Category Archives: Blog

The American Economy

Posted on by
Reply

The American Economy

Our immense resources a problem?

One fundamental problem with the U.S. economy is one we have had for at least the last fifty years: We have the capacity to produce more than we need. This fundamental fact becomes clearer when one thinks about supply of the basic material needs of food, shelter and clothing. Notwithstanding periodic crop failures, America has more than enough farmland to produce food for our entire population, if necessary. We do not face a realistic possibility of famine—barring some appalling ecological disaster, an explosion or fissure or airborne menace that destroys the honeybee population or irrevocably contaminates our land and water supply.

honeybees

The same goes for shelter and clothing. The U.S. has more than enough construction capability to build houses for our entire population, again barring ecological disaster on a life-threatening scale. We have more than enough resources and manufacturing to clothe our entire population, even if to do so would mean resuscitating underused or abandoned industries. The fundamental fact that we can produce more than we need is one of the causes of our chronic unemployment and underemployment. It is one of the causes of our widespread health problems, obesity being the most obvious example. Ironically it is one of the causes of our ongoing trade deficit. Anyone who genuinely wants to ameliorate unemployment and underemployment in the U.S. has to face the fact that we can produce more, far more, than we need to buy, both of what is essential to survival and of nonessential extras.

 

Other countries do it, too

This fundamental fact served the United States well in World War II. The nation went into high gear as a patriotic war machine, and immediately began production on a scale not seen before. Some kinds of commerce, construction, production and imports may have been curtailed—not counting the importation of human capital like Albert Einstein, fortunately driven from Nazi Germany by German ignorance, envy and hysterical beliefs about ‘race’. But domestic production ramped up to fill most essential needs, at least within the parameters of knowledge at the time, and there was less hunger in the United States during a horrific world war than there had been shortly before it.

World War II poster

Post-World War II, the same fundamental production capability and natural resources and well-qualified labor force created economic expansion for over twenty-five years, again on a scale not seen before. Public highways, public schools and the private use of birth control all contributed to the development of an immense, self-confident middle class with a reasonable confidence in achieving shelter, education and personal advancement, among other things. The conformity may have been food for satire, the natural environment somewhat strained by missteps and miscalculations, the health of individuals plagued by toxic products from tobacco to thalidomide, but the material benefits of national development became so obvious as to highlight shameful poverty among the elderly and in Appalachia and in historically excluded groups. They also ineluctably exposed ‘separate but equal’ as transparent sham.

In 2012, the same fundamental is working differently, as we know from the massive slump that has resulted from the mortgage derivatives debacle. When we can readily produce more than we need, some people inevitably end up—or start out–doing things that no one wants to pay them to do. And that’s without factoring in imports. I don’t want to go into dispiriting detail here. Most thinking people have already noticed that we have millions of over-qualified Americans laid off, or trying to enter the job market, or underemployed, underpaid or working in lower-skill occupations than they trained for.

Needless to say, the GOP is blaming all the disappointment on President Obama. Hence the election-year rhetoric about ‘jobs’ and ‘putting people to work’. Predictably, Republican campaigns are funded by entities like Big Oil and the airlines, which have no more standing than does the Chamber of Commerce to yell about ‘jobs’, but more on that later.

For now, there are generally three levels of response to the situation outlined above. That it, there are broadly three kinds of response—boiling this down—once the fundamental fact of our immense resources and production capability is acknowledged:

1)      Bogus. The first is what might be termed the horrible, or George F. Will, response. This is the pseudo-erudite argument that high production capability inevitably means unemployment. This is the way it is, and it’s hopeless. Nothing to see here, folks; move along. People like Will himself, overcompensated for the reverse of beneficial service to humankind, generally use fancier language to make this unsubstantiated claim, but this is what it boils down to.*

2)      Short-term. The second response is the focused, material approach: Let’s expand our overseas markets. A reasonable response–if we recognize that we can, and do, produce more than we need, then it’s logical to look for markets elsewhere. If we can’t consume all our production domestically, and we want markets to sell in, then we should be trying to export. A nice idea as far as it goes, but mostly a) not attempted; and b) problematic when it is attempted. Whatever the problem, dumping tobacco products in emerging markets is not a long-term solution. Unfortunately, for at least the last thirty years we have been exporting ideas and importing products, rather than the other way around.

3)      If we can do these things, why don’t we? In the interest of full disclosure, I should state right up front that this would be my response.  A partial explanation is that the perspective of ‘the law of supply and demand’ tends to treat wealth of resources as a problem.

 

More later.

 

*For right now, Will is with the Boehner-Mitchell crowd in blaming unemployment on the president, but that’s for election year. It’s not his usual or level-of-rest kind of statement.

Side note: If Will weren’t already a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post, he would soon be taken on. Anti-labor are the Post’s cup of tea, where commentary is concerned. They’re popular on ABC News programs, too.

Trayvon Martin and the myth of ‘the first punch’

Posted on by
3

The Trayvon Martin shooting and  the myth of ‘the first punch’

 

The Zimmerman family’s attempts to use the mass media may or may not work to George Zimmerman’s advantage, but regardless of legal outcome, the news media have an obligation not to purvey misunderstanding or misstatements of fact.

 

Zimmerman

The phrase ‘the first punch’ has been heard too often lately. It has also been accompanied too often by overstatement bemoaning how little we know about the shooting of seventeen-year-old, unarmed Trayvon Martin—about which we actually know quite a lot. ‘The first punch’ has also been too often part of fatuous assertions that ‘we may never know’ what happened. Actually, the justice system has an excellent chance of arriving at the truth about those very few minutes not directly recorded in the 911 calls to police. Forensics help.

In the meantime, however, when well-placed personnel in the news media toss around phrases like ‘the first punch’, with too much assertion and too little definition, it can get scary. The concept of self-defense is essential in everyday life as it is in the justice system. Given what we know about Zimmerman’s actions about 7:00 p.m. on Feb. 26, 2012, it is essential to remember that Trayvon Martin had a right to defend himself.

 

Trayvon Martin

Let’s start with ‘first punch’ in its literal sense. As anyone knows who has spent time sitting in courtrooms during domestic violence proceedings, not all fighting or close-hand violence takes the form of punching. In fact, you might be surprised how many husbands or domestic partners are credibly charged with dragging their female partners by the hair, throwing something at them, grabbing them roughly either by the throat or elsewhere, kicking them, or shoving them–into walls, or not; etc. It’s almost as though the aggressor in these cases was foreseeing a legal defense of sorts: “Your honor, I never hit her.” Then there’s the whole separate but related topic of threats of physical violence, along with the actual acts.

In such a case, the question ‘who threw the first punch’ is not the most important question. It might not even arise. Who in his right mind exonerates physical spousal abuse, child abuse or, for that matter, an attack on a stranger, just because it cautiously excludes punching? Conversely, if someone being attacked threw a punch against the aggressor, do you really illuminate the situation by summing it up, “Well, Martha threw the first punch”?

‘First punch’ in its figurative or broader sense, after all, means acting as the aggressor. The question ‘who threw the first punch’ is metonymy for the question, who started the fight? Who was behaving as the aggressor?

For the sake of simplicity, let’s leave ‘fighting words’ out of the equation—use of language that has been held to justify use of force. Let’s just take physical actions.

Give yourself a little quiz at home, in between working the crossword puzzle and Sudoku. In which of these situations would you not want the right to throw a punch?

  • When cornered by your friendly neighborhood rapist, escape not possible
  • When blitzed by a mugger
  • When being chased by someone bigger than you, and you’re running out of breath and/or can’t reach the nearest shelter ahead of the pursuer

Be it noted that in any of these situations, while you have a right to throw a punch, you also have latitude to use your best judgment about whether to do so. These situations do not usually conduce to best judgment on the victim’s part, of course. That’s the nature of aggression, that it trumps judgment as it trumps ethics. But in any case, you can always try to run away, to escape. According to George Zimmerman’s 911 call to police, that is exactly what Trayvon Martin did, and Zimmerman’s account is corroborated by that of the sixteen-year-old girl talking with Trayvon Martin on his cell phone, who has told police she urged him to run.

Anyone wondering whether George Zimmerman was using his best judgment, or trying to do so, can check out Zimmerman’s calls to the Seminole County sheriff’s office, linked here. There is ample indication that Zimmerman had already talked himself into perceiving any black teenager as a threat, and as someone just about to get away with something. Interestingly, Zimmerman had used that “I don’t know what his deal is” line in regard to one of the African-American garbagemen in his complex, before the fateful 911 call about Trayvon Martin.

The Orlando Sentinel previously reported that it was Zimmerman himself who initiated the presentation in his community by Neighborhood Watch. The Florida press did a good job generally reporting on the series of 911 calls.

Regrettably, on January 29 of this year the Tampa Tribune ran a front-page article titled “Use your phone to fight crime.” A GPS device is called “high-tech neighborhood watch.”

If the question is which man was the aggressor, not to give away the ending here, but my money’s on Mr. Zimmerman. He was the man with the 9mm handgun; he was the man in the vehicle calling the police on Trayvon Martin, who had a right to be there; he left the vehicle to go after the seventeen-year-old, after saying “okay” when advised by police not to do so. That Zimmerman is recorded on the 911 tape as saying, “Shit, he’s running,” and that Zimmerman’s brother, Robert Zimmerman, Jr., described Zimmerman as out of breath from running make it sound as though Zimmerman was running after Trayvon Martin. Close police investigation of the few-minutes timeline between Zimmerman’s 911 call and the death of Trayvon Martin, correlating the timeline with the distances between Zimmerman’s vehicle and Martin’s body, between the body and the sidewalk, etc., should clear up any residual doubt. Furthermore, Zimmerman was the man who walked away alive afterward, while an unarmed teenager was fatally shot. As has been reported, the Sanford Police Department initial reports of the shooting categorize it as “homicide–negligent manslaughter—unnecessary killing to prevent unlawful act.” Zimmerman’s gun was confiscated, and Zimmerman was searched, cuffed and taken into custody.

Witness testimony, the forensic examinations, detailed analysis of the short timeline, and a thorough analysis of the recorded screams—which sound like a young guy’s voice–all have yet to come. But in the meantime, nothing in the picture so far yields “Who threw the first punch?” as the intelligent question to ask.

How did that obfuscatory and self-serving misdirection become the meme of the week in discussions of the Florida case?

Trayvon Martin, question 4: Where was the iced tea can?

Posted on by
2

Trayvon Martin, question 4: Where was the iced tea can, when police arrived at the scene?

George Zimmerman’s prominent defenders are not looking more credible on a closer look, with the passage of time. Florida State Attorney Norman (Norm) Wolfinger has popped up in news a few times, before his recent decision to negative arresting shooter George Zimmerman in the killing of Trayvon Martin.

 

George Zimmerman

On May 3, 2008, the St. Petersburg Times noted that Wolfinger was among the state’s top-level double dippers:

“Two of the state’s top prosecutors, Lawson Lamar of Orange County and Norm Wolfinger of Brevard County, qualified to seek re-election. Wolfinger is unopposed and Lamar drew a little-known criminal defense lawyer as an opponent.

Lamar and Wolfinger are among the state’s top double dippers.

Lamar “retired” in 2005 without leaving office. He collected $514,927 in lump sum benefits, plus a $115,752 a year pension, plus an annual salary of $153,140.

Wolfinger followed suit in 2007. He collected $447,834 in lump sum benefits, plus an $83,484 a year pension, plus an annual salary of $153,140.

Circuit judges are paid $145,080.”

Titled “SHHH! Judges Keep Seats,” the article reported that a little-noticed amendment inserted quietly into state law by the Florida legislature allowed judges and some other public servants to be re-elected almost without notice—and without opposition—by moving the filing deadline for some officials to a different season than for others.

An Oct. 10, 2008, Florida Today piece referenced Wolfinger as stating publicly that ACORN was being investigated in connection with ‘voter fraud’. This article, published during a period of intense voter registration drives in Florida, was swiftly disseminated as a PR release by the Republican National Committee.

After 2008, the GOP-dominated Florida legislature stepped on voter registration so firmly that even the League of Women Voters, unhappily, no longer conducts registration drives in the state. At the time, however, the investigation of ACORN was so ‘controversial’—read, despised—that Wolfinger handed it off like a political hot potato within a week of the previous report.

Calls placed to Wolfinger’s State Attorney office are directed to the offices of Angela Corey, the special prosecutor in the case. Emailed questions to Communications Director Jacklyn Barnard in that office have not yet been answered.

On Nov. 6, 2009, Norm Wolfinger was in the news again. The AP, reporting the release of a Florida inmate, finally freed after spending 27 years wrongfully in prison for a crime he did not commit, includes this item pertaining to Wolfinger:

“Eric Ferrero, a spokesman in the Innocence Project’s national office, said 27 states currently have compensation laws on the books. Of those states, Florida is the only one where a roadblock occurs if the former inmate already had a felony conviction on his record.

Norman Wolfinger, the state attorney in Brevard County, said in a letter to the Legislature that while there isn’t enough evidence to convict Dillon again, lawmakers should consider that his innocence isn’t proven, either.”

It might charitably be argued that after that gaffe, Wolfinger became gun-shy about prosecuting. Something seems to have given him a strong motive for causing George Zimmerman not to be arrested in the shooting, even for manslaughter. Wolfinger, as has been reported, showed up at the Sanford police station in person that night.

Norman Wolfinger

Accuracy is always good news. Recent days have brought out the full 911 call by George Zimmerman, which makes clear that Zimmerman said not only “he looks black” about Trayvon Martin, but also that he said Martin looked suspicious, etc. Zimmerman’s loose statement in the call, accusing Martin of being on something, helps explain why the Sanford police tested the body of Trayvon Martin for drugs and alcohol although the initial police report has negatives for ‘drug related’ and ‘alcohol related’. Too bad NBC edited that 911 call wrong, for which the network has apologized.

The new, cleaned up and sharper images in the police video of George Zimmerman help, too. The newly released video clearly shows a cut or scrape on the back top of Zimmerman’s head. The injury is clearly not extensive.

So, a question: Could the cut on the head have been done with an aluminum beverage can? If George Zimmerman grabbed Trayvon Martin—macho-style, clutching the hoodie at the throat—it would have been natural for the seventeen-year-old to swing at him with whatever he had in his hands. The Skittles bag wouldn’t be much help, but the can would have some clout. So, along with the bloody nose from being punched, in this reconstruction, if Zimmerman grappled with the young man, Trayvon Martin might have swung at his head. If Martin did so, theoretically Florida’s ‘stand your ground’ law would protect him—unless it turns out that the law applies only to white people.

 

Trayvon Martin

A call placed to Zimmerman’s attorney Hal Uhrig has not yet been returned.

Rightwing web sites have publicized widely the item that George Zimmerman registered to vote as a Democrat. They are less eager to notice that the weather that evening was hoodie weather.

Were George Zimmerman’s bloodied nose—assuming it was bloodied—and head examined for a match to the iced tea can?

Was the iced tea can bagged as evidence? One of the worrisome aspects of the police video is that it shows police casually tossing George Zimmerman’s jacket into the trunk of the police vehicle, unbagged. But in any case, was the iced tea can examined for George Zimmerman’s DNA as well as for Trayvon Martin’s? Were any fingerprints on it besides Martin’s?

One of the clearer pieces of evidence the public has in this case is the recorded 911 call with screaming the background. I find that call painful to listen to but have listened to it carefully. The voice crying out in the background sounds like a young person, a high schooler, not like a man in his late twenties.

Another of the clearer items in evidence is George Zimmerman’s initial 911 call. Setting aside exactly what language Zimmerman used—something I have not been able to hear clearly—after the expletive, the rest of the exchange is clear. Zimmerman told police, in answer to their question, that he was following Trayvon Martin. The police then told Zimmerman, “Okay, we don’t need you to do that.” Zimmerman then answered, “Okay.”

Why? Why did George Zimmerman say “Okay” when police tried to get him to stay away from Martin? Was he so convinced that Martin would “get away,” as he put it—[they] “always get away”–that he simply resolved to stay close to him even though the rest of the call makes clear that police were on their way to meet up with Zimmerman?

“Shit, he’s running.”

As noted previously, none of the public statements in George Zimmerman’s defense have come from Zimmerman himself. They have been conveyed secondhand, if that, by Joe Oliver—who will no longer serve as the family’s media consultant—or by Zimmerman’s father and brother. Neither of the latter has made a credible statement to the media.

Now, the family has new representation and will put up a web site to aid in the defense and fund-raising. Attorney Hal Uhrig made the following statement:

“We pray for both the Martin and Zimmerman families for what this incident has caused in suffering,” said Uhrig. “We are confident that George Zimmerman, after being vindicated and exonerated, will continue to feel remorse, not for his justified actions but for the unintended consequences.”

What are the unintended consequences? Is this meant to suggest that the death was unintentional?

That brings to mind another question: If George Zimmerman was shooting only to defend himself against an unarmed man, why didn’t he shoot the person in the leg, or in the foot, or in the arm?

The 2012 GOP primaries and the politics of neglect

Posted on by
Reply

2012 GOP primaries–Santorum wins most Wisconsin counties but loses Wisconsin

More primary results, mostly predictable, in the GOP primary season, and another reminder of the importance of being able to do math and to reason. Case in point, Wisconsin, carried by Mitt Romney along with Maryland and D.C.

Romney in Wisconsin

As previously written, former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell pointed out that Rick Santorum has a track record in 2012 of almost winning the large industrial states—Ohio, Michigan. Santorum maintained the same pattern in Wisconsin on April 3. Once again in Wisconsin, Santorum won among non-suburbanites and non-urbanites, but not with enough to carry the state.

 

Santorum in Wisconsin

Wisconsin has 72 counties, of which Santorum carried 46—yet another state where wide swaths of rural land area went mostly for Santorum. This is a point touted by Santorum himself, on the campaign trail.

 

The pattern in Michigan

The Santorum campaign seems not to have picked up on the difference between counties and congressional districts. In the GOP primary process, Wisconsin’s delegates are awarded on the basis of congressional districts won, not counties won. Those wide tracts of low population density amount to maybe six or nine Wisconsin delegates awarded to Santorum.

Let’s skip the least interesting and enlightening aspects of current reporting, namely the suspense over whether, or how, Santorum will be pressured to ‘step aside’ from the GOP primary contests to benefit Mitt Romney.

Romney with friends

More significance lies in how candidates like Santorum score in our ‘country’ areas in the first place—lack of information—and how we as a nation treat our ‘country’—with neglect. Santorum has not been shy about using the politics of resentment. His entire campaign has boiled down essentially to two claims:

1) I’m one of you, and

2) We’re under attack

That these claims are false has not deterred the campaign. The grain of truth lies in the second—not in Santorum’s ridiculous and near-blasphemous pretense that he is being criticized for his ‘faith’, but in the fact that any disadvantaged region is vulnerable, and world history teaches us that vulnerable means a possibility of being preyed upon.  In other words, relatively easy picking for Rick Santorum and his ilk.

Our country areas need broadband; they need good schools; they need safe potable water, clean air and viable soil. They need access to health care and medical attention, to responsible media and good communications, to safe air travel and to useful freight and passenger rail. They do not need maximum-security prison complexes, nuclear waste dumps, mountain-top open mines, toxic waste dumps and the so-called ‘oil pipeline’ from Canada, a ground conduit for toxic waste.

But the latter are what they get.

And—of course–candidates like Santorum who facilitate this set-up, which is also broadly facilitated by the GOP. Does anyone believe that that stuff about “burdensome regulations” is actually about ‘creating jobs’?

Back to the South, to the ‘country’, and to our country. There is a difference between quote-country and real country, just as there is a difference between quote-religion and genuine faith, between quote-jobs and a genuinely viable economy, between quote-debt and real deficit reduction. On all these topics, people with the least access to information get jawboned by exactly the officeholders and candidates most devoted to taking advantage of their audiences. Nice work if you can get it.

Our rightwing media personalities provide some blatant examples. Glenn Beck is out there hysterically pitching gold—at a time when gold prices are sky-high. Rush Limbaugh himself reads an advertising pitch for some company that supposedly deals with the IRS for you.

There is a broad question of why, exactly, this nation so neglects some of its most valuable resources. We are used to raising this question, at least sometimes, in regard to our land and water, but the question applies to ‘country’ people as well. Why is it a given that our rural population in the U.S. is to be handed over like meat on the hoof to some of the sleaziest and most venal practitioners of either politics or communications seen since David Duke?

 

Back to the GOP primaries

At least there has been some improved clarity in the national political press, now able to look at GOP primary voters in terms of greater population density versus less. As previously written, Santorum has taken most of the less populous counties, and he has taken states where rural and small-town counties and congressional districts outweigh metropolitan areas and suburbs–Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi. In this metric, as said, Santorum has been facing a divided field of Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul dividing the more populated areas. It will be mildly interesting to see how many more delegates Santorum picks up, as more people get hip to the demographic pattern. So far, the metric has held up (green highlighting below)—except for Wisconsin (red).

 

*Run-down of remaining contests by metro-versus-rural metric, re-posted

  • Missouri March 17 Santorum, 52 delegates
  • Puerto Rico March 18 Romney, 23 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • Illinois March 20 Romney, 69 delegates
  • Louisiana March 24 Close three-way race, one of Santorum’s better hopes, 46 delegates Proportional
  • DC April 3 Romney, 19 delegates Winner-take-all statewide [Santorum not on ballot]
  • Maryland April 3 Romney, 37 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Wisconsin April 3 Maybe Santorum, 42 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Connecticut April 24 Romney, 28 delegates Winner-take-all at 50%+
  • Delaware April 24 Romney, 17 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • New York April 24 Romney, 95 delegates Winner-take-all at 50%+
  • Pennsylvania April 24 Romney, 72 delegates
  • Rhode Island April 24 Romney, 19 delegates Proportional
  • Indiana May 8 Santorum, 46 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • North Carolina May 8 Close three-way, something for Santorum, 55 delegates Proportional
  • West Virginia May 8 Santorum, 31 delegates Proportional
  • Nebraska May 15 Santorum, 35 delegates
  • Oregon May 15 Maybe Santorum, 28 delegates Proportional
  • Arkansas May 22 Santorum, 36 delegates Proportional/mixed
  • Kentucky May 22 Santorum, 45 delegates Proportional
  • Texas May 29 Romney/Gingrich, 155 delegates Proportional
  • California June 5 Romney, 172 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Montana June 5 Maybe Santorum, 26 delegates
  • New Jersey June 5 Romney, 50 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • New Mexico June 5 Romney, 23 delegates Proportional
  • South Dakota June 5 Maybe Santorum, 28 delegates Proportional
  • Utah June 26 Romney, 40 delegates Winner-take-all statewide

Trayvon Martin, question 3: When Trayvon Martin was cleared to enter the gated community, did anyone notify Neighborhood Watch?

Posted on by
1

Trayvon Martin, question 3: When Trayvon Martin was cleared to enter the gated community, did anyone notify Neighborhood Watch?

 

Retreat at Twin Lakes

Like many gated communities, The Retreat at Twin Lakes, where Neighborhood Watch volunteer George Zimmerman lived and shot Trayvon Martin,  has a homeowners association. As with any electronically controlled gate access, there is a protocol for being buzzed in.

According to Ryan Julison, assistant to Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump, Twin Lakes is actually not entirely gated. There is also no guard at the gate, there are no high fences. The community is just modest condos, Julison says, not protected with the electronic equivalent of a castle moat. So the Gate Access Form provided by The Retreat at Twin Lakes Homeowners Association could be considered somewhat misleading. (See instructions below.)

 

Trayvon Martin in family photograph

Still, getting inside the community through the gate requires punching in, either providing the code or dialing the phone number of the person you’re visiting, and being buzzed in. A useful route map and backtracking guide are provided here.  Sanford Police Officer Timothy Smith, who also provided the exculpatory comment that George Zimmerman had grass stains on his back and a nose bleed, reported that Trayvon Martin’s body was found “laying in the grass between the residences of 1231 Twin Trees Ln. and 2821 Retreat View Cir.” Other writers have suggested that Trayvon Martin came back from the convenience store through another spot in the complex grounds.

Memorials at Twin Lakes

Either way, my question is simple: After Trayvon Martin received access, did anyone get in touch with ‘Neighborhood Watch’ to let patrollers know that he had been cleared for entry?

The short answer is no. No one ‘cleared’ anything with George Zimmerman, because no one had a duty to do so. George Zimmerman—unlike his father, Robert Zimmerman–was not an official. He had no authority to act. This is a tragically inept set-up: Zimmerman had a concealed-weapon permit, he carried a gun on his hip sometimes, he was a Neighborhood Watch volunteer who watched the community. But he was not bound by any protocols—except the law, theoretically—and no one had any obligation to report anything to him.

George Zimmerman

Thus no one would have thought to notify Zimmerman, or the Neighborhood Watch, at any time, when a visitor was cleared for entry or buzzed in at The Retreat.

There was no ‘safe list’, so no one was safe from vigilantism

At times when George Zimmerman was the only watch volunteer, or the main watch volunteer—unofficially the ‘captain’ of Neighborhood Watch there—did anyone get in touch with him, to let him know that such-and-such person was okay? No.

Did the Homeowners Association, or Leland Management—which provided the gate access protocol—or anyone else, get in touch with George Zimmerman/whoever was patrolling, to let him know when a visitor had been cleared? No.

Unlike with real police, and real security guards, on real duty, there was nothing in the set-up, no protocol in place, to safeguard exit as well as entry. There was nothing to inform George Zimmerman of the difference between suspicious characters, on one hand, and neighbors and their guests on the other.

Zimmerman’s father and brother have said in interviews that George Zimmerman was returning from somewhere—i.e. presumably not patrolling—at the time he called 911 upon seeing Trayvon Martin. However, it may be noted that Robert J. Zimmerman, a retired magistrate judge from Virginia, also said in an open letter to the Orlando Sentinel that his son did not get out of his vehicle.

In subsequent interviews Zimmerman, like his son Robert Zimmerman, Jr., has contradicted his Sentinel statement, stating repeatedly that George Zimmerman was outside fighting on the ground with Trayvon Martin, even having his head beaten on the sidewalk.

Zimmerman’s lawyer, Craig Sonner, is currently not available for comment.

Presumably the authorities are supposed to infer that Zimmerman did not recognize Trayvon Martin as someone staying at the community. Zimmerman’s 911 call to police suggests that he did not know or recognize Martin. The Sanford Police Department letter to the community residents the day after the Feb. 26 shooting identifies Trayvon Martin, not by name, as “another resident of the community.” George Zimmerman is said by other residents to have patrolled regularly. But there is nothing to indicate that visitors at the gated community were safeguarded from vigilantism—except by staying indoors, as one of the residents said in the news report linked here. “There was not any sort of organized system,” Julison says.

On some other questions—as to whether George Zimmerman has a passport, has dual citizenship, or is currently in the United States—Julison is not able to provide answers.

 

Excerpted from Gate Access Form:

“RETREAT AT TWIN LAKES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.

. . .

gates@lelandmanagement.com

GATE ACCESS FORM

 

“Visitors should use the directory at the gate to call your telephone for access. Press “9” on your telephone keypad to open the gate for your visitor. The system will not accept long distance telephone numbers; they must be local (407) or (321) numbers. We do not recommend the use of cellular phone numbers as not all are compatible with the gate access system.

 

“The gate system for your community uses a remote transponder. To register and activate your device, please provide the5 digit # for each. The 5 digit # for the remote can be found on the back of the unit, farthest to the right under the wordPIN.

Device #1

5 Digit Pin #

. . .

 

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ If you would like to purchase an additional remote transponder they are available in our office for a cost of $50.00 each. Please send or deliver a check/money order payable to: Retreat at Twin Lakes at the address above. A pre-activated remote will be mailed to the property address listed above. We ask that you allow 3 to 4 business days for the mail delivery.

Need Keypad Code?

Your community also allows personal access codes to be used to gain access from the key pad. If you would like to request a Personal Entry Code, supply the 4 digits of your choice. We ask that you please not select obvious codes such as 1234 and four identical digits. If you choose to share your code with your guests or vendors, you will be held responsible for any individual using your code.

Code:

____ ____ ____ ____ (4 numeric digits)”

 

The fullest compilation of timeline with background information on the shooting of Trayvon Martin is that provided by wikipedia.

Public records in the case are posted at CNN.com.

Trayvon Martin, question 2: Does George Zimmerman have a passport?

Posted on by
1

Trayvon Martin, question 2: Does George Zimmerman have a passport?

Listening to either Robert Zimmerman, on behalf of his son, or Robert Zimmerman, Jr., on behalf of his brother, one wonders what the point of these family interviews could be other than to buy time. They are too dubious to be very effective in generating sympathy for George Zimmerman, too full of inconsistencies and offer too little conciliation.

A Sanford City Commissioner has already expressed concern that George Zimmerman might leave the country. Given how little help his defenders have given him in their highly mixed interviews, it is hard not to suspect that he may already have left. Tonight on CNN with Piers Morgan, George Zimmerman’s brother volunteered the remark that “He speaks two languages thoroughly.”

Not that that was one of the more damaging statements. Robert Zimmerman, Jr., also tried to explain away his brother’s muttered epithet by saying “when someone is running . . .” His statement is that George Zimmerman did not utter any racial epithet: he was “not saying words” at all-because he was out of breath, running–presumably after Trayvon Martin, given the location of the scuffle between the two.

All of this is particularly questionable in light of the eyewitness interviewed by Anderson Cooper on CNN tonight. While candid on the difficulties of seeing in the dark, in a confused scuffle, the eyewitness did see and hear a fight, and saw George Zimmerman walking away from it less than a couple of seconds later. Unable to say categorically that Zimmerman was the man on top, the eyewitness did see one man on top of the other, and Zimmerman was the man seen walking away immediately afterward.

Robert Zimmerman, Jr., told Piers Morgan that he heard from his brother “within twenty-four hours” of the shooting. He did not say when he heard further from his brother but told Morgan that George Zimmerman “still has a broken nose” that is “still healing” but “not healed.” He also told Morgan that his brother has been “diagnosed with PTSD,” and that he is “disappointed at none of the neighbors coming out to help.”

Repeatedly expressing “respect” for “this country’s judicial system,” Robert Zimmerman, Jr., also said that his brother did not take out his gun and shoot anyone. He just kept someone else from taking his gun and shooting him with it. Zimmerman also said that “Trayvon Martin somehow snuck up on him.” The statements about George Zimmerman’s being out of breath, running, panting and therefore not uttering words came after that.

It is hard to imagine George Zimmerman waiting around for the results of forensic analysis, the autopsy, and subpoenas.

Trayvon Martin, question 1: Why were his hands underneath his body?

Posted on by
16

Trayvon Martin, question 1: Why were his hands underneath his body?*

 

Trayvon Martin

There are no bright moments in the killing of seventeen-year-old Trayvon Benjamin Martin. A self-appointed ‘neighborhood watch’ guy named George Zimmerman apparently talked himself into believing that he was some kind of unofficial cop, carried a 9-mm. semi-automatic he never should have been allowed in the first place, and fatally shot an unarmed kid who was walking to his father’s place from a convenience store—as the public knows–carrying Skittles and a can of iced tea. The only helps are public outrage–over the lack of constructive action by Florida prosecutors—public servants, and public information.

George Zimmerman

Copious information is now available, with more coming out every day.

CNN.com has posted some of the public records, including the Sanford Police Department initial reports of the shooting.

George Zimmerman’s father, retired Virginia Judge Robert Zimmerman, and a self-described friend of Zimmerman’s named Joe Oliver have communicated with media on Zimmerman’s behalf, with interviews. The gist of the retired judge’s communication is that Zimmerman was attacked by Trayvon Martin, not the other way around. Oliver has appeared numerous times on air, also arguing that Zimmerman acted in self-defense.

Joe Oliver

ABC News yesterday published the Sanford police videotape of George Zimmerman arriving in the police station after the shooting. As ABC News points out, there is no sign of conflict visible on Zimmerman in the videotape. Virtually any viewer would have the same perception.

The SPD police reports are similarly eye-catching. While numerous criticisms of SPD performance have been reported, and this may turn out to be some kind of complicated case for legal reasons, right now it looks as though any complexity developed largely after the initial police report—not at the scene of the shooting.

To start with, Sanford Police Department reports categorize the shooting by type as “homicide–negligent manslaughter—unnecessary killing to prevent unlawful act.” Police arrived at the scene at or by 7:17 p.m., Sunday Feb. 26.

Address 2831 Retreat View Circle  Sanford FL 32771

Time report completed: 3:07 [a.m.] Feb. 27, 2012

Negatives for drug related and alcohol related

Reporting officer Ricardo Ayala

From Ayala’s statement:

“I then noticed that there was, what appeared to be a black male, wearing a gray sweater, blue jeans, and white-red sneakers laying face down on the ground. The black male had his hands underneath his body. I attempted to get a response from the black male, but was met with negative results. At that time Sgt. Raimondo arrived and attempted to get a pulse on the black male but none was found. At that time, Sgt. Raimondo and I turned the black male over and began CPR . . .

“Sgt. S. McCoy arrived on scene and relieved me doing [chest] compressions.

“Sanford Fire Rescue arrived on scene and attempted to revive the subject, but could not. Paramedic Brady pronounced the subject deceased at 1930 hours [7:30 p.m.].

“The scene was then secured with crime scene tape by Ofc. Mead and Ofc. Wagner. Ofc. Robertson began a crime scene contamination log.

“Lt. Taylor arrived on scene and notified dispatch to have Major Crimes respond to the scene.

“Ofc. Mead and Ofc. Wagner were able to make contact with neighbors in the area . . . to obtain statements from all witnesses on scene.

“The scene was turned over to SPD Major Crimes.”

Crime scene was processed by Diana Smith.

So at least six police and fire dept/paramedics were on the scene by 7:30, when Trayvon Martin was pronounced dead, thirteen minutes after the reporting officer, Ayala, arrived. Sounds pretty unambiguous so far. At least four more police officers arrived then or minutes later, with Major Crimes being called–another turn of events that does not sound like self-defense. The police turned the scene over to Major Crimes, which again does not sound like self-defense.

There were numerous seven adult witnesses, also. Quite a few people on scene.

Officer Ayala reports that he was en route after the initial call from Zimmerman at approximately 7:00 p.m. En route, he got word that shooting had been heard. He arrived at 7:17, within minutes of the shooting. Officer Timothy Smith, already there, had the suspect at gun point. Again, seems to be pretty unambiguous so far. When Ayala arrived, Smith had suspect Zimmerman in custody, identified as the person who had called about Trayvon Martin. Officer Ayala’s report refers to Martin as the victim.

Orlando defense attorney Craig A. Sonner, representing Zimmerman, could not be reached for comment on the question below.

From Ayala’s brief description of the scene, one phrase that leaps out is that the young black male’s hands were “underneath his body.”

This detail may not sound dramatic, but if the second-hand accounts of George Zimmerman’s story are to be accepted as his own story—which is not a given—then this is a further discrepancy. According to repeated statements by Joe Oliver and by Judge Zimmerman, which—again–purport to be George Zimmerman’s account, Zimmerman shot the seventeen-year-old in hand-to-hand combat, after being downed to the ground. Indeed, the claim is that Zimmerman was not only attacked by Martin, but attacked from behind, that he was knocked down on the ground, even that Martin banged Zimmerman’s head on the sidewalk.

The narrative then goes that, while on the ground and struggling face-to-face with Martin, George Zimmerman got his gun out of its holster—“was able to un-holster his gun”—and shot Trayvon Martin with it. In some of the more detailed accounts, this occurred after the gun was exposed and Martin saw it and said something about it, sounding rather like a bad guy out of The Closer.

Setting aside the drama, if one could, here’s the picture: George Zimmerman, via these accounts, is claimed to have been underneath Trayvon Martin. He was having his head banged on the sidewalk, or had just had it banged on the sidewalk; he shot him from the front.

Yet Martin’s body is found by police with “his hands underneath his body.”

So George Zimmerman, struggling for life according to his main apologists, wrestling on the ground with Trayvon Martin, even having his head banged on the sidewalk—shot Martin in self-defense and then got out from underneath Trayvon Martin’s body without dislodging Martin’s hands and arms?

How?

Other discrepancies in the narrative have been widely reported, especially in light of other public statements on the events.

The initial police report by Officer Timothy Smith, submitted with Officer Ayala’s, provides some detail helpful to Zimmerman. When Officer Smith removed Zimmerman’s gun and holster, he adds,

“While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head.”

This part of the narrative is contradicted by the police videotape, of course. Zimmerman’s short, police-style closely clipped head shows no sign of blood or contusions or bruising. His clothes show no sign of conflict, his jacket no grass stains or wetness. In fact, the video shows Zimmerman leaning rather casually back against a wall, apparently concrete, with no visible discomfort re his head or back.

Appropriately, Zimmerman was not questioned at the scene, where he was not mirandized. Officer Smith says Zimmerman was placed in the back of a police car and given first aid by the SFD (Rescue 38). Zimmerman volunteered one comment–“I was yelling for someone to help me, but no one would help me.” Zimmerman was then taken to a police interview room, where he was interviewed by investigator D. Singleton.

 

One problem with subsequent handling by the judicial process, as has been noted, is that the actual police report above contradicts the March 21 public statement by City Manager Norton Bonaparte, Jr.:

“Why was George Zimmerman not arrested the night of the shooting?

When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time was supported by physical evidence and testimony. By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the officer MUST swear and affirm that he/she is making the arrest in good faith and with probable cause. If the arrest is done maliciously and in bad faith, the officer and the City may be held liable.”

Ohmygoodnessgraciousme we wanted to arrest him so badly, but we just couldn’t.

Another fan of The Closer.

As has been noticed—by Keith Olbermann and Lawrence O’Donnell among others on cable and by Jonathan Capehart among others in the print media–there is actually no such statement from Zimmerman on the scene.

Bonaparte also states as fact that George Zimmerman “was in fact on a personal errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the Sanford Police Department.”

Bonaparte also adds this from a subsequent statement by Zimmerman, not yet released: “Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by Trayvon.”

Many alert readers have noticed a problem with this account. Zimmerman’s truck was in the street. According to Officer Smith, Trayvon Martin’s body was “laying in the grass between the residences of 1231 Twin Trees Ln. and 2821 Retreat View Cir”—in the yard between buildings, not near the street. Even a charitable belief that Zimmerman intended to return to his truck has to note that, if so, he hadn’t gotten back near it. How far did Zimmerman chase Trayvon Martin? Or is the claim that Martin was chasing him, a claim contradicted by Martin’s cell phone conversation with his sixteen-year-old girlfriend?

For what it’s worth, however, even the flawed publicly released statement by the City Manager refers to Zimmerman’s phone call as a “non-emergency call.” It also refers to the phone call and the neighbors’ 911 calls as “key to the investigation.”

 

There are far more questions than this simple one. More later.

*It is sad to have to consider these dehumanizing details. Doing so should not be construed as lack of sympathy for the young man and for his family.

Health insurance is not broccoli

Posted on by
Reply

Health insurance is not broccoli

Listening to news updates on the oral argument currently taking place at the Supreme Court is getting a bit scary. If the ‘slippery slope’ argument is being taken seriously, then the dispute over universal health care is taking an odd turn, surprisingly odd.

Reportedly Mr. Justice Scalia posed a question to government lawyers something along the lines of this one: If the government can make you buy health insurance, what’s next? Broccoli? Can’t the government then make the argument that since broccoli is good for you, you will have to buy broccoli?

This is what broccoli looks like

The simplest, clearest answer to this question–assuming it has been reported accurately–is that there is no analogy between health insurance and broccoli. There are plenty of foods with the nutritional value of broccoli. If we’re talking about healthful diet–and where I am right now, in the lovely state of Louisiana, there is little discussion of that–there are plenty of substitutes for broccoli.

There are no substitutes for health insurance.

(N.b.: My own judgment is still that single-payer would be better. If Mr. Justices Scalia, Alito and Roberts come down in favor of eliminating the insurance industry as middlemen/gatekeepers to health care or medical attention, I have to admit that I will feel a certain sympathy for them. I’m only human.)

Slippery-slope arguments are usually feeble.

One problem with them is that they can usually be reversed. They cut both ways, not to hash a metaphor farther.

Take the broccoli question. The underlying argument seems to be that government cannot force us to do something just because it’s good for us. The oddity in this position is that all law, government, and justice is based on an (Aristotelian) concept of good. If we are not better off with law than without, why have law? If we human beings are not better off with the forms of government, why have government? If we are not better off with a justice system, why have a justice system?

So let’s try the slippery-slope argument on that one. If government cannot require something of us BECAUSE it is to our good, then can we have law? No. If government cannot require something of us because it is to our good, then can we have government? No. If government cannot require something of us because it is to our good, then can we have a justice system? No.

No justice system, no courts. No courts, no judges. Q.E.D.

I assume Mr. Justices Scalia et al. have sufficient saved up to live on.

The Big Ho-Hum from Louisiana

Posted on by
Reply

From Louisiana, a big ho-hum for the primary fight

SHREVEPORT-BOSSIER  As was predictable,* Rick Santorum won Louisiana’s presidential primary Saturday. Also predictable, the word ‘evangelicals’ has been all over the air waves. Again predictable, almost all of the commentary has come from people who have not lived in Louisiana, not stayed here for any length of time, not come from any place near here.

I say ‘here’, because I happen to be in the western part of Louisiana this week. What I saw, in the lead-up to the GOP primary March 24, was no sign of political activity. None. Virtually no campaign signs/posters, even. No discussion, unless you count a couple of Limbaugh-listening cab drivers. No movement on the street–any street–or indoors, regarding any candidate. Newspaper reporting was decorous to the verge of tepid. Interest, in short? –Scant. Virtually the only sign of life, outside communities who gratefully turned out to give President Obama their endorsement, has been the Etch-a-Sketch. And even that has been touched on from a different angle than that on air, at least in my hearing. Where the news media  reported that stock in the company manufacturing the Etch-a-Sketch went up, in the wake of the breathtakingly candid comment, locals note that sales of Etch-a-Sketches in stores went up.

So much for all those hordes of bible-waving frothing-at-the-mouth evangelicals, running amuck down the main streets in a grand stampede to vote for the man of their choice–the ‘devout’ Santorum.

There is one thing the topics of religion, the South, Christianity, ‘evangelicals’, the ‘Bible Belt’ and kindred terms all have in common, much more strongly than any other objective (actual) common denominator including demographics: These are all topics on which commentators feel it legitimate to speak without knowing anything about them.

Someone who talks about basketball on television knows at least something about basketball. Someone who talks about fashion knows something about clothes. Someone who reports on the economy, health issues, commerce–you name it–usually knows at least something about the topic, in spite of flaming gaffes like overlooking the mortgage-derivatives debacle.

But someone on air who uses the term ‘evangelical’? With rare exceptions, you could safely bet your mortgage balance–if anyone offered to take the bet–that the speaker has never even met an actual evangelical. Ditto most of the speakers who sweepingly characterize the South, etc.

One simple point, kept short: Genuine evangelicals spend a lot of time trying to convert other people to their faith. In these parts, their interest in voting for either Santorum or Newt Gingrich–the two Catholics in the race–or in Mitt Romney has been consistently tepid, and getting more so.

Try to believe me when I say that most true believers, the overwhelming majority of same, are not parading an eagerness to vote for any of the GOP candidates above as a hallmark of faith, nor are they exacting a promise to vote for Santorum as proof of faith in their neighbors.

Media analysts are obsessed with ‘evangelicals’. It may be a form of xenophobia in our major media hubs.

Back to the prevailing commentary–It’s good that media analysts have waked up to the demographics separating Santorum supporters, by and large, from Romney/Gingrich/Ron Paul voters. But the logical step that should come next has not yet come–the question why far-flung unreached voters would be more willing to go for Santorum. This logical step is being blocked by the ‘evangelicals’ dodge, a fig leaf for journalism not informing.

The answer is not religion. There are plenty of devout African-Americans, Latinos, Caucasians and others not lining up to vote for Santorum. The same holds for income level, occupation and industry.

The answer has to do with level of information. The local newspapers try hard, sometimes, but are withering on the vine. USA Today, read more often than the local paper, is beating the drum for the co-called ‘oil pipeline’. Not all three traditional television networks even air a national evening news program in the Shreveport-Bossier City metro area. Bookstores are few and far between, found mostly in large malls–chain stores. Internet access is more limited than in larger, healthier metro areas. Rush Limbaugh dominates the radio, feeding his audience false stories–that Canadians have to wait “four months” for health care, for example.

In regard to the limited topic of the GOP primary race, there is just about no information on Santorum’s lobbying in D.C. over recent years. There is no detailed evaluation of what Santorum’s policies, including the Paul Ryan budget and more global bellicosity, would do to the average Santorum voter. Santorum goes out and feeds his limited audiences the line they want to hear–I’m one of you, and we are under attack. That’s his campaign, in a nutshell. And people who would be unduly influenced by this thin line are people suffering a dearth of information on the issues that affect their lives.

Take this simple question on health care: How many Americans would be able to pay a high-six-figure medical bill? How many, or what proportion of the U.S. population, would be able to foot big hospital bills for themselves, even if they have insurance (or think they have)? Regardless of income level–how many people could count on being able to keep paying their mortgages, keep their kids in college, take care of their older relatives, meet any of the other demands of ordinary middle-class life, if they abruptly faced hospitalization for serious illness or injury?

And yet we have exactly the people who would be very sadly off, in such a situation–among the millions of people, probably the overwhelming majority of the population–reluctant to have single-payer health care. Why? Because they see it as ‘paying for other people’. What would THEY do, themselves, if faced with medical necessity?

Uh.

btw these untapped reservoirs of obliviousness to the basic question on health care–What would you do–also tend to be people resistant to keeping their own health. These are not, by and large, your joggers, your soccer coaches, your non-smokers. Remember the ‘Thank you for smoking’ line being pushed by a youngish rightwing writer? Them. Driving without a seatbelt? Them. Fast-food junkies? Them.

And these are the people we’re all supposed to listen to, as salt-of-the-earth, backbone-of-America types? People who think they’re showing independence and self-reliance by not buckling up?

Back to the topics above: These people are not evangelicals. They are not born-agains. They are not ‘the base’. They are GOP voters, largely staying home from the primaries because they don’t care too much who wins and just don’t want to know too much about the candidates. And the candidates are pandering to them with all their might, with the exception of Paul.

Granted, most of us are not actuaries. But given the proven shortfalls when an insurance policy has to be relied on, the number of people who don’t even have insurance ‘coverage’ in the first place, the likelihood of hospitalization in the ordinary lifespan–you would think that the concept of sharing the risk, or spreading the risk, would be viable.

As to the remaining contests, so far everything looks going by the metric below. I thought Gingrich and Romney might pull more votes out of Louisiana, but the lack of interest is fierce here, far more fierce than the commitment to any candidate. Former Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania has said he thinks Santorum will pull Pennsylvania; he should know. If it’s only the most abjectly ill-informed voters who go to the polls, the outcome is predictable in a low-turnout vote.  

*Run-down of contests by metro-versus-rural metric, re-posted

  • Missouri March 17 Santorum, 52 delegates
  • Puerto Rico March 18 Romney, 23 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • Illinois March 20 Romney, 69 delegates
  • Louisiana March 24 Close three-way race, one of Santorum’s better hopes, 46 delegates Proportional
  • DC April 3 Romney, 19 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • Maryland April 3 Romney, 37 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Wisconsin April 3 Maybe Santorum, 42 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Connecticut April 24 Romney, 28 delegates Winner-take-all at 50%+
  • Delaware April 24 Romney, 17 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • New York April 24 Romney, 95 delegates Winner-take-all at 50%+
  • Pennsylvania April 24 Romney, 72 delegates
  • Rhode Island April 24 Romney, 19 delegates Proportional
  • Indiana May 8 Santorum, 46 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • North Carolina May 8 Close three-way, something for Santorum, 55 delegates Proportional
  • West Virginia May 8 Santorum, 31 delegates Proportional
  • Nebraska May 15 Santorum, 35 delegates
  • Oregon May 15 Santorum, 28 delegates Proportional
  • Arkansas May 22 Santorum, 36 delegates Proportional/mixed
  • Kentucky May 22 Santorum, 45 delegates Proportional
  • Texas May 29 Romney/Gingrich, 155 delegates Proportional
  • California June 5 Romney, 172 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Montana June 5 Santorum, 26 delegates
  • New Jersey June 5 Romney, 50 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • New Mexico June 5 Romney, 23 delegates Proportional
  • South Dakota June 5 Santorum, 28 delegates Proportional
  • Utah June 26 Romney, 40 delegates Winner-take-all statewide

The 2012 GOP primary race; Illinois today

Posted on by
Reply

2012 GOP primary race–today, Illinois

 

Romney in Chicago

Today, the Illinois primary. Puerto Rico went as expected for Mitt Romney, or better—since he won all the delegates there—and Missouri results are held in a murk, not to be clarified until April. The prevalent question surrounding the Illinois primary is how well Romney will do. Illinois has abundant metropolitan and suburban areas, with enough population to allow some division among Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul without putting Rick Santorum over the top in the state. As to campaign tactics, the primary will reflect whether the Romney team has drafted an appeal sufficient to cut into Santorum’s predictable success among down-staters and non-suburbanites.

Santorum

Actually, Illinois delegates are supposed to be allocated according to a mixed formula, too, so Missouri may not be the last question mark leading to the GOP convention in Tampa.

 

Report on PACs 2012

Reminder from the previous post–this ruling by the U.S. District Court in Northern Illinois last week allows more room to spend for some PACs. The court ruled March 13 that two provisions of the Campaign Disclosure Act do not apply to PACs formed for the sole purpose of making independent contributions.

Recapping, from the Illinois State Board of Elections:

“This ruling has no effect on any political committee other than one formed SOLELY for making independent expenditures.
Contribution limits are still in effect for Candidate Political Committees, Political Party Committees, and Political Action Committees which make coordinated expenditures or direct contributions to candidates or committees. The ruling allows an entity formed for the purpose of making independent expenditures ONLY, to create a Political Action Committee that is not bound by contribution limits . . .”

This ruling allows an entity to have more than one Political Action Committee, provided the second committee is an Independent-Expenditure-Only PAC created only to make independent expenditures . . . The committee created to make independent expenditures only, is not subject to contribution limits . . .”

Disclosure of substantial contributions is still required, but within 30 days. Since that 30 days (since the ruling) have not elapsed, the public does not know at election time which candidates if any have benefited from PAC contributions since the recent ruling.

 

*Run-down of contests by metro-versus-rural metric, re-posted

  • Missouri March 17 Santorum, 52 delegates
  • Puerto Rico March 18 Romney, 23 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • Illinois March 20 Romney, 69 delegates
  • Louisiana March 24 Close three-way race, one of Santorum’s better hopes, 46 delegates Proportional
  • DC April 3 Romney, 19 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • Maryland April 3 Romney, 37 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Wisconsin April 3 Maybe Santorum, 42 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Connecticut April 24 Romney, 28 delegates Winner-take-all at 50%+
  • Delaware April 24 Romney, 17 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • New York April 24 Romney, 95 delegates Winner-take-all at 50%+
  • Pennsylvania April 24 Romney, 72 delegates
  • Rhode Island April 24 Romney, 19 delegates Proportional
  • Indiana May 8 Santorum, 46 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • North Carolina May 8 Close three-way, something for Santorum, 55 delegates Proportional
  • West Virginia May 8 Santorum, 31 delegates Proportional
  • Nebraska May 15 Santorum, 35 delegates
  • Oregon May 15 Maybe Santorum, 28 delegates Proportional
  • Arkansas May 22 Santorum, 36 delegates Proportional/mixed
  • Kentucky May 22 Santorum, 45 delegates Proportional
  • Texas May 29 Romney/Gingrich, 155 delegates Proportional
  • California June 5 Romney, 172 delegates Winner-take-all combined
  • Montana June 5 Maybe Santorum, 26 delegates
  • New Jersey June 5 Romney, 50 delegates Winner-take-all statewide
  • New Mexico June 5 Romney, 23 delegates Proportional
  • South Dakota June 5 Maybe Santorum, 28 delegates Proportional
  • Utah June 26 Romney, 40 delegates Winner-take-all statewide

 

more later

Update primary election night:

It was looking awfully good for Mitt Romney for an hour and a half after polls closed in Illinois at 8:00 ET. Romney had a two-to-one lead over Rick Santorum for a while; Fox News called the state for Romney by 8:37. Other networks and channels followed suit soon after. Wisely, Romney came out and gave his victory speech rather early. Good thing for him he did; when he signed off with a farewell wave and another hug to his wife at 9:31, he was down to 50 percent.

The question now is how much below 50 percent Romney will sag in Illinois, as down-state results favoring Santorum continue to come in. At 9:36 he was down to 49 percent.  Santorum entered to begin his speech soon after, in Pennsylvania, where he is campaigning instead of in Louisiana, Newt Gingrich’s current venue.

Another question, of course, is exactly how Illinois’s delegates will be apportioned.