Baby Steps for Accountability: Asbestos Fund Fraud

2 Replies

Sent to me via a friend, and not something I usually write about, but interesting and worth knowing about nonetheless. Plus, I like to throw people off with not-so-common topics every now and again.

Congressmen Blake Farenthold (R-TX) and Jim Matheson (D-UT) are sponsoring bi-partisan legislation, the FACT Act (Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency).
Harold Kim wrote an article for Free Enterprise detailing the specifics of nonexistent people receiving funds from Asbestos trusts with the help of the best mesothelioma lawyers. Thousands and thousands of dollars intended for real victims being dispersed to faulty trusts and placed in undeserving hands. Imagine that.

Kim notes,

the trusts’ opaque operations open the door to abuse. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal revealed that an employee of a California law firm filed a claim with a trust in the name of someone who didn’t even exist.  Five weeks later, he received a $26,000 check from the trust. The same firm also filed trust claims on behalf of clients who were nurses. They allegedly were exposed to asbestos while chipping paint from boilers – not exactly a typical duty for nurses.

The Wall Street Journal also found that,

“In its analysis, the Journal found 2,689 [Johns Manville bankruptcy trust] applicants through 2005 who claimed to be working in various labor-intensive occupations while under the age of 12. Among them were 753 people who claimed their exposure to asbestos began while working in construction before turning 12; 356 people who said they were metal workers; and 184 chemical workers.”

The FACT Act requires more transparency by requiring quarterly reports to be filed for examination by courts and trusts. A small opportunity to demand more accountability, but certainly worthwhile. Baby steps when we can, right?

Let’s get this over with…

4 Replies

I’ll go ahead and say it. We all knew it was coming. Edward Lindsey has been announcing that he’s going to be ‘announcing something’ for about 3 weeks and now he’s officially in. But saying ‘no’ from the get-go.
You see, I used to be in his district. I wrote him an email voicing my concerns about students and campus carry and his office he sent me an ever-so-long and pretty painful, 6 page email about Sandy Hook, what some professors have said about mental health, some studies related to Newtown, “A quick look at the Constitution” (ironic, eh?), and then some ‘suggestions’ on where we should go. After tracking through the nonsense with my weed whacker, I was left with his propositions:
This is a direct copy-paste from his email regarding his stance on the 2nd amendment. Any bolding was done on my part.

  1. How do we strengthen the established public policy prohibiting individuals with dangerous mental disorders and criminal records from possessing firearms?
    1. Standardize and expand the screening of gun purchasers.  We have gaping holes in our screening process to identify individuals who are barred from owning guns either because of mental health problems or past criminal conduct.  An estimated 40% of gun purchases occur through private sales and 80% of criminal acts involving guns occur from a weapon procured in a private transaction.  Therefore, all sellers of firearms – including sellers at gun shows — should be required to screen purchasers.
    2. Gun manufacturers, who profit from the sale of their product, should bear greater responsibility for monitoring and insuring that retailers who sell their product are doing so in compliance with the law.
    3. Toughen laws against anyone who knowingly or negligently allows someone who is not permitted to possess a gun from obtaining one and committing a crime.  This includes going after so called “straw purchasers” and requiring that the lawful owner of a gun report any theft promptly to the police.
    4. Enforce existing gun laws.  Each year, thousands of individuals are found to be attempting to purchase a firearm who are barred under law from being allowed to so; however, only a tiny fraction are ever prosecuted.
    5. Reform our approach to mental health to better assist the sufferer, and protect society by identifying those individuals who should not be allowed to possess a firearm.
  1. How do you promote safe firearm use, possession, and storage?
    1. Require purchasers of semi-automatic rifles demonstrate an understanding on how to safely handle and store such rifles.  This can be done by demonstrating evidence of having completed an approved gun safety course, passing a gun proficiency and safety test, or being in the active or reserve military or law enforcement.
    2. Require that purchasers of ammunition and magazines for semi-automatic rifles to show identification and the above evidence when purchasing these items.  This requirement would ensure over time that already existing owners of these weapons also pass the safety course.
    3. Similarly, laws already granting permits to carry a concealed weapon should also include a requirement that applicants take and pass a gun safety course in which he/she demonstrates an understanding on how and when to safely use the weapon, and where a concealed weapon can legally and safely be carried.  A concealed weapon may be valid protection but before carrying one into a public place someone should demonstrate that they are proficient in handling the weapon – including when not to use it.  We require a showing of safe handling of automobiles before one can drive on public roads, carrying a weapon in public should be no different. There are also locations where a concealed weapon cannot be legally carried and the permit holder needs to be aware of those locations.

Bless your heart. All I see are a bunch of proposed regulations on a God-given right. I guess that ‘quick look at the Constitution’ was quicker than originally thought? And please don’t try the ‘well you have to get a driver’s license to drive a car!’ argument. Blah blah blah. Driving a car is a privilege. Owning and carrying a weapon is a fundamental right.

I’m sorry, sir. The correct response to my initial email should have said: “I support the 2nd amendment unconditionally.”

Remembering Andrew Wordes: A Memory & A Movement

3 Replies

Last year, at this time, I was at work when someone sent me a Facebook message saying “The Chicken man’s house is on fire!”
I immediately began calling and texting Andrew, obviously with no success. When I saw that his home had exploded, I didn’t need ‘police confirmation’, I already knew his fate.
Even so, it was still unbelievable. I had just spoken to him the day before. It’s a painful memory to reflect on but a necessary one.

If you knew Andrew, you’ll never been the same,
If you knew Andrew, you can probably count the ways your life has changed since his death.
You’re probably a little less trusting and a little more vigilant.
You’re probably a little less complicit and a little more fired up.
You’re probably much more aware of your freedoms and your rights and how those are vulnerable to local politics.
You probably despise the City of Roswell.

Since his death a very long year ago, several things have happened:

A very large group of people have come forward to both me and Maggie Bean regarding their own negative experiences with the City of Roswell. There are many more than you might think. People harassed by police, zoning, and administrators and ultimately run out of their town.

The police chief is gone. Though it’s still as incestuous as ever, Orrick, who literally created chaos in Andrew’s life, is no longer with the Roswell PD. He was forced to resign, though not because of his role in Andrew’s death.

Roswell for Fiscal Responsibility, an watch-dog organization, has come out swinging while demanding transparency….there a few key individuals who consistently demand honest public service including Jake Lilley, Lee Fleck, Cade Thacker, Tom Cork and Martin Howell.

Kay Love is still a villain. She recently organized the “city retreat” at the Ritz Carlton just outside of Atlanta, costing Roswell more cash than any other North Fulton city retreat, and then some. Love took her council members cronies along on her tax dollar vaycay…She has never admitted any wrong doing but, thankfully more people know the truth. Thankfully, many still watch her like a hawk.

While we failed Andrew while he was here with us, we were able to generate significant publicity surrounding Andrew’s turmoil and death. There are a few of us who will never let the issue sink, but I don’t think any of us will ever let it happen again.

Joseph Pond has been working tirelessly with his group Backyard Chicken ALliance in Cobb County and recently won a small, but important, battle against the Commission. They cried fowl, but he stood tall with his grassroots organization. He’s been so successful that other municipalities are popping up with their own Backyard Chicken Alliances.

He was stubborn as hell but Andrew taught everyone he met about kindness and helping, and most importantly freedom.
Andrew taught me about liberty in the grandest way and he brought out the libertarian in me.
He was a friend and he is forever in my heart, whether it be for politics or people or chickens.

Joseph Pond described him perfectly….”In the midst of all of his battles, I called him one day about a sick hen that I had. He insisted that I come over, so he could see it. He took the time to examine the bird, to give medicine for for the bird, and instructions on how I should treat the bird. He could have easily told me that he had more important things to take care of- his health, his finances, his legal battles- but the truth was that the health of that bird was the most important thing to him at that moment… He was also a true patriot who stood tall for freedom. I work hard to let his spirit shine thru my actions. ”

Andrew constantly reminded me how much more powerful two were than one. He’d always say, “Just think if we could get a few more people behind us!I” He’s right. When it comes to freedom and liberty, there is no standing alone. A loss of your neighbors freedom is a loss for you. I ask that you use Andrew’s memory as your fuel to fight for liberty…and your neighbors.

20130326-075902.jpg

More Inbreeding in Roswell

3 Replies

I think I’m going to be sick. This will be short, but not so sweet.

  • Kay Love, the City Manager for Roswell, is from a small town outside of Columbus.
  • Her cherry-picked now former police chief, Dwayne Orrick, was from the same town. (Coincidence? Puhhleez)
  • Roswell has now hired a new police chief –James Russell “Rusty” Grant– who worked under Orrick, has spent some time working for the GBI and is now an adjunct professor at Georgia Law Enforcement Command College Professional Management Program at…wait for it….COLUMBUS STATE UNIVERSITY.

No math is necessary. It seems as though Roswell will just go from one incestuous relationship to another. How’s that working for you? Care to share the financial state of the City, Ms. Love? I guess we will all just sit around and hope this chief doesn’t order officers at the ends of our streets at the demand of personal grudges of the City Manager like the last one did.

Your Liberty Drum’s Not Loud Enough

1 Reply

Dear Georgia House of Representatives Members (who voted ‘yea’),

I thought it would settle. I thought it would stop irritating me. But it hasn’t.

If I have to hear another one of you put yourself on a pedestal because you voted in favor of a bill that was a) dropped on a Thursday night (12 a.m. for the general public to read), b) scheduled for a hearing that following Monday and c) flown through the House by Crossover day the Thursday of the same week, I may just toss my cookies.
2nd amendment issues have been a concern since the before the legislative session began. (Hence the reason a couple other legislators introduced legislation much earlier). Why was there a need to push it all through so fast? Then we’re left with: Republicans who voted in favor of the bill because they didn’t want to be anti-2nd amendment and Democrats who voted against the bill because they didn’t want to be pro-2nd amendment. What happened to HB 28 & 29? Doesn’t anyone have any guts to make a true statement around here?!?!

Let me make this very, very clear. HB 512 is lousy and watered down. You completely ignored a group of citizens that needed immediate assistance and an immediate remedy and you manipulated wording of a lobbyist-backed bill (which is fine, but did you read it?) to make it seem all lovely. Put your liberty drum down. It’s not loud enough. You address bars and churches, but the very group that needed help now was ignored. I thought legislation was supposed to address the needs of citizens? Every student who attends a university in Georgia, every law student, every graduate student, every urban student in Metro Atlanta…you failed them. Each and every one of them. We see how gun-free zones have worked across America and we know how to fix the situation. HB 512 was nothing short of a publicity stunt to make gun owners think the Georgia Assembly supports students. I am not falling for it. As a student and a LICENSED PERMIT HOLDER, I cannot take my gun into university housing, on a university bus (this is crucial for students at Georgia State and Georgia Tech who walk and take school transportation depending on location and time) or into the classroom. Or how about the students at nontraditional campuses?

A ‘Yea’ vote makes it very clear that you place the ‘student’ status before ‘American’ status. Get off your soap box and sit down. You failed.

zip-it

Reflection of the Campus Carry Hearing

6 Replies

So it’s been a couple of days since the hearings and I’ve had some time to ‘reflect’. I was genuinely impressed by how many people turned out for the hearings -in the middle of the day- in support of HB 28 & HB 29. Georgia Gun Owners, Georgia Carry, Students for Concealed Carry, students from various Georgia universities and many private citizens. It’s clear from the people who attended, with the exception of one student who had no argument and the University System of Georgia representative, who is so out-of-touch with what it’s like to be a student and what it means to be an American, there was overwhelming support for both bills.

I’ve also had the opportunity to reflect a bit regarding a conversation I had with a police chief from a private institution after the hearing. (Oh, the irony…me having a conversation with a police officer who would like to see unarmed citizens.)  I told him that I had attended Georgia State University, and he saw my testimony (seen here), as well as other students from the Atlanta area. His response was ‘Well, you don’t HAVE to go to those schools. You can choose to go elsewhere.’. I found this extremely amusing for a couple of reasons: First, this is coming from a liberal gentleman who wants everyone to have access to education but now he’s telling me that students shouldn’t attend Georgia State or Georgia Tech because of the of the “danger”. This is also coming from a public safety officer who is supposed to be protecting students, keeping campus safe. He should know he can’t, and his officers can’t, be everywhere at the same time. I asked him what he would tell his daughter who had to walk across the campus of Georgia State at 8p.m. in the dark after an evening class. He responded that he would ‘never send his daughter there’. Ah.. okay. So 1) you’re on a higher socioeconomic status than many of us (more than 30,000) students who attend GSU and 2) you’re so aware of the violence on campus that you would not send your own daughter there but you still don’t think that students should exercise their second amendment rights on campus.

I’m not following the logic, because there is no logic.
At this point, I extended my hand, thanked him for his service and said ‘have a nice day’. Before I turned my back, he said, “Well, if I went to Tech or State, I guess I would understand why you feel that way”.

But let me go on the record and explain something to you, sir, because you seemed to have missed a giant component of both HB 28 & HB 29. These bills, while they target the second amendment, are more about property rights. They would grant each university, private or public, the ability to regulate campus carry rules. It would be on an individual basis. So, Chief, if you think your campus is so safe so as not to need students to carry, it would be the institution’s right to deny that on campus. It would allow Georgia State support second amendment rights WHILE you folks at unnamed private institution, {cough- Agnes Scott- cough} deny them. The same concept applies to the bill for places of worship. Each individual church, synagogue, etc.  would have the ability to determine whether or not the parishioners could exercise their right in that particular place of worship. It’s a novel concept- actually. It removes the government from the decision. Kind of how Taco Mac won’t let you conceal carry in their bars. It’s an individual organizational choice. I believe you are private university for many reasons, many of which include funding, resources, and meddling from other organizations/government. And surely you understand the concept of ‘property’, as a law enforcement officer.

I’d also like to go on the record and thank Rep. Charles Gregory. As I said in my testimony, I’ve been writing my legislators for some time now regarding students and their right to carry. Rep. Gregory has really stepped up to the plate and gone to bat for all students who walk their campus in the dark or at night or have to go to their car in a bad part of town. But what’s amazing is that he didn’t introduce the bill for any of those reasons. The reason was liberty. The reason was the Constitution.
Thank you for recognizing that I am a citizen first, and a student second.

Atlanta Hates Republicans: Political Correctness Bans Candy

9 Replies

Yesterday I joined the Atlanta Young Republicans in a community outreach of delivering candy to fire stations for Valentine’s Day and as an expression of gratitude for all their hard work. We divided up in teams, mostly ladies, to divide and conquer the 41 stations across the City of Atlanta. When we arrived at a station, our schpeel went a little like this:
“Hi my name is ________ and this is my friend _______ and we’re from the Atlanta Young Republicans. We just came out today to share our appreciation and deliver this bucket of Valentine’s Day candy. We are really grateful for all that you do.”

At most of the stations, this opened the door for casual conversations about how we got involved, what other stations we had already been to and general friendly conversation. A couple of the stations gave us a tour, showed us some of their equipment or shared funny stories and pictures. It was a really great opportunity to meet real public servants and make them feel appreciated. At one point, my car partner and I even discussed how much we’d like to do MORE for our local fire fighters on a regular basis because of how kind they had all been to us.

That was, until, we were turned away because of political affiliation. Apparently one of the chiefs was concerned about accepting candy from a Republican group because they did not want to appear partisan. This prompted an email to a supervisor that resulted in a city-wide candy delivery shut down. I’m sorry, sir, but when did accepting candy from young professionals who wanted to solely express gratitude become a political statement? Would you have done the same thing from the Young Democrats? How about if we had been handing out steak dinners with baked potatoes and pecan pie? I’m calling you out, because I don’t think you would. It’s interesting that the further south we went into the city, the less receptive people became. (I thought liberals liked free stuff???) I could understand if we were bringing around voter registration information or pushing a certain candidate, asking for donations or had something to gain from our actions…but delivering candy? What the heck has the world come to?

You can bet that the next time I deliver a meal to an Atlanta fire station, on my own time of course, (because I won’t punish them all for a few cranky snobs), I will wrap it in elephant print saran wrap and tie Ronald Reagan quotes to each individual tray. I’ll deliver it in my ‘Friends Don’t Let Friends Vote Democrat shirt’ while playing ‘God Bless the USA’ on my iPhone.

One final thing I ask you, City of Atlanta fire personnel….what have the Democrats done for your lately?

8 Reasons Not to Vote for Brian Laurens- HD 21

1 Reply

laurens

Let’s keep it short and sweet.

8. He has a history of lying about people in the press. He attempts to discredit journalists, bloggers and the like.

7. He told a Cherokee constituent that ‘sometimes legislators have more information than constituents’ and in those cases, you have to vote against what the majority wants, majority meaning the constituents.

6. He can’t keep his composure. He was escorted out of last year’s mass precinct meeting, showing Georgians he is incapable of conducting himself in an appropriate manner when tensions are high.

5. His mentor is Chip Rogers.

4. As blogger and a constituent of the State of Georgia, I was dismissed by Mr. Lauren’s on Facebook because I did not live in is district. He implied that my stance on issues was irrelevant because I live in Fulton County, not Cherokee. I believe once you’re at the Gold Dome, you represent your constituents, but you’re also working towards a better Georgia, no? That hasn’t seemed to halt his donations from outside the district, though.

3. He forged a mailer that was delivered this past Friday in which he stated he was endorsed by GA Conservatives in Action. This was a lie and the organization has since asked for a retraction. Of course, no comment from the Laurens camp.

2. Brian Laurens attempted to throw his weight around with a police officer during a traffic stop in front of his house. After stating that he missed the stop sign because his baby was crying, he went on to say he’d have the mayor “fix it”. He left and returned to the scene to inform the officer and a superior that he would remove the sign that he in fact failed to observe. He now denies this… However, it’s all on tape here and here.

1. A combination of numbers 2-8. A deceiving, swindling, loose cannon candidate who seems to feel he is above the law, above his prospective constituents, and accountable to no one who learned his tactics from one of Georgia’s biggest deceivers.

That is one of your House District 21 candidates, folks. You can choose him, or you can vote for the other guy. Scot Turner. It seems pretty easy to me.

Keep Tootin’ That TSPLOST Horn…

1 Reply

Screen-shot-2011-01-09-at-2.45.37-AM4
I feel like the TSPLOST will never die, even though the taxpayers bludgeoned it last summer. This week, a legislator from North Fulton threw down some legislation which would remove the penalty that local municipalities are facing after rejecting the TSPLOST. Senate bill 73 would remove a penalty, which coincides with the current clause that says ‘if a region failed to pass the referendum, every local government in that region must provide a 30 percent match to receive any Local Maintenance and Improvement Grants’ (often used for road and bridge maintenance). This would obviously be deflected onto taxpayers.

So, at first glance,it appears that Senator John Albers of Roswell does have some sense (It almost causes me physical pain to say that, though he is still untrustworthy and lacking a true value in the legislature.) Albers claimed in a press release that the measure was un-American  and unfortunate. We all know Albers likes to champion himself on efficiency and ‘for the people’, but the more I thought about it, this is really a champion of nothing. Legislators voted in favor of this in 2010 and put it to the voters who said ‘hell no’. You can’t vote in favor of something, then oppose it publicly and then spearhead legislation to repeal it. It doesn’t work like that. Sure, Albers wasn’t in office when this was passed, but some of the co-sponsors were, and I can assure you some of the prospective ‘yea’ voters were as well. So here we are: after having a mistake forced on us, we are supposed to applaud the correction? No.

Like I’ve said many-a-times: I am thankful that our legislature is more conservative than liberal, yes, but please– do something conservative and follow through. Stop wasting time on resolutions when the federal government is working daily to trample state’s rights and individual liberties. Stop generating legislation that requires fixing a year or two later. Stop reading resolutions for out of state sports teams. Don’t respond to my letter regarding guns on campus by copy-pasting some statistics from the internet and imply more restrictions ‘may be necessary’ when you’re a Republican. Do something worth applauding. Serve the people. Be accountable. Like for real- get it together.

The 2nd Amendment: Give it back to students

2 Replies

Below is a copy of my letter to my State Representative (and some others that I respect) regarding 2nd amendment privileges on non-traditional college campuses:
————————————————–

January 16, 2013

Representative Edward Lindsey
415 State Capitol
Atlanta, GA 30334

CC: Representative Chuck Martin, Representative B.J. Pak, Representative Paulette Braddock,
Senator Hunter Hill, Senator Judson Hill, Senator Brandon Beach

Re: Second Amendment privileges on alternative college campuses.

Dear Representative Lindsey,

My name is Jessica ________ and I am one of your constituents. I am currently enrolled in the Masters of Public Administration program at the University of Georgia, though I attend the satellite campus in Gwinnett. If you’re not familiar with this campus, it is a multi-story office complex that serves as an alternative campus for working graduate and doctoral students. The “campus”, which includes classrooms, study rooms, a library and a few administrative offices, encompasses the entire first floor of the building, with corporate offices on floors two and three.

As I know you are aware, firearms are prohibited on any college campus, regardless of a carry permit presence or gun caliber. As a Georgia State alum, I recognize the vulnerability of students on a college campuses and I feel that vulnerability is no less simply because my current campus is in a suburb. A “gun-free” zone, regardless of location, places students at an unfair advantage. I recognized the true disadvantage when I was informed by campus personnel that even “non-traditional” campuses fall under prohibited zones. Students have no barriers, as most walls and doors are made of glass and doors open outwards into the hallways (I’m sure you recall the dilemma with this in the Virginia Tech case). Without the ability to protect themselves, the only line of defense is to duck.

Classes at the Gwinnett campus often begin late-afternoon or early evening and release late and after dark. This is true of other campuses, such as the Georgia State campus in Alpharetta, the Terry Business School in Buckhead and the Georgia Perimeter satellite campuses across metro Atlanta. Further, nearly 100% of these students are graduate level and higher, therefore invalidating any argument regarding firearms in the hands of minors or those not eligible for a carry permit.

I understand that a blanket permit of firearms on campuses across Georgia is a long shot, especially in this political climate. I am, however, asking for proposed legislation which would allow firearms on alternative campuses which are adjacent to business offices. Business persons have no restrictions on their second amendment, however, as a student, I immediately stripped of my right to bear arms simply because of a ‘status’, even though we are all operating in the same building. Not only am I student, I, along with my classmates, am a sitting duck with a label of “potential victim”. I believe Georgia can do better and I believe students deserve better.

I welcome your feedback.

Respectfully,

 

Jessica _________
________________________
________________________
________________________
________________________