DOCSLIB.ORG

IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the EASTERN DISTRICT of PENNSYLVANIA LOUIS AGRE, Et Al. V. THOMAS W. WOLF, Governor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the EASTERN DISTRICT of PENNSYLVANIA LOUIS AGRE, Et Al. V. THOMAS W. WOLF, Governor IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA LOUIS AGRE, et al. CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 17-4392 THOMAS W. WOLF, Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, JONATHAN MARKS, Commissioner of the Pennsylvania Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation, ROBERT TORRES, Acting Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, JOSEPH B. SCARNATI, III, President Pro Tempore of the Pennsylvania Senate, and MICHAEL C. TURZAI, Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, in their official capacities. MEMORANDUM Baylson, District Judge, Dissenting January 10, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 II. Procedural History .................................................................................................................. 1 III. Brief Statement of the Issues .................................................................................................. 2 IV. Stipulated Facts ....................................................................................................................... 2 V. Testimony ............................................................................................................................... 2 A. Plaintiffs’ Testimony ........................................................................................................ 2 B. Testimony by Senator Andrew Dinniman ...................................................................... 14 C. Testimony by Representative Vitali ............................................................................... 18 D. Testimony by Senator Daylin Leach .............................................................................. 18 E. Plaintiff’s Expert Witnesses ........................................................................................... 20 1. Anne Hanna ................................................................................................................ 20 2. Daniel McGlone ......................................................................................................... 26 F. Testimony by William Schaller—Introduced by Plaintiffs and Defendants ..................... 29 G. Testimony by Erik Arneson—Introduced by Plaintiffs and Defendants ....................... 31 H. Testimony by Defense Experts ...................................................................................... 33 1. Nolan McCarty ........................................................................................................... 33 2. James G. Gimpel......................................................................................................... 38 VI. Findings of Fact .................................................................................................................... 43 A. Credibility of Witnesses ................................................................................................. 43 B. Intent ............................................................................................................................... 46 VII. Supreme Court Case Summary—Non-Election Clause Decisions ....................................... 49 A. Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) ............................................................................... 49 B. Gaffney v. Cummings, 412 U.S. 735 (1973) ................................................................. 51 C. Davis v. Bandemer, 478 U.S. 109 (1986) ...................................................................... 52 D. Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428 (1992) ...................................................................... 55 E. League of United Latin Am. Citizens v. Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006) ............................ 57 F. Harris v. Arizona Indep. Redistricting Comm’n, 136 S. Ct. 1301 (2016) ......................... 59 G. Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267 (2004) ......................................................................... 60 VIII. History and Decisions Under the Elections Clause .............................................................. 65 A. History of the Elections Clause: Constitutional Convention and Related Materials ..... 65 1. The Risk of State Legislatures Seeking to Manipulate Congressional Elections Through the Regulatory Power ............................................................................................. 65 2. State Legislatures as a Threat to the Continued Existence of the Federal Government . .................................................................................................................................... 68 3. The Risk of Congress Seeking to Manipulate Congressional Election Outcomes Through the Regulatory Power ............................................................................................. 70 B. Case Law Discussion ..................................................................................................... 73 1. Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355 (1932) ........................................................................ 73 2. U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995) ......................................... 73 3. Cook v. Gralike, 531 U.S. 510 (2001) ........................................................................ 77 4. Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Indep. Redistricting Comm’n, 135 S. Ct. 2652 (2015) .................................................................................................................................... 79 IX. Standing ................................................................................................................................ 82 A. Injury .............................................................................................................................. 83 B. District-by-District Injury-in-Fact Requirements ........................................................... 85 C. Statewide Challenge Injury-in-Fact Requirements ........................................................ 86 D. Conclusion Re Standing and Injury ............................................................................... 87 X. Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Relationship to This Case ............................................................................................................................................... 88 A. The Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873) ............................................................. 88 B. Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404 (1935) ........................................................................ 90 C. Madden v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83 (1940) ....................................... 90 D. Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999) ................................................................................ 91 XI. Burden of Proof – Clear and Convincing Evidence .............................................................. 92 XII. The Voting Rights Act and Racial Gerrymandering ............................................................. 99 A. Voting Rights Act ........................................................................................................... 99 B. Racial Gerrymandering Cases ...................................................................................... 100 C. Prior Racial Gerrymandering Cases Involving Appearance ........................................ 101 XIII. Justiciability ........................................................................................................................ 103 A. Court Decisions ............................................................................................................ 103 B. The Statute Authorizing this Three-Judge Court ......................................................... 103 C. Precedent Regarding Justiciability – Cases Involving Politics .................................... 104 D. Technology and Public Policy ...................................................................................... 108 E. Justiciability is Not a Concept Frozen in Time ............................................................ 109 F. Let’s Forget About Politics .............................................................................................. 112 XIV. Standards ...................................................................................................................... 113 A. Looking at this Case from the Viewpoint of the Voter ................................................ 113 ii B. Adopting a Standard – Visual Analysis, Neutral Principles, and Absence of Usual Process .................................................................................................................................... 115 1. Plaintiffs’ Allegations ............................................................................................... 116 2. Use of Traditional Neutral Standards ....................................................................... 117 3. Application of Neutral Principles ............................................................................. 121 4. Partisan Gerrymandering Decisions Discussing Appearance .................................. 123 C. Visual Map Review Proves Unconstitutional Gerrymandering in Five Districts ........ 126 D. Absence of Process ....................................................................................................... 140 XV. Declaratory Judgment and Remedy ...................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— Extensions Of
    E1758 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks December 9, 2014 RECOGNIZING THE 100TH RECOGNIZING THE DESERT VISTA His military education includes 19K (Tanker) ANNIVERSARY OF BOSCOV’S HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS CROSS OSUT, 88M (Truck Driver), Primary Leader- COUNTRY TEAM ship Development Course, Basic Noncommis- sioned Officer Course, Advanced Noncommis- HON. JIM GERLACH HON. KYRSTEN SINEMA sioned Officer Course, Basic Instructor Course, Recruiting and Retention School, OF PENNSYLVANIA OF ARIZONA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Driver Training Course, Mind Resistant AP In- IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES structor Course. Tuesday, December 9, 2014 He furthered his civilian education at Tuesday, December 9, 2014 Ms. SINEMA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to Coahoma Community College in Clarksdale, Mr. GERLACH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognize the Girls Cross Country Team of Mississippi where he graduated in 1999 with a partnership with my colleagues, Representa- Desert Vista High School in Phoenix, Arizona, technical certification in Barbering. His awards and decorations include: the tive CHARLIE DENT, Representative PAT MEE- home of the Thunder. On November 8, 2014, the team won the Division One State Cham- Army Commendation Medal, Army Reserve HAN, and Representative JOE PITTS, to recog- pionship in Cross Country, and the team’s Components Achievement Medal (3RD nize Boscov’s, one of the nation’s largest fam- captain, Senior Dani Jones, set a new course Award), National Defense Service Medal With ily-owned department store chains, on the
    [Show full text]
  • The Long Red Thread How Democratic Dominance Gave Way to Republican Advantage in Us House of Representatives Elections, 1964
    THE LONG RED THREAD HOW DEMOCRATIC DOMINANCE GAVE WAY TO REPUBLICAN ADVANTAGE IN U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTIONS, 1964-2018 by Kyle Kondik A thesis submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Baltimore, Maryland September 2019 © 2019 Kyle Kondik All Rights Reserved Abstract This history of U.S. House elections from 1964-2018 examines how Democratic dominance in the House prior to 1994 gave way to a Republican advantage in the years following the GOP takeover. Nationalization, partisan realignment, and the reapportionment and redistricting of House seats all contributed to a House where Republicans do not necessarily always dominate, but in which they have had an edge more often than not. This work explores each House election cycle in the time period covered and also surveys academic and journalistic literature to identify key trends and takeaways from more than a half-century of U.S. House election results in the one person, one vote era. Advisor: Dorothea Wolfson Readers: Douglas Harris, Matt Laslo ii Table of Contents Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………....ii List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………..iv List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………..v Introduction: From Dark Blue to Light Red………………………………………………1 Data, Definitions, and Methodology………………………………………………………9 Chapter One: The Partisan Consequences of the Reapportionment Revolution in the United States House of Representatives, 1964-1974…………………………...…12 Chapter 2: The Roots of the Republican Revolution:
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 3 Networks on the Ground
    CHAPTER 3 Networks on the Ground “There’s only one way to hold a district: you must study human nature and act accordin’. You can’t study human nature in books. Books is a hindrance more than anything else. If you have been to college, so much the worse for you. You’ll have to unlearn all you learned before you can get right down to human nature, and unlearnin’ takes a lot of time. Some men can never forget what they learned at college...To learn real human nature you have to go among the people, see them and be seen.” – George W. Plunkitt1 3.1 Parties on the Ground If one accepts this more di↵use definition of political parties, we should forgive an initial sense of pessimism or despondency toward our ability to study their behavior in a systematic fashion. The diversity of potential actors – from party organizations, to activist networks; from interest groups, to old-fashioned machines – multiplies both the potential environments and potential resources available for electoral intervention. And worse yet, the actions of these extended party networks are often purposefully kept from the public eye. The choice to recruit candidates for office, pressure others out of a contest, or expend resources in support of particular campaigns are at best highly sensitive decisions and at worst skirt the borders of legality.2 Moreover, the individual state primary and nomination contests are scattered over 1Riordan, William. 1905. Plunkitt of Tammany Hall. The Project Gutenberg. 2For example, the same union officials central to the coming example in Pennsylvania’s 13th district are currently under a FBI investigation covering “virtually every aspect of the union’s operations, as well as [the union leader’s] personal finances” (Phillips and Fazlollah 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Values Voter Handbook H H H H
    2H 0 H1H2 VALUES VOTER HANDBOOK H H H H iVOTE VALUES.ORG 100 DAYS TO IMPACT THE NATION INSIDE: – PRESIDENTIAL VOTER GUIDE – Which presidential candidate represents your Values? – CONGRESSIONAL SCORECARD – Do your senators and representative deserve your vote? ® The stakes in the 2012 election could not be higher. With policies emanating from Washington DC that challenge our historic understanding of religious liberty and force millions of Americans to violate their religious beliefs—the implications of this election are hard to overstate. So which path will Americans choose, and more importantly, how should Christians be involved? 1. Be Informed At Family Research Council we believe it is incumbent upon Americans of religious conviction to be informed and engaged citizens. Voting our values is one important and tangible way that we bear witness to our faith and serve our fellow man. To help you better understand the policies affecting your faith, family and freedom, and the many candidates who stand poised to play a role in shaping those policies, we are pleased to present our 2012 Values Voter Handbook. We designed this resource to provide you with all the information you need to cast an informed, values based vote this election cycle for those candidates running for federal office. This booklet combines both our Presidential Voter Guide and our Congressional Vote Scorecard with documentation to show where the major candidates stand on the issues and how your elected representatives voted in the 1st session of the 112th Congress. 2. Vote Your Values Up and down the ticket, men and women are seeking your vote for local, state and federal offices.But do they merit your support? Before you prayerfully cast your vote, join with Americans from across the nation and declare that you will be a Values Champion this fall, and only support those candidates who share and advocate for your cherished values: Protect Life ~ Honor Marriage ~ Respect Religious Liberty Make the Values Champion pledge by going online at iVoteValues.org.
    [Show full text]
  • Education Reform in Pennsylvania Hearing
    S. HRG. 107–654 EDUCATION REFORM IN PENNSYLVANIA HEARING BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION SPECIAL HEARING MAY 13, 2002—PHILADELPHIA, PA Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 81–668 PDF WASHINGTON : 2002 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Chairman DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania TOM HARKIN, Iowa PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri HARRY REID, Nevada MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky HERB KOHL, Wisconsin CONRAD BURNS, Montana PATTY MURRAY, Washington RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas JACK REED, Rhode Island MIKE DEWINE, Ohio TERRENCE E. SAUVAIN, Staff Director CHARLES KIEFFER, Deputy Staff Director STEVEN J. CORTESE, Minority Staff Director LISA SUTHERLAND, Minority Deputy Staff Director SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES TOM HARKIN, Iowa, Chairman ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania DANIEL K.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Political Contributions
    2012 POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS 2012 Lilly Political Contributions 2 Public Policy As a biopharmaceutical company that treats serious diseases, Lilly plays an important role in public health and its related policy debates. It is important that our company shapes global public policy debates on issues specific to the people we serve and to our other key stakeholders including shareholders and employees. Our engagement in the political arena helps address the most pressing issues related to ensuring that patients have access to needed medications—leading to improved patient outcomes. Through public policy engagement, we provide a way for all of our locations globally to shape the public policy environment in a manner that supports access to innovative medicines. We engage on issues specific to local business environments (corporate tax, for example). Based on our company’s strategy and the most recent trends in the policy environment, our company has decided to focus on three key areas: innovation, health care delivery, and pricing and reimbursement. More detailed information on key issues can be found in our 2011/12 Corporate Responsibility update: http://www.lilly.com/Documents/Lilly_2011_2012_CRupdate.pdf Through our policy research, development, and stakeholder dialogue activities, Lilly develops positions and advocates on these key issues. U.S. Political Engagement Government actions such as price controls, pharmaceutical manufacturer rebates, and access to Lilly medicines affect our ability to invest in innovation. Lilly has a comprehensive government relations operation to have a voice in the public policymaking process at the federal, state, and local levels. Lilly is committed to participating in the political process as a responsible corporate citizen to help inform the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheet: the House Health Repeal Bill's Impact on Pennsylvania
    Fact Sheet: The House Health Repeal Bill’s Impact on Pennsylvania A year ago, a majority of the House of Representatives, including Representatives Mike Kelly, Scott Perry, Glenn Thompson, ​ ​ Bill Shuster, Tom Marino, Lou Barletta, Keith Rothfus, Lloyd Smucker, and Tim Murphy, voted for and passed the so-called “American Health Care Act,” or AHCA, a health repeal bill that would have cut coverage, increased costs, and eliminated protections for hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians. The bill would have imposed an “age tax,” letting insurers charge people over 50 five times more for coverage, and put the health of one in five Americans on Medicaid in jeopardy, including seniors, children, and people with disabilities. While Pennsylvanians would have lost out, the wealthy and insurance and drug companies would have gotten $600 billion in new tax breaks. AHCA Meant Pennsylvanians Would Have Lost Coverage 777,000 Pennsylvanians Would Have Lost Coverage. In 2026, 777,000 Pennsylvanians would have lost coverage under ​ ​ ​ this bill. 371,800 With Medicaid Would Have Lost Coverage. Under the American Health Care Act, 371,800 Pennsylvanians with ​ Medicaid would have lost their coverage. ​ ​ 10,800 Veterans in Pennsylvania Would Have Lost Coverage. Under the American Health Care Act, 10,800 veterans in ​ Pennsylvania would have lost their Medicaid coverage. ​ ​ AHCA Meant Pennsylvanians Would Have Paid Higher Costs, Especially Older Pennsylvanians Raise Premiums By Double Digits. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that a key part of the American ​ Health Care Act, repealing the requirement that most people have health insurance, will premiums 10 percent next year. ​ ​ Though the AHCA never became law, Congressional Republicans managed to enact these changes through the GOP tax bill.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 – 2019 COMMONWEALTH BUDGET These Links May Expire
    2018 – 2019 COMMONWEALTH BUDGET These links may expire: July 6 Some telling numbers lie deeper in state education budget The new state education budget officially put into action July 1 has numbers that should make local school administrators a bit happier. Every Luzerne County district saw an increase in combined basic and special education funding, ranging from a 0.1 percent hike for Northwest Area (a... - Wilkes-Barre Times Leader Philadelphia officials fear late addition to state budget could harm health of low-income teens PHILADELPHIA (KYW Newsradio) -- Philadelphia officials are denouncing a provision, tucked into the state budget bill at the last minute, that they say will result in more teenagers getting hooked on tobacco. But there's little they can do about it. As the state's only first class city, Philadelphia has been able to... - KYW State budget has implications for Erie The $32.7 billion spending plan for the 2018-2019 fiscal year boosts funding for education and school safety. June’s passage of a $32.7 billion state spending plan provides more money for education, including school safety, as well as workforce development programs.... - Erie Times- News July 5 Malpractice insurer sues PA for the third time in three years Governor Tom Wolf and legislative leaders are being sued in federal court over a budget provision to fold a medical malpractice insurer and its assets into the state Insurance Department. It’s the latest development in the commonwealth’s repeated attempts to take $200 million from the group’s surplus.... - WHYY Lancaster County schools to receive $3.5M boost in basic education funding in 2018-19 Lancaster County schools in 2018-19 will get nearly $3.5 million more in state basic education funding than last year, under the budget enacted by the governor in June.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Alumni in the Peace Corps Page 1 Designer Robert L
    GEORGETOWN is published in the Fall, Winter, and Spring by the Georgetown University A lumni Association, 3604 0 Street, Northwest, Washington, D C. 20007 Officers of the Georgetown University Alumni Association President Eugene L. Stewart, '48, '51 VIce -Presidents College, David G. Burton, '56 Graduate School, Dr. Hartley W. Howard, '40 School of Medicine, Dr. Charles Keegan, '47 School of Law, Robert A. Marmet, '51 School of Dentistry, Dr. Anthony Tylenda, '55 School of Nursing, Miss Mary Virginia Ruth, '53 School of Foreign Service, Harry J. Smith, Jr., '51 School of Business Administration, Richard P. Houlihan, '54 Institute of Languages and Linguistics, Mrs. Diana Hopkins Baxter, '54 Recording Secretory Miss Rosalia Louise Dumm, '48 Treasurer Louis B. Fine, '25 The Faculty Representative to the Alumni Association Reverend Anthony J . Zeits, S.J., '43 The VIce-President of the University for Alumni Affairs and Executive Secretary of the Association contents Bernard A. Carter, '49 Editor Denis L. Nichelson, '57, '61 Editorial Consultant Mtendere Means Peace: Dr. Riley Hughes Our Alumni in the Peace Corps Page 1 Designer Robert L. Kocher, Sr. Photography Coping with the New Breed Page 9 Peter Carter, '65 Robert Lovelace Pilot for Progress Page 13 Freedom and the Layman Page 17 THE COVER: On Our Campus Page 22 The cover for this issue illustrates three of the many services performed by Georgetown Peace Corps Volunteers Book Review Page 28 throughout the world. SPECIAL NOTE: This issue includes tne Georgetown University Alumni Annual Fund Report for 1964-65. Mtendere Means Peace: Our Alumni in the Peace Corps ! by Riley Hughes For some it began with a map.
    [Show full text]
  • Potential House Committee Leaders in the 115Th Congress
    Potential House Committee Leaders in the 115th Congress October Edition 2 Potential House Committee Leaders in the 115th Congress • This deck outlines potential changes to House chairmen and ranking members in the 115th Congress, which convenes in January • Some changes will occur as a result of retirements and election outcomes • Term limits will also force changes on some committees – Republicans can serve three Congresses, or six years total, as chairman and ranking member – Democrats don’t impose term limits • In the following slides, you’ll see: – A breakdown of major committees that could have new leaders after Nov. 8 – The candidates for chairman and ranking member under a slimmer Republican majority – How movement on one committee could mean changes for others 3 Democrats would need a huge wave to retake the house • While Democrats are poised to gain seats, winning the 30 seats needed for a majority is unlikely. 4 Appropriations: Rogers’ term limit creates opportunity for Republicans • Republicans: Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) is term limited and will seek the top spot on the panel’s Defense Subcommittee. He’ll probably be succeeded by current Defense Subcommittee Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) or Ag-FDA Subcommittee Chairman Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.). Frelinghuysen Lowey • Democrats: Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) will probably retain her position as ranking member. Other notes: Rogers would face off against Kay Granger • (R-Texas) for the Defense Subcommittee. Aderholt Republican Chairman Ranking Democrat Current Hal Rogers (Ky.) Nita Lowey (N.Y.) 115th Congress Rodney Frelinghuysen (N.J.) or Lowey Robert Aderholt (Ala.) Photo credits: House portraits Sources: Yarmuth Sets Sights on Succeeding Van Hollen on Budget; Buzz Builds on Becerra’s Future Plans; House Gavel Switch: Yarmuth Eyes Budget Tool for Immigration 5 Budget: Van Hollen will be replaced as ranking member • Republicans: Tom Price (R-Ga.) will probably remain as chairman.
    [Show full text]
  • Maintaining Us Influence in South Asia
    MAINTAINING U.S. INFLUENCE IN SOUTH ASIA: THE FY 2018 BUDGET HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION SEPTEMBER 7, 2017 Serial No. 115–76 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 26–758PDF WASHINGTON : 2017 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:48 Nov 30, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 F:\WORK\_AP\090717\26758 SHIRL COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida TED POE, Texas KAREN BASS, California DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina AMI BERA, California MO BROOKS, Alabama LOIS FRANKEL, Florida PAUL COOK, California TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas RON DESANTIS, Florida ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania TED S.
    [Show full text]
  • Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Advisory Committee As of April 17, 2014
    Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Advisory Committee As of April 17, 2014 Honorary State Chair Hon. Mark S. Schweiker Governor, State of Pennsylvania Renee Amoore Deputy Chair, PA Republican State Committee Abraham Amorós PA Legislative Director, Laborers International Union of North America Alex Archawski Founder & Director, Greater Philadelphia Veterans Network Heather Arnet CEO, Women & Girls Foundation of Western PA Otto V. Banks Executive Director, REACH Foundation Dr. Esther L. Barazzone President, Chatham University Gene Barr President and CEO, Pennsylvania Chamber Dorothy Bassett Dean, Duquesne University William F. Benter Chairman, Acusis LLC. Charles E. Bogosta President, International and Commercial Services Division, UPMC Donald Bonk Consultant, Carnegie Mellon University Hon. Robert Borski Former Member of Congress Brendan Boyle State Representative David Briel Executive Director, PA Department of Community and Economic Development Carol Brooks Manager, International Trade, U.S. Export-Import Bank Dana Brown Pennsylvania Center for Women and Politics at Chatham University Andrew Cheesboro CEO, Small Seeds Development INC Dave Christian U.S. Veteran Lalit Chordia Founder and President, Thar Tech INC Dr. Jared L. Cohon President, Carnegie Mellon University Kelly Colvin Associate Director for the Center on Regional Politics, Temple University Linda Conlin President, World Trade Center of Greater Philadelphia Rev. Luis Cortes, Jr. President, Esperanza Roger O. Cranville Honorary Consul General, Canada Lou Crocco Senior Advisor, The Abraham Group LLC Barbara Cross Commissioner, Cumberland County Simin Yazdgerdi Curtis President and CEO, American Middle East Institute Kathy Dahlkemper Erie County Executive and Former Member of Congress Hai-Lung Dai Dean, College of Science and Technology at Temple University Matt Drozd Allegheny County Councilman, LT Colonel USAFR Ret Hon.
    [Show full text]