Libertarian Party and Green Party of Pennsylvania denounce court decision

Commonwealth Court holds that state indictments of illegal activity are not grounds for overturning earlier judgment against Ralph Nader
 

Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania (LPPA) www.lppa.org

Green Party of Pennsylvania (GPPA)

For Immediate Release: December 16, 2008

Contact: Doug Leard (Media Relations) at Media-Relations@lppa.org 
Michael Robertson (LPPA Chair) at 1-800-R-RIGHTS / chair@lppa.org
Hillary Aisenstein (GPPA Chair) at 1-267-971-3559 / hillarya@pobox.upenn.edu



Harrisburg, PA –  The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania and the Green Party of Pennsylvania denounce the recent Commonwealth Court decision against 2004 independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader and his vice presidential candidate Peter Camejo (Mr. Camejo recently passed away after a battle with cancer).

A grand jury report, which led to the indictment of state House Whip Mike Veon and ten former state House Democratic staffers indicated that Veon led a statewide political operation that used commonwealth resources to run a “massive” effort to oust independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader from the 2004 ballot.

According to the report, as many as 50 Pennsylvania House staff members worked on a challenge to Nader's ballot petition, and more than half received state-funded bonuses, in part for their "Nader efforts.”

On the basis of the report and indictment, Mr. Nader challenged a court ruling holding him accountable for nearly $81,000 in costs to remove him from the ballot.

Although the original judgment appears to be based on a criminal conspiracy, the court ruled that opening or vacating the judgment was not justified and went further to say that Nader’s efforts to comply with Pennsylvania’s extremely restrictive signature requirements were “the most deceitful and fraudulent exercise ever perpetuated” against the court.

"This decision drives yet another nail into the political coffin of challenger parties", said Ken Krawchuk, a two-time Libertarian candidate for Pennsylvania Governor.  "First they force us to collect thirty-three times as many signatures to get on the statewide ballot, then they fine us $80,000-plus for the trying, and now they say it's okay for our elected officials to break the law to crush free elections.  It's bad enough being ground into the dust under the heel of criminal oppression, but the saddest part of all is that there is no public outcry, no disgust, no anger.  Pennsylvania voters are letting them get away with it!  It seems as if no one cares any longer about the rule of law.  I fear for our future as a free people."

Hillary Aisenstein, GPPA Chair said "It's absolutely astounding to me that in the face rampant fraud and corruption by the Democratic Party, the Court is still ruling against Nader.  If they want to see 'deceitful and fraudulent,' they should take a look in the mirror."
 
LPPA Chair Michael Robertson added “Not only should Mr. Nader not have been assessed fees at all, but it is a complete travesty of justice that he should be assessed fees as a result of the criminal activity against him. He was victimized by the criminals and then again by the justice system.”
 

# # #

 

Needs volunteers for their Local Eyes network.
http://democracyrisingpa.com/index.cfm?organization_id=66&section_id=1005

Additional update:

The lunchtime speaker at the convention will be someone from the Commonwealth Foundation, although the speaker is yet to be determined.

Also, there will be a second workshop added in addition to the local office workshop. It will address lobbying and techniques to promote/oppose legislation and legislative efforts in the General Assembly. Attendees will have their choice of workshop.

The tentative schedule and convention costs should be available shortly after the new year.

Update on the top 10 banks to get bailout funds. You can check the rest here:

http://bailout.uslaw.com/?page_id=353


Citigroup (New York) — $25 billion

JPMorgan ChaseLoading... & Co. (New York) - $25 billion

Wells Fargo & Co. (San Francisco) — $25 billion

Bank of America Corp. (Charlotte, N.C.) — $15 billion

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (New York) — $10 billion

Merrill Lynch & Co. (New York) — $10 billion

Morgan Stanley (New York) — $10 billion

PNC Financial Services Group Inc. (Pittsburgh) — $7.7 billion

US Bancorp (Minneapolis) — $6.6 billion

Capital One Financial Corp. (McLean, Va.) — $3.55 billion

Happy Birthday wishes are in order for the LP:

http://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/americas-largest-third-party-turns-37

This is from Town Hall commentary, and it seems to fit with this thread:

 "Ask not what your country can do for you....."
 
By Frank Ryan

In his inauguration, President Kennedy invoked our patriotism and sense of honor to serve our Nation rather than to serve ourselves.  In 2008, the auto industry lost the opportunity to lead our Nation to prosperity, while it tried to save itself at the expense of others.  Greed, unrestrained self-interest, and arrogance ruled the day for the auto industry.   
 
Congress debated.   Executives gave in by driving to a hearing.   The UAW made minor concessions.   What a month it has been in the automobile industry.  The end result will be a bailout of an industry that has failed to keep up, has failed to meet the needs of the consumer, has failed its own suppliers and, most importantly, has deceived it employees into believing that bailouts will solve their collective woes.
 
Congress pretended to chastise executives for flying on private jets.  They demanded to know about executive pay and played to the public as part of the plan to convince the American people that the Congress was looking out for us.  I would have loved to been at the hearings and asked Congress to stop taking junkets, to stop their own special treatment, and to demand that they take no pay until social security is solvent.  Unfortunately, we as a nation have stopped asking one another to be accountable for our own decisions.
 
The auto executives must have had some horrible advice or have been so isolated to fail to realize the impact of flying in private jets to a hearing.  It is unfortunate that the executives do not understand that it is precisely this entitlement mentality that is causing our negative reactions to their pleas for help.   All anyone asks is that the Big 3 and its employees sacrifice as much to save their industry as you want the average American to sacrifice by providing the $34 Billion they are demanding.
 
The bailout mentality is such a flawed thought process.  Government should provide the rule of law by providing the basic framework as to how we deal with one another in commerce.  Government bailouts and investments are direct interventions in markets and clearly uncalled for.  Such intervention is counterproductive in the long run.
 
One merely needs to look at the Government Sponsored Enterprises of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to see the negative results of government intervening in markets that they do not understand nor are equipped to manage.
 
A government bailout of the auto industry will be a disaster of untold consequences.  The horrible injustices of the Big 3's flawed business model are apparent to anyone who has been a supplier to the Big 3.  The Big 3 used their market power to demand concessions for their supplier base with the net result of bankrupting many suppliers to the industry.  Jobs were outsourced to Mexico and then to China.  Where was the auto industry cry for help when the supplier base was decimated?  Where was the UAW when the employees of their suppliers were giving wage concessions, canceling health insurance benefits, and outsourcing their jobs?   Their silence speaks volumes about their purity of the cries for help for the beleaguered industry today.
 
It is so sad that it takes a potential bankruptcy of GM for the UAW to finally agree to "consider" giving up the job bank program which allows idle workers to draw nearly full pay.  The UAW also agreed to "delay" certain multi-billion payments to a retiree health care plan.   Did the UAW not recognize that an average hourly payroll cost of $74 is not sustainable in a world market where consumers are not willing to pay the cost?  The bailout is tantamount to asking someone who makes $12 per hour to subsidize someone making $74 per hour.  How absurd!
 
The fear mongering of the claims of three million lost jobs due to a bankruptcy of one of the big 3 is misplaced as well.  A bankruptcy provides protection to a company while it attempts to reorganize and become competitive again.  The real losers in a bankruptcy are usually the current shareholders, you and me, but that is how markets are supposed to work.
 
When the company reorganizes it is given time, under court supervision, to become more competitive and to regain its footing in the markets it once ruled.  The court supervision is precisely the rule of law that governs commerce.   It is not a bailout but instead requires all parties to logically and realistically look at ways to solve very complex problems.
 
The very fabric of our society is under assault with more bailouts.  Until all of us and Congress recognize that personal accountability, personal responsibility, and dealing with ones own problems first are the best solution, we will be doomed to mediocrity.    Protecting an industry in a contrived way is cruel to workers and society in the long run.
 
Apparently the auto industry did not listen to President Kennedy's plea - "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country"    Real leadership and self sacrifice are needed now more than ever.
 
Frank Ryan, CPA specializes in corporate restructuring and lectures on ethics and management for the AICPA.  He is on the boards of numerous publicly traded companies as well as not for profit charitable organizations.  He can be reached at FRYAN1951@aol.com.
 






 

I have driven a pickup for years. When the gas prices went all wonky I figured out that it was cheaper for me to buy a used Honda Accord than it was to drive my truck to work. (60 miles a day) I agree that people flocked for gas efficient cars, but I am not so sure they the majority were looking for new cars. The cost of a new automobile is outrageous and it goes back to the automakers not being competitive due to a number of things, mostly revolving around government intervention. I also find it hard to believe that it only took two years to design, retool, and start producing more efficient engines. I believe automakers have had designs for years that they sat on because they didn't want to spend the money to retool. That is understandable. However, the consumer may decide not to wait for the manufacturer to catch up when there is an alternative on the market.

The government is to blame in this, but so are the manufacturers. They gambled and lost. We should not be subsidizing their gambling addictions.

Oh and I don't want to leave the UAW out but I think that you all covered that well enough already.

Also I think worth mentioning is the failure of the US automaker to change with the market. While the Japanese focussed on building smaller, more fuel efficient, longer running cars the Big Three focussed on trucks and SUVs which had the highest potential profit margins. While this was in fact giving the US consumer what they asked for, they incorrectly focussed only on these 2 models of vehicle, while allowing their respective sedans & small coupes flounder year after year with lackluster design features and ugly body styles. Then, once the OPEC cartels were finally jamming 4.50 a gallon down our throats the big truck/SUV market dried up as Americans flocked to smaller cars which got better mileage (which tended to be Toyotas & Hondas).

Now, that being said, the big 3 (especially GM) make some great cars. Chevrolet in particular has 9 vehicles that average 30mpg or higher, more then any other automaker. It just seems to me that it's too little, too late when compared to the Toyota and Honda sedans. Chevy & Ford let their names turn to mud with their crappy sedans in the 90's (Cavalier, Taurus) while Honda went Gangbusters with the Civic...now flash forward to 2008 and even though Chevy & Ford have good looking, well running small cars now, Honda and Toyota have built a strong name for themselves.

But sadly, it doesn't look like anything we want is going to happen. Congress & the Bush Administration have pretty much guaranteed this week that the bailout is coming. We just don't know for how much. AND, that weasel Barney Frank let it slip that even HE doesn't know how much the bailout will amount to. 

The new newsletter looks great! And I made it in there, you got no idea this is like a huge thing for me I made it in. 

That would be the UAW as they negotiated the contracts that came with a great retirement package.

However, I believe if there is a default on the pension plan, and the auto makers have not fully funded these things if I understand correctly, then there is a government program that picks up the payments at taxpayer expense. They would only pay a portion of what the retiree had been receiving, so everyone loses on that deal. Chances are if there is a bailout, jettisoning the pension plans will be part of it.

I think that instead of a bailout, if any automaker defaults on the pension plan, the assets of the company should be sold off to meet obligations. Someone may then buy the assets and start a new car company. We need free entry to and exit from the marketplace. Corporations should not be able to make commitments to employees then foist them off on taxpayers, nor should they be able to call for taxpayer support due to poor business decisions or adverse economic circumstances.