Home The Website    Corruption Updates    The Database    The Archives    Link Clusters    Why    How to Help     Contact
Fight Corporate Media Liars


Posted: January 8, 2008, Draft edition

Previous Page: Page 143         All Archives               Next page: Page 145

Contact Us: Committeefordemocracy.org

1) The Articles linked below were Abstracted from the sources cited. After the abstract there's analysis and commentary, links to related articles, and a link to the database with suggested search terms.

This article posted on: 1-8-08, at 4:28 am, pst

Supreme court considers lethal injection

washington post, 1-8-08




I am only reprinting one small quote from this article, by Scalia:


(the context of Scalia’s comments involved returning the case to a lower court to test the effacacy of dropping pancuronium bromide, the second drug of the so-called “three drug cocktail,” to eliminate the specter of cruelty from executions due to this drug's potential unpredictability)

Washington Post article abstract:

Breyer and Justice David H. Souter suggested sending the case back to the lower court for an examination of the three-drug protocol compared with alternatives, something that was not done when the case was decided.

Justice Antonin Scalia strenuously disagreed, saying the process "could take years," while executions are put on hold. He also said a comparative analysis is unnecessary.

"This is an execution, not surgery," Scalia said, adding, "Where does this come from, that . . . in the execution of a person who has been convicted of killing people we must choose the least painful method possible? Is that somewhere in our Constitution?"


Committee commentary:

Yes, finding the least painful method possible is in the Constitution. It is in the 8th Amendment to the Constitution. It is simplicity itself:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

But that is not the question facing the court. What is facing the court is the contention that a malfunction in the drug’s effacy condemns a percentage of the condemned to a cruel end.

If returned to a lower court on that point, it is foreseeable that the two-drug solution, essentially a simple narcotic overdose, would be approved. That would take quite some time, and would likely be appealed, and end up before the Supreme Court again.

By accepting, if not promoting, cruelty in executions, Scalia’s line of reasoning would eliminate the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against cruelty to prevent the delay of sending the question through the federal judicial mill again.

By doing this, Scalia indicates that he will put expediency, and therefore his own beliefs, before the rule of law.

Don’t misunderstand me. I am not making a statement for or against the death penalty. I am pointing out that Scalia, supposedly an intelligent man, is intentionally employing intellectual dishonesty to pervert the course of justice, and subvert the clear meaning and intention of the 8th Amendment.

Independent of your position for or against the death penalty, this is dishonorable behavior. Scalia should be brought before Congress to answer for this insult to our Constitution.

I am appalled by Scalia’s demonstration of a complete lack of, if not understanding, then respect for our Constitution.

Disturbingly, the NYT article  (top of p.2) declined to quote Scalia’s open rejection of the Constitution’s prohibition against cruel or unusual punishment. But the Times did quote his rational for throwing the Constitution overboard:

“...Justice Scalia served notice that the conservatives on the court would be disinclined to take that route. “I’m very reluctant to send it back to the trial court so we can have a nationwide cessation of all executions while the trial court finishes its work,” he said, “and then it goes to another appeal to the State Supreme Court, and ultimately — well, it could take years.”

Because of the omission of Scalia's, "Where does this come from" utterance quoted above, the Times denies us the knowledge that Scalia is throwing out the Constitution to speed executions.

Neither the post or the times' articles explicitly reveal the contradiction inherent in Scalia's position.

To tell the truth, I am for the death penalty. I believe that all of our lives are on the line, at all times, and we are responsible not just for our actions, but our motivations behind our actions.

Defining what is bad, and deserves death is easy. But I have one reservation, well demonstrated by Scalia’s misuse of our law: we can’t trust our judicial system. Our polity is so corrupt that our judges, as Scalia’s statements prove, will put aside the law to achieve their ideological goals.

Our Justice system has been corrupted, and can not be trusted to deliver justice in criminal or civil cases, and is not sufficiently fair or honest to be allowed to kill anybody, let alone decide the outcome of fixed elections.

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?


Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., January, 2008

Top of Page

Also See:

Justices Weigh Injection Issue for Death Row, nyt, 1-8-08


Search the Corruption Database under

Speak your Mind here! Send your Comments about the Topic Above for Posting!

Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)



All Archives

Top of Page

2) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Speaker Nunez Will Endorse Hillary Clinton

bill bradley, 4-25-07

In a conference call this morning with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez will endorse the former first lady for president of the United States, according to sources close to the Clintons. Nunez will participate in the call with the frontrunning Democratic presidential candidate from a site at the Sheraton Grand Hotel in Sacramento.

“This is a great ‘get” for Hillary,” says a longtime friend of President Clinton and Senator Clinton of the 40-year old speaker. “Fabian Nunez is one of the brightest new figures in American politics. He is smart, he is charismatic, he is a leader on global warming, and he’s shown how to work across the aisle with a complicated guy like Arnold Schwarzenegger. What’s not to like?”

Nunez is one of the first major California Democrats to endorse in the early California presidential primary, which he, Governor Schwarzenegger, and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata worked successfully to move to February 5th next year. Only four much smaller states will vote before the Golden State next year: Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

“Hillary was already strong with Latinos,” says the Clinton friend. “With Fabian Nunez, she is that much stronger. He has a great network in LA and around the state.”

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

Nunez is a bribed, Paid Whore of the Special Interests and Corporations:

They are Enemies to Our Democracy, and a Threat to Our Rights

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., October 31, 2007

Nunez's World:

This is how politics work in California: The Corporations Bribe Nunez, Perata, and the rest of the Scum in our Legislature with campaign "contirbutions.". In return, Nunez, Perata, and the rest of the paid Scum in our Legislature use their power as lawmakers to serve the financial interests corporate masters.

Taxes, growth, water, communication, and every aspect of California policy has been sold by these dishonorable pimps. Our state government is little more than a crude tool of the rich and powerfull while In the meantime, these "Lawmakers" live like kings on their bribe money.

That's why California has fallen apart: Our politicians have sold our educational, medical, water, and electrical "systems," if they can even be called "systems" down the river to subsidize the profits of their bribers.

Nunez's image: Now and Then

Nunez likes to claim is is "one of us," an average middle-class American. In the past, Nunez has claimed, during his life before the Assembly, that he is an enemy of America, and represents the vanguard of a Mexican Revolution-in the United States-that will destroy White America and reestablish "Atazlan."

Nunez's old rhetoric just drove the anti-Immigrant forces in California Completely Crazy.

Just who is Fabian Nunez?

He is not a man of the people, either of mexico or America. Nunez is a man who represents the marriage of corrutpions that typifies how the "New" Californians are just a whole lot more of the same old shit.

Fabian is one of the new "players," the seekers of exceptional wealth and power, who have crawled out of the mass of crimigrants, and they are reaching high office by combining the worse elements of crimigration with the most corrupted corporations in our state. Fabian is representative of politicians who exploit both crimigrants and corporate bribes to the great detriment to our state, and our country.

Nunez was a radical foreign activist when that led him to power. Nunez gave the crimigrants what they wanted to hear. I never understood how the millions of crimigrants helping our corporations rape our state can call themselves "Revolutionaries" without laughing out loud.

The Corporate-Foreigner Revolutionary Army? HA-HA.

Apparently it makes the foreign slaves who come here to serve the White Man for Dollars feel better if they tell themselves they came here to fight the White Man. Yeah, sure. If Fabian says so. But those days are over for Nunez.

Nunez is a corporate Bitch Now, now that he is able to sell his soul for a big share of the real power, wealth, and luxury that exploiting millions of crimigrants brings to our Corporate Masters.

Once in the Assembly, Fabian saw the Butter Was on the Other Side of the Bread. So Fabian instantly changed how he served the man. Instead of just fighting to keep cheap illegal labor flowing into our country, and keeping the impoverished masses of foreigners living in a false dream, Fabian became the man himself.

Now Fabian lives a life of wealth and power dependent on selling the government of our state to the highest bidder, while assuring the masters of labor in California have a massive state subsidized pool of impoverished foreign labor to profit from. Fabian has not changed. Fabian has just changed role he played in this standing comedy of lies and self-decptions we call our government.

It seems it's a lot easier for a slave like Nunez to become a master, than for a slave like Nunez to become free. Judging by Nunez's earlier rhetoric, and his present behavior, Nunez never has understood the principals this country is based on, only the sad practices that have betrayed our principals.

Rather than pretending to be a "Revolutionary" while maintaining floods of cheap state subsidized crimigrant laborers for the "Evil White Man," now Fabian has become the "Evil White Man," or at least his docile brown dog. Nunez is continuing the fight to flood the state with low cost subsidized labor, but now he is stuffing his pockets with cash, and his mouth with French food, while overstuffing our state with foreigners.

Fabian has settled the crimigrant identity contradiction; To fight the man you must be the man! As we can see from Fabian's life before and after entering the Assembly, if you shove yourself up a mexican elephant's ass, or an American elephant's ass you still smell like a piece of shit.

Has Fabian Changed?

Fabian has managed to merge the worse elements of both worlds, becoming a living link between the massive crimigration that has trashed our social services, destroyed our environment, and fucked our democracy, with the corrupt politicians that have allowed the corporate interests to use foreigners to steal our wealth and rights.

The Crimigrants and the Corporations depend on each other. Fabian represents a new generation of Democrats, the Corporate Democrats, who have forged strong bonds between our criminal corporations and the crimigrants. Both groups depend on the same abuses to maintain their positions, and the Dems are, yet again, selling our country down the river to foreigners and corporations to satisify their lust for wealth and power.

Fabian sold everyone out, except for his own love of power, wealth, and luxury. So, independent of what Fabian actually thinks, which may be dependent on his immediate needs, he is a traitor to our democracy, and represents the worse elements of American society: Those who will do anything for wealth and power. This is the bond that ties the crimigrants and corporations together. This is Fabian.

I don't believe that Nunes is an American, and the radical right's internet ravings demonstrate that I am not alone. Not good company, but they are as right on this issue as they are wrong about drugs, gay marriage, foreign policy and religion. But they are right about Fabian.

The mexican radicals in LA who looked to Fabian to lead the revolution against the White Man must be really disappointed. The ones who haven't sold-out with him, or he hasn't paid off with the fruits of his political corrpution must think he is a traitor.

And I sure as hell can't see any REAL working-class Mexicans (the real Mexicans, the ones in Mexico) viewing him as anything but a traitor to their culture and country.

Nunez, The Triple-FacedTraitor: American traitor, mexican radical traitor, and Mexican traitor.


Don't forget Billery's other local criminal supporter: De la Fuente:

SF Chronicle, October 26, 2007: De La Fuente's son sentenced to 14 years for sexual assaults: Pervert Son of Corrupted Political Hack Sentenced to Prison for multiple Rapes: Sr. has raped our Democracy, Jr. Rapes illegal whores: Let's do a family Reunion in Prison, then deport them both...


Newsome the fornicator also is a billery diehard: Makes sense, since billery has long tolerated fornicators.

Jan 9, 2008: Newsom and de la fuente just toured the mission to promote billery. It goes like this: vote for billery, and we will give away citizenship to anyone who sneaks into our country, obeys the boss, works for slave wages, and swears to obey this criminal government.

Are there any citizens or politicians who respect the rules (our country' constitution) of our once great democratic republic left in the country?

Top of Page

Also See:

Corporate politicians trade citizenship for votes, Hispanic business, 1-08-08


Corruption Updates 7, 2nd article on the page, Another Example of Corruption: Nunez Follows Pattern of Rewarding Family

Corruption Updates 23, 10th article on the page, ASSEMBLY TRIES TO TRADE CORRUPTION REFORM FOR MORE CORRUPTION: "term limit" fraud

Corruption Updates 24, 6th article on the page, Assembly members who bribe fellow Dems get choice assignments

Corruption Updates 29, 1st article on the page, Nunez, ASSEMBLY STEALS LIKE CORPORATIONS

Corruption Updates 24, 6th article on the page, POLITICIANS WHO BRIBE POLITICIANS ARE LEADERS


Hispanic Groups Reconsider Their Support for Gonzales, wp, 5-29-07

Corruption Updates 66, 1st article on the page, Nunez: Term-Limit Donations can't fail to catch Nuñez's eye


Nunez Lives Like a King on Corporate Bribes, lat, October 5, 2007

Nunez Pretends to be "Middle-Class" while living in luxury at public and private troughs, lat, October 7, 2007

Nunez and Perata Living Large on the Massive Bribes of the Special Interests, bee, October 9, 2007

Nunez Brags that his Bribes Pay his for Luxury rather than the State: but he still collects his per diem while whoring for the corporations, bee, October 13, 2007

Great News Clip of Nunez running away from the truth, and his own "Blackwater" security detail


Nunez lives with Political Fundraiser: Is there and separation between Nunez and his Corporate Bribers? ap, dec, '07


Arnie rejects Nunez's Fake Term Limit measure, Bee, September 17, 2007

Term Limit measure is a FAKE, a Deception by the Democrats to damage our democracy, bee, September 12, 2007

Good analysis of Term Limit/Redisticting proposals, bee, September 12, 2007

State dems pay Nunez's fancy wine bill: a lesser sin than Nunez spending campaign bribes on luxury, lat, 12-12-07


Call for Nunez corruption probe, bee, January 23, 2008


Term limit Fraud Defeated in CA, corrupt leadership thrown out of office, ap, February 6, 2008


Special interests buying politicians in Sacramento, bee, February 23, 2008

Marriage of Corruptions, billery and Nunez, bill bradley, 4-25-07


Fabian Nunez' real constituiency: crimigrants and criminal corporations, Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2008


Billery is a corporate whore: Links

Democrats are corporate whores, Links


Search the Corruption Database under



Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)



All Archives

Top of Page

3) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Health Spending Exceeded Record $2 Trillion in 2006


nyt, January 8, 2008





WASHINGTON — National health spending soared above $2 trillion for the first time in 2006 and has nearly doubled in the last decade, amounting to an average of $7,000 a person, the government reported on Monday.


With the advent of a prescription drug benefit in 2006, Medicare spending grew at its fastest pace since 1981, the report said.


Private health insurance spending grew at the slowest rate since 1997, and spending on Medicaid, which covers low-income people, declined for the first time since creation of the program in 1965.


Over all, the report said, health spending increased 6.7 percent in 2006, slightly faster than in 2005, and now accounts for 16 percent of the total output of good and services, a slightly larger share than in 2005.

Health spending by businesses grew 5.7 percent in 2006, to $496.8 billion, the slowest rate of increase since 1997.


Aaron C. Catlin, an economist at the Health and Human Services Department, said the “deceleration in employer payments for private health insurance” resulted, in part, from the fact that Medicare now subsidized drug costs for many retirees.


Employers lobbied for such subsidies when Congress created the benefit.


Retail spending on prescription drugs shot up 8.5 percent in 2006, to $216.7 billion, in part because more prescriptions were filled by Medicare beneficiaries, especially those lacking drug coverage in the past.


The increase was much greater than the 5.8 percent increase in 2005, but well below the average increase of 13.4 percent a year from 1995 to 2004.

National health spending first exceeded $1 trillion in 1995. Since then, even when adjusted for inflation, health spending has grown at a rapid clip, increasing 64 percent in 11 years.


The data, published in the journal Health Affairs, showed that spending on hospitals, doctors and nursing homes grew more slowly in 2006 than in 2005. But administrative costs increased more than twice as fast.


One reason is that private insurance companies have a larger role in Medicare, and they typically have higher administrative costs than the traditional fee-for-service Medicare program, federal health economists said.


Medicare spending increased 18.7 percent in 2006, to $401.3 billion, while spending on Medicaid, which is jointly financed by the federal government and the states, declined 1 percent, to $310.6 billion.


The new drug benefit contributed to an overall increase in drug spending and a profound shift in who pays. Public programs accounted for 34 percent of retail drug spending in 2006, up from 28 percent in 2005.


Medicare’s share of drug spending surged, to 18 percent in 2006, from 2 percent in the previous year, while Medicaid’s share fell to 9 percent, from 19 percent.


Private insurers, which manage the drug benefit for Medicare, negotiate discounts with pharmaceutical companies. The discounts were generally smaller than those provided under Medicaid, the report said.


Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?


Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., January, 2008

Top of Page

Also See:


Bush Assures Health Executives Continued Massive Profits, ap, March 22, 2007

Business wants state subsidies for health care, lat, May 7, 2007

Public sector reels at retiree healthcare tab, lat, 6-10-07

Term limit measure lures corporate health bribes: Nunez and Perata Collecting Corporate health Bribes to maintain Monopoly of Corporate Corruption in Sacramento, Bee, July 16, 2007

NYT, October 29, 2007; Health Sector Puts Its Money on Democrats: Billery Bought to the Hilt by Corporate Medicine: Expect all Medical Costs to Continue Rising after Election


compare Canada and US costs: wiki

Gramps Report

Krugman in 05

Search the Corruption Database under


public health



Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)



All Archives

Top of Page

4) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Huge tab for retiree health

Public employee costs will pass $118.1 billion in next 30 years, state panel finds.

By Gilbert Chan - gchan@sacbee.com

Published 12:00 am PST Tuesday, January 8, 2008




For the first time, California taxpayers have a fix on the total price tag for covering health care benefits for retired public employees over the next 30 years: More than $118.1 billion.


Public agencies have saved enough to meet just 22 percent of this massive tab, a special commission convened by the governor revealed Monday. By contrast, governments have enough money to pay for 89 percent of their long-term pension promises.

public agencies will be under pressure to reduce benefits, raise employee contributions and co-payments or close benefits to new workers to fund the bill. Taxpayers will likely lose some services as political leaders try to cover the costs.


If nothing is done, public agencies will see credit ratings and, consequently, their cost of borrowing increase. And, of course, the bill would mount as medical inflation continues skyrocketing and the baby boomer generation swells the ranks of retirees.


The $118.1 billion figure, reported by the Public Employee Post-Employment Benefits Commission, sheds new light on the enormous task ahead for political leaders in the statehouse and other halls of government. Before this report, only the state's liability was clear.


The health care costs emerge as the Legislature and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger prepare to grapple with a projected $14 billion budget shortfall and as dwindling housing values cut into property tax revenue appropriated to local governments.

The state of California, for example, now pays $1.36 billion a year to cover only the annual cost of health coverage for retirees. Right now, it isn't saving anything for the future, leaving the state to come up with $47.9 billion.


Parsky said that, if no savings or investments are made, the state's annual cost will grow to $5 billion over the next three decades. To fully fund its obligation today, the state needs to come up with another $1.23 billion a year.


For all California public agencies, the cost of paying for retirees' future health benefits is at least $118 billion, according to a commission survey. Some experts estimate the final bill could approach $150 billion.

Schwarzenegger said he will unveil a plan within a month. Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, D-Los Angeles, and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, pledged to come up with a plan to stabilize costs while preserving pension benefits.


California isn't alone in dealing with the issue. Nationwide, experts estimate the U.S. health care liability is close to $1.5 trillion.


Political leaders are now coming to grips with the massive liability because the Government Accounting Standards Board is requiring officials to account on the bottom line for it.



All Archives

Top of Page

5) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Pension Fund Shortages Create Hard Choices


NYT, December 19, 2007




Almost half of the states have been underfunding their retirement plans for public workers and may have to choose in the years ahead between their pension obligations and other public programs, according to a comprehensive study to be released to the public on Wednesday.


All together, the 50 states have promised to pay some $2.7 trillion in pension and retiree health benefits over the next 30 years, according to the Pew Center on the States, which spent more than a year studying the issue.


The amount does not include separate retirement plans run by local governments.

“It is a huge bill,” said Susan Urahn, managing director of the center, a nonpartisan research group that studies public finance and other civic matters.


By way of comparison, $2.7 trillion is roughly the value of all investments worldwide in information technology last year, one of the study’s authors, Richard Greene, said.


Ms. Urahn said that the magnitude of government legacy costs was poorly understood and that one of the center’s goals was simply to establish where things stood.


Until now, there has been a paucity of independent data, making state-to-state comparisons nearly impossible.

Unlike companies, state and local governments are not subject to federal pension laws, which set uniform standards for private industry. If a company skips its required pension contributions, it can be required to pay a big excise tax. No comparable enforcement mechanism exists for states.

At some point, the ailing retirement system can start to dominate the state’s overall finances, taking cash away from other important programs. Ms. Urahn said New Jersey was “a great example.”


“Large underfunded long-term liabilities put future budgets — and taxpayers — at risk,” the center said in its report. It said that paying each year’s required contribution was essential, even though doing so “requires a great deal of political fortitude and the kind of long-term thinking that is hard to come by, particularly in difficult economic times.”


The Pew Center on the States is a nonpartisan research body sponsored by the Pew Charitable Trusts.


All Archives

Top of Page

6) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

calif. Health plan resembles energy plan

By Dan Walters - dwalters@sacbee.com

Published 12:00 am PST Monday, January 7, 2008




Critics of the health insurance plan promoted by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democratic legislative leaders, including this column, have often likened it to the disastrous electricity deregulation scheme enacted in 1996.

Veterans of the months-long energy process, which was dubbed "Steve Peace's death march" for the former legislator who drove it, have, in a series of e-mails and other communications, disdained the comparison and denied that it was an insider game. But advocates of the governor's health plan deny that it, too, is something that was cooked up in the backrooms of the Capitol.

Not only were the processes similar – largely private negotiations with "stakeholders," as they are called – but the products bear a strong resemblance as well in that they are patchworks of concessions to various interests without a full explanation of the potential pitfalls.


Take, for instance, the health plan's imposition of a special tax on hospitals with a guarantee that they would recoup all of the money and then some through higher federal health payments. It's a hide-the-pea gimmick reminiscent of the energy plan's provision for a token decrease in consumers' power rates, financed with bonds that those same consumers would be repaying.


The energy plan assumed that wholesale power costs would remain low forever, so the state could safely commit its utilities to buying juice on the spot market, rather than relying on long-term contracts. The health plan assumes that if cigarette taxes are raised by $1.75 per pack, it will be a dependable source of revenue, even though common sense and past experience tells us that tripling cigarette taxes will reduce smoking and/or increase the traffic in untaxed black market smokes.


We have yet to see anything from either the administration or the legislative cheerleaders, such as Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, that delves into those or other questionable assumptions and downside risks, such as the high probability that the proposed health spending mandate on employers violates federal law. All we get are repeated assurances that it's all upside benefit – very much like we were told in 1996 that passage of the energy plan would reduce everyone's power costs.


The one big difference this time is that the Senate is not likely to rush to judgment like the Assembly. A number of senators voted for that 1996 energy bill and have lived to regret it. With Kuehl promising extensive hearings, the health scheme may get the critical analysis it deserves.


Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., January, 2008

Top of Page

Also See:


Search the Corruption Database under


Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)



All Archives

Top of Page

7) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Ad Watch: Perata, Núñez targeted on term-limits measure


Published 12:00 am PST Tuesday, January 8, 2008




Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata are targets of a television advertising campaign launched this week to kill a ballot measure that would alter legislative term limits.

The two 30-second spots feature mug shots and negative news headlines about Núñez and Perata, signaling that opponents of Proposition 93 plan to use the two leaders as symbols of legislative ineffectiveness and public dissatisfaction.

The following is a text of one ad and an analysis by Jim Sanders of The Bee Capitol Bureau:


•ANNOUNCER: Proposition 93 is a fraud created by two politicians, one under investigation for misusing campaign funds for lavish shopping sprees, and the other whose house was raided by the FBI in an ongoing corruption scandal.


Don't be fooled, 93 lengthens terms for 42 legislators.


Newspapers call 93 "self-serving," a sham to "preserve their opulent lifestyles"...


Whose "sole effect is to keep (the same) ineffective politicians on the job."


Save Term Limits. Vote No on 93.

Núñez, Perata and other incumbents would receive an immediate boost if Proposition 93 passes. A provision would allow them to serve a dozen years in their existing house, thus an extra six years for Núñez and four for Perata.


Núñez played a pivotal role in crafting Proposition 93, and his political consultant, Gale Kaufman, chairs the campaign to pass it. The measure was rewritten, after its unveiling, to ensure that Perata could extend his time in office.


The new 30-second TV ads attempt to capitalize on widespread dissatisfaction with lawmakers. A recent Field Poll found that only 38 percent of voters approve of the Legislature's performance.


Personally, Núñez and Perata have taken their lumps as well.


Núñez made headlines months ago after public documents showed that he had spent tens of thousands of dollars in campaign funds at upscale retail firms and on European trips, including purchases ranging from $2,562 for two "office expenses" at Louis Vuitton to $5,149 from a wine seller in France.


Opponents of Proposition 93 filed a complaint alleging misspending of funds for personal purposes, which Núñez has denied but the Fair Political Practices Commission has agreed to investigate.


Perata, since 2004, has been the subject of an ongoing investigation into whether he received outside income for influencing policy as a public official.


Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

Nunez Using Fraudulent Reform to Protect Party and his Political Ambitions

The article below was written for CU 56_9 on May 17, 2007

We need redistricting to restore any semblance of democracy in California.

We need to maintain term limits to maintain any semblance of democracy in California.

Term limits work. Without term limits the products of monopolized electoral districts are virtually impossible to remove.

Before term limits, California politicians either died in office, or got thrown in prison. Those were about the only ways to remove them.

Here's the Nunez angle: Pass the term limits on the flood of special interest bribes he's collecting as I write, and kill the redistricting initiative. It would be a "win-win" situation for Nunez.

Under the Perata Plan, there is no possibility of a "win-win," where Term limits are loosened, and redistricting is defeated. Under Perata's Plan either both pass or both lose. But Perata's plan avoids the possibility of a "Lose-Lose" situation that Nunez's plan risks.

The "lose-lose" scenario is defeating Nunez's bid to loosen Term limits, while passing the initiative to take redistricting out of the Legislature's dirty hands. Ironically, Nunez's "lose-lose" scenario is the preferred outcome for the health of our democracy, but not for Nunez or the Democrats.

Nunez's plan could blow up in his face under the "lose-lose" scenario, so why is he risking it?

Nunez wants to split the issues of Term Limits and Redistricting to please Pelosi, and the Democrat Congressional Mafia. They would prefer that redistricting not be on the ballot at all. But Nunez is sharp, maybe too sharp. By unwrapping Redistricting from Term Limits, Nunez can get it all, without trading Term Limit extensions for Redistricting, which is the heart of the Perata Plan.

Congressional Dems prefer that nothing be done to alter the Democrat's monopoly on California's Congressional delegation, which is assured under the current districting set up.

Top of Page

Also See

Term Limits

SF Chron on "term limits," 1-22-08


Arnie Flips:

Arnie rejects Nunez's Fake Term Limit measure, Bee, September 17, 2007

Arnie Flops:

arnie flips on dem power grab: supports extending terms, upi, 1-14-08


Term-limit ads attack nunez-Perata Corruption, bee, 1-8-08

Poizner pledges $1.5 million to defeat Nunez "Term Limits" FRAUD, LAT, Nov 7, 2007

Arnie rejects Nunez's Fake Term Limit measure, Bee, September 17, 2007


Term Limit measure is a FAKE, another Deception by the Democrats to damage our democracy, Bee, September 12, 2007


Good analysis of Term Limit/Redistricting proposals, Bee, September 12, 2007


Term limit petitions ready: Defeat Corporate Politician's Grasping for Monopoly of Power, Sac Bee, July 24, 2007


CA Dems Term-limit FRAUD, Bee, July, 20, 2007


Term limit measure lures health care donors: Nunez and Perata Collecting Bribes to maintain Monopoly of Corporate Corruption in Sacramento, Bee, July 16, 2007


Redistrict proposals all flawed, BEE, 6-5-07


Nunez, Donations can't fail to catch Nuñez's eye: Nunez and Corporate Bribers, Special Interests Craft Pact of Greed on Term Limit Attack, NY Times, 6-4-07


Leaders split over plans to redistrict: Nunez Using Fraudulent Reform to Protect Party and his Political Ambitions, BEE, 5-17-07




Term limits change has initial support: Party Leaders Agree: Term Limits Bad, BEE, 4-6-07


House Dems oppose Calif. redistricting measure, ap, 7-16-08



the basis of political power in Ca: Corporate Dems, Crimigrants, and Hippies: growing us to environmental disaster while feeding the beast of irresponsible corporate growth/consumption, alex, 11-07

Nunez' fraudulent term-limits initiative


The background:

Ca districts drawn by corruption, not democracy, bee, 12-3-06


Search the Corruption Database under


term limits


Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)



All Archives

Top of Page

8) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Gambling ad battle heats up: Foes claim measures amount to giveaways for four tribes


Gambling ad battle heats up: Proponents argue deals are vital to solving budget crisis


Both bee, 1-4-08


Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., January, 2008

Top of Page

Also See:

Gambling ad battle heats up: Foes claim measures amount to giveaways for four tribes


Gambling ad battle heats up: Proponents argue deals are vital to solving budget crisis


Both bee, 1-4-08


Search the Corruption Database under

Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)


All Archives

Top of Page

9) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Stricter campaign funds rules proposed

State ethics chief wants details when money is spent on gifts, travel.

By Judy Lin - jlin@sacbee.com

Published 12:00 am PST Tuesday, December 4, 2007




Politicians may have to reveal more about whom they're dining with, what gifts they're giving and where they're traveling under new proposals released by the state's chief campaign watchdog Monday.


Ross Johnson, chairman of the state Fair Political Practices Commission, proposed two new regulations that would require elected officials and candidates to state who's getting meals, gifts and out-of-state travel financed from campaign accounts.


A spokesman for Johnson said the proposals were aimed at closing long-standing loopholes in campaign disclosure laws.


"At times it was unclear whether expenses were being used for those purposes or for personal benefit," commission spokesman Roman Porter said. "This regulation makes it more clear to the public for them to determine whether expenditures are used for those allowable expenses."


Most recently, Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez has come under scrutiny for his use of campaign funds, traveling to Europe and South America. He has spent thousands in campaign money at Louis Vuitton in Paris, a wine merchant in France and on clothing in Carmel.

Johnson's proposal will be considered by the full commission next week and could be put up for a vote early next year.


State law allows candidates and elected officials to spend campaign donations on travel, meeting and gifts as long they are for a political, governmental or legislative purpose.


Currently, politicians only have to show when and how much they spend on meals, gifts and out-of-state travel expenses on their campaign accounts.


The new regulations would require them to state the nature of the gift and who received it. On meal expenses, the candidate-controlled account would have to reveal how many people attended, and specify the names of the candidate, any relative who attended and the treasurer of the account if he or she attended.


The same type of disclosure would be required for out-of-state travel expenses.


Johnson also proposed record-keeping requirements, such as original receipts and a list of all individuals for whom a meal or out-of-state travel was paid, in the event of an audit.


Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?


Corporations Hoping to buy further Profits and Influence from Politicians with luxury trip to Japan

April 3, 2007

This Junketeering represents a high water mark of public arrogance and political corruption by powerful Oil, Energy, and Telecom corporations, through their paid political lackeys.

After spending $23.6 Million to bribe the last legislature, ATT is finishing paying off last year's bribery debt, and setting the table, a luxury table of sushi in Japan's finest restaurants, for this year's legislative goals. A luxury vacation is a good way to begin this year's cycle of political bribes.

This junket shamelessly demonstrates how "our" representatives are openly purchased with exactly the same methods Abramoff used to buy Delay and Ney, among others.

The legislators and regulators who participated in this vacation must recuse themselves from deciding on any political issues involving The California Foundation on the Environment and the Economy This includes any legislation affecting AT&T, Verizon, PG&E, Chevron, Sempra Energy, Southern California Edison and BHP Billiton.

Furthermore, we must require every politician who has accepted special interest bribes ("contributions") to recuse themselves from deciding any issues affecting the special interest who bribed them. Only then can we be assured of some small degree of legislative independence.

Ms. Jordan, of the California Coastal Protection Network cannot seem to understand that as long as politics and policy are decided by money and bribery, the coast, the environment, worker rights, education, health, and all the small money causes, lose.

Ms. Jordan is apparently cool with that, as long as they invite her along for a luxury vacation, I mean a "fact finding trip," and she can collect her paycheck. (A six-figure income? I emailed them asking how much the leadership "earns" but received no reply.)

Also See:


Top of Page

Also See:

Corruption Updates 66, 1st article on the page, Nunez: Term-Limit Donations can't fail to catch Nuñez's eye

Nunez Lives Like a King on Corporate Bribes, lat, October 5, 2007

Nunez Pretends to be "Middle-Class" while living in luxury at public and private troughs, lat, October 7, 2007

Nunez and Perata Living Large on the Massive Bribes of the Special Interests, bee, October 9, 2007

Nunez Brags that his Bribes Pay his for Luxury rather than the State: but he still collects his per diem while whoring for the corporations, bee, October 13, 2007

Great News Clip of Nunez running away from the truth, and his own "Blackwater" security detail


CA: State officials' free junket to Japan with execs, bee, 4-3-07

LA TIMES Kicks RepubliCrats Junketeering in Ass, lat, 4-5-07


Search the Corruption Database under






Submit Your Comments Here

Please limit comments or essay to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number that you are referring to. Example: (82_1.)


All Archives

Top of Page

10) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Supporter of Democrats Is Sentenced in California


NYT, January 5, 2008






SAN FRANCISCO — Norman Hsu, the shamed political powerbroker and Democratic donor, was sentenced Friday to a three-year prison term by a California judge in connection with a 1992 plea in a fraud case in which investors lost millions of dollars in an elaborate Ponzi scheme.


The judge, Stephen Hall, of San Mateo County Superior Court, issued the sentence after denying two motions from Mr. Hsu’s lawyers, who had asked the court to drop the 16-year-old fraud case and withdraw Mr. Hsu’s no-contest plea.


Mr. Hsu, 56, a California businessman and former apparel industry executive, is expected to soon appear before the United States attorney in New York on separate but similar charges of defrauding unwitting investors out of $60 million in another Ponzi scheme.


Mr. Hsu has been a major campaign contributor for many Democratic politicians, including Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has returned $850,000 in contributions tied to him.


Hsu associates touted his connections

Documents show how the fundraiser's network pitched the deals that allegedly turned his Clinton ties into gold.

By Robin Fields and Chuck Neubauer

Los Angeles , December 3, 2007





Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu reveled in his role as friend to Bill and Hillary Clinton.


As Hsu raised more than $800,000 for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign, the couple praised him at star-studded events and showered him with thank-you notes. Hsu often wore a bomber jacket that bore the presidential seal, a gift from the former president, he told associates.


But Hsu's turn in the political limelight was about more than ego gratification.


Documents obtained by the Los Angeles Times show how Hsu's business associates traded on his connections -- going so far as to claim that former President Clinton was a Hsu client -- to lure investors into a scheme that took in tens of millions of dollars nationwide.


A marketing brochure distributed by an Orange County firm to attract investors to Hsu's business claimed the 56-year-old Hong Kong native's "extensive political investment community includes former President Bill Clinton, who continues to invest to this day."


Still, as a marketing tactic, the claim may have worked all too well: A Southern California couple recently filed a lawsuit saying they lost more than $3 million in a Hsu-run Ponzi scheme -- based in part on the brochure's promises.


Investigators and investors have alleged that Hsu used his status as an elite Democratic Party fundraiser to give the appearance of legitimacy to his investment scheme, which promised big profits from short-term bridge loans.


Hsu invited business associates to fundraisers, where they rubbed shoulders with celebrities and Democratic Party luminaries. Their word of mouth helped establish Hsu's bona fides with potential investors.


The federal criminal complaint against Hsu alleges that he pressured investors to make contributions to Democratic candidates as a condition of doing business with him.


Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign has donated to charity or to the U.S. Treasury the $23,000 that came directly from Hsu and has refunded more than $800,000 in contributions linked to him -- including $6,900 from Cornish and his wife.


Hsu remains in the San Mateo County Jail, awaiting sentencing on the 1992 theft charge.



Hsu thrived in 'bundling' system

Campaign finance changes helped create the environment in which a fugitive could be welcomed by Kennedys and Clintons.

By Tom Hamburger, Dan Morain and Robin Fields

Los Angeles Times Staff Writers


September 14, 2007





WASHINGTON — When Bill Clinton received an award at a gala dinner honoring the late Robert F. Kennedy last year, the former president expressed his thanks before an audience that included a Nobel Prize winner and a glittering array of show business celebrities and Wall Street titans. Yet the second sentence of his remarks expressed special gratitude to a man almost no one there had heard of: "our friend Norman Hsu."


...developments in the world of campaign finance helped create the environment in which a man like Hsu could be welcomed into the company of people like the Kennedys and Clintons.


Hsu is what is known in political parlance as a "bundler," a specialized and increasingly important kind of fundraiser for today's campaign finance managers.


Federal law limits the amount any one individual can contribute to a candidate or party. But there is no limit on how much an individual can round up in smaller contributions from friends and associates, and then deliver to a favored politician or party as a "bundle."

Although Hsu arrived on the political scene just four years ago, bundling has been around for decades. But its importance became magnified after passage in 2002 of the McCain-Feingold law, which curbed contributions individuals could make to political parties.


The drive to attract bundlers was accelerated when George W. Bush's 2000 presidential campaign started giving special recognition to those who delivered $100,000 worth of checks. Bush called them "pioneers," and they received rewards for their efforts. At a minimum, such bundlers would be invited to private meetings at Bush's Texas ranch and get invitations to events at political conventions. After Bush took office, several of his bundlers were named ambassadors and 48 were appointed to Cabinet agency transition teams.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York established a "HillRaiser" category for those who bring in $100,000 or more. Her campaign grants special status to those who raise at least $1 million.


The HillRaisers include several bundlers who have ties to President Clinton's time in office. Wealthy Los Angeles businessmen Ron Burkle and Haim Saban were among Bill Clinton's most loyal donors and are aligned with his wife.


The senator has new benefactors too, such as Michel Chaghouri, a 27-year-old Los Angeles-area resident who in 2004 was registered as a Republican. Chaghouri has raised at least $100,000 for Clinton. When he donated $4,600 earlier this year, he listed his occupation as not employed. He now works for the Clinton campaign.


Hsu apparently enlisted 260 people to give a total of $850,000 to Hillary Clinton for President, which the campaign said this week it would return.


The disgraced bundler and his network also delivered hundreds of thousands to other candidates. In 2005 and 2006, Hsu and his network gave at least $175,000 to Democratic Senate incumbents and candidates. House races were of less interest to Hsu -- only a handful of members received donations; most were friends of the Clintons.


One of Sen. Clinton's Democratic presidential rivals, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, recently introduced legislation to require federal candidates to reveal the names of bundlers and the amounts they raise.


"He was important because he could raise money. He could bring in checks from people you never heard of," said one Democratic operative who knows Hsu. Lacking authorization to discuss the matter, the person spoke on condition of anonymity.


Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

Dem Traitors at it Again: Selling Influence to, and Accepting Bribes From Foreigners

may 30, 2007

This happened before, during the 1996 election cycle, when Clinton and the Corporate Branch of the Democratic Party received unreported foreign bribes.

But this does not bother the Dems, especially the "global" Dems. If they had their way, foreigners would be able to both bribe, and collect favors, from them just like the American Special interests do.

For are not Greed, Bribery, and the American Way universal truths? Does not everyone, from Saudi Prince, to Mexican Peasant, recognize the power of political bribery? Is it not unfair to prohibit well funded foreginers from entering our political auction, as we have allowed poor foreigners to enter the labor pool?

The Poor Foreigners can destroy our working conditions and wages from the bottom, and the Rich Foreigners can participate in the destruction of our democracy, from the top.

Maybe Hillary doesn't have to wait for Amnesty to reap foreign bribes. Let's just open up the political auction to all the illegal foreigners already here.

The Dems could charge them by the head, and pay them off by giving them free access to our hospitals, medical care, our schools, roads, water and electrical supplies. Hell, we still have enough for half the people who are here.

Both parties will continue to use foreigners as cheap labor, earning massive profits while throwing the social costs onto what's left of the middle-class's broken infrastructure.

Albion Monitor, Monitor Wire Services, 2-18-97, "More Questions About Clinton's Asian Donations"

March 30, 1998: Clinton's Asian superfunds - '96 campaign funds - Senate probe reports

Dec. 19, 1996, NY Times, "Money From Private Sources Helps Clinton and Associates With Bad Times and Good"

A fine list of NY Times Articles detailing the scummy relationships between the Clintons and Foreign Theives

Also See Right Web for an interesting profile of the DLC and its Corporate Backers


Top of Page

Also See:

Corruption Updates 33, 4th article on page, “Lobbyists find new Congress is open for business

SF Chron, July 27, 2007; Dem leaders shield farm bill: Dems Preserve Subsidies to Corporate Agriculture

LA Times, July 29, 2007; Executive privilege touchy for presidential hopefuls: Just a Reminder of why Bush is Out of Control

Dem candidates back bush wars, NY Times, August 12, 2007

Washington Post, August 5, 2007; House Approves Wiretap Measure: Pelosi, Dems, Betray Constitution Again

Washington Post, August 12, 2007; How the Fight for Vast New Spying Powers Was Won: Dems-Repug Traitors Pass Illegal Spy Bill in Defiance of Constitution


Pelosi: Impeachment 'off the table, Oct 23, 2006, RAW story

Pelosi: Pelosi Kills Impeachment Resolution, Nov 6, 2007, AP


Billery is a corporate whore: Links

Democrats are corporate whores, Links


Search the Corruption Database under


Submit Comments Here

Limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)

11) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Industry Flexes Muscle, Weaker Energy Bill Passes


NYT, December 14, 2007





WASHINGTON — Pared-down energy legislation cleared the Senate on Thursday by a wide margin after the oil industry and utilities succeeded in stripping out provisions that would have cost them billions of dollars.


The legislation still contains a landmark increase in fuel-economy standards for vehicles and a huge boost for alternative fuels. But a $13 billion tax increase on oil companies and a requirement that utilities nationwide produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources were left on the floor to secure Republican votes for the package.


The tax measure and the renewable electricity mandate were included in an energy bill that easily passed the House last week. But industry lobbyists focused their attention on Republican members of the Senate and on the White House, which repeatedly threatened to veto the bill if the offending sections were not removed.


Earlier in the week, Senate leaders agreed to drop the renewable electricity section. And on Thursday, after a failed effort to cut off debate on the bill, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, said he would reluctantly remove the tax provisions as well, clearing the way for passage in the early evening.


The slimmed-down bill passed 86-8.


The Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned electric utilities, led the opposition to the renewable electricity mandate. Along with its member companies in the Midwest and Southeast, the group carried out an extensive lobbying campaign warning that the bill would cause sharp increases in electric rates.


The institute was joined by the National Association of Manufacturers, the Chamber of Commerce and groups representing the paper, mining, petrochemical and refining industries.


Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., January, 2008


Top of Page

Also See:

NY Times, 6-12-07: Congress Turns to Energy, and Lobbyists Arrive: Bribery Convention in Washington: Crooked Energy Policy will Damage America

Dems try to switch subsidies from big oil to industrial agriculture for ethanol fraud/boodoggle, nyt, June 18, 2007


Billery is a corporate whore: Links

Democrats are corporate whores, Links


Search the Corruption Database under


Killing safety regulation


Submit Comments Here

Limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)


Previous page: Page 143                 Next page: Page 145

Contact Us: Committeefordemocracy.org


All Archives

Top of Page

Today's Headlines

1] Supreme Court puts lethal injection to rule of law and constitution. again

2] Article two: Marriage of Corruptions, billery and Nunez

Fabian Nunez is Billery's dude

3] Public health ripped off for corporate profits

4] CA Elite union health costs: 118 bil.

5] Elite union pension costs due

6] Ca creating health care monster

7] Term-limit ads attack nunez-perata Corruption

8] Links: indian gaming for and against

9] New rules to Curb Nunez-Perata life of corporate funded luxury

10] Billery bundler Hsu gets first sentence

10b] Hsu fraud supercharged by clinton connection

10c] Hsu the bundler

11] Dems Serve Big Oil