Privacy

Measure B revisions draw fire

October 30, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Pasadena Star-News (California)</p> <p>Carmen Balber, an advocate for The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, noted that the city didn't allow onto the ballot for the revised Measure B proposed campaign contribution limits by the task force. She said the foundation monitored the task force and supports all proposed revisions to the law. "After four months that the task force looked at this measure, listened to input from people across the community and looked at the intent of the voters, it came up with a balanced proposal that, in the end, will expand what voters intended for barring political kickbacks."</p>

State moves to fire HMO regulator;

October 26, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Kevin Donohue defends his role in reviewing a buyout while owning UnitedHealth stock.</h3><p class="source">The Los Angeles Times</p> <p>Consumer advocates said Donohue seemed particularly tough on patients at public hearings. "He was argumentative with anyone who criticized the [health] plans," said Jerry Flanagan of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. "He limited our time and was extremely argumentative with patients -- people who had gone out of their way to come and give their testimony," he recalled. Flanagan said the disclosure of Donohue's stock holding puts a cloud over the acquisition, and he called upon California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer to investigate.</p>

Outside money fuels incumbents’ runs;

October 25, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Three seats are up for grabs Nov. 7 on the San Juan Capistrano City Council.</h3><p class="source">The Orange County Register (California)</p> <p>"We don't feel hands down that contributions from outside the city are wrong. Somebody's mother is going to want to contribute to their campaign," said Carmen Balber, a consumer advocate for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a Los Angeles-based nonpartisan, nonprofit consumer advocacy group. "It raises questions, though, when the vast majority of contributions are not from residents. One wonders whose interests will be represented in local government," said Balber, who has successfully campaigned in several cities in the state to tighten conflict-of-interest laws.</p>

Campaign watchdog nixes electronic reporting of pledges

October 24, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Associated Press</p> <p>Doug Heller, executive director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, said the decision would allow major contributors to look like "mom and pop political donors" because reporting of their contributions would be spread out. "They've been given new ways to contribute in the dark. If sunshine is the best antiseptic, this is a total eclipse. You can be sure that politicians are going to use this as another way to hide from voters their true identity."</p>

Fundraising practice could be regulated;

October 24, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>'Pledging' has drawn fire because it delays reporting of campaign donations.</h3><p class="source">The Orange County Register (California)</p> <p>Campaign finance watchdogs say this makes it easier for politicians to delay revealing how much money they take from special interests. "At the end of the legislative session this year, we witnessed a disturbing practice of politicians accepting secret contribution pledges from special interests," said Doug Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. "It's pretty shocking; the FPPC proposal would extend that secrecy rather than shed more light on special-interest influence."</p>

Political funding could change;

October 23, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Prop. 89 makes financing public</h3><p class="source">The Ventura County Star (California)</p> <p>Supporters assert that the public loses much more money under the current system, when elected officials pass favorable tax breaks and other laws to benefit the wealthy interests that now finance political campaigns. In a recent television ad, they cite the analysis of the system offered by candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger in the 2003 recall election: "Special interests have a stranglehold on California. Here's how it works: Money comes in; favors go out. The people lose."</p>

Contractor for stem cell institute folds;

October 21, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Computerized system for grants is at issue</h3><p class="source">The San Diego Union-Tribune (California)</p> <p>When the proposal to contract with Arlington was originally brought up with the institute's oversight board, board member Dr. Claire Pomeroy asked why the institute was not soliciting bids, said John Simpson, of FTCR. "In retrospect, the process might not have prevented this situation, but those essentially sound procurement procedures exist for a reason," Simpson said. "And (the institute) might have found out about another company that could have been every bit as good as this one, or better."</p>

Proposition 89: Public financing measure an election fix or a bigger mess?

October 16, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Sacramento Bee (California)</p> <p>The measure would provide public financing for state candidates and place new restrictions on ballot-measure campaigns. "In politics, you get what you pay for -- and until the public pays for elections, they're not going to get an honest government," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights.</p>

Was stem-cell advance ‘obvious’?

October 15, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The Wisconsin State Journal</p> <p>John Simpson, stem-cell director for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, said the license fees demanded by WARF for commercial research using the patented cells or processes are "stifling research in the United States and forcing some money overseas."</p>

FDA approves Avastin for lung cancer

October 12, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The San Jose Mercury News (California)</p> <p>On Wednesday, the company went a step further, announcing that it will cap Avastin's price for eligible colon cancer and lung cancer patients at $55,000 a year. The company has yet to define what an eligible patient is, but Jamie Court of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights isn't impressed. "$55,000 is more than the median income,'' Court said. "That's not exactly a price break.''</p>

Genentech Caps Cost of Cancer Drug for Some Patients

October 12, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The New York Times</p> <p>It is not clear whether Genentech's move will mollify critics. Jerry Flanagan, health care policy director at the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a consumer group in Santa Monica, Calif., said that Genentech ''cannot expect that this will appease patients that are being priced out of life itself.''</p>

WHO’S BACKING PROP. R?;

October 12, 2006  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>FIRMS, UNIONS HAVE STAKE IN KEEPING COUNCIL MEMBERS IN OFFICE</h3><p class="source">The Daily News of Los Angeles</p> <p>"Of course, the special interests want to maintain the status quo as long as they can. They know what they have and how to wield influence. They know how the game works,'' said Doug Heller, executive director of The Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights, a nonprofit, nonpartisan consumer and political accountability group based in Santa Monica. "They give money to the politicians and they give money to initiatives that will preserve these politicians in power. It's what happens when you have a political structure that depends on money. Money flows and money talks.''</p>