1022 lines
47 KiB
Plaintext
1022 lines
47 KiB
Plaintext
Computer underground Digest Fri June 3, 1994 Volume 6 : Issue 48
|
|
ISSN 1004-042X
|
|
|
|
Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.BITNET)
|
|
Archivist: Brendan Kehoe
|
|
Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish
|
|
Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth
|
|
Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala
|
|
Ian Dickinson
|
|
Copy Dittoer: Etaoian Shrdlu
|
|
|
|
CONTENTS, #6.48 (June 3, 1994)
|
|
|
|
File 1--Intro to Jim Warren Special Issue
|
|
File 2--GovAccess.037: re #038-#040 and net-based grassrts pol action
|
|
File 3--GovAccess.036: Census data; NJ LegInfo; Ca. Secy of St loot lists
|
|
File 4--GovAccess.038: ACTION ALERT - Needed action
|
|
File 5--GovAccess.039: Online election-night results;--Cal poli-dregs
|
|
|
|
Cu-Digest is a weekly electronic journal/newsletter. Subscriptions are
|
|
available at no cost electronically.
|
|
|
|
CuD is available as a Usenet newsgroup: comp.society.cu-digest
|
|
|
|
Or, to subscribe, send a one-line message: SUB CUDIGEST your name
|
|
Send it to LISTSERV@UIUCVMD.BITNET or LISTSERV@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU
|
|
The editors may be contacted by voice (815-753-0303), fax (815-753-6302)
|
|
or U.S. mail at: Jim Thomas, Department of Sociology, NIU, DeKalb, IL
|
|
60115, USA.
|
|
|
|
Issues of CuD can also be found in the Usenet comp.society.cu-digest
|
|
news group; on CompuServe in DL0 and DL4 of the IBMBBS SIG, DL1 of
|
|
LAWSIG, and DL1 of TELECOM; on GEnie in the PF*NPC RT
|
|
libraries and in the VIRUS/SECURITY library; from America Online in
|
|
the PC Telecom forum under "computing newsletters;"
|
|
On Delphi in the General Discussion database of the Internet SIG;
|
|
on RIPCO BBS (312) 528-5020 (and via Ripco on internet);
|
|
and on Rune Stone BBS (IIRGWHQ) (203) 832-8441.
|
|
CuD is also available via Fidonet File Request from
|
|
1:11/70; unlisted nodes and points welcome.
|
|
|
|
EUROPE: from the ComNet in LUXEMBOURG BBS (++352) 466893;
|
|
In ITALY: Bits against the Empire BBS: +39-461-980493
|
|
|
|
UNITED STATES: etext.archive.umich.edu (141.211.164.18) in /pub/CuD/
|
|
ftp.eff.org (192.88.144.4) in /pub/Publications/CuD
|
|
aql.gatech.edu (128.61.10.53) in /pub/eff/cud/
|
|
world.std.com in /src/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
uceng.uc.edu in /pub/wuarchive/doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
wuarchive.wustl.edu in /doc/EFF/Publications/CuD/
|
|
EUROPE: nic.funet.fi in pub/doc/cud/ (Finland)
|
|
ftp.warwick.ac.uk in pub/cud/ (United Kingdom)
|
|
|
|
JAPAN: ftp.glocom.ac.jp /mirror/ftp.eff.org/
|
|
|
|
COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing
|
|
information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of
|
|
diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted for non-profit as long
|
|
as the source is cited. Authors hold a presumptive copyright, and
|
|
they should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that
|
|
non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise
|
|
specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles
|
|
relating to computer culture and communication. Articles are
|
|
preferred to short responses. Please avoid quoting previous posts
|
|
unless absolutely necessary.
|
|
|
|
DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent
|
|
the views of the moderators. Digest contributors assume all
|
|
responsibility for ensuring that articles submitted do not
|
|
violate copyright protections.
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 1994 23:18:12 EDT
|
|
From: CuD Moderators <cudigest@mindvox.phantom.com>
|
|
Subject: File 1--Intro to Jim Warren Special Issue
|
|
|
|
Over the past few years, we can think of no other individual who has
|
|
been as active and as effective as Jim Warren in pushing for the union
|
|
of politics and cyberspace. Jim was almost single-handedly responsible
|
|
for the successful initiation of electronic access to legislative
|
|
proceedings in California. Since then, he has expended considerable
|
|
time and personal resources in an effort to build on the California
|
|
experience.
|
|
|
|
In addition to his political work, Jim also compiles periodic
|
|
newsletters to keep us abreast of proposed legislation, activities,
|
|
and other information relevant to opening up the democratic process to
|
|
electronic media. Jim's labors are the low-key type that generally go
|
|
unrecognized, because they are not dramatic, and the successes occur
|
|
gradually. Nonetheless, it's folks like him who, in a decade or two,
|
|
will ultimately be recognized as the true pioneers of cyberspace--no
|
|
glitz, no gloss, just hard work that gradually expands the
|
|
democratization of the electronic medium.
|
|
|
|
We've fallen behind on some of Jim's recent postings, so we devote
|
|
this issue to his efforts of the past few weeks.
|
|
|
|
We don't know where Jim Warren gets his energy, idealism, and
|
|
perseverance. Maybe one of these days he'll share is secret with us.
|
|
Until then, we're certain that others will join us in
|
|
acknowledging Jim's work and extending an enthusiastic "THANKS!!"
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 14:10:51 -0700
|
|
From: Jim Warren <jwarren@WELL.SF.CA.US>
|
|
Subject: File 2--GovAccess.037: re #038-#040 and net-based grassrts pol action
|
|
|
|
GovAccess concerns computer-assisted government-access. So do elections.
|
|
GovAccess.038 will be relatively-brief personal election-related advocacy.
|
|
GovAccess.039 will give details re California's Secretary of State race.
|
|
GovAccess.040 will give details re California's gubernatorial race.
|
|
Thereafter, I will return to postings not focused on elections.
|
|
[If you want to drop off of GovAccess, please phone or fax. I'm still
|
|
apallingly backlogged in my email.]
|
|
|
|
If you can vote in California, these may be of direct interest to you.
|
|
|
|
EVEN IF YOU CAN'T VOTE IN CALIFORNIA, THEIR RESULTS *WILL* LIKELY IMPACT YOU:
|
|
|
|
The results of the June 7th primary elections in California will very-probably
|
|
effect what happens in *your* state, and in Congress - in various ways, e.g.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
** 1. For better or worse, what happens in Californica [sic] politics - and
|
|
what fails to happen - is often picked up by legislators and activists in many
|
|
other states, and by Congress.
|
|
|
|
The prime examples are the tax-revolts of the late '70s (as I said, for
|
|
better or worse; opinions vary). California's Proposition 13 sparked those
|
|
revolts.
|
|
|
|
Also: Last year's California Assembly Bill 1624 that mandated online access
|
|
to Calif's legislative information has become a model for at least half-a-
|
|
dozen similar (often almost-identical) bills, introduced this year in other
|
|
states' legislatures. And they coulda done better than to semi-blindly pick
|
|
up the Calif legislation, mo'less verbatim.
|
|
(It was very-much less-than-optimal, from having been whip-sawed by powerful
|
|
foot-draggers and ego-trippers in the Calif Legislature. Bill-author Debra
|
|
Bowen has already managed to repair one of the minor irritations - passing
|
|
recent legislation declaring that legislative information specified in
|
|
her 1993 AB 1624 was, in fact, *public* information. More fixes are needed.)
|
|
|
|
The point is: Californication splatters far beyond California's borders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
** 2. *You* can very-probably help guide what happens in California,
|
|
even if you've never been near the state - or even the nation. [Details
|
|
follow.]
|
|
|
|
Big-bucks influence-purchasers have long known the value of buying political
|
|
patronage in states other than their own. It's time that us "mere" *citizens*
|
|
to urge *our* preferences on those who will likely impact our futures -
|
|
even if we can't vote for (or against) 'em.
|
|
|
|
|
|
** 3. To the extent that we - nationwide - show that the *national* (and
|
|
global) power of the net has trans-border political impact, politicians
|
|
*will* be more and more responsive to our wishes.
|
|
And, no, they *won't* try to stop us. Why not?
|
|
1. 15- to 25-million of us now have access to the ultimate political power -
|
|
timely information and functionally-free *mass* communications (via the nets).
|
|
2. It's too late for them to try to squelch it; the net's too damned big.
|
|
3. And just incidentally, its a free-speech issue, and U.S. politicians and
|
|
courts aren't *about* to risk charges of censoring political speech.
|
|
|
|
|
|
By using *your* net-speech to impact California "local" issues, you can
|
|
probably have an impact on *your* state's and nation's future policies.
|
|
|
|
GO FOR IT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
HOW TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. EASILY. NOW. FROM "THE PRIVACY OF YOUR OWN HOME"
|
|
|
|
>> Grassroots WORD-OF-MOUTH ADVOCACY by folks who are not political hacks is
|
|
>> THE most-powerful form of political action. Therefore, use our tools:
|
|
|
|
0. Research the issues; check out the allegations; select the candidates
|
|
and ballot measures that you support and oppose; outline your justifications.
|
|
|
|
1. Look through the list of everyone you know with an online address. If you
|
|
have a fax-modem, also see what fax-numbers you have.
|
|
|
|
2. Email and fax your political positions to *ALL* of your friends and
|
|
associates on the net. Include verifiable rationales for your positions.
|
|
|
|
>> In most cases, YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS TO THOSE WHOM KNOW YOU will carry far
|
|
>> more weight than all political advertising (assuming you're not a known
|
|
>> political hack for or against an established party or candidate).
|
|
|
|
3. Encourage your friends and associates to cascade your message to *their*
|
|
friends and associates - just a few keystrokes away.
|
|
|
|
3. Email your comments - positive or negative - to those politicians who are
|
|
online and likely to have any interest in the issue(s).
|
|
|
|
4. Post your advocacy to all relevant news-groups and forums. Your well-
|
|
reasoned positions, supported by verifiable rationales, ARE effective!
|
|
|
|
5. In the case of local or state races beyond your voting precinct -- wherein
|
|
political decisions may, nonetheless, ultimately impact YOU and YOUR family --
|
|
so state. Recipients will then understand why you are concerned.
|
|
|
|
6. In the case of the California June 7th elections, ACT NOW! (Email's fast,
|
|
but lots of folks are voting by absentee ballot, well before Election Day.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most of all: Believe that timely-informed, well-informed voters WILL make the
|
|
most responsible choices. (True or not, special-interest dictatorship is the
|
|
only alternative.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
WHY I GOT OFF THE FENCE AND BECAME A SUSPECT, uh, POLITICAL ADVOCATE
|
|
|
|
Regarding my #038-#040 advocacy re the gubernatorial and Secy-of-State races:
|
|
|
|
When I began this year's push for [landmark] California legislation to require
|
|
computerized filing of, and online public-access to, significant lobbyist and
|
|
campaign-finance disclosures, I planned to remain politically-neutral re the
|
|
upcoming California campaign zoo.
|
|
|
|
But, one of the dangers of wading around in political swamps (cesspools?) is
|
|
that ya quickly learn a *lot* more about the players and their *actual*
|
|
character - or lack of it - than you do as "merely" a concerned citizen,
|
|
dependent upon sound-bite newscasts and sheep-herd, band-wagon print
|
|
reporting (the Tanya Harding mega-trivia ink-tons being a recent example).
|
|
|
|
Even worse: There is *extensive* astute, accurate, penetrating reporting by
|
|
astute and diligent print and broadcast journalists of *important* information
|
|
that *is* valuable to voters making decisions that will effect us all. BUT,
|
|
its buried in the GLUT of print, video and audio that gushes through our daily
|
|
lives. Except for the too-often-trivial flashy iotas of political specifics
|
|
that catch the press' fancy and inordinate time and ink, much of the most
|
|
useful information flashes past in the glut, and is likely forgotten by
|
|
Election Day. Anyway ...
|
|
|
|
Among those who work around a capitol (or town hall, or Washingtoontown),
|
|
the *real* behavior and character of legislators and bureaucrats is actually
|
|
quite well-known - in detail! But it is too-rarely reflected in the flood of
|
|
gotta-be-balanced don't-offend-sources reporting, especially by reporters who
|
|
are outside of the capitol. *Any* capitol.
|
|
|
|
So: In the last several years, I've learned *lots* more than I ever knew
|
|
about the state's political players - some from watching them; much more
|
|
from numerous candid conversations with a broad range of very-experienced
|
|
public-interest activists who have worked the capitol more-or-less full-time,
|
|
and from a number of off-the-record conversations with various capitol
|
|
reporters and political writers whom I have come to know well enough to trust.
|
|
|
|
Part of it pleased and impressed me. Other parts disgusted me, and turned me
|
|
against several politicians of whom I originally had good impressions. But
|
|
that still wasn't enough to incite me to *publicly* support or oppose any of
|
|
the candidates in the upcoming elections.
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE LAST STRAW(S)
|
|
|
|
But, recent power-plays and verified bull-droppings, detailed in #038-#040,
|
|
have been so offensive - so *OUTRAGEOUS* - that they pushed me over the edge;
|
|
pushed me to advocate for some candidates, and publicly oppose others. Sadly,
|
|
that means that now *I* will be suspect - part of the turf.
|
|
|
|
But I *will* provide citations for my information and rationales for my
|
|
positions. And I certainly *encourage* your independent verification.
|
|
|
|
Hope you'll check out #030 thru #040 -- coming soon to a terminal near you.
|
|
|
|
And, I hope YOU'LL ACT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
AND A CLOSING PERSONAL FOOTNOTE
|
|
|
|
No, I won't be voting for or against any of the candidates I mention.
|
|
After last year's slogging around the odious capitol quagmire, pushing for
|
|
AB 1624, I was so disgusted with arrogant career politicians and destructive,
|
|
wasteful, stupid partisan turf tricks that I changed my party registration
|
|
from a wee-minor curmudgeon's party to "independent."
|
|
And unlike more aware and democratic states, California doesn't permit
|
|
voters to cross party [or un-party] lines in the primary elections. So often,
|
|
the whole state gets stuck with one of two extremes in the general elections.
|
|
AND THEIR ACTIONS OFTEN IMPACT FOLKS IN MANY OTHER STATES.
|
|
|
|
But my vote *is* useful in November. *Please* -- gimmie some decent choices.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Sun, 29 May 1994 13:22:10 -0700
|
|
From: Jim Warren <jwarren@WELL.SF.CA.US>
|
|
Subject: File 3--GovAccess.036: Census data; NJ LegInfo; Ca. Secy of St loot lis
|
|
ts
|
|
|
|
CENSUS BUREAU DATA COMING ON THE INTERNET
|
|
>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 1994 23:13:29 -0500 (EST)
|
|
>From: "Eric G. Grant" <egrant@census.gov>
|
|
>To: gopher-announce@boombox.micro.umn.edu
|
|
>
|
|
> *** BETA TEST *** BETA TEST *** BETA TEST ***
|
|
>
|
|
>The United States Bureau of the Census has opened an information
|
|
>server on the internet. Please explore our service and tell us
|
|
>what you think. Connect to our beta site by pointing your client
|
|
>software to our universal resource locators (URL's):
|
|
>
|
|
> http://www.census.gov/ # use with mosaic, lynx, etc
|
|
> gopher://gopher.census.gov # use with gopher
|
|
> ftp://ftp.census.gov/pub # use with ftp
|
|
>
|
|
>For those of you using gopher you can get to us by:
|
|
> gopher gopher.census.gov
|
|
>
|
|
>Also, we plan to offer a majordomo mail server in the near future.
|
|
>
|
|
>If you have problems, questions, suggestions, etc, send email to:
|
|
> gatekeeper@census.gov
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEW JERSEY LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION FOR THE INTERNET : BULLETIN NO.1
|
|
Forwarded by howarlof@CLASS.ORG Thu Mar 3 19:28:52 1994
|
|
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 11:53:14 -0800
|
|
From: Paul Axel-Lute <axellute@andromeda.rutgers.edu>
|
|
|
|
March 3, 1994
|
|
|
|
Attached is the text of a bill endorsed by the New Jersey Law
|
|
Librarians Association, to make New Jersey statutes and legislative
|
|
bills available on the Internet without usage fees. Also attached
|
|
is an explanatory statement.
|
|
|
|
The draft bill has been submitted to the Chairmen of the Senate and
|
|
Assembly State Government Committees. Further bulletins will be
|
|
issued to inform you of the bill number and progress of the bill,
|
|
and to suggest actions in support of its enactment.
|
|
|
|
[Bill-text omitted here in GovAccess. For copy, contact Axel-Lute. --jim]
|
|
|
|
The bill has two purposes: (1) to make the most current
|
|
version of the statutory law as widely available as possible,
|
|
fulfilling the government's obligation to promulgate the law so
|
|
that it can be obeyed; and (2) to facilitate democratic government
|
|
by making the texts of pending bills readily available to the
|
|
public for feedback to the Legislature.
|
|
The states of California, Hawaii, Minnesota, and Utah
|
|
presently offer full-text legislative information via the Internet
|
|
without usage fees.
|
|
The Office of Legislative Services presently operates an
|
|
Electronic Legislative Information System, designed primarily for
|
|
the use of the Legislature itself, but also available to non-
|
|
governmental subscribers for $55 per month ($25/month for
|
|
additional users at same site) plus 75 cents per connect minute.
|
|
This system includes the "New Jersey Permanent Statutes Database"
|
|
(a very current compilation of the statutory law); texts of all
|
|
bills in the current Legislature, with status information and
|
|
subject-heading access; the Legislative Calendar; committee
|
|
membership information; and a "Private Databases Program" enabling
|
|
automatic tracking of particular bills or subjects.
|
|
The bill is partly modeled on California Government Code
|
|
section 10248 (added by 1993 Statutes chapter 1235). It would
|
|
require OLS to make the statutes, bill texts, bill tracking
|
|
information, legislative calendar and committee membership
|
|
information available on the Internet without access charges.
|
|
The bill would allow OLS to continue to provide a fee-based
|
|
service with added-value components, including the Private
|
|
Databases Program, full-text word searching, and archives of bill
|
|
texts from previous Legislatures. OLS would not, however, have a
|
|
monopoly on the provision of such service.
|
|
Revenue from non-governmental subscribers to the OLS system is
|
|
estimated at $120,000 per year. The cost of maintaining the
|
|
exterior connection is estimated at less than $10,000 per year.
|
|
For a worst-case scenario for the fiscal impact of this bill,
|
|
assume complete loss of the external revenue, and a doubling of the
|
|
exterior connection cost. This would mean an additional amount of
|
|
$140,000 per year to be covered by general tax revenue---about four
|
|
cents per year from each of New Jersey's approximately 3.5 million
|
|
taxpayers. (There would also be an initial cost for additional
|
|
equipment, on the order of $10,000.)
|
|
New Jersey executive departments also pay OLS for use of the
|
|
legislative system, at the reduced rate of 45 cents per connect
|
|
minute. Presumably, OLS would lose much of this internal revenue,
|
|
as departments find it cheaper to access the information through
|
|
the Internet. There could therefore be budgetary adjustments
|
|
lowering the departmental budgets and correspondingly increasing
|
|
the OLS budget, with zero net fiscal effect.
|
|
|
|
Paul Axel-Lute Rutgers Law Library tel.(201) 648-5977 or -5964
|
|
Collection Dev't 15 Washington St. axellute@andromeda.rutgers.edu
|
|
Librarian Newark NJ 07102 USA rev.3/2/94
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
CORRECTION <Grrr!>:
|
|
SECY.OF STATE CANDIDATES NOT YET INVITED TO SUBMIT COMPUTERIZED DISCLOSURES
|
|
|
|
In California, campaign-finance disclosures for candidates seeking state
|
|
office are filed with the Secretary of State's Office. In January and again
|
|
in March, that Office invited the Governor candidates to voluntarily file
|
|
their disclosures in computerized form, along with their required paper
|
|
disclosures.
|
|
I asked press contact Melissa Warren (no relation :-) in that Office if the
|
|
candidates for Secretary of State had also been invited to volunteer digital
|
|
filings. She said that they had, but only Acting Secretary of State Tony
|
|
Miller had done so (in March). He did.
|
|
|
|
On 4/18, I faxed a query about this to all of the candidates, asking for
|
|
their positions on computerized disclosures, and asking why they had not
|
|
voluntarily filed in computer form - requesting a prompt reply since I would
|
|
be reporting on it and was "on deadline."
|
|
On 4/20, after no responses from any of the candidates, I reported in
|
|
GovAccess.034 that Miller was the only Secy of State candidate to volunteer
|
|
computerized disclosures. True, but it turns out that the other candidates
|
|
had not yet been asked to do so, by the Secy.of State's office.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CANDIDATES' RESPONSES - AND WOO'S NON-RESPONSE
|
|
|
|
On 4/22, Assembly Member Bill Jones responded by fax, stating, "I have
|
|
not received the request for computerized filings," but that, "Per your
|
|
suggestion, I plan to submit my future reports by electronic filing."
|
|
Neat! - Definative committment, in writing (as I'd requested).
|
|
|
|
On 4/26, Bill Julian called. He's Legislative Consultant to Assembly Member
|
|
Gwen Moore's legislative committee (though not one of her Secy-of-State
|
|
campaign staff).
|
|
He said Moore's campaign Treasurer didn't recall receiving such a request,
|
|
and asked how they might do it. (I suggested asking the Secy of State's
|
|
Office, but thought a computer filing would be accepted by them in almost any
|
|
form, since it was all voluntary.)
|
|
No commitment. No written or faxed response since then.
|
|
Bill also told me of Moore's AB 3615. Apparently, it proposed computerized
|
|
filings, but was just killed in the Assembly Elections Committee with
|
|
Chairwoman Diane Martinez (D-East L.A.) providing the swing-vote against it.
|
|
(Bill said he didn't know why.)
|
|
|
|
Los Angeles City Council Member Mike Woo, the third Secy-of-State candidate
|
|
(who has raised the most loot), hasn't bothered to respond at all, though he
|
|
has a staffed Secy-of-State campaign operation and fax machine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SECY OF STATE'S PRESS OFFICE GOOFED
|
|
|
|
I asked Sos's Ms. Warren about those who said they didn't recall an invite to
|
|
volunteer digital filings.. She checked further and said she had been
|
|
mistaken; that copies of the Gov-candidates' invitation-to-file-digitally
|
|
had been sent to all the legislators (including Moore and Jones), but that
|
|
explicit invitations had NOT yet been sent to the non-Governor candidates.
|
|
(I urged that they do so, promptly.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MOORE'S BILL WOULD IMPACT SECY OF STATE OPERATIONS, BUT SHE NEVER INVOLVED 'EM
|
|
|
|
I also asked Ms. Warren about Moore's AB 3615, since it would *significantly*
|
|
impact the Secretary of State's operations. She wasn't aware of it although
|
|
part of her function is to work with legislators on bills impacting the SoS.
|
|
|
|
Apparently, Moore and her staff never mentioned the bill to the Secretary of
|
|
State, much less involved them in drafting it (as is more or less customary),
|
|
and didn't seek their support before the Assembly Elections Committee -- where
|
|
it was killed through lack of adequate support.
|
|
|
|
Similarly, Moore and Hayden apparently didn't know about each other's bills,
|
|
even though Hayden's SB 758 addresses *exactly* the same issue and Moore's
|
|
former chief consultant, who has been doing some work for her, is a GovAccess
|
|
recipient and knows a great deal about my proposal and, presumably, SB 758
|
|
which is its legislative implementation vehicle. Further, Bill Julian, who's
|
|
generally on top of things, said he wasn't aware that SB 758 had anything to
|
|
do with computerized campaign filings.
|
|
|
|
And although Bill said AB 3615 reflected many of my January
|
|
recommendations on how computerized filings might be economically
|
|
implemented, and Bill and I have known each other since 1991, and we
|
|
have repeatedly discussed computer-aided govt-access -- especially
|
|
when I was trying to get Moore to support AB 1624, last year --
|
|
nonetheless, this was the first time they ever mentioned to me that
|
|
Moore was considering such legislation. Unmentioned until I asked
|
|
about Moore's not filing her disclosures digitally. And only *after*
|
|
the vote that killed it (in the absence of overpowering public
|
|
support).
|
|
|
|
*Amazing* way to conduct the tax-payers' and voters' business!
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Tue, 31 May 1994 16:29:08 -0700
|
|
From: Jim Warren <jwarren@WELL.SF.CA.US>
|
|
Subject: File 4--GovAccess.038: ACTION ALERT - Needed action
|
|
|
|
May 31 1994
|
|
|
|
[ This is longer than I intended, as a "relatively-brief personal election-
|
|
related advocacy." But it includes much of what I intended to put in 039-040,
|
|
and I also realized this could be a "tutorial-by-example" - illustrating the
|
|
techniques I used to help push AB1624 through the California Legislature, last
|
|
year. Curse its length; praise that 039 and 040 will be "back on topic."
|
|
Also, I'm still backlogged in my email; phone of fax if urgent. --jim ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
PARTICIPATING (NOW!) IN THE PROCESS OF OUR OWN GOVERNANCE - BY EXAMPLE
|
|
|
|
The vision thing:
|
|
|
|
Access to government is *NOT* primarily so we can learn the whims and dictates
|
|
of our incumbent Masters - as joyful and fearful, but always-obedient serfs.
|
|
|
|
Access to government is primarily so we may effectively *participate* in the
|
|
process of our own governance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The operational principles:
|
|
|
|
GovAccess.027 offered nuts-n-bolts generic details of how one might pursue
|
|
powerful, effective, net-based, computer-aided GRASSROOTS political action
|
|
(also published in the Apr/May issue of BoardWatch magazine, reaching about
|
|
60,000 bulletin-board sysops and users).
|
|
|
|
The method uses the essential tools of *all* effective citizen action:
|
|
* Person-to-person, "word of mouth" personal advocacy, always most powerful.
|
|
* Timely access to verifiable information on which to base political actions.
|
|
* Timely mass communications, *always* essential to coordinate and effect
|
|
informed action by the sovereign body politic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The operational example:
|
|
|
|
The following exemplifies a *partial* implementation. (Full implementation
|
|
would include *much* greater net-aided coordination, and *much* more outreach
|
|
from those on the net to citizens who are not [yet] users of our *modern* news
|
|
and information media.)
|
|
|
|
This illustrates a possible [hopefully-effective] advocacy statement, and
|
|
how one might encourage its maximum distribution and impact. Incidentally,
|
|
although I've been writing since 1975 (and taught for ten years, earlier),
|
|
it still took three tries and more than two days for me to draft this missive.
|
|
(It *ain't* easy to draft an effective[?] advocacy statement.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Full disclosure, plus apologies:
|
|
|
|
And: This is *most-definitely* ardent personal political advocacy on my part,
|
|
virulently-biased by what I've learned and views I hold (as is *always*
|
|
true of advocacy :-). I encourage you to equally-advocate *your* views.
|
|
|
|
Advance apologies: Some of you who receive GovAccess may also receive the
|
|
following as a separate message, though I will try to avoid dups. But, time's
|
|
too tight for everlate-me to do the massive merge-purge of the GovAccess list
|
|
with my numerous other e-lists - as I *should* do.
|
|
My sincere apologies as a most-imperfect person. Flame me at will.
|
|
|
|
=============================
|
|
|
|
A TIME-SENSITIVE PERSONAL-ADVOCACY MESSAGE TO ONLINE CONTACTS
|
|
|
|
Subject-- An URGENT request that you act, NOW! (if you agree :-)
|
|
|
|
Hi -
|
|
|
|
I apologize for inflicting this on you without first verifying that you're
|
|
interested, but it's so important that I'm risking your ire and your flames.
|
|
But at least most of it's an optional explanatory "footnote."
|
|
|
|
I'm writing to solicit your action regarding some June 7th election issues.
|
|
[Suspicion-flags instantly appear.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you have sound reasons for doing otherwise, if you're in California
|
|
[I'm sending this to a number of folks], I hope you will:
|
|
* Support TONY MILLER for the California SECRETARY OF STATE,
|
|
Or at least, OPPOSE Gwen Moore for Secy of State (reasons follow).
|
|
* Support TOM HAYDEN as Democratic GOVERNOR nominee, at least as a protest.
|
|
* Support RON UNZ as the Republican GOVERNOR nominee, as a protest vote.
|
|
* Support PHIL ANGELIDES for Calif. TREASURER, as a protest against Roberti.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And if you are NOT in Californica [sic :-) ], I hope you will circulate this
|
|
msg to everyone you know who *is* in California. *Their* decisions well may
|
|
impact *you* - for better or worse. For example, the tax revolts of the late
|
|
'70s began with Calif's Prop.13, and the mandate for online access to state
|
|
legislation created by Calif's AB 1624 in 1993 is now proposed in about a
|
|
dozen other states - with imprefections inflicted by some of these folks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would also help if you wrote a *brief* letter to the editor of your local
|
|
newspapers - about these candidates/issues, and/or also giving them a "heads
|
|
up" about the growth of net-aided access to government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many thanks for your attention. Hope you'll act. SOON!
|
|
--jim
|
|
Jim Warren, columnist for MicroTimes, Government Technology, BoardWatch, etc.
|
|
jwarren@well.com (also, jwarren@autodesk.com, but not for political msgs)
|
|
345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax/415-851-2814
|
|
[If you're interested in computer-aided government-access, I'd be delighted
|
|
to add you to my GovAccess distribution-list; one or a few notices per week.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.S. - OPTIONAL READING
|
|
If you are hesitant about my recommendations - or just want to be infuriated
|
|
by the stunts of career politicians :-) ...
|
|
|
|
I hadn't planned to pursue any public advocacy re these June 7th elections.
|
|
But as you may know, I spent much of last year as a flaming open-government
|
|
advocate, pushing [successfully] to mandate online-access to legislation.
|
|
And, this year, I'm pushing for online campaign-finance disclosures <yeah!>.
|
|
In that process, I've learned far more than I could ever have known from the
|
|
"outside," about state government and its players - good and bad. And recent
|
|
events added to the outrages of last year have pushed me off my arse and into
|
|
this action:
|
|
|
|
|
|
REGARDING THE SECRETARY OF STATE -- this is the Office that accepts
|
|
political-disclosure filings. The SoS can either encourage and facilitate
|
|
public access, or make "mere" citizens' access *very* difficult.
|
|
|
|
TONY MILLER became Acting Secretary of State early this year. Since then,
|
|
he has asked statewide candidates to voluntarily file their required
|
|
disclosures in digital form. He is *vigorously* supporting legislation
|
|
(Senate Bill 758, by Hayden) to *require* computerized filings and net-based
|
|
public access. And, he is making state election-night vote-results available
|
|
online -- which I believe is a "first" in the nation.
|
|
|
|
Miller is the *only* candidate for Secretary of State (a $32.6-million agency)
|
|
who has significant administrative experience, a career administrator rather
|
|
than career politician. He was also a founding member of the Fair Political
|
|
Practices Commission. He was Chief Deputy Secy of State for 13+ years, after
|
|
being SoS Chief Legal Counsel beginning in 1976.
|
|
|
|
Miller is also urging that the Secy of State be made a non-partisan office -
|
|
a *much*-needed change for this administrative post.
|
|
|
|
And, unlike some other operations in Sacramento, the Secy of State's office
|
|
has *not* been involved in major corruption or waste scandals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In contrast (as detailed in the 5/19 issue of the Sacramento News & Review),
|
|
GWEN MOORE's hand-picked, personally-supervised senior staffer was busted by
|
|
the FBI in 1988 and was sentenced to four years on corruption charges. SN&R
|
|
reports some of his *appalling* taped statements to undercover agents as he
|
|
demanded more money in exchange for their special-interest legislation, that
|
|
Gwen Moore then authored and carried. (There was insufficient evidence to
|
|
indict her - except, at the least, for *abysimal* staff choice and oversight.)
|
|
|
|
Perhaps a slow learner, Moore in 1993 authored and carried special-interest
|
|
legislation exempting United Parcel Service from PUC regulations. SN&R
|
|
(much of the issue was devoted to political corruption) reported that UPS
|
|
never before contributed to Moore's campaigns, but gave her $3,000 days after
|
|
she got the legislature to pass their bill, another $1,000 immediately after
|
|
it was signed into law, and then waited until the first month of the next
|
|
reporting period to give her another $4,000, plus $1,756 in non-monetary
|
|
"contributions."
|
|
|
|
Politics-as-usual in Kickback City. Please note: The Secy of State's office
|
|
handles *massive* filings by wealthy corporations and businesses, as well as
|
|
huge campaign-finance disclosures - to name *part* of their responsibilities.
|
|
|
|
THE LAST STRAW - that pushed me into this advocacy: Until a few weeks ago,
|
|
Moore appeared to have little chance of becoming Secy of State. The race was
|
|
between Acting SoS Tony Miller and Mike Woo, a powerful Los Angeles career
|
|
politician with no administrative experience but a huge ability to raise loot
|
|
(*much* more largess than administrator Miller has been able to raise).
|
|
|
|
As reported in mid-May in the Sacramento Bee, SF Chronicle and SF Examiner,
|
|
Woo paid gubernatorial-candidate Kathleen Brown's campaign manager $90,000
|
|
to be recommended for Secy of State in the "California Democratic Voter
|
|
Checklist" statewide mailer. But Assembly Speaker Willie Brown - who had
|
|
appointed Moore to her powerful (profitable?) position Chairing the Utilities
|
|
and Commerce Committee - reportedly insisted that the checklist recommend
|
|
Gwen Moore for SoS, or he wouldn't endorse Kath.Brown (no relation). Done!
|
|
|
|
Well, this here little E-mailer ain't goin' to millions, and I'm not gettin'
|
|
paid to send it, but maybe the net has some grassroots clout of its own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
REGARDING THE GOVERNOR'S RACE, State Treasurer Kathleen Brown (Jerry Brown's
|
|
sister), Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi and State Senator Tom Hayden
|
|
(yes, the ex- Mr. Fonda :-) are seeking the Democratic nomination for Guv.
|
|
Kath.Brown has a 20-point lead, obviously a shoo-in. Hayden reportedly
|
|
doesn't have a chancenhell. Let's use the situation to deliver some messages:
|
|
|
|
Note: Until last year, as a naive outsider I was so impressed by Kath. Brown
|
|
that I seriously considered volunteering to set up a "net presence" for her
|
|
campaign. But then I learned more from public-interest sources in Sacramento.
|
|
|
|
As Treasurer, Kath. Brown took over $800,000 from investment and bond firms
|
|
seeking business from her Office - known in the bond industry as "pay to play"
|
|
(see San Jose Mercury News, 5/29/94; even so, SJMN is recommending her).
|
|
Brown didn't stop until about the time the SEC halted the practice (now being
|
|
appealed by another state's Democratic Party Chair). I think this *sucks*!
|
|
|
|
Additionally, Garamendi and Hayden have voluntarily filed their campaign-
|
|
finance reports in computer form, while Kathleen Brown has refused to even
|
|
acknowledge Secy of State Tony Miller's repeated requests. Small wonder.
|
|
|
|
Hayden's primary platform focuses on the need for campaign-finance reform.
|
|
Having seen it operating, up close and odious, I agree that special-interest
|
|
loot is *THE* single greatest danger to responsible government.
|
|
|
|
Hayden is also the author of SB 758 that would require online computerized
|
|
political disclosures, with almost no cost to tax-payers or candidates.
|
|
|
|
The REPUBLICAN Gov's race is a shoo-in for incumbent Pete Wilson - giving
|
|
another opportunity for a protest vote. Wilson has repeatedly failed to
|
|
file his campaign-finance disclosures in computer form. And his DMV and
|
|
Office of Information Technology Director are in the middle of an outrageous
|
|
mess involving $44-million in worthless computers, with investigations of
|
|
possible wrong-doing now underway. Computer entrepreneur Ron Unz is the only
|
|
useful challanger to Wilson - spending millions of his own [earned!] money to
|
|
take Wilson to task, and he offers to serve for a dollar-a-year <har!>.
|
|
|
|
These are the reasons I'm urging votes for Hayden (Democratic nominee) and Unz
|
|
(Republican nominee) *AND* that each of us TELL THE CANDIDATES who are online
|
|
the reason(s) for the protest votes:
|
|
Gov. Pete Wilson: PeteWilson@delphi.com
|
|
Kathleen Brown: katbrown@netcom.com
|
|
Tom Hayden campaign: reform94@delphi.com
|
|
also:
|
|
SB 758 support msgs: darryl.young@sen.ca.gov [Hayden legislative staffer]
|
|
|
|
You are welcome to use any or all of this in your email to anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lastly, REGARDING THE CALIFORNIA TREASURER'S RACE. The Democratic primary
|
|
is essentially between business-person and state Party chair Phil Angelides,
|
|
and multi-decade state politician Dave Roberti, former Leader (dictator!) of
|
|
the state Senate - now seeking some other office in the face of term-limits.
|
|
|
|
Roberti was the one who placed most of the Senators who were convicted in
|
|
the FBI's 1988 corruption sting in the powerful positions from which they
|
|
peddled their influence - and Roberti *ain't* dumb. He recently beat back
|
|
an effort to recall him, but by much less of a winning margin than a 28-year
|
|
legislative veteran in a 2/3-Democratic liberal district should have received.
|
|
|
|
And now Roberti wants to take over Kathleen Brown's *lucrative* position as
|
|
unseen Treasurer. I bet the pay-to-play bonds brokers can hardly wait! - and
|
|
the rest of us can pay and pay and pay higher taxes for higher interest-rates.
|
|
|
|
Additionally, it was Roberti that smoothly slipped in the only serious
|
|
degradations that were inflicted on AB 1624 last year, which now limit *all*
|
|
of us online, to less than optimal access to legislative information, AND are
|
|
too-often being reproduced in other states' online-legislation proposals.
|
|
|
|
Thus, I'm recommending the only viable alternative Treasurer, PHIL ANGELIDES.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuf sed! Again, my apologies for this unsolicited "political" message, but I
|
|
feel it is a *crucial* good-government issue; decisions with national impact.
|
|
|
|
And I *grovelingly* apologize for the length of the "post-script" - but I
|
|
felt it was only fair to tell you *why* I was advocating my positions. At
|
|
least the electrons are fully recyclable.
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE OPERATIONAL COMPONENTS OF THE ADVOCACY MESSAGE ["HOW TO"]
|
|
|
|
1. The subject-line solicits immediate attention, but requires that the
|
|
recipient read at least the first part of the message to find out what it
|
|
concerns - which could not be adequately described in a one-line "Subject."
|
|
|
|
2. The opening paragraph is an appropriate (and sincere) apology.
|
|
|
|
3. The next part *briefly* states the primary requests, including who, what,
|
|
when, where and sorta-why - but as gentle requests; not zealous "demands."
|
|
If folks know and trust you (me) and don't have strong reasons for different
|
|
action, the request may be sufficient cause for them to act as you (I) ask.
|
|
|
|
4. The next parts are less-important requests, and an apparent "close" for
|
|
recipients who remain uninterested.
|
|
|
|
5. The "post-script" part is *VERY* important, especially in any political
|
|
advocacy [always-suspicious]: It gives information supporting the advocacy
|
|
AND means for its independent verification. And it's provocatively stated,
|
|
hoping to incite action.
|
|
|
|
The entire message alternates between evident personal zeal/fury and softening
|
|
and/or self-effacing humor. I happen to think the latter helps (others
|
|
disagree); either way, both components are my well-known personal style.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note: I'm explaining why I wrote how I wrote, both as "how to" suggestions
|
|
for your possible use, and because I am completely comfortable with everyone
|
|
knowing exactly how and why I've written as I've written. No deceptions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mount the ramparts, folks! Join me in virulent personal political action.
|
|
Let us honor our heritage - we use it or we loose it.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 1994 19:15:39 -0700
|
|
From: Jim Warren <jwarren@WELL.SF.CA.US>
|
|
Subject: File 5--GovAccess.039: Online election-night results;--Cal poli-dregs
|
|
|
|
Jun.03, 1994
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hot off the fax machine! --
|
|
A FIRST! [?]: JUNE 7th CALIF. PRIMARY-ELECTION RESULTS AVAILABLE ONLINE
|
|
|
|
California's Acting Secretary of State Tony Miller has arranged for what I
|
|
think is a "first" in the nation - global public access via gopher servers
|
|
across the Internet to election-night voting results.
|
|
|
|
To access the results on June 7th (and, presumably, for some time thereafter),
|
|
or to test it beginning Saturday, June 4th:
|
|
|
|
Gopher directly to caelections.advantis.com and select from the menu.
|
|
|
|
If you need to set up the gopher connection, access the Univ. of Minnesota,
|
|
select "Other Gopher and Information Servers" (Menu B), then
|
|
select all the world's gopher servers (Menu C), and
|
|
select the Advantis Global Network Services (Menu D) and you should see the
|
|
California Election Night gopher server.
|
|
|
|
For this primary, given that it's a first try, they will only be giving the
|
|
results of the state-wide races. But for the general elections in November,
|
|
their plan [hope!] is to provide online reporting of *all* the state races.
|
|
Neat!
|
|
|
|
For more information, call the Secretary of State's Legislative and
|
|
Constituent Services Office at 916-445-6375.
|
|
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Thank gawd! - this is the last GovAccess posting on this stuff, except
|
|
perhaps to howl about the results after next Tuesday's June 7th elections.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
MORE MUCK FROM THE SACRAMENTO POLITICAL SWAMP
|
|
|
|
In GovAccess.038, I offered extensive/inflammatory recommendations and
|
|
information regarding some of the candidates in the California Governor's
|
|
and Secretary-of-State's campaigns, that will be decided next Tuesday (6/7).
|
|
|
|
Ahhh, but there's more!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE FBI RECORDED GWEN MOORE'S NOW-IMPRISONED SENIOR STAFFER
|
|
|
|
In the '80s, Gwen Moore's hand-picked, personally-supervised representative
|
|
was Tyrone Netters.
|
|
|
|
Gwen Moore was *author* of what came to be called the "shrimpscam"
|
|
special-interest legislation sought and paid for by agents posing as
|
|
legislation buyers. As reported in the May 19, 1994, issue of Sacramento
|
|
News & Review Weekly:
|
|
|
|
Netters - Moore's chosen staffer - was recorded by the FBI telling an under-
|
|
cover agent, "Deal with me on the money ...my responsibility as a staffer,
|
|
I take care of my member [Moore] and I don't want you fuckin' around with,
|
|
with her at all, and she don't even wanna talk to you ... I don't have any
|
|
time for any petty bullshit like this, man, you ain't waving enough money.
|
|
I mean we deal with big money around here all the time ... I mean that
|
|
special-interest bill ain't no problem." And it wasn't.
|
|
|
|
Netters was convicted of corruption and sentenced to four years. There
|
|
wasn't enough evidence to indict Moore. If Moore becomes Secy of State, I
|
|
can hardly wait to see who she appoints to key positions - staff appointees
|
|
who to deal with *numerous* big-bucks politicians and wealthy corporations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GWEN MOORE MISSED HER MOST-CRUCIAL CAMPAIGN-FINANCE FILING DEADLINE
|
|
|
|
Gwen Moore has been running for state offices since at least 1978. She
|
|
certainly knows how to run a campaign and how to file required disclosures.
|
|
|
|
Moore wants to be the Secy of State. The Secy of State is the recipient and
|
|
archivist of all campaign-finance disclosures.
|
|
|
|
But Moore didn't file her latest-required campaign-finance disclosure by its
|
|
May 26th deadline - only a minimum-information summary sheet.
|
|
|
|
The details of her campaign-finance receipts that were due May 26th, were not
|
|
filed until Thursday, June 2nd - just two days and a weekend before the polls
|
|
open on June 7th, precluding weekday political reporters from reviewing and
|
|
reporting on her finances before the election.
|
|
|
|
Although her report was generated by a computer, and she was explicitly asked
|
|
in writing to voluntarily also-file her disclosures in computer form, she
|
|
has not yet done so as of now (Friday afternoon).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FOOTNOTE ON PETE WILSON'S OPPONENT, RON UNZ
|
|
|
|
In #038, I recommended supporting Unz *AND* sending email to Wilson telling
|
|
him [PeteWilson@delphi.com] that, since he refused to offer his campaign-
|
|
finance disclosures in computerized form, as some other gubernatorial
|
|
candidates *have* been willing to do, you were supporting opponent Unz.
|
|
|
|
But, I *only* made this recommendation given that Unz doesn't have a chance
|
|
of winning - and his loosership can thus be used to make a point with Wilson.
|
|
|
|
Personally, *I* would NOT support Unz if I thought he had a prayer of
|
|
winning; I strongly disagree with *many* of his major positions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
USE GOVERNOR'S RACE TO DELIVER MESSAGE THAT CAMPAIGN-FINANCES ARE IMPORTANT
|
|
|
|
EMAIL TO PETE WILSON [Send your own, or put your name on this and send it.]
|
|
|
|
To: PeteWilson@delphi.com
|
|
Subject--Your refusal to provide modern disclosures is unacceptable
|
|
Dear Governor Wilson,
|
|
|
|
(1) You accepted massive donations from special interests.
|
|
(2) But, you have steadfastly refused to voluntarily file campaign-finance
|
|
disclosures in computerized form, as repeatedly requested by the Secretary
|
|
of State.
|
|
(3) Campaign-finance reform is *THE* most-important reform needed in
|
|
government, and your actions indicate that you just don't get it.
|
|
|
|
Therefore, I am urging everyone I know to vote for Ron Unz, or at least
|
|
not vote for you - especially since you have such a lead.
|
|
|
|
If you cannot even make your already-computerized campaign-finance records
|
|
available to the public in their modern, computerized form, than you do not
|
|
deserve to be Governor of the nation's largest high-tech state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RE DEMOCRATS: There are three major Demo candidates: Kathleen Brown,
|
|
John Garamendi and Tom Hayden. Brown's machine continues to suck in far more
|
|
special-interest loot than Hayden (who limits contributions to $94 per donor)
|
|
or Garamendi (who, incidentally, was the first to voluntarily file disclosures
|
|
in digital form). The Hayden and Brown campaigns are online. Therefore,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EMAIL TO KATHLEEN BROWN [Send your own, or put your name on this and send it.]
|
|
|
|
To: katbrown@netcom.com
|
|
Subject--Last year, I almost volunteered to set up your online campaign
|
|
Dear Treasurer Brown,
|
|
|
|
After using the nets to help push through AB 1624 last year, mandating
|
|
online access to legislative information, I seriously considered volunteering
|
|
for your campaign. But then, and since, I found out more:
|
|
|
|
(1) You accepted massive donations from special interests including
|
|
$800,000 from bonds-houses and brokerages seeking state funds you invested.
|
|
(2) You steadfastly refuse to volunteer your campaign-finance disclosures in
|
|
computerized form, as repeatedly requested by the Secretary of State - which
|
|
becomes understandable, considering your $800,000 "pay-to-play" collections.
|
|
(3) Campaign-finance reform is *THE* most-important reform needed in
|
|
government, and your actions indicate that you just don't get it.
|
|
|
|
Therefore, I am urging everyone I know to vote for Tom Hayden, or at least
|
|
not vote for you - especially since you have such a lead.
|
|
|
|
If you cannot even make your already-computerized campaign-finance records
|
|
available to the public in their modern, computerized form, than you do not
|
|
deserve to be Governor of the nation's largest high-tech state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MY EMAIL TO TOM HAYDEN [Send your own, or add your name to mine and send it.]
|
|
|
|
To: reform94@delphi.com
|
|
Subject--Your self-imposed limits on donations & SB 758 earned my support
|
|
Dear Senator Hayden,
|
|
|
|
I agree with you that the single most-important reform needed in government
|
|
is campaign-finance reform. Without it, government cannot be of, by or for
|
|
the People. Thus, I am urging everyone I know to vote for you, and urging
|
|
them to tell your leading opponent why (Treasurer Kathleen Brown, who took
|
|
$800,000 "pay-to-play" "contributions" from the bond houses and investment
|
|
firms with which she placed California's massive bonds investments).
|
|
We need to deliver the message that candidates who can't resist functional
|
|
bribes from well-funded special interests will loose votes.
|
|
|
|
However: I strongly *oppose* campaign-spending limits or tax-funded campaign-
|
|
financing. They are simply incumbency-guarantee mechanisms - since an
|
|
incumbent can always raise the limit more easily and then milk their
|
|
incumbency for much greater publicity. Voluntary *self*-limits, such as
|
|
you have adopted, plus MANDATES assuring that voters are fully-informed
|
|
as to the sources and amounts of large donations are the key.
|
|
|
|
Your SB 758 requiring computerized disclosures is one good step.
|
|
|
|
More importantly, disclosures detailing all major contributors should be
|
|
*required* to be included in every political mailing-piece and radio and TV
|
|
ad, just as the name and address of their Treasurer is required. It would
|
|
assure that the electorate is *finally* fully-informed about who buying whom,
|
|
and it would constitutional. Mandate that voters be fully and timely informed
|
|
- and in the process, degrade the propaganda power of political advertising.
|
|
Then, trust us to vote responsibly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
|
|
|
|
|
|
Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys
|
|
to teenage boys. -- P. J. O'Rourke [from rlm@helen.surfcty.com]
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
End of Computer Underground Digest #6.48
|
|
************************************
|
|
|