. Also planned are moves to let judges require more ignition interlocks on vehicles owned by drunken drivers and to legalize roadside sobriety checkpoints.

Taxes on businesses. Senate Democratic leaders say businesses widely use tax loopholes, so they want to tax the profits of parent companies and end the current system that taxes corporate subsidiaries separately. That would amount to an $80 million annual tax increase on Wisconsin businesses. Also pending is a plan to adopt national standards on what should be subject to the 5% sales tax.

Limits on teacher pay and school finance. In his three budgets, Doyle has asked for repeal of the "qualified economic offer" that limits pay and benefit increases for teachers to 3.8% a year. But tied to that is a push to overhaul the school finance system, which rural districts and Milwaukee school officials say is broken. They want to end spending limits, saying they have forced them to lay off teachers and to end language and math programs. But these changes could raise property taxes.

Campaign-finance reform. Democratic legislators have called for changes to diminish the role of cash in Capitol campaigns, and they likely will push requirements that all groups that run political ads disclose where they get their money. Some want to go further, but they will face opposition. A compromise may involve making changes that affect state Supreme Court races, but not gubernatorial and legislative contests. Whatever is adopted likely would face a court challenge on First Amendment grounds.

With an expected 300,000 people flocking to the polls in Milwaukee this November 4th, one cannot help but ask, “When is the best time to vote to avoid the long lines?’ 

This election has created allot of excitement and voters are anxious to get to the polls and vote for their candidate. As of Friday, October 30th, the Milwaukee Election Commission has received nearly 30,000 absentee ballots. That is 10% of the city’s eligible voters. The other 90% will brave the weather and lines to cast their ballot. 

Everyone should expect to wait in line this year. If you want to avoid the long lines, and I know because I work the polls, try not to vote between the following hours:   

• 7 am – 9 am
• 12 noon – 1:30 pm 
•  5 pm – 6:30 pm 

If you have not registered to vote, try to follow these steps to help you speed up the process:

• Check what ward you live in and go to the appropriate ward to register. You will not be allowed to register in a ward you do not reside in. 
• All Election Day registrants must have proof of residence. An acceptable form of proof of residence, when voting on Election Day, must include a current and complete name, including both the first and last name, a current and complete residential address, including a numbered street address and the name of a municipality. 
• In order to register to vote, an individual must provide proof that he or she has been a resident at their registration address for at least 10 days preceding the election.

There are a number of acceptable proof of residence documents a person can use. To name a few:

• A current and valid Wisconsin Driver’s License or Wisconsin ID card.
• A residential lease effective for the period that includes Election Day.
• A bank statement or a paycheck.
•  A check or other document issued by a unit of government.
• A utility bill including cable television, gas, electric, or telephone for the period commencing not earlier than 90 days before Election Day.

 These are just a few items and to get a complete listing you can log into the City of Milwaukee Election web page for additional information .

 Every inspector at the polling locations has received training to assist you in the registration process. If you have not registered to vote, I urge you to register at your ward on Election Day. Your vote does make a difference.

Rewarding Illegal Behavior is Dangerous 

This is something you should be aware of so you do not get blind-sided.  This is really going to catch many families off guard. It should make you worry.

Proposed changes in taxes after 2008 General election:    


CAPITAL GAINS TAX

MCCAIN
0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.

OBAMA
28% on profit from ALL home sales.

How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes.
If you are heading toward retirement and would like to downsize your home or move into a retirement community, 28%   of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.

DIVIDEND TAX

MCCAIN 15% (no change)    

OBAMA 39.6%

How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama become president.  The experts predict that 'higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.    

INCOME TAX

MCCAIN (no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250

OBAMA
(reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750


Under Obama your taxes will more than double! How does this affect you? No explanation needed. This is straightforward.

INHERITANCE TAX

MCCAIN 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)

OBAMA Restore the inheritance tax  

How does this affect you? Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax.  Those willing their assets to loved
ones will probably lose them to these taxes.

NEW TAXES BEING PROPOSED BY OBAMA

* New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet

* New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already)

* New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity)

* New taxes on retirement accounts        
 
And last but not least....    

* New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!    

The finance ministers of the G-7 countries are meeting in Washington. The first announcements on the meetings will come this weekend. It is not too extreme to say that the outcome of these meetings could redefine how the financial markets work, certainly for months and perhaps for a generation. The Americans are arguing that the regime of intervention and bailouts be allowed to continue. Others, like the British, are arguing for what in effect would be the nationalization of financial markets on a global scale. It is not clear what will be decided, but it is clear that this meeting matters.

The meetings will extend through the weekend to include members of the G-20 countries, which together account for about 90 percent of the global economy. This meeting was called because previous steps have not freed up lending between financial institutions, and the financial problem has increasingly become an economic one, affecting production and consumption in the global economy. The political leadership of these countries is under extreme pressure from the public to do something to solve — or at least alleviate — the problem.

Underlying this political pressure is a sense that the financial class, people who run global financial institutions, have failed to behave responsibly and effectively, and have therefore lost their legitimacy. The expectation, reasonable or not, is that the political system will now supplant these managers and impose at least a temporary solution. The finance ministers therefore have a political mandate, almost global in scope, to act decisively. The question is what they will do?

That question then divides further into two parts. The first is whether they will try to craft a single, global, integrated solution. The second is the degree to which they will take control of the financial system — and inter-financial institution lending in particular. (A primary reason for the credit crunch is that banks are currently afraid to lend — even to each other.) Thus far, attempts at solutions on the whole have been national rather than international. In addition, they have been built around incentivizing certain action and increasing the available money in the system.

So far, this hasn’t worked. The first problem is that financial institutions have not increased interbank lending significantly because they are concerned about the unknowns in the borrower’s balance sheet, and about the borrowers’ ability to repay the loans. With even large institutions failing, the fear is that other institutions will fail, but since the identity of the ones that will fail is unknown, lending on any terms — with or without government money — is imprudent. There is more lending to non-financial corporations than to financial ones because fewer unknowns are involved. Therefore, in the United States, infusions and promises of infusion of funds have not solved the basic problem: the uncertain solvency of the borrower.

The second problem is the international character of the crisis. An example from the Icelandic meltdown is relevant. The government of Iceland promised to repay Icelandic depositors in the island country’s failed banks. They did not extend the guarantee to non-Icelandic depositors. Partly they simply didn’t have the cash, but partly the view has been that taking care of one’s own takes priority. Countries do not want to bail out foreigners, and different governments do not want to assume the liabilities of other nations. The nature of political solutions is always that politicians respond to their own constituencies, not to people who can’t vote for them.

This weekend some basic decisions have to be made. The first is whether to give the bailouts time to work, to increase the packages or to accept that they have failed and move to the next step. The next step is for governments and central banks to take over decision making from financial institutions, and cause them to lend. This can be done in one of two ways. The first is to guarantee the loans made between financial institutions so that solvency is not an issue and risk is eliminated. The second is to directly take over the lending process, with the state dictating how much is lent to whom. In a real sense, the distinction between the two is not as significant as it appears. The market is abolished and wealth is distributed through mechanisms created by the state, with risk eliminated from the system, or more precisely, transferred from the lender to the taxing authority of the state.

The more complex issue is how to manage this on an international scale. For example, American banks lend to European banks. If the United States comes up with a plan which guarantees loans to U.S. banks but not European banks, and Europeans lend to Europe and not the United States, the integration of the global economy will very quickly shatter, leading to significant limitations on international trade, currency convertibility and so on. You will nationalize economies that can’t stand being purely national.

At the same time, there is no global mechanism for managing radical solutions. In taking over lending or guarantees, the administrative structure is everything. Managing the interbank-lending of the global economy is something for which there is no institution. And even with coordination, finance ministries and central banks would find it difficult to bear the burden — not to mention managing the system’s Herculean size and labyrinthine complexity. But if the G-7 in effect nationalize global financial systems and do it without international understandings and coordination, the consequences will be immediate and serious.

The G-7 is looking hard for a solution that will not require this level of intrusion, both because they don’t want to abolish markets even temporarily, and more important, because they have no idea how to manage this on a global scale. They very much want to have the problem solved with liquidity injections and bailouts. Their inclination is to give the current regime some more time. The problem is that the global equity markets are destroying value at extremely high rates and declines are approaching historic levels.

In other words, a crisis in the financial system is becoming an economic problem — and that means public pressure will surge, not decline. Therefore, it is plausible that they might choose to ask for what FDR did in 1933, a bank holiday, which in this case would be the suspension of trading on equity markets globally for several days while administrative solutions are reached. We have no information whatsoever that they are thinking of this, but in starting to grapple with a problem of this magnitude — and searching for solutions on this scale — it is totally understandable that they might like to buy some time.

It is not clear what they will decide. Fundamental issues to watch for are whether they move from manipulating markets through government intrusions that leave the markets fundamentally free, or do they abandon free markets at least temporarily.

Another such issue is whether they can find a way to do this globally or whether it will be done nationally. If they do go international and suspending markets, the question is how they will unwind this situation. It will be easier to start this than to end it and state-controlled markets are usually not very attractive in the long run. But then again, neither is where we are now.

(All information for this article iwas from Stratfor.com)

While On a recent trip to Glacier National Park I came across this article written by an unknown person in Tioga, ND. Sound familiar?

”Classical Version: The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he’s a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.  Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.  The grasshopper has no food or shelter so he dies out in the cold.

Modern Version: The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he’s a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.  Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

BBC, CNN, NDTV show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.The world is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be that this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

The ACLU organizes a demonstration in front of the ant’s house. Amnesty International and the U.N. criticize the Government for not upholding the fundamental rights of the grasshopper. Opposition MP’s stage a walkout. Left parties call for ‘Justice for the Poor’ and demand Judicial Enquiry.

Finally the Judicial Committee drafts the prevention of Terrorism Against Grasshoppers Act [POTAGA], with effect from the beginning of winter.The ant is fined for failing to comply with POTAGA, and having nothing left to pay his retroactive fines, his home is confiscated by the government and handed over to the grasshopper in a ceremony covered by BBC, CNN, and NDTV.

The ACLU spokesman calls it a “triumph of justice.” Koffi Annan invites the grasshopper to address the UN General Assembly, marking a victory for the rights of the poor and oppressed.”

Sound familiar? 

Bet you never thought about it that way before – but you will now!Boots 

Patriotism - what's it all about?

Everyone has their own definition of what Patriotism is to them. Below are a few thought from several noteworthy Americans:

"I think patriotism is like charity - it begins at home" - Henry James

"There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured with what is right in America" - Bill Clinton

"I believe with all my heart that America remains 'the great idea' that inspires the world . . . It is a gift to raise your family here, to vote here and to live here." - Arnold Schwarzengger

 

Have a great week!

"Boots"

Unless our Congress acts within the 14 days, MEDICARE and TRICARE payments to doctors will be cut by 10.6% in July of 2008. If that comes to pass your access to health care will be much reduced because more doctors will stop seeing MEDICARE and TRICARE patients.

 

In addition to cutting payments to doctors, hundreds of thousands of MEDICARE patients will lose coverage for their physical, speech, or occupational therapy unless Congress fixes the MEDICARE law within the next two weeks.

Cut and paste the below letter and send it to your Congress person. Thanks for your help in this matter. These changes will have an effect on medical care for everyone.

 I urge you to do all within your power to assure Congress acts quickly to reverse the 10.6% cut in MEDICARE and TRICARE payments scheduled for July 1.  The cut will only cause more doctors to turn away elderly and military patients.  Some doctors have already stated their intentions to do so.

If not corrected in the next two weeks, current law also will terminate speech, physical and vocational therapy coverage for hundreds of thousands of MEDICARE beneficiaries.

Finding TRICARE providers is already a major problem for retirees, survivors, and Guard and Reserve families who don't live near military installations.      

Please do all you can to ensure Congress replaces the MEDICARE/TRICARE rate cuts and sustains MEDICARE therapy coverage.  Without stability in the program, our military families and retirees' care is in jeopardy.

So . . . . what do you think of the new international symbol for gasoline in the USA?

 

Pass it onto your friends and start writing your congressmen to stop this insanity!

President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism. But the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq Bush's mistake came in his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in WWII. It is not.

Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their leaders, so it was the people's duty to back those leaders.

Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not or whether the war was going badly or not.

And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WWII than we have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter. The people stuck with the President because it was their patriotic duty. Americans put aside their differences in WWII and worked together to win that war.

Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in. Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war bonds to help the effort.

Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition trying their best to join the military. Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet there was very little complaining.

You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the President.

Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made upbeat films and entertained our troops to help the troops' morale. And a bunch even enlisted.

And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off with a Pledge of Allegiance, and with prayers for our country and our troops!

Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies.

A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' by being forced to wear women's underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning.

There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers and armed gangs roaming our streets.

No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism. He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that our fathers fought so dearly to preserve.

It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and Gomorra and the land of Oz. We did unite for a short while after 9/11, but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country would require some sacrifices.

We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam. It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause... Hitler and Tojo combined did not have nearly that many potential recruits. So... We either win it - or lose it - and you ain't gonna like losing.

America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall.

This is  from : "You ain't gonna like losing." Author unknown.