DOCSLIB.ORG

2006 Ballot Measure Overview

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2006 Ballot Measure Overview 2006 BALLOT MEASURE OVERVIEW AN A NALYSIS O F TH E MON EY RAISED A RO UND MEASU RES O N STA TE BA LLO TS I N 2006 By THE N ATIO NA L IN STI TU TE O N MON EY IN STA TE PO LI TI CS NOVEMBER 5, 2007 833 NORTH LAST CHANCE GULCH, SECOND FLOOR • HELENA, MT • 59601 PHONE 406-449-2480 • FAX 406-457-2091 • E-MAIL [email protected] www.followthemoney.org The National Institute on Money in State Politics is the only nonpartisan, nonprofit organization revealing the influence of campaign money on state-level elections and public policy in all 50 states. Our comprehensive and verifiable campaign-finance database and relevant issue analyses are available for free through our Web site FollowTheMoney.org. We encourage transparency and promote independent investigation of state-level campaign contributions by journalists, academic researchers, public-interest groups, government agencies, policymakers, students and the public at large. 833 North Last Chance Gulch, Second Floor • Helena, MT 59601 Phone: 406-449-2480 • Fax: 406-457-2091 E-mail: [email protected] www.FollowTheMoney.org This publication was made possible by grants from: JEHT Foundation, Fair and Participatory Elections Carnegie Corporation of New York, Strengthening U.S. Democracy Ford Foundation, Program on Governance and Civil Society The Pew Charitable Trusts, State Policy Initiatives Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Program on Democratic Practice The statements made and the views expressed are solely the responsibility of the Institute. National Institute on Money in State Politics © 2007 2 TA BLE OF CON TENTS Overview..................................................................................................4 Methodology.................................................................................7 Smoking Showdown.................................................................................8 High Stakes: Gambling Ballot Measures.................................................25 Eminent Threat?.....................................................................................37 Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Take Battle to the Ballot..................................51 Taxpayer Bill of Rights ..........................................................................68 The Money Behind the 2006 Marriage Amendments ..............................83 Voters Give Workers a Raise................................................................122 Appendix A..........................................................................................141 National Institute on Money in State Politics © 2007 3 OVERVIEW Although citizens had the last word on Election Day, a close look at who funded state ballot measure campaigns in 2006 reveals that they are often anything but citizen-driven grassroots efforts. Out-of-state donors, large corporations, special interests and wealthy individuals provided the lion’s share of the money raised to support or defeat the 2006 measures. Committees formed to support or oppose the measures raised $648.4 million in contributions, or 28 percent more than the $540 million raised around measures on the ballots in 2004 (see Appendix A on page 141 for 2006 totals by state). The 2005 ballot measures attracted $466.2 million, thanks largely to expensive measures in California. An analysis of the $648.4 million raised around the measures in 2006 reveals: . Individual donors played a relatively small role in funding the campaigns, providing just 23 percent of the total contributions raised, or $147.5 million. However, most of that money, or $101.3 million, was given by just 15 donors who gave $1 million or more. Controversial measures on same-sex marriage, minimum wages, property rights, abortion and others appeared on ballots in more than one state, often orchestrated by the same proponents. The 2006 elections saw a major surge of ballot measures from previous years: 219 measures were on the ballot in 37 states in 2006 — the third- highest in 100 years1 — and almost double the 111 measures on ballots in 28 states in 2004. During the 2005 off-year election, nine states had a total of 25 measures on the ballots, similar to the 24 measures on ballots in 11 states in 2003. Businesses and special interests were the primary donors to ballot measure committees, giving $444.7 million, or 69 percent of the money raised around the 2006 measures. Tobacco company giants R.J. Reynolds and Altria, along with their affiliates and political action committees, were among the top three donors in this group, giving $46.8 million and $35.3 million, respectively, in eight states. Chevron Corporation was the second largest, giving $38.9 million to campaigns in Alaska, California and Colorado. Labor organizations contributed another $48.2 million, while unitemized contributions — those that fall under the states' reporting threshold for providing donor information — came to $3.3 million. The remaining $4.7 million came from party, candidate and leadership committees. Out-of-state donors played a pivotal role as financiers of the ballot measure campaigns, giving nearly $155 million, or 23 percent of the total contributions. Measures in three states — California, Ohio and Arizona — attracted most of the out-of-state donations. The measures in California attracted nearly $58 million, while the measures in Ohio and Arizona received $17 million and $15.7 million, respectively. 1 Pamela M. Prah, “Cancer Research, Vouchers on '07 Ballots,” Stateline.org [on-line] Oct. 1, 2007; available from http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=244564; Internet; accessed Oct. 4, 2007. National Institute on Money in State Politics © 2007 4 Although individual donors as a group were minor players, three individuals rose above the crowd: . Stephen Bing, a Hollywood movie producer, was the largest donor overall, giving $49.6 million in support of the failed Proposition 87 in California. The measure would have imposed a profit tax on energy companies and allotted $4 billion for alternative energy research. Bing’s contributions — the most ever given by an individual — accounted for 83 percent of the $59.7 million raised by supporters of the measure. James and Virginia Stowers, of the Stowers Institute for Medical Research, gave $26.8 million in support of the successful Amendment 2 in Missouri that allows for stem cell research, therapies and cures. (The Stowers Institute itself gave an additional $79,068.) The Stowers’ personal contributions accounted for 82 percent of the $32.6 million raised in support of the measure. Not appearing on any campaign-finance reports, but still a heavy-hitter, was New York real estate magnate and active Libertarian Howard Rich. Although Rich never made any direct contributions, three of every four dollars raised by proponents of the so-called Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR) measures on ballots in several states could be traced back to him. Altogether, groups affiliated with Rich provided $7.6 million to support the measures, three of which were rejected by voters and five that were disqualified after successful court challenges by opponents. CA LIFO RNIA LEAD S TH E PA CK California’s 15 ballot measures were the most costly, garnering a total of $359.1 million, or 55 percent of the money raised. Missouri’s seven ballot measures came in a distant second, with nearly $52 million, $36.7 million of which was raised around the highly controversial Amendment 2, which allowed and set limitations on stem cell research, therapies and cures. Arizona had the second highest number of measures on the ballot in 2006 — 17 — that attracted nearly $32.5 million. The most expensive measure on the ballot in 2006 was California’s Proposition 87, which garnered $153.9 million in contributions. The measure, known as the Clean Alternative Energy Program, would have established a $4 billion program to fund research and production incentives for alternative energy, with the goal of reducing the state’s petroleum consumption by 25 percent. The program would have been funded by a severance tax on producers of oil extracted in California.2 The funding of this measure typifies the point that ballot measure campaigns are not grassroots campaigns, driven instead by large corporations, special interests and wealthy individuals. Ninety-nine percent of the $94.2 million raised in opposition to the measure came from oil production companies. Two companies in particular shelled out substantial sums to fight the 2 “California General Election Official Voter Information Guide,” California Secretary of State [on-line]; available from http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/props/prop87/prop87.html; Internet; accessed Nov. 1, 2007. National Institute on Money in State Politics © 2007 5 measure. Chevron, headquartered in San Francisco, Calif., gave $38 million, and Aera Energy, “one of California’s largest oil and gas producers, accounting for approximately 30% of the state’s production,”3 gave $32.8 million. Just 11 individuals gave in opposition to Proposition 87, contributing a total of $60,100. By comparison, 153 individual donors gave in support of Proposition 87. However, one individual, Stephen Bing, as mentioned earlier, provided 83 percent of the $59.7 million in contributions given by supporters of the measure. In the end, the opponents’ contributions paid off, as voters rejected the measure by a vote of 45 percent in favor to 55 percent against. ISSU ES A CROSS STA TE LIN ES Several issues appeared on ballots in several states in 2006. The Institute researched these “clusters”
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Voters in CA, WA and ID Reject Efforts to Gut Local Zoning and Environmental Protections
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 8, 2006 Voters in CA, WA and ID Reject Efforts to Gut Local Zoning and Environmental Protections Using eminent domain as Trojan Horse fails to fool most voters CONTACT: Alex Goldschmidt, Smart Growth America, (202) 207-3355 x112, [email protected] Washington, DC – Voters in three key Western states Tuesday resoundingly rejected anti-taxpayer measures that sought to hamstring communities’ efforts to manage growth and protect property values and the environment. Foisted onto the ballots with millions from New York real estate mogul Howard Rich and his allied groups, the measures in California, Washington and Idaho would have mimicked a 2004 measure from Oregon, requiring taxpayers to pay landowners when a zoning or environmental protection reduced their speculative profits. If taxpayers couldn’t pay they would have to waive the rules, solely for those landowners. “Voters know their communities need to be able to make sound, local decisions in order to protect our neighborhoods, clean water and quality of life,” said Don Chen, executive director of Smart Growth America. “While our coalition doggedly defends the rights of individual property owners, these measures were really about crippling community planning and creating windfalls for certain speculators.” Only one of the four pay-or-waive measures, Arizona’s Proposition 207, was approved. There, Rich and company deceptively claimed the initiative was limited to restricting the use of eminent domain, and under-funded opponents lacked the resources to unmask the ruse amid 18 other ballot initiatives. Rich poured $1.5 million into the effort to undermine Arizona’s capacity to deal with its rapid growth and protect the state’s military bases from encroaching development.
    [Show full text]
  • 2003 Annual Report
    2003 Annual Report Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund and Leadership Institute 1705 DeSales Street NW, Suite 500 Washington DC 20036 202 842.8679 main 202 289.3863 fax www.victoryfund.org Find out how you can through. www.victoryinstitute.org a through is www.victoryfund.org www.victoryinstitute.org designed and produced by see see eye / Atlanta the first lesbian elected to the U. S. Congress. U.S. Representative Tammy Baldwin Wisconsin 2nd Congressional District Dane County Board of Supervisors 1986–1994 Wisconsin State Assembly 1992–1998 First elected to Congress in 1998 Victory Fund endorsed 1992–2004 First lesbian elected to U.S. Congress 1 the first openly gay African-American mayor popularly elected in U.S. 2 Mayor – Palm Springs, California Mayor Ron Oden Appointed to Palm Springs City Council in 1995; Elected in 1998 Elected mayor in 2003 Victory Fund endorsed 2000, 2003 First openly gay African-American mayor popularly elected in U.S. 3 increasing the number of openly gay public officials more than fivefold in just over a decade. 4 Victory has invested millions of dollars to help LGBT candidates get elected and advance professionally. 5 sending gay and lesbian officials and leaders to the best leadership training in the country. 6 Victory has provided hundreds of thousands of dollars in fellowships to LGBT individuals who have been accepted by Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. 7 a professionally managed forum where hundreds of openly LGBT public officials can exchange ideas and build on their success. 8 Victory has enabled hundreds of LGBT officials from around the world to meet and advance their leadership.
    [Show full text]
  • How and Why Idaho Terminated Term Limits Scott .W Reed
    Idaho Law Review Volume 50 | Number 3 Article 1 October 2014 How and Why Idaho Terminated Term Limits Scott .W Reed Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/idaho-law-review Recommended Citation Scott .W Reed, How and Why Idaho Terminated Term Limits, 50 Idaho L. Rev. 1 (2014). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uidaho.edu/idaho-law-review/vol50/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ UIdaho Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Idaho Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ UIdaho Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HOW AND WHY IDAHO TERMINATED TERM LIMITS SCOTT W. REED1 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1 II. THE 1994 INITIATIVE ...................................................................... 2 A. Origin of Initiatives for Term Limits ......................................... 3 III. THE TERM LIMITS HAVE POPULAR APPEAL ........................... 5 A. Term Limits are a Conservative Movement ............................. 6 IV. TERM LIMITS VIOLATE FOUR STATE CONSTITUTIONS ....... 7 A. Massachusetts ............................................................................. 8 B. Washington ................................................................................. 9 C. Wyoming ...................................................................................... 9 D. Oregon ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Arcus Foundation 2012 Annual Report the Arcus Foundation Is a Leading Global Foundation Advancing Pressing Social Justice and Conservation Issues
    ConservationSocialJustice Arcus Foundation 2012 Annual Report The Arcus Foundation is a leading global foundation advancing pressing social justice and conservation issues. The creation of a more just and humane world, based on diversity, Arcus works to advance LGBT equality, as well as to conserve and protect the great apes. equality, and fundamental respect. L etter from Jon Stryker 02 L etter from Kevin Jennings 03 New York, U.S. Cambridge, U.K. Great Apes 04 44 West 28th Street, 17th Floor Wellington House, East Road New York, NY 10001 U.S. Cambridge CB1 1BH, U.K. Great Apes–Grantees 22 Phone +1.212.488.3000 Phone +44.1223.451050 Fax + 1. 212.488.3010 Fax +44.1223.451100 Strategy 24 [email protected] [email protected] F inancials / Board & Staff ART DIRECTION & DESIGN: © Emerson, Wajdowicz Studios / NYC / www.DesignEWS.com EDITORIAL TEAM: Editor, Sebastian Naidoo Writers, Barbara Kancelbaum & Susanne Morrell 25 THANK YOU TO OUR GRANTEES, PARTNERS, AND FRIENDS WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THE CONTENT OF THIS REPORT. © 2013 Arcus Foundation Front cover photo © Jurek Wajdowicz, Inside front cover photo © Isla Davidson Movements—whether social justice, animal conservation, or any other—take time and a sustained sense of urgency, In 2012 alone, we partnered with commitment, and fortitude. more than 110 courageous organizations hotos © Jurek Wajdowicz hotos © Jurek P working in over 40 countries around the globe. Dear Friends, Dear Friends, As I write this letter we are approaching the number 880, which represents a nearly 400 Looking back on some of the significant of the Congo. Continued habitat loss, spillover 50th anniversary of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Billionaire LGBT Activist Paul Singer Partners with Christians to Reach Millennials
    Billionaire LGBT Activist Paul Singer Partners with Christians to Reach Millennials NATIONAL GAY AND HOBBY LESBIAN TASK LOBBY FORCE ACTION AMERICAN FUND UNITY FUND MUSEUM OF THE BIBLE AMERICAN UNITY PAC FREEDOM PASSAGES FOR ALL ISRAEL AMERICANS YOUNG CONSERVATIVES THE PHILOS PAUL E. LGBT FOR THE PROJECT SINGER UNIVERSITY FREEDOM TO FOUNDATION MARRY AMERICAN UNITY FUND – Created for the purpose of advancing LGBT causes in conservatism and backed by Paul Singer. AMERICAN UNITY PAC – A Super PAC launched by Paul Singer to elect pro-LGBT advocates to federal office. FREEDOM FOR ALL AMERICANS – Paul Singer partnered with Quark founder Tim Gill to start this pro-LGBT group. The group lists Hobby Lobby as an “enemy of equality” for giving money to the National Christian Foundation, a donor-advised fund. HOBBY LOBBY – Donated to MOTB. Steve Green is President of the company and also serves as Chairman of the Museum of the Bible. LGBT UNIVERSITY – LGBT University is a program of Freedom For All Americans to train young LGBT activists. MUSEUM OF THE BIBLE (MOTB) – Steve Green is Chairman of MOTB. President Cary Summers was involved with organizing Passages Israel and worked to obtain funding from Paul Singer and The Philos Project. MOTB leases office space from Hobby Lobby and pays a salary to Steve Green, President of Hobby Lobby. Since 2011, MOTB has had a traveling exhibit about the history of the Bible, called Passages. NATIONAL GAY AND LESBIAN TASK FORCE ACTION FUND – Funded by the Paul E. Singer Foundation PASSAGES ISRAEL – A tour and training program to reach Christian student leaders created in 2015 and jointly funded by the Museum of the Bible and Paul Singer through a nonprofit organization, The Philos Project.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report, 2018-19
    ANNUAL REPORT 2018-19 FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2019 “We are embarking on a forward trajectory that positions Howard University as a model of excellence, in a contemporary context, across everything we do, from academics to operations to fulfilling our legacy and mission of truth and service. This plan outlines our bold strategy to provide a quality educational experience while also doubling down on our commitment to produce distinguished global leaders.” PRESIDENT WAYNE A. I. FREDERICK, M.D., MBA 1 HISTORY OF HOWARD UNIVERSITY 2 LETTER FROM THE CHAIRMAN 3 LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT 5 THE YEAR IN REVIEW 13 STUDENT ACCOLADES 21 HIGH-PROFILE VISITORS 29 ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS 35 NEW APPOINTMENTS 39 STUDENT ENROLLMENT 41 FINANCIALS 47 BOARD OF TRUSTEES 48 ADMINISTRATION b HOWARD UNIVERSITY 2018-2019 ANNUAL REPORT HISTORY OF HOWARD UNIVERSITY Since 1867, Howard has awarded more than 100,000 acre facility in northwest Washington and a 108-acre tract of degrees in the professions, arts, sciences and humanities. land in Beltsville, MD. Howard ranks among the highest producers of the nation’s Black professionals in medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, Howard prepares men and women to advance social justice engineering, nursing, architecture, religion, law, music, social and the preservation of human liberty. In each of its 13 schools work and education. and colleges, Howard University seeks to develop technically competent and morally committed individuals. The University’s The University has long held a commitment to the study of library system contains more than 1.8 million volumes, disadvantaged persons in American society and throughout including the Channing Pollock Collection.
    [Show full text]
  • © Copyright 2020 Yunkang Yang
    © Copyright 2020 Yunkang Yang The Political Logic of the Radical Right Media Sphere in the United States Yunkang Yang A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2020 Reading Committee: W. Lance Bennett, Chair Matthew J. Powers Kirsten A. Foot Adrienne Russell Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Communication University of Washington Abstract The Political Logic of the Radical Right Media Sphere in the United States Yunkang Yang Chair of the Supervisory Committee: W. Lance Bennett Department of Communication Democracy in America is threatened by an increased level of false information circulating through online media networks. Previous research has found that radical right media such as Fox News and Breitbart are the principal incubators and distributors of online disinformation. In this dissertation, I draw attention to their political mobilizing logic and propose a new theoretical framework to analyze major radical right media in the U.S. Contrasted with the old partisan media literature that regarded radical right media as partisan news organizations, I argue that media outlets such as Fox News and Breitbart are better understood as hybrid network organizations. This means that many radical right media can function as partisan journalism producers, disinformation distributors, and in many cases political organizations at the same time. They not only provide partisan news reporting but also engage in a variety of political activities such as spreading disinformation, conducting opposition research, contacting voters, and campaigning and fundraising for politicians. In addition, many radical right media are also capable of forming emerging political organization networks that can mobilize resources, coordinate actions, and pursue tangible political goals at strategic moments in response to the changing political environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Sources/ Credits
    SNAKE, THE PLAIN AND ITS PEOPLE SOURCES/CRED ITS SOURCES/ CREDITS SE LECTIVE BI BLI OG RAP HY AN D SOU RCES OF TH E QUOTATIONS C H. 1: SEE I N G THE LA N D in Idaho," U.S. Geological Survey BlI lletin, I Park," U.S. Geological Survey Profess ional no. 199 (1902); State of Idaho, Dept. of Paper, no. 729-B (1972); CreIghton, D.N;; Alt, David D.,and Donald W. Hynd­ Agri culture, 1989 Agriculture Statistics "Menan Buttes, Southeas tern IdahD, man, Roadside GeologJ) of Idaho (1989) ; (1989); Stearns, Harold T., "Origins of the Rocky Mounta lJ1 SectIon of the Geologica I Arrington, Leonard L "Irrigation SOCiety of America, Centen11lal Field In the Snake River Valley: An H is- Guide, 2 (1 987):109-] 1; Doh erty, D.J., torical Overview," idaho Yesterdays L.A McBroome, and M.A Kuntz, 30 (Summer /Sp ring 1986):3-11 "Preliminary Geologic Interpreta­ ["They thought I was crazy" quote ti on and Lithologic Log of the Ex­ from p . 8]; Bartlett, Ri chard, Great ploratoryTest Well (1 EL-1 ), Idaho Surveys of the AlI1ericall West (1962); National Engineering Laboratory, Buwulda, John P., "A Preliminary Eastern Snake River Plain, Idaho," Reconnaissance of the Gas and Oil U.S. Geological Survey Open File Re­ Possibilities of Southwestern and port, no. 79-1248 (1979); Hackett, South-Central Idaho," Idaho Bureau W.R , and L.A.Morgan, "Explosive of Mines al1d Geology, pamphlet 5 Basaltic and Rhyolitic Volcanism of (July 1923) ["unfavorable" quote the Eastern Sna ke River Plain," from p. 10]; Gazin, C.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Libertarian
    FREE LIBERTARIAN Monthly Newsletter of the Free Libertarian Party VOL. 2, N0.1 1 JANUARY 1973 HOSPERS/NATHAN 3RD IN ELECTORALVOTES John Hospers, the Libertarian Party candidate for President, finished third in the presidential election receiving one electoral vote from Robert MacBride, an at­ torney from Charlottsville, Virginia. The one electoral vote FLP-EINDS HOME placed Hospers and his running mate Toni Nathan 16 votes behind Democrat George McGovern of South Dakota. The Free Libertarian Party of New York has finally found a ·permanent home. The party headquarters are moving to: Robert MacBride, a lifelong Republican, stated: "In casting my vote for another can_didate I am trying to tell 15 West 38th St., New York City 10018 (President Nixon) that he has lost his way; that this country should not move to a controlled mercantilistic economy .. " He further stated that he voted for the Libertarians "on behalf where we will have permanent office space, mailing address of the millions in this country who have helplessly watched and telephone listing. The telephone number will be an­ presidential leadership inexorably move the federal nounced in the next newsletter, and hopefully will be listed government in the direction of ever-greater control over the by Ma Bell in the directory. One never knows, but members lives of all of us." are urged to ask Ma anyway. Toni Nathan thus became the first woman to ever receive Anyone with electrical, carpentry, design or other skills is an electoral vote. Several women's magazines are now urged to contact Howard Rich at (212) 299-0686.
    [Show full text]
  • Return of Private Foundation
    iN Return of Private Foundation OMB No 1545.0052 Form 990 -PF or Section 4947( aXl) Trust Treated as Private Foundation Do not enter social security numbers on this form it may made public. Department of the Treasury ► as be 2015 internal Revenue Service lb, Information about Form 990-PF and its se parate instructions is at WwW.frS.gOV/fonn990pf. Open to im For calendar year 2015 or tax year beginning , and ending Name of foundation A Employer Identification number ARCUS FOUNDATION 38-3332791 Number and street (or P 0 box number it marl is not delivered to street address) Room/sulte I B Telephone number 44 WEST 28TH STREET, 17TH FLOOR 212-488-3000 City or town, state or province, C if application country, and ZIP or foreign postal code exemption is pending , check here ► NEW YORK, NY 10001 G Check all that apply: L_J Initial return L_J Initial return of a former public charity D 1. Foreign organizations , check here Final return Amended return 2 Foreign organizations meeting the 85% test, Add ress change Name change check here and attach computation H Check type of organization : © Section 501 (c)(3) exempt private foundation E If private foundation status was terminated = Section 4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust 0 Other taxable private foundation under section 507(b)(1)(A), check here I Fair market value of all assets at end of year J Accounting method : L_J Cash Accrual F If the foundation is in a 60-month termination ^p (from Part ll, col (c), line 16) 0 Other ( specify) under section 507(b)(1)(B), check here o 00.$ 17 9 , 15 0 , 3 8 9 .
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Print Viewer 11/17/10 11:27 AM
    Multi-Print Viewer 11/17/10 11:27 AM Oregon, 6 other states blanketed in records bid Oregonian, The (Portland, OR) - Saturday, October 7, 2006 Author: GOSIA WOZNIACKA, The Oregonian SUMMARY: FOIA | A group wants e-mail pertaining to property rights and spending limits, an effort that will cost time and money Close to 500 cities, school districts and state agencies in Oregon, and thousands more in six other states, have been hit with public records requests for all e-mails pertaining to any communication regarding measures on term limits, property rights or limiting spending, an undertaking most local municipalities say will take months and thousands of dollars to complete. A Virginia-based group, Citizens in Charge, is mounting what its Web site calls "a study of public resource abuse" under the name CitizenFOIA (FOIA stands for Freedom of Information Act). Citizens in Charge is aiming its campaign, which also includes requests for Internet and e-mail use policies and their enforcement, at Oregon and other states where groups backed by Howard Rich, the head of Americans for Limited Government and U.S. Term Limits, pushed spending limits or property rights measures this year. Citizens In Charge's president, Paul Jacob, says his group is nonpartisan. "Our goal is basically to find out to what degree public resources are being used for political campaigning and to make sure those resources are not abused," he said. Oregon election law forbids public employees to send, forward, copy or distribute e-mail that supports or opposes a political committee, election petition, candidate or measure.
    [Show full text]
  • From Generosity to Justice, a New Gospel of Wealth
    FROM GENEROSITY TO JUSTICE TO GENEROSITY FROM Pr a ise for From Generosity to Justice ndrew Carnegie wrote “The Gospel of “This will become a defining manifesto of our era.” A Wealth” in 1889, during the height of the —Walter Isaacson Gilded Age, when 4,000 American families controlled almost as much wealth as the rest of “Walker bravely tackles the subject of inequality with one pressing FROM the country combined. His essay laid the foun- Darren Walker is president of the Ford question in mind: What can philanthropy do about it?” dation for modern philanthropy. Foundation, a $13 billion international social justice —Ken Chenault Today, we find ourselves in a new Gilded philanthropy. He is co-founder and chair of the U.S. Age—defined by levels of inequality that sur- Impact Investing Alliance and the Presidents’ Council “A recalibration and reimagination of the philanthropic model crafted pass those of Carnegie’s time. The widening on Disability Inclusion in Philanthropy. by the Carnegie and Rockefeller families over a century ago. This new GENEROSITY chasm between the advantaged and the disad- Before joining Ford, Darren was vice president at the gospel must be heard all over the world!” vantaged demands our immediate attention. Rockefeller Foundation, overseeing global and domestic —David Rockefeller, Jr. Now is the time for a new Gospel of Wealth. programs. In the 1990s, he was COO of the Abyssinian In From Generosity to Justice: A New Gos- Development Corporation, Harlem’s largest community “Orchestrating a dynamic chorus of vital voices and vibrant vision, pel of Wealth, Darren Walker, president of the development organization.
    [Show full text]