In many rural parts of Pennsylvania, citizens acting through their elected local officials are uniting to protect their communities from the serious dangers associated with the spreading of sludge and biosolids on Pennsylvania’s farmland.

Unfortunately, we have an attorney general, Tom Corbett, who is on the side of corporate sludge haulers and against rural Pennsylvanians.

Mr. Corbett threatened Pennsylvania’s rural communities back in 2006, and now he is making good on his threat by doing everything he can to interfere with the wishes of rural Pennsylvanians.

I am here today to condemn Attorney General Tom Corbett’s blatant use of the power of the government to intimidate ordinary people who want a safe environment in which to live, and his use of public resources to fight on behalf of corporate interests against our citizens.

As many of you know, a number of municipalities in Pennsylvania have enacted ordinances that ban the spreading of sludge on farmland. By definition, sludge consists of both human waste and other sewage, which could potentially include industrial toxins and heavy metals that are not removed in the process.

We are not merely talking about human waste. While the term "sludge" has often been equated to only human waste, biosolid is wastewater treated by municipal sewage systems and in addition to human waste, can include toxic metals, pathogens, mortuary waste and hazardous hospital waste as well as hundreds of other chemicals.

Anything flushed down a drain in home, factory or hospital ends up as a biosolid and there have been documented ill effects on people. Cities such as Baltimore and Philadelphia pay corporations to take their waste. Those same corporations then distribute the waste to farms. One of the largest companies, Synagro, has impacted Pennsylvania. Synagro transported over 13,000 tons of biosolids onto Pennsylvania farms in 2007.

In 2006 when the state enacted the Agricultural, Communities and Rural Environment Act, known as ACRE, The Evening Sun Newspaper reported that Attorney General Tom Corbett threatened Pennsylvania’s rural communities with lawsuits should they try to get in the way of state sanctioned spreading of corporate sludge.

Since then, Mr. Corbett has carried out his threat against rural Pennsylvania. In a number of municipalities, Attorney General Tom Corbett has agreed to intervene and use the power and resources of state government to fight against the wishes and desire of our citizens who only want to protect their communities from environmental contamination by sludge.

Over in East Brunswick Township, Schuylkill County for example, Attorney General Corbett is carrying the ball for J.C. Hills Tree Farm, a private company, against the citizens of East Brunswick Township. Mr. Corbett wants to have all such municipal ordinances in Pennsylvania declared illegal.

On July 2, 2008, the Republican Herald newspaper reported that on a visit to Schuylkill County, Corbett essentially told local governments to mind their own business when it comes to the spreading of sludge on farmland.

Mr. Corbett also misrepresented the truth to the citizens when he stated that it was his “duty” as attorney general to enforce ACRE. That assertion is entirely false. The law states clearly that the attorney general may bring action against a local government, but it is certainly not his responsibility or “duty” to do so.

Let me read directly from the law, Section 314 b of ACRE states: “The Attorney General has the discretion whether to bring an action…” Section 315a of ACRE states, “The Attorney General may bring an action against the local government... to invalidate the unauthorized local ordinance...”

This is important, ladies and gentleman. Your current attorney general, Tom Corbett, absolutely does not need to bring these cases against your local governments. No law requires him to do so. No law requires him to use state resources to bring lawsuits against you.

He is doing this because he wants to do it. The law that Mr. Corbett has been referencing in defense of his action against you and in support of corporate sludge haulers is completely discretionary. Not only is this not necessary, but in my opinion, it is an irresponsible use of public resources on behalf of private big corporations.

So, today I am here to tell you that if elected attorney general of Pennsylvania, one of my first acts will be to withdraw the OAG from participation in all of these sludge lawsuits.

There is a lot of uncertainty when it comes to the health effects of sludge use, and citizens acting through their local governments have a right to protect their communities. I will not use your tax money to overturn your own decisions and fight the battles for corporations.

As attorney general, I will leave these decisions to you, the members of the community, and focus my attention and state resources on those issues that will address the interests of the community as a whole, not the private interests of corporate America.

John Morganelli is a Democratic candidate for Attorney General of Pennsylvania. He made these remarks before a group of anti-sludge activists.

There has been an increase in sophisticated counterfeit operations in Virginia.

For example, in May 2007 Newport News authorities confiscated $1.8 million worth of counterfeit goods from 11 stores. And, a few weeks ago, Suffolk Police seized more than $32,000 in counterfeit goods from a downtown store, including 260 pairs of counterfeit shoes.

Thanks to new laws that went into effect July 1 that were part of our Office’s legislative agenda, Virginia consumers and businesses have new safeguards against counterfeit and unsafe products.

Counterfeit products have included: automotive brake pads, diabetes test strips, airline mechanical parts, smoke alarms, baby food, prescription drugs, cancer-fighting drugs, surgical products, batteries, wine, clothing, shoes, DVDs/CDs, toys, toothpaste and jewelry.

"Virginia is one of the first states to pass a law toughening penalties and making it harder for counterfeiters to sell their fake merchandise,” said Del. Ben Cline, who was the chief patron of the legislation in the General Assembly.

It is estimated that counterfeiting and piracy cost the United States about $250 billion each year and has led to the loss of more than 750,000 jobs. Plus, many of these “knockoff” products, like medical supplies and car parts, also endanger the user.

The Food and Drug Administration estimates that counterfeit drugs account for 10 percent of all drugs sold in the nation. The Federal Aviation Administration estimates that 2 percent of the 26 million airline parts installed each year are counterfeit - about 520,000 parts.

“Counterfeiting and piracy threaten consumers’ health and safety, while shaking our confidence in the products we rely on and the brands we trust,” said Caroline Joiner, vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Intellectual Property Center. “This legislation will protect Virginia’s consumers from dangerous and defective counterfeit and pirated products, while sending a strong message to the perpetrators of these crimes.”

Here are some tips for consumers to avoid dangerous counterfeit products:

-If the price is too good to be true, it probably is. Know the usual price range for your intended purchases;

-Inspect the quality of the product. Scrutinize labels and packaging. Are there any misspellings? Does the country of origin match the country that normally produces the product?;

-Seek authorized dealers for the product you are planning to purchase and make your purchases from the most legitimate source possible; and

-Report questionable and faulty products to law enforcement.

Consumer protection is an important statutory duty of the Office of the Attorney General, and our staff can help. In an age of increased consumer issues, we all must continue to be educated and vigilant.

Bob McDonnell is the Attorney General of Virginia.

Virginia must have an efficient, first-class transportation system to promote economic vitality and sustain our quality of life. Last year’s transportation legislation, initiated by Republican leaders, and passed with the bipartisan support of nearly 85% of the members of the General Assembly, was the largest infusion of new statewide funding for transportation in 21 years.

It generated approximately $1.2 billion annually in new funding, with no statewide tax increase, including $600 million in revenue options for the economic engines of Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia. It required significant new land use reforms and VDOT accountability. A Virginian-Pilot editorial called it, “the largest proposed overhaul of transportation funding and planning in more than a half-century.”

Thus, the recent editorial in (The Virginian Pilot) now discounting this bill’s achievement and tacitly supporting the governor’s proposed massive statewide tax increase as the only solution is most surprising.

Unfortunately, part of last year’s bill was undermined by the governor’s amendments transferring funding authority away from locally elected officials to the unelected regional authorities themselves, leading the Virginia Supreme Court to invalidate the regional plan, eliminating $600 million in new funding for Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia. However, the significant new statewide funding has remained since July 2007. You wouldn’t know it from reading this paper, or listening to many Democrats.

Here are the facts: The Governor’s own fiscal impact analysis pegged the funding from the statewide portion of the bill at roughly $480 million a year, including $3 billion in bonds at $300 million a year. The bill requires two-thirds of all future budget surpluses go to transportation, averaging $80 million more a year based on the past 10 years, for total new investment of about $560 million a year.

We have realized surpluses in most of the last 15 fiscal years. A recent Pilot editorial (GOP Road Math Doesn’t Add Up, May 27, 2008) takes issue with these official state projections. The editorial wrongly states that revenues from spending cuts, bonds, and budget surpluses do not count as new road money, only tax increases count. This demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of budgeting and economic principles.

The General Assembly will return to Richmond on June 23rd to consider the Governor’s proposal for the second major statewide tax increase in the last four years. Raising taxes statewide at a time when Virginia businesses and families are facing economic uncertainty with soaring food and gas prices is unwise.

With an average of $560 million annually in additional funding going to transportation statewide, the question is what is the legitimate additional need to continue Virginia as one of the most prosperous free-enterprise states in America?

The regional funding options for Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia can be easily fixed legally restoring the total new funding of last year’s bill to $1.2 billion annually.

Now, the governor legitimately raises the additional issue of funding maintenance. Once the legislature obtains complete, detailed information on the size and source of any shortage, prudent steps to address funding and improve management will be required.

The first is a comprehensive independent audit of the billions in annual transportation spending, as was just done in Washington State with dramatic results. Legitimate funding gaps can be closed in several ways, but part of the solution must be to prioritize and cut other spending from the $78 billion biennial budget.

State spending has doubled in the past 10 years, growing 38% higher than the rate of growth in population and inflation. Last summer Governor Kaine and I directed 5% cuts in our respective operating budgets, and there has been no outcry over diminished state services. Prioritization can be accomplished.

There must be a robust expansion in public-private projects, as is being used to upgrade Highway 460, with contracts requiring work on time and on budget. New transportation spending must go to projects that will demonstrably reduce congestion. The plan must expand the use of tolls, smart traffic technology, market-based congestion pricing projects, and ride-sharing incentives. Regulations hampering faster infrastructure development must be changed.

Advocating only large statewide tax increases each time there is an economic downturn is poor policy, and contrary to the long-standing Virginia bipartisan formula. Citizens and business leaders know that tough economic times require tough choices. So too must government. A 21st century transportation system will only be achievable through smart, long-term planning, priority budgeting, and strong leadership.

Bob McDonnell is the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia

I had the pleasure of speaking in January at the third graduation ceremony honoring participants in the Southern Regional Drug Court in Mercer County. I have often said that drug courts save lives, and one of the lives the Mercer County program has saved was the life of a young woman who also spoke that day. I would like to tell you her story.

The woman’s name is Melissa. She gave me permission to use her full name, but to protect her privacy and that of her family, I will use just her first. Melissa started drinking when she about 12 or 13, started smoking marijuana two years later and by the time she was 16 she was taking narcotics. Then she got pregnant. She quit drinking and all drugs while she was pregnant, but started in again as soon as her children were born. She had another son four years later. Her sons are now 18 and 14 and Melissa is now 34.

She had grown up around alcohol. Her mother was an alcoholic who started drinking when Melissa was a year old and Melissa’s older brother drowned in a river. He was only 15. Melissa never knew her father, but she did have a stepfather who drank with her mother until her mother threw him out when Melissa was about 14.

Melissa’s mom stopped drinking several years later. She just decided one day to stop and she never had another drink. Unfortunately, it wasn’t that easy for Melissa.

She was arrested in May 2005 for conspiracy forgery and uttering; she had bought some items from a woman who had purchased them with a stolen credit card. Her arrest came shortly after her husband was arrested for drug dealing, a crime for which he was sent to prison.

The Mercer County prosecutor offered to drop the charges against Melissa if she entered what was then a proposed new drug court treatment program in Mercer County. She agreed because she didn’t want to leave her sons alone with no parent.

Melissa entered the drug court program in May 2006, after she weaned herself off methadone. Once in the program, she did sixteen to twenty hours a week of community service, attended seven to eleven hours of classes each week, appeared before Mercer County Circuit Judge Derek Swope once a week and worked fifty hours a week at a new job at a convenience store near her home, a job she would not have been able to get if she had still been a drug user. She graduated from the program in June 2007.

She says the hardest part of the program was accepting she had a problem. The structure and discipline made her do a lot of soul-searching. It helped her come to terms with her past, led her to end her marriage, and helped her improve her relationship with her mother. She also credits the program with making her the mother she always wanted to be. Her sons are so proud of her, her youngest now aspires to work for the drug court when he grows up.

And through her new job, she met a new husband. They were married in February, by Judge Swope. She says the drug court provides the path, but it’s up to each individual to get on it and stay on it. She says if it hadn’t been for the drug court, she believes she would now be dead.

Like Melissa, the seven people who graduated from the Mercer County program in January had each spent at least a year in the drug court program.

Laura Helton, the southern regional drug court coordinator, says addiction is a struggle that has to be treated every day. The people who enter her program usually have never been recognized for achieving anything in their lives, not even in school. Completing the drug court program is a huge accomplishment for them.

While each graduate’s case is unique, adult drug treatment courts generally serve only those who have either pled guilty or been found guilty of non-violent misdemeanors and felonies, and who were motivated to commit those crimes due to a substance abuse addiction. People can volunteer for the program to avoid jail and prison sentences, if a judge so orders. Prosecutors have final approval of all participants, and all participants must be evaluated as a low to moderate risk to be released back into the community.

People who have been charged with sex crimes or crimes in which a child was the victim are not eligible. Participants undergo substance abuse treatment and are heavily supervised by the Mercer County Day Report Center staff, probation officers, law enforcement and the sentencing court. If needed, they may also undergo treatment for mental illnesses. Participants may be forced to repeat certain phases if they have positive drug screens or if they refuse to cooperate. The judge may impose jail time if he feels it is necessary to make a participant follow the protocol.

Judge Swope supervises the drug treatment court in Mercer County, which opened in 2006.

There are two other adult drug treatment courts in West Virginia. The northern panhandle treatment court serves Brooke, Hancock, Ohio, Marshall and Wetzel counties. The mental health court has been operational since 2003 and the drug court has been operational since 2005. The West Central Drug Court Diversion Program opened in July 2007 to serve Wood and Wirt counties.

There are two juvenile treatment courts in West Virginia. The Wayne County Juvenile Drug Court Diversion Program opened in September 2007 and is a pre-adjudicatory program. The Cabell County Juvenile Drug Court Diversion Program reopened in August 2007. It began as a pre-adjudicatory program in 1999. Personnel changes and other issues led to the program’s closure in November 2006.

Governor Joe Manchin included finding for drug courts in his 2008 State of the State address. I would like to thank Governor Manchin for acknowledging the hard work of judicial system employees. What began as a pilot project in the Northern Panhandle, started by Circuit Judge Martin J. Gaughan and a committed probation officer, Jim Lee, has proven effective. Besides the existing treatment courts, the Supreme Court is now training planning teams from eight other counties.

The planning teams met in Mercer County in November 2007 for the first part of a two-part training session. The second part of the training was held in January in Morgantown. The teams are from Kanawha, Monongalia, Greenbrier, Preston, Boone, Lincoln, Logan, and Cabell counties and want to set up drug treatment courts in their areas.

The teams include judges, magistrates, state and local police officers, prosecuting attorneys, public defenders, deputy sheriffs, county commission members, evaluators, probation officers, day report center employees, court administrators, psychiatrists, psychologists, and other community treatment personnel. The training is funded by a grant received from the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, Division of Alcohol and Substance Abuse.

With a decade of research supporting the effectiveness of adult drug treatment courts, such programs are now recognized as an important strategy to improve substance-abuse treatment outcomes and reduce crime. Treatment courts produce greater cost benefits than other strategies that address criminal activity related to substance abuse and addiction that bring individuals into the criminal justice system.

Laura Helton believes that if her program in Mercer County helps only one person, it has been worthwhile. Melissa’s family would probably agree.

Elliott "Spike" Maynard is the Chief Justice of the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals.

By Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto

In 2007, Nevada was ranked third in the nation for identity theft crimes.

To help address this situation, my office is offering the Nevada Identity Theft Passport program as a service to Nevada residents who are identity theft victims to assist them with recovery from this intrusive and damaging crime.

Other states have implemented similar programs. Nevada's Identity Theft Passport program is now up and running at very low cost to the taxpayers. Our program is doing well because we have been able to use existing personnel and infrastructure in almost every area of Nevada.

The actual procedures vary somewhat depending on where you live in Nevada. Should you become an identity theft victim, let me walk you through the program we offer.

After you discover that you have become the victim of identity theft, you will need to file a police report with local law enforcement and ask for the Nevada Identity Theft Passport brochure and application.

You will then make an appointment with your local County Sheriff or Attorney General's Office to complete an online "Passport" application. The Sheriff's Office will then send the completed application to the Attorney General's office in Carson City.

After we verify the application, you will receive a secure, personalized Nevada "Passport" program card that contains your picture, signature and thumb print.

This card is an effective tool for you to use in order to demonstrate that your identity has been stolen. It is likely to be most useful to help you explain your situation to merchants, banks and law enforcement officials.

For example, suppose the thief who has stolen your identity commits a crime using your identity. Unfortunately, all the police investigating that crime would have to go on is your name, your identity. You would know nothing at all about what the real criminal has done while using your identification information.

Now suppose the police pull you over and accuse you of this crime that has been committed with your identity information.

Remember, the only thing law enforcement in this case has to go on is your name. Would you want to quickly be able to show the police a card that explains you are a victim of identity theft and that you are not the real thief they are after? Of course you would.

Much of the credit for the statewide rollout goes to the National Notary Association. They provided the necessary cameras and software that enable law enforcement personnel to take "Passport" program card photographs and thumbprints.

My office has provided training and other assistance, but it was your local sheriff or police who came up with the computer and, most important, their local staff that to make this program operational.

An Identity Theft Passport does not prevent identity theft. It can only assist in helping to clear things up afterwards. It is a valuable tool that can be used by an identity theft victim to recover from this alarming and intrusive crime.

First and foremost, remember that it is best to protect yourself from identity theft before it happens. While there are no guarantees, everyone should take a few simple steps.

Never loan any identity card like a driver's license or Social Security card to anyone -- not even a close friend. Carefully review all your bank and credit card statements every month. Shred them before you throw them out. Never provide personal or financial information to anyone you do not know over the telephone, Internet or in response to an email.

Once a year, check your credit report (http://www.annualcreditreport.com ) for discrepancies and ensure you are the one who has opened all existing accounts.

Be safe, be secure. Additional information can be obtained from my website at http://ag.state.nv.us/idtheft/idtheft.htm .

This op-ed originally appeared in The Reno (Nev.) Gazette-Journal.

As an attorney, I know that statistics aren’t always the whole story and that often there aren’t simple solutions.

Unfortunately, the statistics about sexual predators in Montana do tell an alarming story: there are more than 4,000 sexual predators living in Montana, putting Montana second in the nation for offenders per capita, according to the nonprofit group Family Watchdog.

The statistics go further: according to the Center for Sex Offender Management, 13% of child molesters and 19% of rapists commit another sexual offense within five years and another 10% of child molesters and 22% of rapists commit a nonsexual violent offense within five years.

This is a serious problem-but it’s not being taken seriously enough by our current Attorney General.

The law requires that photos and other significant information be posted on the Montana Sexual Offender Registry; however this requirement has been neither met nor enforced for over 60% of the individuals on the registry. Ironically, many of the missing photos can be easily found on another state web site administered by the Department of Corrections. The photos exist-it just hasn’t been a priority for this Attorney General to get them posted.

But fixing the Sex Offender Registry is only the first step. I’ve devised a comprehensive plan that includes affordable and efficient measures that will help families protect their kids and send a clear, strong message to sex predators that they will not be tolerated in Montana.

First and foremost, Montana families need to be aware of who these individuals are, what they look like, and where they are living. Photos are truly a parent’s best tool in identifying and protecting their children. Another addition I’ll implement will be to require inclusion of all email addresses and screen names used by offenders.

Secondly, parents should be able to perform an online search to pinpoint where offenders are living in their neighborhood and communities. I’ll add this simple, user-friendly search function to the registry; and I’ll also add a function that will allow parents to receive an email alert whenever there is an addition or change to the registry for their area.

All this information is of little importance, however, if people can’t find it. The registry needs to be more widely accessible to the public with links to it on the homepage of every state and local government website. Parents, teachers, and community leaders may not be aware of the current location of the list on the Department of Justice’s website-every city, county, and state agency website should have a link visible on their homepage.

To round out my play, I’ll partner with law enforcement, media, and Montana businesses to actively disseminate information about the Sexual Offender Registry. With these types of crimes, the best prevention is through information. We all need to work together to protect our kids.

Sexual offenders need to be at the top of the priority list for Montana’s Justice Department. I’ve identified some simple, yet effective, measures I will take if I’m elected Attorney General. Let me be clear-fighting sex predators is at the top of my priority list.

Tim Fox is a Republican Candidate for Attorney General of Montana.

by State Rep. Greg Macpherson

Next January Oregon will swear in a new Attorney General for the first time in a dozen years. Hardy Myers has served the state as Attorney General with great skill and integrity since 1997.

Because no Republican filed by the deadline in March, the winner of the Democratic primary this month will become Oregon’s next Attorney General.

I’m honored to have Hardy Myers’ endorsement in the race to succeed him. But the next Attorney General should not just continue the current work of the Department of Justice he leads.

The Attorney General should respond to the changing threats faced by Oregonians and bring the fresh perspective any organization needs after years under the same leadership.

Internet threats

Some of the new threats to Oregonians come over the Internet. A dozen years ago the Internet was in its infancy. It’s now in a rambunctious adolescence.

Adult sex predators prowl chat rooms in search of underage teens.
Identity thieves and other scammers find victims among Oregon consumers connected to the Internet.

As seniors and lower income people get computers, these vulnerable citizens are exposed to greater risk.

Last year I sponsored a new law making it a specific crime to solicit an underage teen for sex over the Internet. I also passed a law toughening the penalty for high volume identity thieves.

As Attorney General, I will make sure these new laws are enforced. To do so, I will expand the Internet forensics capability of the Department of Justice, a function performed now by just one investigator.

We must be able to find those who prey on our kids and vulnerable consumers. I also will introduce legislation requiring that sex offender registration include the offender’s e-mail address so we can trace attempts to contact victims.

Threats to our landscape

Last year I led the effort to refer Measure 49 to Oregon voters to save our protections for farmlands and open space.

But Oregon’s landscape is threatened by some claimants who assert the right to go forward based on development steps taken before voters approved Measure 49.

As Attorney General, I will challenge invalid development claims to protect farmlands and open space and to assure that landowners are treated the same across the state.

Threats to retirement security

As traditional pension plans disappear, Oregon workers are threatened by loss of their retirement benefits when the stocks in their defined contribution plans drop in value.

Last year I helped pass a new law authorizing Oregon’s Attorney General to act as lead plaintiff in class action lawsuits to recover losses on stocks where fraud is involved.

As Attorney General, I will use this authority to collect from those who defraud stockholders to protect the financial security of retirees.

Threats to air quality

Auto makers are trying to prevent Oregon and other states from implementing cleaner tailpipe emission standards for new vehicles sold in the future.

The Bush administration has sided with the auto makers in trying to block the cleaner standards. As Attorney General, I will challenge this federal interference with a key environmental protection Oregonians have chosen.

In all these areas, and others, I will lead Oregon forward, protecting our state from all the new threats coming at us.

I can be reached about my campaign for Oregon Attorney General at greg@votemac.com or 503-294-9391.

This op-ed was originally published in the West Linn Tidings.

by John Kroger

I’m John Kroger, and I’m running for Oregon Attorney General because the state needs an experienced lawyer in that office who will aggressively fight for every Oregonian.

I am a law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School and former federal criminal prosecutor. As a prosecutor, I represented the United States in court more than 1,000 times, convicting mafia killers, drug kingpins and corrupt government officials. I also prosecuted crooked Enron executives.

My goals are simple: I will tackle Oregon’s meth crisis, protect Oregon’s environment, defend our civil rights, protect consumers from scam artists and crooked companies and ensure that every parent gets the child support they deserve.

Fighting Meth

Meth is Oregon’s No. 1 crime problem, the largest cause of property crime, identity theft and serious child abuse. As Attorney General, I will work with the legislature, treatment experts, police chiefs, district attorneys and sheriffs to craft a new drug treatment and prevention program for our state.

My vision for better addiction treatment is one of the reasons why Gov. John Kitzhaber endorsed me.

I will revitalize the Attorney General’s organized crime unit, so we can go after the big drug cartels that bring most of the meth into the state from Mexico. To do this, I will draw upon my own successes prosecuting drug dealers, Enron and the mafia.

Protecting the Environment

Right now, every single major river in Oregon has failed federal water quality standards and Portland was ranked the third most toxic city in America by Businessweek magazine.

To me, this is unacceptable. My goal is to make Oregon the nationwide leader in environmental protection once again, as we were in the past. This means tougher fines and jail time for big polluters, so we can hold them accountable once again. My commitment to strong environmental enforcement is one reason why the Sierra Club supports me.

Defending Civil Rights

I am the only candidate in this race with extensive courtroom experience, representing the United States as a federal prosecutor more than 1,000 times and winning every trial and appeal.

If the civil rights and civil liberties of Oregonians are threatened, I won’t send a deputy to court. I will argue the case myself.

I will do everything I can to prevent judges from overturning the landmark pro-choice Roe v. Wade decision. I will also work to see that the recently passed legislation banning sexual orientation discrimination is properly enforced.

Protecting Oregon’s Consumers

As a federal prosecutor, I helped prosecute Enron for all of its crimes. As Attorney General, I will be a true consumer watchdog.

I will create an Internet crimes task force to go after sexual predators and identity thieves, investigate abusive and undisclosed fees by credit card companies and aggressively attack home mortgage fraud.

Child Support

Every year, more than 100,000 single parents in Oregon do not get their child support payments at all or in a timely fashion, and this causes immense hardship to these parents and their children.

We can and must do better. I will do this by revamping the Oregon Department of Justice’s child support division to ensure that Oregon’s children get the support they deserve.

If you have any questions about my campaign, please contact me at 503-224-3316 or kroger@johnkroger.com . You can also visit my Web site at www.johnkroger.com .

This op-ed was originally published in the Lake Oswego Review.

Today marked the 60th and final day of the 2008 Session of the Florida Legislature. Faced with a plethora of decisions and tasks, our lawmakers worked extremely hard to pass important laws that will better protect Florida's citizens.

I am particularly proud of several pieces of legislation which passed this session that were priorities of mine. With the help of our legislative sponsors and leaders, we significantly strengthened anti-gang measures, gave victims of Florida-based child pornography a voice in court and the right to substantial civil penalties against perpetrators, provided Florida homeowners extra protection against mortgage foreclosure fraud, targeted marijuana grow houses and enhanced penalties against individuals who manufacture or sell counterfeited products.

In addition to passing significant measures which will improve public safety and have important consumer protection enhancements, the Florida Legislature also provided my CyberCrime Unit with the opportunity to continuing our statewide expansion.

This expansion, which will allow us to open offices in Pensacola and Tampa within the next several months, is critical as we work to protect Florida's children from Internet child predators. I am very grateful our lawmakers recognized and re-affirmed our commitment to fight cybercrime.

Florida's legislators have spent the past 60 days working hard on behalf of their constituents and their state, and for this commitment they have my appreciation and sincere respect.

I look forward to the day our priorities pieces of legislation are signed into law and take effect, and I commend the Legislature for another successful session.

Bill McCollum is the Attorney General of Florida.

I thank the Herald-Leader for bringing attention to the issues and challenges prosecutors in Kentucky will face after significant cuts to their budgets that will likely result in the elimination of up to 100 jobs from the system.

But while I appreciate the attention to the issue, I am disappointed that neither I nor my office was contacted to respond to false allegations contained in the article.

It quotes Jessamine County Attorney Brian Goettl, the owner and operator of a conservative blog, who implies that the reduction in prosecutors' budgets was due, in part, to my lack of attention to this matter with legislators.

If the reporter had sought a response, he would have discovered that Goettl's claims are baseless. During the transition before I took office, I twice met with Gov. Steve Beshear and his staff regarding the importance of the prosecutors' budgets.

On my second day in office, I, along with the elected leadership of county attorneys and commonwealth's attorneys (which does not include Goettl), again met with Beshear on this issue and requested that prosecutors' budgets be spared from his proposed budget cuts.

Multiple meetings with the House and Senate leaders and budget chairmen followed.

If the reporter had called, he would have had access to the voluminous documentation of our efforts.

Because of the efforts of this office and the leadership of the Prosecutors Advisory Council, members of the House increased prosecutors' budgets by almost $6 million more than the governor proposed. Unfortunately, those increases were not included in the final budget.

In the future, if questions are raised about the way I handle particular matters in this office, I would appreciate the journalistic norm of an opportunity to respond.

Jack Conway is the Attorney General of Kentucky. This editorial was originally published in the Herald-Leader of Lexington.

One year later the images remain vivid.

We see the familiar campus buildings of Virginia Tech, a special place for many thousands of Virginians. We see terror on the faces of students and relive that terrible morning. Words are inadequate to describe the emotions. We mourn still over precious lives lost and families forever changed.

We saw horror on April 16, 2007, but we also saw goodness that rushed to fill the void. We saw the greater love that causes one person to lay down his life for others. We saw the injured cared for and the broken comforted. We saw the power of prayer. We saw the resilience of the Virginia Tech community. We have long known of its excellent academic and athletic programs; now we know also the character and compassion of the Tech community.

Since last April, Virginia's leaders have sought to respond properly to this unprecedented tragedy. Changes were needed in our laws and systems, and they are being made. The legislative and administrative reforms that are underway truly are nonpartisan, resulting from the efforts of all three branches of government and the leadership of Virginia Tech. There has been a shared purpose in learning from this tragedy.

Two weeks after the shootings, Gov. Tim Kaine worked with the Office of the Attorney General to craft Executive Order 50, which harmonized state and federal law to prevent gun purchases by those adjudicated mentally ill. Subsequent legislation has codified this executive order.

This initial step was followed by the most significant revision of Virginia's mental health laws in a generation. Dedicated career attorneys from the Office of the Attorney General continued their work with Virginia Supreme Court Chief Justice Leroy Hassell's commission, initiated in 2006, to reform mental health laws and services. They drafted legislation, testified before committees, and provided the necessary research for these reforms.

Virginia's mental health laws have undergone sweeping changes in five key areas: involuntary commitment criteria, mandatory outpatient treatment, procedural improvements, privacy and disclosure provisions, and firearms purchase and reporting requirements. In addition, the mental health system received an infusion of more than $41 million as requested by Gov. Kaine to increase service capacity, particularly at the community level.

The Office of the Attorney General has continued to advise all state agencies of duties and responsibilities under federal law, with particular attention to interpreting the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

This office has provided guidance for crafting a model policy for law-enforcement personnel to provide death notifications with accuracy, sensitivity and respect. Our office and other state agencies have worked closely with Gov. Kaine to facilitate the implementation of numerous recommendations of the Virginia Tech Review Panel, including improving campus safety and coordinating more effective exchanges of information.

These actions by the commonwealth's leaders reflect renewed dedication to the values that have sustained us since that terrible morning one year ago. This year's work manifests our resolve to improve our laws and processes in the face of great tragedy. In so doing, the commonwealth honors the memories of those killed and wounded.

Today we pray again, for all affected, that God's healing hand will touch them anew.

Bob McDonnell is Virginia's attorney general. Contact him at (804) 786-2071.

The closing of a calendar year again brings to state attorney-general watchers that unique annual enjoyment of handicapping the festive square-dancing match-up between big bad utilities trying to raise consumers' rates and fight-the-man AGs trying to stop them.

But some power companies, it seems, are determined to snatch away even that meager ration of reportorial holiday fun. A few have even smartened-up to where they're negotiating rate pacts instead of getting smacked around in court by AGs with an eye on the next gubernatorial vote. Scrooges.

So a shake of the bells at Spokane, WA-based power company Avista, nominated for this year's LNL Grinch Award for their lack of festive spirit. These buzz-killers actually got AG Rob McKenna's Public Counsel Section to agree on a $21.5 million cut in its original rate rise request for 2008, dropping it to $33.5 million, we reported today.

Someone at Avista must have remembered what happened to the utility 10 months ago, when the state's regulating body rejected outright the company's proposed rate-revenue increase of $28.9 million for 2007 after the AG's office opposed. And maybe its rejection two weeks ago of Avista's initially-proposed $55 million increase for next year jogged a few more memories.

What next? More utilities figuring out there's no odds butting heads with ambitious state attorneys-general over grandma's power bill?

Might as well watch College Bowl games.

Prepare yourselves for an assortment of dire cautionary tales about the corrupting influence of special interest money on supposedly independent-to-a-fault judges. Yep, it's election season.

First target up for popping looks like the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vote due Nov. 6. That one was already a state record-breaker last month, we reported Friay, and now it looks like the four candidates will spend well over $4 million running for two vacancies.

According to the website of campaign-finance watchdog Justice at Stake, we should be very worried about the numbers now coming out of Pennsylvania. Other eastern-based media are now picking up on the race and it looks like becoming a mid-Atlantic bellwether for the pernicious influence of lots of corporate cash on Supreme Court ballots.

But forgive us at LNL if we find it hard to "fear up" over spending of $2 million per bench cushion - not even this close to Halloween.

After all, the hardened veterans around here are more used to figures like $5.8 million total spending per Supreme Court seat. That's what the race between newly-installed Justice Annette Kingsland Ziegler and Linda Clifford drew last spring in Wisconsin.

And you think that's some campaign spending? Try what divided Michigan Supreme Court's Chief Justice, Clifford W. Taylor, thinks will be spent on his re-election bid next year - $20 million. And that's to sit on a bench that's become a national judicial laughing-stock.

So take it easy on the Keystone State, watchdogs - looks like the Great Lakes states are where the real juicy meat's at.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform is holding its eighth-annual Legal Reform Summit today, and I'll be using this blog to bring you those highlights that just don't fit into any of the articles we have planned for today.

Scheduled topics of discussion that are of interest to this site include: Results and recommendations from a recent ILR study regarding the power of state attorneys general; trends in business litigation, featuring attorney Chris Manning (the defender of the dry cleaners who were sued for $10 million after misplacing a pair of pants); and an assessment of the ongoing war between businesses and plaintiffs attorneys.

Speakers include Kathleen Casey, Commissioner of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. She will be discussing the future competitiveness of the country's securities market at approximately 1:15 p.m.

I'll start blogging just as soon as the morning Mt. Dew kicks in.

If you all have any questions, submit them in the comments section. If I know the answer, I'll respond. If I don't, I'll quickly delete your comment and act like the site is malfunctioning (kidding!).
---


10:18 a.m. - OK, time to come clean. I wrote that first blog entry yesterday because I knew traffic coming in to D.C. might be a little troublesome. I never even got around to my morning Mt. Dew (the horror).

Turns out, I was right about the traffic. The Summit even started a little late because so there were so many wrecks and roads closed. It hasn't rained hard in months here, and apparently people forgot how to drive in it.

I showed up to hear Bernard Nash, a partner at Dickstein Shapiro, speak to the power of state attorneys general. Good stuff. A story will be up this afternoon. He even covered a few issues that we normally don't at LNL (to our discredit).

Currently, Chris Manning (of the pants lawsuit) is speaking to consumer protection issues. The clacking of my keyboard may be distracting him, so we'll end this entry here.
---


11:09 a.m. - The business trends portion of the program is wrapping up. We'll have a story detailing Manning's thoughts on consumer protection and Thomas Gottschalk's speech on global climate change.

What won't make the story, you say? What am I missing by not being there, you wonder? Tell me! you plead.

Well, Gottschalk, a partner at Kirkland and Ellis who spoke excellently, lamented the fact that he did not bring a visual aid like Manning (that will be in the story). Gottschalk joked that since global warming cases are fairly new, maybe he should have used a picture of "the tip of an iceberg."

Eugene Goldman, a partner at McDermott Will and Emery, later brought up the famous Stoneridge case that will decide if third parties (like banks, accountants and law firms) can be held liable for a company's fraud. The case is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

He noted that Congress had a chance to clearly define the issue in the 1990s, but gave the power to bring those types of suit to the Securities and Exchange Commission and not plaintiffs attorneys. Obviously, plaintiffs attorneys want that power.

He predicted five justices will affirm the lower court ruling dismissing the case, while Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens will rule in favor of the investors.

Clarence Thomas, Goldman was not so sure about since he did not ask any questions during the Oct. 10 arguments. Stephen Breyer did not participate.

Good stuff so far. Hopefully I'm stunting your productivity at work today.
---


12:16 p.m. - On an empty (and I mean e-m-p-t-y) stomach, I've managed to post the story recapping the litigation against businesses discussion. Go ahead, have a read. I dare you.

The current topic is the influx of U.S.-style class actions into Europe. My reasons for not blogging about it are threefold:

1. I've been up seven hours now and have only had a tiny glass of Coke. Needless to say, I'm hungry;

2. Articles come before blogging; and

3. Through no fault of the speakers, I have no clue what is being discussed.

The key to actually being the dumbest person in a room and not letting on is to play with your phone a lot. Think about it.

And when everybody laughs, smile slightly and don't dare laugh. It makes you seem like you got the joke, but it was still a little below you.
---


1:14 p.m. - I'm alone in the ballroom while everyone is next door for lunch and the presentation of the Legal Reform Awards. The lunch registered a solid 8, with chocolate mousse providing a welcome ending. I even offered the lady from Chrysler sitting next to me $20 for hers. She countered with an offer of chocolates from her purse. No deal was struck.

Filet mignon, roasted potatoes, some weird tomato thing and asparagus were the rest of our meal, in case you're curious. And one of those cups of liquid with a lemon in it. This is the second luncheon I've attended with one of those things, and I still don't know what to do with it.

Let's quickly run down the award-winners so I can get back to writing.

Award for Outstanding Research - Tillinghast Towers Perrin, which is the standard-bearer for formulas used to determine the amount of money our current tort system costs each year.

Award for Outstanding Legal Reform Organization - Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System.

Legislative Achievement Award - Mississippi state Sen. Charlie Ross. I couldn't hear all of his speech. In fact, the only thing I heard was "cold day in hell."

Judicial Leadership Award - Harry Janna of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas. After a gracious introduction by ILR President Lisa Rickard, Janna said, "I don't think my wife would recognize the person you're talking about."

Now he sounds like he's still reeling from the Indians blowing that 3-1 lead to the Boston Red Sox.
---


3:31 p.m. - Right now, Ken Mehlman is talking immigration and its effect on the Republican party. At the National Association of Attorneys General meeting this spring, I decided that John Walsh of America's Most Wanted was the best public speaker I'd ever heard.

Mehlman, though, talks faster than that Micro-machines guy and has an incredible amount of substance behind his words. Every question from the audience he sends the answer right back like a line drive at a pitcher.

He's the former chairman of the Republican National Committee. He graduated Harvard Law and, as his campaign manager, got George Bush reelected in 2004. How do people get that smart?

It reminded me of this piece I watched about Tim Tebow. He's 19 years old, plays quarterback for the University of Florida, is really good, has a national championship, carries a near-4.0 GPA and goes to prisons in his spare time to try and convert convicts into accepting God into their lives.

Here's the rundown on me. I'm 25, play Tecmo Super Bowl on my computer, am not good at it, have trouble waking up before 11 o'clock, can't even spell GPA and go to bars in my spare time to try and convert sober people into drunk people, even if they have to work at 6 a.m. I'm no Tim Tebow, and I'm certainly no Ken Mehlman.

Before he spoke, ILR President Lisa Rickard outlined what she feels are the American Association of Justice's federal legislative goals. AAJ was formerly the American Trial Lawyers Association.

She says it wants to: Eliminate pre-dispute binding arbitration; scale back federal pre-emption laws so more suits land in state courts; expand the False Claims Act and Consumer Product Safety Committee legislation; and create new direct and implied causes of action.

All that's left for the day is a discussion on liability issues in the U.S. Supreme Court. Unfortunately for you, I won't be paying attention because I have one more story to write. Thanks for reading.

It's probably a pretty safe bet that Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal grew up a Yankees fan, considering he did his best Yogi Berra impression Wednesday.

No, he didn't quote the quotable catcher. There was no "It ain't over 'til it's over" rallying cries over one of his lawsuits. Instead, he offered an original.

"Discrimination among customers should be barred based on income..." he said.

While that sinks in, let me paraphrase the events that led to an elected official actually saying something like that. It's important not to treat that quote as a soundbite, so we must put it in its proper context before really making fun of it.

AT&T has an Internet television service that Blumenthal wants regulated as if it were cable TV. AT&T wants to be known as a video service provider and will not apply for a cable license.

Blumenthal says the video service license will allow AT&T to cherry-pick the wealthiest and most geographically convenient customers. The end of the above statement is "or geography."

"Discrimination among customers should be barred based on income..." -- Do you realize what this could mean for the world?

Can't afford that new house? Really want to vacation in Paris? Solid-gold spaceship? It can all be yours if you hire attorney Richard Blumenthal and his groundbreaking legal theory of income discrimination.

Instead of a can of tuna for dinner, have crab legs. The grocery store cashier won't ask questions. His employer is now terrified of a lawsuit. Heck, when the cashier gets off he'll be allowed to grab a New York Strip. Beats the pants off a Spam and cheese sandwich.

Personally, I'm tired of paying the market price for anything. I spent 16 dollars on razors last night. Maybe I'll just start putting them in my pockets and walking out the door.

And I'll be wearing my "Discrimination among customers should be barred based on income" T-shirt. All it takes is miserable poverty to have a claim for relief against those greedy businesses that charge too much.

And maybe those charged with rape will start using "I was going through a dry spell" defenses, and maybe drug dealers will operate feet from elementary schools because it is closer to their apartment and they didn't feel like walking all that way to the underpass. That gun gets mighty heavy after a few blocks.

"Discrimination among customers should be barred based on income..."

If we follow Blumenthal's words, maybe we can finally build a future where everybody gets what they want.

It was Yogi who said, "The future ain't what it used to be." Guess what else he said.

"If the world were perfect, it wouldn't be."