No Labels Action, Inc.

bribeNo Labels Action, Inc. is an “Unauthorized Super PAC, Independent Expenditures Only” It is not allowed to coordinate with a candidate, but this is an unenforceable restriction–the points in their mailings match Tom Reed’s advertising. Recent mailings claim:

  1. Bipartisan leadership
  2. Breaking gridlock
  3. Working across the aisle
  4. Fighting for jobs
  5. Fighting for mental health funding
  6. Working with Democrats to prohibit insider trading
  7. Worked with Democrats to save jobs at Dresser Rand

A high degree of coordination is evident.

According to Open Secrets, No Labels Action, Inc.  spends overwhelmingly on Republican candidates. Of the nearly four million dollars raised, about one million was from individual contributions. No Labels Action, Inc. doesn’t reveal their funding sources, but the FEC does record some contributions. Here are two from hedge fund executives:

No Labels Action is one of many PACs funding candidates with mystery money.

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00680983&cycle=2018

https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00680983/

https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?committee_id=C00680983&two_year_transaction_period=2018

Advertisements
Posted in Campaign Finances | Tagged | 1 Comment

Past is prologue

hill.jpg

Anita Hill (1991)

There is nothing new under the sun.

One way to understand the Ford/Kavanaugh controversy is to recall the Hill/Thomas struggle. Here is a brief excerpt from a  contemporary account:

According to sources who’ve seen the (1991) FBI report, nothing in it contradicted Hill’s story except nominee Thomas, who denied any harassment.–National Public Radio

Thomas’ nomination was nevertheless confirmed.

https://jwa.org/node/18888

 

Posted in 2018, Supreme Court | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Pick a PAC

payHundreds of Political Action Committees (PACs) have contributed to Tom Reed. These PACS collect money from many donors and distribute some of it to many recipients. I picked one PAC to study –“What a Country! PAC.” Here is what I learned:

  • WHAT A COUNTRY! PAC
  • Location: ATHENS, GA 30605
  • Affiliate: Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla)
  • Contributes only to Republicans
  • Spent 60% of expenditures on administration and fundraising.
  • Contributed $3000 to Tom Reed
  • The largest contribution to “What a Country! PAC” was from reality interests.
  • Many contributors to What a Country! also contributed directly to Tom Reed or indirectly through other PACs. For example, Honeywell International contributed $7500 directly to Tom Reed and also contributed $10,000 to “What a Country! PAC.”

One thing is clear–these contributors have no interest in local politics, these contributions are to secure Tom’s concern for their specific interests. Money is laundered thru a befuddling network of PACs. Rather than Lincoln’s ideal, they represent government of, by, and for special interests–“pay to play.”

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE TOM REED FOR CONGRESS GENERALDC04/23/2018$2,500.00

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE TOM REED FOR CONGRESS PRIMARYDC11/17/2017$2,500.00

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE TOM REED FOR CONGRESS PRIMARYDC02/28/2017$2,500.00

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?cycle=2018&strID=C00571646

https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?two_year_transaction_period=2018&data_type=processed&committee_id=C00464032&min_date=01%2F01%2F2017&max_date=09%2F17%2F2018

Posted in 2018, Campaign Finances, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Dr. Coleman’s Pundit Night

punditThis report was contributed by Steve Beikirch who attended the meeting. Steve is a lifelong Democrat who has voted in every election since Jimmy Carter ran for President in 1976. He will listen to views on other political ideologies, but rejects Libertarianism and ideologies that inject religion into politics. “I learned from my mom to be proud of being a “bleeding-heart” liberal.” Steve writes:

There was a very good turnout. If you’ve been to the Heights Theater then you have an idea of it’s capacity. I would estimate that it was about two-thirds filled. Before the panelists spoke Dr. Coleman invited the audience to come up to the mike and speak. Many did. Most were critical of Reeds performance. Dr. Coleman introduced several local Chemung County office holders that were in the audience. The only one that I knew was Mike Lausell who is running for State Senate in the 58th district. One audience member who came up to the mike was Chris Callas. Chris is running for Chemung County Legislature eighth district. He seems like a passionate and down to earth guy.

I admit that I am prejudiced, but I feel that Dora was the only one who spoke about anything of substance on Reed’s record.

Dr. Twombly gave a convoluted analysis of why people support a candidate and how they decide to vote the way they do. This may work for a class lecture but provided nothing to the discussion.

Joe Sempolinski talked about how accessible Tom Reed is, how Reed has had 250 town halls and his membership in the problem solvers caucus.

Mike Morrongiello spent his time at the mike presenting a Reed campaign commercial about how great Reed is and how evil progressives are.

Gary Perry talked about the “non-partisan” organization he belongs to called “Reclaim New York”. He worked his way to saying how Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme and should be privatized. This produced jeers and laughter from the audience.

Last but not least, Dr. Matt Seybold,  Assistant Professor of American Literature and Mark Twain Studies, offered almost as little relevant information on Reed’s performance as Morrongiello. However, Seybold was interesting to listen to.

After the panelists were finished a woman walked up to the audience mike and dropped a bombshell about Perry. She brought up the fact that “Reclaim New York” is funded by Robert Mercer and his daughter. The only thing that Perry could get out of his mouth was “We get funding from Rebekah Mercer but not Soros.”

https://www.reclaimnewyork.org/

 

Posted in 2018 | Tagged , , , | 21 Comments

Tom Reed on Free Trade

REED ONCE PRAISED BIPARTISAN PASSAGE OF FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS; Said removal of tariffs will create jobs in New York

tradeIn 2011, Tom returned from his trip to S. Korea praising free trade and the trade agreement with S. Korea and other countries. Tom wrote:

Congressman Tom Reed is praising this evening’s bipartisan passage of free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea.  Several months ago Reed led on a letter to the White House signed by 67 freshman members urging action on the agreements which had been languishing for four years.  “New York State exports to foreign nations have surged after each and every free trade agreement was signed,”
Reed observed. “The agreement with just South Korea alone will mean new markets for New York products and new opportunities created for our farmers, manufacturers, service providers and workers – for example removal of Korean tariffs on produce such as grapes, apples and dairy will be an immediate boost to our farmers.”
“Ninety-five percent of the world’s consumers live outside the United States,” Reed commented. “More exports of New York products means more jobs for New York’s workers. This is a win for the upstate economy.”
The International Trade Commission estimates that 250,000 jobs will be created nationwide by passage of the free trade agreements.–Rep. Tom Reed, Washington, DC, October 13, 2011

 

DJT reportedly has known for 30 years that all such trade agreements are bad for America. So Tom, do you admit that you were wrong in 2011 and for years after? If not, please take action to prevent DJT from disrupting trade, harming our farms and industries.

https://reed.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=325

Posted in Reed's Views, trade, Trump | 3 Comments

Kevin Hassett on lying with statistics

CEA chairman Hassett says 2016 election was a turning point; you can’t believe him.

lie with statistics

Horizontal and Vertical scale matters

Kevin Hassett unveiled a series of charts that appear to show a surge in corporate investment, blue-collar jobs, business startups and small-business optimism after the election two years ago.–, MarketWatch

I watched Kevin Hassett explain these charts which illustrate how a happy-go-lucky CEA Chair lies. Please refer to the White House release of Hassett’s charts.

Hassett’s first three charts refer to information from  The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB). This is not a reliable source; I will say no more about these first three charts. (NFIB is often mentioned in support of Tom Reed.)

fredgraphThe next three charts use data from the reliable Bureau of Economic Analysis. The original chart for “real private nonresidential fixed investment” is shown at the left. Compare this with Hassett’s chart for  “real private nonresidential fixed investment” which shows a marked change on the day of the election. It is a clear example of lying with statistics. Hassett has carefully chosen the horizontal and vertical scales to make a misleading point. One should be surprised by the marked change in the data if nothing else; economic data seldom shows such marked changes if ever.

Hassett also misleads by choosing trend lines based on a short section of only part of the data, which is again unfair. The last three charts are much less striking than the charts featured at the top of the page; they are perhaps reliable, but again the trend lines are chosen to falsely emphasize the Trump Administration’s message. Please don’t be taken in by this administration’s lies.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/top-white-house-economic-adviser-credits-trump-for-boom-disses-obama-era-2018-09-10

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Press-Briefing-9.10.18-CEA_Final.pdf

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/National_Federation_of_Independent_Business

Posted in 2018, Economics, Trump | Tagged , | 4 Comments

The First Circle

first ccircle.jpgIn The First Circle, a novel by Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, Stalin suspects there is a spy in the Soviet Foreign Ministry. Scientists, working as slaves in a government laboratory, are asked to identify the spy by analyzing voice recordings.

The scientists report they have narrowed the suspects down to three. Good enough is the response from the dictator–we just shoot all three.

The Trump Administration reportedly has started a witch hunt to identify the author of the inflammatory NY Times editorial using textual analysis. This is unlikely to be conclusive–they may identify a number of suspects. What then, fire them all?

I don’t understand the intent of the unknown author. If part of a clique working to protect the republic, why blow the whistle?

Posted in Treaties | Tagged , , | Leave a comment