Obama To Squander $3.2 Billion For Healthier School Meals Over Five Years Even While L.A. School Students Throw Healthy Meals In The Garbage

Get ready to take a crowbar and pry open that wallet a bit wider, Mr. and Ms. Taxpayer. The Obama Administration wants to squander $3.2 billion of our money promoting healthier school meals during the next five years, and intend to impose it as an underfunded mandate upon the states, although costs will be offset in part by a reimbursement increase of 6 cents per meal.

Specifically, the Administration proposes an overhaul of U.S. school meal standards that replaces breaded patties and canned fruit with fresh tomatoes and chef salad. The new standards will drop a daily requirement for meat or a meat alternative with breakfast and require more fruit and food rich in whole grains. It will be the first major change to school meals in 15 years. Read the U.S. Department of Agriculture's full press release HERE, and read the 80-page explanation of the new rules HERE (takes about three minutes to download).

Chief Food Nazi Michelle Obama offered an explanation, saying “As parents, we try to prepare decent meals, limit how much junk food our kids eat and ensure they have a reasonably balanced diet. When you’re putting in all that effort, the last thing we want is for our hard work to be undone each day in the school cafeteria. When we send our kids to school, we expect that they won’t be eating the kind of fatty, salty, sugary foods that we try to keep them from eating at home. We want the food they get at school to be the same kind of food we would serve at our own kitchen tables.” Of course, Michelle failed to mention that parents could maintain that control by sending their kids to school with a PACKED LUNCH, the way many students did when I went through school in the 1960s.

Reaction from the food industry is mixed. While the American Frozen Food Institute, which represents 90 percent of U.S. frozen-food production, praised the proposal, a 2011 survey by the Washington-based National Potato Council indicated that 60 percent of district-school food-service directors expected costs to increase and more food to be wasted under the proposal. The Council's pessimism is justified, considering that U.S. schools served 2.9 billion free lunches, about 500 million reduced price lunches and only 1.8 billion full-price lunches as part of the National School Lunch Program in fiscal 2010. We taxpayers pay for those free and reduced-price lunches; in March 2011, then-school board candidate Bob Griffin disclosed that 42 percent of Anchorage School District students received free or reduced-price meals.

Anchorage Baptist Temple Pastor Jerry Prevo Defends His Church's Property Tax Exemptions After Consulting With Two Law Firms

Another self-proclaimed "community voice" has launched an attack upon Anchorage Baptist Temple Pastor Jerry Prevo over the church's numerous property tax exemptions. Professional sourpuss Elise Patkotak, who's been a bitter and vindictive critic of Prevo in the past, complained on January 24th, 2012 that even if Prevo didn't break the law, "it all just feels sleazy". Typical leftist tactic -- exalt feelings over facts. Patkotak also attempted to equivocate Prevo, who's been married only once and who has never been alleged to commit adultery, with the former serial adulterer Newt Gingrich, currently on his third marriage. Another typical leftist tactic -- erect a straw man. Both tactics straight out of Saul Alinsky's playbook.

But while the Anchorage Daily News has prominently reported on the tax controversy, they have minimized Jerry Prevo's own response to the issue. Fortunately, the Northern Right published a response by Prevo in its entirety on January 17th, 2012. Prevo discloses that when the Anchorage Daily News contacted him in December in preparation for their story, he consulted two different law firms and asked them to examine ABT's tax-exempt properties, determine if the exemptions were proper, and if not, how to make it right.

Both law firms advised ABT they believed the church was in compliance with the law. ADN quoted Kevin Clarkson to that effect, and a letter from Thomas P. Amodio also validates ABT's exemptions. Prevo indicates he is fully cooperating with the municipal tax assessor's office, and will comply with whatever final decision is rendered.

Jerry Prevo believes much of the kerfluffle is inspired by opposition to the fact that he has been a positive and articulate spokesman for traditional family values since the 1970s, fervently opposing the promotion and statutory protection of the homosexual agenda, and led public opposition to Ordinance #64 in 2009. Fueling his suspicion is the fact that although Bent Alaska first publicized the tax issue in August 2011, ADN didn't really start pushing it until January 2012, a mere three months before the municipal election during which voters will get the opportunity to weigh in on a new gay nondiscrimination initiative. Thus the tax issue is being used as a wedge issue to fuel a Yes vote on the initiative. Prevo explains this in the Northern Right:

...It seems this issue comes up about every time "special rights" for homosexuals comes up in our city which is coming up in April. If passed, these "special rights" for homosexuals will take away the rights of religious groups, churches, organizations, businesses, religious people, and individuals.

I have opposed "special rights" for what the Bible calls immoral behavior since the 70's. It seems these recent accusations are again a move to diminish my opposition to these "special rights".

What's ironic is that those who demand that Jerry Prevo and ABT stay out of the discussion on gay rights impose no such demands upon those churches who support the proposed gay initiative. Four local churches are involved; St. Mary's Episcopal, United Methodist, Immanuel Presbyterian and Joy Lutheran. Yet no one, including Jerry Prevo himself, questions their tax exemptions or their right to engage publicly in social advocacy without forfeiting tax exemptions. The bottom line: Either it's O.K. for ALL churches to engage in public issue advocacy -- or NONE of them. The only restriction upon churches is against endorsing specific candidates from the pulpit.

It is legal for Anchorage Baptist Temple, like any other entity, to take advantage of property tax exemptions. It is also legal for Anchorage Baptist Temple, like any other entity, to lobby for additional tax exemptions. Consequently, those who still have an issue with these exemptions are best advised to direct their attention towards those who granted or enable the exemptions; namely, the Municipality of Anchorage and the Alaska State Legislature. The Anchorage Assembly exercises control over local taxes, and it was the legislature which passed HB334 in 2006, which broadened the scope of the exemption to include religious school teachers and ordained ministers who run ministries. Those who object to the exemptions should contact their local assembly member to express those objections, and contact their state representative or senator to advocate for repeal of HB334.

The best solution:

-- Limit property tax exemptions for churches to the primary church complex and the senior pastor's residence.
-- Provide an appeal process so churches can apply for additional tax exemptions as desired.
-- Grandfather ABT's remaining exemptions to leave them in force as long as the present occupants live in the properties. Once the present occupants leave, the properties would be placed back on the tax rolls.

Federal Grand Jury Returns Superseding Indictment Against Schaeffer Cox, Coleman Barney And Lonnie Vernon, Includes Murder Conspiracy Charges

For the third time, a federal grand jury has returned an indictment against Alaska Peacemaker Militia members Schaeffer Cox, Coleman Barney, and Lonnie Vernon. The superseding indictment returned before U.S. District Court Judge Robert J. Bryan in Anchorage on January 23rd, 2012 now adds murder conspiracy charges to the preceding indictment, with a possible maximum sentence of life in prison. As a result, the original trial date of February 6th has been pushed forward to May 7th. The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner published the most informative story, but the Alaska Dispatch adds some additional details about the arguments in the courtroom.

Karen Vernon is not named in the new indictment, but she remains jailed on separate federal charges of threatening a federal judge, his family and an IRS employee. Likewise, Michael Anderson was not re-indicted; he was taken into custody as a material witness on December 6th, 2011, but was released on December 13th. It is believed the feds are trying to pressure Anderson to become the third snitch in the case, joining Gerald Olson and William Fulton.

-- Read the complete 24-page indictment HERE.

The murder conspiracy charges are reflected in Counts 12-16 of the new indictment:

-- Count 12: Alleges that Cox, Barney, and Vernon did knowingly, willfully, and
unlawfully conspire and agree together and with other persons known and unknown to the grand jury to kill, with premeditation and malice aforethought, officers and employees of the United States, including law enforcement officers.

-- Count 13: Alleges that Coleman Barney did knowingly carry a firearm, specifically a semiautomatic assault rifle, a ParaUSA AR-15 .223 rifle, during and in relation to a crime of violence, that is, conspiracy to murder.

-- Count 14: Alleges that Lonnie Vernon did knowingly carry a firearm, specifically a semiautomatic assault rifle, a Sig Arms .223 rifle, during and in relation to a crime of violence, that is, conspiracy to murder.

-- Count 15: Alleges that Schaeffer Cox did knowingly carry a firearm, specifically a handgun, during and in relation to a crime of violence, that is, conspiracy to murder (the type of handgun was not specified).

-- Count 16: In summary, alleges that all three defendants engaged in solicitation to murder an officer of the United States, and implies that Cox was the ringleader.

The new indictment also includes seven criminal forfeiture allegations in which the federal government is requesting that weapons found be permanently forfeited to the federal government.

Of interest is the appearance of the phrase "and others known and unknown to the grand jury" repeatedly found in certain parts of the indictment. While this phrase may be used to cover the activities of the snitches involved in the case, it may also imply the feds could be considering charges against other people, it may also be the reason why Alaska Citizens Militia leader Norm Olson expressed concern on January 11th about the possibility that federal snitch Gerald Olson may be trying to rope him into the case. Olson supports Cox in principle 100 percent but denies ever urging Cox or his cohorts to break the law.

During the hearing, all three defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges. Two strategems by the defense team to derail the indictment, challenging the constitutionality of referring to grenade launchers and canisters loaded with bullets as "destructive devices", and claiming the Gerald Olson had effectively "kidnapped" Cox in the weeks leading up to his arrest, were rejected by Judge Bryan. But this simply illustrates the expertise of Cox's defense team; they leave no stone unturned.

The Anchorage Daily News reports that at least 12 supporters of Schaeffer Cox and his cohorts had come down from Fairbanks and were present in the courtroom, along with the wives of all three defendants, Marti Cox and Rachel Barney in the audience, and Karen Vernon in the dock in a prisoner jumpsuit.

Alaska State Rep. Sharon Cissna Prefiles HB262 To Restrict Physical Patdowns By TSA And Co-Sponsors HB270 To Require Posted Warnings

On January 23rd, 2011, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) was temporarily detained by TSA personnel at the Nashville airport when he tried to board a flight to Washington D.C. After triggering an alarm during routine airport screening, TSA personnel sought to give him a patdown. Sen. Paul refused and asked to go back through the scanner a second time; TSA refused his request. They temporarily detained him, but in accordance with Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution, did not take him into custody; local police soon arrived to escort him out of the area, and Sen. Paul made alternative flight arrangements.

But Sen. Paul's experience is likely to give renewed impetus to two TSA-related bills prefiled in the Alaska State Legislature. Alaska State Rep. Sharon Cissna has prefiled two bills designed to address the issue of body scanners and physical patdowns. The primary target of these bills is the Transportation Security Administration.

-- HB262: The short title is "No Required Patdowns/Scans For Access". Adds a section to AS 11.76 defining a new Class A misdemeanor entitled "Interference with access to public buildings or transportation facilities". Defines it as requiring a person to submit or consent to physical contact by any person touching directly or through clothing the genitals, buttocks, or female breast, or requiring a person to submit or consent to any electronic process that produces an electronic image of the genitals, anus, or female breast or otherwise creates an electronic image of the person that exposes or reveals a physical characteristic that is normally hidden from the public. Rep. Cissna is personally invested in this bill because of her experience with TSA; she even gave testimony to Congress in March 2011.

However, HB262 exempts correctional facilities, probation officers, restricted access area of a law enforcement building or federal building, a courtroom, offices of the Alaska Court System, or a courthouse that is occupied only by the Alaska Court System and other justice agencies. So about the only area not exempted is the screening area at an airport. The bill clearly is intended to impose restrictions upon TSA screening at airports. The bill has now been referred to Finance and Judiciary.

Problem: While HB262 is well-intended, if passed, it would impose a Hobson's choice upon a TSA screener. If the screener pats down a traveler upon direction by a supervisor, the screener could be prosecuted for a misdemeanor. In addition, it creates the appearance of a state law intending to supersede a federal practice. Consequently, I predict that TSA would immediately file suit in state court if HB262 is passed. What's more possible is that HB262 was conceived as a hammer to promote passage of the milder HB270, described in the next paragraph.

-- HB270: This is the related bill that Rep. Cissna is co-sponsoring along with Reps. Max Gruenberg (D-Anchorage) and Chris Tuck (D-Anchorage). The short title is "Warning Of Airport Patdowns/Scans". Applies only to areas where screening of passengers and cargo is being actively conducted. Amends AS 02.15.050 by adding subsection which requires a warning notice to be posted in such areas, and prescribes the size and text of the warning. Imposes no penalty for non-compliance. The bill has now been referred to Finance and Transportation. Rep. Tuck also has some personal investment in this bill since he recently released a video of a commercial in which he warned of the prospective radiation hazard of whole body scanners.

Since HB270 does not impose a penalty upon someone for complying with conditions of employment, it is not as potentially problematic. Passage would not likely trigger a lawsuit by TSA. Nevertheless, the secondary value of both bills is to send a legislative message to TSA that they need to clean up and humanize their act a bit more.

InsiderAdvantage Poll Shows Newt Gingrich Leading Mitt Romney By Eight Points In Florida, But Alaska Voters Still Unreceptive To Gingrich

The bubble which suddenly inflated in a matter of days and propelled Newt Gingrich to an unexpected victory over Mitt Romney in the January 21st South Carolina primary seems to be extending to Florida as well. In the first Florida poll conducted since South Carolina, InsiderAdvantage found that Gingrich leads with 34 percent, while Romney is second with 26 percent. Rounding out the field is Ron Paul with 13 percent and Rick Santorum with 11 percent; 14 percent are undecided, and two percent want someone else. InsiderAdvantage contacted 557 registered Republicans in Florida.

This is a significant turnaround from three previous Florida polls taken one to two weeks ago by PPP, CNN/Time, and Sunshine State News/VSS, all of which showed Romney anywhere from 15 to 26 points ahead of Gingrich. Adding to InsiderAdvantage's credibility is the fact that they were the first pollster to pick up the dramatic shift from Romney to Gingrich in South Carolina just days before the primary.

Update: A Rasmussen survey released after this post indicates a similar outcome, with Gingrich at 41 percent, Romney at 32 percent, Santorum at 11 percent, and Paul at 8 percent.

In general, contributing factors to the shift towards Gingrich in South Carolina included Gingrich's willingness to call out the media in his exchange with John King, Romney's dithering about the release of his tax returns, possible backlash against the last-minute revelation by one of Gingrich's ex-wives that Gingrich had proposed an open marriage, and, to a lesser extent, Rick Perry's endorsement of Gingrich and Sarah Palin's "endorsement-that-was-not-quite-an-endorsement". Some exit polls showed that many voters thought Gingrich more electable than Romney.

In the Weekly Standard, Fred Barnes attributes Romney's lack of success in South Carolina to the lack of a "big idea". While Gingrich's campaign was perceived to be based on the big idea that he’ll crush Obama in debates and win the White House, Romney’s insistence on touting his years as a corporate turnaround expert at Bain Capital and his understanding of the economy simply didn't produce the same level of enthusiasm or momentum. Gingrich stirs up the masses by throwing them raw meat, while Romney insists on serving a leisurely, sedate seven-course dinner.

To get back on track, Mitt Romney must go on offense and expose Gingrich's vulnerabilities. He must paint a picture of Gingrich as an unstable loose cannon who's unpopular nationally, with independent voters, and even within his own party, with 23 percent of Republicans saying they would not support him as the nominee in a recent ABC poll. Romney must also overcome perceptions that he is the candidate of the rich, and emphasize how many jobs were created during his tenure at Bain Capital.

Nevertheless, even if Romney loses Florida, the Chicago Tribune doesn't think it's the end of his campaign. Both Arizona and Michigan are considered Romney-friendly turf, and Romney literally owns Utah. Caucuses in Nevada, Colorado, and Minnesota will benefit from a more organized campaign, giving Romney and Ron Paul a boost over Gingrich. Then comes Super Tuesday, when 10 states will allocate a total of 407 delegates; Alaska is expected to be split primarily between Romney and Ron Paul. Comments to an Anchorage Daily News story about South Carolina indicate a pronounced dislike of Gingrich. With few debates left on the horizon, Gingrich won’t have the time, the exposure, or the money to build the type of national campaign Romney has already started to build. The Tribune does project a two-point Gingrich victory in Florida.