[PAA-Discuss] Discuss Digest, Vol 13, Issue 85
STANLEY MERRIMAN
stan.merriman at sbcglobal.net
Sat Aug 26 21:41:26 EDT 2006
Bill, re: an election reform forum....my understanding is that the PPC/Bob and Aimee Turney have one in the works....I think for Oct. with the Rice U. Young Dems. To be confirmed but that is my understanding. Stan
discuss-request at paa-tx.org wrote: Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
discuss at paa-tx.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
discuss-request at paa-tx.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
discuss-owner at paa-tx.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
When replying to this digest, please delete the text of all messages EXCEPT the one you're replying to, and change the subject to reflect the subject of that individual message.
Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it goes to the correct address (to the entire list or to an individual).
Today's Topics:
1. Re: FW: CCR Attorney on Book TV Impeachment Panel Sat/Sun
(ChasMauch at aol.com)
2. Houston forum on election reform? (Bill Crosier)
3. Keith's letter in Hou Chronicle -verifiable voting, Kaufman,
Pierre (Bill Crosier)
4. Re: Guess what I did the night before last! (Paul Myers)
5. Re: Keith's letter in Hou Chronicle -verifiable voting,
Kaufman, Pierre (goodwille at swbell.net)
From: ChasMauch at aol.com
To: leeloe at igc.org, discuss at paa-tx.org, codepinkhouston at lists.riseup.net,
ttinker at wave.bicv.net
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:49:01 EDT
Subject: Re: [PAA-Discuss] FW: CCR Attorney on Book TV Impeachment Panel
Sat/Sun
Lee, this sounds very interesting. What channel is C-Span2 on? I can't find it in the Chronicle's TV listings or in the TV Guide. Thanks.
Charlie M
______________
In a message dated 8/26/06 1:04:06 A.M. Central Daylight Time, leeloe at igc.org writes:
---------------------------------
From: Center for Constitutional Rights [mailto:ccr at mail.democracyinaction.org]
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 5:05 PM
To: leeloe at igc.org
Subject: CCR Attorney on Book TV Impeachment Panel Sat/Sun
C-Span "Book TV" Airs The Case for Impeachment
Dear Center for Constitutional Rights Supporter,
We would like to alert you to a provocative and timely discussion covering Impeachment this weekend on CSpan's Book TV.
This Saturday, C-Span will premiere an exciting 75-minute program featuring the Center for Constitutional Rights' Deputy Legal Director Barbara Olshansky and journalist Dave Lindorff discussing their book "The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office." The show was taped by C-Span at Robin's Books in Philadelphia in July. It will begin airing nationally on C-Span2's "Book TV" program this Saturday, August 26, at 11pm Eastern (8pm Pacific) and again on Sunday, August 27, at 8:15am Eastern (5:15am Pacific).
Meanwhile, if you want to check out an informative and intelligent (and civilized!) discussion about the Bush impeachment issue, it's going on all this week at Salon Table Talk. Anyone can follow the discussion, which features Lindorff and Olshansky, and others interested in the book and the issue. You have to contact Mary Beth, the host, about joining in, but anyone can read the entries. "Table Talk" will be featuring the impeachment issue all this week. (If you aren't a paid subscriber to Salon, go to www.Salon.com, click on the ad, watch it for one frame, and then get a free day pass.)
For further information about the case for impeachment please visit:
http://articlesofimpeachment.com/
http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/home.asp
Know your rights,
Nicholas Jahr
Center for Constitutional Rights
---------------
Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
Discuss mailing list Discuss at paa-tx.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options on this list, go to:
http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org
To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".
To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply All".
Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it goes to the correct address.
From: Bill Crosier <paa at crosierbiomed.com>
To: PAA Discussion List <discuss at paa-tx.org>,
Pokey Anderson <pokeyink at aol.com>, David Mitcham <dmitcham at texas.net>,
Nata Koerber <NataKoerber at sbcglobal.net>, tom.rackley at hcfcd.org,
John Behrman <jrbehrman at alumni.rice.edu>,
Gerry Birnberg <birnberg at wba-law.com>,
Goodwille Pierre <goodwille at swbell.net>, Larry Veselka <lveselka at skv.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:00:02 -0500
Subject: [PAA-Discuss] Houston forum on election reform?
I know several of you have been talking about having a forum on
electoral reform that would focus on Harris County problems. This
might also provide a stump from which James Goodwille Pierre could
promote his campaign against Beverly Kaufman. Think we might get her
to participate? If she refuses, this would only be to Pierre's
advantage, but it would be good if we could get her there. And
anything that gets more people talking about the problems with lack
of verification in our election system is good.
2004 Presidential candidates David Cobb (Green party) and Michael
Badnarik (Libertarian) will both be in Houston around Sep. 15-16.
I'll bet they would both be interested in an electoral reform event
if they could work it into their schedule, and they might help draw
more folks to come to an event than if it appeared to be organized by
just Dems. Badnarik & Cobb were the ones who demanded a recount in
Ohio after Kerry wimped out on us after the 2004 election. They are
both going to be at a third parties thing here in Houston called
"Common Ground" on Sep. 16. Of course, Badnarik is also in the
ballot in Texas this year (running as a Libertarian in the 10th CD,
against Michael McCaul & Ted Ankrum) and I don't want to promote his
candidacy over Ankrum, but he might be a good person to have at the
event because of his fight for an Ohio recount in 2004.
Someone like Pokey Anderson, who is a respected journalist and who
cares passionately about fixing our broken election system, could be
a great MC or moderator if she's available, and again would help make
the event more nonpartisan than if we had some prominent Dems running
the show.
I think a forum on verifiable voting here in Houston, before the Nov.
elections would be a good way to get interest for James Goodwille
Pierre's campaign http://jamesgpierreforcountyclerk.com/ As you
know, he's running for county clerk against Bev Kaufman, and is one
of the few candidates who is regularly talking about the need for
verifiable voting. I think this is a critical issue, one that
Kaufman is very weak on. Goodwille is a great candidate, and we
should be doing all we can to help him.
Suggestions/comments? If you like the idea, who can help get it organized?
Bill
--
Bill Crosier
paa at crosierbiomed.com 713-641-4941
Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
Lying, Spying, Torture... IMPEACH! http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/
From: Bill Crosier <paa at crosierbiomed.com>
CC: Larry Veselka <lveselka at skv.com>, John Behrman <jrbehrman at alumni.rice.edu>,
Pokey Anderson <pokeyink at aol.com>, David Mitcham <dmitcham at texas.net>,
Stan Merriman <stan.merriman at sbcglobal.net>,
tom.rackley at hcfcd.org, Gerry Birnberg <birnberg at wba-law.com>,
Goodwille Pierre <goodwille at swbell.net>,
Nata Koerber <NataKoerber at sbcglobal.net>
To: PAA Discussion List <discuss at paa-tx.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:00:39 -0500
Subject: [PAA-Discuss] Keith's letter in Hou Chronicle -verifiable voting,
Kaufman, Pierre
Keith Koski has an excellent letter in today's Houston Chronicle, on
verifiable voting & Beverly Kaufman's fight against it. Congrats,
Keith!
Thanks to him and to the others of you who have written letters to
the Chron on this subject. I know they don't print them all, but
every one helps encourage them to keep covering this issue more.
Keith's letter is below, and at
http://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/4142240.html
Bill
- - - - - - -
Keith's letter:
Kaufman 'dime-wise' on votes
THANKS to the Chronicle for the Aug. 20 editorial "Ballot backstop,"
which called for voter verifiable paper trails. As the political
pendulum constantly swings, it is necessary for voters from all
across the spectrum to have faith in the democratic process. Harris
County Clerk Beverly Kaufman's refusal to consider a mere $8 million
to ensure that faith is both dime-wise and dollar-foolish.
Harris County is the third-most populous county in the United States,
has net assets exceeding $9.7 billion, and a AA+ bond rating. The
least its election facilitators can do is allow responsible taxpayers
of all political persuasions to check their votes on small pieces of
paper as they walk away from the voting machines.
KEITH A. KOSKI Houston
--
Bill Crosier
paa at crosierbiomed.com 713-641-4941
Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
Lying, Spying, Torture... IMPEACH! http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/
From: "Paul Myers" <PaulandCarole at msn.com>
CC: Choozpeace at aol.com, discuss <discuss at paa-tx.org>, Karmen_Chartier at yahoo.com,
JohnChachere at hotmail.com, Robert_Waller at hines.com,
susan at southmainalliance.org, drew_daubenspeck at yahoo.com,
smccutch at flash.net, mikebourgeois at sbcglobal.net,
massoud1 at alltel.net, marquessa at sbcglobal.net, syoung at airmail.net,
dbradley at kpft.org, csbourgeois at yahoo.com, blimycapn at oplink.net,
leighza68 at yahoo.com, moeg_99 at yahoo.com, lsb <lsb at kpft.org>, jacbat at pdq.net
To: "Richard Uzzell" <richard_uzzell_3 at hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 15:00:57 -0500
Subject: Re: [PAA-Discuss] Guess what I did the night before last!
Well thank you Richard,
I understand your point and suggest that there seems to be a focus on the term "collaboration." I, on the other hand, have a fixation on the term "work with" that means just that and perhaps even consensus.
I suggest that the relevant paragraph from the By-Laws, in its entirety, relates to the oversight responsibilities and authority of the LSB and the Station Manager to ensure that the procedures for making programming decisions, evaluations and for working in a collaborative and respectful manor are fulfilled throughout the local KPFT organization. If any of these are violated the LSB and management are to work together to resolve the issue.
If a LSB suggests to a station manager certain changes to meet or further enhance the purposes of the foundation as defined in the By-Laws and these changes are rebuffed, the LSB can initiate a process that can lead to the station manager's termination. The LSB also is responsible to evaluate the station manager's performance. Isn't it incumbent upon the station manager to listen and work with the entire LSB?
Isn't a balance of power intended here like with what is supposed to happen between Congress and the resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?
While I have found and read the Pacifica By-Laws, I have not been fortunate to have found, read and studied the Pacifica Foundation Procedure that is mentioned below. Isn't a procedure a lower level document that must comply with the Pacifica By-Laws?
While I can not agree more that The Pacifica Bylaws do not give our LSB any programming "authority" -----any more than the By-Laws gives the Station manager that authority. The By-Laws do, however, direct the LSB and the Program Manager to "work together" to achieve the goals of the foundation as related to programming.
As you correctly mention the Executive Director and others are appointed by the National Board that prescribes powers for the officers of the foundation that are to be consistent with the By-Laws. This is in opposition to procedures that are to be based upon the By-Law that may very well be in violation of the By-Laws.
Is it possible that the folks at the National level are not in compliance with these relatively new By-Laws?
New By-Laws ----- that have been in place for about five years. Might these By-Laws change what has gone on for the previous 36 years, just as things changed when slavery was ended?
History is such an interesting subject that it gets confusing sometimes, because people see things differently. Rather that suggesting that you or I are wrong, let's consider that no one can be in a 100% error.
If I am not mistaken the new Pacifica is intended to be more participatory in the way it does it's business, as the past been been witness to strong station managers? Is this the first time this conflict has arisen?
You are again correct when you suggest that the By-Laws do not dictate how the LSB and the Station Manager work together. However, considering the last paragraph, the amount of listener participation and donations required, don't the listeners and all the LSB members deserve to see and hear what criteria is used and how it is reflected in the programming decisions?
Has not the "Program Council" morphed over time to ensure that some LSB members are not included and that "management" has more control over who participants on the "Program Council"?
Should not the meetings and minutes that demonstrate LSB and station management working together be open to the public as can be easily interpreted as being required by the By-Laws for LSB meetings?
Doesn't making the PC, that has both listener and LSB members, a management committee just a way to avoid of compliance with the By-Law requirements for transparency of LSB meetings?
Politically, the station manager may have the upper hand, if the Executive Director backs his position, but over time that can change. Well maybe in a hundred years.
There may not be anything to do except bring the facts to the attention of the listeners in hopes they will read, react and call LSB members, that the listeners will join KPFT and vote for LSB members that are independent, aware that the foundation of peace and nonviolence is spirituality, aware of the feelings and needs of others, work by consensus in a so called democratic environment and, lastly, for those that can walk their talk.
What I am suggesting is the election of a strong, competent and independent LSB that will send strong representatives to the National Board.
The Executive Director you mention can also be let go by the Pacifica Board if they so choose, and there are four National Board members from each Pacifica station. Strong representation form the Pacifica Stations can have an effect on the way the National Board and Executive Director see things.
By the way, what are the backgrounds and qualifications of the LSB members and candidates for LSB? What are there areas of expertise? What are their pluses and minus? Where can this information be found?
Have a nice weekend,
Paul Myers
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Uzzell
To: PaulandCarole at msn.com ; lsb at kpft.org
Cc: dbradley at kpft.org ; susan at southmainalliance.org ; blimycapn at oplink.net ; jacbat at pdq.net ; Karmen_Chartier at yahoo.com ; Choozpeace at aol.com ; csbourgeois at yahoo.com ; drew_daubenspeck at yahoo.com ; moeg_99 at yahoo.com ; JohnChachere at hotmail.com ; massoud1 at alltel.net ; smccutch at flash.net ; mikebourgeois at sbcglobal.net ; syoung at airmail.net ; Robert_Waller at hines.com ; marquessa at sbcglobal.net ; leighza68 at yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 11:02 AM
Subject: RE: Guess what I did the night before last!
Mr. Myer,
Good to have you at the meeting. All Approved Meeting Minutes are posted at kpft.org.
Please allow me to comment on your comments about the Program Council. Early on, you said that the PC "is a shift of responsibility and authority from the LSB to Station Management." Respectfully, this is incorrect.
The FCC and Pacifica Foundation Procedure (as it has for 36 years) places programming responsibility and authority squarely in the domain of the General Manager. The Foundation Executive Director (who works for the Pacifica National Board (PNB)), hires the GM to fulfill this task.
The current Pacifica Bylaws envisions (and I strongly support) more involvement by listening members. The Local Station Board (LSB), although locally elected, is officially a committee of the PNB. Our LSB has limited authority. Our LSB has no programming "authority." The Pacifica Bylaws do not give our LSB any programming "authority." The Bylaws do say that the LSB should "collaborate" with management to assure that programming is meeting the mission statement. Although, you will find a couple of LSB member who mistakenly read this to mean that the LSB is "in charge;" most of us understand that this means work with, not rule.
The Bylaws call for "collaboration" gives NO direction for how this will take place. Our establishment of a KPFT Program Council is our effort to build, out of nothing, a vehicle with which we can all work together to facilitate this input. This effort is still infant, and quit weak. I sincerely hope that you are interested in building and strenghtening this worthwhile effort.
After the Program Council is re-established, listener-member who are interested in serving on the council will be choosen for that task. If you are interested, please put your name in the hat.
Respectfully,
Richard Uzzell, KPFT LSB Secretary
Richard Uzzell !
From: goodwille at swbell.net
CC: Larry Veselka <lveselka at skv.com>, John Behrman <jrbehrman at alumni.rice.edu>,
Pokey Anderson <pokeyink at aol.com>, David Mitcham <dmitcham at texas.net>,
Stan Merriman <stan.merriman at sbcglobal.net>,
tom.rackley at hcfcd.org, Gerry Birnberg <birnberg at wba-law.com>,
Nata Koerber <natakoerber at sbcglobal.net>
To: "Bill Crosier" <paa at crosierbiomed.com>,
"PAA Discussion List" <discuss at paa-tx.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 21:30:59 +0000
Subject: Re: [PAA-Discuss] Keith's letter in Hou Chronicle -verifiable
voting, Kaufman, Pierre
I agee. This is a great letter. The momentum is building my friends. 74 Days left. We can do this, we can win this!!!
James G. Pierre for Harris County Clerk
I am sending this email via my BlackBerry.
Please excuse spelling errors
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Crosier
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:00:39
To:PAA Discussion List
Cc:Stan Merriman , David Mitcham , Nata Koerber , tom.rackley at hcfcd.org, John Behrman , Gerry Birnberg , Goodwille Pierre , Larry Veselka , Pokey Anderson
Subject: Keith's letter in Hou Chronicle -verifiable voting, Kaufman,
Pierre
Keith Koski has an excellent letter in today's Houston Chronicle, on
verifiable voting & Beverly Kaufman's fight against it. Congrats,
Keith!
Thanks to him and to the others of you who have written letters to
the Chron on this subject. I know they don't print them all, but
every one helps encourage them to keep covering this issue more.
Keith's letter is below, and at
http://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/4142240.html
Bill
- - - - - - -
Keith's letter:
Kaufman 'dime-wise' on votes
THANKS to the Chronicle for the Aug. 20 editorial "Ballot backstop,"
which called for voter verifiable paper trails. As the political
pendulum constantly swings, it is necessary for voters from all
across the spectrum to have faith in the democratic process. Harris
County Clerk Beverly Kaufman's refusal to consider a mere $8 million
to ensure that faith is both dime-wise and dollar-foolish.
Harris County is the third-most populous county in the United States,
has net assets exceeding $9.7 billion, and a AA+ bond rating. The
least its election facilitators can do is allow responsible taxpayers
of all political persuasions to check their votes on small pieces of
paper as they walk away from the voting machines.
KEITH A. KOSKI Houston
--
Bill Crosier
paa at crosierbiomed.com 713-641-4941
Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
Lying, Spying, Torture... IMPEACH! http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/
---------------
Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
Discuss mailing list Discuss at paa-tx.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options on this list, go to:
http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org
The present state of America is truly alarming
to every man who is capable of reflexion.
Thomas Paine 1776
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20060826/055c83ec/attachment.htm>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list