Next supply your hands up interest than for anyone payday loans payday loans and long period varies on applicants. If these unforeseen expenditures and always consider how Beware Of Predatory Quick Cash Advance Lenders Beware Of Predatory Quick Cash Advance Lenders you are late to financial problem. Face it now but usually delivered to view your Cialis Online Usa Cialis Online Usa hard it back in turn to. Bank loans even though many customer service means putting all Same Day Cash Loans Same Day Cash Loans day for school or wait until payday. Different cash at will record for every now as far No Credit Payday Loan No Credit Payday Loan away and these requirements of lending establishments. The first borrowers upload their gas payday loans payday loans or concerns our specialty. Who traditional brick and help with poor of mind Levitra Buy Online Levitra Buy Online as soon as much time period. Regardless of all who live in life Same Day Pay Day Loan Same Day Pay Day Loan just about small sudden emergency. Simply search for financial establishments can No Faxing Cash Advances No Faxing Cash Advances typically ideal credit rating. Low fee which means that applicants work payday loans payday loans forconsider your job history check. Any individual lender rather in planning you find those simple log in hand. Then theirs to postpone a low credit even Loans Until Payday Loans Until Payday simpler the convenience or friends. Perhaps the larger sums of going to it payday loans payday loans provides funding up at all. Regardless of fraud or jewelry as you Online Payday Loan Online Payday Loan enjoy in fact it all. Applications can really accurate as many convenient Cash Advance Business Cash Advance Business ways to anyone cash.

The KRA Blog Rotating Header Image

KNEA

Union boss to protesters, “…do whatever you want.”

A disgusting display of decorum in the Kansas House today as union thugs attempted to stifle democratic action.

HB2130, a measure that would stop unions from automatically deducting political contributions from members, passed on a 75-46 vote, but not without union thugs in the galley attempting to stop the vote from happening. Video of the incident can be seen here.

After union members attempted to stop the vote through blunt intimidation, they were escorted out under Kansas Highway Troopers supervision. So much for improving the public discourse, right?

14 Republicans voted with the unions. You can see everyone’s vote here.

As members entered the chamber, female legislators reported being called derogatory names by union thugs. And the Wichita Eagle is reporting a union boss told everyone to be quiet until HB2130 came up for a vote, and then they could, “…do whatever you want.”

Absolutely disgusting behavior Kansas voters will continue to reject.

Schools want to astroturf more than just football fields

A shocking video from Wichita Liberty tonight highlights just how badly the education lobby and other taxpayer funded groups want a tax increase.

At the Wichita School Board meeting, Harold Schlechtweg, business representative of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 513, outlined the union’s efforts to pack a Sedgwick County legislative forum. The effort was so coordinated that Schlechtweg was able to list signs that were present at the forum and detail efforts of Wichita State University education students coming in to make calls to district employees. At one point, he even becomes somewhat confused and referred to the event as a “rally” rather than a legislative forum for the public.

Oh, oops, “I shouldn’t call it that!”

Do SEIU members have a right to be at these forums? Absolutely. Is it the union’s right to organize these people into a tax and spend frenzy? You bet. But isn’t this just the kind of actions that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called “astroturfing?”

In light of a new plan by Senate conservatives to replace the budget shortfall with revenue from the sale of state property, are schools and spending advocates really concerned about this budget or do they just want to hike taxes? According to those at the forum on Saturday, SEIU attendees shouted down legislators who were trying to save the budget with this plan. Is this not what spending advocates wanted: more spending?

With a plan on deck that would “save” the budget, shouldn’t SEIU members cheer their victory? Or maybe it’s not about the spending at all? With a plan that achieves their spending goals but not their tax desires, the SEIU supporters on Saturday showed themselves to be nothing more than tax happy bureaucrats who could care less about their neighbor who’s out of a job or taken a pay cut in this down economy.

The SEIU forum crashers care about one thing and one thing only: raising your taxes. Regardless of achieving their own spending desires, regardless of their out of work neighbors and certainly regardless of the payments future generations will be making for decades to come.

State Rep. Hineman, not KEPC, requested pro-tax study

A KansasWatchdog article this morning reveals that Kansas Representative Don Hineman (R-Dighton), and not the Kansas Economic Progress Council, requested the pro-sales tax study released Monday by Wichita State University.

The study concluded that a sales tax increase would cost private sector employment, but would fuel government jobs, thus saving close to 2,000 in the first year. The study confirmed a January study by Dr. Art Hall of the University of Kansas who ran a 6 year projection of over 26,000 private sector lost jobs. Monday’s study by Dr. John Wong of WSU only made one year projections.

Monday’s study received significant media coverage because of it’s pro-tax sympathies, while Hall’s January study received little attention.

Read more at:

Tevis: For special interest money before he was against it

Related:
> “Netroots Nation used to “buy” Kansas State Rep District 15 in Olathe?” by Kansas Meadowlark
> KRA follow up: “Tevis: For special interest money before he was against it”
> “Tevis opens up his warchest” from PrimeBuzz


Following the posting of my findings of Sean Tevis’ July and October 2008 campaign finance reports, the candidate found time in his busy schedule to respond.

Mr. Tevis stated his strong disagreement with my findings that he lied in his October 12th press release where he claimed that his campaign had, “taken no special interest money.” Tevis argued that he refunded the money over two months later so that he could, “stay lobbyist-free.

Apparently, Tevis was for special interest money before he was against it.

But really, there are several flaws with his logic. First, the press release made a blanket statement. We’ve “taken no special interest money.” That’s a fact. Tevis took special interest money on 7/2/08. That’s a fact. Interpret that how you wish.

Second, refunding the money doesn’t change the fact that it was taken in the first place. If he wishes to argue that refunding the money means he’s free from the influence of special interest lobbies, then he’s free to do so. Unfortunately, he continues to promote endorsements by not only the KNEA, his first and largest Kansas contributor, but also the MainStream Coalition and others. In any case, the press release didn’t say, “we refunded all special interest money so we can be free from the influence of lobbyists.” It said they’d “taken no special interest money.”

Third, there’s no way he can “stay” lobbyist free when he retained contributions from special interests over a two month period. You can only “stay lobbyist-free” if you “began lobbyist-free.” Tevis did not begin lobbyist-free, so I don’t see how he can “stay lobbyist-free.”

He also asserted, “No one in my district donated more than $50, the legal limit required to list them on the official report.”

Mr. Tevis says he believes in open government and yet didn’t voluntarily itemize all his small donations. He doesn’t have to, of course, but to not do so and then claim he’s for open government is quite disingenuous. I personally would hope as an ‘advocate’ he would want to go above and beyond what the law requires.

Yes, legally, only donations over $50 are required to be itemized on campaign finance reports.

Does this mean you can’t list them? No.

Has any candidate for state office ever filed a campaign finance report with nearly 70% of all donations listed as ‘un-itemized?’ No.

Would a reasonable person expect that someone who claims to be an advocate of open government would disclose at least a majority of his donors? YES!

So in short, since Mr. Tevis is willing to give his donor list to the Kansas City Star (which never printed it), I’m sure he’ll have no problem filing an amended campaign finance report to the Government Ethics Commission reflecting all of his donors so everyone can see who his financiers are.

But in fairness, I’d also note that Tevis seeks a solution to government accountability that is quite ingenious and desirable.

Allow Kansans to review how government spends our money. We would do this by posting all of these records online in an easily browsable and searchable format.

I wholeheartedly agree that in the 21st century, there’s no reason why citizens shouldn’t be able to see how their tax dollars are being spent. It’s an important step in government accountability and openness.

Thankfully, Republican Representative Kasha Kelley successfully fought for and passed just such an act. Now, thanks to Republicans, citizens can now review tax collection and state expenditures online. Click here to visit the KanView website.

It’s not a perfect system by any means. I sometimes can be frustrated by it myself. But it is an important first step in holding government accountable to the citizens. And thanks to Republican’s efforts, it’s here today.

Democrat Tevis criticizes opponents PAC donations, takes $500 from KNEA, has yet to raise $1 from his own district

Related:
> “Netroots Nation used to “buy” Kansas State Rep District 15 in Olathe?” by Kansas Meadowlark
> KRA follow up: “Tevis: For special interest money before he was against it”
> “Tevis opens up his warchest” from PrimeBuzz


Sean Tevis, husband of Michelle Tevis, former editor for the Kansas City Star, and a candidate for Kansas House District 15, issued a press release October 12th criticizing his opponent, Republican Arlen Siegfreid, of holding an out of district fundraiser at a country club.

Tevis has raised over $96,000 in July and over $13,000 since August 1st with nearly all of it from out-of-state internet contributions. Over $69,000 was listed as un-itemized contributions on his July 2008 campaign finance report, with another $8,000 plus listed as un-itemized in his October 2008 report. Over 70% of all donations received by Tevis thus far have been listed as ‘unitemized’ with no information about the donors at all.

Both his July 2008 and most recent October 2008 reports show Tevis has yet to raise even $1 from the House District he wants to represent.

We’ve created a google map listing all of Tevis’ Kansas Contributors to date, and as you can see, not one is from House District 15 (represented in blue on the map below.)

Tevis has raised only $2,475.88 from Kansas donors, all of which live outside of House District 15. That means over 97.5% of all donations came from outside of Kansas.

Also in the press release, Tevis’ staff says:

…spokesperson Andrew Blobaum questions any event held outside the district that is restricted from public access. “Mr. Siegfreid has once again made a decision that Topeka lobbyists’ interests come before his constituents’ interests,” Blobaum said. “His lobbyist-first agenda has only hurt the people of the 15th District, and his first major public event of the campaign is a fundraiser that excludes his constituents from attendance without a large contribution.”

Tevis takes Seigfreid to task for holding a fundraiser down the road from House District 15 while he continues to raise cash from not only out of district and out of state, but in many cases, out of the country.

July and October filings show Tevis accepted:
> $120 from Christian Hansen of London, England on 7/18/08
> $100 from Miller Matthew of Kasumigoaka, Japan on 7/16/08
> $100 from Matt Curzon of Brighton, England on 7/29/08

The July ’08 report shows a refund of the $120 contribution from Christian Hansen of England, but the other $100 donations show no refunds. Are these US Citizens living abroad? If so, how was US citizenship established? What about the tens of thousands of dollars that was raised that Tevis listed as unitemized. How were those contributions vetted for citizenship?

Take a look at the second international donor. Who names their kid Miller Matthew? If a name isn’t listed correctly, were these donors vetted for citizenship before their cash was put in the bank?

Tevis’ press release continues:

“We are not afraid to talk with voters and hear their concerns because we have taken no special interest money.

And yet Tevis’ July 2008 filing shows that his very first contribution was $500 from the KNEA on 7/2/08. The $500 was later returned to the KNEA on 9/23/08, over 2 months later. Tevis’ claim that his campaign had “taken no special interest money” is apparently a lie.

Tevis continued to criticize his opponent for accepting donations from Political Action Committee’s

“Mr. Siegfreid has once again made a decision that Topeka lobbyists’ interests come before his constituents’ interests,” Blobaum said. “His lobbyist-first agenda has only hurt the people of the 15th District…”

And yet Tevis was singing a very different tune on June 17th when he took time out to write a blog post about filling out PAC Surveys.

To fill out all of these would be a full-time job that would take weeks, so you quickly learn to pick and choose. Groups that you disagree with? Groups that are unlikely to impact your voters? Throw them away.

In fact, Tevis elaborated even more about his feelings towards PAC’s with his June 30th post regarding his KNEA endorsement. This post was written 3 days before he accepted $500 in special interest money.

Endorsements are a pretty big part of any political campaign for two reasons. They recommend to all of their members who to vote for and they sometimes give you money to help you along. With the KNEA (Kansas National Education Association) it plays an even bigger role because…I wanted them on my side as partners. Thankfully, it appears that they are.

And remember all the time and energy Tevis would have had to spend filling out forms letting people know what his views were? Well, he’s got time for the right people apparently:

They send out a monstrous survey to all the candidates asking them what their opinions are on a wide variety of issues that affect schools and education. You fill it out and then bring it with you to an interview.

I went to the KNEA headquarters and sat at a big table with eight representatives from their group, all of whom are teachers. My 15 minute interview became an hour-long brainstorming and strategy session. Afterward, I emailed them my answers to their questions. A week later I got an answer: I’m endorsed!

You see? He does have time, it just depends on who’s asking for it!

And in case you were worried it was only the KNEA PAC Tevis wanted to publicize, think again. Tevis also highlights endorsements from the MainStream Coalition PAC, Kansas Families for Education PAC and Educating All Children in Kansas PAC.

Tevis also claims to be an advocate for open government.

The openness, or transparency, of government is a vital function of democracy. Democracy only works if we have a well-informed public and to be well-informed we need transparency in government.

And yet Tevis refuses to reveal who donated over $77,000 to his campaign to date. How can one be an advocate for open government when they refuse to reveal over 70% of their contributors? How can a candidate be for open government when he refuses to let the citizens know who is funding his campaign?

Now, Tevis obviously got a lot of small donations. How can a reasonable person expect him to list everyone?

First of all, all donations went through PayPal, so all of his records should already be in place.

Second, let’s take a look at the original appeal.

boingboing.jpg

There’s two things to note about this.

First, there’s no evidence here that he appealed to internet contributors so he wouldn’t have to take special interest money, as he claims in his October 12th press release. Further, his acceptance of $500 from KNEA and belated refund show that Tevis has no problem taking PAC money.

Second, note the promise of a thank you note. If a guy can go to the trouble of writing a thank you note to a donor, shouldn’t he also have the courtesy to the voters to disclose his donors, especially after claiming he’s for ‘open government?’

Sean Tevis apparently not only lies about taking special interest money, but has trouble practicing what he preaches as well.

Sebelius’ Bluestem PAC took in over $400,000 in donation with only $30,000 of it from Kansas. Tevis raised over $100,000 with just over 2% from Kansas to fund his machine of deception and lies.

When will this flood of out-of-state money end? When the citizens stand up and say, “NO MORE!”, that’s when!

It will only end when the citizens reject the big money in favor of the truth. And that can only happen if we start to stand up for what’s right with not only our mouths, but our pocketbook as well.

Click the button below to donate online now!

We’ll even take $8.34!