Vote Smart . Org

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Jan 11, 2008 9:26 PM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

Hey long time anyone heard from me. Maybe some of you already know about this web page if not it's a great way to see who's record match's up to what they say or if they match up to what you want from your candidate.Hope to see some of you guys out there this election I will be out and about.I went part time now I have more time to put my two cents in.
                                                             Tony
http://votesmart.org/index.htm

John Ensign, voted against the $360 million for the armored vehicles

Written by: Anthony Ronci on May 10, 2006 5:52 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

Here something that Jack Carter can hammer Ensign on.He voted against armor on military vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan and to increase Health care funding for medical care to Vets.Lets see Mr.Rap the flag around himself and say Republicans own the patent to all patriotism get out of this.This something I would love to see Ensign try to explain.

Tony

www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/r...


www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/r...

Ensign votes against troops, vets
The Senate, or at least nine-tenths of it, was pretty pleased with itself after passing the whole torture-is-bad amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill Wednesday night. Some senators even got their handsome mugs reproduced in newspapers.

Lost in the shuffle were votes on a couple other amendments to the appropriation measure, including one to increase funding for armored vehicles protecting troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Of course, Republicans support the troops more than the rest of us. Just ask a Republican.

And yet, 42 GOP senators, including Nevada's John Ensign, voted against the $360 million for the armored vehicles.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, in a rare nanosecond devoted to something other than shaking down campaign contributors, helpfully cobbled together evidence of GOP senatorial hypocrisy: Kyl, Frist and Dole have all made public statements about the need for more armored vehicles, and yet all voted against the amendment.

Fortunately, enough Republicans voted with the Democrats to put the armored vehicle amendment over the top.

Unfortunately, an amendment to increase funding for veterans health care failed. Even more Republicans - 50, actually - voted against that, again, including Ensign. The DSCC notes that this is at least the fourth time this year that Republicans have blocked increased funding for veterans medical care, citing a vote in March and two votes in April. And yes, on each of those occasions, Ensign voted, no, no and no.

Of course, the Senate process can be Byzantine and convoluted - for example, a senator might vote against one amendment because he or she prefers another that achieves effectively the same purpose in a different way. That's just one of scores of reasons that it's not always fair to take a vote here or a vote there and use it to distort a senator's position.

So it's probably not right to point at these several votes highlighted by the DSCC and level the blanket charge that John Ensign is against protecting the troops on the ground and doesn't care what happens to them when they come home. After all, if senators' votes were presented to the public in distorted, twisted fashions during a campaign, why, a senator running for president might be accused of voting for, oh, gasoline tax increases eleventy-jillion times, or, say, voting for an $87 billion supplemental defense spending bill before he voted against it, or...hmm.

On second thought, John Ensign and most of his Senate Republican colleagues are against protecting the troops on the ground and don't care what happens to them when they come home.

Sandra Day O'Connor rips into GOP, DeLay, Cornyn, and warns of the

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Mar 14, 2006 8:26 PM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

Read what former Justice O'Conner had to say about the G.O.P leadership.Nowhere hardly in media has this story been reported.
Tony
www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytoo...

Honest Leadership

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Jan 19, 2006 2:00 AM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

Link

From Harry Reid

I have been in public service for over 40 years and never been as disillusioned as I am today. In 1977, I was appointed chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission. It was a difficult time for the gaming industry and Las Vegas, which were being overrun by organized crime.

During the next few years, there would be threats on my life, FBI stings and even a car bomb placed in my family's station wagon. What is happening today in Washington is every bit as corrupt as when Las Vegas was run by the mob, but the consequences for our country are worse. These Republicans have created the most corrupt government in our history. Their "K Street Project" is a shakedown machine that would make the mafia blush. We cleaned up Las Vegas, and we will clean up Washington DC.

Today, Democrats from Howard Dean in Ohio to Nancy Pelosi and me in Washington are declaring our commitment to a government as good and honest as the people it serves. To achieve that vision, this morning we introduced the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act. Our tough, real reforms go beyond the public relations fixes Republicans suggest.

For example, a key proposal in the Act, known as "The Jack Abramoff Rule," will ban staff and members from receiving gifts, meals and travel from lobbyists. This is not just about talking the talk; we are going to walk the walk, right now. Last night I told my staff that even though this bill is not yet law, our office will follow its provisions starting today. I am going to lead by example, and I challenge George Bush to do the same.

Join me, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and hundreds of Democratic elected officials from around the country by signing the Honest Leadership Pledge. Our goal is to have one million Americans join us in this commitment to honest government:

Link

Republicans will be introducing their own ethics legislation. Quite frankly, having Republicans trying to clean up the mess in Washington would be like asking John Gotti to clean up organized crime.

There is a price to pay for the culture of corruption, and we can see it in almost every major issue facing our country. Big Oil, protected by Republicans, reaped $100 billion in profits in 2005 while middle class families are paying more for gas, heat and other needs. Take the state of health care. There are the HMOs that benefited from the $10 billion slush fund in the Medicare bill. On the other side are seniors who face gaps in their coverage and skyrocketing prescription drug costs.

And then there is our national debt. On one side are the special interests and the multimillionaires who have received tremendous tax breaks over the last five years. On the other side are our children and grandchildren who will pay for these tax cuts when they inherit billions in debt.

We are seeing what happens when lawmakers and lobbyists conspire to put the needs of special interests before the needs of the American people. Democrats will put a stop to the culture of corruption -- period.

Join us and sign the Honest Leadership Pledge today by visiting:

Link

Thank you,



Harry Reid

P.S. I know similar emails are being sent today by a variety of Democratic organizations. If you are receiving multiple emails on the same topic, it is only because this issue is so important, we are banding together, as a party, to address this issue in one voice.

Link



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maryland Law Targeting Wal-Mart Could Ripple Across U.S.

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Jan 16, 2006 12:45 AM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

Published on Saturday, January 14, 2006 by Knight Ridder
Maryland Law Targeting Wal-Mart Could Ripple Across U.S.
by Tony Pugh

WASHINGTON - Maryland's bold new law requiring Wal-Mart and other large companies to increase health care coverage of their workers has given new life to supporters trying to pass similar legislation nationwide.

The state's Legislature on Thursday passed a law that directs firms with more than 10,000 employees to spend at least 8 percent of their payrolls on employee health benefits. The law targeted Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, whose low pay and scant benefits have drawn widespread criticism.

In at least 30 other states, plans are under way to draft and introduce similar "fair share" laws. A proposal in Rhode Island would require companies with 1,000 or more employees to spend 8 percent of their payrolls on health benefits. A bill in Washington state would require companies of 5,000 or more to spend 9 percent of payroll on employee health care.

In each state proposal, affected companies that don't meet the payment threshold would have to pay the difference into a state fund to assist the uninsured.

Maryland's law, which overcame fierce opposition from Wal-Mart and a veto by Republican Gov. Bob Ehrlich, prompted cheers from activists across the nation.

"Just (from) the level of calls we're getting from supporters today, everyone's excited. I certainly think what happened in Maryland will help the momentum here in New Hampshire," said John Thyng, director of New Hampshire for Health Care, a Concord-based organization that also backs a measure requiring an 8 percent spending threshold for firms with 1,000 or more workers.

To rein in state Medicaid costs for the uninsured, which now rival spending for education, supporters say it's important that large companies provide adequate coverage for workers and their families.

The percentage of businesses that offer health insurance has declined for five straight years, according to a 2005 report by the Kaiser Family Foundation. The cost of health insurance premiums has gone up 73 percent, the Kaiser study found.

But groups such as the state and national chambers of commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business have strongly opposed "fair share" measures, saying they could scare new jobs away and cause the number of existing jobs to dwindle if cash-strapped employers can't afford the mandated coverage.

Fair share laws also don't address the problem of the uninsured and rising health care costs, said Helen Darling, president of the Washington Business Group on Health, which represents the health care interests of more than 200 large employers that provide health coverage for more than 51 million people.

"We're very concerned about states taking steps like this, which really is a mandate on businesses," Darling said. "They ought to be working on a way to deal with the uninsured, and this doesn't make sense as a way to do it."

Opposition to Maryland's law was led mainly by Wal-Mart, which employs nearly 17,000 people in the state. Three other firms in Maryland employ 10,000 or more people, but they're now spending at least 8 percent of their payroll costs on health coverage.

A Wal-Mart spokeswoman blamed passage of the bill on partisan politics.

"In allowing a bad bill to become a bad law, the (Maryland) General Assembly took a giant step backward and placed the special interests of Washington, D.C., union leaders ahead of the well-being of the people they serve. And that's wrong," said Sarah Clark.

The Maryland Chamber of Commerce has claimed that the new law violates the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act, which supersedes "all state laws insomuch as they ... relate to any employee benefit plan."

Dan Fogelman, a Wal-Mart spokesman at the company's headquarters in Bentonville, Ark., said the company could challenge the law.

"I'm sure that's something that our attorneys are looking into as we decide our course of action," he said.

Supporters say they're certain the new law will stand.

Wal-Mart's spotty reputation for employee benefits may have hurt the company's effort to fight the proposal, but its deep pockets helped the company hire four lobbying groups to help sway lawmakers.

"Wal-Mart is an incredibly powerful corporation. And if you're picking a fight with the biggest bully on the block, it's going to be a harder fight," said Jonathan Parker, national director of Americans for Health Care, a project of the Service Employees International Union. The union is backing similar measures across the country.

Because most large employers already provide valuable employee health coverage, the impact of these laws won't be felt by many companies, said Ron Pollack, the executive director of Families USA, a nonprofit health care advocacy group in Washington.

"I think businesses that already provide good coverage are quietly saying to themselves that it's about time that companies like Wal-Mart fulfill the same kind of responsibility that we've been providing all along."

For more information about so-called "fair share" and "pay or play" laws, go to the National Conference of State Legislatures Web site at
Link

Safe prescription drugs from Canada for Neavda families and senior citizens.

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Jan 9, 2006 9:44 PM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

Safe prescription drugs from Canada for Neavda families and senior citizens.Sorry here is the link please pass it on.
Link

Safe prescription drugs from Canada for Neavda families and senior citizens.

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Jan 9, 2006 9:41 PM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

A coalition of groups is petitioning the pharmacy board to reject Chanos' preciously nit-picked opinion that attempts to derail Nevada Legislation allowing the importation of relatively inexpensive prescription drugs from Canada.

In addition to doing an awful lot for the visibility of Jon Ralston's TV show, the Chanos decision has prompted the Nevada Alliance for Retired Persons, the Retired Public Health Employees of Nevada and the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada to demonstrate at Pharmacy Board offices in Las Vegas and Reno Thursday. And Monday the coalition unveiled a petition that you can sign online that will be delivered to the Pharmacy Board. It goes like this:

Please do not allow an opinion by Attorney General George Chanos prevent the implementation of legislation establishing a state-run web site where Nevadans can purchase lower cost, safe prescription drugs from Canada. This legislation was passed last year by legislators in both parties and both houses and signed into law by Governor Kenny Guinn.

Please vote on January 12 to let the website and our ability to purchase drugs from Canada to move forward. Nevada families and senior citizens need affordable prescription drugs now.

To sign petition click here please pass this onto as many people as you can. Link

Emergency Petition to Filibuster PATRIOT Act!

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Dec 8, 2005 11:34 PM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

House and Senate negotiators have struck a deal on reauthorizing the USA PATRIOT Act, leaving many of the bill's worst provisions intact. Before leaving for recess, several senators were threatening to filibuster this legislation if it contained these provisions. Let's call on them to go all the way to fight for our civil liberties!

Tell your senators to filibuster the USA PATRIOT Act by signing this emergency petition!

Link

If passed:

… the Justice Department will retain the authority to investigate American citizens without judicial oversight, a power that is invoked more than 30,000 times each year.
… the government will still be able to search individuals' private property without notifying them.
… authorities will still be able to search citizens' library records, medical records, school records, and financial records virtually unchecked by the judiciary.
The Senate has an opportunity to take a stand for one of Americans' most cherished traditions --the right to be free from government intrusion.

Tell your senators to filibuster the USA PATRIOT Act by signing this emergency petition!

Link

-- Your Allies at People For the American Way

Sign Our Petition to Stop Alito

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Dec 7, 2005 10:42 PM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

Sign Our Petition to Stop Alito

Link

President Bush wasn't willing to stand up to the far right -- now it is up to the American people and our senators to stand up for the Constitution. Sign our petition urging your senators to oppose Alito's nomination to be associate justice of the Supreme Court.

Dear Senators,

The Senate must reject President Bush's attempt to reward right-wing special interests by nominating Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court of the United States. Alito's record as an ideological activist would make his confirmation a threat to civil rights protections, reproductive and privacy rights, environmental protections, religious liberty, and laws safeguarding workers.

I urge you to vote not to confirm Samuel Alito to a lifetime position on the Supreme Court of the United States.

Save Our Last Wild Forests: Restore the Roadless Rule

Written by: Anthony Ronci on Dec 7, 2005 9:08 PM EST

Linked to groups: Las Vegas Democracy For America

14,610 people have signed our petition so far -- show you care about protecting our last wild national forests! Sign today!

Link

On May 13, the Bush administration repealed the widely supported Roadless Area Conservation Rule, opening nearly sixty million acres of America's last wild national forests to logging, road construction, mining, oil exploration, and other forms of development.
Duncan Canyon: Tahoe National Forest Jim Rose


Hikers, fishermen, hunters, and millions of other Americans considered the 2001 Roadless Rule one of the greatest forest conservation measures in U.S. history. Now, conservation-minded Americans throughout the country are joining together to file an official petition with the Bush administration demanding reinstatement of the original Roadless Rule.

The petition declares that:

America's last roadless national forests belong to all Americans. All of our remaining roadless areas should be protected, completely and permanently, through the reinstatement of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule of 2001.
Please sign your name today! The conservation community wants to collect half a million signatures to present to President Bush and the Department of Agriculture on the fifth anniversary of the signing of the Roadless Rule - January 12, 2006.

Tell me more
Full Petition Text:
Michael Johanns, Secretary
US Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., SW
Washington, DC 20250

Dear Secretary Johanns:

I strongly oppose the Bush administration's recent decision to revoke the Roadless Area Conservation Rule and replace it with a burdensome and uncertain state petition process. Protecting the 58.5 million acres of National Forest Roadless Areas is a core responsibility of the U.S. Forest Service to all Americans. It should not be contingent on action by state governors.

The Roadless Area Conservation Rule was the product of a massive public involvement process that included more than 600 public meetings and generated more than 1.6 million comments from the American people. More than 95 percent of those comments supported a strong nationwide policy protecting all National Forest Roadless Areas.

More Americans supported the Roadless Area Conservation Rule of 2001 than any other federal rule in U.S. history. And more Americans opposed the Bush administration's rescission of that rule than any other rule revision in history.

The American people have loudly, clearly, and in great numbers expressed their desire that you protect the clean water, undisturbed wildlife habitat, and backcountry recreational opportunities our remaining national forest roadless areas provide. And they have made clear that they do not want more of their taxpayer dollars to go toward roadbuilding in wild areas when there is already almost $10 billion in existing maintenance needed on forest service roads.

The Forest Service's rationale for such a rule is as valid today as it was in 2001. It ended decades of conflict. It helped the agency direct resources to its priority responsibilities. It halted expansion of a decaying, 400,000 mile forest road network that has saddled taxpayers with a $10 billion maintenance backlog. And it assured that the broader significance of nationally scarce roadless areas would not be overlooked through local decision-making.

Therefore, I hereby petition you to withdraw the decision of Under Secretary Mark Rey, published on Friday, May 13, 2005, revoking the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule and instituting a state petition process. I make this request pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires each federal agency to "give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule" (5 USC 553(e)). And please do not allow or reinstate any forest-specific exemptions from the 2001 rule, like the prior one for the Tongass rainforest.

Please promptly consider this petition and notify me of your decision, as required by 7 CFR 1.28.


Signed by:
[Your name]
[Your address]