http://artk.lostek.net Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:45:34 GMT http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=7/   BIRMINGHAM, AL—The city of Birmingham’s population is 212,237—down 12.6 percent from 242,820 in 2000, according to the 2010 U.S. Census.  In the last decade the city has lost nearly 30,583 residents and projections by the U.S. Census Bureau predict the trend to continue.   If the population trends continue Birmingham could become Alabama’s second largest city in 2012, falling behind Montgomery.   By 2017, if trends continue, Birmingham’s population would trail Mobile and Huntsville. At 12.6 percent Birmingham’s rate of population decline was the fourth highest in the nation.  The population of only three cities declined at a higher rate:  New Orleans (29.1%), Detroit (25%), and Cleveland (17.1%). Tue, 19 Jul 2011 04:00:00 GMT http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=7/ http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=3/ BIRMINGHAM, AL - Recently, federal officials from the justice department arrested four state senators on corruption charges regarding their role in taking bribes in order to pass the “Sweet Home Alabama Bill”. These arrests came on the heels of Governor Riley’s gambling task force which shut down of all the privately operated casinos in the state.  Last year in the Surles decision, the Supreme Court of Alabama held that the law allowing for bingo does not extend to slot machines. Therefore, Country Crossing and Victory Land were found to be in violation of state law. The gambling industry of Alabama could not accept there defeat in the courts and were determined to do “whatever it takes” to get a bill passed through the Alabama legislature. The justice department became involved because the state gambling interests led by Milton McGregor and Ronald Gilley allegedly bribed four members of the state senate in order to pass the gambling bill. The determination of McGregor and Gilley to pass the bill was astonishing. According to federal officials each state senator were offered between 100,000 to 2 million dollars to vote in favor of the bill.  If these allegations are proven to be true this may be one of the largest corruption scandals in the history of our state. Yet, the reaction of many Alabamians has not been that of shock, dismay or even surprise. Many in our state have come to expect this form of corruption from Montgomery which is why the public outcry has not been significant. The response from our elected officials has been to demand more transparency in government to prevent this from happening in the future. But transparency is only part of the solution. The real solution to preventing corruption is for the public to become more informed about the affairs of the state. Bess Myerson once said “The accomplice to the crime of corruption is frequently our own indifference”. Our founding fathers knew that it was not laws or prosecutors that would keep corruption out of politics….. rather, it was a well informed electorate. These four legislators where willing to risk prison because they knew that the majority of people who voted for them would not be paying attention and therefore they could break the law without suffering a public uproar. Thankfully, someone at the justice department was paying attention and did care enough to investigate these people. But unless there is a fundamental change in the level of participation among the electorate these stories will continue to persist. The problem that we are facing is that most voters feel that their voices are not heard and that their vote does not make a difference. This is simply untrue. One person who is willing to stand up and fight can affect change in the lives of thousands. One vote may go a long way when united with a chorus of informed individuals that hold the potential to change the direction of a nation. The people of this state need to expect and demand excellence from there legislature but the only way to accomplish that is to pay attention to what is going on in Montgomery. Hopefully this year’s election will mark a new era in Alabama politics but that can only occur if the people inform themselves. I will let Thomas Jefferson close by saying “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. Wed, 06 Oct 2010 04:00:00 GMT http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=3/ http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=5/ Gambling interests spent at least $4.1 million to back candidates in the June 1 primary, a Birmingham News analysis of campaign finance disclosures shows. Gambling sources sent cash through 104 political action committees during the 2010 election cycle, disclosures show. With battles over electronic bingo raging in all three branches of state government, gambling interests will ante up even more campaign cash until the Nov. 2 general election, political experts said. "Gambling is a big issue," said David Lanoue, University of Alabama's political science department chairman. "It's a life-and-death struggle for them, survive and thrive or shut down." The top gaming industry donor so far is Milton McGregor, one of the biggest proponents of electronic bingo in the state. McGregor is president of two companies that run his greyhound race tracks in Birmingham and Shorter that gave $1.9 million combined to more than 50 PACs, disclosures show. The Poarch Band of Creek Indians and its gaming authority, PCI Gaming, gave some $1.4 million to 56 PACs, reports show. The tribe, which owns four Alabama casinos or dog tracks, also backed one of two pro-gambling bills that failed in the 2010 legislative session. Greenetrack also contributed more than $487,000 through PACs run by track officials, reports show. The Eutaw track had been battling Gov. Bob Riley's anti-gambling task force before the task force shut down its operations and removed its 900-plus bingo machines on Thursday and Friday. "The gambling interests seem pretty flush with money," said William Stewart, a longtime observer of Alabama politics and a retired University of Alabama political science professor. "After losing in the 2010 session they're not going to give up," he said. "They are trying to influence who will be in office." Top recipients so far have been Ron Sparks, the Democratic nominee for governor, and key Democratic legislators who favor electronic bingo. But gambling PAC money even has gone to three candidates running for Jefferson County Commission, disclosures show. "It's mostly going to people already on their side," Lanoue said. "Ron Sparks has indicated comfort with gambling, at least taxing it. The legislative races are especially important because the balance of power in the Legislature is in question." Little gambling money has appeared in the races for three seats on the Alabama Supreme Court, where electronic bingo cases are pending and the fate of any new gambling law would be decided. Mac Parsons, a Democrat facing Justice Tom Parker on Nov. 2, received $20,000 from PACs that got all or most of their money from gambling sources, current reports show. But the pot will grow for judicial candidates before Nov. 2, as gambling interests back Democrats in seeking a court that would be more favorable to their interests, Stewart said. How much more gambling money will hit campaign coffers over the next four months will depend on how tight key races are running, Lanoue said. "It will go everywhere they think it will be helpful," he said. "It may depend on what the polls look like -- if Ron Sparks has a chance in the governor's race, if the Supreme Court races are close or lopsided." Tracking the money Tracking the source of campaign contributions can be difficult. Donations often run through a maze of PACs before reaching the intended candidate. Montgomery lobbyist John Teague's 47 PACs, including 21 he opened on Dec. 28, were conduits for some $2.3 million in gambling contributions in the 2010 election, records show. "New PACs sprout like mushrooms," Lanoue said. "It's not a system that is strong on accountability." But gambling interests exclusively funded 56 PACs, including 31 run by Teague, disclosures show. Another 20 PACs got all but a handful of their money from gambling sources. Disclosures from those 76 PACs give an example of how gambling cash flows: >> The Poarch tribe contributed to each Teague PAC, including 17 in which it was the sole source of money. McGregor's tracks contributed to 30 Teague PACs, including 14 with only gambling money. >> Another 25 PACs based in Boligee routed money from Greenetrack. The only other cash the Boligee PACs got was $37,000 from McGregor's tracks. >> Gambling interests provided 88 percent of the $152,000 collected by four PACs run by Alison Kinney, a Montgomery lobbyist. Of the remaining $18,000 Kinney's PACs received, $5,000 came from a PAC making its first expenditure after getting money from a Teague gambling PAC. Direct, indirect routes Candidates got more than $500,000 directly from PACs exclusively funded at the time by gambling interests, the Birmingham News analysis shows. Beneficiaries included nine of the Democrats and two of the Republicans in Jefferson County's legislative delegation. Greenetrack split its bet when it sent money to both State Rep. Lawrence McAdory, D-Bessemer, and Claire Mitchell, his opponent in the July 13 runoff, reports show. Some of the gambling money went to PACs that gave to candidates after pooling cash from non-gambling sources including businesses, plaintiff lawyers, the state teacher's union and the Alabama Nursing Home Association. Often, that allowed candidates to get gambling money from PACs that received no cash directly from gambling sources. "It hides the ultimate source," Stewart said. "That helps candidates who don't want to be seen as sympathetic with gambling." Gambling PAC cash also helped pay for political consulting or polling. Some went to political groups that back candidates, like the Alabama New South Coalition and Jefferson County Democratic Conference. Even the Christian Coalition got money from a Teague PAC with only gambling money, disclosures show. Massey donations Not included in the $4.1 million gambling-donation tally was $185,000 that Montgomery lobbyist Jerrod Massey distributed via 10 PACs he runs. The source of that PAC money is murky, since the sole donor was his lobbying firm, Mantra Governmental. Among Massey's 20 lobbying clients are Ronnie Gilley Properties and Resorts Development Group II. They are associated with the Country Crossing resort in southeast Alabama, which closed its short-lived bingo casino in January to avoid a raid by Riley's anti-gambling task force. A legislator told a federal grand jury in May that Massey offered a bribe in the guise of a campaign contribution for a yes vote on a bingo bill this year. Massey has denied the allegation. In March, Luther Strange accused his Republican primary opponent, Attorney General Troy King, of taking pro-gambling money from Gilley through Massey. King went to a 2008 kickoff party for Gilley's Country Crossing and has fought Riley's efforts to rid the state of bingo machines. Strange claimed Massey PACs sent $40,000 from Gilley to ABC Merit PAC last year to route to King. But King, who lost in the primary, denied accepting gambling contributions. In April, ABC Merit returned $40,000 to five Massey PACs, disclosures show. "The public does not have a transparent government," Stewart said. "We have a very cloudy view of who is giving to candidates." Join the conversation by clicking to comment or e-mail Velasco at evelasco@bhamnews.com. © 2011 al.com. All rights reserved. Sun, 04 Jul 2010 04:00:00 GMT http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=5/ http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=1/ With all the talk of proration and deep cuts in state spending, most people in Alabama are well aware of the dire financial condition of the state of Alabama. What they probably do not realize is that the situation is even worse than it appears and is getting worse. Alabama, like almost every other state, is carrying massive unfunded liabilities for state and education employee pensions and health benefits that are requiring massive payments to remain solvent. Almost $1 billion of the $5.6 billion 2011 education budget passed during the last legislative session was to keep Alabama’s pension programs funded. Just over $1 billion more was appropriated to keep the health benefits programs funded. While Alabama has an unfunded liability of about $16 billion for health benefits, the greatest concern for Alabama and other states are the unfunded liabilities for state retirement plans because states are required by law to pay them. According to a February 2010 report from the Pew Center on the States, the Retirement Systems of Alabama (RSA) reports for 2008 a total liability of $40.2 billion for state and education employee pensions with $31 billion in pension assets, leaving $9.2 billion in unfunded liabilities. Another study published in April 2010 by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College entitled The Funding of State and Local Pensions: 2009-2013 projects that the percentage of Alabama’s pension that is funded will decline to about 73 percent for 2009. Depending on the report you read, the total unfunded pension fund liabilities for all 50 states is between $750 billion and $3.23 trillion. For years these unfunded liabilities were hidden, but that changed when the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued rules requiring state and local governments to show these liabilities. Because these liabilities were hidden, state legislatures, including Alabama, did not appropriate adequate funding on an annual basis to keep the pension systems adequately funded resulting in pension plans with assets well below their liabilities. Not only has the Alabama Legislature failed to adequately cover the unfunded liabilities, they made the situation worse by approving Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) without appropriating funds to cover them, including a seven percent increase in 2006 that alone added over $817 million to the state’s pension obligation. Even with the new requirements for reporting unfunded liabilities, states can still present a fiscal picture for pension obligations that is not totally transparent. To a certain extent, states can minimize the impact of increases in obligations such as the increased cost of COLAs and of major investment losses by using an accounting procedure called “smoothing” to spread losses out to future years. In addition, Alabama and other states have used overly optimistic growth projections to reduce the size of the unfunded liability. In Alabama’s case, the RSA projects an eight percent annual growth rate for its pension fund investments which greatly discounts the amount of money needed in the fund now to meet future obligations. By contrast, private sector pension plan managers project returns of only 6.4 percent. In fact, Warren Buffet is projecting investment returns for Berkshire Hathaway of only 6.9 percent. Other pension fund analysts contend that states should base their investment return projections on the interest rates paid on U.S. Treasury securities. According to a study by University of Chicago Assistant Professor of Finance Robert Novy-Marx and Northwestern University Associate Professor of Finance Joshua D. Rauh, the RSA’s stated liability is $41 billion with pension assets of only $22.3 billion. According to Novy-Marx and Rauh, if the RSA based its projections for return on investments on Treasury bills the $41 billion liability reported by the RSA would soar to almost $79 billion. For Alabama to continue to use accounting and asset management methods to reduce the incentive for the State Legislature to adequately fund state pensions or at least reduce the unfunded liability is the equivalent of “whistling past a fiscal graveyard” because eventually those liabilities must be paid. There are solutions to the problem including raising the retirement age from 55 to 60, increasing employee contributions and capping benefits at a set percentage. But the solutions are all long-term which means some tough decisions must be made in the near-term. As Dr. David Bronner, Chief Executive Office of the RSA, warned in the January 2010 edition of the RSA’s monthly newsletter Advisor, “The next two years are going to be the most difficult that I have witnessed.” Regardless of who the people of Alabama elect as the next governor and elect to the State Legislature, they will be faced with a tremendous challenge of getting Alabama’s fiscal house in order. May 14, 2010 Gary Palmer is president of the Alabama Policy Institute, a non-partisan, non-profit research and education organization dedicated to the preservation of free markets, limited government and strong families, which are indispensable to a prosperous society. Note: This column is a copyrighted feature distributed free of charge by the Alabama Policy Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author and API are properly cited. For information or comments, contact Gary Palmer, Alabama Policy Institute, 402 Office Park Drive, Suite 300, Birmingham, Alabama  35223, 205.870.9900, or email garyp@alabamapolicy.org. Tue, 18 May 2010 04:00:00 GMT http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=1/ http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=2/ By Birmingham News editorial board May 13, 2010, 5:45AM Here, courtesy of Thomas Jefferson, is further proof our Founding Fathers got this whole representative democracy experiment right: "We might hope to see the finances of the Union as clear and intelligible as a merchant's books, so that every member of Congress and every man of any mind in the Union should be able to comprehend them, to investigate abuses, and consequently to control them." That's the kind of transparency in government every government official -- and every taxpayer funding those government officials -- ought to believe in. We know in Alabama that is not the case, particularly when it comes to how we elect our government officials and the way we allow lobbyists to influence them. Taxpayers may want transparency in government, but it is clear many elected officials don't. Otherwise, we wouldn't have bad state laws that allow: + Political action committees to mingle money among themselves in a transparent effort to be anything but transparent. PACs launder campaign money from giver to candidate to hide from the public the source of that contribution. + Candidates to report contributions five to 10 days before an election, with no accounting for the money they receive in the days before an election until much later, even though the technology exists for instant reporting. + Lobbyists to spend up to $250 a day entertaining an elected official without having to report that spending to anyone. These laws purposefully keep voters in the dark about who is trying to buy influence with elected officials. One of the most egregious examples this, or any, election cycle comes courtesy of the gambling industry. Regardless of what you think about whether gambling should be legal, it is corrupt to the core to allow the gambling industry, or any special interest, to dump millions of dollars into PACs, which, in turn, funnel the money to candidates -- many of whom are lawmakers who considered gambling legislation during the session that ended last month. At the same time, the industry's lobbyists tried to influence lawmakers' votes (a grand jury is investigating whether some of those attempts were illegal) with no public accounting of any money spent doing so. While some of the campaign money can be traced back to gambling interests, much of it can't because it was washed through a series of PACs and mixed with other money. That gives candidate and contributor plausible deniability. Trying to make sense of all this is daunting. Give a big round of applause to the Alabama Policy Institute for its effort, the Alabama "Right to Know" project. API, a nonprofit research and education group, has built a website (www.alabamarighttoknow.org) on the idea that transparency begets accountability. It is not by accident Jefferson's quote is on the site's home page. The website tries to hold lawmakers responsible for their promises. In 2006, Republicans, Democrats and Gov. Bob Riley listed those promises as priorities for the next Legislature that was about to be seated. The API site identifies whether those promises have been kept. The site also compiles information from the Legislature, secretary of state's office and state Ethics Commission and makes it searchable. Citizens can look up their lawmakers (and get help finding them) and learn how to get in touch with them, as well as get information on the PACs that have given to lawmakers' campaigns and where those PACs got their money. They can also learn about lawmakers' discretionary spending and view travel expenses, as well as information from ethics filings about their and their spouses employers, real-estate holdings, debt and such. API's website connects the dots into as complete a picture as you could hope to see, given the current laws. Congratulations to API for providing a great public service -- one that a government which truly believes in transparency would. Click hereto read the al.com article. Thu, 13 May 2010 04:00:00 GMT http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=2/ http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=4/ EDITORIAL: PACs a recipe for deception By John Peck, The Huntsville Times May 07, 2010, 9:32AM HUNTSVILLE, Ala. - Truth is such a fleeting thing. It's a nearly extinct virtue when it comes to who is behind many campaign advertisements. A simple warning to voters as Alabama's election season kicks into high gear: Groups identified in the disclaimers may not be who they portray themselves as. The truth is, the public cannot easily follow the money trail when political action committees (PACS) are involved. Loose campaign finance laws allow a shameful political shell game called PAC-to-PAC transfers. Those PACs may fund advertisements for a candidate - or attack ads against an opponent - and the public is often left clueless over whose pockets the money originated from. Take the "True Republican PAC," a political action committee formed in March. Ads sponsored by that group began attacking GOP gubernatorial candidate Bradley Byrne by linking him with trial lawyers and Democrats, including President Barack Obama. Look closer and one discovers that the bulk of True Republican PAC's money ($500,000) came from the Alabama Education Association's political arm, A-Vote. The teachers' union can hardly be characterized as a Republican-leaning organization, much less, "True Republican." Leaders with AEA and Byrne have waged war over Byrne's attempt as postsecondary education chancellor to stop lawmakers from also holding jobs at two-year colleges. Byrne has continued to attack AEA throughout the campaign, so it shouldn't be a surprise that AEA would come after him. But Byrne's chief rival in the GOP gubernatorial campaign, Greenville businessman Tim James, probably wouldn't want AEA's backing in the primary - at least not publicly. Instead of donating money to James, the teachers' organization routed money through PACs to the True Republican PAC to discredit Byrne. This is just one example of the way PACs can be used to deceive voters. It's a legal form of money laundering and it's exactly what many elected officials want. State Republican Party Chairman Mike Hubbard underscored that recently when he confirmed some donors wanting to help fund the anti-gambling effort didn't want the public to see their support. Hubbard acknowledged the state Republican Party agreed to transfer their collective donations through PACs, and ultimately to the Citizens for a Better Alabama PAC to fight electronic bingo. Alabama's PAC-meisters pass money around so cleverly by the time it gets to a particular candidate or another PAC, or to a deceitfully named group like Citizens for God, Baseball and Apple Pie, it's impossible to trace. The practice gives candidates a measure of plausible deniability. By having donations tumbled around, an elected official could reasonably claim not to know where the money came from. Alabama deserves better. And so far, our Legislature hasn't done a thing to strengthen our campaign and ethics laws. Proposed reforms like banning PAC transfers, giving the state Ethics Commission subpoena power and requiring full disclosure on lobbyist spending die each session despite presession surveys showing widespread legislative support. One group has stepped forward to help bring transparency to the process. The Alabama Policy Institute recently launched a website: www.alabamarighttoknow.org, which provides links to PACs and individual legislators. The legislative links list lawmakers' income, discretionary appropriations, travel reimbursements and receipts from PACs. The PACs link identifies the chair, address and PAC contributions and expenditures. The website also gives an accounting of major campaign promises. A better means is still needed for voters to more easily follow the money trail in campaigns. The website is the result of a two-year-effort funded by a conservative non-profit organization. Maybe one day state lawmakers will step up to make campaigns - and the policymaking that stems from each election - more transparent. By John Peck, for the editorial board. E-mail: john.peck@htimes.com Mon, 10 May 2010 19:48:44 GMT http://artk.lostek.net/index.cfm?content_mode=blog&blog_mode=BlogDetail&BlogID=4/