My Own Personal Sit In

It took a while for me to gain possession of these clips, but here I am in my own personal sit in when people who were rallying for undocumented immigrants, and, illegals themselves I assume, had told me that they were going to take their country back and that I should leave.

Houston Grind: True to Form, Media Downplays Leftist Violence in AZ Protests

True to Form, Media Downplays Leftist Violence in AZ Protests

by Lori Macomber - 26th April 2010 12:32 pm
in News 
edit

The new illegal residence law recently passed in Arizona brought out large crowds protesting the legislation on Saturday.   A crowd reported to be around 3500 college students gathered in Phoenix to protest against the new legislation saying that it will unfairly profile Arizona’s Hispanic-American population.  Not surprisingly, the tone of the protest is not being reported as anything like the claims of protests at all the Tea Party rallies in the past year.  In fact, on late Saturday night in a Google search, the sole internet media reporting the actual tone of the protesters  was Al-Jarzeera Magazine Online.

Al-Jazeera Magazineis  a news outlet that has a particular focus on events and issues in the Middle East..

Not one American internet outlet was reporting that there were arrests, that protesters were throwing rocks and water bottles, harrassment of police and security forces, and particular torment to the few who bravely stood in support of Arizona’s tough crackdown on uninforced Federal illegal immigration laws.

The protest published by the Boston Globe’s Boston.com late Saturday night described not the angry crowd at the protest but chose rather to focus on describing the legislation as “draconian” and “discriminatory”, and that it would make a specific ethnic group fearful:

Although the local media in Phoenix was covering the event on television, the AP, the AFP and Reuters all failed to mention that the participants engaged in any of the behavior that has been alleged by themainstream media to have been demonstrated at all of the Tea Party Protests. Instead, the focus is on the “rights” of the immigrants who have not entered the United States legally.

This coverage of the protest in Arizona is an small example that the mainstream media is complicit in both the demonization of Conservative protesters and the  promoting the federal government’s agenda.  The larger message, however is that the event is portrayed as the sprouting up of a new “civil rights” movement(Hat Tip: Sweetness & Light).

Population estimates at granting all illegal immigrants amnesty range from 12-15 million people.

Closet Skeleton Oddly Called Out

Several days ago, William Gheen posted this video claiming he was "outting" Senator Lindsey Graham (R - SC). Although I don't really care if Senator Graham is gay or not, I think the POINT Mr. Gheen was making is far more important. Gheen said that he was bringing up this point because he was concerned that Senator Graham's sexual orientation was being held "against" him as leverage for getting him to support the Cap & Trade and the Immigration Reform Legislation, which publicly, he does. This may not have been the proper way to make his point, either, but again, the point being made stands to be examined, especially after so many behind closed doors were being made when the Health Care Reform Legislation was being pushed and debated. Many Democrats who claimed to be pro-life changed their vote from a supposed belief in supporting the innocent, defenseless unborn children to get airports, farm water, judgeships, helicopter rides, massive amounts of campaign money, and promised direct or nepotism-secured federal jobs after they're booted out of office.

What would make someone who supposedly opposes (warning: graphic) this switch? What dark secrets might the rest of some of these people be hiding?  Or am I mistaken and most of these Washington DC public servants are honest and virtuous persons? At this point being a closet homosexual or a cheating spouse is probably light fare compared to some of the dirty dealings a good number of our elected representatives have engaged in.  Get ready for, I am hopeful of this anyway, the money-laundering, Enron-on-steriods scam of the century to be made public when it comes to the Cap & Trade scheme.  That one goes all the way to the top.

So what I am saying is there needs to be more William Gheen moves.  Whoever knows anything, start talking.  Make what you know known, because we certainly don't have a media anymore that is willing to do a job of the All The President's Men calibur.

In the meantime, I'll keep praying for evil to be revealed.  And, I'll pray for Senator Graham too.

Meet The Patriots

In a report dated April 2010, "Meet The Patriots," the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has profiled 40 people claiming they are at the heart of a "resurgence movement". These individuals, says the SPLC, are "people who generally believe that the federal government is an evil entity that is engaged in a secret conspiracy to impose martial law, herd those who resist into concentration camps, and force the United States into a socialistic 'New World Order'."

The SPLC claims on their website: The Southern Poverty Law Center is a nonprofit civil rights organization dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society.

Founded by civil rights lawyers Morris Dees and Joseph Levin Jr. in 1971, the SPLC is internationally known for tracking and exposing the activities of hate groups. Our innovative Teaching Tolerance program produces and distributes – free of charge – documentary films, books, lesson plans and other materials that promote tolerance and respect in our nation’s schools.

Obviously, I have problems with this.
The word "patriot" is defined on dictionary.com as:
–noun
1. a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion.
2. a person who regards himself or herself as a defender, esp. of individual rights, against presumed interference by the federal government.

Yet, the SPLC defines their version of "Patriots" as people who spread hate speech. But at the same time while declaring that they fight against it they state about Wisconsin Representative Michele Bachmann: "When it comes to spreading fear of a menacing federal government infested with anti-American elements, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann can give even the most paranoid militiaman a run for his money;" or, of World Net Daily's editor Joseph Farah: "Farah is a veteran practitioner of conspiracy "journalism," having repeatedly hawked the tale of the supposed cover-up of the death of Clinton aide Vince Foster – thought to be a murder, not a suicide, by anti-Clinton conspiracy-mongers like Farah and his ilk."


The 40 names that are targeted in the SPLC report:
1. Chuck Baldwin, Pastor, Radio Broadcaster, Syndicated Columnist, 2008 Constitution Party Presidential nominee.
2. Joe Banister, former IRS special agent, tax protester.
3. Martin "Red" Beckman, tax protester
4. Catherine Bleish, head of the Liberty Restoration Project.
5. Chris Broughton, Second Amendment advocate, member of "We The People" group.
6. Bob Campbell, head of American Grand Jury.
7. Robert Crooks, Army veteran, retired commercial fisherman, anti-illegal immigration proponent.
8. Joseph Farah, CEO of World Net Daily
9. Gary Franchi, producer of "Camp FEMA: American Lockdown," national director of RestoreTheRepublic.com.
10. Al Garza, head of the Patriot's Coalition, an anti-illegal immigration group.
11. Ted Gunderson, retired FBI agent.
12. John Hassey, "The public face of Alabama's militia movement in the late 1990s," says SPLC.
13. Alex Jones, Radio Talk Show host.
14. Devvy Kidd, "prolific columnist, blogger, and public speaker."
15. Larry Kilgore, telecommunications consultant, former US Senate candidate from Texas, pro-secession advocate.
16. Cliff Kincaid, syndicated columnist and author, editor of AIM Report (Accuracy in Media's publication), founder and president of America's Survival, Inc., a UN watchdog group.
17. Mark Koernke, associated with the now-defunct Michigan Militia.
18. Richard Mack, former Graham County, Arizona, Sheriff, author, and public speaker.
19. Jack McLamb, former Phoenix, Arizona, police officer, author, and public speaker.
20. John McManus, former member of the US Marine Corps, president of the John Birch Society.
21. Daniel New, father of Michael New (the Army medic who refused to wear a UN uniform), author, public speaker.
22. Norm Olson, founder of the now-defunct Michigan Militia.
23. Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America.
24. Stewart Rhodes, Army veteran and Yale Law School graduate, founder of Oath Keepers.
25. Jon Roland, computer specialist, founder of the Constitution Society.
26. Luke Rudkowski, founder We Are Change.
27. Robert "Bob" Schultz, founder of We The People.
28. Joel Skousen, editor, World Affairs Brief.
29. Jim Stachowiak, Radio Talk Show host, "Longtime militia organizer," claims SPLC.
30. John Stadtmiller, founder, Republic Broadcasting Network.
31. Orly Taitz, California attorney, a leader in the push to make President Obama disclose his US birth certificate.
32. Amanda Teegarden, executive director of Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise.
33. Mike Vanderboegh, anti-Obama health care activist.
34. Paul Venable, former candidate for the Idaho House of Representatives.
35. Edwin Vieira, Jr., attorney, author, proponent of constitutional State militias, lecturer.
36. Michele Bachmann, US Representative from Minnesota.
37. Glenn Beck, Fox News Channel TV host.
38. Paul Broun, medical doctor, US Representative from Georgia.
39. Andrew Napolitano, attorney, former State judge in New Jersey, Fox News Channel legal analyist, lecturer.
40. Ron Paul, former member of the US Air Force, medical doctor, US Representative from Texas, 2008 Republican candidate for President.

41. The Conservative Mom, resident of Texas.

Refuting How Things Work

an exellent rebuttle, in four parts:









source: How The World Works

The Patriot's Guide: What You Can Do for Your Country

I have found this very well-organized list avery useful guide, published by  The Heritage Foundation.

The Patriot's Guide: What You Can Do for Your Country
Published on March 24, 2010


Get Involved
Practice the Virtues of Self Governance:
1) Be a responsible citizen;
2) Care for your family;
3) Practice your faith and defend your religious liberty;
4) Join organizations and volunteer in your local community;
5) Start a business and invest in America.

Voice Your Opinion:
1) Vote;
2) Write letters and comment online;
3) Contact your elected officials;
4) Call radio shows;
5) Participate in local town-hall meetings, tea party activism and local assemblies.

Encourage Discussion:
1) Start a blog or Web site;
2) Challenge liberals with fact-based arguments;
3) Encourage the media to represent conservative principles;
4) Encourage candidates and elected representatives to learn more about conservative ideas; 5) Get conservative editorials and letters in your local newspaper;
6) Support teachers, educational programs, and schools that teach the truth about America and its principles.

Spread the Word:
1) Talk to your family and friends;
2) Join social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter;
3) Bring issues you care about to your civic, social, church, or business groups;
4) Celebrate America’s heritage and distribute pocket Constitutions.

Join the Conservative Movement: 
1) Support think tanks and institutions fighting for conservative principles and polices;
2) If you are a student, apply for an internship, such as the year-round program at The Heritage Foundation. These programs are designed to foster young leaders and help them grow as part of the larger conservative movement.

Rediscover the Principles of Liberty
We Still Hold These Truths: The future of liberty depends on reclaiming America’s first principles. Read We Still Hold These Truths: Rediscovering Our Principles, Reclaiming Our Future, a powerful overview of those principles—how they developed, what they mean, and the debate over their status today. Get a copy of the study guide that accompanies the book, appropriate for self-study, as a teaching manual or as the basis for a discussion group.
The Heritage Guide to the Constitution: Free citizens must understand the extent of their rights and the constitutional limits on the powers of government. Get The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, an easy to understand line-by-line examination of the Framers’ Constitution and its contemporary meaning.

Reading the Right Books: Keep reading and learning! Reading the Right Books is an annotated bibliography of thoughtful books (on history, politics, literature, economics, statesmanship, religion, public policy, and modern conservative thought) recommended as a guide for intelligent, conservative-minded readers who want to prepare themselves for a public life of thought and action.

Follow the Important Issues of the Day
Stay Informed:
1) Go to Thomas.gov and review pending legislation;
2) Track local issues with organizations such as the American Legislative Exchange Council or the State Policy Network;
3) Follow several organizations on Facebook and Twitter so you can get all sides to every story.

Find the Organization That Is Right For You: There are many conservative organizations out there. Decide what issues matter most to you, and then support the appropriate institution. Check out http://www.policyexperts.org to help narrow your search.

Go to Heritage.org: 
1) Sign up for the Morning Bell at Foundry.org; 
2) The Foundry blog at Heritage promotes conservative policies and principles by marrying the best in public policy research with every day’s current events; 
3) Read and share our Fact Sheets, which give overviews of the complex issues of our day; and 
4) InsiderOnline.org maintains a searchable database of policy research, publications, and legal actions throughout the nation.

I Have a New Hollywood Hero

Can't wait for this. Good for you, Kelsey Grammer. I'm looking forward to adding yet another channel to my repertoire that has almost completely overtaken television as a source of information.

Tax Day Tea Party 4/15/2010

Photo Essay by Eddie G.

http://www.photoshow.com/watch/Zh3pT4zm

Not Presidential - But That's a Good Thing

This was not a great speech, but it was a good one. Governor Perry gets the RINO thing, or at least he is paying it lip service here. He doesn't sound presidential. But I like that. He needs to stay right here in Texas and keep governing - we're doing pretty well here. God Bless Texas!

Governor Perry's Speech at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference:

Health Care Law Doesn't Require Individuals to Buy Insurance?

Sometimes, all I need to do is repost a story from somewhere else.

Every day, there is a barrage of items that come at us from the Radical Left Front. Today, I'm actually going to count how many rounds I considered fired at me as an intended free citizen of an intended free country.  This is the first on the list today, which came at me the minute I turned on the AM station I listen to in the mornings.

Rep. Wasserman Schultz Insists Health Care Law 

Doesn't Require Individuals to Buy Insurance

CNSNews.com

Wednesday, April 07, 2010

By Matt Cover, Staff Writer

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D.-Fla.) is insisting that the new health care law she voted for last month does not mandate that individuals buy health insurance, despite language in the law that plainly says otherwise.

At an April 5 town hall meeting in Fort Lauderdale (see video below), a constituent asked Wasserman Shultz where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance. She responded that the new health care law did not require individuals to buy health insurance.

In a written statement to CNSNews.com on Wednesday, her press secretary, Jonathan Beeton, said it was true that the health care law did not mandate that individuals buy health insurance and that Wasserman Schultz stood by her assertion at the townhall meeting.

“We actually have not required in this law that you carry health insurance,” Wasserman Schultz said at the townhall meeting.

The bill Ms. W-S voted for and helped to pass reads a bit differently, however.  The new law actually amends the IRS code (this is our tax law) to add a new chapter: ‘‘CHAPTER 48—MAINTENANCE OF MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE ‘‘  and section 5000A:  “Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage.” - DRScoundrels, 4/7/2010

“Yes, this is accurate,” Beeton said in his statement to CNSNews.com. “You have a choice of insuring yourself with affordable coverage, or paying an assessment that will offset the burden you place on other insured Americans and taxpayers by not being insured.”

Wasserman Schultz said at the townhall meeting that instead of an individual federal mandate, the law merely created new tax categories that would reflect who carries insurance and who does not. “What we did is that--just like when you’re treated--that they categorize you differently in terms of your tax return when you’re married versus single, just like we categorize you differently when you’re a homeowner versus someone who doesn’t own a home; just like we’ve categorized you differently when you have children versus not having children,” she said.

“What we’re doing is that you will be in a different tax status if you carry insurance versus not carrying health insurance,” said the congresswoman. “So you can feel free to choose not to carry health insurance -- that’s just going to be reflected in the tax category that you’re in on your tax return.”

To drive her point home, Wasserman Schultz again stated that there was no requirement to buy health insurance. “But there is no requirement in this law that you must carry health insurance,” she said.

The actual law she voted for says otherwise. It contains a requirement that each person have health insurance, and assesses a penalty if they do not.

The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code, the nation’s tax law, adding a section entitled, “Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage,” section 5000A.

“Subtitle D of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new chapter: ‘‘CHAPTER 48—MAINTENANCE OF MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE ‘‘Sec. 5000A. Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage.”

Contrary to Rep. Wasserman Schultz’s claim, this section of the law requires that every individual certify to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that they have a government-approved level of health insurance coverage.

“REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE.—An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month,” the law reads.

Individuals who fail to compy with this "requirement" are assessed a “shared responsibility payment”--a fine collected by the IRS.

“SHARED RESPONSIBILITY PAYMENT.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—If an applicable individual fails to meet the requirement of subsection (a) for 1 or more months during any calendar year beginning after 2013…there is hereby imposed a penalty with respect to the individual in the amount determined under subsection (c).”

That penalty will be no more than $750 per person who does not have health insurance, up to a maximum of $2,250 per household or two percent of household income, whichever is greater.

The law does not create additional tax filing statuses--like the current married or single-filing status--nor does it mandate that not having insurance would place an individual in a different tax bracket, as the mortgage and child deductions can.

“INCLUSION WITH RETURN.—Any penalty imposed by this section with respect to any month shall be included with a taxpayer’s return under chapter 1 for the taxable year which includes such month,” says the new law.

Conservatism Out Loud, and At Home!

The following article is my debut article in an new conservative on-line magazine called Houston Grind. Let me know what you think, and be sure the visit the new site!

In what is often described as a 5,000 year leap, the United States Constitution was a unique and inspired document that dared declare something no other treaty had before: that as people we have certain inalienable rights, that those rights are endowed by our Creator, and that in fact no governmental authority comes between that connection. Then the writers penned just 18 specific limited powers delegated to the government. All else was to belong to states or to the people.

Conservatism, according to the Miriam-Webster Online Dictionary, is defined in simple terms as the tendency to prefer an existing or traditional situation to change. In terms of disposition, conservatives desire to preserve what is established, with a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions. Specifically, conservatism calls for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs. As conservatives, we are confident that judicial interpretation of the Constitution supports those specifics.

For quite some time in our country’s history following the established independence and framework, the electorate sent people to Congress who were interested in liberty and the laws of nature. An un-distracted people were concerned with confining their government, to be sure that it didn’t interfere with our civil liberties, our property rights or our natural rights as given by nature’s God. They recognized their called-upon responsibility to stay engaged with those the elected to the represent them. In time, as we grew to accommodate hundreds of diversions that constantly grab our attention, we found that we had perpetuated a huge distance between ourselves and our elected public servants.

Bridge the above-referenced definition a desire to preserve what is established with the intentional framework set forth by the Founders and the uniqueness of the document that so boldly declares the unalienable rights, we become conservatives. This is stated explicitly in the 9th Amendment to the Constitution: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Herein lies our standard by which we measure most things: we believe the individual prevails over the government: the government of the country, the state, the county, the city. The magic of that 5,000 year leap is that it is brought subjacent to the most local levels of dominion. Conservatives believe this, they want it known and voiced at a place to share.

I am, in my disposition and political philosophy, a conservative individual. Houston is full of these conservative people. Welcome to Houston Grind, a place where the conservative voice will be heard.

By the Numbers: Lobbying by Any Other Name...

In my continuing effort to counter the main-stream media disinformation about everything Obama, I visited the CPI site this morning motivated by the rhetoric from liberal progressive democrats: "The foremost thing on everyone's mind is that they are concerned about their health care."  Really?  Well, if you put it that way...yeah, I am.  The company my husband works for just announced that at a minimum the health care "reform" will cost them 150 million dollars in the first quarter alone.   So in essence, yeah, "Health Care Reform" is on my mind.  H*ll, I helped fight its passage for the past 14 months, and I'm still at it.  And while the MSM continues to abuse the airwaves with propaganda like I have never seen in my lifetime, take a look at the corruption behind the scenes.  We have corruption in the government like I've never seen in my lifetime, too.

From: The Center for Public Integrity




The Top Twelve Health Reform Lobby Firms...
Below are the top 12 firms, based on the number of clients they represented on health reform in 2009. However, the total dollar amounts listed for contracts may include lobbying on multiple issues beyond health care reform. The disclosure documents analyzed by the Center included “health reform” or similar wording but lobbyists are not required to delineate how much money in a given contract is devoted to a specific issue.

· No. 1
Patton Boggs LLP
53 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $7,675,000
Washington’s biggest lobby firm, Patton Boggs represented Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Florida’s Pinellas County, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.
Founded in 1962, the law firm’s current chairman, Thomas Hale Boggs, Jr., is the son of former House Majority Leader Thomas Hale Boggs, Sr.
· No. 2
Alston & Bird LLP
40 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $4,610,000
The Atlanta-based firm represented Aetna Inc., Verizon Communications Inc., and Safeway Inc.
A 900-lawyer firm, its partners have included golfer Bobby Jones, former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, and Neal Batson, who was appointed examiner for bankrupt Enron Corp.
· No. 3
Foley Hoag LLP
32 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $4,064,500
Represented mainly pharmaceutical companies including Pfizer Inc., Eli Lilly & Co., Merck & Co., and Amgen Inc.
Founded in 1943, the firm has nearly 225 lawyers; antitrust, corporate, and intellectual property work have been recognized as strengths.
· No. 4
Tie
Podesta Group Inc.
28 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $5,160,000
Represented a diverse group of medical and other interests, including Davita Inc, Novartis AG and Nestle USA.
Chairman Tony Podesta was one of two lobbyists on GQ’s 2009 list of the 50 most influential people in Washington. His brother, John Podesta, was President Bill Clinton’s chief of staff, and created the think tank Center for American Progress.
· No. 4
Tie
Capitol Tax Partners LLP
28 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $3,640,000
Represented Time Warner Inc., Kraft Foods Inc., and Delta Air Lines Inc.
A consulting firm, Capitol Tax focuses on tax policy and regulatory issues and says it offers clients "an intimate, first-hand knowledge of the tax-writing committees and the Treasury."
· No. 4
Tie
Holland & Knight LLP
28 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $2,840,000
Clients included the Association of Critical Care Transport, Health First Inc., and the Florida Hospital Association.
The 1,150-member law firm has offices in a dozen U.S. cities, China, Israel, Mexico, UAE, and Venezuela.
· No. 5
Tie
Dutko Worldwide LLC
25 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $3,740,000
Represented, among others, insurer United Health Group, drugmaker association PhRMA, and medical device firm Medtronic Inc.
A lobbying and public affairs firm, Dutko has offices in 10 U.S. and European cities. The company was acquired last November by London-based Huntsworth Plc, which also focuses on health care issues.
No. 5
Tie
Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
25 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $1,950,000
Represented National Psoriasis Foundation, National Association of County and City Health Officials, and American Association of Bioanalytics.
With 700 lawyers in a dozen U.S. offices, the firm’s clients are concentrated among health care providers, pharmaceutical firms, asset managers, and transportation industries.
· No. 6
Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti Inc.
24 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $3,490,000
Represented Mayo Clinic, Merck & Co Inc., and Hewlett-Packard Co.
The government affairs firm was founded by Bruce Mehlman, former general counsel to the House Republican Conference; Alex Vogel, former chief counsel to then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist; and David Castagnetti, a senior strategist in John Kerry’s presidential campaign.
· No. 7
Tie
Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP
23 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $2,620,000
Represented mostly health care clients, including California Association of Physician Groups, Lance Armstrong Foundation, and Dynavox Inc.
A century-old law firm, it has more than 700 lawyers in offices throughout the United States and Europe.
· No. 7
Tie
Bryan Cave LLP
23 clients
How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $2,240,000
Represented Blue Shield of California Life and Health Insurance Co., Puerto Rico Federal Affairs Administration, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, and American Academy of Family Physicians.
The firm has more than 1,000 lawyers in offices worldwide.
· No. 7

Tie

Van Scoyoc Associates

23 clients

Represented health care interests and colleges, including University of Alabama System and University of Connecticut.

How much clients spent on health care and other issues in 2009: $1,630,000

Founded in 1990, the Washington-based government affairs firm began as a specialist in tax and appropriations issues and has since expanded to more than 20 areas ranging from agriculture to water policy.

The Center for Public Integrity

Washington Lobbying Giants Cash in on Health Reform Debate

While patients, taxpayers and lawmakers debate the impact of the health care reform law President Obama signed on Tuesday, one result of the epic battle is clear: a bonanza for K Street. And among lobby firms that worked the issue, the richest generally got richer. A Center for Public Integrity ranking of the top dozen with the most clients involved in health care last year reveals a host of high-profile Washington concerns — companies like Patton Boggs LLP, Alston & Bird, LLP, Holland & Knight LLP and the Podesta Group.  Read more...

New Center Story Names Top 12 Health Reform Lobby Firms

They are Patton Boggs LLP, Alston & Bird LLP, Foley Hoag LLP, Podesta Group Inc., Capital Tax Partners LLP, Holland & Knight LLP, Dutko Worldwide LLC, Drinker Biddle & Reath LP, Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti Inc., Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP, Bryan Cave LLP, and Van Scoyoc Associates.

The clients who hired these firms ranged from influential industry associations to small non-profit advocacy groups. Some hired more than one of the top firms to lobby for their interests. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, for example, hired Capital Tax Partners, Dutko, Mehlman, and 22 other outside firms, in addition to the group’s own in-house lobbyists. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. hired Patton Boggs, Podesta Group, Mehlman, and Bryan Cave.

About 1,750 businesses and organizations hired about 4,525 lobbyists, total — eight for each member of Congress — and spent at least $1.2 billion to influence health care bills and other issues, according to a Center analysis of disclosure documents that included “health reform” or similar wording. The exact dollar amount spent on health care reform remains unclear because lobbyists are not required to itemize how much money in a given contract is devoted to a specific area. But if only 10 percent of that lobby spending went toward health reform, the amount would total $120 million — and that’s likely a record for a single year’s spending on a particular issue, experts say.  Read more...

Lobbyists Swarm Capitol To Influence Health Reform

A Center for Public Integrity analysis of Senate lobbying disclosure forms shows that more than 1,750 companies and organizations hired about 4,525 lobbyists — eight for each member of Congress — to influence health reform bills in 2009. Visit CPI website here.

Viewer Be Warned!! Capitol Hill Rioting, Looting, and Sheer Lawlessness!*

April Fool 

*The public servants elected and working on Capitol Hill may actually be 

looting and behavinging lawlessly.


Hat Tip: Patriot Jack Cashill