Clarence Thomas Decided Three Cases Where AEI Filed A Brief After AEI Gave Him A $15,000 Gift

In 2001, a conservative, corporate-aligned think tank called the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) gave Justice Clarence Thomas the gift of a $15,000 bust of Abraham Lincoln. At the ceremony presenting Thomas with this very expensive gift, AEI president Christopher DeMuth explained that the bust was “cast in 1914 by the great neo-classical sculptor Adolph Alexander Weinman.” Watch it:

AEI, however, is not simply in the business of giving luxurious gifts to Supreme Court justices — it is also in the business of litigating before the United States Supreme Court. ThinkProgress uncovered three briefs that AEI filed in Thomas’ Court after Thomas received their $15,000 gift. Thomas recused from none of these three cases, and he either voted in favor of the result AEI favored or took a stance that was even further to the right in each case:

• Riley v. Kennedy : AEI filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court decision preventing a change in Alabama’s voting law from going into effect. Justice Thomas did not recuse, and he joined the Supreme Court’s decision reversing the lower court.

• Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 : AEI filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court decisionupholding a local school district’s desegregation plan. Thomas joined the majority opinion reversing the lower court’s decision, and he filed a lengthy concurrence defending that result.

• Whitman v. American Trucking Association: AEI joined a brief asking the Supreme Court to allow the EPA to consider the costs of implementing new air quality standards before it issued them. Thomas’ concurring opinion went much further than AEI asked him to go, suggesting that the law authorizing EPA to issue these standards is unconstitutional.

Although there is no evidence that AEI gave Thomas the $15,000 gift specifically to buy his vote in a particular case, Thomas’ decision to sit on cases where his benefactor has a demonstrated interest creates a very serious appearance of impropriety. No one would trust a judge to hear their case if they learned that someone on the other side of the case had given that judge a rare and expensive gift.

Generated by BlogIt

BlogIt - Auto Blogging Software for YOU!

After Taking Millions From Natural Gas, Pennsylvania Gov. Threatens To Veto Any Taxes On Industry

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett (R)

When it came time to fix his state’s $4 billion budget deficit, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett (R) steadfastly refused to raise new revenues, even through a tax on natural gas extraction, despite the fact that Pennsylvania is the only state with hydrofracking that does not tax its use.

Instead of taxing fracking, a dangerous technique that fractures the ground to extract natural gas, or closing other tax loopholes, Corbett proposed eliminating $1 billion from the state’s education budget. Corbett’s cuts to education were so drastic that he was was overruled by his own party in the state House, which returned $600 million in funding. To offset the restoration of education funding, state Republicans proposed cuts that would negatively impact low-income Pennsylvanians.

But now, the state Senate has passed an extraction fee on natural gas drilling — the first of its kind in the state. However, Corbett said yesterday that he would veto any fiscal plan that includes a tax or even an impact fee on natural gas extraction, preferring to wait for a study on the matter to be released:

“I think it’s more important to come up with a good policy rather than jamming one through under budget-deadline pressures,” Corbett said.

This veto threat puts him at odds with members of his own party in the legislature and comes despite the fee’s potential to raise more than $310 million over the next two years.

So why has Corbett adamantly opposed taxing the natural gas industry? One reason could be the massive amount of campaign contributions the industry has given the governor. Pennsylvania has no individual campaign finance limits, which has helped the industry donate more than $1,042,116 to Corbett’s campaign for governor and $361,207 to Corbett while he was the state’s attorney general.

Corbett has already repaid the industry by lifting a moratorium on new natural gas drilling on public lands, and by requiring his office’s approval before any regulations against natural gas companies can be enforced. Now, he would rather cut $500 million in education funding and eliminate health care coverage for 100,000 low income Pennsylvanian’s than tax the industry. He even suggested that public universities should pay for themselves by allowing natural gas drilling on their campuses.

Corbett’s support from the natural gas industry was a significant campaign issue, with his Democratic opponent saying, “He will defend their profits and not do anything for taxpayers.” Throughout the campaign, however, Corbett said he was “not beholden to any” of his donors. But now it seems that Corbett would rather side with his donors from natural gas companies than his states’ students, poor, and those who will be impacted by increased gas drilling.

–Sean Savett

Generated by BlogIt

BlogIt - Auto Blogging Software for YOU!

Italian Bus Driver Suspended After Driving Bus With Elbows While Hands on Two Cellphones (video)

I’ve always been against texting while driving, videotaping while driving or talking on your mobile device without a hands-free headset while driving. It makes me angry when I see videos on YouTube where a driver is holding a camera and videotaping themselves while driving (many times at high speeds on the highway). As Judge Judy says, it’s one thing if you want to take your own life, but when you are reckless you put so many others in the path of potential harm. It’s too bad that local police agencies don’t go after those who post their videos on YouTube showing off their “oh so important” video they just had to create while driving.

If you think driving your car while filming a video is not appropriate, what about a city bus driver driving a bus down a busy street using his elbows while operating two cellular phones? The bus driver is operating the bus in Rome and appears to be talking on one cell phone while setting up email and other online accounts on the second phone.

Here’s hoping the bus operator was able to get out that important tweet, check-in to his bus, Like his bus, or tip his important update. Those things are certainly more important than passenger safety and the safety of those around the bus.

Here’s the video from the incident — I am unable to confirm whether the driver has only been suspended or whether he has been fired.

Find more stories about: Europe, online video, transit, Video, YouTube

This story posted on CenterNetworks.

Generated by BlogIt

BlogIt - Auto Blogging Software for YOU!