Things kslattery is Tracking:

	Your OpenCongress profile can track any of the bills, Senators, Representatives, and issue areas on the site. Just click the button under "Track This" at the top of any page and it will be automatically added here to your tracked items. On this page, you have a continually-updating "bird's eye" view of all the activities associated with each tracked item since you last logged-in. Click on any button on this page, for example, "Status Updates", for a drop-down view of the latest five updates and a link to view all. Click on a category name below, such as "Bills", to view more detailed updates for each tracked bill and suggestions on how to find other interesting bills to track throughout the site.

2 Bills

• S.522 Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Act

  • Blog Updates (22) Hide Blog Updates
  • New Comments (1)Hide New Comments
  • adelie : With the MPAA showing record profits for 2007, I think this is further proof that the government and people have been tricked into associating ~$10,000,000,000 profit with "starving artists". What a committee should really be looking into is the value and impact of work that has been effectively stolen from the public domain, and compare big media's gain to the loss by the American public. The only purpose for such a committee, let alone a not to 'limited period of time' copyright term is to control the ability for people to create and compete for a part of that ten billion dollars. How about a 'Public Domain Enforcement Act' that punishes people for destroying (intentionally or otherwise) works that have ever been of any kind of value, keeping them from ever falling into the public domain. Or further, mandate that copyrighted works be made EASILY available for purposes of fair use and make it a right rather than an 'affirmative defense'. Legislation like that would tell me that the government is looking out for the best interests of artists and people, and not just the guys that can steal more than anyone else such as Warner, Fox, and Disney.
  -1 More

• H.R.1689 Curb Illegal Downloading on College Campuses Act of 2007

  • Blog Updates (7) Hide Blog Updates
  • New Comments (1)Hide New Comments
  • adelie : P2P is not a crime! Also, didn't some big group of media guys recently have their cover blown that they completely manipulated the data on college campus piracy in their favor? If this 'piracy' is in any way harming the music or movie industry (wasn't there something about record profits?) it is only because this consumer powered 'try before you buy' internet allows people to be dissuaded from buying junk they never would have purchased had they been aware of the content they were planning on buying. Stop trying to buy congress into another BS war. Their already busy enough with the Bush Administration.
  -1 More

2 Senators

• Sen. Bond

  • New Votes (215) Hide New Votes
  • News Updates (313) Hide News Updates
  • Blog Updates (753) Hide Blog Updates
  • Anonymous : Palmetto Meeting Comments to Palmetto, CMS and the President of the united States. Additional Comments by Fred, Patient, and a Founder of ZERO, The Project to End Prostate Cancer On SBRT Treatment of Cancer of the Prostate Palmetto GBA/Medicare Open Draft LCD meeting, November 18, 2008 Deep concerns about the process Thank you for the opportunity to speak at the recent open meeting held in Los Angeles on November 18th. While I appreciated the opportunity, I would like to state for the public record that I was very disappointed with the failure to provide adequate seating for the registered attendees. Standing room only for physicians and patients who traveled hundreds of miles to provide expert testimony was unacceptable. Registration for the meeting was required[1], but unregistered representatives from drug companies, with no interest in the policies on the agenda, were allowed to sit at the conference table. By contrast, most registered attendees who came to give testimony or make clinical presentations had to stand in the conference room and adjacent rooms, where it was difficult to hear what was being discussed. No audio-visual aid was available, so we could not see charts and other evidence. Since presentations were solicited in advance, it is hard to explain this as poor planning; it was certainly a formidable deterrent to those who wanted to speak. This illustrates Palmetto’s lack of consideration and respect for Doctors and patients, and indeed for the reconsideration process that CMS has mandated. Given this lack of courtesy and the way in which I and others were treated when we attempted to ask questions during the meeting, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Palmetto is simply going through the motions of “reconsideration”, and that its mind is already made up. I hope that events prove me wrong, but I am deeply concerned. While I also appreciate Palmetto’s stated concern “to save money” as the reason for the chosen locale, this statement seems disingenuous as the savings to Medicare for one patient to be treated with SBRT (vs. a course of IMRT treatment in the physician office), would have paid for a professional conference room and hotel rooms for all attendees. The meeting was held at PCRI, an organization whose website advertises the benefits of IMRT and is conspicuously silent on SBRT. The Palmetto Medical Director is listed as a board member of PCRI. I leave it to others better qualified than I to consider whether this raises issues of ethics or of conflict of interest. Request: Palmetto include SBRT as a treatment option for prostate cancer. Doctor Lurvey stated at this LCD meeting that he did not care what dose was delivered by IMRT, as that was up to the patients’ doctor.2 While I agree that patients and their doctors should make the treatment choice, increasing the dose of IMRT without clinical studies to verify patient safety translates into Medicare paying for investigational IMRT treatments. IMRT is considered investigational and no better than 3D-RT. As stated by the California Technology Assessment Forum (CTAF)[20]: “IMRT for prostate cancer was an agenda item at two prior CTAF meetings where discussion focused on a technology assessment that concluded IMRT for prostate cancer was investigational. The investigational status was based on the lack of evidence from controlled trials proving that IMRT provided any incremental benefit over the conventional 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). However, advocates of IMRT pointed out that IMRT should not be considered a new form of radiation therapy subject to distinct technology assessment. Furthermore, advocates pointed out that dose planning studies of IMRT documenting reduced radiation to normal tissues were an acceptable surrogate outcome.” When a patient is treated by IMRT the treatment center submits a code for payment. The dose received by the patient defined varies from treatment center to treatment center. Based on the success of the SBRT, using the CyberKnife, and HDR Brachytherapy for treating prostate cancer with a higher dose of ionizing radiation, IMRT centers are increasing their doses. There have been no randomized trials to define what dose is the most effective and the long term risk, or side effects. For the treatment of prostate cancer, no one therapy has been proven to be more safe or effective than any other (for example, look at the government’s own agency AHRQ’s February 2008 report on prostate cancer alternatives3). Therefore, each patient in consultation with their physician should be allowed to make the choice of treatment that is best for them that weighs effectiveness and adverse events (such as sexual dysfunction, and urinary and bowel injury). Despite the lack of any definitive or conclusive evidence which demonstrates the superiority of one therapy over another, it is documented in the literature that treatment of localized cancer of the prostate by HDR Brachytherapy and SBRT have cure rates as good as or better than IMRT, 3D-RT, Proton Therapy and Surgery. At one, two, three and four years, the CyberKnife at its worst, is no worse than IMRT and Proton therapy which ASTRO advertises on their website for treating prostate cancer.4-17 Prostate cancer is the number two cancer of men. There is no doubt that millions of dollars are at stake. Unfortunately, there seems to be a misconception that providing SBRT as an option for the treatment of prostate cancer is somehow financially driven. It’s actually the other way around – IMRT18 is far more lucrative a business than SBRT. Look at the facts: 1. The doctor receives less pay for 4-5 SRS/SBRT visits vs. 40 IMRT visits. 2. Medicare pays far more for IMRT in a physician office setting, which is where roughly one third of IMRT procedures are performed. Even in the hospital outpatient setting, where Medicare currently reimburses about the same for IMRT and SBRT, Medicare will pay several thousand dollars more for IMRT in 2009. 3. The patient cost of treatment (deductible/copay), transportation, food and lodging is much less for SBRT than IMRT. 4. Proton Therapy is the most expensive of all treatments “and shows no benefit over other forms of radiation”.19 5. Blue Shield of California, the largest insurer in the state of California, policy covers CyberKnife for treatment of prostate cancer (attached). In its October 31, 2008 Report titled “Final CMS Rules Look Positive For Radiation Oncology, Neutral for Others” Oppenheimer reported: Radiation Oncology. There are roughly 30 commonly used codes. Most important is that the key IMRT code (77418) will be up 18% y/y for HOPPS (and up 13% from proposed), as IGRT, which was incorrectly bundled in '08 with no adjustment, is now finally being reflected in payments. So total IMRT+IGRT goes from $403 in CY07 to $348 in CY08 to $411 in CY09. For PFS, 77418 is down 14% y/y. Most other IMRT-related codes are up double digits. By contrast, Oppenheimer reports that for Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), the final robotic SRS codes are generally down in line with proposed rules, with first fraction (G0339) down 3% and 2nd–5th fraction (G0340) down 10% (HOPPS). Reimbursement for Elekta's Gammaknife (77371) is down 5% (HOPPS), while other SRS codes are flat to slightly up (both from proposed and y/y). At the ASTRO 2008 Annual Meeting, ASTRO’s President-elect, Dr. Anthony Zietman, M.D. gave a presentation on proton radiation for early prostate cancer. Dr. Zietman spoke on results from a phase I/II clinical trial in which it failed to show any benefit over other forms of radiation[19]: “Proton radiation has unquestioned value for treatment of certain rare cancers, said Dr. Zietman. However, the technology has yet to demonstrate any advantages over other forms of radiation therapy for common malignancies, such as lung and prostate cancer, where proton radiation centers would recoup the capital investment. "The problem is that most patients in the United States treated with proton beam are treated for prostate cancer," he said. "It's the economic driver of the proton avalanche." Given the lack of any demonstrated superior outcomes for Proton Therapy why does Palmetto allow proton therapy to be covered for the treatment of prostate cancer and not SBRT? Before Palmetto implemented the non-coverage policy of prostate cancer for SBRT it had been covered in California under the exact same circumstances as proton beam therapy. Unlike SBRT, Palmetto continues to cover proton beam despite any evidence to support its superiority over SBRT or any other forms of radiation therapy. As a cancer patient and as a concerned citizen, I believe that my government should make available all treatment options including SBRT, not just those that are backed by vested financial interests. I feel very strongly about a patient’s right to make an informed choice for their treatment. Every treatment has risk; and from my extensive research every other option has higher risk of death, infection or biological failure. It must be the patients’ choice in consultation with our doctors to select the treatment that best meets our specific limitations or medical needs. Best Regards, Fred Prostate Cancer Patient A ZERO founder The Project to End Prostate Cancer________________________________________ References 1 The Palmetto GBA Website stated: Palmetto GBA encourages individuals interested in attending the open meeting to register early. Registration will be closed 2 business days prior to the meeting or once space limitations are reached, whichever comes first. Individuals seeking to present information at the Open Draft LCD meeting should submit a request via E-mail to J1B.Policy@PalmettoGBA.com along with a copy of their presentation. 2 IMRT 81-86 Gy Http://books.google.com/books?id=4NbOoKYvrwsC&pg=PA327&lpg=PA327&dq=prostate+cancer+imrt++86+Gy&source=web&ots=NLu0ibF4j5&sig=2xsTw9NWDbiSNr_mj-i0Ay_wO3Y&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result 3 AHRQ’s February 2008 report on prostate cancer alternatives link: http://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/healthInfo.cfm?infotype=rr&ProcessID=9&DocID=79 4 http://www.joearrington.org/Prostate_article.pdf 5 http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/55980.php 6 http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/96/18/1358 7 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18164858?dopt=Abstract 8 Grills IS, Martinez AA, Hollander M, Huang R, Goldman K, Chen PY, Gustafson GS. High dose rate brachytherapy as prostate cancer monotherapy7 reduces toxicity compared to low dose rate palladium seeds. J Urol. 2004 Mar;171(3):1098-104. 9 Fuller DB, Naitoh J, Lee C, Hardy S, Jin H. Virtual HDR(SM) CyberKnife Treatment for Localized Prostatic Carcinoma: Dosimetry Comparison With HDR Brachytherapy and Preliminary Clinical Observations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Apr 1;70(5):1588-97. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18374232?dopt=AbstractPlus 10 King CR, Lehmann J, Adler JR, Hai J. CyberKnife radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: rationale and technical feasibility. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2003 Feb;2(1):25-30 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12625751 11 Hara W, Patel D, Pawlicki T, Cotrutz C, Presti J, King C. Hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for prostate cancer: early results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 66(3)(supplement):S324-325, 2006. 12 King CR, Brooks J, Gill H, Cotrutz C, Pawlicki T, Presti JC. Stereotactic Body Radiosurgery for Localized Prostate Cancer: PSA results and Toxicity of a Phase II Clinical Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 in press. 13 Madsen BL, Hsi RA, Pham HT, Fowler JF, Esagui L, Corman J. Stereotactic hypofractionated accurate radiotherapy of the prostate (SHARP), 33.5 Gy in five fractions for localized disease: first clinical trial results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 67(4):1099-105. Mar 15 2007 14 Fuller DB, Lee C, Hardy S, Jin H. Virtual HDR(SM) CyberKnife Radiosurgery: Technical Evolution and Clinical Results One Year Following Introduction. CyberKnife Society Annual Meeting. January 2008, Scottsdale AZ. 15 Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Häggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, Spångberg A, Busch C, Nordling S, Garmo H, Palmgren J, Adami HO, Norlén BJ, Johansson JE; Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study No. 4. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005 May 12;352(19):1977-84. 16 Fuller, DB, Lee, C., et al. Prospective Evaluation of CyberKnife® Radiosurgery of Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Emulating HDR Brachytherapy Dosimetry. http://www.accuray.com/Clinical-Development/Clinical-Studies.aspx 17 Meier, R., Cotrutz, C., et al. Prospective Evaluation of CyberKnife® Stereotactic Radiosurgery of Low and Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer: Homogenous Dose Distribution. http://www.accuray.com/Clinical-Development/Clinicalstudies. Aspx
  • Anonymous : Medicare Abuse in my opinion. New York Times 12-17-2008 about Medicare coverage of prostate cancer link follows: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/17/health/policy/17knife.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&em I gave testimony at the following meeting regarding Medicare coverage of prostate cancer. “Official Testimony of Fred >>>>>, Patient On SBRT Treatment of Cancer of the Prostate Palmetto GBA/Medicare Open Draft LCD meeting November 18, 2008 Good morning Palmetto GBA administrators, doctors and other interested parties. Thank you for allowing me to discuss Medicare coverage of SBRT/CyberKnife for treating prostate cancer. My name is Fred >>>>>> and I am a small business owner. I am testifying on behalf of myself as an interested party, a prostate cancer patient treated with the CyberKnife and a prostate cancer advocate. I am also a founder of ZERO the Project to End Prostate Cancer. I was diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) in Aug. of 2007. My PSA was 4.0 ng/ml, a transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy revealed a stage T1c adenocarcinoma involving the right mid to right apex with a Gleason score of 3+3; in 3 of 12 cores. I discussed all treatment options with my family doctor, doctors at Stanford, Surgeons and Radiation Oncologists. I reviewed all options with my wife. As a father of a nine year old son, Business owner, treatment recovery time was an important consideration. I have a clogged artery which made the risk of surgery higher than I was willing to consider. I selected SBRT/CyberKnife treatment option for prostate cancer at Stanford. Their clinical trial data, started Dec. 2003, was very encouraging with ZERO biological failures and minimal side effects (my research suggested the CyberKnife is at least as effective as IMRT). My CyberKnife treatment was five days of one hour sessions with no recovery time (IMRT is five days per week for eight weeks). I was advised of and understand the long term risk of radiation side effects and felt the advantages of SBRT/CyberKnife treatment far out weighted the long term risk. I completed CyberKnife treatment (May 7, 2008) by Dr. Christopher King. Fourteen days post CK treatment there were minimal side effects. I continued to work every day during and after treatment. It is now over six months post CyberKnife treatment. I am 110% of pretreatment base line for all related functions. The plus 10% is from improved urinations. Before treatment I would get up 3-4 times a night now I typically get up once. My PSA at the six month follow up was 1.09 ng/ml. SBRT/CyberKnife has treated my prostate cancer and has improved my quality of life. The key messages I hope to impart to you today are: 1. The previous Medicare contractor in California, NHIC, provided coverage for SBRT/CyberKnife treatment for prostate cancer. 2. SBRT/CyberKnife treatment for prostate cancer is consistent with the Presidents statement from his press conference announcing the MMA of 2003. With this law, we're giving older Americans better choices and more control over their health care, so they can receive the modern medical care they deserve. 3. SBRT/CyberKnife treatment for prostate cancer is consistent with Mark B. McClellan, M.D. PhD Administrator. “Our nation has made a promise, a solemn promise to America's seniors. We have pledged to help our citizens find affordable medical care in the later years of life.” 4. As outlined in the CMS Statement of Work for the Palmetto Medicare Jurisdiction (J1), and on Palmettos Website: The MAC shall select the least restrictive Local Coverage Determination (LCD) from the existing LCDs on a single topic when consolidating LCDs. CMS has identified that there may be instances where the decision to implement "no policy" would meet the definition of the "least restrictive LCD". 5. There are no prostate cancer treatment options without serious risk of permanent side effects and biological failure. 6. The patient in consultation with his doctor(s) must decide what treatments are appropriate for their unique circumstance. a. Some patients live in rural areas with limited or no local treatment centers. b. Some patients have medical conditions that make surgery a high risk. c. Some patients have limited mobility making treatment very difficult. d. Some patients continue to work full time and this trend is increasing. Making treatment recovery and time away from work an important factor. e. Some patients have limited financial resources that limit treatment options due to cost of travel, food and lodging. 7. The majority of Medicare Contractors include SBRT/CyberKnife treatment for prostate cancer. 8. Blue Shield of California the largest insurer in the state, in July of 2008, added SBRT/CyberKnife to their policy for treatment of prostate cancer. All of the above support Medicare coverage of SBRT/CyberKnife treatment for cancer of the prostate. Please consider the fundamental right of patients to make treatment decisions for themselves in consultation with their doctors and families, and for the patients well being and overall quality of life. I have no financial interest in Accuray Inc., Stanford University Medical Center or any other medical provider. Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today.”
  10 More

• Sen. McCaskill

  • New Votes (215) Hide New Votes
  • News Updates (1206) Hide News Updates
  • Blog Updates (3726) Hide Blog Updates
  • Anonymous : * ARE THEY KINGS OF SLAVES OR THE US CONGRESS ? CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY IN USA HAVE BEEN DEVIOUSLY & DECEPTIVELY INFLICTED ON POORER AMERICAN’S ! **** A INTERNATIONAL WORLD COURT INVESTIGATION IS NEEDED INTO THESE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS ! PRESIDENT OBAMA NEEDS TO TELL THE LEADERS OF THE FREE WORLD DEMOCRATIC US CONGRESS ~ LET MY PEOPLE GO ! WILL THE INTERNATIONAL WORLD COURT AND THE POPE COME TO THE RESCUE OF THESE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF ENSLAVED POORER AMERICAN’S ?? ***The CATHOLIC CHURCH could really help AMERICA right now by arranging a speech from the VATICAN by the POPE concerning THIS modern day ENSLAVEMENT of POORER AMERICAN’S by our complacent IVORY TOWER US CONGRESS who appears to be more interested in financing other US Congressional interests then our UNDERFUNDED AMERICAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM. THE POPE KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A STATE MURDER OF TROY DAVIS IN GEORGIA, AND A JUDICIAL EXECUTION OF TROY DAVIS IN GEORGIA. MANY INTERNATIONAL CITIZENS HAVE ALREADY STARTED TO BOYCOTT THIS ROGUE STATE OF GEORGIA ! WILL MILLIONS MORE OF CARING AMERICAN’S AND INTERNATIONAL CITIZENS AVOID GIVING THE STATE OF GEORGIA ANY FUTURE BUSINE$$ IF A 3YR. BOYCOTT TAKES PLACE OVER THIS STATE NOT EVEN OFFERING JUSTICE WITH A NEW LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL TRIAL FOR MR.TROY DAVIS? IT’S BEEN SAID BY MANY THAT A THREE YEAR INTERNATIONAL BOYCOTT OF THIS STATE MIGHT VERY WELL COST IT TENS OF MILLION$ WHERE A NEW AND FAIR TRIAL OF TROY DAVIS MIGHT COST THE STATE LESS THAN $100,000. A SPECIAL FEDERAL TASK FORCE MADE UP OF INVESTIGATORS AND LAWYERS DESIGNED TO VERIFY EVERY ASPECT OF THE 3,300 VARIOUS DEATH ROW LEGAL CASES NATIONWIDE,IS OUR COUNTRIES ONLY REAL METHOD TO MAKE SURE WE DO NOT ALLOW STATES LIKE GEORGIA TO CONTINUE ATTEMPTING TO MURDER POSSIBLE INNOCENT POORER AMERICAN’S LIKE MR.TROY DAVIS! FOR THOSE MILLIONS OF AMERICAN’S WHO BELIEVE IN GOD, WE ALL HAVE TO WONDER IN TOTAL AMAZEMENT, HOW OUR AMERICAN RELIGIOUS LEADERS HAVE ALLOWED THIS HORROR TO CONTINUE WRONGFULLY EXECUTING AND INCARCERATING INNOCENT AMERICAN’S ALL ACROSS OUR COUNTRY ??? LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS IS A DEDICATED WWW VOLUNTEERS LOBBY GROUP WHO ARE INTERESTED IN PREVENTING FURTHER CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY CONTINUING TO BE INFLICTED ON MIDDLE CLASS AND WORKING POOR AMERICANS WHO ARE BEING DENIED PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND BEING FALSELY IMPRISONED AND EXECUTED ALL ACROSS AMERICA!! lawyersforpooramericans@yahoo.com 424-247-2013) **GIVE THEM LIBERTY OR GIVE THEM LAWYERS ! *********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** THE GREAT LIE by Gerry Spence The idea that we should furnish the poor with a public defender has been an effort to save our nation from shame - for sending the poor to prison without adequate representation. But today the nation’s public defender system has become a mockery of justice. To provide an accused with a public defender who has three hundred other cases to defend is simply to laugh in the face of both justice and the accused himself. It takes me months to prepare the average criminal case for trial. The trial itself can take weeks, even months. While O.J. Simpson was being tried in Los Angeles for murder, a case that cost millions to defend and months to conclude, another black man was being tried in the same courthouse for a similar murder. It took only three days for a jury to find him guilty. He had a public defender with scores of other cases to defend. Many prosecutors boast that they have over a 90 percent conviction rate. Little wonder. Under the present public defender system the prosecutors should enjoy one hundred percent convictions, and many in fact approach perfect conviction rates. The public defenders in seven states have finally refused to take on any new cases. It’s about time. If I walked into court to defend my client and had never talked him, never previously opened his file, never discovered the witnesses against him, much less interviewed them, never reviewed the evidence in the hands of the prosecution, never demanded my clients rights to discovery, never read the cases relevant to the case at hand, never prepared the cross examination of the witnesses against my client, never … and on and on, I would be guilty of legal malpractice. Every public defender who purports to represent an accused under circumstances in which he or she has neither the time nor the resources to fully defend the client is guilty of malpractice. These public defenders cannot be saved from malpractice because they are crushed under a ridiculous case load - some with even as many as five hundred cases or more. No one who was accused with such an attorney has received a fair trial and every such accused is entitled to an appeal on that basis alone. The judge must not sentence the accused under these circumstances because the judge would be taking part in a fraud on the system. Yet hundreds of thousands of indigent persons go to prison each year under circumstances no better than those outlined above. When I was coming up as a young prosecutor, the defendants were represented pro bono by the lawyers in the local bar. It was part of the duty of members of the bar to take part in the justice system. Today that idea is unheard of. The practice of law is first and foremost a money-making profession. I see nothing wrong with that notion, but what about giving back? Every trial lawyer should be required to take on a couple of pro bono cases every year. At our office we have a separate pro bono law firm and have for over ten years. It often brings us more satisfaction than our big money wins. The job of a lawyer is to represent the people - the lost, the forgotten, the damned, the hated, the voiceless and the poor. Indeed, God forbid, we may one day become one of those who are entitled to representation but cannot afford it. Every time an accused goes to prison without having received a fair trial we are one step closer to the loss of our own freedoms. Our rights are, in fact, being fought for by public defenders who can never fulfill their duty to their clients because of their pathetic, impossible, caseloads. When they fail, we are in danger. Our system becomes a hypocritical charade. And we prove, once and for all, that the promised justice for all in America is an evil lie that is imposed on the poor. If only those with money can receive justice, then how can we permit our children to recite a horrible falsehood in school when they chant, “with liberty and justice for all.” That can no longer be the truth in America. ************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************* GERRY SPENCE IS A RENOWNED LAWYER AND PATRIOTIC AMERICAN WHO EVEN AT THE AGE OF 82, CONTINUES TO SHOW A KEEN INTEREST IN WANTING TO BETTER AMERICA FOR THE MASSES OF POORER AMERICANS BEING CAUGHT IN OUR UNDERFUNDED JUDICIAL SYSTEM.LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS THANKS YOU MR.SPENCE FOR TAKING YOUR TIME AND INTEREST IN SPEAKING THE TRUTH ABOUT A JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN NEED OF C*H*A*N*G*E… ** WE CAN ONLY HOPE AND PRAY OTHER AMERICAN LAWYERS AND JUDGES WILL FOLLOW YOUR LEAD SO THE PROPER FINANCING CAN BE ALLOCATED BY OUR IVORY TOWER US CONGRESS ! *** ANYONE INTERESTED CAN GOOGLE OR YAHOO GERRY SPENCE ON THE WWW FOR MANY OTHER ENLIGHTENING HONEST ARTICLES.
  • Anonymous : *** THIS IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG OF INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON OUR POORER AMERICAN'S IN A UNDERFUNDED JUDICIAL SYSTEM THAT NEEDS...C*H*A*N*G*E....... **** GOD'S HAND IS INVOLVED IN THIS ONE **** WHEN THIS HORROR IS PROVEN TO BE A TRUE EVENT AFFECTING THE POSSIBLE ENSLAVEMENT OF 2,500 POORER AMERICAN'S, THEN ALL OF AMERICA WILL BE AWARE THAT THIS SAME EXACT TREATMENT OF OUR POORER CITIZENS NEEDS A FORMAL US CONGRESSIONAL AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATION NATIONWIDE !!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted on October 31, 2008 by Gideon --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I’m a little late on writing about this story (via several sources), but it sure is a doozy. You know how it’s common knowlege that most appeals aren’t successful? Well, if you were a pro-se petitioner in Louisiana for the last 13 years, you knew that you wouldn’t win. Why is that? Because the Chief Judge of their Court of Appeals directed his clerk to summarily deny all appeals from pro-se petitioners without circulating the appeal to other judges. The clerk, ridden with guilt, committed suicide earlier this year and left a note confessing everything. This immoral and apparently illegal policy was in place until Jerrold Peterson, the staffer charged with implementing it, blew his brains out in May of last year. Peterson was driven to it in part, his suicide note suggested, by guilt over the nefarious tasks the judges made him perform. In his note Peterson explained how the court gave indigent appellants the bum’s rush. Although every criminal writ application is supposed to be reviewed by three judges, he was deputed to winnow out any that had been filed pro se and arrange for their automatic rejection. Thus were an estimated 2,500 appeals deep-sixed without any judicial consideration whatsoever. Now, facing public embarassment and possible ethical violations, the Louisiana Supreme Court has stepped in and asked…get this…the same appellate court to look at the appeals again. Note that they did not ask the Court to conduct an investigation into this practice, but simply to consider those appeals that were so summarily denied. Because, if we placate the defendants with another cursory look at their appeals, we can sweep the ethical violations under the carpet. At first this whole thing seemed rather odd to me. After all, how is this even possible? Here’s how: Edward Dufresne, Chief Judge of the Fifth Circuit, took charge of pro se appeals in 1994. He then had Peterson prepare rulings denying writs for all of them and signed off “without so much as a glance,” according to the suicide note. “No judge ever saw the writ application before the ruling was prepared by me,” Peterson wrote in a second suicide note to the Judiciary Commission. The rulings also bore the names, though not the signatures, of judges Marion Edwards and Wally Rothschild. Neither Edwards nor Rothschild had any clue as to what was in the applications, or even knew that they had been filed, according to Peterson. So you’ve got one complicit judge and maybe three. But there are 5 more on that court. What of them? Are we to really believe that these 5 (or 7) other judges never once questioned the stark absence of pro-se appeals? Particularly in Louisiana, whose system has the following characteristics: * About 90 percent of criminal defendants in Louisiana are indigent. * Louisiana only provides post-conviction legal aid in death penalty cases. Everyone else must either hire a lawyer, find a lawyer to handle their case pro bono, or handle the appeal themselves. Obviously, most have no choice but to opt for the latter. * One criminal defense lawyer in Louisiana told me that if you’re convicted of murder in Louisiana and you’re innocent, you’re actually better off getting the death penalty. At least then you’ll get a team of lawyers, investigators, and experts to help with your appeal. This from a state whose criminal justice system was already crumbling. It’s hard to believe that people such as Judge Dufresne take an oath to uphold the law and to prove equal protection under it. Disbarment may be enough, but only barely. Justice delayed is no justice at all. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE SMOKING GUN LINK TO AMERICA'S JUDICIAL INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON POORER AMERICAN'S ! *********************************************************** http://www.nola.com/timespic/stories/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1223616107256210.xml&coll=1 ************************************************************ lawyersforpooramericans@yahoo.com (424-247-2013)
  9 More

1 Representatives

• Rep. Graves

  • New Votes (678) Hide New Votes
  • Blog Updates (95) Hide Blog Updates
  • Anonymous : ARE THEY KINGS OF SLAVES OR THE US CONGRESS ? CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY IN USA HAVE BEEN DEVIOUSLY & DECEPTIVELY INFLICTED ON POORER AMERICAN’S ! **** A INTERNATIONAL WORLD COURT INVESTIGATION IS NEEDED INTO THESE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS & CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY ! PRESIDENT OBAMA NEEDS TO TELL THE LEADERS OF THE FREE WORLD DEMOCRATIC US CONGRESS ~ LET MY PEOPLE GO ! WILL THE INTERNATIONAL WORLD COURT AND THE POPE COME TO THE RESCUE OF THESE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF ENSLAVED POORER AMERICAN’S ?? ***The CATHOLIC CHURCH could really help AMERICA right now by arranging a speech from the VATICAN by the POPE concerning THIS modern day ENSLAVEMENT of POORER AMERICAN’S by our complacent IVORY TOWER US CONGRESS who appears to be more interested in financing other US Congressional interests then our UNDERFUNDED AMERICAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM. THE POPE KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A STATE MURDER OF TROY DAVIS IN GEORGIA, AND A JUDICIAL EXECUTION OF TROY DAVIS IN GEORGIA. *** MANY INTERNATIONAL CITIZENS HAVE ALREADY STARTED TO BOYCOTT THIS ROGUE STATE OF GEORGIA ! ***WILL MILLIONS MORE OF CARING AMERICAN’S AND INTERNATIONAL CITIZENS AVOID GIVING THE STATE OF GEORGIA ANY FUTURE BUSINE$$ IF A 3YR. BOYCOTT TAKES PLACE OVER THIS STATE NOT EVEN OFFERING JUSTICE WITH A NEW LEGITIMATE CRIMINAL TRIAL FOR MR.TROY DAVIS? IT’S BEEN SAID BY MANY THAT A THREE YEAR INTERNATIONAL BOYCOTT OF THIS STATE MIGHT VERY WELL COST IT TENS OF MILLION$ WHERE A NEW AND FAIR TRIAL OF TROY DAVIS MIGHT COST THE STATE LESS THAN $100,000. **** A SPECIAL FEDERAL TASK FORCE MADE UP OF INVESTIGATORS AND LAWYERS DESIGNED TO VERIFY EVERY ASPECT OF THE 3,300 VARIOUS DEATH ROW LEGAL CASES NATIONWIDE,IS OUR COUNTRIES ONLY REAL METHOD TO MAKE SURE WE DO NOT ALLOW STATES LIKE GEORGIA TO CONTINUE ATTEMPTING TO MURDER POSSIBLE INNOCENT POORER AMERICAN’S LIKE MR.TROY DAVIS! *** FOR THOSE MILLIONS OF AMERICAN’S WHO BELIEVE IN GOD, WE ALL HAVE TO WONDER IN TOTAL AMAZEMENT, HOW OUR AMERICAN RELIGIOUS LEADERS HAVE ALLOWED THIS HORROR TO CONTINUE WRONGFULLY EXECUTING AND INCARCERATING INNOCENT AMERICAN’S ALL ACROSS OUR COUNTRY ??? LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS IS A DEDICATED WWW VOLUNTEERS LOBBY GROUP WHO ARE INTERESTED IN PREVENTING FURTHER CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY CONTINUING TO BE INFLICTED ON MIDDLE CLASS AND WORKING POOR AMERICANS WHO ARE BEING DENIED PROPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND BEING FALSELY IMPRISONED AND EXECUTED ALL ACROSS AMERICA!! lawyersforpooramericans@yahoo.com 424-247-2013) ****************************************************************************************************************************************** THE GREAT LIE by Gerry Spence The idea that we should furnish the poor with a public defender has been an effort to save our nation from shame - for sending the poor to prison without adequate representation. But today the nation’s public defender system has become a mockery of justice. To provide an accused with a public defender who has three hundred other cases to defend is simply to laugh in the face of both justice and the accused himself. It takes me months to prepare the average criminal case for trial. The trial itself can take weeks, even months. While O.J. Simpson was being tried in Los Angeles for murder, a case that cost millions to defend and months to conclude, another black man was being tried in the same courthouse for a similar murder. It took only three days for a jury to find him guilty. He had a public defender with scores of other cases to defend. Many prosecutors boast that they have over a 90 percent conviction rate. Little wonder. Under the present public defender system the prosecutors should enjoy one hundred percent convictions, and many in fact approach perfect conviction rates. The public defenders in seven states have finally refused to take on any new cases. It’s about time. If I walked into court to defend my client and had never talked him, never previously opened his file, never discovered the witnesses against him, much less interviewed them, never reviewed the evidence in the hands of the prosecution, never demanded my clients rights to discovery, never read the cases relevant to the case at hand, never prepared the cross examination of the witnesses against my client, never … and on and on, I would be guilty of legal malpractice. Every public defender who purports to represent an accused under circumstances in which he or she has neither the time nor the resources to fully defend the client is guilty of malpractice. These public defenders cannot be saved from malpractice because they are crushed under a ridiculous case load - some with even as many as five hundred cases or more. No one who was accused with such an attorney has received a fair trial and every such accused is entitled to an appeal on that basis alone. The judge must not sentence the accused under these circumstances because the judge would be taking part in a fraud on the system. Yet hundreds of thousands of indigent persons go to prison each year under circumstances no better than those outlined above. When I was coming up as a young prosecutor, the defendants were represented pro bono by the lawyers in the local bar. It was part of the duty of members of the bar to take part in the justice system. Today that idea is unheard of. The practice of law is first and foremost a money-making profession. I see nothing wrong with that notion, but what about giving back? Every trial lawyer should be required to take on a couple of pro bono cases every year. At our office we have a separate pro bono law firm and have for over ten years. It often brings us more satisfaction than our big money wins. The job of a lawyer is to represent the people - the lost, the forgotten, the damned, the hated, the voiceless and the poor. Indeed, God forbid, we may one day become one of those who are entitled to representation but cannot afford it. Every time an accused goes to prison without having received a fair trial we are one step closer to the loss of our own freedoms. Our rights are, in fact, being fought for by public defenders who can never fulfill their duty to their clients because of their pathetic, impossible, caseloads. When they fail, we are in danger. Our system becomes a hypocritical charade. And we prove, once and for all, that the promised justice for all in America is an evil lie that is imposed on the poor. If only those with money can receive justice, then how can we permit our children to recite a horrible falsehood in school when they chant, “with liberty and justice for all.” That can no longer be the truth in America. ****************************************************************************************************************************************** GERRY SPENCE IS A RENOWNED LAWYER AND PATRIOTIC AMERICAN WHO EVEN AT THE AGE OF 82, CONTINUES TO SHOW A KEEN INTEREST IN WANTING TO BETTER AMERICA FOR THE MASSES OF POORER AMERICANS BEING CAUGHT IN OUR UNDERFUNDED JUDICIAL SYSTEM.LAWYERS FOR POOR AMERICANS THANKS YOU MR.SPENCE FOR TAKING YOUR TIME AND INTEREST IN SPEAKING THE TRUTH ABOUT A JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN NEED OF C*H*A*N*G*E… ** WE CAN ONLY HOPE AND PRAY OTHER AMERICAN LAWYERS AND JUDGES WILL FOLLOW YOUR LEAD SO THE PROPER FINANCING CAN BE ALLOCATED BY OUR IVORY TOWER US CONGRESS ! *** ANYONE INTERESTED CAN GOOGLE OR YAHOO GERRY SPENCE ON THE WWW FOR MANY OTHER ENLIGHTENING HONEST ARTICLES.
  • Anonymous : *** THIS IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG OF INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON OUR POORER AMERICAN'S IN A UNDERFUNDED JUDICIAL SYSTEM THAT NEEDS...C*H*A*N*G*E....... **** GOD'S HAND IS INVOLVED IN THIS ONE **** WHEN THIS HORROR IS PROVEN TO BE A TRUE EVENT AFFECTING THE POSSIBLE ENSLAVEMENT OF 2,500 POORER AMERICAN'S, THEN ALL OF AMERICA WILL BE AWARE THAT THIS SAME EXACT TREATMENT OF OUR POORER CITIZENS NEEDS A FORMAL US CONGRESSIONAL AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATION NATIONWIDE !!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted on October 31, 2008 by Gideon --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I’m a little late on writing about this story (via several sources), but it sure is a doozy. You know how it’s common knowlege that most appeals aren’t successful? Well, if you were a pro-se petitioner in Louisiana for the last 13 years, you knew that you wouldn’t win. Why is that? Because the Chief Judge of their Court of Appeals directed his clerk to summarily deny all appeals from pro-se petitioners without circulating the appeal to other judges. The clerk, ridden with guilt, committed suicide earlier this year and left a note confessing everything. This immoral and apparently illegal policy was in place until Jerrold Peterson, the staffer charged with implementing it, blew his brains out in May of last year. Peterson was driven to it in part, his suicide note suggested, by guilt over the nefarious tasks the judges made him perform. In his note Peterson explained how the court gave indigent appellants the bum’s rush. Although every criminal writ application is supposed to be reviewed by three judges, he was deputed to winnow out any that had been filed pro se and arrange for their automatic rejection. Thus were an estimated 2,500 appeals deep-sixed without any judicial consideration whatsoever. Now, facing public embarassment and possible ethical violations, the Louisiana Supreme Court has stepped in and asked…get this…the same appellate court to look at the appeals again. Note that they did not ask the Court to conduct an investigation into this practice, but simply to consider those appeals that were so summarily denied. Because, if we placate the defendants with another cursory look at their appeals, we can sweep the ethical violations under the carpet. At first this whole thing seemed rather odd to me. After all, how is this even possible? Here’s how: Edward Dufresne, Chief Judge of the Fifth Circuit, took charge of pro se appeals in 1994. He then had Peterson prepare rulings denying writs for all of them and signed off “without so much as a glance,” according to the suicide note. “No judge ever saw the writ application before the ruling was prepared by me,” Peterson wrote in a second suicide note to the Judiciary Commission. The rulings also bore the names, though not the signatures, of judges Marion Edwards and Wally Rothschild. Neither Edwards nor Rothschild had any clue as to what was in the applications, or even knew that they had been filed, according to Peterson. So you’ve got one complicit judge and maybe three. But there are 5 more on that court. What of them? Are we to really believe that these 5 (or 7) other judges never once questioned the stark absence of pro-se appeals? Particularly in Louisiana, whose system has the following characteristics: * About 90 percent of criminal defendants in Louisiana are indigent. * Louisiana only provides post-conviction legal aid in death penalty cases. Everyone else must either hire a lawyer, find a lawyer to handle their case pro bono, or handle the appeal themselves. Obviously, most have no choice but to opt for the latter. * One criminal defense lawyer in Louisiana told me that if you’re convicted of murder in Louisiana and you’re innocent, you’re actually better off getting the death penalty. At least then you’ll get a team of lawyers, investigators, and experts to help with your appeal. This from a state whose criminal justice system was already crumbling. It’s hard to believe that people such as Judge Dufresne take an oath to uphold the law and to prove equal protection under it. Disbarment may be enough, but only barely. Justice delayed is no justice at all. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE SMOKING GUN LINK TO AMERICA'S JUDICIAL INJUSTICES BEING INFLICTED ON POORER AMERICAN'S ! *********************************************************** http://www.nola.com/timespic/stories/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1223616107256210.xml&coll=1 ************************************************************ lawyersforpooramericans@yahoo.com (424-247-2013)
  6 More

0 Committees

0 Issues

This is your profile's page of Tracked Items. Just click the button under "Track This" at the top of the page for any bill, Senator, Represenative, or issue area, and that item will be added here automatically. You'll have built a one-stop overview of everything you're following in Congress, along with the latest updates for each.

Just getting started? Check out our special page of Hot Bills. It's an easy way to find bills that affect the issues you care about, and then add them to your tracked items.

For your next steps, including ways you can use social networking on OpenCongress and participate in comment boards, visit our how-to guide.