Updated Campaign Financing Report for Michelle Courier

 

This report was previously posted on January 2 and is being reposted so readers may easily refer to it when reviewing her opponent, Tricia Smith’s report, which immediatley follows this posting.

 

To see earlier quarterly reports go to:  http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2015/08/campaign-filings-for-michelle-courier.html and http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2015/10/campaign-financing-disclosure-for.html

Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
D-2 Quarterly Report
10/1/2015 to 12/31/2015

 

Receipts.

---

1.
Individual Contributions:

a. Itemized  $544.54

Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
D-2 Quarterly Report
10/1/2015 to 12/31/2015
This report has 2 itemized Individual Contributions totaling $544.54

Contributed By
Address
Amount
Description
Vendor Name
Vendor Address

Courier, Michelle
Occupation: Boone County State's Attorney
Employer: Boone County State's Attorney
8239 Shaw Road
Belvidere, IL 61008
$44.54
10/13/2015
Individual Contribution

Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Northwestern Illinois Building Trades
212 S. 1st Street, Suite 106
Rockford, IL 61104
$500.00
10/7/2015
Individual Contribution

Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

$544.54

b. Not-Itemized
$500.00

2.
Transfers In:

a. Itemized (from Schedule A)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

3.
Loans Received:

a. Itemized
$1,963.95—all loans from Michelle Courier

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

4.
Other Receipts:

a. Itemized (from Schedule A)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

TOTAL RECEIPTS (1-4)
$3,008.49

---

5.
In-Kind Contributions:

a. Itemized
$975.00

Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
D-2 Quarterly Report
10/1/2015 to 12/31/2015
This report has 1 itemized In-Kind Contributions totaling $975.00

Contributed By
Address
Amount
Description
Vendor Name
Vendor Address

Hunt, Laura
Occupation: website designer
Employer: self
519 E. Lincoln Avenue
Belvidere, IL 61008
$975.00
12/31/2015
In-Kind Contribution
Website
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Hunt, Laura
519 E. Lincoln Avenue
Belvidere, IL 61008

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

TOTAL IN-KIND
$975.00

---

EXPENDITURES

---

6.
Transfers Out:

a. Itemized (From Schedule B)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

7.
Loans Made:

a. Itemized (From Schedule B)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

8.
Expenditures:

a. Itemized—SEE Below
$4,676.62

b. Not-Itemized
$649.84

9.
Independent Expenditures:

a. Itemized (From Schedule B-9)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

TOTAL EXPENDITURES (6-8)
$5,326.46

---

DEBTS AND OBLIGATIONS

---

9.

9 a. Itemized—A;; debts owed to the candidate, Michelle Courier as stated above loans increased by $1963.95
$53,793.48

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

TOTAL DEBTS AND OBLIGATIONS
$53,793.48

---

FUNDS BALANCE

---

Funds available at the beginning of the reporting period:
$21,774.89

Total Receipts:
$3,008.49

Subtotal:
$24,783.38

Total Expenditures:
$5,326.46

Funds available at the close of the reporting period:
$19,456.92

Investment Total:
$0.00

Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
D-2 Quarterly Report
10/1/2015 to 12/31/2015

This report has 22 itemized Expenditures totaling $4,676.62

Print this list

Received By
Address
Amount
Expended By
Purpose / Beneficiary

Allegra
19892 Belford North Drive
Belvidere, IL 61008
$237.50
12/23/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Belrock Printing
915 W. Perry Street
Belvidere, IL 61008
$156.00
12/15/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Belrock Printing
915 W. Perry Street
Belvidere, IL 61008
$156.00
12/19/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Belvidere Area Chamber
130 S. State Street
Suite 300
Belvidere, IL 61008
$105.00
10/5/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Entry fee Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Belvidere Area Chamber
130 S. State Street
Suite 300
Belvidere, IL 61008
$200.00
12/2/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Advertising Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Lindsey Auto Parts Inc
711 W. Grant Highway
Marengo, IL 60152
$138.67
12/15/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Sign equipment Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Lindsey Auto Parts Inc
711 W. Grant Highway
Marengo, IL 60152
$22.00
11/19/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Sign supplies Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Office Depot
6455 E. State Street
Rockford, IL 61108
$73.10
12/18/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Office Depot
6455 E. State Street
Rockford, IL 61108
$43.00
11/25/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Office Depot
6455 E. State Street
Rockford, IL 61108
$8.96
12/9/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Office supplies Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Office Depot
6455 E. State Street
Rockford, IL 61108
$8.65
12/13/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Office supplies Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Office Depot
6455 E. State Street
Rockford, IL 61108
$51.60
11/29/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Office Depot
6455 E. State Street
Rockford, IL 61108
$17.32
11/14/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Office Depot
6455 E. State Street
Rockford, IL 61108
$86.00
11/22/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

USPS
1800 Doc Wolf Drive
Belvidere, IL 61008
$61.20
11/23/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Postage Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

USPS
1800 Doc Wolf Drive
Belvidere, IL 61008
$109.20
11/16/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Postage Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

USPS
1800 Doc Wolf Drive
Belvidere, IL 61008
$73.20
10/14/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Postage Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

USPS
1800 Doc Wolf Drive
Belvidere, IL 61008
$87.00
10/21/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Postage Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

USPS
1800 Doc Wolf Drive
Belvidere, IL 61008
$94.80
11/6/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Postage Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Vistaprint Netherlands B.V.
P.O. Box 842882
Boston, MA 02284
$1,883.67
12/9/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Vistaprint Netherlands B.V.
P.O. Box 842882
Boston, MA 02284
$380.06
11/27/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Vistaprint Netherlands B.V.
P.O. Box 842882
Boston, MA 02284
$683.69
11/29/2015
Expenditure
Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier
Printing Citizens to Elect Michelle Courier

Records 1 to 22 of 22

Above records are from: http://www.elections.state.il.us/CampaignDisclosure/D2Quarterly.aspx?id=594871

Campaign Financing Report for Tricia Smith

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
D-2 Quarterly Report
10/1/2015 to 12/31/2015

To see previous campaign reports go to:  http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2015/10/campaign-financing-for-tricia-smith-for.html and http://boonecountywatchdog.blogspot.com/2015/08/campaign-filings-for-tricia-smith.html

---

 

Receipts

---

1.
Individual Contributions:

a. Itemized  See directly beow:
$4,098.00

130 S STATE
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$200.00
12/1/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

CARLSON, JEANIE
Occupation: RETIRED
Employer: RETIRED
205 TAYLOR RIDGE
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$200.00
11/12/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

CARLSON, JEANIE
Occupation: RETIRED
Employer: RETIRED
205 TAYLOR RIDGE
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$1,700.00
10/8/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

CAVER, BRENDAN
308 W. STATE ST #97
ROCKFORD, IL 61101
$500.00
12/31/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

DAVIS, DARREL
8726 DENNY RD.
GARDEN PAIRIE, IL 61038
$350.00
11/12/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

EAGLESON, DENNIS
3905 GREAT REPUBLIC RD
CHERRY VALLEY, IL 61016
$298.00
11/12/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

FREDERICK, JACQUELINE
106 CLINES FORD DR
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$200.00
11/12/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

LEE, KRISTINA
3489 CHERRY VALLEY RD
CHERRY VALLEY, IL 61016
$250.00
11/12/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

SMITH, SHIRLEY
1009 KRUPKE RD
CALEDONIA, IL 61011
$200.00
11/12/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

THIELEN, LYLE
141112TH AVE
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$200.00
12/1/2015
Individual Contribution

Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney

b. Not-Itemized
$3,823.00

2.
Transfers In:

a. Itemized (from Schedule A)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

3.
Loans Received:

a. Itemized—All from  candidate, TRICIA SMITH
$2,000.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

4.
Other Receipts:

a. Itemized (from Schedule A)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

TOTAL RECEIPTS (1-4)
$9,921.00

---

5.
In-Kind Contributions:

a. Itemized—all from Gallano Trucking
$587.19

GALLANO TRUCKING INC.
1202 IPSEN RD
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$587.19
10/29/2015
In-Kind Contribution
Fund raising - food
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
EICKMAN'S PROCESSING CO.
3226 S PECATONICA RD
SEWARD, IL 61077

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

TOTAL IN-KIND
$587.19

---

EXPENDITURES

---

6.
Transfers Out:

a. Itemized (From Schedule B)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

7.
Loans Made:

a. Itemized (From Schedule B)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

8.
Expenditures:

a. Itemized—See directly below
$7,289.88

ADAMS LETTER SERVICES
222 ROCKTON AVE
ROCKFORD, IL 61103
$1,437.88
12/3/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Mailing TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

BOONE COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING
2141 HENRY LUCKOW LN
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$350.00
10/20/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Donation TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

BOONE COUNTY FAIR
PO BOX 471
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$275.00
12/14/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Sponsorship TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

BOONE COUNTY JOURNAL
419 S. STATE ST
BELVIDERE, IL 61008
$190.00
10/29/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Advertising - newspaper TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

POPLAR GROVE FIRE STATION
305 W. GROVE ST
POPLAR GROVE, IL 61065
$600.00
10/29/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Fund raising - hall rental TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

ROCKFORD LITHO CENTER
1128 AUBURNTR.
ROCKFORD, IL 61103
$518.00
10/13/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Palm cards TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

ROCKFORD LITHO CENTER
1128 AUBURNTR.
ROCKFORD, IL 61103
$734.00
12/3/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Mailing TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

THACKER, JIM
1525 KILBURN AVE.
ROCKFORD, IL 61101
$3,000.00
10/8/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Consulting TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

VEENEMAN, DREW
PO BOX 39
GENOA, IL 60135
$150.00
11/18/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Process voter data TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

VEENEMAN, DREW
PO BOX 39
GENOA, IL 60135
$35.00
12/31/2015
Expenditure
Tricia Smith for Boone County State's Attorney
Process voter data TRICIA SMITH FOR BOONE COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNE

Records 1 to 10 of 10

b. Not-Itemized
$540.11

9.
Independent Expenditures:

a. Itemized (From Schedule B-9)
$0.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

TOTAL EXPENDITURES (6-8)
$7,829.99

---

DEBTS AND OBLIGATIONS

---

9.

9 a. Itemized—All from candidate, Tricia Smith
$7,000.00

b. Not-Itemized
$0.00

TOTAL DEBTS AND OBLIGATIONS
$7,000.00

 

 

 

Above is from:  http://www.elections.state.il.us/CampaignDisclosure/LatestCommitteeTotalsByCandidate.aspx?chkCanActive=true&txtCanLastName=smith&txtCanFirstName=tricia

Illinois EPA files suit against Garden Prairie Organics

 

The following is the current status of the case: 

Arguments regarding the case are scheduled for Febuary 16, 2016 for Courtroom #3, Boone County.

Above items are availalbe on line at:  http://www.judici.com/courts/cases/case_information.jsp?court=IL004015J&ocl=IL004015J,2015CH153,IL004015JL2015CH153D2

Boone County States Attorney, Michelle Courier, provided the County Board the following short summary of the case.

The actual court documents are available on tyhe Boone County Board’s web site at:  http://www.boarddocs.com/il/boone/Board.nsf/files/A5QMJK5B7ADF/$file/Garden%20Prairie%20Organics%20Lawsuit_201512311012.pdf

SEE pages 3 thru 18 on this download.

Koch Brothers Sneak Anti-Wind Op-Ed Past New York Times

 

 

Elliott Negin, Union of Concerned Scientists | January 6, 2016 11:14 am |

 

In the run-up to the perennial debate in Congress over whether to extend a tax credit for the wind industry, The New York Times ran a provocatively headlined—and misleading—op-ed column denouncing it as corporate welfare.

Giving Billions to the Rich was a broadside against Congress’ end-of-the-year tax extenders package, which renews temporary corporate tax breaks, and it singled out the wind production tax credit as one of the most egregious.

Since 1997, Charles Koch (above) and his brother David have given more than $79 million to groups that distort climate science and malign renewable energy.

The Nov. 23, 2015 column was written by Marc Short and Andy Koenig, both from an organization called Freedom Partners. They pointed out that the package the U.S. Senate was considering at the time would revive a tax credit for new wind energy facilities during their first 10 years of operation, which would cost the U.S. Treasury an estimated $10.5 billion over the next decade. Congress had let the tax break expire at the end of 2014.

“The supporters of this 23-year-old credit initially argued that it was necessary to kick-start a nascent industry,” they wrote. “Yet Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and others say wind power is cost-competitive with other energy sources. So why are taxpayers still forced to subsidize it?”

Besides the fact that a tax credit does not force taxpayers to “subsidize,” i.e. give money to, the wind industry, Short and Koenig shrewdly confined their argument to temporary tax breaks. By doing so, they were able to avoid mentioning the fact that the wind industry’s more-established competitors—particularly fossil fuels, the primary cause of climate change—enjoy permanent tax breaks and subsidies that are significantly larger.

The oil and gas industry, for example, has been receiving an average of $4.86 billion in annual tax breaks and subsidies in today’s dollars since 1918, according to an analysis by DBL Investors, a venture capital firm. On top of that, Congress exempted natural gas developers from key provisions of at least seven major environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. That amounts to a substantial subsidy, too, by passing along any cleanup bill to taxpayers.

Renewable energy technologies, by contrast, averaged only $370 million a year in tax breaks between 1994 and 2009, according to DBL. The 2009 stimulus package did provide $21 billion for wind, solar and other renewables, but that support barely began to balance the scales that have tilted toward oil and gas for nearly 100 years and coal for more than two centuries.

The Koch Brothers’ Bank

So who are Marc Short and Andy Koenig? The Times identified them only as “the president and senior policy adviser, respectively, at Freedom Partners, which advocates for free-market policies.”

What the Times neglected to explain is that Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce (its full name) is a major pass-through funding arm of billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch—owners of the coal, oil and gas conglomerate Koch Industries—and Short and Koenig’s Times op-ed is just a small part of a Koch brothers-financed campaign targeting wind and other renewable energy technologies.

Founded in November 2011, Freedom Partners functions as the Kochs’ de facto bank, disbursing contributions from wealthy conservatives to a network of nonprofit “free-market” groups whose goals include rolling back public health, environmental and workplace protections. Unlike a foundation or a political action committee (PAC), Freedom Partners is classified as a trade association, enabling it to raise money without disclosing the names of its donor members, although the amounts and recipients of its grants are public. In June 2014, the organization expanded its arsenal by launching a Super PAC, Freedom Partners Action Fund, which can raise unlimited sums of money and run ads advocating for or against candidates, but it has to divulge its donors.

Freedom Partners Action Fund, whose top donors include the Koch brothers and hedge fund mogul Robert Mercer, raised $29 million and spent $24 million during the 2014 election cycle in support of Republican candidates. But that’s chump change compared to Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce’s war chest. Between 2012 and 2014, it raised $418 million from its more than 200 anonymous members and distributed more than $387 million of it to dozens of organizations. Much of that money paid for television attack ads, but a chunk of it went to climate science denier groups, including the American Energy Alliance, Americans for Prosperity, Americans for Tax Reform, Club for Growth, Heritage Action for America (the Heritage Foundation’s political arm), and the 60 Plus Association. Those groups—along with Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation grantees Competitive Enterprise Institute and Frontiers of Freedom—were signatories on a July 27 letter to House members urging them to support a bill that would kill the wind production tax credit (PTC).

The letter claimed the proposed legislation “protects Americans from the large costs of an out-of-control subsidy.” Since the PTC was created, the letter went on to disingenuously assert, “taxpayers have sent billions of dollars to large multinational corporations in the wind industry.”

The bill referenced in the letter, “The PTC Elimination Act,” was sponsored by Mike Pompeo of Wichita, Kansas—home of Koch Industries—and Kenny Marchant of Texas. Pompeo is Congress’ top recipient of Koch campaign money, and ever since he took office in 2011 he has been introducing bills to scuttle the tax credit because, as he says, the wind industry should “compete on its own.” As of November 17, the bill had 53 co-sponsors. Forty-six of them, including Marchant, received contributions from Koch Industries over the last five years.

Of course, no one would expect the Times to explain all of that, but the paper should have at least mentioned Freedom Partners’ Koch connection. Beyond that, the paper also should have fact-checked its debatable description of the organization. Freedom Partners and other Koch-funded groups all claim to promote “free-market” policies, but they don’t complain about the massive subsidies fossil fuel companies receive. For the Koch network, the wind production tax credit is a “wasteful handout,” but eliminating tax breaks and subsidies for the oil and gas industry, as Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform once put it, would constitute “a massive tax hike on a vital sector of American industry.”

That hardly qualifies as a consistent free-market position.

The Times’ Opaque Transparency Policy

Coincidentally, a debate over how the Times identifies op-ed contributors was sparked four years ago by a column attacking the wind industry. In June 2011, the newspaper ran a column by Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Robert Bryce that made a case for natural gas by misstating facts about renewables, and the Times failed to mention in Bryce’s bio that Manhattan Institute funders ExxonMobil and the Kochs are in the natural gas business. A few months later, the Checks and Balances Project, a government and industry watchdog group, sent a letter to the Times criticizing the paper for failing to report op-ed writers’ funding sources, citing Bryce’s column as a prime example. Signed by more than 50 journalists and educators, the letter called on the paper to “set the nation’s standard by disclosing financial conflicts of interest that their op-ed contributors may have at the time the piece is published.”

The paper’s public editor at the time, Arthur S. Brisbane, responded in a column, The Times Gives Them Space, but Who Pays Them? “[T]he issue of authorial transparency is an important one,” Brisbane wrote, “albeit one that isn’t always simple.” He then turned to editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal to explain the complexities.

Op-ed writers have to sign an agreement that states: “You agree to disclose to the Times any financial interest you may have in the subject matter of the article,” Rosenthal said. Besides that, “story editors ask each writer if there is any real or perceived material or financial interest we should know about.” Finally, Rosenthal said, author bios are written for “clarity, transparency and brevity.”

Brisbane recommended that the Times do more. “So, while I recognize that the Times has limited space in print to provide more disclosure, I believe it should do more to help readers learn about outside op-ed contributors,” he wrote. “In print, besides noting prominent past achievements, author [bios] should include the writer’s current paid role. … On NYTimes.com, the Times should include links to [an author’s] organizational ties so readers can investigate, if they wish. Finally, it would be useful if the Times required contributors to provide a document listing all current paid positions, and publish a link to the document.”

Did the Times take Brisbane’s advice? Apparently not.

Wind Wins This Round, But More Transparency Needed

Fortunately, the Koch campaign to break wind was foiled this time around by some last-minute horse trading on Capitol Hill. End-of-year negotiations over the omnibus government spending bill extended the wind production tax credit through 2019 in exchange for lifting the 40-year-old federal ban on oil exports. That’s good news for the wind industry.

According to the American Wind Energy Association, the production tax credit has helped quadruple wind-powered electricity since 2008, from 16,700 megawatts to more than 70,000 MW at the end of last year, enough to power more than 19 million homes. The tax break also has helped drive down the cost of wind power by 66 percent over the last six years, and Iowa, South Dakota and Kansas—Mike Pompeo’s state—now get more than 20 percent of their electricity from wind. Nine other states get more than 10 percent of their electricity from wind, and a recent Department of Energy report concluded that the U.S. should be able to generate 20 percent of its electricity from wind by 2030.

The omnibus deal was also good news for Koch Industries, because lifting the ban on oil exports likely will boost its business. After all, it owns 4,000 miles of pipelines as well as refineries in Minnesota and Texas that, according to the company, together can process more than 600,000 barrels of crude oil a day.

The bad news is that, even after the debate prompted by an anti-wind op-ed back in 2011, The New York Times continues to provide a platform for special interest mouthpieces and fails to disclose their benefactors. To be sure, the Times is hardly alone. But it’s especially puzzling when it comes to the Times, whose editorial board routinely rails against “the scourge of dark money” in the U.S. political system and calls for greater transparency.

The Times should hold itself to the same standard. If its editorial page editors insist on publishing special interest propaganda, they should let their readers know who is paying for it. In this case, an op-ed with the headline Giving Billions to the Rich is indeed remiss if it doesn’t mention the fact that the covert sponsors of the column, the Koch brothers, are among those benefiting the most from government largesse.

Elliott Negin is a senior writer at the Union of Concerned Scientists

Above is from: 

https://ecowatch.com/2016/01/06/koch-brothers-op-ed/

What top researchers discovered when they re-ran the numbers on income inequality

 

Not quite as bad as we were told.

 

What top researchers discovered when they re-ran the numbers on income inequality

SAN FRANCISCO - The world's most famous inequality researchers unveiled a new way of adding up the growing gap between the super-rich and everyone else on Tuesday.

The findings by economists Emmanuel Saez, Gabriel Zucman and Thomas Piketty, which are preliminary,  were hotly anticipated ever since the American Economic Association conference posted a one-paragraph summary of their results ahead of the event in San Francisco. "In contrast to survey and individual tax data, we find substantial increase in average real pre-tax incomes for the bottom 90% since the 1970s," one line in the preview said, potentially suggesting that concerns about a stagnant middle had been overblown.

That summary was greeted with cheers by  some conservatives that proof that Democrats, particularly Hillary Clinton, have been wrong to focus on income inequality and middle-class wage stagnation so much.

On Tuesday, the economists said  they analyzed inequality trends using a new combination of tax, survey and national accounts data, which the economists say more accurately captures income levels across the population over time. By their analysis, the bottom 90 percent appears to have done better since the late 1970s than previously estimated — but not much better. You can see the trend in the following slide from their presentation.

Instead of slightly declining, after adjusting for inflation, since the late 1970s, the average income for Americans in the bottom 90 percent now appears to have increased by 0.7 percent a year.

That pales in comparison for income for the top 10 percent, which grew three times faster than it did for the bottom 90 percent, or for the top 1 percent, which increased four times faster.

As you can see, those trends are a big departure from the preceding decades, when income grew relatively evenly at all levels.

By 2012, the economists found, more than half the income in America went to the top 10 percent of earners. (That's before accounting for taxes and transfer payments such as Social Security, which the trio will account for in an upcoming paper using the same new data.)

The new data still show inequality widening over the last half-century. The share for the top 10 percent in 2012 is higher than any other recorded year, dating back to 1917. In recent years, the economists find, that is largely attributable to a spike in income for the very rich from capital gains, dividends and other capital income sources, as opposed to wages paid for labor.

 

The newly described income growth for the 90 percent "does make a little difference" in the inequality debate, "but not a lot," Zucman said in an interview.

"The bottom line," he said, "is an economy where the income for the bottom 90 percent grows only 0.7 percent, is not doing very well."

That's especially true in recent years.

Thanks to slow income growth early in the 2000s and the effects of the Great Recession and its aftermath, Zucman and his co-authors found, income for the 90 percent hasn't grown on net since the turn of the century.

ABOVE IS FROM:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/06/what-top-researchers-discovered-when-they-re-ran-the-numbers-of-income-inequality/

Belvidere Schools names its next Superintendent

Belvidere Schools names its next Superintendent

After months of surveys, focus groups, and interviews by the Board of Education and an advisory group consisting of administrators, staff, community leaders, parents, and students the Board will vote on Monday, January 11 to approve a contract naming Dr. Daniel Woestman as its next leader.

"Dr. Woestman stood out among a group of well-qualified candidates interviewed by the Board of Education.  We were impressed with his enthusiasm and vision for our students and are excited about the future of Belvidere Schools."  -- Robert Torbert, School Board President

Dr. Woestman has worked in the region as an English teacher as well as a building-level and district-level administrator in the Hononegah and Rockford school districts.  He earned his bachelor's degree from Brigham Young University, his master's from the University of Cincinnati, and his doctorate from Northern Illinois University.

"Working in neighboring districts for the past ten years has allowed me to get to know not only the Belvidere schools, but the wonderful people in the community.  I'm excited to continue those relationships and the tradition of the Belvidere School District as being a great place to work and learn."  -- Dr. Daniel Woestman 

The Board will offer Dr. Woestman a 3-year contract with a beginning salary of $175,000.

A public reception welcoming Dr. Woestman to the district will be held Tuesday, February 2 from 4 to 6 p.m. in the lobby of the Performing Arts Center located inside Belvidere High School.

Above is from:  https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10153792886516730&id=218720821729

 

***************************************************************************************************************************************************************

  

• Belvidere School District names Daniel Woestman superintendent

Ben Stanley
Staff writer

Posted Jan. 5, 2016 at 10:39 AM
Updated Jan 5, 2016 at 7:03 PM

BELVIDERE — The next superintendent of the Belvidere School District is a familiar face in the Rock River Valley. The Belvidere School Board chose Daniel Woestman, 34, who currently oversees strategic planning for the Rockford School District. Before that, he taught English and was an assistant principal at Hononegah High School.

The district made the announcement today in a news release on its website. He replaces Michael Houselog, who left in August to become director of graduate programs in education at Rockford University. The School Board is expected on Monday to vote on Woestman's three-year contract with a beginning salary of $175,000.

"As a board, we were really impressed with his vision for the district," said Rob Torbert, president of the Belvidere School Board. "He brings a lot of enthusiasm. He’s very smart, very prepared, very relatable. We think that he’s going to do well connecting with faculty, staff, students and everyone in the community."

A search firm hired by the district selected seven candidates out of a pool of more than 30 applicants for the School Board to interview. Woestman was chosen from that group of candidates after interviews with the board and a focus group that included teachers, students, parents and community leaders.

Woestman earned a bachelor's degree from Brigham Young University in 2006, a master's from the University of Cincinnati in 2008 and a doctorate from Northern Illinois University in 2014. He moved to the Rockford area in 2006.

"A lot of my ties to the community I think were a big draw for the position," Woestman said. "I’ve been in the area for about a decade. It’s a high quality school district. It’s just a really, really good school district ... . I’m going to make sure I spend time in every school and listening to a lot of different stakeholder groups."

Woestman will officially take over as superintendent on July 1.

"Dan is an extremely well-liked and well-respected colleague," wrote Rockford School District Superintendent Ehren Jarrett in a prepared statement. "During his tenure with RPS 205, he has led initiatives including our strategic plan, process mapping, accountability and SMART teacher training. His leadership in information technology, in particular, has been remarkable."

Woestman is on the operating board of Alignment Rockford, is a Cub Scout pack leader and is involved in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

A public reception welcoming Woestman to the district is planned for 4 to 6 p.m. Feb. 2 in the lobby of the Performing Arts Center inside Belvidere High School.

Above is from:  http://www.rrstar.com/news/20160105/belvidere-school-district-names-daniel-woestman-superintendent

Is Ted Cruz a natural born citizen? Ask the founders

 

 

 

Is Ted Cruz a natural born citizen? Ask the founders

01/06/16 09:37 AM —Updated 01/06/16 10:18 AM

facebook twitter 1 save share group 103

By Pete Williams

John McCain faced the question. So did Barry Goldwater, George Romney, and Chester A. Arthur.

Their political opponents claimed they did not meet the Constitution’s provision that “No person except a natural born citizen” can be president.

Now Donald Trump has said it could be a problem for Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada to an American citizen mother and a Cuban-born father.

The problem is, the Constitution does not define the term “natural born citizen.”

Does it mean that someone must be born on US soil? McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. When Goldwater was born, Arizona wasn’t yet a state. Romney was born in Mexico.

And Arthur? He was accused of being born in Canada.

view photo essay

The presidential campaign: Ted Cruz

The Texas senator was first to announce his bid back in March, and has since been carefully laying the groundwork for a come-from-behind primary victory.

The Constitution’s drafters shed little light on what they meant by the phrase. It seems clear only that they wanted to make certain that whoever was elected president would be loyal to the U.S. alone and not to another country.

But the term “natural born citizen,” many scholars say, was not in common use at the time the Constitution was written.

Even so, nearly every constitutional scholar who has studied the issue comes to the same conclusion: Anyone born to an American parent, no matter where in the world, is eligible to be president.

That conclusion about what the drafters meant is based partly on a law passed in 1790 by the first Congress, providing that the children of U.S. citizens born outside the country “shall be considered as natural born citizens.” The law is no longer in effect, but it’s considered evidence of the intent of the founders.

Then, in 1964, the Supreme Court muddied the waters by seeming to say, without deciding, that “natural born” meant born inside the United States.

In an opinion on an unrelated issue, the court observed, “The rights of citizenship of the native born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the ‘natural born’ citizen is eligible to be President.”

But that language is not legally binding, and the Supreme Court has never actually ruled on what “natural born” means.

Writing last year in the Harvard law Review, two former holders of the Justice Department’s top courtroom advocate job — Solicitor General — said Cruz met the qualification.

“All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase “natural born citizen” has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding,” Neal Katyal and Paul Clement wrote.

But until the Supreme Court rules on the issue, or the Constitution is amended, the issue will remain officially unsettled.

ABOVE IS FROM:  http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/ted-cruz-natural-born-citizen-ask-founders-n490971