SO when Howie Rich of New York City sics the dynamic duo of his brother-in-law Paul Jacob and Eric O'Keefe's wife Leslie Graves on hundreds of thousands of email messages between hard-working public employees across the nation, trying to find out what they knew about him, when they knew it, who told them and what they did about it, his team calls it a "research project." But when regular folk ask simple questions about who is funding the ballot measures polluting their states, Rich says he's the victim of a "witch hunt." He'll have to excuse the general lack of sympathy for his plight from a host of Arizonans and Californians, the president of the University of Nebraska, Maine business owners and - maybe the worst news of all - Maine librarians, who are all taking bold stands against his so-called Taxpayer Bill of Rights. But assuming that the rest of the thinking world shuns Rich after Election Day, there are hopes that he'll still have friends in South Carolina. After all, he has the receipts showing their purchase.
Gee, when the librarians turn against you, are you really living the right kind of life?
It's not every day that Howie Rich rates coverage in USA Today, but contributor - and Montana rancher, it turns out - Mary Zeiss Stange exposed him and his ballot measures in a whole column this week here
http://blogs.usatoday.com/... a degree of publicity that may have given the poor fella the mad itch. (Rub, don't scratch.) Stange channels the angelic voice of Joni Mitchell and her lyric, "They paved paradise, put up a parking lot," to set her theme.
"The refrain of Joni Mitchell's old hit might as well be the theme song of a steam-rolling property rights movement in the West. Initiatives have made their way onto this November's ballot in six Western states -- Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and Washington -- that would sharply limit the concept of eminent domain and bar government seizure of private property without just compensation. Until recently, these initiatives have drawn little attention, but planners and policymakers around the country are beginning to take note of them, and for good reason," she writes.
"Despite a concerted effort to portray the property rights movement as a grassroots phenomenon, all six initiatives made it onto the ballot thanks to large infusions of out-of-state cash -- lots of it from one man, New York real estate developer Howard Rich," Stange tells her readers. "Rich's two advocacy groups, the Fund for Democracy and Americans for Limited Government, alone have funneled about $4 million into the petition process of getting these initiatives onto state ballots. Much of the money has gone to professional signature-gatherers, most of whom travel from state to state pushing innocuously worded petitions and are paid by the signature. Prices range from $1 a pop in California to $3 for every name collected in Arizona."
Whew, three bucks a pop in California! That's even better than what Schumacher earned in Montana! And speaking of Montana, Stange quotes one of the least expensive members of Rich's petitioneering team, Eric Rittberg/Eric Dondero. No complainer at his short shrift, Rittberg/Dondero demonstrates his message discipline to Stange: "This is a statewide petition to protect our property rights. To keep that new eminent domain law from coming to Montana and taking our homes away."
And Stange doesn't buy it, heh heh. She writes, "Spoken by an itinerant professional petition-pusher from Texas, this hardly amounts to prairie populism. On the contrary, it represents a calculated effort to deceive voters about the likely consequences of property rights initiatives."
Whoa. The USA Today has unceremoniously labeled Eric Rittberg/Eric Dondero "an itinerant professional petition-pusher from Texas," an appellation that surely warrants a better fee than the $18K he earned this year for his troubles in Montana. Last time I heard anyone called "itinerant," it was in John Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath," about folks looking for real work but taking what they could get. And "petition-pusher" gave me a flashback to Nancy Reagan's admonition to "Just Say No" to drug-pushers. The combination, I would suggest, is unflattering...
FILE THIS one under "Pot Calls Kettle Black."
We've already mentioned the initiation of Freedom of Information Act requests across the nation by Rich cronies Paul Jacob and Leslie Graves, trolling the email records of hundreds of thousands of public employees to divine how they learned and shared information about him and his ballot measures. But while the hard-working Americans who oppose Rich's intrusion in their lives have no choice but to comply with the federal law his team wields like against them, Rich himself has adopted various whiny responses when reporters call with simple questions about said intrusions. Few weeks ago, he accused his questioners of "character assassination." We recall what Groucho Marx said about the prerequisites of character assassination.
This week, reports Jessica Coomes here http://www.azcentral.com/... Rich springs an appropriately Halloweeny response to her inquiry: "They're on a witch hunt. That is what they do."
The "they" in this instance is the Center for Public Integrity, which "has been studying the finances of organizations led by Rich," and which uncovered an investigation by the Illinois Secretary of State's office into "five other organizations related to Rich for continuing to operate without authority in Illinois. All five organizations share the same address with Americans for Limited Government, the center reported."
What? Operating without authority under Illinois law? Howie Rich? Hell, is there a law to whose authority his ideology submits? His ideology exists to ELIMINATE the authority of law, in Illinois and elsewhere, for cryin' out loud.
Apparently, Coomes tells us, "Chicago-based Americans for Limited Government gave more than $1 million to Arizona's Proposition 207 property rights campaign, but its authority to do business in Illinois had been revoked when it made most of the donations. The Illinois Secretary of State said the non-profit organization could not legally do business for nearly eight months this year because it did not file an annual report. The document has since been submitted to the state, and the temporary revocation is not expected to affect the Proposition 207 campaign."
But, while secretly knowing that he owes obedience to no law, Rich plays it straight for now: "This was an oversight," he tells Coomes through, of course, an email.
So missing a requirement to renew the business license in the state where his delegate-free quasi-political party has operated for years was an "oversight," which suggests he was distracted. And that, I can believe. I'd be distracted too by losing millions of bucks' worth of ballot measures and petition circulation work through incompetence across a half-dozen states. I'd be distracted enough to drink large quantities of bourbon, I think.
Poor Howie Rich. Things have changed so much since the 1970s, when all you had to do was spend mints of money on a challenge to win the desired outcome. But wait: now that I think of it, that strategy didn't work so well then, either.
I'm a stickler for historical details, so here's a little more data for your sweet-tooth, thanks to Coomes: "Americans for Limited Government's authority to do business was revoked Feb. 1 to Sept. 22. Between Feb. 24 and Sept. 21, it donated $992,000 to the Arizona Home Owners Protection Effort. The organization made another donation Oct. 2 to bring its grand total to more than $1.1 million. From all donors, the pro-Proposition 207 group raised more than $1.3 million."
I wonder if anyone has developed a comprehensive list of the expenditures made by Rich and his paper committees during that unfortunate period of distraction and "oversight"? If anyone has and there's an online link, wouldya send it to me?
Meanwhile, columnist Jim Nintzel is ready for the silly season to be finished. He, too, sees Rich's hand in Arizona's affairs here http://www.tucsonweekly.com/... and is none too excited by it. "Will voters see through the bullshit campaign for Prop 207, the so-called AZ Homeowners Protection Effort, or AZHOPE? The initiative campaign's $1.3 million-plus has come mostly from Americans for Limited Government, a front group for New York City bazillionaire Howard Rich, who is bankrolling initiatives across the country," he writes. "Although it purports to protect ordinary citizens from government condemnation proceedings, the darker side of the initiative would hamstring local planning efforts. Even the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association and the Tucson Chamber of Commerce don't like this one."
Arizonan Karl Winkler of Tucson echoes Nintzel's sentiments here http://www.explorernews.com/... writing, "Proposition 207 is bad news for everybody, especially small towns and wildlife. Prop. 207 is funded with over $800,000 from Howard Rich in New York who is a wealthy developer. Rich's money has been funneled through a group in Chicago called Americans for Limited Government, which had its non-profit status revoked by the Illinois Secretary of State. Prop. 207 goes way beyond eminent domain. Prop. 207 will also disrupt every day, normal zoning measures in cities, counties, environmental, historical, heritage areas, etc."
"The so-called exemptions are very limited," Winkler explains. He has a his own theory about what Prop 207 is and what it's designed to do, he says: "Prop. 207 is a way to confuse voters and to manipulate state governments, resulting in more wasted taxpayer money. Prop. 207 is a way for corporations to gain control in governments."
CALIFORNIANS continue to learn of Rich's reach into their state, as reported by G.W Schulz here http://www.sfbg.com/.... But Schulz wonders whether Rich's vaunted ideology, celebrated as a holdover from the Libertarian Party of the 1970s, has a more banal and current source: Grover Norquist.
"As of late September, the pro-Prop. 90 Protect Our Homes Coalition had spent $3.4 million on its campaign, most of the expenditures covering campaign literature, phone banks and petition circulators. Nearly half of the money -- $1.5 million -- came from a group known as the Fund for Democracy, which was founded by a wealthy New York libertarian activist and real-estate investor named Howie Rich," Schulz reports. "The advocacy group has bankrolled anti-government ballot measures across the United States including a handful aimed at capping annual spending for state governments."
"The other large contribution of $1 million to the Prop. 90 campaign came from the Illinois-based Americans for Limited Government. ALG helped fund an attempt to impose revenue caps on Oklahoma lawmakers last year, but that was shot down after a company hired by the group Oklahomans in Action to gather signatures was caught illegally bussing in petition circulators from out of state," he goes on. "So far, Protect Our Homes has spent a whopping $1.8 million just to circulate petitions in California and tens of thousands more on campaign consultants, according to state records."
"Large contributions to Protect Our Homes also came from the ALG-supported group Montanans in Action ($600,000), the Illinois-based and pro-TABOR Club for Growth State Action ($220,000) and Colorado at its Best ($50,000). Most of the large contributors have some sort of link to Howie Rich."
But, Schulz notes with interest, "The San Francisco Chronicle concluded early last month that some of Rich's political groups have received money from Norquist in the past."
Hmmm... So did TABOR and its axis of anti-American sentiments come from behind Door Number One, Howie Rich of New York City; or from behind Door Number Two, Grover Norquist of Washington, D.C.; or from behind Door Number Three...?
Moving eastward:
EVIDENCE SUGGESTS that I was right when I said here http://www.dailykos.com/... that Nebraska hasn't seen this much excitement since Ed Perkins invented Kool-Aid in Hastings in 1927. Alongside the excitement, reporters tell us, has come an influx of about $4 million to Nebraska's economy, thanks in largest part to Rich and his wild-west pardner, Laird Maxwell. The Associated Press reports here http://www.yankton.net/... as a matter of fact, that "supporters and opponents of a proposed constitutional amendment to cap state spending have raised nearly $4 million.
"Stop Over Spending Nebraska, which is pushing the lid, has received nearly $1.6 million in contributions. Of that, some $1.4 million came from a Montana group headed by a conservative political operative from Idaho, according to records filed with the state Accountability and Disclosure Commission. The group, America At Its Best, is headquartered in a Kalispell, Mont., law firm. The chairman of America At Its Best is Laird Maxwell, a Boise, Idaho, political activist and lobbyist who also leads an organization called Idahoans for Tax Reform."
Better not trumpet that news too loudly, mind you, or the pro-TABOR folks will argue that even before the votes are counted, TABOR has been good for Cornhuskers. (You know they will. That us what they do...)
Speaking of Maxwell, I want to offer a grand shout-out to Larry Grant who returned the favor to your Sandlapper here:
http://larrygrant.typepad.com/... in honor of soon-to-be-former-Idahoan. Will we have to adopt a new label for him, to replace "Howie Rich's wild-west pardner"? Perhaps a re-naming contest is in order.
I AM especially impressed with the note that University of Nebraska President James Milliken sent to university students a couple of weeks ago. I apologize that I have no link to any online publication of Milliken's letter, but in lieu of a link to the full text, I'll just reprint the full text with all credit to the author, President Milliken:
"You are no doubt aware of ballot Initiative # 423 (also referred to as the spending lid), which will be on the November 7 general election ballot in Nebraska. Although as a public employee I am prohibited from using public resources to advocate support or opposition to a ballot question, I am allowed to provide an objective analysis of the potential impact of Initiative 423, and to encourage you to actively express your views as private citizens and to vote.
"Our budget office has analyzed the potential impact of Initiative 423 on the University of Nebraska and on projected tuition rates. This information can be found at www.nebraska.edu/423. I urge you to review this and consider its implications. In short, the analysis demonstrates that the proposed spending lid could result in sharply higher tuition and reductions in important university programs and services.
"Our analysis shows that if the spending lid had been put into effect 10 years ago, the university's state appropriation for 2007 would be $134 million less than it is today. This amount (30% of the state general fund budget for the entire university system) is roughly equal to the entire state appropriation for the UNL city campus this year. For additional perspective, consider the impact that students felt from the budget cuts taken by the university in 2001-03. Those cuts, which totaled about $50 million, led to tuition increases of 10%, 10%, 15% and 12% from 2001-04 for resident undergraduates, and even higher increases for non-resident students. For the last two years, due in large measure to stronger state support, we have been able to hold tuition increases to a much more moderate level.
"Maintaining affordable access to education is the university's highest priority - one which will almost certainly be affected if Initiative 423 would pass. To make up the difference that would result from the Initiative 423, our budget office projects tuition could rise as much as 57% in the next two years.
"There are, of course, many other implications of such a spending lid apart from its impact on higher education. There is debate -- and uncertainty, to be sure -- about its impact on property taxes, local services such as police and fire departments, K-12 education and more. You should consider the arguments regarding these important issues as well.
"Between now and November 7, I encourage you to study the proposed spending lid, which will become part of our state constitution if approved by the electorate, and to voice your opinion on this initiative through personal contacts, letters to the editor of your local newspaper and other opportunities in your part of the state. There is no issue on the ballot this year that is more important to the future of the University and the State of Nebraska."
Needless to reiterate, I'm impressed at Milliken's objective analysis of the potential impact of Rich's TABOR on the lives of Nebraska's college students and their families. And I'm grateful to my Nebraskan correspondent for the text.
NOW, BEFORE I go on to tonight's review of the news from Maine, indulge a brief detour to South Carolina once more. It's so glaringly out of order in Rich's ballot measure activity this year, that it begs attention when the man devotes such time and resources to its politics.
Columnist Ross Shealy asks here in The State http://www.thestate.com/... on Halloween, "Have you ever seen a one-man costume party? If not, take a close look at the most recent campaign finance disclosures. When you do, you'll see that the millionaire who finances the South Carolina voucher lobby is playing dress-up for Halloween. New York libertarian Howard Rich is busy using an arsenal of disguises to bankroll private school tax-credit supporters here in the Palmetto State."
"It works like this: Rich makes the maximum legal contribution of $3,500 to a pro-voucher candidate, under the name of `Bradford Management.' Then he makes another contribution, to the same candidate, as `Spinksville LLC.' And then he makes another, as `Ashborough Investors.' Then another, as `405 49 Associates' -- you get the idea. And there are more: Spooner LLC. Bayrich LLC. Dayrich LLC. 538-14 Realty LLC. West 14 & 18 LLC. 123 LaSalle Associates. Just to name a few."
"Some of these shell companies list Howard Rich's Big Apple apartment as their primary address. Others purport to be located at an alternate address, but have a `principal' address at his New York residence."
Constant reader, if you're thinking what I'm thinking, Shealy's assertions sound an awful lot like a conscious, intentional subversion of a state's laws. Sounds like Shealy draws the same conclusion: "One point of all this masquerading is to bypass our state campaign contribution limit. Rich is the kid who solicits candy at your doorstep, changes his mask and knocks again. And again and again and again. Only Rich isn't begging for sweets, he's giving out wads of out-of-state voucher cash."
So who is benefiting from Rich's largesse?
"Superintendent of education candidate Karen Floyd's disclosures, available online at the State Ethics Commission Web site, are an out-and-out Howard Rich costume ball. The Manhattan developer contributed $13,000 to Floyd during the past three months, and more than $55,000 so far this year," Shealy tells us. "It's the same trick Rich used to funnel money to several State House candidates in the June primary. It's the same tired ploy he has used to furnish Mark Sanford with more than $30,000 so far this campaign."
Then Shealy catches onto what he discovered in our own cursory studies earlier this year: "Playing dress-up is nothing new to Howard Rich. His favorite pastime seems to be paying for organizations around the country and disguising them as grass-roots efforts. There's `Oklahomans for Good Government.' It's a convincing-enough name, until you see who funded the group's million-dollar pet initiative. More than $600,000 came from Rich; actual Oklahomans contributed less than 1 percent to the cause. Then there's Missourians in Charge. This Kansas City group masquerades as `grass-roots,' but is also funded almost entirely by Rich. Rich has plowed more than $2.3 million into the group's bank account; actual Missourians furnished only $150. And there's Montanans in Action, an outfit in Big Sky Country, also financed by Rich."
Wow. You think this guy's been reading your Sandlapper?
"Which brings us to the Palmetto State," he says. "Here, the major lobbying group for Gov. Sanford's twice-failed voucher bill `Put Parents in Charge' gets squeamish when asked to show its funding. `South Carolinians for Responsible Government,' as the group calls itself, would rather sue the state than tell us whether it is just another deceptively named Howard Rich subsidiary. Like those other groups, SCRG wants people to think it is `grass-roots.' But it's easy enough to see where SCRG is really rooted."
"Howard Rich chairs the `Parents in Charge Foundation,' which calls itself a `key participant' in the S.C. voucher effort. SCRG's first executive director was a former `field representative' of Howard Rich's `U.S. Term Limits'." Field representative, heh heh. I love these euphemisms.
Shealy continues, "Rich's masquerading goes beyond playing sugar daddy to candidates and state puppet groups. His assortment of national funds is as impressive as his list of shell companies. US Term Limits. Parents in Charge. Fund for Democracy. Club for Growth State Action. Americans for Limited Government. Legislative Education Action Drive. The point is, it's easy to get tangled in this spider web of out-of-state cash. Figuring out which fund Howard Rich uses to float which puppet group can be mind-numbing. If the groups hide their funding, it can be nearly impossible. That's no accident. Besides skirting contribution limits, there's a more fundamental purpose behind this shell game."
"That purpose is to hide the fact that Rich's initiatives are fueled by an ideology that loathes government, abhors public schools and despises the state laws that stand in its way. It's essentially Halloween in reverse -- the benign masks are there to hide the extremist ideology that lies beneath. Howard Rich's cash is the lifeblood of our state's voucher lobby, and there's plenty of money available for those who will cater to his cause."
Dingdingding. Give that man a Kewpie doll.
Funny thing, constant reader: While Rich is doling out the cash by the wheelbarrow to Floyd, the candidate for schools superintendent, it turns out that someone in her own family is supporting her opponent, as reporter Bill Robinson tells us here http://www.thestate.com/....
"Republican Karen Floyd's stepmother contributed $100 last week to Democrat Jim Rex in the state superintendent of education race, a decision that prompted Floyd's father to send her an identical donation Tuesday. Jean E. Kanes wrote the Rex campaign a check Friday, and her donation is included in a summary of campaign contributions compiled for a mandatory report for the State Ethics Commission."
"I am a Democrat. I support Jim," Kanes tells Robinson, referring to her step-daughter's opponent for statewide office. "I believe our state needs somebody of his quality and experience. I wish Karen well. I believe very strongly this is an important position an educator should hold."
Uh-oh. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at that Thanksgiving dinner this year...
Reporter Tim Flach tells us that Rich is spreading the last-minute love even further here http://www.thestate.com/....
"Kit Spires' race for a Lexington County legislative post is fueled by donations from out-of-state sources with an agenda promoting state aid for private school students. Spires received $6,000 from six New York companies affiliated with Howard Rich, leader of a group whose causes include private school assistance," Flach writes.
Flach apparently had an email conversation with Rich himself, who told Flach - come on, you know the words by now, sing it with me - "My interest is in helping individuals who take a stand for reform and are open to new ideas. Mr. Spires was recommended to me as such a person by a number of friends, so I was glad to help him."
And because one gentle reader caught a previous post noting Rich's generosity to South Carolina's Governor Mark Sanford, my correspondent sent me this review of Sanford, beatified in the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal by none other than Stephen Moore, last seen bestowing similar treatment on the president of Koch Industries. You'll forgive the lack of an online link; I don't subscribe to the WSJ in more than one respect.
"Just when you thought that there weren't any small-government conservatives left in the Republican Party, along comes South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, who may be the only politician in America this year under assault for governing as a fiscal tightwad," Moore gushes. "What's really unusual about Mr. Sanford's bid for re-election is that some of his most formidable adversaries are the old bull politicians in his own party."
Ah, he's a hero who fights the uphill battle against his Republican brethren, while covering his downhill flank against the nipping of the Democrats. This is beautiful. To create a real mythical hero, the author must set his protagonist on a solitary quest without ally or aid, and Moore has this shtick downpat. But to humanize him at the same time, there must be the flash of humor, sometimes mistaken for quick wit, and Moore serves us up this slice of ham to suffice:
"The state's Republican Senate Finance Committee chairman Verne Smith, for example, has just cut a campaign ad for Tommy Moore, the Democrat running against the governor. The ad slams Mr. Sanford for his attempts to squeeze too much grease from the state budget. Mr. Smith has evidently never forgiven him for dramatizing the legislature's overspending by holding a press conference inside the state Capitol in Columbia with two squealing pigs: one named `Pork' and the other `Barrel'." Man, you can't buy cleverness like that in a brown paper bag, you know.
"He has vetoed hundreds of spending bills, including the entire budget in 2004 and 2006 -- although almost all of these vetoes were overridden by -- who else? -- the state Republican House and Senate. `If I weren't fighting the legislature on overspending, I wouldn't be doing my job,' he says about this intraparty squabbling. Then he adds: `Frankly, I wish there were more of this budget strife in Washington.' Words for George W. Bush to live by."
"This is the lingering complaint about Mr. Sanford (which he readily concedes): He `doesn't play in the sandbox well with others.' Even some of the governor's first-term supporters, who at first liked the idea that this former three-term congressman would shake up the stuffy political establishment in Columbia, have come to regard Mr. Sanford as too abrasive and self-righteous."
"Just last week South Carolina's largest newspaper, The State -- which endorsed him four years ago -- published a scathing denunciation charging among other things that the governor `doesn't want government to be more effective as much as he wants it to be cheaper,' and that his first term has been all about `tax cuts and privatizing everything he could -- even the schools.' The fiercest indictment: `He had run as a conservative . . . but [is] as close to an ideologically pure libertarian as you can get.' Egads!"
Egads, indeed. I feel lightheaded. And it gets even worse.
"But with qualifications like his, it is no wonder that a number of leading conservatives across the country, disgusted with GOP gorging on pork and deficit spending, are looking at Mr. Sanford as a potentially attractive new entrant into the 2008 presidential race."
O, snot.
Judicious reader, this purple prose continues, and I urge you to go to your public library - by all means, don't buy a copy yourself - and catch the rest of it. You'll want to skip dessert the night before, as this will give you enough of a sugar rush.
Before we leave South Carolina, I have to forward one priceless resource Google sent me from there: http://stophowardrichsc.blogspot.com/. You'll thank me for this.
Now, on to the great Northeast.
MAINERS now know who's been behind the TABOR ballot measure in their state, thanks to reporter Trevor Maxwell of the Portland Press Herald, who writes here http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/... that "Americans For Limited Government, the think tank chaired by New York libertarian Howard Rich, finally emerged in October as the biggest supporter of the TABOR campaign. The think tank donated $100,000 cash, plus about $12,000 in-kind, on Oct. 3. The money funded purchases of television, radio and print advertising, said campaign spokesman Roy Lenardson."
"Rich's group has reportedly given about $3 million this year to supporters of TABOR-style initiatives in other states. But until last month, it had only donated $20,000 to the cause in Maine despite giving TABOR significant support on its Web site. In August, the group awarded its activist of the year award to Mary Adams of Garland, leader of the pro-TABOR campaign. Bill Becker, who helped draft the legislation as president of the Maine Heritage Policy Center, also spoke at the Americans For Limited Government annual conference."
Nice how everything gets tied together with a neat bow like that. I have a sneaking suspicion that a bunch of folks already figured Rich was behind the Maine TABOR. If it was really Mary Adams's idea, she probably would have promoted it during her 1996 campaign for governor - you know, way back when no one from Rich's network knew who she was or likely even cared. That was well before she was their "Activist of the Year." Poor Mary Adams. Wonder what she'll do when they drop her and move on to the next vehicle.
BY the way, the editors of the Denver Post are highly amused that their governor, Bill Owens, has become such a star on the Maine airwaves. Having watched TABOR undermine their state's economy for more than a decade, then having watched Bill Owens himself lead the fight to suspend the law, they gagged at the television ad featuring Owens and now running in Maine. You'll love this one: http://www.denverpost.com/....
"Last year, Gov. Bill Owens railed about outsiders `trying to buy this election' as the Washington, D.C., anti-tax lobby poured money into a doomed effort to defeat Referendum C, the five-year TABOR correction that he championed. This year, it is Owens crossing state lines, poking his nose into Maine politics, where he supports a TABOR-light initiative. Owens stars in an ad that tells voters: `The Taxpayer's Bill of Rights has been a tremendous success here in Colorado - more jobs, lower taxes and young people choosing to stay in our state'."
"Really?" the editors ask. I'm cracking up here, pardon me. This tickles me.
"A group opposed to Maine's version of TABOR wasted no time putting up a response ad featuring, yes, Owens, as he appeared in last year's pro-Referendum C campaign, saying that `Colorado is in trouble' because of a glitch in TABOR. `After a billion dollars in cuts, we still face a budget crisis,' he said.
"You call that a glitch?" the ad says.
I hope you'll read the whole editorial, but they wrap with this note: "It's up to Maine's voters to decide if that's the future they want. For us, we're glad voters chose the TABOR timeout and restored funding for Colorado transportation, higher education and health care."
Mmm-hm. I got tears in my eyes, constant reader. Plumb tears.
Speaking of Colorado, Mainer Karen Heck of Waterville has been paying attention and declares here http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/... that "there has been a steady stream of Colorado Republicans and owners of businesses coming to Maine to warn us not to make the same mistake they did about TABOR."
"It's odd to me that some Maine business people and Republicans continue to believe TABOR (Taxpayer Bill of Rights) is somehow opposed only by liberals, non-profits and local governments," she observes. "Robert K. Scott is president of McWhinney Centerra, a community real estate development firm in Northern Colorado, past president of the Greater Colorado Springs Economic Development Corp., past president and life member of the statewide Economic Developers' Council of Colorado and has served on the board of the American Economic Development Council. Doesn't sound like a liberal, non-profit, government employee to me. He says the Colorado business community ultimately became a strong voice against TABOR, spearheading the effort to suspend TABOR. Why? Because TABOR was hurting potential job growth by undermining state services that employers demand. A quality higher education system and well-maintained infrastructure are critical elements of regional and global economic competitiveness, but TABOR caused serious declines in these services over the years."
And she remembers the visits of Steve Johnson, "the assistant minority leader (Republican) of the Colorado state Senate worked to get his home state's version of the initiative repealed because he says, `TABOR severely reduced needed services in the state of Colorado' and `Maine's proposal is worse'."
As if to illustrate the power that would be delivered to a distinct minority under TABOR, Waterville Mayor Paul LePage issued a veto recently to the anti-TABOR resolution approved over his objections by all of his city councilors. And as if to illustrate the legitimate principle of majority rule - and further to illustrate the rule of law, which trumps the rule of (one) man - those councilors overrode LePage's veto, as Colin Hickey reports here
http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/....
Taking a page from Howie Rich's philosophy of media relations, Hickey writes, "LePage did not attend the special meeting -- called for by Council Chairman Dana W. Sennett, D-Ward 4 -- because of business commitments."
Hickey explains, "Stephen R. Aucoin, D-Ward 7, was the councilor who sponsored the resolution of opposition to TABOR. Aucoin, speaking before the override vote, said he wanted to express the chief reason he dislikes the spending restriction initiative. `I just wanted to point out that this resolution for me at least is focused on the issue of replacing one person, one vote with veto power by the minority. We live in a democracy, and a democracy is one person, one vote'."
I've saved the very best for last.
Now, if there is any single fact that may lead directly to the defeat of Rich's TABOR in Maine, it is not the castigation of Maine's Catholic Bishop Richard Malone -- voice of the Almighty Himself through His Eminence the Holy Father, and thence to America and even Augusta, Maine -- issued a statement against it, or even that the Christian Science Monitor weighed in against it last week. Nope. Nor is it any one on the long list of individual and collective luminaries whose titles carry weight in most polite company. Indeed, constant reader, it is this: The Maine Library Association has announced its opposition to Howie Rich's ballot measure.
Perhaps, to the heathen, this means nothing. But no constant reader worth his library card will deny the power of the librarian, who guards zealously the collection, who can read one's motives in whispers from great distances, who lives a secret life among the stacks that we workaday types can only imagine... and envy. Mmm.
Well, the staff of the Village Soup in Waldo, Maine, report here http://waldo.villagesoup.com/... that those allied librarians have issued a statewide shush to Howie Rich's TABOR, Mary Adams's grandstanding notwithstanding.
"The Maine Library Association has opposed the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, saying the one-size-fits-all attempt to limit taxes could put public libraries in jeopardy. The Maine Library Association said TABOR would diminish the ability of Maine citizens to make decisions about local spending in their own communities and prevent libraries and other public agencies from maintaining acceptable levels of service," reports the Soup.
"TABOR will limit Mainers' access to information and increase the digital divide. Simply put, closed libraries do not educate Mainers," says Nikki Maounis, president of the Maine Library Association. Reading, she said, is still a basic survival skill in today's high-tech world.
"Libraries are all about education, and we can't help provide a quality education if we are shut down or open only a few days a week. We cannot help provide an educated work force if we are not funded because of municipal cuts," says Maounis, who is also director of the Rockland Public Library. "Our message is simple: Taxes are a problem for all of us, but TABOR is the wrong solution."
I think that's all that needs to be said about that.
Credits, please:
ARIZONA
http://www.azcentral.com/...
Reporter Jessica Coomes, "Groups linked to Prop. 207 backer investigated"
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/...
Columnist Jim Nintzel, "The Skinny"
http://www.explorernews.com/...
Arizonan Karl Winkler, "No on Prop. 207"
CALIFORNIA
http://www.sfbg.com/...
Reporter G.W. Schulz, "The Prop. 90 money trail: Who's behind the measure? Start with Grover Norquist"
COLORADO
http://www.denverpost.com/...
Editors, "TABOR pops up in Maine"
MAINE
http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/...
Mainer Karen Heck, "Many business owners also rejecting TABOR"
http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/...
Reporter Colin Hickey, "Council overrides LePage veto of TABOR condemnation"
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/...
Reporter Trevor Maxwell, "Groups spending big to oppose TABOR"
http://waldo.villagesoup.com/...
Associated Press, "Maine Library Association opposes TABOR"
NATIONAL
http://blogs.usatoday.com/...
Contributor Mary Zeiss Stange, "Life, liberty and property rights"
No link:
Editorialist Stephen Moore, "Supply Side: The Sanford Model"
NEBRASKA
http://www.yankton.net/...
Associated Press, "Nebraska Spending Lid Supporters, Foes Raise Nearly $4 Million"
No link:
Message from University of Nebraska President James Milliken
SOUTH CAROLINA
http://www.thestate.com/...
Reporter Tim Flach, "Spires buoyed by out-of-state gifts"
http://www.thestate.com/...
Columnist Ross Shealy, "Rich's one-man costume party"
http://www.thestate.com/...
Reporter Bill Robinson, "What family ties? This is politics: Floyd's stepmother donates to Rex's campaign for S.C. education superintendent"