HB 2107 Punishes Digital Degraders

A bill to protect against digital degraders is now before the Pennsylvania Senate.

HB 2107, which passed the House on June 9 with a 197-0 vote, wil make it a third-degree misdemeanor to share an intimate image of another person without consent.

“With the rise of digital photography through the use of social media, protecting one’s privacy continues to be an important issue, especially when unscrupulous individuals use social media to post intimate images of others,” says State Rep. Jim Cox (R-129).

The law allows for state-level prosecution of an alleged perpetrator, if the victim is a Pennsylvania resident, regardless of the perpetrator’s state of residence.

The bill also would allow victims to bring both criminal and civil charges against someone who engages in this activity. Conviction for this charge includes a criminal sentence of up to six months in prison and up to a $1,000 fine. Civil penalties could be much higher, including the cost of actual damages, attorney fees and additional relief the court deems necessary and proper for loss of reputation, money and property.

HB 2107 Punishes Digital Degraders

HB 2107 Punishes Digital Degraders

Why I Left Teaching

By Bill Frye

I taught science full-time for more than two decades and enjoyed a rewarding career educating a generation of public school students in Westmoreland County. I retired from teaching earlier than I wanted, though, and I’d like to tell you why.

As a union member for most of my teaching career, I never disguised the fact that I disagreed with much of the Pennsylvania State Education Association’s political dogma. The union promoted values and ideals that I not only disagreed with, but also routinely had no relevance to education.

Before you jump to conclusions, let me assure you that I’m not anti-union. I’ve been generally happy with the local union in my old school district. I’ve also been a member of the farmers’ union all my life. Unions have an important place in society.

It is the state and national teachers’ unions—the PSEA and the National Education Association—that I grew to resent. Their use of my union dues to support political causes I disagreed with ultimately led me to leave education.

Case in point: A school year’s first teacher in-service day usually consists of the administration welcoming teachers, introducing new staff and outlining goals for the year. But in the fall of 2012, PSEA sponsored a pep rally and played a video for the entire school staff to encourage us to help re-elect President Barack Obama. Normally, events like this happen after the school workday—when attendance is voluntary, not when teachers are a captive audience.

What’s more, the PSEA’s magazine The Voice—which is sent to 180,000 members and paid for with our dues—regularly featured ads praising President Obama while denigrating and lampooning his opponents. Teachers paid for this political activity no matter which candidate we personally supported—and every other taxpayer paid for it as well.

How? Pennsylvania allows government unions to use taxpayer-funded payroll systems to collect their members’ dues—as well as optional political action committee contributions that can be sent directly to politicians.

But aren’t unions prohibited from using members’ dues for politics? Take it from the PSEA itself: Last year, their magazine featured a notice that 12 percent (which amounts to $7 million) of teachers’ dues would be used for political activity and lobbying. That’s in addition to millions in PAC money.

Unions use teachers’ money to advocate for policies that will leave teachers, students and all of us poorer. The main example is how the PSEA is advocating against reforming our deeply indebted public pension system.

One incentive for me to continue in public education was the pay and working conditions for educators. I looked forward to what, at least in my opinion, is a very generous retirement—which I will credit the unions for helping to achieve. But I’m also a landowner and property tax payer. I’m told the pension systems are $50 billion in debt and will require huge property tax hikes if nothing is done.

I feel sorry for people on fixed incomes—like some of my teacher colleagues who retired years ago—who will have to struggle to pay these rising taxes.

Everyone agrees the pension system, as it currently exists, is not sustainable. There are solutions to bring economic viability to the system. But the PSEA, using members’ dues money, is one of the main roadblocks to reasonable reform. In a recent “alert” email to members, the union called the latest compromise proposal a “pension attack” that “targets women and new employees” while offering no solutions except to raise taxes.

I couldn’t take any more of PSEA’s fear-mongering and divisiveness on political issues, so I spoke out. As a result, the personal attacks I received (from union members!) made me choose to retire and focus on my farm business.

But, as a taxpayer, there’s no escape: I’m still forced to help PSEA collect its political money.

Legislation called paycheck protection would stop PSEA and other government unions from using public payroll systems to siphon their political money from teachers’ pay.

I think if legislators truly support teachers, they should pass this effort to give them a bigger say over how their money is spent in the political world. Government unions might then engage in productive negotiation instead of political lobbying.

Bill Frye is a retired public school science teacher from Westmoreland County.

 

Why I Left Teaching

Why I Left Teaching

House Committee Passes Paycheck Protection

The Pennsylvania House State Government Committee on a 14-10 vote advanced House Bill 1507 to the floor, today, June 23, taking the first step towards ending the taxpayer collection of government union campaign contributions and political money.

The legislation, called Paycheck Protection, would close a loophole that allows government unions, and only government unions, the ability to use taxpayer-funded payroll services to collect money used for political action committees and other purely political purposes.

“I applaud the House State Government Committee’s determination to restore fairness and accountability to a process that harms both taxpayers and public employees like teachers,” said Matthew J. Brouillette, president and CEO of the Commonwealth Foundation. “Teachers like Keith Williams, who testified before the committee, now have hope that their voices will no longer be co-opted by union executives who abuse taxpayer resources and teachers’ paychecks to advance their own political agendas.”

Other public school teachers are joining Williams in boldly speaking out to end government unions’ special privilege to collect political money using taxpayer resources.

In a television ad campaign, Susan Hancock, a 40-year teaching veteran and union member, argues that, “[teachers’ unions] use our money for political causes that we don’t agree with.”

She wants Paycheck Protection to get her voice back and hold her union leaders more accountable.

The ad can be seen at www.cfpolicy.org/voices

Full-page newspapers ads—which ran in 14 newspapers around the state on Sunday—feature Robin Fought, an 18-year public school teacher, who asks, “Do you think it’s right to force people to fund a politician they disagree with?”

“Paycheck Protection would restore fundamental fairness to the political system and empower teachers with a bigger say in how their money is spent on political activity,” said  Brouillette, a former high school and middle school teacher. “When union leaders have to get their dues and campaign contributions directly from teachers—rather than having it automatically deducted from their paychecks—we will empower teachers to hold their unions more accountable.”

House Committee Passes Paycheck Protection

House Committee Passes Paycheck Protection

Scientific Doom Via Self Satisfaction

By Jim Vanore

In science, self-satisfaction is death. — Jacques Monod

As Features Editor for the Cape May County Herald during the housing boom of the early 2000s, I assigned a story on lumber alternatives for new housing construction to a relatively new assistant.

Several days after I assigned the story, he turned in (what he thought was) the finished product. His 1,200 words praised a new, sustainable wood source that was not widely available and used by only three builders in the entire county—all of whom he had interviewed for the article.

“Why,” I asked, “are there only three companies using this material?”

“it’s just too expensive,” he replied quite assertively.

“Then you should state that in the article,” I said. “Plus, I see where you only interviewed three people—in fact, the only three that use this lumber.” I handed the paper back to him. “Now get me some interviews with contractors that don’t use the material, and find out why. In essence, get their side of this.”

The kid was damn mad about this. “How many more contractors do you want?” he demanded.

“Well,” I said in my best avuncular tone, “you got three that use the stuff; now get three that do not.”

As he continued to silently stare at what he apparently thought was his completely unreasonable editor, I told him what all journalists should know, but most of whom must constantly be reminded: “A newspaper’s job is to be objective,” I said. “Give both sides of the story, if you will. When we stop allowing both sides of an argument to plead their case, we lose credibility.”

He added two more interviews with contractors that had decidedly opposite views to the first three, making the overall article (somewhat) more impartial. But for the rest of his time under my supervision, he held my proclivity for fact-finding against me.

He wasn’t a journalist; never really let himself develop into one. You can study journalism, you can be trained as a journalist, but unless you develop a journalist’s heart…

Having spent my early grammar school years within walking distance of Independence Hall, my journalist’s heart was nurtured on the history of the United States. That heart experienced its first cardiovascular contractions when I learned of what went on at those antique desks inside the hall (we could sit in them in the early 1950s) back in 1776. It experienced a shot of adrenaline when I studied the Constitution a short time later, and settled into a steady rhythm by the time I read—and understood—the Bill of Rights.

But just as with physical cardiac health, you need a journalistic EKG once in a while to make sure you’re not suffering from arrhythmia. The Philadelphia Inquirer provided me with an unscheduled checkup on page A27 of their June 13 edition. In an article unabashedly titled, “Don’t give equal time to climate-change deniers,” the author, an environmental professor at a local college, proposes that the media close off any further discussion because, he wrote: “There is only one side of this story.”

He—like my young editorial assistant mentioned above—displayed his indignation at an unnamed news organization that aired a segment on global warming which presented those who said we should be concerned, and those who held the opposite view. Imagine! They actually presented both sides of an argument!

Scientific Doom Via Self Satisfaction is Excerpted from Good Writers Block

Food Stamps Were Issued William Lawrence Sr Omnibit 6-23-14

Some $10 million worth of Food Stamps were issued in 1962.

The figure has risen to $71.8 billion today with almost 47 million Americans receiving them which is 14 percent of the population.

Food Stamps were issued

Real Temperatures Unravel AGW Scam

The unraveling of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) scam is becoming more apparent with each passing week. The latest blow to Chicken Little’s 21st century incarnation comes from the revelation by Steve Goddard  that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has been replacing real temperatures with data created by computer models.

The effect has been to make older temperatures seem cooler while more recent ones seem warmer.

Goddard compares current temperature graphs with those based on measurements taken at the time that show the United States has been cooling since the 1930s which is the hottest decade on record.

The official claim is that we have been getting hotter since them.

Christopher Booker of the U.K.’s The Telegraph has an excellent article about it.

Hat tip Cathy Craddock

Real Temperatures Unravel AGW Scam

Maybe Foxy Loxy won’t eat us after all. Real Temperatures Unravel AGW Scam.

DUI Murderers May Face Mandatory 5 Years

A bill that would mean a mandatory five-year prison sentence for those who kill while drunk driving is before the Pennsylvania Senate.

HB 1733 was passed by the House 193-6 on June 10.

The dissenters, all Democrats, were Dwight Evans of the 203rd District, Gary Haluska of the 73rd District, Steve McCarter of the 154th District, Phyllis Mundy of the 120th District, Greg Vitali of the 166th District, and Jake Wheatley of the 19th District.

State Rep. Jim Cox (R-129) notes that the bill would upgrade the offense to a first-degree felony.

 

DUI Murderers May Face Mandatory 5 Years

 

DUI Murderers May Face Mandatory 5 Years

Coach Sexual Relations Now Pa Felony

Gov. Tom Corbett signed Act 56, June 18, and it is now a third-degree felony for a  “sports official, volunteer or employee of a nonprofit or for-profit sports program” to engage in sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse or indecent contact with a child under the 18 years of age who is participating in a sports program, according to State Rep. Jim Cox (R-129).

If the child is under the age of 16, sentencing requires a mandatory minimum of two, five or 10 years in prison depending on the specifics.

Cox says the law was necessary as sometimes officials have relations with athletes who are past the age of consent, which is 16 in Pennsylvania.

A coach who had relations with a person  16 or 17 years old would have been liable for corruption of minors, which is but a third-degree misdemeanor.

The law started as HB 112 introduced by Rep. Mike Vereb (R-150) on Jan. 15, 2013 and was inspired by a Montgomery County case in which a private volleyball coach was arrested for having unlawful sexual relations with a 15-year-old player.

It passed the House 197-0 on Nov. 13 and the Senate 45-1 on June 4. Sen. Stewart Greeleaf (R-12) was the dissenter.

Coach Sexual Relations Now Pa Felony

Coach Sexual Relations Now Pa Felony

 

 

 

Honor Flight June 2014 Trip Returns

Honor Flight June 2014 Trip Returns

Honor Flight Philadelphia’s June 2014 trip returned to Saint Kevin’s Church on Sproul Road in Springfield, Pa. this evening, June 21, with a crowd of flag waving well-wishers greeting the 160 veterans who participated.

Honor Flight Philadelphia gives veterans an all-expense paid trip to the memorials in Washington followed by a banquet.

Honor Flight June 2014 Trip Returns Greater Overbrook String Band

Veteran Helen Collins dances with Greater Overbrook String Band Captain Bill Razzano. The band provided the background music as the veterans marched down the red carpet.

Also, on hand were the Knights of Columbus; honor guards from the Marines, Army and Air Force; Congressman Pat Meehan; Philadelphia Eagles cheerleaders and the Eagle’s Swoop mascot; and the Chick-fil-A cow.

Trucks from several volunteer fire companies provided a ladder arch with a hanging flag over Sproul Road and over the entrance to Saint Kevin’s.

Warrior’s Watch provided a motorcycle escort.

Honor Flight June 2014 Trip Returns

 

 

All VA Executives Rated High Under Obama

The Department of Veterans Affairs has 470 senior executives. The New York Times reports that every single of them got a “fully successful” or better rating over the last four years.

And this is while data was being manipulated, whistleblowers were being hounded and veterans were dying.

The Obama administration was aware of the problem since at least 2012. It didn’t matter. The bureaucrats happily got their kudos and bonuses.

Last month, Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid with a wink and a nod from the President killed a bill to give the Veterans Affairs secretary the power to fire or demote VA executives for poor performance.

The bureaucrats must be protected as they are the backbone of the new feudal system, one supposes.

 

All VA Executives Rated High Under Obama

All VA Executives Rated High Under Obama